Appendix B – Public 

Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Rail 

Corridor Service Program – Combined Final Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR and ROD 

June 2022 
This page is intentionally blank. 
 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Program Environmental Document and Service Development Plan 

Outreach Summary Report 

September 2021 
Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

Contents 

1. Introduction...............................................................................................................................................4 

1.1 Program Overview ..............................................................................................................................4 

1.2 Outreach Approach.............................................................................................................................4 

2. Outreach Notification Methods ...............................................................................................................5 

2.1 Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion Outreach Notification Efforts.....................................5 

2.1.1 Press Release & Media Toolkit ....................................................................................................5 

2.1.2 Earned Media and Stakeholder Coverage...................................................................................5 

2.1.2.1 Social Media ..........................................................................................................................5 

2.1.2.2 Articles & Newsletters ..........................................................................................................6 

2.1.2.3 TV Segments..........................................................................................................................7 

2.2 Program Website ................................................................................................................................7 

2.2.1 Collateral Materials......................................................................................................................7 

2.2.2 Sign-up Form ................................................................................................................................7 

2.4 Newspaper Advertisements ...............................................................................................................8 

2.5 E-Notification ......................................................................................................................................8 

2.6 Social Media ........................................................................................................................................9 

2.6.1 Paid Advertisements....................................................................................................................9 

2.6.2 Posts .............................................................................................................................................9 

2.7 Program Video...................................................................................................................................10 

2.8 Geotargeting......................................................................................................................................10 

3. Meeting and Briefings.............................................................................................................................11 

3.1 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting ..........................................................................................11 

3.2 Stakeholder Presentations ...............................................................................................................12 

3.3 Agency Presentations .......................................................................................................................13 

3.4 Elected Office Coordination..............................................................................................................13 

4. Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Comment Review Period........................................................................13 

4.1 Virtual Commenting Platform ..........................................................................................................13 

4.2 Virtual Public Hearings Overview.....................................................................................................14 

4.2.1 Accessibility................................................................................................................................14 

5. Summary of Public Comments ...............................................................................................................15 

6. Conclusion and Next Steps .....................................................................................................................16 

2 
 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

Tables 

Table 1 Social Media Schedule ......................................................................................................................6 

Table 2 Articles & Newsletters ......................................................................................................................6 

Table 3 Newspaper Advertisement Publications...........................................................................................8 

Table 4 E-Notification Schedule.....................................................................................................................8 

Table 5 Paid Advertisements .........................................................................................................................9 

Table 6 Social Media Posts ............................................................................................................................9 

Table 7 Summary of TAC Meetings, Briefings and Public Meetings............................................................11 

Table 8 Agency Presentations......................................................................................................................13 

Figures 

Figure 1 Commenting Sources.....................................................................................................................16 

3 
 

 

 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

1. Introduction 

The purpose of this report is to summarize the outreach efforts and comments received to date 

associated with the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Program Tier 1/Program 

environmental process. This report provides a brief Program overview, description of the outreach 

process, meetings, and activities; as well as a summary of the comments received during the 

preparation of the Draft Tier 1/Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report 

(EIS/EIR). Prior outreach activities related to the scoping process may be found in the 2018 Outreach 

Summary Report (Appendix A). 

1.1 Program Overview 

The proposed Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Program (“Coachella Valley Rail 

Program” or “Program”) extends approximately 144 miles between downtown Los Angeles and the 

Coachella Valley. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), in coordination with the 

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Rail and Mass Transportation, and the 

Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), is working to bring passenger rail service as an alternate mode of 

travel across Southern California, connecting desert communities and attractions with Los Angeles, 

Orange County, and the Inland Empire. The Program proposes operating two daily round-trips between 

Los Angeles Union Station and Indio or Coachella, with morning and evening departures from each end 

of the Program Corridor. The Program Corridor provides a flexible regional context for the best location 

of an enhanced passenger rail system while providing opportunities for the Build Alternative Options 

within the Program Corridor to account for engineering and environmental constraints, as well as public 

input. 

A Notice of Completion/Notice of Availability (NOC/NOA) for the Program was released on May 19, 2021 

to initiate the public review period for the joint Tier 1/Program Environmental Impact 

Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Program EIS/EIR), pursuant to the California Environmental 

Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC and FRA 

accepted public comments over a 45-day period from May 21, 2021, through July 6, 2021. During this 

time, two public hearings were held, one on June 22, and another on June 26 to solicit feedback from 

the public, interested agencies, organizations and other individuals on the contents of the Program 

EIS/EIR. Due to ongoing health restrictions, both hearings were conducted online via the Zoom Webinar 

platform. Both meetings presented an identical agenda and Program presentation. 

1.2 Outreach Approach 

Building a decisive and flexible approach for stakeholder engagement is essential to execute an effective 

outreach program. The outreach approach for the Coachella Valley Rail Program was used to expand 

Program awareness and public involvement along the Program corridor leading up to and during the 

release of the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. Three phases of the outreach approach were implemented with 

specific goals and are outlined below: 

• Phase 1 (Communication Materials): Develop clear and concise materials to inform 

stakeholders and solicit comments throughout the development of the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. 

• Phase 2 (Agency & Stakeholder Communication): Meet with agencies, key stakeholder 

organizations and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to provide Program updates, answer 

questions and solicit help in reaching their constituents. 

4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

• Phase 3 (Development of the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR): Notify the public on the release of the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR through social media, digital and display advertisements and enotifications, and facilitation of in-person and virtual public meetings. 

2. Outreach Notification Methods 

To solicit public participation for the NOA/NOC, a robust notification campaign was developed. Prior 

outreach activities and notification related to the Notification of Intent and Notice of Preparation are 

found in the 2018 Outreach Summary Report (Appendix A). 

2.1 Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion Outreach Notification Efforts 

The NOA/NOC for the Program was released on May 21, 2021 (Appendix E). The sections below detail 

the variety of methods the NOA/NOC was noticed and distributed. 

2.1.1 Press Release & Media Toolkit 

To announce the release of the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, a news release was posted to the RCTC 

website on May 19, 2021. The press release provided background information on the Program, Program 

next steps and the estimated timeline for service. The press release strongly encouraged public 

participation during the comment review period and listed where physical and electronic copies of the 

Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR could be viewed. The press release also provided information on the three 

methods the public could utilize to submit their comments (e.g., online, during the scheduled public 

hearings and through mail or via email). 

To spread awareness about the release of the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, the press release included a 

link to media toolkit. The media toolkit offered resources for media outlets and other organizations to 

easily share the Program information on their social media, websites or broadcast and included the 

following resources: 

• Program Video (Full and Short Versions) 

• Supplemental B-Roll Graphics and Video 

• Program Fact Sheet (English/Spanish) 

• Program FAQ (English/Spanish) 

• Program Logo 

The media toolkit was utilized across multiple news outlets and is summated in the following section. 

2.1.2 Earned Media and Stakeholder Coverage 

The media toolkit and other Program information were utilized across multiple platforms by key 

stakeholder organizations and new media. Information was posted about the Program via social media 

platforms and website posts. These types of stakeholder digital coverage are referred to as earned 

media. 

2.1.2.1 Social Media 

Social media posts provide a snapshot of information and allow members of the public to engage in a 

dialogue relating to the post. Program information and reminders to participate in the comment review 

period for the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR were shared approximately 25 times from various key 

stakeholders across Facebook and Twitter (Table 1). 

5 
 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1 Social Media Schedule 

# Date Organization Distribution Method 

1 5/11/2021 Move I.E Facebook 

2 5/30/2021 Live Work Twitter 

3 6/1/2021 NBC Palm Springs Facebook 

4 6/21/2021 The Transit Coalition Facebook 

5 6/21/2021 Planetizen Facebook 

6 6/21/2021 NBC Palm Springs Twitter 

7 6/22/2021 An Insider Guide Twitter 

8 6/22/2021 Coachella Valley Facebook 

9 6/23/2021 City of Indio Twitter 

10 6/23/2021 KESQ News Channel 3 Twitter 

11 6/24/2021 Coachella Valley Repertory Facebook 

12 6/24/2021 Coachella Valley Repertory Twitter 

13 6/25/2021 The City of Indio Facebook 

14 6/25/2021 Indio Senior Center Facebook 

15 6/25/2021 Sunline Transit Agency Facebook 

16 6/28/2021 Urbanize LA Twitter 

17 6/29/2021 The Transit Coalition Facebook 

18 7/1/2021 City of Indio Twitter 

19 7/2/2021 East West Alliance Facebook 

20 7/3/2021 The City of Indio Facebook 

21 7/3/2021 Indio Senior Center Facebook 

22 7/6/2021 The City of Indio Facebook 

23 7/6/2021 Move I.E Facebook 

24 7/6/2021 California Planning and Development Report Facebook 

25 7/6/2021 Sunline Transit Agency Twitter 

2.1.2.2 Articles & Newsletters 

Multiple stakeholder organizations wrote articles or shared Program information with their readership 

or members and provided links to the Program website, public hearing registration or the Program 

video. The articles were a way to provide in-depth coverage throughout the comment review period for 

the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. In total, 14 different organizations shared or prepared articles on 

behalf of the Program (Table 2). Earned media articles may be found in Appendix B. 

Table 2 Articles & Newsletters 

# Date Publication Article Title 

1 5/20/2021 Patch “All Aboard? LA To Coachella Train Service Planned”

2 5/27/2021 Mobility21 “Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Service Draft Environmental 

Document Available May 21-July 6 for Public Review, Comments”

3 5/28/2021 Urbanize Los Angeles “Union Station-Coachella Valley Rail Project Moves Forward” 

4 5/28/2021 StreetsBlog LA “Union Station To Coachella Valley Rail In the Works” (repost)

6 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

5 6/7/2021 Panetizen “Proposed Rail Project Would Bring Trains from L.A. to Coachella

Valley”

6 6/9/2021 UKEN Report “Indio Infrastructure Project to get $20 Million”

7 6/17/2021 Desert Sun “Coachella Valley rail proposal move forward with environmental

study for review”

8 6/22/2021 Patch “Train From Coachella Valley To Pass Area and LA: Public Hearings”

9 6/27/2021 NBC Palm Springs “Coachella Valley Rail Project; Another Possible Option for Travel”

10 6/27/2021 Global News & 

Entertainment 

“Coachella Valley Rail Project; Another Possible Option For Travel” 

(repost) 

11 6/27/2021 Daily Advent “Coachella Valley Rail Project; Another Possible Option for Travel” 

(repost) 

12 7/6/2021 California Planning & 

Development Report 

“Proposed Passenger Train Route from Los Angeles to Coachella Valley

moves forward”

13 7/6/2021 KESQ Channel 3 news “Last day for public comment on proposed railway to connect 

Coachella Valley with Los Angeles”

14 7/9/2021 The Press Enterprise “Redlands eyes safety as passenger trains proposed for San Timoteo 

Canyon”

2.1.2.3 TV Segments 

Two broadcast news channels, NBC Palm Springs and KESQ Channel 3 News, had segments dedicated to 

the Program. The KESQ Channel 3 News segment aired on June 22, 2021, and showed clips of the 

Program video and included interviews with the mayor of Desert Hot Springs Scott Mata and RCTC 

Public Affairs Manager, Cheryl Donahue. The NBC Palm Springs segment was broadcast on June 27, 

2021, and provided information on the Program and the release of the Program EIS/EIR. The NBC video 

also included a video capture of the public hearings and the Program video. 

2.2 Program Website 

The Program website (rctc.org/cvr) was the main hub of information throughout the comment period. It 

was continuously updated to include the latest Program updates, environmental documents, 

information about the public hearings, and provided details on how to formally submit comments. The 

website also included a direct link to the EPA’s website on regulations.gov for access to the 

environmental documents. Following the public hearings, presentations along with links to video 

recordings for each meeting were posted for continued public interest. Screen images of the website 

may be found in Appendix C. 

2.2.1 Collateral Materials 

Collateral materials including Program Fact Sheet, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), and PowerPoint 

Presentations were available on the Program website. The resources included basic information to 

provide stakeholders with the Program background, purpose and need and an overview of the 

environmental process. All three pieces of collateral were translated into Spanish. The PowerPoint 

Presentations were available following each public hearing. 

2.2.2 Sign-up Form 

The website also provided a fillable form that allowed members of the public to sign-up to receive 

future email updates or ask questions to the Program team. Comments received were logged in an 

inquiry matrix and were included as official public comments. 

7 
 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.4 Newspaper Advertisements 

Twelve display advertisements featuring the NOC/NOA were published in print and online publications 

(Appendix D). The NOC/NOA advertisements announced the availability and completion of the Program 

EIS/EIR, provided the locations where the public can find physical copies of the documents, encouraged 

public participation and provide information on the public hearings. Advertisements published in English 

and Spanish from the Greater Los Angeles Area to the Inland Empire and Coachella Valley. RCTC and the 

Program team published in 11 newspapers (Table 3). 

Table 3 Newspaper Advertisement Publications 

# Newspaper Run Date Type Language 

1 El Informador Del Valle 5/20/21 Print Spanish 

2 Excelsior LA 5/21/21 Print Spanish 

3 Excelsior OC 5/21/21 Print Spanish 

4 Inland Valley Daily Bulletin 5/21/21 Print English 

5 La Opinion 5/21/21 Print Spanish 

6 La Presena Hispana 5/21/21 Print Spanish 

7 La Presna 5/21/21 Print Spanish 

8 LA Times 5/21/21 Print English 

9 San Bernardino Sun 5/21/21 Print English 

11 The Press Enterprise 5/21/21 Print English 

12 The Press Enterprise 5/21/21 Online Eng5lish 

2.5 E-Notification 

E-notifications were prepared and used to send information directly to the following contacts included 

in the Program database including: 

• Academic Institutions • Elected Offices 

• Agencies • Interested Parties 

• Businesses • Participating Railroads 

• Chambers of Commerce • Native American Tribal Partners 

• Community Based Organizations 

Notifications distributed included information on the release of the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, how to 

comment, and invitations to participate to the public hearings. The first round of notifications was 

distributed to cities, agencies and key stakeholder groups with the goal that the groups would go on to 

spread Program information to their audiences. The second round targeted the full list of database 

contacts (Appendix G). Table 4 describes the notification schedule, purpose, and targeted audience. 

Table 4 E-Notification Schedule 

# Purpose Audience Date 

1 TAC Invitation TAC 4/20/21 

2 TAC Thank You & Public Comment/Hearing Invitation TAC 5/4/21 

3 Stakeholder Briefing Invitation Key Stakeholders 5/27/21 

4 Stakeholder Briefing Reminder Key Stakeholders 6/8/21 

5 Stakeholder Briefing Thank You & Public Comment/Hearing Invitation Key Stakeholders 6/17/21 

6 Public Hearing Invitation Full List 6/24/21 

8 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

7 Thank You for Attending the Public Hearings/Comment Reminder Full List 6/29/21 

8 Comment Reminder Full List 7/1/21 

9 End of Comment Period Full List 7/6/21 

2.6 Social Media 

Social media advertisements and posts on the RCTC Facebook and Instagram pages and the Coachella 

Valley Rail Program page were used prior and after the release of the NOC/NOA to provide information 

and invite the public to participate in the comment period and public hearings. 

2.6.1 Paid Advertisements 

Three paid Facebook/Instagram campaigns were launched and targeted audiences in Riverside, San 

Gorgonio Pass and Coachella Valley. The May campaign (May 26 – June 1, 2021) focused on the release 

of the Program EIS/EIR while the June campaigns (June 17 – June 26, 2021) aimed at encouraging the 

public to attend Public Hearing #1 or #2. The three campaigns resulted in a total of 104,417 impressions, 

41,824 persons reached and 3,073 clicks. Analytics by ad are shown in Table 5. 

Table 5 Paid Advertisements 

Ad Impressions Reach Clicks (All) Post Reactions 

Program EIS/EIR Release 66,645 32,536 2,602 413 

Public Hearing #1 18,669 10,362 258 8 

Public Hearing #2 19,073 11,204 213 6 

Total 104,417 41,824 3,073 427 

2.6.2 Posts 

Social media postings continue to be a quick and cost-efficient way to push out information to the 

public. Twitter was utilized to disseminate short digestible information while Facebook and Instagram 

posts expanded on information with accompanying links and graphics. The RCTC YouTube page was also 

utilized to house the Program video and virtual hearing recordings. A robust social media notification 

schedule was developed to organize each post copy and graphic in a way that allowed followers of the 

RCTC and Program social media pages to see a variety of content throughout the duration of the 

comment period. Animated graphics were developed specifically for Facebook to further draw attention 

to the posts. In total, 25 posts were developed and shared across all available platforms. The 

culmination of social media postings are shown in Table 6. 

Table 6 Social Media Posts 

# Post Date Media Platform Theme 

1 5/6/21 Project Facebook Technical Advisory Committee 

2 5/11/21 YouTube Project Video 

3 5/11/21 Project Facebook Project Video Promotion 

4 5/11/21 Instagram Project Video Promotion 

5 5/11/21 Twitter Project Video Promotion 

6 5/17/21 Project Facebook Sign-up for Updates 

7 5/21/21 Project Facebook Release of Program EIS/EIR 

8 5/25/21 Project Facebook Public Hearings & Commenting 

9 5/25/21 RCTC Facebook Public Hearings & Commenting 

10 6/1/21 Project Facebook Coachella/Stagecoach Article 

11 6/21/21 Project Facebook Public Hearing #1 - Tomorrow 

9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

12 6/21/21 RCTC Facebook Public Hearing #1 - Tomorrow 

13 6/21/21 Twitter Public Hearing #1 - Tomorrow 

14 6/21/21 Instagram Public Hearing #1 - Tomorrow 

15 6/22/21 Project Facebook Public Hearing #1 - Today 

16 6/25/21 Project Facebook Public Hearing #2 - Tomorrow 

17 6/25/21 RCTC Facebook Public Hearing #2 - Tomorrow 

18 6/25/21 Instagram Public Hearing #2 - Tomorrow 

19 6/25/21 Twitter Public Hearing #2 - Tomorrow 

20 6/26/21 Project Facebook Public Hearing #2 - Today 

21 6/29/21 Project Facebook Comment Reminder 

22 7/1/21 Project Facebook Comment Reminder 

23 7/6/21 Project Facebook Final Day for Comments 

24 7/6/21 RCTC Facebook Final Day for Comments 

25 7/6/21 Twitter Final Day for Comments 

2.7 Program Video 

To increase public awareness of the Program, a 4-minute Program video was developed and distributed. 

The video described the challenges of moving around Southern California due to increasing traffic and 

explained how the Coachella Valley Rail could make it easier to travel. The video-guided viewers through 

the Program corridor and highlighted potential station stops, landmarks and key destinations along the 

route. The purpose of the tour was to have viewers imagine the possibilities of reliant and convenient 

travel on the proposed Amtrak service and garner excitement for the Program. The video also informed 

of the Program timeline and encouraged viewers to participate in the public comment period. 

The video was posted to RCTC’s YouTube page on May 11, 2021, and was an important piece of the 

notification plan, being utilized in the media toolkit, social posts and was showcased during the public 

hearings. Many of the earned media garnered (Section 2.2), including the TV segments, provided a link 

to the full video or incorporated clips or screen captures. The Program video was especially engaging on 

Facebook earning 3,454 impressions, 736 clicks and 22 shares and was the most successful post during 

the social media notification campaign. 

2.8 Geotargeting 

To augment standard notification efforts, geofencing digital advertisement campaigns were 

implemented to notify the public about the public comment period and the public hearings associated 

with the release of the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. Geofencing advertisements are used as marketing 

tools to digitally display mobile and desktop electronic devise in a global position system-defined 

geographic boundary. This technology allows for digital advertisements to target people in a defined 

area. Three geofencing campaigns were launched during the comment period and focused on targeting 

those traveling or living in zip codes along the rail corridor from Redland to Coachella as well as a 500-

foot “fenced” buffer around Riverside, Fullerton and Union Stations. To capture audiences that may 

have altered their travel patterns during the COIVD-19 pandemic, data was from February 2020 devices 

as well as current data including landmarks and events of interest. Pulling data from locations and 

events of interest made it so the ads were being targeted to potential travelers. 

Two sets of graphic advertisements were used for three campaigns. The first and third campaigns 

prompted the public to provide their input on the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR and ran from May 21 to 

28, 2021 and June 28 to July 6, 2012, respectively. The second campaign invited the public to participate 

in the public hearings. The total engagement resulted in the digital advertisements being viewed online 

10 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

999,994 times on electronic devices, also known as digital impressions. Each campaign drove traffic to 

the Program website (rctc.org/cvrail). Visit Appendix F for details of each campaign. 

3. Meeting and Briefings 

Ongoing outreach to key stakeholders and agencies were conducted prior and during the comment 

period. Continued communication with stakeholders is a critical component of the outreach plan in 

generating overall awareness of the Program and public comment process. Details on the meetings and 

briefings conducted are summarized in Table 7. 

Table 7 Summary of TAC Meetings, Briefings and Public Meetings 

Meeting Date Purpose # of Attendees 

Technical Advisory Committee Meeting 

May 31, 2018 Program overview and update, definition of Alternatives, 

Service Development Plan overview. 

15 

September 20, 2018 Program overview and update, review role of Federal 

Railroad Administration. 

24 

May 16, 2019 Tier 1 and Tier 2 overview, Service Development Plan 

update and next steps. 

33 

May 4, 2021 Program overview and update, information on the 

release of the environmental documents and upcoming 

public hearings. 

34 

Elected Officials Briefing 

May 27, 2021 Program overview and update, information on the 

release of the environmental documents and upcoming 

public hearings with Office of Representative Raul Ruiz. 

16 

Stakeholder Presentations 

June 10, 2021 Program overview and update, information on the 

release of the environmental documents and upcoming 

public hearings. 

8 

June 25, 2021 Program overview and update, information on the 

release of the environmental documents. 

-

July 1, 2021 Same as above -

Agency Presentations 

May 6, 2021 Program overview and update, information on the 

release of the environmental documents and upcoming 

public hearings. 

-

May 6, 2021 Same as above -

May 13, 2021 Same as above -

June 5, 2021 Same as above -

June 7, 2021 Same as above -

June 10, 2021 Same as above -

Public Meetings 

June 22, 2021 Public Hearing 45 

June 24, 2021 Public Hearing 25 

3.1 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting 

RCTC has conducted updates to the TAC on an ongoing basis leading up to the release of the Program 

EIS/EIR. Formed in 2014, the TAC is convened during key milestones of the Program. The goal is to help 

guide the analytical portions of the study and receive feedback from agencies, participating railroads, 

State and Federal partners, rail and tribal partners and other Program partners. While some members of 

11 
 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

the TAC have been involved since the committee’s infancy, new members are continuously added as 

needed. A total of eight TAC meetings have been held since 2014. Approximately 92 members represent 

the TAC and a full roster may be found in Appendix H. 

RCTC held the eighth TAC meeting on May 4, 2021 with TAC members to provide a Program update, 

information about the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR and to encourage agency leaders to help spread the 

Program information to the public. The meeting was held via Zoom webinar and was attended by 34 

people representing 16 agencies. After the presentation portion of the meeting, the Program team was 

made available to answer clarifying questions about the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. The TAC was 

encouraged to share Program information with their communities and followers on their websites and 

social media platforms throughout the comment period. Following the TAC meeting, a Thank You email 

was sent to the full list of TAC members, thanking them for their ongoing participation and partnership, 

listing the three commenting methods and providing the shareable meeting materials including the 

presentation video, PowerPoint presentation and Program fact sheets. The PowerPoint presentation 

may be found in Appendix H. 

3.2 Stakeholder Presentations 

Direct communication with key stakeholders is essential in implementing a broad outreach program. A 

Stakeholder Briefing was scheduled prior to the public hearings and the invitation list was composed of 

community leaders and stakeholders within the Program corridor who represent of a broad range of 

regional and local interests. The meeting emphasized briefing trusted local leaders to share information 

before meeting with the community during the hearings. 

On June 10, 2021, RCTC held a Stakeholder Briefing for the Program via Zoom platform. In consideration 

for stakeholders that may be unfamiliar with the Program, the presentation provided an overview, the 

purpose and need and gave a briefing on the program history and prior planning activities. The Program 

team also explained each of the Build Alternatives Options being considered, provided information on 

the physical and electronic locations of where the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR would be available, and 

gave instructions on how to submit comments. Following the presentation, the stakeholders were 

invited to register for the virtual public hearings and explained the hearings were an opportunity to 

submit oral comments. The group was informed that each hearing would provide Spanish interpretation 

and English closed captioning and the hearings will be recorded and posted on the Program website. The 

stakeholders were then allowed to ask questions on the document to the Program team. At the 

conclusion of the briefing, stakeholders were shown a slide that indicated how to stay involved by 

following RCTC and the FRA across their social media platforms and websites. 

Following the Stakeholder Briefing, all invitees were sent a Thank You email to remind them of the 

public hearings, provide the methods of commenting and share the meeting materials including the 

briefing video recording, PowerPoint presentation and Program factsheet. In summary, 47 stakeholders 

were invited to participate in the Stakeholder Briefing and follow-up calls were placed to the invitees to 

encourage participation. Groups that were invited represented community-based organizations, 

chambers of commerce, businesses, specialized transit groups, academic institutions, religious 

organizations and economic groups. A total of 8 people attended the Stakeholder Briefing. The 

PowerPoint presentation and a full list of organizations invited to the Stakeholder Briefing may be found 

in Appendix I. 

12 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

Two additional briefings with key stakeholder organizations were held on June 25, 2021 for the Greater 

Palm Springs Convention & Visitors Bureau and July 1, 2021 for the Coachella Valley Realtor’s

Association. Each presentation provided similar content to the Stakeholder Briefing and the individual 

briefing allowed each organization to have additional time to ask questions to the Program team. 

3.3 Agency Presentations 

Ongoing communication with agencies is central to the Program to ensure Program partners are well 

informed and are given the opportunity to ask clarifying questions. Prior to and throughout comment 

period, agency presentations were provided upon request. The content of the presentations were 

similar to that of the TAC meeting. In total, six presentations were provided to the agencies (Table 8). 

Table 8 Agency Presentations 

# Date Agency 

1 5/6/21 T-Now San Gorgonio Pass Chapter 

2 5/6/21 RCTC Commission 

3 5/13/21 San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) – Metro Valley Committee 

4 6/5/21 LOSSAN 

5 6/7/21 Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Board 

6 6/10/21 Palm Spring City Council 

3.4 Elected Office Coordination 

Building relationships with elected offices is critical to the success of the overall program. On May 27, 

2021, RCTC gave a briefing to the Office of Representative Raul Ruiz (D-CA 36th District) whose district 

represents a majority of the Coachella Valley. The purpose of the briefing was to provide Program 

updates, information on the release of the environmental documents and the public hearings. 

4. Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Comment Review Period 

The importance of a comment review period is for members of the public to provide input on 

environmental documents related to a variety of topics ranging from environmental and community 

impacts to socioeconomic and environmental justice effects. The Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR for this 

Program was available for public review and comment for 45 days starting from May 21, 2021 and 

ending on July 6, 2021. The public was provided multiple opportunities to comment on the Draft Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR through traditional and online methods. These methods included: 

• Via the virtual public hearings; 

• Via online form at https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002; and 

• Via letter or electronic mail to FRA. 

In addition, the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR was posted to the CEQAnet website, per CEQA guidelines. 

4.1 Virtual Commenting Platform 

An online commenting platform hosted on EPA’s regulations.gov site was made available to the public 

throughout the duration of the comment review period for the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. The 

platform allowed the public to provide input on the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR and for sharing across 

social media platforms and websites. It was the most popular way to provide public input and garnered 

256 comments. 

13 
 

 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

4.2 Virtual Public Hearings Overview 

In conformance with COIVD-19 safety measures, two public hearings were held on virtually via Zoom 

Webinar on June 22nd from 6 to 8 p.m. and June 26th from 9 to 11 a.m. To increase participation, one 

meeting was held on a Tuesday weeknight while the second meeting was held the following Saturday 

morning to accommodate commuters or night working individuals. The combined meetings attracted 70 

participants. At each hearing, a stenographer was online to record all questions, answers and public 

comments. The final transcript may be found in Appendix J. Lists of meeting attendees and copies of 

each presentation can also be found in Appendix J. 

At each public hearing, representatives from FRA, RCTC, and HDR Inc., were introduced and showed the 

attendees the Program video to provide a snapshot rail corridor. Following the video, the Program team 

proceeded to present on the following topics including: 

• An overview of the Program’s purpose and need; 

• A summary of the Program history and prior planning activities; 

• An explanation of the Build Alternative Options considered; 

• A review of the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR availability and ways to comment; 

• A question-and-answer session; and 

• An opportunity for verbal comments and encouragement to present official written comments. 

After the presentation, the attendees were allowed to ask clarifying questions before the start of the 

oral testimony. The Program team provided verbal responses and supplemental resources through the 

Zoom chat feature. In total, 22 questions were clarified during the Q&A. 

Following the Q&A session, the formal public commenting session began. The Program team received 

verbal testimony for the entirety of the scheduled two-hour hearing. In total, 22 verbal comments were 

received during the public commenting session during the public hearings. 

To increase public awareness, video recordings of each public hearing were posted to the RCTC YouTube 

page. As of July 16, 2021, the video recordings garnered 66 views. 

4.2.1 Accessibility 

The proposed Build Alternative Options intersect some of the most diverse communities in Southern 

California. To accommodate the needs of these communities, multiple accessibility features were 

available during the virtual public hearings associated with the release of the Draft Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR. All collateral, including the program fact sheet, FAQ and Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR 

documents were compliant with Section 508. The NOC/NOA informed the public of special 

accommodations that could be made 72 hours in advance of the public hearings, including American 

Sign Language (ASL) interpretation, documentation in alternate formats and language requests. 

Although no special accommodations were requested, a live Spanish interpreter was made available at 

each virtual public hearing. The inclusion of an interpreter allowed Spanish-speaking attendees to ask 

questions or give verbal testimony while the interpreter relayed their comments in English to the panel. 

In addition, the PowerPoint presentation was posted as a link to access in the Zoom chat feature so 

Spanish-speaking individuals could follow along during the virtual public hearings. The audio of the 

Spanish interpreter was recorded and posted online following each virtual public hearing. Closed 

captioning was also accessible during the hearings allowing participants to view the full transcript if 

14 
 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

needed. A telephone call-in number was also provided and allowed for oral testimony participation. 

Specific groups that were contacted represented disabled populations including Blindness Support, 

Independent Living Partnership, Angel View, Specialized Transit providers and members of the Citizens 

and Specialized Transit Advisory Council. 

5. Summary of Public Comments 

As previously stated, the formal comment period ran from May 21 to July 6, 2021. During this time a 

total of 297 public comments were submitted by 9 agencies, 15 organizations and 273 individuals. Ten 

comment letters from individuals were received after the close of the comment period and although 

FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC are not obligated to respond to comment letters received after the close of the 

formal comment review period, the late arriving comment letters were included in the final 

documentation and responses were provided as a courtesy. 

Agencies that provided public comment for this period include: 

• San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) 

• County of San Bernardino 

• City of Colton 

• City of Coachella 

• City of Calimesa 

• City of Indio 

• City of Redlands 

• United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) 

• California Highway Patrol 

The most popular method of submitting comments was through the FRA comment platform, 

Regulations.gov, followed by email submitted comments. A breakdown of total commenting sources is 

seen in Figure 1. 

15 
 

 

Riverside County Transportation Commission Outreach Summary Report 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Rail Pass Corridor Program September 2021 

 

 

Figure 1 Commenting Sources 

Commenting Sources 

Individuals 

Organizations 

Agencies 

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 

Commenting Sources 

Each comment submission had the potential to include mention of multiple comment issues. Most of 

the comments received expressed similar interest in a particular topic. Twelve recurring topics emerged 

from the collection of comments and include: 

• Proposed Station Locations • Train Trip Duration 

• Conceptual Nature of Build Alternative • Program Funding 

Option Components • Program Timing 

• Freight Train Volume Assumptions • Transit Connections 

• Noise Quiet Zones • Locomotive Technology 

• Wildlife Corridors • Environmental Justice 

• Train Trip Frequency 

Of these topics the top three themes were Transit Connections, Proposed Station Locations and 

Conceptual Nature of Build Alternative Option Components. Additional comments that were not 

responded to include support for the program and use of public funding. 

6. Conclusion and Next Steps 

Comments received during the 45-day comment review period will be incorporated and taken into 

consideration as part of the Final Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. Based on public input received during the 

comment review period, FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC would consider the selection of a Build Alternative 

Option during the Final Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR process. If a Build Alternative Option is selected, FRA 

would issue a Record of Decision and RCTC would issue a Notice of Determination for the Final Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR. However, the identification and selection of a Preferred Build Alternative Option at 

the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR does not authorize construction of the Program. The identification and 

selection of a Preferred Build Alternative Option at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR would be carried forward 

for subsequent Tier 2/Project-level studies, design, and environmental review. 

16 
APPENDIX 
Riverside County Transportation Commission 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Project 

Outreach Summary Report 

Appendix A 

2018 Outreach Summary Report 

Appendix B 

Earned Media 

Appendix C 

Project Website 

Appendix D 

Newspaper Advertisements 

Appendix E 

Notice of Completion/ Notice of Availability 

Appendix F 

Geotargeting Analytics 

Appendix G 

Contact Eblast List 

Appendix H 

Technical Advisory Committee Materials 

Appendix I 

Stakeholder Briefing Presentation 

Appendix J 

Public Hearing Materials 
Appendix A 

2018 Outreach Summary Report 
 

8

FINAL Public Scoping 

Summary Report

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail

Corridor Service Study

May 2018
 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

This page is intentionally blank.
 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

 

Contents

1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Description .................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 NEPA/CEQA Scoping Process ................................................................................................. 2

2 Scoping Process ................................................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Pre-NEPA/CEQA Public Outreach............................................................................................ 4

2.2 Notice of Intent/Notice of Preparation ....................................................................................... 5

2.3 Agency and Public Outreach..................................................................................................... 5

2.3.1 Agency Outreach.......................................................................................................... 5

2.4 Public Outreach......................................................................................................................... 6

2.4.1 Outreach and Notification............................................................................................. 6

2.4.2 Public Scoping Meetings.............................................................................................. 8

3 Agency and Public Scoping Comments ............................................................................................ 10

3.1 Summary ................................................................................................................................. 10

3.2 Agency Comments .................................................................................................................. 10

3.3 Public Comments from Individuals and Other Organizations ................................................. 13

3.3.1 Station Locations........................................................................................................ 13

3.3.2 Train Service Frequency ............................................................................................ 14

3.3.3 Project Route/Alternatives.......................................................................................... 14

3.3.4 Connecting Rail Service............................................................................................. 14

3.3.5 Project Support........................................................................................................... 14

3.3.6 Project Study Area ..................................................................................................... 14

3.3.7 Project Design ............................................................................................................ 15

3.3.8 Project Tracking/Mailing Lists .................................................................................... 15

3.3.9 Property Acquisition/Right-of-Way ............................................................................. 15

3.3.10 Public Involvement/Agency Coordination .................................................................. 15

3.4 Rail Stakeholder Comments ................................................................................................... 15

3.4.1 Union Pacific Railroad................................................................................................ 15

4 Conclusion and Next Steps ............................................................................................................... 16

Tables

Table 1. Summary of Pre-NEPA/CEQA Public Outreach ............................................................................. 4

Table 2. Agency Points of Contact................................................................................................................ 6

Table 3. Public Scoping Meetings................................................................................................................. 8

Table 4. Total Number of Public Scoping Comment Submissions ............................................................. 10

May 2018 | i
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendices 

Appendix A. Public Notification Materials 

Appendix A-1 Notice of Intent 

Appendix A-2 Notice of Preparation 

Appendix A-3 Newspaper Notifications 

Appendix A-4 Website Notifications 

Appendix A-5 Social Media Notifications 

Appendix A-6 Scoping Meeting News Articles 

Appendix B. Sign-In Sheets 

Appendix C. Collateral Materials 

Appendix D. Public Scoping Presentation 

Appendix E. Public Scoping Display Boards 

Appendix F. Public Scoping Meeting Photographs 

Appendix G. Public Scoping Comment Cards Received 

Appendix H. Agency Scoping Comments Received 

Appendix H-1 Agency Scoping Comments Matrix 

Appendix H-2 Agency Scoping Comments 

Appendix I. Public Scoping Comments Received 

Appendix 1-1 Public Scoping Individuals Comments Matrix 

Appendix 1-2 Public Scoping Submissions from Organizations 

Appendix J. Railroad Stakeholder Scoping Comments 

May 2018 Iii 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Caltrans California Department of Transportation

CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EO Executive Order

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FR Federal Register

FRA Federal Railroad Administration

LAUS Los Angeles Union Station

Metro Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NOI Notice of Intent

NOP Notice of Preparation

RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission

SCAG Southern California Association of Governments

SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District

SCRRA Southern California Regional Rail Authority

UP Union Pacific Railroad

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

May 2018 | iii
 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

This page is intentionally blank.

May 2018 | iv
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

1 Introduction

This Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Project (CV Rail Project or the project) Public 

Scoping Summary Report summarizes the scoping process undertaken for the project in accordance

with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

regulations implementing NEPA; Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) Procedures for Considering 

Environmental Impacts; 23 U.S.C. § 139; and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

During the scoping process, the lead agencies, which include FRA, California Department of

Transportation Division of Rail & Mass Transportation (Caltrans), and Riverside County Transportation

Commission (RCTC) engage the public (i.e., citizens, elected officials, and key stakeholders), as well 

as local, state, and federal agencies during the early stages of the joint Tier 1/Program Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS)/Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR). 

Information developed by the lead agencies, as well as comments received from the public and other

stakeholders, during the scoping process, will help the agencies:

• Refine the Purpose and Need for the project

• Provide input on alignments or alternatives that should be considered in the Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR

• Identify potential environmental effects of the project to be addressed in the Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR

In addition, this Public Scoping Summary Report describes the scoping activities and summarizes the

written and verbal comments received on FRA’s Notice of Intent (NOI) and RCTC’s Notice of

Preparation (NOP) and comments received at the joint public scoping meetings held for the project

during the scoping period.

1.1 Project Description

FRA and Caltrans are identified as Joint Lead Agencies under NEPA, and RCTC is the Lead Agency

under CEQA. FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC have prepared this Tier I/Program EIS/EIR in compliance 

with NEPA (42 U.S. Code [USC.] § 4321 et seq.) and CEQA (California Public Resources Code,

Section 21000, et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA

(40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] parts 1500 - 1508), FRA’s Procedures for Considering

Environmental Impacts (FRA’s Environmental Procedures) (64 Federal Regulation 28545, May

26, 1999), and 23 USC § 139. The Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR will include a programmatic environmental

evaluation of the potential implementation of daily intercity passenger rail service between

Coachella/Indio in the Coachella Valley through the San Gorgonio Pass to Los Angeles Union Station

(LAUS) in Los Angeles, California (the Corridor).

FRA, RCTC, and Caltrans will use a tiered NEPA process (e.g., Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR) to complete 

the environmental review of the project, under 40 CFR 1508.28 (titled Tiering) and State

CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 (titled Program EIR) and Section 15170. “Tiering” is a staged

environmental review process often applied to environmental review for complex transportation

projects. When used, the initial phase of a tiered process addresses broad questions and likely 

May 2018 | 1
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

environmental effects for the rail corridor including, but not limited to, the type of service(s) being

proposed, major infrastructure components, and identification of major facility capacity constraints.

Based on the decisions made in the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, future site-specific proposals would be

analyzed at a greater level of detail and addressed in subsequent phases or tiered (e.g., project-level

NEPA and CEQA) environmental documents.

The Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR for the project is preceded by several years of preliminary project

development activities. In 1991, RCTC completed the first in a series of studies evaluating the

feasibility of operating one or two daily intercity rail round trips between Los Angeles and Indio. From

1991 to 2013, RCTC completed additional feasibility studies on the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio

Pass Rail Corridor. In July 2016, RCTC, in coordination with Caltrans and FRA, prepared the

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study Alternatives Analysis Final Report

that evaluated a reasonable range of alternatives for a new intercity rail service between Los Angeles

and Indio. The purpose of the Alternatives Analysis Report was to start identifying alternatives for more

detailed evaluation in a subsequent Service Development Plan (SDP) and Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR.

The alternatives identified in the Alternatives Analysis Report were presented to the public during the

scoping process and may be reevaluated or refined, as necessary, in response to comments and as 

the NEPA/CEQA process progresses.

1.2 NEPA/CEQA Scoping Process

NEPA is a procedural federal law that mandates an interdisciplinary environmental review and

documentation process for all federally-funded projects. CEQA is a procedural state law that mandates 

an interdisciplinary environmental review and documentation process for projects within California.

The NEPA/CEQA documentation process ensures that the following goals have been met before a

project is implemented:

• Federal, state, and local agencies; the public; and other project stakeholders have been

involved in the decision-making process

• A reasonable range of alternatives have been examined

• Impacts to environmental resources, and any appropriate mitigation measures, have been

considered

As previously discussed, a Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR is being prepared for the project in accordance

with NEPA and CEQA. The Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR will address compliance with other applicable

federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations, including but not limited to: Section 106 of

the National Historic Preservation Act; Clean Water Act; Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of

Transportation Act of 1966; Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conversion Fund Act (LWCF) of 1965; 

Endangered Species Act; Executive Order (EO) 11988 and USDOT Order 5650.2 on Floodplain

Management; EO 11990 on Protection of Wetlands; and EO 12898 on Environmental Justice.

The scoping process includes the following major elements:

• Publication of the NOI in the Federal Register (FR) and the NOP in the California State 

Clearinghouse

• Public Scoping Meetings

May 2018 | 2
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

• Scoping Comment Period

• Project Scoping Summary Report

The NEPA/CEQA scoping process provides government agencies, public and private organizations,

and the general public the opportunity to identify environmental issues and alternatives for

consideration in the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. The scoping process and results are an initial step in

the NEPA/CEQA process.

May 2018 | 3
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

 

 

2 Scoping Process

2.1 Pre-NEPA/CEQA Public Outreach 

RCTC began public outreach for the project in 2014 prior to the formal initiation of the

NEPA/CEQA process. The early outreach included multiple Technical Advisory Committee meetings,

public outreach meetings, and individual meetings with elected officials within the Coachella Valley.

These early outreach activities are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of Pre-NEPA/CEQA Public Outreach

Meeting Date Location # of Attendees Meeting Topic

Technical Advisory Committee Meetings

November

2014

19, In-person, and via webcast

at Southern California 

Association of Governments

(SCAG) offices in Riverside,

Los Angeles and Orange;

Coachella Valley Association 

of Governments offices; 

conference call option also 

provided

31 Project introduction and overview, study

vision, understanding of partners, FRA

process, public outreach plan, travel market

February

2015

25, Same as above 37 Study status update, draft

Need Statement, concept

public meeting update

Purpose and

alternatives,

November

2015

4, Same as above 28 Route alternatives studied, evaluation 

process, coarse level and fine level

screening criteria and results, discussion of

preferred alternative and no-build alternative

Public Meetings

February

2015

23, Banning City Hall 22 Proposed project overview; seek feedback

about rail service expansion and Purpose

and Need

February

2015

26, Coachella Valley

of Governments,

Desert

Association 

Palm

•

•

•

75 in person 

attendees

56 webcast

attendees

98 additional

webcast views

after the meeting

Same as above

Online Survey (Southern California Region)

March-July 

2015

Online Survey 668 responses Travel patterns, public transit

barriers, traffic congestion

usage, travel

Elected Officials Briefings (Riverside County)

FebruaryMarch 2015One-on-one briefings with 

Riverside County Elected 

Officials

16 participants Proposed project overview; seek feedback

about rail service expansion and Purpose

and Need

May 2018 | 4
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

Comments received during the scoping period from agencies and other stakeholders regarding

recommended or required coordination have been incorporated into this Public Scoping Summary

Report. 

2.2 Notice of Intent/Notice of Preparation

FRA published the NOI in the FR to prepare an EIS for the project on October 11, 2016 (FR Vol. 81,

No. 196, pages 70257-70260). The NOI serves as the official legal notice that a federal agency is 

commencing preparation of an EIS. As described in the NOI, the formal scoping period ended on 

November 10, 2016.

As required by CEQA Guidelines §15082 (14 CCR 15000 et seq.), RCTC issued an NOP on October

6, 2016 (State Clearinghouse #2016101017). The NOP summarized the project, provided information

on RCTC’s intention to prepare a joint Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, and requested comments from

interested parties. The formal scoping period for the NOP ended on November 10, 2016 instead of

November 5, 2016 (as indicated in the scoping meeting notices and scoping meeting materials) to coincide 

with the dates in the NOI published in the FR.

The NOI and NOP provided background information on the project, presented draft project purpose

and objectives, addressed the alternatives development process, and provided an initial list of

environmental resources to be analyzed. The NOI and NOP also announced the public scoping

meetings and invited local, state, and federal agencies; the public; and other interested parties to

submit scoping comments. The NOI and the NOP are included in Appendix A.

2.3 Agency and Public Outreach 

2.3.1 Agency Outreach

Table 2 identifies the agencies that responded to the NOI and NOP. 

May 2018 | 5
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

 

 

Table 2. Agency Points of Contact

Agency Point of Contact Title

City of Palm Desert Ryan Stendell Director of Community Development

South Coast Air Quality

Management District (SCAQMD)

Jillian Wong Planning and Rules Manager

National Park Service Jill Jensen Cultural Resource Specialist

Los Angeles County Metropolitan 

Transportation Authority (Metro)

Elizabeth Carvajal Senior Manager, Transportation Planning

Southern California Regional Rail

Authority (SCRRA/Metrolink)

Ron Mathieu Senior Public Project Specialist

California Department of Fish and 

Wildlife (CDFW)

Leslie MacNair Regional Manager

California Department of

Transportation, District 8 (Caltrans)

Mark Roberts Office Chief, Intergovernmental Review,

Community, and Regional Planning

Southern California Association of

Governments (SCAG)

Ping Chang Acting Manager, Compliance and 

Performance Monitoring

City of Coachella Steven Hernandez Mayor

United States Fish and Wildlife

Service (USFWS)

Kennon Corey Assistant Field Supervisor

United States Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 

IX

Clifton Meek Environmental Review Section

City of Indio Mariano Aguirre Director of Housing and Development

2.4 Public Outreach

Members of the public, including citizens, elected officials, and other key stakeholders (i.e., community

associations, local institutions, and study area-adjacent property owners), are important participants

in the NEPA and CEQA process. These entities will be consulted throughout the NEPA/CEQA process 

at various project milestones. Public input gathered during the scoping phase of the Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR helps guide the development of the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR.

2.4.1 Outreach and Notification

In addition to the publication of the NOI and NOP, public scoping outreach and notification occurred

through a range of outreach methods and activities as outlined below.

2.4.1.1 Website

The NOI/NOP, press release, and information related to scoping meeting locations and times were

made available to the public on RCTC’s website for the project: http://www.rctcdev.info/rail/coachellavalley-rail-service.

2.4.1.2 Social Media

On October 7, October 10, and October 11, 2016, RCTC’s Twitter and Facebook accounts included 

posts with information for the public scoping meeting dates and times and a link to the project website 

May 2018 | 6
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

(Appendix A). RCTC has approximately 900 Twitter and 1,200 Facebook followers. Posts were made

to inform the public on how to submit comments. A link to the project fact sheet was also made 

available via RCTC’s Facebook account. RCTC’s Facebook and Twitter accounts can be found at

www.facebook.com/cvrailproject and @rctc.

2.4.1.3 Mailing List

In addition to the release of the NOP and NOI, notifications were sent via email and postal mail to 

approximately 570 persons on the public outreach distribution list. As identified in the project’s Agency

and Public Coordination Plan, the distribution list was developed by taking into account early outreach

efforts, such as the Technical Advisory Committee meetings, public outreach meetings, and 

stakeholders within the Coachella Valley area and along the rail corridor. The distribution list includes

elected officials, stakeholders, community groups, and members of the public with an interest in the 

project. The distribution list will be updated and expanded as needed throughout the duration of the 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR with updated versions provided to the project team at periodic intervals. An 

additional 23 certified mailings containing the NOP were sent to federal, state, and local agencies and

organizations with an interest in the project. Notifications also included a description of the project, the

NEPA/CEQA process, and instructions for submitting public comments or requesting special

accommodations.

2.4.1.4 Newspaper Advertisements and Press Releases

RCTC advertised the public scoping meetings and comment period in the following newspapers:

• The Press-Enterprise published on October 6, 2016 – circulation in Southern California

• Los Angeles Times published on October 6, 2016 – circulation in Southern California

• The Desert Sun published on October 6, 2016 – circulation in Coachella Valley

• La Opinion (Spanish) published on October 6, 2016 – circulation in Southern California

• El Informador del Valle (Spanish) published on October 6, 2016 – circulation in Coachella

Valley

• La Prensa (Spanish) published on October 7, 2016 – circulation in Riverside, San Bernardino

and East Los Angeles counties

• Excelsior (Spanish) published on October 7, 2016 – circulation in Orange County

• La Prensa Hispana (Spanish) published on October 7, 2016 – circulation in Coachella Valley,

eastern portion of Riverside County, eastern portion of San Bernardino County, and Imperial

County

Copies of these advertisements are included in Appendix A. The advertisements invited the public to 

attend the public scoping meetings, provided information regarding the meeting times and places,

meeting format, the 30-day public scoping period, the publication of the NOI and NOP, project website 

address, and instructions for submitting public comments or requesting special accommodations.

Additionally, RCTC issued an electronic press release on October 11, 2016 (Appendix A), inviting the 

public to attend the public scoping meeting, providing meeting times and places, information regarding

May 2018 | 7
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

the public scoping period, and instructions for submitting public comments or requesting special

accommodations. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the City of Indio

also posted the press release on their respective websites. The NOP and an associated press release

were also made available to the public on RCTC’s website for the 

project: http://www.rctcdev.info/rail/coachella-valley-rail-service.

2.4.2 Public Scoping Meetings

During the NOI/NOP comment period, FRA and RCTC conducted three public scoping meetings as 

summarized in Table 3.

Table 3. Public Scoping Meetings

Meeting Date Location Time

Number of

Attendees

October 12, 2016 Springbrook Clubhouse at Reid Park

1101 N. Orange Street

Riverside, CA 92501

5 – 7 p.m. 8

October 13, 2016 Indio Senior Center

45700 Aladdin St

Indio, CA 92201

5 – 7 p.m. 17

October 17, 2016 Metro Headquarters

1 Gateway Plaza

Los Angeles CA 90012

5 – 7 p.m. 14

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The public scoping meetings helped to notify stakeholders about the public comment period for the 

CEQA NOP (October 6, 2016 through November 10, 2016) and the NEPA NOI (October 11, 2016

through November 10, 2016). The primary goals for the public scoping meetings were to: 

• Educate the public on the need for the project

• Share the history of the project and how the project has evolved

• Outline the project benefits

• Highlight the project elements

• Present the project timeline

• Explain the next steps

• Gather public comments per the requirements of CEQA and NEPA

• Initiate the Section 106 process

The scoping meetings provided the public and government agencies the opportunity to receive

information on the NEPA/CEQA process, the project, and how to provide comments. Approximately 

39 persons attended the scoping meetings in Los Angeles, Indio, and Riverside, including

representatives from local and state agencies, organizations, and private citizens. Appendix 

B includes t he sign-in sheets for the three public scoping meetings.

May 2018 | 8
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

At the beginning of each of the scoping meetings, all attendees were greeted by a member of the

project team and asked to sign in at a “Welcome” station. Copies of the NOI and NOP were also

available at the sign-in tables. To ensure that the multilingual needs of the community were met, the

project fact sheet was available in Spanish. In addition, project team staff members were available to

interpret the presentation in Spanish. Project fact sheets and comment cards were provided as

handouts at the public scoping meetings. Copies of all collateral materials provided at the scoping

meetings are included in Appendix C.

The meeting venue was set up with one main seating area for the project presentation with project

stations located around the main seating area. Prior to the presentation, attendees were encouraged

to visit the various project stations, view the project display boards, and meet the project team. At 5:45

p.m., Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director for RCTC, started the project presentation. Yates

gave the project presentation with assistance from J.D. Douglas, project manager for HDR. Lyle Leitelt

was also in attendance to represent FRA and answered questions from stakeholders. The 

presentation, provided in Appendix D, covered the following topics:

• Project Overview

• Project Purpose and Need 

• Project History

• Project Process

• Agency Coordination

• Project Timeline

• Ways to Provide Public Comments

• Project Contact Information

Following the presentation, stakeholders were encouraged to visit the project stations, meet with the

project team, view project display boards, ask questions, and provide comments. Copies of the display

boards presented at the meeting are provided in Appendix E. Photographs documenting the scoping

meetings are provided in Appendix F.

Attendees were encouraged to submit comments by mail, electronically to the project email address, 

or as written comments submitted at the meeting. Several attendees submitted written comments at

the public scoping meeting using forms made available, as provided in Appendix G.

May 2018 | 9
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

 

 

3 Agency and Public Scoping Comments

3.1 Summary

Federal, state, and local agencies; private and public organizations; and the general public provided 

written comments during the public scoping period. The comment period for the NOP and NOI ended

November 10, 2016. In total, 36 submissions were received: 13 from federal, state, and local agencies;

23 from individuals of the public and other organizations, and 1 from a railroad stakeholder. These

comments are incorporated into the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR project record. The total number of

scoping comment submissions are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4. Total Number of Public Scoping Comment Submissions

Number Received Source

13 Agency Submissions

1 Public comment cards from agencies

12 Letters and emails from agencies

23 Public Submissions

17 Emails submitted via CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com

3 Letters mailed to FRA and RCTC

3 Coachella Valley Rail Project comment forms

1 Railroad Stakeholder Submissions

1 Letters from railroad stakeholders

May 2018 | 10

3.2 Agency Comments

As discussed above, FRA, RCTC, and Caltrans received comments from the following agencies:

• City of Palm Desert

• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

• National Park Service 

• Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (Metro)

• Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink)

• California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)

• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 8

• Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)

• City of Coachella

• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IX

• City of Indio 

All agency comments received are presented in Appendix H and summarized below.

3.1.2.1 City of Palm Desert

In a public comment card dated October 13, 2016, the City of Palm Desert recommended an increase 

of rail service frequency during the music festival season and a “mid-valley” stop at Palm Desert

University (Cook Street). Additionally, the City of Palm Desert requested a map showing how the

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service would connect to Metro services.

3.1.2.2 South Coast Air Quality Management District

In a letter dated October 21, 2016, the SCAQMD requested a copy of the Draft EIR with appendices

upon completion. SCAQMD recommended the use of the 1993 Air Quality Handbook and the 

CalEEMod land use emissions software during preparation of the air quality analysis. Additionally,

SCAQMD requested the lead agency quantify criteria pollutant emissions, compare the results to the

recommended regional significance thresholds, and identify any potential adverse air quality impacts

that could occur from all project phases. A mobile source health risk assessment and permit may be 

required if the project generates or attracts vehicular trips, especially heavy-duty diesel-fueled 

vehicles. SCAQMD requested to be listed as a responsible agency and consulted.

3.1.2.3 National Park Service

In an email dated November 2, 2016, the National Park Service noted that a portion of the project area 

could be located within the corridor of the Old Spanish National Historic Trail. National Park Service

requested to be considered a Section 106 consulting party.

3.1.2.4 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority

In a letter dated November 4, 2016, Metro expressed support for the project and the project’s purpose 

and stated objectives. Metro noted its primary preference for the BNSF alignment with a station in

Fullerton with a secondary preference for the Union Pacific Railroad (UP) Alhambra subdivision 

alignment. Metro expressed it does not support the Metrolink San Bernardino Line or Riverside Line

alignments. Metro requested to be included in the Technical Advisory Committee and for a copy of the 

Draft EIR when completed. Metro also requested that coordination with Metro’s planning and

preliminary engineering efforts for the Link US Project be included with decisions regarding throughput

and capacity at LAUS.

3.1.2.5 Southern California Regional Rail Authority

In a letter dated November 4, 2016, SCRRA/Metrolink expressed its support of need for additional

passenger rail services in Southern California. Metrolink recommended the inclusion and analysis of

at least one other alignment, such as the UP Alhambra Subdivision or Metrolink’s Los Angeles 

Subdivision in the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. Metrolink identified opportunities for joint investments

in capacity-enhancing infrastructure in partnership with other passenger railroads and services.

Metrolink commented that further definition on station locations and stops on selected routes are

needed, as well as an analysis to ensure safe non-stop operations through the existing stations on the

preferred route. Metrolink also requested coordination to ensure that this new planned service is

May 2018 | 11
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

operated in and out of LAUS without compromise to Metrolink dedicated platforms or number of runthrough tracks associated with the Link US Project.

3.1.2.6 California Department of Fish and Wildlife

In a letter dated November 4, 2016, the CDFW requested that a general biological inventory of species

that are present or have the potential to be present be conducted within affected areas. The CDFW

also requested that the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR include a complete assessment of flora and

fauna within and adjacent to the project footprint including habitat types and a corresponding map.

Additionally, the CDFW provided guidance on how the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR could analyze 

direct and indirect biological impacts and how to create mitigation to offset impacts. The

CDFW suggested to consider use of existing infrastructure where feasible to reduce project impacts 

and noted that a California Endangered Species Act Incidental Take Permit may be required. The

CDFW recommended early consultation to discuss project alternatives and routes and

mitigation/minimization measures.

3.1.2.7 California Department of Transportation, District 8

In a letter dated November 14, 2016 (after the close of the formal scoping period), Caltrans 

District 8 office expressed its support of project objectives that will assist in the reduction of vehicle 

miles traveled and traffic along impacted corridors. Caltrans recommended that high density housing

and mixed-use developments are integrated around future stations and encouraged the development

of public transportation and active transportation connections around the station areas. Caltrans 

District 8 office also recommended the project include a study of alignments to connect to the future 

high-speed rail station planned for San Bernardino.

3.1.2.8 Southern California Association of Governments

In a letter date November 5, 2016, SCAG requested a copy of the Draft EIR with appendices upon its

completion. SCAG recommended that the environmental document include a consistency comparison

with goals contained in the 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.

3.1.2.9 City of Coachella

In an email dated November 7, 2016, the City of Coachella requested that a station be considered for 

the city. 

3.1.2.10 United States Fish and Wildlife Service

In a letter dated November 9, 2016 the USFWS recommended that the EIS/EIR include a discussion 

of the project’s effects on the conservation strategies as outlined within existing or draft Natural

Community Conservation Plans/Habitat Conservation Plans. The USFWS also requested that a

description of all alternatives and detailed information (e.g., the number and distribution of all federallylisted species; state-listed species; and locally-sensitive species affected, specific acreages and

descriptions of sensitive habitat) be included in the EIS/EIR. 

May 2018 | 12
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

3.1.2.11 Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX

In a letter dated November 9, 2016, the EPA expressed support of the concept of a rail system that

can provide an alternative to increasing vehicle miles traveled and lead to reduced environmental

impacts, so long as it is planned well. The EPA requested review of the project purpose and need and 

range of alternatives, the Draft and Final EIS, and the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable 

Alternative for the Section 404 permit (if applicable). The EPA recommended early coordination with

the EPA, United States Army Corps of Engineers, CDFW, and USFWS, and identified a series of

methodologies related to environmental issue areas. The EPA also the noted the Draft Tier 1/Program

EIS/EIR should identify the project’s relationship to other regional transportation projects.

EPA requested that the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR also include an analysis of construction of

stations, parking facilities, maintenance and storage facilities, power propagation infrastructure,

required road construction/modifications and inclusion of Leadership in Energy and Environmental

Design for future stations and rail facilities.

3.1.2.12 City of Indio

In two letters dated November 10, 2016, the City of Indio requested that it be the terminus of the future 

rail line due to the presence of the existing Indio Transportation Center (Greyhound Bus services) and

space for a future multimodal facility and storage/layover yard.

3.3 Public Comments from Individuals and Other

Organizations 

Twenty-three public comment letters were received from individuals of the public and other

organizations during the scoping period. The project team reviewed each comment letter to identify

individual comments. Appendix I includes a matrix of all individual comments, which are summarized 

by topic area and discussed in the following sections.

Twenty-one comment letters were from public individuals, one comment letter was from a business,

and one joint comment letter came from local advocacy groups that included: Leadership Counsel for

Justice and Accountability, Kounkuey Design Initiative, Pueblo Unido CDC, Building Healthy

Communities Coachella Valley, Organización en California de Líderes Campesinas, Inc., California

Partnership, and Coachella Unincorporated Inc., as provided in Appendix I.

3.3.1 Station Locations

Seven comments suggested preferred station locations or had questions about potential station

locations along the proposed rail corridor. Two comments suggested a new Downtown Palm Springs

station or shuttle service between the existing Palm Springs Station and Downtown Palm Springs.

Two comments requested a station stop at the Metrolink Ontario station, and two comments expressed

a preference for a station stop at Indio. One comment recommended all cities with a station along the

corridor should own their own station facilities. Another comment suggested station stops in Palm

Desert (by the Aqua Caliente Casino Resort Spa), Beaumont/Banning, Redlands/Loma Linda,

Riverside, Corona, and Fullerton. One comment recommended a station stop in Beaumont, Ontario 

International Airport, and near the San Gabriel Mission. One comment asked what station stops would

be located along the rail corridor.

May 2018 | 13
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

3.3.2 Train Service Frequency

Five comments suggested preferred train service frequency. One comment inquired if there would be 

two trains daily in each direction or one train in each direction. Three comments suggested train

service twice a day in both directions to allow for round trips. Two comments also suggested train

service be increased to three to four times a day during the festival season. One comment suggested

train service between Palm Springs and Los Angeles with a 1- to 2-hour interval.

3.3.3 Project Route/Alternatives

Five comments were about project route or alternative alignments considered. One comment provided

general support for the proposed project route alignments. One comment expressed preference for

the UP Yuma or Alhambra Subdivision route alignment. One comment expressed preference for the 

Alameda Corridor route alignment. One comment indicated that the Riverside route alignment cuts off

rail access to Ontario, Pomona, and San Gabriel populations. One comment suggested that the project

proponent consider a route in the western section of the study area that would accommodate the

greatest amount of passengers.

3.3.4 Connecting Rail Service

Seven comments were about how the project could connect to other existing transit or alternative

transportation systems. One comment suggested that the new rail service be coordinated with trains

leaving LAUS for Central and Northern California. One comment suggested that the new rail service

split services in Riverside/Corona with one service continuing to LAUS and another service continuing

on to San Diego. Two comments recommended the rail service connect to area airports, such as 

Ontario International Airport and Los Angeles International Airport. One comment suggested an

Amtrak-bus connection with San Bernardino, and one comment inquired if the proposed rail service

could be locally integrated with the Coachella Valley Link (a proposed multimodal facility). 

3.3.5 Project Support

Eight comments offered general support for the project, of which five comments requested that the

project be expedited to allow for alternative modes of transportation in the Coachella Valley. One

comment was supportive of the project because it could reduce carbon emissions and bring safety

benefits to the Coachella Valley during festival season.

3.3.6 Project Study Area

Three comments provided suggestions for the current project study area. One comment requested

the extension of rail service to the Salton Sea community. One comment recommended that Indio not

be labeled as the end of the proposed rail corridor but as the “temporary east terminal” or “Phase I of

Los Angeles to Phoenix via Palm Springs and Indio.” One comment indicated that the project be

planned to connect Los Angeles to Phoenix.

May 2018 | 14
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

3.3.7 Project Design

Three comments offered suggestions on project design of the proposed rail corridor. One comment

suggested the potential of electrifying the rail corridor. One comment requested to see transit lines 

improved from current railroad methods using new technologies. One comment recommended that a

study option should include two to four self-propelled railcars instead of traditional locomotives.

3.3.8 Project Tracking/Mailing Lists

One comment was related to project tracking. The comment inquired if there were other ways to track

the project beside Facebook. Two comments requested inclusion on future mailing lists.

3.3.9 Property Acquisition/Right-of-Way 

Three comments were on property acquisition and right-of-way for the project. One comment inquired 

if the project would utilize portions of the I-10, California High-Speed Rail, or Metrolink San Bernardino

right-of-way for parts of the route alignment. One comment stated that there was not enough

information to support percentage of residential and commercial property acquisitions that would be

required for the Riverside route alignment versus the Alameda Corridor route alignment. One comment

suggested that general planning and right-of-way acquisitions be included from Los Angeles to

Phoenix.

3.3.10 Public Involvement/Agency Coordination

Six comments contained suggestions for public involvement and agency coordination. One comment

recommended that a Citizen Advisory Committee be created and that it include at least two

representatives from each of the communities in the Coachella Valley. One comment requested that

East Coachella Valley residents be included and engaged in the development of the rail service via

public meetings and scheduled at accessible times/places with appropriate language assistance. 

One comment suggested including the Arizona Department of Transportation and City of Phoenix on

the list of lead agencies to encourage an Amtrak train service to Arizona. One comment recommended

coordination with the Coachella Valley Water District and the County of Riverside Transportation and

Land Management Agency to address population growth in the proposed rail corridor. One comment

inquired why Imperial County agencies are not part of the sponsoring agency list. One comment

suggested that a San Bernardino County official be included as part of the project to advocate for the

Alameda Corridor route alignment.

3.4 Rail Stakeholder Comments

3.4.1 Union Pacific Railroad 

UP, owner of the existing Yuma subdivision between Colton and Indio and freight rail operator,

provided scoping comments by a letter dated November 10, 2016. UP stated that any existing and

future capacity provided by UP tracks and right-of-way within the project study area is to be reserved

for freight purposes. UP expressed that expanded passenger service, as proposed, would have future

unintended consequences, such as forcing more trucks onto the highway due to reduced rail capacity.

Appendix J includes the letter received from UP. No other rail stakeholders provided letters or written

comments during the formal scoping period.

May 2018 | 15
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Study

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report

Conclusion and Next Steps

Comments submitted during the public scoping process will be taken into consideration by 

FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC throughout the development of the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. The ideas and 

concerns shared during scoping, in addition to any received throughout the remainder of the

NEPA/CEQA process, will be considered in the content of the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, including the 

public and agency involvement process, Purpose and Need Statement, alternatives development, and

environmental resources evaluation. Public and agency involvement for the project will extend 

throughout the development of the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR as described in the Coachella Valley-San 

Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Development Plan Stakeholder and Public Outreach Plan. 

May 2018 | 16
       

     

   

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix A 

Public Notification Materials 
       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A-1-2

PUBLIC NOTICE 

Coachella Valley  – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service  Project 

Notice of Intent (NOI) and Notice of Preparation (NOP)  a  for 

Joint Programmatic Environmental  Impact Statement/  Environmental Impact Report (Program EIS/EIR) 

WHAT’S The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) in cooperation with the Riverside County Transportation Commission

BEING (RCTC) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) are initiating the environmental process for the

PLANNED Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project (Project). The Project will study options for

providing intercity rail services between the cities of Los Angeles and Indio, California, also known as the Coachella

Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Corridor (the Corridor).

FRA has released a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

RCTC has released a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to prepare an EIR under the California Environmental Quality

Act (CEQA). FRA will prepare the Programmatic EIS/EIR jointly with RCTC and Caltrans for the Project.

The Programmatic EIS/EIR will be prepared consistent with the NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the Council 

on Environmental Quality regulations implementing NEPA set forth in 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, the FRA’s

Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts as set forth in 64 FR Part 28545, dated May 26, 1999

(Environmental Procedures) and updated in 78 FR 2713 dated January 14, 2013, 23 U.S.C. 139, CEQA (Section 

21000 – 21178 and California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3 Section 15000-15387), and other applicable

federal and state laws and regulations.

WHY THIS 

AD? The purpose of this Notice is to:

• Provide information about the Project, proposed Purpose and Need for the Project, and proposed alternatives

to be considered; and,

• Invite public and agency participation in the EIS/EIR process.

The Programmatic EIS/EIR will compare the No Build Alternative to a range of reasonable Build Alternatives for a 

new intercity rail service that would meet the future mobility needs of residents, businesses, and visitors between 

the cities of Los Angeles and Indio.

WHEN AND 

WHERE The meeting times and locations are as follows:

Date  Time  Location 

Wednesday, October 12, 2016 5-7 PM Springbrook Clubhouse at Reid Park

Brief Presentation: 5:45 PM 1011 N. Orange Street

Riverside, CA 92501

Thursday, October 13, 2016 5-7 PM Indio Senior Center

Brief Presentation: 5:45 PM 45-700 Aladdin Street

Indio, CA 92201

Monday, October 17, 2016 5-7 PM Los Angeles County Metropolitan 

Brief Presentation: 5:45 PM Transportation Authority (Metro) Headquarters

Plaza Level: One Gateway Plaza

Los Angeles, CA 90012

All scoping meeting locations are Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) accessible facilities. Spanish

language interpreters will be present. You may call (909) 627-2974 at least 72 hours in advance of the meetings

to request other ADA accommodations or interpretation services.

WHAT’S 

AVAILABLE? Scoping materials and information regarding the scoping meetings are available through RCTC’s website 

http://rctc.org/projects/rail-projects/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-rail-service

WHERE YOU 

COME IN The public review and comment period for the NOI and NOP is October 5, 2016 to November 5, 2016. Federal,

state, and local agencies, organizations, and public are invited to provide input into the scope of the Programmatic

EIS/EIR. Interested persons should send written comments to FRA’s Office of Program Delivery, 1200 New Jersey

Avenue, S.E. (Mail Stop 20), Washington, DC 20590, or Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC),

P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California, 92502, or via e-mail to Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director, at

CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Comments should include “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass

Rail Corridor Service Project – NOI Scoping Comments’’ or “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service Project – NOP Scoping Comments” in the subject line and the commenter’s physical mailing address in

the body of the letter or email. Persons interested in providing written comments on the scope of the Project must

do so by Saturday, November 5, 2016.
           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO 

Proyecto del Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley  – San Gorgonio Pass 

Notificación de Intención (NOI) y Anuncio de Preparación (NOP) de un 

Programa de Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/Reporte de Impacto Ambiental  (Programa EIS/EIR) Conjunto 

LO QUE SE La Administración Federal de Ferrocarril (FRA, por sus siglas en inglés) en asocio con la Comisión de Transporte

ESTÁ del Condado de Riverside (RCTC, por sus siglas en inglés) y el Departamento de Transporte de California

PLANEANDO (Caltrans) están iniciando el proceso del Proyecto del Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley – San 

Gorgonio Pass (Proyecto). El proyecto estudiará opciones para proveer servicios de tren interurbano entre las

ciudades de Los Ángeles e Indio, en California, un trayecto conocido como el Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio 

Pass (el Corredor).

FRA ha presentado la Notificación de Intención (NOI) para preparar una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental (EIS)

de acuerdo con el Acta de Política Ambiental Nacional (NEPA). RCTC ha presentado una Notificación de

Preparación (NOP) para preparar el Reporte de Impacto Ambiental (EIR) de acuerdo con el Acta de Calidad

Ambiental de California (CEQA). FRA preparará un EIS/EIR Programático conjunta con RCTC y Caltrans para

el Proyecto.

El EIS/EIR Programático será preparado de acuerdo con el acta NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) y las

regulaciones del Concejo de Calidad Ambiental implementando el NEPA descrito en 40 CFR Partes 1500-1508,

los Procedimientos de Consideración de Impactos Ambientales de FRA como están descritos en 64 CFR Parte

28545, con fecha del 26 de mayo de 1999 (Procedimientos Ambientales), y actualización en 78 FR 2713 con

fecha del 14 de enero de 2013, 23 U.S.C. 139, CEQA (Sección 21000 – 21178 y el Código de Regulaciones de

California Título 14, Capítulo 3 Sección 15000-15387), y otras leyes y regulaciones federales y estatales

aplicables.

EL POR QUÉ Los objetivos de este Anuncio es:

DE ESTE 

AVISO • Proveer información acerca del Proyecto, objetivo y necesidad del Proyecto propuesto y las alternativas

propuestas que deben ser consideradas; e,

• Invitar al público y a las agencias a que participen del proceso del EIS/EIR.

El EIS/EIR Programático comparará la Alternativa de No Construcción y una variedad de Alternativas de

Construcción razonables para un servicio nuevo de tren interurbano que podría satisfacer las necesidades

futuras de movilización de residentes, empresas y visitantes entre las ciudades de Los Ángeles e Indio.

¿CUÁNDO Y

DÓNDE? Estos son los horarios y lugares donde se harán las reuniones:

Fecha  Hora  Ubicación 

Miércoles 12 de octubre de 2016 5-7 PM Springbrook Clubhouse at Reid Park

Presentación Resumida 1011 N. Orange Street

a las 5:45 PM Riverside, CA 92501

Jueves 13 de octubre de 2016 5-7 PM Indio Senior Center

Presentación Resumida 45-700 Aladdin Street

a las 5:45 PM Indio, CA 92201

Lunes 17 de octubre de 2016 5-7 PM Los Angeles County Metropolitan 

Presentación Resumida Transportation Authority (Metro)

a las 5:45 PM Oficinas Principales, A Nivel de la Plaza,

One Gateway Plaza

Los Ángeles, CA 90012

Todas las reuniones informativas se harán en lugares accesibles de acuerdo con el Acta de Americanos con

Discapacidades de 1990 (ADA). Habrá presentes intérpretes de español. Puede llamar al (909) 627-2974 por

lo menos 72 horas antes de las reuniones para solicitar otras acomodaciones ADA o servicios de interpretación.

¿QUÉ HAY 

DISPONIBLE? 

Los materiales e información con respecto a las reuniones informativas están disponibles a través de la página

web de RCTC: http://rctc.org/projects/rail-projects/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-rail-service

¿CUÁL ES SU 

PAPEL? 

La revisión pública y el periodo de comentarios sobre la NOI y NOP es del 5 de octubre de 2016 al 5 de 

noviembre de 2016. Las agencias federales, estatales y locales, las organizaciones y el público general están

invitados a aportar sus comentarios acerca del EIS/EIR Programático. Las personas interesadas deben enviar

sus comentarios por escrito a la oficina Office of Program Delivery de la FRA: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.

(Mail Stop 20), Washington, DC 20590 o a la comisión Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC),

P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California, 92502, o a través de correo electrónico a Robert Yates, Multimodal

Services Director, a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Los comentarios deben decir “Coachella 

Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project – NOI Scoping Comments’’ o “Coachella Valley – San

Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project – NOP Scoping Comments” en la casilla de Asunto, e incluir en la

carta o el correo electrónico la dirección física de quien hace el comentario. Las personas interesadas en hacer

comentarios por escrito acerca de la reunión de detección de necesidades del Proyecto tienen que hacerlo

antes del sábado 5 de noviembre de 2016.
=>Hs=«An~ US. COVERNMENT 

INFORMATION 

GPO 

Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 196/Tuesday, October 11, 2016/Notices 70257 

Section 

Tank Car Owner Notification to All Parties 

under Contract to Car Owner, including 

Lessees and/or sub-Lessees, using tank cars subject to the Terms of this Directive. Report of Inspection , Test, and Repair Infor­ mation stipulated in paragraph 2(g) of Directive to FRA. 

Repairs: 15% of Relevant Tank Fleet of 

14,000 cars- Record and Report of Repairs to Tank Car Owners. Tank Car Facility Request to Tank Car 

Owner for Written Permission and Approval of Qualification and Maintenance 

Program It Will Use Consistent with Appendices D, R, and W of the Tank Car 

Manual and 49 CFR 180.513 Prior to Initiating Any Repairs. Tank Car Facility Report of All Work Performed to Tank Car Owner. 

Respondent universe 

20 Tank Car Owners 

(100 Lessees/SubLessees). 

20 Tank Car Owners 

(100 Lessees/SubLessees). 

10 Tank Car Facility 

Operators. 

10 Tank Car Facility 

Operators. 

10 Tank Car Facility 

Operators. 

Total annual 

responses 

Average time per 

response 

Total annual burden 

hours 

100 notices .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 hours .... .... .... .. .. .. .. .. . 

20 min. per car/report. 

16 hours ..................... 

10 min. + 1 O min ....... 

N/A ............................. 

200 

4,667 

33,600 

7 

N/A 

14,000 reports ............ 

2,100 car reports/ 

records. 

20 requests + 20 written permissions. 

Burden Included Directly Above. 

Total Estimated Responses: 44,293. 

Total Estimated Annual Burden: 

68,953 hours. 

Status: Emergency Review. 

Description: 

On September 30, 2016, FRA issued a 

Railworthiness Directive (Directive) to 

all owners of DOT specification 111 

general purpose tank cars, which can be 

found on FRA's Web site at http:// 

www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L18383. 

FRA issued the Directive based on its 

finding that as a result of nonconforming welding practices, DOT-111 

tank cars built by American Railcar 

Industries, Inc. (ARI) and ACF 

Industries, LLC (ACF) between 2009 and 

2015 to the ARI and ACF 300 stub sill 

design and equipped with a two-piece 

cast sump and bottom outlet valve 

(BOV) skid may be in an unsafe 

operating condition and could result in 

the release of hazardous materials. As a 

result of the non-conforming welding 

practices, these cars may have 

substantial weld defects at the sump 

and BOV skid groove attachment welds, 

potentially affecting each tank's ability 

to retain its contents during 

transportation. The Directive requires 

owners to: (1) Identify tank cars in their 

fleet covered by this Directive; and (2) 

ensure appropriate inspection and 

testing of each tank car's sump and BOV 

skid groove attachment welds to ensure 

no flaw exists which could result in the 

loss of tank integrity. 

As provided under 5 CFR 1320.13, 

Emergency Processing, DOT is 

requesting emergency processing for 

this new collection of information as 

specified in the PRA and its 

implementing regulations. DOT cannot 

reasonably comply with normal 

clearance procedures because the use of 

normal clearance procedures is 

reasonably likely to disrupt the 

collection of information. Further, in 

light of recent tank car accidents/ 

incidents carrying crude oil, FRA 

believes safety is an overriding issue. 

The Directive took effect upon issuance. 

FRA cannot wait the normal 90 days of 

public comment. Under the Directive, 

tank car owners must take immediate 

action to identify tank cars in their fleet 

subject to the Directive. Therefore, FRA 

is requesting 0MB approval of this 

collection of information 7 days after 

publication of this Notice in the Federal 

Register. Upon 0MB approval of its 

Emergency clearance request, FRA will 

follow the normal clearance procedures 

for the information collection associated 

with this Directive. 

Under 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 

1320.S(b), 1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA informs 

all interested parties it may not conduct 

or sponsor, and a respondent is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid 0MB control number. 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 4, 

2016. 

Amitabha Bose, 

Chief Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2016-24429 Filed 10-7-16; 8 :45 am] 

BILLING CODE 491o--06-P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement for the Coachella ValleySan Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service: Riverside, San Bernardino, 

Orange, and Los Angeles Counties, CA 

AGENCY: Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), U.S. Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Intent (NOi) to prepare 

a Programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS). 

SUMMARY: Through this NOi, FRA 

announces it will prepare a 

Programmatic EIS and Environmental 

Impact Report (EIR) jointly with the 

Riverside County Transportation 

Commission (RCTC) and the California 

Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 

for the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio 

Pass Rail Corridor Service (Project). 

FRA, RCTC, and Caltrans will develop 

the Programmatic EIS/EIR in 

compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA), and the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 

FRA invites the public and Federal, 

state, and local agencies to provide 

input into the scope of the EIS/EIR and 

will consider all information from 

outreach activities when preparing the 

EIS/EIR. The Project will study options 

for providing intercity passenger rail 

service between the cities of Los 

Angeles and Indio, California also 

known as the Coachella Valley-San 

Gorgonio Pass Corridor (the Corridor). 

DATES: Persons interested in providing 

written comments on the scope of the 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass 

A-3
70258 Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 196/Tuesday, October 11, 2016/Notices 

Rail Corridor Service Project must do so 

by November 10, 2016. 

Three public scoping meetings are 

scheduled for Wednesday, October 12, 

2016; Thursday, October 13, 2016; and 

Monday, October 17, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons should 

send written comments to FRA's Office 

of Program Delivery, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE. (Mail Stop 20), Washington, 

DC 20590, or Riverside County 

Transportation Commission (RCTC), 

4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, 

California 92501, or via email to Robert 

Yates, Multimodal Services Director, 

CoachellaValleyRail@ 

ArellanoAssociates.com. Comments 

should include "Coachella Valley-San 

Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor ServiceNOi Scoping Comments" in the subject 

line. 

Interested persons may also provide 

comments orally or in writing at the 

following scoping meetings: • Springbrook Club House at Reid 

Park: 1101 N. Orange Street Riverside, 

CA 92501, between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 

p.m.; 

• Indio Senior Center: 45-700 

Aladdin Street, Indio, CA 92201, 

between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.; and • Metro Headquarters, Plaza Level: 

One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, 

California 90012, between 5:00 p.m. and 

7:00 p.m. 

All scoping meeting locations are 

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 

(ADA) accessible. Spanish language 

translators will be present. You may call 

(909) 627-2974 at least 72 hours in 

advance of the meeting to request other 

accommodations or translation services. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Stephanie Perez, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Office of Program 

Delivery, Federal Railroad 

Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE. (Mail Stop 20), Washington, 

DC 20590; Telephone: (202) 493-0388, 

email: stephanie.perez@dot.gov, or 

Robert Yates, Multimodal Services 

Director, at CoachellaValleyRail@ 

ArellanoAssociates.com. 

Scoping materials and information 

concerning the scoping meeting is 

available through RCTC's Web site: 

http://rctc.org/projects/rail-projects/ 

coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-passcorridor-rail-service. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FRA is an 

operating administration of DOT and is 

responsible for overseeing the safety of 

railroad operations, including the safety 

of any proposed rail transportation 

system. FRA also provides financial 

assistance for intercity passenger rail 

capital investments. 

FRA is the lead agency under NEPA 

for the Project. FRA will prepare the 

Programmatic EIS/EIR consistent with 

NEPA, the Council on Environmental 

Quality regulations implementing NEPA 

(40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and FRA's 

Procedures for Considering 

Environmental Impacts (64 FR 28545, 

May 26, 1999; 78 FR 2713, Jan. 14, 2013) 

(Environmental Procedures). FRA, 

RCTC, and Caltrans will prepare the EIS 

consistent with 23 U.S.C. 139 (titled 

"Efficient environmental reviews for 

project decision making"). RCTC and 

Caltrans will ensure the EIR is 

consistent with CEQA. After release and 

circulation of a Draft Programmatic EIS/ 

EIR for public comment, FRA will issue 

a single document consisting of the 

Final Programmatic EIS and a Record of 

Decision under the Fixing America's 

Surface Transportation Act (Pub. L. 

114-94, section 1304(n)(2)) unless it 

determines that statutory criteria or 

practicability considerations prelude 

issuing a combined document. 

The EIS will also document FRA's 

compliance with other applicable 

Federal, state, and local laws including, 

Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act, Section 4(:f) of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation Act of 

1966, the conformity requirements of 

the Clean Air Act, and Executive Order 

12898 and U.S. DOT Order 5610.2(a) on 

Environmental Justice. FRA, RCTC, and 

Caltrans will use a tiered NEPA process 

(e.g. Programmatic EIS/EIR) to complete 

the environmental review of the Project, 

under 40 CFR 1508.28 (titled "Tiering") 

and FRA's Environmental Procedures. 

"Tiering" is a staged environmental 

review process often applied to 

environmental review for complex 

transportation projects. When used, the 

initial phase of a tiered process 

addresses broad questions and likely 

environmental effects for the Corridor 

including, but not limited to, the type of 

service(s) being proposed, major 

infrastructure components, and 

identification of major facility capacity 

constraints. Based on the decisions 

made in the Programmatic EIS/EIR, 

future site-specific proposals would be 

analyzed at a greater level of detail and 

addressed in subsequent phases or 

tiered (e.g. Project-level NEPA and 

CEQA) environmental documents. 

Project Description and Background 

The Project would extend from an 

eastern terminus in Indio, California to 

the western terminus at Los Angeles 

Union Station (LAUS), and is 

approximately 141 miles long. In 1991, 

RCTC completed the first in a series of 

studies evaluating the feasibility of 

operating one or two daily intercity rail 

round trips between Los Angeles and 

Indio. From 1991 to 2013, RCTC 

completed additional feasibility studies 

on the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio 

Pass Rail Corridor Service. In July 2016, 

RCTC, in coordination with Caltrans 

and FRA, prepared and completed the 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass 

Rail Corridor Service Study Alternatives 

Analysis Final Report that evaluated a 

reasonable range of alternatives for a 

new intercity rail service between Los 

Angeles and Indio. The purpose of the 

Alternatives Analysis was to identify an 

alternative(s) for more detailed 

evaluation in a subsequent Service 

Development Plan and Programmatic 

EIS/EIR. 

Project Need 

The Corridor currently faces 

significant mobility challenges that are 

likely to continue as growth in 

population, employment, and tourism 

activity is expected to increase travel 

demand. An effective rail system will 

help meet the future mobility needs of 

residents, businesses, and visitors. The 

Corridor faces continuing transportation 

challenges as evidenced by the 

following: 

Constrained Travel Options-While a 

transportation system that includes air, 

highway, and rail modes, serves the 

Corridor, access and capacity are 

presently constrained along certain 

segments and may be unable to meet 

future travel demand. Air access is 

limited for many residents due to 

distance from major airports, frequency, 

and high cost of flights between the 

Coachella Valley region and Los 

Angeles. Interstate 10 is the only major 

highway that serves the eastern portion 

of the Corridor. Amtrak offers limited 

long distance passenger train service 

three times a week with a stop in Palm 

Springs late at night. 

Significant Highway CongestionWhile travel by car is expected to meet 

the majority of future travel demand, 

increased use will result in additional 

congestion. Congestion along certain 

highway segments of the Corridor is 

likely to worsen, making travel times 

unreliable. Interstate 10 follows the 

entirety of the Corridor and experiences 

regular congestion and travel delays. In 

addition, geographic constraints limit 

the potential expansion of the existing 

highway system. 

Constrained Rail System CapacityExisting corridor rail service could 

accommodate an increasing portion of 

projected travel demand growth by 

providing an alternative mode to car 

travel. However, rail service is currently 

constrained and existing infrastructure 

would need to be upgraded to provide 

adequate main track capacity for 

additional passenger trains. 
Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 196/Tuesday, October 11, 2016/Notices 70259 

Increase Travel Capacity Without 

Impacting Air Quality and Natural 

Resources - Highway capacity 

improvements can have negative 

impacts on regional and local air quality 

as well as the efficient use of natural 

resources. Rail system improvements 

offer the opportunity to achieve air 

quality benefits with fewer potential 

impacts on natural resources. 

Project Purpose and Objectives 

The overall purpose of the Project is 

to provide a safe, reliable, and 

convenient intercity passenger rail 

service that would meet the future 

mobility needs of residents, businesses, 

and visitors within the Corridor. The 

Project would achieve the following 

objectives: 

• Provide travelers between the 

Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles 

Basin with a public transportation 

service that offers more convenient and 

competitive trip times, better station 

access, and more frequency, than 

currently-available public transportation 

services; 

• Provide travelers between the 

Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles 

Basin with an alternative to driving that 

offers reliable travel schedules; • Provide travelers between the 

Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles 

Basin with a transportation service that 

is affordable; 

• Serve a range of trip purposes 

traveling between the Coachella Valley 

and the Los Angeles Basin, particularly 

including business, social, medical, 

leisure, and recreational trirs; • Improve regional trave 

opportunities between the Coachella 

Valley and the Los Angeles Basin for 

transit dependent peo2le; • Serve the expected population 

growth in the Coachella Valley and the 

Los Angeles Basin; and • Not preclude, by choice of 

alignment or technology, a possible 

future Corridor expansion between the 

Coachella Valley and Phoenix. 

The Project would provide enhanced 

passenger rail service and is consistent 

with State and regional efforts to reduce 

mobile source emissions associated with 

highway and truck traffic on parallel 

highways from Los Angeles to Indio. 

These efforts are anticipated to help the 

Southern California Association of 

Governments (SCAG) and RCTC meet 

the air pollution and greenhouse gas 

emission reduction targets mandated by 

California Assembly Bill 32, known as 

the Global Warming Solutions Act of 

2006, as amended, and California Senate 

Bill 375, known as the California's 

Sustainable Communities and Climate 

Protection Act of 2008. These two laws 

establish the basis for SCAG and RCTC 

to accommodate regional growth 

through increased and more frequent 

access to alternative modes of transit for 

local communities. 

Proposed Project Alternatives 

In the Programmatic EIS/EIR FRA, 

RCTC, and Caltrans will evaluate and 

analyze a No Build Alternative and at 

least one Build Alternative consisting of 

multiple improvements between Indio 

and Los Angeles. 

No Build Alternative-The No Build 

Alternative provides a baseline for 

comparison to the Build Alternative. 

This alternative represents the existing 

California transportation system 

(highway, air, and rail) as it would exist 

after completion of programs or projects 

currently funded or being implemented. 

The No Build Alternative would draw 

upon the following sources of 

information: 

• State Transportation Improvement 

Program (2016); 

• Regional Transportation Plans for 

all modes of travel; 

• Airport plans; and • Passenger rail plans. 

Build Alternative-The Build 

Alternative would include the necessary 

infrastructure improvements to meet the 

Project's purpose and need. The Build 

Alternative is made up of two 

components, a route alignment and 

station alternatives. 

FRA, RCTC, and Caltrans will 

consider the July 2016 Alternatives 

Analysis Final Report when identifying 

the Build Alternative(s) for detailed 

analysis in the Programmatic EIS/EIS. 

However, additional reasonable build 

alternatives meeting the proposed 

purpose and need but not considered in 

the July 2016 Alternatives Analysis 

Final Report may be developed during 

the scoping process. This may also 

involve refining the Build Alternative as 

more information comes available based 

on the environmental analysis and 

coordination with stakeholders and the 

public. Additionally, the proposed 

purpose and need may be updated and/ 

or refined based on coordination with 

stakeholders and the public. 

Probable Effects 

The Programmatic EIS/EIR will 

consider the potential environmental 

effects of the Project Alternatives. FRA, 

RCTC, and Caltrans will analyze the 

following environmental issue areas in 

the Programmatic EIS/EIR: Agricultural 

Lands; Air Quality and Global Climate 

Change; Biological and Wetland 

Resources; Cultural and Historic 

Resources; Economic and Fiscal 

Impacts; Energy; Environmental Justice; 

Floodplains, Hydrology, and Water 

Quality; Geology, Soils, and Seismicity; 

Hazardous Waste and Materials; Land 

Use, Planning, and Communities; Noise 

and Vibration; Parklands, Community 

Services, and Other Public Facilities; 

Safety and Security; Section 4(f) and 6(f) 

Resources; Transportation; and Visual 

Quality and Aesthetics. 

Scoping and Comments 

FRA encourages broad participation 

in the EIS process during scoping and 

review of the resulting environmental 

documents. FRA invites all interested 

agencies, Native American Tribes, and 

the public at large to participate in the 

scoping process to ensure the 

Programmatic EIS/EIR addresses the full 

range of issues related to the proposed 

action, reasonable alternatives are 

addressed, and all significant issues are 

identified. FRA requests any public 

agency having jurisdiction over an 

aspect of the Project identify the 

agency's permit or environmental 

review requirements and the scope and 

content of the environmental 

information germane to the agency's 

jurisdiction over the Project. FRA 

requests public agencies advise FRA if 

they anticipate taking a major action in 

connection with the proposed project 

and if they wish to cooperate in the 

preparation of the Programmatic EIS/ 

EIR. 

FRA will coordinate with 

participating agencies during 

development of the Draft Programmatic 

EIS under 23 U.S.C. 139. FRA will 

invite all Federal and non-Federal 

agencies and Native American Tribes 

that may have an interest in the Project 

to become participating agencies for the 

EIS. If an agency or Tribe is not invited 

and would like to participate, please 

contact FRA at the contact information 

listed above. FRA will develop a 

Coordination Plan summarizing how it 

will engage the public, agencies, and 

Tribes in the process. The Coordination 

Plan will be posted to the Project Web 

site http://rctc.org/projects/rail-projects/ 

coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-passcorridor-rail-service and to FRA's Web 

site fra.dot.gov. At various milestones 

during the development of the 

Programmatic EIS/EIR, FRA, RCTC, and 

Caltrans will provide additional 

opportunities for public and interested 

party input. 

FRA, RCTC, and Caltrans have 

scheduled three public scoping 

meetings as an important component of 

the scoping process for both the state 

and Federal environmental review. The 

scoping meetings described in the 

ADDRESSES section will also be 

advertised locally and included in 
70260 Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 196/Tuesday, October 11, 2016/Notices 

additional public notification. The 

format of the meeting will consist of a 

presentation describing the proposed 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass 

Corridor Service Project, objectives, and 

existing conditions. Following the 

presentation, scoping meeting attendees 

will be able to participate in an open 

house format that encourages questions 

and comments on the Project from the 

public. 

Felicia Young, 

Acting Director, Office ofProgram Delivery. 

[FR Doc. 2016-24597 Filed 10-6-16; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Long Bridge Project in 

Washington, DC 

AGENCY: Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), U.S. Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Extension of agency and public 

scoping comment period, Long Bridge 

project. 

SUMMARY: On August 26, 2016, FRA 

published a Notice of Intent (NOi) to 

prepare an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) for the Long Bridge 

Project jointly with the District of 

Columbia Department of Transportation 

(DDOT) (81 FR 59036). The Proposed 

Action consists of potential 

improvements to Long Bridge and 

related railroad infrastructure located 

between the Virginia Railway Express 

(VRE) Crystal City Station in Arlington, 

Virginia and Control Point (CP) Virginia 

in Washington, DC. In announcing its 

intent, FRA and DDOT established a 30-

day public comment period that was 

scheduled to end on September 26, 

2016. In consideration ofrequests for 

additional time to comment, FRA and 

DDOT are extending the scoping 

comment period to October 14, 2016. 

The extension provides agencies and the 

public with 30 days to submit 

comments following public and 

interagency scoping meetings held on 

September 14, 2016. 

DATES: The scoping comment period for 

the Long Bridge Project is extended to 

October 14, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Scoping comments can be 

mailed to the address identified under 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 

caption below. Internet and email 

correspondence may be submitted 

through the Long Bridge Project Web 

site http://longbridgeproject.com/ or at 

info@longbridgeproject.com. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Amanda Murphy, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Office of Railroad 

Policy and Development, Federal 

Railroad Administration, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE., (Mail Stop-20), 

Washington, DC 20590; telephone: (202) 

493-0624. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: More 

information about the Long Bridge 

Project is available at http:// 

longbridgeproject.com/. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, 

2016. 

Felicia B. Young, 

Acting Director, Office ofProgram Delivery. 

[FR Doc. 2016-24522 Filed 10-7-16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

[Docket No. FTA-2016-009] 

Final Notice on Updates to the Uniform 

System of Accounts (USOA) and 

Changes to the National Transit 

Database (NTD) Reporting 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, 

DOT. 

ACTION: Notice, response to comments. 

SUMMARY: This Notice finalizes updates 

to the USDA and changes to NTD 

Automatic Passenger Counter 

Certification requirements. 

DATES: Full implementation required in 

report year 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maggie Schilling, National Transit 

Database Deputy Program Manager, FTA 

Office of Budget and Policy, (202) 366-

2054 or margaret.schilling@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

A. Background 

B. Response to Comments on Proposed 

Updates to the USDA and Changes to 

NTD Reporting Requirements 

C. Response to Comments on the Revised 

APC Certification Process 

D. Overview of Final Updates to the USDA, 

NTD Reporting Requirements and APC 

Certification 

A. Background 

On February 3, 2016, FTA published 

a Federal Register notice (initial notice) 

(Docket No. FTA-2016-009) for 

comment on proposed updates to the 

USDA and changes to NTD reporting 

requirements. The USDA is the basic 

reference document that describes how 

transit agencies are to report to the NTD. 

The USDA was originally published in 

1977 when NTD reporting began. While 

the NTD has undergone numerous and 

substantial changes in the past 38 years, 

the USDA was last updated for minor 

changes in 1995. The notice described 

various proposed changes to the USDA 

to better align with today's NTD and 

accounting practices and to address 

FTA data needs and common questions 

among NTD reporters. In the initial 

notice, FTA proposed the following 

changes: 

A. Separation of "Passenger-Paid Fares" 

and "Organization-Paid Fares" 

B. Separation of "Paid Absences" from 

"Fringe Benefits" 

C. Consolidation of "Casualty and 

Liability Costs" under General 

Administration Function 

D. Expansion of Assets and Liabilities 

Object Classes (F-60) 

E. Addition of "Voluntary NonExchange Transactions" 

F. Addition of "Sales and Disposals of 

Assets" 

G. Simplification of State Fund 

Reporting 

H. Reorganization of B-30 Contractual 

Relationship 

Additionally, the initial notice 

proposed changes to the NTD reporting 

requirements that are not directly 

addressed in the updated USDA, which 

are as follows: 

I. Separation of Operators' and NonOperators' Work Hours and Counts 

J. Enhanced Auditor's Review 

K. Revised Automatic Passenger 

Counter (APC) Certification Process 

In the initial notice, FTA proposed 

that it would begin implementing the 

proposed reporting requirements 

beginning with the FY 2017 NTD 

reporting cycle. 

B. Response to Comments on Proposed 

Updates to the USOA and Changes to 

NTD Reporting Requirements 

The comment period for the initial 

notice closed on April 4, 2016. The 

following is a summary of the comments 

from the initial notice related to the 

updates to the USDA and NTD reporting 

requirements. 

Comment: Three commenters raised a 

concern over the separation of 

"Passenger-Paid Fares" and 

"Organization-Paid Fares." Commenters 

opposed the separation of "PassengerPaid Fares" and "Organization-Paid 

Fares" stating that the additional 

information will add little, if any, value 

to the NTD report. Commenters noted 

that adding these additional reporting 

requirements will only increase the cost 

of compliance for reporting agencies. 

One commenter specifically raised a 

concern stating that the proposed 
1/11/2017 CEQAnet- Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

California Home Wednesday, January 11, 2017 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

SCH Number: 2016101017 

Document Type: NOP - Notice of Preparation 

Project Lead Agency: Riverside County Transportation Commission 

Project Description 

This notice to advise the public that the Federal Railroad Administration will prepare a Program EIS/EIRjointly with the Caltrans and Riverside county 

Transportation Commission to study options for providing intercity rail service between the cities of Los Angeles and Indio to the Coachella Valley - San 

Gorgonio pass Corridor. The objective of the program is to address broad questions and likely environmental effects for the corridor including but not 

limited to, the type of service being proposed, major infrastructure components, and identification of major facility capacity constraints. This notice also 

serves to solicit public and agency input into the development of the scope of the Program EIS/EIR. 

Contact Information 

Primary Contact: 

Robert Yates 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

951-787-7141 

4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor 

Post Office Box 12008 

Riverside, CA 92502 

Project Location 

County: Orange, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Riverside 

City: 

Region: 

Cross Streets: Various 

Latitude/Longitude: 

Parcel No: 

Township: 

Range: 

Section: 

Base: 

Other Location Info: 

Proximity To 

Highways: 

Airports: 

Railways: 

Waterways: 

Schools: 

Land Use: 

Development Type 

Transportation: Rail 

Local Action 

Other Action 

Project Issues 

AestheticNisual, Agricultural Land, Air Quality, Archaeologic-Historic, Biological Resources, Cumulative Effects, Drainage/Absorption, 

Economics/Jobs, Fiscal Impacts, Flood Plain/Flooding, Forest Land/Fire Hazard, Geologic/Seismic, Growth Inducing, Housing, Job Generation, 

Landuse, Minerals, Noise, Population/Housing Balance, Public Services, Recreation/Parks, Schools/Universities, Social, Soil 

Erosion/Compaction/Grading, Solid Waste, Toxic/Hazardous, Traffic/Circulation, Vegetation, Water Quality, Water Supply, Wetland/Riparian, Wildlife 

http://www.ceqanet.ca.gov/DocDescription.asp?DocPK=706538 1/2 

A-4


   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NEWS RELEASE 

Date:  October 11, 2016

Contacts:  Eliza Echevarria Perez, Public Affairs Manager

(951) 787-7141 – Office or (951) 235-9564 – Mobile

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

Meetings Seek Public Input about Proposed Passenger Rail Service 

to Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass 

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), in cooperation with Caltrans and the Riverside County

Transportation Commission (RCTC), is holding three public scoping meetings to seek input

regarding the proposed intercity passenger rail service between the cities of Los Angeles and Indio, 

also known as the Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Corridor. 

Meetings will be held from 5 pm to 7 pm, with brief presentations starting at 5:45 pm. The content of

the presentation will be the same at each meeting; please attend the meeting location that is most

convenient:

 Wednesday, October 12, Springbrook Clubhouse, Reid Park, 1011 N. Orange St., Riverside

 Thursday, October 13, Indio Senior Center, 45-700 Aladdin St., Indio

 Monday, October 17, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro)

Headquarters, Plaza Level: One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles 

The scoping meetings will allow community members to learn more about the proposed project

and to provide input on the purpose and need for the project as well as provide input regarding the

scope and content of the Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report

(EIS/EIR). 

The project proposes additional intercity passenger rail service between Los Angeles Union Station

(LAUS) in the west to the City of Indio in the east. The overall project purpose is to provide a safe, 

reliable, convenient intercity passenger service that would meet future mobility needs of residents,

businesses and visitors within the corridor.

The public review and comment period will be available through November 10, 2016.
 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley Rail Public Scoping Meetings

Page 2 of 2

For more information about the proposed project, the public scoping meetings and comment

process, please go to http://rctc.org/rail/coachella-valley-rail-service

# # #





----

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO 

--- Proyecto del Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass 

Riverside (oumy Transpol1Glioo Commillion 

Notificación de Intención (NOI) y Anuncio de Preparación (NOP) de un 

Programa de Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/Reporte de Impacto Ambiental (Programa EIS/EIR) Conjunto 

LO QUE SE ESTÁ La Administración Federal de Ferrocarril (FRA, por sus siglas en inglés) en asocio con la Comisión de Transporte del Condado de 

PLANEANDO Riverside (RCTC, por sus siglas en inglés) y el Departamento de Transporte de California (Caltrans) están iniciando el proceso 

del Proyecto del Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Val ley - San Gorgonio Pass (Proyecto). El proyecto estudiará opciones 

para proveer servicios de tren interurbano entre las ciudades de Los Ángeles e Indio, en California, un trayecto conocido como 

el Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass (el Corredor). 

FRA ha presentado la Notificación de Intención (NOI) para preparar una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental (EIS) de acuerdo 

con el Acta de Política Ambiental Nacional (NEPA). RCTC ha presentado una Notificación de Preparación (NOP) para preparar el 

Reporte de Impacto Ambiental (EIR) de acuerdo con el Acta de Calidad Ambiental de California (CEQA). FRA preparará un EIS/ 

EIR Programático conjunta con RCTC y Caltrans para el Proyecto. 

El EIS/EIR Programático será preparado de acuerdo con el acta NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) y las regulaciones del Concejo de 

Calidad Ambiental implementando el NEPA descrito en 40 CFR Partes 1500-1508, los Procedimientos de Consideración de 

Impactos Ambientales de FRA como están descritos en 64 CFR Parte 28545, con fecha del 26 de mayo de 1999 (Procedimientos 

Ambientales), y actualización en 78 FR 2713 con fecha del 14 de enero de 2013, 23 U.S.C. 139, CEQA (Sección 21000 - 21178 y 

el Código de Regulaciones de California Título 14, Capítulo 3 Sección 15000-15387), y otras leyes y regulaciones federales y 

estatales aplicables. 

EL POR QUÉ DE Los objetivos de este Anuncio es: 

ESTE AVISO • Proveer información acerca del Proyecto, objetivo y necesidad del Proyecto propuesto y las alternativas propuestas que 

deben ser consideradas; e, 

• Invitar al público y a las agencias a que participen del proceso del EIS/EIR. 

El EIS/EIR Programático comparará la Alternativa de No Construcción y una variedad de Alternativas de Construcción 

razonables para un servicio nuevo de tren interurbano que podría satisfacer las necesidades futuras de movilización de 

residentes, empresas y visitantes entre las ciudades de Los Ángeles e Indio. 

¿CUÁNDO Y Estos son los horarios y lugares donde se harán las reuniones: 

DÓNDE? Miércoles 12 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Springbrook Clubhouse, 1011 N. Orange St., Riverside, CA 92501 

Jueves 13 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Indio Senior Center, 45-700 Aladdin St., Indio, CA 92201 

Lunes 17 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) 

Oficinas Principales, A Nivel de la Plaza, 

One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

*Presentación Resumida a las 5:45 PM 

Todas las reuniones informativas se harán en lugares accesibles de acuerdo con el Acta de Americanos con Discapacidades de 

1990 (ADA). Habrá presentes intérpretes de español. Puede llamar al (909) 627-2974 por lo menos 72 horas antes de las 

reuniones para solicitar otras acomodaciones ADA o servicios de interpretación. 

¿QUÉ HAY Los materiales e información con respecto a las reuniones informativas están disponibles a través de la página web de RCTC: 

DISPONIBLE? http ://rete.erg/pro j ects/ ra i 1-pro j ects/ coa ch el la-val ley-sa n-go rgon io-pass-corridor-ra i 1-service 

¿CUÁL ES SU La revisión pública y el periodo de comentarios sobre la NOI y NOP es del 5 de octubre de 2016 al 5 de noviembre de 2016. Las 

PAPEL? agencias federales, estatales y locales, las organizaciones y el público general están invitados a aportar sus comentarios acerca 

del EIS/EIR Programático. Las personas interesadas deben enviar sus comentarios por escrito a la oficina Office of Program 

Delivery de la FRA: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Mail Stop 20), Washington, DC 20590 o a la comisión Riverside County 

Transportation Commission (RCTC), P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California, 92502, o a través de correo electrónico a Robert 

Yates, Multimodal Services Director, a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Los comentarios deben decir "Coachella 

Val ley- San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project - NOI Scoping Comments" o "Coachella Val ley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail 

Corridor Service Project - NOP Scoping Comments" en la casilla de Asunto, e incluir en la carta o el correo electrónico la 

dirección física de quien hace el comentario. Las personas interesadas en hacer comentarios por escrito acerca de la reunión 

de detección de necesidades del Proyecto tienen que hacerlo antes del sábado 5 de noviembre de 2016. 10115721

JUEVES 6 OCTUBRE 2016 La Opinión | 7

LlaopinionaOpinión .com

AVISO A

NUESTROS

LECTORES

La Opinión no garantiza la

autenticidad ni se

responsabiliza por los

precios de boletos de

avión o paquetes turísticos

que publican las Agencias

de Viajes.

Si usted tiene alguna queja

al respecto, repórtela a

Los Angeles County Department

of Consumer Affairs

(213) 974-1452 Gracias

LlaopinionaOpinión .com

ESTABLISHED SEPTEMBER 16, 1926

MAIN OFFICE:

915 WILSHIRE BLVD

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

ADMINISTRATION: (213) 896-2150

EDITORIAL: (213) 896-2333

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING: (213) 891-9191

DISPLAY ADVERTISING: (213) 896-2300

CIRCULATION: (213) 896-2222

Address all correspondence to:

915 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 800

Los Angeles, CA 90017

SUBSCRIPCION POR CORREO/MAIL SUBSCRIPTION

DOMINGO/SUNDAY

3 meses 6 meses 1 año /months /months /year

Subscripción

Doméstica/ $41.93 $83.85 $167.71 Domestic

Subscription

Subscripción

Extranjera/ $52.10 $104.18 $208.36

Foreign

Subscription

DIARIO/DAILY

3 meses 6 meses 1 año /months /months /year Subscripción

Doméstica/

Domestic $90.00 $180.00 $365.00

Subscription

Subscripción $108.00 $214.72 $429.43 Extranjera/

Foreign

Subscription

Subscription rates are payable in U.S. currency. Payments must

be made in advance. Subscribers must submit new and old

addresses upon change of address. Las tasas de subscripciones

son pagaderas en dólares estadounidenses. Los pagos se tienen

que efectuar por adelantado. Los subscriptores tienen que

someter su domicilio nuevo y el anterior cuando hay cambio de

domicilio.

PLEASE NOTE: LA OPINION attempts to screen advertising

within the limits of its resources and does NOT knowingly accept

any advertising that is false or misleading. LA OPINION does not

guarantee, ensure warrant or in any way endorse any

advertisement, advertiser or the products or services advertised

herein. The truth of statements and/or claims made in the

advertisements appearing in LA OPINION is the responsibility of

the advertiser.

LA OPINION trata de seleccionar los anuncios que aparecen

publicados, dentro del límite de los medios de su alcance, y NO

acepta a sabiendas anuncios fraudulentos o engañosos.

LA OPINION no garantiza, asegura o respalda de manera alguna

los productos o servicios que aparecen en los anuncios. La

veracidad del contenido publicitario es la respon-sabilidad del

anunciante.

LA OPINION (ISSN-0164 3886) is published daily, including

Sunday and Holidays by La Opinión Limited Partnership,

915 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90017.

Periodicals postage paid at Los Angeles, CA.

Send address changes to:

915 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 800, Los Angeles, CA 90017

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to:

La Opinión

915 WILSHIRE BLVD LOS ANGELES, CA 90017 904-163342
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6 Semana del 7 de octubre de 2016 PASE La Prensa 

Latinos: fortalecen la economía 

Sábado 22 de Octubre de 2016 

De las 9a.m. a las 2 p.m. 

Concordia University Irvine 

1530 Concordia West, Irvine 92612 

Conferencista Principal: Alejandra Ceja 

Directora Ejecutiva, Iniciativa de la Casa Blanca 

para la Excelencia Educativa de los Hispanos 

CELEBREMOS TU 

HERENCIA, UNA LATINA 

EJEMPLAR A LA VEZ. 

Concordia University Irvine sabe que para los estudiantes de 

primera generación, la universidad no es un sueño: Es el plan. 

Por eso, el 22 de octubre, inauguramos la Conferencia de 

Latinas Líderes para estudiantes Latinas de preparatoria y de 

colegios comunitarios y sus padres. Aprende cómo prepararte 

y navegar la ruta a la universidad, conoce a hispanos modelo 

de primera generación, quienes contarán cómo llegaron a 

la universidad y cómo contribuyen a sus comunidades. 

Celebrar tu herencia y forjar tu futuro durante el Mes de la 

Hispanidad en Concordia University Irvine ahora es más fácil. 

Gratis para los estudiantes y uno de los padres, pero 

deben inscribir. Para ver el horario, oradores, talleres, 

y formulario de inscripción, visita www.cui.edu/latinas. 

Para más información, o ser patrocinador, contacta a 

Sarah Martini en Sarah.Martini@cui.edu. 

UNIVERSIDAD: TU PLAN PARA EL FUTURO 

La Universidad & TÚ 

Únete a la conversación: #LatinasAdelante 

Media Partner 

VIENE DE LA PÁG. 1 

a este país sin ellos”. 

De hecho, un análisis del 

Consumo de Hogares Latinos en el Condado de Los 

Ángeles, preparado por 

Beacon Economicss para 

la Cámara Latina de Comercio de Los Ángeles, 

muestra que el ingreso 

total de los hogares con 

una cabeza Latino de la 

casa creció de 45,900 mil 

millones de dólares en 

2000 a 72,400 millones de 

dólares en 2014, gracias a 

su aumento demográfico 

y crecimiento en ingresos. 

Un ejemplo lo es Mónica 

Cruz, propietaria de K.C. 

Flowers en la ciudad de 

Montebello, quien, como 

madre soltera, hace cuatro 

años decidió invertir sus 

ahorros para abrir la florería y sacar adelante a sus 

tres hijos: Stephanie, Mónica y Andrés. 

“Siempre he sido una 

mujer que no se da por vencida”, declaró Mónica. “Mis 

hijos y su futuro fueron los 

factores que me impulsaron 

a seguir adelante”. 

Por sus parte, Francisco 

Moreno, activista y portavoz del Comité de Federaciones Mexicanas (COFEM) señaló que la totalidad de latinos en Estados 

Unidos representan 1.3 trillones de dólares para la economía, lo cual representa 

un “tremendo” poder económico, aunque, por otro 

lado, la población hispana 

está comprendida por trabajadores indocumentados, menos habilidades laborales y nuevas generaciones mal preparadas. 

“Ocupamos los puestos 

de trabajo menor remunerados”, lamentó Moreno. 

“Hay muchas carencias en 

la comunidad latina e inmigrante que todavía se tienen que superar y uno de 

los muros de contención hacia nuestro progreso económico es la carencia de 

documentos; por ello es necesaria la regularización de 

11 millones de indocumentados, un asunto que no se 

puede dilatar más, porque ello desataría las 

fuerzas latinas en el renglón económico”. 

HACE FALTA UNA 

REFORMA MIGRATORIA 

Con aproximadamente 

40 millones de habitantes, 

el “Estado Dorado” tiene 

una población mayor que 

muchos países, incluyendo 

un poco más de 2.5 millones 

de inmigrantes indocumentados (2.667,000). 

El condado de Los Ángeles alberga a la mayoría: 

(815,000), seguido por 

Orange (250,000), Santa 

Clara (180,000) y San Diego 

(170,500), Alameda 

(129,500), Riverside (124,00) 

San Bernardino (118,000). 

“Yo no puedo festejar nada ni en septiembre, ni en 

otro mes del año”, comentó 

Otilio Garnica, un trabajaJORGE L. MACÍAS 

Abraham Lugo, un inmigrante oriundo de Mexicali, es 

uno de los millones de extranjeros que con su trabajo 

colaboran grandemente con la economía de California. 

dor indocumentado de la 

construcción de Santa Ana 

y nacido en El Arenal, estado de Hidalgo. “Aunque llevo más de 15 años viviendo 

en Estados Unidos no tengo 

papeles y como están ahora 

las amenazas de Donald 

Trump de que nos quiere 

deportar, mucho menos. 

Ojalá que no gane”. 

Garnica, de 45 años tiene 

tres hijos nacidos en esta 

nación, pero teme que algún día su familia, como la 

de muchos hispanos, sea 

separada a causa de su estatus de indocumentado. 

“Nosotros hemos engrandecido no solamente a 

California, sino a Estados 

Unidos y también ayudamos a México”, expuso. 

“Muchos dejamos nuestro 

país para buscar una mejor 

vida para nuestras familias 

y en vez de querer echarnos 

nos deberían dar ya la reforma migratoria”. 

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO 

Proyecto del Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass 

NoXficación de Intención (NOI) y Anuncio de Preparación (NOP) de un 

Programa de Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/Reporte de Impacto Ambiental (Programa EIS/EIR) Conjunto 

LO QUE SE ESTÁ 

PLANEANDO 

EL POR QUÉ DE ESTE 

AVISO 

La Administración Federal de Ferrocarril (FRA, por sus siglas en inglés) en asocio con la Comisión de Transporte del Condado de Riverside (RCTC, por sus 

siglas en inglés) y el Departamento de Transporte de California (Caltrans) están iniciando el proceso del Proyecto del Corredor del Servicio de Tren 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass (Proyecto). El proyecto estudiará opciones para proveer servicios de tren interurbano entre las ciudades de Los 

Ángeles e Indio, en California, un trayecto conocido como el Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass (el Corredor). 

FRA ha presentado la Nogficación de Intención (NOI) para preparar una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental (EIS) de acuerdo con el Acta de Polígca 

Ambiental Nacional (NEPA). RCTC ha presentado una Nogficación de Preparación (NOP) para preparar el Reporte de Impacto Ambiental (EIR) de acuerdo 

con el Acta de Calidad Ambiental de California (CEQA). FRA preparará un EIS/EIR Programágco conjunta con RCTC y Caltrans para el Proyecto. 

El EIS/EIR Programágco será preparado de acuerdo con el acta NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) y las regulaciones del Concejo de Calidad Ambiental 

implementando el NEPA descrito en 40 CFR Partes 1500-1508, los Procedimientos de Consideración de Impactos Ambientales de FRA como están 

descritos en 64 CFR Parte 28545, con fecha del 26 de mayo de 1999 (Procedimientos Ambientales), y actualización en 78 FR 2713 con fecha del 14 de 

enero de 2013, 23 U.S.C. 139, CEQA (Sección 21000 – 21178 y el Código de Regulaciones de California Título 14, Capítulo 3 Sección 15000-15387), y otras 

leyes y regulaciones federales y estatales aplicables. 

Los objegvos de este Anuncio es: 

! Proveer información acerca del Proyecto, objegvo y necesidad del Proyecto propuesto y las alternagvas propuestas que deben ser consideradas; e, 

! Invitar al público y a las agencias a que pargcipen del proceso del EIS/EIR. 

El EIS/EIR Programágco comparará la Alternagva de No Construcción y una variedad de Alternagvas de Construcción razonables para un servicio nuevo de 

tren interurbano que podría sagsfacer las necesidades futuras de movilización de residentes, empresas y visitantes entre las ciudades de Los Ángeles e 

Indio. 

¿CUÁNDO Y DÓNDE? Estos son los horarios y lugares donde se harán las reuniones: 

Miércoles 12 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Springbrook Clubhouse, 1011 N. Orange St., Riverside, CA 92501 

Jueves 13 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Indio Senior Center, 45-700 Aladdin St., Indio, CA 92201 

Lunes 17 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportagon Authority (Metro) 

Oficinas Principales, A Nivel de la Plaza, 

One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

*Presentación Resumida a las 5:45 PM 

Todas las reuniones informagvas se harán en lugares accesibles de acuerdo con el Acta de Americanos con Discapacidades de 1990 (ADA). Habrá 

presentes intérpretes de español. Puede llamar al (909) 627-2974 por lo menos 72 horas antes de las reuniones para solicitar otras acomodaciones ADA o 

servicios de interpretación. 

¿QUÉ HAY 

DISPONIBLE? 

Los materiales e información con respecto a las reuniones informagvas están disponibles a través de la página web de RCTC: hsp://rctc.org/projects/railprojects/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-rail-service 

¿CUÁL ES SU PAPEL? La revisión pública y el periodo de comentarios sobre la NOI y NOP es del 5 de octubre de 2016 al 5 de noviembre de 2016. Las agencias federales, 

estatales y locales, las organizaciones y el público general están invitados a aportar sus comentarios acerca del EIS/EIR Programágco. Las personas 

interesadas deben enviar sus comentarios por escrito a la oficina Office of Program Delivery de la FRA: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Mail Stop 20), 

Washington, DC 20590 o a la comisión Riverside County Transportagon Commission (RCTC), P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California, 92502, o a través de 

correo electrónico a Robert Yates, Mulgmodal Services Director, a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Los comentarios deben decir “Coachella 

Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project – NOI Scoping Comments’’ o “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project – 

NOP Scoping Comments” en la casilla de Asunto, e incluir en la carta o el correo electrónico la dirección rsica de quien hace el comentario. Las personas 

interesadas en hacer comentarios por escrito acerca de la reunión de detección de necesidades del Proyecto genen que hacerlo antes del sábado 5 de 

noviembre de 2016. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Excélsior PASE Semana del 7 de octubre de 2016 5 

Latinos: fortalecen la economía 

VIENE DE LA PÁG. 1 

imagino a este país sin ellos”. 

De hecho, un análisis del 

Consumo de Hogares Latinos en el Condado de Los 

Ángeles, preparado por 

Beacon Economicss para 

la Cámara Latina de Comercio de Los Ángeles, 

muestra que el ingreso 

total de los hogares con 

una cabeza Latino de la 

casa creció de 45,900 mil 

millones de dólares en 

2000 a 72,400 millones de 

dólares en 2014, gracias a 

su aumento demográfico 

y crecimiento en ingresos. 

Un ejemplo lo es Mónica 

Cruz, propietaria de K.C. 

Flowers en la ciudad de Montebello, quien, como madre 

soltera, hace cuatro años decidió invertir sus ahorros para 

abrir la florería y sacar adelante a sus tres hijos: Stephanie, Mónica y Andrés. 

“Siempre he sido una 

mujer que no se da por vencida”, declaró Mónica. “Mis 

hijos y su futuro fueron los 

factores que me impulsaron 

a seguir adelante”. 

Por sus parte, Francisco 

Moreno, activista y portavoz del Comité de Federaciones Mexicanas (COFEM) señaló que la totalidad de latinos en Estados 

Unidos representan 1.3 trillones de dólares para la economía, lo cual representa 

un “tremendo” poder económico, aunque, por otro 

lado, la población hispana 

está comprendida por trabajadores indocumentados, menos habilidades laborales y nuevas generaciones mal preparadas. 

“Ocupamos los puestos 

de trabajo menor remunerados”, lamentó Moreno. 

“Hay muchas carencias en 

la comunidad latina e inmigrante que todavía se tienen que superar y uno de 

los muros de contención hacia nuestro progreso económico es la carencia de 

documentos; por ello es necesaria la regularización de 

11 millones de indocumentados, un asunto que no se 

puede dilatar más, porque ello desataría las 

fuerzas latinas en el renglón económico”. 

HACE FALTA UNA 

REFORMA MIGRATORIA 

Con aproximadamente 

40 millones de habitantes, 

el “Estado Dorado” tiene 

una población mayor que 

muchos países, incluyendo 

un poco más de 2.5 millones 

de inmigrantes indocumentados (2.667,000). 

El condado de Los Ángeles alberga a la mayoría: 

(815,000), seguido por 

Orange (250,000), Santa 

Clara (180,000) y San Diego 

(170,500), Alameda 

(129,500), Riverside (124,00) 

San Bernardino (118,000). 

“Yo no puedo festejar nada ni en septiembre, ni en 

otro mes del año”, comentó 

Otilio Garnica, un trabajaJORGE L. MACÍAS 

Abraham Lugo, un inmigrante oriundo de Mexicali, es 

uno de los millones de extranjeros que con su trabajo 

colaboran grandemente con la economía de California. 

dor indocumentado de la 

construcción de Santa Ana 

y nacido en El Arenal, estado de Hidalgo. “Aunque llevo más de 15 años viviendo 

en Estados Unidos no tengo 

papeles y como están ahora 

las amenazas de Donald 

Trump de que nos quiere 

deportar, mucho menos. 

Ojalá que no gane”. 

Garnica, de 45 años tiene 

tres hijos nacidos en esta 

nación, pero teme que algún día su familia, como la 

de muchos hispanos, sea 

separada a causa de su estatus de indocumentado. 

“Nosotros hemos engrandecido no solamente a 

California, sino a Estados 

Unidos y también ayudamos a México”, expuso. 

“Muchos dejamos nuestro 

país para buscar una mejor 

vida para nuestras familias 

y en vez de querer echarnos 

nos deberían dar ya la reforma migratoria”. 

Muestra 

amor por 

el agua. 

Quiérela. 

Ahórrala. 

Usa la escoba, no la manguera. 

De esta forma ahorras más de 150 galones 

de agua. Busca más maneras de reducir 

tu consumo. Arregla todas las fugas de tus 

aspersores y cambia los que estén rotos. 

Todos los esfuerzos para ahorrar agua son un 

acto de amor que nos benefcia a todos. 

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO 

Proyecto del Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass 

NoXficación de Intención (NOI) y Anuncio de Preparación (NOP) de un 

Programa de Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/Reporte de Impacto Ambiental (Programa EIS/EIR) Conjunto 

LO QUE SE ESTÁ 

PLANEANDO 

EL POR QUÉ DE ESTE 

AVISO 

La Administración Federal de Ferrocarril (FRA, por sus siglas en inglés) en asocio con la Comisión de Transporte del Condado de Riverside (RCTC, por sus 

siglas en inglés) y el Departamento de Transporte de California (Caltrans) están iniciando el proceso del Proyecto del Corredor del Servicio de Tren 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass (Proyecto). El proyecto estudiará opciones para proveer servicios de tren interurbano entre las ciudades de Los 

Ángeles e Indio, en California, un trayecto conocido como el Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass (el Corredor). 

FRA ha presentado la Nogficación de Intención (NOI) para preparar una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental (EIS) de acuerdo con el Acta de Polígca 

Ambiental Nacional (NEPA). RCTC ha presentado una Nogficación de Preparación (NOP) para preparar el Reporte de Impacto Ambiental (EIR) de acuerdo 

con el Acta de Calidad Ambiental de California (CEQA). FRA preparará un EIS/EIR Programágco conjunta con RCTC y Caltrans para el Proyecto. 

El EIS/EIR Programágco será preparado de acuerdo con el acta NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) y las regulaciones del Concejo de Calidad Ambiental 

implementando el NEPA descrito en 40 CFR Partes 1500-1508, los Procedimientos de Consideración de Impactos Ambientales de FRA como están 

descritos en 64 CFR Parte 28545, con fecha del 26 de mayo de 1999 (Procedimientos Ambientales), y actualización en 78 FR 2713 con fecha del 14 de 

enero de 2013, 23 U.S.C. 139, CEQA (Sección 21000 – 21178 y el Código de Regulaciones de California Título 14, Capítulo 3 Sección 15000-15387), y otras 

leyes y regulaciones federales y estatales aplicables. 

Los objegvos de este Anuncio es: 

! Proveer información acerca del Proyecto, objegvo y necesidad del Proyecto propuesto y las alternagvas propuestas que deben ser consideradas; e, 

! Invitar al público y a las agencias a que pargcipen del proceso del EIS/EIR. 

El EIS/EIR Programágco comparará la Alternagva de No Construcción y una variedad de Alternagvas de Construcción razonables para un servicio nuevo de 

tren interurbano que podría sagsfacer las necesidades futuras de movilización de residentes, empresas y visitantes entre las ciudades de Los Ángeles e 

Indio. 

¿CUÁNDO Y DÓNDE? Estos son los horarios y lugares donde se harán las reuniones: 

Miércoles 12 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Springbrook Clubhouse, 1011 N. Orange St., Riverside, CA 92501 

Jueves 13 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Indio Senior Center, 45-700 Aladdin St., Indio, CA 92201 

Lunes 17 de octubre de 2016, 5-7 PM* 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportagon Authority (Metro) 

Oficinas Principales, A Nivel de la Plaza, 

One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

*Presentación Resumida a las 5:45 PM 

Todas las reuniones informagvas se harán en lugares accesibles de acuerdo con el Acta de Americanos con Discapacidades de 1990 (ADA). Habrá 

presentes intérpretes de español. Puede llamar al (909) 627-2974 por lo menos 72 horas antes de las reuniones para solicitar otras acomodaciones ADA o 

servicios de interpretación. 

¿QUÉ HAY 

DISPONIBLE? 

Los materiales e información con respecto a las reuniones informagvas están disponibles a través de la página web de RCTC: hsp://rctc.org/projects/railprojects/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-rail-service 

¿CUÁL ES SU PAPEL? La revisión pública y el periodo de comentarios sobre la NOI y NOP es del 5 de octubre de 2016 al 5 de noviembre de 2016. Las agencias federales, 

estatales y locales, las organizaciones y el público general están invitados a aportar sus comentarios acerca del EIS/EIR Programágco. Las personas 

interesadas deben enviar sus comentarios por escrito a la oficina Office of Program Delivery de la FRA: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Mail Stop 20), 

Washington, DC 20590 o a la comisión Riverside County Transportagon Commission (RCTC), P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California, 92502, o a través de 

correo electrónico a Robert Yates, Mulgmodal Services Director, a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Los comentarios deben decir “Coachella 

Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project – NOI Scoping Comments’’ o “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project – 

NOP Scoping Comments” en la casilla de Asunto, e incluir en la carta o el correo electrónico la dirección rsica de quien hace el comentario. Las personas 

interesadas en hacer comentarios por escrito acerca de la reunión de detección de necesidades del Proyecto genen que hacerlo antes del sábado 5 de 

noviembre de 2016. 
MUNDO Indio, Ca. del 7 al 13 de Octubre, 2016 A7

San Andrés: 

El peligro real de una

de las fallas más 

temidas del mundo 

La tierra ruge y los rascacielos del distrito financiero

de Los Ángeles se desmoronan, atrapando a miles

de personas bajo sus escombros.  Científicos presentaron en California un proyecto para desarrollar un sistema de alerta temprana.

n tsunami de pro­ delgada.  y lista” para provocar un  Fue la causante del de­ se ha producido un sismo  ficos indica que el extreporciones bíblicas  Esta misma semana se  gran temblor.  vastador terremoto de 7,8  en cerca de 300 años, pese  mo sur de la falla de San 

se adentra en la ba­ produjeron varios tem­ Además, un estudio rea­ grados que destruyó gran a que los registros geo­ Andrés es en la que es más

hía de San Francisco, en­ blores en el sur de la falla  lizado por la Universidad  parte de San Francisco  lógicos indican que es la probable que se produzca

gullendo a su paso el icó­ de San Andrés, varios de  de Hawái señaló que la fa­ en 1906, provocando la  causante de un gran terre­ un gran terremoto en los 

nico puente Golden Gate,  ellos de magnitud superior  lla de San Andrés se está  muerte de más de 3.000  moto con una periodicidad  próximo 30 años”, señala 

antes de arrasar la ciudad  a 4.  moviendo verticalmente.  personas.  de unos 150 años.  en conversación con BBC 

californiana.  La Red Sísmica del Sur  Según la investigación,  Aunque la extrema pre­ Los cálculos más conser­ Mundo Jennifer Andrews, 

Estos son dos de los te­ de California anticipó que publicada en la revista Na­ misa de “San Andrés” tie­ vadores apuntan a que, de sismóloga del Instituto de 

rroríficos escenarios que los movimientos se pue­ ture Geoscience, se trata  ne más de ciencia ficción producirse un temblor de  Tecnología de California 

presentaba “San Andrés”,  den prolongar durante los  de un movimiento cons­ que de escenario real, lo magnitud 7,8 en la escala  (Caltech). 

película protagonizada  próximos días y emitió  tante y a gran escala, aun­ cierto es que esta super­ de Richter en esa sección  Según explica Andrews, 

por Dwayne “la Roca” Jo­ una alerta para los conda­ que muy sutil, de tan solo producción de Hollywood  -que tendría un impacto “la parte media de la falla 

hnson que se estrenó en dos del sur del estado.  unos 2 milímetros al año.  fue un recordatorio de  directo en Los Ángeles,  se rompió hace unos 160 

2015 en los cines de todo  Aunque los expertos no Lo interesante de dicho  que, tarde o pronto, la fa­ la segunda ciudad más  años y la parte norte en 

el mundo.  creen que este enjambre informe es que es la pri­ lla volverá a quebrarse y poblada de EE.UU.­ cer­ 1906, provocando el terreSu argumento gira en  sísmico vaya a ser deto­ mera vez que se han podi­ los más de 38 millones de  ca de 2.000 personas mo­ motos de San Francisco”. 

torno a las devastadoras  nante del temido sismo de  do detectar movimientos  personas que viven en sus rirían y habría más de  “La parte sur de la falla 

consecuencias de un po­ gran magnitud conocido  verticales.  inmediaciones tienen que 50.000 heridos. Los daños  no se ha quebrado en certente terremoto en la fa­ como Big One, las autori­ La sección sur  estar preparadas.  materiales superarían los  ca de tres siglos y sabemos 

mosa falla que da nombre dades recordaron a la po­ La falla de San Andrés,  La que más preocupa a US$200.000 millones.  que durante este tiempo la

al filme y que lleva el caos blación que debe estar pre­ que recorre California de los científicos es la sección “La información con la  tensión se ha ido acumuy la destrucción de la costa  parada para los temblores.  norte a sur a lo largo de  sur de la falla, en la que no que trabajamos los cientí­ lando”. 

oeste estadounidense.  Esto se une a los hallaz­ 1.300 kilómetros y que deSe trata de una premisa  gos de los científicos que limita la placa norteamepensada para el disfrute de  asistieron a la Confenren­ ricana de la placa del Palos amantes del cine de ca­ cia Nacional de Terremo­ cífico, es una de las más

tástrofes, aunque cuando tos el pasado mes de junio  estudiadas del planeta, ya 

U

se habla de terremotos, la  y que advirtieron que la que en su práctica totalilínea que separa realidad sección sur de la falla de  dad se encuentra sobre la 

de ficción es demasiado San Andrés está “cargada  superficie terrestre.


A-5

 

 

 

A-6

FILE: An Amtrak train sits idle at Penn Station in New York. Riverside County officials

are reviving an idea to create train service between Coachella Valley and downtown Los Angeles. STAN HONDA/AFP/Getty Images

The Desert Trip concert series may have left good memories for music lovers, but the same can't be said for the traffic-filled

drive there and back.

Those who’d rather ride the train someday can share their views at a public meeting Monday night to discuss a rail connection between Los Angeles and Coachella Valley.

The idea of a train line between Indio and Union Station has been kicked around since the 1990s.

Now Riverside County officials have received a federal grant to move forward with the proposal.

They are taking public comments on the proposal through Nov. 10 and hope to complete an initial study for the project by

the end of 2018.

Meetings have already been held in Riverside and Indio. Monday night's meeting runs from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Los Angeles

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Headquarters Plaza Level, One Gateway Plaza.

The train line would be built on an existing rail tracks and would have limited stops in the Coachella Valley and Riverside

before making its way to L.A.

Amtrak would operate the service, likely two trains a day, but a funding source is still not in place.

A previous study projected it would take just over three hours for a one-way trip along the 141-mile route.

If you can't make tonight's meeting, you can also send written comments to the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California, 92502. You can also send comments by email to Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director, at CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com.


       

     

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix B 

Sign­In Sheets 









       

     

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix C 

Collateral Materials 

CVR_FactSheet_2016.indd 1 10/11/16 4:26 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COACHELLA VALLEY–SAN GORGONIO PASS 

Rail Corridor Service 

Program Environmental Document 

and Service Development Plan 

Fast Facts 

• Los Angeles Basin: 

16.5 million population, 

7.2 million jobs 

• Coachella Valley: 

443,000 population, 

12.2 million annual visitors 

• Trips through Pass: 

130,000 daily 

• Proposed initial daily 

round-trips: 2 

• Running time Los AngelesIndio: 3 - 3.5 hours 

• Potential host railroads: 

Union Pacifc, BNSF Railway, 

SCRRA (Metrolink) 

• Current phase: 

Program Environmental 

Document and Service 

Development Plan 

Connecting Southern California 

The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), in coordination with the 

Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and California Department of Transportation 

(Caltrans), is studying options for providing additional Amtrak intercity passenger 

rail service between Los Angeles and the desert cities in the Coachella Valley. The 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service would extend from Indio in 

the east to Los Angeles Union Station in the west. The service is envisioned to provide a 

safe, reliable, and convenient intercity passenger rail service that would meet the future 

mobility needs of residents, businesses, and visitors within the Corridor. 

Studying Rail Route Alternative Options 

In 1991, RCTC completed the frst in a series of studies to evaluate the feasibility of 

operating one or two daily intercity rail round trips between Los Angeles and Indio. 

From 1991 to 2013, RCTC completed additional feasibility studies of the Coachella 

Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service. In July 2016, RCTC, in coordination 

with FRA and Caltrans, completed the Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail 

Corridor Service Study Alternatives Analysis Final Report (AA Report) that evaluated 

several alternatives for a new intercity rail service between Los Angeles and Indio. 

The Corridor currently faces mobility challenges that are likely to expand as growth in 

population, employment, and tourism increases. An effective rail system between Los 

Angeles and the San Gorgonio Pass/Coachella Valley will help meet the future mobility 

needs of residents, businesses, and visitors as well as provide new travel options. The 

project study area is outlined on the map on the reverse side of this fact sheet. 

Program Environmental Document and Service 

Development Plan Under Way 

With the completion of the AA Report, the next steps of the process include the 

preparation of a Program Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Program Environmental 

Impact Report (EIR) document, consistent with National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. At the initiation 

of the Program EIS/EIR process, all interested agencies and the public are invited to 

participate in project scoping meetings to provide input on the Purpose and Need 

and to help identify important issues for consideration in the Program EIS/EIR. The 

public comments contribute to fnalizing the Purpose and Need, which drives the 

development of the range of reasonable alternatives, and to identifying potential 

environmental effects that may be analyzed in the preparation of the Program EIS/EIR 

document. Concurrent with the preparation of the environmental document, a Service 

Development Plan will be prepared to conceptualize how the service would operate 

through the Corridor and what infrastructure improvements would be needed to 

accommodate the new intercity passenger rail service. 

This phase of work is being funded through a $2.9 million grant awarded by the FRA to 

Caltrans and RCTC in April 2015 and matched by RCTC with $1.1 million of local funds. 

October 11, 2016 

For more information, visit CVRailProject.info, or contact Sheldon Peterson, 951-787-7141. CVRailProject 
CVR_FactSheet_2016.indd 2 10/11/16 4:26 

COACHELLA VALLEY–SAN GORGONIO PASS 

Rail Corridor Service 

Program Environmental Document 

and Service Development Plan 

How to Stay Involved 

RCTC has formed a Technical 

Advisory Committee comprised 

of regional stakeholders and 

an Ad Hoc Committee of its 

Commission members. These 

groups meet periodically to 

provide feedback about project 

development. 

Public input also is an important 

component of the environmental 

process. Public scoping meetings 

will be held in October 2016, and 

RCTC will seek feedback from 

the community at these meetings 

and as well as through additional 

outreach efforts throughout the 

environmental process. 

Project Process 

The Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service is currently in the early 

stages of the environmental process and will utilize a tiered NEPA/CEQA approach. 

“Tiering” is a phased environmental review process often applied for complex 

transportation projects. When used, the initial phase or Tier 1 (e.g. Program EIS/ 

EIR) addresses broad corridor questions for a project (such as general locations of 

routes and potential impacts of construction and operating the service). Based on 

the decisions made in the Program EIS/EIR, future site-specifc proposals for the rail 

service (such as new track or specifc station locations) would be analyzed at a greater 

level of detail and addressed in subsequent (e.g. Tier II/Project-level NEPA and 

CEQA) environmental documents. Currently, work on the SDP and Program EIS/EIR is 

anticipated to take approximately three years to complete. 

Alternatives 

Analysis 

Program

Environmental 

Document 

& Service 

Development

Plan (current phase) 

Preliminary 

Engineering & 

Project-Level 

Environmental 

Documents 

Final Design & 

Construction 

Study Area Map 

Initial Project Supporters: Riverside County Transportation Commission  Coachella Valley Association of Governments  California High Speed Rail Authority  Cathedral City  

City of Calimesa  City of Coachella  City of Corona  City of Eastvale  City of Jurupa Valley  City of Indian Wells  City of Indio  City of La Quinta  City of Palm Desert  City of 

Palm Springs  City of Rancho Mirage  City of Temecula  Coachella Valley Economic Partnership  County of Riverside  County of Riverside Supervisors  Greater Palm Springs 

Convention & Visitors Bureau  LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency  Metrolink  National Association of Rail Passengers  RailPAC  South Coast Air Quality Management District  

Southern California Association of Governments  Southwest Rail Passenger Association 
CVR_FactSheet_2016_Spanish.indd 1 10/11/16 5:05 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COACHELLA VALLEY–SAN GORGONIO PASS 

Corredor del Servicio del Tren 

Documento Ambiental del Programa 

y Plan de Desarrollo del Servicio 

Datos Rápidos 

• Área de Los Ángeles: 

16.5 millones de habitantes, 

7.2 millones de empleos 

• Coachella Valley: 

443,000 habitantes, 12.2 

millones de visitantes al año 

• Viajes a través del Paso: 

130,000 diariamente 

• Viajes diarios ida y vuelta 

propuestos inicialmente: 2 

• Tiempo de recorrido Los 

Ángeles-Indio: 3 - 3.5 horas 

• Empresas propietarias de la 

vía férrea: Union Pacifc, BNSF 

Railway, SCRRA (Metrolink) 

• Fase actual: 

Documento Ambiental del 

Programa y Plan de Desarrollo 

del Servicio 

Conectando al Sur de California 

La Comisión de Transporte del Condado de Riverside (RCTC, por sus siglas en inglés), 

en asocio con la Administración Federal de Trenes (FRA, por sus siglas en inglés) y el 

Departamento de Transporte de California (Caltrans), está estudiando opciones para proveer 

servicios adicionales de tren Amtrak interurbano para pasajeros entre Los Ángeles y las 

ciudades de desierto del Coachella Valley. El Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley – 

San Gorgonio Pass se extendería desde Indio en el este, hasta la estación Los Angeles Union 

Station en el oeste. Se espera que provea un servicio seguro, confable y conveniente de 

tren interurbano de pasajeros, el cual solucionaría las necesidades de movilidad futuras de 

residentes, empresas y visitantes del Corredor. 

Estudio de las Opciones de las Alternativas de la Ruta 

del Tren 

En 1991, RCTC terminó el primero de una serie de estudios para evaluar la factibilidad de 

operar uno o dos viajes de ida y vuelta diarios entre las ciudades de Los Ángeles e Indio. 

Desde 1991 hasta 2013, RCTC ha completado estudios adicionales de factibilidad del 

Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass. En julio de 2016, RCTC, 

en coordinación con la FRA y Caltrans, completó el Reporte Final del Análisis del Estudio de 

Alternativas (Reporte AA) del Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio 

Pass, el cual evaluó varias alternativas para un nuevo servicio de tren interurbano entre Los 

Ángeles e Indio. 

En la actualidad el Corredor enfrenta retos de movilidad que seguramente serán mayores 

a medida que aumente la población, los trabajos y el turismo. Un sistema de tren efectivo 

entre Los Ángeles y el San Gorgonio Pass/Coachella Valley ayudará a satisfacer las demandas 

futuras de movilidad para los residentes, empresas y visitantes, además de proveer nuevas 

alternativas de viaje. Para poder proseguir con el proyecto, es necesario estudiar en detalle 

el Corredor e identifcar una ruta específca dentro del área de estudio del proyecto para 

hacerle análisis posteriores. El área de estudio del proyecto está delineada en el mapa, al 

reverso de esta fcha técnica. 

El Documento Ambiental del Programa y el Plan de 

Desarrollo del Servicio Están en Marcha 

Al completarse el Reporte AA, los siguientes pasos del proceso incluyen la preparación 

de un documento de la Declaración de Impacto Ambiental del Programa (EIS)/Reporte de 

Impacto Ambiental del Programa (EIR), que sea consistente con los requerimientos del Acta 

de Política Ambiental Nacional (NEPA) y el Acta de Calidad ambiental de California (CEQA). 

Al comenzar el proceso del Programa EIR/EIS, todas las agencias interesadas y el público 

están invitados a participar en las reuniones de detección de necesidades del proyecto para 

proveer sus comentarios acerca de los Objetivos y Necesidades y para ayudar a identifcar 

asuntos importantes para que sean considerados en el Programa EIR/EIS. Los cometarios del 

público contribuyen a la fnalización de los Objetivos y Necesidades, el cual guía el desarrollo 

del rango de alternativas razonables, y a identifcar los efectos ambientales potenciales que 

pueden ser analizados en la preparación del documento del Programa EIR/EIS. De manera 

simultánea a la preparación del documento ambiental, será preparado un Plan de Desarrollo 

del Servicio para conceptualizar de qué manera operaría el servicio a lo largo del Corredor y 

qué mejoras a la infraestructura serían necesarias para dar lugar al nuevo servicio interurbano 

de tren de pasajeros. 

Esta fase de trabajo está siendo fnanciada a través de una subvención de $2.9 millones por 

parte de la FRA a Caltrans y RCTC hecha en abril de 2015, y complementada por RCTC con 

$1.1 millones provenientes de fondos locales. October 11, 2016 

Para más información, visite CVRailProject.info, o contacte a Sheldon Peterson, 951-787-7141. CVRailProject 
CVR_FactSheet_2016_Spanish.indd 2 10/11/16 5:05 

COACHELLA VALLEY–SAN GORGONIO PASS 

Corredor del Servicio del Tren 

Documento Ambiental del Programa 

y Plan de Desarrollo del Servicio 

Cómo Estar 

Involucrado 

RCTC ha conformado un Comité 

de Asesoría Técnica compuesto 

por grupos interesados a nivel 

regional y un Comité Ad Hoc de 

los miembros de la Comisión. 

Estos grupos se reúnen 

periódicamente para aportar sus 

comentarios acerca del desarrollo 

del proyecto. 

Los comentarios del público 

también son un componente 

importante del proceso 

ambiental. En octubre se 

realizarán reuniones de detección 

de necesidades y RCTC espera 

recibir comentarios de la 

comunidad a través de estas 

reuniones y de otros esfuerzos 

adicionales de contacto con la 

comunidad durante el proceso 

ambiental. 

Proceso del Proyecto 

El Corredor del Servicio de Tren Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass está es las fases 

iniciales del proceso ambiental y se construirá mediante un proceso por etapas NEPA/ 

CEQA. Este proceso por etapas (“Tiering”) es un proceso de evaluación ambiental por 

fases usado con frecuencia en proyectos complejos de transporte. Cuando se usa, la fase 

inicial o Etapa I (por ejemplo el Programa EIS/EIR) aborda preguntas generales acerca 

del proyecto del Corredor (como la ubicación general de las rutas e impactos potenciales 

de la construcción y la operación del servicio). Con base en las decisiones tomadas en el 

Programa EIS/EIR, las propuestas futuras de ubicaciones específcas para el servicio de tren 

(como la ubicación específca de la vía férrea nueva o de las estaciones) serían analizadas 

con mayor detalle y abordadas en subsecuentes documentos ambientales (por ejemplo en 

la Etapa II/NEPA y CEQA a Nivel del Proyecto). Actualmente, se anticipa que los trabajos 

en el SDP y del Programa EIS/EIR sean completados en aproximadamente tres años. 

Análisis de 

Alternativas 

Documento 

Ambiental del 

Programa y Plan 

de Desarrollo 

del Servicio 

(fase actual) 

Ingeniería

Preliminar y

Documentos 

ambientales a 

Nivel del Proyecto 

Diseño Final y

Construcción 

Mapa del Área del Estudio 

Partidarios Iniciales del Proyecto: Riverside County Transportation Commission  Coachella Valley Association of Governments  California High Speed Rail Authority  Cathedral 

City  City of Calimesa  City of Coachella  City of Corona  City of Eastvale  City of Jurupa Valley  City of Indian Wells  City of Indio  City of La Quinta  City of Palm Desert 

 City of Palm Springs  City of Rancho Mirage  City of Temecula  Coachella Valley Economic Partnership  County of Riverside  County of Riverside Supervisors  Greater Palm 

Springs Convention & Visitors Bureau  LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency  Metrolink  National Association of Rail Passengers  RailPAC  South Coast Air Quality Management District 

 Southern California Association of Governments  Southwest Rail Passenger Association 
 

   

     

   

   

   

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass 

Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meetings Notification Toolkit 

This Toolkit provides text and links to allow you to easily cut and paste information to your social media 

sites.  In conjunction with the infographic attached to the email, the Toolkit will help promote the

upcoming public scoping meetings.

1. Website : 

Public Invited to Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Scoping Meetings

The Riverside County Transportation Commission, in coordination with the Federal Railroad 

Administration and Caltrans, is studying options for providing additional intercity passenger rail 

services between Los Angeles and Indio. The agencies are preparing a Program Environmental 

Impact State (EIS)/Program Environment Impact Report (EIR) document and a Service

Development Plan consistent with federal and state requirements. 

Join the RCTC, FRA and Caltrans for public scoping meetings on October 12, 13, and 17 to learn

more about the project and to provide feedback:  

 Wednesday, October 12, 5 ‐ 7 pm with a brief presentation at 5:45 pm, Springbrook 

Clubhouse at Reid Park, 1011 N. Orange Street, Riverside, CA 92501 

 Thursday, October 13, 5 ‐ 7 pm with a brief presentation at 5:45 pm, Indio Senior 

Center, 45‐100 Aladdin Street, Indio, CA 92201 

 Monday, October 17, 5 ‐ 7 pm with a brief presentation at 5:45 pm, Los Angeles County 

Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Headquarters, Plaza Level, 1 Gateway 

Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

For more information, click here. 

2. Facebook: 

Join @therctc, @USDOTFRA, and @Caltrans8 for public scoping meetings for the Coachella

Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Project.  Come learn about the project and give your 

input. Visit www.cvrailproject.info to learn more.

3. Twitter: 

@rctc @ will be holding 3 scoping meetings in Riverside, Indio and Los Angeles for the Coachella 

Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Project. www.cvrailproject.info

4. Email Blast: 

Public Scoping Meetings Scheduled for the Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor

Project 

The Riverside County Transportation Commission, in coordination with the Federal Railroad 

Administration and Caltrans, is studying options for providing additional intercity passenger rail 

services between Los Angeles and Indio. The agencies are preparing a Program Environmental 
     

  

Impact State (EIS)/Program Environment Impact Report (EIR) document and a Service

Development Plan consistent with federal and state requirements. 

Join the RCTC, FRA and Caltrans for public scoping meetings on October 12, 13, and 17 to learn

more about the project and to provide comments: 

Public Scoping Meeting Schedule – Attend the Meeting that is Most Convenient for You 

Wednesday, October 12, 2016 

Springbrook Clubhouse at Reid Park  

1011 N. Orange Street 

Riverside, CA 92501 

Thursday, October 13, 2016 

Indio Senior Center

45‐100 Aladdin Street 

Indio, CA 92201 

Monday, October 17, 2016 

La Metro Headquarters

One Gateway Plaza, Plaza Level 

Los Angeles, CA 90012 

Meetings are scheduled from 5 ‐ 7 pm with brief presentations at 5:45 pm. 

For more information about the project and meetings, please visit www.cvrailproject.info. 
 Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting – Springbrook Clubhouse 

1011 N. Orange St., Riverside, CA 92501 

Wednesday, October 12, 2016, 5 – 7 pm 

NAME/NOMBRE ORGANIZATION/

ORGANIZACIÓN ADDRESS/DOMICILIO E-MAIL/CORREO ELECTRÓNICO TELEPHONE /TELÉFONO 

Email/Correo Electrónico 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 
 

 

 

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting – Springbrook Clubhouse 

1011 N. Orange St., Riverside, CA 92501 

 Wednesday, October 12, 2016, 5 – 7 pm 
 

 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting – Indio Senior Center 

45- 700 Aladdin St., Indio, CA 92201 

Thursday, October 13, 2016, 5 – 7 pm 

NAME/NOMBRE ORGANIZATION/

ORGANIZACIÓN ADDRESS/DOMICILIO E-MAIL/CORREO ELECTRÓNICO TELEPHONE /TELÉFONO 

Email/Correo Electrónico 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 
 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting – Indio Senior Center 

45- 700 Aladdin St., Indio, CA 92201 

Thursday, October 13, 2016, 5 – 7 pm 

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE
 

 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting - Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Athority 

One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

Monday, October 17, 2016, 5 – 7 pm 

NAME/NOMBRE ORGANIZATION/

ORGANIZACIÓN ADDRESS/DOMICILIO E-MAIL/CORREO ELECTRÓNICO TELEPHONE /TELÉFONO Email/Correo Electrónico 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Telephone/Teléfono: 

Email/Correo Electrónico : 

Telephone/Teléfono: 
 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting - Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Athority 

One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

Monday, October 17, 2016, 5 – 7 pm 

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE

YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE YOUR BUSINESS CARD HERE
  

              

                                                  

        

           

   

                                 

                  

                             

                     

       

  

              

                                                  

        

           

   

                                 

                  

                             

                     

       

             

                         

             

                         

Coachella Valley‐San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project

Public Scoping Meeting • Thursday, October 13, 2016 • Indio Senior Center, Indio

Name/Nombre: Date/Fecha:

Address/Domicilio:

Phone/Teléfono: Affiliation/Afiliación:

Email/Correo Electrónico:

Comments/Comentarios:

Project scoping comments may be submitted during the public meeting, by mailing this postcard, or emailing to

CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Scoping period comments are due by November 10, 2016.

Los comentarios informativos del proyecto pueden ser sometidos durante la reunión pública, enviados por correo, o por

correo electrónico a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. El plazo para hacer comentarios informativos se cierra

el 10 de noviembre de 2016.

Coachella Valley‐San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project

Public Scoping Meeting • Thursday, October 13, 2016 • Indio Senior Center, Indio

Name/Nombre: Date/Fecha:

Address/Domicilio:

Phone/Teléfono: Affiliation/Afiliación:

Email/Correo Electrónico:

Comments/Comentarios:

Project scoping comments may be submitted during the public meeting, by mailing this postcard, or emailing to

CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Scoping period comments are due by November 10, 2016.

Los comentarios informativos del proyecto pueden ser sometidos durante la reunión pública, enviados por correo, o por

correo electrónico a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. El plazo para hacer comentarios informativos se cierra

el 10 de noviembre de 2016.
 

 

   

      

     

     

 

   

      

     

     

PLACE 

STAMP 

HERE 

ROBERT YATES

RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

P.O. BOX 12008

RIVERSIDE, CA 92502

PLACE 

STAMP 

HERE 

ROBERT YATES

RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

P.O. BOX 12008

RIVERSIDE, CA 92502
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting • Monday, October 17, 2016 • Los Angeles County Metropolitan Authority, 

Los Angeles 

Name/Nombre: Date/Fecha: 

Address/Domicilio: 

Phone/Teléfono: Affiliation/Afiliación: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Comments/Comentarios: 

Project scoping comments may be submitted during the public meeting, by mailing this postcard, or emailing to 

CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Scoping period comments are due by November 10, 2016. 

Los comentarios informativos del proyecto pueden ser sometidos durante la reunión pública, enviados por correo, o por 

correo electrónico a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. El plazo para hacer comentarios informativos se cierra 

el 10 de noviembre de 2016. 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting • Monday, October 17, 2016 • Los Angeles County Metropolitan Authority, 

Los Angeles 

Name/Nombre: Date/Fecha: 

Address/Domicilio: 

Phone/Teléfono: Affiliation/Afiliación: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Comments/Comentarios: 

Project scoping comments may be submitted during the public meeting, by mailing this postcard, or emailing to 

CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Scoping period comments are due by November 10, 2016. 

Los comentarios informativos del proyecto pueden ser sometidos durante la reunión pública, enviados por correo, o por 

correo electrónico a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. El plazo para hacer comentarios informativos se cierra 

el 10 de noviembre de 2016. 
 

 

 

 

 

PLACE 

STAMP 

HERE 

ROBERT YATES 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 

P.O. BOX 12008 

RIVERSIDE, CA 92502 

PLACE 

STAMP 

HERE 

ROBERT YATES 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 

P.O. BOX 12008 

RIVERSIDE, CA 92502 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting • Wednesday , October 12, 2016 • Springbrook Clubhouse , Riverside 

Name/Nombre: Date/Fecha: 

Address/Domicilio: 

Phone/Teléfono: Affiliation/Afiliación: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Comments/Comentarios: 

Project scoping comments may be submitted during the public meeting, by mailing this postcard, or emailing to 

CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Scoping period comments are due by November 10, 2016. 

Los comentarios informativos del proyecto pueden ser sometidos durante la reunión pública, enviados por correo, o por 

correo electrónico a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. El plazo para hacer comentarios informativos se cierra 

el 10 de noviembre de 2016. 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Public Scoping Meeting • Wednesday, October 12, 2016 • Springbrook Clubhouse, Riverside 

Name/Nombre: Date/Fecha: 

Address/Domicilio: 

Phone/Teléfono: Affiliation/Afiliación: 

Email/Correo Electrónico: 

Comments/Comentarios: 

Project scoping comments may be submitted during the public meeting, by mailing this postcard, or emailing to 

CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. Scoping period comments are due by November 10, 2016. 

Los comentarios informativos del proyecto pueden ser sometidos durante la reunión pública, enviados por correo, o por 

correo electrónico a CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com. El plazo para hacer comentarios informativos se cierra 

el 10 de noviembre de 2016. 
 

 

 

 

 

PLACE 

STAMP 

HERE 

ROBERT YATES 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 

P.O. BOX 12008 

RIVERSIDE, CA 92502 

ROBERT YATES 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 

P.O. BOX 12008 

RIVERSIDE, CA 92502 

PLACE 

STAMP 

HERE 
       

     

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix D 

Public Scoping Presentation 
Scoping Meeting and Open Hou

October 12, 2016
Welcome

Overview Agenda

 5:00 pm – 5:45 pm: Welcome and S

 5:45 pm – 6:00 pm: Presentation

 6:00 pm – 7:00 pm: Open House
Presentation Agenda

 Project Overview Project Purpose and Need

 Project History Project Process Agency Coordination

 Project Timeline Project Comments
Project Overview

What is the Coachella Valley‐San Gorgonio Pass Rail C

Service Project ?

 The Federal Railroad Administration, the California

Department of Transportation, and the Riverside 

Transportation Commission are studying options f

providing intercity passenger rail service between of Los Angeles and Indio (the Corridor)

 The Corridor service would extend from an easter

in Indio to the western terminus at Los Angeles U

Station
Project Overview – Study Area

Where is the Project Study Area?
Project Purpose

What is the purpose of providing intercity service in the Coachella Valley – San Gorgo

Rail Corridor Project?

The overall purpose of the project is to provide a sa

reliable, and convenient intercity passenger rail ser

would meet the future mobility needs of residents

businesses, and visitors within the Corridor.
Project Purpose – Service Objective

What objectives would the Coachella Valley Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service achieve More convenient, faster, and more frequent servic

existing transit services

 An alternative to driving that offers reliable schedu

 An affordable transportation service Serve multiple trip purposes Improve regional travel opportunities for transit‐de

people

 Serve expected growth in the Corridor

 Not preclude a possible future extension to Phoen
Project Need

Why do we need Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio 

Rail Corridor Service Project? Constrained travel options  Significant highway congestion  Constrained rail system capacity Increase travel capacity without impacting air qu

and natural resources
Project History

 1991: RCTC completed the first in a series of stud

evaluating the operation of one or two daily inte

round trips between Los Angeles and Indio

 1991 to 2013: RCTC completed additional feasibili

studies on the Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio P

Corridor Service

 July 2016: RCTC, FRA, and Caltrans completed th

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corrido

Service Study Alternatives Analysis Report that

evaluated a reasonable range of alternatives for 

intercity rail service
Project History

The 2016 Alternatives Analysis Report studied mult

route alignments
Project Process

Where we are in the process

(completed July 2016)

• With completion of the Alternative Analysis Rep

next steps of the process include the preparatioService Development Plan and a joint Program

Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmenta

Report (EIS/EIR)
Project Process

What will be prepared? Service Development Plan (SDP)

• Analysis of service levels, infrastructure needs

modeling, station catchment areas, and conn

Railroad design and constructionTrainset equipment

Ridership and revenue forecast

Financial plan and economic impact

Implementation and phasing

• SDP elements analyzed in the Program EIS/EIR
Project Process

What will be prepared? Joint Program EIS/EIR

• Program EIS/EIR will utilize a tiered National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/California

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process

• Addresses likely environmental effects associ

the type of rail service being proposed in the 

• Provides a basis for subsequent phases or tier

Project‐level NEPA/CEQA) environmental doc
Project Process

What will be studied?The joint Program EIS/EIR will evaluate topics including:

• Agricultural resources• Air quality and global climate

change

• Biological and wetland resources

• Cultural and historic resources

• Economic and fiscal impacts

• Energy• Environmental justice• Floodplains• Hydrology/water quality

• Geology, soils and seismicity

• Hazardous materials

• Land use, planning, 

communities

• Noise and vibration

• Parklands, commun

services and other p

facilities

• Safety and security

• Section 4(f) and 6 (f

resources

• Transportation

• Visual quality/aesthe
Agency Coordination

Which agencies are involved? Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)

 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)

 Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC

 Potential Project Partners may include but are not 

• Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG)• Amtrak• Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolin

• Union Pacific Railroad

• BNSF Railway
Program EIS/EIR Timeline

What is next?

Notice of Intent/Notice

of Preparation

Comment Period and

Scoping Meetings

Fall 2016

Preparation of

Technical Studies and

Draft Program EIS/EIR

Winter 2016 to Summer

2018

Draft Program EIS/EIR

Comment Period

Fall 2018

Fin

and 

Public Involvement
Public Scoping

What is the purpose of scoping? Obtain public and agency comments to help:

 Refine the Purpose and Need for the Project

 Provide input on alignments or alternatives that sh

considered in the Program EIS/EIR

 Identify potential environmental effects of the Pro

be addressed in the Program EIS/EIR
How To Submit Comments

CEQA Notice of Preparation (NOP)

Public Comment Period: October 6, 2016 to November 10, 2016

Please submit NOP public comments via the following methods:

Email: Mr. Robert Yates

Multimodal Services DirectorRiverside County Transportation Commission

CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssociates.com

Mail: Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC)

P.O. Box 12008Riverside, California, 92501

Comments should include “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Co

Project – NOP Scoping Comments” in the subject line
How To Submit Comments

NEPA Notice of Intent (NOI)

Public Comment Period: October 7, 2016 to November 10, 2016

Please submit NOI public comments via the following methods:Email: Stephanie Perez

Environmental Protection Specialist

Office of Program Delivery, Federal Railroad Adminis

stephanie.perez@dot.gov

Mail: Federal Railroad Administration

Office of Program Delivery1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Mail Stop 20)

Washington, DC 20590

Comments should include “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Co

Project – NOI Scoping Comments” in the subject line
Stay Involved

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Contact Information:

 Email: CoachellaValleyRail@ArellanoAssoc

 RCTC Website: www.CVRailProject.Info

 Facebook:  facebook.com/CVRailProject

 FRA Website: fra.dot.gov
       

     

     

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix E 

Public Scoping Display Boards 











       

     

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix F 

Public Scoping Meeting Photographs 
   

Riverside Scoping Meeting 

October 12, 2016 

Photographs 







   

Indio Scoping Meeting 

October 13, 2016 

Photographs 

















Los Angeles Scoping Meeting 

October 17, 2016 

Photographs 


















       

     

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix G 

Public Comments Received 







       

     

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix H

Agency Scoping Comments Received
                             

                                  

                                    

                                    

     

       

   

           

             

From: Jack Cheng <jcheng@aqmd.gov> 

Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 9:25 AM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Cc: Jillian Wong 

Subject: Notice of Preparation of a CEQA Document for the Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio 

Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Attachments: RVC161007-04 - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor - NOP.PDF 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) staff appreciates the opportunity to comment on

the attached document. The following comments are meant as guidance for the Lead Agency and should be

incorporated into the Draft CEQA Document. The SCAQMD staff is available to work with the Lead Agency to

address these issues and any other questions that may arise. Please contact me if you have any questions

regarding these comments.

Jack Cheng ‐ Air Quality Specialist

jcheng@aqmd.gov

(909) 396‐2448

South Coast Air Quality Management District

21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA 91765

1
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

South Coast 

Air Quality Management District 

21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 

(909) 396-2000 • www.aqmd.gov October 21, 2016 

coachellavalleyrail@arellanoassociates.com 

Robert Yates, Multi Modal Service Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

P.O. Box 12008 

Riverside, CA 92501 

Notice of Preparation of a CEQA Document for the 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) staff appreciates the opportunity to comment on the abovementioned document. The SCAQMD staff’s comments are recommendations regarding the analysis of potential air quality 

impacts from the proposed project that should be included in the Draft EIR. Please send the SCAQMD a copy of the Draft EIR 

upon its completion. Note that copies of the Draft EIR that are submitted to the State Clearinghouse are not forwarded to the 

SCAQMD. Please forward a copy of the Draft EIR directly to SCAQMD at the address in our letterhead. In addition, please 

send with the Draft EIR all appendices or technical documents related to the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses 

and electronic versions of all air quality modeling and health risk assessment files. These include original emission 

calculation spreadsheets and modeling files (not Adobe PDF files). Without all files and supporting air quality 

documentation, the SCAQMD will be unable to complete its review of the air quality analysis in a timely manner. Any 

delays in providing all supporting air quality documentation will require additional time for review beyond the end of 

the comment period. 

Air Quality Analysis 

The SCAQMD adopted its California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook in 1993 to assist other public 

agencies with the preparation of air quality analyses. The SCAQMD recommends that the Lead Agency use this Handbook as 

guidance when preparing its air quality analysis. Copies of the Handbook are available from the SCAQMD’s Subscription 

Services Department by calling (909) 396-3720. More recent guidance developed since this Handbook was published is also 

available on SCAQMD’s website here: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ceqa-airquality-handbook-(1993). SCAQMD staff also recommends that the Lead Agency use the CalEEMod land use emissions 

software. This software has recently been updated to incorporate up-to-date state and locally approved emission factors and 

methodologies for estimating pollutant emissions from typical land use development. CalEEMod is the only software model 

maintained by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) and replaces the now outdated URBEMIS. 

This model is available free of charge at: www.caleemod.com. 

The Lead Agency should identify any potential adverse air quality impacts that could occur from all phases of the project and 

all air pollutant sources related to the project. Air quality impacts from both construction (including demolition, if any) and 

operations should be calculated. Construction-related air quality impacts typically include, but are not limited to, emissions 

from the use of heavy-duty equipment from grading, earth-loading/unloading, paving, architectural coatings, off-road mobile 

sources (e.g., heavy-duty construction equipment) and on-road mobile sources (e.g., construction worker vehicle trips, material 

transport trips). Operation-related air quality impacts may include, but are not limited to, emissions from stationary sources 

(e.g., boilers), area sources (e.g., solvents and coatings), and vehicular trips (e.g., on- and off-road tailpipe emissions and 

entrained dust). Air quality impacts from indirect sources, that is, sources that generate or attract vehicular trips should be 

included in the analysis. 

The SCAQMD has also developed both regional and localized significance thresholds. The SCAQMD staff requests that the 

lead agency quantify criteria pollutant emissions and compare the results to the recommended regional significance thresholds 

found here: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf. In 

addition to analyzing regional air quality impacts, the SCAQMD staff recommends calculating localized air quality impacts and 

comparing the results to localized significance thresholds (LSTs). LSTs can be used in addition to the recommended regional 

significance thresholds as a second indication of air quality impacts when preparing a Draft EIR document. Therefore, when 

preparing the air quality analysis for the proposed project, it is recommended that the lead agency perform a localized analysis 

by either using the LSTs developed by the SCAQMD or performing dispersion modeling as necessary. Guidance for 

performing a localized air quality analysis can be found at: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysishandbook/localized-significance-thresholds. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Robert Yates -2- October 21, 2016 

In the event that the proposed project generates or attracts vehicular trips, especially heavy-duty diesel-fueled vehicles, it is 

recommended that the lead agency perform a mobile source health risk assessment. Guidance for performing a mobile source 

health risk assessment (“Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risk from Mobile Source Diesel Idling 

Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis”) can be found at: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysishandbook/mobile-source-toxics-analysis. An analysis of all toxic air contaminant impacts due to the use of equipment 

potentially generating such air pollutants should also be included. 

In addition, guidance on siting incompatible land uses (such as placing homes near freeways) can be found in the California Air 

Resources Board’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Perspective, which can be found at the following 

internet address: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf. CARB’s Land Use Handbook is a general reference guide for 

evaluating and reducing air pollution impacts associated with new projects that go through the land use decision-making 

process. 

Finally, should the proposed project include equipment that generates or controls air contaminants, a permit may be required 

and the SCAQMD should be listed as a responsible agency and consulted. The assumptions in the submitted Draft EIR would 

also be the basis for permit conditions and limits. Permit questions can be directed to the SCAQMD Permit Services staff at 

(909) 396-3385, who can provide further assistance. 

Mitigation Measures 

In the event that the project generates significant adverse air quality impacts, CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation 

measures that go beyond what is required by law be utilized during project construction and operation to minimize or eliminate 

these impacts. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15126.4 (a)(1)(D), any impacts resulting from mitigation measures must also be 

discussed. Mitigation Measure resources are available on the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook website: 

http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook 

Data Sources 

SCAQMD rules and relevant air quality reports and data are available by calling the SCAQMD’s Public Information Center at 

(909) 396-2039. Much of the information available through the Public Information Center is also available via the SCAQMD’s 

webpage (http://www.aqmd.gov). 

The SCAQMD staff is available to work with the lead agency to ensure that project emissions are accurately evaluated and 

mitigated where feasible. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Jack Cheng, Air Quality Specialist by 

e-mail at jcheng@aqmd.gov or by phone at (909) 396-2448. 

Sincerely, 

Jillian Wong 

Jillian Wong, Ph.D. 

Planning and Rules Manager 

Planning, Rule Development & Area Sources 

JC:JW 

RVC161007-04 

Control Number 
From: info@rctc.org [mailto:info@rctc.org]  

Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 8:10 AM 

To: eechevarria@rctc.org 

Cc: Cheryl Donahue 

Subject: Coachella Valley Rail Contact Request 

purpose: Add my contact information to the Coachella Valley Rail Project database 

First_Name: Jill 

Last_Name: Jensen 

Email: jill_jensen@nps.gov 

Phone: 801­741­1012 ext 115 

Address: 324 S. State Street Suite 200 

Address2: Salt Lake City, UT 

Zip: 84111 

Comments: The project area is within the corridor of the Old Spanish National Historic Trail. As the federal coadministrators for the National Historic Trail (alongside the BLM) our office would like to be included on their 

NEPA mailing list and considered a consulting party for 106. 

1 
State of California - Natural Resources Agency 

DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE 

Inland Deserts Region 

3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Suite C-220 

Ontario, CA 91764 

(909) 484-0459 

WWW.Wildlife.ca.gov 

November 4, 2016 

Sent by email 

Mr. Robert Yates 

Multimodal Services Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

P.O. Box 12008 

Riverside, CA 92501 

EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., Governor 

CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director 

Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rall Corridor Service Project 

State Clearinghouse No. 2016101017 

Dear Mr. Yates: 

The Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) appreciates the opportunity to 

comment on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Program Environmental Impact 

Report (DPEIR) for the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Project (project) [State Clearinghouse INo. 2016101017]. Pursuant to The Guidelines 

for the Implementation of CEQA (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.; hereafter 

CEQA Guidelines), the Department has reviewed the NOP and offers comments and 

recommendations on those activities involved in the project that are within the 

Department's area of expertise and germane to its statutory responsibilities, and/or 

which are required to be approved by the Department (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15086, 

15096 & 15204). 

The project is being proposed by the Federal Railroad Administration, the California 

Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and the Riverside County Transportation 

Commission (hereafter jointly referred to as the Project Proponents) to study options for 

providing intercity rail service between the cities of Los Angeles and Indio, specifically 

between the western terminus at Los Angeles Union Station and an eastern terminus in 

Indio, California. The purpose of the project is to provide a safe, reliable, and convenient 

intercity passenger rail service within and between the two termini. 

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of 

fish, wildlife, native plants, and the habitat necessary for biologically sustainable 

populations of those species (i.e., biological resources); and administers the Natural 

Community Conservation Planning Program (NCCP Program). The Department offers 

the comments and recommendations presented below to assist Project Proponents in 

Conserving Ca[ifornia's WiU[ife Since 1870 
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

SCH No. 2016101017 

Page 2 of 9 

adequately identifying and/or mitigatinfl the project's significant, or potentially significant, 

impacts on biological resources. The comments and recommendations are also offered 

to enable the Department to adequately review and comment on the proposed project 

with respect to impacts on biological resources and the project's consistency with 

adopted and/or approved Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), NCCPs, and/or other 

local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. 

To enable the Department to adequately review and comment on the proposed project, 

the Department encourages Project proponents to include as much detail as possible in 

the DPEIR regarding proposed project elements, and detailed and specific mitigation 

measures. 

The Department recommends that the forthcoming DPEIR address the following: 

Assessment of Biological Resourceis 

Section 15125(c) of the CEQA Guidelines states that knowledge of the regional setting 

of a project is critical to the assessment of environmental impacts and that special 

emphasis should be placed on environmental resources that are rare or unique to the 

region. To enable Department staff to adequately review and comment on the project, 

the CEQA document should include a complete assessment of the flora and fauna 

within and adjacent to the project footprint, with particular emphasis on identifying rare, 

threatened, endangered, and other sensitive species and their associated habitats. The 

Department recommends that the DPEIR specifically include: 

1. An assessment of the various habitat types located within the project footprint, and a 

map that identifies the location of each habitat type. The Department recommends 

that floristic, alliance- and/or association based mapping and assessment be 

completed following The Manual of California Vegetation, second edition (Sawyer et 

al. 2009). Adjoining habitat areas should also be included in this assessment where 

site activities could lead to direct or indirect impacts offsite. Habitat mapping at the 

alliance level will help establish baseline vegetation conditions; 

2. A general biological inventory of th1e fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, and mammal 

species that are present or have the potential to be present within each habitat type 

onsite and within adjacent areas that could be affected by the project. The 

Department's California Natural Diversity Database (CNDOB) in Sacramento should 

be contacted at (916) 322-2493 or CNDOB@wildlife.ca.gov to obtain current 

information on any previously reported sensitive species and habitat, including 

Significant Natural Areas identified under Chapter 12 of the Fish and Game Code, in 

the vicinity of the proposed project.. The Department recommends that CNDOB Field 

Survey Forms be completed and submitted to CNDDB to document survey results. 

Online forms can be obtained and submitted at: 

https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data 
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

SCH No. 2016101017 

Page 3 of 9 

Please note that the Department's CNDDB is not exhaustive in terms of the data it 

houses, nor is it an absence database. The Department recommends that it be used 

as a starting point in gathering information about the potential presence of species 

within the general area of the project site. 

3. A complete, recent inventory of rare, threatened, endangered, and other sensitive 

species located within the project footprint and within offsite areas with the potential 

to be effected, including California Species of Special Concern (CSSC) and 

California Fully Protected Species ( Fish and Game Code § 3511 ). Species to be 

addressed should include all those which meet the CEQA definition (CEQA 

Guidelines§ 15380). The inventory should address seasonal variations in use of the 

project area and should not be limited to resident species. Focused species-specific 

surveys, completed by a qualified biologist and conducted at the appropriate time of 

year and time of day when the sensitive species are active or otherwise identifiable, 

are required. Acceptable species-s1Pecific survey procedures should be developed in 

consultation with the Department aind the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, where 

necessary. Note that the Department generally considers biological field 

assessments for wildlife to be valid for a one-year period, and assessments for rare 

plants may be considered valid for a period of up to three years. Some aspects of 

the proposed project may warrant periodic updated surveys for certain sensitive 

taxa, particularly if the project is proposed to occur over a protracted time frame, or 

in phases, or if surveys are completed during periods of drought. 

4. A thorough, recent, floristic-based assessment of special status plants and natural 

communities, following the Department's Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating 

Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities ( see 

https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Plants); 

5. Information on the regional setting that is critical to an assessment of environmental 

impacts, with special emphasis on resources that are rare or unique to the region 

(CEQA Guidelines§ 15125[c]); 

Analysis of Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Impacts to Biological Resources 

The Department recommends that the DPEIR provide a thorough discussion of the 

direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts expected to adversely affect biological 

resources as a result of the project. The DPEIR should include a discussion of both 

temporary and permanent impacts. To ensure that project impacts to biological 

resources are fully analyzed, the following information should be included in the DPEIR: 

1. A discussion of potential impacts from lighting, noise, human activity, and wildlifehuman interactions created by project activities adjacent to natural areas, exotic 

and/or invasive species, and drainaige. The latter subject should address projectrelated changes on drainage patterns and water quality within, upstream, and 

downstream of the project site, including: volume, velocity, and frequency of existing 
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

SCH No. 2016101017 

Page 4 of 9 

and post-project surface flows; polluted runoff; soil erosion and/or sedimentation in 

streams and water bodies; and post-project fate of runoff from the project site. 

2. A discussion of potential indirect project impacts on biological resources, including 

resources in areas adjacent to the project footprint, such as nearby public lands (e.g. 

National Forests, State Parks, etc.), open space, adjacent natural habitats, riparian 

ecosystems, wildlife corridors, and any designated and/or proposed reserve or 

mitigation lands (e.g., preserved lands associated with a Natural Community 

Conservation Plan, or other conserved lands). 

Please note that the project area encompasses a large geographic area and 

supports significant biological resouirces and contains habitat connections, providing 

for wildlife movement across the broader landscape, sustaining both transitory and 

permanent wildlife populations. The Department encourages project design that 

avoids and preserves onsite features that contribute to habitat connectivity. The 

DPEIR should include a discussion of both direct and indirect impacts to wildlife 

movement and connectivity, including maintenance of wildlife corridor/movement 

areas to adjacent undisturbed habitats. 

3. An evaluation of impacts to adjacent open space lands from both the construction of 

the project and any long-term operational and maintenance needs. 

4. A cumulative effects analysis developed as described under CEQA Guidelines § 

15130. Please include all potential direct and indirect project related impacts to 

riparian areas, wetlands, vernal pools, alluvial fan habitats, wildlife corridors or wildlife 

movement areas, aquatic habitats, sensitive species and other sensitive habitats, 

open lands, open space, and adjacemt natural habitats in the cumulative effects 

analysis. General and specific plans, as well as past, present, and anticipated future 

projects, should be analyzed relativE~ to their impacts on similar plant communities 

and wildlife habitats. 

Alternatives Analysis 

Although existing rail infrastructure may not connect directly between the two proposed 

termini, rail infrastructure does currenUy exist within the proposed corridor. The 

Department recommends that the Project Proponents consider the use of existing 

infrastructure, where feasible, to reduce project impacts. Note that the DPEIR must 

describe and analyze a range of reasonable alternatives to the project that are 

potentially feasible, would "feasibly at1tain most of the basic objectives of the project," 

and would avoid or substantially lessen any of the project's significant effects (CEQA 

Guidelines § 15126.6[a]). 
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

SCH No. 2016101017 

Page 5 of 9 

Mitigation Measures for Project lmpc:1cts to Biological Resources 

The DPEIR should include appropriate and adequate avoidance, minimization, and/or 

mitigation measures for all direct, indimct, and cumulative impacts that are expected to 

occur as a result of the project. When proposing measures to avoid, minimize, or 

mitigate impacts, the Department recommends consideration of the following: 

1 . Sensitive Plant Communities: The Department considers sensitive plant 

communities to be imperiled habitats having both local and regional significance. 

Plant communities, alliances, and associations with a statewide ranking of S-1, S-2, 

S-3, and S-4 should be considered sensitive and declining at the local and regional 

level. These ranks can be obtained by querying the CNDDB and are included in The 

Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009). The DPEIR should include 

measures to fully avoid and otherwise protect sensitive plant communities from 

project-related direct and indirect impacts. 

2. Mitigation: The Department considEirs adverse project-related impacts to sensitive 

species and habitats to be significant to both local and regional ecosystems, and the 

DPEIR should include mitigation measures for adverse project-related impacts to 

these resources. Mitigation measures should emphasize avoidance and reduction of 

project impacts. For unavoidable impacts, onsite habitat restoration and/or 

enhancement should be evaluated and discussed in detail. If onsite mitigation is not 

feasible or would not be biologically viable and therefore not adequately mitigate the 

loss of biological functions and values, offsite mitigation through habitat creation 

and/or acquisition and preservation in perpetuity should be addressed. 

The DPEIR should include measuries to perpetually protect the targeted habitat 

values within mitigation areas from direct and indirect adverse impacts in order to 

meet mitigation objectives to offset project-induced qualitative and quantitative 

losses of biological values. Specific issues that should be addressed include 

restrictions on access, including, but not limited to measures to ensure domestic 

animals (e.g., cats and dogs) cannot access mitigation areas, and removal 

procedures to implement if they do; proposed land dedications; long-term monitoring 

and management programs; control of illegal dumping; water pollution; and 

increased human intrusion, etc. 

3. Habitat Revegetation!Restoration i~tans: Plans for restoration and revegetation 

should be prepared by persons with expertise in southern California ecosystems and 

native plant restoration techniques. Plans should identify the assumptions used to 

develop the proposed restoration strategy. Each plan should include, at a minimum: 

(a) the location of restoration sites and assessment of appropriate reference sites; 

(b) the plant species to be used, sources of local propagules, container sizes, and 

seeding rates; (c) a schematic depicting the mitigation area; (d) a local seed and 

cuttings and planting schedule; (e) a description of the irrigation methodology; (f) 

measures to control exotic vegetaltion on site; (g) specific success criteria; (h) a 
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

SCH No. 2016101017 

Page 6 of 9 

detailed monitoring program; (i) contingency measures should the success criteria 

not be met; and (j) identification of the party responsible for meeting the success 

criteria and providing for conservation of the mitigation site in perpetuity. Monitoring 

of restoration areas should extend across a sufficient time frame to ensure that the 

new habitat is established, self-sustaining, and capable of surviving drought. 

The Department recommends that local onsite propagules from the project area and 

nearby vicinity be collected and useid for restoration purposes. Onsite seed 

collection should be initiated in the inear future in order to accumulate sufficient 

propagule material for subsequent use in future years. Onsite vegetation mapping at 

the alliance and/or association level should be used to develop appropriate 

restoration goals and local plant pallettes. Reference areas should be identified to 

help guide restoration efforts. Speciific restoration plans should be developed for 

various project components as appropriate. 

Restoration objectives should include protecting special habitat elements or recreating them in areas affected by the project; examples could include retention of 

woody material, logs, snags, rocks, and brush piles. 

4. Nesting Birds and Migratory Bird Treaty Act: Please note that it is the project 

proponent's responsibility to comply with all applicable laws related to nesting birds 

and birds of prey. Migratory non-game native bird species are protected by 

international treaty under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.). In addition, sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of 

the Fish and Game Code (FGC) also afford protective measures as follows: Section 

3503 states that it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or 

eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by FGC or any regulation made 

pursuant thereto; Section 3503.5 states that is it unlawful to take, possess, or 

destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to 

take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise 

provided by FGC or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto; and Section 3513 

states that it is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as 

designated in the MBTA or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as 

provided by rules and regulations a1dopted by the Secretary of the Interior under 

provisions of the MBTA. 

The Department recommends that the DPEIR include the results of avian surveys, 

as well as specific avoidance and minimization measures to ensure that impacts to 

nesting birds do not occur. Project-•specific avoidance and minimization measures 

may include, but not be limited to: project phasing and timing, monitoring of projectrelated noise (where applicable), sound walls, and buffers, where appropriate. The 

DPEIR should also include specific avoidance and minimization measures that will 

be implemented should a nest be located within the project site. If pre-construction 

surveys are proposed, the Department recommends that they be required no more 
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

SCH No. 2016101017 

Page 7 of 9 

than three (3) days prior to vegetation clearing or ground disturbance activities, as 

instances of nesting could be misse·d if surveys are conducted sooner. 

5. Translocation of Species: The Department generally does not support the use of 

relocation, salvage, and/or transplaintation as mitigation for impacts to rare, 

threatened, or endangered species as studies have shown that these efforts are 

experimental in nature and largely unsuccessful. 

California Endangered Species Act 

The Department is responsible for ensuring appropriate conservation of fish and wildlife 

resources including threatened, endani;iered, and/or candidate plant and animal 

species, pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). The Department 

recommends that a CESA ITP be obtained if the project has the potential to result in 

"take" (California Fish and Game Code Section 86 defines "take" as "hunt, pursue, 

catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunit, pursue, catch, capture, or kill") of State-listed 

CESA species, either through construction or over the life of the project. CESA ITPs are 

issued to conserve, protect, enhance, and restore State-listed CESA species and their 

habitats. 

The Department encourages early consultation, as significant modification to the 

proposed project and avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures may be 

necessary to obtain a CESA ITP. Please note that the proposed avoidance, 

minimization, and mitigation measures must be sufficient for the Department to 

conclude that the project's impacts are fully mitigated and the measures, when taken in 

aggregate, must meet the full mitigatioin standard. When the Department issues a CESA 

ITP, it is considered a discretionary action as defined in Title 14 of the California Code 

of Regulations, section 15357, under CEQA. Therefore, before the Department can 

issue the CESA lTP the CEQA Lead Agency must have completed the necessary steps 

under CEQA. If the project CEQA document fails to addresses all project impacts to 

listed species and does not include a mitigation monitoring and reporting program that 

will meet the requirements of a CESA IITP, the Department is required to prepare and 

issue a separate CEQA document prior to issuance of the CESA ITP. 

Habitat Conservation Plans and Natural Community Conservation Plans 

The project occurs within the following conservation plan areas: Western Riverside 

County Multiple Species Habitat Consi~rvation Plan, the Riverside County Stephens' 

Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan, and the Coachella Valley Multiple Species 

Habitat Conservation Plan. Compliance with approved habitat conservation plans is 

discussed in CEQA. Specifically, Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires 

that the CEQA document discuss any inconsistencies between a proposed project and 

applicable general plans and regional plans, including habitat conservation plans and 

natural community conservation plans. An assessment of the impacts to the 
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

SCH No. 2016101017 

Page 8 of 9 

conservation plans listed above as a result of this project is necessary to address CEQA 

requirements. 

Regardless of whether take of threatened and/or endangered species is obtained 

through the conservation plans listed above or through a CESA ITP, the DPEIR needs 

to address how the proposed project will affect the policies and procedures of each 

conservation plan. 

Lake and Streambed Alteration Program 

Based on length of the proposed project, the Project proponents will likely need to notify 

the Department per Fish and Game Code section 1602. Fish and Game Code section 

1602 requires an entity to notify the Department prior to commencing any activity that 

may do one or more of the following: substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of 

any river, stream or lake; substantially change or use any material from the bed, 

channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake; or deposit debris, waste or other materials 

that could pass into any river, stream or lake. Please note that "any river, stream or 

lake" includes those that are episodic (Le., those that are dry for periods of time) as well 

as those that are perennial (i.e., those that flow year round). This includes ephemeral 

streams, desert washes, and watercourses with a subsurface flow. It may also apply to 

work undertaken within the flood plain of a body of water. 

Upon receipt of a complete notification., the Department determines if the proposed 

project activities may substantially adversely affect existing fish and wildlife resources 

and whether a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement is required. An LSA 

Agreement includes measures necessary to protect existing fish and wildlife resources. 

CDFW may suggest ways to modify your project that would eliminate or reduce harmful 

impacts to fish and wildlife resources. 

The Department's issuance of an LSA Agreement is a "project" subject to CEQA (see 

Pub. Resources Code 21065). To facilitate issuance of an LSA Agreement, if 

necessary, the DEIR should fully identify the potential impacts to the lake, stream, or 

riparian resources, and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, and monitoring and 

reporting commitments. Early consultation with the Department is recommended, since 

modification of the proposed project may be required to avoid or reduce impacts to fish 

and wildlife resources. To obtain a Lake or Streambed Alteration notification package, 

please go to https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA/Forms. 

Further Coordination 

The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment on the NOP of a DPEIR for 

the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project (SCH No. 

2016101017) and recommends that Project Proponents address the Department's 

comments and concerns in the forthcoming DPEIR. Due to the size of the project we 

also recommend early consultation with Department to discuss project alternatives 
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

SCH No. 2016101017 

Page 9 of 9 

and routing; project impacts, including cumulative impacts; and project avoidance, 

minimization, and mitigation measures. To arrange a meeting and respond to any 

questions pertaining to the comments provided in this letter, please contact Joanna 

Gibson at (909) 987-7 449 or joanna.gibson@wildlife.ca.gov. 

Sincerely, 

~ nager 

Cc: Heather Pert, California Department of Fish and Wildlife 

Literature Cited 

Sawyer, J. 0., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. M. Evens. 2009. A manual of California 

Vegetation, 2nd ed. California Native Plant Society Press, Sacramento, California. 

http ://vegetation. en ps. org/ 
® Los Angeles County Metro Metropolitan Transportation~ 

One Gateway Plaza 

Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 

213.922.2000 Tel 

metro.net 

November 4, 2016 

Robert Yates 

Multimodal Services Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) 

P.O. Box 12008 

Riverside, CA 92501 

RE: Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Notice of Preparation of Joint 

Program Environmental Statement/Environmental Impact Report 

Dear Mr. Yates: 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed San Gorgino Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Project which will begin in Indio, CA and end at Union Station in Los Angeles. This letter conveys 

recommendations from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) 

concerning issues that are germane to our agency's statutory responsibility in relation to our facilities 

and services that may be affected by the proposed project. 

As the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) for Los Angeles County, the largest 

funding partner in the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), owner of much class 

one railroad right of way in Los Angeles County, member of the Los Angeles - San Diego- San Luis 

Obispo rail corridor agency (LOSSAN), and as owner of Los Angeles Union Station, Metro supports 

the development of future intercity rail corridors in southern California, including a new service 

between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley. 

Regarding project need, Metro is aware that the existing air, highway and rail networks are already 

currently constrained and congestion will worsen with increased population, demand, and aging 

infrastructure. Metro also recognizes that highway capacity improvements to Interstate 10 can have 

negative impacts to regional and local air quality, and require further demand of natural resources. 

Metro concurs with the project purpose and stated objectives: 

• More convenient, faster, and frequent service than existing public transit services 

• Reliable schedules 

• Affordability 

• Serves multiple trips purposes, such as business, leisure, medical, recreational 

• Improved travel opportunities for transit dependent population 

• Address expected growth in trips within the Los Angeles to Coachella Valley corridor 

• Not preclude a possible future extension to Phoenix 

Several route alignments were identified in the 2016 Alternatives analysis Report. Metro offers the 

following comments regarding a potential route alignment and station locations for the Coachella 

Valley- San Gorgonio Pass intercity rail service: 
1) Metro's first preference is that the alignment utilizes the Burlington Northern Santa Fe 

(BNSF) San Bernardino Subdivision, with a station in Fullerton. This is, in part, because 

the BNSF corridor already has extensive infrastructure, capacity and signal improvements 

in place to support the operation of Amtrak Pacific Surfliner intercity rail service, plus an 

extensive Metrolink and freight network. The corridor will have further capacity with the 

completion of the triple track between Redondo Junction and Fullerton. 

2) Metro's second preference is that the alignment utilizes the Union Pacific Alhambra 

Subdivision, with a station in Pomona. This alignment would minimize possible 

interference, capacity issues, and constraints with the existing Metrolink San Bernardino 

and Riverside lines. 

3) Metro does not support the use of either Metrolink San Bernardino Line or Riverside 

Line (San Gabriel subdivision or Los Angeles subdivision). Both lines are already at 

service capacity due to mostly single track operation (San Bernardino Line) or available 

slots (Riverside Line). As called for in the Metrolink Strategic Assessment, there are 

future plans to add more Metrolink service to these lines. The Metro Gold Line is also 

planned to be expanded further east to operate in the San Gabriel subdivision between 

Pomona and Montclair. Priority along these subdivisions should be reserved for future 

Metrolink commuter rail service, rather than intercity service, which is more suited to be 

operated on the San Bernardino or Alhambra subdivisions. 

A final point for consideration is Los Angeles Union Station. Metro is currently advancing the Link 

US project, which, once completed, will provide significant additional throughput and capacity at 

Union Station. Decisions regarding maintenance, storage and staging of intercity consists, platform 

locations, operating plans, real estate and right-of-way acquisition issues, etc. should be made in 

consultation and coordination with Metro's planning and preliminary engineering efforts to advance 

the Link US project. Another factor which will greatly influence operations at Union Station will be 

the future terminus of the high speed rail network between San Francisco and Los Angeles. 

Metro, as a key stakeholder, looks forward to partnering with Riverside County Transportation 

Commission (RCTC), as this important intercity rail project advances through the programmatic 

EIS/EIR process. We welcome the opportunity to participate in the Technical Advisory Committee 

(TAC) meetings. We also welcome the opportunity to coordinate with RCTC on Metro's efforts to 

advance the Link US project, and collaborate on the arrival of high speed rail in Los Angeles 

If you have any questions regarding this response, please contact Elizabeth Carvajal at 213-922-3084 

or by email at DevReview@metro.net. Metro looks forward to reviewing the Draft EIR. Please send it 

to the following address: 

Metro Development Review 

One Gateway Plaza MS 99-23-4 

Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA---CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN Jr .. Governor 

,,,,-

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

DISTRICTS 

PLANNING (MS 725) 

464 WEST 4th STREET, 6th FLOOR 

SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401-1400 

PHONE (909) 388-7017 

FAX (909) 383-5936 

TTY711 

www.dot.ca.gov/dist8 

fii)~©~Il~~~ 

\j\\ NOV 08 2016 \_W 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY 

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 

Serwus Drought. 

Help save water! 

November 4, 2016 

Mr. Robert Yates 

Multimodal Services Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

P.O. Box 12008 

Riverside, CA 92501 

File: RIV- Coachella Valley- San 

Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study 

Coachella Valley- San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Notice of Preparation 

Mr. Yates, 

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has reviewed the Notice of Preparation for the 

Coachella Valley- San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service project. The project will develop a 

Program EIS/EIR between the Federal Rail Administration, Caltrans, and the Riverside County 

Transportation Commission (RCTC) studying options for providing intercity rail service between Los 

Angeles and Indio. 

The mission of Caltrans is to provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation 

system to enhance California's economy and livability. The Local DevelopmentIntergovernmental Review (LD-IGR) Program reviews projects and plans through the lenses of 

our mission and state planning priorities of multi-modal transportation, infill, conservation, and 

travel-efficient development. To ensure a safe and efficient transportation system, we encourage 

early consultation and coordination with local jurisdictions and project proponents on all 

development projects that utilize the multimodal transportation network. We provide these 

comments consistent with the State's smart mobility goals that support a vibrant economy, and 

build communities, not sprawl. As of September 2016, our unit's focus will be towards reducing 

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) associated with local development projects per SB 743. We 

therefore provide the following comments: 

Smart Growth Principles and Multi-Modal Planning 

This project is representative of the state's goals regarding multi-modal transportation planning as 

it will provide a necessary rail linkage between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley, will be a 

significant addition to the interregional rail system, and will assist in the reduction of VMT and 

traffic along impacted corridors. We are supportive of project objectives which include providing 

travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with: upgraded public 

transportation services; an alternative to driving; affordable transportation services; a range of trip 

purposes, including business, social, medical, leisure, and recreation; improving regional travel for 

"Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system 

to enhance California's economy and livability" 
Mr. Yates 

November 4, 2016 

Page 2 

transit dependent populations; and serving expected population growth. We would also encourage 

RCTC to pursue future Corridor expansion between the Coachella Valley and Phoenix. 

In order to increase ridership along the planned rail corridor, it is necessary to make positive landuse and multi-modal transportation changes to reduce vehicle miles traveled to future stations. This 

will involve working in collaboration with local jurisdictions, including Cities and public 

transportation operators. Our recommendations include: 

• Integrating high density housing and mixed-use developments around future stations. This 

would create communities of activity around stations, providing destinations for future riders 

and economic opportunities for businesses. This may also stimulate residents to utilize the rail 

options for many trip purposes as discussed above. 

• Developing public transportation and active transportation connections around the station 

areas. We recommend circulator bus routes connecting stations to other trip generators located 

in proximity to the stations. To increase bicycle trips to access stations, we recommend 

utilizing Class IV Separated Bikeway guidance to separate cyclists from automobiles. 

• Considering long-term multi-modal integration, the project should include a study of 

alignments to connect to the future High Speed Rail station planned for San Bernardino. This 

would further increase the trips one could take utilizing the project to locations throughout the 

State of California. 

Thank you for providing Caltrans the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Preparation 

for the Coachella Valley- San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service project. These recommendations 

are preliminary and summarize our review of materials provided for our evaluation. Please continue 

to keep us informed of the project and other future updates. If you have any questions or need to 

contact us, please do not hesitate to contact Dustin Foster at (909) 806-3955 or myself at (909) 383-

4557. 

Sincerely, ?~1914-. 

MARK ROBERTS 

Office Chief 

Intergovernmental Review, Community and Regional Planning 

"Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation 

system to enhance California's economy and livability" 
METRDLINI<® 

Southern Californi~ Regional Rail Authority 

November 4, 2016 

Mr. Robert Yates 

Multimoclal Service Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

P.O. Rox 12008 

Riverside, CA 9250 I 

RE: Notice of Preparation (NOP) of n Joint Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental 

Report (ElS/EJR) for the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Ra.il Corridor Service 

Dear Mr. Yates: 

The Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) has received the NOP for the Program EIS/EIR 011 

the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Co1Tidor Service. Thank you for the opportunity to provide 

scoping comments on key issues relative lo SCRRA and operations of the railroad within the proposed project 

service location. As background information, SCRRA is a five-county Joint Powers Authority (JPA) that 

operates the regional commuter rail system known as Metrolink. The JPA consists of the Los Angeles County 

Metropolitan Transpo1iation Authority (METRO), San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), 

Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and 

Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC). 

SCRRA recognizes and is supportive of the need for additional passenger rail services in the southern California 

region expanding to areas like the Coachella Valley. This is consistent with our newly adopted Strategic Plan 

goal of "Increase Regional Mobility" with increased and improved connectivity of local and regional transit 

systems to Metmlink. We feel it is important to pursue a smooth passenger interface between thfa planned 

service and the existing passenger operations in southern California, including coordinated schedules and 

integrated fares. This would be a similar anangement to the existing coordination between Amti-ak Pacific 

Surfliner and Metrolink; including the Rail2Rail program. 

General considerations/comments for this NOP are as follows: 

1. For future mallings on NOP's and DEIR's please mail to Metrolink Plam1ing and Development. 

Department, One Gateway Plaza, 12th floor, Los Angeles. CA 90012 

2. While we understand that the Coachell.a Valley - San Gorgonio Pass corridor team has identified the 

Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) San Dernardino Subdivision as a preferred alternative for the 

Western Section of the route between Colton and Los Angeles we recommend inclusion and analysis of 

One Ge1ewoy Plaza, Floor 12 Los Angeles, CA 00012 T (213) 41)2,0200 

~ metrolinktralns.com 
Mr. Robert Yates 

Page2 

November 4, 2016 

at least one other alignment, such as the Union Pacific Railroad (lJPRR) Alhambra Subdivision or their 

Los Angeles Subdivision in the DElR in order to provide flexibility in the implementation of the service, 

especially if negotiations with one railroad does not progress. 

3. SCRRA is supportive of major infrastructure improvements such as grade separations, third main tracks 

and station enhancements for increased services on the preferred route in order to relieve some of the 

existing constraints on the line with the cunent freight and JJasscnger train operations. Opportunities for 

joint investments in capacity-enhancing infrastructure should be pursued in partnership with other 

passenger railroads and services. 

4. Further definition into the designated station locations and stops on the selected route is needed. We 

are also interested in further analysis to ensure safe non-stop operations through the existing stations on 

the preferred mute. 

5. The terminus in Los Angeles will be Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) and Metro is in the planning 

stages for the Link Union Station (LinkUS) run-through tracks projects. SCRRA woultl like to ensure 

that this .new planned service is operated in and out of LAUS without compromise to MetroJink 

dedicated platforms or number of run-through tracks. 

Thank you again for coopcl'ating with SCRRA to help ensure the development of a successful project. If' you 

have any questions regarding these comments pkase contact me at 213-452-0456 or via e-mail at 

mathieur@scna.net. 

:

Sr. Public Project Specialist 

Cc: Sheldon Peterson, RCTC 

Roderick Diaz, SCR.RA 

Henning Eichler, SCRRA 

Patricia Watkins, SCRRA 

Sylvia Novoa, SCRRt\ 

i~i~o 
lliNnVhllNIJ 1111< II ij[ Ilk tOt ltl1fiOV, 

IIIIIH11 /\Ill ii\N 

fl~, 1/\ I ION rlf GOV! ~MHI 

, f, W• st ;111 S!1Pc1 11rh ,1, 1 

I ll11r,rlP•. ( .\ Hi 17 

/I}) 1 );i,T 

U lj) J ~f, 11 15 

Rf< ,ll lN,\i fr ll/lK II (.,fl I< Ff1, 

Mifhek MJrtlnez, ~,Hlld A11a 

V I 

Margaret E. ~inlay, lJudtl" 

I 

Ct1e1 yl Vicgds W,,lkC'f, 11 C~nl", 

nMMII ft 111\IH'-. 

Michel~ MJrhnc•z. ~.rnra And 

H d 

Bill ldhn, Big Br~r I ;ik;, 

y .•.:. " 

C Jt rrn:,n RamirF/1 llrnijf/1 

flart aril MVisin~, Alh.:imh1J 

November 5, 2016 

Mr. Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

P.O. Box 12008 

Riverside, California 92502 

E-mail: coachellavalleyrail@arrelanoassociates.com 

RE: SCAG Comments on the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Joint 

Programmatic Environmental Impact StatemenUEnvironmental Impact Report 

(EIS/EIR) for the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Project {SCAG NO. IGR9024] 

Dear Mr. Yates, 

Thank you for submitting the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Joint Programmatic 

EIS/EIR for the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

("proposed project") to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for 

review and comment. SCAG is the authorized regional agency for InterGovernmental Review (IGR) of programs proposed for Federal financial assistance 

and direct Federal development activities, pursuant to Presidential Executive Order 

12372. Additionally, SCAG reviews the Environmental Impact Reports of projects of 

regional significance for consistency with regional plans pursuant to the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines. 

SCAG is also the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency under state 

law, and is responsible for preparation of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) 

including the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 

375. As the clearinghouse for regionally significant projects per Executive Order 

12372, SCAG reviews the consistency of local plans, projects, and programs with 

regional plans. 1 Guidance provided by these reviews is intended to assist local 

agencies such as local jurisdictions and project proponents to take actions that help 

contribute to the attainment of the regional goals and policies in the RTP/SCS. 

SCAG staff has reviewed the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Joint Programmatic 

EIS/EIR for the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

that spans through Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. 

The proposed project includes the study of options for providing intercity rail services 

in the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Corridor (between cities of Los Angeles 

and Indio, California). 

When available, please send environmental documentation to SCAG's office in 

Los Angeles or by email to sunl@scag.ca.gov providing, at a minimum, the full 

public comment period for review. If you have any questions regarding the 

attached comments, please contact the Inter-Governmental Review (IGR) Program, 

attn.: Lijin Sun, Senior Regional Planner, at (213) 236-1882 or sunl@scaq.ca.qov. 

Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

{ t t,,.,Vv--.-J ~~ -f t'f 

Ping Chang 

Acting Manager, Compliance and Performance Monitoring 

1 Lead agencies such as local jurisdictions have the sole discretion in determining a local project's 

consistency with the 201 6 RTP/SCS for the purpose of determining consistency for CEQA Any 

"consistency' finding by SCAG pursuant to the IGR process should not be construed as a determination of 

consistency with the 2016 RTP/SCS for CEQA 

The Regional Council consists of 86 elected officials representing 191 cities, six counties, six County Transportation Commissions, one representative 

from the Transportation Corridor Agencies, one Tribal Government representative and one representative for the Air Districts within Southern California. 

2016.0S.09 prvtled on1ecycled paper 
November 5, 2016 

Mr. Yates 

COMMENTS ON THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A 

DRAFT JOINT PROGRAMMATIC EIS/EIR FOR THE 

SCAG No. IGR9024 

Page 2 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GORGONIO PASS RAIL CORRIDOR SERVICE PROJECT 

[SCAG NO. IGR9024] 

CONSISTENCY WITH RTP/SCS 

SCAG reviews environmental documents for regionally significant projects for their consistency with the 

adopted RTP/SCS. For the purpose of determining consistency with CEQA, lead agencies such as local 

jurisdictions have the sole discretion in determining a local project's consistency with the RTP/SCS. 

2016 RTP/SCS GOALS 

The SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2016 RTP/SCS in April 2016. The 2016 RTP/SCS seeks to 

improve mobility, promote sustainability, facilitate economic development and preserve the quality of life for 

the residents in the region. The long-range visioning plan balances future mobility and housing needs with 

goals for the environment, the regional economy, social equity and environmental justice, and public health 

(see http://scagrtpscs.neUPaqes/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx). The goals included in the 2016 RTP/SCS 

may be pertinent to the proposed project. These goals are meant to provide guidance for considering the 

proposed project within the context of regional goals and policies. Among the relevant goals of the 2016 

RTP/SCS are the following: 

SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS GOALS 

RTP/SCS G1: Align the plan investments and policies with improving regional economic development and 

competitiveness 

RTP/SCS G2: Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region 

RTP/SCS G3: Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region 

RTP/SCS G4: Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system 

RTP/SCS G5: Maximize the productivity of our transportation system 

RTP/SCS G6: Protect the environment and health for our residents by improving air quality and encouraging 

active transportation (e.g., bicycling and walking) 

RTP/SCS G7: Actively encourage and create incentives for energy efficiency, where possible 

RTP/SCS GB: Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and active transportation 

RTP/SCS G9: Maximize the security of the regional transportation system through improved system monitoring, 

rapid recovery planning, and coordination with other security agencies* 

•scAG does not yet have an agreed-upon security performance measure. 

For ease of review. we encourage the use of a side-by-side comparison of SCAG goals with discussions 

of the consistency, non-consistency or non-applicability of the goals and supportive analysis in a table 

format. Suggested format is as follows: 
November 5, 2016 

Mr. Yates 

SCAG No. IGR9024 

Page3 

SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS GOALS 

RTP/SCS G1: 

Goal Analysis 

Align the plan investments and policies with improving Consistent: Statement as to why; 

regional economic development and competitiveness Not-Consistent: Statement as to why; 

Or 

Not Applicable: Statement as to why; 

DEIR page number reference 

RTP/SCS G2: Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and Consistent: Statement as to why; 

goods in the region Not-Consistent: Statement as to why; 

Or 

Not Applicable: Statement as to why; 

DEIR page number reference 

etc. etc. 

2016 RTP/SCS STRATEGIES 

To achieve the goals of the 2016 RTP/SCS, a wide range of land use and transportation strategies are 

included in the 2016 RTP/SCS. Technical appendances of the 2016 RTP/SCS provide additional 

supporting information in detail. To view the 2016 RTP/SCS, please visit: 

http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.asox. The 2016 RTP/SCS builds upon the progress 

from the 2012 RTP/SCS and continues to focus on integrated, coordinated, and balanced planning for 

land use and transportation that the SCAG region strives toward a more sustainable region, while the 

region meets and exceeds in meeting all of applicable statutory requirements pertinent to the 2016 

RTP/SCS. These strategies within the regional context are provided as guidance for lead agencies such 

as local jurisdictions when the proposed project is under consideration. 

DEMOGRAPHICS AND GROWTH FORECASTS 

Local input plays an important role in developing a reasonable growth forecast for the 2016 RTP/SCS. 

SCAG used a bottom-up local review and input process and engaged local jurisdictions in establishing 

the base geographic and socioeconomic projections including population, household and employment. At 

the time of this letter, the most recently adopted SCAG jurisdictional-level growth forecasts that were 

developed in accordance with the bottom-up local review and input process consist of the 2020, 2035, 

and 2040 population, households and employment forecasts. To view them, please visit 

http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/2016GrowthForecastByJurisdiction.odf. The growth forecasts for the 

region and applicable jurisdictions are below. 

Adopted SCAG Region Wide Forecasts Adopted County of Los Angeles Forecasts 

Year2020 Year2035 Year 2040 Year2020 Year 2035 Year2040 

Population 19,663,000 22,091,000 22,138,800 10,326,200 11,145,100 11,514,800 

Households 6,458,000 7,325,000 7,412,300 3,493,700 3,809,300 3,946,600 

Emolovment 8,414,000 9,441,000 9,871,500 4,662,500 5,062,100 5,225,800 

Adopted County of Orange Forecasts Adopted County of Riverside Forecasts 

Year 2020 Year 2035 Year2040 Year2020 Year 2035 Year 2040 

Population 3,271,100 3,431,200 3,461,500 2,479,800 3,055,100 3,183,700 

Households 1,074,700 1,135,300 1,152,300 802,400 1,009,000 1,054,300 

Emolovment 1,730,400 1,870,500 1,898,900 848,700 1,111,800 1,174,300 
November 5, 2016 

Mr. Yates 

SCAG No. lGR9024 

Page4 

Adopted County of San Bernardino 

Forecasts 

Year 2020 Year2035 Year2040 

Population 2,197,400 2,637 400 2,731,300 

Households 687,100 824,600 854,300 

Emolovment 789,500 998,000 1,028,100 

MITIGATION MEASURES 

SCAG staff recommends that you review the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (Final PEIR) for 

the 2016 RTP/SCS for guidance, as appropriate. SCAG's Regional Council certified the Final PEIR and 

adopted the associated Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (FOF/SOC) and 

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) on April 7, 2016 (please see: 

http://scaqrtpscs.net/Paqes/F1NAL2016PEIR.aspx). The Final PEIR includes a list of project-level 

performance standards-based mitigation measures that may be considered for adoption and 

implementation by lead, responsible, or trustee agencies in the region, as applicable and feasible. 

Project-level mitigation measures are within responsibility, authority, and/or jurisdiction of projectimplementing agency or other public agency serving as lead agency under CEQA in subsequent projectand site- specific design, CEQA review, and decision-making processes, to meet the performance 

standards for each of the CEQA resource categories. 
        

             

       

        

         

                                             

  

      

      

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐

From: Steven Hernandez [mailto:sahernan33@gmail.com]

Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 2:25 PM

To: Coachella Valley Rail <CoachellaValleyRail@arellanoassociates.com>

Subject: City of Coachella

To whom it may concern,

Please ensure that the City of Coachella is considered for a potential rail stop. The city wishes to be included in rail stop

considerations.

Steven A. Hernandez

Mayor

City of Coachella

1
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

United States Department of the Interior 

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 

Ecological Services 

Palm Springs Fish and Wildlife Office 

777 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 208 

Palm Springs, California 92262 

In Reply Refer To: 

FWS-17B0023-17CPA0012 

November 9, 2016 

Sent by Email 

Ms. Stephanie Perez 

Environmental Protection Specialist 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Office of Program Delivery 

1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE (Mail Stop 20) 

Washington, DC 20590 

Subject: Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental 

Impact Report for the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service, 

Riverside and Los Angeles County, California 

Dear Ms. Perez: 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the Notice of Intent (NOI) for the proposed 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service (Project) to provide intercity passenger 

rail service between Indio and Los Angeles. The Project would extend from an eastern terminus in 

Indio, California, to the western terminus at Los Angeles Union Station, and is approximately 141 

miles long. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) will prepare a Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) jointly with the Riverside County 

Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for 

the Project. The FRA, RCTC, and Caltrans will use a tiered NEPA process (e.g. Programmatic EIS/EIR) 

to complete the Project’s environmental review. The initial phase of the tiered process will address 

broad questions and likely environmental effects for the Project including, but not limited to, the type 

of service(s) being proposed, major infrastructure components, and identification of major facility 

capacity constraints. Based on the decisions made in the Programmatic EIS/EIR, future site-specific 

proposals would be analyzed at a greater level of detail and addressed in subsequent phases or tiered 

(e.g. Project-level NEPA) environmental documents. 

We offer the following comments on the NOI as they relate to potential impacts on public trust resources. 

The primary concern and mandate of the Service is the conservation, protection and enhancement of 

fish and wildlife resources and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The 

Service has legal responsibility for the welfare of migratory birds, anadromous fish, and threatened 

or endangered animals and plants listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The comments provided herein are based on the information provided in the 

NOI; the Final Alternatives Analysis for the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Study prepared by RCTC dated July 25, 2016; our knowledge of sensitive and declining fish and wildlife 

resources; and our participation in regional habitat conservation planning efforts. 

As noted in RCTC’s 2016 Final Alternatives Analysis, the alternative to be carried forward and analyzed 

in the programmatic EIS/EIR was chosen because it will use existing rail lines that connect the Coachella 

Valley with the Los Angeles Basin. Alternatives with entirely new alignments were deemed unreasonable, 

due to the cost of new rights-of-way (ROW) and the challenge of timely property acquisition. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ms. Stephanie Perez (FWS-17B0023-17CPA0012) 2 

Additionally, grading an entirely new ROW would cause more impact on the natural environment 

and human environment. 

The rail corridor traverses several existing regional habitat conservation plan areas. It is the policy of 

the Service to promote and foster the development of strategic habitat conservation at the ecosystem 

level through active participation in local development of regional Natural Community Conservation 

Plan/Habitat Conservation Plans (NCCP/HCP’s), which often include innovative regional multiple 

species habitat conservation planning efforts (e.g., Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plans). The 

success of these plans relies on maintaining core biological resource areas and habitat linkages/biological 

corridors that are essential to the long-term viability of rare and threatened wildlife. The EIS/EIR should 

include a discussion of the Project’s effects on the conservation strategies that are outlined within 

existing or draft NCCP/HCP’s. We would also encourage FRA, RCTC, and Caltrans to identify 

opportunities along the Project alignment where connectivity under or over existing rail lines could 

be improved or enhanced as part of the Project to ensure there are interconnected, contiguous preserves 

that meet the survival and recovery needs of multiple species in perpetuity. 

To facilitate evaluation of the proposed Project from the standpoint of fish and wildlife protection, we 

also recommend the EIS/EIR include a description of the proposed Project and the environment in the 

vicinity of the Project, from both local and regional perspectives, including all practicable alternatives 

that have been considered to avoid and/or reduce Project impacts to federally listed and other sensitive 

species and habitat types. Specific acreages and descriptions of the types of wetlands, riparian, and 

other sensitive habitats that may be affected by the Project alternatives should be included, as well as 

aerial photographs, maps, and tables that summarize this information. Please also include detailed 

information on the number and distribution of all Federal candidate, proposed, and listed species; 

State-listed species; and locally sensitive species that may be affected within the footprint or near the 

proposed Project alternatives. To quickly and easily identify trust resources and listed species and to 

get a list of suggested conservation measures for the Project and improve the efficiency of Project 

planning, we recommend using our Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) site 

(https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/). However, please note the species list and conservation measures obtained 

from IPaC may need to be reviewed by our office and additional, more specific measures may be 

recommended. 

We encourage the aforementioned agencies to work with our office to ensure the EIS/EIR incorporates 

adequate avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures and uses the most current species survey 

protocols to ensure any adverse effects to rare and declining species are offset. If you have any questions 

regarding this letter, please contact Felicia Sirchia of the Palm Springs Fish and Wildlife Office at 

760-322-2070, extension 405. 

Sincerely, 

for Kennon A. Corey 

Assistant Field Supervisor 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION IX 

75 Hawthorne Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

November 9, 2016 

Stephanie Perez 

Federal Railroad Administration 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

West Building- Mail Stop 20 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Subject: Scoping Comments for the Programmatic Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Dear Ms. Perez: 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed the Federal Register Notice 

published October 11, 2016, requesting comments on the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) 

proposal to prepare a Programmatic (Tier 1) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) for the 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service: Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, and 

Los Angeles Counties, CA (Project). Our enclosed comments are provided pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CPR 

Parts 1500-1508) and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act. 

EPA looks forward to coordinating with FRA to provide feedback and highlight the potential 

environmental impacts and benefits of a rail system connecting Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley. 

EPA supports the concept of a rail system that can provide an alternative to increasing vehicle miles 

traveled and lead to reduced environmental impacts, so long as it is planned well. We anticipate 

reviewing and commenting on the project Purpose and Need and Range of Alternatives, as well as the 

Draft and Final EIS. Iffuture projects tiering from this Draft EIS will require an Individual Permit 

pursuant to Clean Water Act Section 404, we would also like to review and comment on the alternative 

most likely to contain the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LED PA). 

EPA's detailed comments below include recommendations related to green design and operations, 

relationship of this Project to other regional transportation projects, land use and transportation 

linkages, and analysis of impacts to (1) water resources, (2) biological resources and wildlife, (3) 

noise, (4) air quality, and (5) environmental justice communities. In addition, we have provided 

recommendations for the analyses of cumulative impacts and growth inducement. 
Green Design and Operations 

EPA recommends FRA commit to building a state-of-the-art sustainable rail system that incorporates 

the highest levels of energy efficiency available into construction, operations, and maintenance. FRA 

should provide a clear vision for how the new rail system would be built, operated, and maintained in a 

manner that reduces use of energy, avoids impacts to environmental resources, and provides for 

improved mobility in an equitable manner. 

Recommendations: 

• Include a commitment to achieving Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design 

(LEED) Platinum certification for future stations and rail facilities. 

• Identify measures to conserve water and manage stormwater runoff. We recommend 

commitments to implement "green infrastructure" in onsite stormwater management 

features, such as bioretention areas, vegetated swales, porous pavement, and filter strips. 

These features can serve as both stormwater treatment and visual enhancements. 

• Identify potential measures to produce energy onsite that can be incorporated into design of 

stations, rail, and maintenance facilities. 

• Commit to use recycled industrial materials in the construction of future station and rail 

facilities. Nonhazardous industrial materials, such as coal ash, foundry sand, construction 

and demolition materials, slags, and gypsum, are valuable products of industrial processes. 

Industrial materials recycling preserves natural resources by decreasing the demand for 

virgin materials; conserves energy and reduces greenhouse gas emissions by decreasing the 

demand for products made from energy intensive manufacturing processes; and saves 

money by decreasing disposal costs for the generator and decreasing materials costs for end 

users. 

Relationship to Regional Transportation Projects 

The Draft EIS for the Project should specifically identify how other proposed transportation projects in 

the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area relate to this Project, as well as how the rail system would 

integrate with existing and planned transit systems. EPA encourages FRA to coordinate with local 

transportation agencies to ensure that the Project is integrated with other public transportation systems 

throughout the proposed rail corridor. Coordination with local transportation agencies provides an 

opportunity to integrate the proposed project with plans for local service. Furthermore, FRA 

involvement in regional projects will minimize duplication of efforts and conflicting transit goals so 

that potential design, construction, permitting, and mitigation in the area can be streamlined to 

minimize environmental impacts. 

Recommendations: 

• Address how the proposed project will ensure that potential duplication of efforts and 

incompatibilities with other transit systems will not occur. 

• Identify integration and/or incompatibility of the proposed Project with other existing and 

proposed transit projects. 

• Identify the specific features of the Project that are being designed to "link up" with other 

transportation proposals in the region. 

2 
Land Use and Transportation Linkage 

The Draft EIS should identify all transportation improvements proposed to provide access to the 

Project from anticipated key rider groups in population centers throughout the project study area, 

including transit connections, new methods to move people while reducing congestion, and increased 

bus service. The Draft EIS should analyze and disclose the temporary and permanent environmental 

impacts of constructing stations, parking facilities, maintenance and storage facilities, power 

propagation infrastructure, and required road construction and modifications. EPA supports the use of 

existing transportation corridors and rights-of-way, to the extent feasible, in order to minimize direct 

and indirect effects associated with the construction of a new transportation corridor. 

Recommendations: 

• Maximize the use of existing transportation corridors and rights-of-way, to the extent 

feasible. 

• Describe the expected land use changes associated with station locations, including new 

transit services and other methods for riders to access the stations. 

• Describe the associated environmental impacts of those land use changes, including indirect 

and cumulative impacts. 

• Identify parties responsible for mitigating the environmental impacts associated with the 

indirect and cumulative impacts of the projected land use changes. 

• Demonstrate avoidance and minimization measures to reduce environmental impacts 

associated with the construction of passenger stations and maintenance facilities, such as 

multi-level parking structures instead of large surface parking lots. 

A substantial benefit of a proposed rail corridor connecting Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley is 

the opportunity to provide improved transit services and to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). EPA 

strongly supports including project elements that will further reduce VMT. 

Recommendations: 

• Coordinate with other transit providers to maximize station access by transit; 

• Incorporate pedestrian and cyclist needs into station area planning, in addition to linking 

with other modes of transit; and 

• Support policies that will increase density and mixed uses in the station areas. 

Water Resources 

Given the proximity to important aquatic resources, including the Whitewater River, San Gorgonio 

River, San Jacinto River, Santa Ana River, Charter Oak Creek, San Gabriel River, San Jose Creek, Rio 

Hondo, and the Los Angeles River, among others, this project may involve the discharge of dredged or 

fill material into jurisdictional wetlands and waterways. Discharges of dredged or fill material into 

waters of the U.S. require authorization by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under CWA 

Section 404. The Federal Guidelines at 40 CFR Part 230 promulgated under CW A Section 404 (b )(1) 

provide substantive environmental criteria that must be met to permit such discharges into waters of 

the United States. 

The purpose of the Guidelines is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological 

integrity of waters of the United States. These goals are achieved, in part, by controlling discharges of 

3 
dredged or fill matelial (40 CFR 230.l(a)). Fundamental to the Guidelines is the plinciple that dredged 

or fill matelial should not be discharged into the aquatic ecosystem, unless it can be demonstrated that 

there is no less environmentally damaging practicable alternative that achieves an applicant's project 

purpose. In addition, no discharge can be permitted if it will cause or contlibute to significant 

degradation of the waters of the United States, cause or contlibute to a violation of a State water 

quality standard, or jeopardize a federally listed species. 

Given the extent of the potential impacts associated with the proposed activities, FRA bears the burden 

for clearly demonstrating that the preferred alternative for the final route is the LED PA that achieves 

the overall project purpose while not causing or contlibuting to significant degradation of the aquatic 

ecosystem. Identification of the LED PA is achieved by performing an alternatives analysis that 

estimates the direct, secondary, and cumulative impacts to jurisdictional waters resulting from each 

alternative considered. At the Tier 1 level, FRA should present enough information to ensure that the 

corridor chosen is the corridor most likely to contain the LED PA. To ensure the alternatives analysis 

serves its intended purpose as a planning and screening tool, EPA encourages potential permit 

applicants to meet and discuss project alternatives with the Corps and EPA early in the planning 

process. Engaging in discussions duling the Tier 1 NEPA process will lead to better coordination and 

understanding of project history once the Tier 2 project-level analyses are initiated. Generally, the 

practicable alternative that involves the least amount of "filled" waters will be considered the least 

damaging. 

Waters Assessment 

The waters assessment for each alternative should be of an appropliate scope and detail to identify 

sensitive areas or aquatic systems with functions highly susceptible to change. We recommend that 

FRA present enough information in the Tier 1 Draft EIS in order to provide decision-makers with 

adequate detail to compare corridor-level impacts to aquatic resources and make a determination of 

which corridor will have fewer impacts to aquatic resources. 

Recommendations: 

• Include the classification of waters and the geographic extent of waters and adjacent Iiparian 

areas. 

• Charactelize the functional condition of waters and adjacent Iiparian areas. 

• Desclibe the extent and nature of stream channel alteration, Iiveline corridor continuity, and 

buffered tlibutaries. 

• Include wildlife species affected that could reasonably be expected to use waters or 

associated Iiparian habitat and sensitive plant taxa that are associated with waters or 

associated Iiparian habitat. 

• Analyze the potential flood flow alteration. 

• Charactelize the hydrologic linkage to any impaired water body. 

• Address techniques proposed for minimizing surface water contamination due to increased 

runoff from additional impervious surfaces. 

Avoidance and Minimization Measures 

To demonstrate compliance with CWA Guidelines, FRA must explore on-site alternatives to avoid or 

minimize impacts to specific waters. Typically, transportation projects can accomplish this by using 

4 
spanned crossings, arched crossings, or oversized buried box culverts over drainages to encourage 

continuity of sediment transport and hydrological processes and wildlife passage. It is appropriate at 

the Tier 1 NEPA phase to identify potential sites for crossings and identify types of crossings that will 

result in the least damage to aquatic resources. 

Recommendations: 

• The Draft EIS should include a complete systematic analysis for drainage crossings which 

identifies and prioritizes the potential for improvements to the aquatic system and for 

wildlife use at each crossing, as applicable. 

• The Draft EIS should identify measures and modifications to avoid and minimize impacts 

to water resources. 

• Temporary and permanent impacts to waters of the U.S. for each alternative studied should 

be estimated in the Tier 1 Draft EIS; for example, acres of waters impacted, etc. For each 

alternative, the Draft EIS should report these numbers in table form for each impacted 

water and wetland feature. 

• Include in the Draft EIS a commitment to use newer technology culverts and less damaging 

culverts such as large bottomless or arched culverts and a commitment to span washes and 

major waterway crossings. While newer techniques to reduce impacts may be available in 

the future when the Project is ultimately implemented, it is appropriate to commit to best 

available technologies at this time (along with an estimate of the resources that can be 

avoided by integrating these techniques). 

Biological Resources and Impacts to Wildlife 

Numerous special-status wildlife species have the potential to occur within the project area including 

the Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus califomicus), Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii 

extimus), Least Bell's Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), Stephens' Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys stephensi), and 

Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizi), among many others. EPA recommends early coordination with 

the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 

in order to avoid and minimize project impacts to biological resources to the greatest extent possible. 

The Draft EIS should also address wildlife movement impacts associated with the proposed project and 

present mitigating measures. Proposed stream and wash crossings should be designed to maintain or 

improve existing wildlife passages. 

The Draft EIS should also describe efforts to avoid and/or minimize impacts to threatened and 

endangered species and associated habitats, as well as park and preserve areas. The Draft EIS should 

describe the extent and nature of the protected species and their primary habitat(s) and the extent and 

nature of potential impacts to proposed and designated critical habitat. The Draft EIS should also 

provide a description of narrow endemics, unique habitat elements, and suitable habitat for native 

fauna and flora in the project area and the extent each proposed alternative may affect each resource. 

Efforts to minimize or avoid impacts to resources should be presented. 

Recommendations: 

• Identify all petitioned and listed threatened and endangered species and critical habitat 

within the project area and assess which species and critical habitats might be directly or 

indirectly affected by each alternative. 

5 
• Identify how Project alternatives could be designed to allow for continued wildlife 

movement through the project area. 

• In addition to reviewing the available data indicating where species ranges may be bisected 

by the rail system, EPA recommends that FRA facilitate a meeting with the CDFW and 

USFWS to explore specific locations and design features for wildlife crossings that are 

needed. 

• Identify the connections that would likely remain after construction of the rail system and 

highlight these areas as "connectivity zones" for protection and preservation. In the Draft 

EIS, identify specific commitments for preservation of these corridors through mitigation 

measures and cooperative agreements. 

• Iffencing is proposed, disclose how fencing the rail corridor would affect wildlife 

movement and discuss how fencing for safety purposes would be integrated with proposed 

wildlife passages, such as culverts, bridges, viaducts, underpasses, and overpasses. 

Noise Impacts 

The Draft EIS should address the potential noise and vibration impact to residents, businesses, and 

wildlife related to the construction and operation of the proposed Project. Potential impacts to human 

health and welfare and wildlife activity are important with a project of this magnitude, particularly in 

light of the densely populated area and maximum speed and resulting noise and vibration that a rail 

corridor could produce. 

Recommendations: 

• The Draft EIS should assess noise and vibration exposure to determine the severity of 

impacts near the proposed rail route. 

• The Draft EIS should address nocturnal and diurnal impacts to wildlife activities such as 

foraging, predator avoidance, and nesting that may be affected by new noise and vibration 

introduced to natural habitats. 

Air Quality 

The Draft EIS should provide a detailed discussion of ambient air conditions (baseline or existing 

conditions), National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), criteria pollutant nonattainment areas, 

and potential air quality impacts of the project (including cumulative and indirect impacts) for each 

fully evaluated alternative. The project passes through areas that are designated as non-attainment for 

8-hour Ozone, particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10), and particulate matter less 

than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.s). Because of the area's non-attainment status, it will be important 

to reduce emissions of ozone precursors and particulate matter from future Tier 2 projects to the 

maximum extent. 

Recommendations: 

• Provide a detailed discussion of ambient air conditions (baseline or existing conditions), 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), criteria pollutant nonattainment areas, 

and potential air quality impacts of the project (including cumulative and indirect impacts) 

for each alternative. 

6 
• Include an analysis of impacts from the construction and operation of the proposed 

alternatives. Include monitoring data, any anticipated exceedances of NAAQS, and 

estimates of all criteria pollutant emissions. 

• Disclose the available information about the health risks associated with construction 

emissions, sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project area, and how the proposed 

project will affect current emission levels. 

• Include an identification of potential hotspot impacts, especially where parking lots, idling 

construction vehicles, and road modifications are proposed. 

Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change 

On August 1, 2016, the Council on Environmental Quality issued final guidance on considering 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change in NEPA reviews. Fundamental to this guidance 

are the recommendations that when addressing climate change, agencies should consider: (1) The 

potential effects of a proposed action on climate change as indicated by assessing GHG emissions 

(e.g., to include, where applicable, carbon sequestration); and, (2) The effects of climate change on a 

proposed action and its environmental impacts. 

Recommendations 

• The Draft EIS should assess the impacts of climate change on the project, as well as the effects 

(adverse and beneficial) of the project on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. In 

addition, there may be important design considerations to accommodate future anticipated 

effects due to climate change. FRA should consider the US National Climate Assessment and 

the Council on Environmental Quality Revised Final Guidance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions 

and Climate Change Impacts as information sources to help with analysis of impacts and 

consideration of design standards to mitigate any effects. 

• Due to the nature of this Project and the potential greenhouse gases (GHG) benefits that could 

result, we believe that FRA has an opportunity to demonstrate the potential overall GHG 

benefits of such a project. Any design and operation measures that can be identified as 

reducing GHGs should be identified in the EIS with an estimate of the GHG emissions 

reductions that could result if measures were ultimately implemented. 

Cumulative Impact Analysis 

Cumulative impacts are defined in the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) NEPA regulations 

as the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to 

the other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (Federal or 

non-Federal) or person undertakes such actions (40 CFR 1508.7). The cumulative impacts analysis 

should provide the context for understanding the magnitude of the impacts of the alternatives by 

analyzing the impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects or actions and then 

considering those cumulative impacts in their entirety. These actions include both transportation and 

non-transportation activities. Where adverse cumulative impacts are identified, the Draft EIS should 

disclose the parties that would be responsible for avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating those adverse 

impacts (CEQ's Forty Most Frequently Asked Questions #19). 

7 
Recommendations: 

• The cumulative impact analysis should consider transportation and non-transportation 

projects such as large-scale developments and approved urban planning projects that are 

reasonably foreseeable and are identified within city and county planning documents. 

• The cumulative impact analysis should describe the "identifiable present effects" to various 

resources attributed to past actions. The purpose of considering past actions is to determine 

the current health of resources. This information forms the baseline for assessing potential 

cumulative impacts and can be used to develop cooperative strategies for resources 

protection. Identify the current condition of the resource as a measure of past impacts. For 

example, the percentage of wetlands lost to date. 

• Identify the future condition of the resource based on an analysis of the cumulative impacts 

of reasonably foreseeable projects or actions added to existing conditions and current 

trends. Identify the trend in the condition of the resource as a measure of present impacts. 

For example, the health of the resource is improving, declining, or stasis. 

• The cumulative impact analysis should identify potential large, landscape-level statewide 

and regional impacts, as well as potential large-scale mitigation measures. The analysis 

should examine landscape-level impacts to the human and natural environment on a 

statewide and regional scale. The cumulative impact analysis should guide minimization 

measures and mitigation efforts. Disclose the parties that will be responsible for avoiding, 

minimizing, and mitigating impacts, as well as a timeline for implementing mitigation 

measures. 

• EPA recommends that FRA consider use of the Caltrans cumulative impacts guidance, 

which is applicable to cumulative impact analyses for non-road projects. This guidance can 

be found at http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/cumulative_guidance/purpose.htm. 

Growth Inducement Analysis 

NEPA requires consideration of indirect impacts, including those impacts from land development 

associated with the provision of additional transportation infrastructure, often referred to as growth 

inducing impacts. EPA recommends that FRA make both the methodology and the assumptions in the 

growth inducement analysis as transparent as possible to the public and decision makers. 

Recommendations: 

• Identify which land use model will be used, discuss its strengths and weaknesses, and 

describe why it was selected. 

• Identify the assumptions used in the model, the strengths and weaknesses of the 

assumptions, and why those assumptions were selected. For example, describe which 

method will be used to allocate growth to analysis zones, its strengths and weaknesses, and 

why that method was selected. 

• Ground truth the results of the land use model by enlisting local expertise involved in land 

use issues, such as local government officials, land use and transportation planners, home 

loan officers, and real estate representatives. Use their collective knowledge to validate or 

modify the results of the land use model. 

• Use the results of the growth inducement analysis to inform station locations, and parking 

lot size and locations, as well as mitigation measures to reduce environmental impacts. 

• Use the results of the growth inducement analysis to estimate growth inducement impacts 

to CWA regulated waters and inform LED PA identification. 

8 
• Identify station locations that are currently zoned for high density development and those 

that are not. Address potential growth-related mitigation efforts, including incentives and 

other mechanisms to encourage transit-oriented development, and measures to increase the 

capacity of city/county high density planning efforts. 

• Consider use of the Caltrans growth-related impacts guidance, which is applicable to 

growth-related impact analyses for non-road projects. This guidance can be found at 

http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/Growth-related_IndirectlmpactAnalysis/gri_guidance.htm. 

Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898 addresses Environmental Justice (EJ) in minority and low income populations. 

The recently released Promising Practices for Environmental Justice Methodologies in NEPA Reviews 

(https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/ej-iwg-promising-practices-ej-methodologies-nepareviews) is a compilation of methodologies from current agency practices identified by the NEPA 

Committee of the Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice. The document 

focuses on the interface of environmental justice considerations through NEPA processes and provides 

recommendations on applying EJ methodologies that have been established in federal NEPA practice. 

Recommendations: 

• FRA should consider Promising Practices for EJ Methodologies in NEPA Reviews when 

developing the EJ section of the Draft EIS. 

• The Draft EIS should include a description of the area of potential impact used for the 

environmental justice impact analysis and provide the source of the demographic information 

utilized. 

• The Draft EIS should identify whether the proposed project may disproportionately and 

adversely affect low income or minority populations in the surrounding area and should 

provide appropriate mitigation measures for any adverse impacts 

• Include opportunities for incorporating public input to promote context sensitive design, 

especially in communities with Environmental Justice concerns. 

We look forward to maintaining our strong working relationship with FRA as we coordinate on this 

proposed rail project to better connect Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley. If you have any 

questions or concerns regarding our comments, please feel free to contact me at 415-972-3370 or 

meek.clifton@epa.gov. 

~ - Clifton Meek 

Environmental Review Section 

Cc via email: Robert Yates, Riverside County Transportation Commission 

John Chisholm, California Department of Transportation 

Stephani Hall, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Karin Cleary-Rose, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Heather Pert, California Department of Fish and Wildlife 

9 
November 10, 2016 

Mr. Robert Yates 

Multimodal Services Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

P .0. Box 12008 

Riverside, California, 92501 

Subject: Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project - NOP Scoping Comments 

Dear Mr. Robert Yates, 

The City of Indio is appreciative of its recent meetings with the Coachella Valley San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service and holding a public scoping meeting in the City of Indio. We also appreciate the opportunity to comment 

on the scoping for the Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement. 

We would like to request that our City be considered as the terminus of a future rail line for the following reasons: 

• The City of Indio has an existing Transportation Center with Greyhound Bus operating their services from 

Indio to various destinations in Southern California. We would like to further expand this transportation 

facility into a multimodal facility. 

• The existing transportation center adjoins Union Pacific's right of way with easy access to nearby freeways 

and major arterials. 

• There is space adjacent and to the south for a potential storage or layover yard as well as room for a 

station platform at the Transportation Center. 

• It is also close to Downtown Indio, which has been the City's primary revitalization focus area that will 

include a new Downtown Specific Plan and updated General Plan. According to the General Plan's 

Economic and Demographic Trends and Conditions Report, the City has seen a growth of young families 

locating to Indio, a varied group of regional and seasonal visitors and residents, and a steady growth of 

commercial and residential development throughout the City, but primarily in areas north of Interstate 10. 

Various world-renowned festivals, such as the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival {"Coachella Fest") and the 

Stagecoach Country Music Festival are held in Indio. Other festivals are also held throughout the year. 

Additionally, the City has seen booming economic growth since the development of the Polo Club Resort and 

Entertainment District and the Northgate mixed use district. We have diversified and enhanced our resident ial 

neighborhoods to include resort, golf, and recreational oriented uses. 

As the growth and development opportunities continue to increase in Indio, the City of Indio optimistically looks 

forward to the Riverside County Transportation Commission's, Caltrans' and Federal Railroad Administration's 

support in selecting Indio as the terminal station for the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service. 

Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at {760) 541-4261. 

p: 760.391.4000 · f: 760.391.4008 · 100 Civic Center Mall Indio, CA 92201 • www.lNDIO.org 

1 
November 10, 2016 

Stephanie Perez 

Environmental Protection Specialist 

Office of Program Delivery, Federal Railroad Administration 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Mail Stop 20) 

Washington, DC 20590 

Subject: Coachella Valley- San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project - NOP Scoping Comments 

Dear Ms. Stephanie Perez, 

The City of Indio is appreciative of its recent meetings with the Coachella Valley San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service and holding a public scoping meeting in the City of Indio. We also appreciate the opportunity to comment 

on the scoping for the Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement. 

We would like to request that our City be considered as the terminus of a future rail line for the following 

reasons: 

• The City of Indio has an existing Transportation Center with Greyhound Bus operating their services from 

Indio to various destinations in Southern California. We would like to further expand this transportation 

facility into a multimodal facility. 

• The existing transportation center adjoins Union Pacific's right of way with easy access to nearby 

freeways and major arterials. 

• There is space adjacent and to the south for a potential storage or layover yard as well as room for a 

station platform at the Transportation Center. 

• It is also close to Downtown Indio, which has been the City's primary revitalization focus area that will 

include a new Downtown Specific Plan and updated General Plan. According to the General Plan's 

Economic and Demographic Trends and Conditions Report, the City has seen a growth of young families 

locating to Indio, a varied group of regional and seasonal visitors and residents, and a steady growth of 

commercial and residential development throughout the City, but primarily in areas north of Interstate 

10. 

Various world-renowned festivals, such as the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival ("Coachella Fest") and the 

Stagecoach Country Music Festival are held in Indio. Other festivals are also held throughout the year. 

Additionally, the City has seen booming economic growth since the development of the Polo Club Resort and 

Entertainment District and the Northgate mixed use district. We have diversified and enhanced our residential 

neighborhoods to include resort, golf, and recreational oriented uses. 

As the growth and development opportunities continue to increase in Indio, the City of Indio optimistically looks 

forward to the Riverside County Transportation Commission's, Caltrans' and Federal Railroad Administration's 

support in selecting Indio as the terminal station for the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service. 

Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at (760) 541-4261. 

Mar 

Director g and Development 

1 

p: 760.391.4000 · f: 760.39i.4008 • 100 Civic Center Mall Indio, CA 92201 • www.lNDIO.org 
       

     

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix I 

Public Scoping Comments Received
      

             

       

         

   

   

                                 

                                  

                                

   

                                       

                                

                                

                                

                 

                                   

       

                                   

                               

     

                               

                                        

                                 

               

                                 

         

                           

                                 

                                

                                  

                              

                     

     

                             

                 

         

   

         

  

From: Alek [mailto:alek3773@gmail.com]

Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2016 11:19 AM

To: Coachella Valley Rail <CoachellaValleyRail@arellanoassociates.com>

Cc: Comments@dot.ca.gov

Subject: Coachella Valley ‐ NOP scoping comments

Importance: High

Dear Mr. Yates:

Thank you for giving me an opportunity to state my comments ‐ regarding the study of "Coachella Valley –

San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project". I live in Los Angeles, however ‐ due to my busy work

schedule ‐ will unable to attend the 10/17 meeting at MTA headquarters. Hence I'm putting my comments &

suggestions in writing.

I travel to the Palm Springs area frequently, and am astonished to know that there is no reliable, direct service

between L.A. and Palm Springs. Currently, Amtrak runs long‐distance trains going only three times a week,

and at extremely inconvenient times. Otherwise, twice a day there's a bus going to Fullerton (almost the

opposite direction!) ‐ then requiring a transfer onto a bus, taking people to Palm Springs / Indio. In other

words, current Amtrak service to/from Palm Springs is beyond inadequate.

Sadly, Metrolink (regional train service) goes only as far east as San Bernardino, which is where my friend

usually picks me up from...

Mind you, Palm Springs is one of California's top 7 destinations, and it's disappointing that no reliable service

currently exists. Train service needs to be implemented between those two major destinations at 1 ‐ 2 hours

intervals at most.

Once regular train service is launched, reliable connection to/from the Downtown area of Palm Springs needs

to be established. Current location of the Palm Springs station is too far from the city, making the to commute

between downtown Palm Springs and the station very cumbersome. One of the two options need to be

considered to resolve this "lack of connectivity" issue:

(1) A brand‐new train station needs to be build in Downtown Palm Springs, which should be served by the

to‐be established train service; or

(2) Regular, frequent shuttle service needs to be established between the Palm Springs train station and

downtown Palm Springs. The shuttles need to serve each arriving and each departing station; perhaps it could

be one of Amtrak's Thruway Bus shuttles. Please note: connectivity to/from downtown area of Palm Springs

will be crucial to guarantee good ridership on the train. Meaning, with reliable connection directly into the

heart of Palm Springs ‐ ridership will grow significantly. Remember, train service is a good alternative to

driving, that's why ‐ to guarantee passenger demand ‐ connectivity to/from major cities/town, namely Palm

Springs, is critically important.

Once again, I totally support implementing frequent & reliable train service between Los Angeles and

Coachella Valley (with Palm Springs being the 1st priority station).

Thank you for reviewing my suggestions.

Sincerely,

~ Alexander Friedman

(323) 465‐8511

1330 N. Orange Dr., Apt 106

Hollywood, CA 90028‐7532
From: info@rctc.org [mailto:info@rctc.org]  

Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 9:15 AM 

To: eechevarria@rctc.org 

Cc: Cheryl Donahue 

Subject: Coachella Valley Rail Contact Request 

purpose: Add my contact information to the Coachella Valley Rail Project database 

First_Name: Michael 

Last_Name: Mazgai 

Email: mmazgai@pacbell.net 

Phone: 

Address: 4648 Ladera Lane 

Address2: Riverside 

Zip: 92501 

Comments: Hello, I am unable to attend today's meeting in Riverside so I am writing to you instead. I hope that 

the schedule of this new rail service will co­ordinate with the schedule of trains leaving the LA station for 

Central & Northern California too. This would encourage more passenger use to make these connections. Thank 

you. Regards, Michael Mazgai 

1 
      

             

       

           

                                       

                                 

   

       

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐

From: Chuck [mailto:ctcarter@hotmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 1:07 PM

To: Coachella Valley Rail <CoachellaValleyRail@arellanoassociates.com>

Subject: Indio to Union Station LA

100% In support of this. It would relieve traffic on the busy I‐10, Hwy. 60 thoroughfares, promote additional growth in

the Coachella Valley and increase tourism in Los Angeles. Can't wait. Please railroad this one through.

Charles Carter

Sent from my iPhone

1
From: Robert J. Yates [mailto:ryates@RCTC.org] 

Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 5:16 PM 

To: Cheryl Donahue 

Subject: Fwd: Great Frustration with RCTC 

Robert J. Yates 

Multi Modal Services Director 

951­787­7905 

www.IECommuter.org 

www.IE511.org 

From: Dan Cook <rivron513@gmail.com> 

Date: October 17, 2016 at 12:31:05 PM PDT 

To: <ryates@rctc.org> 

Subject: Great Frustration with RCTC 

I have been waiting years for rail service to begin here in La Quinta California Indio area, still no 

rail⋯..why not? The Indio Calif station was built but corruption and pay­outs were the usual 

Democrat way to get their share of Govt. money. Still no rail and if you have ever seen the Palm 

Springs rail station it is a disgrace, 1st why even build one there where homeless people 

completely destroyed the bathrooms and surrounding facility, no taxi service no nothing 

surrounding this station and trains only arrive at 2a.m. in morning. I am closer to Indio Calif 

station and would prefer using this facility, year after year of delays and yet the people wait to 

see a train stop here for the community. I encourage you to find a solution to this dilemma this 

year would be nice. Daniel Cook La Quinta Calif. 

1 
 

 

 

 

Elsa Argomaniz 

From: gdemond@aol.com 

Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 10:05 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: Proposal for Coachella Valley Rail 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

As a resident of La Quinta, I wish to lend my voice of support for rail service to the Coachella Valley. For too long 

residents have been inconvenienced by hoards of visitors to the desert where the traffic is often becoming 

unbearable. Furthermore, we often travel to Riverside, Orange County and Los Angeles and would welcome the 

opportunity to take a train instead of sitting in freeways that are often clogged with traffic. I believe that the train should 

operate three times a day in season and two times a day off season, be extended to a terminal in Coachella along with 

stops in Indio, Palm Desert by the Aqua Caliente casino, Palm Springs, near the Morongo Casino / Cabezon outlet stores, 

Beaumont/Banning, Redlands/Loma Linda, Riverside, Corona, Fullerton and on to Los Angeles. Perhaps it should be 

considered to have one, or more, of the trains break off cars in Riverside or Corona and continue on to San Diego while 

the remainder of the train continues on to Los Angeles. For too long Coachella Valley residents transportation needs 

have been ignored and I am pleased that a rail proposal is finally being considered. Hopefully one day such service will 

be extended to Phoenix/Tucson. 

Best regards,

Gorton De Mond

La Quinta, CA 

1
From: julianne elliott <madreypapel@gmail.com> 

Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 8:31 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

I grew up in the Coachella Valley (1962­1976) then returned as an adult (1994­now).  I love the area BUT I 

don't love that it is 2+ hours from LA, Orange County, and San Diego.  I have taken the bus/Amtrak to LA a 

couple of times...which sucks up much of a day.   

Please can we have a faster way to get to these Meccas which don't require me to drive? 

1
  

                                         

      

                         

                                 

                               

                             

                               

                       

                                            

                                         

                                        

                                           

                         

  

      

From: Michael Hayes <michael.hayes@partisan.la> 

Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 7:24 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: Los Angeles - Indio Rail connection 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

Hello,

I support the furthering of our rail network in Southern California to extend train trips from Union Station to Indio for

the following reasons.

Environmental responsibility ‐ reducing carbon emissions for hundreds of would be drivers to and from Social

improvements ‐ the foundation for train stations to serve as a hub for multimodal transit and communal spaces for

travelers (assuming transit oriented development occurs at stations to cater to pedestrians instead of vehicles) Safety

benefits ‐ the road is a dangerous and unpredictable place, especially on festival weekends when partygoers are

encouraged to consume "judgement altering substances” Conversely, there could be some appeal for casual travelers to

use the train as a party bus to Palm Springs or Coachella

I think for the system to be effective and utilized, it would need at least 2 roundtrip journeys every day (morning and

evening) with the option to increase to 3‐4 on weekends or festival weeks. It is critical to provide adequate service on

the line otherwise it’s far too easy for travelers to opt for something more convenient and quicker regardless of traffic.

I would gladly take the train more often if service was more consistent. The only thing that has ever deterred me from

riding rail in Southern California is infrequent service, not cost, not location, not inconvenience.

Thanks,

‐Michael James Hayes

1
                                            

   

   

   

     

From: Teresa Adams-Ridila <tadamsridila@dc.rr.com> 

Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 9:16 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: Railway IndiotoLA 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

Mr. Yates‐

Please help to expedite railway from Indio, CA to LA. This would offer more travel options for us out here in the

Coachella Valley.

Thank you.

Teresa Adams

Palm Desert, CA

1
 

From: Anne Taylor-Loughran <aetaylor1@yahoo.com> 

Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:40 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: Yes on the train! 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

Make it happen - LA to the desert/Indio. We need it! Do it! 

Anne Taylor-Loughran 

aetaylor1@yahoo.com 

1
­­  

From: Blake Alexander <bmisajet@gmail.com> 

Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 5:38 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: PSP - LA Train Service 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

Mr. Yates, 

I wasn't able to make the meeting yesterday regarding the Palm Springs to LA train, so I'd like to go ahead and 

add my comments via email.  

I commute often from The Coachella Valley to LA for business and to visit family, and I take transit whenever 

possible. I estimate that i've taken rail to and from the Coachella Valley approximately 45­55 times over the 

past two years. 

The issues that prevent me from taking the train exclusively are the obvious ones — the train only runs certain 

days and at inconvenient times. I think that, at the very least, we would need a train that would leave Palm 

Springs and arrive in LA during the morning rush hour, and one that would leave LA after business hours and 

arrive in PS in the evening, effectively making Palm Springs a far commuting suburb.  

I've also often done the reverse commute, so if possible I'd like to see a train arrive in Palm Springs in the 

morning, as well as leave PS in the early evening. Obviously, the more time options the better. I think that at the 

very least, we need a train going both directions, twice a day, to allow for same day round­trips.  

Looking forward to taking the train soon! 

Blake Alexander 

310­483­0731 

213­999­2609 

Bmisajet@gmail.com 

1
From: Eliza Echevarria Perez [mailto:eperez@rctc.org]  

Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:33 PM 

To: Cheryl Donahue 

Subject: Fwd: RCTC: Contact Form 

This is a comment for the CV Rail Project. Are you the point person for collecting the comments? Or is it 

Robert Yates? 

Eliza 

Begin forwarded message: 

From: Lupe Garibay <lgaribay@RCTC.org>

Subject: FW: RCTC: Contact Form

Date: October 18, 2016 at 5:41:37 PM PDT

To: Eliza Echevarria Perez <eperez@rctc.org>

Hi Eliza, 

This came in regarding the train to Indio. 

Thank you, 

Lupe Garibay 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

4080 Lemon Street 3rd Floor 

Riverside CA 92501 

951 787­7141 

­­­­­Original Message­­­­­ 

From: Website Submission [mailto:website­submission@rctc.org] 

Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 4:46 PM 

To: Lupe Garibay <lgaribay@RCTC.org>; geomaillogs@gmail.com 

Subject: RCTC: Contact Form 

First Name: Gennaro 

Last Name: Pupa 

Organization: Mr. 

Phone Number: 3103187101 

Email: Jerrypooboo@gmail.com 

Check here if you would like to receive RCTC's monthly E­Newsletter ­ RCTC On The Move. 1 Street 

Address: 629 n paulina ave 

Apt/Suite:  

City: Redondo beach 

CA 

Zip Code: 90277 

Yes,I am all for the train from LA­INDIO 

1 
From: Chris C <c.cuatt@gmail.com> 

Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 11:47 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: Questions about possible amtrak service to Indio? 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

Dear Mr. Robert Yates, 

I am a amtrak traveler have a couple of questions about the possible amtrak service from LA to Indio.  If this 

were to happen, do you know what station stops would be along the route?  Also would there be 2 trains daily in 

each direction or 1 in each direction? 

Sincerely, 

Christopher Cuatt 

1
  

                    

                      

     

       

         

     

From: Nancy Holland <nancyc@hkagroup.com> 

Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 2:29 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project 

Follow Up Flag: Follow up 

Flag Status: Flagged 

Good Afternoon,

Is there any way, besides Facebook, to track this project?

Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions.

Nancy (Cooper) Holland

Hernandez, Kroone & Associates

(909) 884‐3222 – ext 104

Direct (909) 382‐9456

www.hkagroup.com

1
        

             

       

           

From: Blair Jockers [mailto:bj90017@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 10:57 AM

To: Coachella Valley Rail <CoachellaValleyRail@arellanoassociates.com>

Subject: Rail Service to Coachella Valley

Good morning, 

I noticed you are considering attempting to improve rail service to the Coachella Valley from Los Angeles and 

are gathering input. 

I would strongly favor such a plan.  The current Amtrack service eastbound from L.A. provides only one stop 

per day in Palm Springs, at a very inconvenient time.  My husband and I own a weekend place in Palm Springs 

and would, along with many of our neighbors, spend much more time in the desert if there was a way to avoid 

the ever­worsening traffic on the 10 and 60 freeways. 

More folks for longer stays in the Valley would surely be a boost for the economy there, which is largely 

tourism­based, and would encourage those who work in Los Angeles to consider the Valley as a full­time home, 

which would improve property values and encourage growth. 

I hope we can find a way to make this happen. 

Thank you, 

Blair Jockers 

1
             

       

         

   

               

  

From: John Ullcott <ullcott@yahoo.com> 

Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 12:36 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: CoachellaValleyRail Offical Comments 

Attachments: Coachella Valley Rail Project Official Comments.doc 

‐‐‐ On Thu, 11/10/16, John Ullcott <ullcott@yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: John Ullcott <ullcott@yahoo.com>

> Subject: CoachellaValleyRail Offical Comments

> To: "ullcott@yahoo.com" <ullcott@yahoo.com>

> Date: Thursday, November 10, 2016, 11:16 AM

>

1
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

Train makers 

1439 Myrtle Avenue

Long Beach, CA 

-

WASTED...

SOUTHERN PACIFIC’S RAIL STATION/HOTEL

AT INDIO; MANY AMENITIES (C. 1900 1906)

THIS SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD “LOCAL”

. KNOWN AS 'OLD SIDEWINDER' (NAMED FOR .

THE DESERT RATTLESNAKE)... A SIDEWINDER...

BRING IT BACK... ALONG

WITH ITS NAME!

...A SHORT TRAIN TO LOS ANGELES THAT ...SIDEWINDING

MADE LOCAL STOPS IN THE IMPERIAL VALLEY.

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, COURTESY OF THE SALTON SEA MUSEUM

SOME BUDD R.D.C.’S ARE

STILL RUNNING...

50-6O YRS.

LATER!

COLORADO RAILCAR TOUR

PHOTOS, CHRIS GUENZLER (2003)

COULD A U.S. RAIL CAR COMPANY BE COMING BACK WITH THESE

FEDERAL RR ADMINISTRATION-COMPLIANT (“49 CFR PART 238”)

DIESEL MULTIPLE UNITS THAT RUN

W/FREIGHT TRAINS?

(U.S. RAILCAR CO. WEBSITE, 2016)

GreenLight Transit 

Post Office Box 7232 

Van Nuys, CA 91409 

Dear RCTC; 

Official comments on proposed LA-to-Coachella Valley Rail Service: 

1. RE: PRESENTATION OF DEFINITE SERVICE EXTENSION PLANS TO 

PHOENIX, AZ: Your boards used a double-negative to explain (words 

to the effect “...the project should not 

preclude...”) No, this study should say 

explicitly: “THIS PROJECT IS PLANNED TO 

CONNECT L.A. TO PHOENIX, AZ to serve 

the largest Metropolitan Planning Area 

in the U.S. =4,500,000(metro) potential WASTED... 

riders that are not directly served by an Amtrak train.” A poor excuse for a real 

Phoenix Union Station (un-served since 1996, shown at right, above) is 

Maricopa, AZ: Pathetically inadequate, too far away from anything 

important by transit or car, where Amtrak station stops foul local 

grade crossings; it’s not something Union Pacific Railroad (anticipating 

100-to-130 of its own trains/ day on this route in the near future) 

should tolerate much longer! The answer is not Union Pacific’s old one 

(dump Amtrak), but dump Maricopa as Phoenix’ main-line rail station... 

It’s much more likely the project will thrive if it has 2 anchor cities 

feeding it at both ends... Even better if service is studied to maximize 

ridership by extending THROUGH these anchor stations to points 

beyond (west through L.A. Union Station to Ventura or Santa Barbara 

desires commuter frequencies of regional rail service... & north through 

to Tucson... adding stations-pairs increases ridership exponentially.) 

...So let’s say “Indio is NOT going to be ‘The End’; but only a 

‘Temporary East Terminal’ or ‘Phase 1’ of L.A.-to-Phoenix service via 

Palm Springs & Indio.” This study should design-in rail siding space 

next to Indio station for “short-turn” trainsets (how many railcars for 

projected ridership at maximum holiday periods?) to layover near the 

main line (before returning to L.A. or Phoenix). General Planning & 

right-of-way acquisition should be finished NOW to include L.A.-toPhoenix features! Comments from an R.C.T.C. Representative at the L.A. 

meeting asserted A. “Phoenix is looking East (Tucson) for Amtrak 

connections, rather than West (Los Angeles via Indio)”... That’s true, but 

unlike this proposed Coachella Valley service, THERE’S NO BUDGET 

OR TIMELINE FOR THAT ARIZONA D.O.T. STUDY! He also said B. 

“Riverside County does not have the authority to work with the State of 

Arizona”--but that’s completely NOT true: “Regional Compacts” are 

exactly what & who George Bush Jr.’s managers designated to dump 

responsibility for all Amtrak trains... except “Long Distance” (750+ mi.) 

...onto States & Regions to pay for (P.R.I.I.A. Sect. 208)! Until his cursed 

artificial tiering of Amtrak can be overturned, we should boldly include 

Arizona D.O.T., & Phoenix on the list of lead agencies to make sure a 

Phase 2 Amtrak train extension to AZ is reality sooner than later! 

2. RE: DESIGN FOR EFFECTIVE FEEDER SERVICE: The Service Area 

map is a freeway map that didn’t even label Indio, show mileage or 

tracks, whose boundary nearly reaches the Salton Sea... Why is NO 

AGENCY FROM IMPERIAL COUNTY invited onto the sponsoring-agency 

list, to bring more feeder service (extending municipal bus routes, if not 

rail) to/from El Centro, CA (pop. 43,000)/Mexicali, BC (MEX)(=997,000 

metro), or Yuma, AZ (= 93,000)? Getting them in the process is needed 

ASAP to guarantee buy-in & later success. Because trains & tracks can’t 

move easily, a (phased) 

Indio station needs to be 

built at what appears to 

be a former railyard in a 

curve at the east end of 

S.R. 111, (where Sun 

Line’s bus route 111 turns 

south to Coachella, near 

an old hardware store)-

This would be the ideal 

spot for a great Transfer 

station/ Layover Zone for 

SOUTHERN PACIFIC’S RAIL STATION/HOTEL Sun Bus/ Sun Lines 54, 

AT INDIO; MANY AMENITIES (C. 1900-1906) 80, 90, 91, 95, & 111)-

that need to move only a 

short way from their present ends at Flower Street... along with 

Greyhound/other regional or long-distance bus lines). The Transfer 

station must prioritize cross-platform boarding from rail-to-bus, then 

THIS SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD “LOCAL” 

. KNOWN AS 'OLD SIDEWINDER' (NAMED FOR .

THE DESERT RATTLESNAKE)... A SIDEWINDER... 

BRING IT BACK... ALONG 

WITH ITS NAME! 

...A SHORT TRAIN TO LOS ANGELES THAT ...SIDEWINDING 

MADE LOCAL STOPS IN THE IMPERIAL VALLEY. 

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, COURTESY OF THE SALTON SEA MUSEUM 

limo/taxi stalls next-nearest the station... The Green (palm-studded?) 

an oasis w/bicycle parking lots & routes should be next out from the 

station, putting private autos & auto parking spaces (existing) on the 

far side of the park... the most successful stations follow this pattern... 

The building(s)’ water fountains & toilet rooms must be open ALL hours 

trains or buses run there, & some choice of coffee shop/licensed food 

cart vendors/ commissary or restaurant service (like Indio specialty 

Date Shakes -hard to find these days-)/ should be open to cover most 

of those hours. Other priority facilities at the station could include: 

baggage-handling staff, travel advisor cross-trained with all local 

agencies to assist with schedule/map/ ticket questions &/or ticket 

sales... a tourist bureau/public lands maps/info center (for Joshua 

Tree, etc.)/a travel agency, conference rooms for rent, public bicycle & 

car rental agency, etc. For best results, all on-line cities (Palm Springs, 

Indio, etc.) should OWN THEIR OWN STATION FACILITIES, with an 

easement for each company or transportation entity using the 

property... Though Stations will be detailed later in this process, 

enough Shade, wind/rain Shelter, & Interior Space must be allotted for 

both initial size & blocked out for maximum build-out.)

 3. RE: STATION AREA INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE ACCOMODATED 

should include: provisions for switching & holding Coachella Valley 

railcars at Indio station, to be coupled onto Amtrak’s Sunset Limited or 

other Arizona train (see 1. & 4.) East-bound’s fine... but since west- bound Sunsets often run hours late, this infrastructure should ALSO be 

designed to hold (with boarding platforms) a west-bound Coachella 

Valley train to leave ahead of it (as a “sweep train” making local 

stops so the Sunset or Phoenix train doesn’t 

have to). Also, keep the new trains running 

even on the days the Sunset Limited doesn’t. 

SOME BUDD R.D.C.’S ARE 

STILL RUNNING... 

50-6O YRS. 

LATER! 

COLORADO RAILCAR TOUR 

PHOTOS, CHRIS GUENZLER (2003)

 4. TO MAKE PASSENGER SERVICE VIABLE 

on a relatively low-ridership line ONE STUDY OPTION SHOULD BE THE 

RE-HAB OF-; OR NEW ORDER FOR 2-4 SELF-PROPELLED RAILCARS 

(f.k.a. “doodlebugs”, a.k.a. Rail Diesel Cars=“RDC”) that could pull 

COULD A U.S. RAIL CAR COMPANY BE COMING BACK WITH THESE 

FEDERAL RR ADMINISTRATION-COMPLIANT (“49 CFR PART 238”)

DIESEL MULTIPLE UNITS THAT RUN 

W/FREIGHT TRAINS? 

(U.S. RAILCAR CO. WEBSITE, 2016) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RADIATOR/ EXHAUST

CAB A CAB B

TYPICAL 85’ CARBODY

DIESEL ENGINE A DIESEL ENGINE B

LAST INDIO STOP... ...ON 5/17/1998

IT’S A TRANSCON, BUT PHOENIX UNION STATION’S ALREADY ABANDONED...

Page 2 

unpowered coaches/diners/sleepers, & run push/pull when bracketed 

by a Cab Car on the other end without turning... instead of traditional 

locomotive (with high operating costs to push/pull only a few coaches). 

The last in the US were built by Colorado Railcar for Oregon’s Tri-Met 

(early 2000’s, the blue/white/yellow pair shown on the prior page)... 

RADIATOR/ EXHAUST 

CAB A CAB B 

TYPICAL 85’ CARBODY 

DIESEL ENGINE A DIESEL ENGINE B

 ...and Budd Co. RDC’s before that (1949-1956, shown above & 

prev. page) to reduce Operating & Maintenance costs for service that 

might otherwise be too marginal to survive its startup. Powered by 

bus/truck engines below the car floor, (by engines that could today be 

exactly the same as, & fueled the same way as engines in local bus or 

truck fleets); savings for offsite fueling/servicing at any such bus-yard 

or truck-stop having an on-line rail siding may be considerable. Also 

they could be (re)powered to replace a “booster” (RDCs up to 500hp 

from the factory; Colorado Railcars up to 1,200hp), or even powered 

as hybrids, to help get a longer train (i.e. The Sunset Ltd.) moving over 

grades without an extra locomotive along, while providing extra 

passenger seats (needing a boarding platform, which could affect the 

layout of the station & carbarns). Colorado Railcars (on Page 1) show 

2 versions of streamline front ends, but a square-end cab-control walk- thru coach (subway style- similar to the Budds on this page) is also 

compatible for coupling w/ diaphragms to other passenger cars 

(Amtrak/commuter/private varnish) cars for walk-thru in-train... Other 

platforms can be engineered to include low-floor, single level full 

dome, high-level (Superliner style), & porch-size open obs. Styles.

 Note that (unlike Colorado Railcar/US Railcar) neither other “diesel 

light rail” trainset in California (like Oceanside-Escondido’s “Sprinter”, 

nor Sonoma-Marin (S.M.A.R.T.)) have “Main-Line” compatibility. Not only 

can’t they pass F.R.A. locomotive crash standards required for “Main 

Line” inter-operability with freight/commuter/Amtrak railroads, but 

their floors heights & widths aren’t compatible with Amtrak in-train, 

and doors fall short (huge gaps!) of commuter platform edges. 

5. RE: BI-NATIONAL RAIL TOURS TO THE SOUTH & WEST: this 

project’s station design should also broadly reserve track space for 

future potential rail tours in the region after the bi-national 

freight/passenger railroad Pacific Imperial Railroad (f.k.a. Carrizo 

Gorge Railway) completes its repairs to reopen its scenic El Centro-toSan Diego line via Campo, CA (Pacific Southwest Railway Museum to 

Tecate, BC, (MEX) tequila distillery... see map segment on future ticket 

above- likely to be popular again), Tijuana, BC, (MEX)(tourist 

destination), & San Ysidro, CA (beginning of San Diego Trolley Blue 

Line). Pacific Imperial celebrated its reopened work with a public rail 

tour over the western end in summer 2016. 

6. RE: ALTERNATING ROUTES BACK TO L.A.U.S. TO EXTEND THE 

SERVICE REACH TO MORE PASSENGERS: If more than 1 Round Trip 

per day is considered, study running the 2nd Round Trip back by 

another route... A. The first Round Trip each way SHOULD always 

sweep for The Sunset Limited (see 3.), & fill that same time-slot for 

consistency, even on days the Sunset doesn’t run. But for a 2nd Round 

Trip, B. Study the effect on ridership of running MetroLink’s “91 Line” 

back to LA Union Station via Fullerton, so passengers can transfer to 

MetroLink trains (going south & north) there. C. If that works, study 

sending a 3rd or 4th Round trip (thru-cars, or self-propelled- see 4.) 

south down the Coast Main Line to Oceanside... i. To sweep for Amtrak 

Surfliners so Surfliners can be returned to running faster limited-stop 

service south of Oceanside- as they did until recently, OR ii. meet 

North County San Diego (NCTD)’s Coaster commuters there, iii. as well 

as NCTD’s Sprinters to Escondido. D. And call the festival promoters of 

“Coachella”, “Stagecoach”, “Desert Trip”, etc. & ask them where their 

patrons are coming from, & how you can help them “go by train”... 

remember, adding stations-pairs increases ridership exponentially. 

7. RE: HIGH COSTS? ~$3,000,000 FOR THE STUDY? PLUS UNION 

PACIFIC RAILROAD (U.P.) DEMANDS ~$750,000,000 to build sidings, 

signals, etc. to accommodate LA-Indio passenger trains? Ok, 

considering that’s only the cost of a Mile & a Half of LA County MTA’s 

Purple Line Subway (& remember a Mile = only 5,280 Feet), is that 

such a king’s ransom? Clearly this is U.P.’s high-bid bargaining chip for 

starting negotiations... So let’s pay it, and then for such wonderful 

infrastructure we’ve built for them that improves traffic flow (for their 

own trains too), then let us DEMAND U.P. GIVE TOP PRIORITY 

DISPATCH FOR ALL PASSENGER TRAINS: >95% On-Time Performance 

(OTP) for Coachella Valley trains & The Sunset Limited! As a Common 

Carrier, they’re supposed to prioritize passengers anyway... and 

Congress is supposed to be enforcing it anyway...! 

LAST INDIO STOP... ...ON 5/17/1998 

IT’S A TRANSCON, BUT PHOENIX UNION STATION’S ALREADY ABANDONED... 

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this important new 

passenger rail service- that’s not just focused on the west coast!

 (John Jay Ulloth) (James Henry Washington, Jr.) 
   

   

   

   

   

   

       

   

                       

               

                           

                            

         

         

               

           

     

      

                         

           

                      

                   

     

         

                                 

                 

                    

                             

                           

                              

November 10, 2016 

Mr. Robert Yates 

Multimodal Services Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

P.O. Box 12008 

Riverside, California 92501 

Sent via email 

Re: Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Dear Mr. Yates, 

On behalf of the undersigned organizations, we request the Federal Railroad Administration, the 

California Department of Transportation, and the Riverside County Transportation Commission 

to study certain aspects and effects of the proposed intercity rail service, including extending the 

service to North Shore, near the Yacht Club Community Center near the Salton Sea.  Below, we 

outline several recommendations as you move forward with this process. 

We  request  that  the  Federal  Railroad  Administration,  the  California  Department  of 

Transportation,  and  the  Riverside  County  Transportation  Commission  study  the  option  of 

extending  the  rail  service  to  North  Shore  near  the  Yacht  Club  Community  Center.  As  the 

communities of North  Shore, Mecca,  and Thermal  undergo more  development, it is imperative 

that you consider extending the corridor to North Shore. 

The  proposed  intercity  passenger  rail  could  serve  as  an  important  mode  of  transportation  for 

Coachella  residents  who  lack  access  to  medical  services,  employment  and  educational 

opportunities in the communities in which they live.  We urge you to see this project more than a 

means  of transportation  for leisure and tourism,  but  rather  as  a mode to increase the  economic 

growth  of  the  Coachella  Valley,  by  insuring  this  investment  primary  beneficiaries  include  the 

residents of the Coachella Valley. 

It is imperative to conduct a study on how this rail can benefit the Coachella Valley, specifically 

the  East  Coachella  Valley,  to  determine  the  increased  access  to  education,  employment,  and 

medical services.  We ask this be included in the Joint Program EIS/EIR. 

Not  only  are transportation  options  for the  residents  of these  communities limited,  but this  rail 

service  would  also  serve  to  reduce  greenhouse  gas  emissions,  an  important  goal  of  the  State. 

Currently, residents must travel up to an hour by car to access basic services and amenities.  By 
                 

                     

                       

                             

                         

     

                               

                

                                 

            

                           

                           

             

                   

         

           

                     

           

         

               

                              

                   

   

         

     

   

     

   

   

   

       

         

   

   

         

   

extending  the  rail,  it  will  insure  residents  of  the  Eastern  Coachella  Valley  have  affordable 

transportation service and it will improve their regional ability to travel within the Valley. 

We must look at this project more holistically and innovatively – this rail can  help  flourish the 

future economy  of the  unincorporated  communities if we are able to think  of this  project more 

holistically.  The rail must not be limited to the connection to the Los Angeles Union Station, but 

rather  must  be  used  to  connect  Coachella  Valley  residents  to  other  communities  and  cities 

between the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles Union Station. 

Residents of the East Coachella Valley must be included and engaged in the development of the 

rail service.  Meetings open to the public at accessible times and places with accessible languages 

must be included in the planning process to gauge the interest of residents affected by the service 

as the service levels, route models, station catchment areas, and connectivity are identified.  We 

are more than willing to work with you to ensure that the community is involved in this process 

going forward. 

Additionally,  we  request  that  you  create  a  Citizens  Advisory  Committee  for  this  project  and 

include at least two representatives from each of the communities in the Coachella Valley. 

Furthermore,  we  are  concerned  that  this study  is  not  addressing  the  potential  impact  with  the 

population growth in the proposed corridor.  This requires adequate land use and zoning to ensure 

affordable  housing,  and  infrastructure  for  water  supply  and  sanitation.  Coordination  with 

Riverside  County  TLMA  and  the  Coachella  Valley  Water  District,  among  other  agencies,  is 

critical for the development of this endeavor. 

* * * * * 

We thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio 

Pass Rail Corridor Service.  Questions or concerns regarding this letter can be directed to Mariela 

Magana, Policy Advocate, Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability at (760) 619­7524 

or mmagana@leadershipcounsel.org. 

Sincerely, 

Mariela Magana, Policy Advocate 

Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability 

Chelina Odbert, Executive Director 

Kounkuey Design Initiative 

Sergio Carranza, Executive Director 

Pueblo Unido CDC 

Silvia Paz, Director 

Building Healthy Communities Coachella Valley 

Suguet Lopez, Executive Director 

Organización en California de Líderes Campesinas, Inc. 

Maribel Nunez, Director 

California Partnership 

Amber Anaya, Program Manager and Editor 

Coachella Unincorporated Inc. 
From: Ron Roy <rroy310@gmail.com> 

Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 3:42 PM 

To: Coachella Valley Rail 

Subject: CVR: NED FOR ALMEDA CORRIDOR AND RAIL TO ONTARIO AIRPORT. 

Attachments: PROPOSED ROUTE EMPHASIZNG UPRR ALHMBRA SUB.docx 

To whom it may concern: 

Re: Coachella Valley San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service: 

I'm objecting to the proposed route at the point it goes from Colton to Riverside and then onwards to LA. 

As a Pass Area resident (Beaumont), my, and my families, rail transit needs would be much better served if the 

rail service connected to Ontario Airport via the Alameda Corridor Route. We would like a rail stop near the 

intersection of Desert Lawn Dr. and Oak Valley Parkway (see attached) This would give us a very convenient 

transit stop to park our car and board the train on the way to our work and recreation commutes to Ontario 

Airport, Monterey Park, Pasadena (via San Gabriel Mission Stop), and DTLA. We and our friends use Ontario 

Airport for 90% of our air travel. We also commute to the Pasadena Area weekdays for work. The Alameda 

Corridor is a much more direct service. I would like a rail stop, not only at Ontario Airport (Near I10), but also 

near the San Gabriel Mission as a stop there put's us less than 3 miles from our employers. This would also give 

improved access to and from  the Monterey Park Community which we visit for cultural enrichment/recreation, 

is a rail transit desert.  

Given, once this rail service is operational, its benefits will last for up to 1/2 century. Rail Projects (Cal High 

Speed Rail) always run over budget. I've received a reply from an individual in your agency that this route 

might be $160 million over the Riverside Line Route. With all due respect, when looking at large transit 

projects (Century Freeway: LA County mass transit system), $160 million is a very small amount to pay to give 

speedy access to millions of people in the San Bernardino, Pomona, and San Gabriel Valleys and would 

drastically reduce congestion on I10 and I210 and provide critical linkage to Ontario Airport and 

Pasadena.  There is a greater population in the above referenced valleys, than along the ill­conceived and 

currently proposed Riverside Line Proposal. I'm concerned that due to the ethnic populations in the Pomona and 

San Gabriel valleys, the Riverside Line Proposal is in fact an example of public works discrimination, cutting 

off critical rail access to Ontario, Pomona, San Gabriel Populations based on Race and Ethnicity. This form of 

discrimination would be most egregious in the Monterey Park Area and Alhambra areas.   

Attached please find my proposed route and stops.  

I look forward to your earliest reply. 

Thank You 

Ron Roy 

Beaumont 

1
ROUTE EMPHASIZING UNION PACIFIC RR ALHAMBRA SUB 

MAP OF EXISTING RAIL SERVICES THROUGH PASS http://rctc.org/uploads/media_items/rctc­coachella­grant­existing­train­map.original.jpg Please note: CVSGPRS should consider the following route to connect with Ontario Airport, Pas

surrounding San Gabriel Valley Communities 

1.  Union Pacific RR Yuma Sub (Purple) 

 Add a Beaumont Station at Oak Valley Parkway and Desert Lawn Dr. (SEE MAP: B

STATION) 

2.  Union Pacific RR Alhambra Sub (Green) 

 Add an Ontario airport station 

 Use Pomona Station 

1 
 Add a San Gabriel Station at San Gabriel Blvd to service Pasadena area and surroun

Valley foothill communities (SEE MAP:PASADENA/SAN GABRIEL VALLEY S

– Coordinate with local transit providers (such as ARTS) for convenient transfe

service to surrounding communities 

 Reach final destination at Union Station 

BEAUMONT STATION: Oak Valley Parkway and Desert Lawn Dr. 

2 
PASADENA/SAN GABRIEL VALLEY STATION 

3 
        

             

       

           

                             

                      

                         

                                  

             

   

     

   

   

      

From: Ron Roy [mailto:rroy310@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 4:03 PM

To: Coachella Valley Rail <CoachellaValleyRail@arellanoassociates.com>

Subject: Carrie Schindler arguing $130 million

To whom it may concern:  

Please note I'm upset because the transit agencies are showing a complete lack of imagination in 

overcoming  obstacles they've stated in the following paragraph. 

"Alternative Alignments 4 and 5 present environmental concerns including a high percentage of residential and

commercial property acquisitions. In addition, technical issues requiring significant engineering and construction

expenditures to provide additional track capacity and connections to accommodate these alignments become

troublesome. Both of these factors result in significant additional costs, $130 million to $160 million, above the

base line estimate for this proposed project. "

 Since when has "residential and commercial property acquisitions ever stopped a  California commuter rail 

project? Also, Ms Schindler failed to demonstrate that the  percentage of residential and commercial property 

acquisitions for the Riverside Line Route was significantly less than the Alameda Corridor Route  (for example 

less than $200 million from that of the Alameda Rail Corridor route).  

Also is the commission considering utilizing portions of the I10 right­of­way, or the  California High Speed 

Rail right­of­way, or the Metrolink San Bernardino Line right­of­way for parts of the route? 

The political motivations of the committee, cause a committee composition that discriminates against Pomona 

Valley and San Gabriel Valley representation, and favors Riverside Area.   

Here is my prior email contact regarding Coachella Valley Rail on January 14, 2016 and January 15, 2016 with 

Carrie Shindler.  

Dear Ms. Schindler 

As a resident of Beaumont in the San Gorgonio Pass, I was initially exited when I learned that a proposed Amtrak route would 

originate in the Coachella Valley, make a stop in the San Gorgonio Pass and then take passengers all the way to Downtown 

Los Angeles (DTLA).  

Unfortunately I later was disheartened when I found out that the proposed Amtrak Route (patterned in many ways after the 

LOSSAN serivice from San Diego to DTLA), being approved at the date of this email, will run through Riverside and Orange 

County to get to DTLA rather than achieving a much more direct route: Alternative 5  which is known as the Alameda 

Corridor.  

My family's professional and cultural lifestyle is such that we virtually never go to Orange County. When we leave Riverside 

County 90% of our travels take us to either San Bernardino Valley, the foothill communities that stretch from Rancho 

Cucamunga to Altadena (including Pasadena), and the  Westside and San Fernando Valley.  Also when  we use air travel we 

use Ontario Airport almost exclusively.  

1
   

 

 

 

 

Given our travel preferences, the Alameda Corridor is the most logical alternative that matches our lifestyle. But RCTC's 

alternative through Orange County will take over three hours, whereas the Alameda Corridor is more direct and much shorter 

in duration.  

To cure this problem, I believe that a San Bernardino County official needs to be on the Coachella Valley Amtrak rail team to 

more forcefully advocate for the Alameda Corridor Alternative. Please let me know if this is possible and any other 

observations you have here. 

Thank you 

Ron Roy 

SEE ARTICLE BELOW 

http://ttcinlandempire.blogspot.com/2015_11_01_archive.html 

Coachella Valley Amtrak Line 

The Riverside County Transportation Commission approved the general routing of a long-proposed 

Amtrak route that will connect Los Angeles to Indio. The initial service plan calls for two daily round 

trips along the corridor.

From LA, the line will follow the existing Metrolink 91 Line through Fullerton to Colton via the BNSF 

right-of-way. It would then turn east at the Colton Crossing and follow the UP tracks that parallel the 

I-10 freeway into the south desert.

Currently the LA-to-Indio route is served by the long-distance Amtrak Sunset Limited that operates 

three trains in each direction per week.

Upgrading the train service into the Coachella Valley is long overdue considering that it is a major 

metropolitan area in Southern California worthy of better public transportation connections. 

Government officials have been talking about this service for over two decades. Yet, reports are 

showing that there are still massive amounts of environmental work and other regulatory issues that 

have to be done. We're still looking at 5-10 more years before these two extra trains are added.

2
 

 

                                       

                                

                               

                                 

                                  

                                 

                            

                          

                     

                              

                       

                     

   

         

     

This is one aspect of the project that bothers me despite the fact that this passenger rail service 

project proposes to add the two daily round train trips along existing rail right-of-way corridors, both 

of them active. That's because of the red tape politics at the state and federal level that continue to 

obstruct transit progress and inflate costs. Add to that the possibility of a NIMBY group that may 

decide to exploit state law by slapping RCTC with a trivial CEQA suit and cashing in on a 

settlement paid for by you and I. 

I well understand that transit must have efficient regulatory oversight from the feds. For instance, I 

don't oppose the mandatory late night train testing of Positive Train Control along the San 

Bernardino Line prior to launch. But do you really think that adding two round trip passenger trains 

along with modest track improvements along existing right-of-way infrastructure is going to be a 

major Inland Empire pollutant? You make the call.

Beaumont, Ca.  

Jan 15

Carrie Schindler <cschindler@sanbag.ca.gov> 

to Justin, me 

Mr. Roy,

I would like to thank you for your interest and comments regarding the Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail

Corridor Service Study, which is being led by the Riverside County Transportation Commission. As this is a

corridor that has the ability to become an important regional rail connection within Southern California, SANBAG

staff have been involved on the Technical Advisor Committee for this Study and have assisted in providing

direction and analysis of the proposed rail alignment alternatives. As analyzed and stated in the draft Study,

there are several factors that make the alignment along the San Gabriel Subdivision (Alternatives 4 and 5)

unfeasible. Most notably, Alternative Alignments 4 and 5 present environmental concerns including a high

percentage of residential and commercial property acquisitions. In addition, technical issues requiring significant

engineering and construction expenditures to provide additional track capacity and connections to accommodate

these alignments become troublesome. Both of these factors result in significant additional costs, $130 million

to $160 million, above the base line estimate for this proposed project.

Once again, I appreciate your comments and interest in this Study.

Regards,

Carrie Schindler, PE

Director of Transit and Rail Programs

San Bernardino Associated Governments

909.884.8276

3
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

NOP and NOI Comment Summary

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

10/8/16 Alexander Friedman Individual  Station Location

 Service Frequency

 Recommends train service between Palm Springs and

Los Angeles with 1-2 hour intervals at most.

 Suggests brand new Downtown Palm Springs Station or

shuttle service between existing Palm Springs Station and Downtown Palm Springs 

 Project support with Palm Spring being the 1st priority 

station. 

EaooInaP

Oin

10/12/16 Michael Mazgai Individual  Contact

Information forMailing List

 Rail Schedule

 Would like new rail service to coordinate with the

schedule of trains leaving the LA station for Central &Northern California.

 Would like contact information to be added to Project’s

contact list.

EdtrOin

10/12/16 Glenn Olsen Individual  Station Location

 Connecting Rail/

Transit Services

 Consider station stop at Ontario Metrolink Include an Amtrak-bus connection with San Bernardino Provide a joint Amtrak - Metrolink fare similar to the one

from Ventura to Oceanside. 

 Consider electrifying this corridor

EaooInhwcE

Oin

10/12/16 Cecilia Karstensen Individual  Connecting Rail/

Transit Services

 Recommends keeping a slot for the Amtrak Sunset E

ththInhwOin

10/13/16 Eric Ceja Agency 

(City of Palm 

 Station Location Service Frequency Connecting Rail/

 Increase rail service frequency during music festival

season

 Map showing how service connects to LA Metro

Eao

1 
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service 

NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

Desert) Transit Services  Recommends Including a “mid-valley” stop in Palm 

Desert University (Cook St.) 

ob

creInaPOin

10/13/16 PJ Gagajena Individual  Connecting Rail/ 

Transit Services 

 Requests a rail connection to LAX E

dtrOin

10/13/16 Michael Harrington Individual  Project Route  Could the rail service locally integrate with CV Link? E

dmOin

10/13/16 Charles Carter Individual  Project Support  Supportive of Project E

imOin

10/17/16 Julianne Elliot Individual  Project Support  Requests that project be expedited to allow for alternative 

modes of transportation that don’t require driving 

EimOin

10/17/16 Michael Hayes Individual  Project Support 

 Service Frequency 

 Suggests train frequency (2 roundtrip journeys every day 

(morning and evening) with the option to increase to 3‐4 on weekends or festival weeks) 

 Supportive of Project

E

th

thOin

10/17/16 Gorton De Mond Individual  Project Support 

 Station Location  Service Frequency 

 Supportive of Project Suggests station stops in Indio, Palm Desert (by the 

Aqua Caliente Casino), Palm Springs (near the Morongo Casino / Cabazon outlet stores), Beaumont/Banning, Redlands/Loma Linda, Riverside, Corona, Fullerton. 

 Suggests train split in Riverside/Corona and continue to 

EaooIna

2 
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service 

NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

San Diego. 

 Recommends train service operates three times a day in 

season and two times a day off season 

POin

10/17/16 Gail Smith Individual  Project Design 

 Project Route 

 Supports proposed route  Requests to see transit lines improved from current 

railroad method using new technology 

EimOin

10/17/16 Dan Cook Individual  Station Location  Preference for Indio Station Stop E

aooOin

10/17/16 Teresa Adams Individual  Project Support  Supports Project 

 Would like for Project to be expedited to allow for more 

travel options in Coachella Valley 

EimOin

10/18/16 Gennaro Pupa Individual  Project Support 

 Contact 

Information for Mailing List

 Supports the Project E

imOin

10/18/16 Blake Alexander Individual  Service Frequency  Recommends trains schedule at least twice a day in both 

directions to allow for round trips. 

EththOin

10/18/16 Anne TaylorLoughran Individual  Project Support  Supportive of Project E

imOin

10/19/16 Christopher Cuatt Individual  Station Location 

 Service Frequency 

 What station stops would be along the route?  Would there be 2 trains daily in each direction or 1 in 

each direction? 

Ea

o

oInaP

3 
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service 

NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

Oin

10/19/16 Nancy Holland Business 

(Hernandez, Kroone & Associates) 

 Project Tracking  Requests if there are other ways to track project besides 

Facebook 

EimOincto 

10/21/16 Jack Cheng, Air 

Quality SpecialistJillian Wong, Planning and Rules Manager Planning, Rule Development & Area Sources 

Agency (South Coast Air Quality Management District)

 Project Analysis 

Recommendations 

 Please send the SCAQMD a copy of the Draft EIR with 

appendices upon its completion. 

 Recommends the use of the 1993 Air Quality Handbook 

(1993) as guidance when preparing air quality analysis.

 Recommends the use of CalEEMod land use emissions 

software 

 Identify any potential adverse air quality impacts that 

could occur from all phases of the project and all air pollutant sources related to the project.

 Staff requests that the lead agency quantify criteria 

pollutant emissions and compare the results to the recommended regional significance thresholds.

 In the event that the proposed project generates or 

attracts vehicular trips, especially heavy-duty dieselfueled vehicles, it is recommended that the lead agency perform a mobile source health risk assessment

 Should the proposed project include equipment that 

generates or controls air contaminants, a permit may be required and the SCAQMD should be listed as a responsible agency and consulted.

EredOinap

11/1/16 Blair Jockers Individual  Project Support  Supportive of Project. E

imOin

11/2/16 Jill Jensen Agency 

(National Park Service) 

 Contact 

Information for Mailing List 

 Section 106

 Project area is within the corridor of the Old Spanish 

National Historic Trail.

 Requests for the National Park Service (NPS) to be 

considered a Section 106 consulting party. 

EaInPOinap1

11/4/16 Elizabeth Carvajal Agency  Project Support  Supportive of Project and the Project’s purpose and E

4 
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service 

NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

Senior Manager, (LA Metro)  Route Preference stated objectives. h

Transportation  Station Location  Metro prefers the BNSF alignment with a station in w

Planning  Interagency 

Coordination 

Fullerton. Metro’s second preference is UP Alhambra subdivision Alignment. Metro does not support the Metrolink San Bernardino Line or Riverside Line alignments.

 Metro is currently advancing the Link US project, which, 

once completed, will provide significant additional throughput and capacity at Union Station. Decisions regarding maintenance, storage and staging of intercity consists, platform locations, operating plans, real estate and right-of-way acquisition issues, etc. should be made in consultation and coordination with Metro's planning and preliminary engineering efforts to advance the Link US project. 

 Request to participate as part of the Technical Advisory 

Committee. 

 Request for a copy of Draft EIR when completed. 

cE

in reAApRthOinap

11/4/16 Ron Mathieu 

Senior Public Project Specialist 

Agency (Metrolink) 

 Project Support  Contact 

Information for Mailing List 

 Route Alignment Connecting Rail/ 

Transit Services 

 Station Locations 

 Supportive of need for additional passenger rail services 

in Southern California. 

 Recommend inclusion and analysis of at least one other 

alignment, such as the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Alhambra Subdivision or their Los Angeles Subdivision in the DEIR in order to provide flexibility in the implementation of the service, especially if negotiations with one railroad does not progress

 Opportunities for joint investments in capacityenhancing infrastructure should be pursued in

partnership with other passenger railroads and services.

 Further definition on station locations and stops on 

selected route is needed. 

 Analysis to ensure safe non-stop operations through the

existing stations on the preferred route is needed.

 SCRRA would like to ensure that this new planned 

service is operated in and out of LAUS without compromise to Metrolink dedicated platforms or number of run-through tracks associated with the LINK US Project.

Ehrea

o

oAApInhwRthOin

ap

11/4/16 Leslie MacNair, 

Regional Manager 

Agency (CDFW)

 Project Analysis 

Recommendations 

 Requests CEQA document to include complete 

assessment of flora and fauna within and adjacent to Project footprint including habitat types and corresponding map. 

 Requests a general biological inventory of species that 

are present or have the potential to be present within 

ECrerefo

5 
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service 

NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

affected areas. 

 Requests focused species specific surveys be completed 

with survey procedures developed in consultation with the CDFW and USFWS where necessary. 

 Provides guidance on how the Draft Program EIR will 

analyze direct and indirect biological impacts and how to create mitigation to offset impacts.

 Suggests that the Project consider the use of existing 

infrastructure where feasible to reduce project impacts. 

 California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Incidental 

Take Permit (ITP) may be required 

 Early consultation with CDFW is recommended to

discuss Project Alternatives and routes and mitigation/minimization measures. 

Oinap

11/4/16 Mark Roberts

Office Chief Intergovernmental Review, Communityand Regional Planning 

Agency (Caltrans District 8)

 Project Support  Project Design 

 Supportive of Project objectives that will assist in the 

reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and traffic along impacted corridors. 

 Recommends that high density housing and mixed-use 

developments are integrated around future stations. 

 Recommends developing public transportation and active 

transportation connections around the station areas. 

 Recommends the Project include a study of alignments 

to connect to the future High Speed Rail stationplanned for San Bernardino. 

EhwcEin 

reOinap

11/5/16 Ping Chang Agency 

(SCAG)

 Contact 

Information for Mailing List 

 Project Analysis 

Recommendations 

 Please send the SCAG a copy of the Draft EIR with 

appendices upon its completion. 

 Recommends that the environmental document include a 

consistency comparison of 2016 RTP/SCS SCAG goals to the Project. 

EcOin

a

11/7/16 Steven Hernandez, 

Mayor

Agency (City of Coachella)

 Station Location  Requests that the City of Coachella be considered for a 

potential station. 

Ea

o

oOin

11/9/16 Jenness McBride Agency 

(USFWS)

 Project Analysis 

Recommendations 

 Recommends the EIS/EIR should include a discussion of 

the Project’s effects on the conservation strategies that are outlined within existing or draft NCCP/HCP’s. 

 Include detailed information on the number and 

distribution of all Federal candidate, proposed, and listed species; State-listed species; and locally sensitive species that may be affected within the footprint or near 

EUreOin

a

6 
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service 

NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

the proposed Project alternatives. 

 Include a description of all alternatives and their 

surrounding environment. 

 Requests that specific acreages and descriptions of 

sensitive habitats along with maps, photos, and tables summarizing the information be included in the EIS/EIR. 

p

11/9/16 Clifton Meek 

Environmental Review Section 

Agency (EPA, Region IX) 

 Project Support  Project Analysis 

Recommendations 

 EPA supports the concept of a rail system that can 

provide an alternative to increasing vehicle miles traveled and lead to reduced environmental impacts, so long as it is planned well.

 Request for reviewing and commenting on the project 

Purpose and Need and Range of Alternatives, the Draft and Final EIS, and if applicable the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) for the Section 404 permit. 

 Recommends LEED Design for future stations and rail 

facilities. 

 The Draft EIS should identify Project’s relationship to 

regional transportation projects (e.g. incompatibilities with other transit systems, link up with other transportation proposals in the region).

 The Draft EIS should analyze impacts of construction of 

stations, parking facilities, maintenance and storage facilities, power propagation infrastructure, and required road construction/modifications.

 EPA supports the use of existing transportation corridors 

and rights of way to the extent feasible. 

 Recommend that the Tier 1 DEIS present enough 

information to ensure the corridor chosen is the corridor containing the LEDPA. 

 Recommends early coordination with Corps and EPA on 

project alternatives to ensure that the Alternative Analysis serves its intended purpose as a planning and screening tool. 

 Recommends early coordination with CDFW and USFWS 

on Project impacts to biological resources. 

 Provides a series of recommendation in regards to 

waters assessment, mitigation measures, biological resources and impacts to wildlife, noise impacts, air quality, greenhouse gases and climate change, cumulative impacts, growth inducement analysis, and environmental justice.

EEdOin

ap

11/7/16 Clint Schelbitzki 

General DirectorNetwork Development 

Business (Union Pacific Railroad) 

 Contact 

Information for Mailing List 

 Railroad Right of 

 UP states that any existing and future capacity provided 

by UP tracks and ROW within the Project study area be reserved for freight purposes. 

 States that expanded passenger service as proposed 

ESfrs

7 
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service 

NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

Union Pacific Railroad 

Way/Capacity would have future unintended consequences that force 

more trucks onto the highway due to reduced railcapacity.

thOinbPPm

11/10/16 Mariela Magana, 

Policy Advocate Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability Chelina Odbert, Executive Director Kounkuey Design Initiative Sergio Carranza, Executive Director Pueblo Unido CDC Silvia Paz, Director Building Healthy Communities 

Local AdvocacyGroups 

 Contact 

Information for Mailing List 

 Project Study Area Public 

Involvement 

 Request to extend rail service to North Shore near Yacht 

Club Community Center near the Salton Sea. 

 Include in the EIS/EIR a study on how the Project rail can 

benefit the Coachella Valley, specifically the East Coachella Valley, through increased access to education, employment, and medical services. 

 Request that East Coachella Valley residents be included 

and engaged in the development of the rail service through meetings open to the public at accessible times and places with accessible languages to determine service levels, route models, station locations, and connectivity. 

 Request that a Citizens Advisory Committee is created 

and that it include at least two representatives from each of the communities in the Coachella Valley. 

 Recommendation for coordination with Riverside County 

TLMA and the Coachella Valley Water District to address population growth in the proposed corridor. 

EredpgOinsA

Coachella Valley Suguet Lopez, Executive Director Organización en California de Líderes Campesinas, Inc.Maribel Nunez, Director California Partnership

Amber Anaya, Program Manager and Editor Coachella Unincorporated Inc.

11/10/16 Ron Roy Individual  Route Alignment

 Station Locations 

 States that Pass Area residents would be better served if 

rail service connected to Ontario Airport via the Alameda Corridor Route. 

Eao

8 
Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Rail Corridor Service 

NOP and NOI Comment Summary Matrix

Comment 

Date Name 

Comment Category Comment Topic Comment Summary EIS

 Recommends a rail stop/station in Beaumont, Ontario 

Airport, and near the San Gabriel Mission.

 Prefers the Union Pacific Yuma Sub or the Union Pacific 

Alhambra Sub route. 

 Believes current Riverside line alternative is 

discriminatory as it cuts off critical rail access to Ontario, Pomona and San Gabriel populations. 

oAApOin

11/10/16 Ron Roy Individual  Route Alignment

 Property 

Acquisitions/ ROW 

 States that there is no basis to support percentage of 

residential and commercial property acquisitions that would be required for the Riverside alignment versus the Alameda Corridor alignment. 

 Questions if the Project will utilize portions of the I-10, 

California High Speed Rail, or Metrolink San Bernardino ROW for parts of the alignment. 

 States that a San Bernardino County official needs to be 

included on the Project to advocate for the Alameda Corridor alignment. 

EthpincOinSo

11/10/16 John Ullcott & 

James HenryWashington

Individual  Project Design 

 Project Study Area 

 Study should say that the Project is planned to connect 

Los Angeles to Phoenix. 

 Recommends that Indio not be labelled as the end of the 

line, but “temporary east terminal” or “Phase I of Los Angeles to Phoenix via Palm Springs and Indio”.

 General planning and ROW acquisitions should be 

included to include Los Angeles to Phoenix. 

 Suggests that Arizona DOT and City of Phoenix be 

included on list of lead agencies to encourage Phase 2 Amtrak train extension to Arizona process. 

 Questions why Imperial County agencies are not invited 

as part of the sponsoring agency list. 

 States that all online cities (Palm Springs, Indio, etc.) 

should own their own station facilities. 

 Requests that one study option should include 2-4 selfpropelled railcars instead of traditional locomotives.  Suggests that the Project consider using alternative 

EAreaAAparePOinIms

routes back to LA Union Station to extend the service reach to more passengers. 

11/10/16 Mariano Aguirre Agency 

(City of Indio) 

 Project Study Area Station Locations 

 Requests that City of Indio be the terminus of the future 

rail line due to the presence of existing Transportation Center (Greyhound Bus services) and space for future multi-modal facility and storage/layover yard. 

EAreaOin

9 
       

     

   

Coachella Valley­San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Corridor Service Study 

FINAL Public Scoping Summary Report 

Appendix J 

Railroad Stakeholder Scoping Comments 
ffl BUILDING AMERICA" 

November 10, 2016 

VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL 

E-Ma i I Address: Coachella ValleyRai l@ArellanoAssociates.com 

Mr. Robert Yates 

Multimodal Services Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

Post Office Box 12008 

Riverside, CA 92501 

Re: Coachella Valley- San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service ProjectNOP Scoping Comments 

Dear Mr. Yates: 

Union Pacific Railroad Company ("UP") submits these comments to the Federal 

Railroad Administration, the California Department of Transportation, and the Riverside 

County Transportation Commission in response to the Notice of Preparation for the 

Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Project (the "Project"). 

UP owns and operates a common carrier railroad network in the western half of 

the United States, including the State of California. Specifically, UP owns and operates 

rail main lines connecting the San Francisco Bay Area to Sacramento and points east 

and north, and to Los Angeles and points east and southeast. UP is the largest rail 

carrier in California in terms of both mileage and train operations. UP's network in 

California is vital to the economic health of the state and the nation as a whole, and its 

rail service to California customers, including those in Los Angeles and in the Inland 

Empire, is crucial to the current and future success and growth of those customers. 

The Project study area includes railroad rights of way that UP owns or on which it 

has rights to operate. UP has invested a tremendous amount of capital within the 

Project study area and across Southern California in order to expand freight rail 

capacity and improve the efficiency of our network. This investment is continually 

made in an effort to meet the needs of our customers who rely on UP to safely and 

efficiently transport their goods. It is UP's expectation that any existing and future 

capacity provided by our tracks and right of way within the Project study area be 

reserved for freight purposes and to ensure we can support freight growth along this 

critical corridor. Further, we believe that utilization of this rail capacity for expanded 

passenger service could have future unintended consequences that force more trucks 

onto an already congested network of highways. 

UNION PACIFIC CORPORATION 

10031 Foothills Blvd. 

Roseville, CA 95747 

Cllnt Schelbltzkl 

General Dir. - Network 

Development 

P 916-789-6360 

E ceschelb@up.com 
Mr. Robert Yates 

Multimodal Services Director 

Riverside County Transportation Commission 

November 10, 2016 

Page 2 

Thank you for considering these comments. Please include me as the UP point 

of contact on the service list for any future notices or correspondence related to the 

Project. 

Sincerely, 

4s~~ 

Clint Schelbitzki 

General Director-Network Development 
Appendix B 

Earned Media 
 

 

7/13/2021 CP&DR News Briefs July 6, 2021: O.C. Housing Lawsuit; Hunters Point Complications; Coachella Valley Rail Service; and More - CP&DR

(/)

User Login

Login (/static/login)

Sign Up (/subscribe)

Connect with CP&DR

 (https://www.facebook.com/pages/California-Planning-DevelopmentReport/122428504114?ref=ts) (https://twitter.com/Cal_Plan)

Follow us on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/pages/California-PlanningDevelopment-Report/122428504114?ref=ts) and Twitter (https://twitter.com/Cal_Plan)

Articles by Category

Reports (/categories/cpdr_report)

Insight (/categories/insight)

Legal Digest (/categories/Legal_Digest)

News Briefs (/categories/news_briefs)

Blogs (/categories/blog)

Podcasts (/categories/20200328)

Job Announcements (/categories/job_announcements)

Single Purchase Store (/store)

You Are Here: Home (/) » News Briefs (/Categories/News_briefs) » CP&DR News Briefs July 6,

2021: O.C. Housing Lawsuit; Hunters Point Complications; Coachella Valley Rail Service; And

More (/Articles/Cpdr-News-Briefs-July-6-2021)

CP&DR News Briefs July 6, 2021: O.C. Housing Lawsuit; Hunters Point

Complications; Coachella Valley Rail Service; and More

by Mckenzie Locke on Jul 6, 2021

 (/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-6-2021/print)

https://www.cp-dr.com/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-6-2021 1/8
 

 

7/13/2021 CP&DR News Briefs July 6, 2021: O.C. Housing Lawsuit; Hunters Point Complications; Coachella Valley Rail Service; and More - CP&DR

Previous (/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-13-2021) | Next (/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-6-2021)

Orange County Cities Proceed with Lawsuit Over Housing Allocation

The Orange County Council of Governments filed (https://www.ocregister.com/2021/06/28/orangecounty-cities-sue-state-over-new-homebuilding-goals/) a lawsuit against the Department of Housing and

Community Development over its housing requirements for the upcoming Regional Housing Needs

Allocation cycle. The HCD determined that Southern California will have to build 1.34 million homes by

2030, while Orange County cities believe that the department severely overestimated the amount of new

housing required and believes that 651,000 new housing units is more accurate. In its lawsuit, the council

of governments maintains that the HCD did not follow appropriate guidelines to provide a correct

estimate and used inaccurate population forecasts and vacancy rates for the region. Meanwhile, the cities

must submit their updated general plans by October to accommodate the housing requirements set by the

HCD.

New Lawsuit over Toxins Threatens to Stall Hunters Point Redevelopment

A group representing 9,000 environmental justice advocates in San Francisco’s Bayview-Hunters Point

neighborhood filed (https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/article/New-legal-challenge-revives-huge-warover-16257916.php) a lawsuit to stop the construction of 12,000 new homes proposed for Hunters Point

shipyard and its surrounding Candlestick Park over concerns about gentrification and the health impacts

of toxic pollutants. The group asks that Lennar Corporation and FivePoint Holdings press pause on the

current construction unless the developers prove their commitment to preventing a major release of toxic

pollutants at the site contaminated from Cold War ships carrying atomic-bomb fallout. The Navy, which

is in the process of cleaning up the shipyard, and public health officials have previously rejected the claim

that the site’s toxicity is connected to community health inequities in the area that is predominantly home

to people of color and working-class residents. A hearing is scheduled for July 29, but the San Francisco

Department of Public Health stated that freezing construction due to dust release is unlikely because the

developers must already adhere to city health codes.

Proposed Passenger Train Route from Los Angeles to Coachella Valley Moves Forward

The proposed development of a 144-mile train route

(https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2021/06/17/coachella-valley-amtrak-rail-plan-environmentalreview/7497576002/) from Los Angeles to the Coachella Valley looks promising after having gone

through environmental review, which officials consider to be a meaningful achievement for the rail

service’s progress. The estimated $1 billion plan--sponsored by Riverside County Transportation

Commission, in collaboration with the Federal Railroad Administration and Caltrans--would have stops

in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside counties and make two round-trips per day. If

completed, the rail service would not only expand public transportation options and increase access to

jobs but also save over 107,000 car trips per year, limiting both traffic and pollution. Moving forward, the

project must go through an additional review of the proposed station locations and existing infrastructure

along the route, and it will require federal funding.

Report Cites Role of Greenbelts in Mitigating Wildfire Damage

A new report from the Greenbelt Alliance, The Critical Role of Greenbelts in Wildfire Resilience Today,

presents (https://www.greenbelt.org/research/the-critical-role-of-greenbelts-in-wildfire-resilience/) the

case for protecting and growing greenbelts in areas threatened by wildfires. The report recommends to

legislators the expansion of four types of greenbelts: open space and parks, agricultural and working

https://www.cp-dr.com/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-6-2021 2/8
 

7/13/2021 CP&DR News Briefs July 6, 2021: O.C. Housing Lawsuit; Hunters Point Complications; Coachella Valley Rail Service; and More - CP&DR

lands, zones placed inside communities, and recreational greenways. The group’s research suggests that

strengthening greenbelts will protect wildlands from wildfires, increase wildfire resilience and defense,

protect biodiversity, and foster green spaces inside urban areas. Their approach also includes

concentrating growth in existing cities and towns in order to limit wildfire risk to residents and confront

the housing crisis.

CP&DR Commentary: Multiple Cities Embrace Multi-Family

CP&DR’s Bill Fulton parses the numbers on California’s recent housing production statistics. California’s

four largest metropolitan areas – with a population of approximately 30 million people – produced about

76,000 new housing permits during the pandemic year, down about 5% from the year before. For the four

largest metro areas in Texas – with a population of 20 million, or about two-thirds of California’s – the

total number of new housing permits during the pandemic year was about 190,000 or almost 2 1⁄2 times as

much. In the three coastal metros, more than 60% of new housing construction is now multifamily.

Quick Hits & Updates

In an effort to increase available and equitable housing, the City of Oakland

(https://www.oaklandca.gov/news/2021/city-of-oakland-joins-national-effort-to-advanceopportunity-equity-through-housing-policy) will participate in a nationally-funded program that

provides services to address the housing crisis in cities with populations under 500,000. The city’s

Housing and Community Development Department will share its ideas with several other smaller

cities throughout the US to increase resource availability and innovation knowledge.

Northern California has borne the brunt of the state’s extensive wildfire damage, totaling over 4.2

million acres in 2020 due to an extreme fire season, according to an analysis

(https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/article/Here-s-where-California-is-losing-the-most16256281.php) by the San Francisco Chronicle. Siskiyou County and Shasta County were the

hardest hit areas, losing 540,000 and 420,000 acres in the past decade, respectively. California is

home to 31.6 million acres of forestry, but the reciprocal relationship between climate change and

deforestation threatens the state’s expansive tree cover, and hot, dry conditions are in place for an

unrelenting 2021.

The Center for Biological Diversity is urging (https://apnews.com/article/ca-state-wire-californiafish-science-365f9daeff90cd22ba8c6e062a00c0c2) the US Fish and Wildlife Service to consider

California’s Santa Ana speckled dace and Temblor legless lizard for protection under the Endangered

Species Act. The fish, which is native to Southern California streams, and lizard, which lives in a

small area of the San Joaquin Valley, face several threats, including dams, invasive species, oil and

gas drilling, and climate change.

The White House (https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/blog/2021/06/17/exclusionary-zoning-its-effecton-racial-discrimination-in-the-housing-market/) released a statement that details the legacy of

systemic racism in the housing market and emphasizes the evils of exclusionary zoning laws, which

are to blame for over 30% the racial wealth gap, helped form “heat islands,” increase housing prices,

and jeopardize children’s health and well-being. The authors communicated that existing policies are

embedded with discriminatory practices that particularly harm Black families and wrote that the

Biden administration’s American Jobs Plan would tackle these inequities by expanding affordable

housing, implementing a community-based approach, and reforming exclusionary zoning.

https://www.cp-dr.com/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-6-2021 3/8
7/13/2021 CP&DR News Briefs July 6, 2021: O.C. Housing Lawsuit; Hunters Point Complications; Coachella Valley Rail Service; and More - CP&DR

Malibu Coast Vintners and Grape Growers Alliance Inc. filed (https://laist.com/news/food/malibuwinemakers-sue-la-county-over-ban-on-new-vineyards-in-the-santa-monica-mountains) a lawsuit

alongside John Gooden, president of Montage vineyards, in response to the Los Angeles County

Board of Supervisors’ decision to ban all new vineyards located in the Santa Monica Mountains. The

petitioners argue that the ordinance has legal faults and hope that the California Environmental

Quality Act will be considered in court to protect the area that has faced extensive damage from the

2018 Woolsey Fire.

Los Angeles and San Jose were two cities considered (https://www.eltis.org/inbrief/news/identifying-amount-urban-space-occupied-roads) in research from the UCLA Institute of

Transportation Studies on the amount of space occupied by roads in US cities. Researcher Adam

Millard-Ball, in considering how public space could be reimagined due to and following the

pandemic, determined that US roads — which average 55 feet wide — composed an average of 18%

and up to 30% of city land area.

The San Diego Association of Governments is considering

(https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/transportation/story/2021-06-19/sandag-road-charge)

a road charge for each mile driven within California that would replace its gas tax, whose

effectiveness is diminishing due to the rise in electric and fuel-efficient vehicles, and fund part of its

$160-billion plan to develop public transit. SANDAG expects that the plan, which reflects proposed

statewide initiatives, would produce $34 billion for transportation infrastructure improvements but is

still contemplating how to charge drivers.

The electric bike share company Bcycle will expand

(https://www.independent.com/2021/06/16/bcycle-trounces-opponent-at-coastal-commission/) its

operations in Santa Barbara and establish docks and two kiosks along the waterfront, in the Funk

Zone, and on Coast Village Road. The Coastal Commission voted unanimously to reject an appeal

filed by a local resident over worries about the docks’ interruption of ocean views.

The Port of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista approved (https://www.portofsandiego.org/pressreleases/general-press-releases/momentous-day-port-san-diego-city-chula-vista-approve) essential

documents for the Gaylord Pacific resort and its nearby convention center, two parks, and streets,

paving the way forward for a huge, $1.23 billion waterfront project proposed for completion as early

as 2025. After this step, the port, city, and the authority must file a Validation Action and then issue

Authority Bonds to begin construction, which is projected to take place by late 2022.

The final environmental impact report (https://theavtimes.com/2021/06/28/environmental-impactreport-for-palmdale-section-of-high-speed-rail-line-released/) for the Bakersfield to Palmdale section

of California’s high-speed rail project is complete and will be submitted to the High-Speed Rail

Authority’s Board of Directors for review starting on August 18. If approved, the 80-mile segment

will be the first in Southern California to be environmentally cleared and will bring the statewide

approval total to 300 miles.

https://www.cp-dr.com/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-6-2021 4/8
 

7/13/2021 CP&DR News Briefs July 6, 2021: O.C. Housing Lawsuit; Hunters Point Complications; Coachella Valley Rail Service; and More - CP&DR

Results from a public opinion poll (https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/High-speed-railopponents-seize-on-poll-showing-16280351.php) about California’s high-speed rail project evidence

weakening public support for the transit system. While 41% of voters voiced their support for

continuing construction, 42% expressed that resources should be dedicated elsewhere, such as to

local rail projects in dense city centers. The results act as reasoning for state legislators who are

challenging Gov. Gavin Newsom’s request to use $4.2 billion in voter-approved bond funding for the

first segment of the system from Merced to Bakersfield.

Community group Save Livermore Downtown is suing

(https://www.pleasantonweekly.com/news/2021/06/28/livermore-community-group-sues-city-forapproving-affordable-housing-development-downtown) the city for its approval of a 130-unit

affordable housing development, maintaining that the city’s proposal does not align with its

Downtown Specific Plan and needs a more comprehensive environmental review to consider existing

contamination at the location. Save Livermore Downtown requests for the court to negate the city’s

approval of the Eden Housing development until it resolves the issues raised by the lawsuit. The

group also believes that the project will increase traffic congestion, produce insufficient parking, and

change neighborhood character.

Union City (https://spectrumnews1.com/ca/la-east/transportation/2021/06/03/south-bay-citiespropose-25-mph-travel-network) City Council approved a proposal by Newport Beach-based

developer Integral Communities to construct nearly 1,000 apartments and condominiums, including

affordable units, on 26.5 acres near BART’s Union City Station. The development aligns with Union

City’s attempt to transform the industrial area into a neighborhood with high-density housing and

commercial development. The city has conducted toxic cleanups and approved multiple policy

changes to accommodate this project, such as raising the average density in the area.

The City of Oakland could sell (https://www.sfchronicle.com/local-politics/article/A-s-surprisedthat-Oakland-may-consider-16242444.php) its 50% share of the Oakland A’s current Coliseum site to

the African American Sports and Entertainment Group, an Oakland-based developer that prioritizes

economic prosperity for the Black community. While the A’s hope to purchase the city’s share for

full ownership to develop housing, offices, retail, and parks, the AASEG wants to work with the A’s

to build a Black business district and bring a Black-owned football team to the city.

The San Diego (https://www.kpbs.org/news/2021/may/28/sandag-transit-plan-high-speed-railhousing/) Association of Governments is prioritizing high-speed rail and high-density housing in its

$160 billion long-range transportation plan. Simultaneously, four cities — Coronado, Solana Beach,

Imperial Beach, and Lemon Grove — are suing SANDAG for its existing housing requirements,

though housing expansion would be central to forming the denser, walkable neighborhoods promoted

by the transportation plan.

CP&DR is a subscriber-supported publication. This article is being provided free of charge, but most

articles are available only on a premium basis.

https://www.cp-dr.com/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-6-2021 5/8



 

 

 

7/13/2021 Coachella Valley Rail Project; Another Possible Option For Travel - Opera News

Download Opera News APP About

Sports Entertainment COVID Economy Politics&Policy Education Health&Fitness Technology Fashion&Beauty

TRAVEL

Coachella Valley Rail Project; Another Possible Option

For Travel

By nbcpalmsprings.com | 16d

Trending News

Travel in and out of the Coachella Valley could be getting easier, A proposed 144 mile Coachella Valley-San

Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor, is one step closer to becoming a reality. “The service would start in the west at L.A.

Union Station and terminate on the east in either Indio or Coachella,” said...

US POLITICS

New Jersey Dismisses Nearly 88K Mar

ijuana-Related Cases Under New Wee

d Law

nbcnewyork.com, 2min

COLLEGE EDUCATION

California drops new ‘social justice' m

ath curriculum after critics say it woul

d ‘de-mathematize math'

washingtonexaminer.com, 2min

Read Full Story

If the content contained herein violates any of your rights, including those of copyright, you are requested to immediately notify us

using via the following email address operanews-external(at)opera.com

Coachella Valley Coachella Valley Rail Project Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass

JD Douglas L.A Riverside

WILDFIRE

Major wildfires scorch U.S. West amid

severe heat wave

axios.com, 2min

Top News

https://www.dailyadvent.com/news/amp/848c3029fceb0899e5acfc22f8f7cea8-Coachella-Valley-Rail-Project-Another-Possible-Option-For-Travel 1/5
 

 

 

 

 

7/13/2021 Coachella Valley Amtrak rail corridor proposal environmental study

NEWS

Coachella Valley rail proposal moves

forward with environmental study up for

review

Eliana Perez Palm Springs Desert Sun

Published 5:01 a.m. PT Jun. 17, 2021

A project decades in the works to expand passenger rail service between Los Angeles and the

Coachella Valley is inching forward with the release of an environmental impact statement.

But there are still hurdles to have trains on track in thenext 10 years.

The Riverside County Transportation Commission, in collaboration with the

Federal Railroad Administration and Caltrans, published a draft environmental study for the

Coachella Valley rail project in May. In a statement, the RCTC called the completion

of the high-level conceptual plan of the service and the assessment of how it could affect the

environment a "significant milestone" in advancing the project.

"This project has an extensive history," Cheryl Donahue, a spokesperson for the RCTC, said

in an interview this week. The commission first looked at a feasibility study involving Los

Angeles County, the Coachella Valley and Imperial County in December 1991, she said. It is a

milestone to have completed the environmental impact report and have an "actual

alignment" proposal for the rail, she added.

The Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass rail service would consist of a 144-mile corridor, set

to include stops in four counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside. The

potential sites for up to five new stations — in the Loma Linda and Redlands area; near

Beaumont, Banning and Cabazon; near Cathedral City, Thousand Palms, Rancho Mirage and

Palm Desert; and an endpoint in either Indio or Coachella — would be in addition to the

existing Palm Springs station. Service would include two round-trips per day.

To continue to advance the project to design, construction and service, the RCTC and project

partners must secure funding for the estimated $1 billion project. Additionally, they must

https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2021/06/17/coachella-valley-amtrak-rail-plan-environmental-review/7497576002/ 1/4
https://www 4

 

 

 

.desertsun.com/story/news/2021/06/17/coachella-valley-amtrak-rail-plan-environmental-review/7497576002/ 2/

7/13/2021 Coachella Valley Amtrak rail corridor proposal environmental study

next complete a study on the proposed station locations and any necessary infrastructure

improvements.

MORE: Plans derailed for April train to Coachella, Stagecoach music festivals

Under Biden, hopes for federal funds

During a Palm Springs City Council meeting last Thursday, Mayor Pro Tem Lisa Middleton

said there was a "long road ahead" in terms of obtaining federal funding. "There is no way

that here, locally, we could come up with the funds to build that third rail," she said, referring

to the third track that needs to be added to the Union Pacific corridor, between Colton and

Coachella, to make the proposed service possible.

Middleton represents the city on the RCTC and is a strong advocate of the project. She

added: "With the infrastructure program that the federal government is attempting to

undertake, the timing for trying to initiate a project such as this has probably never been

better."

Currently, there is limited Amtrak service from Los Angeles to Palm Springs. Depending on

availability, passengers may travel directly from Union Station to the Amtrak station on Palm

Springs Station Rd., or by transferring from the Union Station train to a bus in Fullerton,

which then arrives at the Palm Springs airport. There is also an Amtrak bus stop downtown

at 261 N. Indian Canyon Dr.

President Joe Biden is well-known for his love of passenger trains. In

May, Amtrak announced its plans to push for $75 billion in federal funding over 15 years for

the expansion of train use across the country. Among the routes Amtrak targeted for

expansion was service between Los Angeles and Phoenix.

Donahue said the Coachella Valley rail corridor would solely consist of Amtrak service.

Said Donahue: "Because of the change in administration, with President Biden's interest in

additional public transit, this does make RCTC optimistic about a potential to secure funding

for future phases for this project."

In the past, agreements with freight railroads have posed a big issue; however, if Congress is

involved, it holds authority to impose changes on them. Agreements with freight railroads

are also necessary to move the project along.
https://www 4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 .desertsun.com/story/news/2021/06/17/coachella-valley-amtrak-rail-plan-environmental-review/7497576002/ 3/

7/13/2021 Coachella Valley Amtrak rail corridor proposal environmental study

Saving 100,000+ car trips per year?

Benefits of the rail service emphasized by the RCTC and other proposing agencies include

creating an alternative to driving or riding the bus; serving residential and job centers along

the corridor; facilitating more access for tourists; and boosting economic development.

The RCTC also noted that it could reduce traffic on major highways like Interstate 10,

thereby improving air quality, especially for communities along the highway. Donahue said

studies found that for the route option that ends in the city of Coachella, a train could

potentially eliminate more than 107,000 vehicle trips per year.

"After 20 years, more than 178,000 vehicle trips per year could be eliminated," she added.

Following the announcement of draft environmental impact report, Palm Desert Mayor Pro

Tem and RCTC Chair Jan Harnik said, “I see this as a transformational project — it will truly

change how people travel between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley."

More: Summer vacation? Amtrak Rail Pass offers 10 trips for $299 with passes available

through June 22

More: Palm Springs Aerial Tramway to open 7 days a week

Southern California residents may review the draft environmental document on the

website https://rctc.org/CVRail and at libraries such as the Los Angeles Union

Station/Metro Library as well as in Fullerton, Riverside, Colton, Loma Linda, Beaumont,

Redlands, Banning, Palm Springs, Coachella and Indio.

The public may submit comments at at https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FRA-2021-

0048 until July 6 or during one of the two upcoming public hearings:

Public Hearing #1: Thursday, June 22 at 6 p.m.

Register via at Zoom at https://bit.ly/2U1j8Dp

Public Hearing #2: Saturday, June 26 at 9 a.m.

Register via Zoom at https://bit.ly/2S0UQc4

The content at each hearing will be the same and interpretation in Spanish will be

provided. Comments may also be submitted by U.S. mail:

 Federal Railroad Administration
 

 

 

7/13/2021 Coachella Valley Amtrak rail corridor proposal environmental study

Amanda Ciampolillo, Environmental Protection Specialist

 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE

 Washington, DC 20590

Support local news! Subscribe to The Desert Sun: $1 for 6 months.

Eliana Perez covers the eastern Coachella Valley. Reach her at eliana.perez@desertsun.com

or on Twitter @ElianaPress.

https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2021/06/17/coachella-valley-amtrak-rail-plan-environmental-review/7497576002/ 4/4









7/13/2021 Today’s Headlines – Streetsblog Los Angeles

OUR SITES STREETFILMS DONATE

Today’s Headlines

By Joe Linton May 28, 2021  COMMENT HERE

Metro Suspends 710 Freeway Widening, Stops Short Of Killing Project (LAT)

Metro More-or-Less Approves Fareless Pilot (LAT, NBC, LAist, The Source)

Sheriff Villanueva Says Deputy Gangs Don’t Exist, Are Also In Every Police Department

(KNOCK.LA)

Avocado Heights Has Unincorporated L.A. County’s First Protected Bike Lanes

(ActiveSGV Twitter)

Tomorrow Metrolink Launches Saturday Service To Ventura (SF Valley Biz Journal)

Union Station To Coachella Valley Rail In the Works (Urbanize)

South Bay Cities Might Do A Lot Of Sharrows (Biking in L.A.)

Seal Beach Seeks Millions In Offshore Oil Drilling Lawsuit (Press-Telegram)

Carnage: DTLA Hit-and-Run Driver Who Killed Cyclist Arrested (KTLA)

...Driver Strikes, Kills Woman In Long Beach (Press-Telegram)

...DUI Driver Kills Cyclist In Huntington Beach (Biking in L.A.)

...More People Walking Are Killed On L.A. Freeways (Eastsider)

L.A. Unhoused Camping Site Costs More Than $2,600 Per Tent, Per Month (NPR)

Council Approves $31M For Affordable Housing In Boyle Heights And West L.A.

(Urbanize)

Debunking myths about Measure HHH Housing For Unhoused (Urbanize)

Uber Reneges On Flexibility It Gave Drivers To Support Prop 22 (LAT)

Get National Headlines At Streetsblog USA, State Headlines At Streetsblog CA



https://la.streetsblog.org/2021/05/28/163954/ 1/3
Passenger rail service between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley is taking a step forward with release of the Draft Tier 1 Program Level

EIS/EIR for public comment, May 21-July 6.

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Service Draft Environmental Document

Available May 21-July 6 for Public Review, Comments

Passenger rail service between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley is taking a step forward with the release of the draft environmental

document this week for public review and comments.

The Riverside County Transportation Commission, in collaboration with the Federal Railroad Administration and Caltrans, will release the

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Draft Tier 1 Program-Level Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact

Report (EIS/EIR) on Friday, May 21 for the public to review and submit comments.

The proposed service would offer twice-daily roundtrips between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley. The 144-mile corridor would include

stops in four counties – Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside – with the potential for up to six stations east of Colton and the

service endpoint in either Indio or Coachella.

The agencies have completed the Draft Tier 1 Program Level EIS/EIR, a high-level conceptual plan of the service and how it may affect the

environment. Completing the EIS/EIR is a significant milestone and will bring this service another step closer to reality.

“Yay – a train! While passenger rail service is still many years away, completing the draft program level environmental document is a huge

milestone,” said RCTC Chair and Palm Desert Mayor Pro Tem Jan Harnik. “We look forward to the day that train passengers can fully

experience the attractions of our beautiful Coachella Valley. I see this as a transformational project – it will truly change how people travel

between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley,” she said.

The service would offer an alternative to driving or riding the bus, serve residential and job centers along the corridor, enhance access to

Coachella Valley tourism and boost economic development from the tourism industry. It also is designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled on I-10

and other major highways and improve air quality, especially in disadvantaged communities that align highways.

The next phase of work is a Tier 2 Project Level EIS/EIR, which would study needed infrastructure improvements and station locations. RCTC is

working with state and federal partners to secure funds for this next phase.

The estimated timeline for service to start could be up to 10 years after the Tier 2 EIS/EIR is completed. To advance the project to design,

construction, and service, RCTC and project partners must finalize the Tier 2 document, secure funding for the estimated $1 billion project, and

obtain commitments from the freight railroads.

Public participation is essential. Southern California residents are encouraged to review and comment on the draft environmental document from

May 21 to July 6 at rctc.org/CVRail and at libraries at Los Angeles Union Station/Metro Library, Fullerton, Riverside, Colton, Loma Linda,

Redlands, Beaumont, Banning, Palm Springs, Indio, and Coachella.Comments may be submitted online, via email, and during virtual public

hearings in June. Visit the webpage noted above for details.








7/13/2021 Train From Coachella Valley To Pass Area And LA: Public Hearings IPatch 

Amtrak will likely provide the intercity service on existing tracks shared with other freight and passenger rail 

operators, according to the RCTC. (RCTC) 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA - The public is being asked to weigh in on a proposed $1 

billion passenger rail service that would take riders from the Coachella Valley to Los 

Angeles, passing through the San Gorgonio Pass Area and other nearby areas. 

ADVERTISEMENT 

ADVERTISEMENT 

h tips:/ /pat ch . com/cal ifornia/1akeelsinore-wi I domar /s/h mx q o/lrai n-from-coach ell a-valley-to-pass-area-an d-1a-public-hearings?uIm_source=n earby-news. . . 2/8 
7/13/2021 Train From Coachella Valley To Pass Area And LA: Public Hearings IPatch 

Virtual public hearings are set for Tuesday, June 22, and Saturday, June 26, for 

residents, commuters, and other stakeholders who want to share their thoughts 

about the proposed Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service draft 

environmental studies. 

The Riverside County Transportation Commission, in partnership with Caltrans and 

the Federal Railroad Administration, is hosting the public hearings to provide an 

overview of the proposal. The hearings will also provide an opportunity for meeting 

participants to make comments on studies included in the draft Environmental 

Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIS). 

Find out what's happening in Lake Elsinore-Wildomar with free, 

real-time updates from Patch. I 

I 

L 

~ 

.. ... I I 

I ,' 

.., 

Let's go! 

Participants must use the Zoom links below at the scheduled dates and times. The 

content will be the same for both public hearings. For those unable to participate, a 

recording ofthe public hearing will be posted on the project webpage the week of 

June 28. The deadline to submit comments is July 6. 

• Public Hearing #1 Tuesday, June 22, 6 p.m. 

o https:§zoom.us//98860393291? 

pwd=VkJSUHRFaWRhUXhnM3BQRnBnb0Zqdz09 

• Public Hearing #2 Saturday, June 26, 9 a.m. 

o https:§zoom.us//99115218303? 

pwd=MHBFSnFIWS9ORGM0Z3pvNnF1VXN2UT09 

ADVERTISEMENT 

h tips:/ /pat ch . com/cal ifornia/1akeelsin ore-wi I domar /s/h mx q o/lrai n-from-coach ell a-valley-to-pass-area-an d-1a-public-hearings?uIm_sou rce=n earby-news. . . 3/8 
7/13/2021 Train From Coachella Valley To Pass Area And LA: Public Hearings IPatch 

ADVERTISEMENT 

• https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 

• Federal Railroad Administration Amanda Ciampolillo, Environmental Protection 

Specialist 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington, DC 20590 

The draft EIS/EIS is available for review at rctc.org/cvrail and at libraries at Los 

Angeles Union Station/Metro Library, Fullerton, Riverside, Colton, Loma Linda, 

Redlands, Beaumont, Banning, Palm Springs, Indio, and Coachella. 

The proposed service would provide two daily roundtrips between Los Angeles and 

the Coachella Valley, a 144-mile route. Service could begin in about 10 years after the 

current EIS/EIR is completed, if RCTC and project partners receive environmental 

approvals, obtain commitments from the freight railroads, and secure funding for 

the estimated $1 billion project. 

ADVERTISEMENT 

ADVERTISEMENT 

h tips:/ /pat ch . com/cal ifornia/1akeelsin ore-wi I domar /s/h mx q o/lrai n-from-coach ell a-valley-to-pass-area-an d-1a-public-hearings?uIm_sou rce=n earby-news. . . 4/8 
7/13/2021 Train From Coachella Valley To Pass Area And LA: Public Hearings IPatch 

"The service would offer an alternative to driving or riding the bus, serve residential 

and ob centers along the corridor, enhance access to Coachella Valley tourism and 

boost economic development from the tourism industry, reduce vehicle miles 

traveled, and improve air quality, especially in disadvantaged communities that align 

major highways:• according to the RCTC. 

Amtrak will likely provide the intercity service on existing tracks shared with other 

freight and passenger rail operators, according to the RCTC. 

Learn more about the proposed project here. 

Following the close ofthe public comment period on July 6, RCTC will respond to 

comments and prepare a Final EIS/EIR for Commission review and approval. 

v Thank (1) 0 Reply (15) ~ Share p 

ADVERTISEMENT 

ADVERTISEMENT 

h tips:/ /pat ch . com/cal ifornia/1akeelsin ore-wi I domar /s/h mx q o/lrai n-from-coach ell a-valley-to-pass-area-an d-1a-public-hearings?uIm_sou rce=nearby-news. . . 5/8 
7/13/2021 Proposed Rail Project Would Bring Trains from L.A. to Coachella Valley I Planetizen News 

Planetizen 

..• Q. -

-

Proposed Rail Project Would Bring Trains from L.A. to Coachella Valley 

Riverside County's transportation commission is moving forward with a proposal to bring passenger rail from Los Angeles 

to Indio. 

June 7, 2021, 10:00 AM PDT 

By Diana Ionescu }# @aworkoffiction 

~ 11 in O ~ <f' 

LJ 

-

~v 

SAN GORGC,NIO PASS 

1 

Pass Area 

la 

Riverside County Transportation Commission/ ProQosed Coachella Valley Rail Project 

A new rail project may be coming to the Coachella Valley, reP-orts Steven SharP- for Urbanize Los 

Angeles. "Earlier this month, the Riverside County Transportation Commission published a draft 

environmental study for the Coachella Valley: rail P-roject. which calls for running two daily roundtrip trains between Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles and either the City of Indio or the City 

of Coachella." 

"The first"-and recommended-"build option under study would serve the full 144 mile corridor 

between Los Angeles and the City of Coachella. Within the western section of the project area, 

trains would make use of existing infrastructure, including stations in the Cities of Fullerton and 

Riverside." 

In addition to being a thriving agricultural region, the Coachella Valley, which includes Palm Springs, 

plays host to a variety of festivals, conventions, and events that bring more than 3 million visitors to 

the area each year. Riverside County Transportation Commission Chair and Palm Desert Mayor Pro 

Tern Jan Harnik says "I see this as a transformational project - it will truly change how people travel 

between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley." If approved, the project "could start construction 

within 10 years of the completion of the environmental study" and is estimated to cost around $1 

billion. 

FULL STORY: Union Station - Coachella Valley rail P-roject moves forward 

Friday, June 4, 2021 in Urbanize Los Angeles 

COMMUNITY/ ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT/ POLITICS INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPORTATION 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT View More 

Expand Comments 

Related 

http s ://www. p I an etizen . com/n ews/20 21 /06/11 35 7 5-propose d-rai I-proj ect-wou I d-b ring-train s-Ia-coachelI a-val I ey 1/3 
Rail News Home  Passenger Rail

1/22/2021 Rail News: Passenger Rail

RCTC advances LA-to-Coachella

Valley rail proposal

170

Shares

Share Tweet Share Email Share

The draft environmental impact report for the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Corridor project proposes twicedaily service from Los Angeles to Indio or Coachella.

Photo – RCTC

advertisement
The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) earlier this week 

announced it is nearing completion of an environmental impact report and service 

development plan for a daily passenger-rail service between Los Angeles and the 

Coachella Valley in California. 

The draft environmental impact report/environmental impact statement proposes 

twice-daily service from Los Angeles via Fullerton, Colton, and the San Gorgonio Pass 

to Indio or Coachella. The 145-mile route would take less than three-and-a-half 

hours and offer an alternative to the often congested Route 91 and Interstate 10, RCTC 

officials said in a press release. 

The environmental analysis addresses questions and impacts of the project, but does 

not identify station locations or other specific infrastructure for the new service. More 

detailed studies would be conducted as part of a future Tier 2 environmental analysis, 

which would involve station selection and determining rail improvements required 

for the proposed service, officials said. 

RCTC, the California Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway 

Administration and other local partners are exploring funding to develop the Tier 2 

environmental analysis. 
Other technical modeling for the project also has been completed, including how the 

trains will travel through the higher elevations in the San Gorgonio Pass and maintain 

speeds for effective travel. 

Later this year, RCTC will host meetings to invite public comment on the draft studies. 

Following the public comment period, the RCTC and its project partners anticipate 

project approval by the end of 2021. If funding can be secured, work then could begin 

on the Tier 2 environmental studies, followed by detailed project design, and then 

construction. 
7/13/2021 Indio Infrastructure Project to Get $20 Million I Uken Report 

Posted by Cindy Uken I Jun 9, 2021 I News, Politics 

RUIZ SUCCESSFULLY INCLUDES MAJOR INDIO 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT IN SURFACE 

TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION BILL 

LEGISLATION WOULD PROVIDE $20 MILLION 

TO EXPAND, IMPROVE THE I-10/MONROE ST. 

INTERCHANGE 

WASHINGTON - Congressman Raul Ruiz, M.D., CA-36, on Wednesday 

announced that a major infrastructure project for the 36th District in 

Indio was selected for authorization and funding in the INVEST in America 

Act. 

This legislation includes $20 million specifically for the Monroe St. 

Interchange Project in Indio to reconstruct and widen the on- and offFOR 

ALL 

COVID-19 

STATUS UPDATES 

COV!D19.CA.GOV 

RECENT POSTS 

Eastern Coachella 

Valley Scores Budget 

Triumphs 

Neu rofeedback 

Program Receives 

$20,000 Grant 

Nurses Urge CDC to 

Reinstate Universal 

Masking 

Democrats: Keep 

Newsom, Stop the 

Recall 

Newsom Among 

Highest-Paid 

Governors in Nation 

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy 

with ii. 

B X Privacy policy 

htlps://ukenreport.com/indio-infrastructure-project-to-get-20-millionf?cn-reloaded=1 1/5 
7/13/2021 Indio Infrastructure Project to Get $20 Million I Uken Report 

"I am thrilled to see the much-needed Monroe 

Street Interchange Project included in the Invest 

in America Act," Ruiz said in a prepared 

statement. "Once passed, this bill will bring home 

$20 million to help our local infrastructure meet Online 

the demands ofour growing community and Savings 

help residents and tourists alike cut down on Account 

travel times while experiencing safer commutes. 

I'll continue to advocate to get this bill passed 

through Congress to benefit my constituents." 0.50~ 

The current interchange at the 1-10 / Monroe 

Street exit has insufficient shoulder and 

pedestrian sidewalks, and only contains single 

lanes for the freeway on- and off-ramps. In 

addition, the bridge structure requires a seismic 

retrofit to ensure lasting safety. 

The authorized project would reconstruct the 

overpass, establishing four additional lanes and 

providing safe access for pedestrians and 

cyclists. In addition, the on- and off-ramps would 

have multiples lanes to reduce congestion. Marcus: 

by Goldman Sachs" 

The INVEST in America Act helps achieve the 

Goktn,n SachS Dank UGA ~ ember FDIC goals of President Biden's American Jobs Plan by 

investing in American workers and helping 

communities ofall sizes improve their critical infrastructure. The 

legislation includes: 

• $343 billion for roads, bridges, and public safety measures; 

• $109 billion to help local transit invest in low emission vehicles and 

establish new program s to increase usership; 

• And $95 billion for passenger and freight rail including funding to help 

projects like the CV Rail project, to bring passenger rail service from Los 

Angeles to the Coachella Valley. 

"The City of Indio is projected togrow more than 50% over the next 

decade, thanks to development north of the freeway, additional shopping 

and dining opportunities, and the influx of more than a million visitors to 

our festivals annually," said Indio Mayor Elaine Holmes. "Once signed into 

law, this $20 million funding from the federal government will expand the 

Monroe Street overpass beyond the one-lane bridge we outgrew years 

ago, to meet its potential as a vital portal into our city and the 

surrounding communities." 

.......-.- •••--. ■- - I • I e ~j e I e - I • e - - I • 

RECE NT TWEETS 

deaths in 

#California since 

t he start of the 

#pandemic, 

accord ing to 

@CAPublicHealth. 

1 hour ago · Reply · 

Retweet • Favorite 

"# @AsmEGarciaAD56 

Announces Eastern 

Coachella Valley 

Budget Tri umph 

that Includes $30 

Million Oasis Mobile 

Home 

Park~ twitter.com/i/ 

web/status/1 ...Ok 

2 hours ago · Reply· 

Retweet • Favorite 

"# Neurofeedback 

Program 

,I Follow 

@Uken Report 

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy 

with ii. 

B X Privacy policy 

htlps://ukenreport.com/indio-infrastructure-project-to-get-20-millionf?cn-reloaded=1 2/5 

 

 

 

coachella7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project moves forward | Urbanize LA

REGIONAL (/LA/NEIGHBORHOOD/REGIONAL)

Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project

moves forward

Up to five new stations along a 144-mile corridor 

(mailto:?

subject=Someone

has

shared

an

article

from

Urbanize

with

you&body=I

just

read

this

on

Urbanize

and

thought

you'd

find

it

interesting:%0D%0DUnion

Station

-

Coachella

Valley

rail

(https://twitter.com/intent/tweet? (https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle? project

(http://www text=Union+Station+ mini=true&url=https%3A%2F%2Furbanize.city%2Fla%2Fpost%2Funion .facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php? moves - -

u=https%3A%2F%2Furbanize.city%2Fla%2Fpost%2Funion +Coachella+Valley+rail+project+moves+forward&url=https%3A%2F%2Furbanize.city%2Fla%2Fpost%2Funion stationforward%0Dhttps%3A%2F%2Furbanize.city%2Fla%2Fpost%2Funion - - - -

station- coachella station- station- -

coachella-coachella valley- -

valley- valley-rail- valleyrail- rail- project- railproject- project- project palm- -

palm-palm- palm- springs&title=Union+Station+-

springs) springs) +Coachella+V springs) alley+rail+project+moves+forward&source=LinkedIn)

MAY 28, 2021, 8:00AM STEVEN SHARP 61 COMMENTS

https://urbanize.city/la/post/union-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 1/20
 

 

Blue Gas Could Crush Lithium

A new tech breakthrough could mean the end of lithium and 100% U.S. energy independence

wallstreetwatchdogs.com OPEN

4

7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project moves forward | Urbanize LA

GALLERY

ADVERTISEMENT

Slowly but surely, a proposal to launch rail service between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley is moving 

forward. 

Earlier this month, the Riverside County Transportation Commission published a draft environmental study for 

the Coachella Valley rail project (http://www.rctc.org/CVRail), which calls for running two daily round-trip 

trains between Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles and either the City of Indio or the City of Coachella.  In 

either alternative, service would include one morning departure and one afternoon departure. 

“While passenger rail service is still many years away, completing the draft program level environmental 

document is a huge milestone,” said RCTC Chair and Palm Desert Mayor Pro Tem Jan Harnik in a prepared 

statement (https://www.rctc.org/cv-rail-milestone-2021/). “We look forward to the day that train passengers can 

fully experience the attractions of our beautiful Coachella Valley. I see this as a transformational project – it will 

truly change how people travel between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley,” she said. 

https://urbanize.city/la/post/union-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 2/20
~ 

,/' WESTERN SECTION 

600•foot Swdy A,eo l'rom either side of D i:he ra1road oenterhn~ 

- E1151;"il BNSF Ila lto•d 

'i' ex,sang s1anon$ I.It ll~•a 10< Proposed 

"" R.8' s.rvtoe 

' - ~ 

S.n DitM Rlalto :J -~ Fontana San-St ino 

~ 'tin ~--- BloomiOJ1l011 

we-11 Covtna SAN BERNARDINO Villioda 

COUNTY 

~~

l 

Comptoo 

Woodcrost i

c,,rs a ~G,_~ '\,, r COUN 

~ r.:ir=i/'== l:::n~,~ge , 

·--·-'t) ~.,,._______-11,.,__"_,'. _ ;; \ Cl _ ~ ,...·_v 

7/13/2021 union Station - Coachella Valley rail project m aves forward I urbanize LA 

,

(hltpc//Urbanize.city/la/sitel/Urbanize.city.la/ lea/stylee/ll.40w/public:l2021-

05/coachella"201a"20union"208tation'UOrail"20map"201.jpg7itok=_u3-NaOz) 

Los Angel es· Colton segment of the Coachell aValley rail project 

RCTC 

The rst build option under study would serve the full 144 mile corridorbetween Los Angeles and the City of 

Coachella. Within the western section of the project area, trains would make use of existing infrastructure. 

including stations in the Ci.ties of Fullerton and Riverside. 

https://urbanize.city/la/post/uni on-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 3/20 
EASTERN SECTION 

5 N•w Potenllal SllbOn Ar!tt (With 6

D st.bon,).1.500-lbolSIUdyArea flom 

either side of tM railroad oe111er11ne 

Non-SlltlOtl AtH$. 800-fl>ol Stud¥ At.. D rrom eilJ'ler side of tne railroad centart11e 

&1<11119 Union Patllic Radrood 

Jc,ahw, Tt"H 

llffertHOl Nation/II P>r1t 

Springs 

~ -Ml"'• 

-~ 

/ Ht!tt1~1. Va.Ile- v1-,ra 

w - CS) ~ SunClty 

c;,anyonUke 

! 

a 

1

1 

'( ~41-- .~ 

/ 

) 

' 

Perr~ San J•clntc.t 

~n Btman/ino 

NlitJona/ Fore>J 

l:)· 

/' 

P• S 

" Cathed OURnd Palms 

Agua C•II• le 

7/13/2021 union Station - Coachella Valley rail project m aves forward I urbanize LA 

\ -- (hltps://Urbanize.city/la/site8/Ul'banize.city.la/ lea/stylee/ll.40w/pu'blic/2021-

05/coachella"20la"20union'U08tation"20rail"20map"202.jpg7itok=Sb65vWj_) 

Colton to Indio alternatives 

RCTC 

East of the City ofColton in San Bemardmo County. the project callsfor upgrades to eldsting main line track, 

includmg: 

• the construction of up to ve new stations; 

https://urbanize.city/la/post/uni on-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 4/20 
7/13/2021 union Station - Coachella Valley rail project maves forward I urbanize LA 

• u1e l:IQWUQ.IJ. Ql lil uu.ru. Ull:ll.lJ. 11.ll.e U"l:IC&; 

• new crossovers and sidmgs; 

• a new railroadbridge across the Santa Ana River; and 

• improvementsto signals, drainage systems, andgrade separation structures. 

Potentialsitesfor the ve new stations would allbe locali in Riwrside County. Inaddition to an existing stop 

inthe City ofPalm Springs, newstations couldbe built: 

1. the Loma Lincla/RedJands area; 

2. nearthe communitiesof Beaumont, Banning, andCabazon; 

3. near cathedral City, Thousand.Palms, Agua caliente Casino, Rancho Mirage, andPalm Desert; and 

4. inthe City ofIndio; 

5. inthe City ofCoachella. 

-

r:, . ' ~IJlhl<lnd 

Bemardino 

n t Men~e 

»lands Yucaipa 

.Josttua Tree 

O.senH01 NDtlonill ,,,,,. 

Sp/Ing• 

San ili/,f~j,IENT 

Jacinto 

foa•I

,, \ = 

' 

el A 

,,,--

'' 

-~

w 

0 ~ \ __...._ 

(https;//urbanize.city/la/sitea/Ulbume.city lic/2021-

05/coachella"201a"20union'U08tation'UOI' lr.=mkRV7JoA) 

Under the second build alt!mative, the c ximately 140 miles, with the eastern 

https://urbanize.city/la/post/union-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 5/20 
7/13/2021 Union station - Coachella Valley rail project moves forward I Urbanize LA 

terminus to t>e 1ocatea m me city ot lil .improvements to me eastern comaor 

would remain largely the same, save f hella. 

RCTC is also studying a third build alternative which would run to Indio, but reduce the amount of main line 

track construction along the corridor. 

The environmental report identi es the rst option, with a terminus in Coachella, as the recommended preferred 

alternative. 

The project, which would cost roughly $1 billion to implement, could start construction within 10 years of the 

completion of the environmental study 

For more information, register for upcoming public meetings regarding the project. 

Thursday, June 22 at 6 p.m. 

Registerhere (https://zmm.us/j/98860393291?pwd=VkJSUHRFaWRhUXhnM3BQRnBnb0Zqdz09) 

Saturday, June 26 at 9 a.m. 

Register here (https://mom.us/j/99115218303?pwd=MHBFSnFTWS9ORGM0Z3pvNnFTVXN2UT09) 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GORGONIO PASS RAIL CORRIDOR (/LA/TAGS/COACHELLA-VALLEV-SAN-GORGONIO-PASS-RAIL-CORRIDOR) UNION STATION (/LA/TAGS/UNION-STATION) 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (/LA/TAGS/RIVERSIDE-COUNTY-TRANSPORTATION-COMMISSION) 

htlps://urbanize. city/la/post/uni on-station-coach ella-vall ey-rail-project-pa lm-s prin gs 6/20 
7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project moves forward | Urbanize LA

https://urbanize.city/la/post/union-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 7/20







 

 

7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project moves forward | Urbanize LA

REGIONAL (/LA/NEIGHBORHOOD/REGIONAL)

Union Station - Coachella Valley rail

project moves forward

Up to five new stations along a 144-mile corridor 

https://urbanize.city/la/post/union-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 1/27
 

coachella7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project moves forward | Urbanize LA

(mailto:?

subject=Someone

has

shared

an

article

from

Urbanize

with

you&body=I

just

read

this

on

Urbanize

and

thought

you'd

find

it

interesting:%0D%0DUnion

Station

-

Coachella

Valley

rail

(https://twitter.com/intent/tweet? (https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle? project

(http://www text=Union+Station+- mini=true&url=https%3A%2F%2Furbanize.city%2Fla%2Fpost%2Funion- .facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php? moves

u=https%3A%2F%2Furbanize.city%2Fla%2Fpost%2Funion- +Coachella+Valley+rail+project+moves+forward&url=https%3A%2F%2Furbanize.city%2Fla%2Fpost%2Funion- station-forward%0Dhttps%3A%2F%2Furbanize.city%2Fla%2Fpost%2Funionstation- coachella- station- stationcoachella-coachella- valleyvalley- valley-rail- valleyrail- rail- rail-projectproject- palm-project- projectpalm-palm- palm-springs&title=Union+Station+-

springs) springs) +Coachella+V springs) alley+rail+project+moves+forward&source=LinkedIn)

MAY 28, 2021, 8:00AM STEVEN SHARP 61 COMMENTS

https://urbanize.city/la/post/union-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 2/27
7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project moves forward | Urbanize LA

GALLERY 4

ADVERTISEMENT

Slowly but surely, a proposal to launch rail service between Los Angeles and the 

Coachella Valley is moving forward. 

Earlier this month, the Riverside County Transportation Commission published a 

draft environmental study for the Coachella Valley rail project 

(http://www.rctc.org/CVRail), which calls for running two daily round-trip trains 

between Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles and either the City of Indio or the 

City of Coachella.  In either alternative, service would include one morning 

departure and one afternoon departure. 

“While passenger rail service is still many years away, completing the draft 

program level environmental document is a huge milestone,” said RCTC Chair and 

Palm Desert Mayor Pro Tem Jan Harnik in a prepared statement 

(https://www.rctc.org/cv-rail-milestone-2021/). “We look forward to the day that 

https://urbanize.city/la/post/union-station-coachella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 3/27
WESTERN SECTION tr " 

600-foot Swdy lvH from either 5ide or 1h11 raltoad centerllnt' 

- E"M>"II BNSF Ail 1,o~d 

'i' Ex•song S1a!IOl1$ JJt IIUG ""PropoSt><I J ~ Ra• S.rviu

D 

r. 

' - Riallo In ontana San -8, rdino • Pitt 

ROl$tlt&O I C ,in==~~-:;:::=~~:~ • BIODffllll!j\0'1 C u===s:~~- ~..,b, '". 

1/on l/lonll'f~1Park W..•tCovi

·C va11n~• 

~ '='\\. ~,u.,ne ·,co ~ 

ra LOS ANG,al.ES R 

wt-In...- COUNTI 11 r/on 

Habt• 

!".'.) 8' r 

\ 

WoOden,st 

'

aI 

7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project maves forward I Urbanize LA 

train passengers can fully experience the attractions of our beautiful Coachella 

Valley. I see this as a transformational project - it will truly change how people 

travel between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley,• she said. 

Los Angeles - Colton segment of the Coachella Valley rail project 

RCTC 

The rst build option under study would serve the full 144 mile corridor between 

Los Angeles and the City of Coachella. Within the western section of the project 

area, trains would make use of existing infrastructure, including stations in the 

Cities of Fullerton and Riverside. 

https://urtJanize.city /la/post/union-station-coac hella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 4/27 
t

0 sN•w Po~noal Sioc,on Arns (with 6

D otatio115t, I.SOO-lool Study Area from 

ewr•Ide•• u~ '11 IN>ad ceott111ne 

) D NoM:ii.t,on Area., 800-loot Sl\KlyAJ.. 

f:om 11tntrlido of D'MI reiltoaCI centerline 

- Exlsling Union P.>01&c Rallr<>ad 

r.a.. Exl61JOQ Sl!!tlcns U!IT!7J!d ro1 Pmposaa 

,,::, RIHS.mc. 

7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project maves forward I Urbanize LA 

Colton to Indio alternatives 

RCTC 

East of the City of Colton in San Bernardino County, the project calls for upgrades to 

existing main line track, including: 

• the construction of up to ve new stations; 

• the addition of a third main line track; 

• new crossovers and sidings; 

• a new railroad bridge across the Santa Ana River; and 

• improvements to signals, drainage systems, and grade separation structures. 

https://urtJanize.city /la/post/union-station-coac hella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 5/27 
7/13/2021 Union Station - Coachella Valley rail project maves forward I Urbanize LA 

Potential sites for the ve new stations would all be located in Riverside County. In 

addition to an existing stop in the City of Palm Springs, new stations could be built: 

1. the Loma Linda/Redlands area; 

2. near the communities of Beaumont, Banning, and Cabazon; 

3. near Cathedral City, Thousand Palms, Agua Caliente Casino, Rancho Mirage, and 

Palm Desert; and 

4. in the City of Indio; 

5. in the City ofCoachella. 

ml 

lno ;1JP"'2 

~,. ,..,.,.r 

"" land$ 

~ 

Yuc1ip1 

\, ssn SM1111fllno 

., Nat/01111,I l'oresl 

~. 

~~-

t EASTERN SECTION 

~ 4 New PotQnt1ill Stauon Ateas (Wnl't S

D •liltjon•) I 500-fool Srudy Ar.• from 

etthe.r~ af tl"if rallraad oen~rhl'l(I 1D Non-Stauon AreH' 800.foot Study Area 

&"' d ii'om eltner Sl~ or tne rairoao centerl n• 

,./ef" - Ekliitlng Un.on Pacl!c Ra,iroad 

~ EX1Sbng Stan°"" Utjized l'or Proposed

""' Rao Service 

> 

Josm,• Tteo 

Nation•/ Pam 

-- - -1 . ' - ~ 

J'-

,J , 0 

(httpst/u:rbanize.city/la/sites/Urbanize.city.la/ les/styles/1140w/public/2021-

05/coachella%20la%20union%20station%20rail%20map%203.jpg?itok=mkRV7JoA) 

Colton - Coachella segment 

RCTC 

Under the secondbuild alternative. the corridor would be limited to annroximatelv 

https://urtJanize.city /la/post/union-station-coac hella-valley-rail-project-palm-springs 6/27 
7/13/2021 Union station - Coachella Valley rail project moves forward I Urbanize LA 

., 

140 miles, with the eastern terminus to be located in the City of Indio. Under this 

option, the proposed improvements to the eastern corridor would remain largely the 

same, save for the absence of a terminus in Coachella. 

RCTC is also studying a third build alternative which would run to Indio, but reduce 

the amount of main line track construction along the corridor. 

The environmental report identi es the rst option, with a terminus in Coachella, as 

the recommended preferred alternative. 

The project, which would cost roughly $1 billion to implement, could start 

construction within 10 years of the completion of the ellironmental study. 

For more information, register for upcoming public meetings regarding the project. 

ADVERTISEMENT 

Thursday, June 22 at 6 p.m. 

Registerhere (https://zoom.us/j/98860393291? 

pwd=VkJSUHRFaWRhUXhnM3BQRnBnb0Zqdz09) 

Saturday, June 26 at 9 a.m. 

Register here (https://zoom.us/j/99115218303? 

pwd=MHBFSnFTWS9ORGM0Z3pvNnFTVXN2UT09) 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GORGONIO PASS RAIL CORRIDOR (/LA/TAGS/COACHELLA-VALLEY-SAN-GORGONIO-PASS-RAIL-CORRIDOR) 

UNION STATION (/LA/TAGS/UNION-STATION) 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (/LA/TAGS/ RIVERSIDE-COUNTY-TRANSPORTATION-COMMISSION) 

htlps://urbanize. city/la/post/uni on-station-coach ella-vall ey-rail-project-pa lm-s prin gs 7/27 
Appendix C 

Project Website 



Appendix D 

Newspaper Advertisements 

2 El Informador del Valle - Jueves 20 de Mayo de 2021 E-mail: informador.newspaper@gmail.com
de 220 millones de dólares del gobernador Newsom para el Salton Sea 

Sacramento, CA. - El 

asambleísta Eduardo 

García (D-Coachella), presidente del Comité de la Asamblea sobre 

Agua, Parques y Vida Silvestre, aplaude la propuesta 

de infraestructura de agua, 

respuesta a la sequía y resiliencia climática del gobernador Gavin Newsom 

de $5.1 mil millones, que

incluye $220 millones para 

el Mar de Salton. Después 

de los persistentes esfuerzos de defensa de García, la 

financiación recientemente 

anunciada de Salton Sea 

maximizaría los resultados 

del hábitat y proporcionaría 

un alivio económico inmediato a la comunidad.

“La nueva propuesta de 

infraestructura de agua del 

Gobernador trae grandes

noticias y potencialmente

grandes dólares para Salton 

Sea. Trabajando en coordinación activa con el Gobernador y su administración, 

estamos agradecidos de 

contar con el apoyo del Gobernador para incrementar 

los esfuerzos de mitigación 

del Salton Sea y emocionados por esta oportunidad de 

aprovechar nuestro progreso con una inversión estatal 

adicional de $220 millones”, dijo el Asambleísta 

Eduardo García.

“Estos $220 millones recientemente propuestos

reforzarían los $200 millones que obtuvimos previamente en la Proposición 68 

y se alinearían con nuestro 

impulso legislativo actual 

para desbloquear $240 millones para Salton Sea junto con otras asignaciones

necesarias para inversiones 

en infraestructura de agua 

y resiliencia climática comunitaria. El tiempo corre 

y debemos concentrar toda 

nuestra energía para traer 

a casa estos fondos, cumplir con nuestros puntos de 

referencia de mitigación 

y mejorar las condiciones 

urgentes de salud pública,

ecológicas y económicas 

de nuestra región”, dijo el 

asambleísta Eduardo García.

La semana pasada, el 

asambleísta Eduardo García convocó una audiencia 

informativa especial del 

Comité de Agua, Parques 

y Vida Silvestre sobre la 

preparación para la sequía 

en California, destacando 

la necesidad de inversiones adicionales en resiliencia climática. Este año, el 

asambleísta Eduardo García 

presentó AB 1500, un bono 

de resiliencia climática que 

incluye $240 millones para 

Salton Sea y $15 millones 

para New River. Esta iniciativa va de la mano para

lograr la infraestructura de 

agua del gobernador Newsom y los objetivos de resiliencia climática para California.

Las inversiones propuestas recientemente para 

Salton Sea se basarían en 

los $200 millones que el 

asambleísta Eduardo García aseguró previamente 

para Salton Sea y New 

River a través de la Proposición 68. Desde la histórica inversión de García de 

$200 millones, la Agencia 

de Recursos Naturales de 

California pudo iniciar la 

construcción del Species 

Proyecto Conservation 

Habitat (SCH) en enero 

de 2021. Como parte del 

Plan de Manejo del Salton 

Sea, este proyecto crearía 

aproximadamente 3,000 

puestos de trabajo y marca 

el primer proyecto a gran

escala del estado para crear 

hábitat y reducir el lecho 

del lago expuesto alrededor del mar. El asambleísta 

Eduardo García y el senador Ben Hueso también 

apoyaron la legislación para acelerar la entrega del proyecto.

El asambleísta Eduardo García aplaude la propuesta

3
4

 

 

Ella está de vuelta 

Regresa la hermana pequeña maifest de oktoberfest 

Los boletos de Big Bear Lake Maifest están a la venta por tres fechas en mayo

IG BEAR LAKE, 

California / 13 de 

mayo de 2021 -

¡Big Bear Lake Maifest está 

de vuelta! El evento anual 

derivado del Oktoberfest de 

Big Bear Lake comienza el 

22 de mayo con una banda 

en vivo, concursos tradicionales, auténtica comida alemana y, por supuesto, cerveza alemana helada. Big

Bear Lake Maifest regresa

la semana siguiente para el 

B fin de semana del Día de 

los Caídos, el sábado 29 de 

mayo y el domingo 30 de 

mayo, para momentos más 

festivos y buenos.

El evento anual Big Bear 

Lake Maifest es conocido 

como la hermana pequeña 

de Big Bear Lake Oktoberfest. Es una versión reducida del Oktoberfest, pero 

ofrece el mismo ambiente 

de juerga alegre. Los organizadores de Big Bear 

Lake Oktoberfest concibieron esta novedosa idea 

cuando se enteraron de las 

numerosas celebraciones 

que ocurren cada primavera en toda Alemania llamadas Maifest. Estas fiestas 

tradicionales alemanas se 

remontan al siglo XVIII, 

cuando los aldeanos y los 

habitantes del pueblo celebraban el final del invierno 

y la llegada de la primavera. Es un ajuste natural para 

Big Bear, que recientemente se descongeló su abrigo

de invierno y ahora da la 

bienvenida a la primavera 

con los brazos abiertos. Si 

bien Big Bear Lake Maifest 

está en una escala mucho 

más pequeña que su hermana mayor Oktoberfest, hay 

una cosa segura: ¡Maifest

tiene un gran impacto!

De hecho, Maifest tiene 

su propio ponche llamado Maibowle (un ponche

estilo champán). También 

sirve auténticas cervezas 

alemanas, que incluyen

las tradicionales cervezas 

Springfest llamadas Maibock. Otra costumbre central es el árbol de mayo

festivo conocido como 

Maibaum. Este icónico 

centro de mesa viene adornado con cintas de colores 

que crean excelentes oportunidades para tomar fotografías. Además, Big Bear 

Lake Maifest agrega los 

favoritos de Oktoberfest 

a la mezcla, que incluyen

bratwursts calientes recién 

salidos de la parrilla, chucrut casero, pretzels frescos, strudel de manzana 

con salsa tibia de vainilla, 

una banda en vivo, concursos de aserrado de troncos, 

competencias de celebración de stein y actividades 

para niños. Se anima a los 

CUANDO VEAS ESTA ALERTA, 

ES HORA DE TOMAR ACCIÓN. 

Para crear conciencia y promover la conservación 

voluntaria de energía este verano, el Distrito de 

Irrigación de Imperial ha creado nuevas notifcaciones 

de Alerta de Conservación. 

Si se emite una notifcación de Alerta de 

Conservación, los clientes serán notifcados a través 

de las redes sociales, el sitio web, la aplicación 

móvil, correo electrónico, mensajes telefónicos y las 

noticias locales. 

A través de la conservación de energía, todos podemos 

ayudar a mantener un servicio eléctrico confable para 

todos y evitar cortes rotativos de energía. 

Para más información visite 

iid.com/ConserveAlert. IID

Un siglo de servicio. 

la montaña. Es un evento, 

aunque llueva o haga sol, 

y los organizadores tienen 

un plan B implementado 

para trasladar las festividades al interior en caso de 

que la Madre Naturaleza 

arroje una bola curva. Big

Bear Lake Maifest está 

completamente preparado 

para presentar un ambiente 

asistentes a vestirse con 

pantalones de cuero o falda 

acampanada para realzar el 

espíritu del evento. ¡Aquellos que vengan vestidos 

con el atuendo tradicional 

alemán recibirán un regalo

de Warsteiner!

El Oktoberfest se llevará a cabo al aire libre bajo 

los majestuosos pinos de 

seguro y saludable siguiendo todas las pautas necesarias de los 

CDC.

Big Bear Lake Maifest es el sábado 22 de 

mayo, sábado 29 de 

mayo y domingo 30 de 

mayo (fin de semana 

del Día de los Caídos), 

a partir de la 1 p.m. a 

las 10 p.m. cada día. 

Las festividades de fin 

de semana se llevan a 

cabo en el Centro de 

Convenciones de Big

Bear Lake; hogar de 

Big Bear Lake Oktoberfest, ubicado en 

42900 Big Bear Blvd. 

La entrada cuesta $10 

para adultos, $9 para 

personas mayores

(62+) y $5 para niños 

(de 3 a 12 años). Los 

asientos preferenciales están disponibles 

por $18, que incluyen

asientos reservados y

servicio de cócteles. 

Para precomprar boletos en línea o para obtener información general, inicie sesión en 

BigBearEvents.com,

Facebook o llame al 

909-585-3000.
El consejo consultivo de la juventud de la ciudad de

indio está aceptando nuevos solicitantes

ndio, CA.- Seis miembros del consejo compuesto exclusivamente 

por miembros del sexo femenino se gradúan ahora

Es hora de que la próxima 

generación de miembros 

del Consejo Consultivo de 

la Juventud de la Ciudad de 

Indio dé un paso adelante y 

lidere ahora que se acerca el final del año escolar. 

Las solicitudes para formar 

parte del Consejo Consultivo de la Juventud durante 

el año escolar 2021-2022 

están disponibles ahora en 

línea y se deben entregar 

para el miércoles 30 de junio de 2021.

Durante el año escolar 

2020-2021, y solo por segunda vez en la historia, el 

Consejo Consultivo de la 

Juventud fue representado 

por un consejo de liderazgo 

compuesto exclusivamente 

por miembros del sexo femenino, que consiste en 

14 miembros de los grados 

I nueve a doce de Indio High 

School, Shadow Hills High 

School y Xavier College 

Prep.

A pesar de que el año escolar se vio muy diferente 

debido a la pandemia de 

COVID-19, el Consejo 

Consultivo de la Juventud 

siguió liderando realizando sus reuniones virtualmente por Zoom. También se mantuvo activo 

en la comunidad creando 

videos en las redes sociales tanto para el Censo de 

2020 como para la campaña “Get Out to Vote”. El 

Consejo Consultivo de la 

Juventud utilizó su financiamiento para armar 120 

kits de higiene para ayudar 

a quienes lo necesitaban 

debido a la pandemia. Los 

kits incluían un cepillo de 

dientes, crema dental, desodorante, protector labial, 

desinfectante de manos y 

una mascarilla, y fueron 

entregados a ABC Recovery Center y a Coachella 

Valley Rescue Mission. El 

Consejo Consultivo de la 

Juventud utilizó las redes 

sociales para agradecer 

a los trabajadores de primera línea, tales como las 

enfermeras de JFK Memorial Hospital, y promover a 

las empresas locales, tales 

como Mario’s Italian Café 

y Tacos Gonzalez, también 

como respuesta a la pandemia.

Seis miembros del Consejo Consultivo de la Juventud se graduarán como 

parte de la clase de 2021, y 

continuarán su educación 

y servicio comunitario 

en California. La Ciudad 

de Indio felicita a Denise 

Campos-Lagunas, Katherine Escalante, Edna Mora, 

Kindra Medel, Jaqueline 

Orozco y Trinity Hernández por su dedicación al 

Consejo Consultivo de la 

Juventud y a esta comunidad.

82015 Highway 111 Indio, CA 92201 El Informador del Valle - Jueves 20 de Mayo de 2021 5
Condado, el distrito de recreación del desierto

aprueban el plan del parque 

VALLE DE 

COACHELLA

- La Junta de Supervisores del Condado de 

Riverside aprobó el plan

de parques a largo plazo

del Distrito de Recreación 

del Desierto, que guiará

los servicios de parques y

recreación en el Valle de 

Coachella y los esfuerzos 

de financiamiento para futuros parques en el este del 

Valle de Coachella.

El plan del parque se desarrolló después de escuchar a los miembros de la 

comunidad. El plan actualizado sirve como base para 

la recaudación de las tarifas 

de los parques y las dedicaciones de tierras en virtud 

de la Ley Quimby.

El Distrito de Recreación 

del Desierto (DRD), con un 

importante apoyo del condado, construyó el Parque

Comunitario North Shore 

de cinco acres en 2018. El 

condado de Riverside y el 

DRD están trabajando en 

y recreación junto al Boys 

and Girls Club en la comunidad de Mecca.

“Es emocionante ver el 

progreso en el desarrollo 

de parques para los residentes que han esperado

por mucho tiempo los parques en sus comunidades”, 

dijo el Supervisor V. Manuel Pérez. “Tenemos una 

sólida asociación con el 

Desert Recreation District 

para brindar programas, actividades y recursos recreativos de alta calidad que

beneficien a los residentes 

del Valle de Coachella. Me 

alegra que sigamos asociándonos y obteniendo los 

fondos para construir más 

parques en el este del Vacoordinación para financiar 

parques en Oasis y Thermal, dos comunidades que 

actualmente carecen de 

parques. El condado también está utilizando una 

subvención de $5.8 millones del Estado de California para el Parque Deportivo Regional de Mecca, que 

traerá más espacios verdes 

lle de Coachella y en todas 

nuestras comunidades”.

DRD está actualmente en 

construcción en la fase uno 

del Parque Comunitario 

Oasis, que se espera que

abra este verano. El distrito también está planificando el Parque Comunitario 

Thermal, en un terreno que 

el condado de Riverside 

transfirió al distrito.

“El Distrito de Recreación del Desierto agradece 

a la Junta de Supervisores 

y al personal del condado 

por su continuo apoyo y

asociación para brindar la 

entrega de servicios más 

eficiente y efectiva a nuestros residentes”, dijo el 

Gerente General de DRD, 

Kevin Kalman. “Nuestra 

combinación de recursos 

y acuerdos de cooperación 

han asegurado que no solo 

los servicios permanezcan

disponibles para nuestros 

residentes durante tiempos 

económicos difíciles, sino 

que ha creado la capacidad 

de expandir los servicios y 

abordar áreas que tradicionalmente han estado desatendidas. Este plan proporciona una hoja de ruta para 

la prestación de servicios 

equitativa basada en las 

necesidades expresadas por 

las comunidades a las que

servimos”.

El plan del parque aprobado el martes es la primera 

actualización del plan del 

parque del DRD desde 

2013. El proceso para la actualización integral comenzó en 2018 con comentarios 

de las partes interesadas, 

una encuesta ciudadana y 

un inventario de parques y 

activos recreativos. Medir 

y responder a las necesidades de los residentes y

evaluar las condiciones actuales y futuras a través del 

proceso de planificación 

a largo plazo permite que

DRD continúe brindando 

servicios recreativos de 

alta calidad a todos los habitantes del valle.

6
CSUSB Palm Desert Campus otorga tres

becas completas

PALM DESERT, salientes que asisten a las bresalientes de sus respecCalif. - Tres estu- escuelas secundarias en el tivas escuelas secundarias diantes de primer Valle de Coachella com- que se convertirán en los 

año que asistan al campus pitan por una beca acadé- futuros líderes del Valle de 

Palm Desert de Cal State mica para asistir al campus Coachella del mañana”.

San Bernardino este oto- de CSUSB Palm Desert. Los becados se seleccioño recibirán cada uno una Fue creado para que los nan sobre la base de su 

Beca de Legado Universi- estudiantes del Valle de rendimiento académico, 

tario que cubrirá su matrí- Coachella se dieran cuenta liderazgo y servicio a la cocula y cuotas completas, de cuán accesible es una munidad.

netas de ayuda financiera, educación universitaria, El programa fue establecidurante cuatro años, lo que gracias al generoso apoyo do para estudiantes locales 

los llevará a un grado de de los miembros de la co- meritorios que se graduabachillerato. munidad. ron de escuelas secundarias 

Los destinatarios son: “El campus de Palm De- del Distrito Escolar UnifiOscar Díaz Soto, prepara- sert creó la beca University cado Coachella Valley, el 

toria de Coachella; Legacy Scholarship para Distrito Escolar Unificado 

Madison Eves, preparato- atraer a estudiantes que Desert Sands y el Distrito 

ria Rancho Mirage; y se gradúan de las escuelas Escolar Unificado Palm 

Jason Davalos, preparato- secundarias del Valle de Springs. Además, los esturia Palm Desert. Coachella para que asistan diantes que se gradúan de 

Estos tres nuevos benefi- a Cal State University, San escuelas privadas y en líciarios de becas se unen a Bernardino Palm Desert nea acreditadas en el Valle 

otros 15 becados de lega- Campus y permanezcan en de Coachella también son El campus de CSUSB pública de cuatro años del Desert Campus, comunído universitario de los tres el valle para retribuir a la elegibles para el programa Palm Desert ofrece títulos Valle de Coachella y juega quese con Mike Singer en 

años anteriores. comunidad después de la de becas. de licenciatura y maestría, un papel vital en la educa- la Oficina de ComunicaLa beca University Lega- graduación”, dijo Al Jones, Para obtener más infor- un doctorado en liderazgo ción y capacitación de la ción Estratégica en msincy ofrece una oportunidad Miembro del comité de be- mación sobre la beca Uni- educativo y credenciales y creciente población de la ger@csusb.edu o (760) 

para que los estudiantes cas de University Legacy. versity Legacy, visite la certificados de enseñanza. región. 341-2883, ext. 78107, o vide último año de secunda- “Los tres ganadores de este página web de la beca Uni- Con más de 1,600 estu- Para obtener más infor- site el sitio web de PDC en 

ria que se gradúen sobre- año son representantes so- versity Legacy. diantes, es la universidad mación sobre CSUSB Palm www.csusb.edu/pdc.

De izquierda a derecha: Oscar Diaz Soto, Madison Eves y Jason Davalos.

7
8

DA Hestrin se une a 40 

otros Fiscales de Distrito 

Elegidos que desafían la

liberación temprana de

76,000 presos estatales 

RIVERSIDE - El 

fiscal de distrito 

del condado de 

Riverside, Mike Hestrin, 

anunció que él y 40 fiscales 

electos del Departamento

de Correcciones y Rehabilitación (CDCR) solicitando la derogación de las 

regulaciones temporales

de emergencia que otorgan 

créditos adicionales a más 

de 76,000 reclusos de prisiones estatales. 

Las regulaciones se aprobaron bajo un reclamo de 

emergencia y se hicieron 

públicas por primera vez 

el 30 de abril de 2021. Estas regulaciones resultarían 

en la liberación anticipada

de algunos de los criminales más violentos de California. “La liberación de 

delincuentes peligrosos y

violentos en nuestras comunidades al reducir sus 

sentencias hasta en un 50 

por ciento pone al público 

en peligro”, dijo DA Hestrin. “Esta petición le pide 

al CDCR que derogue estas 

regulaciones y reconsidere 

su enfoque. 

Específicamente, las víctimas y sus familias merecen ser escuchadas sobre 

cómo estas regulaciones

podrían afectarlas a ellas 

y a la seguridad pública en 

general”. Al adoptar estas 

regulaciones y reclamar 

una emergencia, el secretario del CDCR declaró que 

estas regulaciones eran necesarias para cumplir con 

“la dirección delineada en 

el Resumen del Presupuesto del Gobernador” presentado hace un año el 14 de 

mayo de 2020. Al invocar 

una emergencia, el esquema regulatorio tradicional 

y se pasó por alto el período transparente de comentarios públicos.

El director de la 

Preparatoria de Indio

recibe un premio nacional por el

trabajo de base con los estudiantes

durante la pandemia 

I

ndio, CA.- El director 

de Indio High School, 

Derrick Lawson, fue 

nombrado Campeón de 

Defensa del Año 2021 por 

la Asociación Nacional de 

Directores de Escuelas Secundarias (NASSP) por su 

trabajo para mantener a los 

estudiantes conectados a la 

escuela durante la pandemia de COVID-19.

La asociación está formada por directores de 

escuelas intermedias y

secundarias y otros líderes 

escolares en los Estados 

Unidos. Según su sitio 

web, el premio “reconoce 

a una persona que ha trabajado para elevar la voz y 

la influencia de los líderes 

escolares en las políticas y 

el discurso público federal, estatal y local”.

Al explicar por qué eligió a Lawson, el grupo

citó su “destacada defensa 

de las bases”.

Señaló que las poblaciones vulnerables de Indio 

High School han luchado 

de manera desproporcionada durante la pandemia 

de COVID-19, con la mitad de los estudiantes viviendo con familiares que

estaban enfermos, un tercio 

sin vivienda estable y un 

cuarto comenzando a trabajar a tiempo completo o 

al cuidado de sus hermanos 

menores mientras en casa. 

Esto probablemente contribuyó a una caída significativa de la asistencia en Indio High School al 70%, en 

comparación con el 94%, 

cuando llegó la pandemia.

Pero durante el último 

año, Lawson y el subdirector Rich Pimentel se encargaron de intentar comunicarse con los estudiantes 

que habían dejado de asistir a clases para restablecer 

una conexión y asegurarse 

de que estuvieran bien, en 

persona.
¿Puede la vacuna de la

gripe reducir el riesgo de

contagio de covid­19? Un

estudio sugiere que sí 

Desde septiembre,

las autoridades de 

salud pública han 

insistido en la importancia 

de que las personas se vacunen contra la gripe para 

evitar que otro virus respiratorio, altamente contagioso, complique aun más la 

pandemia del coronavirus 

en su temida ‘tercera ola’. 

Ahora, un estudio preliminar ofrece otro motivo más 

para hacerlo: es posible que 

la vacuna contra la gripe

ayude a evitar el contagio

del covid-19.

La investigación realizada 

en el Centro Médico Universitario Radboud de los 

Países Bajos —y que debe 

ser sometida al escrutinio 

científico para ser publicada— analizó la base de 

datos de los trabajadores

de salud de ese hospital.

Lo hizo para determinar si 

los empleados que se vacunaron contra la influenza 

durante la temporada 2019-

2020 eran más o menos 

propensos a enfermarse de 

covid-19 para junio. Encontraron que aquellos que 

recibieron la vacuna fueron 

39% menos proclives a dar 

positivo al covid-19.

Para demostrar cómo es 

que la vacuna contra la 

gripe podría prevenir los 

contagios del coronavirus, 

los científicos holandeses 

condujeron un experimento adicional. Extrajeron 

sangre de personas sanas, 

expusieron algunas de esas 

muestras a la vacuna cuadrivalente de la gripe y las 

dejaron crecer por seis días. 

Luego, las expusieron al 

SARS-CoV-2.

Al cabo de un día de haber 

sido expuestas al nuevo coronavirus, aquellas que recibieron la vacuna contra la 

influenza produjeron más 

citoquinas (moléculas del 

sistema inmune que combaten los virus) que aquellas que no la recibieron. 

Producidas en exceso en 

una fase extendida del covid-19, las citoquinas pueden perjudicar al cuerpo,

pero durante la fase inicial 

de una infección ayudan al 

organismo a defenderse de 

los patógenos.

De este modo, los autores 

concluyen que la vacuna 

contra la gripe puede “producir respuestas ‘entrenadas’ del sistema inmune 

contra el SARS-CoV-2, lo 

que puede resultar en una 

protección relativa contra 

el covid-19”.

Estos hallazgos se corresponden con los de otros 

estudios que sí han sido divulgados en publicaciones

científicas. No obstante, 

hay que interpretar los resultados con un importante

matiz: esta es una investigación preliminar, meramente observacional, que 

no demuestra causalidad y 

que debe ser comprobada 

con experimentos más rigurosos, tal y como indica 

Scientific American, al reseñar esta noticia.

“Es un estudio intrigante, 

pero no provee evidencia 

definitiva”, dice a ese medio Elllen Foxman, inmunobióloga de Yale. Otra 

explicación sobre las variantes de contagios entre 

ambos grupos (los vacunados contra la gripe y los no 

vacunados) podría ser que 

los trabajadores médicos 

que se vacunaron contra la 

gripe tuvieron más cuidado 

en seguir las prácticas de 

los CDC, por ejemplo.

Hay antecedentes

Ya otros estudios han sugerido una asociación entre 

la vacuna contra la gripe 

y un menor riesgo de contraer covid-19. Un paper

publicado en Vaccines en 

septiembre señaló que los 

índices de infecciones de 

covid-19 fueron menores 

en las regiones de Italia 

con mayores índices de vacunación contra la gripe y 

en mayores de 65 años.

Investigadores de la Clínica de Mayo también encontraron que los adultos 

vacunados contra la gripe, 

polio, lechina, rubeola, 

hepatitis, neumococo o influenza tipo B en los últimos cinco años eran menos 

proclives a dar positivo al 

covid-19 que quienes no 

habían sido vacunados con 

ninguna de ellas.

Aunque parezca extraño 

que una vacuna contra una 

enfermedad pueda ofrecer 

protección ante otras, se 

ha comprobado que puede ocurrir ya que algunas 

vacunas ‘entrenan’ al sistema inmune y mejoran su 

habilidad para defenderse 

frente a una variedad de 

infecciones, bacterias y parásitos.

De hecho, actualmente 

hay en curso varios ensayos clínicos en el mundo 

para comprobar si la vacuna de la tuberculosis 

(BCG) podría prevenir o 

mitigar los contagios del 

covid-19. Uno de los equipos que lo está investigando es el mismo grupo de 

científicos holandeses que

publicó sus hallazgos sobre 

la vacuna de la gripe.

El vaping y los cigarrillos

incrementan entre los 

jóvenes las probabilidades de infectarse

por coronavirus, según estudio 

os adolescentes y

adultos jóvenes que 

fuman cigarrillos

convencionales y vapean

tienen entre 5 y 7 veces más 

probabilidades de infectarse con el virus que causa 

la covid-19 que aquellos 

que no lo hacen, según una 

nueva investigación de la 

Escuela de Medicina de la 

Universidad de Stanford.

El sondeo observó los hábitos de 4,350 jóvenes de 

entre 13 y 24 años y concluyó que aquellos que declararon haber fumado cigarrillos y vapeado durante 

el mes anterior a su elabo- el coronavirus.

ración tenían mayor riesgo Además, los jóvenes que de contraer covid-19, con usaron cigarrillos conven- un 6% de ellos arrojando cionales y electrónicos en positivo por coronavirus los 30 días anteriores a la 

frente al 1% de los no fu- elaboración del estudio temadores. nían 5 veces más probabili- “Si usas cigarros conven- dades de mostrar síntomas 

cionales y electrónicos, de covid-19.

L

tienes muchas más posibilidades de ser diagnosticado 

con covid-19”, señaló la 

autora principal del estudio, Bonnie Halpern-Flerher, publicado el lunes en 

el Journal of Adolescent 

Health.

Sigue aquí lo último sobre 

9
10

¿Puede la burbuja estadounidense mantenerse

intacta mientras el mundo se enfrenta a COVID? 

Estados Unidos.-

Los Estados Unidos están experimentando una caída en las 

nuevas tasas de infección 

y muerte por covid-19 

mientras avanza el proceso de vacunación en la 

población, pero aun en 

este escenario puede el 

país mantener esta burbuja 

protectora mientras que el 

resto del mundo sigue luchando contra la pandemia 

e intentando vacunar a su 

población.

En los últimos días en la 

CDC han actualizado sus 

directivas respecto al uso 

de mascarillas y las autoridades han empezado a vacunar a niños a partir de 12 

años, pero en este contexto 

no parece que pronto la nación logre alcanzar la llamada inmunidad de rebaño, hay quienes defienden 

la necesidad de vacunar 

primero a los más vulnerables en aquellos países con 

déficit de vacunas.

Algunos expertos como 

el Dr. Marc Lipsitch, profesor de epidemiología y

director del Centro de Dinámica de Enfermedades 

Transmisibles de Harvard 

comenta que es realmente 

difícil para cualquier individuo cambiar nuestra 

política y no recomienda 

que la gente renuncie a 

las vacunas para sus hijos ahora mismo cuando 

pueden recibirla, dice que 

como país debemos hacer 

todo lo posible incluido el 

compartir vacunas antes 

de que inmunicemos a los 

miembros de menor riesgo

de nuestra población, pero 

eso es solamente una opinión política, pero como 

todos sabemos en el sur 

de Asia en este momento 

los niveles de riesgo son 

tremendamente diferentes 

para las personas vulnerables o en muchas otras partes del mundo comparado 

con un niño de bajo riesgo 

en los Estados Unidos 

Países críticos como la 

India y Brasil buscan minimizar los efectos de las 

nuevas variantes del coronavirus.

Dr. Rosane Guerra trabaja 

en el Centro de Ciencias de 

la Universidad Federal de 

Maranhao, Brasil, ella comenta que la variante P1 es 

más bascular que las otras 

enfermedades y ahora en 

Brasil más del 50% de los 

casos son causados por 

esta variante, se habla de 

una variante que también 

está presente en varios 

países de Latinoamérica, 

Estados Unidos, Canadá, 

Francia, Portugal y otras 

naciones cuyas fronteras 

han sido cruzadas por personas desde Brasil y esto 

es un gran problema, adicionalmente si preguntan,

si puede la burbuja de Estados Unidos permanecer

intacta mientras el mundo 

lidia con el Covid-19 pues 

la respuesta es no, no es 

posible mantener esa burbuja a menos que los ciudadanos no viajen a otros 

países, es imposible mantener una burbuja en este 

momento porque tenemos 

una población global que

viajan de un lugar a otro y 

tenemos fronteras muy cercanas.

De cualquier manera, 

todo parece indicar que las 

mutaciones del virus obligaran a las naciones a continuar realizando nuevas 

jornadas de vacunación en 

los próximos años.

Dr. Ben Newman Virólogo Jefe del complejo de 

Investigación de Salud 

Global de la Universidad 

de Texas A&M menciona 

que la pregunta es, ¿si necesitaremos otros refuerzos 

adicionales dependiendo 

como varia el virus porque 

aunque cada una de las vacunas sigue siendo razonablemente efectiva contra 

todas las variantes?, definitivamente hay una efectividad más baja contra alguna 

de las variantes como las 

que salen de Brasil o Sudáfrica por ejemplo y con el 

tiempo el virus continuara 

variando de manera muy 

impredecible por lo que 

creo q nuestras soluciones 

tendrán que actualizarse y 

es posible que el virus siga 

cambiando, variando el ciclo de vacunación.

También concuerda totalmente que las burbujas son 

hermosas y no duran mucho tiempo en este mundo, 

cree que cualquier burbuja de vacunas que pueda 

existir va a ser frágil, que 

la única solución, es una 

solución global y esto es 

vacunar a todo el mundo, literalmente, no solo 

vacunarlos en un tiempo 

determinado, seis meses, 

quizá un año, pero ese es el 

reto y tal vez esto solo sea 

una opinión y no hechos, 

ha visto lo que el mundo 

puede hacer, cuando peleamos entre nosotros como 

la segunda guerra mundial 

que fue un esfuerzo humano casi máximo hacia una 

meta en particular y no 

cree que soluciones a medias vayan a funcionar.

Peter Maybarduk es Director del Grupo de Acceso de los Ciudadanos Públicos a los Medicamentos 

menciona que podemos 

compartir este conocimiento para hacer vacunas 

libremente e incrementar 

la capacidad mundial sin 

retrasar la vacunación en 

ningún país, para quienes 

hemos trabajado y predicho esta escases de vacunas desde el inicio de esta 

pandemia ha sido claro que 

los políticos quienes son 

responsables de su nación 

van a enfocarse en vacunar 

a su propia gente primero, 

esto no es ideal apoyamos 

el plan de distribución 

equitativa de la OMS pero 

en el mundo de la real política necesitamos entender 

que eso va a pasar y la pregunta entonces es ¿Cómo 

aceleramos la repartición 

no solo de dosis también 

de componentes del conocimiento y capacidad para 

hacer vacunas tan rápido 

como sea posible? 

California no adoptará la

última guía de mascarillas de los CDC hasta el

15 de junio 

(Sigue de la Primera) te eventos al aire libre con- que no se pueda mantener 

curridos. Las personas no el distanciamiento físico, la cara al aire libre para vacunadas deben usar cu- incluso cuando asisten a 

personas completamente biertas faciales al aire libre eventos al aire libre llenos 

vacunadas, excepto duran- “en cualquier momento en de gente, como presenSummerwood Apartments Summerwood Apartments

Now Accepting Applications: Ahora aceptando solicitudes:

51501 Mecca Avenue

Coachella, CA. 92236

Ph: (760) 398-8822

Mon-Fri, 9:00am to 3:00pm

fax: (760) 398-4692

51501 Mecca Avenue

Coachella, CA. 92236

Tel: (760) 398-8822

Lun-Vier, 9:00am to 3:00pm

fax: (760) 398-4692

2 & 3 bdrm apts 

and also apts.

with special design 

features for individuals

 with a disability. Inquire

as to the availability

 of rental subsidy.

Aptos de 2 y 3 habitaciones

 y también aptos. con

 características de diseño

 especiales para personas

 con discapacidad. Preguntar

 en cuanto a la disponibilidad 

de subsidio de alquiler.

EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY,

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ACCESS IGUALDAD DE ACCESO A LA OPORTUNIDAD

IGUALDAD DE OPORTUNIDADES DE VIVIENDA

TDD#711 TDD#711

taciones

en vivo, 

desfiles,

ferias, festivales,

eventos

deportivos

u otros escenarios

similares”.

Se requiere

que tanto 

los californianos

vacunados

como no 

vacuna -

dos usen 

cubiertas

para la 

cara en 

ambientes

interiores, excepto en sus 

hogares.

Aproximadamente el 

15% de los californianos 

están completamente vacunados, según datos estatales.

El gobernador Gavin 

Newsom ha dicho que el 

estado está en camino de 

reabrir completamente su 

economía el próximo mes, 

lo que indica el fin de la 

mayoría de las restricciones pandémicas, ya que las 

tasas de infección se mantienen en mínimos históricos y más personas se vacunan. El estado comenzó 

a permitir que los niños de 

12 a 15 años recibieran la 

vacuna la semana pasada.

Las vacunas Pfizer y Moderna, que son las más 

utilizadas en los EE. UU., 

Requieren dos dosis administradas con unas pocas

semanas de diferencia.
11

Directorio

* El informador del Valle es una publicación semanal gratuita, cada jueves, en el Valle de Coachella y el Valle 

de San Jacinto. Nuestros lectores suman más de 40,000. 

* La administración no se hace responsable del contenido de los anuncios y artículos de los columnistas, pues 

no precisamente refejan el sentir de esta Casa Editorial. 

* No se permite la reproducción parcial ni total de nuestro material sin el permiso escrito por El Informador 

del Valle. 

informador.newspaper@gmail.com

www.elinformadordelvalle.net

Encuéntranos en: 

Facebook, Twitter, Yelp y Google +

82015 Highway 111 Indio, CA 92201 

Director de Ventas: Don Héctor R. Félix Oficina 760.342.7558

951.634.0142

Director General: Héctor Jr. Félix 951.229.6355

Editor: Alma Contreras y Andrea Ramírez

Editor de Eventos Especiales:

Richard A. Gutierrez, Jr.

Diseñador Gráfico: Pablo Aboytes 

Distribución: Esmeralda Rivera, Mr. Ávila,

 Oscar Urías.
Al menos cinco heridos y

una persona en custodia

tras tiroteo en el Aventura Mall 

iami Fl.- La 

policía y los 

rescatistas de 

Miami-Dade, así como 

la policía de la ciudad de 

Aventura, respondieron

esta tarde a los reportes de 

un tiroteo ocurrido en el 

centro comercial Aventura 

Mall.

En el lugar se vivieron 

momentos de pánico, tras 

la balacera que se desató 

en una de las tiendas del 

lugar.

De acuerdo con las autoridades cinco personas

fueron transportadas al dos los clientes y trabaja- la Unidad de Trauma del hospital y varias están bajo dores fueron evacuados del Hospital de Aventura. custodia.

“Tenemos a varios sospe- centro comercial. El acceso El tiroteo ocurrió en una 

chosos en custodia y están al lugar no será permitido tienda del centro comersiendo interrogados por los hasta nuevo aviso. cial, y los involucrados se 

detectives. Las víctimas sin De acuerdo con los bom- conocían entre ellos.

heridas de riesgo para sus beros de Miami-Dade, Usuarios de redes sociavidas están siendo tratadas cinco pacientes fueron les publicaron videos del 

en hospitales locales”, dijo transportados a hospitales momento en que los clienla policía de Aventura. locales. Uno de los pa- tes del lugar huyen por te- La policía agregó que to- cientes fue transportado a mor a los disparos.

M

Verifica si ganaste un

cupo en el sorteo de la

lotería de visas 2022 

Los 55,000 ganado- Congreso. Las residencias programa está abierto sólo 

res del sorteo de la de los ganadores podrán a personas de países que

lotería de visas del ser utilizadas a partir del 1 cumplan con determinaaño fiscal 2022 se conoce- de octubre, cuando arranca dos requisitos, entre ellos 

rán a partir del mediodía el año fiscal 2022. de estudios o experiencia

de este sábado 8 de mayo, El sorteo laboral, ya sea haber com- cuando el Centro Nacional La lotería de visas es uno pletado la secundaria, su de Visas del Departamento de los sorteos más grandes equivalente o tener dos de Estado habilita un link a nivel mundial. El concur- años de experiencia labo- donde los concursantes po- so fue creado por el Con- ral. Los participantes que drán ingresar sus números greso en 1990 y se conoce no cumplan con los requi- de participación. como Programa de Visas sitos “no deben inscribirLos participantes de con- de Diversidad (DV) para se”, advirtieron las bases curso DV-2022 pueden inmigrantes. del concurso. ingresar su información En el concurso cada año Quiénes no participaron de confirmación a través participan entre 14 y 23 mi- La Oficina de Asuntos del enlace que será en- llones de concursantes, es Consulares del DOS indicó cendido “a partir del me- totalmente gratis y solo se que aquellas naciones que diodía (tiempo del Este de puede participar ingresan- han enviado más de 50,000 Estados Unidos) del 8 de do a la página digital del inmigrantes a Estados Uni- mayo de 2021”, se lee en Departamento de Estado dos en los últimos cinco un comunicado del Centro (DOS) en las fechas desde años “están excluidos del publicado en su página di- la apertura de la ventanilla sorteo de la Lotería de Vi- gital. de recepción de solicitudes sas”. La ventanilla del sorteo se hasta el cierre.

Por esa razón, en la selec- abrió el 7 de octubre y ce- En el sorteo del año fis- ción de los ganadores del rró el 10 de noviembre del cal 2019 participaron último concurso no fueron año pasado. Los concur- 22,425,053 concursantes 

santes, una vez enviaron la (incluyendo derivados, tal incluidos ciudadanos origisolicitud de participación como cónyuges e hijos me- narios de:

para el DV-2022, deben nores de edad solteros). En PAÍSES QUE NO PARhaber recibido vía e-mail el año fiscal 2020 el núme- TICIPARON EL LA LOun número de confirma- ro aumentó a 23,182,554, TERÍA DE VISAS DEL 

ción, explica el Departa- mientras que en el sorteo 2022:

mento de Estado. para el año fiscal 2021 la VISA DV-2022

La lotería de visas sortea cantidad de concursan- · Bangladesh

cada año 55,000 tarjetas tes bajó a 11,830,707, de · Brasil

de residencia legal perma- acuerdo con dados del · Canadá

nente ( green card o tarjeta DOS. · China (nacidos en el 

verde) autorizadas por el El gobierno recordó que el continente)

· Colombia

· Corea del Sur

· El Salvador

· Filipinas

· Guatemala

· Haití

· Honduras

· India

· Jamaica

· México

· Nigeria

· Pakistán

· Reino Unido (excepto 

los nacidos en Irlanda del 

Norte)

· República Dominicana

· Vietnam

12
PECHUGA DE POLLO EN 

CREMA DE CHIPOTLE

POLLO EN SALSA DE CHILE 

ANCHO

100 gramos de tocino

1 ajo bien picadito

1 cucharada de mantequilla

sal y pimienta al gusto

2 cucharadas de aceite de oliva

Ingredientes :

2 pechugas de pollo ( deshuesadas y 

sin piel )

1 lata chica de chile chipotle

1 taza de media crema

1 cebolla

¿ Como prepararlo ? En la licuadora vamos a agregar la 

pollo en crema de chipotle media crema, 3 chiles chipotles de la 

Lo primero que tenemos que hacer es lata y todo el contenido del sartén ( si 

lavar muy bien los ingredientes que lo usted lo cree necesario puede escurrir 

necesiten. Ya que las pechugas esten la- toda la grasa ) ya que nuestros ingrevadas vamos a salpimentarlas y bañar- dientes están en la licuadora vamos a 

las con el aceite de oliva, las ponemos a procesar, se puede agregar un poco de 

reposar en el refrigerador y esperamos. agua para que no quede muy espeso y 

En una sartén caliente vamos a poner todo se mezcle muy bien.

la mantequilla, ya que este derretida En el mismo sartén vamos a freír las 

vamos a añadirle el tocino en trocitos, pechugas cortadas en rebanadas, ya 

esperamos a que se dore y agregamos que esten bien cocidas, le agregamos 

el ajo junto a la cebolla en trocitos muy el contenido de la licuadora, tapamos 

pequeños, revolvemos y cocinamos y dejamos que suelte el primer hervor. 

hasta que la cebolla se caramelice. Retiramos del fuego y servimos.

ALITAS DE POLLO CON MIEL 

Y MOSTAZA AL HORNO

El pollo es el favorito de los 

mexicanos por su versatilidad 

y en este blog tenemos cientos 

de recetas distintas para prepararlo a 

la mexicana, hoy te enseñamos como 

prepararlo con una deliciosa salsa de 

chile ancho entre otros ingredientes

que mencionamos a continuación:

6 Piezas de pollo

2 Chiles anchos

¿Cómo se prepara?

pollo en chile anchoLos chiles los les 

quitamos las semillas y los ponemos a 

hervir en un poco e agua. La papa y las 

zanahorias debemos de pelarlas y cocerlas para después cortar en cubos. El 

pollo lo ponemos a cocer en un poco de 

agua con sal y pimienta.

Ahora vamos a hacer la salsa de chile 

ancho, para esto vamos a licuar la media crema com la media taza de agua, 

2 Cucharaditas de consomé de pollo

Aceite para freír

2 Dientes de ajo pelados

1 Papa

2 Zanahorias

250 Mililitros de media crema

1/2 Taza de agua

Pimienta al gusto

Sal al gusto

los 2 dientes de ajo, los chiles y las 2 

cucharaditas de consomé, reservamos la 

salsa.

Calentamos un sartén con aceite y allí 

vamos a freír las papas con las zanahorias hasta que estén doradas, agregamos 

el pollo y la salsa, calentamos revolviendo durante 5 minutos más y ya tenemos 

listo nuestro pollo en salsa de chile ancho. Al servir acompaña con sopa fría ó 

arroz como guarnición.

13

I

NGREDIENTES:

– 1/2 kilo de alitas de pollo

– sal

– ajo en polvo (Hacendado)

– 5 cucharadas de miel de flores (Hacendado)

– 5 cucharadas de mostaza dulce apta (Hacendado)

ELABORACIÓN:

Precalentamos el horno arriba y abajo a 200oC.

Lavamos bien las alitas, quitándoles todas las plumas y las partimos por la mitad si no vienen ya cortadas. Secamos bien, salamos y les ponemos ajo en 

polvo a cada una de ellas.

En un bol preparamos una salsa con las 5 cucharadas de miel y las 5 cucharadas de mostaza. Pasamos 

cada alita por esta mezcla, empapando bien.

En una fuente para horno colocamos papel de horno y colocamos las alitas ya condimentadas.

Metemos al horno a 200oC durante 30 minutos. 

Dando la vuelta a las alitas a los 15 minutos. Podemos dejar unos minutos más si nos gustan muy 

tostadas
14

Muy pronto el Sol provocará un progreso en el área de las finanzas, 

en especial si tienes planes importantes relacionados con tu vivienda o 

la familia. Venus, tu planeta regente, indica que estás atento(a) a nuevas ideas, que la comunicación ha mejorado y que tienes intenciones 

de hacer algunas compras o invertir, lo mejor de todo esto es que, en 

el transcurso de la semana tendrás un sustancial encuentro con las personas que pueden prestarte algún servicio y esto significará para ti un 

cambio afortunado en la realización de algún proyecto. Lunes, martes y 

miércoles, son días estupendos para intimar con tu pareja, expresar un 

poco más de tu creatividad y hacer uso de ese talento especial que tienes 

para la organización y el detalle.

El movimiento celeste de esta semana sugiere que los asuntos más importantes de este corto período están relacionados con tu capacidad para 

organizar el aspecto financiero y material de la vida. Me parece que lograrás dar con una respuesta acertadísima para los asuntos de inversión, 

compras o pagos, es de esperar que una deuda pueda ser saldada en breve plazo, pero si te decides a invertir o, haces alguna compra importante 

esta te dará satisfacciones en muy breve tiempo. 

El movimiento de los astros en esta semana sugiere que, si estás estudiando, sentirás una energía que puede resultar altamente positiva, porque te permitirá tomar algunas decisiones con bastante sentido práctico. 

Lunes, martes y miércoles, te convendrá mostrarte al resto del mundo 

como una persona servicial, si lo haces así encontrarás muchas satisfacciones, te sentirás bien contigo mismo(a) y atraerás la amistad y la ayuda 

de terceras personas que quedarán, por así decirlo, en deuda contigo. 

Jueves y viernes aprovecha para poner en orden los asuntos financieros, 

el equilibrio de las entradas y salidas de dinero debe ser restablecido. Si 

estás dudando acerca de algunas inversiones o compras, sería bueno que 

pensaras siempre si esas son compatibles con tus metas a largo plazo. 

El fin de semana parece ser ideal para un viaje corto y divertido, que te 

ponga en contacto con la familia o viejos amigos.

Las distintas influencias celestes nos proponen un avance, un crecimiento, acción tendente al logro, algo más de actividad y ciertamente 

concreción de lo emprendido. El ciclo promete un poco más de crecimiento y realización entorno del amor, el matrimonio o la pareja; si ya 

estás comprometido(a), es una buena época para darle prioridad a esa 

relación. Si tienes socios, en el transcurso de esta semana deben compartir planes y proyectos, y presentarse juntos con personas que pueden 

tomar decisiones que afectarán el curso de sus negocios. Lunes, martes 

y miércoles, son días afortunados para el intercambio o relacionamiento 

social. Si quieres presentar algún proyecto o trabajo de forma oral, estos 

son los días más indicados. Jueves y viernes, debes reflexionar acerca 

de todo lo dicho, las relaciones que estableciste, cómo llegaste a ellas, 

qué clase de acuerdo estás haciendo, así encontrarás un posible error y

podrás enmendarlo con tiempo. 

Ésta semana, se te da la 

oportunidad de iniciar un 

proceso que hallará su 

momento de culminación 

la próxima semana. La 

propuesta del cielo está 

directamente relacionada con tu creatividad y 

talentos, hace énfasis en 

los asuntos románticos, 

afectivos y ayuda también al trato con tus hijos, 

en caso de que los tengas. 

Darte espacio para estabilizar una relación puede 

ser sumamente importante. Hay probabilidad de 

que te decidas a reorganizar tu vida sentimental 

o las actividades de la 

progenie, en todo caso, 

lo importante será tomar 

decisiones y avanzar de 

forma determinada y firme hacia el logro de tus 

objetivos. 

El movimiento celeste puede traer inconvenientes, y es que tendrás una 

necesidad o sensación de entregarte activamente a los otros. La naturaleza de tu signo ya es de por sí compasiva, comprensiva y hasta ilimitada cuando se entrega, y este cielo aporta un nuevo caudal energético 

que debe ser bien encausado, más que entregarte indiscriminadamente 

al servicio por otras personas aprovecha para ocuparte de ti mismo(a). 

Un poco de egoísmo, de vez en cuando, es necesario. Los procesos de 

la comunicación y las relaciones con tu entorno inmediato se hacen más 

importantes. Lunes, martes y miércoles, son más adecuados para las 

asociaciones, la firma de papeles y documentos legales, por supuesto si 

tienes pareja la energía debe ser procesada por medio de esa persona que 

comparte su vida contigo. 

El movimiento de los planetas traerá sin duda un período de satisfacción, reflexión y belleza personal. El arreglo que puedas hacer de tu 

imagen, es más que conveniente, particularmente podrías atraer a una 

persona encantadora, a quien amar o con quien compartir. Tus habilidades creativas experimentan un período positivo que no debes desaprovechar. Tu cielo astral de esta semana sugiere que tendrás satisfacción y 

realización para asuntos relacionados con la comunicación y los viajes 

cortos. Lunes, martes y miércoles, son los días en que debes atender los 

asuntos de la palabra, la comunicación y los pequeños detalles que, a 

veces, se te pasan por alto.

Los asuntos de esta semana estarán centrados en ti mismo, en tus posibilidades para hacer alguna cosa importante y práctica de las que guardan estrecha relación con tus metas profesionales. La profesión, es un 

área sumamente activa durante este mes debido al tránsito solar y del 

planeta Mercurio. La comunicación se tornará más sensata, concreta y

práctica, las ideas que ahora surgen en tu mente pueden deberse a esa 

necesidad imperiosa que sientes de asegurar tu futuro, de prever para 

el mañana. Al comenzar la semana y hasta el miércoles, se presenta un 

período favorable para las inversiones y el intercambio comercial, sólo 

que deberás hacer uso de tu capacidad analítica para encontrar un pequeño detalle que puede solucionar diferentes problemas o llevarte por un 

camino inquietante. 

Ésta semana es favorable para las personas aventureras, impacientes, 

creativas y con ganas de hacer cosas, en principio eso sucede porque la 

energía celeste nos impulsa a dar el primer paso para realizar un proyecto. La propuesta para tu carta solar es que pongas en acción tus ideas y 

pensamientos, que te dejes llevar por tus creencias y convicciones y que 

las hagas patentes y efectivas, particularmente si están destinados a conseguir una mejora en el ambiente laboral o a crear nuevos sistemas o una 

organización diferente de trabajo. Es de esperar que tengas mejores y más 

efectivos colaboradores. Cuidarás mejor de una mascota. 

Las posibilidades están a la vuelta de la esquina, a veces sólo hace falta 

ponerse en movimiento para encontrarla. Las tuyas están relacionadas 

en el transcurso de esta semana con la pareja, los acuerdos, los contratos 

y, tal vez, algún aspecto legal. Si tiene que ver con una vivienda, bienes 

raíces, inmuebles o la familia mejor aún. Lo importante será encontrar 

estabilidad, seguridad o una idea práctica que poner en marcha. Tu pareja 

puede guiarte a lograr ese objetivo, si es una persona con sentido común 

y capacidad de organización, aprovecha esos talentos y recuerda que una 

asociación es un dar y recibir. Lunes, martes y miércoles, pueden ser días 

difíciles porque debes ser detallista, analítico(a) y hasta fustigador(a), si 

eres excesivamente quisquilloso(a) puedes encontrarte con una situación 

crítica que se escapa de tus manos, principalmente si guarda relación con 

tus hijos o tu vida afectiva.

Esta semana propone un reto de crecimiento, actuación y realización, 

en el campo de la creatividad y sexualidad. Todo esto tiene como punto

inicial al Sol que activa por unos días más el sector de las finanzas. Estás deseando hacer algo que te reporte mayores ingresos, una especie de 

seguridad económica o hacer una inversión. Lunes, martes y miércoles, 

son días favorables para los asuntos de trabajo y la salud. Recuerda que 

comer de prisa “en cualquier esquina” no es conveniente para ti, necesitas 

darte el espacio suficiente para alimentarte mejor. Los asuntos laborales 

están pidiendo que seas preciso(a), metódico(a) o más organizado(a), las 

personas que están a tu servicio quieren ayudarte pero muchas veces te 

falta paciencia para permitir que ellos te ayuden.

Ahora será fácil para ti la comunicación, el intercambio de ideas y el 

romance, en especial si quieres iniciar una relación con una persona de 

otra nacionalidad. Internet, las salas de Chat y cualquier asunto relacionado con un viaje o paseo puede resultar ser una experiencia de lo más 

agradable, no sólo desde un punto de vista romántico, porque incluye el 

establecimiento de nuevas relaciones de amistad. Lunes, martes y miércoles, son días ideales para quedarte contigo mismo(a), sí, más que salir 

por allí a vagabundear y conocer gente, este primer contacto o primera

relación debe ser contigo, con tus sentimientos, inquietudes y miedos. 

Aclarar lo que realmente deseas será definir una dirección, eso te hará 

sentir más seguro(a) y en consecuencia dirás lo que realmente piensas y 

harás lo que mejor te conviene. 
México anuncia nuevo 

partido amistoso ante

Nigeria en Los Angeles

México jugará un 

último partido

amistoso previo 

a iniciar su participación

en la Copa Oro 2021 de la 

Concacaf y lo hará frente a 

la selección de Nigeria el 

próximo sábado 3 de julio 

en el Coliseum de Los Angeles en California, Estados Unidos.

Este será el cuarto compromiso internacional 

entre los meses de mayo,

junio y julio como preparación para el Final Four 

de la Concacaf Nations 

League, así como de la 

Copa Oro, al estar ya agendados los juegos contra las 

selecciones de Islandia, 

Honduras y Panamá, los que la Selección Nacional En cinco partidos jugados 

cuáles se realizarán en las de México enfrentará a su contra México, han empasedes de Arlington, Atlan- similar de Nigeria el sába- tado cuatro juegos y caído 

ta y Nashville, respectiva- do 3 de julio en el histórico una vez. Los dos equipos 

mente. Coliseum de Los Angeles. se enfrentaron por última 

“La Federación Mexica- Nigeria se ha clasificado vez en Atlanta en 2014, en 

na de Futbol y Soccer Uni- a seis de los últimos sie- un partido que terminó emted Marketing informan te Mundiales de la FIFA. patado sin goles.

Rafa Márquez se reúne

con la directiva del 

Barcelona para su regreso

Rafa Márquez está 

cerca de volver al 

Barcelona después

de que este martes sostuviera una reunión con el vicepresidente del club Rafa 

Yuste, en las instalaciones 

del club en la Ciudad Condal, la cual duró cerca de 

dos horas, como adelantó 

hace semanas en TUDN.

Probablemente el regreso del mexicno sea como 

técnico de un equipo juvenil, después que durante la 

campaña a las elecciones 

de la presidencia del Barça 

mostró su apoyo a la candidatura de Joan Laporta,

quien lo llevó al club en su 

etapa como jugador.

Cabe recordar que Rafa 

Márquez jugó del 2003 al los más con Frank Rijkaard Geo González, que sería en 

2010 con el cuadro blau- y Pep Guardiola. Además, l os próximos días cuando grana, justo en el periodo el 23 de abril pasado, el volvería a Catalunya para en que Laporta fue presi- mexicano compartió en en- cerrar su regreso a una de dente en su primera etapa y trevista con el podcast de 

donde ganaron dos Cham- TUDN, ‘En tus Zapatos’ las canteras más importanpions League y varios títu- con Adriana Monsalve y tes del mundo.

15
16

(760)760 1010 ARIELLAWGROUP.COM

CONSULTA GRATIS

TIENE DERECHO A UNA SEGUNDA OPINIÓN

PERSONALMENTE

TE LO RECOMIENDO

FRANK ARIEL

¿LESIONADO

ACCIDENTE?

EN
OC Weeklies Spanish - 05/22/2021 

May 22, 202111:19 am (GMT -7:00) 

lEstá buscando 

comprar su 

primera casa? 

Hay muchos sucesos por primera vez 

en la vida de uno. Y comprar una casa 

puede traer muchas preguntas y dudas. 

Cuando esté listo para ser dueño de una 

vivienda, cuente con nosotros para obtener 

orientación y opciones de préstamos para 

sus necesidades únicas 

Enganches tan baJos como 3% 

Pautas de calificación flexibles 

Tasas competitivas 

IIEASrWESTBANK 

Your financia! bridge" 

¡,Qué esta 

previsto? 

t,Porqué 

este anuncio'? 

Whafs 

Avallable? 

r,Cualessu 

papel'? 

Adaptaoones 

especiales 

ft U.S,eo.,a,tment oll,arupo,totion 

~_-¡? Federal Railrood Admlnlstratlon 

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO Programa del servicio de corl'liildorferroviario del Valle de Coachella• Paso de San Gorgonio 

Anuncio deflnalización (NOC) y Anuncio de disponibilidad (NOA) para una Declaración d,a lmpactoAmbi,antalf 

un Informe de Impacto Ambiental conjuntos para NEPA/CEQA de Nivel 1/ Programa (EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa) 

De corforrn dad con 1-!J ley Nacional de J:l::>~tica Amb,Cntal N;,cional (NEP.A.) yla ley de Calidad Amb~tal de Calib rnia ~EQA~ la Adm ínist~ ión 

Feder.,I deFeroxarri~s (FRA~ la OWisión de Tramport,eFerroviarioyMasivo del Departamertode TransportedeCa~fornia (Caltrans)y la 

Com isi6nde T1ansporl!l!ddConcbdode Rivcrsido! (RCTC) han preparado una Der.: braci6nde lmp~toAmbiental/1.Xl Informe de lmpa::to 

Ambieotal conjuntos para NEPAICEQAde Nivel 1/Pro,Jrama ('EIS/EIRdeNivel 1/P~ma)conel fin de: 1)~Iuar lasor-;ionesde servicio 

ferro,,iarO de pasajeros entre Los Angeles UnOn Stat ion (LAUS) en el cordado de Los Angele~ Calib mia, y b ciudad deCoad1ella en el cordado 

de Rivcrside Calibm0, que se concr::en co~tivamente como el ProgQlma de servicio decorreélorferro,,iarO del Valle deCoachella - Paso de 

San G:>rgonio (Prc:grama~ y 2 ) ofre::eropcionesdevia~alterrnt iwisal uso de un aiJ:om6vil a lo laigodel corre:::br ferro,,iarioddlkillede 

Coachella - Paro de San Gorgonio de 144 mil laidelor,gitud l,'Prc:gramaConecbr~ FRA.Cah~ ns y RCTC han prep~el lbrrad:ir EIS/EIRde 

Ni~ 1/Programa par?! analizar los posibles impacbsambientalessignific: atWsdel Pog~ ma propuesto. e identific: i1r posiblesest~ t~ sde 

mitigación quefuncbmentarían la! futuras rnedicbi de mitig:,cióne5pc,:: tica idel I1..gar pa~evitar o ~u,::ir los impactos significatillOSdu~nte 

los subsiguientes análisis (fut uo s) de Nivel 2/Pro¡e::to. 

FRA., Caltransy ocr han estudiacb b sefe:losqueel Programa propuesto pue::letener sobre el me:lioa mbientey la cornunidad, Los l'!!sultacbs 

deestosestudOs se re::aoeneo el lbrra.:brde Der.:Braci6nde lmpa::toAmbiental/lnbrmede lmpacto Ambental (EIS/EIR)deNwel 1/Programa. 

El propósito deeste anuno::ioes iriormar al público sobre su firali:zaci6n y d isponibilidad parac U!llquer persona intereooa, ybrindYal público 

la oporturidaddeco~ar '/o part icipar en unaaudierxia p.:ti lica sobre el Proorama 

El Borr.:dor E!S/EIRde Ni~ l 1/Progama está disponible py-a fü revisi6nen las sio;¡uientes ubi-.:aciones 

• LA Un ion Station/Met o l ib~ryandA11: hiveüneGa1-yPbz:a, 15th Fbor. los Angeles,CA 90012 

• Fullerton Publio::: Library; 353 W. CommonwealthAven~ Fullerton,CA 92832 

• Riverside Main Library,39)) Mi ss ion lnnAvenue Ri,<ersideCA 92501 

• RiversideCounty Transportation Commission..4030Lemon Slreet,CA 92501 

• Colton Pub lic library,656N, 9th Streoet, Colto n, CA 92324 

• Loma Linda Brarxh Lib~ry,25581 BarbnRoa:1, Loma Linda, CA 92354 

• A,K. Smiey Public Libiary,. 125 W. V1neStreoet, Re:llards,CA 92373 

• Beaumont Library, 125 E. Eighth Street ~umont, CA 92223 

• Bannirg Publ ic Lib1ary;21 W. Nico let Street, Banning.CA 92220 

• Palm Springs Publi:: Library300 S. SunriseWay; Palm Springs, CA 92262 

• Ril-€:rsideCo unty lndio Brar'Jc:h library,200Civic CenterMalt Indio.CA 92201 

• Ri~sideCountyCoochclla Branc h library, 15006th St reoet,Coac~la.CA 92236 

TI:I Borrador EIS/EIR de Ni-ve! 1/ProQ.ama también se puedeconsultaren 100 en las siQuientes ubic&ion-es: 

• Sitio web de la RCTC íhttpsi/www.n:t,Drg/p10je:t s/,oa:: hela-valley-san-~rgonio-pass-<o rri::lor-rail-corricbr-servi:e-proje::t/) 

• Sfo~bde laFRA 

(https-//railroads.dot.gc,,/environment/environmental-reviews/coa:: heNa-Yalley-san-Qjrgonio-pass-co rri::lor-investment-plan) 

• Aegulal:ions.!JOV(https://www.re:¡W,tionsoovldxket;/FRA-2Q2 1-004$) 

Lasau:::lierxias públi:: ai se celebrarándebrmavirtual en lasfer.:has indicad-os a contrluaci6n. Los enb:::esdelas reuniones v irtuales se 

publicará nen los sitios web del ~rama antes delas audien:: ias pL.t!licas. 

• 22 de juniode 2021,de04:30 p ro.a 07:0J p.m. 

• 26dejuni::i de2021,deOO:JOa.rn.a 11:00a.rn. 

El perododerevisó n públi::aycomentarios para el BorrcdorEIS/EIRde Ni~ I 1/Prog-ama es del 2 1 de mapde2021 al 6 de juliode2021 , Se 

invita a las agen:: ias yo.ganizaciores federales. estatales y lo.:al-es y al p.:tilico a propon:iooar,ornentarios sobre el Borl?Jdor EIS/EIR de Nivel 

1/ Prc:grama. Las perronai interesadai debenenviar cornentarios por víae~tróni-.:aa t ravés de reg,.¡lationsgov buscando el NÚ'ne<Ode 

Expe:liente del Programa (fRA.-2021-0048)0 por correoele::t rónico a cvrail:!>o:tc.org, Los coment arios por escrito deben en,,;arse por correo 

postal delos Estado1 U,idos a: Fl!A's Officeof Progam Delivery; 1200 New JcrseyAvenu,: S.E. (Mail Stop 20). 1/ikishirgton, DC205'::Q, o Riverside 

County TransportationCommission (RCTC), RO. lbx 1200$, Ri""'rside California, 92502 . Los comentarios deben in:: llir"Cc:ec:hella \k.illey - San 

Gorgonio Pass Ra~ CorridorService Prc:gam- Diaft ElS/EIRCommeflt {'en B l ne'O deas1.X1toy la drecci6n postal f ísica de la personaqueenvi:i el 

comentario en el(Uerpo de la carta odelcorreoele'.trónico. Loscornentarios deben enviarseantesdel martes, 6 dejulio de2021. 

Las personas que requieranadaptaciones espe: iales (intérprete de ler,olxlje de senas estadouni::lense 00: l.fllentaci6n en formatos alternativos, 

etc.)deben llamar al (9'.)9)627·2974al menos 72 horas antes de las au-Jierxia s públic as para solicitaradaptaciones envirtu:::l dela Leypa~ 

Estadouni::lenses co n Discapacidades (ADA) o servicios de t ra::lu,::c ó n. 

Page: A06 

Po wered by TECNAVIA 
OC Weeklies Spanish - 05/21/2021 

o VIVA LA VIDA Semana del 21 demayode2021 14 B=F4MiifüMl,if i+l::I CONCIERTOS 

Grupo Firme llega a L.A. rompiendo récords 

Tendrán un total 

de 7 conciertoo, el 

mayor rn'.imero en 

un afio realizado 

por cualquier 

artista en L.A 

Rechcciónde Excelsior 

dieron en d grupo Fuena 

Ol\.llta. Este ültimo se <:onvmiria, tras algunos cambios, en la agrupación Grupo 

Firme, ai.m<1,1e inici.alm.ellte 

sell.am.abaGrupo Ria-u. Ya 

que muchas agrupaciones tcniandmicrnonomtc'-c, los 

mi~bros decidi.eroo apos- tar por un sinónimo y que 

mejor-que.Firme 

E.s asi c-0mo na.ció d Grupo Firme, con Eduin 

romo voal.ista y Uda; Joa- Elnuevo hitazode.Grupo quin enel bajo sexto, Abr-.aFirme , 'En ru perra vida', ham y Jhoony .como sellega al S'talR,S Center -este -~~--llll!lf ( ¡unda voz, Christian en -el $0 de julio =c.anID &.s b;¡o, D~an en el acordeón 

r&ords, tanto en pr=ita- y Fit o con la bate.ria 

cionescomoenpopul.arida.d En abril de 20I7, tras tres en las r~ $()Ci.a.les años de ¡resentaciones y ooLos reyes del regional ver.s- en re&s, el ::rq:,o hizo 

mCXl<::ano Slg:uen 1mpara- ruddnt con d lanzamiento 

bl.es al anunciar w$eptimo de su ¡rirn~ hlb..un ~ o, 

conci.~toa1.ru ¡:ira por Es- Presente,Fa;uro.E/;t,eoollit6 

tados Unidos en -el Sta.ples de docei::ancioms, de l.asruaCenter de Los Áng_des les oob-=ilian: De Sol a Sol, 

El grupo tijuanense que Metas Cumplidas, Pe.rdóli~ a Eduin Caz, esta v i- nameyEl delosH.iaraches. viendo un gran momento Ef flfRI.NC&:O Gil.lls,:;o Si "ttcn, al :.J.bum no le fue 

en su trayectoria, al ir su- Los integr"1!tes del grupo firme ~I termino de una rueda de prens a en 1~ ciud~d de GIJadal~~r~. El grupo mexic;,no Firme muy bien, coru:i.:uiO dar a mandonuevasp-esentacio- tendr3 un total de 7 conciertos en l os Angele s. conocer-el ~o. Thos me- nes para d w:intoangdino __________ ses despues, la agrupa.cion 

Con un bcl..er.;¡¡e por ani.ba El nuevo himno de "los regreso con El Barco (2.m'(), 

de losonce.lTÚlespectado- "Cuando Grupo Firme suba al dóli.dos", pues l a letra ha- KIRSIVAS: aibumdeqlince.canctone.s, 

r~, esto d~ido a las_res- escenario el3O de julio de 2021, tladeunhom"trequeyal1(l Quli: Grupo f irme en d. q~ a pare.::Ian _~ te-

:;::~~~:;:~ será el primer concierto COn f~0DS :!r~~~ton~r::1:ec~ DOOdi : Staples Cent er ~~~~~:V~~ 5dea~$.Oa.SUSsietefe<:has dentro de la arena en 513 d(as ' to(k;imuyalestilodeGrwo S~tni~: ~\~~~ao!~t,~)~ - Interezada 

d~=~porpg¡ctón - V,nus~Kroma<U.N.!<Mlian.k?'~rts Fi;~;i!:::Zruo- 5.7. 8 .Q tu!n~;~~!!:;:. Dearuerdo ,::on Vanessa lidadosu reinado ,::orno los Cu~nto: $~~-$17~ cias a los lanzamientos de 

Kr<ime.r de Nede.rlande.r 2021, ~elprtmer<:oocicrtú <:on mu<:h<i res-entimiento y dudÍúS d-el re¡!ional m.exi- www.A)(S.com Me canse delunarte yd hit Conce.rts, los 7 ,::ondertos con fans dentro de la arena dolor, lo rual tlucina a todo ,::ano. Sus integrantes uni- El Amor N:I Fue Plt' Mi (ft. 

p rogramados de Grupo en513dias'; esbozó:K.rom'!r. aq.¡elq~la -esnr ha. dospor-elamoralamwi,::a BandaColoso).Mastalde..t-

:e~~~~:o!:n~i~ Terr:ienclaenredes n~~~¡~t~~i~ !~~~~:~~ ~:z~ ,t ~n~\~~~ ~~rlad=~~~ año en -el srAYI.ES Cente.r Por su parte, 'En tup-erra tafonnas digitales y lleg ó ron en Tijuana.Enestadu- agrupaciones a rtes de fun- loso, LujosySecretosjU'ltoa realizado por un artista, vida' en,::ompo.!.iciónjunto a compañado de un video dad se criaron e iniciaron dar el grupoen2{)":($ Qlinto V Imperio y Por-que 

banda o grupo latino aLenin:Ramirezse haapo- musical en YouI\be, lTÚilIIO sus <:arre.ras como miem- Joaq.ün yEOlin ,::.croen- TeQ.úe.ro,::onLuis Alfonso 

"El ultimo sh:lw p-evio a derado de las prind pales que fue grabado -el pasado tros de diferentes agrupa- zaron en el grupo Reto Sie- Partida ''El YakiM. Tamti.en la pandemia COVID-1.9 fue tendencias de las r~ so- 2.9 de abril en 'Mi Tierra', clones, aunque todos seco- rreñú, luego pasaron por las estrenaron ese año los senXJSS el4.demarzode2020, dales. Esta nueva ,::olabo- un famoso restaurante q.¡e nocian gradas a su trabajo agrwacione.sAventadc2 de cilios Que Me Vas A Dar si: 

,::ua.ndc Grupo Firme si.tia ración de los artistas mex::i- se en,::uentra uti<:ado en la en el medio. Los prime.ros Tijuana y Los 4. de la fron- Vuelro, El Pan.al y A Ti Te al es,::cnario el 00 depiiode <:anos le ,::anta al desamor ,::iudad de Chicago, lllinOis. in tegrantes dd. grtq:,o fue- te.ra y por ultim<i <:oinci- Conviene junto aCah"tre5-0 

May 21, 202110:2 1 am (GMT -7:00) 

¿Qué esta 

prevtito'! 

¿Porqué 

este anuncio"? 

What's 

Avallable'! 

¿Cuales su 

papel'! 

AdaptaclOnes 

especiales: 

A u.s. 00po1,.,.,,, ol T"""P011<1fiO 

,-~ Federal Railroad Admlnlslratlon 

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO Progr11ma dal sarvicio da corrodor farroviario dQIVallQ dQ Coachalla - Paso dQ San Gorgonio 

Anuncio dQ finalización (NOC)y Anuncio da disponibilidad (NOA) par11 una Dacia ración da Impacto Ambilliilntal/ 

un lnformlliil dlliil Impacto Ambiental conjuntos para NEPA/CEQA da Nivel 1/ Programa (EIS/EIRdia Nivel 1/Programa) 

Deconbrmaadcon la Ley Nacioralde lbliticaAmbiental Nacional (NEPA)y la LeydeCalidadAmbientaldeCalibrrnl (CEQA} laAdm inistradón 

Fe:::ler?II deFerocarriles (fRA~ la D;..-isóndeTrans~rte f-erl'OlliarO y Wasi\O del Departament odeTransporte deCa1ibrnia ~ ajtrans)y la 

ComisOndeTransportedel Conda::JodeRi-..erside(OCTC) han pri:,parad::i i.na De::Braci6ndelmpactoAmbiental/ un lnbrmede lm~to 

Ambieri:al conjuntos pa.'?I /IEPM:EQAdeNivel 1/Piogsama (EIS/EIRde Nivel 1/Programa) con el fin de, 1)evall.13rlaso pciones de servi:io 

ferl'Olliariode pa~jefo:s entre Lo:sAngeles Urion Station ¡L.AUS)enelcond:tdodeLos Angele:s, CaHorn~ y 0 cit.rladde Coac:hellaen elconda::Jo 

de Rillief"side Calib rnia, que :iecono:::en coler.:tiv;,mentecomo el Pn:::g=a de servicio de cor~ Íll!rl'OlliarOdel 1/alledeCO:Y.:hclla - Paso de 

SM GorlJ()flio (Piogreima),. y 2) ofreceropciories devl:l~alternati11a sal uso de un ai.torróo'ila lo lal'IJ) da corre:lorferro11l:lriodel 1⁄4 llede 

Ca:,chella - Pasode SanGofg)nÍ:lde 144 milasde bngitud (Piogreima Corrl!lbr~ FRA, Caltsans y RCTC han p,epa radoel Borreidor EIS/EIRde 

Nivel 1/Programa para analizarlos posibles impa:tos ambientales sQnificat i10sdel Piogsama propuesto.e dentificarposti~estrategias de 

mt ígación quef urdaf"llfflarian las futl.Rls me::h:::las demitigx ó neipo::ificas del lugarparei evtar o J'l!do:::ir bs impactos si.;inificatÍ'IQsdu sa nte 

bs subsiguientes afliili sis (ful:uios)deNivel2/Proye::to. 

FRA,Caltrarisy RCTC han est u:::liacb b s¿e::tosqued Programa propuesto puo:::letenerso bll!el medio ambiente y la comunidocl. Los resukados 

deestosestudOs sere::o;ien en el &irradorde Dc,::larac:Ondelmpacb Ambiental/ lriormedelmpactoAmbiental (EIS/EIR)de N;..-el 1/Pn:::grama. 

El propósitodeesteanun:i::i es informar al público sobresutinalizaci6n y disponibilidad parei cua'quierp<'!l",::;,na iri:eresacb, y brindar al público 

laoporturidad decomentary/o parti::ip:ar en l.l'laaudierxia púb li::a sobre el Programa. 

El B:irracbr EIS/EIRdeNi11d 1/Progamaest!ldisponible para :su l'alisónen las siguientes iilicacOnes 

• LAUnion Station/Metro Library anclArchilfl!,OrieGateway Plaza, 15th Fb:i~ Los Argeles, CA 9:Xl12 

• Fullerton Public Library,353 W.CommonW'!l!llthAvenue Fullerton..CA 92832 

• R;..-ers~ Main Libreiry, 39:Xl Mission tlnA11enue Ri~sideCA 92501 

• R;..-ersideCountyTrarisportat ion Commission.4000Lemon Street, CA 92501 

• Co l o n Public Libra ry,656 N. 91h St,eet, Colbn, CA 92324 

• Loma Linda Brarxh Librar-,, 25581 B:irton Fbad Loma Linda.CA 92354 

• A.K. Sm~ey Piillic Librar-,, 125 W. \li neStreet, I8::Hard s, CA 92373 

• 8ea1XOOri: Librar-,, 125 E. Eighth Street 8e1XOOnt,CA 92223 

• Bannirg Public librar-,, 21 W. Nicolet Street, B:inning.CA 92220 

• Palm Springs Public Librar-, 300 S. SunriseWay, Palm Spring~CA 92262 

• River:sideCo unty Indio Branch Library, 200Civi: CenterMal, lndio,CA 92201 

• RiversideCountyCoac~ lla Brao::h Librar-, 15006th Strect,CO:Y.:~l!a, CA 92236 

TEI Borrador ElSIEIR de Ni11el 1/Programa tamb~ se puede consultar en lifll!l?I en las si.;iu~es ubicaciones· 

• Sitio web de la OCTC (https://www.rc.l::.org/proje,::ts/coac hella-valle:y-san-gorgonio,pass-corricbr-reiil-corrdor-service,proje,:: t/) 

• Sifo .....-eb de la FPA 

(https://railroadsdotgov/erwironment/environmenta~reviews/coacl-,elB-valley-san,gogonio-p:ass-corricbr-irwestmert-plan) 

• Regulations.g:,v (httpslfwww.reqtdafons,m11/dqkef/FRA-2Q21-00<¡Al 

b!i:saudierxia:s pública:s se celebraran deforma virtual en lasfe::has irdicadas a co ntinu~ i6n. Lo:senla::e:sdela:s reuriones virtuale:s se 

publi::ariinen b s sitioi .....-eb dd Pl'C\lramaari:esde las aud~ n:;"s públi:as. 

• 22 dejurio de202l,de04:30 p.m.a0700 p.m. 

• 26dejurio de202l,de03:30a .m.a 11:00a.m. 

El perbdodereYisión pública y comeri:arios parad B:irrador EIS/EIRdeNivel 1/Programa es dd 21 de mayode 2021 al 6 dejuliode2021. Se 

irw (a a las ~ ias y organizaciorie1 fcdereiles, estatale:s y locales y al pú blico a piopori:: í::,nar comentarios sobre el 0-Jrrador EIS/EIR de Ni11d 

1/Prcgrama. Las personas iri:ereS&hs debenenv6 r comeri:arios ~ r•iaele::t ióni:aatravo!:sdere,.iulationsgov buscancbel Número de 

Expcd~ri:e dd Prcgrama (FRA-2021-0Cl43)o ~rcorrcode::lióni:oaoreiil@tr.:tc.org. Loscomeri:arios pore,::rib debenenviarsepar corrco 

postal delos Esta:los Unidos a: FPA's OfficedPiogram D-!I,,..ery, 12«l New Jersey Avenue S.E, (Mail Stop20),Washingbn, OC 20590,o R;..-erside 

CourtyTransportation Commission (RCTC~ ID, Ba:.:: 120Cl3. R" erside,Calibmia, 92502. l oscomentarios deben in.:luir'Coa: 1-ella Valley- San 

Gorgonio Pass Rail CorricbrService Program- Draft EIS/ER Co mmentsHen la linea de asunto y ladiie::ción p::ista l fisicade la persor.aq ueerwiael 

comertario enel cuer~ de la carta o deJ correo ele::trónico. Los comertarios deben er111 iar:se antes del martes, 6 de julio de 2021 . 

b!i:s personas que requieran adaptaciones e:spe:iales (intérpri:,te de lenQUajede señas esta:lol.l'lidense, dca:.: urnent ación en b rmato:s alterratOOs, 

elc.)deben lbmar al (9J9)627-2974 al ~nos 72 horas antesdelas a~ias públ icas para solic (aroclaptacionesen11irtud dela Ley para 

Estadoundensescon Di,::a~dade:s (ADA)o '1el"Vic i::i:sdet@dlJ<'.ci6n. 

Page: A04 

Powered by TECNAVIA 
Da ily B ulleti n - 05/21/2021 

6 iONEW'S 1:9:H.ITNt RNCHtro.:NII. N!!,1,1:SGIDUPo !NU.NDDAPl~t 

mmt and a ra,Ong ooronavirus oiibreak 

Netanyahu's otfke said hi.s Securíty Cabinet had 

unanimously a<c.cepted an 

E¡::yptfan u.ase-tire proposal after rec.anmenda- tiom fr-0m l-srael's military chief and othtt top 

security otficials. Asta.te- ment h oasted d "sig:nU\.-

cant adi.ievements in t he 

operation, .s«ne of which 

are unpreceda-r.tt.d.n 

It aho induded a veíled 

threat az:ain st Hamas ''The politica.l l~ers emphasized that the real- ityon the ¡::round will detttmine the futur-e of the camp aiz:n ,n the statement 

said. 

t he fiz:htin¡:: erl..q)ted on 

May ro, when H amas mílitants in Gaza fired loozran::erocl<.ets toward Juu- salem. The barr-a¡:e <:-ame 

after &ys -0! clashes be- tween Pal.minian protesters and Isra.eli pdke at Pale:stl"l~ns wr,,¡e green Hamas and their national fü~ swhile celebnting the cease-f ire agreement ~tween Israel and Hamas in Gaa Cit:y Mrly todllf 

the A\-Aqsa. Mosque compotmd. Heavy-handedpo- Health Ministry, which foce the 2am. cea.se-fue tíons of Yalestinians in ofthe warC<1Uld g iveth<:2n 3:ncethefigttingbegan, lice tact ies at the com- does not break the num- tocketfect the nearby Sheikh Jarrah renewedmomentum to re- Gaza's infrastructure, a lpound, built on a siteholy bers down into fighters ln Washinz:ton, Biden nd:hborhood start those talks ready weakened by a 14-· 

to Muslims and Jews, and and civilians. Twd.ve peo- hailed the cea.se-tire. "I AnEz:yptian ctficial sa.id Meanwhi le in Gaza, a year bl.oclt:i.de, has ra~dly the threatened eviction ple in Israel, including a bd.ieve we have a genuine onlythat tensicns in Jau- Ha.mas spokesman, Ab- deteriocated. 

of d-ozens d P.alcstinians 5-year--old boy and 16-year-- oppoctunity to make pr-Og- s.al<:2n "will be addressed."" delatif al-Q.anou, sa.id 1-s· Medie.al s ~plies, water 

by JeWish settlers had in- dd;irl, were kiUed rws, andl'mcommittedto He sp-Oke rn crudit1-0n of rael's ann-OUncement was and tuel f-0i-electricity a r e 

tl.amed tensions The United Sta.tes, Is- wockin: foc it,"" besa.id ancnymitybecausehewas a "detlaraticn of defeat."" running low in the terri- Th!-oompetingtlaimsto rael's closest and m-Ost Biden s:aid the U.S. was discussing bchind-the- Nonetheless, t he group tory, m. which Israel and 

Jm..isa.l<:2n lle at theheart important ally, initially ccrnmitted t-0 helping Is· scenes negotiatioo.s and said it w-OUld hrnor the E.g:ypt imposed the bl.-0ck· 

~:~:s;:ft!te~1;~t~ ~!~~ ;/;~t 1~osa.~/d~ ~fu;¿~~:~:!stf~~~ pi-~~~r~~e:f~, hud tJJ1;~c~nt:a!tt~/}; ;~:;:u~;er;~cst~z~ 

edly tri.¡.¡ered b-OUts c<vi- fense a.g:ainst indiscr-imi- its l rrn Dome rock.et-de- of the far-ri.¡ht J ewish 2a.m Authority in 2007. 3nce 

-0len<:-e in thepast nater-0<:ket fue. But asthe fense eystem and t-0 work- P-0wer- party, tweeted that Ali Barakeh, an -0ffi- then, Palestinian PresiHamas and -0ther mil- fightinz: draued on and in,: with the internation- the«.-ase-ñre was "a g:rave cial with lslamic Jihad, a dent Mahm-OUd Abbas has itant .¡i-oups fired over the death tdl m-0unted, allyrwognizedPalestinian surrendertoterrorism and sma.Uer .g:r-OUp that fought .¡overned autcnan-OUS ar--

4-,000 rockets into Israel the Amerlcans fncreas· Auth-0rity notHamas the dictates el Ha.mas.~ al-0n,:sideHamas, said Is- eas e{ the lsraeli--0<:-o.1pied 

thl---OU.chout the I'rghtin,:, ingly prwsur-ed lsrael t-0 to provide humanitat"ian Thecea.se-ñre«lmes at ratl'sdeclaratfonofatruce WcstBankand hasb:mited 

launchin.c the prqectiles stqi the otfensive a.id to Gaza. a sensitive time foc Netan- wasa ddeat fer Ne.tan ya.hu influence in Gaza. frcrn civilian a.reas at ls- In a rare public rift, Netanyahuquicldyc.ame ya.hu. Jn the wake e{ an and"avictocytoth!P.ales- IsraeliattackshavealS-O 

raeli ctties. Dozens-0fpro- Netanyahu on Wednes- under heavycriticlsmfrun fn«lnclu sive election in tínian pecple."" damaz:ed at least 18 hos-

~~%:v~~ : ~;;~~ tY~f'r/i!~es~~~~; ~~~]~!( t!e~;;r~ ~a;:¿, ~e~aj1;;ft~ ~~1 .¡r~~¡:~~jm~, ~~~ :~~~et:i~ ~~~~ tb:n.¡ c«nmercial and cul- Joe ~den t o wind thin.¡s Saar, a former ally wh-0 tí-0n in parliament. His sutfered si.¡nific.ant l-0.sses the Wocld Health Orz:anitural capital d-0wn, appearin: deter· n-0w leads a m.aU party -OPP-Onents now have u n- in the f\.chtin: Hamasand zatirn said. Neal"ly half -0{ 

Israel, meanwhile, car-- mined to intb:ctmax:imum qiposedt-0the ¡r-imemin· til June2 U! fcrm anal ter- lslamic Jihad saidat least ali essential drug:s ha.ve ried -0ut hundreds e{ a.ir-- damagecnHamasinawar ist'!'l", called the ce.ase-fue n ative.covanmentc<thdr 20 of their ñ.¡hters were runout 

strikes tar.g:etin.c what it that cooldhelpsa-;relmp-0· "embarrassing."" own. killed, while Israel sa.id Israel! b-0mbin.¡ has 

sa.td was Hamas' mib:tary litical career. l n a p-Otentially damaz:· The war :reat ly w mpif- the nwnber was at least damaz:ed ov.er 50 scl1-0-0ls 

infrastructure, intludin¡:: a Bu.t late Thursday, Ne- ing development for the cated the efforts ofhis op- 1.3-0 and probably higher a.cross the territory; ac- vast tunnel netwock tan}"<'lll.l's ctfi-0e &m-OUnced Isradi leader; the Pales- p-0nents, who include b-Oth Sorne 58,0-00 Pales- cocding to advocac.y .g:roup 

At least230Palcstinians the oease-fue a:reement. tinian milítants claimed Jewish and Arab parties tinians tled their homes, save theChildrc.,dcstroy· were killed, fncludfn,: 65 Ha mas quiclcly followed Net.anyahu had ai::reed to and were forted t-0 suspend many-0ftrJ!lll seeldng shel- ing at least six:. While r echildren and 39 women, suit. Militants -oontinued ha.lt 1\u-ther Israeliact.ions their ne.¡otiations in such ter in cr-owded United Na- pairs are d-0ne, educ.aticn 

with 1,710 pwple W-OUnded, t-O laundi. sporadic rocket at the Al Aqsa Mosq..¡e and a fraught envir-0nment. But tions uhod s ata time -0( a Will bedi:¡-q¡ttd fornearly 

a.cc-0rdin.l! t-0 the Gaza at Israel early t-0day, be - tocall «ftheplannedevic· the ine-0ntlusive -0utc-0me corona.virus outbreak 42,00-0 children 

May 21, 202110:17 am (GMT -7:00) 

What's 

Be lng 

Planned? 

WhyThls 

Ad! 

What's 

Avalla ble? 

Where You 

Come In 

Spe<liil 

A«ommodcltlons 

~""' U.S. Dé,>ortMMt OITIOll<f)O(IOliOol 

~a,? Federal Railroad Administration 

PUBLIC NOTICE Coa challa Vallay - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Sarvic,a Program 

Notica of Complation (NOC) and Notica of Availability (NOA)for a 

Joint Tiar 1/Program Environmantal lmpact Statemant/ Environmantal lmpact Raport (Program EIS/ EIR) 

ltlYllrnOt 

'"'"" TIAIISM>ffATION 

COWMts:S10"1 

Pursuant to the National E.nvironmental Po/icyAct (NE.PA) and the California E.nvironmental Quality Act (CE.QA).. the Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA~ California [)t:ipartment ofTransportation (Caltrans) Division ofRail and Mass Transportation, and Riverside County 

Transportation Corrmission (RCTC~ have prepared a joint NE.l=YI./CE.QA Tier 1/Program E.nvironmental lrrpact Statement/E.nvironmental 

lmpactReport cner 1/Program E.IS/E.IR) to: 1) evaluate passenger raíl service options between Lo s Angeles Un ion station (LAUSJ in Los 

Angeles Count y; Califcrnia and the otyof Coachella in Riverside County, Ca llornia, which are oo\lectively known as the CoachellaValley 

San Gorgonio Pass Rai Corridor Service Progra m (Program), and 2) provide alternativetravel choices to automobile ownership along the 

144-mile long Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Raíl Corridor (Program Corridor). The DraftTier 1/Program E.IS/E.IR has been prepared 

by FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC to analyzethe potential signincant environmental irrpacts of the proposed Program and to identifypotential 

ml:igation strategtes thatwould inform future site-spedficmitigation measuresto avoid or reduce significant impacts durrlg 

subsequent O-uture)Tier 2/Project-level ana!yses. 

FRA., Caltran~ and RCTC have studiedthe effects that the proposed Program may have on the environment and comrrunity. The results 

ofthese studies are contained inthe Draft"Tier 1/Program E.fl\lironmental lrfl)act statement/E.fl\lironmental lrrpact Report ~IS/E.IR). The 

purpose ofthis notice is to informthe publicof its completion and availabilityto any interested individuals, and to provide the publican 

opportunity to comment and/ or participate in a publichearing onthe Program 

The DraftTier 1/Program E.IS/E.IR is availablefor review atthefollowing locations: 

• LA Un ion station/Metro libraryand Archive one Gatelll'ay Plaza, 15th Floor, l os Angeles, CA 9001 2 

• Fullerton Publiclibrary, 353 W. CorrmonwealthAvenue, Fullerton, CA 92832 

• Riverside Main Library, 3900 Mission l nnAvenue, Riverside. CA 92501 

• Riverside CountyTransportation Commission,4080 Lemon Street. CA 92501 

• Coitan Publiclibrary, 656 N. o;("h Street, Coitan, CA 92324 

• Loma linda Branch Library, 25581 Barton Road, Loma Linda, CA 92354 

• AX SmleyPublic Library; 125W. Vine Street, Red lands, CA 92373 

• Beaumont library; 125 E., E.ighth street Beaumont, CA 92223 

• Banning Pubticlibrary, 21 w. Ni col et street, Banning.. CA 92220 

• Palm Springs Public library300 S. SUnriseWay; Palm Springs, CA 92~2 

• Riverside County-Indio Branch Library, 200 Civic Center Mali, India, CA 92201 

• Riverside County- Coachella Brand'l library, 1500 6th Street, Coachel!a, CA 92236 

The DraftTier 1/Program E.IS/E.IR may also bevieiwed online atthe following locations: 

• RCTCs website (https://www.rctc org1cyc,ectskoach€fü-va11ev-san-gorg9ni9-pass-corriQpr-raiI-oorfidor-service;q9ject:D 

• FRA'swebs ite 

(htt ps ;f /rai lroa ds ,Q ot .gov/ envirpnment/ enviro nm ent a 1-reyiw 1 / co achell a-val ley-san-g o rg oni o-pa ss-oor ri dor-investm ent-pla n) 

• Regulations.gov {https·flWW!'lf regIIlations gov/docM/EBA-2021-0048) 

Publlc hearings will be oonducted virtual!yat the dates pr1J1Jided bellJIII. Virtual meeting links will be posted to the Programwebsites 

prior tothe public hearings. 

• June22 2021,04:30 pm.- 07:00 pm. 

• .Une 26, 2021, 08:30 am. - 11 :00 a.m. 

The public revia.v and oomment periodfor the DraftTIer 1/Program E!S/EIR is May21, 2021 toJuly6, 2021, Federal state and local 

agencies, organization!;. and the publicare invited to provide corrments on the DraftTier 1/Program E.IS/E.IR. lnterested persons should 

submt electronic oomments via regulations.gov by searching forthe Prograrrfs Docket Number (FRA-2021 -0048) or via email t o 

01rail@rctc.org. Written aimments should be mailed vía United states f\/lail to: FRA's Office of Program Delivery, 1200 New Jersf!/ Avenue. 

S.E.. (Maíl Stop 20), Washington, DC 20590, orRiverside CountyTransportation Commission (RCTQ, P.O. Box 1200a Riverside, California, 

92502. Comments should indude"Coachella Valley- San Gorgonio Pass Rai! Corridor Service Program- Draft" E.IS/E.IR Comments~in the 

subject line and the aimmenter's physical mailing address inthe body ofthe letteror email. Comrnents are due byTuesday, .Uly6, 2021. 

lndividuals who require special acOJmmodation {American Sign Language interpreter, documentation in alternateformats, etc.) are 

requested to call (909) 627-2974 at least 72 hours in advance of the publichearings to request American with DisabilitiesAct (ADA.) 

a ccorrmodations or translator services. 

Page: A06 

Powered by TECNAVIA 
OC Weeklies Spanish - 05/21/2021 

May 21, 202110:23 am (GMT -7:00) 

J[:IAS uPre.is.i..u1uPU&1.uclONorn:cf1.S10R 

~ 

M IIOlOMGO 

NEWEST • FRIENDLIEST • AFES morongocasinoresort.com/playsafe 

T 

MOlO~GO 

M oror,go supports , .,.pcns ibl•¡¡.am ing. 1-800-G AMBLER. M..,nag•ment res• n,..s d rigMs • GOOD TIMES• 

¿Qué esta 

prev~o"! 

¿Porque 

este anunc101 

What's 

Avallable'? 

¿Cut1l essu 

papel'? 

Adaptaciones 

especiales 

U S. Doport..-1 olTIG""l)OtlCJIIOf> 

Federal Rollrood Administratfon 

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO Programa dal servicio de corredor ferroviario del Valla de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio 

Anuncio de finalización (NOC)y Anuncio de disponibilidad (NOA) para una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/ 

un Informe d a Impacto Ambii1ntal conj untos para NEPAJCEQA de Nive l 1/Programa (EIS/EIRde Nivel 1/Programa) 

Deconbrmdadcon la Ley ~ioralde lbl itk:aAmbiental Nacional (NEPA)y la LeydeCalidadAmbientaldeC-!!librnia (CK;!A~ laAdrninistra.:ión 

Federal deFerocarriles (fRA~ la Oi,,isóndeTransp:;,rte F-erfOlliari:i y Wl:isillO del Depa,rt.ynentode Tra nsporte deC.a1ibrnia ~ ajtrans)y la 

ComisOndeTransportedel CondadodeRi-«!rside(OCTC) han preparacb una De=Brac::iéinde lmpactoAmbiental/ un lnbrmede Impacto 

Ambiertalconjl..l"ltos ~ NEPM:EQAdeNivel 1/Po,;i@ma l,'flS/EIRde Nivel 1/PíOQlclma)con el1inde: 1),eva li..erlaso p,;:iones de se rvi:: io 

ferr,::,(iariode pasa)ef'Os ent:re los A~ Union Station (LAUS)en elco ndxlo deLos Áng::les,CaHornia. y B ciu:::ladde Coachella enelcondado 

de Riverside. Calib rnia, q ue ,ewnrxen cckr.:ti~ mentecomo el Pro;¡rama de se rvicio de corredor ferr,::,(ia ri::i del V?J.ledeCoachella - Paso de 

SanGorgonio (P ogramai y 2)ofre::ero p,;:ionesde ú ,je?J.lernati11a sal uso de un ai.tom6íila lo larg::, del cone ::lorferrolli,rio~Valle de 

Coachella - PasodeSanGorg::,núde 144 mik11de b ngitud (Pograma Corre::br~ FRA,Calt1<1ns y RCTC han p,epa radoel Borrador E!S/EIRde 

Ni11d l/Programa pal?l anaiizarlos posibles imp;s:tos ambient~ sQnificali110sdel P10Qrama propuesto. e dentifica rpostiles e'Strategiasde 

mitigación que:furdamentarian las futuras medidas demitig:t,::Onespe::ificas del lugar pal?I evita r o reducir bs impactos significafoo sd u@nte 

b s subsiguientes a ni!ilisis (fut:u10s)deNi11el2/Proye::to. 

FRA,Caltransy RCTC han e'Sludiad:> bs efei:::tos queeJ Programa propuesto puedetenersob.ecl medioambientey L!J coml..l"lid'YJ. los resukados 

de C'Stos estudi::is se re::cgen en el !brra::lorde De:lara<: Onde lmpacb Amb~ tal/lnformede Impacto Ambiental l,'flS/EIR) de NN'el 1 /Prc:grama 

El propÓsito deC'Sle anun:: O es informar al público sobre su1inali:zación y disponibilidad pasa cual:::¡uier per,::,na irteresacb, y brind:!r i,I p(blico 

laoportunidad decomentM y/o parti:: ipar en I.Xlaaudiencia públi::a sobre el Prcgama. 

El !brracbrEIS/EIR de Ni11d 1/Progamaestil d isponible para su ~ isOnen las siguientes i..tiicaci::ines 

• LAUnion Station/Metro Library andAri:hilfC..OneGateway Plaza, 15th Flco~ Los Argeles,CA ':lXl12 

• Fullerton Public Library,353 W.CommonwealthAvenue Ful!erton..CA 92832 

• RN'erside M~ n Library,3':lXl Mission h nA11enue Ri..-erside.CA 92501 

• RillersideCoontyTransportation Commission.4000Lemon St~ ,CA 92501 

• Co fon Pubk libra ry,656 N. 9th St,eet,Colb n,CA 92324 

• Loma Lincb Branch Library, 25581 Barto n lbac:t Loma Linda.CA 92354 

• A.K. Sm~ey Public Library, 125 W. \lin-eStreet, le::l~rds,CA 92373 

• Beal.Xl)Clrt Library, 125 E. E!Qhth Street Beal.Xl)Clnt,, CA 92223 

• Bannirg Pi.Dlic library, 21 W. Nicolet Street, Banning.CA 92220 

• Palm Spriogs Public library 3(X) S. SunriseWey, Palm Spri119$.CA 92262 

• RiversideCo l..l"lty Indio 81"N1Ch library, 200Civi:: CenterMal, lndio,CA 92201 

• RiversideCol..l"ltyC0aehella Braixh library, 15006th Street,C0aehella,CA 92236 

TEI Borrador El::IEIR deNi11el l/Progamatambi-én se puede consultar en linea en las si;iuientes ubicaciones 

• Sil io web de la OCTC ( htt ps://www.rcl:::.org/pl01et ts/ coac hella-val ~y-san-gorgon io,. pass-co rricbr-raif-corrdo r-service,p rojee ti) 

• Sitú web de la FRA 

(https://railroackdot,;io,,-/environrnent/environrnenta~reiiiewskoache!B-11i,lley-sa rrQ0 1QOnio-pass-corridor-iflll'estmert-plan) 

• Re;iulaions.g:,11 (btlQ5-lfWWWlf'QldalÍJD500V/do:ket/EBA-íW1-004e,) 

Las audiencias públicas se ceiebractindeforma 11irtualen las fechas in:::licadas a continu;s:ión, losenla::es de las reuniones 11irtuales se 

publi::a~nen bs sitios web cid Pro;¡ramaartesde las audien:: ias p(ibli::as. 

• 22 dejunio de202l,de04:30 p.m, a 0 7:00 p.m. 

• 26dejunio de202tde00:30a .m.a 11:00a.m. 

El perbdodereiiisiéi n pá:,!ica y comerta rios para el BorradorEIS/ElRdeNivel 1/Programa e'S dd 21 de mayode 2021 al 6dej1.fode 2021. Se 

irwit.a a las agencias y organizaciones federales, estatales y locales y al público a plOporc i::inar comerilarios sobred Borrador EIS/EIR de Ni11d 

1/Pro;¡rama, Las personas irte resacbs debenenv6 r comentarios p:,r11ía ele::ti6ni::a a travésde~ulationsg:,,, buscancb el Número de 

Expediente del Prcg1?1ma (FRA-2021-0Cl48)o p::,r correoele::tióni::o a cvrail@)lctc.org. loscomerl.arios pores:::rib debenenviarseporcorre::i 

postal delos Esli,::los Unidos a: FRA's OfficeciPiogram [).elJlfery, l200 New Jersey A11enue S.E, (Mail Stop20),Washi119b n, OC 205 90, o Rii,ersm 

CoortyTransportation Commission (RCTq l:o, Ba,;: 12~ Rii,e rside.Calibrnia, 92502. Loscomerta rios deben U luirt oa:hella Valley- San 

Gc:irgonio Pass RailCo rrid:lfSer11ice Pro,Jram- Draft EIS/ERCommentsMen la linea de asunto y ladiiección p:ista l fisicade la pemnaqueeflll'iael 

comerta rio end cuerp::, de la carta o delco rre::i ele::trónico. los comertarios deben en,iarse antes del martes, 6 de jUio de 2021. 

Las personas que requie ran ad,ptacii.:>nC'S espe::iales (intérp~e de lenguaje de sefus esti,::lol.Xlidensc do:: Ul'Tlf!:ntación en b rma(os alte rnati110s, 

etc,)deben llamar al (909)627-2974 al menos 72 horas antesdelas audieo<:ias públ icas para solio:: it.ari!daptaó onesen 11irt ud de la Ley para 

Estadouni::lensescon Dis:::ap:,cdades (ADA)o ,enici::isde tradu,::ciéin. 

Page: AOB 

Powered by TECNAVIA 
•

VIERNES 21 MAYO 2021 La Opinión | 5 

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO

Programa del servicio de corredor ferroviario del Valle de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio

Anuncio de finalización (NOC) y Anuncio de disponibilidad (NOA) para una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/

un Informe de Impacto Ambiental conjuntos para NEPA/CEQA de Nivel 1/Programa (EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa)

¿Qué está De conformidad con la Ley Nacional de Política Ambiental Nacional (NEPA) y la Ley de Calidad Ambiental de California (CEQA), la

previsto? Administración Federal de Ferrocarriles (FRA), la División de Transporte Ferroviario y Masivo del Departamento de Transporte de California

(Caltrans) y la Comisión de Transporte del Condado de Riverside (RCTC) han preparado una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/un

Informe de Impacto Ambiental conjuntos para NEPA/CEQA de Nivel 1/Programa (EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa) con el fin de: 1) evaluar las

opciones de servicio ferroviario de pasajeros entre Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) en el condado de Los Ángeles, California, y la ciudad

de Coachella en el condado de Riverside, California, que se conocen colectivamente como el Programa de servicio de corredor ferroviario

del Valle de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio (Programa), y 2) ofrecer opciones de viaje alternativas al uso de un automóvil a lo largo del

corredor ferroviario del Valle de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio de 144 millas de longitud (Programa Corredor). FRA, Caltrans y RCTC

han preparado el Borrador EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa para analizar los posibles impactos ambientales significativos del Programa

propuesto, e identificar posibles estrategias de mitigación que fundamentarían las futuras medidas de mitigación específicas del lugar

para evitar o reducir los impactos significativos durante los subsiguientes análisis (futuros) de Nivel 2/Proyecto.

¿Por qué FRA, Caltrans y RCTC han estudiado los efectos que el Programa propuesto puede tener sobre el medio ambiente y la comunidad. Los

este anuncio? resultados de estos estudios se recogen en el Borrador de Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/Informe de Impacto Ambiental (EIS/EIR) de

Nivel 1/Programa. El propósito de este anuncio es informar al público sobre su finalización y disponibilidad para cualquier persona

interesada, y brindar al público la oportunidad de comentar y/o participar en una audiencia pública sobre el Programa.

What’s

Available?

El Borrador EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa está disponible para su revisión en las siguientes ubicaciones:

• LA Union Station/Metro Library and Archive, One Gateway Plaza, 15th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012

• Fullerton Public Library, 353 W. Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92832

• Riverside Main Library, 3900 Mission Inn Avenue, Riverside, CA 92501

• Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, CA 92501

• Colton Public Library, 656 N. 9th Street, Colton, CA 92324

• Loma Linda Branch Library, 25581 Barton Road, Loma Linda, CA 92354

• A.K. Smiley Public Library, 125 W. Vine Street, Redlands, CA 92373

• Beaumont Library, 125 E. Eighth Street Beaumont, CA 92223

• Banning Public Library, 21 W. Nicolet Street, Banning, CA 92220

• Palm Springs Public Library 300 S. Sunrise Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262

• Riverside County Indio Branch Library, 200 Civic Center Mall, Indio, CA 92201

• Riverside County Coachella Branch Library, 1500 6th Street, Coachella, CA 92236

TEl Borrador EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa también se puede consultar en línea en las siguientes ubicaciones:

• Sitio web de la RCTC (https://www.rctc.org/projects/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-rail-corridor-service-project/)

• Sitio web de la FRA

(https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan)

• Regulations.gov (https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FRA-2021-0048)

Las audiencias públicas se celebrarán de forma virtual en las fechas indicadas a continuación. Los enlaces de las reuniones virtuales se

publicarán en los sitios web del Programa antes de las audiencias públicas.

• 22 de junio de 2021, de 04:30 p.m. a 07:00 p.m.

• 26 de junio de 2021, de 08:30 a.m. a 11:00 a.m.

¿Cuál es su El período de revisión pública y comentarios para el Borrador EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa es del 21 de mayo de 2021 al 6 de julio de

papel? 2021. Se invita a las agencias y organizaciones federales, estatales y locales y al públicoaproporcionar comentarios sobre el Borrador

EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa. Las personas interesadas deben enviar comentarios por vía electrónica a través de regulations.gov

buscando el Número de Expediente del Programa (FRA-2021-0048) o por correo electrónicoacvrail@rctc.org. Los comentarios por

escrito deben enviarse por correo postal de los Estados Unidos a: FRA’s Office of Program Delivery, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Mail

Stop 20), Washington, DC 20590, o Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California, 92502. Los

comentarios deben incluir“Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program- Draft EIS/EIR Comments” en la línea de

asunto y la dirección postal física de la persona que envía el comentario en el cuerpo de la carta o del correo electrónico. Los comentarios

deben enviarse antes del martes, 6 de julio de 2021.

Adaptaciones Las personas que requieran adaptaciones especiales (intérprete de lenguaje de señas estadounidense, documentación en formatos

especiales alternativos, etc.) deben llamar al (909) 627-2974 al menos 72 horas antes de las audiencias públicas para solicitar adaptaciones en virtud

de la Ley para Estadounidenses con Discapacidades (ADA)oservicios de traducción.

109-97533-1
 

 

 

MUNDO Indio, Ca. del 21 al 27 de Mayo, 2021 A5

¿Cómo lidiar con un compañero de trabajo incompetente?

VALERIA SABATER 

¿Has tenido alguna vez

un compañero de trabajo incompetente? ¿De

los que descuidan sus funciones y hacen imposible

que tú puedas rendir con

normalidad? Si es así, te

explicamos qué estrategias

deberían tomarse en estos

casos.

Personas que no se esfuerzan, que eluden responsabilidades, que crean un mal

clima laboral con su actitud,

con su comportamiento...

¿Cómo lidiar con un compañero de trabajo incompetente? Quien más y quien menos se ha visto alguna vez en

esta situación y comprende,

sin duda, lo complicado que

puede ser, en ocasiones, manejar estas situaciones.

Algo que sabemos bien

desde el ámbito de los recursos humanos y la psicología

organizacional es que en

todo escenario laboral, existen lo que se conoce como

“manzanas podridas”. Lo

curioso es que suelen pasar

con facilidad los filtros de

selección de personal, porque en las entrevistas de trabajo se muestran resueltos y

competentes. Sin restar que

pueden tener un buen currículum.

Ahora bien, las habilidades duras no tienen nada que

ver con las habilidades blandas. Uno puede definirse por

acumular numerosos conocimientos y habilidades técnicas para ese trabajo y, sin

embargo, carecer de habilidades sociales y emocionales, empatía, competencias

para hacer equipo, liderar,

comunicar, motivar, etc.

Asimismo, hay algo que

debemos considerar: las

“manzanas podridas” son

un auténtico problema para

la organización. Afectan a

todo el equipo, reducen la

productividad, elevan la

ansiedad y crean una mala

imagen para la empresa. Lo

analizamos.

Claves para lidiar con un

compañero de trabajo incompetente

En todo entorno laboral

podemos ver a personas responsables que desean hacer

carrera y escalar posiciones

en su trabajo. Asimismo,

también abundan los que se

limitan a cumplir sus objetivos con eficacia e intentan hacer las cosas lo mejor

posible, pero sin tener en

mente optar a nada más que

a conservar su estabilidad.

Ambas figuras, se pueden

ver afectadas por un tercer

elemento caótico: el empleado irresponsable.

El compañero de trabajo

incompetente tiene como

principal característica hacer lo mínimo posible. No

es necesario que sean malas

personas, pero se diferencian de los demás por su baja

motivación, nula responsabilidad por su labor y una

sofisticada habilidad para

colocar en hombros ajenos

los fallos que son propios.

Todo ello se traduce a menudo en que los otros empleados acaban asumiendo

más trabajo, tanto para corregir sus errores como para

lograr que el flujo de actividad no se altere. A corto

plazo, lo que sucede es que

el clima laboral se enrarece,

crece el malestar, el estrés y

los desencuentros. A largo

plazo, surge el desgaste total

de energía y los problemas

de rentabilidad.

Veamos, por tanto, qué

estrategias deberíamos usar

para lidiar con un compañero de trabajo incompetente.

No desahogues con tus

compañeros tu enfado y

frustración

Admitámoslo, cuando tenemos un problema en el

trabajo y en concreto con

un compañero, solemos desahogarnos con los demás. Y

es cierto, resulta catártico

compartir con alguien de la

empresa lo que supone tener al lado a alguien incompetente, lo que cansa y los

problemas que acarrea. Sin

embargo, lo que sucede con

esto es que incrementamos

el malestar general.

Las emociones negativas

se contagian, el ambiente se

vuelve más complicado y, en

ocasiones, podemos vivir situaciones incómodas. Puede

que un compañero de trabajo

acabe desvelando nuestras

confidencias al compañero

incompetente y la situación

se vuelva más problemática.

Habla con la persona

incompetente en primer

lugar, sé claro, comprende,

clarifica qué quieres

Bien es cierto que nos

puede suponer un esfuerzo.

Sin embargo, lo más acertado en todos los casos cuando tenemos que lidiar con

un compañero de trabajo es

empezar por él. Lo ideal es

seguir el siguiente proceso.

-Le expondremos la situación refiriéndonos a tareas

y situaciones concretas. No

vale decirle “estás descuidando tus tareas o trabajar

contigo es un desastre”. Hay

que puntualizar qué conductas, qué situaciones y qué tareas suyas descuidadas nos

están trayendo problemas.

-El tono nunca debe acusador. La estrategia debe 

ser conciliadora y enfocada

a averiguar qué problema

existe. ¿Se siente desmotivado? ¿No está a gusto en 

ese trabajo? ¿Tiene alguna

preocupación? Debemos 

sondearle para que tome

conciencia de que su comportamiento trae consecuencias.

-Asimismo, le concretaremos también qué esperamos

de él o ella a corto plazo.

“Me gustaría que a partir de

mañana cumplieras con esta

tarea“, “espero que pasado

mañana esta incidencia ya

esté resuelta”, etc.

AVISO DE SOLICITUD 

El Condado de Riverside está solicitando comentarios de los ciudadanos, agencias públicas, 

proveedores de servicios y otras partes interesadas con respecto al borrador final del Plan de 

Acción de Un Año 2021-2022 del Plan Consolidado de Cinco Años del Condado 2019-2024 para 

Planificación Comunitaria y Planificación Comunitaria y Financiero para el Desarrollo de HUD. Los 

objetivos contenidos en el Plan de acción de un año son desarrollar comunidades viables a través 

de asociaciones públicas/privadas proporcionando viviendas asequibles decentes, un entorno de 

vida adecuado y oportunidades de desarrollo económico ampliadas principalmente para personas 

de ingresos bajos y moderados.

El plan de acción de un año 2021­2022 cubre todas las áreas del programa del condado urbano, 

incluidas las áreas no incorporadas del condado de Riverside, así como las siguientes ciudades 

colaboradoras: Banning, Beaumont, Blythe, Canyon Lake, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Eastvale, 

Indian Wells, La Quinta, Norco, Calimesa, San Jacinto y Wildomar. Las ciudades metropolitanas

conjuntas de Lake Elsinore y Murrieta también se incluyen dentro del programa CDBG del condado.

Se anticipa que la Junta de Supervisores adoptará el Plan de acción de un año en la reunión 

ordinaria del 8 de junio de 2021. Luego, el Plan de acción se enviará al Departamento de Vivienda y 

Desarrollo Urbano de los EE. UU. Para su revisión y aprobación final.

La fecha y hora en que la Junta de Supervisores puede considerar el Plan de acción final de un 

año 2021-2022 está sujeta a cambios. Comuníquese con el Condado al número de teléfono y/o a 

la dirección de correo electrónico a continuación para verificar cuándo la Junta de Supervisores

considerará el Plan de acción final de un año 2021-2022. Comuníquese con el secretario de la Junta 

sobre los procedimientos y protocolos de COVID-19 en cob@rivco.org o 951-955-1069.

Los comentarios pueden enviarse por escrito a la siguiente dirección a más tardar a las 4:00 p.m. 

del 7 de junio de 2021: Departamento de Vivienda, Personas sin Hogar y Soluciones para la Fuerza 

Laboral del Condado de Riverside, Atención al Programa CDBG, 3403 10th St. Suite 300, Riverside, 

CA 92501. Los comentarios también pueden enviarse por correo electrónico a sorozco@rivco.org, o 

por FAX al 951-374-3098.
San Berna rdino Sun - 05/21/2021 

6 1 ONEWS I SOIJfllERNULlfORNP. NfWSGl'IOOPo lNU ND EM~IRE 

Gaza 

ment and a raginz aronavfrus outbrak. 

Netanyahu's «fice .said his S.ecurity Cabinet h.ad 

tmanimously acupted an Eg:yptia n «ase-fir e pr oposal a fter rwomm'!nda· tioos fran Israd's militar-y chid a nd [(her t op 

security ctficlals. A statement boasted o{ "~,¡:niñ-

<:ant achiev.ements in the 

cperation, sorne of which 

are unpreccdcnted.~ It also included a ve.iled 

threat against Hamas. 

"Thc pditical leaders -empha.sized th.at the real- ity on the :rrund will det.ermine the future o{ the 

campaig n,~ the statement ,a¡d 

Toe fighting erupted CtJ. 

MaylO, whcn Hamas militants in Gaza fired lon:- rangerockets towardJerusalem. The barrage carne 

afta days of clashes betwecn l"alestinian protwt· ers and I sraelí police at Pa1est inians wave green Ha mas and th eir national f la9s whNe celebrating the cease-fire agreement bet ween Isr ael and Hamas in Gaza City early tod ~ 

the Al-Aqsa Mosque canpound . Heavy-handed po- Health Mi nistry, whieh fa-e the 2-a.m . ceaseA1re tiom of Yalestinians in ofthe warc.oo.ldgive thmt Since thef¡g,hting:bcgan, líce tactit-$ a t the com- d= not treak the num- tookdfect. the nearby Sheikh Jarrah renewed moment um to re- Gaza's infrastructure, a lP=d, built on a si:te hd.y bers d own into fighters In Washing ton, Biden neighOOrhood. start those t alks ready weakw.ed by a 14.-

to Mu.slims and Jews, and and chriliaru . 'Iwelve peo- hailed the cease-fire . "I An Egyptianafidalsaid Meanwhile i n Gaza, a year b lockade, hasrap"dly 

t he th reatened evktioo ple i n Isra el, indudin g a believe we have a genuine only thattensionsin Jeru- Hamas spokesman, Ab- deteriorated ci do:i:ens d Pa lestinians 5-year-d d b~ and 16-year- oppa-tunit y to m.alte prog- salem "will be addressed.~ delatif al- Q.anou, said Is- Medica! s~plies, water 

by Jew iih settlers had in- d d¡:irl, were killed . r ess,andI'm canmitted to He sp.cke Ctl ,CU1dition of rael's annooncement was andtuel for electricity a re 

tlamed ten.siros The United Stat es, Is· woclting: fa-itt he said. anonymity becau.se he was a "declaration of ddeat:" runnin¡: low in the terriThecompet;ing clail"ns to rael's closest and most BidcnsaidtheU.S. was discu ssing behind- the- Nonetheless, the ¡:roup ta-Y, cnwhichisraeland Jerusalem lie at the heart important allr, initially committed to helping Is- scenes n.egoti ations and said it would haia- the Egypt imposed the blo-ckof the Israeli-Yalestin ian back.e d what it said was ratl r e plenish its supply providedno details deal, which was to of- ade alter Hamas seiz..ed 

contlict and have repeat- Israel's right to sel(- de- of interceptor missil es fa- Itamar Ben Gvir, head ficially go into df«:,t at powerfrom thePalestinian edly tri¡:gered bouts o( vi· tense against indiscrimi- its Irai Dan.e rock.et-de- of the far-right Jewish 2- a .m Authority in 2-007. Since 

dence in thepast. nate rocket tire. Butas the fensesystmt and to wa-k- Power party, tweeted that Ali Barakeh, an offi- then, Yalestinian PresiHamas and other mil- f¡g,htin¡: dragged ai and in: w ith the intemation- the ceas-e-tire was "a grave cial w ith Islamic Jihad, a dent Mahmood Abbas has 

itant ¡:roups fired over the deat h toll mounted, allyreco:nizedYalestinian surrendertoterrorismand smaller group that (ought ,govemed autaianous a r- 4.,000 rocl:ets into Israel the American s increa s- Autha-ity not Hamas thedictates dHam.as.~ a long:si:de Ham.as, said Is- ea.s dthe lsraeli-occ~ied 

throoghout the fi,ghtin,g, ing:ly pre ssured Israel to to provide hum.anitarian The cea.se-tire comes at rael'sdeclarationofa true.e WestBank.andhaslimited 

launchin g the projectiles stop the ctfensive aid to Gaza a semi ti ve time for Net an- wasa ddeat fa Netanyahu intluence in Gaza. 

th.TI1 dvilian a reas at Is· In ara re public r ift, Netanyal-P.i.quicklycame yahu . In the wake dan and"avictoryto t hePales- lsraeliattack.shavealso raeli cities. Do:rens d pro- Netanyahu on Wed nes- underheavyaiticismfrom inconclusive election in t inian peq,le.~ damaged at least IS h osjectilestlewas far nath as daybrieflyrebuffeda ptb- memb-ers of his hawltish, Mardi, Netanyahu failed D-espíte the daims, b oth pítals and cli nics and deTelAviv, thecountry's bJ.s- lic call from President nationalist bas.e. Gideon to forma majority coali- ,groups appeared to have stroyedcn.ehealth facil.itY, tling: oommercial and cul- Joe Biden to wind thin,gs Saar, a former a lly who tion i n parliament. His suffered SL:nU'i.cant losses the World Health Organitural capital. down, appearing de t er- now l eads a s mall party opponents now have un- in theñghting:. Ham.asand zatiCtl said. Nearly h.alf of 

Israel, meanwhile, car· mined to intlict ma.'Cimum opposed totheprime min- ti!Jun,e 2- to fonn anal ter- Islamíc Jihadsaid at lea.st ali essential drugs have 

ried out hund reds of air· dam.ageaiHam.asina war i.ster, call.ed the «ase-fu-e nativegov,ernrnent d their 2-0 o( thcir t\ghters were run out. strikes tar,get ing wh.at it that couldhel.psavehispo- "embarrassing.~ own killed, while Israel sai d Israeli bo mbin¡: has 

said was Hamas' military litical career. In a potentiall y dama.¡:- The war : reatly oompli- the number was at least damag.ed over 50 schools 

infrastructure, inclu dinga But late Thursdar, Ne- ing: development for th.e cat ed the efforts ofhis op- 130 and probably higher. a cross the territory, acvast tunnd. n etwork tanyahu'sotficeannounced lsraeli le.ader, the Pales-- ponents, whoindude both Sorne 58,00 0 Pales- corofn¡: to a dv= y groop Atleast2S0 Palestinians the cease-tire agreement. tinían militants claimed Jewiih and Arab parties tinians tled t heir homes, Savethe Odldren,destroywere ltille d, including 65 Hamas quickly followed Netanyahu had agreed to and were forced to suspend manyofthem seeking: shel- ing: at l ea.st si:c. While r echildren and 39 wanen, suit. Militants continu.ed haltfurtherlsra.eli actions their ne,gotiatioos in sueh t er in crowded United Na- pairs are done, eG.l.cation With 1,no p«:p.e woonded, to launeh spa-a<lic rocl<..et at the Al Aqsa Mreque and a fraught environment. But tions schods ata time of a will be disrupted fa-nearly 

accordin: to the Gaza at Isratl early today, b e- tocallctftheplanned e vic- the i ncaJ.d usive ootcome coronavirusoutbreak.. 42,000 children. 

May 21, 2021 10 :12 am (GMT -7:00) 

Wtefs 

Belng 

Planned? 

Whyl hls 

Ad! 

Whafs 

Avallable'? 

WhereYou 

Come In 

Speclal 

Accon1n1odat1ons 

u.s. Depa,trnem of Tronspcttatlon 

Federa l Railroad Administration 

PUBLIC NOTICE Coachella Valla y - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Sarv ic,a Program 

Notic,aofComplation (NOC)and Notic,a of Availability (NOA) fora 

Joint Tiar1 /Program Environmental lmpact Stat,am,ant/ Environmantal lmpact Raport (Program EIS/EIR) 

R1VlRSIOe 

, .... rt TIAltStotunCIN 

COIIIMl»IVI 

Pur,uant to the National Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA) and ttie Ca lifornia Enviroomentat Qua lity Act (CEQA), the Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA). California Department ofTransportation (Caltrans) Division ofRail and Mass Transportation, and Riverside County 

Transportation Corrmission (RCTC), have prepared ajoint NEPA/CEQA Tier 1/Program Environmental lmpad Statement/Environmen tal 

lmpact Report (Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR) to: 1) e.raluat e passenger rail service options between Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) in Los 

Angeles Count y, California andthe City of Coachel!a in Riverside County, California, which are oollectively known as the CoachellaValley 

San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program (Program~ and 2) provide altemativetravel cho ices to automobOe ownership a long the 

144-mile long Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Ra íl Corridor (Program Corridor} Toe DraftTier 1/Program EIS/EIR has been prepared 

byFRA, Caltrans, and RCTCto analyze th e potent ial signi1'ic:a nt ernironmental impact, of the proposed Program and to identifypotential 

tTitigation strategies that would informfuture, site-specinc mitigation measure,to avoid orreduce signincant impact, during 

subsequent (future)Tier 2/Projed-l e.rel analyse, 

FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC have studied the effects thatthe proposed Program may have on the environment and comm.Jnity. Toe results 

ofthese studies are contained in the CKaft TIer 1/Program Environmental lmpact Statement/Ernironmental lmpact Report (EJS/EfR). Toe 

purpose ofthi> notice is to inform the publicof its competion and availabilityto any interested individuals, and to providethe publican 

opportunity to comment and/or participate in a publichearing onthe Program 

Toe Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR i> available fer re.riew at the following locatiom: 

• LA Union Station/Metro Libraryand Archive. One GatewayPlaza, 1 5th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

• Fullerton Publiclibrary, 353 w. Commonwealt hAvenue, Fullerton, CA 92832 

• Riverside Main Library, 3900 Mssion lnn Avenue. Riverside, CA 92501 

• Riverside CountyTransportation Commission,4080 Lemon Street, CA 92501 

• Coiten Public Ubrary; 656 N, 91:h Street, Coiten, CA 92324 

• Loma Linda Branch Library; 25581 Barton Road, Loma Linda, CA 92354 

• A.K. SnileyPublic Library, 125 W. Vine street, Redlands, CA 91373 

• Beaumont Library; 125 E. Eighth Street Beaumont CA 92213 

• Banning PIJbjiclibrary; 21 w. Nioolet Street, Banning. CA 92220 

• Palm Spring, Publiclibrary300 S. SUnriseWay, Palm Spring,, CA 92262 

• Riverside County Indio Branch Library; 200 CiVicCenter Mali. Indio. CA 92201 

, Riverside County Coa ch ella Branch Library; 1500 6th Street, Coachel!a, CA 92236 

Toe DrartTier 1/Program EIS/EIR may alrn beviewed online at thefollowing locations: 

• RCTC' s w ebs it e (ntt ps ·t!W'ww.rctc. orgiproie ctsicoa Chell a-va 11 gy-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-ra i!-corrido r-service-pro i ectD • FRA's website 

(https;ltra ilroad s, dot.qpv/ enviran ment t envirqnmenta 1--reyi f"N s/coa dJ ella-va llpy-san-gorgon ip-pa u -m r rid o r-investmen t-pl an) 

• Regutations.gov (bttps·fti,,:1NYJ1 reg11tatiom govfdocket:ffBé-2021-QMR) 

Publichearings will be conducted virtually atthe dates provided below. Virtual meeting links will be posted to the Programwebsites 

priortothe public hearing,. 

• June 22, 2021 , 04:30 pm. - 07:00 pm. 

• June 26. 2021, 08:30 am .- 11:00 a.m 

Toe public review and comrnent period forthe DraftTier1/Program EIS/EIR is May 21, 2021 toJuly6, 2021. Federal, state, and local 

agencie>, organization,. and the publicare invited to provide commenh on the DrartTier 1/Program EIS/EIR. lnt ere,ted perrnns should 

subnit electroniccomments vía regulation,.gov cy searching forthe Program'> Docket Number (FRA-2021-0048) orvia email to 

cvrail@rctc.org. Written comments should be mailed via United states Mail to: FRA's Ornee of Program Delivery, 1200 New Jersey Avenue. 

S.E, (Mail Stop 20), Washington, DC 20590, or Riverside CountyTransportation Co mmis sion (RCTC), P.O. Box 1200& Riverside, California, 

92502. Comment s should include~coachella Valley- 5.3n Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program- CKaft EISIEIR CcmmentsMin the 

sutject line and the oommentef's pnysical mailing address in the body of the letteror email. Comments are due by Tuesday; July6, 2021 

lndividuals who require special accommodation (American Sign Language interpreter, documentation in alternate formats, etc) are 

requested to call (90~ 627-2974 at least 72 hours in advance of the publichearing, to request American with DisabilitiesAct {A.DA) 

accommodations ortrans!ator services . 

Page: A06 

Powered by TECNAVIA 
The Press-Enterprise - 05/21/2021 

s ¡ONEWS ISOIJfHfRNULll'ORNP.NEWSGl'IOOPo lNL..I.NDEM~lll:E 

Gaza 

ment and a raginz aronavfrus outbrak. 

Netanyahu's ctfice said his Se.curíty Cabinet h.ad 

tmanimously acapted an 

Eg:yptian «ase-fire proposal after rwomm'!nda· tioos fran Isra.el.'s military chid and [(her t op 

security ctficlals. A statement boasted of ".si,¡:niñ-

<:ant achiev.ements in the 

cperation, sorne of whid!. 

are unpreccdcnted.~ It also included a vei:led 

t hreat against Hamas. 

"TM political leaders -empha.sized that the real- ity on the :rrund will d et.ermine th e :future of the campaig n,~ the statement ,a¡d 

Toe fighting erupted CtJ. 

MaylO, whcn Hamas militants in Gaza fired lon:- ran:erockets towardJerusalem. The barrage carne 

afta days of clashes betwecn Yalestinian protwt· 

ers and Israelí police at Palestinians wave green Ha mas and their national fla9s whNe celebrating the cease-fire agreement between Israel and Hamas in Gaza City early t od~ 

the Al-Aqsa Mosque can· pound. Heavy-handed po· Health Ministry, whicll fere the 2-a.m. ceas~A1re tions of Palestinians in ,ofthe warcooldgive thmi 3ince thefi;:hting:bcgan, 

líce tactiC$ at the com· d,oes not t:c-eak the num· tooketfect. the nearby .Shclkh Jarrah renewed mommtum tore· Gaza's infrasn-ucture, al· JW,lll.d, built on a site hd.y bus d own into :fighters In Washing ton, Biden neighborhood. start those t alks ready weakw.ed by a 14.· 

to Muslims and Jews, and and civ:ilians. 'Iwelve peo· hailed the cease-fire. "I An Egyptianafidalsaid Meanwhile in Gaza, a year b lockade, hasrap"dly 

the threatened evictioo ple in Israel, induding a belie...e we have a gmuine only thatternionsin Jeru· Hamas spokesman, Ab· deteriorat.ed 

e/ doz:;ens cf Palestinians 5·year-old bc,y and 16-year- opportunity to make p ro;:· salem "wíll be addressed.~ delatif al- Q;mou, said Is- Medica\ SJ.l)plies, water by Jew ish settlers had in- d.d girl, were kílled. r ess, andl'm canmitted t,o He sp.cke Ctl ,CU1dition of rael's annoonc.ement was and tuel for electricity a re 

tlamed terniCtls The United .States, Is· woclting: f a-itt hesaid. anonymitybec.ausehewas a "declaration of defeat :" r unning low in the terri· Thecompct;ingclail"nsto rael's dosest and most Bid'!'ll said the U . .S. was discu ssing b<llind- the· Nonetheless, the gr,oup ta-y; U1 whicll lsrael and Jerusalem lie at the heart important ally; initially c.,ommitted to helping Is- scenes n.egotiati,ons and said it would haia- the Egypt imposed t he bl,o-ckof the lsraeli-Palestinian backed what it said was ratl r eplenish its supply prov:idedno details deal, which was t,o of- ade alter Hamas seiz..ed 

c.onfüct and have repeat· lsrael's right to sel(- de- of interceptor mi.ssil es fer Itamar Ben Gvir, head ficially go into effect at powerfrom thePalestinian 

edlytri:;:ered bouts of vi· fense a¡:ainst indisaimi· its lron Deme rocl<..et·de- of the far·rfght Jewish 2- a .m Authority in 2-007. Since d.ence in thepast. nate rocket tire. Butas the fensesystmi and to wa-k- Power party, tweeted that Ali Barakeh, an offi- then, Palestinian PresiHamas and other mil· fi;:hting dra¡:g ed on and ing w ith the i ntematioo- theceas-e-fire was "a grave cial w ith lslamic Jihad, a dent Mahmood Abbas has 

itant groups fired over the deat h toll mounted, ally rewgniz..edPalestinian surr'!ndertoterrorismand smaller group that fought govemed autC11crnous a r4-,000 ro.ckets i nto 1srael the Americans increas- Al..thct'fty not Hamas thedictates ofHamas:" a longside Hamas, said Is- eas ofthe Israeli·OCCl.q)ied t hrooghout the :fighting, ingly pressured Israel to to provide human ita rian The cuse-fue comes at rael's declarationofa true.e WestBank.andhaslimited 

launching the projectíles stop the ctfensive aid to Gaza a semi ti ve time for Netan- wasa ddeat fer Netanyahu intlumce in Gaza. 

from dvilian a reas at Is· In ara re public r íft, Netanyal-P.i.quicldycame yahu . In the wake dan a nd"av:ictocytothePales- Israeliattackshavealoo raeli cities. Dozens el pro- Netanya h u on Wednes- underheavyaiticismfrom inconclusive election in t inian p~le.~ dama,ged at least IS h osjectiles tlew as far na-th as day briefly rebuffed a ptb· members of his hawltish, Mar<:h, Netanyahu failed Despite the daims, b oth pitals and cli nics and deTel Aviv, thecountry's bus- líe e.ali from President nationalist b ase . Gideon to forma maj"ority c.,oali- groups appeared to have stroyedooehealthfacility; 

tllng: oommercial and cul· Joe Biden to wind things .Saar, a former ally who tion i n parlíament. His suffered si.tnificant losses the World Health órgani· tura! capital. down, a ppearing deter- now leads a s mall party opponents now have un- in thef¡ghting. Hamasand zatiCtl said. Nearly h.alf of 

Israd, meanwhile, car· mined to intlict max:imum opposedtotheprime min- ti!June 2- to fonn anal ter- Islamic Jihadsaid at least ali essential drugs have 

ried out huntlreds of air· dam.ageonHamasina war íster, called the «Me-fue nativegovernmmt d't h!ir 2-0 of their fi;hters were ron out. 

stríkes t a r.tet íng what ít thatcoultlhelp save his po- "emba1Ta.ssing.~ own l<Jlled, while Israel said Israelí bombín.e has said was Hamas' mllitary litical career. In a potentially dama¡- The war greatly oompli- the nwnber was at least dama,ged over 50 s<:hools 

infrastructure, ind udinga But lat e Thursday; Ne· ing development for the cat ed the efforts of his ~ - 130 and prctlably higher. a cross the territory, acvast tunnd n etwork tanyahu'sotfice announced J.sraelí leader, t he Pales- ponents, whoindude both .Sorne 58,000 Pales· -cord:ing to advocacy groop 

Atleast.23-0Palestinians thecease-fue agr~ent. tinian milítants daimed Jew ísh and Arab parties t ínians tled thcir homes, S:we theChildr<m,destroy- were ltilled, including 65 Hamas qu icldy followed Netanyahu had agreed to a nd were forced t o suspend manyofthem seeking shel- ing at l east si:c. While rechild ren and 39 wanen, suit. Militants continued haltfurtherlsraeli acti,ons their negotiatioos in sucll ter in cro wded Unit.ed Na- pairs are done, e<.1l.cation 

With I,TI0 pecp.e wounded, to launcll speradic rocl<..et at the Al Aqsa Mosque and a frau,:ht mv:ironment. But t ions school.s ata time of a Will bedisruptedfa-narly according to the Ga:i:a at Israel early today, b e- tocallctfth.eplanned e vic- the i ncai.dusive outcome coronav:irusoutbreak. 42,000 children. 

May 21, 202110:09 am (GMT -7:00) 

Whafs 

Belng 

Planned? 

WhyThls 

Ad! 

Whafs 

Avallable'? 

Where You 

Come In 

Speclal 

Accon1n1odatIons 

ft U.S.~t OITIOl\lpOftOtiOn t-7 Federal Railroad Admlnlstration 

PUBLIC NOTICE Coachella Valla y • San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Sarvic:,a Program 

Notic:,aofComplation (NOC) and Notica of Availability (NOA)fora 

Joint Tiar 1/Program Environmental lmpact Stat:,am,ant/ Environmantal lmpact Raport (Prog ram EIS/EIR) 

Pur,uant to the National Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA) and ttie Ca lifornia Environmentat Qua lity Act (CEQA), t he Fed eral Railroad 

Administration (FRA), California Department of Transportation (Caltra ns) Division ofRail and Mass Transportation, and River>ide County 

Transportation Corrmission (RCTC), have prepared aj oint NEPA/CEQA Tier 1/Program Environment al lmpact5taternentf'Environmen tal 

lmpact Report (Tier 1/Program EI5f'EIR)to: 1) e.raluat e pa,senger rail service options between Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) in Los 

Angel e-; County, California andthe City of Coachel!a in Riverside County, California, which are oollectively known as the CoachellaValley 

San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program (Program~ and 2) provide altem ativetravel chOice-; to automob0e ownership a long the 

144-mile long Coachella Valley-5an Gorgonio Pass Ra i1 Corridor (Program Corridor} Toe Draft Tier 1/Program EI5/EIR has been prepared 

byFRA- Caltrans, and RCTCto analyze the potent ial signi1'ic:a nt environmental impact, of the prc:posed Program and to identify potential 

tTitigation strategies that would informfuture, site-specinc mitigation measure,to avoid orreduce signincant impact, during 

subsequent (future) Tier 2/Projed-level analyse, 

FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC have studied the effects thatthe proposed Program mayhave onthe environment and comtn1nity. Toe result> 

of th e-;e studie-; are contained in th e Draft TIer 1/Program Environmental lmpact Statement/Envircnmental lrll)act Report (EJ5/EIR). Toe 

purpose of thi> notice is to inform the publicof it> oompetion and availabilityto any interested individuals, and to provide the public an 

opportunity to comment and/or participate in a publichearing onthe Program 

Toe DraftTier 1/Program El5/EIR i> available for re.riew at the following locations: 

• LA. Union Station/Metro Library and Archive. One GatewayPlaza, 1 5th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

• Fullerton Publiclibrary, 353 w. Commonwealth Avenue. Fullerton, CA 92832 

• Riverside Main Library, 3900 M ssion lnn Avenue. Riverside, CA 92501 

• Riverside CountyTransportation ComtTission, 4080 Lemon Street, CA 92501 

• Colton PubUc Ubrary; 656 N, 91:h Street, Colton, CA 92324 

• Loma Linda Branch Library, 25581 Barton Road, Loma Linda, CA 923 54 

• A.K. 5nileyPublic Library, 125W. Vine Street, Redlands, CA 92373 

• Beaumont Library; 125 E. Eighth Street Beaumont CA 92223 

• Banning PubiicLibrary; 21 w. Nioolet Street, Banning. CA 92220 

• Palm 5pring, PubliCLibrary300 5. SUnri,eWay, Palm 5pring,, CA 92262 

• Riverside County Indio Branch Library, 200 CivicCenterMall. Indio. CA 92201 

, Riv erside County Coa ch ella Branch Library; 15006th Street, Coachel!a, CA 92236 

Toe Draftlier 1/Program EIS/EIR may alrn beviewed online at thefollowing locations: 

• RCTC' s w ebs it e (ntt ps ·t/W'ww.rctc. orgiproie ctsicoa Chell a-va II ev-san-gorgonio-p ass-corridor-ra i!-corrido r-service-pro i ectD • FRA's website 

(https;/tra ilroad s, dot.qovt enviran mentt envirqnmenta 1-revi f'iN stcoa chel la-va 11¡,y-¡ a n-gorgon i9-pa ss-m r rido r-i nvest ment-pl an) 

• Regutations.gov (bttps-ttd,:ww regI1tations govfdo<1:et/fBA-2021·0M8) 

Publichearings will be conducted virtuallyatthe dates provided belo,N. Virtual meeting links will be posted to the Programwebsites 

priortothe public hearing,. 

• June 22, 2021 , 04:30 p.m. - 07:00 pm. 

• June 26. 2021, 08:30 am .- 11:00 a.m 

Toe public review and comment period forthe Draftlier1 /Program EIS/EIR is May 21, 2021 toJuty6, 2021. Federal, state, and local 

agencie>, organization,. and the publicare invited to provide corrmenh on the Draftlier 1/Program EIS/EIR. lntere,ted perrnns should 

subnit electroniccomment, vía regulations.gov cy searching fort he Program'> Dock.et Number (FRA-2021-0048) orvia email to 

cvrail@rctc.org. Written comments should be mailed via United States Mail to: FRA's Ornee of Program Delivery, 1200 New Jersey Avenue. 

S.E, (Mail Stop 20),Washington, DC 20590, or Riverside CountyTransportation Co mmission (RCTC~ P.O. Box 1200& Riverside, Califo rnia, 

92502. Corrments should 1nctude~coachella Valley- 5.3n Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program- DraftEISfEIR CorrmentsMin the 

sutject line and the oommentef's physical mailing address in the body of the letteror email. Comments are due byTuesday; July6, 2021 

lndividuals who require special accommodation (American Sign Language interpreter, documentat ion in alternate formats, etc) are 

reque-;ted to call (90~ 627-2974 at least 72 hours in advance of the public hearing, to request American with DisabilitiesAct (ADA) 

accommodations ortrans!ator services 

Page: A06 

Powered by TECNAVIA 
 

Appendix E 

Notice of Completion/ Notice of Availability 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PUBLIC NOTICE

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program

Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Availability (NOA) for a

Joint Tier 1/Program Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report (Program EIS/EIR)

What’s Being Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), 

Planned? the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Rail 

and Mass Transportation, and Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), have prepared a joint 

NEPA/CEQA Tier 1/Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR) to: 1) evaluate passenger rail service options between Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) in Los Angeles 

County, California and the City of Coachella in Riverside County, California, which are collectively known as the 

Coachella Valley San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program (Program), and 2) provide alternative travel 

choices to automobile ownership along the 144-mile long Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

(Program Corridor). The Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR has been prepared by FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC to analyze 

the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed Program and to identify potential mitigation 

strategies that would inform future, site-specific mitigation measures to avoid or reduce significant impacts 

during subsequent (future) Tier 2/Project-level analyses. 

Why This Ad? FRA, Caltrans, and RCTC have studied the effects that the proposed Program may have on the environment and 

community. The results of these studies are contained in the Draft Tier 1/Program Environmental Impact 

Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR). The purpose of this notice is to inform the public of its 

completion and availability to any interested individuals, and to provide the public an opportunity to comment 

and/or participate in a public hearing on the Program. 

What’s 

Available? 

The Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR is available for review at the following locations: 

• LA Union Station/Metro Library and Archive, One Gateway Plaza, 15th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

• Fullerton Public Library, 353 W. Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92832 

• Riverside Main Library, 3900 Mission Inn Avenue, Riverside, CA 92501 

• Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, CA 92501 

• Colton Public Library, 656 N. 9th Street, Colton, CA 92324 

• Loma Linda Branch Library, 25581 Barton Road, Loma Linda, CA 92354 

• A.K. Smiley Public Library, 125 W. Vine Street, Redlands, CA 92373 

• Beaumont Library, 125 E. Eighth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 

• Banning Public Library, 21 W. Nicolet Street, Banning, CA 92220 

• Palm Springs Public Library 300 S. Sunrise Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262 

• Riverside County Indio Branch Library, 200 Civic Center Mall, Indio, CA 92201 

• Riverside County Coachella Branch Library, 1500 6th Street, Coachella, CA 92236 

The Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR may also be viewed online at the following locations: 

• RCTC’s website (https://www.rctc.org/projects/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-railcorridor-service-project/) 

• FRA’s website (https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-sangorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan) 

• Regulations.gov (https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FRA-2021-0048) 

Public hearings will be conducted virtually at the dates provided below. Virtual meeting links will be posted to 

the Program websites prior to the public hearings. 

• June 22, 2021, 04:30 p.m. – 07:00 p.m. 

• June 26, 2021, 08:30 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. 

Where You Come 

In 

The public review and comment period for the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR is May 21, 2021 to July 6, 2021. 

Federal, state, and local agencies, organizations, and the public are invited to provide comments on the Draft 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. Interested persons should submit electronic comments via regulations.gov by searching 

for the Program’s Docket Number (FRA-2021-0048) or via email to cvrail@rctc.org. Written comments should 

be mailed via United States Mail to: FRA’s Office of Program Delivery, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Mail Stop 

20), Washington, DC 20590, or Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, 

California, 92502. Comments should include “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Program- Draft EIS/EIR Comments” in the subject line and the commenter’s physical mailing address in the body 

of the letter or email. Comments are due by Tuesday, July 6, 2021. 

Special 

Accommodations 

Individuals who require special accommodation (American Sign Language interpreter, documentation in 

alternate formats, etc.) are requested to call (909) 627-2974 at least 72 hours in advance of the public hearings 

to request American with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodations or translator services. 
• 

ANUNCIO PÚBLICO 

Programa del servicio de corredor ferroviario del Valle de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio 

Anuncio de ÿnalización (NOC) y Anuncio de disponibilidad (NOA) para una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/ 

un Informe de Impacto Ambiental conjuntos para NEPA/CEQA de Nivel 1/Programa (EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa) 

¿Qué está 

previsto? 

De conformidad con la Ley Nacional de Política Ambiental Nacional (NEPA) y la Ley de Calidad Ambiental de California (CEQA), la 

Administración Federal de Ferrocarriles (FRA), la División de Transporte Ferroviario y Masivo del Departamento de Transporte de California 

(Caltrans) y la Comisión de Transporte del Condado de Riverside (RCTC) han preparado una Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/un 

Informe de Impacto Ambiental conjuntos para NEPA/CEQA de Nivel 1/Programa (EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa) con el ÿn de: 1) evaluar las 

opciones de servicio ferroviario de pasajeros entre Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) en el condado de Los Ángeles, California, y la ciudad 

de Coachella en el condado de Riverside, California, que se conocen colectivamente como el Programa de servicio de corredor ferroviario 

del Valle de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio (Programa), y 2) ofrecer opciones de viaje alternativas al uso de un automóvil a lo largo del 

corredor ferroviario del Valle de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio de 144 millas de longitud (Programa Corredor). FRA, Caltrans y RCTC 

han preparado el Borrador EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa para analizar los posibles impactos ambientales signiÿcativos del Programa 

propuesto, e identiÿcar posibles estrategias de mitigación que fundamentarían las futuras medidas de mitigación especíÿcas del lugar 

para evitar o reducir los impactos signiÿcativos durante los subsiguientes análisis (futuros) de Nivel 2/Proyecto. 

FRA, Caltrans y RCTC han estudiado los efectos que el Programa propuesto puede tener sobre el medio ambiente y la comunidad. Los 

resultados de estos estudios se recogen en el Borrador de Declaración de Impacto Ambiental/Informe de Impacto Ambiental (EIS/EIR) de 

Nivel 1/Programa. El propósito de este anuncio es informar al público sobre su ÿnalización y disponibilidad para cualquier persona 

interesada, y brindar al público la oportunidad de comentar y/o participar en una audiencia pública sobre el Programa. 

El Borrador EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa está disponible para su revisión en las siguientes ubicaciones: 

¿Por qué 

este anuncio? 

What’s 

Available? • LA Union Station/Metro Library and Archive, One Gateway Plaza, 15th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012 

• Fullerton Public Library, 353 W. Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92832 

• Riverside Main Library, 3900 Mission Inn Avenue, Riverside, CA 92501 

• Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, CA 92501 

• Colton Public Library, 656 N. 9th Street, Colton, CA 92324 

• Loma Linda Branch Library, 25581 Barton Road, Loma Linda, CA 92354 

• A.K. Smiley Public Library, 125 W. Vine Street, Redlands, CA 92373 

• Beaumont Library, 125 E. Eighth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 

• Banning Public Library, 21 W. Nicolet Street, Banning, CA 92220 

• Palm Springs Public Library 300 S. Sunrise Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262 

• Riverside County Indio Branch Library, 200 Civic Center Mall, Indio, CA 92201 

• Riverside County Coachella Branch Library, 1500 6th Street, Coachella, CA 92236 

TEl Borrador EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa también se puede consultar en línea en las siguientes ubicaciones: 

• Sitio web de la RCTC (https://www.rctc.org/projects/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-rail-corridor-service-project/) 

• Sitio web de la FRA 

(https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan) 

• Regulations.gov (https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FRA-2021-0048) 

Las audiencias públicas se celebrarán de forma virtual en las fechas indicadas a continuación. Los enlaces de las reuniones virtuales se 

publicarán en los sitios web del Programa antes de las audiencias públicas. 

• 22 de junio de 2021, de 04:30 p.m. a 07:00 p.m. 

• 26 de junio de 2021, de 08:30 a.m. a 11:00 a.m. 

¿Cuál es su 

papel? 

El período de revisión pública y comentarios para el Borrador EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa es del 21 de mayo de 2021 al 6 de julio de 

2021. Se invita a las agencias y organizaciones federales, estatales y locales y al público a proporcionar comentarios sobre el Borrador 

EIS/EIR de Nivel 1/Programa. Las personas interesadas deben enviar comentarios por vía electrónica a través de regulations.gov 

buscando el Número de Expediente del Programa (FRA-2021-0048) o por correo electrónico a cvrail@rctc.org. Los comentarios por 

escrito deben enviarse por correo postal de los Estados Unidos a: FRA’s O°ce of Program Delivery, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Mail 

Stop 20), Washington, DC 20590, o Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California, 92502. Los 

comentarios deben incluir “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program- Draft EIS/EIR Comments” en la línea de 

asunto y la dirección postal física de la persona que envía el comentario en el cuerpo de la carta o del correo electrónico. Los comentarios 

deben enviarse antes del martes, 6 de julio de 2021. 

Las personas que requieran adaptaciones especiales (intérprete de lenguaje de señas estadounidense, documentación en formatos 

alternativos, etc.) deben llamar al (909) 627-2974 al menos 72 horas antes de las audiencias públicas para solicitar adaptaciones en virtud 

de la Ley para Estadounidenses con Discapacidades (ADA) o servicios de traducción. 

Adaptaciones 

especiales 
Appendix F 

Geotargeting Analytics 

Programmatic Display Summary 2

Run Dates Campaign Targeting Impressions Clicks CTR

5/21 – 5/28 Campaign 1 Behavioral 140,000 282 0.20%

5/25 – 5/28 Campaign 1 Geofencing 60,000 58 0.10%

6/14 – 6/22 Campaign 2 Behavioral 247,755 173 0.07%

6/14 – 6/22 Campaign 2 Geofencing 149,999 111 0.07%

6/14 – 6/22 Campaign 2 ReTargeting 102,243 122 0.12%

6/28 – 7/6 Campaign 3 Behavioral 199,997 139 0.07%

6/28 – 7/6 Campaign 3 Geofencing 100,000 116 0.12%

Total 999,994 1,001 0.10%
3

Campaign 1

5/21 – 5/28

Targeting Ad Size Impressions Clicks CTR

Behavioral Total 140,000 282 0.20%

Behavioral 160x600 63,976 116 0.18%

Behavioral 300x250 43,948 75 0.17%

Behavioral 300x600 11,791 49 0.42%

Behavioral 320x50 320 0.00%

Behavioral 728x90 20,228 40 0.20%

Behavioral 970x250 132 15.38%

Behavioral 970x90 120 0.00%

Geofence Total 60,000 58 0.10%

Geofence 160x600 2,8365 0.18%

Geofence 300x250 16,453 12 0.07%

Geofence 300x50 2,9343 0.10%

Geofence 300x600 4,7998 0.17%

Geofence 320x480 620 0.00%

Geofence 320x50 25,631 21 0.08%

Geofence 480x32020 0.00%

Geofence 728x90 6,2458 0.13%

Geofence 970x250 4451 0.22%

Geofence 970x90 5930 0.00%

Grand Total 200,000 340 0.17%
4

Campaign 2

5/14 – 6/22

Targeting Ad Size Impressions Clicks CTR

Behavioral Total 247,755 173 0.07%

Behavioral 160x600 63,148 65 0.10%

Behavioral 300x250 90,066 62 0.07%

Behavioral 300x50 2,2110 0.00%

Behavioral 300x600 6,245 12 0.19%

Behavioral 320x48011 100.00%

Behavioral 320x50 832 2.41%

Behavioral 728x90 85,893 30 0.03%

Behavioral 970x250 281 3.57%

Behavioral 970x90 800 0.00%

Geofence Total 149,999 111 0.07%

Geofence 160x600 1,6934 0.24%

Geofence 300x250 119,761 49 0.04%

Geofence 300x50 2,1184 0.19%

Geofence 300x600 8547 0.82%

Geofence 320x480 260 0.00%

Geofence 320x50 21,036 32 0.15%

Geofence 480x32020 0.00%

Geofence 728x90 3,897 10 0.26%

Geofence 970x250 2443 1.23%

Geofence 970x90 3682 0.54%

Grand Total 397,754 284 0.07%
5

ReTargeting

5/14 – 6/22

Targeting Ad Size Impressions Clicks CTR

Total 102,243 122 0.12%

ReTargeting 160x600 1,924 3 0.16%

ReTargeting 300x250 40,412 22 0.05%

ReTargeting 300x50 2,815 2 0.07%

ReTargeting 300x600 936 1 0.11%

ReTargeting 320x480 73 3 4.11%

ReTargeting 320x50 24,278 17 0.07%

ReTargeting 480x320 5 0 0.00%

ReTargeting 728x90 30,893 70 0.23%

ReTargeting 970x250 287 2 0.70%

ReTargeting 970x90 620 2 0.32%
6

Campaign 3

6/28 – 7/6

Targeting Ad Size Impressions Clicks CTR

Behavioral Total 199,997 139 0.07%

Behavioral 160x600 45,897 53 0.12%

Behavioral 300x250 89,719 52 0.06%

Behavioral 300x50 3520 0.00%

Behavioral 300x600 11,625 10 0.09%

Behavioral 320x50 450 0.00%

Behavioral 728x90 52,242 19 0.04%

Behavioral 970x250 644 6.25%

Behavioral 970x90 531 1.89%

Geofence Total 100,000 116 0.12%

Geofence 160x600 5,5395 0.09%

Geofence 300x250 26,670 14 0.05%

Geofence 300x50 7,752 13 0.17%

Geofence 300x600 5,4875 0.09%

Geofence 320x480 1491 0.67%

Geofence 320x50 38,887 49 0.13%

Geofence 480x320 171 5.88%

Geofence 728x90 10,261 20 0.19%

Geofence 970x250 2,3543 0.13%

Geofence 970x90 2,8845 0.17%

Grand Total 299,997 255 0.09%
Creatives: Campaign 1

7
Creatives: Campaign 2 / ReTargeting

8
Creatives: Campaign 3

9
Appendix G 

Contact Eblast List 
CVR Eblast List

First name Last name Company Email address

Margaret Park ACBCLAD mpark@aguacaliente.net

Benjamin Torres Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians btorres@aguacaliente-nsn.gov

Jeff Grubbe Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians jgrubbe@aguacaliente-nsn.gov

Kari Stout-Smith Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians ksmith@aguacaliente.net

L Fossum Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians lfossum@aguacaliente-nsn.gov

Michael Potts Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians mpotts@accmail.net

Tom Davis Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians tdavis@aguacaliente-nsn.gov

Dawn Petrick Agua Caliente Casinos dpetrick@accmail.net

Alex Khalfin Amtrak alexander.khalfin@amtrak.com

Michelle Caudill Amtrak caudilm@amtrak.com

Richard J. Rogers Amtrak richard.rogers@amtrak.com

Stephanie Espinoza Arellano Associates sespinoza@arellanoassociates.com

Edgar Gutierrez Arellano Associates egutierrez@arellanoassociates.com

Sasha Cheechov Arellano Associates scheechov@arellanoassociates.com

Steve Finnegan Auto Club finnegan.stephen@aaa-calif.com

Robert Ybarra Banning Chamber of Commerce bsgpchamber@outlook.com

Hanna Barazani Barazani Stone hanna@barazani.com

Tammy Carter Beaumont Chamber of Commerce director@beaumontcachamber.com

DJ Mitchell BNSF Railway dj.mitchell@bnsf.com

Silvia Paz Building Healthy Communities Coachella Valley spaz@bhccoachellavalley.org

Paul Slama Cabazon Band of Mission Indians pslama@cabazonindians-nsn.gov

April Gallup Cabazon Outlets april@cabazonoutlets.com

Joanna Gibson California Department of Fish and Wildlife joanna.gibson@wildlife.ca.gov

Leslie MacNair California Department of Fish and Wildlife leslie.mcnair@wildlife.ca.gov

LaDonna DiCamillo California High-Speed Rail Authority ladonna.dicamillo@hsr.ca.gov

Diane Ricard California High-Speed Rail Authority diane.ricard@hsr.ca.gov

Patricia Watkins California High-Speed Rail Authority patricia.watkins@hsr.ca.gov

Erick Lemus California Partnership elemus.cap@gmail.com

Maribel Nunez California Partnership maribelnunez.cap@gmail.com

James Ramos California State Assembly, District 40 assemblymember.ramos@assembly.ca.gov

Chris Holden California State Assembly, District 41 assemblymember.holden@assembly.ca.gov

Chad Mayes California State Assembly, District 42 assemblymember.mayes@assembly.ca.gov

Eloise Gomez Reyes California State Assembly, District 47 assemblymember.reyes@assembly.ca.gov

Blanca Rubio California State Assembly, District 48 assemblymember.rubio@assembly.ca.gov

Ed Chau California State Assembly, District 49 assemblymember.chau@assembly.ca.gov

Freddie Rodriguez California State Assembly, District 52 assemblymember.rodriguez@assembly.ca.gov

Miguel Santiago California State Assembly, District 53 assemblymember.santiago@assembly.ca.gov

Phillip Chen California State Assembly, District 55 assemblymember.chen@assembly.ca.gov

Aurora Saldivar California State Assembly, District 56 aurora.saldivar@asm.ca.gov

Eduardo Garcia California State Assembly, District 56 assemblymember.eduardogarcia@assembly.ca.gov

Jacqueline Lopez California State Assembly, District 56 jacqueline.lopez@asm.ca.gov

Ian Calderon California State Assembly, District 57 assemblymember.calderon@assembly.ca.gov

Cristina Garcia California State Assembly, District 58 assemblymember.garcia@assembly.ca.gov

Reggie Jones-Sawyer California State Assembly, District 59 assemblymember.jones-sawyer@assembly.ca.gov

Sabrina Cervantes California State Assembly, District 60 assemblymember.cervantes@assembly.ca.gov

Jose Medina California State Assembly, District 61 assemblymember.medina@assembly.ca.gov

Anthony Rendon California State Assembly, District 63 assemblymember.rendon@assembly.ca.gov

Mike Gipson California State Assembly, District 64 assemblymember.gipson@assembly.ca.gov

Sharon Quirk-Silva California State Assembly, District 65 assemblymember.quirk-silva@assembly.ca.gov

Kelly Seyarto California State Assembly, District 67 assemblymember.seyarto@assembly.ca.gov

Randy Voepel California State Assembly, District 71 assemblymembervoepel@assembly.ca.gov

Connie Leyva California State Senate, District 20 senator.leyva@senate.ca.gov

Susan Rubio California State Senate, District 22 senator.rubio@senate.ca.gov

Maria Elena Durazo California State Senate, District 24 senator.durazo@senate.ca.gov

Anthony Portantino California State Senate, District 25 senator.portantino@senate.ca.gov

Richard Roth California State Senate, District 31 senator.roth@senate.ca.gov

Lena Gonzalez California State Senate, District 33 senator.gonzalez@senate.ca.gov

Chad Edison California State Transportation Agency chad.edison@calsta.ca.gov

David Lee Caltrans david.lee@dot.ca.gov

Luisa Easter Caltrans, District 12 luisa.easter@dot.ca.gov

Kirk Schneider Caltrans, District 7 kirk_schneider@dot.ca.gov

Tony Tavares Caltrans, District 7 tony_tavares@dot.ca.gov

Michael Beauchamp Caltrans, District 8 exec_sec_d08@dot.ca.gov

Sean Yeung Caltrans, District 8 sean.yeung@dot.ca.gov

Janice Benton Caltrans, District 8 janice.benton@dot.ca.gov

Terri Kasinga Caltrans, District 8 terri.kasinga@dot.ca.gov

Mark Roberts Caltrans, District 8 mark.roberts@dot.ca.gov

James Camarillo Caltrans, District 8 james.camarillo@dot.ca.gov

Richard Dennis Caltrans, District 8 richard.dennis@dot.ca.gov

Rosa F. Clark Caltrans, District 8 rosa.f.clark@dot.ca.gov

Kyle Gradinger Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit kyle.gradinger@dot.ca.gov

Ryan Greenway Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit ryan.greenway@dot.ca.gov
Phillip

Andrew

Hoebeke

Cook

Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit

Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit

phillip.hoebeke@dot.ca.gov

andrew.cook@dot.ca.gov

Dara Wheeler Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit dara.wheeler@dot.ca.gov

Adonis Galarza Center for Community Action and Environmental Just adonis.g@ccaej.org

Alma Marquez Center for Community Action and Environmental Just alma.m@ccaej.org

Jean Kayano Center for Community Action and Environmental Just jean.k@ccaej.org

Marven Norman Center for Community Action and Environmental Just marven.n@ccaej.org

Alejandra Gonzalez Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council agonzalez@ci.norco.ca.us

Catherine Rips Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council crips@angelview.org

Ivet Woolrdige Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council iwoolridge@ilp-trip.org

Jack Marty Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council jackmarty@yahoo.com

John Chavez Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council jd.chavez@verizon.net

Gloria Sanchez Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council joe.gloriaj@verizon.net

John Krick Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council johnkrick@charter.net

Kenneth Woytek Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council kwoytek@msn.com

Lisa Castilone Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council lcastilone@gridalternatives.org

Mary Jo Ramirez Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council mjramirez@cflckids.org

Mary Jo Colangeli Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council paloverdebus@yahoo.com

Priscilla Ochoa Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council pochoa@blindnesssupport.com

Betty Day Citizens and Specialized Advisory Council tippind@yahoo.com

Stephen Faessel City of Anaheim sfaessel@anaheim.net

Jordan Brandman City of Anaheim jbrandman@anaheim.net

Harry Sidhu City of Anaheim hsidhu@anaheim.net

Trevor O'Neil City of Anaheim toneil@anaheim.net

Avelino Valencia

Diaz City of

City of Anaheim avalencia@anaheim.net

Jose

Kevin Sin

Anaheim

City of Banning

jodiaz@anaheim.net

ksin@ci.banning.ca.us

Art Vela City of Banning avela@banningca.gov

Dave Happe City of Banning dhappe@banningca.gov

Alberto Sanchez City of Banning asanchez@banningca.gov

Mary Hamlin City of Banning mhamlin@banningca.gov

Anne Marie Loconte City of Banning amloconte@ci.banning.ca.us

Colleen Wallace City of Banning cwallace@banningca.gov

Heidi Meraz City of Banning hmeraz@banningca.gov

Kyle Pingree City of Banning kpingree@banningca.gov

Elizabeth Gibbs City of Beaumont egibbs@beaumontca.gov

Jeff Hart City of Beaumont jhart@beaumontca.gov

Mike Lara City of Beaumont mlara@beaumontca.gov

Rey Santos City of Beaumont rsantos@beaumontca.gov

Lloyd White City of Beaumont lwhite@beaumontca.gov

Kristine Day City of Beaumont kday@beaumontca.gov

Laurie Miller City of Beaumont lmiller@beaumontca.gov

Todd Parton City of Beaumont tparton@ci.beaumont.ca.us

Connor Traut City of Buena Park ctraut@buenapark.com

Sunny Youngsun Park City of Buena Park spark@buenapark.com

Elizabeth Swift City of Buena Park eswift@buenapark.com

Fred Smith City of Buena Park fsmith@buenapark.com

Art Brown City of Buena Park abrown@buenapark.com

Bonnie Johnson City of Calimesa bjohnson@cityofcalimesa.net

Ed Clark City of Calimesa eclark@cityofcalimesa.net

William David City of Calimesa bdavis@cityofcalimesa.net

Jeff Cervantez City of Calimesa jcervantez@cityofcalimesa.net

Linda Molina City of Calimesa molina@cityofcalimesa.net

Josie Meza City of Cathedral City jmeza@cathedralcity.gov

Mark Carnevale City of Cathedral City mcarnevale@cathedralcity.gov

Ernesto Gutierrez City of Cathedral City egutierrez@cathedralcity.gov

Raymond Gregory City of Cathedral City rgregory@cathedralcity.gov

Rita Lamb City of Cathedral City rlamb@cathedralcity.gov

Charlie McClendon City of Cathedral City cmcclendon@cathedralcity.gov

Gregory Raymond

Corella City of

City of Cathedral City

Cathedral City

graymond@cathedralcity.gov

John

Stone James City of Cathedral City

jcorella@cathedralcity.gov

sjames@cathedralcity.gov

Shawn Maddox City of Cathedral City smaddox@cathedralcity.gov

Adam Pirrie City of Claremont jearl@ci.claremont.ca.us

Maritza Martinez City of Coachella mmartinez@coachella.org

Megan Beaman Jacinto City of Coachella mbjacinto@coachella.org

Josie Gonzalez City of Coachella jgonzalez@coachella.org

Steven Hernandez City of Coachella shernandez@coachella.org

Neftali Galarza City of Coachella ngalarza@coachella.org

Denis Delgado City of Coachella ddelgado@coachella.org

Andrea Carranza City of Coachella acarranza@coachella.org

William

Bill

Pattison

Smith City of

City of Coachella

Colton

bpattison@coachella.org

bsmith@coltonca.gov
Issac Suchil City of Colton isuchil@coltonca.gov

Ernest Cisneros City of Colton ecisneros@coltonca.gov

David Toro Cit

y of Colton dtoro@coltonca.gov

Frank NavarroCity of Colton fnavarro@coltonca.gov

John R. Echevarri

a City of Colton jechevarria@coltonca.gov

Kenneth KoperskiCity of Colton kkoperski@coltonca.gov

Edgar CisnerosCity of Commerce edgarc@ci.commerce.ca.us

Mitch Lansdell Cit

y of Corona mitch.lansdell@coronaca.gov

Tom Koper City of Corona tom.koper@coronaca.gov

Jacque CasillasCity of Corona jacque.casillas@coronaca.gov

Chris Marcarello City of Covina cmarcarello@covinaca.gov

Victor Linares Cit

y of Covina vlinares@covinaca.gov

Russell Betts City ofDesert Hot Springs rbetts@cityofdhs.org

Gary Gardner City ofDesert Hot Springs ggardner@cityofdhs.org

Scott Matas Cit

y ofDesert Hot Springs smatas@cityofdhs.org

Robert Griffith City of Desert Hot Springs rgriffith@cityofdhs.org

Ken DomerCit

y of Fullerton kdomer@cityoffullerton.com

Bruce WhitakerCity of Fullerton bwwhitaker@live.com

Darcy McNaboe City of Grand Terrace hduffey@grandterrace-ca.gov

Darcy McNaboe City of Grand Terrace dmcnaboe@grandterrace-ca.gov

Bill Hussey City of Grand Terrace bhussey@grandterrace-ca.gov

Doug Wilson City of Grand Terrace dwilson@grandterrace-ca.gov

Jeff Allen Cit

y of Grand Terrace jallen@grandterrace-ca.gov

Dana Reed City of

Indian Wells dreed@indianwells.com

RichardBaloccoCity of Indian Wells rbalocco@indianwells.com

KimberlyMuzik City of Indian Wells kmuzik@indianwells.com

Christopher Freeland City of Indian Wells cfreeland@indianwells.com

Donna Griffith City of Indian Wells dgriffith@indianwells.com

Greg Sanders Cit

y of Indian Wells gsanders@indianwells.com

Ken Seumalo City of Indian Wells kseumalo@indianwells.com

Waymond Fermon City of Indi

o wfermon@indio.org

Oscar Ortiz City of Indi

o oortiz@indio.org

Tom RaffertyCity of Indio trafferty@indio.org

Glenn Miller Cit

y ofIndio gmiller@indio.org

Carl Morgan Cit

y ofIndio cmorgan@indio.org

Elaine Holmes City ofIndio eholmesindio@gmail.com

Gloria Hernandez Cit

y of Indio ghernandez@indio.org

Juan RayaCity of Indio jraya@indio.org

Kevin Snyder Cit

y of Indio ksnyder@indio.org

Leila Namvar City of Indio lnamvar@indio.org

Lupe Ramos Amit

h City of Indio lramoswatson@indio.org

Mark Scott City of Indio mscott@indio.org

Timothy Wassil City of Indio twassil@indio.org

Linda EvansCit

y of La Quinta levans@laquintaca.gov

Robert RadiCity of La Quinta rradi@laquintaca.gov

Steve Sanchez Cit

y of La Quinta ssanchez@laquintaca.gov

Edward WimmerCity of La Quinta ewimmer@laquinta.org

Wanda Wise-Latt

a City of La Quinta wlatta@la-quinta.org

Phill DupperCity of Loma Linda pdupper@lomalinda-ca.gov

Eric Garcetti City of Los

Angeles, Office of the Mayor mayor.garcetti@lacity.org

Greg Newton City ofNorco gnewton@ci.norco.ca.us

Bo Chen City of

Palm Desert bchen@cityofpalmdesert.org

Eric Ceja Cit

y ofPalm Desert eceja@cityofpalmdesert.org

Thomas GarciaCity of

Palm Desert garcia@cityofpalmdesert.org

Randy BynderCit

y of Palm Desert rbynder@cityofpalmdesert.org

Russell Grance City of Pal

m Desert rgrance@cityofpalmdesert.org

Geoff Kors Cit

y ofPalm Springs geoff.kors@palmspringsca.gov

Christy HolstegeCity of Pal

m Springs christy.holstege@palmspringsca.gov

David Ready City of Pal

m Springs citymanager@palmspringsca.gov

Lisa MiddletonCity of Pal

m Springs lisa.middleton@palmsprings-ca.gov

Steven Carmona Cit

y of Pico Rivera scarmonca@pico-rivera.org

Raul EliasCity of Pic

o Rivera webfeedback@pico-rivera.org

DamienArrula City of Placentia darrula@placentia.org

Craig Green Cit

y of Placentia cgreen@placentia.org

Iris Smotric

h City ofRancho Mirage iriss@ranchomirageca.gov

G. Dana Hobart Cit

y of Rancho Mirage danah@ranchomirageca.gov

Richard W. Kite City ofRancho Mirage richardk@ranchomirageca.gov

Charles Townsend City of

Rancho Mirage charlest@ranchomirageca.gov

Ted WeillCit

y ofRancho Mirage tedw@ranchomirageca.gov

Bill Enos City of Rancho Mirage bille@ranchomirageca.gov

Isaiah Hagerman City of Rancho Mirage isaiahh@ranchomirageca.gov

Jeremy Gleim Cit

y of Rancho Mirage jeremyg@ranchomirageca.gov

Jesse Eckenroth City of Rancho Mirage jessee@ranchomirageca.gov
Joni Almy City of Rancho Mirage jonia@ranchamirageca.gov

Paul Foster City of Redlands pfoster@cityofredlands.org

Charles M. Duggan Jr. City of Redlands cduggan@cityofredlands.org

Mike Pool City of Redlands mpool@cityofredlands.org

Chuck Conder City of Riverside cconder@riversideca.gov

Erin

Ronaldo

Edwards

Fierro

City of Riverside

City of Riverside

eedwards@riversideca.gov

rfierro@riversideca.gov

Gaby

Steve

Plascencia

Hemenway

City of Riverside

City of Riverside

gplascencia@riversideca.gov

shemenway@riversideca.gov

Andy

Gilbert

Melendez

Hernandez

City of Riverside

City of Riverside

asmelendrez@riversideca.gov

ghernandez@riversideca.gov

Jim

Kris

Perry

Martinez

City of Riverside

City of Riverside

jperry@riversideca.gov

kmartinez@riversideca.gov

Al

Nathan

Zelinka

Mustafa

City of Riverside

City of Riverside

azelinka@riversideca.gov

nmustafa@riversideca.gov

Lock

Ray

Dawson

Cruz

City of Riverside

City of Santa Fe Springs

ldawson@riversideca.gov

rcruz@santafesprings.org

John M. Mora City of Santa Fe Springs adminservices@santafesprings.org

Carlos Fandino City of Vernon cfandino@ci.vernon.ca.us

Mark Pulone City of Yorba Linda mpulone@yorba-linda.org

Peggy Huang City of Yorba Linda phuang@yorba-linda.org

Joanna Stueckle Coachella Valley Association of Governments jstueckle@cvag.org

Martin Magaña Coachella Valley Association of Governments mmagana@cvag.org

Tom Kirk Coachella Valley Association of Governments tkirk@cvag.org

Eric Cowle Coachella Valley Association of Governments ecowle@cvag.org

Erica Felci Coachella Valley Association of Governments efelci@cvag.com

Jonathan Hoy Coachella Valley Association of Governments jhoy@cvag.org

Shawn Isaac Coachella Valley Association of Governments sisaac@cvag.orgsisaac@cvag.orgsisaac@cvag.org

Lesa Bodnar Coachella Valley Economic Partnership lesa@cvep.com

Kyle Wagner Coachella Valley Economic Partnership kyle@cvep.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joe Wallace Coachella Valley Economic Partnership joe@cvep.com

Karen Hawkesworth Coachella Valley Historical Society khawkesworth@cvhm.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Holly J. Mitchell County of Los Angeles hollyjmitchell@bos.lacounty.gov

Janice Hahn County of Los Angeles janice@bos.lacounty.gov

Lisa A. Barlett County of Orange lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com

Donald Wagner County of Orange donald.wagner@ocgov.com

Michelle Steel County of Orange michelle.steel@ocgov.com

Doug Chaffee County of Orange doug.chaffee@ocgov.com

Frank Kim County of Orange kim.frank@ocgov.com

Karen Spiegel County of Riverside district2@rivco.org

Chuck Washington County of Riverside district3@rcbos.org

Jeff Hewitt County of Riverside district5@rivco.org

V. Manuel Perez County of Riverside mperez@rcbos.org

Mark Lancaster County of Riverside Transportation and Land Manage mlancaster@rivco.org

Juan Perez County of Riverside Transportation and Land Manage jcperez@rctlma.org

Richard Lantis County of Riverside Transportation and Land Manage rlantis@rivco.org

Joe Baca, Jr. County of San Bernardino supervisor.baca@bos.sbcounty.gov

Dawn Rowe County of San Bernardino supervisorrowe@sbcounty.gov

Janice Rutherford County of San Bernardino supervisorrutherford@sbcounty.gov

Curt Hagman County of San Bernardino hagman@bos.sbcounty.gov

Thomas Samulski Desert Blind & Handicapped Association, Inc. director@desertblind.org

Blanche Ramirez Desert Sands Unified School District blanche.ramirez@desertsands.us

Gretchen

Cherie

Gutierrez

Eifler

Desert Valleys Builders Association

Diaz Yourman & Associates

gg@thedvba.org

cherie@diazyourman.com

Luis

Bob

Gonzalez

Wright

Dr. G's (Colton City Councilmember) FB live events

East Valley Coalition

luisgonzalez@coltonca.gov

bobwright@rivco.com

Robert De Mas Empire Polo Club rdelmas@empirepolo.com

Carolyn Mulvihill EPA Region 9 mulvihill.carolyn@epa.gov

Lyle Leitelt Federal Railroad Administration lyle.leitelt@dot.gov

Amanda Ciampolillo Federal Railroad Administration amanda.ciampolillo@dot.gov

Faris Mohammed Federal Railroad Administration faris.mohammed@dot.gov

Karla Maffett Federal Railroad Administration karla.maffett@dot.gov

Rich Reiss Federal Railroad Administration rich.reiss@dot.gov

Stephanie Perez Federal Railroad Administration stephanie.perez@dot.gov

Todd McIntyre Federal Railroad Administration todd.mcintyre@dot.gov

Troy Johnson Federal Railroad Administration troy.johnson@dot.gov

Sylvia Tenorio Friends of the Indio Senior Center stenorio54@hotmail.com

Andrew Salas Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation gabrielenoindians@yahoo.com

Charles Alvarez Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indi calvarez1@gabrielinotribe.org

Shea Kopp Goldenvoice shea@goldenvoice.com

Diana Soto Greater Coachella Valley Chamber of Commerce diana.soto@gvcc.org

Jeff Levine Greater Coachella Valley Chamber of Commerce info@gcvcc.org

 
Gene Hale Greater Los Angeles African American Chamber of Co info@glaaacc.org

Revae Reynolds Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitors Assoc rreynolds@palmspringsoasis.com

Bob Thibault Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitors Assoc bthibault@palmspringsoasis.com

Scott White Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitors Assoc swhite@palmspringsoasis.com

Jonny Westom Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitors Assoc jwestom@palmspringsoasis.com

Gary Orfield Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitors Burea gorfield@gpscvb.com

Julie Sinclair Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitors Burea jsinclair@gpscvb.com

Rebecca Kirkpatrick Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitors Burea rkirkpatrick@gpscvb.com

Andrew Sall Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce asall@riverside-chamber.com

Cindy Roth Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce croth@riverside-chamber.com

Nick Adcock Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce nadcock@riverside-chamber.com

Crystal Wang HDR crystal.wang@hdrinc.com

Joel Lessard-Clouston HDR joel.lessardclouston@hdrinc.com

Robert Yates HDR, Inc. robert.yates@hdrinc.com

Rob Klovsky HDR, Inc. rob.klovsky@hdrinc.com

JD Douglas HDR, Inc. jd.douglas@hdrinc.com

Bruno Penet HDR, Inc. bruno.penet@hdrinc.com

Gerard Reminiskey HDR, Inc. gerard.reminiskey@hdrinc.com

Jessica Talman HDR, Inc. jessica.talman@hdrinc.com

Kelly Czechowski HDR, Inc. kelly.czechowski@hdrinc.com

Matt Van Hattem HDR, Inc. matt.vanhattem@hdrinc.com

Nina Delu HDR, Inc. nina.delu@hdrinc.com

Patrick O'Neill HDR, Inc. patrick.oneill@hdrinc.com

Rick Degman HDR, Inc. rick.degman@hdrinc.com

Nancy Holland, PE Hernandez, Kroone and Associates nancyc@hkagroup.com

Katie Porter House of Representatives, California District 45 katie.porter@mail.house.gov

Judy Chu House of Representatives, California District 27 judy.chu@mail.house.gov

Adam Schiff House of Representatives, California District 28 adam.schiff@mail.house.gov

Pete Aguilar House of Representatives, California District 31 pete.aguilar@mail.house.gov

Grace Napolitano House of Representatives, California District 32 grace.napolitano@mail.house.gov

Jimmy Gomez House of Representatives, California District 34 jimmy.gomez@mail.house.gov

Norma Torres House of Representatives, California District 35 norma.torres@mail.house.gov

Raul Ruiz House of Representatives, California District 36 raul.ruiz@mail.house.gov

Karen Bass House of Representatives, California District 37 karen.bass@mail.house.gov

Linda Sanchez House of Representatives, California District 38 linda.sanchez@mail.house.gov

Young Kim House of Representatives, California District 39 info@youngkimforcongress.com

Lucille Roybal-Allard House of Representatives, California District 40 lucille.roybal-allard@mail.house.gov

Mark Takano House of Representatives, California District 41 mark.takano@mail.house.gov

Ken Calvert House of Representatives, California District 42 ken.calvert@mail.house.gov

Doug Sears Hyatt Regency Indian Wells Resort & Spa doug.sears@hyatt.com

Lucille J. Boston Indian Wells Chamber of Commerce info@indianwellschamber.com

Steven Rosen Indian Wells Golf Resort srosen@iwgr.com

Joshua Bonner Indio Visitors Bureau joshua@indiochamber.org

Melissa Castro Inland Empire Economic Partnership mcastro@ieep.com

John Lopez Inland Empire Economic Partnership jlopez@ieep.com

MelisaMelissa Barragan Inland Empire Economic Partnership mbarragan@ieep.com

Paul Granillo Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP) pgranillo@ieep.com

Lee Marcos Kaiser Family of Restaurants lmorcus@kaisercorp.com

Jeff Fishbein La Quinta Chamber of Commerce jeff.fishbein@gvcc.org

Jose Moreno Los Amigos of Orange County jmoreno@anaheim.net

Maria Salinas Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce msalinas@lachamber.com

Hilda Solis Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, District firstdistrict@bos.lacounty.gov

Sheila Kuehl Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, District sheila@bos.lacounty.gov

Kathryn Barger Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, District kathryn@bos.lacounty.gov

Elizabeth Carvajal Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Aut carvajale@metro.net

Jay Fuhrman Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Aut fuhrmanj@metro.net

Delaney Morris Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Aut morrisde@metro.net

Jeanet Owens Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Aut owensj@metro.net

Michael Litschi LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency mlitschi@octa.net

James Campbell LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency jcampbell@octa.net

Fred Strong LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency fstrong@octa.net

Grant Wilson LSA Associates, Inc. grant.wilson@lsa-assoc.com

Michael Roach MJR Branding and Marketing michaeljroach@gmail.com

Roger Meyer Morongo Band of Mission Indians roger_meyer@morongo.com

Sandra Plunk Morongo Band of Mission Indians sandra_plunk@morongo.com

Michael Milhiser Morongo Band of Mission Indians michael_milhiser@morongo.com

Shane Helms Morongo Band of Mission Indians shelms@morongo-nsn.gov

Eric Haley Morongo Band of Mission Indians haleyassociates.llc@gmail.com

James Foster Morongo Band of Mission Indians jfoster@morongo-nsn.gov

Kimberly Gladney Morongo Casino Resort & Spa kimberly_gladney@morongo.com

Robert Steward National Association of Rail Passengers narp@narprail.org

Sophia Cohen National Association of Rail Passengers scohen62@gatech.edu

Sean Jeans-Gail National Association of Rail Passengers sjeansgail@narprail.org
Jill

Theresa

Jensen

Harvey

National Park Service

North Orange County Chamber of Commerce

jill_jensen@nps.gov

tharvey@nocchamber.com

Octavio Gonzalez Office of Congressmember Raul Ruiz octavio.gonzalez@mail.house.gov

Elizabeth Balistreri Office of Senator Richard D. Roth elizabeth.balistreri@sen.ca.gov

Elise Gyore Office of Senator Richard D. Roth elise.gyore@sen.ca.gov

Kevin Chang Office of U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein kevin_chang@feinstein.senate.gov

Erin Rogers Omnitrans erin.rogers@omnitrans.org

Andrew Do Orange County Board of Supervisors, District 1 andrew.do@ocgov.com

Dinah Minteer Orange County Transportation Authority dminteer@octa.net

Megan LeMaster Orange County Transportation Authority mlemaster@octa.net

Rosa Guillen Sanchez Orange County Transportation Authority rsanchez4@octa.net

Jennifer Bergener Orange County Transportation Authority jbergener@octa.net

Jared Hill Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) jhill1@octa.net

Suguet Lopez Organización en California de Líderes Campesinas, mmagana@leadershipcounsel.org

James Brownyard Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce james.brownyard@stbernie.com

Naran Reitman, Esq. Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce nreitmanesq@reitmanlaw.net

Jeanette Moore Palm Mountain Resort & Spa jmoore25@dc.rr.com

Mary Jo Ginther Palm Springs Bureau of Tourism and Convention Cent mginther@visitpalmsprings.com

Nona Watson Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce nwatson@pschamber.org

Martin Greenwood Palm Springs Hospitality Association adminpsha@gmail.com

Jerry Martin Rail PAC UNNC m_martin48@yahoo.com

Don Bing RailPAC dbing@railpac.org

Katie Stice Rancho Mirage Chamber of Commerce katie.stice@ranchomirage.org

Beth K. Daniel Renaissance Palm Springs Hotel bethdaniel@remingtonhotels.com

Cheryl

Lupe

Donahue

Garibay

Riverside County Transportation Commission

Riverside County Transportation Commission

cdonahue@rctc.org

lgaribay@rctc.org

Sheldon Peterson Riverside County Transportation Commission speterson@rctc.org

Anne Mayer Riverside County Transportation Commission amayer@rctc.org

John Standiford Riverside County Transportation Commission jstandiford@rctc.org

David Knudsen Riverside County Transportation Commission dknudsen@rctc.org

Lorelle Moe Luna Riverside County Transportation Commission lmoe-luna@rctc.org

Ariel Alcon Tapia Riverside County Transportation Commission aalcontapia@rctc.org

Marla Dye Riverside County Transportation Commission mdye@rctc.org

Jillian Guizado Riverside County Transportation Commission jguizado@rctc.org

Beatris Megerdichian Riverside County Transportation Commission bmegerdichian@rctc.org

Tyler Madary Riverside County Transportation Commission tmadary@rctc.org

Kristin Warsinski Riverside Transit Agency kwarsinski@riversidetransit.com

Larry Rubio Riverside Transit Agency lrubio@riversidetransit.com

Tom Franklin Riverside Transit Agency tfranklin@riversidetransit.com

Steve Smith San Bernardino County Transportation Authority ssmith@gosbcta.com

Rebekah Soto San Bernardino County Transportation Authority rsoto@gosbcta.com

Carrie Schindler San Bernardino County Transportation Authority cschindler@gosbcta.com

Andres Ramirez San Bernardino County Transportation Authority aramirez@gosbcta.com

Jim Guerra San Gorgonio Pass Hispanic Chamber of Commerce guerraproject@yahoo.com

Lauri Kibby Selene International, LLC lkibby@seleneinternation.com

Dean Francuch Shannon & Wilson, Inc. dgf@shanwil.com

Buford Crites South Coast Air Quality Management District bacrites@rcbos.org

Jack Cheng South Coast Air Quality Management District jcheng@aqmd.gov

Ping Chang Southern California Association of Governments chang@scag.ca.gov

Philip Law Southern California Association of Governments law@scag.ca.gov

Priscilla Freduah-Agyemang Southern California Association of Governments agyemang@scag.ca.gov

Hasan Ikhrata Southern California Association of Governments hikhrata@scag.ca.gov

Lijin Sun Southern California Association of Governments sunl@scag.ca.gov

Steve Fox Southern California Association of Governments (SC fox@scag.ca.gov

Harold Benash Southern California Railway Plaza Association hpbenash@att.net

Henning Eichler Southern California Regional Rail Authority eichlerh@scrra.net

Yena Jeon Southern California Regional Rail Authority jeony@scrra.net

David Huang Southern California Regional Rail Authority huangd@scrra.net

Devon

Al

Ryan

Scala

Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Southern California Regional Rail Authority

ryand@scrra.net

scalaa@scrra.net

Tom Schamber Southern California Regional Rail Authority schambert@scrra.net

Roderick Diaz Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metro diazr@scrra.net

Perias Pillay Southern California Transit Advocates pspillay@yahoo.com

Diana Morgan Southwest Community Church dmorgan@southwestchurch.com

Ray Johnston Southwest Community Church rayj@southwestchurch.com

Bob

Alan L.

Manning

Bosch, PE STV Inc.

Southwest Passenger Rail Association rmanning007@gmail.com

alan.bosch@stvinc.com

Felipe Olivar Sukut Construction folivar@sukut.com

Brittney Sowell Sunline Transit Agency bsowell@sunline.org

Victor A. Duran Sunline Transit Agency vaduran@sunline.org

Lauren Skiver Sunline Transit Agency lskiver@sunline.org

Vicky

Anita

Castaneda

Petke

Sunline Transit Agency

Sunline Transit Agency

vcastaneda@sunline.org

apetke@sunline.org
Jeff Guidry Sunline Transit Agency jguidry@sunline.org

Luis Salcido Sunline Transit Agency lsalcido@sunline.org

Rohan Anthony Kuruppu Sunline Transit Agency rkuruppu@sunline.org

Todd McDaniel Sunline Transit Agency tmcdaniel@sunline.org

Naomi Mbanefo The Greater Los Angeles African American Chamber o naomi@glaaacc.org

Randy Zupanski The Westin Mission Hills Golf Resort & Spa randy.zupanski@westin.com

Raquel Wood The Westin Mission Hills Golf Resort & Spa raquel.wood@westin.com

Ron Roy T-Now Trainer Training CHR rroy310@gmail.com

Art Brown Train Riders Association of California sirydd@aol.com

Tom Frankum Train Riders Association of California tfrankum@aol.com

Paul Dyson Train Riders Association of California pauljdyson@yahoo.com

David Casady Train Riders Association of California dcasady@san.rr.com

Rich Tolmach Train Riders Association of California rftolmach@earthlink.net

Shelby Kaplan Train Riders Association of California rusticanyo@aol.com

Project Train Riders Association of California trainriders2100@gmail.com

Barb Frost TranSystems bgfrost@transystems.com

Lynne Marie Whately TranSystems lmwhately@transystems.com

Anthony Madrigal, Jr. Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians amadrigal@29palmsbomi-nsn.gov

John Trudeau Two Bunch Palms jtrudeau@twobunchpalms.com

Clifton Meek U.S. Environmental Protection Agency meek.clifton@epa.gov

Jerry Wilmoth Union Pacific jwilmoth@up.com

Jamie Graydon Union Pacific jlgraydo@up.com

Clint Schelbitzki Union Pacific (UP) Railroad ceschelb@up.com

Lupe Valdez Union Pacific (UP) Railroad lcvaldez@up.com

Christopher Gray Western Riverside Council of Governments cgray@wrcog.us

Elaine Leib Windermere Real Estate elmorinpd@gmail.com

Mark Chang WSP changm@pbworld.com

Amber Amaya Youth Leadership Institute, Eastern Coachella Vall aamaya@yli.org

Brian Yanity yanityak@gmail.com

gmlevinmd@gmail.com

Dan Wentzel danrwentzeljr@yahoo.com

reedalvarado@gmail.com

Jackson Hurst jhurst29@students.kennesaw.edu

Douglas Weiss mabstoa2001@gmail.com

Pollyanne Wilson pollybygolly27@gmail.com

geedeb@aol.com

SNEHAL JARDOSH mbaexecutive@yahoo.com

Joseph Field fieldjosephf1@gmail.com

Elaine Morgan welainemorgan@gmail.com

Robert Frampton rvframpton@hotmail.com

Sabina Greco srgreco73@gmail.com

Michael Sloan michael.sloan50@yahoo.com

Andrea Josephson andij4@aol.com

Shawn Stoller shawnstoller@outlook.com

Michael Moore michaeljacksonmoore@gmail.com

Marvin Norman jebanorman@gmail.com

Sandra Allen allensl22@yahoo.com

Cindi Andersen cindersnaps343@yahoo.com

Billy Barr zookiebilly@gmail.com

Richard Bortness psguy92262@aol.com

Larry Cather lgc4407@aol.com

Gustavo Chavez guschavezjr@gmail.com

JL Fall jlfall@gmail.com

Kim Floyd kimffloyd@fastmail.com

Jeremy Gabriel jgabriel4@gmail.com

Jesus Gomez jgomez@indio.org

James Horne jhpalms@aol.com

George Irwin georgeirwin143@gmail.com

Cecilia Karstensen mrcecilk@yahoo.com

Christopher Koontz cikoontz@gmail.com

Ken Kunz kennethpar4@aol.com

Tara Lazar radlazar@aol.com

Anna Lewis bilingualagent@hotmail.com

Mary Maloney marymaryt513@aol.com

Marcella Marino gramball2@hotmail.com

Rebecca McCloud five5andjean@yahoo.com

Serik Nieto cityofgfestivals@icloud.com

Alvin Ocampo a.ocampo21595@gmail.com

MATTHEW PALAVIDO matthew.palavido@gmail.com

Gennaro Pupa jerrypooboo@gmail.com

Anthony Rincon arincon1225@yahoo.com

Greg Sadoian gsadoian@msn.com

Mark Scanlon-Greene marks-g@sbcglobal.net
David Schwartz

Mimi Smith

dsmc00@hotmail.com

mosaicmod@aol.com

Steven Staker steve.staker@slc.ca.gov

Sylvie

John Vollmar

Weiss

Teicher sylvieteicher@gmail.com

moodebluz@aol.com

Brad

Sam

Wald bradleykwald@gmail.com

samweiss@charter.net

Chris

Teresa

Younger

Adams-Ridila

chris@chrisyounger.com

tadamsridila@dc.rr.com

Blake

Charles Carter

Alexander bmisajet@gmail.com

ctcarter@hotmail.com

Dan Cook rivron513@gmail.com

Christopher Cuatt c.cuatt@gmail.com

Gorton De Mond gdemond@aol.com

Julianne Elliott madreypapel@gmail.com

Alexander Friedman alek3773@gmail.com

Michael Hayes michael.hayes@partisan.la

Blair Jockers bj90017@gmail.com

Joshua Katz joshuadanielkatz@gmail.com

Michael Mazgai mmazgai@pacbell.net

David Pickett dmpicket@up.com

Ann Taylor-Loughran aetaylor1@yahoo.com

John

Marc Anderson

Arias

Ullcott ullcott@yahoo.com

mander806@twc.com

Larry

Ruben

Anderson diannereedanderson@gmail.com

Maria Casillas

ruben.arias@colfa.ca.gov

mcasillas@la-quinta.com

Sandy

Ann Cobb

Clark sandypalms@gmail.com

alcobb@aol.com

Keith Coleman kbcoleman@aol.com

Anthony Crump anthony.crump@gmail.com

Jacqueline Danos jac.danos@gmail.com

Gustavo Gomez gusgomez@live.com

John Hale jhale3@gmail.com

Zhong Huang openjohn@outlook.com

Jennifer Kellams jensing83@yahoo.com

Jan Kielmann jan.k@hsresort.com

Mary Larsen mhugheslarsen@gmail.com

Steve Lech rivcokid@gmail.com

Mareo Rosset rossettiml@gmail.com

Beatrice Silverstein silveb47@yahoo.com

Bernadine Styburla bern.styburski@gmail.com

Bob Treacy dsrtplace15@yahoo.com

Bob Wright bwpalmdesert@aol.com

Jeffrey Kramer jeffrey@kramer.net

jesse.budlong@stvinc.com

Paul Druce drucep@gmail.com

Jackson Hurst ghostlightmater@yahoo.com

Glenn Olsen gi@sprintmail.com

Erica Wilder e_wilder@yahoo.com

Frank Mastroly frank.mastroly@socal.rr.com

gmartin@coachella.org

kwilson@wrcog.us

atristan@usc.edu

bkeith@aqmd.gov

cottonzgirl@gmail.com

danielle.squires@alstomgroup.com

ericvreese94@yahoo.com

garellano@arellanoassociates.con

gmjudge@twc.com

jchan@rctc.org

jefbu@aol.com

jmrubalcava@gmail.com

llubi.rios@palmspringsca.gov

mauromamawal@gmail.com

mbellre44@gmail.com

mmencacci@aol.com

nicolejohnson1127@gmail.com

nrobles@sunline.org

olivercleary@gmail.com

pcologne@icloud.com

pinaeric88@gmail.com

psphil9@gmail.com
rallegra@gmail.com

rebecca.johnson@kesq.com

sbaadkar@titanaec.com

sbcolman@sonic.net

shelley_kaplan@aol.com

thegrauels@yahoo.com

timothy@emergingtransport.com

todd.besant@gcinc.com

x.jaimes18@gmail.com

yoryomyan@aol.com

tom.tokheim@gmail.com

fwhitson@coltonca.gov

menorman@gmail.com

lorellemoe@yahoo.com

rockeye24@yahoo.com

cristinacamacho31@outlook.com

tjliebman@gmail.com

npayne@entravision.com

ntelemaque11@gmail.com

mloera@leadershipcounsel.org

heather@redlandsconservancy.org

ryan@oldgh.com

sallyrobertson3@gmail.com

ian.stewart@railpropulsion.com

simonholzman@gmail.com

overlandconstruction@yahoo.com

jeanetbo@gmail.com

a@a.com

jayjackson.pdx@gmail.com

vkast2000@gmail.com

jrobertsondr@gmail.com

manuel.barajas1211@gmail.com

nansea36@hotmail.com

azoueihid@picf.org

n.parra91711@gmail.com

wurtz2@gmail.com

catydid924@gmail.com

heidit100@gmail.com

rmurillo@hacsb.com

jharleaux@arellanoassociates.com

Adam Rush adamrushcitycouncil@gmail.com

Mark Manke mrmanke@msn.com

Ruwan Wickremesinghe 007ruwan@gmail.com

Tim Martin 1205psp@gmail.com

Jazmine Fontes 21jazmine@gmail.com

Ramona Ochoa 227ramona@gmail.com

Abner Vilches abnerfnp@yahoo.com

Alfred Moch aedwardmoch@yahoo.com

Alison LeBoeuf aleboeuf04@yahoo.com

Alex Putman alexander.putman@gmail.com

Liza Medrano alohaliza21@gmail.com

Gino Possanza ambassbear@aol.com

Andee Kaskiw andee760@gmail.com

Lisa Andresen andresen951@hotmail.com

Angie Balderas angie.balderas@sierraclub.org

Paulina Ospina anipso0505@gmail.com

Anwar Zoueihid anwarz4840@gmail.com

Apollo Fidel apollo_fidel@yahoo.com C Abeyta applechar@mac.com

Anne Rohm arohm@railworks.com

Susie Bowman artqueen1@aol.com

Delia Ruiz atmproductionsdelia@gmail.com

Patricia Lober auntpatsyr12@gmail.com

Antonio Yanez ayanez500@student.msjc.edu

Rosalinda Gutierrez bajarose3@yahoo.com

Barbara DoCouto barbdo@verizon.net

Ben Bodenmiller bbodenmiller@gmail.com

Bruce Ferguson bferg1@cox.net

Brian Freund bfreund@flatironcorp.com

William Dwyer bildwyer@gmail.com

Bob Jaworski bjaworski.ca@gmail.com

Brian Helder bjhelder@gmail.com

Bill Lanese blanese@lanese.com
Barbara

Barbra

Andrew

MacLaughlin

Matis

Dietz

bmaclaughlin@gmail.com

bmatis24@aol.com

bmemudrew@hotmail.com

Roberr Stowe bob@stoweins.com

Bobby Turner bobbyturner1@yahoo.com

Brad Zylstra brad_zylstra@yahoo.com

brendhan springe brendhan.springe@gmail.com

Brent Nguyen brent.ng48@yahoo.com

BrockBennett brockisfree66@gmail.com

Natasha Burt burt.natasha@gmail.com

ByronScott byron_g_scott@hotmail.com

Bill

Eric

Cadman

Thomas

cadmans@msn.com

cakid98@yahoo.com

Carlynne McDonnell caralex@verizon.net

Carol

Cecy

Shearman

Carrillo

carollinca@aol.com

cecy760@live.com

Christian Slotter cesmpt@gmail.com

Josee Silva chanelsilva70@yahoo.com

Christopher Thompson chris@massagebyyesi.com

Chrisanthie Wickremesinghe chrisanthiew01@gmail.com

MarcKlink chrome_slinky@hotmail.com

Joni Miller churchmowce@gmail.com

Kevin Christine

Barone

Caffrey

ckbarone@msn.com

clcaffrey53@gmail.com

Joyce

Do

Lawrence Quaal

clcharlie02@gmail.com

clearday1@me.com

Colleen

Charles

Baumbach

Powell

cmkb@hotmail.com

cmtap@msn.com

jorge gsrcia coky197040@aol.com

Colin Havens colinjameshavens@gmail.com

Constantine Krick constantine.krick@gmail.com

John Reiningercowboydiesel@yahoo.com

CraigGundersoncraig1731@aol.com

Kelly Muth cre8kell@yahoo.com

Robert

Christopher

Harris

Riess

crh01@earthlink.net

cwriess@yahoo.com

Dale

Danielle

Stowell

Wright

dalestowell@hotmail.com

dam.wright@hotmail.com

Darren Schilling darren.r.schilling@gmail.com

ColleenTodd daughterofliberty@msn.com

DavidKobbeman david.kobbeman@gmail.com

Gilbert Contreras delrey24@yahoo.com

David RobinRobertson

Lever

desertdave521@earthlink.net

desertrobn3@gmail.com

David

daniel

Freedman

kivenas

dfreedman2@dc.rr.com

dkivenas40@gmail.com

Doug McGillan dmcgillan75@gmail.com

Derek McGow

a dmic06@gmail.com

David Looez dnlopez24@gmail.com

DorisChurry dochurry@aol.com

John Wieland docwieland@gmail.com

RobertoDavalos dolly6161@msn.com

AdrianaDonozo donozoadriana@yahoo.com

Douglas Mefford dougmefford@gmail.com

Douglas Spesert dspesert@gmail.com

DavidWilgarde dswmd57@gmail.com

Daniel Palm dtpalm@yahoo.com

Irene

Dennis

Duncan

Walsh

duncan324@msn.com

dwjag@aol.com

David Kingsley dwkk1965@verizon.net

Earl Parica earlcparica@yahoo.com

James Spence ecnepsmij@gmail.com

Ed Lefkowit

z eddybearmd@gmail.com

Edward Horwitz edward.horwitz@gmail.com

EdwardDoran edwardjdoran@gmail.com

Earl Nelson egilbertnelson@yahoo.com

Eddie Idolyantes eidolyantes@yahoo.com

Kenneth Wagovich emlofcat@yahoo.com

Erich Obst erich@sunquestbuilders.com

Eric Tooley erictooley1@gmail.com

Ernestine Iniguez

Eric

Everett Stone

Stankis

ernestine.iniguez@yahoo.com

estankis@gmail.com

estone2002@earthlink.net
Bryan Martinez ether_909@yahoo.com

Tyler Burton etyburton@gmail.com

Ezra Sacks ezrasacks18@gmail.com

Genevieve Sanz fabiasanz@yahoo.com

Favian

Felix

Torres

Romero

faviantrr18@gmail.com

felixromero2013@gmail.com

Philip

Peter

Martin

Green

flipem2535@aol.com

fogcitypete@hotmail.com

Emma Castner fremto@aol.com

WILLIAM GOULD fullvalue@hotmail.com

Ben

Gary

Gallardo

Van Zandt

gallardoben@yahoo.com

garyvanzandt@verizon.net

Gavin

Henry

Perez

Corrado

gavin.perez@gmail.com

gejettest@yahoo.com

Greg

Glen

Hafner

Hutloff

ghafner@msn.com

ghutloff@gmail.com

Gerry

Glenna

Mattijetz

Knotts

gjetz077@aol.com

gjknotts@dc.rr.com

John

George

Hachey

Puddephatt

goaliejhachey@msn.com

gpuddephatt@dc.rr.com

Grant

CHRISTOPHER

Wilson

HARAMI

grantoid@yahoo.com

greekboy62@gmail.com

Greg

Gustavo

Orrante

Mastrapa

gregorrante@gmail.com

gus.mastrapa@gmail.com

Chris

Luis

Younger

Mariscal

hellocayo@gmail.com

horseloven2004@yahoo.com

Hector

Christine

Patino

Dreyer

hpalu@hotmail.com

hrdryer@verizon.net

Raymond

WILLIAM

Wakeham

Kopelk

hugh.wakeham@gmail.com

insideoutsideinc@aol.com

Ray

Jacob

Kennedy

Whitney

j_ray_kennedy@yahoo.com

jacobwhitney123@gmail.com

Jaime

Ross

Calitto

Massengale

jaimecalitto@gmail.com

jaimesdoug@gmail.com

Jan

John

Chang

Andrus

janchang1@gmail.com

jandrus613@gmail.com

Jay

Jazmin

Jarvis

Ibarra

jayj92260@gmail.com

jazminibarra17@yahoo.com

John

Jane

Adams

Mills

jbentona@gmail.com

jemills4354@gmail.com

Ken JMancebo Hjenandken@verizon.net

jhendrick78@hotmail.com

Kirk

Joan

Stone

Helms

jkirkstone@sbcglobal.net

joanh4@verizon.net

John

john

Harrell

lazarchic

john.r.harrell@gmail.com

john@lazarchic.com

John

Johnr

Clavin

Teall

johnclavin@aol.com

johnteall@gmail.com

Joseph

Joseph

Farley

Haller

jos.tfarley@gmail.com

joseph_haller@icloud.com

Jody

James

Sims

Rider

jsims@stacywitbeck.com

jtr777@aol.com

Joe

James

Rodriguez

Turner

jvrod10@gmail.com

jvt0913_2004@yahoo.com

Kristen

Gloria

Gonzalez

Gutierrez

k_gonzalez1202@yahoo.com

kaiser378@aol.com

Harriet Kamahele kamahelh@roadrunner.com

Tim Vigil kaos_unit@hotmail.com

Brett

Karin

Carlson

Starr

kapowskicarlson@yahoo.com

karinstarr@gmail.com

FRANCISCO VILLANUEVA katannga@hotmail.com

kristin Washington kaywash@msn.com

Kimberly

Keith

Durkin

Howard

kdurkin6@gmail.com

keiththoward@yahoo.com

kevin

Kim

nourse

Westman

kevin.nourse@gmail.com

kimwestman@hotmail.com

Kamryn

Carol

Miller

Garcia

kmiller@mctcjv.com

krol_irn7@hotmail.com

Kurt Pearson kurtimus@aol.com

Kyle Wagner kwwagner1@gmail.com

Connie

Leah

Navarro

Battle

ladycon12@yahoo.com

labattle64@gmail.com

Leticia Avila lavila789@gmail.com
Leanne Place

Leslie

Kent

Morelee

leannegpsanford@gmail.com

leslieyms01@yahoo.com

Liza

Lois

Hall lhall@fmgarchitects.com

loiskent1@hotmail.com

Brian Lopuck lopuck@me.com

Lorenzo Sanchez lorenzosanchez0392@gmail.com

Lorise Braviroff lorisepd@aol.com

William

Meredith Jordan

Kavadas losangeles2319@gmail.com

lovehavana@hotmail.com

Alvin Jasper lvnjspr@gmail.com

Dennis Lytton lyttondennis@gmail.com

Mark Coker macoker@sbcglobal.net

Maggie

Desiree Otero

Cahill maggiemagee@gmail.com

mail@desireeotero.com

Anthony Mazzilli mamazzilli@yahoo.com

Mario

Jose Rivera

Navarrete man241999@gmail.com

manorive@hotmail.com

Kim Albright manypaws88@gmail.com

Ray Marchant marchanttv2@gmail.com

Alan

Maribel Ornelas

Maretsky maretsky52@gmail.com

maribelkendra1@outlook.com

Marisol Gaxiola marisolgaxiola@comcast.net

Mark Peterson mark@soultonesmpe.com

Marilyn Casey maroca.1@juno.com

MARTHA

Martin

Van Rooijen

Camarena

martaxes@hotmail.com

martin.camarena@yahoo.com

Marlena Davis marzell08@gmail.com

Matt

Marvin Basham

Stroud mattpsca@gmail.com

mbb52@aol.com

Morag Cousins mcousins2017@outlook.com

Melissa Rush melissa.rush37@yahoo.com

Victoria Hicks melita54321@gmail.com

Quinston Merced merced.family2004@gmail.com

Mark Galletta mgsrv56@gmail.com

Michael Boytim michaelboytim@aol.com

Mike

Mike Wales

Levee mike.dava@gmail.com

mike@mikewales.com

Mike French mike@pioneertown-motel.com

Michael Lewis mikeaslan1@yahoo.com

Roman Minyaylyuk minyaylyuk@gmail.com

Mitch Moldenhauer mitch@themoldenhauers.org

Matt

michelle Cicalese

Kuzmick mkuzmick@stacywitbeck.com

mlcicalese40@hotmail.com

Melissa Mexia mmexia3@gmail.com

Mario Mora mmora89@yahoo.com

Arlen

Monica Moreno

Pavka mog1138@yahoo.com

monica_otiniano@hotmail.com

Ilene Rubenstein moonlightandbooks@gmail.com

Adriana Moreno morenoadriana40@yahoo.com

Todd Mowrey mowsefan@yahoo.com

Dale King mrfabulocity@yahoo.com

Zachary Katona mrgps853@aol.com

Lynn Austin mslynn99@gmail.com

Mario

Nate Fakes

Elizondo mzondo3@yahoo.com

nate@natefakescartoons.com

Nicola Wong nicolapd@aol.com

Noel Dodge noel.a.dodge@morganstanley.com

Nicole Tuchez ntezcod@gmail.com

Eric Livingstone nurseapp07@gmail.com

Brenda Ochoa ochoa.bc9@gmail.com

Owen Nordvig okninpsp@gmail.com

Miguel Olvera olverama@uci.edu

Dave Fleischman owldave57@gmail.com

Michelle Soto-Teall palmspringsmagpie@gmail.com

Paul Riedel parnyc4248@aol.com

Paula Andreozzi pastrychef_one@yahoo.com

Richard Patino patino19&6@hotmail.com

Paula Familetti paula.trimblefamiletti@yahoo.com

Philip Smith pfsmitty2982@yahoo.com

Phil

Patricia

Murphy

Brockman

phil.murphy@me.com

pjbrockwoman@aol.com

Paul

Patricia Britten

Rosen pjrosen@aol.com

pmail4243@gmail.com
Jill MiklesProbst probstjill@gmail.com

Marc Thomson psmarc93@gmail.com

John OConnell pstikibear@gmail.com

Rhea Cardona pulsetaker123@hitmail.com

Peter Davies pvdfish@hotmail.com

Ron McMillan r_mcmillan90004@yahoo.com

Rachael Polk rachael.polk10@gmail.com

Raul Correa Lopez racolo80@gmail.com

Ronald Gilbert rbgilbert@gmail.com

Ross Crowe rcrowe@crcimpresa.com

Read Brown read.brown1@gmail.com

Regina Basterrechea regina.basterrechea@gmail.com

Robert Smith res2@rocketmail.com

Robert Goldware rhgold53@gmail.com

Richard Jimenez richard.m.jimenez.jr@gmail.com

Richard Bortness richbortness@dc.rr.com

Richard Feutz richfeutz@gmail.com

Rick Adamson rickadamson1230@yahoo.com

Robert Leabow rl@acinetcom.com

Rick Merrill rmerrill432@gmail.com

Adam Gray roamin318@yahoo.com

Robert Keeran robertakeeran@gmail.com

Robert Tinker roberttinker486@gmail.com

Ronald Robnett ron@olympus.net

Ronald Williams ronsfo@gmail.com

Ron Peake ronwpeake@gmail.com

Rosie Alonzo rosee06@aol.com

Rosemary Flores rosemaryflores05@yahoo.com

Roy-Michel Bolduc roymichel.bolduc08@gmail.com

Roland Thompson rrt30@aol.com

Reza Asgharpour rshna@yahoo.com

Richard Gariepy rt.gariepy@gmail.com

Roger Westman rwshop@dc.rr.com

Spencer Allegaert sallegaert@gmail.com

Samieh Wood samie4peac@yahoo.com

Gordon Edwards sammydog99@hotmail.com

Sanjuana Mendoza sanjuanamendoza15@yahoo.com

Sean Mills sean@excelccinc.com

Susan Gorgei sfgorgei@yaahoo.com

Shawn Harkness shawnhark@yahoo.com

Sheryl Jones sheryl.jones@gmail.com

Toni Shiffman shiffmantoni@gmail.com

Shirleen Law shirleen1956@icloud.com

Craig Silver silver@sbtrust.net

Richard Savedra sixfour@rocketmail.com S J Perry sjperry000@gmail.com

Sherry Kelly skelly01@yahoo.com

Sharon Hayden slhayden1@yahoo.com

Jennie Vasquez smokey333@verizon.net

Elaine Snyder snyder.elaine@yahoo.com

Kelly Watson soberkel@gmail.com

Mohammad Rashid sonofrashid@icloud.com

Steve Spear spearsd@icloud.com

Martin Price sprice63@yahoo.com

Susan Byrne srbyrne.sb1@gmail.com

Stein Dolplads steindolplads@gmail.com

Steve Cole steve0296@yahoo.com

Steve Garey stevegarey@yahoo.com

Shaun Syed syedshaun377@gmail.com

Thomas Brady tbradymd@pacbell.net

Tom Desimone tdesimone@dc.rr.com

Marilee Miller teachendeavoring@gmail.com

Terry Rayborne terryr59@gmail.com

Tommy Reyna tgreyna01@gmail.com

Tom Vogt thomascvogt@yahoo.com

Michael Walsh tmobile080413@gmail.com

Thomas Engler tnengler@gmail.com

Tim Obayley tobayley@mac.com

Toni Bakal tonidbakal@me.com

Tim Parrott tparrps@aol.com

Roseann Zirpoli tvmom2@aol.com

Tyson Atwood tyson.atwood@anseradvisory.com

Gilbert Vandemheen vanssons@gmail.com
Victoria Cordova vcordova22@yahoo.com

Phyllis Verdugo verdugophyllis@yahoo.com

Victoria Emerson vickiemerson@roadrunner.com

Vivian Posen viposen@gmail.com

Sonia Barrera virgo021898@msn.com

Victor Yepello vyepello@gmail.com

Karen Pope waterlady65@gmail.com

Wayne Edwards wayne.edwards@dc.rr.com

Waymon Fitts wfitts1@yahoo.com

Will Alarcon willalarcon@aol.com

WilliamM Baird william.baird@verizon.net

William Walker wiyum@wiyum.org

David Finn writefinn@gmail.com

Nathan Perkins y2korn79@hotmail.com

YESSENIA NARVAEZ yessenianb@gmail.com

Amelia Bauder zelda2811@icloud.com
 

Appendix H 

Technical Advisory Committee Materials 
Technical Advisory Committee Roster 

Category 

Agency Partner 

Category 2 

Transportation Agencies 

Organization 

Coachella Valley Association of Governments 

Salutation 

Mr. 

First 

Tom 

Last 

Kirk 

Title 

Executive Director 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Coachella Valley Association of Governments Mr. Martin Magaña Director of Transportation 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Coachella Valley Association of Governments Mr. Jonathan Hoy Transportation Director 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Coachella Valley Association of Governments Ms. Erica Felci Government Projects Manager 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Coachella Valley Association of Governments Mr. Eric Cowle Transportation Program Manager 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management Agency Mr. Richard Lantis Land Development/Survey Deputy Director 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Mr. Jay Fuhrman Transportation Planning Manager 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Ms. Jeanet Owens Senior Executive Officer – Program Management 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Orange County Transportation Authority Ms. Jennifer Bergener Deputy Chief Executive Officer 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Orange County Transportation Authority Ms. Megan LeMaster Sr. Transportation Analyst, Rail Operations 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Orange County Transportation Authority Ms. Dinah Minteer 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Orange County Transportation Authority Ms. Rosa Guillen Sanchez Senior Transportation Analyst 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Ms. Carrie Schindler Director of Rail and Transit 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Ms. Rebekah Soto Management Analyst III 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Mr. Steve Smith Director of Planning 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Southern California Association of Governments Mr. Steve Fox Senior Regional Planner 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Southern California Association of Governments Mr. Philip Law Rail and Transit Planning Manager 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Southern California Association of Governments Ms. Priscilla Freduah-Agyemang Senior Regional Plannger, Mobility Plannign & Management 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Southern California Regional Rail Authority Mr. Roderick Diaz Director of Planning and Development 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Southern California Regional Rail Authority Mr. Henning Eichler Market Insights and Analytics Manager 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Southern California Regional Rail Authority Ms. Anne Louise Rice Director of Grants, Revenue Sourcing & Acquisition 

Agency Partner Transportation Agencies Southern California Regional Rail Authority Mr. David Huang Planning Manager 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Banning Mr. Art Vela Director of Public Works/City Engineer 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Banning Mr. Kevin Sin Sr. Civil Engineer 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Banning Ms. Anne Marie Loconte Associate Civil Engineer 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Banning Ms. Heidi Meraz Community Services Director - Transit 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Beaumont Ms. Elizabeth Gibbs Community Services Director 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Beaumont Ms. Kristine Day Assistant City Manager 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Beaumont Mr. Jeff Hart Public Works Director 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Calimesa Ms. Margaret Monson Interim Public Works Director 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Cathedral City Mr. Charlie McClendon City Manager 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Cathedral City Mr. Shawn Maddox Development Project Manager 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Cathedral City Mr. John Corella City Engineer/Public Works Director 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Cathedral City Mr. Stone James Economic Development Director 

Agency Staff Local City of Coachella Ms. Maritza Martinez Public Works Director 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Indian Wells Mr. Ken Seumalo Public Works Director 

Agency Staff Local City of Indio Mr. Tom Rafferty Prinicipal Civil Engineer 

Agency Staff Local City of Indio Mr. Timothy Wassil Public Works Director 

Agency Staff Local City of Indio Mr. Juan Raya City Engineer 

Agency Staff Local City of Indio Mr. Kevin Snyder Director of Community Development 

Agency Staff Local City of Indio Ms. Gloria Hernandez Contract Coordinator 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Palm Desert Mr. Bo Chen City Engineer 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Palm Desert Mr. Thomas Garcia Director of Public Works 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Palm Springs Mr. Marcus Fuller Assistant City Manager 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Rancho Mirage Mr. Bill Enos City Engineer 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Rancho Mirage Mr. Jeremy Gleim Director of Development Services 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Riverside Mr. Gilbert Hernandez Deputy Director/ City Engineer 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Riverside Mr. Nathan Mustafa Deputy Public Works Director 

Agency Staff Agencies City of Riverside Ms. Kris Martinez Public Works Director 

Agency Staff Transportation Agencies County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management Agency Mr. Juan Perez Agency Director 

Agency Staff Transportation Agencies County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management Agency Mr. Mark Lancaster Director of Transportation 

Agency Staff Federal EPA Region 9 Mr. Clifton Meek Enforcement Division RSC Representative 

Agency Staff Federal EPA Region 9 Ms. Carolyn Mulvihill NEPA Review 

Agency Staff Agencies Western Riverside Council of Governments Mr. Christopher Gray Director of Transportation 

Agency Staff Agencies Western Riverside Council of Governments Dr. Kurt Wilson Executive Director 

Elected Official Agencies City of El Centro Mr. Tomas Oliva City Councilmember 

Federal/State Partner Transportation Agencies California State Transportation Agency Mr. Chad Edison Chief Deputy Secretary of Transportation 

Federal/State Partner State Caltrans Mr. David Lee District Local Assistance Engineer 

Federal/State Partner State Caltrans, District 12 Ms. Luisa Easter Associate Transportation Planner 

Federal/State Partner State Caltrans, District 7 Mr. Tony Tavares District Director 

Federal/State Partner State Caltrans, District 8 Mr. James Camarillo Associate Transportation Planner 

Federal/State Partner State Caltrans, District 8 Mr. Richard Dennis Senior Transportation Planner 

Federal/State Partner State Caltrans, District 8 Mr. Sean Yeung Senior Environmental Planner 
Federal/State Partner State Caltrans, District 8 Ms. Rosa F. Clark Relinquishment & Mass Transit 

Federal/State Partner State Caltrans, District 8 Mr. Michael Beauchamp District Director 

Federal/State Partner State Caltrans, District 8 Ms. Jeannie Ward-Waller Deputy Director for Planning & Modal Programs 

Federal/State Partner Project Team Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit Mr. Andrew Cook Chief, Rail Planning Branch 

Federal/State Partner Project Team Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit Mr. Phillip Hoebeke Associate Transportation Planner 

Federal/State Partner Project Team Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit Mr. Kyle Gradinger Division Chief of Rail and Mass Transportation 

Federal/State Partner Project Team Caltrans, Division of Rail and Mass Transit Mr. Ryan Greenway Senior Regional Rail Coordinator 

Federal/State Partner Transportation Agencies Federal Railroad Administration Mr. Lyle Leitelt Community Planner 

Federal/State Partner Transportation Agencies Federal Railroad Administration Ms. Karla Maffett Program Delivery Regional Team Lead 

Federal/State Partner Transportation Agencies Federal Railroad Administration Mr. Faris Mohammed Attorney-Advisor, Office of Chief Counsel 

Participating Railroad Transportation Agencies Amtrak Mr. Richard J. Rogers Principal Officer - Corridor Planning 

Participating Railroad Transportation Agencies Amtrak Mr. Alex Khalfin Senior manager, Government Affiars 

Participating Railroad Transportation Agencies Amtrak Ms. Michelle Caudill AVP Transportation 

Participating Railroad Transportation Agencies California High-Speed Rail Authority Ms. Diane Ricard Project Manager 

Participating Railroad Transportation Agencies California High-Speed Rail Authority Ms. Patricia Watkins Project Manager 

Participating Railroad Transportation Agencies California High-Speed Rail Authority Ms. LaDonna DiCamillo Southern California Regional Director 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Mr. Ken Potts Chief Rail and Planning Consultant 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency Mr. James Campbell Deputy Managing Director 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Omnitrans Ms. Erin Rogers Chief Executive Officer and General Manager 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Riverside Transit Agency Mr. Tom Franklin Chief Operating Officer 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Riverside Transit Agency Mr. Joe Forgiarini Planning and Scheduling Director 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Riverside Transit Agency Ms. Kristin Warsinski Director of Planning 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Sunline Transit Agency Ms. Lauren Skiver General Manager 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Sunline Transit Agency Ms. Vicky Castaneda Special Assistant to Deputy Chief Administration Officer 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Sunline Transit Agency Mr. Victor A. Duran Transit Planning Manager 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Sunline Transit Agency Mr. Luis Salcido Transit Planning Analyst 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Sunline Transit Agency Mr. Rohan Anthony Kuruppu Chief Planning Consultant 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Sunline Transit Agency Mr. Todd McDaniel Deputy Chief Operations Officer 

Transit Agency Transportation Agencies Sunline Transit Agency Mr. Jeff Guidry Transit Planning Manager 

Tribal Partner Tribes Morongo Band of Mission Indians Ms. Karen Woodard Realty Administrator 
 

 

Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Technical Advisory Committee Meeting 

May 4, 2021 
 

Presentation Agenda 

 Project Purpose & Need 

 Project Process 

 Service Development Plan Overview 

 Infrastructure Needs 

 Program-Level (Tier 1) EIS/EIR Overview 

 Preferred Alternative and Service Options 

 Next Steps and Upcoming Project Phases 
 

 

 

 

Coachella Valley Passenger Rail Project 

Passenger Rail Service Studied 

Two round trips per day between Los Angeles and Coachella Valley 

Up to six potential stations east of Colton 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

CV Rail: Purpose and Need 

 Purpose: Provide convenient and competitive public transportation 

between the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor and the 

Los Angeles Basin 

 Need: 

 Regional population and employment growth 

 Limited and constrained 

travel options 

 Serve disadvantaged 

communities 

 Help conform to air 

quality regulations 
 

Project Process Overview 2016 

Alternatives 

Analysis 

Current

Program-Level 

(Tier 1) EIS/EIR 

& Service 

Development 

Plan 

Future Conceptual 

Engineering & 

Project-Level 

(Tier 2) 

Environmental 

Documents 

Future Final Design & 

Construction 

& Operations 

CURRENT PHASE 

 What will be prepared? 

• Service Development Plan (SDP) 

• Program-Level (Tier 1) EIS/EIR 
Service Development Plan (SDP) Overview 

 Analyzing service, infrastructure needs, routes, 

connections, stations 

 Improvement Costs 

 Trainset Equipment 

 Ridership and Revenue Forecast 

 Financial Planning 

 Benefit-Cost and Economic Impact 

 Implementation and Phasing 
 

Operations Modeling 

 To determine on-time performance and quantify freight rail 

delay 

 Goals: 

 On-time performance by train-type 90% 

 No unreasonable delay in freight rail 

 Estimate project-specific infrastructure needs to meet 

performance goals 

The Hill Model Example 
 

 

Overall Infrastructure Needs 

Based on modeling full buildout may require: 

 Third main track between Colton and Coachella 

 BNSF/UPRR Colton Connector 

 Enhanced signal equipment 

 Structures – modify highway interchange/rail bridges 

 Stations & platforms 

 Improved rail crossings 

 Potential investment of $1 billion 
Questions? 
 

 

 

 

 

Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR Overview 

 Program-Level (Tier 1) process will satisfy both federal and 

state environmental requirements (EIS + EIR) WE ARE HERE 

 Evaluates effects of implementing service (regional context) 

 Identifies broad areas of potential environmental effects and the 

resources that could be potentially affected in the study area by: 

Train operations 

Infrastructure improvements and construction 

 Project-Level (Tier 2) environmental process for 

infrastructure improvements to follow program-level EIS/EIR 

 Tier 2 would analyze site-specific impacts based on the 

infrastructure improvements identified in the SDP 
 

 

Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR 

 Environmental topics analyzed in the Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR: 

 Land Use and Planning 

 Transportation 

 Visual Quality and Aesthetics 

 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases 

 Noise and Vibration 

 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetland Resources 

 Biological Resources 

 Floodplains, Hydrology, and Water Quality 

 Geology, Soils, Seismicity, and Paleontological Resources 

 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 

 Public Utilities and Energy 

 Cultural Resources 

 Parklands and Community Services 

 Safety and Security 

 Socioeconomics and Communities Affected 

 Cumulative Effects 

 Environmental Justice Effects 

 Section 4(f)/6(f) 

11 
Passenger Rail Options Studied 

Eastern terminus options: 

1. Indio 

2. Coachella 

12 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR Alternatives 

 The Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR includes the analysis of: 

1. No-Build Alternative 

2. Build Alternative Option 1. Six stations east of Colton, terminus in 

Coachella, third track through entire eastern section (from Colton to 

Coachella) 

3. Build Alternative Option 2. Five stations east of Colton, terminus in 

Indio, third track through entire eastern section (from Colton to Indio) 

4. Build Alternative Option 3. Five stations east of Colton, terminus in 

Indio, third track through portion of eastern section 

(from Colton to Mid Valley) 

13 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Next Steps in Program -Level (Tier 1) EIS/EIR 

Outreach prior to release of Draft EIS/EIR: 

 Technical Advisory Committee meeting: May 4 

 Presentation to RCTC Commission: May 12 

 Presentation to SBCTA Valley Study Committee: May 13 

 Notice of Completion published: May 21 

 Press release: ~ May 21 

Draft EIS/EIR Public Release: May 21 
 

 

 

 

Upcoming Project Phases 

PROGRAM-LEVEL (TIER 1) DRAFT EIS/EIR 

 Draft EIS/EIR public release: May 21, 2021 

 Public comment opportunities 

 Virtual Public Hearings on Draft EIS/EIR: June 22 and 26, 2021 

 Selection of preferred alternative based on analysis and public 

comment 

 Preparation of Program-Level (Tier 1) Final EIS/EIR 

 Record of Decision: Late 2021 

SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 

 Work ongoing. Planned completion date November 2021 
 

 

 

 

Program-Level (Tier 1) EIS/EIR Public Comment 

 Draft EIS/EIR will be available for review on the RCTC 

project website and at local libraries along the project 

corridor 

 Public comments accepted May 21 – July 6, 2021 

 Electronic comments to the CV Rail page on the 

regulations.gov website 

 By regular mail to FRA 

 Verbal comments during the virtual public hearings 
Questions? 
 

 

 

Thank You for Your Participation 

Please share this information with your community by: 

 Posting public hearing notices and fact sheets in your offices 

or other public locations 

 Distributing public hearing notices and fact sheets by email 

 Listing the public hearings on your events calendar 

 Sharing our social media posts and video 

 Including information in your newsletter 

Visit the project website at RCTC.org/cvrail 
Appendix I 

Stakeholder Briefing Presentation 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Stakeholder Briefing 

June 10, 2021 
Program Video 
Presentation Agenda 

▪ Overview 

▪ Purpose and Need 

▪ Program History 

▪ Prior Planning Activities 

▪ Alternatives Considered 

▪ Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

▪ Q&A 
Overview 

What is the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service Program? 

▪ The Federal Railroad Administration, the California Department of 

Transportation, and the Riverside County Transportation 

Commission are studying a 144-mile passenger rail service corridor 

between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley. 

▪ Service would extend from Los Angeles Union Station to Indio or 

Coachella. 
 

Program Overview – Study Area 

Where is the Program Study Area? 

Passenger Rail Service Studied 

Two round trips per day between Los Angeles and Coachella Valley 

Up to six potential stations east of Colton 
 

Purpose & Need 

Purpose: Provide safe, reliable, and convenient intercity passenger rail 

service with capability to meet the future mobility needs of residents, 

businesses, and visitors 

Need: 

▪ Regional population and employment growth 

▪ Limited and constrained travel options 

▪ Serve disadvantaged communities 

▪ Help conform to air 

quality regulations 
Program Purpose – Service Objectives 

What objectives would the service achieve? 

▪ More convenient, faster, frequent service than existing transit 

▪ An alternative to driving that offers reliable schedules 

▪ An affordable transportation service 

▪ Improve regional travel options for transit-dependent people 

▪ Serve expected growth within the Program Corridor 

▪ Help conform to air quality regulations 
 

Program History & Prior Planning Activities 

1991 

2010-2013 

2013-2016 

July 2016 

Fall 2016 –

Summer 2021 

Initial Feasibility Studies: Evaluated one or two daily longdistance rail round-trips between Los Angeles and Indio 

Additional Feasibility Studies 

Market Assessment/Alternatives Analysis: Evaluated five 

alternatives to determine the preferred alignment 

Finalized Alternatives Analysis/Preferred Route Advances 

for Environmental Studies 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR: Held public scoping meetings and 

completed studies for Draft EIS/EIR for public review 
(completed July 2016)

Project Process 

Where are we in the process? 2016 

Alternatives 

Analysis 

Current

Program-Level 

(Tier 1) EIS/EIR 

& Service 

Development 

Plan 

Future

Conceptual 

Engineering & 

Project-Level 

(Tier 2) 

Environmental 

Analyses 

Future Final Design & 

Construction & 

Operations 
 

 

Project Process 

What will be prepared? 

▪ Service Development Plan (SDP) 

• Analysis of service levels, infrastructure needs, route modeling, 

station catchment areas, and connectivity 

▪ Program-Level (Tier 1) EIS/EIR 

• Joint National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/ 

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process 

• Addresses likely environmental effects associated with type of 

rail service proposed in corridor 

• Provides a basis for subsequent phases or tiered environmental 

documents (Tier 2 Project Level) 
Project Process 

The Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR evaluates topics, including: 

✓ Land Use and Planning 

✓ Transportation 

✓ Visual Quality and Aesthetics 

✓ Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases 

✓ Noise and Vibration 

✓ Jurisdictional Waters and Wetland Resources 

✓ Biological Resources 

✓ Floodplains, Hydrology, and Water Quality 

✓ Geology, Soils, Seismicity, and Paleontological 

Resources 
Project Process 

Topics, continued: 

✓ Hazards and Hazardous Materials 

✓ Public Utilities and Energy 

✓ Cultural Resources 

✓ Parklands and Community Services 

✓ Safety and Security 

✓ Socioeconomics and Communities Affected 

✓ Cumulative Effects 

✓ Environmental Justice Effects 

✓ Section 4(f)/6(f) Resources 
 

 

 

 

Alternatives Considered 

The Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR includes the analysis of: 

Daily Train Trips Eastern 

Terminus 

# of Stations 

East of Colton New Third Track in Eastern Section 

No Build None N/A 0 N/A 

Option #1 Two round trips Coachella 6 Colton to Coachella 

Option #2 Two round trips Indio 5 Colton to Indio 

Option #3 Two round trips Indio 5 Colton to approx. Mid Valley 
Western Section 

*No construction, no new stations
Eastern Section: Coachella Terminus 
Eastern Section: Indio Terminus 
 

Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

The Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR was released on May 21, 2021 and will be 

available for public comment until July 6, 2021. 

Digital copies of the full Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR are available to review 

on the following web pages: 

▪ RCTC website 

RCTC.org/cvrail 

▪ FRA website 

https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-sangorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 

▪ Regulations.gov 

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 
Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

Printed copies of the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Executive Summary are available to 

review at the following locations: 

▪ Los Angeles Union Station/Metro Library and Archive 

▪ Fullerton Public Library 

▪ Arlington Library 

▪ Riverside County Transportation Commission Offices (by appointment only) 

▪ Colton Public Library 

▪ Loma Linda Branch Library 

▪ A.K. Smiley Public Library 

▪ Beaumont Library 

▪ Banning Public Library 

▪ Palm Springs Public Library 

▪ Riverside County Indio Branch Library 

▪ Riverside County Coachella Branch Library 

*Subject to library location hours and COVID-19 procedures 
 

 

How To Submit Comments 

Public Comment Period: May 21, 2021 to July 6, 2021 

Please submit comments on the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR via the following 

methods: 

During the Public Hearings: June 22 & 26, 2021 

Via Online form: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 

Via Mail*: Federal Railroad Administration 

Amanda Ciampolillo, Environmental Protection Specialist 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Comments should include “Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Project – Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Comments” in the subject line.

*Comments that are mailed should be postmarked July 6, 2021 or earlier. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

How To Submit Comments 

Your comments on the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report are 

welcome. Reviewers are encouraged to: 

▪ explain the basis for their comments, 

▪ submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, 

or expert opinion supported by facts, and 

▪ submit the name of a contact person who will be available for 

later consultation, if necessary. 
 

 

Virtual Public Hearings* 

Visit RCTC.org/cvrail to register for a hearing 

Tuesday, June 22, 2021 

6:00 PM – 8:00 PM 

& 

Saturday, June 26, 2021 

9:00 AM – 11:00 AM 

*Spanish interpretation and English closed captioning will be available on Zoom. 

English & Spanish recordings of the public hearings will be posted on the project website 
Questions? 
Stay Involved 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study 

Email: CVrail@rctc.org 

RCTC Website: RCTC.org/cvrail 

Facebook: facebook.com/CVRailProject 

FRA Website: fra.dot.gov 
Appendix J 

Public Hearing Materials 
Public Hearing Attendance 

Hearing First Name Last Name 

22-Jun-21 Alan Bosch 

22-Jun-21 Anthony Tristan 

22-Jun-21 Barbara DoCouto 

22-Jun-21 Brandee Keith 

22-Jun-21 Colm Smith 

22-Jun-21 Angela Harbor 

22-Jun-21 Crystal Wang 

22-Jun-21 Danielle Squires 

22-Jun-21 David Knudsen 

22-Jun-21 Dana Reed 

22-Jun-21 Edgar Gutierrez 

22-Jun-21 Eric Reese 

22-Jun-21 Peter Green 

22-Jun-21 Genoveva Arellano 

22-Jun-21 Deborah Garbe 

22-Jun-21 Genevieve Judge 

22-Jun-21 gary levin 

22-Jun-21 Jenny Chan 

22-Jun-21 Jeff Burt 

22-Jun-21 Jesse Budlong 

22-Jun-21 Jacqueline Lopez 

22-Jun-21 Joel Lessard-Clouston 

22-Jun-21 Lisa Middleton 

22-Jun-21 Matt Van Hattem 

22-Jun-21 Mauro 

22-Jun-21 Margo Bell 

22-Jun-21 Michael Mencacco 

22-Jun-21 Nicole Johnson 

22-Jun-21 Nr 

22-Jun-21 Oliver 

22-Jun-21 Pat 

22-Jun-21 Eric Pina 

22-Jun-21 Phillip Kaplan 

22-Jun-21 Richard Allegra SSNO Alt 

22-Jun-21 Rebecca JOHNSON 

22-Jun-21 Reed Alvarado 

22-Jun-21 Shobhit Baadkar 

22-Jun-21 Steve Colman 

22-Jun-21 Shelley Kaplan 

22-Jun-21 Steve Smith 

22-Jun-21 Dee G 

22-Jun-21 Tim Papandreou 

22-Jun-21 Todd Besant 

22-Jun-21 Arturo 
22-Jun-21 Brian Yanity 

22-Jun-21 Raul Espinosa 

26-Jun-21 Tom Tokheim 

26-Jun-21 Phil Hoebeke 

26-Jun-21 Elaine Morgan 

26-Jun-21 Frank Navarro 

26-Jun-21 Marven Norman 

26-Jun-21 Lorelle Luna 

26-Jun-21 Rick Fox 

26-Jun-21 Cristina Camacho 

26-Jun-21 Dan Wentzel 

26-Jun-21 Todd Liebman 

26-Jun-21 Nico Payne 

26-Jun-21 NT 

26-Jun-21 John Harrell 

26-Jun-21 Mariela Loera 

26-Jun-21 The Asistencia 

26-Jun-21 Ryan Kuruppu 

26-Jun-21 Brian Yanity 

26-Jun-21 Jacqueline Lopez 

26-Jun-21 srobertson 

26-Jun-21 Ian Stewart 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Public Hearing: June 22, 2021 
 

Interpretation Assistance 

Para oír la presentación en español, haga clic en el botón 

de traducción de Zoom en la parte inferior de la pantalla. 
Introductions 

 Amanda Ciampolillo – Federal Railroad Administration 

 Sheldon Peterson – Riverside County Transportation 

Commission 

 JD Douglas – HDR 
Program Video 
Presentation Agenda 

 Overview 

 Purpose and Need 

 Program History 

 Prior Planning Activities 

 Alternatives Considered 

 Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

 Q&A 

 Public Comment Period 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overview 

Today’s focus is the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service Tier 1 Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental 

Impact Report and potential environmental impacts identified. This 

meeting will provide you the opportunity to comment on the draft 

environmental document. 

While commenting, participants are encouraged to: 

 Explain the basis for their comments, 

 Submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions 

based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts, and 

 Submit the name of a contact person who will be available 

for later consultation, if necessary. 
 

 

 

Overview 

What is the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service Program? 

 The Federal Railroad Administration, the California Department of 

Transportation, and the Riverside County Transportation 

Commission are studying a 144-mile passenger rail service corridor 

between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley 

 Service would extend from Los Angeles Union Station to Indio or 

Coachella 
 

 

 

 

Program Overview – Study Area 

Where is the Program Study Area? 

Passenger Rail Service Studied 

Two round trips per day between Los Angeles and Coachella Valley 

Up to six potential stations east of Colton 
 

 

 

 

 

Purpose & Need 

Purpose: Provide safe, reliable, and convenient intercity passenger rail 

service with capability to meet future mobility needs of residents, 

businesses, and visitors 

Need: 

 Regional population and employment growth 

 Limited and constrained travel options 

 Serve disadvantaged communities 

 Help conform to air 

quality regulations 
 

 

Program Purpose – Service Objectives 

What objectives would the service achieve? 

 More convenient, faster, frequent service than existing transit 

 An alternative to driving that offers reliable schedules 

 An affordable transportation service 

 Improve regional travel options for transit-dependent people 

 Serve expected growth within the program corridor 

 Help conform to air quality regulations 
 

 

 

 

Why Amtrak Intercity Service and not Metrolink? 

 Intercity service with over 3 hours travel time is preferred to have larger, 

reclining seats and access to the lounge car. 

 Early Draft Schedules (limited stops) 

LAUS to Indio Trip 1 Trip 2

LAUS 10:20 AM 3:20 PM

Fullerton 10:55 AM 3:55 PM

Riverside 11:39 AM 4:39 PM

Palm Springs 12:59 PM 5:59 PM

Indio 1:23 PM 6:23 PM

Indio to LAUS Trip 1 Trip 2

Indio 9:32 AM 3:32 PM

Palm Springs 9:59 AM 3:59 PM

Riverside 11:22 AM 5:22 PM

Fullerton 12:06 PM 6:06 PM

Los Angeles 12:40 PM 6:40 PM

 Congress has authorized Amtrak to operate on private railroads, with some 

track improvements. Metrolink does not have that authorization. 

 Intercity service is funded by the state agencies not local funds. 
 

 

 

 

 

Program History & Prior Planning Activities 

1991 

2010-2013 

2013-2016 

July 2016 

Fall 2016 – 

Summer 2021 

Initial Feasibility Studies: Evaluated one or two daily longdistance rail round-trips between Los Angeles and Indio 

Additional Feasibility Studies 

Market Assessment/Alternatives Analysis: Evaluated five 

alternatives to determine the preferred alignment 

Finalized Alternatives Analysis/Preferred Route Advances 

for Environmental Studies 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR: Held public scoping meetings and 

completed studies for Draft EIS/EIR for public review 
 

 

(completed July 2016)

Project Process 

Where are we in the process? 2016 

Alternatives 

Analysis 

Current

Program-Level 

(Tier 1) EIS/EIR 

& Service 

Development 

Plan 

Future

Conceptual 

Engineering & 

Project-Level 

(Tier 2) 

Environmental 

Analyses 

Future Final Design & 

Construction & 

Operations 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Project Process 

What will be prepared? 

 Service Development Plan (SDP) 

• Analysis of service levels, infrastructure needs, route modeling, 

station catchment areas, and connectivity 

 Program-Level (Tier 1) EIS/EIR 

• Joint National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/ 

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process 

• Addresses likely environmental effects associated with type of 

rail service proposed in corridor 

• Provides basis for subsequent phases or tiered environmental 

documents (Tier 2 Project Level) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Project Process 

 Tier 1 Program-level process will satisfy both federal and 

state environmental requirements (EIS + EIR) WE ARE HERE 

 Evaluates effects of implementing service (regional context) 

 Identifies broad areas of potential environmental effects associated with 

program construction and operation and the resources that could be 

potentially affected in the study area. 

 Procedural planning document only (i.e., not associated with any project 

construction) 

 Tier 2 Project-level environmental process for infrastructure 

improvements to follow program-level EIS/EIR 

 Tier 2 would analyze site-specific impacts based on the infrastructure 

improvements identified in the SDP 

 Once approved, next steps (e.g., construction permitting, etc.) can 

commence 
 

 

 

 

Project Process 

The Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR evaluates topics, including: 

 Land Use and Planning 

 Transportation 

 Visual Quality and Aesthetics 

 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases 

 Noise and Vibration 

 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetland 

Resources 

 Biological Resources 

 Floodplains, Hydrology, and Water Quality 

 Geology, Soils, Seismicity, and 

Paleontological Resources 
Project Process 

Topics, continued: 

 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 

 Public Utilities and Energy 

 Cultural Resources 

 Parklands and Community Services 

 Safety and Security 

 Socioeconomics and Communities Affected 

 Cumulative Effects 

 Environmental Justice Effects 

 Section 4(f)/6(f) Resources 
 

 

 

Alternatives Considered 

The Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR includes the analysis of: 

Daily Train Trips Eastern 

Terminus 

# of Stations 

East of Colton New Third Track in Eastern Section 

No Build None N/A 0 N/A 

Option #1 Two round trips Coachella 6 Colton to Coachella 

Option #2 Two round trips Indio 5 Colton to Indio 

Option #3 Two round trips Indio 5 Colton to approx. Mid Valley 
Western Section 

*No construction, no new stations
Eastern Section: Coachella Terminus 
Eastern Section: Indio Terminus 
 

 

 

Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

The Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR was released on May 21, 2021 and will be 

available for public comment until July 6, 2021. 

Digital copies of the full Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR are available to review 

on the following web pages: 

 RCTC website 

RCTC.org/cvrail 

 FRA website https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmentalreviews/coachella-valley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 

 Regulations.gov 

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

Printed copies of the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Executive Summary are available for 

review at: 

 Los Angeles Union Station/Metro Library and Archive 

 Fullerton Public Library 

 Arlington Library 

 Riverside County Transportation Commission Offices (by appointment only) 

 Colton Public Library 

 Loma Linda Branch Library 

 A.K. Smiley Public Library 

 Beaumont Library 

 Banning Public Library 

 Palm Springs Public Library 

 Riverside County Indio Branch Library 

 Riverside County Coachella Branch Library 

*Subject to library location hours and COVID-19 procedures 
 

 

 

 

 

 

How To Submit Comments 

Public Comment Period: May 21, 2021 to July 6, 2021 

Please submit comments on the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR via the following 

methods: 

During the Public Hearings: TODAY & June 26, 2021 

Via Online form: https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FRA-2021-0048-0002 

Via Mail*: Federal Railroad Administration 

Amanda Ciampolillo, Environmental Protection Specialist 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

*Comments that are mailed in should be postmarked July 6, 2021 or earlier. 
 

 

 

Next Virtual Public Hearing 

Saturday, June 26, 2021 

9:00 AM 

Register at: https://bit.ly/2Saioel 

Meeting ID: 991 1521 8303 

*Spanish interpretation and English closed captioning will be available on Zoom 

English & Spanish recordings of the public hearings will be posted on the project website 
 

 

Questions? 

*This portion of the agenda is for clarifying questions only. 

Please save your official comments for the next agenda item. 
 

 

 

 

 

Comments Today 

3 minutes per speaker 

To request to speak: 

 Zoom app users: Raise 

hand feature 

 Call-in users: Dial *9 to 

raise your hand 

When it is your turn to speak: 

 Zoom app users: You will be unmuted 

 Call-in users: Dial *6 to unmute your mic when you hear your number 

announced 
 

Stay Involved 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study 

Email: CVrail@rctc.org 

RCTC Website: RCTC.org/cvrail 

Facebook: facebook.com/ CVRailProject 

FRA Website: 

https:/railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/ coachellavalley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 
 

 

 

 

We’re Here to Take Your Comment! 

To request to speak: 

 Zoom app users: Raise hand feature 

 Call-in users: Dial *9 to raise your hand 

When it is your turn to speak: 

 Zoom app users: You will be unmuted 

 Call-in users: Dial *6 to unmute your mic when you hear your number 

announced 
Servicio de corredor ferroviario del Valle de Coachella -

Paso de San Gorgonio 

Audiencia pública 

22 de junio de 2021 
Asistencia la interpretación 

Para oír la presentación en español, haga clic en el botón 

de traducción de Zoom en la parte inferior de la pantalla 
Presentaciones 

▪ Amanda Ciampolillo – Federal Railroad Administration 

▪ Sheldon Peterson – Riverside County Transportation 

Commission 

▪ JD Douglas – HDR 
Video del programa 
Orden del día de la presentación 

▪ Resumen 

▪ Propósito y necesidad 

▪ Historial del programa 

▪ Actividades de planificación previa 

▪ Alternativas consideradas 

▪ Disponibilidad de los documentos y oportunidad de hacer 

comentarios 

▪ Preguntas y respuestas 

▪ Periodo de comentarios públicos 
 

Resumen 

Hoy nos centramos en la Declaración de impacto ambiental/Informe de 

impacto ambiental del programa de nivel 1 del Servicio de corredor 

ferroviario del Valle de Coachella-Paso de San Gorgonio y los posibles 

impactos ambientales detectados. Esta reunión le ofrecerá la oportunidad 

de comentar el proyecto de documento medioambiental. 

Durante los comentarios, se anima a los participantes a: 

▪ explicar el fundamento de sus comentarios; 

▪ presentar datos o referencias que ofrezcan hechos, supuestos 

razonables basados en hechos o dictámenes respaldados por hechos; y 

▪ indicar el nombre de una persona de contacto que 

estará disponible para consultas posteriores, si es necesario. 
Resumen 

¿Qué es el proyecto de Servicio de corredor ferroviario del 

Valle de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio? 

▪ La Federal Railroad Administration, el California Department of 

Transportation y la Riverside County Transportation Commission 

están estudiando construir un corredor de servicios ferroviarios 

para pasajeros de 144 millas entre Los Ángeles y el Valle de 

Coachella. 

▪ El servicio se extendería desde Los Angeles Union Station hasta 

Indio o Coachella 
 

Descripción general del programa – Zona de estudio 

¿Dónde está la zona de estudio del programa? 

Servicio ferroviario para pasajeros 

Dos viajes de ida y vuelta al día entre Los Ángeles y el Valle de Coachella 

Hasta seis posibles estaciones al este de Colton 
 

 

Propósito y necesidad 

Propósito: Ofrecer un servicio de trenes de pasajeros interurbanos seguro, 

fiable y cómodo con capacidad para satisfacer las futuras necesidades de 

movilidad de residentes, empresas y visitantes 

Necesidad: 

▪ Población regional y crecimiento del empleo 

▪ Opciones de desplazamiento limitadas 

▪ Prestar servicio a las comunidades 

desfavorecidas 

▪ Ayudar a cumplir las normas relativas 

a la calidad del aire 
Propósito del programa – Objetivos del servicio 

¿Qué objetivos alcanzaría el servicio? 

▪ Servicio más cómodo, más rápido y más frecuente que el 

transporte público existente 

▪ Una alternativa al coche que ofrece horarios fiables 

▪ Un servicio de transporte asequible 

▪ Mejorar las opciones de desplazamiento regionales para las 

personas que dependen del transporte público 

▪ Atender el crecimiento esperado dentro del corredor del 

programa 

▪ Ayudar a cumplir las normas relativas a la calidad del aire 
 

¿Por qué Amtrak Intercity Service y no Metrolink? 

▪ Para un servicio interurbano de más de 3 horas de viaje se prefieren asientos 

reclinables más grandes y acceso a vagón lounge. 

▪ Primeros borradores de horarios (paradas limitadas) 

Itinerario a Indio Itinerario 1 Itinerario 2

LAUS 10:20 a.m. 3:20 p.m.

Fullerton 10:55 a.m. 3:55 p.m.

Riverside 11:39 a.m. 4:39 p.m.

Palm Springs 12:59 a.m. 5:59 p.m.

Indio 1:23 a.m. 6:23 p.m.

Indio a LAUS Itinerario 1 Itinerario 2

Indio 9:32 a.m. 3:32 p.m.

Palm Springs 9:59 a.m. 3:59 p.m.

Riverside 11:22 a.m. 5:22 p.m.

Fullerton 12:06 p.m. 6:06 p.m.

Los Angeles 12:40 p.m. 6:40 p.m.

▪ El Congreso ha autorizado a Amtrak a operar en ferrocarriles privados, con 

algunas mejoras en las vías. Metrolink no tiene esa autorización. 

▪ El servicio interurbano está financiado por agencias estatales, no por 

fondos locales. 
 

Historial del programa y actividades de planificación previas 

1991 

2010-2013 

2013-2016 

Julio de 2016 

Otoño 2016 –

Verano 2021 

Primeros estudios de viabilidad: Se evaluaron uno o dos 

trayectos diarios de ida y vuelta en tren de larga distancia 

entre Los Ángeles e Indio 

Estudios de viabilidad adicionales 

Evaluación del mercado/análisis de alternativas: Se 

estudiaron cinco alternativas para determinar el trazado 

preferido 

Análisis de las alternativas finalizadas/Avances de rutas 

preferidas para estudios ambientales 

EIS/EIR del Programa / Nivel 1: Se celebraron reuniones 

públicas de determinación del alcance y se llevaron a cabo 

estudios para la revisión pública del borrador de EIS/EIR. 
 

(completed July 2016)

Proceso del proyecto 

¿En qué punto del proceso nos encontramos? 2016 

Análisis de 

alternativas 

Actuales EIS/EIR a nivel 

de programa 

(Nivel 1) y plan 

de desarrollo de 

servicios 

Futuro Ingeniería 

conceptual y 

análisis 

ambientales a 

nivel del 

proyecto 

(Nivel 2) 

Futuro

Diseño, 

construcción y 

operaciones 

finales 
Proceso del proyecto 

¿Qué documentos se elaborarán? 

▪ Plan de desarrollo de servicios (SDP) 

• Análisis de niveles de servicio, necesidades de infraestructura, 

modelado de rutas, áreas de captación de estaciones y conectividad 

▪ EIS/EIR a nivel de programa (Nivel 1) 

• Ley de Política Ambiental Nacional (NEPA)/Proceso de la Ley de 

Calidad Ambiental de California (CEQA) 

• Aborda los efectos ambientales probables asociados al tipo de 

servicio ferroviario propuesto en el corredor 

• Proporciona la base para fases posteriores o documentos 

ambientales escalonados (a nivel de proyecto, Nivel 2) 
 

Proceso del proyecto 

▪ El proceso a nivel de programa (Nivel 1) satisfará requisitos ambientales 

federales y estatales (EIS + EIR) ESTAMOS AQUÍ 

✓ Evalúa los efectos del servicio de ejecución (contexto regional) 

✓ Identifica áreas generales de posibles efectos ambientales asociados con la 

construcción y la explotación del programa y los recursos que podrían verse 

afectados en la zona de estudio. 

✓ Solo documento de planificación de procedimientos (es decir, no asociado a la 

construcción de ningún proyecto) 

▪ Proceso ambiental a nivel de proyecto (Nivel 2) para mejoras de 

infraestructura a fin de cumplir la EIS/el EIR a nivel del programa 

✓ El Nivel 2 analizaría impactos específicos del sitio en función de las mejoras de 

infraestructura identificadas en el SDP 

✓ Una vez aprobados, pueden comenzar los siguientes pasos (p. ej., permiso de 

construcción, etc.) 
 

Proceso del proyecto 

El borrador de EIS/EIR a nivel del programa (Nivel 1) evalúa temas, entre ellos: 

✓ Uso de la tierra y planificación 

✓ Transporte 

✓ Calidad visual y estética 

✓ Calidad del aire y gases de efecto invernadero 

✓ Ruido y vibración 

✓ Aguas jurisdiccionales de aguas y recursos de 

los humedales 

✓ Recursos biológicos 

✓ Llanuras aluviales, hidrología y calidad del agua 

✓ Geología, suelos, sismicidad y recursos 

paleontológicos 
Proceso del proyecto 

Temas (continuación): 

✓ Peligros y materiales peligrosos 

✓ Servicios públicos y energía 

✓ Recursos culturales 

✓ Parques y servicios comunitarios 

✓ Seguridad y protección 

✓ Socioeconomía y comunidades afectadas 

✓ Efectos acumulativos 

✓ Efectos de la justicia ambiental 

✓ Recursos de la sección 4(f) y la sección 6(f) 
 

 

 

 

Alternativas consideradas 

El borrador de EIS/EIR a nivel de programa (Nivel 1) incluye el análisis de: 

Viajes diarios en 

tren 

Terminal 

oriental 

N.o de estaciones 

al este de Colton New Third Track in Eastern Section 

No construir Ninguna N/A 0 N/A 

Dos viajes de ida Opción #1 Coachella 6 De Colton a Coachella y vuelta 

Dos viajes de ida Opción #2 Indio 5 De Colton a Indio y vuelta 

Dos viajes de ida Opción #3 Indio 5 De Colton a aprox. Mid Valley y vuelta 
Sección occidental 

*Sin construcción, sin estaciones nuevas
Sección oriental: Terminal de Coachella 
Sección oriental: Terminal de Indio 
Disponibilidad de los documentos y oportunidad de hacer 

comentarios 

El borrador de EIS/EIR de programa/Nivel 1 se publicó el 21 de mayo de 2021 y 

estará disponible para comentarios públicos hasta el 6 de julio de 2021. 

En las siguientes páginas web se ofrecen copias digitales del borrador 

completo de EIS/EIR de programa/Nivel 1 para su revisión: 

▪ Sitio web de RCTC 

RCTC.org/cvrail 

▪ Sitio web de FRA 

https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-san-g 

orgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 

▪ Regulations.gov 

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 
 

 

Disponibilidad de los documentos y oportunidad de 

hacer comentarios 

Se ofrecen copias impresas del borrador del Resumen ejecutivo de EIS/EIR de programa / 

Nivel 1: 

▪ Los Angeles Union Station/Metro Library and Archive 

▪ Biblioteca pública de Fullerton 

▪ Biblioteca de Arlington 

▪ Oficinas de la Riverside County Transportation Commission (solo con cita previa) 

▪ Biblioteca pública de Colton 

▪ Loma Linda Branch Library 

▪ A.K. Biblioteca pública de Smiley 

▪ Biblioteca de Beaumont 

▪ Biblioteca pública de Banning 

▪ Biblioteca pública de Palm Springs 

▪ Riverside County Indio Branch Library 

▪ Riverside County Coachella Branch Library 

*Sujeto al horario de la biblioteca y a los procedimientos relacionados con la COVID-19 
 

 

 

 

Cómo enviar comentarios 

Periodo de comentarios públicos: del 21 de mayo de 2021 al 6 de julio de 2021 

Envíe comentarios sobre el borrador de EIS/EIR de programa/Nivel 1 por las siguientes 

vías: 

Durante las audiencias públicas: HOY y el 26 de junio de 2021 

Mediante el formulario en línea: https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FRA-2021-

0048-0002 

Por correo postal*: Federal Railroad Administration 

Amanda Ciampolillo, Environmental Protection Specialist 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

*Los comentarios enviados por correo postal deben tener fecha de franqueo del 6 de 

julio de 2021 o antes. 
 

Próxima audiencia pública virtual 

Sábado 26 de junio de 2021 

9:00 p.m. 

Regístrese en: https://bit.ly/2Saioel 

ID de la reunión: 991 1521 8303 

*La interpretación en español y los subtítulos en inglés estarán disponibles en Zoom 

Las grabaciones en inglés y español de las audiencias públicas se publicarán en el sitio 

web del proyecto. 
¿Preguntas? 

*Esta parte del programa es solo para aclarar preguntas. 

Guarde sus comentarios oficiales para el siguiente punto del orden 

del día. 
 

Comentarios de hoy 

3 minutos por orador 

Para solicitar la palabra: 

• Usuarios de Zoom: Función 

de levantar la mano 

• Usuarios de teléfono: 

Marque *9 para levantar la 

mano 

Cuando llegue su turno de palabra: 

▪ Usuarios de Zoom: Será desmuteado 

▪ Usuarios de teléfono: Marque *6 para desactivar el micrófono cuando 

escuche anunciar su número 
 

¡Estamos aquí para recoger su comentario! 

Para solicitar la palabra: 

• Usuarios de Zoom: Función de levantar la mano 

• Usuarios de teléfono: Marque *9 para levantar la mano 

Cuando llegue su turno de palabra: 

▪ Usuarios de Zoom: Será desmuteado 

▪ Usuarios de teléfono: Marque *6 para desactivar el micrófono cuando 

escuche anunciar su número 
 

Participe 

Estudio del corredor ferroviario del Valle de Coachella - Paso 

de San Gorgonio 

Correo electrónico: CVrail@rctc.org 

Sitio web de RCTC: RCTC.org/cvrail 

Facebook: facebook.com/CVRailProject 

Sitio web de FRA: 

https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-sangorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 
BIG ENOUGH TO DE L IVER 

SMA L L ENOUGH TO CARE 

In the Matter Of:

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

PUBLIC HEARING

June 22, 2021

Case No:

CERTIFIED CONDENSED
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8  COACHELLA VALLEY­SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT 

9  DRAFT EIR/EIS PUBLIC HEARING #1 

0  JUNE 22, 2021 6:00 P.M. ­ 8:00 P.M. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

0  Reported by: 

1  Chelsea Giuliany.  CERTIFIED 

2  CSR No. 13842  CONDENSED 

3 

4 

5 

1 COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

2 DRAFT EIR/EIS PUBLIC HEARING #1 

3 JUNE 22, 2021 6:00 P.M. - 8:00 P.M. 

4 

5 MR. PETERSON: Looks like we are doing good, and we've 

6 got a number of people. As we get started, we will get 

7 started we will start off with housekeeping, and then go on 

8 with introductions. 

9 MS. ESPINOZA: Good evening, everyone. Tonight we 

10 have Diana Orozco our Spanish interpreter. If you need 

11 interpretation, you can click on the globe icon at the bottom 

12 of your screen in the zoom panels and click for the Spanish 

13 line. 

14 MS. CIAMPOLILLO: Hi. Good evening, everybody. My 

15 name is Amanda Ciampolillo, and I am an Environmental 

16 Protection Specialist for the Federal Railroad Administration. 

17 The first thing I want to say is thank you all for joining us 

18 today. 

19 This public hearing today is kind of a combination of 

20 a lot of work from a lot of folks that are both on the meeting 

21 tonight and also that are just kind of supporting us from the 

22 background. This project is really exciting for us. We are 

23 really looking forward to soliciting public comment. We are 

24 here to listen to what you have to say tonight. 

25 We have been working on this project for a long time. 

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

1  COACHELLA VALLEY­SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT. 

2  DRAFT EIR/EIS PUBLIC HEARING #1 

3  JUNE 22, 2021 6:00 P.M. ­ 8:00 P.M. 

4 

5 

6  APPEARANCES: 

7  STEPHANIE ESPINOZA, MODERATOR 

8  SHELDON PETERSON, RCTC 

9  JD DOUGLAS, HDR 

0  AMANDA CIAMPOLILLO, FRA 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

1 You'll kind of get that as we walk through the project, but we 

2 think we are at a really great point, and we are interested in 

3 what everybody has to say tonight. So, again, just thank you 

4 for your time and attention. I will turn it over to Sheldon. 

5 MR. PETERSON: Good evening. My name is Sheldon 

6 Peterson. I am the Rail Manager for the Riverside County 

7 Transportation Commission. With the leadership of our 

8 Coachella Valley elected officials, RCTC has been actively 

9 pursuing this new intercity rail corridor from Los Angeles to 

0 Coachella Valley since at least 2013. We see this project as 

1 transformational by providing a new opportunity for mobility 

2 in our region. It would both benefit disadvantaged 

3 communities and promote economic development, provide another

4 connection where we see is definitely needed. First off, I 

5 want to thank FRA and Caltrans and consulting team at HDR for 

6 getting us to this milestone with the release of the public 

7 administrative draft. 

8 It has been years of work. We worked really hard to 

9 get to this point, so we're happy to share that with you. We 

0 will start off by having a brief video flyover of the project 

1 and route, and then our project manager, JD Douglas, will 

2 provide an overview and kind of get into some of the details 

3 as we get ready to listen to your public comments and get your 

4 feedback at this early stage. Once again, thank you for 

5 participating. 

4

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
1 (Whereupon, a video presentation was played.) 

2 MR. PETERSON: Hello, before I wanted to hand it off 

3 to JD, let me just welcome a couple of project champions that 

4 have joined us today, both Dana Reed from Indian Wells and 

5 Lisa Middleton from Palm Springs have been very active in 

6 supporting this project. We thank your efforts all the way 

7 through and anyone else who has joined us who has been 

8 supporting the project. With that, I will hand it to JD 

9 Douglas. Thank you. 

0 MR. DOUGLAS: Thank you, Sheldon, and good evening, 

1 everyone. I am JD Douglas from HDR. I am the Consultant Tea

2 Project Manager, and I will be walking you through our 

3 presentation tonight leading up to the public comment period. 

4 So the slide that is up now will give you an overview of the 

5 project to start out. I will go over the project purpose and 

6 need, which is the important fundamental foundation statement 

7 for the project. We will talk a little bit about the history 

8 and prior activities in planning this project, and then we 

9 will get into specifics about the environmental document 

0 itself, talk about the alternatives that are being evaluated 

1 in this document, and then how you can review the documents 

2 and provide and your comments in addition to the opportunity 

3 to comment tonight. 

4 We will have a -- at the end of the presentation, a 

5 question-and-answer period. That is not part of the public 

1

1 m

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

7 

1 comment period, but to provide an opportunity for attendees to 

2 ask clarifying questions about the projects to help their 

3 understanding of the project and enable them to make comment

4 and then we will have the public comment period after the Q&A

5 period. 

6 So let's dive into the presentation and first an 

7 overview of what this session tonight is all about. Our focus 

8 is the Coachella Valley-San Grogonio Pass Rail Corridor 

9 Service Tier 1 Program Environmental Impact Statement 

0 Environmental Impact Report. That is a mouth full for sure. 

1 That document has evaluated this potential rail program and 

2 the environmental impacts of it. Our meeting tonight will 

3 provide you with the opportunity to comment on the draft 

4 environmental document. 

5 We will provide more specific directions later when we 

6 get to the comment period, but we would like you to keep in 

7 mind when you are making your comments, please explain the 

8 basis for your comments, provide data or references that 

9 provide facts and reasonable assumptions based on facts or 

0 expert opinion supported by the facts. Also, please submit 

1 the name of a contact person who will be available for later 

2 consultation, if necessary. Next slide, please. 

3 So what is the Coachella Valley-San Grogonio Pass Rail 

4 Corridor Service Program? As Sheldon mentioned in his 

5 introduction, the Federal Railroad Administration, Caltrans, 

1 and the Riverside County Transportation Commission have bee

2 collaborated to study a potential new passenger rail service 

3 that would extend from Los Angeles Union Station to the 

4 Coachella Valley with its eastern terminus in either the city 

5 of Indio or Coachella. Next Slide. 

6 The study area is shown on the map on screen with LA 

7 Union Station on the west, Coachella Valley on the far east, 

8 and you will see the orange dots for existing stations that 

9 will be utilized, and then the orange band areas are 

0 communities where potential new stations might be added to 

1 serve the service. 

2 The service would include two round trips per day 

3 between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley and up to six 

4 potential stations in the eastern half of the corridor, 

5 including existing Palm Springs station and up to potentially 

6 five new stations. 

7 I mentioned the purpose in need as the foundational 

8 statement of what the project is endeavoring to accomplish, so 

9 the need is driven by the fact that the region's population 

0 and employment continue to grow. There are very limited 

1 constrained travel options other than driving a car between 

2 the LA area and the Coachella Valley. This kind of service 

3 would also help serve the needs of disadvantaged communities 

4 and help to achieve air quality goals for the region. The 

5 purpose and the objectives of the project are to provide more 

1 convenient, faster and more frequent service than the existing

2 transit service to provide an alternative to driving that has 

3 reliable schedules to provide an affordable transportation

4 service to improve the regional options for transit-dependent

5 people making longer distance trips through the region and to

6 serve the expected growth of population and employment within

7 the corridor and help to contribute to air quality goals.

8 So a question we often get asked is, why are you

9 talking about Amtrak intercity service and not Metrolink

0 commuter rail type of service? There are a few reasons for

1 this. First of all, Amtrak intercity type of service, with

2 this long of a trip time, it is preferred to have the more

3 comfortable accommodations that the Amtrak service can provid

4 as compared to commuter rail service. The initial schedules

5 that we have been studying for the service include two round

6 trips per day, and as the charts there show, the initial

7 thinking is that there would be one trip in the morning and

8 one trip in the afternoon in each direction. A third reason

9 that we are talking about Amtrak type of service is that

0 congress has authorized Amtrak to operate on private railroads

1 as long as track improvements are made so that the passenger

2 rail service can operate together with the freight rail

3 service that is on those railroads. Metrolink does not have

4 that type of federal legislative authorization.

5 And lastly, intercity service is funded by state

s,

6

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1 e

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

8 

n 

1

[fucALJ 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

1 · ·agencies. · This type of service would be similar, for example, 

2 · ·to the Pacific Surfliner Amtrak passenger service, which the 

3 · ·state is a source of funds for. 

4 · · · · · ·Now, a little bit for you about the history of this 

5 · ·program and prior planning activities. · RCTC actually started 

6 · ·very early feasibility studies of this rail concept way back 

7 · ·in the early 1990s. · They had a couple of initial feasibility 

8 · ·studies back then looking at one or two daily rail round trips 

9 · ·between LA and Indio. · After 2010 for the next three years, 

0 · ·there were a couple of additional feasibility studies, and 

1 · ·then as Sheldon mentioned in 2013, RCTC embarked on a 

2 · ·significant new market assessment and alternative analysis for 

3 · ·the corridor. · Looking at five alternative routes through the 

4 · ·LA area to determine the preferred alignment. 

5 · · · · · ·That led up to the significant milestone in July of 

6 · ·2016 when the alternatives analysis was finalized, and the 

7 · ·preferred route was selected to move forward into the current 

8 · ·environmental study. · In the fall of 2016, public scoping 

9 · ·meetings were held for this environmental study and the 

0 · ·technical team began the technical studies to prepare the 

1 · ·foundation for this draft environmental document. 

2 · · · · · ·Looking at the overall project development process 

3 · ·then as I mentioned the alternative analysis was completed in 

4 · ·2016. · We are currently in the phase of the program level or 

5 · ·Tier 1 environmental documents and also a Service Development

1 · ·Plan to meet the technical analysis needs of the Federal 

2 · ·Railroad Administration. · Future steps will include getting 

3 · ·into more detailed engineering and project-level environmental 

4 · ·analysis when specific construction projects are proposed. 

5 · · · · · ·And following that stage, the project would advance 

6 · ·into final design and then construction and ultimately getting 

7 · ·to operation of the service. · So there are several steps 

8 · ·through the process, and a lot of work still to go after we 

9 · ·complete this Tier 1 program-level environmental document. 

0 · · · · · ·So what exactly is being prepared in this project with 

1 · ·the Tier 1 and the Service Development Plan? · As I mentioned, 

2 · ·the Service Development Plan is a technical document prepared 

3 · ·for the Federal Railroad Administration. · FRA had this 

4 · ·planning document for these types of services around the 

5 · ·country when they are implemented or expanded, and it involves 

6 · ·analyzing the service levels, the infrastructure needs in 

7 · ·order to achieve operational goals, modeling, specifically, of 

8 · ·the route over which the operation will occur, evaluating 

9 · ·station areas and the catchment areas and how access will be 

0 · ·provided to those station areas, and then connectivity with 

1 · ·other rail and transit services at stations along the 

2 · ·corridor. · That's the SDP technical side of our current phase. 

3 · · · · · ·Then what we are here for tonight is the program-level 

4 · ·Tier 1 EIS/EIR. · This is a joint environmental document 

5 · ·merging the needs of the Federal National Environmental Policy 

· ·Act or NEPA, as well as need meeting the needs of the 

· ·California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA. 

· · · · · ·The program-level document addresses the likely 

· ·environmental effects associated with the proposed rail 

· ·service. · It provides the basis for subsequent phases of 

· ·tiered environmental documents, so this Tier 1 analysis does 

· ·not get a level of specificity of proposed projects to be 

· ·constructed, but it is evaluating the impacts of the service 

· ·being operated. · When specific construction projects are 

0 · ·identified in the future, they will be subject to a Tier 2 

1 · ·project-level environmental analysis. 

2 · · · · · ·To give you a few more specifics on Tier 1 versus 

3 · ·Tier 2 -- and I should mention Tier 1 is the federal or NEPA 

4 · ·term for this higher-level environmental study, and program 

5 · ·level is the CEQA term for this level of study. · So our 

6 · ·document will satisfy both the federal and state environmental 

7 · ·requirements. · It will evaluate the effects of the 

8 · ·implementing the service in the regional context, so it 

9 · ·specifically identifies broad areas of potential environmental 

0 · ·effects that will be associated with the overall construction 

1 · ·program and operation of the service, so it will identify the 

2 · ·resources that could potentially be affected within the study 

3 · ·area by either the construction or the operation. 

4 · · · · · ·It is important to note that it is a procedural 

5 · ·planning document only. · There is not any project proposed to 

· · be constructed yet, but it is to help the decision makers 

· · understand what the impacts would be of construction in 

· · general if the project were to move forward. 

· · · · · · As I mentioned, the Tier 2 or project-level 

· · environmental process would be required for any specific 

· · infrastructure improvements that would get built, but that 

· · Tier 2 environmental analysis would occur after more specific 

· · designs have been prepared for the specific projects. 

· · · · · · Okay. · Moving on, this environmental document 

· ·evaluates a whole range of topics. · It is the full range of 

· · potential impacts that are in a typical environmental 

· · document. · I am not going to read through the bullets one by 

· · one because it covers two slides, but just be aware that it is 

· · a very comprehensive analysis, and it includes all of the 

· · range of resource areas and potential impacts in a typical 

· · environmental document. 

· · · · · · Now, to describe the alternatives evaluated in the 

· · EIS/EIR, itself, there is a no-build alternative, and there is 

· · a build alternative with three service options. · When I was 

· · talking about the history of the program, I mentioned the 

· · previous study evaluated several different route alternatives 

· · and narrowed down the route to this one preferred build 

· · alternative route, so the no-build alternative is basically no 

· · new service in the corridor. · The build alternative has three 

· · options, and the differences between them are basically the 

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

9 11 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 10

1 11

1 12

1 13

1 14

1 15

1 16

1 17

1 18

1 19

2 20

2 21

2 22

2 23

2 24

2 25

10 12 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
·1 · ·eastern terminus, and the amount of new track infrastructure 

2 · ·that is involved. 

3 · · · · · ·Option 1 -- again, they all have two round trips of 

4 · ·service. · Option 1 as eastern terminus in the city of 

5 · ·Coachella, so it has six stations, up to six stations 

6 · ·potentially, in the eastern part of the corridor, and it would 

7 · ·have a new third track in the whole eastern part of the 

8 · ·corridor between Colton and Coachella. 

9 · · · · · ·Option number 2, again, two round trips. · The eastern 

0 · ·Terminus of Option 2 would be in the city of Indio, 4 miles 

1 · ·west of Coachella, basically. · So it would only have five 

2 · ·stations east of Colton because it would not have a Coachella 

3 · ·station. · And Option 2 has a new third track throughout the 

4 · ·entire eastern section from Colton to Indio. · Option 3 is a 

5 · ·somewhat modified infrastructure element. · It is similar to 

6 · ·Option 2 in that it, again, has two round trips per day with 

7 · ·eastern terminus in Indio and five stations east of Colton. 

8 · · · · · ·The extent of the third track is the difference in 

9 · ·this alternative. · The technical studies that I mentioned 

0 · ·before evaluated how much third track would be necessary in 

1 · ·order to make sure that the project could achieve the FRA 

2 · ·requirements of 90 percent on-time train performance without

3 · ·adding delay to the freight trains in the corridor. · And the 

4 · ·modeling indicated that there may be a need to have a third 

5 · ·track all the way from Colton to the eastern Terminus, but it 

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

1 · ·might be possible to achieve those performance objectives with 

2 · ·somewhat less third track, and so for modeling and analysis 

3 · ·purposes, Option 3 considers a third track from Colton to 

4 · ·approximately the middle of the Coachella Valley, which would 

5 · ·be approximately Rancho Mirage or Palm Desert. · Next slide, 

6 · ·please. 

7 · · · · · ·The next couple of maps just provide an overview of 

8 · ·the two sections of the corridor. · The western section from LA 

9 · ·through Fullerton and Riverside to Colton is shown on this 

0 · ·map, and there would not be any need for additional track or 

1 · ·rail infrastructure or stations in the western half of the 

2 · ·corridor. · The sufficient infrastructure is already in place 

3 · ·to serve the needs of the rail service in the western half. 

4 · · · · · ·The next slide shows the eastern end of the corridor 

5 · ·with Coachella as the eastern Terminus. · Again, those thicker 

6 · ·areas of the purple line indicate the potential areas in which 

7 · ·new stations might be located. · The environmental analysis 

8 · ·identifies the potential impacts throughout those whole bands 

9 · ·so that when specific stations are identified and evaluated in 

0 · ·a Tier 2 document, this document will have identified 

1 · ·potential types of impacts anywhere within those larger bands. 

2 · ·And the next slide is the same thing of the eastern section, 

3 · ·but with the Terminus in Indio, which is, again, 4 miles to 

4 · ·the west and north of Coachella. · Next slide, please. 

5 · · · · · ·So now I am going to go through the opportunities that 

· · you have to review the documents, and then we will provide 

· · your opportunities of where and how to comment on the

· · subsequent slides.

· · · · · · The draft Tier 1 program EIS/EIR was released may 21st

· · and is out for a 45-day public review period, so it will be

· · available for public comment until July 6th. · Digital copies

· · of the document are available on the RCTC website. · The 

· · Federal Railroad Administration website, and the

· · regulations.gov website. · Next slide.

0· · · · · · A number of printed copies have been made available at

1· · locations around Southern California, mostly libraries, also

2· · the RCTC offices. · Just check ahead for opening times of those

3· · facilities, and note that if you would like to review it at 

4· · RCTC, you can make an appointment to do so.

5· · · · · ·Now, to talk about how to submit your comments. · There

6· ·are three methods for submitting your comments. · The first is

7· · during the public hearings, and we are having two of them this

8· · evening and this coming Saturday morning.

9· · · · · · The second opportunity will be provided by submitting

0· · it on the online form, which is on the regulations.gov

1· ·website, and the link that is there can take you to our

2· ·projects specific website location where you can submit that

3· · form.

4· · · · · · If you wish to submit it by regular mail, the address

5· · is provided there. · It is to the attention of Amanda

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

· · · Ciampolillo, who is with us on the Webinar tonight, and you

· · already heard from Amanda at the beginning. · Comments that are

· · mailed in should be post marked by July 6th or sooner to be 

· ·within the comment period. · As I mentioned, we are going to

· · have a second virtual public hearing this coming Saturday.

· · There is the location for registering and the meeting ID. · And

· · as with tonight, Spanish interpretation and English closed

· · captioning will be available on zoom, and the recordings of

· · both the English and Spanish versions of tonight's hearing

0 · ·will be posted on the project website.

1 · · · · · ·That brings us to the close of the presentation part

2 · ·of our agenda, and now we have come to the part for clarifying

3 · ·questions if anyone is unclear about certain elements of the

4 · ·project or has specific questions about what the project is

5 · ·proposing to do, again, this is not the comment period of the

6 · ·meeting. · We will get to that in a few minutes, but we do want

7 · ·to -- if anyone has clarifying questions they have to ask, we

8 · ·do want to give you answers with those so you are

9 · ·understanding what the project is that is being evaluated in

0 · ·this document.

1 · · · · · ·So, Stevie, do we turn it over to you for this point?

2 · · · · · ·MS. ESPINOZA: · Sure. · We do have a number of questions

3 · ·in the Q&A already, so I am just going to start with the first

4 · ·one from Steve Coleman. · Steve is asking, "Why did you

5 · ·recommend the routing via Fullerton rather than the shorter

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

13 15 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

2 2

14 16 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
·1 · ·route that could serve the Ontario Airport?" 

·2 · · · · · ·MR. DOUGLAS: · I will take that one. · The alternative 

·3 · ·analysis that was done between 2013 and 2016 evaluated five 

·4 · ·alternative routes through the Los Angeles area and the route 

·5 · ·past Ontario airport was one of those five. · There were a 

·6 · ·number of criteria that were considered in evaluating those, 

·7 · ·including potential ridership of the infrastructure that would 

·8 · ·be needed as well as the operations, and at the conclusion of 

·9 · ·that analysis, the route through Fullerton was the best 

10 · ·alternative in all of those respects. · Sheldon, did you want 

11 · ·to add anything to that? 

12 · · · · · ·MR. PETERSON: · No. · That basically covers it. · It just 

13 · ·looked like the best performing routes that connected to 

14 · ·Orange County and all the opportunities there as well as 

15 · ·downtown LA. · So it looked it like, at the time, the best 

16 · ·option to move forward. 

17 · · · · · ·MS. ESPINOZA: · Okay. · Great thank you for that. · We do 

18 · ·have also a question from Brandy Keith. · "Will a copy of Mr. 

19 · ·Douglas' presentation be available online for further review?" 

20 · · · · · ·MR. PETERSON: · Yes, we can make that available on the 

21 · ·project website. · As JD mentioned, we will have the full 

22 · ·recordings of these messages, as well, these public hearings, 

23 · ·they will be made available. 

24 · · · · · ·MS. ESPINOZA: · Okay. · We do also have a question from 

25 · ·Phillip Kaplan who also provided comments. · We are only taking 

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

1 · ·clarifying questions right now, and we will be doing a 

2 · ·separate formal comment session after this, but his question 

3 · ·was, let's see, "My question has to do with the compliance 

4 · ·with Title 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act: · One, 

5 · ·regarding the train cars accessibility with people with 

6 · ·disabilities; and, two, the need for accessible ground 

7 · ·transportation to and from the stations. 

8 · · · · · ·MR. PETERSON: · Yes, so we would be offering fully ADA

9 · ·complaint rail cars. · We haven't specifically identified what 

0 · ·rail cars will be made available, but Amtrak has a very 

1 · ·aggressive ADA program throughout the country, and we would 

2 · ·meet all the requirements there. · As far as ground 

3 · ·transportation, we are supportive of trying to help and insure 

4 · ·those first-mile/last-mile connections, and try to make those 

5 · ·accessible, as well. · So once we get into that implementation 

6 · ·phase, we will definitely look to address and meet those 

7 · ·needs. · You also mentioned a quick question about the 

8 · ·stations. · As we go in and move forward and design other 

9 · ·stations, we will look at accessibility issues. · You mentioned 

0 · ·the Palm Springs station has been there a while, so there 

1 · ·could be an opportunity to make it easier for all riders to 

2 · ·access that station as we move that project forward, so there 

3 · ·will be upgraded stations, as well. 

4 · · · · · ·MS. ESPINOZA: · Thank you, Phillip for that question. 

5 · · · · · ·We have a question and from Reed Alvarado. · "How will 

· · this line interact for funding with the LA to Phoenix route 

· · proposed recently?" 

· · · · · · MR. PETERSON: · Yes, we have been in discussions with 

· · Amtrak about the proposals and their Connect Us program 

· · nationally. · We see that both the service to Indio and 

· · Coachella and a future service to Phoenix would be very 

· · complimentary. · If we were to get our service up and running 

· · first, that service would be the same route and access for 

· · future Phoenix service, so we don't see it as a competition, 

· ·we see it as definitely a complimentary effort to try advance 

· · both projects. 

· · · · · · MS. ESPINOZA: · This is a similar question from Anthony 

· · Tristan. · "Will this project eventually link with a national 

· · system?" 

· · · · · · MR. PETERSON: · Yes. · With the connection at LA Union 

· · Station we are connected to all kinds of locations throughout 

· · the nation, so we have Amtrak service up to Oregon and 

· · Washington from LA, as well as cross-country routes, so making 

· · that connection to Los Angeles is vital to connecting this 

· · route. 

· · · · · · MS. ESPINOZA: · We have a question from Oliver. · He is 

· · asking, "How much time will the trip take?" 

· · · · · · MR. PETERSON: · We had that previous slide that did 

· · have a rough schedule. · We are looking at roughly 3 hours and 

· · 15 to 3 hours and 30 minutes to go ahead and make that 

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

· · · connection. · Hopefully over time we could expedite that trip. 

· · That is the current technology we are looking at. 

· · · · · · MS. ESPINOZA: · Barbara Dequoto is asking, "Will there 

· ·be a Banning station? · I currently drive from Riverside to 

· · San Clemente pier every weekend for 15 years." 

· · · · · · MR. PETERSON: · We are glad you able to make that 

· · weekend trip to San Clemente. · We agree that it is a great 

· ·service on Metrolink. · We identified that there will be a pass 

· · area station, but we haven't decided which community it will 

· · be in. · That will be part of the Tier 2 effort, so we do 

· · anticipate that sort of route. · Our service would be able to 

· · take you as far as potentially Fullerton to make connections 

· · and/or into downtown Los Angeles, but couldn't directly 

· · connect you to San Clemente pier, unfortunately, but we will 

· · get you close. 

· · · · · · MS. ESPINOZA: · We have another question from Reed 

· · Alvarado. · "Will there be any opportunities for a transfer to 

· · the Omnitrans Arrow line in Redlands or to Metrolink's 

· · San Bernardino line. 

· · · · · · MR. PETERSON: · Yeah, that's a great question. · We are 

· · coordinating with our partners at the CTCA to look at some 

· · opportunities for a station in the San Bernardino or 

· · Loma Linda area that could make shuttle connections with the 

· · Arrow Service or San Bernardino Station. · We don't see it as a 

· · direct link because they are two separate rail lines, but we 

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

17 19 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 10

1 11

1 12

1 13

1 14

1 15

1 16

1 17

1 18

1 19

2 20

2 21

2 22

2 23

2 24

2 25

18 20 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · 

1 would definitely make as tight of a connection as we could 1 priority for the service? 

2 with some sort of shuttle service that we will explore in the 2 MR. PETERSON: I'm not sure we are clear on who has 

3 future. 3 responded. We have reached out to a number of communities, so 

4 MS. ESPINOZA: Michael would like to know or would 4 we don't have the formal comments to the environmental 

5 like to understand that at this stage, are you looking at both 5 document just yet so we will definitely include those in the 

6 train and monorail around the I-10? 6 follow-up as we look at that. We have reached out to the 

7 MR. PETERSON: Specifically, for our project, we are 7 Indian tribes along the corridor as well to make sure they are 

8 looking at traditional rail service along the existing rail 8 well informed of the process. They are being stakeholders and 

9 quarters, so it wouldn't directly follow the 10 Freeway, so we 9 partners. 

10 are not anticipating any new technology such as the monorail 10 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for that. Philip, I do see 

11 with this specific project. 11 your hand raised. If you would like to go ahead and ask your 

12 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. We do have a question from Tim. 12 question through the Q&A, that would be great. If not, we 

13 Tim is asking, why types of funds are dedicated for these 13 will hold your comments for the official comment period. 

14 types of operations? Also, will the ticketing be the same as 14 Other than that, we have another question from Tim. 

15 Metrolink? 15 This question is, "Is there anything with a current design 

16 MR. PETERSON: We are looking at various fund types to 16 that would include future electrification?" 

17 go ahead and support the operations of the service. Typically 17 MR. PETERSON: I don't think there is anything that 

18 these types of services are funded through the State's 18 will specifically preclude it. I think if we do look for 

19 program, such as the Surfliners JD mentioned earlier, so we'd 19 electrification in the future, we would need to potentially 

20 anticipate the operating funds to come from those sources. 20 expand the thumbprint for identifying that technology, so I 

21 The ticketing would be a little bit different than Metrolink, 21 think there is a future opportunity, but it not a specific 

22 but state is looking to interconnectivity or 22 element of our initial plan. 

23 interchangeability for ticking throughout the network, so we 23 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. That is everything that is 

24 would definitely make sure there would be some transfer 24 coming through the Q&A. 

25 agreements or some way for those tickets to be connected. 25 I do see a hand raised for Margo. Margo, I'm going to 

21 23 

1 MS. ESPINOZA: And we have a question from Steve 1 go ahead and unmute you. I'm not sure if you have the ability 

2 Smith. "The EIS/EIR shows freight train volumes in the 2 to use Q&A, so go ahead and unmute yourself and ask the 

3 eastern section doubling by 2040. Some of the communities are 3 question. 

4 concerned the third track will enable this growth to occur 4 Margo, you are still muted. I did unmute you. You 

5 more easily with all the associated impacts. We think this 5 will just need to unmute yourself at your end if you have a 

6 potential outcome needs to be evaluated and explained in 6 question. 

7 detail. Would this be possible for the final EIS/EIR?" 7 MARGO BELL: Okay. The present Palm Springs train 

8 MR. PETERSON: Yes, we appreciate that question, and 8 station is in the boondocks in the wind belt and the sand 

9 that is the type of comment we would like to see in the formal 9 belt, and very few people even know it is even there. It 

10 comments. We don't have a quick answer for that. Definitely 10 would have to be improved a great deal. And as a wonderful 

11 include that in the formal comments, and we will address it as 11 spot, when we were discussing Amtrak in 1982 that if there was 

12 part of the process. 12 going to be a railway, the best place for the station would be 

13 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. Shelly Caplin would like to know 13 near the Agua Caliente Casino, which was not built then, but 

14 will there new track sections be designed for the high-speed 14 it is at the bottom of Bob Hope Drive and Highway 10, and 

15 train travel? 15 there is a big space there that has been really kept for the 

16 MR. PETERSON: The way it is being designed right now 16 purpose of the station in the future. I think there may be 

17 is for more traditional rail service. High-speed rail that's 17 some storage places there which can easily be removed, and it 

18 progressing in other areas of the state has a very different 18 would be an ideal spot for it that everybody could get to. Of 

19 service portfolio so the curves and everything else are being 19 course, it would be in Rancho Mirage, which is a few miles 

20 designed very differently than the work we are doing now. It 20 further. 

21 is not specifically designed for high-speed trains over the 21 MS. ESPINOZA: Margo, did you have a specific question 

22 typical 90 miles an hour at this point. 22 you would like to ask our team today? 

23 MS. ESPINOZA: Michael has a follow-up question, how 23 MARGO BELL: I just encourage them to go ahead and we 

24 many of the cities along the I-10 have responded to your plan 24 have to walk before we can run, and I think it is a great 

25 to date? Does the federal land that Morongo has have a high 25 start. It isn't a question, just a comment. Thank you. 

22 24 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · · 

· · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · 

· · · · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

1 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you so much. Just as a reminder, 1 we recognize this is a Tier 1 program EIS/EIR, which is one 

2 we are going to be taking formal comments during the formal 2 step of a multi-phase-iterative process, and details such as 

3 comment period. That is next, so I do encourage you to make 3 passenger station locations and so forth will be evaluated the 

4 that comment during that time, so right now we are just going 4 next phase; however, RailPAC wants to emphasize how this 

5 to be taking Q&A, but I actually don't see any more questions 5 project can open the door for future projects and goals much 

6 coming in, so I am wondering if we are good, JD and Sheldon, 6 greater than the proposed or evaluated Tier 1 passenger rail 

7 to move on at this point. 7 service option of two daily rounds trips between Los Angeles 

8 MR. PETERSON: Yes, and then just for a quick -- for 8 Union Station and Coachella Valley. RailPAC fully supports 

9 Margo, that location she identified could be an option for 9 the main feature of the preferred bill alternative option 1, 

10 what we have been calling a mid-valley station, so we see the 10 which is construction of a new third mainline track 76 miles 

11 potential of having multiple stations in Coachella Valley and 11 long along Union Pacific Railroad along the existing Yuma 

12 at Agua Caliente could be a potential site. So that is great 12 subdivision between Colton and Coachella. Given the capital 

13 input. We really do appreciate that. And I am good with 13 costs of the third mainline track proposed from Colton to the 

14 moving on. Thanks. 14 Coachella Valley. RailPAC wants to emphasize a variety of 

15 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. We are going to be moving 15 benefits to passenger and freight rails that are possible with 

16 forward with the official comment period today. We do have a 16 this investment additional track capacity. Any proposed 

17 court reporter who will be transcribing tonight's comment 17 service in the Coachella Valley Rail Corridor and capital 

18 session, so we are going to be limiting comments to 3 minutes 18 improvements associated with it must be a building block for 

19 per speaker through a timer, and we request that you, you 19 future expansion, and I am just going to briefly list a few 

20 know, formally state your name. And if you have a name that 20 initiatives that would also benefit from this investment and 

21 is a little harder to spell, just for ease for our court 21 add significant public value to any capital grant request for 

22 reporter, if you can spell that for her, that would be great. 22 a Colton Coachella third mainline track and perhaps we should 

23 We are limiting to 3 minutes per speaker. We want to 23 evaluate them in the Tier 2 of CIR, that's greater frequency 

24 make sure everybody has an opportunity to give their comment 24 than proposed -- greater frequency, like much more than two 

25 tonight, and to request to speak, we are going to ask for 25 round trips a day, maybe 6 or 12 preferably with higher 

25 27 

1 verbal comments only. So anything that is coming in through 1 speeds, a daily Amtrak sunset limited, which has long been a 

2 the Q&A will not be accepted as a formal comment today, so you 2 goal of our organization, and also many in Riverside County 

3 can go ahead and use your hand feature, but if we have any 3 benefit the Union Pacific Freight rail. With the new third 

4 callers -- I don't believe we have any callers today, but if 4 track, UP can run a lot or conventional freight trains, along 

5 you do have -- call in, you can use -- dial *9 to raise your 5 with short-haul and medium-haul trains to get trucks off I-10. 

6 hand. When it is your turn to speak, we will be unmuting you 6 The new California-Arizona passenger service that Amtrack has 

7 and call-in users can dial *6 to unmute your mic when you hear 7 proposed, extension to the Imperial Valley as proposed by 

8 your number announced. So let me just get that started. 8 RCTC's 1991 study that's down to Coachella -- or sorry, to 

9 Okay. We do have a hand raised from Brian, so Brian 9 El Centro, Calexico, and I guess that's the end of my three 

10 go ahead and unmute yourself when you are ready. 10 minutes. Thank you very much. 

11 BRIAN YANITY: Hello, good evening. Can you hear me? 11 MS. ESPINOZA: Great. Thank you, Brian. Okay. 

12 MS. ESPINOZA: We can hear you. 12 We -- just as a reminder, if you don't want to provide a 

13 BRIAN YANITY: Hi, my name is Brian Yanity, and I am 13 verbal comment today, there is an opportunity for you to still 

14 Vice President South of the Railroad Passenger Association of 14 provide your comment through a written way. We have linked 

15 California and Nevada or RailPAC, and thank you again for this 15 the regulations.gov in the chat feature, so if you would 

16 opportunity to give comments this evening on the Coachella 16 rather provide a written comment today, you can go ahead and 

17 Valley Tier 1 program EIS/EIR, Coachella Valley Rail, I should 17 just visit that website, and you will be able to do that. 

18 say. 18 So we do have another hand raised from Reed Alvarado, 

19 RailPAC is a 501C3 volunteer group of railroad 19 Reed, I will unmute you. Go ahead when you are ready. 

20 professionals and advocates that have campaigned for improved 20 REED ALVARADO: My name is Reed Alvarado. I am a 

21 personal mobility in California and the west since 1978. 21 resident of Palm Springs, and actually a car-free resident of 

22 RailPAC applauds the efforts to advance additional intercity 22 Palm Springs. I am a frequent user of Amtrak's current 

23 rail services in the Los Angeles Union Station and Coachella 23 three-way bus service to Fullerton, and I understand the that 

24 Valley, and it has long been a goal of our organization, the 24 the interest -- which makes a lot of sense for RCTC -- to want 

25 California State Rail Plan and many in Riverside County, and 25 to serve Riverside. That being said, I think it is incredibly 

26 28 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · · 

· · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

1 important that in the next EIR, there is a specific plan 1 visiting in the 20s, so this place has been well known for 

2 outlined that expands on the dedicated shuttle comment, and 2 people coming from LA, and I think it is long overdue. Japan 

3 hopefully improved access either through BRT or what have you 3 has been building monorails since the 1960s. I am grateful 

4 to the SB line or the Arrow Rail for faster and more 4 that you guys are working on this. I appreciate it. Thank 

5 convenient access to Metrolink and the Inland Empire. 5 you for allowing me to comment. 

6 I also wanted to support Margo's comment about a 6 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you, Anthony, for your comment. 

7 mid-valley station. As we know in Palm Springs, the current 7 We are going to move on. We have a few hands raised in the 

8 station is located in a very desolate area, and Agua Caliente, 8 queue. I will be just be taking them as I see them. Peter, I 

9 SunLine Transit Agency, CSUSBPD are all areas that are served 9 will go ahead and unmute you now. Feel free to start when you 

10 in the Mid-Valley area. I just wanted to echo that support 10 are ready. 

11 for a Mid-Valley Station option, and, you know, coordinate 11 PETER GREEN: I am Peter Green. Can you hear me? 

12 with the local transit agency in the future for added 12 MS. ESPINOZA: Yes, I can hear you. 

13 connections for people once they get off that line, and 13 PETER GREEN: It is Green like the color for the court 

14 finally I wanted to just support the previous comment for a 14 reporter. I am a resident of Palm Desert. I support the 

15 full corridor third track for increased frequency. As we all 15 proposal. I would like to reiterate that besides having a 

16 know, two daily round trips won't suffice the desire to be 16 station at Bob Hope, I would hope they would consider a 

17 able to live in this region car-fee and access the second 17 station in University Park where the proposed Cal State campus 

18 largest city in the country, but it is a great starting point, 18 is going. Across from that, there is a 100 -- or a 

19 and I fully support this project, and I just wanted to see 19 10,000-seat arena being built as we speak, and the Seattle 

20 more car-free transit options and accessibility for the 20 Kraken Minor League team will be based there. Also, I would 

21 Coachella Valley. Thank you very much. 21 like to see in the final report if additional trains could be 

22 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for that comment, Reed. We 22 provided for special events like Coachella or athletic events 

23 have another hand raised from Anthony Tristan. Anthony, I 23 or other things. My other concern, which I also put in 

24 just unmuted you. Go ahead and unmute yourself and provide 24 writing is I believe that the North Palm Desert residents will 

25 your comment when you are ready. 25 want either a sound wall or some other mitigation like 

29 31 

1 ANTHONY TRISTAN: Thank you for this opportunity. I 1 landscaping for additional rail noise. They are already upset

2 am a long-term resident of the Coachella Valley. I have also 2 about the rail noise as it is. But, again, I support the

3 lived in the Bay area for six years, so I had the opportunity 3 project and thank you for your time.

4 to take the BART to school from -- 4 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for your comment, Tim, or

5 MS. ESPINOZA: Sorry, would you provide your name for 5 thank you for your comment, Peter.

6 our court reporter today. 6 Tim, I do see your hand is raised. Go ahead and start

7 ANTHONY TRISTAN: Sure. I thought I stated it was 7 when you are ready. I have unmuted you.

8 Anthony Tristan. 8 TIMOTHY PAPANDRTOU: Thank you. My name is Timothy

9 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. Thank you. 9 Papandrtou, spelled P-a-p-a-n-d-r-t-o-u. I am a resident of

10 ANTHONY TRISTAN: I am a long term resident of the 10 Palm Springs, and I am a transportation planner. As well, so

11 Coachella Valley, but I have also lived in Orange County, LA, 11 I really applaud the efforts to try to get this corridor under

12 and the San Francisco Bay Area, and I have had the opportunity 12 way. Let's figure out how to get this expedited to get this

13 of taking the BART, which is very convenient from Berkeley to 13 service from LA to this area as quickly as possible. I do

14 San Francisco state. I am an educator from Palm Springs 14 want to highlight two things.

15 Unified School District, and I am very excited to know this is 15 One is that we want to make sure that the access to

16 finally being talked about. I mean, considering Walt Disney 16 and from stations really look at the surrounding street

17 had the first monorail in the western hemisphere back in the 17 designs focusing on making sure there are prioritized areas

18 60s. I did commute recently a couple years ago to USC three 18 for bicycles and transit bus access.

19 or four times a day -- I mean three or four time as week for 19 We also want to mention that in Palm Springs their

20 my Master's in public administration, and prior to that in the 20 recent climate action work has basically identified that

21 early 2000s, I had to commute to Cal State Long Beach, so I am 21 regional trips are growing much faster than they can handle,

22 very excited that a rail system is going to be implemented 22 which is increasing their carbon footprint impact. So this is

23 hopefully soon. It is much needed, especially since Palm 23 a regional corridor with regional trips reduction prospects,

24 Springs has been a destination since the 20s, and I worked at 24 but only if they are really connected to the areas that they

25 a place in Desert Hot Springs where supposedly Al Capone was 25 serve, so I really want to see much stronger connections with

30 32 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

1 the street design from the tourism stations, the transit 1 comment, you can go ahead and use the regulations.gov website 

2 access, the bicycle access with parking, and more 2 that we have linked in the chat. 

3 interoperability designed for how it links in with the 3 Oh, great. I will go ahead and unmute you, and go 

4 Metrolink system, but, overall, I think this is fantastic, and 4 ahead when you are ready. 

5 I am so glad you guys are moving forward in this. Thank you. 5 MARGO BELL: Well, I just commented on the 

6 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. Thank you, Tim, for that 6 Palm Springs station as is, which is terrible, and a lot of 

7 comment. I don't see any other hands raised at this point. 7 people don't even know it is there, but another gentleman also 

8 Again, if you would like to provide a comment today, you can 8 commented on that, so I think we have looked at that issue 

9 go ahead and use the raised hand feature. That will be 9 that we certainly need something better than what is there 

10 located at the bottom of your screen on the Zoom control 10 that most people don't know about. And I do like that place 

11 panels. If you don't want to provide a verbal comment, we do 11 at Bob Hope Drive at the corner, near Agua Caliete, but the 

12 have -- we have provided the link in the chat to the 12 other place near the college, I think that is on Cook Street, 

13 regulations.gov website, so if you would rather provide a 13 that's an excellent spot too, but I think they were keeping 

14 written comment today, you can go ahead and just click on that 14 that for further expansion and for parking places for the 

15 website, and that will be a way for you to do so. 15 college, which is going to grow and grow. I have nothing more 

16 We do have a hand raised at the moment from Barbara. 16 to say except that I am excited about this wonderful train. I 

17 Barbara, I will unmute you now, and go ahead when you are 17 think you are doing a great job, and I am so glad that Donna 

18 ready. 18 Reed a representative for Indian Wells is spearheading it here 

19 BARBARA DOCOUTO: Hi, my name is Barbara DoCouto, and 19 and getting us all excited about it in Indian Wells. Thank 

20 I am so excited about this transaction that is being done. I 20 you, Donna. Good bye. 

21 have lived here in Sun Lakes for 21 years, and the last 21 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you, Margo, for your comment. I 

22 16 years, like I said, I take the train every weekend in the 22 do have another hand raised from Lisa Middleton. I will go 

23 summer because I am originally from Rhode Island, and I miss 23 ahead and unmute you, and you may provide your comment when 

24 the ocean, and I drive down to the Riverside downtown station 24 ready. 

25 and do that every weekend. Unfortunately we have had a lot of 25 LISA MIDDLETON: Thank you. I am Lisa Middleton, 

33 35 

1 mishaps, like a lot of trains having to be stopped because of 1 member of Palm Springs City Council, as well as member of the 

2 people trying to commit suicide and all, and I don't know if 2 Riverside County Transportation Commission. All of us in 

3 there is anything that can be done about that. That is very 3 Palm Springs are very well aware of the need for improvement 

4 discouraging, which I have sometimes had to come home late at 4 of the Palm Springs train station. I can tell you that 

5 night, but I am so happy that this is being done. I have been 5 council will look very enthusiastically at making those 

6 talking about it to the conductors every time I go on the 6 improvements as we progress toward achieving the kind of train 

7 train. I am going to be 80 years old in August, and I don't 7 service that is being envisioned here this evening. Thank

8 know how long I can be driving down to the Riverside station. 8 you.

9 Me living in Banning, it would be so convenient for me to get 9 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. Those are all the hands raised 

10 my beach bag on that train and hop on and get off really 10 we have at the moment. This could be a good time for the

11 quickly, and I appreciate all of the work that you folks are 11 group to take a short recess as we wait for more comments as

12 doing, and we really, really need it in this area because 12 to come in.

13 Banning and Beaumont area is really growing and there is a lot 13 Or if you would like, we can move onto the next slide

14 of senior communities here, and this would be so convenient 14 while people think of maybe some other comments they would

15 for the elderly to get on a train to go to LA to concerts or 15 like to provide today. 

16 go to a ball game, and we so appreciate what you guys are 16 Just as a reminder, we are going to be here until

17 doing, and good luck in your endeavor. Thank you for 17 8:00 p.m. We don't have anything else on the agenda, other

18 listening to me. 18 than public comment period, so you are free to leave if you

19 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you. Barbara that was -- I think 19 have already provided your comment, but we and the group will

20 I can speak from the group when I can say that was a wonderful 20 be on until 8:00 p.m. today. 

21 comment. 21 Okay. We do have a hand raised, so I am going to ask 

22 We don't have any other hands raised at the moment. 22 our panelist to come back on. 

23 Margo, I know you had a comment earlier. I do invite you to 23 Okay. Gary, I am going to unmute you now, and go 

24 give that comment again for the record if you would like to 24 ahead when you are ready. 

25 raise your hand. If you would rather do it through written 25 Gary, you are still muted. If you are trying to --

34 36 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · · · · · · · · 

· · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

1 GARY LEVIN: Yes, good morning. Good afternoon, this 1 other specifically for Cabazon. There are several attractions

2 is Gary Levin. I live in Riverside. I have spent quite a bit 2 located specifically at Cabazon, which merit a stop. I think

3 of time living in the desert for about 10 years, and I think 3 we all know what those are. However, it is somewhat

4 this is a great idea. It is quite ambitious. I am sure there 4 disconnected from Beaumont and Banning, so I would likely see

5 are a lot of hurdles to get over. 5 more commuter traffic in Beaumont and Banning versus tourist 

6 Living in the Coachella Valley sort of is a different 6 to Cabazon, and we are trying to force either group to use one

7 experience. It is a different environment, a different 7 or the other station for an entire area will depress ridership

8 community. You do feel cut off from the rest of Southern 8 from both, so I think we should have two stations in that

9 California at times, but I think this is a great idea because 9 area. Thank you.

10 I think it will help with the people that feel isolated out 10 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you, Brian, for that follow-up

11 there. It will certainly help senior citizens to get back and 11 comment. Looks like we don't have any more hands raised at 

12 forth. I agree with the comment about where the train 12 the moment. For those of you who joined us late, we are

13 stations are located. That has to be a critical thing. One 13 taking public comment today for the Riverside county

14 thing I think we have to consider is how much growth there 14 transportation commissions Coachella Valley Rail project

15 will be for the next 25 to 100 years. Palm Springs used to be 15 today, so if you would like to leave a public comment, please

16 isolated. Now there is a lot of commercial educational going 16 go ahead and raise your hand. If you do not wish to provide a

17 up along the I-10 railroad corridor. There were a couple 17 verbal comment today, you can go ahead and visit the 

18 other things I wanted to comment on. Oh, I wonder how much 18 regulations.gov website that we have already linked in the

19 support you are getting from our elected state representatives 19 chat today.

20 in this endeavor, and that's about it. 20 While we wait for another raised hand to come in, we

21 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. Thank you, Gary. I appreciate 21 will give our panelists a little bit of a break, and we will

22 your comments today. 22 turn off their videos.

23 We do have somebody who asked if they could provide a 23 MS. ESPINOZA: I do see we have a comment coming 

24 comment. Brian, I don't see your hand up, though. Would you 24 through the Q&A today. Again, today we are only taking verbal

25 still like to provide your comment? Okay. I do see your hand 25 comments. However, if you would like to leave a written

37 39 

1 raised. 1 comment, you can go ahead and visit the regulations.gov 

2 BRIAN YANITY: Hello, this is Brian Yanity with the 2 website we provided in the chat. If you would like to provide 

3 Rail Passenger Association of California and Nevada. Is it 3 your comment today verbally, go ahead and raise your hand and 

4 okay to give a second comment? I didn't want to violate the 4 we can unmute you. 

5 rules if I am only entitled to one comment. 5 For those who are still with us, there are multiple 

6 MS. ESPINOZA: Yes, but if there is a third comment, I 6 ways to stay involved and updated with the project. You can 

7 will ask you to please go to the regulations.gov website. 7 stay connected on the project Facebook at CV Rail Project, or 

8 BRIAN YANITY: Okay. Well, thank you. I won't take 8 follow the RCTC Project. We do have the Federal Railroad 

9 too much time on the second comment, but an additional thing 9 Administration website here, as well. We have the project 

10 we wanted to comment on, we being RailPAC, the Rail Passenger 10 e-mail listed, but, again, we are only accepting written 

11 Association of California and Nevada. When it comes to noise 11 formal comments through the formal comments through that 

12 and vibration of the passenger rail operations, at least one 12 regulations.gov e-mail. 

13 speaker brought that up earlier and in relation to section 13 Again, we are going to be here until 8:00 o'clock 

14 3.6, that is mitigation strategy LU3, Land Use Consistency in 14 today, so if you have a comment, if you have not provided a 

15 the draft EIR documents, RailPAC recommends that sound walls 15 comment yet and would like to do so today, you can go ahead 

16 and sound dampening ballast in the rail beds should be 16 and raise your hand, and again we will be here until 

17 implemented where the track passes close to residential area. 17 8:00 o'clock. 

18 I think someone mentioned north Palm Springs. We were also 18 If you would rather leave a verbal comment, maybe you 

19 thinking the Loma Linda area. And then on the station 19 need time to formulate a comment, we are having another 

20 location, one comment we had about the Cabazon station, so far 20 virtual public hearing, and that will be taking place on 

21 in the Tier 1 EIR/EIS, it was identified 21 Saturday, June 26th. That is this Saturday from 9:00 a.m. 

22 Beaumont/Banning/Cabazon as a single station opportunity, or 22 until 11:00 a.m. Our team will be on until 11:00 a.m. If you 

23 at least a single, kind of, a long, you know, corridor along 23 log on a little late, that is okay. You can go ahead and 

24 the map; however, we believe there is enough reasons to 24 register at the following link or on our project website, and 

25 explore two stations, one for Beaumont and Banning and the 25 Spanish interpretation and English closed captioning will 

38 40 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

1 still be available on Zoom, and English and Spanish recordings 1 point --

2 of that hearing, as well, will be posted on the project 2 GENEVIEVE JUDGE: So that will be RCTC.org? That's

3 website following that meeting, so if you have -- if you would 3 all I wanted to know. I would have typed it, but you have

4 like to join us again on Saturday, feel free to do so, or if 4 chat turned off. I am sorry to waste people's time with this.

5 you, you know, have neighbors that are interested, they can 5 MS. ESPINOZA: That is no problem, Genevieve, and, you

6 also join us on Saturday, as well. 6 know, if your friends do want to join us for Saturday's

7 Just a clarification, the content on Saturday's 7 meeting, they do have that availability to do so. We are

8 meeting will be the same as today's meeting, so you are 8 going to be having a virtual public hearing on Saturday at

9 welcome to hear our team give a great presentation on 9 9:00 a.m. They can register at this link that I have just

10 Saturday, as well, but it will be the same as today's meeting, 10 provided, or you can go onto the project website and also have

11 so if you have already listened to today's meeting, then you 11 them register through there. The content that is going to be

12 are covered. 12 presented on Saturday's meeting will be the same as we just

13 I do also want to call attention to a couple links 13 presented today, but if your friends missed out, go ahead and

14 that we shared earlier in the. That's to the project fact 14 just invite them to the public meeting on Saturday. If they

15 sheet and to the project FAQ, so if you are still looking for 15 are not able to make it, we do understand, and they can go

16 additional information, those are two great resources that we 16 ahead and watch the video recordings later.

17 did post in the chat. They are also available on the project 17 GENEVIEVE JUDGE: Okay. That is RCTC.org. Okay. Let

18 website, and you can access them there, as well. 18 me check it right now. Am I getting any place? Let me see,

19 For anyone that joined late, we will share the project 19 yes, okay. Thank you. I just wanted to be sure I had the

20 section. If you have a comment, I can unmute you. If you 20 right URL because I can't write and copy everything off of

21 would like to provide a written comment, you can visit that 21 your presentation that fast. Thank you.

22 regulations.gov link that we have provided in the chat. Let 22 MS. ESPINOZA: No problem. And we will go ahead and

23 me pull up that project video for those of you who just joined 23 link that in the chat, as well, so you can pull that

24 us. 24 information from there.

25 (Whereupon, the video was played.) 25 GENEVIEVE JUDGE: Perfect. Thank you.

41 43 

1 MS. ESPINOZA: So, again, thank you for those who are 1 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you so much, Genevieve. 

2 joining us this evening. Again, we are here to take your 2 I do see another hand raised from Margo bell. Margo, 

3 comments, so if you do have a comment, go ahead and just raise 3 go ahead and unmute yourself. 

4 your hand. We can unmute you at that point. We have a hand 4 MARGO BELL: In response to Genevieve, she can do a 

5 raised. Genevieve, just give me a moment for our panelist to 5 very nice printout of a wonderful thing you put out explaining 

6 come back on video. 6 just about everything, and she can do it on her computer in 

7 Okay. Great. Everyone is back. Genevieve, go ahead 7 beautiful technicolor if she likes, and all she's got to do is 

8 and unmute yourself when you are ready. 8 go to RCTC.org, and it will tell her where to go, and I 

9 GENEVIEVE JUDGE: Can you hear me? Can you hear me? 9 printed this out, and I am giving it to all of my friends 

10 MS. ESPINOZA: We can hear you, Genevieve. 10 because we are so excited about the project, and before I 

11 GENEVIEVE JUDGE: Oh, okay. I just have a question. 11 close for the last time, I think this has been a great 

12 I just want to send this information to other people in other 12 presentation. You have all done very, very well. Thank you. 

13 counties that might be impacted, Orange County specifically. 13 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you very much for your comment, 

14 Is there a place where I can get a copy of this presentation 14 Margo. 

15 that you gave, the one we just saw and the one we went through 15 Again, we are going to be here for another 13 minutes 

16 previously? I am very excited about this. I have often 16 or so, so if you do have another comment or if you haven't 

17 wondered why we don't have rail service between here and LA. 17 given a comment yet, feel free to just raise your hand, and we 

18 I live in Palm Desert. So is it possible to get this to send 18 can just unmute you at that point. Again, if you would rather 

19 to somebody and prep them for the next meeting? Maybe you 19 leave a written comment for us, you can go ahead and go to 

20 can't hear me. Hello. 20 that regulations.gov website that we have provided in the 

21 MS. ESPINOZA: We can hear you. Right now we are 21 chat. We are going to be here until 8:00 p.m. today. 

22 taking formal public comments, but I can just go ahead and let 22 Genevieve, I would like to call attention to this 

23 you know that we are going to be posting the video recordings 23 slide as there are other ways you and your community can stay 

24 of today's hearing and Saturday's hearing on the project 24 involved with the project and other projects that RCTC has 

25 website. That will be posted sometime next week. At that 25 going on. They are shown on the screen. I will leave it here 

42 44 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · 

· · · 

· · · · · ·

· · · · · · ·

· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

· · · · · · · · · 

·

· · · · · · · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · ·

· ·

· · · · · · · · · · · ·

· · · · · · · · · · · ·

45 

1 for a few moments in case you wanted to take a photo of the 

2 screen or wanted to jot it down really quick. 

3 We do have the RCTC website you can visit, our project 

4 Facebook, as well as the FRA website, and we do have the 

5 project e-mail listed here, as well. Again, as I mentioned 

6 earlier, we are only taking formal public written comments 

7 through that regulations.gov website that we have listed in 

8 the chat. 

9 Thank you, everyone who is still with us this evening. 

10 Again, we will be on a few more minutes. If you do have a 

11 comment you would like to give to the panel, we are here to 

12 take your comments this evening. Go ahead and raise your hand 

13 using the raise hand feature located at the bottom of the 

14 screen in your Zoom features. If you would also like to leave 

15 a written comment, again, as I said earlier this evening, we 

16 do have a regulations.gov link provided to you in the chat, so 

17 if you would not like to leave a verbal comment this evening, 

18 you can go ahead and leave written comments through that link. 

19 Again, we are going to be on for just a few more minutes, and 

20 if you would rather leave a comment for us on Saturday, we are 

21 going to be here on Saturday, as well. That information that 

22 we will be sharing will be identical to tonight's meeting. 

23 Okay. I don't see any more hands raised, so we are 

24 three minutes until 8:00, so I think we are good to, kind of, 

25 close things up for this evening. Amanda, would you like to 

46 

1 close us out? 

2 AMANDA CIAMPOLILLO: Thank you so much, Stevie, and 

3 thanks to all the folks here behind the scenes getting things 

4 organized and keeping the flow going this evening. I 

5 appreciate it. Thank you to everyone who stuck around the 

6 whole time. Thank you for everyone for sending us your 

7 comments, for being here. We will take -- we like to hear all 

8 of the comments good and, you know, ones that have good 

9 constructive criticism. We are here to get information from 

10 the public, and construct the best kind of project that we 

11 have. 

12 Like Sheldon mentioned in the beginning, it has been a 

13 long time coming, so we are really excited to get this 

14 feedback tonight. If folks want to hear again, please tune in 

15 Saturday. Otherwise, there are lots of resources in the chat 

16 and in the websites. So thanks again for coming this evening, 

17 and I will let Sheldon wrap that up too. 

18 MR. PETERSON: If I could echo all the things from 

19 RCTC for everyone's participation and comments along the way. 

20 We look forward to a successful process here. Once again, we 

21 appreciate your time in staying up so late working with us on 

22 this process. The team just did a fantastic job. Everyone 

23 have a fantastic night. We will meet again. 

24 (Whereupon, the proceedings concluded at 8:00 p.m.) 

25 

47 

1 Coachella Valley-San Grogonio Pass Rail Project 

2 Public Hearing #1 

3 June 22, 2021 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. 

4 

5 I, CHELSEA E. GIULIANY C.S.R., 13842, do hereby 

6 certify: 

7 That I am a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the 

8 State of California, duly licensed to practice; that I did 

9 report in Stenotype oral proceedings in the above mentioned 

10 hearing of the aforementioned cause via Zoom at the time and 

11 place hereinbefore set forth; that the foregoing pages 

12 numbered 1 to 45, inclusive, constitute to the best of my 

13 knowledge and belief a full, true and correct transcription 

14 from my said shorthand notes so taken for the date of Tuesday, 

15 June 22, 2021 

16 Dated at San Bernardino, California, this 24th day 

17 June 2021. 

18 

19 ______________________________________ 

20 CHELSEA E. GIULIANY, C.S.R. No. 13842 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
#

#1 3:2

1

1 6:9 9:25 10:9,

 11,24 11:6,12,13

 13:3,4 15:4

 26:17 27:1,6,9

 38:21

10 21:9 24:14

 37:3

10,000-seat 31:19

100 31:18 37:15

11:00 40:22

12 27:25

13 44:15

15 19:25 20:5

16 33:22

1960s 31:3

1978 26:21

1982 24:11

1990s 9:7

1991 28:8

2

2 11:10,13 12:4,7

 13:9,10,13,16

 14:20 18:4 20:10

 27:23

2000s 30:21

2010 9:9

2013 4:10 9:11

 17:3

2016 9:16,18,24

 17:3

2021 3:3

2040 22:3

20s 30:24 31:1

21 33:21

21st 15:4

22 3:3

25 37:15

26th 40:21

3

3 13:14 14:3

 19:24,25 25:18,

 23

3.6 38:14

30 19:25

4

4 13:10 14:23

45-day 15:5

5

501C3 26:19

6

6 26:7 27:25

60s 30:18

6:00 3:3

6th 15:6 16:3

7

76 27:10

8

80 34:7

8:00 3:3 36:17,20

 40:13,17 44:21

 45:24 46:24

9

9 26:5

90 13:22 22:22

9:00 40:21 43:9

A

a.m. 40:21,22

 43:9

ability 24:1

accepted 26:2

accepting 40:10

access 10:19

 18:22 19:8 29:3,

 5,17 32:15,18

 33:2 41:18

accessibility 

 18:5,19 29:20

accessible 18:6,

 15

accommodations 

 8:13

accomplish 7:18

achieve 7:24

 10:17 13:21 14:1

achieving 36:6

Act 11:1,2 18:4

action 32:20

active 5:5

actively 4:8

activities 5:18

 9:5

ADA 18:8,11

add 17:11 27:21

added 7:10 29:12

adding 13:23

addition 5:22

additional 9:10

 14:10 26:22

 27:16 31:21 32:1

 38:9 41:16

address 15:24

 18:16 22:11

addresses 11:3

administration 

 3:16 6:25 10:2,

 13 15:8 30:20

 40:9

administrative 

 4:17

advance 10:5

 19:10 26:22

advocates 26:20

affected 11:22

affordable 8:3

afternoon 8:18

 37:1

agencies 9:1

agency 29:9,12

agenda 16:12

 36:17

aggressive 18:11

agree 20:7 37:12

agreements 

 21:25

Agua 24:13

 25:12 29:8 35:11

ahead 15:12

 19:25 21:17

 23:11 24:1,2,23

 26:3,10 28:16,19

 29:24 31:9 32:6

 33:9,14,17 35:1,

 3,4,23 36:24

 39:16,17 40:1,3,

 15,23 42:3,7,22

 43:13,16,22

 44:3,19 45:12,18

air 7:24 8:7

airport 17:1,5

alignment 9:14

allowing 31:5

alternative 8:2

 9:12,13,23

 12:18,19,23,24

 13:19 17:2,4,10

 27:9

alternatives 5:20

 9:16 12:17,21

Alvarado 18:25

 20:17 28:18,20

Amanda 3:15

 15:25 16:2 45:25

 46:2

ambitious 37:4

Americans 18:4

amount 13:1

Amtrack 28:6

Amtrak 8:9,11,

 13,19,20 9:2

 18:10 19:4,17

 24:11 28:1

Amtrak's 28:22

analysis 9:12,16,

 23 10:1,4 11:6,

 11 12:7,14 14:2,

 17 17:3,9

analyzing 10:16

and/or 20:13

Angeles 4:9 7:3,

 13 17:4 19:19

 20:13 26:23 27:7

announced 26:8

answers 16:18

Anthony 19:12

 29:23 30:1,7,8,

 10 31:6

anticipate 20:11

 21:20

anticipating 

 21:10

applaud 32:11

applauds 26:22

appointment 

 15:14

approximately 

 14:4,5

area 7:6,22 9:14

 11:23 17:4 20:9,

 23 29:8,10 30:3,

 12 32:13 34:12,

 13 38:17,19

 39:7,9

areas 7:9 10:19,

 20 11:19 12:15

 14:16 22:18 29:9

 32:17,24

arena 31:19

Arrow 20:18,24

 29:4

assessment 9:12

Association 

 26:14 38:3,11

assumptions 

 6:19

athletic 31:22

attendees 6:1

attention 4:4

 15:25 41:13

 44:22

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
attractions 39:1

August 34:7

authorization 

 8:24

authorized 8:20

availability 43:7

aware 12:13 36:3

B

back 9:6,8 30:17

 36:22 37:11

 42:6,7

background 3:22

bag 34:10

ball 34:16

ballast 38:16

band 7:9

bands 14:18,21

Banning 20:4

 34:9,13 38:25

 39:4,5

Barbara 20:3

 33:16,17,19

 34:19

BART 30:4,13

based 6:19 31:20

basically 12:23,

 25 13:11 17:12

 32:20

basis 6:18 11:5

Bay 30:3,12

beach 30:21

 34:10

Beaumont 34:13

 38:25 39:4,5

Beaumont/ 

banning/cabazon 

 38:22

beautiful 44:7

beds 38:16

began 9:20

beginning 16:2

 46:12

bell 24:7,23 35:5

 44:2,4

belt 24:8,9

benefit 4:12

 27:20 28:3

benefits 27:15

Berkeley 30:13

Bernardino 

 20:19,22,24

bicycle 33:2

bicycles 32:18

big 24:15

bill 27:9

bit 5:17 9:4 21:21

 37:2 39:21

block 27:18

Bob 24:14 31:16

 35:11

boondocks 24:8

bottom 3:11

 24:14 33:10

 45:13

Brandy 17:18

break 39:21

Brian 26:9,11,13

 28:11 37:24

 38:2,8 39:10

briefly 27:19

brings 16:11

broad 11:19

brought 38:13

BRT 29:3

build 12:19,22,24

building 27:18

 31:3

built 12:6 24:13

 31:19

bullets 12:12

bus 28:23 32:18

bye 35:20

C

Cabazon 38:20

 39:1,2,6

Cal 30:21 31:17

Calexico 28:9

Caliente 24:13

 25:12 29:8

Caliete 35:11

California 11:2

 15:11 26:15,21,

 25 37:9 38:3,11

Californiaarizona 28:6

call 26:5 41:13

 44:22

call-in 26:7

callers 26:4

calling 25:10

Caltrans 4:15

 6:25

campaigned 

 26:20

campus 31:17

capacity 27:16

capital 27:12,17,

 21

Caplin 22:13

Capone 30:25

captioning 16:8

 40:25

car 7:21

car-fee 29:17

car-free 28:21

 29:20

carbon 32:22

cars 18:5,9,10

case 45:1

Casino 24:13

catchment 10:19

Centro 28:9

CEQA 11:2,15

champions 5:3

charts 8:16

chat 28:15 33:12

 35:2 39:19 40:2

 41:17,22 43:4,23

 44:21 45:8,16

 46:15

check 15:12

 43:18

Ciampolillo 

 3:14,15 16:1

 46:2

CIR 27:23

cities 22:24

citizens 37:11

city 7:4 13:4,10

 29:18 36:1

clarification 41:7

clarifying 6:2

 16:12,17 18:1

clear 23:2

Clemente 20:5,7,

 14

click 3:11,12

 33:14

climate 32:20

close 16:11 20:15

 38:17 44:11

 45:25 46:1

closed 16:7 40:25

Coachella 3:1

 4:8,10 6:8,23

 7:4,5,7,13,22

 13:5,8,11,12

 14:4,15,24 19:6

 25:11 26:16,17,

 23 27:8,12,14,

 17,22 28:8 29:21

 30:2,11 31:22

 37:6 39:14 47:1

Coleman 16:24

collaborated 7:2

college 35:12,15

color 31:13

Colton 13:8,12,

 14,17,25 14:3,9

 27:12,13,22

combination 

 3:19

comfortable 8:13

comment 3:23

 5:13,23 6:1,4,13,

 16 15:2,6 16:4,

 15 18:2 22:9

 23:13 24:25

 25:3,4,16,17,24

 26:2 28:13,14,16

 29:2,6,14,22,25

 31:5,6 32:4,5

 33:7,8,11,14

 34:21,23,24

 35:1,21,23

 36:18,19 37:12,

 18,24,25 38:4,5,

 6,9,10,20 39:11,

 13,15,17,23

 40:1,3,14,15,18,

 19 41:20,21 42:3

 44:13,16,17,19

 45:11,15,17,20

commented 35:5,

 8

comments 4:23

 5:22 6:3,17,18

 15:15,16 16:2

 17:25 22:10,11

 23:4,13 25:2,18

 26:1,16 36:11,14

 37:22 39:25

 40:11 42:3,22

 45:6,12,18 46:7,

 8,19

commercial 

 37:16

Commission 4:7

 7:1 36:2

commissions 

 39:14

commit 34:2

communities 

 4:13 7:10,23

 22:3 23:3 34:14

community 20:9

 37:8 44:23

commute 30:18,

 21

commuter 8:10,

 14 39:5

compared 8:14

competition 19:9

complaint 18:9

complete 10:9

completed 9:23

compliance 18:3

complimentary 

 19:7,10

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
comprehensive 

 12:14

computer 44:6

concept 9:6

concern 31:23

concerned 22:4

concerts 34:15

concluded 46:24

conclusion 17:8

conductors 34:6

congress 8:20

connect 19:4

 20:14

connected 17:13

 19:16 21:25

 32:24 40:7

connecting 19:19

connection 4:14

 19:15,19 20:1

 21:1

connections 

 18:14 20:12,23

 29:13 32:25

connectivity 

 10:20

considered 17:6

considers 14:3

Consistency 

 38:14

constrained 7:21

construct 46:10

constructed 11:8

 12:1

construction 

 10:4,6 11:9,20,

 23 12:2 27:10

constructive 46:9

Consultant 5:11

consultation 6:22

consulting 4:15

contact 6:21

content 41:7

 43:11

context 11:18

continue 7:20

contribute 8:7

control 33:10

convenient 8:1

 29:5 30:13 34:9,

 14

conventional 

 28:4

Cook 35:12

coordinate 29:11

coordinating 

 20:21

copies 15:6,10

copy 17:18 42:14

 43:20

corner 35:11

corridor 4:9 6:8,

 24 7:14 8:7 9:13

 10:22 12:24

 13:6,8,23 14:8,

 12,14 23:7 27:17

 29:15 32:11,23

 37:17 38:23

costs 27:13

council 36:1,5

counties 42:13

country 10:15

 18:11 29:18

county 4:6 7:1

 17:14 26:25 28:2

 30:11 36:2 39:13

 42:13

couple 5:3 9:7,10

 14:7 30:18 37:17

 41:13

court 25:17,21

 30:6 31:13

covered 41:12

covers 12:13

 17:12

criteria 17:6

critical 37:13

criticism 46:9

cross-country 

 19:18

CSUSBPD 29:9

CTCA 20:21

current 9:17

 10:22 20:2 23:15

 28:22 29:7

curves 22:19

cut 37:8

CV 40:7

D

daily 9:8 27:7

 28:1 29:16

dampening 

 38:16

Dana 5:4

data 6:18

date 22:25

day 7:12 8:16

 13:16 27:25

 30:19

deal 24:10

decided 20:9

decision 12:1

dedicated 21:13

 29:2

delay 13:23

depress 39:7

Dequoto 20:3

describe 12:17

desert 14:5 30:25

 31:14,24 37:3

 42:18

design 10:6

 18:18 23:15 33:1

designed 22:14,

 16,20,21 33:3

designs 12:8

 32:17

desire 29:16

desolate 29:8

destination 30:24

detail 22:7

detailed 10:3

details 4:22 27:2

determine 9:14

development 

 4:13 9:22,25

 10:11,12

dial 26:5,7

Diana 3:10

difference 13:18

differences 12:25

differently 22:20

Digital 15:6

direct 20:25

direction 8:18

directions 6:15

directly 20:13

 21:9

disabilities 18:4,

 6

disadvantaged 

 4:12 7:23

disconnected 

 39:4

discouraging 

 34:4

discussing 24:11

discussions 19:3

Disney 30:16

distance 8:5

District 30:15

dive 6:6

Docouto 33:19

document 5:19,

 21 6:11,14 9:21

 10:9,12,14,24

 11:3,16,25 12:9,

 12,16 14:20 15:7

 16:20 23:5

documents 5:21

 9:25 11:6 15:1

 38:15

Donna 35:17,20

door 27:5

dots 7:8

doubling 22:3

Douglas 4:21 5:9,

 10,11 17:2

Douglas' 17:19

downtown 17:15

 20:13 33:24

draft 3:2 4:17

 6:13 9:21 15:4

 38:15

drive 20:4 24:14

 33:24 35:11

driven 7:19

driving 7:21 8:2

 34:8

E

e-mail 40:10,12

 45:5

earlier 21:19

 34:23 38:13

 41:14 45:6,15

early 4:24 9:6,7

 30:21

ease 25:21

easier 18:21

easily 22:5 24:17

east 7:7 13:12,17

eastern 7:4,14

 13:1,4,6,7,9,14,

 17,25 14:14,15,

 22 22:3

echo 29:10 46:18

economic 4:13

educational 

 37:16

educator 30:14

effects 11:4,17,20

effort 19:10

 20:10

efforts 5:6 26:22

 32:11

EIR 29:1 38:15

EIR/EIS 3:2

 38:21

EIS/EIR 10:24

 12:18 15:4 22:2,

 7 26:17 27:1

El 28:9

elderly 34:15

elected 4:8 37:19

electrification 

 23:16,19

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
element 13:15

 23:22

elements 16:13

embarked 9:11

emphasize 27:4,

 14

Empire 29:5

employment 

 7:20 8:6

enable 6:3 22:4

encourage 24:23

 25:3

end 5:24 14:14

 24:5 28:9

endeavor 34:17

 37:20

endeavoring 

 7:18

engineering 10:3

English 16:7,9

 40:25 41:1

enthusiastically 

 36:5

entire 13:14 39:7

entitled 38:5

environment 

 37:7

environmental 

 3:15 5:19 6:9,10,

 12,14 9:18,19,

 21,25 10:3,9,24,

 25 11:2,4,6,11,

 14,16,19 12:5,7,

 9,11,16 14:17

 23:4

envisioned 36:7

ESPINOZA 3:9

 16:22 17:17,24

 18:24 19:12,21

 20:3,16 21:4,12

 22:1,13,23

 23:10,23 24:21

 25:1,15 26:12

 28:11 29:22

 30:5,9 31:6,12

 32:4 33:6 34:19

 35:21 36:9 37:21

 38:6 39:10,23

 42:1,10,21 43:5,

 22 44:1,13

evaluate 11:17

 27:23

evaluated 5:20

 6:11 12:17,21

 13:20 14:19

 16:19 17:3 22:6

 27:3,6

evaluates 12:10

evaluating 10:18

 11:8 17:6

evening 3:9,14

 4:5 5:10 15:18

 26:11,16 36:7

 42:2 45:9,12,15,

 17,25 46:4,16

events 31:22

eventually 19:13

everyone's 46:19

excellent 35:13

excited 30:15,22

 33:20 35:16,19

 42:16 44:10

 46:13

exciting 3:22

existing 7:8,15

 8:1 21:8 27:11

expand 23:20

expanded 10:15

expands 29:2

expansion 27:19

 35:14

expected 8:6

expedite 20:1

expedited 32:12

experience 37:7

expert 6:20

explain 6:17

explained 22:6

explaining 44:5

explore 21:2

 38:25

extend 7:3

extension 28:7

extent 13:18

F

Facebook 40:7

 45:4

facilities 15:13

fact 7:19 41:14

facts 6:19,20

fall 9:18

fantastic 33:4

 46:22,23

FAQ 41:15

fast 43:21

faster 8:1 29:4

 32:21

feasibility 9:6,7,

 10

feature 26:3 27:9

 28:15 33:9 45:13

features 45:14

federal 3:16 6:25

 8:24 10:1,13,25

 11:13,16 15:8

 22:25 40:8

feedback 4:24

 46:14

feel 31:9 37:8,10

 41:4 44:17

figure 32:12

final 10:6 22:7

 31:21

finalized 9:16

finally 29:14

 30:16

first-mile/lastmile 18:14

flow 46:4

flyover 4:20

focus 6:7

focusing 32:17

folks 3:20 34:11

 46:3,14

follow 21:9 40:8

follow-up 22:23

 23:6 39:10

footprint 32:22

force 39:6

form 15:20,23

formal 18:2 22:9,

 11 23:4 25:2

 26:2 40:11 42:22

 45:6

formally 25:20

formulate 40:19

forward 3:23

 9:17 12:3 17:16

 18:18,22 25:16

 33:5 46:20

foundation 5:16

 9:21

foundational 

 7:17

FRA 4:15 10:13

 13:21 45:4

Francisco 30:12,

 14

free 31:9 36:18

 41:4 44:17

Freeway 21:9

freight 8:22

 13:23 22:2 27:15

 28:3,4

frequency 27:23,

 24 29:15

frequent 8:1

 28:22

friends 43:6,13

 44:9

full 6:10 12:10

 17:21 29:15

Fullerton 14:9

 16:25 17:9 20:12

 28:23

fully 18:8 27:8

 29:19

fund 21:16

fundamental 

 5:16

funded 8:25

 21:18

funding 19:1

funds 9:3 21:13,

 20

future 10:2 11:10

 19:6,9 21:3

 23:16,19,21

 24:16 27:5,19

 29:12

G

game 34:16

Gary 36:23,25

 37:1,2,21

gave 42:15

general 12:3

Genevieve 42:5,

 7,9,10,11 43:2,5,

 17,25 44:1,4,22

gentleman 35:7

give 5:14 11:12

 16:18 25:24

 26:16 34:24 38:4

 39:21 41:9 42:5

 45:11

giving 44:9

glad 20:6 33:5

 35:17

globe 3:11

goal 26:24 28:2

goals 7:24 8:7

 10:17 27:5

good 3:5,9,14 4:5

 5:10 25:6,13

 26:11 34:17

 35:20 36:10 37:1

 45:24 46:8

grant 27:21

grateful 31:3

great 4:2 17:17

 20:7,20 23:12

 24:10,24 25:12,

 22 28:11 29:18

 35:3,17 37:4,9

 41:9,16 42:7

 44:11

greater 27:6,23,

 24

Green 31:11,13

Grogonio 3:1

 6:8,23 47:1

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
ground 18:6,12

group 26:19

 34:20 36:11,19

 39:6

grow 7:20 35:15

growing 32:21

 34:13

growth 8:6 22:4

 37:14

guess 28:9

guys 31:4 33:5

 34:16

H

half 7:14 14:11,

 13

hand 5:2,8 23:11,

 25 26:3,6,9

 28:18 29:23 32:6

 33:9,16 34:25

 35:22 36:21

 37:24,25 39:16,

 20 40:3,16 42:4

 44:2,17 45:12,13

handle 32:21

hands 31:7 33:7

 34:22 36:9 39:11

 45:23

happy 4:19 34:5

hard 4:18

harder 25:21

HDR 4:15 5:11

hear 26:7,11,12

 31:11,12 41:9

 42:9,10,20,21

 46:7,14

heard 16:2

hearing 3:2,19

 16:5,9 40:20

 41:2 42:24 43:8

hearings 15:17

 17:22

held 9:19

hemisphere 

 30:17

high 22:25

high-speed 

 22:14,17,21

higher 27:25

higher-level 

 11:14

highlight 32:14

Highway 24:14

history 5:17 9:4

 12:20

hold 23:13

home 34:4

hop 34:10

hope 24:14 31:16

 35:11

Hot 30:25

hour 22:22

hours 19:24,25

housekeeping 

 3:7

hurdles 37:5

I

I-10 21:6 22:24

 28:5 37:17

icon 3:11

ID 16:6

idea 37:4,9

ideal 24:18

identical 45:22

identified 11:10

 14:19,20 18:9

 20:8 25:9 32:20

 38:21

identifies 11:19

 14:18

identify 11:21

identifying 23:20

impact 6:9,10

 32:22

impacted 42:13

impacts 6:12

 11:8 12:2,11,15

 14:18,21 22:5

Imperial 28:7

implementation 

 18:15

implemented 

 10:15 30:22

 38:17

implementing 

 11:18

important 5:16

 11:24 29:1

improve 8:4

improved 24:10

 26:20 29:3

improvement 

 36:3

improvements 

 8:21 12:6 27:18

 36:6

include 7:12 8:15

 10:2 22:11 23:5,

 16

includes 12:14

including 7:15

 17:7

increased 29:15

increasing 32:22

incredibly 28:25

Indian 5:4 23:7

 35:18,19

Indio 7:5 9:9

 13:10,14,17

 14:23 19:5

information 

 41:16 42:12

 43:24 45:21 46:9

informed 23:8

infrastructure 

 10:16 12:6 13:1,

 15 14:11,12 17:7

initial 8:14,16

 9:7 23:22

initiatives 27:20

Inland 29:5

input 25:13

insure 18:13

interact 19:1

interchangeabilit 

y 21:23

intercity 4:9 8:9,

 11,25 26:22

interconnectivity 

 21:22

interest 28:24

interested 4:2

 41:5

interoperability 

 33:3

interpretation 

 3:11 16:7 40:25

interpreter 3:10

introduction 

 6:25

introductions 3:8

investment 

 27:16,20

invite 34:23

 43:14

involved 13:2

 40:6 44:24

involves 10:15

Island 33:23

isolated 37:10,16

issue 35:8

issues 18:19

J

Japan 31:2

JD 4:21 5:3,8,11

 17:21 21:19 25:6

job 35:17 46:22

join 41:4,6 43:6

joined 5:4,7

 39:12 41:19,23

joining 3:17 42:2

joint 10:24

jot 45:2

JUDGE 42:9,11

 43:2,17,25

July 9:15 15:6

 16:3

June 3:3 40:21

K

Kaplan 17:25

keeping 35:13

 46:4

Keith 17:18

kind 3:19,21 4:1,

 22 7:22 36:6

 38:23 45:24

 46:10

kinds 19:16

Kraken 31:20

L

LA 7:6,22 9:9,14

 14:8 17:15 19:1,

 15,18 30:11 31:2

 32:13 34:15

 42:17

Lakes 33:21

land 22:25 38:14

landscaping 32:1

larger 14:21

largest 29:18

lastly 8:25

late 34:4 39:12

 40:23 41:19

 46:21

leadership 4:7

leading 5:13

League 31:20

leave 36:18

 39:15,25 40:18

 44:19,25 45:14,

 17,18,20

led 9:15

legislative 8:24

level 9:24 11:7,15

levels 10:16

Levin 37:1,2

libraries 15:11

likes 44:7

limited 7:20 28:1

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
limiting 25:18,23

Linda 20:23

 38:19

lines 20:25

link 15:21 19:13

 20:25 33:12

 40:24 41:22

 43:9,23 45:16,18

linked 28:14 35:2

 39:18

links 33:3 41:13

Lisa 5:5 35:22,25

list 27:19

listed 40:10 45:5,

 7

listen 3:24 4:23

listened 41:11

listening 34:18

live 29:17 37:2

 42:18

lived 30:3,11

 33:21

living 34:9 37:3,6

local 29:12

located 14:17

 29:8 33:10 37:13

 39:2 45:13

location 15:22

 16:6 25:9 38:20

locations 15:11

 19:16 27:3

log 40:23

Loma 20:23

 38:19

long 3:25 8:12,21

 26:24 27:11 28:1

 30:10,21 31:2

 34:8 38:23 46:13

long-term 30:2

longer 8:5

looked 17:13,15

 35:8

Los 4:9 7:3,13

 17:4 19:19 20:13

 26:23 27:7

lot 3:20 10:8

 28:4,24 33:25

 34:1,13 35:6

 37:5,16

lots 46:15

LU3 38:14

luck 34:17

M

made 8:21 15:10

 17:23 18:10

mail 15:24

mailed 16:3

main 27:9

mainline 27:10,

 13,22

make 6:3 13:21

 15:14 17:20

 18:14,21 19:25

 20:6,12,23 21:1,

 24 23:7 25:3,24

 32:15 43:15

makers 12:1

makes 28:24

making 6:17 8:5

 19:18 32:17 36:5

manager 4:6,21

 5:12

map 7:6 14:10

 38:24

maps 14:7

Margo 23:25

 24:4,7,21,23

 25:9 34:23 35:5,

 21 44:2,4,14

Margo's 29:6

marked 16:3

market 9:12

Master's 30:20

medium-haul 

 28:5

meet 10:1 18:16

 46:23

meet all 18:12

meeting 3:20

 6:12 11:1 16:6,

 16 41:3,8,10,11

 42:19 43:7,12,14

 45:22

meetings 9:19

member 36:1

mention 11:13

 32:19

mentioned 6:24

 7:17 9:11,23

 10:11 12:4,20

 13:19 16:4 17:21

 18:17,19 21:19

 38:18 45:5 46:12

merging 10:25

merit 39:2

messages 17:22

methods 15:16

Metrolink 8:9,23

 20:8 21:15,21

 29:5 33:4

Metrolink's 

 20:18

mic 26:7

Michael 21:4

 22:23

mid-valley 25:10

 29:7,10,11

middle 14:4

Middleton 5:5

 35:22,25

miles 13:10

 14:23 22:22

 24:19 27:10

milestone 4:16

 9:15

mind 6:17

Minor 31:20

minutes 16:16

 19:25 25:18,23

 28:10 44:15

 45:10,19,24

Mirage 14:5

 24:19

mishaps 34:1

missed 43:13

mitigation 31:25

 38:14

mobility 4:11

 26:21

modeling 10:17

 13:24 14:2

modified 13:15

moment 33:16

 34:22 36:10

 39:12 42:5

moments 45:1

monorail 21:6,10

 30:17

monorails 31:3

morning 8:17

 15:18 37:1

Morongo 22:25

mouth 6:10

move 9:17 12:3

 17:16 18:18,22

 25:7 31:7 36:13

moving 12:9

 25:14,15 33:5

multi-phaseiterative 27:2

multiple 25:11

 40:5

muted 24:4

 36:25

N

narrowed 12:22

nation 19:17

national 10:25

 19:13

nationally 19:5

needed 4:14 17:8

 30:23

neighbors 41:5

NEPA 11:1,13

network 21:23

Nevada 26:15

 38:3,11

nice 44:5

night 34:5 46:23

no-build 12:18,

 23

noise 32:1,2

 38:11

north 14:24

 31:24 38:18

note 11:24 15:13

number 3:6 13:9

 15:10 16:22 17:6

 23:3 26:8

O

objectives 7:25

 14:1

occur 10:18 12:7

 22:4

ocean 33:24

offering 18:8

offices 15:12

official 23:13

 25:16

officials 4:8

Oliver 19:21

Omnitrans 20:18

on-time 13:22

online 15:20

 17:19

Ontario 17:1,5

open 27:5

opening 15:12

operate 8:20,22

operated 11:9

operating 21:20

operation 10:7,

 18 11:21,23

operational 

 10:17

operations 17:8

 21:14,17 38:12

opinion 6:20

opportunities 

 14:25 15:2 17:14

 20:17,22

opportunity 4:11

 5:22 6:1,13

 15:19 18:21

 23:21 25:24

 26:16 28:13

 30:1,3,12 38:22

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
option 13:3,4,9,

 10,13,14,16 14:3

 17:16 25:9 27:7,

 9 29:11

options 7:21 8:4

 12:19,25 29:20

orange 7:8,9

 17:14 30:11

 42:13

order 10:17

 13:21

Oregon 19:17

organization 

 26:24 28:2

organized 46:4

originally 33:23

Orozco 3:10

outcome 22:6

outlined 29:2

overdue 31:2

overview 4:22

 5:14 6:7 14:7

P

P-A-P-A-N-D-RT-O-U 32:9

p.m. 3:3 36:17,20

 44:21 46:24

Pacific 9:2 27:11

 28:3

Palm 5:5 7:15

 14:5 18:20 24:7

 28:21,22 29:7

 30:14,23 31:14,

 24 32:10,19 35:6

 36:1,3,4 37:15

 38:18 42:18

panel 45:11

panelist 36:22

 42:5

panelists 39:21

panels 3:12

 33:11

Papandrtou 

 32:8,9

Park 31:17

parking 33:2

 35:14

part 5:25 13:6,7

 16:11,12 20:10

 22:12

participating 

 4:25

participation 

 46:19

partners 20:21

 23:9

pass 3:1 6:8,23

 20:8 47:1

passenger 7:2

 8:21 9:2 26:14

 27:3,6,15 28:6

 38:3,10,12

passes 38:17

past 17:5

people 3:6 8:5

 18:5 24:9 29:13

 31:2 34:2 35:7,

 10 36:14 37:10

 42:12

people's 43:4

percent 13:22

Perfect 43:25

performance 

 13:22 14:1

performing 

 17:13

period 5:13,25

 6:1,4,5,16 15:5

 16:4,15 23:13

 25:3,16 36:18

person 6:21

personal 26:21

Peter 31:8,11,13

 32:5

Peterson 3:5 4:5,

 6 5:2 17:12,20

 18:8 19:3,15,23

 20:6,20 21:7,16

 22:8,16 23:2,17

 25:8 46:18

phase 9:24 10:22

 18:16 27:4

phases 11:5

Philip 23:10

Phillip 17:25

 18:24

Phoenix 19:1,6,9

photo 45:1

pier 20:5,14

place 14:12

 24:12 30:25 31:1

 35:10,12 40:20

 42:14 43:18

places 24:17

 35:14

plan 10:1,11,12

 22:24 23:22

 26:25 29:1

planner 32:10

planning 5:18

 9:5 10:14 11:25

played 5:1 41:25

point 4:2,19

 16:21 22:22 25:7

 29:18 33:7 42:4

 43:1 44:18

Policy 10:25

population 7:19

 8:6

portfolio 22:19

post 16:3 41:17

posted 16:10

 41:2 42:25

posting 42:23

potential 6:11

 7:2,10,14 11:19

 12:11,15 14:16,

 18,21 17:7 22:6

 25:11,12

potentially 7:15

 11:22 13:6 20:12

 23:19

preclude 23:18

preferably 27:25

preferred 8:12

 9:14,17 12:22

 27:9

prep 42:19

prepare 9:20

prepared 10:10,

 12 12:8

present 24:7

presentation 5:1,

 13,24 6:6 16:11

 17:19 41:9 42:14

 43:21 44:12

presented 43:12,

 13

President 26:14

previous 12:21

 19:23 29:14

previously 42:16

printed 15:10

 44:9

printout 44:5

prior 5:18 9:5

 30:20

prioritized 32:17

priority 23:1

private 8:20

problem 43:5,22

procedural 11:24

proceedings 

 46:24

process 9:22 10:8

 12:5 22:12 23:8

 27:2 46:20,22

professionals 

 26:20

program 6:9,11,

 24 9:5,24 11:14,

 21 12:20 15:4

 18:11 19:4 21:19

 26:17 27:1

program-level 

 10:9,23 11:3

progress 36:6

progressing 

 22:18

project 3:1,22,25

 4:1,10,20,21 5:3,

 6,8,12,15,17,18

 6:3 7:18,25 9:22

 10:5,10 11:25

 12:3 13:21

 16:10,14,19

 17:21 18:22

 19:13 21:7,11

 27:5 29:19 32:3

 39:14 40:6,7,8,9,

 24 41:2,14,15,

 17,19,23 42:24

 43:10 44:10,24

 45:3,5 46:10

 47:1

project-level 

 10:3 11:11 12:4

projects 6:2 10:4

 11:7,9 12:8

 15:22 19:11 27:5

 44:24

promote 4:13

proposal 31:15

proposals 19:4

proposed 10:4

 11:4,7,25 19:2

 27:6,13,16,24

 28:7 31:17

proposing 16:15

prospects 32:23

Protection 3:16

provide 4:13,22

 5:22 6:1,13,15,

 18,19 7:25 8:2,3,

 13 14:7 15:1

 28:12,14,16

 29:24 30:5 33:8,

 11,13 35:23

 36:15 37:23,25

 39:16 40:2 41:21

provided 10:20

 15:19,25 17:25

 31:22 33:12

 36:19 40:2,14

 41:22 43:10

 44:20 45:16

providing 4:11

public 3:2,19,23

 4:16,23 5:13,25

 6:4 9:18 15:5,6,

 17 16:5 17:22

 27:21 30:20

 36:18 39:13,15

 40:20 42:22

 43:8,14 45:6

 46:10

pull 41:23 43:23

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
purple 14:16

purpose 5:15

 7:17,25 24:16

purposes 14:3

pursuing 4:9

put 31:23 44:5

Q

Q&a 6:4 16:23

 23:12,24 24:2

 25:5 26:2 39:24

quality 7:24 8:7

 11:2

quarters 21:9

question 8:8

 17:18,24 18:2,3,

 17,24,25 19:12,

 21 20:16,20

 21:12 22:1,8,23

 23:12,14,15

 24:3,6,21,25

 42:11

question-andanswer 5:25

questions 6:2

 16:13,14,17,22

 18:1 25:5

queue 31:8

quick 18:17

 22:10 25:8 45:2

quickly 32:13

 34:11

R

rail 3:1 4:6,9 6:8,

 11,23 7:2 8:10,

 14,22 9:6,8

 10:21 11:4

 14:11,13 18:9,10

 20:25 21:8 22:17

 26:17,23,25

 27:6,17 28:3

 29:4 30:22 32:1,

 2 38:3,10,12,16

 39:14 40:7 42:17

 47:1

Railpac 26:15,

 19,22 27:4,8,14

 38:10,15

railroad 3:16

 6:25 10:2,13

 15:8 26:14,19

 27:11 37:17 40:8

railroads 8:20,23

rails 27:15

railway 24:12

raise 26:5 34:25

 39:16 40:3,16

 42:3 44:17

 45:12,13

raised 23:11,25

 26:9 28:18 29:23

 31:7 32:6 33:7,9,

 16 34:22 35:22

 36:9,21 38:1

 39:11,20 42:5

 44:2 45:23

Rancho 14:5

 24:19

range 12:10,15

RCTC 4:8 9:5,11

 15:7,12,14 28:24

 40:8 44:24 45:3

 46:19

RCTC's 28:8

RCTC.ORG 

 43:2 44:8

Rctc.org. 43:17

reached 23:3,6

read 12:12

ready 4:23 26:10

 28:19 29:25

 31:10 32:7 33:18

 35:4,24 36:24

 42:8

reason 8:18

reasonable 6:19

reasons 8:10

 38:24

recent 32:20

recently 19:2

 30:18

recess 36:11

recognize 27:1

recommend 

 16:25

recommends 

 38:15

record 34:24

recordings 16:8

 17:22 41:1 42:23

 43:16

Redlands 20:18

reduction 32:23

Reed 5:4 18:25

 20:16 28:18,19,

 20 29:22 35:18

references 6:18

region 4:12 7:24

 8:5 29:17

region's 7:19

regional 8:4

 11:18 32:21,23

register 40:24

 43:9,11

registering 16:6

regular 15:24

regulations.gov 

 15:9,20 28:15

 33:13 35:1 38:7

 39:18 40:1,12

 41:22 44:20

 45:7,16

reiterate 31:15

relation 38:13

release 4:16

released 15:4

reliable 8:3

reminder 25:1

 28:12 36:16

removed 24:17

report 6:10 31:21

reporter 25:17,

 22 30:6 31:14

representative 

 35:18

representatives 

 37:19

request 25:19,25

 27:21

required 12:5

requirements 

 11:17 13:22

 18:12

resident 28:21

 30:2,10 31:14

 32:9

residential 38:17

residents 31:24

resource 12:15

resources 11:22

 41:16 46:15

respects 17:10

responded 22:24

 23:3

response 44:4

rest 37:8

review 5:21 15:1,

 5,13 17:19

Rhode 33:23

riders 18:21

ridership 17:7

 39:7

Riverside 4:6 7:1

 14:9 20:4 26:25

 28:2,25 33:24

 34:8 36:2 37:2

 39:13

rough 19:24

roughly 19:24

round 7:12 8:15

 9:8 13:3,9,16

 27:25 29:16

rounds 27:7

route 4:21 9:17

 10:18 12:21,22,

 23 17:1,4,9 19:1,

 8,20 20:11

routes 9:13 17:4,

 13 19:18

routing 16:25

rules 38:5

run 24:24 28:4

running 19:7

S

San 20:5,7,14,19,

 22,24 30:12,14

sand 24:8

satisfy 11:16

Saturday 15:18

 16:5 40:21 41:4,

 6,10 43:8,14

 45:20,21 46:15

Saturday's 41:7

 42:24 43:6,12

SB 29:4

scenes 46:3

schedule 19:24

schedules 8:3,14

school 30:4,15

scoping 9:18

screen 3:12 7:6

 33:10 44:25

 45:2,14

SDP 10:22

Seattle 31:19

section 13:14

 14:8,22 22:3

 38:13 41:20

sections 14:8

 22:14

selected 9:17

send 42:12,18

sending 46:6

senior 34:14

 37:11

sense 28:24

separate 18:2

 20:25

serve 7:11,23 8:6

 14:13 17:1 28:25

 32:25

served 29:9

service 6:9,24

 7:2,11,12,22 8:1,

 2,4,9,10,11,13,

 14,15,19,22,23,

 25 9:1,2,25 10:7,

 11,12,16 11:5,8,

 18,21 12:19,24

 13:4 14:13 19:5,

 6,7,8,9,17 20:8,

 11,24 21:2,8,17

 22:17,19 23:1

 27:7,17 28:6,23

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
 32:13 36:7 42:17

services 10:14,21

 21:18 26:23

session 6:7 18:2

 25:18

share 4:19 41:19

shared 41:14

sharing 45:22

sheet 41:15

Sheldon 4:4,5

 5:10 6:24 9:11

 17:10 25:6

 46:12,17

Shelly 22:13

short 36:11

short-haul 28:5

shorter 16:25

show 8:16

shown 7:6 14:9

 44:25

shows 14:14 22:2

shuttle 20:23

 21:2 29:2

side 10:22

significant 9:12,

 15 27:21

similar 9:1 13:15

 19:12

single 38:22,23

site 25:12

slide 5:14 6:22

 7:5 14:5,14,22,

 24 15:9 19:23

 36:13 44:23

slides 12:13 15:3

Smith 22:2

soliciting 3:23

sooner 16:3

sort 20:11 21:2

 37:6

sound 31:25

 38:15,16

source 9:3

sources 21:20

South 26:14

Southern 15:11

 37:8

space 24:15

Spanish 3:10,12

 16:7,9 40:25

 41:1

speak 25:25 26:6

 31:19 34:20

speaker 25:19,23

 38:13

spearheading 

 35:18

special 31:22

Specialist 3:16

specific 6:15 10:4

 11:9 12:5,7,8

 14:19 15:22

 16:14 21:11

 23:21 24:21 29:1

specifically 10:17

 11:19 18:9 21:7

 22:21 23:18

 39:1,2 42:13

specificity 11:7

specifics 5:19

 11:12

speeds 28:1

spell 25:21,22

spelled 32:9

spent 37:2

spot 24:11,18

 35:13

Springs 5:5 7:15

 18:20 24:7

 28:21,22 29:7

 30:14,24,25

 32:10,19 35:6

 36:1,3,4 37:15

 38:18

stage 4:24 10:5

 21:5

stakeholders 

 23:8

start 3:7 4:20

 5:15 16:23 24:25

 31:9 32:6

started 3:6,7 9:5

 26:8

starting 29:18

state 8:25 9:3

 11:16 21:22

 22:18 25:20

 26:25 30:14,21

 31:17 37:19

State's 21:18

stated 30:7

statement 5:16

 6:9 7:18

station 7:3,7,15

 10:19,20 13:13

 18:20,22 19:16

 20:4,9,22,24

 24:8,12,16 25:10

 26:23 27:3,8

 29:7,8,11 31:16,

 17 33:24 34:8

 35:6 36:4 38:19,

 20,22 39:7

stations 7:8,10,

 14,16 10:21

 13:5,12,17

 14:11,17,19

 18:7,18,19,23

 25:11 32:16 33:1

 37:13 38:25 39:8

stay 40:6,7 44:23

staying 46:21

step 27:2

steps 10:2,7

Steve 16:24 22:1

Stevie 16:21 46:2

stop 39:2

stopped 34:1

storage 24:17

strategy 38:14

street 32:16 33:1

 35:12

stronger 32:25

stuck 46:5

studies 9:6,8,10,

 20 13:19

study 7:2,6 9:18,

 19 11:14,15,22

 12:21 28:8

studying 8:15

subdivision 

 27:12

subject 11:10

submit 6:20

 15:15,22,24

submitting 

 15:16,19

subsequent 11:5

 15:3

successful 46:20

suffice 29:16

sufficient 14:12

suicide 34:2

summer 33:23

Sun 33:21

Sunline 29:9

sunset 28:1

support 21:17

 29:6,10,14,19

 31:14 32:2 37:19

supported 6:20

supporting 3:21

 5:6,8

supportive 18:13

supports 27:8

supposedly 30:25

Surfliner 9:2

Surfliners 21:19

surrounding 

 32:16

system 19:14

 30:22 33:4

T

taking 17:25

 25:2,5 30:13

 31:8 39:13,24

 40:20 42:22 45:6

talk 5:17,20

 15:15

talked 30:16

talking 8:9,19

 12:20 34:6

team 4:15 5:11

 9:20 24:22 31:20

 40:22 41:9 46:22

technical 9:20

 10:1,12,22 13:19

technicolor 44:7

technology 20:2

 21:10 23:20

term 11:14,15

 30:10

terminus 7:4

 13:1,4,10,17,25

 14:15,23

terrible 35:6

thicker 14:15

thing 3:17 14:22

 37:13,14 38:9

 44:5

things 31:23

 32:14 37:18

 45:25 46:3,18

thinking 8:17

 38:19

thought 30:7

three-way 28:23

thumbprint 

 23:20

ticketing 21:14,

 21

tickets 21:25

ticking 21:23

Tier 6:9 9:25

 10:9,11,24 11:6,

 10,12,13 12:4,7

 14:20 15:4 20:10

 26:17 27:1,6,23

 38:21

tiered 11:6

tight 21:1

Tim 21:12,13

 23:14 32:4,6

 33:6

time 3:25 4:4

 8:12 17:15 19:22

 20:1 25:4 30:19

 32:3 34:6 36:10

 37:3 38:9 40:19

 43:4 44:11 46:6,

 13,21

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
timer 25:19

times 15:12

 30:19 37:9

Timothy 32:8

Title 18:4

today 3:18,19 5:4

 24:22 25:16

 26:2,4 28:13,16

 30:6 33:8,14

 36:15,20 37:22

 39:13,15,17,19,

 24 40:3,14,15

 43:13 44:21

today's 41:8,10,

 11 42:24

tonight 3:9,21,24

 4:3 5:13,23 6:7,

 12 10:23 16:1,7

 25:25 46:14

tonight's 16:9

 25:17 45:22

topics 12:10

tourism 33:1

tourist 39:5

track 8:21 13:1,

 7,13,18,20,25

 14:2,3,10 22:4,

 14 27:10,13,16,

 22 28:4 29:15

 38:17

traditional 21:8

 22:17

traffic 39:5

train 13:22 18:5

 21:6 22:2,15

 24:7 33:22 34:7,

 10,15 35:16

 36:4,6 37:12

trains 13:23

 22:21 28:4,5

 31:21 34:1

transaction 

 33:20

transcribing 

 25:17

transfer 20:17

 21:24

transformational 

 4:11

transit 8:2 10:21

 29:9,12,20 32:18

 33:1

transitdependent 8:4

transportation 

 4:7 7:1 8:3 18:7,

 13 32:10 36:2

 39:14

travel 7:21 22:15

tribes 23:7

trip 8:12,17,18

 19:22 20:1,7

trips 7:12 8:5,16

 9:8 13:3,9,16

 27:7,25 29:16

 32:21,23

Tristan 19:13

 29:23 30:1,7,8,

 10

trucks 28:5

tune 46:14

turn 4:4 16:21

 26:6 39:22

turned 43:4

type 8:10,11,19,

 24 9:1 22:9

typed 43:3

types 10:14

 14:21 21:13,14,

 16,18

typical 12:11,15

 22:22

Typically 21:17

U

ultimately 10:6

unclear 16:13

understand 12:2

 21:5 28:23 43:15

understanding 

 6:3 16:19

Unified 30:15

Union 7:3,7

 19:15 26:23

 27:8,11 28:3

University 31:17

unmute 24:1,2,4,

 5 26:7,10 28:19

 29:24 31:9 33:17

 35:3,23 36:23

 40:4 41:20 42:4,

 8 44:3,18

unmuted 29:24

 32:7

unmuting 26:6

updated 40:6

upgraded 18:23

upset 32:1

URL 43:20

USC 30:18

user 28:22

users 26:7

utilized 7:9

V

Valley 4:8,10

 7:4,7,13,22 14:4

 25:11 26:17,24

 27:8,14,17 28:7

 29:21 30:2,11

 37:6 39:14

Valley-san 3:1

 6:8,23 47:1

variety 27:14

verbal 26:1

 28:13 33:11

 39:17,24 40:18

 45:17

verbally 40:3

versions 16:9

versus 11:12

 39:5

vibration 38:12

Vice 26:14

video 4:20 5:1

 41:23,25 42:6,23

 43:16

videos 39:22

violate 38:4

virtual 16:5

 40:20 43:8

visit 28:17 39:17

 40:1 41:21 45:3

visiting 31:1

vital 19:19

volumes 22:2

volunteer 26:19

W

wait 36:11 39:20

walk 4:1 24:24

walking 5:12

wall 31:25

walls 38:15

Walt 30:16

wanted 5:2 29:6,

 10,14,19 37:18

 38:10 43:3,19

 45:1,2

Washington 

 19:18

waste 43:4

watch 43:16

ways 40:6 44:23

Webinar 16:1

website 15:7,8,9,

 21,22 16:10

 17:21 28:17

 33:13,15 35:1

 38:7 39:18 40:2,

 9,24 41:3,18

 42:25 43:10

 44:20 45:3,4,7

websites 46:16

week 30:19 42:25

weekend 20:5,7

 33:22,25

Wells 5:4 35:18,

 19

west 7:7 13:11

 14:24 26:21

western 14:8,11,

 13 30:17

wind 24:8

wondered 42:17

wonderful 24:10

 34:20 35:16 44:5

wondering 25:6

work 3:20 4:18

 10:8 22:20 32:20

 34:11

worked 4:18

 30:24

working 3:25

 31:4 46:21

wrap 46:17

write 43:20

writing 31:24

written 28:14,16

 33:14 34:25

 39:25 40:10

 41:21 44:19

 45:6,15,18

Y

Yanity 26:11,13

 38:2,8

years 4:18 9:9

 20:5 30:3,18

 33:21,22 34:7

 37:3,15

Yuma 27:11

Z

zoom 3:12 16:8

 33:10 41:1 45:14

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing on 06/22/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service 

Public Hearing 

June 26, 2021 
Interpretation Assistance 

Para oír la presentación en español, haga clic en el botón 

de traducción de Zoom en la parte inferior de la pantalla 
Introductions 

▪ Amanda Ciampolillo – Federal Railroad Administration 

▪ Sheldon Peterson – Riverside County Transportation 

Commission 

▪ JD Douglas – HDR 
Program Video 
Presentation Agenda 

▪ Overview 

▪ Purpose and Need 

▪ Program History 

▪ Prior Planning Activities 

▪ Alternatives Considered 

▪ Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

▪ Q&A 

▪ Public Comment Period 
 

 

 

Overview 

Today’s focus is the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service Tier 1 Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental 

Impact Report and potential environmental impacts identified. This 

meeting will provide you the opportunity to comment on the draft 

environmental document. 

While commenting, participants are encouraged to: 

▪ Explain the basis for their comments, 

▪ Submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions 

based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts, and 

▪ Submit the name of a contact person who will be available 

for later consultation, if necessary. 
Overview 

What is the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor 

Service Program? 

▪ The Federal Railroad Administration, the California Department of 

Transportation, and the Riverside County Transportation 

Commission are studying a 144-mile passenger rail service corridor 

between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley 

▪ Service would extend from Los Angeles Union Station to Indio or 

Coachella 
 

Program Overview – Study Area 

Where is the Program Study Area? 

Passenger Rail Service Studied 

Two round trips per day between Los Angeles and Coachella Valley 

Up to six potential stations east of Colton 
 

Purpose & Need 

Purpose: Provide safe, reliable, and convenient intercity passenger rail 

service with capability to meet future mobility needs of residents, 

businesses, and visitors 

Need: 

▪ Regional population and employment growth 

▪ Limited and constrained travel options 

▪ Serve disadvantaged communities 

▪ Help conform to air 

quality regulations 
Program Purpose – Service Objectives 

What objectives would the service achieve? 

▪ More convenient, faster, frequent service than existing transit 

▪ An alternative to driving that offers reliable schedules 

▪ An affordable transportation service 

▪ Improve regional travel options for transit-dependent people 

▪ Serve expected growth within the program corridor 

▪ Help conform to air quality regulations 
 

Why Amtrak Intercity Service and not Metrolink? 

▪ Intercity service with over 3 hours travel time is preferred to have larger, 

reclining seats and access to the lounge car. 

▪ Early Draft Schedules (limited stops) 

LAUS to Indio Trip 1 Trip 2

LAUS 10:20 AM 3:20 PM

Fullerton 10:55 AM 3:55 PM

Riverside 11:39 AM 4:39 PM

Palm Springs 12:59 PM 5:59 PM

Indio 1:23 PM 6:23 PM

Indio to LAUS Trip 1 Trip 2

Indio 9:32 AM 3:32 PM

Palm Springs 9:59 AM 3:59 PM

Riverside 11:22 AM 5:22 PM

Fullerton 12:06 PM 6:06 PM

Los Angeles 12:40 PM 6:40 PM

▪ Congress has authorized Amtrak to operate on private railroads, with some 

track improvements. Metrolink does not have that authorization. 

▪ Intercity service is funded by the state agencies not local funds. 
 

Program History & Prior Planning Activities 

1991 

2010-2013 

2013-2016 

July 2016 

Fall 2016 –

Summer 2021 

Initial Feasibility Studies: Evaluated one or two daily longdistance rail round-trips between Los Angeles and Indio 

Additional Feasibility Studies 

Market Assessment/Alternatives Analysis: Evaluated five 

alternatives to determine the preferred alignment 

Finalized Alternatives Analysis/Preferred Route Advances 

for Environmental Studies 

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR: Held public scoping meetings and 

completed studies for Draft EIS/EIR for public review 
(completed July 2016)

Project Process 

Where are we in the process? 2016 

Alternatives 

Analysis 

Current

Program-Level 

(Tier 1) EIS/EIR 

& Service 

Development 

Plan 

Future

Conceptual 

Engineering & 

Project-Level 

(Tier 2) 

Environmental 

Analyses 

Future Final Design & 

Construction & 

Operations 
Project Process 

What will be prepared? 

▪ Service Development Plan (SDP) 

• Analysis of service levels, infrastructure needs, route modeling, 

station catchment areas, and connectivity 

▪ Program-Level (Tier 1) EIS/EIR 

• Joint National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/ 

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process 

• Addresses likely environmental effects associated with type of 

rail service proposed in corridor 

• Provides basis for subsequent phases or tiered environmental 

documents (Tier 2 Project Level) 
Project Process 

▪ Tier 1 Program-level process will satisfy both federal and 

state environmental requirements (EIS + EIR) WE ARE HERE 

✓ Evaluates effects of implementing service (regional context) 

✓ Identifies broad areas of potential environmental effects associated with 

program construction and operation and the resources that could be 

potentially affected in the study area. 

✓ Procedural planning document only (i.e., not associated with any project 

construction) 

▪ Tier 2 Project-level environmental process for infrastructure 

improvements to follow program-level EIS/EIR 

✓ Tier 2 would analyze site-specific impacts based on the infrastructure 

improvements identified in the SDP 

✓ Once approved, next steps (e.g., construction permitting, etc.) can 

commence 
Project Process 

The Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR evaluates topics, including: 

✓ Land Use and Planning 

✓ Transportation 

✓ Visual Quality and Aesthetics 

✓ Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases 

✓ Noise and Vibration 

✓ Jurisdictional Waters and Wetland 

Resources 

✓ Biological Resources 

✓ Floodplains, Hydrology, and Water Quality 

✓ Geology, Soils, Seismicity, and 

Paleontological Resources 
Project Process 

Topics, continued: 

✓ Hazards and Hazardous Materials 

✓ Public Utilities and Energy 

✓ Cultural Resources 

✓ Parklands and Community Services 

✓ Safety and Security 

✓ Socioeconomics and Communities Affected 

✓ Cumulative Effects 

✓ Environmental Justice Effects 

✓ Section 4(f)/6(f) Resources 
 

 

 

Alternatives Considered 

The Program-Level (Tier 1) Draft EIS/EIR includes the analysis of: 

Daily Train Trips Eastern 

Terminus 

# of Stations 

East of Colton New Third Track in Eastern Section 

No Build None N/A 0 N/A 

Option #1 Two round trips Coachella 6 Colton to Coachella 

Option #2 Two round trips Indio 5 Colton to Indio 

Option #3 Two round trips Indio 5 Colton to approx. Mid Valley 
Western Section 

*No construction, no new stations
Eastern Section: Coachella Terminus 
Eastern Section: Indio Terminus 
 

Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

The Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR was released on May 21, 2021 and will be 

available for public comment until July 6, 2021. 

Digital copies of the full Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR are available to review 

on the following web pages: 

▪ RCTC website 

RCTC.org/cvrail 

▪ FRA website 

https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-san-g 

orgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 

▪ Regulations.gov 

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 
Document Availability and Opportunity to Comment 

Printed copies of the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Executive Summary are available for 

review at: 

▪ Los Angeles Union Station/Metro Library and Archive 

▪ Fullerton Public Library 

▪ Arlington Library 

▪ Riverside County Transportation Commission Offices (by appointment only) 

▪ Colton Public Library 

▪ Loma Linda Branch Library 

▪ A.K. Smiley Public Library 

▪ Beaumont Library 

▪ Banning Public Library 

▪ Palm Springs Public Library 

▪ Riverside County Indio Branch Library 

▪ Riverside County Coachella Branch Library 

*Subject to library location hours and COVID-19 procedures 
 

How To Submit Comments 

Public Comment Period: May 21, 2021 to July 6, 2021 

Please submit comments on the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR via the following 

methods: 

During the Public Hearings: TODAY 

Via Online form: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 

Via Mail*: Federal Railroad Administration 

Amanda Ciampolillo, Environmental Protection Specialist 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

*Comments that are mailed in should be postmarked July 6, 2021 or earlier. 
Questions? 

*This portion of the agenda is for clarifying questions only. 

Please save your official comments for the next agenda item. 
 

 

 

Comments Today 

3 minutes per speaker 

To request to speak: 

▪ Zoom app users: Raise 

hand feature 

▪ Call-in users: Dial *9 to 

raise your hand 

When it is your turn to speak: 

▪ Zoom app users: You will be unmuted 

▪ Call-in users: Dial *6 to unmute your mic when you hear your number 

announced 
 

 

We’re Here to Take Your Comment!

To request to speak: 

▪ Zoom app users: Raise hand feature 

▪ Call-in users: Dial *9 to raise your hand 

When it is your turn to speak: 

▪ Zoom app users: You will be unmuted 

▪ Call-in users: Dial *6 to unmute your mic when you hear your number 

announced 
 

How To Submit Comments 

Public Comment Period: May 21, 2021 to July 6, 2021 

Please submit comments on the Draft Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR via the following 

methods: 

During the Public Hearings: TODAY 

Via Online form: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 

Via Mail*: Federal Railroad Administration 

Amanda Ciampolillo, Environmental Protection Specialist 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

*Comments that are mailed in should be postmarked July 6, 2021 or earlier. 
 

Stay Involved 

Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study 

Email: CVrail@rctc.org 

RCTC Website: RCTC.org/cvrail 

Facebook: facebook.com/CVRailProject 

FRA Website: 

https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachellavalley-san-gorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 
 

Asistencia la interpretación 

Para oír la presentación en español, haga clic en el botón 

de traducción de Zoom en la parte inferior de la pantalla 
 

 

 

Servicio de corredor ferroviario del Valle de Coachella -

Paso de San Gorgonio 

Audiencia pública 

26 de junio de 2021 
Presentaciones 

 Amanda Ciampolillo – Federal Railroad Administration 

 Sheldon Peterson – Riverside County Transportation 

Commission 

 JD Douglas – HDR 
Video del programa 
Orden del día de la presentación 

 Resumen 

 Propósito y necesidad 

 Historial del programa 

 Actividades de planificación previa 

 Alternativas consideradas 

 Disponibilidad de los documentos y oportunidad de hacer 

comentarios 

 Preguntas y respuestas 

 Periodo de comentarios públicos 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Resumen 

Hoy nos centramos en la Declaración de impacto ambiental/Informe de 

impacto ambiental del programa de nivel 1 del Servicio de corredor 

ferroviario del Valle de Coachella-Paso de San Gorgonio y los posibles 

impactos ambientales detectados. Esta reunión le ofrecerá la oportunidad 

de comentar el proyecto de documento medioambiental. 

Durante los comentarios, se anima a los participantes a: 

 explicar el fundamento de sus comentarios; 

 presentar datos o referencias que ofrezcan hechos, supuestos 

razonables basados en hechos o dictámenes respaldados por hechos; y 

 indicar el nombre de una persona de contacto que 

estará disponible para consultas posteriores, si es necesario. 
 

 

 

 

 

Resumen 

¿Qué es el proyecto de Servicio de corredor ferroviario del 

Valle de Coachella - Paso de San Gorgonio? 

 La Federal Railroad Administration, el California Department of 

Transportation y la Riverside County Transportation Commission 

están estudiando construir un corredor de servicios ferroviarios 

para pasajeros de 144 millas entre Los Ángeles y el Valle de 

Coachella. 

 El servicio se extendería desde Los Angeles Union Station hasta 

Indio o Coachella 
 

 

 

Descripción general del programa – Zona de estudio 

¿Dónde está la zona de estudio del programa? 

Servicio ferroviario para pasajeros 

Dos viajes de ida y vuelta al día entre Los Ángeles y el Valle de Coachella 

Hasta seis posibles estaciones al este de Colton 
 

 

 

Propósito y necesidad 

Propósito: Ofrecer un servicio de trenes de pasajeros interurbanos seguro, 

fiable y cómodo con capacidad para satisfacer las futuras necesidades de 

movilidad de residentes, empresas y visitantes 

Necesidad: 

 Población regional y crecimiento del empleo 

 Opciones de desplazamiento limitadas 

 Prestar servicio a las comunidades 

desfavorecidas 

 Ayudar a cumplir las normas relativas 

a la calidad del aire 
 

 

 

 

 

Propósito del programa – Objetivos del servicio 

¿Qué objetivos alcanzaría el servicio? 

 Servicio más cómodo, más rápido y más frecuente que el 

transporte público existente 

 Una alternativa al coche que ofrece horarios fiables 

 Un servicio de transporte asequible 

 Mejorar las opciones de desplazamiento regionales para las 

personas que dependen del transporte público 

 Atender el crecimiento esperado dentro del corredor del 

programa 

 Ayudar a cumplir las normas relativas a la calidad del aire 
 

 

 

 

¿Por qué Amtrak Intercity Service y no Metrolink? 

 Para un servicio interurbano de más de 3 horas de viaje se prefieren asientos 

reclinables más grandes y acceso a vagón lounge. 

 Primeros borradores de horarios (paradas limitadas) 

Itinerario a Indio Itinerario 1 Itinerario 2

LAUS 10:20 a.m. 3:20 p.m.

Fullerton 10:55 a.m. 3:55 p.m.

Riverside 11:39 a.m. 4:39 p.m.

Palm Springs 12:59 a.m. 5:59 p.m.

Indio 1:23 a.m. 6:23 p.m.

Indio a LAUS Itinerario 1 Itinerario 2

Indio 9:32 a.m. 3:32 p.m.

Palm Springs 9:59 a.m. 3:59 p.m.

Riverside 11:22 a.m. 5:22 p.m.

Fullerton 12:06 p.m. 6:06 p.m.

Los Angeles 12:40 p.m. 6:40 p.m.

 El Congreso ha autorizado a Amtrak a operar en ferrocarriles privados, con 

algunas mejoras en las vías. Metrolink no tiene esa autorización. 

 El servicio interurbano está financiado por agencias estatales, no por 

fondos locales. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Historial del programa y actividades de planificación previas 

1991 

2010-2013 

2013-2016 

Julio de 2016 

Otoño 2016 – 

Verano 2021 

Primeros estudios de viabilidad: Se evaluaron uno o dos 

trayectos diarios de ida y vuelta en tren de larga distancia 

entre Los Ángeles e Indio 

Estudios de viabilidad adicionales 

Evaluación del mercado/análisis de alternativas: Se 

estudiaron cinco alternativas para determinar el trazado 

preferido 

Análisis de las alternativas finalizadas/Avances de rutas 

preferidas para estudios ambientales 

EIS/EIR del Programa / Nivel 1: Se celebraron reuniones 

públicas de determinación del alcance y se llevaron a cabo 

estudios para la revisión pública del borrador de EIS/EIR. 
 

 

 

 

 (completed July 2016)

Proceso del proyecto 

¿En qué punto del proceso nos encontramos? 2016 

Análisis de 

alternativas 

Actuales EIS/EIR a nivel 

de programa 

(Nivel 1) y plan 

de desarrollo de 

servicios 

Futuro Ingeniería 

conceptual y 

análisis 

ambientales a 

nivel del 

proyecto 

(Nivel 2) 

Futuro

Diseño, 

construcción y 

operaciones 

finales 
 

 

 

 

 

Proceso del proyecto 

¿Qué documentos se elaborarán? 

 Plan de desarrollo de servicios (SDP) 

• Análisis de niveles de servicio, necesidades de infraestructura, 

modelado de rutas, áreas de captación de estaciones y conectividad 

 EIS/EIR a nivel de programa (Nivel 1) 

• Ley de Política Ambiental Nacional (NEPA)/Proceso de la Ley de 

Calidad Ambiental de California (CEQA) 

• Aborda los efectos ambientales probables asociados al tipo de 

servicio ferroviario propuesto en el corredor 

• Proporciona la base para fases posteriores o documentos 

ambientales escalonados (a nivel de proyecto, Nivel 2) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceso del proyecto 

 El proceso a nivel de programa (Nivel 1) satisfará requisitos ambientales 

federales y estatales (EIS + EIR) 

 Evalúa los efectos del servicio de ejecución (contexto regional) 

ESTAMOS AQUÍ 

 Identifica áreas generales de posibles efectos ambientales asociados con la 

construcción y la explotación del programa y los recursos que podrían verse 

afectados en la zona de estudio. 

 Solo documento de planificación de procedimientos (es decir, no asociado a la 

construcción de ningún proyecto) 

 Proceso ambiental a nivel de proyecto (Nivel 2) para mejoras de 

infraestructura a fin de cumplir la EIS/el EIR a nivel del programa 

 El Nivel 2 analizaría impactos específicos del sitio en función de las mejoras de 

infraestructura identificadas en el SDP 

 Una vez aprobados, pueden comenzar los siguientes pasos (p. ej., permiso de 

construcción, etc.) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceso del proyecto 

El borrador de EIS/EIR a nivel del programa (Nivel 1) evalúa temas, entre ellos: 

 Uso de la tierra y planificación 

 Transporte 

 Calidad visual y estética 

 Calidad del aire y gases de efecto invernadero 

 Ruido y vibración 

 Aguas jurisdiccionales de aguas y recursos de 

los humedales 

 Recursos biológicos 

 Llanuras aluviales, hidrología y calidad del agua 

 Geología, suelos, sismicidad y recursos 

paleontológicos 
 

 

 

Proceso del proyecto 

Temas (continuación): 

 Peligros y materiales peligrosos 

 Servicios públicos y energía 

 Recursos culturales 

 Parques y servicios comunitarios 

 Seguridad y protección 

 Socioeconomía y comunidades afectadas 

 Efectos acumulativos 

 Efectos de la justicia ambiental 

 Recursos de la sección 4(f) y la sección 6(f) 
 

 

 

 

 

Alternativas consideradas 

El borrador de EIS/EIR a nivel de programa (Nivel 1) incluye el análisis de: 

Viajes diarios en 

tren 

Terminal 

oriental 

N.o de estaciones 

al este de Colton New Third Track in Eastern Section 

No construir Ninguna N/A 0 N/A 

Dos viajes de ida Opción #1 Coachella 6 De Colton a Coachella y vuelta 

Dos viajes de ida Opción #2 Indio 5 De Colton a Indio y vuelta 

Dos viajes de ida Opción #3 Indio 5 De Colton a aprox. Mid Valley y vuelta 
Sección occidental 

*Sin construcción, sin estaciones nuevas
Sección oriental: Terminal de Coachella 
Sección oriental: Terminal de Indio 
 

 

 

 

 

Disponibilidad de los documentos y oportunidad de hacer 

comentarios 

El borrador de EIS/EIR de programa/Nivel 1 se publicó el 21 de mayo de 2021 y 

estará disponible para comentarios públicos hasta el 6 de julio de 2021. 

En las siguientes páginas web se ofrecen copias digitales del borrador 

completo de EIS/EIR de programa/Nivel 1 para su revisión: 

 Sitio web de RCTC 

RCTC.org/cvrail 

 Sitio web de FRA 

https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-san-g 

orgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 

 Regulations.gov 

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FRA-2021-0048-0002 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Disponibilidad de los documentos y oportunidad de 

hacer comentarios 

Se ofrecen copias impresas del borrador del Resumen ejecutivo de EIS/EIR de programa / 

Nivel 1: 

 Los Angeles Union Station/Metro Library and Archive 

 Biblioteca pública de Fullerton 

 Biblioteca de Arlington 

 Oficinas de la Riverside County Transportation Commission (solo con cita previa) 

 Biblioteca pública de Colton 

 Loma Linda Branch Library 

 A.K. Biblioteca pública de Smiley 

 Biblioteca de Beaumont 

 Biblioteca pública de Banning 

 Biblioteca pública de Palm Springs 

 Riverside County Indio Branch Library 

 Riverside County Coachella Branch Library 

*Sujeto al horario de la biblioteca y a los procedimientos relacionados con la COVID-19 
 

 

 

 

 

Cómo enviar comentarios 

Periodo de comentarios públicos: del 21 de mayo de 2021 al 6 de julio de 2021 

Envíe comentarios sobre el borrador de EIS/EIR de programa/Nivel 1 por las siguientes 

vías: 

Durante las audiencias públicas: HOY 

Mediante el formulario en línea: https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FRA-2021-

0048-0002 

Por correo postal*: Federal Railroad Administration 

Amanda Ciampolillo, Environmental Protection Specialist 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

*Los comentarios enviados por correo postal deben tener fecha de franqueo del 6 de 

julio de 2021 o antes. 
 

 

¿Preguntas? 

*Esta parte del programa es solo para aclarar preguntas. 

Guarde sus comentarios oficiales para el siguiente punto del orden 

del día. 
 

 

 

 

Comentarios de hoy 

3 minutos por orador 

Para solicitar la palabra: 

• Usuarios de Zoom: Función 

de levantar la mano 

• Usuarios de teléfono: 

Marque *9 para levantar la 

mano 

Cuando llegue su turno de palabra: 

 Usuarios de Zoom: Será desmuteado 

 Usuarios de teléfono: Marque *6 para desactivar el micrófono cuando 

escuche anunciar su número 
 

 

 

 

 

¡Estamos aquí para recoger su comentario! 

Para solicitar la palabra: 

 Usuarios de Zoom: Función de levantar la mano 

 Usuarios de teléfono: Marque *9 para levantar la mano 

Cuando llegue su turno de palabra: 

 Usuarios de Zoom: Será desmuteado 

 Usuarios de teléfono: Marque *6 para desactivar el micrófono cuando 

escuche anunciar su número 
 

Participe 

Estudio del corredor ferroviario del Valle de Coachella - Paso 

de San Gorgonio 

Correo electrónico: CVrail@rctc.org 

Sitio web de RCTC: RCTC.org/cvrail 

Facebook: facebook.com/CVRailProject 

Sitio web de FRA: 

https://railroads.dot.gov/environment/environmental-reviews/coachella-valley-sangorgonio-pass-corridor-investment-plan 
In the Matter Of:

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

PUBLIC HEARING - 2

June 26, 2021

Case No:

CERTIFIED CONDENSED
· · ·

· · · · · 

· · · · 

·

·

·

·

·

·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · · · · · ·

· · · · · · · 

·

·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· · · · ·

· · · · · · · · ·

· · · · · · · 

·

·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

1  COACHELLA VALLEY­SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT  1 COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT 

2  DRAFT EIS/EIR PUBLIC HEARING #2  2 DRAFT EIS/EIR PUBLIC HEARING #2 

3  JUNE 26, 2021 9:00 A.M. ­ 11:00 A.M.  3 JUNE 26, 2021 9:00 A.M. - 11:00 A.M. 

4  4 

5  5 

6  6 MR. PETERSON: Yes. Good morning, and thanks 

7  7 for joining. We will give it a few more minutes. It 

8  8 is probably early for a number of people, so we'll make 

9  9 sure they get a chance to join. 

10  10 Once again, thanks for joining. We will just 

11  11 give it another minute or so, and then we will get 

12  12 started. Thank you. 

13  Reported by:  13 All right. It is five after. Looks like we 

14  Chelsea Giuliany  14 will go ahead and get started. Maybe we will get 

15  CSR No. 13842  15 started with a little bit of housekeeping for the 

16  16 Webinar. Let's go with that. 

17  17 MS. ESPINOZA: Good morning, everyone. This 

18  18 morning we have Diana Orozco as our Spanish 

19  19 interpreter. If you do need Spanish interpretation, 

20  20 you can go ahead and click on the globe icon that will 

21  21 be located at the bottom of your screen in your Zoom 

22  22 controls, and you can go ahead and click on Spanish. 

23  23 We have also linked the Spanish presentation in the 

24  24 chat for you to follow along. 

25  25 MS. CIAMPOLILLO: Hi. Good morning, everybody. 

2 

1  COACHELLA VALLEY­SAN GROGONIO PASS RAIL PROJECT  1 My name is Amanda Ciampolillo. I am an Environmental 

2  DRAFT EIS/EIR PUBLIC HEARING #2  2 Protection Specialist for the Federal Railroad 

3  JUNE 26, 2021 9:00 A.M. ­ 11:00 A.M.  3 Administration. I first want to thank everyone for 

4  4 coming in and spending some time with us today on a 

5  5 Saturday morning. We appreciate your time and your 

6  APPEARANCES:  6 attention, and, of course, most importantly, your 

7  STEPHANIE ESPINOZA, MODERATOR  7 comment on the project that we will be talking about 

8  SHELDON PETERSON, RCTC  8 today, our Coachella Valley Rail Project. The team 

9  JD DOUGLAS, HDR  9 here, both on the call today and lots of other folks 

10  AMANDA CIAMPOLILLO, FRA  10 behind the scenes, have been working for years on this 

11  11 project to get it to where it is today, and we are 

12  12 really excited to bring this to you and show you the 

13  13 work that we have been doing and get your feedback, so 

14  14 we can make this project even better and get feedback 

15  15 on the potential folks who really this project will 

16  16 impact the most. 

17  17 With that, I will turn it over to Sheldon to 

18  18 talk about the rest of the introduction today, but 

19  19 thank you for being here. 

20  20 MR. PETERSON: I want to thank you, Amanda. And 

21  21 I, too, want to -- I appreciate everyone for joining us 

22  22 this morning. My name is Sheldon Peterson. I am the 

23  23 RCTC Rail Manager. We have been working with the 

24  24 leadership of Coachella Valley officials for a number 

25  25 of years actively pursuing this intercity rail corridor 

1 3 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

1 from Los Angeles to the Coachella Valley. 1 So that is an overview of what we are doing 

2 We see this project as transformational, that 2 today. So let's dive right in. Today's focus is, the 

3 will provide a new opportunity for mobility in the 3 official name, Coachella Valley-San Grogonio Pass Rail 

4 region. It would benefit the disadvantaged community, 4 Corridor Service Tier 1 Program Environmental Impact 

5 as well as economic development, and is basically a 5 Statement/Environmental Impact Report. That is a long 

6 connection between Coachella Valley and the rest of 6 name, and the potential environmental impacts that have 

7 southern California. 7 been identified in our study of this potential project. 

8 I truly want to thank our partners at the 8 Our meeting today will provide you with the opportunity 

9 Federal Railroad Administration, Caltrans and our 9 to comment on the draft environmental document. 

10 consulting team at HDR for getting us to this milestone 10 A couple of notes. When you are commenting, 

11 with the release of the environmental document. We are 11 please explain the basis for your comments, provide 

12 excited to get your input today. Just as a note, this 12 data or facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, 

13 will be recorded as well and put on our website, as 13 or expert opinions supported by facts, and please also 

14 well as other materials that are on our website. 14 submit the name of a contact person who will be 

15 So we will go ahead and get started with a brief 15 available if there is a need for consultation at a 

16 flyover video of the project, and then our Project 16 later time. 

17 Manager, JD Douglas, will provide an overview of the 17 So what is the Coachella Valley-San Grogonio 

18 process, and at the end we will have opportunities for 18 Pass Rail Corridor Service Program? As Amanda and 

19 questions. 19 Sheldon mentioned in their introductions, it is a 

20 So with that, here is the video. 20 corroborative effort between the Federal Railroad 

21 (Whereupon, a video presentation was played.) 21 Administration, Caltrans, and RCTC to study a passenger 

22 MR. DOUGLAS: Good morning, everyone. My name 22 rail service between Los Angeles and the Coachella 

23 is JD Douglas, and I am the Consultant Team Project 23 Valley, which is a distance of about 144 miles. The 

24 Manager for the Coachella Valley Rail Project. I am 24 service would start in the west at LA Union Station, 

25 going to be providing a presentation preview for you 25 and terminate on the east in either Indio or Coachella. 

4 6 

1 this morning. On screen now you will see our agenda 1 The study area is shown on the map on the 

2 for the morning, so I will go through that briefly, and 2 screen, and you see it extends from LA in the west,

3 then we will dive into the presentation. 3 Coachella is the far terminus on the east, and the

4 First, we are going to provide an overview of 4 service we are studying would be initially two

5 what this project is all about. I will spend a minute 5 roundtrips per day between LA and the Coachella Valley,

6 talking about the purpose and need statement, which is 6 with three stations in the western part of the corridor

7 the foundational statement governing what the project 7 that you see on the map, LA, Fullerton, Riverside, and 

8 is trying to accomplish. We will talk a little bit 8 potentially up to six stations in the eastern half of

9 about the history of this program and prior planning 9 the corridor, east of Colton. Those potential station

10 activities that have brought us to this point. And 10 areas are shown in the orange bar along the rail line

11 then we will get into specifics relative to the 11 where potential new stations could go, as well as the

12 environmental document itself. We will talk about the 12 orange dot for the Palm Springs station that exists 

13 alternatives that are being evaluated in the document, 13 today and would likely be expanded and used as one of 

14 and then how you can get accessibility to the document 14 the stations for this service. 

15 to review it and what opportunities you have and the 15 I mentioned the purpose and needs statement 

16 different ways you can comment. 16 being the foundational statement for what the project 

17 At the end of my presentation, we will have a 17 is trying to accomplish. So the purpose of this 

18 question-and-answer period, which is not part of the 18 service would be to provide a safe, reliable, and 

19 public comment period but to give you an opportunity to 19 convenient intercity-passenger rail service with the 

20 ask clarifying questions so you understand what the 20 ability to meet mobility needs of residents, 

21 project is all about. And then after the Q&A period, 21 businesses, visitors. The purpose is driven by several 

22 we will have the official public comment period where 22 needs. 

23 you will be able to give us your comments on the 23 As we all know, the region continues to grow. 

24 project for the record in the environmental review 24 There are really limited, constrained travel options 

25 process. 25 other than driving a car between the LA Basin and the 

5 7 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

1 Coachella Valley, and so especially disadvantaged 1 of a train service connecting LA and Indio. Between

2 communities would benefit from having an additional 2 2010 and 2013, a couple of additional feasibility

3 convenience and reliable type of transit service. In 3 studies were done, and then starting in 2013, RCTC

4 addition, it would help achieve air quality goals of 4 embarked on a significant effort to do a detailed

5 the region. 5 market assessment and alternative analysis for this

6 Next slide, please. 6 corridor. That was essentially the predecessor phase

7 The specific service objectives that the service 7 to this current phase that we are in now. That study

8 is intended to accomplish. Firstly, to provide, again, 8 evaluated five different alternative rail routes

9 a convenient, faster, more frequent service than 9 through the LA area to determine the preferred

10 existing transit services that connect the Coachella 10 alignment for a rail corridor to connect LA with the

11 Valley with the greater LA Basin, to provide an 11 Coachella Valley.

12 alternative to driving that has reliable schedules, to 12 At the end of that study starting July 2016 is

13 have it be an affordable transportation service, and 13 when our current effort started. The alternative

14 thereby improving the regional travel options for 14 analysis was finalized at that point, and then the

15 people who are dependent on transit for getting around. 15 outcome of the environmental -- sorry, the outcome of

16 It would be an additional mode of travel that would 16 the alternative analysis was then, a preferred route

17 provide additional transportation capacity to serve the 17 was selected and moved forward into this current

18 growth within the corridor, and again, it would help to 18 environmental study.

19 achieve air quality goals for the region. 19 In fall of 2016, the Tier 1 program, EIS/EIR was

20 We have often been asked the question, why 20 kicked off with public scoping meetings, and subsequent

21 should it be an Amtrak intercity type of rail service 21 to that, technical studies were initiated, and the

22 and not Metrolink. There are several reasons for that. 22 draft EIS/EIR was prepared leading to its release for

23 Firstly, the intercity service for a long train trip 23 public review mid May of this year.

24 like this, which is over three hours, it is preferable 24 This is an overview of the big-picture process.

25 to have a type of train that has larger seating, more 25 You see on the left the alternative analysis completed

8 10 

1 comfortable seating, lounge car, et cetera, just 1 in 2016. Our current phase in the light blue box is

2 because of the duration of the trip. 2 the program-level EIS/EIR Service Development Plan,

3 We put in this slide, the initial schedules that 3 which I will describe a little bit more in just a

4 are envisioned for the service just to give an idea of 4 minute. Subsequent to this phase, the project would

5 when it might operate. And as you can see, 5 need to go through conceptual engineering and more

6 from -- both from the west end to the east end, the 6 details, environmental analysis on specific projects

7 idea is to have one trip in the morning, and one trip 7 that would be built, and that would ultimately lead to

8 in the afternoon in each direction. 8 final design, construction, and operation of the

9 Another reason that it works better to have the 9 service at a later date.

10 intercity rail service is that there is federal law 10 So I mentioned at the current phase of the

11 that has authorized Amtrak to operate on private 11 process we are developing a service development plan,

12 railroads as long as track improvements are made so 12 and this program-level Tier 1 EIS/EIR. The SDP is the

13 that the passenger rail service and freight rail 13 technical document prepared to meet the needs of the

14 service can all utilize the corridor efficiently. 14 Federal Railroad Administration, FRA. It involves

15 Metrolink for commuter service does not have that 15 analyzing service levels for the train service,

16 federal legal authorization. 16 identifying infrastructure needs in order to

17 Lastly, the Intercity Rail Service would be 17 accommodate the service, modeling the route for

18 funded by state agencies rather than local funds, 18 operations to see the operation of the passenger rail

19 similar to other Amtrak services in the state, such as 19 service in relation to the freight rail service through

20 the Pacific Surfliner trains. 20 the corridor, identifying station areas and how access

21 Next slide, please. 21 to those station areas would need to be provided to

22 A little history about the history of the 22 connect the service as well as regional connections to

23 programs and activities that have led us up to the 23 other rail and transit services along the route.

24 point in the planning process. RCTC started as early 24 The program level Tier 1 EIS/EIR is a joint

25 as 1991 to do initial feasibility studies for this type 25 environmental document that meets the needs of the

9 11 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

1 Federal National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA, and 1 alternatives are. In brief, there is a no-build 

2 the state of California's, California Environmental 2 alternative, and there is a build alternative route 

3 Quality Act, CEQA. This environmental document 3 that has three service options. I will go through 

4 addresses the anticipated environmental effects 4 individually what these alternatives are. 

5 associated with this rail service that we are proposing 5 The no-build alternative is just basically that 

6 and studying for this corridor. This Tier 1 or 6 no action would be taken. There would not be a new 

7 program-level environmental document provides the 7 intercity-rail service in this corridor. For the build 

8 foundation or the basis for subsequent phases of 8 alternative, there are three different options, and 

9 environmental studies of actual projects that would be 9 they relate to the eastern terminus of the corridor, 

10 built. So this current phase is not studying specific 10 and the infrastructure that would be built in order to 

11 projects that are proposed to be built, it is studying 11 accommodate the service. 

12 the overall service and an analysis of the types of 12 Service Option Number 1, and I should just 

13 projects that would need to be built, but they have not 13 mention briefly that all three of these service options 

14 been specifically identified as to exactly where they 14 assume the two roundtrips per day that we have talked 

15 would be yet. 15 about as the service that would be initiated. Service 

16 Next slide. 16 Option Number 1 has its eastern terminus in the city of 

17 A little bit more detail about this. The Tier 1 17 Coachella. It has six stations, potentially up to six 

18 or program-level process, again, satisfies both federal 18 stations, in the eastern half of the corridor, east of 

19 and state environmental requirements at this higher 19 Colton. And the third track of infrastructure wouldn't 

20 level of analysis. It will evaluate the effects of 20 be built. There are existing two tracks in this rail 

21 implementing the service in a regional context. It 21 corridor from Colton to Coachella and beyond. 

22 identifies broad areas of potential environmental 22 Service Option 1 would have a third track built 

23 effects associated with the overall program of 23 from Colton to the eastern terminus in the city of 

24 construction and operation. And it identifies the 24 Coachella. Service Option Number 2, its eastern 

25 resources, the natural resources that could potentially 25 terminus would be city of Indio. There would be five 

12 14 

1 be affected in the study area. 1 stations east of Colton, because there would not be a 

2 Again, it is a procedural planning document only 2 station in Coachella in this service option. The new 

3 and not associated with construction of any particular 3 third track would again be the full length of this 

4 project. That would happen in Tier 2. So Tier 2 is 4 corridor from Colton to the eastern terminus in Indio. 

5 project-level environmental analysis for the 5 Service Option 3 is similar to Service Option 2 in that 

6 infrastructure improvements that would be built. 6 the eastern terminus would be in Indio and there would 

7 Tier 2 would get to a more site specific analysis based 7 be up to five stations east of Colton. The difference 

8 on the specific infrastructure improvements that are 8 in Service Option 3 is that the third track in the 

9 identified at that time. 9 corridor would not extend all the way to the eastern 

10 Once the Tier 1 -- sorry, once the Tier 2 is 10 terminus in Indio. 

11 approved, then the next steps can go forward. But 11 During the course of our technical study, the 

12 again, the Tier 2 process is where projects would be 12 modeling of train operations through the corridor 

13 studied for potential design and construction. 13 determined that it might be possible to achieve the 

14 Just a little bit about the content and the 14 service objectives of having the passenger trains 

15 breadth of the environmental study. You will see on 15 operate at 90 percent on-time performance without 

16 this screen and the subsequent screen that it covers a 16 degrading freight train operations, that it might be 

17 full range of potential impacts, topic areas where 17 possible to achieve those service objectives without 

18 potential impacts could occur. I am not going to read 18 building a third track all the way from Colton to 

19 through the entire list of these areas, but we wanted 19 Indio, and so this scenario extends the third track 

20 to show them on the screen so you would have a sense of 20 from Colton to approximately Rancho Mirage or 

21 the full breadth that this environmental study 21 Palm Desert area where the mid-valley station is 

22 incorporates. 22 proposed, and so that is the extent of the third track 

23 Next slide, please. 23 in Service Option 3. 

24 The environmental document studies a few 24 I am going to go through a couple of maps now 

25 alternatives, and this slide summarizes what these 25 that just zoom in a little bit on the western and 

13 15 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · · 

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

1 eastern sections of the corridor. 1 and that link that you see there on screen, which will

2 First, the western section of the corridor as we 2 also be provided to you in the chat box, that specific

3 noted earlier, the stations would be at Los Angeles, 3 document number is for our project specifically. So

4 Fullerton, and Riverside. There would not be a need 4 that will take you right to the place where you would

5 for additional track improvements or new stations in 5 provide online comments for that regulations.gov

6 this part of the corridor because the existing 6 website.

7 facilities would accommodate the service and achieve 7 Lastly, if you prefer using regular mail and

8 the service objectives without any need for expansion. 8 writing out your comments and mailing them, the address

9 Next slide, please. 9 is there. They would be sent to the FRA, to the

10 The eastern section of the corridor extends, 10 attention of Amanda in Washington DC. And note at the

11 again, from Colton to Coachella. In this map, 11 bottom comments that are sent via mail must be

12 Coachella would be the eastern terminus, and you'll see 12 postmarked by July 6th or earlier.

13 -- excuse me -- you'll see the areas with the thicker 13 So that concludes our presentation. We have now

14 purple lines along the route. Those, again, are the 14 come to the question and answer part of the agenda.

15 areas in which stations could be considered along the 15 Just a reminder, this part of the agenda is for

16 route, and the Palm Springs existing station location 16 answering questions to help to clarify your

17 is shown there with the black dot. 17 understanding of what the project is all about. So we

18 Next slide. 18 are not to the comment period yet, but we do want to

19 This is the eastern corridor with the Indio as 19 give you the opportunity to ask questions if you are

20 the eastern terminus. And again, the station areas are 20 unclear about any part of the project or want to

21 the same as in the previous slide, with the exception 21 understand any aspects of it better.

22 of city of Coachella. 22 So, Stevie, could you let folks know how they

23 Now, I am going to talk a little bit about the 23 can ask their questions?

24 availability of the environmental document for you to 24 MS. ESPINOZA: Yes. Thank you, JD.

25 read and review. And then after we talk about the 25 As we said, we are going to be moving into the

16 18 

1 document availability, the different ways that you can 1 Q&A portion today. I do see we have a few questions 

2 provide your comments. 2 already. You can access the Q&A at the bottom of your 

3 The Tier 1 program EIS/EIR was released May 3 screen and the Zoom panel, and I am just going to be 

4 21st, and is available for a 45-day-review period, 4 reading them off as they come. 

5 which will end on July 6th. The environmental document 5 Our first question today comes from Dan Wentzel. 

6 has been made available both in digital form and in 6 He is asking, "Would it be possible to increase the 

7 hard copies. The digital availability is shown on this 7 frequency of service as it proves as popular as we 

8 slide. You can go to the RCTC website. You can go to 8 believe it will?" 

9 the FRA website. And you can go to regulations.gov, 9 MR. PETERSON: This is Sheldon. I will go ahead 

10 which is the website where comments can be submitted 10 and take that. 

11 electronically. 11 For the study we have as defined in service 

12 Next slide. 12 levels, probably the minimum of the two roundtrips that 

13 There are a number of locations around Southern 13 we identified. There is always a potential in the 

14 California where hard copies of the environmental 14 future, especially if the infrastructure is built for 

15 document have been made available for review. Most of 15 the service to expand, but our study is specifically 

16 them as you will note on the list are public libraries, 16 focusing on these two here. 

17 and they are also available by appointment at the RCTC 17 MS. ESPINOZA: We have another question. This 

18 offices. 18 comes from Simon, and Simon is asking, "What is the 

19 Next slide, please. 19 fastest the service could run from Palm Springs to LA 

20 How to submit your comments. There are three 20 if it weren't stopping anywhere else?" 

21 different ways you can do that. During these public 21 MR. PETERSON: That's a good question. We 

22 hearings -- and today is the second of the two public 22 haven't specifically studied that. Potentially, you 

23 hearings. So today is your last opportunity to submit 23 could take a half hour off of the schedule, but the way 

24 it during a public hearing. You can do it via the 24 it looks with track and run times, it wouldn't be so 

25 online form, which is at the regulations.gov website, 25 much different that we would want to skip stops. We 

17 19 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

1 see the value in making stops along the way. 1 many acres is needed for parking, building, et cetera?"

2 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for that question. 2 MR. PETERSON: Yes, we haven't completely

3 We have another question from Dan Wentzel. This 3 defined the stations, either the locations and the

4 question is, "Could this service potentially be 4 needs, just yet. Traditionally, the stations will need

5 extended to Calexico or Mexicali?" 5 potentially 100 or more parking spaces, access for a

6 MR. PETERSON: At this point we are having the 6 platform, and shelters, but they don't necessarily need

7 final point of our studies in Coachella, but going 7 to be as elaborate as the LA Union Station. But we

8 forward there could be following studies that look into 8 will coordinate with the community to see what the best

9 expanding into Calexico or Mexicali. I know Amtrak is 9 options are for each of the stations.

10 looking at a service to Yuma and Phoenix as a potential 10 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. We have another question.

11 extension, so that could be something in the future as 11 This comes from S. Robertson. They are asking, "What

12 well. 12 mitigation efforts are planned for the San Timoteo

13 MS. ESPINOZA: We have a couple of questions 13 corridor?"

14 from Mariela Loera. This is regarding the high-speed 14 MR. PETERSON: What we have done initially is

15 rail. The first question is, "Is this project 15 just some broad overviews of potential options for

16 connected in any way to the high-speed rail?" And her 16 treatments for sound mitigation. Once we get into the

17 follow-up question is, "I understand that this project 17 Tier 2 and track-level specific, we will identify more

18 has access to the existing railway because of the 18 specific implementations for sound mitigations along

19 nature of it being an Amtrak intercity service. Given 19 the way. And basically, it is to be determined.

20 this, was there a need for any agreement between this 20 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. Those are all of the

21 project and any company in regards to track use?" 21 questions that we have. Maybe I will just wait a few

22 MR. PETERSON: Let me start off, this project is 22 more moments in case people had any more questions

23 not directly related to the existing high-speed rail 23 before we move on to the official comment period today.

24 efforts that are taking place in the Central Valley. 24 And I am not seeing anything come through, so -- we do

25 However, once that service connects to LA Union 25 have a question from John Harell. He is asking, "What

20 22 

1 Station, our service would be a fantastic feeder 1 is the best case when service will begin?" 

2 service that would get more people to use the 2 MR. PETERSON: That's a great question. We are 

3 high-speed rail in the future. 3 pursuing advancing the project as quickly as possible; 

4 The services, the Amtrak intercity is using 4 however, likely it would probably be at least 5 to 

5 existing rail right-of-ways. We will need to reach 5 10 years before service is actually implemented. All 

6 agreements with the freight railroads involved in the 6 of that is dependent on the agreements, the 

7 service, and we will need to do that in the future. 7 requirements for capital improvements, and our ability 

8 Those agreements have not been finalized. 8 to secure funding. So we are doing our best, but we 

9 And you also had a question on the technology 9 will still have to wait and see. 

10 that will be used in stations and railways. At this 10 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for that question, 

11 point, we are looking at the existing diesel technology 11 John. Again, I am not seeing anything else -- oh, Tom 

12 that is available. There are a number of years before 12 has another question. 

13 we actually implement the service, so if any 13 Tom is asking, "What all is expected to be 

14 zero-emissions locomotives or other more 14 accomplished in this project over the next six months 

15 environmentally friendly opportunities are available, 15 and in the next 12 months." 

16 we will definitely explore them prior. I think that 16 MR. PETERSON: Over the next six months by the 

17 answers those questions. 17 end of the calendar year, we are hoping to get a record 

18 MS. ESPINOZA: We do have one more question in 18 of decision on this Tier 1 Environmental Document, and 

19 the Q&A. Again, if you do have additional questions 19 that way we will be able to then position ourselves to 

20 for our panel today, you can go ahead and open up the 20 seek funding to move forward to the Tier 2 

21 Q&A feature at the bottom of your screen, and we are 21 Environmental Project Planning. So those are the next 

22 happy to answer some clarifying questions for you this 22 steps we need to take over the next six to 12 months. 

23 morning. 23 MS. ESPINOZA: We have another question from 

24 The question from Tom is, "What does a new 24 Simon. Simon is asking, "Why can't a basic service be 

25 station in the mid Coachella Valley look like? How 25 started sooner without any additional stations or 

21 23 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

1 tracks? There used to be service from Indio to LA." 1 MR. PETERSON: Let's do that. So basically, if

2 MR. PETERSON: That's a great question. 2 you took the 9:30 train out of Indio, you would arrive

3 Currently, Amtrak runs the Sunset Limited train that 3 in LA Union Station around 12:40 p.m. If you wanted to

4 goes cross-country basically from LA with a stop in 4 make a same-day trip, you would leave Union Station at 

5 Palm Springs on its way to New Orleans. For us to run 5 3:20 p.m., getting back to Indio at about 6:23. There

6 additional service for a different time, we still need 6 is always a potential for overnight or longer trips,

7 to have agreements with the railroad. So at this 7 but that would be the same day service. 

8 point, there is not really an opportunity to run 8 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. I think that was our last 

9 service right away without some sort of an agreement 9 question coming in, so I think it is okay for us to 

10 ready to go. 10 move on to the official comment period for today. 

11 MS. ESPINOZA: Great. Again, if you do have a 11 Okay, so thank you again for joining us this 

12 question for our panel before we get into the official 12 morning. Our panel is going to be here until 11:00 

13 comment period today, I am going to ask for you to go 13 a.m. to take in your comments. We are asking that you 

14 ahead and enter that into the Q&A feature that is 14 keep your comments to three minutes per speaker, and if 

15 located at the bottom of your screen, and we can answer 15 you do have a verbal comment for us today, you can go 

16 some clarifying questions for you today. 16 ahead and use the raise hand feature in the Zoom app, 

17 Okay. We do have a question from Ryan. Ryan is 17 and that will notify, to me, that you would like to

18 asking, "What were the critical factors in determining 18 speak.

19 the draft schedules?" 19 Again, we are only taking verbal comments as

20 MR. PETERSON: Ryan, that is a great question. 20 part of the official comment period, and if you -- I

21 When we looked at the schedules, we tried to balance 21 don't see any call-in users, but if you do happen to 

22 not only the needs of the potential riders, which we 22 call in, you can call, dial *9 to raise your hand. And

23 see as more transportation or tourism focus, so they 23 that will notify me that you would like to speak. When

24 wouldn't necessarily be daily commuters. And we also 24 I call your name, I am going to unmute you, and you

25 have the challenge of rail traffic near LA Union 25 just have to remember to unmute yourself as well. So

24 26 

1 Station, which has significant commuter traffic and 1 we can go ahead and get started today. Give me one 

2 backlog during the peak periods. So the goal was to 2 second to adjust my screen.

3 come in kind of midmorning and arrive outside of the 3 Okay. We already have some hands raised. Thank

4 peak windows in Union Station, and then do the same 4 you very much. Dan, I am going to unmute you now, so

5 thing for an afternoon trip to kind of get out of Union 5 go ahead and unmute yourself when you are ready.

6 Station before the afternoon peak period commuter rush. 6 DAN WENTZEL: Good morning. I wanted to thank

7 Those were the key features. 7 you for this great presentation. I understand the

8 Once we get closer to the actual operation, we 8 project a lot better now, and I fully support it.

9 will work collectively to try to find out the best 9 I -- if I could make one recommendation, it is that it

10 schedules. That's kind of what drove the initial plan. 10 would have a longer same-day turn-around time in Los

11 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for that, Ryan. Okay. 11 Angeles, if that is possible, instead of three hours,

12 I am not seeing any other Q&As coming through at this 12 maybe four or five hours. Other than that, I think the

13 point. I will wait a few more moments for people to 13 project should be built in such a way that it allows

14 get in their last-minute questions, and if not, we can 14 for further extensions to, as was stated, to Yuma,

15 proceed to the official comment period for today's 15 Phoenix or to Imperial County, EL Centro, Calexico,

16 agenda. 16 Mexicali, and should allow for more frequency. I think

17 Okay, I am not seeing anything come through, so 17 this is going to be a very, very popular service, and I

18 I think we can start with the next portion of the 18 am excited about it, and I look forward to riding it.

19 agenda. Oh, we have one. We will take this one final 19 So thank you very much for your time, and

20 question, looks like it is coming in from Simon. 20 it -- I would like to be able to -- that discussion of

21 "How long is it between arriving in LA and 21 why it is Amtrak rather than Metrolink, if someone

22 departing?" 22 could provide a link to that, I would love to be able

23 MR. PETERSON: Is there a way to pull up that 23 to get to that. I get asked that question a lot when I

24 slide that shows the schedule? 24 get asked about this project, and it has to do with

25 MS. ESPINOZA: Yes. 25 funding. I would love to have a link to read that and

25 27 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · · · 

· · · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

1 understand that more fully. Thank you. 1 would like to see the schedule moved up faster to get

2 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. Thank you, Dan. That was 2 the service going as quickly as possible, and

3 Dan Wentzel. Thank you for that comment today. 3 extensions. Thank you for the opportunity to comment

4 Just as a reminder, we are going to be posting 4 this morning, and I wish you all the success with your

5 our presentation slides on our project website, so you 5 project. Thank you. 

6 will be able to access that information and that 6 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for your comments,

7 particular slide. So thank you for your comment. 7 Todd.

8 Okay. Our next commenter today is Todd Liebman. 8 Continuing on, we have a hand raised from Brian.

9 Todd, I am going to unmute you. If you could go ahead 9 Excuse me, Brian Yanity. So, Brian, I am going to

10 and unmute yourself and state your name for the record. 10 unmute you. Please just remember to unmute yourself.

11 You may begin when you are ready. 11 BRIAN YANITY: Hello. Good morning, everyone. 

12 TODD LIEBMAN: Yes. Good morning, everybody. 12 Thank you again for this presentation, and, of course,

13 Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment. My 13 the opportunity for us to speak. My name is Brian

14 name is Todd Liebman, and I am the president of All 14 Yanity. I am vice president south of the Rail

15 Aboard Arizona. We are a non-profit group here in 15 Passenger Association of California and Nevada or

16 Arizona that advocates for improved passenger rail in 16 RailPAC. RailPAC is a 501(c)(3) volunteer group of

17 Arizona and throughout the southwest. I just wanted to 17 railroad professionals and advocates that has 

18 express our whole-hearted support, of course, for your 18 campaigned for improved mobility and improved passenger 

19 program and your looking at this. It was an excellent 19 rail in particular in California and Nevada since 1978. 

20 presentation, and I appreciate it. 20 I will -- wanted to follow up on what my 

21 We would like to advocate, though, that you not 21 colleague at All Aboard Arizona, Todd Liebman, just 

22 forget about one of our top priorities, which is the 22 said about keeping the Sunset Limited on the radar for 

23 Daily Sunset Limited. Some of the question -- comments 23 this project, even though we do recognize that, you 

24 and questions have centered on the fact that obviously 24 know, Amtrak negotiations with UP are technically 

25 getting the same-day return from LA would be nice. 25 separate from RCTC and FRA's negotiations on the 

28 30 

1 Well, the Sunset Limited on its current schedule leaves 1 Coachella Valley Rail Service, but the reality is they

2 late in the evening, so that would help to accommodate 2 would be using the same infrastructure, and the same

3 that at least with -- perhaps, you know, two stops at 3 Daily Sunset Limited as Todd mentioned could compliment

4 least, maybe three stops along the route. Obviously, 4 the Regional East Coachella Valley Rail Service very

5 Amtrak's working towards service improvement. 5 well.

6 Going beyond the Daily Sunset, which is really a 6 Around the country one of the markets that are

7 major priority, and I would urge you not to lose sight 7 served by a long distance train, like the Sunset

8 of that because that would really increase your 8 Limited, are shorter distanced trips within that

9 mobility in the corridor without the additional 9 corridor. For example, the Sunset Limited could add

10 operating expense, but, also, we feel it is very 10 extra schedules off peak for someone with a roundtrip

11 important to keep extensions to Yuma, Phoenix and 11 ticket going through the Coachella Valley during the

12 Tucson in the mix. And one of the reasons we are so 12 day, and then they can go back to LA late at night or

13 supportive of your project is because that would allow 13 vise versa on the Sunset Limited, because people

14 that to really come to fruition. 14 complain about the Sunset Limited stopping in

15 Again, it was mentioned in the frequency. I 15 Palm Springs between 12:30 and 2:00 in the morning or

16 think your two roundtrips add to a -- several -- couple 16 5:00 in the morning if it is late. But that could

17 of roundtrips, perhaps to Tucson, Phoenix, Yuma, would 17 actually be an advantage if you are complimenting

18 really increase service in the corridor, and we feel 18 service during more quote/unquote bankers hours that

19 there are a lot of Arizona travellers that would be 19 the Coachella Valley rail could be doing.

20 traveling to the Coachella Valley, and this would be a 20 But back to really the focus of this EIR,

21 tremendous opportunity to link one of the country's 21 RailPAC fully supports the main feature of the

22 largest metropolitan areas and a large metropolitan in 22 preferred option, build alternative option 1, and that

23 the form of Tucson and Phoenix to LA and also the 23 is construction of a new third mainline track from

24 Coachella Valley region. 24 76 miles -- with 76 miles in length from Colton to

25 Again, we are wholeheartedly supportive. We 25 Coachella Valley along the Union Pacific Railroad's

29 31 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

1 existing Yuma subdivision. 1 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay. Thank you for your 

2 You know, we would like it to be more, of 2 comment, Mariela, and for joining us this morning. 

3 course -- more passenger track everywhere, that's our 3 As a reminder if you do not want to provide a 

4 organization's position, but we do think this is a good 4 verbal comment today, you can go online to the 

5 start, and we want this record and decision to happen 5 regulations.gov link that we have provided in the chat, 

6 soon, that way we can get building and to doing 6 and you can provide a written comment through that 

7 extensions to it, like the greater frequency and speed 7 avenue. So today, again, we are only taking verbal 

8 people are desiring, more than two partnerships a day 8 comments as part of the official public record this 

9 and faster service, which we hope will be planned for. 9 morning. 

10 Along with that, back to Arizona service, yes, 10 Okay. We have a hand raised from Tom Tokeim. 

11 RailPAC also fully supports regional trains, and Amtrak 11 So, Tom, I have unmuted you. Go ahead and unmute 

12 has recently proposed between Tucson, Phoenix, Yuma, 12 yourself, and begin when you are ready. 

13 Coachella Valley, and LA on top of this Coachella 13 TOM TOKEIM: I am Tom Tokeim. I live in 

14 Valley Rail Service and on top of the Daily Sunset and 14 Rancho Mirage, middle of the Coachella Valley, and I 

15 we fully support an Imperial Valley extension to 15 think it is important to have a mid valley station and 

16 Calexico. 16 be very convenient. The Amtrak station in Palm Springs 

17 Thank you very much for the opportunity to 17 is somewhat removed. It is three or four miles from 

18 comment. 18 downtown. It is -- got some safety issues depending 

19 MS. ESPINOZA: Okay, Brian, thank you very much 19 upon time of day and weather issues. I really think 

20 for your comment today. I do see that we have some 20 that a mid valley location in Palm Desert would be most 

21 questions in the Q&A. We are going to hold off on 21 functional. 

22 those until toward the end of the comment period just 22 There is a new 11,000-seat arena approved and 

23 so we can get through all of our comments at this time. 23 started in development off Cook Street, and it will 

24 Okay. So we have a hand raised. This is from 24 host a Minor League Hockey team, and there will be 

25 Mariela. Mariela, go ahead and unmute yourself when 25 concerts and other events, you know, totaling about 150 

32 34 

1 you are ready. 1 a year from what they have said. And so, you know,

2 MARIELA: Hello, I am Mariela. I am a public 2 being able to get on and off the train and get to them,

3 advocate with Leadership Council, which is a state-wide 3 it would be more convenient. There is also hotels, two

4 community based organization. I am based in the 4 or three hotels off of Cook Street, and it is near the

5 Coachella Valley, and most of our work focuses on the 5 university, the Cal State San Bernardino Palm Desert

6 unincorporated communities in the Coachella Valley, 6 campus and the UC Riverside campus. So I think that it

7 like Thermal and Mecca. I am very excited to see a 7 is a safe area and there is adequate parking.

8 project like this. It is very exciting to see 8 I think it would be very functional. I think a

9 transportation being expanded to those unincorporated 9 lot of people would utilize it there, so hopefully that

10 communities who have a very hard time reaching those 10 will be taken into consideration when sites are looked

11 areas. So that's very exciting. 11 at.

12 And like the previous comment, I also think the 12 Thank you for having this presentation, it has

13 Option 1 is the best option. So in regard to the 13 been very helpful for me.

14 service, fully supportive of this project, very excited 14 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you, Tom, for your comment

15 to see it being planned. I am aware the comment is 15 this morning.

16 only for the service, but I do want to mention the 16 I don't see any hands raised at the moment, but

17 importance of considering green and zero-emission 17 again, we are going to be here until 11:00 a.m. taking

18 technology, at least at the station in Coachella 18 in your comments this morning. So if you do have a

19 Valley, because as your EIR mentioned, these 19 comment, you can go ahead and use the raise hand

20 communities are very vulnerable and already have a lot 20 feature. That is going to be located at the bottom of

21 of pollution in the area, especially from the 21 your screen. As I mentioned earlier, you can also

22 Salton Sea. That would be a very important feature to 22 provide written comments through the regulations.gov

23 keep in mind. 23 website that we have linked in the chat.

24 But fully supportive and excited for this 24 This also concludes -- well, this will be the

25 project. Thank you. 25 final portion of the agenda today. So if you have

33 35 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· · · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

1 provided a comment already and want to start your 1 IAN STEWART: My name is Ian Stewart. I am 

2 weekend, you are free to do so. We also have -- we 2 president of Rail Propulsion Systems. I want to make 

3 will have the recordings of the meetings posted to our 3 sure I stay on the scope of this meeting and give our 

4 project website sometime within the next week. 4 support as the Option 1 that has been supported by some 

5 Otherwise, you are free to spend the morning with us. 5 of the other speakers, and I want to show our support 

6 Again, we will be here until 11:00 a.m. this morning 6 for the expansion of passenger rail on all forms, be it 

7 taking on your public comments. 7 our focus, which is commuter rail and improving 

8 (Brief pause.) 8 metropolitan areas, and its interface with the larger 

9 MS. ESPINOZA: If you are still with us this 9 projects and interstate projects such as this one. 

10 morning and would like to provide an additional comment 10 Thank you all for your efforts, and if there is 

11 today, since it looks like we don't have any hands 11 anything we can do to support zero-emissions 

12 raised at the moment, and if you have already provided 12 locomotives in any of these projects, we are more than 

13 a comment and would like to utilize another three 13 happy to do so and speak with you about it. Thank you 

14 minutes, you are welcome to do so this morning. But if 14 for your time. 

15 not and you would rather provide a written comment, you 15 MS. ESPINOZA: Ian, thank you very much for your 

16 can go ahead and use that regulations.gov website that 16 comment this morning. 

17 we have linked in the chat. 17 We will be here until 11:00 a.m. this morning to 

18 Looks like we do have a hand raised from the 18 receive your comments, so if you do have a comment or 

19 Asistencia, so I am going to go ahead and unmute you. 19 if you have already given a comment this morning and 

20 If you could just please provide your name for the 20 would like to provide an additional one, you can go 

21 record, that would be great. Go ahead and let us know 21 ahead and use that raise hand feature located at the 

22 when you are ready. 22 bottom of your screen, and we will be able to take your 

23 HEATHER ROSS: Hi, my name is Heather Ross. I 23 comments in this morning. 

24 want to follow-up regarding the other two questions I 24 While we are waiting, I do want to call 

25 have posed that have not been answered. The first is 25 attention to this slide that is our, "how you can stay 

36 38 

1 with regard to the I-10 having originally been designed 1 involved." We have a number of resources in here, 

2 to have a train corridor included, and has this not 2 including the project website, our project Facebook,

3 been investigated as an option. And the other question 3 and the FRA website, and those will be really good

4 is with regard to the Ontario Airport Hyperloop 4 resources for you to continue to stay involved with the

5 development. Has this also been considered as a 5 project, keep up to date on what is going on, and the

6 transportation link to Palm Springs and Los Angeles? 6 RCTC project website in particular has our project fact

7 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for that comment. 7 sheet, the project FAQ and has a few additional

8 Right now my panel is only receiving comments right 8 resources on there in case you were looking for more

9 now. I believe after the comment period has closed, 9 information.

10 they will be able to answer your questions. So I ask 10 The RCTC project website is also going to be

11 you for some patience while we get through this 11 where you can find the recording of today's hearing, as

12 official comment period, and we will be able to provide 12 well as the recording from Tuesday's hearing, as well

13 you a clarifying answer after the close of the comment 13 as the English presentation, and we also have a Spanish

14 period. Thank you very much. I do see that you have 14 presentation, as well. So you can find all of those

15 asked us questions in the Q&A, so we have those ready 15 great resources on that website. We do also have the

16 once the comment period has closed. 16 project e-mail here, the CVRail@RCTC.org e-mail, and I

17 Okay. I don't see any more hands raised at this 17 just would like to remind you that if you do have an

18 moment. Why don't we give our panel a break, and if 18 official public comment to please use the

19 you do have a question, you can go ahead and raise your 19 regulations.gov link that we have provided in the chat.

20 hand and we will come back online and receive your 20 So anything that comes through our project e-mail will

21 comment this morning. So thank you. 21 not be considered part of the public record.

22 (Brief pause.) 22 But again, as we wait, we can go ahead and give

23 MS. ESPINOZA: I see we have a hand raised from 23 our panel a little bit of a break this morning, but we

24 Ian Stewart. Ian, if you could give us one minute as 24 will be back if anyone has either an additional comment

25 our panel comes back online. Ian, I have you unmuted. 25 or if you would like to provide your first comment this

37 39 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · · 

· · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

1 morning, so thank you. 1 official public comments until 11:00 a.m. 

2 (Brief pause.) 2 Unfortunately, you did miss the presentation earlier 

3 MS. ESPINOZA: For those still with us this 3 today, but I will share the project video right now 

4 morning, I want to let you know how you can continue to 4 just for you to be a little more acquainted with the 

5 submit comments after today. Again, we are taking your 5 project and what is going on. And then after the 

6 official public comments today during this time, and we 6 video, we can take your public comments this morning. 

7 will be here until 11:00 to do so. If you have 7 We are only taking verbal public comments. If 

8 additional comments, you can use the online form, that 8 you would like to make a comment this morning, you can 

9 is the regulations.gov website that we have shown here, 9 go ahead and utilize the raise hand feature. 

10 as well as linked in the chat, and if you would like to 10 Otherwise, I will let you know how you can continue to 

11 provide an official comment via mail, I have provided 11 provide public comments and other methods. 

12 that information on the screen, and we just ask that 12 So here is our video for you to get a little 

13 comments that are mailed in, they should be postmarked 13 more background information on our project. 

14 July 6th or earlier. So again, the official end of the 14 (Whereupon, the video presentation was played.) 

15 public document period is July 6th, so there is still 15 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you again. If you are just 

16 time left to provide your public comments. 16 joining us this morning, that was an overview of our 

17 And again, we will be here until 11:00 a.m. 17 project. This morning, we are taking official public 

18 (Brief pause.) 18 comments for the record. So if you would like to 

19 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you for those who are still 19 provide a comment to the panel this morning, you can go 

20 joining us this morning. Again, as I mentioned earlier 20 ahead and use the raise hand feature that is located at 

21 this is the final portion of today's agenda. If you 21 the bottom of your screen for your Zoom panel. If you 

22 would like to go ahead and start your weekend, we thank 22 are a call-in user, you can dial *9 to raise your hand, 

23 you for joining us this morning. We are going to be 23 and that will notify me that you would like to provide 

24 here until 11:00 a.m. to take in your verbal public 24 a verbal public comment. 

25 comments. And as a reminder this meeting is going to 25 We will be here until 11:00 a.m. to receive your 

40 42 

1 be recorded and posted to the project website following 1 comments, but if you do not wish to provide a verbal 

2 today's hearing. If you could just give us a couple of 2 comment this morning, you may use the regulations.gov 

3 days for that to be posted, all of that information 3 website that we have provided in the -- we have 

4 will be on there, as well as the presentation slides. 4 provided in the chat, or you can mail in your comment 

5 So if you would like to go ahead and start your 5 and that information is on the screen now. Again, we 

6 weekend, that would be great. 6 will be here until 11:00 a.m. Thank you for joining us 

7 Thank you again for joining us. If you have an 7 this morning. 

8 additional comment, we are going to be here until 11:00 8 And again, there are multiple ways you can 

9 a.m. 9 continue to stay involved with our project. We have a 

10 We did have a couple of questions come in 10 few options listed here. That is including the RCTC 

11 through the Q&A, and those have been responded to 11 website. That is RCTC.org/CV rail. There are a lot of 

12 through the Q&A feature. If you open up the Q&A box 12 great resources, including our project fact sheet, the 

13 and click over to the answer column, you can see 13 project FAQ. And we are going to be linking the 

14 answers to those questions that were received, as well 14 presentation in English and Spanish on there for you to 

15 as a record of the other questions that were asked 15 review afterward, and -- in case you wanted to sit a 

16 during the Q&A period. But we did answer those live, 16 little more with the presentation slides today. We 

17 so unfortunately, you won't be able to see answers to 17 will also be posting the video of today's public 

18 those questions. But again, we do have the today's 18 hearing as well as Tuesday's public hearing. 

19 hearing recorded, so if you wanted to go back and 19 So if you missed out on Tuesday's public 

20 listen to those, you will be able to do so. That 20 hearing, the content that was provided was the same, 

21 recording will be posted on the RCTC project website in 21 but you are free to review both of those, and if you 

22 a few days. 22 need to jump off this morning, go ahead and start your 

23 (Brief pause.) 23 weekend, we are going to be here until 11:00, but 

24 MS. ESPINOZA: Good morning and welcome to those 24 again, if you need to drop off and start your weekend, 

25 who are just joining us this morning. We are taking 25 you can review the public hearing video of today in a 

41 43 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· · ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· ·

1 few days, and that will be posted to the RCTC project 1 today those are some great resources to share with

2 website. 2 them.

3 We also have a lot of great information for you 3 Thank you again for those who are still with us.

4 on our project Facebook. You can go ahead and follow 4 We have about 15 more minutes for today's public

5 the project Facebook and be up to date of what is 5 hearing. If you would like to provide a comment or

6 happening with our project. And there are also a lot 6 provide a second comment to our panel, you can go ahead

7 of great resources on the FRA website that we have 7 and use the raise hand feature that is going to be

8 listed below. We also have our project e-mail listed 8 located at the bottom of your screen or in the Zoom

9 on here. 9 panel. So again, we are going to be here for another

10 But again, if you do want to provide a written 10 15 or so minutes, and we are happy to take your comment

11 comment today, that would need to go through the 11 this morning.

12 regulations.gov website. Anything that comes in 12 (Brief pause.)

13 through our project e-mail will not be considered part 13 MS. ESPINOZA: For those who are still with us

14 of the record. Again, we are taking your official 14 this morning, we are going to be here for another 10

15 public comments this morning, and we will be here until 15 minutes. So if you did have a comment you would like

16 11:00. 16 to leave for our panel this morning, you may do so for

17 (Brief pause.) 17 the next ten minutes. If not, you can leave additional

18 MS. ESPINOZA: For those of you just joining us 18 comments via the online form again. That is the

19 this morning there are multiple ways to access the 19 regulations.gov website I listed here, as well as

20 draft program EIS/EIR. You can find that document 20 posted in the chat, and we have the mailing address you

21 linked on our project website, that is RCTC.org/CVRail. 21 can send printed comments as well. So there are

22 You can also access it through the FRA website listed 22 multiple ways for you to still provide your comment

23 on the screen, as well as the regulations.gov website 23 after today, and those are going to be available to you

24 that I keep referring to. 24 until July 6th. So July 6th is the last day to provide

25 The regulations.gov link is posted in the chat, 25 official public comments, so if you didn't want to

44 46 

1 so if you would like to access that, through the 1 leave a comment today, you have until then to do so.

2 digital copies, you can do so using that link. If you 2 For those of you who are still with us this

3 would like a printed copy, those are available at the 3 morning, we are going to be here for another five

4 posted locations, the Riverside County Transportation 4 minutes, but I just wanted to call attention, again, to

5 Commission Offices. Those are only available by 5 this slide for you to stay involved in what is going on

6 appointment. So, again, there are multiple ways to 6 with the project. There are a lot of great resources

7 access the document both online and through printed 7 on our RCTC project website that is listed here, and

8 copies. 8 you can also get more updates on our project Facebook.

9 (Brief pause.) 9 And again, there are great resources also on the FRA

10 MS. ESPINOZA: Thank you to those who are still 10 website that is listed. And you can also contact us

11 with us this morning. Again, we are going to be here 11 through the CVRail@RCTC.org e-mail that is listed here.

12 until 11:00, so if you have an additional comment you 12 Again, anything that comes through that e-mail

13 would like to provide to the panel today, you can go 13 will not be considered part of the official comment

14 ahead and use your raised hand feature, and that will 14 record, but you can go ahead and utilize that

15 notify us that you would like to provide a second 15 regulations.gov website we have linked in the chat to

16 comment for the panel this morning. So again, we are 16 provide written comments, as well.

17 going to be here until 11:00 taking in your comments 17 Again, we are going to be here for a few more

18 today. 18 minutes, and then we will close out today. So if you

19 I did want to call attention to the chat 19 would like to review either today's public hearing

20 feature. We have just linked the project fact sheet 20 recording or Tuesday's public recording, those will be

21 and project FAQ, so those are some great resources if 21 made available on our RCTC project website in the

22 you have additional questions or if you would like 22 coming days.

23 additional information, and those are great resources 23 Seeing as we don't have any other hands raised

24 to share as well. If you have someone who is 24 this morning, I just would like to remind you that

25 interested in the project but wasn't able to make it 25 after today, you can submit comments through the online

45 47 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · · 

· · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · · · · · 

· ·

· · · 

· ·

· · · 

· · ·

·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

·

·

·

·

·

· · · · ·

· · · · · · · · · · · · 

· · · · · · ·  · 

·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · · · · · 

· · ·

· · ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· ·

· · · · · 

· ·

· · · · · · · · · ·

· · · · · · · · · · 

48 

1 form regulations.gov and via mail. That is going to 

2 be -- that information is on the screen now, but you 

3 can find that information on our project website. That 

4 is RCTC.org/CVRail. I do encourage you to check that 

5 following today's meeting. We are at 10:59, just about 

6 11:00. I will ask our panelists to come back on and 

7 close today's meeting so... 

8 MS. CIAMPOLILLO: Thank you, everyone, again for 

9 your time and attention on a Saturday morning. We 

10 appreciate your time here with us, your time reviewing 

11 the documents, and your time submitting comments. We 

12 really do look for public documents in projects like 

13 these to make sure that we are addressing the need that 

14 the public might see, and also some comments really do 

15 help to make our project better, both now and future 

16 Tier 2 projects that might have actual real 

17 construction things associated with them. 

18 That input that we are receiving today is 

19 useful, not only to this document but documents in the 

20 future. So again, thank you for your time. 

21 MR. PETERSON: On behalf of RCTC, I also want to 

22 thank you for your time and participation in this 

23 process. We look forward to wrapping this up by the 

24 end of the year and pressing on for the next phases of 

25 this effort. So once again, thank you for your time 

49 

1 and have a great day. 

2 

3 (Whereupon, the proceedings concluded at 11:00 

4 a.m.) 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

50 

1  Coachella Valley­San Grogonio Pass Rail Project 

2  Public Hearing #1 

3  June 26, 2021 8:30  a.m. ­ 11:00 a.m. 

4 

5  I, CHELSEA E. GIULIANY C.S.R., 13842, do hereby 

6  certify: 

7  That I am a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the 

8  State of California, duly licensed to practice; that I 

9  did report in Stenotype oral proceedings in the above 

10  mentioned hearing of the aforementioned cause via Zoom 

11  at the time and place hereinbefore set forth; that the 

12  foregoing pages numbered 1 to 45, inclusive, constitute 

13  to the best of my knowledge and belief a full, true and 

14  correct transcription from my said shorthand notes so 

15  taken for the date of Tuesday, June 22, 2021 

16  Dated at San Bernardino, California, this 24th 

17  day June 2021. 

18 

19  ______________________________________ 

20  CHELSEA E. GIULIANY, C.S.R. No. 13842 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685 YVer1f
#

#2 2:2

1

1 6:4 10:19

 11:12,24 12:6,17

 13:10 14:12,16,

 22 17:3 23:18

 31:22 33:13 38:4

10 23:5 46:14

100 22:5

10:59 48:5

11,000-seat 34:22

11:00 2:3 26:12

 35:17 36:6 38:17

 40:7,17,24 41:8

 42:1,25 43:6,23

 44:16 45:12,17

 48:6 49:3

12 23:15,22

12:30 31:15

12:40 26:3

144 6:23

15 46:4,10

150 34:25

1978 30:19

1991 9:25

2

2 13:4,7,10,12

 14:24 15:5 22:17

 23:20 48:16

2010 10:2

2013 10:2,3

2016 10:12,19

 11:1

2021 2:3

21st 17:4

26 2:3

2:00 31:15

3

3 15:5,8,23

3:20 26:5

4

45-day-review 

 17:4

5

5 23:4

501(c)(3) 30:16

5:00 31:16

6

6:23 26:5

6th 17:5 18:12

 40:14,15 46:24

7

76 31:24

9

9 26:22 42:22

90 15:15

9:00 2:3

9:30 26:2

A

a.m. 2:3 26:13

 35:17 36:6 38:17

 40:17,24 41:9

 42:1,25 43:6

 49:4

ability 7:20 23:7

Aboard 28:15

 30:21

access 11:20 19:2

 20:18 22:5 28:6

 44:19,22 45:1,7

accessibility 5:14

accommodate 

 11:17 14:11 16:7

 29:2

accomplish 5:8

 7:17 8:8

accomplished 

 23:14

achieve 8:4,19

 15:13,17 16:7

acquainted 42:4

acres 22:1

Act 12:1,3

action 14:6

actively 3:25

activities 5:10

 9:23

actual 12:9 25:8

 48:16

add 29:16 31:9

addition 8:4

additional 8:2,

 16,17 10:2 16:5

 21:19 23:25 24:6

 29:9 36:10 38:20

 39:7,24 40:8

 41:8 45:12,22,23

 46:17

address 18:8

 46:20

addresses 12:4

addressing 48:13

adequate 35:7

adjust 27:2

Administration 

 3:3 4:9 6:21

 11:14

advancing 23:3

advantage 31:17

advocate 28:21

 33:3

advocates 28:16

 30:17

affected 13:1

affordable 8:13

afternoon 9:8

 25:5,6

afterward 43:15

agencies 9:18

agenda 5:1

 18:14,15 25:16,

 19 35:25 40:21

agreement 20:20

 24:9

agreements 21:6,

 8 23:6 24:7

ahead 2:14,20,22

 4:15 19:9 21:20

 24:14 26:16

 27:1,5 28:9

 32:25 34:11

 35:19 36:16,19,

 21 37:19 38:21

 39:22 40:22 41:5

 42:9,20 43:22

 44:4 45:14 46:6

 47:14

air 8:4,19

Airport 37:4

alignment 10:10

alternative 8:12

 10:5,8,13,16,25

 14:2,5,8 31:22

alternatives 5:13

 13:25 14:1,4

Amanda 3:1,20

 6:18 18:10

Amtrak 8:21

 9:11,19 20:9,19

 21:4 24:3 27:21

 30:24 32:11

 34:16

Amtrak's 29:5

analysis 10:5,14,

 16,25 11:6

 12:12,20 13:5,7

analyzing 11:15

Angeles 4:1 6:22

 16:3 27:11 37:6

answering 18:16

answers 21:17

 41:14,17

anticipated 12:4

app 26:16

appointment 

 17:17 45:6

approved 13:11

 34:22

approximately 

 15:20

area 7:1 10:9

 13:1 15:21 33:21

 35:7

areas 7:10 11:20,

 21 12:22 13:17,

 19 16:13,15,20

 29:22 33:11 38:8

arena 34:22

Arizona 28:15,

 16,17 29:19

 30:21 32:10

arrive 25:3 26:2

arriving 25:21

Asistencia 36:19

aspects 18:21

assessment 10:5

Association 

 30:15

assume 14:14

assumptions 

 6:12

attention 3:6

 18:10 38:25

 45:19 47:4 48:9

authorization 

 9:16

authorized 9:11

availability 

 16:24 17:1,7

avenue 34:7

aware 33:15

B

back 26:5 31:12,

 20 32:10 37:20,

 25 39:24 41:19

 48:6

background 

 42:13

backlog 25:2

balance 24:21

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
bankers 31:18

bar 7:10

based 6:12 13:7

 33:4

basic 23:24

basically 4:5

 14:5 22:19 24:4

 26:1

Basin 7:25 8:11

basis 6:11 12:8

begin 23:1 28:11

 34:12

behalf 48:21

benefit 4:4 8:2

Bernardino 35:5

big-picture 10:24

bit 2:15 5:8 11:3

 12:17 13:14

 15:25 16:23

 39:23

black 16:17

blue 11:1

bottom 2:21

 18:11 19:2 21:21

 24:15 35:20

 38:22 42:21 46:8

box 11:1 18:2

 41:12

breadth 13:15,21

break 37:18

 39:23

Brian 30:8,9,11,

 13 32:19

briefly 5:2 14:13

bring 3:12

broad 12:22

 22:15

brought 5:10

build 14:2,7

 31:22

building 15:18

 22:1 32:6

built 11:7 12:10,

 11,13 13:6

 14:10,20,22

 19:14 27:13

businesses 7:21

C

Cal 35:5

calendar 23:17

Calexico 20:5,9

 27:15 32:16

California 4:7

 12:2 17:14

 30:15,19

California's 12:2

call 3:9 26:22,24

 38:24 45:19 47:4

call-in 26:21

 42:22

Caltrans 4:9

 6:21

campaigned 

 30:18

campus 35:6

capacity 8:17

capital 23:7

car 7:25 9:1

case 22:22 23:1

 39:8 43:15

centered 28:24

Central 20:24

Centro 27:15

CEQA 12:3

cetera 9:1 22:1

challenge 24:25

chance 2:9

chat 2:24 18:2

 34:5 35:23 36:17

 39:19 40:10 43:4

 44:25 45:19

 46:20 47:15

check 48:4

Ciampolillo 2:25

 3:1 48:8

city 14:16,23,25

 16:22

clarify 18:16

clarifying 5:20

 21:22 24:16

 37:13

click 2:20,22

 41:13

close 37:13 47:18

 48:7

closed 37:9,16

closer 25:8

Coachella 2:1

 3:8,24 4:1,6,24

 6:3,17,22,25 7:3,

 5 8:1,10 10:11

 14:17,21,24 15:2

 16:11,12,22 20:7

 21:25 29:20,24

 31:1,4,11,19,25

 32:13 33:5,6,18

 34:14

colleague 30:21

collectively 25:9

Colton 7:9 14:19,

 21,23 15:1,4,7,

 18,20 16:11

 31:24

column 41:13

comfortable 9:1

comment 3:7

 5:16,19,22 6:9

 18:18 22:23

 24:13 25:15

 26:10,15,20

 28:3,7,13 30:3

 32:18,20,22

 33:12,15 34:2,4,

 6 35:14,19 36:1,

 10,13,15 37:7,9,

 12,13,16,21

 38:16,18,19

 39:18,24,25

 40:11 41:8 42:8,

 19,24 43:2,4

 44:11 45:12,16

 46:5,6,10,15,22

 47:1,13

commenter 28:8

commenting 

 6:10

comments 5:23

 6:11 17:2,10,20

 18:5,8,11 26:13,

 14,19 28:23 30:6

 32:23 34:8

 35:18,22 36:7

 37:8 38:18,23

 40:5,6,8,13,16,

 25 42:1,6,7,11,

 18 43:1 44:15

 45:17 46:18,21,

 25 47:16,25

 48:11,14

Commission 

 45:5

communities 8:2

 33:6,10,20

community 4:4

 22:8 33:4

commuter 9:15

 25:1,6 38:7

commuters 

 24:24

company 20:21

complain 31:14

completed 10:25

completely 22:2

compliment 31:3

complimenting 

 31:17

conceptual 11:5

concerts 34:25

concluded 49:3

concludes 18:13

 35:24

connect 8:10

 10:10 11:22

connected 20:16

connecting 10:1

connection 4:6

connections 

 11:22

connects 20:25

consideration 

 35:10

considered 16:15

 37:5 39:21 44:13

 47:13

constrained 7:24

construction 

 11:8 12:24 13:3,

 13 31:23 48:17

Consultant 4:23

consultation 6:15

consulting 4:10

contact 6:14

 47:10

content 13:14

 43:20

context 12:21

continue 39:4

 40:4 42:10 43:9

continues 7:23

Continuing 30:8

controls 2:22

convenience 8:3

convenient 7:19

 8:9 34:16 35:3

Cook 34:23 35:4

coordinate 22:8

copies 17:7,14

 45:2,8

copy 45:3

corridor 3:25

 6:4,18 7:6,9 8:18

 9:14 10:6,10

 11:20 12:6 14:7,

 9,18,21 15:4,9,

 12 16:1,2,6,10,

 19 22:13 29:9,18

 31:9 37:2

corroborative 

 6:20

Council 33:3

country 31:6

country's 29:21

County 27:15

 45:4

couple 6:10 10:2

 15:24 20:13

 29:16 41:2,10

covers 13:16

critical 24:18

cross-country 

 24:4

current 10:7,13,

 17 11:1,10 12:10

 29:1

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
CVRAIL@ 

RCTC.ORG 

 39:16 47:11

D

daily 24:24 28:23

 29:6 31:3 32:14

Dan 19:5 20:3

 27:4,6 28:2,3

data 6:12

date 11:9 39:5

 44:5

day 7:5 14:14

 26:7 31:12 32:8

 34:19 46:24 49:1

days 41:3,22 44:1

 47:22

DC 18:10

decision 23:18

 32:5

defined 19:11

 22:3

degrading 15:16

departing 25:22

dependent 8:15

 23:6

depending 34:18

describe 11:3

Desert 15:21

 34:20 35:5

design 11:8

 13:13

designed 37:1

desiring 32:8

detail 12:17

detailed 10:4

details 11:6

determine 10:9

determined 

 15:13 22:19

determining 

 24:18

developing 11:11

development 4:5

 11:2,11 34:23

 37:5

dial 26:22 42:22

Diana 2:18

diesel 21:11

difference 15:7

digital 17:6,7

 45:2

direction 9:8

directly 20:23

disadvantaged 

 4:4 8:1

discussion 27:20

distance 6:23

 31:7

distanced 31:8

dive 5:3 6:2

document 4:11

 5:12,13,14 6:9

 11:13,25 12:3,7

 13:2,24 16:24

 17:1,5,15 18:3

 23:18 40:15

 44:20 45:7 48:19

documents 

 48:11,12,19

dot 7:12 16:17

Douglas 4:17,22,

 23

downtown 34:18

draft 2:2 6:9

 10:22 24:19

 44:20

driven 7:21

driving 7:25 8:12

drop 43:24

drove 25:10

duration 9:2

E

e-mail 39:16,20

 44:8,13 47:11,12

earlier 16:3

 18:12 35:21

 40:14,20 42:2

early 2:8 9:24

east 6:25 7:3,9

 9:6 14:18 15:1,7

 31:4

eastern 7:8 14:9,

 16,18,23,24

 15:4,6,9 16:1,10,

 12,19,20

economic 4:5

effects 12:4,20,23

efficiently 9:14

effort 6:20 10:4,

 13 48:25

efforts 20:24

 22:12 38:10

EIR 31:20 33:19

EIS/EIR 2:2

 10:19,22 11:2,

 12,24 17:3 44:20

EL 27:15

elaborate 22:7

electronically 

 17:11

embarked 10:4

encourage 48:4

end 4:18 5:17 9:6

 10:12 17:5 23:17

 32:22 40:14

 48:24

engineering 11:5

English 39:13

 43:14

enter 24:14

entire 13:19

environmental 

 3:1 4:11 5:12,24

 6:4,6,9 10:15,18

 11:6,25 12:1,2,3,

 4,7,9,19,22 13:5,

 15,21,24 16:24

 17:5,14 23:18,21

environmentally 

 21:15

envisioned 9:4

ESPINOZA 2:17

 18:24 19:17

 20:2,13 21:18

 22:10,20 23:10,

 23 24:11 25:11,

 25 26:8 28:2

 30:6 32:19 34:1

 35:14 36:9 37:7,

 23 38:15 40:3,19

 41:24 42:15

 44:18 45:10

 46:13

essentially 10:6

evaluate 12:20

evaluated 5:13

 10:8

evening 29:2

events 34:25

excellent 28:19

exception 16:21

excited 3:12 4:12

 27:18 33:7,14,24

exciting 33:8,11

excuse 16:13

 30:9

existing 8:10

 14:20 16:6,16

 20:18,23 21:5,11

 32:1

exists 7:12

expand 19:15

expanded 7:13

 33:9

expanding 20:9

expansion 16:8

 38:6

expected 23:13

expense 29:10

expert 6:13

explain 6:11

explore 21:16

express 28:18

extend 15:9

extended 20:5

extends 7:2

 15:19 16:10

extension 20:11

 32:15

extensions 27:14

 29:11 30:3 32:7

extent 15:22

extra 31:10

F

Facebook 39:2

 44:4,5 47:8

facilities 16:7

fact 28:24 39:6

 43:12 45:20

factors 24:18

facts 6:12,13

fall 10:19

fantastic 21:1

FAQ 39:7 43:13

 45:21

faster 8:9 30:1

 32:9

fastest 19:19

feasibility 9:25

 10:2

feature 21:21

 24:14 26:16

 31:21 33:22

 35:20 38:21

 41:12 42:9,20

 45:14,20 46:7

features 25:7

federal 3:2 4:9

 6:20 9:10,16

 11:14 12:1,18

feedback 3:13,14

feeder 21:1

feel 29:10,18

final 11:8 20:7

 25:19 35:25

 40:21

finalized 10:14

 21:8

find 25:9 39:11,

 14 44:20 48:3

Firstly 8:8,23

flyover 4:16

focus 6:2 24:23

 31:20 38:7

focuses 33:5

focusing 19:16

folks 3:9,15

 18:22

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
follow 2:24 30:20

 44:4

follow-up 20:17

 36:24

forget 28:22

form 17:6,25

 29:23 40:8 46:18

 48:1

forms 38:6

forward 10:17

 13:11 20:8 23:20

 27:18 48:23

foundation 12:8

foundational 5:7

 7:16

FRA 11:14 17:9

 18:9 39:3 44:7,

 22 47:9

FRA's 30:25

free 36:2,5 43:21

freight 9:13

 11:19 15:16 21:6

frequency 19:7

 27:16 29:15 32:7

frequent 8:9

friendly 21:15

fruition 29:14

full 13:17,21 15:3

Fullerton 7:7

 16:4

fully 27:8 28:1

 31:21 32:11,15

 33:14,24

functional 34:21

 35:8

funded 9:18

funding 23:8,20

 27:25

funds 9:18

future 19:14

 20:11 21:3,7

 48:15,20

G

give 2:7,11 5:19,

 23 9:4 18:19

 27:1 37:18,24

 38:3 39:22 41:2

globe 2:20

goal 25:2

goals 8:4,19

good 2:6,17,25

 4:22 19:21 27:6

 28:12 30:11 32:4

 39:3 41:24

governing 5:7

great 23:2 24:2,

 11,20 27:7 36:21

 39:15 41:6 43:12

 44:3,7 45:21,23

 46:1 47:6,9 49:1

greater 8:11 32:7

green 33:17

Grogonio 2:1

 6:3,17

group 28:15

 30:16

grow 7:23

growth 8:18

H

half 7:8 14:18

 19:23

hand 26:16,22

 30:8 32:24 34:10

 35:19 36:18

 37:20,23 38:21

 42:9,20,22 45:14

 46:7

hands 27:3 35:16

 36:11 37:17

 47:23

happen 13:4

 26:21 32:5

happening 44:6

happy 21:22

 38:13 46:10

hard 17:7,14

 33:10

Harell 22:25

HDR 4:10

hearing 2:2

 17:24 39:11,12

 41:2,19 43:18,

 20,25 46:5 47:19

hearings 17:22,

 23

Heather 36:23

helpful 35:13

high-speed 

 20:14,16,23 21:3

higher 12:19

history 5:9 9:22

Hockey 34:24

hold 32:21

hope 32:9

hoping 23:17

host 34:24

hotels 35:3,4

hour 19:23

hours 8:24 27:11,

 12 31:18

housekeeping 

 2:15

Hyperloop 37:4

I

I-10 37:1

Ian 37:24,25

 38:1,15

icon 2:20

idea 9:4,7

identified 6:7

 12:14 13:9 19:13

identifies 12:22,

 24

identify 22:17

identifying 

 11:16,20

impact 3:16 6:4,5

impacts 6:6

 13:17,18

Imperial 27:15

 32:15

implement 21:13

implementations 

 22:18

implemented 

 23:5

implementing 

 12:21

importance 

 33:17

important 29:11

 33:22 34:15

importantly 3:6

improved 28:16

 30:18

improvement 

 29:5

improvements 

 9:12 13:6,8 16:5

 23:7

improving 8:14

 38:7

included 37:2

including 39:2

 43:10,12

incorporates 

 13:22

increase 19:6

 29:8,18

Indio 6:25 10:1

 14:25 15:4,6,10,

 19 16:19 24:1

 26:2,5

individually 14:4

information 28:6

 39:9 40:12 41:3

 42:13 43:5 44:3

 45:23 48:2,3

infrastructure 

 11:16 13:6,8

 14:10,19 19:14

 31:2

initial 9:3,25

 25:10

initially 7:4

 22:14

initiated 10:21

 14:15

input 4:12 48:18

intended 8:8

intercity 3:25

 8:21,23 9:10,17

 20:19 21:4

intercitypassenger 7:19

intercity-rail 

 14:7

interested 45:25

interface 38:8

interpretation 

 2:19

interpreter 2:19

interstate 38:9

introduction 

 3:18

introductions 

 6:19

investigated 37:3

involved 21:6

 39:1,4 43:9 47:5

involves 11:14

issues 34:18,19

J

JD 4:17,23 18:24

John 22:25 23:11

join 2:9

joining 2:7,10

 3:21 26:11 34:2

 40:20,23 41:7,25

 42:16 43:6 44:18

joint 11:24

July 10:12 17:5

 18:12 40:14,15

 46:24

jump 43:22

JUNE 2:3

K

keeping 30:22

key 25:7

kicked 10:20

kind 25:3,5,10

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
L

LA 6:24 7:2,5,7,

 25 8:11 10:1,9,

 10 19:19 20:25

 22:7 24:1,4,25

 25:21 26:3 28:25

 29:23 31:12

 32:13

large 29:22

larger 8:25 38:8

largest 29:22

last-minute 

 25:14

Lastly 9:17 18:7

late 29:2 31:12,

 16

law 9:10

lead 11:7

leadership 3:24

 33:3

leading 10:22

League 34:24

leave 26:4 46:16,

 17 47:1

leaves 29:1

led 9:23

left 10:25 40:16

legal 9:16

length 15:3 31:24

level 11:24 12:20

levels 11:15

 19:12

libraries 17:16

Liebman 28:8,

 12,14 30:21

light 11:1

limited 7:24 24:3

 28:23 29:1 30:22

 31:3,8,9,13,14

lines 16:14

link 18:1 27:22,

 25 29:21 34:5

 37:6 39:19 44:25

 45:2

linked 2:23 35:23

 36:17 40:10

 44:21 45:20

 47:15

linking 43:13

list 13:19 17:16

listed 43:10 44:8,

 22 46:19 47:7,

 10,11

listen 41:20

live 34:13 41:16

local 9:18

located 2:21

 24:15 35:20

 38:21 42:20 46:8

location 16:16

 34:20

locations 17:13

 22:3 45:4

locomotives 

 21:14 38:12

Loera 20:14

long 6:5 8:23

 9:12 25:21 31:7

longer 26:6

 27:10

looked 24:21

 35:10

Los 4:1 6:22 16:3

 27:10 37:6

lose 29:7

lot 27:8,23 29:19

 33:20 35:9 43:11

 44:3,6 47:6

lots 3:9

lounge 9:1

love 27:22,25

M

made 9:12 17:6,

 15 47:21

mail 18:7,11

 40:11 43:4 48:1

mailed 40:13

mailing 18:8

 46:20

main 31:21

mainline 31:23

major 29:7

make 2:8 3:14

 26:4 27:9 38:2

 42:8 45:25

 48:13,15

making 20:1

Manager 3:23

 4:17,24

map 7:1,7 16:11

maps 15:24

Mariela 20:14

 32:25 33:2 34:2

market 10:5

markets 31:6

materials 4:14

Mecca 33:7

meet 7:20 11:13

meeting 6:8 38:3

 40:25 48:5,7

meetings 10:20

 36:3

meets 11:25

mention 14:13

 33:16

mentioned 6:19

 7:15 11:10 29:15

 31:3 33:19 35:21

 40:20

methods 42:11

Metrolink 8:22

 9:15 27:21

metropolitan 

 29:22 38:8

Mexicali 20:5,9

 27:16

mid 10:23 21:25

 34:15,20

mid-valley 15:21

middle 34:14

midmorning 

 25:3

miles 6:23 31:24

 34:17

milestone 4:10

mind 33:23

minimum 19:12

Minor 34:24

minute 2:11 5:5

 11:4 37:24

minutes 2:7

 26:14 36:14

 46:4,10,15,17

 47:4,18

Mirage 15:20

 34:14

missed 43:19

mitigation 22:12,

 16

mitigations 

 22:18

mix 29:12

mobility 4:3 7:20

 29:9 30:18

mode 8:16

modeling 11:17

 15:12

moment 35:16

 36:12 37:18

moments 22:22

 25:13

months 23:14,15,

 16,22

morning 2:6,17,

 18,25 3:5,22

 4:22 5:1,2 9:7

 21:23 26:12 27:6

 28:12 30:4,11

 31:15,16 34:2,9

 35:15,18 36:5,6,

 10,14 37:21

 38:16,17,19,23

 39:23 40:1,4,20,

 23 41:24,25

 42:6,8,16,17,19

 43:2,7,22 44:15,

 19 45:11,16

 46:11,14,16

 47:3,24 48:9

move 22:23

 23:20 26:10

moved 10:17

 30:1

moving 18:25

multiple 43:8

 44:19 45:6 46:22

N

National 12:1

natural 12:25

nature 20:19

necessarily 22:6

 24:24

needed 22:1

negotiations 

 30:24,25

NEPA 12:1

Nevada 30:15,19

nice 28:25

night 31:12

no-build 14:1,5

non-profit 28:15

note 4:12 17:16

 18:10

noted 16:3

notes 6:10

notify 26:17,23

 42:23 45:15

number 2:8 3:24

 14:12,16,24

 17:13 18:3 21:12

 39:1

O

objectives 8:7

 15:14,17 16:8

occur 13:18

offices 17:18 45:5

official 5:22 6:3

 22:23 24:12

 25:15 26:10,20

 34:8 37:12 39:18

 40:6,11,14 42:1,

 17 44:14 46:25

 47:13

officials 3:24

on-time 15:15

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
online 17:25 18:5

 34:4 37:20,25

 40:8 45:7 46:18

 47:25

Ontario 37:4

open 21:20 41:12

operate 9:5,11

 15:15

operating 29:10

operation 11:8,

 18 12:24 25:8

operations 11:18

 15:12,16

opinions 6:13

opportunities 

 4:18 5:15 21:15

opportunity 4:3

 5:19 6:8 17:23

 18:19 24:8 28:13

 29:21 30:3,13

 32:17

option 14:12,16,

 22,24 15:2,5,8,

 23 31:22 33:13

 37:3 38:4

options 7:24 8:14

 14:3,8,13 22:9,

 15 43:10

orange 7:10,12

order 11:16

 14:10

organization 

 33:4

organization's 

 32:4

originally 37:1

Orleans 24:5

Orozco 2:18

outcome 10:15

overnight 26:6

overview 4:17

 5:4 6:1 10:24

 42:16

overviews 22:15

P

p.m. 26:3,5

Pacific 9:20

 31:25

Palm 7:12 15:21

 16:16 19:19 24:5

 31:15 34:16,20

 35:5 37:6

panel 19:3 21:20

 24:12 26:12

 37:8,18,25 39:23

 42:19,21 45:13,

 16 46:6,9,16

panelists 48:6

parking 22:1,5

 35:7

part 5:18 7:6

 16:6 18:14,15,20

 26:20 34:8 39:21

 44:13 47:13

participation 

 48:22

partners 4:8

partnerships 

 32:8

Pass 2:1 6:3,18

passenger 6:21

 9:13 11:18 15:14

 28:16 30:15,18

 32:3 38:6

patience 37:11

pause 36:8 37:22

 40:2,18 41:23

 44:17 45:9 46:12

peak 25:2,4,6

 31:10

people 2:8 8:15

 21:2 22:22 25:13

 31:13 32:8 35:9

percent 15:15

performance 

 15:15

period 5:18,19,

 21,22 17:4 18:18

 22:23 24:13

 25:6,15 26:10,20

 32:22 37:9,12,

 14,16 40:15

 41:16

periods 25:2

person 6:14

Peterson 2:6

 3:20,22 19:9,21

 20:6,22 22:2,14

 23:2,16 24:2,20

 25:23 26:1 48:21

phase 10:6,7

 11:1,4,10 12:10

phases 12:8

 48:24

Phoenix 20:10

 27:15 29:11,17,

 23 32:12

place 18:4 20:24

plan 11:2,11

 25:10

planned 22:12

 32:9 33:15

planning 5:9

 9:24 13:2 23:21

platform 22:6

played 4:21

 42:14

point 5:10 9:24

 10:14 20:6,7

 21:11 24:8 25:13

Policy 12:1

pollution 33:21

popular 19:7

 27:17

portion 19:1

 25:18 35:25

 40:21

posed 36:25

position 23:19

 32:4

posted 36:3 41:1,

 3,21 44:1,25

 45:4 46:20

posting 28:4

 43:17

postmarked 

 18:12 40:13

potential 3:15

 6:6,7 7:9,11

 12:22 13:13,17,

 18 19:13 20:10

 22:15 24:22 26:6

potentially 7:8

 12:25 14:17

 19:22 20:4 22:5

predecessor 10:6

prefer 18:7

preferable 8:24

preferred 10:9,

 16 31:22

prepared 10:22

 11:13

presentation 

 2:23 4:21,25 5:3,

 17 18:13 27:7

 28:5,20 30:12

 35:12 39:13,14

 41:4 42:2,14

 43:14,16

president 28:14

 30:14 38:2

pressing 48:24

preview 4:25

previous 16:21

 33:12

printed 45:3,7

 46:21

prior 5:9 21:16

priorities 28:22

priority 29:7

private 9:11

procedural 13:2

proceed 25:15

proceedings 49:3

process 4:18 5:25

 9:24 10:24 11:11

 12:18 13:12

 48:23

professionals 

 30:17

program 5:9 6:4,

 18 10:19 11:24

 12:23 17:3 28:19

 44:20

program-level 

 11:2,12 12:7,18

programs 9:23

project 2:1 3:7,8,

 11,14,15 4:2,16,

 23,24 5:5,7,21,

 24 6:7 7:16 11:4

 13:4 18:3,17,20

 20:15,17,21,22

 23:3,14,21 27:8,

 13,24 28:5 29:13

 30:5,23 33:8,14,

 25 36:4 39:2,5,6,

 7,10,16,20 41:1,

 21 42:3,5,13,17

 43:9,12,13 44:1,

 4,5,6,8,13,21

 45:20,21,25

 47:6,7,8,21 48:3,

 15

project-level 

 13:5

projects 11:6

 12:9,11,13 13:12

 38:9,12 48:12,16

proposed 12:11

 15:22 32:12

proposing 12:5

Propulsion 38:2

Protection 3:2

proves 19:7

provide 4:3,17

 5:4 6:8,11 7:18

 8:8,11,17 17:2

 18:5 27:22 34:3,

 6 35:22 36:10,

 15,20 37:12

 38:20 39:25

 40:11,16 42:11,

 19,23 43:1 44:10

 45:13,15 46:5,6,

 22,24 47:16

provided 11:21

 18:2 34:5 36:1,

 12 39:19 40:11

 43:3,4,20

providing 4:25

public 2:2 5:19,

 22 10:20,23

 17:16,21,22,24

 33:2 34:8 36:7

 39:18,21 40:6,

 15,16,24 42:1,6,

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
 7,11,17,24

 43:17,18,19,25

 44:15 46:4,25

 47:19,20 48:12,

 14

pull 25:23

purple 16:14

purpose 5:6 7:15,

 17,21

pursuing 3:25

 23:3

put 4:13 9:3

Q

Q&a 5:21 19:1,2

 21:19,21 24:14

 32:21 37:15

 41:11,12,16

Q&as 25:12

quality 8:4,19

 12:3

question 8:20

 18:14 19:5,17,21

 20:2,3,4,15,17

 21:9,18,24

 22:10,25 23:2,

 10,12,23 24:2,

 12,17,20 25:20

 26:9 27:23 28:23

 37:3,19

question-andanswer 5:18

questions 4:19

 5:20 18:16,19,23

 19:1 20:13

 21:17,19,22

 22:21,22 24:16

 25:14 28:24

 32:21 36:24

 37:10,15 41:10,

 14,15,18 45:22

quickly 23:3 30:2

quote/unquote 

 31:18

R

radar 30:22

rail 2:1 3:8,23,25

 4:24 6:3,18,22

 7:10,19 8:21

 9:10,13,17 10:8,

 10 11:18,19,23

 12:5 14:20

 20:15,16,23

 21:3,5 24:25

 28:16 30:14,19

 31:1,4,19 32:14

 38:2,6,7 43:11

Railpac 30:16

 31:21 32:11

railroad 3:2 4:9

 6:20 11:14 24:7

 30:17

Railroad's 31:25

railroads 9:12

 21:6

railway 20:18

railways 21:10

raise 26:16,22

 35:19 37:19

 38:21 42:9,20,22

 46:7

raised 27:3 30:8

 32:24 34:10

 35:16 36:12,18

 37:17,23 45:14

 47:23

Rancho 15:20

 34:14

range 13:17

RCTC 3:23 6:21

 9:24 10:3 17:8,

 17 30:25 39:6,10

 41:21 43:10 44:1

 47:7,21 48:21

RCTC.ORG/CV 

 43:11

Rctc.org/cvrail. 

 44:21 48:4

reach 21:5

reaching 33:10

read 13:18 16:25

 27:25

reading 19:4

ready 24:10 27:5

 28:11 33:1 34:12

 36:22 37:15

real 48:16

reality 31:1

reason 9:9

reasonable 6:12

reasons 8:22

 29:12

receive 37:20

 38:18 42:25

received 41:14

receiving 37:8

 48:18

recently 32:12

recognize 30:23

recommendation 

 27:9

record 5:24

 23:17 28:10 32:5

 34:8 36:21 39:21

 41:15 42:18

 44:14 47:14

recorded 4:13

 41:1,19

recording 39:11,

 12 41:21 47:20

recordings 36:3

referring 44:24

regard 33:13

 37:1,4

region 4:4 7:23

 8:5,19 29:24

regional 8:14

 11:22 12:21 31:4

 32:11

regular 18:7

regulations.gov 

 17:9,25 18:5

 34:5 35:22 36:16

 39:19 40:9 43:2

 44:12,23,25

 46:19 47:15 48:1

relate 14:9

related 20:23

relation 11:19

relative 5:11

release 4:11

 10:22

released 17:3

reliable 7:18 8:3,

 12

remember 26:25

 30:10

remind 39:17

 47:24

reminder 18:15

 28:4 34:3 40:25

removed 34:17

Report 6:5

requirements 

 12:19 23:7

residents 7:20

resources 12:25

 39:1,4,8,15

 43:12 44:7

 45:21,23 46:1

 47:6,9

responded 41:11

rest 3:18 4:6

return 28:25

review 5:15,24

 10:23 16:25

 17:15 43:15,21,

 25 47:19

reviewing 48:10

riders 24:22

riding 27:18

right-of-ways 

 21:5

Riverside 7:7

 16:4 35:6 45:4

Robertson 22:11

Ross 36:23

roundtrip 31:10

roundtrips 7:5

 14:14 19:12

 29:16,17

route 10:16

 11:17,23 14:2

 16:14,16 29:4

routes 10:8

run 19:19,24

 24:5,8

runs 24:3

rush 25:6

Ryan 24:17,20

 25:11

S

safe 7:18 35:7

safety 34:18

Salton 33:22

same-day 26:4

 27:10 28:25

San 22:12 35:5

satisfies 12:18

Saturday 3:5

 48:9

scenario 15:19

scenes 3:10

schedule 19:23

 25:24 29:1 30:1

schedules 8:12

 9:3 24:19,21

 25:10 31:10

scope 38:3

scoping 10:20

screen 2:21 5:1

 7:2 13:16,20

 18:1 19:3 21:21

 24:15 27:2 35:21

 38:22 40:12

 42:21 43:5 44:23

 46:8 48:2

SDP 11:12

Sea 33:22

seating 8:25 9:1

section 16:2,10

sections 16:1

secure 23:8

seek 23:20

selected 10:17

send 46:21

sense 13:20

separate 30:25

serve 8:17

served 31:7

service 6:4,18,22,

 24 7:4,14,18,19

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
 8:3,7,9,13,21,23

 9:4,10,13,14,15,

 17 10:1 11:2,9,

 11,15,17,19,22

 12:5,12,21 14:3,

 7,11,12,13,15,

 22,24 15:2,5,8,

 14,17,23 16:7,8

 19:7,11,15,19

 20:4,10,19,25

 21:1,2,7,13 23:1,

 5,24 24:1,6,9

 26:7 27:17 29:5,

 18 30:2 31:1,4,

 18 32:9,10,14

 33:14,16

services 8:10

 9:19 11:23 21:4

share 42:3 45:24

 46:1

sheet 39:7 43:12

 45:20

Sheldon 3:17,22

 6:19 19:9

shelters 22:6

shorter 31:8

show 3:12 13:20

 38:5

shown 7:1,10

 16:17 17:7 40:9

shows 25:24

sight 29:7

significant 10:4

 25:1

similar 9:19 15:5

Simon 19:18

 23:24 25:20

sit 43:15

site 13:7

sites 35:10

skip 19:25

slide 8:6 9:3,21

 12:16 13:23,25

 16:9,18,21 17:8,

 12,19 25:24 28:7

 38:25 47:5

slides 28:5 41:4

 43:16

sooner 23:25

sort 24:9

sound 22:16,18

south 30:14

southern 4:7

 17:13

southwest 28:17

spaces 22:5

Spanish 2:18,19,

 22,23 39:13

 43:14

speak 26:18,23

 30:13 38:13

speaker 26:14

speakers 38:5

Specialist 3:2

specific 8:7 11:6

 12:10 13:7,8

 18:2 22:17,18

specifically 12:14

 18:3 19:15,22

specifics 5:11

speed 32:7

spend 5:5 36:5

spending 3:4

Springs 7:12

 16:16 19:19 24:5

 31:15 34:16 37:6

start 6:24 20:22

 25:18 32:5 36:1

 40:22 41:5

 43:22,24

started 2:12,14,

 15 4:15 9:24

 10:13 23:25 27:1

 34:23

starting 10:3,12

state 9:18,19

 12:2,19 28:10

 35:5

state-wide 33:3

stated 27:14

statement 5:6,7

 7:15,16

Statement/ 

environmental 

 6:5

station 6:24 7:9,

 12 11:20,21

 15:2,21 16:16,20

 21:1,25 22:7

 25:1,4,6 26:3,4

 33:18 34:15,16

stations 7:6,8,11,

 14 14:17,18

 15:1,7 16:3,5,15

 21:10 22:3,4,9

 23:25

stay 38:3,25 39:4

 43:9 47:5

steps 13:11 23:22

Stevie 18:22

Stewart 37:24

 38:1

stop 24:4

stopping 19:20

 31:14

stops 19:25 20:1

 29:3,4

Street 34:23 35:4

studied 13:13

 19:22

studies 9:25 10:3,

 21 12:9 13:24

 20:7,8

study 6:7,21 7:1

 10:7,12,18 13:1,

 15,21 15:11

 19:11,15

studying 7:4

 12:6,10,11

subdivision 32:1

submit 6:14

 17:20,23 40:5

 47:25

submitted 17:10

submitting 48:11

subsequent 

 10:20 11:4 12:8

 13:16

success 30:4

summarizes 

 13:25

Sunset 24:3

 28:23 29:1,6

 30:22 31:3,7,9,

 13,14 32:14

support 27:8

 28:18 32:15

 38:4,5,11

supported 6:13

 38:4

supportive 

 29:13,25 33:14,

 24

supports 31:21

 32:11

Surfliner 9:20

Systems 38:2

T

taking 20:24

 26:19 34:7 35:17

 36:7 40:5 41:25

 42:7,17 44:14

 45:17

talk 3:18 5:8,12

 16:23,25

talked 14:14

talking 3:7 5:6

team 3:8 4:10,23

 34:24

technical 10:21

 11:13 15:11

technically 30:24

technology 21:9,

 11 33:18

ten 46:17

terminate 6:25

terminus 7:3

 14:9,16,23,25

 15:4,6,10 16:12,

 20

Thermal 33:7

thicker 16:13

thing 25:5

things 48:17

ticket 31:11

Tier 6:4 10:19

 11:12,24 12:6,17

 13:4,7,10,12

 17:3 22:17

 23:18,20 48:16

time 3:4,5 6:16

 13:9 24:6 27:10,

 19 32:23 33:10

 34:19 38:14

 40:6,16 48:9,10,

 11,20,22,25

times 19:24

Timoteo 22:12

today 3:4,8,9,11,

 18 4:12 6:2,8

 7:13 17:22,23

 19:1,5 21:20

 22:23 24:13,16

 26:10,15 27:1

 28:3,8 32:20

 34:4,7 35:25

 36:11 40:5,6

 42:3 43:16,25

 44:11 45:13,18

 46:1,23 47:1,18,

 25 48:18

today's 6:2 25:15

 39:11 40:21

 41:2,18 43:17

 46:4 47:19 48:5,

 7

Todd 28:8,9,12,

 14 30:7,21 31:3

Tokeim 34:10,13

Tom 21:24

 23:11,13 34:10,

 11,13 35:14

top 28:22 32:13,

 14

topic 13:17

totaling 34:25

tourism 24:23

track 9:12 14:19,

 22 15:3,8,18,19,

 22 16:5 19:24

 20:21 31:23 32:3

track-level 22:17

tracks 14:20 24:1

Traditionally 

 22:4

traffic 24:25 25:1

train 8:23,25

 10:1 11:15

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685
 15:12,16 24:3

 26:2 31:7 35:2

 37:2

trains 9:20 15:14

 32:11

transformational 

 4:2

transit 8:3,10,15

 11:23

transportation 

 8:13,17 24:23

 33:9 37:6 45:4

travel 7:24 8:14,

 16

traveling 29:20

travellers 29:19

treatments 22:16

tremendous 

 29:21

trip 8:23 9:2,7

 25:5 26:4

trips 26:6 31:8

Tucson 29:12,17,

 23 32:12

Tuesday's 39:12

 43:18,19 47:20

turn 3:17

turn-around 

 27:10

type 8:3,21,25

 9:25

types 12:12

U

UC 35:6

ultimately 11:7

unclear 18:20

understand 5:20

 18:21 20:17 27:7

 28:1

understanding 

 18:17

unincorporated 

 33:6,9

Union 6:24 20:25

 22:7 24:25 25:4,

 5 26:3,4 31:25

university 35:5

unmute 26:24,25

 27:4,5 28:9,10

 30:10 32:25

 34:11 36:19

unmuted 34:11

 37:25

updates 47:8

urge 29:7

user 42:22

users 26:21

utilize 9:14 35:9

 36:13 42:9 47:14

V

valley 3:8,24 4:1,

 6,24 6:23 7:5

 8:1,11 10:11

 20:24 21:25

 29:20,24 31:1,4,

 11,19,25 32:13,

 14,15 33:5,6,19

 34:14,15,20

Valley-san 2:1

 6:3,17

verbal 26:15,19

 34:4,7 40:24

 42:7,24 43:1

versa 31:13

vice 30:14

video 4:16,20,21

 42:3,6,12,14

 43:17,25

vise 31:13

visitors 7:21

volunteer 30:16

vulnerable 33:20

W

wait 22:21 23:9

 25:13 39:22

waiting 38:24

wanted 13:19

 26:3 27:6 28:17

 30:20 41:19

 43:15 47:4

Washington 

 18:10

ways 5:16 17:1,

 21 43:8 44:19

 45:6 46:22

weather 34:19

Webinar 2:16

website 4:13,14

 17:8,9,10,25

 18:6 28:5 35:23

 36:4,16 39:2,3,6,

 10,15 40:9 41:1,

 21 43:3,11 44:2,

 7,12,21,22,23

 46:19 47:7,10,

 15,21 48:3

week 36:4

weekend 36:2

 40:22 41:6

 43:23,24

Wentzel 19:5

 20:3 27:6 28:3

west 6:24 7:2 9:6

western 7:6

 15:25 16:2

whole-hearted 

 28:18

wholeheartedly 

 29:25

windows 25:4

work 3:13 25:9

 33:5

working 3:10,23

 29:5

works 9:9

wrapping 48:23

writing 18:8

written 34:6

 35:22 36:15

 44:10 47:16

Y

Yanity 30:9,11,

 14

year 10:23 23:17

 35:1 48:24

years 3:10,25

 21:12 23:5

Yuma 20:10

 27:14 29:11,17

 32:1,12

Z

zero-emission 

 33:17

zero-emissions 

 21:14 38:11

zoom 2:21 15:25

 19:3 26:16 42:21

 46:8

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685

COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GROGONIO RAIL PROJECT

Public Hearing - 2 on 06/26/2021

www.regalcourtreporting.com

866-228-2685