HomeMy WebLinkAbout072894 PC Workshop MinutesPRESENT: 4
ABSENT: I
JOHNSON RANCH
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
MINUTES
JULY 28, 1994
COMMISSIONERS: Ford, Fahey, Hoagland and Blair
COMMISSIONERS: Salyer
Associate Planner, Saied Naaseh, presented the Staff Report.
Jim Fergus gave a brief overview of the project.
Larry Markham, Project Consultant, discussed all the approved and proposed Specific
Plans in the vicinity of the project. He indicated that the nearest winery is one Section
or one mile away from the site. He also talked about the open space connecting
Skunk Hollow with Lake Skinner and the proposed Domenigoni Reservoir through
Johnson Ranch.
Chairman Ford requested information regarding the land uses abutting the site. Mr.
Markham explained that Mountain View Specific Plan is approved to the west of the
site with approved vesting tentative tract maps, Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan is
being proposed to the south, preserve area and estate lots are located to the north and
estate lots are to the east.
John Canty, Project Engineer, explained project drainage through the Tucalota and
Santa Gertrudis Creeks and explained the access to the site. Access will be provided
from Butterfield Stage Road to Washington Street to the north and south, minor rural
roads to the east, Murrieta Hot Springs and the extension of Buck Road to the west.
Chairman Ford inquired about the acquired right of way for the extension of Murrieta
Hot Springs Road and Buck Road. Mr. Cant¥ replied that the Murrieta Hot Springs
right of way was secured but the extension of Buck Road is not.
Mr. Canty explained the first phase of the project (500 units) will be using the existing
water tank on the Mountain view site; however, eventually the project will be self
sufficient with the construction of two water tanks, one on-site to the north and the
other off-site to the east of the site. He also indicated that the water system is
adequate to serve this project and is acceptable to Eastern Municipal Water District
(EMWD). Commissioner Hoagland asked why the site was not being annexed to the
Rancho California Water District's boundary? Mr. Canty replied that it is not required.
Bob Luchens, a nearby resident, asked why was the water tank for Mountain View
used when it was not designed for this project and was paid for by Assessment
R:~PLANNI~OO'OI-I~SOI~.k-flN 11/22/94 10b I
District 161 funds? Mr. Canty replied that the project will use it only for the first 500
units.
Mr. Canty talked about the sewer system and explained that the site drains southeast
to northwest. Commissioner Hoagland asked if the sewer system is adequate and
whether the project is within AD 161 ? Mr. Canty replied that the sewer system for
the project is adequate, is acceptable to EMWD and the project is outside the
boundaries of AD 161. Mr. Canty also stated that EMWD oversized the sewer line on
Murrieta Hot Springs Road through AD 161 funds. The first phase of the project (500
units) will be served by a gravity sewer line which would carry the sewage to a lift
station and it would take it Murrieta Hot Springs Road sewer line; however, future
facilities will be built for the project.
Bob Davis , Project Traffic Engineer, explained the traffic impacts of the project.
Three different analysis were included in the Traffic study, existing plus project
conditions, 2015 forecast and area build-out forecast. The primary access to the site
is provided through Murrieta Hot Springs Road, Nicolas Road, Butterfield Stage Road,
Washington Street, Promontory Road and Borel Road. The Project will generate
approximately 61,500 trips per day. The 2015 with project conditions were better
than the without project conditions since the project will serve the needs of the
surrounding communities. The cost to provide infrastructure is estimated to be
$45,000,000.00 with the first phase including $7,000,000.00.
The Anza Road connection in the General Plan was forecasted to produce 4000-7000
trips per day. These trips were mainly generated by Johnson Ranch which was a
smaller project than the currently proposed project. A General Plan Amendment will
be necessary to implement the project.
The phasing of improvements will be by roadway utilization. A two lane improvement
to Murrieta Hot Springs Road will connect the site to the existing Murrieta Hot Springs
Road for the first 500 units without needing a secondary access. Subsequent focused
Traffic Impact Reports will be prepared for projects that generate over 400 peak hour
trips. These reports will identify the necessary mitigation measures.
Commissioner Blair asked if the traffic study supported the elimination of Anza Road.
Mr. Davis indicated that this road was never analyzed in the traffic study, since the
applicant did not propose it as a part of his project. Mr. Davis also added that Anza
Road has always been on the County General Plan but has never had high numbers
assigned to it.
R:\PLANNING~IOI-INSON.MIN 11/22/94 klb ~
Chairman Ford indicated that the 2000 daily trips generated by the project on Borel
Road seems to be a lot of trips for a two (2) lane dirt road. Mr. Davis indicated that
those trips are generated because the project becomes a magnet to attract trips.
Chairman Ford asked Staff whether the Anza Road connection is necessary. Mr.
Casey replied that it is.
John Yeager, Project Attorney, talked about project implementation, land dedication
and financing. Over 400 acres of open space is proposed on the project. Mr. Yeager
indicated that agencies in need of land are usually cash poor; therefore, Johnson
Ranch will be dedicating an open space corridor to the Riverside County Habitat
Conservation Agency (RCHCA). This dedication will take place as the project is
granted approvals. Johnson Ranch wants to help preserve this open space and
dedicate it to RCHCA in return for credits towards applicable fees. The value of the
open space is approximately $4,000,000.00.
Financing the infrastructure was discussed by Mr. Yeager. This project is self-
sufficient in its infrastructure and will not depend on other projects to build the
necessary infrastructure. In order for the infrastructure to be built, the project needs
to approved. The Development Agreement will ensure building of the infrastructure.
The money needed to build the infrastructure will come from some form of public
financing method provided that the sizing and timing of the infrastructure is
reasonable. Additional funds may come from reimbursement agreements. The
issuance of the bonds need to be phased as the improvements are needed. AD 161
bonds were issued too soon and the same mistake should not be repeated.
Commissioner Hoagland asked what kind of public financing is the project proposing?
Mr. Yeager replied that Assessment District is the first choice with Community
Facilities District being the second choice.
Commissioner Hoagland asked how the schools will be built? Mr. Yeager replied that
they will be built with a combination of dedication of land and payment of fees.
Jim O'Neal, Project Land Planner, talked about the land planning aspects of the
project. Mr. O'Neal demonstrated through a slide show that most of the project area
will not be visible from the surrounding properties, except the southern portion of the
site which lies lower than the surroundings and will be visible from the surrounding
homes. Mr. O'Neal also talked about the park system and their locations which
included eight (8), three (3) acre neighborhood parks; one, four (4) acre neighborhood
park; three (3), six (6) acre parks and one, fifteen (15) acre park.
Commissioner Blair asked how fire hazards will be mitigated. Mr. Naaseh replied that
the EIR requires a 100 foot wet zone,
R:\PLANNINOklOHNSON.MIN 11/22/94 klb
Mr. Fergus indicated that the proposed density is needed to make the project feasible,
the Village Center helps to reduce trips and Johnson Ranch is a self sufficient
community.
Commissioner Hoagland left the meeting at 7:35 PM.
Chairman Ford requested the public to come forward to express their concerns.
Jerry Butkiewicz, 37872 Avenida Armada, expressed concerns about the availability
and design of playing fields for kids and also was concerned about the traffic on the
two lane Borel Road.
David Robinson, 39600 Ave Arizona, expressed the following concerns: the area is
rural now and should remain rural; the drainage of the project into Santa Gertrudis and
Tucalota Creeks and their ability to handle the increased run-off is questionable and
should be analyzed; the open space land being dedicated is too steep; the 100 foot
wet zone is not adequate; Anza Road connection needs to be examined and how will
the Rancho California and Winchester off ramps be able to handle the extra 61,000
additional daily trips associated with this project?
Cindy Bush, 32775 Bootleg Road, indicated that she agrees with the statements made
by the two previous speakers and had additional concerns regarding the Geologic
Hazard Area, the necessity to install a fence around the Santa Gertrudis Creek to
prevent kids from drowning, the inadequacy of the sewer system and where all the
wild life will go. Ms. Bush concluded that French Valley residents do not want this
project, development should not jump into rural areas and development should only
be allowed next to existing development. Ms. Bush also added that the Winchester
1800 Specific Plan was recently denied by the County Planning Commission.
Ann Buford, 38951 Avenida Arriba, indicated that there is too much traffic on Rancho
California Road, this project is taking an otherwise open space area and the rural
atmosphere of the area should be preserved. She also wondered why a lot of people
cannot build their homes because of K-rat and why big developers like Johnson Ranch
are being allowed to develop their projects.
John Rockwell, P.O. Box 1018, indicated that Tucalota Creek is not on the Johnson
Ranch site and is a larger creek off-site and because of flooding he had no access or
utilities for 60 days. He was also concerned about the children from urbanization who
will vandalize his property and asked whether a wall will be built to protect him. He
also wondered if all the concerns brought up tonight will make any difference when
voting on the project.
R:\PLANNINOLIOHNSON.MIN 11/22/94 klb
4
Commissioner Blair indicated that the revised plan was a better plan; however, her
concerns remain the same about premature development and leapfrogging. She also
indicated concerns about the circulation and wondered whether the project should be
approved now.
Commissioner Fahey indicated that this project is premature development.
Chairman Ford indicated that we should listen to the public, address off-site circulation
concerns regarding improvements to Borel road and the Anza connection, clarify the
Tucalota Creek status, the adequacy of the fire safety wet zone, the proximity of the
closest Fire Station and the geological concerns.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 PM.
-~ v/ Chairman Steve Ford
R:\?L.ANNIIqGklOHNSON.MIN 11/22/94 klb 5