Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout021199 PTS/PC Jnt. Workshop AgendaIn c~lmllhancc with thc Amcrlcans with Disabilities Act, if you nccd slx:cial assistance to participate in this mectlng, please contact the ~lfficc of the City Clerk at (909) 694~6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangcmcnts to ensure accessibility to that raceling [28 CFR35. 102.35. 104 ADA Title I11 AGENDA JOINT WORKSHOP OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AND TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION TO BE HELD AT CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 6:00 P.M. CALl, TO ORDER: CHAIRPERSON COE FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL: PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSIONERS: Counertun, Edwards, M~wkhmn. Telesio, Coe PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Guerrienb N'~aggar, Slaven, Sidtys"mk, Webster PUBLIC COMMENTS A t~,tal of 15 minutes is provided so members of the pnblic can address the Commisskm on items that are not lisled on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item no5 listed on ~e Agenda, a pink "Requ~t to Speak" fi~rm should be filled trot and filed with the C~mm~ission Secretary. When you are called to speak, please ctnne forward and state your name and address. Fl}r all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" ti}rm must be filed with the Recording Secretary before the Commission gets Ill that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit till' individual speakers. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Ctmsent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one unanin~ous vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Public/Traffic Safety Cim~missitm reqnest specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar tilt separate action. COMMISSION BUSINESS I. Apprl~ve the Minutes of the Joint Worksht~p Temecula Planning Commission and Public/Traffic Safety Ctlmmissitm meeting of January 20, 1999. WORKSItOP ITEM 2. Circulation Element Update AD.|OURNMENT The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public/Traffic Sat~ty Commission will be held on Thursday, March I I, 1999, at 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, Connell Chambers, 432~ Business Park Drive, Tcmccula, California. ITEM NO. I MINUTES OF A JOINT WORKSHOP OF THE TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA JANUARY 20,1999 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a joint workshop of the Planning Commission Public/Traffic Commission at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, January 20, 1999, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLL CALL Planning Commission: Public/Traffic Commission: Absent: Also Present: Commissioners Guerriero, Naggar, Webster, and Chairwoman Slaven. Commissioners Coe, Connerton, Markham*, and Telesio None. Deputy City Manager Thornhill, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Senior Planner Hogan, and Minute Clerk Hansen. Soltysiak, Edwards, * (Commissioner Markham arrived at 6:02 P.M.) PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Agenda MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 2. Approval of Minutes - December 16. 1999 MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 3. Circulation Element Update Senior Planner Hogan noted that in addition to the presentation of the Circulation Element Update, and the Summary of Proposed Circulation Plan Changes, a Prioritization List for Projects, concentrating primarily on the initial 5-year program for improvements will be presented for the Commissions' input and, thereafter, those comments forwarded to the City Council's Workshop on January 21, 1999; advised that the list has been modified per the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's recommendation; relayed that the Circulation Element Update process began in the spring of 1998; and noted that Mr. Bob Davis will present the Update in detail, and will be available for questions, advising that this process will culminate into the finalization of the Update which will be presented to the Planning Commission in approximately a month. A. Presentation of the Prioritization List for Projects for Capital Improvement Program 1. Projects for Capital Improvement Program (5-year) Mr. Bob Davis presented a detailed report of the Prioritization List of the Circulation Element (per supplemental agenda material), focusing primarily on the projects for the Capital Improvement Program within the 5-year plan, Items 1-34 (of record); noted the rationale for the improvements; clarified the denotations reflecting projects that are under contract, funded, partially funded, and the entity which the project falls under (i.e., Temecula, Murrieta, Caltrans); relayed that the list is not all inclusive (omitting minor intersection improvements, etc.); advised that the first 10 items are currently under contract or under construction; and noted that regarding Item No. 34, Rancho Vista Road should be corrected to reflect Tierra Vista Road. Mr. Davis concurred with Commissioner Guerriero's recommendation that Item No. 17, regarding the extension and signal at Jefferson Avenue, should be moved up in prioritization due to its effect on the Overland Crossing. For Commissioner Webster, with regard to Item No. 17 (aforementioned), Mr. Davis clarified that this project was inclusive of the engineering plans and the construction; with regard to Item No. 16, regarding improvements at Jefferson Avenue and Construction of the Date Street extension, noted that this project will be funded by the City of Murrieta; relayed the rationale for the location of Item No. 13, the Firat Street Bridge project; with regard to Item No. 8, the Rancho California Road off-ramp widening, relayed that the reference reflected solely the off- ramp project. For Commissioner Webster, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified that although the Rancho California Road east side on-ramp, heading northbound, and the widening of Rancho California Road (having a duo right turn onto the ramp), are currently under design, this project could be added to the Prioritization List; further clarified the rationale for the location of Item No. 13, regarding the First Street Bridge. For Commissioner Guerriero, Mr. Parks noted that the extension of Pujol Street to the Western Bypass, although developer driven, could be added to Item No. 35, in the Medium-Range Considerations. Commissioner Connerton recommended addressing northbound Ynez Road at Winchester Road to the northbound 1-15 on-ramp, recommending a double-striped lane for the provision of two right lanes with the inside lane being straight-through, or, right only, and the northbound Ynez Road and westbound Rancho California Road on-ramp in order to adequately alleviate traffic in this particular area before mall opening; and advised that a time frame be provided to the City Council regarding this project. Mr. Parks relayed that staff would investigate and bring an update back to the Commission. Commissioner Markham suggested directing the discussion at this point in time back to the elements of the Circulation Update, in order to avoid entering another arena of discussion which wouldn't envelop the Circulation Element. Echoing Mr. Markham's suggestion, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified that staff desired the input of the Commissions regarding recommendation as to the Circulation Element modification, specifically, the order of the Items on the Prioritization List. Per Commission request, Deputy City Manager Thornhill reiterated the desire for Commission input regarding prioritization of the improvements up to the 5-year range (Items 1-34) in order to bring those comments forward to the City Council's workshop, advising that the immediate issues, in the 6- to 18-month range will be presented as a package and brought to the City Council and the Public/Traffic Safety Commission for input at a future point in time. Commissioner Naggar concurred with the Prioritization List, regarding Items 1-34. For Commissioner Soltysiak, Mr. Thornhill advised that the primary analysis utilized in the Update was traffic modeling; and noted that cost analysis was considered. Commissioner Telesio suggested that in addition to prioritization of the Items, the Commissioners consider the addition of Items not included on the list. Commissioner Coe, echoed by Chairwoman Slaven, recommended prioritizing Item No. 33, regarding Santiago Road, in line with Item No. 13, regarding the First Street Bridge. Due to Chairwoman Slaven's concern with the priority placement of Item No. 34, regarding the widening of Ynez Road, due to the imminent opening of the Marie Callender's restaurant, Mr. Davis suggested dividing the project into smaller segments, prioritizing the widening from Tierra Vista Road to Rancho Vista Road or Pauba Road to address that impact. Chairwoman Slaven recommended with regard to Item No. 11, that the Petition process be expedited, Commissioner Webster recommended that a brief overview of the medium- to long-range program be presented prior to the Commissions' recommendation. 2. and 3. Medium- to Long-Range Phasing Considerations (6 to beyond 10 years) Mr. Bob Davis briefly presented the Medium- to Long-Range Considerations (6 to 10 years), Items No. 35-51 (per agenda material). For Commissioner Edwards, Mr. Davis clarified that Item No. 38, regarding Murrieta Hot Springs Road, is a Murrieta project. Mr. Davis furlher clarified that although Murrieta's projects are denoted on the Prioritization List, it is not to be deduced that the projects are being funded by the City of Temecula. Commissioner Connerton, echoed by Commissioners Telesio and Slaven, recommended moving Item No. 46, regarding the Butterfield Stage Road northerly extension from Nicolas Road to Washington Street, up to coincide with Item No. 11, regarding the Petition reflecting redesignation of the 1-15 freeway. Mr. Davis recommended moving the engineering phase of Item No. 46, Item No. 42, forward. Commissioner Markham recommended not deleting Item No. 40 (listed after Item No. 47) regarding development of a collector distributor/frontage road system along the 1-15 corridor, and placing it in the 1- to 5-year range. For Commissioner Soltysiak, Mr. Davis clarified the rationale for the prioritization placement of Item No. 50, regarding the widening of De Portola Road. With regard to Commissioner Markham's querying with regard to the parallel route to Winchester Road from Murrieta Hot Springs Road and over to the split Diamond Interchange, Mr. Davis advised that although this project is partially developer driven, it should be added to the list. Presentation of the Proposed Revisions to the General Plan Circulation Element (continued, see page 6) Mr. Bob Davis presented the Revised Circulation Update, briefly highlighting each Item (of record). 1. Section I (Introduction) For Commissioner Webster, Senior Planner Hogan relayed that after the Circulation update is revised staff will further investigate provision of a supplement to the EIR (Environmental Impact Report.) It was noted on page 6, first paragraph, that the word their should be corrected to indicate there. Chairwoman Slaven recommended that with regard to Page 6, at the top of the page, the term conformity review be clarified. 2. Section II (Summary of Circulation Issues) For Chairwoman Slaven, Mr. Davis clarified page 9, as follows: the deletion of paragraph I and 4 was due to the improved condition in those specific areas; and advised that as to paragraph 5, regarding alternative modes of transportation, that this provision could be added back into the material. Ms. Slaven recommended, additionally, not deleting paragraphs 1 and 4. 4 For Commissioner Webster, Mr. Davis indicated that page 10, the last paragraph, should be corrected to reflect complete deletion. For Commissioner Naggar, regarding page 10, paragraph 2, Mr. Davis noted that with regard to the future transportation system, the time frame for this particular project is within the 5-year range, although the TSM (Transportation System Management) program and the TDM (Transportation Demand Management) program plans should be immediately addressed. 3. Section III (Goals and Policies) With regard to Goal 1, striving to maintain a Level of Service "D" or better, Chairwoman Slaven expressed dissatisfaction with the level, advising that this issue should be brought before the City Council. Commissioner Guerriero, regarding page 11, Policy 1.2, recommended that the word adequate be changed to reflect comprehensive; commended staff for their diligent efforts associated with Policy 1.4, reflecting TSM; recommended that additional language be added to page 12, Policy 2.1 to include right-of-way violations, advising that the City Council consider adding an additional 2-4 motor enforcement officers; and suggested with regard to Policy 2.6, regarding traffic calming, holding a workshop for the consideration of traffic calming devices (i.e., speed undulations.) Commissioner Telesio, echoed by Commissioner Edwards, recommended for City Council consideration with regard to Policy 1.2, evaluation of potential traffic impacts, that the Public Traffic/Safety Commissioner become more actively involved in this process. Chairwoman Slaven expressed a desire for more input from the Public Traffic/Safety Commission on traffic matters. With regard to Policy 4.3, on page 14, Commissioner Markham noted, for Commissioner Slaven, that all arterial parking has been eliminated with the exception of Winchester Road and Margarita Road (adjacent to the school.) Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that with regard to the City not having control over Winchester Road with regard to parking, due to it being a State highway, that staff is investigating this area of concern. Mr. Davis clarified Policy 4.9, on page 15, regarding the TDM Plan. Commissioner Edwards recommended that this area of discussion be an arena in which the Public Traffic/Safety Commission become more involved. At 8:02 P.M. a short recess was taken, and the meeting reconvened at 8:12 P.M. 4. Section IV (Circulation Plan) For Commissioner Webster, Mr. Davis recommended the elimination of the reference curb parking. For Commissioner Markham, Mr. Davis noted that the continuity issue between the Cities of Temecula and Murrieta with regard to standards of saturation levels am currently unresolved. C. Presentation of the Summary of Proposed Circulation Plan Changes Since Section IV of the Circulation Element included revisions, by way of overhead maps, Mr. Davis presented the Summary of Proposed Circulation Plan Changes (per supplemental agenda material.) 1. Highway Component Deletions With regard to Item No. 2, Commissioner Markham clarified, for Commissioner Webster, the rationale for the deletion of the Butterfield Stage Road southerly extension. With regard to Item No. 3, for Commissioner Soltysiak, Mr. Davis noted that the Western Bypass is a potential use for connection with Cherry Street. With regard to Chairwoman Slaven's concern with regard to Item No. 4, regarding the Nicolas Road easterly extension, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that the omission of this item doesn't mandate the deletion of this extension. 2. Highway Component Classification Upgrades and Other Modifications With regard to Item No. 5, Mr. Davis presented the options of modifications to relieve traffic on Winchester Road, noting the potential involvement with the County, Caltrans, and surrounding cities; advised the elimination of Option A (of record); and clarified, for Commissioner Webster, the rationale for the aforementioned project not being placed on the prioritization list, noting, however, that there is a process of coordinating this project with the Priority List. Commissioner Guerriero recommended coordinating the classification upgrades and modifications to the Circulation Plan with the anticipated population at build-out; and noted, additionally, that The City may not have the population base to support the current Commercial Industrial development. In light of the time constraint, it was the consensus of the Commissions that the remainder of the Summary of Proposed Circulation Plan Changes be thoroughly reviewed with the provision of maps by the Commissioners outside the meeting, and then reconvene for discussion and Commission input at another scheduled joint workshop, Thursday, February 11, 1999. At this time the meeting went back to the review of the Proposed Revisions to the General Plan Circulation Element. B. Presentation of the Proposed Revisions to the General Plan Circulation Element (continued from page 4) 5. Section V (Implementation Programs) For Chairwoman Slaven, Mr. Davis noted that page 34, section A, of Section V, addresses traffic impact study guides. With regard to page 36, Item 1, regarding the City's Development Impact Monitoring Program Commissioners Naggar and Edwards recommended that additional language be added to indicate review by the City's staff and the Planning and Public Traffic/Safety Commissions. For Commissioner Naggar, with regard to traffic impact, Mr. Davis advised that there is a proposal to have developers at a future point in time provide an additional independent traffic study. Mr. Davis concurred with Chairwoman Slaven, regarding the use of the percentage to indicate traffic impact, recommending in lieu of that, the results of the trip generation counts and the road capacity usage serve as more effective tools to measure the impact. Chairwoman Slaven recommended annually updating the Circulation Element. For Chairwoman Slaven, Mr. Davis noted the recommendation of defining Level of Service designations. Senior Planner Hogan recommended, additionally, the provision of graphic presentation to more accurately review traffic issues. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that the policy issue on Traffic Circulation could be presented to both Commissions at a future point in time when the supplemental EIR (Environmental Impact Report) presentation is presented. Chairwoman Slaven commended staff on their assiduous endeavor with regard to the Circulation Update. PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT Senior Planner Hogan thanked the Commissioners for their time and input on the Circulation Update. COMMISSIONER REPORTS A. Commissioner Guerriero commented, as follows: With regard to projects that are transporting dirt, for removal, or for additional provision on a site, that staff ensure proper traffic control during transportation. With regard to Jefferson Avenue, recommended that a study be done reviewing the need for the addition of designated right-turn only lanes, primarily between Winchester Road and Via Montezuma. With regard to the Farmer Boys restaurant site located on Winchester Road (approved at the August 19, 1998 Planning Commission Meeting), recommended enforcement of the temporary installation of delineators (which the project was conditioned by) until the Winchester median project is completed. B. Commissioners Connerton and Telesio relayed that this workshop provided cohesiveness and constructive discussion, recommending that the Commissions periodically meet. ADJOURNMENT At 9:41 P.M. Chairwoman Slaven formally adjourned this joint workshop to Thursday. February 11. 1999, at 6:00 P.M., and the next regular Planning Commission meeting will be on Wednesday. February 3. 1999, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Marcia Slaven, Chairwoman Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager ITEM NO. 2 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA REPORT Public/Traffic Safety Commission and Planning Commission All Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic February 1 I, 1999 Item 2 Circulation Element Update RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Sat~ty Commission and the Planning Commission: I. Pruvide comments lbr the prioritizatk~n of the short-term circulation improvement projects; and 2. Prtlvide ct~llllnnents for the proposed revisions to the General Plan Circulatk~n Element. BACKGROUND: At the .jlfint workshnp of January 20, 1999, the Planning Commission and the Public/Traffic Satbty Commisskm received a status relx~rt from Mr. Bob Davis, Wilbur Smith Associates, regarding the Circulation Element Update Study and a list of the short-term circulation improvemenLs identified in the study. Comments were received from both commissions tbr inclusion in the revised documents. Mr. Davis will be presenting those changes and receiving further comments on the prt~posed revisions to the General Plan Circulatilm Element. This infi~rmation will be incorporated into the final d{Icument prior to presentallure to the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT: 'Fhcrc are no fiscal impacts associated with the recommended actkin. AtlilchlBeBt: Suggested Changes Received from Planning Commission and Public/Traffic Safety Commission Project #17: Project #33: · New: Project #35: · Project #36: · Project #37: · Project #42: · Project #46: · New: · New: · New: · New: Move engineering study for new Mumeta Creek crossing up to Position 14. Keep construction project in its present position. Move up to Position 30 since it is complementary to Project #29. Add the widening of Ynez Road from Tierra Vista Road to Rancho Vista Road following Project #19. Add references to the extension of Pujol Street to Western Bypass. Move this project up to the end of the 5-year program. Move up to end of 5- year Program. Move up to end of 5- year Program. Move up to Project #23 Position. Move up to end of Medium Range. Reinstate feasibility study for collector distributor frontage road system along I-15 Corridor. Place in Position 24. Add petition to re-designate SR-79 North along Date Street Alignment. Add Date Street from I-15 to Margarita Road at end of 5-year program. Add Date Street from Margarita Road to Winchester Road/SR-79 North at approximately position #38. "o OlolO,olOIO I i !1 .~. :D 0 :D 0 The OPERATIONS LEVEL METHODOLOGY, which is described in ~e Transporta~on Research Board's Highway C~;~acity Manual defines Level of Service (LOS) for signalized intersections in terms Of delay. Technically, delay is the amount of time an average vehicle must welt at an intersection before being ableto pass t~roughffie intersestion. For signaJized lntersections, the relationship between LOS and delay is based on the average stopped delay per vehicle for a fifteen minute period. LEVEL OF SERVICE 'A' - Delay 0.0 to 5.0 seconds Describes operations with very low delay. i.e., less than 5 seconds per vehicle, Th[s occurs when signal progression is extremely favorable. Most vehicles arrive during the green phase and are not required to stop at all Corresponding V/C rotfoe usually range from 0.00 to 0.60. LEVEL OF SERVICE 'B' - Deliy 5,1 to 15.0 seconds Describes operations with delay in the range of 5 to 15 seconds per vehicle generally characterized by good signal progression and/or short Cycle lengths. More vehicles are required to stop than for LOS 'A' causing higher laveis of average delay. Corresponding V/C ratios usually range fl'om 0,81 to 0.70. LEVEL OF SERVICE 'C' - Delay 15.1 to 25,0 seconds Describes operations with delay in the range of 15 to 25 seconds per vehicle. Occasionally, vehicles may be required Io walt more than one red signal phase. The number of vehicles stopping at this level is significant elihough many stiff pass through the intersection without stopping. Corresponding V/C ratfoe usually range from 0.71 to 0.80. LEVEL OF SERVICE 'D' - Delay 25.1 to 40.0 seconds Describes operations with delay in the range of 25 of 40 seconds per vehicle. At LOS 'D', the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable, Many vehicles stop, and me proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. The number of vehicles falling to cleat the signal during the first green phase is noticeable. Corresponding V/C ratios usually range from 0.81 to 0.90. LEVEL OF SERVICE 'E' - Deity 40,1 to 60.0 seconds Describes operations with delay in the range of 40 to 60 seconds per vehicle. These high delay values generaily indicate pcor signal progression. long Cycle lengths and high V/C ratios. Vehicles frequent/y fa~l to clea' the intersection during the first green phase. Corresponding V/C ratios usually range from 0.91 to 1.00. LEVEL OF SERVICE 'F' - Delay 60.1 seconds I~lus Describes operations with delay in excess of 60 seconds per vehicle. This condition often occurs with oversaturation, i,e., when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection, Corresponding V/C ratios of aver 1.00 are usually associated. SOURCE: Transportation Re~ea~cn Boe~d, 'OperaSone Levet Meffiodology-SlgneJIzed Inte~sec~o~s', H~ehway Canaclty Manual Special Repo~t 209, 1985, LEVEL Of SERVICE DIAGRAM A V LOS 'A' LOS 'C' LOS 'D' LOS 'F'