Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout021199 PTS/PC Jnt. Workshop MinutesMINUTES OF A JOINT WORKSHOP OF THE TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FEBRUARY 11, t999 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission and the Planning Commission convened in a joint workshop at 6:00 P.M., on Thursday, February 11, 1999, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Edwards. ROLL CALL Public/Traffic Commission: Planning Commission: Absent: Also Present: Commissioners Connerton, Edwards, Markham, Telesio*, and Chairman Coe. Commissioners Guerriero, Naggar, Soltysiak, and Webster. None. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Senior Planner Hogan, and Minute Clerk Hansen. * (Commissioner Telesio arrived at 6:09 P.M.) PUBLIC COMMENTS Development Service Director Miller, representing the City of Muraleta, addressed the Commissions regarding the proposed projects associated with the City of Murrieta referenced in Temecula's Circulation Element Update (per submitted memorandum), relaying that the majority of the items referenced are not part of Murrieta's one-five year Circulation Implement Plan (CIP.) In response to Mr. Millers comments, the Commissioners commented, as follows: Chairman Coe relayed that due to the current heavily impacted traffic circulation (created by the County when the freeway was constructed without provision of adequate off-ramps) the City of Temecula is proactively addressing the issue for future impact; and queried whether the City of Murrieta will address the traffic, specifically denoted in the Circulation Update, for provision of adequate traffic flow for the future. In response to Commissioner Connerton's comments, Commissioner Markham confirmed that the City of Murrieta was involved in the recent traffic meetings due to its concern regarding traffic impact at mall-opening, noting that the City of Murrieta was specifically represented by Mr. Mole, or Mr. Miller. Commissioner Connerton queried whether the pertinent information discussed at the numerous traffic meetings went back to the City Council of Murrieta. Commissioner Markham queried the timing of the response, echoed by Commissioner Connerton, in light of the active involvement the City of Murrieta had regarding this particular Circulation Update; and advised that the primary issue of concern is the Date Street Interchange, involving the Split Diamond at Cherry Street, the connection across the Creek, and the connection of the Interchange tying into State Highway 79; and queried whether the City of Murrieta had identified alternate routes, other than those referenced in the Capital Improvement Program, specifically denoted as Project No. 31. Commissioner Soltysiak relayed for informational purposes, the condition of heavy impact at the Winchester Road on-ramp; noted that numerous projects referenced in the Update refer to the Winchester Road Interchange; relayed that Murrieta's growth in development, specifically with regard to Industrial construction along Cherry Street impacts the Winchester Road on-ramp; and queried how the Industrial projects associated with the City of Murrieta will affect the traffic impact if the City does not address the issue. Mr. Miller relayed that it is the desire of the City of Murrieta to work with the City of Temecula to address traffic impact; clarified that the items referenced in the Circulation Update associated with Murrieta have been identified as areas for improvement, advising, however, that the aforementioned areas have not been placed in the one-five year plan of the CIP for Murrieta due to the lack of funding; in response to Commissioner Markham's comments, relayed that if the City of Temecula would provide funding through mitigating measures, that the City of Murrieta would be agreeable to such a proposal; in response to Murdeta's involvement in the traffic discussions, relayed that there wasn't clarity as to the timing of the projects; with regard to the aforementioned Project No. 31 (regarding Cherry Street), relayed that although there is a potential for the project to be developer driven, at this point in time the project is viewed as long-term for Murrieta; for Commissioner Naggar, clarified that the memorandum (of record) submitted was authored by himself per Murrieta's City Manager's direction; for Commissioner Webster, relayed that the General Plan Update for Murrieta is proposed to be brought to the City Council of Murrieta on March 30, 1999; noted that the Circulation Element Update is currently being processed, proposed to be in draft-form in June or July, clarifying that few of the projects referenced in Temecula's one- five year plan will be included in Murrieta's one-five year plan due to the priority projeds currently being implemented in Murrieta, encompassing its one-five year plan; and assured the Commissioners that he would forward their comments to the City of Murrieta. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Minutes - January 20, t 999 MOTION: Commissioner Telesio moved to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Connerton and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 2. Circulation Element Update Senior Planner Hogan relayed that a brief introduction of the actual proposed circulation map will be presented by Mr. Bob Davis, specifying the deletions, revisions, and the new components reflective of the central, southern, and northern portions of the City; relayed that the comments of the Commissions will be brought to the City Council at a future point in time; and advised that the comments of Mr. Miller, representing the City of Murrieta, will be forwarded to both City Councils for further discussion. Mr. Bob Davis presented the revised version of the Capital Improvement Program for the one-five year plan, and beyond ten years; relayed that the previous comments of the Commissions have been incorporated into the revision; and invited the Commissioners to address any questions or concerns. Commissioner Markham noted, for Commissioner Connerton, that Via Eduardo is located in the Pechanga Valley. For Commissioner Connerton, Mr. Davis clarified that one project may be denoted on the priority list twice due to the provision of the studies required for the project represented as the first listed entity, relaying that the following listed entity would be the actual improvement. A. Presentation of Level of Service (LOS) Determinations By way of overheads, Mr. Davis presented detailed clarification as to Level of Service (LOS) determinations; and noted that LOS measures density of traffic and the accessibility of lane changing. B. Presentation of the Proposed Revisions to the General Plan Circulation Element By way of maps, Mr. Davis provided extensive clarification of the revisions to the Circulation Plan; and reviewed the deleted, revised and new components of the revision. 1. Deletions, Revisions and New Components (central portion of the City) · Deletions the extension of the Western Bypass continuing into Murrieta, currently proposed to terminate at Cherry Street · the Date Street InterchanQe · Revisions since the Western Bypass will not be a continuous route into Murrieta, this project will be downGraded to a Principal Collector, uDdatinQ Chern/Street to a Secondan/ regarding re-alignment of Diaz Road at the Rancho California Road Connection, eliminate one of the siclnalized intersections uOarade Rancho California Road to a six-lane facility (between Moraga and Ynez Roads) · uparade a small portion of Ynez Road (south of Rancho California Road) up,qrade from Secondary, to Major a small portion of the Western BYPass (as it approaches the freeway) · New Components connection from the Western Bypass over to Cherry Street, widening to four lanes; relayed two options regarding the Cherry Street improvement (as it continues east), as follows: a) tie into the Date Street Extension to State Highway 79, redesignating Date Street as State Route 79, diverting traffic from the Winchester Road Corridor, and b) leave Date Street as it exists, bring Cherry Street across south to the top of the ridge (north of the Santa Gertrudis Creek) and tie into Margarita Road, advising that the first option provides for even and extensive reduction in traffic from the Winchester Road Corridor an additional Principal Collector two-lane crossing at the creek (at Via Montezuma) · Interchanae at Santiaao Road For Chairman Coe, Mr. Davis confirmed that if there is no consideration for the utilization of the Split Diamond interchange now, the use may not be possible at a future point in time due to the continued development in the area, noting that it is one of the few opportunities with the potential of provision for diverting traffic from Winchester Road in the area of discussion. For Commissioner Markham, Mr. Davis relayed that Date Street is on the County's Circulation Element, classified as Major; and noted that currently there are no proposed overcrossings in Murrieta between Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Date Street. 2. Deletions and Revisions (northern portion of the City) · Deletions · the elimination of the Borel Road Connection to Anza Road · regarding the Johnson Ranch Project area, Anza Road terminates and the connection is eliminated · the extension of Nicolas Road to Calle Contento has been eliminated · Revisions · Borel Road downclraded from Major to Principal Collector · Leon Road downclraded to Principal Collector · Nicolas Road downaraded in staqes, first to a Major, then to Principal Collector (as it appreachers Butterfield Stage Road) For Commissioner Connerton, Mr. Davis relayed that Butterfield Stage Road is still proposed to continue from Washington Street, noting that a portion (between Murrieta Hot Spdngs and Nicolas Roads) will be six lanes; and, for Commissioner Webster, noted that although the connection of North General Kearny Road (from Nicolas Road to Margarita Road) would divert 10-11,000 cars a day from Winchester Road, this connection has been deleted. With regard to the deletion of the aforementioned North General Keamy Road Connection, the Commissioners comments were, as follows: · Commissioner Webster recommended that the City Council reconsider the connection. · Commissioner Naggar queried what action the Commissioners could make to bdng this issue forward for consideration due to the substantial traffic alleviation the connection provides, reiterating Mr. Davis' comments that the lack of this connection would have a detrimental impact on alternate streets in the area. · Commissioner Edwards advised that this particular connection appeared to be the most effective diversion of traffic. Commission Recommendation: It was the consensus of the Commissions that staff add the North General Kearny Road Connection back into the Circulation Element as a Secondary road. 3. Deletions, Revisions and New Components (southern portion of the City) · Deletions · Extension of Butterfield StaGe Road to Pala Road Revisions · upGrade Loma Linda Road to a Principal Collector · downGrade De Portola Road (between Jedediah Smith and Margarita Roads) · downGrade Jedediah Smith Road (between Margarita and De Portola Roads) New Components a new crossing at Temecula Creek proposed (east of Pala Road), the exact location yet to be determined Senior Planner Hogan relayed, for Commissioner Edwards, that the Pala Road Bridge encompassed four lanes. With regard to the extension of Butterfield Stage Road being eliminated due to the existing development, Mr. Davis relayed, for Commissioner Connerton, the impact of this revision. Commissioner Markham further specified the existing development in the aforementioned area of discussion. Senior Planner Hogan further clarified the rationale for the revision of the extension. Commissioner Connerton recommended downgrading the aforementioned alignment, but adding it back into the Circulation Update. In response to Mr. Connerton's comments, Mr. Davis advised that the extension could be added back into the Circulation Update, downgrading it to a Principal Collector. Commission Recommendation: It was the consensus of the Commissions that the Butterfield Stage Road Extension be added back into the Circulation Plan as a Pdncipal Collector, based on the topography. For Commissioner Telesio, Mr. Davis clarified the rationale for the downgrading of De Portola Road; and relayed the proposals northwest of the Jedidiah Smith Road area. For Commissioner Markham, Senior Planner Hogan relayed that although there are intergovemmental issues that need to be addressed, a connection in the Via Eduardo area is being considered for a future point in time. Senior Planner Hogan thanked the Commissioners for their efforts associated with the Circulation Update, relaying that their comments will be forwarded into the final Update to be brought to the City Council in May or June. Senior Traffic Engineer Moghadam introduced Mr. Hughes, the City's Senior Engineer of the Capital Improvement Program, relaying that he will be Acting Director of Public Works when Director of Public Works Kicak retires from the City. Mr. Hughes addressed the Commissions, providing an overview of his role with the Temecula; and noted his pleasure to be working with the City. The Commissionere welcomed Mr. Hughes; and Commissioner Edwards commended Mr. Hughes for his diligent efforts associated with the Old Town Construction Project, regarding his interaction with the merchants. ADJOURNMENT At 7:25 P.M. Chairman Cce formally adjoumed this joint workshop to the next regular Public/Traffic Safety Commission meeting Thursday, March 11. 1999, at 6:00 P.M., and the next regular Planning Commission meeting Wednesday. February t7, t999, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Planning Manager Debbie Ubnoske