HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 15 - Supplemental Info. RTC CorrespondencePatricia Romo
Director of Transportation
Transportation Department
June 14, 2016
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY
Juan C. Perez
Agency Director 0
Steven A. Weiss Mike Lara Al Brady
Planning Director Building and Safety Official Code Enforcement Official
Planning Department Building and Safety Department Code Enforcement Department
Mr. Grant Taylor
Community Development Director
City of Lake Elsinore
130 S. Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
RE: Response to Comments for the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan
Dear Mr. Taylor:
Thank you for providing responses to the comment letters dated December 31, 2015 and February 16, 2016,
submitted by the County of Riverside Transportation Department (County) on the Alberhill Village Specific Plan
(AVSP). The County has reviewed the responses and acknowledges the inclusion of mitigation measure (TC -0.5):
Prior to approval of the first Phased Development Plan (PDP), a TIA evaluating cumulative impacts of
the AVSP on regional transportation facilities within the City's sphere of influence, including without
limitation, Temescal Canyon Road to Indian Truck Trait Lake Street, and Nichols Road shall be
completed in consultation with the County of Riverside and WRCOG. To ensure that impacts of the
AVSP on the regional road network are mitigated, a Phased Road Improvement Plan shall be
prepared in conjunction with the first Phased Development Plan and, to the maximum extent
allowable in accordance with the TUMF program, regional road improvements shall be constructed by
the developer in exchange for TUMF fee credits.
County staff recognizes that this new measure is intended to ensure that the cumulative impacts of AVSP on
Temescal Canyon Road and on the Nichols Road/I-15 Interchange will be evaluated in a traffic impact analysis and
mitigation will be established prior to the approval of the first Phased Development Plan. In both comment letters
provided by the County, an emphasis has been placed on the critical importance of Temescal Canyon Road to the
region. The County reiterates our availability and desire to actively participate in the preparation of the Phased Road
Improvement Plan as it relates to transportation related improvements.
We appreciate your willingness to participate in a collective effort with the County and our Regional Transportation
Agency partners to improve Temescal Canyon Road and the Nichols Road/I-15 Interchange.
jerely,
Juan C. Perez
Director of Transportation and Land Management
RUW:KKT
cc: Supervisor Jeffries, 1t District
Patricia Romo, Director of Transportation
Mojahed Salama, Deputy Director of Transportation
Page 2 of 2
Comment Letter E
County of Riverside Transportation Department
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
TRANSPORTATIONAND
LAND MANAGEMENTAGENCY ;
°jb41p 'r1ON
Juan C. Pare¢, P.T., T.E. Transportation Department Patricia Roma, P.E.
Director of Transportation mrd Assistaot Director of Transportation
Land Management
December 31, 2015
Mr. Roy F. Stephenson, P.E.
Land:Use Engineer
City of Lake Elsinore
c/o HR Green
1100 Town and Country Road, Suite 1025
Orange, CA 92858
RE: Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion of Drab Environmental Impact Report for
the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan (SP 2010-02)
Dear Mr. Stephenson,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Alberhill
Villages Specific Plan — SP 2010-02 (DEIR). The project proposes development of
approximately 1;400 acres with up to 8,244 residential dwelling units; approximately 4 million
square feet of non-residential uses including civic/institutional, commercial/retail, professional
office/medical and entertainment uses; development of a university campus or similar
educational institution to serve up to 5;000 students; and supporting uses including schools,
parks, worship centers, and green belt paseos. The Transportation Department (County) has
reviewed the DEIR and has the following comments.
The DEIR and project traffic study indicate the development at its ultimate
buildout is estimated to generate 150,415 daily trips, 9,927 AM peak hourly trips,
and 14;575 PM peak hourly trips. However, no information is provided to
illustrate the project's trip distribution to the surrounding area and roadways.
Under the County's traffic impact analysis preparation guidelines; where the
proposed development would add 50 or more peak hourly trips to County
intersections, the intersection shall be analyzed. The County believes it is
reasonable to assume that the project would add 50 or more peak hourly trips to
County intersections beyond the studied intersection ofHorsethief Canyon Road
and Temescal Canyon Road. Without a trip distribution of project traffic, it is
difficult to verify. This information is needed to determine if the studied area is
adequate.
4080 t.erom Street, 8" Floor Riverside. CA 92501 (951) 955.67,0
P.Q. Box 1090 - Riverside. CA 92502-1090 - FAX (951) 955-3198
E-1
M
Mr, Roy F. Stephenson, P.E.
December 31, 2015
Page 2
The DEIR provides an analysis of the existing conditions as well as the City's
General Plan Buildout with and without the project. The combination of these
analyses may provide the project's cumulative impact under buildout conditions,
however determining the project's impact on the existing road network is still
unknown and therefore not mitigated. An analysis needs to be provided to identify
both the project's direct impacts and necessary improvements to mitigate those.
impacts.
As noted in the DEIR (page 4.7-5), the City's General Plan depicts Temescal
Canyon Road between the city limits and Horsethief Canyon Road within the
unincorporated County of Riverside as a Major Highway (4 lanes within a 100
foot right-of-way). The County's General Plan depicts this same segment as a
Major Highway, but the County's designation uses slightly different
specifications (4 lanes and a striped median turn lane within a 118 foot right--of-
way). The discussion of General Plan Buildout without the Project beginning on
page 4.7-35 and ending on page 4.7-40 also indicates that this segment of
Temescal Canyon Road was being studied as a 41ane roadway.
However, the discussion of General Plan Buildout with the Project seems to have
studied this segment of Temescal Canyon Road as an Urban Arterial Highway
whichhas 6 lanes within a 120 foot right-of-way. While the County's standard
for a Major Highway would nearly meet the right-of-way requirement, the actual
roadway design of the County's Major Highway standard would require
significant modifications to accommodate 6lanes. The DEIR's determination
that the Temescal Canyon segment is not impacted by the proposed Project
appears to rest on the assumption of improvements that exceed the requirements
of the City and County's General Plan designations. Although the analysis
indicates a 6 -lane facility is required to provide adequate capacity for the
projected 44,000 daily trips, page 4.7-62 of the DEIR appears to recommend
retaining Temescal Canyon Road as a 4 -lane facility. The analysis indicates the
LOS "E" capacity of a 4 -lane Major is 34,100 daily trips which would notprovide
adequate capacity. Furthermore, the DEIR attributes a portion of the 44,000 daily
trips as being diverted trips from a congested I-15 freeway. The report considers
this diversion of traffic to `very unlikely" in order to justifies the use of a 4 -lane
facility. One could argue from real world examples that traffic from congested
freeways does divert to parallel facilities. The gravity model component of the
City's traffic model operates in this manner. Therefore the recommendation of
maintaining Temescal Canyon Road as a 4 -lane facility is inadequate mitigation.
4080 Lemon Street, 9" Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 955-6740
P.O. Box 1090 Riverside, CA. 92,502-1090 - FAX (951) 955-3198
E-2
E-3
83
Mr. Roy F. Stephenson, P.E.
December 31, 2015
Page 3
The DEIR also seems to assert that this increase in design requirements somehow
does not rise to the level of requiring a General Plan Amendment to the City and
County General Plan. However, if this higher level of improvements is required
to fully mitigate the project's impacts, formalizing these requirements in the
City's and County's General Plan through a General Plan Amendment should be
given consideration as a mitigation measure of the Project to ensure that the
higher level of improvements is carried out in the future by all affected projects
that may develop along this segment of road,
Under the discussion of Traffic Capacity/Level of Service in the DEIR (page 4.7-
78) and its traffic study, impacts are identified from the Project at the intersection E-3
of Horsethief Canyon Road and Temescal Canyon Road. The improvement Cont.
identified to reduce the impact to less than significant is through the installation of
a traffic signal and road widening. It is questionable whether the recommendation
of adding a single right -turn lane on Horsethief Canyon Road is adequate to
accommodate the projected 1,263 PM peak hourly trips. The County would also
like to point out that the total project peak Hourly traffic at the intersection is
shown to decrease at General Plan Buildout with Project, an unlikely scenario..
The DEIR indicates the City will require the developer to pay for the
improvements in the form of fair -share fees. The County requests that the
mitigation fees be paid to the County at the time of building permit issuance in
order to mitigate project impacts.
If you have any questions about these comments, please contact me at (95.1) 955-2016 or at
ruwiliiaCal�rctlma.ore.
Sincerely,
,�V �Russell Williams
Development Review Manager
RW:RF:KT:rg
cc: Juan C. Perez, Director of Transportation and Land Management
Patricia Romo, Assistant Director of Transportation
4080 Lemon Street. 8" Floor : Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 955-6740
P.O. Bon 1090 Riverside. CA 92502-1090 - FAX (951) 955-3998
M
Response to Comment Letter E
County of Riverside Transportation Department
The County of Riverside Transportation Department provided comments regarding the Draft
Program Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") (State Clearinghouse Number 2012061046) for
the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan and related applications in its letter dated December 31, 2016.
The following discussion provides responses to those comments. The responses and any edits
provided below merely clarify and amplify the analysis and conclusions already presented in the
DEIR. The environmental issues raised in the comment letter and responded to below do not
present any substantial evidence showing any new or different potentially significant impacts as
defined by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
Response to County of Riverside Transportation Department Comment E-1
The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan's Land Use Plan, which was adopted on December 13,
2011, included land use designations on the AVSP project site that reflect the land uses proposed
by the AVSP, in anticipation of the submittal of the AVSP project. Therefore, the TIA completed
as part of the General Plan Update Recirculated Program EIR (GP EIR), which was certified by
the Lake Elsinore City Council on December 13, 2011 included traffic generated by the AVSP in
its analysis of area -wide traffic impacts. The primary purpose of the AVSP TIA was to provide a
consistency analysis with the General Plan and therefore utilized a study area consistent with the
previous GP EIR's TIA. The AVSP TIA analyzed significantly more study locations than the
General Plan Update EIR TIA.
The existing roadway network serving the AVSP site consists of Lake Street, Nichols Road, and
Temescal Canyon Road and the additional roadway network in the area is essentially part of the
Project. For this reason, an Existing plus Project analysis is not required.
Response to County of Riverside Transportation Department Comment E-2
There is a projected 30 -year development period for the AVSP, construction of implementing
development projects will occur at individual project locations and at unknown times during the
30 -year period. It would be speculative to identify the timing of future traffic levels at each phase
of the future development of the AVSP. As noted on Pages 2.0-6 through 2.0-8 of the DEIR, the
AVSP proposed development will be regulated by Phased Development Plans and Design Review
applications which will set forth precise design proposals for all or a portion of a particular area
within the AVSP. As Phased Development Plans, Design Review, or Subdivision Map applications
are proposed, more timely and accurate traffic impact analysis and determination of required
improvements can be determined.
In order to assure the completion of appropriate and timely road improvements to serve the AVSP
project area, new Project -wide Development Standards have been added to the AVSP which
require:
RE,
• All road improvements within the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan (AVSP) shall be
constructed to ultimate City standards and consistent with the General Plan, unless
otherwise identified and approved, as a requirement of the implementing development
projects (including but not limited to subdivisions, design review applications and
conditional use permits) subject to approval by the City Engineer. The AVSP "Enhanced"
and "Modified" cross-sections are subject to the submittal and review of design drawings,
at the time implementing development projects are submitted.
Site-specific Traffic Impact Analyses (traffic studies) shall be required for each Phased
Development Plan (PDP) and for all subsequent implementing development projects in
accordance with the City's Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation Guide requirements in
effect at the time of Traffic Impact Analysis preparation.
Prior to approval of the first Phased Development Plan (PDP), a TIA evaluating cumulative
impacts of the AVSP on regional transportation facilities within the City's sphere of
influence, including without limitation, Temescal Canyon Road to Indian Truck Trail, Lake
Street, and Nichols Road shall be completed in consultation with the County of Riverside
and WRCOG. To ensure that impacts of the AVSP on the regional road network are
mitigated, a Phased Road Improvement Plan shall be prepared in conjunction with the first
Phased Development Plan and, to the maximum extent allowable in accordance with the
TUMF program, regional road improvements shall be constructed by the developer in
exchange for TUMF fee credits.
A new Mitigation Measure TC -0.5 will be added as follows:
TC -0.5 Prior to approval of the first Phased Development Plan (PDP), a TIA evaluating
cumulative impacts of the AVSP on regional transportation facilities within the
City's sphere of influence, including without limitation, Temescal Canyon Road
to Indian Truck Trail, Lake Street, and Nichols Road shall be completed in
consultation with the County of Riverside and WRCOG. To ensure that impacts
of the AVSP on the regional road network are mitigated, a Phased Road
Improvement Plan shall be prepared in conjunction with the first Phased
Development Plan and, to the maximum extent allowable in accordance with the
TUMF program, regional road improvements shall be constructed by the
developer in exchange for TUMF fee credits.
Response to County of Riverside Transportation Department Comment E-3
The City's Circulation Element and the "Proposed Land Use Program Recommended Roadway
System" (Exhibit M) in the General Plan Update TIA shows Temescal Canyon Road as a six -lane
Urban Arterial facility between Horsethief Canyon Road and Lake Street, which is why it was
analyzed as a six -lane facility in the Roadway Segment analysis.
M
The proposed mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure TC -2) to add a single right -turn lane on
Horsethief Canyon Road at Temescal Canyon Road consists of a free right -turn lane, which has
significantly greater capacity than a typical single right -turn lane without a free movement. The
total peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Horsethief Canyon Road at Temescal Canyon
Road actually slightly increase at General Plan Buildout with Project.
Please refer to Response to Comment E-2.
The AV SP is required to comply with all regulatory requirements for payment of "fair share" fees
for road improvements. These fees are payable at the times established by the regulations that
establish such fees. Compliance with regulatory requirements do not need to be set forth as
mitigation fees. Nevertheless, Mitigation Measure TC -2 provides:
"The project shall participate in the phased construction of the on -and off-site intersection
improvements through payment of City of Lake Elsinore fees, and the participation in the
Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) program.
Where require, improvements are not covered by these programs; mitigation shall be
implemented through fair -share contribution or as otherwise determined by the City
Engineer."
In order to reflect the requirement for payment of "fair share" road improvement fees, new Project -
wide Development Standards have been added to the AV SP which require:
• The project proponent/developer(s) shall pay the Transportation Uniform Mitigation
Fee (TUMF) in accordance with the fee schedule in effect at the time of issuance of a
building permit, pursuant to County Ordinance No. 824.
The project proponent/developer(s) shall pay all applicable development impact fees
and mitigation fees as required by the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and other
City -adopted fees.
tc,;l
Comment Letter X
County of Riverside Transportation Department
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
\j TRANSPORTATIONAND
LAND MANAGEMENTAGENCY
Juan C. Perez, PX, KE. Transportation Department Pamela aoum, P.r.
Dire zar of %ransporlanon and Assistant l%W vor or rrenspod don
Land bfanagarient
February 16, 2016
City of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission
183 N. Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
RE! Public Hearing Item IDM 16-.068, Aiberhill Villages specific Plan (SP No. 2010-02), on the
February 16. 2016 Planning Commission Nearing
Dear Commissioners;
As part of your considerations to take action on the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan (SP No. 2010-02), the
County of Riverside Transportation Department (County) provides the following continents in addition to
those provided in the County's December 31, 2015 letter.
The proposed project is locatedsouth of the I-15 freeway, west of Lake Street, and borders the
unincorporated County. As illustrated in the SP No. 2010-02 and its Draft Environmental Impact Report,
Temeseal Canyon Road provides a' connection to areas north and west of the project. It would be
reasonable to assume that the project's proposed university and retail uses would attract trips from these
areas.. Although the: I-15 freeway is available, trips from these areas would also utilize Temeseal Canyon
Road, Additionally, Temeseal. Canyon Road is the only parallel facility that operates as an alternate to the
freeway which makes it a critical road duringemergency closures on the freeway. The Riverside County
Transportation. Commission (RCTC) has plans to further improve the I-15 Freeway, however the timing of
these improvements are unknown and would occur at some point in the distant future.
X-1
With the project estimated to generate over 150,000 dailytrips, an emphasis should be placed to have the
project improve Temeseal Canyon Road. The County requests that the City require theproject to develop
a phasing plantoimprove the Temeseal Canyon Road corridor prior to approval of the Specific Plan. This X-2
phasing plan, with input from the City and County, will provide a clear plan of action to ensure
improvements are constructed in a timely manner as the project develops.
The City and County utilize the same Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation Guidelines to determine the
study area and intersection to be analyzed in a traffic study. One of the key criteria used to determine if X-3
an intersection should be studied is when a proposedproject adds 50 or more peak hourly trips to it
Although the project's traffic study analyzed the intersection of Horsethief Canyon Road at Temeseal
4080 I.mon Siren, 8'6 Floor Riwreide, CA 92501 (931)453-6740
R.O. Hos 1040 Rivctudk CA 92502-1090 FAX(951)955=3198
001
Canyon Road, if is reasonable to assume -that the project would add more than SO peak hourly trips to
intersections on TemescaI Canyon Road to the north and west. According to Caltrans' publication of traffic X-3
counts, in 2014 the annual daily average traffic an the 1-15 freeway between Lake Street and Indian Truck Cont.
Trail Road was 122,ODO. Given only six lanes exists on the freeway, a portion of the projects estimated
150,000 daily trips will likely use alternative routes to travel north, namely Temescal Canyon Road.
The County views Temescal Canyon Road as a critical roadway for the area as it Serves an emergency
access route and -provides relief as congestion develops on the freeway. We hope the City will see the
benefit in requiring the project to develop a phasing. plan to improve the Temescal Canyon Road corridor. X-4
Sincerely,
:Russell Williams
'Development Review Manager
RUW:KKT
cc: Juan C. Perez, Director of Transportation and Land Management.
Patricia Romo, Assistant Director of Transportation
4090),emnn SSima, 8"' Moo Riversi& CA 925{11. (9511955G740
RO. Bos 1090 lbl usidra CA 92502-109(1 fAX (951)1).55-3198
237
Response to Comment Letter X
County of Riverside Transportation Department
The County of Riverside Transportation Department ("Caltrans") provided comments regarding
the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") (State Clearinghouse Number
2012061046) for the Alberhill Villages Specific Plan and related applications in its letter dated
January 13, 2016. The following discussion provides responses to those comments. The responses
and any edits provided below merely clarify and amplify the analysis and conclusions already
presented in the DEIR. The environmental issues raised in the comment letter and responded to
below do not present any substantial evidence showing any new or different potentially significant
impacts as defined by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
Response to County of Riverside Transportation Department Comment X-1
The commenter describes how Temescal Canyon Road is the only parallel facility that operates as
an alternative to the I-15 freeway, which makes it a "critical road during emergency closures on
the freeway." The commenter also notes that the Riverside County Transportation Department
(RCTC) has plans to improve the I-15 freeway, but that the timing of these improvements are
unknown "and would occur at some point in the distant future." These comments are
acknowledged. No new environmental issues have been raised by this comment and no additional
mitigation measures and no modification of the DEIR are required.
Response to County of Riverside Transportation Department Comment X-2
It is acknowledged that at AVSP build -out, the project is expected to generate over 150,000 daily
trips. However, there is a projected 30 -year development period for the AVSP, and construction
of implementing development projects will occur at individual project locations and at unknown
times during the 30 -year period. It would be speculative to identify the timing of future traffic
levels at each phase of the future development of the AVSP and when future off-site improvements
to Temescal Canyon Road may be required. Additionally, the need to improve those portions of
Temescal Canyon Road may result from currently unknown development projects located within
unincorporated Riverside County and in the City of Corona.
As described above in the Response to Comment X-1, Temescal Canyon Road is the only parallel
facility that operates as an alternative to the I-15 freeway, which makes it a "critical road during
emergency closures on the freeway." As such, Temescal Canyon Road serves a regional role and
should be improved as a regional facility. Only a short stretch of Temescal Canyon Road is within
the incorporated boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore and the majority of Temescal Canyon
Road is within unincorporated Riverside County. The City has no legal jurisdiction beyond its
incorporated borders.
Please refer to the above Response to Comment B-65 and the above Response to Comment E-2.
238
The AV SP is required to comply with all regulatory requirements for payment of "fair share" fees
for road improvements. These fees are payable at the times established by the regulations that
establish such fees. Compliance with regulatory requirements do not need to be set forth as
mitigation fees. Nevertheless, Mitigation Measure TC -2 provides:
"The project shall participate in the phased construction of the on -and off-site intersection
improvements through payment of City of Lake Elsinore fees, and the participation in the
Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) program.
"Where require, improvements are not covered by these programs; mitigation shall be
implemented through fair -share contribution or as otherwise determined by the City
Engineer."
In order to reflect the requirement for payment of "fair share" road improvement fees, new Project -
wide Development Standards have been added to the AVSP which require:
• The project proponent/developer(s) shall pay the Transportation Uniform Mitigation
Fee (TUMF) in accordance with the fee schedule in effect at the time of issuance of a
building permit, pursuant to County Ordinance No. 824.
The project proponent/developer(s) shall pay all applicable development impact fees
and mitigation fees as required by the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and other
City -adopted fees.
Response to County of Riverside Transportation Department Comment X-3
It is acknowledged that both the City and County currently utilize the same Traffic Impact Analysis
Preparation Guidelines. See the above Response to Comment E-1. As described above in the
above Response to Comment X-1, it is acknowledged that Temescal Canyon Road will serve as
an alternative to the I-15 freeway for travel north.
Response to County of Riverside Transportation Department Comment X-4
See the above Response to Comment X-2.
239