Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout011800 CC Minutes WorkshopMINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 18, 2000 The City Council convened in an adjoumed workshop meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Tuesday, January 18, 2000, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Absent: ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers: Councilmember: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, and Stone. None. The salute to the Flag was led by Councilman Naggar. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Having met with Congressmen Calvert and Packard and Congresswoman Bono, Mayor Stone commented on the city's funding wish list of $10 to $13 million and commended Congressmen Calvert and Packard and Congresswoman Bono on their representation on behalf of the City in an effort to achieve this wish list. COUNCIL BUSINESS Riverside Countv InteGrated Plan (RCIP) RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Receive and file. City Manager Nelson reviewed the staff report (of record), highlighting the County's coordinated efforts with the City to propedy address the impacts of population growth, including traffic impacts, as well as new construction. Mr. Nelson advised that the County of Riverside has embarked on the development of the Riverside County Integrated Plan, which encompasses mass transit, traffic circulation, land use densities, and endangered species and noted that without the input of all County of Riverside cities, this Plan would be neither functional nor effective. Stating that it would be staffs goal, this evening, to provide information to the City Council and the community on the County's Integrated Plan, City Manager Nelson requested that the City Council consider the development strategies, between the County and the City, necessary to ensure the City's concerns/issues are properly addressed within this Plan. Mayor Stone welcomed and introduced Supervisor Buster. R:%Minutes~)l 1800 1 In light of the County's recognized high levels of growth and the recognized need to differently proceed in the future, Mr. Bob Lashbrook, Agency Director, commented on the County's commitment to the development of the Integrated Plan which will be addressing an overhaul of the County's General Plan, transportation infrastructure, and the Endangered Species Act. In closing, Mr. Lashbrook commented on the total budget for this Plan ($20 million), the timeframe (three years), and the need for partnership among the cities and County. Mr. Mel Placilla, Project Director, further elaborated on the Integrated Plan process, commenting on the projected estimates as to population, job growth/creation, commuting patterns, General Plan challenges, existing entitlements, and open space requirements, density, and multi-modal corridor needs. Mr, Placilla as well commented on the County's goal of an outreach program to the cities and its residents and further addressed the scheduled timeframe. Referencing the County's Vision Statement, Mr. Richard Ramella, General Plan Team Leader, provided detailed information of the Statement, noting that the County's Vision Statement was written 20 years in the future, commenting on housing, transportation, conservation, air quality, etc., and advising that the Vision Statement is responsive to the one adopted by the Board of Supervisors and Riverside County Transportation Committee (RCTC), and bdefly commenting on identification of corridors/arterials, transportation program budget, working area plans, outreach programs, development of habitat alternatives, and transportation mitigation fees. Mr. Ramella reiterated the County's desire for City participation and need to work with City staff in order to identify projects, action, and ensure compatibility with the Habitat Conservation Plan. In closing, Mr. Ramella reiterated the importance of City and community involvement in this process. Providing an overview of the Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP), Mr. Steve Smith, CETAP Team Leader, addressed transportation and corridors, noting the following: · Development of multi-modal corridors · Circulation Element - arterial highways, trails, transit system, etc. coordinated with Circulation Elements of other adjoining cities impact of anticipated population growth on traffic development of an initial transportation strategy transportation support strategies (ridesharing) · Reviewed CETAP Plan schedule In response to City Council discussion, County representatives provided input as follows: For Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero, the following was noted with regard to specifically dealing with problems relative to the Southwestern Riverside County, with regard to the County's ability to truly implement the Plan once completed and approved, and with regard to the possibility of reversing the estimated population growth: that the Southwestern Area Plan has been identified as the No. 1 priority plan for the County; R:%Minutes~011800 2 that there is a sense of urgency in completing this Plan; that the existing level of development (previously approved) and its potential impacts are being reviewed and monitored; that the population growth forecast, for the Region, is driven by SCAG which, in turn, is driven by the Department of Finance at the State level; at the County's request, SCAG is further reevaluating that population growth forecast; that part of the upcoming precass, a determination will be made as to whether or not that estimate should change and or be reversed. In response to Councilman Naggar, the following was noted with regard to mad and artedal relief, freeway system concams, and implementation and funding of the Plan: that the Plan should be developed within 24 months and, therefore, should be completed within the next 15 months; that the public hearing review process, once developed, will take approximately 12 months with a majority of that process occurring at the State/Federal level; that the next two-to- six month period is an extremely cdticel period for the development of this Plan and, therefore, reiterated the involvement of cities; that freeway interchange locations will be reviewed; that it has been deemed appropriate, by Supervisor Buster, to continue, for the County, to review projects based on the existing General Plan and existing policies/problems; that the General Plan Advisory Committee has been asked to make some formal recommendation with regard to how to process projects in the intedm pedod. In response to Councilman Roberts' request, the following was noted: that the General Plan Advisory Committee may request input from CETAP and Multi-Species on the issue of not approving any additional projects until the completion of this Plan. Commending the City Council on a job well done with regard to this issue, Councilman Pratt noted that the issue of transportation must be the key issue of concern and unless that is accomplished, this Plan will not be functional. With regard to the moratorium, he noted that it would not necessarily be his intent to stop construction but to ensure that the future will provide proper and adequate transportation. Commending the County on its proactive approach, Mayor Stone commented on the Circulation Element and the need for right-of-way acquisitions and associated funding and the County's need to address public transportation, Apprising the City Council of staff's efforts associated with the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee, Deputy City Manager Thornhill commented on Federal grants and other alternative funding sources available to acquire property and associated improvements. Expressing his appreciation for having been given the opportunity to attend this Workshop, Supervisor Buster further commented and clarified the Plan and its associated process and the R :Vvlinutes~l 1800 3 need for the cities and County to work together, noting that the City's General Plan should not necessarily be identical to that of the County's but that it should be integrated and compatible and as well share similar goals. Commenting on the public's responsibility in the future, Mr. Buster, as well, encouraged the general public to be involved in this process. At this time, Mayor Stone invited public input. Ms. Adrian McGregor, 3455 Madera del Playa, expressed her concerns with regard to future impacts on water, air congestion, and the impacts of SMART Housing. Speaking in support of this process, Mr. David Micheal. 30300 Churchill Court, commended the Board of Supervisors, City Council, and staff on a job well done. Speaking in opposition to a moratorium, Mr. Karel Lindemans spoke in strong support of public transportation. In light of the incredible amount of growth the City has experienced, Ms. Tamra Teig Kjos, 39570 Calle Anita, spoke in support of this process; encouraged the County and City to work together; expressed concern with regard to transportation; and noted her opposition to a moratorium. Deputy City Manager Thornhill advised that over the past 10 years, the City has reduced development density of previously appreved County plans by 8% to 10% and that the City has only approved a couple of Specific Plans such as Campos Verde for which the density was reduced from 900 units to 200 units and that the Merdi Ranch project has been deferred because Pala Road and the bridge has not been completed nor has the widening of SR 79. In response to public comments, it was noted by County representatives that the desire for mass transit and the desire for reduced density are two issues that don't necessarily coincide and that the proposed Plan will require the need for choices. Ms. Michelle Anderson, 43797 Barletta Street, encouraged Supervisor Buster to stop approvals of any Specific Plans until the completion of this Integrated Plan. Mr. Gene Frickman, Citizens Advisory Board, encouraged public participation in this process and suggested that city staff provide to the public periodic updates as to the Plan process. Favoring periodic updates, Councilman Roberts noted that he would be providing periodic updates as a result of his attendance at CETAP meetings. Mr. Roberts requested that the presentation made, at a recent CETAP meeting, about the clustering of dwelling units around a transportation center, be presented to the City Council. Mayor Pro Tern Comerchero strongly emphasized to the County representatives of what the City could potentially lose if this Plan were not effectively implemented. Councilman Pratt reiterated his support of mass transportation. Supporting this Plan process, Councilman Naggar echoed his support for mass transit. Mayor Stone requested that it be relayed to the Supervisors that the City Council is unanimously concerned about the increases of density along the City's periphery while the Integrated Plan is being formulated. Mr. Stone reiterated the City's desire to be a part of this process and echoed the comments with regard to mass transit. R:W)inutes~)l 1800 4 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT Commending staff for their efforts associated with the preparation of this meeting and thanking Supervisor Buster and the public for their attendance, Mr. Nelson informed the City Council and the public that representatives from the City of Murrieta were invited but because of a City Council meeting, representation at this meeting was not feasible. He noted that staff will continue to communicate with the City of Murrieta with regard to the development of this Plan. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that there were no Closed Session items to report. ADJOURNMENT At 8:26 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, January 25, 2000, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Ddve, Temecula, California. JOr~eSu'~' ~ [SEAL] (~'~"~eff~re~, Mayor R:~4inutes~Dl 1800 5