Lucerne Valley Information Website
Lucerne
Valley Community Calendar
|
|
|
|
HWY 18/247 PROJECT LIST – LUCERNE VALLEY (Not necessarily in order of priority )
(Notes from 3/6/08 meeting in SB and 4/23/08 meeting/drive around in LV)
SR 18
1. Impact of “High Desert Corridor Project” on Lucerne/Morongo Valleys. The Corridor’s eastern terminus ends at Joshua Rd. in Apple Valley. Its 4 to 6 lanes dumping traffic on 2 lane Hwy 18 (with a significant ADT increase in both directions due to the Corridor’s link between I-14 and the I-10) will create congestion and safety hazards on Hwys 18, 247 and 62. This is a “trade corridor” that has to be addressed in its entirety. LVEDA’S position: The best long-term solution would be to incorporate improvements to these eastern segments in the planning and funding for the High Desert Corridor project. Without said planning and a financing link to the project, the Corridor EIR’s “off-site” analysis for these eastern segments will have to show “a significant, adverse environmental impact” that will be difficult or impossible to ignore with “findings of overriding consideration”. The EIR will likely be challenged. (Not resolved)
2. 1 mile segment (4 lanes) between Lucerne and Apple Valleys and realignment - from mile 80-81.
Originally a SHOPP project (#40320k). Dropped due to funding problems and will not be reactivated as such. At 3/6/08 meeting: Brad mentioned a “Measure I project”. Obtain an “operational match”? Need a cost est. and scope. Could be $2-3 mil. Include in legislative program? Per Haissam: SHOPP is under-funded and the wrong process. Passing lanes are not a safety solution – only when warranted by volume - so therefore “this is not a safety project”. “Should not have been previously proposed for mile 80-81 on a curve. Plus - would have 4 lanes of traffic merging back to 2 lanes – causing additional hazards”. 4/23 meeting: This project “won’t be planned or installed”. LVEDA’s position: Increasing traffic (exacerbated by interstate truck traffic) necessitates some form of resolution. And well before the “Corridor” is operational - need a min. 4 lanes between AV and LV. Ideas mentioned at 4/23 meeting for interim measures: - “new signage coming – more ‘no passing’ striping” (including at curves and sight restricted areas west past Bear Valley Rd. turnoff). Caltrans to consider “no passing” from Buena Vista Rd. east past CDF station. Agreement that commercial strip needs continuous L/T center lane. How to finance? CHP presence helpful now.
3. Status of left turn pocket at High Rd.
Still set for 11/08. Originally “approved” in
early-mid 90’s. 4. Resurface west bound lane between Lucerne Valley and Apple Valley - damaged by heavy truck traffic.
Summer 08? – to be confirmed by Gary.
5. Left turn pockets at Custer, Kendall and Tradepost Rds. - right turn lane at Highland Rd. - all 3 projects in conjunction with County Trans.
Custer: Const. is now set for 9/09 – high priority for Caltrans. Tradepost: County doing it – environmental is done. April 08 bid. Const. on schedule per Eric for 7/08 or 8/08. Kendall: No project initiated – consider using Measure I or include in trans. fee plan? Highland: RT lane was required per shopping center approval – never installed. Simple and cheap. Use available fee plan $ and get it done now. (This was mistakenly referred to as “L/T” lane in a recent press release – which exists). Eric to check R/W and old shopping center CUP status. We will provide owner info. @$400,000 in LV Trans. Fund – agreed this is #1 priority for said $ and to proceed.
6. Caltrans' plans for the ultimate R/W and number of lanes.
Per “Hwy 18 Route Concept Report”: Ultimate 4 lanes plus turn pockets. “But will remain 2 lanes for @ 20 years” (which from LV’s perspective certainly won’t be feasible, especially if the High Desert Corridor comes on line before that). 4 lanes will be needed much sooner – see #2 above). County’s Trans. Fac. Plan shows it as ultimate 6 lanes? Discrepancy. Projections/polices need revising? Requested replacement of reflectors on flood channel bridge. Caltrans to do?
7. Re-align Hwy 18/247(Crystal Creek Rd.) intersection to 90 degree approaches.
Minor discussion - no resolution.
8. 4 way stop – Said intersection.
No discussion or resolution other than “could be an interim solution” but contrary to Caltrans’ policy to keep state highways “free flowing”.
SR 247 1. Flashing yellow light on southbound lane of SR 247 north of the Elementary School.
Per Caltrans: Limited and highly competitive funding for these flashers, especially since students are primarily bussed w/limited walking to and from school (even with the existing crosswalk). Eric to find out from grant sources if this would be competitive. School Dist. can purchase and install outside Caltrans’ R/W – or OK in R/W w/encroachment permit. School Dist. could pursue special funding sources. Best would be solar and operate 24/7 (which would also slow down south-bound traffic prior to the 4-way stop – avoiding need for flasher at said stop?). Stripe no-passing lanes from the 4-way stop at 247/247 north past school site?
2. No-passing striping from east of the 4-way stop past fire stations.
East-bound
passing is currently allowed immediately east of the 4-way stop through the
locations of the library, Senior Center, park, County and CDF fire stations –
resulting in high-speed passing at these critical turning locations. @½ mile
of no-pass striping in this segment is necessary, easy, cheap solution.
Caltrans to review - looks promising. 3. Numerous requests for east-bound left-turn pockets east of the 4-way stop at Post Office, Midway and Medanos Rds. - and a right turn lane at Visalia Rd.
Needed now – can’t wait for when and if Hi Des. Corridor is in place. Absolutely need to get these turn pockets on a schedule. Eric to check re: fee plan option. R-Turn at Visalia most important – all agreed it is Fee Plan priority #2.
4. Install flashers/rumble strips/larger “stop ahead” signs/larger stop signs on west and southbound approaches to Hwy 247/247’s 4-way stop.
Simple, low cost, effective. Rumble strips are noisy – but effective and not major problem in commercial area. Flasher is best, in addition to larger “stop” and “stop ahead” signs? Has to meet volume, etc. criteria. Caltrans to respond. School flasher could suffice for south-bound traffic. If not, need both at intersection.
6. R/L turn pockets – north and southbound lanes – Hwy 247/Rabbit Springs Rd. intersection.
R/T lane most critical now due to increasing north-bound truck traffic. Future payback from Rancho Lucerne project? Fee Plan priority #3.
GENERAL
1. Status of LV Transportation Facilities Fee Plan?
Currently being reviewed, updating costs – determine realistic fees for LV development. LV requests input – will be public meeting.
2. Mechanism to best mitigate increased local truck traffic generation?
County Planning issue. Needs resolution.
3. “R-turn only” exiting new storage facility on Hwy 18.
Discussed the resulting and dangerous turning movements created by this requirement. Per Haissam – the “only solution is for owners to provide L/T pocket”. This is an expensive, unwarranted, precedent-setting requirement; where line-of-sight is adequate. We need a resolution other than “L/T lane” – especially for low traffic volume land-uses.
.Excerpt from our 4/8/08 e-mail:
……. it will create a significant traffic problem. Traffic desiring to exit east (left-turn) - likely the majority - will have to exit right - either moving to the west-bound shoulder to do a u-turn - more likely turning around in the "Burger Depot" parking lot - or make a left turn (south) onto Custer Rd. - and even with an eventual left-turn lane - having to find a place to turn around - and make a r-turn onto Hwy 18 - all complicated and unnecessary movements. Said traffic could likely include trailers - moving stuff to or from the storage facility - further slowing said vehicles on the busy highway. There is no good reason why the minimal amount of traffic associated with this project (only a few vehicles per day - unlike that associated with more intense commercial land-uses) - can't wait for a break in traffic on Hwy 18 to make a left turn - with good line-of-sight - and not holding up other vehicles behind (likely none) from their turning movements. |
Send mail to
webmaster@sisp.net with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
