Los Ranchitos homeowners, cycling advocates tell Temecula council to protect neighborhood and keep active-transportation goals

At a Temecula City Council capital-improvement workshop, two public commenters asked council and staff to hold firm to the city’s circulation and quality‑of‑life goals and to protect a longtime neighborhood from a proposed roadway widening.

Louis Todd, president of the Los Ranchitos Homeowners Association, said his neighborhood — where his family moved in 1986 — has become a cut‑through for drivers and that proposed capital improvements such as “Inez phase 2” widening to four lanes are a threat to local safety. “We would just ask that you would consider helping our neighborhood and protecting our ability to actually go out of our front yards, and walk down the street,” Todd told the council. He said Los Ranchitos is an equestrian community with bike lanes used by families and riders and asked council to remove the widening from the CIP so residents would not feel the change was inevitable.

An active‑transportation advocate who identified himself as Adi, speaking for the Pike Temecula Valley coalition, urged council to keep the circulation element and the Quality of Life Master Plan at the center of CIP decisions. “We’ve become a silver level bicycle town,” Adi said, praising recent trail projects and urging the council to continue planning for “biking, walking, mobility devices” and safe connections between residential areas and employment centers.

Why it matters: Residents near Inez Road asked the council to prioritize safety, neighborhood character and separated bike/pedestrian facilities over widening that would increase vehicle speeds. Council members and staff later discussed how the General Plan circulation element currently shows Inez as four lanes and that any change in its inclusion or scope would be handled through the General Plan update and a follow‑up circulation analysis.

What happened next: Council members discussed the Inez item as part of the broader CIP review and noted the project is in the CIP only because the circulation element currently lists four lanes. Several council members said the General Plan update will inform whether the widening stays in the CIP; staff said the HOA and nearby stakeholders will be consulted during the general‑plan update process.

Context and limits: Todd asked for the removal of the widening from the capital plan; staff and council said removing or changing the project is a policy decision tied to the General Plan circulation element and would come back to council after the circulation analysis. The speakers requested, and staff acknowledged, more outreach to HOAs and improved active‑transportation design in future CIP work.