HomeMy WebLinkAbout032416 PTS Agenda In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the
office of the City Clerk's Department at 951-694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting(28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]
MEETING AGENDA
TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
TO BE HELD AT
TEMECULA CIVIC CENTER, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
THURSDAY, MARCH 24, 2016, 6:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Richardson
FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Mann
ROLL CALL: Carter, Coram, Nagel, Mann, Richardson
PRESENTATIONS:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of fifteen minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Commission on
items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes each. If you desire
to speak to the Commission about an item not listed on the Agenda, a yellow"Request to Speak"
form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
For all other agenda items, a"Request to Speak"form must be filed with the Recording Secretary
before the Commission gets to that item. There is a three minute time limit for individual speakers.
COMMISSION REPORTS
Reports by the Commissioners on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not
to exceed, ten minutes will be devoted to these reports.
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by
one vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission request that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
1. Action Minutes of February 25, 2016
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of February 25, 2016.
1
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2. Neighborhood Traffic Calming — Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission:
2.1 Recommend the implementation of traffic calming measure Alternative A;
2.2 Maintain the existing "Stop" control on Suzi Lane at Seraphina Road: and
2.3 Direct Staff to perform an Engineering and Traffic Survey on Suzi Lane and
Chandler Drive after implementation of traffic calming measures.
3. City Council and Public/Traffic Safety Commission Joint Meeting
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission:
3.1 Provide further direction to Staff.
TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT
POLICE CHIEF'S REPORT
FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission will be held on
Thursday, April 28, 2016, at 6:00 P.M. at Temecula Civic Center,City Council Chambers,41000
Main Street, Temecula, California.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
The agenda packet(including stall'reports)will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center(41000 Main Street,
Temecula)atter 4:00 PM the Friday before the Publ icrtraffie Safety Commission meeting. At that time,the agenda packet may also be accessed on the
City's website-www.cityoftemecula.org-and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting,
Supplemental material received after the posting of the \genda
Any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the agenda. will be
available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center(41000 Main Street.Temecula,5:00 AM-5:00 PM). In addition,
such material may he accessed on the City's website-www.ciyoftemecula.org-and will be available for public review at the respective meeting.
If you have any questions regarding any item on the agenda for this meeting,please contact the Public Works Department at the Temecula Civic Center,
(951)694-64H.
2
91OZ 'SZ Annmaai
Jo saJnum uoJJaF
I 'ONI IAIAII
ACTION MINUTES
TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
TEMECULA CIVIC CENTER, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
41000 MAIN STREET
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2016, 6:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Richardson (6:00 PM)
FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Hagel
ROLL CALL: Coram, Hagel, Mann, Richardson
Commissioner Carter was absent.
PRESENTATIONS: None
COMMISSION REPORTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Action Minutes of January 28, 2016 -Approved staff recommendation (3-0-1-1)with a
motion made by Commissioner Hagel and seconded by Commissioner Coram.
Individual voice vote reflected approval by Commissioners Coram, Hagel and
Richardson. Commissioner Mann abstained; Commissioner Carter was absent.
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of January 28, 2016.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2. Nighthawk Pass Traffic Calming—Revisited -Approved staff recommendation(4-0-1)
with a motion made by Commissioner Hagel and seconded by Commissioner Coram.
Individual voice vote reflected approval by Commissioners Coram, Hagel, Mann and
Richardson. Commissioner Carter was absent.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission:
2.1 Recommend the implementation of Phase 1 — "Bulb-outs" on Nighthawk
Pass at Choate Street, Channel Street and Easterly Subdivision Boundary;
and
2.2 Direct Staff to coordinate the removal of landscaping on Nighthawk Pass at
Choate Street and Channel Street with the property owner and Homeowner's
Association.
Speakers on this item were: Denise Wells, Leland Watson and Bruce Fallini
3. Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey Update-Approved staff recommendation(3-
0-1-1)with a motion made by Commissioner Coram and seconded by Commissioner
Mann. Individual voice vote reflected approval by Commissioners Coram, Hagel and
Mann. Commissioner Richardson abstained; Commissioner Carter was absent.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission:
3.1 Recommend the City Council adopt an Ordinance establishing the speed
limits identified in Exhibit "B".
TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT
POLICE CHIEF'S REPORT
FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT -The meeting adjourned at 7:27 PM with a motion made by Commissioner
Mann and seconded by Commissioner Hagel.
The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission will be held on
Thursday, March 24, 2016, at 6:00 P.M. at Temecula Civic Center, City Council Chambers,
41000 Main Street, Temecula, California.
J. R. Richardson Thomas W. Garcia
Chairperson Director of Public Works I City Engineer
2
ITEM NO. 2
Neighborhood Traffic Calming —
Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive
AGENDA REPORT tog TRAtto
•
•
TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission
1111,61989
FROM: Tom Garcia, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE: March 24. 2016
SUBJECT Item 2
Neighborhood Traffic Calming — Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive
Prepared By: Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer- Traffic
RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission:
1. Recommend the implementation of traffic calming measure Alternative A;
2. Maintain the existing "Stop" control on Suzi Lane at Seraphina Road; and
3. Direct Staff to perform an Engineering and Traffic Survey on Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive
after implementation of traffic calming measures.
BACKGROUND: In November 2015, Staff received a petition from residents on Suzi Lane
and Chandler Drive requesting the establishment of a posted speed limit and implementation of
neighborhood traffic calming features to reduce vehicular speeds and mitigate cut-through traffic
volumes. The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commissions consideration
of this issue through the agenda notification process and by mail.
Suzi Lane is a forty-four (44) foot wide street that functions as a residential collector roadway
providing access to numerous single family homes between Seraphina Road and Murrieta Hot
Springs Road. On-street parking is allowed on both sides of the roadway. Since there are only
six (6) residences fronting Suzi Lane, the roadway does not comply with the definition of
Residence District as identified in the California Vehicle Code and the residential prima facie
speed limit of 25 MPH does not apply on Suzi Lane.
Chandler Drive is a forty-four (44) foot wide street that functions as a residential collector
roadway providing access to numerous single family homes between Seraphina Road, Suzi
Lane and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. On-street parking is allowed on both sides of the
roadway. Since there are only four (4) residences fronting Chandler Drive, the roadway does
not comply with the definition of Residence District as identified in the California Vehicle Code
and the residential prima facie speed limit of 25 MPH does not apply on Chandler Drive.
In December 2015. Staff performed a review of conditions on Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive
which included vehicular volume data collection and observation of prevailing vehicular speeds
using radar. The vehicular volume data was collected along both roadways over a three (3)
period The results of the review are shown in the table below.
85m Percentile
Location Volume Speed
Suzi Lane - Seraphina Road to Shree Road 1,860 ADT 30 MPH
Chandler Drive - Suzi Lane to Murrieta Hot Springs Road 1.540 ADT I 35 MPH
1 _
As shown, the existing 85`" percentile speeds on Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive vary from 30
MPH to 35 MPH. Based on the results of the observation of prevailing speeds, a posted speed
limit of 30 MPH and 35 MPH may be appropriate for Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive,
respectively. However, a posted speed limit for both streets will need to be established on the
basis of an Engineering and Traffic (E&T) Survey as defined in the California Vehicle Code.
At a Neighborhood Traffic Calming Workshop held in February 2016, Staff presented potential
traffic calming measures that would address the resident's concerns about vehicular speeds.
The workshop was attended by ten (10) of fourteen (14) affected residents on Suzi Lane and
Chandler Drive. The traffic calming measures presented included roadway striping, "bulb-outs",
chicanes, bike lanes, painted medians and traffic calming measures considered at other
locations throughout the City. Additionally, Staff presented two (2) concept striping plans that
were specific for conditions on Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive. The ten (10) workshop attendees
selected concept plan, Alternative A, which provides the following lane configuration:
Suzi Lane — Seraphina Road to Shree Road
2-10 foot wide travel lanes with Sharrow bike facility
2-8 foot wide parking lanes
1-8 foot wide painted median with driveway access
Suzi Lane — Shree Road to Chandler Drive
2-5 foot wide striped bike lanes
2-10 foot wide travel lanes
1-14 foot wide painted median
Chandler Drive — Suzi Lane to Murrieta Hot Springs Road
1-12 foot wide combination parking/bike lane (residential side)
2-10 foot wide travel lanes
1-5 foot wide bike lane
1-7 foot wide painted median with driveway access
During the workshop several attendees suggested that multi-way stop signs be considered at
the intersection of Seraphina Road at Suzi Lane to reduce excessive speeds attributed to
vehicles turning right onto Suzi Lane from Seraphina Road. Staff agreed to perform a multi-way
stop warrant analysis to determine if multi-way stop signs are justified at the intersection.
At a follow-up Neighborhood Traffic Calming Workshop held in March 2016, a detailed plan of
the selected Alternative A was presented to the residents for review and final approval. The
consensus of the workshop attendees was to move forward with implementation of the selected
traffic calming measure. Since the vehicular volume data was not available for the workshop,
Staff was not able to address the multi-way stop request.
In March 2016, vehicular volume data was collected at the intersection for a three (3) day
period. In addition to the data collection, a review of conditions was performed, which included
an evaluation of sight distance, collision history, and completion of a multi-way stop warrant
analysis.
An evaluation of sight distance revealed the visibility is appropriate for conditions and speeds
looking north and south on Seraphina Road from Suzi Lane. An unobstructed line of sight of
155 feet is required for the posted prima facie speed limit of 25 MPH on Seraphina Road.
2
A review of the collision history for the twelve (12) month period from March 1, 2015 to February
29, 2015, indicates there were no reported collisions at the intersection. The favorable record is
attributed to driver familiarity with roadway conditions and exercising due care when entering
and travelling through the intersection.
The Multi-Way Stop Sign Installation Policy for Residential Streets warrant criteria was used to
evaluate the need for multi-way stop signs at the intersection. The warrants allow for the
installation of multi-way stop signs when the following conditions are satisfied:
1. Minimum Traffic Volumes
a) The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches is equal to or
greater than three-hundred (300) vehicles per hour for any eight (8) hours of an average
day and
b) The combined vehicular volume and pedestrian volume from the minor street is equal to
or greater than one-hundred (100) per hour for the same eight (8) hours.
2. Collision History
a) Three (3) or more reported collisions within a twelve (12) month period of a type
susceptible to correction by a multi-way stop installation. Such accidents include right
and left-turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions.
3. Roadway Characteristics
a) The traffic volume on the uncontrolled street exceeds two thousand (2,000) vehicles per
day,
b) The intersection has four (4) legs, with the streets extending 600 feet or more away from
the intersection on at least three (3) of the legs;
c) The vehicular volumes on both streets are nearly equal to a forty/sixty percent (40/60%)
split; and
d) Both streets are 44 feet wide or narrower.
WARRANTS 1, 2, and 3 MUST BE SATISFIED
Other criteria that may be considered when evaluating the need for multi-way stop signs
include:
4. Visibility
a) The intersections sight distance is less than:
• 155 feet for 25 MPH
• 200 feet for 30 MPH
• 250 feet for 35 MPH
5. The need to control left-turn conflicts.
6. The need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts near locations that generate high pedestrian
volumes such as schools, parks and activity centers.
7. The roadways and intersection appear on a Suggested Route to School plan.
8. There are no traffic signal or all-way stop controls located within 600 feet of the intersection.
3
i - i -
9. The installation of multi-way stop signs is compatible with overall traffic circulation needs for
the residential area.
The Multi-Way Stop warrant analysis performed at the intersection indicates that Warrants 1, 2,
and 3 are not satisfied and multi-way stop signs are not justified. Additionally, an evaluation of
the optional criteria, such as intersection sight distance, indicates there are no special
circumstances that justify the need for right-of-way control provided by multi-way stop signs.
In the past, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission has considered similar requests to install
multi-way stop signs to control vehicular speeds on roadways that function as a residential
collector. The Commission has consistently upheld Staff's opinion that multi-way stop signs
should be used at locations where there is a compelling need to regulate traffic flow and
improve safety and should not be used to reduce vehicular speeds or volumes. The installation
of unwarranted multi-way stop signs at this location will stop vehicles needlessly, create noise,
congestion and increase pollution. For these reasons, Staff does not support the installation of
multi-way stop signs and recommends maintaining the existing Stop control on Suzi Lane at
Seraphina Road.
As previously mentioned the current prevailing speed on Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive is 30
MPH and 35 MPH, respectively. An E&T Survey will be required to establish an appropriate
posted speed limit on both streets. Since traffic calming measures will be implemented that will
alter the characteristics of the roadway, Staff recommends performing an E&T Survey after the
striping improvements have been implemented on Suzi Lane and Chandler Drive.
FISCAL IMPACT: Minor cost associated with implementing recommended traffic calming
measures. Adequate funds are available in the Traffic Division's operating budget.
Attachment:
1. Exhibit "A" — Location Map
2. Exhibit "B" —Traffic Calming Alternative A
3. Exhibit "C" - Multi-Way Stop Warrant Analysis
4
EXHIBIT "A"
LOCATION MAP
5
Qii1CULA
Hk 4l I rF N
Location Map ill
1 Vili 4, Cr"a yv i
i Ili P ..%
1 + tom, r ,`
lih Itilirli
..roRS
r i .1, ,1 4 • - Ir. .. -.%•••';•"".--
'IP , 48��„....-„e.oil
+ �; - el" a ,i Legend
r .'
e` �� .� - '<�68+¢� +- • �. _ MMlielw--- O streets
'R p SpA �F,�.�'� ; r. 0 Parcels
-...,kip •. fi �tP' r�-r ^y P 1 O Aerial 2012
I f f I pRK" rn, , c, dp fl
• / YL. a r. r $ 1 r
'ii. r+
! .\ R t}l TPJ Al '�
i II''
1 , - 4,3:1 \ ----" .0....- 4 't .1 L
�SAkTiT.POINTiCT b._- w ' .! }� , 0/410, 1*-44 .°1-..- :_-..--' fir .
��t •V V.11 1 'P
,. A .1• rIx .. "! ! limit
IV t • om.
'� gall .
,. � t, g , .. ` 1 :I_ i'�`,�rat -
11 � y� r • i 4 IriO v
jiL
•,h. . `�
1.
..
var. � H GHIJIHD;VI9� IR 4, � -� vi'w 1 fir «,,
-,, . Li i„, t i_ ,.:: , - -.01,
0 475 950 1425 ft. (k Scale: 1:4,939
Map center: 6296636, 2145446
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for general
reference only Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate,current.or
otherwise reliable THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION.
EXHIBIT "B"
TRAFFIC CALMING ALTERNATIVE A
7
: .
II
l iiminimaimobaMIE111.111111t 11111011t1111 1
.....
pr
c--7.1,07-:, --- (---- ,
The Heart of Southern California
Wine Country
•.,;.ji:-•,it: . . - - ,,- t ' IP/ 1 ,
I 1 - "111411t" ' y ..
---...._
t ., ---yir . - . r ---",...• 1 --, . - .ap..
1,..r -74 .216
1
.
.....‘1._ . i . _. ..,.
- - :. •
.......-.... .. 4., : .,. •,, ,•1
1 . • r . . .. , .
, . N - ,
a ., , .•ri• I 004010t. '. 0- ..... *. ,...
- • - . N.. ",it"*••• .....` --I"'
Si li ,....,
„...... . . a- _ .. - .,gart- war-•mifir -rmaraimam• ••••••• ffavaTamar S r alwa ' _ So .4 -.
•-r- 1 -, i. ;. 7: • • . •1.4.- •
A.....
ti, _........, \,,,,,,.....
' ...,
;• 4-. ., -
1
,-•,,, , ,, • ,.-E_ • -
- 4- -
,... • i:
Ir• A• .." - I ' . -...i..-.7. k.-e••S.,i ..1! ,
. q •1,_ ir , . .
'' .•2%/44
i H-2 4 ._ .4
1•
F .
. -t', :..' •.a.,. ,..
. ..
i .
• .- -k 74 It , 1 _ .
- . • - •-..i. '
.
`--Ng. ./..... . . .
1 . ...
.• /a .t...
-46.
.._
AO
I # ,
. . .
I .
. ...2,
RP
lit
...-;44*11',-+•...- 4'1: i -. .
I4' ' eit • . . -04 e
Air
11.
. •
'L.ample Flo - T
II
1 i__,.. . .... • .
., ,„T,, ..it.. Ap • 41,
.
.
. ,..
. ..:
I lip.: • , . 4- •a ..,,,
...
•,
...;
,.-.
viii
..,..,
•
-Z„,' • ..
'..
"s tett/
" . &
it 5 : -- I 2 t / - -...
_, ea
•
r.--dr -.... *bp
'.i,... , . ... ,11,1 r , ••••.....„,...... .
Pt, • --'"..-......_ -11Ir ' I . •
, i-A--
• - - r , . . • -v.-. • - -s-- ' 1 ' '
lora 1 1 ._
F
i
....
EXHIBIT "C"
MULTI-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS
9
MULTI-WAY STOP WARRANT (Residential Streets)
Major Street: Seraphina Road Critical Approach Speed 25 MPH
Minor Street: Suzi Lane Critical Approach Speed 30 MPH
Wararnts 1,2,and 3 Must Be Satisfied
1. Minimum Vehicular Volume Satisfied Yes No X I
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS 7-8 AM 12-1 PM 1-2 PM 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM Hour
Total All
Approaches 300 155 108 191 194 190 200 200 128
Combined Vehicular
Ped Volume
(Minor Street) 100 70 40 126 81 76 86 73 39
2. Collision History Satisfied Yes No X
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS
3 OR MORE 0
3. Roadway Characteristics Satisfied Yes No X
(All Parts Below Must Be Satisfied)
A. The traffic volume on the uncontrolled street exceeds two thousand(2,000)vehicles Yes No X
per day,
B. The intersection has four(4)legs,with the streets extending 600 feet or more away
from the intersection on at least three(3)of the legs, Yes No X
C. The vehicular volumes on both streets are nearly equal to a forty/sixty percent(40/60%)
split,and Yes No X
D. Both streets are 44 feet wide or narrower. Yes X No
Options(Other Criteria That May Be Considered)
Satisfied
4. Visibility
The intersection sight distance is less than: Yes No X
155 feet for 25 MPH
200 feet for 30 MPH
250 feet for 35 MPH
5. The need to control left-turn conflicts. Yes No X
6. The need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts near locations that generate
high pedestrian volumes such as schools,parks and activity centers. Yes No X
7. The roadways and intersection appear on a Suggested Route School plan. Yes No X
8. There are no traffic signal or all-way stop controls located within 600 feet of
the intersection. Yes X No
9. The installation of multi-way stop signs is compatible with overall traffic
circulation needs of the residential area. Yes No X
ITEM NO. 3
City Council and
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
Joint Meeting
AGENDA REPORT 7
TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission
1987_2
FROM: .7 Tom Garcia, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
l
DATE: March 24, 2016
SUBJECT Item 3
City Council and Public/Traffic Safety Commission Joint Meeting
Prepared By: Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer - Traffic
RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission:
1. Provide further direction to Staff.
BACKGROUND: Recently, Executive Staff was directed to schedule a joint meeting
between the City Council and each of the individual Commissions that report to the City Council.
The yearly joint meeting provides an opportunity for the Commission to update the City Council
on past accomplishments and future plans. The Commission's joint meeting with the City
Council is scheduled for the meeting of April 12, 2016. Shown below is a list of potential items
that could be presented to the City Council.
Past Accomplishments
• Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
• Bay Hill Drive/Clubhouse Drive
Via Puebla
➢ Nighthawk Pass
➢ Suzi Lane/Chandler Drive
• Multi-Way Stop Signs
Mercedes Street at Third Street
North General Kearny Road at Sierra Madre Drive
• Parking Restrictions
Via Dos Picos
• Land Use Specific Plans
Uptown Jefferson Specific Plan
Temecula Creek Inn Specific Plan
• Altair Specific Plan
• School Issues
Great Oak High School Neighborhood Parking Restrictions
Temecula Valley Unified School District Attendance Area Proposal
School Area Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation
• Speed Limits - Citywide Engineering and Traffic Surveys
• Capital Improvement Program
• Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan
• Old Town Sewer Project
• Sustainability Program
Future Plans
• Red Light Violations
• U-Turn Restrictions
• Citywide Overnight Parking Restrictions
• Continued Implementation of Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
• Pedestrian Accessibility— Features to enhance pedestrian visibility at intersections
Staff recommends the Commission provide further direction regarding the content of the
Commission's presentation to the City Council. The public has been notified of the
Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification
process.
FISCAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact anticipated with the recommended action.
2
TRAFFIC ENGINEER' S
REPORT
A.
L_ ----._j __ -,
+,, 1989
"•,,.,,,,,,,,,,,� MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Garcia, Director of Public Works
FROM: Rodney Tidwell, Maintenance Superintendent— PW Streets
DATE: March 1, 2016
SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report for February, 2016
CC: Judy McNabb, Administrative Assistant
Mayra De La Torre, Senior Engineer— Land Development
Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer - Traffic
Attached please find the Monthly Activity Report for the Month of February. 2016.
The attached spreadsheets detail the maintenance activities and related costs completed by
both in house crews and maintenance contractors
Attachments:
Monthly Activity Report Street Maintenance Division
Street Maintenance Contractors Detail Report
Contracted Maintenance Work Completed
Graffiti Removal Chart
MEMORANDUM
OV t Eatrro
TO: Tom Garcia, Director of Public Works c • ��'^
F I� d
FROM: Rodney Tidwell, Maintenance Superintendent r�rl ,. �t
DATE: March 1, 2016
1989
SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report-February,2016
The following activities were performed by the Street Maintenance Division personnel for the month of February,2016:
1. SIGNS
A. Total signs replaced 44
B. Total signs installed 2
C. Total signs repaired 28
D. Banners Replaced 0
❑. TREES
A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 9
Ill. ASPHALT REPAIRS
A. Total square feet of A. C.repairs 2 004
B. Total Tons 59
IV. CATCH BASINS
A. Total catch basins cleaned 132
B. Down Spouts 12
C. Under sidewalks
D. Bowls 2
V. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT
A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 0
VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL
A. Total locations 36
B. Total S.F. 3,170
VII. STENCILING
A.675 New and Repainted Legends
B.0 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping
C. 0 Bull Nose
D. 0 Thermal Plastic
E. 0 RPMs Installed
R%MN NLAl NtMOACI RPI
Also, City Maintenance stall respoudcd to 63 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming,sign
repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 47 service order requests for the
month ofJanuary,2016.
The Maintenance Crew has also put in 47 hours of overtime which includes standby time,special events and response to
street emergencies.
The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of February, 2016 was $26,164.50
compared to$33,930.50 for the month of January, 2016.
Account No. 5402 $ 26,164.50
Account No.5401 $
Account No. 999-5402
Electronic Copies:
Tom Garcia,City Engineer • Director of Public Works
Amer Altar, Principal Engineer - Capital Improvements
Mayra De Ia Torre,Senior Engineer - land Development
Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer - Traffic Division
npnmwrAIMMOACrkn
i
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Date Submitted March 1 2016
MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT Submitted By Thomas Garcia
STREET MAINTENANCE DIVISION Prepared By Rodney Tidwell
FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016
3RD QUARTER Jan•16 Fsb-15 Mar-15 T_ FISCAL YEAR TO DATE
t TOTAL COST
SCOPE OF WORK Unit Cost WORK COST WORK COST WORK COST WORK COST FOR LAST
COMPLETED COMPLETED COMPLETED COMPLETED SAL YEAR
ASPHALT REPAIRS.
Square Footage $2 97 1,408 $ 4,181.78 0 :$ • 0 S - 60 128 1 43.474 86 $ 78.553 53
'ons 43 5 0 0 318 5
Parking Lot Slurry Seal Square Footage
Gallons'
PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE:
Square Footage' $2 97 0 $ • 0 3 - 0 $ - 0 5 • $ -
PCC Yards 0 0 0 0 -
STRIPING 8 PAVEMENT MARKINGS:
Red curb 8 Stnprng(linear feet) 30 07 0 S - 0 S • 0 $ - 1,817 $ 127 19 $ 8,019 20
New 8 Repainted Legends(each) $8 00 8 S 64 00 675 S 6,400.00 0 $ - 1.200 $ 9,600.00 3 24.056 00
But Noses(each) $0 07 C $ 0 S 0 3 - 0 S - $ 42.84
Raised Pavement Markers-RPM's[each) 10 7 0 42
Tnerrno P+estic Legends(each) C 0 0 — - - -
SIGNS&BANNERS
No of Signs REPLACED $26 39 21 S 554 19 44 S 1,161 16 0 ' S • 608 S 16.045 12 S 17.892 42
Malenal(cost per sign) 350 00 S 1.050 00 $ 2,200.00 •$ - S 30,400.00 ! 33.900 00
No of Signs INSTALLED $26 39 117 S 211 12 2 5 52.78 0 -$ - 107 $ 2.823.73 3 9,579 57
Material(cost per sign $50 00 S 400 00 $ 100.00 $ • •$ 5.350 00 $ 18,150 00
No of Signs REPAIRED $26 39 S 422.24 28 3 738.92 0 $ • 372 '$ 9,81708 5 12.851 93
Materiel(cost per sign). 350 00 5 800.00 $ 1,400.00 $ $ 18,600.00 $ 24,350 00
No of BANNERS installed: 326 39 165 S 4,354 35 ). $ • 0 $ • 418 $ 11,031.02 $ 22.748 19
Christmas Wreaths installed 525 39 0 5 - 0 S 8 84.448
GRAFFITI REMOVAL ~ --
No of Locations 36 0 480 3347
Square Footage 3 170 _ _ _ 0 - 16.749 31884
DRAINAGE FACILmEs CLEANED
Catch Basins 526 39 193 -3 5,093.27 132 $ 3,483.48 0 S - 898 $ 18,420 22 5 38,972 39
Down Drains 526 39 0 $ • 12 S 316.68 0 S • 60 $ 1,583.40 $ 2,982 07
I Jnder sidewalk Drains 526 39 5 ,$ 131.16 1 S 25.39 0 $ • 438 S 11,558.82 $ 12,403 30
Detention Basins $26 39 9 '$ 23711 2 $ 52.75 0 $ • 37 $ 976.43 i 3,114 02
Bridge Deck Drains. 328 39 0 S - 0 3 0 5 • 0 •$
TREES TRIMMED
No of Trees Trimmed 526 39 93 ! 2,454.27 9 t< 237.51 0 S • 364 S 9.806.96 ! 19,87117
R.O.W-WEED ABAT�NME - t
Area Abated(square feel _ $0.034 0 S - 0 i! 0 S • 5,395 S 163.43_5 536.50_
The Street Maintenance Division also responds to service requests for a variety of other reasons,the total number of Service Order Requests,some of which Include work reported above is reported monthly.
SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS l
No of SOR_e - - I-- _ 63 -- 0 _ - l —567 _ , 655
Personnel assigned to the Street Maintenance Division an on-call and respond to after hours emergencies or support City sponsored special events
Caertrrre hours 539 59 91 0 3 3,602.69 47 5 1.860 73 0 - S - 608 S 24,050.83 537.382 86
TOTALS: 2,117.5 3 23,567.36 4,221 3 16,687 36 0 3 • 90,206 .$ 213,615.19 5364.249 96
STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS
The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of February,2016
DATE pESCRIPTION TOI"AL COST
ACCOUNT' SI'l;EF.T/C'HANNI:I/l3RlllGE OF WORK SILL
Cf.)NTRAC 1'()R: West Coast Arborists, Inc.
Date: 1/31/16
Citywide Annual ROW Tree Trimming
# 112753 TOTAL COST $ 15,995.00
Date: 2/15/16
A# l 13019 l
Citywide ROW Tree Trimming
TOTAL COST $ 7,246.50
Dalt::
R
TOTAL COST
CONTRACTOR: R n '
L CTOR e e s Commercial Management
Date: 2/22/16
Citywide Miscellaneous Weed Abatement
#02-16
TOTAL COST $ 2,923.00
Date:
TOTAL COST
CONTRACTOR:
Date:
TOTAL COST
Date:
TOTAL.COST
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 $26,164.50
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #99-5402
MAlNTAINAMUACTRPT
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Date Submitted: March 1,2016
CONTRACTED MAINTENANCE WORK COMPLETED Submitted By: Thomas Garcia
FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016 Prepared By: Rodney Tidwell
•
SCOPE OF WORK JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Year to Date
ASPHALT CONCRETE
Square Footage 0 0 0 __ 0 0 0 0
Cost $ - $ - $
---- - $ - $ - $_.... - : -.__
ANNUAL SPRAYS
Annual Spraying of Pre/Post Herbicides Cost 5 18,838.50 $ ^ $ - •_$ - $ __-.._.: $ • $ 56`838,50
DRAINAGE FACILITIES
Channels(each) - - ----- - o - - - -- 0-- ---- 0 0 0 0
Cost $ - $ - S - $ - $ - $ - S -
STRIPING AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS
Stuping(linear feet) 0 0 0 _ 0 _0 0 0
Sandblasting(linear feet) y 0 „—0 0 0 0 - 0 —_� __. 0
Legends(each) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cost $ - $ • $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 151,844.48
TREES
Trees Tnmmed ___________A -- -- --0-----___ _ 0 �.._ _- - 0 --- 0 — --- 0 0
Trees Removed 0 0 0 0
J
Tree Planting 0
Cost $ 16,092.00 $ 23,241.50 $ $ - $ - $ - $ 79,220.50
WEED ABATEMENT
ROW Area Abated(Square Feet) 0 0 0 0 0-•-� „ 0
Other Public Lands Abated(Square Feet) 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ -
Cost $ - $ 2,923.00 ,_S •_ __.__.._.._. $ - $ - $ - $ 7,923.00
MISC.MAINT ACTIVITES
Misc cleanup(mowing/debris/etc.) Cost $ __-- - $ $ _—— $ ._... .----------.-:----s.____-------.-.-- •--• 1 5,000.00
Install 10 LF of 18"CMP Cost
Fix Guardrail Cost ------ __..._.:._...
Repair Roadway Cost $ $ - $ • $ - S $
._......._.._� - ----•- --._._...___.....r —.—_ -
_„... $ 35,000.00
Sandbags Cost $ - $ $ • $ - -
Misc concrete work Cost $ ___•_---- --$ $ - __. $ _.. $ .--... $ •
Channel cleanout Cost $ $ $ $ i -__ __—_--$ $ 8j60.00
TOTAL CONTRACTED MAINT COSTS , $ 33,930.50 _$ 26,164.50 $ - $ - $ - - $ - $ 287,481.48
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS STREET MAINTENANCE DIVISION
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016
1zn
1 Number Square
Month of Calls Footage Y
Jul 98 1,798 3,500
100
Aug 104 3,776 3,000 - —
Sep 112 1,796 80 _
111 11
2,500 11 i
Oct 57 2,523 ,
4 .o
Nov 32 735 IA 2,000 - 60 co
A
Dec 41 2,951 3
c
1,500 � z
Jan 55 1,086 40
Feb 36 3,170 1,000 iiiii.
Mar 20
500
Apr
May 0 0
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Totals 535 17,835 a Square ■Number
Footage of Calls
POLICE CHIEF ' S REPORT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
4111 SOUTHWEST STATION
CRIME ANALYSIS UNIT
To: Southwest Station Admin
From: Marianna Kuhn, Crime analyst
Date: March 2, 2016
Re: Part 1 crimes for the City of Temecula
February 1 — 29
Total Part 1 calls for service: 261. 11% decrease from the previous month (293).
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20 ■o
Aggavated Assault Burglary Larceny Theft Robbery Veh Theft Rape
■Total 19 36 165 5 35 1
UCR combines vehicle burglaries into Larceny Theft category. This information includes vehicle burglaries in that category.
Data was obtained using Data warehouse. If you need any additional assistance in regards to this
request, please do not hesitate to ask.
CITY OF TEMECULA TRAFFIC STATISTICS
FEBRUARY 2016
Citation Totals
Total Hazardous Citations 1031
Total Non-Hazardous Citations 333
Parking Citations 150
Total Citations 1514
Citation Breakdown
S.LA.P. 159
N.E.T. Citations 136
School Zones 68
Seatbelt Citations 45
Community Presentations 0
Traffic Collisions
Non-Injury 27
Hit and Run 10
Injury 32
Fatal 0
Total 69
Pedestrian Related Collisions 4
Note: Collision stats are only those calls for service resulting in a written Police report.
D.U.I. Arrests
D.U.I. Arrests 17
Cell Phone Cites
Total cell phone cites 51
(23123 & 23124 CVC)
Grant Funded DUI Checkpoints/ "Click it or Ticket" Operations
02/06/16: DUI Saturation patrol (5 officer, 1 Sergeant)
Prepared March 3, 2016
Deputy Joe Narciso
Commission Members March 3, 2016
City of Temecula
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
Ref: Public/Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Division Activities/Events
Dear Commission Members:
Below please find the Traffic Division activities for the month of January, 2016. These activities include
the following:
• Citation statistics (attachment)
• Part 1 Crimes (attachment)
• Community Action Patrol supported call-outs: None
• CAP Meetings: No staff meeting
CAP Monthly Meeting: 15 out of 27 members participated
• Community Action Patrol activity/ patrol hours:
761 hours for February, 2016. Year-to-date total: 1,558 hours.
*There were 25 CAP patrols with 41 members participating.
• Training: First Aid/CPR Training
• Special Events:
-First AID/CPR training, Southwest Station,8:00 AM to 7:00 PM, 10 CAP Members
Training provided by CSO Lopez and CSO Zachary
• Radar Trailer Deployments:
02/03-02/08 Redhawk Pkwy, north of Peppercorn 19,743 vehicles
02/08-02/17 In front of 32651 Valentino Way 13,442 vehicles
02/08-02/17 Redhawk Pkwy, near Tioga Road 30,130 vehicles
If you have any questions regarding this package, please do not hesitate to call me at the Temecula
Police Department,Traffic Division—(951) 704-7097.
Sincerely,
Poe Zeman
Deputy Joe Narciso
Temecula Police Department
Traffic Division
FIRE CHIEF ' S REPORT
Riverside County Fire Department/ CAL FIRE
Emergency Incident Statistics
FIRE
SINCE 1885
�Smin‘ E Coy,
IMMIN
1 AIL lc\
John R. Hawkins
Fire Chief
3/10/2016
Report Provided By: Riverside County Fire Department
Communications and Technology Division
GIS Section
Please refer to Map and Incident by Battalion,Station,Jurisdiction
Incidents Reported for Date between 2/1/2016 and 2/29/2016 and Temecula City Page 1 of 6
'Incidents are shown based on the primary response area for the incident location.This does not represent total response times for all units only the first unit in.
Response Activity
Incidents Reported for Date between 2/1/2016 and 2/29/2016 and Temecula City
IN Corn Fire 2 0.3%
■False Alarm 59 6.7%
■ 1azMal 3 04%
_ ■Medical 479 71.0%
•Other Fire 6 09%
Other Misc 1 0 1%
•Public Some Assisi 21 3 I%
•Res Fre 1 D 1%
■Ringing Alarm 1 0.1%
•Standby 10 1.5%
•Traffic Culhsiun 90 13.3%
• Vehicle Fire 1 0.1%
• Widland Fire 1 0 1%
Total 675 100 0%
Com Fire 2
False Alarm 59
Haz Mat 3
Medical 479
Other Fire 6
Other Misc 1
Public Service Assist 21
Res Fire 1
Ringing Alarm 1
Standby 10
Traffic Collision 90
Vehicle Fire 1
Wildiand Fire 1
Incident Total: 675
Average Enroute to Onscene Times
Enroute Time=When a unit has been acknowledged as responding Onscene Time=When a unit has been acknowledge as being on
•
scene. For any other statistic outside Enroute to Onscene please contact the IT Help Desk at 951-940-6900
<5 Minutes +5 Minutes +10 Minutes +20 Minutes Average % 0 to 5 min
486 138 17 0 4.1 75.8%
The following incidents are included in the total number of records but not in the average time HZM, HZMMC,OAC,OAF,OAM,OAMAD, OAMAI,OAMTE,OAMVA,OAP,OAR,OAV,OUT,OOU,
LEB, LEO,LEI, BRNPMT.OES, PAA, PAD,PAF,PAO,PAP, HFS,HFSAM. HFSCA,HSBT,HSBTC,HSBTS,HSBTV. HSE,HSG
Last Updated 3/10/2016 3 Page 2 of 6
'Incidents are shown based on the primary response area for the incident location. This does not represent total response times for all units only the first unit in.
Incidents by Battalion, Station and Jurisdiction
Corn False Hai Mat Medical Other Other Public Res Ringing Standby Traffic Vehicle WildIan Total
Fire Alarm Fire Miac Service Fire Alarm Collisio Fire d Fire
8aflallon f3 Mallon 12 Temecula 0 22 1 79 2 0 3 0 0 3 36 1 0 147
°macula
Station Total 0 22 1 79 2 0 3 0 0 3 36 1 0 147
'Station 73 Rancho Tem ;..,'° 2 14 0 164 0 1 9 0 0 4 24 0 0 218
California
Station Total 2 14 0 164 0 1 9 0 0 4 24 0 0 218
Station 153 French _a, 0 3 0 r6 C 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 11
Valley
Station Total 0 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 11
Station 84 0 12 0 130 2 0 5 0 1 1 17 0 0 168
Parkview
Station Total 0 12 0 130 2 0 5 0 1 1 17 0 0 168
Station 92 Wolf 0 8 2 100 2 0 4 1 0 2 11 0 1 131
C ree k
Station Total 0 8 2 100 2 0 4 1 0 2 11 0 1 131
Battalion Total 2 59 3 479 6 1 21 1 1 10 90 1 1 675
- Total 2 55 3 479 6 1 21 1 1 10 90 1 1 675
Last Updated 3/10/2016 3 Page 3 of 6
'Incidents are shown based on the primary response area for the incident location. This does not represent total response limes for all units only the first unit in.
Incidents by Jurisdiction
Corn Fire False Hat Mat Medical Other Other Public Res Fire Ringing Standby Traffic Vehicle Wildland Total
Alarm Fire Misc Service Alarm Collision Fire Fire
Temecula 2 59 3 479 6 1 21 1 1 10 90 1 1 675
Grand Total 2 59 3 479 6 1 21 1 1 10 90 1 1 676
Last Updated 3/10/2016 3 Page 4 of 6
*Incidents are shown based on the primary response area for the incident location This does not represent total response times for all units only the first unit in
Incidents by Supervisorial District - Summary
DISTRICT 3 Grand
CHUCK Total
■ I S I
Corn Fire 2 2
False Alarm 59 59
Naz Mat 3 3
Medical 479 479
Other Fire 6 6
Other Misc 1 1
Public Service Assist 21 21
Res Fire 1 1
Ringing Alarm 1 1
Standby 10 10
Traffic Collision 90 90
Vehicle Fire 1 1
Wildland Fire 1 1
Total 675 675
Last Updated 3/10/2016 3 Page 5 of 6
'Incidents are shown based on the primary response area for the incident location.This does not represent total response times for all units only the first unit in
INCIDENT_DATE >= '2016-2-1' and INCIDENT_DATE <='2016-2-29' and CC►I�TYNAME = 'Temecula'
, ,,,,,, \rim= 7 ..4.,...;..:40.44A me,--_
Jv " f y
. .:), a)\
U J .. -1/ 44j
O :soJ
,cv\ittl_V7 .it CI
tit Y c&Atbrow.u`.], V V t?
slabV v
O 4 . a0 '9,- u 0 5
*01.4 O � V
v
` J
v tiu V �0 O 4! UVO t _
x_«
0 4 - o o"' ;l .
Fent�t uRt ett 4 •. 0 u
J
Q J v a V d..... ,,0 6, i'Y.l,n,141 O J 09 J ,
4C#1. u J O �` I ,.m4
J
O ;ru J V- - ; �"r_
41\i
- - J i,,
- J _ �
u
•
a• V _ J�
:�kJV 0 a:J J
'
.wT0 J u O Oa
J
bbN
v RW Hallo 1t -
:) J 9tat.u.9: (,) . . r
_ ,...,.
Aar:„. ".;„...-2, � J PE CN ANG A C AZ:N O AM D RV/ / // /'i/ � /f /
n �
^' r r ..6),1:041
V,uonoa v V +� �{ / O�chs�ps / //
,r ,� � a 4��/ / /�/ rif/iii/ fir/�/`
f. ; L PeLhanya3 /, �' 1// /1,/ ///F/
" •-4', - ° r fr//iri, ice, ilr/ii/,s ,7//:
Legend ill !Ili
0 Fire V OU. .Alp....
n �_
Rivlrsia.0O3 -.i =reS:aticr
V Ma Mat ui Puu n.3e..its Aaa.aLl _-
hitec.wu - - _ R. .t10R3 '_aSi^. .*5 Rr%Iris.rnun ty Fuo(.IS
Last Updated 3/10/2016 3 Page 6 of 6
'Incidents are shown based on the primary response area for the incident location This does not represent total response times for all units only the first unit in.
2016 City of Temecula Fire Department Emergency Response and Training Totals
PUBLIC SAFETY CLASS TOTALS
2016 Class Totals Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nut: Dec Total
CPR/AED 20 16 36
FIRST AID 7 0 7
PEDIATRIC FIRST AID 0 0 _ 0
HCP 0 0 _ 0
•
STAFF HCP 3 0 3
CERT 0 0 0
TEEN CERT 0 0 0
Total 30 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46
INCIDENT/RESPONSE TOTALS FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA
20l6lncident Response Totals Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total
COMMERCIAL FIRE 0 2 2
FALSE ALARM 75 59 134
HA7.MAT 6 3 9
MEDICAL AID 463 479 _ 942
MIITI FAMILY DWELLING 0 0 0
OTHER FIRE 13 6 19
OTHER MISC. 0 1 1
PSA 33 21 54
- RINGING ALARM 1 1 2
RESIDENTIAL FIRE 3 1 4
RESCUE 0 0 0
STANDBY 12 10 22
_ TRAFFIC COLLISSION 83 90 173
VEHICLE FIRE 1 1 2
WILDLAND FIRE 3 1 4
Total 693 675 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1368
FIRE DEPARTMENT TOTAL CALL COMPARISON
2015 vs. 2016
1400
1200
1000
800 11
600 ■2015 YTD
400 0 2016 YTD
200
4
0
JN. QJP FrPg- PP\\ `SPS ,Jam ,)\A JCJ�� kk0%e L�JO‘P ,�`'0cQ L��O1/4Q sOOPtik
,Q 'C P 51/43. �0 & /4
,
MONTH 2015 YTD 2016 YTD
JANUARY 660 693
FEBRUARY 584 675
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
, OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
TOTAL TO DATE 1244 1368
FIRE DEPARTMENT CLASS TOTAL COMPARISON
2015 vs. 2016
Sou 291
250
200 80
I I
150
111
100
6
S0 0
6
,Pa��Qy �Jpei `rPQ4� Rn e ,J�� 1`�r+ ?J�JS e��•0 {041' a�41' `�N$�4 �OP~�
c.
•2015YTD 02016YTD
MONTH 2015 YTD 2016 YTD
JANUARY 180
FEBRUARY 1 1 1 16
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
TOTAL TO DATE 21I 46
Fire Department
Ternecula Fire Stations- Public Education
Reporting Month: February Reporting Year: 2016
Reporting 12, 73, 84, 92
Stations:
PR and Public Education Programs:
Total Number of
Events Event Type Total Number of Hours Number of Public Contacts.
for Reporting Month
1 School Event 1.5 25
0 Adult Education 0 0
0 Fair/Safety Expo 0 0
1 Display 2 100
7 Station Tour 9 90
•
0 Fire Safety Trailer 0 0
0 Other 0 0
Field Inspections: LE-100's (Weed Abatement)
Total Number of Initial Field Total Number of
Inspections for Reporting 2 LE-100 Inspections for 0
Month Reporting Month
Prevention Referrals:
Total Number of
Re-inspections for Reporting 0 Total Number of Fire
Month Prevention Referrals for 2
Reporting Month
Significant Events:
Provide a brief synopsis of significant TC's, Fires Near Drownings Road Closures etc
Include photos if available
One of the station tours listed above was at Fire Station 12 in Old Town and was for 20
exchange students visiting from China. T73 & E73 responded to a small structure fire at Mo's
Egg House —fire was confined to the kitchen.