HomeMy WebLinkAbout012204 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 at (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City
to make reasonable arrangements to ensure acc~s.sibility to that meeting [28 CFR35.1 02.35.104 ADA Title II]
AGENDA
TEMECULA PUBLlCfTRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
TO BE HELD AT
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California
Thursday, January 22,2004 at 6:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL:
COMMISSIONERS: Katan, Lanier, Ramos, Connerton
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 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 two (2) 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 vour 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 (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
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 PublicfTraffic Safety
Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
1.
Minutes of December 11. 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Approve the Minutes of December 11, 2003
rltcaffic\commissolageoda\20041012204 Ageodalaip
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2.
Public Safetv/Public Works Commendation Award ProQram
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
That the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission consider staff's recommendation for the
creation of a Public Safety/Public Works Commendation Award Program to
communicate the City and Commission's appreciation for outstanding work
performance and service, by recognizing those individuals who maintain high
standards of personal conduct and make significant contributions to make Temecula
one of the best cities to live in.
3.
Community CPRIAED/First Aid ProQram
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
That the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission review the program concept and provide
input to staff.
4.
Request for Street Closure - Promenade Subdivision
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1
That the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission deny the request to close Georgetown
Lane at Margarita Road: or Winwood Circle at Rycrest Drive.
5. Traffic Engineer's Report
6. Police Chiefs Report
7. Fire Chiefs Report
8. Commission Reports
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula PublicfTraffic Safety Commission will be held on
Thursday, February 26, 2004 at 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, Council Chambers, 43200 Business
Park Drive, Temecula, California.
i
rltcafficlcommissolageoda\20041012204 Ageodalajp
ITEM' ,NO.1
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR
MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLlCfTRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
DECEMBER 11, 2003
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula PublicfTrafficSafety Commission convened in an adjourned
regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, December 11, 2003, in the City Council
Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
FLAG SALUTE
Chairman Connerton led the audience in the Flag salute.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Commissioners Katan, Ramos, Lanier, and Chairman Connerton
Absent:
Commissioner Wedel
PRESENTATION:
Ms. Cathy Zaitz of Southern California Automobile Club - Public Safety Education,
provided a brief presentation, commenting as follows:
That the Auto Club in cooperation with the Highway Patrol and the DMV conduct
yearly Vehicle Code Seminar which typically would take place every November;
0 That attendees review legislation' that has been enacted the prior year in
regards to Vehicle Code sections;
0 That City Managers. Chiefs of Police, and City Engineers are invited to
attend these seminars; .
0 That the Auto Club distributed a digest of traffic legislation book to the
Commission;
0 That the Auto Club will be providing a Tipsy Tow Service on New Year's
Eve at 6:00 p.m. through 6:00 a.m. on New Year's Day; and that this
service will be advertised through the. local newspaper.
At this time, Ms. Zaitz distributed a digest of traffic legislation book to the Commission.
Chairman Connerton requested that the Public Traffic Safety Commission be invited to
attend these seminars.
Commissioner Ramos thanked Mš. Zaitz fór her attendance and presentation and
expressed enthusiasm to working with the Auto Club.
R:IMinuteslPublicTrafficSafetyCommission121103
Chairman Connerton echoed Commissioner Ramos' comments.
For Chairman Connerton, Ms. Zaitz relayed that the Auto Club offers safety programs on
DUls, child restraints systems, and as well trains and certifies Police Officers on how to
install restraint seats.
Ms. Zaitz also relayed that she would keep Assistant to the City Manager Yates informed
as to any programs with which the Public Traffic Safety Commission could be involved. .
Senior. Management Analyst Adams presented a brief update on Automatic External
Defibrillator (AED) equipment, stating the following:
That three (3) months ago, the City received a grant to purchase Auto External
Defibrillator (AED) and that this equipment was recently received;
0 That the technology would allow a person to shock a patient in which will
result in a normal heart rhythm;'
0 That the AED equipment also coaches on CPR;
0 That two (2) AEDs have been installed at City Hall;
0 That training will be provided to City employees, Commissioners, and the
City Council;
0 That a formal invitation will be sent out to Commissioners and City
Council members;
0 That the dates for the AED training will be January 6 and 7, 2004, in the
City Council Chambers from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.;
0 That there will be no cost for the AED training;
0 That an AED and CPR certification will be distributed with this training;
0 That the remaining five (5);. AEDs will be installed at the Community
Recreation Center (CRC), Temecula Community Center (TCC), Mary
Phillips Senior Center, ~nd'the Temecula Library;
0 That in January 2004, a detailed presentation on AEDs will be provided.
For Commissioner Katan, Mr. Adams relayed that the Guidant Corporation was the first
facility to install AEDs.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No public comments.
R:IMinuteslPublicTrafficSafetyCommission1211 03
2
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
.1.
Minutes of November 6. 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Approve the Minutes of November 6, 2003
MOTION: Commissioner Lanier moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No.1.
J Commissioner Ramos seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Commissioner Wedel who was absent.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2.
Stop LiQht Abuse Public CampaiQn
,~
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
That the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission consider staffs
recommendations for the. creation of a specialized public information
campaign aimed to discourage red-light running and obedience of traffic
laws. .
Senior Management Analyst Adams presented conceptual ideals to be incorporated into
the Stop Light Abuse Program (SLAP), highlighting the following concepts that may be
used throughout the community at appropriate venues for marketing and promoting safe
driving:
Signage at strategic locations at major axis points throughout the City such as
"Welcome Home- Please Slow Down and Drive Safely" (see staff report);
That locations for such signage be installed (see staff report);
That campaign distribution on list of litèrature relating to the campaign exceeds
the prepared list in staff report.
. Commissioner Ramos congratulated staff on its excellent work and efforts associated
.J with this matter.
Commissioners Lanier, Katan, and Chairman Connerton echoed Commissioner Ramos'
comments.
, Mr. Adams also noted for the record that the costs associated with the distribution of
literature would be at a nominal fee to the city. .
For Chairman Connerton, Mr. Yates clarified .that after the Public Traffic Safety
Commissions approval, the item will be forwarded to the City Council for final approval.
MOTION: Commissioner Lanier moved to approve staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Ramos seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Commissioner Wedel who was absent.
R:IMinuteslPublicTrafficSafetyCommission121103
3
3.
ParkinQ Restrictions - Winchester Business Park
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
That the PubliclTraffic Safety Commission:
1.
Recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing
parking restrictions on Diaz Road from Winchester Road to Dendy
Parkway; and
Direct staff to remove the "No Parking" signs on the remainder of
the streets within the Westside Business Park area.
2.
Senior Engineer Moghadam presented a report (per staff report), noting the following:
That the majority of the streets within the Wests ide Business Park are posted as
No Parking;
That the parking restrictions were not established by a City Council Resolution,
and therefore, are not legal;
That the only enforceable .No ParkinQ area is on Winchester Road where
parking restrictions were established by resolution in June 1997;
That there is limited traffic on these'streets;
That based on the fact that the streets are not arterial streets; that they are not
striped for a bike lane; and that there is light pedestrian traffic, staff would
recommend with the exception of Diaz and Winchester Road, the remaining
streets No ParkinQ signs be removed;
That the parking restrictions were established as the area was being developed
and, at that time, it was a CC&R requirement of the area.
For Commissioner Katan, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the CC&Rs for the
development required No on street parking; that there are no reasons, as far as traffic
safety is concerned, to not allow parking on some of the streets.
Director of Public Works Hughes stated the following:
That during the planning process 'of the industrial park, it was an esthetic issue
with the Planning Commission to not allow parking on the streets;
That the CC&Rs do not make it an enforceable parking from a City standpoint,
unless a resolution establishing no parking zones were adopted by the City;
That either a No Parking Zone resolution be established by the City Council or
that'action be taken by the City to not enforce the CC&Rs;
R:IMinuteslPublicTrafficSafetyCommission121103
4
. -----.
That currently there are businesseslmanufacturers within the Business Park that
prefer the parking and others that would rather not have the parking and support
the position of the Planning Commission;
That one developer has been posting No ParkinQ signs without City
authorization.
It was noted by Commissioner Ramos that the Planning Commission consider waiving
., the CC&R requirement.
For Chairman Connerton, Director of Public Works Hughes noted that the CC&Rs do not
have any jurisdiction or authority to establish ParkinQ or No ParkinQ; that at the time the
CC&Rs were established, the streets did not exist and the City Council did not have the
ability to pass the appropriate resolutions.
At this time, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Pete Olhasso, 42430 Winchester Road, Association Manager for Business Center
Park, spoke in opposition of removing the No ParkinQ signs for the following reasons:
That the Board of Directors of the West Side Business Park is opposed to the
proposed resolution, removing the No ParkinQ signs;
That the Architectural Control Committee does require all parking to be on site;
That the No ParkinQ is a restriction in the CC&Rs; that the Board of Directors is
required to enforce the CC&Rs whether there are No ParkinQ signs or not;
That whether there are ParkinQ or No ParkinQ signs, the tenants have agreed to
abide by the CC&Rs when the property was purchased within the association;
That the CC&Rs were a required condition when the proposal was presented to
the County/City;
That whether there are signs posted or not, if someone were to park on the
street, they would receive a violation notice by letter, that a hearing will take
place, that a fine would be assessed for parking on the street; and that whether
the signs are' posted or not, a violation would exist as per in the CC&Rs;
That removing the No ParkinQ signs would potentially lower the value of the
property;
That the Board of Directors of the Association respectfully would request that the
City not remove the No ParkinQ signs.
For Mr. Olhasso, Chairman Connerton noted that in his opinion that there should not be
a precedence be permitting CC&Rs to govern public streets and that CC&Rs have no
jurisdiction into the public right-of-way.
R:\MinutesIPubiicTrafficSafetyCommission121103
5
At this time, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Katan expressed concern voting against the CC&Rs.
For the Commission, Mr. Hughes clarified the following:
That the City is not concerned with whether or not ParkinQ or No ParkinQ signs
are posted;
That the City is not attempting to remove the No ParkinQ signs; but it must clarify
by enforcing No ParkinQ or ParkinQ;
That CC&Rs do not dictate whether the City may enforce ParkinQ or No
ParkinQ;
That if the Business Association of the Winchester Business Park were to decide
to impose a violation against the property owners within the Business Park, that
this would be a private matter' between the property owners and the Business
Association;
That the CC&Rs do not govern City public streets;
That the City is responsible for the public right-of-way;
That the Business Association may not dictate whether to cite or not to cite;
That there is confusion with regard to posted No ParkinQ signs.
MOTION: Commissioner Katan moved to approve staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Ramos seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Commissioner Wedel who. was absent.
4.
Commercial Vehicle ParkinQ Fines. Citywide
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1
That the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission reviews the City's Municipal
Code regarding commercial parking on City streets and makes a
recommendation if-necessary.
Commissioner Lanier requested that the Commission review and make suggestions
regarding the Commercial Vehicle Rarking Fines Citywide (see report).
Commissioner Ramos relayed his opinion that the City consider raising parking fines
versus adding more No parking signs and establishing more ordinances.
Commissioner Katan concurred with Commissioners Ramos, comments regarding
increasing parking fines.
R:IMinuteslPublicTrafficSafetyCommission121103
6
Police Chief Domenoe echoed Commissioner Ramos in that there are adequate laws
and signs and that it is maybe time to reevaluate the parking fines; that Mr. Domenoe
will have a staff m ember evaluate the parking fees against other Southern California
Cities and that a staff report would be brought back to the Commission with
recommendations from the Police Department.
". MOTION: Commissioner Lanier moved to continue this item to the February 26, 2004
meeting, to review the recommendation of the Police Department. Commissioner
Ramos seconded the motion and voice vo"te reflected approval with the exception of
, Commissioner Wedel who was absent.
5.
Election of Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson
RECOMMENDATION:
5,1 That the P ublicfTraffic Safety Commission entertain nominations
from the Commissioners to elect a Chairperson and a Vice-Chairperson
to preside until the end of the 2004 calendar year.
Chairman Connerton relayed that it has been his pleasure serving as Chairman for the
Public Traffic Safety Commission and expressed interest in continuing acting as
Chairman.
MOTION: Commissioner Lanier moved to elect Commissioner Katan as Chairman,
(There being no second to this motion, it died for the lack of a second),
MOTION: Commissioner Katan moved to elect Commissioner Lanier as Chairman,
(There being no second, it died for a lack of a second),
Commissioner Lanier noted that due to work circumstances, he would not be able to
serve as Chairman for the year 2004.
MOTION: Commissioner Katan moved to re.elect Chairman Connerton as Chairman for
the year 2004, Commissioner Ramos seconded the motion a nd voice vote reflected
approval with the exception of Commissioner Wedel who was absent.
MOTION: Commissioner Lanier, moved to elect Commissioner Ramos as Vice-
Chairman, Commissioner Katan seconded the,motion and voice vote reflected approval
with the exception of Commissioner Ramos who abstained and Commissioner Wedel
who was absent.
Traffic EnQineer's Report
Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that he'hadno report at this time,
Director of Public Works Hughes reported on the following:
That the City Council took action to'remove the speed bumps and signage on
Calle Pina Colada;
R:\MinutesIPublicTrafficSafetyCommission1211 03
7
That the streets were re-slurry sealed so that were would not be any grinding
marks throughout the area; that as a part of that work, the street was restriped
with a double yellow line and raised reflectors; that there has been many calls
and contacts from property owners indicating that they felt that the restriping was
inappropriate;
That it was the opinion of the Public Works Department to install double lines;
that it was an appropriate solution for this type of street; and that some residents
were of the opinion that the striping was appropriate;
That in the near future an issue of the possibility of extending a raised median
from Winchester North will be brought to the Commission for consideration,
For Chairman Connerton, Mr, Hughes noted that the Commission may visit the Public
Works Department anytime during business hours to observe the new camera
intersection-monitoring program,
For Commissioner Katan, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the Public Works
Department has not yet heard from Mr,.La Marca.
Police Chiefs Report
Sergeant Pi no presented a brief report relaying the following:
That the red light enforcement tickets are down 7%;
That the injury and non-injury property' damage accidents are down;
That there will be a DUI check point December 12, 2004; and that the
Commission may arrive after 7:00 p.m::
That there are two motor officers undercover video taping violations;
That there are a total of four DUI check points scheduled for the month of
December;
That Calle Pina Colada has bee,n heavily enforced;
That new motor officers were selected and they will be attending the academy
January 19, 2004; that two, motor officers were in house and one was the
selection of a traffic officer from the Lake Elsinore Station and Officer Irvin started
December 11, 2003. ,,'
Fire Chiefs Report
No Fire report at this time,
R:\MinutesIPublicTrafficSafetyCommission121103
8
I .
I
I
\.
, .
Commission Reports
Commissioner Ramos thanked the Public Works Department for allowing him to attend a
workshop on November 8, 2003, in Pomana; that it was very informative and
recommended the seminar to the memoers of the Commission who have not yet had an
opportunity to attend.
Chairman Connerton thanked the Commission for allowing him to continue as Chairman
for the year 2004 and directed staff to put together for the Commission an outline of
upcoming public safety topics that wi)1 be discussed at each meeting.
Chairman Connerton wished everyone a Merry Christmas and prosperous New Year.
~ ADJOURNMENT
At 7:37 P,M, Chairman Connerton formally adjourned this meeting to Thursday, January
22, 2004 at 6:00 P,M" in the Citv Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula,
Chairman Darrell Connerton
Administrative Secretary Anita Pyle
R:IMinuteslPublicTrafficSafetyCommission1211 03
9
ITEM NO. 2
I
I
r'
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
PubliclTraffic Safety Commission
FROM:
Denise Lanier, Human Resources Analyst
DATE:
January 22, 2004
SUBJECT:
Item 2
Public Safety/Public Works Commendation Award Program
RECOMMENDATION:
That the PubliclTraffic Safety Commission consider staff's recommendation for the creation of a
Public SafetylPublic Works Commendation Award Program to communicate the City and
Commission's appreciation for outstanding work performance and service, by recognizing those
individuals who maintain high standards of personal conduct and make significant contributions to
make Temecula one of the best cities to live in,
BACKGROUND:
At the December meeting of the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission, City staff was directed to develop
a formal commendation program, Commissioners provided staff with concepts and ideas that the
Commission wanted to see included in the commendation award program effort.
The PubliclTraffic Safety Commendation Award Program was designed to recognize and award
local POLICE IFIRE SAFETY along with PU.BLlC WORKS employees for exceptional performance
beyond their normal job requirements
The PublicfTraffic Safety Commission would be the liaison between Public Safety officials and the
City of Temecula staff to determine and recognize, Program recipients, Awards would need to be in
writing and include the following facts: '
Explain, specifically, what the employee would be awarded for.
I:
Distinguished Service Certificate
Major improvement in technology, procedure, exceptional personal effort
Excellence Certificate
Exceptional Achievement above and beyond normal job requirements
Meritorious Certificate .
Acts of heroism performed at great personal risk,
The award will explain what made the employee's performance stand out and what helshe did
beyond the expectations of their job description, The PolicelFire Chiefs, in consultation with City
Staff, will decide upon awards.
1
R"'caffi,'CO"'IISSIONIAGENDA\20Q4\OI2204\T"n;, Comm;,,;on.Conun<nd,,'oo Aw"d I'mgcam,doc
'..
The PublicfTraffic Safety Commission Chairman and the City of Temecula Mayorwill then sign the
certificate, Award recipients would be presented y;ith a Certificate of Appreciation at a PublicfTraffic
Safety Commission meeting along with the readi,ng of the actual act of service achievement.
Attached to this staff report is an example of the certificate of appreciation for the commendation
profiled in the formal commendation award program.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Not available at this time,
Attachment: Certificate of Appreciation DRAFT
2
.o"caffic\COMMISSIONIAGENDA\2004\O12""ITcaffic Comm;"im"Commc,,"";on Aw"d Pmg"m,d'~
CITY OF TEMECULA .
PUBLIC SAFETY/PUBLIC WORKS
COMMENDATION AWARD PROGRAM
Believing that the Temecula Public Safety and Public Works employees are among the City's
, most valuable assets, the City and Public SafetylTraffic Commission is proud to have developed
a program to award local safety personnel.
This program is intended to communicate the City and Commission's appreciation, for
, 'outstanding work performance arid service, by recognizing those individuals who maintain high
standards of personal conduct'and who make significant contributions to making Temecula one
of the best cities to live in. The Program is designed to recognize employee's who consistently
goes the extra mile--someone who makes an exceptional effort to get the job done.
PROGRAM GOALS:
The Public Safety/Public Works Commendation Award Program is designed to recognize and
award local POLICEIFIRE SAFETY employees along with PUBLIC WORKS employees for
exceptional performance beyond their normal job requirements, The objectives of the program
are:
x
"
to develop a procedure to officially recognize and honor Public SafetylPublic Works
personnel, who have performed distinctive acts or services for their Department, or for,
the public who are worthy of recognition,
x
to involve employees in continuous improvement of City services by recognizing
excellent work; . '
x
to promote employee innovation, which results in productivity and performance
improvements; , .
x
to promote team spirit and unity of purpose, within the City, based on shared
achievement; ,
Who is eligible?
All POLICE/FIRE SAFETY EMPLOYEES along with PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES who work
with the City of Temecula are eligible,
Eligibility Guidelines for Public Safety Commendation Awards:
x
Demonstration of a high level of service to. and concern for the needs of the public,
Work performance above and beyond that of others in not only their department but
throughout the City, '
x
x
Application of a particular skill or talent not generally included in the employee's job
function,
R"tcaffi,\COMMISSIONIAGENOAI2004\O12204\Co""",,,""Hoo Pc'H, SalOl, Awarn P,og"m,doo
x
Assumption of a leadership role (consistently sacrificing personal output to assist in
training fellow employees, etc,).
x
Acts on improving relations between the public, employees, departments, other
agencies, governmental bodies or community groups.
x
Outstanding performance or courageous manner, above and beyond the call of duty,
during an emergency situation.
x
Makes a substantial contribution to Temecula, which enhances the City,
The Selection Committee
The PubliclTraffic Safety Commission will be the liaison between Public Safety officials and the
City of Temecula staff. Award information must be brought to a designated Public Safety official
and/or City Staff, The PolicelFire Chiefs, in consultation with City Staff, will decide upon the
awards. Awards will need to be in writing and include the following facts:
x
Explain, specifically, what the employee is being awarded for.
Distinguished Service Certificate
Major improvement in technology, procedure, exceptional personal
effort '
Excellence Certificate
. Exceptional Achievement above and beyond normal job
requirements
Meritorious Certificate
Acts of heroism performed at great personal risk,
x
Explain what makes the employee stand alone
x
Explain what helshe does, beyond the expectations of their job description
x
What you personally have seen himlher do that is noteworthy
(Explain the nominee's actions in. detail and the positive results of those actions.)
Each award will be defined at the appropriate level with a certificate created to read: This
"Distinguished Service Award" is given ,to a member of the City of Temecula
police/Fire/Public Works Departmentwho has demonstrated exceptional achievement
above and beyond the call of duty. The PubliclTraffic Safety Commission Chairman and the
City of Temecula Mayor will sign the certificate, Award recipients will then be presented with a
Certificate of Appreciation at the next PubliclTraffic Safety Commission meeting along with the
reading of the actual act of service achievem~'nt.
R'\Irn"OC\COMMISSION"'GENDA\2004\O \2204\Co""",,,""oo Publio So"" Awaro P"'9camdoc
. , City qf T emecula
Certificate of Appreciation
Presented on behalf of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission
and the
Citizens of the City ofTemecula to:
Sergeant Mark Lohman
We would like to take this opportunity to express our sincere gratitude for your experience,
professionalism and commitment in serving with the Temecula Police Department Traffic Division and
ensuring the safety of the City and its Citizens. Also your participation as a committed representative to
the Public/Traffic Safety Commission has been greatly apprec~'!ted.
b~4p)'
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto
affixed my hand and official seal this 24th day
of April, 2003,
Jeffrey E, Stone, Mayor
Darrell L Connerton, Chairman
ITEM <NO.3
"
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
PubliclTraffic Safety Commission
FROM:
Greg Adams, Fire CaptainlParamedic Coordinator
DATE:
January 23, 2004
SUBJECT:
Item 3 .
Community CPRlAED/first Aid Program
PREPARED BY: Greg Adams, Fire Captain
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission review the program concept and provide input to staff,
BACKGROUND:
The leading cause of death in America today is coronary artery disease, it is estimated
that over 250,000 people die each year from it. The number one heart rhythm
associated with sudden cardiac arrest is Ventricular Fibrillation (VFIB); the only
treatment for this deadly rhythm is defibrillation or shocking the heart, Early defibrillation
and CPR is the key to survival, for every minute that passes chances for survival
decrease 7 - 10%,
The City has recognized this issue and has recently purchased 7 Automated External
Defibrillators (AED's) for use at various City facilities, In addition, City staff is receiving
training on the use of these units and as part of that training, staff is also receiving
training on CPR.
Studies have proven that when early CPR and early defibrillation are started, victims of
sudden cardiac arrest chances 0 f survival improve dramatically, Therefore, staff has
created a training program that will allow for community members to receive this
valuable training at a reduced cost. City Paramedics and Firefighters will conduct the
training at Fire Station 84.
The following represents the proposed training schedules and related costs that will be
provided to the community,
AED/CPRlFirst Aid TraininQ Schedule
AED/CPR TRAINING SCHEDULE
This training will take place every other month starting in March 2004, The training will
be held at Fire Station 84 during one week of the month on Tuesday and Thursday
evenings from 6:00 p,m, to 9:00 p,m. The cost of this training is $25,00,
AED/CPR/FIRST AID TRAINING
This training will take place every other month beginning in March 2004, The training
will be held at Fire Station 84 during one wee~end of the month, The schedule will be
from 8:00 a,m, to 5:00 p,m, on Saturday and from 8:00 a,m, to noon on Sunday.
The funds that are collected from this program will be deposited into a special account.
This account will be utilized to fund matching grants for the community to purchase AED
units.
In addition, at the January 13, 2004 City Council meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Jeff
Comerchero requested that staff bring back an item for City Council consideration that
would provide $15,000 in grant funding for a, Public Access,Defibriliation (PAD)
program, This program would provide matching grant funding for qualifying businesses
that wish to purchase an AED unit and begin a PAD program.
Staff recommends that the Temecula Citizen Corps Council be tasked with managing
the grant program. Staff will develop the appropriate criteria for the program, In general,
the program will provide matching grant funds for a qualifying business to begin a PAD
program, The requirements of this program are that the business follow all of the
requirements of Title 22 of the Health a nd Safety Code, the business h ire a medical
director and appropriate training is part of the program, In addition, the business must
agree to use the unit for the benefit of the not only the employees of the facility, but also
for members of the general public who patronize the business,
FISCAL IMPACT:
The training for this program will take place during times when extra firefighters are
already on duty so the overtime costs will be kept to a minimum, In addition, Finance
has set up an account to deposit the'training funds that participants will pay, This fund
will be used to offset future grant applications from the community to begin a PAD
program,
ITEM NO.4
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
PubliclTraffic Safety Commission
FROM:
Ali Moghadam, P.E" Senior Engineer, Traffic
DATE:
January 22, 2004
SUBJECT:
Item 4
Request for Street Closure - Promenade Subdivision
RECOMMENDATION:
That the PubliclTraffic Safety Commission deny the request to close Georgetown Lane at Margarita
Road, or Winwood Circle at Rycrest Drive,
BACKGROUND:
Staff received a request from the Promenade Homeowners Association to re-evaluate traffic
conditions along Georgetown Lane, Carelton Way and Winwood Circle and to consider the
feasibility of closing Georgetown Lane at Margarita Road or Winwood Circle at Rycrest Drive. The
public has been notified of the PubliclTraffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue
through the agenda notification process and by mail.
At the meeting of September 14, 2000, the PubliclTraffic Safety Commission received a request
from the Promenade Homeowners Association to review the feasibility of closing Winwood Circle at
Rycrest Drive to eliminate "cut-through" traffic along Georgetown Lane and Carleton Way, The
request was considered at the meeting of October 12, 2002, with the Commission approving the
staff recommendation (4-0) to deny the request to close Winwood Circle at Rycrest Drive.
In 2002, subsequent to another request for the closure of Winwood Circle, staff performed an
evaluation of traffic conditions along Georgetown Lane, Carleton Way and Rycrest Drive. The study
included the collection of traffic volume data an.d a license plate survey, The study revealed that
although the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) had increased from 1,100 to 1,400 on Georgetown Lane,
the increase was consistent with the volumes that are likely to be generated by the number of
homes located in the vicinity, The license plate survey was performed in order to identify the
presence of any "cut-through" vehicular movements, The survey revealed that of the one hundred-
twenty (120) vehicles observed entering and exiting the area between Margarita Road and Solana
Way during the p,m. peak hour, onlv two (2) vehicles actually used the streets to cut-through. The
rest of the 120 vehicles were either residents ór visitors to the neighborhood.
In September 2003, the City received a petition from the residents of the Promenade subdivision
requesting that the City Council consider the installation of a gate at the west end of the subdivision
(Margarita Road at Georgetown Lane) or at the east end of the subdivision (Winwood Drive at
Rycrest Drive),
In January 2004, vehicular volume and speed data was collected on Georgetown Lane, Carleton
Way, Winwood Circle and Rycrest Drive, ,In additio~ to the volume and speed data, a license plate
ntcafficlcomm;ssolageoda\200410122IPromeoadelajp
survey was conducted during the AM and PM peak periods to identify any "cut-through" vehicular
movements, Counts Unlimited, Inc" an independent consultant, performed the data collection and
license plate survey, The results of the volume and speed data are shown below,
Location Volume and Sneed 2000 2002 2004
Georgetown Lane e!,st of Margarita Road Westbound (ADT) 488 632 677
Eastbound (ADT) 609 772 816
85'h Percentile 22 MPH 27 MPH 28 MPH
Carleton Way btw, Georgetown Lane and Westbound (ADT) N/A N/A 353
Win wood Circle Eastbound (ADT) N/A N/A 541
Saeed (85'h Percentile) 24 MPH 27 MPH 28 MPH
Winwood Circle east of Carleton Way Westbound (ADT) 244 N/A 348
Eastbound 1ft-On' 369 N/a 509
Rycrest Drive south of Winwood Circle Southbound (ADT) 356 N/A 549
Northbound IADTj 260 N/A 366
Although the data indicates that the ADT and 85th percentile speeds have increased on Georgetown
Lane, Carleton Way and Winwood Circle in the past four (4) years, it is our opinion that the increase
in traffic volumes is likely the result of more of the resid!,nts using this route and using it more often,
Also, the volumes are consistent with the volumes that would be generated by the number of homes
located within the immediate area and are well below what would normally be considered significant.
Moreover, the volumes and speeds are consistent with those observed on other streets throughout
the City with similar residential characteristics.'
A license plate survey was conducted on January 7, 2004, with observers posted at Georgetown
Lane and Margarita Road, Rycrest Drive at Solana Way and Skywood Drive at Solana Way, The
results of the license plate survey indicate that of the 222 vehicles observed during the AM peak
hour only 3 vehicles cut-through between Margarita Road and Solana Way. The survey also
indicates that of the 212 vehicles observed during the PM peak hour, 5 vehicles used the streets to
cut-through between Margarita Road and Solana Way. These numbers are consistent with those
observed in 2002 and supports our previous finding that the majority of traffic using the streets is
generated from within the Promenade and Wood crest subdivisions and is not external to the
neighborhood, Since the results of the evaluation indicate that cut through traffic volumes is
minimal, Staff cannot recommend closing Georgetown Lane or Winwood Circle,
In addition to the data collection and license plate survey, a review of the accident history was
performed for Georgetown Lane, Carleton Way and Winwood Circle for the twenty-four (24) month
period from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2003, Our review indicates that there were no
reported collisions on the streets, This indicates that ttie majority of drivers exercise due care when
traveling on these streets,
The Promenade residents perceive traffic generated by the Wood crest subdivision as cut through
traffic and would like to divert this traffic elsewhere. It is still our opinion that this route is being used
as it was designed, to access Margarita Road, An altemative that has been suggested, to the
requested closure, is the closure of the median'opening at the intersection of Margarita Road and
Georgetown Lane. This closure would effectively eliminate left-turn access into the Promenade
subdivision from Margarita Road, This alternative will force vehicles to turn left at the Margarita
Road and Solana Way traffic signal and use Rycrest Drive to access both subdivisions, The median
closure at this intersection will divert a portion of the Promenade subdivision traffic to Rycrest Drive
effectively increasing traffic ,volumes on Rycrest Drive and Winwood Circle, Potentially, this
alternative' would create impacts to residents of'the Woodcrest subdivision as well as, the
Promenade residents living along Winwood Circle.and portions of Carleton Way. Staff does not
support this alternative,
""caffic\com missolageoda\2004 101 22\Pmmeoadelajp
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachment:
1. Exhibit "A" - Location Map
2. Exhibit "B" - PubliclTraffic Safety Commission Meeting Minutes and Agenda Report, October
12,2000
3. Exhibit "C" - Letter from Beverly Perkins dated January 17, 2002
4. Exhibit "D" - Letter Response from Director of Public WorkslCity Engineer dated July 22,2002
5. Exhibit "E" - Letter from Promenade Residents dated September 16, 2003
6. Exhibit "F" - Vehicular Volume and Speed Data
7. Exhibit "G" - License Plate Survey Data
"'cafficlcom m;ssolagenda\2004\O 122\PromenadeJajp
EXHIBIT "A"
LOCATION MAP
....>'
(;
City of Temecula
!~~./
!~,-- 'Òrj.<
.' ----- - -~-'-'
(
CO-) R,VOnj Implemootatioo
. 1::]9WoodcrnsiCounOy
I:J 49 Promoo- al Temecuta
N Highways
/,/S_IS
8Pa"",'s
City
N
A
Thi, map wa, mOOe by the City of Tamacula Geog.."hic
Info~tioo Sysl~, The map . derived from baso data
prod"ced by Iho Ri"o"'~e County "'sessor, Deportmenl
aod tho T","sportalion aod Laod Managemool Aga",y
of R_a Coooty, The City of Temecula aae"mM 00
wa"""ty a< legal nosponaibility fa< the Infa<maflco ",otalood
00 thl, map, Data aod lofonnation 'o""",mod on thi, map
ono ,"bjoct 10 "pdala aod modificatioo The Geogcaphlc
Info~lioo System aod otha, "'"""" ,hauld be q"criod f", the
moat cunant Inl""""Iion, Thi, map I, ~I fa< noprinl ""aselo,
"" a ""
=--
"""",--"""""""",,"'02,,"
EXHIBIT "B"
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES Aj\!D AGENDA REPORT
OCTOBER 12, 2000
\
\
the final acceptance of these streets; and relayed that this issue could most likely be
agendized in November or December.
Chairman Connerton advised Mr. LaMarco that he ,Would be notified as to the date that
the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission would consider this issue.
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
1,
Minutes of September 14, 2000
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Approve the Minutes of September 14, 2000
MQI!Qtl: Commissioner Lanier moved to approve the minuies. Commissioner Katan
seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of
Commissioner Coe who was absent and Commissioner Edwards who abstained.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2,
Traffic Concerns AlonQ GeorQetown Lane. Carelton Wav. and Wlnwood
Circle In the Promenade Subdivision
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
That the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission deny the request to close
Winwood Circle at Rycrest Drive.
Relaying that this item had been agendized due to a request from the Promenade
Homeowners at the September 14, 2000 PublicfTraffic Safety Commission meeting,
Associate Engineer Gonzales presented the staff report (of record); and noted that traffic
counts were conducted at three locåtions (i.e., Georgetown Lane. Winwood Circle, and
Rycrest Drive),
Via overheads, Associate Engineer Gonzales presented the information from the traffic
data revealing that the total volumes'are half of what would normally be considered
significant, advising that the data does not warrant a road closure; and provided
additional information regarding the speed of vehicles in this area.
Per Commission request, Associate Engineer Gonzales relayed that staff investigated
the Planning Commission's and the County's approval of the projects associated with
the area of discussion, and per agenda, material, provided an overview of the
configuration of the subdivision tracts.
In response to Chairman Connerton, AssoCiate Engineer Gonzales reiterated that when
the Wood crest Subdivision was approved by the County in 1987, that the connection
point at Winwood Circle and the adjacent tract was denoted on the plan; and advised
that the rationale for prohibiting southbound left-turn movements onto Margarita Road
was due to visibility impacts.
R,\lnW""'¡~""'O1200
;/
For Commissioner Edwards, Associate Engineer Gonzales relayed that there were 227
units in the Wood crest Subdivisions which would generate approximately 2270 vehicle
trips a day; and confirmed that these two tracts (the Woodcrest tract and the Promenade
tract) were designed to be connected, and that the streets were functioning as planned. ,
For comparison, Commissioner Edwards provided additional information regarding the
vehicle counts at alternate areas within the City.
Ms. Sue Temblador, 29477 Georgetown Lane, thanked staff and the Commission for
their investigation of this issue; noted that when the traffic data was collected that there
had been rainy weather, relaying that there was not as much traffic as normal; and
relayed that she was concerned about the traffic at the Margarita Road entrance into the
subdivision, and the speed of vehicles on Margårita Road, recommending that signage
be installed making drivers aware of the proximate residential tract entrance,
For Ms, Temblador, Chairman Connerton relayed that the recommendation denoted on
the agenda was solely the recommendation of staff, clarifying that the PublicfTraffic
Safety Commission had not taken action with respect to this item at this time.
Mr, Roger Temblador, 29477 Georgetown Lane, queried whether the traffic generated
from the future shopping center was taken into consideration when the subdivision tracts
were approved.
In response to Mr. Temblador, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that when the
tract maps were approved, the future mall development and surrounding commercial
development were taken into account; and advised that there had been no formal
application to the City at this time regarding the proximate commercial development,
noting that the preliminary concepts that have been brought before the City revealed that
there would be no significant negative impacts; as proposed in the preliminary plan,
relaying that the primary access to the commercial development would be the interior
mall roads.
In response to Mr. Ternblador, Chairman Connerton relayed that since the commercial
development would not have a signifièant ñegative impact that the traffic generation
would either raise slightly or remain the same. .
For Commissioner Katan, Mr. Temblador confirmed that it was the desire of the
residents that Winwood Circle and Rycrest Drive be closed, noting that it was the opinion
of the residents that while the speed was posted at 25 MPH, that drivers were not
adhering to this limit. '
Mrs. Temblador relayed that she was coñcerned with the children's safety (i.e.,
skateboarders) in her neighborhood due to the speeds of travel in this area, .
Commissioner Lanier noted that he was pleased with the traffic counts and vehicle
speeds revealed in this area per the study that was conducted, relaying that the
configuration of the tract had been designed to calm traffic; and advised that via visiting
this area, he had noticed that there were numerous construction vehicles, noting that this
would improve after the construction was completed,
)
"""_"",,.11101200
\
\
,
,
For Commissioner Lanier, Officer Nelson confirmed that there had been no accidents at
the Georgetown LanelMargarita Road entrance/exit point.
Relaying that she had visited the area of discussion, Commissioner Edwards noted that
there was a plethora of on-street parking; advised that the curves in the configuration of
the tract layout were effectively slowing the traffic speeds; with respect to traffic volumes,
noted that the two subdivisions were designed to be connected, relaying that the
circulation was functioning as designed, with the traffic counts within limits; and advised
that since there have been no accidents on Margarita Road, and the traffic counts and
speeds are within normal limits to service this entire area, that she would support staff's
recommendation.
Advising that he, too, had visited this particular neighborhood on five or six occasions,
Commissioner Katan noted the tremendous amount of street parking on both sides of
the street which would contribute to slower traffic speeds; relayed that he would be
reluctant to close the streets of discussion since the traffic counts indicate that the two
tracts are utilizing this access to Solana Way, or Margarita Road; and relayed his
support of staff's recommendation, noting that this area was most likely not utilized as a
short cut due to the difficulty of traveling through the tracts.
Relaying that he, too, had visited the area of discussion, Chairman Connerton noted that
he had measured the width of the streets in the neighborhoods, relaying that Rycrest
Drive was forty-four feet (44') wide, noting that if one entered the tract from Solana Way,
that Dawncrest Circle (the cul-de-sac) was thirty-six feet (36') wide, and Amwood Way
was forty feet (40') wide, relaying that Shorewood Court and Waynewood Drive were,
additionally, forty feet (40') wide, and that all of the cul-de-sacs were thirty-six feet (36')
wide; noted that the width measurements were consistent with the design of the tracts;
and relayed the rationale for the two access points to the tracts.
For Chairman Connerton, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that the rationale for
the installation of narrower streets was to decrease cut-through traffic, noting the intent
in the planning stages to configure the streets to slow the speed of vehicles; advised that
the City did plan to maintain the forty-foot (40') minimum standard street width, while
noting that in particular areas, the thirty-six foot (36') width would be appropriate;
advised that while the narrow streets and the curvature of the streets did reduce traffic
speed, that there were other factors to be considered for planning developments with
these elements, such as: less room to pass other vehicles, and less reaction time, noting
that merely narrowing a street does not make it" safer without taking into account other
considerations (referencing the Planning Commission's recently expressed desire to
narrow the streets in the Wolf Valley Project); advised that in the industry, it has been
revealed that the most appropriate street width for a street with on-street parking on both
sides was forty feet (40'), while noting the rationale for the design features implemented
in this particular area in order to calm the'speeds.
Chairman Connerton concurred with the plan to maintain a forty-foot (40') minimum
street width, noting the negative impact,s with respect to narrower streets.
In response to Chairman Connerton, Director of Public Works Hughes reiterated that in
this particular area, if the streets had been widened there would be a slight increase in
traffic speeds.
"""I!IanJn"'.\IO1200
I
/
Associate Engineer Gonzales relayed that a contributing factor to the speed slowing was
the amount of on-street parking in these particular neighborhoods.
In response to Chainnan Connerton, Associate Engineer Gonzales relayed that staff
could investigate the feasibility of installing advance warning signage stating that there
was a tract entrance (on Margarita Road), per the request from Ms. Temblador during
the public speaking portion of this agenda item.
MQI!QH: Commissioner Edwards moved to approve staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Katan seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Commission Coe who was absent.
3.
Wolf Creek ProJect Circulation Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
3,1
That the PublicfTraffic Safety Commission receive and file a presentation
regarding the Wolf Creek Project circulation project plans.
Director of Public Works Hughes provided an overview of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan,
as it has been presented to the City, relaying the traffic situations and concerns that
have arisen with this project that were reviewed in the traffic study; via overheads,
presented the site plan, inclusive of the park sites, residential areas, school sites, fire
station, recreational facilities, and the commercial area; relayed that this project has
been in the planning stages for approximately two years, noting the elements of the
Specific Plan that have been thoroughly analyzed by the Planning Department, as well
as, the Public Works Department; advised that this plan was inclusive of various
meritorious features, noting that the proposed loop road would have wide boulevard
parkways with separated trails for pedestrian access; relayed that the primary concern
with staff with this project was the impact that the project would have with respect to the
City streets; noted that this project has been conditioned to widen Pala Road to four
lanes prior to the issuance of any building pennits, relaying that at a certain threshold in
the development Pala Road would be widened to six lanes from Via Gilberto to Highway
79; advised that the traffic studies indicated that with the improvements to Pala Road, as
well as, the improvement to Loma Linda Road and Wolf Valley Road that the project
would mitigate its traffic impacts tõ this area; noted that the project was conditioned to
make the applicant responsible for all the infrastructure in phasing with the development
or there was an option to negotiate and enter into an agreement with the City to form a
Community Facility District where the City would have the control of completing the
infrastructure for the project. at their cost, noting that it was expected that the Pechangas
would participate in these costs; relayed that for the most part, staff was of the opinion
that this was a great project plan, noting that the commercial components would aid in
relieving traffic on Highway 79, and Pàla Road, advising that with the proposed'
components of this project that there would be a net benefit to the traffic circulation;
relayed that at this point in time the project had been reviewed by the Planning
Commission at three meetings, noting that the Planning Commission had denied the
project and would be reviewing the resolutions of denial at the next Planning
Commission meeting; and relayed that staff was uncertain what the final outcome of this
project would be, noting the efforts of the applicant and staff with respect to the project
plan, advising that the City had been looking forward to gaining the positive components
of this project.
""",,"""""...\101200
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
FROM:
Ali Moghadam, P.E" Senior Engineer, Traffic
DATE:
October 12,2000
SUBJECT:
Item 2
Traffic Concerns along Geo,rgetown Lane, Carelton Way and Winwood Circle in
the Promenade Subdivision
RECOMMENDA nON:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission deny the request to close Winwood Circle at Rycrest Drive,
BACKGROUND:
At the meeting of September 14, 2000, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission received a request from the
Promenade Homeowners Association to review the feasibility of closing Winwood Circle at Rycrest Drive
to eliminate "cUt-through" traffic along Georgetown Lane and Carleton Way, The public has been notified
of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification process
and by mail.
Georgetown Lane is a 36-foot wide residential street that provides access to numerous residential homes
between Margarita Road, Carleton Way and ultimately Winwood Circle, On-street parking is allowed on
both sides of the roadway, The average daily traffic (ADT) volume on Georgetown Lane is approximately
1,097 just east of Margarita Road, The prima facie'speed limit on Georgetown Lane is 25 MPH.
Georgetown Lane at Margarita Road does not allow for westbound to southbound left rums.
Carleton Way is a 36-foOl wide residential street that provides access to numerous residential homes
between Georgetown Lane, Win wood Circle and ultimately Rycrest Drive. On-street parking is allowed on
both sides of the roadway and the prima facie speed limit is 25 MPH,
Winwood Circle is a 36-foot wide residential street that"provides access to numerous residential homes
between Rycrest Drive, Carel ton Way, Georgetown Lane and ultimately Margarita Road. On-street parking
is allowed on both sides of the roadway and the prima facie speed limit is 25 MPH, The traffic volume on
Winwood Circle west of Rycrest Drive is approximately 613 ADT,
Rycrest Drive is a 44-foot wide collector roadway that ,provides access to numerous residential homes
between Margarita Road and Solana Way, On-street parking is allowed on both sides of the roadway and
the prima facie speed limit is 25 MPH. The traffic volume on Rycrest Drive south of Winwood Circle is
approximately 616 ADT,
,,\!rnfticlcommissolageoda\20001 I 0 121Promenade
The Woodcrest subdivision was approved, by the County of Riverside under tWo separate tract maps.
Approved in January 1987, Tract Map 21561 established a roadway connection between the Woodcrest
subdivision and future Promenade subdivision at Winwood Circle just west of Rycrest Drive. The
subsequent approval of Tract Map 22208 provided for the complerion of the remainder of the Woodcrest
subdivision west of Rycrest Drive and north of Solana Way, Collecrively, the Woodcrest subdivision hàs
approximately 227 single-family homes that can potentially generate a traffic volume of2,270 ADT. This
is based on a trip generation rate of 10 trips per day per dwelling unit.
,. The Promenade subdivision (Tract Map 28553) was approved by the City of Temecula in August 1997, At
that rime, the connection between the two subdivisions was constructed and subsequently the on-site
roadway system was dedicated to the city for public use and acceptance into the City's maintained roadway
system. The connection between both subdivisions at Winwood Circle was for circulation between the tWo
(2) subdivisions and to serve as secondary emergency access to the area. This type of "inter-subdivision"
access is not uncommon throughour the City,
The Promenade subdivision has approximately 69 single-family dwelling homes, which represents a
potential trip generation rate of 690 ADT, About half of the Promenade homes are on cul-de-sacs and half
are along the through streets,
In September 2000, traffic volume data was collected at Georgetown Lane, Winwood Circle and Rycrest
Drive. This informarion was used to determine if a significant "cut-through" traffic pattern is present.
Directional count data was collected at all three locations for a period of seven consecutive days. The count
data indicates that Georgetown Lane east of Margarita Road carries approximately 488 ADT westbound
(ourbound from the subdivision) and 609 ADT eastbound (inbound to the subdivision) during the seven-day
period, Winwood Circle west of Rycrest Drive carries approximately 244 ADT westbound (inbound to the
subdivision) and 369 ADT (outbound from the subdivision) and Rycrest Drive south of Winwood Circle
carries approximately 356 ADT sourhbound and 260 ADT northbound during the same seven-day period
(Exhibit "3").
In addition to the traffic count data collecrion, a spot speed survey was performed on Georgetown Lane and
Carleton Way, The spot speed survey revealed that the 85" percentile speed on Georgetown Lane is
approximately 22 MPH and 24 MPH on Carleton Way, The results show that the opportunity for speeding
is limited due to the roadway widths and alignment constraints (knuckles and "T" intersecrions) of the
subdivision's roadway system, '
The traffic volume data indicates that some "cut-through" traffic does occur within the Promenade
subdivision, bur the total volumes are half of what would normally be considered significant and they do not
warrant a road closure, The majority of the traffic is generated by the Woodcrest subdivision, which uses
the route, as it was designed, to access Margarita Road, Staff does not recommend closing Winwood Circle
at Rycrest Drive, '
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachments:
1.
2,
Exhibit "A" - Location Map
Exhibit "3" - Traffic Volume Data
"ltrafficlcommissnlageodaI2000\ 1 0 12\Promeoade
EXHIBIT "C"
LETTER FROM BEVERLY PERKINS
DATED
JANUARY 17, 2002
/
j ì
January 17,2002
RECEIVED
JAN 1 8 2002
Mr. Ali Moghadam
Sr. Traffic Engineer
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Dr. Mr. Moghadam:
I reside on Georgetown Lane in the Promenade subdivision - a 2-year old, 68-home
subdivision bounded by Margarita Road to the West and Rycrest Road to the East. I am
writing with concerns regarding the volume of traffic that is currently flowing through
the subdivision - most which comes fÌ'om the fumilies of the adjoining subdivision who
are using our subdivision as a thoroughfare between Margarita Road and Rycrest Dr, The
situation has become unbearable and dangerous to the point where proactive measures are
necessary by the city.
There are two outlets to the Promenade subdivision - one at Georgetown Lane and
Margarita Road and the other at Winwood Circle and Rycrest Drive. It appears that prior
to the Promenade development, the approximately 250 homes in the older subdivision
had no direct outlet to Margarita Road. Regrettably, an unintentional and unfortunate
consequence of the development of the Promenade subdivision was the creation of a
main traffic artery - via the narrow residential streets of Win wood Circle, Carlton Way,
and Georgetown Lane- to Margarita Road. This is clearly an unintended, inappropriate
and dangerous utilization of these streets. '
Sadly, residents on these streets, especially those with children, cannot fully enjoy the
basic amenities that most similar residentiaÎ neighborhoods provide - mainly the ability
to walk, run, bike, skate, etc. in the neighbOrhood without fear of being hit by the
constant flow of cars streaming through the area, mcluding an increasing number of
commercial vehicles. Additionally, children in both subdivisions are constantly walking
or riding through the neighborhood on their way to and fÌ'om school, and must also
endure and navigate the constant stream of traffic. Furthermore, there are several cars that
have decided that for the sake of convenience, it is okay to make an illegal left-hand turn
fÌ'om Georgetown onto Margarita, thereby creating another set of dangerous traffic
conditions not only for the residents and children, but also for the traffic on Margarita'
Road. It is unfair to require the affected residents, children, and to some degree the
commuters on Margarita Road, to endure the consequences of what, in hindsight, was
poor street planning (for both subdivision) by the developers and the city.
The situation needs to be addressed and proactive measures need to be taken. I am
monitoring the traffic coming through here throughout the day, and it is increasing at an
alarming rate. Every 5-10 minutes a car is traveling through the subdivision in either
~'
direction, some of which are traveling well past the speed limit and others that are
making the illegal left hand turn onto Margarita. I am seeking viable alternatives to
discourage the flow of cars coming through the area, especially with the opening of other
commercial developments along Margarita Road, for the safety of the residents and
pedestrians who wish to enjoy this neighborhood as it was meant to be.
2
Your response to this important matter is greatly anticipated.
JiJelY
( Rd:íy Per
29462 Geo own Lane
Temecula, A 92591
(909) 506-1399
cc: Bill Hughes
Public Traffic Safety Commission
Ë I, 't-< M!)þ--J- Ct"
J97'c'o >1c7 tk-lC/'- .or-
w.,rI rr~ q 2 -r {,3
f.J:- L
i
EXHIBIT "D"
LETTER RESPONSE FROM
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
DATED
JUL Y 22, 2002
:' '
(
City of Temecula
Public Works Department
43200 Busines. Park DriveoTemecula, CA 92590oMaiiing Address: PO, Box 9033oTemecula, CA 92589-9033
19091694-641 t 0 Fax (9091 694-6475
July 22, 2002
Ms. Beverly Perkins
29462 Georgetown Lane
Temecula, CA 92591
Subject:
Traffic Complaints in the Promenade Subdivision
Dear Ms. Perkins:
I am responding to your recent concerns regarding inireased traffic volumes within the Promenade
subdivision and your request to close streets to cut-through traffic,
As you are aware, the Publicrrraffic Safety Commission addressed these issues and denied the request to
close Wind Wood Circle at Rycrest Drive. This decision was supported by an analysis of traffic data
collected within the Promenade subdivision, which indicated that vehicular volumes and speeds did not
warrant any additional traffic control devices or road closures, This information was further reiterated to
you in a letter /Tom our Senior Traffic Engineer, Ali Mogadham, dated February II, 2002. With respect
to the illegal left-turn movements at the intersection of Georgetown Lane and Margarita Road, we have
installed delineators at the median opening to eliminate illegal left-turn movements /Tom Georgetown
Lane, I am hopeful that this work has been complcted to your satisfaction.
In an effort to evaluate the most current traffic conditions in your subdivision, we have compiled new
speed and volume data for the area, The speed survey revealed that speeds had not changed /Tom the last
survey (27mph, 85<> percentile), indicating that the subdivision's circuitous roadway system continues to
reduce the opportunity for speeding. Although t~e surVey revealed that average daily trip (ADT) volumes
had increased /Tom I, I 00 to 1,400 on the busiest section of Georgetown Lane, these volumes are
consistent with the volumes that would be generated by the number of homes located within the
immediate neighborhoods. The increase in traffic volumes is likely a result of more of the existing
residents using this street and using it more often.
To further insure ourselves that the streets were not being used as a cut-through route, we also conducted
,á field study of "cut-through" traffic. On Monday, July 8, 2002 we surveyed vehicles entering and exiting
the area between 4:45 and 5:45 p,m, to determine if this subdivision is being used as a shortcut between
Margarita Road and Solana Way, We found that only 2 of the 120 vehicles surveyed during this time
/Tame used the streets to cut-through, ,The rest were either residents or visitors to the neighborhood,
$"""""'00""1""""""'"
R,",ugh"h\2002"'t1e"IProm..,d,rnoflk P"k;og'"
~
, --
(
(
Ms. Beverly Perkins
July 22, 2002
Page 2
In conclusion, both the traffic volumes and speeds in your neighborhood continue to be consistent with
other residential streets throughout the City with similar characteristics. Moreover, the most recent
survey confmns that the streets are functioning as they were originally intended. As a result, I am not
able to support your request for road closures within the Promenade subdivision. Unless directed
otherwise, I do not plan on placing this item on the Public Traffic Safety Commission Agenda,
If you have any questions, please feel fi-ee to contact me at (909) 694-6411,
sm:;;: ~
William G. Hughes
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Cc:
Mayor and City Council
PublicfTraffic Safety Commission
Shawn Nelson, City Manager
Mr. Scott Eggum
Ms. Danielle Woodward
KIhug¡,csb\2002\1,"",IPro""oid,Trnffio P,"'ing'"
EXHIBIT "E"
LETTER FROM PROMENADE RESIDENTS
DATED
SEPTEMBER 16, 2003
,i .
PROMEN ADE SUBDIVISION
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
, )
PREFACE
SEPTEMBER 16, 2003
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
PROMENADE RESIDENTS
GATING SUBDIVISION ENTRY
The four-year-old Promenade subdivision consists of68 single-family dwellings, encompassing
the residential streets of Georgetown Lane, Brandeis Circle, Carleton Way, and Windwood
Circle. The Promenade adjoins the 14-year-old Woodcrest subdivision, which consists of227
single-family dwellings and encompasses several streets throughout the tract. The two
subdivisions connect at the comer of Wind wood Circle and Rycrest Drive,
Since the completion of Promenade in 2000, the subdivision has transformed from the
envisioned small quiet hamlet into a major traffic artery for commuters accessing Margarita
Road. This transformation has adversely affe<,:ted the safety, infrastructure, quality, amenities,
and solitude of the community. The situation is at a crisis point for the residents within the
Promenade, who are petitioning the City Council to take corrective measures as set forth in this
communiqué. (EXH-I)
PROBLEM
Since its development, the Promenade residents have been crusading, without success, to resolve
the critical traffic problem plaguing the neighborhood. Two city-initiated traffic studies
confirmed that from September 2000 until June 2002, traffic volume through the neighborhood
increased from 1.100 cars per dav to 1.400 cars perdav. Using the city's criteria of average daily
trips (10 trips per resident per day); both figures are significantly higher than the 680 ADT
calculated for this subdivision.
Considering the 27% increase from 2000-2002, continuing commercial development along
Margarita Road ensures traffic volume will continue to increase through the Promenade. The
residents can attest that traffic volume has increased since the June 2002 traffic study, Even a
slight increase (15%) would classify the streets of the Promenade as "arterial" or "collector"
streets under Section 5871(b) ofthe California Streets and Highways Code.
- 2-
The subdivision, by design, can neither endure nor accommodate the number of vehicles
currently traveling through its narrow (36 feet wide) streets. The traffic control measures
instituted by the city to date, though appreciated, have been largely ineffective in alleviating the
problem The only viable solution, and one we have sought before, is to gate one end of the
Promenade subdivision.
CITY'S POSITION (PER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT)
+ The Public Works Department (PWD) acknowledged that the majority of the traffic
generates f!om outside the subdivision, but attributes it to the 227 residents of the adjoining
Woodcrest subdivision. The PWD does not differentiate between the two adjoining
subdivisions and for this reason does not classify this as "cut-through" traffic. (EXH-2)
+ PWD has consistently maintained that thl? Promenade, by design, provides for circulation
between the two subdivisions and serves as a secondary emergency access for the Woodcrest
residents. (EXH-2) ,
+ ' The narrow streets and alignment constraints (knuckles and "T" intersections) were planned
to discourage cut-through traffic, limit speeding, and as a calming traffic control measure.
(EXH-2)
PROMEN ADE'S POSITION /SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
+ Circulation between the two subdivisions occurs primarily within the Promenade, adversely
affecting approximately 30 residents along the travel route of Georgetown Lane, Carleton
Way, and Windwood Circle. Consequently; these residents are forced to bear the burden of
over 1,400 vehicles traveling their streets on a daily basis. Using the city's ADT (average
daily trips) criteria, this number could increase to 2,950 vehicles on any given day, (EXH-2;
EXH-3)
+ Circulation through Woodcrest is available by using Rycrest Drive, a 44-foot wide
designated collector street with no residential dwellings, and Skywood Drive with dwellings
on both sides, each providing access to Solana wáy. Rycrest Drive is, and has been for the
past 12 years, the main artery servicing the Woodcrest residents.
By design, circulation within Woodcrest is nori-existent fÌ'om the Promenade residents and
the majodty of Woodcrest residents, most 'whom use Rycrest Drive to access Solana Way.
Traffic studies have confmned that traffic ,volume is significantly less along Rycrest Drive.
Since the Promenade functions more as a'convenience to Woodcrest residents, closing one
end will not affect the access Woodcrest residents have always had in and out of their
subdivision, via Rycrest Drive and Skywood Drive.,(EXH-2; EXH-3)
+ Cut-through traffic is not limited to Woodcrest residents. Increasingly, traffic is funneled
through the Promenade via Skywood Drive, Rycrest Drive and Margarita Road by motorists
attempting to avoid traffic on Margarita Road or the left turn signal at Margarita and Solana
Way, These include patrons of the ABC daycare, RTA buses, school buses, and numerous
- 3-
commercial vehicles, using the Promenade route to cut through to Margarita or Solana Way.
(EXH-4)
~ Gating either end of the subdivision would allow emergency vehicle access into the
Promenade either electronically or by a "Knox Box", while still satisfying the street
dimensions set by Section 902.2.2.1 of the California Fire Code. This continues to allow for
two unobstructed emergency vehicle access entries into the Woodcrest subdivision, via
Skywood Drive and Rycrest Drive at Solana Way, which existed 12 years prior to
Promenade being developed. (EXH-3)
~ . The intersection at Georgetown Lane and Margarita is a safety hazard to the numerous
pedestrians, including schoolchildren and bicyclists, crossing at Georgetown Lane. The
obstructed view caused by the curved design of Margarita Road forces motorists exiting the
subdivision at Georgetown instinctively to roll past the stop sign into the unmarked
pedestrian walkway to safely gauge oncoming traffic. This condition has resulted in one
accident and many near misses. The increasing volume of vehicles and pedestrians at this
intersection amplifies the potential for more accidents in this area. (EXH-5)
, ~ The City Council has set the precedent forgating and permanently closing streets between
two adjoining subdivisions. There is a gate in the middle of Kahewa and a park median
blocking Avenida De La Reina at Corte Arroyo Vista and Calle Aragon, As recently as April
'1999, the City Council approved Ordinance NO 99-08, allowing for the closure of Sanderling
at Sanford Drive and Starling at Odessa, between the adjoining subdivisions of Campos
Verdes and Roripaugh Estates. The approval was based, in part, on projected traffic flows
considerably less than those currently passing through the Promenade. To date, one of your
Council Members, a resident of Campos Verdes, benefits (rightfully so) fÌ'om the closure of
Starling at Odessa. (EXH-6; 6a)
~ There are few, ¡fany, neighborhoods within the city ofTemecula with the design
characteristics of the Promenade. Contrary to the standard forty-foot wide streets of most
Temecula neighborhoods, all streets within the Promenade were narrowed to thirty-six feet
widths. Consequently, the narrow streets and alignment constraints are what distinguish this
neighborhood fÌ'om others in the city and makes traffic flow comparisons unreliable. Yet, no
traffic circulation plan was conducted or even required for the development of this
subdivision. We would argue it is precisely'the characteristics of this neighborhood that
warrant special traffic control measures. (EXH- 7)
~ The current volume of traffic forced upon the Promenade residents is in direct violation of
Section 16.51.020 of the City Municipal Code and Section 2 I 949(a) (b) ofCalifomia Vehicle
Code, Chapter 5, Division II. Both charge the governmental body with the responsibility to
establish pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods and ensuring that pedestrian safety is a priority,
To date, the Promenade fails to meet either standard. (EXH-8)
, ..
- 4-
SOLUTION
.. The Promenade residents have sought proposals for installing either an electronic or a
permanent gate at the west end of the subdivision (Georgetown Lane at Margarita Road) or at
the east end (Windwood Circle at Rycrest Drive) and are willing to bear the cost. Provisions
will be made to ensure emergency and pedestrian access and that the gate blends aesthetically
with the décor of the neighborhood and area. (EXH-9)
The Woodcrest residents would be minimally impacted, required only to return to previous
traffic patterns utilized before the development of the Promenade. To gate Georgetown Lane
at Margarita Road would have no direct impact on the Woodcrest residents since the only
street involved (Georgetown Lane) would be within the Promenade. The adverse affect
would fall on the Promenade residents, incon"enienced by one less direct entrance into the
subdivision. It is a sacrifice we would willingly embrace if it means securing a safe
neighborhood.
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
6a.
7.
8.
9.
List of Exhibits
Resident Petitions
Traffic Study Reports/City CoITespondimce '
Map of Promenade and Woodcrest Subdivision Tracts
Pictorials - Traffic through Promenade
Hazardous Comer - Margarita Road and Georgetown Lane - Pictorial
Existing Street Closures within Temeculà
Ordinance NO. 99-08 - Amending Campos Verdes Specific Plan/With Pictorials
Promenade Subdivision Traffic Circulation Plan
Municipal City Code Section 16.51.020; California Vehicle Code Section 2] 949
Gate Installation Proposals for Promenade
EXHIBIT "F"
VEHICULAR VOLUME AND SPEED DATA
Legend
City of Temecula
I~~ ~...'~j<P,/
i ffil ù\~/\
!- ,#w
! ~---,-, ---~'
ì
'.
(
", '\ RV 0"" Implementation
\, I:J 9 Woodcæsl Country
.. D 49 Promenado 01 Temecula
7\l Highways
1\/8-
8po""",
City
N
Â.
This ~p ~s ~do by the CIty 01 Tomecula Geogmp'"
Inlonnatioo sysl~, The ~p 's derived from base data
prod""'" by the RI,e"lde Coumy Asses....s Departmenl
OM the Tcansportalloo OM LBnO Ma"""","ool Agency
oIR""'"""" Couoty, TheCityofTomeculaoM"~""
~""my °' legal ""po""",lty 10< the inlonnallon "",ta;ned
on th's map, Deta aM ioloonation """...oIed on this map
e", ,"b¡oct 10 "pdate OM modlfi",tion, The Geogca"'"
Inlonnatioo System aM othe, "",ucœs sri""'" be ,",oed 10< the
masl ou""'" ""onnation, This map 's "'" 1"'_01 '" ",sale,
200 o '00 ..., Fœ'
z==>--- ~
""""""'~"""""'.""pm"'D2.",
'Of¡
""",,~
RECEIVED
JAN 1 3 ZOO4
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINE ING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF TEMECULA
GEORGETOWN LANE E/O MARGARITA ROAD
Directional Volume Count
January 2004 '
.'
Counts Unlimited, Inc. . ,,25424 Jaclyn Avenue. Moreno Valley, CA 92557 . T 9092476716 . F 9099248604
~
"~'.,!"":-;,.!",,;,.,.,,
. ~mG~~o~~MfmA . Counts'Onl1mlted Inc," '
909-247-6716 Site Code: 150334
E/MARGARITA ROAD Start Date: 01/06/2004
24 ER DIRECTIONAL VOLUME COONT File I.D, : TEGEEOMA
Paqe : 1
------) Tuesday
12 :00 01/06 0 13 0 0 23
12:15 3 8 1 4 11
12:30 0 4 0 0 14
12:45 4 7 32 1 35 5 13 67
01 :00 0 10 0 0 17
01:15 1 7 1 2 17
01 :30 0 10 0 0 16
01:45 1 10 37 0 30 1 11 67
02:00 1 11 0 1 11
02:15 0 15 0 0 17
02 :30 '1 18 1 2 42
02 :45 2 17 61 0 50 2 41 III
03:00 0 14 0 0 2B
01 :15 1 12 1 2 21
01:30 1 5 0 1 19
01:45 0 12 43 0 43 0 18 86
04:00 2 13 0 2 25
04:15 0 24 0 0 J6
04:30 0 26 0 0 39
04:45 0 19 82 1 59 .1 41 141
05:00 0 21 1 '1 33
05: 15 0 21 1 1 38
05:10 1 23 3 4 14
05:45 0 8 73 4 53 4 10 21 126
06:00 0 20 8 8 32
06:15 3 18 7 10 27
06: 30 4 10 8 12 16
06:45 3 10 17 65 17 40 40 20 50 10 105
07:00 9 13 30 19 22
07 :15 17 21 11 28 10
07 :30 13 24 12 25 11
07 :45 12 51 13 71 15 68 10 27 119 18 101
08:00 16 9 18 14 21
08 :15 20 13 6 26 22
08:30 13 8 13 26 17
08:45 9 58 14 44 8 45 36 17 103 20 80
09:00 6 11 10 16 15
09:15 8 7 12 20 10
09:30 5 5 B 13 11
09 :45 2 21 9 12 9 39 18 11 60 14 50
10 :00 9 6 7 16 9
10:15 8 3 8 16 5
10:30 15 6 8 23 1
10:45 8 40 5 20 9 32 17 72 1 28
11: 00 18 3 10 28 4
11:15 4 3 11 15 5
11 :30 11 7 6 17 8
1'4 1 44 1 5 1 1
Totals 242 574 271 513 980
oar Totals 816 677 1493
Sp it 1 47,11 58,5% 5281 41.41 "
Peak Hour 07:30 04:15 06:45 02:10 07:00 OUO
Volume 61 90 70 71 119 151
P ,H ,1, ,76 ,86 ,58 ,7J ,76 ,92
,'Ø:í
^c~,'
RECEIVED
JAN 1 3 2004
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF TEMECULA
CARLETON WAY /
B/GEORGETOWN LANE & WINWOOD CIRCLE
Directional Speed Survey
Jamlary 2004
Counts Unlimited, Inc. . 25424 Jaclyn Avenue. Morenq Valley, CA 92557 . T 9092476716 . F 9099248604
CITY O~TEMECULA l,': 'eMit Unli~itid ¡öc, Site Cnde : 150378
. CARLETO WAY 909-247-6716 '
B/GEORGETOWN LANE & WINWOOD CIRCLE Start Date: 01{06/2004
24 HR OIRECTIONAL SPEED SURVEY File 1.0. : TECAGTWI
EASTBODND Pane . 1
Begin 0- 16- 21- 26- 31- 36- 41., 46- 51- 56- 61- 66- 71- 76-
Time Total 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 999
12: 00 01/06 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
01:00 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:00 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03: 00 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04: 00 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06:00 10 1 3 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
07:00 J4 2 8 15 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
08:00 39 11 4 17 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09: 00 20 16 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 26 2 2 12 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 35 0 7 16 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 pm 23 2 4 8 8 1 0 0
01:00 31 6 6 8 11 0 0 0
02: 00 48 3 9 22 10 4 0 0
03: 00 29 4 8 7 9 1 0 0
04: 00 59 2 11 37 8 1 ,0 0
05:00 45 0 9 22 1J 1 0 0
06:00 39 1 3 16 17 2 0 0
07:00 J1 3 8 11 6 3 0 .0
08:00 27 0 1 14 10 1 1 0
09:00 16 0 1 6 6 3 0 0
10:00 10 0 2 1 5 2 0 0
11:00 7 0 0 4 2 1 0 0
Day Totals 541 53 92 225 144 25 2 t
Grand Total 541 53 92 225 144 25
Speed Statistics
15th Percentile Speed : 16 MPH
Median Speed !50th percentile!: 22 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 23 MPH
85th Percentile Speed 28 MPH
95th Percentile Speed 29 MPH
10 MPH Pace Speed : 21-30 MPH
Number of Vehicles in Pace : 369
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 68,501
Number of Vehicles> 55 MPH : 0
Percent of Vehicles> 55 MPH: ,00\
, . ", "
CITY O~TEMECULA Counts Unlimited Inc, Site Code: 150378
'CARLiTO WAY 909-247-6716
B/GEORGETOWN LANE & mWOOD CIRCLE Start Date: 01/06/2004
24 HR DIRECTIONAL SPEED SURVEY File J.D. : TECAGTWI
WESTBOUND Paqe : 2
Begin 0- 16- 21- 26- 31- 36- 41- 46- 51- 56- 61- 66- 71- 76-
Time Total 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 15 999
12: 00 01/0! 1 0 0 0 1 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02: 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03: 00 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04: 00 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
. 05: 00 11 0 3 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06 :00 36 3 6 13 11 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
07: 00 29 2 2 11 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
08: 00 22 4 2 9 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09 :00 10 2 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10: 00 20 0 3 10 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11: 00 12 1 1 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12: 00 pm 21 2 6 7 4 2 0 0 0
01 :00 17 2 2 1 4 2 0 0 0
02: 00 J1 2 5 12 9 2 1 0 0
03 :00 23 3 3 13 2 1 0 0 0
04 :00 26 4 10 5 5 1 1 O' 0
, 05 :00 32 1 4 15 9 2 0' 0 0
06 :00 16 1 1 6 8 0 0 0 0,
07 :00 13 0 3 4 3 2 I' 0 0
08 :00 15 0 0 5 7 3 0 0 0
09:00 9 0 1 2 6 0 0 0 0
10:00 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
11' 00 4 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0
Day Totals 353 28 54 129 107 29 4 . .
Grand Total 353 28 54 129 107 29
Speed Statistics
15th Percentile Speed : 17 MPH
Median Speed ¡50th percentile): 23 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 24 MPH
85th Percentile Speed 28 MPH
95th Percentile Speed 32 MPH
10 MPH Pace Speed 21-30 MPH
Number of Vehicles in Pace : 236
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 67.00%
Number of Vehicles, 55 MPH 1
Percent of Vehicles, 55 MPH: .28%
;r"' 'co~nt¡Unlimitèd I~è, ¡."
. CITY OF.. TEMECULA Site (ode: 150318
CARLETON WAY 909-247-6716
B/GEORGETOWN LANE & WINWOOO CIRCLE Start Date: 01106/2004,
24 HR DIRECTIONAL SPEED SURVEY Pile I.D, : TECAGTWI
EASTBOUND, WESTBOUND Pane 3
Begin 0- 16- 21- 26- 31- 36- 41- 46- 51- 56- 61- 66- 71- 76-
Time Total 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 999
12:00 01/06 4 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
01:00 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:00 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 5 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00. ¡¡ 0 3 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06:00 46 4 9 17 1J 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
07:00 63 4 10 26 19 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
08:00 61 15 6 26 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09:00 30 18 4 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 46 2 5 22 14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 :00 47 1 8 21 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 pm 44 4 10 15 12 3 0
'01:00 48 8 8 15 15 2 0
02 :00 79 5 14 J4 19 6 0
03:00 52 7 11 20 ¡¡ 2 0
04:00 85 6 21 42 13 2 0
05:00 77 1 13 37 22 3 0
, 06 :00 55 2 4 22 25 2 0
07:00 44 3 ¡¡ 15 9 5 0
'08:00 42 0 1 19 17 4 0
09:00 25 0 2 8 12 3 0
10:00 . 12 0 3 1 6 2 ,0
¡¡.OO 11 0 0 5 4 2 0
Day Totals 894 81 146 354 251 54 .
Grand Total 894 81 146 354 251 54 ,0
Speed Statistics
15th Percentile Speed 16 MPH
Median Speed (50th percentile): 22 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 23 MPH
85th Percentile Speed 28 MPH
95th Percentile Speed 31 MPH
10 MPH Pace Speed 21-30 MPH
Number of Vehicles in Pace : 605
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 67,98%
Number of Vehicles> 55 MPH 1
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH: ,11%
;a:i~
".",
RECEIVED.
JAN 1 3 2004
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF TEMECULA
WINWOOD CIRCLE E/O CARLETON WAY
Directional Volume Count
January 2004
Counts Unlimited, Inc. . 25424 Jaclyn Avenue' Moreno Valley, CA 92557 . T 9092476716 . F 9099248604
EY..
..CITY ò~ TEMECULA c~~nEs Unlimited in~,
mwoo CIRCLE 909.241-6716 Site Code: 150370
E/CARLETON WAY Start Date: 01/06/2004
24 ER DIRECTIONAL VOLUME COUNT File I.D, : TEmOCA
Page 1
(...... ....--)(--.... ......, Tuesday
M ,M
12 :00 01/06 1 1 0 2 1 9
12:15 0 1 1 6 1 13
12:30 1 4 0 5 1 9
12:45 2 6 24 0 3 16 2 9 40
01 :00 1 10 0 5 1 15
01:15 0 5 0 4 0 9
01:30 0 8 0 1 0 9
01:45 0 5 28 0 6 16 0 11 44
02:00 0 10 0 4 0 14
02:15 0 8 0 5 0 13
02 :30 1 11 0 10 1 21
02:45 1 12 41 0 9 28 1 21 69
03:00 0 12 1 5 1 11
03 :15 1 9 0 6 1 15
03:30 1 4 0 8 1 12
03:45 0 6 J1 0 1 26 0 13 51
04 :00 2 11 0 2 2 19
04 :15 3 11 1 5 4 16
04:30 1 14 0 13 ,1 21
04 :45 0 12 54 0 1 21 0 19 81
05:00 0 14 0 9 0 23
05: 15 0 15 1 10 1 25
05:30 0 13 1 6 1 19
05:45 0 3 45 5 9 34 5 12 19
06:00 1 14 6 8 1 22
06:15 2 9 1 4 3 13
06:30 4 4 6 4 10 8
06 :45 1 9 36 13 26 4 20 14 34 13 56
07 :00 6 3 19 3 25 6
07:15 11 8 5 1 16 9
07:30 6 9 5 8 11 11
07:45 12 35 8 28 6 35 4 16 18 10 12 44
08 :00 1 2 5 1 ' 12 9
08: 15 12 11 4 4 16 15
08:30 10 6 8 3 18 9
08:45 8 31 6 25 5 22 3 11 13 59 9 42
09 :00 4 5 3 1 1 6
09:15 3 2 3 1 ' 6 3
09 :30 2 2 3 5 5 1
09:45 3 12 6 15 3 12 1 8' 6 24 1 23
10:00 6 3 5 1 11 4
10:15 3 2 5 0 8 2
10:30 9 3 4 1 13 4
10 :45 5 23 4 12 5 19 0 10 42 4 14
11 :00 11 0 3 ] 14 3
11 :15 4 4 ] ] 1 1
11 :]0 5 2 0 0 5 2
11'4 14 2 1
Totals 164 132 296
oar Totals 509 348 851
Sp it \ 55 It 615\ 44.5\ ]85\
Peak Hour 01:45 04:30 06:30 04:30 , 01 :00 04:30
Volume 41 55 4J 39 10 94
P .E.F. ,85 ,91 ,56 ,15 ,1 ,81
:~;¡
RECEIVED
JAN 1 3 2004
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERINn'DEPARTMENT
CITY OF TEMECULA
RYCREST DRIVE S/OWINWOOD CIRCLE
Directional Volume Count
January 2004
Counts Unlimited. Inc. . 25424 Jaclyn Avenue. Moreno Valley, CA 92557 . T 9092476716 . F 9099248604
=
'." ,",' , .' . :
CITY OF TEMECULA Couots Unlimited Inc, Site Code: 150363
.iYCREST-DRIVE 909-241-6116
S/WINWOOD CIRCLE Start Date: 01/06/2004
24 HR DIRECTIONAL VOLDME COUNT File I.D, : TiRYSOWI
NORTH/SOOTH Page 1
Begin NBND -n_n"__---- --uu,,------Combined u----) Tuesday
Tim P M AM P
12: 00 01/06 0 3 1 8 1 11
12:15 2 3 1 6 3 9
12:30 0 5 0 4 '0 9
12 :45 0 2 13 2 6 24 2 8 31
01: 00 0 5 0 '6 0 11
01: 15 0 4 0 6 0 10
01:30 0 0 0 9 0 9
01:45 0 1 16 0 4 25 0 11 41
02 :00 0 6 0 10 0 16
02:15 0 5 0 10 0 15
02:30 0 10 1 7 1 17
02 :45 0 4 25 1 18 45 1 22 70
03:00 1 8 0 16 1 24
. 03:15 0 9 1 8 1 " 17
03:30 0 12 1 4 1 16
03:45 0 8 31 0 8 36 0 16 73
04 :00 0 3 1 16 1 19
04:15 1 5 4 11 5 16
04:30 0 15 1 17 1 32
04 :45 0 8 31 0 12 56 0 20 87
05:00 0 11 0 14 0 25
05: 15 0 14 0 11 0 25
05: 30 1 6 0 13 1 19
05: 45 5 11 42 0 4 42 5 15 84
06: 00 5 5 1 16 6 21
06:15 1 6 2 8 3 14
06: 30 4 4 1 4 11 8
06:45 10 20 6 21 2 12 6 J4 12 32 12 55
07:00 17 5 10 4 27 9
07: 15 3 0 14 8 ,17 8
07: 30 5 5 10 9 15 14
07: 45 6 J1 7 17 12 46 6 27' 18 71 13 44
08: 00 4 8 10 5 14 13
08: 15 4 4 11 12 15 16
08: 30 8 3 12 .4 20 7
08: 45 4 20 4 19 11 44 8 29 15 64 12 48
09:00 5 2 3 6 .8 8
09: 15 3 1 6 2 9 3
09: 30 3 5 4 1 7 6
09 :45 6 17 1 7 20 7 16 13 37 8 25
10:00 6 1 7 5 13 6
10: 15 7 0 2 0 9 0
10: 30 5 1 10 5 15 6
10:45. 4 22 0 10 29 1 11 14 51 1 13
11: 00 3 2 10 2 13 4
11: 15 3 3 6 3 9 6
11: 30 0 0 5 1 5 1
1 12 41 1
238 198 589
366 549 915
39.2% 40 4\ 60,7\ 595\
Peak Hour 06:45 04:30 07:00 04:00 07:00 04:30
Volume 35 !8 46 56 77 102
P ,H,F. ,51 ,8 ,82 ,82 ,11 ,79
EXHIBIT "G"
LICENSE PLATE SURVEY DATA
~
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
25424 Jaclyn Avenue
Moreno Valley, CA 92557
.
T 909 2476716
F 909 924 8604
C 909 721 5067
RECEIVED
JAN 1 3 2004
January 12, 2004
City of Temecula
PO Box 9033
. Temecula, CA 92589-9033
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Attention: Tony Chu
Here is the summary of the data from the License Piate Study on Jan, 7, 2004 from 7-8 AM and
5-6 PM:
'8
Total vehicles on Georgetown EtO Margarita:
AM PM
Eastbound 37 ' 62.
Westbound 62 '36
Total vehicles on Rycrest Drive N/O Solana Way:
AM " PM
Northbound 15 58
Southbound 89 33
Total vehicles on Skywood Drive N/O So!àna Way:
AM PM
Northbound 8 14
Southbound 11 9
Tolal malchinQ license olales:
EB on Georgetown to SB on Rycrest:
AM
2
PM
3
EB on Georgetown to SB on Skywood:
a
a
NB on Rycrest to WB on Georgetown:
a
NB on Skywood to WB on Georgetown:
If you have any questions, please don 1 hesita'te to cal/.
Sincerely,
Counts Unlimited, Inc,
~/(. þ-
Barbara N. Sackett
~
ITEM NO.5
TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
ðJ1Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent
January 2, 201)4
Monthly Activity Report - December, 2003
The foilowing activities were performed by Public Works Depallment, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel
for the month of Decemher,2003:
I. SIGNS
A, Total signs replaced
B, Total signs instailed
C. Total signs repaired
II.
III,
IV,
V,
VI.
VII.
---.lli
-...!!i
~
TREES
.A,
Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns
-.12
ASPHALT REPAIRS
A,
B,
Total square feet of A, C. repairs
Total Tons
4,222
----Ë.
CATCH BASINS
A,
. Total catch basins cieaned
-Æ
RfGHT-OF- WAY WEED ABATEMENT
A,
Total square footage for right-of-way abatement
-.@Q
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
A,
B,
Total locations
--H
~
Total S,F,
STENCILING
A, ....::...!!.... New and repainted legends
B. 875 LF. of new and repainted red curb and striping
Also, City Maintenance staff responded to.-1L service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming,
sign repair, A,c. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings, This is compared t°.2!... service order requests
for the month of November, 2003.
The Maintenance Crew has also put in.....!.Ð!..... hours of overtime which includes standby time, speciai events and
response to street emergencies,
The lotal COSI for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for tbe month of December, 2003 was $ 34,204.84
compared to $ 56,503,66 for the month of November, 2003.
Aceount No. 5402
Account No, 5401
Accounl No, 999-5402
$ 11,860,00
$ 21,024,84
$ 1,32000
cc:
Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works
Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer (CIPlTraffic)
Greg Butier, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements)
Amer Attar, Senior Engineer (Capitallmprovemenls)
Jerry Aiegria, Senior Engineer (Land Development)
./,.
""MAINIAIN\MOo\C,m""'OOJ,2001\IJECEMBER,OJ
'" "";";','
DA:¡1E' , f
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
MONTH OF DECEMBER 2003
,;(, '<'f,,: ~;t~~I~~~;~'~~:Wt~~firi-"',,)' "
i2/01/03 ,TARGET CENTER
12/04/03
i 2105/03
12108/03
i 2108103
i 2/08/03
12/09/03
12/i 1/03
I 2/i t 103
12/i i 103
121 t 1/03
12/12/03
t 2122103
12/30/03
'.
4TII STREET AT OLD TOWN FRONT STREET
VAIL RANCH PARKWAY ATCINON
6TII STREET ALLEY
TARGET CENTER
EDW ARDS THEATER
MARGARITA AT WINCHESTER
PUJUL
RANCHO CREEK APARTr...1ENTS
6Tfl STREET AT FRONT STREET
6TH STREET ALLEY
LIEFER ROAD BRIDGE
TOWER PLAZA
EMPiRE CREEK AT YNEZ EIS
TOTAL S,F, GRAFFITI REMOVED
TOTAL LOCATIONS
.-
Wq~KGf'>MR¥ETED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
REMOVED
825
----H
15
S,F, OFGRAFFITI
125
S,F, OF GRAFFITI
20 SF OF GRAFFITI
40
S,F. OF GRAFFITI
3
S,F, OF GRAFFITI
2
S,F. OF GRAFFITI
25
S,F. OF GRAFFITI
tOO
S,F. OF GRAFFITI
iSO S,F,OFGRAFFITI
i20
S,F. OF GRAFFITI
30 S,F. OF GRAFFITI
3S
S,F, OF GRAFFITI
40
S,F, OF GRAFFITI
120 S,F, OF GRAFFITI
R,""AINTAIN\WKCMPLrDIGRAFFlTlVUL Y 200) - JUNE 2IJO"IJECEMBER,OJ,OOCDECEMBEROJ
CITY OF TEMECULA
2003 GRAFFITI REM 0 V AL
COSTS
January $ 4,833,50
February $ 271.25
March $ 6,524,00
April $ 13,312,25
May $ 4,943,75
June $ 8,582.00
July $ 4,042.50
August $ 7,726.25
September $11,553,50
pct,?ber $11,863.25
November $,4,880:75 '
Decëniber $ 1,44Y75
SQUARE
FOOTAGE
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
2,762
155
3,728
7,607
2,825
4,904
2,310
4,415
6,602
6,779
2,789
825
TOTAL CALLS
January 49
February 10
March 43
April 23
May 25
June 28
July 15
August 21
September 35
October 47
November 14
December 14
Totals for the Year
To Date: Jan. 1,2004
Sq, Foot
Cost
CaUs
45,701
$79,976.75
324
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
JAN
FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
-+- COST -- sa FT
"""""'AI""'RAFRmGRAAmDl""".,
THIS PAGE
LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK