Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout022207 PTS AgendaIn 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 (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 CFR35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY TO BE HELD AT CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California Thursday, February 22, 2007 at 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Hagel, Ramos, Jacobs, Arbogast, Youmans ;j.l*94Z111L'Y11 Is) z1- 1 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 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 (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 Public/Traffic Safety Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. COMMISSION REPORTS Reports by the Commissioners on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports. r.VrafflckommiwnNagerda\200T022207 Agendatajp COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of January 25, 2007 RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of January 25, 2007 COMMISSION BUSINESS 2. RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance establishing prohibiting the non -permitted use, storage, manufacturing, and sale of fireworks. 3. Annual Fire Inspection Program RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and provide input to the Fire Department for the Annual Fire Inspection Program. 4. Request for Traffic Signal Installation — Margarita Road at Paseo Brillante RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 That the PublictTraffic Safety Commission deny the request for installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Margarita Road at Paseo Brillante. 5. Request for Traffic Signal Installation — Wolf Valley Road at Caminito Olite RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 That the Public/ Traffiic Safety Commission deny the request for installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Wolf Valley Road at Caminito Olite. 6. Traffic Engineers Report 7. Police Chiefs Report 6. Fire Chiefs Report ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission will be held on Thursday, March 22, 2007 at 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. rvreNic\ mmissn\agenda\20071022207 Agendalaip ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION JANUARY 25, 2007 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 25, 2007, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. FLAG SALUTE Commissioner Jacobs led the audience in the Flag salute. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners: Hegel, Ramos, Jacobs, and Chairperson Arbogast Absent: Youmans. Service Recognition and Retirement — Kaos In honor of Police Service Dog, Kaos, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission presented Kaos with a plaque of appreciation for his service to law enforcement. On behalf of Kaos, Corporal Cohen accepted the plaque of recognition and thanked the Public/Traffic Safety Commission for its past support. The Public/Traffic Safety Commission wished Kaos a happy retirement. Certificate of Distinguished Service — Armida "Army" Basquez On behalf of the City and Public/Traffic Safety Commission, Armida "Army" Basquez was commended for her exceptional professional efforts as a Community Service Officer for the Temecula Police Department, and wished her well in her retirement. Ms. Basquez thanked the Public/Traffic Safety Commission for its recognition. Certificate of Appreciation — Bob Hegel, Temecula Citizens Corps Program Administrator Chairperson Arbogast, on behalf of the City and the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, presented Mr. Hagel with a Certificate of Excellence for his countless hours of volunteering for the Temecula Citizen Corps (TCC) along with his extraordinary dedication and exceptional professionalism. Mr. Hegel thanked the Public/Traffic Safety Commission for its recognition R:VdinuteslPublicTraffoSafabC.ommission012507 1 Certificate of Aporeciation — Battalion Chief Bryan Devo Presenting a Certificate of Distinguished Service, Chairperson Arbogast commended Battalion Chief Bryan Deyo for his exceptional efforts, dedication, and professionalism in representing the Temecula Fire Department. Expressing his appreciation, Battalion Chief Deyo thanked the Commission for its past support. Captain Alm — Temecula Zone Policing Statistics Per PowerPoint Presentation, Captain Alm highlighted on the following: • Zone Policing Strategy — March 2006 ■ Zone Policing Objectives ■ Crime Concerns and Strategies — 2006-2007 • Crime Trends Continued Part One Crimes ■ Crime Trends for — 2004-2005 ■ Zone Policing 180 — Day Results • Zone Policing Sub -Programs ■ Zone Policing & Technology ■ Temecula Police Department Goals for — 2007-2008. Speaking enthusiastically regarding Zone Policing Statistics, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission commended Captain Alm and relayed its full support. In response to Commissioner Hagel's query, Captain Alm advised that calls for service would be generated from calls from the office such as a drunk driver, public assistance, an abandoned vehicle to a robbery, burglary, or an alarm call, 9-1-1 calls; noting that if an officer would be dispatched it would be considered a call for service. Captain Alm also advised that the Automated License Plate Reader would be able to read parked and moving cars at a 95% accuracy rate. The Public/Traffic Safety Commission thanked Captain Alm for the outstanding performance, noting that the changes that have been made thus far have been incredible. A. Commissioner Jacobs relayed that he received an e-mail from a home owner in Vail Ranch Community commending the Police Department for its efforts in orchestrating the police trailer and enforcement of officers patrolling the area. Commissioner Jacobs requested that any changes to the Stop Light Abuse Program (SLAP) be noted in the monthly activity report. Commissioner Jacobs queried if staff or any member of the TCC would be in attendance of the Homeland Security Conference held in February 21-23, 2007. In response to the Commissioner Jacobs' query, Commissioner Hagel advised that two Council Members will be in attendance of the conference. B. Commissioner Hagel informed that the Temecula Citizen Corps recently received a trailer from the City but that would be in great need of medical supplies, and advised that donations of medical supplies as well as cash would be in great need to supply the trailers. R,.\ inuteslPubkTrafficSafe4C.ommission012507 - 2 Commissioner Hagel noted that he had an opportunity to attend a DUI check point and relayed his amazement with the amount of work that is put on by the volunteers. He also thanked the Public Works Department for the generators that were provided. Commissioner Hagel thanked the Community Services Department for its quick response to a complaint of noise and activity taking place at Temecula Middle School field before 9:00 a.m. With regard to hazardous sites in the City, Captain Buckley noted that the City would average 20 to 30 Hazmat calls per year; that a standard response would include a dispatch of County Hazmat Team, Riverside County Health, one or two engines and a Battalion Chief; and that incidences would include a paint buckets or batteries on the side of the road. C. Chairperson Arbogast thanked the volunteers of the DUI check points. She also thanked the Fire Department for quick response to the incident at Abbott Laboratories. Chairperson Arbogast also advised that Portable Traffic Signals will be agendized at a future meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Thanking the Public/Traffic Safety Commission for sending officers to patrol Seraphina Road, Mr. Shane Lesovsky, Temecula, queried on the status of the portable traffic signals. In response to Mr. Lesovsky, Chairperson Arbogast advised that the portable traffic signal will be agendized a future Public/Traffic Safety Commission meeting. Principal Engineer Moghadam noted that if portable traffic signals were approved by City Council, they would not be permanent structures. COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of December 14, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of December 14, 2006. MOTION: Commissioner Ramos moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Hagel seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Youmans who was absent. 2. Traffic Engineer's Report Principal Engineer Moghadam noted that although he would not have any report at this time, he would be available for questions. With regard to the traffic signal on Pechanga Parkway and SR 79 South, Principal Engineer Moghadam advised that the traffic signal cabinet will be replaced on Monday, January 29, 2007. Referencing a letter from residents of Calle Pina Colada, Commissioner Ramos requested that staff follow-up with a staff report. For Commissioner Ramos, Principal Engineer Moghadam advised that staff has addressed the concern and will forward a copy of the response to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission. R:WlnutesTubGcTraf !cSafe4yC=misslon012507 3. Police Chiefs Report With regard to the Stop Light Abuse Program, Sergeant Anderson advised of the following: o That the original intent of the SLAP program was to target four to five intersections in the City o That violation at key intersections have gone down and officers will be deployed at new intersections o That officers will be assigned intersections within their zones o That 1,763 citations were written for the month of December 2006 o That there were 39 DUI arrests for the month of December 2006 o That 96 traffic collision reports were written for December 2006 o That calls for service for the year 2006 were 85,850 calls. 4. Fire Chiefs Report Captain Buckley offered the following staff report: o That the AED program would be up and running and would include 26 AED units through the entire City; and advised that 19 units have been updated to the new American Heart Association Guidelines o That CPR classes continue to be performed at Fire Station 84. The Public/Traffic Safety Commission welcomed Captain Buckley to the Public\Traffic Safety Commission meeting. ADJOURNMENT At 7:13 p.m. Chairperson Arbogast formally adjourned this meeting to Thursday, February 22, 2007 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, and Temecula. Tomi Arbogast, Chairperson Administrative Assistant Anita Pyle R:WinutestPublicTraf cSafe4C,ommission012507 ITEM NO. 2 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission FROM: Howard Windsor, Fire Chief DATE: February 22, 2007 SUBJECT: Item 2 Proposed Ordinance of the City of Temecula Prohibiting the Non -Permitted Use, Storage, Manufacturing, and Sale of Fireworks. RECOMMENDATION: That the Public(Traffic Safety Commission review and recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance establishing prohibiting the non -permitted use, storage, manufacturing, and sale of fireworks. BACKGROUND: Illegal fireworks represent a public safety hazard to the City of Temecula leading to hazardous situations, injuries, personal property loss, and fires, which jeopardize the safety of the public and increase the cost of law enforcement and fire protection. The Temecula Police Department responded to 142 calls for service regarding fireworks in calendar year 2005 and 128 in 2006. This problem has also been experienced throughout unincorporated Riverside County. To develop a solution, Riverside County approved the creation of the Illegal Fireworks Task Force on April 11t', 2006. The first recommendation from the task force was to enact a new County ordinance prohibiting the use, storage, manufacturing, and sale of fireworks to deal with these problems. The ordinance also authorizes the Fire Chief to issue permits for fireworks shows and pyrotechnic special effects. This new ordinance combines all County regulations regarding fireworks into one ordinance and allows for stiffer penalties for the use and possession of illegal fireworks. As a result of this work, the Western Riverside Council of Government's Executive Committee has recently taken action to encourage local jurisdictions to consider adopting the ordinance or similar provisions. Adopting a City ordinance similar to the new County Ordinance will allow the City to reduce the public safety hazard caused by illegal fireworks with greater ease. Illegal fireworks represent a public safety hazard to the City of Temecula for several reasons. First, fireworks are often sold to children. According to the U.S. Fire Administration, children under the age of 15 suffered 45% of all injuries from fireworks in 2003. Second, fireworks are often stored without safety precautions in residential neighborhoods. In March 2006, in Los Angeles County, a cache of illegally stored fireworks destroyed a Lakewood home when they erupted in a massive explosion that knocked the house off its foundation and damaged several other houses and cars nearby. Third, fireworks can be disassembled for the explosive powder they contain to make bombs and other explosive devices. Fourth and finally, fireworks often come from Mexico where safety regulations for making fireworks are not as stringent as those for fireworks manufactured in the United States. The preceding information provides evidence that illegal fireworks lead to hazardous situations, injuries, personal property loss, and fires, which jeopardize the safety of the public and increase the cost of law enforcement and fire protection. Moreover, in light of Temecula's geographical location within the County of Riverside, the City is subject to long and volatile fire seasons. This makes illegal fireworks even more dangerous to all citizens of the City and not just those possessing and using the fireworks. The Fire Department recommends that the Council adopt the included ordinance as an effort to reduce the public safety hazards associated with the use of illegal fireworks. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Proposed ordinance prohibiting fireworks within the City of Temecula ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 8.36 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING THE NON -PERMITTED USE, STORAGE, MANUFACTURING AND SALE OF FIREWORKS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULIA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 8.36 is hereby added to the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows: `CHAPTER 8.36 FIREWORKS "8.36.010 Definitions. Whenever, in this Chapter, or in any resolution or standard adopted by the City Council pursuant to this Chapter, the following terms are used, they shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this Section, unless it is apparent from the context thereof that some other meaning is intended. A. "AGRICULTURAL AND WILDLIFE FIREWORKS" means fireworks designed and intended by the manufacturer to be used to prevent damage to crops or unwanted occupancy of areas by animals or birds through the employment of sound or light, or both. B. "DANGEROUS FIREWORKS" has the same meaning ascribed to it under Section 12505 of the California Health and Safety Code and includes all of the following: 1. Any fireworks which contain any of the following: (a) Arsenic sulfide, arsenates, or arsenates. (b) Boron. (c) Chlorates, except: (1) In colored smoke mixture in which an equal or greater amount of sodium bicarbonate is included. (2) In caps and party poppers. (3) In those small items (such as ground spinners) wherein the total powder content does not exceed 4 grams of which not 946344.1 January 20, 2007 greater than 15 percent (or 600 milligrams) is potassium, sodium, or barium chlorate. (d) Gallates or Gallic acid. (e) Magnesium (magnesium -aluminum alloys, called magnalium, are permitted). (1) Mercury salts. (g) Phosphorus (red or white except that red phosphorus is permissible in caps and party poppers). mesh. (h) Picrates or picric acid. (i) Thiocyanates. 0) Titanium, except in particle size greater than 100- (k) Zirconium. 2. Firecrackers. 3. Skyrockets and rockets, including all devices which employ any combustible or explosive material and which rise in the air -during discharge. 4. Roman candles, including all devices which discharge balls of fire into the air. 5. Chasers, including all devices which dart or travel about the surface of the ground during discharge. 6. Sparklers more than 10 inches in length or one-fourth of one inch in diameter. 7. All fireworks designed and intended by the manufacturer to create the element of surprise upon the user. These items include, but are not limited to, auto-foolers, cigarette loads, exploding golf balls, and trick matches. 8. Fireworks known as devil -on -the -walk, or any other firework which explodes through means of friction, unless otherwise classified by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to applicable law. 9. Torpedoes of all kinds which explode on impact. 10. Fireworks kits. 946344.1 January 20, 2007 2 11. Such other fireworks examined and tested by the State Fire Marshal and determined by him to possess characteristics of design or construction which make such fireworks unsafe for use by any person not specially qualified or trained in the use of fireworks. C. "EXEMPT FIREWORKS" has the same meaning ascribed to it under Section 12508 of the California Health and Safety Code and shall mean any special item containing pyrotechnic compositions which the State Fire Marshal has investigated and determined to be limited to industrial, commercial, agricultural use, or religious ceremonies when authorized by a permit granted by the authority having jurisdiction. D. "FIRE CHIEF" or "CHIEF" shall mean the Fire Chief of the County of Riverside or such person as designated by the City Council to provide fire services for the City or his or her authorized representatives. E. "FIREWORKS" has the same meaning ascribed to it under Section 12511 of the California Health and Safety Code and shall mean any device containing chemical elements and chemical compounds capable of burning independently of the oxygen of the atmosphere and producing audible, visual, mechanical, or thermal effects which are useful as pyrotechnic devices or for entertainment. The term "FIREWORKS" includes, but is not limited to, devices designated by the manufacturer as fireworks, torpedoes, skyrockets, roman candles, model rockets, rockets, Daygo bombs, sparklers, chasers, fountains, smoke sparks, aerial bombs and fireworks kits. F. "FIREWORKS KITS" has the same meaning ascribed to it under Section 12512 of the California Health and Safety Code and means any assembly of materials or explosive substances, which is designed and intended by the seller to be assembled by the person receiving such material or explosive substance and when so assembled would come within the definition of "FIREWORKS." G. "PUBLIC DISPLAY OF FIREWORKS" means an entertainment feature where the public or a private group is admitted or permitted to view the display or discharge of DANGEROUS FIREWORKS. . H. "PYROTECHNIC OPERATOR" means any licensed pyrotechnic operator, who by examination, experience, and training, has demonstrated the required skill and ability in the use and discharge of fireworks as authorized by the license granted. 1. "PYROTECHNIC SPECIAL EFFECTS MATERIAL" means a low explosive material, other than detonating cord, commonly used in motion picture, television, theatrical or group entertainment production for which a permit from the Chief is required for use or storage. J. "SAFE AND SANE FIREWORKS" has the same meaning ascribed to it under Section 12529 of the California Health and Safety Code and 946344.1 January20, 2007 3 shall mean any fireworks which do not come within the definition of "DANGEROUS FIREWORKS" or "EXEMPT FIREWORKS." K. "SHERIFF" shall mean the Sheriff of the County of Riverside or such person as designated by the City Council to provide fire services for the City or his or her authorized representatives. L. STATUTORY REFERENCES. Whenever a provision of this Chapter refers to a state statute, the reference shall include a successor statue and any renumbered statute. "Section 8.36.020 Prohibitions A. GENERAL. No person shall have in his possession, or keep, store, use, shoot, discharge, set off, ignite, explode, manufacture, sell, offer to sell, . give or transport any FIREWORKS, DANGEROUS FIREWORKS, or SAFE AND SANE FIREWORKS, except for use as AGRICULTURAL AND WILDLIFE FIREWORKS or for use in a PUBLIC DISPLAY OF FIREWORKS pursuant to a permit obtained under the provisions of Sections 12640 to12654 of the California Health and Safety Code, the Fire Code adopted by the City, and this Chapter. B. MANUFACTURING PROHIBITED. The manufacturing of FIREWORKS, DANGEROUS FIREWORKS, or SAFE AND SANE FIREWORKS is prohibited except under special permits as required by local and state regulations issued by the Fire Chief. C. PYROTECHNIC SPECIAL EFFECTS MATERIAL. A permit is required to manufacture, compound, store or use PYROTECHNIC SPECIAL EFFECTS MATERIAL: Permit application shall be make to the Fire Chief and the Sheriff. A permit shall be granted only to a State Fire Marshal licensed PYROTECHNIC OPERATOR. D. The FIRE CHIEF is authorized to establish procedures for the application and issuance of the permits authorized pursuant to this section. 118.36.030. Displays A. GENERAL. Permits are required to conduct a PUBLIC DISPLAY OF FIREWORKS. Permit application shall be made to the FIRE CHIEF not less than 14 days prior to the scheduled date of the display. The permit application shall include a diagram of the grounds on which the display is to be held showing the point at which the fireworks are to be discharged; the location of buildings, highways and other lines of communication; the lines 946344.1 January 20, 2007 4 behind which the audience will be restrained; and the location of nearby trees, telegraph or telephone lines and other overhead obstructions. At the time of permit application, the SHERIFF shall be consulted regarding the requirements for standby fire apparatus. B. UNDER SUPERVISION OF PYROTECHNIC OPERATOR. Public display of fireworks operations shall be under the direct supervision of a PYROTECHNIC OPERATOR. The PYROTECHNIC OPERATOR shall be responsible for all aspects of a display related to pyrotechnics. C. INSURANCE REQUIRED. The permitee shall furnish a certificate of insurance in an amount deemed adequate by the FIRE CHIEF for the payment of damages which could be caused either to a person or persons or to property by reason of the permitted display and arising from acts of the permitee, agents, employees or subcontractors. D. The FIRE CHIEF is authorized to establish procedures for the application and issuance of the permits authorized pursuant to this section. "8.36.040 Exceptions Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to prohibit the use of fireworks by railroads or other transportation agencies for signal purposes of illumination, or the sale or use of blank cartridges for a show or theater, or for signal or ceremonial purposes in athletics or sports or for use by military organizations. "8.36.050. Enforcement A. The FIRE CHIEF and his or her authorized representatives and the SHERIFF and his or her authorized representatives shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this Chapter. B. The FIRE CHIEF and his or her authorized representatives and the SHERIFF and his or her authorized representatives shall have the authority to seize, take, and remove any FIREWORKS, DANGEROUS FIREWORKS, and SAFE AND SANE FIREWORKS in accordance with applicable law. The FIRE CHIEF and his authorized representative and the SHERIFF and his authorized representative may charge any person whose fireworks are seized pursuant to this section, a reasonable amount which is sufficient to cover the cost of transporting, storing, handling, and disposing of the seized fireworks. C. Any person who violates any provision of this Chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction shall be punished as set forth in Chapter 1.20 of the Temecula Municipal Code. D. Any person who violates any provision of this Chapter shall be subject to the enforcement remedies of Chapters 1.21 and 1.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code. 946344.1 January 20, 2007 E. Nothing in this Ordinance shall be intended to limit any of the penalties provided for under the California Health and Safety Code or Penal Code with regard to the sale, use, possession, delivery, or transportation of DANGEROUS FIREWORKS or all of these, nor any other civil or criminal remedies available to the CITY, FIRE CHIEF or SHERIFF." SECTION 2. PRIOR ORDINANCE. The provisions of Chapter 8.36 shall supercede the provisions of any ordinances in conflict therewith adopted by reference in Chapter 1.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code. SECTION 3 SEVERABILITY If any portion, provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance is rendered or declared to be invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining portions, provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect and shall be interpreted by the court so as to give effect to such remaining portions of the Ordinance. 946344.1 January 20, 2007 ITEM NO. 3 CITY OF TEMECUTA AGENDA REPORT TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission FROM: Howard Windsor, Fire Chief DATE: February 22, 2007 SUBJECT: Item 3 Proposed Annual Fire Code/Permit Inspection Program RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and provide input to the Fire Department for the Annual Fire Inspection Program. BACKGROUND: The enhancement of our current annual fire code inspection program will reduce the chances of a catastrophic fire emergency occurring within the City. The Fire Chief will discuss the many different aspects that need to be considered when a comprehensive annual fire code inspection program is adopted by the City of Temecula. The City of Temecula is expected to grow, and currently has a system in place, inspecting only businesses of class B occupancy. Enhancing our current system will ensure that businesses of all occupancies are staying compliant with the current fire code. This creates an especially dangerous situation since Temecula has been experiencing a time of record growth. According to a report by the ISO (Insurance Service Office), "Without careful attention, long-term planning, and adequate funding, communities risk deterioration in their fire protection, especially in fast-growing areas" (Effective Fire Protection, 2004). Temecula's Fire Prevention Bureau met with other local governments while developing its annual fire inspection program. These included the City of San Bernardino and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The purpose of these meetings was to try and develop a list of best practices that the City could utilize in its own inspection program. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Annual Inspection Process Flowchart 2. Pamphlet Insert doc. 3. Inspection Announcement doc. 4. Sorry We Missed You doc. 5. Violation Clearance From Emergency Pre -Planning You may be visited by a fire engine company on coca ion. The firefight- ers visiting your business are devel- oping a pre -plan of your occu- pancy. This is not a component of the Fire Code / Permit Inspection program. Producing a pro -plan al- lowe firefighters to have an accurate record of the hazards, layout, and otherimportantinformetion regard- ing your place of business. This inforrretion will increase the level of safety and efficiency at which Are - fighters respond to an incident at your business. The firefighters are required to notify the Prevention Bureau If they notice a fire code violation that threatens the life safety environment while conducting a pre -plan of your busi- ness. Once the Prevention Bureau is made aware of the situation, they will schedule a follow-up inspection. Cky of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau 43200 audnea Puk Drive Te ub. CA 92589 Phone: (%I) 69444M Fax: (951) 506-5169 Web: wwwckya&emeu kcrW Temecubl GovemmarlFire Temecula Fire Department Fire Prevention Bureau Fire Code / Permit Inspection Program Enhancing the l fe safety environment of Temeculas h 4ness community The Fire Code / Permit Inspection Program The major responsibility of the Temecula Fire Preven- tion Bureau is to prevent fire. An effective way to most this obligation Is to conduct field Inspections in accordance with section 103.3 of the California Fire Code. The Fire Code i Permit Inspection program developed by the Prevention Bureau enhances the life safety environment of the City of Temecula by ensuring all businesses are meeting fire code re- quirements. This program will effect all occupancies subject to fire code regulations. The goal of the pro- gram is to reduce the amount of deaths, Injuries, and property loss in the city resulting from fire. How does the program work? Each business will be mailed a letter giving notice of our intent to conduct a fire code / permit Inspection. The letter will provide an approximate date for the inspection to take place and include a list of the most common types of code violations found in our com- munity. Many of these violations can usually be remedied before the inspector arrives. Any violation found will be noted and you will be given a specified period of time to correct them. You may be able to complete a selfcomection torn de- pending on the severity of the violation. The inspector will recommend a re -inspection if the violations are of a more serious nature. What types of violations is the inspector looking for? The inspector will conduct a thorough inspection of your business to ensure fire code compliance. The Prevention Bureau strongly recommends that the business owner or a senior member management accompany the inspector. Violations common to all occupancies include, but are not limited to: • Condition of exits • Condition of Interior finish • Operation of exit doors • Emergency lighting (d required) • Exit signs (d required) • Components of fire -resistive separation • Maintenance of fire apparatus ecoesa • Maintenance of fire lanes • Proper addressing of the building • Current and readily available fire extinguishers • Building exit discharge areas • Records for fire alarm and fire protection sys- tems • Test records for snake management eysteme (d required) • Ensure there is an emergency evacuation plan in place (if required) If these or any other violations are found the inspec- tor will notify you and make a decision based on the fire code whether the infraction must be corrected Immediately or if a re -inspection should be sched- uled. A re -inspection will be scheduled within a two (2) week period. You will also be given instructions on how to appeal. However, filing an appeal does not delay the enforcement of the order. Why does the city charge at fee? The City of Temecula has grown rapidly over the past decade. This growth has produced an unprem- dented amount of construction in the city. Due to limited staffing and resources.... How much does the fee coat? The Fire Code Inspection fee is based on a combi- nation of your occupancy type, square footage, and use... Dept. Use Only Date Received: Station #: Unit #: CITY OF TEMECULA FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE CODE / PERMIT INSPECTION PROGRAM VIOLATION CLEARANCE FORM Business Name: Address: Inspector: No Violation(s) Found Phone Number: A fire code inspection of your business was conducted by the _/ve /_ This Violation Clearance Form is provided to yo habeen corrected, abated, or discontinued. Once received may not elect to re -inspect your business. You must correct the item(s) noted and return this CORRECT THE ITEM(S) CHECKED %ling A71nk1 1K1171AI \/Inl ATInM Suite: Fire Department on Is that the violation(s) �yention Bureau may or to WHEN IAIITIeI I certify under penalty of perjury that the violations noted above have been corrected. Print Name: Signature: Date: Failure to correct the Identified violation(s), sign and return this notice within 14 days after Inspection will result in re -inspection or other appropriate legal action to ensure compliance. RAFim Preventim\Annual Inspection Progmm TTSC 2.22-Miolation Clearance Fonmilm CITY OF TEMECULA FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE CODE / PERMIT INSPECTION PROGRAM Business Name: Address: Suite: Inspector: SORRY WE MISSED YOU The City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau atten of your business. We will return within two (2) Please contact the Fire Prevention Bureau at,A appropriate time to return or if you have any quest is not occupied at this time the Fire Prevents 'B with a visit. for e.a fire code inspection ,ort pletp your inspection. 405 to., inform us of an note that. if your building still nhvsically verifv this RAFire Preventim\Annual Inspection ProgramslPTSC 2.22-07\Sony We Missed You.doc CITY OF TEMECULA FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE CODE / PERMIT INSPECTION PROGRAM NOTICE OF FIRE CODE INSPECTION Dear Business Owner, This correspondence is to inform you that your business, is due for a fire code inspection. An inspector from the Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau will visit your business between _/ / and / � California Fire Code section 103.3 grants the Fire Prevention Burea access,to conduct fire code inspections of businesses within its jurisdictiori.4,he Prevention Bureau strongly recommends the business owner or a senior member management accompany the inspector. The following list includes; but is not linAi~d-to the most common items addressed during a fire inspection: • Condition of exits • Condition of interior finish • Operation of exit doors • Emergency lighting jif teq • Exit signs (if fequifed) f • Components of fire -resists • aintenance orpre cress • Me pence of fire > SA L .1 Please visit (URL for information. ° .1' rV Sincerely, Sean Dakin Deputy Fire Marshal City of Temecula • Proper addressing of the building • Currenta-n4 readily available fire ed) `� Ulkling exit discharge areas i Records for fire alarm and fire { protection systems • Test records for smoke management systems (if required) is, • Ensure there is an emergency evacuation plan in place (if required) inspection page) or call (951) 694-6405 for more RAFin Prevention\Annuat Inspection PmgamsTrogmm documentAInspection atmouncment.doc ITEM NO. 4 AGENDA REPORT TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission FROM: 40 Ali Moghadam, P.E., Principal Engineer - Traffic DATE: February 22, 2007 SUBJECT: Item 4 Request for Traffic Signal Installation — Margarita Road at Paseo Brillante RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission deny the request for installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Margarita Road at Paseo Brillante BACKGROUND: Staff received a request to review the feasibility of installing a traffic signal at the intersection of Margarita Road and Paseo Brillante to enhance access to and from Paseo Brillante. The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification process and by mail. Margarita Road is classified as a six (6) lane divided Principal Arterial Highway on the City's General Plan Circulation Element with three (3) travel lanes in each direction and a raised median. Currently, Margarita Road is striped for two (2) travel lanes in each direction and a painted median. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume on Margarita Road is approximately 28,500 in the vicinity of Paseo Brillante. The speed limit is posted at 45 MPH on Margarita Road. Paseo Brillante is a 40 foot wide residential street which provides secondary access to Margarita Road for 173 single family residential units in the Rancho Del Sol subdivision. The subdivision's other access is provided at Avenida Cima Del Sol which is located east of Moraga Road. The ADT on Paseo Brillante is approximately 1,200 at Margarita Road. The prima facie speed limit is 25 MPH on Paseo Brillante. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) indicates that when used properly, traffic signals are valuable devices for controlling vehicular and pedestrian traffic by assigning right-of-way, which ultimately influences traffic flows. Traffic signals that are properly designed, located, maintained, and operated will provide the orderly movement of traffic, increase the capacity of an intersection, and reduce the frequency and severity of certain types of crashes. Traffic signals used at locations where they are not needed will often adversely affect the safety, and efficiency of vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Moreover, special consideration must be given to insure that traffic signals are recommended at locations where they will not seriously disrupt traffic flow progression along the arterial corridor. r:\4afic\commissn\agenda\2007U1222Vnargadtaandbdllante/ajp A careful analysis of traffic operations, pedestrian and bicyclist needs, and other factors, coupled with engineering judgment, has provided a series of guidelines that define the minimum conditions under which traffic signals maybe justified. The guidelines for the installation of a traffic signal are based on an intersection satisfying one (1) or more of the eight (8) basic warrants identified in the MUTCD. Those warrants are identified in Exhibit "B". In order to evaluate the need for traffic signal controls, entering vehicular volume data, sight distance, and accident history was reviewed for the intersection. This data along with an evaluation of other roadway conditions was used to perform a Traffic Signal Warrants analysis. A copy of the traffic count data is included as Exhibit "C A review of the accident history for the period from January 1, 2006 to January 31, 2007, indicates that there was one (1) reported collision at the intersection during this 13 month period. Although there was no record available of the fatal collision which occurred on January 18, 2007, staff included the collision in the Traffic Signal Warrants analysis. The warrant analysis performed for the intersection indicates that none of the eight basic warrants are satisfied one hundred (100) percent and traffic signals are notjustified at this intersection. The results of the analysis are shown in Exhibit "D". Common practice and current City standards require that signalized intersections be located a minimum of 1,320 feet (114 mile) apart to insure that traffic progression is not seriously disrupted by the traffic signal operation. In this case there are two (2) signalized intersections located less than 1,320 feet from Paseo Brillante. The intersections are Stonewood Road which is 1,000 feet west of Paseo Brillante and Moraga Road which is 577 feet east of Paseo Brillante. Given the marginal distance between Paseo Brillante and the two signalized intersections, along with the anticipated traffic volumes of43,000 vehicles per day on Margarita Road, the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection would adversely impact the traffic progression along Margarita Road and would cause additional delays at the intersection of Moraga Road during school AM and PM peak periods. It should be noted that almost every arterial highway in the City has intersecting streets that have similar operational characteristics to Paseo Brillante, providing residential access to City's arterial network system. At the majority of these locations it is likely that Warrant 2, Interruption of Continuous Traffic will be satisfied due to the delay to the side street and heavier volumes on the arterial highway. Given this scenario and in order to maintain consistency, traffic signals would be required at nearly every intersection along the City's arterial highway network. It is reasonable to assume that this would cause a serious degradation to traffic progression in the City. For these reasons, staff recommends that the Commission deny the request for traffic signals at the intersection of Margarita Road and Paseo Brillante and closely monitor safety at this intersection. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachment: 1. Exhibit "A"— Location Map 2. Exhibit "B" —Traffic Signal Warrants 3. Exhibit "C" — Traffic Volume Data 4. Exhibit "D" —Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis — Margarita Road at Paseo Brillante r.\traffic\commissn\agenda\2W7\0222bnargadi ndbdllante/aip From: JOHN/LOR Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 8:29 PM lights for Paseo Brillante & Margarita Councilmen: We would like you to consider having teffic lights installed at the Paw Brillante and Margarita intersection. There was a fatal accident there 1 week ago. Margarita Park is across from the Rancho Del Sol tract. it is very dangerous trying to exit onto Margarita, since treffic continues to Increase due to the Middle School being located there and cars going to and from the Promenade Mall. There also is heavy traffic to and from the Margarita Community Park, and we believe there will be a YMCA coming soon to that area. Please take this suggestion under consideration. Thank you, John & Dolores Notardonato 02/05/2007 EXHIBIT "A" LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT "B" TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Page 4C-2 2003 Edition Option: At an intersection with a high volume of left -turn traffic from the major street, the signal warrant analysis may be performed in a manner that considers the higher of the major -street left -turn volumes as the "minor - street" volume and the corresponding single direction of opposing traffic on the major street as the "major -street" volume. For signal warrant analysis, bicyclists may be counted as either vehicles or pedestrians. Support: When performing a signal warrant analysis, bicyclists riding in the street with other vehicular traffic are usually counted as vehicles and bicyclists who are clearly using pedestrian facilities are usually counted as pedestrians. Option: Engineering study data may include the following: A. The number of vehicles entering the intersection in each hour from each approach during 12 hours of an average day. It is desirable that the hours selected contain the greatest percentage of the 24-hour traffic volume. B. Vehicular volumes for each traffic movement from each approach, classified by vehicle type (heavy trucks, passenger cars and light trucks, public -transit vehicles, and, in some locations, bicycles), during each 15-minute period of the 2 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the afternoon during which total traffic entering the intersection is greatest. C. Pedestrian volume counts on each crosswalk during the same periods as the vehicular counts in Item B above and during hours of highest pedestrian volume. Where young, elderly, and/or persons with physical or visual disabilities need special consideration, the pedestrians and their crossing times may be classified by general observation. D. Information about nearby facilities and activity centers that serve the young, elderly, and/or persons with disabilities, including requests from persons with disabilities for accessible crossing improvements at the location under study. These persons might not be adequately reflected in the pedestrian volume count if the absence of a signal restrains their mobility. E. The posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the uncontrolled approaches to the ( \ location. t / F. A condition diagram showing details of the physical layout, including such features as intersection geometries, channelization, grades, sight -distance restrictions, transit stops and routes, parking conditions, pavement markings, roadway lighting, driveways, nearby railroad crossings, distance to nearest traffic control signals, utility poles and fixtures, and adjacent land use. G. A collision diagram showing crash experience by type, location, direction of movement, severity, weather, time of day, date, and day of week for at least 1 year. The following data, which are desirable for a more precise understanding of the operation of the intersection, may be obtained during the periods specified in Item B of the preceding paragraph: A. Vehicle -hours of stopped time delay determined separately for each approach. B. The number and distribution of acceptable gaps in vehicular traffic on the major street for entrance from the minor street. C. The posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on controlled approaches at a point near to the intersection but unaffected by the control. D. Pedestrian delay time for at least two 30-minute peak pedestrian delay periods of an average weekday or like periods of a Saturday or Sunday. E. Queue length on stop -controlled approaches. Section 4C.02 Warrant 1. Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Support: The Minimum Vehicular Volume, Condition A, is intended for application at locations where a large volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. The Interruption of Continuous Traffic, Condition B, is intended for application at locations where Condition A is not satisfied and where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or crossing the major street. It is intended that Warrant I be treated as a single warrant. If Condition A is satisfied, then the criteria for r Warrant I is satisfied and Condition B and the combination of Conditions A and B are not needed. Similarly, if 1 Condition B is satisfied, then the criteria for Warrant 1 is satisfied and the combination of Conditions A and B is not needed. Sect 4C.01 m 4C.02 R 2003 Edition Table W-1. Warrant 1, Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Page 4C-3 Condition A —Minimum Vehicular Volume Vehicles per hour on higher -volume Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street minor -street approach moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100°/d 801/60 701/60 5.61/o° 100°/d 80%° 70%` 56%° 1................. 1................. 500 400 350 280 150 120 105 84 2 or more... 1................. 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 84 2 or more... 2 or more ... 600 480 420 336 200 160 140 112 1................. 2 or more.... 500 400 350 280 200 160 140 112 Condition B—Interruption of Continuous Traffic Vehicles per hour on higher -volume Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street minor -street approach moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 1000/d 800/6" 70%` 560/o° 100% 800/,b 70%` 560/; I ................. 1................. 750 600 525 420 75 60 53 42 2 or more... 1................. 900 720 630 504 75 60 53 42 2 or more... 2 or more... 900 720 630 504 100 80 70 56 1................. 2 or more.... 750 600 525 420 100 80 70 56 ° Basic minimum hourly volume. ° Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. ` May be used when the major -street speed exceeds 70 kmlh or exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000. ° May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures when the major - street speed exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day: A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection; or B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection. In applying each condition the major -street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 8 hours. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the traffic volumes in the 70 percent columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 100 percent columns. SwL 4C.02 Page 4C-4 K10103-M-M 11 Guidance: The combination of Conditions A and B is intended for application at locations where Condition A is not (' satisfied and Condition B is not satisfied and should be applied only after an adequate trial of other alternatives l that could cause less delay and inconvenience to traffic has failed to solve the traffic problems. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day: A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection; and B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection. These major -street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours for each condition; however, the 8 hours satisfied in Condition A shall not be required to be the same 8 hours satisfied in Condition B. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of the 8 hours. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the traffic volumes in the 56 percent columns in Table 4C-I may be used in place of the 80 percent columns. Section 4C.03 Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume Support: The Four -Hour Vehicular Volume signal warrant conditions are intended to be applied where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that, for each of any 4 hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher -volume minor -street approach (one direction only) all fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-1 for the existing combination of approach lanes. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 4 hours. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, Figure 4C-2 may be used in place of Figure 4C-1. Section 4C.04 Warrant 3, Peak Hour Support: The Peak Hour signal warrant is intended for use at a location where traffic conditions are sucli that for a minimum of 1 hour of an average day, the minor -street traffic suffers undue delay when entering or crossing the major street. Standard: This signal warrant shall be applied only in unusual cases, such as office complexes, manufacturing plants, industrial complexes, or high -occupancy vehicle facilities that attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short time. The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories are met: A. If all three of the following conditions exist for the same 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day: 1. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor -street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds: 4 vehicle -hours for a one -lane approach; or 5 vehicle -hours for a two-lane approach, and sat.4co2 to 4c.04 M ---, eco -4 7c0 Page 4C-6 2003 Edition 2. The volume on the same minor -street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vehicles per hour for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vehicles per hour for two moving lanes, and 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650 vehicles per hour for intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections with four or more approaches. B. The plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher -volume minor -street approach (one direction only) for 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-3 for the existing combination of approach lanes. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, Figure 4C-4 may be used in place of Figure 4C-3 to satisfy the criteria in the second category of the Standard. Section 4C.05 Warrant 4. Pedestrian Volume Support: The Pedestrian Volume signal warrant is intended for application where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal at an intersection or midblock crossing shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following criteria are met: A. The pedestrian volume crossing the major street at an intersection or midblock location during an average day is 100 or more for each of any 4 hours or 190 or more during any 1 hour; and B. There are fewer than 60 gaps per hour in the traffic stream of adequate length to allow pedestrians to cross during the same period when the pedestrian volume criterion is satisfied. Where there is a divided street having a median of sufficient width for pedestrians to wait, the requirement applies separately to each direction of vehicular traffic. The Pedestrian Volume signal warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than 90 m (300 ft), unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. If this warrant is met and a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study, the traffic control signal shall be equipped with pedestrian signal heads conforming to requirements set forth in Chapter 4E. Guidance: If this warrant is met and a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study, then: A. If at an intersection, the traffic control signal should be traffic -actuated and should include pedestrian detectors. B. If at a nonintersection crossing, the traffic control signal should be pedestrian -actuated, parking and other sight obstructions should be prohibited for at least 30 in (100 ft) in advance of and at least 6.1 in (20 ft) beyond the crosswalk, and the installation should include suitable standard signs and pavement markings. C. Furthermore, if installed within a signal system, the traffic control signal should be coordinated. Option: The criterion for the pedestrian volume crossing the major roadway may be reduced as much as 50 percent if the average crossing speed of pedestrians is less than 1.2 m/sec (4 ft/sec). A traffic control signal may not be needed at the study location if adjacent coordinated traffic control signals consistently provide gaps of adequate length for pedestrians to cross the street, even if the rate of gap occurrence is less than one per minute. Section 4C.06 Warrant 5. School Crossing Support: The School Crossing signal warrant is intended for application where the fact that school children cross the major street is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. sect 4C.04 m 4C.06 n___ ern _9 �cn Page 4C-8 2003 Edition Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered when an engineering study of the frequency and adequacy of gaps in the vehicular traffic stream as related to the number and size of groups of school (, children at an established school crossing across the major street shows that the number of adequate gaps in the traffic stream during the period when the children are using the crossing is less than the number of minutes in the same period (see Section 7A.03) and there are a minimum of 20 students during the highest crossing hour. Before a decision is made to install a traffic control signal, consideration shall be given to the implementation of other remedial measures, such as warning signs and flashers, school speed zones, school crossing guards, or a grade -separated crossing. The School Crossing signal warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than "m (300 ft), unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. Guidance: If this warrant is met and a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study, then: A. If at an intersection, the traffic control signal should be traffic -actuated and should include pedestrian detectors. B. If at a nonintersection crossing, the traffic control signal should be pedestrian -actuated, parking and other sight obstructions should be prohibited for at least 30 in (100 ft) in advance of and at least 6.1 in (20 ft) beyond the crosswalk, and the installation should include suitable standard signs and pavement markings. C. Furthermore, if installed within a signal system, the traffic control signal should be coordinated. Section 4C.07 Warrant 6, Coordinated Signal System Support: Progressive movement in a coordinated signal system sometimes necessitates installing traffic control signals at intersections where they would not otherwise be needed in order to maintain proper platooning of vehicles. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following criteria is met: A. On a one-way street or a street that has traffic predominantly in one direction, the adjacent traffic control signals are so far apart that they do not provide the necessary degree of vehicular platooning. B. On a two-way street, adjacent traffic control signals do not provide the necessary degree of platooning and the proposed and adjacent traffic control signals will collectively provide a progressive operation. Guidance: The Coordinated Signal System signal warrant should not be applied where the resultant spacing of traffic control signals would be less than 300 in (1,000 ft). Section 4C.08 Warrant 7. Crash Experience Support: The Crash Experience signal warrant conditions are intended for application where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic control signal. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that all of the following criteria are met: A. Adequate trial of alternatives with satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the crash frequency; and B. Five or more reported crashes, of types susceptible to correction by a traffic control signal, have occurred within a 12-month period, each crash involving personal injury or property damage apparently exceeding the applicable requirements for a reportable crash; and C. For each of any 8 hours of an average day, the vehicles per hour (vph) given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1(see Section 4C.02), or the vph in both of the 80 1 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exists on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approach, respectively, to the intersection, or the volume of pedestrian traffic is not sat 4C.06 to 4C.08 Dent 4R7 ni 7=0 2003 Edition Page 4C-9 less than 80 percent of the requirements specified in the pedestrian Volume warrant. These major - street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of the 8 hours. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the traffic volumes in the 56 percent columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 80 percent columns. Section 4C.09 Warrant 8. Roadway Network Support: Installing a traffic control signal at some intersections might be justified to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow on a roadway network. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the common intersection of two or more major routes meets one or both of the following criteria: A. The intersection has a total eausting, or immediately projected, entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour during the peak hour of a typical weekday and has 5-year projected traffic volumes, based on an engineering study, that meet one or more of Warrants 1, 2, and 3 during an average weekday; or B. The intersection has a total eydsting or immediately projected entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour for each of any 5 hours of a nonnormal business day (Saturday or Sunday). A major route as used in this signal warrant shall have one or more of the following characteristics: A. It is part of the street or highway system that serves as the principal roadway network for through traffic flow; or B. It includes rural or suburban highways outside, entering, or traversing a City; or C. It appears as a major route on an official plan, such as a major street plan in an urban area traffic and transportation study. saa. 4c.08 to 4c.09 n___ mac^ _X'.n EXHIBIT "C" TRAFFIC VOLUME DATA Counts Unlimbed, Inc. Page 1 25424 Jaclyn Avenue Moreno Valley, CA 92557 City of Temecula (951) 247-6716 TEPBMAEW N/S: Paseo Brillante Site Code: 015064 E/W: Margarita Road Date Start: 08-Feb-07 24 Hour Entering Volume Count Date End: 08-Feb-07 Start 0&07eb- Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Thu Momina Aftemoon Momina Afternoon Momino Afternoon Momina Aftemoon Momino Aftemoon --12:00 34 206 28 228 12:15 22 223 15 236 - 12:30 24 212 16 221 12:45 15 221 95 862 13 241 72 926 167 1788 01:00 14 222 7 224 i 01:15 8 252 10 220 01:30 13 246 3 188 01:45 19 243 54 963 10 214 30 846 84 1809 02:00 7 237 9 220 02:15 12 294 11 193 02:30 12 270 16 196 02:45 18 326 49 1127 15 255 51 863 100 1990 03:00 4 313 15 276 03:15 2 366 5 272 03:30 14 295 12 325 03:45 9 315 29 1289 11 302 43 1175 72 2464 04:00 6 334 15 258 04:15 17 339 19 297 04:30 18 279 30 314 04:45 16 340 57 1292 45 310 109 1179 166 2471 05:00 31 324 34 327 05:15 24 395 37 311 05:30 36 353 58 287 05:45 45 293 136 1365 58 259 187 1184 323 2549 06:00 53 342 54 243 06:15 67 298 89 278 06:30 83 258 66 202 06:45 81 273 284 1171 160 223 369 946 653 2117 07:00 116 243 177 151 07:15 138 208 193 159 07:30 200 247 245 140 07:45 173 194 627 892 264 133 879 583 1506 1475 08:00 171 181 229 115 08:15 152 175 175 118 08:30 185 138 195 87 08:45 218 144 726 638 270 120 869 440 1595 1078 09:00 157 142 230 166 09:15 135 134 165 115 09:30 135 114 187 81 09:45 133 97 560 487 226 68 808 430 1368 917 10:00 150 99 184 72 10:15 176 80 174 50 10:30 163 74 171 49 10:45 180 50 669 303 209 43 738 214 1407 617 11:00 174 57 191 34 11:15 187 42 187 34 11:30 229 35 231 24 11:45 216 33 806 167 215 35 824 127 1630 294 Total 4092 10556 4092 10556 4979 8913 4979 8913 Combined 14648 14648 13892 13892 Total AM Peak 11:00 07:15 Vol. 806 931 P.H.F. 0.880 0.862 PM Peak 04:45 04:30 Vol. 1412 1262 P.H.F. 0.894 0.965 Percentag 27.9% 72.1% 35.8% 64.2% e ADT/AAD ADT 28,540 AADT 28,540 T 9071 19469 28540 Counts Unlimtied, Inc. 25424 Jaclyn Avenue Moreno Valley, CA 92557 Page 1 City of Temecula (951) 247-6716 TEPBMANS N/S: Paseo Brillante Site Code: 015064 EIW: Margarita Road Date Start: 08-Feb-07 24 Hour Entering Volume Count Date End: 08-Feb-07 Start 08--F7eb- Southbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Thu Momina Aftemoon Momina Aftemoon Momina Aftemoon Momina Afternoon Momina Afternoon --12:00 -- 1 14 0 0 12:15 1 9 0 0 12:30 0 7 0 0 12:45 1 10 3 40 0 0 0 0 3 40 01:00 2 8 0 0 01:15 1 6 0 0 01:30 1 3 0 0 01:45 1 10 5 27 0 0 0 0 5 27 02:00 0 10 0 0 02:15 0 5 0 0 02:30 0 5 0 0 02:45 0 8 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 28 03:00 0 11 0 0 03:15 3 12 0 0 03:30 2 12 0 0 03:45 1 11 6 46 0 0 0 0 6 46 04:00 5 6 0 0 04:15 3 9 0 0 04:30 5 9 0 0 04:45 6 9 19 33 0 0 0 0 19 33 05:00 2 11 0 0 05:15 4 16 0 0 05:30 5 12 0 0 05:45 6 15 17 54 0 0 0 0 17 54 06:00 9 11 0 0 06:15 9 8 0 0 06:30 12 13 0 0 06:45 16 15 46 47 0 0 0 0 46 47 07:00 16 6 0 0 07:15 12 10 0 0 07:30 11 6 0 0 07:45 14 7 53 29 0 0 0 0 53 29 08:00 11 6 0 0 08:15 4 5 0 0 08:30 13 4 0 0 08:45 17 3 45 18 0 0 0 0 45 18 09:00 9 8 0 0 09:15 2 6 0 0 09:30 3 7 0 0 09:45 11 5 25 26 0 0 0 0 25 26 10:00 15 4 0 0 10:15 9 1 0 0 10:30 12 4 0 0 10:45 6 1 44 10 0 0 0 0 44 10 11:00 8 1 0 0 11:15 7 3 0 0 11:30 5 0 0 0 11:45 5 1 25 5 0 0 0 0 25 5 Total 288 363 288 363 Combined 651 651 Total AM Peak 06:30 Vol. 56 P.H.F. 0.824 PM Peak 05:00 Vol. 54 P.H.F. 0.844 Percentage 442% 55.8% ADT/AAD ADT 651 AADT 651 T 0.0% 0.0% 288 363 651 EXHIBIT "D" TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS MARGARITA ROAD AT PASEO BRILLANTE TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Major Street Margarita Road Critical Approach Speed _45 MPH Minor Street: Pasco BdIlame Critical Approach Speed 25 MPH Critical speed of major street traffic is > 40 MPH .................................... or ) RURAL In built up area of isolated community of c 10,000 pop ............................ 0 URBAN WARRANT 1 - EIGHT HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Condition A- Minimum Vehicle Volume Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic Combination of Conditions A S B 100%SATISFIED YES NO 80%SATISFIED YES NO X Hour 100%SATISFIED YES NO J 90%SATISFIED YES Y NO ` Hour SATISFIED YES NO �X REQUIREMENT I WARRANT FULFILLED TWO WARRANTS SATISFIED 80% Warard 1 - Minimum Vehicular Volume or Warrem 2-Interruption of Continuous Traffic X YES F NO F Y WARRANT 2 - Four Hour Vehicular Volume Record hourly veNcular volume for four hours 2 or 'All plotted points fall above the wives in MUTCD Figure 4C-1 or 4C-2. SATISFIED YES NO �X Hour TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Major Street: Margarita Road Critical Approach Speed _4L MPH Minor Street: Paseo Brillante Critical Approach Speed 25 MPH Critical speed of major street traffic is > 40 MPH .................................... or ) RURAL In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop ............................ 0 URBAN WARRANT 3 - Peak Hour PART A OR PART B SATISFIED YES NO �X PART A (AII parts 1, 2, and 3 below must be satisfied) F9_Yt�'Idf39 1. The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four "hide hours of a one lane approach and five vehicle hours for a two law approach; AND 2. The volume on the Same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane and 150 vph for two moving lares; AND 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or more approaches or 850 vph for intersections with three approaches. PART B SATISFIED 2 or Approach Lanes One More 34 PM 4-5 M 2PM -7 PM Hour X 2684 247ol9Both Appoaches -MrS2117 4Highest Approaches - Mntre48 54 The plotted points for vehicles per hour on major streets (both approaches) and the corresponding per hour higher volume vehicle minor Street approach (one direction only) for one hour (any consewbve 15 minute period) fall above the appropriate curves in MUTCD Figure 4C-3 and 4C-4. YES NO �X YES O NO 0 YES NO 0 YES NO YES NO WARRANT 4- Pedestrian Volume (NOTCOUNTED) 100%SATISFIED YES NO L� (All Parts Must Be Satisfied) Hours > Pedestrian Volume Any Hour> 190 _ YES NO OR4HWM>100 YES NO Ad oats CrossingGap,/AND <60 Gap/Hour YES NO AND the distance to the nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater than 300 feet _ _ _ _ __ YES NO AND the new traffic signal will not seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow on the major scree[ YES NO WARRANTS -School Crossings (NOTCOUNTED) SATISFIED YES NO (AII Parts Must Be Satisfied) PART A GapfMinutes and A of Children Each of Two Hours Gaps M(runes Children Using vs Crossing Minutes Numberof Ad oats Ga Gaps<Minutes SATISFIED YES E] NO School Pedestrians Crossing Street Children >20/Hour SATISFIED YES NEl PART B Distance to Nearest Controlled Crossing Is Nearest Controlled Crossing More Than 600 Feet Away?____________________ SATISFIED YES 0 NO TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Major Street: Margarita Road Critical Approach Speed _45 MPH Minor Street: Paseo Bnllante Critical Approach Speed 25 MPH Critical speed of major street traffic is > 40 MPH .................................... X� or ) RURAL In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop ............................ URBAN WARRANT S - Coordinated Signal System SATISFIED YES NO �X (All Parts Must Be Satisfied) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL FULFILLED > 1000 FEETI NA ft. S NA ft. E577R W 1000 R. YES NO X YES NO F X On one-way isoated streets or sheets with one-way traffic signilance and adjacent signals are so far apart that rrecessa Platoonino antis speed control would be lost On 2-way streets where adjacent signals do not provide necessary plalooning and speed control; proposed signals could constitute a progressne signal system WARRANT 7 - Crash Warrant (All Parts Must Be Satisfied) WARRANTS - Roadway Network (All Parts Must Be Satisfied) SATISFIED YES NO �X SATISFIED YES NO MINIMUM VOLUME REQUIREMENTS =NTERING VOLUME -ALL APPROACHES FULFILLED During Typical Weekday Peak Hour 2§I22 veNhr. I X 1000 VEH/HR or During Each of Any 5 Hours of a Saturday and/or ISundav velvhr YES X NO CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES Ma or St. Minor St. Hinhway System Sewing As a Principle Network For Throu h Traffic X 11X Rural or Suburban Highway Outside Of, Entering, Or Treverei a Ci Appears As a Major Route On An Official Plan I X ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERISTIC MET BOTH STREETS YES NO X The satisfaction of a wamard is not necessanilyjus0firation fora signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the reed for right-of-way assigned must be shown. 2003 Edition x > 500 x' 400 W¢ Q 300 S W Z D 200 OR S 100 W S (7 S Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume Esm. lwl,*Mlq ���E BRIONAIRMIMANE ■NEQ6►-Mro ■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ Page 4C-5 '115 '80 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES — VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Note:115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C 2. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume (70 % Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 kmth OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET) x 400 a x Q 300 ru a w ¢a < 200 ¢W 02 Jn� > 100 Cr ■N<2OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE■ �2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 11 LANE & ILANE■ OWN�i■� 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES — VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note: 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. SeM 4C.o4 2003 Edition x 600 o_ x Soo a wir aoo ¢a- w 300 O2 zD 0 200 w 100 Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3, Peak Hour ■N,'■■■■■■■■■■ Page 4C-7 *150 *100 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES — VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note:150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70%. Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 kmfh OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET) x a- x 400 a W a 300 �a Z w j 200 _ J M tr too W x C7 x 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES — VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Sea. 4C.06 ITEM NO. 5 AGENDA REPORT TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission FROM: n Ali Moghadam, P.E., Principal Engineer -Traffic DATE: February 22, 2007 SUBJECT: Item 5 Request for Traffic Signal Installation — Wolf Valley Road at Caminito Olite RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission deny the request for installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Wolf Valley Road and Caminito Olite. BACKGROUND: Staff received a request from Mayor Washington to review the feasibility of installing a traffic signal at the intersection of Wolf Valley Road and Caminito Olite. The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification process. In the vicinity of Caminito Olite, Wolf Valley Road is classified as a four (4) lane undivided Secondary Arterial Highway on the City's General Plan Circulation Elementwith two (2) travel lanes and a bike lane in each direction. Wolf Valley Road west of Caminito Olite is classified as a four (4) lane divided Major Arterial Highway with two (2) travel lanes and a bike lane in each direction. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume on Wolf Valley Road is approximately 11,000 east of Pechanga Parkway and 10,200 in the vicinity of Caminito Olite. The speed limit is currently posted at45 MPH in the vicinity of Caminito Olite. Caminito Olite is a 40 foot wide residential street which functions as a residential collector street providing access to Wolf Valley Road for numerous single family residential units. At the intersection with Wolf Valley Road, Caminito Olite is 47 feet wide with a raised landscaped median. The ADT on Caminito Olite is approximately 900 at Wolf Valley Road. The prima facie speed limit is 25 MPH on Caminito Olite. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) indicates thatwhen used properly, traffic signals are valuable devices for controlling vehicularand pedestrian traffic byassigning right-of-way, which ultimately influences traffic flows. Traffic signals that are properly designed, located, maintained, and operated will provide the orderly movement of traffic, increase the capacity of an intersection, and reduce the frequency and severity of certain types of crashes. Traffic signals used at locations where they are not needed will often adversely affect the safety, and efficiency of vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Moreover, special consideration must be given to insure that traffic signals are recommended at locations where they will not seriously disrupt traffic flow progression along the arterial corridor. r.\Vaffic\commiwn\agenda\2007\022Zmltvalleyandolite/ajp A careful analysis of traffic operations, pedestrian and bicyclist needs, and other factors, coupled with engineering judgment, has provided a series of guidelines that define the minimum conditions under which traffic signals maybe justified. The guidelines for the installation of a traffic signal are based on an intersection satisfying one (1) or more of the eight (8) basic warrants identified in the MUTCD. Those warrants are identified in Exhibit "B" In order to evaluate the need for traffic signals, entering vehicularvolume data, sight distance, and accident history was reviewed for the intersection. This data along with an evaluation of other roadway conditions was used to perform a Traffic Signal Warrants analysis for the intersection. A copy of the traffic count data is included as Exhibit "C A review of the accident history for the period from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006, indicates that there was one (1) reported collision at the intersection during this 12 month period. The accident history indicates that motorists are exercising due care when accessing Wolf Valley Road at this intersection. The warrant analysis performed for the intersection indicates that none of the eight basic warrants are satisfied and traffic signals are not justified at this intersection. The results of the analysis are shown in Exhibit "D". For these reasons, staff recommends that the Commission deny the request for traffic signal controls at the intersection of Wolf Valley Road and Caminito Olite. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachment: 1. Exhibit "A!'— Location Map 2. Exhibit "B" —Traffic Signal Warrants 3. Exhibit "C" —Traffic Volume Data 4. Exhibit "D" —Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis —Wolf Valley Road at Caminito Olite r.\traffic\commis n\agenda\2007\022ZmlNalleyandolite/alp EXHIBIT "A" LOCATION MAP e � y N EXHIBIT "B" TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Page 4C.2 2003 Edition Option: At an intersection with a high volume of left-tum traffic from the major street, the signal warrant analysis may be performed in a manner that considers the higher of the major -street left-tum volumes as the "minor- ) street" volume and the corresponding single direction of opposing traffic on the major street as the "major -street" volume. For signal warrant analysis, bicyclists may be counted as either vehicles or pedestrians. Support: When performing a signal warrant analysis, bicyclists riding in the street with other vehicular traffic are usually counted as vehicles and bicyclists who are clearly using pedestrian facilities are usually counted as pedestrians. Option: Engineering study data may include the following: A. The number of vehicles entering the intersection in each hour from each approach during 12 hours of an average day. It is desirable that the hours selected contain the greatest percentage of the 24-hour traffic volume. B. Vehicular volumes for each traffic movement from each approach, classified by vehicle type (heavy trucks, passenger cars and light trucks, public -transit vehicles, and, in some locations, bicycles), during each 15-minute period of the 2 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the afternoon during which total traffic entering the intersection is greatest. C. Pedestrian volume counts on each crosswalk during the same periods as the vehicular counts in Item B above and during hours of highest pedestrian volume. Where young, elderly, and/or persons with physical or visual disabilities need special consideration, the pedestrians and their crossing times may be classified by general observation. D. Information about nearby facilities and activity centers that serve the young, elderly, and/or persons with disabilities, including requests from persons with disabilities for accessible crossing improvements at the location under study. These persons might not be adequately reflected in the pedestrian volume count if the absence of a signal restrains their mobility. E. The posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the uncontrolled approaches to the ( �. location. l F. A condition diagram showing details of the physical layout, including such features as intersection geometrics, channelization, grades, sight -distance restrictions, transit stops and routes, parking conditions, pavement markings, roadway lighting, driveways, nearby railroad crossings, distance to nearest traffic control signals, utility poles and fixtures, and adjacent land use. G. A collision diagram showing crash experience by type, location, direction of movement, severity, weather, time of day, date, and day of week for at least 1 year. The following data, which are desirable for a more precise understanding of the operation of the intersection, may be obtained during the periods specified in Item B of the preceding paragraph: A. Vehicle -hours of stopped time delay determined separately for each approach. B. The number and distribution of acceptable gaps in vehicular traffic on the major street for entrance from the minor street. C. The posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on controlled approaches at a point near to the intersection but unaffected by the control. D. Pedestrian delay time for at least two 30-minute peak pedestrian delay periods of an average weekday or like periods of a Saturday or Sunday. E. Queue length on stop -controlled approaches. Section 4C.02 Warrant 1. Eig_ht-Hoar Vehicular Volume Support: The Minimum Vehicular Volume, Condition A, is intended for application at locations where a large volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. The Interruption of Continuous Traffic, Condition B, is intended for application at locations where Condition A is not satisfied and where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or crossing the major street. It is intended that Warrant I be treated as a single warrant. If Condition A is satisfied, then the criteria for I Warrant I is satisfied and Condition B and the combination of Conditions A and B are not needed. Similarly, if t Condition B is satisfied, then the criteria for Warrant 1 is satisfied and the combination of Conditions A and B is not needed. sea.4coi to 4c02 2003 Edition Table 4C-1. Warrant 1, Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Page 4C-3 Condition A —Minimum Vehicular Volume Vehicles per hour on higher -volume Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street minor -street approach moving traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 1000k' 800k" 700W 56%° 1000/6& 80%° 7009 560/o° 1................. 1................. 500 400 350 280 150 120 105 84 2 or more... 1................. 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 84 2 or more... 2 or more... 600 480 420 336 200 160 140 112 1................. 2 or more .... 1 500 400 350 280 200 160 140 112 Condition B--Interruption of Continuous Traffic Vehicles per hour on higher -volume Number of lanes for Vehicles per hour on major street minor -street approach moving traffic on each approach (total of loth approaches) (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 1001/6* 800/.° 70W 560/6° 11000/64 80ok° 70%` 56W 1................. 1................. 750 600 525 420 75 60 53 42 2 or more... 1................. 900 720 630 504 75 60 53 42 2 or more... 2 or more... 900 720 630 504 100 80 70 56 1................. 2 or more.... 750 600 525 420 1 100 80 70 56 Bask minimum hourly volume. ° Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. 'May be used when the major -street speed exceeds 70 With or exceeds 40 mph or In an isolated community with a population of less 10,000. ° than May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures when the major - street speed exceeds 70lmvh or exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of lose dean 10,000. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day: A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection; or B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the highenvolume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection. In applying each condition the major -street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On the minor sheet, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 8 hours. Option: if the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 701on/h or I exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population �- of less than 10,000, the traffic volumes in the 70 percent columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 100 percent columns. say 4C.tn Page 4C-4 2003 Edition Guidance: The combination of Conditions A and B is intended for application at locations where Condition A is not (` satisfied and Condition B is not satisfied and should be applied only after an adequate trial of other alternatives t that could cause less delay and inconvenience to traffic has failed to solve the traffic problems. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day: A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection; and B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection. These major -street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours for each condition; however, the 8 hours satisfied in Condition A shall not be required to be the same 8 hours satisfied in Condition B. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of the 8 hours. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the traffic volumes in the 56 percent.columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 80 percent columns. Section 4C.03 Warrant 2. Four -Hour Vehicular Volume Support: The Four -Hour Vehicular Volume signal warrant conditions are intended to be applied where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that, for each of any 4 hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher -volume minor -street approach (one direction only) all fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-1 for the existing combination of approach lanes. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 4 hours. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, Figure 4C-2 may be used in place of Figure 4C-1. Section 4C.04 Warrant 3. Peak Hour Support: The Peak Hour signal warrant is intended for use at a location where traffic conditions are such that for a minimum of 1 hour of an average day, the minor -street traffic suffers undue delay when entering or crossing the major street. Standards This signal warrant shall be applied only in unusual cases, such as office complexes, manufacturing plants, industrial complexes, or high -occupancy vehicle facilities that attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short time. The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories are met: A. If all three of the following conditions exist for the same 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day: 1. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor -street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds: 4 vehicle -hours for a one -lane. approach; or 5 vehicle -hours for a two-lane approach, and sect 4C.02 to 4C04 Page 4C-6 2003 Edition 2. The volume on the same minor -street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vehicles per hour for onemoving lane of traffic or 150 vehicles per hour for two moving lanes, �— 1 and II 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650 vehicles per hour for intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections with four or more approaches. B. The plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher -volume minor -street approach (one direction only) for 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-3 for the existing combination of approach lanes. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, Figure 4C-4 may be used in place of Figure 4C-3 to satisfy the criteria in the second category of the Standard. Section 4C.05 Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume Support: The Pedestrian Volume signal warrant is intended for application where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal at an intersection or midblock crossing shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following criteria are met: A. The pedestrian volume crossing the major street at an intersection or midblock location during an average day is 100 or more for each of any 4 hours or 190 or more during any 1 hour; and B. There are fewer than 60 gaps per hour in the traffic stream of adequate length to allow pedestrians to cross during the same period when the pedestrian volume criterion is satisfied. Where there is a divided street having a median of sufficient width for pedestrians to wait, the requirement applies separately to each direction of vehicular traffic. The Pedestrian Volume signal warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than 90 to (300 ft), unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. If this warrant is met and a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study, the traffic control signal shall be equipped with pedestrian signal heads conforming to requirements set forth in Chapter 4E. . Guidance: If this wan -ant is met and a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study, then: A. If at an intersection, the traffic control signal should be traffic -actuated and should include pedestrian detectors. B. If at a nonintersection crossing, the traffic control signal should be pedestrian -actuated, parking and other sight obstructions should be prohibited for at least 30 in (100 ft) in advance of and at least 6.1 in (20 ft) beyond the crosswalk, and the installation should include suitable standard signs and pavement markings. C. Furthermore, if installed within a signal system, the traffic control signal should be coordinated. Option: The criterion for the pedestrian volume crossing the major roadway may be reduced as much as 50 percent if the average crossing speed of pedestrians is less than 1.2 in/sec (4 Nam). A traffic control signal may not be needed at the study location if adjacent coordinated traffic control signals consistently provide gaps of adequate length for pedestrians to cross the street, even if the rate of gap occurrence is less than one per minute. Section 4C.06 Warrant 5. School Crossing Support: The School Crossing signal warrant is intended for application where the fact that school children cross the major street is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. l i Sac 4co4 to 4C.06 Page 4C-8 2003 Edition Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered when an engineering study of the frequency and adequacy of gaps in the vehicular traffic stream as related to the number and size of groups of school l ' children at an established school crossing across the major street shows that the number of adequate gaps in the traffic stream during the period when the children are using the crossing is less than the number of minutes in the same period (see Section 7A.03) and there are a minimum of 20 students during the highest crossing hour. Before a decision is made to install a traffic control signal, consideration shall be given to the implementation of other remedial measures, such as warning signs and flashers, school speed zones, school crossing guards, or a grade -separated crossing. The School Crossing signal warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than 90 m (300 ft), unless the proposed traffic control 'signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. Guidance: If this warrant is met and a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study, then: A. If at an intersection, the traffic control signal should be traffic -actuated and should include pedestrian detectors. B. If at a nonintersection crossing, the traffic control signal should be pedestrian -actuated, parking and other sight obstructions should be prohibited for at least 30 m (100 ft) in advance of and at least 6.1 m (20 ft) beyond the crosswalk, and the installation should include suitable standard signs and pavement markings. C. Furthermore, if installed within a signal system, the traffic control signal should be coordinated. Section 4C.07 Warrant 6. Coordinated Sismal System Support: Progressive movement in a coordinated signal system sometimes necessitates installing traffic control signals at intersections where they would not otherwise be needed in order to maintain proper platooning of vehicles. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the ) following criteria is met: A. On a one-way street or a street that has traffic predominantly in one direction, the adjacent traffic control signals are so far apart that they do not provide the necessary degree of vehicular platooning. B. On a two-way street, adjacent traffic control signals do not -provide the necessary degree of platooning and the proposed and adjacent traffic control signals will collectively provide a progressive operation. Guidance: The Coordinated Signal System signal warrant should not be applied where the resultant spacing of traffic control signals would be less. than 300 m (1,000 ft). Section 4C.08 Warrant 7, Crash Exnerknce Support: The Crash Experience signal warrant conditions are intended for application where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic control signal. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study fords that all of the following criteria are met: A. Adequate trial of alternatives with satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the crash frequency; and B. Five or more reported crashes, of types susceptible to correction by a traffic control, signal, have occurred within a 12-month period, each crash involving personal injury or_property damage apparently exceeding the applicable requirements for a reportable crash; and C. For each of any 8 hours of an average day, the vehicles per hour (vph) given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1(see Section 4C.02), or the vpb in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exists on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approach, respectively, to the intersection, or the volume of pedestrian traffic is not " sac 4coe to 4C.08 2003 Edition Page 4C-9 less than 80 percent of the requirements specified in the Pedestrian Volume warrant. These major - street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same, approach during each of the 8 hours. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 70 km/h or exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10.000, the traffic volumes in the 56 percent columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 80 percent columns. Section 4C.09 Warrant 8. Roadway Network Support: Installing a traffic control signal at some intersections might be justified to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow on a roadway network. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the common intersection of two or more major routes meets one or both of the following criteria: A. The intersection has a total existing, or immediately projected, entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour during the peak hour of a typical weekday and has 5-year projected traffic volumes, based on an engineering study, that meet one or more of Warrants 1, 2, and 3 during an average weekday; or B. The intersection has a total existing or immediately projected entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour for each of any 5 hours of a nonnormal business day (Saturday or Sunday). A major route as used in this signal warrant shall have one or more of the following characteristics: A. It is part of the street or highway system that serves as the principal roadway network for through traffic flow; or B. It includes rural or suburban highways outside, entering, or traversing a City; or \ C. It appears as a major route on an official plan, such as a major street plan in an urban area traffic and transportation study. sea 4C08 to 4C.09 EXHIBIT "C$$ TRAFFIC VOLUME DATA Counts Unlimtied, Inc. Page 1 25424 Jaclyn Avenue Moreno Valley, CA 92557 City of Temecula (951) 247-6716 TECOWVEW N/S: Caminito Olite Site Code: 015064 E/W: Wolf Valley Road Date Start: 08-Feb-07 24 Hour Entering Volume Count Date End: 08-Feb-07 Start 0 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined Totals OFeb- Time Tti„ AAnminn Aem— AA..ml— Aem—n AAnminn Aemm�nn AAnminn Aft.— AAnminn Aeemnnn 12:00 9 62 11 58 12:15 18 54 2 77 12:30 18 50 7 68 12:45 9 54 54 220 8 76 28 279 82 499 01:00 17 48 8 52 01:15 19 60 8 69 01:30 13 69 11 72 01:45 19 76 68 253 3 59 30 252 98 505 02:00 12 56 1 62 02:15 15 92 6 67 02:30 10 96 6 75 02:45 14 128 51 372 2 103 15 307 66 679 03:00 16 104 3 84 03:15 7 110 5 143 03:30 10 101 9 96 03:45 6 113 39 428 5 82 22 405 61 833 04:00 9 97 16 98 04:15 5 94 10 93 04:30 6 113 18 92 04:45 6 134 26 438 32 94 76 377 102 815 05:00 12 145 31 85 05:15 6 150 35 91 05:30 11 143 44 102 05:45 15 111 44 549 61 102 171 380 215 929 06:00 15 114 47 80 06:15 14 111 69 57 06:30 26 78 91 64 06:45 42 69 97 372 84 68 291 269 388 641 07:00 44 72 130 59 07:15 68 67 79 46 07:30 52 58 104 69 07:45 60 68 224 265 79 50 392 224 616 489 08:00 33 61 95 37 08:15 51 60 69 38 08:30 100 44 79 49 08:45 139 43 323 208 158 39 401 163 724 371 09:00 49 33 113 55 09:15 39 40 81 39 09:30 39 36 88 33 09:45 47 35 174 144 57 22 339 149 513 293 10:00 51 40 54 29 10:15 52 28 57 31 10:30 48 35 58 30 10:45 47 33 198 136 61 16 230 106 428 242 11:00 43 22 59 17 11:15 49 22 67 22 11:30 75 26 64 14 11:45 49 28 216 98 64 9 254 62 470 160 Total 1514 3483 1514 3483 2249 2973 Combined 4997 4997 5222 Total AM Peak 08:15 08:45 Vol. 339 440 P.H.F. 0.610 0.696 PM Peak 04:45 02:45 Vol. 572 426 P.H.F. 0.953 0.745 Peroentag 30.3% 69.T% 43.1% 56.9% e ADT/AAD ADT 10,219 AADT 10,219 T 2249 2973 3763 6456 5222 10219 Counts Unlimtied, Inc. Page 1 25424 Jaclyn Avenue Moreno Valley, CA 92557 City of Temecula (951) 247-6716 TECOWVNS N/S: Caminito Olite Site Code: 015064 EMI: Wolf Valley Road Date Start: 08-Feb-07 24 Hour Entering Volume Count Date End: 08-Feb-07 Start 0&07eb- Northbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined Totals Timor Thu Mnminn Aftemnnn Mnminn Aftemnnn Mnminn Aftemnnn Momina Aftemoon Mnmina Aftemoon 12:00 1 4 0 0 12:15 3 4 0 0 12:30 2 4 0 0 12:45 0 2 6 14 0 0 0 0 6 14 01:00 1 8 0 0 01:15 0 2 0 0 01:30 0 6 0 0 01:45 1 6 2 22 0 0 0 0 2 22 02:00 1 1 0 0 02:15 1 3 0 0 02:30 0 12 0 0 02:45 1 19 3 35 0 0 0 0 3 35 03:00 0 10 0 0 03:15 0 4 0 0 03:30 0 5 0 0 03:45 0 3 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 22 04:00 1 5 0 0 04:15 1 7 0 0 04:30 4 5 0 0 04:45 - 4 8 10 25 0 0 0 0 10 25 05:00 3 7 0 0 05:15 5 9 0 0 05:30 7 6 0 0 05:45 6 6 21 28 0 0 0 0 21 28 06:00 5 5 0 0 06:15 4 8 0 0 06:30 8 9 0 0 06:45 7 3 24 25 0 0 0 0 24 25 07:00 19 6 0 0 07:15 22 4 0 0 07:30 17 4 0 0 07:45 20 2 78 16 0 0 0 0 78 16 08:00 22 2 0 0 08:15 6 5 0 0 08:30 3 2 0 0 08:45 9 4 40 13 0 0 0 0 40 13 09:00 13 0 0 0 09:15 9 1 0 0 09:30 8 3 0 0 09:45 9 1 39 5 0 0 0 0 39 5 10:00 4 1 0 0 10:15 9 1 0 0 10:30 8 0 0 0 10:45 2 1 23 3 0 0 0 0 23 3 11:00 5 0 0 0 11:15 6 0 0 0 11:30 2 0 0 0 11:45 3 01 16 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 I otal Z62 2UC 262 Zutf 0 0 0 0 262 206 Combined 470 470 0 0 470 Total AM Peak 07:15 Vol. 81 P.H.F. 0.920 PM Peak 02:30 Vol. 45 P.H.F. 0.692 Percentag 55.7% 44.3% 0.0% 0.0% e ADTIAAD ADT 470 AADT 470 T I EXHIBIT "D" TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS WOLF VALLEY ROAD AT CAMINITO OLITE TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Major Street: Wolf Valley Road Critical Approach Speed _45 MPH Minor Street: Caminho Olite Critical Approach Speed 25 MPH Critical speed of major street traffic is > 40 MPH .................................... XD . or } RURAL In twig up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop ............................ 0 URBAN WARRANT 1 -EIGHT HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Condition A - Minimum Vehicle Volume Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic Combination of Conditions A & B 10D%SATISFIED YES NO 80%SATISFIED YES NO X Hour 100X SATISFIED YES � NO 80%SATISFIED YES NO X Hour SATISFIED YES NO �X REQUIREMENT I WARRANT FULFILLED TWO WARRANTS Warrant l- Minimum Vehicular Volume or SATISFIED 80% Warram 2 - Interrupflon of Continuous Traffic YES NO F X WARRANT 2 - Four Hour Vehicular Volume Record hourly wNcular volume for fiver hours 2 or 'AII plotted points fall above the curves in MUTCD Figure 40-1 or 4C-2. SATISFIED YES NO Hour TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Major Street: Wog Valley Road Critical Approach Speed _45 MPH Minor Street: Caminito Olite Cnfical Approach Speed 25 MPH Critical speed of major street traffic is > 40 MPH .................................... X� or ) RURAL In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop ............................ URBAN WARRANT 3-Peak Hour PART A OR PART B SATISFIED PART A SATISFIED (All parts 1, 2, and 3 below must be satisfied) 1. The total delay expedenced for barfic on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four "hide hours of a one lane approach and five vehicle hours for a two lane approach; AND 2. The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane and 150 vph fartwo moving lanes; AND 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or more approaches or 850 vph for Intersections with three approaches. PART B 2 or SATISFIED PM I 45 PM I "PM Hour The plotted points for vehicles per hour on major streets (both approaches) and the oonespoMing per lour higher volume vehide minor street approach (ore direction only) for one hour (any oonsecuitve 15 minute period) fall above the appropriate curves in MUTCD Figure 4C3 and 4C-4. YES NO YES NO �X YES O NO 0 YES NO 0 YES NO YES NO �X WARRANT 4 - Pedestrian Volume (NOT COUNTED) 100% SATISFIED YES NO (All Parts Must Be Satisfied) Hours Pedestrian Volume Any Hour> 190 YES NO OR 4 Hrsou> 100 YES NO Adequate Crossing Gaps AND < 80 GapMour YES NO AND the distance to the nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater than 300 fast YES NO AND the new traffic signal will not seriously disNpt progressive traffic flow on the major street_________ YES NO WARRANTS -School Crossings (NOTCOUNTED) (Al Parts Must Be Satisfied) PART A Gap/Minutes and # of Children Each of Two Hours G ps IMinutes Children Using Crossin Minutes Number of Adequate Gaps 11 Gaps <Minutes School Age Pedestrians Crossing Street I Children > 20/Hour PART B Distance to Nearest Controlled Crossing SATISFIED YES NO SATISFIED YES NO SATISFIED YES I NO Is Nearest Controlled Crossing Mon: Than e00 Feet Away?____________________ SATISFIED YES NO TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Major Street: Wolf Valley Road Minor Street: Caminito Olite Critical speed of major street traffic is > 40 MPH ....................... In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop .............. Critical Approach Speed _45 MPH Critical Approach Speed 25 MPH 0 or }RURAL 0 URBAN WARRANT 8 - Coordinated Signal System SATISFIED YES NO �X (All Parts Must Be Satisfied) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL FULFILLED > 1000 FEET N NA ft. S NA a. El 700 ft. W2300 ft. YESLX NO YES NO X On one-way isolated streets or streets with one-way traffic signitance and adjacent signals are so far apart that necessary latooni ands speed control would be lost On 2-way streets where adjacent signals do not provide necessary datooning and speed cordmi; proposed signals could constitute a prograssive signal system WARRANT 7 - Crash Warrant (All Parts Must Be Satisfied) SATISFIED YES NO �X REQUIREMENTS WARRANT FULFILLED ONE WARRANT Warrant 1- Minimum Vehicular Vdume or SATISFIED 80% Warrant 2-Interro ion of Continuous Traffic YES NO X Signal Will Not Seriously Disrupt Piogresiilva Traffic Flow X Adequate Trial of Less Restrictive Remedies Has Failed To Reduce Accident FWuencyX Accidents Within a 12 MonN Period Susce Ne For Correction & Involvl Inju or>s500 Dame e X MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS 5 OR MORE 1 X WARRANT 8 • Roadway Network (All Parts Must Be Satisfied) SATISFIED YES NO �X MINIMUM VOLUME REQUIREMENTS ENTERING VOLUME -ALL APPROACHES FULFILLED 1000 VEH/HR During Typical Weekday Peak Hour_957 h1hr or During Each of Any 5 Hours of a Saturday and/or ISunday vehhrc YES NO X CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES Major St. Minor St. X I X YES NO X Hi hwa System Servi As a Princi a Network For Throh Traffic Rural or Suburban Highway wa Outside Of, Entering, Or Traversi a City Appears As a Major Rene On An Official Plan ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERISTIC MET BOTH STREETS The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification fora signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the deed for rigMaf-way assignment must he shown. 2003 Edition E Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume INS . ' MEN s OCIRFARWIMMENq_ ISO5���■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ Page4C-5 *116 *80 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES — VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes. and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C 2. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km/h OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET) x 400 a. •x FF Q 300 WQ wa ¢a to C 200 S W 02 Z J O> 100 CC x ■ •- •-.LANES & 2 OR MORE LNEMMEW I '80 '60 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES — VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note: 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Sect. 4C.04 n___ OLn _i 11I n 2003 Edition = 600 o_ x Soo W 0 400 FroF- o- m w 300 02 0 200 w 100 x Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3, Peak Hour ■m►M■■■■■■■■■■ ` , a `�■ ■■■■■■ffi\29=�M-WM ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Page 4C-7 *150 *100 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES — VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Note:150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 kmlh OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET) x a x 400 .o a w¢ p� L 300 u1 a w Z j 200 _ J cr 0 W 100 x _0 x 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET —TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES — VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Sea 4C.06 ITEM NO, 6 TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE:. February 27, 2007 SUBJECT: Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file the attached Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Reports for the month of November and January, 2007. MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: Ihg Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent DATE: February 12, 2007 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - January, 2007 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of January, 2007: I. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 147 B. Total signs installed 7 C. Total signs repaired 77 . II. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 21 M. ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs 5,794 B. Total Tons 137.41 IV. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned 210 V. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 0 VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations 51 B. Total S.F. 7,804 VII. STENCILING A. 63 New and repainted legends B. 70 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 45 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 37 service order requests for the month of December 2006. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 104.5 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 January, 2007 was $77.720.90 compared to 51� ,433.00 for the month of December, 2006. Account No. 5402 $ 77,720.90 Account No. 5401 $ -0- Account No. 999-5402 $ -0- cc: Dan York, Deputy Director of Public Works Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - (Traffic) Amer Attar, Senior Engineer - (Capital Improvements) Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer - (Land Development) I:m Q9Q \ !I93 F-A all \ � as 99 ■ ■ a# ■m Jo 9 ■ ■■ ■ ■q #m ms # # ■ as § 2 �� $J §\ a � & §■ k § 2 , � \ . \� §� { \ « . & \ § m# 99 « a an mq a■ 9 ■ ■ ■ ■ q , ■ @ kk §; §■ § g- © k o / § © © ■ § � � , � ■ s_ �& $§� � If :� 2� ■ LU ■ .. U. ■ e ° A ■ ., 7 .■ ). .. §� § . °§ § LU .K § B e LU � LU ! LU k ° § ! § � § §.8 k / / k 0 a �� Kix k @ - _ . W Z J K F ag3 z i' Y 3 �_ d W W O CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF JANUARY, 2007 ' � y SIP, TOTAL:`' TONS 01/02/07 AMERITA W/O PIO PICO R & R A.C. 200 5.5 01/03/07 MONTELEGRO AT PIO PICO R & R A..C. 280 8 01/08/07 MONTELEGRO AT PIO PICO R & R A.C. 537 13 01/09/07 MONTELEGRO AT PIO PICO R & R A.C. 225 5.5 01/16/07 PECHANGA PARKWAY POTHOLES 46 .5 01/17/07 MARGARITA S/O MORAGA R & R A.C. 318 9.5 01/18/07 DIAZ ROAD / RAINBOW CANYON ROAD R & R A.C. 462 6 01/22/07 30317 VIA BRISA R & R A.C. 240 7 01/23/07 CHERRY AT JEFFERSON R & R A.C. 216 1 01/23/07 CRC PARKING LOT R & R A.C.' 16 11.08 01/24/07 RANCHO VISTA BETWEEN SOUTHERN CROSS & MIRA LOMA R & R 480 14 01/25/07 RANCHO VISTA BETWEEN SOUTHERN CROSS & MIRA LOMA R & R 530 16.11 01/29/07 PECHANGA PARKWAY AC OVERLAY 790 3.5 01/29/07 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD AC OVERLAY 280 1 01/30/07 PAUBA AT LA PRIMAVERA R & R AC 480 14 01/31/07 PAUBA AT LA PRIMAVERA R & R AC 690 23 01/31/07 WOLF VALLEY W/O CAMINO ROSALES POTHOLE 4 TEMP AC TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 5,794 TOTAL TONS 137.41 R1MAINTAINIWKCMPLTI ASPHALT.REPAIRb6.07 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF JANUARY, 2007 � u5ft"'It �A 00 n "'r W .. ....... .. - w - Al 01/02107 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 20 CATCH BASINS 01/03/07 AREAS #2 & #1 CLEANED & CHECKED I I CATCH BASINS 01/04/07 AREA #3 CLEANED & CHECKED 8 CATCH BASINS 01/08/07 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 19 CATCH BASINS 01/09/07 AREA#4 CLEANED & CHECKED 3 CATCH BASINS 01/11/07 AREA #3 CLEANED & CHECKED 10 CATCH BASINS 01/12/07 AREA#4 CLEANED & CHECKED 12 CATCH BASINS 01/16107 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 16 CATCH BASINS 01/17/.07 JEFFERSON AT WINCHESTER CLEANED & CHECKED 2 CATCH BASINS 01/22/07 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 16 CATCH BASINS 01/23/07 AREA#4 CLEANED & CHECKED 7 CATCH BASINS 01/24/07 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 26 CATCH BASINS 01/25/07 AREA #3 CLEANED & CHECKED 7 CATCH BASINS 01/29/07 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 16 CATCH BASINS 01/30/07 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 36 CATCH BASINS 01131/07 WOLF VALLEY ROAD CLEANED & CHECKED I CATCH BASINS ElTOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 210 &1bWNTAIMWKCMPLEMCATCHBAS18� CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF JANUARY, 2006 MORAGA AT EDISON PLANT REMOVED st:ZNw" . 300 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/02/07 01/02/07 TOWER PLAZA REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/02/07 1 SANTA GERTRUDIS AT MARGARITA REMOVED 630 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/02/07 SANTA GERTRUDIS AT NO. GENERAL KEARNY REMOVED 715 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/02/07 ROANOAKE AT LONG VALLEY REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/02/07 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD REMOVED 75 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/04/07 1 RANCHO VISTA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REMOVED 81 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/04/07 VINTAGE HILLS REMOVED 81 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/08/07 NB I-15 AT CITY MONUMENT REMOVED 175 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/08/07 SANTA GERTRUDIS AT I-15 BANKS REMOVED 330 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/08/07 OVERLAND BRIDGE REMOVED 25 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/08/07 29000 OLD TOWN FRONT STREET REMOVED 22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/12/07 MARGARITA AT MORAGA REMOVED 38 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/16/07 AVENIDA DE MISSIONES REMOVED 355 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/16/07 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT DIAZ REMOVED 12 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/16/07 1 PECHANGA PARKWAY BEHIND U-HAUL REMOVED 673 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/16/07 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT HWY 79 SO. REMOVED 79 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/16/07 NO. GENERAL KEARNY AT PARK REMOVED 60 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/16/07 30161 VIA GILBERTO REMOVED 30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/17/07 PECHANGA BRIDGE REMOVED 650 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/19/07 HONORS DRIVE AT BRASSIE COURT REMOVED 5 S.F. OF GRAFFITI Ol/22/07 AVENIDA DE MISSIONES REMOVED 77 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/22/07 HUMBER CHANNEL REMOVED 12 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/22/07 1 SIERRA VISTA AT LOMA LINDA IREMOVED 1 250 S.F. OF GRAFFITI R:UTA AIMWRCMPLTM MMTM6.07 •�W,a art_n_ r" Mow ��p r��T �;'�i!ORKROW ETED 01/22/07 CANTERFIELD AT TEMECULA LANE REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/22/07 43132 CALLE VERONICA REMOVED 3 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/22/07 SB I-15 AT OVERLAND BRIDGE REMOVED 125 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/22/07 MARGARITA AT MORAGA REMOVED 15 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/22/07 CALLE MEDUSA EMWD REMOVED 180 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/23/07 31005 OAK HELL DRIVE REMOVED 5 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/23/07 CALLISITO VALLARTA AT VIA ALLAZON REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/23/07 REDHAWK PARKWAY AT OVERLAND TRAIL REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/24/07 30602 COLINA VERDE REMOVED 80 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/24/07 CALA CARRASO / CALA ROSSO REMOVED 25 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/24/07 1 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT VIA CONSUELO REMOVED 75 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/26/07 VIA PUERTA REMOVED 28 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/29/07 AVENIDA DE MISSIONES REMOVED 200 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/29/07 MIRA LOMA REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/29/07 1 VIA LAS COLINAS AT MORAGA REMOVED 140 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/29/07 CALLE MEDUSA AT WINDSOR REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/29/07 40355 MARGARITA REMOVED 80 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/29/07 WINCHESTER AT BRIDGE REMOVED 575 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/29/07 1 MARGARITA BRIDGE REMOVED 1,195 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/30/07 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT PASEO DE LAS OLAS REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/31/07 28046 DEL RIO REMOVED 130 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/31/07 MARGARITA AT STONEWOOD REMOVED 30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/31/07 1 MARGARITA AT RAMSEY REMOVED 1 15 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/31/07 40355 WINCHESTER REMOVED 120 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/31/07 27656 PARKVIEW DRIVE REMOVED 15 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01/31/07 RIDGE PARK DRIVE AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REMOVED 16 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 01131/07 WOLF VALLEY ROAD AT CAMINO ROSALES REMOVED 1 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 7.804 TOTAL LOCATIONS 51 0 z t 0 t W N 0 'a J W z J_ per, QgQ' Z W LL W 0 00000000000000000000000000 0 p0p��01f0�l0!��000000000000000000000 1�f)et��V'�MMMCM9MNNNNN�����0ti0ef� y � U v400zQ F a° Vl W .o pp O ti V1 y, N r" d r: ,o w m Q F F W a � U 4 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF JANUARY, 2006 DATE REC'D LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK COMPLETED 01/02/07 HARVESTON AT MARGARITA DEBRIS PICK-UP 01/02/07 01/02/07 30980 CALLE FUENTE SIGN MISSING 01/02/07 01/02/07 30135 MILANO STORM DRAIN CLEANING 01/02/07 01/02/07 RUSTIC GLEN AT RAINBOW CREEK DEBRIS PICK-UP 01/02/07 01/04/07. 41780 ASTEROID WAY TREE TRIMMING 01/04/07 01/04/07 30571 COLINA VERDE TREE TRIMMING 01/04/07 01/05/07 LA SERENA WAY TREE DOWN 01/05/07 01/05/07 NO. GENERAL KEARNY AT LA COLIMA TREE DOWN 01/05/07 01/05/07 YNEZ ROAD AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD TREE DOWN 01/05/07 01/05/07 29799 WINDWOOD TREE TRIMMING 01/05/07 01/05/07 AVENIDA DE LA REINA TREE DOWN 01/05/07 01/05/07 CALLE PINA COLADA TREE DOWN 01/05/07 01/05/07 45547 CLUBHOUSES DRIVE DEBRIS PICK-UP 01/05/07 01/08/07 44860 MARGE PLACE TREE DOWN 01/08/07 01/08/07 AVENIDA ALVARADO S.N.S. DOWN 01/08/07 01/08/07 CORTE CABRAL S.N.S. DOWN 01/08/07 01/08/07 42635 REMORA TREE TRIMMING 01/08/07 01/08/07 30570 SOUTHERN CROSS TREE TRIMMING 01/08/07 01/09/07 McCABE STREET TOY PLANE IN TREE 01/09/07 01/09/07 YORBA AVENUE DEBRIS REMOVAL 01/09/07 01/10/07 PFCHANGA PARKWAY POTHOLES 01/10/07 01/11/07 BRANFORD DRIVE S.N.S. REPAIR 01/11/07 01/16/07 PREECE AT YNEZ TREE LEANING 01/16/07 01/16/07 30450 BOGART PLACE S.N.S. DOWN 01/16/07 01/16/07 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT TEMECULA CREEK GRAFFITI 01/16/07 R:UWNTA[N\ R COMPLTO ORS106.07 DATE REC'D LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK COMPLETED 01/16/07 42506 VERDADERO PLACE TREE TRIMMING 01/16/07 01/17/07 39693 OAK CLIFF DRIVE TREE REMOVAL 01/17/07 01/17/07 30599 IRON BARK TREE TRIMMING 01/17/07 01/17/07 SOUTHERN CROSS AT AGENA STREET DEBRIS REMOVAL 01/17/07 01/18/07 ASHLEY ROSE COURT / CAMELOT MISSING S.N.S. 01/23/07 01/19/07 OLD TOWN POLICE DPEARTMENT DOOR LOCK 01/22/07 01/19/07 SANTIAGO ROAD FLOOD ABATEMENT 01/22/07 01/19/07 30131 LEVANAE PLACE TRIM TREE 01/22/07 01/22/07 29813 VIA SEVILLA TRIM TREE 01/23/07 01/23/07 MORAGA AT PASEO BRILLIANTE DEBRIS IN STREET 01/24/07 01/24/07 40435 MARGARITA ROAD BENT SIGN 01/24/07 01/24/07 43864 BUTTERNUT DRIVE TRIM TREE 01/25/07 01/24/07 ATMORE COURT AT DEER MEADOW CRACKS INSTREET 01/25/07 01/25/07 REDHAWK AT GOLF COURSE SIGN KNOCKED DOWN 01/25/07 01/25/07 MARGARITA AT DE PORTOLA OVERHEAD STREET SIGN 01/26/07 01/29/07 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA SIGN 01/30/07 01/30/07 HIAWATHA AT PIUTE STREET NAME SIGN 01/31/07 01/31/07 46068 VIA LA COLORADA DEBRIS, 02/01/07 01/31/07 MANCERA AT VERDE LANE SIGN 01/31/07 01/31/07 HIAWATHA AT PIUTE STREET NAME SIGN 01/31/07 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 45 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SIGNS MONTH OF JANUARY, 2006 MARGARITA AT DE PORTOLA 01/02/07 REPLACED R4-7, "K" MARKER 01/02/07 PAUBA E/O LA PRIMAVERA REPLACED R4-1 01/02/07 LA SERENA W/O SO. GENERAL KEARNY REPLACED W3-1 01/02/07 CITYWIDE REPAIR 9 SIGNS 01/03/07 LA SERENA AT VIA AGUILA REPLACED R-26D 01/03/07 LA SERENA AT WALCOTT REPLACED R26 01/03/07 TEMEKU DRIVE TO CAMINO CORTO REPLACED 8 R-26D 01/03/07 CALLE FIESTA REPLACED 3 W3-1 01/03/07 SANTIAGO BRIDGE REPLACED R26 01/04/07 PECHANGA AT VIA CONSUELO REPLACED R26S 01/04/07 RANCHO CALIFONRIA ROAD AT BUSINESS PARK DRIVE REPLACED 2 CARSONITES 01/04/07 PAUBA E/O MARGARITA REPLACED R2-45 W 11-8, 7 R-26D 01/05/07 HWY 79 SO. AT WABASH REPLACED R4-7, TYPE "K" 01/05/07 MARGARITA AT PASEO BRILLIANTE REPLACED RI, R26D 01/09/07 MARGARITA AT SOLANA REPLACED R2-45, R26D 01/10/07 CHEMIN DOMAINE AT CHEMIN CHEVALIER REPLACED S.N.S. 01/10/07 VINTAGE HILLS AT CAMINO RESACA REPLACED S.N.S. 01/10/07 HARVESTON AREA INSTALLED 11 R4-7, 11 TYPE "K" 01/10/07 CITYWIDE REPAIRED 12 SIGNS 01/16/07 REDHAWK AT CAMINO BROZAS REPLACED R4-7 01/16/07 EQUITY DRIVE AT YNEZ IREPLACED OMI-3 01/16/07 YNEZ AT SOLANA • REPLACED I R4-7, TYPE "K" 01/16/07 1 NO. GENERAL KEARNY AT MARGARITA REPLACED I W3-1 ikS. /�yJ�yt�p YV' 'sCOMPLETED 01/16/07 WINCHESTER AT YNEZ REPLACED R026 01/17/07 MARGARITA ROAD N/O RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REPLACED W3-3 01/17/07 CALLE GIRASOL AT TOMMY LANE REPLACED W l-1 01/17/07 WALCOTT AT CALLE CHAPOS REPLACED 2 CARSONITES 01/17/07 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD AT GOLF COURSE REPLACED WI-5 01/17/07 PECHANGA PARKWAY REPLACED R26, WI-7 01/17/07 MEADOWS PARKWAY REPLACED W3-1, W 13-1, R26 01/18/07 CITYWIDE REPAIRED 15 SIGNS 01/18/07 WALCOTT TO NICOLAS REPLACED 10 CARSONITES 01/18/07 MARGARITA N/O WINCHESTER REPLACED 5 DELINEATORS 01/19/07 SOLANA AT MARGARITA REPLACED R4-7 01/19/07 YNEZ AT LA PAZ REPAIRED Rl-1 01/19/07 YNEZ AT JEDEDIAH SMITH REPLACED RI-1 01/19/07 DE PORTOLA / VIA SABINO REPLACED 3 CARSONITES 01/19/07 CAMINO ROMO AT RANCHO VISTA REPLACED Rl-1 01/19/07 RANCHO VISTA AT MEADOWS REPAIRED W3-3 01/22/07 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY AT TERZICH REPAIRED R4-7 01/22/07 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY AT TERZICH REPAIRED RI-1 01/22/07 CAMINO PIEDRA ROJO AT VAIL RANCH REPAIRED (2) R4-7, Rl-1 01/22/07 PIO PICO AT MARGARITA REPLACED 10 TYPE Q'S 01/22/07 CAMPANULA S/O DE PORTOLA REPLACED 6 TYPE Q'S 01/22/07 CAMPANULA AT CAMINO DEL SOL REPLACED 5 DELINEATORS 01/22/07 WALCOTT AT CALLE KATERINE REPLACED 6 CARSONITES 01/22/07 MARGARITA AT AVENIDA BARCA REPLACED 1 DELINEATOR 01/23/07 4TH AT FRONT STREET REPAIRED RI-1 01/23/07 CAPANULA AT MARGARITA REPLACED 3 DELINEATORS 01/23/07 CHEMIN DOMAINE REPAIR 2 SNS 01/23/07 NB JEFFERSON AT SANDBORN REMOVED R2 50 01/23/07 REDHAWK PARKWAY AT VIA ALMAZON REPAIRED 1 SNS 01/23/07 REDHAWK AT OVERLAND TRAIL REMOVED Rl-1, SNS 01/23/07 WB PAUBA AT MARGARITA INSTALLED TYPE C Ol/24/07 CAMPANULA 100' SO. AT DE PORTOLA REPLACED 3 DELINEATORS •imW P {t i�z i ft qx J^.. V}Y tl.. e , r s yy01iK COMPLETED 01/24/07 NB CAMPANULA / DE PORTOLA REPAIRED RW-7 01/24/07 LA SERENA AT CALLE MEDUSA REPAIRED R2-45 01/25/07 REDHAWK AT OVERLAND TRAIL REPLACED 3 DELINEATORS 01/25/07 PIO PICO / MARGARITA REPLACED 1 DELINEATOR 01/25/07 PREECE AT YNEZ REPLACED Rl-I 01/25/07 BUTTERFIELD AT DE PORTOLA REPLACED W3-3 01/25/07 PAUBA AT VIA CERDA REPLACED 2 SNS 01/25/07 NICOLAS AT WARBLER NEW INSTALL W3-3 01/25/07 WALCOTT AT KLARER REPLACED 2 CARSONITES 01/25/07 LOW FLOW REPLACED 2 RI 1-2 01/25/07 CALLE MEDUSA AT NICOLAS REPLACED R2-5 01/25/07 CALLE MEDUSA AT MONIQUE REPLACED R2-5 01/25/07 SOLANA AT YNEZ REPLACED R-26 01/26/07 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT 1-15 REPAIR R-3-7 01/26/07 MARGARITA ROAD 500' N/O PAUBA ROAD REPAIR W3-3 01/26/07 RANCHO VISTA ROAD 100' W/O MIRA LOMA REPAIR OM3-1, CARSONITES 3 01/26/07 RANCHO HIGHLAND AT YNEZ REPAIR RI-1 01/26/07 SOLANA WAY AT MARGARITA ROAD REPLACE R-26 01/27/07 MORAGA AT VIA LAS COLINAS INSTALL R-26 01/29/07 CALLE MIRA COPA INSTALL R2-1-25 01/29/07 CAMINO RUBANO INSTALL R2-1-25 01/29/07 TEHACHAPPI AT CAMINO RUBANO REPLACE RI-1 01/30/07 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA REPLACE R6-1 01/30/07 BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD 2000' W/O LA SERENA REPLACE R26A 01/30/07 BUTTERFIELD STAGE RD 2500' N/O RANCHO CALIF. REPLACE R26A 01/30/07 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA ROAD REPLACE 8 DELINEATORS 01/30/07 VIA INDUSTRIA REPAIR W9-2 01/30/07 PAUBA AT TORRES REPAIR R2-1-50 01/30/07 VALLEJO AT PALMA REPLACE TYPE Q 01/30/07 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT DE PORTOLA REPAIR R4-7 01/30/07 BUTTERFIELD STAGE AT CROWNS HILL REPAIR R4-7 01/30/07 BUTTERFIELD STAGE AT WELTON WAY REPAIR W3-3, R14 RiMAMAIMWKCWLTDl5IGM3 W.07 BUTTERFIELD STAGE AT NIGHTHAWK PASS '.�"'W�5,rRFPAIR R R9-3 01/30/07 01/30/07 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY AT CAMINO PIEDRA ROJO R1 401/30/07 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY AT SUNBEAM CE RI -I 01/30/07 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY AT SUNBEAM REPAIR R4-7 01/30/07 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY AT VALENTINO REPAIR 114-7 01/30/07 VAIL RANCH PARKWAY AT CINON REPAIR RI-1, SNS 2 01/30/07 REDHAWK PARKWAY AT PEPPERCORN REPAIR R4-7 01/30/07 EASTRIDGE AT REDHAWK PARKWAY REPLACE RI-1 01/31/07 HIAWATHA AT PIUTE REPAIR SNS 2 01/31/07 PECHANGA PARKWAY AT HURON REPAIR R-26 01/31/07 CALLE GIRASOL AT TOMMY LANE REPLACE W 13-1 "2" 01/31/07 CALLE GIRASOL AT RIVERTON REPLACE W I-6, W 1-7, OM4-3 01/31/07 WOLF VALLEY ROAD REPLACE 16 — R-26 WITH 16 — R7-94 01 31/07 MEADOWS PARKWAY S/O PAUBA REPAIR R4-7 "2" 01/31/07 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT CORTE FLORECITA REPAIR W 11-1 01/31/07 MEADOWA PARKWAY AT McCABE REPLACE R14 01/31/07 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT DE PORTOLA REPAIR W3-1 01/31/07 CAMPANULA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REPAIR SPECIALTY SIGN 01/31/07 CAMPANULA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REPLACE R7-9 TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 147 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED, 7 TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 77 R:IMAINTAIMWKCMPLTMlGNRM.09 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF JANUARY, 2006 w1 COMPLETED 01/02/07 DEL REY AT DEL REPOSO TRIMMED 4 R.O.W. TREES 01/03/07 OVERLAND AT VAIL RANCH TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 01/03/07 DEL REY ROAD AT CARMELITA TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 01/18/01 PAUBA ROAD TRIMMED 5 R.O.W. TREES 01/18/07 MARGARITA ROAD TRIMMED 4 R.O.W. TREES 01/19/07 CAMINO ROMO AT RANCHO VISTA TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES 01/19/07 EB RANCHO VISTA AT MEADOWS TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 01/31/07 CAMPANULA AT SEMENA TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 21 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF JANUARY, 2007 yw i h T:il.. 01/02/07 MONTHLY SURVEILLANCE LIST REPAINTED 14 LEGENDS 01/03/07 MONTHLY SURVEILLANCE LIST REPAINTED 3 LEGENDS 01/17/07 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD REPAINTED 29 LEGENDS 01/24/07 AGENA AT COSMIC SOUTHERN CROSS AT MARGARITA ASTEROID AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD MILKY WAY SOUTHERN CROSS AT VIRGO COURT VIA RIO TEMECULA AVENIDA DE MISSIONES REPAINTED 15 LEGENDS 01/29/07 CALLE MIRA COPA INSTALL (1) 25 LEGEND 01/29/07 CAMINORUBANO INSTALL (1) 25LEGEND 01/29/07 MORAGA AT VIA LAS COLINAS INSTALL 70' RED CURB TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS 63 NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F. 70 RAMAMTA RKCOWLTDlSiR WGb6.0 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK REQUESTS TO SPEAK REQUEST TO SPEAK 1v-1 CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Date 221 O Z I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against Subject: M\ f cL � / C. / i-& c Q `—t . :N S �P a \ N'e �'!`oS5 ldnsi, 5-Y rsck, "�o -lL.!!�,�O"rA Name: `0 A"'.a. KP O A -'%A PLEASE PRINT Address: Phone: � The Chairman or presiding officer will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and address for the record. If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name. r.kn(fic\comm mXspnlcreW2jp