HomeMy WebLinkAbout062807 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 COMMISSION
TO BE HELD AT
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California
Thursday, June 28, 2007 at 6:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Hegel, Ramos, Jacobs, Youmans, Arbogast
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.
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.
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
Minutes of May 24, 2007
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Minutes of May 24, 2007
rUrafgckummissn�agenda�2007a82807 Agendalajp
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2. Engineering and Traffic Survey - Citywide
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and recommend that the City
Council adopt an Ordinance establishing the recommended speed limits identified in
Exhibit "A"
3. Review of Traffic Signal Warrant Methodology
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission receive and file a presentation on Traffic
Signal Warrant Methodology
4. Traffic Engineers Report
5. 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, July 26, 2007 at 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California.
r.\tmffiobommlaen\agenda\2007\062807 Agendalajp
ITEM NO. 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR
MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLICITRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
MAY 24, 2007
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission convened in a regular meeting
at 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 24, 2007, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City
Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
FLAG SALUTE
Commissioner Youmans led the audience in the Flag salute.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Hagel, Ramos, Youmans, Arbogast
Absent: Jacobs
PRESENTATIONS:
On behalf of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission and the City of Temecula,
Chairperson Arbogast presented Mr. Ralph Koiro with a Citizens Certificate of
Appreciation for his courageous act in assisting Traffic Officer Nelson with an altercation
he experienced during a routine traffic stop.
Expressing his sincere gratitude, Officer Nelson relayed his appreciation to Mr. Koiro.
Mr. Coeroy thanked the Commission for the recognition.
The Public/Traffic Safety Commission thanked Mr. Koiro.
COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Commissioner Youmans commended the Police Department for their efforts in
apprehending a burglar in the City.
B. Echoing Commissioner Youmans' comments, Commissioner Ramos also
thanked the Police Department for their excellent work.
C. Chairperson Arbogast wished the Public Works Department a Happy National
Public Works Week. Chairperson Arbogast requested a tour of the new Wolf Creek Fire
Station as well as a tour of Hemet Ryan. Chairperson Arbogast relayed the importance
of staff keeping in touch with the Community HOAs in regard to fire season.
R:\Minutes\PublicTrafficSafetyCommisslon0524207
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes of April 26, 2007
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Minutes of April 26, 2007.
MOTION: Commissioner Youmans moved to approve the Consent Calendar.
Commissioner Hagel seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Commissioner Jacobs who was absent and Chairperson Arbogast who
abstained.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2. Proposed Capital Improvement Program — Fiscal Years 2008-2012
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and discuss the
proposed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Circulation Projects for
Fiscal Years 2008-2012
Director of Public Works Hughes provided a brief overview of the proposed Capital
Improvement program (as per agenda packet).
In response to the questions by the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, Director of Public
Works Hughes offered the following:
o That $220 million of the CIP budget would currently be identified; that the
California Transportation Commission will be voting to dedicate $31 million to the
French Valley through the Transportation Improvement Program
o That the Diaz Road extension would only go up to City limits
o That the alignment study and eastern bypass would be controlled by the County
o That the burden for local interchanges would be on local agencies.
The Public/Traffic Safety Commission thanked Mr. Hughes for his report.
3. Traffic Engineer's Report
Principal Engineer Moghadam reported on the following:
o That staff recently striped 12 miles of new bike lanes in the City of Temecula
o That staff is in the process of hiring a consultant to review all major arterials and
explore the possibility of adding travel and/or bike lanes.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A. Mr. Shane Lesovsky, Temecula, relayed his appreciation of the officer's
presence on Seraphina Road; but that the speed continues to be a concern and queried
on the flashing lights and speed limit trailers.
R:\Minutes\PublicTrafficSafetyCommission0524207
In response to Mr. Lesovsky, Principal Engineer Moghadam noted that City would not
have the ability to place LED radar signs on poles that belong to Southern California
Edison, but that staff would currently exploring opportunities to place LED radar signs in
other locations that would accommodate LED lights.
4. Police Chiefs Report
Sergeant Anderson advised the Public/Traffic Safety Commission that he will no longer
be attending the meetings and will be replaced by Sergeant Ken Southern and/or Eric
Albert.
Sergeant Anderson reported the following:
o That red light violations were down for the month of April due to reassignment of
officers
o That zone policing has been successful
o That the violations on Seraphina Road attributed to its own residents.
Commissioner Youmans commended the Police Department for their efforts with citing
markets in violation of selling alcohol to minors.
5. Fire Chiefs Report
Captain Buckley noted the following:
o That staff will be implementing AEDs in Temecula schools by August, 2007
o That the Temecula Citizens Corp is moving its location to the new Fire Station
o That the month of May would be National Preparedness Month and that a lecture
will be given at the Temecula Library on June 27, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. and will be
open to the public
o The Public Health Exercise Program will be July 21, 2007 at Chaparral High
School.
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:55 p.m. Chairperson Arbogast formally adjourned this meeting to Thursday, June
28, 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:\Minutes\PublicTrafficSafetyCommission0524207
ITEM NO. 2
AGENDA REPORT
TO: PublictTraffic Safety Commission
FROM: Ali Moghadam, P.E., Principal Engineer - Traffic
DATE: June 28, 2007
SUBJECT: Item 2
Engineering and Traffic Survey - Citywide
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and recommend that the City Council adopt an
Ordinance establishing the recommended speed limits identified in Exhibit "A".
BACKGROUND:
The California Vehicle Code requires local authorities to establish, review and reaffirm or adjust
speed limits within theirjurisdiction on the basis of an Engineering and Traffic Survey. The required
speed limit survey provides the mechanism for the legal enforcement of the posted speed limit by
the use of radar or any other electronic speed -measuring device.
As defined in the California Vehicle Code, an engineering and traffic survey is "a survey of highway
and traffic conditions in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation
for use by state and local authorities." The survey shall include, but not be limited to, consideration
of prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements, accident statistics, and
highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver. These characteristics
are all considered when determining a reasonable and prudent posted speed limit. It should be
noted that establishing a speed limit, which is not consistent with the 85`" percentile speed,
constitutes a "speed trap" and is not enforceable by the use of radar or any other electronic speed -
measuring device.
In July 2006, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission considered a similar Engineering and Traffic
Survey performed on thirty (30) major and secondary arterial roadways that included approximately
one hundred and twenty-six (126) segments. The current Engineering and Traffic Survey includes
forty (40) arterial and collector roadways at approximately sixty-nine (69) segments. These
segments were not included in the previous survey because some did not exist, were under
construction, or the characteristics of the roadway had not changed significantly to warrant a survey.
The survey indicates the majority of currently posted speed limits do not require a change, and the
recommended speed limits are consistent with the existing speed limits. There are however, five (5)
locations where a decrease in the posted speed limit is being recommended. The locations are:
r:Vraf Eickom ioo\agmda\2007\0629\speed limit update
• Mira Loma Drive — Rancho Vista Road (E) to Rancho Vista Road (W) 30 MPH to 25 MPH
• Vallejo Avenue — La Paz Street to Ynez Road 35 MPH to 30 MPH
• Vallejo Avenue — Ynez Road to Cabrillo Avenue 35 MPH to 30 MPH
• Cabrillo Avenue — Jedediah Smith Road to Vallejo Avenue 35 MPH to 30 MPH
• Wolf Valley Road — Pechanga Parkway to Wolf Creek Drive 55 MPH to 45 MPH
The survey also indicates there are three (3) locations where conditions and 85tt' percentile speeds
warrant an increase to the posted speed limit. The locations are:
• Nicolas Road — Calls Medusa to Calls Girasol
30 MPH to 40 MPH
• Pechanga Parkway - Wolf Valley Road to Pechanga Casino South
40 MPH to 45 MPH
• Pechanga Parkway— Pechanga Casino South to South City Limits
40 MPH to 45 MPH
Based on the results of the Engineering and Traffic Survey, staff recommends the approval of the
speed limits as identified in Exhibit "A".
The public has been noted of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue
through the agenda notification process.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are available for the installation of signs and associated pavement markings in the Public
Works Routine Street Maintenance Account.
Attachment:
1. Exhibit "A"— Engineering and Traffic Survey —Summary of Recommendations
r.\tlafckommission\agenda\2007\0628lspeed limit update
EXHIBIT "A"
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
64ON
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
a E 09
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
O
mm
a J
Q
N
M
M
Q
Q
M
N
M
N
N
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
Q
a S'
e ��E
CO
m
=
M
m
o
o
M
r
o
M
o
aD
rn
rn
�a
m
m
ro
so
Cc
ri
m
M
of
M
6N
Q
a
a
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
N
c
N
c
o
c
v E
t. N 0
a
'
'
'
M
v
M
M
M
'
M
M
M
'
M
M
M
M
M
g
1 8 w
N
N
N
w
�
N
w
�
w
�.
co
.
lV
M
w
m
w
w
w
w
m
c
m m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
c
o
c
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Q
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
N
N
fD
O
O
M
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
O
W
O
O
p
Q
N
N
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
t0
M
N
N
M
N
CI
Q
N
M
lh
N
N
N
Q
N
N
N
t7
n
�
S m
so
N
N
Q
Q
N
aD
O
N
M
Cl
OI
N
N
M
N
r
N
2
Gi
r
C
O
O
Q
«O
Q N
o
p
❑ O
LOU
p
o
Y
g
p
co
p C
pa'i
3p
p�
p�
coop
Oa
0
00
OK
O
>g
>
p
p
9
Z
O
4Z
O
d'Q
r
Q
i=
Zd'
O
r3
ZQ
O r
r-
2Q
O r
P.
ZK
O a
r-
Z❑
O w
C�
a z
<
r
p
���
pU
W
4Z a
ZN
O w
Z
O
Q
g r
o
p
y
W
Wy
> W
w2
jCQQQ7
KF
W
W
W 4y�
NZ
r
W C7
Ny
aa
2�
W
W
Wd
W
O
d
Z
¢K
LU
y¢
GQQQ7U
¢aNa
QY
4Q�' R'
a� "-
QO
Q�QJ
Oa>
O W
W Q
Q W
W g
w
Z�
LU
w
>
S
g S
g
W
x g
S
2
x r
S>
r 2
6
Vl p
CC)
U Q
�>
❑
o
o
a
z
p
�
o
o
Ow
o
o
a
ir
0O
w
w
ul
0
p
r
W
tr/1
r
r
N
N
U)
Cl)
x
w
C�
K
C
z
Z
Q
N
W
W
>
W
W
->
> O
>
>
Z
d
g
F
2
Z
Z
G
Z
5
N
w
}
r
O
Y
S
¢�
Q
r
O
r
G
Qz
Q
Q x
a N
zz
Q
Qz
Q
3
Qz
2
O
>
>
>
>
p
>
Vl
Z
GION
c
2
v
p
m J
N
Q
v7
Q
N
M
O
M
O
M
O
M
O
M
O
M
v7
M
O
M
�O
N
O
Q
O
Q
N
M
O
Q
v7
M
O
Q
O
Q
�O
M
a
Ky
v n
aye
d
_
t C x
O
OaOf
7
GOD
aOD
N
O
qa
h
N
p
tD
M
tNp
M
N
p
f0
a
.0 d
O m
O
O
GD
Ili
M
M
GD
O
O
N
O
O
GD
Q
A
O
rO
v c
d$
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
Id
M
M
M
M
M
N
M
Id
M
M
m
O
O
a0
N
N
O
GO
i0
N
aD
O
GD
OR
7
aD
�O
N
O
W a
c
d d
O W
O
O
O
O
M
Q
O
O
M
M
O
O
O
O
M
O
M
N
O
O
A
N
7
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
M
Q
N
O
O
a
� co
F
O
O
O
O
OJ
��pp
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
m
Qt0
N
N
C'f
M
O
O
t0
O
O
Q
It
i0
N
tG
th
P'f
{+1
C'1
0I
OI
N
1�
N
N
N
1�
N
N
tV
N
M
Q
w
C
H
�
O
Q
O
Q
Ol
GD
M
Q
O
N
N
M
O
M
M
N
N
O
N
O
M
N
N
O
N
Ol
O
aN
❑
¢
❑
5
0
w
r
d SS
wL
z
o
a
�
co
❑aFa-
OO
_
Z�F
°30
¢
J
LL❑
a.
W
��
-W
J()
F.O.
K
F
jQ
FJd
z
»
-owF
�
O
}a-
o
yy
0
0
W0:a
o
ao
0
xOx
2o0x
0
O0LL
O0
K
❑o
LL'�
00
2QQ❑
U
J¢�x
z
Jm�0g
y
❑Qy
co
1Z
❑p
yFrns
CNg
JJZ
UU
N
N N
UU
QE
z�
rnKs
z
J.0..
z
z
J
147
W K
W W
>❑
NUUZ❑QW
}}
QQs❑x
ow
WIL
U�
y>
K}
>0
O
OY
U
K
K
y
Z
K
C
Z
Z
°
O
z
F
c>,
❑❑
N
O
❑
U
wW
W
W
W=V
_
W
WW_
gia
6F
O
0
m
LL
Wy
>
U
Z
ewN
E
P
�9z
W
M
M
M
v
N
N
a
a
M
O
M
M
M
a
v
V
Y
J
m
a
O
N
M
Q
eD
lh
N
O
n
Q
O
O
f0
h
n
f0
n
IA
aa
tG
th
m
M
n
O
N
N
ap
N
N
G
6
G
O
O
O
m
a
CL
o
0
0
d
M
M
M
U0
M
M
i0
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
lM
gym„
m
m
m
O
—
W
N
M
M
m
m
—
O
—
O
O
N
OR
O
CR
—
Lu
m _m
N
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
¢
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
M
m
O
O
aD
O
N
f0
aD
M
N
M
N
�0
O
i0
M
M
N
M
N
M
a)
O
t7
N
N
N
�
� N
t0
N
M
N
Q
N
Q
M
n
J�
O
O
O
G
G
O
O
�
G
G
a
G
O
O
O
O
G
6
O
O
O
3
0
yc
w
E
¢ It
E
Of
000
¢
O
a' W
W ¢¢
¢J
N0
�0
0
y
0
O: c0
KH
y(�
H
C
KyQ
Kaj
7N
OJ_
wx
>
E�
a'
pF
Crr
�3
0
��
0
op
��
�¢
=0
O
tll0
-0
0Q
..F
ON
H�
K1
W Z.
V,
ZN
N W
W Y
w W
Y�
Lij
�O
a W
F
N0
U J
K
0'¢
OU'
o
U' -
W
�m
O W
¢J
f
.Y
Oa'
n
aN'g
NN6
xJ
Jg
x2
Z W
W W
W Z
3
NN w
w J
a'Q
F
U¢
g�
Um
QJ
N
�z
W Z
z¢
W LL
z
J
qg'¢
U K
z�
K
�U
U W
z(7
W J
ID
J J
6¢
kC
a N
az
N
z¢
w5
a F
O¢
F¢
¢¢
¢U
d
OU
W¢
W>
x>
) co
Y
2 U
w
co z
Z
Z O
00
m U
g W
> U
0
a
w
IL
Y
N
r
r
r
00
>
¢
z
¢
¢
a
K
5
LU
wz
C
>
a
>
a
F
Ww
J
a
O
O
U
O
O
O
co¢
¢
z
a:
>
¢¢
¢~
U
co
0
Z
_
8i%
■
■
■
e
■
e
;
■
R
R
e
■
7\
e■
S■
e«
e
e
a.
§
)�
k
}
(
§
}
!
}
(
§
)
§
k
a.
!'2,
2
§
�
§
�
�
�
§
§
OR
/
§
�) �
�
2
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
2
§
§
§
§
[
7
§
§
§
§
k
k
}
§
0
0
a
,
§
|
§
\
k/
(
20
z!
in IL�
�
®§
o§nak�*!k
he
.
()§
(i
�;
\§§�i0
(§
K!%§($w
$
§
$k
§
�
)
§2
§)
E§k
§§0
0
>.)222
akaan
a.a
-
\
\
LU
w
\
\
»
#
\
\
k
\
k
/
\
)
}
\
\
)
§
)
§
§
§
@
+
@
§
#
2
+
7
@
E
2§
\\�/
fkk�
3ca§
/-We
0
/kL
.\\\/
)U)mWU)
Zc
ITEM NO. 3
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission
FROM: Ali Moghadam, P.E., Principal Engineer - Traffic
DATE: June 28, 2007
SUBJECT: Item 3
Review of Traffic Signal Warrant Methodology
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission receive and file a presentation on Traffic Signal Warrant
Methodology.
BACKGROUND:
At a previous meeting, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission requested that Staff provide a brief
presentation of the Traffic Signal Warrant Methodology to help them understand the MUTCD
guidelines. Ali Moghadam, Principal Engineer — Traffic will provide the presentation.
The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue
through the agenda notification process.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachment:
Exhibit "A" — Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies, Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices, 2003 Edition
r:\traffrc\com mion\agcnda\2007\0628Vt ffic signal ants
EXHIBIT "A"
CHAPTER 4C:TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL NEEDS
STUDIES, MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL
DEVICES, 2003 EDITION
Page 4C- I
CHAPTER 4C. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL NEEDS STUDIES
Section 4C.01 Studies and Factors for Justify.Lg Traffic Control Signals
Standard:
An engineering study of traffic conditions, pedestrian characteristics, and physical characteristics of
the location shall be performed to determine whether installation of a traffic control signal is justified at a
particular location.
The investigation of the need for a traffic control signal shall include an analysis of the applicable
factors contained in the following traffic signal warrants and other factors related to existing operation
and safety at the study location:
Warrant 1, Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume.
Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume.
Warrant 3, Peak Hour.
Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume.
Warrant 5, School Crossing.
Warrant 6, Coordinated Signal System.
Warrant 7, Crash Experience.
Warrant 8, Roadway Network.
The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a
traffic control signal.
Support:
Sections 8D.07 and 1O13.05 contain information regarding the use of traffic control signals instead of gates
and/or flashing light signals at highway -railroad grade crossings and highway -light rail transit grade crossings,
respectively.
Guidance:
A traffic control signal should not be installed unless one or more of the factors described in this Chapter
! are met.
A traffic control signal should not be installed unless an engineering study indicates that installing a traffic
control signal will improve the overall safety and/or operation of the intersection.
A traffic control signal should not be installed if it will seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow.
The study should consider the effects of the right -turn vehicles from the minor -street approaches.
Engineering judgment should be used to determine what, if any, portion of the right -turn traffic is subtracted
from the minor -street traffic count when evaluating the count against the above signal warrants.
Engineering judgment should also be used in applying various traffic signal warrants to cases where
approaches consist of one lane plus one left-tum or right -turn lane. The site -specific traffic characteristics dictate
whether an approach should be considered as one lane or two lanes. For example, for an approach with one lane
for through and right -turning traffic plus a left -turn lane, engineering judgment could indicate that it should be
considered a one -lane approach if the traffic using the left -turn lane is minor. In such a case, the total traffic
volume approaching the intersection should be applied against the signal warrants as a one -lane approach. The
approach should be considered two lanes if approximately half of the traffic on the approach turns left and the
left -turn lane is of sufficient length to accommodate all left -turn vehicles.
Similar engineering judgment and rationale should be applied to a street approach with one lane plus a right -
turn lane. In this case, the degree of conflict of minor -street right -turn traffic with traffic on the major street
should be considered. Thus, right -turn traffic should not be included in the minor -street volume if the movement
enters the major street with minimal conflict. The approach should be evaluated as a one -lane approach with
only the traffic volume in the through/left-turn lane considered.
At a location that is under development or construction and where it is not possible to obtain a traffic count
that would represent future traffic conditions, hourly volumes should be estimated as part of an engineering study
for comparison with traffic signal warrants. Except for locations where the engineering study uses the
satisfaction of Warrant 8 to justify a signal, a traffic control signal installed under projected conditions should
have an engineering study done within 1 year of putting the signal into stop -and -go operation to determine if the
signal is justified. If not justified, the signal should be taken out of stop -and -go operation or removed.
For signal warrant analysis, a location with a wide median, even if the median width is greater than
9 in (30 ft), should be considered as one intersection.
sic 4C.m
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-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.
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. 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 1 be treated as a single warrant. If Condition A is satisfied, then the criteria for
Warrant 1 is satisfied and Condition B and the combination of Conditions A and B are not needed. Similarly, if
Condition B is satisfied, then the criteria for Warrant I is satisfied and the combination of Conditions A and B is
not needed.
sat.4C.oi to 4C.02
Don. IMP of 7Cn
2003 Edition
Page 4C-3
Table 4C-1. Warrant 1, Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume
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%' 800/.' 700/.` 560/64
100% 8080%° 70%c 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
1000V 800/6" 700/6` 560/6°
1000/66 800/." 700/60 560/o°
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....
1 750 600 525 420
1 100 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 km1h 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.
sxt. 4C.a2
On.... 0=7 r f 7XZ4
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 /
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 some 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 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.
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
Sxt. 4CO2 to 4C.04
Pnna '2r.A of 7r.A
KUT0304 Mir,
x
> 500
2
F 400
W Q
a
Q 300
W
Z 7 200
x 100
W
x
(7
2
Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume
ME • • .- • ■■■
MIMEMMEM WON■
Page4C-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:116 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 10,00(11 POPULATION OR ABOVE 70 km1h OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET)
x 400
a
x
300
ri12
wa
cc a
rn Q 200
xw
0�
Z�
2 O> 100
W
w
SEEPI h Won I %qq a Sh E
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.
1000
n___ nrn _e+gin
SML 4C.04
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 ( 1
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 in (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.
swc. 4C.04 t0 4C.06
^--- O/ n _L 9ff 1
■
2003 Edition
= 600
a
= 500
a
w0 400
do
o-
N w 300
0M
Z 0 200
In 100
2
t7
Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3, Peak Hour
■NCRENE■■■■■■■
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 kWh OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET)
a
V 400
Wo
W
W a 300
�4
W
z7 200
�o
W 100
_x
2
'100
'75
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.
On.... 4R4 ..0'fco
sat. 4C.06
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 kWh OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET)
a
V 400
Wo
W
W a 300
�4
W
z7 200
�o
W 100
_x
2
'100
'75
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.
On.... 4R4 ..0'fco
sat. 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 t
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 in (300 it), 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
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
Dine IA) of 7r,Q
K110 txntm
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-I 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.
sat. 4C.08 to 4c.09
Donn 4RZ of 7r,R
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
Major Street: Critical Approach Speed _ MPH
Minor Street: Critics] Approach Speed _ MPH
Critical speed of major street traffic is > 40 MPH................................0
or } RURAL
In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop........................0
URBAN
WARRANT 1 - EIGHT HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME
Condition A- Minimum Vehicle Volume 100%SATISFIED YES I NO
80%SATISFIED YES NO
Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic
Combination of Conditions A S B
100%SATISFIED YES � NO
80%SATISFIED YES NO
SATISFIED YES NO
REQUIREMENT
WARRANT
FULFILLED
TWO WARRANTS
SATISFIED 80%
Wamarrt 1 - Minimum Vehiwlar Volume or
Warrant 2 - Intenu Ion of Continuous Tremc
YES NO
WARRANT 2 - Four Hour Vehicular Volume
Record hourly vehicular volume lorfour he=
2 or
'All plotted points fall soon the curves in MUTCD Figure 4G1 or 4C-2.
SATISFIED YES O NO
Hour
Hour
0 0
0 0
Hour
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
Major Street Critical Approach Speed
Minor Street Critical Approach Speed
Critical speed of major street traffic is > 40 MPH ...............................
or
In In built up area of isolated community of <10,000 pop........................0
0 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 experienced for tramc on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or
exceeds four vehicle hewn of a one lane approach and five vehicle tours for a tso lane 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 lanes; AND
3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or
more approaches or 650 vph for intersectona with three approaches.
PART B SATISFIED
2or
The plotted points for vehicles per hour on major streets (both approaches) and the corresponding par hour
higher volume vehicle minor street approach (acre direction only) for one hour (any conse:u the 15 minute
period) fall above the appropriate curves In MUTCD Figure 4C3 and 4C 4.
WARRANT 4 - Pedestrian Volume
(All Parts Must Be Satisfied)
Hans
Hour
MPH
MPH
YES NO
YES 0 NO
YES O
NO
YES O
NO O
YES
NO
YES
NO
100%SATISFIED YES O NO
our180 YES
Hour
Poaamten Vdurrio Any r
Hours >100 YES
lAdequata Crossing Gaps AND <80 Gap/Hour YES
AND the distance to the nearest traffic signal along the major street is greeter man 300 feet ......... ____ YES
AND me newtralfo signal will not seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow on to major street__________ YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
WARRANTS -School Crossings
(All Parts Must Be Satisfied)
SATISFIED
PART A
Gap/Minutes, and Is of Children
Eachof Two Hour >
Gaps Minutes Chiteren Using
vs Credal
Mimes Number olAtl uate Gaps <Minutes SATISFIED
Stool Ag,Pedestriw Grassi Street Children >20/Hour SATISFIED
PART B
Distance to Nearest Controlled Crossing
Is Nearest Controlled Crossing More Than 600 Feet Away?____________________ SATISFIED
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
Major Street: Critical Approach Speed _ MPH
Minor Street: Critical Approach Speed _ MPH
Critical spcetl of major street traffic is> 40 MPH ...............................
or ) RURAL
In built up area of isolated communityof 4 10,000 pop ........................
URBAN
WARRANT 8 - Corrdinated Signal System
(Ail Parts Must Be Satisfied)
SATISFIED YES NO
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL
I FULFILLED
> 1000 FEET N It. S a. E fL W ft.
I YES I NO
YES NO
On oneway Isolated streets or streets with one-way traffic signttence and adjacent signals are so
far apart that necessary platoorflngends speedcontrol would be bat
On 2-wey streets where adjacent signals do not provide necessary platooning and speed control
proposed SOWS could constitute a Progressive signal System
WARRANT 7 - Crash Warrant
(All Parts Must Be Satisfied)
SATISFIED YES NO O
REQUIREMENTS
I WARRANT
I FULFILLED
ONE WARRANT
Wanart 1- Minimum Vehicular Volume or
SATISFIED 80%
Warrant 2-Intertu of Continuous TI.
YES
NO
Signal Will Not Seriously Disrupt
Progressive Traffic Flow
oats Trial of Less Restrictive Remedies Has Failed To Reduce Accident Frequency
Accidents Within a 12 MwM Pedco
Suave ible Fw Correction a Imrolvin Injuryor>E500 Damage
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS
5 OR MORE
WARRANT 8 - Roadway Network
(All Parts Must Be Satisfied)
SATISFIED YES NO 0
MINIMUM VOLUME
REQUIREMENTS ENTERING-ALL APPROA HES
FULFILLED
During Typical Weekday Hour vehM
kday Peak
1000 VEHIHR or During Each of Any 5 Hours of a Saturday and/or
Sunda vehslr
YES NO
CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES Me w St. Minor St.
Highway System Serving As a Principle Network For Tt=Mh Trelflc
Rural or Suburban HIghway Outside Of Enterim, Or Tramming a uny
Appears As a Major Route On An Official Plan
ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERISTIC MET BOTH STREETS YES NO
The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, contusion w other evidence of the reed for
fight-o -vmy assignment mot be shown.
ITEM NO. 4
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
DATE: June 26, 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 May, 2007.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Monthly Activity Report
May 1 June 2007
Prepared By: Amer Attar
Submitted by: William G. Hughes
Date: June 26, 2007
PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
1. Fire Station - Northeast Site (Roripaugh Ranch)
This project will construct a new fire station in the north part of the City. The majority of work was
completed by April of 2006. Roripaugh Developer (Ashby) schedule shows access and utilities to
the site in August 2007. Because of this there was cost to re -mobilize and complete the project
when the aforementioned items are complete, these costs are reflected in an approved change
order total, which is the responsibility of the developer. In addition, a fire engine/truck venting
system (requested/added on 2/06) will be installed when the Contractor is re -mobilized; this cost is
also included in the approved change order total.
2. Patricia H. Birdsall Sports Park
A new 40+ Acres sports complex has been built at the comer of Pechanga Parkway and Deer
Hollow Way. Bids were opened on 9/16/04, with Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc. submitting the low bid of
$13,365,055.51. The grand opening for the sports park was held on 12/2/06. Work on the kitchen
improvements was completed and the park concessions opened for business on March 17, 2007.
The project was accepted at the City Council meeting on June 12, 2007.
3. Temecula Library
A full service library, approximately 34,000 square feet in area, has been built on Pauba Road, just
west of Fire Station #84. The City was successful in obtaining State grant to aid in funding the
library. The Library grand opening was held on December 14, 2006. This project, including all
punchlist items, is complete. The contractor, EDGE Development, is in the process of submitting the
Maintenance Bond and the Final Release. A Notice of Completion will be filed and the project will be
presented to the City Council for acceptance at the June 26, 2007 City Council meeting.
4. Temecula Education Center- Rough Grading
This project will provide for the grading of the proposed Temecula Education Center. Project was
awarded on 4/11 /06. Construction started on 5/1/06. CCO#1 to relocate/modify all impacted utilities
along Diaz Road adjacent to the project was approved by the RDA Board on 10/10/06 and Diaz
Road was brought up to grade. All work was completed on March 28, 2007. Other ongoing work
under this contract involves EMWD work outside of the project limit. The work is anticipated to be
complete in July of 2007.
5. State Route 79 South Medians
Under this project raised medians have been constructed on Route 79 South within the Temecula
City limits. Most of the work on this project is complete. The Contractor only has punchlist items and
the four monument walls to complete. The monument walls should be completed by the end of
June.
6. City Field Operations Center (Maintenance Facility and Corporate Yard) - Phase 2
This project will construct the second phase of the City's Field Operation Center, which includes the
building and the corporate yard. The project was awarded on July 25, 2006, a preconstruction
meeting was held on 8-10-06 and the Notice to Proceed was issued effective 8-11-06. Exterior
stucco and windows are complete. Interior plumbing and electrical fixtures are ongoing. Work on
interior finishes is starting.
7. Fire Station -Wolf Creek Site
A new 3-bay heavy urban fire station will be built at the SE comer of Wolf Valley Rd & Wolf Creek Dr
South. A $3,591,000 construction contract was awarded to RC Construction on 7/25/06. A Notice
to Proceed for this 260 workday contract was issued on 8/15/06. HVAC air balancing/fire sprinkler
systems have been completed. The final walk-through for punchlist was conducted on 6/11th.
Punchlist items include: generator final testing, touchup painting/drywall, cabinet panels, floor & file
work, window blinds, stucco patching, downspout rework, cleaning of facility, ceiling tiles, rollup door
adjustments/repairs, bollards, landscaping/planting, etc. Perimeter wall will be re -stuccoed to match
WC Development wall theme by L&M Stucco Specialists. Work is progressing ahead of schedule.
Contractor submitted Pay Application #9. Currently, there is 1 approved change order.
8. Diaz Road Realignment to Vincent Moraga
Under this project, Diaz Road will be realigned starting just south of Rancho Way to Vincent Moraga
Road at Rancho California Road. Business Park Drive will be a T-intersection at Diaz. The traffic
signal at existing Diaz Road and Rancho California Road will be removed. The Notice to Proceed
was issued and construction began on 3/26/07. Despite an approx. 3-week delay due to a conflict
with EMWD facilities early in the project, the contractor has made up time, and the project is on
schedule. Phase II of the project, which involved a complete closure of Business Park Drive
between Single Oak and Rancho California Road, began on 6/4/07. Anticipated duration is 7
weeks. Project is on schedule for completion in August.
9. Old Town Infrastructure Projects - Site Demolition and Site Preparation
This project involves demolishing the existing non -historic structures on the City owned parcels at
the intersection Main and Mercedes to make way for the Main Street Realignment and the Old Town
Parking Structure. The two buildings involved in this phase are the McLaughlin Building and the
Pantry. The McLaughlin Building and the old pantry building have been demolished. Haz Mat Trans
is currently demoing the concrete and asphalt and intend to finish the project by 5/18107. This is the
scheduled completion date.
10. Rancho California Road Widening, Old Town Front Street to 1-15 (Southside)
This project will construct an additional eastbound lane to provide for a right turn lane to southbound
1-15, as well as modify the existing median to accommodate dual left turn lanes from westbound
Rancho California Road to southbound Old Town Front Street. Caltrans has issued the
encroachment permit for the portion of the work within the State right-of-way. The Notice to Proceed
was issued and construction started on 04/16107. The first phase of work, which includes the
construction of the Cast In Place retaining wall and structural fill, is nearly complete.
11. Bridge Fencing Enhancement
This portion of the project will provide Architectural Enhancements to the recently constructed
fencing at the Overland Drive and Rancho California Road bridges over Interstate 15. Caltrans has
issued an Encroachment Permit for the construction and maintenance of the project. A cost
proposal for construction has been received and the project was awarded on 05/08/07. The pre -
construction meeting is forthcoming.
12. Citywide Concrete Repairs, Phase II - FY 2006-07
This project will replace old and cracked concrete throughout the City. The project was advertised
and two contractors submitted bids. Bids were opened on 05-29-07. The lowest bidder was Del Rio
Enterprise. The Council awarded the contract on June 12th. Pre -con will be set up after the contract
documents have been finalized.
PROJECTS BEING ADVERTISED FOR BIDS
1. Murrieta Creek Multi Purpose Trail
This project will build equestrian and bike trails along Mumeta Creek between Rancho California
Road and Diaz Road. The project is funded in part by a $1,214,000 federal grant. All necessary
approvals to advertise the project have been obtained and Council has authorized the solicitation of
construction bids. The City sent the Encroachment PennitApplication to the Riverside County Flood
Control District on Dec. 13, 2006. The issuance of the permit is still pending. The project was
advertised for construction bids and construction bids opening has been delayed until 07/11/07 in
order to incorporate the changes dictated by the US Army Corps of Engineers' Murrieta Creek
project. Kimley-Hom, the design consultant, is working on this addendum.
PROJECTS IN DESIGN
1. Pechanga Parkway Improvements — Phase II (SR 79 South to Pechanga Road)
This project will widen Pechanga Parkway (formerly Pala Road) to its ultimate width from the
Pechanga Parkway Bridge to Pechanga road. The Environmental Document (Categorical
Exclusion) was approved by FHWA on April 19, 2007. The PS&E Package will be submitted to
Caltrans (Local Assistance) shortly and then a 60 day review period will begin. Once the City
receives a letter of authorization for construction from Local Assistance, the City can start the public
bidding process for construction.
2. Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements — Environmental Mitigation
The project includes the construction of new wetlands as part of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel -
Stage I Project. The mitigation area is located along the north bank of Temecula Creek and a new
landscaping and irrigation system will be installed. Once the mitigation area is constructed, the City
is required to complete a 5-year maintenance and monitoring plan. Design plans have not been
submitted to the City; however, the conservation/grading/water line easements are currently being
designed.
3. Murrieta Creek Bridge - Overland Drive Extension to Diaz Road
This project includes studying alignments, design and construction of an extension of Overland
Drive, westerly to Diaz Road, including a new bridge over Murrieta Creek. The design is being
coordinated with the planned Murrieta Creek improvements overseen by Riverside County Flood
Control (RCFC) and the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE). The design consultants 60% plans have
been routed to the appropriate City departments, RCFC & ACOE, and the local utility agencies for
review and comment. Plan check comments were sent to the consultant during the month of
January; however, the design is currently on hold until the Corps provides the City with a
channel cross section that represents their final design.
4. Main Street Bridge Over Murrieta Creek (Replacement)
This project will replace the existing Main Street Bridge over Murrieta Creek. Design consultant
Simon Wong Engineering (SWE) and the City are continuing to pursue environmental permitting
and coordination issues associated with pursuing the bridge replacement as a stand alone project
separate from the Corps of Engineer's Murrieta Creek improvement project. SWE has also revised
their original design proposal for this project in light of these additional efforts required; additional
funding will be required to cover these revisions. The City was notified that anticipated Federal
funding for this project was programmed for Federal Fiscal Year 201012011, which could have
serious ramifications to the project. SWE submitted a revised proposal to include the expanded
scope of environmental work in June. City Council approval of a contract amendment for SWE
anticipated in July.
6. Diaz Road Extension to Cherry Street
.This project was previously "On -hold"' pending data from Riverside County Flood Control. With the
construction of the proposed Education Center, this project has become developer driven. Plans
have been routed to various utilities for identification of possible conflicts and to Riverside Flood
Control and Army Corp of Engineers for verification that the proposed roadway is in conformance
with the proposed detention basin within Murrieta Creek.
6. Santa Gertrudis Bicycle/ Trail Undercrossing at Margarita Road
This project will construct a trail for bicycles and pedestrians along Santa Gertrudis Creek under
Margarita Road. Data regarding existing utilities are being incorporated into the design. RCFC has
provided an Encroachment Permit. This project cannot be constructed until adequate funds are
identified. An application was submitted for State Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funds on
12/1/06.
7. Western Bypass Corridor Alignment Study
This project will complete an alignment study for the Western Bypass Corridor. The City's design
Consultant, URS, is now working on developing the plans for the Preferred Alignment.
Electronic files of one of the alignments for the southern portion of the project (south of Rancho
California Road) were given to the engineer of the developer of the Villages of Old Town. They are
supposed to commit to complete the plans and the construction of this portion within a specified time
frame. The City is waiting for a letter from the Villages of Old Town with a commitment to design
and construct the southerly portion of the WBC including a timeline to accomplish these
improvements.
8. Western Bypass Bridge Over Murrieta Creek
This project involves the design and construction of a new bridge over Murrieta Creek at the
westerly terminus of R-79S and an extension of Pujol Street to the new structure. Once constructed,
this will serve as the southerly connection of the Western Bypass Corridor. Entry permits for
geological investigations are pending.
The developer of the Villages of Old Town may be taking over the design and construction of this
project. The City and developer are negotiating an agreement for the transfer of work. Further
development of the design and environmental document is on hold pending the outcome of
negotiations.
9. Redhawk Park Improvements, Four Sites
This project will add amenities to four park sites in the recently annexed Redhawk area. RJM is
currently working on master plans for the four different park sites. A dog park is planned for one of
the park sites.
RJM gave a presentation to a committee with members from City Council, residents and staff. This
presentation included the information from past community work shops, which helped with
conceptual design of the parks. Due to budgetary restraints, the construction was divided into
phases over a number of years. RJM used the existing irrigation layout at the future dog park to
help reduce the costs but at the same time allowed for a very flexible design that will be able to be
adjusted as the dog park needs change in the future.
10.Old Town Infrastructure Projects - Site Demolition and Site Preparation
This project involves demolishing the existing non -historic structures on the City owned parcels at
the intersection Main and Mercedes to make way forthe Main Street Realignment and the Old Town
Parking Structure. The demolition of the McLaughlin Building and the community Pantry is complete.
The site has been graded and erosion control BMP's have been installed. The Relocation of the
Escalier house and Barn are dependent upon the Temecula Community Center (TCC) site
preparation.
11.Old Town Infrastructure Projects - Underground Utility District
This project will effectively underground all overhead utility lines along Old Town Front Street,
between 2nd and a streets, all of Main Street east of Murrieta Creek and Mercedes Street between
2n° and a streets. The City Council approved the resolution forming the underground utility district
on October 10, 2006. SCE is designing their underground systems, which will be followed by design
of CAN & Telephone UG systems. 60% street improvement plans have been forwarded to the
utilities for their review in late January 2007. SCE will have their portion of the design complete in
May 2007.
12.Old Town Infrastructure Projects - Street Improvements, Mercedes St (2nd - 8th) & the
Realignment of Main St
This project will improve Mercedes Street and realign Main Street as part of phase 1 of the Old
Town Civic Center project. RBF submitted 90% street plans, which are under review. Water/sewer
lines are under design & will be incorporated into the plans. Coordination between the plans and the
landscape architect is occurring. Items of interests: (a) the plans will define the Town Square plaza
perimeter curb, the colored pavers at Mercedes St, decorative bollards, etc; (c) signage is being
reviewed to match existing Old Town signage, (d) impacts to existing structures will be minimized.
The design process will be ongoing for the next few months. Bidding process is expected in
Sept/Oct.
13.Old Town Infrastructure Projects - Parking Structure & Office/Retail frontage
This project will construct a parking structure, including office and retail frontage as part of phase 1
of Old Town Civic Center project. Design Architect, NMR, submitted schematic design drawings for
the OTCC Parking Structure (Ph 1 D) on 6/117. Office/Retail frontage has been revised to a more
efficient design eliminating the narrow space to the south. Northerly frontage space will now be two-
story to make up the space, facades and view from the street will remain the same. Modifications to
items such as lighting, secured paths of travel for Council, secured parking area, gates, basement
parking, etc. are on -going.
14. Old Town Infrastructure Projects — Town Square Plaza
Under this project, the plaza area for Phase 1 of the Civic Center will be constructed. NMR and their
landscape architectural sub, SWA, have submitted the schematic design package Review
comments will be forwarded to the designer when they are done. Designers will meet with the City
to go over comments and finalize any modification prior to design development in June.
16. Old Town Civic Center Phase 2
Under this project the design and construction documents for phase two of the Civic Center Project
will be developed. The City Council approved the Old Town Civic Center Master Plan and awarded a
design contract to NMR for balance of the Civic Center design on April 10, 2007. Design consultant
NMR continues the schematic design process. NMR is finalizing the departmental space allocations
and adjacency requirements and will be forwarding results in the next few weeks. Departmental
floor plans will follow.
16.79 South Park & Ride
This project will design and construct a park and ride facility on 79 South at La Paz. The City is
coordinating with RTA to develop an MOU for the preliminary engineering phase of the work and the
implementation of the project. Based on Statements of Qualifications a consultant has been
selected. The City Council approved a design contract with AAE at the 6/12/07 City Council meeting.
17. De Portola Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project (from Jedediah Smith to Margarita)
This federally funded project includes rehabilitating De Portola Road from Jedediah Smith Road to
Margarita Road. On Nov 14, 2006 City Council approved the design agreement WGFB-Friedrich.
Consultant started the record research & survey. City forwarded utility as-builts to GFB for
coordination. 30% plans were submitted on 2/12/07; design engineer hired consultant to perform
street borings. 70% plans are expected in June. Discussion of the new modified roadway section is
taking place to determine if we could incorporate the new section into this rehab project. This is a
federally funded project. The PIES Submittal/App was resubmitted w/the NESMI Report. It is being
reviewed by Caltrans.
18.79 South to Pechanga Parkway - Dual Right Turn Lanes
This project includes the design and construction of two dedicated right turn lanes on eastbound 79
South to southbound Pechanga Parkway. The design includes the widening of 79 South and
relocation of traffic signal poles. A preliminary design plan was provided to the City and is currently
being reviewed by staff.
19. Santiago Detention Basin
This project includes the design and construction of a desilting basin on the south side of Santiago
Road between Vallejo Avenue and John Warner Road. The City Council approved the design
contract with Kimley-Horn at the 03/06/07 meeting and Phase I of the design has begun. On
05/03/07, The City and the consultant, Kimley-Horn met with the US Army Corps of Engineers and
the Regional Water Quality Control Board to review the project site and determine the best location
for the basin. Kimley-Horn will come up with viable alternatives for basin location.
20. Winchester Road/79-North Corridor Beautification
This federally funded project will design and construct landscaping and irrigation enhancements to
the existing raised medians along Winchester Road between Ynez Road and the easterly City limit.
The project kickoff meeting was held with the City personnel and RBF consulting. The project is in
the 30% design phase. City PM met with consultant and resolved the topo/aerial issues. Consultant
was performing hand survey within the project area last week. Due to the funding issues the City has
decided to eliminate the proposed improvements within Caltrans right of way on the east end of the
project. The City PM has forwarded all utility information to the consultant.
21. French Valley Parkway Phase 1- Southbound Off -Ramp to Jefferson, Auxiliary Lane, and
Widening the Bridge over Santa Gertrudis Creek atthe Winchester Southbound Off -ramp
A southbound of -Ramp to Jefferson, an auxiliary lane, and widening the bridge over Santa Gertrudis
Creek at the Winchester southbound off -ramp are the components of Phase 1. The City and
Caltrans have agreed that immediate action is required to relieve congestion at the Winchester
Road southbound off -ramp. Status is as follows:
➢ PS&E — Consultant is preparing 95% plans.
➢ R/W - Establishing dedication and acquisition needs.
➢ Construction Cooperative Agreement - Caltrans comments received on 2nd fact sheet
submittal; City is preparing additional information requested.
➢ Declaration of Units — Caltrans Approved Metric Exception for this phase.
➢ Utilities - Preparing documents to initiate potholing.
22. Temecula Community Center Expansion
This project will add approximately 4000 square feet of space to the existing Temecula Community
Center to accommodate more human services programs. Work has begun on construction
documents for the approved project design. The site plan will also include provisions for the
Community Pantry which will be located in the Escalier House and Bam. They will be moved to the
site after it has been graded and utilities have been stubbed out. Soils investigation and survey are
complete and there are no extraordinary soils conditions. The grading for the Escallier house will be
performed in January of 2008. The agreement with Meyer and Associates is being revised to reflect
the changed scope of work and will go to Council on June 26, 2007.
23. Localized Storm Drain Improvements
This project will fix the drainage problem at the south end of Front Street (at the MWD easement).
Baseline right of way, utilities, and mapping are established. This project is currently on hold.
24. Long Canyon Detention Basin - Access Road
This project will construct an access road to the Long Canyon Detention Basin. Plans and
specifications are 90% complete. City is seeking FEMA funds to remove excess silt deposited
within the basin before constructing the access road. Project is on hold until FEMA determination
Is finalized.
25. Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Over Santa Gertrudis Creek
This federally funded project includes the design and construction of an approximately 200' ped/bike
bridge over Santa Gertrudis Creek near Chaparral H.S. This is a federally funded project, which will
involve a NEPA document. A field meeting was held on 4/11 /07 between the City, Caltrans, Army
Corps, Regional Water Board, and Notts to gather input in preparing the Preliminary Environmental
Study form for submittal to Caltrans, the first step in obtaining Federal environmental clearance in
the event of Federal funding. Staff review of the PES form has been completed, and the document
has been submitted to Caltrans for review. Coordination between the City and Rancho California
Water District to acquire a portion of an RCWD-owned parcel needed to construct the bridge
contnues.
26. Ronald Reagan Sports Park Channel Sift Removal & Desiltation Pond
This project includes restoring the Best Management Practices (BMP) of the Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and the RWQCB by
desilting the channel & pond located near the Sports Park. A US Army Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit application has been submitted and communication with the Department of Fish
& Game is continuing. City Council authorized the Professional Services Agreement with BonTerra
Consulting on 11 /14/06 and the kickoff meeting was held on 12/06/06. BonTera has initiated the
environmental clearance process. An amendment to the consultant agreement was approved by
City Council on 05/08/07 to provide additional studies required by the regulatory agencies. These
studies will aide in determining any impact to native habitat.
PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGE
1. 1-161 SR 79 South Interchange -Project Report (PR)
This project will modify the 1-15/ SR 79 South Interchange to accommodate projected future traffic.
This is the next step of project development after the completion of the Project Study Report.
City continued development of design geometrics and environmental technical studies. Status is as
follows:
➢ Draft Project Report -Final submittal pending Caltrans review of Environmental Document.
➢ Advisory Design Exceptions -Approved 10/18/06.
➢ Mandatory Design Exceptions - Approved 10/20/06.
➢ Stormwater Data Report - 4th submittal is to coincide with final PR Submittal.
➢ Traffic Study - Approved 09/11/06.
➢ Modified Access Report -1st submittal under FHWA review.
➢ Geometric Approval Drawings - Under development.
➢ Initial Study Assessment — Approved September 2005.
➢ Acoustic Evaluation — Approved December 2005.
➢ Air Quality Assessment - Approved PM10 Nov 2005 and PM2.5 Jul 2006.
➢ Nat Environmental Study — Approved May 2006.
➢ Cultural Studies - Approved November 2006.
➢ Environmental Document — 3rd Submittal is under Caltrans review.
2. French Valley Parkway Overcrossing and Interchange, Project Report (PR), Plans
Specifications, and Estimate (PSBE) Preparation
This project will construct an interchange between Winchester Road Interchange and the 1-15/1-215
split. The project is moving through the Caltrans process. Current status is as follows:
➢ Draft Project Report - Approved June 2006.
➢ Project Report - Final preparation pending approval of Environmental Document.
➢ Draft Environmental Document - Approved December 2006.
➢ Environmental Document - FHWA review pending NCR determination of acceptability.
➢ New Connection Report - Preparing revisions per FHWA
➢ Stormwater Data Report - Under Caltrans review.
➢ Mandatory Design Exceptions - Approved 07/18/06.
➢ Advisory Design Exceptions - Approved 07/18106.
➢ Exception to Ramp Metering Policy - Approved 07/05/06.
➢ Geometric Approval Drawings - Approved 07/18/06.
➢ Freeway Agreements - 4th submittal is under Caltrans review.
➢ Risk Management Plan - Updating as necessary.
➢ Project Charter - Preparing first draft.
➢ Declaration of Units -1st Request for Metric Exception under Caltrans review.
➢ Freeway Agmts - Preparing 5th submittal for Caltrans review.
➢ Risk Mgmt Plan - Updating as necessary.
➢ Project Charter -1 st draft is under Caltrans review.
➢ Maintenance Agmt - Preparing 1 at submittal for Caltrans review.
➢ Financial Plan - Preparing 2nd submittal for Caltrans review.
3. 1-15 and 79 South Sign Replacement — Temecula Parkway Name Addition and
Replacement of 79South Signs Within City Limits
This project will add the newly adopted name of "Temecula Parkway" to the appropriate freeway
signs and change all "79 South" signs within City Limits. City PM met with Caltrans staff and
finalized the sign order forms. Caltrans forwarded the orders to the sign manufacturers for pricing
and a schedule. Caltrans will have the information from the manufacturer this week and will forward
them to the City for approval.
4. Pavement Rehabilitation — STPL Project
This project will rehab Rancho California Road from Ynez Rd. to the City limits on the east. The kick-
off meeting was held at the City and various issues and schedules were discussed. The geo-tech
sub -consultant performed 30 test borings along the project limits and forwarded the findings to the
consultant. City PM has forwarded all utility information to the consultant.
6. Old Town Gymnasium
This project will construct a gymnasium in old town, adjacent to the Boys and Girls Club. An RFP
was issued to hire an architect to design the gymnasium. Interviews were conducted on 01 /22/07.
The scope of work has been finalized by the chosen architect and it has been approved by Staff.
The agreement with the chosen architect will be presented to the City Council for approval at the
06/26/07 meeting.
10
p
W
W
H
LL
O
W
W
2
N
n
O
3
J
H
z
CO)
W
O
a
z
W
`2
J7�
H
Q
L Lv NS
�$y3
W
q
E Fl0j
Y.
- C^
N $xiO
E
pS
n
Wi` I
-g
n$Ag
�"
g�Es
��E
o��
N�aa8.t5
�gSn
�$E
o'$RMa Em�.9
no Wow �i�
E{9$Y�
BPS pptg
E.E�S
g
o
sags
°D
rB g'n
E
d$n
=a
$gn
ESE N
E
m
15 �
oK¢L'a t3 U
o'm&m o
p W N
V N
L •-
C
S N
Q O
c_
qq
�O = m
C'W Y
C f,'?ta� yW _ d� •�+
::,C;:.;::'°'QE$g
p n m c 'yp W
n
.ffi tp
p3p
S 3 i
o
3 6 0
ZNQp'-
�tSE
Eyy
�F�oo2fg
� n�$'j—=}}$
�Eo�
=Srg
�rnvp 88
^8
8 'S
Edam
�'w'
c
fi .�ffiE
n
5E'ESE$3a
n
,s
$�'��ffid-'
=
@ m
�1
�'S��
rm
W�4#{pO
$Q^ n 9C�
.%OI''O
fop, L
Lpg
s�
20
mom
p E
� 0_�'SOYIO
;pWp;1{1{tlYly
mo+�
EggS9a
�o �S$�p
coog'a
ni�A
o3
mE
5—�
fl€� gcg gc0�'mciS
o
, 05 ""'_-
�35�
Sao.^m
M m 0
�E
�
��a
LL � � ic4 $'
'o?,,,�n W
EyII M
py 8
m-H
&Ea73
n
��1
b_ 800�+3
Ea w2 K3K is
c
�E
,t�S+�
Q"c ni^
o' S.
La
41�$w� ��gynEmg
$ Etluj- �c�cm "o c
`� 38gN
�88s
�g�U
�cioo=¢r9i`o53W�5
::1>
........
p
b
X 4 X p
w �g
N Q
o
y`p
a�
1
m
fy
pcw
1n
C
mN
O� C
KY
O
W�pp
€a8
`E
pl C
mo
iili
�S�ppW
=
C9NN
O.� W
qw
-b
og
0 zo O
LLO
ELu
y
8d�
oL°o=off
Ego
mw 0
cr
ndQ
cm
oi
a lEpS�ro
LT
aNIm bici
Wc>a
8
E
Ea
Y
e t;
g V
A Cp
UicT
UCp
ti
Li
C
S
W
fy/!
IL
LL
3
}
Z
,w
OLU
OR
a
9
z
W
a
a
s F w C @E
3$w'O�
n
«ry mo E
rw^ O
Ec aE
L^ w
ntli�_tl
O c N
¢3y?
a y
cca�
E
88'
E80 Al
•g'8
Mg
am amas�
'2o
Q�« '=
E E_a
SSS 12
oc
Cmoc
E
$
n$$E 9S N
«$E�y.Ea£Y �pe�
—g
tE
wffioo
gg++y8mmn
ME E
$
Wa•� 3w
Efi"`og
�`w fig_'
3ai gw8°«�5
E'a�5g5gv
�4U�
c O
g"y
O¢� « n v $
B.�j
@usi$ iE
9!
F$
o c
'g a
u7a�i�_
'" t»�c
$
low Q¢�
:''�::>:
•_o-'1p q$'
oil
:�fi5 @�
2Sc9
$E m
5
$83_
'� 8
.�'Sc
9
cEc8.
r.:
nc=c
�$
u'
E
ca
3�d
S
RRam
9 E�aaa
� 22�
8
32g�Ff.
a
;
`;
bv8c mx�
2f�E �dp
�C��RoV
m cC
amE$
mg�8
mk '�
$r`ilo��
g_aoo
OwEC
wwo$
moE�pO�i
E
�ffi
''�$
�,,�gg `gog
�'afi«'gmc
`o
r3 m
«caw$«gxSE$g
$
w
.:
a@�� $ _�3
`_o
_
E
R
a
c^
L'
S was
.who_
N.ffi
a
•a�$3L EE
mc36
>CV �OLLL6�
m;55a
wW
agFcc �W�
FU`oO
wWa
EOa
�:
O: .
.:..:.
X.
sg�
12
N
g'=0
0
rv�
ohm�9
c°
Qo.
�w`
E
E
a
0
EW
Q -E
�j
Ew8�
aSmY^nwo
m
EN"=8Q1E
Z l7
C
O
K
LT
voQ
os�
EUlo$
c
c
m
o
U
y
a� mm
w�w«c
a 0 Y!
waEc
o t@S
c . 3
'i4 x
:
Ne
o�
Eof�U
w7
fi'eS cc o
wc
awcQw
14
0
a
a
p
C1
W
2
LL
tu
O
F-
O
c E
m '�
g'— 5
2
c
ffi8i «R
4 9 m
�
`o
U
?
E
=6f n'$o n
a-13
_� $_
DQ r
w8�
n w
usg'
a°ems=
--pp¢EW
,g
L .9vv
'Fj «,£n��5
S5uu RR ,.Q_qgg��
3YsS$yLmV
$�=m 10
fig=
qn
9
.y7g�;
U�gQ�Cc p2
p�L,o$SS�p
9I�Sf
-UF.
..
C
aCm�5
pp
�Tgm
ffi
Fimb C'as2'VE�8
. iffiffiS
mp.$wE
,� gr8ytS
ma
S$
$
o
p G t
'r�
I 1
3'm�0.€E�s
8 E a
Ol::::�
y:::::c
m ;` m
agal
�Ucn9 '9
2(3 cy
� 8 $E
c api aci
�w1 EY
1 1t
6
a,ID
cgg 92 $g E$
3 558 8a
'mA
o$ m=
5�
g b a�gEi�Q
`c�E@S m
o
32ga
m
5
t�Ep gg
E3,E5
g� g
m �$v
O�Sc 5
g°g
w7m3'L$�o o
��8V+a3 L'oo
tmgo'
8iao
E�acp
Vl 'am
c
t
.g�a E
ffi�8m
3cm mp's mat
s
.N
c m 0
�,�$$s
':'
Si may CC
r
�KzEm
a 10 $
'pg@g}�552Ei$pT28$S�rcgUg
imp m5&pa$�`v
c m c S'
Em�m'cm
u�$
n s o d
@'EmLL1pS
U c
$'�
Qc09 S S
m o .ffi�
£yE
apt
E°5mbj6Q
v°�c W
o�n F 2 g
mooc
—col
,=�ecSS
va �°o
.:
qg
mo�3L.ffi
_
@o—
�np
�g°
$Co
� 9 ffi0
Q
El
$=g
m o o S E
�'i�gf¢W��mssE
........::
« m «� @
!SA B E'
�CG. a._U6SU5
L'ig'gqc�o$
C2 8 «'S
.ffiCbs
�Ci S�_ W a
�U.S B'ln
F-O. II�`OS 83 m _
a
@s
c
o
>
CI
=
f9
O
iq
d
Ix
m a
apc,
c@
X:
ro
m c
'mi
E w
Dew
Y4 _W
°'
�a
0 o
a o
mNs
EE
Z E
5E0E
N c
E0
�ca
4?:totS£
Cffija
c
aE
cQ
@
cE
yu C
�c
:.:ass
e
�52w
mmo
s�U
o
ic�ci
3cici
N
N
�
a
9
f mi
RBI
W
2
F-
U.
O
T
�
pEEr B
F# w
� •goc
LF 3
f3
E3.. `$
?ygc
��3_
En
�'::.:::.:,'$9�ES
gpp"9���
cE�i
L
fi
Qg Ew
U�C
UEg og.
ffiW
o
L_
yg3 gc
41:: i::
ffi
pp 8 5g «
3� E i' S
4 m
g-
i ;,
m
o 22
g m o _
o Ti $ a
2 p L
« Z L m
255
"�'"'
L
3
.9.@E€ asio
8`
aqg
12
E c5
�
Lq 11;
.�$d
�
rL
g
fAg�
� .
c � ov
3 c
�•�ge
g"''E$a•�npgmgg
:�E• 2 r as
m c
«c
MME`
IS
919
3wp$�a+
o�°�°oiS �r�. ao
v¢
01 g+
�pffic q�
i'c
:�:
$oE Ws mE
Bi
E,`Q
�o
�
U �
�
T +j{j+��3SS
=" m
m
E
�gpE§E
o
a$•�
zoc
12g$
v9�g�
wc+��
oSm
o
$
�gg`o
05
.�a
$W �LE oS
$�E
ai
c
� $8m
C$
m
'� Ea �
Emq!
:;:$We
��oEA
EL
IL
m12
�2v�8
a�o�3w
ma
$E
s8rc���5��t
z�N-sv�°8
ix
ioma�a
zS�
y3y3i
':�^ii..
mom
� F
pw
� !7
n
� �
jxp^
♦ �
$tp:Q
CD a
ae°QQ°
N P7
xb'
N �
��
�
Ai
9
9 m
9
�m
m
U
U
u
qq
tltl��
c
!y� v
}q k
g{
ma cyy�
`aC4
E
ea
2?3
C
.
fO42
I!=.
ag_
Lin
Lp
Lm�mo
W��
��
06
�
ry
is
a�E
E .y
c
C
��
� �
L
W �
N RL
c
V.
E
Es
EC
a Q
E
Q
m
2 E o
c
�
U oQ
� a
Eg4i
0
o
E�c
i
o
o
om
n
^
n
h
0
a
3
0
O
H
w
Q
d
R
-
aqyO�• QlpS
i'S �gT fa dg'
c' 3Aa2
@ dal Sam�smgo$
@ryry� g
(Q� m7Uc 19 �iE^g LVIZ
IEmo uBp$i 3
:�:�:: O a a a0 c n c c o$ E
COLo m4�fQ C 3
�_ _ ��g p =
€ ` $° $rrya �3�pm� h c€ 8
ggsF$ }. �°�, w 1V
;m �� �� �E6 � °'g�. Q ou'IW� :R�� E �2e $�?� •E
s y0�"a�8eN�p a33�aoppdc� �gE2
VM�wa�m=y3
6 a
8
nVSS V`7'
ME
8
aA�UEmq v...
..........
0
Z U ca `
:V:i c^ o Z nE c $
EO
E$a m 9 c m N c o
0.
m u sm0(DmE a M5
'.. +d15 o
75
J n W
aeEp�p°� g SS_EGo �a 5 YF`aE�EmE °°{a n
is 8C7 O^ J N SU LLU�U Qd Z n
:Ox'i,}iii 3W O e3QN$ YI >r�
LL � LL 6 w
W
x
H
m
n
cagEE m,g'
i•o�a�5
Lsz'2
_
S
E
x�3 m
�Qo3Sa•S�
W gEga
g
cq$
Lu rc•.0 ma
oz`�3
.pffi,m�pEt c' £9E
S�S pie EaTu
�g��
44E'3�
3 ar Pi a igF
2 LA86@
C05��maTc
m�i2 cgc��
A
`
8
o
a
M
h
O
r
W
a
a
P,
F-
V
W
W
N
J
O
F�-
W
12
IL
p
z
W
a
F
Q
V
s $`
�....
e a
E
a
E
a5q
OM
zo A
0 Ego
E C m m
::,.,�.::::Na�gCay6�
EoE—
a �$ 0
mEc�i"j Rey�'"QE'�o'.�'N
C
E nmr9�gggpp
'
miEc�aEdmg,L'o.
ac l-AiI<4
c E
sEa �W
E
„E
3alEgc
pe,��EV,o��LQ
�mOc
�agw�U�m fi
mgy o@
cc o.
qq�1ism ac
.c
Q $_
aQ E��am
F`�D8Ai
(�5 n
2
Ff 5 aZUW
666 n n n w n n n n n n n n
0CL
L'�O LLOW ZFrp�¢ U'
((�5 u1 n n n n n n n n n n w
S0LLK0.�I-i
oo w w n w n n
6$ Ro
m a o 5 m
m
Y
.•.0
Cm
c
wt�0 y
0000
mE paSg ggg SvN�Y
occ��g
c
E m—S
A-NN S
oa9V�
a m�ptlY��E
6
=m ON N
_
.9!o
n2
Cmf/1
ppppt
m�U
a
�zz Z•�3
fi$33
Zw
a c
::
m a
10
Uz0
w
vK
d
oEQ"zd
Oa29
��
o 0 N . . .
g
> :<:
nj�a
6' a
�
m C G
tj E 3 c
g 33 Gim
mQ:i dz
> � 6 6 d d c
gW MZZZZZod
ti ,j < o c c c c
g$
Cm E
$
�e33a�
Z
" a3�aa��888aa
���
W
lu
3
�Z
z
sa
LLI '
OW
Vna
P
z
W
ul
ce
n
a
IL
rtc
$o
El
g c
g
€
8 a
i C
m g
�ram.9
�' °
�>$
v
�m
8
p o
m
WgQ�
a �S
�o�m
o =e
s.g..a�Va�p
o
$
�
a
E
1u
n
Q
N
E IL
so
ae
r8
8m
s',
tS
n m
`�
c n n
C
Lei
e
m
E s
,32 4- �q
a o
°
�E$mg
E- n
Glm
r,
cat
d=€�
y�9
No
a
$g�
'E
o� SSaa
�=�nZ�o
a
'g
..L
mvco
T$gQ
m
LaEdEo
g,ard
Otj
�
oc
mmc
3p
'Q
'8
'
Ei
t
6w
m
oy
yi �E �OMO
c
a�
W8
3E
0� �
Qq�'c
F iW
6
gR
Vim
0
�
°$A
°
ii
Lmm m Q
p�
t�t G
V���
,,CmC O C 9 W-
m�
O
,,C�C a
G��
'� yy LL Q Y 9 y�y
Q�
� m Y, g
a
an
..........
F 6
F m
F C' m s .ffi
a
F� m m
Q G R a m LL LL
f 0 CC m
m—
>'
..........
x
at
x
'0
Q
....
:j .z
c=
`
mQ
8
f
8
V
::
y...
m
`m
LM
h
C
o
E
W
m
a
o
E
�'
;
'a
:
O
=rc
Q
EM
a
E
c
c
°
a
a
g3
G
�3
2
A
�m
W
0.
-a
m
E
Vm
oZ
1E
m
o $
E
�za
Q
c
LL=
a
'W
o
O
W
p
W
2
H
LL
O
m
S
E
is
E g
a
am
m
$ M
c LL c
8mo
m
m
m
m
Ea
LL
$��E
L°
a
8 m
�
gW
'8
�qW�q
D
gWg
D
gW
E
8
AN:'::''
.�'
°
E
a
a
a
n
aqqIWO
a���
B I T E
ul
22
a
E
m
�
Q
0
.ss
W
$ m
8
yaq
E
3
3
o
c
iQQ,®�Si
ii
�LQ?•
y
�
is-ip
�p
Epf12
=
c
N
¢_
C
d
K
K
K
N
L �
V 's
C Q
le
� W p
E n��
E'
E
Qd1
E
qd1
qd1
9�?
E
Z�
LLC
@�
a
E
E
E
E
E
a
�a
t� m
mLn
�o
m'n
t)
m'
W
W
I
W
rc
W
W
W
L
�d
U
ELL
='o3
Qc
::emE
yy@
s
mm
S
n
Q.
E
c
a
c
c
8
c
�i
c
sdi
c
8
a
'Q
m
E�m
g5,2g
co
OC
gg
z
E
10.
gg
a
g
a
gg
a
gg
a
K
� u w
:
�i
i 8
c to
m
>
0 .�
N
$:::::: :
e�
c
.
�F
z
z
z
z
4
z
3
3
3
i+:pp
o
0
L
C
L
G
C
C
a
C
C
a
a
O
m
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
V
U
m
3
............[..
.
E
c
a
:: •:
U
0
r O
NE
L O
m•c
L aN
We
n
dQ
o:
a
g
8
12m
g 8
E
U
E
i
E
W
e
c
a g
N W
m
0
ow
rL
P
41
? E
s m S
E
O
m
py
m
LL
LL
LL
U
LL
U
Lu
m
{Wp
W
C
m
N
e
C
m
uI
O I
O
O
Y
S
nq
@LLB
m G
�j�U
m
o
o
f
a
2
Sm
im
10
0)CLMa.
co a.
a
cqS
'%�
a
q�
goQgqqqqq
eqq
O
1�
sQpsi
3Q�
i
a
a
p
W
W
H
a
O
s
W
W
N
co
O
IL
0
3
J
H
Z
H
W
112
OR
9
z
W
2
OR
a
`a
r
U
16
E
LLa
UE
12
,
'E
�E
IE
rc
LP
La
. .:.:.:.
O „
m
'cE
c
OZ
W
gms
02E
TgE
s
S c�E•z
10 n
c„
m
=c$
„ c
�
YS
g m
r.
a g
nQ
cvj
m
a m
�€=�a��gLL
LL
A
o.
rct`i
oogg
��
.e E¢agccc
m
,S�{F
s�
.05
I
„mag
0
e�m
`o
�£�
9
o
�t
W
2
nc�i
�S£E
f
acog2
a¢a'ouw8ci
Egg
noci
LL
Y
zn
�>go
g'
ci
=LL
0�
0)
�Wg
z
z
z
o
0
0
0
3
0
3
0
02
0
3
0
3
0
m
°
m
`'
o°
g
g
.2
m
om
.2
m
O
O
m
O
(fig.
fi
e
s
a
p
W
m
E
a
C
,
C4 �CCC
IL
c
moo
O
@°ffip��E_
a
o
92
„
mnLL
E
a
E
gQ
gc
9t
sm
r
o
a
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
FROM: ho Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent
DATE: June 13, 2007
SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - May, 2007
The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel
for the month of May, 2007:
I. SIGNS
A. Total signs replaced
B. Total signs installed
C. Total signs repaired
II. TREES
A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns
III. ASPHALT REPAIRS
A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs
B. Total Tons
IV. CATCH BASINS
A. Total catch basins cleaned
V. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT
A. Total square footage for right -of --way abatement
VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL
A. Total locations
B. Total S.F.
VII. STENCILING
A. 374 New and repainted legends
B. 16,987 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping
22
29
65
7,036
118
97
0
67
8,942
Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 37 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming,
sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 31 service order requests
for the month of Anr11.2007.
The Maintenance Crew has also put in 94 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 May, 2007 was 2$ 8,310.00 compared
to $6,795.00 for the month of Anrll. 2007.
Account No. 5402 $ 26,280.00
Account No. 5401 $ -0-
Account No. 999-5402 $ 2,030.00
cc: Dan York, City Engineer
Ali Moghadam, Principal Engineer - (Traffic)
Amer Attar, Principal Engineer - (Capital Improvements)
Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer - (Land Development)
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS
MONTH OF MAY, 2007
05/01/07
VIA NORTE
A.C. OVERLAY
1,028
4.5
05/07/07
VIA NORTE
A.C. OVERLAY
1,032
5
05/08/07
MARGARITA AT COURTNEY PLACE
R & R A.C.
340
12
05/09/07
OLD TOWN FRONT STREET
R & R A.C.
354
11
05/10/07
RIVERTON AT YARDLEY
R & R A.C.
368
12
05/14/07'
VIA NORTE
A.C. OVERLAY
800
4
05/15/07
MARGARITA N/O STONEWOOD
R & R A.C.
396
18.5
05/16/07
PECHANGA PARKWAY
A.C. OVERLAY
465
4
05/17/07
YORBA AT DE PORTOLA
R & R A.C.
260
6
05/21/07
MARGARITA T JEDEDIAH SMITH
R & R A.C.
780
18
05/22/07
MARGARITA AT JEDEDIAH SMrM
R & R A.C.
598
12
05/23/07
YORBA & YNEZ
R & R A.C.
405
8.5
05/23/07
30395 CABRILLO
A.C. OVERLAY
210
2.5
TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 7,036
TOTAL TONS 118
RXMA AW WRCWLTDWPHALTAPRW .n
05/01/07
05/07/07
05/08/07
05/14/07
05/15/07
05/16/07
05/21/07
05/29/07
05/29/07
05/30/07
HWY 79 SO.
CITYWIDE
AREA #4
CITYWIDE
YNEZ ROAD
AREA #4
CITYWIDE
CITYWIDE
AREA #1
MALL
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE
MONTH OF MAY, 2007
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
CLEANED & CHECKED
TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 97
3
CATCH BASINS
15
CATCH BASINS
16
CATCH BASINS
12
CATCH BASINS
5
CATCH BASINS
6
CATCH BASINS
11
CATCH BASINS
14
CATCH BASINS
7
CATCH BASINS
8
CATCH BASINS
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
MONTH OF MAY, 2007
05/01/07
LEENA WAY AT AMEADOWS PARKWAY
REMOVED
29 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/01/07
40605 WINCHESTER
REMOVED
37 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/20/07
33233 ROMANCE PLACE
REMOVED
47 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/02/07
TEMECULA CREEK PALA PARK
REMOVED
333 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/03/07
WINCHESTER AT MARGARITA
REMOVED
122 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/04/07
MIRA LOMA AT SCE PLANT
REMOVED
228 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/07/07
HUMBER CHANNEL
REMOVED
121 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/07/07
LA SERENA AT SO. GENERAL KEARNY
REMOVED
14 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/07/07
VIA INDUSTRIA AT RIO NEDO
REMOVED
64 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/07/07
NO. GENERAL KEARNY AT SANTA GERTRUDIS
REMOVED
75 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/07/07
RORIPAUGH DRIVE AT NICOLAS
REMOVED
65 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/07/07
MARGARITA ROAD AT HARVESTON
REMOVED
49 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/10/07
26111B YNEZ ROAD
REMOVED
60 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/10/07
YNEZ ROAD AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
REMOVED
8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/11/07
MARGARITA N/O WINCO
REMOVED
30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/11/07
LA SERENA AT TEMEKU HILLS
REMOVED
36 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/14/07
TEMECULA CREEK BRIDGE
REMOVED
20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/14/07
I-15 AT 79 SO, OFF RAMP
REMOVED
58 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/14/07
JEFFERSON AT BUECKING
REMOVED
6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/14/07
TARGET CENTER
REMOVED
91 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/14/07
AVENIDA DE MISSIONES
REMOVED
174 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/14/07
LONG VALLEY AT HUMBER
REMOVED
14 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/16/07
YUKON AT COPPER BEACK
REMOVED
50 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/15/07
JADE PLACE AT SHARON
REMOVED
186 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/15/07
MARGARITA S/O SOLANA
REMOVED
6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/17/07
1 LUCKY CENTER
REMOVED
125 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/17/07
LA SERENA AT SO. GENERAL KEARNY
REMOVED
8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/18/07
MEADOWS AT RANCHO VISTA
REMOVED
46 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/18/07
YNEZ ATEQUITY DRIVE
REMOVED
15 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/21/07
1 LOMA LINDA AT PECHANGA PARKWAY
REMOVED
296 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/21/07
REDHAWK BRIDGE
REMOVED
73 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/21/07
WOLF STORE CHANNEL
REMOVED
330 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/21/07
TARGET CENTER
REMOVED
22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/21/07
TEMECULA CREEK BRIDGE
REMOVED
45 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/21/07
NB 1-15 AT 79 SO.
REMOVED
I10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/21/07
LOMA LINDA AT TESIBEN
REMOVED
12 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/21/07
VIA CONSUELO AT PECHANGA PARKWAY
REMOVED
50 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/22/07
26631 YNEZ
REMOVED
54 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/22/07
41850 MORENO
REMOVED
100 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/22/07
MARGARITA AT SOLANA WAY
REMOVED
31 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/23/07
VIA GILBERTO ALONG TRAIL
REMOVED
37 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/23/07
SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK
REMOVED
154 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/24/07
CORTEPOSITA
REMOVED
20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/25/07
SB I-15 AT HWY 79 SO.
REMOVED
580 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
BUSINESS PARK DRIVE AND AREA
REMOVED
128 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
MERCEDES MUSICIANS WORKSHOP
REMOVEDI
302 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
BEDFORD COURT
REMOVED
22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
AVENIDA DE MISSIONES
REMOVED
206 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
REDHAWK OVERLAND
REMOVED
32 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
RANCHO CALIFORNIA BRIDGE
I REMOVEDI
42 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
27520 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
REMOVED 220 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
MARGARITA S/O SOLANA
REMOVED
60 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
S/O 26443 YNEZ
REMOVED
18 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
NICOLAS ROAD
REMOVED
84 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
NO. GENERAL KEARNY AT BRIDGES
REMOVED
47 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
BEDFORD AT WINCHESTER
REMOVED
109 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/29/07
28071 DIAZ
REMOVED
30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/30/07
2ND STREET AT MERCEDES
REMOVED
10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/30/07
BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
REMOVED
50 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/30/07
CULVERT AT YNEZ
REMOVED
38 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/30/07
RAINBOW CANYON AT TEMECULA CREEK
REMOVED
92 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/30/07
I-15 NB & SB
REMOVED
452 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/30/07
VIA GILBERTO / LOMA LINDA
REMOVED
30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/30/07
VIA EDUARDO
REMOVED
176 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/30/07
MARGARITA S/O SOLANA
REMOVED
20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/31/07
42140 LYNDIE LANE
REMOVED
836 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
05/31/07
RAINBOW CANYON AT PECHANGA CREEK
REMOVED
1,908 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 8.942
TOTAL LOCATIONS 67
R: VAAWAIM WKQ.IPLTDNIRAFFl fTM.W
00000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000
OOA00�00lA�OffM�00fAY09M�00fAt�MrOOf�lOf1M�
MMMMMNNNNN�a�a—�—a—
�
co p
a
ODD
N
N
�
d .-r
w
A
w
o
FF
W
c
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING
05/01/07 1 PAUBA ROAD
05/09/07 1 YNEZ ROAD AT PAUBA ROAD
MONTH OF MAY, 2007
TRIMMED 1 7 R.O.W. TREES
TRIMMED 1 4 R.O.W. TREES
TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 11
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG
MONTH OF MAY, 2007
J)',
A"'`k 0
�/I1
'�,x}���'�s,�.� "�' '�sv"���/�,.�+'w�a �%r
i r r ..,,�,�sr����iy`.
" ��il►'3��E�ED
05/02/07
30512 BAYHH.L
DEAD TREE
05/02/07
05/02/07
31160 CALLE ARAGON
DEAD TREE
05/02/07
05/03/07
39720 PRIMROSE CIRCLE
PAINT ON CAR
05/03/07
05/07/07
WINCHESTER ROAD
DEBRIS PICK-UP
05/07/07
05/07/07
MORAGA
DEBRIS PICK-UP
05/07/07
05/07/07
45378 EAGLE CREST LANE
GLASSES IN STORM DRAIN
05/07/07
05/07/07
31956 AVENIDA MALLARI
SNS MISSING
05/07/07
05/07/07
CORTE GANSO
SNS MISSPELLED
05/07/07
05/08/07
41129 VINTAGE CIRCLE
ROOT PRUNING
05/08/07
05/09/07
29905 AVENIDA VERDE
POTHOLES
05/09/07
05/09/07
27147 GREENSTONE
DEAD TREE
05/09/07
05/10/07
LIEFER ROAD
ROAD GRADING
05/10/07
05/10/07
30040 LOS NOGALES ROAD
TREE TRIMMING
05/10/07
05/11/07
PECHANGA AT CUPENO
S.N.S. DOWN
05/11/07
05/11/07
FOX AT PARAGUAY
STRIPING QUESTION
05/11/07
05/11/07
32836 PARAGUAY DRIVE
STORM DRAIN PLUGGED
05/11/07
05/11/07
30490 SHENANDOAH COURT
DEAD TREE
05/11/07
05/14/07
30495 SHENANDOAH COURT
ROOT PRUNING
05/14/07
05/14/07
MORAGA
DEBRIS
05/14/07
05/14/07
MARGARITA
DEBRIS
05/14/07
05/14/07
41875 CORTE LARA
A.C. REPAIRS
05/14/07
05/15/07
DATE STREET
FLOWER TRIMMING
05/15/07
05/15/07
27483 DANDELION COURT
ROOT PRUNING
05/15/07
05/16/07
42104 HUMBER DRIVE
TREE CONCERN
05/16/07
05/15/07
LIEFER ROAD
GRADING ROAD
05/16/07
DXV,"p
-,4 y., P��kjq,-* *-s2e
I WA Xtl% If �R I
4-40,
D
05119/07
LOS RANCHITOS HOA
MISSING SNS
05/18/07
05118107
RIVERTON AT YARDLEY
PICK UP DEBRIS
05/18/07
05/18/07
1 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA
PICK UP DEBRIS
05/18/07
05/22/07
CABRILLO AT E. VALLEJO
MISSING SNS
05/22/07
05/22/07
OLD TOWN FRONT AT SANTIAGO
PICK UP DEBRIS
05/22/07
05(22107
30395 CABRILLO
POTHOLES
05/23107
05/22/07
31045 PFSCADO DRIVE
A.C. REPAIR
05/22/07
05/23/07
39340 LIEFER ROAD
GRADING ROAD
05/24/07
05123/07
PECHANGA PARKWAY
VERIZON / DEBRIS
05/24/07
05n3/07
30964 PESCADO DRIVE
A.C. REPAIR
05/23/07
05/25/07
44865 POTESTAS
TRAFFIC CONCERN
05/25/07
05/31/07
MARIAN STREET
DEBRIS REMOVAL
05/31/07
TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 37
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
SIGNS
MONTH OF MAY, 2007
05/01/07
PAUBA E/O YNEZ
INSTALLED
R3-7, W73-A
05/03/07
CITYWIDE
REPAIRED
16 SIGNS
05/04/07
NICOLAS ROAD
REPLACED
R7-4, R245
05/04/07
MARGARITA AT MEADOWS
REPLACED
R74
05/04/07
YNEZ AT OVERLAND
REPLACED
2 R74
05/04/07
HUMBER
REPLACED
W8-2, R2-25
05/07/07
ROICK DRIVE AT VIA INDUSTRIA
REPLACED
WI-6
05/07/07
RIO NEDO AT VIA INDUSTRIA
REPLACED
WI-6
05/07/07
46472 KOHINOOR WAY
INSTALLED
R2-1- 25
05/08/07
YNEZ / MARGARITA
INSTALLED
4 LIBRARY SIGNS
05/09/07
CITYWIDE
REPAIRED
15 SIGNS
05/10/07
CITYWIDE
REPAIRED
10 SIGNS
05/15/07
CITYWIDE
REPAIRED
15 SIGNS
05/16/07
COPPER BEACH N/O YUKON
REPLACED
R2-25
05/17/07
AREA #3
REPLACED
5 SIGNS - REPAIRED 9
05/23/07
RANCHO VISTA E/O MEADOWS
INSTALLED
22 R7-9A
05/25/07
SANTIAGO ESTATES
REPLACED
4 SNS
05/29/07
BUTTERFIELD STAGE AT WOLF STORE
REPLACED
R4-7
05/31/07
4T" STREET AT MERCEDES
REPLACED
R-1
05/31/07
MARGARITA AT SPARKMAN
REPLACED
R4-7
TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 22
TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 29
TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 65
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
STENCILS / STRIPING
MONTH OF MAY, 2007
.„�
4
.. s• ;. r
-ter.
051 1/07
PAUBA E/O YNEZ
REPAINTED
20 LEGENDS
05/02/07
PAUBA F/O YNEZ
REPAINTED
46 LEGENDS
05/03/07
AREAS #3 & #4
REPAINTED
17 LEGENDS
05/07/07
AREA #4
REPAINTED
53 LEGENDS
05/08/07
TEMEKU HILLS
REPAINTED
72 LEGENDS
05/09/07
AREA #5
REPAINTED
55 LEGENDS
05/10/07
AREA #5
REPAINTED
20 LEGENDS
05/14/07
AREA #1
REPAINTED
46 LEGENDS
05/15/07
AREA #1
REPAINTED
29 LEGENDS
05/16/07
AREA #1
REPAINTED
3,626 LF RED CURB
05/17/07
AREAS #1 & #2
REPAINTED
5,025 LF RED CURB
05/22/07
PALOMA DEL SOL
REPAINTED
4,306 LF RED CURB
05/23/07
PALOMA DEL SOL
REPAINTED
4,030 LF RED CURB
05/23/07
PAUBA ROAD / RANCHO VISTA
REPAINTED
16 LEGENDS
THIS PAGE
LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
REQUESTS TO SPEAK
REQUEST TO SPEAK
CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
GDate -Z8 I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. OU'c CwK --^ 0--j-r
For / Against
�i lee- LArt Af L✓itCOw/ �A& kl --
Name- �EFW C��lv.► Rts. S`rA✓r S,.per.,rra ir..r 73vS.N-r/ sJPPo-2�rv�t �/
PLEASE PRINT
Phone:
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.
REQUEST TO SPEAK
CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
Date W - Zg - o% I wish to speak on Agenda Item No.
For Against
Subject: S t1/ >; LA)J G nm m5p D 6W EP �Wy— 4y
Name: g1Li, 11A%G' I)JiJ N
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.
M
-T1 mecULA vAu4g u�J 1F1UD Sct4ocx-., A45-'Pwa-t'
REQUEST TO SPEAK 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
Date 6 2 �/ I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. N.
For Against
Subject: S e r a.� 4 � u I `v' , Ora {- t c
Name: �� Or LeSaVSk�
PLEASE PRINT
Address:
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.
cktraffic\wm jssn\speak. req/ajp
REQUEST TO SPEAK l�
CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
Date 2 I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. i✓� ��
For Against
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.
rAlraffic\com nn\speak.mq/ajp