Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout051816 PC Agenda In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting[28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]. AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA MAY 18, 2016—6:00 PM Next in Order: Resolution: 16-15 CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute: Commissioner Turley-Trejo Roll Call: Guerriero, Telesio, Turley-Trejo, Watts and Youmans PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Commission on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item not on the Agenda, a salmon colored "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 for the record. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Commission Secretary prior to the Commission addressing that item. There is a three-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 roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the Planning Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of May 4, 2016 1 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the Commission Secretary at, or prior to, the public hearing. Any person dissatisfied with any decision of the Planning Commission may file an appeal of the Commission's decision. Said appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days after service of written notice of the decision, must be filed on the appropriate Community Development Department application and must be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. 2 (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 2, and MARCH 16, 2016 MEETINGSI: Planning Application No. PA15-0968, a Modification to amend the existing approved Conditional Use Permit for Refuge Brewery. The modification will allow for Refuge Brewery to expand the tasting room area to a total of 1,393 square feet and allow for the hours of operation to extend to 10:00 p.m. nightly. The project is located at 43040 Rancho Way, Suites 100 and 200, James Atkins RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Continue off-calendar. 3 Long Range Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Planning Commission review of the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, and recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution to approve the plan, which includes an updated inventory of trails and bikeways completed since the plan was adopted in 2002. The plan also evaluates the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the entire City. The plan includes five main sections; 1) History, Trends and Project Goals; 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources; and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs, Matt Peters RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 16- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE LONG RANGE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. LR13-0001, MULTI-USE TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN UPDATE, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) SECTION 15262, FEASIBILITY, AND PLANNING STUDIES 2 4 Planning Application No. PA15-1003, a Development Plan application for the construction of a new 54,884 square-foot, two-story, automobile service and parts center at 42074 DLR Drive, Scott Cooper RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 16- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA15-1003, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 54,884 SQUARE-FOOT, TWO-STORY, AUTOMOBILE SERVICE AND PARTS CENTER AT 42074 DLR DRIVE, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) (APN 921-730-046) 5 Planning Application No. PA15-1803, a Maior Modification application for the addition of 122 square-feet to an existing building; the construction of a 1,558 square-foot one-story office/retail building; and construction of a 1,420 square-foot one-story office/retail building at 29400 Rancho California Road, Scott Cooper RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 16- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA15-1803, A MAJOR MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR THE ADDITION OF 122 SQUARE-FEET TO AN EXISTING BUILDING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,558 SQUARE-FOOT ONE-STORY OFFICE/RETAIL BUILDING AND A 1,420 SQUARE-FOOT ONE-STORY OFFICE/RETAIL BUILDING AT 29400 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) (APN 921-320-062) 6 Planning Application No. PA16-0438, a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the existing Ubon Thai Restaurant to upgrade its existing Type 41 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license to a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. With the approval of this CUP, the existing restaurant will continue to operate within its existing hours of 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Thursday, 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. Friday and Saturday, and 12 p.m. to 9 p.m. on Sundays. The restaurant is located at 27300 Jefferson Avenue, James Atkins RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 16- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA16-0438 A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE EXISTING UBON THAI RESTAURANT TO UPGRADE ITS EXISTING TYPE 41 ON-SALE BEER AND WINE FOR BONA FIDE PUBLIC EATING PLACE (RESTAURANT) LICENSE TO A TYPE 47 ON-SALE FOR BONA FIDE PUBLIC EATING PLACE (RESTAURANT) LICENSE. WITH THE APPROVAL OF THIS CUP, THE EXISTING RESTAURANT WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE WITHIN ITS EXISTING HOURS OF 11 A.M. TO 9 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, 11 A.M. TO 10 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY, AND 12 P.M. TO 9 P.M. ON SUNDAYS AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE RESTAURANT IS LOCATED AT 27300 JEFFERSON AVENUE. (APN 910- 282-017) REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS REPORTS FROM COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE(S) DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Planning Commission, Wednesday, June 1, 2016, 6:00 PM City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center(41000 Main Street,Temecula)after 4:00 PM the Friday before the Planning Commission meeting. At that time,the agenda packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.org — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. Supplemental material received after the posting of the Agenda Any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the agenda, after the posting of the agenda,will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center(41000 Main Street,Temecula, 8:00 AM — 5:00 PM). In addition, such material may be accessed on the City's website —www.cityoftemecula.org — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. If you have questions regarding any item on the agenda for this meeting, please contact the Community Development Department at the Temecula Civic Center, (951)694-6400. 4 ITEM 1 ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA MAY 4, 2016—6:00 PM Next in Order: Resolution: 16-10 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Guerriero (6:00 p.m.) Flag Salute: Commissioner Turley-Trejo Roll Call: Present: Commissioners Telesio, Turley-Trejo, Watts and Chairman Guerriero Absent: Commissioner Youmans— Excu. Staff Present: Director Watson, City Attorney Lee, Senior Planner Fisk, PW Director Garcia, Associate Planner Atkins, and Commission Secretary Jacobo PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments received. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the Planning Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of April 20, 2016 APPROVED 4-0-1; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WATTS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TELESIO; AYES VOTES FROM COMMISSIONERS GUERRIERO, TELESIO, TURLEY-TREJO AND WATTS; COMMISSIONER YOUMANS ABSENT 2 Director's Hearing Summary Report RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and File Director's Hearing Summary Report RECEIVE AND FILE 1 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the Commission Secretary at, or prior to, the public hearing. Any person dissatisfied with any decision of the Planning Commission may file an appeal of the Commission's decision. Said appeal must be filed within 15 calendar days after service of written notice of the decision, must be filed on the appropriate Community Development Department application and must be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. 3 Planning Application PA15-1185 (Development Plan) and PA15-1187 (Conditional Use Permit) for Home2 Suites by Hilton to allow for the construction and operation of a four- story 66,552 square foot hotel in the Business Park (BP) zone. The hotel consists of 120 rooms with lounge areas, a dining room and breakfast bar, a coffee bar, an exercise room, quest laundry, and a business center. Outdoor amenities include a pool, a dining area, fire pit, and a barbecue area. The site is located between Rancho California Road and Single Oak Drive, approximately 450 feet east of Business Park Drive. (APN 921- 020-041), James Atkins APPROVED 4-0-1; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TURLEY- TREJO, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATTS; AYES VOTES FROM COMMISSIONERS GUERRIERO, TELESIO, TURLEY-TREJO AND WATTS; COMMISSIONER YOUMANS ABSENT RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 16-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA15-1185, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR HOME2 SUITES BY HILTON TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FOUR-STORY 66,552 SQUARE FOOT HOTEL IN THE BUSINESS PARK (BP) ZONE. THE HOTEL CONSISTS OF 120 ROOMS WITH LOUNGE AREAS, A DINING ROOM AND BREAKFAST BAR, A COFFEE BAR, AN EXERCISE ROOM, GUEST LAUNDRY, AND A BUSINESS CENTER. OUTDOOR AMENITIES INCLUDE A POOL, A DINING AREA, FIRE PIT, AND A BARBECUE AREA AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE SITE IS LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND SINGLE OAK DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 450 FEET EAST OF BUSINESS PARK DRIVE. (APN 921-020-041) 2 3.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 16-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA15-1187, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HOME2 SUITES BY HILTON TO ALLOW FOR THE OPERATION OF A FOUR-STORY 66,552 SQUARE FOOT HOTEL IN THE BUSINESS PARK (BP) ZONE. THE HOTEL CONSISTS OF 120 ROOMS WITH LOUNGE AREAS, A DINING ROOM AND BREAKFAST BAR, A COFFEE BAR, AN EXERCISE ROOM, GUEST LAUNDRY, AND A BUSINESS CENTER. OUTDOOR AMENITIES INCLUDE A POOL, A DINING AREA, FIRE PIT, AND A BARBECUE AREA AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE SITE IS LOCATED BETWEEN RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND SINGLE OAK DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 450 FEET EAST OF BUSINESS PARK DRIVE. (APN 921-020-041) 4 Planning Application No. PA13-0141, a Major Modification to a Development Plan (PA07-0200) and Conditional Use Permit (PA07-0202) for the Temecula Valley Hospital to relocate a previously approved helistop to two new locations including an interim location for use during preliminary Project phases and a permanent location on the roof of a future hospital tower to be constructed during a later phase and to construct an approximately 5,000 square foot single- story storage building for non-hazardous material storage (including disaster supplies, linens, and storage of excess construction materials to allow for repairs) to be located at the site of the previously approved helistop. The 35.3 acre hospital site is generally located on the north side of Temecula Parkway, approximately 700 feet west of Margarita Road at 31780 Temecula Parkway, Stuart Fisk APPROVED 4-0-1; MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TURLEY-TREJO, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATTS; AYES VOTES FROM COMMISSIONERS GUERRIERO, TELESIO, TURLEY-TREJO AND WATTS; COMMISSIONER YOUMANS ABSENT RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 16-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA13-0141, A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PA07-0200) AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PA07-0202) FOR THE TEMECULA VALLEY HOSPITAL TO RELOCATE A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HELISTOP TO TWO NEW LOCATIONS INCLUDING AN INTERIM LOCATION FOR USE DURING PRELIMINARY PROJECT PHASES AND A PERMANENT LOCATION ON THE ROOF OF A FUTURE HOSPITAL TOWER TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING A LATER PHASE AND TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 5,000 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE STORY STORAGE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED AT THE SITE OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HELISTOP. THE 35.3 ACRE HOSPITAL 3 SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TEMECULA PARKWAY, APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD (A.P.N. 959-080-026)" 4.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 16-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVE A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING THE RECIRCULATED SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE TEMECULA VALLEY HOSPITAL HELISTOP RELOCATION AND STORAGE BUILDING MAJOR MODIFICATION PROJECT, ADOPTING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FOR THE TEMECULA VALLEY HOSPITAL HELISTOP RELOCATION AND STORAGE BUILDING MAJOR MODIFICATION PROJECT ON THE 35.3 ACRE HOSPITAL SITE GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TEMECULA PARKWAY, APPROXIMATELY 700 FEET WEST OF MARGARITA ROAD (A.P.N. 959-080-026)" Darlene Wetton, Temecula resident, addressed the Planning Commission Melissa Schmidt, Applicant Representative addressed the Planning Commission Tony Bellen, Temecula resident, addressed the Planning Commission Penny Brown, Winchester resident, addressed the Planning Commission REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS REPORTS FROM COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE(S) DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REPORT ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:03 PM to the special meeting of May 11, 2016, at 6:00 PM City Council Chambers, located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Ron Guerriero Luke Watson Chairperson Director of Community Development 4 ITEM 2 STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: May 18, 2016 TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: James Atkins, Planner III APPLICANT NAME: Curt Kucera PROJECT Planning Application No. PA15-0968, a Modification to amend the SUMMARY: existing approved Conditional Use Permit for Refuge Brewery. The modification will allow for Refuge Brewery to expand the tasting room area to a total of 1,393 square feet and allow for the hours of operation to extend to 10:00 p.m. nightly. The project is located 43040 Rancho Way, Suites 100 and 200. CEQA: Categorically Exempt Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities RECOMMENDATION: Continue off-calendar BACKGROUND SUMMARY On November 2, 2015, applicant Mr. Curt Kucera, submitted Planning Application No. PA15-0968, a Minor Modification for the existing Refuge Brewery. The purpose for the modification is to allow for an expansion to the existing retail and tasting room from 520 square feet to 1,393 square feet and extending retail and tasting hours to 10:00 p.m. nightly. On March 16, 2016, the Planning Commission heard the application at a regularly scheduled meeting and made the determination to continue the application to the May 18, 2016 meeting. During this meeting, the Commission directed staff to conduct research related to alcohol beverage manufacturing uses including how best to define these types of uses, identifying possible security concerns, determining whether to recommend limiting the quantity of alcohol that may be served in tasting room, identifying the availability of public, studying the parking requirements, considering the land use compatibility, and determining appropriate zones where the manufacturing of alcohol with a tasting room may be established. On April 12, 2016, City Council heard staff's initial findings and initiated a moratorium on all brewery applications to enable staff time to conduct research and prepare an ordinance. On May 11, 2016, the Planning Commission reviewed Long Range Planning Project Number LR16-0097, proposed Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing ordinance, and forwarded an approval recommendation to the City Council for their review of the ordinance on May 24, 2016. As a result of the pending action by the City Council, the applicant has requested that the modification application be continued off-calendar until the City Council has acted on the proposed ordinance. CAProgram Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\54814EF7-E448-4583-A741-980E7ACDC708\12803.doc ITEM 3 STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: May 18, 2016 TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: Matt Peters, Associate Planner APPLICANT NAME: City of Temecula PROJECT Long Range Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Planning SUMMARY: Commission review of the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, and recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution to approve the plan, which includes an updated inventory of trails and bikeways completed since the plan was adopted in 2002. The plan also evaluates the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the entire City. The plan includes five main sections; 1) History, Trends and Project Goals; 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources; and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs. CEQA: Statutorily Exempt Section 15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan BACKGROUND SUMMARY The City Council adopted the Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan in January 2002. Since then, the document has been used to condition new development for trail and bike lane infrastructure, resulting in the creation of 37 miles of trails and 59 miles of bike lanes. While much has been accomplished, the network remains fragmented and an update to the Master Plan is needed to create a cohesive system. In an effort to close the gaps and the City of Temecula filed Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Long Range Planning Application for Multi- Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan update during January 2013. On May 14, 2013, the City of Temecula entered into an agreement with KTU+A Consulting to update the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. On October 26, 2013, the City of Temecula hosted a public workshop at the Mercantile Theater at 42051 Main Street. The public workshop included the presentation of maps and background data, as well as a launch of the www.hikebiketemecula.org, which included an online survey 400 people filled out and provided more than 550 comments. On May 10, 2014, the City hosted a Hike Bike Event which included opportunities to review draft maps, and walk or ride portions of trails or bike routes in and around Old Town. On April 12, 2016, Staff met with the Trails Subcommittee (Mike Naggar and Matt Rahn) to present a summary of the plan and a schedule to take to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, Community Services Commission, and Planning Commission for input prior to consideration by the City Council in May, which is nationally recognized as Bike Month. ANALYSIS The Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan update was prepared to allow for an updated inventory of trails and bikeways completed since the plan was adopted in 2002. The plan also evaluates the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the entire City. The plan includes five main sections: 1) History, Trends and Project Goals; 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources; and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs. Adoption of the Plan will ultimately result in a comprehensive network of bike lanes and trails connecting residential areas to commercial areas, schools, parks, and employment centers. It will provide an alternative form of transportation for residents from a diversity of backgrounds, including youth, and seniors. An improved trail and bicycle network will also increase bicycle usage for commuting, recreation and exercise, allowing for more healthy and active lifestyles that in turn yield numerous public health benefits. Finally, the plan meets all requirements of an Active Transportation Plan (ATP), and in addition to hiking and biking, the plan addresses equestrians, transit/bus stops, bikeshare and neighborhood electric vehicles. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the U-T San Diego on May 6, 2016 and mailed to the property owners within the required 600-foot radius. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Adoption of this Plan is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the State Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which actions the City Council has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. Consistent with this exemption, the plan is limited to the preparation of concept plans and recognizes various environmental factors in the area such as aesthetic, historic and biological resources. The concept plans identified in Section 5, Gap Closure Alternatives, were developed to avoid or minimize potential impacts on the environment. In addition, the alternatives illustrate one option for closing a bike lane or trail gap. Other options may be considered using the Toolbox, Design Guidelines in Appendix A. The plan is limited to concept plans only, and does not include design engineered plans. Therefore, the plan qualifies for this exemption. Should funding be pursued and obtained, site specific studies would be required to develop detailed designs beyond the conceptual level, which would at that time require complete environmental review pursuant to CEQA. FINDINGS 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the City. The Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan update is intended to evaluate the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the City. The plan includes five main sections; 1) History, Trends and Project Goals; 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources; and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs. Furthermore, the plan provides supporting information to assist in implementing General Plan Figure C-4, Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways. As such, the Plan is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of state law and other city ordinances. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide. This document is intended to provide a standardized set of treatments for world-class bicycling streets in the U.S. The result is a unique set of standards aimed at creating safe bicycling conditions to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the community. ATTACHMENTS PC Resolution Draft CC Resolution Draft Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Notice of Public Hearing PC RESOLUTION PC RESOLUTION NO. 16- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE LONG RANGE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. LR13-0001, MULTI-USE TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN UPDATE, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) SECTION 15262, FEASIBILITY, AND PLANNING STUDIES Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On January 3, 2013, the City of Temecula filed Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Long Range Planning Application for Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan update in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On May 14, 2013, the City of Temecula entered into an agreement with KTU+A Consulting to update the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. C. On October 26, 2013, the City of Temecula hosted a Public Workshop at the Mercantile Theater at 42051 Main Street. The Public Workshop included the presentation of maps and background data, as well as a launch of the www.hikebiketemecula.org, which included an online survey 400 people filled out and provided more than 550 comments. D. On May 10, 2014, the City hosted a Hike Bike Event, which included opportunities to review draft maps, and walk or ride portions of trails or bike routes in and around Old Town. E. On April 12, 2016, Staff met with the Trails Subcommittee to present a summary of the plan, and a schedule to take to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, Community Services Commission, and Planning Commission for input prior to consideration by the City Council in May, which is nationally recognized as Bike Month. F. The Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan was prepared to allow for an updated inventory of trails and bikeways completed since the plan was adopted in 2002. The plan also evaluates the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the entire City. The plan includes five main sections; 1) History, Trends and Project Goals; 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources; and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs. G. The City-initiated Long Range Planning Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. H. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on May 18, 2016, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. I. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve Long Range Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. J. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Development Code Section 17.05.010 A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; The Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan update is intended to evaluate the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the City. The plan includes five main sections, 1) History, Trends and Project Goals, 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources, and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs. Furthermore, the plan provides supporting information to assist in implementing General Plan Figure C-4, Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways. As such, the Plan is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of state law and other city ordinances. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide. This document is intended to provide a standardized set of treatments for world-class bicycling streets in the U.S. The result is a unique set of standards aimed at creating safe bicycling conditions to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the community. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Long Range Planning Application: A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be statutorily exempt from further environmental review based on Section 15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies. 1. Adoption of this Plan is statutorily exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which actions the City Council has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. Consistent with this exemption, the plan is limited to the preparation of concept plans and recognizes various environmental factors in the area such as aesthetic, historic and biological resources. The concept plans identified in Section 5, Gap Closure Alternatives were developed to avoid or minimize potential impacts on the environment. In addition, the alternatives illustrate one option for closing a bike lane or trail gap. Other options may be considered using the Toolbox, Design Guidelines in Appendix A. The plan is limited to concept plans only, and does not include design engineered plans. Therefore, the plan qualifies for this exemption. Section 4. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby recommends that the City Council approve Long Range Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 18th day of May 2016. Ron Guerriero, Chairman ATTEST: Luke Watson Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 16- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of May 2016, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Luke Watson Secretary C:\Program Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\12068D62-C3DA-4F37-AF45-D99EE1802B1C\12718.docx DRAFT CC RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE LONG RANGE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. LR13-0001, MULTI-USE TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN UPDATE, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) SECTION 15262, FEASIBILITY, AND PLANNING STUDIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On January 3, 2013, the City of Temecula filed Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Long Range Planning Application for Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan update in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On May 14, 2013, the City of Temecula entered into an agreement with KTU+A Consulting to update the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. C. On October 26, 2013, the City of Temecula hosted a Public Workshop at the Mercantile Theater at 42051 Main Street. The Public Workshop included the presentation of maps and background data, as well as a launch of the www.hikebiketemecula.org, which included an online survey 400 people filled out and provided more than 550 comments. D. On May 10, 2014, the City hosted a Hike Bike Event, which included opportunities to review draft maps, and walk or ride portions of trails or bike routes in and around Old Town. E. On April 12, 2016, Staff met with the Trails Subcommittee to present a summary of the plan, and a schedule to take to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, Community Services Commission, and Planning Commission for input prior to consideration by the City Council in May, which is nationally recognized as Bike Month. F. The Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan was prepared to allow for an updated inventory of trails and bikeways completed since the plan was adopted in 2002. The plan also evaluates the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the entire City. The plan includes five main sections; 1) History, Trends and Project Goals; 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources; and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs. G. The City-initiated Long Range Planning Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. H. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on May 18, 2016, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. I. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve Long Range Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Multi- Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. J. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The City Council, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; The Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan update is intended to evaluate the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the City. The plan includes five main sections, 1) History, Trends and Project Goals, 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources, and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs. Furthermore, the plan provides supporting information to assist in implementing General Plan Figure C-4, Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways. As such, the Plan is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of state law and other city ordinances. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide. This document is intended to provide a standardized set of treatments for world-class bicycling streets in the U.S. The result is a unique set of standards aimed at creating safe bicycling conditions to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the community. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The City Council hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Long Range Planning Application: A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be statutorily exempt from further environmental review based on Section 15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies. Adoption of this Plan is statutorily exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which actions the City Council has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. Consistent with this exemption, the plan is limited to the preparation of concept plans and recognizes various environmental factors in the area such as aesthetic, historic and biological resources. The concept plans identified in Section 5, Gap Closure Alternatives were developed to avoid or minimize potential impacts on the environment. In addition, the alternatives illustrate one option for closing a bike lane or trail gap. Other options may be considered using the Toolbox, Design Guidelines in Appendix A. The plan is limited to concept plans only, and does not include design engineered plans. Therefore, the plan qualifies for this exemption. Section 4. Recommendation. The City Council approve Long Range Planning Application No. LR13-0001, Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 24th day of May, 2016. Mike Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 16- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 24th day of May, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk MULTI-USE TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN Colty Of Temecul Mul i cs ils and Bike Plan The Heart of Southern California HIKE ■ • ■ - March 2016 Acknowledgements MM%l This City of Temecula Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update was prepared under the guidance of Matt Peters,AICP, Associate Planner with assistance from: Aaron Adams, City Manager Greg Butler,Assistant City Manager Luke Watson, Director of Community Development Tom Garcia, Director of Public Works Jerry Gonzalez, Traffic Engineer Lynn Lehner, Senior Management Analyst and members of the Council Trails/Open Space Ad Hoc Subcommittee: Mike Naggar, Mayor Pro Tem Matt Rahn, Council Member Chuck Washington, former Mayor and Council Member This plan was prepared by KTU+A Planning + Landscape Architecture: John Holloway, PLA,ASLA, LEED Green Associate, LCI, Project Manager amn Joe Punsalan, GISP, PTP, LCI, Senior Associate Planner Ptan"inq Landscape Architecture Diana Smith, GISP, GIS Analyst Alison Moss, Mobility Planner Kristin Bleile, GIS Analyst Jacob Leon, Senior Planner F E H R PEERS Transportation engineering support was provided by Fehr& Peers. Michael Baker, Outreach support was provided by Michael Baker International. I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L isCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULAARG Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Plan Background and Goals 1 Plan Scope 1 Public Participation 1 Implementation Highlights 2 LAB Bicycle Friendly Community 2 Conclusion 2 Introduction 3 Brief History of Temecula 3 Active Transportation Trends 3 Plan Scope 3 Study Area 3 Methodology 3 Plan Background and Goals 4 Facility Types 6 Relevant Planning Documents 10 Adjacent Jurisdiction Plans 13 Applicable Legislation and Regulations 16 Analysis 19 Existing Trail and Bikeways Systems 19 Connectivity Issues and Opportunities 19 Trail and Bikeways Users and Abilities 21 Trip Origin and Destination Analysis 23 Cyclist and Pedestrian Collisions Analysis 27 Problematic Locations for Cyclists, Horses and Pedestrians 34 Level of Traffic Stress Analysis 35 Health Benefits 44 • Economic Benefits 47 Neighborhood Electric Vehicles 48 BikeShare 50 Emerging Technologies 52 3 Recommended Trails and Bikeways 55 Implementation 55 Suggested Bicycle Routes 55 Temecula as Regional Trail Hub 60 Trailheads and Access Points 63 Pump Tracks/Bike Skills Parks 63 Best Practices Maintenance Program 66 RTA Bus Stops 69 Promenade Temecula 70 Old Town Bike Friendly Business District 71 go 4 Programs and Funding Sources 73 is Gap Closure Alternatives (GCAs) 95 iii Table of Contents Figures Figure 1 —Study Area 5 Figure 2—Riverside County Southwest Area Plan -Trails and Bikeways System 14 Figure 3—Existing Trails and Bikeways 20 Figure 4—The Four Types of Cyclists 22 Figure 5—Population Density 24 Figure 6—Employment Density 25 Figure 7-Activity Centers 26 Figure 8—Bike Collisions 28 Figure 9—Pedestrian Collisions 32 Figure 10—Level of Traffic Stress 37 Figures 11a-c—Low Stress Routes 39 Figure 12—Safe Routes to School LTS Analysis 43 Figure 13—Existing and Proposed Trails(Natural Surface and Paved Class 1) 56 Figure 14—Existing and Proposed Bike Lanes (On-street Bikeways-Class II and III) 57 Figure 15—Composite Trails and Bikeways 58 Figure 16—Suggested Bicycle Routes 59 Figure 17—Proposed Murrieta Creek Trail System 59 Figure 18—Gap Closure Alternatives 86 Tables Table 1 —QLMP Transportation Mobility and Connection Indicators 12 Table 2—Bike Collision Summary 29 Table 3—Pedestrian Collision Summary 33 Table 4-Level of Traffic Stress 36 Table 5—Potential Funding Sources 77 Appendices A. Toolbox: Design Guidelines App1 B. Sidewalk Analysis App75 C. Community Input Summary App80 D. Rules of the Road App84 E. BFC Checklist APp87 F. BTA Reviewer Checklist App88 v a 9 -P; City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIMBIMEMECUMORG EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Plan Background and Goals Plan Scope This Trails and Bikeways Master Plan(TBMP)is a While the 2002 TBMP comprehensively evalu- comprehensive 2002 plan update,and is intended ated Temecula's trail and bikeway potential and to guide the City's future trail and bicycle facility recommended a number of new facilities and im- implementation.The process included evaluating provements to existing ones,this update focused previously and newly proposed trails and on- instead on re-evaluating and supplementing the street bicycle facilities using conventional field original recommendations with additional facilities techniques,geographic information systems(GIS) through gap analysis, incorporating modifications analysis,and public inputvia community meetings, inspired by the latest standards and guidelines, walking/biking events and online surveys. and developing gap closure plans conforming The City of Temecula originally surveyed its with the most up-to-date design guidelines. residents in 1991 to determine their desires for public Participation City services and to set priorities. Residents expressed strong interest in a well-defined trail Public participation has always been a hallmark system that served the following functions: of Temecula's planning process. It was through • Access key City and regional destinations public input, not long after the City's incorpora- tion, that the demand for non-motorized trails • Serve as recreation and transportation routes first arose and spawned the original trails and • Connect neighborhoods to parks, schools, bikeways master plan in 2002. employment and commercial areas • Form loops that follow creeks and utility ease- The public input for this master plan update ments wherever feasible included an online survey that generated more than 400 responses and 550 written comments, This strong citizen interest in what is now known two well-attended community workshops, a as "active transportation" persists, as expressed "Hike/Bike"walking and biking event in Old Town by survey and workshop respondents for the Temecula that kicked off at City Hall, and several 2002 TBMP and for this implementation update. meetings with the City Council Trails Subcommit- "The trail experience is becoming increasingly tee, attended by City staff and project managers, desirable, whether the trail users ride bicycles along with the consultant team. Among the most or horses, run, walk orbirdwatch. Recent sur- important findings was that while nearly half of veys have shown that homeowners along trails survey respondents answered that they never experience less crime and have actually expe- commute by bicycle, almost 60 percent said they rienced disproportionate increases in property would use safe and easily accessible paths to values compared to their neighbors whose work or school to commute. properties are not adjacent to the trail system." The 2002 TBMP's survey results established that Temecula residents felt trails and bikeways were important to quality of life and that the City should develop a community-wide, interconnected trail Community Workshop-October 2013 and bikeway system connecting schools, parks and other areas of interest to support both active transportation and recreation. r 1 Chapter 1:Introduction Furthermore,four out of five survey respondents 2002 TBMP facility recommendations were said they would ride more if there were safe and freshly analyzed for this plan, paying particular at- easily accessible paths between where they live tention to facility gaps highlighted by more recent and commercial destinations. This strong com- public input, along with other newly suggested munity response directly influenced plan recom- routes. Among the updated techniques were a mendations, especially desired destinations, bicycle boulevard appraisal employing level of E., facility types and specific routes. (See Appendix traffic stress(LTS)analysis,a GIS technique that C for a summary of community input.) helps to define the likely comfort or discomfort a t Branding was also developed, including a distinc- ypical cyclist may feel on a particular roadway. tive "HikeBikeTemecula" logo and color scheme While some 2002 recommendations specifics used on all project materials, and will continue were modified, many original proposals remained to be used throughout plan implementation. For high priorities and were developed along with new example, the logo is recommended as a unify- GCAs in Chapter 5. ing feature on wayfinding signage, mapping and the HikeBikeTemecula web presence. The City LAB Bicycle Friendly Community launched a HikeBikeTemecula website specifi- The League of American Bicyclists'(LAB) named cally to highlight and promote its trail and bikeway Temecula a Bronze level Bicycle Friendly Com- efforts,and to acquaint citizens with future plans. munity (BFC) in 2013, and the City would like to For example, gap closure alternatives (GCAs) improve on its initial designation. To help cities descriptive cut-sheets are available for review achieve higher levels(Silver, Gold, Platinum and and download from the website via links to an overall system map. Diamond), the LAB provides a checklist defin- ing what a city needs to accomplish to achieve higher designation (See Appendix E). The City Implementation Highlights and consultants strove through this TBMP update Much has changed in the mobility planning world to address checklist items by recommending en- since the original TBMP was prepared in 2002, gineering, education, policy and encouragement especially a greater focus on adapting streets to improvements, a "bundled" approach that has support active transportation, including wider ac- proved successful in other cities. _ ceptance of innovative on-street bicycle facilities. These elements reflect an expanding emphasis Conclusion on the needs of accommodating all roadway us- While this trails and bikeways plan addressed ers, including vulnerable ones, and the types of active transportation through recommending bike facilities required to provide true mobility choices lanes, sidewalk improvements, paved paths and for all. Another important change is greater ac- natural surface trails throughout the City,the City ceptance of off-street facilities as not just rec- worked with the mobility planning consultant to reational amenities, but integral transportation address the community's desire to link these non- system components. This updated plan reflects motorized facilities into a truly comprehensive this new mobility environment with up-to-date network that connects the kinds of destinations facility design guidelines and recommendations. residents want to access by bike or on foot,espe- "Hike/Bike"event kick-off at City Hall-May 2015 cially schools, parks, open space, and shopping and employment centers (See Figure 15). Upon implementation, the result of these efforts will be an interconnected network designed to encourage more residents to get around via ac- tive transportation rather than by driving, which 07 € survey respondents strongly supported. Plan recommendations are described in Chapter 3 and specific GCAs in Chapter 5. 4 DanCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKMMEM A.4RG INTRODUCTION Brief History of Temecula Temecula was originally a Luiseno village near driving levels and increased preference for walk- where Temecula and Murrieta Creeks join to form able, bikeable and transit-connected communities the Santa Margarita River, immediately west of among both Millennials and Empty Nesters is Interstate 15. The Luisenos moved upstream on well documented. Millennials, in particular, are Temecula Creek in the early 1800's until they interested in living where getting around does not were evicted in 1875.The site had been develop- immediately imply driving a motor vehicle. They ing into an American settlement along the South- are driving less and walking, biking and taking ern Emigrant Trail since the 1850's and became transit at significantly higher levels than previous known as Old Temecula. generations. It is clear that this next generation of workers — and consumers — are less interested Following Mexican independence and transfer in driving than their parents. to American control, Temecula Valley's former Spanish ranchos became large-scale beef cattle Reasons for this trend likely include a blend of a operations that gave way to suburban develop- sluggish economy(i.e. unemployed people drive ment such as Rancho California in the 1960's. less), increased use of technology (i.e. virtual interaction has replaced some face-to-face inter- Incorporated in 1989, Temecula's population action), and a changing culture (i.e. preference grew rapidly as families were drawn from San for cities over suburbs and walkable places over Diego and Orange Counties by its relatively drivable places). affordable housing. The latest Department of Finance statistic estimated Temecula's popula- Empty Nesters,particularly as the number of Baby tion at 108,920. The city has become a tourist Boomers reaching retirement age accelerates, destination highlighted by Old Town Temecula, are also showing a strong preference for com- the Promenade Temecula mall, the Pechanga munities that support walking and provide public Resort and Casino, the nearby Temecula Valley transportation. Recent American Association of Wine Country and the annual Temecula Valley Retired Persons (AARP) surveys found that 70 Balloon and Wine Festival. percent of respondents age 65 and older agreed that living near where they want to go, such as Active Transportation Trends grocery stores, doctors'offices, libraries and so- Man American cities were built on a foundation cial or religious organizations, was extremely or y very important. Additionally, 51 percent agreed of auto-centric infrastructure, programs and poli- that it was extremely or very important to be able cies, but many of those same cities are embracing to walk easily in their community. Temecula is a active transportation as option to driving. Some young city,with 92 percent of its population under of them are making minor improvements to sup- 65 and 68 percent under 45, but decision makers port cycling and walking,while others are working should be aware of these demographic trends hard to undo decades of planning that privileged and their community composition when making vehicle throughput and speed above all else. transportation decisions. Environmental, health and economic benefits reinforce the task of retrofitting American cities Mercedes Street at City Hall to make them bicycle and pedestrian friendly. The movement to make cycling and walking vi- able transportation options is also supported by several recent pieces of California legislation. + `. According to a recent US Public Interest Re- search Group report,the average American drove six percent less in 2011 than 2004, and among young adults (16 to 34 year olds), car use plum- meted 23 percent from 2001 to 2009. Diminished I 3 Chapter 1:Introduction Project Scope Project Background and Goals This Trails and Bikeways Master Plan (TBMP) The City of Temecula originally surveyed its is primarily tool a for implementing the results residents in 1991 to determine their desires for of preceding active transportation planning. Its City services and to set priorities. Residents primary purpose is to guide future bikeways and expressed strong interest in a well-defined trail multi-use trails development within the City of system that served the following functions: Temecula. It therefore includes revisions to some . Access key City and regional destinations existing facilities and new facility construction,all . Serve as recreation and transportation routes supported by a design guideline "toolbox" (See Chapter 5). Connect neighborhoods to parks, schools, employment and commercial areas Study Area • Form loops that follow creeks and utility ease- ments wherever feasible The TBMP study area was specifically within the City of Temecula corporate boundary. The This strong citizen interest in what is now known adjacent community of Murrieta, as well as as"active transportation" persists, as expressed unincorporated Riverside County areas, were by survey and workshop respondents for the analyzed where opportunities for connections 2002 TBMP and for this implementation update. with Temecula's proposed trail system presented The following primary project goals were part of themselves (See Figure 1). 2002 TBMP development, based on the desired Methodology functions noted previously: The TBMP methodology included evaluating "An interconnected system of pathways and existing and proposed on-street bicycle facilities bike routes is needed to support a variety of and trails based on on-site assessment and geo- recreational uses and non-motorized transpor- graphic information systems (GIS) analysis, as tation requirements for Temecula residents." well as significant community input via an online "This system should be community-wide and survey and public meetings, applicable docu- should connect a variety of community and re- ments review and aerial photography analysis. gional destinations(such as schools,parks and The literature review addressed applicable ex- other areas of interest)and should utilize open cerpts from documents prepared by the City of space corridors, flood control channels, utility Temecula, the City of Murrieta, the County of easements,publicly owned lands and roadways Riverside, as well as applicable specific plans most appropriate for non-motorized uses." and a variety of specialized trails and bicycling "Trails and bike routes should be provided publications.This included land use data from the to improve the quality of life for residents of County of Riverside and roads and trails data from Temecula, offer transportation alternatives, the City of Temecula incorporated into a project accommodate recreational enjoyment and geographic information system (GIS) database. increase the value and connectiveness of GIS is a digital analytical tool that allows users the community." to identify spatial relationships between map features by overlaying data layers representing Multi-use path along Diaz Road a feature's characteristics and selectively calling up associated information. GIS's core value is its ability to reveal complex spatial relationships E that would not otherwise have been noticeable. - The online survey was developed specifically for this TBMP with the assistance of City staff and . the City Council Trails Subcommittee, and madey _ available on the City's website. Participants at -_ two public meetings also provided a wealth of local knowledge. 4 BullCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKE BIKETEMECULA.ORG Figure 1: Study Area err,,rr ti •� �, r CAMYf31G' MENIFEE LAKE r LAKE a ELSINORE ` Wow 0 r � �F • r'-. f Vail . I Y Uk® fir, Ii`' f y RIVERSIDE If l COUNTY SA DIEGO P y - e UN G jo ,4 JIP ,r_ Chapter 1:Introduction Facility Types The California Department of Transportation(Caltrans)standard for designated bikeway facility types is used throughout this document. Standardized designation is required for consideration for Caltrans- administered bikeway funding. However,this master plan also proposes routes not intended to receive Caltrans bikeway designation because they would be unpaved trails likely to be used primarily for recreation and are referred to as non-motorized multi-use (natural surface) trails. The following are general descriptions of each facility type. See Appendix A for more details. Natural Surface (Non-motorized Multi-use) Trail Route separated from roadways for pedestrian, bicyclist, equestrian and other non-motorized users. Designation generally refers to unpaved natural surface routes that can vary in width and configura- tion,depending upon expected types and numbers of users, local topography and design intent.They are generally surfaced with locally occurring soil, but may be supplemented with decomposed granite (DG) or other appropriate and visually compatible materials as needed. Width is 10 feet maximum, Ak but may be determined on a case-by-case basis depending primarily on likely use levels, and can therefore be narrower where warranted. Or �4 Note that some agencies and municipalities refer to all off-street routes, both paved or unpaved, as trails. To avoid confusion, this plan refers to unpaved routes as "trails" and paved routes as "paths." 4 6 ogleCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG (Class 1) Multi-use Path Caltrans-specified, non-motorized route physically separated from vehicular roadways. Minimum 12 feet wide, of which eight feet are paved and two feet graded on each side. Specific horizontal and vertical clearances also apply.Allows all non-motorized uses, but wider cross section recommended if multiple uses are to be accommodated or if higher volumes are expected. Generally does not support equestrian use due to paving, but specific situations vary, especially where parallel natural surface trails are provided. y f4 s_ • ,t: I Y �I' _ 5 - i (Class 11) Bicycle Lane „„ Caltrans-specified,on-street bicycle lane designated by striping and signage with a minimum width of five feet from face of curb or roadway edge where parking occurs, and four feet where parking does not occur. Where parking occurs, buffering is recommended between the bicycle lane and parking lane. Buffering from vehicle traffic is also recommended where width is available. P It Many municipalities have successfully upgraded bicycle lanes by widening them to six feet measured from the gutter pan edge instead of the curb face. The additional width is generally repurposed from the vehicle travel lanes, proportionally narrowing them to provide for the wider bicycle lanes, while also providing a vehicle "traffic calming" effect. This additional width functions as buffer space that also allows bicyclists to ride away from the "door zone." 7 Chapter 1:Introduction (Class III) Bicycle Route Caltrans-specified, on-street bicycle route designated by signage only, but may include shared lane markings ("Sharrows") and/or"Bikes May Use Full Lane ("BMUFL") signs. Usually installed on road- ways with low traffic volumes and speed limits of no more than 35 mph. S r 111TTT^111111 (Class IV) Cycle Track Exclusive bicycle facilities separated from vehicular traffic and from walkways. Cycle tracks may be one- or two-way and design treatments demarcate them from adjacent sidewalks, travel or parking lanes.Their physical separation from roadways may employ parked vehicles, planting areas, bollards, raised lanes or a combination of these elements.These treatments reduce the risk of conflicts between cyclists, pedestrians and parked and moving vehicles. By providing physical separation from vehicle traffic, cycle tracks offer a higher degree of security and are attractive to a broader public spectrum, supported by a strong preference among this plan's survey respondents for "more protection than conventional bike lanes." 6 r h 1 U anCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBI KETEMECULA.ORG Bicycle Boulevard Enhanced Class III bicycle routes designed to give travel priority to cyclists on "low-stress" streets by discouraging cut-through vehicle traffic while allowing local access. Most employ traffic calming enhancements, traffic diverters, distinctive pavement markings and higher road surface standards than other streets. Signage supports full lane usage to encourage parity between cyclists and vehicle drivers. Bicycle-specific signals and detection provide for safer and more convenient crossing where 4 facilities cross high volume roadways. Because their traffic calming features improve safety for all, including pedestrians, bicycle boulevards are now often designated as"calmed,green or quiet"streets or "neighborhood byways or parkways." bL Urban Trail (Wide Walkway) Generally concrete walkways, wider than standard sidewalks, either along roadways, within parks or open space. Recommended width 10 feet minimum. Intended for both pedestrian and bicyclist use. a :.a rx- 9 Chapter 1:Introduction Relevant Planning Documents Multi-Use Trails and Bikeway Master Plan (2002) Non-motorized and Alternative Travel Modes The City of Temecula's 2002 Multi-Use Trails and Promotion of alternative travel modes such as Bikeway Master Plan was its first non-motorized bicycle, pedestrian, new technology, and eques- mobility planning effort.The 2002 TBMP's survey trian modes requires a transportation network results established that Temecula residents felt supporting these modes, providing convenient trails and bikeways were important to quality of access and designed to promote safety. life and that the City should develop a community- Goal 5 Safe and efficient alternatives to motorized wide, interconnected trail and bikeway system connecting schools, parks and other areas of travel throughout the City. interest to support both active transportation and Policy 5.1 Promote pedestrian and bicycle safety recreation. by adhering to uniform trail standards and practices Temecula General Plan, 2005 Update and communicating safety practices to the public. Several elements within the General Plan offer Policy 5.2 Minimize potential conflicts between support for the recommendations of this plan. off-street bicycle and equestrian trails and auto- Goals and policies most relevant to this plan are mobile cross traffic. excerpted below. Policy 5.3 Ensure the accessibility of pedestrian Circulation Issues, Goals and Policies facilities to the elderly and disabled. Roadway Circulation Policy 5.4 Provide a comprehensive network of Policy 1.2 Pursue trip reduction and transporta- multi-use trails and bikeways between residen- tion systems management measures to reduce tial areas and commercial/employment activity and limit congestion at intersections and along centers, public institutions, and recreation areas. ". Job streets within the City. Policy 5.5 Apply appropriate restrictions(includ- Transportation Demand Management ing prohibiting)to motorized vehicles and cycles using the City's multi-use trail system. Circulation system improvement options in Tem- ecula are limited by various constraints.As the City Policy 5.6 Encourage the provision of facilities continues to develop, it will become increasingly that support carpooling and public transportation important to maximize roadway network efficiency within the City. and minimize vehicular travel on City streets.The Traffic Safety following policies'intent is to allow for a proactive approach in achieving these goals. Safe operation of vehicular traffic on City streets is a concern of both City officials and community Goal 3 An efficient City circulation system residents. The following policies are directed through the use of transportation system manage- towards minimizing safety hazards and encour- ment and travel demand management strategies. aging safer operating conditions on City streets. Policy 3.3 Provide a comprehensive system of Goal 6 Enhanced traffic safety on City streets. Class I and/or Class II bicycle lanes to meet the needs of cyclists traveling to and from work and Policy 6.1 Enforce speed restrictions throughout other destinations within the City. the City. Policy 3.4 Encourage a mix of uses within proj- Policy 6.2 Require that future roads and improve- I ects designed to internalize trips, maximize use ments to current roads be designed to minimize of parking facilities,and promote a shift from auto traffic conflicts which result from curb parking use to pedestrian, bicycle, and other alternative maneuvers, uncontrolled access along heavily ++ *� modes of travel. traveled roadways, and development of private Policy 3.6 Discourage closing local streets to driveways onto primary residential collector streets. maintain the functionality of the arterial road net- Policy 6.3 Require that vehicular, pedestrian work, achieve public safety goals, and improve and bicycle traffic be separated to the maximum the response time for police,fire, and ambulance extent feasible, especially in areas with high traf- services, unless it significantly impacts rural fic volumes. preservation areas. 10 a8 �_. City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKE BIKETEMECULA.ORG Policy 6.4 Establish public education and en- Policy 2.2 Require mixed use projects proposed forcement programs to promote safe driving in within Mixed Use Overlay Areas to include a the community. residential component, to contain a mixture of sup- Policy 6.5 Work with schools and developers compatible uses, and to provide necessary sup- Y p porting public and community facilities. to improve circulation at pick-up/drop off areas and encourage that these facilities be provided Policy 2.3 Require preparation of a detailed plan on-site. and a traffic study for all proposed mixed use Policy 6.6 Consider installing traffic calming mea- projects within Mixed Use Overlay Areas. sures on residential streets when other forms of Policy 2.4 Link mixed use projects and village traffic control have not been successful at reduc- centers with trails and potential transit systems, ing traffic speeds. including RTA bus, shuttles and commuter/high Parking speed rail. Policy 7.5 Require parking for bicycles and other Policy 2.5 Ensure that the architecture, land- forms of alternative transportation. scape design, and site planning of mixed use projects is of the highest quality, emphasizing a Open Space/Conservation Element Goals pedestrian scale and safe and convenient access and Policies between uses. Trail System Policy 2.6 Ensure adequate public gathering Goal 8 Development of a trail system that serves areas or plazas are incorporated within mixed both recreational and transportation needs. use projects to allow for social interaction and community activities. Policy 8.1 Provide a citywide recreation system Air Quality Element Goals and Policies that connects to the County's regional trail system which provides for bicycling,equestrian,hiking and Air Pollutant Emissions from Automobiles jogging trails with appropriate support facilities. Goal 3 Enhance mobility to minimize air pollut- Policy 8.2 Negotiate land deeds as necessary to ant emissions. implement the citywide trail system. Policy 3.1 Use transportation demand reduction Policy 8.3 Require proposed development to pro- techniques to reduce motor vehicle trips. vide trail connections to the citywide trail system Policy 3.2 Use transportation systems manage- through the dedication of land and the provision ment techniques to maintain an orderly flow of of easements. traffic and improve mobility. Policy 8.4 Require development plans to identify Policy 3.3 Pursue development of a public transit locations for an internal trails/sidewalk system system consisting of local shuttle and bus routes, that links land uses and provides convenient as well as bicycle and pedestrian trails that are travel to transit facilities. linked to the regional transit network. Policy 8.5 Develop trails and sidewalks suitable Policy 3.4 Establish a convenient and efficient for multiple uses, including for the physically dis- system of bicycle routes and pedestrian walkways. abled and for personal transportation alternatives. Policy 3.5 Promote the use of alternative clean- Land Use Goals and Policies fueled vehicles, new transportation technologies, Encouraging Mixed Use and combustion engine alternatives for personal Goal 2 Successful, high-quality mixed use devel- and business use. opment projects containing a mix of residential, Policy 3.6 Develop and implement programs that commercial/office,and civic land uses,supported reduce local traffic congestion at peak hours and by alternative modes of transportation. during special events. Policy 2.1 Encourage development of mixed use projects to revitalize older commercial and industrial areas or to create village centers, pro- vided that adequate capacity is available on the roadway system to support such projects. 11 Chapter 1:Introduction Quality of Life Master Plan 2030 The Quality of Life Master Plan (QLMP) docu- • Meeting new state and federal regulations ments the City's aspirations, goals and strategic and policies requiring that communities re- priorities for the next 20 years and provides a duce greenhouse gas emissions and promote baseline to measure progress over time. Quality sustainability. New programs and resources of life investments will help Temecula retain and are providing incentives for communities to attract both residents and quality jobs to ensure better link transportation planning and land its economic prosperity,the basic foundation of a use;expand choices for transit,biking, pedes- high quality of life. Particularly applicable to this trian trails and non-single car occupancy;and plan are the QLMP's transportation goals: promote High Speed Rail where applicable. • Coordinate land use and transportation to • Working with local and regional transportation create a balanced, modern, integrated trans- partners to leverage existing resources for all portation system available transportation modes. • Increase transportation and mobility options • Building interconnected bicycle and multi- that provide a variety of choice purpose trails one system at a time, with • Expand and enhance the transportation emphasis placed on removal of travel barri- network by completing missing links with ap- ers and safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. propriately sized streets • Complete the missing links of bike trails and • Establish a connected pedestrian and bicycle pathways as identified in the Master Plan.Iden- transportation system tify remaining incomplete segments of Class I Bike Lanes/Trails and Class II Bike Lanes and Temecula's residents and leaders clearly identi- incorporate projects into the CIP budget. fied several key priorities to achieve the City's • Enhance the City's Safe Routes to School transportation mobility and connectivity goals.Ac- Program complishing these priorities also will help the City meet its sustainability goals and become one of The Quality of Life Master Plan also includes the most welcoming, livable and innovative cities indicators by which the City can assess its perfor- in California. To do so, the City's transportation- mance.The indicators or goals developed,as well related planning, design and investments will as the City's progress, are listed below. Pending need to prepare by: the implementation of this plan,Temecula should meet or exceed its goals for miles of Bike Lanes and Multipurpose Trails. Table 1 - QLMP Transportation Mobility and Connection Indicators Meet/ Needs Indicator Exceeds Progressing Improvement Goals Complete 80 miles of Bikes Lanes-show 55.8 miles or 70 increase from 2011 baseline percent complete" Complete 78 miles of Multipurpose Trails 26.8 miles or 34 - show increase from 2011 baseline percent complete* Maintain a"Very Walkable"rating for Old Town;70-89 is a rating of"Very Walkable" Rating: 77 based on Walk Score® Maintain a "Walkable" Rating for a City- wide average; 50-69 is a rating of"Walk- Rating: 44 able" based on Walk Score®; less than 50 is very car dependent *Figures updated March 2016 12 0®12 City of Temecula,California-Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKEUMECULACRG Adjacent Jurisdictions Plans County of Riverside Trail Planning Temecula is bounded by the City of Murrieta along Much of the area surrounding Temecula is un- its northern boundary and by unincorporated incorporated County of Riverside. Six regionally County land around the remainder of the City, significant proposed routes are shown on a draft except for the Pechanga Indian Reservation at 2009 Riverside County Southwest Area Plan — the City limits in the southeast portion of the City. Trails and Bikeway System map in Figure 2 on The City of Murrieta and the County have their the following page. These include two "Class I own trail planning efforts at different levels of de- Bike Paths," one paralleling Leon Road through tail and stages of implementation. The planning Murrieta to the northern City limit and another process included contacting the surrounding ju- along Butterfield Stage Road between Pauba risdictions to ensure the development of concepts Road and La Serena Road. and alignments would be compatible with those of the surrounding areas.A summary of the issues A "Combination Trail (Regional/Class I Bike regarding each community is presented below. Paths)" is shown paralleling Rancho California Road and terminating at Butterfield Stage Road. The City should continue to maintain periodic contact with surrounding jurisdictions to ensure Another parallels Anza Road and connects with that the linkages necessary to achieve aregion- Temecula's eastern City limit near Temecula ally connecting trail system are accomplished. Parkway and loops down to the southeast adja- cent to the city limit near the Redhawk commu- City of Murrieta General Plan nity. Just north of that trail lies a "Regional Trail" Circulation Element paralleling Verde and Monte Verde Roads to the The City of Murrieta forms the northern border southern City limit. with Temecula between Winchester Road west- Finally, the Southern Emigrant "Historic Trail" is ward to the base of the Santa Rosa Plateau west shown paralleling Temecula Parkway from the of Murrieta Creek. Roadways directly connecting southeast City limit to Interstate 15 where it then with Temecula with existing Class II bicycle lanes turns to follow Murrieta Creek northward into include Date Street, Margarita Road and Win- Murrieta. (See Chapter 3-Temecula as Regional chester Road east of Interstate 15 and Jefferson Trail Hub.) Avenue west of the freeway. Metropolitan Water District Proposed bikeway facilities will be additional Class 11 lanes on Murrieta Hot Springs Road and The Metropolitan Water District(MWD)owns and on Jackson Avenue east of Interstate 15, as well operates aqueducts on their own property or via as on Washington Avenue and Adams Avenue easements that cross the entire City of Temecula. west of the freeway.A"multi-purpose trail"is also These aqueducts run in a generally north/south proposed along Washington Avenue that then orientation, cutting across what is essentially branches off eastward just north of Temecula. the City's geographical center.These aqueducts (See City of Murrieta General Plan Circulation have surface access in the form of dirt roads that Element Figure 5-1.) are almost fully contiguous with the underlying aqueducts except in the areas of steepest ter- rain. The aqueduct alignments predate the City Multi-use path along Diaz Road of Temecula's incorporation by several decades. Over the years, these aqueduct easements have been routinely assumed to be likely non- motorized trail routes by a number of planning agencies. However, interviews with MWD staff concerning this type of use indicated that MWD customarily applies regulations to its aqueducts that directly affects potential trails development planned along them. While non-trail specific alterations such as landscaping (outside a pipe- K. : line corridor) are welcomed, rules governing _ equestrian use and grading for trails raise special concerns. 13 Chapter 1:Introduction Figure 2:Riverside County SouthwestArea Plan- Trails and Bikeway System CITY OF - --- CITY OF Ai4 INT,f,� PERRIS •I s�° CITY OF i r HEMET it fx E + 1Y ~4 J e1�AK � :+1ti1 F'- �J CIN OF MENIFEE •^w' /1 „ CITY OF - LAKE E INORE cox E J c CITY OF WILDOMAR CITY OF MURRIETA 891 RaA76. aea CITY OF �• Kaa� TEMECULA San[lege C-nly /�/cemmunMTra. o neary Ncamb.unen Trwlaaggnal,cbzs,era raml -"-zaFfaarY�afs'a,14Mi 1.nez M,xa�aAw�alra.WaCxy nrwm.ar�ra.aaaWn..waa i � /1/clazlrlke Pem s WlzrboaNz M41 M.Wiwrnllrlr My�L�f[���rP^+�Ib,+rxaN olra btattw.Kd1re.rHnb aaazrwa ram /�waxam w«ra.arawa-+e••�y•vn.r.Am...rwanla.wawwo�wl�r� a.i wan s.�a Tran aae swlwcrranrm.,a.,.ra.asw.a�a,r w a++nas,.a..�aaa,men.e.�.. N wcyn c��eamaa Tnl ar.r wfmwew�i��ua ca`mpw4.gc.�d a.awngwf�,.aa oe���""'.•�e .. of w.mrx n.l xaa:[maer,rl..r.yan,irrmaa raa.�asara.yla+a+,r aswr.srn.ua _ J�/xoncnumy wesa am a��+.mr s.ma mh M�A.ta,n*�aaivaat�Ywiai�r„rww.rr....+.i,�.:e'a na,w a�rn91pt4°n.a� ar.r.nra ca�nrni.reams a wnew m1 mw.w wwm wv.a..►a«..uae,.,fror a,ewn war r.ed.wa.nrr«a.w Figure 8 acxame } January 13,2010 Bey SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN DRAFT TRAILS AND BIKEWAY �1 Miles ��wp.. �y q 3 6 ^^ •• SYSTEM 14 Flux City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKE BIKETEMECULAARG US Army Corps of Engineers MWD has strict regulations governing equestrian Flooding has been an ongoing problem in the use along its aqueduct easements. Horses are Murrieta Creek area,causing significant damage simply not allowed within its easements or on to the Old Town area of Temecula as recently as property it owns, except in areas where they 1993 and is expected to get worse with increased would be 25 feet below the adjacent pipeline's watershed development. Flooding problems in invert level and laterally separated by at least the Murrieta Creek watershed are related to the 100 feet. Essentially, this means that equestrian existing drainage system's inadequate capacity, use along the aqueducts is not possible because particularly in the Old Town Temecula area. In the combined vertical and horizontal offset is response, the Corps of Engineers completed not known to occur anywhere in Temecula. This a Murrieta Creek Flood Control, Environmental regulation is intended to prevent pathogens Restoration and Recreation Final Feasibility Re- from entering the water system following a pipe port, dated September 2000. breakage and subsequent repair. According to MWD staff, shutting off an aqueduct pipeline The study's planning goals included reducing and emptying it for repairs can create sufficient flood inundation damage, reducing the costs of vacuum to pull potentially pathogen-laden water flood insurance, restoring the riverine ecosystem from surrounding soil and into the pipe. and providing recreational opportunities.The plan calls for 12 foot wide combination service roads/ As well as not allowing horses near pipelines, trails along both sides of the creek, with the west MWD also allows no change in grade of more side facility designated for equestrian use and the than one foot within its jurisdiction. This is in- east side for pedestrian and bicycle use. A foot- tended to protect pipeline cover because MWD bridge is planned across Santa Gertrudis Creek cannot be certain how much cover exists over its and a trail undercrossing of Winchester Road. pipelines. MWD's concern is that reducing cover- The plan also indicates a crossing of Murrieta age may endanger pipes by making them more Creek just north of the confluence of the Santa likely to be exposed, while increasing coverage Gertrudis and Murrieta Creeks at Diaz Road, could place excessive strain on aging pipes. where a service road would cross a levee struc- Therefore,any change in grade of more than one ture forming the outlet of a large detention basin. foot, either cut or fill, may not be allowed. This can be problematic in areas of steep terrain where The Final Feasibility Report was updated in 2014 to reflect several changes. The most relevant to switchbacks are likely to be a desirable method of routing a trail,or even the only workable method. this Multi-Use Trails and Bikeway Master Plan Update is the following: Riverside County Flood Control and "Construction of maintenance roads on the Water Conservation District east and west channel banks; the west side The Riverside County Flood Control and Water maintenance road would also be used as a Conservation District (RCFCWCD) jurisdiction recreation trail forpedestrians, bicyclists, and within Temecula includes all creek beds and ad- equestrians;the east bank would be used as jacent maintenance roads. These roadways are a pedestrian and bicycle trail." generally hard-packed natural surfaced and wide enough to allow large equipment access to the Southem California Edison Electric Company creek beds for seasonal riparian plant clearing The Southern California Edison Electric Company and any other needed maintenance. Most seg- (SCE) owns and operates several power lines ments are currently fenced and gated.However,a on their own property in fee simple ownership substantial segment along Santa Gertrudis Creek or via easements. In most cases, these ease- has been paved and striped as a multi-purpose ments cross multiple privately owned parcels trail. RCFCWCD representatives indicated that and do not have associated roadways or other additional trail installations are feasible if three access. For example, power line segments pass criteria can be met.They are(1)that the agency over rear property line fences between the back not pay for any improvements,(2)that the agency yards of residential developments over significant be indemnified and (3) that any improvements distances. not reduce existing channel cross-sections. The agency welcomes any trail proposal that fulfills these three basic criteria. 1 Chapter 1:Introduction Pechanga Indian Reservation Applicable Legislation and The Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians Regulations owns and operates the Pechanga Resort and Several pieces of State of California legislation Casino on the southeast edge of Temecula along support increased bicycling and walking. Some Temecula Creek. This includes a casino and RV address greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction and park. Reservation property encompasses asignifi- employ bicycling and walking as means to cant portion of the creek bed in this area. Luiseno achieve reduction targets. Other legislation high- tribal representatives indicated to City of Temecula lights the intrinsic worth of bicycling and walking staff that trails access has been discussed, but no and treats the safe and convenient accommoda- formal planning has been undertaken. tion of cyclists and walkers as a matter of equity. San Diego Association of Governments The most relevant legislation concerning bicycle and pedestrian policy, planning,infrastructure and The San Diego Association of Governments programs are described in the following sections. (SANDAG)is the metropolitan planning organiza- tion(MPO)governing San Diego County.Though State Legislation and Policies within Riverside County, Temecula lies less than AB-32 Global Warming Solutions Act two miles north of the San Diego County line. AB-32 calls for the reduction of greenhouse gas According to SANDAG, the sole non-motorized emissions and codifies a 2020 emissions reduc- connection between Riverside and San Diego tion goal. This act also directs the California Air Counties is Class II bike lanes on Old Highway Resources Board to develop specific early actions 395 that begin at the county line south of the inter- to reduce greenhouse gases, while also prepar- .,�. section of Old Highway 395 and Rainbow Valley/ ing a scoping plan to identify how best to achieve Rainbow Canyon Road, then continue south ap- proximately 3.7 to an Interstate 15 interchange. the 2020 limit. From this point, cyclists can continue west over SB-375 Redesigning Communities to Interstate 15 and then onto Class II bike lanes Reduce Greenhouse Gases ��• on East Mission Road approximately 3.3 miles to the community of Fallbrook,or continue south via This bill seeks to reduce vehicle miles traveled Class II bike lanes on Old Highway 395 approxi- through land use and planning incentives. Key mately 18 miles to the City of Escondido. North of provisions require the larger regional transporta- the county line, Rainbow Canyon Road continues tion planning agencies to develop more sophisti- approximately 3.2 miles to Pechanga Parkway cated transportation planning models,and to use near its intersection with Temecula Parkway, but them for the purpose of creating"preferred growth this segment's pavement width is roughly 10 feet scenarios" in their regional plans that reduce narrower than the segment within San Diego greenhouse gas emissions.The bill also provides County, with significant curves and grades. incentives for local governments to incorporate these preferred growth scenarios into their gen- eral land use plans transportation elements. AB-1358 Complete Streets Act AB-1358 requires a city or county legislative body, F upon revision of their general plan circulation ele- ment, to identify how the jurisdiction will provide for the routine accommodation of all roadway users including drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, Milk individuals with disabilities, seniors and public - transit users.The bill also directs the Governor's Office of Planning Research (OPR) to amend guidelines for general plan circulation element development so that the building and operation of local transportation facilities safely and con- veniently accommodate everyone, regardless of their travel mode. h' -�� 16 11913 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKE BIKETEMECULA.ORG AB-1581 Bicycle and Motorcycle Traffic Signal Actuation This bill defines a traffic control device as a This is extremely important because adequately traffic-actuated signal that displays one or more accommodating cyclists, particularly in built-out of its indications in response to the presence of environments, often requires reallocation of traffic detected by mechanical, visual, electrical right-of-way and the potential for increased mo- or other means. When placing or replacing a for vehicular congestion. The reframing of Level traffic-actuated signal, it must be installed and of Service as a matter of driver inconvenience, maintained to detect bicycle or motorcycle traffic. rather than an environmental impact,allows plan- Caltrans has adopted standards for implementing ners to assess the true impacts of transportation the legislation. projects and will help support bicycling projects that improve mobility for all roadway users. AB-1371 Passing Distance/Three Feet for Safety Act AB-1193 Bikeways This statute,widely referred to as the"Three Foot This act amends various code sections,all relating Passing Law," requires drivers to provide at least to bikeways in general,specifically by recognizing three feet of clearance when passing cyclists. If a fourth class of bicycle facility, cycle tracks. traffic or roadway conditions prevent drivers from giving cyclists three feet of clearance, they must It is important to note that existing law requires "slow to a speed that is reasonable and prudent" Caltrans, in cooperation with county and city and wait until they reach a point where passing governments,to establish minimum safety design can occur without endangering the cyclist. Vio- criteria for the planning and construction of bike- lations are punishable by a $35 base fine, but ways, and requires the department to establish drivers who collide with cyclists and injure them uniform specifications and symbols regarding in violation of the law are subject to a $220 fine. bicycle travel and traffic related matters. Existing law also requires all cities, county, regional and SB-743 CEQA Reform other local agencies responsible for the develop- Just as important as the previous pieces of ment or operation of bikeways or roadways to legislation that support increases in bicycling utilize all of those minimum safety design criteria and walking infrastructure and accommodation and uniform specifications and symbols. is one that promises to remove a longstanding This bill revises these provisions to require roadblock to them. That roadblock is vehicular Caltrans to establish minimum safety design cri- Level of Service (LOS) and the legislation with teria for each type of bikeway, including the new the potential to remove it is SB-743. Class IV cycle tracks. However, the potentially For decades, vehicular congestion has been most significant impact this bill will have on future interpreted as an environmental impact and has bikeway development is that it authorizes local often stymied on-street bicycle projects in par- agencies to utilize different minimum safety cri- ticular. Projections of degraded Level of Service terra if adopted by resolution at a public meeting. have, at a minimum, driven up project costs and, at a maximum, precluded projects altogether.S13- 743 could completely remove LOS as a measure of vehicle traffic congestion that must be used to analyze environmental impacts under the Califor- nia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 17 Chapter 1:Introduction Caltrans' Deputy Directive 64-R1 Deputy Directive 64-R1 is a policy statement af- Of those three categories, the first two will now fecting Caltrans mobility planning and projects be allowed on any infrastructure where conven- requiring the agency to: tional bicycles are allowed, but the bill also pro- vides local authorities the specific ability to limit "...provide for the needs of travelers of all or prohibit those uses. Class III electric bikes or ages and abilities in all planning, program- any bikes with non-electric motor would not be ming, design, construction, operations, and allowed on off-street paths, but could still be used maintenance activities and products on the on on-street bike lanes.The changes would apply State highway system. The Department views to the state's vehicle code and would not affect all transportation improvements as opportuni- open space trails or public lands access rules. ties to improve safety, access, and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes CEQA for Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes as in- According to the Association of Environmental tegral elements of the transportation system." Professionals 2014 CEQA Guidelines 229,a proj- The directive goes on to mention the environ- ect involving only feasibility or planning studies mental, health and economic benefits of more for possible future actions that an agency has not Complete Streets.This directive has been instru- approved, adopted or funded, does not require mental in achieving more equitable consideration an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require of non-motorized roadway users in highway consideration of environmental factors. This has project planning and design. been supported by numerous cities and counties, as well as State agencies. AB-902 Diversion Programs Planning projects such as this trails and bikeways This bill was signed in September 2015 and spon- master plan are exempt from CEQA analysis sored by the California Bicycle Coalition. It allows since they are comprised of planning and con- local jurisdictions to create diversion programs ceptual recommendations. However,as individual that allow ticketed cyclists to have their tickets recommendations move forward through design removed from their records if they successfully and implementation, the City will need to deter- complete a bicycle training course. This type of mine if there are impacts associated with them for program has been available for children for some which environmental review may be necessary. time, but this legislation expands availability to adults. It also offers all cyclists, ticketed or not, Federal Legislation more opportunities to learn the rules of the road Safe Streets Act (S-2004/HR-2468) and safe bicycle handling skills. HR-2468 encourages safer streets through policy AB-1096 Redefine Electric Bikes adoption at the state and regional levels, mir- The bill was passed by the California Senate in roring an approach already being used in many September 2015 and awaiting the Governor's local jurisdictions, regional agencies and states signature. It would replace California's existing governments. The bill calls upon all states and vehicle law that does not allow motorized bicycles metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to on non-motorized paths. The updated law splits adopt Safe Streets policies for federally funded e-bikes from other motorized bikes and divide construction and roadway improvement projects them into three categories: within two years. Federal legislation will ensure consistency and flexibility in road-building pro- - Class I: pedal-assisted electric bike with a top cesses and standards at all levels of governance. assisted speed of 20mph • Class II: pedal-assisted or propelled unassist- ed with a top motor-driven speed of 20mph • Class III: pedal-assisted electric bike with a top assisted speed of 28mph 18 0818 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update If nBIKETEMECULA OVR ANALYSIS Existing Trail and Bikeways Systems Connectivity Issues and Opportunities In many growing southern California cities, non- As stated in the previous section, the existing motorized bikeway and trail network development bikeway and trail network is fragmented due to has not kept up with demand. Though bikeways specific development circumstances, existing and trails are often conditioned as part of devel- conditions and roadway layout.Temecula's street opment,this can result in disconnected facilities. network relies on arterials and collectors to con- In many cities, planning is underway to address nect the City,which places pedestrians and bicy- system gaps through re-striping streets to real- clists on high-speed, high-volume streets. Open locate space to bicycle facilities,updating bicycle space,topography, easements and flood control and trails master planning, and securing grants channels play a part in the way the City's streets for facility construction. are laid out, which tends to create connectivity Many of Temecula's existing bicycle facilities are issues for non-motorized users. Class II bicycle lanes on arterial and collector While bikeways can sometimes be easily accom- streets. However,there are some significant gaps modated by striping bicycle lanes, adding side- between existing facility segments on the same walks for pedestrians requires additional costs, roadways, such as on Ynez Road, Meadows such as potential structural,storm water and other Parkway and Margarita Road. Shared lanes, or utility modifications.Some neighborhoods prefer Class III bicycle routes,exist only within Old Town, a rural environment and discourage sidewalk where they have been enhanced with Shared installation. This, in turn, causes connectivity Lane Markings ("sharrows"), signage and traffic issues for pedestrians. While new development calmed streets. requires the installation of sidewalks and, in some cases, paved off-street paths, existing adjacent Multi-use paths exist along some flood control development may not have sidewalks,creating a channels and creeks, but do not connect with disconnected pedestrian environment.Aseparate each other. They often, however, connect with sidewalk study (Appendix B)was commissioned on-street facilities such as bicycle lanes. Natu- as part of this plan that identifies these gaps, ral surface trails exist along some flood control ranks them and provides cost estimates. This channels,adjacent to some streets or conditioned Sidewalk Study will allow the City to focus on with development.They too connect to on-street installing sidewalks where they are needed the bicycle facilities and only along Diaz Road does most and allocate funds to complete the network. a natural surface trail connect to a paved multi- use path. Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail This plan's gap closure alternatives (GCAs) aim •— to close those gaps and to provide a comprehen- sive on-street and off-street bicycle facility and multi-use trail network. .i 9 Chapter 2:Analysis Figure 3- Existing Trails and Bikeways �, sa 40Norte o Call"rnfe w Rei Rv Ma $t � � t4 f, fl - rho W"'Rd h 9 T _ t Natoydt IL t� ta/fits�oc f'i' MollowwY Shared Use Paths(Class 1) Parks Existing Paved Hard Surface Trail(7 6 miles) Schools Bike Lanes(Class 11) Commercial Center �• Existing(55.8 miles) Open Space n' Bike Routes(Class III) Vineyards/Agricultural a Existing(2 9 miles) L i City Boundary Eydsting Oft-Street Facilities sr Existing Urban Trail(10.2 miles) m� Existing Natural Surface Trails(19 2 miles) 20 r �y City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Trail and Bikeways Users and Abilities This plan's survey responses correspond with and Fearless"representing just one percent,and numerous recent polls that show people would "Enthused and Confident" representing about choose to bicycle for transportation more often seven percent, are likely to ride whether encour- if they simply felt safer while riding. Attention is aged to or not.At the other end of the spectrum, therefore being shifted away from trying to create the 33 percent of the population that identifies "cyclists"or providing facilities for relatively expe- as "No Way No How" may be unlikely to change rienced cyclists, and toward making it easier for their minds, but could be tempted to try biking any person to choose cycling for their everyday with enough encouragement. trips. Bicycle planning recommendations now often try to help reposition cycling as a safe and Even though all segments of the population common mode of transportation and increase the may be encouraged to ride, it is through the en- number of people riding. couragement of the largest "Interested but Con- cerned"segment that the greatest gains in mode Based by on this shift and on their experience share will be made. In fact, the bicycle planning creating one of America's most comprehensive field is being redefined toward this end. bicycle networks, the City of Portland, Oregon developed a typical cyclist typology as shown in At the October 2013 public workshop at the Old Figure 4 describing Portland's cyclist types and Town Temecula Community Theater, Figure 4 was their perceived abilities. This categorization has used to gauge how participants viewed themselves strongly influenced bikeway planning because re- in relation to Portland's cyclist types.They skewed search continues to show that it correctly reveals toward the more confident range of the spectrum a strong latent interest in cycling among the 60 than the national average, but this is likely because percent of the population who identify themselves bicycle planning workshops tend to attract partici- as"Interested but Concerned."While these indi- pants who are probably more experienced riders, viduals do not identify themselves as "cyclists," ride more regularly and are therefore more comfort- the point is that they do not necessarily need to able with existing bicycle facilities than those who do so to benefit from facilities and programs to en- typically fall into the other categories. courage cycling.The top two categories, "Strong NONE= "Hike/Bike"event along Murietta Creek-May 2015 ;4 4. 21 Chapter 2:Analysis Figure 4 - Cyclist Types THE FOUR TYPES OF CYCLISTS* Which best describes you . Wine country Put your dots and comments here! Strong and Fearless I Riding is a strong part of my identity and I am generally undeterred by traffic speeds and iff adway conditions. Enthused and Confident E am comfortable sharing the road with motor vehicles,but given a choice,I prefer 15 to use bike lanes and boulevards. Interested but Concerned I like riding a bike,but I don't ride much.i would 5 like to feel safer when I do ride,with less traffic and slower speeds. No Way No How 33% 1 don't bike at all due to inability,fear for my safety,or simply a complete and utter lack of interest. *Commonly used planning descriptions of cyclists (Developed by Roger Geller,Bicycle Coordinator-Portland Office of Transportation) 22 Y City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Trip Origin and Destination Analysis Trip Origins Trip Destinations In the context of a trails and bikeway master plan Non-motorized trip destinations are generally analysis, "trip origins"are defined as those areas referred to as a community's "activity" centers. or specific locations from which the majority of The term "activity" specifically refers to a usage non-motorized multi-use facility usage is likely to generated as a result of the particular trip desti- AIM come. Determining where these trip origins are nation. State statutes governing bicycle master now or will be in the future is important in guiding planning mandate the analysis of a specific set the design and implementation of a cost-effective of community activity centers, including schools, trails and bikeways system that will maintain its parks, open spaces, athletic facilities, libraries, usefulness over time. This includes evaluating community centers, retail complexes and employ- predicted changes in land use, population density ment centers.Activity center types and locations and housing data, but defining trip origins for a within a community reflect the amount and types particular city is usually not so straightforward. of non-motorized usage that can be expected to Extracting useful information from some of the generate(See Figures 6 and 7).This is especially sources described in the following sections true in terms of their proximity to residential areas. sometimes requires evaluating data from other Also, since this is not only a bicycle master plan, sources and synthesizing the results.Other infor- others specific destinations were evaluated in ad- mation sources were reviewed based on widely dition to those required by State mandates. Other employed mobility master planning principles. For potential local trail destinations include: instance, residential areas are, in general, trip • Schools origin points. In all cases,the primary information . Parks sought was how and where changes are pro- jected to occur in Temecula in the near future.The • Old Town Temecula population density map (Figure 5) shows where • City Hall Now the higher origin densities are,which are located • Libraries primarily in the central and eastern portions of • Park and Ride Lots the City where significant single and multi-family . Temecula Valley Museum residential housing has most recently developed. . Regional Sports Parks • Promenade Temecula • Temecula Canyon Regional destinations(outside City limits)include: • Wine Country • Warm Springs Park and Reserve • Santa Rosa Plateau Preserve • Santa Margarita Ecological Preserve • Lake Elsinore • Vail Ranch • Vail Lake • Lake Skinner • East Side Reservoir • Pechanga Resort and Casino • Old Highway 395 • Diamond Valley Lake 23 Chapter 2:Analysis Figure 5- Population Density _.�- -• _ mow:C rim MAR t � a � 40 Q !. � a i %"%ATO a `i►�.rt `ti_ ..raw � ;� `"! �'� ��,"qo• � �1► far wv— rr�"�r k 1e��'�► .� i 1 Population Density(People per Acre) ®[ Schools a2 Parks 2-5 Open Space u ll , ; W. 5-10 Vineyards/Agricultural >10 City Boundary NIX 24 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Figure 6- Employment Density WIri CAci1 or Rd A# Hoft a r1RanclioCa��temin Ru Man, Del AeyaV � -- -- r, Maln Sa' zi �c J� A Its d Ra oche R4 VENOM S .0 r} �ti 4 VA-V Id — 1 Employment Density(People per Acre) Schools 0-2% Parks 2-5% Commercial Center w 5-10% Open Space M >10% Vineyards/Agricultural E-] City Boundary 25 Chapter 2:Analysis Figure 7-Activity Centers �.. wlrichpaEpr Rd•�_ � 4 .x OveRgrb, Hort° a,� ab 4, r; ..p. r R.nc Gaf�IcrNa Rq Myr, DOS Rey �serorq Wy f f ti e a" Sareyd�Rd a''�a �b Rancho yrs,,Rn y Vklt%%VeY Rd ,,K I*,wo Pry Q' t,r.Hanavr, • Children's Museum Promenade Temecula Public Facilities Schools • Old Town Tower Plaza Parks Commercial Center Pechanga Casino Town Center Open Space Vineyards/Agricultural i City Boundary 226 DunCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Cyclist and Pedestrian Collision Analysis Bicycle and pedestrian collision data were derived The timing of bicycle collisions also coincided with from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records weekday use, since the lowest numbers of colli- System (SWITRS) data sets of reported bicycle/ sions occurred on Saturdays and Sundays. This vehicle, pedestrian/vehicle and bicycle/pedes- is significant because many areas have higher trian collisions in Temecula from January 2010 weekend use due primarily to recreational riding through December 2014. Note that collisions at the same time that weekend vehicle traffic on off-street paths are not included in the data volumes are generally lighter. and, unlike vehicle crashes, thE! lower bicycle crash volumes and lack of robust, long-term There was also a very high incidence of colli- exposure data (such as the number of cyclists sions during daylight rather than at night. This using each corridor) means that this dataset is may indicate I'hat they occurred as a result of not as statistically sound as vehicle data. Also, weekday commuter riding. Though the data do it is generally assumed that collisions involving not contain the information, it may be that many cyclists, whether they involve vehicles, other of these weekday collisions were children riding cyclists, or pedestrians, are under-reported, so to and from schools. bicycle collisions are likely to have occurred that These preceding collision types were the result of were not included in the data. Some estimates user behavior.Decreasing their occurrence would are as high as two unreported incidents for each most likely be addressed through increased cy- one reported. clistand drivereducation and enforcement,rather Tables 2 and 3 and Figures 8 and 9 summarize the than physical design solutions. data collected to help reveal trends and high colli- However, collisions can also be analyzed and sion frequency roadway segments and locations. mapped in terms of the numbers that occurred at These tables and mapping were analyzed to help certain locations.The data detail is limited to spe- identify other trends that may help to determine cific intersections and on-road segments,but there what and where physical treatments or other In- is enough information to draw some conclusions terventions can be recommended. concerning locations within the roadway network. Bicycle Collisions Bicycle collisions appear to be strongly tied to �.e.. There were 74 reported bicycle/vehicle-related intersections(See Figure 8).The data contained collisions in the 14 year period.Of these reported locations for 57 of the reported bicycle collisions, collisions, one was fatal. of which most occurred on just three multi-lane arterials-Margarita Road(13),Winchester Road The official cause of bicycle collisions is almost (11) and Rancho California Road (7). Together always attributed to either the cyclist or another they accounted for 31 of 54 reported collisions, roadway user's behavior. For example, by far the or 57 percent. These roadways were all noted highest number of incidents under the "Collision in survey comments as popular but problematic by Vehicle Code Violation"category was "Riding cycling routes due to high vehicle speeds and on the Wrong Side of the Road," 32 of the total volumes.The two most notable"hot spots"are the 74 collisions, or 43 percent. This correlates with intersection of Winchester Road and Margarita what is often the most common cause of bicycle Road, and on Winchester immediately west of collisions and the one that results in the most se- Interstate 15. vere injuries.This is because vehicle drivers have no reason to expect someone coming from the Most of the remainder of the data's roadways "wrong" direction, and often at higher combined were smaller and carry less vehicular traffic approach speeds. than the first three, and were the site of five or less collisions each. Old Town Front Street had The next highest collision type under this cat- two collisions, but vehicle speeds there are low egory was "Violating Automobile Right-of-Way," enough that it is likely the collisions did not result though it was only a third as common as wrong- in severe injury. way riding.This collision type is also problematic because it is likely that the cyclists involved suf- fered significant injuries.All 74 bicycle collisions resulted in at least"Complaint of Pain" and over half were "Other Visible Injury." 7 Chapter 2:Analysis Figure 8— Bicycle Collisions � f d all a now" ; .. Ar L, J WodV610r ea100'r�A %W RX-CO PAD' ti 4D . Bicycle Collisions Schools High Frequency parks Low Fequency Commercial Center Open Space I' Vineyards/Agdcultural =i City Boundary �+' 28 wpm isCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Table 2- Bicycle Collision Summary Collision by Severity Fatal 1 Injury-Complaint of Pain 34 Other Visible Injury 36 Severe Injury 3 . . E 07011 . . Under the Influence 3 2010 14 Improper Passing 1 2011 16 Improper Turning 7 2012 12 Other Hazardous Violation 5 2013 13 Other Improper Driving 2 2014 19 Riding on the Wrong Side of Road 32 MEN - Traffic Signals and Signs 3 Unknown 6 Violating Automobile Right of Way 11 Violating Pedestrian Right of Way 4 i 'a Day of the Week Sunday 9 Dark-Street Lights 7 Monday 10 Daylight 64 Tuesday 14 Dusk-Dawn 2 Wednesday 11 Not Stated 1 Thursday 11 .k Friday 13 Saturday 6 Margarita Rd 13 Winchester Rd 11 Rancho California Rd 7 Vail Ranch Pkwy 5 Jefferson Av 4 Meadows Pkwy 3 Nicolas Rd 3 Redhawk Pkwy 3 Old Town Front St 2 Overland Dr 2 Rustic Glen Dr 2 Ynez Rd 2 Data Source: CA Statewide Integrated Traffic Records Systems (SWITRS) 29 Chapter 2:Analysis Another roadway with two collisions was Rustic The hot spot at the intersection of Rancho Cali- Glen Drive. This is a relatively low volume road- fornia Road and Moraga Road(noted previously) way that terminates at Winchester Road to the may be addressed by GCA 6, which would pro- east and as Harveston School Road at Ysabel vide an off-street alternative pathway directly ac- Barnett Elementary School to the west. This cessing the school and Moraga Community Park corresponds with the approach to the school's along an adjacent flood control channel. entrance where most children are probably dropped off by a parent. It is possible the colli- Class II bike lanes proposed to fill the gap on sions involved students, and potentially school Margarita Road between Rancho Vista Road and Santiago Road, as well as GCAs 8b and 9, drop-off traffic.Two very similar hot spots occur at the intersection of Camino Piedra Rojo and Red- may address the hot spot at Rancho Vista Road hawk Parkway, near Vail Ranch Middle School, and Margarita Road adjacent to Temecula Valley and another at the intersection of Rancho Cali- High School. fornia Road and Moraga Road, near Temecula One hot spot at the intersection of Meadows Elementary School. Parkway at Empezar Street is not directly ad- Collision analysis drove the development of both dressed by any of the GCAs. Bike lanes exist on infrastructure and programmatic recommenda- Meadows Parkway, which slopes southbound tions,as well as specific GCA development. In the with two travel lanes in each direction with a left following chapter, infrastructure improvements turn lane at Empezar, near the apex of a broad are recommended at high collision intersections curve.The intersection is uncontrolled except for and roadway segments wherever possible. In a stop sign on Empezar and the speed limit on other cases, recommended improvements to Meadows is 40 mph. Without more detailed col- the citywide bicycle network will provide cyclists lision information, it is difficult to determine why with alternatives to problematic intersections or collisions are happening here, as well as who is roadway segments. involved and when, but it may be advisable to �* consider warning signage for approaching drivers For examples, buffered bike lanes are recom- to watch for cyclists, especially in the downhill mended on Margarita Road as part of the City's (southbound direction). regular roadway resurfacing program that should address its high collision numbers.Similarly, GCA 1 would provide an off-road extension of the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail as a convenient al- ternative to riding on Winchester Road, especially to cross Interstate 15 (See GCAs in Chapter 5). paved shoulder along Ynez Road Other smaller hot spots, such as at the intersec- tions of Margarita Road and Via Seron/Overland Trail and at Camino Piedra Rojo and Redhawk Parkway(noted previously)should be addressed by GCA 15, which would implement a paved pathway along the south side of nearby Temecula Creek as an alternative to riding on the streets. .rr s 230 BullCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Pedestrian Collisions The pedestrian collision data differs from the Elementary. Many of these pedestrian collision bicycle collisions in significant ways. Of the 59 hot spots are on low speed, low volume residen- reported pedestrian-related collisions, five were tial streets near these schools, making it likely fatal, a relatively high figure for the period. The that they involve children making their way to two most common collision types under the ve- and from school.These pedestrian collisions, like hicle code violations, by far, were "Pedestrian many of the bicycle collisions, may be addressed Violations" (23) and "Violating Pedestrian Right- with enforcement targeted at these hot spots, as of-Way"(24).These two collision types accounted well as student and driver education. for 47 of the 59 reported collisions, or fully 80 percent of pedestrian collisions. While it can be Some of these locations may be addressed assumed that the"Pedestrian Violations"were the by some of the same CCAs noted under the fault of the walkers and the"Violating Pedestrian bicycle collision section, such as GCA 1, which Right-of-Way"collisions were the fault of the driv- is close enough to Winchester Road to make it ers, the few remaining collisions were likely due an easy choice over walking along Winchester to driver fault, such as "Improper Turning" and itself. Another example is GCAs 8b and 9 that "Unsafe Speed." may address the hot spot at Rancho Vista Road and Margarita Road adjacent to Temecula Valley Collision pattern by day of the week was similar to High School. that of bicycle collisions, with less on weekends, but not as definite a distinction between week- The hot spot on Jefferson Avenue is likely to days and weekends. Also, the peak days were be addressed by implementation of the Uptown Monday and Tuesday, butjust slightly higher than Jefferson Specific Plan that will include new side- the other weekdays. walks, as well as GCAs 1 and 5c,which together will provide attractive off-street paths paralleling More than half of pedestrian collisions occurred Jefferson. The hot spot centered on Old Town daylight hours,but 18 or the 59 reported collisions Front Street will also benefit from nearby parallel occurred at night, with 13 of those occurring on creekside paths, particularly GCA 5a. lit streets. Temecula is well served with sidewalks and Like the bicycle collisions,the pedestrian collision pedestrians generally cover less distance than hot spot pattern is tied to intersections, but the cyclists. These two facts imply that not all the pedestrian hot spots are also more closely linked routes described under the bicycle collisions together than the bicycle collisions (See Figure may address some of these pedestrian hot spots 9). Several of these groupings actually form Ion- because the facilities are too far away to be practi- gitudinal hot spot corridors, yet are still focused cal walking route alternatives.Also, many of the " on intersections. This includes corridors west of pedestrian hot spots,even though fairly corridor- Interstate 15 along Jefferson Avenue,Winchester specific, reveal that most pedestrian collisions oc- Road and Main Street, as well as along Ynez cur at intersections. It is likely that improvements Road, Pauba Road, Rancho California Road to existing pedestrian routes can alleviate some and Rancho Vista Road east of the freeway.The of these problematic locations, especially high pedestrian collision data corresponds with this visibility crosswalks and user-actuated signals analysis, with the highest number of pedestrian (See Toolbox—Design Guidelines—Appendix A). collisions occurring on Rancho California Road, Winchester Road,Ynez Road,Jefferson Avenue Finally,the fact that five fatalities occurred among and Margarita Road. Some pedestrian hot spots the 59 reported pedestrian collisions is tragic. at least partially overlap bicycle locations. One in 12 collisions resulting in the death of a pe- destrian is unacceptable. Without more detailed Even more so than bicycle collisions,a significant information, it is difficult to determine solutions, number of hot spots occur near and even adja- but high vehicle speeds are likely to have been cent to schools, such as Temecula Valley High, an issue since higher speeds directly contribute Chaparral High,Temecula Elementary,James L. to the level of pedestrian injury and death. The Day Middle, Redhawk Elementary and Paloma physical improvements suggested in the previ- ous paragraph may help, as well as targeted enforcement and education, for both drivers and pedestrians (See Chapter 4 — Programs and Funding Sources). 31 Chapter 2:Analysis Figure 9- Pedestrian Collisions i Woft .D s �110l, Von Rsobj WY 1ti Pedestrian Collisions Schools High Frequency Parks Low Frequency Commercial Center �t Open Space Vineyards/Agricultural l__I City Boundary NOV- 32 19 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Table 3 - Pedestrian Collisions Summary Fatal 5 Injury-Complaint of Pain 28 Other Visible Injury 23 Severe Injury 3 Improper Turning 2 2010 5 Other Improper Driving 1 2011 13 Other Than Driver(or Pedestrian) 1 2012 11 Pedestrian Violation 23 2013 14 Traffic Signals and Signs 2 2014 16 Unknown 2 Unsafe Speed 3 Unsafe Starting or Backing 1 Violating Pedestrian Right of Way 24 Day of the Week . . . ■ t Sunday 7 Dark-No Street Lights 5 Monday 12 Dark-Street Lights On 13 Tuesday 11 Dark-Street Lights Out 1 Wednesday 9 Daylight 37 Thursday 6 Dusk-Dawn 3 Friday 9 - Saturday 5 `"w Rancho California Rd 8 ' Winchester Rd 8 Ynez Rd 5 Jefferson Av 4 Margarita Rd 4 Crowne Hill Dr 2 Old Town Front St 2 1-15 2 Wolf Valley Rd 2 Data Source: CA Statewide Integrated Traffic Records Systems (SWITRS) 33 Chapter 2:Analysis Problematic Locations for Cyclists, Horses and Pedestrians Crossing at Freeway Interchanges Many cyclists and pedestrians find crossing major While pedestrians and horses tend to mix well, roadways unnerving due to high vehicle volumes faster moving cyclists can startle horses, which and speeds.This is particularly true when cross- may occur on open space trails where horses ing freeways,where they must contend with faster share the trail with cyclists. This is less likely to moving vehicles turning and crossing lanes, at occur where sight distance is adequate. User both on- and off-ramps, and often involving education has been shown to be effective, es- more than one lane. Situations like this occur at pecially where adequate sight distances can Pechanga Parkway, Rancho California Road and not be maintained. While not required on trails Winchester Road where they cross over or under used more as transportation corridors than for Interstate 15.The experience is so daunting that recreation,best practices recommend separating for many people,freeways are barriers to walking cyclists and horses. or biking. Even experienced cyclists find such crossings unpleasant and will avoid them when Trail Crossings at Roadways provided with a readily accessible alternative. Popular trails crossing multi-lane roadways will Only Santiago Road provides a freeway crossing require careful consideration, including enhance- away from an interchange. ments such as user-actuated signals at mid-block crossings, or modified signal timing at intersec- Based on survey input and field review, ad- tions. Curb extensions may be advisable at both dressing these freeway crossings ranked very to effectively shorten crossing distances, as well high in priority. GCA 1 is intended to provide an as shorten vehicle wait times. Most of the natural attractive alternative to crossing Interstate 15 on surface trail GCAs prepared for this plan reflect Winchester Road with a path along Santa Ger- these types of enhancement. trudis Creek (See GCAs in Chapter 5). GCA 5d is a long-term look ahead to take advantage of Where a trail crosses a roadway, equestrians •-� any future reconfiguration of this interchange to can be provided with special user-actuated sig- provide a completely separated freeway cross- nal buttons, designed for equestrians,which are ing connecting Old Town with the rest of the City set higher than pedestrian buttons. This allows east of the freeway. The future French Valley equestrians to cross the street, though neces- Parkway overcrossing is another opportunity to sarily mixing with pedestrians,cyclists and motor provide such a relatively low-stress connection vehicles. The same premise applies to cyclists across Interstate 15. who would use pedestrian signal buttons where a multi-use path crosses a roadway. In this case, Equestrians on Multi-use Trails cyclists would travel as pedestrians through the While the GCAs prepared for this plan reflect cy- intersection. clists and pedestrians as the primary trail users, It is up to the individual equestrian to determine when viable, adjacent equestrian trails can be planned along many of these routes. Depending whether or not to dismount and lead the horse on trail type and available width, trails can be across roadways, which may be preferable in terms of safety. Where equestrian use is ex- built to accommodate all users within a single alignment. While cyclist-pedestrian interaction pected, crosswalk and paved trail crossing sur- is inherent to non-motorized planning, the inter- faces should be made more slip-resistant than action of equestrians poses a unique situation. standard. Equestrians and pedestrians can share natural Where significant equestrian use is expected, surface trails while cyclists and pedestrians can additional special considerations can be made, share paved multi-use paths. These can be built such as adequate queuing space at a reasonable in parallel with separation such as a planted or distance from the roadway edge to give groups unplanted median or fencing, though fencing of horses and riders room to wait without undue tends to detract from the open space experience. crowding. This also benefits other users, espe- cially on popular trails where there may be high number of users needing to cross per signal cycle. 34 lin City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEEIKETEMECUI.A.ORG Level of Traffic Stress Analysis Bicycle and pedestrian planning state of practice while local, low-stress streets tend to be residen- has changed significantly since the adoption of tial connectors to schools and parks. For trans- the 2002 Plan. Rather than focusing primarily on portation purposes, arterials can better serve the connectivity and gap closure, planning now em- needs of people who bicycle to work, providing phasizes safety improvements designed to ben- a more direct route, and can often be improved efit all roadway users. This includes addressing with facility enhancements. both objective safety and the perception of safety, Figure 10 illustrates the results of the LTS analy- which has been shown to increase the numbers of sis performed on all City streets to ensure that people choosing to walk and bike which, in turn, recommendations, and GCAs in particular, of- have been shown to further increase safety.Look- fered the least stressful cycling experience pos- ing at network and facility design through the lens sible. GCAs on corridors that were determined of perceived safety has therefore fundamentally to be high LTS were "upgraded"or re-evaluated. changed the way bicycle and pedestrian planners conduct analysis and make recommendations. Bicycle Boulevard or Low-Stress Net- Roadway data related to street classification, work Connectivity Analysis number of lanes, traffic volumes and posted Abicycle boulevard is a bicycle priority route,gen- speeds have come to define objective and per- erally located on calm residential streets, parallel ceived safety and are heavily relied upon for to busier arterials and collectors. They are used analysis and recommendations. This section by cyclists seeking low-stress travel corridors to offers a brief explanation of three different forms access destinations.Candidate bicycle boulevard of analysis, employed in this project, that reflect streets may vary in the amount of traffic calming the new state of practice: (1) the Level of Traffic measures needed to reduce vehicle speeds and Stress model, (2) the Bicycle Boulevard or Low- volumes, but are alike in requiring wayfinding Stress Network Connectivity model and (3) the treatments. Safe Routes to School methodology. In communities with conventional street grids, Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) is a fairly recently strong bicycle boulevard candidates are often developed GIS analysis method that addresses easy to identify. In fact, public input often reveals the perceived safety related to traffic speed, that residential streets parallel to busier streets volumes, number of lanes and existing bikeway are already used as de facto bicycle boulevards facility type. In addition to serving as a proxy for by cyclists to travel along a corridor and access safety, the existing bikeway factor is a measure destinations. In communities with more subur- of existing network supply. ban street grids such as those characterized by superblocks and cul-de-sacs, bicycle boulevard Stress increases with traffic speed and volume, candidates are much more difficult to identify. number of lanes and lack of existing bikeways. Cul-de-sacs seldom offer bicycle and pedestrian LTS scores can range from 1 (lowest stress)to 4 connections and, even when they do, often me- (highest stress). Table 4 from the Mineta Trans- ander to the point of inconvenience. Still, nearly portation Institute's Low-Stress Bicycling and all communities, including Temecula, have some Network Connectivity Report describes the four bicycle boulevard potential. stress level categories and defines what stress levels will result when bicycle lanes or routes are For this plan, knowledge of bicycle boulevard applied to specific roadway configurations and design was paired with GIS network analysis speed limits. The model was created using City to improve efficiency and maximize identifying data, including speed limits, number of lanes and bicycle boulevard candidates based on specific the presence or absence of bicycle facilities. inputs and parameters.The primary input was the existing street network, which was augmented High stress and low stress routes are generally with both existing and potential Class I facilities prioritized for treatment, and streets with either and small sidewalk connections, additions that low stress (LTS 1) or high stress (LTS 4) were can help close gaps and effectively increase given an equal scoring value. The reasoning the amount of bicycle boulevard candidates. behind this is that both are ideal for increasing Parameters included designated "local" streets ridership based on positive existing conditions and that they experience vehicle volume and (LTS 1), or improvements can be made to high speed appropriate for bicycle boulevards (less stress streets (LTS 4). In the case of high stress than 4,000 vehicle trips per day and less than streets, many arterials are direct travel routes 25 mph, respectively). Parks and schools were Chapter 2:Analysis Table 4 - Level of Traffic Stress Stress Category Stress Indicator Suitable for all bicyclists, including LTS 1 children trained to safely cross inter- sections. Suitable for most adult bicyclists, but LTS 2 demanding more attention than may be expected from children. Acceptable to most adults currently LTS 3 cycling in American cities, but not gener- ally desirable. LTS 4 Level of stress beyond LTS 3. Shared Facilities (Bicycle Routes) Number of Lanes Speed Limit 2 3(2+1) 4-5 (4+1) 6+ 25 mph 1 2 3 4 30 mph 2 3 4 4 >35 mph 4 4 4 4 Bicycle Lanes • • Number of Lanes Speed Limit 2 3+ 25 mph 1 1 30 mph 1 1 >35 mph 2 2 >40 3 3 Bicycle Lanes • • Number of Lanes Speed Limit 2 3 4+ Buffered 25 mph 1 1 1 1 30 mph 1 2 1 1 35 mph 2 3 2 2 >40 mph 3 3 3 2 36 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Figure 10 - Level of Trac Stress , r j. Per Rd { Stege Rd d 1 Mau, 4. + Woo it ZRai �• s ,. .. pvK Hnugwrwarr �Eg'l , r" Level of Traffic Stress Schools LTS 1 Parks LTS 2 Commercial Center LTS 3 Open Space LTS 4 Vineyards/Agricultural I-_i City Boundary 37 Chapter 2:Analysis Safe Routes to School Using LTS Analysis identified as desirable destinations, between Safe Routes to School (SRTS) included Level of which the network algorithm attempted to find Traffic Stress (LTS) analysis of the entire City's routes potentially suitable for bicycle boulevards. street network, particularly addressing streets On-street portions were evaluated based on their around schools in terms of number of lanes, traffic stress(LTS)level.The result was a network speed limits, street widths, presence or absence of candidate routes for further analysis. of sidewalks, etc. This was especially true for the proposed GCAs intended to serve schools. Knowledge of best practices was then used to Lowering traffic stress level for GCAs generally eliminate disjointed segments,such as segments addressed"upgrading"facilities,where feasible,to that fit the required parameters, but were too facilities that provided more separation from traffic. isolated to serve any real purpose. Conversely, professional judgment was used to more closely More direct SRTS analysis was also conducted. evaluate segments that appeared to be strong A quarter-mile buffer was created around each candidates, but which had been excluded by school and the streets within this buffer were the GIS analysis algorithm. Common reasons analyzed for LTS.As shown in Figure 12,the vast included vehicular speeds or volumes that slightly majority (80 percent) of streets within a quarter- exceeded those recommended for bicycle bou- mile of schools were classified as low-stress levards. Some candidate routes would require (LTS 1). These low-stress streets were followed more intervention than others to become true in prevalence by the highest stress streets (LTS bicycle boulevards. 4 = 12 percent). Streets of LTS 2 and 3 were un- common(less than 1 and 6 percent,respectively). Lastly,an additional"out-of-direction"travel anal- ysis was performed of the candidate routes and Given the suburban nature of the street network, the entire street network, irrespective of speeds Temecula essentially has two types of streets and traffic volumes. Routes that increased travel from an LTS perspective - low-stress and high- distances more than 25 percent were rejected. stress -with little in between. That 80 percent of -�-�•+ streets within a quarter mile of schools are low- Ultimately,this methodology yielded a number of stress (LTS 1) makes intuitive sense based on candidate routes, but none were deemed suitable visual analysis. Most of Temecula's schools are for bicycle boulevard designation, even though within neighborhoods and surrounded by local the network algorithm included existing off-street streets with low speeds and volumes because paths,such as the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail. In they often provide no through routes. The 12 most cases, due to street network configuration, percent of high-stress (LTS 4) streets within a candidate routes were not contiguous enough quarter mile of schools are major collectors or to justify bicycle boulevard investments (See arterials with relatively high posted speeds and Figures 11 a-c). traffic volumes,and provide good vehicle access This is not uncommon for cities with predomi- throughout the City and region, but are therefore nantly suburban roadway configurations like not attractive walking or cycling routes. Temecula's since most successful bicycle boule- What is less clear from the numbers and visual vards have been on grid networks where bicycle analysis is that several of Temecula's schools can boulevards often provide low-stress alternatives only be accessed from high-stress routes.Traffic to riding on parallel high volume, high speed stress is directly related to vehicle volumes and arterials. Even so, many of these candidate low- speeds, as well as number of travel lanes, and stress routes coincide or connect with existing as noted in the collision analysis, a number of and proposed Class II bike lanes, so they may schools fall within or near bicycle or pedestrian be of value in future planning since they provide collision "hot spots"that coincide with nearby in- connectivity between neighborhoods and the tersections of higher LTS streets. These include City's on-street bicycle network. (GCAs 3, 5a, 8b Ysabel Barnett Elementary,Temecula Elementa- and 15 all address portions of these low-stress ry, Redhawk Elementary, Paloma Elementary Vail routes. See Chapter 5.) Ranch Middle, James L. Day Middle, Temecula Valley High and Chaparral High. 0:38 i City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Figure 11 — Low-Stress Routes IMF M (See following pages for blow-up maps.) Figure 11a .� [erRd I I Norte . II 4 ! AL � Q � o � t a Ren Cali ————^I -- Main �5 I gas wy II Rancho Visy Rd I I I Figure 11 b I IT° 4. I I 1 .-.,.. ,�,. Way� rIR Pi'A Vail Ranch N, Figure 11 c oea.Nai wy l� ea I Potential Low Stress Routes: Schools Highlights shortest routes Parks between parks and Commercial Center s Low Stress Routes schools on roads with speeds<25 mph. Open Space v ney ardslAgricultu ral I_., City Boundary 39 Chapter 2:Analysis Figure 11a - Low-Stress Routes (North) .00 Q �°rl ate h ktd e 1 //101 411, s,4 a IBra(+NO�vx <aSe`nna wi' a` m g� IQ � Sr a: N v a° m� .,er ` 1 fanhoCalifornia RC,� Potential Low Stress Routes: Schools Highlights shortest routes parks Low Stress Routes between parks and Commercial Center schools on roads with speeds<25 mph. Open Space vineyards/Agricultural s__i City Boundary 40 dF17=9 O City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Figure 11b - Low-Stress Routes (Central) <a nto��t Se`ana Bra Cecil" wY Cecil, O m y07 k- 0 N ZJ f 1 macho Calico +I mia R i j 7 o o er®� Via onilla ,r G �t4 m� LT � w �'--,� Ro►tola Ra jr' G Potential Low Stress Routes: Schools Highlights shortest routes Parks between parks and Commercial Center �- Low Stress Routes schools on roads with speeds<25 mph. Open Space Vineyards/Agricultural !-_l City Boundary 41 Chapter 2:Analysis Figure 11c— Low-Stress Routes (South) m x Loma Linda Ra Via Cordo, - s (P Wolf Valley Rd Vail R2,'0`Pkwy til S 6T`p Sohnston d ! �Q Potential Low Stress Routes: Schools Highlights shortest routes parks between parks and Commercial Center �+ Low Stress Routes schools on roads with speeds<25 mph. Open Space Vineyards/Agricultural City Boundary 42 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update E HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Figure 12- SRTS Trac Stress Wf'10W�111 Ra Vvk \ Ii a � 6D 4 o � Fean4h8 CJlIIO.,,TIS IZ Main 8t N,, t t i. 1(', . .,mak 1� 'l`5Y ams+ TJ - r ' s Level of Traffic Stress Schools LTS 1 Parks t LTS 2 Commercial Center LTS 3 Open Space LTS 4 Vineyards/Agricultural — f I.__1 City Boundary 43 Chapter 2:Analysis Health Benefits Some of these locations may be addressed by Transportation accounts for nearly 30 percent of some of the route improvements in CCAs noted all US greenhouse gas emissions,with cars and under the collision analysis section,such as GCA trucks creating nearly 20 percent of those emis- 6 near Temecula Elementary School, and CCAs sions. While a solo driver in an average North 8b and 9 near Temecula Valley High School(See American vehicle releases about 1.2 pounds of GCAs in Chapter 5). However, this master plan CO2 per mile, the average cyclist releases only identifies the further exploration of access points 0.7 grams through respiration. to and from schools as a next step in providing safer routes to schools. Best practices in Safe A significant percentage of Americans are over- Routes to School planning suggest that future weight or obese and recent projections indicate schools should be sited within neighborhoods that 42 percent of the population will be obese they serve, rather than along major collector or by 2030. To combat this trend and prevent a va- arterial streets,such as Abby Reinke Elementary riety of diseases,the Center for Disease Control School, for example. Existing schools oriented (CDC) suggests a minimum of 30 minutes of towards busy streets may be able to provide im- moderate intensity physical activity five days per proved and more direct neighborhood connection week, such as cycling and walking. through rear access, such as through gates or Facilities that support outdoor activities encour- other fence openings, so students can enter the age cycling and walking,which are great ways to school grounds without having to do so from the help lose weight since they burn fat,which helps busy fronting street. individuals feel and function better. Exercise im- �"� Such changes to school access will require coop- proves heart and lung fitness,as well as strength eration between the City and school district/pri- and stamina. Regular exercise reduces the risk of vate schools. Providing low-stress routes, along high blood pressure, heart attacks and strokes. with complementary education, encouragement In addition to heart disease, regular exercise can and enforcement programs, will likely lead to a also help to prevent other health problems such higher percentage of children walking and riding as non-insulin dependent diabetes,osteoarthritis to schools.This, in turn,will likely lead to reduced and osteoporosis. Exercise also relieves symp- demand for vehicle circulation and parking on toms of depression, improves mental health,and the busy streets. Recent studies show that as decreases anxiety and stress levels.Cycling and much as 25 percent of morning vehicular traffic walking on a regular basis can be enjoyable ways is parents driving their children to school. Both to exercise and take advantage of their stress- trends may ultimately lead to support for placing reducing capabilities. school entrances away from busy streets in the A large body of research shows that providing first place. bicycling and walking friendly facilities encour- ages more people to ride and walk and that this availability directly improves overall community health. From the Active Living Research website: "The way communities are designed has a great influence on how active we are. When communities are safe, well-maintained and have appealing scenery, children and families are more likely to be active. Unfortunately, many people—especially those at high risk for obesity—live in communities that lack parks ' and have high crime rates, dangerous traffic patterns and unsafe sidewalks. Such com- munities discourage residents from walking, bicycling and playing outside. Increasingly, local governments are considering how com- munity design will impact residents'physical activity. Our research documents effective strategies for creating communities that sup- port active living and promote health." 44 gasCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update H I KEBI KETE MECU LA.O RG Active Lifestyles Planning for active transportation provides oppor- According to the Mayo Clinic website: tunities for people to get outside and walk, bike, jog, skate, rollerblade or partake in other physi- "Virtually any form of exercise or movement cal activities. These aerobic activities all burn can increase your fitness level while decreas- calories, enabling people to maintain a healthy ing your stress. The most important thing is weight and improve mental health. For example, to pick an activity that you enjoy." a 160 pound adult, walking at 3.5 miles per hour Having attractive bikeways,trails and pedestrian for one hour burns 314 calories, and running at facilities can entice more people to get outside 8 miles per hour for one hour burns 861 calories. and become more active, relieving their stress Similarly, a 130 pound person bicycling at 14-16 and improving their health. miles per hour for one hour burns about 590 calo- ries.Since each pound of body weight represents Social Interaction roughly 3,500 calories, burning 500 calories per Walking, cycling, skating, rollerblading and other day translates into a pound lost per week. non-motorized transportation modes put people Children who walk or bicycle to school are gen- in the streets, in situations that offer much more erally healthier than their peers who are driven. opportunity for social interaction compared to Because of this, they also miss fewer days of driving.This can make communities more vibrant school, are more alert in class and perform better and can help to develop stronger social capital. academically. Similarly, healthy employees miss Research shows that people living on streets fewer days of work, focus better and perform with light traffic have roughly three times as many better at work than those that are less healthy. friends and twice as many acquaintances as those living on streets with heavy traffic. Active According to the President's Council on Fitness, transportation brings about a "people-oriented" regular physical activity: feel to streets and seeing people out makes it • Reduces heart disease,cancer and stroke risk easier to do the same and to interact with their • Strengthens muscles, bones, and joints neighbors. • Improves heart and lung condition Enjoyment • Decreases depression P Trail and bikeway networks give people conve- • Increases energy and self esteem nient access to enjoy outdoor recreation. They • Lengthens life expectancy are able to go out to enjoy the network on their • Relieves stress own, and may find that the trails also offer a vi- able setting to spend time together with family. By contrast, people who live sedentary lifestyles Trail activities can be enjoyed by people of nearly have a greater risk of developing Type 2 diabetes, all ages, and research consistently shows that high blood pressure, high cholesterol, stroke, residents greatly value trails and bikeways in heart disease and cancer. their communities. Locally, this was most suc- By creating safe,convenient options for people to cinctly expressed under Temecula's Quality of walk, bicycle and use other forms of active trans- Life Master Plan 2030 (QLMP) goals: portation, people can integrate physical activity At the QLMP community meetings, resi- into their daily lives without having to set aside a dents expressed their desire to travel safely special time of the day for exercise. throughout the City on various modes of Stress Relief travel, including bike and pedestrian trails and on complete streets." Many medical conditions, illnesses and mental problems are now known to be either caused by The QLMP also lists trails as a component of or intensified by stress. These range from heart several goals, such as part of Murrieta Creek attacks and cancer to depression, insomnia, flood control enhancements, integration of the chronic fatigue, a variety of mental illnesses and City's trails with the Wine Country and the City alcoholism. of Murrieta, and in support of healthy and active lifestyles. Master plan survey responses also indicate that trails are seen as popular recre- ational facilities, since 90 percent of respondents said they would "likely" or "definitely" use "trails along creeks and utility corridors separated from roadways." 45 Chapter 2:Analysis Improvements to the Public Realm By making walking and biking true transporta- Bicycle lanes, new sidewalks and new parkways, tion alternatives, cities may reduce the amount when accommodated through narrowing vehicle of public space dedicated to the movement and travel lanes,also have the potential to reduce the storage of private vehicles and repurpose it for vehicle speeds and improve safety. Speed is a "higher uses,"such as"road diets." In addition to key factor in crash reduction for three reasons. creating more space for walking and biking, road First, drivers' peripheral vision declines with diets can create more public space. Medians, speed. Second, stopping distance increases street furniture, landscaping, public art, historical with speed. For example, the average stopping plaques, wayfinding signs, improved bus stops distance at 40 mph is 170 feet, while it is 60 feet and community gardens exemplify the types of at 25 mph. Third, crash severity significantly in- uses that could become the "higher and better" creases with speed. If struck by a car moving at use of the public space. 20 mph,a pedestrian has a 95 percent chance of survival, but only a 15 percent chance at 40 mph. Safety The more cyclists, pedestrians and joggers there By providing low-stress bikeways, improved pe- are using local streets and trails,the more people destrian crossings, and trails, people will be able will be aware and will look for them.Also, because to cycle,walk,jog and ride in a safer environment. a greater percentage of drivers will also use the streets and trails as cyclists, pedestrians and Bicycling on streets with low vehicular volumes joggers at other times, they will be more aware and speeds, or on a dedicated bikeway on a high of their presence. volume street with higher speeds both provide low-stress bicycling experiences.Shared streets Personal safety benefits can result from having are often inherently comfortable bicycling envi- people out walking, cycling or skating since they ronments, but may be further enhanced with traf- put"eyes on the street."As more people are out fic calming elements. Dedicated bikeways make and casually surveying the street, criminals are cyclists more comfortable by increasing visibility less likely to partake in anti-social activity. More and legitimacy. Bicycle lanes provide a place to people on the streets provide an increased sense ride where drivers generally do not intrude and cy- of safety and may, in turn,encourage more walk- clists feel more comfortable.Going a step further, ing and biking. protected bikeways go a long way in increasing cyclists'safety and comfort, even when traveling alongside fast moving cars. Improved pedestrian-friendly safety features re- duce the number of pedestrians hit by drivers of cars. The figures are compelling. For example, adding a sidewalk to a street yields a crash reduc- tion factor of 88 percent. Crossing islands reduce , pedestrian-involved crashes by 46 percent at mak. marked, uncontrolled crossings (where there were no signals or stop signs). Please Drive Safcly Rad idgkf R Sp-aed#nR L;ws - S!�#rr#y�njarrad INFORMATION 1 + 46 Irw arc `.•� City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update H I K E B I K E T E M E C U LA.O R G Economic Benefits Cycling and walking are low cost activities that Cost savings for individuals and society also re- can be easily incorporated into an individual's sult from better health.The annual cost of obesity daily life, such as commuting to work or running has been calculated as $4,879 for women and errands. In mild climates like Temecula's, cycling $2,646 for men. Nationally, obesity-related ail- and walking can occur year round. Residents ments, such as chronic disease, disability and can benefit financially from improved cycling and death are estimated to cost $190.2 billion an- walking infrastructure. nually. By 2018, obesity is estimated to cost the United States$344 billion per year,or 21 percent Cost Savings of national health care spending. This is likely People who walk or bicycle for daily trips to the to cause private insurance rates to rise and to store, work, school, or other destinations can consume significant resources from public health realize substantial costs savings by not using insurance programs such as Medicare and state their cars. People who regularly drive pay higher health programs. Fortunately,walking and cycling costs than those who ride or walk. Beyond the up- at moderate speeds are effective and convenient front cost of their vehicle, there is maintenance, means of maintaining healthy weight and general insurance and often parking. According to the fitness, provided safe and comfortable facilities American Automobile Association (AAA), daily are available. driving now costs $9,100 annually. Based on an Finally, a bicycle's life-cycle energy use, includ- example wage of 20 dollars an hour, a vehicle ing manufacturing and maintenance, is just 1.4 owner must work 455 hours each year to pay percent that of a typical combustion engine car. for his or her commute by car. By comparison, a cyclist making the same wage only has to work Property Value Increases about 15 hours per year to pay for commuting by Research shows that trails have potential to bicycle, and not at all for walking. Even for a typi- cal suburban family, being able to eliminate the create jobs, expand local businesses and en- need for a second or third car can reap significant hance property values. In Apex, North Carolina, economic benefits. developers added a $5,000 premium onto home prices adjacent to a regional greenway,and those Cycling's health benefits can also have a powerful homes were still the first to sell. economic impact. The City of Portland has con- Since its completion in 2012, the $62.5 million ducted annual counts of cyclists crossing its Wil- Indianapolis Cultural Trail(a cycle track)through lamette River bridges since 1991, creating what central Indianapolis has generated 11,000 jobs is likely the most robust cyclist count dataset in the United States.Researchers took advantage of and $863 million through construction, private this data to conduct a first of its kind benefit-cost sector investment and increased tourism. The analysis of the city's bicycle infrastructure, exist- Project has also increased adjacent property values by $45 million and redevelopment along ing and planned. They determined that Portland residents could save 'between $388 and $594 the corridor is continuing. million in individual health care costs by 2040 These are just two of many documented ex- directly attributable to the city's increased invest- amples of economic development through active ment in bike infrastructure and that health care transportation. Such facilities support the tourist cost savings and fuel savings over time amply industry, restaurants and other retail outlets, justified investments in bicycling infrastructure bringing in tax revenue to the city. In addition to st- and promotion, yielding benefit-cost ratios as tracting visitors, local residents may choose to do high as 3.8 to 1.Additionally, accounting for lives more of their shopping and entertainment locally, saved from a reduction in mortality using value of rather than travelling to another city.Also, if they statistical life,as is commonly done for transporta- save money by driving less, they will have more tion planning, further increased the benefits-cost disposable income that could be used locally. ratio. The researchers felt that including other less easily monetizable benefits, such as less spending on vehicles and less time needed for additional exercise, would further bolster the economic case for bicycling investments. 47 Chapter 2:Analysis Economically Viable Futures Reduced Travel Time Smaller cities and towns are having difficulty Many trips are short and could be done on foot MAP., keeping and attracting vibrant industries and or bicycle if attractive facilities were available. workforce because many Millennials want a more Considering that 48 percent of all trips are three "urban" lifestyle where they can live in compact, miles or less, 21 percent of all trips are less than walkable, bikeable communities. There is also one mile and 60 percent of all trips less than one growing evidence that the "Baby Boomer" gen- mile are driven, there is significant potential to eration shares a similar desire for more compact, convert these trips to walking or biking. Especially walkable communities. If smaller cities expect to in congested areas, door-to-door travel time, es- attract both Millennials and Boomers, planning pecially by bike, can be less than when driving a for denser, walkable and bikeable communities vehicle, especially if the time needed to address It appears to be a smart formula. parking is taken into account. In addition,convert- ing vehicle trips to walking and biking can reduce Examples of such development in Temecula in- vehiculartravel time for those who chose to travel clude Old Town Temecula and the higher density by vehicle by reducing roadway and destination developments planned around it, such as the parking congestion. Jefferson Avenue corridor to the north and Altair to the west. The Uptown Jefferson Specific Plan Neighborhood Electric Vehicles addresses the corridor that was once Highway 395, the primary vehicular route prior to the con- Many people, particularly Baby Boomers, are struction of Interstate 15. Trails along Murrieta interested in simplifying their lives through local Creek factor prominently into future Jefferson "alternative transportation"such as bicycling and Avenue plans and the surrounding area.Altair is Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs), which a proposed new development on the west side of can effectively replace a conventional car with Temecula Creek overlooking Old Town Temecula a device much less financially burdening to own that will have 1,500 dwelling units and significant and maintain. Facilities that support both bicycles pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, including and NEVs are driving development planning in high quality connections with Old Town Temecula. some areas. All three developments reflect the qualities many The California Air Resources Board(CARB)clas- people say they prefer, such as attractive walking sifies NEVs as zero emissions vehicles. Legally, routes and convenient bike facilities. The Main NEVs are "Low-Speed Vehicles" as defined by Street Bridge that will directly connect Altair and CVC Section 385.5: Old Town Temecula was designed with this in mind, and Altair's primary pedestrian connection (a)A"low-speed vehicle' is a motor vehicle that aligns with the bridge. Biking, in particular, will meets all of the following requirements: be an easy way to access all three areas since (1) Has four wheels. they are within readily rideable distances of each other. Plan recommendations and GCAs take ad- (2) Can attain a speed, in one mile, of more than vantage of this spatial relationship with a variety 20 miles per hour and not more than 25 miles per of separated and on-street facilities, such as a hour, on a paved level surface. cycle track on Rancho California Road crossing Murrieta Creek and paved paths paralleling the (3) Hasa gross vehicle weight rating of less than channel (See GCAs in Chapter 5). 3,000 pounds. (b) (1) For the purposes of this section, a "low- AW speed vehicle" is not a golf cart, except when operated pursuant to Section 21115 or 21115.1. (2) A "low-speed vehicle" is also known as a "neighborhood electric vehicle." 48 09 FIN City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG To satisfy federal safety requirements for manu- rapid deployment of Zero-Emissions Vehicles facturers, NEVs must be equipped with three-point (ZEV) in California. According to Temecula's seat or lap belts, running lights, headlights, brake Quality of Life Master Plan, the City is planning lights,reflectors, rearview mirrors and turn signals. to"implement NEV system throughout Temecula" around 2020. To date, this plan has not been NEVs are energy-efficient and minimally pollut- further developed. ing vehicles. In addition to their low impact on . air quality, NEVs have a relatively low impact on State law treats NEVs differently from the ap- public infrastructure due to their small size and proach used for bicycles and other low speed low weight. NEV facility requirements are similar vehicles. NEVs are prohibited from use on to that for bicycles,with Class I, II and III facilities streets with speed limits greater than 35 mph, types, each chosen depending on context. NEV yet bicycles can be used on most streets regard- and bicycle facilities are so alike, in fact, that less of speed limit. In addition, electric scooters they may sometimes be shared, if wide enough can be ridden on streets with speed limits of 25 to accommodate both modes. Minimum desired mph, or on streets with limits of 30 mph or more lane widths for bicycles and NEVs are five and if marked with bicycle lanes. Scooter users must eight feet, respectively.Similar to bicycle facilities, use the bicycle lanes and follow the same rules projecting demand for NEV facilities is limited as cyclists.On residential streets with their typical by a lack of data (i.e. it is difficult to predict use 25 mph speed limits, NEVs function within the of facilities and networks that do not yet exist). travel lane, and not in the bicycle lanes. Projections are based on data that demonstrate a latent demand for NEV facilities such as de- There is interest in expanding NEV-accessible mographic information, circulation and land use roadway networks to allow larger travel areas data, and projected fuel/auto ownership costs. by removing existing legal barriers imposed on Similar to other mobility modeling, the actual their use by being restricted from higher speed implementation of NEV projects, as well as pre- streets. This is an evolving issue as mobility and post-intercept surveys, can enable planners choice initiatives, especially those that support to make more accurate projections. California's climate change mandates, continue to be debated at the state level. NEVs are becoming a popular alternative to stan- dard motor vehicles, especially in urban areas Because state law does not allow NEVs or golf and for short trips where the local climate sup- carts within bicycle lanes on streets with speed ports the use of these often open-sided vehicles. limits greater than 35 mph, expanding NEV use The Governor and State Legislature of California would require a city to secure special study ..` have prioritized NEV travel as means of reaching status through the legislature. NEVs could then air quality and greenhouse gas reduction targets. operate within these bicycle lanes, but only on California Senate Bill 375 outlines Sustainable designated streets with speeds greater than 35 Communities Strategies, which support the mph. Wider joint-use lanes may be acceptable, expansion of NEV infrastructure, among other as has been done in several California cities. On strategies. In March 2012, Governor Brown is- these designated streets, a city could adopt a sued Executive Order B-16-2012 and the Zero new standard dimension for bicycle/NEV joint-use Emissions Vehicle Action Plan requiring all state lanes, perhaps eight feet wide including gutter, agencies and entities to make efforts toward the and marked appropriately. :; BIKE LANE +r3 GOLF CART 1 LANE 49 Chapter 2:Analysis Bikeshare Bicycle sharing is an innovative approach to in- Successful bicycle sharing programs have been crease bicycle usage throughout an urban area. implemented worldwide, including in southern Providing a bicycle share program, combined California cities in recent years. Most of these with other transportation systems, allows more systems are highly advanced using key cards, diverse,flexible and cost-effective transportation on-line advanced purchase, GPS and Radio Fre- choice. Such a program can reduce the number quency Identification(RFID)technologies making of overall vehicle trips and travel time between it possible for bicycle sharing to be simple for all residences and transit stops, schools and shop- users. Programs such as B-Cycle can even track ping centers. riders by their associated membership numbers. Data such as distance, duration, calories burned A bike share program represents yet another and carbon offset can be captured and uploaded mobility option that is anticipated to induce de- to personal web pages at Bcycle.com. This data mand for bicycle facilities and reduce demand can also be helpful for those commuting and for auto-oriented facilities. Over roughly the past exercising at the same time. five years, bike share programs have been pop- ping up and expanding in mid-sized-large cities Since bike sharing's inception, providers have across the US. Among cities where bike share included governments, quasi-governmental has been implemented, significant benefits in transport agencies, universities, non-profits, ad- terms of health, the economy and mode share vertising companies and for-profits. Five primary have been documented. models exist. Most bike share programs exist within major cities Government Model and universities. This makes sense considering The community operates the bike-sharing service their transportation, land use and demographic like it would any other transit service and, as op- composition. Large cities and universities have erator, has greater control over the program. On constrained vehicle access, compact land use the other hand, it may not have the management patterns and populations accustomed to cir- experience of an existing bike sharing program culating without vehicles. Bike share systems operator.Also, the community maintains liability, also tend to thrive in places with robust transit which can be less desirable from the community's systems, like big cities and universities, because perspective. the modes complement each other (i.e. transit helps cover longer distances and bike share helps Transit Agency Model cover the "first/last mile" connections). The City A quasi-governmental organization provides of Temecula currently has neither a bike share the service and the agency's customer is a ju- plan nor infrastructure. Given Temecula's gener- risdiction. Some transit agencies have incorpo- ally low density, subareas like Old Town, Altair, rated bike sharing as an extension of their other Harveston and the Jefferson Avenue corridor, transport offerings to be a more comprehensive which are or will be characterized by compact, mobility provider. An example is Bay Area Bike mixed-use development and multi-modal trans- Share, managed by the San Francisco Municipal portation options, may be good candidates for a Transportation Agency (SFMTA). bike share program in the near future based on one of the following models. s^ - �' '°� 50 BOBCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update H I KEBI KETE ME CU LA.OR G Non-profit Model The non-profit model is usually created to operate Other system operators specialize in smaller the service or folds bike sharing into its existing cities and college campuses. Further simplifying interests, such as Washington D.C.'s Capital bike share system use and management, Social Bikeshare. While the non-profit operates the Bicycles(Sobi)did away with docking stations and program, it usually receives funding from the ju- kiosks altogether and integrated their functions risdiction for the service it provides to the public in directly onto their bikes. Sobi's system employs addition to collecting the revenues generated by no infrastructure. Instead, users find and reserve membership and usage fees and sponsorships. a bicycle using a web browser or mobile device and users without internet access can make a Advertising Company Model reservation directly from the keypad interface Companies offer a bike sharing program to a on the bike. The proprietary GPS-enabled bikes jurisdiction, usually in exchange for the right to come equipped with built-in U-locks and users use public space to display revenue-generating can pick up and leave them at any public bike advertisements on billboards, bus shelters and rack. Some systems charge a small additional kiosks, for examples. To date, this model has fee for random parking, but provide free parking been the most popular. Citibike in New York City at"hubs,"signature racks placed where additional is a prime example. bike capacity is desired. Compared to the other systems previously described, Sobi's system is For-profit Model more easily scaled and costs less to manage A private company provides the service with lim- since it requires minimal additional infrastructure. ited or no government involvement. Decobike is a The City of Portland, Oregon is initiating a Sobi prime example of this model, a business running system in 2016. the service using an off-the-shelf flexible station system.While similar to the advertising company The simplest system is weBike s, a software model, this model differs in that there is no on- Provider that has eliminated the need for either street advertising contract with the locality and the bike stations or proprietary bikes. The commu- for-profit keeps all revenues generated. nity provides the bicycles and locks and weBike provides the software that allows members to There is no one ideal model that works best in all check out a bicycle via text message or by using a jurisdictions. Potential factors determining which mobile app,and can then return the bicycle to any model to use include the size of the jurisdiction bike rack in the community. Like Sobi's system, and availability of both bike sharing systems able weBike gives users the convenience of leaving to operate in the locality and local entrepreneurs bicycles anywhere within a specified service area. to run the program. Jurisdiction size is an impor- For a growing city like Temecula, the flexibility of tant factor because the predominant advertising systems like weBike or Sobi may be advisable, company providing bike sharing service model since they can be easily expanded as demand in- tends to occur mostly in larger cities where the creases.While neither system requires additional potential for advertising views, and therefore infrastructure like docking stations, Sobi does advertising revenue, is the greatest. require the purchase of their proprietary bicycles, It is important to note that all of the systems but does not require users to have internet access referenced in the previous paragraphs are in to use the system. large cities. However, there are system opera- tors providing bicycle sharing for individual busi- nesses,institutions and even multi-family housing complexes.An example is a company operating ' a system for a General Motors'technology cam- pus, a 710 acre site with 38 buildings housing 21,000 employees.The site's scale and compact arrangement makes bike sharing a viable alterna- tive to employees having to move a vehicle from place to place during the course of their work day, and then having to locate a parking space each time they move. Access to shared bikes allows them to pick up transportation at will and conveniently drop it off. Chapter 2:Analysis Emerging Technologies Wayfinding Because technologies are ever-changing, this Private mapping services such as Google and section should be considered a snapshot of Bing provide online/smartphone apps that al- what exists at the time of this writing. Informa- low users to select from various transportation tion sharing continues to be faster, easier, more modes, including walking or biking.As the master customizable and convenient. These tools can plan is implemented, it will be important to update help to supplement sharing between residents these and other providers with the latest biking and City staff. and walking routes. Mobile phone applications provide real time geo- A custom map app created for the City of Tem- spatial information about bike share, transit and ecula could also include information about where ride share availability, in many cases enabling to ride and bicycle parking locations. It can gro- users to access these options on demand. Mobile vide details, such as long-term or indoor storage apps, particularly those related to bike share, solutions, as well as provide the ability to report transit and the sharing economy have great po- problems with racks, facilities or even report tential to transform the way people get around. close-calls. In doing so, they have the potential to reduce auto-dependency and support more pedestrian, Condition Reporting • bicycle and transit travel.The proliferation of bike With the power of a smartphone, it is now easy to share, increased use of transit and explosion of take a photo, record the time, date and location ride share options like Car2Go, Uber and Lyft and add a text description. Pairing this function- would not be possible without their supportive ality with an app can allow individuals to report =Room mobile apps. Enhancing choices means less car issues such as graffiti, overgrown plantings, dependency,an increasing reality in cities across roadway problems, broken sidewalks, lighting the US. In the City of Temecula, the use of mo- problems, trash, irrigation leaks, etc. The most bile apps, in conjunction with real transportation widely used such app is City Sourced, which so choices, would reinforce those choices and sup- produces apps customized for a number of cities port increased walking and biking.The following across the country. sections describe potential smartphone apps, as well as cutting edge technologies for enforcement Close-call Reporting and counting. Crash data provides a wealth of information regarding locations with safety concerns. This Route Tracking can help to determine if an education campaign Route tracking can employ a smartphone's global or engineering fix can address crash patterns. positioning system (GPS) capabilities to later However,this is a reactionary measure.A method map on-line where the riding, walking or running for reporting "close-calls" where crashes nearly occurred and see the routes others use.This can happened can help to capture valuable informa- help route planning, as well as track mileage, tion before there is a serious incident.Additionally, calories burned or reductions in vehicle miles this can be a venue to report a crash that results traveled (VMT) and green house gas (GHG) in no damage or injury and therefore would have emissions. This can be a basis for competition otherwise gone unreported. between student groups for prizes or tracked for commuter incentives. Quick Response (QR) Codes This can be done with apps like MapMyRide or A Quick Response (QR) code is an image Endomondo,or this functionality can be a custom- that functions similar to a barcode, readable ized City app.The benefit of a customized app is by smartphones equipped with an appropriate that the City can use the data for tracking active reader app. The most widely used type consists transportation trips to be used for incentives, of black squares arranged in a pattern on a white prizes and awards, but also general knowledge background that make up a code containing let- about those s.tri It can be helpful for learning ters, characters and numbers. The QR code can p p g therefore contain a link to a website or video or popular routes residents use, when and how of- other digital content online. Users encountering ten facilities are utilized and to track changes as a QR code scan it with a smartphone or tablet encouragement programs are implemented and camera enabled with a QR code reader app and facilities are expanded.This can provide excellent the device then loads an encoded Web URL benchmarking data overtime,which can also be onto the device's Web browser. Posting a QR particularly useful for future grant applications. code assumes the user will recognize what to do a + 52 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG with the QR code and have a smartphone and Three Foot Passing Enforcement QR reader app. Therefore, it is best to reserve The Chattanooga Police Department recently the use of these codes for added information or became the first bicycle enforcement unit to convenience. For example, a QR code posted deploy a handlebar-mounted ultrasound device, on a City map could be encoded to direct users BSMART(Bicyclist and Safe Monitoring Applied to the City's active transportation website to find Radar Technology). It can measure the distance more information about City routes. between passing vehicles and the rider with unprecedented accuracy of down to one inch. �%" 7■3 Bicycle enforcement officers generally hand out ■ Heducational pamphlets and explain the three foot passing law to cooperative drivers, but can also W A 7 issue tickets. 7Ar Continuous Multi-modal Measurement Multi-modal measurement is a relatively new service that promises to provide more accurate PW and cost-effective counting than can typically be provided by humans on the street. The technol- QR Codes can be used to provide additional ogy does this by incorporating video feeds from information for wayfinding, bicycle parking and any web-enabled camera to measure variables transit information,as well as instructional videos, like pedestrian density and sidewalk level of ser- contact information and more. For example, one vice, as well as monitoring roadways usage and bicycle parking manufacturer employs QR code vehicle speeds, including bicycles. The goal is stickers on its racks that links to an instructional to support projects and studies through real-time video on how to properly lock a bicycle. counts on specific streets or urban locations,such as business districts. RFID Tags Radio Frequency Identification(RFID)is a widely Raw video is transmitted to a sensor that turns the feed into aggregated and anonymous data. used data collection and marking technology that employs electronic tags for storing data and a The algorithm does this by analyzing the move- reader device to retrieve the data.Tags are made ment of pixel aggregations representing specific up of an RFID chip attached to an antenna and user types,automatically identifying whether they most derive their power from the radio frequency represent a car, bus or pedestrian,for examples. waves coming from the reader. To satisfy privacy concerns, the video is deleted after it has been processed,without having been +�•�• Like bar codes, RFID tags identify items. How- viewed by a human being.The resulting data are ever, unlike bar codes, which must be in close then made available for purchase by local gov- proximity and line-of-sight to the scanner for ernments, businesses districts, urban planners reading, RFID tags do not require line-of-sight and advertisers so that they can achieve a more and can be embedded within objects, such as accurate measurement of activity levels and types bicycle frames. Depending on the type of tag and within a specific zone. application, they can be read at a varying range of distances. A common use of RFID tags is commuter track- ing for incentive programs, but it is also used for bicycle registration programs. Installing RFID tags on or in bicycle frames allows them to be easily scanned and compared with a "hot list" of stolen bicycles.The tags may not deter thieves, but they are connected to the police database,which aids bicycle recovery. A downside to using RFID technology for incen- tive programs and use level surveys compared to smartphone apps is that signals must be tracked via readers installed in specific locations, such as along popular routes. 53 Chapter 2:Analysis y nl / til iol 54 109 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG RECOMMENDED TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS 3 Implementation Suggested Bicycle Routes Based on the outreach, research and analysis Based on previous planning efforts and subse- summarized in the previous chapters, this chap- quent public input, four longer, contiguous and ter illustrates the improvements recommended mostly paved routes are recommended to provide to create the desired comprehensive active a framework for the entire Temecula trail system. transportation network. Recommendations are These"backbone"trails would also serve a visitor organized by type and whether they are on- and tourist function by accessing important desti- street or separated facilities.As noted previously, nations and should therefore be well supplied with Temecula's trails and bikeways are relatively wayfinding signage(See Appendix A for trail way- disconnected, with isolated segments occurring finding signage). These routes are shown in the across the City. The recommended facilities are accompanying Figure 16 as the Temecula Loop intended to close these gaps by taking advan- Trail, the Lake Skinner Trail, the Wine Country tage of potential connections between on-street Trail and the South Side Loop Trail. These four and off-street facilities to create a system that backbone trails would form a circumference loop encourages more residents to bike or walk rather with north/south and east/west routes across it, than drive, as illustrated in the following maps. as well as a second smaller loop system south Off-street trails are shown on Figure 13 and on- of the main loop. street bikeway facilities are shown on Figure 14. All of these facilities are then shown together on Temecula Loop Trail a composite map (Figure 15) to illustrate how Starting in Old Town Temecula, the 17 mile long they combine to form a comprehensive active Temecula Loop Trail will follow Murrieta Creek transportation network. north to the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail, then east to Butterfield Stage Road, then south to This master plan is a tool to help implement the Temecula Creek,then west to complete the loop proposals generated during previous planning at Old Town. It will be entirely paved, but will also phases, as well as the gap closure alternatives have some parallel natural surface trail segments. (GCAs) developed for this plan. A major com- Specifically, it will be comprised of 10.1 miles of ponent of this planning phase was refining the Class I multi-use paved path and 6.9 miles of previously recommended routes and facilities into buffered Class II bike lanes, most of which will be GCAs to support future development by providing on Butterfield Stage Road, along with 4.2 miles more detailed site analysis, conceptual routing of natural surface trail paralleling some of the and planning level costs.The resulting GCAs are Class I segments. included in Chapter 5 and are available on the HikeBikeTemecula website. Lake Skinner Trail The six mile long Lake Skinner Trail bisects the City roughly north/south. Its southern third will parallel Margarita Road, and then turn northeast to run between Temecula Valley High School and Linfield Christian School,around the Temeku Golf Course, and then to follows an MWD easement north to Murrieta. Both ends intersect the Tem- ecula Loop Trail.Approximately half of this route will be paved, and the segments within the utility easement will be natural surfaced. 41 Al ,4�w 55 Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Figure 13-Existing and Proposed Trails (Natural Surface and Paved Class 1) Ir��r��rtYr� ' 7nCh 6 PR % � f �#i� +Py ♦14r ,&None , ` .r AL 40 � IR Dey� �Nomfa Rd "k,ny #4* ♦. f a F 4P e ♦ ♦♦ • �°♦ ,, ♦ 10 Y a; ` s4' ti fit♦ Rd � C ♦% Rancho►'7ay Ra � k i i • ♦;� , 'r�ro ♦ n #j*�1i` #j/ I� iWorI Vaway Rd yA�PL" VAI no- AYt,�� s h. Hdf`swwr Proposed Trailheads Shared Use Paths(Class 1) Schools Proposed Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail Connections ! Existing Paved Hard Surface Trail(7.6 miles) Parks Proposed Natural Surface Trails(21 4 miles) I I Proposed Paved Hard Surface Trail(19.2 miles) Commercial Center Existing Natural Surface Trails(19,2 miles) Existing Off-Street Facilities Open Space Proposed Horse Route(3.4 miles) Existing Urban Trail(10.2 miles) Vineyards/Agricultural Proposed Wide Sidewalk City Boundary 56 = City of Temecula,California-Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Figure 14-Existing and Proposed Bike Lanes(On street Bikeways-Class 11 and 111) • W7ntheseorRd•----� 111!1 b�`— �� ♦1f1 111 0441N 1r 40 Korte r aa! Qb I ♦ ��l1 F11 ♦♦♦ � 1��%+ ko • °a --..'ho Ca_jimiIRd nia Del Pej- ••ra _ see Via.arms l/ 4♦ ara I{�I ! �'r y+ ti r 9 41 'WR., giya r s � 1 Raneg P. — WVTsh/Rd 1 �If1 r I � •'l��II• 0 111111 I I Ari 4. *f a ' as ii Ab 'r 4 wo op • a%qb r •~•+►s Proposed Trailheads Schools f Bike Lanes(Class II) Parks Existing(55.8 miles) Commercial Center 1 I Proposed(23 9 miles) Open Space Bike Routes(Class 111) Vineyards/Agricultural Existing(2.9 miles) City Boundary 11 I Proposed(3.4 miles) { a•a Proposed Sharrow Route(9.6 miles) — bp 5 IT Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Figure 15 - Composite Trails and Bikeways r - Ar Nolte .100 4 � X111 1lt tt~ a w r tt J.-Pee, V� - f h % Ae ,.00,Ifi I#*+I ter se er►n•!R41;� � �t�;►�� t t� If up Ile i t 41 _ � ♦ � � �, f RancriolVr&yptd 1♦ 10 ',�� / 4W Proposed Traitheads 0 �� * Proposed Santa Gertrudis Creek ♦� I ��► ••• Trail Connections r • M� Proposed Natural Surface Trails .0 (21.4 miles) ••+• * Existing Natural Surface Trails (19.2 miles) Proposed Horse Route(3 4 miles) y� Shared Use Paths(Class 1) i Existing Paved Hard Surface ••M ♦ *■ .o. Trail(7.6 miles) �• Prop o19. Paved Hard Surface Trail •• f, Bike Lanes(Classmiles11))nes(Classl11)) i•Vr1yr'R SPrcliy�atnnc �' /// 1, Existlng(55.8 miles) •% 1 1 Proposed(23.9 miles) P% Bike Routes(Class 111) Existing(2.9 miles) 11 Proposed(3 4 miles) j_.. �� ` Ale— , � •• Proposed Sharrow Route(9 6 Ittailow yr, miles Existing Off-Street Facilities \� Existing Urban Trail(10 2 miles) Proposed Wide Sidewalk r' Schools Parks Commercial Center Open Space VineyardslAgdoultural City Boundary 58 agoCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Figure 16— Suggested Bicycle Routes avn,r allorte �O -i aO1�'18 ya_ 0111 i Y Rd Ran[ho califomla Rrf Ma'9 Det Rey to Serena wY f L' L ti c J Rd >?nnthn Vls7a Ru 7 asp 1&64W 41P. Proposed Trailheads Paved Facility I_ _ Natural Surface Facility — / Lake Skinner Trail(6 miles) NCO pyf Jf South Side Loop Trail(6.3 miles) i� Temecula Loop(17 1 miles) wine Country Trail(4.2 miles) Schools Parks Commercial Center Open Space Vineyards/Agricultural C_f City Boundary 59 Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Wine Country Trail Temecula as Regional Trail Hub The four mile long Wine Country Trail will connect Due its prime location in southwest Riverside Old Town east/west across the City with the Wine County,Temecula lies in the middle of a planned Countryjust east of Butterfield Stage Road where regional trail network that includes the four back- it intersects the east side of the Temecula Loop bone routes noted in the previous section that Trail. It will parallel portions ofYnez Road, Rancho lie wholly within the City, but also includes other Vista Road and Rancho California Road. Most of regional trail connections to other more distant this route will be paved, but the segment along destinations, such as the Santa Rosa Plateau, a portion of Rancho California Road and another the Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve, Gavilan contiguous with the Lake Skinner Trail within the Mountain, Vail Lake and Lake Skinner. Planned utility easement will be natural surfaced. regional trails include the Murrieta Creek Re- South Side Loop Trail gional Trail (part of the Temecula Loop Trail),the Temecula Creek to Vail Lake Trail, and the pro- The eight mile long South Side Loop Trail is actually posed Waves to Wineries Trail,which is planned a double loop paralleling Calle Piedra Rojo, Red- to connect with the Pacific Ocean. All three of hawk Parkway, Vail Ranch Parkway, Wolf Creek these major regional trails either exist in part or Drive,Wolf Valley Road and portions of Pechanga are in the planning stages.The following sections Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road. It directly outline the significance of the trail alignments to connects with the Lake Skinner Trail at Redhawk both the City and regional networks and how their Parkway and with the Temecula Loop Trail at both interconnectedness affects the overall system. Redhawk Parkway and Butterfield Stage Road. They are the culmination of years of analysis and These segments will be entirely paved. planning, based largely on City survey comments Note that these four backbone trails are com- and community meeting participant input through prised of component trails shown in previous all phases of master plan development since the maps and that many existing and proposed routes City's first survey in 1991. intersect with these. The suggested wayfinding system described in the Toolbox in Appendix A would take advantage of these connections and give users clear guidance about their relative position within the overall trails system, as well as direct them to nearby schools, parks, retail centers and other points of interest within reason- able distance of these backbone trails. Figure 17— Proposed Murrieta Creek Trail System Riverwalk Trail Ilk ■ San Jacinto River Trail Santa Gertrudis Creek A Warm Springs Creek to Wine Country ►� Lake Elsinore Wildomar r Butterfield Murrieta • �...art.��r rMa...r., ■ Trail • ■ Temecula • �• • Wildon Trail ■ `-• ■ Temecula Creek & Butterfield Trail South Santa Rosa Plateau Divide Trail (USFS) 60 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Western Temecula The Murrieta Creek Regional Trail is especially Currently, walkers and bikers traveling between noteworthy and has gained wide support. It is a the Old Town Temecula area and the rest of the joint project of the Riverside County Regional City must cross Interstate 15 at freeway inter- Park and Open Space District, the Riverside changes,such as at Winchester Road or Rancho County Flood Control and Water Conservation California Road, mingling with heavy vehicle District (RCFCWCD), the San Diego Regional traffic, turning motions and lane changes. Most Water Quality Control Board,the Santa Rosa Pla- people are not willing to risk riding or walking in teau Ecological Reserve, the US Army Corps of such conditions, effectively making the freeway Engineers (ACOE) and the US Fish and Wildlife a barrier to east-west non-motorized travel. Even Service. It will connect Temecula with Murrieta, experienced cyclists prefer to avoid crossing in Wildomar and Lake Elsinore, but also direct con- the midst of heavy vehicle traffic if a nearby safer nections to many other trails along it length. alternative was available. The Santa Gertrudis Interconnect is that alternative. It would replace Temecula is committed to ensure that future this uncomfortable experience with a much development projects and community planning needed, low-stress, off-street route connecting efforts support the trail's establishment, as well the Old Town Temecula are and its surrounding as coordinating way-finding,branding and promo- developing areas(Altair and the Jefferson Avenue tion. Part of this effort was the official opening corridor)with the rest of the City east of Interstate in June 2015 with a bicycle ride from Old Town 15 via a paved pathway under the freeway along Temecula to Lake Elsinore. The trail is yet to be Santa Gertrudis Creek. fully developed, but sections exist on both sides of the creek within Temecula, which were part Analysis shows that providing an alternative east- of an ACOE project to widen the channel to pre- west biking route to having to ride on Winchester vent future flooding. Some sections are paved Road is also a matter of safety. Bicycle collision and others are natural surfaced. Construction is analysis shows that Temecula's two densest colli- dependent on RCFCD and ACOE funding (See sion"hot spots"are on Winchester on either side of Figure 17). Interstate 15.This is even more pronounced in the pedestrian collision hot spot analysis(See Figures Several project survey respondents said they 8 and 9).These maps strongly support the Santa lived or worked in Murrieta and within the survey Gertrudis Creek Trail as a safety enhancement. comments were numerous requests to provide a connection with Murrieta. While it was originally The proposed Santa Gertrudis Interconnect also conceived as a recreational amenity,the Murrieta supports Safe Routes to School, specifically for Creek Regional Trail will provide a low-stress Chaparral High School,whose site is bounded on regional bicycle commuting route that will directly three sides by Nicolas Road, Winchester Road benefit bicycle commuting between the cities and Margarita Road, and by an existing segment along Murrieta Creek. of the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail.A bike/pedes- trian bridge crosses the creek at southeast corner Northern Temecula of the campus near the end of Roripaugh Road,a The proposed Santa Gertrudis Interconnect is quarter of a mile from the campus center. Three an extremely important to Temecula, especially bicycle collisions and two pedestrian "hot spots" within the regional trail network, as described occur at the major roadway intersections closest in GCA 1 (See Chapter 5). It is the lynch pin of to the school (See Figures 8 and 9). Completing Temecula's overall trail network because the the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail and making it a Santa Gertrudis Interconnect is a segment of the contiguous segment of the Temecula Creek Loop Temecula Loop Trail that circles the entire City, would likely encourage more students to bike which includes the segment of the Murrieta Creek or walk to school, and would give students who Regional Trail that lies within Temecula, and are currently walking or biking an alternative to would connect the two sides of the City bisected Winchester Road. by Interstate 15. 61 Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Southern Temecula (Trails along Temecula Creek) An additional creek crossing is proposed at the Non-motorized users within the neighborhoods cul-de-sac terminus of Nicolas Road, which is south of Temecula Parkway and east of Pechanga almost half a mile north of the existing crossing at Parkway are hemmed in from the rest of the City Roripaugh Road.This new crossing would provide by these high speed, high traffic volume roadways. more convenient access across the creek from the Trails along Temecula Creek are discontinuous and Harveston area east of Margarita Road to the north biking or walking between southern Temecula and end of the campus and the school's main entrance Old Town Temecula involves crossing Interstate on Nicolas Road. The trail is currently fenced off 15 at the Temecula Parkway interchange or going from the campus and Nicolas Road, but recurring north to cross at the Santiago Road bridge over damage to the fence indicates that students and the freeway. others are likely going under it at this location, as well as others accessing the trail from Nicolas According to project survey comments and com- Road. munity meeting participants, most cyclists who live south of Temecula Parkway and want to get The proposed Santa Gertrudis Interconnect is to the Old Town area cross Temecula Parkway likely to support employment access connecting and then use DePortola/Ynez Road to access the housing and jobs on both sides of Interstate 15 Santiago Road overcrossing to reach the Old Town because the availability of such a high quality off- Temecula area. GCA 14 addresses the crossing street connection will encourage more people to of Temecula Parkway at Redhawk by expanding commute by bike instead of driving to work. The existing sidewalks to 10 feet wide because no ad- Santa Gertrudis Interconnect also supports social ditional roadway space was available for improved equity because it will especially benefit residents on-street major bicycle facilities.This crossing point of low income housing along Pujol Street west of is important because it connects three of the four Murrieta Creek and Old Town Temecula who may backbone trails: the Lake Skinner Trail, the Tem- _,, ,,■ be less likely to own a vehicle or have access to ecula Loop Trail and the South Side Loop Trail. A one. The Santa Gertrudis Interconnect will give trailhead is proposed just south of Temecula Creek them much improved access to the rest of the City in this area (See Figures 13, 14 and 15). and its services and employment centers. The proposed trails in the Redhawk Parkway/Mar- Nicolas Road Widening garita Road/Temecula Parkway area paralleling The Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail's current eastern Temecula Creek not only connect with the South terminus is Nakayama Park on Nicolas Road at Jo- Side Loop Trail, but converge and then cross under seph Road. Nicolas Road is planned to be widened Interstate 15 to connect with the south end of the as part of developer-provided improvements from Murrieta Creek Regional Trail to provide direct off- near the current terminus eastward to Butterfield street access between southern and eastern Tem- Stage Road to include a trail network within the ecula and the Old Town Temecula area(See GCAs development, as well as continuation of the Santa 12, 13, 14 and 15 in Chapter 5). GCA 14 would be Gertrudis Creek Trail to Butterfield Stage Road. part of the Temecula Loop Trail, connecting with These improvements are critical to Temecula's bike facilities on Butterfield Stage Road,the eastern overall planned trail network because they include segment of the Temecula Loop Trail,as well as the segments of two of the four backbone trails. One is starting point for the proposed Temecula Creek to a segment of the Temecula Loop Trail that forms the Vail Lake Trail, where a trailhead is proposed. A northeastern`corner'of the overall loop connecting trailhead is also proposed at the junction of GCAs If the Santa Gertrudis Creek and Butterfield Stage 14 and 15 (See Figures 13, 14 and 15). Road segments of the loop.The other is the north- Eastern Temecula ernmost segment of the Lake Skinner Trail, which would cross Nicolas Road and intersect with the (Temecula Pkwy/Butterfield Stage Road area) Temecula Loop Trail just east of Butterfield Stage The majority of the Temecula Loop Trail's eastern Road.A trailhead is planned immediately north of segment lies within the Butterfield Stage Road cor- this area along the Lake Skinner Trail. ridor, connecting the trails along Temecula Creek in the south with the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail in the north.Two backbone trails intersect with this Temecula Loop Trail segment: the Wine Country Trail at Rancho California Road,and the Lake Skin- ner Trail continues north of Santa Gertrudis Creek. 162 OHIOCity of Temecula, California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update H I KEB I KETE MEC ULA.O RG Trailheads and Access Points An otherwise comprehensive trail system's utility While a relatively new idea, bike skills parks are can be undermined by lack of access. In most simply another recreational amenity, analogous to cases, this means long sections with no access skate parks,which many cities already provide and points except at major arterials, even though the successfully manage. Compared to other typical trail passes through residential neighborhoods and park facilities, bike parks are relatively inexpensive lies near schools, parks and retail centers. Public to build and maintain, especially since they often comment and consultant experience revealed that attract volunteer support. many multi-use pathway networks lack adequate access points, including existing pathways in Over 65 percent of survey respondents and work- Temecula such as the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail. shop attendees said they "liked" or "loved" bike Having few access points can result in a number skills parks or pump tracks. Workshop attendees of issues: pointed out that many cities have built such fa- • Users must travel out-of-direction more than cilities with extensive volunteer support, including should be necessary to reach a destination. construction, materials and ongoing maintenance. While most survey respondents did not specify a • Destinations that should be readily accessible location, several suggested locating them within are not, such as schools, parks and retail. City parks. Two potential locations are adjacent • Users frequently force their own access points, to Rancho Elementary School on La Serena Way such as cutting or going under fences. and at the Ronald Reagan Sports Park as part of • Having limited locations to leave the trail in- CCAs 9 and 17 (See Chapter 5). creases the perception of danger. As part of a comprehensive bikeway system, the • Limited access points makes it more difficult to League of American Bicyclists(LAB)supports bike take shorter trips, such as with young children. skills parks because they encourage children to ride To address this issue, a number of trailheads are more. In general, children have shorter attention proposed at locations with enough space for ameni- spans, less stamina and prefer to ride shorter dis- ties such as vehicle and bicycle parking, seating, tances than adults. Anecdotal evidence suggests shade, and restrooms where appropriate (See that having fun,shorter riding venues helps to keep Figures 13, 14 and 15). Three new access points them interested in riding into adulthood. along the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail, including one The LAB's Bicycle Friendly Community program noted previously at the north end of Nicolas Road, awards points to cities for facilities like bike parks are recommended to address the issues noted and pump tracks since kids use them on their way above,as well as to support area businesses along home from school, and are therefore more likely to Winchester Road that lie very close to the trail, but ride their bicycles to and from school. Bike skills are currently cut off from it. parks should be distributed across the community within kids'ability to access them without depending Pump Tracks/Bike Skills Parks on having to be driven to them.To support this,bike- The continual increase in trail biking has led to a ways should be provided connecting associated boom in the popularity of bike skills parks, often neighborhoods, schools and bike skills parks and within city parks. These venues can be a great be well maintained. (Temecula is an LAB Bronze community asset providing a managed arena for level Bicycle Friendly Community and facilities like beginner to expert skill development, including kids bike parks could be a significant factor in future and their parents.They also provide riding venues upgrade applications.) closer to home, ideally close enough to be ridden Bike skills park planning advice is available from the to instead of having to drive to a trailhead. Pump International Mountain Biking Association (IMBA), tracks and bike skills parks are popular with young which supports such facilities close to home so that people and participation can encourage cycling families and children can more easily have fun and throughout their lives. These parks encourage rid- ing to and from the park and promote riding bicycles get exercise outdoors. as a means of transportation. While it appears from project workshop and survey results that volunteer support and labor is readily available, overall community backing needs to be assured.The following development guidelines are based on IMBA's guidance: 63 Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Set the stage Progression is key Identify local government allies, secure volunteer Bike skills parks must include smaller stunts that labor and funding and conduct an educational allow for low risk progression to more challenging campaign to familiarize people with bike skills terrain to attract new riders and parents who other- parks. This should include collecting web links of wise would be watching from the sidelines. Paren- exemplary bike parks. Most provide videos, which tal support can progress into actual participation, help people unfamiliar with the concept of bike which helps build momentum for future expansions. parks to visualize them. This can be followed by tours of potential sites. Plan for growth Bike parks are long-term community assets and Address risk management should be periodically evaluated and modified to Bike skills parks provide a level of managed risk that keep them fresh and exciting. Some advanced rid- many riders and parents will find reassuring. De- ers may move on, but this renewal will help retain velop standards for structures and emphasize how and attract other riders. this will be a safe place for kids to ride while saving the city money otherwise spent tearing down fea- Hire a professional designer/builder tures illegally built in private or open space areas. Communities often prefer working with a profes- sional contractor.When hiring a builder to construct Design a visually appealing facility a bike skills park, be prepared to articulate the com- Communities often reject plans perceived to be munity's needs, longer term plans, education and eyesores. Emphasize planting and other beautifi- other goals and any in-kind contributions that may cation efforts to help convince skeptics who claim be available. It is not as important to know about a bike skills park would be visually unappealing. specific materials or technical specifications as it Garden clubs and other community groups may be is to know what the community wants. willing to support beautification efforts. The following map illustrates the extent of one of the Develop a maintenance program most comprehensive bike skills parks built to date Develop a thorough written maintenance plan that as part of Valmont City Park in Boulder, Colorado. names each structure and have staff use an inspec- Other well-known California examples within urban tion form when performing routine maintenance parks include Fresno, Elk Grove and Folsom. checks. This will help standardize maintenance records and allow staff to easily identify features that need repair or when a rider reports a problem. Train the builders Potential crew leaders need to be comfortable directing groups of volunteers, so they must have - - both the building skills and the leadership qualities needed to produce a first-rate facility. Example Bike Skills Park features +j L - _ 64 q. , Big City of Temecula,California a Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Example Bike Park Map(Boulder, Colorado) 7 TTA PI � T 77)` Yela PION . OC.. ~ `J fee•er3,l4.ar.�r_�• _ IJ i• itis I T ��``dd� �C4p� ti"F}RIVwt �" < Q ;1 _ t araamaar.. 1~y J 1 '0,"0 yi 9 : t . , - , •O•Lase OlfllcWt y OREWAYTrall y,8.Yore Oittlnolt TWO WAY Troll —TuroLn Perk !- Techalcsl Feature •••Rat—Path Fabricated Feature Q E a Large Tomei. Lop F>aamn ®Lupo Tarram Q mt. t _ ®Yadlam Tbrrdn Q Parklap "T - •/�, ��j^�� ®SmaIIT§rnm O Reemaome ' Extra%mall Tarraln O Rua SMp - 'a frO SMHLLI v Shand Path •••• Lbaat Only Trails [15l'Ll9:)t-: a 7eaak s _ 65 �tlOiJeR fi,,. Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Best Practices Maintenance Program Maintaining Bicycle Lane Continuity The following sections address the most common Bicycle facilities can sometimes "disappear" fol- maintenance issues affecting paved multi-use path- lowing roadway reconstruction. This can happen ways and natural surface trails with an emphasis on incrementally as paving repairs are made overtime preventing them through proper planning, design and are not promptly followed by proper re-striping. and construction practices. When combined with poor surface conditions fol- lowing long periods out of service due to roadwork, On-Street Facility Maintenance bikeway facilities can be "lost,"which can discour- and Operations age cycling in general. Facility maintenance and performance monitoring Following any roadwork repairs, the surface must and assessment are critical for ensuring safe and be restored to satisfactory quality with particular efficient travel for cyclists and walkers. Debris on attention to smoothness suitable for cycling.Also, the streets, particularly within bicycle lanes,was the striping must be restored to the prior markings or most common non-site-specific survey comment about on-street issues. These complaints usually new markings installed if called for by the project. included requests for more frequent street sweep- These requirements should also be applied to ing of popular routes. adjacent construction that involves the demolition Motor vehicle traffic tends to "sweep" debris like and rebuilding of roadway surfaces. Construction activities controlled through the issuance of permits, litter and broken glass toward the roadway edges where it can accumulate in bicycle lanes. Swerv- especially driveway,drainage,utility,or street open- ing to avoid debris or broken glass can cause loss ing permits, can have an important effect on the of control, which makes proper maintenance a quality of a roadway surface where cyclists operate. safety priority. For this reason, street sweeping Such construction can create hazards in the form of mismatched pavement heights, rough surfaces or needs to occur regularly on roadways with bicycle facilities, especially in the curb lanes and along longitudinal gaps in adjoining pavements, or other the curbs themselves. Bicycle facilities should be Pavement irregularities. Permit conditions should ensure that pavement foundation and surface swept regularly, at least twice a month, and prefer- treatments are restored to their pre-construction ably more often for heavily traveled routes. Also, conditions, that no vertical irregularities will result adjacent shrubs and trees should be kept trimmed back to prevent encroachment into the pathway or and that no longitudinal cracks will develop. obstructing cyclists'views. Strict specifications, standards and inspections There should also be a method to address contin- designed to prevent these problems should be de- gencies in a timely manner, such as areas about veloped, as well as effective control of construction which the City is receiving reports of the need for activities wherever bikeways must be temporarily additional sweeping, or following significant rain- demolished. Because surface deterioration due to falls. Roadways with designated bicycle routes, faulty roadway surface reconstruction can take time particularly those accessing Old Town Temecula to appear,a five year bond should be held to assure and the Wine Country, should receive priority, and deteriorations are repaired. sweeping should include the full width of the curb lanes along with their adjoining bicycle lanes. Law enforcement could also assist by requiring towing companies to fully clean up crash debris. This would prevent glass and debris from being A ti_ left in place after a motor vehicle crash, or simply swept to the curb or shoulder area. 166 9uoCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Asphalt Multi-use Pathways Even a small roadway resurfacing could result in The main cause of asphalt pathway edge failure a missed opportunity if cyclists and planned im- is inadequate compaction under the pavement provements are not taken into consideration early. edges. Multi-use path pavement design should Each resurfacing should be cross-referenced with begin with a soils investigation to determine the the Trails and Bikeways Master Plan to highlight native soil's load carrying capabilities. The com- GCAs that can be implemented along with other pacted subgrade should exceed the width of the improvements. Planning for trails and bikeway planned asphalt pavement edge by a foot and the facilities should begin at the very earliest stage base layer exceed it by an additional foot. of project development. Where motor vehicles are driven on multi-use Strive for intra-agency coordination within the paths, especially those eight feet wide, their City to ensure that this plan's recommendations wheels usually will be at or near the path edges. are incorporated at every level of transportation Because this can cause edge damage that will,in planning, engineering and design.An integrated turn, reduce the path's effective operating width, approach results in creative funding opportuni- adequate edge support should be provided either ties, synergistic teamwork and successful proj- in the form of stabilized shoulders through the use ects at lower cost. An example is a Portland, of geotextile fabric underlay or thickened edges, Oregon's "Greenstreets Program" integrating or in additional pavement width, or a combina- traffic-calming measures and stormwater reten- tion of these. tion. Intersection curb extensions were installed to serve as atraffic-calming measure, but they Multi-use paths built along riparian corridors and through wooded areas must contend with were also designed to serve as catch basins to tree roots that can pierce the path surfacing and capture stormwater.This allowed the city to utilize stormwater retention funding to install otherwise cause it to break apart. Preventative methods costly traffic-calming infrastructure that also include vegetation removal, path alignment away serves as streetscape improvements. from trees, and root barrier placement along the path edge when it must come within 10 feet of existing trees. Asphalt Pathway First Subsequent Maintenance Task Application Applications Recommendations (Years) (Years) Check drainage compo- 1 1 nents for proper function Identify and complete 2 6 crack sealing Identify and complete 2 6 patching Perform seal coating 4 4 67 Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Concrete Multi-use Pathways Natural Surface Trails Vegetation infiltration into the pavement is less As with paved trails, it is necessary to ensure that of a concern with concrete surfaces than asphalt natural surface trails are crowned or have a con- surfaces. However, it is prudent to ensure that all sistent cross-slope to drain water from the surface. organic materials are grubbed from the proposed ADA specifies that the maximum cross-slope be pathway subgrade prior to construction. two percent. It is critical to keep water from ponding Tree roots can cause faulting of joints in concrete on the trail surface by directing water off the trail. pavements along with disrupting the transverse and The following maintenance tasks intervals are longitudinal grade of slabs. Therefore, the same recommendations. Real-world factors, such as considerations and recommendations described construction materials, construction technique,trail for asphalt pathways in riparian areas are valid for usage and environmental conditions, may dictate concrete pathways and should be implemented. task completion more or less frequently than out- lined. For example, high rain seasons are likely to Joint sealing is recommended since any measure cause some erosion damage, but the additional to prevent moisture penetration into the concrete moisture levels also allow for superior compaction. pavement structure will increase serviceable life. Additionally, sealant will prevent foreign objects from entering the joint,which can cause deteriora- tion. However, cost versus benefit will need to be determined. i Concrete Pathway Maintenance Natural Surface Trail Maintenance Maintenance Task Interval Maintenance Task Interval Recommendations (Years) Recommendations (Years) Check drainage compo- 1 Check drainage compo- nents for proper function nents for proper function Identify and complete 6 Spot fixes/localized 2 crack sealing grading and shaping Identify and complete patching 6 �`' 68 I OuluCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECUTA.ORG RTA Bus Stops The overarching goal of an active transportation Jefferson Avenue master plan is to safely provide active transpor- tation infrastructure to persons of all abilities. Integrating master plan recommendations into the surrounding transportation and transit network is j intended to improve the user experience by provid- ing intuitive,safe and recognizable routes connect- ing the active transportation and transit networks, making both more viable. i Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) provides bus ser- vice for the Temecula area with three routes that operate within the City and three commuter routes that connect with transit centers in Oceanside, Corona and Moreno Valley. Of particular concern for this plan are the bus stops r themselves.The accompanying example on Jeffer- son Avenue illustrates conditions common to RTA stops in Temecula-no shade or weather protection, seating,sidewalk orADA-compliant access,and the " stop is not located near a controlled intersection ' x _ equipped with crosswalks. f �. Improving cyclist and pedestrian access to transit 4 16 helps to expand the sphere of influence for both ". . cyclists and walkers. Improvements should be — -- guided by a set of best practices as they apply to transit stops and associated bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Specifically, making bus stops more comfortable and accessible can encourage transit Winchester Road use and create a safer environment for all users. Best practices include flush curb—to-bus board- ing, ample seating, shade and weather protection, ' all-weather paving, lighting, and public art where space permits. When feasible,street furniture,trash cans and park- ing for mobility devices and bicycles at transit stops ' should also be included, and bus stops should be located on the far side of intersections.An example of a stop on Winchester Road that meets all recom- mended criteria is shown in the lower photo. --¢ 4- 69 Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Promenade Temecula Like most malls, Promenade Temecula was laid Ring Road out primarily to support motor vehicle acces- sibility from the surrounding streets. Pedestrian infrastructure outside the core shopping area is not nearly as refined as that within the core. Its + short"Main Street"entering from the southeast is A.r ' relatively accessible, but the surrounding parking 44 #` r lot and circulation roadways are not.The mail also ,I lacks bicycle facilities. Even so,there are a number of potential revisions that can be done to better connect Promenade ry Temecula with planned and existing bicycle lanes and trails that come close to it, and to provide facilities to help attract patrons who want to ride or walk there. General Recommendations Main Street • Sidewalks where "desire lines" now exist • Overall intersection enhancements, espe- cially high visibility pedestrian and cyclist crossings On-site Recommendations • Short-term customer bicycle parking(such as in-street bike corrals near the Apple Store) • Secure, covered bicycle lockers for employ- • � ees (may be out of line of sight, but readily overseen by security) • Ring Road bicycle enhancements such as signage, shared lane markings and green transition lanes Off-site Recommendations ' + h»h Pedestrian enhancements to N. General �I "Desire Line"along roadway Kearny Road/James L. Day Middle School 4w • Directional signage on Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail with distances to nearest mall entrance at t � Ynez Road(2,600 feet),Promenade Mall Way w + (1,200 feet) and Margarita Road (1,800 feet) • Connection enhancements with proposed Long Canyon Creek Trail-GCA 2 (See Chapter 5) ry Many of these recommendations could be part of any future redevelopment. Outside Promenade Temecula, improvements should prioritize wide pathways and enhanced roadway crossings con- necting adjoining neighborhoods with the mall. r I 70 13912 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Old Town Temecula Bicycle Friendly Business District A bicycle friendly business district (BFBD) is a Old Town Temecula is an ideal BFBD candidate partnership between a city, neighborhood and due to its existing compact bicycle friendly con- business organizations and local businesses that figuration of a relatively low-stress street grid and improves a business district's bicycle friendliness its mix of entertainment and dining venues. The through bicycle infrastructure and local business City has already installed shared lane markings,a promotions to people travelling by bicycle. BFBD bike fix-it station and bike corrals. Being a BFBD services, infrastructure and other program ele- and highlighting its bicycle friendliness could ments combine with privately funded local invest- make Old Town an even more viable commercial ment in bicycle amenities and programs imple- and recreational destination by helping to attract mented by neighborhood and business partners. more potential customers to its businesses. BFBDs encourage and promote short,local trips, Survey respondents cited Old Town Temecula especially for shopping, dining and recreation. as a desirable casual cycling destination specifi- BFBD programs work in conjunction with Com- cally because of its business mix. Also, as new plete Streets and traffic calming objectives to residential development occurs in Old Town and capture local and tourist dollars to help support this plan's bikeway CCAs are implemented, it will neighborhood business development. become much better connected with the City's overall bikeway system, making it even more desirable destination. Future branding could spe- cifically highlight Old Town Temecula as a BFBD. Shared Lane Markings-Old Town Front Street Main Street Bridge ■ • s l R 71 Chapter 3:Recommended Trails and Bikeways Design and Implementation The facility recommendations listed in this chapter Physical design should be guided by the Tool- will be implemented on a case-by-case basis to box— Design Guidelines (Appendix A), which is address connectivity and as part of intersection intended to provide the latest design guidance and roadway segment improvements as need for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. It has been arises and funding allows. This also applies to compiled and customized for Temecula, including the GCAs addressed in Chapter 5. The follow- conceptual signage designed for the backbone ing chapter addresses supporting programs to trail system described previously. Even though encourage more biking and walking in parallel the Toolbox represents design guidance up-to- with this chapter's facility construction solutions date for when this plan was prepared (March and the GCAs, as well as their potential funding. 2016), bicycle facility design, in particular, con- tinues to advance. Federal and State design guidance should be consulted prior to preparing plans based on these recommendations. Natural surface trail along Butterfield Stage Road �T r i •u 72 r � gullCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HinSIKETEMECUMOR6 PROGRAMS AND FUNDING SOURCES 4 Federal Sources Federal, State and local government agencies The previous federal transportation funding authori- invest billions of dollars every year in the na- zation, MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the tion's transportation system. Only a fraction of 21 st Century), has ended and been replaced with that funding is used in development projects, a new funding mechanism. In late 2015, Congress policy development and planning to improve passed and President Obama signed into law a conditions for pedestrians and cyclists. Even five year, $305 billion transportation bill, called the though appropriate funds are limited, they are Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) available, but desirable projects sometimes go Act. It is the first law enacted in over a decade that unfunded because communities may be un- provides long-term funding certainty for surface aware of a fund's existence,or may apply forthe transportation, meaning States and local govern- wrong type of grants.Also,the competition be- ments can move forward with critical transportation tween municipalities for the available bikeway projects. and trail funding is often fierce.Whenever fed- eral funds are used for bicycle or trail projects, Notably, the bill requires all design for National a certain level of State and/or local matching Highway System roadways to take into account ac- funding is generally required. State funds are cess for all modes of transportation. It also makes often available to local governments on similar NACTO's Urban Design Guide one of the U.S. terms. Almost every implemented bicycle and Department of Transportation's roadway design trail program and facility in the United States standards, as well as permits local governments has had more than one funding source and it to use their own adopted design guides if they are often takes a good deal of coordination to pull the lead project sponsor, even if it differs from their the various sources together. state guidelines. According to the Federal Highway Adminis- tration's (FHWA) publication, An Analysis of Current Funding Mechanisms for Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs at the Federal, State and Local Levels, where successful local bi- cycle and pedestrian facility programs exist, there is usually a full time active transportation coordinator with extensive funding source un- derstanding. Cities such as Seattle, Washing- ton, Portland, Oregon and Tucson are prime examples. Active transportation coordinators are often in a position to develop competitive and detailed project proposals that can be used to improve conditions for cyclists and walkers within their jurisdictions. Some of the following information on federal and State funding sourc- es was derived from the previously mentioned FHWA publication. 73 Chapter 4:Programs and Funding Sources Safe Routes to School Programs Caltrans administers two separate Safe Routes to thorize the LWCF with almost 200 co-sponsors School programs. The first is the State-legislated in December, 2015. It is now funded for three program referred to as "SR2S" and the second is years at $450 million, 50 percent more than the federal program referred to as "SRTS." Both previously. programs are intended to achieve the same basic goal of increasing the number of children walking Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assis- and biking to school by making it safer for them to tance Program (RTCA) do so. SR2S is now a part of the Active Transporta- This program is the National Park Service's tion Grant program (ATP) described in the "State community assistance arm. The RTCA pro- Sources." vides technical assistance to communities to preserve open space and develop trails. RCTA The SRTS Program funds non-motorized facilities funds can not be used for infrastructure. As- that improve access to schools through the Caltrans sistance is specifically for construction plans, Safe Routes to School Coordinator. Eligible appli- engaging public participation and identifying cants include State, local, and regional agencies other sources of funding for conservation and experienced in meeting federal transportation outdoor recreation projects.A local example is requirements. Nonprofit organizations, school dis- the Murrieta Creek Regional Trail,for which the tricts, public health departments, and Native Ameri- NPS is a prime partner agency. can Tribes must partner with a city,county, MPO,or RTPA to serve as the responsible agency for their Other Infrastructure Funding Options project. Eligible projects include stand-alone infra- The American Recovery and Reinvestment structure or non-infrastructure projects. Projects Act of 2009 is commonly referred to as the must be completed within four years after project °,stimulus"or the"stimulus package"and targets is amended into FTIP. Targeted beneficiaries are infrastructure development and enhancement. children in grades K-8. No local match is required. In 2011, the original expenditure estimate of Department of the Interior- Land and Water $787 billion was increased to $840 billion to Conservation Fund (LWCF) be in line with the President's 2012 budget and with scoring changes made by the Congressio- The U.S. Recreation and Heritage Conservation nal Budget Office since the enactment of the Service and the California Department of Parks Recovery Act. There was no end date written and Recreation (CDPR) jointly administer this into the Recovery Act because, while many of funding source.The Land and Water Conservation its projects were focused on jumpstarting the Fund is a 50 year old budget neutral program that economy, others are expected to contribute to reinvests a portion of the royalties from offshore oil economic growth for many years. and gas leasing into recreation and conservation priorities. The program has a tremendous track States must use 18.2 percent of their funding record of success and broad bipartisan support, for public safety and government services.An and has been used to expand protected areas eligible activity under this section is to provide and improve recreation facilities in every state. funding to K-12 schools and institutions of Projects acquired or developed under the LWCF higher education to meet green building stan- program must be primarily for recreational use and dards. This is particularly applicable for active not transportation purposes, and the lead agency transportation and Safe Routes to School must guarantee to maintain the facility in perpetuity projects because the Leadership in Energy and for public recreation. Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System, developed by the U.S. Green Applications are evaluated using criteria including Building Council (USGBC), addresses green priority status within the State Comprehensive standards for schools that include bicycle and Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP). The CDPR pedestrian facilities providing safe access to selects which projects to submit to the National Park schools. Service(NPS)for approval. Final approval is based on the amount of funds available that year, which Another $5 billion is provided for the Energy is determined using a population-based formula. Efficiency and Block Grant Program. This pro- Trails are the most commonly approved project. vides formula funding to cities, counties and Though it was allowed to expire at the end of Sep- states to undertake a range of energy efficiency activities. An eligible use of funding is bicycle tember, 2015,widespread public outcry is credited and pedestrian infrastructure. with helping to goad Congress into voting to reau- 74 OupCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBI KETEMECULA.ORG State Sources State Highway Account Transportation Development Act Article 3 Section 157.4 of the California Streets and (SB-821) Highways Code requires Caltrans to set aside TDA funds are based on State sales tax, with rev- $360,000 for the construction of non-motorized enues made available primarily for transit operating facilities that will be used in conjunction with and capital purposes. By law,the Riverside County the State highway system. The Office of Bi- Auditor's office estimates the apportionment for the cycle Facilities administers the State Highway upcoming fiscal year. Account fund. Funding is divided into different project categories. Minor B projects (less than TDA Article 3 funds may be used for activities re- $42,000) are funded by a lump sum allocation lated to the planning and construction of bicycle and by the California Transportation Commission pedestrian facilities such as engineering expenses (CTC) and are used at the discretion of each leading to construction, right-of-way acquisition, Caltrans District office. Minor A projects (esti- and construction or reconstruction.This can include mated to cost between$42,000 and$300,000) a number of activities, such as retrofitting existing must be approved by the CTC. Major projects bicycle and pedestrian facilities to comply with (more than $300,000) must be included in the ADA requirements, route improvements like signal State Transportation Improvement Program controls for cyclists, bicycle loop detectors and rub- and approved by the CTC. Funded projects berized rail crossings.Also eligible are the purchase have included fencing and warning signs re- and installation of facilities such as intersection lated to rail corridors. improvements, bicycle parking, benches, drinking fountains, rest rooms, showers adjacent to paths, Caltrans Active Transportation Program employment centers, park-and-ride lots, and/or (ATP) transit terminals accessible to the general public. This program was created to encourage in- creased use of active modes of transportation, Local Sources such as biking and walking. It consolidates Developer Impact Fees existing federal and State transportation pro- As a condition for development approval, munici- grams, including the Transportation Alternatives palities can require developers to provide certain Program (TAP), Bicycle Transportation Ac- infrastructure improvements, which can include count (BTA), and State Safe Routes to School bikeway projects. These projects have commonly (SR2S), into a single program with a focus provided Class II facilities for portions of on-street, to make California a national leader in active previously planned routes. They can also be used transportation. The ATP is administered by the to provide bicycle parking or shower and locker Division of Local Assistance, Office of Active facilities.The type of facility that should be required Transportation and Special Programs. This is to be built by developers should reflect the greatest a competitive program intended to increase need for the particular project and its local area. biking and walking trips, safety and mobility, Care should be taken to demonstrate a clear nexus to support regional agency greenhouse gas between the project and the mandated improve- (GHG) reduction, enhance public health, ben- ment to avoid legal challenges. efit disadvantaged communities,and include a broad spectrum of projects.As of March 2015, New Construction no local match is required. Future road widening and construction projects The SR2S component of the ATP addresses are one means of providing on-street bicycle facili- eligible city and county infrastructure projects. ties. To ensure that roadway construction projects Projects must be infrastructure projects within provide bicycle lanes where needed, it is important two miles of a grade school or middle school that the review process includes input pertaining and be completion within four years after proj- to consistency with the proposed system. Future ect funds are allocated to the agency.Targeted development in the City will contribute only if the beneficiaries must be children in grades K-12. projects are conditioned. 75 Chapter 4:Programs and Funding Sources Restoration Private Sources Cable,TV and telephone companies sometimes Private funding sources can be acquired by need new cable routes within public rights-of-way. applying through advocacy groups such as the This has most commonly occurred during expan- League of American Bicyclists and the Bikes Be- sion of fiber optic networks. Since these projects long Coalition. Most private funding comes from require a significant amount of advance planning foundations wanting to enhance and improve and often disrupt curb lanes, it may be possible bicycle facilities and advocacy.Grant applications to request reimbursement for affected on-street will typically be through the advocacy groups as bicycle facilities to mitigate construction impacts. they leverage funding from federal, State and In cases where cable routes cross undeveloped private sources. areas, it may be possible to provide for new trail facilities following completion of the cable trench- Table 5 on the following pages summarize many ing, or sharing the use of maintenance roads. of the funding sources available. Other Sources Volunteer programs may be developed to sub- stantially reduce the cost of implementing some routes, particularly multi-use trails. For example, a local college design class may use such a multi- use route as a student project,working with local landscape architectural or engineering firms. .ter Work parties could be formed to help clear the route.A local construction company may donate or discount services beyond what volunteers can do. A challenge grant program with local busi- nesses,schools or families may be a good source ..�.�+• of local funding, through which they can "adopt" a route or segment of one to help construct or maintain it. Trail adoption plaques(Park City, UT) MOUNTAIN mom rRAIL LINK EMPIREAL s +{ I t '+�1 r�[���• l .^7� rf fi�.1'�i" �ate rr'`� ,■n■n,yaJ,�n■r■ ID - k." ro 76 i City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Table 5- Potential Funding Sources Funding subject to north/south split (60%for Southern California).Grants $450 National 50% + may be used for statewide outdoor Parks Service/ 2-6/O° recreational planning and for acquiring Conservation Act of eral;$3.6 Dec-Jan admin. Land and Water million fed- California and developing recreational parks and 1965(LWCF) million CA sur- Department facilities, especially in urban areas. (2012) of Parks and charge Provides matching grants to state and Recreation local governments for land acquisition and development for outdoor recre- ation use. Funds wide variety of bicycle and pe- $10 billion destrian improvements, including on- federal; street bicycle facilities,off-street trails, Surface Transportation $888 mil- sidewalks, crosswalks, bicycle and lion CA FHWA/Caltrans June 1 20% pedestrian signals, parking and other Program(STP) (pre-set- ancillary facilities.May be exchanged aside, pre- for local funds for non-federally certi- penalty) fied local agencies.No match required if project improves safety. _ Transportation $820 Funds construction, planning and million design of facilities for pedestrians, Alternatives Program federal; FHWA/MPO Annual 20% (TAP) Includes Trails $72 5 bicyclists and other non-motorized and SRTS Programs million CA forms of transportation. $5.75 Federal/ million FHWA, Region- Percentage of TAP funding allocated Recreational Trails Regional al must guaranteed Annual to Recreational Trails Program at dis- Program (set-aside agency may not cretion of State. from TAP) also contribute exceed 95% Federal Funds construction and maintenance 80- projects located on National Highway National Highway System(NHS),including those related $1.9 billion FHWA/Caltrans 100%; Performance Program State to bicycle and pedestrian infrastruc- 0-20% ture.Certain safety projects may have federal cost share of up to 100%. 77 Chapter 4:Programs and Funding Sources * ` ' � • � �� ,ice{moi $2.4 billion Funds projects that address safety federal; issues and may include education /o; 90 Highway Safety $197 Federal and enforcement programs. Pro- Improvement Program million CA FHWA/Caltrans N/A State gram includes Railroad-Highway (HSIP) (pre-set- 10% Crossings and High Risk Rural aside, pre- Roads programs. Bicycle projects penalty) must provide high degree of safety. Funding includes pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities Congestion Mitigation $464 construction and nonconstruction and Air Quality(CMAQ) million CA FHWA/Caltrans April 20% projects related to safe bicycle use. Amount depends on state's popula- tion share and on degree of air pollu- tion nonattainment areas. Caltrans proposed funding SRTS 80% from$21 million set aside in STP, Safe Routes to School $21 million FHWACaltrans, federal; approved by CTC as one year Program (SRTS) then MPO N/A 20% policy. Future funding for SRTS to (2012) State be determined through FAST Act implementation process. Staff time Rivers,Trails and awarded Funds expenditures such as bike- Conservation Assis- for National Park Service August N/A way plans, corridor studies, bike- tance Program (RTCA) technical ways and trails assistance. assistance $3.2 billion Provides formula funding for cities, Energy Efficiency and federal; Department of June N/A counties and states to take part in Block Grant Program over$35 Energy energy efficient activities. million CA 78 91' -LCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update F HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG r �!-" Ymm � $2 million HUD and 90% Funds improve land use and trans- Community for planning CA Dept.of federal; portation infrastructure in low-in- Development Block and technical Housing and Ongoing 10% come neighborhoods or citywide for Grants(CDBG) assistance Community local accessibility improvements. (2013) Development May be used to fund building bicycle Federal Lands $611 million FLH/FHWA Ongoing Varies and pedestrian facilities in conjunc- Highway Program (2008-10) tion with roads and parkways at discretion of grantee. Pilot Transit- Federal Transit Funds planning efforts to increase Oriented $10 million Administration N/A N/A pedestrian and bicycle access to Development transit hubs. Planning Program 80% Typical projects have included bicycle 1%of capital lockers and parking near transit sta- Urban- assis- tions and stops. Recipients of Sec- Associated Transit ized Area Federal Transit tance; tion 5307 (Urbanized Area Formula Improvements Formula Grant; Administration/ N/A 50% Grants) must certify spending no less ($45 million in MPO opera- than 1 percent of federal transit funds _ tional FY2014) on associated transit improvements assis- (formerly transit enhancements). tance $409 million Funds preparing or implementing Partnership for P P 9 P 9 Sustainable in grants and/ HUD/DOT/EPA Ongoing N/A regional plans for sustainable devel- Communities or assistance (2010) oP ment. Community Regional health Funds implementing broad, sustain- Transformation $35 million and planning N/A N/A able strategies to reduce health dis- Grants(CTG) (2012) agencies parities and expand preventive health care services. 79 Chapter 4:Programs and Funding Sources Federal Sour'�— im Can be used for innovative, multi- $474 modal and multi jurisdictional Transportation million 80% transportation projects(including Investment federal; bicycle and pedestrian projects) Generating Economic $31 US DOT October federal;20% that promise significant economic Recovery Program million in State and environmental benefits to an (TIGER) California entire metropolitan area, region or (2013) the nation. Minimum project cost is $10 million. Can be used for projects to provide Bus and Bus Facilities $2.17 80% bicycle access to public trans- Program:State of Good billion Federal Transit March federal; portation facilities, specifically for Repair federal Administration 20% shelters for people, bicycle park- (2014) State ing amenities and accommodating bicycles on transit. 90% Can be used for bicycle and pe- $125 destrian support facilities, such as Bus Livability Initiative million Federal Transit March federal. bicycle parking, bicycle racks on (2012) Administration 10% buses, pedestrian amenities and ' State educational materials. Pacific Varies, Federal Lands West generally Funds transportation modes that Transportation Program, Region October; reduce congestion and pollution in Category 3, "Alternative awarded FHWA pro- NIA parks and public lands. (Formerly Transportation" $3.38 grammed Paul S. Sarbanes Transit in Parks million through Grant Program) (2013) 2017 88.53% match Funds to replace or rehabilitate Local Highway Bridge $300 for localpublic highway bridges over water- Program million FHWA/Caltrans Ongoing highways, ways,other topographical barriers, 100%for other highways, or railroads. federal highways Assists private, non-profit cor- porations and public agencies in providing transportation services $20-35 Federal Transit Annuallto meet needs of seniors and Section 5310 million Administration y 11.47% persons with disabilities for whom public transportations services are otherwise unavailable, insufficient or inappropriate. 80 oneCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG SourcesState State Highway Account: (Consult March Must have an adopted Bicycle Bicycle Transportation Varies Caltrans Local 10% Transportation Plan. Funding Account(BTA) Assistance) available for all project phases. Consolidates BTA,Transportation Active Transportation $124 Caltrans Two-year ° Alternatives and Safe Routes to Program million cycle 12/0 School funding. 60% awarded by State, 40% by MPOs. Transportation $149 Local MPO 2% of TDA total,funds for bicycle Development Act(TDA) million or CTC Annually N/A and pedestrian projects. Section 99234 (2014) Regional Improvement $3.4 billion Every two Capital improvement projects Program (STIP) over 5 Caltrans y N/A g ) years ears (planning and rideshare activities AB-2766 Vehicle $30 million SCAQRB February N/A Competitive program for projects Registration Funds (2010) that benefit air quality. Vehicle Registration Competitive program for projects Surcharge Fee(AB-434) N/A APCB July N/A that benefit air quality. RCF 40%from Funds distributed to count com- Vehicle Registration grant APCB April N/A y Surcharge Fee(AB-434) source munities based on population. Developer Fees or Project- Cities Ongoing N/A Mitigation required during land Exactions specific use approval process. Allocated State Gas Tax N/A by State Monthly N/A Major projects>$300,000. (local share) Auditor-Con- allocation troller State and Local Est. $200 Road projects with bicycle lanes. Transportation million Caltrans Summer 50% Requires developer or traffic fee Partnership Program state-wide match. (SLPP) Projects such as upgraded Caltrans Minor Capital Varies Caltrans Ongoing after N/A bicycle facilities must be on state Program July 1 highways. Environmental State None Enhancement and $10 million Resources October required, Individual grants limited to Mitigation Program state-wide Agency annually but $350,000. (EEM) favored 81 Chapter 4:Programs and Funding Sources State Sources Caltrans, CA Community Projects must save energy, Petroleum Violation Es- Varies Services and March N/A Provide public restitution and be crow Account(PVEA) Development, approved by CA Energy Commis- Air Resources sion and US DOE. Board Community Based Transportation Planning $3 million Caltrans November 20% Projects must have a transporta- Demonstration Grant tion component or objective. Program Habitat Conservation CA Dept of Fund Grant Program $2 million Park and October 50% Funded through July 1,2020. (HCF) Recreation Goal to reduce vehicle fatali- Office of Traffic Safety Office of ties and injuries through safety Program(OTS) Varies Traffic Safety January N/A program to include education, enforcement and engineering. State Transportation Gives metropolitan regions more Improvement Program Varies Caltrans Every 4 years N/A control over state transportation (STIP) fund investment. California Conservation California CCC provides emergency assis- Corps(CCC) N/A Conservation N/A N/A tance and public service conser- Corps vation work. Engage low-income and minor- Environmental Justice $9 million ity communities in transportation (EJ) Planning Grants (2010) Caltrans Annually 10% projects to ensure equity and positive social,economic and environmental impacts. CA Natural Create or expand trails for walk- California River ing, bicycling and/or equestrian Parkways Varies Resources October N/A activities compatible with other y Agency conservation objectives. r82 009 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Parking Meter Districts can use Parking Meter Annual parking meter revenues for Districts N/A City Budget N/A streetscape improvements such as pedestrian facilities, landscap- ing and lighting. Riverside County Eligible projects include sidewalks, SB-821 Varies Transportation Annually Uptobicycle paths,lanes and routes, Commission 25lo and access ramps or curb cuts. (RCTC) Riverside County Western County, public transit Transportation includes funding for specialized Measure A $400 million Commission Annually NIA transit,commuter rail, intercity (RCTC) bus service and commuter as- sistance. Direct funding of innovative plan- SCAG ning initiatives for member agen- Sustainability Varies SCAG Annually NIA cies through Compass Blueprint Program Demonstration Projects. New division intended to assist bicycle and pedestrian planning SCAG Activeu efforts. Program focus on efforts Transportation Varies SCAG Annually 11.47/o to meet local needs, contribute to Program implementing SCS and reducing greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions. 83 Chapter 4:Programs and Funding Sources -- - -- Private SOUrces No specific Numerous programs to support funding cycles Healthy Initiatives. Most applicable Community N/A Kaiser at region; N/A is Healthy Eating Active Living with Health Initiatives Permanente accept letters grant focus on environmental and of inquiry year policy approaches to healthy eat- round ing and active living. Grants focused on bicycle infra- None structure such as paths, lanes, required, trails and bridges, mountain bike but lever- facilities, bike parks and pump People for e and tracks, BMX facilities, and end-of- CommunityGrant Up to$10,000 p Twice a year age trip facilities such as bicycle park- Program Bikes funding ing.Also some advocacy projects, partner- such as programs that transform ships city streets, including Ciclovias and important initiatives to increase ridership or investment in bicycle infrastructure. Donated labor and materials for In-kind Services N/A Depends on N/A N/A facility construction or maintenance project such as tree planting programs or trail construction and maintenance. AvailableSources s Must be AHS Alliance member and 501(c)(3). Hikers as primary constituency, but multi-purpose Annual, trail uses eligible. Funds acquisi- National Trails Grants from American application tion, including conservation ease- Hiking N/A ments for projects that will result in Fund $500 to$5,000 deadline � Society mid-February visible and substantial ease of ac- cess, improved hiker safety and/or avoidance of environmental dam- age. Higher preference often given to projects with volunteer labor. Must be Alliance for Biking and Walking and League of American Grants from Bicyclists member and 501(c)(3) $1,000 to or 501(c)(4),with immediate op- Advocacy $3,000, but portunity and specific timeframe Rapid Response staff can N/A N/A for campaign to raise additional Grants decide to Advance federal, state or local funding for give more for biking and walking infrastructure special cases and/or programs; or proposes winnable, replicable campaign with measurable results. 84 HERCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HInSINETEMECULkORG Cap Closure Alternatives (GCAs) is This trails and bikeways plan addressed active The following GCA sheets include existing condi- transportation improvements throughout Temecu- tions, a project text and graphic/map description, la in the form of bike lanes, shared bike facilities, the project's benefit/core value and estimate cost. sidewalk and intersection improvements, paved Figure 18 illustrates their locations. paths and natural surface trails. All of the following CCAs are important and This chapter is a compilation of the gap closure should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis alternatives(GCAs)developed as an integral part as public or private development is proposed, of this plan update. They represent the highest street and intersection improvements are made, priority trail and bikeway improvements based and parks and open space are developed. The on community input and address the residents' following GCAs are therefore not "ranked" or desires to link these non-motorized facilities into shown in any ranked order.Their numbering is for a truly comprehensive network that connects the reference only, starting in the northwest working kinds of destinations they want to access by bike to the southeast portion of the City. or on foot,especially schools, parks,open space, and shopping and employment centers. In addition,these alternatives illustrate one option for closing a bike lane or trail gap. Other options Upon implementation, the result of these efforts may be considered using the Toolbox, Design will be an interconnected network designed to Guidelines in Appendix A. achieve the linkages the community desires, as well as encourage more residents to get around via active transportation rather than by driving, which survey respondents strongly supported. 1 '.� 'mss. _ ..•4 �� pp 1 85 5:Gap Closure Alternatives Figure 18 - Gap Closure Alternatives G.Y1?Ijp� TA '.,:.,-. 4r �Ra qoe Csrfiom4j Rq r�•, Maga B°��Ra, l 7 1 `°'4 to Sernna WV ff main St ..�.. 1a , a Rancho V13..Rd K. V T 'E4 1 wagjllla'Y Rd `NK VNI P.nch Pky GCA End Points GCA Projects Schools Parks Commercial Center Open Space V i n e y a rd s/Ag ri c u ku ra l C3 City Boundary y� 86 f� Santa Gertrudis • 139® HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition The Santa Gertrudis Creek Recreational Trail is a paved, multi-use path that doubles as a Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District maintenance road approximately 15 feet wide, and striped to provide a two- ` way, multi-use trail along the south bank between Joseph `\ .r and Ynez Roads to just east of Interstate 15, immediately X% north of Winchester Road. Li.}rr Interstate 15 is a major barrier to east-west connectivity in r ;, the City of Temecula, forcing cyclists and walkers to deal rrr a s� with heavy vehicular volumes and turning movements at the Winchester Road, Rancho California Road, and Te- r i mecula Parkway Interchanges. This GCA would provide a tit much needed, Class I (off-street)trail connection between : ,r the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail and the Murrieta Creek t Regional Trail, which currently terminates at Winchester and Diaz Roads. Ownership: Riverside County Flood Control and Water •��i� ���� nres ri'. Conservation District(RCFCWCD) 3 scnooi Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description Segment length:0.97 miles(5,137 feet) This GCA would provide undercrossings at Ynez Road, In- terstate 15 and Jefferson Avenue for a continuously paved asphalt path from Joseph Road in Nicolas Valley to Rancho California Road just north of Old Town Temecula. It would connect the Santa Gertrudis Creek Regional Trail to the Murrieta Creek Regional Trail. Engineered drawings have - been completed, and this GCA has been, and continues to be, identified as a "future years" project. This GCA would require environmental review and permits, along with an access and maintenance agreement with RCFCWCD. tiIt � . Oak_: - Benefit/Core Value View west of proposed south side route from southbound Interstate Based on 2002 and 2013 community surveys, this is the 15 Winchester Road offramp City's single most important trail connection, and to re- gional trails beyond. It would provide safe, east-west con- nectivity under Interstate 15 on a Class I off-street facility. This GCA would also complete the Temecula Loop, a trail encircling the City utilizing the Santa Gertrudis Creek Rec- A� ,: reation Trail, Murrieta Creek Regional Trail, bicycle lanes " ' and natural surface paths on De Portola Road, and Class y 5, II bicycle lanes on Butterfield Stage Road. 1 *�. ; The Temecula Loop will provide a family-friendly, recre- ation trail, and a bicycle commuter route connecting hous- ing with jobs, schools and shopping centers, including rC,lrl ,s; Promenade Temecula and Old Town Temecula. In addition, � ' this GCA would satisfy v the City's Core Values of a Health F y and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. View east of existing path at Ynez Road Aft IT Long Canyon Creek Trail Connection 139H HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition The existing route is primarily a creek channel dirt road running behind a series of public facilities, crossing Margarita Road and Overland Drive. Ownership: Private and City of Temecula a t' `Y Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description This off-street route wouIdconnect JamesDay MiddleSchool and Long Canyon Creek Park on North General Kearny t% Road to the Promenade Temecula and an employment center to the west. The route includes crosswalks at the Promenade Way/Overland Drive intersection, as well as a ' ,•� ��` crossing of Margarita Road at Georgetown Lane. A wide sidewalk is recommended on the east side of Margarita �+ between where the route intersects Margarita and the crossing immediately south of Georgetown. A median 610.4' 1 barrier is recommended to discourage users from crossing �i`� Margarita other than at the crosswalk at Georgetown Lane. If a mid-block crossing is planned, a Pedestrian Hybrid ,f x.•00, Beacon (PHB) is recommended due to Margarita Road's — number of travel lanes and 45 mph speed limit. Segment length:1.37 miles(7,286 feet) This route would require coordination with private property owners for access and maintenance. Existing gates would need to be converted to vehicle exclusion only. An interim route employing Class II bicycle lanes is sug- gested on Margarita Road and Overland Drive. Benefit/Core Value This route provides a paved,low-stress alternative to riding �- a bicycle on multi-lane arterials such as Margarita Road,aswell as provides improved crossings of major roadways. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy _ and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. View ea$t from Margarita Road it Class I Multi-use Path View south from Camino Campos Verde (10'paved,4"AC on 6"compacted sub-base,typical) 'l North General Kearny Trail Ejula HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This route is a combination of residential roadways and an xo.ai•.w existing segment of off-street natural surface path shown on Google Maps as the "North General Kearny Trail." The '""$`'°°'� on-street portions include segments of North General •� Kearny Road, as well as Nada Lane, all of which are contiguous with each other. / Ownership: Meadowview HOA and City of Temecula E Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description Not r, This route would connect the James L. Day Middle School area with parks on Nicolas Road, as well as the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail,part of the Temecula Loop Trail. (The City vacated portions of North General Kearny Road/Nada Lane, but retained right-of-way for a public trail easement.) From the south, this route would be on-street Class II a '', bicycle lanes to Calle Pina Colada, Class I multi-use trail between Calle Pina Colada and Calle Madero, Class III bicycle route with shared lane markings on Nada Lane between Calle Madero and Valle Olvera Street, and then r Class II lanes north to Nicolas Road. Segment length:0.95 miles(5,009 feet) This route would require a public trail easement from Meadowview HOA. Benefit/Core Value lob This route provides a Safe Route to School connection for am I Do James L. Day Middle School students, as well as other .� , users from the surrounding residential neighborhood.This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, ...... . . 4 and a Sustainable City. View south from Calle Madero 4 t_ Y 4 IKE •� Class I Multi-use Path Class III Bicycle Route View northeast on Nada Lane (10' ri,ed- 4"AC on 6"compacted 1 sub-base,lypical) ]hr iMari of 5ssi..shnrn{;nlifaM.. F I Wine coiimq l F- - rI Nicolas Valley Trail HIKEBIKETEMECULA,ORG Existing Condition Mlnriato Nat 8prtny$ This route follows a dirt road between Murrieta Hot Springs -- : Road and Nicolas Road. Ownership: Private and City of Temecula I 1 4 I Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description ; 1 This route will connect open space immediately north of Murrieta Hot Springs Road with both the Nicolas Valley and a portion of the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan area open space trail system. It would also connect with the proposed a�'SPd Temecula Loop Trail at Santa Gertrudis Creek. This route would require coordination with private property �`v Na��knm Rive„ owners for access and maintenance. t s Segment length:0.66 miles(3,497 feet) Benefit/Core Value ' This route provides a paved, off-street north/south connection between Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Nicolas Road where few such routes exist. This GCAwould satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, ' and a Sustainable City. Aerial view north al Class 1 Multi-use Path View north from Nicolas Road .. (10'paved,4"AC on 6"compacted sub-base,typical) ]� Mir"I Murrieta r Creek 13alm M HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition n � This route is adjacent to an existing segment of the natural- +; =t rA�a surfaced Murrieta Creek Trail adjacent to Jefferson Avenue , on the east bank of Murrieta Creek between Rancho California Road and and the south leg of Moreno Road. ; Ownership: City of Temecula �► y� �' Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description Sam H&Cks ent This GCA would add a parallel paved path next to the `� ; ; '°Park existing DG-surfaced Murrieta Creek Trail segment along Old Town Front Street between Rancho California Road •� and Moreno Road. It also adds shared lane markings R ("Sharrows") on Old Town Front Street along the same "N segment and curb modification on the west side of Old `�'�� `� `�, $`'., Town Front Street at Rancho California Road to narrow the '`s, roadway approach into Old Town Temecula. Additional design features are recommended to address the Rancho California Road crossing with improvements ; that support all user types, including pedestrians and - — equestrians. This may include enhanced paving, signage, Segment length:0.22 miles(1,165 feet) user-actuated signals and traffic signal timing modifications. (Roundabout shown in concept plan addressed in Old Town Temecula Specific Plan-not included in GCA) SOL --agwak Benefit/Core Value This GCA would add a paved trail adjacent to an existing DG-surfaced trail to function as a low-stress, off-street r continuation of the Murrieta Creek Trail, along what will be a popular walking and cycling route between Old Town Temecula and the redeveloping Jefferson Avenue area < north of Rancho California Road. It also improves the on- street experience for cyclists on Old Town Front Street through traffic calming and marking. In addition, this GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and Murdeta Creek Trail approaching Old Town Temecula a Sustainable City. .4 Class I Multi-use Path(along existing DG side path) Shared Lane Marking on Old Town Front Street (10'paved,4"AC on 6"compacted sub-base,typical) / .� ''ri,.rtnart of southern California Wrnv Country r ■ Trail 1399 HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG } ' ' , ; i w Sharrows(Typ.) I 112 inches 72 indie,s - Y I Y. ` 1 f � Shared Lane Marking(Sharrow) CA MUTCD Figure 9C-9 Multi-use Paved Path Parallel Natural Surface Trail N Landscape Enhancements z North L y Rancho California • . • HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This route is the existing Rancho California Road right-of- way between Old Town Front Street/Jefferson Avenue and ° Diaz Road/Vincent Moraga Drive. Tilt t Ownership: City of Temecula ; i Ise lopIF 1 v ' Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description ►, �.At This GCA would provide a buffered or fully protected Class II bicycle lane on the south side of Rancho California Road, .�'� . r , " � as well as a two-way cycle track on the north side. It would ti also close the eastern leg of Diaz Drive to vehicles and +" , remove excess paving. Additional traffic calming features may also be appropriate, m "% ', ►' i such as corner curb extensions. s "" Design features are recommended to address the71 crossings at either end of this segment,such as bike boxes, o i� enhanced paving, signage and signaling that supports all user types, including pedestrians and equestrians. Segment length:0.20 miles(1,030 feet) Benefit/Core Value k This route provides a low-stress connection between the Jefferson Avenue and Old Town Temecula areas across Murrieta Creek and the developing neighborhood on the west side, as well as directly and safely connecting with planned trails along Murrieta Creek. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. View east on Rancho California Road bridge across Murrieta Creek Class II Buffered Bicycle Lanes and Two-way Cycle Track(Class IV) View north across Rancho California Road to Diaz Road east legj Ate'. rl.s Linv.r of Sve.nc�rnE;•fG try vJi��Cr.y �-Rancho California • i 138 Vit, HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG oil �. . - Multi-use Paved Path Parallel Natural Surface Trail p Landscape Enhancements Y' High Visibiiifsswa(r& Enhanced Signals 94ignaO Two-way Cycle Track «� Walkway K Rail Buffered Bike Lane Raised Roundabout Bike box " Sharrows(Typ.) �I Green Transition Zone Buffered Bike Lane Median Not to scale North Murrieta Creek Trail - North n- Kin HIKEBIKETEMECULA,ORG +. s Existing Condition °.° This route is an undeveloped corridor along Murrieta Creek ' s Trail between Rancho California Road and Del Rio Road. Ownership: City of Temecula 5C z Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description This GCA would provide a paved extension of the Murrieta "°'_ r Creek Trail between Rancho California Road and Del Rio Road, as well as a parallel natural surface trail. r ,r s Additional design features are recommended to address Z. . the Rancho California Road crossing, and are addressed y.► �.�' + under GCA 5a. 7g Sim Hicks ftwnument Segment length:0.80 miles(4,244 feet) Benefit/Core Value 4 This GCA would provide a low-stress, off-street, paved r and natural surface continuation of the Murrieta Creek Trail along what will be a popular walking and biking route between Old Town Temecula and the redeveloping Jefferson Avenue area north of Rancho California Road. a This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, J and a Sustainable City. Nano, View north from Rancho California Road �y : l Class I Multi-use Path View southwest from Jefferson Avenue J (10'paved,4"ACon 6"compacted sub-base,typical) IP The Heart of 5outimn4ahf&r iA ' WIM cotiol 01 Creek 1191B ,Murrieta Trail HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Match Line f i Multi-use Paved Path Parallel Natural Surface Trail b• y 4 'f M1 ' ,y I� 4 �• ti 7 5 A f Multi-use Paved Path Parallel Natural Surface Trail Landscape Enhancements U O 0 Z North Match Line Moreno Bypass OUR HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This route is primarily the right-of-way of the southern leg of Moreno Road between Old Town Front Street and the Caltrans Interstate 15 right-of-way. i a % Ownership: City of Temecula and State of California 1 �. "'eA � 1 % aI HIcks Ga Closure Alternative GCA Description Sam Monument nn M (GCA) M �� � ��, � Monument This GCA would provide buffered Class II bicycle lanes on ` ; Park Moreno Road to a future Interstate 15 crossing. `; ; • Old Town Front Street crossing features are recommended, W e such as median and pedestrian refuge. If this roadway is narrowed, corner curb extensions may be appropriate. A trail head may be included adjacent to the Interstate 15 right-of-way. (Roundabout shown in concept plan is addressed in other area planning and not included in GCA) Segment length:On-street 650 feet, Off-street 260 feet Benefit/Core Value _ This route provides a low-stress,paved connection between the Jefferson Avenue and Old Town Temecula areas and destinations east of Interstate 15. This route bypasses ' the high volume, steep, eastbound Rancho California - approach to Interstate 15 and would take users to where they will be able to more safely access any future freeway crossing facilities. (This GCA reflects recommendations in - "Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Assessment - September 2014" prepared for the City.) This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, AML and a Sustainable City. View north on Old Town Front Street at Moreno Road F y. � I � k -•/ 4 Class!!Buffered Bicycle Lanes View east on Rancho California Road toward Interstate 15; 1 �13' C !-Fra.l p�$✓»+IfHI+M1 LAIIOtn.A Wr€Iry Col.try Moreno • . • Bypass Dan HIKEBIKETEMECULA,ORG Multi-use Paved Path { High Visibilily Crossing Enhancements r� VV } ~r Dual Buffered Bike Lanes r'tir Green Transition Zones W cn ' ° North 0 z -Yukon • 13010■ HIKEBIKETEMECULA,ORG Existing Condition This route is primarily dirt roads and informal trails along flood control channels and through open spaces just north of Rancho California Road, between Ynez Road east of Interstate 15 and Yukon Road west of Margarita Road. A � ,.Rd segment east of Moraga Road is a concrete lined channel with no adjacent roadway. ✓ Ownership: Private, City of Temecula, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCW- LAcoffiaurft .r,,.r , CD) and Temecula Valley Unified School District g _ 'f= �e�►''�`'�-. - ~'L� Temecula °'�`� Town Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description , Center .,�,,,�i This GCA would be a paved enhancement of existing dirt ,f" `.�__ roads and informal trails along flood control channels,then '�'r ""'„e„y i00, continue west to Diaz Road, at Murrieta Creek. Exact lay- " ■ out(north or south sides or both)will be considered. Implementation will require coordination with private prop- erty owners for access and maintenance. f ~ Segment length: 1.31 miles(6,929 feet) Benefit/Core Value This route employs existing dirt roads and flood control channels to provide an east/west, paved off-street connec- tion between the residential neighborhoods in this area of the City with other destinations east of Interstate 15. It also provides direct off-street Safe Routes to School access for Temecula Elementary School students and retail centers at both ends. i This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, ` and a Sustainable City. View east from Moraga Road a Class I Multi-use Path .. (10'paved,4"AC on 6"compacted sub-base,typical) ] I rl.,,u.,ar- i l (Ad­­ pv.n-•"a u n r i r Calle Medusa Connection IMEN HIKEBIKETEMECULA,ORG Existing Condition An existing dirt road begins at Calle Medusa and runs y northwest behind the residential developments along Cal- le Medusa and Wellington Circle. The road has moderate r grades between its origin off Calle Medusa and the valley floor west of Wellington Circle. Ownership: Private (HOA) ti f � a Ga Closure Alternative (GCA) Description �,,1`�r�`'�., Gap , This GCA would take advantage of an existing dirt road "� �� •�-��'�*; r off a low volume residential street. This GCA would be an i enhancement of an existing dirt road within open space between residential developments. sure!� n Implementation will require coordination with privateHill% PAN i � property owners for access and maintenance, such as �¢ addressing existing fences and gates, and providing removable bollards. Rancha 1s°`�014%1 Elam�niary r School �+�••► I Benefit/Core Value Segment length:0.34 miles(1,778 feet) This route provides the surrounding residential neighbor- hoods with a direct, natural surface connection to the trails planned for the adjoining Nicolas Valley area and the pro- posed Arbor Vista project. This would give users off-street access to not only the Nicolas Valley area, but also the Santa Gertrudis Creek Trail immediately north of Nicolas Road,which is to be part of an overall Temecula Loop Trail. The northern end of this segment would be less than half a mile from the Santa Gertrudis Trail's existing east end at the intersection of Nicolas Road and Joseph Road. Finally, this GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a ` Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Con- nectivity, and a Sustainable City. - - Existing entrance off Calle Medusa J. Ailb- 'u x� Natural Surface Trail Aedal view north-Existing Santa Gertrudis Trail ,AW at upper left Il,31 � r V_ 1 f The Heart of Southern 4aWh— Wenn Caunt�y 1 � �.'� ' Lake Skinner Trail North HIKEBIKETEMECULA,ORG Existing ConditionThis route is an existing utility dirt road running roughly ! i north/south between Meadows Parkway in the south and • ; Murrieta Hot Springs Road in the north. Ownership: Metropolitan Water District(MWD) f Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description t This GCA would take advantage of an existing utility dirt f road that runs the entire length of this segment as a road- i way enhancement through residential development. It ex- tends to the northern City boundary and would connect with trails around Lake Skinner and beyond. It would also serve a planned bike skills park adjacent to Rancho Ele- mentary School on La Serena Way. xnax y "sO'' Implementation will need to address existing fences and gates, as well as secure an access and maintenance agreement. However, unlike the southern portion (8b), the City would only need to coordinate with one entity, MWD. — A controlled crossing,such as a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Segment length:2.24 miles(11,821 feet) (PHB), will be needed at Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Benefit/Core Value 4' ,4 This route provides an off-street, natural surface connec- tion for the surrounding residential neighborhoods with planned bicycle lanes on La Serena Way, which would connect with Rancho Elementary School and Temeku Hills Park to the west, and Serena Hills Park to the east. It also provides north-south connectivity through the City and be- I, i yond to County open space at Lake Skinner. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. View north from La Serena Way ,., Id - µy OF V a Natural Surface Trail View south from Heitz Lane Lake Trail South Ilan HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This route is a dirt road running roughly north/south be- tween Rancho California Road and Temecula Parkway. ..- �5±,,e_ ■� ,.,�„ Ownership: Paloma Del Sol HOA, Metropolitan Water Dis- trict (MWD) and Linfield Christian School Ra r Au-.d f ; 4 Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description This GCA would be an enhancement of a dirt road through residential development. Implementation will need to address existing fences and gates, as well as secure access and maintenance agree- i ments with MWD and private property owners.A controlled , crossing, such as a Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB)or a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB),will be need- ed at Pauba Road. Segment length:2.25 miles(11,873 feet) Benefit/Core Value This GCA would provide the surrounding residential neigh- borhoods a natural surface, off-street route using an ex- isting dirt road that would directly connect with Temecula Valley High School and Temecula Valley Adult School, and ';, .. welt as other nearby private and charter schools. It would - - . also provide a connection with the other facilities near the ti schools, such as those in Ronald Reagan Sports Park. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. '` s View north at Ynez/De Portola Road(Note original sign) Y - - r � � M - _ I Natural Surface Trail View north at Pauba Road ff hrr H,�w,°f 5a ghnm C.1""', w��ca�,rrp. I�I ft w'- v Ronald Reagan Sports Park 0 HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition C41W This route is a combination of informal natural surface Rwk paths through open space and paved park paths of varying widths. It runs east-west between Ronald Reagan Sports Park and a utility easement. Ownership: Metropolitan Water District (MWD), Private, City of Temecula and City of Temecula Community Services y i �' �'. School District ~�� ►`SI* t`. Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description This GCA would be an enhancement of a dirt road and walk- ways through the park and open space. It would provide an ; east-west connecting paved trail through the park and open space, as well as a singletrack trail loop system within the :4I open space and a bike skills park/pump track. ; Benefit/Core Value f This GCA would provide an off-street route between a Segment length:0.83 miles(4,372 feet) north/south utility easement on the west and Margarita Road to the east. It would also provide internal connectivity between a number of public facilities, including Ronald Reagan Sports Park, Temecula Community Recreation Center, Temecula Skate Park, as well as Temecula Valley High School immediately across Margarita Road from the sports park. In addition, the adjacent open space may , support a network of single-track trail loops, which would ;. draw additional users from the surrounding neighborhoods, + ' the rest of the City and beyond. + This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. Aerial view north of approximate alignment (red) and potential single-track loops(blue) a r r w Natural Surface Trail Aerial view southeast of approximate alignment(red)an. ' potential single-track loops(blue) Margarita toYnez Trail Connection Flum HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This route is primarily a utility easement dirt road running north east/southwest between Margarita Road and Ynez 7a, erem.nrsy f Road. Ownership: Metropolitan Water District(MWD) R•"�h,yyRU�f f M)nwdi snry` Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description This GCA would be an enhancement of a dirt road through 11�4 residential development. /+ Implementation will need to address existing fences and gates, as well as secure an access and maintenance �,■ 5 `'�.�,�M� agreement with a single entity, MWD. Segment length:1.58 miles(8,346 feet) Benefit/Core Value This GCA would provide the surrounding residential neighborhoods a natural surface, off-street route using an existing utility dirt road that would directly connect with a proposed path through Ronald Reagan Sports Park (GCA f' 9)and another similar east/west route (GCA 11). This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. View south at Margarita Road i V y f Natural Surface Trail View north at Santiago Road Thu H�x.tal So:nham irwlVf .. 71fti= Wine Cauniry�• Vail Trail gn!! HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This route is an dirt road running roughly east/west be- tween Moraga Road the east and Southern Cross Road to the west. i Lir Ownership: Private and Southern California Edison (SCE) Rile ; �+ ll Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description v"+f �fwnvnurk Sthocl ,y This GCA would be an enhancement of a dirt road through °"'� i a residential development. Implementation will need to address existing fences and gates, as well as secure an access and maintenance agreement with SEC. i Benefit/Core Value Segment length:0.81 miles(4,273 feet) This GCA would provide the surrounding residential neigh- borhoods an off-street, paved route using an existing east/ west dirt road that directly connects with another proposed off-street path accessing the Ronald Reagan Sports Park (GCA 9). It also provides a Safe Routes to School function since it comes within a short distance of Vail Elementary School . This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy r i and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. View east at Santa Cecilia Drive Class 1 Multi-use Path View west at Southem Cross Read (I U paved,4"AC on 6"compacted sub-base,typical) ] l� °i,ri+e ani u"iaAhr :f;ulifu•-:v Wrnr Gwn4ry Jedediah Extension— 13912 HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition _ This route follows the alignment of Jedediah Smith Road where it terminates south of Temecula Parkway, and a dirt road along Temecula Creek. The City vacated Jedediah Smith Road, but reserved a trail •� __,_,,,'_� IL easement for a future pedestrian bridge. Ownership: Private and City of Temecula m � u Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description d This route crosses Temecula Creek from the north via the alignment of Jedediah Smith Road where it terminates south of Temecula Parkway, to the south side Temecula Creek using a dirt road that continues under Pechanga Parkway. Segment length:0.55 miles(2,887 feet) This GCA would require a significant bicycle/pedestrian bridge or a seasonal at-grade creek crossing to make this connection. Benefit/Core Value This GCA would provide a primarily off-street, low stress, paved route between the residential neighborhoods south of Temecula Parkway with the retail and service land uses on the north. It would allow users to cross Temecula Creek while avoiding the very heavy traffic volumes at the 1� Pechanga Parkway/Temecula Parkway intersection. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. h1W\2 View north from Pechanga Parkway mom Class I Multi-use Path View south from Jedediah Smith Road (10'paved,4"AC on 6"compacted sub-base,typical) The Heart of Svutlon C.FiEoma I f. WineCniied.y Jedediah Smith Extension 13911 HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG T 9 • Multi-use Paved Path Parallel Natural Surface Trail Landscape Enhnacements I Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge .__4 See following page thr enlargement. i I,a AL North ' Jedediah Smith Extension Bon HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Offset High Visibility Crosswalks Enhanced Signals and Signage ti •._ f.,Y , � Landscape Enhancements Paved Multi-use Path Jug Handle' Transition to-Crosswalk Green Transition Zone Buffered Bike Lane, _ Not to scale North Temecula Creek North OUR HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This route is primarily a dirt road along Temecula Creek on t��UlapMMv roti the north side of Temecula Creek between Via Rio Temec- ula and Redhawk Parkway. a John Ownership: Private, City of Temecula and Riverside County Magee Flood Control and Water Conservation District(RCFCWCD) Park ' P 1 fro., Redhawk '�PP� �� ��'• Community P- ,RrM i Park Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description This route would parallel Temecula Creek on the north side, % connecting Redhawk Parkway and Avenida de Missiones, `%�,�' providing accesses at those points to the overall creek trail system from adjoining neighborhoods. ' Implementation will need to address existing fences and cam Mddk Kent p g , Hlntergartlt ElementaryRedhawk gates, as well as secure access and maintenance agree- School I"Memorial Park School ments with RCFCWCD and private property owners. Segment length:0.64 miles(3,395 feet) Benefit/Core Value This GCA would provide a segment of an important region- al off-street, east/west route along Temecula Creek that - accesses residential and retail development, as well as a existing crossing of Temecula Creek via the Redhawk Parkway bridge. It also connects with an existing paved path segment (in fair condition)east of Redhawk Parkway. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. -. View west from Via Rio Temecula 4 u _ � !Natural Surface Trail View south from Redhawk Parkway It! ��l.,r:ul Sau�lEc:r.C.�filrv,x _ ono Gnlmlry' Margarita r ling HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition �..9•�° " This GCA would be located where Margarita Road crosses Temecula Parkway within a large commercial shopping district. Both are multi-lane,high volume arterials and there is no available roadway space for bicycle facilities. Off- street facilities are planned along both sides of Temecula 14 Creek immediately to the south of this GCA. Ownership: City of Temecula ti. jam Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description `''�"` .• -.WWI "Al This route would be an off-street shared-use facilityrra. comprised of wide sidewalks paralleling Margarita s�-�.y ►:'' 6amnunk Road where it crosses Temecula Parkway within a large park commercial shopping district. Crossings may require ��sem.■''���~~ ; safety enhancements due to high traffic volumes, such ` as high visibility crosswalks, warning signage and signal Segment length:0.34 miles(1,814 feet) optimization. Benefit/Core Value This GCA would provide a parallel off-street alternative to riding on a major arterial through a busy commercial district with high volume roadways with no room for on- street bicycle facilities. This segment would connect with -. existing Class II bicycle lanes at either end on Margarita r s Road and Redhawk Parkway, requiring crossing Temecula Parkway. This route would provide a direct connection to planned off-street bicycle facilities along Temecula Creek, _ as well as connecting the residential neighborhoods north and south of Temecula Parkway with those facilities. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. View south on Margarita Road at Temecula Parkway 46* •� rF' Curb-adjacent Wide Sidewalks View north on Margarita Road at Temecula Parkway .R ne Heart o4 iniEprn L:eLi W6rui C­ Y" line HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG AL \ \ _ - t - > - » . _ � k � \ \ v , ■� �� � �: \�& �3 � �• � \��:< . North Creek MEN HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This route is primarily a partially paved flood control channel road on the south side of Temecula Creek between egal! Redhawk Parkway westward to just past Corte Sierra. Ownership: Private, Rancho California Water District, Cc t `ne ■ Riverside County Flood Control and District (RCFCWCD) and Temecula Valley Unified School District M.y.. P Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description This route would parallel Temecula Creek on the south side, connecting Butterfield Stage Road and Jedediah Smith Road, providing accesses at those points to the overall creek trail system from adjoining neighborhoods.A y ._ mid-block crossing will be needed at Redhawk Parkway. Implementation will need to address existing fences and �* ■ gates, as well as secure access and maintenance agree- ments with the water district, RCFCWCD and private prop- Segment length:2.42 miles(12,762 feet) erty owners. Benefit/Core Value This GCA would provide a paved segment of an important regional off-street, east/west route along Temecula Creek, including off-street access to residential neighborhoods and Redhawk Community Park, as well as a crossing of Temecula Creek via the Redhawk Parkway bridge. It could also take advantage of the existing parking lot at Redhawk Community Park as a trail head. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. W x` `moi Class I Multi-use Path View west from Redhawk Parkway (10'paved,4"A C on 6"compacted sub-base,typical) QJ I Ihrnuu.t of yair717r+�r Cekl�r- W6ryp Country Temecula Creek South 1 . • e HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Refuge Median Offset High Visibility Crosswalks r' y Enhanced Signals and Signage t+ Green Transition Zone "IRE _ Not to scale North Great • r Trail Connection • 1 HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition 4 Great Oak High School occupies the south side of Deer ' Hollow Way between traffic signals at Pechanga Parkway ' and Peachtree Street. The school's parking lot lies at the southeast corner of the Pechanga Parkway/Deer Hollow Way intersection. Students arriving via the Great Oak Trail have only one protected crossing of Deer Hollow Way at s vxlrx ,+` the Pechanga Parkway/Pala Road intersection. Ownership: City of Temecula f4F Sob") f 4 A Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description "IQ a� This GCAwould install enhanced mid-block crosswalks with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) to provide safer crossings of Deer Hollow Way between the high school and the sports fields, as well as fencing and wider Segment length:0.21 miles(1,093 feet) sidewalks, particularly to channel Great Oak Trail users to the Pechanga/Deer Hollow intersection.An education and promotional campaign is also recommended to accompany the installation. Benefit/Core Value t This GCA would deter unsafe crossings by providing mid- block crosswalks and wider sidewalks to safer and more visible connections between the sports fields and Great Oak High School. (This GCA reflects recommendations in a `Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Assessment-September 2014"prepared for the City.) This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City, Transportation Mobility and Connectivity, and a Sustainable City. ' View east on Deer Hollow Way f J d Mid-block Crosswalk with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon(RRFB) View west on Deer Hollow Way Ink t � t" the!mrt v'sn:,dec,4alliy vn A-Cuunl'.. 16 Great Oak Trail Connection ISI ofo r'' ,y fi �` ."• r ti Cry I fr Y io 00, v4 I r k`r.i� ` •' '4� eyj'. dr Great * Trail ling HKEBIKETEMECULA,ORG High Visibility Crosswalks Widended Sidewalk ' Green Transition Zones • x Of High Visibility Crosswalk Widended Sidewalk and Fencing �? u • r I High Visibility Crosswalk Widended Sidewalk Green Transition Zones Refuge Median Not to scale " Offset High Visibility Crosswalks North Enhanced Signals and Signage HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Existing Condition This GCA's site is the northwest corner of Ronald Reagan Sports Park near the intersection of Rancho Vista Road and Margarita Road. Ownership: City of Temecula ` � , s Gap Closure Alternative (GCA) Description The GCA would consist of a compacted dirt pump track. Pump track location(Approximate) Pump tracks are constructed of packed dirt sculpted into a series of rollers and banked turns. They are typically designed to permit a bicycle rider to traverse a looped course with minimal pedaling. The images shown below are of existing pump tracks.The design of each pump track is unique, so Temecula's pump track will not be exactly like the images shown. The pump track area development will also include a Via' hardscape paved entry area with signage that describes the ' park and its rules, bench seating and bike racks. It will also require water and power utilities to service the pump track. } Benefit/Core Value This GCA reflects strong citizen interest in such bicycle skills facilities, as expressed in public meeting and online " survey responses conducted for the City of Temecula Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update. This GCA would satisfy the City's Core Values of a Healthy and Livable City. -•ti - - fir,. _ A + yr . V a+ Example pump tracks Ire Heart of Southern Cal4arr.. wllnC CaunrY ANk 4 The Heart a4 Southern r:a(H n— s Worm r'oturtry M City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECUU.ORG Appendix A: Toolbox - Design Guidelines t- This appendix is intended to assist in the selection Existing standards are referenced throughout and and design of bicycle and trail facilities through il- should be the first source of information when seek- lustrating best practices by facility type from public ing to implement any treatments featured here. agencies and municipalities nationwide. Design Several agencies and organizations provide design treatments are addressed within a single sheet standards for bike and pedestrian facilities in the tabular format relaying important design informa- US, including the most commonly used manuals tion and discussion, example photos, schematics shown below. (if applicable)and existing summary guidance from current or upcoming draft standards. R � �.N.r.r an Ow++r.rrm d Bicycle Facilities Bikeway Design Gulde l rr rr;, - ��' ' : .�/;��.�//�1►1111111�Itlltl ,: . 4 r 1 App1 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines National Standards The Federal Highway Administration's Manual on The National Association of City Transportation Of- Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) defines ficials'(NACTO)2014 Urban Bikeway Design Guide the standards used by roadway managers nation- is the newest publication of nationally recognized wide to install and maintain traffic control devices on bikeway design standards and offers guidance all public streets, highways, bikeways and private on current design state of the practice. Its intent roadways open to public traffic.The FHWA MUTCD is to offer substantive guidance for cities seeking forms the basis of the California MUTCD. to improve bicycle transportation in places where competing demands for right-of-way present unique To further clarify the MUTCD, the FHWA created challenges. All NACTO Urban Bikeway Design a table of contemporary bicycle facilities that lists Guide treatments are in use internationally and in various bicycle related signs, markings,signals and many cities around the US. other treatments and identifies their official status, such as whether it can be implemented or is cur- Meeting Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) re- rently experimental. See Bicycle Facilities and the quirements is an important part of any bicycle and Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. pedestrian facility design.The United States Access Board's proposed Public Rights-of-Way Acces- Bikeway treatments not explicitly covered by the sibility Guidelines (PROWAG) and the 2010 ADA MUTCD are often subject to experiments, inter- Standards forAccessible Design(2010 Standards) pretations and official rulings by the FHWA. The contain standards and guidance for the construction MUTCD Official Rulings is a resource that allows of accessible facilities.This includes requirements website visitors to obtain information about these for sidewalk curb ramps, slope requirements and supplementary materials. Copies of various docu- pedestrian railings along stairs. ments(such as incoming request letters, response letters from the FHWA, progress reports and final Some of these treatments are not directly refer- reports) are available on this website. enced in current AASHTO Guide or MUTCD ver- sions,although many treatment elements are found .�.�.�► American Association of State Highway and within these documents. In all cases, engineering Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the judgment is recommended to ensure that the ap- Development of Bicycle Facilities, updated in June plication makes sense for the context of each treat- 2012 provides guidance on dimensions, use and ment,given the many complexities of urban streets. layout of specific bicycle facilities. The standards and guidelines presented by AASHTO provide ba- sic information, such as minimum sidewalk widths, bicycle lane dimensions, detailed striping require- ments and recommended signage and pavement markings. - Additional References and Guidelines FHWA. Bicycle Facilities and Manual on Uniform Traf- fic Control Devices. 2011. kt MUTCD Official Rulings. FHWA. App2 E19E] City of Temecula,California-Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBI K ETE MECO LA.QRG State Standards and Guidelines California Highway Design Manual (HDM) New Legislation Allowing Safety Stan- (2012) dards Other Than Caltrans HDM This manual establishes uniform policies and AB-1193, signed into law in September 2014, al- procedures to carry out highway design functions lows local agencies to adopt, by resolution, safety for the California Department of Transportation. standards for bikeways other than Caltrans' High- The 2012 edition incorporated Complete Streets way Design Manual. According to the Legislative focused revisions to address the Department Di- Analyst,AB-1193"allows local governments to de- rective 64 R-1. viate from state criteria when designing bikeways, but does not give them complete control. Cities Complete Intersections: A Guide to Re- and counties that elect to use design criteria not constructing Intersections and inter- contained within the HDM would have to ensure changes for Bicyclists and Pedestrians that the alternative criteria have been reviewed and (2010) approved by a qualified engineer, are adopted by This California Department of Transportation ref- resolution at a public meeting and adhere to guide- erence guide presents information and concepts lines established by a national association of public related to improving conditions for bicyclists and pe- agency transportation officials,such as the National destrians at major intersections and interchanges. Association of City Transportation Officials."The bill The guide can be used to inform minor signage also expands the definition of bikeways to include and striping changes to intersections, as well as cycle tracks or separated bikeways, also referred major changes and designs for new intersections. to as "Class IV bikeways," which promote active transportation and provide a right-of-way desig- Main Streets: Flexibility in Design & Op- nated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to a erations (2005) roadway and which are protected from vehicular This Caltrans booklet is an informational guide that traffic. Types of separation include, but are not reflects many recent Caltrans manual and policy limited to,grade separation,flexible posts, inflexible updates that improve multimodal access, livability physical barriers, or on-street parking. and sustainability within the transportation system. NCHRP Legal Digest 53: Liability Aspects The document will help users locate information about standards and procedures descried in the of Bikeways (2010) Caltrans Highway Design Manual(HDM),the Cali- This digest is a useful resource for city staff con- fornia Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices sidering innovative engineering solutions to local- (California MUTCD) and the Project Development ized issues. The document addresses the liability Procedures Manual (PDPM). of public entities for bicycle collisions on bikeways ;...� as well as on streets and highways. The report will be useful to attorneys, transportation officials, planners, maintenance engineers and all persons interested in the relative rights and responsibilities of drivers and bicyclists on shared roadways. tct�di Rt-ifdr[1r i�aa�e•�l 5) V v App3 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Bicycle Facility Standards Compliance Some of these bicycle facilities covered by these indicates a treatment is not specifically mentioned, guidelines are not directly referenced in current but is allowable assuming MUTCD-compliant signs AASHTO Guide or California MUTCD versions, and markings are used. In all cases, engineer- although many treatment elements are found within ing judgment is recommended to ensure that the these documents.An"X"in the following table iden- application makes sense for the context of each tifies the inclusion of a particular treatment within treatment, given the potential complexities of any the national and state design guides. No marking specific site. California Guide for the Urban Bikeway MUTCD Development of Design Guide Facility Type Bicycle Facilities (2014) ( (2014) 2012) Signed Shared Roadway X X Marked Shared Roadway , X X X c Bicycle Boulevard X X Bicycle Lane X X X Buffered Bicycle Lane X X X Cycle Tracks j "One-way sidepath" X Bike Box X X Bike Lanes at Right Turn Only Lanes X X X Colored Bike Lanes in Conflict Areas FHWA Interim Approval X X Combined Bike Lane/Turn Lane X X Intersection Crossing Markings X X X Wayfinding Sign Types and Placement X X X Shared-Use Path X X X Active Warning Beacons X X X Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons X X X N� r. App4 I 9 *s City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.ORG Multimodal Level of Service Description Discussion Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS) methods HCM 2010 model for Bicycle LOS calculation limi- are used to inventory and evaluate existing condi- tations include: tions, or to forecast future conditions for roadway . Calculations do not address gradients. users under different design scenarios. While automobile-oriented LOS measures vehicle delay, • Contemporary facility types included in this Bicycle, Pedestrian and Transit LOS is oriented guide, such as shared lane markings, bike toward user comfort. boxes or cycle tracks, are not included in the HCM (Florida LOSPLAN update does feature MMLOS scores different modes independently, cycle tracks). but their results are interdependent, allowing an . Scoring is for a"typical'adult bicyclist and heav- understanding of trade-offs between modes for ily weighs the presence of bike lanes. Results different street designs. A compatible A-F scoring may not be appropriate in communities that system makes comparison between modes simple. seek to encourage bicycle travel by people of There are a variety of Multimodal or Bicycle/Pe- varying ages and abilities where bike lanes may destrian LOS tools available for use. Different tools not be adequate. require different data and may present different or conflicting results. Despite potential limitations of MMLOS methodology,the results help jurisdictions _ better plan for all road users. Guidance MMLOS modeling is an emerging practice and cur- rent methods continue to be improved and revised. Additional References and Guidelines Local resident and planner knowledge should be Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity used to verify MMLOS model results. Manual.2010. The current standard for MMLOS calculation is Florida Department of Transportation. LOSPLAN. described in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual 2012. (HCM 2010). This method has limitations, particu- Fehr&Peers. LOS+ Multi-Modal Roadway Analysis larly for Bicycle LOS modeling (See Discussion). Tool. +•--� An alternative MMLOS method/tool should be Mineta Transportation Institute. Low-Stress Bicycling considered if HCM 2010 is not appropriate for the and Network Connectivity. 2011. community. Other multimodal "Service Quality" tools include: • Florida DOT LOSPLAN • LOS+ • Mineta Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis (Bicycle-only scoring) App5 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Bicycle Facility Selection There are no 'hard and fast' rules for determining the most appropriate type of bicycle facility for a particular location — roadway speeds, volumes, right-of-way width, presence of parking, adjacent land uses and expected bicycle user types are all critical elements of this decision. Studies find that the most significant factors influencing bicycle use are motor vehicle traffic volumes and speeds.Ad- ditionally, most bicyclists prefer facilities separated from motor vehicle traffic or located on local roads with low motor vehicle traffic speeds and volumes. Because off-street pathways are physically sepa- rated from the roadway,they are perceived as safe and attractive routes for bicyclists who prefer to avoid motor vehicle traffic.Consistent use of treat- ments and application of bikeway facilities allow users to anticipate whether they would feel com- fortable riding on a particular facility and plan their trips accordingly. This section provides guidance on various factors that affect the type of facilities that should be provided. Facility Classification 71 App6 Or i City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update Hl KE BI KETEMECU LA.o R G Facility Continua The following continua illustrate the range of some corridors, it may be desirable to construct bicycle facilities applicable to various roadway facilities to a higher level of treatment than those environments, based on the roadway type and recommended in relevant planning documents in desired degree of separation. Engineering judg- order to enhance user safety and comfort. In other ment, traffic studies, previous municipal planning cases, existing and/or future motor vehicle speeds efforts, community input and local context should and volumes may not justify the recommended level be used to refine criteria when developing bicycle of separation and a less intensive treatment may facilitv recommendations for a particular street. In be acceptable. Arterial/Highway Bikeway Continuum (without curb and gutter) Cycle Track: Protected with Shared Use Path Barner 711, YY f. Arterial/Highway Bikeway Continuum (with curb and gutter) Marked Cycle Track: Cycle Track: Cycle Track: Curb 1 At-Grade,protected Protected with Curb Separated with parking Barrier —1 44 Collector Bikeway Continuum Marked Wide Conventional Wide Bicycle Buffered Curb Lane Bicycle Lane Lane Bicycle Lane 7 T I App7 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Facility Classification Description These design guidelines utilize the California standard Caltrans facility types, but list them in an order based on what many users consider the most important factor affecting whether they would use them - their degree of separation from motor vehicle traffic and the likely level of traffic stress. The Caltrans IIIA facility type designations are therefore described in the following sequence: Class III (bike route), Class r;.a II bike lane), Class IV (cycle track) and Class I (multi-use path).Also, in many instances, existing street conditions may be fully adequate and even comfortable to ride without bicycle-specific signing and pave- ment markings. Class III (Bike Routes) are Shared Roadways configured with pavement markings, signage and other treatments including directional signage, traffic diverters, chicanes, chokers and /or other traffic calm- ing devices to reduce vehicle speeds or volumes. Such enhanced treatments are often associated with Bicycle Boulevards. r � Class II (Bike Lanes) use signage and striping to delineate the right-of-way assigned to bicyclists and ■ vehicle drivers. Bike lanes encourage predictable movements by both bicyclists and drivers. r App$ 4. OEMCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIMIHETEMECl1LA.oRG Class IV(Cycle Tracks) are exclusive bicycle facilities that combine the user experience of a separated path with the on-street infrastructure of conventional bike lanes. They may be one- or two-way. r � r rr L 1 Class I(Multi-use Paths)are facilities separated from roadways for use primarily by bicyclists and pedes- trians, but also by other users. ti 1r App9 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Shared Roadways On shared roadways, bicyclists and motor vehicles use the same roadway space. These facilities are typically on roadways with low speeds and traffic ti lhrJ ` volumes, but they can be used on higher volume ` roads with wide outside lanes or shoulders. A ve- hicle driver will usually have to cross over into the adjacent travel lane to pass a bicyclist, unless a ,...�' wide outside lane or shoulder is provided. Typical shared roadways often employ a variety of treatments, primarily signage and lane markings. • , . , Bicycle boulevards are a special class of shared roadways designed for a broad spectrum of bicy- clists. They are low-volume local streets where drivers and bicyclists share the same travel lane. Bicycle boulevards treatments are selected as nec- essary to support appropriate vehicle volumes and speeds and to provide safe crossing opportunities of busy streets. Bicycle boulevards usually employ more complex treatments than other shared road- ways, including traffic diverters,chicanes,chokers and other traffic calming devices to reduce vehicle Marked Shared Roadway �I speeds or volumes.See Pages 14-15 for examples. App10 r City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update H I KE B I K E T E M E C U LA.O R G Signed Shared Roadway Description Guidance Class III facilities are generally located on roadways "BIKE ROUTE" -This sign (D11-1) is intended for with lower speeds and traffic volumes. Class III fa- use where no unique route designation is desired. cilities are designated as roadways with no striped However,when used alone,this sign conveys very bicycle lanes, but include signage to indicate the little information. Directional changes should be roadway is a bicycle route. Shared roadways can signed with appropriate arrow sub-plaques(D1-1 b) be used on higher volume roads with wide outside or directional signage. lanes or shoulders.Avehicle driver will usually have to cross over into the adjacent travel lane to pass "BICYCLES MAY USE FULL LANE"(BMUFL)-This a bicyclist, unless a wide outside lane or shoulder sign (R4-11) sign may be used: is provided. • On roadways without bicycle lanes or adjacent shoulders usable by cyclists and where travel lanes are too narrow for cyclists and motor vehicles to safely operate side-by-side • In locations where it is important to inform all road users that cyclists may occupy travel lane SHARE THE ROAD plaque(W16- 1 p)may be used in conjunction with bicycle warning sign(W11-1) to warn drivers to watch for slower forms of transportation MUTCD D11-1 6L 1 THE MAY USE - Rppp FULL LANE Discussion Additional References and Guidelines A BICYCLE MAY USE FULL LANE sign(R4-11) AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- may be used on a lane too narrow for a bicycle cilities. 2012. and an automobile to share the road side by California MUTCD. 2014. side within the same lane). Materials and Maintenance Maintenance needs for bicycle wayfinding signs are similar to other signs and will need periodic replacement due to wear and fading. App11 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Marked Shared Roadway Description Guidance The shared lane marking (SLM) or "Sharrow" is Shared lane markings may be considered in the commonly used where vehicle parking is provided following situations: adjacent to the travel lane. The marking center . On roadways with speeds of 40 mph or less should be located a minimum of 11 feet from the (CA MUTCD) curb face or roadway edge. If used on a street without on-street parking that has an outside travel • On constrained roadways too narrow to stripe lane less than 14 feet wide, Shared Lane Marking with bicycle lanes centers should be at least four feet from the curb • To delineate space within wide outside lane face, or from the pavement edge where there is where cyclists can be expected to ride no curb. (Note that these criteria are evolving and . On roadways where it is important to increase that it is now common practice to place SLMs in vehicle driver awareness of cyclists the center of the rightmost travel lane.) • On roadways where cyclists tend to ride too close to parked vehicles ,g MUTCD D11-1 46 O .•� Minimum placement 11'from curb MAY USE . FULL LANE �•Fa When placed adjacent to parking, SLMs should he outside `door zone" Placement in center of travel lane pre- ferred in constrained conditions App12 nurCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG °a• MUTCD D11-1 Minimum placement 11'from curb MAY USE FULL LANE II When placed adjacent to parking, SLMs should be outside "door zone" Placement in center of travel lane pre- ferred in constrained conditions Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Bike lanes should be considered on roadways Caltrans HDM Chapter 300 with outside travel lanes wider than 15 feet, or California MUTCD 2014 where other lane narrowing or removal strate- NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2014 gies may provide adequate road space. SLMs Model Design Manual of Living Streets, 2011 can not be used in shoulders, designated bike lanes, or to designate bicycle detection at sig- FHWA MUTCD. Interim Approval for Optional Use of nalized intersections. (MUTCD 9C.07) Green Colored Pavement for Bike Lanes (IA-14) Materials and Maintenance Placing SLMs between vehicle tire tracks will increase marking life and minimize the long- term treatment costs. App13 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Bicycle Boulevard Description Guidance Bicycle boulevards are low-volume, low-speed • Signs and pavement markings minimum treat- streets modified to enhance bicyclist comfort by ments necessary to designate a street as a using treatments such as signage, pavement mark- bicycle boulevard ings, traffic calming and/or traffic reduction and • Bicycle boulevards should have maximum intersection modifications.These treatments allow posted speed of 25 mph through movements of bicyclists while discouraging . Employ traffic calming to maintain an 85th per- similar through-trips by non-local motorized traffic. centile speed below 22 mph • Implement volume control treatments based on bicycle boulevard context, using engineering judgment-Target motor vehicle volumes range from 1,000 to 3,000 vehicles per day • Intersection crossings should be designed to enhance safety and minimize delay for bicyclists Shared lane markings are MUTCD-compliant and widely used to mark bicycle boulevards. Signs identify street as a bicycle priority route. MUTCD D11-1 Partial closures and other volume management tools limit the number of cars traveling on the bicycle boulevard. Enhanced Crossings: Use signals, beacons and roadway geometry to increase safety at major intersections. App14 12 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Curb Extensions: Mini Traffic Circles:Slow drivers Shorten pedestrian crossing distance. in advance of intersections. f i Discussion Additional References and Guidelines The term "bicycle boulevard" implies a facility that Caltrans HDM Chapter 300 encourages bicycle usage while reducing motor California MUTCD 2014 vehicle volumes and/or speeds to a greater extent NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2014 than on a typical Class III route. Methods used may AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- include preferential treatment such as turn restric- cilities. 2012. tions, contra-flow access through one-way streets, exclusive traffic signal phases, or the reorientation FHWA Mini-Roundabouts. 2010 of stop sign control to favor the bicycle boulevard. Traffic calming techniques may include curb exten- sions, chokers, traffic circles, roundabouts, speed humps, turn restrictions or barricades. Materials and Maintenance Vegetation should be regularly trimmed to maintain visibility and attractiveness. App15 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Separated Bikeways Designated exclusively for bicycle travel,separated bikeways are segregated from vehicle travel lanes by striping (Class II - Bicycle Lane), or physical ' measures such as bollards or curbs (Class IV ■ o �� - Cycle Tracks). Separated bikeways are most * Ar appropriate on arterial and collector streets where Ann higher traffic volumes and speeds warrant greater separation. Separated bikeways can increase safety and promote proper riding by: • Defining road space for bicyclists and drivers by reducing possibility that drivers will stray into bicyclists' path • Discouraging bicyclists from sidewalk riding • Reducing incidence of wrong way riding • Reminding drivers that bicyclists also have road rights ftho r Bu4d Bicycle Lanes a App16 ru City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.ORG Bicycle Lane Description Guidance This facility provides an exclusive lane for one-way Provide five foot minimum width for bicycle lanes bicycle travel on a street or highway, installed along located between parking and traffic lanes. Six feet streets in corridors where there is significant bicycle is desired. demand and where there are distinct needs that . Provide four foot minimum width if no gutter can be served by them. On streets with on-street exists. With normal two foot gutter, minimum parking, bicycle lanes are located between the bicycle lane width is five feet parking area and the traffic lanes and used in the same direction as motor vehicle traffic. • 14.5 feet preferred from curb face to edge of bike lane (12 foot minimum) Many bicyclists, particularly less experienced rid- . Seven foot maximum width for use adjacent to ers, are more comfortable riding on a busy street if arterials with high travel speeds.Greater widths it has a striped and signed bikeway than if they are may encourage motor vehicle use of bike lane expected to share a lane with vehicles. When approaching an intersection with right turn only lanes,the bike lane should be transitioned to a through bike lane to the left of the right turn only lane. 4"white line or parking"Ts" R81 (CA) 6"white line n 1 BIKE LANE 14.5'preferred Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Wider bicycle lanes are desirable in certain situa- AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facili- tions such as on higher speed arterials (45 mph+) ties, 2012 where use of a wider bicycle lane would increase California MUTCD, 2014 separation between passing vehicles and bicyclists. NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2014 Consider buffered bicycle lanes when further sepa- Caltrans California HDM, 2012 ration is desired. Materials and Maintenance Paint can wear more quickly in high traffic areas. App17 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Bicycle Lanes and Diagonal Parking Description Guidance The back-in/head-out parking is considered safer Based on existing dimensions from test sites and than conventional head-in/back-out parking due permanent facilities, provide 16 feet from curb edge to better visibility when leaving. This is particularly to inner bicycle lane stripe and a five foot bicycle lane. important on busy streets or where vehicle drivers may find their views blocked by large vehicles or tinted windows in adjacent vehicles.The presence of raised median islands helps prevent drivers from using a back-in stall for head-in parking. Back-in Diagonal Parking R81 (CA) 2'buffer BIKE LANE Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Test the facility on streets with existing head-in Back-in/Head-out Angle Parking, Nelson/Nygaard angled parking and moderate to high bicycle traf- Consulting Associates, 2005 fic.Additional signs to direct vehicle driver in how City of Los Angeles Bicycle Plan Update, City of the back-in angled parking works is recommended. Los Angeles Materials and Maintenance i Paint can wear more quickly in high traffic areas. App18 1 * . City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEWETEMECULA.ORG Buffered Bicycle Lane Description Parking Side or Curb Buffers Buffered bike lanes are defined in the Urban Bike- Parking or curb side buffers provide space between way Guide as"conventional bike lanes paired with the bicyclist and parked cars or gutter pan.This re- a buffered space separating the bike lane from the duces the potential for a bicyclist to strike a car door adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking being opened by a driver ("dooring"), eliminates lane."Buffered bike lanes are allowed per California use of the gutter pan as part of the bike lane, and 4111 2014 MUTCD guidelines for buffered preferential moves the bicyclist out drivers' blind spots as they lanes (Section 3D-01). approach from side streets or driveways. Conventional bike lanes typically provide 5 to 6 Travel Side Buffer foot wide space between the curb and travel lane. Travel side buffers provide space between the However, many bicyclists are uncomfortable riding bicyclist and motor vehicles in the travel lane. this close to moving traffic particularly on higher High speed, high volume roadways make many speed and/or higher volume roadways. A recent bicyclists uncomfortable. Recent studies from the Portland State University study titled"Evaluation of Portland State University have shown that a simple Innovative Bicycle Facilities," shows that bicyclists buffer substantially increases most bicyclists'level feel a lower risk of being"doored" in a buffered bike of comfort. lane and nearly nine in ten bicyclists prefer buffered lanes to standard lanes. Seven in ten bicyclists Combined Side or Double Sided Buffer indicated they would go out of their way to ride on The combined side or double sided buffer offers the a buffered bike lane over a standard lane. advantage of guiding bicyclists away from the door The NACTO Urban Bikeway Design guides list zone while providing a perceived safer distance several advantages of buffered lanes including: between bicyclists and passing motor vehicles. • Providing "shy" distance between motor ve- hicles and bicyclists • Providing space for bicyclists to pass another bicyclist without encroaching into adjacent mo- Guidance for vehicle travel lane According to California MUTCD 2014 Section 3D, • Encouraging bicyclists to ride outside door buffered bike lanes are considered "allowable" zone when buffer is between parked cars and treatments. Signage and dimensional guidelines bike lane are the same as for Class II bicycle lanes.Additional • Providing greater space for bicycling without guidance is included in the NACTO Urban Bikeway - making bike lane appear so wide that it might Design Guide: be mistaken for travel or parking lane • Use bike lane word and/or symbol (MUTCD • Appealing to wider cross-section of bicycle users Figure 9C-3) • Encouraging bicycling by contributing to per- • Use interior diagonal cross hatching or chevron ception of safety among bicycle network users markings for buffers three feet in width or wider • Mark buffer with two white lines based on There are three types of buffers: California MUTCD 2014 standards. Section • Parking or side or curb buffer 3D.01 says that for bicyclists to be allowed • Travel lane side buffer to cross double white line, it must be dashed (same as standards applied to buffered HOV • Combined side or double buffer lanes).Therefore, inside line should be dashed instead of solid. • Buffers should be at least 24 inches wide App19 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Color may be used at beginning of each Parking side buffer to discourage block to discourage drivers from enter- riding in "door zone" ing buffered lane R81 (CA) BIKE LANE .�E Travel side(left)and parking side(right)buffers Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Add diagonal striping on the outer buffer adjacent NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2014 to the traffic lanes every 10 feet. However longitu- CA MUTCD, 2014 dinal spacing should be determined by engineering judgment considering factors such as speed and desired visual impacts. • On-street parking remains adjacent to curb • Travel lane may need to be eliminated or nar- rowed to accommodate buffers Materials and Maintenance Paint can wear more quickly in high traffic areas. k �i App20 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Cycle Track Description Cycle tracks, which were recently officially desig- This facility type has been shown to be effective in nated as Class IV bikeway facilities in California, increasing the number of bicyclists using the street, are an exclusive bike facility that combines the user increasing safety for bicyclists, pedestrians and experience of a separated path with the on-street drivers and increasing access to local businesses infrastructure of a conventional bike lane. Cycle (Lessons from the Green Lanes: Evaluating Pro- tracks are physically separated from motor traffic tected Bike Lanes in the US, National Institute for and distinct from the sidewalk. They differ from Transportation and Communities, 2014). buffered lanes in that the bicyclist is separated from travel lanes by a physical barrier. Separated bikeways can increase safety and pro- mote proper riding by: Cycle tracks have different forms but all share . Defining road space for bicyclists and drivers, common elements.They provide space exclusively reducing possibility that drivers will stray into used by bicyclists and are separated from motor bicyclists' path vehicle travel lanes, parking lanes and sidewalks. Cycle tracks may be raised to the adjacent sidewalk • Discouraging bicyclists from sidewalk riding level or set at an intermediate level between the • One-way cycle tracks can be either conven- roadway and sidewalk to separate the cycle track tional flow (same direction as adjacent traffic) from the pedestrian area. or contra-flow (opposite direction of adjacent traffic flow) R81 (CA) BIKE LANE - _ Y buffer preferred _ OMAN" Locate cycle track between Cycle track can be raised parking lane and sidewalk or at street level Guidance One-Way Cycle Tracks Cycle tracks should ideally be placed along streets NACTO Guidelines recommend a seven foot mini- with long blocks and few driveways or mid-block mum to allow passing and five foot minimum width motor vehicle access points. in constrained locations. Note: In accordance with AB-1193, the local agency must pass a resolution to adopt NACTO Guidelines in lieu of Caltrans Highway Design Manual if one-way cycle track width is less than nine feet. App21 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines • Two-Way Cycle Tracks • Cycle tracks located on one-way streets have of fewer potential conflict areas than those on two-way streets • 12 foot recommended minimum for two-way facility,eight foot minimum in constrained loca- tions (Note: In accordance with AB-1193, local agency must pass resolution to adopt NACTO Guidelines in lieu of Caltrans Highway Design Manual for two-way cycle tracks less than 12 feet wide) R81 (CA) '�� BIKE LANE Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Special consideration should be given at transit NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014 stops to manage bicycle and pedestrian interac- Lessons from the Green Lanes: Evaluating Protected tions. Driveways and minor street crossings are Bike Lanes in the US, National Institute for Trans- unique challenges to cycle track design. Parking portation and Communities, 2014 should be prohibited within 30 feet of the intersec- tion to improve visibility. Materials and Maintenance Depending on the width, barrier-separated and raised cycle tracks may require smaller sweeping equipment. App22 mainCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.ORG Separated Bikeways at Intersections Intersections are junctions at which different ' modes of transportation meet and facilities overlap. Intersection facilitate the interchange between bicyclists, drivers, pedestrians and _ other modes to advance traffic flow in a safe and efficient manner. Designs for intersections with bicycle facilities should reduce conflict between bicyclists (and other vulnerable road users) and Bike ; vehicles by heightening the level of visibility, ox:�� denoting clear right-of-way and facilitating eye contact and awareness with other modes. Intersection treatments can improve both queu- ing and merging maneuvers for bicyclists and are often coordinated with timed or specialized signals. The configuration of a safe intersection for bicyclists may include elements such as color, signage,medians,signal detection and pavement Only Lanes markings. Intersection design should take into consideration existing and anticipated bicyclist, pedestrian and - driver movements. In all cases, the degree of -- _ mixing or separation between bicyclists and other modes is intended to reduce the risk of crashes and increase bicyclist comfort.The level of treat- ment required for bicyclists at an intersection will depend on the bicycle facility type used,whether Colored Bike rines in onflict bicycle facilities are intersecting and the adjacent 1 street function and land use. Combined Bike Line/Turn Lane Intersection Crossing Markings App23 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Bike Box Description Guidance A bike box is a designated area located at the head Bike boxes are currently experimental treatments. of a traffic lane at a signalized intersection that pro- Obtaining approval is a 4-6 week process and vides bicyclists with a safe and visible space to get reatment evaluation is performed for a minimum in front of queuing motorized traffic during the red of one year. signal phase. Motor vehicles must queue behind . 10-16 foot depth(Deeper boxes help to prevent the white stop line at the rear of the bike box. motor vehicles encroachment) • "STOP HERE ON RED" sign should be post- mounted at stop line to reinforce stop line observance • "YIELD TO BIKES"sign should be post-mounted in advance of and in conjunction with egress lane to reinforce that bicyclists have right-of-way going through intersection • Ingress lane should be used to provide access to bike box • Supplemental "WAIT HERE" legend can be provided in advance of stop bar to increase clarity for drivers May be combined with intersection • Requires permission to experiment from Fed- crossing markings and colored bike eral Highway Administration lanes in conflict areas H4 d: in T6IRNING C toned pavement V CLEs ter, can be used within V bike bax for increased visibility TO BIKES ANS pEOESTRWN5 1'R10-15 Variant t Wide stop!r'n s used , r inc sed visItsna if used,eorore 5 �P I pavement should ex teR � HERE ON 501 from the interse�ti RED oe R10-6a Discussion Materials and Maintenance Bike boxes should be placed only at signalized Because the effectiveness of markings depends intersections and motor vehicle right turns on red entirely on their visibility, maintaining markings shall be prohibited. Bike boxes should be used in should be a high priority. locations that have a large volume of bicyclists and are best utilized in central areas where traffic Additional References and Guidelines is usually moving more slowly. NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. FHWA MUTCD. Interpretations, Experimentations, Changes and Interim Approval (IA-14). 2011. App24 nullCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Bike Lanes at Right Turn Only Lanes Description Guidance The appropriate treatment at right-turn lanes is to At auxiliary right turn only lanes (add lane): place the bike lane between the right-turn lane and . Continue existing bike lane width;standard width the right-most through lane or, where right-of-way of 5 to 6 feet(4 feet in constrained locations) is insufficient, to use a shared bike lane/turn lane. The design (right) illustrates a bike lane pocket, • Use signage to indicate that drivers should yield with signage indicating that drivers should yield to to bicyclists through conflict area bicyclists through the conflict area. • Consider using colored conflict areas to pro- mote mixing zone visibility Where through lane becomes right turn lane: • Do not define dotted line merging path for bicyclists • Drop bicycle lane in advance of merge area Colored pavement may be used in transition area to increase visibility and • Use shared lane markings to indicate shared potential conflict awareness. use of lane in merging zone L BEGIN �. AItlHI t�ulrE YIEEtl S0 BIKES •pfianat od line MUTCt7=144-4 (optio`i�af) Discussion Additional References and Guidelines For other potential approaches to providing accom- AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- modations for bicyclists at intersections with turn cilities. 2012. lanes, please see combined bike lane/turn lane, California MUTCD. 2014. bicycle signals and colored bike facilities. NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. Caltrans. California HDM. 2012. Materials and Maintenance Caltrans. Complete Intersections.2010. Because the effectiveness of markings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining markings should be a high priority. Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Colored Bike Lanes in Conflict Areas Description The Federal Highway Administrative (FHWA) has Local agencies have adopted different philoso- granted the State of California approval for optional phies on the usage of green colored pavement. use of green colored pavement in marked bicycle Some agencies use green colored pavement only lanes and in extensions of bicycle lanes through in- for Class II lanes where bicyclists have exclusive tersections and other traffic conflict areas. It should use and leave the conflict zones uncolored. Other be noted that the green colored pavement as de- agencies use the green colored pavement only in scribed under this approval is used for two different conflict zones, such as the weave shown in the situations: figure below. • To denote lane exclusively for bicyclists • To advise drivers and bicyclists that they are sharing pavement and should be aware of each other's presence •..� ' �"�/,K�l�/I/■11111I�1��1■ 111 MUTCD R4-4 - (optional) W if dotted edg 6EGIR lines should derin RKK M LAKE tared°spat rIELB rB BLEs r .I - - �frriwi�fr��ft► � ����� MUTCD R4-4 (optional) � BEG1R w ite d•teed B BIfH� IllRK LAVE Imes should dune YIELB f�Q BIKES Eolpred SCI CB . , 9 App26 "gig City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Guidance Additional References and Guidelines Jurisdictions must notify Caltrans where the treat- AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- ment is being installed as part of FHWA's conditions cilities. 2012. to maintain an inventory list. California MUTCD. 2014 At auxiliary right turn only lanes (add lane): NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. • Continue existing bike lane width;standard width Caltrans. California HDM. 2012. of 5 to 6 feet(4 feet in constrained locations) Caltrans. Complete Intersections. 2010. • Use signage to indicate that drivers should yield to bicyclists through conflict area • Consider using colored conflict areas to pro- mote mixing zone visibility Where through lane becomes right turn lane: • Do not define dotted line merging path for bicyclists • Drop bicycle lane in advance of merge area • Use shared lane markings to indicate shared use of lane in merging zone Discussion The best practices for green colored pavement are still evolving. As of this date, more agencies use green colored pavement for conflict zones than for exclusive bicyclist lanes.The amount of green paint used by such agencies varies dramatically. Some agencies fill the entire conflict zone with solid green paint, while others use a pattern of green stripes. Some agencies use green colored pavement across every driveway, alley and cross streets, while others reserve the use of green colored pave- ment for conflict zones that merit special attention. The precise design of green colored pavement remains at local agency discretion. It should be noted that combing a shared lane mark- ing ("sharrow") within green colored pavement is no longer approved for new experimentation by the FHWA. However,the FHWA may accept for experi- mentation the use of green colored pavement as a "background conspicuity enhancement." Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of markings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining markings should be a high priority. pp27 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Combined Bike Lane/Turn Lane Description Guidance The combined bicycle/right turn lane places a stan- The FHWA has disallowed the experimental use dard-width bike lane on the left side of a dedicated of combined bike lane/turn lane markings. Previ- right turn lane.Adotted line delineates the space for ously, installations were as follows: bicyclists and drivers within the shared lane. This treatment includes signage advising drivers and Maximum shared turn lane width is 13 feet; nar- bicyclists of proper positioning within the lane.This rower is preferable. treatment is recommended at intersections lacking • Bike lane pocket should have minimum width sufficient space to accommodate both a standard of four feet with five feet preferred through bike lane and right turn lane. • Dotted four inch line and bicycle lane marking should be used to clarify bicyclist positioning within combined lane,without excluding driv- ers from suggested bicycle area • "RIGHT TURN ONLY"sign with"EXCEPT BI- CYCLES"plaque may be needed for through bicyclists to legally use right turn lane Short length turn pockets encour- age slower motor vehicle speeds. a_ �c e ►bNLY axe r � R4-4 BEGIN SlGHi iEIRN CAkE YIELD TO BIKES 4141 Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Unless the FHWA resumes granting permission to NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. experiment with a combined bike lane/turn lane, AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- this treatment will not be recommended. cilities. 2012. Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of markings depends on their visibility, maintaining markings should be a high priority. App28 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Intersection Crossing Markings Description Guidance Bicycle pavement markings through intersections • See MUTCD Section 36.08:"dotted line extensions" indicate the intended path of bicyclists through an • Crossing striping shall be at least six inches wide intersection or across a driveway or ramp. They when adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes guide bicyclists on a safe and direct path through the . Dotted lines should be two foot line segments intersection and provide a clear boundary between spaced two to six feet apart the paths of through bicyclists and either through or crossing motor vehicles in the adjacent lane. • Chevrons, shared lane markings, or colored bike lanes in conflict areas may be used to in- crease visibility within conflict areas or across entire intersections Elephant's Shared Colored Feet in Lane Conflict Elephant's Conflict Chevrons Markings Zones Feet Areas 2'stripe 2-6'gap- Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Additional markings such as chevrons, shared AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- lane markings, or colored bike lanes in con- cilities. 2012. flict areas are strategies currently in use in the California MUTCD. 2014. United States and Canada. Cities considering NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. the implementation of markings through intersec- tions should standardize future designs to avoid confusion. Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of marked crossings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining marked crossings should be a high priority. App29 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Two-Stage Turn Box Description Guidance Many bicyclists are reluctant to cross traffic lanes • Two-stage turn box to facilitate jughandle turn at to turn left. Two-stage turn boxes offer bicyclists a T-intersection allowed in Federal and California safe way to make left turns at multi-lane signalized MUTCD.Two-stage turn box for use other than intersections from a right side cycle track or bike for jughandle turn at T-intersection considered lane. Bicyclists continue straight while the traffic experimental signal displays green for the original direction of Required design elements include bicycle sym- travel during the first stage of a traffic signal and bol pavement marking, pavement marking turn then wait for the second stage when the cross street or through arrow, full-time turn on red prohibi- receives a green light to complete the move. tion for cross street, and passive detection of bicycles if signal phase that permits bicyclists to enter intersection during second stage of their turn is actuated • Green colored pavement optional Discussion While two stage turns may increase bicyclist com- fort in many locations, it results in higher average Turns from a bicycle lane may be protected by an signal delay for bicyclists versus a vehicular style adjacent parking lane or crosswalk setback space. left turn maneuver. Materials and Maintenance Paint can wear more quickly in high traffic areas or in winter climates. Additional References and Guidelines NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. Turns from brcy�le Fane may tae pro ect tl by parking lane or other physr`eat buffer App30 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMEC ULA.ORG Bike Lanes at Diverging Ramp Lanes Description Guidance Some arterials may include high speed freeway- Entrance Ramps: style design, such as merge lanes and exit ramps, Angle bike lane to increase approach angle with which can create difficulties for bicyclists. These entering traffic.Position crossing to draw drivers'at- entrance and exit lanes typically have intrinsic vis- tention prior to being focused on upcoming merge. ibility problems because of low approach angles and high speed differentials between bicyclists and Exit Ramps: motor vehicles. Strategies to improve safety focus Use a jughandle turn to increase bicyclists ap- on increasing sight distances,creating formal cross- proach angle with exiting traffic and add yield strip- ings and minimizing crossing distances. ing and signage to the bicycle approach. Crossing should be located prior to where drivers'attention becomes x' focused on upcoming merge. Colored pavement within bicycle lane increases facility visibility and reinforces bicyclists'priority in conflict areas. Custom W11-1 Sign W11-1 � } 1111e YIELD M BIKE XING BIKES XING Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Green colored pavement is optional. California MUTCD. 2014. AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- cilities. 2012. Materials and Maintenance Caltrans. Complete Intersections. 2010. Paint can wear more quickly in high traffic areas or in winter climates. Locate crossing markings out of wheel tread when possible to minimize wear and maintenance costs. App31 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Freeway Interchange Design Description Guidance Freeway Interchanges can be significant obstacles Entrance Ramps: to bicycling if they are poorly designed. Travel • Right-turn lane should be configured with taper as through some interchange designs may be par- "add-lane" for drivers turning right onto freeway ticularly challenging for youth bicyclists. Key design entrance ramp features at conflict areas through interchanges . Bike lane should be provided along left side of should be included to improve the experience for bicyclists. right turn lane • Dotted through bike lane striping provides clear priority for bicyclists at right turn "add lane" on-ramps Exit Ramps: • Drivers existing freeway and turning onto cross- road should be controlled by stop sign, signal or yield sign, rather than allowing free flowing movement Discussion The on-ramps should be configured as a right-turn- only "add lane" to assert through bicyclist priority. Designs that function for bicycle passage typically encourage slowing or require motor vehicle traffic to slow or stop. Designs that encourage high- speed traffic movements are difficult for bicyclists to negotiate. ,9 Materials and Maintenance Locate crossing markings out of wheel tread when possible to minimize wear and maintenance costs. Additional References and Guidelines AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- cilities. 2012. California MUTCD. 2014 . Caltrans. Complete Intersections. 2010. s. . App32 OURCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Signalization Determining which type of signal or beacon to use for a particular intersection depends on a variety of factors. These include speed limits, Average Daily Traffic (ADT), anticipated bicycle crossing traffic and the configuration of planned or existing ' bicycle facilities. Signals may be necessary as part �r of protected bicycle facility construction, such as a cycle track with potential turning conflicts, or to decrease vehicle or pedestrian conflicts at major - , crossings.An intersection with bicycle signals may reduce stress and delays for a crossing bicyclist and Bicycle Detectio d Actuation discourage illegal and unsafe crossing maneuvers. to App33 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Bicycle Detection and Actuation Loop Detectors or Video Detectors Discussion For signalized intersection movements that do Bicycle detection should meet two primary criteria: not normally receive a green light unless actu- . Accurately detect bicyclists ated by a car or pedestrian, the California Vehicle Code requires installation of detectors capable of • Provide clear guidance to bicyclists on how to detecting bicyclists at the limit line. This is most actuate detection (e.g., what button to push, commonly done with either inductive loop detectors where to stand) or video detection. Traffic actuated signals should Requirement for bicycle detection at all new and be sensitive to bicycles, should be located in the modified approaches to traffic signals is included bicyclist's expected path and stenciling should di- in 2014 California MUTCD. rect the bicyclist to the point where the bicycle will be detected. This allows the bicyclist to stay within the travel lane without having to maneuver to the side of the road to trigger a push button. Materials and Maintenance Signal detection and actuation for bicyclists should Push Button Actuation be maintained with other traffic signal detection and A bicyclist pushbutton may be used to supplement roadway pavement markings. the required limit line detectors. These buttons should be mounted in a location that permits their activation by a bicyclist without having to dismount. Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor Detec- Additional References and Guidelines tion (RIMS) AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- cilities. 2012. RTMS is a system which uses frequency modulated NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. continuous wave radio signals to detect objects in the roadway. This method marks the detected California MUTCD. 2014. object with a time code to determine its distance Caltrans. Policy Directive 09-06. 2009. from the sensor.The RTMS system is unaffected by Caltrans. Complete Intersections. 2010. temperature and lighting,which can affect standard video detection. Bicycle defector pa ement marking Push button ctiVBti•n Mt1TGt7 Figure 9C-1 Bicycle detector pave en marking App34 Il y City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Bicycle Signal Heads Description Guidance The California MUTCD authorizes the use of California MUTCD Bicycle Signal Warrant is based bicycle signal heads only at locations that meet off bicyclist volumes, collision history, or geometric Caltrans Bicycle Signal Warrants. FHWA's Interim warrants: Approval IA-16 specifies a more detailed application . Those with high peak hour bicyclist volumes of bicycle signal indications. Bicycle signal heads may be used for a movement not in conflict with • Those with high bicycle/motor vehicle collision any simultaneous motor vehicle movements at a numbers, especially those caused by turning signalized intersection, including right or left turns vehicle movements on red.The bicycle movement may not be modified • Where multi-use path intersects roadway by lane-use signs,turn prohibition signs, pavement . At locations to facilitate bicycle movement not markings,separate turn signal indications,or other permitted for motor vehicle traffic control devices. • Bicycle signals must utilize appropriate detec- The signal lens size may be 4 inches, 8 inches, or tion and actuation 12 inches, with 4 inch lens size reserved only for supplemental near-side mountings. Discussion Additional References and Guidelines For improved visibility, smaller (4 inch lens) near- FHWA Interim Approval IA-16. 2013. side bicycle signals should be considered to supple- California MUTCD. 2014. ment far-side signals. Materials and Maintenance Bicycle signal heads require the same maintenance as standard traffic signal heads, such as lamp re- placement and responding to power outages. �s - - N0 TURN ON RED ` AD App35 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Active Warning Beacons Description Guidance Active warning beacons are user actuated illumi- Warning beacons shall not be used at crosswalks con- nated devices designed to increase motor vehicle trolled by YIELD signs, STOP signs or traffic signals. yielding compliance at crossings of multi lane or . Warning beacons initiate operation based on high volume roadways.Types of active warning bea- pedestrian or bicyclist actuation and cease cons include conventional circular yellow flashing operation at predetermined time after actuation beacons, in roadway warning lights,or Rectangular or, with passive detection, after pedestrian or Rapid Flash Beacons(RRFB).RRFBs have blanket bicyclist clears crosswalk approval in California per FHWA MUTCD IA11. Providing secondary Median refuge islands provide Rectangular Rapid Flash installations of RRFBs on added comfort and should be Beacons(RRFB)dramatically median islands improves angled to direct users to face increase compliance over con- driver yielding behavior. oncoming traffic. ventional warning beacons. W11-15 W16-7P Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Rectangular rapid flash beacons have the highest NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. compliance of all warning beacon enhancement California MUTCD. 2014. options.The effectiveness of a two-beacon RRFB FHWA. Interim Approval (IA-11). 2008. installation has been shown to increase yielding Caltrans. Complete Intersections. 2010. from 18 percent to 81 percent compared to a no- beacon arrangement.A four-beacon arrangement raised compliance to 88 percent. Materials and Maintenance Depending on power supply, maintenance can be minimal. Solar-powered RRFBs can operate for years without issue. App36 0813 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.ORG Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons Description Guidance A pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB), previously Pedestrian hybrid beacons may be installed with- known as a high-intensity activated crosswalk out meeting traffic signal control warrants. Need (HAWK), consists of a signal head with two red should be considered on the basis of engineering lenses over a single yellow lens on the major street study that considers speed, major-street volumes and pedestrian and/or bicycle signal heads for the and gaps. minor street. There are no signal indications for . If installed within signal system, signal engi- motor vehicles on the minor street approaches. neers should evaluate need for PHB to be Pedestrian hybrid beacons are used to improve coordinated with other signals non-motorized crossings of major streets in loca- • Parking and other sight obstructions should be tions where side-street volumes do not support prohibited for at least 100 feet in advance of installation of a conventional traffic signal or where and at least 20 feet beyond marked crosswalk there are concerns that a conventional signal will encourage additional motor vehicle traffic on the minor street. Hybrid beacons may also be used at mid-block crossing locations. C � W11-15 May be paired with bicycle signal W16-7P head to clarify bicycle movement y R. Discussion Additional References and Guidelines An alternative to a pedestrian hybrid beacon is a California MUTCD. 2014. standard signal face that displays a flashing red indication during the pedestrian clearance phase. The advantage of a standard signal face is that it displays no dark indications that could be inter- preted by a driver to be a symptom of a power outage that requires coming to a stop. Materials and Maintenance Signing and striping need to be maintained to help users understand any unfamiliar traffic control. App37 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Retrofitting Existing Streets to Accommodate Bikeways Most major streets are characterized by high vehicle speeds and/or volumes for which dedi- cated bike lanes are the most appropriate facility ri to accommodate safe and comfortable riding. ' 77 iRIfF'! Although opportunities to add bike lanes through r+srNEasr roadway widening may exist in some locations, many major streets have physical and other con- straints that would require street retrofit measures within existing curb-to-curb widths. As a result, much of this section's guidance focuses on ef- fectively reallocating existing street width through — striping modifications to accommodate dedicated bike lanes. Although largely intended for major streets,these measures may be appropriate for any roadway _ where bike lanes would be the best accommoda- tion for bicyclists. App38 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Lane Narrowing ("Lane Diet") Description Guidance Lane narrowing utilizes roadway space that ex- Vehicle Lane Width ceeds minimum standards to provide the needed • Before: 10-15 feet space for bike lanes. Many roadways have existing . After: 10-11 feet travel lanes wider than those prescribed in local and national roadway design standards, or which Bicycle Lane Width are not marked. Most standards allow for the use • Bicycle lane guidance applies to this treatment of 11 foot and sometimes 10 foot wide travel lanes to create space for bike lanes. - Before 24'Travel/Parking Lane k- �sll�l After X WAOWN w 10'Travel 16'Bike 8'Parking ng .-sem Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Special consideration should be given to the AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- amount of heavy vehicle traffic and horizontal cur- cilities. 2012. vature before the decision is made to narrow travel AASHTO.A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways lanes. Center turn lanes can also be narrowed in and Streets. 2004. certain situations to provide space for bike lanes. Caltrans. California HDM. 2012. Caltrans. Main Streets. 2005. Materials and Maintenance Repair rough or uneven pavement surface. App39 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Lane Reconfiguration ("Road Diet") Description Guidance The removal of a single travel lane will generally Width depends on project. No narrowing may be provide sufficient space for bike lanes on both sides needed if a lane is removed. of a street. Streets with excess vehicle capacity provide opportunities for bike lane retrofits. Bicycle lane width: • Bicycle lane guidance applies to this treatment Before d- �Y: 11-12'Travel 11'Travel After 10-12'Tum 10-12' 6'Bike Travel Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Depending on a street's existing configuration, AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- traffic operations, user needs and safety concerns, cilities. 2012. various lane reduction configurations may apply. FHWA. Evaluation of Lane Reduction "Road Diet" For instance, a four-lane street (with two travel Measures on Crashes. 2010. lanes in each direction)could be modified to provide Caltrans. Main Streets. 2005. one travel lane in each direction, a center turn lane and bike lanes. Materials and Maintenance Repair rough or uneven pavement surface- App40 yl B.- City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Shared Use Path Shared-use paths allow for two-way, off-street bicycle use and also may be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users,joggers and other non- ' motorized users. These facilities are frequently .?� ; ' found in parks,along rivers, beaches and in green- qVA. _� belts or utility corridors where there are few conflicts with motorized vehicles. Path facilities can also include amenities such as lighting, signage and fencing (where appropriate). Key features of greenways include: • Frequent access points from local road network 11,11 • Directional signs to direct users to and frommpath • Limited number of at-grade crossings with streets or driveways • Terminating path where easily accessible to and from local road network • Separate treads for pedestrians and bicyclists when heavy use expected !ll�l cal Nei r WLL- I! App4l Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines General Design Practices Description Guidance Shared-use paths can provide a desirable facility, Width particularly for recreation and for users of all skill • 9 feet minimum allowed by HDM for one-way levels preferring separation from traffic. Paths Class I multi-use path consisting of five foot should generally provide directional travel oppor- paved width with two foot shoulders tunities not provided by existing roadways. • 12 feet minimum allowed by HDM for two-way Class I multi-use path consisting of two four Discussion foot lanes and two foot shoulders AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle • On structures,Class I multi-use path clear width Facilities generally recommends against develop- between railings not less than 10 feet ment of shared use paths along roadways. Lateral Clearance • Minimum separation between edge of pave- Materials and Maintenance ment of one-way or two-way multi-use path and edge of travel way of parallel road or street five Asphalt is the most common surface for Class I feet plus standard shoulder width. paths, but concrete has proven to be more durable over the long term. Overhead Clearance • Minimum vertical clearance allowed by HDM to obstructions across width of multi-use path eight feet and seven feet over shoulders Additional References and Guidelines Striping When striping required, use four inch dashed AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- yellow centerline stripe with four inch solid white cilities. 2012. edge lines California MUTCD. 2014. • Provide solid centerlines at tight or blind corners Caltrans. California HDM. 2012. and on roadway crossing approaches r I ,- App42 i� {� City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.ORG Paths in River and Utility Corridors Description Guidance Utility and waterway corridors often offer excellent Shared-use paths in utility corridors should meet or shared-use path development and bikeway gap clo- exceed general design practices and must conform sure opportunities. Utility corridors typically include to the Caltrans Highway Design Manual if desig- power line and sewer corridors, while waterway nated as a Class I multi-use path. If additional width corridors include canals, drainage ditches, rivers allows,wider paths and landscaping are desirable. and beaches.These corridors offer excellent trans- portation and recreation opportunities for bicyclists Access Points of all ages and skills. Any access point to the path should be well-defined with appropriate signage designating the pathway as a bicycle and pedestrian facility and prohibiting motor vehicles. Discussion Path Closure Similar to railroads, public access to flood control Public access to the path may be prohibited during channels or canals is undesirable by all parties. the following events: Appropriate fencing may be required to keep path . Canal/flood control channel or other utility main- users within the designated travel way. Creative tenance activities design of fencing is encouraged to make the path facility feel welcoming to the user. • Predicted inclement weather or storm conditions Materials and Maintenance Additional References and Guidelines For paths susceptible to flooding or ponding, per- AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- meable pavement is an option to reduce water cilities. 2012. collection, but will require additional regular main- California MUTCD. 2014. tenance to maintain effectiveness. Flink, C. Greenways. 1993. i 4�' x .` App43 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Local Neighborhood Accessways Description Guidance Neighborhood accessways provide residential • Neighborhood access should be public areas with direct bicycle and pedestrian access to • Trail pavement should be at least 8 feet wide parks, trails, green spaces and other recreational to accommodate emergency and maintenance areas.They most often serve as small trail connec- vehicles, meet ADA requirements and be con- tions to and from the larger trail network, typically sidered suitable for multi-use having their own rights-of-way and easements. . Trail widths should be designed to be less than Additionally,these smaller trails can be used to pro- 8 feet wide only when necessary to protect large vide bicycle and pedestrian connections between mature native trees over 18 inches in caliper, dead-end streets,cul-de-sacs and access to nearby wetlands or other ecologically sensitive areas destinations not provided by the street network. • Access trails should slightly meander whenever possible to take advantage of available right- of-way space 8'wide concrete access from street(Minimum 5' ADA access) '* I w de asphair:orncrete trail Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Neighborhood access should be designed into new AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- NNW subdivisions wherever possible. cilities. 2012. California MUTCD. 2014. Materials and Maintenance For paths susceptible to flooding or ponding, per- meable pavement is an option to reduce water collection, but will require additional regular main- tenance to maintain effectiveness. App44 # h. • A• City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.ORG Path/Roadway Crossing At-grade roadway crossings can create potential conflicts between path users and drivers, but well- designed crossings can mitigate many operational issues and provide a higher degree of safety and comfort for path users. This is evidenced by they thousands of successful facilities around the United °y States with at-grade crossings. In most cases, at- grade path crossings can be properly designed �'�" to provide a reasonable degree of safety and can meet existing traffic and safety standards. Path facilities that cater to bicyclists require addi- tional considerations due to the higher travel speed of bicyclists versus pedestrians. In addition to guid- ance presented in this section, see previous entries for active warning beacons and pedestrian hybrid beacons (PHBs)for other methods for enhancing trail crossings. j �: T 414 4� App45 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Marked/Unsignalized Mid block Crossings Description Guidance Marked/unsignalized mid block crossings typically Maximum traffic volumes consist of a marked crossing area, signage and • <9,000-12,000 Average Daily Traffic(ADT)volume other markings to slow or stop traffic. Designing . Upto 15,000ADTontwo-lane roads,preferably crossings at mid-block locations depends on an with a median evaluation of vehicular traffic, line of sight, pathway traffic, use patterns, vehicle speed, road type, road • Up to 12,000ADT on four-lane roads with median width and other safety issues such as proximity to • Maximum travel speed: 35 mph major attractions. Minimum line of sight When space is available, using a median refuge . 25 mph zone: 155 feet island can improve user safety by providing pedes- trians and bicyclists space to safely cross half the 35 mph zone: 250 feet roadway at a time. • 45 mph zone: 360 feet Y W11-15, Crosswalk mark- Curves in path approaches help W16-9p Detectable warning strips ings legally establish slow path users and make them help visually impaired mid-block pedestrian aware of oncoming vehicles. identify edge of street. crossing. If used, curb ramp should AHEAD be full path width. Conside a median fug island when space is avallabfe Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Unsignalized crossings of multi-lane arterials over AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- 15,000 ADT may be possible with features such as cilities. 2012 sufficient crossing gaps (more than 60 per hour), California MUTCD. 2014 median refuges and/or active warning devices like Caltrans. California HDM. 2012 rectangular rapid flash beacons. Materials and Maintenance Locate markings out of wheel tread when possible to minimize wear and maintenance costs. ,. App46 1� City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Overcrossings Description Guidance Bicycle/pedestrian overcrossings provide critical • 10 foot minimum width between railings, 14 non-motorized system links by joining areas sepa- feet preferred rated by barriers such as deep canyons,waterways • Overcrossing with scenic vistas should pro- or major transportation corridors. In most cases, vide additional width to allow for stopping these structures are built in response to user de- . Separate five foot pedestrian area may be mand for safe crossings where they previously did provided for facilities with high bicycle and not exist. pedestrian use Grade-separated crossings may be needed where • 10 foot headroom on overcrossing;clearance existing bicycle/pedestrian crossings do not exist, below will vary depending on feature being where ADT exceeds 25,000 vehicles and where crossed 85th percentile speeds exceed 45 miles per hour. . Roadway: 17 feet • Freeway: 18.5 feet • Heavy Rail Line: 23 feet i Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Overcrossings for bicycles and pedestrians typi- AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- cally fall under the Americans with Disabilities Act cilities. 2012. (ADA),which strictly limits ramp slopes to 8.33 per- AASHTO. Guide for the Planning, Design and Opera- cent (1:12) with landings every 30 feet. California tion of Pedestrian Facilities. 2004. Code of Regulations Title 24 requires gradients up to five percent(1:20)with five foot landings at 400 foot intervals. Materials and Maintenance Potential vandalism may be addressed with sacri- ficial coatings. App47 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Signalized Crossings Description Guidance Path crossings within approximately 300 feet of Mid block crosswalks shall not be signalized if they an existing signalized intersection with pedestrian are located within 300 feet of the nearest traffic crosswalks are typically diverted to the signalized control signal and should not be controlled by a intersection to avoid traffic operation problems traffic control signal if the crosswalk is located within when located so close to an existing signal. For 100 feet from side streets or driveways controlled this restriction to be effective, barriers and signing by STOP signs or YIELD signs. If possible, offset may be needed to direct path users to the signal- the path to the intersection. ized crossing. If no pedestrian crossing exists at the signal, modifications should be made. r ANEN 1Nir re r p• sl6le,nff eipath to Inters on Discussion Additional References and Guidelines In the US, the minimum distance a marked cross- AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- ing can be from an existing signalized intersection cilities. 2012 varies from approximately 250 to 660 feet. Engi- AASHTO. Guide for the Planning, Design and Opera- neering judgment and location context should be tion of Pedestrian Facilities.2004 taken into account when choosing the appropriate California MUTCD. 2014. allowable setback. Materials and Maintenance If a sidewalk is used for crossing access, it should meet ADA guidelines. App48 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.ORG Bicycle Support Facilities Bicycle Parking Bicyclists expect a safe,convenient place to secure their bicycle when they reach their destination.This may be short-term parking of two hours or less, or long-term parking for employees, students, resi- dents or commuters. Access to Transit Safe and easy access to bicycle parking facilities is necessary to encourage commuters to access transit via bicycle. Providing bicycle access to ' transit and space for bicycles on buses and rail vehicles can increase the feasibility of transit in k"r lower-density areas,where transit stops are beyond ; walking distance of many residences. People are often willing to walk only a quarter- to half-mile to a bus stop, but they may bike as much as two or = !. more miles to reach a transit station. ' . ;Sri I AL Secure PArking F r " - - !i App49 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Bicycle Racks • Description Guidance Secure bicycle parking at likely destinations is Acceptable racks: an integral part of a bikeway network. Adequate . Do not bend wheels or damage other bicycle parts bicycle parking should be incorporated into any �u new development or redevelopment project. Bi- • Accommodate high security U-locks cycle parking should be given a balanced level of • Accommodate securing frame and wheels importance when considering car parking improve- . Does not trip pedestrians ments or development. In commercial areas where bicycle traffic is more prevalent, as well as parks • Are easily accessed yet protected from motor and shopping centers, increased bicycle parking vehicles is recommended. • Are covered if users will leave their bicycles for Bicycle rack type plays a major role in bicycle rack long periods utilization. Only racks that support the bicycle at • Are located where cyclists are most likely to travel two points and allow convenient locking should be used. The Association for Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) recommends selecting bi- cycle racks that: Discussion • Supports bicycle in at least two places, prevent- where bicycle parking is very limited,an occasional ing it from falling over parking space could be converted into a bicycle • Allow locking frame and one or both wheels corral to increase the attraction of cycling to the with U-lock commercial district instead of driving there. See • Are securely anchored to ground bike corrals. - Resist cutting, rusting, bending or deformation Materials and Maintenance Use proper anchors to prevent vandalism and theft. Additional References and Guidelines AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- cilities. 2012. APBP. Bicycle Parking Guide 2nd Edition. 2010. Loop may be attached to retired parking meter posts to formalize them as bicycle parking. r �3. i App50 OEMCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update H I K E B I K E T E M E C U LA.O R G Bicycle Lockers Description Guidance Bicycle parking facilities intended for long-term • Minimum dimensions: width (opening) 2.5 parking must protect against theft of the entire feet, height four feet, depth six feet bicycle and its components and accessories. • Four foot side and six foot end clearance Three common ways of providing secure long-term • Seven foot minimum distance between fac- bicycle parking include: ing lockers • Fully enclosed lockers accessible only by user, • Locker design allows visibility and security either coin-operated,or by electronic,on-demand inspection locks operated by "smartcards" equipped with • Access controlled by key or access code touch-sensitive imbedded RFID chips • Continuously monitored facility that provides at least medium-term type bicycle parking facilities generally available at no charge • Restricted access facilities in which short-term type bicycle racks are provided and access re- stricted only to owners of bicycles stored there Perhaps the easiest retrofit is the bicycle locker. Generally, they are as strong as the locks on their doors and can secure individual bicycles with their panniers, computers, lights,etc, left in place.Some bicycle locker designs can be stacked to double the ` parking density. >' Q f Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Long-term parking facilities are more expensive AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- to provide than short-term facilities, but are also cilities. 2012. significantly more secure. Although many bicycle APBP. Bicycle Parking Guide 2nd Edition. 2010. commuters may be willing to pay a nominal fee to guarantee the safety of their bicycle, long-term bicycle parking should be free wherever automobile parking is free. Materials and Maintenance Regularly inspect moving part function and enclo- sures.Change keys and access codes periodically to prevent access by unapproved users. App51 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines On-Street Bicycle Corral Description Guidance Bicycle corrals are generally former vehicle parking See bicycle rack guidelines section. stalls converted to bicycle parking. Most have been . Bicyclists should have entrance width from on-street conversions, but they are now being roadway of 5 to 6 feet incorporated into shopping center parking lots as well. Corrals can accommodate up to 20 bicycles • Desirable to put bicycle corrals near intersections performer vehicle parking space.On-street bicycle • Can be used with parallel or angled parking corrals provide many benefits where bicycle use is . Parking adjacent to curb extensions good high and/or growing: candidates for bicycle corrals since extension • Businesses - Corrals provide a much higher serves as delimitation on one side customer to parking space ratio and advertise "bicycle friendliness. They also allow more out- Lockers can be custom designed and fabricated to door seating for restaurants by moving the bi- complement specific locations. cycle parking off the sidewalk. Some cities have instituted programs that allow local businesses to sponsor or adopt a bicycle corral to improve * bicycle parking in front of their business. • Pedestrians - Corrals clear the sidewalks and Additional References and Guidelines those installed at corners also serve as curb APBP. Bicycle Parking Guide 2nd Edition. 2010. extensions • Cyclists - Corrals increase the visibility of cy- cling and greatly expand bicycle parking options • Vehicle drivers - Corrals improve visibility at intersections by preventing large vehicles from parking at street corners and blocking sight lines Improved comer visibility Remove existing sidewalk bicycle racks to maximize pedestrian space. NL% W Discussion Materials and Maintenance In many communities,the installation of bicycle cor- Physical barriers may obstruct drainage and collect rals is driven by requests from adjacent businesses debris. Establish a maintenance agreement with and is not a city-driven initiative. In other areas,the neighboring businesses. city provides corrals and business associations take responsibility for maintenance. i App52 n 0913 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Secure Parking Areas (SPA) Description Guidance A Secure Parking Area for bicycles, also known as Key features may include: a Bike SPA or Bike& Ride (when located at transit . Closed-circuit television monitoring stations), is a semi-enclosed space that offers a MORMON higher level of security than ordinary bike racks.Ac- • Double high racks and cargo bike spaces a A cessible via key-card, combination locks, or keys, • Bike repair station with bench Bike SPAs provide high-capacity parking for 10 to . Maintenance item vending machine 100 or more bicycles. Increased security measures create an additional transportation option for those • Bike lock"hitching post'allows users to leave whose biggest concern is theft and vulnerability. bike locks • Secure access for users i Ir � i - t i Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Long-term parking facilities are more expensive AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- to provide than short-term facilities, but are also cilities. 2012 significantly more secure. Although many bicycle APBP. Bicycle Parking Guide 2nd Edition. 2010 commuters would be willing to pay a nominal fee to guarantee the safety of their bicycles, long-term bicycle parking should be free wherever automobile parking is free. Materials and Maintenance Regularly inspect moving part function and enclo- sures. Change keys and access codes periodically to prevent access by unapproved users. App53 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Bike Fix-It Stations Description Guidance A bike fix-it station is a public work stand complete Stations are best placed in public areas with a with tools to perform basic bike repairs and main- significant amount of bicycle traffic or at popular tenance including fixing a flat to adjusting brakes. trailheads. While there are several stand designs, they all provide an ergonomic work environment for any Wall Setbacks rider.The tools are attached to the stand via stain- • Minimum 48 inches from side of station to wall less steel gauge cables to prevent theft. Hanging or other objects the bike from the arm hangar allows the pedals and • Minimum 12 inches from back of station to wall wheels to move freely while making adjustments or other objects to the bike. Street or Trail Setback • Minimum 60 inches from perpendicular street/trail • Minimum 96 inches from parallel street/trail noon" AIR IT. Y= 4� FIX IT- Discussion T Discussion Stations employ universal bike mounting and should be ADA compliant. Common bike tools are tethered to the station by stainless steel cables.The stations'tubing are generally powder coated,galva- nized or stainless steel anchored into concrete or another proper base material specified by vendor. Stations can be color customized from a variety of colors available by vendor. Many stations have a QR code with repair instructions should the rider need additional information. Materials and Maintenance Stations are built for outdoor use and sealed from the elements. Some vendors provide a warranty for service and repair should vandalism or mechanical failure occur. App54 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Bicycle Access to Transit Description Guidance Safe and easy access to transit stations and secure Wayfinding bicycle parking facilities is necessary to encourage • Provide direct and convenient access to transit commuters to access transit via bicycle. Bicycling stations and stops from bicycle and pedestrian to transit reduces the need to provide expensive networks. and space consuming car parking spaces. Many . Provide maps, wayfinding signage and pave- people who ride to a transit stop will want to bring ment markings from bicycle network to transit their bicycle with them on the transit portion of their stations. trip, so buses and other transit vehicles should be equipped accordingly. Bicycle Parking For staircases at bus or rail transit stations, bicycle - Route from bicycle parking locations to station/ access could be facilitated with bicycle channels. stop platforms should be well-lit and visible. These consist of ramped channels wide enough to • Signing should note bicycle parking location, accommodate typical bicycle tires, installed below rules for use and instructions, as needed. and offset from staircase handrails far enough to • Provide safe and secure long-term parking clear handlebars. These ramps make it easier for such as bicycle lockers at transit hubs. Parking cyclists to walk their bicycles up and down stairs, should be easy to use and well maintained. rolling them within the channels. Long-term bicycle parking A Bicycle TA, rack f I Map of bicycle routes Discussion Additional References and Guidelines Providing bicycle routes to transit helps combine the APBP. Bicycle Parking Guide 2nd Edition. 2010. long-distance coverage of bus and rail travel with FHWA. University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian the door-to-door service of bicycle riding. Transit Transportation. use can overcome large obstacles to bicycling, Lesson 18: Bicycle and Pedestrian Connections to including distance, hills, riding on busy streets, Transit. 2006. night riding, inclement weather and breakdowns. Materials and Maintenance Regularly inspect the functioning of long-term park- ing moving parts and enclosures. App55 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Bikeway Facility Maintenance Regular bicycle facility maintenance includes sweeping, maintaining a smooth roadway, ensur- ing that the gutter-to-pavement transition remains # I relatively flat and installing bicycle-friendly drainage W' T grates. Pavement overlays are a good opportunity ` to improve bicycle facilities. The following recom- mendations provide a menu of options to consider enhancing a maintenance regimen. Y Gutter to.Pavement Transfflflb' j Roadway / - / apl u'-.arsTWO _.. App56 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Sweeping Description Guidance Bicyclists avoid shoulders and bike lanes known to Establish a seasonal sweeping schedule that pri- be filled with gravel, broken glass and other debris oritizes roadways with major bicycle routes: and will ride in the roadway to avoid these hazards, . Sweep walkways and bikeways whenever de- potentially causing conflicts with drivers. Debris bris accumulates on facility from the roadway should not be swept onto side- walks (pedestrians need a clean walking surface), • In curbed sections, sweepers should pick up nor should debris be swept from the sidewalk onto debris;on open shoulders,debris can be swept the roadway.A regularly scheduled inspection and onto gravel shoulders maintenance program helps ensure that roadway • Pave gravel driveway approaches to minimize debris is regularly cleaned up. loose gravel on paved roadway shoulders • Perform additional sweeping in spring to re- move winter debris accumulations :I • Perform additional sweeping in fall in areas where leaves accumulate j Note: Some separated bike facilities (cycle tracks) that employ curbs or other physical barriers for separation may be too narrow for standard street sweepers, which require 10 foot clearance. If this is the case, smaller sweepers are available. Gutter to Pavement Transition Description Guidance On streets with concrete curbs and gutters, the • Ensure no more than %4" inch vertical gutter-to- outer one to two feet is typically the gutter pan, pavement transition where water collects and drains into catch basins. • Examine pavement transitions during every On many streets, bikeway is situated near the roadway project for new construction, mainte- transition between gutter pan and pavement edge. nance activities and street construction project This transition can be susceptible to erosion, creat- activities ing potholes and a rough surface for travel. These . Inspect pavement two to four months after areas can also be prone to standing water during trenching construction activities are completed and after rains. to ensure excessive settlement has not oc- curred • Provide at least three feet of pavement outside of gutter seams • Check for potential drainage issues when add- ing new bike facilities such as separated lanes, -..� roundabouts and traffic circles ~} Installing adjacent bioswales to capture runoff and avoid standing water in bike lanes is be- coming standard part of building bike facilities in bike-friendly communities App57 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Roadway Surface Description Guidance Bicycles are much more sensitive to subtle changes • Maintain a smooth pothole-free surface. in roadway surface than motor vehicles. Various • Ensure new roadway construction bikeway fin- materials are used to pave roadways and some ished surface does not vary more than '/4 inch are smoother than others. Uneven settlement after . Maintain pavement so ridge buildup does not trenching can affect roadway surface nearest the occur at gutter-to-pavement transition or adja- curb where bicycles travel. If compaction is not cent to railway crossings achieved to a satisfactory level, uneven pavement surface can result due to settling. • Inspect pavement two to four months after trenching construction activities are completed When resurfacing streets, use the smallest chip to ensure excessive settlement has not occurred size and ensure that the surface is as smooth as . If chip sealing is to be performed, use smallest possible for bicyclist safety and comfort. possible chip size on bike lanes and shoulders and sweep loose chips regularly following ap- plication During chip seal maintenance, if bike lane pave- ment condition is satisfactory, it may be appro- priate to chip seal travel lanes only. However, crµiTn, , avoid creating unacceptable ridge between bike lane and travel lane Drainage Grates Guidance Require all new drainage grates be bicycle-friendly, Description including grates with horizontal slats to prevent bi- Drainage grates are typically located in the gutter cycle and assistive device tires from falling through. area near the curb of a roadway. Drainage grates Create program to inventory all existing drain- typically have slots through which water drains age grates and replace hazardous grates as into the municipal storm sewer system. Some necessary –temporary modifications such as older grates were designed with linear parallel bars installing re-bar horizontally across grate should spread wide enough for a tire to become caught so not be acceptable alternative to replacement that if a bicyclist were to ride on them, the front tire could become caught in the slot.This can cause the bicyclist to tumble over the handlebars and sustain potentially serious injuries. f— — — �-- 4"Max spacing Acceptable grate types Direction of travel I App58 � City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Bikeway Maintenance and Operations Description Motor vehicle traffic tends to "sweep" debris like Construction controlled through permits, such as litter and broken glass toward the roadways edges driveway, drainage and utility work can have an where it can accumulate in bicycle lanes. Maneu- important effect on roadway surface quality where vering to avoid such hazards can cause a cyclist to cyclists operate in the form of mismatched pave- fall. In this way, proper maintenance directly affects ment heights, rough surfaces or longitudinal gaps in safety and street sweeping must be a priority on adjoining pavements,or other pavement irregulari- roadways with bicycle facilities, especially in curb ties. Permit conditions should ensure that pavement lanes and along curbs themselves. Law enforce- foundation and surface treatments are restored to ment can assist by requiring towing companies their pre-construction conditions, that no vertical to fully clean up crash sites to prevent glass and irregularities will result and that no longitudinal debris from being left in place or simply swept to cracks will develop.Strict specifications,standards the curb or shoulder after collisions. and inspections designed to prevent these prob- lems should developed.Afive year bond should be When any roadwork repairs are done by the city held to assure correction of any deterioration that or other agencies, the roadway must be restored might occur as a result of faulty roadway surface to satisfactory quality with particular attention to reconstruction. surface smoothness suitable for cycling. Striping must be restored to the prior markings or new Bicycle facilities should be swept regularly, at least markings. Bicycle facilities also sometimes seem twice a month and preferably more often for heavily to "disappear" after roadway construction occurs. traveled routes. Also, adjacent shrubs and trees This can happen incrementally as paving repairs should be kept trimmed back to prevent encroach- are made overtime and are not promptly followed ment into the pathway or obstructing cyclists'views. by proper re-striping. When combined with poor surface reconstruction following long periods of no service due to road work, bikeway facilities can be"lost",which can discourage cycling in general. Construction that require the demolition and re- building of adjacent roadways can cause problems maintaining and restoring bikeway function. IIG� App59 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Guidance for Colored Pavements: Waterborne Paints Thermoplastics Over the past 10 years, transportation agencies Thermoplastics are a durable pavement marking in the United States have gradually replaced con- material composed of glass beads, pigments, ventional solvent paints with waterborne paints binders (plastics and resins) and fillers. There that have low volatile organic compounds (VOC) are two types of thermoplastics: hydrocarbon and and other newer pavement marking materials. alkyd. Hydrocarbon thermoplastics are made from Waterborne traffic paints are the most widely used petroleum-derived resins;and alkyd thermoplastics and least expensive pavement marking material are made from wood-derived resins. Another ad- available. Glass beads are either pre-mixed into vantages of thermoplastic is that the material can the paint or dropped onto the waterborne paint to be re-applied over older thermoplastic markings, provide retro-reflectivity. simultaneously refurbishing the older markings and saving the cost of removing old pavement Waterborne paints generally provide equal per- markings.Although thermoplastic materials usually formance on asphalt and concrete pavements, perform very well on all types of asphalt surfaces, but have the shortest service life of all pavement there have been mixed results when they have marking materials.This paint type tends to wear off been applied on concrete pavements. rapidly and lose retro-reflectivity quickly after being exposed to factors such as high traffic volumes. Use of Green Paint Although still a widely used material, waterborne paint is also used as an interim marking material A significant recent change is the FHWNs interim until they can apply something more durable. approval for the use of green colored pavement within bicycle lanes in mixing or transition zones, Regular Solvent Paint such as at intersections and in other potential This type of paint can be used universally for any conflict zones where motor vehicles may cross a pavement needing paint and is the least expensive. bicycle lane. They are intended to warn drivers to Additives such as reflective glass beads for reflec- watch for and to yield to cyclists when they encoun- tivity and sand for skid resistance are widely used ter them within the painted area. FHWA studies to mark road surfaces. This is typically considered have also shown that green bicycle lanes improve a non-durable pavement marking and is easily cyclist positioning as they travel across intersec- worn by vehicle tires and often requires annual tions and other conflict areas. re-application. Jurisdictions must notify Caltrans before proceed- Durable Liquid Pavement Markings ing with green bicycle lanes because the agency is required to maintain an inventory, but since Durable liquid pavement markings(DLPM)include Caltrans has requested to participate in this in- epoxy and methyl methacrylate (MMA). Epoxy terim approval, the process has been streamlined paint has traditionally been viewed as a marking because FHWA experimental treatment protocol is material that provides exceptional adhesion to both no longer required. asphalt and concrete pavements when the pave- ment surface is properly cleaned before application. The strong bond that forms between epoxy paints and both asphalt and concrete pavement surfaces results in the material being highly durable when ap- plied on both pavement surfaces. These markings are highly durable and can be sprayed or extruded but generally require long no-track times. Bit App60 - City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.ORG Product Life Estimates for Paint Durable Liquids for Pavement Markings: • 9-36 monthsI Epoxy • Inexpensive • 4 years • Quick-drying • Longer life on low-volume roads • Longer life on low-volume roads • More retro-reflective • Easy clean-up and disposal • Slow drying • Short life on high-volume roads • Requires coning and/or flagging during ap- • Subject to damage from sand/abrasives plication • Pavement must be warm or will not adhere • Heavy bead application may need to be cleaned off roadway • High initial cost • Subject to damage from sand/abrasives Thermoplastic • 3-6 years • Long life on low-volume roads • Retro-reflective • No beads needed • Any temperature for application e 1'� • Recommended use for symbols and spot treat- ments • Subject to damage from sand/abrasives • Cost prohibitive for large scale applications • Shown to wear quickly in conflicts areas • Life of pavement marking will depend on traffic volume, surface condition and application time Additional References and Guidelines NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. FHWA. Durability and Retro-Reflectivity of Pavement Markings (Synthesis Study). 2008 App61 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines On-street Bikeway Signing ..�. The following signage system guidelines specifical- Acommunity-wide bicycle wayfinding signage plan ,., ly address on-street bicycle routes. Such signage identifies: is regulated by the Manual of Uniform Traffic Con- . Sign locations trol Devices (MUTCD), which establishes national standards for traffic signs and related traffic control • Sign types — what information should be in- devices.This ensures MUTCD-compliant signs are cluded and design features familiar to all roadway users. • Destinations to be highlighted on each sign — The MUTCD should therefore govern sign design key destinations for bicyclists and placement technical aspects, such as dimen- • May include approximate distance and travel sions, font size and ground clearance. It guidance time to each destination is intended to improve cyclists' experience and to • Bicycle wayfinding signs can visually cue driv- help encourage people to ride more frequently, or ers that they are driving along bicycle route and to begin riding. should use caution The ability to navigate through a city's streets is in- • Sign placement such as at key locations leading formed by landmarks,natural features and othervisual to and along bicycle routes, including intersec- cues. Signs throughout the system should indicate: tion of multiple routes • Travel direction Too many road signs tend to clutter the right-of- • Destinations locations way and it is recommended that signs be posted • Travel time/distance to those destinations at a level most visible to bicyclists rather than per vehicle signage standards. These signs will increase users' comfort and bike- way system accessibility. Signage can serve both wayfinding and safety purposes including: • Helping to familiarize users with the bicycle network • Helping users identify the best routes to destinations • Helping to address misconceptions about time and distance • Helping overcome a"barrier to entry"for people who are not frequent bicyclists(e.g.,"interested but concerned" bicyclists) RAF r App62 ia� City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HEKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG On-street Bikeway Sign Types Description A on-street bicycle wayfinding system consists of comprehensive signing and/or pavement mark- ings to guide bicyclists to their destinations along preferred bicycle routes. There are three general on-street bikeway wayfinding sign types: ~ Confirmation • Indicate to bicyclists that they are on designated , bikeway • Make drivers aware of bicycle route • May include destinations and distance/time, but not arrows BIKE ROUTE _- Decision • Mark junctions of two or more bikeways Confirmation Sign • Inform bicyclists of designated bike route to access key destinations • Destinations and arrows are required,distances are optional, but recommended • Travel time is nonstandard, but recommended City Hall Turn `AD • Indicate where bikeway turns from one street onto another. Can include pavement markings t 0"AD Old Town Temecula 2 • Include destinations and arrows Decision Sign Discussion There is no standard color for bicycle wayfinding signage. MUTCD Section 1A.12 establishes the general meaning for signage colors. Green is the4= ' , color used for directional guidance and is the most common color of bicycle wayfinding signage in the US, including those in the MUTCD. Turn Sign Materials and Maintenance Maintenance needs for bicycle wayfinding signs are similar to other signs and will need periodic replace- ment due to wear and fading,to which south-facingjl signs are especially prone. Additional References and Guidelines AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- cilities. 2012. California MUTCD. 2014. NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. App63 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines On-street Bikeway Sign Placement Guidance Discussion Signs are typically placed at decision points along A list of destinations on signs should be based on bicycle routes—typically at the intersection of two their relative distance to users from a particular or more bikeways and at other key locations leading sign's location. A particular destination's ranking to and along bicycle routes. in the hierarchy can be used to infer the physical distance from which the location is signed. ••0 Decisions Signs Materials and Maintenance - Near-side of intersections in advance of junction with another bicycle route Maintenance needs for bicycle wayfinding signs • Along route to indicate nearby destination are similar to other signs and will need periodic replacement due to wear. Confirmation Signs • Every two or three blocks along on-street bi- cycle facilities, unless another sign type is used Additional References and Guidelines (e.g.,within 150 feet of a turn or decision sign) AASHTO. Guide for the Development of Bicycle Fa- • Should be placed soon after turns to confirm cilities. 2012. destination(s) California MUTCD. 2014. • Pavement markings can also be used for con- NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2014. firmation that bicyclist is on preferred route Turn Signs • Near-side of intersections where bike routes turn (e.g., where the street ceases to be a bi- cycle route or does not go through). Pavement markings can also indicate the need to turn to the bicyclist. h BIKE ROUTE_, I I OConfirmation Sign Library City Hall 1 `•r� • . Town Temecula 2 ODecision Sign City f Hall Library��r� 0 Turn Sign App64 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update KE6 HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Trails Signage and Wayfinding Wayfinding is a fundamental part of a comprehen- Destinations sive trail system. Some on-street bikeway signage attributes apply to multi-use paths and trails, but Destinations shown on trail wayfinding signs should there are also some fundamental differences. For be immediately recognizable to the majority of us- example, it differs from on-street signage systems ers.Certain categories of destinations,such as trail in that no specific standards apply, such as the heads and parks, are more appropriate for public signs than individual shopping centers, though MUTCD.The City therefore can exercise significant design freedom. the City can decide if these may be appropriate if they provide trail user needs, such as food, water, Effective trail wayfinding systems create well- seating, shade or restrooms. structured pathways that help travelers to: • Identify their location Information Hierarchy • Assure that they are traveling in the desired direction Because our eyes tend to scan information from • Navigate junctions and other decision-making points top to bottom and left to right,trail wayfinding signs • Identify their destination upon arrival should be arranged as a hierarchical information flow that takes this into account. This means that It is likely that most wayfinding signage will occur the most important information should be near along the system's four backbone trails since the the top and left and displayed in the largest size. system's other trails intersect with them close to Information of lesser importance is placed below other signage systems,such as street and on-street that and in smaller sizes, located toward the sign's bikeway signs. Trail wayfinding signage design is right and bottom portions. intended to readily orient users to their location within the overall system by employing system-wide key maps on all backbone trail signs. The Four Ds In the context of a trail wayfinding signage system, Destination Driven fundamental information is designation, destina- tion, direction and duration. Trail wayfinding signage guides users through the destinations displayed. As users approach a Each individual sign should first designate itself as given sign, it presents a set of destinations acces- a piece of route wayfinding information, typically sible from that point. A user may be attempting to with a recurring and prominent icon or text, such reach a destination shown on the signage, so it as the HikeBikeTemecula logo. This information is will direct the person directly to their destination. displayed prominently at the sign's top. The sign However,destinations also serve a broader role by should indicate the route name, color or logo,such painting a general route picture, the area served as the Temecula Loop Trail. and the terminus. Signs provides useful orienta- People using a sign first need to identify the desti- tion information even for people are not going to a nation most relevant to them before they proceed particular destination, such as using the signage to direction or distance information. Destination to approximate their path to their own destination. information is generally presented along the sign's This is supported by system-wide key maps on all left side. Direction and distance (duration) infor- backbone trail intersection and trail head signs. mation are shown on the same line as the destina- tion. Directional arrows should be prominent. Naming Routes Naming trail routes simplifies navigation, serving a predictability and Redundancy purpose similar to street names. One approach is Consistently repeating these features helps users to name routes based on key attributes like a des- „ � to become familiar with their typical placement, tination ("Old Town"), a general orientation ("Wine Country"),or a geographic feature("Lake Skinner"). shape, color and font. They will learn to anticipate where to expect to see signs and the messages For Temecula, the four primary backbone routes are therefore named the Temecula Loop Trail, the the signs will convey. The HikeBikeTemecula logo Wine Country Trail, the South Side Loop Trail and and colors should be consistently applied across the Lake Skinner Trail. the trail network's signage system. App65 Appendix A:Toolbox- Design Guidelines Designing for Human Scale Consistency and Repetition Trail wayfinding signs need to be designed for im- • Maintain consistent color,font and iconographic mediate legibility from the perspective of a person scheme riding a bicycle or a horse or walking. Factors like a . Strive to position signs at consistent heights user's height can inform sign design, but the cardi- and locations on standard mounting devices nal design consideration is viewer speed. Because the fastest moving trail users will be cyclists, their Simplicity and Legibility needs should therefore drive signage legibility. • Use shortest, most concise phrasing whenever Based on guidance from Portland,Oregon, people possible riding bicycles should be able to see an upcoming • Consider using icons to supplement text for sign from about 100 feet away. They should not people not fluent in English have to stop to read a sign, so signs must clearly convey their message, ideally within a seven sec- Distance Measurements and envelope. The following principles help to • Confirmation and decision signs should convey achieve this goal: distances measured in miles Text Sign Design and Color • Capital letters should be 2 to 2.5 inches tall Trail wayfinding signs often include some aesthetic • Signs should be mixed-case, not all uppercase cues and place a stronger emphasis on graphic design than other wayfinding sign systems. As • Information should be five text lines maximum shown in the conceptual examples on the following Contrast and Proximity pages, Temecula's trail system signage primary • Maintain high contrast between text and back- colors should be those already in use in the Hike- ground colors BikeTemecula logo. The signs' irregular outlines ,. are also intended to make them stand out visually. • Related pieces of information should be grouped and assigned similar sizes and shapes HIKEBIKETEMECULA,ORG App66 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Sign Types Confirmation Signage Concepts The proposed trail wayfinding system employs confirmation and decision sign types. They have o different purposes and messages, but they work together to guide trail users along a designated trail network. TEMECULA LOOP The system employs the sign types separately, as well as combines them in a modular fashion. This Old Town 0.3 Miles Ao reduces the number of sign types needed and helps to reinforce the system's recognizability. Lake Skinner 0.8 Miles Confirmation nald Reagan • Indicate to trail users which designated trail Sports Park 1.2 Miles S• they are on • Include destinations and distance/time, but no 0 0 arrows • May be stand-alone or be combined with deci- SOUTH SIDE LOOP sion signs Decision • Town 0.3 Miles • Sign sets mark junctions of two or more trails • Inform trail users of designated route to accessLake Skinner 0.8 Miles desired destinations • Display both destinations and arrows Ronald '- • Intended to be used in sets, or combined with '• rts Park confirmation signs ;;,` • When combined,confirmation signs are mount- ed above decision signs, which are mounted in order of distance from destinations they list, with closest first Large Map I • Intended for major intersections where back- bone trails meet and at trailheads along them • At such locations, signage consists of confirrn�n 3 Minutes IS - mation, decision and large map signs pole Li Lake Skinner 6 Minutes Ak) - mounted together, in order from top to bottom • Supplement with other signs as needed Ronald - _._ ,__J5,ports Park 10 Minutes A These maps would be identical, with a "You Are Here"label affixed to each sign corresponding with its specific location.This requires the creation of a single map sign, which can duplicated as needed. L6 IL This reduces system costs and helps to reinforce r--Zf NE COUNTRY TRA the system's recognizability. Conceptual signage designs employing these prin- a ..rr ciples are shown on the following pages. '—Lake Skinner 6 Minutes A" Sr! 4 c .60;onald Reagan Sports P iark 7 App67 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Confirmation Signage Concepts MY1 WINE COUNTRYTRAIL TEMECULA LOOP LAKE SKIIyNERTRAIL oilDE LOOP SOUTH SIDE LOOP LAKE SKINNER TRAIL OR .�- TEMECULA LO . WINE COUNTRYTF�AIL � Decision •ined Confirmation/Decision Signage O L D TOW N TEMECULA LOOP � :�. oe._.� ,,s„ TEMECULALOOPIV WINE COUNTRY LAKE SKfNNER WINECOUNTRY oema�: '- 'WINE COUNTRY LAKE SKINNER 0 8 mik. its E SKINNER i 'p App68 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Large Map Signage Concepts HlKEBIKETEMECULADRG LAKE " SKINNER rr ,r fianc °`�+anta Ra .?'OLD �D�afio TOWN b WINE °^qr Ranoho COUNTRY F.. yieca nq K 0 9a 0. a¢ 9 S� neahe '°� `v. �+YY I TEMECULA LOOP LAKE SKINNER LOOP SOUTH SIDE LOOP WINE COUNTRY LOOP App69 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines •#'• �!#l�■ mak' # .. # i LAKE °** � SKINNER • i ■ # OLD ■■� &'TOW N ,� r■■ ° r °- i 7r•X0 ovadmfoe.06 ow+■■y•°ri VIEW Ra • f " . ##� ■ WINE M COUNTRY � • too�OF,g� •r s ° # • ■ • r•�r • 6066#�•#4w*■r#i •41 # i •••. TEMECULA LOOP see* LAKESKINNERLOOP •••. WINE COUNTRY LOOP 6666 SOUTH SIDE LOOP App70 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update 13913 HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Major Intersection Signage Combined Confirmation/Decision/Large Map HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG i h • 1�, • i r App71 ` Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines Sign Materials Signs can be manufactured from a variety of sub- High-density Overlay (HDO) Plywood strate materials, including wood, metals, plastics Marine-quality,3/4 inch plywood with one side cov- and fiberglass. The message or artwork is usually ered with a high density,slick material(the overlay), either painted or printed (usually by silk screening) to which adhesives cling quite strongly. Commonly or applied as adhesive vinyl film. Some commonly used as the substrate for pressed-on materials such used substrates are described below, but in gen- as reflective vinyl. It weathers well and holes in the eral, most small to medium sized directional signs vinyl can be easily repaired. are now made of aluminum substrate panels cov- ered with printed adhesive vinyl overlay, on one or Plastics both sides, which are often digitally printed. Sign making can involve a variety of plastics: Aluminum Acrylic, or Plexiglas, is a hard, rigid material that A common substrate for routine, smaller signs. withstands abrasion well but breaks easily. It is Message usually silk screened onto substrate. often used as a clear protective covering over Easily and significantly damaged by bullets and another sign. other forms of vandalism, but has good weather resistance. Medium initial and replacement costs. Polycarbonate, or Lexan, is similar to the acrylic panel but is softer, with a greater flex. Its softness Aluminum-clad Plastic makes it more likely to be marred by dust and Similar in character to aluminum signs.The plastic blowing sand. core adds strength.This substrate is highly durable Polyethylene and polypropylene are fairly common and light weight, making it ideal for kiosk panels or materials suitable for most routine sign applications. other signs mounted with a backing. Moderate cost. They are soft materials that have sufficient rigidity Aluminum-clad Plywood to stand up as small signs, but not so rigid that they Similar in character to aluminum signs. Plywood are easily broken. backing adds support to the aluminum to provide They come in basic colors and accept paint (silk stability/rigidity for larger size signs. Moderate to screening) well. Generally, they weather well, but high initial and replacement costs. their softness makes them easy prey to vandals Porcelain Enamel on Steel wielding sharp or pointed instruments. Initial and replacement costs are low. This material is highly resistant to scratches, im- pacts and weathering. Most often used on interpre- Carsonite tive signs, it offers a very appealing appearance, Carsonite is a patented material that combines but at a high initial and replacement cost. It lends fiberglass and epoxy resins to make a strong but itself well to graphic displays. High cost, but has a flexible substrate. Used most often in a thin, verti- lifetime of 20 years or more. cal format that may be useful for confirmation signs Fiberglass Embedment between destinations. Its hard, impervious surface g is best used as a substrate for decals, although In this process, an image is embedded in a fiber- silk screening is possible. Very resistant to impact glass/epoxy-resin panel.While initial image cost is and weather with low initial and replacement costs. high, additional copies can be made at the same time as the original and put aside for later embed- ment at relatively low cost to replace a damaged Sign Mounting and Placement or stolen original.The fiberglass resists scratching, Trail wayfinding confirmation signs are generally impact and weathering very well. High initial cost, placed along the trail with about four or five signs but long lived. per mile. Occasional confirmation signs should be Metal installed on long segments between intersections. Engraved or acid etched metals, aluminum and As a general rule, signs should be mounted in stainless steel have a long service life, are gener- consistent,conspicuous locations.Clear sight lines, ally good or very good in their resistance to weather free of vegetation and other obstructions, need to and fair or poor in their resistance to scratching or be maintained between the trail and the signs. impact.Medium to high initial and replacement cost. M App72 �L City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Quick Response Codes (QR Tags) Sign Implementation A Quick Response or QR code is an image that The following steps apply to most signage plan- functions similar to a barcode. The most widely ning efforts: used type consists of black squares arranged in . Define trail network to be signed, including a pattern on a white background that make up a backbone and connecting routes, as well as code containing letters, characters and numbers. route names (if desired) The QR code can represent a link to a website or video or other online content. Users scan a QR • Establish master list of destinations and assign code with a smartphone or tablet camera enabled each to hierarchical level, if needed with a QR reader app and the device will load an • Establish signage design and placement guidelines encoded Web URL onto the device's Web browser. . Display destinations and route network together Posting a QR code assumes users will recognize on maps what to do with them and have smartphones • Divide routes into segments bookended by equipped with a QR reader app.Therefore, it is best major destinations that will be used as control to reserve the use of these codes for added infor- locations (termini)when creating signs mation or convenience. For example, a QR code . Identify junctions, turns and other decision posted on a trail sign could be encoded to direct points where turn or decision signs will be users to the City's active transportation website or online map for more information about trail and necessary bikeway routes. • Prepare signage plan, including sign schedule specifying individual sign placement and con- QR Codes can also be used to provide additional tent (Ideally, create GIS database to manage information, such as instructional videos, contact content and location details for each sign and information and more. They can be used on trail to support future system management) maps to provide more information about specific destinations. • Prioritize implementation One use gaining popularity is augmented real- • Implement signs ity, especially for interpretive signage. This goes beyond simply showing users web content when they scan a QR tag, but can, for example, show distances to a selected set of destinations as users pan their smartphones around them. Another use is to display images of historical photos oriented in space as the user pans their smartphone. Sample Quick Response(QR) Tag ■ ■ ■ ■ App73 Appendix A:Toolbox-Design Guidelines fri.Hain vt Sm.nhern C..II Wires Country ON—"Wdffl App74 OUR City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECUU.ORG Appendix B: Sidewalk Analysis Sidewalk Priority Index Methodology Temecula's sidewalk prioritization index considered Projects that affected a greater number of pedes- the relative need and cost of sidewalk improve- trian attractor types earned more points than those ments to ensure that investment occurs in areas with fewer. In other words, projects with a greater with the greatest propensity for pedestrian activity. variety of attractors earned more points, regard- This index included a composite accessibility index less of gross number of attractors. Schools were and a cost-benefit index. The composite acces- also considered a pedestrian attractor, but differed sibility index included an array of critical acces- in point system. For example, projects with three sibility inputs, each weighted to reflect its relative schools within walking distance earned three times importance. as many points under that category as those with The cost-benefit index compared the accessibility only one. index with project costs to prioritize the most cost- Pedestrian Facilities effective sidewalk improvements. Relatively low This input related to the length of a contiguous pe- cost improvements that yield high pedestrian ben- destrian path to ensure the practicality of specific efits in critical access areas score high. Although facilities, including evaluating their connection to cost is important, it was weighted slightly lower than each other.Those of greater length received more accessibility. This was done purposefully to make points than those of shorter length. Projects were cost a potential tie-breaking factor for comparable broken down into the following length categories: projects within the sidewalk priority index, should they occur. Further descriptions of individual ac- • 1/8 mile- 1/4 mile cessibility indices and the cost-benefit index follow. • 1/4 mile - 1/2 mile • 1/2 mile - 1 mile ACCESSIBILITY • >1 mile Pedestrian Attractors Pedestrian Generators These include attractions within walking distance Generators are largely related to demographic that people would likely walk to."Walking distance" information and were derived from US Census was determined to be 0.5 miles and attractors in- data. Employment and population densities within cluded the following: the project census tract were considered, as were �.... • Offices demographic traits of those residing, such as the percentage of people who walk or take public trans- • Neighborhood, regional service and commercial portation to work or the percentage that do not own centers a motor vehicle. Projects within areas of greater • Parks and recreation facilities residential and employment density, especially those with greater walking and transit mode share • Transit stops and less car ownership, received more points than • Pre-schools and daycare centers projects with converse traits. • Libraries, post offices and other public facilities • Religious facilities • Schools App75 Appendix B:Sidewalk Analysis Pedestrian Attractors 55 Within 0.5 e Pedestrian Barriers Office 5 Neighborhood Commercial(Strip malls,local retail) 5 Several inputs known to act as pedestrian barriers parks and Recreation(Excludes non-useable open space) 5 were included in the prioritization model: Regional Commercial and Retail 5 COIIISIOnS Service Commercial 5 • Bus Stops 5 • Speed limits Pre-SchooMay Care Centers 5 Public Facilities Libraries,Post Office and Reil ious Facilities) 5 • Traffic volumes Schools • Slopes and canyons One o 5 p Y Two Scchh oollss 10 • Freeway crossings Three Schools or Morel 15 Pedestrian Facilities 4 Average speed limits and traffic volumes were em- Length of ployed for each zone.All inputs,with the exception >1 mile 4 of freewaycrossings, were weighted according to 4 mile-1/ mile 3 9 9 9 1l4 mile-1/2 mile 2 severity.Freeway crossings,owing to the significant 1/8 mile-1/4 mile 1 barriers they represent, were weighted strongly irPedestrian Generators 15 - respective of quantity. Walk to work >2%113 <2%1 2 transportationPublic COST-BENEFIT INDEX >1% 3 Planning-Level Cost Estimates Households with No Vehicle Ownership Planning-level unit cost measures were prepared to nQ 3 <2% 2 help estimate the cost of Temecula's future sidewalk , , PopulationDe improvements. All sidewalk improvements were >10 3 assigned a planning-level cost estimate with unit 1 5-10 2 costs based on recent City of Temecula roadway 00: Employment ■ <5 1 and sidewalk improvement projects. >41 3 241 2 Cost-Benefit Ratio <21 1 A cost-benefit ratio was calculated for each possible Pedestrian Barriers 16 sidewalk improvement by dividing the project's es- Collisions(3) ���m >3 3 timated cost by the composite accessibility scores. 1-2 2 Cost-benefit index point values were then derived from the priority ranges.Sidewalk projects with the X45 4 lowest cost per point value were assigned the most 36-45 3 priority points in the cost-benefit index. 26-35 2 <25 mphl mph1 Traffic Vojqmes Composite Sidewalk Priority/ Index 0,000 4 M 7 10,000-20,000 3 A composite sidewalk priority index was calculated 5.000-10,000 2 for each sidewalk improvement based on the total 1,000-5.000 1 scores from the accessibility and cost-benefit indi- ° 1-8ndforrn Feature with Slope>10% 2 ces.The potential sidewalk improvements with the Landtorm.Walkway or Street Slope 5-10% 1 highest composite sidewalk priority index score(out slope< % 0 of 100 possible) should have the highest priority (See Sidewalk Study Ranking). Benefit-Cost Index 103 st by Level of Effort(Physical Improvement)ftplred Sidewalk portion ortion onl to complete all sidewalks within segment limits 5 Sidewalk one side of segment limits 4 Sidewalk on bath sides of segment limits 3 Street widening and sidewalk on one or both sides 2 Additional righLgi-way to accommodate sidewalk on one or both sides 1 Projected Project Cost Divided by Points Lowest 35%costl pint 5 Middle 35%costipoint 3 fthest 30%cosll olnt 1 1 Maximum Possible Score: 100 App76 unCity of Temecula,California a Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG m 1 lrnnrin•�I,: /� 4r W �IRRIlr1I�•u P...'i.k's�`S'- `A[} -•rj* OGeh6h% �ti® r�nrr Alamos Elementary Ll7rTSchoolTry r"`_•--~ _.•�-.Y t. n Purk`�( r �y \. s Bella Vista prinof"R Middle r I �+ b School R "Cole'sual / Zianxntar r�V , � I fi` � � d. tG�• ~`t ].c rairisQu¢e [)e1'FtQY Rd �. {° ` ^Margarita} wry f' .. a rd.]n[da 4'rt ...- Ar.-_ Hlr< �� % fair r r reran 1 r.r �Jlaln'St r�r`raa m Rancho:.Calitornla ltd k`Il Ya7"'6' r' Mf IIC A:r �`�� 1�81}G�"In Vis dI o a;;y Santiag�y Rpr i '^• � � c;rwlw R�� cY;h.Gtn� Ekema+tery r Q. f i�l Is parr f WM,,Rt•'r_� •A ° _e4rn�,la7 r�� P 1 .,a pa'r'nrtnt ('1 R $• N14h 8drtwi 3 k,f nS gyp_ c aGr;buar� .a r 71 Is P.. pro 4bbY RWM.. CrbuTw Hfll /+ 5 1�F3�:•as ,An fy J I.,r T8 s+,fX k r" ElpfiltenLrY E4.mcrnary .rk f Pii1 IP.a QcWtp -- Sitiiid Sc4nQ1 klov Erie SYanteY { y � I•.mr•,Il r 7 MWdle Sctwni r. tmunrty'r f ��� � I .Ir I.uabnn1..� rWdhar,i, r vuM Rano t-ry S war Eb rnnlsry E nvrtmy Gh Pkr. ighw ;, S nl EthP�l yall-Rdn T��W_;rl r ap-Tg- ` d SI n1FVallayrRr! Rr � fS �r-; P-,Bre WoH Creek EIslYrsrdxry ,RL lr�.•-"" Trail Park Wk.phY- Bch,D,ol .1fpl•nsoara3 P,u; j __ Ha>err eM+M�r.a„ -- -; + EliMreM(V school Pm!°y' Scar Sidewalk Study Projects lariM r7ax• � ,ilplf:�l�euY Anxa Rd City Projects qm Developer Projects Caltrans Projects Schools y Parks Golf Course App77 Appendix B:Sidewalk Analysis Segment Location* Estimated '0- a and Number Cost Cn W To From City Project 36 Ynez and Pauba $836,476 71 1 Portraits Lane La Primavera St 0.55 40 Margarita Road $1,135,594 66 2 Pauba Road Pio Pico Road 0.88 38 Pauba Road $866,676 65 3 Margarita Road Corte Villosa 0.74 34 Ridge Park $1,336,775 63 4 Rancho California Rd Rancho Cal Rd 1.04 35 1 Solana Way $754,774 58 5 Skywood Drive Del Rey Road 0.59 7 North General Kearny Rd $529,158 56 6 Cam Campus Verdes Calle Pifia Colada 0.44 31 Rider Way $1,021,823 53 7 Enterprise Circle So Jefferson Avenue 1.14 32 Commerce Can& Del Rio $1,822,066 53 8 Overland Drive Jefferson Avenue 1.00 27 Ynez Road $112,577 52 9 Country Center Dr Winchester Road 0.10 25 Old Town Front Street $99,996 50 10 Moreno Road Moreno Road 0.80 4 Winchester Road $117,750 49 11 Diaz Road Enterprise Cir No 0.09 20 Business Park Drive $1,206,746 48 12 Rancho California Rd Diaz Road 1.25 33 Ave Alvarado&Rio Nedo $2,599,370 48 13 Tierra Alta Way Diaz Road 1.46 21 Single Oak Drive $207,895 47 14 Business Park Dr Business Pk Dr 0.24 17 Rancho Vista Road $188,513 46 15 Via El Greco Fosse Way 0.44 2 Pauba Road $540.682 44 16 Elinda Road Showalter Road 0.45 14 Jedediah Smith Road $487,186 40 17 Temecula Parkway Cabrillo Avenue 0.43 39 Jedediah Smith Road $2,279,892 40 18 Cabrillo Avenue Margarita Road 1.69 10 Walcott Lane $1,035,518 30 19 Klarer Lane Calle Chapos 0.91 + 9 Calle Girasol/So Loop Rd 1 $991,422 28 20 Riverton Lane Walcott Lane 0.89 22 Winchester Road $1,198,101 27 21 Remington Avenue Diaz Road 1.05 Developer 'See segment map 1 Dendy Parkway/Diaz Road *"Uptown Jefferson Specific Plan Developer project and projects that 3 Via Industria require coordination with Caltrans are 6 Solana Wav not ranked.Segment number for N location purposes only. 8 Nicolas Road 12 Ynez Road 15 Rainbow Canvon Road 16 De Portola Road 18 Deer Hollow Way 19 Jefferson Avenue" 23 Butterfield Stage Road 24 IButterfield Stage Road 26 Ynez Road 28 Santiago Road 29 Nicholas Road 30 Jefferson Avenue 37 Rancho Vista 5 Winchester Road 11 Rancho California Road App78 City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECULA.ORG Appendix C: Community Input Summary Public participation has always been a hallmark of Other Comments Temecula's planning process. It was through public . Desire for a bike skills park/pump track input, not long after the City's incorporation, that . Potholes in need of repair the demand for non-motorized trails first arose and spawned the original trails and bikeways master • Insufficient walkways and bicycle lanes plan in 2002. • Dead zones without connectivity The public input for this master plan update in- • Desire for Wine Country connections cluded an online survey that generated more than 400 responses and 550 written comments, two Corridor Comments well-attended community workshops(October 2013 Connectivity issues along: and November 2015), a "Hike/Bike" biking and • 79/Diaz Road/Winchester Road walking event in Old Town that kicked off at City Hall . Butterfield Stage/Diaz/Winchester Road and several meetings with the City Council Trails Subcommittee, attended by City staff and project • Diaz Road/Main Street/Winchester Road managers, along with the consultant team. This • Rustic Glen Drive/Winchester Road strong community response directly influenced plan recommendations,especially desired destinations, • Margarita Road facility types and specific routes. • Pauba Road • Vail Ranch Road Community Workshops The two community workshops provided opportuni- Praise for the following corridors: • Business Park Drive ties for community members to give input on the existing trails and bikeways system and to identify • Butterfield Stage Road community priorities for future system enhance- General Comments ments.Additionally,the first workshop served as an opportunity to educate the community on bicycle Need/desire for: and pedestrian safety and opportunities for active • Bicycle parking at schools and shopping centers transportation within Temecula. Over 50 partici- • More education for cyclists and drivers pants attended the event. • Programs to increase bicycle commuting Three large City aerial photo maps were placed • Bicycle sensors at left-hand turns on tables for community members to mark-up with ideas, concerns or enhancement opportunities. - Bike skills park/pump track Post-it Notes®, highlighters and colored pens were • Track that circles the entire city with hub distributed for community input. Facilitators were . Sidewalk and bicycle connections to shopping also available to answer questions and record comments from attendees regarding issues and • Updated trail map (online) opportunities (geographic or non-site specific) • More trails and any other comments that could be helpful in the plan development process. Mapping exercise ' Organized hikes comments were collected and sorted by location and comment type: Location-Specific Comments Roadway improvements needed: • Butterfield Stage Road _ • De Portola Road r ' • Rainbow Canyon Road • Santiago Road r • Safer crossings of 1-15 and 1-215 App79 Appendix C:Community Input Summary Online Survey Results Two thirds of respondents answered "yes" or "sometimes" when asked if they "currently ride More than 400 people filled out the plan's online sur- their bicycles for running errands or short trips." vey and entered more than 550 written comments. Furthermore,four out of five respondents said they When asked what type of activity they were most would bicycle more if there were "safe and easily interested in,respondents selected road cycling(61 accessible paths between where you live and com- percent),followed by mountain biking(52 percent), mercial destinations." hiking (45 percent) and walking for exercise (42 The most popular facility type was paved bicycle percent). Running and nature viewing(32 percent) paths, with natural surface trails a very close and walking for relaxation (26 percent)came next, second. Note that both were described as being followed by horseback riding(15 percent)and skat- separated from roadways. This preference was ing/skateboarding/scooter(7 percent). strongly supported again when respondents were When asked if they commuted by bicycle to work asked if they would use "trails along creeks and or school, 14 percent responded with "daily" or utility corridors separated from roadways"with 90 "3-4 days a week." Keeping in mind that this was percent answering "likely" or "definitely" that they a self-selected and therefore non-random survey, would use such facilities and with virtually the same this figure is quite high compared to most Ameri- percentage when asked whether they supported can cities. Also, while nearly half of respondents amore connected system connecting fragmented bicycle lanes and paths." answered that they never commute by bicycle, almost 60 percent of respondents said they would use "safe and easily accessible paths to work or school to commute." JBicycle Path - Make, r 1 %} PumpTrack i • Question 13 Images to App80 �Ir� 1181aCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECU LA.O RG When asked about on-street bicycle facilities,there Survey Comment"Word Cloud" was a strong preference for"more protection than conventional bike lanes," such as cycle tracks or buffered bicycle lanes. Improved bicycle detection Buttedield s at intersections and more bicycle events were alsoC t Cars ac i ■ " , popular and 65 percent of respondents said "yes" Ylc! or "maybe" when asked if they would use a bike share system. Almost two thirds of respondents said they would Rik ride more to major destinations and public facili (191 e 8 - ties if more secure bicycle parking was provided. ' , Review of relevant site-specific survey question responses indicate that Old Town is (or would be) C the most popular destination, followed closely by the Wine Country.The only other destinations that C-Ir C/13 rated nearly as high were City parks in general, 111py -.LLB i es especially Ronald Reagan Sports Park. 17F, _ = = GOD(I 14fi'!rsoll CD CD Equestrians made up about 13 percent of respon- -Make `■ Kom dents and many added written comments asking for better access to and within the Wine Country. ` " Comments commonly cited safety concerns and specifically requested separation from vehicle traffic. urrietra ■ " 1 Almost a quarter of respondents were not Temeculaicni Paths residents, but 64 percent said they work in the City. , ' ` 1 ! ' ProvideRiders Survey question responses and survey comments 4 ■ Im Road both indicated a widespread desire for better off- Old I owr . street connections that allowed users to cross ' i _ Interstate 15 without having to interact with vehicle traffic, and especially facilities that improved ac- " TrafficSafeloads cess to Old Town. Accessing the Wine Country, m. Winchester especially via facilities separated from roadways, putsilappilig was also popular, whether by bicycle or by horse. CD - The initial community meeting was focused on selecting five priorities based on workshop and WorkTrai synez survey input.The online survey's Question 4 listed nine potential priority routes, most of which had been addressed in the original 2002 Multi-use Trails Winecountry and Bikeways Master Plan. Of these, community responses indicated that the most popular routes were as follows(See survey map on following page): Survey comment text was processed through Wordle®, a online tool that creates graphic "word clouds"with each word sized to reflect its relative number of occurrences within the imported text-essentially a metadata analysis of survey comments. The resulting graphic of the top 100 words provides a "snapshot"that highlights what words showed up most often, which is likely to represent what is important to the most respondents. App81 Appendix C:Community Input Summary 1. North/south utility corridor route Additional Priorities 2. East/west route along Rancho California Road In addition to the five priorities, three other en- hancements are included in plan recommendations 3. Temecula Creek because they appeared so frequently in survey 4. Santa Gertrudis Interconnect and workshop comments. Coincidentally, these included a location (Old Town Temecula bikeway 5. Murrieta Creek Trail improvements), a program (street sweeping) and a facility type (bike skills park/pump track. These closely reflected survey responses and workshop comments and correlated well with the 2002 plan's preferred routes. Priority Projects x Over 4 D, o, ha No 4b i ..�.� � Solana yyy .9� � 11 Del Rey Rdf�r I� amps r I l {h l n Aa c aPlfpmla Rd � -- ancri..Vista Rd . Sa+ltiago Rd A � pauLa Rd 3� WA �81'7iaC4�8 p ��* p Nz I' �#Vallcy Rd 3Q x •••k►+urat Sur4e�i'raas � 173ef I � Existingla s Bicycle FaCIli1195 Class I:1Aulirllsa PaV. S. '�7.J Cass 11$kepanes r.NIIfEBII(ETfMECUL0..ORG - Scnvw°o /J�' "MIN ax.s App82 BullCity of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKE9iKETEMECUUDRG Appendix Di: Rules of the Road Operation on Roadway The California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 21200 The on-road position of cyclists is narrowed by states that the rules of the road, as set out in CVC CVC 21202, which requires riding "as close as Division 11,that do not specifically apply only to mo- practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the for vehicles are applicable to cyclists. Only police roadway" except in certain circumstances. officers riding bicycles are exempt from the provi- sions while they are responding to an emergency 21202. A. Any person operating a bicycle upon a call, engaged in rescue operations, or in immedi- roadway at a speed less than the normal speed ate pursuit of a suspect. Otherwise, the following of traffic moving in the same direction at that time CVC sections constitute California's cyclist rules shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand of the road. curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations: 21200. (a) Every person riding a bicycle upon a highway has all the rights and is subject to all the 1.When overtaking and passing another bicycle or provisions applicable to the driver of a vehicle by vehicle proceeding in the same direction. this division...except those provisions which by their 2 When preparing for a left turn at an intersection very nature can have no application. or into a private road or driveway. 3. When reasonably necessary to avoid condi- Locations of Cycling tions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving On-road objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes)that Right Side of Roadway make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand CVC 21650 sets the on-road position for all ve- curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section hicles, including bicycles. 21656. For purposes of this section, a"substandard width lane" is a lane too narrow for a bicycle and a 21650. Upon all highways,a vehicle shall be driven vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane. upon the right half of the roadway. 4. When approaching a place where a right turn is Cyclists are allowed but never required to ride on authorized. the shoulder. CVC 530 defines the "roadway" as "that portion of a highway improved, designed, or The wording "shall ride as close as practicable to ordinarily used for vehicular travel". the right" is sometimes misunderstood by police officers, as well as cyclists. Bicycle Operated on Roadway or Highway Shoulder CVC 21650.1 clarifies that cyclists, unlike drivers of vehicles,are generally not prohibited from riding on the shoulder of the road. 21650.1. A bicycle operated on a roadway, or the shoulder of a highway, shall be operated in the same direction as vehicles are required to be driven upon the roadway. App83 Appendix D: Rules of the Road Freeways and Expressways Use Restrictions Off-road CVC Section 21960 authorizes local authorities to CVC 21100 sets out that "Local authorities may prohibit or restrict the use of bicycles on free-ways. adopt rules and regulations regarding the operation of bicycles and, as specified in Section 21114.5, 21960. (a) The Department of Transportation and electric carts by physically disabled persons, or local authorities, by order, ordinance, or resolution, persons 50 years of age or older,on the public side- with respect to freeways, expressways, or desig- walks." Underthis provision, many California cities nated portions thereof under their respective juris- have banned sidewalk cycling in business districts. dictions, to which vehicle access is completely or partially controlled, may prohibit or restrict the use Movement of the freeways,expressways,or any portion there- Turning Movements and Required Signals of by pedestrians, bicycles or other non-motorized traffic or by any person operating a motor-driven CVC 22107 requires cyclists to yield and signal cycle, motorized bicycle, or motorized scooter. before moving left or right. Permitted Movements from Bicycle Lanes 22107. No person shall turn a vehicle from a direct Where bike lanes exist on roadways, CVC 21208 course or move right or left upon a roadway until requires cyclists to use them, except under certain such movement can be made with reasonable conditions.There is no requirement to ride in a bike safety and then only after the giving of an appropri- lane or path not on the roadway. ate signal in the manner provided in this chapter in the event any other vehicle may be affected by 21208. (a) Whenever a bicycle lane has been es- the movement. tablished on a roadway pursuant to Section 21207, Turning Out of Slow-Moving Vehicles any person operating a bicycle upon the roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving CVC 21656 specifies that slow-moving vehicles in the same direction at that time shall ride within causing a queue of five or more vehicles behind the bicycle lane, except that the person may move them must turn off the roadway to allow the vehicles out of the lane under any of the following situations: behind to pass them.Section 21202 explicitly states that cyclists are "subject to the provisions of Sec- 1. When overtaking and passing another bicycle, tion 21656." vehicle, or pedestrian within the lane or about to enter the lane if the overtaking and passing cannot 21656. On a two-lane highway where passing is be done safely within the lane. unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow-moving vehicle, includ- 2. When preparing for a left turn at an intersection ing a passenger vehicle, behind which five or more or into a private road or driveway. vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the road- 3.When reasonably necessary to leave the bicycle way at the nearest place designated as a turnout lane to avoid debris or other hazardous conditions. by signs erected by the authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever sufficient area for a 4. When approaching a place where a right turn is safe turnout exists,to permit the vehicles following authorized. it to proceed.As used in this section a slow-moving vehicle is one proceeding at a rate of speed less (b) No person operating a bicycle shall leave a than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time bicycle lane until the movement can be made with and place. reasonable safety and then only after giving an ap- propriate signal in the manner provided in Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 22100) in the event that any vehicle may be affected by the movement. There is no requirement in the CVC for riding single file, but side-by-side riding may be regulated by local ordinance. App84 w 01"r City of Temecula, California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKEBIKETEMECUL&ORG Three Feet for Safety Act Miscellaneous CVC 21760 requires drivers to maintain a three foot Equipment requirements space while passing a cyclist. CVC 21201 states that a bicycle ridden on public 21760. (a)This section shall be known and may be roads must have a brake on at least one wheel that cited as the Three Feet for Safety Act. can make the wheel skid on dry pavement. (b) The driver of a motor vehicle overtaking and Bicycles ridden at night must have the following passing a bicycle proceeding in the same direction equipment: on a highway shall pass in compliance with the • A white front lamp (either attached to the bike requirements of this article applicable to overtaking or to the rider) which can be seen from 300 and passing a vehicle and shall do so at a safe dis- feet away. tance that does not interfere with the safe operation . A red rear safety reflector visible from 500 feet of the overtaken bicycle, having due regard for the away when illuminated by automobile head- size and speed of the motor vehicle and the bicycle, traffic conditions,weather,visibility and the surface lights. and width of the highway. • White or yellow reflectors visible from on the (c) A driver of a motor vehicle shall not overtake bike's pedals or the cyclist's feet or ankles. or pass a bicycle proceeding in the same direction • A white or yellow reflector on each side of the on a highway at a distance of less than three feet bike's front half. between any part of the motor vehicle and any part • A white or red reflector on each side of the of the bicycle or its operator. bike's back half. (d) If the driver of a motor vehicle is unable to com- Youth Bicycle Helmets: Minors ply with subdivision (c), due to traffic or roadway CVC 21212 requires cyclists under the age of 18 conditions, the driver shall slow to a speed that is to wear helmets. reasonable and prudent and may pass only when doing so would not endanger the safety of the op- 21212. (a) A person under 18 years of age shall erator of the bicycle, taking into account the size not operate a bicycle, a non-motorized scooter, ory and speed of the motor vehicle and bicycle, traffic a skateboard, nor shall they wear in-line or roller conditions,weather,visibility and surface and width skates, nor ride upon a bicycle, a non-motorized of the highway. scooter, or a skateboard as a passenger, upon a (e)(1)A violation of subdivision (b), (c), or(d) is an street, bikeway, as defined in Section 890.4 of the infraction punishable by a fine of$35. (2) If a colli- Streets and Highways Code, or any other public sion occurs between a motor vehicle and a bicycle bicycle path or trail unless that per-son is wearing causing bodily injury to the opera-tor of the bicycle a properly fitted and fastened bicycle helmet that and the driver of the motor vehicle is found to be in meets the standards of either the American Soci- violation of subdivision (b), (c), or (d), a $220 fine ety for Testing and Materials (ASTM)or the United shall be imposed on that driver. States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), or standards subsequently established by those entities. App85 Appendix E:BFC Checklist Appendix E: BFC checklist s x Gt• E W� AW- 4m; 0l'4�4v 0 O o p CD LAJ Q� 0 N N N 3 ° q _ 171 �� � �� � �;1J�jm 89iTt1}11fglJul �_ +9kd�TN'On11�1 4 App86 * City of Temecula,California•Multi-use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update HIKE BIKETEMECLILA.0RG Appendix F: BTA Reviewer Checklist California Streets and Highways Code Section 891.2, items a-k Bicycle master plan compliance with applicable guidelines and standards is required by California Street and Highways Code Section 891.2. for a municipality to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account funding. Caltrans approval is also increasingly important for many other grant funding programs. The following appendix section describes how each code section item was addressed in this Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Update. For reviewer convenience, code text and associated document sections and/or responses are listed under each item. (a) The estimated number of existing bicycle (d) A map and description of existing and commuters in the plan area and the estimated proposed end-of-trip bicycle parking facilities. increase in the number of bicycle commuters These shall include, but not be limited to, park- resulting from implementation of the plan. ing at schools, shopping centers, public build- Current estimate of bicycle commuters is 1,344 ings and major employment centers. using industry standard calculation methods. Ex- See Chapter 3 maps and tables. pected increase as a result of this plan was based on other jurisdictions'experience with bikeway sys- tem development. This also addresses forecasted posed bicycle transport and parking facilities future employment increase of seven percent to for connections with and use of other transpor- 37,169,yielding 2,586 commuting cyclists,or 1,242 tation modes. These shall include, but not be additional cyclists, a 92 percent increase resulting limited to, parking facilities at transit stops, rail from implementation of this plan, including students and transit terminals,ferry docks and landings, and transit users. park and ride lots, and provisions for trans- porting cyclists and bicycles on transit or rail (b) A map and description of existing and pro- vehicles of ferry vessels. posed land use and settlement patterns which shall include, but not be limited to, locations of See Chapters 2 amd 3 maps and tables. residential neighborhoods, schools, shopping (f) A map and description of existing and centers, public buildings and major employ- proposed facilities for changing and storing ment centers. clothes and equipment.These shall include,but See Chapter 2 maps and tables. not be limited to, locker, restroom and shower facilities near bicycle parking facilities. (c) A map and description of existing and pro- See Chapter 3 maps and tables. posed bikeways. See Chapter 3 maps and tables. App87 Appendix E:BFC Checklist (g) A description of bicycle safety and educa- (h) A description of the extent of citizen and tion programs conducted in the area included in community involvement in development of the the plan,efforts by the law enforcement agency plan including, but not be limited to, letters of having primary traffic law enforcement respon- support. sibility in the area to enforce provisions of the See Appendix C, Community Input Summary. Vehicle Code pertaining to bicycle operation, and the resulting effect on accidents involving (i)A description of how the bicycle transporta- cyclists. tion plan has been coordinated and is consis- The Temecula Police Department participates in tent with the local or regional transportation,air three major events each year: 1) Safety Town quality or energy conservation plans,including, hosted by the Rotary Club each year and teaches but not be limited to, programs that provide bicycle and scooter safety; 2) Teen Expo at the incentives for bicycle commuting. Promenade Mall to teach the importance of helmets Encouraging bicycle commuting is addressed and safety gear associated with bicycles, scoot- throughout the document, particularly Chapter 4: ers, skateboards and dirt bikes; 3) a Bike Rodeo Funding and Bicycle Programs. hosted each Spring by the Temecula Community Services Department, which teaches Rules of the U)A description of the projects proposed in the Road, safety and conducts bicycle equipment plan and a listing of their priorities of implementa- safety inspections. tion. The Police Department also hands out helmets See Chapter 3 maps, tables and program recom- to minors, as available, based on grants and cor- mendations. porate donations. During routine patrol, officers (k) A description of past expenditures for bicycle hand out helmets and explain their importance to facilities and future financial needs for projects that minors stopped for riding without a helmet, in lieu improve safety and convenience for bicycle com- of citations. muters in the plan area. The Temecula Police Department also has a Prob- The City has added 30 miles of bike lanes(including lem Oriented Policing (POP)team that uses bikes buffered lane markings), and four miles of shared to move around in crowded conditions during major lane marking (sharrows)during the past five years events in Old Town Temecula. at a cost of approximately $60,000. Several of these miles were completed during pavement rehab projects.The City has also provided bike racks and a fix-it station at key locations. ,a Wine Country App88 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ¢» Notice of Public Hearing re 1989" A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Case No: LR13-0001, Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan update Applicant: City of Temecula Proposal: Planning Commission review of the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, and recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution to approve the plan, which includes an updated inventory of trails and bikeways completed since the plan was adopted in 2002. The plan also evaluates the feasibility of proposed connections throughout the entire City. The plan includes five main sections; 1) History, Trends and Project Goals; 2) Analysis of the Existing Network; 3) Recommended Trails and Bikeways; 4) Programs and Funding Sources; and 5) Gap Closure Alternatives. The plan incorporates new design concepts found in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and meets all Caltrans requirements for the City to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding and other grant programs. Environmental: Adoption of this Plan is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Section 15262 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which actions the City Council has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. Consistent with this exemption, the plan is limited to the preparation of concept plans and recognizes various environmental factors in the area such as aesthetic, historic and biological resources. The concept plans identified in Section 5, Gap Closure Alternatives were developed to avoid or minimize potential impacts on the environment. In addition, the alternatives illustrate one option for closing a bike lane or trail gap. Other options may be considered using the Toolbox, Design Guidelines in Appendix A. The plan is limited to concept plans only, and does not include design engineered plans. Therefore, the plan qualifies for this exemption. Should funding be pursued and obtained, site specific studies would be required to develop detailed designs beyond the conceptual level, which would at that time require complete environmental review pursuant to CEQA. Case Planner: Matt Peters, (951) 694-6408 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Council Chambers Date of Hearing: May 18, 2016 Time of Hearing: 6:00 p.m. The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission Meeting. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.org. Any Supplemental Material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula), 8:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.org — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please call the Community Development Department, (951) 694-6400. ITEM 4 STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: May 18, 2016 TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: Scott Cooper, Case Planner PROJECT Planning Application No. PA15-1003, a Development Plan SUMMARY: application for the construction of a new 54,884 square-foot, two- story, automobile service and parts center at 42074 DLR Drive RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution approving the project subject to Conditions of Approval CEQA: Categorically Exempt Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: Peter Noll General Plan Service Commercial (SC) Designation: Zoning Designation: Service Commercial (SC) Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: Vacant Land, Temporary Vehicle Storage Lot / Service Commercial (CC) North: Existing Commercial Center/Service Commercial (SC) South: DLR Drive, Temporary Vehicle Storage Lot, Vacant Land / Service Commercial (SC) East: Automobile Dealership, Temporary Vehicle Storage Lot / Service Commercial (SC) West: DLR Drive, Vacant Land / Service Commercial (SC) Existing/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required Lot Area: 4.73 Acres 0.92 Acres Total Floor Area/Ratio: 54,884 Square Feet/ 0.27 0.30 Landscape Area/Coverage: 36.2% 20.0% Minimum CAProgram Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\F1 C012B2-8DC8-4402-8901-E1 CBB14AC5B7\12751.doc Parking Provided/Required: 194 Parking Spaces 74 Parking Spaces BACKGROUND SUMMARY On July 7, 2015, Peter Noll submitted Planning Application PA15-1003, a Development Plan Application for the construction of a new 54,884 square-foot, two-story, automobile service and parts center at 42074 DLR Drive. Automobile repair services and parts sales are a permitted use within the service commercial zone. A temporary use permit was approved under PA15- 0154 on March 10, 2015 to allow for a temporary vehicle storage lot of vehicle inventory for John Hine Subaru located on the northern portion of the project site. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. ANALYSIS Site Plan The project is located in the Service Commercial (SC) zoning district at 42074 DLR Drive. The project site currently contains a temporary vehicle storage lot of vehicle inventory for John Hine Subaru. The proposed repair service and parts building would be located on the southern portion of the project site and work in unison with the temporary vehicle storage lot with both projects taking access from the DLR Drive and sharing a driveway. The two story repair services and parts building, including rooftop parking, would contain fifteen service bays, parts storage area, employee lounge, offices, and restrooms on the first floor, parts mezzanine and an equipment room on the first floor mezzanine, and parking on the second floor and roof levels. There is a ramp that connects the existing auto dealership to the east of the project site to the proposed repair service building that will be used by employees only in order to take cars from the repair check-in located at the existing building down the ramp to the repair building. Individual entrances to the parking structure for vehicles are located off the proposed ramp on the roof and the second floor. The project is required to provide 74 parking spaces for an automobile service building and parts building project per Table 17.24.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The project proposes 194 parking spaces. The parking spaces provided do not include the parking provided for the temporary vehicle storage lot as that project is under a separate permit. Architecture The architectural design of the project is consistent with similar use buildings within the Temecula Auto Mall and incorporates aluminum composite panels as well as stucco as the main finishes. In addition, the project contains two-roll up service doors that provide an interior drive- thru effect as all the service bays and automobile repairs would take place in the interior of the building. CAProgram Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\F1 C012B2-8DC8-4402-8901-E1 CBB14AC5B7\12751.doc Landscaping The project would provide 36.2% landscaping which exceeds the 20% minimum landscape requirements of the development code. Plant types include silk, orchid, Texas laurel, and Mexican fan palm trees, daylily, bougainvillea, and lemonberry. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the U-T San Diego on May 2, 2016 and mailed to the property owners within a 600-foot radius. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects). The project meets all General Plan and Zoning policies and regulations and is located within City limits on a site of no more than five acres. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The site is also surrounded by development and is able to be serviced by all required utilities and public services. The project is not anticipated to result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. FINDINGS Development Plan (Code Section 17.05.010F) The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. Automobile services and parts centers are an allowable use within the Service Commercial General Plan designation. Therefore the use will be consistent with the General Plan for Temecula as well as the requirements for State law and other Ordinances of the City. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project has been reviewed and conditioned to ensure conformance with the Development, Building, and Fire codes. These codes contain provisions designed to ensure the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. ATTACHMENTS Vicinity Map Plan Reductions Resolution Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Notice of Public Hearing CAProgram Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\F1 C012B2-8DC8-4402-8901-E1 CBB14AC5B7\12751.doc VICINITY MAP Cityof Temecula PA15- 1003 f Ilk w �. .. . .' ,.. _ -._: •_ ��%,. -. ' .� � X711 * X11 t 1 ► 4u_ _�y� T ti ► ija z l_ Project Site 7�� t i t,, _, v ,rix• �. � �� 4 4 � f 0 250 500 Feet This map was made m the Cityof Temecula Geographic de County AssessSystemor's 3 The map is derived from base data produced by the Riverside County Assessor's Department and the Transportation and Land Management Agency of Riverside `7 NORTH County.The City of Temecula assumes no warranty or legal responsibility for the in forma lion contained on This map,Data and information represented on this map e subjectto update and modification.The Geographic Information System and other sources should be queried for the most current information, - This map is not for reprint or resale, f rogl`mphiG InfprnfnTittrs JyS�{L rTIR PLAN REDUCTIONS v 0£1Z6 oluojgoD oba1p uos'ajonbS ysimpiod 4SSI1 163Z6 VINNOAI1VO V1f103mi'lAING NIG 17ZOZY o° 1065'M'938 Z » c w ' 2131NK) Sldb'd aNb'30In�3S 100NON IIoN S aalad f121vons 3NIH NHOf 9 D o f = Q a CL q - ,, LU ll y _ mY �� .g � �,i 1` is ♦ � 1, - —4: E uS�� ora ° U Zwoo o 31; �. ., ««< isms a L �gjF " ■ �8=�� � � tt `I, � ``• '' •'\- 1 "�� ^gym^ I V1 E� It ItV \ rd 5 m�Nm ti Lk .• YY ,y aw wao< a� ;y u - �� # q It"y" 1 < 'pN ­ ,Lill " ao y o Up ❑ y Fy •� •Y� {1� � 60U � Ow YH E20 o �;� ,l o wan �y w - awP n a d a ��n "n LL, 0 CL 0 ❑(yuan 1D1�"qpa'�iyeNnao� Art /f -� SUBA lJOHN HILAE WEST ELEVATION z LU � P LU u s CL NORTH ELEVATION z a EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE ELEVATION KEY NOTES = .. w_ w n. ti.++�.��+w W'.M w/+r4 .Kw.FT R.�.9�.c.• R aleK� 4atw�'�.a�w,.wM�Yewn T(W� p LJYlI k.O�tlw.wv4a ;„�yyy„„ ..K wow w�•..a�+w w•.v+ .+ .n,.o.�•,uc•u..c O �.rxwr rlw �SRwk..k.I MYC hFuiw u.v.c�uc.a w date gym.=x drawn ChOCMd - �N�oM•�WaK � � ,Aw W. i�Flrwr�Oti LEGEND i} it RT�1Mi.Q�^ wknq NwONIGr uilla'��Oy�. GMKwQSK! EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS k __1 c EAST ELEVATION CL n > - Com-• _ - �,. [ _ L a Lli H V LU SOUTH ELEVATION EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE ELEVATION KEY NOTES 00.E vw'EkwE r'w�W M���MY -aar�. '— ` .nr.s.t. - en.io au.r•v�w.a..n ark U O K O> o w R caro w.,, arawn dw - Cql�'+q•W NrY wK< �O.M4Vfan 11 __ — �n GNr� no.Pn�raK ww w,,,aw .w LEGEND , y �/G.nuV CnW nm N..I�R. •4l4'.f�l�h �n<e+• w..� �� ® AOOn'OOOMU01 sqq wib�lAfgrlW Lb Kn Mr..�.r.c..r rsr�s 'd'�SCt y� >grrnv/mT� u,NYONrMNONYn MMulr�(14-i1 •.=!f EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A5.2 or-ra �• n{.�Y-9 �c.P.sy revision date Me a�n..rrmv `° s A I I IJ6HN -A Ht 141 H! ry - •y V M.Y,aC amM,,n,f ww ui Y[.or xnr.P wnu � N • a Up "?c WEST ELEVATION o w o N a RW 9 L .n V/ y Two — Pr11 VP 4x+• CL n°m°cxnwCES i � R oa� L P LuZD ONN •� Q U o NORTH ELEVATION "`°"' °° xr. Z C EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE _ w ELEVATION KEY NOTES CODE MATER7 Q IAL MANUFACTURER PRODUCT co JIM NOTES - c[rvl sax r Z ruWe.iPrrOld+N! mvn ma rtx*° rvxxounrn.avnvmr wx T w K wt§(.x.x°' nsv.opW ia+Ea.>H.pYJ u+•'y.. P° 1(� � ne [xwo Moe vv menu �,,N vet `�' K .c �.ey ��W�.x� �iuWvwA- -Z—= [s .wrMarvrt°wn uwmxc O` Q - �•,c» vin W niR ATFK•fbf. p,ear. wrm-w+a woo a.wr-+.x m.s�rvcw^e W O .em.rOe.ui . Cyw lry N R _ M�v�O++• .MWe?ATG*•wle ee 1�fPKn�M: „�,[ >•-r[ -r++u „ ww�+wn.�.am.+.wovw - dale Checkad •+a•s.r..z rs rr�a.r.c�.. mui.xw Jp>„x •cxe - x.°.wna¢,..G ry �. fvxalr.sw, .�amv[ro.mc r�wwn°e sheet tine LEGEND +.snW :w» rvn AB" Pnizwmm°M "VRry WEST 6 NORTH • sn ' '� ry uirx° rvnT wx int[x oxxhNe°errwxscxeoA[ ELEVATIONS mr.v+ie°Pwiiurvu nMy .y ya, Q wwpow°esx;rvnma xtrexi°wm+oownxa sxen.w° ftil4e Y.°xerPe sH�m°EM s�leerviex[°weal .. Oil al EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AS. notimm- e"As re�sion date IDJ 4 my mar- df" •. IF Ews,mc rx R —_---_— m. --- ---------------- — I MFn wxu ' �i m .F•F In n:lm2o Tan F..tic EAST ELEVATION U Q a o z W • � rca°I .a�fan�wl� � N KYY Rf.•IOeLeT L 4- 7 D - � 1 CL v'Di q n losxu � — Em �j q y / vaorovmaunv i� 1 �/ o� ER sn Z a 1 W z y <uLa O — — w —wo U an...'11- tea �[ �aueo. W S SOUTH ELEVATION _ w EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE ELEVATION KEY NOTES CODE MATERIAL MANUFACTURER t PRODUCT �fKW CC.Cq 4I: NOM Tuna C­ m IK,nixocaun ran.afo ero , ­I T.N,Tca.o =W e+vnovE '.� nvanOEsaOwx¢lOx FNf�v�PlRa ❑ uV11N{pu4wwvwNq �^� 9qp{�'{r4 F.1 PIXlvgilvlEOIXCeIK,rnMO O U � fAv60Tfa 4 -fAtt{ `/ ,RQEY.\/n v.Nl rr.rh-Ei'ST P'9NFu.n:^P'rb-:�-ni LU W o 4�l.lEO W:ac! ecat W. (n N O *6,-w GQwa A.I.10P CAI EL..-1. iw Nm +wav lvao•a.wtd .na�vw MIR Fal>mNMIn! Arro/OR EULn+Gi wNGS POa NmOvu _—_ ]:xnalOa MMN Gv bEOF{.b1e0Aft0 ,�..A., C hOCiGf+. tlNA]Exn+c W MT+ci }d?tsa.0 Nousnas Nc oua oa.r,C, a yhaet title ac ..,n.NEOMI. LEGEND EIST 65DU„ ELEVATIONS PC­ vvsrz � �—J a� N', a 1R Ea,Ee Raw.su Eo uvMiforoaartuµ+00 ec4lr Hrtvvse�i Gr6SraCCDo eow. �mEYrt mmn WM � wvuoow oESC��.,oa aern�O wwoow lr.Eivrt[,wo ShMi F waEow esWltmRL C. E:�~�.,�aE`M � ����� EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS � A5.2 rvuf E is.t•a �ai .UCEIDATEE.0-TAId revision date Ire hi Em Luu. t.mu. LUMSTOR-E 0 -M2 z 31 STAIR A; �106 0,- r .............................. 4- :tz .2 u ELEC L- (D 4- 105 TOT ---------- LU LOCUN-R. PARTS STQRACE PAR,R-.-.. IIN'I F ,119. -Fm- < R14- 4N ,�O" R� -a .1 Eg d!ik <u RAF 4 COLL H, V) :3 F- < EWLg�YLE,I-O�N,GE 2 —'A IT R ILI SECVRE3TORAC-E ui OFRCE 1109 u p QFFICE ------ Z > LU --------------------- - 0 LU V) CL ante Oraw 0 checked 0 job,,,,-u,—c..,.. FIRST FLOOR PLAN sheet title LL- revision date i I I i I I e TAIR AT$AIR 6 ❑ o o v ❑ 0 M } N } O U v a a a ❑ ❑ O ^� z m9 c6 -;� LI N W o W Y �x.s .FllelSie � 1 PQM ^ LI CL � a W m H Q U o pApis AVSIArmiF m LL urpq ..• � Q ti i .R�u°•� j cn 5 4 w � t Z ID w ------- ----- ___ _— — ----------- .r aoor eaow . — ...... r4 W> onow W ..... . O ._....... U _ W O> o 7 �o c Z W o -- Z N � Qdate N drawn �a PARTS MEZZANINE PLAN checked �N sheet title s < nooao�µ ° A3.2 nw-MIL fp.pp-li revision dote i w f[O STAIR STAIR B Q O � ypk.aua.atr+e /� W 6 � O O 1 a u CA Z Ws x- - rm ry �,Ws,kooac�c N , R �✓ � y S 4U•u�y.� 'rt:iu rxuv �' Cy vQi rwrvr..�rar oc• o b w N ui d U Fl (� Z w 1 Z =z QQ > JM:Li O> o W o //� O aura .e�o•a J drawn L checked �a SECOND FLOOR PLAN Q ::+cer HRe `6 Z O ° w PLOT DAM: 164745 revision dole arer--m.�Hrs l'�F rau Maw.noecnc.wc��.., 1 � 4 'ST�R A I1I1 1 I1 I Jy T 1 1 ! 1 1 1 O 71 pr w...•a ^ 6 z o •�.,�• 1 � 1 � .,,��u. U v Q ab ii h I— O W ro 6 ROOF DECK N y nxElei cnnl�x } y cw wa,. occ sx � i � a w a a =)Uf U -^ W d g Q 2 Z w Z LU ZEQ a�F,E,ow .o�.E ow woa.F ow ,,ow O> o LU o l <7 N ZCry checked Q tROOF PLAN sheettitle nM U- 0 1 A3.4 at revision dare ecwvww.av Rw+n ae sien iUefsu Loe O�r°Sr ]gNN.iNH in fOSpIW y PARKING SPACE i K2fi\1q wep-�am•w�wcco n"u"io Mn.c"�rn+G I I r..s,nra-ICOI UG IIII I HASP.,"°i°R QAy L�xC awn.us SOUTH TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATION WEST TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATION Q o NS o TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN z m ^L� W Y } O a CL � a W N F— LU W Z mU o U LU< U Z� w Q Ld zw O> o s..,HNG was W N SOY^ i'�'riVi�fOdiO date msu�sv uP¢:eoi no 'Nsiocw wsoHe.wni. drawn � `=• checked job lH II xnc. 1 ewr�neevir. sheet title TRASH ENCLSURE PIAN 6 ELEVATIONS z sheer ° NORTH TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATION A5.3 of nrncwe Io-saLs 3 I -E- E Q! r yty CITY OFTEMECULAGENERALNOTE: T. X WA E ADNE.[ro TnE ED DF 1 !" f Irrr{� ✓ 'M :LLS 1-1. N, "ir g EW... �. 1-1 1 1111 AOE x mG Lx !' r.j . [,. DNxw[AT LL NnA DL NNG NE GDA9nDRx DP TT.PRD Dan OWNERIAPPPLICANT: _ t SITE INFORMATION SUMMARY: rnrrwD net.IAwraLrwlyRr.[.ANN .j!' � � �. 4 .. `x �l rrl r[xNYaaRw T2+rL�Ax'1 tLaQu x„L.ipl[ary�Y IVM R,LrWww.w RLAL Fiwllti+fu[IE•I• u. rn Ne enP.. L x.W,uw.nw, u, INDEX MAP cur-Imc � SCALE: 1.8100' SCu1,XIX i�iwumo, nDlnla sl ZEP[ gp EWs.Ewn LeEwAaDwwnmAT>. � d .I N.—Txno.exsi ci IAI..Lv cuss�u r. -11NG Ux SIA 4 .Ax LAID PIEF{EATaPL'T[xCT19+IPMNEe 4MAIRuxIIM1r'RYCAmDOiaEcrxtG(peEilr WANTITIES SYMBOL NrOAT SPAC[PLANNING OILr I LAI y'rpl ..IEI n ITEM IMPROVEMENTS STD. DWG._DLR dUiE ORNXD[MAxcAnONWRINE IS PXOPua20.AN ARK PON INVTPROP9itt x01N;pARY N DnIGNAI ED 9[[LxIT e[NCLp YA 1YGI� E wNA EW51WG CGIlTd1R --1025 ARGwLONG AATH[EMcnGxx'CV ACCeNGSLM2 PlnWdS EXII UXOWEIIU GLED TN ` ND91 GIUR G011T011R —1022— 1 t. ;®WKw��pqT<w,'T—. rAKUK ; U—a d+AD{Ic CIVIL ENGINEER: xnxxmcmNNLn rANtxmc. lv.1 © POC—WAY—CE V iC,EiXKw[ 6A.v uD'Oq�CA 'L I ryryryIyttt O TWE"F"G1CX BAgN SAN DIEGO REGIONAL Sm DRAYWG NO-D-Y F AERIAL MAPPING: LOT•e LOT•c• Di cGH:TXGcr IUNw�EG a t ren.wcrcD r Ky sra ,�w7.,wAeSe �O A[YOiT. MA 0 I EN5NYG 21 ASE :Pnx T[cxNIN.M.., TEix.0 Y 12"PVC DLR 0911 •-•E' ® ———— =P...TACA9iw r wAR{I➢w\.Y IEYYY:L.tiH w XA. ![eM .•. _ _-C(E)4RCUlD LAND SURVEYOR: ��nLn>-mrE ® MASdiRT RETAINING WALL _ I wV.F PER RAV © PCC ORA1N LHUIE r—� NALec[tl�Cri T[xXW xaUrRO ® 4"PVC SEMER LATERAL �y nwn .0 �mOPOSEN Y XofE al1cH PFA OTT OF 1FlELlIU PROJECT DATA SUMMARY: R-o-w.urRmvcnr R1auReuENTs 4•dANEToi Pw sEMFA dEurwT O� Nos SAL Yp.E ® 1"PVC WATER SERVICE —W— 4'Imn1.AC,CAC1:lIIAlnV ® 4'PVC ME SEANCE —FS— d61UliX[X AGREAG[:1.M AC'R[S ® FIRE DEPARI1YENi CONNECTION ep o POST INDICTOR VALVE � Q$X'PA3aNWRIXM[NUM{eX;N6nYIN CFITIIICATO.VNm9RA.l{N CNNG 1C (1) A"DOUBLE DETECTOR CXECK VALVE A,.:.T,.TYNDY. SOIL MAMX NONS © xAr.Aw.GWrwt WT[ADXxLN. ;�4,DLivGA,lnl § N°A r ss�Lr a nAn ® s•.TIE.De erxW.we,IDH o.n+n Nm x nrnAxc T[An OR PhC SHEET INDEX: Nora• . aYL ® T nwe NrD[An.6E wW-! wy s DETAE OR Y`.Karn:rnLEX WOREIENTpN saL uAT9x 11 EAA.aIAXs axe m.uers ® caw.ACT vwr YL,Snl[EnrAxer wuE T;, MLANlWX6REKM:MTgW'.a IXIW.1'w'nAA L0f4-.Y,1'.YG�P Underground Service Alert ee'ol uIRK a PEP,•.Pw O rrx IIRMIMIt2Io SIDES rlel PaPtrAl.,x LYE_w.STT"k ow"t rnOIII 9III R u No rat-m wAw PIPE nm ro 4•Pvc UIDILw,ri—IIAm>:En orRro leH9.rn P Ey1ALLTIC r.. A 6U/LIhPiYGAfA'P S4�ETY 2 1/2"DISC IN Ddu cnlwER LOCATED IN ME NaRTx SOLID WA (TIGHT UNE)PER x12Y•IgLry anainr SAEIL 8D L>:cn As INrTIN KNEE aGdE Aw Call:TOLL FREE CDR a THE INT.OF D wsOR RANwNIA RD AND E PIAN IAKx AxW BE[Knl>K saA ABLnW"°TDcx GI1w TIG TIR nAOED LIE 1-800 RD.,x'w.w.Er NA.DYO tlulrwAA m.rXY NpEni a >'s fAYALLD AAiIow N9 ADI[nATWin w AlxKatiANDE WTW ne xwyntrN,P7 rn D.LwaeLw-E.tri. .iE[ Sw W oP w NQIYr� M EAS,m E P •+PG,�N iC+X9AWl'r pwT 422-4133 OF A 1m■AEe IN A lw x r.1�rno YKIFEII S '�• _ REAL ESTATE"AGN. I. r i TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG BE.. 1G20.5nr(ADJ.DATE P-T2-X2) �. WIC ppf�>g03 APPROVED wt [1fw5wlK'[IW KfWS1 A'r?C h REWSIONS wE,IGL WRN SAL fy„r. APe>pl..e Wr ?..x>& Threw IY :CLE °r CITY OF TEMECULA ErjrrxTlnn a.M�WOWS '"'"''� wcGA.Yaan Em D.W _ r,A..s Trewer tr+r.•v,e+.•.na,er Enxpecto� Dlsar{o1 TENS Tar N....NA ACCEPTED BY: WVnA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DPN coxPl•<.a w °k rI • uARx A.—N— x. 2 22 a eaTU uc wdxcs/on ENGINEER JOHN NINE SUBARU SERVICE AND PARTS CENTER NA RCE w 2en4 ��„ 3al-U LOT'E'LLA NO.PA 03--657 LIMB �' �iiiiii�ii�iii�iiii ,• �,, _ �7 re Pri15,i �C f y_ MINN 3 c I own i ago a N1 Iili imom wL : u Y� r o. 4% r7i'•x:F,- Ikiigr_111AP.9f.U.°A s' .��rs•�a�lt9� Undergrour�d Service Alert .TOLL FREE sir•-ccr.-ys;, rri;w� o , / l��:i i•?Y-:u � 800 �.:�.uCN.tlfi_IfL.rQ1l� U d 422-4133 a air I I - s � p r S � , T PRO,iECT r LOCATION m E n PrapomW D,v,egp„t Pen Arte, ) - - Arm Name SA—Famapn C M r,9rc zo6a2� d _ FYP-Rbtehon b,A] C N A s'wnd r,sn E CL rmp—pl—np �,M3 Conceptual Landscape Plan Ew,Irp PNann9 p I = Sheet 1 of 2 sheets o ROW P nbN 6,W —27=5 77,521 Tael tens m Arm Scald t--JlT S Junn 3C?p15 N Conceptual Landscape i L (Sw P App L I—,—Pt JOHN H I N E S U BARU Rapo„dl,r9,RauMbe,d,tl CaraPY I,nL,Rnnd,- SMW p21 .�Propawdlantl,aap,P,n6nG,.,M�,era proanem.v.- N arabor,,a rap S toS­ ell,pnntl,-Sll,tll R) Prgwyd C-11 Parng N SERVICE AND PARTS CENTER P­—Cro59w,lk Poyk,p rme•Y,,..;s-zr.c.•:,r.n e.-.ae 7„m..,e Propo.,d eo.—n Ar,a(smn Plum LOP.rm-sn�n nz) 42074 DLR Drive Temecula,CA 92591 r-r.7 Yl,au,frn..n.n F..nrrw.-nwinr V Praaarad DY m Pm~R—1%MR(5—lar reMenm Qtly-See OW Ergnrefs M—) !0 Nopo..d Slp Era. ,C—"A.Pen��,,. b,.b Bran��„,. KRIZAN Associates, Inc. o f Prapa,etlV,Nc,I FamAmnl Trrw(511,PInlLpurwb-$IIWl,21 Loa4xu L Appmp roSp,u„(Ss PI,m tl SI»,Ilal lwndaupe NcbilWwa Plmiii Z}; PmpM,d LgMvg P-(Slq+m fa lNennv mly-5„lJ9eirg Pbnl L�,n'- 1097 Gr—H.6 Onw G,.—HdN U92J18 d :1y.w,Y a--..,.SA.ti,ty-wMvya'ry-Sce 0W1 En9nw P1...) P.~S.—T—(S,n Pent L,".-S p2) -� ,_,,, IorwW�kywl7n,�btl5alm o-mmi ?VS�euvp�.rrea:5ie l':1�L.yeraR-✓v..w e:i APN#921-730-046 PA#15-1003 PC DRAFT RESOLUTION PC RESOLUTION NO. 16- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA15-1003, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 54,884 SQUARE-FOOT, TWO-STORY, AUTOMOBILE SERVICE AND PARTS CENTER AT 42074 DLR DRIVE, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) (APN 921-730-046) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On July 7, 2015, Peter Noll filed Planning Application No. PA15-1003 a Development Plan, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on May 18, 2016, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA15-1003, subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Development Plan, Development Code Section 17.05.010.F A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; Automobile services and parts centers are an allowable use within the Community Commercial General Plan designation. Therefore the use will be consistent with the General Plan for Temecula as well as the requirements for State law and other Ordinances of the City. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; The project has been reviewed and conditioned to ensure conformance with the Development, Building, and Fire codes. These codes contain provisions designed to ensure the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Major Modification: A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects); 1. The project meets all General Plan and Zoning policies and regulations and is located within City limits on a site of no more than five acres. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The site is also surrounded by development and is able to be serviced by all required utilities and public services. The project is not anticipated to result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA15-1003, a Development Plan Application for the construction of a new 54,884 square-foot, two-story, automobile service and parts center located at 42074 DLR Drive, and making a finding of exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (APN 921-730-046), subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 18th day of May, 2016. Ron Guerriero, Chairperson ATTEST: Luke Watson, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 16- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of May, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Luke Watson, Secretary EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA15-1003 Project Description: John Hine Subaru Development Plan: A Development Plan for John Hine Subaru to construct a 54,884 square-foot, three-story, service and parts center. The project is located at 42074 DLR Drive. Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-730-046 MSHCP Category: Commercial DIF Category: Retail Commercial TUMF Category: Retail Commercial Quimby Category: N/A(Commercial Project) Approval Date: May 18, 2016 Expiration Date: May 18, 2019 PLANNING DIVISION Within 48 Hours of the Approval 1. Filing Notice of Exemption. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 2. Indemnification of the City. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards,judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 3. Expiration. This approval shall be used within three years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the three year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit. 4. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three extensions of time, one year at a time. 5. Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division. 6. Signage Permits. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 7. Landscape Maintenance. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Community Development shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. 8. Water Quality and Drainage. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval: a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately. b. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. c. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. d. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. 9. Paint Inspection. The applicant shall paint a three-foot-by-three-foot section of the building for Planning Division inspection, prior to commencing painting of the building. 10. Materials and Colors. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by City staffs prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. Materials: Aluminum Composite Panel Silver Metallic Aluminum Composite Panel Regal Blue Exterior Paint Site White (SW7070) Exterior Paint Gray Screen (SW7071) Exterior Paint Network Gray (SW7073) Glazing Solar Gray/Clear Glazing Solar Gray/Transom Panel Stucco Site White (SW7070) Stucco Gray Screen (SW7071) Stucco Network Gray (SW7073) Storefront System Clear Anodized Roofing White 11. Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project. 12. Trash Enclosures. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as regular solid waste containers. 13. Trash Enclosures. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on the site plan. 14. Covered Trash Enclosures. All trash enclosures on site shall include a solid cover and the construction plans shall include all details of the trash enclosures, including the solid cover. 15. Phased Construction. If construction is phased, a construction staging area plan or phasing plan for construction equipment and trash shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. 16. Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning Division verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. 17. Public Art Ordinance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Public Art Ordinance as defined in Section 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code. 18. Property Maintenance. All parkways, including within the right-of-way, entryway median, landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities, and on-site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit 19. Placement of Transformer. Provide the Planning Division with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check valves prior to final agreement with the utility companies. 20. Placement of Double Detector Check Valves. Double detector check valves shall be installed at locations that minimize their visibility from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. 21. Archaeological/Cultural Resources Gradinq Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Director of Community Development at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow the City to consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the discovery is not an archaeological/ cultural resource, the Director of Community Development shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Community Development shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Director of Community Development." 22. Discovery of Cultural Resources. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If cultural resources are discovered during the project construction (inadvertent discoveries), all work in the area of the find shall cease, and a qualified archaeologist and representatives of the Pechanga Tribe shall be retained by the project sponsor to investigate the find, and make recommendations as to treatment and mitigation." 23. Relinquishment of Cultural Resources. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition." 24. Preservation of Sacred Sites. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved." 25. MSHCP Pre-Construction Survey. A 30-day preconstruction survey, in accordance with MSHCP guidelines and survey protocol, shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the 30-day preconstruction survey shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. 26. Burrowing Owl Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "No grubbing/clearing of the site shall occur prior to scheduling the pre-grading meeting with Public Works. All project sites containing suitable habitat for burrowing owls, whether owls were found or not, require a 30-day preconstruction survey that shall be conducted within 30 days prior to ground disturbance to avoid direct take of burrowing owls. If the results of the survey indicate that no burrowing owls are present on-site, then the project may move forward with grading, upon Planning Division approval. If burrowing owls are found to be present or nesting on-site during the preconstruction survey, then the following recommendations must be adhered to: Exclusion and relocation activities may not occur during the breeding season, which is defined as March 1 through August 31, with the following exception: From March 1 through March 15 and from August 1 through August 31 exclusion and relocation activities may take place if it is proven to the City and appropriate regulatory agencies (if any) that egg laying or chick rearing is not taking place. This determination must be made by a qualified biologist." 27. Rough Grading Plans. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 28. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees are subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 29. Downspouts. All downspouts shall be internalized. 30. Development Impact Fee (DIF). The developer shall comply with the provisions of Title 15, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all its resolutions by paying the appropriate City fee. 31. Photometric Plan. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot, to the Planning Division, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Riverside County Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely affect the growth potential of the parking lot trees. 32. Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. Four (4) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. These plans shall be submitted as a separate submittal, not as part of the building plans or other plan set. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, height and spread, water usage or KC value, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance and Water Storage Contingency Plan per the Rancho California Water District. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan. 33. Landscaping Site Inspections. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. 34. Agronomic Soils Report. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating, "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." 35. Water Usage Calculations. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). Applicant shall use evapotranspiration (ETo) factor of 0.70 for calculating the maximum allowable water budget. 36. Landscape Maintenance Program. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. The landscape maintenance program shall detail the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. 37. Specifications of Landscape Maintenance Program. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. 38. Irrigation. The landscaping plans shall include automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property for private common areas; front yards and slopes within individual lots; shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to 66 feet or larger; and, all landscaping excluding City maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to, private slopes and common areas. 39. Precise Grading Plans. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. 40. Landscaping Requirement for Phased Development. If any phase or area of the project site is not scheduled for development within six months of the completion of grading, the landscaping plans shall indicate it will be temporarily landscaped and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. 41. Utility Screening. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction drawings shall show and label all utilities and provide appropriate screening. Provide a three-foot clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after-thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all light poles on plans and ensure that there are no conflicts with trees. 42. Employee Parking. A parking plan showing the location of designated on site employee and customer parking spaces shall be submitted for review to the planning department. These parking spaces shall be designated by painting and labeling of the curb or on the asphalt. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit 43. Screeninq of Loadinq Areas. The applicant shall be required to screen all loading areas and roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent residences and public right-of-ways. If upon final inspection it is determined that any mechanical equipment, roof equipment or backs of building parapet walls are visible from any portion of the public right-of-way adjacent to the project site, the developer shall provide screening by constructing a sloping tile covered mansard roof element or other screening reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 44. Landscape Installation Consistent with Construction Plans. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Community Development. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 45. Performance Securities. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Community Development, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Division for a period of one year from final Certificate of Occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Community Development, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. 46. Installation of Site Improvements. All site improvements, including but not limited to, parking areas and striping shall be installed. 47. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. Outside Agencies 48. Compliance with Dept. of Environmental Health. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health transmittal dated December 28, 2015, a copy of which is attached. 49. Compliance with EMWD. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Municipal Water District's transmittal dated July 10, 2015, a copy of which is attached. 50. Compliance with RCWD. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated August 13, 2015, a copy of which is attached. 51. Compliance with County Geologist. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County Geologist's transmittal dated March 21, 2016, a copy of which is attached. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements 52. Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval, the Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any governmental agency. 53. Entitlement Approval. The developer shall comply with the approved site plan, the conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and other relevant documents approved during entitlement. Any significant omission to the representation of site conditions may require the plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 54. Precise Grading Permit. A precise grading permit for on site improvements (outside of public right-of-way) shall be obtained from Public Works. 55. Haul Route Permit. A haul route permit may be required when soils are moved on public roadways to or from a grading site. The developer/contractor is to verify if the permit is required. If so, he shall comply with all conditions and requirements per the City's Engineering and Construction Manual and as directed by Public Works. 56. Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction, encroachment permit(s) are required; and shall be obtained from Public Works for public offsite improvements 57. Storm Drain Improvement Plans. The developer shall submit storm drain improvement plans if the street storm flows exceeds top of curb for the 10-year storm event and/or is not contained within the street right-of-way for the 100-year storm event. A manhole shall be constructed at right-of-way where a private and public storm drain systems connect. The plans shall be approved by Public Works. 58. Private maintenance. All onsite drainage and water quality features shall be privately maintained. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 59. Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS). The developer shall comply with all constraints per the recorded ECS with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 60. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion & sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. The approved plan shall include all construction-phase pollution-prevention controls to adequately address non-permitted runoff. Refer to the City's Engineering & Construction Manual at: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/engineeringconstmanual.ht m 61. Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 24, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security and entering into an agreement to guarantee the erosion & sediment control improvements. 62. NPDES General Permit Compliance. The developer shall obtain project coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities and shall provide the following: a. A copy of the Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB); b. The project's Risk Level (RL) determination number; and c. The name, contact information and certification number of the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) Pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements and City's storm water ordinance, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be generated and submitted to the Board. Throughout the project duration, the SWPPP shall be routinely updated and readily available (onsite) to the State and City. Review www.cabmphandbooks.com for SWPPP guidelines. Refer to the following link: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/stormwater/construction.shtm] 63. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement. The developer shall submit a final WQMP (prepared by a registered professional engineer) with the initial grading plan submittal, based on the conceptual WQMP from the entitlement process. It must receive acceptance by Public Works. A copy of the final project-specific WQMP must be kept onsite at all times. In addition, a completed WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement shall be submitted for review and approval. Upon approval from City staff, the applicant shall record the O&M agreement at the County Recorder's Office in Temecula. Refer to the WQMP template and agreement link below: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/WQMPandNPDES/WQMP. htm 64. Drainage. All applicable drainage shall be depicted on the grading plan and properly accommodated with onsite drainage improvements and water quality facilities, which shall be privately maintained. Alterations to existing drainage patterns or concentration and/or diverting flows is not allowed unless the developer constructs adequate drainage improvements and obtains the necessary permissions from the downstream property owners. All drainage leaving the site shall be conveyed into a public storm drain system, if possible. The creation of new cross lot drainage is not permitted. 65. Drainage Study. A drainage study shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan check in accordance with City, Riverside County and engineering standards. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities (to mitigate the 100-year storm event) from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed offsite or onsite, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. 66. Soils Report. A soils report, prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site's soil conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 67. Geological Report. The developer shall complete any outstanding County geologist's requirements, recommendations and/or proposed Conditions of Approval as identified during entitlement. 68. Letter of Permission/Easement. The developer shall obtain documents (letters of permission or easements) for any offsite work performed on adjoining properties. The document's format is as directed by, and shall be submitted to, Public Works for acceptance. The document information shall be noted on the approved grading plan. 69. Ingress/Egress Easement. The developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over adjacent properties. The easement shall be recorded and the easement information shall be noted on the approved grading plan. 70. Sight Distance. The developer shall limit landscaping in the corner cut-off area of all street intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. Prior to Issuance of Encroachment Permit(s) 71. Public Utility Agency Work. The developer shall submit all relevant documentation due to encroaching within City right-of-way; and is responsible for any associated costs and for making arrangements with each applicable public utility agency. 72. Traffic Control Plans. A construction area traffic control plan (TCP) will be required for lane closures and detours or other disruptions to traffic circulation; and shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. The TCP shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer in conformance with the latest edition of the Caltrans Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and City standards. 73. Improvement Plans. All improvement plans (including but not limited to street, storm drain, traffic) shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. 74. Street Trenching. All street trenches shall conform to City Standard No. 407; refer to the City's Paving Notes. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 75. Construction of Street Improvements. All street improvement plans shall be approved by Public Works. The developer shall start construction of all public street improvements, as outlined below, in accordance to the City's General Plan/Circulation Element and corresponding City standards. a. DLR Drive (Collector (2 lanes undivided) Standard No. 103A — 66'- 78' R/W) to include installation of paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, drainage facilities, signing and striping and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). 76. Certifications. Certifications are required from the registered civil engineer-of-record certifying the building pad elevation(s) per the approved plans and from the soil's engineer-of-record certifying compaction of the building pad(s). Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 77. Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all on site work (including water quality facilities), public improvements and the executed WQMP Operation and Maintenance agreement. 78. Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearance from applicable utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.) for the completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works. 79. Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section 8771. 80. Certifications. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by Public Works. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION General Requirements 81. Final Building and Safety Conditions. Final Building and Safety conditions will be addressed when building construction plans are submitted to Building and Safety for review. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), and related codes which are enforced at the time of building plan submittal. 82. Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2013 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2013 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, 2013 California Energy Codes, 2013 California Green Building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and City of Temecula Municipal Code. 83. ADA Access. Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans to include: a. All ground floor units to be adaptable. b. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. c. Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. d. Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. e. Path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as club house, trash enclose tot lots and picnic areas. 84. County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance. Applicant shall submit, at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 85. Street Addressing. Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by requesting street addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi-family residential projects or a recorded final map for single-family residential projects. 86. Clearance from TVUSD. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley Unified School District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 87. Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 88. Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. 89. Demolition. Demolition permits require separate approvals and permits. 90. Sewer and Water Plan Approvals. On-site sewer and water plans will require separate approvals and permits. 91. Hours of Construction. Signage shall be prominently posted at the entrance to the project, indicating the hours of construction, as allowed by the City of Temecula Municipal Ordinance 9.20.060, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. The permitted hours of construction are Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized Government Holidays. 92. House Electrical Meter. Provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site. Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed. 93. Protection of drains and penetration. Protection of joints and penetrations in fire resistance-rated assemblies shall not be concealed from view until inspected for all designed fire protection. Required fire seals/fire barriers in fire assemblies at fire resistant penetrations shall be installed by individuals with classification or certification covering the installation of these systems. Provide certification for the installation of each area and certification of compliance for Building Official's approval. At Plan Review Submittal 94. Submitting Plans and Calculations. Applicant must submit to Building and Safety four (4) complete sets of plans and two (2) sets of supporting calculations for review and approval including: a. An electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic, and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work. b. A Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the Section 1207, of the 2013 edition of the California Building Code. c. A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for persons with disabilities. d. Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) 95. Onsite Water and Sewer Plans. Onsite water and sewer plans, submitted separately from the building plans, shall be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval. 96. Demolition Permits. A demolition permit shall be obtained if there is an existing structure to be removed as part of the project. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 97. Plans Require Stamp of Registered Professional. Applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on the plans. Prior to Beginning of Construction 98. Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements 99. Fire Hydrants. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x (2) 2 '/2" outlets) shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent public streets. For all Commercial projects hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The fire line may be required to be a looped system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required and additional hydrants may be required (CFC Appendix C and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). 100. Fire Hydrant Clearance. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. (CFC Chapter 5). 101. Fire Dept. Plan Review. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 102. Fire Flow. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial and residential buildings per CFC Appendix B. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4,000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure for a 4-hour duration for multi-family and commercial projects. The fire flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC Appendix B and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) 103. Access Road Widths. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). 104. All Weather Access Roads. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 3310.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads. (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). 105. Gradient Of Access Roads. The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed 15 percent (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). 106. Turninq Radius. Dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 107. Required Submittals (Fire Underground Water). The developer shall furnish three copies of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all private water systems pertaining to the fire service loop. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block, and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. Hydraulic calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements are being met for the on-site hydrants. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building permit being issued (CFC Chapter 33 and Chapter 5). 108. Required Submittals (Fire Sprinkler Systems). Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. 109. Required Submittals (Fire Alarm Systems). Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. The fire alarm system is required to have a dedicated circuit from the house panel. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy 110. Gates and Access. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by fire fighting personnel (CFC Chapter 5). 111. High Piled Stock (Proposed). Buildings housing high-piles combustible stock shall comply with the provisions of California Fire Code Chapter 32 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. The storage of high-piled combustible stock may require structural design considerations or modifications to the building. Fire protection and life safety features may include some or all of the following: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire Department access roads (CFC Chapter 32 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). 112. Hydrant Verification. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots) (City Ordinance 15.16.020). 113. Knox Box. A"Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room (CFC Chapter 5). 114. Addressing. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Commercial buildings shall have a minimum of 12-inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of 6-inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). 115. Site Plan. The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs (CFC Chapter 5). 116. Additional Submittals (Hazardous Materials). The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City Fire Department a Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report. A full hazardous materials inventory report and color coded floor plan is required for any building storing or using hazardous materials (CFC Chapters 1 and 50 through 67 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). POLICE DEPARTMENT General Requirements 117. Berm Height. Berms shall not exceed three feet in height. 118. Parking Lot Lighting. All parking lot lighting shall be energy saving and minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. 119. Exterior Door Lighting. All exterior doors shall have a vandal resistant light fixture installed above the door. The doors shall be illuminated with a minimum one-foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed. 120. Exterior Building Lighting. All lighting affixed to the exterior of buildings shall be wall mounted light fixtures to provide sufficient lighting during hours of darkness. 121. Outdoor Lighting During Non-Business Hours. The applicant shall comply with the Governor's order to address the power crisis. This order became effective March 18, 2001 calling for a substantial reduction from businesses to cut usage during non-business hours. The order, in part, states, "All California retail establishments, including, but not limited to, shopping centers, auto malls and dealerships, shall substantially reduce maximum outdoor lighting capability during non-business hours except as necessary for the health and safety of the public, employees or property." Failure to comply with this order following a warning by law enforcement officials shall be punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1,000 in accordance with Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations 122. Commercial or Institution Grade Hardware. All doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade 123. Graffiti Removal. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the buildings must be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being discovered. Report all such crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch Center at (951) 696-HELP. 124. Alarm System. Upon completion of construction, the buildings shall have a monitored alarm system installed and monitored 24 hours a day by a designated private alarm company to notify the Temecula Police Department of any intrusion. All multi-tenant offices/suites/businesses located within a specific building shall have their own alarm system. This condition is not applicable if the business is opened 24/7. 125. Roof Hatches. All roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." 126. Rooftop Addressing. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a nine-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced nine inches apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard nine-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street. 127. Public Telephones. Any public telephones located on the exterior of the buildings shall be placed in a well-lit, highly visible area, and installed with a "call-out only" feature to deter loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the buildings. 128. Disabled Parking. All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with Section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code. 129. Employee Training. Employee training regarding retail/credit card theft, citizens' arrest procedures, personal safety, business security, shoplifting or any other related crime prevention training procedures is also available through the Crime Prevention Unit. 130. Inspections and Training. Contact the Temecula Police Department for inspections and training for both employees and owners. This includes special events held at business locations where alcohol will be served for a fee and the event is open to the general public 131. Employee Training for Identification Checks. The applicant shall ensure all employees involved with the sales, service and identification checks for the purpose of any sales of alcoholic beverages are trained in the proper procedures and identification checks. The Temecula Police Department provides free training for all employers and employees involved in service and sales of alcoholic beverages. It is the responsibility of the applicant to set up a training session for all new employees. Contact the Crime Prevention and Plans Office at (951) 695-2773 to set up a training date. Training should be completed prior to the grand opening of this business and periodic updated training should be conducted when new employees/management are hired. 132. Crime Prevetion Through Environmental Design. Crime prevention through environmental design as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) supports the concept that"the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life." The nine primary strategies that support this concept are included as conditions below: a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery or signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of identifying controlled space. b. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. c. Gathering or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. d. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. e. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. f. Redesign the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. g. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and intervention. h. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be award of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clear lines-of-sight serve to provide such a perception of surveillance. i. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. 133. Business Security Survey. Businesses desiring a business security survey of their location can contact the Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department at (951) 695-2773. 134. Questions Regarding Conditions. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 695-2773. 00*EH Tpt f/ � 1a County of Riverside DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH r`� J P.O. BOX 7909 • RIVERSIDE,CA 92513-7909 STEVE VAN STOCKLIM,DIRECTOR December 28,2015 City of Temecula Planning Department Attn: Scott Cooper 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA—PLANNING APPLICATION FOR PA15-1003\ (APN 921-730-046) Dear Mr. Cooper: The project listed in the subject heading of this letter is proposing the construction and operation of 54,884 square-foot, three-story, service and parts center. The site is located at 42074 DLR Drive, in the city of Temecula. The Department of Environmental Health(DEH) offers the following comments: WATER AND WASTEWATER "Prior to building permit issuance,"a will-serve letter from Rancho California Water District (RCWD) must be submitted. A water availability letter has been received but confirmation of water connection is required. The applicant must meet all requirements set forth by the water purveyor. A general condition shall be placed on this project indicating that it will be serviced by Eastern Municipal Water District(EMWD) for sanitary sewer service. As the sewer agency, EMWD shall have the responsibility of determining any grease interceptor or other requirements, including but not limited to sizing capacity and other structural specifications. Please note that it is the responsibility of the proposed facility to ensure that all requirements to receive potable water service and sanitary sewer service are met with the appropriate purveyors, as well as, all other applicable agencies. Note: A General Condition shall be placed on this project indicating that any existing wells and/or existing onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) shall be properly removed and/or abandoned under permit with the Department of Environmental Health(DEH). Office Locations o Blythe • Corona • Hemet • Indio s Murrieta • Palm Springs • Riverside Phone (888)722-4234 www.rivcoeh.org ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP_PROGRAMS (ECF) Based on the information provided in the environmental assessment document submitted for this project and with the provision that the information was accurate and representative of site conditions,Riverside County Environmental Health—Environmental Cleanup Programs (RCDEH-ECP concludes no further environmental assessment is required for this project. If previously unidentified contamination or the presence of a naturally occurring hazardous material is discovered at the site, assessment, investigation, and/or cleanup may be required. Contact RCDEH-ECP at(951)955-8980, for further information. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT BRANCH Prior to the issuance of any building permit the operator of the facility shall contact DEH Hazardous Materials Management Branch at(951) 358-5055 for any plan check and/or permitting requirements. Based on the applicant's "Statement of Operation"this facility will utilize and/or store hazardous materials in quantities that are greater than 55 gallons for liquids, 200 cubic feet for gases, or 500 pounds for solids, or any acutely hazardous materials or extremely hazardous substances, If further review of the site indicates additional environmental health issues, DEH Hazardous Materials Management Branch reserves the right to regulate the business in accordance with applicable County Ordinances. DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES—PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC FOOD FACILITY Prior to operation of a food facility, the applicant shall be required to contact DEH District Environmental Services to determine the appropriate food facility plan check and/or permitting requirements. For further information,please call(951)461-0284. County of Riverside, Department of Environmental Health District Environmental Services-Murrieta Office 38740 Sky Canyon Drive, Suite"A" Murrieta CA 92563 VECTOR CONTROL All proposed retention basin(s) shall be constructed and maintained in a manner that prevents vector breeding and vector nuisances. Should you have any further questions or require further assistance,please contact me by email at kakim(u) riveocha.pM or by phone at(951) 955-8980. Sincerely, 4jq` - Kristine Kim, REHS Environmental Protection and Oversight Division Land Use and Water Resources Program August 13, 2015 Scott Cooper, Planner City of Temecula Board of Directors Post Office Box 9033 John E.Hoagland Temecula, CA 92589-9033 President James"Stew"ent Stewart Sr Vire President SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY Stephen J.Corona JOHN HINE SUBARU AND PARTS CENTER, Ben R.Drake 42074 DEALER DRIVE; PORTION OF PARCEL NO. 10 OF Lisa D,Herman PARCEL MAP NO. 23496; APN 921-730-046; PA15-0154 William E.Plummer [JHCH RIVERSIDE LAND CO.,LLC] Roger C.Ziemer Officers Dear Mr. Cooper: Matthew G.Stone General Manager Please be advised that the above-referenced project/property is located within the Richard S.Williamson,P.E- service boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD/District). The Assistant General Manager subject project/property fronts an existing 12-inch diameter water pipeline (1305 JeMey D.Armstrong CRYTreasnrer Pressure Zone) within Dealer Drive. Fred F.Edgecomb,MPA Director Operations& Maintenance Water service to the subject project/property does not exist. Additions or Ma Andrew L.Webster,P.E. modifications to water service arrangements are subject to the Rules and Chirf Engineer Regulations (governing) Water System Facilities and Service, as well as the Belli E.Garcia completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. District Secretary James B.Gilpin Best Best&Krieger LLF General Counsel Y Where private on-site water facilities (for water service, fire service, irrigation, or other purpose) will cross or will be shared amongst multiple lots/project units (only by special variance of the Rules and Regulations), and/or where such `common' facilities will be owned and maintained by a Property Owners' Association, RCWD requires execution and recordation of a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement or equivalent document of covenants, codes, and restrictions. Water availability is contingent upon the property owner(s) destroying all on-site wells and signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. In addition, water availability is subject to water supply shortage contingency measures in effect (pursuant to RCWD's Water Shortage Contingency Plan or other applicable ordinances and policy), and/or the adoption of a required Water Supply Assessment for the development,as determined by the Lead Agency. 15\KK:hab029\F450\FEG Rancho California Water District 42131)Winchester Road'Post Office Box 9017 -Temecula,California 926899017•(951)206-6900•FAX(951)2966860 www,ranchowater.com `cntt ooper ity o emecu a - August 13,2015 Page Two There is no recycled water currently available within the limits established by Resolution 2007- 10-5. Should recycled water become available in the future, the project/property may be required to retrofit its facilities to make use of this availability in accordance with Resolution 2007-10-5. Recycled water service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site and/or off-site recycled water facilities and the completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Requirements for the use of recycled water are available from RCWD. As soon as feasible, and prior to the preparation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents, the project proponent should contact RCWD for a determination of existing water system capability, based upon project-specific demands and/or fire flow requirements, as well as a determination of proposed water facilities configuration. If new facilities are required for service, fire protection, or other purposes, the project proponent should contact RCWD for an assessment of project-specific fees and requirements. Please note that separate water meters will be required for all landscape irrigation. Sewer service to the subject project/property, if available, would be provided by Eastern Municipal Water District. If no sewer service is currently available to the subject project/property, all proposed waste discharge systems must comply with the State Water Resources Control Board and/or health department requirements. If you should have any questions or need additional information, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at the District office at(951) 296-6900. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Kim Kerckhoff Engineering Services Representative cc; Corey Wallace,Engineering Manager-CIP&Development Phillip Dauben,Associate Engineer Heath McMahon,Construction Contracts Manager Corry Smith,Engineering Services Supervisor Peter S.Noll,Architect 15\KK:hab029\F450\FF-G J Rancho California Water District 42135 Winchester Road•Post Office Box 9017,Temecula,California 92589-9017 (951)296-6900•FAX(951)296-6860 www ranchowater com EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT July 10, 2035 SINCE 1950 Mr.Scott Cooper ja 131015 Board of Directors City of Temecula President Planning Department Randy A.Record 41000 Main Street Vice President Temecula,CA 92590 David J.Slawson Directors RE: Case/Plan Number: PA15-1003 Joseph J.Kuebler,CPA Project Name: John Hine Subaru Development Plan Philip E.Paule Project Description: Construct a 54,884 s.f.,3-Story Svc./Parts Center Ronald W.Sullivan Project Location: 42074 DLR Drive General Manager Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-730-046 Paul D.Jones 11,P.E. Parcel Map 23496,Parcel 10 rre&surer Joseph J.Kuebler,CPA Thank you for the opportunity to review the above-referenced project. The subject Chaproject requires water, recycled water and sewer service from EMWD. The detail of the The Metropolitaf the n ate ro osed development requires a submittal to EMWD b the project proponent. Upon The Metropolitan Water p p p q y p J p p p DlsrrictofSo.calif receipt of submittal, EMWD will review further and provide requirements for obtaining Randy A.Record service(s)which include but not limited to: Legal Counsel Lemieux&O'Neill 1. Discuss potential candidacy for recycled water service 2. Review of the project within the context of existing infrastructure 3. Evaluation of the project's preliminary design and points of connections 4. Formal Application for Service detailing applicable fees and deposits to proceed with EMWD approved service connections. To begin the submittal process the project proponent may contact EMWD's New Development Department at: Eastern Municipal Water District New Business Development 2270 Trumble Rd Perris CA 92570 (951)9283777 Extension 2081 Again, EMWD appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Sincerely, Elena Navarre Administrative Assistant New Business Development Engineering Department Mailing Address: Post Office Box 8300 Perris,CA 92572-8300 Telephone:(951)928-3777 Fax:(951)928-6177 Location: 2270 Trumble Road Perris,CA 92570 Internet:www.emwd.org R IV E R S I D E CO U NTY ;- PLANNING DEPARTMENT Steven Weiss Planning Director March 21, 2016 Pages 2 (including this cover) City of Temecula Attention: Scott Cooper (scott.cooper@cityoftemecula.org) RE: GE002462 Conditions of Approval John Hine Subaru Development Plan City of Temecula — PA15-1003 County Geologic Report(GEO)No. 2462, submitted for this City of Temecula project(PA 15- 1003)was prepared by LGC Geo-Environmental, Inc. and is entitled: "Summary Report of Previously Reported Preliminary Geotechnical and Fault Investigations for the Maintenance and Temporary Parking Additions at John Hine Subaru of Temecula, Located at 42074 DLR Drive, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California," dated February 11, 2016. In addition, LGC Geotechnical Environmental submitted the following documents: "Response to County Comments Regarding for the Proposed Subaru Maintenance Building, Located at 42074 DLR Drive-, City of Temecula,Riverside County, California,"dated December 15,2015. "Geologic Fault Study of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for the Proposed Commercial Development, Located at 42074 DLR Drive in the City of Temecula,Riverside County, California,"dated October 8, 2015. These documents are herein incorporated as a part of GEO02462. GE002462 concluded: I. The site is located within a State of California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and County Of Riverside Fault Zone. 2. A previous study by Schaefer Dixon Associates has established setback lines on either side of the fault between which habitable structures should not be built. The remaining area is considered not subject to surface displacement from future faulting. 3. Cracking due to shaking from a seismic event is not considered a significant hazard, although it is a possibility at any site. 4. The potential for liquefaction is considered remote. 5. Adverse effects on the proposed development resulting from groundwater are not anticipated. 6. Landslides or surface failures were not observed at or directly adjacent to the site. As a result,the possibility of the site being affected by landsliding is not anticipated. 7. In consideration of the anticipated grading,recommended overexcavations,proposed structures and improvements and subsurface material types and their conditions, unfavorable ground subsidence is not anticipated. Riverside Office•4080 Lemon Street, 12th Floor Desert Office•77588 EI Duna Court P.O. Box 1409, Riverside,California 92502-1409 Palm Desert, Califomia 92211 (951)955-3200- Fax (951)955-1811 (760)863-8277• Fax (760)863-7555 GE002462 recommended: 1. A previous study by Schaefer Dixon Associates has established setback lines on either side of the fault between which habitable structures should not be built. 2. A"Potentially Active"Zone has been delineated and additional mitigation measures within the proposed structural areas are recommended, including overexcavation of at least 5 — 10 feet below existing surface to bedrock and replacement with compacted fill, post tensioning slab design, and Tri-Axial Grid reinforcement. 3. Within proposed parking and roadway areas the upper 1 foot to 2 feet of artificial fill should be overexcavated to competent engineered compacted fill or competent bedrock. 4. Prior to placing engineered fill, exposed bottom surfaces in each overexcavated area should first be scarified to a depth of approximately 6 inches, watered or air-dried as necessary to achieve a uniform moisture content of optimum or higher and then compacted in place to a relative compaction of 90 percent or more. GEO No. 2462 satisfies the requirement for a geologic/geotechnical study for Planning/CEQA purposes. GEO No. 2462 is hereby accepted for Planning purposes. Engineering and other Uniform Building Code parameters were not included as a part of this review or approval. This approval is not intended and should not be misconstrued as approval for grading permit. Engineering and other building code parameters should be reviewed and additional comments and/or conditions may be imposed by the City upon application for grading and/or building permits. Thank you for the opportunity to review this case for the City of Temecula. Please call me at (951) 955-6187 if you have any questions. Sincerely, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Steven Weiss, Planning Director 4 Daniel P. Walsh, CEG No. 2413 Associate Engineering Geologist, TLMA-Planning Cc: Applicant: Peter S. Noll Architect: (peter@psnollarch.com) Consultant: LGC Geo-Environmental, Inc., ATTN: Bob Gregorek (rg regorek@Ig cgeoenv.com) Jim Cappadocia, Jesno Corporation: Qimcapp@cox.net) B:\GeologykTemecula ReviewskGE02462 Approval for PA15-1003.docx NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice of Public Hearing A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Case No: PA15-1003 Applicant: Peter Noll Proposal: A Development Plan application for the construction of a new 54,884 square-foot, two-story, automobile service and parts center located at 42074 DLR Drive Environmental: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project is exempt from further environmental review and a Notice of Exemption will be adopted in compliance with CEQA (15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects) Case Planner: Scott Cooper, (951) 506-5137 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Council Chambers Date of Hearing: May 18, 2016 Time of Hearing: 6:00 p.m. ��R OR ti Project Site 0 2 O m O � R a 0 259 500 Feet The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission Meeting. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.citvoftemecula.org. Any Supplemental Material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula), 8:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.org — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please call the Planning Department, (951) 694-6400. ITEM 5 STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: May 18, 2016 TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: Scott Cooper, Case Planner PROJECT Planning Application No. PA15-1803, a Major Modification application SUMMARY: for the addition of 122 square-feet to an existing building; the construction of a 1,558 square-foot one-story office/retail building; and construction of a 1,420 square-foot one-story office/retail building at 29400 Rancho California Road RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution approving the project subject to Conditions of Approval CEQA: Categorically Exempt Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: Chris Campbell General Plan Community Commercial (CC) Designation: Zoning Designation: Community Commercial (CC) Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: Existing Office Building / Community Commercial (CC) North: Existing Commercial Center/Community Commercial (CC) South: Ynez Road, Rancho California Road, Commercial Buildings / Office Professional (Rancho Highlands Specific Plan) East: Rancho California Road, Temecula Duck Pond, Commercial Building /Office Professional (Rancho Highlands Specific Plan) West: Ynez Road, Existing Commercial Center / Highway Tourist Commercial (HT) Existing/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required Lot Area: 0.76 Acres 0.69 Acres CAProgram Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\4C396EC2-6E15-4702-8CF9-4C3E93BOD6C8\12759.doc Total Floor Area/Ratio: 6,547 Square Feet of 0.30 Proposed & Existing / 0.21 Landscape Area/Coverage: 29% 20.0% Minimum Parking Provided/Required: 23 Parking Spaces 25 Parking Spaces BACKGROUND SUMMARY On December 2, 2015, Chris Campbell submitted Planning Application PA15-1803, a Major Modification for the addition of 122 square-feet to an existing building and the construction of a 1,558 square-foot one-story office/retail building and a 1,420 square-foot one-story office/retail building at 29400 Rancho California Road. Office and retail buildings are a permitted use within the community commercial zone. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. ANALYSIS Site Plan The project is located in the Community Commercial (CC) zoning district at 29400 Rancho California Road on a developed lot. The project site currently contains an office building which will be expanded by 122 square-feet, a parking lot, and landscaping. In addition to the expansion of the existing building, a 1,558 square-foot one-story office/retail building and a 1,420 square-foot one-story office/retail building are proposed on the project site. The project, as proposed, would be developed in two phases: - Phase One: Remodel of the existing building to add 122 square-feet, construction of a 1,558 square-foot one-story office/retail building, construction of a new trash enclosure, and new landscaping. - Phase Two: Construction of a 1,420 square-foot one-story office/retail building. The vehicular access to the project is from a single driveway located on Ynez Road. The project is required to provide 23 parking spaces for an office/retail project per Table 17.24.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The project proposes 25 parking spaces. Should the new buildings occupancy become a medical office use, then the project is required to provide 27 parking spaces. The project qualifies for two parking space credits for providing four motorcycle spaces and five bicycle racks in order to reach the 27 required parking spaces. Architecture The architectural design of the project is consistent between all three of the buildings with the use of the same materials, window treatments, and colors. The project incorporates stucco, wood trellis, clay tile roof, and adobe brick wainscot throughout the project. The two new buildings are similar in design by incorporating similar roof lines and window treatments and will complement the existing building that is being remodeled to include a clay tile roof and the adobe brick wainscot which is on all three of the buildings. CAProgram Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\4C396EC2-6E15-4702-8CF9-4C3E93BOD6C8\12759.doc Corner Community Monument Signage Per Section 17.28.070(3)(0 of the Development Code, "If a tenant, building, or center identification signage is proposed within seventy-five feet of a major intersection, it shall incorporate, or be located as part of, a community feature". The location of this project provides a great opportunity to provide a corner community monument sign as a gateway to Temecula and the wine country. The project has been conditioned that a design of the corner community monument sign shall be approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit and that the corner community monument sign shall be installed prior to building occupancy. Landscaping The project, when completed, would provide 29% landscaping which exceeds the minimum landscape requirements of the development code. Plant types include fruitless olive and red crepe myrtle trees, red kangaroo paws, red yucca, agave, and spanish lavender. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the U-T San Diego on May 2, 2016 and mailed to the property owners within a 1,200-foot radius. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects). The project meets all General Plan and Zoning policies and regulations and is located within City limits on a site of no more than five acres. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The site is also surrounded by development and is able to be serviced by all required utilities and public services. The project is not anticipated to result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. FINDINGS Development Plan (Code Section 17.05.010.F) The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. Office and retail buildings are allowable uses within the Community Commercial General Plan designation. Therefore, the use will be consistent with the General Plan for Temecula as well as the requirements for State law and other Ordinances of the City. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project has been reviewed and conditioned to ensure conformance with the Development, Building, and Fire codes. These codes contain provisions designed to ensure the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. CAProgram Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\4C396EC2-6E15-4702-8CF9-4C3E93BOD6C8\12759.doc ATTACHMENTS Vicinity Map Plan Reductions Resolution Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Notice of Public Hearing CAProgram Files(x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\4C396EC2-6E15-4702-8CF9-4C3E93BOD6C8\12759.doc VICINITY MAP .S }�,� •. r � . .h .'' .T yeti {f�:`'d. �. 1 of � �' y t ��✓ - ••\. "�.tb- PLAN REDUCTIONS I CALCIA.ATK?N& PROJECT TEAM Q C"m, a � p ZOKN& l �. X � N � ,� K,D.YT!IQ �■ 1.1„ 6w ® CQIIACTi MD1W1 D.Ll60R Q 1! LAW UM2•64ZULA TOM 6090V �.aDevs OG MLIN=� .l mobs con M .».. w.. M.ue.R Aunt ARGAIGT.wxcc • M,l,QD TQM ABMT D„QfT.INTE � f ]Q TlMCA.II�W,a,o bL ibU N60lol P I I T �. 4-v fQ1TALTi IMLT Aud a.eAeD Tr L �. aNIE D TDGJL' h W SDC I I � r� CQITALT�L/JD.Y MMIRIMM ARCATWT O I I e .Dr erfnDMne cn.cu.MORIA fe113Y-M003W 4l17 la�ro0]6GD0! co n.u rle AororelAc A.w ro a<.,a �.r,� � � aor.. Aar srn.r ncQewna I BUILDIN6G T' wry. wn.w.sr rvnw wuM wrwe B LDIIYs I IAW F �f a fiKallv�MVA�R.w L 2 —O I �+Q - '� ■ PROJECT lsa RA ATKCN: w euL12Tw I Rgym. i o � evsews W. Cd KW W.f P Ms 7x e O �.o PMSE1 > �k UTIJTY PUFNEYOFiB O) N � � I PHAHrJO•M VICNJITY MAP N.75 � ': ♦ �i 'C$ rcr•oox,� i�ae�R.M� �..�."a�.�..T�..,..r,�o.R _ I � O � ow wwG+ocwiL . w. — �•��t oaesA R.x PR-1 Q aR ., ZONiWS CC(c4mt,%NITY G=O� Z 8 I I � I i e co r . i,4ao00 I .r O ME W r N I u F r BUILDING A y�'*% �. - U ; 'o CO r =G97T91B BUILDING i y�I tiew a rtr \; BUILDING B WK BULDINS laser 0 0 Lj • °+��.... wiTrisx2 isam>t.a. - _ PHOTOMEIFNC DATA• uR — RANOW CALIFORNIA RD. — — — t —. ', , "` r°-"•_• � raroo�az emar asses PRAT Q Q i a ISO 3 � (EJ BUILDING " ; PHA5E I 3,59'7 sf (N)BUILDING PHA5E I c_ 1,558 5F C for -9*? -- - B E U PHASE 2 ___ c A ovmt. pt o n w a 1,420 sf ':S' BEEn N i E - �.- PR-2 Q 4xC�gA s��wse Q J wmra c i �a �h•xwa� mNATgi MAl1UlD GALegww ICAD) �� By rnm�Acaeurm�..W..00 w.,.re A,n. INDBIe a RWDIM A eYYDINe L aavAmr�..pw e� +asr•s .0 L euarnw n etanwe a ;� MUM auniHe c cd C CiJA*rTl haCL iRAtll^�' �'GNATOIA �.,s �.� O eYILCIW A 0.1LDVtl e O 0.1lDIM G Av WwTOM Mei/WICNe uiuKwYN u.iw Z. — IT i CIO -171 W. ........ flaTmilimmill cli co . .�. : qT• o.■. --------------- �� PA15- 1303 CONCEPT GRADING ' w? s19a 1,las.R7Xr �Plm,Ec YDf rD rc,.e !M;_ MASOR MODIFICATION ' I IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA �0 ° + RECIPROCAL ACCESS&k+ Gsnrt. APN: 921-320-012 Ex STREET PER MIT ND 111-urea f-n-+9q OWNER: 9ACM 2005 5 RANCHO CALIF CfD m Br oWtrhn sru9ols Leceeo: ZONING Cc (COMMUNITY COMMERCWL) ���EEE%%%wAu ro '[Dm �rD ts K� -TAI PROP RO Ra EXISTING LAND USE. 'TEMCULA TOWN CENTER' / REMUN PRov° Box 11 PROP SHOPPING CENTER / C+>�* Y uK '" ' ' N510834E 164.10R&M r rv. — f 7777777, a,W�9M,M 9D xaNw o asrw C°x°R¢[ OUaT SM NO,- A W TO BE RE CON""I'TEO� I PROP F" J y f` " @A[RM pq°,gs[0—CR- USING c SING c DATA TABLE I \\\\{ K NYk le...�A 1COR.wu 1Reyp-oq PA p b GmrK iM1++0 K STREt %AS 0 �'' rwMX V 1v"R �I,�,I�vxggs[0 R¢wuxc wui oA00GAIRD ala els a1"'J.aS4YK ^,� IECAL n I?&a 11DA[ or UPw.(r1?j !rye• AR9REVIATIONS ■Jy f A 1r'DXD.�D fG BERM +�R� R vur R[mR0[n In eW",.W SD tlC REMOVED •_WImGtl C"''M 1G Cdwly G.�i7IN or I C'OF Vaca 1a-s, PROP t ?_Y)•rifR 1r_IE}nIC AwN 9V[t4GEu xaAr,ac rt "ACwOw �1 �!C ) M � 0"OF K.�1 '` _,-EX -E%CURB pb� IW v,,�Y1'p�� .i! � .M1LCMc[R MI'.ar af[a'La IaI n°Y EX S/w-, i t i li_ �ti F%Cl9 ,IyE✓ It - - Lgxt \ \ 8w,R1i YC/ou i.y.x ]„ !P \ M f 1r��}�O.DIM1�ww[ X^'l E%CURB S/�' f$w •,. E% Y \-EEEP ,y .gip W IfpO. 10 ss/0.>e rcREs f AND cuTTER' TO MaN Xw vID l a 1)) w� ramMer.R[• 3r ,Ex Ac PAVEMENT yR �r 1 PL r PAD-102233 , 4 ^ A N" A JD \ L W 4rre e.u[r. BD C z0 SF ++ FF.,010.0 " �gSYP V S11 ,Ex wv I -= Ic,r• �x & K rum e°e REMAIN TO Ov BUILDING C ,t o.CIF "e TM' LOT O future building °t a ^f —RE °M- R ANSA I 1,420 if �� $ .` r ylrr M y s u atl� P.n„s/Ew�°scw[.Aw 'eoo°s'< z s I A. As,5na I p1p To BE cr` oo az oW gZw wU °m°°'w'°s+aw•sr°L w° x''" V%4, i" r" [s ­r"`."u�w"°socpew' , D.sam>u PEas ((311--Ex RP¢o ( Txuacvc/r°01TTKL wxr 11ssPPxAAAa[<x[a/oaoo°crxaDrw ( ..ar. epx,an eo P is m .m.A.a a-...,.r I E1 At!rnY A Z,o w K wk[.!•v°eaLwra wa nes off' o sicn BUILDING A "S ro Re rarApm ''i-� z�'N o e'.p'e`°'r • (,00av°`e) o ro REMdN 1' a 'D x ...�""aen wa sa'i",a 1 existing building d°j, yw N rr+xa3.eo-v r naym ro.ms 3,477 If z ,a WM I R addition 120 If - - total building Z S SECTION A-A 00.Y.w4.AN-W r+T'.rsnxeamM n r+AOR z _ TzP�V aP O r• '� 3,597 If r�..«' o z 1050 naso X r I PEP-11032 29 5 BUILDING B ■ N 104 - 1045 R NIIYRPR nP rm 1 new building 1,558 If � loao %� moo g Q rRry -_. PAO=I Dui ea Y 1 s . !N.T sJ.1wY� FF=101250 1035 .� 1035 f /y rE e W \\TO REMPIN L��`• !p E REMOVED .w.• a_ � 1030 1030 nOr svR xxpn[0 N a s to is T) zs W F, BE y�X�Q DIRT°°°°(Pr) v/ PL ry r �r x ulc Ill �fA'wKR VP \\E rD�M11 y x(3)52T2EE5 BE REMpVE0 D srvlr[cr s y %(.7I A TREES / �'� ARCHITECT: V I N51'08'34"E 144.62' R&M PL Ex STREET ucllr� �/ A °PRSR A �� ° _ '¢°iy �o/.a ae�eeNanµ onTNG STI.'I ,a roen ea°-0>o cuTrER EA%.(asu eaT-weeo%' R[pmc aro-. setlAw.. Tnn1e OD4 s/w 'Ex PB `Ex PB TYP. SECTION YNEZ RD. (EXISTING) CURB Al. FIRE'.DEPT.NOTES COAD(YO rli0) rvnwc a rv. nes u,w w a uo 121INER/APPLICANT 1 wYw,nxc �Ka � O C21 iEMEC U C 11R Q vwxw ro AVv cOnsrxucrpw C/O BILL BACHELOR I Ir0 Axr—NG 25050 MADISON AVE,SUTIE 101 �*� MURRIEi0. R[ CA 92562 TEL (909)855-199w ( = M roi calslMK'IAYI FAx:N/A �I � tom• »,u x¢°xx°x RAPD[nmv nsrp. °64 °R1Re lllfD'.�M SIDEWALK I "PoYD fTYP. SECTION RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. (EXISTING) Moran- I: RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD, ""°"°"°"° `"°°P°°' _ _ _ N51'08'34"E 1526.59' � 11635 En(Wk Ude N -Sidle 6 I� - - 1°re c,,,rvp 92599 -1 (951)296-M TEL (951)296-7176 FAX C REVISED PA15-1185 PRELIMINARY PLANTING PLAN MAJOR MODIFICATION TO PA15-1185 IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA JJ 1, FR ■. ao�S 1 � 5 C 00 I BUILDING C y r Q i - - �gy p�� 811E CALCU Rimm •rlt R wAOuiD C -� Mi[EeI 4P �d,m m rt.. I BUILDING B F RANCHO CALF ONM HOAR £ly R,AMw>.k+�t�n R ■ we..y.: rao.at wu.r.�wuwnwMn wva www ,aL nu�ruu=•roc drawn: VD r we Naos w.X..rownpe rwrr.w - oma checked: V,D nu•O w y w,a date:11-12-15 p SHEET ,.b,�,p rr r w.c KCPtlNw Ywi+p[ er an q wpry r eua-w®.y n w.nww.a.wew. of 1sheets JOB NO 15-124 AFN ....s.�rrr�arr�...��.e.®.�n��...�ve�..��...�. :�.�����,w.�r�.�+r rrMror�rwr.w+Ysfwrnwr��rr�.,r•r�=�W•>o=rrrr.�rrr PC DRAFT RESOLUTION PC RESOLUTION NO. 16- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA15-1803, A MAJOR MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR THE ADDITION OF 122 SQUARE-FEET TO AN EXISTING BUILDING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,558 SQUARE-FOOT ONE-STORY OFFICE/RETAIL BUILDING AND A 1,420 SQUARE-FOOT ONE-STORY OFFICE/RETAIL BUILDING AT 29400 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) (APN 921-320- 062) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On December 2, 2015, Chris Campbell filed Planning Application No. PA15-1803 a Major Modification, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on May 18, 2016, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA15-1803, subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Development Plan, Development Code Section 17.05.010.F A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; Office and retail buildings are allowable uses within the Community Commercial General Plan designation. Therefore, the use will be consistent with the General Plan for Temecula as well as the requirements for State law and other Ordinances of the City. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; The project has been reviewed and conditioned to ensure conformance with the Development, Building, and Fire codes. These codes contain provisions designed to ensure the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Major Modification: A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects); 1. The project meets all General Plan and Zoning policies and regulations and is located within City limits on a site of no more than five acres. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The site is also surrounded by development and is able to be serviced by all required utilities and public services. The project is not anticipated to result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA15-1803, a Major Modification application for the addition of 122 square-feet to an existing building and the construction of a 1,558 square-foot one-story office/retail building and a 1,420 square-foot one-story office/retail building located at 29400 Rancho California Road, and making a finding of exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (APN 921-320-062), subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 18th day of May, 2016. Ron Guerriero, Chairperson ATTEST: Luke Watson, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 16- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of May, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Luke Watson, Secretary EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA15-1803 Project Description: A Major Modification application for the addition of 122 square-feet to an existing building and the construction of a 1,558 square-foot one-story office/retail building and a 1,420 square-foot one story office/retail building at 29400 Rancho California Road. Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-320-062 MSHCP Category: Commercial DIF Category: Retail Commercial TUMF Category: Retail Commercial Quimby Category: N/A(non-residential0 Approval Date: May 18, 2016 Expiration Date: May 18, 2018 PLANNING DIVISION Within 48 Hours of the Approval 1. Filing Notice of Exemption. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 2. Indemnification of the City. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards,judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 3. Expiration. This approval shall be used within two years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit. 4. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to three extensions of time, one year at a time. 5. Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division. 6. Signage Permits. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. 7. Landscape Maintenance. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Community Development shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. 8. Water Quality and Drainage. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval: a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately. b. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles onsite. c. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. d. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. e. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. 9. Paint Inspection. The applicant shall paint a three-foot-by-three-foot section of the building for Planning Division inspection, prior to commencing painting of the building. 10. Materials and Colors. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by City staffs prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. Materials Color Stucco Desert Beige Stucco Moroccan Sand Stained Wood Trellis Walnut Clay Tile Roof Palmilla Blend Heavy Timber Wood Trellis Walnut Wood Fascia Evolution Adobe Brick Wainscot EI Dorado Capistrano Adobe 11. Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project. 12. Trash Enclosures. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as regular solid waste containers. 13. Trash Enclosures. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on the site plan. 14. Covered Trash Enclosures. All trash enclosures on site shall include a solid cover and the construction plans shall include all details of the trash enclosures, including the solid cover. 15. Phased Construction. If construction is phased, a construction staging area plan or phasing plan for construction equipment and trash shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. 16. Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning Division verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. 17. Public Art Ordinance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Public Art Ordinance as defined in Section 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code. 18. Property Maintenance. All parkways, including within the right-of-way, entryway median, landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities, and on-site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit 19. Placement of Transformer. Provide the Planning Division with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check valves prior to final agreement with the utility companies. 20. Placement of Double Detector Check Valves. Double detector check valves shall be installed at locations that minimize their visibility from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development. 21. Archaeological/Cultural Resources Gradinq Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Director of Community Development at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow the City to consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the discovery is not an archaeological/ cultural resource, the Director of Community Development shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Director of Community Development shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Director of Community Development." 22. Discovery of Cultural Resources. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If cultural resources are discovered during the project construction (inadvertent discoveries), all work in the area of the find shall cease, and a qualified archaeologist and representatives of the Pechanga Tribe shall be retained by the project sponsor to investigate the find, and make recommendations as to treatment and mitigation." 23. Relinquishment of Cultural Resources. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition." 24. Preservation of Sacred Sites. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved." 25. Rouqh Grading Plans. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 26. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees are subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 27. Downspouts. All downspouts shall be internalized. 28. Development Impact Fee (DIF). The developer shall comply with the provisions of Title 15, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all its resolutions by paying the appropriate City fee. 29. Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. Four (4) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. These plans shall be submitted as a separate submittal, not as part of the building plans or other plan set. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, height and spread, water usage or KC value, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance and Water Storage Contingency Plan per the Rancho California Water District. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan. 30. Landscaping Site Inspections. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. 31. Agronomic Soils Report. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating, "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." 32. Water Usage Calculations. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). Applicant shall use evapotranspiration (ETo) factor of 0.70 for calculating the maximum allowable water budget. 33. Landscape Maintenance Program. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. The landscape maintenance program shall detail the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. 34. Specifications of Landscape Maintenance Program. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections. 35. Irrigation. The landscaping plans shall include automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property for private common areas; front yards and slopes within individual lots; shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to 66 feet or larger; and, all landscaping excluding City maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to, private slopes and common areas. 36. Precise Grading Plans. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. 37. Landscaping Requirement for Phased Development. If any phase or area of the project site is not scheduled for development within six months of the completion of grading, the landscaping plans shall indicate it will be temporarily landscaped and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. 38. Utility Screening. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction drawings shall show and label all utilities and provide appropriate screening. Provide a three-foot clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after-thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all light poles on plans and ensure that there are no conflicts with trees. 39. Corner Community Monument Sign. The applicant shall have an approved corner monument sign for the corner of Ynez Road and Rancho California Road as a gateway to Temecula and the wine country. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit 40. Screening of Loading Areas. The applicant shall be required to screen all loading areas and roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent residences and public right-of-ways. If upon final inspection it is determined that any mechanical equipment, roof equipment or backs of building parapet walls are visible from any portion of the public right-of-way adjacent to the project site, the developer shall provide screening by constructing a sloping tile covered mansard roof element or other screening reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 41. Landscape Installation Consistent with Construction Plans. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Community Development. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 42. Performance Securities. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Community Development, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Division for a period of one year from final Certificate of Occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Community Development, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. 43. Installation of Site Improvements. All site improvements, including but not limited to, parking areas and striping shall be installed. 44. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 45. Corner Community Monument Sign. The applicant shall have constructed an approved corner monument sign for the corner of Ynez Road and Rancho California Road as a gateway to Temecula and the wine country. Outside Agencies 46. Compliance with Dept. of Environmental Health. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Healths transmittal dated April 11, 2016, a copy of which is attached. 47. Compliance with EMWD. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Municipal Water District's transmittal dated December 22, 2015, a copy of which is attached. 48. Compliance with RCWD. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated December 21, 2015, a copy of which is attached. 49. Compliance with County Geologist. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County Geologist's transmittal dated March 21, 2016, a copy of which is attached. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements 50. Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval, the Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any governmental agency. 51. Entitlement Approval. The developer shall comply with the approved site plan, the conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and other relevant documents approved during entitlement. Any significant omission to the representation of site conditions may require the plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 52. Precise Grading Permit. A precise grading permit for on site improvements (outside of public right-of-way) shall be obtained from Public Works. 53. Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction, encroachment permit(s) are required and shall be obtained from Public Works for public offsite improvements. 54. Vehicular/Traffic Movement Restrictions. The developer shall comply with the following vehicular movements restrictions: a. The access onto Ynez Road shall be restricted to a right-in/right-out movement. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 55. Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS). The developer shall comply with all constraints per the recorded ECS with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 56. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion & sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. The approved plan shall include all construction-phase pollution-prevention controls to adequately address non-permitted runoff. Refer to the City's Engineering & Construction Manual at: http://www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/PublicWorks/engineeringconstmanual.ht m 57. Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 24, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security and entering into an agreement to guarantee the erosion & sediment control improvements. 58. Soils Report. A soils report, prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site's soil conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 59. Geological Report. The developer shall complete any outstanding County geologist's requirements, recommendations and/or proposed Conditions of Approval as identified during entitlement. 60. Letter of Permission/Easement. The developer shall obtain documents (letters of permission or easements) for any offsite work performed on adjoining properties. The document's format is as directed by, and shall be submitted to, Public Works for acceptance. The document information shall be noted on the approved grading plan. 61. Sight Distance. The developer shall limit landscaping in the corner cut-off area of all street intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. Prior to Issuance of Encroachment Permit(s) 62. Public Utility Agency Work. The developer shall submit all relevant documentation due to encroaching within City right-of-way; and is responsible for any associated costs and for making arrangements with each applicable public utility agency. 63. Traffic Control Plans. A construction area traffic control plan (TCP) will be required for lane closures and detours or other disruptions to traffic circulation; and shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. The TCP shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer in conformance with the latest edition of the Caltrans Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and City standards. 64. Street Trenching. All street trenches shall conform to City Standard No. 407; refer to the City's Paving Notes. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 65. Certifications. Certifications are required from the registered civil engineer-of-record certifying the building pad elevation(s) per the approved plans and from the soil's engineer-of-record certifying compaction of the building pad(s). Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 66. Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all on site work (including water quality facilities), public improvements and the executed WQMP Operation and Maintenance agreement. 67. Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearance from applicable utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.) for the completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works. 68. Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section 8771. 69. Certifications. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by Public Works. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION General Requirements 70. Final Buildinq and Safety Conditions. Final Building and Safety conditions will be addressed when building construction plans are submitted to Building and Safety for review. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), and related codes which are enforced at the time of building plan submittal. 71. Submittinq Plans and Calculations. Applicant must submit to Building and Safety four (4) complete sets of plans and two (2) sets of supporting calculations for review and approval including: a. An electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic, and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work. b. A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for persons with disabilities. d. Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer. 72. Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2013 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2013 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, 2013 California Energy Codes, 2013 California Green Building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and City of Temecula Municipal Code. 73. ADA Access. Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans to include: a. All ground floor units to be adaptable. b. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. c. Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. d. Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. e. Path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as club house, trash enclose tot lots and picnic areas. 74. County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance. Applicant shall submit, at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 75. Street Addressing. Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by requesting street addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi-family residential projects or a recorded final map for single-family residential projects. 76. Clearance from TVUSD. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley Unified School District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 77. Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 78. Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. 79. Demolition. Demolition permits require separate approvals and permits. 80. Sewer and Water Plan Approvals. On-site sewer and water plans will require separate approvals and permits. 81. Hours of Construction. Signage shall be prominently posted at the entrance to the project, indicating the hours of construction, as allowed by the City of Temecula Municipal Ordinance 9.20.060, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. The permitted hours of construction are Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized Government Holidays. 82. House Electrical Meter. Provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site. Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed. 83. Protection of drains and penetration. Protection of joints and penetrations in fire resistance-rated assemblies shall not be concealed from view until inspected for all designed fire protection. Required fire seals/fire barriers in fire assemblies at fire resistant penetrations shall be installed by individuals with classification or certification covering the installation of these systems. Provide certification for the installation of each area and certification of compliance for Building Official's approval. At Plan Review Submittal 84. Submitting Plans and Calculations. Applicant must submit to Building and Safety four (4) complete sets of plans and two (2) sets of supporting calculations for review and approval including: a. An electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic, and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work. b. A Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the Section 1207, of the 2013 edition of the California Building Code. c. A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for persons with disabilities. d. Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) 85. Onsite Water and Sewer Plans. Onsite water and sewer plans, submitted separately from the building plans, shall be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval. 86. Demolition Permits. A demolition permit shall be obtained if there is an existing structure to be removed as part of the project. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 87. Plans Require Stamp of Registered Professional. Applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on the plans. Prior to Beginning of Construction 88. Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements 89. Fire Hydrants. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x (2) 2 '/2" outlets) shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent public streets. For all Commercial projects hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in private the system.Although the buildings on site will be non-sprinklered, fire flow is still required to be met on site. (CFC Appendix C and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). 90. Fire Dept. Plan Review. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) 91. Access Road Widths. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). 92. All Weather Access Roads. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 3310.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads. (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) 93. Required Submittals (Fire Underground Water). The developer shall furnish three copies of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all private water systems pertaining to the fire service loop. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block, and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. Hydraulic calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements are being met for the on-site hydrants. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building permit being issued. This is required for any additions being made to the site for fire hydrant coverage and meeting on site fire flow requirements. (CFC Chapter 33 and Chapter 5). Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy 94. Hydrant Verification. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots) (City Ordinance 15.16.020). 95. Knox Box. A"Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance for each building (CFC Chapter 5). 96. Addressing. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Commercial buildings shall have a minimum of 12-inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of 6-inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). 97. Site Plan. The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs (CFC Chapter 5). POLICE DEPARTMENT General Requirements 98. Defensible Plants. Applicant shall ensure any landscaping surrounding buildings is kept at a height of no more than three feet, or below the ground floor window sills. Plants, hedges, and shrubbery shall be defensible plants to prevent would-be intruders from breaking into the buildings utilizing lower level windows. 99. Trees. Applicant shall ensure any trees surrounding building rooftops be kept at a distance to prevent roof accessibility by would-be burglars. Since trees also act as a natural ladder, the branches must be pruned to have a six-foot clearance from the buildings. 100. Berms. Any berms shall not exceed three feet in height. 101. Exterior Building Lighting. All lighting affixed to the exterior of buildings less than 8 feet high shall be vandal resistant. 102. Exterior Door Illumination. All exterior doors shall have a vandal resistant light fixture installed above the door. The doors shall be illuminated with a minimum one-foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed. 103. Hardware. All doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade. 104. Graffiti. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the buildings or other structures must be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being discovered. Report all such crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch Center at (951) 696-HELP 105. Alarm System. Upon completion of construction, each building or business shall have an alarm system that is monitored by a designated private alarm company to notify the Temecula Police Department of any intrusion. All multi-tenant offices/suites/businesses located within a specific building shall each have their own alarm system. This condition is not applicable if the business is open 24/7. 106. Roof Hatches. Any roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." 107. Rooftop Addressing. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a nine-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced nine inches apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard nine-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street. 108. Public Telephones. Any public telephones located on the exterior of the buildings shall be placed in a well-lit, highly visible area, and installed with a "call-out only" feature to deter loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the buildings. 109. ADA Parking. All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with Section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code. 110. Sale of Alcohol. Any business that serves or sells any type of alcoholic beverage shall comply with all guidelines within the Business and Profession Codes and all rules, regulations and guidelines of the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. 111. Crime Prevention Through Design. Crime prevention through environmental design, as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI), supports the concept that "the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life." The nine primary strategies that support this concept are included below: 1. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery, or signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of identifying controlled space. 2. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. 3. Gathering or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. 4. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. 5. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. 6. Redesign the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. 7. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and intervention. 8. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be award of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clear lines-of-sight serve to provide such a perception of surveillance. 9. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. 112. Crime Prevention Training. Employee training regarding credit cards, theft, citizens' arrest procedures, personal safety, business security or any other related crime prevention subject is available free of charge through the Crime Prevention Unit. To schedule an appointment, call (951) 506-5132. 113. Business Security Survey. The Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department offers free business security surveys, to schedule an appointment contact the unit at (951) 506-5132. 114. Contact. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 506-5132. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice of Public Hearing A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Case No: PA15-1803 Applicant: Chris Campbell Proposal: A Major Modification application for the addition of 122 square-feet to an existing building and the construction of a 1,558 square-foot one-story office/retail building and a 1,420 square-foot one story office/retail building located at 29400 Rancho California Road Environmental: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project is exempt from further environmental review and a Notice of Exemption will be adopted in compliance with CEQA (15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects) Case Planner: Scott Cooper, (951) 506-5137 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Council Chambers Date of Hearing: May 18, 2016 Time of Hearing: 6:00 p.m. kr T�WfR pLpZ � lr r rr Project Site r � 250 500 1,000 The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission Meeting. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.citvoftemecula.org. Any Supplemental Material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula), 8:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.org — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please call the Planning Department, (951) 694-6400. ITEM 6 STAFF REPORT— PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: May 18, 2016 TO: Planning Commission Chairperson and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Luke Watson, Director of Community Development PREPARED BY: James Atkins, Case Planner PROJECT Planning Application No. PA16-0438, a Conditional Use Permit to SUMMARY: allow for the existing Ubon Thai Restaurant to upgrade its existing Type 41 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license to a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. With the approval of this CUP, the existing restaurant will continue to operate within its existing hours of 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Thursday, 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. Friday and Saturday, and 12 p.m. to 9 p.m. on Sundays. The restaurant is located at 27300 Jefferson Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution approving the project subject to Conditions of Approval CEQA: Categorically Exempt Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities PROJECT DATA SUMMARY Name of Applicant: Zheng Song General Plan Highway Tourism (HT) Designation: Zoning Designation: Specific Plan 14 (Uptown Temecula) Existing Conditions/ Land Use: Site: Existing commercial building North: Existing commercial building South: Existing commercial building East: Existing commercial building West: Existing commercial building 1 Existing/Proposed Min/Max Allowable or Required Lot Area: 0.45 Acres N/A Total Floor Area/Ratio: 2,987 Square Feet N/A Landscape Area/Coverage: N/A N/A Parking Required/Provided: N/A There is currently a shared parking agreement in place for the entire center. BACKGROUND SUMMARY On March 18, 2016, Zheng Song submitted Planning Application No. PA16-0438, a Conditional Use Permit for Ubon Thai, to acquire a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. The acquisition of this license will allow the applicant to expand service in order to meet the requests of restaurant patrons seeking distilled spirits, and to stay competitive with surrounding eating establishments that currently possess a similar license. Currently the establishment operates under a Type 41 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license which limits their sales to beer and wine. However, due to the number of eating establishments located nearby, the applicant believes they are at a disadvantage competitively and therefore is seeking the opportunity to offer distilled spirits. As a result, Ubon Thai is requesting to upgrade to a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license at 27300 Jefferson Avenue. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all concerns have been addressed, and the applicant concurs with the recommended Conditions of Approval. ANALYSIS Ubon Thai is an existing 2,987 square-foot restaurant located in the Uptown Jefferson Specific Plan area. The applicant is proposing to upgrade their existing Type 41 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license to a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. No new square footage is proposed. Currently Ubon Thai provides a full menu as well as select beers and wines. Operating hours are 11:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Mondays through Thursdays; 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays; and 1:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Sundays. The restaurant employs between 7 and 8 employees and there is no anticipated need to add employees with the upgraded license. The facility can accommodate up to 80 patrons at a given time in its seating and bar area which include handicap accessible tables. The existing bar area includes 7 stools, one handicap seat, and is fully equipped for the regular service of its customers. Staff has confirmed with the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) that the Planning Commission does not make the finding of Public Convenience or Necessity application (PCN) for restaurants. ABC will process the findings of Public Convenience or Necessity upon approval of the Conditional Use Permit after the license application process has been initiated. The applicant must state their case in support of the PCN to ABC rather than to the local jurisdiction in the request of upgrading the existing Type 41 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license to a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. 2 LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the U-T San Diego on May 6, 2016 and mailed to the property owners within 600-foot radius. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15301, Class 1 Existing Facilities). The request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license at Ubon Thai will be conducted in an existing restaurant. All access and public utilities are available to the site. The proposed use, with issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, is in conformance with all zoning requirements of the Development Code. FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit (Development Code Section 17.04.010.E) The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. Ubon Thai currently operates as a full-service restaurant with the primary purpose of offering a full menu of food items with select wines and beers. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan which specifies Highway Tourism (HT) for this site, and conditionally allows for restaurants to operate with a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. The sale of distilled spirits would serve as an incidental use to the establishment's operations. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. Ubon Thai is an existing restaurant within the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan area. As conditioned, the proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures, and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. The application will allow for a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license at an existing restaurant in a commercial building location. The site will remain unchanged in size and shape to accommodate the uses prescribed in the Development Code as required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. 3 The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The project meets all the requirements of the Development Code, Fire Code and the Building Code, which provided safeguards for the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. That the decision to conditionally approve or deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal. The decision to conditionally approve the application for a Conditional Use Permit has been based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS Aerial Map Site Plan Resolution Exhibit A - Draft Conditions of Approval Statement of Operations Notice of Public Hearing 4 AERIAL MAP City of Temecula, Project Site 5 ��. ■r - - �; ;fir �, ,;� - - Ve Project Site A �.. . -ter/ 'T;• 'ri .Z �� ;� � �� '. 4 f�f�• dry �� � ,� Y. 4 - _ { 0 125 250 500 Feet This map was made by the City of Temecula Geographic Information System, The map is derived from base data produced by the Riverside County Assessor's Department and the Transportation and Land Management Agency of Riverside County.The City of Temecula assumes no warranty or legal responsibility for the information contained on this map.Data and information represented on this map are subject to update and modification.The Geographic Information System and other sources should be queried for the most current information.: This mar)is not for reprint or resale. SITE PLAN - -- - _ PRODUCED RYAN AUTOD.K EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT o JEFFERSON BLVD. D1_4 °°`p E=. n° Q Nu a 9, 1 1. Z F \ / PHONE (fi1616ne-vn rxaNS(j6pe1]n6-n. JV1R1 G'f o CITY OF TEMECULA P 'D APPLICABLE CODES: Ir�T 2013 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE •�--•��— -TP"r'T-'-`` p 2013 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE 2013 CALIFORNIA PLUMPING CODE 46 (p 2013 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE RCFPD ORDINANCE IIl 2013 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE III I 2013 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE la 2013 GBSC ED IIIEL y1. •tl ------------}--- I LORE SOFT Ate. -!� `•'•+ ...----_- *r •I.' V 759, t iie I ` • �j 1 I � HARDS' AA. 10 7 r I 1 •1 •y '' AR RA Q'St]ly,. ❑OT U 18 f100 .� EXISTING I u �E•T. w I>,) L1c.sErevc ' 'r, o 2 UBON THAI RESTAURANT '' p 1 1 f A f. II14 v r _7 E 6 711, IAL a 1I o -• .'I BLDG SET W y _ - I• !^ LIJ r � n •I IvJ 'd i .� • III GO m 1 J crco n o i r o m qW W t I z F— I . . i• vN O I U EXISTING SITE PLAN° E N NO CHANGE KEY NOTES LS 1 ® °`—NO PURIC EWAN ON(�l—,—)N°LN"N,T r .I6,ING ­CELION(LAN°;w )N°­­ S H NLE o � o En„NL PNI�NG RA"R ON(�RERE°N REw)NO CNANG6 5 6 7 8 4 10 C)f IIRECT I ON(, R]RN N-)NO Cx,NtE i 12 13 14 ©EEI51IN6 6I OE RNEGUL,(FIRE IIY .NT)N°CN,NLT o f.I6nNt 6, 61 N N°EH.NLE �y _ O fMIRENL OIIA➢Ixc vPOPEpIv(UNOGC"PE 1x0 LH"xW .-- • • O9 fnsPx6 nUYnlxc vRCOfPN(PuixNf.NC nxc I-)NO CNANC! 136" Q Ex6 Nt Rx Nt pRp ptt(NNN D­°°E)x°1111E G„° .,° 41� O[nS,Nf.BORING 11-1(A➢"I—NO I NO "NLE MR RP-i9-20 6 cl)EnS,NO RUILOWt PRIPERtt(p0."IRNG EO"ONL)NO gµCE O En61Nc BIIIO)NG N1°PERtt(Ia Xa!R"SII[H0.a6ORC)NO cNwG[ •1{y]q 'p'� la BOIIDINC.PROoERry( CESSPLE LONC up,ER �—1 n ME OiM]NNG uAN fNm.wLELxO CNVNCE O Ensnxc eOLnNc rpucR,N v.w of m"IrtC 1 LION"o"rwxwc �1i17�€11`IRE SfE A _ __ _ _ _— — © ,Nn�6ax,°L"('w ING/E TINFINGN I NO EpNtRlxxIE° 10DOOBd WN0I1V0D03 NS3DOIDV NY AB 03DDOONd EXISTING AL ELECTRICAL RM FXIETWG 1 ELECTRICAL RM ,Lw l 1 �.y nCR�rli /. }yLirjl AIHl. �NE6 Iti ' + TSi kdICV{ - Iw 1 � k• NE J rl GOMM Ica aacz 1 }�� '�^' ;,_ 1 dam.« •. 1 . WAITSTAFF .r_ C ; v 4v `,•/ _ ` _ � } _ PREP,AREA r j -- T It J =%4 % YYYkkkSSf 1 ' 15 W r WL NUG(4R3�kf1 PRTH.n rr.....r..... <=Cm L .................tea�H .._..- 1 0 11+�l = Excl 1 ~W 1� O LLL J 0 Co ocw mew� nils ON ON MC ]II SO FT/1 O 20 O UJ IGf 2 TpA N C)m PT rax +x �`�'cE"IPatil Yf A R170WIw1 f r j TOTAL OCCUPANT-011 Z 1yti1]ry r{AN:r-Po O EXIT1tJG ATN C3F TRAVEL R LA 1Q�t U .w «qll IrM.w�. awR T1-1 RR EXISTING NO CHANGE R� EQUIPMENTS KEY NOTE: TpTALLINEAR FOOTAGE OF -. Exlsrwc O I11LER:Pw"la"oa SHELVING UNITS=32' E EcrRICALRu p ",-A-F I W/HWL 11 G) ........ w@1dF�F5 R 4! " rL1q wNx E _ EXISTING 1 E✓�F'�L6 � i�'xG DRY STORAGE f A.cuRTAx y mt�p s (� sA pe sT.xass 1-1-1 ` Iis.wer'°w R Eacm CAL suR"EL - - w Q MR[SxaK,a(.or"Lf' f •N'�"aev l r ��� - o RP EES,aLLCCRER k C "o-.1 wM -CH NgWhO xOP swx y+ xs11 NAa RRgLER(COON1[R MI) le 4w w/'xn"R'W L� PURxws aAx« f. �G:n.oR Ex�Siq:s: s w I� gx. 1 I O 1]711x.11 2C �� A I bl Irk(p z1-x1w.BURNERS ww —'P "Rr l y ��' `•Y �� - �/ Y" 1 O ExnxLNgIEW EXi R'-'. e" qhr _S V " pn (7)�)W'SAAMACI/s V rarP TAR �G+i a� r CJ �","RI`c."L'000"w.rwWa�,� �.,.r ! }} .WAIT STAFF f �t r Q sr Cwars STEEL uRa A— I{5 .` PREP AREA I 1 k Q 1:HMMAL RCE CPCIER ' I NER DSNWAEHEP u.CxNE © NEW DRINK kl Q c[uAxw(ME CUR') - SER DE AREA o EXISTING 6 EN A+{EN'S RE - M '• r/, A ) y © RRURE WATER AITE4 wD.gs 'AREl E"`-H. ,,wt L - - r_ — AI ease snn !mE pi[L.F. prrtIX Eu—L-L 11L 0 �Lw*IRIRI m.RElWw PER RTWE. SWI FT kryy..w�Sp x f � srweu'wn.s Awe .sc I O Hill r*+ .n.�nl " _ A., a,N E.Tw Q e• ® ® x o sNx w/NwL'a]r Arr <I]NEvvE rzo I r- ® c-ITS-M-M EEPIHH ma.Ru aµR .. e]qE NOH 0 Ln* z n.aoL sa.11n nnwrx. `'"1 ..hcv� CV ® ` � Ml K.ll voncw w O0) E�s�n Q \ 5 MUCH 511EEx C.SHER u.CHxE wLYf[rY'W.r Y a1kf.401L (Wox rvrIM 1/.'/.c �U © IUMvsDEs a {{((�� ❑E 0❑ ROTIIE "'LER ILDE J.D[FP Will xdn2CwT.L LL RI COLOR Au 1 1 BAH(1) WPAR A1.1 I— MW COLIANDtR J LL� _ }" - ]p1 IIIfb PJ1i rxnxruGxc"g1EYN 11 Aru LE n. �yO�'�Ui� Irl.r ww res -- — -Lam woa .p:1 z W O0 CD w.. co EXISTING F-OOR PLAN H. W 1 ACCE (JOMMw- JN� r E'EEYATICkiS.ICfr'A07ES [r QIrp.C^�.rgEl 41P0.^ {"� � Y• nR_ter _ + � LI I C'C' aR Q N E lE W//R'1-1 Q nNIED Ox ERII——M, PLAN KEY NOTFS 13 4 r o f �• O D O O 0-n�inlu"d w.aE i - _ O i I r A O - ©T.TEE ERIK SIGN w/w2wO5-E.1 - CV o;srcDlitO]Ck51&]DS[BC)NALE EV {ON E ENATION a E EV TIONE VATI rE pN �, � MEd S1AN0 rO M OPEN 41 ALL nNES"I Va" gMT1EP""IM DISPBILIllES GaAP s➢R-III0LE AT GH AND]R'ARIE(COCl—) Y _ 5❑nuSSMPTE"L°1REc siou MWEN o N IT As CLEAR FOR.CCESERE AT ]a'.6 uAx Oj Oj ©ERISWxn PANIC HARDWARE ID T_ o ... ©x]'x Arr AT PAR SEARNc FB AnNr.Po1ms } D O j k •� ct'� O I p r>r rl x w 13".1.r Dxx TAPLE € r<- € I -. ••L +M>En`,le_ r� p tOlr! 9 11 ELEVATION ,/<x° D LEV,0.TC7ELEVATION 1 DRAFT CUP RESOLUTION PC RESOLUTION NO. 16- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA16-0438 A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE EXISTING UBON THAI RESTAURANT TO UPGRADE ITS EXISTING TYPE 41 ON-SALE BEER AND WINE FOR BONA FIDE PUBLIC EATING PLACE (RESTAURANT) LICENSE TO A TYPE 47 ON-SALE FOR BONA FIDE PUBLIC EATING PLACE (RESTAURANT) LICENSE. WITH THE APPROVAL OF THIS CUP, THE EXISTING RESTAURANT WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE WITHIN ITS EXISTING HOURS OF 11 A.M. TO 9 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, 11 A.M. TO 10 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY, AND 12 P.M. TO 9 P.M. ON SUNDAYS AND MAKING A FINDING OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE RESTAURANT IS LOCATED AT 27300 JEFFERSON AVENUE. (APN 910-282-017) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On March 18, 2016, Zheng Song filed Planning Application No. PA16- 0438 a Conditional Use Permit, in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. The Application was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. C. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on May 18, 2016, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. D. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission approved Planning Application No. PA16-0438, subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. E. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in approving the Application hereby finds, determines and declares that: Conditional Use Permit (Development Code Section 17.04.010.E) A. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code; Ubon Thai currently operates as a full-service restaurant with the primary purpose of offering a full menu of food items with select wines and beers. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan which specifies Highway Tourism (HT) for this site, and conditionally allows for restaurants to operate with a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. The sale of distilled spirits would serve as an incidental use to the establishment's operations. B. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures; Ubon Thai is an existing restaurant within the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan area. As conditioned, the proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures, and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings or structures. C. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in the Development Code and required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood; The application will allow for a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license at an existing restaurant in a commercial building location. The site will remain unchanged in size and shape to accommodate the uses prescribed in the Development Code as required by the Planning Commission or City Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. D. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community; The project meets all the requirements of the Development Code, Fire Code and the Building Code, which provided safeguards for the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. E. That the decision to conditionally approve or deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit be based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal; The decision to conditionally approve the application for a Conditional Use Permit has been based on substantial evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Conditional Use Permit: A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review (Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities); The request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license at Ubon Thai will be conducted in an existing restaurant. All access and public utilities are available to the site. The proposed use, with issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, is in conformance with all zoning requirements of the Development Code. Section 4. Conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA16-0438, a Conditional Use Permit for Ubon Thai Restaurant to upgrade its existing Type 42 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Public Premises license to a Type 47 On-Sale General for Bona Fide Public Eating Place and making a finding of exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The restaurant is located at 27300 Jefferson Avenue (APN 910-282-017), subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 18th day of May, 2016. Ron Guerriero, Chairperson ATTEST: Luke Watson, Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 16- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18th day of May, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Luke Watson, Secretary EXHIBIT A DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA16-0438 Project Description: Ubon Thai CUP: a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the existing Ubon Thai Restaurant to upgrade its existing Type 41 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license to a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. With the approval of this CUP, the existing restaurant will continue to operate within its existing hours of 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Thursday, 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. Friday and Saturday, and 12 p.m. to 9 p.m. on Sundays. The restaurant is located at 27300 Jefferson Avenue. Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-282-017 MSHCP Category: N/A(no new grading) DIF Category: N/A(no new construction) TUMF Category: N/A(no new grading/construction) Quimby Category: N/A(non-residential) Approval Date: May 18, 2016 Expiration Date: May 18, 2018 PLANNING DIVISION Within 48 Hours of the Approval 1. Filing Notice of Exemption. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashiers check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not delivered to the Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements 2. Indemnification of the City. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards,judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 3. Expiration. This approval shall be used within two years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit. 4. Consistency with Specific Plans. This application and all aspects of the existing facility shall remain consistent with Specific Plan No. 14 (Uptown Temecula). 5. Modifications or Revisions. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this CUP. 6. Food Service. The bona fide public eating place shall serve a full menu at all hours that alcohol is served. 7. Statement of Operations. The applicant shall comply with their Statement of Operations date stamped March 18, 2016, on file with the Planning Division, unless superseded by these Conditions of Approval. 8. Revocation of CUP. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. 9. City Review and Modification of CUP. The City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission, and City Council retain and reserve the right and jurisdiction to review and modify this Conditional Use Permit (including the Conditions of Approval) based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the modification of business, a change in scope, emphasis, size of nature of the business, and the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration or change of use. The reservation of right to review any Conditional Use Permit granted or approved or conditionally approved hereunder by the City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission and City Council is in addition to, and not in-lieu of, the right of the City, its Director of Community Development, Planning Commission, and City Council to review, revoke or modify any Conditional Use Permit approved or conditionally approved hereunder for any violations of the conditions imposed on such Conditional Use Permit or for the maintenance of any nuisance condition or other code violation thereon. 10. Posting of Local Transportation Providers. An 8.5" x 11" (or larger) sign listing local transportation service providers and corresponding telephone numbers shall be posted at a conspicuous location within the building. Information to assist in the compilation of this sign may be obtained through the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce at (951) 676-5090. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit 11. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. POLICE DEPARTMENT General Requirements 12. Type 47 License. The applicant has applied for a Type 47 On-Sale General — Eating Place (Restaurant) which authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption on the licensed premises and authorizes the sale of beer and wine for consumption off the licensed premises. Applicant must operate and maintain the licensed premises as a bona fide eating place. Minors are allowed on the premises. 13. Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in Public Prohibited. The applicant shall comply with Temecula Municipal Code Section 9.14.010, Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in Public Prohibited. 14. Ensure No Alcohol Sold or Consumed by Person Under the Age of 21. The applicant shall ensure that no alcohol is sold to or consumed by any person under the age of 21. 15. Identification Verification. Identification will be verified utilizing one of the following: (a) valid California driver's license; (b) valid California identification card; (c) valid military identification card (active/reserve/retired/dependent); (d) valid driver's license from any of the 50 States or Territories of the United States; (e) valid U.S. Passport; (f) valid government issued identification card issued by a Federal, State, County or City agency. 16. Acceptable Forms of Identification. As noted above, only a valid government issued identification card issued by a Federal, State, County or City agency is acceptable, providing it complies with Section 25660 of the Business and Profession Code (B&P), which includes the following requirements: (a) name of person; (b) date of birth; (c) physical description; (d) photograph; (e) currently valid (not expired). It is the responsibility of the business owner and any person who serves or sells alcohol to be aware of current laws and regulations pertaining to alcoholic beverages. 17. Section 303 (a) (PC). On-sale licensees may not: (a) employ hosts, hostesses, or entertainers who solicit others to buy them drinks, alcoholic or non-alcoholic; (b) pay or agree to pay such an employee a percentage of the receipts from the sales of drinks solicited; (c) permit any person whether an employee or not, to loiter for the purpose of soliciting an alcoholic drink. 18. Maintain Premises as a Bona Fide Eating Place. Type 41, 47 and 49 licensees must operate and maintain their licensed premises as a bona fide eating place. They must make actual and substantial sale of meals, during the normal meal hours that they are open, at least five days a week. Normal meal hours are: breakfast 6:00 a.m. — 9:00 a.m., lunch 11:00 a.m. — 2:00 p.m., and dinner 6:00 p.m. — 9:00 p.m. Premises that are not open five days a week must serve meals on the days they are open. The premises must be equipped and maintained in good faith. This means the premises must possess working refrigeration and cooking devices, pots, pans, utensils, table service, condiment dispensers, menus, posters, signs, and enough goods to make substantial meals. The premises must comply with all regulations of the local health department. Incidental, sporadic or infrequent sales of meals or a mere offering of meals without actual sales is not compliance. "Meals" means the usual assortment of food commonly ordered at various hours of the day. The service of only sandwiches or salads is not considered compliance. However, certain specialty entrees, such as pizza, fish or ribs, and an assortment of other foods, such as soups, salads or desserts, may be considered a meal. The Department will presume that a licensee is operating as a bona fide eating place if the gross sales of food prepared and sold to guests on the premises exceeds the gross sales of alcoholic beverages. "Prepared" means any processing preliminary to the final serving of food. (Note: Some licensees have a "conditional" license that requires food sales to be 50% or more of the total gross sales Sections 23038 and 23787 B&P). 19. No Alcohol Sales Between 2:00 am and 6:00 am. Licensees may not sell, give, or deliver alcohol (by the drink or by the package) between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. of the same day. No person may knowingly purchase alcohol between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. Section 25631 B&P Code). Licensees may not permit patrons or employees to consume alcohol between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. of the same day (even if someone bought the drinks before 2:00 a.m. Section 25632 B&P). Some ABC licenses have special conditions (restrictions) as to hours of sale that are stricter that the law. Those licenses are marked "Conditional" (23805 B&P). 20. Inspections. Police officers, sheriff's deputies and ABC investigators are sworn law enforcement officers (peace officers) with powers of arrest. Whether in plainclothes or uniform, peace officers have the legal right to visit and inspect any licensed premises at any time during business hours without a search warrant or probable cause. This includes inspecting the bar and back bar, store room, office, closed or locked cabinets, safes, kitchen, or any other area within the licensed premises. It is legal and reasonable for licensees to exclude the public from some areas of the premises. However, licensees cannot and must not deny entry to, resist, delay, obstruct, or assault a peace officer (Sections 25616, 25753, and 25755 B&P; 148 and 241 (b) PC). 21. Disorderly House. Licensees may not permit their licensed premises to become a disorderly house. A disorderly house is a licensed outlet (on or off sale) that: (a) disturbs neighbors with noise, loud music, loitering, littering, vandalism, urination or defecation, graffiti, etc; and/or (b) has many ongoing crimes inside such as drunks, fights, assaults, prostitution, narcotics, etc. The licensed premise includes the parking lot (Section 25601 B&P; 316 PC). 22. Employee Training for Identification Checks. The applicant shall ensure all employees involved with the sales, service and identification checks for the purpose of any sales of alcoholic beverages is trained in the proper procedures and identification checks. The Temecula Police Department provides free training for all employers and employees involved in the service and sales of alcoholic beverages. It is the responsibility of the applicant to set up a training session for all new employees. Contact the Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 506-5132 to set up a training date. Training must be completed prior to the grand opening of this business and periodic updated training when new employees/ management are hired. 23. Entertainment Rules. On-sale licensees who offer entertainment must abide by the following rules: (1) No licensee shall permit any person to perform acts of or acts which simulate; (a) sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation or any sexual acts which are prohibited by law; (b) the touching, caressing or fondling on the breast, buttocks, anus or genitals; (c) the displaying of the pubic hair, anus, vulva or genitals; and (2) Subject to the provisions of subdivision (1) hereof, entertainers whose breasts and/or buttocks are exposed to view shall perform only upon a stage at least 18 inches above the immediate floor level and removed at least six feet from the nearest patron. No licensee shall permit any person to remain in or upon the licensed premises who exposes to public view any portion of her or her genitals or anus (Rule 143.3 CCR. Also violates Section 311.6 PC if conduct is "obscene," e.g. intercourse, sodomy, masturbation, etc.) 24. Under Number of Calls for Service. Licensees may not permit their licensed premises to be a problem for the local law enforcement agency by needing an undue number of calls for service. The licensed premise includes the parking lot (Sections 24200 (a) (B&P). 25. Questions Regarding Conditions. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 506-5132. STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS Conditional Use Permit FIRE S E� V E D Statement of Operations—Uban Thai Inc. R 1 8 2016 Ubon Thai is a full-service fine dining restaurant and bar serving traditional Thai cuisine with high quality ingredients and excellent customer service. This filing for a Conditional Use Permit is for the purpose of our application for a Type 47 Liquor License. Our business operates seven days a week from 11am-9pm Monday through Thursday, 11am- 10pm Friday and Saturday, and 12pm-9pm on Sundays. We currently employ 7 to�$employees with the space to hire more if needed. The facility can seat up to 80 patrons at once with multiple handicap accessible tables, and we have a bar area with 7 stool seats, one handicap seat, and is fully equipped with a dishwasher, sinks, and coolers. Our property has 14 parking spots available with three of them being handicap spots, all of which have ADA paths leading to the handicap ramp. We are able to take phone orders for pickup but are not able to provide delivery, and our facility has two restrooms, one for each sex, both of which are handicap accessible. The proposed project will not require any change to the facility as it was designed and built with the project in mind, and therefore operations will not differ. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice of Public Hearing 1989 A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the City of Temecula PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the matter described below: Case No: PA16-0438 Applicant: Zheng Song Proposal: A Conditional Use Permit to allow for the existing Ubon Thai Restaurant to upgrade its existing Type 41 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license to a Type 47 On-Sale for Bona Fide Public Eating Place (Restaurant) license. The site is located at 27300 Jefferson Avenue. Environmental: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project is exempt from further environmental review and a Notice of Exemption will be adopted in compliance with CEQA (Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities) Case Planner: James Atkins, (951) 240-4206 Place of Hearing: City of Temecula, Council Chambers Date of Hearing: May 18, 2016 Time of Hearing: 6:00 p.m. i i Project Sitevo - "� `. 00% 0 125 250 500 F3` ' FeeE The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 p.m. the Friday before the Planning Commission Meeting. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.citvoftemecula.org. Any Supplemental Material distributed to a majority of the Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula), 8:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.org — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (951) 694-6400.