HomeMy WebLinkAbout090999 PTS AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact
the office of the City Clerk at (909) 694-644& Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR35. 102.35. 104 ADA Title II]
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL:
PUBLIC COMMENTS
AGENDA
TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
TO BE HELD AT
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California
Thursday, September 9, 1999 at 6:00 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS: Ct~nnerton, Edwards, Markham, Telesio, Coe
A total of 15 minutes is pruvided so members of the public can address the Commission on items that are not
listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commission
about an item no__lt listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request tn Speak" ik~rm should be filled out and filed with
the Cummission Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come t~rward and state your name and address.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" ti~rm must be filed with the Recording Secretary before the
Commission gets to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one vote.
There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Public/Trat'fic Salary Commission request
specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar tkn' separate action.
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
i. A0Oruwtl uf Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Minutes of August 26, 1999
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2. Refluest ~}r Occa.sional Exceotiun to the Parkinl~ Restriction - Temeku Drive
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 That the Public/Traffic Sat~ty Commission deny a request to allow overflow on-street parking
on Temeku Drive during certain events.
3. ReQuest ~r Street Closure - Calle Pina Colada
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commissinn deny a request to close Calle Pina Colada West
of Salt River Court.
4. Traffic Engineer's Report
5. Pulice Chief's Repurt
6. Fire Chief's Report
7. Commission Report
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public/Traffic Satiety Commission will be held on Thursday,
September 23, 1999, at 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California.
ITEM NO. I
TraffComm/minutes/082699
MINUTES OF A REGULAR
MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 1999
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission convened in a regular meeting
at 6:00 P.M., on Thursday, August 26, 1999, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula
City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
FLAG SALUTE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Telesio.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Commissioners Connerton, Edwards, Markham,
Telesio, and Chairman Coe
Absent: None.
Also Present:
Acting Director of Public Works Hughes,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Senior Engineer Moghadam,
Police Deputy Leggett,
Administrative Secretary Pyle, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mr. Charles Hankley, 31745 Via Cordoba, addressed two issues, as follows: 1) for
informational purposes, relayed the recent arrest of a driver on Via Cordoba that he
witnessed, noting his concern with regard to speed violators on Via Cordoba, and
2) relayed that while he was not opposed to the project in general, expressed concern
with respect to the Wolf Valley project, regarding the potential traffic impact on Via
Cordoba in light of the proposed widening of Loma Linda associated with the project.
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Minutes of July 22, 1999
MOTION: Commissioner Connerton moved to approve the minutes. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Edwards and voice vote reflected approval with the
exception of Chairman Coe and Commissioner Markham who abstained.
TraffComm/minutes1082699
COMMISSION BUSINESS
Median Island Modification - Rancho California road between Ynez Road
and Via Las Colinas
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommend the closure of the
median island located on Rancho California Road at the Claim Jumper
and Target Center driveways.
Providing a brief overview of the staff report (per agenda material), Senior Engineer
Moghadam relayed that the matter had been brought before the Commission at the July
8, 1999 Public/Traffic Safety Commission meeting and had been continued to the
August 12, 1999 meeting which was subsequently cancelled; noted that at the
aforementioned meeting the property owner's representative relayed that Mr. Robert
Davis was in the process of preparing plans to revise the on-site circulation and that the
proposed plans would be provided to staff prior to the meeting; noted that staff had not
received the plans until August 20, 1999; advised that staff is of the opinion that the
proposed on-site improvements would not alleviate the need for closure of the median
due to the current number of accidents in the area of discussion; and for Commissioner
Markham, confirmed that the letter from GMS Realty (of record) references
improvements on Rancho California Road that are currently out to bid.
Mr. Robert Davis, representing GMS Reality, provided an overview of the circulation
issues since 1997; relayed the rationale of postponing on-site circulation improvements
until the signal improvements are completed; noted the planned on-site improvements
proposed to be completed in conjunction with the signal improvements, specifying the
potential for improved circulation at that time; relayed GMS's desire to evaluate the
traffic circulation after the improvements, prior to making alternate on-site modifications;
specified the proposed on-site improvements, inclusive of a mandatory right-in at the
Target driveway (i.e., striped median), and additional signage directing traffic to the Via
Las Colinas intersection; noted that additional on-site improvements would involve
displacement of required parking spaces; for Commissioner Telesio, noted that the
required parking was inclusive of the parking spaces behind the Center (confirmed by
Mr. Gary Smith, representing the property owner); for Commissioner Connerton, clarified
the referenced signal improvements; for Chairman Coe, concurred that at a future point
in time Rancho California Road would need to be a six-lane road, relaying that provision
of a through lane at the intersection could still be provided; advised that alternate
changes in the area may provide significant improvement on Rancho California Road,
listed, as follows: 1) the mall opening (directing traffic away from the area of discussion),
and 2) the additional access to Oscar's Restaurant, reducing the U-turn demand at the
intersection; noted that the volumes of traffic after the improvements may be
insignificant, and thereby alleviate the need for further immediate modifications; advised
that it would then be the desire of GMS Realty to subsequently study the impacts of the
improvements prior to additional revisions; recommended further analysis of the reported
accidents in order to address the specific movements of cause; and for Commissioner
Edwards, clarified the rationale for the recommended provision of additional specificity
regarding the accidents.
TraffComm/minutes/082699
In response to Commissioner Telesio's comments, Senior Engineer Moghadam
confirmed that while further specificity with respect to the cause of accidents could have
been analyzed, closure of the median would thoroughly address the cause of accidents.
While not disputing the overall effectiveness of the median closure, Mr. Davis advised
that there may be alternate improvements that would address the specific movements
impacting the accidents; relayed that while GMS's intent is to work with the City in order
to address the accident issues, the preference would be to utilize an incremental
approach to additional modifications in order to implement on-site modifications
necessary for the revised access to the site; for Commissioner Telesio, reiterated the
benefit of evaluating the traffic circulation after the signal improvements are compete,
noting the difficulty to design on-site improvements without the aforementioned
evaluation.
In response to the Commission's querying with respect to the installation of signage
allowing only right-ins and right-outs (suggested by the representative from GMS),
Senior Engineer Moghadam noted that the signage would be legally enforceable if the
City Council approved a Resolution associated with the matter; and advised that the
signage would not be as effective as closure of the median.
Mr. Gary Smith, representing GMS Realty, relayed GMS's intent to address the
accident issues at the Center; noted that the on-site circulation was not designed to
accommodate closure of the median, relaying the difficulties associated with re-design of
the on-site circulation if the median would be closed; recommended development of a
committee encompassed of City representatives, tenants, and the associated parties, in
order to adequately address the matter; reiterated that the Las Colinas signalization and
the alternate proposed signal improvements would significantly affect traffic circulation;
and relayed that there may be additional negative traffic impacts associated with closure
of the median.
Ms. Kathy Kuper, presenting GMS Realty, was available for questions from the
Commission.
Mr. Owen Wickstrand, representing GMS Realty, reiterated the recommendation to
conduct a traffic study after the completion of the signal improvements in order to
analyze the traffic patterns; for Commissioner Connerton, clarified the rationale for not
utilizing the security personnel to direct on-site traffic; and noted the intent of GMS to
address the traffic impact.
Commissioner Edwards advised that the proposed ~mprovements (per agenda material)
would not alleviate the left-turn movements at the Center.
Mr. Wickstrand relayed that the improvements would provide provision for safe turning
movements,
Mr, Davis advised that with respect to egress from the site, that if provision of a
convenient alternative were installed, most drivers would utilize the safer movement
provisions.
Ms. Linda McDonald, 38925 Calle Breve, expressed her comments, as follows:
1) recommended not delaying the project in order to conduct additional studies,
3
TraffCornmlminutes1082699
2) relayed her concurrence with staff to close the median, and 3) noted the
ineffectiveness of solely installing signs to direct traffic.
In response to Commissioner Telesio's comments, Mr. Smith relayed that the Rancho
California Road exits are utilized at this point in time due to established traffic patterns;
for Chairman Coe, noted the variance between originally developing a site plan
restricting left-turn movements, and modifying an existing site to accommodate the
prohibition of left-turn movements.
For Commissioner Edwards, Senior Engineer Moghadam provided additional information
regarding the egress onto Ynez Road.
In response to Commissioner Markham's comments, Senior Engineer Moghadam
provided additional information regarding the funding for the design and installation of
the improvements in the area of discussion.
In conclusion, Mr. Wickstrand reiterated GMS's desire to implement the modifications
incrementally due to the desire to conduct studies and the concern with respect to the
tenants and the customers.
In response to Chairman Coe's querying, Acting Director of Public Works Hughes
relayed that if funding was available, the earliest date for initiation of the median closure
project would be three months, relaying the process of preparation of plans, presentation
to the City Council, authorization to go out for bid, and the final awarding of the contract;
advised that the construction most likely not begin until the beginning of 2000.
Senior Engineer Moghadam provided additional information regarding construction of
this particular project in conjunction with the eastbound additional lane project, which
would be installed after the Duck Pond Project is complete.
In response to the Commissioner's desire to postpone the Median Closure Project until
the first of the year, Senior Engineer Moghadam advised that it most likely would not be
constructed prior to that time.
For Commissioner Edwards, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the signal
modification would most likely take place at the beginning of November; and
recommended that the Center implement the proposed on-site channeling of the right
turn at the Target driveway during the interim period.
The Commission relayed their concluding comments, as follows:
Commissioner Markham relayed that since this matter had been discussed for two
years, that if GMS had a desire to conduct further studies with respect to the issue
of median closure, the study should have been addressed prior to this point in time;
noted his concern associated with the accidents in the area; relayed that the
Center's seven driveways provide adequate access to the site; advised that in his
opinion, closure of the median would not have a significant negative effect on the
Center; and relayed his support of staff recommendation, with the additional
recommendation to immediately create a protected left movement into the Center
at the two driveways, restricting the left-turn outs.
4
TraffComrn/minutes/082699
Commissioner Connerton advised that some mitigating measures should have
been provided by the Center prior to this time, and relayed his support of staff
recommendation with the additional modification recommended by Commissioner
Markham.
Relaying concurrence with Commissioner Connerton's comments, Commissioner
Telesio relayed the safety benefits the median closure would provide; and noted his
concurrence with staff recommendation,
Commissioner Edwards relayed her concurrence with GMS's goal to provide
safety; noted the asset the site maintains with respect to the number of access
points at the site; and in an effort to protect the residents, relayed her support of the
closure of the median, noting that she was of the opinion that the closure would not
be significantly detrimental to the Center.
Chairman Coe relayed that the lack of improvements within the Center was due to
alternate factors, specifying the ownership change; noted that it was his opinion
that the closure's provision for safe turning movements would not affect the Center
negatively due to the vast opportunities the site maintains for access; and
recommended installation of signage to direct drivers to the safe exits in an effort to
change the established traffic patterns.
MOTION: Commissioner Connerton moved to approve staff recommendation, and to
implement Commissioner Markham's recommendation. Commissioner Edwards
seconded the motion. (This motion was ultimately amended.)
Commissioner Markham provided additional clarification regarding his recommendation
to immediately install into the median center (within the public right-of-way) provision for
protected left-turn movements; and recommended that the median closure project not
begin construction until after the Christmas season.
MOTION: Commissioner Connerton moved to approve staff recommendation to close
the median island located on Rancho California Road at the Claim Jumper and Target
Center driveways; and to install as soon as possible provision for left-turn movements
into the median center (within the public right-of way); and to postpone construction of
the median closure project until after the Christmas season. Commissioner Edwards
seconded the motion and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT
For Commissioner Connerton, Commissioner Markham provided additional
information regarding the Circulation Update, noting that it would be presented to
the Commission at the September 9, 1999 meeting.
Be
Commissioner Markham commended staff for their diligent efforts with respect to
the provision of the action log included in the agenda material.
POLICE CHIEF'S REPORT
No comments.
TraffComm/minutes1082699
FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT
No comments.
COMMISSION REPORTS
In response to Commissioner Markham's querying with respect to safety
associated with the Duck Pond Project regarding the lack of provision of a
guardrail, and the depth of the pond, Acting Director of Public Works Hughes
relayed that sand was brought in to fill the pond in order to assure that the depth
of the pond would remain shallow; noted that lifesaving devices would be
installed on the perimeter of the pond; and for Commissioners Coe and
Connerton, advised that the matter of placing fish in the pond is being considered
by the Community Services Department.
With respect to Commissioner Telesio's comments regarding the flashing beacon
lights at the school site, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the County is
currently maintaining the lights, noting the ultimate plan to have the lights
maintained by the City.
For informational purposes, Commissioner Telesio relayed the unsafe turning
movements being made at the Rancho Car Wash Center.
In response to Commissioner Telesio's comments, Commissioner Markham
noted that there is a partially funded median for future installation at the
previously aforementioned location.
Commissioner Edwards relayed that due to the construction at the commercial
center of Margarita Road and Pauba Road, and the associated removal of the
right lane of travel, Pauba Road is heavily impacted; and recommended that
police officers direct traffic during peak traffic hours in that area.
For Commissioner Edwards, Police Deputy Leggett noted that he would relay the
Commission's request.
For informational purposes, Commissioner Edwards relayed the City Council's
recent decision temporarily install traffic circles and pylons in the Via Cordoba
area in an effort to address the speed of traffic, and to study the effectiveness of
the installations.
In response the Commissioner Edwards comments, Acting Director of Public
Works Hughes noted that the previously mentioned installations would be
installed temporarily while staff investigates permanent solutions in an attempt to
act proactively with respect to the issues of concern in the area.
Commissioner Edwards relayed that at her recent attendance of the Wolf Valley
Workshop, residents expressed their concern with respect to the traffic impact
associated with the project, specifically regarding Via Cordoba
TraffComm/minutes/082699
Commissioner Markham relayed that the Wolf Valley Project will be brought
before the Planning Commission at the September 1, 1999 Planning Commission
meeting.
In response to Commissioner Edwards's request, Acting Director of Public Works
Hughes relayed that staff would make efforts to schedule a mall tour for
interested Commissioners.
In response to Chairman Coe's comments regarding the parking at the red
curbing at Margarita High School, Police Deputy Liggett provided additional
information; and noted that he would relay the Commission's observations with
respect to drivers making illegal U-turn movements in that area.
Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that red curbing signifies no parking at any
time.
Due to Commission request, Acting Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that
staff would investigate the aforementioned red-curbed area.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:55 P.M. Chairman Coe formally adjourned this meeting to Thursday, September 9,
1999 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Chairman Charles Coe
Administrative Secretary Anita Pyle
ITEM NO. 2
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
AGENDA REPORT
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic
September 9, 1999
Item 2
Request for Occasinnal Exception to the Parking Restriction - Temeku Drive
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Satbty Commission deny a request to allow overflow on-street parking on Temeku
Drive during certain events.
BACKGROUND:
The City received a letter from the Temeku Hills Management Company requesting that the City consider
establishing a procedure to allow overflow on-street parking on Temeku Drive, which is currently posted as
"No Parking - Bike Lane".
As indicated in the attached letter (Exhibit "B"), during large events the on-site parking is not adequate to
accommodate the visitors' parking demand. Therefore, overflow on-street parking occurs on the adjacent
residential streets causing an inconvenience to the homeowners as well as the visitors. It should be noted that
the City has not received any complaints from the nearby homeowners.
Since the City will not have control over the procedures outlined in the letter, and by allowing parking on bike
lanes will unnecessarily be exposed to liability, staff recommends that this request be denied and if on-street
parking is needed, the bike lane signing and striping will have to be removed in the vicinity of the clubhouse.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachment:
1. Exhibit "A" - Location Map
2. Exhibit "B" - Letter from Temeku Hills Management Company
EXHIBIT A
LOC~T~aN ~k~
EXHIBIT "B"
Temeku Hills Master Association
Procedures for Large Events with Parking Overflow
Purpose:
Procedures:
The following procedures have been developed in order to accommodate overflow
parking when either a golf course or auditorium event (or both) will result in the
number of vehicles of attendees exceeding the capacity of the parking lot. Since
Temeku Drive is posted as a "No Parking" area. this has forced attendees in the past
to park on the private streets around the clubhouse which has sometimes delayed
mail delivery to the homeowners and has an inconvenience to both the homeowners
and the attendees. The procedures outlined below will allow parking on Temeku
Drive which should reduce, if not eliminate, this problem.
The Banquet Director shall require from all groups renting the auditorium an
estimate of the nu nber of vehicles that will be attending the event.
The Golf Course Operator shall advise the Banquet Directors of all special
events that will increase the number of vehicles needing parking related to the
golf course.
The Banquet Director will keep a running tally of the anticipated number of
vehicles on a daily basis thai will be using the golf and dubhouse lhcilities.
When the total number of vehicles exceeds the parking lot capacity by 10%
then the Clubhouse Director will take the remaining action listed below.
A letter will be sent to the City of Temecula, City Manager's office the City
of Temecula Police Department and the City of Temecula Fire Department
notifying them of the day/dates when overflow parking is anticipated.
The bags which have been purchased by the ,Association shall be placed over
the "No Parking" signs on both sides of Temeku Drive the morning of the
event no earlier than 6:00 a.m.
The bags will be removed ti*om the signs no later than 4 hours al~er the event
ends or 8:00 a.m. the following morning if the event end a/ler 8:00 p.m.
ITEM NO. 3
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
AGENDA REPORT
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
~)Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic
September 9, 1999
Item 3
Request tbr Street Closure - Calle Pina Colada
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission deny a request to close Calle Pina Colada west of Salt River Court.
BACKGROUND:
At the meeting of April 29, 1999, the Public/Traffic Sat~ty Commission received a staff report that
summarized the Commission and City Council's past actions regarding the issue of speeding, speed
undulations, and potential street closure on Calle Pina Colada. The Commission reaffirmed staff's
recommendation that the speed undulations tin Calle Pina Colada remain in place until after the completion
of the Meadowview Circulation Study. Subsequently a request was received from Mr. Dennis Bueschel,
representing the Ridgeview Homeowners Association, to install a barrier on Calle Pina Colada between the
Meadowview and Ridgeview communities. The residents and representatives of the Ridgeview Homeowners
Association have been notified of the Public/Traffic Satiety Commission's consideration of this issne through
the agenda notification process.
Calle Pina Colada functions as a residential collector street providing direct access between La Serena Way
and Del Rey Road to approximately 50 dwelling units in Ridgeview and 14 dwelling units in Meadowview.
Based on the number of homes that access Calle Pina Colada and trip generation rates established by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) fi~r single family dwelling units, an Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
volume of approximately 640 can be expected along Calle Pina Colada. Traffic w~lume data collected in
March 1999, indicates that the ADT on Calle Pina Colada is approximately 1,600. Although the traffic
volumes indicate there is some "cut-through" traffic, the traffic volumes on Calle Pina Colada are consistent
with those found on other City streets that are primarily residential collectors.
The Caltrans Traffic Manual indicates that Multi-Way Stop controls may be useti. d at locations where the
volume of traffic tin intersecting roads is approximately equal and/or where a combination of high speeds,
restricted sight distance and an accident history indicates that the assignment of right-of-way is necessary.
Multi-Way controls are recommended where there is strong evidence that overall traffic safety can be
improved and should not be used to control vehicle speeds. An evaluation of traffic conditions akmg Calle
Pina Colada revealed that Multi-Way Stop controls are not justified at any of the intersecting streets.
In the past six years, speed studies conducted along Calle Pina Colada have resulted in very similar 85~n
percenttie speeds. In 1993 prior to the installation of speed undulations the 85~ percenttie speed along Calle
Pina Colada was approximately 31 MPH. Subsequent studies performed in 1994, 1998, and 1999 revealed
85~h percenttie speeds between 27 MPH and 29 MPH. The results of the studies indicate that the speed
undulations have been efti~ctive at reducing vehicle speeds along Calle Pina Colada. Moreover, the speeds
observed on Calle Pina Colada are consistent with vehicle speeds observed on other City streets that are
primarily residential collectors.
In addition to the studies conducted, staff was asked to develop alternatives to the closure of Calle Pina Colada
including the possibility of constructing a bypass roadway within the Metropolitan Water District's facility
easement located east of Calle Pina Colada between La Serena Way and Del Rey Road. At the meeting of
April 29, 1999, staff presented a relyart that identified two potential alignment alternatives and associated costs.
Staff was directed to continue analyzing the alignment alternatives and include the analysis of the bypass
roadway in the Meadowview Circulation Study. A further analysis of the construction alternatives revealed
that the cost to implement the roadway improvements is prohibitive and not likely to provide a great benefit
to the overall toototing public and the Ridgeview homeowners.
Residents commonly express concerns alyaut excessive vehicle speeds and volumes on nearly every residential
street in the City of Temecula. A solution expressed by residents is the closure of the street to control vehicle
speeds and volumes. To that end, the City of Temecula has developed a Policy for the Closure or
Modification of Traffic Flows on Public Streets. The policy includes the criteria that must be satisfied when
considering a street closure or modification of the traffic flow on lmblic streets. The policy indicates that a
closure may be effective at localtuns where the traffic volumes exceed 2,000 ADT and an engineering safety
study indicates that the proposed closure will not create nnreasonable traffic volumes on streets that may be
impacted by diverted traffic. It is staff's opinion that the permanent closure uf Calle Pina Colada would divert
traffic to other neighborhoods and adversely impact ad.}acent streets such as Avenkla Barca.
The residents along Avenida Barca have also expressed their upposition to any type of clusure or traffic flow
modification un Calle Pina Colada. They are cancerned that the closure will lbrce motorists to travel on
Avenida Barca to access Margarita Road, La Serena Way and Rancho Calitbrnia Road. Other concerns cited
are that Avertida Barca is nattower that Calle Pina Colada, does not have sidewalks, consists of hills and
curves, and has a great deal of school-age pedestrian traffic.
A closure alternative prupo~d by Mr. Dennis Bueschel is to install a barrier that eft~ctively limits the roadway
operation to "one-way" between the Meadowview and Ridgeview communities. The proposed barrier shown
in Exhibit "G" would be located just north of Salt River Court on Calle Pina Colada. Typically, these types
of half-street closures are lbund at intersections and would not be used at mid-block locations. This type of
barrier has been fi~und to reduce through traffic in one direction, allow two-way traffic on remainder of the
street, provide additional landscape area, and at intersections it provides shorter crossing distances tbr
pedestrians. The disadvantages to this type of barrier are that it limits access tbr the residents, increases trip
lengths Ibr residents, emergency vehicle access is limited, compliance with the half-clt~sure is limited and
sa/bty is tompromised. Moreover, a mid-block irkstallation as proposed in Exhibit "G" may require addi~unal
right-of-way to provide lbr a cul-de-sac style radius. For these reasons, staff does not support the use of this
type of facility at this location.
Recently the City Council recommended that Staff develop a Neighborhiked Traffic Cahning Policy as a means
of addressing concerns alx~ut excessive vehicle speeds and volumes. Ahmg with the policy the City Council
recommended the use of traffic circles on Via Ctlrdoba. Via Cordoba was chusen as a test h~cation primarily
because of the excessive traffic w~lun~es, approximately 2,400 ADT. Initially, a temporary traffic circle
pattern will be implemented using delineators in order to determine if the traffic circle is effective in reducing
vehicle speeds and volumes. The test period is expected t~ last appruximately six months. At~ter the
Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy has been adopted and the results of the Via Cordoba test have been
evaluated, traffic circles could be implemented on Calle Pina Colada, if conditions are appropriate and the
traffic circles prove to be effective.
Therefore, staff recommends the denial of the request for full or partial closure of Calle Pina Colada west of
Salt River Court.
An alternative recommendation would be that the Commission deny the request to close Calle Pina Colada
west of Salt River Court and direct staff to evaluate the tbasibilily of implementing traffic circles along Calle
Pina Colada after the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy has been adopted and the results of the Via
Cordoba have been evaluated.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachment:
I. Exhibit "A" Location Map
2. Exhibit "B" - Public/Traffic Satbty Commission Agenda Report dated April 29, 1999
3. Exhibit "C" - Calle Pina Colada Speed Survey Data
4. Exhibit "D" - Public/Traffic Safety Commission Agenda Report dated April 29, 1999
5. Exhibit "E" - Policy tbr Closure or Modification of Traffic Flow on Public Streets
6. Exhibit "F" Letters of Opposition to the Calle Pina Colada Closure
7. Exhibit *'G" - Letter from Mr. Dennis Bueschel dated May 13, 1999
EXHIBIT "A"
LOCATION MAP
CALLE PINA COLADA/
/
/
EXHIBIT "B"
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
('~Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic
April 29, 1999
Item 4
Speed Undulations - Calle Pina Colada
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission reaffirm the speed undulations on Calle Pina Colada to remain in
place until after the completion of the Meadowview Circulation Study.
BACKGROUND:
At the meeting of March 11, 1999, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission requested that shaft agendize ate
Calle Pina Colada Speed Undulation issue to determine if conditions satisfy ate criteria for the removal of the
undulations.
The issue of speeding, speed undulations. and potential closures on Calle Pina Colada has been addressed
numerous times by the Public/Traffic Safety Commission and the City Council. Eventually, the City Council
adopted the use of speed undulations on Calle Pina Colada between Del Rey Road and La Serena Way at their
meeting of September 14, 1993.
Subsequently, a follow-up analysis was performed fluat included an evaluation of before and after travel
patterns, results of the public survey, and input from public service providers. The results of the analysis were
presented to the City Council at the roecling of March 22, 1994. The before and after evaluation revealed that
the traffic volumes increased by approximately twenty-four (24) vehicles per day but, average vehicle speeds
were re'luced by approximately four (4) miles per hour. The City Council Agenda report is atlached as
Exhibit 'A".
At their meeting of April 5, 1994, the City Council considered the recommendation to increase the height of
the speed undulations on Calle Pina Colaria from two inches (2") to atree inches (3"). The proposed height
incre, ase was in response to public concern of sporadic incidence of motorists violating the posted speed limit
of fifteen 115) miles per hour. The City Council denied the height increase to allow shaft the opportunity to
research the Calle Pina Colada Bypass route along the Metropolitan Water District easement between La
Serena Way and Del Rey Road.
On January. 5, 1999, Staff received a petition requesting ate closure of Calle Pina Colada west of Salt River
Court. The request was presented to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission at the March 11, 1999, meeting.
Prior to the meeting a comprehensive speed and volume study was conducted by Counts Unlimited, Inc., an
independent data collection firm. The study revealed that the 85~h percenfile speed on Calle Pina Colada is
approximately twenty-nine (29) miles per hour. This speed is consistera with vehicle speeds observed in 1994,
afier the installation of the speed undulations. This data suggests that the speed undulations have provided an
eftEctive means of maintaining a speed limit that is considered both reasonable and prudent by motorists ttsthg
Calle Pina Colada.
lnso3thr as the removal of the speed undulations, the City's policy allows the removal of the undulations when
the following conditions are satisfied:
1. Undulations are ineffective in reducing speeds and volumes of vehicles.
2. Undulations were placed in locations conflicting with adopted guidelines.
3. There is evidence that the original location is no longer in the best interest of the community.
4. There is a petition with 65% of residents in favor of removal.
5. Undulations have been installed for at least two (2) years.
Removal of undulations which have been installed less than two (2) years will onJy be considered if the City
is colnpensated by those requesting the removal for the full cost of the original installation, including design,
construction and inspection.
Since speed data indicates the undulations have been somewhat effective at reducing vehicle speeds and the
cost tbr the removal of the undulations would be borne by the City, Staff suggests that the speed undulations
on Calle Pina Colada remain in place until the Meadowview Circulation Study has been completed.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Anachmen~s:
1. Exhibit "A' Location Map
2. Exhibit ~B" City Council Agenda Report dated March 24, 1993
3. Exhibit ~C" Speed Undulation Policy
4. Exhibit "D" Calle Pina Colada Speed Survey dated March 9, 1999
EXHIBIT "A" - LOCATION MAP
EXHIBIT "B"
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
March 22, 1994
Speed Undulations - Follow-Up Report
PREPARED BY: Marty Lauber, Traffic Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and File.
BACKGROUND:
As a follow-up to the installation of speed undulations on Calle PiCa Colada, the Traffic
Division of the Public Works Department has complied the following information. Our research
is broken down into three distinct areas:
Travel Patterns - Before and After
Speed Undulation - Public Survey Results
input from Public Service Providers
Travel patterns on Calle PiCa Colada have been compared using count and speed data.
Our data shows a two direction, 24 hour volume of 1425 prior to the installation of
speed undulations and 1449 after. Radar speed studies conducted indicated an
average critical speed of 33 mph before and 29 mph after. Speeds were taken
between both Bravos Court/Yuba Circle and Del Rey/Salt River Court and averaged to
represent the change over the complete roadway link. This represents an average
decrease in speeds of 4 mph during off peak (unrestrained) periods.
Public input surveys (93 Total) were distributed to all property owners fronting Calle
PiCa Colada, Salt River Court, Yuba Circle and Bravos Court. These are the same
properties that were required to provide 65% signatures in favor of the installation of
speed undulations. Thirty-seven (37) surveys were returned, which re~re:'ent
approximately 40% response.
Exhibit "A" is a copy of the survey and the number of responses received for each question.
Questions 3 through 5 reflect responses from those people who live on Calle PiCa Colada.
Resident perceptions indicate a feeling that speeds have remained the same or decreased, that
r:\agdr0t%94~O322\spaeclunds.fu0 03/08/94skg
traffic volumes have remained the same and that noise has stayed the same or increased.
Those surveyed were evenly split between the benefit or detriment of installing this type of
residential traffic control. Those surveyed also felt that the height of the undulation was too
low to be most effective. It should be noted that the height of the undulations was modified
to eliminate the possibility of the School District diverting their buses to another residential
street.
Additional comments received regarding citizen perceptions included:
- Cars speed between undulations
- Undulations are an eye sore, ugly
- Sporadic thrill seekers grossly violate speed limit
- Undulations are ineffective at high speeds
- Undulations are detrimental to car maintenance
- Drivers try to avoid undulation by driving in gutter
- Kids use undulations as play toy
In order to gage the complete impacts of speed undulations, staff also solicited input
from all related public service providers.
The Police Department observed vehicles hugging the curbline in order to avoid hitting the
undulations with both sides of their car. They have also worked radar after installation and
have cited very few drivers because of conformance to the posted speed limit. The School
District, Fire Department, Public Works Maintenance Division, and Solid Waste Haulere all
responded by stating the undulations did not create a significant problem for their operations.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachment:
Exhibit "A" - Calle PiCa Colada Speed Undulation Survey Results
CALLE PINA COLADA SPEED UNDULATION SURVEY
January 1994
The Traffic Engineering Division of the City of Temecula's Public Works Department is
conducting a follow-up evaluation of the speed undulations recently installed on Calle PiCa
Colada. Please take a few minutes to fill out the attached survey and return to my office.
Thank you.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
I live on:
[ 19 ] Calle Pina Colada
[ 16 ] Other street. Name:
If you live on Calle Pina Colada, is a speed undulation directly in front of your house?
[ 12 ] Yes [ 7 ] No, number of houses away
Since the installation of the speed undulations, vehicle speeds on my street have:
[ 6 ] decreased | 11 ] stayed the same [ 4 ] increased
Since the installation of the speed undulations, the amount of traffic on my street has:
[ 2 ] decreased [ 17 ] stayed the same [ 3 ] increased
Since the installation of the speed undulations, the noise of traffic on my street has:
[ 3 ] decreased [ 9 ] stayed the same
The installation of the road humps has had:
[ 10 ] an overall beneficial impact
[ 9 ] no impact
[ 11 ] an overall negative impact
I feel that the height of the road humps are:
[ 2 ] too high [ 12 ] just right
increased
[ la, ] too low
8) Any additional comments?
Please complete survey and return to City of Temecula, Public Works Department, 43174
Business Park Dr., Temecula, CA 92590 by February 1, 1994. Thank you for your
participation in this survey.
r:~sgdrpt~94~0322\$peedunds.ful} 03/08/94skg
EXHIBIT "C"
SPEED UNDULATION POLICY
Prior to
criteria:
the construction of a speed undulation, the subject street seelion shall meet the following
A 'speed undulatio~ petition" signed by at least sixty percent (60%) of the affected residents
Ih~li be filed with the Cit~ of Ternacute Department of Public Works, Traffic Engineering
Division.
The average traffic shall range between 1,200 - 2,500 vehicles in a twenty*four (24) hour
The siDeed limit shall be no greater than twenty-five (25) mph as determined by State law.
At least sixty percent (60%) of the surveyed vehicles are exceeding the twenty-five (25) mph
speed limit. ,
The subject street:
e. Shall not be over forty (40} feet wide, unless aiDproved by City Engineer.
b, Shall not be more than two (2) traffic lanes.
c. Shall not have s grade greater than five percent (5%) in the section where humps are
to be constructed,
d. Shall be at least one quarter ('A) mile in length.
e. Shall not have severe vertical or horizontal alignment feat~Jres.
f. Shall not be a truck route or transit route.
g. .qhall not be an important access route for emergency vehicles.
h. Shp',l not be listed on the City Circulation Plan, unless sOproved by City Engineer.
The distance between undulations shall range between 200 - 250 feet.
Unddmions shall not normally be constructed in isolated blocks along a continuous street or
on · rlatively short ( < $0 0'} cul-de-sac.
UndulatiOns shall be constructed per the City of Temecula Standard Drawings.
Undulations are still experimental roadway features; therefore, additions, alternations or
removal of any hump may occur at any time.
pwOl%traffi=~$pedhurnp.cri fau1021193
Speed Undulation Policy
Page 2
Changing the location of undulations on a street, or the removal of undulations, may be
considered when all the findings listed below are made by the Commission:
Relocation of Undulations
1. Undulations are ineffective in reducing speeds and volumes of vehicles.
2. Undulations were placed in a location conflicting with adopted guidelines.
3. There is evidence that the original location is no longer in the best interest of the
community.
4. There is a petition signed by at least sixty-five percent (65%) of the affected
property owners in favor of relocation.
Removal of Undulations
1. Undulations are ineffective in reducing speeds and volumes of vehicles.
2. Undulations were placed in a location conflicting with adopted guidelines.
3. There is evidence that the original location is no longer in the best interest of the
community.
4. There is a petition signed by at least sixty-five percent (65%} of the affected
property owners in favor of removal.
5. Undulations have been installed for at least two (2) years.
Removal of undulations which have been installed for less than two years will only be
considered if the City is compensated by those requesting removal for the full cost of the
original installation, including design, construction and inspection.
The original installation and maintenance of the undulations will be financea cs all other
signs, striping and pavement features.
pwOB\traffic\unaulatn~sl~clund
EXHIBIT "D"
CALLE PIMA COLADA M/O
2~ ]R SPEED SURVEY
12:!5
~2:i0
i2:43
lout Total
:::15
~our Total
C2:00
32:15
02:]0
~our
G3:19
~3:30
:3:45
Hour Total
am
G4:15
04:30
34:45
Eour Total
35:00
~s:i5
US:SO
~5:~
Hour
06:20 am 2 0 0 C O
36:L5 2 O 0
36:30 6 I I i 2
:S:45 5 O 0 2 2
Hour To~a] 15 2 ! 3 5
;7:OO am 23 0 2 ~ 4
27:15 33 0 5 15 7
:7:3C 21 2 6 0 4
C7:45 12 0 ! 2 8
Ecur .... 33
· ~, 89 2 14 23
OR'^n am 9 1 i 5 2
[ 13 ~ i 7 4
~our Total 58 2 14 l] 18
909.247.6716
3d 41 46 51
0 O 0 Q C
0 O O 0 0
Start Dace:
File I.D.:
Page
61 66 7I 7~
0 C 0 0 0
O 0 0 0
O 0 O 0
0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 ~
0 0 0 O 0 a 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O Q 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0
O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
i 0 0 U 0 0 0 a 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 O 0 0
0 O 0 O 0 "~ 0 0 0 0
0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
0 O O O 0 0 0 {3 0 0
0 0 C O 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 O
0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 ~ O
0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
] 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
7 2 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 O 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
0 I 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0
1 0 0 0 O 0 0 O a 0
i4 3 0 0 O 0 0 0 : 0
2 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 O
1 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 O 0
I 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 O
5 0 O 0 C 0 0 ~ 0 0
0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0
0 O 0 0 O O 0 O 0 O
0 O 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O
0 O 0 U 0 0 0 U 0 0
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
O O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0
0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O
0 i O 0 0 0 O 0 0 O
Hegxu int. 0- 16
Ttze Total 15 20
09:00 a~ 8 O
09:~5 12 ~ 4
09:30 7 ; ~
09;~5 6 ;
Hour To[ai ]3 2 N
909.241.G716
MASTBOUNU
21 26 31 36 4Z 46 51 56 61
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
4 2 0 1 0 2 0 D 0
4 2 2 0 0 0 U 0 O
2 2 0 0 0 0 : 0 U
2 0 2 0 Q 0 ; 3 O
I2 6 4 1 0 0 0 0 O
70
0
File 1.3.: TKPCiUDi
hoe : 2
71 76
0
O 0
0 0
02:00 p; 5 C i 1 3 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0
02:15 29 C 5 14 5 5 0 O 3 0 O 0 0 0 0
02:30 15 ~ 5 4 5 I 0 0 O O 0 O O O O
02:45 22 5 12 2 O ~ 0 0 O 0 0 0
Hour Tonal 74 15 24 25 8 O C 0 0 O O 0 O
03:00 pm 26 1 6 9 10 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0
03:15 22 2 4 6 3 5 2 0 G U 0 0 0 O ~
OO:t0 15 O 3 7 ] 2 0 0 O O 0 O 0 O O
03:45 25 ~ 2 l! 6 2 i 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 3
HOur Total 68 3 15 36 22 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
34:00 p~ 21 I 4 3 6 i 0 0 C 0 0 O 0 0 0
04:15 25 3 ~ ;0 ? 1 0 0 0 U O O 0 D 0
24:30 27 O 5 8 11 3 O 0 C 0 O 0 0 Q 0
~4:45 19 O 4 9 3 2 ~ 0 O 3 0 0 0 0 Q
Hour T;~al 92 20 36 27 7 : 0 0 i U 0 0 0 0
05:00 pm 15 3 5 3 d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D
35:15 23 ] 8 9 ] O O O 3 0 0 0 0 0 O
05:30 23 O ] !2 4 2 0 2 3 ~ 0 0 0 0 ;
05:45 17 c 7 5 4 0 I 0 ~ 0 0 O 3 O 0
Hour Total 78 4 23 29 15 2 i 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
01:00 pm 7 i 2
01:15 11 G 3
01:30 17 1 4
01:t5 8 2
Hour Total 43 2 8
3 1 0 0 0
5 5 2 0 O
] 2 0 0 O
12 14 6 0 O
12:00 pm !5 i 3 5 i 2 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 O
:2:15 4 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
12:30 4 I 0 1 I 1 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0
12:15 1~ 0 1 1O t 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 U Q 0
Hour Total 39 2 4 I9 ~ 5 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O O
~ 0 {] 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
O 0 0 0 0 0
O 0 O 0 O ~
1!:00 a{ 11 2 3 4 2 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:15 5 O 2 3 ~ O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0
if:30 15 I 4 3 4 2 i 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 ~
11;45 8 O 2 ] 2 I 0 0 3 O 0 0 0 0 ~
Hour Total 39 3 11 13 B 3 1 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 D
loT00 a= 7 C 2 2 I 2 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 :
10:~5 9 0 i 3 { 0 1 0 C 0 0 0 0 O 0
10:]0 2 0 i 0 ' 0 O 0 3 0 0 0 O O O
10:45 6 I 0 2 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Tcnal 24 1 4 7 9 2 I 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
CALLE PINA COLADA H/O ~"~ REY RCAD
224 RR SPENI] SUI{VLv
T~e Total 13 20 25 ]0 35
C~:OO pm 20 4 5 7 2
C6:iS 19 0 S 8 4 0
06:30 11 : 4 5 1
06:45 II ; 2 4 2 l
Haur Totu[ 61 I 12 21 18 6
07:00 pm 19 0 3 lO { 0
07:15 21 1 ] 6 8 2
0730 10 0 5 4 ! 0
270~5
~our Total
08:00 pm G 2 1 2 0
08015 9 0 ] 4 i 1
:8:30 S ~ 0 4 1 ]
080~5 lO C 3 ] 2 1
Hour Total 34 1 8 12 6 5
39000 pm 8 0 0 ~ t 0
09015 7
09:30 lO 0 ] 1 1 5
09:85 6 ~ 0 8 2 0
Eo~r Total 31 0 ] 9 i1 8
h pm 2 0 0 1 0
i3015 5 I O I ] 0
10:]0 ] 0 O 1 1 0
ID045 i 3 0 : 0 O
~our Total 11 2 0 ] 5 0
n00o p= 1 o o 3 o
lh;5 i 3 0 0 !
If:SO 2 0 0 I 1 0
Hour To~al 4 0 0 I 2 1
Day Totals 879 31 !74 31~ 23S 92
To;al 879 34 174 31~ 238 92
Soeed Statzstics.
15oh Perceecile Speed : 17 MP8
Median Speed {SOth percentlle}: 21 MPH
Average Speed · All Vehicles: 2l MPH
HBth Percentile Speed : 29 MPR
95tlz Perceegile Speed : 33 MPH
I~ M~E Pace Speed : 21-30 MPH
Number of vehicles in Pace: 554
Percent of Vehicles zn Pace: 63,11t
Num"er uf Vehicles > 55 NPH : 0
Percent of VehzcZes > 55 MPH: 00t
909.247.6714 Start Date: o3/o)/te
File I.D.: TEPCMOUR
~ASTBOUND Page : 3
J6 41 &6 5~ S6 61 ~4 71 7~
40 45 50 55 ~0 65 70 ~5 9999
I 3 O 0 0 0 0 C O
2 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0
0 3 O O O O 0 3 0
O ~ 0 0 O 0 3 G 0
3 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0
2 G ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0
0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0
0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
] 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 O 0 0 G 0
0 3 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 O 0 0 0 0 0 O O
2 3 0 O O G 0 :) 0
0 3 0 0 0 0 0 O 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 O 0 O 0 ~ 0
0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
O {3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3 O 0 0 0 0 O 0
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 ~ I 0 0 0 O O 0
0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 G 0 0 O 0 0 3 O
0 0 : 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
0 ~* O 0 0 0 0 ~ 0
O 0 0 O G 0 O 0 0
21 2 I 1 ' *
2I 2 I 1 0 0 0 0 0
Heglo ht. O- 16 21 26 3:
:2:00 03/09 C 3 0 3 0 C
L~:~5 0 C 0 D 0 O
Eour Total : O 0 : 0 - 0
:l:0D am
Ca:IS
Ca:t0
01:45
Hour Total
32:00 a~ 2 0 D 0 D
22:30 0 0 D 3 D
32:45 0 0 0 D O
Ecur Total 0 0 O O 0
33:00 am
Bout Total
~4:00 am
04:15
04:30
Q4:45
Hour Total
C5:00 am
35:15
95:45
8our Total
C6:00 am
06:15
96:45
~our Total
37.15 11 0 I 6 5
07:30 21 0 ] 5 8
C7:4S l) 0 ] 9 ~
Eour Tot;l 68 0 ? 29 2o
3B:DO am 15 0
38:15 15
~S:45
H~ur Total 72 0 !1 2G 29
909.247.6716
WHTBOUNB
O O 3 0 0 O
3 0 O 0 3 0
C 0 0 0 0 0
0
Start Date:
PaVe :
O 0
0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0
i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
0 0 3 0 O 0 O 0 0 0
0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0
O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 O 0 O 0 0 3 O 0
0 3 0 O 0 3 0 0 0 0
0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 3
I 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
! 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0
] 3 1 0 0 0 O O 0 0
¢ O i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
i 2 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0
i O O 0 0 0 0 3 0 C
3 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
] .n 0 O 0 ~" 0 0 0 0
8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O
I 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
3 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
2 i O 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
3 2 O 0 0 0 1 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
O O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
0 n O O 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 O 0 C O 0 O 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 D O O 0 : 0 G 0 0
D O O 0 ~ 0 0 3 O O
O 0 3 0 0 0 0 O 0 O
0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
5e~,~ In:, C- 16 2I 26
T:~e Total
9900C am 3 0 I 2
09015 lI 0 1 G 4
090]C ]
09'45 tO 1 1 ] ]
Hour Total 27 i ) 12 g
lO:O: n
IO:15 13 0 3 4
10030 6 C 2
10045 8 1 ] ] 1
Hour Total 36 1
lh~O ae 9 0 : ] 4
11.15 7 0 0 4 ]
11030 10 I 4 2 1
!1045 ]0 2 5 !1 2
Hour Total 46 ] 11 20 l~
12:00 ps 9 0 2 5 2
12:15 II 0 2 ~ 2
I2:3~ 15 0 4 5 G
12:45 3 0 ~ 2 5
Bout To:al 44 0 9 1N 15
01015 ll 0 2 J 2
01030 12 ~ 2 6 4
01045 I1 0 4 6 1
Hour Total 40 1 g 2I lO
02:00 pm ]0 0 3 4 3
c2015 i0 i ] 4 1
02:]0 8 O 4 2 1
~20]5 I6 0 I 4 5
~our Total 44 1 11 14 1C
0300C pn 18 O 4 5 4
33:15 27 0 2 1]
03030 31 2 I 13 13
03:45 21 1 5 6
Hour Total 97 3 12 17 ]4
04:00 p: :5 0 I 7 5
04015 15 ~ 1 ] 6
~4033 12 1 2 3 4
04:45 20 O ] 5 6
Hour Total 62 1 7 ~8 23
0~ pm IG 0 4 7 ]
D, 15 1 ] 4 4
C50]0 25 2 4 2 ~
$5:45 16 2 3 5 4
flour T;tai 62 5 14 1~ 17
ic9.247.4716
31 26 41 46 51 56
55 40 45 50 55 60
o o o c 0 0
0 u o o o 0
G 0 o o 0 o
1 1 0 0 0 Q
i i C O 0 0
61
S~art Date: G3/091~9
File I.O.: TZPCBODR
66 71 76
7C 75 9999
G 0 O 0
3 0 0 0 '
G 0 0 0
0 0 0 U
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G
i O 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 O 0 n 0 D 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 O C O 0 0 0
2 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0
1 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I 2 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0
2 ] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
i 0 0 3 0 0 0 C 0 0
0 0 3 0 C 0 0 0 0
4 2 O 0 0 0 O 0 O 0
6 2 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
3 i C i 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 C 0 O 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 O 0 0
'- 1 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 3 0 ! 0 0 0 O 0 0
2 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 O U 0 0 0 O 0
2 0 0 O 0 C 0 0 O 0
2 i 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0
11 I D I 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
2 1 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0
7 I O 0 0 : 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0
C 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 L 0 0 0 O 3 0 0 0
U 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0
I 1 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0
i ; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
G ~ 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0
C O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O
i C 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
Time Total !5 20 25 30 35
)6=~3 pm 13 0 I 8 2
~G:i5 15 0 ~ 8 4 2
C~:3C 18 ~ O 5 ~
:~:4L 14 0 4 3 5 '
Hour TOCai 60 ~ 5 24 19 ' ~
ST:0D pm il 0 0 8 ] 3
3~:15 7 1 1 1 2 2
~7'D 12 I 2 2 6 D
G7:45 6 0 S 2 4 3
Hou~ Total 36 2 3 13 15 2
08:03 F
~8:15
Hour Total
09:00 pm 10 0 ~ 4 6 0
39:i5 6 0 O 1 ] 1
C9:30 ] 0 0 1 1 I
09:45 5 0 0 I 1 I
]our Total 24 0 O 7 11 ]
1~:15
13:30
13:45
Hour
ll:UO pm I 0 0 O 0 0
Ii:15 0 0 O 0 O O
11.33 3 0 0 0 0 O
11:45 0 0 0 O O 0
Ecur Total 1 0 O O 0 O
Day Totals 794 18 121 299 251 72
Total 75 18 121 2~9 251 72
Speed Sta:zRmcs.
15tb Percentlie Speed
NedlaD Speed (SOzl percezile
Average Speed - All Vehicles
85th Percentlie Speed
95tb Percentlie Speed
!~ MPH Pace Speed
Number or Vehicles ia Pace
Percent of Vehicles in Pace
Number o~ Vehicles ~ 55 NPB
Perce~c of Vehicles > 55 NPG:
23
25
29
34
21-30
6Lilt
2
251
40 45 50 55 60 ES
0 C 0 3 0 8
I 1 O O O 0
3 I O 0 O O
Start Date:
File I.D.:
PaQe
7:
~5 9~99
O
0
0 0 O 0 0 O 0 O C
0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 O
O 0 O 0 0 0 0 O
2 O 0 O O 0 0 0 O
I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
I 0 O 0 n 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 O 0 O : O 0
2 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C
I 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0
! 1 O O 0 O 0 0 (l
2 1 0 O 0 O 0 0 O
O I 0 0 O 0 O 0 C
O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
0 3 O 0 O 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
C 0 n 0 ~ 0 0 O
O C 3 0 G 0 O g 0
O C O 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 J -* O 0 0 O O 0
I O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0
NPE
MPH
MPE
27 4 2 , , 1
27 4 2 0 0 i 1 0 O
EXHIBIT "C"
CALLE PINA COLADA
SPEED SURVEY DATA
CItY OR TEMECULA
CALLE PINA COLADA H/O DEL
24 HR SPEED SURVEY
HEY ROAD
Begin int. 0- 16 2I 26
_Time Total 15 20 25 30
00 03/09 2 0 0 1 1
~:i5 I 0 1 O 0
I2:30 0 0 0 0 0
12:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 3 0 1 1 1
01:00 am 0 0 0 0 0
01:15 0 0 0 0 0
01:30 1 0 0 0 0
01:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 1 0 0 0 0
02:00 am 0 0 0 0 0
02:15 0 0 0 0 0
02:30 0 0 0 0 0
02:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 am 0 0 0 0 0
03:15 0 0 0 0 0
03:30 1 0 1 0 0
03:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 1 0 1 0 0
04:00 am 1 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0 0
.30 0 0 0 0 0
04:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 1 0 0 0 0
05:00 am 0 0 0 0 0
05:15 0 0 0 0 0
05:30 0 0 0 0 0
05:45 2 I 0 1 0
Hour Total 2 I 0 1 0
06:00 am 2 0 0 0 0
06:15 2 1 0 0 1
06:30 u 1 1 1 2
06:45 b 0 0 2 2
Hour Total 15 2 1 3 5
07:00 am 23 0 2 8 4
07:15 33 0 5 15 7
07:30 21 2 6 8 4
07:45 12 0 1 2 8
Hour Total 89 2 14 33 23
08:00 am 9 1 I 3 2
08:15 13 0 1 7 4
l0 26 1 8 8 8
,45 10 0 4 1 4
'~our Total 58 2 14 19 18
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC. Site Code: 159632
909.247.6716 Start Date: 03/09/99
File I.D.: TEPCEODR
HASTBOUND Page : 1
31 36 41 46 5t 56 61 66 71 76
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 9999
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CITY OF TEMECULA
CALLE PINA COLADA E/O DEL
24 HR SPEED SURVEY
ROAD
Begin Iut. 0- 16 21 26
_Time Total 15 20 25
00 am 8 1 0 4 2
u~:i5 I2 0 4 4 2
09:30 7 0 ] 2 2
09:45 6 1 1 2 0
Hour Total ]t 2 8 I2 6
10:00 am 7 0 2 2 1
10:15 9 0 1 3 4
10:30 2 0 1 0 1
10:45 6 1 0 2 3
Hour Total 24 1 4 7 9
11:00 am 11 2 3 4 2
11:15 5 0 2 3 0
11:30 15 1 4 3 4
11:45 8 0 2 ] 2
Hour Total 39 ] I1 13 8
12:00 pm 15 1 3 5 4
12:15 4 0 0 3 0
12:30 4 I 0 1 1
12:45 16 0 1 10 4
Hour Total 39 2 4 19 9
01:00 pm 7 1 2 3 I
· 15 11 0 0 1 6
.30 17 1 4 5 5
01:45 0 1 2 3 2
Hour Total 43 ] 8 12 14
02:00 pm 8 0 4 1 3
02:15 29 0 5 14 5
02:30 15 0 5 4 5
02;45 22 1 1 5 12
Hour Total 74 1 I5 24 25
03:00 pm 26 1 6 9 10
03:15 22 2 4 6 ~
03:30 15 0 3 7 3
03:45 25 0 2 14 6
Hour Total 88 3 15 36 22
04:00 pm 21 1 4 9 6
04:15 25 0 7 10 7
04:30 27 0 5 8 11
04:45 19 0 4 9 3
Hour Total 92 1 20 36 27
05:00 pm 15 I 5 3 4
05:15 23 3 8 9 3
t0 23 0 3 12 4
./40 17 0 7 5 4
Hour Total 78 6 23 29 15
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
EASTBOUND
31 36 41 46 51 56
35 40 45 50 55 60
0 1 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
4 1 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
0 I 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0
I 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 0
8 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 O 0 0
5 2 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 0
9 3 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 I 0
7 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 2 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0
2 1 2 0 0 0
61
66
70
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Site Code: 155632
Start Date: 03/09/99
File I.D.: THPCHODR
Page : 2
V1 76
75 9999
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
CITY OF TEMSCULA
CALLS PINA COLADA E/O DEL
24 RR SPEED SURVEY
REY ROAD
Begin Int. 0- 16 21 26
.Time Total 15 20 25 30
00 pm 20 1 4 5 7
~:15 19 0 5 8 4
06:30 11 0 1 4 5
06:45 11 0 2 4 2
Hour Total 61 1 i2 21 18
07:00 pm 19 0 3 I0 4
07:15 21 1 3 6 8
07:30 10 0 5 4 1
07:45 8 0 1 5 1
Hour Total 58 1 I2 25 14
08:00 pm 6 1 2 1
08:15 9 0 3 4
08:30 9 0 0 4
08:45 10 0 3 3
Hour Total 34 1 8 I2
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
09:00 pm 9 0 0 4
09:15 7 0 0 0
09:30 10 0 3 1
09:45 6 0 0 4
Hour Total 31 0 3 9
EASTBOUND
31 36 41 46 5I 56 61 66
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 pm 2 1 0 0
"'15 5 1 0 1
30 3 0 0 1
10:45 I 0 0 1
Hour Total 11 2 0 3
Site Code: 155632
Start Date: 03/09/99
File I.D.: TEPCEODR
Page : 3
71 76
75 9999
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
11:00 pm 1 0 0 0
11:i5 1 0 0 0
11:30 2 0 0 1
11:45 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 4 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Day Totals 879 34 174 316 238 92 21 2 1 1
Total 879 34 174 316 238 92 2I 2 1 I 0 0 0 0 0
Speed Statistics.
15th Percentlie Speed
Median Speed (50th percentlie
Average Speed - All Vehicles
85th Percentlie Speed
95th Percentlie Speed
10 MPR Pace Speed
Number of Vehicles in Pace
Percent of Vehicles in Pace
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPH
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH:
17
23
24
29
33
21-30
554
63.11%
0
.00{
I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
MPN
MPR
MPH
MPE
MPH
MPH
, , t ,
0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CITY OF TEMECULA
CALLE PINA COLADA E/O DEL
24 ~R SPEED SURVEY
EEY ROAD
Begin Int. 0- 16 21 26
Time Total 15 20 25 30
00 03/09 0 0 0 0 0
,~:15 0 0 0 0 0
12:30 0 0 0 0 0
12:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 0 0 0 0 0
01:00 am 0 0 0 0 0
01:15 1 0 0 1 0
01:30 0 0 0 0 0
01:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 1 0 0 I 0
02:00 am 0 0 0 0 0
02:15 0 0 0 0 0
02:30 0 0 0 0 0
02:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 am 0 0 0 0 0
03:15 0 0 0 0 0
03:30 2 0 0 I 0
03:45 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 2 0 0 1 0
04:00 am 0 0 0 0 0
"'15 0 0 0 0 0
,30 t 0 0 0 1
04:45 1 0 0 0 1
Eour Total 2 0 0 0 2
05:00 am 2 0 0 1 0
05:15 1 0 0 0 1
05:30 1 0 0 0 1
05:45 3 0 0 0 2
Hour Total 7 0 0 I 4
06:00 am 1 0 1 0 0
06:15 6 0 2 2 1
06:30 2 0 0 2 0
06:45 12 0 1 3 4
Hour Total 21 0 4 7 5
07:00 am 15 0 0 9 3
07:15 13 0 1 6 5
07:30 2I 0 3 5 8
07:45 19 0 3 9 4
Hour Total 68 0 7 29 20
08:00 am 15 0 0 7 8
08:15 15 0 0 3 9
*' 30 19 0 9 8 2
.45 23 0 2 8 I0
~our Total 72 0 11 26 29
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC. Site Code: 155632
909.247.6716 Start Date: 03/09/99
File I.D.: TEPCEODR
WESTBOUND Page : 1
31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 9999
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
CITY OF TEMECULA COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC. ~ite Code: 155632
CALLE PINA COLADA E/O DEL REY ~OAD 909.247.6716 Start Date: 03/09/99
24 ER SPEED SURVEY File I.D.: TEPCEODR
WESTBOUND Page : 2
Begin Int. 0- I6 21 26 31 06 41 46 51 56 61 66 7I 76
Time Total 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 9999
O0 am 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.~:15 11 0 i 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09:30 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0
09:45 10 1 1 3 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O
Hour Total 27 I 3 12 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 am 9 0 4 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:15 13 0 3 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:30 6 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:45 8 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 36 1 12 12 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 am 9 0 2 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:15 7 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:30 10 1 4 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:45 20 2 5 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 46 3 11 20 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 pm 9 0 2 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:15 11 0 2 6 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:30 15 0 4 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:45 9 0 1 2 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 44 0 9 18 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
01:00 pm I2 1 1 5 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
"'15 11 0 2 4 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.30 12 0 2 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
01:45 11 0 4 6 1 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 46 1 9 21 10 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:00 pm 10 0 3 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:15 I0 1 3 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:30 8 0 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
02:45 16 0 I 4 5 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour TOtal 44 1 11 14 10 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:00 pm 18 0 4 5 4 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:15 27 0 2 !t 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:30 31 2 1 13 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03:45 21 1 5 6 7 1 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 97 3 12 37 34 7 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:00 pm 15 0 1 7 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:15 15 0 1 3 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:30 12 1 2 3 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
04:45 20 0 3 5 8 2 1 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 62 1 7 18 23 1I 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:00 pm 16 0 4 7 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
05:15 15 1 3 4 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
"30 15 2 4 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.45 16 2 3 5 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 62 5 14 18 17 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CITY OF TEMECULA
CALLE PlNA COLADA E/O DEL
24 ER SPEED SURVEY
REY ROAD
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
WESTBOUND
Begin Int. 0- I6 21 26 31 36 41 46 5I 56 61 66
,Time Total 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 00 S5 70
00 pm 13 0 1 8 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
vo:15 15 0 0 8 4 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 0
06:30 I8 0 0 5 8 3 I 1 0 0 0 0 0
06:45 14 0 4 3 5 1 I 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 60 0 5 24 19 7 3 1 0 0 0 0 1
Site Code: 155632
Start Date: 03/09/99
File I.D.: TEPCEODR
Page : 3
71 76
75 9999
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
07:00 pm 11 0 0 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
07:15 7 1 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
07:30 12 1 2 2 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
07:45 6 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 36 2 3 13 15 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
08:00 pm 7 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
08:15 10 0 1 6 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
08:30 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
08:45 8 0 I 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 28 0 2 16 6 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09:00 pm 10 0 0 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09:15 6 0 0 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09:30 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
09:45 5 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 24 0 0 7 11 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 pm 4 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'15 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.30 3 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:45 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 10 0 1 4 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 pm 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hour Total 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'Day Totals 796 18 121 299 251 72 27
4 2
Total 796 18 121 299 251 72 27 4 2 0 0 1 I 0 0
Speed Statistics.
15th Percentlie Speed : 18 MPR
Median Speed (50th percentlie): 23 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 25 MPE
85th Percentlie Speed : 29 MPR
95th Percentlie Speed : 34 MPR
10 MPH Pace Speed : 21-30 MPH
Number of Vehicles in Pace : 550
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 69.11%
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPH : 2
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH: .25{
SiTE CC30E: 00000000 CITY OF TENECULA PAGE:
STREET : Carte Pina Cotado FILE:
LIMITS : 100~ East of De{ Rey
: DATE: 9/03/9
.E ....... e/b .............. w/D ............ COMBINED ..... OAT: THURSDAT
aEGIN AM PN AN PN AN
12:00 0 16 0 9 0 25
12:45 0 3 3 34 1 3 9 40 1 6 12 74
1:00 1 10 I 12 2 22
1:30 0 7 0 1 0 8
1:45 1 2 ? 38 0 2 10 30 1 4 17 68
Z:O0 0 20 0 11 0 31
2:15 I 21 0 18 I
2:30 I 22 0 19 I
2:45 0 2 30 93 0 0 16 64 0 2 46 157
~:00 0 21 0 29 0 50
~:15 0 17 0 27 0 44
3:30 0 27 0 9 0 36
3:45 0 0 12 77 1 1 14 79 1 1 26 156
~:00 0 10 0 15 0 25
~:15 1 24 4 9 5 33
~:30 0 18 1 14 I 32
~:45 1 2 14 66 1 6 26 64 2 8 40 130
5:00 0 30 1
3:15 0 20 1 21 1
5:30 2 17 4 12 6 29
5:45 3 5 19 86 3 9
6:30 11 26 6 8 17 34
6:45 11 25 16 80 20
7:00 36 16 6 16 42 32
7:15 36 12 11 14 47 26
7:30 16 12 14 5 30 17
7:45 13 101 7 ~7 14 45 10 45 27 146 17 92
8:00 15 7 6 5 21 12
8:15 17 9 lZ 7 29 16
8:30 24 6 17 5 41 11
8:45 18 74 4 26 20 55 7 24 38 129 11 50
9:00 3 9 10 8 13 17
9:15 12 10 7 7 19 17
9:30 3 3 6 5 9 8
9:45 9 27 4 26 7 30 6 26 16 57 10 52
10:00 6 3 9 3 15 6
10:15 6 6 7 2 13 8
I0:30
10:45 15 31 6 17 8 30 0 7 23 61 6
11:00 10 1 10 0 20
11:45 13 50 2 5 9 34 2 4 22 84 4 9
TOTALS 322 595 249 489 571 108/,
DAY TOTALS 917 738 1655
SPLIT % 56.4 54.9 43.6 45.1
,K HOUR 7:00 2:45 8:15 2:30 6:45 2:30
VOLUME 101 95 59 91 150 181
P.H.F. 0.70 0.79 0.74 0.78 0.80 0.90
SZTE CCOE: 00000000 CTTY OF TENECULA PAGE: 1
STREET : CaLLe Pina CoLada FILE: cpc2
LIHITS : Bravos to Yuba
: gestbound OnLy DATE: 3/11/9~
TIHE TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPB) AVE
BEGIN ~OURTED 0-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 ]1-33 ]6-~,0 Z. 1-65 ~6-50 51-55 56-60 61-63 66-70 70+ (NPR)
11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0
9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0
11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DAY TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SITE COOE: 00000000 CZTY OF TEFIECULA PAGE: 2
STREET : CatLe Pina CoLada FILE: cpc2
LINITS : Bravos to yuba
: Westbound OnLy GATE: 3/12/98
.E TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPH) AVERAG
BEGIN CC/JNTED 0-15 16o20 21-25 26-30 31-35 3&-40 41-45 ~6o50 51o55 56-60 61-65 66-70 704. (NPN)
12:00 AN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
hO0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 ~9 0 4 7 16 18 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
9:00 28 0 6 6 3 5 6 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
10:00 39 0 3 3 16 9 S 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
11:00 35 0 0 8 9 8 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
12:00 PN 37 0 2 8 18 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
1:00 44 1 ~ 7 16 9 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
2:00 66 0 3 11 26 14 9 3 O 0 0 0 0 0 29
3:00 70 0 I ~ 22 19 15 6 2 1 O 0 0 0 33
4:00 6~ 0 4 13 22 13 9 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 30
5:00 84 0 5 16 33 17 7 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 19
6:00 55 0 1 10 12 18 6 ~ 2 2 0 0 0 0 32
?:00 36 0 0 S 9 11 5 ~ 0 2 0 0 0 0 33
8:00 25 0 2 3 7 S 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 31
9:00 27 0 2 7 5 6 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 30
10:00 14 0 1 3 2 4 Z 2 0 0 0 0 0 O 31
11:00 8 0 0 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 :~,
DAY TOTAL 683 1 38 112 218 161 92 45 10 6 0 0 0 0
SITE CCOE: 00000000 CITY OF TENECULA PAGE:
STREET : CatLe Pina Cotact8 FILE: cpc2
LINITS : Bravos to Yuba
: Westbe~r~l OnLy DATE: 3/13/~
TIHE TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPH) AV,
BEGIN COUNTED 0-15 16-20 21-25 28-)0 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56*60 61-65 66-70 704.
lZ:00 AN 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
1:00
Z:00 Z 0 0 0
3:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 O 0 53
4:00 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
5:00
6:00 27 0 1 S 3 11 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 32
7:00 8Z 0 0 19 28 19 11 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 30
8:00 63 0 1
9:00 31 1
10:00 31 1 5 8 7 7 Z 1 0 0 O 0 0 O 7,6
11:00 27. 0 2 7 8 4 5 1 O 0 O 0 0 O 29
12:00 PN 37 0 2 11 15 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z7
1:00 50 1 6 12 14 9 S 2 0 1 0 0 0 O 28
Z:O0 65 0 3 12 28 16 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z8
3:00 71 2 2 11 22 19 11 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 64 0 0 11 30 8 10 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 30
S:O0 77 0 4 15 24 24 5 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 29
6:00 51 0 1 11
7:00 49 0 2
8:00 22 0 0 3 6 6 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 32
9:00 28 0 0 5 13 8 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 29
10:00 23 0 0 4 7 6 3 ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 )1
11:00 19 0 1 1 6 4 · 0 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 35
DAY TOTAL 829 5 35 164 271 197 89 43 16 7 2 0 0 0
SITE CODE: 00000000 CITY OF TENEC~LA PAGE: ~
STREET : CaI[e Pina CoLackl FILE: cpc2
LIHITS : Bravos to Yuba
: ges~bound Onty DATE: ~/14/98
= TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPH) AVERAG
BEGIN COUNTED 0-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31'35 36-40 41-45 46-50 S1-55 56-60 61-65 66-713 70, (MPN)
12:00 AN 13 0 0 0 2 3 1 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 39
1:00 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 35
2:00 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 38
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 5 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 6 0 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
7:00 14 0 o 0 5 3 4 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 34
8:00 33 0 2 4 11 6 6 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 31
9:00 38 0 I 7 10 13 5 I 0 0 1 0 0 0 31
10:00 58 1 3 8 16 16 11 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 30
11:00 41 3 1 8 14 9 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 28
12:00 PM 56 0 3 22 16 8 S 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 27
1:00
2:00 39 0 4 6 10 10 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 30
3:00 53 0 5 11 21 3 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
4:00 45 0 3 7 19 8 5 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 29
5:00 58 0 7 13 22 7 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 28
6:00 50 0 2 12 14 8 7 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 31
7:00 23 0 3 4 5 5 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
8:00 20 0 0 7 6 4 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 29
9:00 21 0 0
10:00 20 0 1 I 6 6
11:00 16 0 1 1 5
DAY TOTAL 663 6 38 127 205 135 98 34 15 2 3 0 0 0
SITE CCOE: 00000000 CITY OF TENEOJLA pAGE: S
STREET : CatLe Pina CoLada FILE: cpc2
LINITS : Bravos to Yuba
: ~estbound Only DATE:
TIME TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPH) A~
BEGIN COUNTED O-1S 16-20 Zl-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 A1-45 ~b-SO 51o55 5&-60 61-65 ~-70 70+ (NPN)
lZ:00 AM 7 0 0 1
1:00 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 32
Z:OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 2 0 0 0 0 1 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35
4:00 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 38
5:00 2 0 0 0 I 0 O I 0 0 0 0 0 0 35
6:00 6 0 1 1
7:00 8 0 0 1 Z 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
8:00 15 0 0 1 8 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
9:00
10:00
11:00
lZ:O0 PN
1:00 51 1 3 12 l& 10 7 I 0 1 0 0 0 0 29
2:00 50
3:00 43 0 5 7 8 9 9 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 31
4:00 39 1 S 7 12 8 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
S:O0 49 0 4 7 ? 19 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
6:00 3Z 0 0 5 9 10 3 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 3Z
7:00 20 0 0 4 7 5 Z 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
8:00 27 0 1 5 8 7 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 32
9:00 9 0 0 2 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 5 0 0
11:00
DAY TOTAL 495 S 24 92 141 117 71 S4 5 5 1 0 0 0
SZTE CODE: 00000000 CTTY OF TEMECULA PAGE: 6
STREET : CaLte Pina CoLaQa FILE: cpc2
LIMITS : Bravos to Yut~
: westbound Onty DATE: 3/16/98
E TOTAL SPEED RANGES (MPN) AVEIL~G
BEGIN COUNTED 0-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 /+6-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 70+ (NPN)
12:00 AM
1:00
2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
5:00 4 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~,
6:00 27 0 2
8:00 74 1 2 14 22 15 13 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
9:00 24 1 3 7 2 6 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
10:00 19 0 2 4 6 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
11:00 33 0 2 8 6 10 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
12:00 PM 32 1 5 6 9 4 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 28
2:00 74 1 4 11 25 16 8 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 30
3:00 8/, 1 2 14 23 28 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
4:00 71 0 1 10 25 13 13 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 32
5:00 84 0 0 18 38 20 6 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 29
6:00 51 1 3 12 13 11 7 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
7:00 29 0 0 5 9 5 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 32
8:00 21 0 1 4 3 6 3 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 33
9:00 17 0 0 3 4 3 ~ 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 33
10:00 5 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
11:00 6 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 35
DAY TOTAL 7'77 6 29 148 235 180 113 49 13 3 1 0 0 0
SZTE CCOE: 00000000 CITY OF TEIqECULA PAGE: 7
STREET : Carte Pina CoLadD FILE: cpc2
LIHITS : Dravos to Yu~oa
: Westbound OnLy DATE: 3/17/98
TINE TOTAL SPEED RANGES (HPH) AVE,
BEGIN COUNTED 0-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-A0 ~1-~5 ~6-50 51-55 S6-60 61-65 66-70 70+ (HPH)
12:00 AH 5 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 35
1:00 ~ 0 0 0 0 ] 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 35
2:00 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3~
5:00 5 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
6:00 2D 0 1 Z 8 6 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 32
7:00 75 1 2 19 19 18 8 S 2 0 1 0 0 0 30
8:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~3
9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DAY TOTAL 122 1 5 21 29 31 Z1 10 3 0 1 0 0 0
SITE CODE: 00000000 CZTY OF TENECULA PAGE: 1
STREET :Catte Pine CoLada FILE: cpceb
LINITS : West of SaLt River
: Eastbound Onty DATE: 3/11/9~
~ TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPN) AVeRAG
BEGIN COUNTED 0-15 16-20 21-Z5 26-30 31-35 36-40 ~1-45 /,6-50 51-55 S6-60 61-65 66-~13 70+ (NPN)
11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
lZ:O0 PN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
S:O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DAY TOTAL O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SITE CCI3E: 00000000 CITY OF TEMEClJLA PAGE: 2
STREET : CatLe Pina CoLada FILE: cpceb
LIMITS : West of Salt River
: Eastbound Onty OATE: 3/12/98
TIME TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPN) AV,
BEGIN COUNTED 0-15 16-20 21-25 Z6-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 70+ (NPN)
12:00 AN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z:O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 15 3 2 ? 1 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
8:00 62 6 17 26 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~2
9:00 31 2 8 14 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
10:00 Z2 1 S 8 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
11:00 30 0 ? 9 1Z 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
12:00 PM 51 4 10 22 10 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~3
1:00 46 1 12 17 11 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z~
2:00 67 1 15 30 12 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
3:00 T3 1 16 30 21 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,~
4:00 67 1 15 25 19 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
5:00 79 1 16 33 20 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
6:00 67 2 10 25 2.1 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
7:00 34 1 9 9 10 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
8:00 35 1 6 7 13 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
9:00 17 0 6 4 2 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 25
10:00 8 0 I 2 2 I 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
11:00 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
DAY TOTAL 707 25 155 269 176 67 11 3 1 0 0 0 0 0
SiTE CI3OE: 00000000 CZTY OF TENE{]JLA PAGE: 3
STREET : CaLLe Pina Cotada FILE: cpceb
L]NZTS : West of SaLt River
: Eastbound O~Ly DATE: 3/13/f8
~ TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPH) AVERAG
BEG]N COUNTED 0-15 16-Z0 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61o65 6~-70 70+ (NPR)
12:00 AN 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
1:00 Z 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
Z:O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 5 0 1
5:00 3 0 1 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
6:00 ZO 0 6
7:00 51 2 S 17 ZO 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z5
8:00 63 5 1Z 27 15 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z3
9:00 Z7 0 5 lZ 8
10:00 32
11:00 32 0 7
12:00 PN z~. 3 9 16 13 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
1:00 36 2 5 15 12 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 75 4 2x 22 18 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
3:00 87 1 14 32 26 10 3 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
4:00 64 0 13 32 16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
5:00 61 0 15 27 17 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 67 2 19 25 14 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
7:00 50 0 10 19 17
8:00 59 1 6 14 12 5 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
9:00
10:00 13 0 2 4 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
11:00 31 1 7 7 11 2 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
DAY TOTAL 835 25 175 318 237 60 15 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
SITE CCOE: 00000000 CITY OF TENECULA PAGE: 4
STREET : CaLte Pina Cotada FILE: cpceb
LIMITS : West of Salt River
: Eastbound Only DATE: 3/14/oA
T1NE TOTAL SPEED RANGES (NPH) Ai
BEGIN COUNTED 0'15 16-20 Z1'25 26"30 31'35 ~6'40 41-45 46'50 51'55 56'60 61-65 66-70 70+ (MPH)
12:00 AM 1~ 1 0 ~ 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
1:00 Z 0 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
Z:O0 ~ 0 0 I 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
~:00 Z 0 0 I 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
4:00 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 18
5:00 5 0 q 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
6:00 7 0 1 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
7:00 ZO 0 6 7 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 24
8:00 28 0 6 15 3 1 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
9:00 ~7 2 10 19 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
10:00 38 0 6 12 16 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z5
11:00 54 I 17 19 1~ 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
12:00 PR 45 2 11 19 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
1:00 A5 8 9 13 10 ~ 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
2:00 62 5 24 22 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
3:00 48 3 8 17 15 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2A
~:00 ~2 3 I~ 15 6 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
5:00 50 3 12 24 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
6:00 54 2 18 26 6 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
7:00 27 0 8 11 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z3
8:00 24 2 2 8 4 7 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
9:00 29 1 9 9 ~ 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
10:00 2& 0 7 9 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2A
11:00 12 0 0 6 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
DAY TOTAL 674 33 170 263 142 S~ 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
SITE COOE: 00000000 CZTY OF TEMECULA PAGE: S
STREET : CaLte Pina Cotada FILE: cpceb
LIMITS : West of Salt River
: Eastbound Only DATE: 3/15/98
AE TOTAL SPEED RANGES (MPN) AVERAI
BEGIN COUNTED 0-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 70, (NPN:
12:00 AN 9 0 3 3 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
1:00 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
2:00
3=00 7 0 2 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
4:00 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
5:00 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
6:00 4 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
7:00 12 0 1 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 17 0
9:00 29 0 7 12 5
10:00 32 0 5 15 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00
12:00 PM 37 3 11 13 6 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
1:00 54 1 13 26 6 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
2:00 45 1 10 17 11 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
3:00 42 0 10 16 10 4 2 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 24
4:00 45 Z 11 13 11 7 1 0 0 0 g 0 0 0 24
5:00
6:O0 40 2 12 15 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22
7:00 30
8:00 25 1
9:00 15 1 2 6 2 3 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
10:00 10 0 1 I 5 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
11:00 3 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
DAY TOTAL 544 14 125 215 119 50 15 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
SITE CnnE: 00000000 CZTY OF TENECtJLA PAGE: 6
STREET : Carte Pina CoLada FILE: cpce~o
LIMITS : West of SaLt River
: Eastbound OnLy DATE: 3/16/98
TIME TOTAL SPEED RANGES (MPR) AVk
BEGIN COUNTED 0-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46°50 51-55 56-60 61o65 66-70 70+ (MPN)
12:00 AM
1:00 1 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
2:00 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00
S:O0
6:00 18 0 9 5
7:00 50 0 4 25 13 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
8:00
9:00 26 0 7 10
10:00 29 1 3 16 6
11:00
12:00 PM
1:00
2:00 67 5 lZ 25 19 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
3:00 98 2
4:00 59 1 16
5:00 63 1 13 25 15 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 55 0 11
7:00 38 0 9 14 8 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 36 Z 7 10
9:00 17 0 I 9 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z5
10:00 8 0
11:00 5 0 0 1 Z 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30
DAY TOTAL T~9 18 16~ 293 18r 67 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
SITE COOE: 00000000 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE: ?
STREET : CaLLe Pina Cotada FXLE: cpceb
LIMITS : West of SaLt River
: Eastbound Only DATE: 3/17/98
~ TOTAL SPEED RANGES (MPH) AVERAm:
BEGIN COUNTED 0-I5 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 7D+ (NPN)
12:00 AM 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
1:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 4 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
5:00 6 0 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
6:00 24 0 6 12 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
7:00 53 Z ? 17 22 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
8:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DAY TOTAL 91 2 16 33 29 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Speed vs. Cummulative %
Street: Calle Pina Colada
e
U
m
120
115 ..............
110 ..............
105 ...............
85th percentile: 27 mph
% in pace :
lOmph pace : 18-28 mph
· in pace : 70 ~
Dat~ : 213/94
m
u
Section:
100 ................................................_, .....
75
70
65
60 ....................
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
10 15 20
25 30 35 40 45
Bravos Ct. to Yuba Cir.
speed in mph I
CITY OF TEMECULA
R
Street:
;corder:
MPH
65
""; -/c Location:
't
'-" : Weather:
5 10 15
VEHICLE SPEED DATA SHEET
'~ ', :; -': Day of the week: ~7" u Date:
~-~' ,"~'/~'/':~ ~ ~'~, C ;'~' '
r~,. Begin ~me:/':'~nEnd ~me: .'2 '~:~Exist. Posted Limit: :~
NUMBER OF VEHICLES
20 25 30 35 40 45
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES:
/ O0
~"/ iL
85th Percentfie: fi~
lOmph pace range is: I~ to ~; 7'(2 % of total.
/
Sp,r./ ,,,dzJ-, {F>-.: ~'..: ;/ ',,z,-z.// pk,~ dd,; >.,,-,, ,:.,,6~_, .~fi,','.~'
Bather Belrose Boje, Inc. SPEEDPLOT Program
STREET ................ 0 Blk. C~T.T.E PINA COLADA
-LIMITS ................ bet BRAVOS and ~ YUBA
2ECTION(S) .......... N & S BOUND
DATE .................. 9-14-93
TIME .................. 1011 TO 1210
POSTED SPEED LIMIT .... 25
SPEED NO. PCT. PCT.
15 1 1.0 1.0
16 i 1.0 2.0
17 I 1.0 3.0
18 I 1.0 4.0
19 i 1.0 5.0 90
20 3 3.0 8.0 C -
21 2 2.0 10.0 U 80
22 2 2.0 12.0 M -
23 2 2.0 14.0 70
24 8 8.0 22.0 P -
25 9 9.0 31.0 E 60
26 6 6.0 37.0 R -
27 9 9.0 46.0 C 50
28 9 9.0 55.0 E -
29 7 7.0 62.0 N 40
',30 11 11.0 73.0 T
, ~ 3 3.0 76.0 S 30
'-- ~2 5 5.0 81.0
33 2 2.0 83.0 20
34 5 5.0 88.0
35 2 2.0 90.0 10
36 5 5.0 95.0
37 0 0,0 95,0
38 1 1,0 96,0
39 1 1,0 97,0
40 0 0,0 97,0
41 0 0,0 97,0 20
42 2 2,0 99,0 -
43 0 0,0 99,0
44 0 0,0 99,0 -
45 0 0,0 99,0 -
46 1 1,0 100,0 P 15
E -
R -
C -
E -
N 10
T -
S -
50TH PERCENTILE SPEED .................
85TH PERCENTILE SPEED .................
10 MPH PACE SPEED .......... 23 through
PERCENT IN PACE SPEED .............. 69.
PERCENT OV]~i{ PACE SPEED ............. 19.
PERCENT UNDER PACE SPEED ............ 12.
RANGE OF SPEEDS ................. 15 to
VEHICLES OBSERVED ................... 1(
AVERAGE SPEED ....................... 28
+ .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... +
100
,
,
**
,
,
· **
· , **
--
-- ******* , ·
--********************** ** ,
+ .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... +
+ .... + .... + .... + .... ~ .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... +
15 25 35 45 55 6~
+ .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... +
C:T'! O~ TBMECULA
CL~j'/e. ~ no
VEHICLE SFEED DATA SHEET
MPH
55
80
55
50
NUMBER OF VE-IICLES
25
30
25
20
15
20 25 45
20 35 40
TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICt PS:
~o
85th Percentj/e:
l Omph pace range is: __ to ; % of total.
Bather Belrose Boje, Inc. SPEEDPLOT Program
STREET ................ 0 Blk. CALLE PINA COLADA
LIMITS ................ bet SALT RIVER ~ and DEL REY
~RECTION(S) .......
DATE ...............
TIME ...............
POSTED SPEED LIMIT.
SPEED NO. PCT. PCT.
14 2 2.0 2.0
15 1 1.0 3.0
16 1 1.0 4.0
17 2 2.0 6.0
18 3 3.0 9.0
19 0 0.0 9.0
20 4 4.0 13.0
21 4 4.0 17.0
22 2 2.0 19.0
23 4 4.0 23.0
24 7 7.0 30.0
25 11 11.0 41.0
26 11 11.0 52.0
27 6 6.0 58.0
28 2 2.0 60.0
"9 9 9.0 69.0
3 7 7.0 76.0
- 31 5 5.0 81.0
32 5 5.0 86.0
33 2 2.0 88.0
34 0 0.0 88.0
35 2 2.0 90.0
36 4 4.0 94.0
37 1 1.0 95.0
38 2 2.0 97.0
39 i 1.0 98.0
40 0 0.0 98.0
41 0 0.0 98.0
42 0 0.0 98.0
43 0 0.0 98.0
44 0 0.0 98.0
45 1 1.0 99.0
46 1 1.0 100.0
...N & S BOUND
...9-13-93
...0900 TO 1100
...25
50TH PERCENTILE SPEED ..................
85TH PERCENTILE SPEED ..................
10 MPH PACE SPEED .......... 23 through
PERCENT IN PACE SPEED .............. 67
PERCENT OVER PACE SPEED ............. 14
PERCENT UNDER PACE SPEED ............ 19,
RANGE OF SPEEDS ................. 14 to
VEHICLES OBSERVED ................... 1{
AVERAGE SPEED ....................... 27
90
C -
U 80
M -
70
p -
E 60
R -
C 50
E -
N 40
T -
S 30
20
,
,
,
**
,
10 **
_
O*
+ .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... +
14 24 34 44 54
+ .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... ~ .... + .... +
20
P 15
E -
R -
C -
E -
N 10
T -
S -
**
** ·
**
***
5 ,666
-- 6, ,6*** ,6**
-- · ,6 ***6, ****
+ .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + ....
MPH
~5
60
55
50
45 ~
40
CItY OF TEMECULA
VEHICLE SPEED DATA SHEET
',V..th.r: CJ~r B.gi. ;me: qO~End ~me: J~Exist. Posted Umit: ~ ....
NUMBER OF VEHICLES
10 15 20 45
25
30 35 40
I
TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES:
of Total Percentage
85th Percentlie:
10mph pace range ss: ,,, to __; % of total.
Speed vs. Cummulative %
Street: Calle Pina Colada
u
in
m
u
1
t
v
e
120
115
110
105
100
95
85th percentile: 31 mph
percent in pace:
I0 mph pace : 21-31 mph
percent in pace: 53
Date : 218193
60-- - .................................
55 ..................................................
50 .....................................
45--
40--
35--
30--
25--
20--
15
10
5--
0
15
20 25 30 35 40 45
Section: Del Rey Rd. & Salt River Ct.
5~tL ~
R~ Je.": z./,-',~
MPH
5 10
65
60
55
50
45 ~
35 · X-.
25 .
85th Percentile:
CiTY OF TEMECULA
vEHICLE SPEED DATA SHE=F
Location: ~'/00 './,i c~-' :,;cT .,,y.r,7.. or. Day of the week: 'r'fJE Date:
2 T~"' ,
r~_ ,E_/ tEE'/ Z; ~ _,;.-- _,,~tm,,._ ,'r ..~
Weather: 'Z-"','~'/· :=., 'L Begin Time: 2'.'-' End 'Rrne: ,/,/J~ Exist, Posted Limit: 'Lc5
15
NUMBER OF VEHICLES
20 25 30
35 40 45
m
TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES:
/oO
10mph pace range is: ; to __~; __ % of total.
EXHIBIT "D"
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
~Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic
April 29, 1999
SUBJECT:
Item 3
Bypass Roadway Alignment Study - Calle Pina Colada
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission receive the report and provide further direction to Staff.
BACKGROUND:
At the meeting of March 11, 1999, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission requested that Staff develop
alternatives to the closure of Calle Pina Colaria including the possibility of constructing a roadway within the
Metropolitan Water District's facility easement between 12 Serena Road and Del Rey Road.
Calle Pina Colada Bypass Alignment Study
In July 1994, a study was prepared by Markham and Associates to determine the feasibility of constructing
a bypass roadway on a water line easement held by the Metropolitan Water District (IVBVD) between La
Serena Way and Del Rey Road. The proposed roadway was to be constructed to Collector Highway
standards. A Collector Highway is identified as a 56-foot wide roadway within a 78-foot right-of-way section.
The study included the evaluation of the profile and alignment for the proposed roadway.
The study identified two potential roadway alignment alternatives. Alignment "A' located on the eastside of
the MWD water line faciliti~ has an approximate vertical difference of 152 feet between La Serena Way and
Del Rey Road. This profile resu~:ed in roadway design speeds of 34 to 35 miles per hour. Alignment "B"
located on the westside of the MWD water line facilities has an approximate vertical difference of 77 feet
between 12 Serena Way and Del Rey Road. This profile resulted in roadway design speeds between 32 and
50 miles per hour. Each of the alternatives identified the need for drainage structures and concrete roadway
crossings over the MXVD facilities.
The cost to construct this Alignment "A" is estimated at $1.5 million including design, inspection and contract
administration. Construction costs for Alignment ~B" are estimated at $1.3 million including design,
inspection and contract administration.
A copy of the study was submitted to MWD in January 1995, for their review and processing. Subsequently,
a list of comments and requirements was forwarded to Markham and Associates in March 1995. Among
those. was a requirement for an indemnification and certificate of insurance for $1 million from the City of
Temecula naming MWD as coinsured including joint and several liabili.ty coverage. Those comments are
included as Exhibit "B" . The letter received from MWD suggests that they were receptive to the roadway
concept with Ali_mu'nent -A' being the preferred alternative. To dam, this issue has not been pursued further
with MWD.
Since the City of Temecula will be performing a comprehensive circulation study of the Meadowview area,
the Bypass Roadway Alignment Study could be included in the analysis to determine the benefits of the
proposed roadway to the overall circulation system
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachment:
I. Exhibit "A" Location Map
2. Exhibit "B" Calle Pitha Colada Bypass Study
3. Exhibit "C" Letter from Metropolitan Water Distzict dated March 15, 1995
EXHIBIT "A" - LOCATION MAP
MARKHAM & ASSOCIATES
Development Consultants
EXHIBIT "B"
CALLE PINA COLADA
BYPASS STUDY
Profile and Alignment
Prepared for:
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
July 28, 1994
JN 650
C: I WPDOCSIJOHNT1650COT.RpT
4 t 750 Winchester Road, Suite N · Tcmecula, California 92590 · (909) 676-6672 · FAX (909) 699-1848
Calle Pina Colada
Bypass Study
City of Temecula
JN 650
July 28, 1994
Page 2
SCOPE OF WORK
Prepare a
the Calle
speed.
preliminary horizontal and vertical alignment for
Pina Colada Bypass with a minimum 30 mph design
PREPARATION and COMMENTS
Two alignment were proposed. Alignment "A" is on the east
side of the MWD line and Alignment "B" is on the west side of
the MWD line.
The profile of each alignment meets the design speed criteria.
Each alignment will require drainage structures to pass the
natural drainage from east to west in at least two locations.
Each alignment can be adjusted vertically to obtain a balance
in earthwork quantities without significant changes.
It also should be noted that it
place concrete protection over
roadway crossings.
is standard MWD practice to
any of its facilities at
c: I WPDOCSI JOHNT~ 650COT .RPT
............ :- ....................
I~+ob ............LZE~_~O , _~x~O.~. _- ~.0%~c~ ~b
7-27-94 Page
PROFILE ~1 ALIGNMENT "A"
TYPE STATION ELEV % GRADE/ROC
PO8 10+20.00 1274.00
-5.000%
VERTICAL CURVE LENGTH: 100,100
PVC 11+00.00 1270.00
-2.500%
PVI 12+00.00 1263.75
-2.500%
PVT 13+00.00 1255.00
-10.000%
14+00.00 124S.00
-10.000%
15+00.00 1235.00
-I0.000%
16+00.00 1225.00
-10.000%
17+00.00 1215.00
-10.000%
VERTICAL CURVE LENGTH: 150,150
PVC 17+50.00 1210.00
2.109%
18+00.00 1205.26
2.109%
PuI 19+00.00 1197.37
2.109%
20+00.00 1191.59
2.109%
PUT 20+50.00 1189.49
-3.674%
21+00.00 1187.65
-3.674%
22+00.00 1183.78
-3.674%
2~+00.00 1180.]0
-3.674%
24+00.O0 1176.63
-].674%
25+00.00 I172.96
].674%
END 25+26.00 1172.uu
OFFSET TAN ELEV
0,000 i270.00
-1,250 1265.00
0.000 1210.00
.264 1205.00
2.372 1195.00
.264 1191.33
200-4 HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL
Figure 201.4
Sto ping Sight Distance on
~rest Vertical Curves
Height of eye-3.60 feet.
Height of obJect-0.60 feet.
""'-
NOTE:
· Before using this chart for
Intersections, branch connections
and exits, see Index 201.7,
405.1 and 504.2.
· See Figure 204.4 for vertical
ourve formulas.
· Bee Index 204.4 for minimum
length of vertical curve.
LU14
0-12
(0
UJlO
n- g
C~
"Y 8
LU
,~ 7
Z
LU 6
n-
U. 5
Q 4
,( 3
m
LU 2
_11
,4:
0
0 200 400
'1
L = CURVE LENGTH - FEET
A = ALGEBRAIC GRADE DIFFERENCE -
8 = 81GHT DISTANCE - FEET
V = DESIGN SPEED - M.P.H. FOR
K: DI8TANCE IN FEET REQUIRED TO
ACHIEVE A 1% CHANGE IN GRADE.
K VALUE SHOWN 18 VALID WHEN 8<L.
WHEN 8~L
WHEN
L=28 1329 L= A82
A 1329
DESION SPEED -- M.P.H.
O
600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000
LENGTH OF VERTICAL CURVE -- FEET
7-27-94 Page I
PROFILE ~2 ALIGNMENT
TYPE STATION ELEV % GRADE,,'ROC
P08 10+20.00 :248.50
-z.826%
11+00.00 !246.24
-2.826%
VERTICAL CURVE LENGTH: :,0,100
Pv[' 11+50.00 1244.83
2.678%
12+00.00 ;243.08
--2.~18~
PV[ 12+50.00, 1240.66
-2.678%
13+00.00 1237.57
-2.678%
PVT 13+50.0O I233.82
-8.182~
14+O0.00 I229.73
-8.182%
15+00..oo 1221.55
-8.182~
16+00.00 1213.36
-8.182%
VERTICAL CURVE LENGTH: 100,100
PVC 17+00.00 1205.18
1.636~
PVI 18+00.00 1197.82
1.636%
PVT 19+00.00 1192.09
-4.909%
20+00.00 1187.18
-4,909%
21+00.00 I~82.27
-4.909%
22+00.00 1177.36
-4.909%
VERTICAL CURVE LENGTH: 125,125
PVC 22+25.00 1176.]4
2,457%
23+00.00 1173.15
2.457%
PvI 23+50.00 1171.92
2,457%
24+OO.00 117[.31
2.457%
HI/LOW 24+24.76 1171.23
2.457%
PVT 24+75.00 ll71.54
1.235%
25+00.00 1171.85
OFFSET TAN ELEV
0.000 1244,83
-.335 1243.41
-1.339 1242,00
-.335 1237.91
0.000 1205.18
.818 1197.00
0.000 1176.14
.691 1172.45
1.920 1170.00
.691 1170.62
.310 1170.92
1.235%
END 25+12.00 1172.00
HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL 200-
Figure 201.5
Stopping Sight Distance on Sag Vertical Curves
NOTE: '~~~o,
· Before using this chart for
Interseotlons, branch connections
and exits, see Index 201.7. 405.1
and 504~.
CURVE LENGTH - FEET
ALGEBRAIC GRADE DIFFERENCE - %
SIGHT DISTANCE - FEET
DESIGN SPEED - M.P.H. FOR '8'
DISTANCE IN FEET REQUIRED TO
ACHIEVE A 1el CHANGE IN GRADE.
K VALUE SHOWN IS VALID WHEN S< L.
For sustained downgrades, see
Index 201-%
See FIgure 204,4 for vertical
ourve formulas.
WHEN
L=2S_400+3-5S
WHEN
AS2
L= 400+3.58
18
t-
Z
LU15
Q,
I 13
I
0~12
LU
4:11
(~10
UJ
(J
UJ
.i 7
LL
.....
(J
4:
LU
.J 3
4:
2
See Index 204.4 for minimum
length of vertical curve.
DESIGN SPEED -- M.P.H.
~'~ cv ~ c~ ~
o 200 400 600
800 1ooo 12oo 14oo 16oo
18oo 2000
LENGTH OF VERTICAL CURVE -- FEET
!
//
/
// /
t~~ ~
I
/
eMWD
METROPOL/TAN WATER D/STRICT OF SOUTHERN CAL/;ORNIA
Office ot The Genera/Manager
EXHIBIT "C"
HARI51~
MWD San Diego Pipeline
Nos i and 2
Sta. 1256+00 to 1273+00
R/W Parcel SDN-23-81, 2P-81
MWDWork Order No. 7-Pending
Substr. Job No. 2028-95-003
Markham and Associates
Development Consultants
41750 Winchester Road, Suite N
Temecula, California 92590
Attention Mr. John T. Reinhart, RCE 23464
Senior Civil Engineer
Gentlemen:
Proposed Bypass Between
La Serena Way and Del Rev Road
After a further review of your proposed bypass over
Metropolitan's San Diego Pipeline 1 or 2 between La Serena Way
and Dei Rey Road in the City of Temecula, the following comments
and requirements are provided for your infornlation:
1. If the City of Temecula decides to proceed with
this project, Metropolitan will require a deposit in the
amount of $4,000 to apply towards the cost of our
engineering review of your plans. The final billing for
such review will be based on the actual cost incurred, which
will include our engineering plan review, administration,
and overhead charges calculated in accordance with
THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTTIE~N C~LIFORNIA
Markham and Associates
Metropolitan's standard accounting practices. If the cost
is less than the deposit, a refund will be made; however, if
the cost exceeds the deposit, an invoice will be forwarded
for payment of the additional amount within 30 days.
2. Additional deposits will also be required for
manhole adjustments and inspection fees involved with
pipeline protection. An estimate of cost of will be
forwarded to you once detailed information is available.
3. If you agree to the foregoing terms and
conditions, please so indicate by signing the duplicate
of this letter where indicated and returning it to
Metropolitan.
4. Details of all grading, street improvements,
drainage, landscaping, utility, and irrigation plans must
be submitted for our review and approval. Metropolitan's
easement, pipelines, and other facilities must be fully
shown and identified on all applicable plans.
5. During construction Metropolitan's field
personnel will make periodic inspections. We request
that a stipulation be added to your plans for notification
of Mr. Roy Howard of our Operations Maintenance Branch,
telephone (213) 217-7780, at least two working days (Monday
through Thursday) prior to any work in the vicinity of our
facilities and easement.
6. To assist you in preparing plans that are
compatible with Metropolitan,s facilities and easements,
we have enclosed a copy of our "Guidelines for Developments
in the Area of Facilities, Fee Properties, and/or Easements
of The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California."
7. The proposed bypass should be incorporated solely
over one pipeline, with no adjustment to grades allowed
within 30-feet from the centerline of the remaining
pipeline. This is necessary to keep the proposed bypass
outside the theoretical trench prism of the remaining
pipeline should excavation of this line become necessary.
rUE M~TROPOUTAN W~TER OI~'RICT C-~ ~OU~7tERN CA~IFORIVI~
Markham and Associates - 3
HAR J. S 199S
8. Attachment A gives the maximum and minimum
covers allowed over San Diego Pipelines Nos. 1 and 2 without
protection. Metropolitan's preferred alignment would be
the one requiring the least protection and drainage
facilities. Potholing will be required prior to the start
of any grading of the easement to verify the location and
depth of the existing pipelines. Please contact Mr. Roy
Howard to coordinate this work.
9. For any reach where the total cover will be
increased by 5-feet or more, a soils report showing
the predicted settlement of the pipeline at 10-foot
intervals will be required. This data shall be carried
past the point of zero change in each direction and the
actual size and varying depth of the fill shall be
considered when determining the settlement. The possible
settlement due to soil collapse should also be considered.
Subject to possible lower limits due to settlement, the
maximum allowable total cover on the pipeline without
protection is as shown on attachment A.
10. Where a protective slab is required, it
should be similar to the one used in Temecula Sports Park.
Construction joints will be required at 20-foot intervals
due to the potential lengths involved and to assist in the
removal of the protection slab should excavation of the
pipeline become necessary.
11. Please verify that the vertical datum used to
produce your plan-and-profile drawings is compatible with
the datum used to produce the plan-and-profile drawings for
San Diego Pipelines 1 and 2. Our mnhole at Sta. 1254+98.08
of San Diego Pipeline No. 1, located just north of Del key
Road, has a datum set inside the manhole of 1267.080 feet.
Please contact Mr. Roy Howard no assist in gaining access to
this marlhole.
12. we require that you submit the specification
of any equipment which will impose loads greater than
AASHTO H-20 on our pipeline. These specifications must be
reviewed and apprsved by our engineering staff an least one
week prior to the use of such equipment
THE M[TROPOLITAAI WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Markham and Associates
HAR 15 I~
13. Metropolitan must have vehicular access along
San Diego Pipelines Nos. 1 and 2 at all times for
inspection, patrolling, and for maintenance of our pipelines
on a regular basis. Please incorporate details of these
requirements into your bypass plans and provide suitable
barriers to prevent public access to areas outside the
proposed road but within Metropolitan's easement.
14. Facilities constructed within Metropolitan's
easement shall be subject to the paramount right of
Metropolitan to use the easement for the purpose for which
it was acquired. If at any time Metropolitan or its assigns
should, in the exercise of their rights, find it necessary
to remove any of the facilities from the easement, such
removal and replacement shall be at the expense of the owner
of the facility.
15. Furthermore, it is Metropolitan's long-standing
policy not to consent to longitudinal rights over its
easements with the exception of the imminent construction of
a public road for which there is a preocommiUment by the
local municipality to accept a dedication of the right-of-
way and improvements. Such pre-co~=nitment must be in the
form of an official letter from a local municipality stating
that it is willing to immediately accept dedication of the
road improvements and easement upon completion of road
construction. An indemnification and a certificate of
insurance naming Metropolitan as coinsured must be posted
with Metropolitan for $1 million, including joint and
several liability coverage.
Upon receipt of the deposit and the executed original
of this letter agreement, we will continue with our review of
your plans and provide additional comments and requirementF.
Please reference the Substructures Job Number as shown on the top
right-hand corner of the first page of this letter on your check,
so that Metropolitan's Controller Branch may notify us
immediately of your deposit.
Enclosed for your use is one print each of our plan
and profile Drawings Nos. B-69687, B-69688, and B-69689,
for San Diego Pipelines Nos. 1 and 2, between La Serena Way and
Del Rey Road.
For any further correspondence with Metropolitan
relating to this project, please make reference to the MWD
Substructures Job Number shown in the upper right hand corner
THE METROPDLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Markham and Associates - 5
of the first page of this letter. Should you require any
additional information, please contact Mr. Kieran Callanan,
telephone (213) 217-7474.
Very truly yours
Gary M. Snyder
Chief Engineer
Substructures Section
nJB/KC/ss
DOC# SSKC003
Encl. 15629
In duplicate
CONFIRM ACCEPTANCE:
Signature
Date
CC:
City of Temecula
Department of Public Works
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula~ California 92590-3661
Attention Mr. Don Spagnolo, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Guidelines for Developments in the
Area of Facilities, Fee Properties, and/or Easements
of The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Introduction
a. The following general guidelines should be
followed for the design of proposed facilities and
developments in the area of Metropolitan's facilities,
properties, and/or easements.
b. We require that 3 copies of your tentative and
final record maps, grading, paving, street improvement,
landscape, storm drain, and utility plans be submitted
for our review and written approval as they pertain to
Metropolitan's facilities, fee properties and/or
easements, prior to the commencement of any construction
work.
fee
Plans, Parcel and Tract Maps
The following are Metropolitan's requirements for the
identification of its facilities, fee properties, and/or
easements on your plans, parcel maps and tract maps:
a. Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements and
its pipelines and other faoilities must be full~ shown and
identified as MetrOpolitan's on all applicable plans.
b. Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements
must be ~how~ and identified as Metropolitan's with the
official recording data on all applicable parcel and
tract maps.
c. Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements
and existing survey monuments must be dimensionally tied
to the parcel or tract boundaries.
d. Metropolitan's records of surveys must be
referenced on the parcel and tract maps.
- 2 -
Maintenance of Access Alon~ MetroDolitan's Ri~hts-of-WaV
a. Proposed cut or fill slopes exceeding 10 percent
are normally not allowed within Me=ropolitan's fee
properties or easements. This is required to facilitate the
use of construction and maintenance equipment, and provide
access to its aboveground and belowground facilities.
b. We require that 16-foot-wide commercial-type
driveway approaches be constructed on both sides of all
streets crossing Metropolitanes rights-of-way. Openings
are required in any median island. Access ramps, if
necessary, must be at least 16-feet-wide. Grades of ramps
are normally not allowed to exceed 10 percent. If the slope
of an access ramp must exceed 10 percent due to the
topography, the ramp must be paved. We require a
40-foot-long level area on the driveway approach to access
ramps where the ramp meets the street. At Metropolitan~s
fee properties, we m~y require fences and gates.
c. The terms of Metropolitan~s permanent easement
deeds normally preclude the building or maintenance of
structures of any nature or kind within its easements, to
ensure safety and avoid interference with operation and
maintenance of Metropolitan~s pipelines or other facilities.
Metropolitan must have vehicular access along the easements
at all times for inspection, patrolling, and for maintenance
of the pipelines and other facilities on a routine basis.
We require a 20-foot-wide clear zone around all above-ground
facilities for this routine access. This clear ~one should
slope away from our facility on a grade not to exceed
2 percent. We must also have access along the easements
with construction equipment. An example of this is sho~m on
Figure 1.
d. The footings of any proposed buildings adjacent to
Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements must not
encroach into the fee property or easement or impose
additional loading on Metropolitan's pipelines or other
facilities therein. A typical situation is shown on
Figure 2. Prints of the detail plans of the footings for
any building or structure adjacent to the fee property or
easement must be submitted for our review and written
approval as they pertain to the pipeline or other facilities
therein. Also, roof eaves of buildings adjacent to the
easement or fee property must not overhang into the fee
property or easement area.
e. Metropolitan's pipelines and other facilities,
e.g. structures, manholes, equipment, survey monuments, etc.
within its fee properties and/or easements must be protected
from damage by the easement holder on Metropolitan's
property or the property owner where Metropolitan has an
easement, at no expense to Metropolitan. If the facility is
a cathodic protection station it shall be located prior to
any grading or excavation. The exact location, description
and way of protection shall be shown on the related plans
for the easement area.
Easements on Metropolitan's ProDerty
a. We encourage the use of Metropolitan's fee rights-
of-way by governmental agencies for public street and
utility purposes, provided that such use does not interfere
with Metropolitan's use of the property, the entire width of
the property is accepted into the agency's public street
system and fair market value is paid for such use of the
right-of-way.
b. Please contact the Director of Metropolitan's
Right of Way and Land Division, telephone (213) 250-6302,
concerning easements for landscaping, street, storm drain,
sewer, water or other public facilities proposed within
Metropolitan's fee properties. A map and legal description
of the requested easements must be submitted. Also, written
evidence must be submitted that shows the city or county
will accept the easement' for the specific purposes into its
public system. The grant of the easement will be subject to
Metropolitan's rights to use its land for water pipelines
and related purposes to the same extent as if such grant had
not been made. There will be a charge for the easement.
Please note that, if entry is required on the property prior
to issuance of the easement, an entry permit must be
obtained. There will also be a charge for the entry perKnit.
Landscaping
Metropolitan's landscape guidelines for its fee
properties and/or easements are as follows:
a. A green belt may be allowed within Metropolitan's
fee property or easement.
b. All landscape plans.shall show the location and
size of Metropolitan's fee property and/or easement and the
location and size of Metropolitan's pipeline or other
facilities therein.
c. Absolutely no trees will be allowed within 15
of t~e centerline of Metropolitan's existing or future
pipelines and facilities.
feet
d. Deep-rooted trees are prohibited within
Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements. Shallow-
rooted trees are the only trees allowed. The shallow-rooted
trees will not be permitted any closer than 15 feet from the
centerline of the pipeline, and such trees shall not be
taller than 25 feet with a root spread no greater than
20 feet in diameter at maturity. Shrubs, bushes, vines, and
ground cover are permitted, but larger shrubs and bushes
should not be planted directly over our pipeline. Turf is
acceptable. We require submittal of landscape plans for
Metropolitan's prior review and written approval. (See
Figure 3).
e. The landscape plans must contain provisions for
Metropolitan's vehicular aocess at all times along its
rights-of-way to its pipelines or facilities therein.
Gates capable of accepting Metropolitan's locks are
required in any fences across its rights-of-way. Also,
any walks or drainage facilities across its access route
must be constructed to AASHTO B-20 loading standards.
f. Rights to landscape any of Metropolitan's fee
properties must be acquired from its Right of Way and
Land Division. Appropriate entry permits must be obtained
prior to any entry on its property. There will be a charge
for any entry permit or easements required.
Fencing
Metropolitan requires that perimeter fencing of its fee
properties and facilities be constructed' of universal chain
link, 6 feet in height and topped with 3 strands of barbed
wire angled upward and outward at a 45 degree angle or an
approved equal for a total fence height of 7 feet. Suitable
substitute fencing may be considered by Metropolitan.
(Please see Figure 5 for details).
Utilities in Metropolitan's Fee Properties and/or Easements
or Adjacent to Its Pipeline in Public Streets
Metropolitan's policy for the alinement of utilities
permitted within its fee properties and/or easements and
street rights-of-way is as follows:
- 5 -
a. Permanent structures, including catch basins,
manholes, power poles, telephone riser boxes, etc., shall
not be located within its fee properties and/or easements.
b. We request that permanent utility structures
within public streets, in which Metropolitan's facilities
are constructed under the Metropolitan Water District
Act, be placed as far from our pipeline as possible, but
not closer than 5 feet from the outside of our pipeline.
c. The installation of utilities over or under
Metropolitan's pipeline(s) must be in accordance with the
requirements shown on the enclosed prints of Drawings
Nos. C-11632 and C-9547. Whenever possible we request a
minimum of one foot clearance between Metropolitan's pipe
and your facility. Temporary support of Metropolitan's
pipe may also be required at undercrossings of its pipe
in an open trench. The temporary support plans must be
reviewed and approved by Metropolitan.
d. Lateral utility crossings of Metropolitan's
pipelines must be as perpendicular to its pipeline
alinement as practical. Prior to any excavation our
pipeline shall be located manually and any excavation
within two feet of our pipeline must be done by hand.
This shall be noted on the appropriate drawings.
e. Utilities constrlacted longitudinally within
Metropolitan's rights-of-way must be located outside the
theoretical trench prism' for uncovering its pipeline and
must be located parallel to and as close to its rights-
of-way lines as practical.
f. When piping is jacked or installed in jacked
casing or tunnel under Metropolitan's pipe, ~.here must be
at least two feet of vertical clearance between the
bottom of Metropolitan's pipe and the top of the jacked
pipe, jacked casing or tunnel. We also require that
detail drawings of the shoring for the jacking or
tunneling pits be submitted for our review and approval.
Provisions must be made to grout any voids around the
exterior of the jacked pipe, jacked casing or tunnel. If
the piping is installed in a jacked casing or tunnel the
annular space between the piping and the jacked casing or
tunnel must be filled with grout.
- 6
g. Overhead electrical and telephone line
requirements:
1) Conductor clearances are to conform to the
California State Public Utilities Commission, General
Order 95, for Overhead Electrical Line Construction or
at a greater clearance if required by Metropolitan.
Under no circumstances-shall clearance be less than
35 feet.
2) A marker must be attached to the power pole
showing the ground clearance and line voltage, to help
prevent damage to your facilities during maintenance or
other work being done in the area.
3) Line clearance over Metropolitan's fee
properties and/or easements shall be shown on the
drawing to indicate the lowest point of the line
under the most adverse conditions including
consideration of sag, wind load, temperature change,
and support type. We require ~hat overhead lines be
located at least 30 feet laterally away from all
above-ground structures on the pipelines.
4) When underground electrical conduits,
120 volts or greater, are installed within
Metropolitan's fee property and/or easement, the
conduits must be incased in a minimum of three inches
of red concrete. Where possible, above ground warning
signs must also be placed at the right-af-way lines
where the conduits enter and exit the right-of-way.
h. The construction of sewerlines in Metropolitan's
fee properties and/or easements must conform to the
California Department of Health Services Criteria for the
Separation of Water Mains-and Sanitary Services and the
local City or County Health Code Ordinance as it relates to
installation of sewers in the vicinity of pressure
waterlines. The construction of sewerlines should also
conform to these standards in street rights-of- way.
i. Cross sections shall be provided for all pipeline
crossings showing Me~ropolitan's fee property and/or
easement limits and the location of our pipeline(s). The
exact locations of the crossing pipelines and their
elevations shall be marked on as-built d:awings for our
information.
- 7 -
j. Pothoiing of Metropolitan's pipeline is required
if the vertical clearance between a utility and
Metropolitan's pipeline is indicated on the plan to be one
foot or less. If the indicated clearance is between one and
two feet, potholing is suggested. Metropolitan will provide
a representative to assists others in locating and
identifying its pipeline. Two-working days notice is
requested.
k. Adequate shoring and bracing is required for the
full depth of the trench when the excavation encroaches
within the zone shown on Figure 4.
1. The location of utilities within Metropolitan's
fee property and/or easement shall be plainly marked to
help prevent damage during maintenance or other work done
in the area. Detectable tape over buried utilities
should be placed a minimum of 12 inches above the utility
and shall conform to the following requirements:
1) Water pipeline: A two-inch blue warning
tape shall be imprinted with:
"CAUTION BURIED WATER PIPELINE"
2) Gas, oil, or chemlcal pipeline: A
two-inch yellow warning tape shall be imprinted
with:
"CAUTION BURIED
PIPELINE"
3) Sewer or storm drain pipeline: A
two-inch green warning tape shall be imprinted with:
"CAUTION BURIED
PIPELINE"
4) Electric, street lighting,,.or traffic
signals conduit: A two-inch red warning tape shall
be imprinted with:
"CAUTION BURIED
CONDUIT"
5) Telephone, or television conduit: A
two-inch orange warning tape shall be imprinted
with:
"CAUTION BURIED CONDUIT"
- 8 -
m. Cathodic Protection requirements:
1) If there is a cathodic protection station
for Metropolitan's pipeline in the area of the proposed
work, it shall be located prior to any grading or
excavation. The exact location, description and manner
of protection shall be shown on all applicable plans.
Please contact Metropolitan's Corrosion Engineering
Section, located at Me~ropolitan's F. E. Weymou=h
Softening and Filtration Plant, 700 North Moreno
Avenue, La Verne, California 91750, telephone (714)
593-7474, for the locations of Metropolitan's cathodic
protection stations.
2) If an induced-current cathodic protection
system is to be installed on any pipelAne crossing
Metropolitan's pipeline, please contact Mr. Wayne E.
Risner at (714} 593-7474 or (213) 250-5085. He will
review the proposed system and determine if any
conflicts will arise with the existing ca~hodic
protection systems installed by Metropolitan.
3) Within Metropolitan's rights-of-way,
pipelines and carrier pipes (casings) shall be coated
with an approved protective coating to conform to
Metropolitan's requirements, and shall be maintained in
a neat and orderly condition as directed by Metropolitan.
The application and monitoring of cathodic protection
on the pipeline and casing shall conform to Title 49 of
the Code of Federal' Regulations, Part 195.
4) If a steel carrier pipe (casing) is used:
(a) Cathodic protection shall be provided
by use of a sacrificial magnesium anode (a sketch
showing the cathodic protection details can be
provided for the designers information}.
(b) The steel carrier pipe shall be
protected with a coal tar enem~l coating inside
and out in accordance with AWWA C203 specification.
n. All trenches shall be excavated to comply with the
CAL/OSHA Construction Safety Orders, Article 6, beginning
with Sections 1539 through 1547. Trench hackfill shall be
placed in 8-inch lifts and shall be compacted to 95 percent
relative compaction (ASTM D698) across roadways and through
protective dikes. Trench backfill elsewhere will be
compacted to 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM D698).
- 9
O. Control cables connected with the operation of
Metropolitan's system are buried within streets, its fee
properties and/or easements. The locations and elevations
of these cables shall be shown on the drawings. The
drawings shall note that prior to any excavation in the
area, the control cables shall be located and measures
shall be taken by the contractor to protect the cables in
place.
p. Metropolitan is a m~m~er of Underground Service
Alert (USA). The contractor (excavator) shall contact
USA at 1-800-422-4133 (Southern California) at least 48
hours prior to starting any excavation work. The contractor
will be liable for any damage to Metropolitan's facilities
as a result of the construction.
Paramount Right
Facilities constructed within Metropolitan's fee
properties and/or easements shall be subject to the
paramount right of Metropolitan to use its fee properties
and/or easements for the purpose for which they were
acquired. If at any time Metropolitan or its assigns
should, in the exercise of their rights, find it necessary
to remove any of the facilities from the fee properties
and/or easements, such removal and replacement shall be at
the expense of the owner of the facility.
Modification of MetrcDolitan's Facilities
When a manhole or other of Me~ropolitan's facilities
must be modified to accommodate your construction or recons-
truction, Metropolitan will modify the facilities with its
forces. This should be noted on the construction plans. The
estimated cost to perform this modification will be given to
you and we will require a deposit for this amount before the
work is performed. Once the deposit is received, we will
schedule the work. Our forces will coordinate the work with
your contractor. Our final billing will be based on actual
cost incurred, and will include materials, construction,
engineering plan review, inspection, and administrative
overhead charges calculated in accordance with Metropolitan's
standard accounting practices. If the cost is less than the
deposit, a refund will be made; however, if the cost exceeds
the deposit, an invoice will be forwarded for payment of the
additional amount.
- 10-
10. Drainage
a. Residential or co.~,ercial development typically
increases and concentrates the peak storm water runoff as
well as the total yearly storm runoff from an area, thereby
increasing the requirements for storm drain facilities
downstream of the development. Also, throughout the year
water from landscape irrigation, car washing, and other
outdoor domestic water uses flows into the storm drainage
system resulting in weed abatement, insect infestation,
obstructed access and other problems. Therefore, it is
Metropolitan's usual practice not to approve plans that show
discharge of drainage from developments onto its fee
properties and/or easements.
b. If water Rust be carried across or discharged onto
Metropolitan's fee properties and/or easements, Metropolitan
will insist that plans for development provide that it be
carried by closed conduit or lined open channel approved in
writing by Metropolitan. Also the drainage facilities must be
maintained by others, e.g., city, county, homeowners associati-
etc. If the development proposes changes to existing drainage
features, then the developer shall ~mke provisions to provide
for replacement and these changes mus~ be approved by Metropolita
in writing.
11. Construction Coordination
During construction', Metropolitan's field representative
will make periodic inspections. We request that a stipulation
be added to the plans or specifications for notification of
Mr. of Me~ropoli~an's Operations S~:vices Branch,
telephone (213) 250- ., at least two working days prior to
any work in the vicinity of our facilities.
12. Pipeline Loading Restrictions
a. Metropolitan's pipelAnes and conduits vary in
structural strength, and some are not adequate for
AASHTO H-20 loading. Therefore, specific loads over the
specific sections of pipe or conduit must be reviewed and
approved by Metropolitan. However, Metropolitan's pipelines
are typically adequate for AASHTO ~-20 loading provided that
the cover over the pipeline is not less than four feet or
the cover is not substantially increased. If the temporary
cover over the pipeline during construction is between three
and four feet, equipment must restricted to that which
- 11 -
imposes loads no greater than AASHTO H-10. If the cover is
between two and three feet, eguipment must be restricted to
that of a Caterpillar D-4 tract-type tractor. If the cover
is less than two feet, only hand equipment may be used.
Also, if the contractor plans to use any equipment over
Metropolitan's pipeline which will impose loads greater than
AASHTO H-20, it will be necessary to submit the specifications
of such equipment for our review and approval at least one
week prior to its use. More restrictive requirements may
apply to the loading guideline over the San Diego Pipelines
1 and 2, portions of the Orange County Feeder, and the
Colorado River Aqueduct. Please contact us for loading
restrictions on all of Metropolitan's pipelines and
conduits.
b. The existing cover over the pipeline shall be
maintained unless Metropolitan determines that proposed
changes do not pose a hazard to the integrity of the
pipeline or an impediment to its maintenance.
13.
Blastinq
a. At least 20 days prior to the start of any
drilling for rock excavation blasting, or any blasting,
t. he vicinity of Me~ropolitan's facilities, a two-part
preliminary conceptual plan shall be submitted to
Metropolitan as follows:
in
b. Part 1 of the conceptual plan shall include a
complete su~nary of proposed transportation, handling,
storage, and use of explosions.
c. Part 2 shall include the propcsed general concept
for blasting, including controlled blasting techniques and
controls of .noise, fly rock, airblast, and ground vibration.
14. CEQA Requirements
a. When Environmental Documents Have Not Been
Prepared
1) Regulations implementing the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) require that
Metropolitan have an opportunity to consult with the
agency or consultants preparing any environmental
documentation. We are required to review and consider
the enviror~nental effects of the project as shown in
the Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) prepared for your project before committing
Metropolitan to approve your request.
12 -
2) In order to ensure compliance with the
regulations implementing CEQA where Metropolitan is not
the Lead Agency, the following minimum procedures to
ensure compliance with the Act have been established:
a} Metropolitan shall be timely advised of
any determination that a Categorical Exemption
applies to the project. The Lead Agency is to
advise Metropolitan that it and other agencies
participating in the project have complied wi~h
the requirements of CEQA prior to Metropolitan~s
participation.
b) Metropolitan is to be consulted during
the preparation of the Negative Declaration or
EIR.
c) Metropolitan is to review and s-~wit any
necessary comments on the Negative Declaration or
draft EIR.
d) Metropolitan is to be indemnified for
any costs or liability arising out of any
violation of any laws or regulations including but
not limited to the California Environmental
Quality Act and its implementing regulations.
b. When Environmental Documents Have Been Prepared
If environmental documents have been prepared for your
project, please furnish us a copy for our review and files
in a timely manner so that we mmy have sufficient time to
review and comment. The following steps must also be
accomplished:.
1) The Lead Agency is to advise Metropolitan
that it and other agencies participating in the project
have complied with the requirements of CEQA prior to
Metropolitan's participation.
2) You must agree to indemnify Metropolitan, its
officers, engineers, and agents for any costs or
liability arising out of any violation of any laws or
regulations including but not limited to the California
Environmental Quality Act and its implementing regulations.
Metropolitan~s Plan-Review Cost
a. An engineering review of your proposed facilities
and developments and the preparation of a letter response
13 -
giving Metropolitan's comments, requirements and/or approval
that will require 8 man-hours or less of effort is typically
performed at no cost to the developer, unless a facility
must be modified where Metropolitan has superior rights. If
an engineering review and letter response requires more than
8 man-hours of effort by Metropolitan to determine if the
proposed facility or development is compatible with its
facilities, or if modifications to Metropolitan's manhole(s)
or other facilities will be required, then all of
Metropolitan's costs associated with the project must be
paid by the developer, unless the developer has superior
rights.
b. A deposit of funds will be required from the
developer before Metropolitan can begin its detailed
engineering plan review that will exceed 8 hours. The
amount of the required deposit will be determined after a
cursory review of the plans for the proposed development.
c. Metropolitan's final billing will be based on
actual cost incurred, and will include engineering plan
review, inspection, materials, construction, and
administrative overhead charges calculated in accordance
with Metropolitan's standard accounting practices. If the
cost is less than the deposit, a refund will be made;
however, if the cost exceeds the deposit, an invoice will be
forwarded for payment of the additional amount. Additional
deposits may be required if the cost of Metropolitan's
review exceeds the amount of the initial deposit.
16.
Caution
We advise you that Metropolitan's plan reviews and
responses are based upon information available to
Metropolitan which was prepared by or on behalf of
Metropolitan for general record purposes only. Such
information may not be sufficiently detailed or accurate for
your purposes. No warranty of any kind, either express or
implied, is attached to the information therein conveyed as
to its accuracy, and no inference should be drawn from
Metropolitan's failure to comment on any aspect of your
project. You are therefore cautioned to make such surveys
and other field investigations as you may deem prudent to
assure yourself that any plans for your project are correct.
- 14-
17. Additional Information
Should you require additional infozunation, please
contact Mr. Jim Hale, telephone (213) 250-6564.
JEH/MRW/lk
Rev. January 22,
Encl.
1989
NO PERMANENT STRUCTURES PERMITTED
M.W.D. PERMANENT RIGHT GF WAY
NO ROOF OVERHANG PERMITTED
FOOTING MUST NOT
ENCROACH INTO
ADJACENT
TO RIGHT
OF WAY
REQUIRED
OEPTH OF
FOOTING
NOTE.' MVL. D. PIgELINE SIZE, DEPTH, LOCATION
AND WIDTH OF PERMANENT RIGHT OF
WAY VARI~'S.
REQUIREMENTS FOR
BUILDINGS ANO FOOTINGS
AOJACENT TO
RIGHT OF WAY
3NI~
\\/
1
SECtiON
CROSS SECT10N
l $uASortin~ woll sholl hove o firm benring on the
g. Promol~e~ exSon.fion joint filler Nr
In N uaud .in $u~rt tot Sitel ;i~ one.
~ If trenc~ width is 4 lift or g~mr,~u~ oio~
centerline of ~0 pi~e, conctute
4. If trUn~ width is le~ thon 4 INI, cleon ~n~ buck-'
fi/t, c~octu~ to ~0~ ~unn/ty in occor~oncu
the ~ovisions of ASTM Ston~ 0-t~57-70 moy
be usu~ in lieu of the toncrete sv~ort wo//.
SECTION
TYPICAl. S6IPPORT FOR
M,W.O. PIP£LINK
IC-~547
Trench width
S£CTION A
3'P?efotmed expansion joint fillet
I. This method to be ,used where the
elilily line is 24'or greolet in
diameter on~ the clearance
between the uHHty line on~
pipe i$ IS"at
· . SDeciol protection may be re~uited
if the uHI/ty llne diameter
greoter thon ~0 pipe orif the
cover over the utility line to the
$tteet surface iS minitool ond there
i$ IS'or leas oleofence beNeen
pipe end the utility line.
S. Pro formed expansion joint filler to
comply with Ab'rM designation
4. M.W.O. requests
clearance whenever possible.
' O.?~O
joint fiHer
CROSS S 'CTION
T~PICAL E'XPANS/ON JOINT
FILL~rR PROT~rCTION FOR
OV~rRCROSS/NG OF
~ ~ O. PIP~ IN~
EXHIBIT "E"
POLICY FOR CLOSURE OR
MODIFICATION OF TRAFFIC FLOW
ON PUBLIC STREETS
CITY OF TEIVIECULA
POLICY FOR CLOSURE OR MODIFICATION
OF TRAFFIC FLOW ON PUBLIC STREETS
Traffic flow modifications covered by this policy include all "official traffic control devices"
authorized by the California Vehicle Code. Some of the methods authorized in particular
circumstances might include traffic islands, curbs, traffic barriers, or other roadway design
features, removing or relocation traffic signals and one-way traffic flow.
CRITERIA
A petition request for the closure or modification of traffic flow on public streets, including re-
openiv,[ previously closed streets, will be considered by the City for those streets meeting all of
the following criteria:
a. The street must be cla~i fuxi as a "local street" based on the City 's Circulation Element
of the General Plan.
b. The street should be primarily residential in nature.
Traffic volumes on the street must equal or exceed 2,000 vehicles per day for a
complet~ closure. Volumes for a partial closure must equal or exceed 1,000 vehicles
per day.
d. Public Safety Agencies have not provided sufficient evidence of any major public safety
concerns regarding the proposed street closure or traffic flow modification.
An engineering safety study has determined that the proposed closure or traffic flow
modifications will not create unreasonable traffic on the subject street or on streets
which may be impacted by diverted traffic.
Th,~ changes in traffic flow will not result in unreasonable liability exposure for the
City.
All persons signing a petition requesting a street closure or traffic flow modification
acknowledge it is the City's policy that they will need to participate in all costs directly
associated with the street closure or traffic flow modification in order to facilitate the
funding of the ultimate improvements needed to implement the street closure or traffic
flow modifications.
h. The requested action is authorized by legislative authority in State law.
PETITION REQUIREMENTS
The following procedures must be followed for submitting a petition to the City:
The City Traffic Engineer will examine the technical feasibility and anticipated impacts
of the proposed street closure or traffic flow modifications. This review will include,
but will not be limited to, items such as State law, the Circulation Element of the City's
General Plan, the type of road or street involved, compliance with engineering
regulations, existing traffic conditions, projected traffic conditions, the potential for
traffic diversion to adjacent streets, the increased liability exposure for the City or
conflicts with future planned improvements.
The City Traffic Engineer will determine the boundary of the "affected area" to be
pefitioned. The affected area will include those properties where normal travel routes
are altered by the street closure or traffic flow modifications, and/or properties which
are significan~y impacted by traffic that is to be diverted.
The petition requesting the street closure or traffic flow modifications must be
supported by a minimum of 75 percent of the total number of properde~ within the
"affected area." Persons submitting petitions must attempt to contact all property
owner~ within the affected area to determine their views on the proposed street closure
or modifications in traffic flow. The City will not accept a petition unless the petitioner
offers confirmation in a form satisfactory to the City Traffic Engineer that at least 85
percent of the property owners in the affected area have been contacted and have either
signed the petition in support of the street closure or traffic flow modification or have
signed a document indicating non-support for the street closure or traffic flow
modification.
d. At a minimum, petitions submitted to the City for review must include the following:
· A statement that all persons signing the petition acknowledge it is the City 's polic
y that they will need to participate in all costs directly associated with the street closure or traffic
flow modifications in order to facilitate the funding of the ultimate improvements needed to
implement the street closure or traffic flow modifications.
A drawing showing the exact location of the proposed street closure or traffic flow
modifications and the boundary of the "affected area" must be provided: The
drawing must include changes in traffic patterns anticipated as result of the
proposed street closure or traffic flow modifications.
· The petition language must also clearly explain the location and nature of the
proposed street closure or traffic flow modifications.
The petition language and attached drawing must be reviewed and approved by the
City Traffic Engineer prior to circulation to ensure its accuracy and ability to be
clearly understood.
· A specific reference to the Vehicle Code section authorizing such street closure or
traffic flow modifications must be provided.
A sample petition has been provided as an attachment to this policy.
pETITION REVTEW PROCvAqS
The following process will be used to review all petitions associated with a proposed street closure
or traffic flow modifications:
The City Traffic Engineer will review any petition to verify compliance with all petition
requirements set forth above, including whether the request in the petition is authorized
by State law. Any petition not complying with these requirements will not be accepted
for consideration.
If the petition contains all of the required information under this policy, the proposed
street closure or traffic flow modifications will be referred to all affected public
agencies in conjunction with the environmental review process. When applicable, these
agencies will include all City Departments, the local office of the California Highway
Patrol, County Sheriff and Fire Departments, all affected local utility companies,
Ternecttla Valley Unified School District, Riverside Transit Agency, the local office of
California Department of Transportation and any other agencies affected by the
requested closure or traffic flow modification.
ff the petition contains all of the required information under this policy, where the street .
closure or traffic flow modifications on a street or system of streets may be
accomplished by several different methods, a public workshop will be held to which all
petition .e.xs, affected property owners, and long-i~4m tenants such as mobile home park
residents will be invited to participate after the petition requesting the lnffic flow
modifications or street closure has been received and verified by the City. The purpose
of the workshop will be to attempt to determine the method that has the greatest
community support.
CITY ACTION ON STREET CLOSURE OR TRAFFIC FLOW MODIFICATION
REQUESTS
Once a petition contains all of the required information and all of the matters described above
under "Petition Rex/jew Process" have bet.n completed, the City Traffic Engineer will preparK a
report with recommeadalions and initiate ~nd complete the environmental review process for the
project. Project alternatives to the extent required will be defined for a temporavf or permanent
street closure or traffic flow modifications. The City of Temecula, Public/Traffic Safety
Commission will review the street closure or traffic flow modifications request, any environmental
review document prepared for the project, all public agency referral responses received during the
environmental review process, and the results of the technical staff review. The City of Temecula
Public/Traffic Safety Commission may support or recommend against the street closure or traffic
flow modifications. If the Public/Traffic Safety Commission denies the proposed street closure
or traffic flow modifications, that action will be final unless within ten days from the date of the
City Traffic Engineer's notification of the Commission's decision to all property owners within
the affected area, a property owner within the affected ~rea appeals the Commission's decision
to the City Council. In order to ~ the decision. the property owner shall file a written notice
of ~,ppeal with the Department of Public Works. The appeal will be heard in accordance with the
Appeal Process listed below. If the request is recommended for further consideration, after public
notice is given, the City Council may, after making any necessary findings, establish a temporary
or permanent period of street closure or traffic flow modifications.
When the City Council considers a recommendation of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission or
an appeal oft decision of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission with respect to a proposed street
closure or tnffic flow modifications, it will follow the process outlined below:
A letter explaining the street closure or traffic flow modifications and the time and
place when the matter will be heard by the City Council will be sent to all propony
owners, within the affected area prior to its installation.
All approaches to the proposed closure or modification will be posted notifying
motorists of upcoming Public Hearing.
A Public Hearing will be set before the City Council and public notice will be given
at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing by letter to property owners in the affected
area and by posting of signs on the affected roadways as described in this Section and
by a notice published in the newspaper.
Public notification of the City Council action will be given in cases when a street
closure or traffic modifications is approved by the City Council, .and signs giving notice
of the street closure or tnffic flow modifications will also be erected at least two weeks
prior to the date of implementation of the street closure or traffic rnedifications.
In the event the action involves a highway not under the exclusive jurisdiction of the
City of Temecula, the City will obtain the proper approvals from the California
Transportation Commission pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 21101 or
21100 (d) prior to implementation of the street closure or traffic flow modification.
A letter explaining the final City Council decision will be sent by the City to all
property owners, within the affected area.
The City Council tits the sole discretion, subject to all applicable laws, to appr'~e, modify,
continue or deny any street closure or traffic flow modifications request regardless of any support
or lack thereof via the petition process. Any action by the City Courteft to approve or deny a
street closure or traffic flow modifications request will be by adoption of a formal resolution.
DEPART1VIENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
PETITION TO CLOSE OR MODIFY THE TRAFFIC FLOW ON STREET
BETWEEN AND
BY THE INSTALLATION OF (Nature of Chan~es)
AT (Location~
DATE:
BEFORE YOU SIGN THIS PETITION, UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SIGNING! IT IS
RECOMMENDED THAT YOU PIEST READ THE CITY'S POLICY FOR CLOSURE OR
MODIFICATION OF TRAFFIC FLOW ON PUBLIC STREETS.
We, the undersigned resident of the area shown on the attached map do/do not petition the City of Temecula
to on Street as shown on the
attached drawing.
All persons signing this petition acknowledge it is the City' s policy that they will ned to participate in all costs
direc~y associated with the street closure or traffic flow modification in order to facilitate the funding of the
ultimate improvements needed to implement the street closure or traffic flow modification.
The specific California Veb, icle Code section(s) authorizing such closure or ~affic flow modifications states:
All persons signing this podlion do hereby certify that they reside within the area impacted by the proposed
~affic flow change as shown on the attached map.
Our designated contact person is:
Phone:
Signature Print Name Print Address
APPENDIX "A"
RULES AND REGULATIONS: SUBJECT MATTER
VEHICLE CODE SECTION
21100. Local authorities raay adopt rules and regulations by Ordlrmuce or resolution regarding the
following matters:
a. Regulating or prohibiting processions or assemblages on the highways.
Licensing and regulatig the operation of vehicles for hire and drivers of passenger vehicles for
c. Regulating uric by means of traffic officers.
Regulating waffle by means of official traffic control devices meetig the requiren~nts of Section
21400. ·
Regulating traffic by means of any person given temporary or permanem appoinun~nt for such
duty by the local authority whenever official waffic control devices are disabled or offerwise
inoperable, at the sc~nes of accidents or disastera, or at such locations as may require U'affic
direction for orderly traffic flow.
No pezson .~hall~ however, be appointed pursuant to this subdivision unless and until the local au~ority
has submitted to the commissioner or to the chief law enforcement officer exercising jurisdiction in the
enforcement of Waffle laws within the area in which such person is to perform such duty, for review, a
proposed program of instruction for the traiving of a person for such duty, and unless and until the
commissioner or such other chief law enforcement officer approves the proposed program. The cornmi~sioner
or such other chief law enforcement officer shall approve such a proposed program if he reasonably
determines lint the program will provide sufficient training for persons assigned to perform the duty described
in this subdivision.
Regulating traffic at the site of road or street construction or maintenance by persons authorized
for such duty by the local authority.
Licensing and regulating the operation of tow truck service or tow truck drivers whose principal
place of business or employment is within the jurisdiction of the local authority, excepting the
operation and operator of any auto dismantier's tow vehicle licensed under Section 1150:5 or any
tow truck operated by a repossessing agency licenseM under Chapter 11 {commencing with Section
7500) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code and its registered employees. Nothing
in this subSvision shall limit the authority of a city or city and county pursuant to Section 12 11 I.
Operation of bicycles, and, as specified in Section 21114.5, electric carts by physically disabled
persons, or persons :50 years of age or older, on the public sidewalks.
Providing for the appointment of nonstudent school crossing guards for the protection of persons
who are crossing a sweet or highway in the vicinity of a school or while returning thereafter to a
place of safety.
Regulating zhe methods of deposit of garbage and refuse in streets and highways for collection by
the local authority or by any person authorized by the local-authority.
Regulating cruising. The ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to this subdivision nhall
regulamd cruising, which ~11 be defined as the repealfive driving of a motor vehicle past a u'affic
control point, in traffic which is congested at or near the traffic control point, as dct~xmined by
lira ranking peace officer on duty wiltfin the affected area, within a specified lime period and after
the vehicle operator has been given an adequate written notice that further driving past the con~ol
point will be a viohtion of the ordinance or resolution. No person is in violation of an orditmnce
or resolution adopted pursuant to this subdivision unless (I) that person has been given the written
notice on a previous driving trip past the control point and then again passes the control point in
that same time interval ~nd (2) the be~nnlnE and el~ of the portion Of the s=eet subject to cn~ising
controls are clearly identified by signs that briefly and clearly state the appropriate provisions of
this subdivision and the local ordlrmnce or resolution on cruising.
Regulating or authorizing the removal by peace officers of vehicles unlawfully parked in a fire
lane, as described in Section 22500.1, on private property. Any removal pursuant to this
subdivision shall be consistera to the extent possible with the procedures for removal and slotage
set forth in Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 22650).
TRAFfiC CONTROL DEVICES: UNIFORM STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS
VEHICLE CODE SECTION
21100.1 Whenever any city or county, by ordirmnce or resolution, permits, restricts, or prohibits the
use of public or private highways pursuant to this article, any waffle control device erected by it on or after
January 1, 1981, shah conform to the uniform standards and specifications adopted by the Depatia~.nt of
Transportation pursuant to Section 21400.
REGULATION OF HIGHWAYS
VEHICLE CODE SECTION
21101. Local authorities, for those highways under their jurksdiction, may adopt rules and regulations
by ordinance or resolution on the following matters:
a. Closing any highway to vehicular traffic when, in the opinion of ~he legislative kody havix;g
jurisdiction, the highway is no longer needed for vehicular traffic.
Designating any highway as a through highway and requiring that all vehicles observe official
traffic control devices before entering or crossing the highway or designating any intersection as
a stop intersection and requiring all vehicles to stop at one or more enwances to the intersection.
Prohibiting the use of parficuhr h~ghways by certain vehicles, except as otherwise provided by the
Public Utilities Commission pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 1031) of Chapter 5
of Part I of Division i of Public Utilities Code. No ordinance which is adopted pursuant to this
subdivision after November I0, 1969, shall apply to any state highway which is included in the
National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, except an ordinance which has been
approved by the California Transportation Commission by a four-fifths vote.
d. Closing particular streets during regular school hours for the purpose of conducting automobile
driver training programs in the secondary schools and colleges of this state.
Temporarily closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and
other purposes when, in ~he opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction, the closing is necessary
for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the
temporary closing.
Prohibiting entry to, or exit from, or both, from any street by means of islands, curbs, waffle
ban'lets, or other wadway design features to implement the circulation element of a general plan
adopted pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with Section 65350) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title
7 of the Government Code. The rules and regulations authorized by th/s subdivision shall be
consistent with the responsibility of local government to provide for the health and safety of its
citizens. "
LOCAL AUTHORITY TO TEMPORARILY CLOSE HIGHWAY: CRIMINAL ACTIVITY
VEHICLE CODE SECTION
21101.4 (a) A local authority may, by ordinance or resolution, adopt rules and regulations for
temporaxily closing to through raffle a highway under its jurisdiction when all of the following conditions are,
after a public hearing, found to exist.
The local authority finds and deterrninPs that there is serious and continual criminal activity in the
portion of the highway recommended for temporary closure. This finding and determination ~hal]
be based upon the recommendation of the police deparUnent or, in the case of a highway in an
unincorporated area, on the joint recommendation of the sheriffs department and the Deparunent
of the California Highway Patrol,
2. The highway has not been designated as a through highway or arterial street.
3. Vehicular or pedestrian traffic on the highway contributes to the criminal activity.
The closure will not substantially adversely affect the operation of emergency vehicles, the
performance of mudicipal or public utility services, or the delivery of freight by commercial
vehicles in the area of the highway proposed to be temporarily closed.
Co)
A highway may be temporarily closed pursuant to subdivision (a) for not more than 18 months, except
that period may, pursuant to subdivision (a) , be extended for one additional period of not more than .18
months,
EXHIBIT "F"
LETTERS OF OPPOSITION
May 28~ 1999
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
RE: City Streets - Pina Colada
Regarding the ongoing discussion of closing south Pina Colada at Del Rey Road. we wish
to offer the following considerations:
1. Closing Pina Colada Strem forces drivers on much ofDel Rey Road to use Avenida Barca to
reach Margarita Street and/or Rancho California Road, the U. S. Post Office and stores.
2. Avenida Barca is a much narrower street than Pina Colada.
3. Avenida Barca consists of hills and curves.
4. Avertida Barca has no sidewalks.
5. Avenida Barca already has a great deal of foot traffic to and ~'om schools as well as other
pedestrians and cars.
We can't think of a much worse street policy than closing a wide, safe street and forcing
more traffic on the narrow, hilly, school route without sidewalks. What more can we say? The
idea of closing Pina Colada has no merit whatsoever.
Thank you for giving careful consideration to these points offered.
Mr. and Mrs. Alton Pace
30600 Del Rey Road
Temecula, CA 92591
Ph: (909) 676-4961
March 7, 1999
RECEIVED
MAR 0 9 1999
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Diana Broderick
40612 Nob Court
Temecula, California
92591
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
Dear Sir or Madam:
I would like to applaud your pending recommendation to City Council to deny
the petition to close Calla Pina Colada to through traffic,
Like it or not, our beautiful city is growing at a very rapid pace. Widening
major streets and improving freeway ingress/egress access has greatly
improved peak traffic flows. The planned Overland connection between
Jefferson Avenue, Ynez and Margarita Roads is highly anticipated. Any
additional route open to residents as an alternative to using major
thoroughfares improves mobility and reduces congestion. The completion of
North General Kearney and removal of the temporary barricade on Kahwea
Road would add two more routes to residents pleading for improved practical
choices. These changes would reduce traffic on Calte Pina Colada by creating
additional Meadowview access.
Your responsibility is to provide the best possible traffic and safety conditions
for all City of Temecula citizens. It is impossible, however, to please everyone.
I appreciate your efforts.
Sincerely,
Diana Broderick
CO: Steven .1. Ford, Mayor
EXHIBIT "G"
LETTER FROM DENNIS BUESCHEL
City of Temeeula
Ali S. Moghadam
43200 Business Park Dr.
Temecula Ca. 92589
Mr. Moghadam and Traffic Commissions
May 13. 1999
RECEIVED
MAY ]. ~ 1999
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEE~NG DEPARTMENT
As you know, the deaire of homeowners in the area of Calle Pina Colndn wish to see this
street dosed between the developments of Ridgeview and Meadowview. The closure of
Calle Pina Colada is still our number one goal to reduce the large volume of traffic and
speeding cars on this
The Tra~c Commission has asked for other ideas and alternatives to help aid in the
solution to this problem. I would like to propose the following idea as a possible solution
to be considered if total closure can not be achieved. Construct a one-way barrier on one
hnlf of the roadway between the developments of Redgeview and Meadowview just east
of the Edison easement. On the other half of the roadway in;,a~all three speed binrips.
These speed bumps should be close enough and high enough to make through traffic very
Undesirable but still allows access for em_sgency vehicles if needed. This type of barrier
still allows two-way traffic on either side for both associations homeownen. Once .~!g,
the goal is to reduce speeding cars and through mtffic. See attached maps.
Please fill flee to contact me if you have any questions.
Dennis Bueschel
41358 Yuba C~'.
Temecula, Ca.. 92591
Wk. 714-288-2521
He. 909-694-9233
, i~S~LJAL
I
ITEM NO. 4
TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT
ITEM NO. 6
FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT
ITEM NO. 7
COMMISSION REPORTS