HomeMy WebLinkAbout021000 PTS AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance t~ participate in this meeting, please contact
the office of the City Clerk at (909) 694-6444. Notifieatinn 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure aeeessibillty to that meeting [28 CFR35. 102.35. 104 ADA Title Ill
AGENDA
TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
TO BE HELD AT
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California
Thursday, February 10, 2000 at 6:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER:
FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL:
COMMISSIONERS: Coe, Edwards, Katan, Telesio, Connerton
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Commission on items that are not
listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commission
about an item no__t listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with
the Commission Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Recording Secretary before the
Commission gets to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one vote.
There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission request
specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
L Minutes of January 27. 2000
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Minutes of January 27, 2000
r:\Lrafflc\cornmlssn',,ageada\2000\021000\0210Agenda/ajp
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2. Evaluation of Traffic Circles - Via Cordoba
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review the effectiveness of traffic circles and
make a recommendation to the City Council.
3. Additional Left-Turn Lane - Mar~,arita Road at Rancho California Road
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission receive and file the report.
4. Traffic Engineer~s Report
5. Police Chief~s Report
6. Fire Chief's Report
7. Commission Reports
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission will be held on Thursday,
February 2.4, 2000, at 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive,
Temecala, California.
ITEM NO. I
MINUTES OF A REGULAR
MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
JANUARY 27, 2000
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission convened in a regular meeting
at 6:01 P.M., on Thursday, January 27, 2000, 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 Edwards.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Also Present:
Commissioners *Coe, Edwards, Katan, Telesio,
and Chairman Connerton.
None.
Director of Public Works Hughes,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
Senior Engineer Moghadam,
Associate Engineer Gonzalez,
Police Sergeant DiMaggio,
Administrative Secretary Pyle, and
Minute Clerk Hartsen.
* (Commissioner Coe arrived at 6:03 P.M.)
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes of January 13, 2000
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Minutes of January 13, 2000.
MOTION: Commissioner Edwards moved to approve the minutes. The motion was
seconded by Cor~missioner Telesio and voice vote reflected approval with the exception
of Commissioner Coe who was absent.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
2. Review of Sl~eed Limit - De Portola Road and Ynez Road
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission reaffirm the existing posted
speed limit of 45 MPH on Ynez Road and 50 MPH on De Portola Road
the input from the affected residents.
It was noted for the record that Commissioner Coe ardved at the meeting at
6:03 P,M.
Relaying that the matter presented before the Commission was requested to be
agendized by community members, Senior Engineer Moghadam provided a brief
overview of the staff report; noted that an unofficial speed survey had been conducted to
determine if there were any changes in the area of discussion with respect to volumes
and speed; relayed the legal restrictions associated with enforcing the speed limit if the
speed limit were lowered; and relayed staff's recommendation that the center line be
striped as a double-yellow line (which would prohibit passing) due to the drivers sited
passing vehicles.
Mr. Victor Jones, Post Office Box 1624, representing the Los Ranchitos Homeowners
Association, noted that he was opposed to the posted speed limits, and relayed his
desire to give his 3-minute public comment time to Mr. Curtsinger.
Mr. Curt Curtsinger, 29083 Ynez Road, expressed the following comments and
recommendations:
With respect to the Temecula General Plan, challenged the designation of Ynez
Road (from Santiago Road southbound to De Portola Road/Margarita Road) as a
Secondary four-lane road, stating that this portion of Ynez Road had been solely
improved to a Principal Collector two-lane road; and provided additional data
regarding the surrounding area.
Per Caltrans discussions, relayed that the average posted speed on a Collector 2-
Lane Road should be between 30-35 MPH.
Queried the speed limit determination being established by the results of speed
surveys; noted that the sole restriction to not adhering to a speed limit established
by surveying (on State Highways) was that Law Enforcement could not utilize radar
for enforcement purposes (acknowledging that the roads of discussion were not
State Highways).
Noted that a properly posted speed limit could be enforced be means other than
radar.
With respect to the Prima Facie Speed Law, sited the Vehicle Code, noting the
Local Authority's jurisdiction to decrease local speed limits.
Relayed the following three recommendations: a) that a speed survey be conducted
expeditiously, b) that there be consideration to change the designation of Ynez
Road and De Portola Road (between Santiago Road, and Margadta Road) to a
Principal Collector two-lane road, and c) that when the Highway 79 Road
Improvement Project was complete, the City install No Through Traffic signs at the
four major intersections leading into Los Ranchitos, and additionally restdct turning
movements onto those same roads during certain rush hour periods of the day.
Mr. Mike Krone, 29001 Ynez road, queded staff as to whether there were State funds
received by the City of Temecula for the maintenance of Ynez and Margarita Roads,
thereby restricting the City's jurisdiction to lower the speed limits.
Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the City maintained Ynez and Margarita Roads;
and requested that Director of Public Works Hughes provide additional information.
With respect to Ynez Road, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that to the best of
his knowledge, the City had not utilized any Federal funds for the construction,
maintenance or improvement of Ynez Road.
In response to Mr. Krone's quedes, Senior Engineer Moghadam specified that with
respect to the speed survey results, that the average speed on Ynez Road was 47 MPH,
and on De Portola Road was 52-53 MPH. Associate Engineer Gonzalez relayed that the
speed survey had been conducted between approximately 2:00 P.M. and 3:00 P.M.
Mr. Krone recommended that the City lower the speed limits in the area of discussion
due to the tendency of drivers to drive above the posted limits, or that there be increased
Police enforcement of the current speed limits.
In response to Commissioner Edwards, Senior Engineer Moghadam clarified the
following:
That the classification of a roadway does not determine the speed limit, or the
authority of the local jurisdiction to establish a speed limit with the exception of a
prima facie speed limit such as a school zone, or a residence district.
Noted that there were certain requirements associated with a residential area
qualifying as a residential district (i.e., the number of residents accessing the
roadway).
Relayed that the speed limits established by the surveys (based on the 85 percentlie
of speed traveled in a certain area) justified the posting of lowered speed limits
regardless of the classification of a road (i,e,, Rancho Califomia Road had varied
speed limits for portions of the same road, within the same road classification
justified by the surveyed results).
Advised that data revealed that the majority of drivers do travel at prudent speeds.
For Commissioner Telesio, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the roads were
classified in the City's General Plan, reiterating that this classification had no bearing on
the establishment of speed limits.
For Commissioner Edwards, Senior Engineer Moghadam confirmed that the City
maintained speed limits established by the standard guidelines (i.e., Caltrans standards)
and confirmed that with respect to Mr. Curtsingers comment, the City could lower the
speed limits (without utilizing the surveyed data), advising that the Police Department
would not be able to enforce the lowered limits with radar.
In response to Mr. Krone's comments, Commissioner Telesio advised that it would not
be prudent to post a lowered speed limit in order to attempt to maintain speeds at the
current posted limits (based on the comment that ddvers will drive faster than the posted
limits); and recommended posting the speed at the safe limit, and enforcing that limit.
With respect to Commissioner Katan's queries regarding the Four-Lane designation in
the General Plan, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the General Plan Circulation
Element was in the process of being updated; advised that based on the overall
projected build-out of the City, this area would most likely remain classified as a four-
lane Secondary Artedal Road; relayed that if the road was constructed at a future point
as a four-lane road, that if the volumes of traffic remained the same, the speed limits
would not be necessarily be revised.
In light of the current construction project on Highway 79 South, Commissioner Coe
relayed that he would be reluctant to change the speed limits in this area at this time;
and noted that when the construction project was complete there would most likely be
significant reductions in speed and volumes.
Noting that he had visited the area of discussion on Sunday, January 23, 2000,
Chairman Connerton relayed that he timed the vehicles travelling from Villa Del Sur
Drive to Verde Ddve; advised that dudng this two-hour period he witnessed five vehicles
passing other vehicles in an unsafe manner; relayed that most of the vehicles appeared
to be driving within the parameters of the posted speed limit; per his Tuesday visit to the
area. noted that the results were similar; queried whether the speed limits could be
modified to be consistently posted at 45 MPH, noting the existing variant limits (i.e., 45
MPH, 50 MPH).
For Chairman Connerton, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed the restrictions
associated with lowering the speed limit (if the revised limit were not based on surveyed
results), noting that a citation for speeding could be dismissed, and therefore the speed
could not be effectively enforced.
Police Sergeant DiMaggio concurred that if a speed limit was posted without utilizing the
aforementioned guidelines (the 85 percentlie surveyed results) that the citations could be
dismissed, depending on the judge or commissioner sitting on the bench; advised that
the lowered speed limit would pose restrictions on the enforcement process; and for
Commissioner Edwards, relayed the rationale for utilizing radar in this area for speed
enforcement.
For informational purposes, Chairman Connerton noted that seven out of ten cars
traveling in this area did not stop at the Jedediah Smith Road four-way stop sign,
relaying the need for enforcement in this area.
Chairman Connerton recommended that the speed limits in the entire area be posted at
45 MPH which would create consistency, regardless of the portion of the road where
citations would have the potential of being dismissed; noted that the matter needed to be
addressed; and relayed that during his visit to the area (previously noted) he had seen
three Police vehicles ddve by, commending the Police Department for their presence in
the area.
Commissioner Telesio queried the location of the area where the speed citations could
not be enforced if the limits were lowered to 45 MPH in the entire area, noting that the
inconsistency with respect to the existing varying posted speed limits could confuse
drivers.
Police Sergeant DiMaggio relayed that there were stop signs separating the varying
speed limits.
For Commissioner Telesio, Senior Engineer Moghadam and Commissioner Edwards
clarified that if the posted speed limits were arbitrarily lowered (dismissing the 85
percentlie surveyed speed) that the speed citations issued via the utilization of radar
could potentially be dismissed, and therefore the speed limits could not be enforced
effectively.
Chairman Connerton reiterated his previous recommendation, and recommended that
additionally, the centedine be stdped as a double yellow line in order to prohibit passing.
Commissioner Edwards relayed that in her opinion, if the speed limit were lowered, the
unsafe passing of vehicles would increase, creating a hazardous condition.
For clarification, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that staff was in concurrence
with the recommendation to place a double-yellow stripe in the area, to restdct the
unsafe passing, and with respect to the recommendation to lower the speed limit overall
to 45 MPH, advised that the speed could not be effectively enforced, advising that there
was no data to support the reduced limit.
Chairman Connerton queried whether this issue should be continued until additional
speed studies had been completed.
Director of Public Works Hughes recommended the following: a) that the area be
double-striped at this time, b) that when the Highway 79 Road Improvement Project was
completed that the area be surveyed, and c) after the conduction of the survey, that the
speed limits be posted with enforceable limits.
For Commissioner Edwards, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed the likelihood of a
new survey revealing consistent data (after completion of the Highway 79 Project); noted
the benefit of the Police Department being able to enforce the posted limits, relaying that
studies have demonstrated that arbitrarily reducing the posted limits does not slow traffic
speed.
MOTION: Commissioner Coe moved to direct staff to double-stripe Ynez and De Portola
Roads, and to maintain the current posted speed limits. Commissioner Edwards
seconded the motion. (This motion ultimately passed. See page 6)
For Commissioner Edwards, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that the
approximate date for the completion of the Highway 79 South Project would be
December of 2000. For community informational purposes, Commissioner Edwards
noted that the Highway 79 South Project was not a City project.
At this time voice vote was taken reflecting unanimous approval.
For Chairman Connerton, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the stdping project
could be completed in approximately 3-4 weeks.
Commissioner Edwards requested that this issue be agendized for consideration in
November of 2000, in order to the Commissioner to receive an update regarding the
Highway 79 Project, and a timeframe for the re-surveying of the area.
For Mr. Curtsinger, Senior Engineer Moghadam clarified the relationship between the
surveyed 85 percentlie speed and the posted limit, specifying that the posted limit was
set at the next increment of 5 MPH below that 85 percentlie speed.
In response to Mr. Curtsinger, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that based on
years of evaluation, data had demonstrated that if all the posted speed limit signage
were removed, the 85 percentlie speed traveled would remain the same; and noted that
the factors that directed the speed of drivers were, as follows: a) the number of
driveways in the area, b) the curves in the road, and c) site distance issues.
For Mr. Krone, Chairman Connerton provided additional information regarding the
posted limits and the inability to enforce lowered speed limits effectively if the limits were
lowered; relayed that when additional studies were performed, that the speed limits
could be lowered if the data justified the reducing of speed limits; and noted that the
public members could appeal the Commission's decision (to not lower the posted speed
limits) to the City Council.
For Mr. Jones, Senior Engineer Moghadam and Commissioner Edwards provided
additional information regarding the relationship between the curvatures presented in the
roads and the associated speeds traveled in the area.
Mr. Jones commented on Commissioner Coe utilizing the route of discussion to access
the proximate school site. Commissioner Coe provided additional information regarding
the public's access to public roads.
3. Commissioner Appointment to the Public Traffic Safety Awareness Groul~
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission appoint one (1) Commissioner
to represent the City of Temecula on the Public Traffic Safety Awareness
Group.
Relaying the City Council's recommendation that one Public/Traffic Safety
Commissioner be appointed to serve on the Murrieta/Temecula Public Traffic Safety
Awareness Group, Chairman Connerton noted the issue before the Commission for
consideration.
Commissioner Coe volunteered to serve on the aforementioned committee.
Chairman Connerton relayed that numerous individuals would volunteer to serve on this
committee due to the opportunity to impact the community, noting that he had a desire to
serve on the committee, himself.
Commissioner Edwards relayed her desire to serve on the committee.
Chairman Connerton queried Commissioner Edwards and Coe with respect to the
amount of time available to devote to this effort.
Commissioners Edwards and Coe relayed that they had sufficient availability of time to
effectively serve on the committee.
Chairman Connerton recommended that Commissioner Edwards be appointed as the
committee member to represent the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, and that
Commissioner Coe be appointed as an alternate committee member to serve in
Commissioner Edwards' stead if she was unavailable to attend; and relayed that the
committee member would regularly update the Commission with respect to the
committee meetings.
Reiterating his recommendation, Chairman Connerton relayed the importance of the
appointment, noting Commissioner Edwards' involvement in the community and the
associated traffic aspects; and commended her abilities with respect to public
awareness.
Chairman Coe noted that his seven years of service on the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission contributed to his awareness of traffic issues with respect to the public; and
relayed that if Chairman Connerton viewed this matter of appointment as his sole duty,
to make the appointment unilaterally, then sobeit.
Chairman Connerton queded whether the Commission disagreed with his
recommendation, and whether the Commission had a desire to appoint an alternate
Commissioner.
Commissioner Telesio queried whether it was within the purview of the Commissioners
to make this appointment.
Chairman Connerton relayed that the Commission could make the appointment, noting
that he recommended that Commissioner Edwards be the appointed committee
member.
Based on experience and a schedule that was unencumbered, Commissioner Telesio
nominated Commissioner Coe for the committee member position, and Commissioner
Edwards for the position of alternate committee member.
Commissioner Edwards noted that per discussions with alternate committee members,
the Red Light Camera issue would be matter for committee consideration; relayed that
she had attended all the associated Red Light Camera workshops, advising that her
involvement and recommendations with respect to this matter could be an asset to the
committee; and noted that she would enjoy serving on the committee.
It was the general consensus of the Commission to appoint Commissioner Coe to serve
as the Commissioner to represent the City of Temecula on the Public Traffic Awareness
Group, and that Commissioner Edwards be the alternate member (Voice vote reflected
3/2 in favor of the appointment recommendation).
Commissioner Edwards noted that she was not opposed to the recommended
appointment, but that she had looked forward to serving on the committee.
TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT
With respect to Mr. Guerriero's comments raised at the January 13, 2000
Public/Traffic Safety Commission meeting regarding the recommendation to
consider installing dual left-turn lanes from southbound Margadta Road to
eastbound Rancho Califomia Road, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that
staff had investigated the matter and due to the increased volumes in this area,
had concurred with Mr. Guerriero's recommendation.
Chairman Connerton relayed his desire to have the matter agendized for a
PublicrTraffic Safety Commission meeting.
With respect to the problems reported by Commissioner Edwards at the traffic
signal at Ynez Road/Tierra Vista Road, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that
the issue had been addressed.
POLICE CHIEF'S REPORT
With respect to Sparkman Elementary School, Police Sergeant DiMaggio relayed
that numerous vehicles have been parking in the bike lane on Pio Pico Road;
queried whether the curb in that area could be painted red or whether there could
be signage installed, stating No stopping, standing, orparking for enforcement
purposes; and noted that due to the width of the read, there was the potential for
a collision.
Senior Engineer Moghadam recommended that the issue not be addressed until
the School District had completed the proposed additional provisions for on-site
parking for parents.
Police Sergeant DiMaggio noted that the public members (parking in the
restricted area) had relayed to the Police Officers that the school had distributed
flyers stating that if the ddvers remained in their vehicles while parking in the
restricted zone, that they would not be cited; and noted his reluctance to cite the
drivers if they had been noticed by the school that there would be no violations.
Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that staff had had several meetings with
the School District regarding the parking impacts at the school sites; advised that
at this time the School District had proposed to provide additional on-site parking
in the area of discussion; and recommended that the Police not address the
issue until the parent have an alternate option for parking, and that after the
completion of the parking project that the City consider painting the curb red.
While acknowledging the benefit of the School Distdct working with the City at
this point in time, Chairman Connerton relayed his dismay with the School
District allegedly distributing flyers allowing parents to park in a no parking zone.
For clarification purposes, Director of Public Works Hughes concurred that if the
school distributed the flyer, it was an inappropriate action; noted that if an
individual parked in the restricted area, that individual would be subjecting
themselves to possible enforcement; relayed the rationale for the
recommendation that the matter not be aggressively addressed at this time due
to the lack of provisions for parents to park in alternate areas; and reiterated that
the School District was in the process of addressing the issue.
For Chairman Connerton, Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that the
School District had made diligent efforts within the last year to work with the City
to find solutions to the negative impacts related to the school sites.
With respect to the proposed parking provisions, Director of Public Works
Hughes relayed that although he could not provide a specific date for
construction of the project, that the plans had been submitted to the City, and
approved; and noted that the project would most likely begin construction within
the next three to four months, possibly sooner.
Commissioner Telesio noted his concern with setting a precedent, allowing the
School District to determine which laws would be enforced unilaterelly; and
recommended that it be relayed that to the School District that there needed to
be coordination with the Police Department with respect to these issues.
Police Sergeant DiMaggio relayed that the Police Department was receiving calls
from residents, requesting the Police to address the illegal parking.
Commissioner Coe recommended that if the School did actually send the alleged
flyer (stating that parents would not be cited while parking in a no parking zone)
that the school should be instructed to send a new letter, correcting the
misinformation.
Police Sergeant DiMaggio reiterated that he had not seen the letter, but that it
had been relayed to the Officers at the site by the parents that the school had
distributed the letters; and queried whether a portion of the bike lane could be
removed.
Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that staff would not recommend removal of
the bike lane at this point in time.
Director of Public Works Hughes noted that staff could address the issue of the
letter with the School District and investigate who generated the letter.
Police Sergeant DiMaggio relayed that his concern was with respect to the safety
impacts of the situation, noting that the Police Department could move forward
with enforcement; advised that he would instruct the Officers to provide warnings
for a week's time, prior to the issuance of citations.
After additional Commissioner discussion, Director of Public Works Hughes
recommended that staff send a letter to the school addressing the flyer issue,
and that there be a scheduled meeting with City staff, the Police Department, the
principal, and the School Distdct in order to address this issue.
For Commissioner Katan, Police Sergeant DiMaggio relayed that the parking
matter was a problem pdor to the issuance of the alleged flyer.
In response to Sergeant DiMaggio's queries (in response to community
comments relayed to him) regarding funding issues for flashing yellow lights in
the school zone at Chaparral High School, Director of Public Works Hughes
provided additional information; advised that the City was working in conjunction
with the School Distdct regarding these matters; and noted that Police Sergeant
DiMaggio could direct community quedes to his office.
Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that staff was in the process of receiving
quotes for the costs associated with installing additional school flashing lights.
C=
With respect to Police Sergeant DiMaggio's quedes regarding the signals at
Margarita Road/Rancho Vista Road, Senior Engineer Moghadam specified the
improvements recently completed in this area, relaying that the improvements
would be operational within a week's time.
D,
For informational purposes, Police Sergeant DiMaggio provided data to the
Commissioners regarding State funding legislature issues.
FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT
No comments.
COMMISSION REPORTS
For Commissioner Coe, Director of Public Works Hughes provided additional
information regarding the delay in the Rainbow Canyon Road Improvement
Project, noting that staff had deliberately attempted to delay this project until the
completion of the trenching work associated with Fiber Optics was completed in
this area; and advised that after the appropriation provisions for funding were
obtained, that the Rainbow Canyon Road Project would begin construction.
B=
With respect to the 1 ,t Street Bridge Project, Commissioner Coe recommended
that there be consideration to connect 1't Street to Mercedes Street, noting that
the connection would significantly improve circulation.
Director of Public Works Hughes relayed that the property associated with the
proposed connection was privately held; noted that the intersections in the area
would be significantly changed in conjunction with the 1't Street Project,
specifying, as follows: a signal would be placed at Old Town Front Street and 1~
Street, and 1`~ Street would be re-aligned slightly to the south to lineup with
Santiago Road, and would be signalized; and advised that staff would investigate
the recommendation, noting that the current proposed project could significantly
improve circulation in the area.
D,
Commissioner Coe recommended that there be consideration to rename
Highway 79 South to a name inclusive of the word Temecula; and requested that
the matter be agendized within the next 60 days.
For Commissioner Telesio's quedes regarding the lack of a designation at
Sparkman Elementary School notifying ddvers of the ending of the school zone,
Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the Vehicle Code and the Department
of Transportation requires that within school zones there be an ending
designation which could be implemented via one of the following options: 1) a
sign stating End of school zone, or 2) installation of a speed limit sign; and
relayed that staff would ensure that one of the designations had been placed at
the site.
Commissioner Coe expressed oongretulations to Commissioner Telesio for his
recent appointment to the Planning Commission; and relayed that he would be
greatly missed.
Commissioner Telesio noted that it had been a pleasure to serve on the
Commission; and relayed that he would be an unofficial liaison of the
Public/Traffic Safety Commission in his new role, promoting the responsibilities of
the Commission; and noted that he was of the opinion that the Public/Traffic
Safety Commission should review projects that are presented to the Planning
Commission in order to proactively address traffic impacts.
Commissioner Edwards expressed her congratulations to Commissioner Telesio,
noting that she had gleaned knowledge from serving with him on the
Commission; and noted that he would be missed.
Chairman Connerton echoed the previous congratulatory comments to
Commissioner Telesio; relayed that his experience would be a great asset to the
Planning Commission; and provided additional information regarding his
recommendation that the Publicrrraffic Safety Commission review the
development plans presented to the Planning Commission in order to address
impacts associated with traffic prior to development.
For informational purposes, Chairman Connerton noted that at Temecula Valley
High School the curb pick-up area had been painted white; and relayed that
vehicles were still making unsafe U-turns in this area.
Chairman Connerton commended the Police Department regarding their diligent
efforts and expeditious response to two recent traffic incidents, one near his
residence, and one on Rancho California Road.
Commenting on the timing issues related to the City's signals, Chairman
Connerton relayed that while traveling on Margarita Road he waited
approximately two minutes at the Margarita Road/Solana Way signal although
there were no cars on Solana Way. Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that
staff would investigate the matter.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:38 P.M. Chairman Connerton formally adjourned this meeting to Thursday,
February 10, 2000 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park
Ddve, Temecula.
Chairman Darrell L. Connerton
Administrative Secretary Anita Pyle
ITEM NO. 2
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic
February 10, 2000
Item 2
Evaluation of Traffic Circles - Via Cordoba
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review the effectiveness of traffic circles and make a
recommendation to the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
At the meeting of August 24, 1999, per a request from a resident, the City Council directed staff to conduct
a demonstration project by installing traffic circles on Via Cordoba and evaluate lheir effectiveness in reducing
vehicle speeds and volumes over a four (4) month evaluation period. Staff was directed to present the resnits
of the evaluation to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission and the City Council for consideration of permanent
improvements if the demonstration project proved to be effective. The four-month evaluation period has
concluded and a before and after survey has been performed. The public has been notified of the
Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the normal agenda notification process
and by written notification to the residents along Via Cordoba.
At the meeting of June 24, 1999, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission considered a request from
representatives of the Bridlevale Homeowners Association (HOA) to evaluate the need for Multi-way stop
controls at intersections along Via Cordoba due to increased vehicle volumes and speeds. The evaluation
determined that Multi-way stop controls were not warranted at intersections along Via Cordoba and the
Commission approved staff's recommendation to deny the request.
At the meeting of July 13, 1999, the City Council received an appeal to the Public/Traffic Safety
Commission's decision from the residents. The residents asked that the City Council agendize the issue and
reconsider the installation of Multi-way stop controls along Via Cordoba to control vehicle speeds.
At the meeting of August 24, 1999, the City Council upheld the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's decision
to deny the request for Multi-way stop controls on Via Cordoba. However, staff was directed to install
temporary traffic circles on Via Cordoba to address neighborhoed speeding concerns. Based on this direction,
staff developed two (2) types of traffic calming devices for installation at five (5) intersections along Via
Cordoba in an effort to reduce the speed.
On September 30, 1999, a letter was mailed to the residents of Via Cordoba that explained the intent of the
traffic calming demonstration program and identified the types of temporary traffic calming devices that cotrid
be expected on Via Cordoba. The letter also stated that the devices would be evaluated for a period of four
months to determine their effectiveness and that following the evaluation period the City Council would be
apprised of the results of the evaluation and provide further direction on installing permanent improvements.
Temporary traffic circles and median islands were installed along Via Cordoba on October 6, 1999. The
temporary traffic circles were installed at Via Salito/Corte Bravo and Corte Bella Donna, which are four-way
intersections. Temporary median islands were installed at Loma Linda Road, Corm Rosa, and Corte Zorita,
which are three-way intersections and due to driveway locations traffic circles were not appropriate. In
addition to the temporary devices, advanced warning signs were installed along Via Cordoh at both the traffic
circle and median island locations. The approximate cost for the research, data collection, design and
implementation of the temporary traffic calming devices including signing and striping was approximately
$10,000.
A before and after study was performed to determine the effectiveness of the temporary traffic calming
devices. The study includes an evaluation of vehicle volume data, and speed data before and after installation
of the temporary devices. Vehicle volume and speed data was collected at four locations on Via Cordoba on
September 21, 1999. Following the installation of the temporary traffic calming devices, vehicle volume and
speed data was collected at the same four locations on November 17, 1999. The table below summarizes the
results of the before and after evaluation conducted on Via Cordoba.
LOCATION BEFORE (9/21/99) AFTER ( 11 / 17/99)
Btw. Via Quivera and Volume(ADT) 2,078 1,821
Via Salito/Corte Bravo Speed (85m %) 32 MPH 33.5 MPH
Btw. Via Lucia and Volume (ADT) 1,277 1,304
Loma Linda Road Speed (85* %) 31 MPH 33 MPH
Btw. Corte Valle and Volume(ADT) 2,071 2,046
Corte Rosa Speed (85* %) 33 MPH 33 MPH
Btw. Corte Zorita and Volume (ADT) 1,708 1,593
Corte Bella Donna Speed (85* %) 31 MPH 30 MPH
As shown, the before and after evaluation indicates that the installation of the temporary traffic calming devices
did not significantly reduce the overall speed of traffic or vehicle volumes along Via Cordoba. In fact, the
results indicate that the 85m percentile speeds increased by 1 to 2 miles per hour at two of the locations.
Additionally, our observation of vehicle speeds at the temporary traffic circles revealed that a majority of the
motorists did slow down at the traffic circle, but increased their speed immediately after leaving the circle
location. The temporary median islands did not prove to be effective in reducing vehicle speeds even at the
median locations.
An observation of conditions and driver behavior following the installation of the devices revealed several
operational problems. The problems observed at the circles included vehicles making illegal left-turns (against
opposing traffic), failure to yield to vehicles in the circle area, and potential vehicle versus pedestrian conflicts
as vehicles maneuvered around the circles. The problems observed at the median island locations were
elimination of on-street parking in some areas and restriction of convenient access to properties at other
locations.
In addition to the statistical evaluation, the "pulse" of the neighborhood was evaluated to determine the
perceived effectiveness of the tempermy traffic calming devices. During the evaluation period staff received
input from approximately 24 residents of Via Cordoba and adjacent streets regarding the traffic calming
devices. Some of the complaints received included the devices are ugly, motorists are confused by the circles,
2
r:\traffic\commian\agenda\2000\0210\fv, cordoba/ajp
children are using the circle as a playground, trash collects in the circles, vehicles continue to speed between
the devices, large trucks and school buses cannot maneuver around them, loss of on-street parking in front of
some homes, too many signs, access has been restricted, and neighborhood property values have been
decreased by this installation. The positive "feedhack" reeeived included the circles are wonderful, these are
better than "Stop" signs and thank you for doing something about vehicle speeds.
According to the residents, a major portion of the increased traffic is related to the soccer games held at the
Kent Hintergardt Park, this issue can not be addressed by installation of various traffic control devices, and
requires coordination with the game organizers.
Of the 24 responses received by staff, approximately 19 were opposed to the traffic calming devices and only
five (5) supported their use.
The table below summarizes the results of the responses received.
Resident of Via Cordoba
Resident of adjacent streets
Unknown
In favor of traffic calming Against traffic calming devices on
devices on Via Cordoba Via Cordoba
2 4
2 12
1 3
Following the installation of the temporary traffic calming devices, the Bridlevale Homeowners Association
conducted their own survey of the residents on Via Cordoba and adjacent streets. The survey consisted of six
questions with pre-determined responses. The HOA submitted a total of 38 responses to the City.
The table below summarizes the survey responses.
QUESTIONS
1. Do you feel that the temporary traffic circles and
median islands have slowed traffic?
2. How long should the temporary median be tested?
3. Do you feel that there are too many No Parking
signs?
4. Do you wish to see red marked curbs in lieu of No
Parking signs?
5. Do you want the street returned to the way that it
was no circles nor median islands?
6. What should the final medians be made of?.
RESPONSE TOTAL RESPONSES
Yes 22
No 16
2 months 19
3 months 5
4 months 6
(Remove) 8
Yes 25
No 11
(No response) 2
Yes 27
No 9
(Neither) 2
Yes 18
No 19
(None) 1
Landscaped flowers 26
and trees
Plain colored brick 2
(Neither Imp.) 9
(Either Imp.) 1
( ) - represents responses other than the pre-determined responses
In addition to the information shown above, a survey form was hand delivered to residents of Via Cordoba
and the adjacent streets on February 3, 2000. The survey asked, "if the residents believed that the temporary
traffic calming devices have been effective in reducing overall vehicle speeds along Via Cordoba' and "if the
traffic calming devices were found to be effective, would they support permanent improvements". Due to a
request from the HOA representatives not to delay the meeling da~e, the results of the survey will be presented
at the meeting.
Emergency response times were also evaluated during the four-month evaluation period. Following the
installation of the temporary traffic calming devices, a fire apparatus from Station 84, which is responsible
for this area, performed a "mock nm' on Via Cordoba. Although, the vehicle did maneuver around the traffic
circle slowly, their response time was not significantly reduced nor did it create a problem. Subsequent
observations by station personnel during the four-month evaluation period resulted in the same findings. No
delays were experienced at the median island locations.
Independent studies that have been conducted by other agencies that have implemented traffic calming devices
indicate that typical response times at traffic circles are reduced by approximately 5 to 8 seconds per circle
for fire trucks. The studies further show that typically no delays are experienced at raised median island
locations. These results are consistent with those found on Via Cordoba.
The decision to start using traffic circles and/or raised median islands as a means of reducing neighborhood
vehicle speeds on a citywide basis will need to consider potential design, construction and maintenance costs.
The cost to design and construct a traffic circle can vary from $10,0130 to $20,000 depending on the location
and type of improvements desired. The estimated cost includes some form of landscaping. Based on our
observations of operational problems at the test locations, modification to the existing improvements may also
be necessary to mitigate these problems. The additional cost to modify existing improvements is unknown and
would be in addition to the estimated cost to construct the circles.
The cost to design and construct the raised median island varies from $5,000 to $15,000 depending on the
location and type of improvements needed. The estimated cost includes some form of landscaping. If the City
chooses the median island design that is currenfiy simulated on the street, the existing curb, gutter and sidewalk
area will need to be modified to provide a "narrowing" effect. The estimated cost to construct the additional
improvements may vary between $20,000 to $40,000 depending on the degree of improvements needed.
In addition to the design and construction improvements, landscape and roadway maintenance costs would be
incurred with the installation of both types of improvements. The costs are unknown at this time but may vary
from $500 to $1,500 per year per location.
To date, Staff has received numerous requests to implement some type of traffic calming device at
approximately ten (10) locations throughout the City. Based on the estimated cost previously stated, the
construction of traffic circles at these locations could cost as much as $200,000. Currently, there are no funds
appropriated in the City's Capital Improvement Program for this type of improvement. It should be noted that
the existing adopted City Policy for closure or modification of traffic flow on public streets requires the
residents to participate in all costs directly associated with the street modification.
The restfits of the before and after study performed on Via Cordoba, indicate that the temporary traffic circles
and median islands have been ineffective in reducing vehicle speeds. Moreover, the estimated cost to install
and maintain permanent ~affic circle and median island improvements outweighs the direct benefits received
from the improvements. Therefore, staff recommends that the temporary traffic calming devices on Via
Cordoba be removed permanently and the street be restored to its prior condition as requested by the majority
of the residents.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approximately $2,000 for removal of temporary devices, signing and striping. These funds are available in
the Public Works signing and striping account
Attachments:
1. Exhibit "A" - Location Map
2. Exhibit "B" - Minutes and City Council Agenda Report of August 24, 1999
3. Exhibit "C" - Letter b~ Residents of Via Cordoba dated September 30, 1999
4. Exhibit "D' - "Before and "After" Volume and Speed Data
5. Exhibit "E' - Letter and Survey to Residents of Via Cordoba dated February 2, 2000
5
EXHIBIT "A"
LOCATION MAP
EXHIBIT "B"
MINUTES AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
OF AUGUST 24, 1999
MINUTE ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
DATE:
August 27, 1999
TO:
Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works / City Engineer
MEETING OF:
August 24, 1999
AGENDA
ITEM NUMBER:
Item No. 19
SUBJECT:
Appeal of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission Denial to Install Stop Signs
on Via Cordoba for SpeedControl
The motion was made by Councilmember Comerchem, seconded by Councilmember
Roberts to approve staff recommendation.
Staff was directed to place two or three temporary circles/medians on Via Cordoba while
staff is formulating a City-wide plan and standard policy for addressing speeding problems
in residential areas. Staff was given discretion on the placement of the signs. Staff was
further directed to cell a meeting of the Public Works Subcommittee.
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Deny a request for multi-way stop controls along Via Cordoba at Corte Zorita,
Loma Linda Road, and Corte BrevoNia Saltio intersections;
19.2
Provide direction to the Public Works Traffic Division to establish a standard policy
for addressing speeding problems in residential areas to be approved by the
Public/Traffic Safety Commission and City Council, respectively.
The motion carded by the following vote:
AYES: 4
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
ABSTAINED: 1
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Comerchero, Lindemans, Robeits, Stone
None
None
Ford
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, Califomia, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY, under penalty of perjury, the foregoing to be the official action taken by the City
Council at the above meeting.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 27th day of August, 1999.
APPROVAL
CITY A'FFORNEY
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
William G. Hughes. Director of Public Works/City Engineer
August 24, 1999
Appeal of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission Denial to Install Stop Signs
On Via Cordoba for Speed Control
PREPARED BY: Allie Kuhns, Semor Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council
Deny a request for Multi-Way Stop Controls along Via Cordoba at the CoRe Zorita, Loma
Linda Road, and CoRe Bravo/Via Saltio intersections.
Provide direction to the Public Works Traffic Division to establish a standard policy for
addressing speeding problems ~n residential areas to be approved by the Public/Traffic
Safety Commission and City Council, respectively.
BACKGROUND: In July 1999, a request was received from representatives of the
Bridlevale Homeowners Association to evaluate the need for Multi-Way stop controls at intersections
along Via Cordoba due to increased traffic volumes and vehicle speeds, An evaluation of traffic
conditions was performed that included 24-hour volume counts, survey of vehicle speeds and Multi-
Way stop warrant analyses at three locations along Via Cordoba. The warrant analys~s performed
at each of the locations determined that Multi-Way stop controls were not justified on Via Cordoba
at CoRe Zonta. Loma Linda Road and CoRe Bravo/Via Salito
At their meeting of June 24, 1999, the PublinjTraffic Safety Commission approved the Staff
recommendation to deny a request for Multi-Way Stop Controls on Via Cordoba at CoRe Zorita.
Loma Linda Road and CoRe Bravo/Via SalitQ Cop~es of the minutes of the June 24, 1999 meeting
along with the staff report and attachments documenting the stop sign warrant analysis are provided
for reformation
Dunng Public Comments at the July 13, 1999 City Council meeting, two residents who live on or near
Via Cordoba requested an appeal to the PublidTraf~c Safety Commission's decision and asked that
the City Council agendize the ~ssue. The residents are requesting that the City Councd consider the
installation of MultFWay stop controls along Via Cordoba to control vehicle speeds
The Caltrans Traffic Manual indicates that MultFWay Stop controls may be useful at locations where
the volume of traffic on ~ntersecting roads ~s approximately equal and/or where a combination of high
speed, restncted sight distance and an accident histoN indicates that assignment of right-of-way is
necessary MultFWay controls are recommended where there ~s strong ewdence that overall traffic
safety can be ~mproved and should not be used solely for controlling vemcle speeds
Stuales have shown that when Stop signs are installed at locations that do not satisfy me miramum
warrant cr=ter~a. they beccme ~neffective traffic control devices. Thus, by installing s~gns at
unwarranted locations, some drivers become conditioned to a~sregard traffic Controls such as speed
limits, stop s~gns and signam Those motorists who actually stop for the controls are forced to stop
for no apparent reason, This often results in driver frustration and tack of respect to traffic control
devices while doing nothing to address the real problem of speeding. When this occurs, safety can
be, and is often, comprommec~.
Residents commonly express the concern about excessive speeds on neady every residential street
in the City of Temecula. A speed survey performed in May 1999 indicates that although some
speeding does occur on the roadway, the majority of drivers are travelling at a reasonable and
prudent speed for conditions on Via Cordoba. The speeds observed on Via Cordoba are enfomeable
and consistent with vehicle speeds observed on other City streets that are primarily residential.
The Citywide enforcement of existing speed limits on residential streets has shown that the residents
of the area commit a majonty of the violations. Through enforcement of the posted 25-MPH speed
limit along Via Cordoba, the Temecula Potice Department has proven that Via Cordoba is no
exception to this Citywide finding. Most traffic citations for exceeding the posted speed limit on Via
Cordoba were issued to residents of Via Cordoba and adjacent streets. Recently, the Police
Department placed their radar trailer on Via Cordoba to remind drivers of the posted speed limit. This
effort will continue as time and availability of the radar trailer permits. until drivers become more
aware of the 25 MPH posted speed limit.
Another concern expressed by the residents was that there was a high volume of "cut-through" traffic
on Via Cordoba. In May 1999, traffic volume data was collected at two locations along Via Cordoba.
The count data indicates that Via Cordoba carries approximately 2,400 vehicles per day between
Loma Linda Road and Redhawk Parkway and approximately 1,400 vehicles per day between Loma
Linda Road and Via Del Coronado. Based on the traffic volumes shown, it does not appear that
there is a s~gnificant amount of "cut through" traffic along this corndor. In fact the number of vehicles
travelling on Via Cordoba ~s appropriate for t;le approximately 300 single-family dwelling units that
directly access Via Cordoba, This finding is further substantiated by the Police Department's speed
violation citations issued along Via Cordoba.
By installing unwarranted stop signs or other traffic controls on Via Cordoba the City would be setting
a precedence for installing unwarranted traffic controls along residential collector streets that were
designed to provide access between residential neighborhoods and regional roadway facilities.
Therefore, it is staff's recommendation that the Council deny the request to install stop signs along
Via Cordoba at the Cone Zorita, Loma Linda Road, and Cone Bravo/Via Saltio intersections.
Along w~th the recommendation to deny the installation of stop signs on Via Cordoba, Staff
recommends that a policy be developed to address speeding concerns in residential areas. This
policy will prowde standard procedures for evaluating the need for traffic control devices m all
residential areas so that consistency ~n addressing this ~ssue can be maintained Cityw~de
2
R ,agdrpt\99\O824\wacordoDatrafficcontrols
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:
1. June 24, 7999 Pubtic/Traffic Safety Commission Agenc~a Report (with attachments)
2. June 24. 1999 Public/Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Minutes
',/~a Comoba at Cone Zcnta
Multi*Way Stop Warranting Software
05/17/99
Major Street: Via Cordoba
Minor Street: Corte Zorita
Date of Analysis: 05/17/99
Name of Analyst: jg
Case Number:
Comments:
85'h% Speed of Major Street: 25
WARRANT ANALYSIS SUMMARY:
WARRANT 1 - Accident Expenence
NOT SATISFIED - The accident warrant of 5 or more reportable accidents of a correctable type is
not met with 0 accidents over a 12-month period.
WARRANT 2 - Minimum Traffic Volumes
NOT SATISFIED - The 100% vehicular warrant of 500 entering vehicles for any 8 hours of the day
is not met with 0 hours meeting the warrant.
WARRANT 3 - Vehicular & Pedestrian Traffic from Minor Road
NOT SATISFIED - The combined total of 200 vehicles and pedestrians from the minor approach is
not met w~th O hours meeting the warrant,
4
R ,agorptL99\O824\wacordobatrafficcontrols
V~a Cordoba at Loma Linda Road
MulthWay Stop Warranting Software
05/17/99
Major Street: Via Cordoba
Minor Street: Loma Linda Road
Date of Analysis: 05/17/99
Name of Analyst: jg
Case Number:
Comments:
8 ,"o
5 Yo Speed of Major Street: 25
WARRANT ANALYSIS SUMMARY:
WARRANT 1 - Accident Experience
NOT SATISFIED - The accident warrant of 5 or more reportable accidents of a correctable type is
not met with 0 accidents over a 12-month period.
WARRANT 2 - Minimum Traffic Volumes
NOT SATISFIED - The 100% vehicular warrant of 500 entering vehicles for any 8 hours of the day
is not met with 0 hours meeting the warrant.
WARRANT 3 - Vehicular & Pedestrian Traffic from Minor Road
NOT SATISFIED - The combined total of 200 vehicles and pedestrians from the m~nor approach is
not met with 0 hours meeting the warrant
V~a Cordoba at Corte Bravo/Via Saltio
MulthWay Stop Warranting Software
05/17/99
Malor Street: Via Cordoba
Minor Street: Cone Bravo/Via Salted
Date of Analys~s: 05/17/99
Name of Analyst: Jg
Case Number
Comments:
85"'% Speed of Major Street: 25
WARRANT ANALYSIS SUMMARY:
WARRANT 1 -Accident Experience
NOT SATISFIED - The accident warrant of 5 or more reportal31e accidents of a correctalale type is
not met with 0 accidents over a 12-month period.
WARRANT 2 - Minimum Traffic Volumes
NOT SATISFIED - The 100% vehicular warrant of 500 entering vehicles for any 8 hours of the day
is not met with 0 hours meeting the warrant.
WARRANT 3 - Vehicular & Pedestrian Traffic from Minor Road
NOT SATISFIED - The combined total of 200 vehicles ancl pedestrians from the minor approach is
not met with 0 hours meeting the warrant,
6
R:~agdrpt~99\O824,wacordol~atrafflccontrols
EXHIBIT "C"
LETTER TO RESIDENTS OF
VIA CORDOBA
September 30, 1999
RE: VIA CORDOBA TRAFFIC CALMING PROTOTYPE
Dear Residents of Via Cordoba:
In preparation for the installation of the temporary traffic calming measures that will be
constructed at various locations along Via Cordoba, we would like to take this
opportunity to thank you for your patience and cooperation during the demonstration
site improvements for this traffic calming program.
HISTORY
Several months ago, residents from Via Cordoba approached the City of Temecula
Public/Traffic Safety Commission regarding the volume and speeds of traffic along Via
Cordoba. These residents expressed their concern that drivers are not adhering to the
25 MPH speed limit along this street, and are creating a hazard to the residents both on
Via Cordoba as well as on adjacent through streets and cul-de-sacs. The residents
requested that stop signs be installed at 3 intersections along Via Cordoba. Based on
all of the information presented at this meeting, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission
denied this request, primarily because stop signs are used to assign right-of-way and
are not effective in slowing down traffic.
In appeal of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's recommendation, residents
approached the City Council and requested that the installation of stop signs along Via
Cordoba be placed on a Council Agenda. Prior to taking this item to the Council, City
staff researched effective speed mitigation tools used in Southern California, and
conducted a door-to-door survey of residents along Via Cordoba to determine if
residents perceived a speed problem on this street. The results of the survey showed
that a high percentage of residents felt that there is a speed problem along Via
Cordoba, although there was not a consensus among those as to what should be done
to slow drivers down.
At the Temecula City Council Meeting on August 24, 1999, the Council agreed with
staffs recommendation not to install stop signs. However, based on a presentation
made by a resident of Via Cordoba, the Council directed staff to pursue a demonstration
project involving the installation of traffic calming measures, including traffic circles, as
soon as possible.
In response to Council direction, the City's Traffic Engineering Division has designed
two different traffic calming devices that will be installed at 5 intersections along Via
Cordoba. Where there are two streets that intersect in a "T", the medians shown in
Figure 1 (see attached) will be installed because traffic circles are not appropriate for
this type of intersection. This is the case at the intersections of Via Cordoba and Loma
Linda Road, Corte Zorita, and Corte Rosa. Where Via Cordoba intersects with Via
Saltio and Corte Bella Donna and the two streets create a four-way intersection, traffic
circles will be installed (Figure 2).
As discussed during the meeting, these devices are temporary in nature and will be
monitored closely for approximately 4 months to determine if the devices are effective in
slowing traffic. After the evaluation period is completed, staff will report to the City
Council on the effectiveness of the devices and request direction on installing more
permanent improvements.
Also, for your information, we have enclosed a brochure that explains the concept of
roundabouts (traffic circles) and how to drive around them.
We sincerely hope that this program will be effective and successful in slowing traffic
along Via Cordoba. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to give us
a call at 694-6411.
Sincerely,
William G. Hughes
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Senior Traffic Engineer
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEERING/
PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
ALL ABOUT
ROUNDABOUTS
ROUNDABOUTS
Each year, the City receives numerous requests to reduce the traffic
congoshon on streets throughout the City Citizens also express concerns
about lhe safety of the streets where they live In an effort to reduce traffic
congestion and improve safety, lhe City has recently considered the use of
roundabouts,
Roundabouts are used throughout Europe and in several countries around
the world to reduce injury accidents, traffic delays, fuel consumption, air
pollution, and to enhance intersection beauty. They have also successfully
been used to control traffic speeds in cedain residential neighborhoods. If
properly constructed, they are considered one of the safest types of
intersection design.
A roundabout is a circular intersection similar to the traffic circle used
previously in the U.S. The major differences between a lraffic circle and a
roundabout are:
Yield at Entry: At roundabouts the entering traffic yields the right-of-way to the
circulating traffic. This yield-at-entry rule keeps traffic from locking up and
allows free flow movement.
Deflection: The entry and center island of a roundabout deflects entering
traffic to slow traffic and reinforce the yielding process.
Fllar¢: The entry to a roundabout often flares out from one or two lanes to two
or three lanes at the yield line to provide increased capacity.
WHY USE A ROUNDABOUT?
1. Safety: Roundabouts have been shown to reduce fatal and injury accidents
as much as 75% in Australia and 86% in Great Britain. The reduction in
accidents is attributed to slower speeds and reduced number of conflict
points (See Figure f).
2. Low Maintenance: Roundabouts eliminate maintenance costs associated
with traffic signals, which can be up to $3,500 per year per intersection.
Additionally, electricity costs are reduced approximately $1,500 per year
per intersection.
3. Reduced Delay: By yielding at the entry rather than stopping and waiting
for a green light, delay is significantly reduced.
4. Capacity: Intersections with a high volume of left turns are better handled
by a roundabout than a multi-phased traffic signal.
5. Aesthetics: A reduction in delay corresponds to a decrease in fuel
consumption and air pollution, In addition, the central island provides an
opportunity to provide landscaping.
Standard Intersection
Roundabout Intersection
· = Conflict Point
Figure I
HOW TO DRIVE A ROUNDABOUT
As you approach a roundabout, there will be a YIELD sign and dashed
yield limit line. Drivers need to slew down, watch for pedestrians and
bicyclists, and be prepared to stop, if necessary. When you enter, yield to
circulating traffic on the left, but do not stop if it is clear.
A conventional roundabout will have "ONE-WAY" signs mounted in the
center island. They help traffic and indicate that you must drive to the right of
the center island. Mini-roundabouts have no one-way signs since the center
island is not raised. You must still drive to the right of the domed painted
island.
Upon passing the street prior to your exit, turn on your right turn signal and
watch for pedestrians and bicyclists as you exit.
Left turns are completed by traveling around the center island (see Figure
2).
Figure 2
Important Contacts
Public Works Information:
(909) 694-6411
City Hotline:
(909) 694-6445, Option f
Traffic Hotline:
(909) 694-6445, Option 6
City Website:
www. cL temecula. ca
EXHIBIT "D"
BEFORE AND AFTER VOLUME
AND SPEED DATA
ApT
MP//
Z071 ADT
33 HP/-/
~07~ AOF
~ ~z
1708 APF
~ S~90~ M P H
XxX' =
CITY OF TEMECULA
VIA CORODOBA E/O CORTE VALLE
24 RR SPEED SURVEY
~in
Time
12:00 09/21
01:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
10:00
11:00
0- 6- i1- 16-
10 15 20
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 1
0 0 1
0 0 1
0 0 i
0 0 3
0 0 1
0 1 1
0 I 2
0 0 1
1 1 2
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
EASTBOUND
21- 26- 31- 36- 41-
25 30 35 40 45
0 2 I I 0
0 2 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 1 1
2 1 4 1 0
9 I2 16 0 1
11 44 12 6 0
9 35 14 3 1
15 17 11 8 2
8 13 9 7 1
9 10 12 5 4
46- 51-
50 55
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56- 61-
60 999 Total
0 4
0 2
0 3
0 2
0 4
0 9
0 41
0 74
0 64
0 56
0 39
0 44
Site Code: 000000157707
Start Date: 09/21/1999
File I.D.: TRVCgOCV
Page : 1
50th 85th
Pct. Pct.
29 34
27 29
24 29
19 34
34 39
29 34
28 33
27 32
27 32
27 36
28 36
29 37
{peed Statistics.
a 0 rcentile}~ 27 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 29 NDH
85th Percentile Speed : 33 MPH
05th Percentlie Speed : 38 NPH
10 MPR Pace Speed : 26-35 MPH
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 689
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 61.35{
Number of Vehicles > 55 MUR : 0
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPg: .00{
12:00 pm 0 1 1 4 6 14 10 4 2 0 0 0 0 42 28 34
)h00 0 0 1 0 0 22 12 5 2 0 0 0 0 50 20 34
)2:00 0 0 0 0 16 26 12 7 0 0 0 0 0 61 27 33
)3:00 0 0 0 2 21 37 34 12 3 0 1 0 0 110 28 34
14:00 0 0 1 2 26 37 29 15 2 0 0 0 0 112 28 34
)5:00 0 0 4 7 41 50 20 4 I 0 0 0 0 144 26 32
)6:00 0 0 1 5 44 37 23 0 2 0 0 0 0 112 26 31
)7:00 0 0 3 6 14 24 11 5 0 0 0 0 0 63 26 33
)8:00 0 0 0 1 7 11 13 4 1 0 0 0 0 37 29 34
19:00 Q 1 1 1 3 9 7 O 3 0 0 Q O 25 28 33
:0:00 0 0 0 0 I 5 7 5 0 0 0 0 0 18 32 37
Ll:00 0 0 I 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 26 29
~"' Totals * 3 16 42 252 420 269 03 26 * 1 * , 1122 27
als 0 3 16 42 252 420 260 93 26 0 I 0 0 1122
ITY OY T~MECUBA
IA CORODOBA E/O CORTE VALLE
4 ~R SPEED SURVEY
jin 0- 4-
ime 5 10
2:00 09/21 0
1:00 0
2:00 0
3:00 0
4:00 0
5:00 0
6:00 0
7:00 0
8:00 0
9:00 0
0:00 0
I:00 0
1I- 16-
15 20
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 I
1 0
0 0
1 0
1 4
1 1
0 0
0 2
1 0
COUNTS ULIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
WESTBOUND
21- 26- 31- 36- 41- 46- 51-
25 30 35 40 45 50 55
1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 O 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 0 0 0
4 4 3 1 0 0 0
13 20 9 2 0 0 0
18 46 13 3 2 0 0
8 21 11 7 0 0 0
I1 12 12 3 0 0 0
8 6 6 1 1 0 I
9 16 12 2 0 O 0
56-
60
Site Code: 000000157707
Start Date: 09/21/1999
File I.D.: TEVCEOCV
Page : I
61- 50tb 85th
999 Total Pct. Pct.
0 1 . 24
0 2 32 34
0 1 + 34
0 3 24 29
0 3 29 34
O I2 27 33
0 45 27 32
0 87 27 32
0 49 28 34
0 38 28 33
0 25 26 33
0 41 27 33
2:00 pm 0 0 0 3 7
1:00 0 0 I 0 6
2:00 I 0 1 8 20
3:00 0 0 0 3 13
{:00 0 1 0 3 14
5:00 0 0 1 6 29
0:00 1 0 2 1 41
7:00 0 0 1 2 14
):00 0 1 0 0 12
):O0 O 0 1 O 1O
):00 0 0 0 2 1
h0O 0 O 0 1 O
"' Totals 2 3 12 37 240
~ls 2 3 12 37 240
16 14 5 0 0 0 0 0 45 28 33
17 11 0 0 2 0 0 0 37 28 33
31 18 3 1 0 0 0 0 83 27 32
25 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 56 27 33
35 17 3 0 0 0 0 0 73 27 32
37 23 3 0 O O 0 0 99 27 32
51 9 I 1 0 0 0 0 107 26 29
21 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 49 26 32
15 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 36 26 32
14 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 37 27 33
4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 12 28 34
4 I 1 1 0 0 0 0 8 28 39
397 199 50 6 2 1 * * 949 27
397 199 50 6 2 1 0 0 949
teed Statistics.
15th Percentlie Speed : 21 MPH
Median Speed (50th percentlie): 27 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 28 MPH
85th Percentile Speed : 32 MPE
95th Percentlie Speed : 36 MPU
10 MPH Pace Speed : 21-30 MPH
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 637
Percent of Vehicles in Pace:
Mu.her of Vehicles > 55 MPH : O
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH: .00%
CITY OF TEMECULA
VIA CORDOBA S/O CORTE VALLE
24 ER SPSED SURVEY
Jin Int.
Time Total
12:00 11/17 4
0h00 1
02:00 3
03:00 2
04:00 5
05:00 8
06:00 47
07:00 72
08:00 62
09:00 26
10:00 38
lh00 46
12:00 pm 86
Oh00 7I
02:00 62
03:00 92
04:00 109
05:00 118
06:00 92
07:00 57
08:00 30
09:00 25
10:00 19
11:00 12
~"' Totals 1083
0- 16 2I
15 20 25
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 2
0 2
1 19
I 20
0 20
0 6
1 10
1 11
2 17
0 18
0 11
I 17
1 26
0 19
0 23
1 18
1 2
0 1
0 5
0 2
11 37 250
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
EASTBOUND
26 3i 36 41 46
30 35 40 45 50
0 2 I 0
1 0 0 0
1 1 1 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 1 1
2 2 I 0
16 7 4 0
21 21 2 1
21 16 2 1
12 8 0 0
13 4 2 1
16 14 3 0
32 25 5 2
26 21 6 0 0
34 11 6 0
34 25 11 2 0
42 26 6
66 25 6 0 0
45 14 4 0
17 15 5 O 0
15 6 4 1
8 13 2 I 0
5 7 2 O
2 4 3 1
430 267 77 I1
Grand Total 1083 11 37 250 430
51 56
55 60
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
61
65
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
O O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 O
O 0
0 0
0 O
O O
0 O
, , ,
$~eed Statistics.
15th Percentih Speed : 22 NPM
Median Speed (50th percentile): 27 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 28 MP8
85th Percentlie Speed : 33 NPR
95th Percentlie Speed : 37 MPR
10 NPE Pace Speed : 26-35 MPM
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 697
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 64.34%
Number of Vehicles > 55 NPH : 0
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPR:
Site Code: 00000015157B
Start Date: ll/17/19g9
File I.D.: TEVCEOCV
Page : 1
66 7I 76
V0 75 9999
0
0
0
0
0
0
267 77 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CITY OF TEMECULA
VIA CORDOBA E/O CORTE VALLE
24 HE SPEED SUHVEY
Jim Int. 0-
Time Total 15
12:00 11/17 2
01:00 0
02:00 3
OS:0O 2
04:00 9
05:00 18
0S:00 31
07:00 69
08:00 57
09:00 38
10:00 36
11:00 42
16
20
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
WESTBOUND
21 26 31 36 41 46
25 30 35 40 45 50
0 i 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 2 0 1
I 1 0 0
3 0 3 1
1 6 3 0
6 17 2 0
19 28 14 2 0
19 19 13 3 0
7 16 13 0 0
7 15 i1 1 1
12 13 11 2 2
12:00 pm 84 2 3 20 31 22 5 0
01:00 72 1 3 15 29 19 5 0
02:00 60 0 1 15 26 12 4 2
03:00 63 0 0 10 30 18 4 I
04:00 7d 2 4 26 26 13 3 0
05:00 94 1 4 20 39 26 3 0
06:00 57 0 3 1S 26 10 2 0
07:00 65 0 2 13 33 15 2 0
08:00 47 0 3 9 22 9 4 0
09:00 25 0 0 1 16 6 I 1
10:00 13 O 2 2 5 3 i 0
11:00 2 0 0 1 0 I 0 0
~"' Totals 963 12 36 223 401 229 50 9
51 56
55 60
61 66
65 70
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
Site Code: 000000151578
Start Date: 11/17/1999
File I.D.: TEVC]OCV
Page : 1
71 76
75 9999
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 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 O 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 O 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
* 1 * 1 * * *
Srand Total 963 12 36 223 401 229 50 9 I 0 1 0 1 0 0
Speed Statistics.
a 0 rcentile)~ 27 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 28 MPR
85th Percentlie Speed : 33 MPH
95th Percentile Speed : 36 MPH
10 MPH Pace Speed : 26-35 MPH
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 630
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 65.40%
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPH : 2
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH: .21%
2ITY OF TEMECULA
HA CORDOBA E/0 VIA ZORITA
14 MR SPEED SURVEY
~in 0- 6-
rime 10
[2:00 09/21 0
31:00 0
)2:00 0
)3:00 0
)4:00 0
15:00 0
)6:00 0
)7:00 0
)8:00 0
39:00 0
LO:O0 0
Li:00 1
11- i6- 21- 26-
15 20 25 30
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0
1 1 1 3
1 0 1 I
0 2 11 11
0 3 11 44
0 0 6 30
0 1 8 13
0 1 1I 17
0 I 9 13
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
EASTBOUND
31- 36- 41- 46- 51-
35 40 45 50 55
1 0 0 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0
3 1 O 0
6 0 0 0
8 1 0 0
13 2 0 1
11 6 O 0
15 1 0 0
13 1 0 0
56- 61-
60 999
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Site Code: 000000157714
Start Date: 09/21/1999
File I.D.: TEVCEOCZ
Page : 1
50th 85th
Total Pct. Pct.
2 29 34
2 29 34
2 29 49
1 * 19
8 26 39
7 31
30 26 31
67 27 29
52 28 32
39 28 34
45 27 32
38 27 32
L2:00 pm 1 0 0 5 7 18 6 I 0 0
)1:00 0 0 0 0 9 22 9 I 0
)2:00 0 0 0 3 9 27 16 1 0 0
)3:00 0 0 1 2 17 39 20 4 i 0
)4:00 0 0 0 0 I6 41 18 6 0 0
)S:00 0 1 i 7 26 64 8 '2 1 0
)6:00 0 0 1 3 33 40 12 3 0
)7:00 0 0 1 1 12 19 I3 3 0 0
)8:00 0 1 0 1 6 14 4 I 2 0
)9:00 0 0 O 0 1 8 4 2 1 0
L0:00 0 0 0 0 I 2 7 3 2 0
Ll:O0 0 0 0 I 0 0 I 0 0 0
". Totals 1 3 6 33 195 429 189 40 8 4
als 1 3 6 33 195 429 189 40 8
0 39 27 31
0 42 27 32
0 56 27 32
0 84 21 32
0 81 27 33
0 110 26 29
0 93 26 31
0 49 21 33
0 29 27 33
0 16 28 37
0 15 33 39
0 2 19 34
* 909 27
0 909
]Deed Statistics.
15th Percentlie Speed
Median Speed (50th percentlie
Average Speed - All Vehicles
85th Percentlie Speed
95th Percentile Speed
10 MPS Pace Speed
Number of Vehicles in Pace
Percent of Vehicles in Pace
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPH
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH:
28
32
36
21-30
624
68.65t
0
.00t
22 MPH
27 MPH
MPH
MPS
MPE
MPH
ITV OF TEMMCULA
[A CORDOBA E/O VIA ZUNITA
I HR SPBSD SURVEY
.~in 0-
me 10
2:08 09/21
/:00
2:00
3:00
1:00
5:00
5:00
7:00
hOG
}:00
):OO
l:O0
11- 16- 21-
15 20 25 30
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0
0 i 0 I
1 2 0 1
0 0 3 I
1 0 10 20
2 1 17 35
i 2 5 12
0 3 11 13
0 2 9 8
0 4 14 20
COUNTSUNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
WESTBOUND
31- 36- 41-
35 40 45
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
3 0
2 0
14 0
9 1
4 0
2 0
2 0
46- 51-
50 55
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56- 61-
60 999 Total
O
2
1
2
4
7
34
72
30
31
24
41
Site Code: 000000157714
Start Date: 09/21/1999
File I.D.: TBVCROCZ
Page : 1
5Oth 85th
Pct. Pct.
, t
27 29
* 3d
19 29
17 19
29 33
26 29
27 32
27 33
20 29
26 32
25 28
bOO pm
hO0
Z:O0
J:O0
t:O0
i:O0
j:O0
hO0
J:O0
9:00
):00
i:O0
",,Totals
0 I 0 14 17 6 1
0 0 0 13 15 4 I
1 0 5 26 28 10 0
0 2 3 22 20 5 I
1 0 5 16 37 9 0
0 1 4 25 39 6 1
0 1 0 33 41 7 2
1 0 1 15 19 9 I
1 1 0 8 13 1 2
1 1 0 11 12 2 2
0 0 0 4 7 0 1
0 0 0 0 3 0 1
5 12 39 256 364 96 21
5 12 39 256 364 96 21
39 26 31
34 26 31
70 25 29
H 24 29
68 26 29
77 26 29
90 25 29
46 26 31
26 26 29
30 26 32
12 26 28
5 2! 39
799 26
799
}eed Statistics.
15th Percentlie Speed : 21 MPR
Median Speed (50th percentlie): 26 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 27 MPR
85th Percentlie Speed : 30 HPE
95th Percentile Speed : 33 MPR
I0 MPH Pace Speed : 21-30 MPR
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 620
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 77.50%
Number of Vehicles > 55 NPR : 0
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH: .00%
ITY OF TEMECULA
IA CORDOBA E/O CORTE ZORITA
4 HR SPEED SURVEY
.Jin Int. O-
lme Total 15
2:00 11/17 2 0
1:00 1 0
2:00 2 0
3:00 1 0
4:00 7 0
5:00 13 1
6:00 23 2
7:00 61 1
8:00 43 1
9:00 26 1
0:00 30 I
h00 29 I
2:00 pm 73 1
h00 55 2
2:00 49 0
3:00 56 2
4:00 61 1
5:00 68 1
6:00 50 1
7:00 51 2
8:00 40 1
9:00 19 0
0:00 10 1
hO0 I 0
-" Totals 771 20
16 21 26 31
20 25 30 35
0 2 0 0
I 0 0 0
0 0 1 1
0 1 0 0
1 1 3 2
1 3 6 2
7 9 5 0
3 41 11 4
9 22 8 3
4 13 8 0
6 17 5 I
3 17 7 1
9 33
11 26
27
22
38
30
28
27
24
12
3
0
104 396
28 1 0 0
15 1 0 0
12 1 0 0
16 5 0 0
10 2 0 0
30 2 0 0
13 0 0
16 2 0
11 0 0
5 1 0
4 1 0
1 0 0
215 30 *
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
EASTBOUND
36 41 46
40 45 50
51 56
55 60
61 66
65 70
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 O 0
0 0 0 O
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
, , , ,
Site Code: 000000151575
Start Date: 11/17/1999
File I.D.: TEVCEOCZ
Page : 1
71 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
t t
rand Total 771 20 104 396 215 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
peed Statistics.
15th Percentlie Speed : 19 MPH
Median Speed (50th percentlie): 23 MPR
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 25 MPH
85th Percentih Speed : 28 MPR
95th Percentlie Speed : 29 MPR
10 MPE Pace Speed : 21-30 NPR
Number of Vehicles in Pace: Sll
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 79.32t
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPR : 6
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH: .78%
]ITY OF TBMBCULA
IIA COBDOBA E/O CORTE ZORITA
!4 HR SPEED SURV]Y
~in lot.
~ime Total
L2:00 11/I7 2
}1:00 1
}2:00 3
)3:00 2
14:00 4
{5:00 10
16:00 35
17:00 58
18:00 56
19:00 23
,0:00 29
.hO0 44
O- 16
15 20
21 26 31
25 30 35
0 2 0
0 0 1
0 2 0
1 1 0
i 2 0
4 4 2
11 13 9
14 25 10
13 25 9
9 12 1
12 10 2
14 16 8
COUNTS UNLIMITBD, INC.
909.247.6716
WESTBOUND
36 41 46
40 45 50
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
.2:00 pm 76 0 4 20 34 15 1 1 0 0
}1:00 45 0 5 13 19 8 0 0 0
{2:00 46 2 1 8 28 6 1 0 0 0
}3:00 73 2 4 24 32 6 4 0 0 0
~4:00 69 0 5 23 33 7 0 0 0 0
15:00 77 0 0 20 48 8 1 '0 0 0
~0:00 70 0 2 I6 39 10 2 1 0
}7:00 34 0 0 4 15 13 2 0 0 O
18:00 24 0 1 4 10 7 2 0 0
bg:00 19 0 0 0 8 9 1 I O 0
.0:0O 14 0 0 2 4 6 2 0 0 0
1:00 8 0 0 O 2 4 2 0 0 0
.... Totals 822 9 41 213 384 141 23 5 * ,
)
51 56 61 66
55 60 65 70
0 0 1
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
* * 6
~rand Total 822 9 41 213 384 141 23 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
peed Statistics.
15th Percentih Speed : 21 MPH
Median Speed (50th percentlie): 27 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 28 MPH
85th Percentlie Speed : 31 MPH
95th Perceutile Speed : 34 MPH
10 MPR Pace Speed : 21-30 MPH
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 597
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 72.63%
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPM : 6
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPB: .73%
Site Code: 000000151575
Start Date: I1/17/1999
File I.D.: T]VCEOCZ
Page : 1
71 76
75 9999
CITY OF TEMECULA
VIA COEDOBA E/O VIA DEL CORONADO
24 HR SPEED SURVEY
~in Int. 0- 16 21 26
Time Total 15 20 25 ]0
12:00 11/17 7 0 0 1 4
OhOO 2 0 0 2 0
02:00 2 0 0 0 0
03:00 2 1 0 0 1
0d:00 2 0 0 0 1
05:00 4 0 0 2 1
06:00 3 1 0 1 0
07:00 31 0 3 7 10
08:00 79 2 6 21 31
09:00 20 i 0 4 5
10:00 29 1 1 8 10
11:00 48 O 1 11 18
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
EASTBOUND
31 36 41 46
35 40 45 50
2 0 0
0 0 0
1 1 0
0 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
0 1 0
7 4 0
16 2 1
7 2
9 0 0
13 5 0
51 56
55 60
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12:00 pm 89 2 2 17 30 26 10 0 0 0
0h00 67 1 5 18 20 19 2 1 1 0
02:00 42 1 0 11 14 9 7 0 0 0
03:00 78 0 2 7 33 31 4 1 0 0
04:00 90 1 3 21 30 29 5 I 0 0
05:00 130 0 1 14 50 54 8 2 1 0
06:00 88 0 3 17 43 22 3 0 0 0
07:00 62 0 3 11 27 1S 2 0 0 0
08:00 43 0 3 8 17 11 4 0 0 0
09:00 27 0 1 5 9 11 I 0 0 0
10:00 13 0 0 4 3 5 1 0 0 0
11:00 12 0 0 2 5 1 4 0 0 0
n.v Totals 970 11 34 192 362 294 66 6 3 *
61 66
65 70
Site Code: 000000151563
Start Date: 11/17/1999
File I.D.: TEVCEOVC
Page : 1
71 76
75 9999
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 e
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 , ,
Grand Total 970 11 34 192 362 294 66 6 3 0 0 0 0 2 0
Speed Statistics.
15tb Percentile Speed : 22 MPR
Median Speed (50tb percentlie): 28 MPE
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 29 MPH
85th Percentile Speed : 33 MPH
95th Percentlie Speed : 37 MPH
10 MPN Pace Speed : 26-35 MPR
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 656
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 67.61%
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPH : 2
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPE: .21%
ITY OF TEMECULA
IA CORDOBA E/O VIA DEL CORONADO
4 HR SPEED SURVEY
in Int. 0-
ide Total 15
2:00 11/I7 i
1:00 0
2:00 1
3:00 0
4:00 18
5:00 64
6:00 83
7:00 85
8:00 82
9:00 32
0:00 43
l:00 31
16 21
20 25
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 3
3 9
2 10
2 20
1 4
1 10
0 4
COUIqTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
WESTBOUND
26 31 36 41 46
30 35 40 45 50
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0
2 7 7 2
17 29 11 2
16 30 20 4
16 38 16 0
30 24 5 0
10 14 2 0
14 13 2 2
10 14 3 0
2:00 pm 43 1 2 3 8 23
I:00 66 1 2 13 28
2:00 39 0 2 5 12 16
3:00 45 0 1 8 18 14
4:00 47 1 I 5 18
5:00 55 0 2 5 22 22
6:00 44 1 0 3 14 18
7:00 31 0 1 4 iI 11
8:00 21 0 0 3 6 10
9:00 8 O O 0 0 5
O:00 7 1 0 0 1 4
1:00 5 0 0 1 2 0
~v Totals 851 11 22 110 256 330
1 0
1 I
2 0
1 0
0 0
O 0
2 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
O 0
O 0
lO0 19 1
51 56
55 60
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
+ * I
61 66
65 70
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
peed Statistics.
15th Percentile Speed : 23 MPN
Median Speed (50th percentile): 30 MPR
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 30 MPB
85th Percentih Speed : 34 MPH
95th Percentlie Speed : 38 MPH
10 MPR Pace Speed : 26-35 MPN
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 586
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 68.83i
Nu~er of Vehicles > 55 MPR : 2
Percent of Vehicles > 55 NPR: .23t
Site Code: 000000151563
Start Date: 11/17/1999
File I.D.: TEVCEOVC
Page : 1
71 76
75 9999
rand Total 851 11 22 110 256 330 100 19 1 0 0 I 1 0 0
CITY OF TEMECULA
VIA COIDOBA N/O VIA ~CIA
24 NN SPEND SURVNY
~in 0- 6-
rime 10
12:00 09/21
0h00
)2:00
D3:00
)4:00
~5:00
36:00
)7:00
38:00
39:00
[0:00
ll:OO
11- 16-
I5 20
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
21- 26-
25 30
0 0
0 0
0 0
I 0
t 0
2 4
3 4
9 15
18 10
14 7
5 4
11 6
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
EASTBOUND
31- 36- 41-
35 40 45
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
1 0
7 0
4 0
S 0
5 0
3 0
46- 51- 56-
50 55 60
Site Code: 000000157706
Start Date: 09/21/1999
File I.D.: TNVCWOVL
PUe : 1
61- 50th 85tb
999 Total Pct. Pct.
1 * 34
0 * *
0 * *
1 * 24
2 24 44
8 24 28
12 23 28
35 27 32
35 24 29
30 24 33
15 28 33
25 23 31
L2:00 pm 0 0 0 4 11 14 4 I 0 0 0 0 0 34 26 29
31:00 0 0 0 2 5 7 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 21 27 33
)2:00 0 1 0 1 15 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 23 29
)3:00 1 0 2 9 28 12 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 59 23 28
)4:00 0 0 2 3 i1 29 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 27 31
)5:00 0 2 2 8 25 46 13 '1 0 0 0 0 0 97 26 29
36:00 0 0 2 8 34 31 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 84 24 28
37:00 0 1 2 0 11 14 G 0 0 0 1 0 0 35 26 31
)8:00 0 0 1 0 7 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 26 32
39:00 1 0 1 0 3 7 3 0 O 0 0 0 0 15 27 31
LO:O0 0 0 1 1 3 lO 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 20 27 32
Li:O0 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 24 28
'-~ Totals 2 6 17 46 218 240 97 14 1 , 1 , * 642 26
~ls 2 6 17 46 218 240 97 14 1 0 1 0 0 642
;peed Statistics.
15th Percentih Speed
Median Speed (50th percentlie
Average Speed - All Vehicles
85th Percentih Speed
95th Percentlie Speed
i0 MPH Pace Speed
Number of Vehicles in Pace
Percent of Vehicles in Pace
Number of Vehicles > 55 NPl
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH:
20
26
26
3I
33
21-30
458
71.45%
0
.00t
MPE
MPH
MPH
MPN
MPE
MPH
XTY OF TEMECULA
FIA COMDOBA W/0 VIA ~CIA
14 El SPEED SURVEY
Fime
L2:00 09/21
mOO
)2:00
)3:00
}4:00
15:00
16:00
)7:00
}8:00
19:00
.0:00
.1:00
0- 6- 1I- 16-
10 I5 20
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
1
3
0
3
21-
16
21
14
7 10
8 10
13 7
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
WESTBOUND
26- 31- 36- 41-
30 35 40 45
0 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
2 2 0
lO 4 1
24 8 0
31 13 2
33 10 4
7 0
1 0
2 1
46- 51-
50 55
.2:00 pm 0 0 0 0 13 ll 3 2 0 0 0
I1:00 0 0 0 S 7 7 3 0 0 0
12:00 0 0 0 2 19 29 S 2 0 0 0
}3:00 0 2 1 4 4 I6 5 0 0 0 0
14:00 0 0 0 1 10 17 11 1 0 0 0
}5:00 0 2 2 4 23 21 2 I 0 0 0
'6:00 0 1 1 2 11 31 4 1 0 0 0
~7:00 0 0 0 6 S 10 3 1 O 0 0
,8:00 0 1 0 2 4 5 3 1 0 0 0
~9:00 0 1 0 0 3 7 2 2 0 0 0
0:00 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0
l:0O 0 0 I 2 1 0 2 I 0 0 0
.... .Totals , 9 8 40 183 284 90 20 1 , ,
jls 0 9 8 40 183 284 90 20 Z 0 0
peed StatisticS.
15th Percentlie Speed : 21 MPH
Median Speed (50th percentlie): 26 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 26 NPH
85th Percentlie Speed : 31 MPH
95th Percentlie Speed : 34 MPH
l0 MPH Pace Speed : 21-30 MPH
Mumbet of Vehicles in Pace: 467
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 73.43t
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPR : 0
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH: .00t
Site Code: 000000157706
Start Date: 09/21/1999
File I.D.: TEVCMOVL
Page : I
56- 61- 50th 85tb
60 999 Total Pct. Pct.
0 0 0 * *
0 0 1 * 29
0 0 0 * ,
0 0 1 * 19
0 0 4 29 32
0 0 17 27 32
0 0 53 26 29
0 0 68 27 32
0 0 64 27 32
0 0 28 26 32
0 0 19 26 28
0 0 26 23 2S
0 0 29 25 31
0 0 22 23 29
0 0 57 26 29
0 0 32 26 29
0 0 40 27 32
0 0 55 23 28
0 0 51 26 29
0 O 25 25 29
0 0 1G 26 33
O 0 15 27 34
0 0 5 22 27
0 0 7 24 34
· * 635 26
0 0 635
~ITY OF TEMECULA
'IA CONDORA E/O VIA
4 RR SPEED SURVEY
LUCIA
]in Int. 0- 16 21 26
ime Total 15 20 25
2:00 11/17 2 0 0 0
hOO O 0 0 0 O
2:00 1 0 0 0 0
3:00 2 1 O 1 0
4:00 2 0 0 O 1
5:00 4 0 0 2 I
6:00 21 i 0 9 7
7:00 26 1 4 6 12
8:00 56 0 3 15 29
9:00 19 2 1 9 4 3
0:00 20 1 1 5 2 9
h00 32 0 2 8 I0 9
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
EASTBOUND
31 36 41 46
35 40 45 50
1 I 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
2 1 0
3 0 0
8 1 0
0 0
1 0
3
2:00 pm 44 0 1 13 14 11 3 i 0
1:00 54 I 2 12 27 9 3 0 0
2:00 45 1 0 12 17 13 1 0 0
3:00 54 0 i 14 15 14 9 1 0
4:00 58 1 1 11 22 21 2 0 0
5:00 75 2 0 17 35 19 2 0 0
6:00 54 1 1 13 24 12 3 0 0
7:00 30 1 0 ll 10 ? I 0 0
8:00 12 0 O 4 6 i 1 0 0
9:00 13 Q O 0 8 5 2 O 0
0:00 10 0 0 1 3 5 1 0 0
h00 7 0 O 0 2 4 I 0 0
"' Totals 441 13 17 163 247 158 37
51 56
55 60
61 66
65 70
0
0
0
0
0
Site Code: 000000151569
Start Date: 11/17/1999
File I.D.: TEVCEOVL
Page : 1
71 76
75 9999
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 1 O
0 0 0 O
1 0 0 O
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 O Q
0 0 0 Q
1 * 1 * *
rand Total 641 13 17 163 247 158 37 4 0 0 0 1 0 I O
peed Statistics.
15th Percenfih Speed : 22 MPH
Median Speed (50th percentile): 27 MPR
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 28 MPH
85th Percentlie Speed : 33 MPN
95th Percentlie Speed : 36 MPR
10 MPH Pace Speed : 21-30 MPN
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 410
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 63.94%
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPN : 2
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPH: .31%
HTY OF TRMMCU~
IIA CORDOBA E/O VIA LUCIA
{4 NR SPEED SURVEY
Time
L2:00 11/17
)1:00
}2:00
)3:00
14:00
15:00
}6:00
}7:00
}8:00
~9:00
.0:00
.h00
Int. 0- 16
Total 15 20
i 0
0 0
2 0
1 1
8 2
22 2
22 1
47 4
57 2
28 2
32 1
34 2
21
25
0
0
0
0
0
6
13
19
7
12
5
COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC.
909.247.6716
WESTBOUND
26 31 36 41
30 35 40 45 50
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 1 0
0 0 0
0 3 2
3 10 3 0
9 1 0
18 3 0
26 0 0
6 2 0
9 2
12 6
2:00 pm 50 1 1 9 16
}1:00 55 I 3 13 25
+2:00 45 1 ] 9 23
k3:00 39 1 2 1O 9
~4:00 47 1 4 17 19
+5:00 59 0 0 11 24
,6:00 36 1 2 12 14
17:00 35 0 0 7 19
,8:00 23 1 1 6 8
+9:00 I3 I 0 2 5
0:00 6 0 1 1 3
hO0 1 0 0 0 0
) Totals 663 14 34 iS3 251
:rand Total 663 I4 34 163 251
51 56
55 60
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
61 66
65 70
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18 5 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 1 1 i 0 0 0
13 3 0 1 0 0 0
4 1 1 0 0 0 0
19 3 I O 0 i 0
6 1 0 0 0 0 0
8 1 0 0 0 0 0
3 4 0 0 0 0 0
2 3 0 0 O 0 0
1 O 0 0 O 0 0
i 0 0 O O 0 0
147 43 7 ] * 1 *
0
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 6
O O
0 O
0
0
, ,
peed Statistics.
a 0 rcentile); 27 MPH
Average Speed - All Vehicles: 28 MPN
85th Percen0ile Speed : 33 NPH
95th Percentlie Speed : 37 MPH
10 MPR Pace Speed : 21-30 NPR
Number of Vehicles in Pace: 414
Percent of Vehicles in Pace: 62.43%
Number of Vehicles > 55 MPN : 1
Percent of Vehicles > 55 MPN: .15%
Site Code: 000000151569
Start Date: 11/17/1999
File I.D.: TNVCIOVL
Page : 1
71 7S
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 ~
147 43 7 3 O 1 0 0 0 e
EXHIBIT "E"
LETTER AND SURVEY TO RESIDENTS OF
VIA CORDOBA
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive-Temecula, CA 92590,Mailing Address: I~O Box 9033-Temecula, CA 92589-9033
(909) 694-641 I · Fax (909) 694-6475
February 1, 2000
Re: Via Cordoba Traffic Calming Prototype Program
Dear Residents of Via Cordoba:
As you may recall, the temporary traffic calming devices were installed on Via Cordoba in October
1999, in response to speed control requests made by residents who live on Via Cordoba. The
temporary devices were installed to determine their effectiveness in reducing vehicle speeds over a
four-month evaluation period. The four (4) month evaluation period has concluded and a "before" and
"after" evaluation has been performed.
Enclosed you will find a survey along with a self-addressed stamped envelope. Please respond to the
questions on the survey form and return it to the City of Temecula no later than 5:00 P.M.,
Wednesday, February 9, 2000. Your responses will assist us in determining if the residents believe the
temporary traffic calming devices have been effective.
The results of the evaluation and the survey will be presented to the Public/Traffic Safety Commission
for consideration at their meeting of February 10, 2000 at 6:00 P.M. The meeting will be held at City
Hall Council Chambers located at 43200 Business Park Drive. You are encouraged to attend this
meeting to provide input.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer or me at
(909) 694-6411.
Sincerely,
William G. Hughes
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Enclosures
CC:
All Moghadam, Senior Engineer
Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer
R:\gonzalj\2000~letters\lviacordoba
Via Cordoba
Survey of Traffic Calming Devices
1. Do you believe that the temporary traffic calming devices (traffic circles and median islands)
have been effective in reducing overall vehicle speeds on Via Cordoba?
YES NO
If the traffic calming devices are found to be effective, would you support the installation of
permanent improvements (raised concrete median islands and/or raised concrete traffic
circles)?
YES NO
,
Additional Comments: (Please provide your observation of the effectiveness of the devices
and list any advantages and disadvantages to having traffic circles and/or median islands on
Via Cordoba.)
R:\gor~alj\2000\lettersXlviaeordoba
ITEM NO. 3
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Public/Traffic Safety Commission
Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic
February 10, 2000
Item 3
Additional Left-Turn Lane - Margarita Road at Raneho California Road
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission receive and file the report.
BACKGROUND:
At the meeting of January 13, 2000, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission received a request from Mr. Ron
Guerriero to investigate the possibility of providing an additional southbound left-turn lane on Margarita Road
at Rancho California Road to improve traffic flow. The Commission directed staff to agendize the request.
The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the
agenda notification process.
As the Commission may recall, this improvement was originally identified by staff on the list of potential
"short term" improvements developed in January 1999. After reviewing the peak hour turning movement
volumes, staff determined that the southbound right-turn movement was heavier than the southbound left-turn
movement and the existing right-turn lane was needed to accommodate the traffic demand. Because Margad~a
Road is not wide enough to accommodate an additional left-turn lane without losing the right-turn lane, no
changes were made at that time.
Subsequent to Mr. Guerriero's request, staff performed an evaluation of current peak hour turning movement
volumes. The results of the evaluation indicate that turning movement patterns have changed significantly in
the past twelve months. The current volumes indicate that the southbound left-turn is the predominant
movement on this leg of the intersection and that an additional southbound left-turn lane is necessary to
accommodate the volumes. The change in the traffic pattern may be attributed to the completion of the
Margarita Road widening improvements and the Overland Drive connection between Jefferson Avenue and
Margarita Road.
Staff will prepare a work order to modify the striping on Margarita Road to provide an additional southbound
left-turn lane and modify the signal operation to accommodate the change. The striping medification will
effectively eliminate the existing southbound right-turn lane.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approximately $2,000 for signing and striping improvements. These funds are available in the Public Works
signing and striping account. Approximately $3,000 for traffic signal modification improvements.
These funds are available in the Public Works traffic signal improvement account.
Attachment:
1. Exhibit ~A" - Location Map
2. Exhibit "B' - Peak Hour Traffic Volume Data
EXHIBIT "B"
PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUME DATA
City of Temecula
Turning Movement AM Count Data
Rancho California Road @ Margarita Road
File Name: RCMARG
Site Code: 00000001
Start Date: 01/26/2000
Page No : 1
<,, 743 1172
59
316 476
939 743 ,,
160 i.
547 316 -->
70
173
City of Temecula
Turning Movement AM Count Data
Rancho California Road @ Margarita Road
File Name: RCMARG
Site Code: 00000001
Start Date: 01/26/2000
Page No : 1
168
660 1057
221:
871 660 ~,
507 296 -.),.
62
City of Temecula
Turning Movement AM Count Data
Rancho California Road @ Margarita Road
Margarita Road
Southbound
Factor ~
07:00 AM 43" ~ 34 ' I 20
07:15AM 61 82 57 0 15
07:30 AM 24 67 42 0 9
07:45 AM 32 94 41 0 8
Total 460 353 174 1 ] 52
08:00 AM 44 68 40 1 12
08:15 AM 32 72 39 0 7
08:30 AM 33 73 42 14
08:45 AM 36 66 52 6
Total 145 279 173 39
Groups Printed- Vehicles
Ranchb C~liForn~a I~oad I Margadta Road
,%'t!°%htP.d !
195 35 0 ! 86
203 33 0 ~ 67
180 43 I 58
743 143 1 255
143 26 58
197 42 23
146 51 56
174 49 84
660 168 221
File Name: RCMARG
Site Code: 00000001
Start Date: 01/26/2000
Page No : 1
Northbound
Left; Tl~ ~g~[ Fec]~ EBft Thru
87 33 0 i 20 89
60 15 0 I 14 73
Rancho California Road
Eastbound
Right Peds Int Total
30 0 656
29 0 789
19 0 626
23 0 617
101 0 2688
21 0 621
34 1 613
19 0 611
19 2 691
93 3 2536
5224
Grand Total 305 632 347 3 ! 91 1403 311 ~:i 476 585 132 4 121 612 194 3
Apprch % 23.7 49.1 27.0 0.2, 5.0 77.5 17.2 39.8 48.9 11.0 0.3 13.0 65.8 20.9 03
Total % 5.8 12.1 6.6 0.1 1.7 26.9 6.0 9.1 11.2 2.5 0.1 2.3 11.7 3.7 0.1
City of Temecula
Turning Movement PM Count Data
Rancho California Road @ Margarita Road
File Name: RCMARGPM
Site Code: 00000002
Start Date: 01/26/2000
Page No : 1
183
<.. 486 823
O
563 920
744 486 ,.
1069 563 -~
City of Temecula
Turning Movement PM Count Data
Rancho California Road @ Margarita Road
File Name: RCMARGPM
Site Code: 00000002
Start Date: 01/26/2000
Page No : 1
181
<_ 496 882
640 1014
744 496
391 o
1098
640 ~
64
Start Time
Factor
04:00 PM
04:15 PM
04:30 PM
04:45 PM
Total
05:00 PM
05:15 PM
05:30 PM
05:45 PM
Total
Grand Total
Apprch %
Total %
City of Temecula
Turning Movement PM Count Data
Rancho California Road @ Margarita Road
Groups Printed- Vehicles
Margarita Road RanC~o California Road Marg~rita Road '
From North From East From South
Thru ! Right Peds~ Left Thru Thru Right Peds
Left '
1.0~ 1.0 1.0 ~.0 "
1.0 1.0
97 114 27 2 24 103 42
112 107 20 0 16 132 46
111 139 19 0 16 114 51
103 99 13 0 18 137 44
423 459 79 2 74 486 183
102 118 23
103 127 33
97 126 30
89 131 20
391 502 106
01 28 139
0! 11 125
0~ 13 113
0~ 12 119
0 64 496
1.0 1.0
0 68 84 19
0 56 91 21
1 48 93 22
0 77 80 20
I 249 348 82
51
50
42
38
181
File Name: P, CMARGPM
Site Code: 00000002
Start Date: 01/26/2000
Page No : 1
814 961 185
41.5 49.0 9.4
120 14.2 2,7
2 138
0.1 9.3
0,0 j 2.0
Rancho C~lffornia Road
From West
Left Thru Right Peds Int.
Total
1.0 ~ 1,0 1.0 1.0 10
0' 43 1~8 46 0 787
1 43 151 46 1 843
1 , 49 124 37 4 829
0 ~ 36 170 48 4 849
2 171 563 177 9 3308
0 58 96 19 1
I 84 93 21 0
0 61 101 17 0
2 71 89 7 0
3 274 379 64 I
39 150 45 0 869
67 155 47 1 918
40 137 42 5 824
39 198 49 0 864
185 640 183 6 3475
982 364 g~i 523 727 146 3 356 1203 360 15 6783
66.0 24.5 37.4 52,0 10.4 0.2 I 18.4 62,2 18.6 0.8
14,5 5.4 7.7 10.7 2.2 0.0 I 5.2 17,7 5.3 0.2
TY OF TEMECULA
S: MAHGAHITA ROAD
W: EANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
ATEERr SUNNY
COUNTS UNLIMITED
25424 JACLYN AVENUE
MORENO VALLEY, CA 92557
909-247-6716
TOTAL VOLUME
Site Code: 00150201
Start Date: 06/03/98
File I.D.: TEMAHCAM
Page : 1
MAHGAHITA ROAD !HANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD MAHGARITA ROAD RANC~O CALIFORNIA ROAD
Southbound ~Westbound Northbound Eastbound
Left Thru Eight Left Thru Eight Left Thru Eight Left Tbru Right Total
06/03/98
:00 27 160 ]5 19 130 45 69 63 15 ]0 79 73 745
:15 35 98 ]1 10 I65 42 91 99 26 18 65 55
:30 36 80 34 14 174 42 67 53 16 8 57 35 616
:45 21 71 30 8 178 34 83 65 17 14 57 26 604
Total 119 407 130 51 647 163 310 280 74 70 258 189 2698
:00 22 60 ]5 8 I4i ]8 67 65 16 20 56 23 551
:15 2] 64 29 14 141 30 82 58 12 18 58 33 540
:]0 ]7 72 47 6 147 ]6 101 67 32 24 57 32 858
:45 ]1 65 36 I8 132 42 88 68 14 14 72 ]1 611
Total 113 261 147 ~ 48 561 146 318 258 74 76 241 119 2360
)TAL* 232 668 277 97 1208 309 ~ 628 538 148 I46 499 388 ~ 5058
~k Nuur Analysis By Individual Approach for the Period: 07:00 to 09:00 on 06/03/98
Lk start 07:00 07:00 07:15 07:00
me 119 407 130 51 647 I83 308 282 75 70 258 189
.ent 18% 62% 20% 6% 75% 19% 46% 42% 11% 14% 50%
total 658 861 665 517
ihest 07:00 07:]0 07:15 07:00
ume 27 180 35 I4 174 42 91 99 28 ]0 79 7]
total 222 2]0 216 182
.74 .94 .77 .7I
k Hour Analysis By Entire Intersection for the Period: 07:00 to 09:00 on 06/03/98
k start 07:00 07:00 07:00 07:OO
ume 119 407 130 51 647 163 310 280 74 70 258 189
cent 18% 62% 20% 6% 75% 19% 47% 42% 11% I4~ 50% 37%
total 656 B61 664 517
best 07:00 07:30 07:15 07:00
ume 27 160 35 14 174 42 91 99 26 30 79 73
total 222 230 216 I82
.74 .94 .77 .71
TY OF TEMECULA
S: MARGARITA ROAD
W: RANCRO CALIFORNIA ROAD
ATHER: SUNNY
COUNTS UNLIMITED
25424 JACLYN AVENUE
MOREN0 VALLEY, CA 92557
909-247-6716
TOTAL VOLUME
Site Code: 00150211
Start Date: 06/03/98
File I.D.: TEMARCPM
Page : 1
MARGARITA ROAD RANCNO CALIFORNIA ROAD MARGARITA ROAD RANCRO CALIFORNIA ROAD
Southbound Nestbound Northbound Eastbound
Left Thru Right Left Thru Right [ Left Thru Right Left Tbru Right Total
te 06/03/98 .......................................................................................................................
:00 93 125 27 22 122 3I 75 88 27 38 117 53 818
:15 70 i27 18 14 113 44 91 98 27 24 106 67 799
:30 52 133 29 22 132 40 66 64 29 33 131 62 793
:45 88 141 29 19 123 47 90 82 31 30 130 57 883
Total 303 526 103 77 490 162 330 332 114 125 492 239 3293
:00 82 132 28 22 128 48 67 77 24 54 145 56 063
:15 84 144 26 14 80 48 71 71 10 31 128 58 765
:30 81 124 31 I7 105 37 65 65 19 52 130 78 812
:45 84 117 27 6 88 32 67 74 18 42 115 73 743
Total 311 517 112 59 401 165 270 287 71 179 526 265 3183
634 1043 215 136 891 ]27 [ 600 619 185 [ 304 1010 504 ~ 6476
]k Nour Analysis By Individual Approach for the Period: 16:00 to 10:00 on 06/03/90
ik start i6:45 16:15 16:00 17:00
"me ]]5 541 114 77 496 179 ]30 332 114 I79 526 265
,out 34% 55% 12% i0% 66% 24% 43% 43% 15% 18% 54% 27%
total 990 752 776 970
thest 16:45 17:00 16:15 17:30
Fume 88 141 29 22 128 48 9I 98 27 52 138 78
total 258 198 216 268
~ .96 .95 .90 .90
ik ~our Analysis By Entire Intersection For the Period: 16:00 to 18:00 on 06/0]/98
~k start 16:15 16:15 16:t5
tume 292 533 104 77 496 179 322 ]21
:cent 31% 57% 11% 10% 66% 24%
total 929 752 754
]host 16:45 I7:00 16:15
.ume 88 141 29 22 I28 48 91 98
total 258 198 216
1 ,90 .95 .87
16:15
111 141 520 242
15l 16% 58l
903
17:00
27 54 145 56
255
.89
ITEM NO. 4
TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT
All-Way Stop Sign installation Criteria Page 1 of 5
All-Way Stop Sign Installation Criteria
January - February, 1999 Vol. 53
No.1
All-Way STOP Sign
Installation Criteria
Robert Rees, P.E.,
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Traffic Engineers are often asked by residents
and policy makers to install STOP signs
within residential areas to slow traffic and/or
make side street access easier. Typical
criterion for STOP sign installation (Manual
on Uniform Traffic Con~ol Devices
(MUTCD), 1988 Edition) apply to arterial
and collector streets but do not adequately
address the needs on residential or
neighborhood streets.
Both quantitative engineering factors and
professional judgement need to be applied
when evaluating STOP sign installation
requests. The question is... What factors
should be considered and how should the
factors be quantified?
http ://www.arch21 .org/WestemlTE/199WITE/stopsign.htm 01/26/2000
All-Way Stop Sign Installation Criteria Page 2 of 5
STOP Sign Installation Background
A conservative use of STOP signs and other
regulatory signs are recommended as, if used
to excess, these signs lose their effectiveness.
Excessive use ofregulatory signs (e.g., STOP
signs) throughout an area can result in
contempt for law enforcement and erosion of
obedience to the signs command. In the
specific case of a STOP sign, this could result
in motorists not obeying STOP sign controls
at critical intersections.
A STOP sign is not a cure-all and is not a
substitute for other traffic control devices. As
with all changes in traffic control, the site
should be reviewed to determine if there are
other, better, solutions. Sometimes, for
example, removing obstructions and/or
relocating the STOP bar can improve
visibility and sight distance eliminating the
need for installation of a multi-way STOP
sign.
STOP signs are a substantial inconvenience to
motorists. As with the installation of traffic
signals, an increase in rear-end type accidents
is likely to occur when traffic flows on the
main corridor are impeded. This increase
must be weighed against the current level of
traffic conflicts at the intersection location
proposed for STOP sign installation.
Multi-way or all-way STOP controlled
intersections are controlled by STOP signs at
all approaches. STOP control on all
approaches at an intersection is normally used
at intersections with approximately equal
volumes on all approaches. The important
elements involved in a multi-way STOP
controlled warrant analysis are explained
below.
Elements for Installation of Multi-way
STOP Control Volume
A primary parameter for evaluation is the
traffic volume that enters the intersection
from all approaches. For this warrant, it is
preferable to have volumes that are nearly
http ://www. arch21 .org/WestemlTE/199WITE/stopsign.htm 01/26/2000
All-Way Stop Sign Installation Criteria Page 3 of 5
equal on all approaches or in the case of a
residential area, the volumes on the side street
needs to be high enough to justify stopping
the traffic on the major street. If traffic
becomes too unbalanced, there might be a
tendency for the main street traffic to disobey
their STOP sign, therefore diminishing the
effectiveness of the intersection control.
Accidents - Another element to be evaluated
is the accident history of the intersection.
Accidents that are included in this warrant are
only those that can be corrected through all-
way STOP sign installation. For example,
rear-end accidents would not be considered
because STOP signs would not reduce the
likelihood of future rear-end accidents.
Visibility - The visibility or sight distance at
the intersection plays an important role in
determining whether the intersection needs
STOP signs on all approaches. A restriction
in sight distance at an intersection approach
may require the STOP sign, but installation of
a STOP sign should be the last option. Other
corrective measures such as prohibiting
parking, landscape trimming, or removal of
fences, poles, signs or other obstructions
should first be considered.
Speeds - Approach speed to the intersection,
primarily on the major street, is also a
consideration. Again, installing a STOP sign
should be the last option. Other measures
(speed limit signs or police enforcement)
should be20considered first, because
installing STOP signs may increase speeds
between successive stops, create roll-through
STOP sign violations, and reduce STOP sign
effectiveness at other locations.
Other Factors - There are other factors, such
as presence of steep grades, sharp curves,
schools, pedestrians, etc., which need to be
considered when evaluating a potential all-
way STOP sign installation. Since each
location has its own physical characteristics,
each location should be evaluated
individually. No attempt is made to set rigid
criteria for these types of factors because the
variability in conditions among intersections
makes the use of such criteria nearly
impossible.
http ://www.arch21 .org/WesternlTE/199WITE/stopsign.htm 01/26/2000
All-Way Stop Sign Installation Criteria Page 4 of 5
Conclusion
After conducting a search of the all-way
STOP warrants adopted in San Francisco Bay
Area jurisdictions and using engineering
judgement, the following criterion for multi-
way STOP installations are recommended for
neighborhood streets.
Multi-Way STOP Installation Criteria for Neighborhood Streets
Factors to Consider
Volume
Accidents
Visibility
Speed
Crossing Residential
Collectors
Criteria An intersection meeting
two of the criteria is considered
a candidate for an all-way STOP
sign installation
Total intersection vehicle
volume must be equal to or
greater than 300 vehicles per
hour for at least 8 hours during
the day (pedestrian and
vehicular volumes can be
combined).
Side street intersection volumes
must be at least 1/3 of the total
intersection vehicle volume for
the same 8 hours.
3 or more accidents within the
previous 12 month period
(Accident types must be
correctable through STOP sign
installation).
Intersection sight distance must
be equal to or less than 150 feet.
The 85th percentlie speeds must
be equal to or greater than 30
mph.
Intersecting streets are
collectors and distribute
residential traffic to several
residential streets and/or cul-de-
sacs.
AND
Volumes on both streets must be
nearly equal (no greater than a
http://www.arch21 .org/WesternlTE/199WITE/stopsign.htm 01/26/2000
All-Way Stop Sign Installation Criteria Page 5 of 5
1140 percent to 60 percent split).
Volume Adjustment Factors
The volume criteria can be
reduced to 60 percent if all
adjustment factors are met
Residential frontage with
a 25 mph speed limit.
Neither street width
exceeds 40 feet.
No other STOP Signs or
Signals within 600 feet.
Intersection is located
near an activity center
(i.e., school, park, pool)
AND at least 25 children
walk or bike through the
intersection during any
two hours during the day.
Return to the Front Page
http ://www. arch21 .org/WestemITE/199WITE/stopsign.htm 01/26/2000
ITEM NO. 5
POLICE CHIEF'S REPORT
ITEM NO. 6
FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT
ITEM NO. 7
COMMISSION REPORTS