Loading...
062812 PTS Agenda In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk's Department at 951-694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] MEETING AGENDA TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION A REGULAR MEETING TO BE HELD AT TEMECULA CIVIC CENTER, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, JUNE 28, 2012, 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Hagel FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner ROLL CALL: Carter, Cosentino, Coram, Youmans, Hagel PRESENTATIONS: Certificate of Meritorious Service - John Devries Certificate of Appreciation — Deputy Martin Cardenas, Temecula Police Department Emergency Management Update — Grant Yates, PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of fifteen 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 three minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item not listed on the Agenda, a yellow "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state vour 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 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 that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. Any public writings distributed by the City Staff to at least a majority of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission regarding any item on this regular meeting agenda will be made available at the City Clerk's Office at Temecula Civic Center, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92589, during normal business hours. � COMMISSION REPORTS Reports by the Commissioners on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten minutes will be devoted to these reports. � COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Action Minutes of May 24, 2012 RECOMMENDATION: ' 1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of May 24, 2012. COMMISSION BUSINESS 2. Request for Parkinq Restriction — Peach Tree Street and Primrose Avenue RECOMMENDATION: � 2.1 Consider the request for a parking restriction program on Peach Tree Street south of Primrose Avenue, Primrose Avenue west of Peach Tree Street, and Ritchart Court as shown in Exhibit "B". 2.2 Provide direction to Staff. 3. Consideration of Multi-Wav Stop Siqns — Old Kent Road and Fox Road/Vermont Road RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Recommend the City Council adopt a resolution establishing Multi-Way Stop signs at the intersection of Old Kent Road and Fox Road/Vermont Road. 4. Citvwide Enqineerinq and Traffic Survev Update RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Recommend the City Council adopt an Ordinance establishing the speed limits identified in Exhibit "A". TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORTS POLICE CHIEF'S REPORTS FIRE CHIEF'S REPORTS ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission will be held on Thursday, July 26, 2012, at 6:00 P.M. at Temecula Civic Center, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The agenda packet (including staffreports) will be available for viewing at the Main Reception, Temecula Civic Center, (41000 Main Street, Temecula) or the Temecula Library (30600 Pauba Road, Temecula) after 4:00 PM the Friday before the Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission meeting. At that time, the packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.cirioftemecula.org Supplemental material received after the posting of the Agenda Any supplemental material distributed to a majoriry of the Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission regarding any item on the Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, will be available for public review at the Main Reception, Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula— 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM). In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.org — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. Ifyou have any questions regarding any item of business on the Agenda for this meeting, please contact City Clerk's Department — 951-694-6444. 2 ITEM NO. 1 Action Minutes of May 24, 2012 ACTION MINUTES OF TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION TEMECULA CIVIC CENTER, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, MAY 24; 2012, 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Hagel FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Cosentino ROLL CALL: Cosentino, Coram, Youmans, Hagel Absent: Carter PRESENTATIONS: Certificate of Appreciation — Lt. Scott Madden, Temecula Police Department PUBLIC COMMENTS Evelyn Buchanan and Michael Santaniello addressed the commission. COMMISSION REPORTS COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Action Minutes of March 22, 2012 - Approved staff recommendation —(3-0-1) — Commissioner Cosentino made the motion; it was seconded by Commissioner Coram and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Carter who was absent and Commissioner Youmans who abstained. RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Action Minutes of March 22, 2012. COMMISSION BUSINESS 2. Proposed Capital Improvement Proqram — Fiscal Years 2013-2017 — Received and filed the report. ' RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Receive and file the report. 3. Roripauqh Road Neiqhborhood Traffic Calminq Alternatives —Approved staff recom- mendation —(4-0-0) — Commissioner Youmans made the motion; it was seconded by Commissioner Cosentino and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Carter who was absent. RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Direct Staff to install striping improvements, which simulate a Raised Median Entry 1 Treatment and propose inclusion of the raised median improvements in the City's Capital Improvement Program for future consideration. 3.2 Direct Staff to install "VCalm" signs at various locations on Roripaugh Road to monitor and reduce vehicular speeds. 3.3 Direct Staff to install "fine" placards below existing 25 MPH speed limit signs on Roripaugh Road. 3.4 Deny the request to install multi-way stop signs on Roripaugh Road to reduce vehicular speeds. 4. School Area Traffic Safetv Workshop — Area 5 Pauba Vallev Elementarv School and Tonv Tobin Elementarv School (County) — received and filed the report. RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the report. TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORTS � POLICE CHIEF'S REPORTS FIRE CHIEF'S REPORTS ADJOURNMENT At 7:58 P.M., Commissioner Coram moved, seconded by Commissioner Cosentino, to adjourn the Public Traffic Safety Commission meeting to Thursday, June 28, 2012 at 6:00 P.M. Bob Hagel Greg Butler Chairperson Director of Public Works / City Engineer 2 ITEM NO. 2 Request for Parking Restriction — Peach Tree Street and Primrose Avenue AGENDA REPORT ��\ I ��i � _ , � \�� �'iL TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission �,� �'z � � �.�- 1989 ` FROM: reg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: June 28, 2012 SUBJECT: Item 2 Request for Parking Restriction — Peach Tree Street and Primrose Avenue Prepared By: Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer — Traffic RECOMMENDATION: 1. Consider the request for a parking restriction program on Peach Tree Street south of Primrose Avenue, Primrose Avenue west of Peach Tree Street, and Ritchart Court as shown in Exhibit « 2. Provide direction to Staff. BACKGROUND: Staff received a request from Richmond American Homes to consider the feasibility of implementing a parking restriction program on Peach Tree Street and Primrose Avenue adjacent to their development to discourage Great Oak High School students from parking in the neighborhood. The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification process and by mail. Peach Tree Street is a forty-four (44) foot wide residential collector roadway, which provides access to the arterial roadway network for numerous single family residential enclaves. Currently, Peach Tree Street carries 2,100 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) south of Deer Hollow Way. The speed limit is not posted on Peach Tree Street, but the school zone speed limit is posted 25 MPH when children are present. Primrose Avenue is forty-four (44) foot wide residential collector roadway, which provides access for numerous single family residential units to Pechanga Road and ultimately Pechanga Parkway. Primrose Avenue carries 2,000 ADT east of Pechanga Road. The speed limit is not posted on Primrose Avenue, but the school zone speed limit is posted 25 MPH when children are present. An evaluation of conditions was performed along Peach Tree Street and Primrose Avenue, which included a review of the accident history and on-street parking conditions. A review of the collision history for the twelve (12) month period from June 1, 2011 to May 31, 2012, indicates there were no reported collisions on Peach Tree Street and Primrose Avenue. This favorable record can be attributed to low vehicular speeds and volumes, familiarity with the roadways and motorists exercising due care when traveling on these neighborhood streets. 1 In May, on-street parking data was collected over a two (2) day period to determine the number of vehicles that could potentially be displaced by implementation of a parking restriction program on the west side of Peach Tree Street and south side of Primrose Avenue. The table below summarizes the results of the data collection. Location Ma 1, 2012 Ma 3, 2012 Peach Tree Street — South of Primrose Avenue 17 (west side) 13 (west side) Primrose Avenue — Peach Tree Street to Ritchart 10 (south side) 10 (south side) Court The results indicate the proposed parking restriction will affect an average of 15 vehicles on Peach Tree Street south of Primrose Avenue and an average of 10 vehicles on Primrose Avenue west of Peach Tree Street. Because the proposed parking restriction could potentially shift the displaced vehicles to adjacent streets, such as Vine Street, Ritchart Court, Dorset Court, Ritter Court, and Peach Tree Street (west) a written notice was mailed to the owners of record to solicit their response and advise them of the Commission's consideration of the proposed parking restriction. A written notice was also delivered to the property occupant to solicit their response regarding the proposed parking restriction. The survey attached to the notices indicated that a two-third (2/3) majority of the affected residents on each street is needed to implement the proposed parking restriction. The owner/occupant survey indicates that of the seventy-seven (77) affected residents surveyed, approximately 24 (31 %) are in favor of the proposed restriction, 11 (14%) are opposed, and 42 (55%) did not respond to the survey. The table below summarizes the results of the survey by street. In Favor of Opposed to Parking Parking Location Restriction Restriction No Response Vine Street (12 Homes) 2 4 6 Ritchart Court (3 Homes) 2 0 1 Dorset Court 21 Homes 9 1 11 Ritter Court 29 Homes 7 5 17 Peach Tree Street west 12 Homes 4 1 7 As shown, the majority of residents potentially affected by a parking restriction program on their street did not respond to the survey, which may indicate there is limited interest in pursuing a parking restriction program on the above streets. Since the required two-third (2/3) majority was not achieved and 55% of the affected residents did not respond, a parking restriction program is not recommended on these streets, except at Ritchart Court. It is our opinion that the parking restriction on Primrose Avenue will shift vehicles onto this cul-de-sac causing an impact to the residents of Ritchart Court. , Staff recommends the Commission consider only the request for a parking restriction program at the following locations and provide direction to staff. • West side of Peach Tree Street (East) from Primrose Avenue to 600 feet south of Vine Street.. • South side of Primrose Avenue from Ritchart Court to Peach Tree Street (East). • Ritchart Court Although the original request for the parking restriction on Peach Tree Street was befinreen Primrose Avenue and Vine Street only, it is Staff's opinion that extending the restriction an additional 600 feet south will mitigate potential impacts caused by the displaced vehicles. 2 The proposed parking restriction program is consistent with a program currently in place on Kohinoor Way. The program, which restricts parking from 9 AM to 12 PM, Monday through Friday except Holidays, has been in place for approximately 5 years and was implemented to discourage Great Oak High School students from parking on neighborhood streets. FISCAL IMPACT: Minor cost associated with installation of signs. Adequate funds are available in the Traffic Division operating budget. Attachment 1. Exhibit "A" — Location Map 2. Exhibit "B" — Proposed Parking Restriction 3 EXHIBIT "A" LOCATION MAP 4 •'', 'nrF.rrnor I 1 TEMECULA Request for Parking Restriction 1111-iiii÷Ct6 71r1-11to iii.11147174":2:'..72)-' .'. ST\le*<-(4‘*"711"). e '4: '!. ik: imp t I--....., in . , 4,)1,.. ,, r ,>,i',:.);.;.. i; iiii,, iirjr2,-j • Illiri 41:.'111.117,' • ./ f ) ,r., 01, r � y Legend if .� /' i \'�. Cl de • a- l / , +thy,. 4 ' I, stets 1 ,� • / //� * /: f r ❑ Parcels ,+ ` 4. .. • • � '• _ a i _,? ,(t% Aerial 2011 V 7 ti 1lb 4 - .(1../ .72. , .., 7, ..s1/4/NO .1,!.., .N. -‹.,, ... -°-4; . .,1', 4,/,..., __ - / •Pi ' kg.'" 0• r A.:_'‘.AIL ..• r_... ,..../ . , gitftti-- ...t• t .. illi . :.•[ - „) €7'.' N .....1.. . :-..-... , -rer.,w-. ilk ,,i . iji •- .,,,,a Mit 'I \ \A: ; ' ,..._ ' ./.. '\ . w ' -/''..., ..ic5' Iril .- Zi 1 • - • . 11iiii,,,,,, . - -- . ,/,... ) .., . a . '''.. . # P-11;jilitit ' I I:. . _ - ft' 4flii„)itka: .• ) , 1';01411 _ H1E OARANCH.•' + • ..7u4.4,0 ` .M" 4. -I mss}, •-\.. - __i1/`` N 0 600 1200 1800 ft. Scale:1:6,241 Map center: 6304950,2109153 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate,current,or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. EXHIBIT "B" PROPOSED PARKING RESTRICTION 6 � ��� THF.f.ITV'nF TE�ECU�.� Proposed Parking Restriction �� �,�T�.�.� • • ' , � . - I ;,�, ' . � . � � �\ ' ..``' . :� e - . �. w� a ., c,'��. � � r ///))) ' � �n � . � � . �" A � . `�. / � t �� l �` ''� �. . � � �� Y� / I � � , �.+- ry - t-- b i w ;// .� a � � � ��,� � �°"' �;� '` +� ' ]� j Legend •` � ` / � �, . / � x �• ` r � e � "iw • C1 � f �� � s '; "� ;� j � � •� ir . l r ; • '� is,' �. `'� � Sveets '•; . �, •', . j 'r,;�, , / u ; � ��e RITC " "� ' ��, °�'�' � Parcels � � '� j H ' 4 �'TC . ' i - AerIa12011 '_,,,,,> T �� s . �;, ,� .i ' `.�� y A �' . � ,Q . 1 f _��v ' . . I`: . .' , �S � �. � . �J , f .♦ -. � -� � �% ' � y :'�, . i � 1 �l `. h?�'l . �P +i i=r fr f � `:� � -. � �, S �j t ' F" I �# a � � '�/ '. , �Q-�� ' � . ' - � W � � Q 1 ` D �, � ' <, � �� ., �f s .� .,�i �RSET CT _� � -'+c. _,` .. y .. � �, .�: . _ { U � - { � � r r . "� �? � �� � ,. '� .., ;-,:., a ,� �. : ..,. ' _ k _ `'> . ' lp �R �T � .., j - � , � „� b' � � ; _ � � c �, �; .�, � .� t �-.� _ - ` � ` ' � T � ;�., � ' ',� _�,'; .. � �`. � 0. r �1'. � __ � f ... � ,�,- � � ti°: '� r �` � °=R p+,.c v � . :� �,Z � �'� `"a � R � � +• � � � N 0 300 600 900 ft. {� Scale: 7:3,183 Map center: 6305613, 2108688 YY This map is a user generated static output from an Intemet mapping site and is for general refere�ce only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. ITEM NO. 3 Consideration of Multi-Way Stop Signs — Old Kent Road and Fox Road / Vermont Road AGENDA REPORT \�� � ��� �,� _ �� TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission � �� �,_��� FROM: eg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: June 28, 2012 SUBJECT: Item 3 Consideration of Multi-Way Stop Signs — Old Kent Road and Fox Road/Vermont Road Prepared By: Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer — Traffic RECOMMENDATION: 1. Recommend the City Council adopt a resolution establishing Multi-Way Stop signs at the intersection of Old Kent Road and Fox Road/Vermont Road. BACKGROUND: In the past Staff has received requests to consider the feasibility of installing multi-way stop signs at the intersection of Old Kent Road and Fox Road. A recent review of school area conditions performed by the Temecula Police Department identified the potential need for multi-way stop signs to provide right-of-way control and reduce potential conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians at the intersection. The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification process and by mail. Old Kent Road is a forty-four (44) foot wide residential collector roadway, which provides access for numerous single family residential enclaves to Crowne Hill Drive and ultimately Butterfield Stage Road. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on Old Kent Road is 1,300 at Fox Road/Vermont Road. Currently, the speed limit is not posted on Old Kent Road and east and west bound entering traffic is controlled by stop signs on Old Kent Road. Fox Road/Vermont Road is a forty (40) foot wide local roadway, which provides access for numerous single family residential units to Crowne Hill Drive. Fox RoadNermont Road carries approximately 2,000 ADT at Old Kent Road. The 25 MPH prima facie speed limit is posted on Fox Road. In March 2012, a review of conditions was performed at the intersection, which included an evaluation of sight distance, collision history, school age pedestrian counts, and completion of a multi-way stop warrant analysis. The sight distance evaluation revealed that the visibility at this intersection exceeds the minimum sight distance required for conditions and prevailing speeds. The results of the evaluation indicate the sight distance is 200 feet looking north and 170 feet looking south from the wesYleg of Old Kent Road. On the east leg of Old Kent Road, the sight distance is 265 feet looking north and 300 feet looking south. A minimum unobstructed sight distance of approximately 155 feet is required for the 25 MPH posted speed limit on Fox Road/Vermont Road. i A review of the collision history for the twelve (12) month period from April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012, indicates there were no reported collisions at the intersection. This favorable record can be attributed to driver familiarity with roadway conditions and exercising due care when traveling through the intersection. The Multi-Way Stop Sign Installation Policy for Residential Streets' warrant criteria was used to evaluate the need for multi-way stop signs at the intersection of Old Kent Road and Fox RoadNermont Road. The warrants allow for the installation of multi-way stop signs when the following conditions are satisfied: 1. Minimum Traffic Volumes a) The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches is equal to or greater than three-hundred (300) vehicles per hour for any eight (8) hours of an average day and ' b) The combined vehicular volume and pedestrian volume from the minor street is equal to or greater than one-hundred (100) per hour for the same eight (8) hours. 2. Collision History a) Three (3) or more reported collisions within a finrelve (12) month period of a type susceptible to correction by a multi-way stop installation. Such accidents include right and left-turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions. 3. Roadway Characteristics a) The traffic volume on the uncontrolled street exceeds two thousand (2,000) vehicles per day, b) The intersection has four (4) legs, with the streets extending 600 feet or more away from the intersection on at least three (3) of the legs; c) The vehicular volumes on both streets are nearly equal to a forty/sixty percent (40/60%) split; and d) Both streets are 44 feet wide or narrower. WARRANTS 1, 2, and 3 MUST BE SATISFIED Other criteria that may be considered when evaluating the need for multi-way stop signs include: 4. Visibility a) The intersections sight distance is less than: • 155 feet for 25 MPH • 200 feet for 30 MPH • 250 feet for 35 MPH 5. The need to control left-turn conflicts. 6. The need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts near locations that generate high pedestrian volumes such as schools, parks and activity centers. 7. The roadways and intersection appear on a Suggested Route to School plan. 8. There are no traffic signal or all-way stop controls located within 600 feet of the intersection. 9. The installation of multi-way stop signs is compatible with overall traffic circulation needs for the residential area. The Multi-Way Stop warrant analysis performed indicates that Warrants 1 and 2 are not satisfied but all parts of the Roadway Characteristics warrant are satisfied. Since all three combined warrants are not satisfied, multi-way stop signs would not be justified. However, the Optional warrant criteria does provide the flexibility to consider multi-way stop signs at locations where there is a need to control left-turn conflicts, conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles at locations that generate high z pedestrian volumes, on roadways and intersections that are on a Suggested Route to School, and where multi-way stop signs are compatible with overall traffic circulation needs of the residential area. Based. on these special circumstances, it is Staff's opinion that there is a compelling need to provide stop controls at this intersection. Staff recommends the Commission approve a recommendation that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing Multi-Way Stop signs at the intersection of Old Kent Road and Fox Road/Vermont Road. FISCAL IMPACT: Minor cost associated with relocating and installing signs and associated pavement markings. Adequate funds are available in the Traffic Division operating budget. Attachment 1. Exhibit "A" — Location Map 2. Exhibit "B" — Multi-Way Stop Warrant Analysis 3 EXHIBIT "A" LOCATION MAP 4 '�� 7HF.f.iTYOF ,!'�TEI�IEC Request for Multi-Way Stop Signs ; . � �,, � �� �,, ..F.� ��l'�� � . ' ✓ '�� y • j `O � � " r `* � ! %' � .. � �r �F +�. �. ' � ���� �y - � �� ^ '' �S'j � _ � ' ' ' R!apry'� < 2 � �+ �• +� . r .. , . v- . �A_ ` � T /�� y� 4 w . . � .� ° . > � .. ,f �;: , ' . , ' , , _ - �. M y= � � :, v �` :. � $�:..• .�� :.� Legend � , . I r `w . l, i i ,=� � �' - .L.. ' _� A � , " >. .. ��. ! t n '� �ril� ! ,y�_AC .h�.' ' , M�^ � .L W p ;� G �� , � �., � n' ,,� Streets . ,. ' � Parcels , _ c � , ., n. �: � . . \ � \ s ' ' ' �+ .: . Z , ` t . . Aerlal 2011 •;,., , �2` c'P `� � � . �► .. �, , :- ..+ i,. .�. '-�� � r t �. � ' y� \� , � •� r , , : <<� \ .� : , „+ . � n v � I.: �.'Q . ��. ti • ,. � t � �, �' O�p K. Nt �� O �.. �� • ::- � ' , ,_\, *> 1 � � , 1. �i' ,.; - `a ;�S`�'� ';' � ' � �� � t ��y�. , J� a � . �� � . �. �, / ..; Z . . r� O / _,• �, � , ' ` ``, , � ;y �` � 'a�, yi �i ,, :,l'�, � � � �� Z �_ � n � � �- •�` � �}. '. i ��, F°- �� , ` � O ,' ��`" , � '� �,. � `.✓ ` � • '> ` ��� , Y m � '� r � - , . i � „ �.,�� � . a � �J � :c ' �, . � y � . �.�,�-/G' � �� � • . .. � __++ .�-_ � `♦ � �� �� : ; I � �( ' � • �k . � _ � .�' . . :! �i� 1,, �"�. �; �". � � ±� . k S1 ` 7: ' ✓�'�. � ` � � � ��. � ��,` �* ' ' �,�, r ,,,r�r .,ur, ' r �� Q-�� ' L -� �a C,�� J ' / � �1 � ,` 3;; � % �p+ J �q '``, �pQ'�P i� � y ^ �.,: �,.�. ` _ S. ,� ", � Y' , � � SG :� `' IC �kR O , � • . ♦, vi"� �,' :=.. i � r _ �" '� �, r3 . :, N 0 275 550 825 ft. � Scale:1:2,962 Map center: 6309332, 2125615 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherv✓ise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. EXHIBIT "B" MULTI-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS 6 MULTI-WAY STOP WARRANT (Residential Streets) Major Street: Fox Road Critical Approach Speed 25 MPH Minor Street: Old Kent Road Critical Approach Speed 25 MPH Wararnts 7, 2, and 3 Must Be Satisfied 1. Minimum Vehicular Volume Satisfied Yes � No �X MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 10-11 AM 12-1 PM 1-2 PM 23 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM Hour Total All A roaches 300 1t2 597 95 325 285 179 114 99 Combined Vehicular Ped Volume Minor Street 100 85 311 57 195 254 80 90 57 2. Collision History Satisfied Yes O No �X MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS 3 OR MORE 0 3. Roadway Characteristics Satisfied Yes �X No � (All Parts Below Must Be Satisfied) A. The traffic volume on the uncontrolled street exceeds two thousand (2,000) vehicles Yes �X No � per day, B. The intersection has four (4) legs, with the streets extending 600 feet or more away from the intersection on at least three (3) of the legs, Yes �X No � C. The vehicular volumes on both streets are nearly equal to a forty/sixty percent (40/60%) split, and Yes �X No � D. Both streets are 44 feet wide or narrower. Yes OX No � Options (Other Criteria That May Be Considered) Satisfied 4. Visibility The intersection sight distance is less than: Yes � No �X 155 feet for 25 MPH 200 feet for 30 MPH 250 feet for 35 MPH 5. The need to control left-turn conflicts. Yes �X No � 6. The need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts near locations that generate high pedestrian volumes such as schools, parks and activity centers. Yes �X No � 7. The roadways and intersection appear on a Suggested Route School plan. Yes �X No � 8. There are no traffic signal or all-way stop controls located within 600 feet of the intersection. Yes �X No � 9. The installation of multi-way stop signs is compatible with overall traffic circulation needs of the residential area. Yes �X No � ITEM NO. 4 Citywide Engineering and . Traffic Survey Update AGENDA REPORT ��\ I // �. . �,�. . ;� TO: Public/Traffic Safety Commission ��{'��-�'� � ��� _° , :1�8g ' FROM: �reg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: June 28, 2012 SUBJECT: Item 4 Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey Update PREPARED BY: Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer - Traffic RECOMMENDATION: 1. Recommend the City Council adopt an Ordinance establishing the speed limits identified in Exhibit "A". BACKGROUND: The California Vehicle Code requires local authorities to review and reaffirm or adjust speed limits within their jurisdiction every seven (7) years on the basis of an Engineering and Traffic Survey. The required speed limit update provides the mechanism for the legal enforcement of the posted speed limit by the use of radar or any other electronic speed-measuring device. The City's current posted speed limits were adopted by ordinance in August 2006. As defined in the California Vehicle Code, an engineering and traffic survey is "a survey of highway and traffic conditions in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation for use by state and local authorities." The survey shall include, but not be limited to, consideration of prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements, accident statistics, and highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver. These characteristics are all considered when determining a reasonable and prudent posted speed limit. It should be noted that establishing a speed limit, which is not consistent with the 85 percentile speed, constitutes a"speed trap" and is not enforceable by the use of radar or any other electronic speed- measuring device. An Engineering and Traffic Survey was performed on nine (9) arterials, which included fifty-nine (59) segments. The survey indicates that overall, the majority of speed limits do not require a change, and the recommended speed limits are consistent with the existing posted speed limits. There are however, twelve (12) segments where a decrease in the posted speed limit is being recommended. The segments are as follows: • Butterfield Stage Rd. - La Serena Way to Rancho California Rd. 55 MPH to 50 MPH � Butterfield Stage Rd. — Rancho California Rd. to Rancho Vista Rd. 55 MPH to 50 MPH � Butterfield Stage Rd. — Rancho Vista Rd. to Pauba Rd. 55 MPH to 50 MPH • Butterfield Stage Rd. — Pauba Rd. to De Portola Rd. 55 MPH to 50 MPH • Del Rey Rd. — Via Norte to Solana Way 35 MPH to 30 MPH 1 , • Del Rey Rd. — Solana Way to Calle Pina Colada 35 MPH to 30 MPH • Jefferson Ave. — North City Limits to Winchester Rd. 50 MPH to 40 MPH • Rancho California Rd. — Diaz Rd. to I-15 Southbound Ramps 50 MPH to 40 MPH • Temecula Parkway — Bedford Court to Pechanga Parkway 55 MPH to 50 MPH • Temecula Parkway — Pechanga Parkway to Avenida De Missions 55 MPH to 50 MPH • Via Norte — Solana Way to Del Rey Rd. 35 MPH to 30 MPH • Via Norte — Del Rey Rd. to Calle Pina Colada 35 MPH to 30 MPH In addition to the decreases, the survey also revealed two (2) segments where the 85` percentile speed has increased from the previous survey. An increase in the posted speed limit is being recommended on the following segments: • Winchester Rd. — Diaz Rd. to Fuller Rd. 45 MPH to 50 MPH • Winchester Rd. — Fuller Rd. to Dendy Parkway 45 MPH to 50 MPH The recommended increase.to the posted speed limit on these segments of Winchester Road conforms to the requirements of the California Vehicle Code and the Caltrans MUTCD for establishing prudent posted speed limits that are consistent with roadway conditions, prevailing speeds, and more importantly, enforceable. Staff recommends the Commission approve a recommendation that the City Council adopt an � Ordinance establishing the speed limits identified in Exhibit "A". The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification process. Attachment: 1. Exhibit "A" — Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey — Summary of Recommendations 2 EXHIBIT "A" CITYWIDE ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 3 Engineering and Traffic Survey — Summary of Recommendations Posted Speed Recommended Location Segment Limit Speed Limit 1. Butterfield Stage Road La Serena Way to Rancho California Road 55 50 Rancho California Road to Rancho Vista Road 55 50 Rancho Vista Road to Pauba Road 55 50 Pauba Road to De Portola Road 55 50 De Portola Road to Temecula Parkway 50 50 Temecula Parkway to Welton Way 45 45 Welton Way to Nighthawk Pass 45 45 2. Del Rey Road Via Norte to Solana Way 35 30 Solana Way to Calle Pina Colada 35 30 Calle Pina Colada to Avenida Del Reposo 35 35 3. Jefferson Avenue North City Limits to Winchester Road 50 40 Winchester Road to Overland Drive 40 40 Overland Drive to Via Montezuma 40 40 Via Montezuma to Del Rio Road 40 40 Del Rio Road to Rancho California Road 40 40 4. Meadows Parkway La Serena Way to Royal Oaks Drive 45 45 Royal Oaks Drive to Rancho California Road 45 45 Rancho California Road to Rancho Vista Road 45 45 Rancho Vista Road to Pauba Road 45 45 Pauba Road to De Portola Road 45 45 De Portola Road to Temecula Parkway __ 40 40 5. Rancho California Road West City Limit to Diaz Road 50 50 Diaz Road to 1-15 Southbound Ramps 50 40 1-15 Southbound Ramps to Ynez Road 40 40 Ynez Road to Via Las Colinas 40 40 Via Las Colinas to Moraga Road 40 40 Moraga Road to Cosmic Drive 50 50 Cosmic Drive to Margarita Road 50 50 Margarita Road to Meadows Parkway 55 55 Meadows Parkway to Butterfield Stage Road 55 55 6. Temecula Parkway Bedford Court to Pechanga Parkway 55 50 Pechanga Parkway to Avenida De Missions I 55 50 Avenida De Missions to Margarita Road 55 55 Margarita Road to Butterfield Stage Road 55 55 Butterfield Stage Road to East City Limits 55 55 Engineering and Tra�c Survey — Summary of Recommendations Posted Speed Recommended Location Segment Limit Speed Limit 7. Via Norte Solana Way to Del Rey Road 35 30 Del Rey Road to Calle Pina Colada 35 30 Calle Pina Colada to Avenida Del Reposo 35 35 8. Winchester Road Diaz Road to Fuller Road 45 50 Fuller Road to Dendy Parkway 45 50 Diaz Road to Enterprise Circle North 40 40 Enterprise Circle North to Jefferson Avenue 40 40 Jefferson Avenue to Ynez Road 40 40 Ynez Road to Promenade Mall West 40 40 Promenade Mall West to Promenade Mall East 40 40 Promenade Mall East to Margarita Road 40 40 Margarita Road to Roripaugh Road 45 45 Roripaugh Road to Nicolas Road 45 45 Nicolas Road to East Cit Limits 55 55 9. Ynez Road Date Street to Equity Drive 45 45 Equity Drive to Winchester Road 45 45 Winchester Road to Overland Drive 45 45 Overland Drive to Solana Way 45 45 Solana Way to Rancho California Road 45 45 Rancho California Road to Rancho Vista Road 45 45 Rancho Vista Road to Pauba Road 45 45 Pauba Road to Santiago Road 45 45 Santiago Road to La Paz Street 45 45 La Paz Street to Jedediah Smith Road 45 45 XX — DECREASE TO POSTED SPEED LIMIT XX — INCREASE TO POSTED SPEED LIMIT TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works � �� x. FROM: Rodney Tidwell, Maintenance Superviso � i s. � DATE: June 6, 2012 1989 SLIBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - May, 2012 The following activities were performed by Public Works Deparhnent, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel far the month of May, 2012: L SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 5� B. Total signs installed 1 C. Total signs repaired '15 D. Banners Replaced ! 185 II. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 79 III. ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs 3,618 B. Total Tons 97.6 IV. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned - 203 B. Down Spouts 0 C. Under sidewalks 0 D. Bowls 12 V. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 41,200 VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Totallocations 63 B. Total S.F. 2,594 VII. STENCILING A. 379 New and repainted legends B. 878 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping C. 0 Bull Nose D. 0 Thermal Plastic E. 66 RPMs Installed � R:�MAIN1'AIN\MOACTRPT Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 51 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A. C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 57 service order requests for the month of A�ril, 2012. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 63 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and response to street emergencies. The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of Ma�, 2012 was 6$ �750.00 compared to $251 �67.35 for the month of A�ril, 2012. Account No. 5402 $6,760.00 Account No. 5401 $ - 0 - Account No. 999-5402 $ - 0 - ' Electronic Copies: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer - CaPital ImProvements Mayra De La Torre, Senior Engineer - Land DeveloPment Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer - Traffic Division R:UvIAINTAIN�MOACTRPT � DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE WORK COMPLETED Date Submitted: os-�un-i2 FISCAL YEAR 2011 - 2012 Submitted By: �rte� BuT�eR SECONp HAL� �` �4 � � � r � ,� � Prepared By: RODNEYTIDWELL �. ' . .; r: �",. : � :: �t.�. �, �_ ,�u',, ✓ � + �. r �� . �� ��rr � � �: . � ._ _GONTR�'AGTORS'' �. -;{ JANUARY :i `' FEBRUARY p `� � MARCH ' ? _,APRIL�; ' MAY -. JUNE'� , 2ND,HALF TOTALS;YEAR-TO-DATEi __. . __. _�.__ ___.._,. �-��._. _ __.__._. _ .. . . � _ . , Asphalt Square Feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Concrete Square Feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Drainage Channels 0 1 0 3 3 7 7 TOTAL COSTS $0.00 $17 500.00 $49,543.00 $49,193.75 $9 079.00 $125,315.75 $230 261.75 CONTRACT STRIPING Striping Linear Feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sandblasting Linear Feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL COSTS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $148,945.60 $0.00 $148 945.60 $148,945.60 TREE CONTRACTORS Trees Trimmed 611 1,090 1,055 1,123 0 3,879 3,879 Trees Removed 6 11 7 2 0 26 26 TOTAL COSTS $32,102.00 $55,446.00 $50,427.00 $53,028.00 $0.00 $191,003.00 $191,003.00 R.O.W. SPRAYING Square Feet 520,000 120,000 640,000 640,000 TOTAL COSTS $28,725.00 $16,800.00 $1,800.00 0 $6,750.00 $54,075.00 $112,583.00 CITY MAINTENANCE CREW Banners 94 80 95 0 185 454 1,039 Signs Replaced 27 93 107 78 54 359 803 Signs Installed 0 5 9 8 1 23 977 Signs Repaired 74 149 106 40 75 444 1,024 Catch Basins Cleaned 143 238 175 184 215 955 2,295 TreesTrimmed 119 310 40 100 79 648 1,266 R.O.W. Weed Abatement 0 8,400 5,600 4,400 44,200 62,600 108,260 New & Repainted Legends 244 358 525 . 767 379 2,273 4,061 After Hours Call Outs 56 35 212 67 63 433 1,194 Service Order Requests 51 34 50 57 51 243 591 Graffiti Removal - S Ft 4,847 1,922 1,989 4,306 2,594 15,658 37,291 TOTAL COSTS $25,858.34 $43,448.85 $50,591.62 $43,102.49 $35 423.25 $198 424.55 $ 683,352.41 R NWNTNNNIONCRPTNMINT. WORN COMPLETED \ JMI. TO JUNE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Date Submitted: .lune s, zo�2 MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT Submitted By: Greg Butler STREET MAINTENANCE Prepared By: Rodney Tidwell FISCAL YEAR 2011 - 2012 ` ,,4th�.QUARTER �: � , .. ��� �� � �: `�� ; � WORK � � � �Y` �� � WORK '� WORK ;� � : , � TOTAL' ;COST FOR TOl'AL CO3T=FOR�' `�� • ; COMPLETED ' COST FOR APR � COMPCETED COST FOR MAY :COMPLETED 'COST FO�RrJUNE THIS`FISCAL � LAST FIS6AL _. _ ...� ., '� . , . . ., . . ., �SCOPE OF;WORK� : ,:; .�.APR"'_1 �:.: . r_1_2'�_ :.:.� MAY '72 '12 ' .'JUNE.'12 . ��. ,. _ �.12 _.. �__, ,. ... , YEAR�.. �- _,... ;.�YEAR : '-; ASPHALT AC Square Footage: 5,740 517,047.80 3,618 $10,745.46 $178,924.74 $95,917.63 Tons: 732 $0.00 98 $0.00 $0.00 SIDEWALK CURB & GUTTER REPAIR Square Footage: 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 PCC Yards: 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 STRIPING LINEAR FEET: 235 $16.45 878 $61.46 $623.56 $6,242.78 IN-HOUSE PAINTING LEGENDS: � 767 $6,136.00 379 $3,032.00 $33,216.00 $27,488.00 SIGNS REPLACED Material: 78 $3,900.00 54 $2,700.00 $40,050.00 $41,500.00 Labor: $2,058.42 $1,425.06 $21,138.39 $21,903.37 SIGNS INSTALLED Material: 8 $400.00 1 $50:00 $9,850.00 $5,100.00 Labor: $211.12 $26.39 $5,198.83 $2,691.78 SIGNS REPAIRED ' Material: 40 $2,000.00 75 $3,750.00 $35,000.00 $39,486.50 Labor: $1,055.60 $1,979.25 $27,023.36 $15,965.95 GRAFFITI Square Footage: 4,306 2,594 DRAINAGE CHANNELS CLEANED Basins: 184 $4,855.76 215 $5,673.85 $60,565.07 $69,854.33 Channels: 0 $0.00 $82,650.00 $177,505.50 IN-HOUSE TREES TRIMMED: 100 $2,639.00 79 $2,084.87 $28,553.98 $26,812.24 SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS: 57 51 � AFTER HOURS CALL OUTS: � 67 $2,632.74 63 $2,494.17 $47,211.08 $48,200.99 R.O.W. WEED ABATEMENT: 4,400 $149.60 41,200 $1,400.80 $3,605.84 $2,332.84 TOTALS $43,102.49 $35,423:25 $513,610.85 $581,001.31 R:\MAINTAINWIOACTRPT�STREETMAIN1lNPRIL, MAY, JUNE. STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following Projects for the month of May, 2012 DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK SIZE CONTRACTOR: RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT Date: 05.08.12 CITYWIDE 2 APPLICATION OF POST EMERGENT ON CITY OWNED LOTS # 5402 TOTAL COST $ 6,750.00 Date: # TOTAL COST Date: #� TOTAL COST Date: # TOTAL COST CONTRAC'I'OR: Date: # TOTAL COST Date: # TOTAL COST CONTRACTOR: Date: # TOTAL COST Date: # TOTAL COST TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401 - 0 - '� TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 $ 6,750.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #99-5402 - 0 - R:�MAINTAIMMOACTRPT CITY OF TEMECULA 2012 GRAFFITI REMOVAL 51000 _--__—___--------._.�.`---��.._..._...-------__.�.-- 49000 - 47000 - 45000 - 43000 - 41000 - SOUARE FOOTAGE TOTAL CALLS 39000 - 37000 , - 35000 - January 4,847 January 117 33000 - 31000 - 29000 - February 1,922 February 61 27000 - 25000 - March 1,989 March 44 23000 - 21000 - 19000 � - April 4,306 April 112 17000 - 15000 - May 2,594 May 63 13000 - . 11000 - 9000 - June June 7000 - 5000 - July July 1000 - August August JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DE�� September September -�- SQ FT October October Totals for the Year To Date: June 1, 2012 November November December December Sq. Foot 15,658 Calls 397 PO�ICE CHIEF'S REPORT RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT • SOUTHWEST STATION Nit CRIME ANALYSIS UNIT To: Capt. O'Harra Sgt. Leggett Sgt. Lee Cc: Sgt. McDonald Fm: Marianna Davis, Crime Analyst Date: June 4, 2012 Re: Part 1 Crime for the City of Temecula May 1 - 31 2012 In response to your request to provide information in regards to Part 1 Crimes for the above time frame, I found the following: Part 1 Calls for Service: 257 CRIME Total Homicide 0 Aggravated Assault 14 Arson 0 _Burglary 49 Larceny/Theft* 166 Rape 1 Robbery 4 Veh Theft 23 Grand Total 257 *UCR combines vehicle burglaries into Larceny Theft category. This information includes vehicle burglaries in that category. Data was obtained using Data warehouse. If you need any additional assistance in regards to this request, please do not hesitate to ask. Thanks. CITATION STATS MAY 2012 Citations Totals , Total Hazardous Citations 1292 Total Non-Hazardous Citations 525 Parking Citations 165 Total Citations 1982 Citafion Breakdown S. L.A. P. 150 N.E.T. Citations 152 School Zones 159 Seatbelt Citations 58 Community Presentations 0 Traffic Collisions Non-Injury 46 Hit and Run 12 Injury 30 Fatal 0 Total 88 Note: Collision stats are only those calls for service resulting in a written Police report. D.U.1. Arrests " D.U.I. Arrests 31 Cell Phone Cites Total cell phone cites 172 (23123 & 23124 CVC) Grant Funded DUI Checkpoints / Click it or Ticket Operations Double DUI / Safety Checkpoint on May 5, 2012 - Old Town Area Commission Members June 6, 2012 City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission 4100 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Ref: Public/Traffic Safety Commission Traffic Division Activities/Events Dear Commission Members; Below please find the Traffic Division activities for the month of May, 2012. These activities include the following: • Citation statistics (attachment) • Community Action Patrol supported call-outs: None during the month of May. • Community Action Patrol activity / patrol hours: 1,062 hours for May, 2012. Year-to-date total: 4,986 hours. **Included for May were 20 patrols with 31 CAP members participating, coupled with security . monitoring / patrols at the Promenade Mall, 4 nights, 1 CAP member participating** • Special Events for May, 2012: May 2, 2012, Every 15 Minute program at Chaparral High School May 5, 2012, DUI / Driver's License Checkpoint May 17, 2012, Logistics — Vehicle Speedometer Calibrations May 19-20, 2012, Denim and Diamonds May 19-20, 2012, March ARB Air Show May 30-31, 2012, Preparation Work—Temecula Balloon and Wine Festival • Radar Trailer Deployments: May 7-14, 2012, Roripaugh and Bolandra —16,410 Vehicles May 9-14, 2012, Roripaugh and Sanderling —10,906 Vehicles May 14-16, 2012, Roripaugh and Dandelion —4,364 Vehicles May 16-21, 2012, Margarita east of Date — est. 11,000 Vehicles If you have any questions regarding this package, please do not hesitate to call me at the Temecula Police Department — (951)696-3072. Sincerely, Sergeant Mark Leggett Temecula Police Department Traffic Division FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT Riverside County Fire Department/ CAL FIRE Emergency Incident Statistics CAL. FIRE SINCE 1885 CCG Ak1 John R. Hawkins Fire Chief 6/11/2012 Report Provided By: Riverside County Fire Department Communications and Technology Division GIS Section Incidents Reported for the month of May,2012 and TEMECULA City Responae Activlty incide� Reporbed for the month of Mey,2012 and TEMECULA City ■ Medical 453 73.1% � Tralfic Collision 69 11.1% ■ False Alarm 57 9.296 � Public Senice Assist 31 5.0% ■ Haz Mat 3 0.596 Other Fire 2 0.396 ■ Res Fire 2 0.3°y6 ■ Other Misc 1 0.2°�6 ■ Standby 1 0.2% ■ Vehicle Fire 1 0.296 Total: 620 100.0% False Alarm 67 Naz Mat 8 Madical �63 Othar Flro Z Otfier Misc 1 Public Service Ilssist S1 Res Firo Z S�ndby 1 TrsAfe Collision 88 Vehide Fire 7 Incicknt Total: 620 Response Time+ � <5 Minubes +5 Minubes +10 Minubes +20 Minutes Averaqe % 0 bo 5 min 473 102 9 2 3.8 80.776 �Exdudes non emerper,cy reaponse times Page 2 of 5 Incidents by Battalion, Station and ]urisdiction False Haz Mat Medical Other Fire Other Public Res Fire Standby Traffic Vehide � Alarm Misc Service Coliision Fire .- . StaUon`PeeAanga ;City of Temewla 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 h i 2 ;__- --_.. ._... . .. ._.._.. . .. ..... ._. � _ .. .. . ,._.-- _ � _ . . . _ . _ _. _._ r . .: ..._ . . .� , - -` .- Ststlon Tofal. . �.�: . 0. " �.. �' 0 ' �. . p p p p , � � � � � � � � � .. n 12 ,City of Temecula 11 0 74 1 1 6 0 0 16 0 �� en�eeuis I _ �,. _ r .-_.. _ __ _;; _ ., . _, , , _ . -- $fatlwi Total i t . . . . . ; 0 74, 1. . '. 1 . . . 6 . . . . 0 : . 0. .. 16 -: :0. - , . 9tafbn 73 Raneho ,City of Temecula 24 _^ 1 — 148 1 0 11 1. 0 24 �� 0� � Call(omta : - ... �._... ._ .. . - - . 8fatlon�Total. ' .24 . 1 148 1 0, 11. . '1 . 0 -24: 0 � .�. . �.__�__ . ._ _ .. _ �. _ _ - -- --- =- _ _ _ . �._._ _ � ,: . _ , ._ _ ... 9Wtlon 83 French City of Temeeula 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 VaOsy � __. . . , . _ _,�.� .,_: ..-_ - — ... _,._ ....._.. Slatlon Toml ' R ^ ' . _ :�_ . _ . . . . � � :. 0 � . . p . p . . . p . p ' .��_, _._ __ _ . . _ .--- . ._ , . _ _ , _..: Stafbn 84 City of Temecula 13 2 121 0 0 10 1 1 12 1 Parkvfew " ; -.----,--, -.� . . . . . __, _ _ _ .__ _. ,. __ . _. � . _� . Statlon Tofal 1� � 2 121 „ 0 0 10 1 1 12 1� .—_ _.:: —_.._ ...,.. . -- - � , _ . _ _. . . ._ T____ ..__ . .... ��. SLatlon 42 WW� : City oi Temewla 9 0 101 0 0 3 0 ` 0 17 0 � C�eek , __. , � �. . _- — --- _- --_. .. _ _ �___ ... ___ _ _ _ - - — ---- Stsflon Total _ 8. 0 101 0. 0.. S. 0 0 17 .' 0" � . � Page 3 of 5 Incidents by ]urisdiction False Haz Mat Medical Other Fire Other Misc Public Res Fire Standby Ttaffic Vehicle Alartn Service Collision Fire City ot Temecula 57 3 453 2 1 31 2 1 69 1 �� r � � Page 4 of 5 Incident5 by Supervisorial District - Summary DISTRICT 3 JEFF STONE . False Alartn 57 Haz Mat 3 Medicai 453 Other Fire 2 Other Misc 1 Public Service Assist 31 Res Fire 2 Standby � Traffic Collision 69 VehiGe Fire � .. .� .� Page 5 of 5 2011 CITY OF TEMECULA EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND TRAINING REPORT PUBLIC SAFETY CLASS TOTALS , . 2012 Class Tofals Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total GPR/AED _ _ _. _ _ . _ .._56 _ 18 . 29 � .:_ 30 133 . FIRST AID 36 37 27 100 �._ _ _ . . __ _ , P_EDIATRIG_FIRSI'AID : _� . . _ _ 3 - __ __ . __ 2 � _. ` .. _ ; . ' '__.�_ . _ ._ _. . ' S- .. - SCHOOL CPR 42 36 78 --- _ SCHOOL,FIRSTAID__.�. • _ _ _ _. _ _ . ,. . _ 0 STAFF HCP 19 8 10 37 __:.- _ _ • _ = HCP-- - _ � _.. ; _� . - - _ .- - .- 9 . 6. _16 . _ � _ ' - 12 -- - - = - -- -` - . . .: - - _ _ . . . __ _ __. .._ .- _ , _:.. 43 CERT 40 40 . . �-__. . _ .. - _ r . _.___- . , . . ,Total_�..._.;_�..___ __ ._��,.�_.120._x.w.27� _._132_---__ 90__� ._A67 .�,, _0.. . __ 0 . -�_ 0 .:_ .._0_ _._. 0.__.� °�0._�_ ._.0_,. _436_.. INCIDENT/RESPONSE TOTALS FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA 2012/ncideni Response Totals Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total .. __ . , _. .. . , . Commercial.Fire . ._.. . - 0 3 . : 2 _- - - - 0 - _ _� � ' _ , . _ - r _ - _= � � . ..: _ 5 False Alarm 68 58 61 46 57 290 Haia�dou"s MatenaL --' . __-`_ _ . _0 _. 3 0 . t � - _ � 3 . _ �. " - _ _; _ - _ . -. � 7 Medical 436 377 447 378 453 2091 _ ,__. , _. . : � _ . _ , _ _ ,. . Multi-Farriil _Dwellin � . _, _� 2 _ . . 0 _ 0 . _. 1. __ 0 _._ _ � � � -_ -' - .� . . _.___ _ _3. Other Fire 4 1 5 2 2 14 _ .. , ,- � � , Othe[..Misc: .: _ _ . � _ w� .w '. _1 0 . ± 0 -,: 1 . , • •_ _. ` . : 3 PSA 35 42 23 19 31 150 . _.. , . , . , , ,, , . Besidential:Fi�e - - -_ .: __°_ _ _ 1. ._ _ 1. . . . _1 � . 1 �-. . :, .2 - _ _ _ _ �- - � _ - -- - : 6 � Rescue 0 0 1 0 0 1 ._ , . Standti _ _ . __ _.: . =�- ---1.L__: _ 2_ . . 5,. . .6 1 . . - _._ . _.. � . . __ _ 25 Traffic Collision 66 44 79 58 69 316 VefiiGe.Fire.. ----_.- - --=._-.2___. ..__1._.. . 1�_ - 4_.-:. _•. 1 :.: �::_-__ - - _ --._' 9 _ Wildland Fire 0 0 0 1 0 1 ___- _ - -.. ,. - _.. ; . _ . _ ... _.._ rotBL_ ._.-----._ ._ _.. �, ,.�: _..-.626:_ . __ 533 . _--625.. .. _�:. 5l7__. _ 620. _ _ ._b . 0 __._. _._ _0 __.`. � 0__ 0 0_` __ _ �.0._ _ _ _ 2921- --