HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012/05/24 Item 1 PROPOSED CIP FY 2012/2013
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
PROPOSED BUDGET
FISCAL YEAR 2012-2013
CHERYL COX
MAYOR
STEVE CASTANEDA RUDY RAMIREZ PAMELA BENSOUSSAN PATRICIA AGUILAR
COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER
JIM SANDOVAL
CITY MANAGER
DONNA NORRIS
CITY CLERK
GLEN GOOGINS
CITY ATTORNEY
ADMINISTRATION
Jim Sandoval City Manager
Scott Tulloch Assistant City Manager
Gary Halbert Assistant City Manager/Director of Development Services
DIRECTORS
Maria Kachadoorian Director of Finance/Treasurer
Michael Meacham Director of Economic Development
Richard Hopkins Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Dave Hanneman Fire Chief
Kelley Bacon Director of Human Resources
and Information Technology Services
David Bejarano Chief of Police
Buck Martin Director of Recreation
Betty Waznis Director of Library
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Capital Improvement Budget is a living document and the citywide cumulative work
of staff at all levels and partnerships with other Local, State, and Federal agencies. This
year?s cover design highlights three of the major projects which will be in construction
thanks to the hard work of all stakeholders and most importantly the community: Third
Avenue Streetscape, Willow Street Bridge and the addition of a new park in western
Chula Vista. It also highlights two of five projects, which received special American
Public Works Association (APWA) recognition at this year?s awards banquet. The other
three projects of equal importance are highlighted in the CIP document. A special
thanks to Public Works Operations and Engineering managers and staff for exceptional
work in securing funding and agency approval for critical infrastructure needs,
preliminary engineering, survey, design and ultimately exceptional project delivery.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TRANSMITTAL LETTER..............................................................................................................1
CIP PROGRAM OVERVIEW........................................................................................................2
A YEAR AT A GLANCE (...........................................................5
FY2011-12 COMPLETED PROJECTS)
CIP AWARDS...............................................................................................................................6
PROPOSED FY12-13 CIP BUDGET............................................................................................8
CIP PROJECTS BY FUNDING SOURCE....................................................................................9
CIP PROJECTS BY GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION...................................................................16
CIP PROJECTS BY ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM...................................................................18
INFRASTRUCTURE SCORECARD ..........................................................................................19
ROADWAY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS ..................................................................23
WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS ...........................................................84
DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS ..................................................................94
BUILDING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS ...................................................................77
FLEET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS ...........99
(BUDGETED IN THE City?s OperatingBudget)
PARKS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS.......................................................................100
OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS ...........................................................104
GENERAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS ......................................105
REGIONAL PROJECTS ..........................................................................................................114
ACTIVE PROJECTS.................................................................................................................117
GLOSSARY OF FINANCE AND BUDGET TERMS.................................................................121
INDEX.......................................................................................................................................124
ï
CIP PROGRAM OVERVIEW
The following is an overview of the Capital Improvement Budget Program. The goal of
the Capital Improvement Program is to provide for the sustainable preservation of City-
owned assets at the lowest cost and leverage financial strategies to address
infrastructure needs within a prioritized framework, which includes an assessment of the
assets condition, capacity to meet service demands, probability of failure, maintenance
and preservation strategies and funding availability. The CIP is a living document used
to identify current and future requirements and the basis for determining annual capital
budget expenditures. In addition to new capital projects, the Capital Improvement
Program includes continuing projects that have authorized budget amounts remaining
but do not need additional funding allocated in the adopted budget or the CIP 5-year
cycle. A list of active projects previously approved in prior year CIP budget is included in
the budget.
Capital Improvement Projects are defined as multi-year capital investments with a value
of $50,000 or more and a minimum useful life of 5 years at a fixed location. Equipment,
operating and maintenance costs are budgeted in the City?s operating budget. New
maintenance costs are included in the CIP budget and appropriated in future operating
budget cycles. For example the development of the new multi purpose park on the
SDG&E easement on the corner of Fourth and Orange Avenue includes an estimated
ongoing maintenance cost. This cost will be included in the FY 2013-14 operating
budget.
A new document format has been developed for this year?s CIP budget document in an
effort to provide capital project budget detail and reporting by asset management
category, funding, and location. This format better aids the decision-making process as
it allows the City Council to review projects recommended in each asset management
system, gain an understanding of the condition of the asset in relation to the overall
system and the basis for the recommendation, as well as the availability of funding
sources. The proposed projects detail sheets within each asset management system
which provides a description, location, project intent, type of project and funding
requirements over the life of the project.
CIP Process
The Department of Public Works annually prepares a Capital Improvement Budget for
the City Council?s approval. The CIP budget includes an estimated five-year Capital
Improvement Program. The City is faced with the challenge of managing a range of
aging infrastructure assets that are critical to maintaining an aging City and serving new
development. Making sound decisions about asset maintenance and replacement
requires information about the asset's probability of failure and capacity to meet the
requirements of the system.
On a continuous basis, project proposals are added to the City?s capital improvement
budget and project management database (CIPACE) following recommendations from
guiding documents (see list below) adopted by the City Council and condition
assessments performed by Public Works staff. This year?s CIP process includes a new
process of ranking projects and setting funding priorities. Funding recommendations are
based on the evaluation of the proposed asset?s probability of failure, capacity, and level
of service requirements including efficiency improvements gained. For example, funds
î
are recommended for Bonita Canyon Repairs. This project will address erosion in
Bonita Canyon along the canyon bottom and sides including the failing gabion structure.
This project has the highest priority among all drainage erosion projects due to the high
probability of failure. Despite fiscal constraints, General Fund reserves will be used for
the first time to fund a failing critical asset. This paradigm shift aims at seeking to
minimize total costs and risks of acquiring, operating, maintaining and renewing assets
within an environment of limited resources while trying to maintain service levels and
adhering to regulations.
Another tool used in ranking and formulating the CIP recommendations are Guiding
Documents approved by the City Council. The City utilizes ?guiding documents? to
ensure proposed CIP projects are consistent with established program priorities. The
following is a partial list of guiding documents, which have included public input from
multiple stakeholders in the community. For example the Five-year Pedestrian Master
Plan and Bike Master Plan were recently adopted by the City Council. They identify
missing infrastructure needs within those program categories. Additionally, proposed
CIP projects are reviewed for consistency with the City?s General Plan and specific plan
and City policies.
General Plan
Regional Transportation Program
Bikeway Master Plan
Street Saver Condition Index Database
Drainage Master Plan
Wastewater Master Plan
Fire Master Plan
Asset Management Plan
Parks Master Plan
Pedestrian Master Plan/Safe Routes to School
Redevelopment Implementation Plan
Southwest United in Action Survey Results
Third Avenue Streetscape Master Plan
Environmental Mitigation Program
Western TDIF Program
TDIF Program
Redevelopment Implementation Plan
Third Ave Streetscape Master Plan
Traffic Monitoring Program
Growth Management Oversight Committee Annual Report
Other Specific Plans (e.g. Urban Core Specific Plan, Palomar, Bayfront and Main
Street Specific Plans
Public comment is a vital component of the CIP process. The public has the
opportunity to comment on the proposed CIP. The initial proposed capital improvement
project detail sheets are posted annually in April of each year on the public works
website for public comment and review.
http://www.chulavistaca.gov/City_Services/Development_Services/Engineering/index.asp
í
Additionally the Public Works Department publishes an annual proposed CIP budget.
The document is made available at the City Clerk?s office, the Civic Center, Otay Ranch
Mall Library and the South Chula Vista Library. The proposed CIP is presented at a
Council Budget Workshop in May and adopted in June of every year.
ì
A YEAR AT A GLANCE
At a glance, the status of Capital Improvement Projects completed in the current fiscal
year ending June 30, 2012 is as follows:
14 Miles of Centerline Lanes Resurfaced
470 Miles of Sewers Cleaned
225 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Ramps Installed
2 Large Emergency Storm Drain Repaired
Over 3,700 Work Requests Completed by Public Works Operations Crews
All Seasons Park Opened to the Public
Animal Care Facility Improvements
Otay Ranch Library branch Opened in Otay Ranch Town Center
Five Year Pedestrian and Bikeway Master Plans Adopted by the City Council
New Second Avenue & Quintard Street Traffic Signal Installed
Oxford Street Improvements from Third Avenue to Alpine Avenue
Second Avenue Improvements ? Naples Street to Palomar Street
?I? Street Improvements ? First Avenue to Hilltop Drive
Highway Safety Improvements Program for Major Intersection ? Phase I
Funding Approval of Willow Street Bridge ? Environmental Clearance
480 kW of Solar PV Installed
New Alternative Fuel Stations
Conversion to LED Streetlights (residential streets)
First Avenue and Glenhaven Way Assessment District Improvements
Phase I of Otay Lakes Road/East H Street Widening
12 Adaptive Traffic Signal System Upgrades
Palomar Gateway Smart Growth Improvements
Undergrounding Utility Lines on Fourth Avenue & East L Street
Funding Authorization Approved to proceed with Heritage Bridge Preliminary
Engineering and Environmental Review
Citywide Sidewalk Improvements completed
There are approximately 44 other CIP projects underway in various stages of
completion. Among the larger projects are Third Avenue Streetscape and Willow
Street Bridge.
ë
CIP AWARDS
Five Capital Improvement Projects received American Public Works Association (APWA)
Awards, one of which also received the California Parks and Recreation Society (CPRS)
Award of Excellence for Community Park planning this year. The projects are:
San Miguel Park
? (Project of the Year and Award of Excellence) ? The plan for this 20-
acre park was a product and result of many meetings with the community, and focus
groups.The end result of this community participation process was the design and
construction of a community park that offers significant amenities while at the same time
respecting and recognizing the special character and needs of the adjacent
neighborhood. The park provides a unique contrast of high-energy activities within a
relaxed, natural setting. Three lighted adult softball fields radiate out from a centrally
located concession/restroom/storage facility.
Other active-use areas include a tennis court, a
basketball court, and a children's playground in
the shape of a California quail. The playground
design integrates traditional play equipment as
well as a natural rock-climbing wall created
from boulders native to the site. Passive uses
include an off leash dog-park, multiple picnic
shelters, and overlooks that provide expansive
views of the surroundings. Drought tolerant and
California native plants, and state of the art
irrigation and weather-based irrigation controllers are used to promote water
conservation. A vegetated bio-swale captures on site run-off and naturally filters it prior
to discharge into the city's storm drain system without impacting surrounding areas. The
bio-swale is made of native, on-site fractured granite and provides natural play and
exploration opportunities for park users.
All Seasons Park -
(Project of the Year) This seven-acre,
multi-use neighborhood park features a basketball court,
a picnic shelter, a large children's play area, restroom
facility, meandering pathways and a multipurpose field.
The park is located in Wolf Canyon and situated on the
Chula Vista trail system with connection to the Otay
River Valley. The design of the park's bio-drainage swale treats all of the runoff from the
parking lot and court with a very effective, pleasing natural appearance. During the
master plan phase, many workshops were conducted to get input from the community
and from organized youth sports groups.
Municipal Solar Photovoltaic project
(Project of the Year)
? The project involved the installation of 500 kW of solar
photovoltaic arrays at 11 municipal facilities, lowering
long-term utility costs and greenhouse gas emissions
which earned recognition from the EPA Green Power
Partnership Program. This project represents a
successful model for other public agencies interested in
expanding onsite renewable energy generation to control
long-term energy costs and to convert to more
sustainable energy sources. The project maximized a
ê
Federal stimulus funding opportunity to ?green? municipal operations, while contributing
to local economic development. The City has used this project as a springboard for a
public outreach campaign about broader environmental topics such as climate change
and air quality. Every system includes a ground-level digital monitor that publicly
displays its real-time energy production and the equivalent reductions in greenhouse gas
emissions.
Second Avenue Pavement Improvement project
(Honor Award) ? This project between
Naples and Palomar Streets involved major street reconstruction, along with installation
of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, drainage improvements, pedestrian ramps, and
pavement striping and marking. The unique, award-winning
portion of the project involved the use of Full Depth
Reclamation (FDR) for the street reconstruction. The City is
a pioneer in utilizing this process in San Diego County. This
new process for residential street reconstruction, which
involves reusing the deteriorated asphalt pavement, and
adding Portland cement to create a new stabilized base, will
be utilized in subsequent reconstruction projects. The
cement stabilized section below the recycled asphalt pavement section supports and
disburses wheel loads better than conventional aggregate base, and is water
impermeable. This construction method is less costly;
has less impact on landfills due to the recycling of the
old asphalt; provides more energy savings and less
greenhouse gas emissions via fewer truck trips for
material removal and import of sub base; and takes
less time than the conventional process of removing
and replacing the sub grade. By using the FDR
method, major underground gas and water utility
relocation costs were avoided because of the
minimized depth of excavations. In addition, homeowners had access to the street by
the end of the day because of the minimized excavations. Management of the project
enabled completion four weeks ahead of schedule.
-
Robinhood Ranch Unit II Sewer Pump Station
(Honor Award)The original pump
station was in danger of failing due to the age of the pumps, deterioration of the wet well,
and the lack of emergency storage and emergency power. Therefore, the CIP project
involved the construction of a new pump
station with new pumps and new back-up
pumps, 48 hours of emergency storage, a
building to allow for safer maintenance, and a
back-up emergency generator and an exterior
pump hook. These safety features were
incorporated to protect against spills as the
pump station is close to a seasonal creek.
The project was planned, designed and managed during construction with in-house staff,
and was delivered on time and under budget. In an effort to minimize public
inconvenience, staff and the contractor worked together to inform the community of the
project and its major construction milestones. They met with residents to discuss the
project and how it would impact their daily routines. Mailers were used as a means to
inform the residents who could not make the meetings. As the project progressed,
additional meetings were held prior to any change in condition, as a safety precaution.
é
PROPOSED FY12-13 CIP BUDGET
The 2013-2017 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a five-year expenditure plan that
provides the City with a financial strategy for infrastructure improvements. The CIP
includes funding for projects and programs in various geographic areas of the City. The
Proposed Fiscal Year 2012-13 capital expenditure is $20 million. The forecasted five-
year program is estimated at $76.1 million. The 2013-2017 CIP program reflects the
actions taken by Council and developed in accordance with Council adopted policies
and guiding documents (such as and not limited to the City?s General Plan, Master
Plans, Specific Plans and the Regional Transportation Plan) as well as generally
accepted accounting principles. Overall, the 5-year program continues to trend
favorably despite the economy and the fiscal constraints facing the City.
è
CIP PROJECTS BY FUNDING SOURCE
City staff continues to look for opportunities to diversify revenue and leverage funding for
infrastructure improvements. The following chart and table summarizes the funding
sources for the FY12-13 CIP budget.
FY 12/13 Capital Improvement Program
By Funding Source
General Fund
Traffic Signal & Trans Dev.
Transnet
Parking Meter
10%
5%
6%
Prop 84
6%
26%
CDBG CIP
3%
Sewer
OR Village1 AD 7-2
3%
Miscl. Trans. Grants
Highway Bridge
1%
Traffic Congestion
24%
14%
2%
Fund Source Percentage Amount
General Fund 5.34%$1,065,486
Traffic Signal & Trans 5.91%$1,178,952
Dev.
Transnet 26.61%$5,310,873
Parking Meter 0.65%$130,000
Prop 84 14.03%$2,800,000
CDBG CIP 1.88%$375,000
Sewer 24.13%$4,817,650
OR Village1 AD 7-2 2.82%$563,263
Misc. Trans. Grants 2.63%$524,449
Highway Bridge 5.99%$1,195,863
Traffic Congestion 10.02%$2,000,000
Total: 100.00%$19,961,536
The Capital Improvement Budget is primarily supported by TransNet, Community
Development Block Grant funds and development revenues such as Traffic Signal funds
and Transportation Development Fees. TransNet revenue increased slightly over last
fiscal year while development revenues such as Traffic Signal funds remain flat due to
the slow growth in the economy. TransNet is the largest stable source of revenues for
Capital Improvement projects. Along with TransNet Proposition 42 funds now referred to
as State Congestion Relief funds continued to provide a stable source of revenue for
street related projects. Other major revenues in this year?s budget include Truck Sewer
for projects addressing capacity issues and Facility Sewer funding for ongoing sewer
ç
rehabilitation projects followed by an increase in grant revenue. Significant growth is
noted in competitive grant revenues. Of paramount importance this year was the award
of Proposition 84 State funds for the construction of Orange Park in Southwest Chula
Vista followed by various Transportation Grants. Transportation grants include the State
and Federal Safe Routes to School and Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program
funds. Revenue decreases include the end funds available from Section 108 Loan and a
reduction in Community Block Grant funding traditionally used for ADA pedestrian
improvements. On the horizon are increased revenues from the Highway Bridge
Program for Willow Street Bridge and Heritage Bridge and additional energy funded
projects. The HBP is a safety program that provides federal-aid to local agencies to
replace and rehabilitate deficient locally owned public highway bridges.
The following is a brief description of the multiple funding sources which support the
Capital Improvement Budget:
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Funds
ARRA funding: As part of the President's economic recovery plan, the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was proposed in an effort to stimulate the
economy by providing jobs for shovel-ready construction projects. The City received
approximately $9 million in ARRA funds. The funds were used for roadway pavement
rehabilitation, traffic signal work, and to launch a community energy efficiency and solar
retrofit program for residents and businesses. In addition, ARRA funds were used to
purchase and install an above ground fuel tank to transition the City?s diesel-powered
vehicles to biodiesel. The second round of ARRA (redistribution of ARRA balances)
nationwide funding did not occur in FY 2010-11 as anticipated. The City continuously
communicates with Caltrans and SANDAG to keep up-to-date on this reallocation. On
March 2, 2010, Council approved resolutions to allow the City to be able to accept
approximately $12 million in new ARRA funds for pavement rehabilitation should they be
made available. To date, these funds have not been made available. No ARRA funds
are available for the FY2012-13 CIP.
Development Impact Fees
The Eastern Area Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) was established by
Council in January 1988 and covers the Eastern Territories of Chula Vista. This $230
million program, consisting of approximately 70 transportation related improvement
projects, has helped finance improvements to the I-805 interchanges, major arterial
roadways and needed traffic signals. It is recommended that development impact fee
programs be updated at a minimum of every 5 years. The TDIF has been updated in
1993, 1999 and most recently in 2005. Due to the downturn in the economy and
construction the FY 2010-11 update was postponed to this coming year.
The FY 2012-13 update will incorporate any land use changes proposed since year
2005, provide project costs for recently completed TDIF projects and provide updated
project estimates for several arterial roadways and bridge projects, such as Heritage
Road Bridge and the Willow Street Bridge. In addition, costs for two potential SR-125
interchanges at Rock Mountain Road (Main Street) and at Otay Valley Road near the
university site are being studied at this time with Caltrans. The program's remaining
number of building permits within the benefit area will also be updated.
ïð
The WTDIF was established in 2008 and covers the Bayfront, Northwest and Southwest
areas of Chula Vista. This $52 million program will help finance over 60 transportation
projects such as the ultimate improvements for Interstate-5 interchanges, major arterial
roadways, light rail trolley improvements and needed bicycle, pedestrian and traffic
signal projects within the benefit area. Once the Bayfront land use changes are
approved, the WTDIF will be updated in FY 2012-13. There will be an updated list of
facilities west of Interstate-5 as well as regional project updated information to be added.
The WTDIF will pay its? proportionate share for regional projects. Per a regional rail
grade-separation study conducted by SANDAG, the Palomar Street light rail trolley
crossing ranks as a higher priority than the E Street & H Street rail crossings. There are
no WTDIF projects proposed in the FY 2012-13 CIP Program.
Grants
Bicycle Transportation Account
The Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) is an annual program providing state funds
for city and county projects that improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters.
Projects must be designed and developed to achieve the functional commuting needs
and physical safety of all bicyclists. The City recently submitted two BTA eligible projects
at East Orange Avenue and at the north end of Industrial Blvd. Award notification for the
BTA program is expected by the end of summer the proposed CIP will be amended
accordingly.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds
Each year, the City receives approximately $1.9 million in CDBG funds. Of this amount
approximately $1.1 million is available for capital improvement projects. The City of
Chula Vista received Section 108 loan funds in June of 2008 for the Castle Park street
improvement projects; the debt service on that loan is paid back from the City?s annual
allotment of CDBG funds. This reduces the amount of CDBG funds available for other
capital projects to approximately $0.3 - 0.5 million annually for the next ten years. Due to
favorable bidding as a result of the economy, in a letter dated March 15, 2012 HUD
approved a request to expand the scope of work for the Section 108 Castle Park Project.
The scope was increased to include two additional streets, Del Mar (between Naples
and Oxford) and Elm (between Naples and Oxford). These streets are in the same
Castle Park neighborhood where the improvements were made with the original loan. In
FY 2012-13 CDBG funds were reprogrammed for to complete the final streets. All of the
authorized street improvements funded by Section 108 must be expended by April 30,
2013.
Highway Bridge Program
The Highway Bridge Program is a safety program that provides federal-aid to local
agencies to replace and rehabilitate deficient locally owned public highway bridges.
Approximately $240 million of federal funds are made available to local agencies
annually. In the FY 2012-13 CIP, $1.2 million of Highway Bridge Program grant funds
are programmed for the Willow Street Bridge Utility Relocation.
ïï
Highway Safety Improvement Program
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) was established to attain a significant
reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads through the
implementation of infrastructure-related highway safety improvements. HSIP grants were
submitted for Third Avenue Corridor Traffic Signal Modifications and Moss Street
Corridor Traffic Signal Modifications and Pedestrian Improvements. Award notifications
are anticipated at the end of the calendar year. The CIP will be amended to reflect grant
awards received, if any.
Safe Routes to School
The State Safe Routes to School (SR2s) program goal is to reduce injuries and fatalities
to schoolchildren and to encourage increased walking and bicycling among students.
Competitive grants are available to local government agencies for construction of
facilities that enhance safety for pedestrians and bicyclists, primarily students in grades
K-12 who walk or bicycle to school. Safe Routes to school grants were submitted for the
Quintard Street Corridor and the Hazel Cook Elementary School Pedestrian
Improvements. Award notifications are expected in August of 2012 amendments to
follow.
Smart Growth Incentive Grant
The TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP) funds transportation related
infrastructure improvements and planning efforts that support smart growth development
that will facilitate compact, mixed use development focused around public transit, and
that will increase housing and transportation choices. Active SGIP grants include $2
.
million for the Third Avenue Streetscape project
Transportation Grant
The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act (SAFETEA-LU)
authorizes the Federal surface transportation programs for highways, highway safety,
and transit. It covers a variety of transportation related issues including financing,
congestion relief, improved safety, improved efficiency (such as coordinated planning
and environmental streamlining), environmental stewardship, and transportation related
research studies. SAFETEA-LU promotes longer- lasting highways using innovative
technologies to speed up the construction of efficient and safe highways and bridges. A
total of $524,449 is programmed in the FY2012-13 CIP for the Heritage Road Bridge
Replacement.
General Fund
The General Fund is the City?s main operating fund used to pay for City services. In the
FY2012-13 CIP, $514,000 for the Bonita Canyon Repairs project and $850,000 for the
Third Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project are programmed from the General
Fund.
ïî
Otay Ranch Village I Assessment District
The Otay Ranch Village I Assessment District fund is used for the maintenance of
improvements completed in Assessment District No. 97-2 (AD 97-2) Otay Ranch Village
One. In the FY2012-13 CIP $563,263 has been programmed to complete maintenance
improvements.
Parking Meter Fund
The Parking Meter Fund is a dedicated funding source for the downtown-parking district.
$130,000 was programmed in the FY 2012-13 CIP.
Proposition 1B Highway Funds
In 2006-07, the voters of the State of California approved Proposition 1B. This
proposition included funds to be provided to cities within the State for local roadway
improvements. The initial allocation of $3.6 million was spent on pavement rehabilitation
projects in FY 2010-11. The second allocation of $3.3 million was frozen by the State of
California due to the State?s financial crisis and released in late April 2010 in monthly
installments. As a result, the State provided an additional year of expenditure for Prop
1B funds received in 2009-10. The City has until June 2014 to expend the second
allocation of Prop 1B funds.
Prop 42 (Traffic Congestion Relief Fund)
Several years ago the voters approved Proposition 42, which provided funding for cities
to improve streets from the sales tax on fuel. The funds can only be utilized for street
improvements and the City has utilized these funds to augment its annual pavement
rehabilitation efforts. In FY 2012-13 the proposed CIP budget is $2 million for minor
rehabilitation.
Proposition 84 Statewide Park Grant Fund
California voters passed Proposition 84 (Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply,
Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006) on November 7, 2006.
Funding for the $368 million Statewide Park Program Grant was made available through
the Sustainable Communities and Climate Change Reduction chapter within Proposition
84. This Statewide Park Program awards grants on a competitive basis for the creation
of new parks and new recreation opportunities in proximity to the most critically
underserved communities across California. In a letter dated March 26, 2012 from the
California State Parks? Office of Grants and Local Services (OGALS), the City was
awarded $2.8 million of Round Two Statewide Park Program Grant funds for the Orange
Avenue Park Project. The project was one of the 64 selected for funding from a pool of
more then 400 applications.
ïí
Residential Construction Tax
The Residential Construction Tax (RCT) was established by the City Council in October
1971 to provide a more equitable distribution of the burden of financing parks, open
spaces, public facilities, and other capital improvements, the need for which is created
by the increasing population of the City. The RCT is applicable to all new residential
units and paid by the person constructing the units. RCT funds are used to pay for debt
service obligations resulting from the issuance of Certificates of Participation (COP?s) for
western Chula Vista failing CMP repairs.
Sewer Fund
Sewer Facility Replacement Fund
The Sewer Facility Replacement Fund is a fee based revenue source that all properties
pay each month as part of their sewer bills. The funds can be utilized to replace,
rehabilitate or upgrade existing sewer facilities. In the FY 2012-13 CIP, a total of $2.7
million is proposed for sewer rehabilitation projects. In addition, approximately $5.8
million of existing funds and projects will carry over in the FY 2012-13 CIP fiscal year for
completion.
Sewer Service Revenue Fund
The Sewer Service Revenue Fund accounts for all monies collected from the monthly
sewer service charge. The funds may be used for any and all sewer related activities.
$7,600 is programmed in the FY2012-13 CIP for performance of various studies and
projects including recycled and potable water planning.
Special Sewer Fund
The Special Sewer fund is used to account for the sale of the City?s excess Metropolitan
Sewerage Capacity. No Special Service funds are programmed in the FY2012-13 CIP.
Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund
The Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund is a permit fee based revenue source received
from the owner or person applying for a permit to develop or modify the use of any
residential, commercial, industrial or other property, that may increase the volume of flow
in the City?s sewer system. The funds may be used for: (1) to repair, replace or enlarge
trunk sewer facilities to enhance efficiency of utilization and/or adequacy of capacity to
serve the needs of the City, or (2) to plan and/or evaluate any future proposals for area-
wide sewage treatment and/or water reclamations systems and facilities. In the FY 2012-
13 CIP, $2.1 million are programmed to upsize an existing sewer pipe at Industrial Blvd
between Main Street and Anita Street to meet operational standards for existing flow and
to upsize a sewer main at East ?H? Street from I 805 to Del Rey Blvd.
ïì
Traffic Signal Fee
The Traffic Signal Fee is a trip based development impact fee that is charged with the
issuance of building permits for new construction. The fee can be utilized for the
installation and upgrade of traffic signals throughout the City. Traffic Signal fees are
reduced, as are all development related revenues. In FY 2012-13 $30,000 is being
reallocated from prior year project savings for a Traffic Signal Modification at Third
Avenue and K Street.
Transportation Sales Tax
Transportation Sales Tax (TransNet) funds are derived from sales tax revenues levied in
San Diego County that are collected by the State specifically for use on transportation
related projects in San Diego County. The regional metropolitan planning agency, San
Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), programs these funds to municipalities
within San Diego County. Revenues vary from year-to-year, depending on the amount
of sales tax available to the region and the number and costs of projects for which
municipalities, local transit, and Caltrans request funding. The revenue approved for
municipalities is based on the specific cost estimates that are required to be submitted
as part of the annual request for funding. In FY 2012-13, the Transportation Sales Tax
budget is $5.3 million with approximately $10 million of existing funding and projects
carrying over from prior years. A number of smaller traffic congestion improvement
projects and transportation planning efforts are also funded from TransNet. The City
continues to ensure that a minimum of 70% of its TransNet funds is allocated to traffic
congestion relief efforts. Therefore, not more than 30 % of the City?s annual allocations
are available for minor pavement rehabilitation efforts.
ïë
CIP PROJECTS BY GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION
A list of the proposed FY2012-13 CIP projects by Geographical Location is included in
this budget document and is summarized as follows:
FY 12/13 Capital Improvement Program
By Location
2%
21%
Bayfront
41%
Citywide
8%
Eastern
Northwest
Southwest
28%
Project Location PercentageAmount
Bayfront 2%$300,000
Citywide 42%$8,480,523
Eastern 28%$5,516,527
Northwest 8%$1,551,486
Southwest 21%$4,113,000
Total:100%$19,961,536
The Geographical Locations are the City?s Community Planning Areas. Bayfront refers to
the area within the Bayfront Master Plan, west of I-5. Eastern refers to projects located
east of I-805. Northwest refers to projects located east of I-5 and north of ?L? Street.
Southwest refers to projects located east of I-5 and south of ?L? Street. The term
Citywide is used to identify projects that cover the entire city, including, but not limited to
the annual pavement rehabilitation program, sidewalk rehabilitation program, ADA Curb
ramp program and sewer facility rehabilitation program.
An estimated 50% to 60% of the Citywide project expenditures occur in western Chula
Vista, though this can change from year-to-year. Assuming that 50% holds true, then
50% of the capital expenditures programmed for FY 2012-13 are earmarked for western
Chula Vista.
Most Eastern Chula Vista projects are funded by development impact fees or other
revenues directly related to development activities (Traffic Signal Fund/TDIF/PAD).
Developers, as part of their development approval obligations, construct many of the
improvements that occur in the eastern portions of the City. For this reason, those
projects which provide public benefit are not part of the City?s CIP program. However,
as the eastern portion of the City continues to age additional resources will be needed to
maintain the existing infrastructure.
ïê
Staff has conducted a preliminary analysis of expenditures by area for the last 19 fiscal
years through FY 2011. Total capital expenditures for this period of time are
approximately $328 Million.
The following is a breakdown of the $327,697,702 CIP expenditures by location:
Southwest Area $108,869,288 (33%)
Northwest Area $80,130,119 (24%)
Eastern Area $138,063,296 (42%)
Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF) funded $49,068,348 of the CIP during
this period of time. Since TDIF cannot be spent in western Chula Vista, this amount is
deducted from the CIP total and the revised totals, with no TDIF, by location are as
follows:
Southwest Area $108,869,288 (39%)
Northwest Area $80,130,119 (29%)
Eastern Area $138,063,296 - $49,068,348 = $88,994,948 (32%)
ïé
CIP PROJECTS BY ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Projects in this year?s Capital Improvement Budget have been sorted by the eight-asset
management systems identified in the City?s Recovery Plan and the Infrastructure
Workshop with the City Council. This provides a mechanism to track CIP allocations by
Asset Management System (AMS). The eight AMS?s include the following:
The Roadway Management System (RMS), which is comprised of all City-owned assets
in the Public Right-of-Way. These assets include: Major and Local Streets, Sidewalks,
Traffic Signals & Striping, Street Trees, Bicycle and Pedestrian paths, ADA Ramps and
Curbs and Gutters. A majority of the CIP funding is focused on the RMS.
The Wastewater Management System (WMS), which is comprised of Sewer Pump
Stations, Rehabilitation and related projects.
The Drainage Management System (DMS) is comprised of citywide storm drain facilities.
The Building Management System (BMS) is comprised of City-owned facilities including
the Civic Center, Fire Stations, Libraries, Police Station, Recreation Centers, and
community facilities such as Rohr Manor and the Woman?s Club.
The Parks Management System (PMS) is comprised of the citywide park system.
The General Government Management System (GGMS) includes general-purpose items
such as Automation, Utility Undergrounding and Parking Meters.
FY 2012-2013 Capital Improvement Program
By Asset System
General
DrainageGovernment
7%1%
Parks
12%
Wastewater
24%
Roadway
56%
Projects By Asset PercentageAmount
Building 0% $0
Drainage 7% $1,364,000
General Government 1% $205,523
Parks 12% $2,335,000
Roadway 56% $11,247,013
Wastewater 24% $4,810,000
Total: 100% $19,961,536
ïè
INFRASTRUCTURE SCORECORD
City of Chula Vista Infrastructure 2012 Scorecard Summary
GREENWastewater Management SystemWMS
REDRoadway Management SystemRMS
REDDrainage Management SystemDMS
YELLOWParks Management SystemPMS
YELLOWBuilding Management SystemBMS
YELLOWFleet Management SystemFMS
YELLOWOpen Space Management SystemOSMS
YELLOWGeneral Government SystemGGS
Celebrating Chula Vista?s Centennial ? 1911-2011
Eight Asset Management Systems for 100 years of investments
The City of Chula Vista is comprised of over 50 square miles and has an estimated population
of 244,000. As the second largest City in San Diego County, its asset portfolio has over 450
center line miles of streets, several bridges, over 1,000 miles of sidewalks, trails and paths, 495
miles of sewer, 263 traffic signals, 9,020 street lights, over 500 acres of parks in addition to
dozens of City-owned buildings. The goal of the City of Chula Vista Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) is to support the sustainable preservation of City-owned assets at the lowest cost
and to leverage financial strategies to address infrastructure needs. The goal is also to develop
systems toward ultimate capacity at build out. Not included in the CIP are infrastructure projects
for new development, which are the responsibility of the development community.
Throughout the United States, aging and deteriorating public infrastructure is in desperate need
of repair and replacement. Most of the current infrastructure in the United States, above and
below ground, was designed and constructed more than 50 years ago. As Chula Vista
celebrates its 100th year, it too struggles with aging infrastructure. For example, the City has
gone through significant growth as a result of new planned communities over the past 10 years.
Within the last decade, these new developments have added 73 miles of public streets and
associated elements such as drainage, sidewalks, traffic signals and signage in the newly
dedicated Rights of Way. This increase of approximately 21 percent brings the total to 430
miles of roadways as of 2011. Now the responsibility of the City of Chula Vista, these public
assets are maintained with less staff and funding than were available in 2001. The continued
addition of public roadways, parks, libraries, recreation centers, fire and police stations without
additional resources for maintenance has exacerbated the City?s inability to preserve its
infrastructure and facilities.
Moreover, the City is starting to experience infrastructure failures in ?new? eastern communities
of the City. Although they are considered new by the 100-year standard, the initial phases of
Eastlake were built over two decades ago. For example, many pavement and sidewalk
segments in the Eastlake community have necessitated expensive reconstruction due to the
lack of preventative maintenance. The City?s ability to address these needs is further
aggravated by more established sections of the City, primarily in western Chula Vista, which
ïç
require more extensive and expensive repairs. As a result, most of the limited, annual Capital
Improvement Program Budget is dedicated to critical infrastructure needs on the west side. Like
most other agencies throughout the United States annual capital improvement funding has not
kept pace with citywide capital maintenance needs.
The one capital asset that has kept pace with maintenance costs is the wastewater collections
system. This system has a dedicated revenue stream, an enterprise sewer fund, like many
municipalities.
Other infrastructure dedicated revenues that come to the City include Federal and State
TransNet
Gasoline Excise Taxes and vehicle licensing fees and the regional sales tax. Per
State law, these revenues can only be spent on roadway related expenditures, such as
pavement preservation and rehabilitation projects. These projects occur on a citywide basis
and are prioritized through a comprehensive process that the City performs every year to
assess the most cost efficient manner to preserve and rehabilitate the City?s roadways.
Although these projects represent the largest part of the Capital Improvement Program, these
dedicated revenues are merely a fraction of the funds needed to preserve the City?s roadway
assets. The resulting funding gap for roadways must compete with the needs of all other city
assets and services. Although ?one time? revenues are occasionally made available from State
or Federal grants or appropriations (e.g. American Restoration and Recovery Act) most of the
needed revenue will rely on the City?s General Fund.
The most challenging unfunded asset to manage continues to be storm drains; the City
continues to experience failures of severely deteriorated corrugated metal pipe (CMP) annually.
These failures are currently addressed in a reactive emergency basis due to the lack of funding
for proactive preventative maintenance/rehabilitation. The estimated cost to address failing
CMP ?now needs? is $14 million.
In the recent past the City has used loans to fund roadway and CMP infrastructure
improvements. A Section 108 loan in the amount of $9.5 million was acquired to make roadway
infrastructure improvements in the Castle Park Assessment District resulting in an annual debt
payment obligation of $746,000 from the Community Development Block Grant program. Also
a Chula Vista Certificate of Participation (COP) was issued in the amount of $10.5 million for
western Chula Vista improvements to fund priority 1, failing CMP. The COP has an annual debt
payment obligation of $700,000, which is paid for from the Residential Construction Tax (RCT)
fund.
Also of paramount importance is the lack of available funding to maintain City-owned facilities
such as parks, libraries, fire and police stations, Civic Center, parking lots, recreation centers
and historic buildings such as the Women?s Club and Rohr Manor (indefinitely closed awaiting
repairs).
The following sections of this report summarize the preliminary status of the various
infrastructure categories and proposed Capital Improvement Projects (CIP). Due to the
significant fiscal constraints in the General Fund, allocation of resources for
preservation/rehabilitation will not likely be available in the foreseeable future. Alternative
funding options will be considered as part of the City?s Long Term Financial Plan. Due to the
magnitude of the funding gap, the financial strategy proposed will likely include the
recommendation for a citywide bond measure to provide funding for citywide infrastructure
needs. Cities nationwide are resorting to new funding strategies to maintain aging
infrastructure. The City of San Diego and County recently passed bond measures for needed
îð
infrastructure. Some cities and counties have gone to the voters and levied a cent per parcel on
the property tax for maintenance of streets.
Lastly some agencies are recommending an annual General Fund commitment (sinking funds).
A long-term goal is to increase the General Fund investment towards preservation and
rehabilitation Capital Improvement Projects. Significant challenges will continue to face the City
due to deteriorating infrastructure that has exceeded its service life, and lack of needed funding.
Asset Management Systems ? Total $761.1 Million
Backlog and Pending Projects by Project Type in millions
Please note change in scale
Asset Management Systems ? Total $761.1 Million
Backlog and Pending Projects by Need
îï
Asset Management Systems
Backlog and Pending Projects ? Now Needs Project Type (Total $39.7 M)
?Ã?Ã ±Û
x,È02
x03È14
Û£_Û
x-.3È/4
?Ã? ±É?£·?
Ûâ?Ã?Ã ±
ªª£_ª
Asset Management Systems
Backlog and Pending Projects ? Critical Needs Project Type (Total $8.42 M)
?Ã?Ã ±Û
x,È02
x03È14
Û£_Û
x-.3È/4
?Ã? ±É?£·?
Ûâ
?Ã?à ± ªª£_
ª
îî
Red
Roadway Management System (RMS)
The largest and most expensive elements of the RMS are our street pavements. The
City utilizes a comprehensive pavement management system, which forms the basis for
the development of current and future pavement preservation and rehabilitation projects.
Since completion of the citywide pavement condition assessment and presentation at a
Council workshop on pavement management in fiscal year 2006-07, the City has
initiated and/or completed construction on nearly 400 lane miles of the identified
pavement preservation/ rehabilitation projects. These projects cost approximately $25
million as of December 2011. Despite this investment, the citywide Pavement Condition
Index (PCI) dropped to 76 in 2012 as compared to 77 in 2006.
The following PCI Map shows the average 2006 and 2012 PCI for the entire City roadway
network and for each of the major planning areas, except the Bayfront:
More critically, the percentage of streets requiring either major rehabilitation or complete
reconstruction (PCI < 50) increased from 8% to 13% of the City?s total centerline miles;
this trend is predicted to increase at a more rapid rate over the next several years as the
funds needed to adequately maintain the pavement network far exceed available funds.
During an April 5, 2007 Workshop presented by the Pavement Management Consultant,
Council adopted Resolution 2007-080, reaffirming Council?s commitment to the
implementation of a Pavement Management System which emphasizes maintenance
efforts to maximize pavement preservation system-wide in contrast to a ?worst first?
strategy, which focuses on streets that require expensive treatments such as
reconstruction.
îí
Pavement Deterioration Curve
Also in the April 2007 Workshop, the City?s consultant estimated the amount of funds it
would take to eliminate the City?s pavement preservation backlog. The consultant?s
estimated cost was $19.2 million per year over a 10-year period. Although the City had a
large TransNet fund reserve and one-time revenues of $7 million from Proposition 1B to
use for its pavement program over the past few years, there continues to be a significant
gap between the annual available pavement preservation revenue and the amount
needed per year. Using the Streetsaver Pavement Management Program, staff
estimates that the annual funding need is now $40 million dollars over the each of the
next five years or $26 million over each of the next ten years. The following graph shows
the revenue gap from fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2015.
îì
Total TransNet funds available have fluctuated from year-to-year in direct proportion to
local consumer spending habits and these fluctuations may extend into the future. If the
State borrows from regular funding sources, such as
Gas Tax, there will be more competition for limited
TransNet funds.
With regard to other street rehabilitation efforts, the City
continues to focus significant attention and resources
on street improvements in western Chula Vista. A
number of projects have been undertaken in the past several years, including over $16
million in street rehabilitation projects, as well as significant sidewalk improvements.
Within the Castle Park neighborhood, all assessment district projects will be completed
in FY 2012-13, including the improvement of two additional residential streets not
originally anticipated in the HUD Section 108 Loan application but were recently
approved by HUD for inclusion. The addition of these streets is the result of strong
project management efforts and a competitive contracting environment favorable to the
City.
Proposed Projects
A majority of the CIP funding is focused on the Roadway Management System (RMS).
The appropriation for Roadway projects is $11.2 million, which represents 56% of the
proposed CIP budget. Project types within the RMS are Major Streets, Local Streets,
and Traffic. The following chart and table summarizes the funding by these project
types.
FY 2012-2013 Capital Improvement Program
BY Project Type
(56% Represents Roadway Projects)
Traffic
8%
Major Streets
10%
Local Streets
82%
Project Type PercentageAmount
Local Streets 82%$9,249,301
Major Streets 10%$1,107,712
Traffic 8%$890,000
Total:100%$11,247,013
îë
Major Streets
The $1.1 million in funding includes the Heritage Road Bridge Replacement project,
maintenance of infrastructure in Otay Ranch Village I, and
Otay Lakes Road Widening, East ?H? Street to Telegraph
Canyon Road. Phase I of the Heritage Road Bridge
project involves preliminary engineering, design, and
environmental work for the bridge and the adjoining
roadway between Entertainment Circle and Nirvana
Avenue. For the Otay Lakes Road project, staff will
conduct an update of the 2006 Traffic Impact Study for
this project, analyzing the impact of reduced tolls on SR-
125 on the proposed future phases, and reviewing the internal traffic circulation within
Southwestern College, among other tasks.
Local Streets
The $9.25 million in funding includes the Willow Street Bridge Road
widening and utility relocation, Third Avenue Streetscape
Improvements, and major and minor pavement rehabilitation. In
addition, the remaining funds from the $9.5 million Section 108 Loan
from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban development (HUD)
have been committed for street improvements in the Castle Park area
on Del Mar, Twin Oaks, and Alpine Avenues, via the formation of
assessment districts.
Funding of $150,000 is included for a Pavement Management Study which will further
the development of the Roadway Management System, by addressing other roadway
elements, besides pavement, on eligible roads. These elements include curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, medians, parkways, traffic signals and street lighting.
Two other projects, Castle Park Middle School ? Quintard Street Corridor Pedestrian
Improvements and the Hazel G. Cook Elementary School Pedestrian Improvements will
only proceed if State Safe Routes to School grant funding is awarded.
Traffic
The $890,000 in funding includes the Traffic Calming
Program, Enhanced Traffic Calming Crosswalk
Improvements at the vicinity of Montgomery Elementary
School, and traffic signal modifications at various locations.
A currently funded project, Signal Modification ? Anita &
Industrial, is included in the RTIP for TransNet funding in FY13-14. The project also
involves widening a portion of Industrial Boulevard. A new
project, Traffic Signal Installation at Industrial Boulevard and
Moss and Naples streets is also included in the RTIP for
TransNet funding in FY13-14. These projects are tied to a
SANDAG project to widen the trolley crossing at these
locations. Staff is working with SANDAG to fund a portion of
the costs; an agreement will be forthcoming to Council for
consideration, which may move up these projects to FY12-13. An amendment to the
RTIP will be needed.
îê
Yellow
Building Management System (BMS)
The City owns over one million square feet of public buildings including: libraries,
recreation centers, fire stations, police station, and the Civic Center Complex. The
upkeep of these facilities has historically been reactive with little or no preventive
maintenance funding. The deferral of maintenance is becoming more visible to staff and
the general public even in our newer buildings. Peeling paint and wall paper, broken or
missing tiles, stained or worn flooring, are just the visible indicators of the deterioration
that is occurring across our entire facilities inventory. Aging plumbing, HVAC systems,
and roofing are less visible, but essential in keeping these buildings operational. The
goal is to better manage these assets with dedicated funding for replacement of
components or entire facilities when they reach the end of their useful life.
Fire Stations 1 and 5 are in need of replacement. Built in
1954, Fire Station 5 was part of the Montgomery Fire
District in the area, which was annexed by the City in 1985.
This station is 57 years old and in an advanced state of
deterioration. This fire station is past its useful life, and
needing constant repair, that has been brought on by the
lack of funds to preserve and extend the life of the asset.
Fire Station 5 is currently in need of a new roof and other
major repairs. Fire Station 1 was built in 1948 and is 64 years old. This station also has
structural damage and is in need of a new roof.
Rohr Manor, a former residence converted to a community facility, was closed this past
year due to its advanced state of deterioration. The structural integrity of the Manor has
been compromised due to water and termite damage and an estimated $1 million would
be needed to renovate the facility and bring it into compliance with the current building
codes for public use.
The Civic Center Library, the Parkway recreation
complex, the Loma Verde Recreation Center and the
Woman?s Club are among our oldest facilities. These
assets have and continue to be heavily used by the
community. Without substantial restoration investment
over the next few years, these venues will reach a
state where closure is necessary.
Proposed Projects
The appropriation for Building Management System (BMS) projects is $0. The single
project type within the BMS is City Facilities.
City Facilities
The total is $0 because funds of $79,270 are being transferred from two completed
projects to a new project, Facility Improvements at Loma Verde Recreation Complex in
the same amount of $79,270. Significant repairs are needed to the doors and roof, and
other areas.
éé
There will be a later appropriation to the Solar Photovoltaic Project Phase II project for
the construction phase. New solar photovoltaic arrays will be installed at up to six City
facilities, including Rohr Park, Loma Verde Center, the Civic Center, and Corporation
Yard.
éè
Green
Wastewater Management System (WMS)
The City currently owns 20.8 MGD of treatment capacity in the Metropolitan Wastewater
system (Metro) administered by the City of San Diego. The average daily flow this year
has been 16.3 MGD. Per the 2005 Wastewater Master Plan, the City will need
approximately 26.2 MGD at build-out. This ultimate demand will likely go down. At this
time, the City is looking into several options to secure the ultimate treatment capacity
required. These options include the purchase of additional treatment capacity from
Metro and the construction of the City?s own treatment plant. The City will need
additional treatment capacity in approximately 10 to 15 years with current growth
projections (per GMOC) and water conservation efforts.
Average Daily Flow Trend
28.00350,000
26.00
300,000
24.00
250,000
22.00
METRO Capacity (20.864
d)
200,000
20.00
18.00
150,000
16.00
100,000
14.00
50,000
12.00
10.000
Year
Average Daily Flow (MGD)Treatment CapacityPopulation
The City continues to focus on its Annual Sewer Rehabilitation Program, which expends
approximately $1.0 million to $2.0 million annually for the replacement and rehabilitation
of sewer pipes, connections between sewer mains and laterals, lift stations, access
roads, and access covers. The City also utilizes standardized evaluation and ranking
criteria in televising and evaluating the condition of sewers in order to ensure that the
most critically impacted sewer infrastructure is replaced or rehabilitated first.
Up to now, the funds collected from the City?s rate payers have been sufficient to
maintain and operate the City?s wastewater collection system as well as to pay for the
treatment of the wastewater. In order to ensure the future adequacy of the sewer funds,
the City is currently undergoing a sewer rate case study that will propose the sewer rates
for the next five years. One of the issues that could significantly impact the sewer rates
for the City is the Point Loma Treatment Plant (PLTP) Secondary Treatment Waiver. In
2010, the City of San Diego was successful in obtaining a five-year waiver that allowed
èì
the continued operation of the PLTP at an advanced primary level of sewer treatment
before discharging into the ocean. If San Diego is not successful in obtaining another
waiver in 2015, the sewer rates for the City of Chula Vista will increase substantially.
This increase will help pay for the upgrade to the PLTP to a secondary level of sewer
treatment.
Proposed Projects
The second highest commitment of CIP funding is for the Wastewater Management
System (WMS). The appropriation for Wastewater projects is $4,810,000, which
represents 24% of the proposed CIP budget. The single project type within the WMS is
Sewer. However, the discussion below is divided into the following two categories:
Sewer Rehabilitation and Specific Sewer Improvements, and Sewer Pump Stations and
Access Roads.
Sewer Rehabilitation and Specific Sewer Improvements
The annual Sewer Rehabilitation project for FY12-13 commits $1.5 million for citywide
work. In addition, upsizing of the sewer pipe on Industrial Boulevard between Main
Street and Anita Street will be undertaken to meet City operating
standards for depth of flow. Growth Management Oversight
Commission (GMOC) threshold standards have been exceeded
on East ?H? Street between I-805 and Del Rey Boulevard, which
was not expected because no significant new development has
been approved within the area tributary to that system for a
number of years. Therefore, staff is undertaking a broader study
of the area to determine if faulty meter reading was the cause,
before committing to this major $1.5 million project.
Sewer Pump Stations and Access Roads
Pump stations at Corral Court and Hilltop Drive will be rehabilitated, at an estimated cost
of $550,000 and $400,000, respectively. Funding of
$150,000 is being added to their budgets. The pump
station at Max Field will be reconstructed at a cost of
$300,000. Sewer access roads at various locations will be
rehabilitated, at a cost of $400,000. The force main at the
?G? Street pump station on the Bayfront will be relined, at a
cost of $300,000.
èë
Red
Drainage Management System (DMS)
During the last decade, the City has evaluated the condition of its storm drain facilities,
which includes approximately 67,000 lineal feet of corrugated metal pipe (CMP) storm
drain within the City limits. CMP storm drains have not been allowed for permanent use
in the City of Chula Vista for over 20 years due to their more rapid deterioration as
compared to other types of pipes, such as plastic and reinforced concrete pipes. In
2005, the City ranked the known CMP segments into 5 categories and produced a
preliminary replacement cost as shown in the table below:
CMP Storm Drain Replacement
Category (as ranked in 2005) Feet Total Cost
1. Immediate Attention 2,342 $ 3,668,000
2. Action recommended in One Year 24,293 $14,373,000
3. Action recommended in Three Years 13,207 $ 6,392,000
4. Action recommended in Five Years 4,269 $ 982,000
5. Re-inspect in Five Years 22,984 $ 2,668,000
Due to the lack of dedicated funding, the City continues to be reactive in addressing
CMP repairs, primarily after failure has occurred. Based on one-time funding from the
issuance of Certificates of Participation (COP?s) for western Chula
Vista, the CMPs identified as Priority 1 have been rehabilitated.
However, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are being addressed on an emergency
basis, either after failure has occurred or when failure is imminent.
As CMP continues to age, it is becoming increasingly difficult to
fund CMP replacement and rehabilitation work due to the
increased cost of repair and unanticipated adjacent property
damage. A total of $1.2 million in TransNet funds were
appropriated in FY 2009-10. These funds were used to pay for 5
major emergency drainage projects in the roadway and in City easements within private
properties.
In FY 2011-12 an additional $150,000 was appropriated for citywide CMP repairs and
$250,000 for a storm drain repair at Claire Avenue. These new allocations and a small
balance from the original appropriation were used to fund a large emergency storm drain
repair on F Street and unanticipated additional storm drain repair costs upstream of
Claire Avenue. Failing CMP poses a high-risk liability to the City. On average, CMP
repairs have ranged in cost from $400,000 to $2.7 million. The City averages 3-5
emergency repairs per year, but we anticipate failure rates will increase in the coming
years.
Proposed Projects
The appropriation for Drainage Management System (DMS)
projects is $1,364,000, which represents 7% of the proposed CIP
budget. The single project type within the DMS is Drainage.
çì
Drainage
A total of $850,000 in TransNet funds has been committed for CMP rehabilitation. This
project is to address rehabilitation of CMP at specific locations, as well as for emergency
repairs. General Fund monies of $514,000 have been allocated to the Bonita Canyon
Repairs project, which has severe erosion problems.
The City has submitted Vector Habitat Remediation Program grant applications to the
County of San Diego to eliminate mosquito nesting in three drainage channels. The
channels are located: south of the intersection of Reed
Court and Main Street; at the southwest corner of ?C?
Street and Fourth Avenue; and south of the intersection
of Fresno Avenue and Main Street.
The drainage studies will be aimed
at redesigning the channels to
stabilize them, minimizing
environmental impacts and
permitting requirements, and minimizing or eliminating standing and
shallow water areas. If the County approves the grants, staff will
bring forward a report to Council to amend the FY12-13 budget to appropriate the funds.
The City will then apply for construction grants in the next grant cycle.
çë
Yellow
Fleet Management System (FMS)
The City owns and operates over 540 vehicles, from police cars to fire trucks to dump
trucks. Maintenance of these vehicles is funded via the individual City department?s
budgets that operate vehicles. Replacement of the vehicles is funded by the Equipment
Replacement Fund, which the City Council established in 1985. The replacement cost
of vehicles is based on the anticipated economic and useful life for the class of vehicle,
the salvage value of the vehicle, and inflation. New vehicles are purchased from various
funding sources, depending on the use of the vehicle.
Proposed Projects
There are no CIP projects associated with the purchase of new vehicles or the
replacement of existing ones.
çç
Yellow
Parks Management System (PMS)
The City owns and operates 54 Parks covering more than 500 acres of land including
amenities such as sports fields, lighting, play equipment, basketball and tennis courts,
skate features, restrooms, parking lots landscaping, picnic areas and shelters. The
preservation and rehabilitation funding for these assets predominantly is from the
General Fund. Over the years, the City has also successfully competed for State Grants
used for park improvements and received philanthropic donations. Unfortunately, all of
these funding sources have been stressed with the economy and the actual
maintenance investment has decreased in each of the last four budget cycles. As a
result, the condition of the parks and amenities, throughout the system, is suffering
visible deterioration.
A study was presented to the City Council in 2000, which recommended appropriate
staffing levels for adequately maintaining the parks system. Current staffing levels are
down by 16 positions from the recommended levels. Additionally, critical needs are
estimated to cost $405,000 and include tot lot replacements at Valle Lindo and Los
Ninos Parks, tot lot soft fall replacements at various parks, repairs to steps that join
Loma Verde Recreation Center to Rienstra fields, sidewalk repairs at Rohr and Tiffany
Parks, jogging trail, restroom and a pump replacement at Rohr Park.
Proposed Projects
The appropriation for Parks Management System (PMS) projects is $2,335,000, which
represents 12% of the proposed CIP budget. The single project type within the PMS is
Parks.
Parks
The City is receiving $2.8 million in Proposition 84
State Parks Grant funds to design and construct the
newly named Orange Park, south of the South Chula
Vista Library, within an SDGE easement. The General
Fund funds of $840,000, originally appropriated to the
project, will be returned to the General Fund reserves,
as the $2.8 million in funding will be sufficient to build
all of the park improvements.
A new project has been established for Citywide Park Improvements within SDG&E
Rights of Way in western Chula Vista for $375,000, per the Memorandum of
Understanding between the City and SDG&E from 2004. SDG&E funds are to be spent
for park space within rights of way specifically in western Chula Vista. Exact locations
have yet to be determined.
Included in the City?s proposed Operating Budget is funding of $359,400 of State
Housing-Related Parks Program grant funds as a minor CIP for improvements to
Lauderbach and Eucalyptus parks, Norman Park and Parkway centers, and the
Woman?s Club. Minor CIP funding is also included in the Operating Budget for
improvements to Eucalyptus Park to be paid from annual lease payments by the
American Legion.
ïðð
Yellow
Open Space Management System (OSMS)
The Open Space Districts and Community Facility Districts (CFD?s) were established
with new subdivisions beginning in the 1980s. These funding mechanisms were
established to ensure sustainable improvements in the natural and landscaped areas in
and around the new developments. These fees were structured to allow incremental
adjustment with inflation and have generally kept pace with the maintenance needs of
the districts. However, Wild Land Fire prevention practices have evolved to higher
standards. Specifically, vegetation management has become a safety concern. Many of
the districts do not have enough funding to sustain the vegetation reductions needed to
meet the new standards. City staff is forming a campaign to raise awareness of these
safety concerns and to process a ballot in each of the affected districts seeking approval
for fee increases to cover these unanticipated expenses. If the ballot fails, maintenance
tasks in each area will be reprioritized to ensure that vegetation management is
performed. This reprioritization will result in many open space management tasks being
deferred and overall quality in the districts will suffer.
Proposed Projects
There are no projects included in the FY12-13 CIP budget.
However, in the proposed operating budget for the Fire
Department, funding of $133,000 in General Fund monies
are budgeted, as matching funds to a Federal FEMA
mitigation grant of approximately $385,000 for brush
management and fire clearance. The funds will be used in the Rice Canyon Open
Space area to create a 60-foot defensible space between the homes and the open
space area. A contractor will be hired to perform the brush clearance, which will then be
maintained by Open Space District contractors via District assessments.
ïðì
Yellow
General Government Management System (MMS)
Several years ago the City Council directed staff to evaluate City owned real estate assets in an
effort to maximize their value by means of increased utilization or consolidation, revenue
generation, or disposal through sale. Since then, many City facilities have been leased and
private public partnerships have been established increasing revenues and providing services.
For example, the Public Works Maintenance Facility on F Street was leased; generating
revenues for services such as maintenance of City owned street medians which could no longer
be maintained by City crews or contractual services due to the lack of General Funds.
Currently, four tenants are generating approximately $115,000 in revenue annually.
Forthcoming to City Council for its consideration is an agreement with a broker to market the
Ken Lee building and available space a the Corporation Yard.
The private rental of the Lauderbach Community Center for Quinceañeras on weekends is
another example of a public-private partnership that has generated revenues which help
maintain the facility and keep it open to the public.
In addition, monies from the parking meters located in the City?s parking lots within the
Downtown Parking District are collected by Ace Parking, via contract. Upgrades to the parking
lots and parking structure are the City?s responsibility.
Utility Undergrounding Districts are also included here, as the work is done by utilities agencies,
such as SDG&E and AT&T.
Finally, General Government also refers to general planning and information technology.
Proposed Projects
The appropriation for General Government System (GGS) projects is $205,523, which
represents 1% of the proposed CIP budget. The single project type within the GGS is General
Government.
General Government
Funding of $130,000 in Parking Meter Fund monies is included for resealing of the parking lots
and improvements to individual parking meters located within the Downtown Parking District.
Remaining funds are for advance planning work by Engineering staff, and upgrades to software
used by the Engineering division. One of the software programs is AutoCAD Civil 3D, which
improves efficiency in the development of construction plans and allows the division to bring
design work ?in-house?, and perform regional work in partnership with other agencies, thus
leveraging resources and revenue-generating opportunities.
There is no CIP funding for Utility Undergrounding Districts in the coming year. The City has
approximately 164 Miles of aboveground electric distribution wires with an estimated cost to
underground of $275 million. The Franchise Agreement with SDGE
Allocation is $2 million per year from 20A Funds. Almost $40 million
has been expended in undergrounding projects since the 1990?s.
The most recent completed projects are the Phase I Bayfront
project at $20 million, and Fourth Avenue from L Street to Orange
Avenue and L Street from Monserate Avenue to Nacion Avenue, at
ïðë
$9.3 million. The City?s 20A fund allocation has a negative balance of ($9,629,977). According
to Rule 20A, municipalities are allowed in incur debt up to five times the annual allocation.
Since the City?s annual allocation is $2.0 million, this is within the five- year limit ($10.0 million)
allowed by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). However, it means that, until at least next
year, the City cannot currently borrow ahead any additional funds to construct additional
undergrounding facilities unless allowed by a revised agreement with SDG&E.
In an effort to contain undergrounding construction costs, the City of Chula Vista as well as
several other local agencies formed a Utility Undergrounding District subcommittee to meet and
discuss policies and various other methods for controlling underground utility district costs so
that additional conversion districts can be funded in the future. Future conversion districts may
be established and constructed differently than how we have done previous districts. A letter to
the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) was sent on May 17, 2011 for CPUC
clarification of additional local agency eligible reimbursable expenses.
ïðê
REGIONAL PROJECTS
The City of Chula Vista CIP includes funding for several studies related to regional
projects. It does not include total costs of regional projects funded or led by other
agencies such as Caltrans or SANDAG. However, City staff often partners or gets
involved in the delivery of these projects since they provide a direct benefit to the
community and sustainable infrastructure. The following is a summary of various
projects:
Interstate-5 Multi-modal Corridor Study -
In an effort to identify all transportation related
improvements needed along, across and within the four-mile long Interstate-5 and rail
corridor in Chula Vista, the City has combined efforts with Caltrans, Metropolitan Transit
System (MTS) and SANDAG to undertake this planning level study. This study will
identify and prioritize needed transportation improvements that will improve mobility and
goods movement within the study area bounded by SR-54 and Main Street. TransNet
and two Federal grants fund the study. Planning level study findings have already been
included in the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan adopted by SANDAG in October
2011.
The Blue Line Improvement Corridor - SANDAG has current freight
rail improvements throughout the Blue Line corridor that are in various
stages of design and/or construction. These planned improvements
in the City should be completed by end of FY13/14, and include
making improvements to the rail siding south of Anita Street to
provide a new rail over-crossing at Main Street.
In addition to the roadway and freeway network, Light Rail Trolley
(LRT) maintenance upgrades at all Chula Vista at-grade rail crossings
will begin by MTS/SANDAG in FY 12/13 and take a couple of years to
complete. The work includes the following locations and scope:
E Street, F Street, H Street, J Street, L Street, and Palomar Street
? SANDAG will be improving all rail crossings including upgrading railroad equipment
? SANDAG will widen pedestrian crossings to match street width
? SANDAG will make improvements to trolley station platforms to accommodate new
phased-in low-floor trolley cars
? SANDAG proposes to phase the work, starting at E Street and then work southwards
Moss Street and Naples Street
? The California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) is requiring a new traffic signal at
each crossing, due to rail improvements and proximity to intersection with Industrial Blvd
? City of Chula Vista is working with SANDAG on cost sharing at these two locations
(see TF383)
Anita Street
? SANDAG will be improving rail crossing including railroad equipment
? SANDAG will widen crossing to match street width to east
? City of Chula Vista will upgrade existing traffic signal
? City of Chula Vista will widen Industrial Boulevard north of Anita Street
? CPUC is requiring crossing improvements that include a raised median on Anita
Street, east of the intersection with Industrial Blvd.
ïïì
Planning for ultimate rail corridor improvements such as grade-separation of the LRT at
each of the three trolley station sites in Chula Vista is underway with the LRT
Improvement Study. Said LRT study will be completed in early FY13. Final
recommendations from the LRT Improvement study will be incorporated into future
regional plans and as individual projects into the Western Transportation Development
Impact Fee (WTDIF) program and the CIP program. This study will serve to identify an
accurate project description for a future LRT grade-separation Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) that will commence in FY12/13 and be completed in FY13/14. The
Palomar Street crossing is the highest priority LRT grade-separation project within Chula
Vista. The H Street and the E street locations rank second and third below the Palomar
Street location, respectively.
The South Bay Bus Rapid Transit (SBBRT) project
? The SBBRT project, coordinated by
SANDAG, is expected to coincide with the Caltrans I-805 Direct Access Ramp project.
SANDAG, as the project manager, will design and build a 21-mile BRT line between the
Otay Mesa Port of Entry and downtown San Diego via eastern Chula Vista, I-805 and
SR-94. The eastern Chula Vista section extends from the intersection of East Palomar
and Oleander through Otay Ranch Town Center and the Millennia Project to SR-125.
City staff is in discussions with SANDAG staff to provide design and surveying for the
portion of the project within the Otay Ranch Shopping Center and Birch Road. An
agreement with SANDAG is expected this summer.
The project will include arterial "transit only" lanes, transit signal priority, special shoulder
lanes for busses-only on the freeway, and enhanced customer amenities. The SBBRT
project will be in operation in FY2013-14 to coincide with the opening of the I-805 Direct
Access Ramp project at East Palomar Street. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
will be out for public review in summer 2012, covering the entire proposed 21-mile route.
State Route-125 (SR-125
) ? In December 2011, SANDAG purchased the lease to
operate the SR-125 toll road (South Bay Expressway). SANDAG has already
announced three toll reduction options at their Transportation Committee meeting of May
4, 2012. The SANDAG Board of Directors will finalize the recommendation in late May
or June.
Shortly thereafter, SANDAG expects to make an announcement and process to lower
tolls by summer 2012. As SANDAG completes its transition with South Bay
Expressway, city staff will work with Caltrans and SANDAG to pursue construction of the
northbound off-ramp and the southbound on-ramp at the San Miguel Ranch subdivision.
City staff will be providing cost estimates for completing these ramps and work with
Caltrans and SANDAG to agree on financing and expediting completion of this work.
For more information, including a list of frequently asked questions, visit
www.sandag.org/southbayexpressway
At the south end of the toll road, City staff is also working with Caltrans and the
development community to determine the ultimate on-ramp and off-ramp needs and
geometric configurations where the future Rock Mountain Road and Otay Valley Road
local streets eventually will cross the SR-125 corridor.
Bayshore Bikeway Project ?
The City will begin a preliminary
engineering study for the segment between E and H Streets,
ïïë
working with SANDAG and a consultant. The multi-purpose bike path segment between
H Street and Palomar Street was completed by SANDAG in March 2012. The City of
San Diego is responsible for working with SANDAG on the segment south of Palomar
Street to Main Street, which is currently in the environmental and design phases.
Future segments of the Bayshore Bikeway along the Chula Vista Bayfront waterfront will
be part of the development of that area and a general alignment of that facility can be
seen on the City?s 2011 Bikeway Master Plan map.
ïïê
GLOSSARY OF FINANCE AND BUDGET TERMS
Accrual Basis of Accounting ? The accounting basis used by the City by which
transactions are recognized when they occur, regardless of the timing of cash receipts
and disbursements.
Accounting System ? The collective set of records and procedures used to record,
classify, and report information on the financial status and operations of the City.
Accounts Payable ? Amounts owed by the City to external entities for goods and
services received.
Accounts Receivable ? Amounts due to the City from external entities for goods and
services furnished.
Adopted Budget ? The title of the budget following its formal adoption by resolution of
the City Council.
Amended Budget ? The title of the budget version that includes all amendments to the
Adopted Budget approved by Council throughout the fiscal year.
Appropriation ? A legislative act by the City Council authorizing the expenditure of a
designated amount of public funds for a specific purpose.
Asset Management ? A systematic approach to getting the most use/service from
infrastructure investments.
Audit ? An examination of City records and accounts by an external source to check
their validity, propriety, and accuracy.
Bond ? A certificate of debt issued by a government or corporation guaranteeing
payment of the original investment plus interest by a specified future date.
Budget ? A spending plan and policy guide comprised of an itemized summary of the
City?s probable expenditures and revenues for a given fiscal year.
Capital Expenditures - Expenditures related to the acquisition, replacement, or
improvement of a section of Chula Vista?s infrastructure.
Capital Improvement Program ? The long-range systematic construction plan designed
to foresee and address the City?s future capital infrastructure needs and expenditures
within a prioritized framework.
Capital Project ? Any major construction, acquisition, or renovation that increases the
useful life of the City?s physical infrastructure assets or adds to their value.
Debt Service ? Payment of interest and repayment of principal to holders of the City?s
various debt instruments.
Depreciation ? The expense incurred with the expiration of a capital asset.
ïîï
Direct Costs ? Operational expenditures exclusive to a specific service or program.
Discretionary Revenue ? Revenues that are generated by general or specific taxing
authority such as Property or Sales Taxes.
Encumbrance ? The designation of appropriated funds to buy an item or service.
Fiscal ? Of or pertaining to the finances of the City.
stth
Fiscal Year ? The twelve-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30 of the
subsequent calendar year.
Fixed Assets ? An asset with a useful life greater than three years.
Full-time Equivalent Positions ? The conversion of a part-time, temporary, or volunteer
positions to a decimal equivalent of a full-time position based on an annual amount of
2,080 hours worked.
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ? A uniform set of minimum standards for
external financial accounting and reporting.
Gann Appropriation Limit ? A State of California mandated appropriation limit imposed
on local jurisdictions.
General Fund ? The funds necessary to sustain the Operating Budget.
General Plan ? The fundamental policy document that guides the City?s future growth
and development.
See
General Revenue ? Discretionary Revenues.
Grants ? A contribution by a government or other organization to provide funding for a
specific project. Grants can either be classified as capital projects or operational,
depending on the specific restrictions and requirements of the grantee.
Indirect Cost ? Costs that are essential to the operation of the City but not exclusive to
any specific service or program. Indirect costs are primarily associated with support
departments such as City Clerk, City Attorney, Administration, Management Information
Systems (MIS), Human Resources, and Finance.
Infrastructure ? Basic physical assets such as buildings, streets, sewers, and parks.
Interest Expense ? Interest costs paid by Chula Vista on loans and bonds.
Liability ? Debt or other legal obligations arising out of past transactions that will be
liquidated, renewed, or refunded at some future date.
Memorandum of Understanding ? A document detailing the outcomes of labor
negotiations between the City and its various bargaining units.
ïîî
Municipal Code ? A collection of ordinances approved by City Council.
Operating Budget ? Costs associated with the on-going, day-to-day operation of the City.
Ordinance ? A formal legislative enactment by the City Council.
Other Expenditures ? All budgeted expenditures that do not fall into one of the three
primary expenditure categories: Personnel, Supplies and Services, and Capital.
Personnel Services Expenditures ? Salaries, wages, and benefits paid for services
performed by City employees.
Program Revenue ? Revenues generated by a given activity or line of business.
Proposed Budget ? The title of the budget prior to its formal adoption by resolution of the
City Council.
Reserves ? The portion of the General Fund balance set aside for contingencies.
Resolution ? A special order of the City Council that requires less legal formality than an
Ordinance.
Spending Plan ? A preliminary budget approved by City Council contingent upon
subsequent adoption of appropriations.
Supplies and Services Expenditures ? Expenditures for supplies required for the daily
operation of the City and for contractual and professional services.
Yield ? The rate of return earned on an investment.
ïîí
INDEX
CIP No.Project NamePage
BMS - Building
GG206Solar Photovoltaic Project Phase II70
GG207PIMA Institute - Animal Care Facility80
GG219HVAC Energy Retrofits II81
LB144South Chula Vista Library Roof82
PR315Facility Improvements at Loma Verde 83
Recreation Complex
DMS - Drainage
DR189Bonita Canyon Repairs96
DR193Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Project97
For FY 2013
GGMS - General Government
OP202CIP Advanced Planning107
OP206Automation - AutoCAD Upgrade109
OP208CIP Mgmt & Equipment Purchase111
OP212Downtown Parking District 113
Improvements
PMS - Parks
PR311Orange Ave Library Park Site101
PR314Citywide Park Improvements within 102
SDG&E Rights of Way
PR316Prop 84, Orange Park103
RMS - Roadway
GG214Induction Lighting - Residential Street 27
Lights
OP219Pavement Management System28
ïîì
CIP No.Project NamePage
29
STL261Willow Street Bridge Widening
30
STL291Fourth Avenue Sidewalk Improvements
(RAS)
STL306Southwestern CV Street Impvt Program31
STL342Second Avenue Improvements-Naples 32
Street to Palomar Street
33
STL362Third Avenue Streetscape
Improvements
STL364Sidewalk installation along Naples St35
STL375Enhanced Traffic Calming Crosswalk 36
Improvements at the vicinity of
STL379Alpine Avenue Improvements - Naples 37
St. to Oxford St.
STL384Willow Street Bridge Utility Relocation38
STL385Del Mar Avenue Improvement -Naples 39
Street to Oxford Street
STL386Twin Oaks Avenue Improvements, 40
Emerson Street to Oxford Street
STL387Otay Ranch Village 1 AD 97-2 41
Maintenance
STL388Pavement Minor Rehabilitation FY2012-42
13
STL389Castle Park Middle School - Quintard 43
Street Corridor Pedestrian
STL390Cross Gutter Rehabilitation @ Various 44
Locations FY 12-13
STM355Otay Lakes Road Widening, East "H" St. 46
to Telegraph Canyon Rd.
STM364Heritage Road Bridge Replacement
48
STM369Bikeway Facilities Gap Project49
STM373Pavement Major Rehabilitation FY 12-50
13
STM374Heritage Road - Olympic to Main
59
TF274Traffic Count Station and Maintenance
60
TF319Signal Modification - Anita & Industrial
61
TF321Citywide Traffic Count Program62
ïîë
CIP No.Project NamePage
TF325Transportation Planning Program63
TF327Neighborhood Traffic and Pedestrian 64
Safety Program
TF332Signing and Striping Program65
TF344I 805 Direct Access Ramp East H Street 66
and East Palomar Street
TF345Traffic Calming Program67
TF350Traffic Signal System Optimization68
TF354Traffic Congestion Relief Program69
TF356Otay Mesa Transportation System70
TF359SR54 Corridor and Arterial Operations71
TF366Traffic Signal and Streetlight Systems 72
Upgrade and Modification Program
TF376Traffic Signal Modification at Third 73
Avenue and "K" Street Intersection
TF382Traffic Signal Modifications at Third 74
Avenue and Naples Street
TF383Traffic Signal Installation at Industrial 75
Boulevard and Moss Street and
TF384Hazel G Cook Elementary School 76
Pedestrian Improvements
WMS - Wastewater
SW263Anita Street Sewer Improvements86
SW264Corral Ct Pump Station Rehabilitation87
SW269Hilltop Pump Station Rehabilitation88
SW274East H Street Sewer Main Upsize89
SW275Reline Force Main @ G St Pump Station90
SW276Sewer Rehabilitation Project for FY 201391
SW277Sewer Access Road Rehabilitation 92
Project for FY 2012-2013
SW278Max Field Pump Station Reconstruction 93
Project
ïîê