Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022/09/27 Post Agenda Packet REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL **POST AGENDA** Date:Tuesday, September 27, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Location:Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA View the Meeting Live in English & Spanish: chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings Cox channel 24 in English only Welcome to your City Council Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS: Public comments may be submitted to the City Council in the following ways: In-Person. The community is welcome to make public comments at this City Council meeting. Masks or face coverings are recommended in Council Chambers and all City conference and meeting rooms. • Submit an eComment: Visit www.chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings, locate the meeting and click the comment bubble icon. Select the item and click "Leave Comment." eComments can be submitted until the conclusion of public comments for the item and are viewable online upon submittal. If you have difficulty submitting eComments, email comments to: cityclerk@chulavistaca.gov. • HOW TO WATCH: Live stream is available at www.chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings. To switch the video to Spanish, please click on "ES" in the bottom right hand corner. Meetings are available anytime on the City's website (English and Spanish). ACCESSIBILITY: Individuals with disabilities or special needs are invited to request modifications or accommodations to access and/or participate in a City meeting by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@chulavistaca.gov or (619) 691-5041 (California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired by dialing 711) at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting. SPEAKER TIME LIMITS: The time allotted for speakers may be adjusted by the Mayor. - Five minutes* for specific items listed on the agenda - Three minutes* for items NOT on the agenda (called to speak during Public Comments) - A group of individuals may select a spokesperson to speak on their behalf on an agenda item, waiving their option to speak individually on the same item. Generally, five minutes are allotted per person, up to a limit of 30 minutes, although the limits may be adjusted. Members of the group must be present. *Individuals who use a translator will be allotted twice the amount of time. GETTING TO KNOW YOUR AGENDA Agenda Sections: CONSENT CALENDAR items are routine items that are not expected to prompt discussion. All items are considered for approval at the same time with one vote. Councilmembers and staff may request items be removed and members of the public may submit a speaker slip if they wish to comment on an item. Items removed from the Consent Calendar are discussed after the vote on the remaining Consent Calendar items. PUBLIC COMMENT provides the public with an opportunity to address the Council on any matter not listed on the agenda that is within the jurisdiction of the Council. In compliance with the Brown Act, the Council cannot take action on matters not listed on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS are held on matters specifically required by law. The Mayor opens the public hearing and asks for presentations from staff and from the proponent or applicant involved (if applicable) in the matter under discussion. Following questions from the Councilmembers, the Mayor opens the public hearing and asks for public comments. The hearing is closed, and the City Council may discuss and take action. ACTION ITEMS are items that are expected to cause discussion and/or action by the Council but do not legally require a Public Hearing. Staff may make a presentation and Councilmembers may ask questions of staff and the involved parties before the Mayor invites the public to provide input. CLOSED SESSION may only be attended by members of the Council, support staff, and/or legal counsel. The most common purpose of a Closed Session is to avoid revealing confidential information that may prejudice the legal or negotiating position of the City or compromise the privacy interests of employees. Closed sessions may be held only as specifically authorized by law. Council Actions: RESOLUTIONS are formal expressions of opinion or intention of the Council and are usually effective immediately. ORDINANCES are laws adopted by the Council. Ordinances usually amend, repeal or supplement the Municipal Code; provide zoning specifications; or appropriate money for specific purposes. Most ordinances require two hearings: an introductory hearing, generally followed by a second hearing at the next regular meeting. Most ordinances go into effect 30 days after the final approval. PROCLAMATIONS are issued by the City to honor significant achievements by community members, highlight an event, promote awareness of community issues, and recognize City employees. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 2 of 617 Pages 1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE 4.SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 4.1.Oaths of Office for Planning Commission: Jimmy Combs Bryan Felber 4.2.Presentation by Marketing and Communications Manager Anne Steinberger and Third Avenue Village Association District Director Dominic LiMandri Regarding the Chula Vista Block Party and other Third Avenue Events 8 4.3.Presentation of a Proclamation Proclaiming September 2022 as Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month in the City of Chula Vista 5.CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 5.1 through 5.7) All items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered and acted upon by one motion. Anyone may request an item be removed for separate consideration. RECOMMENDED ACTION: To approve the recommended action appearing below consent calendar Items 5.1 through 5.3. The headings below were read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: 5.1.Approval of Meeting Minutes 15 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the minutes dated: January 11, 14, 15, 18, 2022. 5.2.Waive Reading of Text of Resolutions and Ordinances RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve a motion to read only the title and waive the reading of the text of all resolutions and ordinances at this meeting. 5.3.Consideration of Requests for Excused Absences 37 Councilmember McCann from the September 20, 2022 Special City Council meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve an excused absence request from Councilmember McCann for the September 20, 2022, Special City Council meeting. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 3 of 617 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSETNT CALENDAR 5.4.Tobacco Sales: Consider Prohibiting Flavored Tobacco Sales within the City of Chula Vista 38 Report Number: 22-0189 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. RECOMMENDED ACTION: To adopt Ordinance No. 3525, heading read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: 5.5.Conflict of Interest Code: Modify the List of Officials, Candidates, and Designated Employees Who are Required to File Periodic Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) and Their Disclosure Categories 243 Report Number: 22-0212 Location: No specific geographic location Department: City Clerk Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution modifying the appendix to the local Conflict of Interest Code to revise the list of officials, candidates, and designated employees who are required to file Statements of Economic Interests (FPPC Form 700) and their disclosure categories. 5.6.Grant Acceptance and Appropriation: Accept Funds from The San Diego Foundation to Create and Implement an Age-Friendly Business and Business District Toolkit and Designation Program 264 Report Number: 22-0258 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 4 of 617 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution accepting grant funds in the amount of $40,000 from The San Diego Foundation Age-Friendly Communities grant to implement goals in the Age-Friendly Action Plan, authorizing the City Manager or designee to enter into necessary agreements to implement the grant, and appropriating funds for that purpose. (4/5 Vote Required) 5.7.Agreement: Approve a Brush Clearance Services Agreement with Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. 274 Report Number: 22-0243 Location: Barons Canyon, Bonita Long Canyon, Church Canyon, Goats Hill, Independence Canyon, and Lynwood Hills (named City canyons) Department: Public Works Environmental Notice: The Project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15304 Class 4 (Minor Alterations to Land). The Project is also Exempt under a regulatory program of the Fish and Game Commission pursuant to Section15251(b). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution approving an agreement for brush clearance services in certain City canyons with Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. in an amount not-to-exceed $3,169,593. 6.PUBLIC COMMENTS 313 The public may address the Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council but not on the agenda. 7.ACTION ITEMS The following item(s) will be considered individually and are expected to elicit discussion and deliberation. 7.1.City Election: Report by City Clerk Kerry Bigelow Regarding Possible Outcomes of the November 2022 Election and Options to Address Potential Vacancies 316 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Hear the report. 7.2.Parking Management: Approve the Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Report and Implement Recommendation Numbers 1, 9 and 11 of the Report 327 Report Number: 22-0215 Location: Downtown Parking District, bounded by E Street to the north, Del Mar Avenue to the east, Garrett Avenue to the west, and H Street to the south Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 5 of 617 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution approving the Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Report dated August 2022 and implementing Recommendation Numbers 1 (Smart Meters), 9 (Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot – remove meters, extend to 4 hour parking limit) and 11 (increase Parking District boundary) of the Report. 7.3.Employment Agreement: Extend and Amend City Manager Employment Agreement 587 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Human Resources Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution approving the amended City Manager employment agreement. 8.CITY MANAGER’S REPORTS 9.MAYOR’S REPORTS 9.1.Ratification of Appointments to the Board of Ethics:591 Scott Wm. Davenport William Gersten Jose Torres, Jr. Alexia Velissaropolos RECOMMENDED ACTION: Ratify the appointments. 10.COUNCILMEMBERS’ COMMENTS 10.1.Councilmember Padilla:617 Consider City support of the 3rd Annual Southbay Rainbow Ride and Festival to be held at Otay Ranch Town Center, October 8, 2022 11.CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 6 of 617 12.ADJOURNMENT to the regular City Council meeting on October 4, 2022, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Materials provided to the City Council related to an open session item on this agenda are available for public review, please contact the Office of the City Clerk at cityclerk@chulavistaca.gov or (619) 691-5041. Sign up at www.chulavistaca.gov to receive email notifications when City Council agendas are published online. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 7 of 617 Special Events Update 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 8 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 9 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 10 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 11 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 12 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 13 of 617 Upcoming Events •October 29 Dia de los Muertos •December 4 Starlight Nights 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 14 of 617 1 City of Chula Vista Regular Meeting of the City Council Meeting Minutes January 11, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA Present: Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Deputy Mayor McCann, Councilmember Padilla, Mayor Casillas Salas Also Present: City Manager Kachadoorian, City Attorney Googins, City Clerk Bigelow, Assistant City Clerk Turner The City Council minutes are prepared and ordered to correspond to the City Council Agenda. Agenda items may be taken out of order during the meeting. The agenda items were considered in the order presented except for Item10.1, which was heard after the Pledge of Allegiance. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order 5:03 p.m. via teleconference and in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Bigelow called the roll. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE Deputy Mayor Cardenas led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 4.1 COVID-19 Update by the City of Chula Vista Emergency Services Manager Marlon King Emergency Services Manager King gave a presentation on the item. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 5.1 through 5.9) Mayor Casillas Salas announced that Items 5.4, 5.9 and 5.10 would be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember McCann stated he would abstain from voting on Item 5.4 due to a potential property-related conflict of interest. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 15 of 617 2 Moved by Councilmember McCann Seconded by Councilmember Cardenas To approve the recommended actions appearing below consent calendar Items 5.1 through 5.3 and 5.5 through 5.8. The headings were read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Result, Carried (5 to 0) 5.1 Waive Reading of Text of Resolutions and Ordinances Approve a motion to read only the title and waive the reading of the text of all resolutions and ordinances at this meeting. 5.2 Consideration of Request for Excused Absences Approve an excused absence for Councilmember McCann from the December 7, 2021 City Council meeting. 5.3 Employee Positions: Approve the Addition and Deletion of Various Position Titles Francisco submitted a written communications regarding positions in the Engineering & Capital Projects Department. Adopt an ordinance amending Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 2.05.010 to add the unclassified position titles of Communications/Special Events Coordinator and delete the position title of Special Events Coordinator. ORDINANCE NO. 3515 OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.05.010 ADDING THE UNCLASSIFIED POSITION TITLE OF COMMUNICATIONS/SPECIAL EVENTS COORDINATOR AND DELETING THE POSITION TITLE OF SPECIAL EVENTS COORDINATOR (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) 5.5 Annual Report: Fiscal Year 2020/21 Development Impact Fees, the Parkland Acquisition and Development Fee, and Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Funds Receive the annual report regarding Development Impact Fees, the Parkland Acquisition and Development Fee, and Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Funds for Fiscal Year 2020/21. 5.6 City Election: Call the June 7, 2022 Election for a Mayor, District 1 City Councilmember, District 2 City Councilmember and City Attorney; and Adopt Regulations for Candidate Statements Adopt resolutions A) Calling a general municipal election to be held on Tuesday, June 7, 2022, for the election of a Mayor, two Members of the City Council, representing Districts 1 and 2, and a City Attorney; consolidating the election with the statewide election, and requesting the County of San Diego Board of Supervisors to permit the Registrar of Voters to perform certain services for the conduct of the election; and B) Adopting regulations for candidates for elective 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 16 of 617 3 office pertaining to materials submitted to the electorate at the general municipal election on June 7, 2022. A) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-002 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CALLING A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2022, FOR THE ELECTION OF A MAYOR, TWO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, REPRESENTING DISTRICTS 1 AND 2, AND A CITY ATTORNEY; CONSOLIDATING THE ELECTION WITH THE STATEWIDE ELECTION; AND REQUESTING THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO PERMIT THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO PERFORM CERTAIN SERVICES FOR THE CONDUCT OF THE ELECTION B) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-003 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO MATERIALS SUBMITTED TO THE ELECTORATE AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2022 5.7 Grant Award: Accept Grant From California Department of Justice for Tobacco Grant Program Adopt a resolution accepting $74,957 in grant funds and appropriating said funds to the Police Grants Section of the State Grants Fund for the Tobacco Grant Program. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-004 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $74,957 FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, TOBACCO GRANT PROGRAM, APPROVING MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY AND CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, AND APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS TO THE POLICE GRANTS SECTION OF THE STATE GRANTS FUND 5.8 Grant Award: Accept Funding From U.S. Department of Homeland Security for Operation Stonegarden Zarek Lee submitted written communications in opposition to staff's recommendation. Delia Dominguez Cervantes submitted written communication registering a neutral position on the item. Adopt a resolution accepting $88,000 from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for Operation Stonegarden. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-005 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $88,000 FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY AND APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS TO THE POLICE GRANTS SECTION OF THE FEDERAL GRANT FUND FOR OPERATION STONEGARDEN 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 17 of 617 4 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 5.4 Contract Award: Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract to Just Construction, Inc. for the ADA Pedestrian Curb Ramps Program for Fiscal Years 2018/19 and 2020/21 Alan C. spoke in opposition to the item. Moved by Councilmember Cardenas Seconded by Councilmember Galvez To adopt Resolution No. 2022-001, heading read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Result, Carried (5 to 0) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-001 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS; AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE “ADA PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS PROGRAM FY2018/19 (CIP# STL0432)” AND “ADA PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS PROGRAM FY2020/21 (CIP# STL0447)” PROJECTS TO JUST CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $346,362; AND TRANSFERRING $125,500 IN TRANSNET APPROPRIATIONS FROM STL0454, “ADA PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS PROGRAM FY2021/22, TO STL0432 “ADA PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS PROGRAM FY2018/19” PROJECT (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) 5.9 Grant Acceptance: Accept Federal and State Funds Supplemental Emergency Rental Assistance Program Awards and Enter into a Contractor/Service Provider Agreement with SBCS Corporation for the Administration of the Program Alan C. spoke in opposition to the item. Moved by Councilmember Cardenas Seconded by Councilmember Galvez To adopt Resolution Nos. 2022-006 through 2022-008, headings were read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes (4): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Abstain (1): Councilmember McCann Result, Carried (4 to 0) A) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-006 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A SUPPLEMENTAL ALLOCATION FROM THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT OF 2021 FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY FOR AN EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA2) AND APPROPRIATING SAID FUNDS (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 18 of 617 5 B) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-007 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE STATE RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM-2, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE A STANDARD AGREEMENT WITH HCD FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A STATE RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PURSUANT TO AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT OF 2021 AND ASSEMBLY BILL 832, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED) C) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-008 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.56.070(B)(3) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDED CONTRACTOR/SERVICE PROVIDER SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SBCS CORPORATION TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE AN EMERGENCY RENTAL AND UTILITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FUNDED BY STATE AND FEDERAL AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT OF 2021 ALLOCATIONS 5.10 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODIES OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 12, 2022 THROUGH JANUARY 22, 2022 PURSUANT TO THE BROWN ACT Alan C spoke in opposition to the item. Moved by Councilmember Cardenas Seconded by Councilmember Galvez To adopt Resolution No. 2022-009, heading read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Result, Carried (5 to 0) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-009 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODIES OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 12, 2022 THROUGH JANUARY 21, 2022 PURSUANT TO THE BROWN ACT 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS 6.1 Public Comments Received for 1/11/2022 Joseph Raso and Michele Noid spoke in opposition to a rate increase for trash services. Alan C spoke regarding masks and COVID-19 regulations. Susana Sanchez request an update to the City's website. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 19 of 617 6 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7.1 Consideration of Protests Against an Adjustment on Collection Rates to Comply with Organic Waste Regulations Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and no earlier than the specified in the notice. Mayor Casillas Salas opened the public hearing and continued the item to the meeting of January 25, 2022. The following members of the public submitted written communications in opposition to an adjustment on collection rates:  Amanda  Mark  Jeff Mullin  Lillian  James Parker  Kathleen L. Morgan  Roman Covarrubias  Roesli John  Monica Dr. Jeff Del Merla submitted written communications offering resources to implement a green plan as a means to alleviate the current Republic Services strike. 7.2 Planning Commission Appeal: Conditional Use Permit and Design Review for a 120-Bed Acute Psychiatric Hospital in the Eastlake II Planned Community, known as Eastlake Behavioral Health Hospital Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and no earlier than the specified in the notice. Mayor Casillas Salas opened the public hearing and continued the item to the meeting of January 25, 2022, time certain at 6:00 p.m. 8. ACTION ITEMS 8.1 Update from Republic Services on the Impacts of Recent Waste Collection Interruptions City Manager Kachadoorian introduced the item. Deputy City Manager Crockett and Environmental Services Manager Medrano gave a presentation on the item. Richard Copeland, Matt Cross and Neil Mohr representing Republic Services gave a presentation on the item. Council discussion ensued. Mayor Casillas Salas requested that staff report back on the feasibility of issuing a request for proposals at the end of the contract to select a provider, and within said proposal, examine what it would cost to bring services in-house. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 20 of 617 7 City Attorney Googins provided clarification on the process of submitting referrals and providing feedback for the item. Councilmember Galvez spoke in support of declaring a public health state of emergency and invoking the self-help option within the Republic Services contract. The following members of the public spoke in support of Republic Services workers:  Castillo Doheny representing Teamsters Local 542  Cesar Silva representing Teamsters Local 542  Salvador Abrica representing Teamsters Local 542  John Acosta  Michele Noid  Adan Pelayo-Mark  Cesar Fernandez, Chula Vista resident  Sophia Rodriguez, Chula Vista resident  Rita McIntyre, Chula Vista resident  Maria Whitehorse  Hilda Salas  Oscar Salas Mayor Casillas Salas recessed the meeting at 7:06 p.m. The Council reconvened at 7:13 p.m., with all members present. The following members of the public spoke in opposition to the Republic Services waste collection interruptions:  Sandra Kaltenborn  Leonardo Vanegas  Alan, Chula Vista resident  John Serrano  Ricardo Santoyo-Mejia representing Chula Vista Elementary School District  John Teevan  Cynthia Brown  John Moot, Chula Vista resident Jennifer Carbuccia representing Sweetwater Union High School District spoke regarding the Republic Services contract with the District and its impacts on schools. The following members of the public submitted request to speak but were not present when called:  Joseph Raso  Sean Chamberlin 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 21 of 617 8 The following members of the public submitted written communication with a neutral position on Republic Services waste collection interruption:  Johnny Romero  Roesli John  David Kaltenborn  Martin Calvo  Jonathan George  Margaret Fellenbaum  John Molina  Kathleen L Morgan  William Henry  Mrs. Lien  Dr. Del Merlan, Chula Vista resident  Tina Medina  Tina Matthias  Delia Dominguez Cervantes  Henry Cagle  Carolyn Scofield, Chula Vista resident  James Parker  Patrice Milkovich  Frank Luzzaro  Izzybeth Rodriguez-Prats The following members of the public submitted written communication in opposition to the Republic Services waste collection interruption:  Andy Crowe  Monica  John Galt  Robert Walker  Kelly Luna  Carol Pedersen  Roesli John  Joan Locke  Alexandra Epstein  Roman Covarrubias  Todd Voorhees  Tracy Morgan Hollingworth  James Parker  Tom O'Donnell  Daniel Zeller  Lillian  Michele Gidron  Michele  Jeff Mullin  Mark  Zarek Lee 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 22 of 617 9  Amanda  John Zarem  John Sturges  Alice Kolodji  Michael Cepe  Roesli John  Robert Ledesma  Zeamora Pablo  Nancy Painter  Kristin  Elizabeth E. nelson  Adell Burge  Delia Dominguez Cervantes  Paul de la Pena Councilmember Padilla distributed and discussed a memorandum regarding Republic Services. At the request of Councilmember Padilla, there was consensus of a majority of the Council to direct the City Manager and City Attorney pursue the following actions: 1. Request the City Manager to provide immediate written notice to Republic Services of the City’s intention to exercise its Self Help rights under Section 11.2.3. 2. Such notice shall include Self Help actions such as the establishment of recyclable and yard-waste collection sites at City locations with the support of City employees — the expenses incurred being billed to Republic Services. 3. The written notice shall include direction to Republic Services to provide equipment and staffing to pick up materials dropped at these sites and transport them to the landfill at their expense. 4. The written notice will also provide that the City will pursue any and all remedies available to it under the Franchise Agreement if city-wide collection and cleanup is not commenced within 7days. 5. Request the City Manager and City Attorney to prepare a potential declaration of Public Health Emergency to give the City additional latitude to address the crisis. 6. Request the City Manager to return to the City Council in 90 days with a suggested process and timeline for initiating a Request for Proposal, or "RFP,” for the collection of Solid Waste, and Franchised Recyclables from Residential, Commercial, and Industrial sites within the City in anticipation of the expiration of this agreement — or sooner if warranted. 7. Request the City Manager and City Attorney to immediately evaluate our authority under the Franchise Agreement to direct Republic Services to immediately suspend all collection activities on accounts of customers in Chula Vista until the situation is resolved—and also our ability to rebate 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 23 of 617 10 or credit customers for the weeks in which collection activit ies did not occur. City Attorney Googins spoke regarding City's options to address the Republic Services waste collection interruption. 9. CITY MANAGER’S REPORTS There were none. 10. MAYOR’S REPORTS 10.1 Consideration of Reappointment of Ann Moore to the San Diego Board of Port Commissioners for the Term Beginning January 2023. Council discussion ensued. Moved by Mayor Casillas Salas Seconded by Councilmember Padilla To reappoint Ann Moore to the San Diego Board of Port Commissioners for the upcoming term beginning January 2023. Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Result, Carried (5 to 0) 11. COUNCILMEMBERS’ COMMENTS Councilmember McCann extended holiday greetings. 12. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS There were none. 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Casillas Salas adjourned the meeting in memory of Eduardo Federico Vargas Ojeda, the father of Nora Vargas. The meeting was adjourned at 8:37 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Tyshar Turner, Assistant City Clerk _________________________ Kerry K. Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 24 of 617 City of Chula Vista Special Meeting of the City Council Meeting Minutes January 14, 2022, 4:00 p.m. Virtual, Via Teleconference Present: Deputy Mayor Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, Mayor Casillas Salas Also Present: City Manager Kachadoorian, City Attorney Googins, City Clerk Bigelow, Assistant City Clerk Turner Pursuant to the Brown Act and City Council Resolution No. 2022-009, and in the interest of public health and safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, members of the City Council and staff participated in this meeting via teleconference. Members of the public participated remotely and were not present in Council Chambers. All votes were taken by roll call and public comments were submitted electronically or otherwise in writing. The City Council minutes are prepared and ordered to correspond to the City Council Agenda. Agenda items may be taken out of order during the meeting. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER A special meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 4:03 p.m. via teleconference and in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. 2. ROLL CALL Assistant City Clerk Turner called the roll. Due to technical difficulties, Mayor Casillas Salas recessed the meeting at 4:10 p.m. The Council reconvened at 5:50 p.m., with all members present. Staff reported that the technical difficulties could not be resolved at that time and prevented the public from being able to participate in the meeting remotely. Therefore, the item was not discussed, no action was taken, and the meeting was adjourned. 3. ACTION ITEMS 3.1 Ratification of the January 12, 2022 Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency of the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Chula Vista 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 25 of 617 2022/01/14 Minutes - City Council - Special Meeting Page 2 and Report of the City Manager Regarding Status of Trash Service and Impacts on the Community Item 3.1 was not discussed. The item was continued to a special meeting on January 15, 2022. 4. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:53 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Tyshar Turner, Assistant City Clerk _________________________ Kerry K. Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 26 of 617 Page 1 City of Chula Vista Special Meeting of the City Council Meeting Minutes January 15, 2022, 6:00 p.m. Virtual, Via Teleconference Present: Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Deputy Mayor McCann, Councilmember Padilla, Mayor Casillas Salas Also Present: City Manager Kachadoorian, City Attorney Googins, City Clerk Bigelow, Assistant City Clerk Turner Pursuant to the Brown Act and City Council Resolution No. 2022-009, and in the interest of public health and safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, members of the City Council and staff participated in this meeting via teleconference. Members of the public participated remotely and were not present in Council Chambers. All votes were taken by roll call and public comments were submitted electronically or otherwise in writing. The City Council minutes are prepared and ordered to correspond to the City Council Agenda. Agenda items may be taken out of order during the meeting. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER A special meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:06 p.m. via teleconference and in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Bigelow called the roll. Mayor Casillas Salas expressed appreciation to the citizens of Chula Vista for their understanding and patience during this crisis and to City staff for their assistance with trash pick-up throughout the City. Councilmember Padilla provided an update regarding the mediation process for Republic Services announcing that Republic and Local 542 would be back to the table for negotiations on Sunday, January 16, 2022. 3. ACTION ITEMS 3.1 Ratification of the January 12, 2022 Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency of the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Chula Vista and Report of the City Manager Regarding Status of Trash Service and Impacts on the Community City Manager Kachadoorian provided a report on the item and responded to questions of the Council. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 27 of 617 2022/01/15 Minutes - City Council - Special Meeting Page 2 Council discussion ensued. City Attorney Googins provided clarification on the enforcement process and the process of ratifying the Proclamation of Local Emergency related to Republic Services waste collection interruption. The following members of the public submitted written communications in support of the item:  Phillip  Roman Covarrubias  Paul John Zee submitted written communications regarding trash service for single- family homes. Moved by Councilmember McCann Seconded by Councilmember Cardenas To adopt Resolution No. 2022-010, heading read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Carried (5 to 0) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-010 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 2.14 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RATIFYING THE PROCLAMATION OF EXISTENCE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA 4. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:42 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Tyshar Turner, Assistant City Clerk _________________________ Kerry K. Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 28 of 617 City of Chula Vista Regular Meeting of the City Council Meeting Minutes January 18, 2022, 5:00 p.m. Virtual, Via Teleconference Present: Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Deputy Mayor McCann, Councilmember Padilla, Mayor Casillas Salas Also Present: City Manager Kachadoorian, City Attorney Googins, City Clerk Bigelow, Assistant City Clerk Turner Pursuant to the Brown Act and City Council Resolution No. 2022-009, and in the interest of public health and safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, members of the City Council and staff participated in this meeting via teleconference. Members of the public participated remotely and were not present in Council Chambers. All votes were taken by roll call and public comments were submitted electronically or otherwise in writing. The City Council minutes are prepared and ordered to correspond to the City Council Agenda. Agenda items may be taken out of order during the meeting. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 5:08 p.m. via teleconference and in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Bigelow called the roll. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE Mayor Casillas Salas led the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Casillas Salas announced that the public hearing for Item 6.1 had been canceled and that the public hearing for Item 6.2 would be opened and continued to the March 8, 2022 meeting. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 4.1 through 4.6) Moved by Mayor Casillas Salas Seconded by Councilmember McCann To approve the recommended actions appearing below consent calendar Items 4.1 through 4.6, headings read, text waived. The motion carried by the following vote: 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 29 of 617 2022/01/18 Minutes –City Council Regular Meeting Page 2 Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Carried (5 to 0) 4.1 Waive Reading of Text of Resolutions and Ordinances Approve a motion to read only the title and waive the reading of the text of all resolutions and ordinances at this meeting. 4.2 Consideration of Request for Excused Absences No requests were received at that meeting. 4.3 Ambulance Transport System Purchase: Approve the Purchase of Two (2) Additional Ambulances and Required Outfitting Adopt the resolutions to purchase two (2) additional ambulances through Republic EVS, and purchase required outfitting from Stryker Gurney Systems and Motorola for necessary ambulance outfitting. A) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-011 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH REPUBLIC EVS FOR TWO AMBULANCES THROUGH SOUTHWEST AMBULANCE SALES B) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-012 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH STRYKER MEDICAL FOR GURNEY SYSTEMS C) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-013 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE COMPETITVE BIDDING REQUIREMENT AND APPROVING A SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS FOR AMBULANCE RADIO EQUIPMENT 4.4 Engine Purchase: Approval of the purchase of two (2) Pierce Engine Pumper Apparatuses through Measure P Adopt a resolution approving the purchase of two (2) Pierce Engine Pumper Apparatuses in compliance with the Measure P Expenditure Plan. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-014 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENT AND APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF TWO PIERCE ARROW XT PIERCE’S ULTIMATE CONFIGURATION (PUC) PUMPERS TO BE PURCHASED THROUGH THE MEASURE P EXPENDITURE PLAN 4.5 Park Master Plan Approval: Approval of the Park Master Plan for the 2.8-acre Town Square Park (Lots B and C) in Otay Ranch Village 8 West and the name “Central Square Park” Adopt a resolution approving the Park Master Plan for the 2.8-acre Town Square Park in Otay Ranch Village 8 West and the name “Central Square Park.” RESOLUTION NO. 2022-015 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE PARK MASTER PLAN FOR THE 2.8-ACRE TOWN 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 30 of 617 2022/01/18 Minutes –City Council Regular Meeting Page 3 SQUARE PARK (LOTS B & C) IN OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST AND THE NAME “CENTRAL SQUARE PARK” 4.6 Contract Award: Preparation of a Storm Water Management & Drainage Funding Report with SCI Consulting Group Adopt a resolution awarding a contract to SCI Consulting Group to provide professional services for the preparation of a Storm Water Management & Drainage Funding Report. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-016 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SCI CONSULTING GROUP TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE PREPARATION OF A STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND DRAINAGE FUNDING REPORT 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS 5.1 Public Comments Received for 1/18/2022 Marc Marconi, Chula Vista resident, submitted written communications regarding current City contracts. Robert Johnson submitted written comments regarding the pandemic and related mandates. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 Public Hearing to Accept and File an Economic Development Subsidy Report Pursuant to Government Code Section 53083 for Sunroad BCV Holding to Construct a BMW Auto Dealership Mayor Casillas Salas announced that the public hearing for Item 6.1 was canceled at the request of the applicant. The public hearing was not held and no action was taken. 6.2 Vacation of Land: A Portion of Marina Parkway and a Portion of G Street as Part of the Bayfront Development Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and no earlier than specified in the notice. Mayor Casillas Salas opened the public hearing. Moved by Councilmember McCann Seconded by Councilmember Galvez To continue the public hearing to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2022. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Carried (5 to 0) 6.3 Sunbow II Land Use Amendments: Amendments to the General Plan, the Sunbow II General Development Plan, and the Sunbow II Sectional Planning 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 31 of 617 2022/01/18 Minutes –City Council Regular Meeting Page 4 Area Plan to Rezone an Existing Vacant Parcel from Industrial to Residential Use Resulting in 718 New Units Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and no earlier than specified in the notice. Acting Housing Manager Kurz gave a presentation on the item. Bill Ostrem, representing Lennar, gave a presentation on the item. He, Ryan Green, also representing Lennar, and Deputy City Manager Crockett responded to questions of the Council. Planning Commission Chair Zaker spoke regarding the Planning Commission discussion and vote on the item. Mayor Casillas Salas opened the public hearing. A concerned Sunbow resident submitted written communications in opposition to the staff recommendation. The following members of the public submitted written communications in support of the staff recommendation:  Beatriz Young Mondaca  Stacy Dion  Catherine Thong  Danna Wilkinson Mayor Casillas Salas closed the public hearing. Bill Ostrem responded to questions of the Council. Council discussion ensued. Moved by Councilmember Padilla Seconded by Councilmember McCann To adopt Resolution Nos. 2022-017 through 2022-020, as revised to add the requirement to the development agreement that all properties be for-sale products, and to place the below ordinances (Items 6.3 D and F) on first reading. The headings were read, text waived. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Yes (4): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas No (1): Councilmember Galvez Carried (4 to 1) A) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-017 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR-20-0002; SCH NO. 2020110148) FOR THE SUNBOW II, PHASE 3 SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 32 of 617 2022/01/18 Minutes –City Council Regular Meeting Page 5 PLAN, SUNBOW II GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND TENTATIVE MAP PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT B) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-018 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN (MPA20-0012) AND THE SUNBOW II GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (MPA20-0013) TO REFLECT LAND USE CHANGES FOR APPROXIMATELY 135.7 ACRES WITHIN THE SUNBOW II, PHASE 3 PLANNED COMMUNITY, INCLUDING ASSOCIATED TEXT, MAPS AND TABLES C) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-019 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE SUNBOW II SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN (MPA20-0006) TO UPDATE CHAPTERS 10.0 TO 17.0, TO DESCRIBE AND DEFINE THE AMENDED LAND USES FOR SUNBOW II, PHASE 3 AND INCORPORATE THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES SPECIFIC TO THIS PROJECT D) ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SUNBOW II, PHASE 3 PROJECT TO REZONE FROM LIMITED INDUSTRIAL TO RESIDENTIAL USES ALLOWING UP TO 534 MULTI-FAMILY MEDIUM-HIGH- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND 184 MULTI-FAMILY HIGH- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS ON SIX PARCELS, A 0.9-ACRE COMMUNITY PURPOSE FACILITY SITE, ON-SITE STREETS, OPEN SPACE AND MSCP PRESERVE OPEN SPACE (FIRST READING) E) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-020 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP CVT20-0002 (PCS20-0002) FOR A 135.7-acre site FOR (718) MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, KNOWN AS THE SUNBOW II, PHASE 3 PROJECT F) ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND ACI SUNBOW, LLC (MPA21-0014) FOR THE SUNBOW II, PHASE 3 PROJECT (FIRST READING) Mayor Casillas Salas recessed the meeting at 7:36 p.m. The Council reconvened at 7:42 p.m., with all members present. 7. ACTION ITEMS 7.1 Citywide Data Privacy Policy Initiative and Smart Cities Update Chief Sustainability Officer Gakunga, Police Captain Redmond, and Information Technology Services Director Chew gave a presentation on the item and responded to questions of the Council. Jim Madaffer and Jeremy Ogul, representing Madaffer Enterprises, gave a presentation on the item and responded to questions of the Council. Robert Johnson submitted written communications expressing a neutral position on the item. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 33 of 617 2022/01/18 Minutes –City Council Regular Meeting Page 6 City Attorney Googins announced that a revised resolution and agreement had been distributed to the Council, and that action on the item would be with respect to the revised documents. Moved by Mayor Casillas Salas Seconded by Councilmember McCann To adopt Resolution No. 2022-021, heading read, text waived. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Carried (5 to 0) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-021 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH MADAFFER ENTERPRISES TO PROVIDE TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION TASK FORCE FACILITATION SERVICES 7.2 Measure P Citizens’ Oversight Committee: Amend the Municipal Code to Change the Number of Committee Members from 16 to 9 Moved by Mayor Casillas Salas Seconded by Councilmember Galvez To place the ordinance on first reading, heading read, text waived. The motion was carried by the following roll call vote Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Carried (5 to 0) ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE (CVMC) CHAPTER 2.61 TO CHANGE THE NUMBER OF “MEASURE P” CITIZENS’ OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEMBERS FROM 16 TO 9 (FIRST READING) 7.3 Ratification of the January 12, 2022 Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency of the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Chula Vista and Report of the City Manager Regarding Status of Trash Service and Impacts on the Community Environmental Services Manager Medrano provided a report on the item. Darrell Reno, Director of Operations for Republic Services spoke regarding the item and responded to questions of the Council. Robert Johnson submitted written communications expressing a neutral position on the item. Council discussion ensued. Mayor Casillas Salas read a letter from Salvador Abrica representing Teamsters Local 542 into the record. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 34 of 617 2022/01/18 Minutes –City Council Regular Meeting Page 7 Moved by Mayor Casillas Salas Seconded by Councilmember McCann To adopt Resolution No. 2022-022, heading read, text waived. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Yes (5): Councilmember Cardenas, Councilmember Galvez, Councilmember McCann, Councilmember Padilla, and Mayor Casillas Salas Carried (5 to 0) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-022 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 2.14 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RATIFYING THE PROCLAMATION OF EXISTENCE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA 8. CITY MANAGER’S REPORTS There were none. 9. MAYOR’S REPORTS At the request of Mayor Casillas Salas, there was consensus of the Council to place an item on the next meeting agenda regarding the elimination of tolls on the SR-125. 10. COUNCILMEMBERS’ COMMENTS There were none. 11. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS There were none. 12. CLOSED SESSION Pursuant to Resolution No. 13706 and Council Policy No. 346-03, Official Minutes and records of action taken during Closed Sessions are maintained by the City Attorney. City Attorney Googins announced that the Council would convene in closed session to discuss the items listed below. Mayor Casillas Salas recessed the meeting at 9:20 p.m. The Council convened in Closed Session at 9:30 p.m., with all members present. 12.1 Conference with Legal Counsel Regarding Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) A) Name of case: Patricia Ortiz v. City of Chula Vista, San Diego Superior Court, Case No. 37-2020-00040498-CU-PO-CTL B) Name of case: Yasoda Namier, et al. v. City of Chula Vista, San Diego Superior Court, Case No. 37-2019-00062842-CU-PA-CTL ACTION: No reportable action 12.2 Conference with Labor Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 35 of 617 2022/01/18 Minutes –City Council Regular Meeting Page 8 Agency designated representatives: Maria Kachadoorian, Glen Googins, Courtney Chase, Kelley Bacon, Simon Silva, Sarah Schoen, Ed Prendell, Tanya Tomlinson, and Steve Berliner Employee organizations: IAFF, MM/PR ACTION: No reportable Action 13. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:58 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Tyshar Turner, Assistant City Clerk _________________________ Kerry K. Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 36 of 617 MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 (619) 691- 5044 (619) 476-5379 FAX ______________________________________________________________________ DATE: September 20, 2022 TO: Mayor and Councilmembers CC: City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney FROM: John McCann Councilmember SUBJECT: Request for Excused Absence Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, Please excuse my absence from the Special City Council meeting on September 20, 2022. I am unable to attend due to a prior work meeting that was scheduled after the regular City Council meeting for September 20, 2022 at 5 PM was canceled. Sincerely, John McCann Councilmember 1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 37 of 617 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 September 27, 2022 ITEM TITLE Tobacco Sales: Consider Prohibiting Flavored Tobacco Sales within the City of Chula Vista Report Number: 22-0189 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Adopt an ordinance amending Chula Vista Municipal Code chapter 5.56, Tobacco Retailer, to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products within the City of Chula Vista. (Second Reading and Adoption) SUMMARY In January 2016, the City of Chula Vista adopted the Healthy Chula Vista Action Plan inclusive of strategies to prevent chronic diseases. In February 2020, an ordinance amending Chula Vista Municipal Code (“CVMC”) Chapter 5.56 (Tobacco Retailer) to incorporate additional regulations on tobacco products that address youth access and emerging public health risks was presented for Council consideration. At that time City Council directed staff to collect additional information about the types of stores and youth access to tobacco products within the City of Chula Vista. The proposed amendments to Chapter 5.56 presented tonight incorporate input from the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission after review of the additional data collected since February 2020; and if adopted, would prohibit the sale by any person of all flavored tobacco products (except for shisha and premium cigars) beginning January 1, 2023 within the City of Chula Vista. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with CEQA. The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because the proposal will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environmental. Therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission provided an advisory recommendation that the City Council adopt the ordinance at their February 3, 2020 and subsequently at their May 12, 2022. At the meeting on May 12, 2022, the commission recommended removing the language in the original draft ordinance specific 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 38 of 617 P a g e | 2 to electronic smoking devices “lacking a required food and drug administration marketing order” and mirror the recently adopted provisions within an ordinance recently passed by City of San Diego. DISCUSSION On December 19, 2017, City Council approved amendments to CVMC Chapter 8.22 (Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment) to add e-cigarettes, including devices used for vaping, to the definition of “smoking”; prohibit smoking on any portion of City owned property, inclusive of all parks, libraries, City buildings and associated parking lots; and restrict smoking to designated areas in Affordable Housing Projects to align with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) guidelines. On March 16, 2018, the City Council also adopted CVMC Chapter 5.56 (Tobacco Retailer), establishing a tobacco retailers license program to regulate tobacco businesses and prevent the selling of tobacco and tobacco paraphernalia to individuals under the age of 21. On February 3, 2020, the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission considered further amendments to CVMC Chapter 5.56 to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products and e-cigarette devices lacking marketing orders from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), who regulate tobacco products throughout the country. Utilizing the Police Department database of potential tobacco retailers in Chula Vista, over 150 stores were notified of the meeting. This included vape only and hookah only, smoke shops selling multiple tobacco products, as well as larger grocery stores. At that time, speakers almost evenly split for and against the proposed amendments. Commissioners expressed that their priorities were:  Preventing youth from nicotine addiction;  A belief that flavors are a starter product to lifelong tobacco use;  Limiting local youth access; and  The importance of Chula Vista moving forward with these amendments. The Commission unanimously made an advisory recommendation that City Council adopt the amendments. On February 25, 2020, City Council considered the First Reading Amending CVMC Chapter 5.56 and directed staff to collect additional data to: (1) identify the types of stores selling tobacco products and proximity to sensitive receptors, such as school and parks, to determine if specific types of stores or locations should be prohibited from selling products; (2) verify where Chula Vista youth are accessing products to determine if national trends related to online sales are consistent with local data; and (3) provide information on whether banning products at a particular nicotine level would help prevent youth addiction to nicotine. Attachment 1 to the staff report provides the staff report dated February 25, 2020, which provides a detailed analysis of the public health risks associated with tobacco consumption, data around flavored products and youth access. Additional Data Collected Since February 2020 In response to Council direction in February 2020, staff conducted additional research over the past two years, as detailed below. It should be noted that due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated school closures, staff encountered delays in data collection surrounding youth, hence the length of time to bring forward a revised proposal. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 39 of 617 P a g e | 3 (1) Retailers and Sensitive Receptors – Exhibit 1 provides greater details on the types of stores that have tobacco retailer and business licenses and identifies that nearly 32% [thirty-nine (39) out of 122] of the stores identifying as selling tobacco were gas stations/convenience stores. Exhibit 1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 40 of 617 P a g e | 4 Exhibit 2 maps all retailers proximity to sensitive receptors. At the time of mapping, approximately 30% [thirty-seven (37) retailers out of 122] were located within 500 feet of a school or park where youth are likely to be located. Although Council requested additional information regarding proximity to sensitive receptors, the current policy proposed does not target restrictions based on proximity and rather proposes to prohibit sales at all locations throughout the City. Exhibit 2 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 41 of 617 P a g e | 5 (2) Local Youth Access - During March and April 2021, in collaboration with faculty at the Sweetwater Union High School District, staff conducted a survey of students, grades 9-12, to gather local data on usage and access to vaping devices. 2,404 students responded to the survey at 14 different schools as identified in Exhibit 3. Attachment 2 to the staff report provides a full report of all data collected with this survey of students. Exhibit 3 Sweetwater Union High School District Student Participation 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 42 of 617 P a g e | 6 As shown on Exhibit 4, nearly 35% of respondents indicated they have tried an E-cigarette/vape device (471/1,362). Of all tobacco products tried by respondents E-cigarettes/vapes accounted for 54% of the use (471/867). Exhibit 4 -Types of Devices Used As shown on Exhibit 5, 44% (142+158/714) of respondents indicated youth are accessing vaping products at retail stores (convenience stores/gas stations and vape shops). Another 40% (286/714) indicate youth access them from friends and family, some of which likely purchase them at retail stores as well, making retail locations the most likely way a youth would access tobacco products. Exhibit 5 Vaping Product Access 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 43 of 617 P a g e | 7 As shown on Exhibit 6, 94% (615+1,366/2,099), the majority of youth respondents, indicated that they are “not sure” if they would or “not likely” to try tobacco products that are not flavored, while only 7% (39+79/2,099) indicated they are “very likely” or would “possibly” use non-flavored products. Exhibit 6 Non-Flavored Tobacco Use (3) Prohibiting Nicotine Content – City Staff conducted research on “high” level nicotine products and concluded that there is not enough data to determine what level of nicotine consumption is “less” addictive. Nicotine delivery and absorption can vary based on concentration, including the delivery system and user-specific characteristics. In addition, there would be difficulty in enforcing nicotine content since evidence shows that in laboratory tests, labeling is not always reflective of nicotine content and vape stores often mix their own products. The labelling of nicotine content varies across e-cigarette products and liquids and may be difficult to interpret if units are not provided. E-cigarette liquid nicotine concentrations may be labelled incorrectly. Additionally, users may mix homemade e-cigarette liquids (i.e., ‘do-it-yourself’ liquids) resulting in unknown nicotine concentrations or inconsistent concentrations between batches.1 Even if the liquids have the same concentration of nicotine and other compounds, e- cigarette device characteristics across the range of e-cigarettes available vary, which can have dramatically different abilities to aerosolize liquid and affect nicotine absorption.2 Therefore, tobacco retail enforcement, conducted by the City’s Police Department, would be unable to determine actual nicotine content of products being sold. 1The nicotine content of a sample of e-cigarette liquid manufactured in the United States. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29280749 2 Have combustible cigarettes Met their match? the nicotine delivery profiles and harmful constituent exposures of second-generation and third-generation electronic cigarette users. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27729564 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 44 of 617 P a g e | 8 State Legislation Since February 2020 In August 2020, the California State Legislature passed Senate Bill 793 (SB 793), which Governor Gavin Newsom signed on August 28, 2020. This bill prohibits a tobacco retailer, or any of the tobacco retailer’s agents or employees, from selling, offering for sale, or possessing with the intent to sell or offer for sale, a flavored tobacco product or a tobacco product flavor enhancer. Three days later, on August 31, 2020, a proposed referendum was submitted to the Attorney General of California and on January 22, 2021, the referendum qualified for the ballot, putting SB 793 on hold until the November 2022 general election. Due to the uncertainty of the statewide prohibitions, many local jurisdictions have moved forward to adopt local restrictions to protect youth in their community from the dangers of tobacco and nicotine addiction. Proposed Amendments to Chapter 5.56 On May 12, 2022, the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission provided a recommendation to move forward to City Council with the February 2020 proposed ordinance with minor edits to mirror recent prohibitions taken by the City of San Diego and remove language specific to electronic smoking devices “lacking a required Food and Drug Administration marketing order”, and instead reference all electronic smoking devices. An ordinance amending CVMC Chapter 5.56 (Tobacco Retailer) to incorporate additional regulations on tobacco products that address youth access and emerging public health risks related to flavored tobacco products, as recommended by the Commission, is being presented for City Council consideration (the “Ordinance”) in Attachment 3 to the staff report. The amendments to Chapter 5.56 include to prohibit the sale of all flavored tobacco products, inclusive of menthol, in the City of Chula Vista. The Ordinance does specifically define and exempt two forms of tobacco: shisha used in hookah and premium cigars. Conclusion In addition to the ordinance updates that have been made in the past few years to establish a tobacco retailers license and make City facilities smoke/vape free, the Police Department has received two rounds of funding through Tobacco Grant Programs. The first round of funding was granted to assist in providing additional services aimed at the education, compliance and enforcement of tobacco-related issues within the community. To date, the Police Department has spent over 200 staff hours educating the community on the harmful effects of vaping, enforcing tobacco-related violations through undercover operations and conducting compliance checks at retail establishments. The second round of funding will support an additional School Resource Officer with the hopes of bringing much needed education directly into the schools, directly to our youth. Partnerships with the school district, retailers and ongoing education are critical to ensure our community is aware of the potential dangers of tobacco use. The Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission has recommended amendments to CVMC Chapter 5.56 to place a prohibition on the sale of all flavored tobacco products within the City of Chula Vista. While these amendments have been proposed by the Commission based on best practices identified to limit youth access and use of tobacco products to address chronic health issues, as detailed in Attachment 1, jurisdictions throughout the country have taken different approaches to address this issue. If approved, the ordinance would take effect January 1, 2023. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 45 of 617 P a g e | 9 DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the real property holdings of the City Council members do not create a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov’t Code Section 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in the matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT No current year fiscal impact to the General Fund or Development Services Fund is anticipated as a result of this action. There may be additional costs associated with the enforcement of the new provision; however, these costs are anticipated to be fully offset by the revenue from the tobacco retail licensing fee program. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT No ongoing fiscal impact to the General Fund or Development Services Fund is anticipated as a result of this action. There may be additional costs associated with the enforcement of the new provision; however, these costs are anticipated to be fully offset by the revenue from the tobacco retail licensing fee program. ATTACHMENTS 1. City Council Staff Report dated February 25, 2020 2. 2021 Chula Vista Youth Tobacco Use Survey Results 3. Proposed Amendments to CVMC 5.56 (Tobacco Retailers) 4. Correspondence Staff Contact: Genevieve Hernandez, Senior Planner, Development Services Department Stacey Kurz, Housing Manager, Development Services Department Laura C. Black, AICP, Interim Director of Development Services 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 46 of 617 SECOND READING AND ADOPTION C:\Program Files\eSCRIBE\TEMP\18335198648\18335198648,,,Ordinance Amending 5.56 to Add Flavored Tobacco Ban revised 9.12.22.docx ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5.56 (TOBACCO RETAILER) TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS WHEREAS, jurisdictions are becoming increasingly aware that cities play a critical role in supporting the health and well-being of their communities and, thus, the City of Chula Vista adopted the Healthy Chula Vista Action Plan on January 5, 2016; and WHEREAS, the City recognizes that policy to limit exposure and access to smoking, especially in our youth, is important to prevent increasing the number of smokers in our community and to reduce the risk of chronic diseases; and WHEREAS, in 2018, the City adopted various restrictions related to smoking prohibitions and tobacco sales through Ordinance 3413 (updating Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 8.22 (Regulation of Smoking in Public Places, Affordable Housing Projects and Places of Employment) and Ordinance 3417 (adding Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 5.56 (Tobacco Retailer) (“CVMC 5.56”)); and WHEREAS, over 480,000 smoking related deaths are reported in the United States each year; and WHEREAS, 99% of smokers report starting tobacco use before the age of 26; and WHEREAS, electronic cigarettes, known as e-cigarettes, e-vaporizers, or electronic nicotine delivery systems, are battery-operated devices used to inhale aerosols that typically contain tobacco or nicotine; and WHEREAS, in 2019, about one in every ten middle schoolers and more than one in every four high schoolers reported using electronic cigarettes in the past 30 days; and WHEREAS, according to a 2021 University of San Diego study, youth who use electronic cigarettes are three times more likely to become daily cigarette smokers; and WHEREAS, the federal Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act), enacted in 2009, prohibited candy- and fruit-flavored cigarettes, largely because these flavored products were marketed to youth and young adults, and younger smokers were more likely than older smokers to have tried these products; and WHEREAS, although the manufacture and distribution of flavored cigarettes (excluding menthol) are banned by federal law, federal law does not restrict the sale of flavored non-cigarette tobacco products, such as cigars, cigarillos, smokeless tobacco, hookah tobacco, electronic smoking devices, and the solutions used in these devices; and 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 47 of 617 Ordinance Page 2 WHEREAS, in August of 2020, California Senate Bill 793 was signed into law, prohibiting a tobacco retailers in the State of California from selling flavored tobacco products or tobacco product flavor enhancers, and allowing local jurisdiction to impose greater restrictions on the access to tobacco products; and WHEREAS, Proposition 31, a referendum on Senate Bill 793 qualified as a November 8, 2022 statewide California ballot measure that, if successful, would repeal Senate Bill 793 and remove the statewide prohibition on the sale of flavored tobacco products or enhancers; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 793 is currently suspended pending the outcome of the statewide vote on Proposition 31 on November 8, 2022; and WHEREAS, according to the California Department of Public Health, e-cigarettes are available in over 15,000 flavors, many of which appeal to youth, such as cotton candy, bubble gum, or “unicorn poop,” with some flavored tobacco products sharing the same names, packaging, and flavor chemicals of popular candy brands; and WHEREAS, 86.4 percent of youth tobacco users reported using flavored tobacco products; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to strengthen local tobacco regulations and promote public health, safety, and welfare of the community, including to further limit the exposure of youth to starter products such as flavored tobacco products, by amending the Chula Vista Municipal Code to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products; and WHEREAS, the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission recommends that City Council adopt amendments to CVMC 5.56 to restrict the sale of flavored tobacco products. NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: Section I. A. Chapter 5.56, section 5.56.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 5.56.010 Definitions. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this chapter, shall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise: A. “Arm’s Length Transaction” means a sale in good faith and for valuable consideration that reflects the fair market value in the open market between two informed and willing parties, neither of which is under any compulsion to participate in the transaction. A sale between relatives, related companies or partners, or a sale for which a significant purpose is avoiding the effect of the violations of this chapter is not an Arm’s Length Transaction. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 48 of 617 Ordinance Page 3 B. “Applicant” means the Person applying for a permit pursuant to this chapter. C. “Chief of Police” means the Chief of Police of the City of Chula Vista, or his/her designee. D. “City” means the City of Chula Vista. E. “City Attorney” means the City Attorney for the City of Chula Vista, or his/her designee. F. “Crime of Moral Turpitude” means a crime involving a readiness to do evil, an act of moral depravity of any kind that has a tendency in reason to shake one’s confidence in their honesty, deceit, or fraud. G. “Drug Paraphernalia” has the meaning set fort h in California Health and Safety Code Section 11014.5, as that section may be amended from time to time. H. “Electronic Smoking Device” means an electronic device that can be used to deliver an inhaled dose of nicotine, or other substances, including any component, part, or accessory of such a device, whether or not sold separately. “Electronic Smoking Device” includes any such device, whether manufactured, distributed, marketed, or sold as an electronic cigarette, an electronic cigar, an electronic cigarillo, an electronic pipe, an electronic hookah, or any other product name or descriptor. “Electronic Smoking Device” also includes cartridges, cartomizers, e-liquid, smoke juice, tips, atomizers, Electronic Smoking Device batteries, Electronic Smoking Device charges, and any other item specifically designed for the preparation, charging, or use of Electronic Smoking Devices. I. “Flavored Tobacco Product” means a Tobacco Product that contains or emits a taste or smell, other than the taste or smell of tobacco, including but not limited to, any taste or smell relating to fruit, mint, menthol, wintergreen, chocolate, cocoa, vanilla, honey, candy, dessert, alcoholic beverage, herb, or spice. Flavored Tobacco Products do not include products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for sale either as a tobacco cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes, where the product is marketed and sold solely for such an FDA-approved purpose. J. “Loose-Leaf Tobacco” consists of cut or shredded pipe tobacco, usually sold in pouches, excluding any tobacco product which, because of its appearance, type, packaging, or labeling, is suitable for use and likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as tobacco for making cigarettes, including roll-your-own cigarettes. K. “Owner” means a Person with an ownership or managerial interest in a business. An ownership interest shall be deemed to exist when a Person has a 20 percent or greater in terest in the stock, assets, or income of a business other than the sole interest of security for debt. A managerial interest shall be deemed to exist when a Person can or does have or share ultimate control over the day-to-day operations of a business. L. “Person” means any natural person, partnership, cooperative association, corporation, personal representative, receiver, trustee, assignee, or any other legal entity. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 49 of 617 Ordinance Page 4 M. “Premium Cigars” means any cigar that is handmade, has a wrapper that is made entirely from whole tobacco leaf, and has a wholesale price of no less than twelve dollars. A Premium Cigar does not have filter, tip, or nontobacco mouth. N. “Police Department” means the Chula Vista Police Department, and any agency or Person designated by the Department to enforce or administer the provisions of this chapter. O. “Self-Service Display” means the open display or storage of Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia in a manner that is physically accessible in any way to the general public without the assistance of the retailer or employee of the retailer and a direct person-to-person transfer between the purchaser and the retailer or employee of the retailer. A vending machine is a form of Self-Service Display. P. “Shisha” means a tobacco product that is mixed with molasses, honey, fruit, or dried fruits and is sold for use in a hookah. Q. “Tobacco Paraphernalia” means any item designed for the consumption, use, or preparation of a Tobacco Product. R. “Tobacco Product” means: 1. “Tobacco Products” means any substance containing derived from tobacco leaf or nicotine, including but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, or any other preparation of tobacco. 2. Any Electronic Smoking Device. 3. Notwithstanding any provision of subsections (R)(1) and (R)(2) of this section to the contrary, “tobacco product” includes any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, whether or not sold separately. “Tobacco product” does not include any product that has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes where such product is marketed and sold solely for such an approved purpose. S. “Tobacco Retailer” means any Person who sells, offers for sale, or does or offers to exchange for any form of consideration tobacco, Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia. “Tobacco Retailing” shall mean the doing of any of these things. This definition is without regard to the quantity of Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange. Tobacco Retailer does not include persons licensed by the City to conduct commercial cannabis activity in accordance with Chapter 5.19 CVMC. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). [Section 5.56.020 through 5.56.090 remain unchanged.] B. Chapter 5.56, section 5.56.095 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is added to read as follows: 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 50 of 617 Ordinance Page 5 5.56.095 Sale of Certain Items Prohibited. A. Sale of Flavored Tobacco Prohibited. Beginning January 1, 2023, it shall be unlawful for any Person to sell or offer for sale, or to possess with intent to sell or offer for sale, any Flavored Tobacco Product in the City of Chula Vista. 1. There shall be a permissive inference that a Tobacco Retailer in possession of four or more Flavored Tobacco Products, including but not limited to individual Flavored Tobacco Products, packages of Flavored Tobacco Products, or any combination thereof, possesses such Flavored Tobacco Products with intent to sell or offer for sale. 2. There shall be a permissive inference that a Tobacco Product is a Flavored Tobacco Product if: a. a public statement or claim is made or disseminated by the manufacturer of a Tobacco Product, or by any person authorized or permitted by the manufacturer to make or disseminate public statement concerning such tobacco product, that such Tobacco Product has or produces a taste or smell other than tobacco; or b. text and/or images on the Tobacco Product’s Labeling or Packaging explicitly or implicitly indicates that the Tobacco Product is a Flavored Tobacco Product. B. Exempted Products. This section does not apply to the sale of Shisha, Premium Cigars, or Loose-Leaf Tobacco. [Section 5.56.100 through 5.56.130 remain unchanged.] Section II. Severability If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent j urisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional. Section III. Construction The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. Section IV. Effective Date 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 51 of 617 Ordinance Page 6 This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on January 1, 2023. Section V. Publication The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. Presented by Approved as to form by _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Laura C. Black, AICP Glen R. Googins Interim Director of Development Services City Attorney 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 52 of 617 v . 0 01 P a g e | 1 February 25, 2020 File ID: 20-0021 TITLE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5.56 (TOBACCO RETAILER) TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND ELECTRONIC SMOKING DEVICES LACKING A REQUIRED FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION MARKETING ORDER (FIRST READING) RECOMMENDED ACTION Council hear the report, consider the ordinance and provide staff with direction. SUMMARY The City of Chula Vista adopted the Healthy Chula Vista Action Plan in January 2016 inclusive of strategies to prevent chronic diseases. An ordinance amending Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 5.56 (Tobacco Retailer) to incorporate additional regulations on tobacco products that address youth access and emerging public health risks, as recommended by the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission, is being presented for Council consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission provided an advisory recommendation that the City Council adopt the ordinance at a special meeting on February 3, 2020 by a vote of 4-0. All Chula Vista licensed tobacco retailers were notified of the meeting and eleven speakers provided input into the agenda item. DISCUSSION On January 5, 2016, the first Healthy Chula Vista Action Plan was adopted, providing a set of strategies to review, create, and evaluate policies and programs within the City and to develop community partnerships to promote wellness within our community. A key component of the plan included measures to prevent chronic diseases within our community. As the overseeing body of the Action Plan, the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission has proposed amendments to the Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC) to address emerging public health issues surrounding youth access to e-cigarette products. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 53 of 617 P a g e | 2 On December 19, 2017, the City Council approved amendments to CVMC Chapter 8.22 (Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment) to: add e-cigarettes, including devices used for vaping, to the definition of “smoking”; prohibit smoking on any portion of City owned property (inclusive of all parks, libraries, City buildings, and associated parking lots); and restrict smoking to designated areas in Affordable Housing Projects to align with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development guidelines. On March 16, 2018, the City Council also adopted CVMC Chapter 5.56 (Tobacco Retailer), establishing a tobacco retailers license program to regulate tobacco businesses and prevent the selling of tobacco and tobacco paraphernalia to individuals (under the age of 21). Public Health Risks Associated with Smoking Over 480,000 deaths are attributed annually to smoking related diseases in the United States. In the South Bay of San Diego, 20.5% of deaths are attributable to smoking related diseases. While we have known the dangers of smoking combustible cigarettes and other tobacco products for decades, a new form of tobacco products emerged in the U.S. in 2006 through e-cigarettes and became popular over the past three to five years. In June 2019 multiple reports of sudden, and severe lung illness associated with vaping began to be noticed by physicians across the United States. These illnesses have been classified as E-cigarette, or Vaping, Product Use Associated Lung Injuries (EVALI) or Vaping-Associated Pulmonary Injury (VAPI). As of January 21, 2020, the U.S. Centers for Disease Controls and Prevention (CDC) has reported 2,711 hospitalized EVALI cases or deaths, with 60 confirmed deaths1. Currently the CDC research has closely related the additive Vitamin E acetate to EVALI, however there are many different substances and product sources that are being investigated, and there may be more than one cause. While CDC guidance continues to evolve, they indicate that youth and young adults should never use e-cigarette or vaping products1. Due to the public health risks surrounding e-cigarettes, many jurisdictions across the country have become more aware of who was using vaping devices in their communities. While advocates for vaping indicate that e-cigarettes have helped many people stop smoking combustible cigarettes, t he U.S. Surgeon General indicated in the January 2020 Smoking Cessation report that there is presently inadequate evidence to conclude that e-cigarettes, in general, increase smoking cessation2. To date, no e-cigarette product in the U.S. has been approved as a cessation device. The most alarming discovery in the 2020 report was the increased number of youths using e-cigarette products: 1 CDC Smoking & Tobacco Use, “Outbreak of Lung Injury Associated with the Use of E -Cigarette, or Vaping, Products”, https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html?s_cid=osh-stu-home- spotlight-006 2 U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, “Smoking Cessation: A Report of the Surgeon General”, January 2020, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2020-cessation-sgr-full-report.pdf 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 54 of 617 P a g e | 3 • Nearly one-third of high schoolers report using tobacco products, of which 27.5% reported using e- cigarettes within the past 30 days3; • 99% of smokers started before the age of 26; and • At the current rate of smoking among youth, 5.6 million of today’s Americans younger than 18 will die early from a smoking-related illness4. Within San Diego County, several jurisdictions have recently adopted policies or are considering taking actions to prohibit flavored products and/or e-cigarette products, including the County of San Diego and the City of Imperial Beach. Amendments have been proposed by the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission to reduce youth tobacco use and reduce public health risks associated with vaping by placing prohibitions on the sale of flavored tobacco products and electronic smoking devices, as described below. Flavored Tobacco Products While the federal government recognized the dangers of flavored cigarettes in 2009, banning them through the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act), the law did not restrict menthol cigarettes and it does not restrict flavored non-cigarette tobacco products, such as smokeless tobacco4. Since 2009, the “vaping” industry has flourished across the United States, introducing many new non-cigarette flavored products. Flavored tobacco products are considered “starter” products that help establish long -term tobacco use and that are proven to be particularly appealing to youth. These products also pose significant barriers to achieving health equity since tobacco companies have targeted youth, communities of color, low -income populations, and members of LGBTQ+ communities with marketing efforts and these groups are significantly more likely to use flavored tobacco products5. According to the 2019 National Youth Tobacco Survey 67.8% of high school students report using flavored vaping products like fruit, mint and candy flavors6. E-Cigarette Products On Aug. 8, 2016, all e-cigarettes and other Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS), such as e-liquids products, became subject to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) premarket approval requirements, meaning that they must receive authorization to be legally marketed7. To date, only one ENDS products has been authorized by the FDA and therefore all others are subject to enforcement, at any time. 3 CDC Smoking & Tobacco Use, “Fast Facts”, https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/index.htm#diseases 4 “Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - An Overview”, https://www.fda.gov/tobacco- products/rules-regulations-and-guidance/family-smoking-prevention-and-tobacco-control-act-overview 5 California Medical Association, “Flavored and Mentholated Tobacco Products: Enticing a New Generation of Users”, May 2016, https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Policy/FlavoredTobac coAndMenthol/FlavoredAndMentholatedTobaccProductsCMAWhitePaperAndExecSummaryMay2016.pdf 6 U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2019 Preliminary Data - National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) 7 Federal Register – The Daily Journal of the United States Government, May 10, 2016, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/05/10/2016-10685/deeming-tobacco-products-to-be-subject- to-the-federal-food-drug-and-cosmetic-act-as-amended-by-the 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 55 of 617 P a g e | 4 On June 11, 2019, the FDA released its final guidance on applications of ENDS products for premarket approval. The FDA will review the tobacco products components, ingredients, additives, constituents and health risks, as well as how the product is manufactured, packaged and labeled to limit risk to overall public health of nicotine and tobacco-related disease and death8&9. The FDA further identified limiting access and target marketing to youth as a driver in this recent guidance. On January 2, 2020, the FDA issued a guidance policy to manufacturers of ENDS, to prioritize enforcement resources against those that: market flavored products; have failed to take (or are failing to take) adequate measures to prevent minors’ access; and target to minors or whose marketing is likely to prom ote use of ENDS by minors10. Chula Vista Actions to Prevent Youth Access In addition to the ordinance updates that have been made in the past few years to establish a tobacco retailers license and make City facilities smoke/vape free, the Police Department has received two rounds of funding through Tobacco Grant Programs. The first round of funding was granted to assist in providing additional services aimed at the education, compliance and enforcement of tobacco-related issues within the community. To date, the Chula Vista Police Department has spent over 200 staff hours educating the community on the harmful effects of vaping, enforcing tobacco-related violations through undercover operations and conducting compliance checks at retail establishments. The second round of funding will support an additional School Resource Officer with the hopes of bringing much needed education directly into the schools, directly to our youth. Partnerships with the school district, retailers and ongoing education are critical to ensure our community is aware of the potential dangers of tobacco use. The Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission has recommended amendments to CVMC Chapter 5.56 to place a prohibition on the sale of all flavored tobacco products and e-cigarette products that do not have FDA premarket approval, within the City of Chula Vista. While these amendments have been proposed by the Commission based on best practices identified to limit youth access and use of tobacco products, jurisdictions throughout the country have taken different approaches to address this issue. If approved, the ordinance would take effect September 1, 2020. 8 “FDA finalizes guidance for premarket tobacco product applications for electronic nicotine delivery systems as part of commitment to continuing a strong oversight of e-cigarettes”, FDA News Release, June 11, 2019, https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-finalizes-guidance-premarket-tobacco-product-applications- electronic-nicotine-delivery-systems 9 “Premarket Tobacco Product Applications for Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) - Guidance for Industry”, June 2019, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/premarket-tobacco-product- applications-electronic-nicotine-delivery-systems-ends 10“FDA Finalizes Enforcement Policy on Unauthorized Flavored Cartridge-Based E-Cigarettes That Appeal to Children, Including Fruit and Mint”, HHS News Release, January 2, 2020, https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2020/01/02/fda -finalizes- enforcement-policy-unauthorized-flavored-cartridge-based-e-cigarettes.html 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 56 of 617 P a g e | 5 DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the real property holdings of the City Council members do not create a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware, and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT All costs associated with the preparation of this staff report are covered under the Development Services budget. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Staff time associated with the enforcement of the tobacco retailing prohibitions are budgeted under that Police Department. ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed Ordinance Amendments. Staff Contact: Stacey Kurz, Senior Project Coordinator, Development Services Department 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 57 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/1/11 Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey Vaping Results Q1 w Which school do you currently attend? Answered: 40 Skipped: 0 Alta Vista Academy Bonita Middle Bonita Vista High Castle Park High Castle Park Middle Chula Vista High School Chula Vista High Middle Eastlake High Eastlake Middle Hilltop High Hilltop Middle Launch Academy Mar Vista Academy Mar Vista High Montgomery High Montgomery Middle Montgomery Middle Olympian High Options Secondary Otay Ranch High Palomar High Rancho del Rey Middle San Ysidro High 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 58 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/2/11 Q2 w 0.00%0 20.00%8 12.50%5 2.50%1 2.50%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 7.50%3 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 7.50%3 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 15.00%6 32.50%13 0.00%0 0.00%0 0.00%0 TOTAL 40 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Southwest High Southwest Middle St Rose of Lima Sweetwater High ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Alta Vista Academy Bonita Middle Bonita Vista High Castle Park High Castle Park Middle Chula Vista High School Chula Vista High Middle Eastlake High Eastlake Middle Hilltop High Hilltop Middle Launch Academy Mar Vista Academy Mar Vista High Montgomery High Montgomery Middle Montgomery Middle Olympian High Options Secondary Otay Ranch High Palomar High Rancho del Rey Middle San Ysidro High Southwest High Southwest Middle St Rose of Lima Sweetwater High What grade are you currently in? Answered: 40 Skipped: 0 7 8 9 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 59 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/3/11 Q3 w 0.00%0 20.00%8 5.00%2 5.00%2 32.50%13 37.50%15 TOTAL 40 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 10 11 12 ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 7 8 9 10 11 12 Before school closures, how often did you notice other students vaping? Answered: 40 Skipped: 0 Before/After School During Lunch Breaks Between Class Periods Socially Outside of...40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 60 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/4/11 Q4 w Q5 w 22.50% 9 32.50% 13 22.50% 9 22.50% 9 40 2.45 27.50% 11 22.50% 9 35.00% 14 15.00% 6 40 2.38 47.50% 19 27.50% 11 7.50% 3 17.50% 7 40 1.95 20.00% 8 15.00% 6 40.00% 16 25.00% 10 40 2.70 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Never Rarely Sometimes Often NEVER RARELY SOMETIMES OFTEN TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Before/After School During Lunch Breaks Between Class Periods Socially Outside of School 40.00%16 42.50%17 12.50%5 5.00%2 Approximately how many of your friends currently vape? Answered: 40 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 40 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% None 1-5 6-10 More than 10 ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES None 1-5 6-10 More than 10 Which tobacco products have you used/tried? (check all that apply) Answered: 12 Skipped: 28 Cigarettes 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 61 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/5/11 Q6 w 25.00%3 83.33%10 16.67%2 16.67%2 8.33%1 16.67%2 16.67%2 0.00%0 Total Respondents: 12 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% E-cigarettes/va pes Chewing tobacco/snus... Little cigars/cigar... Cigars Pipes Hookah None ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Cigarettes E-cigarettes/vapes Chewing tobacco/snus/etc. Little cigars/cigarellos Cigars Pipes Hookah None 95.00%38 2.50%1 0.00%0 How often do you smoke cigarettes? Answered: 40 Skipped: 0 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Never Less than once per month At least once per month At least once every week At least once every day Several times a day ANSWER CHOICES ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES RESPONSES Never Less than once per month At least once per month 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 62 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/6/11 Q7 w Q8 w 0.00%0 0.00%0 2.50%1 TOTAL 40 TOTAL 40 At least once every week At least once every day Several times a day 87.50%35 7.50%3 2.50%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 2.50%1 How often do you vape? Answered: 40 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 40 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Never Less than once per month At least once per month At least once every week At least once every day Several times a day ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Never Less than once per month At least once per month At least once every week At least once every day Several times a day What do you vape? (check all that apply) Answered: 33 Skipped: 7 Nicotine products Non-nicotine products Cannabis None of the above 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 63 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/7/11 Q9 w Q10 w 15.15%5 3.03%1 18.18%6 75.76%25 Total Respondents: 33 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Nicotine products Non-nicotine products Cannabis None of the above 78.95%30 15.79%6 5.26%2 15.79%6 2.63%1 7.89%3 2.63%1 Why did you start vaping? (check all that apply) Answered: 38 Skipped: 2 Total Respondents: 38 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% I do not vape Curiosity My friends and/or famil... Stress relief It's a cool thing to do Enjoy the taste of the... To help quit smoking... ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES I do not vape Curiosity My friends and/or family members vape Stress relief It's a cool thing to do Enjoy the taste of the flavored product To help quit smoking cigarettes What products do you or your friends use? (check all that apply) Answered: 27 Skipped: 13 Juuls Suorin 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 64 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/8/11 Q11 w 40.74%11 3.70%1 55.56%15 44.44%12 3.70%1 11.11%3 33.33%9 Total Respondents: 27 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Suo Puff Bar Pens Tanks Mods Not sure ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Juuls Suorin Puff Bar Pens Tanks Mods Not sure 21.43%6 28.57%8 25.00%7 14.29%4 64.29%18 Where do you or your friends get vaping products? (check all that apply) Answered: 28 Skipped: 12 Total Respondents: 28 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Convenience stores/gas... Vape shops Family/friends On-line Not sure ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Convenience stores/gas stations (e.g. 7-11, Mobile, Arco, etc.) Vape shops Family/friends On-line Not sure 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 65 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/9/11 Q12 w Q13 w Q14 w 7.89%3 84.21%32 7.89%3 Do you use flavored tobacco/vaping products? Answered: 38 Skipped: 2 TOTAL 38 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Yes No Not sure ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes No Not sure 50.00%16 12.50%4 3.13%1 34.38%11 How likely are you to use a non-flavored product? Answered: 32 Skipped: 8 TOTAL 32 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Not likely Possibly Very likely Not sure ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Not likely Possibly Very likely Not sure 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 66 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/10/11 Q14 w Q15 w Q16 w 84.21%32 0.00%0 2.63%1 5.26%2 7.89%3 Has COVID-19 affected how often you vape? Answered: 38 Skipped: 2 TOTAL 38 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% No, I do not vape No, I vape the same amount Yes, I vape more now Yes, I vape less now I stopped vaping ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES No, I do not vape No, I vape the same amount Yes, I vape more now Yes, I vape less now I stopped vaping 33.33%13 56.41%22 10.26%4 Do you believe vaping is safer than smoking cigarettes? Answered: 39 Skipped: 1 TOTAL 39 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Yes No Why? (please specify) ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes No Why? (please specify) f k i ld lik i 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 67 of 617 8/5/22, 11:56 AM Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey - Responses | SurveyMonkey https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XSH8K99L9/11/11 Check out our sample surveys and create your own now! Powered by 5.00%2 7.50%3 87.50%35 If you vape or smoke cigarettes, would you like to quit? Answered: 40 Skipped: 0 TOTAL 40 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Yes No N/A, I don't vape/smoke ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes No N/A, I don't vape/smoke 40 responses Share Link https://www.surveymonkey.com/res Tweet COPY Share Share ÷ wSIGN UP FREE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 68 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 Chapter 5.56 TOBACCO RETAILER Sections: 5.56.010 Definitions. 5.56.020 Tobacco retailer’s permit required. 5.56.030 Permit application and procedure. 5.56.040 Issuance of a permit. 5.56.050 Permit renewal and expiration. 5.56.060 Permits nontransferable. 5.56.070 Permit conveys a limited, conditional privilege. 5.56.080 Permit fee. 5.56.090 Tobacco retailer operating requirements and prohibitions. 5.56.095 Sale of certain items prohibited. 5.56.100 Compliance monitoring. 5.56.110 Suspension or revocation of permit. 5.56.120 Violations – Penalties. 5.56.130 Requirement for tobacco retailer permit – Operative date. CROSS REFERENCE: Sales and use tax, see Ch. 3.36 CVMC. Smoking prohibited, see Ch. 8.22 CVMC. Prior legislation: Prior code §§ 20.2.1, 20.2.5 – 20.2.9; Ords. 1133, 1178, 2506 and 2693. 5.56.010 Definitions. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this chapter, shall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise: A. “Arm’s Length Transaction” means a sale in good faith and for valuable consideration that reflects the fair market value in the open market between two informed and willing parties, neither of which is under any 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 69 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 compulsion to participate in the transaction. A sale between relatives, related companies or partners, or a sale for which a significant purpose is avoiding the effect of the violations of this chapter is not an Arm’s Length Transaction. B. “Applicant” means the Person applying for a permit pursuant to this chapter. C. “Chief of Police” means the Chief of Police of the City of Chula Vista, or his/her designee. D. “City” means the City of Chula Vista. E. “City Attorney” means the City Attorney for the City of Chula Vista, or his/her designee. F. “Crime of Moral Turpitude” means a crime involving a readiness to do evil, an act of moral depravity of any kind that has a tendency in reason to shake one’s confidence in their honesty, deceit, or fraud. G. “Drug Paraphernalia” has the meaning set forth in California Health and Safety Code Section 11014.5, as that section may be amended from time to time. H. “Electronic Smoking Device” means an electronic device that can be used to deliver an inhaled dose of nicotine, or other substances, including any component, part, or accessory of such a device, whether or not sold separately. “Electronic Smoking Device” includes any such device, whether manufactured, distributed, marketed, or sold as an electronic cigarette, an electronic cigar, an electronic cigarillo, an electronic pipe, an electronic hookah, or any other product name or descriptor. “Electronic Smoking Device” also includes cartridges, cartomizers, e-liquid, smoke juice, tips, atomizers, Electronic Smoking Device batteries, Electronic Smoking Device charges, and any other item specifically designed for the preparation, charging, or use of Electronic Smoking Devices. I. “Flavored Tobacco Product” means a Tobacco Product that contains or emits a taste or smell, other than the taste or smell of tobacco, including but not limited to, any taste or smell relating to fruit, mint, menthol, wintergreen, chocolate, cocoa, vanilla, honey, candy, dessert, alcoholic beverage, herb, or spice. “Flavored Tobacco Products” do not include products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for sale either as a tobacco cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes, where the product is marketed and sold solely for such an FDA-approved purpose. J. “Loose-Leaf Tobacco” consists of cut or shredded pipe tobacco, usually sold in pouches, excluding any tobacco product which, because of its appearance, type, packaging, or labeling, is suitable for use and likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as tobacco for making cigarettes, including roll-your-own cigarettes. KJ. “Owner” means a Person with an ownership or managerial interest in a business. An ownership interest shall be deemed to exist when a Person has a 20 percent or greater interest in the stock, assets, or income of a business other than the sole interest of security for debt. A managerial interest shall be deemed to exist when a Person can or does have or share ultimate control over the day-to-day operations of a business. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 70 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 JL. “Person” means any natural person, partnership, cooperative association, corporation, personal representative, receiver, trustee, assignee, or any other legal entity. ML. “Premium Cigars” means any cigar that is handmade, has a wrapper that is made entirely from whole tobacco leaf, and has a wholesale price of no less than twelve dollars. A Premium Cigar does not have filter, tip, or nontobacco mouth. KN. “Police Department” means the Chula Vista Police Department, and any agency or Person designated by the Department to enforce or administer the provisions of this chapter. LO. “Self-Service Display” means the open display or storage of Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia in a manner that is physically accessible in any way to the general public without the assistance of the retailer or employee of the retailer and a direct person-to-person transfer between the purchaser and the retailer or employee of the retailer. A vending machine is a form of Self-Service Display. P. “Shisha” means a tobacco product that is mixed with molasses, honey, fruit, or dried fruits and is sold for use in a hookah. MQ. “Tobacco Paraphernalia” means any item designed for the consumption, use, or preparation of a Tobacco Product. NR. “Tobacco Product” means: 1. Any product containing, made, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, snuff; and 2. Any Electronic Smoking Device. 3. Notwithstanding any provision of subsections (NR)(1) and (NR)(2) of this section to the contrary, “tobacco product” includes any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, whether or not sold separately. “Tobacco product” does not include any product that has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes where such product is marketed and sold solely for such an approved purpose. OS. “Tobacco Retailer” means any Person who sells, offers for sale, or does or offers to exchange for any form of consideration tobacco, Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia. “Tobacco Retailing” shall mean the doing of any of these things. This definition is without regard to the quantity of Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange. Tobacco Retailer does not include persons licensed by the City to conduct commercial cannabis activity in accordance with Chapter 5.19 CVMC. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 71 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 5.56.020 Tobacco retailer’s permit required. It shall be unlawful for any Person to act as a Tobacco Retailer in the City without first obtaining and maintaining, for each location at which Tobacco Retailing is to occur, a valid Tobacco Retailer’s permit pursuant to this chapter, a valid business license pursuant to Chapter 5.02 CVMC, and any and all required state licenses, including but not limited to a California Cigarette and Tobacco Products Retailer’s License. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.030 Permit application and procedure. A. All applications shall be submitted on a form supplied by the Police Department and shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: 1. The Applicant’s business name and address. 2. The address of the proposed Tobacco Retailer business location. 3. If the Applicant is a natural person: a. The full true name and any other names ever used by the Applicant; b. The current residential address and telephone number of the Applicant; c. Written proof that the applicant is 21 years of age or older; d. The Applicant’s height, weight, and color of eyes and hair; e. The Applicant’s valid social security number; f. Photographs of the Applicant as specified by the Chief of Police; g. The applicant’s business, occupation, and employment history for the five years immediately preceding the date of application, including addresses and dates of employment; h. A list of all crimes for which the applicant has been convicted, including those dismissed pursuant to Penal Code Section 1203.4, except traffic infractions, and a statement of the dates and places of such convictions. 4. If the Applicant is a corporation, the name of the corporation exactly as shown in its Articles of Incorporation or Charter, together with the state and date of incorporation, the names and residential addresses of each of its current officers and directors, and of each stockholder holding more than 25 percent of the stock of the corporation. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 72 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 5. If the Applicant is a partnership, the name and residential address of each of the partners, including limited partners. If one or more of the partners is a corporation, the Applicant shall provide the information about that partner required by subsection (A)(4) of this section. 6. If the Applicant is a limited partnership, a copy of the limited partnership’s certificate of limited partnership as filed with the County Clerk. If one or more of the partners is a corporation, the Applicant shall provide the information about that partner required by subsection (A)(4) of this section. 7. If the Applicant is a corporation or partnership, the name of the responsible managing officer pursuant to subsection (C) of this section. 8. A single name and mailing address authorized by the Applicant to receive all communications and notices (the “Authorized Address”) required by, authorized by, or convenient to the enforcement of this chapter. If an Authorized Address is not supplied, the Applicant shall be understood to consent to the provision of notice at the address specified in subsection (A)(1) of this section. 9. All fictitious business names ever used by the Applicant and the respective addresses of those businesses. 10. Whether the Applicant has ever had any license or permit issued by any agency or board, or any city, county, state, or federal agency, suspended or revoked, or has had any professional or vocational license or permit suspended or revoked within five years immediately preceding the application, and the reason for the suspension or revocation. 11. The name and address of the current owner and lessor of the real property upon which the proposed Tobacco Retailing business is to be conducted, and a copy of the lease or rental agreement. 12. Copies of all business tax certificates and local business licenses. 13. Copies of applications for licenses and licenses issued pursuant to California Business and Professions Code Section 22970 et seq., the “Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003.” If an application for a license pursuant to the “Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003” has been denied, copies of documentation regarding the reason for the denial of such license. 14. At the discretion of the Chief of Police, such other identification and information, including fingerprints, as may be required in order to discover the truth of the matters herein and/or deemed necessary for the administration or enforcement of this chapter as specified on the application form required by this section. B. Owners, Corporate Officers, Partners Deemed Applicants. Each Owner of a Tobacco Retailer applicant is deemed a co-Applicant and each shall provide the information required in subsection (A) of this section. For Tobacco Retailer applicants with less than 20 employees, each corporate officer or partner of a Tobacco Retailer is deemed a co-Applicant and each shall provide the information required in subsection (A) of this section. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 73 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 C. Designation of Responsible Managing Officer. A Tobacco Retailer applicant that is a corporation or partnership shall designate one of its officers or general partners to act as its responsible managing officer. The responsible managing officer may complete and sign all applications on behalf of the corporate officers and partners. D. Change in Information. An Applicant shall inform the Police Department in writing of any change in the information submitted on an application for a Tobacco Retailer’s Permit within 10 business days of a change. E. All information specified in an application pursuant to this section shall be subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et seq.) or any other applicable law, subject to the laws’ exemptions. F. Application Fee. The Applicant shall pay an application fee in an amount to be set by the City Council to cover the costs incurred by the City to process the application. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.040 Issuance of a permit. A. Upon the receipt of a complete application for a Tobacco Retailer’s permit and the permit fee required by this chapter, the Chief of Police shall have authority to grant or deny the application for Tobacco Retailer permit. An application for permit may be denied by the Chief of Police for any of the following reasons: 1. The application is received after the designated time and date. 2. The application is not in the required form and/or is incomplete. 3. The Applicant has made a false, misleading, or fraudulent statement, or omission of fact in the application or in the application process. 4. The Applicant or a co-Applicant has failed to submit fingerprints or other information deemed necessary by the Chief of Police pursuant to CVMC 5.56.030. 5. The Applicant or a co-Applicant has within five years immediately preceding the date of the filing of the application been convicted of, suffered any civil penalty, or faced administrative action against any type of license for violations of any tobacco control law, including but not limited to the following offenses: Penal Code Section 308, Business and Professions Code Section 225950 et seq. (“Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement Act” or the “STAKE Act”), Business and Professions Code Section 22970 et seq. (“Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003”), or a charge of violating a lesser-included or lesser-related offense including, but not limited to, Penal Code Section 415, in satisfaction of, or as a substitute for, an original charge of any of the offenses listed in this section. 6. The Applicant or a co-Applicant has within 10 years immediately preceding the date of the filing of the application been convicted of any felony criminal offense or any Crime of Moral Turpitude. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 74 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 7. There are charges pending against the Applicant or a co-Applicant for a felony offense, a Crime of Moral Turpitude, or an offense involving the use of a weapon. 8. The Applicant or a co-Applicant has within five years immediately preceding the date of the filing of the application been convicted of, suffered any civil penalty, or faced administrative action for violation of local, state, or federal law. 9. The Applicant seeks authorization for Tobacco Retailing that is prohibited pursuant to this chapter, that is unlawful pursuant to this Code including without limitation the zoning, building, and business license tax regulations and codes, or that is unlawful pursuant to any other law. 10. The Applicant or a co-Applicant has had a Tobacco Retailer’s renewal permit or an application for a Tobacco Retailer’s permit denied within one year prior to the date of application. 11. The Applicant or a co-Applicant is ineligible for a Tobacco Retailer permit pursuant to CVMC 5.56.120. B. The Chief of Police shall serve the Applicant, either personally or by first class mail addressed to the Authorized Address, with dated written notice of the decision to approve or deny the application for a Tobacco Retailer’s permit. If the application has been approved, the notice shall state the permit fee amount, the date by which the permit fee must be paid, and the location where payment must be made. If the application has been denied, the notice shall state the reasons for denial, the effective date of the decision, and the right of the applicant to appeal the decision to the City Manager. Any appeal must be filed in writing with the City Clerk within 14 days of service of the notice. The City Manager’s determination regarding the application shall be final. The City Manager shall provide dated written notice to the applicant, either personally or by first class mail addressed to the Authorized Address, of the City Manager’s determination and the right of the applicant to seek judicial review of the City Manager’s determination. C. No permit shall issue pursuant to this chapter unless the permit fee, established in accordance with CVMC 5.56.080, has been timely paid pursuant to the notice issued above. D. A permit issued under this chapter shall be valid for a period of one year from the date of the issuance or from the date of renewal. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.050 Permit renewal and expiration. A. A Tobacco Retailer’s permit shall automatically renew on an annual basis unless the Chief of Police determines prior to the date on which the permit is to be automatically renewed that any of the factors identified in subsection (C) of this section exist. A Tobacco Retailer shall have the duty to ensure that all City records generated pursuant to this chapter are accurate and up to date prior to automatic renewal. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 75 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 B. The Tobacco Retailer shall pay a renewal fee established pursuant to CVMC 5.56.080 prior to the date on which the permit is to be automatically renewed. C. The Chief of Police shall have authority to grant or deny the renewal permit. A renewal permit may be denied by the Chief of Police for any of the following reasons: 1. Any of the grounds for suspension or revocation under CVMC 5.56.110 exist. 2. The permit is suspended or revoked at the time of the application. 3. The Tobacco Retailer has not been in regular and continuous operation in the four months prior to the renewal application. 4. The Tobacco Retailer fails to or is unable to renew any required state licenses. 5. The Tobacco Retailer has failed to pay the renewal fee established pursuant to CVMC 5.56.080 prior to the date on which the permit is to be automatically renewed. 6. The Tobacco Retailer fails to ensure that all City records generated pursuant to this chapter are accurate and up to date prior to the automatic renewal. D. The Chief of Police is authorized to make all decisions concerning the issuance of a renewal permit. In making the decision, the Chief of Police is authorized to impose additional conditions on a renewal permit if it is determined to be necessary to ensure compliance with state or local laws and regulations or to preserve the public health, safety or welfare. E. The Chief of Police shall serve the Tobacco Retailer, either personally or by first class mail addressed to the Authorized Address, with dated written notice of the decision to approve or deny the renewal permit. A denial notice shall state the reasons for the action, the effective date of the decision, and the right of the Tobacco Retailer to appeal the decision to the City Manager. Any appeal must be filed in writing with the City Clerk within 14 days of service of the notice. The City Manager’s determination regarding the renewal permit shall be final. The City Manager shall provide dated written notice to the Tobacco Retailer, either personally or by first class mail addressed to the Authorized Address, of the City Manager’s determination and the right of the Tobacco Retailer to seek judicial review of the City Manager’s determination. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.060 Permits nontransferable. A. A Tobacco Retailer’s permit may not be transferred from one Person to another or from one location to another. A new Tobacco Retailer’s permit is required whenever a Tobacco Retailer has a change in more than 20 percent ownership of the Tobacco Retailer or whenever a Tobacco Retailer changes location. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 76 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, prior violations at a Tobacco Retailer location shall continue to be counted against the location and permit ineligibility periods shall continue to apply to the location unless: 1. The location has been transferred to the new Owner in an Arm’s Length Transaction; and 2. The new Owner provides the City with clear and convincing evidence that the new Owner(s) have acquired or are acquiring the location in an Arm’s Length Transaction. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.070 Permit conveys a limited, conditional privilege. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to grant any Person obtaining and maintaining a Tobacco Retailer’s permit any status or right other than the limited conditional privilege to act as a Tobacco Retailer at the location in the City identified on the face of the permit. It is the responsibility of each permittee to be informed regarding all laws applicable to Tobacco Retailing, including those laws affecting the issuance of a Tobacco Retailer’s Permit. No permittee may rely on the issuance of a permit as a determination by the City that the permittee has complied with all laws applicable to Tobacco Retailing. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to vest in any Person obtaining and maintaining a Tobacco Retailer’s license any status or right to act as a Tobacco Retailer in contravention of any provision of law. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.080 Permit fee. The fee to issue or to renew a Tobacco Retailer’s permit shall be established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. The fee shall be calculated so as to recover the cost of administration and enforcement of this chapter, including, for example, issuing a permit, administering the permit program, retailer education, retailer inspection and compliance checks, documentation of violations, and prosecution of violators, but shall not exceed the cost of the regulatory program authorized by this chapter. All fees and interest upon proceeds of fees shall be used exclusively to fund the program. Fees are nonrefundable except as may be required by law. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.090 Tobacco retailer operating requirements and prohibitions. A. Compliance with All Laws Required. In the course of Tobacco Retailing or in the operation of the business or maintenance of the location for which a permit issued, it shall be a violation of this chapter for a permittee, or any of the permittee’s agents or employees, to violate any local, state, or federal law applicable to Tobacco Products, Tobacco Paraphernalia, or Tobacco Retailing. B. Fixed Location Required. No Person shall engage in Tobacco Retailing at other than a fixed location. For example, Tobacco Retailing by Persons on foot or from vehicles is prohibited. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 77 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 C. Display of Permit. Each Tobacco Retailer permit shall be prominently displayed in a publicly visible location at the permitted location. D. Positive Identification Required. No Person engaged in Tobacco Retailing shall sell or transfer a Tobacco Product or Tobacco Paraphernalia to another Person who appears to be under the age of 27 years without first examining the identification of the recipient to confirm that the recipient is at least the minimum age under state law to purchase and possess the Tobacco Product or Tobacco Paraphernalia. E. Self-Service Displays Prohibited. Tobacco Retailing by means of a Self-Service Display is prohibited. F. Tobacco Display Prohibited without Valid Permit. A Tobacco Retailer without a valid Tobacco Retailer permit shall not display Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia in public view. A Tobacco Retailer without a valid Tobacco Retailer permit shall not display any advertisement relating to Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia that promotes the sale or distribution of such products from the Tobacco Retailer’s location or that could lead a reasonable consumer to believe that such products can be obtained at that location. G. Drug Paraphernalia. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any permittee or any of the permittee’s agents or employees to violate any local, state, or federal law regulating controlled substances or Drug Paraphernalia, except that conduct authorized pursuant to state law shall not be a violation of this chapter. H. Windows. 1. In the course of Tobacco Retailing or in the operation of a business or maintenance of a location for which a permit issued, it shall be a violation of this chapter for a permittee, or any of the permittee’s agents or employees, to cover more than 20 percent of the window area with window signs in accordance with CVMC 19.60.500. 2. All windows shall be maintained to ensure law enforcement personnel have a clear and unobstructed view of the interior of the premises, including the area in which the cash registers are maintained, from exterior public rights-of-way or from the entrance. However, this subsection shall not apply to premises where there are no windows, or where the design or location of windows or landscaping precludes a view of the interior of the premises from exterior public rights-of-way or from the entrance. I. Change in Information. A Tobacco Retailer shall inform the Police Department in writing of any change in the information submitted on an application for a Tobacco Retailer’s permit within 10 business days of a change. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.095 Sale of Certain Items Prohibited. A. Sale of Flavored Tobacco Prohibited. Beginning January 1, 2023, it shall be unlawful for any Person to sell or offer for sale, or to possess with intent to sell or offer for sale, any Flavored Tobacco Product in the City of Chula Vista. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 78 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 1. There shall be a permissive inference that a Tobacco Retailer in possession of four or more Flavored Tobacco Products, including but not limited to individual Flavored Tobacco Products, packages of Flavored Tobacco Products, or any combination thereof, possesses such Flavored Tobacco Products with intent to sell or offer for sale. 2. There shall be a permissive inference that a Tobacco Product is a Flavored Tobacco Product if: a. a public statement or claim is made or disseminated by the manufacturer of a Tobacco Product, or by any person authorized or permitted by the manufacturer to make or disseminate public statement concerning such tobacco product, that such Tobacco Product has or produces a taste or smell other than tobacco; or b. text and/or images on the Tobacco Product’s Labeling or Packaging explicitly or implicitly indicates that the Tobacco Product is a Flavored Tobacco Product. B. Exempted Products. This section does not apply to the sale of Shisha, Premium Cigars, or Lloose-Lleaf Ttobacco. 5.56.100 Compliance monitoring. A. Compliance with this chapter shall be monitored by the Police Department. In addition, any peace and/or code enforcement officer may enforce the provisions of this chapter. B. The Police Department shall inspect each Tobacco Retailer at least one time per 24-month period. Nothing in this subsection shall create a right of action in any permittee or other Person against the City or its agents. C. Right of Access. The Police Department and/or their authorized representatives shall have full access to enter a permitted Tobacco Retailer location to conduct an inspection during the operating hours of the Tobacco Retailer. Failure to cooperate with any Police Department inspection may result in a permit violation subject to suspension or revocation. This subsection shall not be construed to deprive a licensee of any privilege guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, or any other constitutional or statutory privileges. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.110 Suspension or revocation of permit. A. Suspension or Revocation of Permit for Violation. In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, a Tobacco Retailer’s permit may be suspended or revoked if any court of competent jurisdiction determines, or the Chief of Police finds, based on a preponderance of the evidence, after the permittee is afforded notice and 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 79 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 an opportunity to be heard, that the permittee, or any of the permittee’s agents, officers, partners, representatives, managers, or employees, has violated any of the requirements, conditions, or prohibitions of this chapter, or has pleaded guilty, “no contest” or its equivalent, or admitted to a violation of any law designated in CVMC 5.56.020 as follows: 1. Upon a finding by the Chief of Police of a first violation of this chapter at a location, the permittee shall be issued a warning by the Department. 2. Upon a finding by the Chief of Police of a second violation of this chapter at a location within any 60- month period, the permit shall be suspended for 90 days. 3. Upon a finding by the Chief of Police of a third violation of this chapter at a location within any 60- month period, the permit shall be suspended for one year. 4. Upon a finding by the Chief of Police of a fourth violation of this chapter at a location within any 60- month period, the permit shall be revoked. B. The Chief of Police shall serve the Tobacco Retailer, either personally or by first class mail addressed to the Authorized Address, with dated written notice of the decision to suspend or revoke the permit. A suspension or revocation notice shall state the reasons for the action, the effective date of the decision, and the right of the permittee to appeal the decision to the City Manager. An appeal to the City Manager is not available for a revocation made pursuant to subsection (C) of this section. Any appeal must be filed in writing with the City Clerk within 14 days of service of the notice. The City Manager’s determination regarding the suspension or revocation shall be final. The City Manager shall provide dated written notice to the Tobacco Retailer, either personally or by first class mail addressed to the Authorized Address, of the City Manager’s determination and the right of the Tobacco Retailer to seek judicial review of the City Manager’s determination. C. Revocation of Permit Wrongly Issued. A Tobacco Retailer’s permit shall be revoked if the Chief of Police finds, after the permittee is afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard, that one or more of the bases for denial of a permit under CVMC 5.56.020 existed at the time application was made or at any time before the permit issued, or one or more of the bases for denial of a renewal permit under CVMC 5.56.050 existed at the time the renewal permit was issued. Notice and appeal of the revocation shall be conducted in accordance with subsection (B) of this section. D. If a permit issued under this chapter is suspended or revoked, all Tobacco Products and Tobacco Paraphernalia at the suspended or revoked Tobacco Retailer’s location shall be removed from public view for the duration of the suspension or revocation. The Tobacco Retailer additionally shall not display any advertisement relating to Tobacco Products or Tobacco Paraphernalia that promotes the sale or distribution of such products from the Tobacco Retailer’s location or that could lead a reasonable consumer to believe that such products can be obtained at that location for the duration of the suspension or revocation. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 80 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 5.56.120 Violations – Penalties. A. It shall be unlawful for any Person to violate any provision, or to fail to comply with the requirements, of this chapter or any regulation adopted hereunder. Any person violating any of the provisions or failing to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter or any regulation adopted hereunder shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for a period of not more than six months, or by both a fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues is deemed to be a new and separate offense. No proof of knowledge, intent, or other mental state is required to establish a violation. B. Causing, permitting, aiding, abetting, or concealing a violation of any provision of this chapter shall also constitute a violation of this chapter. C. Any condition caused or allowed to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter or any regulation adopted hereunder is a public nuisance and may be abated by the City, or by the City Attorney on behalf of the people of the state of California, as a nuisance by means of a restraining order, injunction, or any other order or judgment in law or equity issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. The City, or the City Attorney on behalf of the people of the state of California, may seek injunctive relief to enjoin violations of, or to compel compliance with, this chapter or seek any other relief or remedy available at law or equity, including the imposition of monetary civil penalties. Each day that a violation continues is deemed to be a new and separate offense and subject to a maximum civil penalty of $2,500 for each and every offense. D. Tobacco Retailing without a Valid Permit – Ineligibility for Permit. In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, if the Chief of Police finds based on a preponderance of evidence, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, that any Person has engaged in Tobacco Retailing at a location without a valid Tobacco Retailer’s permit, either directly or through the Person’s agents or employees, the Person shall be ineligible to apply for, or to be issued, a Tobacco Retailer’s permit as follows: 1. After a first violation of this section at a location within any 60-month period, no new permit may issue for the Person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an Arm’s Length Transaction), until 30 days have passed from the date of the violation. 2. After a second violation of this section at a location within any 60-month period, no new permit may issue for the Person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an Arm’s Length Transaction), until 90 days have passed from the date of the violation. 3. After of a third or subsequent violation of this section at a location within any 60-month period, no new permit may issue for the Person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an Arm’s Length Transaction), until five years have passed from the date of the violation. E. Whenever evidence of a violation of this chapter is obtained in any part through the participation of a Person under the age of 18 years old, such a Person shall not be required to appear or give testimony in any 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 81 of 617 Item #8.2 – Revised 9/13/22 Attachment 3 civil or administrative process brought to enforce this chapter and the alleged violation shall be adjudicated based upon the sufficiency and persuasiveness of the evidence presented. F. The remedies specified in this section are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available under State or local law for a violation of this Code. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 5.56.130 Requirement for tobacco retailer permit – Operative date. For a Tobacco Retailer business not in existence, a Tobacco Retailer permit must be obtained prior to commencement of Tobacco Retailing. For an existing Tobacco Retailer business, a Tobacco Retailer permit must be obtained the later to occur of six months after the date the Police Department begins accepting applications for Tobacco Retailer permits or upon renewal of the Tobacco Retailer’s business license issued pursuant to Chapter 5.02 CVMC. (Ord. 3417 § 1, 2018). 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 82 of 617 September 1, 2022 Re: Flavored Tobacco Products and OUR KIDS Attn: Chula Vista City Council Dear Mayor Salas and Council Members Padilla, Cardenas, McCann, & Galvez, As two cofounders of Parents Against Vaping E-cigarettes (PAVe), a national organization founded in 2018 by three moms as a grassroots response to the youth vaping epidemic, we write today to express our strong support for ending the sale of all flavored e-cigarettes and all other FLAVORED tobacco products in Chula Vista, with no exemptions. PAVe’s passionate parent volunteers have been advocating across California for ending the sale of all flavored tobacco products, participating in successful legislative campaigns in San Diego, Sacramento, San Jose, Santa Ana, Los Angeles and many more California cities and counties. At the state level PAVe parents helped pass SB 793, which is now on hold due to Big Tobacco’s referendum. We are grateful to serve as important partners for California’s county, city, and state tobacco prevention coalitions. According to the 2021 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS), over 2 million young people are currently vaping, and the research has proven over and over that flavors are hooking our kids. The latest figures show that 8 out of 10 teens who vape use flavors. With 40% of high-school users using an e-cigarette on 20 or more days out of the month,we must take action immediately to protect these teens from becoming an entire generation of nicotine addicts. A report published by Data Bridge Market Research published on January 13, 2022, stated, "Various flavor offerings with shisha tobacco and widespread adoption by the various themed restaurants as well as the youth population has been directly impacting the growth of shisha tobacco market. Variety of flavor offerings in shisha tobacco is one of the major driving factors as a large portion of the youth are willing to take up flavored smoking.” For these reasons, we are proud to advocate for a strong tobacco retail license ordinance in Chula Vista that is comprehensive and includes hookah, e-cigarettes, and ALL flavored tobacco products. Please provide the kids of Chula Vista with the same protections enjoyed by the kids in many other surrounding municipalities and prioritize lives, health equity, and prevention during this public health emergency! Thank you for your leadership and bringing this very important issue forward. Sincerely, Dorian Fuhrman and Meredith Berkman Co-Founders, PAVe www.parentsagainstvaping.org Written Communications Item #8.2 - Fuhrman and Berkman 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 83 of 617 Written Communications Item #8.2 - Knapp 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 84 of 617 Written Communications Item #8.2 - Knapp 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 85 of 617 From: Cynthia Knapp <Cynthia.Knapp@saysandiego.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2022 2:15 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov>; Hartman, Lester <Lester.Hartman@childrens.harvard.edu>; JohnDale Noriega <JohnDale.Noriega@saysandiego.org> Subject: Dr. Hartman: LOS for Tobacco Product Regulation Hello Mayor Salas, Dr. Lester Hartman, pediatrician and tobacco researcher out of Harvard University, has close ties to the City of Chula Vista. He wrote the attached letter for your consideration in the upcoming flavored tobacco decision. Dr. Hartman cannot join us in-person for the City Council meeting, but is copied on this message. Please reach out with any questions you have regarding his points. Thank you, Cynthia Cynthia (Cindy) Knapp, MPH | Program Manager she/her/hers SAY San Diego Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drug Prevention 4275 El Cajon Blvd., Ste. 101 | San Diego, CA 92105 Mobile: www.saysandiego.org From: Cynthia Knapp Sent: Friday, September 2, 2022 2:33 PM To: msalas@chulavistaca.gov Cc: CityClerk Subject: SAY San Diego: LOS for Tobacco Product Regulation Good afternoon Mayor Salas, Please accept this letter of support from Social Advocates for Youth (SAY) San Diego regarding amending Chula Vista’s Tobacco Retail License program to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products. The data shows ordinances like this one reduce youth access to tobacco products, which reduces youth initiation and use. We appreciate your leadership. Warm regards, Cynthia Warning: External Email Written Communications Item #8.2 - Knapp mailto:Cynthia.Knapp@says andiego.org mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.govmailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov mailto:Lester.Hartman@childrens. harvard.edumailto:JohnDale.Noriega@say sandiego.org http:// www.saysandiego. org/ mailto:Cynth ia.Knapp@s aysandiego. org mailto:msalas@chula vistaca.govmailto: CityCler k@chul avistac a.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 86 of 617 Cynthia (Cindy) Knapp, MPH | Program Manager she/her/hers SAY San Diego Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drugs Prevention 4275 El Cajon Blvd., Ste. 101 | San Diego, CA 92105 Mobile: www.saysandiego.org Confidentiality Notice: This message and any accompanying documents contain information that is confidential, privileged, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. This information is private and protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information in any manner is strictly prohibited Written Communications Item #8.2 - Knapp http:// www.saysandiego. org/ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 87 of 617 September 6, 2022 Mayor Salas and Chula Vista Councilmembers, I am a retired Massachusetts-based pediatrician integrally involved in Massachusetts passing Tobacco21 and the tobacco flavor ban, including menthol. Here are some points about vaping you may not know: 1.) 95% of lifetime tobacco users start before the age of 21. 2.) There is a strong association between vape and thyroid cancer, cervical cancer, and leukemia. In my own practice, I saw a 19 year-old who vaped THC and nicotine develop nasopharyngeal cancer which, on average, strikes adult adults age 40 or older. 3.) In Massachusetts, after Tobacco21 age restriction and flavor ban were enacted, the convenience store industry continue to grow at a 3-5% increase. These regulations don’t put businesses out of business. 4.) E-cigarettes are adolescent nicotine addiction devices, not adult smoking cessation devices. Several months ago, in a vape shop in Chula Vista, I bought the e-cigarette product called INFINITE 8000. Yes, it has 8,000 puffs of “Blu razz” vape. The device fits into the palm of your hand and is equivalent to 30-40 packs of cigarettes. 5.) When Massachusetts initially exempted menthol, Massachusetts kids defaulted to using menthol products. In Vancouver, when menthol was banned, there was a 30-50% increase in adult quit attempts. 6.) Dr. Hajek’s recent study says nicotine-based e-cigarettes are 2 times more likely to gets you off cigarettes than gum and patches. But what he did not say is gum and patches are 2.5 times more likely to get you off ALL nicotine containing products. 7.) The goal of Big Vape and Big Tobacco is to delay, delay, delay while they continue to make millions and even billions of dollars. Send a message to Big Tobacco and voters in other towns that you are not waiting for the vote on Proposition 31, you want to stop this youth epidemic NOW!! 8.) Dr. Friedman’s paper on claiming when flavors were banned kids started using combustible tobacco. Her data was flawed, and she used data before the legislation went from passed to enacted, which is often a 6-month gap. She failed account for this. Thank you, Lester J. Hartman, MD MPH FAAP Westwood-Mansfield Pediatric Associates Lester.hartman@childrens.harvard.edu | www.wmpeds.com Proactive in your child’s care. Empowering families for over 60 years." @DrHartmanWMPEDS | # Tobacco21 | # DontBeAJuulFuul | # FlavorsHookKids Written Communications Item #8.2 - Knapp http:// www.wmpeds.co m/ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 88 of 617 Dear Councilmembers, My previously sent email contained an error, please accept my sincerest apologies and see the corrected message below: Attached is a letter from the African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council strongly encouraging the Chula Vista City Council to end the sale of menthol cigarettes and all flavored tobacco products in the City. This is no minor matter; lives are at stake. New research shows that between 1980-2018 menthol cigarettes were responsible for: 1. 1.5 million new African American smokers; 2. 157,000 smoking-related premature deaths among African Americans; and 3. 1.5 million life-years lost among African Americans (Mendez & Le, 2021) (the full article and an accompanying editorial are also attached.) Time is of the essence. We can't wait on the State or the FDA. Chula Vista must act now! Thank you for your leadership. With gratitude, Camille Cummings On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 9:36 AM Camille Cummings <ccummings@amplify.love> wrote: Dear Councilmembers, Attached is a letter from the African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council strongly encouraging the Chula Vista City Council to end the sale of menthol cigarettes and all flavored tobacco products in the City. This is no minor matter; lives are at stake. New research shows that between 1980-2018 menthol cigarettes were responsible for: 1. 1.5 million new African American smokers; 2. 157,000 smoking-related premature deaths among African Americans; and 3. 1.5 million life-years lost among African Americans (Mendez & Le, 2021) (the full article and an accompanying editorial are also attached.) Time is of the essence. We can't wait on the State or the FDA. New York City must act now! Thank you for your leadership. With gratitude, Written Communications Item #8.2 - Cummings 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 89 of 617 Camille Cummings -- Camille Cummings, Project Coordinator African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council Phone: 888.881.6619 ext. 109 https://www.savingblacklives.org/ Written Communications Item #8.2 - Cummings 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 90 of 617 From: Camille Cummings < Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2022 9:36 AM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov>; Steve C. Padilla <spadilla@chulavistaca.gov>; Andrea Cardenas <acardenas@chulavistaca.gov>; John McCann <jmccann@chulavistaca.gov>; Jill Galvez jmgalvez@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov>; Adrian Kwiatkowski < Aida C. Castaneda <Valerie Yerger <Carol McGruder Phillip Gardiner <Camille Cummings Subject: End the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes and all Flavored Tobacco Products in Chula Vista Dear Councilmembers, Attached is a letter from the African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council strongly encouraging the Chula Vista City Council to end the sale of menthol cigarettes and all flavored tobacco products in the City. This is no minor matter; lives are at stake. New research shows that between 1980-2018 menthol cigarettes were responsible for: 1. 1.5 million new African American smokers; 2. 157,000 smoking-related premature deaths among African Americans; and 3. 1.5 million life-years lost among African Americans (Mendez & Le, 2021) (the full article and an accompanying editorial are also attached.) Time is of the essence. We can't wait on the State or the FDA. New York City must act now! Thank you for your leadership. With gratitude, Camille Cummings Camille Cummings, Project Coordinator African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council Phone: 888.881.6619 ext. 109 https://www.savingblacklives.org/ Warning: External Email Written Communications Item #8.2 - Cummings mailto:ccummings@a mplify.love mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:spadilla@chula vistaca.govmailto:acardenas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:jmccann@chula vistaca.govmailto:jmgalvez@chula vistaca.govmailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov mailto:adrian@bartellkwiatk owski.commailto:aida.cuahutli@ gmail.com mailto:dr.yerger@ gmail.commailto:cmcgruder @usa.net mailto:gmoney.gardiner @gmail.commailto:ccummings@a mplify.love https:// www.savingblacklives.org/ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 91 of 617 1MendezD, Le TTT. Tob Control 2021;0:1–3. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056748 Consequences of a match made in hell: the harm caused by menthol smoking to the African American population over 1980–2018 David Mendez, Thuy T T Le Brief report To cite: Mendez D, Le TTT. Tob Control Epub ahead of print: [please include Day Month Year]. doi:10.1136/ tobaccocontrol-2021-056748 Additional supplemental material is published online only. To view, please visit the journal online (http:// dx. doi. org/ 10. 1136/ tobaccocontrol- 2021- 056748). Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA Correspondence to Dr Thuy T T Le, Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor 48109, MI, USA; thuyttle@umich. edu Received 28 April 2021 Accepted 16 August 2021 http:// dx. doi. org/ 10. 1136/ tobaccocontrol- 2021- 056988 Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re- use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. ABSTRACT Background For many years, national surveys have shown a consistently disproportionately high prevalence of menthol smokers among African Americans compared with the general population. However, to our knowledge, no prior study has quantified the harm that menthol smoking has caused on that population. In this work, we estimate the public health harm that menthol cigarettes have caused to the African American community over the last four decades. Methods Using National Health Interview Survey data, we employed a well- established simulation model to reproduce the observed smoking trajectory over 1980–2018 in the African American population. Then, we repeat the experiment, removing the effects of menthol on the smoking initiation and cessation rates over that period, obtaining a new hypothetical smoking trajectory. Finally, we compared both scenarios to calculate the public health harm attributable to menthol cigarettes over 1980–2018. Results Our results show that menthol cigarettes were responsible for 1.5 million new smokers, 157 000 smoking- related premature deaths and 1.5 million life- years lost among African Americans over 1980–2018. While African Americans constitute 12% of the total US population, these figures represent, respectively, a staggering 15%, 41% and 50% of the total menthol- related harm. Discussion Our results show that menthol cigarettes disproportionally harmed African Americans significantly over the last 38 years and are responsible for exacerbating health disparities among that population. Removing menthol cigarettes from the market would benefit the overall US population but, particularly, the African American community. BACKGROUND For over 60 years, tobacco companies have targeted menthol cigarettes to the African American commu- nity through aggressive marketing and promo- tion.1–3 It is well known that a disproportionately high number of African Americans smoke menthol cigarettes. According to the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 85% of African American smokers used menthol versus 39% of those in the general population. This is not a recent phenom- enon. In 1980, for example, menthol prevalence among African American smokers was 66% vs 33% among the general population, according to the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Several articles4 have addressed the prospec- tive harm to the black community that could be avoided if menthol cigarettes were banned from the market; and while other studies3 5–9 have addressed the historical causes that have made menthol the preferred choice of cigarette products among African Americans, to our knowledge, no prior study has quantified the health harm that menthol smoking has already inflicted on that population. Following a recent study10 that calculated the health damage caused by menthol smoking on the entire US population over 1980–2018, the current work estimates the share of such harm borne by the African American community, and its disproportion compared with the total menthol toll in the USA. Our results may be helpful to the Food and Drug Administration as they continue evaluating the benefit of a menthol ban. METHODS We used the same simulation model and calibration process as in the Le- Mendez article10 with param- eters specific to the African American population. The model formulation, definition of model param- eters and how some parameters were calculated were thoroughly described in Le- Mendez’s work.10 The African American- specific parameters were taken from several data sources described below and summarised in online supplemental table A1. For our initial year (1980), we obtained the African American population by single year of age from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.11 For subsequent years, we got the African American birth cohorts from 1981 through 2018 from the National Vital Statistics Reports.12 13 The overall age- specific death rates for the African American population, updated every 5 years, were extracted from the 1980–2018 US Life Tables.14 We used relative risks of mortality specific to the African American population, derived from Cancer Prevention Study II (CPS- II data; Relative risks for African American current and former smokers were derived from CPS- II data and provided by Dr Michael Thun from the American Cancer Society for the 2011 Tobacco Products Scientific Advi- sory Committee (TPSAC) Menthol Report. Available in online supplemental table A5) to calculate the death rates by age for never, current and former smokers following the same procedure described in Le- Men- dez’s article.10 Smoking prevalence for current and former smokers and the proportion of menthol use among smokers in 1980 were estimated using NHIS data. We calculated the overall smoking cessation rates for African Americans by adjusting the general population’s overall smoking cessation rates presented in Le- Mendez’s work10 with the ratio of cessation copyright. on September 20, 2021 at 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 92 of 617 2 Mendez D, Le TTT. Tob Control 2021;0:1–3. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056748 Brief report rates between the African American and general populations (0.66) reported in ref 15. Then, using the menthol cessation multiplier for African Americans estimated by Mills et al16 (0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.91) and the proportion of menthol smokers among current African American smokers, we applied the same process used in ref 10 to compute the cessation rates for African American non- menthol and menthol smokers. The specific formulation and cessa- tion values for 1980 are shown in the Supplement to ref 10 and online supplemental tables A2 and A3. The annual adult smoking initiation rates for African Amer- icans were computed by taking the average NHIS smoking prevalence among 18–24 year- olds, consistent with ref 10. The switching rates between menthol and non- menthol smokers were calculated as in the 2011 menthol report17 (2.29% switching to menthol and 1.08% to non- menthol cigarettes). An extensive sensitivity analysis (see online supplemental table A4) showed that these parameters exert little influence on the results. The ratio of yields from experimenter to smoker18 19 and menthol mortality multiplier for the African American population remains as in the Le- Mendez work,10 following their same arguments. As in ref 10, we first used NHIS smoking prevalence data over 1980–2018 (when the NHIS survey was conducted) to calibrate the model. Then, we used the calibrated model to replicate African Americans’ smoking prevalence trajectory during 1980–2018. Finally, to quantify the harmful effect of menthol use on the African American population, we repeated the previous step to generate an alternative smoking trajectory for African Americans during the same period, eliminating the effect of menthol since 1980. We achieved this by adjusting the smoking initiation and cessation rates to elimi- nate the effect of menthol on those parameters (see the Appendices to the 2011 TPSAC Menthol Report17 and the Le- Mendez paper10). Finally, we compared our results from both scenarios (with and without menthol cigarettes) to calculate the impact of menthol on smoking prevalence, life- years lost and smoking- related premature deaths. Additionally, we compared our results with those for the general population reported in Le- Mendez’s work10 and calculated the disproportionate harm inflicted on the African American popu- lation due to menthol. RESULTS The simulated smoking prevalence for African Americans closely captures the NHIS reported smoking prevalence over 1980–2018 with pseudo- R2=0.95 (pseudo- R2=1[Errors Sum of Squares]/[- Total Sum of Squares]) (see online supplemental figure A1 and A2). Table 1 shows the harm attributable to menthol cigarettes for the general population (from Le- Mendez’s work10), the African Amer- ican population and the hypothetical low- menthol African Amer- ican population. A complete sensitivity analysis on the values in table 1 is presented in online supplemental table A4. The values in the first three columns of the table are self- explanatory; the numbers within parentheses show the percent- ages that those values represent, relative to those for the general population. The last column shows the average proportion over 1980–2018) of the corresponding population referred to on each row, relative to the entire US population. For example, the table shows that, among African Americans, menthol was responsible for 1.5 million extra smokers, 157 000 smoking- related premature deaths and 1.5 million excess life- years lost during 1980–2018, representing 15%, 41% and 50% of the total menthol toll, respectively. However, during the same period, African Americans constituted only around 12% of the overall US population. The last row of the table shows a hypothetical African Amer- ican population that exhibits the same menthol smoking- related parameters as the general population. We simulated this scenario by setting the values of menthol- affected parameters for the African American population to those of the general popula- tion. In this hypothetical group, the estimated menthol smoking excess initiation, premature deaths and life- years lost would have represented 13%, 16% and 21% of the overall menthol harm, respectively; much more in agreement with the propor- tional (relative to the entire US) size of this population (12%). It is worth noting, though, that the menthol death toll in the low- menthol population is still above its proportional share. This is due to the mortality rates among African American smokers, which are higher than in the general population. DISCUSSION Since the 1960s, the tobacco industry has targeted the African American community for the consumption of menthol cigarettes through aggressive marketing, including intense advertising and price discounts. Simultaneously, the industry supported numerous African American organisations to gain the trust of the African American community. Several publications3 9 describe the marketing efforts by the tobacco industry to establish a special connection between menthol cigarettes and the African American community. In a fascinating article entitled ‘The African Americanization of menthol cigarette use in the United States’,3 Gardiner recounts the long history of, and explains the facts behind, the relationship between African Americans and menthol cigarettes, and how those products became an inte- gral part of the African American culture. In essence, the iden- tification of African American smokers with menthol has been purposely orchestrated by the tobacco industry following their goal of maximising their profits. Unfortunately, this marketing strategy turned out to be a huge success for the tobacco industry, but deadly for the black community. Besides creating a brand with which African Ameri- cans could identify and call their own, the industry exposed this population to a substance that amplifies the damaging effects of cigarette smoking. Menthol intensifies this harm by increasing the chances that individuals transition from experimentation to regular smoking,18 19 and by increasing dependency, which leads to delayed cessation.16 These effects increase the number of smokers and the amount of time they remain smoking. Table 1 Excess smoking initiation, smoking- related deaths and life- years lost due to menthol cigarettes over 1980–2018 for the adult general, African American and hypothetical low- menthol African American population Cumulative excess smoking initiators (%)Cumulative excess deaths (%) Cumulative excess life- years lost (%) Average percentage of population (%) General population 10 137 808 (100)377 528 (100)2 951 533 (100)100 African American population 1 508 913 (15)156 471 (41)1 476 198 (50)12 Hypothetical low- menthol African American population 1 286 848 (13)61 132 (16)606 840 (21)12 copyright. on September 20, 2021 at 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 93 of 617 3MendezD, Le TTT. Tob Control 2021;0:1–3. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056748 Brief report The negative impact of menthol cigarettes on the public’s health is significant, as Le and Mendez described in ref 10. For African Amer- ican smokers, though, the harm wrought by menthol smoking is much higher than that for the rest of the population. Despite having a similar overall smoking prevalence as the general population,20 it is well known that African Americans suffer, proportionally or disproportionately, more serious smoking- attributable health conse- quences.21 Main probable causes for this phenomenon are the high overall mortality rates due to economic and social conditions and the high prevalence of menthol among African American smokers, which causes them to be more addicted and quit less. In fact, our results show that menthol was responsible for 157 000 smoking- related deaths among African Americans during 1980–2018, over two and a half times their proportional share of menthol deaths compared with the general population. And, what is even more depressing, 50% of all the life- years lost to menthol smoking during 1980–2018 occurred among African Americans. Additionally, our results (shown in online supplemental figure A1) also indicate that, without menthol, smoking prevalence among African Americans in 2018 would have been 8.3%, instead of the NHIS reported 14.9% a 44% reduction). We note that our results may be considered conservative, since we do not take into account the future harm that menthol smoking over 1980–2018 will cause to the African American population. Considering that cigarette smoking is the number one cause of preventable deaths in the USA, menthol in cigarettes is an important factor in creating and exacerbating health disparities in this country. Removing menthol cigarettes from the market will save thousands of African American lives per year and help reduce health disparities at a time when inequalities among minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups are increasingly salient. What this paper adds Menthol cigarettes have been disproportionately used among African Americans. Menthol cigarettes exacerbate health inequalities for the African American community. Removing menthol can have the double effects of saving lives and reducing inequalities. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the University of Michigan Data Analysis and Dissemination Core led by Dr. Jihyoun Jeon for providing us some data for this work. Contributors DM and TTTL conceptualised the project. TTTL calibrated the model and conducted all the analysis. DM supervised the work. Both authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript. Funding The research reported in this publication was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health and Food and Drug Administration Centre for Tobacco Products (award number U54CA229974). Competing interests None declared. Patient consent for publication Not required. Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed. ORCID iD Thuy T T Le http:// orcid. org/ 0000- 0002- 3106- 4045 REFERENCES 1 Food and Drug Administration. Preliminary scientific evaluation of the possible public health effects of menthol versus nonmenthol cigarettes. Food and Drug Administration, 2013. 2 Davis RM, Gilpin EA, Loken B. The role of the media in promoting and reducing tobacco use. USA, 2008. 3 Gardiner PS. The African Americanization of menthol cigarette use in the United States. Nicotine Tob Res 2004;6 Suppl 1:55–65. 4 Levy DT, Pearson JL, Villanti AC, et al. Modeling the future effects of a menthol ban on smoking prevalence and smoking- attributable deaths in the United States. Am J Public Health 2011;101:1236–40. 5 Anderson SJ. Marketing of menthol cigarettes and consumer perceptions: a review of tobacco industry documents. Tob Control 2011;20 Suppl 2:ii20–8. 6 Sutton CD, Robinson RG. The marketing of menthol cigarettes in the United States: populations, messages, and channels. Nicotine Tob Res 2004;6 Suppl 1:83–91. 7 Delnevo CD, Ganz O, Goodwin RD. Banning menthol cigarettes: a social justice issue long overdue. Oxford University Press US, 2020. 8 Cadham CJ, Sanchez- Romero LM, Fleischer NL, et al. The actual and anticipated effects of a menthol cigarette ban: a scoping review. BMC Public Health 2020;20:1–17. 9 Robert N. Proctor, golden holocaust: origins of the cigarette catastrophe and the case for abolition, 2012. 10 Le TTT, Mendez D. An estimation of the harm of menthol cigarettes in the United States from 1980 to 2018. Tob Control 2021. doi:10.1136/ tobaccocontrol-2020-056256. [Epub ahead of print: 25 Feb 2021]. 11 Population by age groups, race, and sex for 1960-97. centers for disease control and prevention. 12 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJ. Births: final data for 2015, 2017. 13 ed..Martin J, Hamilton B, Osterman M. Births: final data for 2018. In: National vital statistics reports. Services DoHaH, 2019. 14 Arias E, Xu J. United States life tables: 2017, 2019. 15 Babb S, Malarcher A, Schauer G, et al. Quitting Smoking Among Adults - United States, 2000-2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2017;65:1457–64. 16 Mills SD, Hao Y, Ribisl KM, et al. The relationship between menthol cigarette use, smoking cessation, and relapse: findings from waves 1 to 4 of the population assessment of tobacco and health study. Nicotine Tob Res 2021;23:966–75. 17 Mendez D. Results from a Population Dynamics Model of the Consequences of Menthol Cigarettes for Smoking Prevalence and Disease Risks. Appendix A, 2011. Available: http://www fda gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/ CommitteesMeetingMaterials/TobaccoProductsScientificAdvisoryCommittee/ UCM247689 pdf 18 Nonnemaker J, Hersey J, Homsi G, et al. Initiation with menthol cigarettes and youth smoking uptake. Addiction 2013;108:171–8. 19 Nonnemaker J, Feirman SP, MacMonegle A, et al. Examining the role of menthol cigarettes in progression to established smoking among youth. Addict Behav 2019;98:106045. 20 Cornelius ME, Wang TW, Jamal A, et al. Tobacco Product Use Among Adults - United States, 2019. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020;69:1736–42. 21 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Tobacco use among U.S. racial/ ethnic minority Groups—African Americans, American Indians and Alaska natives, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics: a report of the surgeon General. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Office on Smoking and Health, 1998, 1998. copyright. on September 20, 2021 at 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 94 of 617 1YergerV. Tob Control Month 2021 Vol 0 No 0 What more evidence is needed? Remove menthol cigarettes from the marketplace—now Valerie Yerger 1,2 Tobacco remains the leading cause of preventable death and disease in the USA and many other countries. However, among all racial and ethnic groups in the USA, African Americans bear the greatest burden from tobacco- related morbidity and mortality.1 Every year, 45 000 African Americans prematurely and unnecessarily die from tobacco- caused diseases. An esti- mated 85% of them smoked menthol cigarettes.2 Menthol’s sensory properties reinforce smoking, increase uptake of nicotine and toxic smoke components, and discourage cessation. Menthol’s cooling, anaesthetic and analgesic effects ease initiation among new smokers by masking the harshness and irritation of tobacco smoke, reducing pain sensations in the mouth and throat, and enabling deeper inhalation that facili- tates greater exposure to nicotine.3 On 3 March 2009, Representative Henry Waxman and 124 congressional cosponsors introduced H.R. 1256—the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.’4 Representative Waxman’s Committee Report expressed concerns about the disproportionate use of menthol cigarettes among African Americans, the targeted marketing of menthol cigarettes in black communities, and the higher rates of lung cancer among African Amer- ican smokers compared with non- African American smokers, urging the Secretary of Health and Human Services to move quickly to address the unique public health issues posed by menthol cigarettes. Yet, although most other characterising flavours in cigarettes were prohibited in 2009 under the final version of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, menthol was inexplicably excluded.5 It has been estimated that hundreds of thousands of African Americans and other menthol smokers are destined to die prematurely if the exemption of menthol is allowed to continue.6 The disproportionate toll of menthol ciga- rettes among African Americans compared with the general population is a social injus- tice. The black community has long been subjected to the predatory marketing of mentholated tobacco products, particularly in lower income areas, where there are not only more advertisements, but more promo- tions and cheaper prices for menthol ciga- rettes when compared with more affluent neighbourhoods.7 Tobacco companies also heavily rely on their cooptation of commu- nity leaders to defuse tobacco control efforts.8 Black- led organisations with finan- cial ties to the tobacco industry have played a critical role in disseminating misinforma- tion throughout the black community. Such misinformation, for example, includes the idea that local policies prohibiting the sale of mentholated tobacco products are racist and will increase the criminalisation of individ- uals who possess or smoke them, exploiting legitimate concerns about racist policing to defend the tobacco industry’s targeted preda- tion on the black community.9 10 Authors Mendez and Le, in their article Consequences of a match made in hell: the harm caused by menthol smoking to the African American population over 1980–2018,’11 show why none of us can remain silent and complicit. This paper should serve as a kick upside the head for those who are in a position to remove these deadly products from the market- place. Until this paper, no prior study has fully quantified the health harm inflicted on African Americans by menthol ciga- rettes. Yet, for at least three decades, African American tobacco control activists have been out there resisting the perva- sive presence of the tobacco industry and their deadly products in black communi- ties,12–15 including filing a lawsuit to get the Center for Tobacco Products of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to act on menthol.16 Now the evidence is irrefutable: menthol cigarettes are killing our people at a rate unmatched by any other assaults on our community. Though constituting only 12% of the total US population, African Amer- icans bear an alarming amount of the total menthol- related harm: 41% of the smoking- related premature deaths and 50% of the life- years lost. This anal- ysis demonstrates the contribution of menthol cigarettes toward the annihila- tion of a people already under siege by a racist society and its myriad of inequities, governmental policies and political domi- nation.17 18 Institutionalised racism, its long historical impact, and the associated, yet unresolved, intergenerational trauma experienced by black people in America have made them vulnerable to the clever marketing and predatory dumping of mentholated tobacco products in their communities. For decades, the tobacco industry has exploited social and economic inequities to foster the uptake and use of menthol cigarettes, and create brand loyalty among African Americans. Tobacco companies strategically targeted menthol cigarettes to low- income African Americans, blanketing inner city communities with marketing, free samples, and music promotions,19 and thereby contributing to the tobacco- related health disparities observed today, as Mendez and Le have now confirmed. We can no longer ignore the intersecting, overlapping and distinctive systems of oppression that shape ‘being black in America’ and how menthol cigarettes contribute to sustained and widening health disparities.20 This paper is compelling on its own merit; however, read in tandem with the authors’ previous paper,21 one can fully appreciate the significant role menthol cigarettes have played in addicting millions of young people to nicotine and in the deaths of thousands due to tobacco. As the authors emphasise, mentholated cigarettes have a ‘significant detrimental impact on the public’s health and could continue to pose a substantial health risk.’ More than a decade after the FDA was given authority to regulate tobacco products, long after other flavours favoured by white children were banned from most tobacco products, and long after the first of several scientific reports found menthol cigarettes to pose a public health risk above that seen with non- menthol cigarettes,22–24 the FDA still has not acted. The black community has been abandoned at the federal level, leaving activ- ists to seek local and state policy changes. So, the question for me is: Given the mountains of evidence, will anything push the federal government to consider social justice and act on its commitment to finally ban menthol cigarettes and all flavoured cigars?25 26 The recent highly publicised killings of black men and women, including George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor and many others, brought to the forefront 1Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA 2African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council, San Francisco, California, USA Correspondence to Dr Valerie Yerger, Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143-0612, USA; Valerie. Yerger@ucsf. edu Editorial copyright. on September 20, 2021 at 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 95 of 617 2 Yerger V. Tob Control Month 2021 Vol 0 No 0 Editorial of our nation’s conscience how pervasively racism permeates everyday life. Whether one is on the receiving or perpetuating end of racist behaviours or if one benefits from or is negatively impacted by racist policies, we all recently watched how quickly the world mobilised to support the Black Lives Matter movement. Are we in a moment to leverage this movement? If menthol cigarettes are allowed to stay in the marketplace, the lives of African Americans and others remain at increased risk. Conversely, removing these terrible products will benefit not only the black community but also other racial and ethnic groups, the lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans- gender community, youth and those with behavioural health issues, since these groups also disproportionately smoke mentho- lated cigarettes over non- mentholated ciga- rettes.27–30 I ask that others stand with us to repair a wrong done to the black community, as we stand with you. There is simply no ethi- cally acceptable reason to allow the tobacco industry to continue using a flavouring that makes it easier to start smoking and harder to quit. Whether we work at the federal, state or local level, we are empowered in our collec- tive work to protect our communities from our number one killer, a corporate industry of federally adjudicated racketeers.31 This paper provides us with added ammunition to get that vital work done. It is long past time for the FDA to get inoculated against what- ever the hell is keeping it from getting these deadly products out of the marketplace. Contributors As the sole author, VY, I made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work. I drafted the work and revised it critically for important intellectual content. As the sole author, I provided final approval of the version published and am accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not- for- profit sectors. Competing interests None declared. Patient consent for publication Not applicable. Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed. Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re- use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. To cite Yerger V. Tob Control Epub ahead of print: please include Day Month Year]. doi:10.1136/ tobaccocontrol-2021-056988 http:// dx. doi. org/ 10. 1136/ tobaccocontrol- 2021- 056748 Tob Control 2021;0:1–2. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056988 ORCID iD Valerie Yerger http:// orcid. org/ 0000- 0003- 2469- 402X REFERENCES 1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Tobacco use among U.S. racial/ ethnic minority groups. A report of the surgeon General. Washington, DC, 1998. https:// www. cdc. gov/ tobacco/ data_ statistics/ sgr/ 1998/ complete_ report/ 2 Villanti AC, Mowery PD, Delnevo CD, et al. Changes in the prevalence and correlates of menthol cigarette use in the USA, 2004-2014. Tob Control 2016;25:ii14–20. 3 Kreslake JM, Wayne GF, Alpert HR, et al. Tobacco industry control of menthol in cigarettes and targeting of adolescents and young adults. Am J Public Health 2008;98:1685–92. 4 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act P.L. 111e31, 2009. Available: https://www. govinfo. gov/ content/ pkg/ PLAW- 111publ31/ pdf/ PLAW- 111publ31. pdf 5 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act 21, 2009. Available: https://www. fda. gov/ tobacco- products/ rules- regulations- and- guidance/ family- smoking- prevention- and- tobacco- control- act- overview#:~: text= To% 20protect% 20the% 20public% 20and, and% 20marketing% 20of% 20tobacco% 20products. [Accessed 22 Jun 2009]. 6 Levy DT, Pearson JL, Villanti AC, et al. Modeling the future effects of a menthol ban on smoking prevalence and smoking- attributable deaths in the United States. Am J Public Health 2011;101:1236–40. 7 Henriksen L, Schleicher NC, Dauphinee AL, et al. Targeted advertising, promotion, and price for menthol cigarettes in California high school neighborhoods. Nicotine Tob Res 2012;14:116–21. 8 Yerger VB, Malone RE. African American leadership groups: smoking with the enemy. Tob Control 2002;11:336–45. 9 Tulloss KW. Community leaders come together against racism and discrimination protesting senate bill 793. Available: https:// lasentinel. net/ community- leaders- come- together- against- racism- and- discrimination- protesting- senate- bill- 793. html [Accessed 20 Aug 2020]. 10 Brown SM. Conference expresses opposition to proposed Maryland menthol ban. Washington Informer Newspaper. Available: https://www. washingtoninformer. com/ baltimore- black- baptist- ministers- conference- expresses- opposition- to- proposed- maryland- menthol- ban/ [Accessed 11 Feb 2021]. 11 Mendez D, TT Le. Consequences of a match made in hell: the harm caused by menthol smoking to the African American population over 1980–2018. Tob Control 2021. doi:10.1136/%20 tobaccocontrol-2021-056748 12 African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council. What’s menthol got to do with it? Everything! (Still): the plight of African Americans and mentholated tobacco products. Washington, D.C: International Press Briefing, National Press Club, 2019. https:// youtu. be/ 7wT9Lbn8nmk 13 Sixfootah the Poet. What menthol cigarettes have taken from me. San Francisco Bayview national black newspaper. Available: https:// sfbayview. com/ 2020/ 04/ what- menthol- cigarettes- have- taken- from- me/ Accessed 05 Apr 2020]. 14 RJ Reynolds new "uptown" targets Blacks, 1990. Advocacy Institute. Available: https://www. industrydocuments. ucsf. edu/ docs/ mkvw0005 Accessed 04 Sep 2021]. 15 Sutton CD, Robinson RG. The marketing of menthol cigarettes in the United States: populations, messages, and channels. Nicotine Tob Res 2004;6 Suppl 1:83–91. 16 African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council v. US Department of Health and Human Services, Case No. 4:20- cv-4012- KAW (N.D. Cal.), 2021. Available: https://www. publichealthlawcenter. org/ sites/ default/ files/ AATCLC- v- FDA- Defs- Second- Motion- to- Dismiss. pdf 17 Alexander M. The new Jim Crow: mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York, NY: The New Press, 2012. 18 Dawes D. The political determinants of health. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, 2020. 19 Yerger VB, Przewoznik J, Malone RE. Racialized geography, corporate activity, and health disparities: tobacco industry targeting of inner cities. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2007;18:10–38. 20 Kong AY, Golden SD, Berger MT. An intersectional approach to the menthol cigarette problem: what’s race(ism) got to do with it? Crit Public Health 2019;29:616–23. 21 Le TT, Mendez D. An estimation of the harm of menthol cigarettes in the United States from 1980 to 2018. Tob Control 2021. doi:10.1136/ tobaccocontrol-2020-056256. [Epub ahead of print: 25 Feb 2021]. 22 Tobacco Products ScientificAdvisory Committee, US Food and Drug Administration. Menthol cigarettes and public health: review of the scientific evidence and recommendations, 2011. Available: https:// wayback. archive- it. org/ 7993/ 20170405201731/ https:// www. fda. gov/ downloads/ AdvisoryCommittees/ Committe esMeetingMaterials/ TobaccoProductsScientificAdv isoryCommittee/ UCM269697. pdf [Accessed 04 Sep 2021]. 23 US Food and Drug Administration. Preliminary scientific evaluation of the possible public health effects of menthol versus nonmenthol cigarettes. Silver Spring, MD: Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, 2013. 24 Tobacco Control Legal Consortium et al. Citizen Petition to the US Food and Drug Administration, Prohibit menthol as a characterizing flavor in cigarettes, 2013. Available: https://www. publiche althlawcenter. org/ sites/ default/ files/ resources/ tclc- fdacitizenpetition- menthol- 2013. pdf 25 FDA commits to evidence- based actions aimed at saving lives and preventing future generations of smokers, 2021. Available: https://www. fda. gov/ news- events/ press- announcements/ fda- commits- evidence- based- actions- aimed- saving- lives- and- preventing- future- generations- smokers [Accessed 29 Apr 2021]. 26 Statement by HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra on FDA tobacco actions on menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars, 2021. Available: https://www. hhs. gov/ about/ news/ 2021/ 04/ 29/ statement- hhs- secretary- xavier- becerra- fda- tobacco- actions- menthol- cigarettes- flavored- cigars. html [Accessed 29 Apr 2021]. 27 Mukherjea A, Wackowski OA, Lee YO, et al. Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander tobacco use patterns. Am J Health Behav 2014;38:362–9. 28 Delnevo CD, Villanti AC, Giovino GA. Trends in menthol and non- menthol cigarette consumption in the U.S.A.: 2000-2011. Tob Control 2014;23:e154–5. 29 Fallin A, Goodin AJ, King BA. Menthol cigarette smoking among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adults. Am J Prev Med 2015;48:93–7. 30 Young- Wolff KC, Hickman NJ, Kim R, et al. Correlates and prevalence of menthol cigarette use among adults with serious mental illness. Nicotine Tob Res 2015;17:285–91. 31 Eubanks SY, Glantz SA. Bad acts: the racketeering case against the tobacco industry. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association, 2013. copyright. on September 20, 2021 at 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 96 of 617 September 7, 2022 To:Mayor Mary Casillas Salas, Councilmember Steve Padilla, Councilmember Andrea Cardenas, Councilmember John McCann, and Councilmember Jill Galvez From:The African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council (AATCLC) Re: End the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes and all Other Flavored Tobacco Products in Chula Vista! No Exemptions: All Flavors, All Products at All Locations! The African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council (AATCLC) strongly encourages the Chula Vista City Council to end the sale of menthol Cigarettes and all flavored tobacco products, with no exemptions. We are glad to see that the Council is considering this issue. Frankly, this couldn’t come at a better time. We already know that 80% of youth, 12-17 start smoking using flavored cigarettes (Ambrose et al., 2015). Indeed, in the midst of the ongoing COVID 19 pandemic, nothing could be more important than getting these products out of our community. We already know that smokers are more susceptible to COVID infection CDC, 2020). If the Council truly wants a healthier Chula Vista, and we believe that you do, then it is imperative that menthol-flavored cigarettes and other flavored tobacco products be prohibited. This will end the predatory marketing of these products that disproportionately impact poorer communities, marginalized groups, youths, and communities of color. Menthol the Ultimate Candy Flavor; It Helps the Poison Go Down Easier! This is no minor matter.Menthol cigarettes and flavored tobacco products are driving tobacco-related deaths and diseases nationwide. While the use of non-flavored tobacco cigarettes has been decreasing, the use of menthol cigarettes is on the rise, among youth and adults; among Latinos, Blacks, and Whites (Villanti, 2016). Let’s be clear, the majority of women smokers smoke menthol cigarettes; folks from the LGBTQ community disproportionately smoke these products; 47% of Latino smokers prefer menthol cigarettes, with 62% of Puerto Rican smokers using menthol; nearly 80% of Native Hawaiians; a majority of Filipinos; and a majority of smokers with behavioral health issues smoke menthol cigarettes. Frankly, the most marginalized groups disproportionately use these so-called “minty” products (CDC, 2010; Fallin, 2015; Forbes, 2013; Delnevo, 2011; Hawaii State Dept. of Health, 2009; Euromonitor, 2008; Hickman, 2015). Be appraised that 85% of African American adults and 94% of Black youth who smoke are using menthol products (Giovino, 2013). These striking statistics arise from the predatory 1 Written Communications Item #8.2 - Cummings 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 97 of 617 marketing of these products in the Black Community, where there are more advertisements, more lucrative promotions, and most disturbing menthol cigarettes are cheaper in the Black community compared to other communities (Henriksen et al., 2011; Seidenberg et al., 2010). These predacious practices for the past 50 years have led to Black folks dying disproportionately from heart attacks, lung cancer, strokes, and other tobacco-related diseases (RSG, 2014). Take note that new research shows that menthol cigarettes were responsible for 1.5 million new smokers, 157,000 smoking-related premature deaths, and 1.5 million life-years lost among African Americans from 1980–2018. While African Americans constitute 12% of the total US population, these figures represent, respectively, a staggering 15%, 41%, and 50% of the total menthol-related harm (Mendez & Le, 2021). The Council should be aware that menthol is an anesthetic by definition, and as if to add insult to injury, masks the harsh taste of tobacco and allows for deeper inhalation of toxins and greater amounts of nicotine. The greater the nicotine intake, the greater the addiction. Hence, it is no surprise menthol cigarette users find it harder to quit than non-menthol cigarette users (Ton et al., 2015; Levy et al., 2011). The “cool refreshing taste of menthol” heralded by the tobacco industry is just a guise; ultimately, menthol and all flavors allow the poisons in cigarettes and cigarillos “to go down easier!” Hookah: The Manipulation of Culture for Industry Profits! While we have all become aware of the meteoric rise of E-Cigarette use, especially among kids, another addictive product is growing in popularity: flavored shisha / Hookah. Let’s not be fooled: passing tobacco smoke through water does nothing to stop the user from inhaling all the toxins, nicotine, and cancer-causing chemicals associated with tobacco smoking. Let’s be clear, Hookah is just as deadly as cigarettes, if not more. Studies show that in a single hookah smoking session of 40 minutes, smokers consume 25 times the tar, 125 times the smoke 2.5 times the nicotine, and 10 times the carbon monoxide compared to smoking a cigarette (Primack et al., 2016). Moreover, both patrons and employees at Hookah lounges are exposed to elevated levels of 2nd hand smoke an already recognized cause of cancer (Zhou et al., 2016) Then there is the fiction that Hookah smoking is a 1000-year-old tradition in the Middle East. Look, tobacco only made its way to Europe some 500 years ago and only gradually made its way to the Middle East 3 to 4 hundred years ago. Make no mistake about it, it’s the Hookah Lounge owner’s manipulation of culture argument that is used to attract more business and profits.Flavored shisha like Blue Mist, Irish Kiss, and Sex on the Beach has nothing to do with Middle Eastern Culture. Once it was determined in the 1960s that smoking kills, Islamic Leaders deemed tobacco, Hookah, and Shisha Forbidden. At bottom, Hookah 2 Written Communications Item #8.2 - Cummings 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 98 of 617 lounges with their nightclub atmosphere have nothing to do with Middle Eastern Culture, rather it’s all about the Benjamin’s! It’s not about getting rid of all hookahs or all tobacco products, it's about getting rid of all flavors, at all places, in all products, period. We Can’t Wait on the State or the FDA The AATCLC is calling upon the City Council of Chula Vista to join a growing number of cities, counties, and states around the country that are prohibiting, jurisdiction-wide, the sales of menthol cigarettes and all other flavored tobacco products. In June 2018, San Francisco voters passed the first-ever citywide restriction on the sales of all flavored tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes and flavored e-cigarette juices. This “strongest flavor ban law ever” was rapidly replicated in numerous cities in California and around the country, including Oakland, Alameda, Hayward, Fremont, Berkeley, and Sacramento, just to mention a few. Just recently, the County of Sacramento adopted its own menthol and flavor restrictions. Today over 72 municipalities prohibit the sale of all menthol tobacco products including flavored e-juices no-smoke.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/flavored-tobacco-product-sales.pdf Indeed, in June of 2020, the State of Massachusetts became the first state to prohibit the sale of menthol cigarettes and all flavored tobacco products state-wide and in August of 2020 California followed suit and became the second state to do so.With the tobacco industry forcing a referendum of SB 793, now Prop 31, it becomes even more imperative that local jurisdictions take steps to protect their citizenry. We can’t wait on the State, let’s take steps to make Chula Vista healthier now! While it is important that the FDA finally began the rulemaking process in April of 2021 to remove menthol cigarettes and flavored little cigars from the marketplace, this process will take years. First, the proposed rule was only made public in April of 2022. And we have just come through a summer where the tobacco industry dragged out the comment period to August of this year. We already know that 100,000’s of comments have been sent to the FDA, the majority of them from the tobacco industry. Once the public comment is over, the “rule” is sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), whose review could take a number of months. Once a final rule is made public and there is more public comment, the industry will sue to stop the process from going forward. And may sue for numerous reasons. The bottom line is that we can’t wait on the FDA. Cities like Chula Vista must take steps to protect the health of our citizens, lives are at stake. Who Are the Racists: The Tobacco Control Advocates or the Tobacco Industry? Some groups funded by the tobacco industry insist that removing menthol cigarettes and flavored little cigars would be taking away “our” cigarettes; we’d be discriminatory; racist. This line of argumentation stands history on its head. As was pointed out earlier, it was and is the tobacco industry that predatorily markets these products in the Black Community. The facts are 3 Written Communications Item #8.2 - Cummings 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 99 of 617 these: there are more advertisements, more lucrative promotions, and most disturbing is that menthol cigarettes are cheaper in the Black Community compared to other communities Henriksen et al., 2011; Seidenberg et al., 2010). This is how these flavored death sticks became our” cigarettes, they pushed them down our throats! Still, other groups, spurred on and funded by the tobacco industry, have been spreading falsehoods, stating that restricting the sale of menthol cigarettes and flavored tobacco products, including flavored e-juices will lead to the “criminalization” of particularly young Black men. Nothing could be further from the truth. All ordinances adopted around the country would prohibit the sale of flavored products, it would not prohibit the possession of these products. The facts are that the adoption of menthol restrictions will not lead to police having any greater interaction with any youth; it won’t be illegal to possess these products, just retailers cannot sell them. These same groups rail about “unintended consequences.” We respond: Look at the Intended Consequences! As mentioned before, Black folks die disproportionately from tobacco-related diseases of heart disease, lung cancer, and stroke compared to other racial and ethnic groups. (RSG, 2014); menthol cigarettes and flavored little cigars are the agents of that destruction. It is estimated that 45,000 Black folks die each year from tobacco-related diseases RSG, 1998). In this regard, the Committee should remove all criminal penalties associated with the purchase, use, and possession of all tobacco products. Decriminalize tobacco! Hold retail owners responsible, not clerks, don’t punish kids! The AATCLC Formed in 2008, the African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council is composed of a cadre of dedicated community activists, academics, public health advocates, and researchers. Even though based in California, we are national in our scope and reach. We have partnered with community stakeholders, elected officials, and public health agencies, from Chicago, Boston, and Minneapolis to Berkeley and San Francisco. Our work has shaped the national discussion and direction of tobacco control policy, practices, and priorities, especially as they affect the lives of Black Americans, African immigrant populations, and ultimately all smokers. The AATCLC has been at the forefront in elevating the regulation of mentholated and other flavored tobacco products on the national tobacco control agenda, including testifying at the FDA hearings in 2010 and 2011 when the agency was first considering the removal of menthol cigarettes from the marketplace. In November of 2019 we testified on Capitol Hill in support of HR 2339 (The Pallone Bill), this bill would prohibit the manufacturing and sale of menthol and all flavored tobacco products throughout the United States. This Bill was passed in 4 Written Communications Item #8.2 - Cummings 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 100 of 617 the House of Representatives in February of 2020 but went nowhere in the Senate. In June of 2020 the AATCLC along with its partner Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) filed a lawsuit against the FDA for dragging their feet by leaving menthol on the marketplace with overwhelming scientific evidence showing that it should be removed immediately. Subsequently and importantly the American Medical Association (AMA) and the National Medical Association (NMA) have joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs. Call to Action! Now is the time to adopt strong tobacco control measures that can protect our families. We already know that menthol and flavors “make the poison go down easier.” Let’s not now allow menthol to make COVID-19 go down easier too! The City Council needs to put the health of Chula Vista at the forefront of their thoughts, not the interests and profits of the tobacco industry, the vaping industry, and their surrogates. This is not the time for half-steps, like continuing to allow these products to be sold in adult-only venues, rather it is time to take a stand for the public’s health and say:No Selling of Menthol Cigarettes and All Other Flavored Tobacco Products, including Flavored E-Juices and Flavored Hookah in Chula Vista! Say “No”to the continued predatory marketing of menthol-flavored tobacco products to our youth and say “Yes”to the health and welfare of our kids, who are the most vulnerable. Say Yes” to the protection of all residents of Chula Vista. We are all counting on you! Sincerely, Phillip Gardiner, Dr. P.H. Co-Chair AATCLC www.savingblacklives.org Carol McGruder, Co-Chair AATCLC Valerie Yerger, N.D., Co-Chair AATCLC 5 Written Communications Item #8.2 - Cummings http:// www.savingblacklive s.org 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 101 of 617 Good morning, Attached is a letter from the American Heart Association of Greater San Diego regarding the upcoming flavored tobacco ordinance being heard next Tuesday (Agenda Item 8.2). This ordinance is a critical step to protecting Chula Vista’s children, Communities of Color, and LGBTQ+ Community from nicotine addiction and tobacco-related disease and death. We urge you to support this ordinance. Thank you, Chelsea Walczak Vircks, MPH, CHES Senior Director, Community Impact American Heart Association 9404 Genesee Ave, Suite 240 San Diego, CA 92037 O: 858.410.3848 Pronouns: she/her/hers Emergencies don’t stop for COVID-19. Call 9-1-1 at the first sign of heart attack, stroke, or cardiac arrest to save lives. Written Communications Item #8.2 - Walczak Vircks https:// www.my pronoun s.org/ she-her https://www.heart.org/en/about-us/heart- attack-and-stroke-symptoms https:// www.hea rt.org/ heartorg 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 102 of 617 September 8, 2022 Chula Vista City Council Chula Vista City Hall 8130 Allison Avenue, La Mesa, CA 91942 Dear Mayor Salas and City Council Members, The American Heart Association is deeply concerned with the high rates of tobacco use among kids and adults driven by fruit, mint, and candy-flavored tobacco products. Ending the sale of flavored tobacco gives Chula Vista the opportunity to protect all residents including kids, communities of color, andthe LGBTQ+ community from the direeffects of tobacco use and nicotine addiction. Therefore, weurge you to end the sale of all flavored tobacco products, without exemptions. With nearly 24 percent of high school studentsnow reporting tobacco use, the need for a strong policy ending the sale of flavored tobacco is clear. The tobacco industry is actively and aggressively working to addict new users with easy access to minty, sweet and candy-flavored tobacco products. All flavored tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, menthol cigarettes, and cigars come in kid-friendly flavors and are highly addicting. Cigarette smoking is still the leading cause of preventable disease anddeath in the United States, claiming on average 480,000 lives each year. Smoking increases the risk for heart disease and stroke and the risk for blood clots. The best way to prevent tobacco-related illness and death is to prevent people fromstarting to smoke in the first place. Ending the sale of flavored tobacco products will reduce access to the products that are the tobacco industry’s key strategy for targeting and addicting new smokers. Although Senate Bill 793 passed with bipartisan support and a signature from the Governor in 2020, tobacco companies spent more than $20 million to place thelaw on hold until the next statewide general election. Chula Vista kids can’t wait to be protected - local action will protect the community now and address the urgent issue of youth tobacco use. Every day we delay is a day that Big Tobacco will use mint, fruit, and candy-flavored tobacco to addict more life-long customers. Over 120 communities across California protect their residents from nicotine addiction and tobacco-related death and disease by prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco products. Chula Vista kids deserve these same protections. Thank you. Sincerely, Juli Moran, MBA Chair, Board of Directors Greater San Diego Division, American Heart Association Greater San Diego Division 9404 Genesee Avenue Suite 240 San Diego, CA 92037 Board of Directors 2022-2023 Chair of the Board Juli Moran Thirtle, MBA Deloitte President of the Board Ramón Hernandez, DrPH, MPH UC San Diego Immediate Past-Chair Yameeka J. Williams, FACHE Kaiser Permanente Immediate Past-President Robert Stein, MD, FACC, FAHA Graybill Medical Group Directors-at-Large Debbie Day, MBA Nancy Greengold, MD, MBA Natalie Hawryluk, PhD Andrew Ho, MD, FACC Steven Hooker, PhD Tommy Le, MHA Joe Lo Duca, MBA, MPH Gene Ma, MD, FACEP Linda Naviaux Niggli Ajay Srivastava, MD Ernesto Villanueva, EdD Matthew Zubiller David Zumaya, MS Executive Director Jessica Newmyer Written Communications Item #8.2 - Walczak Vircks 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 103 of 617 From: Rima Khoury < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 10:29 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Chula Vista Flavored Tobacco Ban Agenda # 8.2 - Hookah Exemption Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers, My name is Rima S. Khoury and I am General Counsel for Fumari, a premium hookah tobacco manufacturer located in San Diego City and one of the founding members of the National Hookah Community Association which was established to protect and preserve the cultural tradition of hookah. https://www.nationalhookah.com/ Thank you for exempting the nearly thousand year cultural tradition of hookah at in the City of Chula Vista. Please see presentation link below for your consideration. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1SvmoLKgKKm81TDzBv0P3cQdDovhJj5srvHis2JpzccA/present? usp=sharing There is no teen hookah epidemic. The FDA and CDC reports have made it clear that hookah is not the problem with youth. According to the CDC 2021 survey, current hookah use among high school students is less than 1% at 0.8%, and this number has been going down over the last decade. The FDA recently stated in their Guidance for the Industry dated April 2020 that although data shows that flavored tobacco entice youth, that such data does NOT appear to raise comparably urgent public health concerns with youth usage of hookah products because the lower prevalence of youth use of these products suggests that they do NOT appear to be as appealing to youth at this time. Emphasis added. See page 30 in attached. If the goal is to protect kids, this would not be achieved by banning hookah as kids are not using hookah according to these reliable sources. If hookah is banned, there will be a disproportionate impact on Middle Eastern, Persian, Turkish, Indian, Armenian, and North African minority communities and minority owned businesses who are still struggling due to COVID-19. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/youth_data/tobacco_use/index.htm#:~:text= In%202021%2C%20about%201%20of%20every%20100%20middle%20school%20students,in%20the%20 past%2030%20days.&text=In%202021%2C%20nearly%202%20of,in%20the%20past%2030%20days. Warning: External Email Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 mailto:rima@fu mari.com mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov https:// gcc02.safelinks.protection.outl ook.com/?url=https%3A%2F %2Flinkprotect.cudasvc.com %2Furl%3Fa%3Dhttps%253a %252f% 252fwww.nationalhookah.com %252f%26c%3DE%2C1% 2CF_ATqMfAtmPTeWZSYde guWVvFtk-ekpEe- sqN7L3XvA6Wk1aEtj0whzZn nwfqmoveRNSDxKi4p9X- AQWRI7CGPGPYn2vSIG3kQ RJ11BkxyE8vJs47zQz% 26typo%3D1&data=04% 7C01%7Cdhoward% 40redwoodcity.org% 7C5ac1c6f923a44a15de7f08d 9afa31c41% 7C02eee40d6a354d7588035 403096cc23e%7C0%7C0% 7C637733939034357300% 7CUnknown% 7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiM C4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luM zIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVC I6Mn0%3D% 7C1000&sdata=CHeaGpAu1p RQFfHz9b% 2B6LCCj8QZ9CK3r% 2FTyEdMc5pJA% 3D&reserved=0 https://docs.google.com/presentation/ d/1SvmoLKgKKm81TDzBv0P3cQdDovhJj5srvHis2JpzccA/present?usp=sharinghttps:// docs.goog le.com/ presentati on/ d/1SvmoL KgKKm81 TDzBv0P3 cQdDovhJ j5srvHis2J pzccA/ present? usp=shari ng https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/youth_data/tobacco_use/ index.htm#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20about%201%20of%20every%20100%20middle% 20school%20students,in%20the%20past%2030%20days.&text=In%202021%2C% 20nearly%202%20of,in%20the%20past%2030%20days https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/youth_data/tobacco_use/ index.htm#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20about%201%20of%20every%20100%20middle% 20school%20students,in%20the%20past%2030%20days.&text=In%202021%2C% 20nearly%202%20of,in%20the%20past%2030%20days https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/youth_data/tobacco_use/ index.htm#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20about%201%20of%20every%20100% 20middle%20school%20students,in%20the%20past%2030%20days.&text=In% 202021%2C%20nearly%202%20of,in%20the%20past%2030%20days 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 104 of 617 Hookahs are not being confiscated in schools. Hookahs are 3 feet tall and cannot be easily concealed in your pocket or backpack like vape. Hookahs take 25 – 30 minutes to set up and need hot coals, therefore it cannot be smoked during recess in the bathroom at school. Hookah’s cost over $200 for all the ten parts and accessories, making it out of reach for most kids. Hookah is not the problem. Yet hookah has become collateral damage in the war against vape. Hookah is not vape. Hookah has been practiced for nearly a thousand years by Persians, Arabs, Armenians, Turks, Indians, North Africans, and other minority groups many of which have immigrated to America and still practice their cultural traditions. Hookah is the center piece of social gatherings and is often offered to guests as a sign of hospitality and respect. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 105 of 617 Many immigrant small business owners have built their business doing what they know from their home country. Often times they work 20 hour days, seven days a week to support multiple generations of their family. Banning hookah has crippled these immigrant small business owners who are already struggling due to COVID-19. Thank you for proposing a reasonable regulation that addresses youth usage and access to flavored vape. Many of these business owners that have been operating legally for years are happy to work with law makers to address youth access issues verses losing their livelihood as hookah lounges and retailer owners often have several years remaining on their leases and have personally guaranteed their leases. If hookah were banned they would not only lose their business, but their homes and no longer be able to support their family and extended family. A tobacco flavor ban is a ban on hookah because it only comes in flavors. Even hundreds of years ago hookah was made with molasses and honey which is still the case today. The federal government is doing a lot to address youth access and usage of flavored tobacco products. At the end of 2019 the federal government passed a 21 and over minimum for tobacco products across all fifty states, called Tobacco-21. In addition, in February 2020 the FDA passed an e- cigg ban on flavored e-cartridges. September 9, 2020 was the FDA deadline for all vape and hookah products to be accepted for FDA review through PMTA or SE applications, after which any products without FDA authorization will be unlawfully on the market and their products seized and injunctions restricting sales will be issued along with fines and penalties. Currently, FDA has issued approximately six million refusals or Marketing Denial Orders for these applications. Furthermore, the FDA announced that they will be banning menthol and flavored cigars. The federal government is addressing the youth access issue and also providing legislation across the board, eliminating the patchwork of laws from city to city and closing loop holes for bad actors to skirt the law. Moreover, Hookah has been exempted from the California State flavored tobacco ban, SB793, because of its cultural significance and that it is fundamentally different from vape. Please see attached video of Senator Hill, author of the bill, explaining why hookah was exempted from SB793 at the Senate Appropriations hearing on June 25th, 2020. Senator Hill learned the difference between vape and hookah and understood that hookah was not the problem and took steps to exempt it due to its cultural significance. SB793, which, as amended and revised, prohibits the sale of all flavored tobacco products and flavored tobacco product enhancers, exempting hookah tobacco, cigars with a wholesale price of $12.00 or more, loose leaf pipe tobacco was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom on August 28, 2020. SB793 was referendized and is on the November 2022 general election ballot as Prop 31. Please see the hookah exemption language from SB793 below: c) Subdivision (b) does not apply to the sale of flavored shisha tobacco products by a hookah tobacco retailer if all of the following conditions are met: 1) The hookah tobacco retailer has a valid license to sell tobacco products issued pursuant to Chapter 2 commencing with Section 22971.7) of Division 8.6 of the Business and Professions Code. 2) The hookah tobacco retailer does not permit any person under 21 years of age to be present or enter the premises at any time. 3) The hookah tobacco retailer shall operate in accordance with all relevant state and local laws relating to the sale of tobacco products. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 106 of 617 4) If consumption of tobacco products is allowed on the premises of the hookah tobacco retailer, the hookah tobacco retailer shall operate in accordance with all state and local laws relating to the consumption of tobacco products on the premises of a tobacco retailer, including, but not limited to, Section 6404.5 of the Labor Code. SB793 balances the interests of law makers by addressing youth access and usage of flavored tobacco products, while protecting the cultural tradition of hookah. The SB793 hookah exemption limits sales to 21 and over establishments, meaning you have to be 21 and over to enter a retail establishment or lounge in order to purchase hookah and requires these establishments to comply with local and state laws. This shows that law makers can reach their regulatory goals without creating unintended consequences like eliminating the rich cultural tradition of hookah. We thank the City of Chula Vista for proposing a flavor ban that exempts hookah just as the State of Massachusetts and soon California, Denver, CO; and the following California Cities: Los Angeles City, San Jose, Elk Grove, Walnut Creek, West Hollywood, Burbank, Glendale, Irvine, Long Beach, Encinitas, San Diego City and County, El Cajon, Ventura, Pleasant Hill, Redwood City and Culver City have done. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or to discuss further. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qlUH3hmvUc The Culture of Hookah | An Exploration of History and Tradition RIMA KHOURY, ESQ. GENERAL COUNSEL 619) 331-3535 EXT. 723 FUMARI INC. The information in this email is confidential. It is intended only for the use of the individuals or entities named above. You are hereby notified that if you are not the intended recipient, or employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the information in this email is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and delete the original. Thank you. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https:// gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/? url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com% 2Fwatch%3Fv% 3D9qlUH3hmvUc&data=04%7C01% 7Cdhoward%40redwoodcity.org% 7C5ac1c6f923a44a15de7f08d9afa31c41% 7C02eee40d6a354d7588035403096cc23e %7C0%7C0%7C637733939034367254% 7CUnknown% 7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMD AiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJX VCI6Mn0%3D% 7C1000&sdata=DzsLMEIboNEsd8koAu4rR VbPb9qs6eKp9u5%2BPCnakY4% 3D&reserved=0 http:// www.fumari.c om/ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 107 of 617 SB 793 Hookah Exemption Senator Hill Video: https://cvapps.chulavistaca.gov/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=246066&dbid=0&repo=CityClerk&dbid=0&re po=CityClerk&mediaid=246214 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 108 of 617 Enforcement Priorities for Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) and Other Deemed Products on the Market Without Premarket Authorization (Revised)* This is a revision to the first edition of this guidance, which issued in January 2020. Guidance for Industry Comments may be submitted at any time for Agency consideration. Electronic comments may be submitted to https://www.regulations.gov. Alternatively, submit written comments to the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with docket number FDA-2019-D-0661. For questions regarding this guidance, contact the Center for Tobacco Products at (Tel) 1-877- CTP-1373 (1-877-287-1373) Monday-Friday, 9 a.m. – 4 p.m. ET. Additional copies are available online at https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/products- guidance-regulations/rules-regulations-and-guidance. You may send an e-mail request to SmallBiz.Tobacco@fda.hhs.gov to receive an electronic copy of this guidance. You may send a request for hard copies to U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Tobacco Products, Attn: Office of Small Business Assistance, Document Control Center, Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-2000. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Tobacco Products April 2020 Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https:// www.regulations.gov/ mailto:SmallBiz.Tobacco@fd a.hhs.gov https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/ products-guidance-regulations/rules- regulations-and-guidance https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/ products-guidance-regulations/rules- regulations-and-guidance 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 109 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations i Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 2 II. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 3 A. Statutory and Regulatory History ................................................................................................ 3 B. FDA Response to Evidence of Increasing Youth Use of ENDS Products ................................. 6 III. DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................. 9 IV. ENFORCEMENT PRIORITIES REGARDING CERTAIN ENDS PRODUCTS ON THE MARKET WITHOUT PREMARKET AUTHORIZATION .................... 10 A. Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 10 B. Data Show Substantial Increase in Youth Use of ENDS Products, Particularly Certain Flavored, Cartridge-Based ENDS Products .............................................................................. 11 C. Additional Relevant Considerations .......................................................................................... 17 D. Enforcement Priorities for ENDS Products ............................................................................... 18 1. Any flavored, cartridge-based ENDS product (other than a tobacco- or menthol- flavored product) ....................................................................................................... 19 2. All other ENDS products without adequate measures to prevent minors’ access .... 21 3. Any ENDS product that is targeted to minors or whose marketing is likely to promote use of ENDS by minors .............................................................................. 24 4. Any ENDS product that is offered for sale in the United States after September 9, 2020 ..................................................................................................... 27 E. Avoiding a “Black Market” ........................................................................................................ 28 V. PREMARKET REVIEW FOR OTHER DEEMED NEW TOBACCO PRODUCTS .................................................................................................................... 29 APPENDIX A – SIGNIFICANT COMMENTS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO MARCH 2019 DRAFT GUIDANCE AND FDA RESPONSES ..............................................30 Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 110 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 2 Enforcement Priorities for Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) and Other Deemed Products on the Market Without Premarket Authorization (Revised) Guidance for Industry1 1 This guidance was prepared by the Office of Compliance and Enforcement, Office of Health Communication and Education, Office of Regulations, and Office of Science in the Center for Tobacco Products at FDA. This guidance represents the current thinking of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. To discuss an alternative approach, contact the FDA staff responsible for this guidance as listed on the title page. I. INTRODUCTION This guidance document describes how we intend to prioritize our enforcement resources with regard to the marketing of certain deemed tobacco products that do not have premarket authorization.2 2 As with FDA’s prior compliance policies on deemed new tobacco products that do not have premarket authorization, this guidance document does not apply to any deemed product that was not on the market on August 8, 2016. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 111 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 3 For ENDS products marketed without FDA authorization, FDA intends to prioritize enforcement against: Any flavored, cartridge-based ENDS product (other than a tobacco- or menthol-flavored ENDS product); All other ENDS products for which the manufacturer has failed to take (or is failing to take) adequate measures to prevent minors’ access; and Any ENDS product that is targeted to minors or whose marketing is likely to promote use of ENDS by minors.3 3 For purposes of this Final Guidance, FDA’s use of the term “minor” refers to individuals under the age of 21. This is consistent with the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (H.R. 1865), signed into law on December 20, 2019, which included a provision amending section 906(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to increase the federal minimum age to purchase tobacco products from 18 to 21, and adding a provision that it is unlawful for any retailer to sell a tobacco product to any person younger than 21 years of age. In addition, FDA is working to update our regulations within 180 days, consistent with the timeline set forth in the law. Further, FDA intends to prioritize enforcement of any ENDS product that is offered for sale after September 9, 2020, and for which the manufacturer has not submitted a premarket application or after a negative action by FDA on a timely submitted application). This guidance does not in any way alter the fact that it is illegal to market any new tobacco product without premarket authorization. FDA is continuously evaluating new information and adjusting its enforcement priorities in light of the best available data, and it will continue to do so with respect to these products. FDA will take appropriate action regarding tobacco products that are marketed without premarket authorization, including as warranted based on changed circumstances, new information, or to better address minors’ use of those products. FDA’s guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe the Agency’s current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word should in Agency guidances means that something is suggested or recommended, but not required. II. BACKGROUND A. Statutory and Regulatory History The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) (Public Law 111-31) granted FDA the authority to regulate the manufacture, marketing, and distribution of cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco, and smokeless tobacco products to protect the public health and to reduce tobacco use by minors. The Tobacco Control Act also gave FDA the authority to issue regulations deeming other products that meet the statutory definition of a tobacco product4 4 21 U.S.C 321(rr) (section 201(rr) of the FD&C Act). to be subject to chapter IX of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 387 through 387u) section 901(b) of the FD&C Act). Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 112 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 4 In accordance with that authority, on May 10, 2016, FDA issued a final rule deeming all products that meet the statutory definition of a tobacco product, except accessories of deemed tobacco products, to be subject to FDA’s tobacco product authority. This included electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), cigars, waterpipe (hookah) tobacco, pipe tobacco, nicotine gels, and dissolvables that were not already subject to the FD&C Act (81 FR 28974 at 28976 (May 10, 2016)). The requirements in Chapter IX of the FD&C Act now apply to deemed products. Particularly relevant to this guidance is section 910, which imposes certain premarket-review requirements for “new tobacco products”—i.e., those that were not commercially marketed in the United States as of February 15, 2007. Accordingly, after the rule’s effective date, deemed new tobacco products were required to obtain premarket authorization under Section 910. Deemed new tobacco products that remain on the market without marketing authorization are marketed unlawfully in contravention of the Tobacco Control Act. Through the premarket review process, FDA conducts a science-based evaluation to determine whether a new tobacco product meets the applicable statutory standard for marketing authorization—for example, whether the product is appropriate for the protection of public health with respect to the risks and benefits to the population as a whole, including users and nonusers, and taking into account, among other things, the likelihood that those who do not use tobacco products will start using them. The preamble to the May 10, 2016, final deeming rule explained that FDA intended to defer enforcement for failure to have premarket authorization during two compliance periods related to premarket review: one for submission and FDA receipt of applications and one for obtaining premarket authorization. The first compliance period depended on the type of application. The compliance date was 12 months from the effective date of the rule for substantial equivalence exemption requests (EX REQs), 18 months for substantial equivalence reports (SE Reports), and 24 months for premarket tobacco applications PMTAs). In addition, the preamble explained that under the second compliance period: Unless FDA has issued an order denying or refusing to accept the submission, products for which timely premarket submissions have been submitted will be subject to a continued compliance period for 12 months after the initial compliance period described previously. For such products, FDA does not intend to initiate enforcement for failure to have premarket authorization during this continued compliance period.5 5 81 FR at 29011. The preamble further explained that this compliance policy did not apply to any new tobacco product that was not on the market on August 8, 2016. Significantly, this policy did not confer lawful marketing status on new tobacco products being marketed without the necessary premarket authorization. In May 2017, FDA published a guidance document, Three-Month Extension of Certain Tobacco Product Compliance Deadlines Related to the Final Deeming Rule, under which the Agency, as Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 113 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 5 a matter of enforcement discretion, stated its intention to defer enforcement for an additional three months for all future compliance dates for requirements under the final deeming rule. In July 2017, FDA announced a new comprehensive plan for tobacco and nicotine regulation that would serve as a multi-year roadmap in an effort to significantly reduce tobacco-related disease and death. Prior to this announcement, nationally representative data suggested that youth use of e-cigarettes had declined beginning in 2016.6 6 Jamal, A., A. Gentzke, S.S. Hu, et al., “Tobacco Use Among Middle and High School Students — United States, 2011–2016,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 66:597–603, 2017, available at: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6623a1.htm. The comprehensive plan was announced in part to afford the Agency time to explore clear and meaningful measures to make combustible tobacco products less toxic, less appealing, and less addictive. One aspect of the plan involved striking a balance between regulation and encouraging development of innovative tobacco products that may be less harmful than cigarettes. The Agency announced that it planned to issue an updated compliance policy further deferring some enforcement timelines described in the final deeming rule. In accordance with this comprehensive plan, in August 2017, FDA announced an extension of the period during which it did not intend to initiate enforcement action for premarket review requirements under the final deeming rule (“August 2017 Compliance Policy”) for deemed tobacco products that were on the market on August 8, 2016. This revised policy stated that, for these products, FDA did not intend to initiate enforcement regarding submitting EX REQs, SE Reports, and PMTAs for newly regulated combusted tobacco products (such as most cigars) until August 8, 2021, and FDA did not intend to initiate enforcement regarding EX REQs, SE Reports, and PMTAs for newly regulated noncombusted tobacco products (such as most ENDS products) until August 8, 2022. In addition, FDA revised the compliance policy relating to the period after FDA receipt of EX REQs, SE Reports, and PMTAs for deemed tobacco products that were on the market on August 8, 2016. FDA stated that, under this policy, it intended to continue deferring enforcement until the Agency rendered a decision on an application (i.e., issuance of: a Marketing Order; a No Marketing Order; a Refuse to File; or a Refuse to Accept) or the application was withdrawn. In March 2018, the August 2017 Compliance Policy was challenged in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, and on May 15, 2019, the court issued an order that vacated the guidance.7 7 American Academy of Pediatrics, et al. v. Food and Drug Administration, et al., 379 F. Supp. 3d 461, 496 (D. Md. 2019). On July 12, 2019, the court issued a further order directing FDA to require that premarket authorization applications for all new—i.e., not “grandfathered”8 8 A “grandfathered” product is one that was on the market as of February 15, 2007. Guidance, Establishing That a Tobacco Product Was Commercially Marketed in the United States as of February 15, 2007, dated September 2014, available at: https://www.fda.gov/media/123544/download. deemed tobacco products be submitted to the Agency within 10 months, by May 12, 2020, and providing for a one-year period during which products with timely filed applications might remain on the market Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.fda.gov/media/123544/ download https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/ mm6623a1.htm 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 114 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 6 pending FDA review.9 9 American Academy of Pediatrics, et al. v. Food and Drug Administration, et al., No. 8:18-cv-883 (PWG), 2019 WL 3067492, at *7 (D. Md. July 12, 2019) (Dkt. No. 127). The court has granted intervention to vapor industry trade associations for purposes of appealing the court’s decision and remedies order. See American Academy of Pediatrics, et al. v. Food and Drug Administration, et al., No. 8:18-cv-883 (PWG), Dkt. No. 154 (Oct. 2, 2019). An appeal is pending. See American Academy of Pediatrics v. Cigar Ass’n of America, Nos. 19-2130, -2132, -2198, - 2242 (4th Cir.). The court subsequently clarified that its order did not restrict FDA’s authority to enforce the premarket review provisions against deemed products, or categories of deemed products, prior to the submission date or during the one-year review period.10 10 American Academy of Pediatrics, et al. v. Food and Drug Administration, et al., Case No. 8:18-cv-883 (PWG), D. Md. Aug. 12, 2019), Dkt. No. 132. On April 22, 2020, the court granted a motion for a 120-day extension (until September 9, 2020) in light of the global outbreak of respiratory illness caused by a new coronavirus.11 11 American Academy of Pediatrics, et al. v. Food and Drug Administration, et al., Case No. 8:18-cv-883 (PWG), D. Md. Apr. 22, 2020), Dkt. No. 182. As required by the court’s order, deemed new tobacco products on the market as of August 8, 2016, for which premarket authorization applications are not filed by September 9, 2020, are subject to FDA enforcement actions, in the Agency’s discretion.12 12 American Academy of Pediatrics, et al. v. Food and Drug Administration, et al., No. 8:18-cv-883 (PWG), 2019 WL 3067492, at *7 (D. Md. July 12, 2019) (Dkt. No. 127). B. FDA Response to Evidence of Increasing Youth Use of ENDS Products In late 2017, FDA started to see a marked increase in complaints about ENDS products. FDA initiated an investigation of these complaints, the majority of which pertained to minors’ access to and use of these products. This new information indicated an alarming increase in the use of ENDS products by middle and high school students. In April 2018, FDA conducted a nationwide undercover enforcement effort that resulted in FDA issuing 56 warning letters to online retailers and 6 civil money penalty (CMP) complaints to retail establishments related to the illegal sales of certain ENDS products to minors. In addition, FDA sent an official request for information to manufacturers of certain ENDS products commonly used by minors requiring them to submit documents to facilitate the Agency’s understanding of the reported high rates of youth use and the particular youth appeal of these products. FDA also took measures to address the sale of ENDS products to minors online by contacting eBay to raise concerns over several listings on its website. This resulted in listings for these ENDS products being removed from eBay. In May 2018, FDA issued 17 warning letters to manufacturers, distributors, and retailers for selling e-liquids with labeling and/or advertising that resemble kid-friendly food products, such as juice boxes, candy, or cookies. The warning letters stated that failure to correct violations may result in FDA initiating further action such as seizure or injunctive relief. Of these warning letters, 13 were issued as part of a joint action with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). On September 12, 2018, FDA announced a series of enforcement and other regulatory actions related to the labeling and advertising of ENDS products, including that it had conducted Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 115 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 7 nationwide, undercover investigations of brick-and-mortar and online stores over the summer of 2018 and issued more than 1,300 warning letters and CMP complaints to retailers who illegally sold ENDS products to minors. FDA also issued 12 warning letters to online retailers that were selling misleadingly labeled and/or advertised e-liquids resembling kid-friendly food products such as candy and cookies. In addition, on September 12, 2018, FDA issued letters to five ENDS product manufacturers, requesting each company to submit a plan describing how it would address minors’ access to and use of its products. In response to the September 12th letters to industry, manufacturers described safeguards that they could implement to help to restrict minors’ access to ENDS products sold at brick and mortar retailers and online. Examples of potential safeguards included: Establishing or enhancing programs, such as mystery shopper programs, to monitor retailer compliance with age-verification and sales restrictions; Establishing and enforcing contractual penalties for contracted retailers that sell tobacco products to youth; Using age-verification technology to better restrict access to the manufacturer’s website, such as through independent, third-party age- and identity-verification services that compare customer information against third-party data sources; and Limiting the quantity of ENDS products that a customer may purchase within a given period of time. In conjunction with issuing the September 2018 letters, FDA announced in September 2018 that the Agency was considering whether, in light of current information, it would be appropriate to revisit the August 2017 Compliance Policy, which could result in withdrawing or revising the policy with respect to certain flavored products that may be contributing to the rise in youth use and having firms “remove some or all of [these] products . . . until they receive premarket authorization and otherwise meet all of their obligations under the law.”13 13 FDA takes new steps to address epidemic of youth e-cigarette use, including a historic action against more than 1,300 retailers and 5 major manufacturers for their roles perpetuating youth access (Sept. 11, 2018), available at: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-takes-new-steps-address-epidemic-youth-e-cigarette- use-including-historic-action-against-more. Following the September 12th letters and announcement, FDA repeatedly publicly discussed14 14 See, e.g., Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on proposed new steps to protect youth by preventing access to flavored tobacco products and banning menthol in cigarettes, available at: https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm625884.htm; Scudder, L., “Vaping and E- Cigarettes in Kids: An Unprecedented Epidemic,” Medscape, January 28, 2019, available at: https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/908077?faf=1. the fact that these compliance timelines were under reconsideration and solicited the view of stakeholders— including manufacturers, retail associations, and public interest organizations.15 15 See, e.g., FDA Public Calendar – Meeting With FDA Officials, available at: https://www.fda.gov/news- events/fda-meetings-conferences-and-workshops/public-calendar-meetings-fda-officials (noting meetings held on October 11, 16, 18, 29 and 30 of 2018; November 13, 2018; and December 19, 2018); February 6, 2019 Letters sent Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-takes-new-steps-address- epidemic-youth-e-cigarette-use-including-historic-action-against-morehttps://www.fda.gov/news- events/press-announcements/ fda-takes-new-steps-address- epidemic-youth-e-cigarette-use- including-historic-action-against- more https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/ PressAnnouncements/ucm625884.htmhttps://www.medscape.com/ viewarticle/908077?faf=1 https://www.fda.gov/news- events/fda-meetings- conferences-and- workshops/public-calendar- meetings-fda-officials https://www.fda.gov/news-events/fda-meetings-conferences-and- workshops/public-calendar-meetings-fda-officials 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 116 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 8 Since the effective date of the Deeming Rule in August 2016, FDA has issued more than 10,000 warning letters and more than 1,400 CMP complaints to retailers for the sale of ENDS products to minors. Specifically, from April 2018 through August 2019, FDA issued over 6,000 warning letters and more than 1,000 CMP complaints to retailers for the sale of ENDS products to minors. Since May 2018, FDA has also issued over 40 warning letters to manufacturers, distributors, and retailers for selling e-liquids with false or misleading labeling and/or advertising that resemble kid-friendly products. In June 2019, the Agency issued joint FDA/FTC warning letters to four e-liquid manufacturers for violations related to online posts by social media influencers on the companies’ behalf. In September 2019, FDA issued a warning letter to an ENDS manufacturer for marketing unauthorized modified risk tobacco products, including in outreach to youth.16 16 For more information, please see https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-warns-juul-labs- marketing-unauthorized-modified-risk-tobacco-products-including-outreach-youth. FDA will continue to use all available tools to prevent youth use of all tobacco products, including ENDS products. In 2018, FDA continued to receive information underscoring the problem of youth use of ENDS products. Current e-cigarette use had increased considerably among U.S. middle and high school students during 2017–2018, reversing a decline in e-cigarette use that had been observed in recent years and increasing overall tobacco product use in 2018. Specifically, among high school students, current e-cigarette use had increased by 78 percent in the past year (from 11.7 percent in 2017 to 20.8 percent in 2018, p<0.001), while among middle school students, current e-cigarette use had increased by 48 percent (from 3.3 percent in 2017 to 4.9 percent in 2018, p = 0.001).17 17 Cullen, K.A., B.K. Ambrose, A.S. Gentzke, et al., “Notes from the Field: Increase in e-cigarette use and any tobacco product use among middle and high school students – United States, 2011-2018,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(45);1276-1277, 2018. Frequent use among high school students (defined as use on 20 of the past 30 days) also had increased, from 20.0 percent in 2017 to 27.7 percent in 2018 (p = 0.008).18 18 Id. Data from this study, as well as the concerns described above, prompted FDA to issue a draft guidance, Modifications to Compliance Policy for Certain Deemed Tobacco Products” (“March 2019 Draft Guidance”), regarding the continued marketing of deemed tobacco products that have not obtained premarket authorization, and to call on industry to do more to keep their products out of the hands of minors. In 2019, two of the largest surveys of tobacco use among youth found that e-cigarette use has hit the highest levels ever recorded. As detailed in Section IV below, data from both the National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) and the Monitoring the Future (MTF) Study have documented a continued increase in youth use of ENDS products and further underscored the magnitude of the problem. These data, information conveyed to FDA in comments to the March 2019 Draft Guidance, and concern about health and safety issues connected to these products—e.g., the to JUUL Labs, Inc. and Altria Group Inc., requesting meetings to discuss concerns related youth addiction to tobacco products, available at: https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/rules-regulations-and-guidance/ctp-letters- industry. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/rules-regulations-and- guidance/ctp-letters-industryhttps:// www.f da.gov / tobacc o- produc ts/ rules- regulat ions- and- guidan ce/ctp- letters- industr y https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda- warns-juul-labs-marketing-unauthorized-modified-risk- tobacco-products-including-outreach-youth https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda- warns-juul-labs-marketing-unauthorized-modified-risk-tobacco- products-including-outreach-youth 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 117 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 9 harmful effects of nicotine on adolescent brain development, as well as battery explosions with ENDS products—continue to inform FDA’s serious public health concerns regarding the sale of these products without premarket authorization. Repeated exposure to nicotine during adolescence induces long-lasting changes in brain regions involved in addiction, attention, learning, and memory. Furthermore, as of December 17, 2019, there have been approximately 2,506 reported cases of hospitalizations for lung injuries associated with use of vaping products (“hospitalized EVALI patients”), including 54 confirmed deaths.19 19 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Outbreak of Lung Injury Associated with E-cigarette Use, or Vaping,” available at https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html#latest- outbreak-information. Working closely with other federal and state agencies, FDA has not been able to determine the cause of this outbreak. It appears that most of the patients impacted by these illnesses reported using THC-containing products, with evidence suggesting that additive agents, specifically Vitamin E, may play a causative role. In many of the cases, individuals reported using multiple products, including some with nicotine. Many different substances and product sources are still under investigation. Although this guidance does not address products that are not tobacco products, the outbreak of lung injuries associated with use of vaping products illustrates public health and safety concerns that may arise for products for which information related to product safety and health impact are lacking and affirms the importance of the premarket review process, as contemplated by the Tobacco Control Act, to scientifically evaluate products based on a public health standard. Accordingly, FDA is issuing this Final Guidance to communicate its enforcement priorities with respect to ENDS products. FDA’s decision to exercise its enforcement authorities with respect to particular products will be determined on a case-by-case basis, informed by the enforcement priorities described in this Final Guidance and any other relevant factors.20 20 See Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 835 (1985) (providing that the FD&C Act’s enforcement provisions commit broad discretion to the Secretary to decide how and when they should be exercised). III. DEFINITIONS For purposes of this guidance, FDA intends to use the following definitions: Cartridge-based ENDS products are a type of ENDS product that consists of, includes, or involves a cartridge or pod that holds liquid that is to be aerosolized through product use. For purposes of this definition, a cartridge or pod is any small, enclosed unit (sealed or unsealed) designed to fit within or operate as part of an electronic nicotine delivery system.21 21 An example of products that would not be captured by this definition include completely self-contained, disposable products. Electronic nicotine delivery systems (or ENDS) include devices, components, and/or parts that deliver aerosolized e-liquid when inhaled. For example, FDA considers vapes or vape pens, personal vaporizers, e-cigarettes, cigalikes, e-pens, e-hookahs, e-cigars, and e-pipes to be ENDS. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe- lung-disease.html#latest-outbreak-informationhttps:// www.cdc.gov/ tobacco/ basic_informatio n/e-cigarettes/ severe-lung- disease.html#lat est-outbreak- information 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 118 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 10 E-liquids are a type of ENDS product and generally refer to liquid nicotine and nicotine- containing e-liquids (i.e., liquid nicotine combined with colorings, flavorings, and/or other ingredients). Liquids that do not contain nicotine or other material made or derived from tobacco, but that are intended or reasonably expected to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product, may be components or parts and, therefore, subject to FDA’s tobacco control authorities. Label means a display of written, printed, or graphic matter upon the immediate container of any article. Section 201(k) of the FD&C Act. Labeling means all labels and other written, printed, or graphic matter (1) upon any article or any of its containers or wrappers, or (2) accompanying such article. Section 201(m) of the FD&C Act. New tobacco product means (1) any tobacco product (including those products in test markets) that was not commercially marketed in the United States as of February 15, 2007; or (2) any modification (including a change in design, any component, any part, or any constituent, including a smoke constituent, or in the content, delivery or form of nicotine, or any other additive or ingredient) of a tobacco product where the modified product was commercially marketed in the United States after February 15, 2007. Section 910(a) of the FD&C Act. Tobacco product means any product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption, including any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product (except for raw materials other than tobacco used in manufacturing a component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product). The term “tobacco product” does not mean an article that under the FD&C Act is a drug (section 201(g)(1) (21 U.S.C 321(g)(1))), a device (section 201(h)), or a combination product (section 503(g) (21 U.S.C 353(g))). Section 201(rr) of the FD&C Act. IV. ENFORCEMENT PRIORITIES REGARDING CERTAIN ENDS PRODUCTS ON THE MARKET WITHOUT PREMARKET AUTHORIZATION A. Overview The Tobacco Control Act provides that new tobacco products (i.e., non-grandfathered products) may not legally be marketed without premarket authorization. Accordingly, all deemed new tobacco products on the market without authorization are illegally marketed products. Beginning February 6, 2020, FDA intends to prioritize enforcement of the premarket review requirements for certain ENDS products, including against retailers selling such products. Specifically, FDA intends to prioritize enforcement against: 1) Flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products (except for tobacco- or menthol-flavored products); 2) All other ENDS products for which the manufacturer has failed to take (or is failing to take) adequate measures to prevent minors’ access; and Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 119 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 11 3)Any ENDS products targeted to, or whose marketing is likely to promote use by, minors. In addition, FDA intends to prioritize enforcement of any ENDS product that is offered for sale in the United States after September 9, 2020, and for which the manufacturer has not submitted a premarket application (or after a negative action by FDA on a timely submitted application).22 22 We note that FDA would be enforcing the priorities discussed in Section IV of this guidance regardless of the court’s decision in the AAP case. As discussed in this Final Guidance, FDA is implementing this policy to address the alarming increase in youth use of ENDS products as well as other recent health and safety issues regarding such products. FDA will make enforcement decisions on a case-by-case basis, recognizing that it is unable, as a practical matter, to take enforcement action against every illegally marketed tobacco product, and that it needs to make the best use of Agency resources. This guidance does not in any way alter the fact that it is illegal to market any new tobacco product without premarket authorization, or to sell any tobacco product to minors. The Agency also retains discretion to pursue enforcement action at any time against any deemed new tobacco product marketed without premarket authorization, regardless of whether it falls within one of these categories of enforcement priorities. B. Data Show Substantial Increase in Youth Use of ENDS Products, Particularly Certain Flavored, Cartridge-Based ENDS Products At the time FDA issued the August 2017 Compliance Policy to announce changes in its approach to enforcement regarding premarket authorization (as described in the preamble to the final deeming rule), data from the 2016 NYTS showed a decrease in prevalence of current e-cigarette use (i.e., past 30-day use) among high school students, from 16 percent in 2015 to 11.3 percent in 2016.23 23 Jamal, A., A. Gentzke, S.S. Hu, et al., “Tobacco Use Among Middle and High School Students — United States, 2011–2016,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 66:597–603, 2017, available at: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6623a1.htm. Results from the 2017 NYTS later confirmed that in regards to youth use there was no statistically significant rise at the time, with data suggesting that high school student use had leveled off between 2016 (11.3 percent)24 24 Id. and 2017 (11.7 percent).25 25 Wang, T.W., A. Gentzke, S. Sharapova, et al., “Tobacco Product Use Among Middle and High School Students – United States, 2011-2017,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67:629-633, 2018, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6722a3. However, multiple survey results over the past several years demonstrate that there is significant initiation by youth. The recent surge in youth use of ENDS products has caused us to reevaluate our July 2017 assessment and to modify our enforcement priorities for ENDS products. Recent data show an alarming increase in youth use of ENDS products in the past two years. They also show youth are more likely to use certain flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/ mmwr.mm6722a3 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/ mm6623a1.htm 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 120 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 12 Overall, data showed that ENDS product use more than doubled among middle school and high school students from 2017 to 2019.26 26 Miech R, L. Johnston, P.M. O’Malley, et al., “Trends in adolescent vaping, 2017–2019,” New England Journal of Medicine, 381:1490-1491, 2019; DOI:10.1056/NEJMc1910739. Data from MTF showed that from 2017 to 2018, current past 30-day) e-cigarette use significantly increased from 6.6 percent to 10.4 percent among 8th graders (a 58 percent increase), 13.1 percent to 21.7 percent among 10th graders (a 66 percent increase), and 16.6 percent to 26.7 percent among 12th graders (a 61 percent increase).27 27 Miech, R. A., Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., et al., “Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975–2018: Volume I, Secondary school students,” Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan (2019), available at http://monitoringthefuture.org/pubs.html#monographs. For each age group, the increase from 2017 to 2018 was statistically significant (p<.001). This trend continued in the 2019 MTF data. The number of students who had used ENDS products during the previous 12 months and those who had ever used ENDS products significantly increased in 8th, 10th, and 12th grade from 2018 to 2019.28 28 Miech R, L. Johnston, P.M. O’Malley, et al., “Trends in adolescent vaping, 2017–2019,” New England Journal of Medicine; 381:1490-1491, 2019; DOI:10.1056/NEJMc1910739. Data from the NYTS for the same time period show that, between 2017 and 2018, current e-cigarette use among high school students increased from 11.7 percent to 20.8 percent (a 78 percent increase, p<0.001).29 29 Cullen, K.A., B.K. Ambrose, A.S. Gentzke, et al., “Notes from the Field: Increase in e-cigarette use and any tobacco product use among middle and high school students – United States, 2011-2018,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(45);1276-1277, 2018. The NYTS defines e-cigarettes as “battery-powered devices that provide nicotine and other additives to the user in the form of an aerosol.” Current e-cigarette use among middle school students also increased from 3.3 percent to 4.9 percent over the same time period (a 48 percent increase, p=0.001), which we calculated as an increase of an estimated 180,000 middle school students reporting past 30-day e-cigarette use in one year.30 30 Id. The data from 2019 NYTS have also documented that this is the second year in a row where current (past 30-day) e-cigarette use reached new highs among youth.31 31 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. Several improvements were made to the NYTS in 2019, including switching from paper- and-pencil to electronic survey administration, adding skip patterns and example product images, and updating brand examples to reflect the current tobacco marketplace (e.g., adding JUUL), which may affect the comparability of tobacco product use behaviors, including e-cigarette use behaviors, with previous years. Although trend analyses, which use more data points and are not solely dependent on changes during a single year, may be conducted without major shifts in patterns or findings, the exact magnitude of the effect of these survey improvements in 2019 cannot be fully quantified. Thus, direct statistical comparisons between estimates of tobacco product use between 2018 and 2019 were not conducted. The prevalence of current e-cigarette use among high school students was 27.5 percent and middle school students was 10.5 percent.32 32 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. Among high school students, 4.11 million reported having used an e- cigarette in the past month in 2019 with 1.24 million middle school students reporting the same. For the first time ever, the total number of middle and high school students reporting current use of e-cigarettes surpassed 5 million in 2019.33 33 Id. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 http://monitoringthefuture.org/ pubs.html#monographs 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 121 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 13 Disturbingly, these data also indicate that a growing percentage of America’s youth who use e- cigarettes have become frequent e-cigarette users (defined as reporting use on 20 days or more of the prior 30-day period). An increasing number of youth are thus at greater risk of nicotine addiction at a time when the developing brain is particularly susceptible to permanent changes from nicotine use and when almost all nicotine addiction is established.34 34 Miech R., Johnston L, O’Malley PM, et al., “Adolescent vaping and nicotine use in 2017–2018 — U.S. National Estimates,” New England Journal of Medicine; 380:192-3, 2019. Data from the 2019 NYTS have documented continued frequent youth ENDS use.35 35 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. The proportion of current high school e-cigarette users who reported use on 20 days or more (of the prior 30-day period), and thus were frequent users, was 34.2 percent in 2019.36 36 Id. The proportion of current middle school e- cigarette users who reported use on 20 days or more (of the prior 30-day period) was 18.0 percent in 2019. This builds upon an increase in frequent ENDS use among youth who report using ENDS products observed in 2018. For example, data from the 2018 NYTS showed that the proportion of current high school e-cigarette users who reported use on 20 days or more (of the prior 30-day period) increased by 38.5 percent, from 20.0 percent in 2017 to 27.7 percent in 2018.37 37 Cullen, K.A., B.K. Ambrose, A.S. Gentzke, et al., “Notes from the Field: Increase in e-cigarette use and any tobacco product use among middle and high school students – United States, 2011-2018,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(45);1276-1277, 2018. In a study that collected data from February to May 2018 and focused specifically on 15-to-17-year- old current users of JUUL products (the most commonly used brand, including among youth), 55.8 percent reported using such ENDS products on 3 or more of the previous 30 days, and over a quarter (25.3 percent) reported use on 10 to 30 days of the prior month.38 38 Vallone, D.M., M. Bennett, H. Xiao, et al., “Prevalence and correlates of JUUL use among a national sample of youth and young adults,” Tobacco Control,0:1-7, 2017, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-05463. The concerns caused by the sharp increase in the number of youth using ENDS products are compounded by evidence indicating that youth whose first tobacco product is an ENDS product are at an increased risk of becoming cigarette smokers as compared to non-ENDS users. A 2018 report by the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine entitled “Public Health Consequences of E-Cigarettes,” which took into account multiple lines of evidence across different studies and study designs, concluded that “there is substantial evidence that e-cigarette use increases risk of ever using combustible tobacco cigarettes among youth and young adults.”39 39 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, “Public health consequences of e-cigarette,”. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/24952. FDA is also concerned about the extraordinary popularity of flavored ENDS products with youth. Research has long shown that flavors increase youth appeal of tobacco products, Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https:// doi.org/10.17226/24952 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 122 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 14 including ENDS.40 40 E.g., Carpenter, C.M., et al., “New Cigarette Brands with Flavors that Appeal to Youth: Tobacco Marketing Strategies,” Health Affairs, 24(6):1601-1610, 2005; Pepper, J. K., K.M. Ribisl, N.T. Brewer, “Adolescents’ interest in trying flavoured ecigarettes,” Tobacco Control, 25:ii62-ii66, 2016; Camenga, D. R., M. Morean, G. Kong, et al., Appeal and use of customizable e-cigarette product features in adolescents,” Tobacco Regulatory Science, 4(2):51- 60, 2018; Harrell, M.B., S.R. Weaver, A. Loukas, et al., “Flavored e-cigarette use: characterizing youth, young adult, and adult users,” Preventive Medicine Reports, 5:33-40, 2017. Evidence continues to accumulate, further confirming that youth are particularly attracted to flavored ENDS products. Data from the 2018 NYTS showed that past 30-day use of any flavored e-cigarette increased from 2017 among high school students who reported current e-cigarette use (60.9 percent to 67.8 percent, p<0.05).41 41 Cullen, K.A., B.K. Ambrose, A.S. Gentzke, et al., “Notes from the Field: Increase in e-cigarette use and any tobacco product use among middle and high school students – United States, 2011-2018,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(45);1276-1277, 2018. In the 2016-2017 Wave 4)42 42 Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study [United States] Restricted Use Files (ICPSR 36231), available at: https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NAHDAP/studies/36231. Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study,43 43 The PATH study is a research study that assesses within-person changes and between-person differences in a large national cohort of participants aged 12 years and older over time. Each wave is a follow-up where the PATH study can examine its objectives, iteratively and cumulatively, to generate a broad body of knowledge about tobacco product use in the USA. Data collection for each wave occurred during the following timeframes: Wave 1 September 2013-December 2014), Wave 2 (October 2014-2015), Wave 3 (October 2015-2016), and Wave 4 (2016- 2017). among youth age 12 to 17 who reported using an ENDS product, 93.2 percent reported that their first ENDS use was with a flavored ENDS product.44 44 Rostron B et al. “Prevalence and Reasons for Use of Flavored Cigars and ENDS among US Youth and Adults: Estimates from Wave 4 of the PATH Study, 2016-2017,” American Journal of Health Behavior, 44(1);76-81, 2020. Data from Wave 4 also showed that 71 percent of current youth ENDS users said they used ENDS products “because they come in flavors I like.” 45 Id. 45 The NYTS survey instrument groups mint- and menthol-flavored products together, so it is not possible to differentiate youth use of mint and menthol flavors separately based on the NYTS data. The 2018 NYTS data indicate that, among high school students whose only tobacco product use is e-cigarettes, known as exclusive e-cigarette users, the proportion who reported fruit-flavored ENDS use was 75.5 percent in 201846 46 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, et al., “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. and the proportion who reported mint-and menthol-flavored ENDS use was 38.1 percent.47 47 Cullen, K.A., B.K. Ambrose, A.S. Gentzke, et al., “Notes from the Field: Increase in e-cigarette use and any tobacco product use among middle and high school students – United States, 2011-2018,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(45);1276-1277, 2018. In 2019, in the same population, fruit-flavored ENDS use was 66.1 percent and mint- and menthol-flavored ENDS use was 57.3 percent.48 48 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. Among middle school exclusive e-cigarette users, the 2018 NYTS data indicate that use of fruit- flavored ENDS use was 58.1 percent and mint-and menthol-flavored ENDS use was 20.6 Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NAHDAP/ studies/36231 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 123 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 15 percent.49 49 Id. In 2019, in the same population, fruit-flavored ENDS use was 67.7 percent and mint- and menthol-flavored ENDS use was 31.1 percent.50 50 Id. Between 2016 and 2019, high school exclusive e-cigarette users who reported mint- and menthol-flavored ENDS use increased from 16.0 percent to 57.3 percent, p<0.05.51 51 Id. Data for middle school e-cigarette users was inconclusive on this point due to a limited number of middle-school students in the NYTS sample who not only used e-cigarettes within the past 30 days, but whose exclusive tobacco product use in the past 30 days was e-cigarettes.52 52 Id. In 2019, the data indicate that more than one million middle and high school exclusive e-cigarette users used mint- or menthol-flavored ENDS in the past 30 days.53 53 Id. However, data from the MTF survey examine mint and menthol JUUL use separately and indicate that youth use of menthol-flavored products is not as high as that for mint- and fruit- flavored products. Specifically, a randomly-selected third of 2019 MTF respondents were asked about their flavored JUUL use.54 54 Leventhal A., et al., “Flavors of e-Cigarettes Used by Youths in the United States,” JAMA, 322(21):2132-2134, 2019. The analytic sample included past 30-day JUUL users who answered the question, “Which JUUL flavor do you use most often?” with response options of Classic Tobacco, Crème, Cucumber, Fruit, Mango, Menthol, Mint, Virginia Tobacco, and Other. Among past 30-day JUUL users in each grade studied (8th, 10th, and 12th), use of mango and mint ranked highest, followed by fruit. Reported use of menthol and tobacco flavors were among the lowest ranked options. Specifically, a number of 8th grade past 30-day JUUL users reported use of mango (33.5 percent), while the others reported use of mint (29.3 percent), fruit (16.0 percent), and other (14.8 percent).55 55 The remaining flavors, including tobacco and menthol flavors, each had estimates of 2.3%. A large percentage of 10th grade past 30-day JUUL users reported use of mint (43.5 percent), while the others reported use of mango (27.3 percent), fruit 10.8 percent), and other (8.4 percent).56 56 The remaining flavors, including tobacco and menthol flavors, each had estimates of 3.0%. Close to half of 12th grade past 30-day JUUL users reported use of mint (47.1 percent), while the others reported use of mango (23.8 percent), fruit 8.6 percent), other (6.0 percent), menthol (5.9 percent), and cucumber (4.4 percent).57 57 The remaining flavors, including tobacco flavors, each had estimates of 1.5%. Data from the 2019 NYTS also indicate that youth overwhelmingly prefer cartridge-based ENDS products,58 58 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. and we have found that these products are easy to conceal, can be used discreetly, may have a high nicotine content, and are manufactured on a large scale. The 2019 survey instrument included a measure for the “usual brand” of e-cigarette used in the past 30 days. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 124 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 16 Most youth who were current e-cigarette users reported a cartridge-based e-cigarette as their usual brand.59 59 Id. Unpublished data from the 2019 survey list other brands that are used by youth, some of which are available in both cartridge-based and non-cartridge-based forms. In fact, the leading brand is a cartridge-based product that commands approximately 70 percent of the market.60 60 Nielsen Total US xAOC/Convenience Database & Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, in Wells Fargo Securities, Nielsen: Tobacco All Channel Data Thru 10/4 – Cig Vol Declines Moderate, October 15, 2019. Of particular concern are the design features that appear to make the cartridge-based products so popular with young people. Attributes typically present in cartridge-based products include a relatively small size that allows for easy concealability, and intuitive and convenient features that facilitate ease of use, including draw activation, prefilled cartridges or pods, and USB rechargeability. Small products may allow youth to use the product in circumstances where use of tobacco products is prohibited, such as a school.61 61 See, e.g., Schillo B., et al., “JUUL in School: Teacher and Administrator Awareness and Policies of E-Cigarettes and JUUL in U.S. Middle and High Schools,” Health Promot Pract., 21(1):20-24, 2020; “Why 'juuling' has become a nightmare for school administrators,” Kaiser Health News (March 26, 2018), available at: https://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/why-juuling-has-become-nightmare-school-administrators-n860106/; Juul Is Sued by School Districts That Say Vaping Is a Dangerous Drain on Their Resources,” The New York Times October 7, 2019), available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/us/juul-vaping-schools.html. Small size may also allow the user to quickly conceal the product in the palm of one’s hand or in a pocket.62 62 http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2017/12/13/new-ecigarette-popular-among-kids-easy-to-conceal-from-parents/ Small size may allow for product use in a social setting without others’ awareness,63 63 https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/12/04/568273801/teenagers-embrace-juul-saying-its-discreet- enough-to-vape-in-class particularly in conjunction with vaping techniques that may be used to prevent or hide the vapor cloud. Additionally, depending on the size and shape of the product, it may also blend in with other equipment that is expected in that setting e.g., if the ENDS is shaped like a flash drive, for example, next to a computer, where an actual flash drive would be used), or it may otherwise go undetected because parents, teachers, or coaches do not recognize the product as an ENDS.64 64 “New vaping devices may go undetected by parents,” The Excelsior Springs Standard, April 16, 2018, available at: http://excelsior225.rssing.com/chan-47020297/all_p70.html#item1400. Products ready for use immediately after purchase have characteristics that facilitate ease of use among young people. With cartridge-based products, there are no settings to change and very little assembly is required. Research on other tobacco products suggests that ease of use is associated with susceptibility to tobacco product uptake among youth.65 65 Chaffee B.W., J. Urata, E.T. Couch, S. Gansky, “Perceived flavored smokeless tobacco ease-of-use and youth susceptibility,” Tobacco Regulatory Science, 3(3):367-373, 2017. Additional research among youth suggests that younger adolescents are more likely to use more basic ENDS Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/why-juuling-has-become-nightmare- school-administrators-n860106/ https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/us/juul- vaping-schools.htmlhttp://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2017/12/13/new-ecigarette-popular-among-kids- easy-to-conceal-from-parents/https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/12/04/568273801/teenagers- embrace-juul-saying-its-discreet-enough-to-vape-in-classhttps:// www.npr.org/ sections/health- shots/2017/12/04/ 568273801/ teenagers- embrace-juul- saying-its-discreet- enough-to-vape- in-class http://excelsior225.rssing.com/chan-47020297/ all_p70.html#item1400 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 125 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 17 products than older adolescents.66 66 Pepper J.K., A.J. MacMonegle, J.M. Nonnemaker, “Adolescents’ use of basic, intermediate, and advanced device types for vaping,” Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 21(1):55–62, 2019. Thus, particularly easy-to-use products, such as cartridge- based products, may have lower barriers to initiation. Other product features that facilitate ease of use include pre-filled cartridges, which are convenient because they do not require filling prior to use and are easy to dispose of and replace; a draw-activated battery that makes the devices much easier to use than other devices; and rechargeability, an important characteristic for use among youth who recharge via a USB port when connected to a computer or charging adapter from other electronic devices, such as a cellphone. In the notice of proposed rulemaking for the Deeming Rule, FDA noted that the overall public- health impact of ENDS products would depend crucially upon “who uses the products and how they are used. If such products result in minimal initiation by children and adolescents while significant numbers of smokers quit, then there is a potential for the net public health impact at the population level to be positive. If, on the other hand, there is significant initiation by youth, minimal quitting, or significant dual use of combust[ed] and non-combust[ed] products, then the public health impact could be negative.”67 67 79 Fed. Reg. 23141, 23147 (2016). The data discussed above demonstrate substantial and increasing initiation of ENDS products by youth, particularly certain flavored, cartridge-based products. C. Additional Relevant Considerations In issuing the March 2019 Draft Guidance, FDA solicited public comment generally on the proposed approach and specifically sought information that could help inform its decision- making for each key issue. In developing this Final Guidance, FDA considered information provided in the public comments submitted on the March 2019 Draft Guidance. Overall, out of the over 15,000 public comments FDA received in response to the Draft Guidance, many were related to form letter campaigns, while approximately 294 public comments provided unique and substantive information. In addition to the comments that provided unique and substantive information, FDA received thousands of general comments expressing support or opposition to the guidance and separate provisions within the guidance. These comments express broad policy views and do not address specific points related to the March 2019 Draft Guidance. Additional information regarding significant comments received in response to the March 2019 Draft Guidance and FDA’s responses is described in Appendix A.68 68 FDA generally does not respond to comments in guidance documents and, as noted in the preamble to the deeming rule, generally “[a]gency compliance/enforcement policies are not subject to the requirements that govern notice-and-comment rulemaking.” 81 Fed. Reg. at 28,977, 29,010 (citing Prof’ls & Patients for Customized Care v. Shalala, 56 F.3d 592 (5th Cir. 1995) (a compliance policy guide is not a substantive rule and not subject to APA’s notice-and-comment rulemaking); Takhar v. Kessler, 76 F.3d 995, 1002 (9th Cir. 1996) (FDA compliance policy guides were not required to go through notice-and-comment procedures)). Although FDA is addressing comments here, it does so voluntarily and given the circumstances. By responding to comments here, FDA in no way Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 126 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 18 FDA also remains concerned about health and safety issues connected to ENDS products—e.g., cases of lung injuries associated with use of vaping products69 69 See, e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Outbreak of Lung Injury Associated with E-cigarette Use, or Vaping,” available at: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung- disease.html#latest-outbreak-information; Layden, J. E., I. Ghinai, I. Pray, et al., “Pulmonary Illness Related to E- Cigarette Use in Illinois and Wisconsin – Preliminary Report,” New England Journal of Medicine, Sept. 2019; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1911614. as well as battery explosions with ENDS products70 70 See, e.g., Rossheim, M.E., M.D. Livingston, E.K. Soule, et al., “Electronic Cigarette Explosion and Burn Injuries, US Emergency Departments 2015-2017,” Tobacco Control, 2019; 28:472-474, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054518. particularly given that these products have been marketed without premarket evaluation. These current public health issues affirm the importance of the premarket review process, as contemplated by the Tobacco Control Act, to scientifically evaluate products based on a public health standard. For example, FDA review of premarket tobacco product applications considers the risks and benefits of the product to the population as a whole, including tobacco product users and non-users. In reviewing premarket tobacco product applications, FDA will consider, among other things: the product’s components, ingredients, additives, and properties; manufacturing practices; and any studies or investigations into the health risks of the tobacco product. D. Enforcement Priorities for ENDS Products In the discussion that follows, we describe our current intent regarding prioritizing our enforcement resources with respect to certain illegally marketed ENDS products. FDA will prioritize enforcement of flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products (other than tobacco- and menthol-flavored products), which are produced primarily by large manufacturers. This policy should have minimal impact on small manufacturers (e.g., vape shops) that primarily sell non-cartridge-based ENDS products, unless they market to youth or fail to take adequate measures to prevent youth access. Specifically, FDA intends to prioritize enforcement regarding the lack of marketing authorization against: Any flavored, cartridge-based ENDS product (other than a tobacco- or menthol-flavored ENDS product); All other ENDS products for which the manufacturer has failed to take (or is failing to take) adequate measures to prevent minors’ access; and Any ENDS product that is targeted to minors or whose marketing is likely to promote use of ENDS by minors. FDA intends to prioritize enforcement beginning February 6, 2020. establishes a policy, practice, or precedent requiring the Agency to do so with respect to future iterations of this document or any other guidance document. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe- lung-disease.html#latest-outbreak-informationhttps://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/ basic_information/e-cigarettes/ severe-lung- disease.html#latest-outbreak- informationhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ tobaccocontrol-2018-054518 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 127 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 19 Further, FDA intends to prioritize enforcement of any ENDS product that is offered for sale after September 9, 2020, and for which the manufacturer has not submitted a premarket application or after a negative action by FDA on a timely submitted application). In addition to violations related to lack of marketing authorization, FDA will continue to take legal action regarding sales of tobacco products to minors and other violations and will closely monitor all sales of ENDS products. 1. Any flavored, cartridge-based ENDS product (other than a tobacco- or menthol-flavored product) FDA intends to prioritize enforcement for lack of marketing authorization against any flavored, cartridge-based ENDS product (other than a tobacco- or menthol-flavored ENDS product) that is offered for sale in the United States without regard to whether or when premarket application for such product has been submitted. In its balancing of the different public health considerations regarding ENDS products, the March 2019 Draft Guidance did not include tobacco-, mint- and menthol-flavored ENDS products in its proposed enforcement priorities, based on the data at that time indicating that these flavors were preferred more by adults than youth. The intent was, to the extent possible consistent with protecting population health, to avoid foreclosing one potential means by which some adult smokers might seek to transition completely away from combusted tobacco products to potentially less harmful tobacco products. Moreover, the March 2019 draft did not distinguish between cartridge-based products and other products, and instead focused on how products are sold rather than product characteristics. As discussed above, evidence shows that youth are particularly attracted to flavored, cartridge- based ENDS products. Data show that, among youth who reported ever using an ENDS product, a large majority reported their first ENDS use was with a flavored ENDS product.71 71 Rostron B et al. “Prevalence and Reasons for Use of Flavored Cigars and ENDS among US Youth and Adults: Estimates from Wave 4 of the PATH Study, 2016-2017,” American Journal of Health Behavior, 44(1);76-81, 2020. Data also show that among current youth ENDS users, a majority of youth respondents stated that they used ENDS products “because they come in flavors I like.”72 72 Id. In addition, recent data indicate that flavors preferred by youth include mint. Data from the 2019 MTF survey indicate that youth use of mint- and fruit-flavored JUUL products is higher than that of menthol- and tobacco- flavored JUUL products.73 73 Leventhal A., et al., “Flavors of e-Cigarettes Used by Youths in the United States,” JAMA, 322(21):2132-2134, 2019. Finally, data from the 2019 NYTS indicate that youth overwhelmingly prefer cartridge-based ENDS products.74 74 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. These products are easy to conceal, can be used discreetly, may have a high nicotine content, and are manufactured on a large scale. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 128 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 20 FDA received a number of comments that focused on the popularity of mint- and menthol- flavored ENDS among youth and adult populations. Some commenters suggested that such products would become even more popular if others became less available. They argued that not prioritizing enforcement against mint- and menthol-flavored ENDS products would risk the shift of youth from one flavor of ENDS products to another based on a potential but indeterminate impact on adult consumers. Several comments argued that data suggest that even if youth currently prefer “fruit” and “sweets” to mint and menthol, this does not mean that youth do not still find mint and menthol to be appealing flavors. FDA also received public comments claiming that mint- and menthol-flavored ENDS products help smoking cessation. For example, some commenters focused on the potential role that mint- and menthol-flavored ENDS products could play in helping some adults cease the use of combusted tobacco products. It is possible that prioritizing enforcement against mint-flavored ENDS products could at least in the short term make fewer products available for some addicted adult smokers seeking to use ENDS products to transition completely away from cigarettes. However, the comments, as well as the recent surge in youth use of ENDS products, and especially the preferences indicated in the 2019 NYTS and 2019 MTF data, have led FDA to reconsider its approach with regard to prioritizing enforcement of mint-flavored ENDS products. FDA also received multiple comments urging the Agency to further refine its enforcement priorities in consideration of how the design features of certain ENDS products may make them so popular among youth. Some commenters focused on the features of cartridge-based systems, particularly that they may contain high nicotine content and that they are easy to conceal. Similarly, some commenters focused on the potential impact of nicotine salts, which are used in some brands of cartridge-based ENDS products. In contrast, FDA received a comment arguing that the rise of youth use should not be attributed to all cartridge-based products but rather to a single, uniquely prevalent cartridge-based product, and that FDA’s regulatory actions should be tailored accordingly. As discussed above, data show that flavors are a strong driver for youth use, and that youth overwhelmingly use cartridge-based ENDS products. Moreover, preliminary research indicates that certain effects of nicotine salts in ENDS products (e.g., higher nicotine exposure and faster rate of absorption) may increase the abuse liability of ENDS with nicotine salts, which raises concerns of addiction in youth, particularly due to the vulnerability of the developing adolescent brain. However, for many individual addicted cigarette smokers, the potential for ENDS to act as a substitute for cigarettes, thereby encouraging smokers to seek to switch completely away from combustible cigarettes, may be dependent, in part, upon the product having acceptability and abuse liability more comparable to a cigarette. FDA has refined its enforcement priorities in the Final Guidance to focus on flavored, cartridge- based ENDS products (other than tobacco- and menthol-flavored). This approach strikes an appropriate balance between restricting youth access to such products, while maintaining availability of potentially less harmful options for current and former adult smokers who have transitioned or wish to transition completely away from combusted tobacco products. FDA will, however, continue to evaluate new information and adjust these enforcement priorities, as warranted, in light of the best available data about these products. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 129 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 21 We also note that the March 2019 Draft Guidance proposed to prioritize enforcement for flavored ENDS products that are offered for sale in ways that pose a greater risk for minors to access such products. Several comments discussed the wide availability of these products and the means by which youth gain access. These included comments that expressed concern regarding the availability of flavored ENDS products on the Internet and in vape shops. Other commenters focused on how the enforcement priorities were unclear and difficult for retailers to understand, and how that may negatively affect “potentially compliant” retail locations that attempt to prevent minor access. Others expressed concern that the enforcement priorities were altogether impractical and costly for retailers. While the March 2019 Draft Guidance proposed to focus its enforcement priorities of flavored ENDS products on how the product was sold, after considering the comments, the public health threats, and the new evidence described above, FDA determined that focusing on how the product was sold would not appropriately address youth use of the products that are the most popular among youth—i.e., flavored, cartridge-based products. The reality is that youth have continued access to these products in the face of legal prohibitions and even after voluntary actions by some manufacturers. Moreover, as discussed above, the data show that youth overwhelmingly prefer certain flavors of cartridge-based ENDS products.75 75 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. These products are produced on a large scale, are easy to conceal, can be used discreetly, and are not the products typically produced in vape shops that mix nicotine with e-liquid flavors. Given the urgent need to address the dramatic rise in youth use, this Final Guidance prioritizes enforcement with respect to any flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products (other than a tobacco- and menthol-flavored ENDS product) without regard to the location or method of sale. FDA believes that focusing enforcement on these products is important in addressing the increasing rates of youth use of these flavored, cartridge-based products because this is a primary driver in youth experimentation with, and continued use of, ENDS products. Accordingly, FDA has recalibrated its balancing of public health considerations in light of the public health threats and the significant new evidence described above. This policy reflects FDA’s balancing of concerns regarding the appeal of certain flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products to youth; the potential public health benefit of noncombusted options by which some adult smokers might seek to transition completely away from combusted tobacco products; and the potential risks created by extended availability of these new tobacco products without scientific review and evaluation under the applicable public health standard. 2. All other ENDS products without adequate measures to prevent minors’ access FDA intends to prioritize enforcement for lack of a marketing authorization for any other ENDS products (i.e., any tobacco-, menthol-, or non-flavored ENDS products and any non-cartridge- based, flavored ENDS products) when the manufacturer has not taken or is not taking adequate measures to prevent minors’ access to these products, without regard to whether or not, or when, a premarket application for such product has been submitted. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 130 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 22 In assessing whether a manufacturer is taking (or has taken) adequate measures to prevent minors’ access to these ENDS products, factors the Agency intends to consider include, but are not limited to: Whether the manufacturer has implemented adequate programs to monitor retailer compliance with age-verification and sales restrictions. Such programs might include, for instance: screening retailers, in advance of establishing or renewing distribution agreements, based on the strength of the retailers’ age verification policies; establishing and publicizing a hotline for anonymous reporting of noncompliant sales; implementing a mystery shopper program; requiring use of technology that tracks age-verification practices; or other mechanisms. Whether the manufacturer has established and enforces penalties against retailers that fail to comply with age-verification and sales restrictions. For instance, in response to the September 12th letters, respondent manufacturers stated that they had mechanisms, such as through distribution agreements, to enforce financial penalties and stop sales to retailers in response to noncompliance. In addition to such mechanisms, FDA may consider whether a manufacturer has implemented a policy of notifying FDA of retailer violations. If the manufacturer is also a retailer, factors to adequately prevent underage access might include: whether the manufacturer/retailer has implemented programs to ensure compliance with age-verification and sales restrictions; establishing and publicizing a hotline for anonymous reporting of noncompliant sales; checking identification at the door; or other mechanisms. If the manufacturer is also a retailer, whether the manufacturer uses adequate age- verification technology (or requires that retailers who sell its products use such technology) to prevent underage access to its website and to prevent underage sales through the Internet. For instance, adequate age-verification could include use of an independent, third-party age- and identity-verification service that compares customer information against third-party data sources, such as public records; and Whether the manufacturer limits (or requires that retailers who sell its products to limit) the quantity of ENDS products that a customer may purchase within a given period of time. FDA’s decision to exercise its enforcement authorities with respect to particular products will be fact-specific and determined on a case-by-case basis. This prioritization takes into account information that was provided by manufacturers in response to the Agency’s September 2018 letters, including measures to address youth use that manufacturers can or have already taken to address youth access to ENDS products, as well as information provided in comments to the March 2019 Draft Guidance. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 131 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 23 As noted, FDA considered comments about the practical concerns of implementing an enforcement policy based on how products are sold. The factors above reflect information FDA received from industry, including information manufacturers shared during meetings with FDA leadership, in response to the September 2018 letters, and public comments submitted in response to the March 2019 Draft Guidance. From this information, FDA understands that manufacturers have the means to monitor and/or control how their products are sold at retail by, for example, including or requiring terms, conditions, or controls in their contracts with downstream distributors (wholesalers, distributors, importers, and/or retailers) to prevent youth access. The March 2019 Draft Guidance did not propose to prioritize enforcement for tobacco- or menthol-flavored ENDS products and did not propose to distinguish between cartridge-based and other ENDS products. The continued significant increase in youth use of ENDS, as demonstrated in the 2019 NYTS and MTF data, as well as the data showing that youth overwhelmingly use flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products, support a reconsideration of the Agency’s approach. As noted in the draft guidance, FDA is continuously evaluating new information and adjusting its enforcement priorities in light of the best available data, and it will continue to do so with respect to these unauthorized ENDS products. As noted above, FDA received a number of comments arguing that the popularity of menthol- flavored ENDS (as well as mint-flavored ENDS, which are discussed above) had increased among youth and adult populations, and suggesting that such products would become even more popular if other flavored ENDS products became less available. They argued that excluding menthol-flavored ENDS products from prioritization would risk the shift of youth from one flavor of ENDS products to another based on a potential but indeterminate impact on adult consumers. FDA also received comments stating that it should immediately begin enforcing premarket review of all ENDS products, including tobacco-flavored ENDS products. Other commenters emphasized a need for ENDS products to remain available for former smokers who have transitioned or current smokers who want to transition completely away from combustible products. Menthol is unique compared to other available ENDS product flavors as it is the only characterizing flavor available in cigarettes, and it may reduce the irritation and harshness of smoking.76 76 See, e.g., Harris, B., “Menthol: A review of its thermoreceptor interactions and their therapeutic applications,” International Journal of Aromatherapy, 16(3-4):117-131, 2006; Galeotti, N., L.D. Mannelli, G. Mazzanti, et al., Menthol: a natural analgesic compound,” Neuroscience Letters, 322(3):145-148, 2002; Nishino, T., Y. Tagaito, Y. Sakurai, “Nasal inhalation of l-menthol reduces respiratory discomfort associated with loaded breathing,” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 156(1):309-313, 1997; Lawrence, D., B. Cadman, A.C. Hoffman, Sensory properties of menthol and smoking topography,” Tobacco Induced Diseases, 9 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S3, 2011; Garten, S. & R.V. Falkner, “Continual smoking of mentholated cigarettes may mask the early warning symptoms of respiratory disease,” Preventive Medicine, 37(4):291-296, 2003. Menthol cigarettes are also used by a substantial portion of the U.S. population, who are addicted to nicotine and may be looking for an alternative product to seek to transition completely away from combusted products.77 77 See, e.g., United States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. National Survey on Drug Use and FDA is compelled to act by data that Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 132 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 24 show youth overwhelmingly prefer certain flavors of cartridge-based ENDS products such as fruit, mint, and candy.78 78 Cullen, K.A., A.S. Gentzke, M.D. Sawdey, “E-cigarette use among youth in the United States, 2019,” JAMA, 322(21);2095-2103, 2019. At the same time, FDA is aware that approximately 9 million adults currently use e-cigarettes.79 79 Creamer, M.R., “Tobacco Product Use and Cessation Indicators Among Adults- United States 2018,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 68:1013-1019, 2019, available at: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/pdfs/mm6845a2-H.pdf. Studies have shown that the majority of adult e-cigarette users use flavored e-cigarettes and there is some evidence to suggest that flavored e-cigarettes may improve switching from cigarette smoking to using e-cigarettes, compared to non-flavored e- cigarettes.80 80 Russell, C. et al. “Changing Patterns of First E-Cigarette Flavor Used and Current Flavors Used by 20,836 Adult Frequent E-Cigarette Users in the USA,” Harm Reduction Journal, 15(1):33-47, 2018; Bonhomme, M.G. et al. Flavoured Non-Cigarette Tobacco Product Use Among US Adults: 2013–2014,” Tobacco Control, 25(Suppl 2):4– 13, 2016. FDA seeks both (1) to avoid foreclosing, even if temporarily, one potential means by which some adult smokers might seek to transition completely away from combusted tobacco products to potentially less harmful tobacco products; and (2) to prevent minors’ access to ENDS products. FDA believes that this policy strikes an appropriate balance between restricting youth access to ENDS products and maintaining availability of potentially less harmful options for current and former adult smokers who have transitioned or wish to transition completely away from combusted tobacco products.81 81 FDA notes that no ENDS product has been approved by FDA as a drug for smoking cessation. However, the premarket review process for ENDS products will provide an opportunity for FDA to further examine the potential of an ENDS product to meet the tobacco product premarket authorization standard of “appropriate for the protection of public health,” including adult decisions to completely transition away from use of combustible products to potentially less harmful ENDS products or other non-combustible forms of nicotine delivery. Moreover, the prioritization of flavored, cartridge-based products articulated in Section D.1 above, and the prioritization of all other flavored ENDS product sold without adequate measures to prevent youth access, should have minimal impact on those vape shops that primarily sell non- cartridge-based ENDS products and that ensure purchasers are of the requisite age and not purchasing for resale (e.g., are not purchasing in large quantities). Should evidence indicate to the contrary, the Agency will take appropriate action. 3. Any ENDS product that is targeted to minors or whose marketing is likely to promote use of ENDS by minors Many ENDS products have been and continue to be marketed to minors through a wide variety of media and technology, and their labels and labeling, print advertising, and/or online advertising are appealing to minors. Unlike combusted cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products, for which advertising through television and radio (and any other medium of electronic Health, 2016. Analysis run on October 12, 2018. SAMHSA’s public online data analysis system (PDAS). (Original Data Source: NSDUH 2016) Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/pdfs/ mm6845a2-H.pdf 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 133 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 25 communication subject to regulation by the Federal Communications Commission) has been prohibited since 1971 and 1986 respectively,82 82 15 U.S.C. § 1335 (“It shall be unlawful to advertise cigarettes or little cigars on any medium of electronic communication subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission”); 15 U.S.C. § 4402(c) same, for smokeless tobacco). ENDS products are advertised through television, radio, and online.83 83 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults. A Report of the Surgeon General,” 2016. Social media accounts are frequently used to electronically share tobacco- product-related content with other minors.84 84 See Chu, K.-H., J.B. Colditz, B.A. Primack, et al., “JUUL: Spreading Online and Offline,” Journal of Adolescent Health, 63(5), 582-586, 2018. Sales of such products to minors are prohibited, and FDA is concerned with actions likely to promote unlawful sales and maintain or increase youth use. FDA has issued joint warning letters with the FTC to four firms that manufacture, advertise and offer for sale or distribution several flavored e-liquid products for violations related to online posts by social media influencers on each company’s behalf.85 85 FDA News Release, “FDA, FTC take action to protect kids by citing four firms that make, sell flavored e-liquids for violations related to online posts by social media influencers on their behalf,” June 7, 2019, available at: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-ftc-take-action-protect-kids-citing-four-firms-make-sell- flavored-e-liquids-violations-related. This type of marketing is especially concerning because longitudinal data from Waves 1 (2013-2014) and 2 (2014-2015) of the PATH Study show that engagement with online tobacco marketing is a risk factor for adolescent tobacco use, as adolescents who engaged with online tobacco marketing had greater incidences of initiating tobacco use, increased frequency of use and progression to poly-product use, and lower incidences of cessation compared to those who do not engage.86 86 Soneji, S., J. Yang, K.E. Knutzen, et al., “Online Tobacco Marketing and Subsequent Tobacco Use,” Pediatrics, 141(2):e20172927, 2018; doi:10.1542/peds.2017-2927. Researchers have found that certain marketing strategies can increase youth appeal, both in general and with respect to tobacco products in particular. FDA has previously issued warning letters for products that resemble kid-friendly foods and drinks or that resemble other non-ENDS products that are often consumed by youth.87 87 E.g., “E-Liquids Misleadingly Labeled or Advertised as Food Products,” available at: https://www.fda.gov/tobaccoproducts/newsevents/ucm605729.htm; “FDA In Brief: FDA warns companies to stop making, selling or distributing e-liquids marketed to resemble prescription cough syrups,” available at: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/fda-brief/fda-brief-fda-warns-companies-stop-making-selling-or-distributing-e- liquids-marketed-resemble. This includes labeling and/or advertising that results in the product resembling juice boxes, candy, or kid-friendly cereal. Actions by manufacturers to present their ENDS products in this way are likely to promote youth use, and also present a risk of confusion that could be harmful to children, including the risk of accidental poisoning.88 88 See, e.g., Kamboj, A., H.A. Spiller, M.J. Casavant, et al., “Pediatric Exposure to E-Cigarettes, Nicotine, and Tobacco Products in the United States,” Pediatrics, 2016;137(6):e2016004. Other marketing conduct likely to promote youth use includes the use of cartoons as part of e-cigarette manufacturers’ and retailers’ logos, marketing materials, promotions,89 89 Allem, J.-P., T. B. Cruz, J.B. Unger, et al., “Return of cartoon to market e-cigarette-related products,” Tobacco Control, 0, 1-3, 2018; doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054437 (2018); Jackler, R. K., & Ramamurthi, D., Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-ftc-take-action-protect-kids- citing-four-firms-make-sell-flavored-e-liquids-violations-relatedhttps://www.fda.gov/news- events/press- announcements/fda-ftc- take-action-protect-kids- citing-four-firms-make-sell- flavored-e-liquids- violations-related https://www.fda.gov/tobaccoproducts/newsevents/ ucm605729.htmhttps://www.fda.gov/news-events/fda-brief/fda-brief-fda-warns-companies-stop-making- selling-or-distributing-e-liquids-marketed-resemblehttps://www.fda.gov/ news-events/fda- brief/fda-brief-fda- warns-companies- stop-making-selling- or-distributing-e- liquids-marketed- resemble 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 134 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 26 Instagram posts,90 90 Allem, J.-P., T.B. Cruz, J.B. Unger, et al., “Return of cartoon to market e-cigarette-related products,” Tobacco Control, 0, 1-3, 2018; doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054437. and video advertisements.91 91 Padon, A. A., Maloney, E. K., & Cappella, J. N., “Youth-targeted e-cigarette marketing in the US,” Tobacco Regulatory Science, 3(1):95-101, 2017; doi:10.18001/TRS.3.1.9. Cartoon figures are frequently used on product packaging and in television advertising to promote youth consumption of consumer goods.92 92 Ethan, D., C.H. Basch, L. Samuel, et al., “An examination of product packaging marketing strategies used to promote pediatric multivitamins,” Journal of Community Health, 40(3), 564-568, 2015; doi:10.1007/s10900-014- 9972-1; Kraak, V. I., & Story, M., “Influence of food companies' brand mascots and entertainment companies' cartoon media characters on children's diet and health: a systematic review and research needs,” Obesity Reviews, 16(2), 107-126, 2015. A common theme discussed in food and beverage industry publications has been using cartoons in marketing and packaging consumer products to target children and teenagers.93 93 Barrey, S., M. Baudrin, & F. Cochoy, “From fun foods to fun stores,” Young Consumers, 11(2);138-147, 2010; Cioletti, J., “Cereal thrillers,” Supermarket Business Magazine, 56(10):30, 2001; Cioletti, J., “Future of... youth marketing,” Beverage World, 122(8), 10 (2003); Cvetan, D., “Active market for active cultures,” Dairy Field, 183(4):18, 2000; Fry, J., “Moo kids on the block say they've got more than the white stuff,” Beverage World, 114(1596):1, 1995; Landi, H., “High Tea,” Beverage World, 130(7):18-22, 2011; Steinriede, K., “The year's best packaging,” Beverage Industry, 91(12): 34, 2000; White, L., “A license for profits,” Professional Candy Buyer, 19(6):19-21, 2011. Another marketing strategy that has been recently employed by manufacturers is labeling, advertising, and/or product design that results in the ENDS product resembling ordinary items that may not draw the attention of adults.94 94 See, e.g., Ramamurthi, D., C. Chau,, R.K. Jackler, “JUUL and Other Stealth Vaporisers: Hiding the Habit From Parents and Teachers,” Tobacco Control, Sept. 2018, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054455. Similar marketing conduct likely to promote youth use includes labeling and/or advertising highlighting how the product is ‘stealth’ or ‘secret’ and in the form of ordinary objects that may not be readily recognized by parents or teachers.95 95 Id. Any efforts to entice minors to use tobacco products are of concern to FDA. FDA intends to prioritize its enforcement to focus on products that are targeted to minors or likely to promote use of ENDS by minors. Some examples of such products include: Products marketed with labeling and/or advertising that resemble kid-friendly foods and drinks or resemble other non-ENDS products that are often marketed and/or appealing to youth. This includes, for example, labeling and/or advertising that results in the product resembling juice boxes, candy, or kid-friendly cereal; and/or Products marketed directly to minors by promoting ease of concealing the product or the nature of the product as a tobacco product from parents, teachers, or other adults; and/or Products marketed with youth-appealing cartoon or animated characters, such as those that depict or resemble popular children’s characters; and/or Unicorns cartoons: marketing sweet and creamy e-juice to youth,” Tobacco Control, 26(4), 471-475, 2017; doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053206; Kirkpatrick, M. G., T.B. Cruz, N.L. Goldenson, et al., “Electronic cigarette retailers use Pokémon Go to market products,” Tobacco Control, 26(e2), e145, 2017; doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053369 (2017); Padon, A. A., E.K. Maloney & J.N. Cappella, “Youth-targeted e- cigarette marketing in the US,” Tobacco Regulatory Science, 3(1), 95-101, 2017; doi:10.18001/TRS.3.1.9. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 135 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 27 Products marketed, including through paid social media influencers, with popular children’s characters and titles (e.g., popular children’s YouTube channels, television shows, or characters). This includes, for example, the use of minors or people who portray minors on such shows and their associated show titles. 4. Any ENDS product that is offered for sale in the United States after September 9, 2020. The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland has ordered that premarket applications for all deemed new tobacco products on the market as of August 8, 2016, be submitted by September 9, 2020. Even in the absence of this court order, FDA would prioritize enforcement of any ENDS product that lacks a premarket application after September 9, 2020, for the reasons described in this guidance. For ENDS products other than those described in D.1 – D.3 above, if premarket applications are submitted by September 9, 2020, FDA intends to continue to exercise enforcement discretion for up to one year pending FDA review, unless there is a negative action by FDA on such application. A negative action would consist of the issuance of a Refuse to Accept (RTA), Refuse to File (RTF), and/or No Marketing Order (NMO); or of a letter administratively closing the application, or cancelling the application if FDA finds that it mistakenly accepted the application or that the application was submitted in error. In addition, the other enforcement priorities discussed in this guidance would apply to such products, regardless of whether or not a premarket application has been submitted for the product. We note that the March 2019 Draft Guidance had included August 8, 2021, as the date for which FDA would prioritize enforcement for flavored ENDS products that had not submitted premarket applications. A number of comments expressed concern about the impact of the August 2021 date on businesses. For example, several commenters argued that any restriction on the sale or distribution of ENDS products could result in companies going out of business. On the other hand, FDA received many comments suggesting that in light of the problem of increasing youth access and use of ENDS products, FDA should begin enforcing the premarket authorities as applied to deemed new tobacco products earlier than August 8, 2021. Several comments remarked that FDA should have begun enforcing the premarket review requirements against ENDS products already, that FDA’s previous premarket review compliance date extensions enabled some companies to “delay or circumvent areas of regulatory compliance,” and that further delays were contrary to public health. Although FDA considered the potential impact of the draft compliance policy on businesses large and small, we note that, pursuant to the Tobacco Control Act, as of the effective date of the final deeming rule, ENDS products were required to have premarket authorization prior to marketing. While some deemed new tobacco products remained on the market in light of FDA’s deferred enforcement policy, such policies are subject to change. Manufacturers cannot have settled expectations to market unlawful products, especially in the face of evolving public health concerns. Therefore, FDA believes that manufacturers should have begun contemplating and/or preparing premarket applications no later than the time of the final deeming rule. As discussed in Section II.B of this Final Guidance, FDA has repeatedly publicly discussed the fact that enforcement discretion timelines for deemed tobacco products were under reconsideration and solicited views from stakeholders. Manufacturers may obtain information about the application Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 136 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 28 process from the statutory criteria, as well as published guidances, webinars, and marketing orders and their accompanying documentation provided by FDA.96 96 For more information on premarket tobacco product applications please see Premarket Tobacco Product Applications for [ENDS], Guidance for Industry (June 2019), available at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory- information/search-fda-guidance-documents/premarket-tobacco-product-applications-electronic-nicotine-delivery- systems-ends; Applications for Premarket Review of New Tobacco Products (updated June 2019) available at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/applications-premarket-review-new- tobacco-products. For more information on CTP’s other published regulations and guidances, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/products-guidance-regulations/rules-regulations-and-guidance; for more information on FDA CTP webinars, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance-enforcement- training/fda-tobacco-compliance-webinars; for information on marketing orders and accompanying documentation, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance-enforcement-training. Under the circumstances, FDA believes that earlier enforcement of the premarket review provisions is appropriate for ENDS products. This policy should result in earlier submission of applications and allow FDA to better evaluate whether these products meet the applicable premarket standard, such as whether the products are appropriate for the protection of the public health, considering the risks and benefits to the population as a whole, including users and nonusers of the tobacco product. Because of FDA’s concerns regarding youth use of ENDS products, as well as other ongoing health concerns regarding vaping more generally, all described at length above, FDA is prioritizing enforcement of premarket review requirements for ENDS products, as described in this section, and is doing so independently of the court order. This will ensure that FDA has the necessary information to exercise adequate, timely oversight over these relatively novel and potentially harmful products. Enforcing premarket authorization requirements will, consistent with the process set forth in the Tobacco Control Act, ensure that the burden falls on manufacturers of ENDS products to demonstrate that the manufacture and sale of their products is appropriate for the protection of the public health. E. Avoiding a “Black Market” FDA is aware of concerns that, given the rise in popularity of ENDS, removal of some of the most popular products from the market may be accompanied by an increase in black market versions of these products that may pose additional health and safety risks to consumers beyond those of the authentic products. Although all newly deemed products currently on the market without premarket authorization are being sold in violation of the Tobacco Control Act, in this section, we use the term “black market” to refer to, for example, products intended to look like another ENDS products that is currently being marketed, products intended to take the place of an ENDS product that a manufacturer has stopped distributing because the product lacks premarket authorization, and ENDS products intended for another country’s market but diverted to the U.S. market. Additional risks posed by these products include the potential that they contain harmful chemicals or constituents that are not present in other products, that they are manufactured using comparatively poor quality controls, and that they are designed in ways that facilitate modifications by distributors or users—all of which increase the risk of adverse events.97 97 E.g., “Amid Vaping Deaths, California Targets Counterfeit Products,” The New York Times (Sept. 17, 2019), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/16/us/california-vaping.html; “‘Juul-alikes’ Are Filling Shelves With Moreover, to the extent that such products are sold through nontraditional retail Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory- information/search-fda- guidance-documents/premarket- tobacco-product-applications- electronic-nicotine-delivery- systems-ends https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/premarket- tobacco-product-applications-electronic-nicotine-delivery-systems-endshttps:// www.fda.g ov/ regulatory - informatio n/search- fda- guidance- document s/ premarket -tobacco- product- applicatio ns- electronic- nicotine- delivery- systems- ends https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/applications- premarket-review-new-tobacco-productshttps:// www.fda.gov/ regulatory- information/ search-fda- guidance- documents/ applications- premarket- review-new- tobacco- products https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/products-guidance-regulations/rules- regulations-and-guidance https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance- enforcement-training/fda-tobacco-compliance- webinars https://www.fda.gov/tobacco- products/compliance- enforcement-training/fda- tobacco-compliance-webinars https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance- enforcement-training https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/16/us/ california-vaping.html 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 137 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 29 channels, such as social sources or online commercial marketplaces that do not include age- verification requirements, they pose an increased risk of being accessed by minors. FDA has regulatory tools and enforcement authorities to address ENDS and other tobacco products that are marketed without authorization, that are counterfeit, and/or that are otherwise involved in illicit trade.98 98 See, e.g., sections 301, 902, 903, 905, 910, and 920 of the FD&C Act. FDA has previously issued letters to companies suspected of marketing counterfeit or otherwise unauthorized products.99 99 E.g., “Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on forceful new actions focused on retailers, manufacturers to combat youth access to e-cigarettes as part of FDA’s Youth Tobacco Prevention Plan,” available at: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/statement-fda-commissioner-scott-gottlieb-md-forceful- new-actions-focused-retailers-manufacturers. Additional potential actions against adulterated or misbranded illicit tobacco could include: (1) issuing a Warning Letter; (2) issuing an import alert and refusing admission of tobacco products imported or offered for import into the United States; and (3) initiating seizure or injunction court actions. Persons engaging in illicit trade in tobacco products may also be criminally prosecuted under the law. As a result of this policy, FDA will be better situated to combat black market products, including those that are particularly troubling from a public health or safety perspective, such as counterfeit pods entering the country at the border or being sold through illicit, online channels. By prioritizing our focus as outlined in Section IV.D, the Agency can target our supply chain surveillance and investigation resources on the types of ENDS products that are likely to be subject to counterfeiting and/or sale on the black market. As a result, we will be able to more efficiently and effectively deploy our enforcement tools to get counterfeit and black market products off the market. Moreover, FDA believes that there are significant public health benefits of the policy set forth in this guidance, which is aimed at curbing the dramatic rise in youth use of ENDS products and will help address safety issues connected to ENDS products that are not fully understood—e.g., the development of acute or chronic lung injuries associated with use of vaping products as well as battery explosions with ENDS products—particularly given that these products have been marketed without premarket evaluation. These current public health issues affirm the importance of the premarket review process, as contemplated by the Tobacco Control Act, to scientifically evaluate products based on a public health standard. V. PREMARKET REVIEW FOR OTHER DEEMED NEW TOBACCO PRODUCTS FDA remains concerned with minors’ access to and use of all tobacco products, particularly flavored tobacco products, which appeal to minors and promote initiation.100 100 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “E-cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the Surgeon General,” 2016; Villanti, A.C., A.L. Johnson, B.K. Ambrose, et al., “Flavored Tobacco Product Use in Youth and Adults: Findings From the First Wave of the PATH Study (2013-2014),” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 53(2); 139-151, 2017. In addition to the Sweet, Teen-Friendly Nicotine Flavors” The New York Times (Aug. 13, 2019), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/health/juul-flavors-nicotine.html; Omaiye, E.E., I. Cordova, B. Davis, et. al., Counterfeit Electronic Cigarette Products with Mislabeled Nicotine Concentrations,” Tobacco Regulatory Science, 3(3): 347–357, 2017. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/health/juul- flavors-nicotine.html https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/statement-fda-commissioner- scott-gottlieb-md-forceful-new-actions-focused-retailers-manufacturershttps://www.fda.gov/news-events/ press-announcements/statement- fda-commissioner-scott-gottlieb- md-forceful-new-actions-focused- retailers-manufacturers 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 138 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 30 tobacco products covered earlier in this guidance document, FDA has considered revising its enforcement priorities with respect to premarket authorization for other deemed new tobacco products. We note that several comments on the March 2019 Draft Guidance suggested that FDA begin immediately enforcing the premarket requirements for flavored deemed tobacco products such as cigars and other deemed tobacco products. FDA received numerous comments relating to the proposed policy for flavored cigars in the March 2019 Draft Guidance. Some of the comments were supportive of that proposed policy, although some wanted the Agency to take even more aggressive action. Other comments opposed inclusion of flavored cigars as an enforcement priority and disagreed with the bases for the proposed policy. For example, some commenters argued that flavored cigars are used most commonly by adult users and that the inclusion of flavored cigars as an enforcement priority limits adults’ freedom to choose their preferred product. Other commenters argued that FDA did not have the data necessary to support the need for “a drastic and unprecedented change in enforcement priorities.” Some commenters also stated that the evidence cited by FDA discussing initiation of youth usage of flavored cigars was inconsistent and inconclusive. After consideration of the data regarding youth use of cigars generally and comments received on this issue, we have decided to not prioritize enforcement of flavored cigars before September 9, 2020. While there is no public health benefit associated with flavored cigars and FDA remains concerned with youth use of flavored cigars, current data indicate that youth are using flavored cigars at a lower rate than they are using flavored ENDS products. Comments regarding deemed tobacco products other than ENDS products and cigars, such as waterpipe tobacco (hookah) products, also provided data showing the use of such tobacco products among high school students and stating that evidence reflects that flavors for these tobacco products entice youth. However, such data do not appear to raise comparably urgent public health concerns, as the lower prevalence of youth use of these products suggests that they do not appear to be as appealing to youth at this time. Accordingly, at this time, FDA has decided to prioritize use of its limited enforcement resources to address the sudden and dramatic increase in youth use of ENDS products, as well as to focus on health and safety concerns connected to ENDS products such as vaping-associated lung injuries. While acknowledging that all new tobacco products on the market without the required authorization are marketed unlawfully and are potentially subject to enforcement action, at any time, in FDA’s discretion, FDA’s primary focus will be to address the sudden and dramatic increase in youth use of ENDS products, and the products covered by this section of the guidance will therefore be a lower priority. We have decided not to prioritize enforcement of the tobacco products covered by this section before September 9, 2020. Manufacturers of flavored cigars, however, just like manufacturers of all other deemed new tobacco products, will be required to submit marketing applications for those products by September 9, 2020, consistent with the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland’s order directing FDA to require that applications be submitted to the Agency by September 9, 2020, for deemed new tobacco products on the market as of August 8, 2016, or be subject to FDA enforcement actions, in FDA’s discretion. As part of the premarket review process, FDA may evaluate, among other things, the product’s constituents, ingredients, Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 139 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 31 additives, and properties; manufacturing practices; and any studies or investigations into the health risks of the tobacco product. FDA also has stated its intention to issue a regulation that would ban the use of characterizing flavors in cigars, and FDA is actively working towards that proposed rule. After September 9, 2020, FDA will make enforcement decisions on a case-by-case basis, recognizing that it is unable, as a practical matter, to take enforcement action against every illegally marketed tobacco product, and that it needs to make the best use of Agency resources. FDA intends to prioritize enforcement based on the likelihood of youth use or initiation to make the most efficient use of its resources. In assessing this, factors the Agency intends to consider include, but are not limited to: What FDA understands about the number of youth currently using the product or category of product; The trends in those numbers, particularly since 2016; Whether the product contains added flavors; What FDA understands about how the product or category of product is typically sold and how that is likely to impact access and use by minors; and What FDA understands about the frequency and other demographics of use by minors. To illustrate, based on these factors, FDA’s lowest priority among these products will include relatively expensive, large hand-rolled cigars that do not have flavors (e.g., fruit, candy, or mint), given what FDA understands to be their comparatively lower youth usage rates. FDA is continuously evaluating new information and adjusting its enforcement priorities in light of the best available data, and it will continue to do so with respect to these products. FDA will take appropriate action regarding tobacco products that are marketed without premarket authorization, including as warranted based on changed circumstances, new information, or to better address minors’ use of those products. VI. DOCUMENT HISTORY January 2020 – First edition of guidance issued. April 2020 – Guidance is revised to reflect the court’s order in American Academy of Pediatrics, et al. v. Food and Drug Administration, et al., Case No. 8:18-cv-883 (PWG), (D. Md. Apr. 22, 2020), Dkt. No. 182, granting a motion for a 120-day extension (until September 9, 2020) in light of the global outbreak of respiratory illness caused by a new coronavirus. Specific revisions include the following: Section II.A – Added reference to order granting 120-day extension. Section IV.A (and throughout) – Changed language stating that FDA’s new enforcement priorities would begin “30 days after issuance of this Final Guidance” to “February 6, Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 140 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 32 2020,” which is 30 days after the Notice of Availability announcing the Final Guidance was published. Section IV.A (and throughout document) – Changed “May 12, 2020” to “September 9, 2020.” Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 141 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 33 APPENDIX A – SIGNIFICANT COMMENTS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO MARCH 2019 DRAFT GUIDANCE AND FDA RESPONSES Legal and statutory framework issues Comment Response FDA should engage in legislative rulemaking process The draft guidance constituted a major rule and FDA has not followed procedures established by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) governing the promulgation of rules The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires an analysis of a proposed rule’s impact on small business and FDA has not conducted such an analysis FDA is bypassing the requirement to conduct a cost benefit analysis by issuing a guidance instead of formal rule FDA has not considered regulatory alternatives to the approach outlined in the draft guidance This action would impose costs and adverse effects on industry which constitutes a major rule which should be subject to the requirements under the Congressional Review Act Though guidance documents are non- binding, the way the guidance is written, retail outlets would need to comply with standards suggested by the draft guidance as though they were law Engaging in rulemaking would offer more substantial opportunity for stakeholders to provide public comments and would provide clarity on what stakeholders through the supply and retail chain) needed to do to come into compliance The Final Guidance is a statement of policy that discusses the enforcement of premarket authorities already existing in the statute. It does not establish any rights for any person, is not binding on FDA or the public, and is not subject to requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the notice-and-comment provisions of the APA. Historically, FDA has not analyzed the economic effects of enforcement guidance, including for reasons such as difficulty in predicting such effects. Alternatives such as issuing warning letters and other enforcement techniques have been considered and used by the Agency. Despite this, as shown by the data highlighted in the Final Guidance, the rate of youth use of tobacco products (particularly fruit- and candy-flavored and mint-flavored ENDS products) has dramatically increased. FDA retains discretion to enforce premarket authorities. The relevant substantive requirements are those governing premarket authorization as set forth in Section 910. The Final Guidance does not impose new restrictions, for retailers or manufacturers, but rather discusses FDA’s enforcement priorities for existing statutory requirements. In Section 910, Congress placed the onus on manufacturers to demonstrate that the marketing of a tobacco product is appropriate for the protection of the public health, taking into account, among other things, the likelihood that those who do not use tobacco products will start using them. FDA provided for a 45-day period for comment on the draft guidance, and interested parties may continue to submit comments after publication of the final guidance, providing a substantial opportunity for public input. FDA is bypassing statutory restrictions on its discretionary enforcement authority and obligations related to rulemaking, by threatening selective enforcement of its premarket authorization authority. FDA has discretion to decide how when to enforce its premarket authorization authorities under the FD&C Act. See Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 835 (1985). The Final Guidance is a statement of policy that Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 142 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 34 outlines FDA’s enforcement priorities with respect to such requirements. Guidance should conform to Section 907. Actions in this guidance should conform to Section 907, which obligates FDA to consider factors not addressed by the guidance, including technical achievability and countervailing effects. FDA should not adopt modifications to compliance policy but should instead follow through with a rule that considers the comments from FDA’s ANPRM on Flavors in Tobacco Products. Section 907 refers to tobacco product standards. This Final Guidance is not setting tobacco product standards, such as a tobacco product standard restricting or eliminating the use of flavors in ENDS. Instead, it is explaining FDA’s enforcement priorities for premarket review requirements already included in the Tobacco Control Act. A flavored product could be marketed consistent with this guidance if it meets the statutory standards for authorization. For example, in April 2019, FDA authorized the marketing of a menthol-flavored IQOS heat-not-burn cigarette product through the PMTA pathway.101 101 For more information please see https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-permits-sale-iqos- tobacco-heating-system-through-premarket-tobacco-product-application-pathway. FDA is supposed to be an advisory agency, not a regulatory agency, and its actions are an overreach. The Tobacco Control Act provides FDA with regulatory authority over tobacco products. FDA’s proposed actions are arbitrary and capricious because it has failed to provide adequate reasoning/scientific reasoning/used incomplete or incorrect data. The enforcement priorities explained in the Final Guidance are based upon and supported by, among other things, multiple high-quality scientific data sources (e.g., NYTS, PATH, MTF). FDA has failed to connect the proposed policy to an official finding that the actions were appropriate for the protection of public health.” The Final Guidance discusses the enforcement of premarket authorities already existing in statute. Section 910 places the onus on manufacturers to show that the marketing of a tobacco product would be appropriate for the protection of the public health, not on the FDA to show otherwise. The Tobacco Control Act uses the term “appropriate for the protection of the public health,” in section 910 and several other provisions. The considerations identified in the statute typically include analysis of whether the action would increase or decrease the likelihood that existing users of tobacco products would stop using such products, and whether it would increase or decrease the likelihood that those who do not use tobacco products will start using the products. The Guidance reflects these considerations. FDA has been unresponsive/lack of clarity. Manufacturers have been relying on guidance and information since the deeming rule; this is a drastic departure FDA has communicated its concerns regarding the increase in youth access in public statements, the March 2019 draft guidance, and requests for information to manufacturers. FDA has consistently Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda- permits-sale-iqos-tobacco-heating-system-through- premarket-tobacco-product-application-pathway https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda- permits-sale-iqos-tobacco-heating-system-through-premarket- tobacco-product-application-pathway 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 143 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 35 from deeming and guidances issued since deeming. Difficult to keep track of FDA’s policies and compliance requirements. informed industry that its compliance policies will be responsive to changed circumstances. There could be no reasonable reliance on a deferred enforcement policy subject to change at any time. The guidance explains why the changed circumstances warrant this prioritization; i.e., the substantial increase in youth use of ENDS in addition to other health and safety considerations. FDA has always stated (and the Tobacco Control Act itself is clear) that deemed new tobacco products are required to obtain premarket authorization and that such products that remain on the market without marketing authorization are marketed unlawfully. FDA has stated it will provide further guidance and issue rules to make the product review process more transparent and predictable but has not done so. FDA has provided guidance and information to industry on the premarket pathways through publishing guidances and marketing orders, as well as posting information via webinars and public workshops.102 102 For more information on premarket tobacco product applications please see Premarket Tobacco Product Applications for [ENDS], Guidance for Industry (June 2019), available at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory- information/search-fda-guidance-documents/premarket-tobacco-product-applications-electronic-nicotine-delivery- systems-ends; Applications for Premarket Review of New Tobacco Products (updated June 2019) available at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/applications-premarket-review-new- tobacco-products. For more information on CTP’s other published regulations and guidances, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/products-guidance-regulations/rules-regulations-and-guidance; for more information on FDA CTP webinars, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance-enforcement- training/fda-tobacco-compliance-webinars; for information on marketing orders and accompanying documentation, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance-enforcement-training. The statute also informs the public of the information needed in a premarket tobacco product application. Industry members have successfully obtained marketing authorization orders with information currently available. Draft guidance would have unjustifiable retroactive effects on industry actors who were “in compliance” with FDA’s previous policy. This Final Guidance would only affect those products that are illegally on the market; none of the products affected by the guidance were ever in compliance with the premarket authorization requirements of the law. FDA has consistently informed industry that its compliance policies will be responsive to changed circumstances. As discussed in the guidance, FDA stated in the notice of proposed rulemaking for the Deeming Rule, that the overall public health impact of ENDS products would depend crucially upon “who uses the products and how they are used. If such products result in minimal initiation by children and adolescents while significant numbers of smokers quit, then there is a potential for the net impact at the Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory- information/search-fda- guidance-documents/premarket- tobacco-product-applications- electronic-nicotine-delivery- systems-ends https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/premarket- tobacco-product-applications-electronic-nicotine-delivery-systems-endshttps:// www.fda.g ov/ regulatory - informatio n/search- fda- guidance- document s/ premarket -tobacco- product- applicatio ns- electronic- nicotine- delivery- systems- ends https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/applications- premarket-review-new-tobacco-productshttps:// www.fda.gov/ regulatory- information/ search-fda- guidance- documents/ applications- premarket- review-new- tobacco- products https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/products-guidance-regulations/rules- regulations-and-guidance https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance- enforcement-training/fda-tobacco-compliance- webinars https://www.fda.gov/tobacco- products/compliance- enforcement-training/fda- tobacco-compliance-webinars https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance- enforcement-training 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 144 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 36 population level to be positive. If, on the other hand, there is significant initiation by youth, minimal quitting, or significant dual use of combust[ed] and non-combust[ed] products, then the public health impact could be negative.” As such policies are subject to change, manufacturers cannot have settled expectations to market unlawful products, especially in the face of evolving public health concerns. Therefore, FDA believes that manufacturers should have begun contemplating and/or preparing premarket applications at no later than the time of the final deeming rule. Draft guidance will kill innovation and force industry out of work. FDA disagrees that the Final Guidance will cause these results. The Final Guidance explains FDA’s enforcement priorities for certain deemed new products that are being marketed without required premarket tobacco product authorization. The Final Guidance would only affect those products that are illegally on the market; none of the products affected by the guidance were ever in compliance with the premarket authorization requirements of the law. In any event, FDA believes that the use of premarket pathways will incentivize development of innovative tobacco products that meet the applicable statutory standards. Draft guidance policy on marketing practices would violate the First Amendment as it represents an impermissibly broad commercial speech restriction. FDA disagrees that the Final Guidance violates the First Amendment. Speech regarding an illegal activity including distribution of a product that requires premarket review under the FDCA – is not protected under the First Amendment. See United States v. Caputo, 517 F.3d 935, 941 (7th Cir. 2008) (unapproved device); United States v. LeBeau, 654 Fed. App’x 826, 831 (7th Cir. 2016) (unapproved drug); United States v. Cole, 84 F. Supp. 3d 1159, 11-66-67 (D. Or. 2015) unapproved drug). Even if the First Amendment were applicable, the government has a substantial interest in protecting youth from tobacco products, and prioritizing enforcement actions with respect to ENDS products targeted to, or likely to promote use by, minors is a reasonable measure to directly advance that interest. See, e.g., Discount Tobacco City & Lottery, Inc. v. United States, 674 F.3d 509, 536 (6th Cir. 2012). We have provided additional examples for clarity in the Final Guidance. Modifications to ENDS Compliance Policy – Flavored ENDS except Tobacco, Mint, Menthol Comment Response Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 145 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 37 There is no evidence/limited evidence to connect liquid nicotine use with harmful health effects in youth. As discussed in the Final Guidance the studies of the effects of nicotine exposure in the naïve adolescent brain find that the adolescent brain is uniquely vulnerable to nicotine compared to the adult brain. Repeated exposure to nicotine during adolescence induces long-lasting structural and functional changes in brain regions involved in addiction, attention, learning, and memory.103 103 McDonald, C.G., A.K. Eppolito, J.M. Brielmaier, et. al., “Evidence for elevated nicotine-induced structural plasticity in nucleus accumbens of adolescent rats,” Brain Research, 1151, 211-218, 2007; doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.03.019; Bergstrom, H.C., R.F. Smith,, N.S. Mollinedo, et al., “Chronic nicotine exposure produces lateralized, age-dependent dendritic remodeling in the rodent basolateral amygdala,” Synapse, 64(10), 754- 764, 2010; doi:10.1002/syn.20783; England, L.J., K. Aagaard, M. Bloch, et al., “Developmental toxicity of nicotine: a transdisciplinary synthesis and implications for emerging tobacco products,” Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 72:176-189, 2017. Studies further suggest that nicotine-induced changes in the adolescent brain can lead to long-lasting effects on cognitive function, such as cognitive deficits following nicotine abstinence, and may contribute to the risk for mood and anxiety disorders. Nicotine is the primary addictive substance in tobacco products, including e-cigarettes and combustible cigarettes. The rate and extent of nicotine delivery significantly impact product abuse liability. Higher nicotine content and faster rates of nicotine delivery increase products’ abuse liability due to the rapid absorption of nicotine into the brain. Some e-cigarettes are capable of achieving similar or greater nicotine delivery as cigarettes.104 104 Hiler, M., A. Breland, T. Spindle, et al., “Electronic cigarette user plasma nicotine concentration, puff topography, heart rate, and subjective effects: Influence of liquid nicotine concentration and user experience,” Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, 25(5), 380-392, 2017; doi:10.1037/pha0000140; Lopez, A.A., M.M. Hiler, E.K. Soule, et al., “Effects of Electronic Cigarette Liquid Nicotine Concentration on Plasma Nicotine and Puff Topography in Tobacco Cigarette Smokers: A Preliminary Report,” Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 18(5):720-723, 2016; doi:10.1093/ntr/ntv182; Maloney, S. F., A. Breland, E.K. Soule, et al. “Abuse liability assessment of an electronic cigarette in combustible cigarette smokers,” Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 27(5):443- 454, 2019; doi:10.1037/pha0000261; O’Connell, G., J.D. Pritchard, C. Prue, et al, “A randomised, open-label, cross- over clinical study to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profiles of cigarettes and e-cigarettes with nicotine salt formulations in US adult smokers,” Internal and Emergency Medicine, 14(6):853-861, 2019; doi:10.1007/s11739- 019-02025-3; Ramoa, C. P., M.M. Hiler, T.R. Spindle, et al. “Electronic cigarette nicotine delivery can exceed that of combustible cigarettes: a preliminary report,” Tobacco Control, 25(e1): e6-9, 2016; doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol- 2015-052447; Yan, X. S., & C. D’Ruiz, “Effects of using electronic cigarettes on nicotine delivery and cardiovascular function in comparison with regular cigarettes,” Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 71(1):24- 34, 2015; doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.11.004. Banning” flavors outside of tobacco, mint, and menthol would deter cigarette smokers from The Final Guidance does not ban any products but rather identifies FDA’s priorities in connection with the enforcement of the statutory premarket review Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 146 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 38 quitting or force smokers to restart smoking if they have already quit. Smokers trying to quit smoking avoid tobacco-, mint-, and menthol-flavored products because they are too similar to flavors of a traditional cigarette. Stricter policies for ENDS products for youth should not come at expense of adult users. requirements. Moreover, the policy announced in the Final Guidance does not prioritize any menthol- flavored, tobacco-flavored, or non-flavored ENDS products or any non-cartridge-based flavored ENDS products for enforcement where the manufacturer is taking adequate measures to prevent minors’ access to these products. Additionally, consumers will be able to access ENDS products (including flavored ENDS products) that receive market authorization. Nicotine replacement therapy products also remain available for tobacco product users who may need assistance with withdrawal symptoms and are also available in several flavors. Available research does not support the argument that smokers trying to quit smoking and transition to ENDS products avoid tobacco and menthol-flavored ENDS products because they are too similar to traditional cigarette flavors. FDA has repeatedly emphasized that the availability of non-combustible options should not come at the expense of addicting a generation of children to nicotine through these same delivery vehicles. FDA believes that this policy strikes an appropriate balance between preventing youth access to ENDS products and maintaining availability of potentially less harmful options for current adult smokers who have transitioned or wish to transition completely away from combusted tobacco products. No basis for prioritizing flavored ENDS products. The policy will not be successful at keeping kids from using these products; kids use anything that is taboo and illegal. Youth are more attracted to these products due to peer use than flavors. Youth use ENDS products for nicotine delivery not for flavors. Only a correlative, not causal, relationship between youth preference for flavors and increased ENDS usage. As discussed in the Final Guidance, data from 2018 NYTS as well as from 2019 Monitoring the Future study and 2019 NYTS show a significant increase in youth use of these products. Data also clearly show that flavors are a primary driver in youth experimentation with, and continued use of, ENDS products, and that the flavored ENDS products overwhelmingly used by youth are cartridge-based products. The policy outlined in the Final Guidance prioritizes enforcement of ENDS products that are targeted to minors or likely to promote use of ENDS by minors. FDA expects that this policy and others stated in the guidance will make fewer products available and more difficult for youth to obtain. No basis for excluding tobacco, mint, and menthol from prioritization. The Final Guidance explains that FDA intends to prioritize mint-flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products (and any other flavored, cartridge-based Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 147 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 39 General increasing popularity of mint and menthol ENDS products amongst youth populations. Mint- and menthol-flavored products drive youth ENDS usage. Flavors clearly increase appeal of ENDS products and some flavors have toxic effects and documented respiratory toxicity. ENDS product, other than tobacco- or menthol- flavored ENDS products) for enforcement for lack of a marketing authorization. The guidance also explains that FDA intends to prioritize enforcement for lack of a marketing authorization for any tobacco- or menthol- flavored ENDS products and non-cartridge-based flavored ENDS products when the manufacturer is not taking adequate measures to prevent minors’ access to these products. Data shows that tobacco- and menthol-flavored ENDS products are not as appealing to minors as other flavored ENDS products. While the NYTS groups mint- and menthol-flavored products together, a randomly-selected third of respondents to the Monitoring the Future (MTF) study were asked specifically about their preferred flavors of JUUL and reported use of menthol- and tobacco-flavored products were among the lowest ranked options. Based on the available data and FDA’s interest in balancing between preventing youth usage and preserving options for adults trying to transition away from combustible products, FDA is not prioritizing enforcement against tobacco-, menthol-, and non- flavored ENDS products or non-cartridge-based flavored ENDS products except when the manufacturer is not taking adequate measures to prevent minors’ access to these products. Prioritizing flavors for enforcement will create a significant black market for “banned” flavors outside those that are exempted. By black market flavored products, we assume this could refer to, for example, flavored ENDS products, including e-liquids, put on the market after the guidance, flavored ENDS products diverted from another country’s market to the U.S market, and/or flavored ENDS products made to look like another ENDS product that is currently being marketed. FDA has regulatory tools and enforcement authorities to address deemed tobacco products that are marketed without authorization, counterfeit, and/or otherwise involved in illicit trade. See, e.g., sections 301, 902, 903, 905, 910, and 920 of the FD&C Act. This Final Guidance describes the Agency’s enforcement priorities for products that are on the market without the required premarket authorization—it does not ban any tobacco product— and illicit ENDS products are necessarily subject to the enforcement priorities identified in the guidance as they do not have premarket authorization. Thus, FDA believes that this policy will not significantly increase Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 148 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 40 illicit practices or create new illicit markets, and it could help FDA better address such practices. Once products receive premarket authorization, they can legally enter the market. FDA believes that there are significant public health benefits of the policy set forth in the guidance, which is aimed at curbing the dramatic rise in youth use of ENDS products and will help address safety issues connected to ENDS products that are not fully understood—e.g., lung injuries associated with use of vaping products as well as battery explosions with ENDS products—particularly given that these products have been marketed without premarket evaluation. These current public health issues affirm the importance of the premarket review process, as contemplated by the Tobacco Control Act, to scientifically evaluate products based on a public health standard. FDA believes that by pursuing this policy the Agency will be better able to monitor and identify illicit cartridge-based products that are threats to public health and safety. As flavored, cartridge- based products exit the market until they are able to demonstrate that they meet the applicable public health standard and receive authorization, the number of potential flavored, cartridge-based products that could cause these threats will shrink to a more manageable number for FDA to monitor. Thus, FDA expects that to the extent any illicit markets were to develop with respect to cartridge-based products in an attempt to evade premarket review requirements, this guidance will help FDA better address the public health threats caused by such markets and the overall public health benefits that will likely accrue as a result of the guidance will be greater than any negative effects of increased illicit markets. Moreover, FDA does not believe that the Agency should refrain from enforcing existing statutory authorities merely because regulated entities could find other ways to violate such authorities. The Agency can, and will, continue to monitor the marketing and use of ENDS and other tobacco products, and adjust its policies and approaches as warranted. Many other harmful products (e.g., alcohol) are available in various flavors attractive to youth; it is inconsistent to only prioritize for enforcement flavored ENDS products. The policy expressed in this Final Guidance is limited solely to tobacco products over which FDA has statutory authority. The focus of this guidance and the Agency’s enforcement priorities is tobacco products, Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 149 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 41 specifically certain ENDS products. Moreover, this comment is about flavored alcohol products that are lawfully on the market, whereas this guidance concerns products being sold in violation of the requirement to have premarket authorization, where the product’s ingredients and additives are among the considerations in the premarket review. FDA should focus its enforcement priorities on products that contain nicotine salts and/or should specify differences between nicotine and nicotine salts. FDA believes that ENDS products containing nicotine salts will be adequately addressed by the enforcement priorities set in this Final Guidance. Research is ongoing to better understand the abuse liability associated with nicotine-salt based e-liquids and new cartridge-style ENDS products, the potential for initiation in youth and nonusers, and the potential for switching from combusted cigarettes in current smokers from use of these products. Preliminary research indicates that nicotine salts in ENDS products can drive nicotine exposures in users higher than ENDS containing freebase nicotine; these exposures can also be comparable to or potentially higher than cigarettes.105 105 Goniewicz, M. L., R. Boykan, C.R. Messina, et al., “High exposure to nicotine among adolescents who use Juul and other vape pod systems (‘pods’),” Tobacco Control, 28(6), 2019; doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054565; Talih, S., R. Salman, R. El-Hage, et al, “Characteristics and toxicant emissions of JUUL electronic cigarettes,” Tobacco Control, 28(6):678-680, 2019; doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054616; Teichert, A., P. Brossard, L.F. Medlin, et al, “Evaluation of Nicotine Pharmacokinetics and Subjective Effects following Use of a Novel Nicotine Delivery System,” Nicotine Tobacco Research, 20(4):458-465, 458-465; doi:10.1093/ntr/ntx093. In addition to greater nicotine exposures, ENDS with nicotine salts can have faster absorption106 106 O’Connell, G., J.D. Pritchard, C. Prue, et al., “A randomised, open-label, cross-over clinical study to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profiles of cigarettes and e-cigarettes with nicotine salt formulations in US adult smokers,” Internal and Emergency Medicine, 14:853-861, 2019; doi:10.1007/s11739-019-02025-3. and potentially faster elimination from the blood.107 107 Bowen, A., & C. Xing, “Nicotine Salt Formulations for Aerosol Devices and Methods Thereof,” United States Patent, Pub. No. US 2015/0020824, 2015, https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/57/f8/7e/2db69f396801d5/US20150020824A1.pdf (visited Oct 8 2019). These factors can increase the abuse liability of ENDS with nicotine salts compared to freebase nicotine, and potentially cigarettes. The higher abuse liability of ENDS with nicotine salts compared to freebase nicotine raises concerns of addiction in youth, particularly due to the vulnerability of the developing adolescent brain. However, for many individual addicted cigarette smokers, the potential for ENDS to act as a substitute for cigarettes, Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/57/f8/7e/2db69f396801d5/ US20150020824A1.pdf 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 150 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 42 thereby encouraging smokers to seek to switch completely away from combustible cigarettes, may be dependent, in part, upon the product having acceptability and abuse liability more comparable to a cigarette. The Final Guidance focuses FDA’s priorities on flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products because data show that flavors are a strong driver for youth use, and that youth overwhelmingly prefer cartridge-based ENDS products. However, FDA is continuously evaluating new information and adjusting its enforcement priorities in light of the best available data, including any data on ENDS products containing nicotine salts, and it will continue to do so with respect to these products. FDA should focus its enforcement priorities on cartridge-based ENDS products. FDA is concerned about the rising youth appeal and use of ENDS products. The data show that flavors are a strong driver for youth use, and that youth overwhelmingly use cartridge-based ENDS products. Accordingly, such products are a key focus of the Final Guidance. FDA will, however, take appropriate action regarding ENDS that are marketed without premarket authorization, including as warranted based on changed circumstances, new information, or to better address minors’ use of those products. Modifications to ENDS Compliance Policy – Offered for sale in ways that pose a greater risk for minors to access such products Comment Response The Tobacco Control Act prohibits FDA from restricting tobacco sales to a specific category of retail outlets. FDA is not restricting or even prioritizing enforcement against ENDS products sold in a specific category of retail outlets. Although the March 2019 Draft Guidance proposed to focus its enforcement priorities for flavored ENDS products on how the product was sold (regardless of the type of retail establishment), after considering the comments, the public health threats, and new evidence, FDA determined that focusing on how the product was sold would not be sufficient to address youth use of these products. Given the urgent need to address the dramatic rise in youth use, this Final Guidance prioritizes enforcement with respect to any flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products (other than a tobacco- and menthol-flavored ENDS product) without regard to the location or method of sale. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 151 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 43 With respect to tobacco-, menthol-, and non-flavored ENDS products as well as flavored cartridge-based ENDS products, the Final Guidance states that FDA does not intend to prioritize enforcement where manufacturers have taken adequate measures to prevent youth access. These types of measures generally are among those that manufacturers have informed FDA that they are capable of implementing for ENDS products and none involve a specific category of retail outlet. Lack of clarity for retail locations Should retail locations have age verification at their door or a separate room for the sale of any ENDS products? Can retail locations employ less burdensome alternatives? Concern that the policy could make traditional cigarette products more easily accessible than ENDS products. Need clarity on how manufacturers or wholesalers can document adequate measures to prevent youth access. How are retail outlets supposed to balance space constraints with youth access concerns? FDA should give existing enforcement mechanisms the chance to succeed or focus on enforcing existing mechanisms before instituting new policy. FDA has provided additional details regarding factors that it intends to consider in assessing whether a manufacturer is taking adequate measures to prevent youth access. For example, the Final Guidance lists several different types of programs to monitor compliance with age-verification and sales restrictions, all of which are programs that some manufacturers have stated they are capable of implementing for ENDS products. Unlike the Draft Guidance, it does not include, as a factor for prioritization, whether the product is sold by retailers in a location where minors are able to enter at any time. The March 2019 Draft Guidance proposed to focus its enforcement priorities of flavored ENDS products on how the product was sold (regardless of the type of retail establishment). After considering the comments, the public health threats, and new evidence, FDA determined that, to address youth use of these products, this Final Guidance should prioritize enforcement with respect to any flavored, cartridge- based ENDS products (other than a tobacco- and menthol-flavored ENDS product) without regard to the location or method of sale. The alarming data on the increase in youth use of ENDS products shows that the FDA’s enforcement efforts to date did not adequately address this problem. Enforcement priorities would effectively ban many retailers from selling ENDS products while allowing sales from vape shops and online retailers. Concerns that many retailers will be forced to close. Concerns that this will just cause retailers to shift unauthorized products to vape shops and other stores. This Final Guidance prioritizes enforcement with respect to any flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products (other than a tobacco- and menthol-flavored product) without regard to the location or method of sale. In addition, the Final Guidance explains that FDA intends to prioritize enforcement for lack of a marketing authorization for tobacco-, menthol-, and non-flavored ENDS products and for non-cartridge- Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 152 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 44 Concerns about the rise in youth use of open tank systems and sourcing of e-vapor products at vape shops, as indicated by an analysis of Wave 2 (2014-2015) to Wave 3 2015-2016) of results from the PATH study. based flavored ENDS products where the manufacturer is not taking adequate measures to prevent youth access to ENDS products. For example, the Final Guidance lists several different types of programs to foster compliance with age-verification and sales restrictions, all of which are programs that some manufacturers have stated they are capable of implementing for ENDS products. Finally, FDA notes that there has been a dramatic rise in youth use of cartridge-based ENDS products since Wave 3 of the PATH study was completed in 2016, as demonstrated by results from the NYTS in 2018 and 2019. These recent data inform FDA’s serious public health concerns regarding the sale of certain flavored, cartridge-based products without premarket authorization. Moreover, although this Final Guidance should have minimal impact on those vape shops that primarily sell non-cartridge ENDS products and ensure that purchasers are of the requisite age and are not purchasing for resale (e.g., are not purchasing in large quantities), should evidence indicate to the contrary, the Agency will take appropriate action. Stricter enforcement of current age verifications rules would be an effective enforcement strategy. Lax enforcement is a primary driver of youth ENDS use. FDA should increase penalties to retailers who violate current regulations and sell to minors. Age verification should be as strong as it is for alcohol. There is a need for stricter age verification for online sales of ENDS products. As described in the Final Guidance, FDA vigorously enforces the age verification requirements in its compliance check program. FDA has been focusing enforcement efforts on age verification as a strategy to address youth use of tobacco products, and FDA continues to enforce age restrictions. However, FDA believes that age verification alone is not sufficient to address this issue, given the most recent data that youth use of ENDS products continues to increase. FDA determined that focusing on how the product was sold would not be sufficient to address youth use of these products given the many sources of products available for youth access. The reality is that youth have continued access to ENDS products in the face of legal prohibitions and even after voluntary actions by some manufacturers. FDA believes that the policy expressed in the Final Guidance is a more appropriate means to combat youth use of, and access to, these products. Many companies already comply with age verification requirements. Policies that encourage additional measures would harm law-abiding retailers. The Final Guidance does not require additional age verification measures. Instead, it states that FDA intends to prioritize enforcement for lack of a marketing authorization for tobacco-, menthol-, and non-flavored ENDS products as well as non-cartridge- Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 153 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 45 based flavored ENDS products where the manufacturer is not taking adequate measures to prevent youth access to ENDS products. Online sales of ENDS products should be banned. This suggested sales restriction is outside of the scope of this guidance, which concerns enforcement of the premarket authorization requirements. At this time, FDA is finalizing this Guidance to address its concerns regarding youth use of ENDS products. The guidance prioritizes enforcement with respect to flavored, cartridge-based ENDS products because data shows that flavors are the primary driver in youth experimentation with, and continued use of, ENDS products, and that youth overwhelmingly use cartridge-based ENDS products. These priorities apply whether the products are sold online or in brick-and- mortar stores. However, the Agency will continue to monitor this issue. Lack of clarity on what quantity limits for online sales would entail. Given the data that many youth obtain their ENDS products from friends or sources in their social networks, FDA believes that quantity limits are one measure that a manufacturer could adopt to prevent individuals from purchasing large quantities of ENDS products to then distribute to minors on a secondary market. FDA’s enforcement decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis and depend on many factors, but FDA intends to consider whether a manufacturer limits the quantity of ENDS products that a customer may purchase within a given period of time as a factor in assessing whether a manufacturer is taking adequate measures to prevent youth access. There is wide variation in these types of ENDS products and, based on some of the comments FDA received and the responses to the Agency’s September 12, 2018 letters, FDA believes individual manufacturers are best positioned to know how to set purchase limits for their specific products. Therefore, FDA does not believe that further detail is warranted regarding this issue. Age to purchase ENDS products should be increased to 21. On December 20, 2019, the President signed into law legislation that raised the federal minimum age of sale of tobacco products from 18 to 21 years. FDA views this as a major step in protecting the next generation of youth from becoming addicted to ENDS and other tobacco products. FDA believes, however, that this change alone is not sufficient to address the epidemic use of ENDS by youth, especially use of flavored, Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 154 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 46 cartridge-based products (except for tobacco- or menthol-flavored products) that are easily concealed, produced on a large scale, and (in some cases) sold in bulk quantities that has helped enable resale through social or black market sources. As part of the premarket review process for these products, FDA intends to consider measures taken by manufacturers to control youth access to these products. Purchasing from other adolescents is a major factor driving ENDS usage in youth populations. FDA should increase penalties for individuals who provide products to youth. This type of behavior should be the responsibility of parents, not the government. Only specialty vape stores should be permitted to sell ENDS. Data from CDC’s 2017 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) found that 86.4% of youth who used ENDS did not purchase them at a retail store. Youth will find ways to purchase restricted flavored products and increased regulations will be ineffective. FDA agrees that social sources remain a concern for ENDS and other tobacco products. Given the popularity of social sources, FDA believes that quantity limits could be effective in preventing individuals from purchasing large quantities of ENDS products to then distribute to minors on a secondary market. Accordingly, FDA intends to consider whether a manufacturer limits the quantity of ENDS products that a customer may purchase within a given period of time as a factor in assessing whether a manufacturer is taking adequate measures to prevent youth access. Limits on retail or online sales would remove two of the top purchase options for adult ENDS product users. The priorities in the Final Guidance are addressed to particular products, not retailers. FDA believes that the Final Guidance strikes an appropriate balance between preventing youth access to ENDS products and maintaining availability of potentially less harmful options for current adult smokers who have transitioned or wish to transition completely away from combusted tobacco products. FDA would consider measures taken by manufacturers to control youth access, not adult access, when determining whether to enforce the premarket authorities with respect to these products. Does not provide adequate reasoning or specificity for manufacturers to understand what marketing actions would prompt enforcement actions. FDA’s decision to exercise its enforcement authorities with respect to particular products will be determined on a case-by-case basis, informed by the enforcement priorities described in this Final Guidance and any other relevant factors. The Final Guidance provides a number of examples of measures manufactures can take to help prevent youth access to their tobacco products. Such examples reflect information provided by manufacturers in response to the Agency’s September 12, 2018 letters, including measures to Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 155 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 47 address youth use that manufacturers can or have already taken to address youth access to ENDS products, as well as information provided in comments to the March 2019 Draft Guidance. Modifications to ENDS Compliance Policy – flavored ENDS offered for sale after August 8, 2021, without the manufacturer submitting (and FDA receiving) a premarket application Comment Response Moving up the compliance review date would be harmful. Has the potential to impact adults using ENDS products for smoking cessation purposes. Will harm businesses that have already planned for the initial date. Will exacerbate an already burdensome premarket review process. Will be difficult for small businesses to submit complete applications by August 8, 2021. The Tobacco Control Act provides that new tobacco products may not be legally marketed without premarket authorization. Accordingly, all deemed new tobacco products on the market without authorization are illegally marketed products. As discussed in the Final Guidance, industry had notice that FDA would revisit its compliance policy if necessary. The Final Guidance announces that FDA intends to prioritize for enforcement ENDS products for which a premarket application has not been submitted by September 9, 2020. FDA understands the concerns expressed by these commenters but believes that it is appropriate for ENDS products to undergo premarket review on a shorter timeframe given the rise in youth use, in addition to other new and continuing public health and safety concerns, such as the outbreak of pulmonary injuries and battery hazards. Leaving products on the market for this long is problematic. Date is still too far away and will allow harmful products to remain on the market. Deadline means longer time for products on the market to continue to make unsubstantiated claims without scientific review. Leaving products on the market is problematic due to lack of evidence justifying later premarket review. FDA agrees with these commenters that the proposed August 8, 2021, date would allow products that may be harmful to remain on the market too long, would allow products to market unsubstantiated claims without scientific review, and that the data before the agency does not justify later premarket review. The Final Guidance discusses the date for premarket application submission and the importance of earlier submission of applications to allow for FDA to better evaluate whether these products meet applicable premarket standards, such as whether the products are appropriate for the protection of the public health, considering the risks and benefits to the population as a whole, including users and nonusers of the tobacco product. Lack of clarity around date for submission of premarket review applications FDA should articulate the status of submitted premarket applications and provide manufacturers opportunity to The Final Guidance discusses dates for submission of applications for premarket review and provides links to application submission information, including where to view marketing orders and accompanying documentation, available at FDA.gov. FDA has Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 156 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 48 amend applications in light of changing deadlines. Still unclear what information must be included in a PMTA and/or SE report provided guidance and information to industry on the premarket pathways through publishing guidances and marketing orders, as well as posting information via webinars and public workshops.108 108 For more information on premarket tobacco product applications please see Premarket Tobacco Product Applications for [ENDS], Guidance for Industry (June 2019), available at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory- information/search-fda-guidance-documents/premarket-tobacco-product-applications-electronic-nicotine-delivery- systems-ends; Applications for Premarket Review of New Tobacco Products (updated June 2019) available at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/applications-premarket-review-new- tobacco-products. For more information on CTP’s other published regulations and guidances, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/products-guidance-regulations/rules-regulations-and-guidance; for more information on FDA CTP webinars, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance-enforcement- training/fda-tobacco-compliance-webinars; for information on marketing orders and accompanying documentation, please see https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance-enforcement-training. Modifications to ENDS Compliance Policy – targeted to minors or likely to promote use of ENDS product by minors Comment Response FDA should use its authority to require ENDS manufacturers to stop running ads with unsubstantiated claims about smoking cessation and modified risk claims. This is outside of the scope of the Final ENDS guidance, which addresses premarket review requirements for ENDS products. FDA closely monitors retailer, manufacturer, importer, and distributor compliance with Federal tobacco laws and regulations and takes corrective action when violations occur. When enforcing FDA’s tobacco product authorities, the Agency generally issues a warning letter the first time a compliance check reveals a violation of federal tobacco laws and regulations, including when a manufacturer sells or distributes a product as a modified risk tobacco product without an FDA order in effect. Failure to promptly and adequately correct all violations and ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations may lead to enforcement actions, including civil money penalties, seizure, and/or injunction. To the extent that manufacturers are marketing their products for therapeutic purposes, they are subject to FDA’s medical product authorities. Lack of clarity – it is unclear what ENDS products manufacturers (and other parties that engage in ENDS marketing activities) and retailers can do to avoid concerning marketing activities. Would like to know what specific steps they can take to ensure their marketing reaches adults rather than minors. FDA believes the level of detail and examples in the Final Guidance provide sufficient clarity. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory- information/search-fda- guidance-documents/premarket- tobacco-product-applications- electronic-nicotine-delivery- systems-ends https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/premarket- tobacco-product-applications-electronic-nicotine-delivery-systems-endshttps:// www.fda.g ov/ regulatory - informatio n/search- fda- guidance- document s/ premarket -tobacco- product- applicatio ns- electronic- nicotine- delivery- systems- ends https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/applications- premarket-review-new-tobacco-productshttps:// www.fda.gov/ regulatory- information/ search-fda- guidance- documents/ applications- premarket- review-new- tobacco- products https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/products-guidance-regulations/rules- regulations-and-guidance https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance- enforcement-training/fda-tobacco-compliance- webinars https://www.fda.gov/tobacco- products/compliance- enforcement-training/fda- tobacco-compliance-webinars https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/compliance- enforcement-training 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 157 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 49 Need clarity on what the agency considers targeting or promoting to minors. FDA should ensure social media platforms are not used as advertising platforms for ENDS products, including monitoring videos that promote ENDS products and limiting the reach of social media influencers who promote products. To the extent this comment is about the advertising of ENDS products generally, it is outside the scope of the policy. To the extent this comment is about advertising of ENDS products that are targeted to minors or likely to promote use of ENDS by minors, FDA believes the Final Guidance addresses this by indicating that such products will be an enforcement priority. A number of ENDS products are designed to be small and discreet, thus promoting ENDS use in minors. The Final Guidance discusses the Agency’s intent to prioritize its enforcement for products that are targeted to minors or likely to promote use of ENDS by minors. One example of such products includes products marketed directly to minors by promoting ease of concealment. FDA should support stakeholder partnerships to develop common approach and standards in preventing youth access. FDA CTP’s Office of Stakeholder Relations regularly connects with stakeholders. Stakeholders also have access to the ombudsman as well. Flavored Cigars Comment Response Enforcing the premarket requirements against flavored cigars would limit adults’ freedom to choose their preferred products. The Final Guidance does not include a policy to prioritize flavored cigars for enforcement. Instead, as described in the Final Guidance, flavored cigars are treated like all other deemed products that are not ENDS. Flavored cigars may seek premarket authorization from FDA. Manufacturers of flavored cigars, and of other deemed new tobacco products, will be required to submit marketing applications for those products by September 9, 2020, consistent with the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland’s order, as described in the Guidance. Eliminating flavored cigars would result in the creation of a black market. The Final Guidance does not include a policy to prioritize flavored cigars for enforcement. In addition, we do not think development of a black market is likely given that there are a number of grandfathered” flavored cigars that are lawfully marketed and would remain available to consumers regardless of FDA’s enforcement of premarket authorities. FDA’s assertion of product migration of youth is an unfounded hypothesis. Concerns that FDA mischaracterizes research and does not cite contrary The Final Guidance does not include a policy to prioritize flavored cigars for enforcement. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 158 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 50 government findings (citing to CDC reports and PATH data) FDA’s data on this topic limited to two studies that only recently became available and has not been vetted There are limitations to the Wave 1-3 PATH data that FDA cites in support FDA relies on 2018 NYTS data and incorrectly speculates that youth could migrate to flavored cigars CDC MMWR data and PATH data contradict suggestions that youth usage of cigars is on the rise Data show decreasing importance of flavors to first time cigar users Only allowing 30 days after guidance is finalized would result in a de facto ban on flavored cigars. Not enough time for manufacturers to submit SE reports. May not be enough time for retailers to sell off inventory/FDA should include an additional sell off period of time to the compliance guidance. Should be able to remain on the market until FDA has reviewed and made a determination on the premarket review application. The Final Guidance does not include a policy to prioritize flavored cigars for enforcement. In addition, we note that there are a number of “grandfathered” flavored cigars that are lawfully marketed that would remain available to consumers regardless of FDA’s enforcement of premarket authorities. Guidance should address grandfathered flavored cigar products as well. The Draft and Final Guidance are about enforcement against products that lack required premarket authorization. Grandfathered tobacco products, which do not require premarket authorization, are outside the scope of the policy. Lack of clarity Lack of a definition of flavored cigars will lead to confusion and leave retailers misinformed about what constitutes a flavored cigar. Lack of definition of characterizing flavor. The Final Guidance no longer discusses prioritizing enforcement for flavored cigars. FDA should pursue the flavored cigar enforcement policy addressed in the Draft Guidance. At this time, FDA has decided to focus this Final Guidance on ENDS products, given the recent surge in youth use and additional considerations such as battery explosions and vaping-related illnesses. Nevertheless, FDA is continuously evaluating new information and adjusting its enforcement priorities in light of the best available data. FDA will take Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 159 of 617 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 51 appropriate action regarding tobacco products that are marketed without premarket authorization, including cigars, in accordance with the court’s order in American Academy of Pediatrics. FDA also has stated its intention to issue a flavored cigar rule. Compliance Policy for Other Deemed Products Comment Response FDA should modify compliance policy for other deemed products. Data on waterpipe tobacco use demonstrates increase in youth use. As discussed in the Final Guidance, consistent with the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland’s order, FDA intends to enforce premarket requirements for these products after September 9, 2020. FDA should not modify compliance policy for other deemed products. As discussed in the Final Guidance, consistent with the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland’s order, FDA intends to enforce premarket requirements for these products after September 9, 2020. FDA should focus its efforts on menthol cigarettes. The Final Guidance describes FDA’s policy on enforcing premarket requirements for products subject to the deeming rule. Menthol cigarettes are outside the scope of this policy. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Khoury - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 160 of 617 From: Hayley Hodges < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 3:41 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: Jaime Rojas < Subject: Public Comment - Flavored Tobacco Ordinance Good afternoon City Clerk, Attached is a letter regarding the discussion on the flavored tobacco ordinance that will be discussion on behalf of the National Association of Tobacco Outlets as well as an excel sheet of data. Thank you! Hayley Hodges National Association of Tobacco Outlets (NATO) Warning: External Email Written Communications Item 8.2 - Hodges - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 161 of 617 National Association of Tobacco Outlets, Inc., 17595 Kenwood Trail, Minneapolis, MN 55044 952-683-9270 www.natocentral.org September 12, 2022 Mayor Mary Casillas Salas Members of the Chula Vista City Council RE: Proposed Flavored Tobacco Products Ban Dear Mayor Salas and Members of the City Council: As the Executive Director of the National Association of Tobacco Outlets (NATO), a national retail trade association that represents more than 60,000 retail stores throughout the country including numerous Chula Vista retail stores, I am writing to submit our comments and concerns regarding the proposed ordinance on your September 13, 2022, agenda that would ban the sale of all flavored tobacco products, including the sale of menthol cigarettes, mint and wintergreen smokeless tobacco products, flavored cigars and flavored pipe tobacco. This ban would include products that have been determined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to be “appropriate for the protection of the public health.” We would ask that the Chula Vista City Council not adopt this ordinance for the reasons explained below. Chula Vista Should Focus on Youth Use of Alcohol and Marijuana According to the 2018-2019 California Health Kids Survey, the most recent available, for the Sweetwater Union High School District, only 6% of 11th graders had ever smoked a cigarette and only 2% had ever tried smokeless tobacco, while only 1% of 11th graders reported using either cigarettes or smokeless tobacco in the prior 30-day period. With no significant youth use of traditional tobacco products, there is no justification for an across-the-board prohibition of every kind of flavored tobacco product that adults who are 21 and older choose to purchase. This same survey found that 12% of 11th graders had used alcohol in the most recent 30-day period, 5% were binge drinkers, and 12% had used marijuana. Chula Vista has a much more significant problem with youth drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana; a reasonable person can inquire why the Chula Vista City Council is not considering a ban on all flavored alcohol products and additional regulations to respond to the high marijuana use rates? Given the Council’s responsibility to protect the public health, the absence of any action on underage drinking and marijuana use is concerning. It is not as if flavored alcohol products are uncommon; there are numerous alcohol flavors, such as cinnamon, whipped cream, chocolate, and cake, which are more youth-oriented than the traditional flavors of tobacco products, such as menthol, mint, or wintergreen, which would be banned under this proposal. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Hodges - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 162 of 617 National Association of Tobacco Outlets, Inc., 17595 Kenwood Trail, Minneapolis, MN 55044 952-683-9270 www.natocentral.org If the underlying reason for the bans is youth usage of electronic cigarette products, which the Survey found 8% of 11th graders had used in the previous 30 days (still one-third lower than alcohol or marijuana use,) the Council should focus its regulatory efforts on youth-oriented electronic cigarette vaping products and not, at the same time, all other traditional tobacco products that legal age adults choose to buy and use. When considering restrictions on electronic cigarette products, it is important to understand that the Centers for Disease Control found that e-cigarette use nationally among high schoolers dropped about 60% from 2019 (which the most recent available Sweetwater Union survey covers) to 2021. See E- Cigarette Use Among Middle and High School Students — National Youth Tobacco Survey, United States, 2021, US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, October 1, 2021, Vol. 70, No. 39. The empirical data showing very low underage use rates of traditional products by local high schoolers and the national trend of a 60% drop in e-cigarette use does not support depriving all 21 and over adults their freedom to choose flavored tobacco products they prefer. It is also important to understand the facts about the public’s use of and opinions about tobacco products. A Gallup poll issued in August 2022 noted that combustible cigarette smoking (both tobacco and menthol flavored) was at an historic low of 11% of the adult population, down from 16% (over a 30% drop) from 2021. Cigarette smoking, which everyone believes is on the higher end of the risk continuum, is rapidly fading out as newer, lower risk products, including electronic cigarettes and modern oral tobacco products, become more common. Many of these products have been found by the FDA to be “appropriate for the protection of the public health” and several of them have flavors that would be banned under the proposed ordinance. It is perhaps for this reason that the same Gallup poll found that only 42% of respondents, Democrats and Republicans alike, support banning menthol cigarettes. By contrast, a July 2022 Gallup poll found that 50% of adults think marijuana use has a negative effect on society. The Council must also consider the study published online August 17, 2022, in Nicotine and Tobacco Research, funded by the National Institutes of Health, finding “that local [flavored tobacco sales restrictions] in the California Bay Area were not associated with a change in e-cigarette use one-year post-implementation.” M.S. Dove, et al, Flavored Tobacco Sales Restrictions and Teen E-cigarette Use: Quasi-experimental Evidence From California, https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntac200. FDA Actions on Flavored Tobacco and Electronic Cigarette/Vaping Products The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s recent regulatory actions have for all intents and purposes already enacted the kind of flavored electronic cigarette ban contained in the proposed ordinance. However, the FDA regulatory actions go far beyond just banning flavored electronic cigarettes. Due to all of the FDA’s actions as outlined below, I urge the City Council to allow the FDA regulatory processes to continue in lieu of proceeding with a local flavored tobacco ban ordinance. Ø On April 28, 2022, the FDA issued proposed regulations banning the sale of menthol cigarettes and all flavored cigars. If enacted, these proposed regulations would apply nationwide and remove hundreds of brands of menthol cigarettes and even more brands of flavored cigars form the marketplace. The comment period on these regulations recently closed, and the rulemaking Written Communications Item 8.2 - Hodges - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 163 of 617 National Association of Tobacco Outlets, Inc., 17595 Kenwood Trail, Minneapolis, MN 55044 952-683-9270 www.natocentral.org process continues. Ø May 14, 2022, was the deadline for manufacturers of tobacco products and electronic cigarette/vaping products that contain synthetic nicotine to file an application with the FDA seeking an order from the agency to market their synthetic nicotine products. To date, the FDA has not authorized a single electronic cigarette product with synthetic nicotine to be on the market and has announced that 88,000 such products are now illegal to sell. Ø The FDA continues to review and act on pre-market tobacco product applications (PMTAs) that manufacturers had to file with the agency by September 9, 2020, to keep their other tobacco products on the market while the FDA reviewed the applications. To date, PMTA applications covering 8,092,129 electronic cigarette and nicotine vaping products have been submitted to the FDA. The FDA has refused to accept 1,402,226 applications, refused to file 5,091,368 applications, or issued marketing denial orders for 1,234,848 electronic cigarette and nicotine vapor products. These actions add up to denying a total of 7,729,309 electronic cigarette and nicotine vapor products from being sold in the marketplace. Ø To date, the FDA has issued marketing granted orders allowing only 23 electronic cigarette and vapor products to remain on the market, and not a single one of the 23 products has a characterizing flavor. Ø In February 2020, the FDA adopted a ban on the sale of all flavored cartridge-based and pod- based electronic cigarettes, except for tobacco and menthol flavored products. This action removed thousands of flavored cartridge-based and pod-based electronic vaping products from the market. With all of these past, current, and pending actions being taken by the FDA, we urge the City Council not to adopt a ban on the sale of flavored tobacco and electronic cigarette products. Voters Want to Decide Whether Flavor Bans Make Sense California Senate Bill 793, which would ban most flavored tobacco products statewide, has been referred to the November ballot as Proposition 31 to let the voters decide whether to allow the statewide flavor ban bill to go into effect. Voters want their say on flavor bans. We respectfully suggest that deferring action until the voters have spoken in November is in the best interests of Chula Vista and its retailers. Store Closures and Layoffs May Follow the Enactment of the Ordinance NATO’s convenience store members experienced losses of up to 45% in gasoline sales and 20% or more in grocery, snack, beverage, and tobacco product sales during the past couple of years during the pandemic. With convenience stores relying on tobacco product sales for approximately 36% of in- store sales, a ban on all flavored tobacco products would eliminate an important product category that is an integral part of a store’s business model. Also, tobacco specialty stores that rely on tobacco product sales for up to 90% of total sales will be devastated by the loss of hundreds of flavored tobacco products. Additionally, retailers have recently found it difficult to attract and retain employees and combined with the effects of inflation, stores payroll costs continue to rise. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Hodges - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 164 of 617 National Association of Tobacco Outlets, Inc., 17595 Kenwood Trail, Minneapolis, MN 55044 952-683-9270 www.natocentral.org If Chula Vista retailers must remove hundreds of products from their shelves, it will be very difficult to compete with retailers in neighboring localities or with illicit sellers who do not care to whom they sell their products. Employee layoffs and even store closures are real possibilities. NATO and its Chula Vista retail members share everyone’s interest in keeping tobacco and electronic smoking devices out of the hands of persons under 21 years old but banning all these products for 21 and older adults makes no sense from a health standpoint or economic point of view. According to the FDA, there have been 26 attempts to induce Chula Vista retailers to sell tobacco products to underage persons; only once did a retailer make the sale, a 96% compliance rate. Why would the City Council want to harm responsible, legitimate retailers and force their 21 and older adult customers to drive to other cities or to buy from illicit sellers? We urge the Chula Vista City Council not to move forward with the proposed ban on flavored tobacco products and single use electronic cigarettes. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Thomas A. Briant NATO Executive Director Written Communications Item 8.2 - Hodges - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 165 of 617 Compliance Check Inspections of Tobacco Product Retailers Through 8/31/22 - Search Results You searched for: City contains: chula vista State is CA Retailer Name Street Address City State Zip Minor Involved Sale to Minor Product Type Brand Flavor Inspection Date Decision Date Inspection Result Link Charges VAPE AND SMOKE 4360 MAIN ST CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 5/24/2022 No Violations Observed N/A PINE PALACE LIQUOR 11 3RD AVE STE C CHULA VISTA CA 91910 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 5/18/2022 No Violations Observed N/A PURE SMOKE 1037 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 1/19/2022 No Violations Observed N/A AMIGOS SMOKE SHOP & MINI MARKET 1285 BROADWAY # 102 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 7/22/2021 No Violations Observed N/A VAPE AND SMOKE 4360 MAIN ST CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/19/2020 No Violations Observed N/A VAPE AND SMOKE 4360 MAIN ST CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes Yes ENDS / E- liquid Other Mint 7/31/2019 8/29/2019 Warning Letter Issued 1140.14(b)(1)-Sale to a Minor; 1140.14(b)(2)(i)- Failure to verify age VAPE ELEMENTS 2015 BIRCH RD CHULA VISTA CA 91915 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 11/1/2018 No Violations Observed N/A APPLE TREE SUPERMARKET 1193 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 3/5/2018 No Violations Observed N/A VALERO FOOD MART 873 PALOMAR ST CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 3/5/2018 No Violations Observed N/A SUNSET LIQUOR 985 BROADWAY STE L CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 3/5/2018 No Violations Observed N/A FOOD 4 LESS #780 660 PALOMAR ST CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 3/1/2018 No Violations Observed N/A AMIGOS SMOKE SHOP & MINI MARKET 1285 BROADWAY # 102 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 3/1/2018 No Violations Observed N/A SOUTH BAY LIQUOR 1355 BROADWAY STE L M CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 3/1/2018 No Violations Observed N/A 7-ELEVEN 13569 796 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91910 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A 711 STORE 2131 13590D 1097 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A 7-ELEVEN STORE #202121604C 899 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A NORTGATE MARKET # 27 1058 3RD AVE CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A 7-ELEVEN STORE #33715A2131 689 PALOMAR ST CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A WAL-MART STORE # 5305 1150 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A L STREET 76 898 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A PALOMAR ARCO 800 PALOMAR ST CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A BROADWAY SMOKE SHOP 1067 BROADWAY STE 101 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A L STREET SHELL 902 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A MIRAGE LIQOUR 1096 BROADWAY STE 101 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A U.S.A. LIQUOR MARKET 947 BROADWAY CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A VISHIONS SMOKE SHOP 1037 BROADWAY STE F CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Yes No N/A N/A Not available 2/28/2018 No Violations Observed N/A Written Communications Item 8.2 - Hodges - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 166 of 617 From: Marlon Mansour < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 3:48 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: NMA Letter in Opposition to Proposed Flavor Tobacco Ban Good afternoon, Please find attached the Neighborhood Market Association's Letter in opposition to the proposed ban on flavored tobacco, on the agenda for tomorrow's council meeting. I also want to stress that the retailer community, a key stakeholder greatly affected by the ultimate action of the City Council on this proposed ordinance, was not reached out for thoughts or guidance on this proposed ordinance. The Chula Vista business community is not aware that this ban is being proposed in 24 hours. Delay this Vote till the proper stakeholder outreach is done! Passing this ordinance without proper outreach to this key stakeholder group is tantamount to silencing their voices. Best regards, Marlon Oram Mansour President Neighborhood Market Association 6367 Alvarado Court, Suite 204 San Diego, CA 92120 Phone: 619-313-4400 www.neighborhoodmarket.org Follow us Warning: External Email Written Communications Item 8.2 - Mansour - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 167 of 617 6367 Alvarado Court Suite 204, San Diego, CA 92120 – 619-313-4400 – www.neighborhoodmarket.org Executive Board Of Directors Firas “Russ” Soro Executive Chairman Mark Kassab Vice Chairman Remon Mansour Treasurer Steve Mattia Secretary Samir Salem Past Chairman Basil Zetouna Executive Board Member Ghassan Namou Executive Board Member Molly Sylvester Executive Board Member Rony Georges Executive Board Member Saeed Somo Executive Board Member Sam Attisha Executive Board Member Wisam Moshe Executive Board Member Executive Advisory Members Mike Anderson Anheuser-Busch Karam Toma Southern Wine & Spirits Robert Wolf PepsiCo Eric Frey Reynolds President Marlon Oram Mansour President Emeritus Arkan Somo General Counsel David C. Jarvis September 12th, 2022 Mayor Mary Casillas Salas Chula Vista City Council 276 Fourth Ave, Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: Proposed Flavored Tobacco Ban The Honorable Mayor Mary Casillas Salas, On behalf of the Neighborhood Market Association (NMA) Executive Board and our members, we would like to submit our written testimony in opposition to the Flavored Tobacco Ban currently under your consideration. The NMA is a non-profit trade organization that represents over 700 family-owned businesses, including many operating in Chula Vista. In recent years, use of e-cigarettes and vaping products has risen, largely as a less harmful alternative to traditional tobacco products.1 Youth access to these products has become a concern for legislators. In recent years, the California state government as well as the Federal government, through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), have taken powerful steps to prevent youth access and advertising of these products.2, 3, 4 Issues of youth access is also paramount to our retailers. That is why they take every measure to assure these products never reach the hands of underage youth. Our retailers are not just business owners; they have families and kids of their own. The NMA strongly opposes this proposed flavor ban for several reasons: the effect on small businesses, the unintended consequences similar flavor bans have had, and the recent State and Federal actions that have been taken on the issue. Effect on Small Businesses In a year of enforcement in the County-level, retailers have lost an average of around 50% of their sales due to the flavor ban. Some have shuttered their stores because they could not afford their rent. Others have had to lay off employees or raise prices of non-tobacco products (milk, bread, eggs, gas) just to offset the large revenue losses to try to remain afloat. Prohibiting products and subjecting retailers and employees to civil and criminal penalties will only increase law enforcement presence on our local communities. Meanwhile, there is no data in the staff report suggesting that retailers are the source of youths getting tobacco and vaping products. Many cities and localities in the greater San Diego area do not currently have flavored tobacco bans, creating a lack of uniform laws. Convenience stores are for convenience. They serve their communities and provide a one-stop shop for various purchases. Prohibiting them from selling products that are being permitted to sell a few streets away only drives away business to other districts. Written Communications Item 8.2 - Mansour - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 168 of 617 6367 Alvarado Court Suite 204, San Diego, CA 92120 – 619-313-4400 – www.neighborhoodmarket.org The Unintended Consequences of Similar Flavor Bans Throughout history, bans on legal products have created previously unforeseen, more grave consequences. Black market and other unregulated sources, such as the internet, assume the market vacuums created from these bans and further endanger consumers. In prior flavor tobacco bans, studies showed great increases in traditional cigarette smoking.5, 6, 7 Finally, these bans cause negative impacts on businesses and local government tax revenue. We have two relevant case studies to look to for guidance: San Francisco’s flavor ban, which was made in effect in January 2019; and the County of San Diego’s flavor ban, which started enforcement in July 2021. In San Francisco, the flavor ban resulted in an increase in youths smoking traditional tobacco cigarettes.5, 6 San Francisco saw devastating impacts to small businesses and their local tax revenue.8, 9 Legislators cannot fail to adequately research and contemplate these unintended consequences when drafting a ban. Banning a product and taking it away from our regulatory bodies will only do more harms to youths, the local business communities, and the local government while making a de minimis impact on its intended goals. Recent State and Federal Actions In less than 2 months, the people of the State of California will vote on the State Referendum for SB 793, the statewide flavored tobacco ban Governor Gavin Newsom had signed into law in 2020.10 In recent years, the FDA has taken a big focus on the tobacco industry, reviewing applications for tobacco products with a focus on ensuring the public health of the entire population and focused on ensuring products do not cater to new users. To date, 6.7 million Pre-Market Tobacco Applications (PMTAs) have been submitted for the FDA’s review.2, 3, 4 Without the FDA’s approval, these products cannot come to market anywhere in the entire country. Of the 6.7 million PMTAs, only 22 have been approved. And these 22 are subject to yearly review and potential revocation if further data shows the products risk the population as a whole or that the product encourages new tobacco users.2 In sum, while the concerns of tobacco and vaping products catering to youth with artistic packaging and unique flavors is very serious, it has recently been addressed and continues to be addressed. Not only is it being taken care of, but each application is also being strictly scrutinized by the FDA under a wide federal scope. Passing this local law would ban tobacco products that even the FDA approves. Conclusion While the intentions behind this proposed law are noble, the measure is ill-conceived temporally, the language and scope are overly broad, and the unintended consequences from such a ban not deeply addressed. The unintended consequences of other flavor bans have only caused greater health harms to youths, which not only negates the primary purpose of this proposed ban; it exacerbates concerns of youth access and drives use of more harmful, traditional tobacco products. It’s also clear the adverse impact on local small businesses, a large stakeholder, were not contemplated, and our retailer community was not reached out to prior to the drafting of this legislation for feedback or guidance on the consequences of a proposed ban. Our retailer community is always ready and willing to discuss issues affecting our local and business communities with our elected representatives. The state will have its answer on this issue through a democratic referendum process. The FDA has already taken immense steps to alleviate the primary concern underlying this proposed ban. Do not kill your own district’s businesses, cause thousands of employees to lose their jobs, all to the advantage of Written Communications Item 8.2 - Mansour - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 169 of 617 6367 Alvarado Court Suite 204, San Diego, CA 92120 – 619-313-4400 – www.neighborhoodmarket.org other localities, lacking in flavor bans, down the street when you can wait a few months for a potential uniform state-wide ban. These stakeholders have already been cut out of the process and had their voices silenced. Do not continue to disregard these stakeholders. Respectfully, Marlon Oram Mansour President Written Communications Item 8.2 - Mansour - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 170 of 617 6367 Alvarado Court Suite 204, San Diego, CA 92120 – 619-313-4400 – www.neighborhoodmarket.org References 1 https://www.cbsnews.com/video/public-health-expert-worries-e-cigarette-panic-is-ruining-single- biggest-public-health-opportunity-in-120-years/ 2 https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/market-and-distribute-tobacco-product/premarket-tobacco- product-applications 3 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-27/fda-official-says-tobacco-product-reviews-are- in-final-stages 4 https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/ctp-newsroom/perspective-fdas-progress-tobacco-product- application-review-and-related-enforcement 5 “A Difference-in-Differences Analysis of Youth Smoking and a Ban on Sales of Flavored Tobacco Products in San Francisco, California” Abigail S. Friedman, Yale School of Public Health 6 “The impact of a comprehensive tobacco product flavor ban in San Francisco among young adults” Yong Yang, Eric N. Lindblom, Ramzi G. Salloum, and Kenneth D. Ward 7 https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/youth-and-tobacco/results-annual-national-youth-tobacco- survey?linkId=133964541&utm_campaign=ctp-nyts&utm_medium=social&utm_source=CTPTwitter 8 Economic Impact of the Ban on Flavored Tobacco Products in San Francisco (California Fuels & Convenience Alliance) 9 Economic Mitigation Measures Responsive to City Bans on the Sales of Certain Tobacco Products (San Francisco Small Business Commission, 2019) 10 SB 793: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB793 Written Communications Item 8.2 - Mansour - Received 9/12/2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 171 of 617 From: Adrian Kwiatkowski < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 4:06 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov>; Andrea Cardenas <acardenas@chulavistaca.gov>; Steve C. Padilla <spadilla@chulavistaca.gov>; John McCann <jmccann@chulavistaca.gov>; Jill Galvez jmgalvez@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov>; Stacey Kurz <SKurz@chulavistaca.gov>; Genevieve Hernandez <ghernandez@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: San Diegans VS Big Tobacco | letter in support of flavored tobacco ordinance Dear Mayor and City Council, On behalf of San Diegans VS Big Tobacco, I am submitting the attached letter in support of the flavored tobacco ordinance (with no amendments) in advance of the Chula Vista City Council meeting tomorrow. Please feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions on my mobile phone at ( Sincerely, Adrian Kwiatkowski Coalition Manager San Diegans VS Big Tobacco Adrian Kwiatkowski Vice President | Partner Warning: External Email Written Communications - Item 8.2 Kwiatkowski - Received 9/12/22 mailto:adrian@bartellkwiatk owski.com mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:acardenas@chula vistaca.govmailto:spadilla@chula vistaca.gov mailto:jmccann@chula vistaca.govmailto:jmgalvez@chula vistaca.govmailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov mailto:SKurz@chula vistaca.govmailto:ghernandez@chula vistaca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 172 of 617 SAN DIEGANS VS BIG TOBACCO All Flavors | All Products | All Locations SanDiegansVSBigTobacco.org SAN DIEGANS VS BIG TOBACCO C/O Bartell & Kwiatkowski 1650 Hotel Circle North, Suite 222| San Diego, CA 92108 September 9, 2022 Mayor and City Council City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA RE: September 13th City Council Agenda, ITEM 8.2: Prohibiting Flavored Tobacco Sales Dear Mayor and City Council: On behalf of the San Diegans VS Big Tobacco coalition, we want to express our appreciation for your leadership and supporting ending the sale of flavored tobacco products in Chula Vista and to strongly express our support for ITEM 8.2 on the September 13th City Council agenda with no amendments. As you know, ITEM 8.2 will end the sale of most flavored tobacco products in Chula Vista including: e-cigarettes, menthol cigarettes, synthetic nicotine and tobacco-derived e-liquids. Across California, more than one-hundred cities and counties have taken similar action to protect their residents from the tobacco industry. The largest cities in California have taken action including: San Jose, San Francisco, Sacramento, Oakland, Long Beach, Santa Ana, Los Angeles and San Diego. Chula Vista will join them and Imperial Beach and the County of San Diego by approving this ordinance and protecting your community. In a recent poll, 68% of local voters support ending the sale of flavored tobacco products. The San Diegans VS Big Tobacco coalition strongly encourages you to join them in supporting ITEM 8.2 on the September 13th City Council agenda with no amendments. We look forward to your leadership on taking a strong stand against Big Tobacco. Sincerely, Adrian Kwiatkowski Coalition Manager Written Communications - Item 8.2 Kwiatkowski - Received 9/12/22 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 173 of 617 From: The Xavier Trust < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 10:55 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: No on tobacco flavor ban Warning: External Email I am writing to let you know that there has been no public outreach, no stakeholder engagement and to respect the democratic process and let the voters speak this November! Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Xavier mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 174 of 617 From: Christine Dulatre < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 9:57 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: No to Flavor Ban To whom it may concern: Please know that there has been no public outreach, no stakeholder engagement and to respect the democratic process and let the voters speak this November! No flavor ban! This has truly helped people from all walks of life- get rid of traditional analog cigarettes that has thousands of chemicals known to cause various ailments vs a better alternative! Please hear out the community! Thank you, Our company Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Dulatre mailto:pixy360photobooth@ gmail.com mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 175 of 617 From: Leanora Toma < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 9:27 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavor tobacco ban Warning: External Email I am writing to let you know that there has been no public outreach, no stakeholder engagement and to respect the democratic process and let the voters speak this November! Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Toma mailto:leanoratoma@y ahoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 176 of 617 From: Karlos Toma < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 9:23 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: ATTENTION Warning: External Email I am writing to let you know that there has been no public outreach, no stakeholder engagement and to respect the democratic process and let the voters speak this November! Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Toma mailto:ktoramo@ya hoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 177 of 617 From: amar nadem < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 8:19 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavoured tobacco ban. Warning: External Email Hi. Good evening my Name is Amar Nadem. I am the owner of king liquor in the City Of Chula Vista. We just heard about the tobacco flavor ban meeting that’s happening tomorrow at the City Hall. First thing there has been no public outreach, Second we all know this is not going to fix the issue. If you guys are gonna be able to ban all the flavor tobacco from the small businesses how are you guys able to control the black market/Internet Let the State vote for it in November. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone Written Commuications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Nadem mailto:amarnadem@hot mail.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 178 of 617 From: Holly Tenaglia < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 8:14 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: Lynda Barbour <CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Chula Vista Resident Request for Support: Vote YES to Flavored Tobacco Ordinance Dear Mayor Mary Casillas Salas, My name is Holly Tenaglia, and I am a resident of Chula Vista, District 3, in Windingwalk right by Camarena Elementary School. In addition to being a Chula Vista resident, I am an oncology advanced practice nurse at VA San Diego, an American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network advocate, and an active member of the San Diego Oncology Nursing Society. Given my background in healthcare, and specifically oncology, I want to urge you to vote YES on the flavored tobacco ordinance that will be heard on Tuesday, September 13th. The use of any flavored tobacco product among youth is concerning because it exposes them to a lifetime of nicotine addiction, disease, and premature death, which I saw firsthand as a Navy Veteran and am deeply concerned about as a mother of two young children. Thank you for your attention, and please, vote YES to end the sale of all flavored tobacco products in Chula Vista. Very Respectfully, Holly Tenaglia Chula Vista, CA 91915 Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Tenaglia mailto:holly.santos.917 @gmail.com mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.govmailto:lynda.barbour@ cancer.org mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 179 of 617 From: Hanny Thomas < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 8:13 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavor ban Warning: External Email You can not do that. It is unconstitutional, there has been no public outreach, no stakeholder engagement and to respect the democratic process and let the voters speak this November whether to keep the Vape and the flavors or ban it! Thanks, Johnny Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Thomas mailto:johnnyt_16@icl oud.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 180 of 617 From: ramez louis < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 8:10 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavors tobacco ban Hello there We just received note from friend of mine There is meting tomorrow at city of Chula Vista , this is not right! it's about respecting small businesses, making sure the public is notified and engaged and respecting voter rights! Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Louis mailto:e_smokeshop@ yahoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov https:// overview.mail.yahoo.com/?. src=iOS 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 181 of 617 From: Namer < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 8:04 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Tobacco flavor ban Warning: External Email As a tax payer and a voter this issue must be left to the voters to decide. alcohol and weed is legal because it was the people who voted on it not bunch of old ppl who have nothing to do with it just like the Supreme Court voting on abortion . Please allow the people to decide . Thank you and may god bless you all Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Namer mailto:bayho @cox.net mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 182 of 617 From: Angelo < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 7:59 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavor Ban Warning: External Email Hello! My name is Angelo and I am a small business owner in Chula Vista! I am very upset that as a owner in your city I was not informed about this meeting at all. This is unfair as it seems like it’s being done in the dark and not giving the local business owner a fair chance to come out and speak. I hope you guy can respect the process of the state of California and let them decide as a whole state. This won’t only effect small businesses but the city tax dollars. Thank you for your time. Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Angelo mailto:angelonissou@y ahoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 183 of 617 From: Mike Sabri < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 7:57 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Warning: External Email it's about respecting small businesses, making sure the public is notified and engaged and respecting voter rights! Thank you Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Sabri mailto:mikesabri1990@ic loud.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 184 of 617 From: Avrin Yakou < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 7:56 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavored Tobacco Ban Hi, There is absolutely no way in good conscience the City of Chula Vista can without notice to anyone hold this meeting tomorrow. This is not a third world country where laws and regulations are passed in the dark. There has been 0 public outreach or respect for the democratic process. Why hold this meeting regardless when California as a whole will be voting on it in November? This whole thing feels extremely slimy and wrong. Respect the people of this City and the businesses within it and cancel this meeting immediately!! Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Yakou mailto:avrinyakou91@ gmail.com mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 185 of 617 From: Giselle Brambila < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 7:54 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: FLAVOR BAN Warning: External Email It is unlawful as a California resident, to have a law or a flavor ban passed without any city involvement or public opinion. NO FLAVOR BAN! Giselle Brambila Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Brambila mailto:gisellebrambila89@ gmail.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 186 of 617 From: Desiree Dhawn Adamos < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 5:17 PM To: Jill Galvez <jmgalvez@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: Chelsea Walczak Vircks <CityClerk CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Chula Vista City Council Meeting Good afternoon Councilmember Galvez, My name is Desiree Adamos, a recent graduate of the Sweetwater Union High School District and a concerned health advocate in regards to the use of tobacco among youth. Attached is a letter expressing my support for the upcoming ordinance restricting the sale of flavored tobacco in Chula Vista. This ordinance is a critical step to protecting my peers and generations to come from a lifetime of nicotine addiction and tobacco-related disease and death. I urge you to support this ordinance on September 13 when it is brought forward. Thank you, Desiree Adamos Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Adamos mailto:desireedhawn.adamos @gmail.com mailto:jmgalvez@chula vistaca.govmailto:Chelsea.Walczak.Virck s@heart.orgmailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 187 of 617 Dear Mayor Salas and Councilmembers, My name is Desiree Adamos, a former high school student from the Sweetwater Union High School District. I am reaching out to you to emphasize the importance of passing legislation that would restrict the sale of flavored tobacco in our county. The experiences of my peers and the overall negative impacts of tobacco make this decision a necessary step in ensuring healthy and productive futures for our generation. A handful of the students I went to school with suffered greatly from tobacco use. With impressionable minds, students are more likely to become addicted to the nicotine in tobacco in comparison to their older counterparts. As a result, I’ve witnessed many students use tobacco as an unhealthy coping mechanism and a way to “fit in” with other peers. In fact, an acquaintance of mine was sent to the emergency room a few months ago due to the damage that tobacco was inflicting on her lungs. The advertisement of flavored products only makes the issue worse. According to the American Heart Association, more than 8 out of 10 youth who have ever used tobacco began with flavored tobacco products. If Chula Vista county continues to permit the sale of flavored tobacco, the city has proven where their priorities are – with economic incentive, instead of the future of our youth. Tangible legislation must be implemented to properly support and protect our youth from decisions that could ruin their lives. Thank you for your time and consideration. Desiree Adamos 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 188 of 617 From: Alfa Santos < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 6:03 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: End the sale of flavored tobacco Dear The Honorable Salas, As your constituent, I'm writing to ask you to help end the sale of all flavored tobacco products in Chula Vista. This includes flavored e-cigarettes, menthol cigarettes and hookah. These products are fueling a youth nicotine addiction crisis. Menthol cigarettes in particular have long been used by the tobacco industry to target and addict people in communities of color. The facts are clear: 81% of youth who have used tobacco started with a flavored product. E-cigarettes and other tobacco products are available in such kid-friendly flavors as Gummi Bear, Mango Mania, Cotton Candy and Cool Mint. More than 2 million kids nationwide use e-cigarettes, and the vast majority say flavors are the reason why. Due to heavy tobacco industry targeting, 85% of Black smokers now use menthol cigarettes – compared to 29% of White smokers. This has had devastating health impacts on Black communities. 41% of high school smokers use menthol cigarettes, which are easier for kids to start using and harder for smokers to quit. Cigars – which come in hundreds of sweet flavors – are now the second most popular tobacco product among high schoolers. Please join the fight to protect kids from all flavored tobacco products. Other California communities are already tackling this problem. Los Angeles County, Oakland, and San Francisco have eliminated the sale of all flavored tobacco products, just to name a few. Chula Vista should join them – and the growing number of communities across the nation that have taken a stand against flavored tobacco products. Given the COVID-19 pandemic and its devastating impact on the lungs, stopping youth use of tobacco products is more important than ever. Our kids can't wait. Please do everything you can to end the sale of flavored tobacco products in our city. Sincerely, Alfa Santos Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Santos mailto:calichicafolife@y ahoo.com mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 189 of 617 From: Xtabay Rico < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 5:57 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: End the sale of flavored tobacco Dear The Honorable Salas, As your constituent, I'm writing to ask you to help end the sale of all flavored tobacco products in Chula Vista. This includes flavored e-cigarettes, menthol cigarettes and hookah. These products are fueling a youth nicotine addiction crisis. Menthol cigarettes in particular have long been used by the tobacco industry to target and addict people in communities of color. The facts are clear: 81% of youth who have used tobacco started with a flavored product. E-cigarettes and other tobacco products are available in such kid-friendly flavors as Gummi Bear, Mango Mania, Cotton Candy and Cool Mint. More than 2 million kids nationwide use e-cigarettes, and the vast majority say flavors are the reason why. Due to heavy tobacco industry targeting, 85% of Black smokers now use menthol cigarettes – compared to 29% of White smokers. This has had devastating health impacts on Black communities. 41% of high school smokers use menthol cigarettes, which are easier for kids to start using and harder for smokers to quit. Cigars – which come in hundreds of sweet flavors – are now the second most popular tobacco product among high schoolers. Please join the fight to protect kids from all flavored tobacco products. Other California communities are already tackling this problem. Los Angeles County, Oakland, and San Francisco have eliminated the sale of all flavored tobacco products, just to name a few. Chula Vista should join them – and the growing number of communities across the nation that have taken a stand against flavored tobacco products. Given the COVID-19 pandemic and its devastating impact on the lungs, stopping youth use of tobacco products is more important than ever. Our kids can't wait. Please do everything you can to end the sale of flavored tobacco products in our city. Sincerely, Xtabay Rico Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Rico mailto:ricoxxtabay @aol.com mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 190 of 617 From: Sunset < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 9:51 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavored tobacco ban Warning: External Email Good morning our Leaders at Chula Vista City Council. Not sure if I’m sending this email to our leader or anther cites tail or follower . Regarding today’s hearing about flavored tobacco ban. It’s misguided policy that will do more harm than good" and "hurt small businesses, eliminate necessary tax revenue, and perpetuate dangerous . We are 2 miles from the border . we are all dealing with human trafficking ,drug trafficking Do you want to add more power and business to them? Best Regards. Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Sunset mailto:sunsetliquor@y ahoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 191 of 617 From: Heveen Toma < Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 9:25 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Hello Warning: External Email I am writing to let you know that there has been no public outreach, no stakeholder engagement and to respect the democratic process and let the voters speak this November! Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Toma mailto:heveentoma619@y ahoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 192 of 617 From: Eva Quiambao < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 10:38 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Tobacco Warning: External Email To whom it may concern, Please be fair in handling tobacco issue. Respect small businesses and wait until November election. Thank You Concerned Citizen Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Quiambao mailto:quiambaoeva@y ahoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 193 of 617 From: Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 11:17 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavor ban Warning: External Email Flavor Bans without public opinions are unfair and overreaching. Small businesses will close! Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Minds - Orcas - Or mailto:minds- orcas-0r@icloud.com mailto:minds- orcas-0r@icloud.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 194 of 617 From: naell soro < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 12:35 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Vape ban Warning: External Email Hello to whom it may concern My name is is Naell Soro, emailing about the Vape ban, I OPPOSE this ban this will hurt our businesses significantly and the underage sales will sore, because over 90% of the underage sales are happening online. So I strongly oppose this ban Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Soro mailto:naellsoro@g mail.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 195 of 617 From: Jeff Mansour < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 12:37 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Agenda item 8.2 Warning: External Email Hello my name is Jeff Mansour. Please don’t pass the flavor ban. You didn’t give your constituents enough time to voice their opinion. The people will vote on it in two months for the entire state of California. I don’t understand why you would pass this now when we are going to vote on it soon. You must protect and respect the democratic process. We the people need to choose. This issue has already been addressed and it’s was put in the hands of the people. This is the United States of American. You guys are making a mistake by passing it now. This is a slap to the face of all voters. What is the point of a referendum if you pass it now. By passing it, you are basically saying you don’t care about what voters and the citizens think. You guys were elected by the voters so please do your job right and do the right thing. Don’t let lobbyists push you around and please don’t make this about politics. Do it as common sense and wait for the November vote and see what happens. At least than we know that you trust the American democratic process. Thank you Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Mansour mailto:jeff@mys dcc.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 196 of 617 From: Sam Zora < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 12:49 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: today Agenda Item 8.2. ban Flavor Tobacco I'm a business owner in chula vista, I have been in business for 30 years. if this goose through will effects our business and will create a black market element in our city. This will hurt our business and will drive our adult smokers to the neighboring cities. You should leave this issue to state level since it will be on the ballot end of the year Salam Zora Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Zoro mailto:s.zora@y ahoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 197 of 617 From: Lynda Barbour < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 1:10 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov>; Steve C. Padilla <spadilla@chulavistaca.gov>; Andrea Cardenas <acardenas@chulavistaca.gov>; John McCann <jmccann@chulavistaca.gov>; Jill Galvez jmgalvez@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Letter in Support of item 8, ending the sale of flavored tobacco products in Chula Vista Dear Madam Mayor and Honorable Council members, Please find ACS CAN’s letter in support of the ordinance on tonight’s agenda to end the sale of flavored tobacco products. Thank you for your consideration of this important policy. Lynda Barbour Lynda Barbour, MPH Senior Government Relations Director, So.California & Grant Program 619.682.7416 | m: 619.742.4861 | f: 619.296.0928 American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Inc. fightcancer.org | 1.800.227.2345 This message (including any attachments) is intended exclusively for the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain proprietary, protected, or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, copy, or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Barbour mailto:lynda.barbour@ cancer.org mailto:MSalas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:spadilla@chula vistaca.govmailto:acardenas@chula vistaca.gov mailto:jmccann@chula vistaca.govmailto:jmgalvez@chula vistaca.govmailto:CityClerk@chula vistaca.gov tel:619.682. 7416 tel:619.742. 4861 tel:619.296. 0928 http:// fightcancer.or g/ tel:1.800.227. 2345 http:// fightcancer.org/ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 198 of 617 American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network 5333 Mission Center Rd, Ste. 105; San Diego CA 92108 619.682.7416 (F) 619.296.0928 lynda.barbour@cancer.org September 13, 2022 The Honorable Mary Salas Mayor, City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Ave Chula Vista CA 91910 Re: Agenda item: 8.2 Prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco products Dear Mayor Salas and members of the Chula Vista City Council, Our mission at the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network is to end suffering and death from cancer, and we are committed to advancing that mission in Chula Vista. We are deeply concerned about the availability of flavored tobacco products, which is contributing to the youth access and initiation into tobacco use in communities across the state and country. We write to ask that you to adopt an ordinance that ends the sale of flavored tobacco products, including flavored e-cigarettes and menthol cigarettes without exemptions. Tobacco companies have a long history of marketing to youth with imagery and by marketing appealing flavors. Tobacco companies have aggressively marketed menthol products in low income and Latino communities who already bear a greater burden of health disparities; this marketing increases tobacco use and widens health disparities in these communities. Comprehensive tobacco policies reduce the community cancer risk and help to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to prevent, treat, and survive cancer. There are many reasons to adopt a policy like the one being considered. Consider the following: Four out of five youth who have ever used a tobacco product started with a flavored tobacco product, and when asked why, say it is because they come in flavors they like. More than half of the youth who smoke use menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars have continued to gain popularity, especially among high school boys; they are available in an array of flavors and often packaged to be priced at 3 or 4 for 99-cents, making them even more appealing to youth who want to experiment. A recent study concluded that youth who use e-cigarettes are more than four times as likely to try cigarettes than those youth who never tried e-cigarettes. Ending the sale of all flavored tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes, removes much of the allure of these products and is a key component of a comprehensive strategy to reduce tobacco initiation and subsequent addiction, as well as to promote health equity for all. Additionally, this will help put an end to the predatory marketing of tobacco products that disproportionately impact poorer communities, marginalized groups, youth, and communities of color in Chula Vista. We urge the council to demonstrate your commitment to the health and well-being of your residents by joining the almost 90 California jurisdictions that have adopted strong policies to end the sale of all flavored tobacco products. Sincerely, Lynda Barbour, MPH Southern California Government Relations Director 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 199 of 617 From: Saiman_ Dekho < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 1:40 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: For Agend 8.2 Warning: External Email Hello my name is Saiman Dekho and My Family owns a business in beautiful Chula Vista. I am emailing you regarding agenda 8.2 today because I do not believe this agenda item should pass at this point. Although I understand the purpose and the goal of the agenda, I do believe it does not fix the problem at this point and the timing is absolutely wrong. I do not believe a flavor ban for a single city will help and curbing youth access. I looked at your report and it shows that a large percent of youth based on your study shows that they access these products from family and friends. This will only get worse. The best way to curb youth access by state wide ban which we are voting on in November. One way or another What we need is a large solution, not one by an individual city. Thank you. Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Dekho mailto:saiman_dekho@y ahoo.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 200 of 617 From: randi saco < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 1:47 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Agenda 8.2 Warning: External Email Please don’t pass the flavor ban in my city. We are going to vote on it in November. It only makes sense to wait. Let us make the decision and not politicians. Make the right decision by waiting to see what the people vote for. It will be fair for all voters especially the ones living in Chula Vista. Thank you Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Saco mailto:randisaco@g mail.com mailto:CityClerk@chulavi staca.gov 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 201 of 617 From: victor perez < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 5:16 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Flavored tobacco What. You want to take away my constitutional rights to be able to smoke or have my own business. What's next. Taking my voting rights away. WTH. OVER Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/13/22 Item #8.2 - Perez 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 202 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 203 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 204 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 205 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 206 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 207 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 208 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 209 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 210 of 617 Item 8.2 Amendment to CVMC 5.56 to Prohibit Flavored Tobacco Presented by: Stacey Kurz, Housing Manager Genevieve Hernandez, Senior Planner2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 211 of 617 Chronic Disease •Lung Cancer, COPD, heart disease and stroke. •Over 480,000 deaths each year in the U.S. •Healthcare spending exceeds $170 billion annually. Long-Term Tobacco Use 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 212 of 617 2021 National Youth Tobacco Survey 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 213 of 617 “Flavored Tobacco Product”means a Tobacco Product that contains or emits a taste or smell,other than the taste or smell of tobacco,including but not limited to,any taste or smell relating to fruit,mint,menthol,wintergreen, chocolate,cocoa,vanilla,honey,candy,dessert,alcoholic beverage,herb,or spice.Flavored Tobacco Products do not include products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)for sale either as a tobacco cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes,where the product is marketed and sold solely for such an FDA- approved purpose. Flavored Tobacco Defined 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 214 of 617 Brain Development Smoking tobacco can cause: •nicotine addiction; •mood disorders; and •permanent lowering of impulse control. Nicotine changes the way synapses are formed, which can harm the parts of the brain that control attention and learning. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 215 of 617 Flavored Nicotine E-Liquid 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 216 of 617 Chula Vista Smoking Policy CVMC 8.22 “Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment” •Defined e-cigarettes •Made all city facilities smoke/vape free •Added affordable housing projects •Posted signage at all city facilities & updated 30 city parks •Conducted under cover operations at problem public venues CVMC 5.56 “Tobacco Retailer” •Created licensing program 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 217 of 617 City of San Diego •May 2022: Adopted ban on Flavored Tobacco & Menthol (effective 1/1/23) State •Dec. 11, 2020: Attorney General Xavier Becerra agreed to suspend flavor ban until November 2022 election •Jan. 22, 2021: Validation of the number of signatures needed to suspend the enactment of a flavor ban until Nov. 2022 election •November 2022: anticipated on Ballot Local and State Action 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 218 of 617 •Feb. 25, 2020: CV City Council request addition information •Oct. 8, 2020: HCVAC direct staff to conduct additional research Areas of Research •Types of stores & proximity to sensitive receptors •Youth vaping trends in CV Chula Vista as of February 2020 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 219 of 617 1.Retailers and Sensitive Receptors 2.Local Youth Access •Types of Devices Used •Vaping Product Access •Youth Opinions on use of Flavored Tobacco 3.Prohibiting Nicotine Content Additional Research Conducted 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 220 of 617 Retailers and Sensitive Receptors 32% [thirty-nine (39) out of 122] of the stores identifying as selling tobacco were gas stations or convenience stores. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 221 of 617 Retailers and Sensitive Receptors 30% [thirty-seven (37) retailers out of 122] were located within 500 feet of a school or park where youth are likely to be located. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 222 of 617 Youth Survey 1.Types of Devices Used 2.Vaping Product Access 3.Youth Opinions on using Flavored Tobacco 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 223 of 617 Survey –Response by School 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 224 of 617 Survey -Response by Grade Level 509 451 988 466 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 9 10 11 12 Number of Responses by Grade Level 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 225 of 617 Survey –Reported Types of Devices Used 126 471 23 27 42 86 92 495 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Smoking Devices Used 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 226 of 617 Survey –Vaping Product Access 142 20% 158 22%286 40% 128 18% Where do you or your friends get vaping products? Convenience stores/gas stations (e.g. 7-11, Mobile, Arco, etc.) Vape Shops Family/friends On-line 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 227 of 617 Youth Opinions –Flavored Tobacco 1366 65% 79 4% 39 2% 615 29% How likely are you to use a non-flavored product? Not likely Possibly Very likely Not sure2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 228 of 617 City Staff conducted research on “high” level nicotine products and concluded: •Not enough data to determine what level of nicotine consumption is “less” addictive; •Absorption can vary based on device and content; and •Enforcement would be difficult due to packaging and shops mixing their own liquid. Prohibiting Nicotine Content 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 229 of 617 •The proposed ordinance makes it unlawful for any tobacco or electronic cigarette retailer to sell or distribute specified flavored tobacco products, including menthol. •Unflavored or tobacco flavored e-cigarettes as well as FDA approved cessation devices will also be exempt. •The ordinance does not apply to the sale of shisha, premium cigars, or loose-leaf tobacco. 5.56.010 Definitions. J. “Loose-Leaf Tobacco” consists of cut or shredded pipe tobacco, usually sold in pouches, excluding any tobacco product which, because of its appearance, type, packaging, or labeling, is suitable for use and likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as tobacco for making cigarettes, including roll-your-own cigarettes. Amendment to CVMC 5.56 Prohibit Flavored Tobacco 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 230 of 617 Recommendation Approve an ordinance (first reading) amending Chula Vista Municipal Code chapter 5.56, Tobacco Retailer, to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products within the City of Chula Vista. Effective January 1, 2023 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 231 of 617 Ending the Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products is a Win for Chula Vista! John Dale Noriega, Community Organizer 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 232 of 617 Myth:Kids get their tobacco products from the internet; retailers do not sell to minors. •Chula Vista Vaping & Smoking Survey (2021) ⚬44% of students got their tobacco products from vape shops and convenience stores ⚬18% got their products from the internet •County Young Adult Tobacco Purchase Survey (2020) ⚬measured number of tobacco sales made to persons under 21 ⚬20% of tobacco retailers sold to minors 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 233 of 617 Fact:Prohibition is NOT racist •Big Tobacco has a long history of targeting and exploiting historically marginalized groups for corporate gain •Although non-flavored tobacco product use has decreased among young people, menthol cigarette use is on the rise among Black, Latino, and White youth •Black community members die disproportionately from tobacco-related diseases stemming from the industry’s predatory marketing 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 234 of 617 Myth:Prohibition Will Lead to Financial Hardships •Business models are adaptable! •Convenience stores were fully operational before flavored tobacco became a regular product •Massachusetts saw an increase in the number of convenience stores after flavored tobacco products were prohibited •When bars banned smoking, many argued that bars would have to close ⚬We have no shortage of bars 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 235 of 617 The Benefits of Ending the Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products? Prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco products will: ⚬Reduce the youth access and initiation of tobacco products in Chula Vista ⚬Lead more users to quit ⚬Enhance health equity ⚬Reduce health care spending 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 236 of 617 John Dale Noriega, Community Organizer Johndale.Noriega@saysandiego.org 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 237 of 617 From: jasonhelio29 < Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 10:05 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Proposed Flavor Tobacco ban I ask that the City Council Not to vote on banning Flavored Tobacco . I ask that the City Council allow the voters to speak on the ballot measure on Nov 08 I have two close personal people to myself that have switched from smoking cigarettes to vaping flavored tobacco devices and I consider this a move in the right health direction for both people. Thank you for your consideration Jason Resident of 40 years plus in Chula Vista. Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/14/22 Item #8.2 - Jason 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 238 of 617 From: Milton Boyle < Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2022 10:29 AM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Stop the ban please Warning: External Email I’m a 61 year old man who used to smoke cigarettes. My health was bad but since vaping my lungs and health have cleared up. Please reconsider the ban and research how bad it would be to ban flavored tobacco Sent from my iPhone Written Communications - Received 9/14/22 Item #8.2 - Boyle 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 239 of 617 From: Lynda Barbour < Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 12:35 PM To: Mary Salas <MSalas@chulavistaca.gov>; Steve C. Padilla <spadilla@chulavistaca.gov>; John McCann jmccann@chulavistaca.gov>; Andrea Cardenas <acardenas@chulavistaca.gov>; Jill Galvez jmgalvez@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Agenda Item 5.4 Dear Mayor Salas and Honorable council, IM attaching our official letter of support for this ordinance. Your unanimous yes vote on 9/13 was appreciated by the public health groups and residents that have been working on this policy for several years. I urge your continued strong support tonight. With your vote, you will send a strong message to the tobacco industry that as a matter of public policy, this city will protect resident’s health and well-being over profits from a product that when used as directed, kills. Thank you! Lynda Barbour, MPH Senior Government Relations Director, So.California & Grant Program 619.682.7416 | f: 619.296.0928 American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Inc. fightcancer.org | 1.800.227.2345 This message (including any attachments) is intended exclusively for the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain proprietary, protected, or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, copy, or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/27/22 Item #5.4 - Barbour 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 240 of 617 Lynda Barbour, MPH, Sr. Director, Government Relations American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network www.FightCancer.org PO Box 910549; San Diego, CA 92191 W: 619-624-1517 C: 619-742-4861 lynda.barbour@cancer.org September 27, 2022 The Honorable Mary Salas Mayor, City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Ave Chula Vista CA 91910 Re: Agenda item: 5.4 Prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco products Dear Mayor Salas and members of the Chula Vista City Council, Our mission at the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network is to end suffering and death from cancer, and we are committed to advancing that mission in Chula Vista. Tobacco use is still the top cause of cancer deaths and policies that reduce all types of tobacco products are necessary to address this issue. Thank you for your unanimous yes vote on the first reading of the ordinance to end the sale of flavored tobacco products in your city. We urge your continued strong support for this ordinance to end the sale of flavored tobacco products, including flavored e-cigarettes and menthol cigarettes without exemptions. Please put people’s health and well-being over the profits of businesses that sell products that when used as directed, are responsible for untold death and disability. Tobacco companies have a long history of marketing to youth with imagery and by marketing appealing flavors. Tobacco companies aggressively market flavors and menthol products in low income and Latino communities who already bear a greater burden of health disparities. Ending the sale of all flavored tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes, removes much of the allure of these products and is a key component of a comprehensive strategy to reduce tobacco initiation and subsequent addiction, as well as to promote health equity for all. Additionally, this will help put an end to the predatory marketing of tobacco products that disproportionately impact poorer communities, marginalized groups, youth, and communities of color in Chula Vista. We urge this council to demonstrate your commitment to the health and well-being of your residents with your YES vote tonight. Sincerely, Lynda Barbour, MPH Southern California Government Relations Director 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 241 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 242 of 617 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 September 27, 2022 ITEM TITLE Conflict of Interest Code: Modify the List of Officials, Candidates, and Designated Employees who are Required to File Periodic Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) and their Disclosure Categories Report Number: 22-0212 Location: No specific geographic location Department: City Clerk Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Adopt a resolution modifying the appendix to the local Conflict of Interest Code to revise the list of officials, candidates, and designated employees who are required to file Statements of Economic Interests (FPPC Form 700) and their disclosure categories. SUMMARY The Political Reform Act requires every local agency to periodically review its Conflict of Interest Code to determine whether amendments are needed. The proposed resolution adopts an amended appendix to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code. The appendix lists the officials and designated employees of the City who are required to file periodic statements of economic interests and the disclosure categories under which each such official and designated employee is required to file. It also states that those designated officials and employees are required to complete biennial ethics training, pursuant to AB 1234. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined unde r Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result in a physical change in the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 243 of 617 P a g e | 2 BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION On March 21, 2000, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 2807, adopting by reference the standardized Conflict of Interest Code contained in Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 18730, and any amendments thereto that are adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). The ordinance requires that the Council set forth by resolution the officials and designated employees who are required to file statements of economic interests and the disclosure categories under which each such official and designated employee shall file. The City Clerk and the City Attorney have performed a review of the Code in conformance with Political Reform Act requirements. Each department director provided input regarding the level of decision-making authority employees have in their respective departments. With that input, along with various title changes that have occurred since the last update, it has been determined that the appendix to the Code requires amendments. Several positions that are currently vacant and unfunded were not deleted since they remain on the City’s classification plan and should be designated to file Statements of Economic Interests. Adoption of the proposed resolution amends the appendix to the local Conflict of Interest Code accordingly. The resolution also specifies that all employees designated as filers under the City’s Conflict of Interest Code are “designated employees” for purposes of AB 1234 and, as such, are required to participate in mandatory ethics training. In addition to reviewing the list of filers, the City Clerk and City Attorney also reviewed the City’s disclosure categories provided for in Chula Vista Municipal Code section 2.02.030. No changes to the category descriptions are recommended at this time. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the real property holdings of the City Council members do not create a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware, and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of the resolution will have no impact on the general fund. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There is no ongoing fiscal impact. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 244 of 617 P a g e | 3 ATTACHMENTS 1. Revised list of designated filers Staff Contact: Cristina Hernandez, City Clerk Analyst Kerry K. Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 245 of 617 RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MODIFYING THE APPENDIX TO THE LOCAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE TO AMEND THE LIST OF OFFICIALS, CANDIDATES, AND DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES WHO ARE REQUIRED TO FILE PERIODIC STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS AND THE DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES FOR SAID FILERS WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act (California Government Code sections 87100 through 91014), requires certain officials and candidates to file Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) and requires local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2807, adopting by reference the standardized conflict of interest code contained in Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, section 18730, and any amendments thereto that are adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission; and WHEREAS, the ordinance requires that the City Council set forth by resolution the officials and designated employees who are required to file statements of economic interests and the disclosure categories under which each such official and designated employee shall file; and WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act requires every local agency to review its Conflict of Interest Code periodically to determine if amendments are necessary; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney and the City Clerk have reviewed the Code and its appendix, consulted with Department Directors, and determined that amendments to the appendix of the Code are necessary; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires that all City employees who are required to file Form 700 under the City’s Conflict of Interest Code be designated as “Local Agency Officials,” as defined in Government Code §53234(c)(2), thereby requiring them to participate in the ethics training mandated by AB 1234; and WHEREAS, the list of officials, candidates, and designated employees of the City of Chula Vista who are required to file periodic statements of economic interests, and the disclosure categories under which each such official, candidate, or designated employee is required to file, was presented to the City Council and is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and made a part of this Resolution. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 246 of 617 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it hereby modifies the appendix to the local Conflict of Interest Code to amend the list of officials, candidates, and designated employees who are required to file periodic statements of economic interests, and the disclosure categories for said filers, in the form presented and as reflected in Exhibit 1 to this resolution, with such minor modifications as may be required or approved by the City Attorney, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Presented by Approved as to form by Kerry K. Bigelow, MMC Glen R. Googins City Clerk City Attorney 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 247 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on 09/22/2020XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 20202022-217XXX EXHIBIT A OFFICIALS REQUIRED TO FILE PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE §§ 87200, et seq. The following officials shall file periodic statements disclosing certain economic interests (commonly referred to as “700 Forms”) with the Fair Political Practices Commission, as required by California Government Code §§87200 – 87210: Mayor and City Councilmembers Candidates for Elective Office City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance/City Treasurer Planning Commission Members Candidates for Elective Office In addition, each official falling within any of the above-listed categories, except “Candidates for Elective Office,” is required to comply with the ethics training requirements of California Government Code §§53234, et seq. DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES REQUIRED TO FILE UNDER THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE Each City employee whose position title is listed below shall file a 700 Form under the designated disclosure category (as set forth in Chula Vista Municipal Code §2.02.030) and is required to comply with the ethics training requirements of California Government Code §§53234, et seq. Where “Full Disclosure” is indicated, it implies that the disclosure categories are 1, 2, 5, and 7. Position Title ................................................................................................ Disclosure Category Administrative Services Manager .......................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Animal Care Facility Administrator .................................................................................. 1, 3, 6, 7 Animal Care Facility Manager............................................................................................ 1, 3, 6,7 Assistant Chief of Police .................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 Assistant City Attorney Series 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 248 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on 09/22/2020XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 20202022-217XXX Senior Assistant City Attorney ................................................................... Full Disclosure Assistant City Attorney ............................................................................... Full Disclosure Assistant City Clerk ............................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6 Assistant City Manager ........................................................................................... Full Disclosure Assistant Director of Development Services ..................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 Assistant Director of Engineering .......................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Assistant Director of Finance.................................................................................. Full Disclosure Assistant Director of Human Resources ................................................................................ 1, 3, 5 Assistant Director of Public Works ....................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Assistant Director of Recreation ........................................................................................ 1, 2, 6, 7 Associate Engineer..................................................................................................................... 3, 4 Bayfront Development Manager ........................................................................................ 1, 2, 6, 7 Benefits Manager ........................................................................................................................... 5 Budget & Analysis Manager ................................................................................... Full Disclosure Building Inspection Manager ......................................................................................................... 3 Building Inspector Series Senior Building Inspector .............................................................................................. 3 , 4 Building Inspector (all levels) ............................................................................................ 3 Building Official/Code Enforcement Manager .......................................................................... 1, 2 Building Project Manager ...................................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Building Services Manager .................................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Building Services Supervisor ......................................................................................................... 6 Chief of Police ........................................................................................................ Full Disclosure Chief of Staff........................................................................................................... Full Disclosure Chief Sustainability Officer ............................................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 City Attorney Investigator ...................................................................................... Full Disclosure City Clerk ............................................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6 City Clerk Analyst (excluding hourly) .......................................................................................... 6 City Librarian ......................................................................................................................... 2, 6, 7 Civil Engineer Series Principal Civil Engineer ............................................................................................. 3, 4, 5 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 249 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on 09/22/2020XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 20202022-217XXX Senior Civil Engineer ................................................................................................. 3, 4, 5 Associate Civil Engineer.................................................................................................... 3 Code Enforcement Series Senior Code Enforcement Officer ................................................................................. 3, 4 Code Enforcement Officer (all levels) ............................................................................... 3 Collections Supervisor ................................................................................................................... 3 Communication/Special Events Coordinator ............................................................................. 5, 7 Constituent Services Manager ................................................................................ Full Disclosure Construction & Repair Supervisor ................................................................................................. 6 Council Assistant Series Senior Council Assistant ............................................................................. Full Disclosure Council Assistant ........................................................................................ Full Disclosure Cultural Arts Program Manager ................................................................................................. 2, 7 Deputy City Attorney (all levels) ............................................................................ Full Disclosure Deputy City Manager .............................................................................................. Full Disclosure Deputy Fire Chief .................................................................................................................. 1, 2, 6 Development Automation Specialist ..................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Development Services Counter Manager .................................................................................. 3, 4 Director of Animal Services .............................................................................................. 1, 3, 6, 7 Development Services Department Director of Development Services ............................ 1, 2, 6, 7 Director of Community Services ............................................................................ Full Disclosure Director of Economic Development .................................................................................. 1, 2, 6, 7 Director of Engineering/City Engineer .............................................................................. 1, 2, 6, 7 Director of Human Resources/Risk Management ................................................................. 1, 3, 5 Director of Information Technology Services ............................................................................... 6 Director of Public Works ....................................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Economic Development Specialist Series Principal Economic Development Specialist ............................................................. 1, 2 , 7 Senior Economic Development Specialist ................................................................. 1, 2, 7 Emergency Services Coordinator6Emergency Services Manager ......................................................................................................................................... 5 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 250 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on 09/22/2020XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 20202022-217XXX EMS Inventory Specialist .............................................................................................................. 6 Environmental Services Manager .......................................................................................... 3, 6, 7 Environmental Sustainability Manager.................................................................................. 3, 6, 7 Facilities Financing Manager ............................................................................................. 1, 2, 6, 7 Facilities Manager .......................................................................................................................... 5 Facility & Supply Specialist ........................................................................................................ 6 Finance Manager (including with CPA) ................................................................. Full Disclosure Fire Battalion Chief (all designations) ........................................................................................... 6 Fire Captain (C only; excluding when assigned to the academy) .................................................. 6 Fire Chief ............................................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6 Fire Division Chief ................................................................................................................ 1, 2, 6 Fire Inspector/Investigator Series Senior Fire Inspector/Investigator .................................................................................. 3, 4 Fire Inspector/Investigator (all levels) ........................................................................... 3, 4 Fire Prevention Engineer/ Investigator ...................................................................................... 3, 4 Fire Prevention Aide ...................................................................................................................... 3 Fire Prevention Specialist .......................................................................................................... 3, 4 Fiscal and Management Analyst .................................................................................................... 5 Fiscal Debt Management Analyst .................................................................................................. 5 Fleet Inventory Control Specialist ................................................................................................. 5 Fleet Manager ................................................................................................................................ 5 Housing Manager ............................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 Human Resources Operations Manager......................................................................................... 5 Human Resources Manager ....................................................................................................... 5, 7 Information Technology Manager ................................................................................................. 6 Land Surveyor Series Associate Land Surveyor ............................................................................................... 3, 4 Senior Land Surveyor .................................................................................................... 4, 5 Landscape Architect Series Principal Landscape Architect ....................................................................................... 1, 2 Senior Landscape Inspector ....................................................................................... 3, 4 , 5 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 251 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on 09/22/2020XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 20202022-217XXX Landscape Architect....................................................................................................... 3, 4 Landscape Planner (all levels) ................................................................................................... 3, 4 Law Office Manager ...................................................................................................................... 6 Librarian Series Principal Librarian ......................................................................................................... 6, 7 Senior Librarian ............................................................................................................. 6, 7 Librarian III (except excluding hourly) ............................................................................. 6 Library Digital Services Manager .................................................................................................. 6 Management Analyst Series Principal Management Analyst (when assigned to Housing & Public Works) ......... 3, 5, 7 Principal Management Analyst (all assignments unless otherwise noted) .................... 3, 5 Senior Management Analyst .......................................................................................... 5, 7 Senior Management Analyst (when assigned to Finance and Parks & Recreation) .......... 5 Management Analyst (all levels, assigned to Finance, Fire, Development Services, & Police) ................................................................................................................................ 5 Management Analyst (all levels, all assignments unless otherwise noted) ....................... 6 Management Analyst (all levels) ................................................................................................... 5 Marketing and Communications Manager................................................................................. 3, 5 Open Space Inspector Series Senior Open Space Inspector ......................................................................................... 3, 5 Open Space Inspector .................................................................................................... 3, 5 Open Space Manager ................................................................................................................. 3, 5 Park Ranger Program Manager ................................................................................................. 3, 5 Park Ranger Series Senior Park Ranger ............................................................................................................ 3 Park Ranger (excluding hourly) ........................................................................................ 3 Park Ranger Supervisor ................................................................................................................. 3 Parks and Recreation Administrator ....................................................................... Full Disclosure Parks Manager ....................................................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Performance and Organizational Development Manager .............................................................. 5 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 252 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on 09/22/2020XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 20202022-217XXX Plan Check Engineer Series Senior Plan Check Engineer .......................................................................................... 3, 4 Assistant Plan Check Engineer ...................................................................................... 1, 2 Associate Plan Check Engineer ..................................................................................... 1, 2 Plan Check Supervisor ............................................................................................................... 1, 2 Planner Series Principal Planner ............................................................................................................ 1, 2 Senior Planner ................................................................................................................ 1, 2 Assistant Planner ............................................................................................................ 3, 4 Associate Planner ........................................................................................................... 3, 4 Planning Manager ...................................................................................................................... 1, 2 Police Administrative Services Administrator........................................................ Full Disclosure Police Captain ......................................................................................................... Full Disclosure Police Facility and Supply Coordinator ......................................................................................... 6 Police Technology Manager ...................................................................................................... 3, 6 Policy Aide.............................................................................................................. Full Disclosure Principal Accountant ...................................................................................................................... 5 Principal Recreation Manager........................................................................................................ 6 Principal Traffic Engineer ...................................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Procurement Services Analyst ................................................................................ Full Disclosure Procurement Specialist Series Senior Procurement Specialist .................................................................... Full Disclosure Procurement Specialist....................................................................................................... 5 Project Coordinator Series Principal Project Coordinator .................................................................................... 1, 2, 7 Senior Project Coordinator ........................................................................................ 1, 2, 7 Project Coordinator (all levels) ...................................................................................... 2, 7 Public Works Inspector Series Senior Public Works Inspector .................................................................................. 3, 4, 5 Public Works Inspector (all levels) ............................................................................ 3, 4, 5 Public Works Manager .......................................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 253 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on 09/22/2020XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 20202022-217XXX Public Works Superintendent ................................................................................................ 1, 2, 5 Public Works Supervisor ....................................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Purchasing Agent .................................................................................................... Full Disclosure Real Property Manager .......................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6 Revenue Manager ................................................................................................ 6 Full Disclosure Risk Management Specialist Series Senior Risk Management Specialist .............................................................................. 1, 2 Risk Management Specialist .......................................................................................... 1, 2 Risk Manager ............................................................................................................................. 1, 2 Senior Electronics Technician ....................................................................................................... 5 Senior Graphic Designer ................................................................................................................ 5 Senior Land Surveyor ................................................................................................................ 4, 5 Senior Public Works Inspector .............................................................................................. 3, 4, 5 Senior Risk Management Specialist .......................................................................................... 1, 2 Smart Technology Officer ......................................................................................................... 3, 6 Special Events Coordinator............................................................................................................ 3 Special Events Manager .......................................................................................... Full Disclosure Stormwater Compliance Inspector II ............................................................................................. 3 Stormwater Environmental Specialist (all levels).......................................................................... 3 Stormwater Program Manager ............................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Supervising Public Safety Analyst............................................................................................. 3, 6 Traffic Signal & Lighting Supervisor .................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Transportation Engineer (with Cert. and without Cert.) ........................................................ 3, 4, 5 Veterinarian (Permitted, all levels, except hourly) ........................................................................ 6 Boards and Commissions Members: Board of Appeals and Advisors Members ..................................................................... 2, 5 Board of Ethics Members .............................................................................................. 1, 2 Civil Service Commission Members ................................................................................. 3 Charter Review Commission Members ..................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Redistricting Commission Members.......................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Growth Management Oversight Commission Members ............................................... 2, 4 Historic Preservation Commission Member .................................................................. 1, 2 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 254 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on 09/22/2020XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 20202022-217XXX Mobilehome Rent Review Commission Members ........................................................ 1, 2 Consultants/Newly Created Positions* ................................................................... Full Disclosure Hearing Officers...................................................................................................... Full Disclosure *Consultants and individuals in newly created positions shall be included in the list of designated employees and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest disclosure category in the code, subject to the following limitation: The City may determine, in writing, that a particular consultant or individual in a newly created position, although a “designated position,” is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements in this section. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant’s or new position’s duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The determination for consultants shall be included in the contract by which the consultant is hired by the City. The determination for newly created positions shall be documented on an FPPC Form 804. The City’s determinations are public record. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 255 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 2022-XXX EXHIBIT A OFFICIALS REQUIRED TO FILE PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE §§ 87200, et seq. The following officials shall file periodic statements disclosing certain economic interests (commonly referred to as “700 Forms”) with the Fair Political Practices Commission, as required by California Government Code §§87200 – 87210: Mayor City Councilmember City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance/City Treasurer Planning Commission Member Candidate for Elective Office In addition, each official falling within any of the above-listed categories, except “Candidates for Elective Office,” is required to comply with the ethics training requirements of California Government Code §§53234, et seq. DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES REQUIRED TO FILE UNDER THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE Each City employee whose position title is listed below shall file a 700 Form under the designated disclosure category (as set forth in Chula Vista Municipal Code §2.02.030) and is required to comply with the ethics training requirements of California Government Code §§53234, et seq. Where “Full Disclosure” is indicated, it implies that the disclosure categories are 1, 2, 5, and 7. Position Title ................................................................................................ Disclosure Category Administrative Services Manager .......................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Animal Care Facility Manager............................................................................................ 1, 3, 6,7 Assistant Chief of Police .................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 Assistant City Attorney Series Senior Assistant City Attorney ................................................................... Full Disclosure Assistant City Attorney ............................................................................... Full Disclosure Assistant City Clerk ............................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6 Assistant City Manager ........................................................................................... Full Disclosure Assistant Director of Development Services ..................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 256 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 2022-XXX Position Title ................................................................................................ Disclosure Category Assistant Director of Engineering .......................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Assistant Director of Finance.................................................................................. Full Disclosure Assistant Director of Human Resources ................................................................................ 1, 3, 5 Assistant Director of Public Works ....................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Assistant Director of Recreation ........................................................................................ 1, 2, 6, 7 Associate Engineer..................................................................................................................... 3, 4 Bayfront Development Manager ........................................................................................ 1, 2, 6, 7 Benefits Manager ........................................................................................................................... 5 Budget & Analysis Manager ................................................................................... Full Disclosure Building Inspection Manager ......................................................................................................... 3 Building Inspector Series Senior Building Inspector .............................................................................................. 3, 4 Building Inspector (all levels) ............................................................................................ 3 Building Official/Code Enforcement Manager .......................................................................... 1, 2 Building Project Manager ...................................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Building Services Manager .................................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Building Services Supervisor ......................................................................................................... 6 Chief of Police ........................................................................................................ Full Disclosure Chief of Staff........................................................................................................... Full Disclosure Chief Sustainability Officer ............................................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 City Attorney Investigator ...................................................................................... Full Disclosure City Clerk ............................................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6 City Clerk Analyst (excluding hourly) .......................................................................................... 6 City Librarian ......................................................................................................................... 2, 6, 7 Civil Engineer Series Principal Civil Engineer ............................................................................................. 3, 4, 5 Senior Civil Engineer ................................................................................................. 3, 4, 5 Associate Civil Engineer.................................................................................................... 3 Code Enforcement Series Senior Code Enforcement Officer ................................................................................. 3, 4 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 257 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 2022-XXX Position Title ................................................................................................ Disclosure Category Code Enforcement Officer (all levels) ............................................................................... 3 Collections Supervisor ................................................................................................................... 3 Communication/Special Events Coordinator ............................................................................. 5, 7 Constituent Services Manager ................................................................................ Full Disclosure Construction & Repair Supervisor ................................................................................................. 6 Council Assistant Series Senior Council Assistant ............................................................................. Full Disclosure Council Assistant ........................................................................................ Full Disclosure Deputy City Attorney (all levels) ............................................................................ Full Disclosure Deputy City Manager .............................................................................................. Full Disclosure Deputy Fire Chief .................................................................................................................. 1, 2, 6 Development Automation Specialist ..................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Development Services Counter Manager .................................................................................. 3, 4 Director of Animal Services .............................................................................................. 1, 3, 6, 7 Director of Development Services ..................................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 Director of Community Services ............................................................................ Full Disclosure Director of Economic Development .................................................................................. 1, 2, 6, 7 Director of Engineering/City Engineer .............................................................................. 1, 2, 6, 7 Director of Human Resources/Risk Management ................................................................. 1, 3, 5 Director of Information Technology Services ............................................................................... 6 Director of Public Works ....................................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Economic Development Specialist Series Principal Economic Development Specialist ............................................................. 1, 2, 7 Senior Economic Development Specialist ................................................................. 1, 2, 7 Emergency Services Manager ........................................................................................................ 5 EMS Inventory Specialist .............................................................................................................. 6 Environmental Services Manager .......................................................................................... 3, 6, 7 Environmental Sustainability Manager.................................................................................. 3, 6, 7 Facilities Financing Manager ............................................................................................. 1, 2, 6, 7 Facilities Manager .......................................................................................................................... 5 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 258 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 2022-XXX Position Title ................................................................................................ Disclosure Category Finance Manager (including with CPA) ................................................................. Full Disclosure Fire Battalion Chief (all designations) ........................................................................................... 6 Fire Captain (C only; excluding when assigned to the academy) .................................................. 6 Fire Chief ............................................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6 Fire Division Chief ................................................................................................................ 1, 2, 6 Fire Inspector/Investigator Series Senior Fire Inspector/Investigator .................................................................................. 3, 4 Fire Inspector/Investigator (all levels) ........................................................................... 3, 4 Fire Prevention Engineer/Investigator ....................................................................................... 3, 4 Fire Prevention Aide ...................................................................................................................... 3 Fire Prevention Specialist .......................................................................................................... 3, 4 Fiscal and Management Analyst .................................................................................................... 5 Fiscal Debt Management Analyst .................................................................................................. 5 Fleet Inventory Control Specialist ................................................................................................. 5 Fleet Manager ................................................................................................................................ 5 Housing Manager ............................................................................................................... 1, 2, 6, 7 Human Resources Manager ....................................................................................................... 5, 7 Information Technology Manager ................................................................................................. 6 Land Surveyor Series Associate Land Surveyor ............................................................................................... 3, 4 Senior Land Surveyor .................................................................................................... 4, 5 Landscape Architect Series Principal Landscape Architect ....................................................................................... 1, 2 Senior Landscape Inspector ........................................................................................... 3, 4 Landscape Architect....................................................................................................... 3, 4 Landscape Planner (all levels) ................................................................................................... 3, 4 Law Office Manager ...................................................................................................................... 6 Librarian Series Principal Librarian ......................................................................................................... 6, 7 Senior Librarian ............................................................................................................. 6, 7 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 259 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 2022-XXX Position Title ................................................................................................ Disclosure Category Librarian III (excluding hourly) ......................................................................................... 6 Library Digital Services Manager .................................................................................................. 6 Management Analyst Series Principal Management Analyst (when assigned to Housing & Public Works) ......... 3, 5, 7 Principal Management Analyst (all assignments unless otherwise noted) .................... 3, 5 Senior Management Analyst .......................................................................................... 5, 7 Senior Management Analyst (when assigned to Finance and Parks & Recreation) .......... 5 Management Analyst (all levels, assigned to Finance, Fire, Development Services, & Police) ................................................................................................................................ 5 Management Analyst (all levels, all assignments unless otherwise noted) ....................... 6 Marketing and Communications Manager................................................................................. 3, 5 Open Space Inspector Series Senior Open Space Inspector ......................................................................................... 3, 5 Open Space Inspector .................................................................................................... 3, 5 Open Space Manager ................................................................................................................. 3, 5 Park Ranger Program Manager ................................................................................................. 3, 5 Park Ranger Series Senior Park Ranger ............................................................................................................ 3 Park Ranger (excluding hourly) ........................................................................................ 3 Park Ranger Supervisor ................................................................................................................. 3 Parks and Recreation Administrator ....................................................................... Full Disclosure Parks Manager ....................................................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Plan Check Engineer Series Senior Plan Check Engineer .......................................................................................... 3, 4 Assistant Plan Check Engineer ...................................................................................... 1, 2 Associate Plan Check Engineer ..................................................................................... 1, 2 Plan Check Supervisor ............................................................................................................... 1, 2 Planner Series Principal Planner ............................................................................................................ 1, 2 Senior Planner ................................................................................................................ 1, 2 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 260 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 2022-XXX Position Title ................................................................................................ Disclosure Category Assistant Planner ............................................................................................................ 3, 4 Associate Planner ........................................................................................................... 3, 4 Planning Manager ...................................................................................................................... 1, 2 Police Administrative Services Administrator........................................................ Full Disclosure Police Captain ......................................................................................................... Full Disclosure Police Facility and Supply Coordinator ......................................................................................... 6 Police Technology Manager ...................................................................................................... 3, 6 Policy Aide.............................................................................................................. Full Disclosure Principal Accountant ...................................................................................................................... 5 Principal Recreation Manager........................................................................................................ 6 Principal Traffic Engineer ...................................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Procurement Services Analyst ................................................................................ Full Disclosure Procurement Specialist Series Senior Procurement Specialist .................................................................... Full Disclosure Procurement Specialist....................................................................................................... 5 Project Coordinator Series Principal Project Coordinator .................................................................................... 1, 2, 7 Senior Project Coordinator ........................................................................................ 1, 2, 7 Project Coordinator (all levels) ...................................................................................... 2, 7 Public Works Inspector Series Senior Public Works Inspector .................................................................................. 3, 4, 5 Public Works Inspector (all levels) ............................................................................ 3, 4, 5 Public Works Manager .......................................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Public Works Superintendent ................................................................................................ 1, 2, 5 Public Works Supervisor ....................................................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Purchasing Agent .................................................................................................... Full Disclosure Revenue Manager ................................................................................................... Full Disclosure Risk Management Specialist Series Senior Risk Management Specialist .............................................................................. 1, 2 Risk Management Specialist .......................................................................................... 1, 2 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 261 of 617 Conflict of Interest Code – Designated Positions Adopted by City Council on XX/XX/2022, Resolution No. 2022-XXX Position Title ................................................................................................ Disclosure Category Risk Manager ............................................................................................................................. 1, 2 Senior Electronics Technician ....................................................................................................... 5 Senior Graphic Designer ................................................................................................................ 5 Senior Land Surveyor ................................................................................................................ 4, 5 Senior Public Works Inspector .............................................................................................. 3, 4, 5 Senior Risk Management Specialist .......................................................................................... 1, 2 Smart Technology Officer ......................................................................................................... 3, 6 Special Events Manager .......................................................................................... Full Disclosure Stormwater Compliance Inspector II ............................................................................................. 3 Stormwater Environmental Specialist (all levels).......................................................................... 3 Stormwater Program Manager ............................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Supervising Public Safety Analyst............................................................................................. 3, 6 Traffic Signal & Lighting Supervisor .................................................................................... 3, 4, 5 Transportation Engineer (with Cert. and without Cert.) ........................................................ 3, 4, 5 Veterinarian (Permitted, all levels, except hourly) ........................................................................ 6 Boards and Commissions Member: Board of Appeals and Advisors Member....................................................................... 2, 5 Board of Ethics Member ................................................................................................ 1, 2 Civil Service Commission Member ................................................................................... 3 Charter Review Commission Member....................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Redistricting Commission Member ........................................................................... 1, 2, 5 Growth Management Oversight Commission Member ................................................. 2, 4 Historic Preservation Commission Member .................................................................. 1, 2 Mobilehome Rent Review Commission Member.......................................................... 1, 2 Consultants/Newly Created Positions* ................................................................... Full Disclosure Hearing Officers...................................................................................................... Full Disclosure *Consultants and individuals in newly created positions shall be included in the list of designated employees and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest disclosure category in the code, subject to the following limitation: The City may determine, in writing, that a particular consultant or individual in a newly created position, although a “designated position,” is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements in this section. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant’s or new position’s duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The determination for consultants shall be included in the contract by which the consultant is hired by the City. The determination for newly created positions shall be documented on an FPPC Form 804. The City’s determinations are public record. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 262 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 263 of 617 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 September 27, 2022 ITEM TITLE Grant Acceptance and Appropriation: Accept Funds from The San Diego Foundation to Create and Implement an Age-Friendly Business and Business District Toolkit and Designation Program Report Number: 22-0258 Location: No specific geographic location Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Adopt a resolution accepting grant funds in the amount of $40,000 from The San Diego Foundation Age- Friendly Communities grant to implement goals in the Age-Friendly Action Plan, authorizing the City Manager or designee to enter into necessary agreements to implement the grant, and appropriating funds for that purpose. (4/5 Vote Required) SUMMARY On July 10, 2018, the City Council adopted the City’s first Age-Friendly Action Plan (the “Plan”) and set a variety of goals related to increasing the livability of the city. This action will accept and appropriate funds from The San Diego Foundation Age-Friendly Communities (AFC) Grant (the “Grant”) program in the amount of $40,000 to carry out goals contained within the Plan by creating a toolkit for businesses to designate as an “Age-Friendly Business” and implement an “Age-Friendly Business District” within Downtown Chula Vista, previously known as the Third Avenue Village area. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services reviewed the proposed action for compliance with CEQA and determined that the action is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 264 of 617 P a g e | 2 therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the action is not subject to CEQA. Therefore, no further environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION The San Diego Foundation established an AFC Grant for San Diego jurisdictions that joined the AFC AARP Network in November 2020 to “support services and initiatives to increase the quality of life of older adults in the community and ultimately all San Diegans.” In 2021 the City implemented the CV Senior Connect phone line through the Grant and in July 2022 the Foundation announced the City of Chula Vista was successful in this year’s grant application process. The Plan identified several goals to address better communication, sensitivity in public places , and respect for older adults and recognized the need for all sectors of the community to be involved. Funds from the Grant will help implement goals in the Outdoor Spaces & Buildings, Social Participation, Respect & Social Inclusion, Community & Health Services, and Communication & Information Respect sections of the Chula Vista Age-Friendly Action Plan adopted on July 10, 2018. Specifically, the following goals will be advanced by Grant funds of $40,000: Goal 1.1 Increase park usage and community ownership. A. Create at least two (2) Park Action Groups (PAGs) to address community ownership of the park and organize programs that increase the community’s presence (e.g., Adopt-A-Park, clean-ups, etc.). Goal 4.1 Develop culturally- and age-appropriate programming throughout the city. D. Create an older adult-related theme for the “THIS is Chula” campaign and other identified communication efforts surrounding respect, economic power, adventure and vibrancy in aging. Goal 8.2 Develop behavioral health and dementia-friendly practices and awareness. B. Host at least four (4) dementia-friendly trainings and workshops for businesses, families, Community Based Organizations (CBOs) and/or health care in the south bay. The City’s application identified the creation of a Business Designation Toolkit (the “Toolkit”) to provide a pathway for businesses (e.g. incorporating priority reservation, ADA features, senior employment options) and business “districts” (e.g. sensitive streetscape, % of designated businesses) to become more accessible and pleasing for residents of all ages by using a “lens of age ,” and implement such in partnership with the Third Avenue Village Association (TAVA) in the historic main street of Chula Vista. The effort will engage the community and businesses along Third Avenue with surveys and a series of focus groups in order to inform and develop the Toolkit which will help businesses start asking the right questions about how they can improve interactions with persons of all ages and abilities and provide inspiration to others that are also on the path to becoming more Age-Friendly. Some of the topic areas that will be covered in the toolkit include accessibility, appeal, welcoming, communication, relevance, connectivity and will be assessed in the areas of environment, communication, added value, and feedback, to name a few. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 265 of 617 P a g e | 3 Overall, the toolkit will provide a process and assessment tools to create a business designation and district that is Age-Friendly with case studies from the implementation along Third Avenue that can be replicated in other areas of Chula Vista, the region and nationally. The process will also provide valuable feedback for the City and TAVA related to future Age-Friendly events and infrastructure improvements that are desired by the community and will enhance the revitalization of the area. Additionally, a marketing package will be developed for participating Age-Friendly designated businesses and a campaign will be developed to promote the new Age-Friendly business district through the existing #THISischula campaign. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found that Mayor Salas has real property holdings within the boundaries of the project which is the subject of this action. However, to the extent that any decision would have a reasonably foreseeable financial effect on the member’s real property, the effect would be nominal, inconsequential, or insignificant. Consequently, pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 2, sections 18700 and 18702(b), this item does not present a real property-related conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT There is no current year fiscal impact to the General Fund or the Development Services Fund as a result of this action. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There is no ongoing fiscal impact to the General Fund or the Development Services Fund as a result of this action. This is a one-time project with costs covered by the grant. ATTACHMENTS 1. The San Diego Foundation AFC Grant Agreement Staff Contact: Stacey Kurz, Housing Manager, Development Services Laura C. Black, AICP, Interim Director of Development Services 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 266 of 617 RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING GRANT FUNDS FROM THE SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION AGE-FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES GRANT TO CREATE AND IMPLEMENT AN AGE-FRIENDLY BUSINESS DESIGNATION AND BUSINESS DISTRICT AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR WHEREAS, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched an international effort, entitled the Age-Friendly Cities and Communities Program, to help cities prepare for rapid population aging and the parallel trend of urbanization and in the United States the American Association of Retired Persons’ (AARPs’) Age-Friendly Communities Network (the “Network”) is the affiliate to the WHO program; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorized staff to submit an application to enter the Network on May 10, 2016 by Resolution No. 2016-068 and in July 2016, the City of Chula Vista became the 99th jurisdiction in the United States to enter, committing to a five-year process to evaluate, develop an Action Plan and implement Age-Friendly concepts to encourage the livability of the community for all generations; and WHEREAS, on July 10, 2018, City Council adopted the first Chula Vista Age-Friendly Action Plan, entitled ‘Chula Vista: Creating an Age-Friendly City, Age-Friendly Action Plan’; and WHEREAS, on August 2, 2022, The San Diego Foundation announced that the City of Chula Vista was awarded a grant under the 2022 Age-Friendly Communities Grant in the amount of $40,000.00 to accomplish goals under the Outdoor Spaces & Buildings, Social Participation, Respect & Social Inclusion, Community & Health Services, and Communication & Information Respect Sections of the Action Plan; and WHEREAS, grant funds will enable the city to create a toolkit for businesses to designate as an “Age-Friendly Business” and implement an “Age-Friendly Business District” within Downtown Chula Vista, previously known as the Third Avenue Village area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it does hereby accept funds in the amount of $40,000.00 from The San Diego Foundation Age-Friendly Communities Grant, authorizes the City Manager or designee to enter into necessary agreements to implement such grant, and authorizes the appropriation of such funds. Presented by Approved as to form by _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Laura C. Black, AICP Glen R. Googins Interim Director of Development Services City Attorney 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 267 of 617 AGE FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES GRANT Grant ID #: A23114332 August 2, 2022 Please use this number in all correspondence. Stacey Kurz Housing Manager City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA, 91910 Dear Stacey Kurz: Congratulations! The City of Chula Vista has been selected to receive a $40,000 grant to support Age-Friendly Business & District Designations. This grant is made by the approval of San Diego Foundation’s Board of Governors. This grant agreement is made between San Diego Foundation and The City of Chula Vista (hereinafter referred to as “Grantee”).  Grant Summary The Age-Friendly Business & District Designations program will provide a toolkit that includes process and assessment tools to create a business designation and district that is Age-Friendly with case studies from the implementation along Third Avenue that can be replicated in other areas of Chula Vista, the region and nationally. Program Deliverables Expected Results of Age-Friendly Business & District Designations: • The project timeframe is July 2022-June 2023 and is anticipated to serve up to 10,000 individuals. • Increase park usage and community ownership o Create at least two (2) Park Action Groups (PAGs) to address community ownership of park and organize programs that increase the community’s presence (e.g., Adopt-A-Park, clean ups, etc.) • Develop culturally- and age- appropriate programming throughout the city o Create an older adult related theme for the “THIS is Chula” campaign and other identified communication efforts surrounding respect, economic power, adventure and vibrancy in aging • Develop behavioral health and dementia friendly practices and awareness. o Host at least four (4) dementia friendly trainings and workshops for businesses, families, CBOs and/or health care in the south bay • Provide sustainability features and replicability through the involvement of New City America and the established AF Business Toolkit 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 268 of 617 Page 2 Agreement: AGE FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES GRANT CITY OF CHULA VISTA, August 2022 Expected Reporting Activities To best illustrate your accomplishments, reporting will include qualitative and quantitative information that illustrates the demographic and geographic data of populations served. In addition to this, the sharing of images, testimonials and updates on the progress of the project will take place over the course of the grant period. During the course of the grant, representatives of the grantee organization may be asked to participate in events, media spotlights, or convening actions. The data, written content, and visual assets that you collect over the course of the program cycle will be utilized to inform San Diego Foundation of your work. Deadline Reporting Requirement Engagement June 2023 Data and related content uploads Grantee will upload: • Content including photos, testimonials, videos, and/or stories to the online shared folder depicting the program impact. This is an ongoing requirement, if these items are available ahead of the deadline, early sharing is greatly appreciated. 1 • Project/program data, using the template provided by San Diego Foundation, and in alignment with the attached Data Collection Guide (Addendum A). 2 June 2023 Final report, including outcomes and data At the conclusion of the grant period, Grantee will submit a final report. with description of the project/program’s final outcomes. Grantee will share: • Project/program data, using the template provided by San Diego Foundation, and in alignment with the attached Data Collection Guide (Addendum A). 2 • An evaluation of impact of the project/program, including outcomes and metrics. Ongoing Communications Coordination If opportunities for collaboration around public visibility for the project/program arise, the Grantee will coordinate with San Diego Foundation staff, including Communications team, to plan public-facing engagement and media coverage around this effort. 1. Capture and provide testimonials, videos, photos, or infographics that tell a story of pr ogram impact. San Diego Foundation requests photos, videos, or written testimonials from individuals who have been positively impacted by the program. During the life cycle of the grant program, please identify individuals with inspiring stories who are wi lling to speak about the value of the program in their lives. When sending photos, please visibly show activity and include front - facing people and consider any media waivers that may need to be signed and shared. Please include a caption that describes the activity and names of individuals in the picture. 2. Track and record information relevant to the program, referencing Grant Program Data Collection Guide for content guidelines. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 269 of 617 Page 3 Agreement: AGE FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES GRANT CITY OF CHULA VISTA, August 2022 Acknowledging Your Grant This grant was made possible by the Age Friendly Communities Initiative at San Diego Foundation. Please acknowledge your grant using the following language: This program was made possible thanks to grant support from San Diego Foundation. When planning to write or post information about the grant award and program, coordinate with San Diego Foundation Communications Department prior to publishing. This is to ensure proper usage of San Diego Foundat ion brand and logo, as well as to allow San Diego Foundation to coordinate and complement communications efforts, when appropriate. If you need a description of San Diego Foundation please use: San Diego Foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region. Please always use our full name, “San Diego Foundation” (please note ‘The’ has been removed). Please check with our Communications team and consult our online resource for utilizing San Diego Foundation logo at SDFoundation.org. Terms of the Grant San Diego Foundation grant funds may be expended only for charitable, scientific, literary or educational purposes. This grant is made only for the purposes stated in this letter and it is unders tood that these grant funds will be used for such purposes. It is also understood that no variances will be made from the purpose of the grant without San Diego Foundation’s prior written approval. Grantees are responsible for attaining appropriate work permits, if necessary, and abiding by all relevant state and federal labor laws. Any grant funds not expended for the purpose of the grant will be returned to San Diego Foundation. To be eligible for future funding, you must fulfill the responsibilities outl ined here. This does not guarantee future funding. If you have any questions, please contact Grants Administration at 619 ‐235‐2300 or at grants@sdfoundation.org. Diversity Resolution San Diego Foundation supports and encourages diversity in all of its forms, including, but not limited to age, disability status, income or economic circumstance, ethnicity, gender, race, religion and sexual orientation. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 270 of 617 Page 4 Agreement: AGE FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES GRANT CITY OF CHULA VISTA, August 2022 If this letter correctly sets forth your understanding of the terms of this agreement, please have the appropriate officer from your organization execute this agreement electronically and send to CommunityImpact@sdfoundation.org. Please keep an electronic and printed copy for your records. Best wishes, Mark A. Stuart, CFRE President & CEO Accepted on behalf of City of Chula Vista (Grantee) by: __________________________________________ Authorized Signature __________________________________________ Printed Name __________________________________________ Title __________________________________________ Date 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 271 of 617 Page 5 Addendum A Agreement: AGE FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES GRANT CITY OF CHULA VISTA, August 2022 Data Collection Guide San Diego Foundation believes one of the best ways to measure community impact is by collecting and sharing data and stories of impact. Within the appropriate guidelines of your organization, please track the following metrics to the best of your ability. We recognize that not all organizations are able to gather all data identified in this document and appreciate the effort to gather what is appropriate/feasible. This valuable information will help to inform future grant-making initiatives. • Visual assets, testimonials, additional resources, and materials: o Capture and provide testimonials, videos, photos, and/or infographics that tell a story of program impact. o When capturing photos, please visibly show activity and include front-facing people. o All images should include a caption that describes the activity, date, location, and names of individuals in the image. o Identify individuals with inspiring stories who are willing to speak about the program and the value of the program in their lives. o Links to relevant media coverage, publications, podcasts and/or blogs related to the execution of the grant. o Any additional resources, materials (i.e. graphics, fact sheets, etc.) that demonstrate the impact of your work. • Demographic information: o Total Served o Gender o Ethnicity o Age o Annual Household Income o Participant Zip Codes or Zip Codes of Areas Served (please specific which of these you’ll use) • Program information: o Provide the program’s final outcomes, referencing expected results/deliverables as listed on page 1 (including completion rates, if applicable). 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 272 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 273 of 617 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 September 27, 2022 Item Title Agreement: Approve a Brush Clearance Services Agreement with Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Report Number: 22-0243 Location: Barons Canyon, Bonita Long Canyon, Church Canyon, Goats Hill, Independence Canyon, and Lynwood Hills (named City canyons) Department: Public Works Environmental Notice: The Project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15304 Class 4 (Minor Alterations to Land). The Project is also Exempt under a regulatory program of the Fish and Game Commission pursuant to Section15251(b). Recommended Action Adopt a resolution approving an agreement for brush clearance services in certain City canyons with Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. in an amount not-to-exceed $3,169,593. SUMMARY On August 23, 2022, the City received two (2) bids for brush clearance services in certain City canyons. Funding for the proposed agreement is included in the budgets for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant CIP Project CTY0234, which the City Council adopted in December 2021. Staff’s recommendation is that Council accept the bids and approve a brush clearance agreement with Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15304 Class 4 (Minor Alterations to Land) because the proposed project would not result in a significant effect on the environment, create a cumulative impact, damage a scenic highway, or cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The Project is also Exempt under a regulatory program of the Fish and Game Commission pursuant to Section15251(b) as further outlined in the Memorandum Of 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 274 of 617 P a g e | 2 Understanding Between the Fish and Wildlife Service of The United States Department of the Interior, the California Department of Fish and Game, the California Department of Forestry, the San Diego County Fire Chief's Association and the Fire District's Association of San Diego County authorizing abatement of flammable vegetation, as executed on February 26, 1997. Thus, no further environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not Applicable. DISCUSSION In August 2022, Staff solicited a Request for Bids for brush clearance services for certain City canyons. On August 23, 2022, the Director of Public Works received and opened two (2) bids via PlanetBids from Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. (Kingsborough) and Utility Tree Service, LLC respectively. The two bids are shown below: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. (Kingsborough) Utility Tree Service, LLC Staff has reviewed the bids and determined that Kingsborough’s bid is responsive, and Kingsborough is the lowest responsible bidder. The bids received were higher than the available funding for this project as it is being funded by a FEMA grant which required matching funds. Kingsborough has agreed to a reduction in scope of the project to bring the total contract cost within the available budget. As such, Staff recommends 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 275 of 617 P a g e | 3 accepting Kingsborough’s bid and awarding the brush clearance contract to Kingsborough in the amounts shown below. The agreement with the Kingsborough includes the following services and requirements:  Kingsborough will perform brush clearance services including but not limited to modification of native and non-native plant materials for fire safety along the rims of the named canyon. The primary goal is to increase the established defensible space zone between structures that are in direct proximity to the urban interface with canyons. The additional fuel reduction zone is expected to provide the necessary area required for the Fire Department to defend people and properties from a potential conflagration within the canyons.  Objectives of the brush management services are to: o Implement Zone 2 brush management activities in accordance with the guidelines contained in the City’s Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea plan. o Reduce the height and density of existing plant material to create a “mosaic” pattern of vegetation with adequate spacing between the shrubs to reduce the fire ladder effect. o Cut non-native grasses and weeds to 2 inches in height to reduce rapid ignition potential and competition for native species. Approved herbicides shall be applied immediately to cut non- native grasses and perennials and other weeds to ensure their complete desiccation and deter their regrowth. o Protect native habitat by minimizing impact in the adjacent areas.  Kingsborough will revegetate areas of brush clearance with a hydroseed mix of specified plant species.  Kingsborough will be required to provide insurance and to indemnify the City, and the agreement contains other risk management provisions to protect the City from liability. If approved, Kingsborough will begin work no sooner than September 28, 2022, and complete the work by no later than February 28, 2023. Kingsborough will be required to pay prevailing wages to persons employed by them for the work performed under this contract and shall ensure compliance with all applicable state and local laws governing the payment of prevailing wages. CANYON NAME/ACREAGE Project Management Prepare Work Plan Tribal Notifiation Field Coordination Biological Monitoring and Reporting Brush and Vegetation Management Services CANYON TOTALS Per Acre Cost Barons Canyon (30.72 acres)4,753.98$ 448.56$ 200.00$ 4,753.98$ 9,748.89$ 571,951.72$ 591,857.13$ 19,264.30$ Bonita Long Canyon (40.89 acres)6,326.88$ 596.96$ 200.00$ 6,326.88$ 12,974.41$ 761,299.01$ 787,724.14$ 19,265.41$ Church Canyon (19.67 acres)3,042.90$ 287.11$ 200.00$ 3,042.90$ 6,240.02$ 366,220.22$ 379,033.15$ 19,274.51$ Goats Hill (43.08 ac)6,666.45$ 629.00$ 200.00$ 6,666.45$ 13,670.76$ 802,072.91$ 829,905.57$ 19,263.17$ Independence Canyon (8.62 acres)1,333.29$ 125.80$ 200.00$ 1,333.29$ 2,734.15$ 160,489.04$ 166,215.57$ 19,290.38$ Lynwood Hills (21.53 acres)3,331.02$ 314.29$ 200.00$ 3,331.02$ 6,830.86$ 400,850.25$ 414,857.44$ 19,271.49$ TOTALS 25,454.52$ 2,401.72$ 1,200.00$ 25,454.52$ 52,199.09$ 3,062,883.15$ 3,169,593.00$ 19,267.81$ TASK 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 276 of 617 P a g e | 4 DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has determined that the action contemplated by this item solely concerns the repairs, replacement, or maintenance of existing streets, water, sewer, storm drainage or similar facilities, and any member’s property will not be affected disproportionately to other properties receiving the same services. Consequently, pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 2, sections 18700 and 18702.2(d)(1)), this item does not present a real property-related conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT There is no additional current year fiscal impact. City Council previously approved the appropriation of FEMA grant funds and the required match that was appropriated from the General Fund. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There is no ongoing fiscal impact. ATTACHMENT 1. 2-Party Agreement with Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Staff Contact: Sam Oludunfe, City Forester & Open Space Manager. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 277 of 617 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR BRUSH CLEARANCE SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY AND KINGSBOROUGH ATLAS TREE SURGERY, INC. WHEREAS, on August 5, 2022, City staff issued a Request for Bids for brush clearance services; and WHEREAS, on August 23, 2022, the City received two (2) bids from Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. and Utility Tree Service, LLC; and WHEREAS, after completing review of the bids, staff determined Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. to be the lowest responsive and responsible lowest bidder; and WHEREAS, Staff recommends the City Council of the City of Chula Vista accepts the bids and approve the brush clearance services agreement with Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. in an amount not-to-exceed $3,169,593. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista that it: 1. Accepts bids submitted in response to the request for bids for a brush clearance service agreement. 2. Approves the City of Chula Vista Contractor Services Agreement with Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. to Provide Brush Clearance Services, in the form presented, with such minor modifications as may be required or approved by the City Attorney, directs a copy to be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk, and authorizes and directs the City Manager or designee to execute the same. Presented by Approved as to form by _________________________ __________________________ Matt Little Glen R. Googins Director of Public Works City Attorney 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 278 of 617 1 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONTRACTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KINGSBOROUGH ATLAS TREE SURGERY, INC. TO PROVIDE BRUSH CLEARANCE SERVICES This Agreement is entered into effective as of September 27, 2022, by and between the City of Chula Vista, a chartered municipal corporation (“City”) and Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc., a California corporation (“Contractor”), (collectively, the “Parties” and, individually, a “Party”) with reference to the following facts: RECITALS WHEREAS, on August 5, 2022, City staff issued a Request for Bids for brush clearance services Barons Canyon, Bonita Long Canyon, Church Canyon, Goats Hill Canyon, Independence Canyon, and Lynwood Hills Canyon; and WHEREAS, on August 23, 2022, two (2) bid were received from Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. and Utility Tree Service, LLC respectively for the brush clearance services contract; and WHEREAS, after completing review for responsiveness, staff determined Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. to be the responsible lowest bidder, submitting a responsive bid based on bid line-item unit costs; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista accepted the bids and awarded the brush clearance services contract to Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. on September 27, 2022; and WHEREAS Contractor warrants and represents that it is experienced and staffed in a manner such that it can deliver the services required of Contractor to City in accordance with the time frames and the terms and conditions of this Agreement. [End of Recitals. Next Page Starts Obligatory Provisions.] 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 279 of 617 2 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 OBLIGATORY PROVISIONS NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the covenants contained herein, and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which the Parties hereby acknowledge, City and Contractor hereby agree as follows: 1. SERVICES 1.0. Contract Documents. This Agreement consists of the following contract documents (“Contract Documents”), all of which are incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement as if set forth in full: 1.0.1. This Agreement and all exhibits hereto, and any change orders, amendments, and supplemental agreements duly authorized and executed by authorized representatives of the City and Contractor. 1.0.2. All permits for the Project. 1.0.3. The City of Chula Vista’s Standard Special Provisions, Standard Special Provisions (“Greenbook”), Special Provisions, and Standard Plans. 1.0.4. All referenced specifications, plans, and materials. 1.0.5. The Project’s Notice to Bidders, Bid Requirements and Conditions, Bid Form, Special Provisions – General, Special Provisions – Technical, and Bid General Provisions. 1.0.6. The successful bidder’s bid documents submitted in response to the request for bid, and any post- bid documentation submitted prior to the award of the Project contract. 1.1. Required Services. Contractor agrees to perform the services, and deliver to City the “Deliverables” (if any) described in the attached Exhibit A, incorporated into the Agreement by this reference, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence for this Agreement. The services and/or Deliverables described in Exhibit A shall be referred to herein as the “Required Services.” 1.2. Reductions in Scope of Work. City may independently, or upon request from, from time to time, reduce the Required Services to be performed by the Contractor/Service Provider under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Contractor agree to meet and confer in good faith for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with the reduction. 1.3. Additional Services. Subject to compliance with the City’s Charter, codes, policies, procedures and ordinances governing procurement and purchasing authority, City may request Contractor provide additional services related to the Required Services (“Additional Services”). If so, City and Contractor agree to meet and confer in good faith for the purpose of negotiating an amendment to Exhibit A, to add the Additional Services. Unless otherwise agreed, compensation for the Additional Services shall be charged and paid consistent with the rates and terms already provided therein. Once added to Exhibit A, “Additional Services” shall also become “Required Services” for purposes of this Agreement. 1.4. Standard of Care. Contractor expressly warrants and agrees that any and all hereunder shall be performed in accordance with the highest standard of care exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 280 of 617 3 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 1.5. No Waiver of Standard of Care. Where approval by City is required, it is understood to be conceptual approval only and does not relieve the Contractor of responsibility for complying with all laws, codes, industry standards, and liability for damages caused by negligent acts, errors, omissions, noncompliance with industry standards, or the willful misconduct of the Contractor or its subcontractors. 1.6. Security for Performance. In the event that Exhibit A Section 4 indicates the need for Contractor to provide additional security for performance of its duties under this Agreement, Contractor shall provide such additional security prior to commencement of its Required Services in the form and on the terms pr escribed on Exhibit A, or as otherwise prescribed by the City Attorney. 1.7. Compliance with Laws. In its performance of the Required Services, Contractor shall comply with any and all applicable federal, state and local laws, including the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 1.8. Business License. Prior to commencement of work, Contractor shall obtain a business license from City. 1.9. Subcontractors. Prior to commencement of any work, Contractor shall submit for City’s information and approval a list of any and all subcontractors to be used by Contractor in the performance of the Required Services. Contractor agrees to take appropriate measures necessary to ensure that all subcontractors and personnel utilized by the Contractor to complete its obligations und er this Agreement comply with all applicable laws, regulations, ordinances, and policies, whether federal, state, or local. In addition, if any subcontractor is expected to fulfill any responsibilities of the Contractor under this Agreement, Contractor shall ensure that each and every subcontractor carries out the Contractor’s responsibilities as set forth in this Agreement. The Contractor is fully responsible for the acts and omissions of all subcontractors of every tier for the Project (as defined in Exhibit A), and for all persons and entities either directly or indirectly employed by or under the control of any subcontractor in the same manner and to the same extent that Contractor is responsible for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by it or under its control pursuant to this Agreement. 1.9.1. Subcontract Indemnity. Contractor shall require all subcontracts for the Project to obligate each subcontractor, with respect to the work to be performed under that subcontract, to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties (as defined in Section 4.1) in the same manner and to the same extent that Contractor is required to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties under this Agreement. 1.9.2. Subcontract Insurance. Contractor shall require all subcontracts for the Project to obligate each subcontractor, with respect to the work to be performed under that subcontract, to procure and maintain insurance in the same manner and to the same extent that Contractor is required to procure and maintain insurance under the Agreement, including without limitation naming the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers as additional insureds. 1.9.3. Subcontractor Licensure. Contractor shall require all subcontractors for the Project to be appropriately licensed before commencing work for the Project, and to remain licensed for the duration of their work performed under the subcontract. In the event that a subcontractor is not properly licensed at any time during the Project, Contractor shall immediately cease payment to that subcontractor and Contractor shall return to the City any payment made to that subcontractor for work performed during the period for which the subcontractor was not licensed. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 281 of 617 4 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 1.9.4. Subcontractor Payments. Contractor shall pay its subcontractors for the Project not later than seven (7) days after receipt of each progress payment received in accordance with the provision in Section 7108.5 of the California Business and Professions Code. Any delay or postponement of payment may take place only for good cause and with the City’s prior written approval. Any violation of Section 7108.5 shall subject the violating Contractor and its respective subcontractors to the penalties, sanctions, and other remedies of that section. 1.10. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the earlier to occur of the Effective Date or Contractor’s commencement of the Required Services hereunder, and shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all their obligations hereunder; provided, however, provisions which expressly survive termination shall remain in effect. 2. COMPENSATION 2.1. General. For satisfactory performance of the Required Services, City agrees to compensate Contractor in the amount(s) and on the terms set forth in Exhibit A, Section 4. Standard terms for billing and payment are set forth in this Section 2. 2.2. Detailed Invoicing. Contractor agrees to provide City with a detailed invoice for services performed each month, within thirty (30) days of the end of the month in which the services were performed, unless otherwise specified in Exhibit A. Invoicing shall begin on the first of the month following the Effective Date of the Agreement. All charges must be presented in a line item format with each task separately explained in reasonable detail. Each invoice shall include the current monthly amount being billed, the amount invoiced to date, and the remaining amount available under any approved budget. Contractor must obtain prior written authorization from City for any fees or expenses that exceed the estimated budget. 2.3. Payment to Contractor. Upon receipt of a properly prepared invoice and confirmation that the Required Services detailed in the invoice have been satisfactorily performed, City shall pay Contractor for the invoice amount within thirty (30) days. Payment shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A and section 2.4, below. At City’s discretion, invoices not timely submitted may be subject to a penalty of up to five percent (5%) of the amount invoiced. 2.4. Retention Policy. City shall retain ten percent (10%) of the amount due for Required Services detailed on each invoice (the “holdback amount”). Upon City review and determination of Project Completion, the holdback amount will be issued to Contractor. 2.5. Reimbursement of Costs. City may reimburse Contractor’s out-of-pocket costs incurred by Contractor in the performance of the Required Services if negotiated in advance and included in Exhibit A. Unless specifically provided in Exhibit A, Contractor shall be responsible for any and all out-of-pocket costs incurred by Contractor in the performance of the Required Services. 2.6. Exclusions. City shall not be responsible for payment to Contractor for any fees or costs in excess of any agreed upon budget, rate, or other maximum amount(s) provided for in Exhibit A. City shall also not be responsible for any cost: (a) incurred prior to the Effective Date; or (b) arising out of or related to the errors, omissions, negligence or acts of willful misconduct of Contractor, its agents, employees, or subcontractors. 2.7. Payment Not Final Approval. Contractor understands and agrees that payment to the Contractor or reimbursement for any Contractor costs related to the performance of Required Services does not constitute a City final decision regarding whether such payment or cost reimbursement is allowable and eligible for 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 282 of 617 5 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 payment under this Agreement, nor does it constitute a waiver of any violation by Contractor of the terms of this Agreement. If City determines that Contractor is not entitled to receive any amount of compensation already paid, City will notify Contractor in writing and Contractor shall promptly return such amount. 3. INSURANCE 3.1. Required Insurance. Contractor must procure and maintain, during the period of performance of Required Services under this Agreement, and for twelve months after completion of Required Services, the policies of insurance described on the attached Exhibit B, incorporated into the Agreement by this reference (the “Required Insurance”). The Required Insurance shall also comply with all other terms of this Section. 3.2. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions relating to the Required Insurance must be disclosed to and approved by City in advance of the commencement of work. 3.3. Standards for Insurers. Required Insurance must be placed with licensed insurers admitted to transact business in the State of California with a current A.M. Best’s rating of A V or better, or, if insurance is placed with a surplus lines insurer, insurer must be listed on the State of California List of Eligible Surplus Lines Insurers (LESLI) with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A X. For Workers’ Compensation Insurance, insurance issued by the State Compensation Fund is also acceptable. 3.4. Subcontractors. Contractor must include and/or require to be included all subcontractors of every tier as insureds under its policies and/or furnish separate certificates and endorsements demonstrating separate coverage for those not under its policies. Any separate coverage for subc ontractors of every tier must also comply with the terms of this Agreement. 3.5. Additional Insureds. City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers must be named as additional insureds with respect to any policy of general liability, automobile, or pollution insurance specified as required in Exhibit B or as may otherwise be specified by City’s Risk Manager. The general liability additional insured coverage must be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor’s insurance using ISO CG 2010 (11/85) or its equivalent; such endorsement must not exclude Products/Completed Operations coverage. 3.6. General Liability Coverage to be “Primary”. Contractor’s general liability coverage must be primary insurance as it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers is wholly separate from the insurance provided by Contractor and in no way relieves Contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance. 3.7. No Cancellation. No Required Insurance policy may be canceled by either Party during the required insured period under this Agreement, except after thirty days’ prior written notice to the City by certified mail, return receipt requested. Prior to the effective date of any such cancellation Contractor must procure and put into effect equivalent coverage(s). 3.8. Waiver of Subrogation. Contractor’s insurer(s) will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for each Required Insurance policy under this Agreement. In addition, Contractor waives any right it may have or may obtain to subrogation for a claim against City. 3.9. Verification of Coverage. Prior to commencement of any work, Contractor shall furnish City with original certificates of insurance and any amendatory endorsements necessary to demonstrate to City that Contractor has obtained the Required Insurance in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. The words 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 283 of 617 6 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 “will endeavor” and “but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents, or representatives” or any similar language must be deleted from all certificates. The required certificates and endorsements should otherwise be on industry standard forms. The City reserves the right to require, at any time, complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements evidencing the coverage required by these specifications. 3.10. Claims-Made Policy Requirements. If General Liability, Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability and/or Errors & Omissions coverage are required and are provided on a claims -made form, the following requirements also apply: a. The “Retro Date” must be shown, and must be before the date of this Agreement or the beginning of the work required by this Agreement. b. Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided, for at least five (5) years after completion of the work required by this Agreement. c. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a “Retro Date” prior to the effective date of this Agreement, the Contractor must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the work required by this Agreement. d. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review. 3.11. Not a Limitation of Other Obligations. Insurance provisions under this section shall not be construed to limit the Contractor obligations under this Agreement, including Indemnity. 3.12. Additional Coverage. To the extent that insurance coverage provided by Contractor maintains higher limits than the minimums appearing in Exhibit B, City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for higher limits maintained. 4. INDEMNIFICATION 4.1. General. To the maximum extent allowed by law, Contractor shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its elected and appointed officers, agents, employees and volunteers (collectively, “Indemnified Parties”), from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs), liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged acts, omissions, negligence, or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and contractors, arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Required Services, the results of such performance, or this Agreement. This indemnity provision does not include any claims, damages, liability, costs and expenses arising from the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Also covered is liability arising from, connected with, caused by or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Indemnified Parties which may be in combin ation with the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Contractor, its employees, agents or officers, or any third party. 4.2. Modified Indemnity Where Agreement Involves Design Professional Services. Notwithstanding the forgoing, if the services provided under this Agreement are design professional services, as defined by California Civil Code section 2782.8, as may be amended from time to time, the defense and indemnity 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 284 of 617 7 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 obligation under Section 1, above, shall be limited to the extent requir ed by California Civil Code section 2782.8. 4.3. Costs of Defense and Award. Included in Contractor’s obligations under this Section 4 is Contractor’s obligation to defend, at Contractor’s own cost, expense and risk, any and all suits, actions or other l egal proceedings that may be brought or instituted against one or more of the Indemnified Parties. Subject to the limitations in this Section 4, Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against one or more of the Indemnified Parties for any and all related legal expenses and costs incurred by any of them. 4.4. Contractor Obligations Not Limited or Modified. Contractor’s obligations under this Section 4 shall not be limited to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the Indemnified Parties, or by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Contractor. Furthermore, Contractor’s obligations under this Section 4 shall in no way limit, modify or excuse any of Contractor’s other obligations or duties under this Agreement. 4.5. Enforcement Costs. Contractor agrees to pay any and all costs City incurs in enforcing Contractor’s obligations under this Section 4. 4.6. Survival. Contractor’s obligations under this Section 4 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 5. FINANCIAL INTERESTS OF CONTRACTOR. 5.1. Form 700 Filing. The California Political Reform Act and the Chula Vista Conflict of Interest Code require certain government officials and Contractor performing work for government agencies to publicly disclose certain of their personal assets and income using a Statement of Economic Interests form (Form 700). In order to assure compliance with these requirements, Contractor shall comply with the disclosure requirements identified in the attached Exhibit C, incorporated into the Agreement by this reference. 5.2. Disclosures; Prohibited Interests. Independent of whether Contractor is required to file a Form 700, Contractor warrants and represents that it has disclosed to City any economic interests held by Contractor, or its employees or subcontractors who will be performing the Required Services, in any real property or project which is the subject of this Agreement. Contractor warrants and represents that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee or approved subcontractor work ing solely for Contractor, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Contractor warrants and represents that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee or approved subcontractor working solely for Contractor, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. Contractor further warrants and represents that no officer or employee of City has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, the proceeds hereof, or in the business of Contractor or Contractor’s subcontractors. Contractor further agrees to notify City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement. For breach or violation of any of these warranties, City shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. 6. REMEDIES 6.1. Termination for Cause. If for any reason whatsoever Contractor shall fail to perform the Required Services under this Agreement in a proper or timely manner, or if Contractor shall violate any of the other 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 285 of 617 8 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 covenants, agreements or conditions of this Agreement (each a “Default”), in addition to any and all o ther rights and remedies City may have under this Agreement, at law or in equity, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving five (5) days written notice to Contractor. Such notice shall identify the Default and the Agreement termination date. If Contractor notifies City of its intent to cure such Default prior to City’s specified termination date, and City agrees that the specified Default is capable of being cured, City may grant Contractor up to ten (10) additional days after the designated termination date to effectuate such cure. In the event of a termination under this Section 6.1, Contractor shall immediately provide City any and all ”Work Product” (defined in Section 7 below) prepared by Contractor as part of the Required Services. Such Work Product shall be City’s sole and exclusive property as provided in Section 7 hereof. Contractor may be entitled to compensation for work satisfactorily performed prior to Contractor’s receipt of the Default notice; provided, however, in no event shall such compensation exceed the amount that would have been payable under this Agreement for such work, and any such compensation shall be reduced by any costs incurred or projected to be incurred by City as a result of the Default. 6.2. Termination or Suspension for Convenience of City. City may suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion of the Required Services, at any time and for any reason, with or without cause, or for no reason by giving specific written notice to Contractor of such termination or suspension at least fifteen (15) days prior to the effective date thereof. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall immediately cease all work under the Agreement and promptly deliver all “Work Product” (defined in Section 7 below) to C ity. Such Work Product shall be City's sole and exclusive property as provided in Section 7 hereof. Contractor shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for this Work Product in an amount equal to the amount due and payable under this Agreement for work satisfactorily performed as of the date of the termination/suspension notice plus any additional remaining Required Services requested or approved by City in advance that would maximize City’s value under the Agreement. 6.3. Waiver of Claims. In the event City terminates the Agreement in accordance with the terms of this Section, Contractor hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation as a result of such termination except as expressly provided in this Section 6. 6.4. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures. No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this Agreement against City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with City and acted upon by City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may be amended, the provisions of which, including such policies and procedures used by City in the implementation of same, are incorporated herein by this reference. Upon request by City, Contractor shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 6.5. Governing Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in San Diego County, State of California. 6.6. Service of Process. Contractor agrees that it is subject to personal jurisdiction in California. If Contractor is a foreign corporation, limited liability company, or partnership that is not registered with the California Secretary of State, Contractor irrevocably consents to service of process on Contractor by first class mail directed to the individual and address listed under “For Legal Notice,” in section 1.B. of Exhibit A to this Agreement, and that such service shall be effective five days after mailing. 7. OWNERSHIP AND USE OF WORK PRODUCT 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 286 of 617 9 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems, and any other materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement in connection with the performance of the Required Services (collectively “Work Product”) shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such Work Product shall be subject to private use, copyrights, or patent rights by Contractor in the United States or in any other country without the express, prior written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such Work Product, without requiring any permission of Contractor, except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act or expressly prohibited by other applicable laws. With respect to computer files containing data generated as Work Product, Contractor shall make available to City, upon reasonable written request by City, the necessary functional computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, and printing computer files. 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS 8.1. Reserved. 8.2. Assignment. City would not have entered into this Agreement but for Contractor’s unique qualifications and traits. Contractor shall not assign any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement, nor any part hereof, without City’s prior written consent, which City may grant, condition, or deny in its sole discretion. 8.3. Authority. The person(s) executing this Agreement for Contractor warrants and represents that they have the authority to execute same on behalf of Contractor and to bind Contractor to its obligations hereunder without any further action or direction from Contractor or any board, principal, or officer thereof. 8.4. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one Agreement after each Party has signed such a counterpart. 8.5. Entire Agreement. This Agreement together with all exhibits attached hereto and other agreements expressly referred to herein, constitutes the entire Agreement between the Pa rties with respect to the subject matter contained herein. All exhibits referenced herein shall be attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, warranties and statements, oral or written, are superseded. 8.6. Record Retention. During the course of the Agreement and for three (3) years following completion of the Required Services, Contractor agrees to maintain, intact and readily accessible, all data, documents, reports, records, contracts, and supporting materials relating to the performance of the Agreement, including accounting for costs and expenses charged to City, including such records in the possession of subcontractors of every tier. 8.7. Further Assurances. The Parties agree to perform such further acts and to execute and deliver such additional documents and instruments as may be reasonably required in order to carry out the provisions of this Agreement and the intentions of the Parties. 8.8. Independent Contractor. Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to City a wholly independent contractor. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor’s officers, employees, or agents (“Contractor Related Individuals”), except as set forth in this Agreement. No Contractor Related Individuals shall be deemed employees of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled, 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 287 of 617 10 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 including but not limited to overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave, or other leave benefits. Furthermore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax with respect to any Contractor Related Individuals; instead, Contractor shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with respect to same. Contractor shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its Contractor Related Individuals are employees or agents of City. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability whatsoever against City, or bind City in any manner. 8.9. Notices. All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands, and requests to be sent to any Party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such Party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified in this Agreement at the places of business for each of the designated Parties as indicated in Exhibit A, or otherwise provided in writing. 8.10. No Waiver. The failure of City to insist, in any one or more instances, upon the performance of any provision of the Agreement, or to exercise any right in the Agreement, shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of such provisions or rights. Any waiver of any breach of this Agreement shall not be held to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach. Any waiver issued by the City of any provision of the Agreement shall only be effective if issued in writing by the City and shall be specific and apply only to the particular matter concerned and not to other similar or dissimilar matters. 8.11. No Limitation. The duties and obligations imposed by this Agreement and the rights and remedies available hereunder to the parties hereto, and, in particular but without limitation, the warranties, guarantees, and obligations imposed upon the Agreement or by this Agreement and all of the rights and remedies available to City thereunder, are in addition to, and are not to be construed in any way as a limitation of, any rights and remedies imposed or available by laws, regulations, or codes, by special warranty or guarantee or by other provisions of the Contract Documents. 8.12. Severability. If any term or provision or portion of a term or provision of this Agreement is declared invalid or unenforceable by any court of lawful jurisdiction, then the remaining terms and provisions or portions of terms or provisions will not be affected thereby and will remain in full force and effect. (End of Obligatory Provisions. Next page is signature page.) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 288 of 617 11 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 SIGNATURE PAGE BRUSH CLEARANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, by executing this Agreement where indicated below, City and Contractor agree that they have read and understood all terms and conditions of the Agreement, that they fully agree and consent to be bound by same, and that they are freely entering into this Agreement as of the Effective Date. Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. CITY OF CHULA VISTA BY:________________________________ BY: ________________________________ RICHARD KINGSBOROUGH MARIA V. KACHADOORIAN CEO/FOUNDER CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: ________________________________ GLEN R. GOOGINS CITY ATTORNEY 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 289 of 617 12 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK AND PAYMENT TERMS 1. Contact People for Contract Administration and Legal Notice A. City Contract Administration: Angelica Aguilar Assistant Director of Public Works 1800 Maxwell Road, Chula Vista, CA 91911 619-397-6088 AAguilar@chulavistaca.gov For Legal Notice Copy to: City of Chula Vista City Attorney 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 619-691-5037 CityAttorney@chulavistaca.gov B. Contractor Contract Administration: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Richard Kingsborough, CEO/Founder 1544 Ludwig Avenue Santa Rosa, CA 95407 707-974-3093 Rich@atlas-tree.com For Legal Notice Copy to: Tyler R. Willis, Director, Forest Management 1544 Ludwig Avenue Santa Rosa, CA 95407 707-787-7334 tyler.willis@atlas-tree.com 2. Required Services A. General Description: The Contractor will furnish all work, materials, equipment, services, and labor necessary to fully complete brush clearance services for Chula Vista’s named canyons in strict accordance with the Contract Documents. B. Detailed Description: The Contractor shall furnish and provide all labor, materials, equipment, tools, facilities, skill, and services necessary to complete, in a good and workmanlike manner, all brush clearance services, and all other Required Services within the named canyons throughout the City at the unit prices contained herein in strict accordance with the Contract Documents. 3. Term: In accordance with Section 1.10 of this Agreement, the term of this Agreement shall begin September 27, 2022 and end on March 31, 2023 for completion of all Required Services. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 290 of 617 13 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 4. Compensation: The unit prices for completed and approved Required Services are reflected on the table below: Unit Prices. Unit Prices shall include all labor, traffic control, equipment, materials, insurance, permit and license fees, disposal costs, profit, overhead, supervision, transportation, applicable sales tax, and all other costs to complete all necessary work for that line item. Payment. As full compensation for completion of the Required Services, the City shall pay Contractor for the quantity or percentage of line item of work actually performed and approved by the City in accordance with the Contract Documents. Payment shall be made for each acre of brush clearance and revegetation completed per canyon as noted in the table above. The City’s obligation to pay Contractor under this Agreement is subject to and may be offset by charges owed by Contractor under this Agreement. 5. Special Provisions: Security for Performance: Prior to commencement of the Required Services, Contractor shall procure Performance and Labor and Material Bonds for the Required Services. Such bonds are to be issued by a Surety authorized to transact such business in the State of California and listed as approved by the United States Department of Treasury Circular 570 with an underwriting limitation sufficient to issue bonds in the amount required by the Agreement. Approved entities are listed on the United States Department of Treasury’s website - www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/ref/suretyBnd/c570.htm. Any renewal certificates required during the course of the Agreement must be renewed and received by the City within fifteen (15) days prior to expiration and must meet the same criteria. No substitutions shall be allowed. DIR/Prevailing Wages. Contractor and its subcontractors of every tier shall comply with all Federal and State law prevailing wage requirements for all persons employed to perform the Required Services, including but not limited to payment of prevailing wages at the specified rates. The prevailing wage rates are determined by the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) and are available on the DIR’s website. Prior to commencing the Required Services, the Contractor shall provide the City with a list of its subcontractors and the classifications and wages of workers that will be employed to perform the Required Services. If Contractor desires to modify the list during the term of the Agreement, Contractor shall immediately provide an updated list to the City for City’s consideration. To verify compliance with State prevailing wage requirements, Contractor shall be registered with the DIR’s online registration of contractors and shall furnish and submit certified payrolls and other required documentation directly to the DIR. Contractor and its subcontractors of every tier shall comply with all requirements of Labor Code section 1776. This Agreement is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR pursuant to Labor Code section 1771.4. CANYON NAME/ACREAGE Project Management Prepare Work Plan Tribal Notifiation Field Coordination Biological Monitoring and Reporting Brush and Vegetation Management Services CANYON TOTALS Per Acre Cost Barons Canyon (30.72 acres)4,753.98$ 448.56$ 200.00$ 4,753.98$ 9,748.89$ 571,951.72$ 591,857.13$ 19,264.30$ Bonita Long Canyon (40.89 acres)6,326.88$ 596.96$ 200.00$ 6,326.88$ 12,974.41$ 761,299.01$ 787,724.14$ 19,265.41$ Church Canyon (19.67 acres)3,042.90$ 287.11$ 200.00$ 3,042.90$ 6,240.02$ 366,220.22$ 379,033.15$ 19,274.51$ Goats Hill (43.08 ac)6,666.45$ 629.00$ 200.00$ 6,666.45$ 13,670.76$ 802,072.91$ 829,905.57$ 19,263.17$ Independence Canyon (8.62 acres)1,333.29$ 125.80$ 200.00$ 1,333.29$ 2,734.15$ 160,489.04$ 166,215.57$ 19,290.38$ Lynwood Hills (21.53 acres)3,331.02$ 314.29$ 200.00$ 3,331.02$ 6,830.86$ 400,850.25$ 414,857.44$ 19,271.49$ TOTALS 25,454.52$ 2,401.72$ 1,200.00$ 25,454.52$ 52,199.09$ 3,062,883.15$ 3,169,593.00$ 19,267.81$ TASK 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 291 of 617 14 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 In addition to Federal and State law prevailing wage requirements, Contractor shall also comply with the following in its performance of the Required Services: • Labor Code 1810: Hours in legal day’s work; • Labor Code 1813: Penalty for exceeding legal day’s work; and • Labor Code 1815: One and one-half time rate of pay. Contractor acknowledges and agrees that a failure to comply with any requirements of this section authorizes the City to withhold payments under the Agreement. Nothing contained in, or not contained in, this section shall be construed to limit Contractor’s obligations to comply with any applicable Federal, State, or local law or regulation. Employment of Apprentices. Contractor and its subcontractors of every tier shall comply with all requirements for employment of apprentices as provided by any applicable law or regulation, including but not limited to Labor Code sections 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1777.7. Information regarding apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the DIR. Non-Collusion Affidavit. Prior to commencing the Required Services, Contractor shall provide a fully executed and properly notarized Non-Collusion Affidavit, in the form attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit D. Workers’ Compensation Insurance Declaration. Prior to commencing the Required Services, Contractor shall provide a fully executed and properly notarized Workers’ Compensation Insurance Declaration, in the form attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit E. OPTIONAL (check if applicable): ☒ Permitted Sub-Contractor: None ☒ Notwithstanding the completion date set forth in Section 3 above, City has the option to extend this Agreement for up to four (4) additional terms, defined as one-year increments from July 1st to June 30th. The City Manager or Director of Finance/Treasurer, or their designee, shall be authorized to exercise the extensions on behalf of the City. If the City exercises an option to extend, each extension shall be on the same terms and conditions contained herein, provided that the amounts specified in Section 4 above may be increased by up to the lower of the annual Regional Consumer Price Index (CPI-W) increases or 5% of the Contractor-quoted prices for each extension. The City shall give written notice to Contractor of the City’s election to exercise the extension via the Notice of Exercise of Option to Extend document. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 292 of 617 15 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 EXHIBIT B INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Contractor shall adhere to all terms and conditions of Section 3 of the Agreement and agrees to provide the following types and minimum amounts of insurance, as indicated by checking the applicable boxes (x): Type of Insurance Minimum Amount Form ☒ General Liability: Including products and completed operations, personal and advertising injury $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury (including death), and property damage. If Commercial General Liability insurance with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit must apply separately to this Agreement or the general aggregate limit must be twice the required occurrence limit Additional Insured Endorsement or Blanket AI Endorsement for City* Waiver of Recovery Endorsement Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 *Must be primary and must not exclude Products/Completed Operations ☒ Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury, including death, and property damage Insurance Services Office Form CA 00 01 Code 1-Any Auto Code 8-Hired Code 9-Non Owned ☒ Workers’ Compensation Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 each accident $1,000,000 disease policy limit $1,000,000 disease each employee Waiver of Recovery Endorsement 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 293 of 617 16 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 EXHIBIT C CONTRACTOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST DESIGNATION The Political Reform Act1 and the Chula Vista Conflict of Interest Code2 (“Code”) require designated state and local government officials, including some Contractor, to make certain public disclosures using a Statement of Economic Interests form (Form 700). Once filed, a Form 700 is a public document, accessible to any member of the public. In addition, Contractors designated to file the Form 700 are also required to comply with certain ethics training requirements.3 ☒ A. Contractor IS a corporation or limited liability company and is therefore EXCLUDED4 from disclosure. ☐ B. Contractor is NOT a corporation or limited liability company and disclosure designation is as follows: APPLICABLE DESIGNATIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL(S) ASSIGNED TO PROVIDE SERVICES (Category descriptions available at www.chulavistaca.gov/departments/city-clerk/conflict-of-interest-code.) Name Email Address Applicable Designation Enter Name of Each Individual Who Will Be Providing Service Under the Contract – If individuals have different disclosure requirements, duplicate this row and complete separately for each individual Enter email address(es) ☐ A. Full Disclosure ☐ B. Limited Disclosure (select one or more of the categories under which the Contractor shall file): ☐ 1. ☐ 2. ☐ 3. ☐ 4. ☐ 5. ☐ 6. ☐ 7. Justification: ☐ C. Excluded from Disclosure 1. Required Filers Each individual who will be performing services for the City pursuant to the Agreement and who meets the definition of “Contractor,” pursuant to FPPC Regulation 18700.3, must file a Form 700. 2. Required Filing Deadlines Each initial Form 700 required under this Agreement shall be filed with the Office of the City Clerk via the City's online filing system, NetFile, within 30 days of the approval of the Agreement. Additional Form 700 filings will be required annually on April 1 during the term of the Agreement, and within 30 days of the termination of the Agreement. 3. Filing Designation The City Department Director will designate each individual who will be providing services to the City pursuant to the Agreement as full disclosure, limited disclosure, or excluded from disclosure, based on an analysis of the services the Contractor will provide. Notwithstanding this designation or anything in the Agreement, the Contractor is ultimately responsible for complying with FPPC regulations and filing requirements. If you have any questions regarding filing requirements, please do not hesitate to contact the City Clerk at (619)691-5041, or the FPPC at 1-866-ASK-FPPC, or (866) 275-3772 *2. Pursuant to the duly adopted City of Chula Vista Conflict of Interest Code, this document shall serve as the written determination of the Contractor’s requirement to comply with the disclosure requirements set forth in the Code. Completed by: Samuel O. A. Oludunfe, City Forester & Open Space Manager 1 Cal. Gov. Code §§81000 et seq.; FPPC Regs. 18700.3 and 18704. 2 Chula Vista Municipal Code §§2.02.010-2.02.040. 3 Cal. Gov. Code §§53234, et seq. 4 CA FPPC Adv. A-15-147 (Chadwick) (2015); Davis v. Fresno Unified School District (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 261; FPPC Reg. 18700.3 (Consultant defined as an “individual” who participates in making a governmental decision; “individual” does not include corporation or limited liability company). 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 294 of 617 17 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 EXHIBIT D NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT To the City of Chula Vista, Director of Engineering & Capital Projects: The undersigned, in submitting a bid for performing the following work by Contract being duly sworn, deposes and says: That he/she has not, either directly or indirectly entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competitive bidding and has not accepted any deposit from any subcontractor or material supplier through any bid depository, the by-laws, rules, and regulations of which prohibit or prevent the Contractor from considering any bid from any subcontractor or material supplier, which is not processed through said bid depository, or which prevent any subcontractor or material supplier from bidding to any Contractor who does not use the facilities or accept bids from or through such bid depository in connection with this Contract. _____________________________________ Business Address Company _____________________________________ Place of Residence Signature of Bidder (Attach Proper Notarization) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 295 of 617 18 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 EXHIBIT E WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE DECLARATION Date:________________________ I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract. _____________________________ Signature _____________________________ Contractor _____________________________ State Contractor's License No. _____________________________ Address _____________________________ City/State _____________________________ Phone Number (Attach Proper Notarization) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 296 of 617 19 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 EXHIBIT F SPECIAL PROVISIONS – TECHNICAL 1 SCOPE OF WORK "Behave" fire modeling has identified named canyons as fire hazard areas. The named canyons present a unique fire safety challenge as adjacent construction was completed prior to fuel modification requirements. Subsequent establishment of open space areas within the canyons has allowed for the accumulation of vegetative biomass proximate to residential structures that are not compliant with the latest structural code improvements. The named canyons are natural preserves protected by the Multiple Species Conservation Subarea Plan (MSCP) adopted in 2003. Thick stands of native lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia) and non-native Acacia redolens as well as non-native grasses and other weeds, with slopes up to 55%, have increased fuel buildup in the interface between the residences around the named canyons and the preserve areas. The Contractor shall reference and follow all requirements applicable in the following documents: 1) City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Subarea Plan (MSCP), Sections 7.4.4 and 7.4.5.1 http://www.chulavistaca.gov/City_Services/Development_Services/Planning_Building/Planning/Enviro mental/Habitat.asp 2) City of Chula Vista Area Specific Management Directives (ASMDs), Sections 8 and 9 http://www.chulavistaca.gov/City_Services/Development_Services/Planning_Building/PDF/04_asmd4_ rpt.pdf 3) ANSI A300 – Standards for Tree Care Operations: Standard Practices (Pruning) http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/Legistarweb/Attachments/62250.pdf While a 10-foot clear area within the interface and outside the preserves has been established and maintained, it is inadequate to provide access for the Fire Department to defend these homes in the event of a fire occurrence. Although the MSCP provides guidelines for fuel load reduction in these areas, funding has not been included to address this important issue. Modification of native and non-native plant materials for fire safety within a 60-foot swath along the named canyons’ rims, covering a total of 173.16 acres, in accordance with the City’s MSCP and Area Specific Management Directives (ASMDs), is the objective of this vegetation management project. Moreover, the entire 60-foot brush clearance area in named canyons will be revegetated to stabilize the slopes and deter the growth of undesirable plant species. The following native plant species will be used for the revegetation, by hydroseeding, of the named canyons: Argrostis pallens (seashore bentgrass) Lasthenia californica (California goldfields) Lupinus bicolor (miniature lupine) Lupinus succulentus (hollowleaf lupine) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 297 of 617 20 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 Melica imperfecta (little California melic) Muhlenbergia microsperma (littleseed muhly) Nassella lepida (foothill needlegrass) Sisyrinchium bellum (western blue-eyed-grass) and Stipa pulchra (purple needlegrass) 2 BRUSH MANAGEMENT ZONES/IMPLEMENTATION The primary goal is to increase the established defensible space zone between homes that are near the urban interface with the named canyons. The 60-foot fuel reduction zone is expected to provide the necessary area required for the Fire Department to defend a potential conflagration within the canyons. Objectives are to: (a)(i). Implement Zone 2 brush management activities in accordance with the guidelines contained in the City's Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea plan. (a)(ii). Reduce the height and density of existing stands of Rhus integrifolia to create a "mosaic" pattern of vegetation with adequate spacing between the shrubs to reduce the fire ladder effect. (a)(iii). Remove non-native species to further reduce the fuel loads. (a)(iv). Reduce non-native Acacia redolens density and remove all dead wood to reduce fuel load build up. (a)(v). Cut non-native grasses and weeds to 2 inches to reduce rapid ignition potential and competition for native species. Approved herbicides shall be applied immediately to cut non-native grasses and weeds to ensure their complete desiccation and deter their regrowth. (a)(vi). Protect native habitat by minimizing impact in the adjacent preserve. Furthermore, these goals and objectives will be in accordance with the City's Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSCP) and Area Specific Management Directives (ASMDs). Specifically: (b)(i). Actual brush cutting and clearance shall occur between September 1 and February 14 to avoid disturbing nesting gnatcatchers. Already cut brush may continue to be removed from the work site until March 31, 2023. Revegetation activities may continue to March 31, 2023. Each instance of space width – 10 feet, 30 feet, 40 feet, 50 feet, or 60 feet – shall be measured horizontally. (b)(ii). The project consists of implementing up to 60 feet of Zone 2 brush management activities. The project does not involve brush management on private lots. (b)(iii). The 60-foot-wide fuel reduction brush management activities proposed will occur within the limits authorized for brush management as described in the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan’s Brush Management Guidelines and Brush Management within the Central City Preserve, Sections 7.4.4 and 7.4.5.1: o In Zone 2, vegetation will be thinned and/or pruned to 24 inches in height and dead underbrush will be cleared and removed. o All brush management activities will be performed by hand using hand tools including loppers, 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 298 of 617 21 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 chainsaws, weed whips, hand pruners, and rakes. o Non-native species will be reduced to 2 inches in height and treated with herbicide to reduce the potential for regrowth. Full compensation for trimming, removal, and disposal of all landscape vegetation as required by this contract and all necessary items, labor, equipment, and manpower is considered included in the contract price paid for "BRUSH CLEARANCE" and no other compensation will therefore be allowed. 3 REVEGETATION OF BRUSH MANAGEMENT AREA The following native plant species will be used for the revegetation, by hydroseeding, of the entire 60-foot brush clearance area in the named canyons to stabilize the slopes and deter the growth of undesirable plant species: Argrostis pallens (seashore bentgrass) Lasthenia californica (California goldfields) Lupinus bicolor (miniature lupine) Lupinus succulentus (hollowleaf lupine) Melica imperfecta (little California melic) Muhlenbergia microsperma (littleseed muhly) Nassella lepida (foothill needlegrass) Sisyrinchium bellum (western blue-eyed-grass); and Stipa pulchra (purple needlegrass) A 90-day maintenance period of hydroseed establishment, including weed removal by hand, chemical (herbicide), and with the use of small equipment (e.g., line trimmer), will follow hydroseed germination. Full compensation for site preparation, procurement of materials, mixing of hydroseed, application of hydroseed, establishment of hydroseeded materials, 90-day establishment period maintenance of hydroseeded areas, and the removal and disposal of all attendant debris as required by this contract, and the provision of all necessary items, labor, equipment, and manpower is considered included in the contract price paid for "REVEGETATION OF BRUSH CLEARANCE AREA" and no other compensation will therefore be allowed. 4 TREE TRIMMING  Remove all dead wood ≥1 inch in diameter from trees in project area.  Thin tree crowns; do not remove more than 25% of any tree’s crown in any case.  Within the vegetation management space – Prune tree crowns extending to within 10 feet of any structure to maintain a minimum horizontal clearance of 10 feet. Prune tree crowns to maintain a minimum horizontal clearance of 10 feet from crowns of surrounding trees. Prune tree crowns to remove limbs located less than 8 feet above the ground surface adjacent to the trees.  Where any shrub grouping is adjacent to a tree, there must be a minimum vertical space of 6 feet or three times the height of shrubs (whichever is greater) between the top of shrub grouping and the lowest branch of tree. All tree work must be directed by an International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist. All tree 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 299 of 617 22 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 work must comply with ANSI A300 – Standards for Tree Care Operations: Standard Practices (Pruning). Full compensation for trimming, removal, and disposal of all landscape vegetation as required by this contract and all necessary items, labor equipment, and manpower is considered included in the contract price paid for "BRUSH CLEARANCE" and no other compensation will therefore be allowed. 5 BRUSH MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT & OBSERVATION • A qualified biologist shall survey the project area within 1 week prior to the start of fuel reduction activities. The survey shall be conducted in the morning to maximize detection of bird species, specifically the gnatcatcher. The focus will be to identify the presence of any MSCP covered species, map the observed location, and flag the location in the field. The intent of this pre-implementation survey is to familiarize the biologist with the habitats within the project area and to gather data that can assist the biologist in developing additional recommendations to further avoid/minimize impacts to sensitive biological species. • Based on the pre-implementation survey, a qualified biologist shall identify and delineate any highly sensitive areas to be avoided, and mark shrubs to aid pruning and thinning in such a way as to maintain the maximum allowable shrub cover and species diversity. It is anticipated that this task will be initiated prior to project implementation and continue as the project progresses. The biologist shall consider the habitat structure, species density and composition typically used by gnatcatchers to maintain the integrity of the habitat in concert with the needs to meet brush management goals. • A qualified biological monitor will be present each day that trimming will occur to monitor and direct crews. As the project progresses, the biologist shall monitor brush management activities to preserve the integrity and function of existing habitats. Full compensation for Brush Management Assessment and Observation as required by this contract and all necessary items, labor, equipment, and manpower is considered included in the contract price paid for "BIOLOGISTS MONITORING AND OBSERVATION" and no other compensation will therefore be allowed. 6 TEMPORARY FENCING FOR STAGING AREA The Contractor shall provide temporary fencing to enclose any staging areas required during the duration of work performed in this contract. The fencing shall be a minimum 6-foot-tall chain link with round metal fence posts, unless otherwise approved by the City Forester and Open Space Manager. Full compensation for furnishing, installing, maintaining, and removal of all temporary fencing as required by this contract and all necessary items, labor, equipment, and manpower is considered included in the contract price paid for "TEMPORARY FENCING FOR STAGING AREA" and no other compensation will therefore be allowed. 7 CONTRACTOR INSTRUCTIONS The Contractor will receive training from environmental representatives on minimizing the impact to habitat when cutting and hauling. Further training and oversight will focus on identification and removal of non-native plants as well as identification and level of trimming and thinning required for native plants. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 300 of 617 23 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 Contractor shall take all necessary precautions to avoid damaging Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) and other native vegetation in project areas. Contractor shall take all necessary precautions to protect native habitat by minimizing impact in the preserve adjacent to project areas. Contractor shall take all necessary precautions to protect all trees that are to be retained. Contractor shall set up photograph points with T-post at each site. A word document displaying “before” and “after” pictures will be submitted to City of Chula Vista at completion of project segments. Depending on the location of access, temporary dumpster locations on City streets will be identified to minimize the hauling process. Contract crews will stage equipment at predetermined staging areas in or near the named canyons. Crews of ≥ 10 persons will perform primarily hand labor utilizing loppers, chainsaws, and string trimmers to cut existing brush and weeds to a desired density level. After raking and picking up the cut materials in burlap squares, the brush will be hauled on foot to the brush staging areas near the closest respective dumpsters. Depending on the Contractor and logistics of the location, a loader with a grapple may assist in loading the dumpsters from the brush staging area. 8 CLEARING AND GRUBBING, REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS The Contractor shall clear and grub all objectionable material within the construction area in accordance with Section 300-1 of the Greenbook & Regional Supplement. All existing improvements required to be removed by construction of the new work as identified in the attached maps shall become the property of the Contractor & shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Section 300-1.3, Removal and Disposal of Materials, of the Greenbook, Regional Supplement, and as directed by the City Forester and Open Space Manager. The Contractor has sole discretion on the means of hauling away the removal items. The Contractor may use Contractor’s own vehicles and employees to haul waste that is incidental to the contract. If the Contractor self- hauls waste material, he or she must designate the specific State permitted landfill or recycling facility that will be used to dispose of any waste material generated on the job. If the Contractor does not designate a State permitted disposal site, he or she shall obtain a hold harmless agreement acceptable to the City Risk Manager and the City Attorney. If the Contractor subcontracts for waste hauling, he or she is obligated to use the franchised waste disposal company that has an agreement with the City (Currently Allied Waste Services owned by Republic Waste Services at (619) 421-9400). For questions regarding waste disposal requirements, call Allied Waste Services owned by Republic Waste Services, George Ortiz (619) 482-4058, cell number (619) 921-4932 or David Pote at (619) 482 - 4002, cell (619) 921 4982. For a listing of commercial recycling services, or construction, demolition, and yard waste sites, call the “I love a clean San Diego” at 1-800-237-2583 or online at www.cleansd.org/recycle. For additional information or questions regarding waste disposal requirements and for a listing of commercial recycling services, or construction, demolition, and yard waste sites within the City of Chula Vista, call the City of Chula Vista Recycling Specialist Manuel Medrano at (619) 585-5766 or Martie Solomon at (619) 409-5844. Full compensation for removal and disposal of all vegetative waste as required by construction of this contract and all necessary items, labor, equipment, and manpower is considered included in th e contract price paid for 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 301 of 617 24 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 "WASTE MANAGEMENT" and no other compensation will therefore be allowed. 9 ROOT REMOVAL All roots of removed trees shall be removed by the Contractor to a depth of 12 inches below the finished grade. Trees and plants that are not to be removed shall be fully protected from damage by the Contractor at all expense. The Contractor shall notify the City Forester and Open Space Manager to have the City Arborist inspect the exposed roots upon completion of the removal of the existing improvements and prior to root pruning/subgrade preparation. The Contractor to the satisfaction of the City Forester and Open Space Manager shall do root pruning, old tree stump removal, and or root barrier installation. Without jeopardizing the health of the tree, the roots shall be cleanly cut with a saw at the edge or bottom and or root barrier of the excavation and removed surface. Jagged or ripped cut roots are not acceptable. The Contractor shall hire a Certified Arborist to perform this work. Full compensation for this work shall be considered included in the contract price paid for “BRUSH CLEARANCE” and no additional compensation will therefore be allowed. 10 REMOVAL OF EXISTING TREES The Contractor shall remove existing trees/bushes as shown on the plan. All roots under the new concrete and pavement work shall be removed by the Contractor to a depth of 12 inches below the finished grade and to 2 feet outside the limits of the concrete and pavement work/replacement. The Contractor shall notify the City Forester and Open Space Manager to have the City Arborist inspect the exposed roots upon completion of the removal of the existing improvements and prior to root pruning/subgrade preparation. Root pruning shall be performed to the satisfaction of the City Arborist/City Forester and Open Space Manager. All root pruning of trees within the work area that are to remain, shall be done with a machine designed for this purpose, e.g., a root pruner or a stump grinder. In lieu of this, roots may be exposed and individually cut with a sharp handsaw or chainsaw only. Under no circumstances should roots be torn, ripped out, or otherwise damaged with a backhoe or other equipment. Trees and plants that are not to be removed shall be fully protected from damage by the Contractor at all expense. Tree branches that hang within 8 feet above finished curb and sidewalk grade shall be cut off to the boles. The Contractor shall remove additional tree branches under the direction of the City Forester, in such a manner that the tree will present a balanced appearance. Full compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and for doing all work involved in the removal and disposal of existing trees, including stumps, roots (12 inches below finish grade), shall be considered as included in the contract unit price paid for “BRUSH CLEARANCE” and no additional compensation will therefore be allowed. 11 AVOIDANCE OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO MIGRATORY BIRDS AND OCCUPIED RAPTOR NESTS Citywide Vegetation Removal To avoid any direct impacts to raptors and/or any migratory birds, removal of habitat, including mature trees, that support active nests on the proposed area of disturbance should occur outside of the breeding season for these species (February 15 to August 31). If removal of habitat on the proposed area of disturbance must occur during the breeding season, a City-approved biologist (see Appendices) will be retained to conduct a pre- construction survey to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds on the proposed area of disturbance. The pre-construction survey must be conducted within 10 calendar days prior to the start of construction activities (including removal of vegetation and trees). The results of the pre-construction survey 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 302 of 617 25 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 will be reviewed and approved by the City of Chula Vista Development Services Director prior to initiating any construction activities. If nesting birds are detected, a letter report or mitigation plan as deemed appropriate b y the Development Services Director will be prepared and will include proposed measures to be implemented to ensure that disturbance of breeding activities is avoided. The report or mitigation plan will be prepared and implemented to the satisfaction of the City’s Development Services Director. If construction work is proposed outside the bird-breeding season (February 15 and August 31) and the construction area is found outside the Chula Vista MSCP Sub Area Plan, then, removal of non-native vegetation, including trees, may proceed without the 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 303 of 617 26 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 aforementioned restrictions. Full compensation to retain a City-approved biologist to conduct the pre-construction survey, determine the presence or absence of nesting birds, provide results to the City, and if neces sary prepare a report or mitigation plan shall be considered included in the contract unit price paid for “BIOLOGISTS MONITORING AND OBSERVATION” and no additional compensation will therefore be allowed. 12 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION In performing work under this contract, the Contractor shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to storm water pollution prevention, including but not limited to: o Federal Clean Water Act o California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act o National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit No. CAS000002 (NPDES General Construction Permit), and any subsequent reissuances of or amendments thereto o City of Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 14.20 o City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual The Contractor shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent the discharge of pollutants to storm water conveyance systems during all phases of construction until the project is completed, and the site is fully stabilized. Implementation of BMPs shall be to the maximum extent required by federal, state, and local laws and regulations, as well as any contract documents, including Contract Specifications and plans. The Director of Public Works or designee shall have sole discretion in determining if compliance with BMPs requirements has been met or not. The City reserves the right to require modifications in the field to BMPs requirements where the City determines that Contractor-selected BMPs are not effective in preventing the discharge of pollutants to the storm water conveyance system to the extent required by federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Notwithstanding identification or selection of BMPs in the project’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Pla n (SWPPP) or Construction Storm Water Management Plan (CSWMP), the Contractor shall be fully responsible and obligated to implement all necessary BMPs to prevent the discharge of pollutants due to construction activities as required in this section. The Director of Public Works or designee, at their sole discretion, shall determine if implemented BMPs are adequate or if additional BMPs are necessary, in which case the Contractor shall implement additional BMPs needed to comply with the requirements of this section. To ensure compliance with federal, state, or local storm water laws and regulations, the City may take enforcement action as follows:  Stop all other work on the project at no cost to the City until the non-compliance is corrected; working days shall continue to be assessed  Require revisions to plans at no cost to the City  Require modifications/BMPs improvements in the field at no cost to the City  Assess fines and penalties  Other enforcement action, as may be appropriate All costs incurred by the Contractor in complying with the provisions specified in this section are included in the contract unit price paid for the various items of work as contained in the proposal and no additional payments will be made for implementation of storm water pollution prevention measures. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 304 of 617 27 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 For projects disturbing less than one acre of land, the Contractor shall complete and sign a CSWMP (Form 5504B). The Contractor shall select all applicable minimum and recommended BMPs from Tables A and B of Form 5504B and shall implement such BMPs during construction as necessary to prevent pollution of storm water conveyance systems. A completed and signed CSWMP shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of a “Notice to Proceed”. 13 PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY (TRAFFIC CONTROL) Public convenience and safety shall be according to Section 7-10 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and Regional Supplement Amendments. The Contractor shall submit traffic control plans for work to be done two weeks before starting of work, for the Director of Public Works’ approval. The Contractor shall comply with the traffic control plans. Traffic control shall conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, or MUTCD. At least five (5) working days before commencing work, the Contractor shall submit its construction schedule to the City for approval. Based upon the construction schedule, the Contractor shall notify residents of the proposed work. Notification of residents shall be in the form of “Door Knocker” notices. The City shall provide the language to be included on the “Door Knocker” notices. The Contractor shall submit a sample of the “Door Knocker” notices to the City for approval. The Contractor is responsible for making satisfactory arrangements with the various property owners concerning access to their property during the construction. The Contractor shall notify each affected resident in person at least forty-eight (48) hours before starting the project and closing the driveways (if any). The C ontractor shall submit requests for changes in the schedule to the Engineer for approval, at least forty-eight (48) hours before the scheduled construction of the streets affected. It is the responsibility of the Contractor performing work on a City street to install and maintain the approved traffic control devices and such additional traffic control devices (e.g., flag persons) as may be required to ensure safe movement of traffic motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians and construction staking staff through and around the work area and provide maximum protection and safety to construction workers. The Contractor shall be fully responsible for the adequacy of any traffic plan used. He or she shall notify the City at least two (2) working days before starting any construction detour. When an existing pedestrian access route is blocked by construction, alteration, maintenance or other temporary conditions, the traffic control plan shall include an alternate pedestrian access route complying to the maximum extent possible with the applicable requirements of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the latest adopted edition of Manual Uniform of Traffic Control Devises (MUTCD) and California Supplements to the MUTCD. The street shall always remain open to traffic. Flaggers may be necessary to provide safety. Contractor shall have stop signs available on site (for each intersection approach) for emergency use. Prior to closing any lane, the Contractor is required to provide a traffic control plan for approval a minimum of two weeks prior to starting work. The City reserves the right to observe the traffic control plans in use and direct the Contractor to make changes as field conditions warrant. Any changes will supersede the plans and will be done solely at the Contractor’s expense. The Contractor is responsible for maintaining all traffic control devices and conforming to the State of 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 305 of 617 28 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 California and City of Chula Vista standards and specifications. The Contractor shall replace all roadway striping 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 306 of 617 29 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 removed by the construction work A separate traffic control plan for any work on arterial and collector streets shall be submitted for approval prior to the start of any work on these streets. The Contractor shall also submit separate traffic control plans for work within any major intersections, State rights-of-way, and other congested areas. The traffic control plan shall include phasing, existing striping, temporary striping during construction, and finished permanent striping. The Contractor shall be responsible for preserving original locations and dimensions of all existing striping obliterated by the work. The Contractor shall be responsible for maintaining sufficient striping control points to be able to restore lane dimensions. The Contractor shall install and maintain temporary overlay yellow or white markers, whichever is applicable, where striping cannot be restored by the end of the workday. The Contractor shall replace all roadway striping and pavement markings removed by the construction work. The cross traffic at intersection streets shall always be maintained. An asphalt ramp at 4:1 slope shall be constructed next to a construction zone travel lane where drop-off exceeds 0.15 feet (1.8”). Driving across newly placed asphalt into driveways will not be allowed until the pavement has cooled and become firm enough to prevent displacement and tracking. The Contractor shall be responsible for adequate barricading of the work area and controlling of traffic near the project as specified in Sub Section 7-10, or as directed by the Engineer. The Contractor shall arrange with Pacific Waste Services to maintain trash pick -up services for those property owners affected by the work. The Contractor shall notify the transit agencies of any delays to thei r buses. The Contractor shall notify all schools (public and private) where the work may affect school operations. The Contractor is responsible for maintaining all traffic control devices and conforming to the State of California and City of Chula Vista Standards and Specifications. Contractor shall assume sole and complete responsibility for job site conditions during construction of this project. The Contractor shall be responsible for maintenance of steel plates, shoring, and asphalt concrete. In any event, the Contractor shall cover all open trenches at the end of each day to prevent any pedestrian or traffic injury. Full compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and all necessary traffic control as required by the City of Chula Vista is considered included in the contract unit price paid for “PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY (TRAFFIC CONTROL)” and no additional compensation will therefore be allowed. 14 PROTECTION AND RESTORATION OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS Protection and restoration of existing improvements shall conform to Section 7-9 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and as described below. Trees, shrubs, and other plants that are not to be removed, and pole lines, fences, signs, markers and monuments, buildings and structures, conduits, pipelines under or above ground, sewer and water lines, all highway or street facilities, and any other improvements or facilities within or adjacent to the right-of-way shall be protected from injury or damage. If the objects are injured or damaged because of the Contractor’s operations, they shall be replaced or restored at the Contractor’s expense. The Contractor shall review all roadside vegetation (e.g., trees, shrubs) prior to the start of construction to ensure 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 307 of 617 30 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 proper clearance for all construction equipment being utilized for all work involved in this contract. The Contractor shall be responsible for notifying the proper entities (City Arborist and/or private property) to ensure 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 308 of 617 31 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 that all vegetation requiring trimming is addressed prior to construction on those locations. Should any work under this contract damage or cause to be damaged any item or items not scheduled to be removed, such items shall be restored to their original condition and position, or shall be replaced, all at the Contractor's expense. All repairs or replacements shall be performed to the satisfaction of the Project Engineer. Full compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and for doing all work involved in protecting or repairing property shall be considered as included in the contract unit price paid for the various contract items of work and no additional compensation will therefore be allowed. The Contractor shall protect existing curb and pavement striping in place and replace existing red curb paint and other striping destroyed or damaged during removal. The Contractor shall remove and reset street signs in conflict with the work or as directed by the Engineer. The Contractor shall replace signposts destroyed or damaged during removal. If required, the City will provide new signs. The concrete base of existing signpost shall be removed prior to resetting. Full compensation for protecting and replacing existing striping and removing and resetting of signs shall be included in the prices paid for the various contract items of work and no additional compensation will therefore be allowed. 15 STORAGE, STAGING, AND STOCKPILING AREA The Contractor shall stage all equipment and stockpiles within the predetermined staging areas in or near the named canyons. These sites shall be clean and free of objectionable materials. Arrangement for these sites shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contractor must acquire the necessary City permit(s) to properly operate this area. Additionally, this area must meet all requirements stated in the Stockpile Management procedures and practices of the California Stormwater BMP Handbook to reduce or eliminate air and stormwater pollution. Full compensation for storage, staging, and stockpiling area shall be included in the prices paid for the various contract items of work and no additional compensation will therefore be allowed. 16 CLEANING AND CLEAN-UP Contractor shall not permit the adjacent property, public or private, to become dirty and unsightly because of work under this section or specifications. The Contractor shall carefully and continuously protect all areas included in the contract, including lawn areas, plant material, supports, etc., until final acceptance by the City. The Contractor shall repair and/or replace any damaged areas at no additional cost to the City. Use water or other means to control dust generated by work noted herein per NPDES requirements. All water and equipment necessary to provide dust control shall be included in the unit price paid for various contract items of work. 17 VEHICLE LOAD RESTRICTIONS - VEHICLE CODE 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 309 of 617 32 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 Pursuant to the authority contained in Vehicle Code Section 591, the City has determined that within those areas that are within the limits of the project and are open to public traffic, the Contractor shall comply with any or all the requirements set forth in Divisions 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of the Vehicle Code. Vehicles used to transport materials on City streets must comply with State and City weight restrictions whenever they are operating on public streets. Overweight vehicles transporting materials on City streets, even for short distances, will be subject to citation by the Police Department unless a Transportation Permit is issued by the City Engineer after application by the Contractor. 18 CALL FOR INSPECTION The Contractor shall notify the City's Open Space Manager at (619) 397 -6006 two working days before commencing work, and two working days in advance for calls for inspection. Any work performed without benefit of inspection shall be subject to rejection and removal. 19 CHANGE IN QUANTITY OF WORK The City shall have the option of increasing or decreasing the unit quantity for all bid items in the proposal any amount without a change in contract unit prices. There will be no adjustment in compensation. This does not limit the City’s right to increase or decrease any quantities of work in the Contract as allowed by the Standard Specifications or other pertinent law. 20 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Per Section 6-9 of the 2006 Regional Supplement to the 2006 Green Book “Execution of the Contract shall constitute agreement by the Agency and Contractor that $250 per day for contracts with a value of $100,000 or less, and $500 per day for contracts with a value of over $100,000 are the minimum values of the costs and actual damages caused by failure of the Contractor to complete the work within the allott ed time. Such sums are liquidated damages and shall not be construed as a penalty, and such sums may be deducted from payments due the Contractor if such delay occurs.” 21 OBSERVANCE OF CITY HOLIDAYS The City of Chula Vista observes the following holidays and all offices including Public Works Department will be closed. Therefore, inspection services will not be provided. December Holidays December 25 New Year’s Day January 1 Martin Luther King Jr. Birthday 3rd Monday of January Cesar Chavez Day April 1 Memorial Day Last Monday of May Independence day July 4 Labor Day 1st Monday of September Veteran’s Day November 11 Thanksgiving Day and Day after Thanksgiving 4th Thursday and Friday of November As specified in Section 2-11 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (“Greenbook”), “Work shall be done only in the presence of the engineer. Any work done without proper inspection will be subject to rejection.” The Contractor must arrange all construction work to avoid performing work that requires inspection including traffic control during these days. Under Section 6-7.2, the above holidays are not considered working 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 310 of 617 33 City of Chula Vista Agreement No.: 2022-155. Consultant Name: Kingsborough Atlas Tree Surgery, Inc. Rev. 10/20/17 days. 22 COMMENCEMENT OF WORK The Contractor shall begin work no later than fifteen (15) days after the execution of the contract, or as directed by the Director of Public Works or designee. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 311 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 312 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 313 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 314 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 315 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 316 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 317 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 318 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 319 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 320 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 321 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 322 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 323 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 324 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 325 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 326 of 617 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 September 27, 2022 ITEM TITLE Parking Management: Approve the Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Report and Implement Recommendation Numbers 1, 9 and 11 of the Report Report Number: 22-0215 Location: Downtown Parking District, bounded by E Street to the north, Del Mar Avenue to the east, Garrett Avenue to the west, and H Street to the south Department: Development Services Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Adopt a resolution approving the Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Report dated August 2022 and implementing Recommendations Number 1 (Smart Meters), 9 (Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot – remove meters, extend to 4 hour parking limit) and 11 (increase Parking District boundary) of the Report. SUMMARY The Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan (the “Downtown PMP”) (Attachment 1) analyzes existing and projected future parking conditions within the Downtown Parking District (the “Parking District”) and provides a series of recommendations to optimize parking facilities and parking availability throughout the Parking District. The Downtown PMP report is being presented to the City Council for their consideration. Additionally, Staff is requesting that Recommendation Number 1 (Smart Meters), Recommendation 9 (Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot – remove meters, extend to 4 hour limit) and Recommendation 11 (increase Parking District boundary) of the Report be implemented with acceptance of the Downtown PMP. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 327 of 617 P a g e | 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the CEQA and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Downtown PMP was presented as an informational item to the Planning Commission on June 22, 2022. DISCUSSION Background The Parking District encompasses a roughly 120-acre area in downtown Chula Vista bounded by E Street to the north, Del Mar Avenue to the east, H Street to the south, and Garrett Avenue to the west. Third Avenue, a major commercial thoroughfare, runs in a north/south direction through the center of the Parking District. Businesses fronting Third Avenue include bars, restaurants, offices, commercial shops, and numerous other uses. Within the Parking District, Third Avenue is characterized by wide sidewalks, streetscape improvements (such as curb bulb-outs and mid-block crosswalks), numerous store fronts and bar/restaurant entrances and dining areas, and angled on-street parking, all of which facilitate pedestrian access and circulation along this roadway. Memorial Park is located on the west side of the Third Avenue, between G Street and F Street, and the Third Avenue corridor is the site of numerous community-wide special events, such as the Día de los Muertos Celebration and the Lemon Festival. Areas outside of the Parking District are mostly residential, with single family and multi-family residences throughout. Over the past four years, there have been several multi-family projects constructed within the Parking District. Some examples include 288 Center Street (43 units), 230 Church Avenue (29 units), and 252 Church Avenue (31 units). The Parking District includes 1,5281 public parking spaces, which are located on-street, in surface parking lots, and in one multi-level parking structure located at 340 F Street (the “Park Plaza Parking Structure”) (Attachment 2). Of the 1,528 total spaces, approximately 47 percent are available at no charge. Paid parking facilities include the following:  460 on-street metered spaces ($0.50 per hour)  15 off-street metered spaces at the Norman Park Senior Center ($0.50 per hour)  329 spaces in six surface lots, including 213 spaces in four lots that charge $0.25 per hour and the remaining 116 spaces in two lots charging $0.50 per hour. Hourly parking fees and parking time limitations within the surface lots (i.e., “pay lots”) are governed by Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC) Section 10.56.040. Parking time limitations in the pay lots range from two hours at the Norman Park Senior Center lot to up to 10 hours at pay lots 1, 3, 8, and 10. Parking fees and time limitations are enforced by the City between the hours of 9:00 am and 6:00 pm every day of the year except for Sundays and Holidays. Parking management activities, including revenue collection and citations, 1 Including 21 on-street metered spaces located to the north of the Parking District boundary, but which are managed by the City in the same manner as the other 475 meters. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 328 of 617 P a g e | 3 are performed by the City’s parking management operator (currently ACE Parking Management, Inc.). Where there are time limitations for on-street parking spaces, the limitations are communicated to motorists by signs and/or painted curbs. Previous Actions in the Parking District The Parking District was formed on July 9, 1963 by Ordinance 847 under the provisions of the Parking District Law of 1943 (California Streets and Highways Code 31500 – 36745), which allows construction of parking facilities and imposition of parking fees. The original Parking District boundaries encompassed Third Avenue between E Street and G Street and for the most part did not extend to the current eastern and western boundaries of Del Mar Avenue and Garrett Avenue. In 1980, the City adopted the In-Lieu Parking Fee program, which was codified in CVMC Section 19.62.040. As described in CVMC Section 19.62.040A, the off- street parking requirement for a nonresidential use within a parking district is considered to be met provided that the proposed project pays the required fees. The amount of the in-lieu fee is calculated using the equation in Resolution No. 1980-9943, which is based in part on the fair market value of the land needed to accommodate a single surface parking space. On December 15, 1983, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 461, Reciprocal Agreement of Easements and Declarations Establishing Restrictions and Covenants for the Town Center Focus Area Including Provisions for the Maintenance and Management of the Town Centre Parking Facility (Reciprocal Access Agreement). The Reciprocal Access Agreement was between the City and the owners of six commercial parcels located immediately adjacent to the Park Plaza Parking Structure. Existing uses on these parcels include commercial office, medical office, restaurant, retail, and fitness center. The adjacent One Park Apartment complex located to the south and west of the structure, was not a part of the Reciprocal Access Agreement. Under the Reciprocal Access Agreement, Centre City Associates, Limited Commercial (CCAL-C), then owner of three of the six adjacent parcels, assumed responsibility for overseeing maintenance and operation of the parking structure and were reimbursed by the other property owners. Construction of the parking structure was completed in February 1984. The Reciprocal Access Agreement for the Park Plaza Parking Structure had a term of 35 years and expired in December 2018. With this expiration, the City assumed financial responsibility for all maintenance and operational costs of the structure and issued a new contract to a professional parking management firm for routine maintenance activities. In 2007, the City completed a Downtown Parking Management Study. This study included an inventory of existing parking facilities, analysis of existing and future parking demand and turnover, and an evaluation of management practices. The 2007 study provided a series of recommendations related to parking management, policies, operations, marketing, enforcement, revenue control, facilities, alternate modes of travel, and parking requirements. Two of the more notable recommendations from this study that have been implemented are provided below:  Transfer Parking District management and enforcement functions from the City to a professional parking management firm (completed in September 2009 via Resolution No. 2016-216); and  Expansion of the Parking District boundaries to encompass the area bounded by E Street to the north, Del Mar Avenue to the east, H Street to the south, and Garrett Avenue to the west (accomplished in October 2009 via Ordinance No. 3139) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 329 of 617 P a g e | 4 The current Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Study is the successor to the 2007 study. Current Draft Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan The City circulated Request for Proposal P21-1718 for the current Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Study in April 2018 and after careful consideration of responses from four qualified consultants by an interdepartmental City review panel, the contract was awarded to Chen Ryan Associates via Resolution No. 2018-179 in August 2018. The objectives of the study are as follows:  Develop a more holistic understanding of public parking demand within the Parking District, accounting for how the demand varies spatially, temporally, and is specific to various destinations within the study area  Assess the City’s parking infrastructure and operational practices  Forecast near-term parking demand within the project study area based on historical growth patterns  Provide recommendations to efficiently utilize parking resources and manage future parking demand Data collection, including a parking inventory, occupancy counts, and a series of in-person and on-line surveys of Parking District users, was completed primarily during the summer and fall of 2018 and the results were documented in the Existing Conditions Report, which was completed in June 2019. Subsequent data collection and surveys were completed in November 2019 in connection with the Norman Park Senior Center. The parking data and surveys, conducted prior to statewide stay-at-home orders in connection with the COVID-19 global pandemic, remain valid for the purposes of the study and its recommendations. Since most businesses were closed during the stay-at-home orders, parking patterns were significantly disrupted; therefore, the data from 2018 and 2019 is more typical of normal operations within the Parking District. Parking demand analysis in the Downtown PMP showed that there is adequate parking supply for existing conditions. “Adequate” parking supply reflects no more than 85% occupancy within a 1/8-mile radius. The future parking demand was estimated based on a review of entitled projects in the Parking District and a projection of potential development. If redevelopment occurs as modeled in this analysis, approximately 200 spaces would need to be accommodated in the future. The recommendations in the Downtown PMP support this eventuality through the increase in parking fees and re-evaluation of the in-lieu fees that will contribute to the construction of a future parking structure. Given the expiration of the Reciprocal Access Easement for the Park Plaza Parking Structure, the City engaged a structural engineer in 2019 to evaluate the integrity of the parking structure and conducted additional research and analysis to estimate short-term and long-terms costs associated with operating the structure. Local businesses within the Parking District were severely impacted by the closure of indoor spaces brought on by public health restrictions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. To minimize economic impacts to businesses the City allowed businesses to provide Curb Cafés. Since this was a significant change within the Parking District during the timeframe of the study, the City conducted a series of surveys to track the 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 330 of 617 P a g e | 5 development and evolution of the Curb Café2 program along Third Avenue to document its effect on parking supply. The Curb Café program has a sunset date of July 31, 2023, and the Downtown PMP provides a series of recommendations if the City considers extending the sunset date. This analysis is included in Chapter 5 of the Downtown PMP. The City also commissioned research and analysis on Electric Vehicle (EV) use in Chula Vista, the South Bay, and San Diego County to project EV parking demand and to develop criteria for the siting of EV charging stations in the Downtown area (see Chapter 6 of the Downtown PMP). Community Engagement Starting in January 2019, City staff engaged with various community stakeholders within the Parking District throughout the study process, including the business and landowners adjacent to the Park Plaza Parking Structure. Staff held in-person and virtual meetings with updates to the various stakeholders as the study was being prepared and finalized. Staff met with the Norman Park Senior Center in 2020 to provide the preliminary recommendations for the parking lot adjacent to the center. Additionally, staff engaged with the Downtown Chula Vista Association, formerly known as the Third Avenue Village Association (“TAVA”), starting in 2019 and continuing through the most recent meetings, held on June 13, 2022 and July 6, 2022. Staff discussed the study approach early in the process with the Downtown Chula Vista Association Parking Subcommittee and at their Annual Meeting. Additionally, staff has presented the Downtown PMP to the Downtown Chula Vista Association’s Land Use Committee and Board of Directors. CONCLUSION Staff is requesting implementation of Recommendations Number 1, 9 and 11 with acceptance of the Downtown PMP. Recommendation Number 1 will allow all parking meters within the Parking District to be replaced with Smart Meters. This update of meters provides more convenience for users and easier enforcement. Additionally, to streamline the implementation of Recommendation Number 1, staff is also requesting that the City Manager, or designee, be authorized to enter into an agreement for the purchase or lease of Smart Meters. Recommendation Number 9 will allow the City to promptly remove the parking meters located at the Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot. These meters will be replaced by signage allowing for time parking up to 4 hours in this lot. Increasing the time allotment is more compatible with the programs offered at this location serving Seniors. Recommendation Number 11 allows the City to expand the boundary of the Parking District to include the metered spaces north of E Street, on Garrett Avenue and Landis Avenue, thereby containing all metered parking spaces within the Parking District. The additional metered space locations are reflected in Attachment 2 of this Report. The Downtown PMP contains the following recommendations: Recommendations Rationale Benefits 1. Convert All Parking District Meters (Except Norman Park) to Smart Meters Current parking meters do not accept more convenient forms of payment (credit card), thereby discouraging some users. Increases the utility of parking meter infrastructure, is more convenient for users and provides easier enforcement. 2 Outdoor dining areas within the public right-of-way for restaurants, bars, and breweries. The Curb Café structures temporarily replace existing metered spaces along Third Avenue in accordance with Ordinance No. 3508, which modified CVMC Section 12.28.30. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 331 of 617 P a g e | 6 Recommendations Rationale Benefits 2. Shift Parking Enforcement Time from 9 AM – 6 PM to 10 AM - 8 PM The current hours of parking enforcement do not coincide with the operating hours of most businesses along Third Avenue. Facilitates parking turnover between 6 PM and 8 PM and encourages use by patrons/shoppers. 3. Increase Parking User Fees: Meters: $0.75/hour Surface Lots: $0.50/hour Current parking user fees are insufficient to support credit card payments. Provides sufficient revenue to support credit card payments and optimizes parking turnover. 4. Update Wayfinding and Information Signage within the Parking District Parking information signage within Parking District is limited and inconsistent. Improved information about parking locations and availability for visiting motorists. 5. Revise Downtown In-Lieu Parking Fee Program Existing In-Lieu Parking Fee program does not meet the needs of expected costs of providing for future parking demand. Aligns In-Lieu Parking Fee program with costs of providing for future parking demand. 6. Facilitate Non-Vehicular Transportation Modes to the Parking District Limited end-of-trip facilities for bicycles and micro-mobility and limited pedestrian and transit stop amenities within Parking District. Facilitates usage of other forms of transportation to access destinations within the Parking District, reducing parking demand. 7. Park Plaza Parking Structure Improvements and Maintenance Institute parking fees: $0.50/hour The City is now responsible for Park Plaza parking structure maintenance and repairs. Provides funding for maintenance and operation and to make improvements to the largest parking facility within the Parking District. Facilitates parking turn-over. 8. Curbside Management Lack of short-term parking and commercial loading locations along Third Avenue. Accommodates a variety of users, each with varying peak demand times. Reduces double-parking along Third Avenue. 9. Modify Parking Restrictions at Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot Remove meters, increase time limit to 4 hours. Current time restrictions (two hours) are not compatible with Norman Park Senior Center activities. Facilitate access to and use of the center. 10. Demand Management Plans for Large Events Event attendees may not be aware of parking locations for large public events held in Downtown Chula Vista. Increases utilization of available parking spaces. Improves event attendee perception of parking within the Parking District. Reduces congestion from motorists searching for parking spaces. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 332 of 617 P a g e | 7 Recommendations Rationale Benefits 11. Expansion of Parking District Boundary to include all existing parking meters Approximately 21 parking meters are located to the north of the Parking District boundaries, but which are managed in the same manner as meters inside the Parking District. All meters are encompassed within the Parking District, facilitating management. 12. Establish funding mechanisms to accommodate future demand. Approximately 200 additional spaces will be needed in the future if redevelopment occurs as projected. Implementation of capital reserve fund and recommended changes to the in- lieu fee program will contribute to the construction of future parking facilities. 13. Monitor and make minor adjustments to the Curb Café program if it is extended beyond the July 31, 2023 sunset date. Review of implementation and impacts identified several measures to improve administration of the program. Continued monitoring is suggested to address effects on parking availability and to ensure Curb Cafés remain attractive and structurally sound. Monitoring will help avoid potential parking availability impacts and other recommendations will clarify operation of the program. 14. Provide additional Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCS) in public parking lots and monitor EVCS use. The City is committed to achieve its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission reduction goals and wants to support and encourage the use of electric vehicles. Additional charging stations are needed to accommodate expected increase in demand. Establishes EVCS siting criteria, technical specifications, and monitoring procedures to support future EVCS installation and operation. Next Steps Staff will implement Recommendations Number 1, 9 and 11 with acceptance of the Downtown PMP and work on sequencing the remaining recommendations contained in the Downtown PMP. Staff will return to City Council for consideration of follow-up actions, as appropriate. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found that Mayor Casillas Salas has real property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this action. This includes the proposed expanded boundary of the Parking District as well. Consequently, pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 2, sections 18700 and 18702.2(a)(7), this item presents a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.) for the above-identified member. Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT There are no current year fiscal impacts to the General Fund or Development Services Fund as a result of this action. All revenues for the district are held in a Parking Meter Fund that is separate from the General Fund. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 333 of 617 P a g e | 8 It is anticipated that implementing actions with any costs associated will be accommodated within the Parking Meter Fund. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT There are no ongoing fiscal impacts to the General Fund or Development Services Fund as a result of this action. All revenues for the district are held in a Parking Meter Fund that is separate from the General Fund. It is anticipated that implementing actions with any costs associated will be accommodated within the Parking Meter Fund. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Report, dated August 2022 Attachment 2 - Existing Parking Supply Diagram Staff Contacts: Scott Barker, Transportation Engineer, Development Services Laura C. Black, AICP, Interim Director, Development Services 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 334 of 617 RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN REPORT DATED AUGUST 2022 WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista established the Downtown Parking District (the “Parking District”) in 1963 and expanded the Parking District boundaries in 2009; and WHEREAS, the Parking District encompasses an approximately 120-acre area bounded by E Street to the north, Del Mar Avenue to the east, H Street to the south, and Garrett Avenue to the west; and WHEREAS, Third Avenue, a major commercial thoroughfare, runs through the center of the Parking District and provides various streetscape amenities that facilitate pedestrian circulation and access to fronting businesses, which include bars, restaurants, offices, commercial shops and others; and WHEREAS, there are 1,528 public parking spaces in the Parking District, consisting of on- street spaces, spaces in surface parking lots, and spaces in the Park Plaza Parking Structure; and WHEREAS, public parking facilities within the Parking District are managed by City personnel with the support of a parking management contractor; and WHEREAS, the City retained a consultant in August 2018 to prepare a Downtown Parking Management Plan (the “Downtown PMP”) report, which included parking data collection, public outreach, analysis of management practices, projection of future parking demand, and development of recommendations; and WHEREAS, the Downtown PMP report documents the analysis described in the preceding recital and makes 14 recommendations to optimize management of the Parking District; and WHEREAS, Staff will implement the following recommendations from the Downtown PMP as a result of this action: 1. Recommendation Number 1: Convert all Parking District meters to Smart Meters. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to enter into an agreement for the purchase or lease of Smart Meters. 2. Recommendation Number 9: Modify Parking Restrictions at Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot by removing the existing meters and increase the time limit to 4 hours. 3. Recommendation Number 11: Expansion of the Parking District Boundary to include all existing parking meters. There are approximately 21 existing parking meters located north of E Street on Garrett Avenue and Landis Avenue that will be added to the Parking District. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 335 of 617 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it hereby approves the Downtown Parking Management Plan report, dated August 2022. Presented by: Approved as to form by: Laura Black, AICP Glen R. Googins Interim Director of Development Services City Attorney 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 336 of 617 City of Chula Vista 276 4th Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 CR Associates 3900 Fifth Avenue, Suite 310 San Diego, CA 92103 PREPARED FOR PREPARED B Y FINAL DOWNTOWN CHULA VISTA PARKING DISTRICT PARKIN G MANAG EMEN T PLAN AUGUST 2022 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 337 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan ES- 1 Executive Summary The Downtown Parking Management Plan (Downtown PMP) analyzes existing and projected future parking conditions within the Downtown Chula Vista Parking District (Parking District) and provides a series of recommendations to optimize parking facilities and parking availability throughout the Parking District. The objectives of the study are as follows:  Develop a more holistic understanding of public parking demand within the Parking District, accounting for how the demand varies spatially, temporally, and is specific to various destinations within the study area.  Assess the City’s parking infrastructure and operational practices.  Forecast near-term parking demand within the project study area based on historical growth patterns.  Provide recommendations to efficiently utilize parking resources and manage future parking demand. Data collection, including a parking inventory, occupancy counts, and a series of in-person and on-line surveys of Parking District users, was completed primarily during the summer and fall of 2018 and the results were documented in the Existing Conditions Report, which was completed in June 2019. The parking data and surveys, conducted prior to statewide stay-at-home orders in connection with the COVID-19 global pandemic, remain valid for the purposes of the study and its recommendations. Since most businesses were closed during the stay-at-home orders, parking patterns were significantly disrupted; therefore, the data from 2018 is more typical of normal operations. The data collected showed that there is adequate parking supply for existing conditions. “Adequate” parking supply reflects no more than 85% occupancy within a 1/8-mile radius. Future parking demand was estimated based on a review of entitled projects in the Parking District and a projection of potential development. If redevelopment occurs as modeled in this analysis, demand for an additional 218 spaces would be generated. The recommendations in the Downtown PMP support this eventuality through increased parking fees, establishment of a capital reserve fund, and re-evaluation of in-lieu fees collected from new development to fund the construction of future parking facilities. The Downtown PMP included a series of surveys to track the development and evolution of the Curb Café1 program along Third Avenue to document its effect on parking supply. The Curb Café program has a sunset date of July 31, 2023, and the Downtown PMP provides a series of recommendations, if the City considers extending the sunset date. The Downtown PMP also includes research and analysis on Electric Vehicle (EV) use in Chula Vista, the South Bay, and San Diego County to project EV parking demand and to develop criteria for the siting of EV charging stations in the Downtown area. The Downtown PMP makes the following recommendations: 1 Outdoor dining areas within the public right-of-way for restaurants, bars, and breweries. The Curb Café structures temporarily replace existing metered spaces along Third Avenue in accordance with Ordinance No. 3508, which modified CVMC Section 12.28.30. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 338 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan ES- 2 Recommendation Rationale Benefits 1. Convert All Parking District Meters (Except Norman Park) to Smart Meters Current parking meters do not accept more convenient forms of payment (credit card), thereby discouraging some users. Increases the utility of parking meter infrastructure, is more convenient for users and provides easier enforcement. 2. Shift Parking Enforcement Time from 9 AM – 6 PM to 10AM - 8 PM The current hours of parking enforcement do not coincide with the operating hours of most businesses along Third Avenue. Facilitates parking turnover between 6 PM and 8 PM and encourages use by patrons/shoppers. 3. Re-assess Parking User Fees Meters: $0.75/hour Surface Lots: $0.50/hour Current parking user fees are insufficient to support credit card payments. Provides sufficient revenue to support credit card payments and optimizes parking turnover. 4. Update Wayfinding and Information Signage within the Parking District Parking information signage within Parking District is limited and inconsistent. Improved information about parking locations and availability for visiting motorists. 5. Revise Downtown In- Lieu Parking Fee Program Existing In-Lieu Parking Fee program does not meet the needs of expected costs of providing for future parking demand. Aligns In-Lieu Parking Fee program with costs of providing for future parking demand. 6. Facilitate Non- Vehicular Transportation Modes to the Parking District Limited end-of-trip facilities for bicycles and micro-mobility and limited pedestrian and transit stop amenities within Parking District Facilitates usage of other forms of transportation to access destinations within the Parking District, reducing parking demand. 7. Park Plaza Parking Structure Improvements and Maintenance Institute parking fees: $0.50/hour The City is now responsible for Park Plaza parking structure maintenance and repairs. Provides funding for maintenance and operation and to make improvements to the largest parking facility within the Parking District. Facilitates parking turn-over 8. Curbside Management Lack of short-term parking and commercial loading locations along Third Avenue Accommodates a variety of users, each with varying peak demand times. Reduces double-parking along Third Avenue 9. Modify Parking Restrictions at Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot Remove meters, increase time limit to 4 hours. Current time restrictions (two hours) are not compatible with Norman Park Senior Center activities. Facilitate access to and use of the center. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 339 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan ES- 3 Recommendation Rationale Benefits 10. Demand Management Plans for Large Events Event attendees may not be aware of parking locations for large public events held in Downtown Chula Vista. Increases utilization of available parking spaces. Improves event attendee perception of parking within the Parking District. Reduces congestion from motorists searching for parking spaces. 11. Expansion of Parking District Boundary to include all existing parking meters Approximately 21 parking meters are located to the north of the Parking District boundaries, but which are managed in the same manner as meters inside the Parking District. All meters are encompassed within the Parking District, facilitating management. 12. Establish funding mechanisms to accommodate future demand. Approximately 200 additional spaces will be needed in the future if redevelopment occurs as projected. Implementation of capital reserve fund and recommended changes to the in- lieu fee program will support future construction of parking facilities. 13. Monitor and make minor adjustments to the Curb Café program if it is extended beyond July 31, 2023 sunset date. Review of implementation and impacts identified several measures to improve administration of the program. Continued monitoring is suggested to address effects on parking availability and to ensure Curb Cafés remain attractive and structurally sound. Monitoring will help avoid potential parking availability impacts and other recommendations will clarify operation of the program. 14. Provide additional Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCS) in public parking lots and monitor EVCS use. The City is committed to achieve its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission reduction goals and wants to support and encourage the use of electric vehicles. Additional charging stations are needed to accommodate and expected increase in demand. Establishes EVCS siting criteria, technical specifications, and monitoring procedures to support future EVCS installation and operation. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 340 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page i Table of Contents Executive Summary ..............................................................................................................................ES-1  1.0 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1  Context ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 Location ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 Report Organization ................................................................................................................................... 3 2.0 Existing Parking Conditions ............................................................................................................. 4  Parking Supply ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Destination Based Parking Supply ............................................................................................................ 6 In-Lieu Parking Fee Program ..................................................................................................................... 8 Revenue Purposes ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Current Parking Management and Enforcement Practices ..................................................................... 9 Wayfinding and Parking Information Systems ....................................................................................... 10 Existing Parking Occupancy .................................................................................................................... 10 Park Plaza Parking Structure .................................................................................................................. 15 3.0 Community Outreach .................................................................................................................... 16  Outreach Methods ................................................................................................................................... 16 Public Outreach Documentation – Survey Results Summary ............................................................... 17 4.0 Future Parking Conditions ............................................................................................................ 19  Growth Projections ................................................................................................................................... 19 Accommodating Long Term Future Demand ......................................................................................... 20 5.0 Curb Cafés and Parking Supply .................................................................................................... 23  Parameters for Curb Cafés and Sidewalk Cafés .................................................................................... 23 Field Observations and Parking Impacts ................................................................................................ 24 Effect on Parking Supply ......................................................................................................................... 25 Curb Café Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 32 6.0 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations ............................................................................................... 34  Siting Criteria and Policy Recommendations ......................................................................................... 34 7.0 Parking Management Plan Recommendations ........................................................................... 38  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 341 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page ii Figures Figure 1.1 - Project Study Area ................................................................................................................................... 2  Figure 2.1 - Existing Public Parking Supply ................................................................................................................ 5  Figure 2.2 - Estimated Supply of Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations .............................................................. 7  Figure 2.3 - Weekday Estimated Parking Occupancy within 1/8th Mile of Destinations – Peak Period of Time of Day ............................................................................................................................................. 11  Figure 2.4 - Weekend Estimated Parking Occupancy within 1/8th Mile of Destinations – Peak Period of Time of Day ............................................................................................................................................. 14  Figure 4.1 - Near-Term Parking Occupancy by Block – 11 AM to 1 PM Weekday Average ................................... 21  Figure 4.2 - Near-Term Parking Occupancy by Block – 9 PM to 11 PM Weekday Average .................................. 22  Figure 5.1 - Public Parking Supply Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés ................................................... 26  Figure 5.2 - Estimated Supply of Parking within 1/8th Mile of Destinations Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés .............................................................................................................................................. 28  Figure 5.3 - Parking Occupancy by Block 11 AM to 1 PM Weekday Average (Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés) ......................................................................................................................................... 29  Figure 5.4 - Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8th Mile of Destinations 11 AM – 1 PM Weekday Average (Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés ......................................................... 30  Figure 5.5 - Parking Occupancy by Block 9 PM to 11 PM Weekday Average (Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés) ......................................................................................................................................... 31  Figure 5.6 - Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8th Mile of Destinations 9 PM – 11PM Weekday Average (Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés) ........................................................ 33  Figure 6.1 - SANDAG EV Map .................................................................................................................................... 36  Figure 6.2 - Surface Lots with Recommended EVCS Installation ........................................................................... 37  Figure 7.1 - Parking District Boundary Expansion Recommendations ................................................................... 48  Figure 7.2 - New Parking District Boundary ............................................................................................................. 49  Tables Table 2.1 - Public Parking by Cost and Time Restriction ........................................................................................... 4  Table 2.2 - Summary of Off-Street Public Parking Facilities ...................................................................................... 8  Table 3.1 - Summary of Public Outreach.................................................................................................................. 17  Table 4.1 - Future Parking Generation and Assignment ......................................................................................... 19  Table 5.1 - Summary of Curb Café Parking Occupancy ........................................................................................... 25  Table 5.2 - Summary of Maximum Parking Spaces Lost per Current Program ..................................................... 27  Table 6.1 - Recommended ECVSs ............................................................................................................................ 35  Table 7.1 - Recommendation Summary ................................................................................................................... 52  Appendices Appendix A - Downtown Chula Vista Existing Conditions Report  Appendix B - On-Site Parking Capacity and Future Parking Generation  Appendix C - Electric Vehicle Parking Analysis Memo  Appendix D - Parking District Pro-Forma  Appendix E - In-Lieu Fee Program Pro-Forma  Appendix F - Third Avenue Village Signage Plan  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 342 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 1 1.0 Introduction Context This study analyzes existing and projected future parking conditions within the Downtown Chula Vista Parking District (Parking District) and provides recommendations to manage and accommodate parking demand within the Parking District. The analysis of near-term parking demand considers historical development activity, the Parking District’s current parking demand patterns, opportunities for new parking supply and/or more efficient supply management, and the effect of emerging mobility options. This study supersedes the 2007 parking management study. The 2007 study recommended expansion of the Parking District, which was implemented in 2009 by Ordinance 3139. The primary objective of this study is to develop strategies to ensure abundant existing and future access to Downtown Chula Vista for all of the various user groups, including visitors, residents, businesses, and commuters. This study, which provides a road map intended to help the City achieve this goal, involved the following:  Developing a more holistic understanding of public parking demand within the Parking District, accounting for how the demand varies spatially, temporally, and is specific to various destinations within the study area.  Assessing the City’s parking infrastructure and operational practices.  Forecasting near-term parking demand within the project study area based on historical growth patterns.   Providing recommendations to efficiently utilize parking resources and manage future parking demand.  During this study, input was solicited from the visitors to the Parking District, the business community, and City staff. This was supplemented by additional information obtained from a careful review of the previous study. These recommendations are documented in this report and were also considered in the development of the proposed recommendations. Location The City of Chula Vista (City) is in southern San Diego County and is the second largest city in the County. The City occupies approximately 50 square miles, extending from San Diego Bay in the west, to the foothills of the Jamul and San Ysidro Mountains in the east. Figure 1.1 displays the present Parking District boundary. Downtown Chula Vista is in the northwest quadrant of the City, and concentrated around Third Avenue, where between E Street and H Street the corridor has retained much of its traditional “main street” character. The Parking District, plus the surrounding few blocks which comprise the remainder of the project study area, contain all the City operated parking meters and other time-limited parking serving Downtown Chula Vista. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 343 of 617 Four th AveGlove r AveGar re t t AveLandi s AveThi rd AveChur ch AveDel Ma r AveTwin Oak s Ave Davidson St E St F St Center St Park Wy G St Vance St Roosevelt St H St Alvarado St Madrona St Cypress St Chur ch AveDel Ma r C tSecond Ave D St Glove r Ave Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Figure 1-1Project Study Area ProjectLocation City ofChula Vista Off-Street Public Parking Current Parking District ParkPlazaParkingStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 344 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 3 Report Organization Following the introductory chapter, this study is organized into the following chapters: Chapter 2 – Existing Parking Conditions documents existing parking conditions within the study area. The chapter inventories the Parking District’s parking infrastructure, reports on parking occupancy and turnover, (as collected in August and September of 2018), considers other forms of mobility present within the study area, and examines the City’s current In-Lieu Parking Fee program. Chapter 3 – Community Outreach: summarizes the input received from all stakeholder engagement efforts undertaken during the study, which included the administration of survey questionnaires to the public and business community, presence at community events, and facilitation of stakeholder working group meetings with the Downtown Chula Vista Association (DCVA) (formerly known as the Third Avenue Village Association (TAVA)), the public benefit corporation representing businesses in Downtown Chula Vista. Chapter 4 – Future Conditions: forecasts future parking conditions based on anticipated redevelopment, associated additional demand, and changes in parking supply. Chapter 5 – Curb Cafés and Parking Supply: analyzes the impacts that Curb Cafés have on parking occupancy and provides recommendations related to the Parking District. Chapter 6 – Electric Vehicle Charging Stations: analyzes the Parking District’s current Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCS) coverage and provides recommendations related to the EVCS standards for the Parking District. Chapter 7 – Parking Management Program: synthesizes the findings from the preceding chapters to develop a set of recommendations to manage future parking demand within the Parking District. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 345 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 4 2.0 Existing Parking Conditions This chapter provides a high-level summary of the project study area’s supply of public on-street and off-street parking, its parking occupancy (examined in the August and September of 2018, and November 20192) and examines the City’s parking management practices. Appendix A, the Downtown Chula Vista Existing Conditions Report, completed in June of 2019, examines these topics in much greater detail. Parking demand declined severely starting in March 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2018/2019 data is used in this report to better approximate typical conditions. For discussion relating to the City of Chula Vista’s parking-related measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, refer to Chapter 5. Parking Supply The Downtown Parking District currently maintains 1,528 public parking spaces both on-street and within eight off-street facilities (I.e., surface lots and the Park Plaza Parking Structure). Table 2.1 summarizes the public parking supply of the Parking District by cost and time restriction. Approximately 47% of the Parking District’s supply is free. All but 20 spaces within the Parking District have either a cost, a time restriction, or both. Cost and time restrictions to parking spaces are enforced between 9 AM and 6 PM on all days of the week, excepting Sundays and Holidays. Table 2.1 - Public Parking by Cost and Time Restriction Cost and Time Restriction Parking District Supply % of Total Free Parking – Unlimited Time 20 1.3% Free Parking – Time Limited 704 46.1% Paid Parking – Time Limited 804 52.6% Total 1,528 100% Source: CR Associates (2022) The study area for this document also includes on-street parking spaces located outside of the Parking District boundaries. Figure 2.1 is a map of the project study area that displays the total public parking supply along each block segment and within the eight off-street public parking facilities. Spaces located outside the Parking District include 21 meters, 364 free spaces without time limits, and 67 free, time-limited spaces. The 21 meters are adjacent to the northern Parking District boundary, and the City maintains and operates them in the same manner as those inside the Parking District boundaries. The 670 spaces shown at the Park Plaza Parking Structure includes 637 spaces that are provided within the footprint of the structure plus 23 that are provided in adjacent surface parking areas.3 2 November 2019 surveys covered the Norman Park Senior Center only. 3 An additional 14 Accessible Parking Spaces are provided within the Park Plaza Parking Structure and 9 Accessible Parking Spaces are provided in the adjacent surface parking area. These Accessible Parking Spaces are not included in the 670 parking spaces. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 346 of 617 72 7 9 2 9 1 2 3 5 1 6 3 6 3 025 63 2 3 521 1 154 201337156 2 1 2 1 6 5 2 9 1 6 211 97 6 7 9 3416371 5 3 8 3 3 1 3 5 43 4058 361421 20 3 3 4 2 7 418 292 4 11 10 5 8 17191 2 1 2 15 1 9 18 311 7 3 1 9 2 1 3 4 93 4 8 3 6 14 7 1617153 1 7 3 5 3 5 9 1 6 4 19Four th AveGlove r AveGar re t t AveLandi s AveThi rd AveChur ch AveDel Ma r AveTwin Oak s Ave Davidson St E St F St Center St Park Wy G St Vance St Roosevelt St H St Alvarado St Madrona St Cypress St Chur ch AveDel Ma r C tChur ch AveSecond Ave D St Glove r Ave Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Figure 2-1Existing Public Parking Supply ParkPlazaParkingStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 PayLot1 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 Public Off-Street Parking Supply Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Pay Lot 1 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 3 Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Norman Park Senior Center Lot 14 74 118 670 42 53 28 15 Paid Off-Street Public Parking Free Off-Street Public Parking Parking Supply# Metered On-Street Parking Location Predominantly MeteredOn-Street Parking Block Predominantly FreeOn-Street Parking Block Parking District 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 347 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 6 Destination Based Parking Supply Within urban settings such as the Third Avenue Village, reliance on on-street parking and numerous small-supply parking lots scattered in various locations is typical. When an area’s collective parking supply is composed of fragmented and scattered sources, it can be difficult to conceptualize how many parking spaces are within a close walking distance of specific destinations. To overcome that limitation, an analysis approach was developed for this report which summarizes the parking supply, data collection and future parking demand estimates to each parcel within a 1/8-mile distance. A 1/8- mile (660 feet) approximates one long-sided block length or two short-sided block lengths in the typical street grid system in the northwest quadrant of Chula Vista. That distance also makes for a good approximation of the walking distance from the most remote parking spaces at a typical major shopping center with a large, consolidated parking lot. Figure 2.2 summarizes paid and free parking supply to within 1/8-mile of every parcel within the study area. Parking user fees within the Parking District are regulated by Chula Vista Municipal Code (CMVC) Section 10.56.020. CVMC Section 10.56.020 establishes parking user fees at the following rates:  Thirty (30) Minute Meters: A $0.25 deposit up to the maximum time limit established for the zone in which the meter is located; or  Two, Three, and Four-Hour Meters: A $0.25 deposit for each 30-minute interval or a $0.50 deposit for each one-hour interval up to the maximum legal time limit established for the zone in which the meter is located; or  Ten (10) Hour Meters: A $0.25 deposit for each one-hour period up to the maximum legal time limit established for the zone in which the meter is located. The locations of parking meter zones and paid parking lots (as well as their respective maximum time limits) are listed within Chapter 13 of the City’s Master Fee Schedule. Parking citation regulations, including initial citation amount and late payment penalties, are stated in both CVMC Chapter 10.62 and Chapter 13 of the Master Fee Schedule. Expired meter citations are $25 if paid within 30 days, and $50 if not paid within 30 days. Parking revenue collection and enforcement services for the Parking District are provided by a professional parking management firm, Table 2.2 details the cost, and time restrictions of the eight off-street public parking facilities within the Parking District. The off-street parking facilities, with their time restrictions in excess of two hours, are intended to accommodate lower turnover vehicular trips within the Parking District. Except for the Park Plaza Parking Structure, all the lots are paid parking during enforcement hours. Additionally, the City also issues quarterly parking permits for $124.50, which allow the permit holders to park within the Parking District’s off-street public parking lots for an unlimited amount of time. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 348 of 617 Paid Parking SupplyFigure 2-2Estimated Supply of Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management PlanFree Parking SupplyThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StPay Lot 3Pay Lot 2PayLot1 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2PayLot1 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 > 300 201 - 300 101 - 200 51 - 7576 - 100 26 - 50 1 - 25 0 Off-Street Parking Parking District Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 349 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 8 Table 2.2 - Summary of Off-Street Public Parking Facilities Off-Street Facility Time Restriction Cost Supply Park Plaza Parking Structure 3 Hours Free 670 Pay Lot 1 10 Hours $0.25/hour 14 Pay Lot 2 4 Hours $0.50/hour 74 Pay Lot 3 10 Hours $0.25/hour 118 Pay Lot 5 4 Hours $0.50/hour 42 Pay Lot 8 10 Hours $0.25/hour 53 Pay Lot 10 10 Hours $0.25/hour 28 Norman Park Senior Center Lot 2 Hours $0.50/hour 15 Total 1,014 Source: CR Associates (2022) In-Lieu Parking Fee Program The City’s In-Lieu Parking Fee program was established in 1980. The In-Lieu Parking Fee program allows for development projects within the Parking District to accommodate a portion (up to 50%) of their minimum parking requirements off-site. The regulations governing the In-Lieu Parking Fee program are codified within CVMC Section 19.62.040. Section 19.62.040A states that: “For any new nonresidential use, structure or building, required off-street parking which, due to the size or location of the parcel, cannot be provided on the premises may be provided on other property not more than 200 feet distant by publicly available pedestrian access from said use, structure or building, subject to an off-site shared parking agreement with the City as to permanent reservation of said space and access thereto; or if the proposed nonresidential use lies within the boundary of a parking district, off-street parking requirements shall be considered to be met; provided, that any developer of a new commercial building within a parking district, or a developer of a commercial addition to an existing building therein, shall pay the required fee(s).” The method for calculating the In-Lieu Parking Fee is provided in Resolution 1980-9943, which is based in part on the fair market value of the land needed to accommodate each parking space. The City’s Urban Core Specific Plan dictates eligibility by establishing which zones and uses are able to use the program. All In-Lieu Parking Fees collected are set aside for construction of future parking facilities. It should be noted that the current In-Lieu Fee is calculated based on the fair market value of the land and does not include the anticipated costs of designing and constructing additional parking facilities. The City should consider revising its In-Lieu Parking Fee program to better reflect the actual cost of providing new parking facilities. Appendix E provides data on the cost of constructing a parking structure in 2019 dollars. This analysis demonstrates one potential methodology for calculating an in- lieu fee. Regardless of the methodology used, it is recommended that the In-Lieu Parking Fee be better aligned with the current cost of providing additional parking. Chapter 4 provides an analysis of future demand. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 350 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 9 Revenue Purposes Per CVMC Section 10.56.260, all revenue collected from parking meters in the City are to be deposited into a special fund and earmarked for any or all of the following purposes:  For the purchasing, leasing, installing, repairing, maintaining, operating, removing, regulating and policing of parking meters in this City and for the payment of any and all expenses relating or incidental thereto.  For the purchasing, leasing, acquiring, improving, operating and maintaining of off-street parking facilities in the City.  For the installation and maintenance of traffic control devices and signals.  For the painting and marking of streets and curbs required for the direction of traffic and parking of motor vehicles.  For the proper regulation, control and inspection of parking and traffic upon the public streets.  To be pledged as security for the payment of principal and interest on off-street parking revenue bonds issued by the City or any parking district organized within the City (Ordinance 2670 and Ordinance 973). City operated parking meters are located only within (and immediately adjacent to) the Parking District boundaries. The City has established the Parking Meter Fund to account for the associated revenues and expenditures. In-Lieu Parking Fees are deposited into a separate fund (the Town Center I Parking Fund). Use of the In-Lieu funds is restricted to the purchase or development of off-street parking sites which will generally and directly benefit the Parking District. Current Parking Management and Enforcement Practices The City has retained a professional parking management firm for parking management and enforcement services for Downtown Chula Vista since 2009. Under their original agreement4 with the City, the contractor’s responsibilities included parking enforcement, parking revenue collection, and maintenance of parking meter equipment. Parking Enforcement Under its services agreement, the contractor is responsible for staffing enforcement patrol between 9 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday, excluding Holidays. The Downtown Chula Vista area is overseen by an operations manager, whose responsibilities include proactively maintaining and repairing parking revenue equipment. The contractor also maintains an office at 231 3rd Avenue, Suite F, in Downtown Chula Vista for the purposes of accepting in-person parking citation payments and appeals, as well as handling public inquiries regarding the Parking District. 4 In March 2020, parking management contractor was awarded a contract for maintenance of the Park Plaza Parking Structure. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 351 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 10 Revenue Collection The parking contractor collects the revenue in the field, tracks the revenue and makes deposits into an account for the City of Chula Vista three times per week. Credit card transactions at the surface parking lot multi-space machines are deposited directly into the City’s account. Fees collected from citations and permits sales are remitted monthly to the City. Wayfinding and Parking Information Systems The existing parking wayfinding signage within Downtown Chula Vista is primarily designed to meet the standards of the Third Avenue Village Signage Design Intent Drawings (Third Avenue Village Signage Plan) (Appendix F), which was a component of the Third Avenue Streetscape Master Plan improvement projects implemented in 2021. Existing and future signage should reflect the rebranding of the former TAVA to DCVA. The signs were designed to guide patrons to nearby businesses and attractions. Field review indicates that all signs were designed to the standard of the plan except for the parking guiding sign, guiding signage at the Park Plaza Parking Structure, and the pedestrian paseo5 guiding sign throughout the Parking District. Additional signage is needed to guide the public to under-utilized parking lots. Existing Parking Occupancy Data Collection Methodology Average parking occupancy for a typical weekday and weekend day was calculated within the study area, plus an additional perimeter of one block outside of the study area through data collection in the field. Parking occupancy was studied and documented for five different daily time intervals, representing morning, lunch, afternoon, dinner, and evening periods. Data was collected for those periods on four weekday dates and four weekend dates occurring between August 29th and September 16th, 2018. The data collection is consistent with usage prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and is considered valid. The summaries presented in this chapter consist of averages, by period, for the four weekday or weekend dates in which data collection took place. Teams of two data collectors counted parked vehicles on every block and public parking lot within the study area, plus an additional perimeter of one block outside of the study area, with scheduled departures taking place at 7 AM (morning), 11 AM (lunch), 3 PM (afternoon), 6 PM (dinner), and 9 PM (evening). Figure 2.3 summarizes weekday peak parking occupancy conditions to within 1/8-mile of destinations within the project study area by time of day (upper panel) and the percent occupancy corresponding to that destination’s peak hour (lower panel). A more detailed discussion of parking occupancy and turnover, including exhibits showing parking occupancy by block and lot for every collection period is provided in the Existing Conditions Report (Appendix A). 5 Paseos are pedestrian spaces (walkways) that provide linkages between public parking, businesses, and the street environment. Downtown Chula Vista Wayfinding Signage 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 352 of 617 Weekday Peak Period (Time of Day)Figure 2-3Weekday Estimated Parking Occupancy within 1/8 Mile of Destinations -Peak Period by Time of Day Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management PlanWeekday Peak Period OccupancyThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson St9PM - 11PM6PM - 8PM3PM - 5PM11AM - 1PM7AM - 9AM Multiple Periods >85% OccupancyPeak:Peak > 85% Occupancy Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 50% and <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Off-Street ParkingOccupancy During Peak:Parking District Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 353 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 12 The following conclusions and observations were made based on the analysis of weekday parking occupancy under existing conditions:  Parking utilization of 85% of total capacity is considered to be a good target threshold for balancing maximum usage and excess capacity6.  Parking occupancy between E Street and G Street (near most commercial and retail destinations along Third Avenue) was highest during the mid-day data collection periods (between 11 AM and 5 PM). Parking occupancy typically peaks in the residential portions of the study area (outside of the Parking District boundary and south of Madrona Street) after 6 PM.  Parking occupancy peaks at greater than 85% in many portions of the Parking District south of Madrona Street, an area which is primarily residential. This is explained by the lower quantity supply of off-street public parking within this area and by residential parking behavior, which is generally lower turnover than commercial.  Peak off-street parking occupancy does not exceed 85% of the parking capacity at any location except for Pay Lot 5, which reaches full capacity during the 6 PM period. This is explained by the lot’s proximity to several restaurants, and its centrality between the Third Avenue Village and the residential areas south of Madrona Street, which begins to peak at this time.  Parking occupancy at off-street parking facilities decreases substantially after 6 PM, when enforcement of on-street metered parking ends.  There are no dedicated short-term parking and commercial loading locations along Third Avenue within the study area. Currently, short-term and commercial loading areas within the Parking District are along side streets to Third Avenue. These locations are less convenient for short-term users who access businesses along Third Avenue. It was noted during field observations of existing conditions that there were regular instances of delivery vehicles double-parking along Third Avenue when making deliveries, resulting in blockage of through traffic and parking areas. Norman Park Senior Center  Existing parking within the Norman Park Senior Center parking lot does not exceed 85% utilization. However, community outreach efforts (documented in Chapter 3) indicated that available parking supply is a high priority for senior center visitors. Outreach findings also revealed that visitors tend to avoid parking at the parking lots behind the senior center due to concerns about parking enforcement, since most senior center activities last over two hours, longer than the maximum period allowed in most of the surrounding parking. Special Events  Field observations were conducted at the following large community events: o Villains in the Village (Saturday, October 20, 2018). o Starlight Parade (Saturday, December 1, 2018). o Lemon Festival (Sunday, August 4, 2019). 6 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers – Parking Occupancy Data Collection: https://www.ite.org/technical- resources/topics/trip-and-parking-generation/parking-occupancy-data-collection/ Metropolitan Area Planning Council – How to do a Parking Study: https://www.mapc.org/resource-library/how-to-do-a- parking-study/ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 354 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 13 Observations suggested a general lack of awareness of where to find off-street public parking. It was observed that much of the public either parked on-street at a further distance from the events or avoided closer off-street parking locations owing to the perception of higher cost. Drone observations show that paid public lots are generally at less than 50% occupancy, whereas on-street (non-metered) parking occupancy is greater than 85%. Figure 2.4 summarizes weekend peak parking occupancy conditions to within 1/8-mile of destinations within the project study area by time of day (upper panel) and the percent occupancy corresponding to that destination’s peak hour (lower panel). The following conclusions were made based on the analysis of weekend parking occupancy under existing conditions:  Parking occupancy between E Street and G Street generally does not exceed 70% during its peak periods. West of Third Avenue, in closer proximity to the Park Plaza Parking Structure, peak occupancy does not typically exceed 50%.  Consistent with weekday observations, peak off-street parking occupancy does not exceed 85% of the parking capacity at any location except for Pay Lot 5, which reaches full capacity during the 6 PM period. As discussed above, this lot is centrally located within the Parking District, which likely explains its high level of occupancy.  Similar to weekday observations, parking occupancy peaks are greater than 85% in many portions of the Parking District south of Madrona Street, which is primarily residential. This is explained by the lower quantity supply of parking within this area; and by residential parking behavior, which is generally lower turnover than commercial. Some additional conclusions which were observed to be consistent during both weekday and weekend include:  Commercial land use (mostly between E Street and G Street) and residential land use (primarily south of Madrona Street and away from Third Avenue) peak time periods are complimentary. Peaks for commercial land uses tend to occur during the mid-day when most retail and service businesses are operating. Where dining and drinking establishments are located, commercial parking demand extends into the early evening hours. Parking peak demand for residential land uses tends to occur when typical business hours conclude in the early evening hours and continue overnight.  Supply of available parking between E Street and G Street (near most businesses) was generally observed to be adequate (below 85%) during both weekday and weekend peak periods. However, there are a few parcels clustered around G Street which straddle the study area’s commercial and residential land uses and experience the overlap between the typical peaks of the two land uses and therefore have less available parking. The spatial pattern of demand outside of the Parking District south of Madrona Street is almost identical on both weekdays and weekends: Third Avenue between G Street and Alvarado Street has an occupancy peak between 50% and 70% (forming a yellow core), followed by a concentric (orange) ring of 70% to 85% peak occupancy along Alvarado Street, on the adjacent to Third Avenue portions of Park Way, G Street, and Roosevelt Street, while the surrounding outer portions of the study area have peak occupancy of 85% or greater. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 355 of 617 Weekend Peak Period (Time of Day)Figure 2-4Weekend Estimated Parking Occupancy within 1/8 Mile of Destinations -Peak Period by Time of Day Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management PlanWeekend Peak Period OccupancyThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson St9PM - 11PM6PM - 8PM3PM - 5PM11AM - 1PM7AM - 9AM Multiple Periods >85% OccupancyPeak:Peak > 85% Occupancy Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 50% and <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Parking DistrictOff-Street ParkingOccupancy During Peak: Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 356 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 15 Park Plaza Parking Structure The Park Plaza Parking Structure is a multi-level public parking facility located near the southwestern corner of Third Avenue and F Street. According to the recorded Notice of Completion for the project, construction of the structure was completed in February 1984. The Park Plaza Parking Structure provides 637 spaces within the footprint of the structure plus 33 in adjacent surface parking areas. In addition to the 670 unmarked parking stalls, there are a total of 23 Accessible parking spaces in the structure and adjacent areas. This facility is available for up to three hours of free public parking as described in CVMC Section 10.56.040 and as noted by signs displayed at the parking structure. Overnight parking is prohibited at the structure. On December 15, 1983, the Chula Vista City Council adopted Resolution No. 461, Reciprocal Agreement of Easements and Declarations Establishing Restrictions and Covenants for the Town Center Focus Area Including Provisions for the Maintenance and Management of the Town Centre Parking Facility (Reciprocal Access Agreement). The Reciprocal Access Agreement was between the City and the owners of six commercial parcels located immediately adjacent to the Park Plaza Parking Structure at the southwestern corner of Third Avenue/F Street. Existing uses on these parcels include commercial office, medical office, restaurant, retail, and fitness center. (The One Park Apartments, located to south and west of the structure, was not a part of the Reciprocal Access Agreement.) Under the Reciprocal Access Agreement, Centre City Associates, Limited Commercial (CCAL-C), then owner of three of the six adjacent parcels, assumed responsibility for maintenance and operation of the parking structure. The Reciprocal Access Agreement had a term of 35 years and expired in December 2018. The City has assumed financial responsibility for all maintenance and operation of the structure and issued a new contract with a parking management contractor for routine maintenance activities. The City engaged a structural engineer in 2019 to evaluate the structural integrity of the parking structure. It was determined to have no major structural concerns, and the engineer recommended repairs to relatively minor instances of cracking and spalling. Aerial View of the Park Plaza Parking Structure, facing northwest 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 357 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 16 3.0 Community Outreach Various stakeholder groups were engaged during the completion of this study, including residents, business owners, visitors and senior citizens. Outreach efforts utilized two main approaches: through the collection of opinion surveys (conducted through mail, in person, and online) and by presentations to stakeholder groups. Outreach Methods Surveys were promoted through a variety of strategies, including social media, a project website, email blasts, meetings and through targeted “pop-up” outreach at community events. The target respondents to the surveys were visitors of the Parking District, business owners, and the patrons of Norman Park Senior Center. Each group received questionnaires that were tailored to their experiences. A total of 42 surveys were received from visitors to the Parking District, 52 surveys from business owners and 68 were collected from patrons of Norman Park Senior Center. Presentations were conducted on multiple occasions to solicit feedback to constituent groups. A list of presentations and outreach events is provided in Table 3.1. A stakeholder working group was formed during the completion of this study, which comprised members of the DCVA Parking Subcommittee. City staff and consultants engaged with the subcommittee on two occasions, once during the analysis of existing conditions and again to solicit feedback on the development of parking management recommendations. Outreach was paused in March 2020 following stay-at-home orders in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. To bolster the study’s engagement with the senior community of Downtown Chula Vista, a presentation was made at the Norman Park Senior Center prior to a meeting of the City’s Commission on Aging on March 11, 2020, to solicit comments on the parking management recommendations. Feedback obtained from each of the presentations was taken into consideration in the preparation of the parking management recommendations. A summary of the outreach and sample surveys are provided in Appendix A as a part of the Existing Condition Report. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 358 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 17 Table 3.1 - Summary of Public Outreach Date Location Target Type October 20, 2018 Third Avenue (Villains In The Village) Visitors to Third Avenue Intercept Surveys January 9, 2019 Civic Center DCVA Ad-Hoc Parking Committee Project approach presentation & gather DCVA feedback on existing concerns October 2018 – December 2018 Digital Survey via DCVA email list Businesses within the Parking District Digital Survey to understand existing parking concern from a business perspective February 21, 2019 DCVA Annual Meeting DCVA Members Presentation of project approach, existing condition findings, and conduct additional public surveys March 13, 2020 Civic Center DCVA Ad-Hoc Parking Committee Presentation of preliminary recommendations January 2020 – March 2020 Norman Park Senior Center Senior Center Patrons Paper and digital surveys of the Norman Park Senior Center. Paper surveys were left at the front desk and collected weekly. March 11, 2020 Norman Park Senior Center Commission on Aging & Friends of the Norman Park Senior Center Presentation of preliminary recommendations and gather feedback specific to the Senior Center Source: CR Associates (2022) Public Outreach Documentation – Survey Results Summary Three groups were targeted for survey outreach: visitors to the Third Avenue Village, Third Avenue Village area business owners and patrons of the Norman Park Senior Center. The following provides a summary of the survey findings for each of the three groups. A more detailed analysis can be found in the Existing Conditions Report (Appendix A). Profile of Visitor Survey Responses Over half of the visitors surveyed indicated they visit the Third Avenue Village at least once a week. When asked of which destinations in the Third Avenue Village they were going to, nearly three-quarters of the visitors responded that they were going to restaurants, bars or cafes. 13% of respondents stated were going to or from work. Despite much of the Parking District’s supply being time restricted (two hours on street and three hours in the Park Plaza Parking Structure), 60% of the visitors reported that their typical visits to the Third Avenue Village are longer than two hours. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 359 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 18 A combined two-thirds of respondents answered always or usually find parking within one or two blocks of their destination, while a combined 34% indicated they have some level of difficulty finding parking close to their destination. Nearly half (49%) of the respondents claimed they always avoid parking in locations which cost money to park, while another 20% stated they usually avoid parking in those locations. Of the respondents who reported to always avoid parking in locations which cost money, a combined 58% stated they still are always (21%) or usually (37%) able to find parking within one or two blocks of their destination. Over half the respondents (54%) have been discouraged on a previous occasion to visit the Third Avenue Village because of parking difficulties. A third of those surveyed were not aware of the free Park Plaza Parking Structure, while just over a quarter of those surveyed (27%) did not perceive the location of the parking structure as conveniently situated to most of their usual destinations. When asked if more convenient forms of payment (such as credit cards) would make respondents more willing to use the metered parking along Third Avenue, 64% respondents indicated yes. 42% of respondents stated they would not walk longer distances than two blocks (approximately 1/8 mile) under any circumstances, though half of those indicated they might reconsider if walking conditions were improved. The most cited conditions which deterred walkers included inadequate lighting, security concerns related to the presence of a homeless population, ADA-accessibility and lack of shade. Profile of Business Owner Survey Responses Three-quarters of the business owners surveyed indicated their businesses do not have their own supply of off-street parking for their customers use. Almost half of the business owners surveyed indicate they instruct their staff to park remotely in order to preserve parking spaces near their business for customers. While 60% of the visitors indicate they spend more than two hours in the Parking District, 87% of business owners indicates that their patrons spend less than 2 hours in their business. This is typical for a downtown area, where patrons may park once and frequent multiple business during their visit. As such, parking lots and parking structures are typically better at accommodating this type of parking demand versus on-street parking which has a two-hour parking limit. Half of the business owners surveyed (50%) were unsatisfied with the quantity of available parking close to their business. Very few of the responding business owners (13%) regarded the location of the Park Plaza Parking Structure as a convenient location for their customers to park. Most business owners (70%) believed the meters along Third Avenue would receive better use from visitors to the Third Avenue Village if they accepted more convenient forms of payment, such as credit cards. Profile of Senior Citizen Survey Responses Senior citizens surveyed at Norman Park Senior Center indicated overwhelmingly (86%) that they drive to the center. 78% of the senior respondents stated their average duration of visit is over two hours. This conflicts with the parking supply closest to the senior center, which is limited to two-hour turnover. Over half of the senior visitors occasionally or usually have trouble finding parking within one or two blocks. A vast majority of the seniors surveyed state that they have at one time or another been discouraged to visit the Norman Park Senior Center due to parking difficulties. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 360 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 19 4.0 Future Parking Conditions Growth Projections The parking demand for future conditions was analyzed as a part of this study. The assumptions for future demand are based on historical development patterns and redevelopment assumptions. For entitled projects, parking demand is known and used in place of estimates. For the other parcels, surface parking capacity estimates were generated based on the dimensions of the parcel. The development capacity estimates assumed the ground floor space would be used for off-street parking. This methodology using known entitlement information and development assumptions for specific parcels generates the most reasonable future scenario. The future conditions analysis estimated parking generation for two time periods, noon and 9pm, based on projected future development. These timeframes were selected because noon coincides with the peak demand for many commercial uses, while residential parking demand is highest during evening and night hours. Total parking generation for each of the anticipated redeveloped parcels was subtracted by the estimated on-site surface parking supply would provide. Estimated on-site parking capacity and future parking generation attributed to each redeveloped parcel is explained in Appendix B. Excess parking generation, per parcel, was then compared to the parking occupancy within the study area under existing conditions during those corresponding time periods and assigned to available supply until occupancy of off-site parking reached 85% of the supply, located within 1/8 mile. The remaining parking generated in excess of what could be accommodated within the existing parking supply, represents the quantity of parking that will need to be created in the future to accommodate anticipated growth. Table 4.1 summarizes the future parking generation, on-site and off-site parking assignment, and the quantity of parking spaces needed in the study area. Parking generation, per parcel, which exceeds the parcel’s parking capacity was summarized for the study area under both time periods. Table 4.1 - Future Parking Generation and Assignment Time Parking Generation Parking Generation in Excess of Parcel ( A ) Parking Assignment Sourced Off-Site ( B ) Remaining Parking Generation ( A – B ) Noon 680 154 92 62 9 PM 980 436 218 218 Source: CR Associates (2022) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 361 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 20 Projected parking occupancy for noon and 9 PM are shown in Figures 4.1 and 4.2. The parking demand generated by the future scenario was applied to the on-site parking supply of every parcel and any spillover parking demand was then allocated to the nearest on-street and off-street public parking locations within an 1/8-mile of the parcel. The following conclusions were made based on the analysis of future parking demand:  The existing public parking supply within the current Parking District boundary is equipped to handle parking demand under near-term conditions, until such time that future redevelopment starts to cause a parking imbalance (i.e., 85% occupancy within 1/8-mile is exceeded.)  If redevelopment occurs as modeled for this analysis, an additional 218 spaces would be needed to accommodate the anticipated parking demand at 9 PM, which is concentrated along Third Avenue between G Street and H Street (outside of the Parking District but within the study area). Accommodating Long Term Future Demand Additional parking supply will need to be created to accommodate the future demand anticipated to be generated by redevelopment and the continued transition of the Third Avenue Village into a commercial destination. To provide the needed spaces within the Parking District, a reasonable assumption is to build a structure on one of the City-owned parking lots. The in-lieu parking fees (described in Section 2.3) and Parking District revenues could contribute to the funding of a structure. The timing of the need for additional parking will be determined by the pace of redevelopment. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 362 of 617 Fourth AveGlover AveGarrett AveLandis AveThird AveDel Mar AveTwin Oaks Ave Davidson S t E St F St Center S t Park Wy G St Vance St Rooseve l t S t H St Alvarado S t Madrona S t Cypress S t Church AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSecond Ave D St Glover Ave Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Figure 4-1 Near-Term Parking Occupancy by Block 11AM to 1PM Weekday Average Percent Occupancy Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predominantly Metered Parking Predominantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Church Ave Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 3 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Pay Lot 1 Norman Park Sr. Ctr. Lot 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 363 of 617 Fourth AveGlover AveGarrett AveLandis AveThird AveDel Mar AveTwin Oaks Ave Davidson S t E St F St Center S t Park Wy G St Vance St Rooseve l t S t H St Alvarado S t Madrona S t Cypress S t Church AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSecond Ave D St Glover Ave Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Figure 4-2 Near-Term Parking Occupancy by Block 9PM to 11PM Weekday Average Percent Occupancy Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predominantly Metered Parking Predominantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Church Ave Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 3 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Pay Lot 1 Norman Park Sr. Ctr. Lot 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 364 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 23 5.0 Curb Cafés and Parking Supply Local businesses were severely impacted by the closure of indoor spaces brought on by public health restrictions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The City of Chula Vista responded by adopting a COVID-19 90-Day Economic Recovery Plan in May 2020 to minimize impacts to businesses and to support a safe re-opening and recovery of Chula Vista’s local economy. To that end, in July 2020 the City allowed businesses to create additional seating within the public right-of-way via a Temporary Right of Entry License Agreement for Sidewalk and Curb Cafés. In June 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom announced a fully reopened California economy and lifted the pandemic executive orders that limited indoor operations; however, businesses were still recovering financially from eighteen months of reduced occupancy and revenues. Therefore, the City wanted to continue to give businesses the opportunity to operate outdoors, which gave them increased patronage to support their ongoing economic recovery. Additionally, members of the community have enjoyed the opportunity to take a meal and/or beverages outside, and the outdoor cafés contribute to the “place-making” of Third Avenue in downtown Chula Vista through increased pedestrian activity, which enlivens the street scene. On July 14, 2021, the City Council amended CVMC 12.28.0307 to broaden allowed encroachments into the public right-of-way. Staff created a Curb/Sidewalk Café Encroachment Permit Guide (“Guide”) which sets forth guidelines for design, construction, maintenance and permitting8 of Curb Cafés and Sidewalk Cafés within the public right-of-way along sidewalks and within on-street parking areas. The purpose of this chapter is to analyze the impacts that Curb Cafés have on parking supply and provide recommendations related to the Parking District. One purpose for establishing a more formal process for Curb and Sidewalk Cafés was to ensure that improvements made in the right-of-way were appropriately designed, structurally sound, do not impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic flow and are ADA accessible. When the new program was adopted, the City required structures not in compliance to be removed. The current program sunsets on July 31, 2023. Parameters for Curb Cafés and Sidewalk Cafés Curb Cafés  Restaurants, bars, and breweries are the only businesses eligible to establish Curb Cafés in the right-of-way within parking spaces along Third Avenue between E Street and G Street.  Curb Cafés are limited to the area adjacent to the business’ street frontage unless written consent is provided from the adjacent/adjoining business and property owner that the Curb Café would encroach in front of.  To establish a balanced approach and avoid over-proliferation, the guidelines state that staff will generally endeavor to ensure that the number of Curb Cafés would be limited to two per each side of each block and that no more than six parking spaces would be eliminated per block side (three spaces per Curb Café.) 7 “Improvements Not Requiring Council Authorization” (CVMC 12.28.30), located here. 8 Curb/Sidewalk Café Encroachment Permit Guide 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 365 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 24  The instrument for approval of Curb Cafés is a “Maintenance Agreement and Encroachment Permit.” Maintenance Agreements and Encroachment Permits under this program are for a period of one year, with an option for the City Manager or his/her designee to authorize one additional one-year extension. Sidewalk Cafés:  Restaurants, bars, breweries, bakeries, coffee shops and ice cream shops are the types of businesses eligible to establish Sidewalk Cafés in the right-of-way on City sidewalks and sidewalk bulb-out areas along Third Avenue. Similar to Curb Cafés, their location would be limited to the area adjacent to the building’s frontage, unless written consent is provided from the adjacent/adjoining business and property owner that the Sidewalk Café would encroach in front of. Since Sidewalk Cafés would have no effect on parking supply, the remainder of this chapter is focused on the effect of Curb Cafés only. Field Observations and Parking Impacts The Guide allows up to two Curb Cafés per each side of each block and the loss of no more than three parking spaces per café. Therefore, six parking spaces could be eliminated per block side, along Third Avenue, between E Street and G Street, resulting in potentially 54 parking spaces being removed from the Parking District’s available inventory. To assess historical Curb Café implementation and parking loss, parking observations were conducted in July 2021, November 2021, January 2022, and February 2022. Table 5.1 displays the number of Curb Cafés as well as the number of affected parking spaces. The last column shows the maximum spaces that could be impacted under the current program. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 366 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 25 Table 5.1 - Summary of Curb Café Parking Occupancy Third Avenue Block Side July 2021 Observation November 2021 Observation January 2022 Observation February 2022 Observation Max Allowance under Guide No. Parking Spaces No. Parking Spaces No. Parking Spaces No. Parking Spaces No. Parking Spaces E Street to Davidson Street West 1 5 1 5 1 5 1 5 2 6 East 2 6 1 3 1 3 1 3 2 6 Davidson Street to F Street West 3 14 1 4 1 4 1 4 2 6 East 3 9 2 5 1 2 1 2 2 6 F Street to Center Street West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 East 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 2 6 Center Street to Park Way West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 East 2 6 1 3 1 3 0 0 2 6 Park Way to G Street West 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 Easta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 12 43 7 23 5 17 4 14 18 54 a The eastern side of this segment has a total of six parallel parking spaces adjacent to a relatively narrow travel lane. Therefore, this block face was excluded from the maximum parking loss calculations Source: CR Associates (2022) As shown, in July 2021 there were a total of 12 businesses utilizing 43 parking spaces for Curb Cafés in July 2021. This number reduced to four businesses and 14 parking spaces by February 2022. Effect on Parking Supply The analysis that follows assumes that all Curb Cafés allowed by the current program are built, and each removes 3 on-street parking spaces. It should be noted that this is a conservative analysis since only certain types of businesses may have Curb Cafés and not all of those business types currently exist on every block. Figure 5.1 shows the locations along Third Avenue where on-street parking supply was eliminated to accommodate the maximum number of Curb Cafés allowed by the program. Table 5.2 summarizes the change in supply of on-street parking by block. As shown, maximum parking loss assuming all allowable Curb Cafés would reduce on-street parking supply by an average of 28% per block. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 367 of 617 ( - 6 ) ( - 6 ) ( - 6 ) (- 6 ) ( - 6 ) ( - 6 ) ( - 6 ) (- 6 ) ( - 6 )72 7 9 2 9 1 2 3 5 1 6 3 6 2 419 62 6 3 525 154 20133796 2 610 5 2 3 1 0 211 97 6 7 9 3416371 5 3 8 3 3 1 3 5 43 4058 361421 20 3 3 4 2 7 418 292 4 11 10 5 8 17191 2 1 2 15 1 9 18 311 7 3 1 9 2 1 3 4 93 4 8 3 6 14 7 1617153 1 7 3 5 3 5 9 1 6 4 19Four th AveGlove r AveGar re t t AveLandi s AveThi rd AveChur ch AveDel Ma r AveTwin Oak s Ave Davidson St E St F St Center St Park Wy G St Vance St Roosevelt St H St Alvarado St Madrona St Cypress St Chur ch AveDel Ma r C tChur ch Ave D St Glove r Ave Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Figure 5-1Public Parking Supply Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés ParkPlazaParkingStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 PayLot1 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 Public Off-Street Parking Supply Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Pay Lot 1 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 3 Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Norman Park Senior Center Lot 14 74 118 670 42 53 28 15 Metered On-Street Parking Location Second Ave Parking Space Removed for OutdoorStructures Paid Off-Street Public Parking Free Off-Street Public Parking Predominantly FreeOn-Street Parking Block Predominantly MeteredOn-Street Parking Block # #Removed Parking Supply Remaining Parking Supply Parking District 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 368 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 27 Table 5.2 - Summary of Maximum Parking Spaces Lost per Current Program Third Avenue Block Original Parking Supply Maximum Allowable Parking Loss New Parking Supply Percent Loss E Street to Davidson Street 55 12 43 22% Davidson Street to F Street 61 12 49 20% F Street to Center Street 31 12 19 39% Center Street to Park Way 31 12 19 39% Park Way to G Street 18 6 12 33% Total 196 54 142 28% Source: CR Associates (2022) Figure 5.2 shows total parking supply within a 1/8- mile of every destination in the study area. The distance of 1/8 mile is considered a reasonable distance for a patron to walk for parking. Despite the 12 fewer parking spaces available between Davidson and F Street due to reduction of spaces for Curb Cafés, all parcels along that block still have over 200 metered parking spaces within a short walk because of the proximity to several large capacity paid parking lots and adjacency to neighboring blocks with ample parking. Figure 5.3 shows the parking occupancy by supply during a weekday from 11 am to 1 pm adjusted for the loss of on-street parking for Curb Cafés. With the smaller available supply, several blocks within the study area would not be able to accommodate the average weekday demand during the lunch peak period at their new capacity. Neighboring blocks can accommodate the spillover parking and none of the adjacent blocks or facilities reach the 85% occupancy threshold due to the spillover, except for Pay Lot 10. The 85% occupancy threshold is considered within parking industry practice as an indicator for when parking is being utilized most efficiently, striking a balance between maximizing usage and having some spare capacity. When parking usage exceeds 85% it is an indication that drivers would need to circulate within the Parking District to find parking. Figure 5.4 shows estimated available parking supply within a 1/8-mile of each parcel in the study area during a weekday from 11 am to 1 pm. As shown, a number of parcels along Third Avenue and Church Avenue north of F Street are experiencing 85% occupancy or greater. However, this is not substantially different from conditions without implementation of the Curb Cafés. Figure 5.5 shows the parking occupancy during a weekday from 9 pm to 11 pm adjusted for the loss of on-street parking for Curb Cafés. Parking occupancy during this period is much lower on Third Avenue, between E Street and Davidson Street. The reduction of supply of on-street parking on this segment has no impact on evening parking demand. South of Davidson Street, there are several blocks on Third Avenue which are not able to accommodate the average weekday demand during the evening period assuming the maximum number of Curb Cafés are permitted. However, the neighboring blocks and nearby parking lots can accommodate the spillover parking. Only Center Street between Third Avenue and Church Avenue is pushed into the 85% occupancy threshold due to the spillover. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 369 of 617 Paid Parking SupplyFigure 5-2Estimated Supply of Parking within 1/8 Mile of DestinationsAssuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management PlanFree Parking SupplyThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StPay Lot 3Pay Lot 2PayLot1 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2PayLot1 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot > 300 201 - 300 101 - 200 51 - 7576 - 100 26 - 50 1 - 25 0 Off-Street Parking Parking District 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 370 of 617 Four th AveGlove r AveGar re t t AveLandi s AveThi rd AveDel Ma r AveTwin Oak s Ave Davidson St E St F St Center St Park Wy G St Vance St Roosevelt St H St Alvarado St Madrona St Cypress St Chur ch AveDel Ma r C tChur ch AveSecond Ave D St Glove r Ave Figure 5-3 Parking Occupancy by Block11AM to 1PM Weekday Average (Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés) Percent Occupancy Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predominantly Metered Parking Predominantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch Ave ParkPlazaParkingStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 371 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekday 11AMFigure 5-4Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations11AM - 1PM Weekday Average (Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés) Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekday 11AMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot 50% and <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Parking DistrictOff-Street Parking 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 372 of 617 Four th AveGlove r AveGar re t t AveLandi s AveThi rd AveDel Ma r AveTwin Oak s Ave Davidson St E St F St Center St Park Wy G St Vance St Roosevelt St H St Alvarado St Madrona St Cypress St Chur ch AveDel Ma r C tChur ch AveSecond Ave D St Glove r Ave Figure 5-5 Parking Occupancy by Block9PM to 11PM Weekday Average(Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés) Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predominantly Metered Parking Predominantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch Ave ParkPlazaParkingStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 373 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 32 Figure 5.6 shows parking occupancy and estimated available parking supply within a 1/8-mile of each parcel in the study area during a weekday from 9 pm to 11 pm. The reduction of supply of on-street parking does not have a discernable impact during this time period. The heaviest demand for parking during this time period is in the primarily residential southern portion of the study area. Parking occupancy surrounding parcels along Church Avenue between E Street and Madrona Street increased above 50% with the change in supply. Curb Café Recommendations Based on the analysis conducted above, even if all Curb Cafés allowed by the current program are constructed, the loss of parking spaces due to Curb Cafés does not have a consequential effect on available parking, due to the high inventory available behind the businesses in public surface parking lots and neighboring streets. However, this situation could change if there is an increase in the number of businesses with a significant number of patrons or there is intensification of uses in the neighboring blocks. If the City desires to continue the Curb Café program beyond the July 31, 2023, sunset date the following recommendations are made:  Continue to require the Maintenance and Removal Agreement and Encroachment Permit. Include termination provisions if public right-of-way is needed for parking. Require regular maintenance and repairs to ensure structures do not become unsightly and remain structurally sound.  The City should monitor parking occupancy periodically to ensure that there is available parking within a 1/8-mile walking distance of the business (during a mid-day and evening peak hour) and confirm that the available parking within that radius does not exceed 85% occupancy.  If the City does not want to increase the number of Curb Cafés beyond what is allowed in the current program and/or wants to limit the number of parking spaces eliminated per café, it is recommended that Guide state clearly that Curb Cafés are limited to no more than two per block side, with each taking up no more than three parking spaces. While the Curb Cafés do not have a significant impact on parking supply currently, there is an impact to parking revenue within the Parking District. At the current $0.50 per hour meter rate and assuming the average weekday use level over nine hours per day for an average of 250 weekdays and 52 Saturdays per year, each metered space would generate a maximum revenue of $1,100 per year, or $3,300 per Curb Café per year. The loss of revenue should be balanced with the increased revenue and jobs created by the expansion of these businesses. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 374 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekday 9PMFigure 5-6Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations9PM - 11PM Weekday Average (Assuming Maximum Number of Curb Cafés)Estimated Available Parking - Weekday 9PMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaParking Structure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot 50% and <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Parking DistrictOff-Street Parking Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 375 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 34 6.0 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations As of April 2022, there were 14 existing, publicly accessible Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations in the Parking District (I.e., seven each at the Park Plaza Parking Structure and Parkway Community Center), and 16 additional EV charging stations (EVCSs) were under construction in Pay Lot 2. Based on information from the California Energy Commission, EV ownership in Chula Vista, the South Bay Area, and San Diego County grew steadily every year between 2016 and 2020. Within Chula Vista, the proportion of EVs increased from 0.4% of all vehicles in 2016 to 1.3% in 2020. By the year 2030, EVs are projected to be approximately 3.6% of all vehicles owned in Chula Vista. Given the trend of increased EV ownership in San Diego County, including Chula Vista and the surrounding South Bay area, siting criteria and policy recommendations have been developed to guide implementation of future EVCSs in the Parking District, as described below. Refer to Appendix C for additional information on EVCSs. Siting Criteria and Policy Recommendations The location of future EVCSs in the Parking District was determined based on a review of San Diego Association of Government’s (SANDAG’s) Plug-in San Diego Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Map9. This map estimates the end location of EV trips using EV registration information, future EV sales projections, and trip destination data from the SANDAG Regional Transportation Model. Figure 6.1 highlights areas within the Parking District where there is likely high EV charging demand, based on SANDAG data. As shown in Figure 6.1, the areas with the highest EV charging demand in the Parking District are the Park Plaza Parking Structure (including adjacent surface parking) and Pay Lot 5, followed by the area surrounding Pay Lot 3, Pay Lot 8, Pay Lot 2, and Pay Lot 10. As discussed above, the projected future EV ownership would be less than 5% of the total vehicles in the South Bay Region and the City of Chula Vista. To accommodate additional future growth in EV ownership, it is assumed that 5% of the vehicles using parking lots in the Parking District would be EVs. The following policies are recommended for EVCS siting and installation within the Parking District:  Continue to monitor EVCS usage at the Park Plaza Parking Structure and nearby pay lots to determine EV charging usage. When EV charging usage reaches 85% daily per lot, consider additional EVCSs.  Consider an enforcement policy such as implementing a time limited charging program to ensure that vehicles are actively charging instead of just using a premium parking space. The recommended time limit is four hours or approximately fifty percent of the time required to charge an EV from empty.  EVCSs should be in compliance with the technical specifications documented in Appendix C.  EVCSs should be an open system to be compliance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) 44268.2.  All EVCS installations shall comply with current ADA requirements of the California Building Code which sets forth design requirements for accessible EVCSs, number of accessible spaces 9 Source: https://evcs.sandag.org/ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 376 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 35 required, and technical requirements for spaces. Site planning for EVCSs should consider accessible routes to building entrances or site boundary.  The recommended number of EVCSs is 5% of the total available parking spaces within City- operated parking facilities in areas having the highest EV charging demand, as shown in Table 6.1 below.  Provide information to the public about the location, cost, and type of charging stations available. (Ex: UCSD website: https://transportation.ucsd.edu/commute/ev-stations.html) Table 6.1 displays the recommended EVCSs for parking lots within the Parking District within areas having the highest EV charging demand. Given that 16 EVCSs are currently being installed in Pay Lot 2, no additional installation is recommended at this location, unless usage of those spaces reaches 85% daily. As discussed above, Figure 6.2 displays the additional surface parking lots where EVCSs are recommended. Note that additional EVCS installation should follow the recommendation provided above and occur only when the current EVCS reaches 85% usage to reduce loss of parking. Table 6.1 - Recommended ECVSs Off-Street Facility Total Parking Supply EVCSs Under Construction Recommended EVCSs (5%) Park Plaza Parking Structure a 670 0 34 Pay Lot 2 74 16 - Pay Lot 3 118 0 6 Pay Lot 5 42 0 3 Pay Lot 8 53 0 3 Pay Lot 10 28 0 2 Totals 985 16 48 a Including adjacent surface lot near Third Avenue Source: CR Associates (2022) Since only building a few EVCSs per lot may not be practical or cost-effective due to the cost of infrastructure, the City may need to consider a minimum number of EVCSs per lot. When siting ECVSs in the surface lot adjacent to the Park Plaza Parking Structure, consider adjacency of Memorial Park. Parking adjacent to the Park should not be constrained by EVCSs. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 377 of 617 ^^Fourth Ave ²Glover AveGarrett AveLandis AveThird AveChurch AveDel Mar AveTwin Oaks Ave Davidson S t E St F St Center S t Park Wy G St Vance St Rooseve l t S t H St Alvarado S t Madrona S t Cypress S t Church AveDel Mar CtSecond Ave D St Glover Ave Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicle Charging Figure 6-2 Public Parking Facilities with Recommended EVCS Installation _Project Location City of Chula Vista Off-Street Public Parking Parking District P Existing EVCS EVCS Under Construction roject Study Area Park Plaza Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 3 Pay Lot 2 P Norman Park Sr. Ctr. Lot ay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Pay Lot 1 Recommended EVCSFourth Ave ²Glover AveGarrett AveLandis AveThird AveChurch AveDel Mar AveTwin Oaks Ave Davidson S t E St F St Center S t Park Wy G St Vance St Rooseve l t S t H St Alvarado S t Madrona S t Cypress S t Church AveGlover Ave Figure 6-1 SANDAG EV Use Map Off-Street Public Parking EV Trip End Percentile 91% - 100% 81% - 90% 71% - 80% 61% - 70% 50% - 60% Existing EVCS EVCS Under Construction Park Plaza Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 3 Pay Lot 2 P Norman Park Sr. Ctr. Lot ay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Pay Lot 1 Recommended EVCS Parking District Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 378 of 617 Fourth AveGlover AveGarrett AveLandis AveThird AveChurch AveDel Mar AveTwin Oaks Ave Davidson S t E St F St Center S t Park Wy G St Vance St Rooseve l t S t H St Alvarado S t Madrona S t Cypress S t Church AveDel Mar CtSecond Ave D St Glover Ave Figure 6-2 Surface Lots with with Recommended EVCS Installation Project Location Off-Street Public Parking Parking District Existing EVCS EVCS Under Construction Project Study Area Recommended EVCS Pay Lot 2 Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 3 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Pay Lot 1 Norman Park Sr. Ctr. Lot Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 379 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 38 7.0 Parking Management Plan Recommendations This section provides short-term and long-term recommendations to manage parking demand. The recommended strategies consider the findings from the analysis of existing and future conditions and input from the various stakeholder groups engaged during the outreach process. A financial pro-forma that analyzes Parking District recommendations is provided in Appendix D. Table 7.1 provides a summary of the recommendations presented in this chapter. The following objectives were considered when developing the parking management strategies:  Modernization of parking infrastructure that provides convenient payment options and operational flexibility.  Have clear way-finding systems to guide motorists to the nearest available parking space.  Maintain convenient parking for visitors, customers, and employees.  Ensure convenient, safe and clear access between parking lots and destinations.  Parking revenue needs to cover operational costs. Recommendation 1: Convert All Existing Meters to Smart Meters The existing parking meters within and immediately adjacent to the Parking District are not technologically equipped to accept more convenient forms of payment, such as credit cards and mobile payment apps. As found in the outreach conducted for this study, this can discourage visitors from parking at metered locations, where they instead opt for parking at unmetered locations on the outskirts of the Parking District. As noted in Chapter 3, 64% of responded indicated the lack of convenience of the coin-operated parking meters was a deterrent. Smart meters can also ensure more efficient enforcement time restrictions and collection of revenues. Other benefits of the smart meters include:  Maximizes parking turn-over in front of businesses and within the corridor.  Remote monitoring of parking conditions allows real time parking analysis and generation of reports without the high cost associated with physical data collection.  Tracking of financial metrics throughout the smart meter area.  Allows the City’ flexibility to implement dynamic time limits and pricing.  Dynamic and remote control of meters for special event parking. Short Term: It is recommended that the meters within the Parking District and nearby surrounding environs be replaced with modern “smart” parking meters, which have the following capabilities:  The flexibility to accept multiple forms of payment, including credit cards, coins, and mobile payment apps. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 380 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 39  Sensors which can detect when a vehicle is parked at a space and reset when the vehicle leaves. The sensors will facilitate efficient and prompt parking enforcement response when a meter violation occurs.  Ability to accept additional payment remotely (up to the maximum legal time limit established for the zone in which the meter is located) using a smart phone app.  Ability for commercial establishments within the Parking District to issue validations (up to the maximum legal time limit established for the zone in which the meter is located) using a smart phone app.  Capability for City staff to adjust and control enforcement periods remotely, such as during special events.  Capability to provide real time information on parking availability. Long Term: The following long-term recommendations are made:  Monitor parking conditions within the Parking District and consider installing additional smart meters as parking demand increases or parking supply or turn-over issues occur.  Coordinate with parking smart phone apps to inform the public of parking availability. Recommendation 2: Shift Parking Enforcement Hours to Between 10 AM and 8 PM The current hours of parking enforcement, between 9 AM and 6 PM do not coincide with the operating hours of most businesses along Third Avenue. Altering the parking enforcement hours would better match commercial demand periods, accommodate a more efficient management of supply and facilitate quicker turnover in the portions of the Parking District where dining and drinking establishments (which peak in the early evening) are concentrated. Short Term:  Shift parking enforcement hours to between 10 AM and 8 PM. Long Term:  Monitor development and parking utilization throughout the Parking District and adjust the enforcement hours, as needed. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 381 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 40 Recommendation 3: Update Parking User Fees The Downtown Chula Vista user parking fees are currently among the lowest in the region. The current user parking fees within the Parking District range between $0.25 to $0.50 per hour. This amount is less than the typical credit card processing fee ($0.27-$0.35). The parking user fees should be raised to an amount that would make the acceptance of credit card payment (Recommendation 1) financially feasible. Appendix D contains financial pro-forma for smart meter installation. Short Term:  Raise parking user fees to $0.75 per hour for all on-street parking meters once the smart meters are implemented.  Implement parking user fees of $0.50 per hour for all off-street parking lots, including the Park Plaza Parking Structure (Note: the Park Plaza Parking Structure is also included in Recommendation #7). This strategy encourages higher turnover in front of businesses and longer-term parking in surface lots.  The recommended meter fee is comparable to the City of La Mesa, which has a rate of $0.75 per hour. By way of comparison, the City of San Diego charges $1.25 per hour.  Monitor and implement dynamic pricing by location and times of day or special events. Long Term:  Monitor parking utilization throughout the Parking District and adjust the user parking fees to encourage longer term visitors to use off-street facilities for parking. Monitoring can be done using the smart meter equipment proposed in Recommendation 1.  Parking user fees should be evaluated on a regular basis (every 5 years). 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 382 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 41 Recommendation 4: Update Wayfinding and Information Signage within the Parking District There are four different types of parking information signage within Downtown Chula Vista: Third Avenue Village Signage Plan, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Parking Area D4-1, Park Plaza Village Planned Sign Program, and Pedestrian Paseo Parking guidance signs. Based upon review of the existing signage program throughout the Parking District, the following recommendations are made: Short Term: MUTCD Parking Area D4-1 signs throughout the Parking District should be replaced with the “Public Parking” signage in the Third Avenue Village Signage Plan, or other comprehensive signage program for Downtown Chula Vista that may be developed in the future. Since the Third Avenue Village Association recently changed their name to Downtown Chula Vista Association, this should be reflected in the signage plan along with any updated branding.  Pedestrian Paseo Parking guidance signs throughout the Parking District should be redesigned to match the style established in the Third Avenue Village Signage Plan,  Install new wayfinding signage to direct users to surface parking lots and parking structure, with parking rates and enforcement hours clearly posted.  Ensure all public parking lots are identified in all major driving/mapping apps such as Waze, Google Maps, Apple maps by submitting “places” to each platform. Long Term:  Monitor and update signage throughout the Parking District as needed when new development occurs.  Consider installing parking wayfinding signage at the boundaries of the Parking District. Third Avenue Village Signage Plan Example  Signage  Example of Potential Parking Pricing  Signage 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 383 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 42 Recommendation 5: Revise the Downtown In-Lieu Parking Fee Program The City’s In-Lieu Parking Fee program was established in 1980. The regulations governing the In-Lieu Parking Fee program are codified within CVMC Section 19.62.040 and the method for calculating the fee is provided in Resolution 1980-9943 (the “In-Lieu Parking Fee”). The purpose of the program is to providing funding for future parking facilities, most likely a parking structure. Appendix E includes a pro-forma to revise the In-Lieu Parking Fee rates based on current construction costs. The following recommendations are made: Short Term:  The In-Lieu Parking fees should be revised to accommodate future needs, including a potential new parking structure or other off-street parking facilities. Also, CVMC Section 19.62.040 should be revised to state explicitly that the In-Lieu Parking Fee program is applicable to residential uses, in conformance with the Urban Core Specific Plan. Long Term:  Monitor and adjust the parking In-Lieu Parking Fee program periodically to maintain sufficient centralized public parking within the Parking District.  Consider adjusting the In-Lieu Parking Fee rates periodically based on a relevant construction cost index. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 384 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 43 Recommendation 6: Facilitate Non-Vehicular Transportation Modes to the Parking District Bicycle parking and street furniture along Third Avenue is currently constructed to the specifications of the Third Avenue Village Streetscape Master Plan The last phase (Phase 3) of the Third Avenue Streetscape improvements was completed in December 2021. As of the time of this report, most of the bicycle parking and benches within the Parking District are located on both sides of Third Avenue, between F Street and H Street. Based on review of the field conditions and the Third Avenue Village Streetscape Master Plan, the following recommendations are made: Short Term:  Bicycle loop racks installed on parking meter posts are the preferred design to accommodate bicycles.  Bicycle racks should conform to the design of the Third Avenue Village Streetscape Master Plan.  Bike racks should be installed at regular intervals (one rack every 1-2 blocks) to encourage use and facilitate access.  Ensure bicycle racks are compliant with ADA regulations.  Bicycle parking should be located in high visibility areas. Micro-mobility (short to long term):   Dedicated parking should be considered along Third Avenue to accommodate micro-mobility vehicles.  Micro-mobility deployment areas and micro-mobility parking should be concentrated where destinations are most concentrated, to facilitate first and “last mile” portions of trips.  Micro-mobility parking should be located within the roadway, by converting red curb space (subject to Chula Vista Fire Department approval) or daylighted areas near intersections into dedicated parking. Micro-mobility parking on sidewalk is not an ideal solution due to the possibility of accessibility obstacles and hazards. Micro-mobility parking designation should follow applicable design standard, regulation for clear zones, line of sights, and fire access. Long Term:  Monitor innovations and changes in micro-mobility and prepare accordingly.  Coordinate with San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and SANDAG to ensure all bus stops within the study area provide useful travel information and comfort amenities (seating, shade, etc.) Micro‐Mobility Parking within Red  Curb of Roadway Bicycle Rack on Parking Meter Post  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 385 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 44 Recommendation 7: Park Plaza Parking Structure Improvements and Maintenance As discussed in Section 2.8, the City recently assumed responsibility for maintenance and operation of the Park Plaza Parking Structure following the expiration of the Reciprocal Access Agreement. To help cover these additional costs and to implement relevant elements of Recommendation 4, the following recommendations are made: Short Term:  Install a parking fee collection system in the Park Plaza Parking Structure. User parking fees in the Park Plaza Parking Structure should be the same as all other off-street parking facilities. The design of the parking fee collection system should consider the unique parking characteristics of the adjacent commercial businesses.  Park Plaza Parking Structure signage should be updated to be consistent with the Third Avenue Village Signage Plan. The following locations should receive updated signage: o Third Avenue, F Street, and Garrett Avenue o At Park Plaza Parking Structure entrances, located on Madrona Street and Landis Avenue  Update the parking structure striping to be consistent with current standards.  Consider removing the existing planters inside the parking structure and install wheel stops where appropriate.  Install an upgraded lighting system within the parking structure to improve visibility and public safety.  Consider implementing a validation program with adjacent tenants when parking fee collection is implemented. Long Term:  Install electronic signage at the exterior access points of the parking structure with real time data to indicates available parking spaces within the structure. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 386 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 45 Recommendation 8: Curbside Management There are no dedicated short-term parking and commercial loading locations along Third Avenue within the study area. As the need for curbside space for loading and delivery logistics increases, flexible curb side management will be essential to ensure to meet the needs of all users in the Parking District. The following recommendations are provided: Short Term:  Designate short-term flexible parking spaces at interspersed locations along Third Avenue to accommodate short term users and deliveries. These spaces should be used to serve the different short-term needs throughout the day. During regular business hours these locations could be allocated for visitors with short-term parking needs (15 to 30 minutes). In the evening, the spaces could be dedicated for utilization by taxis and ride-hailing services for pick-up and drop-off, to better serve night life demand. Finally, after 8 PM, the curbside management locations could be designated for overnight parking, to residents who live in the vicinity.  Consider providing parking for food delivery/app-based delivery in coordination with DCVA, as appropriate.  Designate a number of commercial parking spaces per block, where appropriate, for commercial delivery during regular business hours. These spaces could be: (1) passenger loading spaces – white zones (2) commercial loading spaces – yellow zones OR combo/flex loading zones for passengers/commercial vehicles. Long Term:  Install digital signage at curbside management parking locations to indicate the permitted uses allowed at the current time.  As parking technology evolves, consider providing live parking availability information via the City’s website or an app.  Monitor and update flex spaces along Third Avenue as needed. Potential curbside management locations Potential Curbside Management Signage 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 387 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 46 Recommendation 9: Modify Parking Restrictions at Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot Based on findings from the community outreach effort, the following recommendations are provided: Short term:  Remove meters and increase the parking time restrictions within the Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot from two hours to four hours.  Convert the Normal Park Senior Center parking lot into a lot for the Norman Park Senior Center. Consider development of a Senior Parking Permit program for this parking lot.  Consider designating 1-2 spaces with a one-hour time limit for short-term use. Recommendation 10: Demand Management for Large Events Based on a review of traffic control plans utilized for the Downtown’s Lemon Festival and Starlight Parade, and field observations documented in Chapter 2, the following are recommendations for large events: Short Term: On-Street events (e.g., Lemon Festival, Starlight Parade, Taste of Third)  Coordinate with the special event applicant to develop a comprehensive parking management plan to efficiently guide visitors to targeted parking locations.  Coordinate off-street parking location information together with traffic detour signage.  Display parking costs and restrictions at the entrances to all off-street parking facilities with the Parking District.  Coordinate with the special event applicants to provide parking information to ensure adequate communication of parking options, including a list of off-street parking lots. Off-Street events (e.g., Vogue Theater)  Establish loading and staging areas for ride-hailing services  Utilize parking valet systems  Coordinate with event organizers to disseminate parking information on event information and promotional materials. Drone observation shows empty parking lot  but high demand for on‐street parking  during Lemon Festival 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 388 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 47 Recommendation 11: Expansion of Parking District Boundary to Include All Existing Parking Meters Short Term: Approximately 21 parking meters are located outside of the Parking District, but within the project study area. The Parking District should be expanded to cover that additional supply. To encompass those locations, the following adjustments to the Parking District boundary would be necessary:  300 feet north of E Street on all north-south streets between Garrett Avenue and Del Mar Avenue Figure 7.1 displays the Parking District boundary adjustment, and Figure 7.2 displays the proposed Parking District. Recommendation 12: Establish Funding Mechanisms to Accommodate Future Demand Approximately 200 additional spaces will be needed in the future if redevelopment occurs as projected. Short Term:  Implement a capital reserve fund which, together with the recommended adjustments to the In-Lieu Parking Fee, will build up the fund balance to help pay for future parking facilities, such as a parking structure. Long Term:  Monitor parking inventory and demand within the Parking District and program funds for the siting, design, and construction of a new parking facility when additional inventory is warranted. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 389 of 617 7 2 7 9 2 9 1 2 3 5 1 6 3 6 3 0 2 5 63 2 3 521 1 154 201337156 2 1 2 1 6 5 2 9 1 6 211 97 6 7 9 3416371 5 3 8 3 3 1 3 5 43 40583614 21 20 3 3 4 2 7 418292 4 1110 5 8 1719 1 2 1 2 151 9 18 311 7 3 1 9 2 1 3 4 93 4 8 3 6 14 7 1617 15 3 1 7 3 5 3 5 9 1 6 4 19Four th AveGlove r AveGar re t t AveLandi s AveThi rd AveChur ch AveDel Ma r AveTwin Oak s Ave Davidson St E St F St Center St Park Wy G St Vance St Roosevelt St H St Alvarado St Madrona St Cypress St Chur ch AveDel Ma r C tChur ch AveSecond Ave D St Glove r Ave Figure 7-1Parking District Boundary Expansion Recommendation ParkPlazaParkingStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 PayLot1 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 Public Off-Street Parking Supply Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Pay Lot 1 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 3 Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Norman Park Senior Center Lot 14 74 118 670 42 53 28 15 Paid Off-Street Public Parking Free Off-Street Public Parking Parking Supply# Metered On-Street Parking Location Predominantly MeteredOn-Street Parking Block Predominantly FreeOn-Street Parking Block Parking District Parking District Expansion Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 390 of 617 7 2 7 9 2 9 1 2 3 5 1 6 3 6 3 0 2 5 63 2 3 521 1 154 201337156 2 1 2 1 6 5 2 9 1 6 211 97 6 7 9 3416371 5 3 8 3 3 1 3 5 43 40583614 21 20 3 3 4 2 7 418292 4 1110 5 8 1719 1 2 1 2 151 9 18 311 7 3 1 9 2 1 3 4 93 4 8 3 6 14 7 1617 15 3 1 7 3 5 3 5 9 1 6 4 19Four th AveGlove r AveGar re t t AveLandi s AveThi rd AveChur ch AveDel Ma r AveTwin Oak s Ave Davidson St E St F St Center St Park Wy G St Vance St Roosevelt St H St Alvarado St Madrona St Cypress St Chur ch AveDel Ma r C tChur ch AveSecond Ave D St Glove r Ave Figure 7-2New Parking District Boundary ParkPlazaParkingStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 PayLot1 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 Public Off-Street Parking Supply Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot Pay Lot 1 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 3 Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Norman Park Senior Center Lot 14 74 118 670 42 53 28 15 Paid Off-Street Public Parking Free Off-Street Public Parking Parking Supply# Metered On-Street Parking Location Predominantly MeteredOn-Street Parking Block Predominantly FreeOn-Street Parking Block New Parking District Boundary Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 391 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 50 Recommendation 13: Monitor and Make Minor Adjustments to the Curb Café Program As discussed in Chapter 5, the Curb Café program, which was initiated in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, does not currently have any significant effect on parking supply. The recommendations below would be implemented if the Curb Café program were to be extended beyond the current sunset date of July 31, 2023: Short Term:  Continue to require the Maintenance and Removal Agreement and Encroachment Permit. Include termination provisions if public right-of-way is needed for parking. Require regular maintenance and repairs to ensure structures do not become unsightly and remain structurally sound.  Monitor parking occupancy periodically to ensure that there is available parking within a 1/8- mile walking distance of the business (during a mid-day and evening peak hour) and confirm that the available parking within that radius does not exceed 85% occupancy.  If the City does not want to increase the number of Curb Cafés beyond what is allowed in the current program and/or wants to limit the number of parking spaces eliminated per café, is it recommended that guidelines state clearly that Curb Cafés shall be limited to no more than two per block side, with each taking up no more than three parking spaces. Recommendation 14: Provide additional Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in Public Parking Lots and Monitor EVCS Use The City is committed to achieve its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission reduction goals and wants to support and encourage the use of electric vehicles. Additional charging stations are needed to accommodate expected increase in demand. Short Term:  Continue to monitor EVCS usage at the Park Plaza Parking Structure and nearby pay lots to determine EV charging usage. When EV charging usage reaches 85% daily per lot, consider additional EVCSs.  Consider an enforcement policy such as implementing a time limited charging program to ensure that vehicles are actively charging instead of just using a premium parking space. The recommended time limit is four hours or approximately 50% of the time required to charge an EV from empty.  EVCSs should be in compliance with the technical specifications documented in Appendix C.  EVCSs should be an open system to be compliance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) 44268.2.  All EVCS installations shall comply with current ADA requirements of the California Building Code which sets forth design requirements for accessible EVCSs, number of accessible spaces required, and technical requirements for spaces. Site planning for EVCSs should consider accessible routes to building entrances or site boundary. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 392 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 51  The recommended number of EVCSs is 5% of the total available parking spaces within City- operated parking facilities in areas having the highest EV charging demand, as shown previously in Table 6.1.10  When siting ECVSs in the surface lot adjacent to the Park Plaza Parking Structure, consider adjacency of Memorial Park. Parking adjacent to the Park should not be constrained by EVCSs. The recommended parking management strategies are summarized in Table 7.1. 10 Alternatively, a minimum number of spaces per lot may be identified based on cost considerations. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 393 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 52 Table 7.1 - Recommendation Summary Recommendation Rationale Short Term Long Term Benefits 1. Convert All Existing Meters (Except Norman Park) to Smart Meters Current parking meters do not accept more convenient forms of payment (credit card), thereby discouraging some users. It is recommended that the meters within the Parking District and nearby surrounding environs be replaced with modern “smart” parking meters, which are able to accept multiple forms of payment, provide vehicle sensors, have a remote payment capability, accommodate merchant validation, allow for remote enforcement, and provide real-time parking information Monitor parking conditions within the Parking District and consider installing additional smart meters as parking demand increases or parking supply or turn-over issues occur. Coordinate with parking smart phone apps to inform the public of parking availability. Increases the utility of parking meter infrastructure for user convenience and easier enforcement. 2. Shift Parking Enforcement Time from 9 AM – 6 PM to 10 AM - 8 PM The current hours of parking enforcement do not coincide with the operating hours of most businesses along Third Avenue. Shift parking enforcement hours to 10 AM and 8 PM Monitor and adjust enforcement hours, as needed Facilitates turnover between 6 PM and 8 PM and encourages use by patrons/shoppers 3. Re-assess Parking User Fees Current parking user fees are insufficient to support credit card payments. With installation of smart meters, raise parking user fees $0.75 per hour for all on-street parking meters and $0.50 per hour for off-street parking facilities. Monitor and implement dynamic pricing by location and times of day or special events. Monitor and adjust parking user fees as appropriate. Parking user fees should be evaluated regularly. Provides sufficient revenue to support credit card payments and optimizes parking turnover. 4. Update Wayfinding and Information Signage within the Parking District Parking information signage within Parking District is limited and inconsistent. Improve signage to the standards proposed in the Third Avenue Village Signage Plan, and update branding to reflect the recently-established Downtown Chula Vista Association. Install new wayfinding signage to direct users to surface parking lots and parking structure, with parking rates and enforcement hours clearly posted Ensure all public parking lots are identified in all major driving/mapping apps such as Waze, Google Maps, Apple maps by submitting “places” to each platform Monitor and update signage needs within the Parking District as needed. Consider installing parking wayfinding signage at the boundaries of the Parking District Improved information about parking locations and availability for visiting motorists. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 394 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 53 Table 7.1 - Recommendation Summary Recommendation Rationale Short Term Long Term Benefits 5. Revise Downtown In-Lieu Parking Fee Program Existing In-Lieu Parking Fee program does not meet the needs of expected costs of providing for future parking demand. The In-Lieu Parking fees should be revised to accommodate future needs, including a potential new parking structure or other off-street parking facilities. Also, CVMC Section 19.62.040 should be revised to state explicitly that the In-Lieu Parking Fee program is applicable to residential uses, in conformance with the Urban Core Specific Plan. Monitor and adjust the In-Lieu Parking Fee Program periodically to maintain sufficient centralized public parking within the Parking District. Consider adjusting the In-Lieu Parking Fee rates periodically based on a relevant construction cost index. Aligns In-Lieu Parking Fee program with costs of providing for future parking demand. 6. Facilitate Non-Vehicular Transportation Modes to the Parking District Limited end-of-trip facilities for bicycles and micro-mobility and limited pedestrian and transit stop amenities within Parking District Bicycle loop racks installed on parking meter posts are the preferred design to accommodate bicycles Install bicycle parking at regular intervals along Third Avenue, between E Street and F Street. Provide micro mobility parking within red curb zones of roadway (subject to Chula Vista Fire Department approval) and other opportunity areas. Micro-mobility parking designation should follow applicable design standard, regulation for clear zones, line of sights, and fire access. Provide support for emerging micro-mobility options in the future. Coordinate with MTS and SANDAG to improve bus stops within the Parking District. Facilitates usage of other forms of transportation to access destinations within the Parking District, reducing parking demand. 7. Park Plaza Parking Structure Improvements and Maintenance The City is now responsible for Park Plaza parking structure maintenance and repairs. Install a parking fee collection system in the Park Plaza Parking Structure. User parking fees in the Park Plaza Parking Structure should be the same as all other off-street parking facilities. The design of the parking fee collection system should consider the unique parking characteristics of the adjacent commercial businesses. Park Plaza Parking Structure signage should be updated to be consistent with the Third Avenue Village Signage Plan. Update the parking structure striping to be consistent with current standards. Consider removing the existing planters inside the parking structure and install wheel stops where appropriate. Install an upgraded lighting system within the parking structure to improve visibility and public safety. Consider implementing a validation program with adjacent tenants when parking fee collection is implemented. Provide digital signage indicating real time information of available parking supply. Provides funding for maintenance and operation and to make improvements to the largest parking facility within the Parking District. Facilitates parking turn-over 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 395 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 54 Table 7.1 - Recommendation Summary Recommendation Rationale Short Term Long Term Benefits 8. Curbside Management Lack of short-term parking and commercial loading locations along Third Avenue Identify locations for flexible curbside management uses to accommodate a variety of parking uses, including short-term parking, commercial loading, ride-hailing service pick-up and drop-off and overnight parking. Install discrete physical signage on parking meter indicating allowed parking uses Consider providing parking space for food delivery/app-based delivery within the Parking District. Install digital signage at curbside management parking locations to indicate the permitted uses allowed at the current time. As parking technology evolves, consider providing live parking availability information via the City’s website or an app. Monitor and update flex spaces along Third Avenue as needed. Accommodates a variety of users, each with varying peak demand times. Reduces double-parking along Third Avenue 9. Modify Parking Restrictions at Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot Current time restrictions (two hours) are not compatible with Norman Park Senior Center activities. Remove parking meters and increase time restriction to lot from two hours to four hours Convert the Norman Park Senior Center parking lot into a permitted senior parking only. Consider 1-2 spaces with one-hour time limit for short-term use. - Facilitate access to and use of the center. 10. Demand Management for Large Events Event attendees may not be aware of parking locations for large public events held in Downtown Chula Vista. On-street events Coordinate with event applicants to develop a comprehensive parking management plan to efficiently guide visitors to parking locations Coordinate with the special event applicants to provide parking information ensure proper promotion of parking options. Off-street events (Vogue Theater) Establish loading and staging areas for ride-hailing services. Utilize parking valet systems. Coordinate with event organizer to disseminate parking information on event information materials and promotions. - Increases utilization of available parking spaces. Improves event attendee perception of parking within the Parking District. Reduces congestion from motorists searching for parking spaces. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 396 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 55 Table 7.1 - Recommendation Summary Recommendation Rationale Short Term Long Term Benefits 11. Expansion of Parking District Boundary to Include All Existing Parking Meters Approximately 21 parking meters are located to the north of the Parking District boundaries, but which are managed in the same manner as meters inside the Parking District. Expand the Parking District boundary to include the 21 parking meters by extending the northern boundary by approximately 300 feet north of E Street on all north-south streets between Garrett Avenue and Del Mar Avenue - All meters are encompassed within the Parking District, facilitating management. 12. Establish Funding Mechanisms to Accommodate Future Demand Approximately 200 additional spaces will be needed in the future if redevelopment occurs as projected. Implement a capital reserve fund which, together with the recommended adjustments to the in-lieu fee, will build up the fund balance to help pay for future parking facilities, such as a parking structure. Monitor parking inventory and demand within the Parking District and program funds for the siting, design, and construction of a new parking facility when additional inventory is warranted. Implementation of capital reserve fund and recommended changes to the in-lieu fee program will support future construction of parking facilities. 13. Monitor and Make Minor Adjustments to the Curb Café Program, if it is Extended beyond July 31, 2023 Sunset Date Review of implementation and impacts identified several measures to improve administration of the program. Continued monitoring is suggested to address effects on parking availability and to ensure Curb Cafés remain attractive and structurally sound. Continue to require the Maintenance and Removal Agreement and Encroachment Permit. Include termination provisions if public right-of-way is needed for parking. Require regular maintenance and repairs to ensure structures do not become unsightly and remain structurally sound. Monitor parking occupancy periodically to ensure that there is available parking within a 1/8-mile walking distance of the business (during a mid-day and evening peak hour) and confirm that the available parking within that radius does not exceed 85% occupancy. If the City does not want to increase the number of Curb Cafés beyond what is allowed in the current program and/or wants to limit the number of parking spaces eliminated per café, it is recommended that Guidelines state clearly that Curb Cafés are limited to no more than two per block side, with each taking up no more than three parking spaces. - Monitoring will help avoid potential parking availability impacts and other recommendations will clarify operation of the program. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 397 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Page 56 Source: CR Associates (2022) 11 Alternatively, a minimum number of spaces per lot may be identified based on cost considerations. Table 7.1 - Recommendation Summary Recommendation Rationale Short Term Long Term Benefits 14. Provide additional Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in Public Parking Lots and Monitor EVCS Use The City is committed to achieve its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission reduction goals and wants to support and encourage the use of electric vehicles. Additional charging stations are needed to accommodate and expected increase in demand. Continue to monitor EVCS usage at the Park Plaza Parking Structure and nearby pay lots to determine EV charging usage. When EV charging usage reaches 85% daily per lot, consider additional EVCSs. Consider an enforcement policy such as implementing a time limited charging program to ensure that vehicles are actively charging instead of just using a premium parking space. The recommended time limit is four hours or approximately 50% of the time required to charge an EV from empty. EVCSs should be in compliance with the technical specifications documented in Appendix C. EVCSs should be an open system to be compliance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) 44268.2. All EVCS installations shall comply with current ADA requirements of the California Building Code which sets forth design requirements for accessible EVCSs, number of accessible spaces required, and technical requirements for spaces. Site planning for EVCSs should consider accessible routes to building entrances or site boundary. The recommended number of EVCSs is 5% of the total available parking spaces within City-operated parking facilities in areas having the highest EV charging demand, as shown previously in Table 6.1.11 Provide information to the public about the location, cost, and type of charging stations available. (Ex: UCSD website: https://transportation.ucsd.edu/commute/ev-stations.html) When siting ECVSs in the surface lot adjacent to the Park Plaza Parking Structure, consider adjacency of Memorial Park. Parking adjacent to the Park should not be constrained by EVCSs. - Establishes EVCS siting criteria, technical specifications, and monitoring procedures to support future EVCS installation and operation. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 398 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Appendix A - Downtown Chula Vista Existing Conditions Report 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 399 of 617 Correction  Existing Conditions Report  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan    At the time the Existing Conditions Report was drafted (Final Report, June 2019) it was assumed that the  boundaries of the Parking District were the original ones established in 1963. After the publication of the  Existing Conditions Report, it was discovered that the boundaries of the Parking District were modified  in 2009 by Ordinance 3139. The map below shows the 1963 and 2009 Parking District boundaries and  the Study Area boundaries.      Due to the boundary adjustment, 21 parking meters are located outside of the 2009 Parking District  boundary, including 4 meters along Garrett Avenue, north of E Street, and 17 meters along Landis  Avenue, north of E Street.  Five of the 17 meters along Landis Avenue are located outside of both the  1963 and 2009 Parking District boundaries. These parking meters were included in the Geographical  Information System (GIS) database for the Existing Conditions analysis. This additional clarification only  affects the summary presented in Table 4‐1, and does not affect the conclusions of the Existing  Conditions Report.  A strikeout and underline version of Table 4‐1 is provided below for informational  purposes.    Table 4-1: Public Parking Supply within Study Area Time Restriction Location Cost Parking District Within Study Area  (Outside Parking District)  Total Study  Area  No Time Limit On‐Street Free 20 364 384  ≥10‐Hour Limit Off‐Street Pay 213 0 213  4‐Hour Limit Off‐Street Pay 42116 0 42116  3‐Hour Limit Off‐Street Free 670 0 670  2‐Hour Limit On‐Street Pay 430460 2146 476481  2‐Hour Limit Norman Scott Pay 15 0 15  2‐Hour Limit On‐Street Free 16 57 73  1‐Hour Limit On‐Street Free 0 3 3  <1‐Hour/Loading On‐Street Free 18 7 25  Total  1,409  1,538  477452  1,886  1,980      It should also be noted that Pay Lot 3 maximum time restriction is 10 hours, instead of the 16 Hours  documented in Table 4‐3 of the Existing Conditions Report.  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 400 of 617 Four t h AveGl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveChur c h AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id s o n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o s e v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur c h AveDel Mar CtSecond AveD S tGl over AveProjectLocation City ofChula Vista Off-Street Public Parking 1963 Parking District Boundar y 2009 Parking District Boundar y ParkPlazaParkingStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 Norman ParkSr. Ctr. Lot 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 401 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Study Existing Conditions Report June 28, 2019 TRANSPORTATION • PLANNING • DESIGN FINAL 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 402 of 617 Prepared for:  City of Chula Vista  Prepared by:  3900 Fifth Avenue, Suite 310  San Diego, CA 92103  In association with:    EFS Engineering  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Existing Conditions Report Final Report June 28, 2019 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 403 of 617  Page i  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report    Table of Contents  1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1  2.0 Summary of Relevant Policy Documents ................................................................................................ 4  3.0 Public Parking Facilities & In‐Lieu Fee Program ...................................................................................... 7  3.1 Parking User Fees................................................................................................................................ 7  3.2 Parking In‐Lieu Fee Program ............................................................................................................... 7  3.3 Revenue Purposes .............................................................................................................................. 8  4.0 Facilities Inventory .................................................................................................................................. 9  4.1 Parking Supply ..................................................................................................................................... 9  4.2 Current Parking Management and Enforcement Practices ............................................................. 15  4.3 Wayfinding and Parking Information Systems ................................................................................. 16  4.4 Transit Services ................................................................................................................................. 18  4.5 Walking and Bicycling Conditions ..................................................................................................... 21  5.0 Existing Parking Demand ...................................................................................................................... 24  5.1 Weekday Parking Occupancy ........................................................................................................... 25  5.2 Weekday Parking Turnover .............................................................................................................. 40  5.3 Weekend Parking Occupancy ........................................................................................................... 42  5.4 Weekend Parking Turnover .............................................................................................................. 56  6.0 Public Outreach .................................................................................................................................... 57  6.1 Documentation of Public Outreach Efforts ...................................................................................... 57  6.2 Results from Public Survey ............................................................................................................... 62  6.3 Results from Business Owners Survey .............................................................................................. 65  7.0 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................... 67    List of Tables  Table 4‐1: Public Parking Supply within Study Area ...................................................................................... 11  Table 4‐2: Public Parking by Cost and Time Restriction ................................................................................ 14  Table 4‐3: Summary of Off‐Street Public Parking Facilities ........................................................................... 14  Table 5‐1: Weekday Off‐Street Parking Occupancy by Time of Day in Public Parking Facilities .................. 27  Table 5‐2: Weekday Parking Turnover along Third Avenue between E Street and Madrona Street ........... 40  Table 5‐3: Weekday Parking Turnover in Park Plaza Parking Structure ........................................................ 41  Table 5‐4: Weekend Parking Occupancy by Time of Day in Public Parking Facilities ................................... 42  Table 5‐5: Weekend Parking Turnover along Third Avenue between E Street and Madrona Street .......... 56  Table 5‐6: Weekend Parking Turnover in Park Plaza Parking Structure ....................................................... 56  Table 6‐1:  Survey Respondents Visitation Frequency .................................................................................. 62  Table 6‐2:  Survey Respondents Trip Purpose ............................................................................................... 62  Table 6‐3: Respondents Typical Length of Visits ........................................................................................... 63  Table 6‐4a: Perceived Convenience of Parking at Third Avenue Village (Likert Scale) ................................. 63  Table 6‐4b: Perceived Convenience of Parking at Third Avenue Village (Yes/No) ....................................... 64  Table 6‐5:  Other Forms of Transportation Previously Utilized ..................................................................... 64  Table 6‐6:  Respondents Business Type ......................................................................................................... 65  Table 6‐7:  Customers/Clients Typical Duration of Visit ................................................................................ 65  Table 6‐8:  Business Has Own Source of Off‐Street Parking ......................................................................... 65  Table 6‐9:  Business Directs Staff to Park Remotely ...................................................................................... 66  Table 6‐10: Business Owners Perception of Convenient Available Parking at Third Avenue Village ........... 66  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 404 of 617  Page ii  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report    List of Figures  Figure 1‐1: Project Location ............................................................................................................................. 2  Figure 4‐1: Existing Public Parking Supply ..................................................................................................... 10  Figure 4‐2: Metered Parking Supply by Time Limit ....................................................................................... 12  Figure 4‐3: Estimated Supply of Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations .................................................... 13  Figure 4‐4: Parking Wayfinding Signage within Parking District ................................................................... 17  Figure 4‐5: Existing Transit Service ................................................................................................................ 19  Figure 4‐6: Existing Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress ......................................................................................... 23  Figure 5‐1: Weekday Estimated Parking Occupancy within 1/8 Mile of Destinations – Peak Period by Time  of Day ................................................................................................................................... 26  Figure 5‐2: Parking Utilization by Block ‐ 7AM to 9AM Weekday Average ................................................... 28  Figure 5‐3: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations – 7AM ‐ 9AM Weekday  Average ................................................................................................................................ 29  Figure 5‐4: Parking Utilization by Block ‐ 11AM to 1PM Weekday Average ................................................. 31  Figure 5‐5: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations – 11AM ‐ 1PM Weekday  Average ................................................................................................................................ 32  Figure 5‐6: Parking Utilization by Block ‐ 3PM to 5PM Weekday Average ................................................... 33  Figure 5‐7: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations – 3PM ‐ 5PM Weekday  Average ................................................................................................................................ 34  Figure 5‐8: Parking Utilization by Block ‐ 6PM to 8PM Weekday Average ................................................... 36  Figure 5‐9: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations – 6PM ‐ 8PM Weekday  Average ................................................................................................................................ 37  Figure 5‐10: Parking Utilization by Block ‐ 9PM to 11PM Weekday Average ............................................... 38  Figure 5‐11: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations – 9PM ‐ 11PM  Weekday Average ................................................................................................................ 39  Figure 5‐12: Weekend Estimated Parking Occupancy within 1/8 Mile of Destinations ‐ ............................. 43  Peak Period by Time of Day ........................................................................................................................... 43  Figure 5‐13: Parking Utilization by Block – 7AM to 9AM Weekend Average................................................ 45  Figure 5‐14: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations 7AM – 9AM Weekend  Average ................................................................................................................................ 46  Figure 5‐15: Parking Utilization by Block – 11AM to 1PM Weekend Average .............................................. 47  Figure 5‐16: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations 11AM ‐ 1PM Weekend  Average ................................................................................................................................ 48  Figure 5‐17: Parking Utilization by Block – 3PM to 5PM Weekend Average ................................................ 50  Figure 5‐18: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations 3PM ‐ 5PM Weekend  Average ................................................................................................................................ 51  Figure 5‐19: Parking Utilization by Block – 6PM to 8PM Weekend Average ................................................ 52  Figure 5‐20: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations 6PM ‐ 8PM Weekend  Average ................................................................................................................................ 53  Figure 5‐21: Parking Utilization by Block – 9PM to 11PM Weekend Average .............................................. 54  Figure 5‐22: Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations 9PM ‐ 11PM Weekend  Average ................................................................................................................................ 55  Figure 6‐1:  Public Opinion Survey ................................................................................................................. 58  Figure 6‐2: Business Owners Survey .............................................................................................................. 60      2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 405 of 617  Page 1  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  1.0 Introduction This  report  examines  current  parking  conditions  in  Downtown  Chula  Vista.  Specifically,  it  covers  the  Downtown Parking District (Parking District) and the adjacent surrounding area, as shown in Figure 1‐1.     Project Location  Chula Vista (City) is located in southern San Diego County, and is the second largest city in the region.  The  City is approximately 50 square miles, extending from San Diego Bay in the west, to the foothills of the  Jamul and San Ysidro Mountains in the east.    Downtown Chula Vista is in the northwest quadrant of the City, and concentrated around Third Avenue –  where between E Street and H Street the corridor has retained much of its traditional main street character.   These extents also describe the approximate study area of the project.  The Parking District, which is within  the project study area, is where a vast majority of the metered and other time‐limited parking serving the  needs of the Downtown Chula Vista business community is situated.  The Parking District was established  in 1963 and surrounds Third Avenue between E Street and G Street, including some intersecting side streets  and adjacent parallel blocks.       Third Avenue in Downtown Chula Vista (looking to the north)  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 406 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveChur ch AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtSecond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 1-1Project Location ^_ProjectLocation City ofChula Vista Off-Street Pub lic Parking Parking District Project Study A rea ParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 407 of 617  Page 3  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Report Context  Downtown Chula Vista land use planning is guided by the Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP), which, among  other goals, envisions higher densities, mixed‐use development, traffic calming and more place‐making  attractions  within  the  community.    The  City’s  In‐Lieu  Parking  Fee  program  (established  in  1980  via  Resolution 9943, and codified in Section 19.62.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC)) relaxes  parking requirements for projects within UCSP area, allowing developments to utilize excess public parking  capacity within the area to accommodate a portion of their project’s parking demand off‐site.  This report  represents the first phase of the Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan, which will inquire how  suitable the Downtown area’s parking infrastructure is for the density  and  development  changes  encouraged by the UCSP.  This assessment is based on observations of the existing parking patterns and  evaluation  of  currently‐practiced  parking  management  measures.   The  full  study  will  synthetize  that  information, project how expected development changes to the urban core area will affect parking demand  and identify measures which can be implemented to better manage parking demand in the future.    Project Background  This study is an update to a 2007 parking management study conducted by Rich and Associates, Inc.  The  2007 study estimated that there is an overall surplus of parking within the Parking District; however,  utilization throughout is spread unevenly, resulting in some individual block locations within Downtown  having  parking  deficits.    Some  of  the  recommendations  from  that  plan  were  designed  to  distribute  utilization more evenly, thereby taking advantage of underutilized parking assets.    Report Organization  The remainder of this report is organized into the following chapters:  Chapter 2 – Summary of Relevant Policy Documents identifies and reviews policies from other Chula  Vista planning and transportation studies which have any relation to parking within the Downtown  project study area.  Chapter 3 – Public Parking Facilities & In‐Lieu Fee Program reviews the main parking revenue sources  which fund the operations of the Parking District.  Chapter 4 – Facilities Inventory provides a detailed quantification of the entire supply of public parking  within the study area, including documentation of any unique attributes of the supply such as cost,  time and purpose restrictions.  This  section  also  examines  how parking  enforcement  practices,  alternative transportation modes, and auxiliary infrastructure such as wayfinding signage supplement  the use of parking within the study area.  Chapter 5 – Existing Parking Demand presents and analyzes parking occupancy data collection within  the  study  area.    This  chapter  introduces  a  unique  approach  to  analyzing  parking  occupancy  conceptualizing fragmented parking supply.  This section also examines parking turnover along Third  Avenue and within the Park Plaza parking structure.  Chapter 6 – Public Outreach summarizes all the public outreach efforts undertaken during the life of  the project up to this point in time.  These efforts include meetings with stakeholder groups, a pop‐up  booth hosted at a community event, and the preparation of opinion surveys, which were administered  to business owners and public stakeholders.  Responses from the survey efforts will also be presented  and analyzed in this section.  Chapter 7 – Conclusions synthesizes the information and findings from the chapters which preceded  it.  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 408 of 617  Page 4  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  2.0 Summary of Relevant Policy Documents This section summarizes policies related to Downtown Chula Vista  parking  from  municipal  planning  documents, including the Chula Vista General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan.  Relevant issues or  findings from other local planning and transportation studies are also summarized.    Chula Vista General Plan  The General Plan includes several parking‐related objectives within the Land Use and Transportation (LUT)  Element.  Each of these objectives are accompanied by several more focused policy strategies.    As stated in Objective 30 of the LUT Element, the General Plan prefers parking management strategies to  make more efficient utilization of existing parking resources over public expenditures for creating additional  parking supply.  One policy (LUT 30.3) which supports this objective emphasizes short‐term parking in  commercial areas, which generates higher parking turnover than otherwise, thereby serving a greater  number of users more efficiently.  Another policy (LUT 30.2) recommends considering parking maximums  (as opposed to minimum parking requirements) in mixed‐use areas, the externalities of which can be offset  by the closer proximity of destinations to each other and the availability of transit.    Another General Plan parking objective (LUT 32) favors, where applicable, exploring flexible strategies for  pairing parking with land uses, such as joint‐use parking agreements (Policy LUT 32.1), the creation of  parking districts with centralized parking (Policy LUT 32.2), and the use of parking credits/in‐lieu fees where  parking resources are abundant (Policies LUT 32.3 and 32.4).    One other parking‐related General Plan objective (LUT 33) indicates a preference for parking siting and  design that is efficient, appropriately integrated with the surrounding urban form, and which interfaces  properly with alternative vehicles and the pedestrian environment.  Urban Core Specific Plan  The UCSP is a planning document devised to guide growth and development in the urban core located in  northwestern Chula Vista, where the Parking District is located.  The key vision of the UCSP is to facilitate  the transformation of the core area into a place with land use diversity and urban vitality, supported by a  variety of mobility options in addition to driving, such as walking, bicycling and public transportation.  The  UCSP aims are consistent with visions of the City’s General Plan, while also allowing for some innovative  planning strategies, not otherwise available in the General Plan, to better deal with the unique conditions  of the downtown and more urban area.    The plan recognizes that providing this type of environment while simultaneously mandating abundant  parking supply are conflicting priorities and that they need to be balanced.  The City’s In‐Lieu Parking Fee  program  relaxes  parking  requirements  for  projects  within  UCSP  area,  allowing  non‐residential  developments to utilize excess public parking capacity within the area to accommodate a portion of their  project’s parking demand off‐site.  The plan also aims to reconcile this tension through land use and  development regulations that are form‐based, as opposed to the traditional use‐based regulations found  in most urban plans. The plan also provides extensive design guideline criteria which specifically addresses  how parking should complement and interface with the pedestrian environment.    The UCSP also recognizes that a component to its vitality is its ability to attract new businesses and future  development  to  the  core.    The  plan  recommends  that  the  In‐Lieu Parking  Fee  program,  which  is  a  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 409 of 617  Page 5  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  mechanism used to assist developers with the challenges of accommodating parking on infill sites, be  evaluated for possible expansion in scope.    Downtown Parking Management Study (2007)  The Downtown Parking Management Study analyzed then‐current (i.e., year 2007) and projected future  parking needs within the Parking District and issued a series of recommendations.    Based upon a parking generation assumption of 2.37 spaces per 1,000 per square feet of building area (a  ratio more conservative than the required 2.0 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet found within the UCSP  form‐based codes), the study calculated that under 2007 year conditions the  Parking District collectively  would have a parking surplus of approximately 1,300 spaces.  Despite the overall surplus, the distribution  was not spread evenly throughout the district and some specific block locations inside of the would have  parking supply deficits.  The study recommended making better use of the underutilized parking assets,  such as the 675‐space Park Plaza parking structure located near Third Avenue and F Street, to help offset  deficits within individual block areas.  Based on the parking ratio developed by the authors, the study  estimated that there would be a deficit of 500 parking spaces within the Parking District with a complete  buildout of the planned land uses.    Some of the recommendations from the study included:   Formation of a parking committee with appointed leadership to facilitate stronger management  and operations; and   Updated and improved signage to increase efficient utilization of parking resources; and   Increased rates for permits and meters; and   Ordinance controlling how valet parking operates within the Parking District.  Some  of  those  recommendations  have  been  implemented,  including the  establishment  of  a  parking  committee within Third Avenue Village Association (TAVA) in 2018.  Wayfinding signage enhancements  were proposed and implemented as a part of the Third Avenue Village Streetscape Improvements in 2012.   Chula Vista Bicycle Master Plan (2011)  The currently adopted Bicycle Master Plan recommends that the Third Avenue corridor, in its entirety, be  dedicated as a Class III Bicycle Route.  A Class III Bicycle route is a mixed‐traffic facility where bicyclists and  motorists share the same lane.  A Class III route will contain bicycle signage and often include ”sharrow”  markings, a bicycle symbol with chevron arrows stenciled in the middle of the travel lane at frequent  intervals.  Class III bicycle facilities do not typically require modifications to the roadway such as the removal  of on‐street parking; however, the plan recommends an ideal travel lane width for such facilities to be 14  feet – allowing enough room for a motorist to pass a cyclist while providing 3 feet of clearance (the State  recently increased the clearance requirement to 5 feet).  In comparison to eastern Chula Vista, there are  fewer bike lane projects that are proposed in the older, more developed western half of Chula Vista due to  the western half’s generally narrower street widths and heavier reliance on on‐street parking.    The Bicycle Master Plan recommended several initiatives which may relate to or compliment transportation  planning objectives of the business district core of Chula Vista, including improved wayfinding signage as a  navigational aid for cyclists; encouragement activities such as Bike to Work events; business and employer  bicycling incentive programs; bicycle sharing programs; and replication of “open street” events such as  CicLAvia in Los Angeles – where selected streets are closed to vehicular traffic in order to celebrate a  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 410 of 617  Page 6  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  reclamation of the city streets for human‐scaled transportation.  Since plan adoption, the City of Chula Vista  has established its own open street event called CiclaVista.    The City of Chula Vista is currently updating their bicycle and pedestrian master plans under the umbrella  of an ‘active transportation’ master plan.  Chula Vista Pedestrian Master Plan (2010)  The currently adopted Pedestrian Master Plan recommends wider sidewalks and curb extensions along  several high priority project corridors which overlap with the downtown area, including Third Avenue, E  Street, G Street and H Streets.  The plan does not otherwise reference parking issues within the City and  Downtown area.    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 411 of 617  Page 7  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  3.0 Public Parking Facilities & In-Lieu Fee Program Operations within the District are funded by the following main revenue sources: (1) revenues generated  from parking user fees and penalties (i.e., payments at meters and parking lots, employee parking permits,  and parking citations); and (2) revenues received from the Parking In‐Lieu Fee Program. The regulations  governing parking user fees are specified in Chapter 10 of the CVMC. Current rates for parking meters,  parking permits, and parking citations are published in Chapter 13 (General Parking Fees) of the City’s  Master Fee Schedule.  The conditions and processes for utilizing the Parking In‐Lieu Fee program are  codified within CVMC Section 19.62.040, while the UCSP dictates eligibility by establishing which zones and  uses are able to use the program.  The Downtown Parking District In‐Lieu Fee structure is established in  Chapter 9 of the City’s Master Fee Schedule (Downtown District Fees).    3.1 Parking User Fees CVMC Section 10.56.020 establishes parking user fees at the following rates:     Thirty (30) Minute Meters: A $0.25 deposit up to the maximum time limit established for the zone  in which the meter is located; or   Two, Three, and Four‐Hour Meters: A $0.25 deposit for each 30‐minute interval or a $0.50 deposit  for each one‐hour interval up to the maximum legal time limit established for the zone in which  the meter is located; or   Ten (10) Hour Meters: A $0.25 deposit for each one‐hour period up to the maximum legal time  limit established for the zone in which the meter is located.    The locations of parking meter zones and paid parking lots (as well as their respective maximum time limits)  are listed within Chapter 13 of the City’s Master Fee Schedule.    Parking citation regulations, including initial citation amount and late payment penalties, are stated in both  CVMC Chapter 10.62 and Chapter 13 of the Master Fee Schedule. Expired meter citations are $25 if paid  within 30 days, and $50 if not paid within 30 days.    Parking revenue collection and enforcement services for the District are provided by Ace Parking, under  City Agreement Number 16147, adopted by Resolution 2017‐047.    3.2 Parking In-Lieu Fee Program The City’s Parking In‐Lieu Fee program was established in 1980. The In‐Lieu Fee program allows for  development projects within the District to accommodate a portion (up to 50%) of their minimum parking  requirements off‐site. The regulations governing the Parking In‐Lieu Fee program are codified within CVMC  Section 19.62.040. Section 19.62.040 states that:    “For any new nonresidential use, structure or building, required off‐street parking which,  due to the size or location of the parcel, cannot be provided on the premises may be  provided on other property not more than 200 feet distant by publicly available pedestrian  access from said use, structure or building, subject to an off‐site shared parking agreement  with the City as to permanent reservation of said space and access thereto; or if the  proposed nonresidential use lies within the boundary of a parking district, off‐street parking  requirements  shall  be  considered  to  be  met;  provided,  that  any developer  of  a  new  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 412 of 617  Page 8  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  commercial building within a parking district, or a developer of a commercial addition to  an existing building therein, shall pay the required fee(s).”    The UCSP dictates eligibility by establishing which zones and uses are able to use the program.    3.3 Revenue Purposes Per CVMC Section 10.56.260, all monies collected from parking meters in the City are to be deposited into  a special fund and earmarked for any or all of the following purposes:     For the purchasing, leasing, installing, repairing, maintaining, operating, removing, regulating and  policing of parking meters in this City and for the payment of any and all expenses relating or  incidental thereto;   For the purchasing, leasing, acquiring, improving, operating and maintaining of off‐street parking  facilities in the City;   For the installation and maintenance of traffic control devices and signals;   For the painting and marking of streets and curbs required for the direction of traffic and parking  of motor vehicles;   For the proper regulation, control and inspection of parking and traffic upon the public streets;   To be pledged as security for the payment of principal and interest on off‐street parking revenue  bonds issued by the City or any parking district organized within the City. (Ord. 2670 § 1, 1996;  Ord. 973 § 1, 1966; prior code § 19.17.13).    The only City operated parking meters are located in the District.  The City has established the  Parking Meter Fund to account for the associated revenues and expenditures.    Parking In‐Lieu Fees are deposited into a separate fund (the Town Center I Parking Fund).  Use of the In‐ Lieu funds is restricted to the purchase or development of off‐street parking sites which will generally and  directly benefit the District.    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 413 of 617  Page 9  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  4.0 Facilities Inventory This chapter documents the project study area’s supply of public on‐street and off‐street parking, examines  the Parking District’s current parking management practices and support infrastructure, and evaluates the  area’s mobility alternatives.    4.1 Parking Supply Figure 4‐1 shows the extent of the project study area and total parking supply along each block segment,  and the total parking supply provided within the seven off‐street public parking facilities.  The quantity of  parking supply within the study area and approximately one block surrounding was determined through a  combination of aerial imagery interpretation with field verification.    Individually‐marked on‐street parking stalls, which are normally encountered where parking is metered,  were counted on aerial imagery and were verified in the field.  Any usage restrictions which apply to specific  parking locations, such as cost, time limits or use purpose were gathered in the field.  Unmarked on‐street  parking was estimated using a method which interprets aerial imagery from Google Earth and Google Street  View in order to determine the extents and length of segments where on‐street parking is allowed.   Spatially‐referenced lines along curbside locations where on‐street parking is allowed were subsequently  drawn in Google Earth.  The parking supply was then estimated by dividing the extents of each line segment  by 25 feet, rounding to the nearest whole number.  Typically, marked parking stalls are about 22 feet in  length.  The somewhat more conservative 25‐foot interval was chosen because vehicles are seldom parked  in a configuration in which the maximum storage of vehicles is possible when street parking is unmarked.  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 414 of 617 7 2 7 9 2 9 1 2 3 5 1 6 3 6 3 0 2 563 2 3 521 1 154 20 13 37 156 2 1 216 5 2 9 1 6 211 97 6 7 9 341 637 1 5 3 8 3 3 1 3 5 4 3 4 058 3614 2 1 20 3 3 4 2 7 4 1829 2 4 11 1 0 5 81719 1 2 1 2 15 1 9 18 311 7 3 1 9 2 1 3 4 93 4 8 3 6 1 4 7 1617 15 3 173 5 3 5 91 6 41 9Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveChur ch AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 4-1Existing Public Parking Supply Predom inan tly Metered On-Street Parking Predom inan tly Free On-Street Parking Paid Off-Street Pub lic Parking Free Off-Street Pub lic Parking Parking Sup ply Parking District Project Study A rea # ParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 PayLot1 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 Public Off-Street Parking Supply Pay Lot 1 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 3 Park Plaza Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 14 74 118 670 42 53 28 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 415 of 617  Page 11  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Table 4‐1 presents the total supply of public parking by each of the unique time restrictions represented in  the study area.    Table 4-1: Public Parking Supply within Study Area Time Restriction Location Cost Parking District Within Study Area  (Outside Parking District)  Total Study  Area  No Time Limit  On‐Street  Free  20  364  384  ≥10‐Hour Limit  Off‐Street  Pay  213  0  213  4‐Hour Limit  Off‐Street  Pay  42  0  42  3‐Hour Limit  Off‐Street  Free  670  0  670  2‐Hour Limit  On‐Street  Pay  430  46  476  2‐Hour Limit  On‐Street  Free  16  57  73  1‐Hour Limit  On‐Street  Free  0  3  3  <1‐Hour/Loading  On‐Street  Free  18  7  25  Total  1,409  477  1,886  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    As shown, including the seven off‐street public parking facilities, there are an estimated total of 1,891  parking spaces within the study area.  The Park Plaza parking structure (and adjacent lot to the south of the  structure), which provides free parking for up to 3 hours, has 670 spaces, accounting for almost half of the  total supply within the Parking District and about 35% of the total parking within the study area.  There are  approximately 476 metered on‐street parking spaces within the study area.  All meters are coin‐operated  and cost $0.50 per hour.  All cost and time restrictions to parking spaces are enforced on all days except  Sunday and Holidays between 9 am and 6pm.    Figure 4‐2 shows the metered parking supply by time restrictions.  Note there are also some metered  parking spaces outside of the study area.    Figure 4‐3 summarizes the quantity of paid and free parking within 1/8th of a mile of each parcel within the  study area.  Parcels which appear blank in both panels of this figure are vacant lots.    Table 4‐2 breaks down the public parking supply of the study area by cost and time restriction.  As shown,  almost the entire supply within the Parking District has either a cost and/or time restriction associated with  it (98.6%).  About half of the Parking District’s supply is free with a time restriction (this total is mostly  comprised of the Park Plaza parking structure).  Within the study area as a whole, including the areas  outside of the Parking District, nearly 80% of the parking supply has either a cost or time restriction.     2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 416 of 617 !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(33 1 6 7 2 7 9 2 3 1 2 4 1 6 3 6 3 0 2 563 2 35 21 1 124 20 13 37 156 2 1 216 5 2 9 1 6 211 1 7 4 233 4 2 762 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveChur ch AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 4-2Metered Parking Supply by Time Limit Location of Parking Meter !(Lo ading !(15-Minute !(30-Minute !(2-Hour Paid Off-Street Pub lic Parking Free Off-Street Pub lic Parking Parking District Project Study A rea ParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 PayLot1 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 Metered Parking Supply by Time Limit Loading 15-Minute 30-Minute 2-Hour 6 3 6 487 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 417 of 617 Paid Parking SupplyFigur e 4-3Estimated Supply of Parking within 1/8 Mile of DestinationsDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanFree Parking SupplyThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson St> 300 201 - 300 101 - 200 51 - 7576 - 100 26 - 50 1 - 25 0 Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2PayLot1 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2PayLot1 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 418 of 617  Page 14  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Table 4-2: Public Parking by Cost and Time Restriction Cost and Time Restriction  Parking District Within Study Area (Outside  Parking District) Total Study Area  Supply % of Total Supply % of Total Supply % of Total  Free Parking – Unlimited Time  20  1.4%  364  76.3%  384  20.3%  Free Parking – Time Limited  704  50.0%  67  14.1%  771  41.0%  Paid Parking – Time Limited  685  48.6%  46  9.6%  731  38.7%  Total  1,409  477  1,886  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    As shown in Table 4‐3, there are seven off‐street public parking facilities included within the study area.   With  time  restrictions  between  3  and  16  hours,  the  off‐street  parking  facilities  are  intended  to  accommodate lower turnover trip activities within the Parking D istrict.  With the exception of the Park Plaza  parking structure, all of the lots are paid parking during enforcement hours.    Table 4-3: Summary of Off-Street Public Parking Facilities Off‐Street Facility Time  Restriction Cost Supply  Park Plaza Parking Structure  3 Hours  Free  670  Pay Lot 1  10 Hours  $0.25/hour  14  Pay Lot 2  4 Hours  $0.50/hour  74  Pay Lot 3  16 Hours  $0.25/hour  118  Pay Lot 5  4 Hours  $0.50/hour  42  Pay Lot 8  10 Hours  $0.25/hour  53  Pay Lot 10  10 Hours  $0.25/hour  28  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)      2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 419 of 617  Page 15  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  4.2 Current Parking Management and Enforcement Practices Ace Parking has provided parking management and enforcement services for Downtown Chula Vista since  2009.   The most recent contract with Ace was approved by the City of Chula Vista City Council in November  2015.   Ace  Parking’s  responsibilities  include  parking  enforcement,  parking  revenue  collection,  and  maintenance of parking meter equipment.    Parking Enforcement  Under its contract, Ace Parking is responsible for staffing enforcement patrol between 9am and 6pm on  Mondays through Saturdays.  The Downtown Chula Vista area is overseen by an operations manager,  whose responsibilities include proactively maintaining and repairing parking revenue equipment.  Ace  Parking also maintains an office at 231 3rd Avenue, Suite F, in Downtown Chula Vista for the purposes of  accepting in‐person parking citation payments and appeals, as well as handling public inquiries regarding  the Parking District.    Revenue Collection  Collection of cash parking revenues from individual coin‐ operated  parking  meters  and  parking  lot  multi‐space  payment  machines  are  regularly  scheduled  to  occur  between 6am and 10am, Monday through Thursday, using  a sealed collection system that prevents the loss or theft of  revenues in the field.  The meter collections are transferred  in  sealed  containers  to Ace Parking’s  headquarters  for  counting., Deposits are made three times per week into an  account for the City of Chula Vista.  Credit card transactions  at parking lot multi‐space machines are deposited directly  into the City’s account. Fees collected from citations and  permits sales are remitted monthly to the City.      Parking Lot Pay Machine at Pay Lot 5  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 420 of 617  Page 16  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  4.3 Wayfinding and Parking Information Systems The parking wayfinding signage within Downtown Chula  Vista is primarily designed to meet the standards of the  Third Avenue Downtown Signage Master Plan, which was a  component of the Third Avenue Streetscape  Improvements projects implemented in 2012. The signs  were designed to guide patrons to nearby businesses and  attractions.  Field  review  indicates  that  all  signs  were  designed to the standard of the plan with the exception of  the  parking  guiding  sign,  which  instead  followed  the  California  Manual  on  Uniform  Traffic  Control  Devices  (MUTCD) Parking Area Sign D4‐1.    Figure 4‐4 displays the locations of the MUTCD Parking Area  D4‐1  parking  guide  signs  within  the  Parking  District.  As  shown, there are eight signs positioned around four  intersections:   Third Avenue and Davidson Street   Third Avenue and Madrona Street   Landis Street and F Street   Church Avenue and F Street         The signage mounted above the vehicular entrances to the Park  Plaza  parking  structure  signage  were  designed  to  the  specifications identified in the Park Plaza at the Village Planned  Sign Program (1988).               MUTCD Parking Sign D4‐1 on Third Avenue  Downtown Chula Vista Wayfinding Signage  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 421 of 617 !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 4-4Parking Wayfinding Signage within Parking District !(Parking Sign ag e Off-Street Pub lic Parking Parking District Project Study A rea ParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 Chur ch AvePayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 422 of 617  Page 18  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  4.4 Transit Services Four Metropolitan Transit System (MTS)  bus  routes  traverse  the  project  study  area: one bus route (#929) runs north‐to‐ south  along  Third  Avenue,  while  the  other three bus routes (#705, #701, and  #709)  run  from  west‐to‐east,  crossing  Third Avenue at E Street, F Street, and H  Street, respectively.  Along Third Avenue  within the study area, there are bus stops  at F Street and at G Street.  There are also  bus stops on the cross‐streets of Third  Avenue at E Street and H Street.    Figure 4‐5 displays the existing bus routes  within the study area, as well as the areas  that  can  reach  the  corridor  via  transit  within  a  thirty‐minute  travel  time.  The  intersection of Third Avenue and Center  Street was assumed as the approximate  center of the study area.  As shown, southern Chula Vista along Third Avenue and Hilltop Drive, a portion  of Chula Vista east of Interstate 805 along H Street, and National City along Highland Avenue are within a  thirty‐minute transit trip of the study area.    Route #929  Route #929 bus service operates between the Downtown San Diego transit hub at 12th Street and Imperial  Avenue and Iris Avenue Transit Center in the southern San Diego community of Otay Mesa‐Nestor (south  of Chula Vista). According to MTS statistics, Route #929 carried over 2.2 million annual riders in FY2017.   In  addition to Chula Vista, the communities served along this route include Downtown San Diego, Barrio Logan  (San Diego), National City, and Otay Mesa‐Nestor (San Diego).  The route runs along Third Avenue much of  its way through Chula Vista.  Bus stops are spaced approximately 1/8th of a mile apart for most of the route.    On weekdays, MTS operates this route on 15‐minute headways in both directions during the morning and  midday, and on 12‐minute headways in both directions in the afternoon and PM peak period.  After 7pm,  headways decrease to 30 minutes and to 60 minutes after midnight.  On weekends, headways are typically  20 minutes during the middle of the day and 30 minutes during the mornings and evenings.  Service span  lasts approximately 20 to 21 hours on weekdays and Saturdays.     Route #929 headed south on Third Avenue at Madrona Street  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 423 of 617 H S t J S t E S t L S t P a lo m a r A v e Main St OrangeAveBroadwayFourth AveThi rd AveHi l l top DrE.HStE .P a lo m a rS tO lym picPkw yOtayLakes Rd P r octor Valley Rd O ta y L a k e s R dTelegraph C a n y o n R dMar i na PkwySan MiguelRd B i r c h R d EastlakePkwyHuntePkwyCorralCa nyonRdLaMediaRdBrandywineAve§¨¦805 §¨¦5 ·}125 ·}54 Figur e 4-5 Existing Transit Ser vice Downtown Chula Vista Par king Mana gement Plan ² 0 10.5 Miles San Diego Bay Lower Otay Reservoir Her i t ageRd") Bus Routes Ser v ing S tudy Area 701 705 709 929 Other Transit Routes Parking District Study Area Third Avenue and Cen ter Street Within 30 Minute Transit Travel Time ") 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 424 of 617  Page 20  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Route #701  Route #701 operates entirely within western Chula Vista and runs along a U‐shaped route, with both of its  termini at Blue Line trolley stations: H Street station in the north and Palomar Street station in the south.    According to MTS statistics, Route #701 carried over 519,000 annual riders in FY2017.  Route #701 runs  along Hilltop Drive when it is farthest from its termini.  There are some minor deviations to the U‐shape on  the west‐to‐east portions, where the route is aligned along some portions on H Street and some portions  on F Street in the north.  In the south, it deviates from Palomar Street to run partially along Anita Street  and Main Street.  Route #701 overlaps with the project study area when the route intersects Third Avenue  at F Street; that location is also transfer point for Route #929.  Bus stops are typically spaced approximately  1/8th of a mile apart along the route.    On weekdays, MTS runs buses along this route at 15‐minute headways in both directions during the  morning and midday.  After 6pm, headways decrease to 30 minutes and to approximately 45 minutes after  7pm.  On weekends, headways are typically 60 minutes during its entire service span.  Service span lasts  approximately 18 hours on weekdays, 15 hours Saturdays and 12 hours on Sundays.    Route #705  Route #705 operates mostly within the City of Chula Vista, along E Street, Bonita Road and Otay Lakes Road.   According to MTS statistics, Route #705 carried over 240,000 annual riders in FY2017.  Its western terminus  is at E Street trolley station.  The eastern terminus varies according to schedule – alternating between  Westfield Plaza Bonita shopping center (in National City) and Southwestern College.  Route #705 comes  into contact with the study area along E Street at Third Avenue, which is a transfer location for Route #929.    On weekdays, headways along this route between the E Street Trolley Station and Plaza Bonita are 15‐ minutes in both directions.  Headways to locations along the route between Plaza Bonita and Southwestern  College are 30‐minute in both directions.  After 6pm, service terminates at Plaza Bonita for all route runs  and headways decrease to 60 minutes.  On Saturdays, service terminates at Plaza Bonita and headways are  30 minutes during its entire operating span on Saturday.  This route does not operate on Sundays.  Service  span lasts approximately 16 hours on weekdays and 12 hours on Saturdays.    Route #709  Route #709 operates entirely within the City of Chula Vista, primarily along H Street.  According to MTS  statistics, Route #709 carried over 915,000 annual riders in FY2017.  Its western terminus is at H Street  trolley station.  The eastern terminus varies according to schedule – alternating between Southwestern  College (every 15 minutes during the day and twice every 15 minutes during peaks), Eastlake Parkway and  Olympic Parkway (every half hour during the day), and Eastlake Drive and Lakeshore Drive (limited service).    Route #709 interfaces with the project study area where the route crosses Third Avenue at H Street – that  location is also a transfer point for Route #929.  Bus stops are typically spaced approximately 1/8th of a  mile apart along the route in western Chula Vista; spacing between stops widens in eastern Chula Vista to  approximately 1/4mile apart in some locations.  Occasional runs of Route #709 also operate as limited stop  service between Third Avenue and Southwestern College during the peak period according to the peak  direction.     After  6pm,  15‐minute  headways  decrease  to  30  minutes  between  H Street  Trolley  Station  and  Southwestern College.  On weekends, headways are typically 30 minutes during its entire service span on  Saturday and 60 minutes during its entire service span on Sundays.  Service span lasts approximately 18  hours on weekdays, 15 hours Saturdays and 12 hours on Sundays.  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 425 of 617  Page 21  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  4.5 Walking and Bicycling Conditions Walking Environment  The Third Avenue Village within the study  area resembles a traditional main street in  its urban form. Most of the businesses are  situated  on  narrow  lots  with  mostly  full  building  coverages,  contributing  to  an  engaging  walking  environment  where  pedestrians pass by many different visual  elements across a short walking distance.    Third  Avenue  is  also  equipped  with  enhanced  walking  facilities  and  pedestrian‐friendly  treatments.    Third  Avenue  is  lined  with  frequently‐spaced  trees  and  other  landscaping  enhancements  between  E  Street  and  H  Street,  which  provide  shade  for  pedestrians  and  contribute  to  the  visual  interest  of  the  walking  environment.    Sidewalks  are  equipped  with  aesthetically‐chosen pedestrian‐scaled  lighting  and  other  installations such as seating areas.  Several of the parking lots located on Landis Avenue (Pay Lots 2 and 3),  Church Avenue (Pay Lot 10) and Madrona Street (Pay Lot 5) are connected to Third Avenue through paseos  – walkways designed to be integrated with Third Avenue’s pedestrian‐friendly urban form that provide  short‐cuts to and from the off‐street parking facilities.  The Park Plaza parking structure is also connected  to Third Avenue through walkways.    Third Avenue uses a variety of treatments to calm the traffic within the Parking District, including a lowered  (25‐mph) posted speed limit, the reduction of travel lanes from four to two within the Village, the utilization  of angled parking (which helps slow traffic through traffic side “friction”), the installation of frequent  crossing locations and the use of variegated  pavement materials and other streetscape  elements along the corridor.    All  of  the  street  crossings  along  Third  Avenue south of E Street and north of H  Street make use of the different pavement  materials, which visually break up the  asphalt  of  the  roadway  –  conveying  the  message to motorists that they are driving  through  an  area  with  many  pedestrians.   Several  non‐traffic‐controlled  crossings  have been installed along Third Avenue to  supplement  the  controlled  crossing  locations at Davidson Street, F Street and G  Street, so that designated crossings are  spaced, on average, every 300 feet.  The non‐traffic‐controlled crossings are enhanced by the use of same  pavement materials, signage and traffic calming.  Crossings along Third Avenue are also aided by curb  extensions, which enhance pedestrian visibility at street corners and reduce the width of the roadway  Elements of the Third Avenue Village walking environment  Uncontrolled crossing location along Third Avenue  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 426 of 617  Page 22  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  pavement  by  reclaiming  road  space  unusable  for  parking  at  the  intersections.    Curb  extensions  at  intersections near the end of angled parking rows have reallocated a large amount of roadway width for  the pedestrian realm along Third Avenue at locations near Davidson Street, F Street and Center Street.    Many of the aforementioned pedestrian enhancements along Third Avenue, such as the high visibility  crossings, street furniture, lighting and landscaping, have been added as a part of the Third Avenue  Streetscape Improvement Plan. This plan has implemented improvements in two previous phases along  Third Avenue between F Street and H Street since 2012.  A third phase, scheduled to take place in 2019,  will extend such improvements north of F Street to E Street.    Other  streets  within  the  study  area  partially  incorporate  some of the pedestrian‐friendly treatments  described above.  Center Street includes angled parking and the sidewalks along F Street are equipped with  street furniture and enhanced landscaping.  The residential streets within the study area, such as Del Mar  Avenue and Church Street, do not have any pedestrian treatments other than street trees, though most of  these streets are two‐lane with low posted speeds, which generally contribute toward a neutral (or “non‐ hostile) pedestrian environment.    Bicycling Environment  There are no bicycle facilities within the study area other than Class III shared‐lane roadway markings called  “sharrows” along Third Avenue.  Despite the traffic‐calmed environment along Third Avenue, angled  parking is generally considered not to be complimentary with mixed‐traffic cycling due to the poor visibility  a motorist backing out of an angled parking space would have of an oncoming cyclist.    Despite the absence of dedicated bicycle facilities on most of the roadways within the study area, many of  the roadways are two‐lane with 25‐mph posted speed limits, which are regarded in leading bicycle planning  research1 as low‐stress cycling environments for most adult populations riding in mixed‐traffic.  Bicycle  Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) classifies the street network according to estimated level of stress it causes  cyclists, taking into consideration a cyclist’s physical separation from vehicular traffic, posted speed limits  and number of travel lanes along a roadway, as well as factors related to intersection approaches.    Figure 4‐6 shows the Bicycle LTS scores for the roadway links within the project study area.  LTS scores,  ranging from 1 (lowest stress) to 4 (highest stress), correspond to roadway conditions that different cycling  demographics would find suitable for riding on the basis of stress tolerance.  According to LTS literature,  roadways which do not have bicycle facilities but which are LTS 2 or lower are generally suitable for  “interested but concerned” cycling populations.  The most cycling‐deficient (LTS 4) roadways within the  study area are E Street and H Street, both of which are four‐la ne 35‐mph roadways with no bicycle facilities.   According to LTS criteria, LTS 4 roadways present enough traffic stress to deter all but the “strong and  fearless” cycling demographic, which represents under 1% of the population.                                                                      1“Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity”, Mekuria et. al. (2012) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 427 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 4-6Existing Bicycle Level of Traf fic Stress Bicycle Level of Traffic S tress 1 - 2 3 4 Off-Street Pub lic Parking Parking District Project Study A rea Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 428 of 617  Page 24  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  5.0 Existing Parking Demand Within downtown urban settings such as the Third Avenue Village, reliance on on‐street parking and  numerous small‐supply parking lots scattered in various locations is typical.  When an area’s collective  parking supply is composed of fragmented and scattered sources, it can be often be difficult to  conceptualize how many parking spaces are within a close walking distance of specific destinations.  To  overcome that limitation, an analysis approach was developed fo r this report which summarizes the parking  data collection to within a 1/8th of a mile distance of the parcels within the study area.  A distance of 1/8th  of a mile (660 feet) approximates one long‐sided block length or two short‐sided block lengths in the typical  street grid in the northwest quadrant of Chula Vista.  That distance also makes for a good approximation  of the walking distance from the most remote parking spaces at a typical major shopping center with a  large consolidated parking lot.    Data Collection Methodology  Average parking occupancy for a typical weekday and weekend day was determined within the study area,  plus an additional perimeter of one block outside of the study area for five different daily time intervals,  representing morning, lunch, afternoon, dinner, and evening periods.  Data was collected for those periods  on four weekday dates and four weekend dates occurring between August 29th and September 16th, 2018.   The summaries presented in this chapter consist of averages by period for the four weekday or weekend  dates in which data collection took place.    Teams of two data collectors counted parked vehicles on every block and public parking lot within the study  area, plus an additional perimeter of one block outside of the study area, with scheduled departures taking  place at 7am (morning), 11am (lunch), 3pm (afternoon), 6pm (dinner), and 9pm (evening).  Prior to  initiating the data collection, a route was developed designed to strike a balance between collection  efficiency and rational navigation.  The route developed would, on average, require two hours to complete;  therefore, the average parking occupancies for each of the time periods represent a snapshot taking place  in an approximate two‐hour window following departure of the data collection teams.    Occupancy was calculated by dividing the time period averages for weekday and weekend parked vehicles  along each block or parking lot by its approximate supply.  Parking occupancy totals by block and parking  lot are summarized for weekday and weekend by the average hourly totals in the following sections.  This  section also presents estimates of parking occupancy and parking availability within a short walking distance  of destinations at the parcel level within the study area.    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 429 of 617  Page 25  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  5.1 Weekday Parking Occupancy Weekday parking occupancy was collected during the aforementioned five different time intervals on the  following dates:   Wednesday, August 29th   Thursday, August 30th   Wednesday, September 12th   Thursday, September 13th    A summary of weekday peak parking occupancy within the project study area by time period and percent  occupancy is presented in Figure 5‐1.  As shown, the peak time periods vary by different sections of the  study area.  The peak time periods within much of the Parking District,  where  the  destinations  are  commercial, dining and retail, occur during the 11am (lunch) and the 3pm (afternoon) collection shifts.    While the peaks within the Parking District occur during daytime business hours, the peak time periods  outside of the Parking District boundary – where land uses are primarily residential, mostly occur during  the 6pm (dinner) and 9pm (evening) observation periods.  These different time period peaks are a result of  the different types of land uses inside and outside of the Park ing District boundary.  Residential areas reliant  on on‐street parking typically fill up after business hours, when commuters are returning home and staying  home for the remainder of the night.  Commercial and retail land uses have different time of day demand  peaks  that  coincide  with  the  operating  hours  of  the  majority  of  its  businesses.    While  some  dining  establishments might have later operating peak time periods within the district, most of the businesses  within the district maintain regular daytime business hours.    Another notable observation from Figure 5‐1 is that the peak occupancy percentages are of different  magnitudes inside and outside of the Parking District.  Peak parking occupancy within the District generally  does not exceed 85%.  Some of that is explained by the abundant supply, aided by the 670‐space Park Plaza  parking structure and other large off‐street parking facilities.  However, another major contributing factor  is also the cost and time restrictions on much of the parking within the District.  Time and cost restrictions  discourage low‐turnover and more discretionary parking behaviors, thereby enabling parking to be more  efficiently allocated (i.e., serving the highest use and a greater number of individual users).    In contrast, outside of the Parking District – where the supply is comparatively limited in quantity and much  of the parking is unregulated, parking occupancy hits higher percentages (greater than 85% in some  portions of the study area).  Many of the parcels outside of the Parking District also experienced multiple  observation periods over the course of the weekday where their nearby parking supply exceeded 85%  occupancy2.  The typical pattern occurring in those locations is that the parking fills up by 6pm and remains  that way through the next observation period at 9pm.  In the case of the parcels along H Street, the nearby  parking fills up earlier (at 3pm) and remains that way through the remainder of the day.                                                                    2 In the event there are multiple observation times with the identical peak occupancy value, the earliest of occurring those peak  times are represented in Figure 5‐1.  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 430 of 617 Weekday Peak Period (Time of Day)!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(Figur e 5-1Weekday Estimated Parking Occupanc y within 1/8 Mile of Destinations -Peak Period by Time of Day Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanWeekday Peak Period OccupancyThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson St9PM - 11PM6PM - 8PM3PM - 5PM11AM - 1PM7AM - 9AM Multiple Periods >85% Occupancy!(Peak:Peak > 85% Occupancy!( 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street ParkingOccupancy During Peak: Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 431 of 617  Page 27  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Table 5‐1 presents the occupancy peaks by time of day for the off‐street public parking facilities studied, all  of which are situated inside of the Parking District. Table 5‐1 offers a good basis for understanding how the  peak demands cycle by time of day within the District.  When enforcement of paid parking ends at 6pm,  parking demand decreases in the parking lots (which are less conveniently situated to the entrances of  businesses along Third  Avenue), while  utilization at the more conveniently‐situated  on‐street meters  increases.    Table 5-1: Weekday Off-Street Parking Occupancy by Time of Day in Public Parking Facilities Facility Spaces 7am 11am 3pm 6pm 9pm  Parking Structure  670  27% 80%  58%  52%  33%  Pay Lot 1  14  43%  55% 68%  66%  48%  Pay Lot 2  74  28% 67%  65%  31%  21%  Pay Lot 3  118  27% 84%  81%  40%  20%  Pay Lot 5  42  38%  61%  64% 100%  33%  Pay Lot 8  53  32% 74%  55%  16%  15%  Pay Lot 10  28  22% 80%  79%  74%  29%  Note: Red cell denotes peak period  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)     Weekday Parking Occupancy – Morning (7am to 9am)  Figure 5‐2 displays average weekday parking occupancy by block for the morning hours between 7am and  9am.  As shown, most of the metered blocks within the Parking District (where the vast majority of the  Downtown businesses are located) were below 50% utilization during this time period.  The seven off‐street  public parking facilities serving the District were also observed to be below 50% utilization.  The blocks  outside of the Parking District (where the land uses are primarily residential) experienced higher utilization  rates during this time, including several in the 85% or greater category.  It is probable that since the  collection took place during the morning commute peak period, the parked vehicles of many residents  within the study area who work regular business hours and had not yet left for work were captured during  the data collection.    Figure 5‐3 shows the parking occupancy and estimated quantity of parking available within a 1/8th mile of  each parcel inside the study area during the morning observation period.  During this time period, nearly  all parcels within the Parking District boundary, as well as southern portion of Third Avenue between G  Street and H Street average below 50% occupancy.  Very few of the businesses within the study area are  operating during these hours, which largely explains the low demand for parking along Third Avenue.  The  blocks on the outer periphery of the study area surrounding the District are primarily residential and have  higher utilization at this time.  Available parking is generally abundant throughout the study area on a  weekday during this time period, especially within the Parking District.       2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 432 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-2Parking Utilization by Block7AM to 9AM Weekday Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 433 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekday 7AMFigur e 5-3Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations7AM - 9AM Weekday Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekday 7AMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 434 of 617  Page 30  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Weekday Parking Occupancy – Lunch (11am to 1pm)  Figure 5‐4 shows average weekday parking occupancy, by block, for the lunch period between 11am and  1pm.  During this time period the metered blocks along Third Avenue within the Parking District have an  average parking utilization between 70% and 85%.  Five of the seven off‐street public parking facilities  serving the parking district were also observed to have utilization in that range, including the free 670‐ space Park Plaza parking structure.  The streets with free on‐street parking in the closest proximity to the  Parking District boundary (such as the parking along Del Mar Avenue, Garrett Avenue, and Park Way) had  utilization greater than 85% during the lunch period.    As shown in Figure 5‐5, the parking occupancy within a 1/8th mile walk of most parcels within the Parking  District boundary falls between 70% and 85% during the 11am to 1pm time period.  This period represents  the highest overall parking utilization within the District during the average weekday.  Most of the parcels  within the District increased two occupancy categories during this period (from green in the morning,  symbolizing below 50%, to orange in the lunch period, symbolizing between 70% and 85%).  The primarily  residential blocks on the outer periphery of the study area fluctuated less drastically from morning to lunch,  with the parcels in those locations retaining comparable rates of parking occupancy within a 1/8th mile  from morning to lunch and others only shifting one category (from below 50% to between 50% and 70%).    Available parking is generally abundant throughout the study area on weekdays during this time period,  though not at the same quantities as the morning.  The majority of the available parking in close proximity  to the parcels along Third Avenue between E Street and F Street is paid parking.  The Park Plaza parking  structure still provides an abundant supply of available free parking to the blocks of Third Avenue between  F Street and Park Way.    Weekday Parking Occupancy – Afternoon (3pm to 5pm)  Parking occupancy, by block, for the afternoon period between 3pm and 5pm is shown in Figure 5‐6.  At  the block level, afternoon parking occupancy appears to be at levels collectively similar to the lunch period;  however, some blocks shift one occupancy category higher and some blocks shift one occupancy category  lower from the lunch period.  Notably, along Third Avenue in both directions between Davidson Street and  F Street demand intensifies to the highest occupancy category (greater than 85%).    As shown in Figure 5‐7, parking occupancy within a 1/8th mile walk of parcels between 3pm and 5pm  afternoon period remained at levels similar (70% and 85%) to the lunch period along Third Avenue between  Davidson Street and F Street, while the parcels within the peripheral areas of the Parking District receded  from the orange 70% to 85% category to the yellow 50% to 70% category.      Available parking is generally abundant throughout the study area on weekdays during this time period,  which is consistent with the lunch period.  The majority of ava ilable parking in close proximity to the parcels  along Third Avenue between E Street and F Street is paid parking.  The quantity of available parking is  boosted along Third Avenue between F Street and Park Way as the rate of occupancy at the 670‐space Park  Plaza parking structure decreases from 80% in the lunch period to 58% in the afternoon period.     2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 435 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-4Parking Utilization by Block11AM to 1PM Weekday Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 436 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekday 11AMFigur e 5-5Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations11AM - 1PM Weekday Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekday 11AMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 437 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-6Parking Utilization by Block3PM to 5PM Weekday Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 438 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekday 3PMFigur e 5-7Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations3PM - 5PM Weekday Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekday 3PMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 439 of 617  Page 35  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Weekday Parking Occupancy – Dinner (6pm to 8pm)  Figure 5‐8 shows the average weekday parking occupancy, by block, for the dinner period between 6pm  and 8pm.  During this time period, most of the metered blocks along Third Avenue within the Parking  District increase to the highest utilization category (paid parking enforcement at meters and pay parking  lots ends at 6pm throughout the District).  After 6pm, the parking utilization in the Pay Lot 2, Pay Lot 3, and  Pay Lot 8 decrease to below 50% percent.  Among the parking lots, Pay Lot 5 (next to several busy  restaurants), is the exception as it averages full 100% utilization during the dinner period.  Some of the  residential‐fronting  blocks  on  the  periphery  of  the  study  area also  climb  to  the  highest  occupancy  categories (85% or greater) during this time period, including Park Way, G Street and Roosevelt Street.    As shown in Figure 5‐9, the occupancy of the parking supply within a 1/8th mile of the parcels along Third  Avenue between E Street and Park Way is consistently between 50% and 70%, despite the previously noted  increase in parking occupancy along the metered spaces of Third Avenue between Davidson Street and G  Street after the enforcement period ends.  The overall supply of parking available is balanced by the  aforementioned decline in use of the pay parking lots after 6pm.  There are some exceptions, such as those  parcels on Third Avenue closest to Pay Lot 5, where the occupancy of nearest supply to those parcels are  in excess of 70%.  At this time, the residential areas begin filling up with commuters returning home,  explaining decreases in the number of available parking spaces in the peripheral parts of the study area.    Weekday Parking Occupancy – Evening (9pm to 11pm)  Figure 5‐10 shows average weekday parking occupancy, by block, for the evening period between 9pm and  11pm.  During this time period parking occupancy decreases below 50% throughout within all of the off‐ street parking facilities and along most of the metered on‐street blocks within the Parking District, while  parking occupancy increases to above 85% along most of the resi dential blocks in the periphery of the study  area.    As shown in Figure 5‐11, the occupancy of the parking supply within a 1/8th mile of the parcels within nearly  the entire Parking District recedes to below 50%.  Parcels alon g the residential blocks in the southern fringes  of the study area increase to above 85%, with very little available parking along blocks such as Church  Avenue (south of G Street) and Roosevelt Street.       2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 440 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-8Parking Utilization by Block6PM to 8PM Weekday Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 441 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekday 6PMFigur e 5-9Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations6:00PM - 9:00PM Weekday Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekday 6PMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 442 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-10Parking Utilization by Block9PM to 11PM Weekday Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 443 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekday 9PMFigur e 5-11Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations9PM - 11PM Weekday Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekday 9PMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 444 of 617  Page 40  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  5.2 Weekday Parking Turnover Parking turnover was observed along Third Avenue between E Street and Madrona Street and within the  Park Plaza parking structure over a period of time between October 11th and November 13th 2018.    Turnover along Third Avenue was collected over a 24‐hour period by photograph.  Cameras were installed  at selected positions along Third Avenue and programmed to take hourly photos.  This method was able to  capture approximately one block at a time.  Collection took place over a period of weeks in order for the  data to be collected on the same weekday (Thursday).  Technicians interpreted the photographs to record  the data.    Due to the large size, irregular configuration and varying ceiling height of the Park Plaza parking structure,  photo capture by mounted cameras was not utilized to collect turnover due to limitations in visibility;  instead, turnover was collected by manually.  The turnover counts took place on one weekday, Wednesday,  November 7, 2018.  Vehicles observed for more than one period were considered parked for a period  longer than three hours and vehicles observed in the same parking place for more than two periods were  considered parked for a period longer than six hours.      The data collection approach and quantity of turnover data collection obtained for the project study area,  including the parking structure is consistent within industry practice for parking studies.    Table 5‐2 summarizes weekday parking turnover by block along Third Avenue, separating enforcement  hours (9am to 6pm) from non‐enforcement hours.  The mean vehicle length of stay observed on weekdays  along Third Avenue between E Street and Madrona Street during enforcement hours was one hour and 29  minutes.  During enforcement hours, approximately 10% of vehicles observed remained parked longer than  the two‐hour time limit.  It should be noted that any data collection method used short of continuous  monitoring will under‐estimate vehicles making short‐duration stays as additional vehicles could have  arrived and departed between scheduled collection snapshots.  Correcting for this would, if anything,  reduce the mean length of stay and the percentage of vehicles exceeding 2‐hours parked to lower values  than what are presented in the table.  During non‐enforcement hours, approximately one quarter of  vehicles were parked for a period of time exceeding 2‐hours.    Table 5-2: Weekday Parking Turnover along Third Avenue between E Street and Madrona Street Section of Third  Avenue  Total  Spaces  Monitored  Total  Vehicles  Observed  Mean  Length of  Stay (Hours)  Vehicles  Exceeding 2‐ Hours  Total  Vehicles  Observed  Mean Length  of Stay  (Hours)  Vehicles  Exceeding 2‐ Hours  During Enforcement Hours Outside of Enforcement Hours  E Street to  Davidson Street 55  217  1:24  21 (10%)  55  2:11  15 (27%)  Davidson Street  to F Street 61  285  1:38  39 (14%)  105  2:49  38 (36%)  F Street to  Center Street 31  121  1:28  11 (9%)  100  2:37  13 (13%)  Center Street  to Madrona  Street  21  98  1:14  1 (1%)  55  2:15  15 (27%)  Total  168  721  1:29  72 (10%)  315  2:14  81 (26%)  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 445 of 617  Page 41  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Table 5‐3 summarizes weekday parking turnover within the Park Plaza parking structure.  As was  previously stated, due to the size of the area, turnover was collected less frequently.  As shown, 68% of  the vehicles observed remained parked for under three hours.  A total of 46 vehicles were observed (5%  of total observations) to be parked longer than six hours.    Table 5-3: Weekday Parking Turnover in Park Plaza Parking Structure Parking  Structure  Levels  Total  Spaces  Monitored  Total Unique  Vehicles  Observed  Under 3 Hours  (One Period)  3 to 6 Hours  (Two  Periods)  Greater than 6 Hours  (Three or more  Periods  1st Level  198  524  408 (78%)  94 (18%)  22 (4%)  2nd Level  193  297  170 (57%)  108 (36%)  19 (7%)  3rd Level  246  164  91 (56%)  68 (41%)  5 (3%)  Total  637  985  669 (68%)  270 (27%)  46 (5%)  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)        2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 446 of 617  Page 42  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  5.3 Weekend Parking Occupancy Weekend parking occupancy was collected during the same time intervals (7am, 11am, 3pm, 6pm, and  9pm) on the following dates:   Saturday, September 1st   Sunday, September 2nd   Saturday, September 15th   Sunday, September 16th    A summary of weekend peak parking occupancy within the project study area by time period and percent  occupancy is presented in Figure 5‐12.  As shown, the supply of parking within close proximity to most  parcels within the Parking District do not typically reach high occupancy peaks on the weekend.  Most  parcels, particularly those clustered around the Park Plaza parking structure, have a peak occupancy that  tops out below 50% on the weekend.  Other parcels within the Parking District, situated farther from the  parking structure, have weekend peaks between 50% and 70%.  The block of Church Avenue, between E  Street and Davidson Street, peaks between 70% and 85%.    There is a strong visual correlation between the parcels whose peaks occur at 11am (lunch) on the  weekend and the parcels which have occupancy peaks below 50%.  The two largest public parking  facilities, Park Plaza parking structure and Pay Lot 3, are closely situated to this part of the parking district.   As shown in Table 5‐4, both of those facilities have their peak occupancy periods at 11am and are  significantly under‐utilized on the weekends (as evidenced by their peaks, 17% and 33%, respectively).    Table 5-4: Weekend Parking Occupancy by Time of Day in Public Parking Facilities Facility Spaces 7am 11am 3pm 6pm 9pm  Parking Structure  670  9% 20%  17%  15%  8%  Pay Lot 1  14  32%  48%  61% 66%  55%  Pay Lot 2  74  16%  19%  15%  17% 23%  Pay Lot 3  118  13% 33%  24%  19%  14%  Pay Lot 5  42  27%  81%  85% 100%  35%  Pay Lot 8  53  14%  13%  10%  12% 20%  Pay Lot 10  28  22%  52%  48%  56% 81%  Note: Red cell denotes peak period  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)       2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 447 of 617 Weekend Peak Period (Time of Day)!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(Figur e 5-12Weekend Estimated Parking Occupancy within 1/8 Mile of Destinations -Peak Period by Time of Day Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanWeekend Peak Period OccupancyThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson St9PM - 11PM6PM - 8PM3PM - 5PM11AM - 1PM7AM - 9AM Multiple Periods >85% Occupancy!(Peak:Peak > 85% Occupancy!( 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street ParkingOccupancy During Peak: Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 448 of 617  Page 44  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Outside of the Parking District, where land uses are primarily residential, the peak occupancy times occur  at various times throughout the day.  Along Alvarado Street, the peak was observed at 7am.  Unlike the  weekday  7am  period,  less  commuting  takes  place  on  the  weekends,  resulting  in  the  7am  weekend  observation time retaining some commonalities with the 9pm weekday observation time periods where a  large number of residents are at home.  Between the southern extent of the Parking District at G Street  and Alvarado Street, the peak time period was observed at 6pm.  It is likely that the blocks in this vicinity  are receiving a mix of demand from both residents and downtown visitors, since they are situated in close  proximity to both the business district and the residential areas (the peak period on G Street during the  weekday was also 6pm).    As was true during the weekday observations, the magnitudes of the peak parking occupancies within the  study area are higher outside of the Parking District.  The spatial pattern of demand outside of the District  is almost identical on both weekday and weekend:  Third Avenue between G Street and Alvarado Street  has an occupancy peak between 50% and 70% (forming a yellow core), followed by a concentric (orange)  ring of 70% to 85% peak occupancy along Alvarado Street, on the adjacent to Third Avenue portions of Park  Way, G Street, and Roosevelt Street, while the surrounding outer portions of the study area have peak  occupancies of 85% or greater.    Weekend Parking Occupancy – Morning (7am to 9am)  Figure 5‐13 shows the average weekend parking occupancy, by block, for the morning hours between 7am  and 9am.  All of the metered blocks within the parking district are below 50% utilization during this time  period, as was also the case during weekday observations.  The seven off‐street public parking facilities  serving the Parking District were observed to be well below 50% utilization.  Numerous residential blocks  on the periphery of the study area were observed to have 85% or greater occupancy.  On weekend  mornings, it is likely that many residents would be home and fewer persons would be commuting, as  compared to weekdays.    Figure 5‐14 shows the occupancy of surrounding parking supply and estimated quantity of parking available  during the morning observation period within a 1/8th mile walk of parcels within the study area.  During  this period, the supply of parking within a 1/8th mile of nearly all parcels within the Parking District  boundary are below 50% occupancy.  Some parcels along Alvarado Street, Roosevelt Street and H Street  on the outer periphery of the study area which surround the parking district have occupancies which range  from 70% to 100%.    Weekend Parking Occupancy – Lunch (11am to 1pm)  Figure 5‐15 displays the average weekend parking occupancy, by block, for the lunch period between 11am  and 1pm.  During this period the occupancy along some of the metered blocks on Third Avenue increases  from the morning period, though available parking is still generally abundant within the parking district.   Four of the largest off‐street public parking facilities are below 50% occupancy.    Figure 5‐16 shows the occupancy of surrounding parking supply and estimated quantity of parking available  during the weekend lunch observation period within a 1/8th mile walk of parcels within the study area.   During the lunch period, the supply of parking within a 1/8th mile of most parcels within the Parking District  remains below 50% occupancy.  The occupancy of parking supply near the residential parcels on the  periphery of the study area decreases slightly from the morning period.       2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 449 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-13Parking Utilization by Block7AM to 9AM Weekend Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 450 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekend 7AMFigur e 5-14Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations7AM - 9AM Weekend Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekend 7AMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 451 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-15Parking Utilization by Block11AM to 1PM Weekend Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 452 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekend 11AMFigur e 5-16Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations11AM - 1PM Weekend Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekend 11AMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 453 of 617  Page 49  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Weekend Parking Occupancy – Afternoon (3pm to 5pm)  Parking occupancy, by block, for the afternoon period between 3pm and 5pm is presented in Figure 5‐17.   As shown, parking within the District is generally under‐utilized with the exception of Pay Lot 5 and along  G  Street.    The  residential  blocks  on  the  surrounding  periphery of the study area remain at higher  occupancies, with some blocks (G Street, Church Avenue – south of G Street, Roosevelt Street) exceeding  85%.    Figure 5‐18 displays the parking occupancy within a 1/8th mile walk of parcels between 3pm and 5pm.  The  usage of parking throughout the study area is generally the sam e as the previous period, with the exception  of occupancy increases to the parcels on Church Avenue, south of G Street.  Conditions along that block of  Church Avenue are affected by the increased usage of parking at Pay Lot 5 and along G Street.    Weekend Parking Occupancy – Dinner (6pm to 8pm)  Figure 5‐19 shows the average weekend parking occupancy, by block, for the dinner period between 6pm  and 8pm.  After 6pm, the metered blocks along Third Avenue within the Parking District increase to above  85% occupancy (paid parking enforcement at meters and pay parking lots ends at 6pm throughout the  district).  The on‐street parking along many of the residential blocks in the periphery of the study area are  also greater than 85% occupancy.    As shown in Figure 5‐20, the occupancy of the parking supply within a 1/8th mile along Third Avenue  remains below 50% for most parcels, despite the previously noted increase in parking occupancy which  occurs along the metered spaces of Third Avenue after the enforcement period ends.  Overall supply of  parking available is balanced by the aforementioned decline in use of the pay parking lots after 6pm.   Occupancy along Church Avenue between E Street and F Street increases for most parcels to between 50%  and 70%.  The residential parcels south of the parking district are primarily at occupancies greater than  70%.    Weekday Parking Occupancy – Evening (9pm to 11pm)  Figure 5‐21 shows the average weekend parking occupancy by block for the evening period between 9pm  and 11pm.  During this time period parking occupancy increases to above 85% on the metered blocks on  Third Avenue between Davidson Street and Church Avenue and to between 70% and 85% along the meters  on Church Avenue and on Third Avenue north of Davidson Street.  The on‐street parking for many of the  residential blocks in the periphery of the study area remains at greater than 85% occupancy.    As shown in Figure 5‐22, the occupancy of the parking supply within a 1/8th mile of the parcels increases  in some portions of the parking district to above 50%:  notably along Church Avenue between E Street and  Davidson Street, it is between 70% and 85%.  North of F Street, this period represents the weekend peak  for many of the parcels within the Parking District.       2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 454 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-17Parking Utilization by Block3PM to 5PM Weekend Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 455 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekend 3PMFigur e 5-18Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations3PM - 5PM Weekend Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekend 3PMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 456 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-19Parking Utilization by Block6PM to 8PM Weekend Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 457 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekend 6PMFigur e 5-20Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations6PM - 8PM Weekend Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekend 6PMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 458 of 617 Four t h Ave²Gl over AveGar r et t AveLandi s AveThi r d AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v id so n S tE S tF S tC e n te r S tP a rk W y G S tV a n c e S tR o o se v e lt S tH S tA lv a ra d o S tM a d ro n a S tC y p re ss S tChur ch AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSec ond AveD S tGl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan Figur e 5-21Parking Utilization by Block9PM to 11PM Weekend Average Percent Utilization Greater than 85% 70.1% - 85% 50.1% - 70% 50% and Below Predom inantly Metered Parking Predom inantly Free Parking Off-Street Parking Chur ch AveParkPlazaStructure PayLot5 PayLot3 PayLot2 Pay Lot8 PayLot10 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 459 of 617 Percent Occupancy - Weekend 9PMFigur e 5-22Estimated Supply of Available Parking within 1/8 Mile of Destinations9PM - 11PM Weekend Average Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management PlanEstimated Available Parking - Weekend 9PMThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StThird Ave Landis Ave Church Ave Del Mar Ave Garrett AveE StF StG StH StMadronaStPark WayRoosevelt StAlvarado StCenter StDavidson StSpaces Available:> 200 101 - 200 51 - 100 26 - 50 11 - 25 6 - 10 1 - 5 0 50% an d <50.1% - 70%70.1% - 85%> 85%Occupancy:Study AreaParking DistrictOff-Street Parking Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 Pay Lot 3Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot10 PayLot8 Park PlazaStructure Pay Lot5 PayLot1 PayLot1 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 460 of 617  Page 56  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  5.4 Weekend Parking Turnover Weekend parking turnover by block along Third Avenue is summarized in Table 5‐5.  Turnover was observed  on Saturday only, when parking cost and time limits at the meters are enforced.  The mean vehicle length  of stay observed on weekends along Third Avenue between E Street  and  Madrona  Street  during  enforcement was one hour and 28 minutes.  During enforcement hours, approximately 8% of vehicles  observed remained parked longer than the two‐hour time limit.  As  discussed  previously,  any  data  collection method used short of continuous monitoring will under‐estimate vehicles making short‐duration  stays as it is probable that some vehicles could have arrived and departed between scheduled collection  snapshots.  Correcting for this would, if anything, reduce the mean length of stay and the percentage of  vehicles exceeding 2‐hours parked to lower values than what are presented in the table.  During non‐ enforcement hours, about 43% of vehicles were parked for a period of time exceeding 2‐hours, with the  average length of stay two hours and 46 minutes.    Table 5-5: Weekend Parking Turnover along Third Avenue between E Street and Madrona Street Section of Third  Avenue  Total  Spaces  Monitored  Total  Vehicles  Observed  Mean  Length of  Stay (Hours)  Vehicles  Exceeding 2‐ Hours  Total  Vehicles  Observed  Mean Length  of Stay  (Hours)  Vehicles  Exceeding 2‐ Hours  During Enforcement Hours Outside of Enforcement Hours  E Street to  Davidson Street 55  238  1:20  16 (7%)  89  3:24  54 (61%)  Davidson Street  to F Street 61  328  1:37  37 (11%)  136  3:02  68 (50%)  F Street to  Center Street 31  117  1:27  10 (9%)  69  2:19  22 (32%)  Center Street  to Madrona  Street  21  96  1:14  2 (2%)  55  1:34  4 (7%)  Total  168  779  1:28  65 (8%)  349  2:46  148 (43%)  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    Table 5‐6 summarizes weekend parking turnover within the Park Plaza parking structure.  As was  previously stated, due to the size of the area, turnover was collected less frequently.  As shown, 84% of  the vehicles observed remained parked under the three‐hour limit.  A total of 19 vehicles (6%) were  observed to be parked longer than six hours.    Table 5-6: Weekend Parking Turnover in Park Plaza Parking Structure Parking  Structure  Levels  Total  Spaces  Monitored  Total Unique  Vehicles  Observed  Under 3 Hours  (One Period)  3 to 6 Hours  (Two  Periods)  Greater than 6 Hours  (Three or more  Periods  1st Level  198  227  196 (86%)  18 (8%)  13 (6%)  2nd Level  193  117  93 (80%)  18 (15%)  6 (5%)  3rd Level  246  4  3 (75%)  1 (25%)  0  Total  637  348  292 (84%)  37 (11%)  19 (6%)  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 461 of 617  Page 57  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  6.0 Public Outreach This chapter summarizes the methods of public outreach undertaken during this phase of the project.  To  date, the project team has met with stakeholders one time – a meeting involving TAVA on January 9, 2019.   The project team drafted and administered two surveys, one for the public and one for business owners.   Results from the two surveys are summarized in this section.    6.1 Documentation of Public Outreach Efforts Opinion surveys were developed and tailored toward two Third Avenue Village stakeholder groups: the  public who visits Third Avenue Village, as shown in Figure 6‐1; and the TAVA business owner’s association,  as shown in Figure 6‐2.  The results from both surveys are discussed in the forthcoming sections.  Raw  results from both surveys are presented in Appendix A.    The survey for the public which visits Third Avenue Village was developed in both English and Spanish, and  structured  to  gather  some  basic  information  from  the  public  about  their  typical  trip  purpose,  travel  behavior, and their thoughts on parking matters such as convenience and cost.  It was administered in two  ways: as an intercept3 survey and as an online survey.  Many intercept surveys were gathered along Third  Avenue, at locations near F Street and Madrona Street.  The survey was also hosted online and promoted  to  the  public  through  various  communications,  including  the  City’s  official  website  and  social  media  accounts.  In total, 52 persons completed the survey.      The TAVA survey gathered basic information from the TAVA business community regarding their clients’  and customers’ parking needs, and their perceptions on the quantity and convenience of the Village’s  parking supply.  The survey was circulated and promoted through the association’s email lists.  Most of the  business owners who responded to the survey run businesses on Third Avenue within the Parking District  (between E Street and Center Street); however, some responding businesses were located elsewhere on  Third Avenue, on cross‐streets to Third Avenue – such as F Street and G Street, or on parallel blocks such  as Church Avenue or Garrett Avenue.  The survey was also translated into Spanish.    In addition to the development of surveys, the project team also hosted a booth at the Villains In The  Village, a Halloween‐themed community event held by TAVA on Saturday, October 20, 2018.  The booth  was staffed by members of the project team, who shared information regarding the study and provided  Halloween treats to the children.  The public was invited to take the survey at the booth or provided  encouragement to complete the survey online at later time.                                                                      3 Intercept surveys are conducted in-person, where the interviewer – positioned in a populated public area, asks individuals approaching for their participation 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 462 of 617 Figure 6‐1:  Public Opinion Survey  This is a questionnaire designed to gather opinions about parking conditions and gain a better  understanding about travel behaviors from members of the public who frequent the area around the  Third Avenue Village of Downtown Chula Vista.  It is being administered on behalf of the City of Chula  Vista, and the results will help inform the update of the City’s Downtown Parking Study.  1) How frequently do you visit the Third Avenue Village?  a) Multiple times per week  b) About once a week  c) About once or twice a month  d) A few times per year  e) A couple times per year or less    2) Within the past month, have you come to the Third Avenue Village to do any of the  following activities?  Select all that apply:  a) Shopping  b) Visiting Restaurants, Bars or Cafes  c) Working  d) Entertainment  e) Exercise or Recreation  f) Other    On the occasions you have arrived to the Third Avenue Village via automobile:  3) Are your typical visits longer than 2‐hours?  a) Yes  b) No   c)  Unsure  d) Not applicable    4) How often are you able to find parking within one or two blocks of your destination?  a) Always    b)  Usually   c) Occasionally  d)  Never  e)   Not applicable    5) Do you try to avoid parking in locations which cost money (such as meters or paid parking  lots)?  a) Always    b)  Usually   c)  Occasionally    d)  Never  e)  Not applicable    6) If the parking meters along Third Avenue accepted more convenient forms of payment –  such as credit cards, would you be more encouraged to use those parking spaces?  a) Yes    b)  No    c)  Unsure   d)  Not applicable    7) Were you aware that there is a parking structure with free parking situated behind the  shops on the west side of Third Avenue near F Street?  a) Yes    b)  No    8) Is the location of this parking structure convenient to most of the destinations you visit  along Third Avenue?  a) Yes    b)  No    c)  Unsure  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 463 of 617 Figure 6‐1:  Public Opinion Survey  9) If you could not find parking on the same block as your destination, are there  circumstances where you would be willing to walk longer distances from where you  parked (approximately 3 to 4 blocks) to reach your destination?  a) Yes  b) No  c) No, but would reconsider if conditions along the streets in the neighborhood were improved*    *If you answered question 9 with “C”, indicate what conditions would need to be improved in order for  you to reconsider your unwillingness to walk longer distances from where you parked:     _____________________________________________    10) Have prior difficulties in searching for parking at the Third Avenue Village discouraged  you from wanting to make visits here on other occasions?  a) Yes    b)  No    c)  Not applicable    11) Other than driving, indicate any other forms of transportation you have ever utilized  previously to visit the Third Avenue Village:  Select all that apply:  a) Dropped‐off by a driving companion  b) Taxi or Ride‐Hailing service (Lyft, Uber, etc)  c) Bus  d) Bicycle  e) Walking  f) Other      2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 464 of 617 Figure 6‐2:  Business Owners Survey    This is a questionnaire designed to gather opinions from Third Avenue Village business owners about  parking conditions and to gain a better understanding about their customers’/clients’ parking needs.  It is  being administered on behalf of the City of Chula Vista, and the results will help inform the update of the  City’s Downtown Parking Study.  1) What is the address of your business? __________________________________________    2) What type of business do you operate?  a) Retail  b) Food and Beverage  c) Professional Services  d) Entertainment  e) Exercise or Recreation  f) Other    3) On average, how much time do your customers/clients spend in your business per visit?  a) Less than 30 Minutes  b) 30 Minutes to 2 Hours  c) 2 Hours to 4 Hours  d) Longer than 4 Hours  e) Unsure    4) Does your business have its own private supply of off‐street parking?  a) Yes, for customers use only  b) Yes, for staff use only  c) Yes, for both customers and staff  d) No    5) Does your business direct its employees to park remotely, in order to preserve closer  parking spaces for customers?  a) Yes    b)  No    c)  Unsure   d)  Not applicable    6) Do you believe that visitors to the Village would be more encouraged to use the parking  meters along Third Avenue if they accepted more convenient forms of payment, such as  credit cards?  a) Yes    b)  No    c)  Unsure   d)  Not applicable    Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements:    7) I am generally satisfied with the quantity of available parking spaces close to my business  a) Strongly Agree  b) Agree  c) Neutral  d) Disagree  e) Strongly Disagree  f) Unsure      2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 465 of 617 Figure 6‐2:  Business Owners Survey    8) The location of the Village parking structure (behind the shops on the west side of Third  Avenue, south of F Street) is a convenient place to park for my customers/clients  a) Strongly Agree  b) Agree  c) Neutral  d) Disagree  e) Strongly Disagree  f) Unsure    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 466 of 617  Page 62  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  6.2 Results from Public Survey Table 6‐1 shows the frequency that respondents indicated they visit the Third Avenue Village.  Among the  respondents, 40% reported visiting the Third Avenue Village multiple times per week, with an additional  19% indicating they average about one visit per week.    Table 6-1: Survey Respondents Visitation Frequency Visitation Frequency Percent of Respondents  Multiple times per week  40%  About once per week  19%  About once or twice per month  19%  A few times per year  14%  A couple times per year or less  8%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    Trip Purpose  Respondents were asked to indicate which types of activities (allowing multiple answers) drew them to  the Third Avenue Village in the past month.  Table 6‐2 summarizes the percent of total respondents who  indicated each activity type.    Table 6-2: Survey Respondents Trip Purpose Activity Type Percent of Respondents  Visiting Restaurants, Bars or Cafes  73%  Exercise or Recreation  37%  Entertainment  27%  Shopping  21%  Working  13%  Other  2%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    Almost three‐quarters (73%) of the respondents indicated they have recently visited the Third Avenue  Village in order to patronize a restaurant, bar or cafe.  The second most common response was exercise or  recreation, with 37% indicating they have come or came recently for that purpose.  The unexpectedly large  number of responses for exercise and recreation is likely due to the success that survey administrators had  gathering surveys near the 24 Hour Fitness.  Work trips were specified by 13% of the respondents (notably,  that number is much lower than the 40% of respondents who indicate they visit the Village multiple times  per week).  This may also be a function of the survey sample group.    Length of Visit  Respondents were asked if on the occasions they have arrived to the Third Avenue Village by automobile,  if their typical visits are longer than two hours.  Two hours is the time restriction imposed on the parking  meters along Third Avenue in order to ensure quicker parking turnover.  As shown in Table 6‐3, 60% of the  respondents reported that their typical visits are longer than two hours, while 28% said their typical length  of stay at the Third Avenue Village takes less time.  It should be noted, a sizable share of intercept surveys  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 467 of 617  Page 63  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  was gathered near the Park Plaza parking structure, which allows longer‐term parking.  68% of those who  parked in the parking structure during parking turnover observations were staying under three hours.    Table 6-3: Respondents Typical Length of Visits Typical Length of Visit Percent of Respondents  Longer than 2‐Hours  60%  2‐Hours and Less  28%  Unsure  12%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    Perceived Convenience of Parking  Survey takers were asked a series of questions intended to gauge their opinions regarding the convenience  of parking in the Third Avenue Village and their general attitudes toward paying for parking.  The responses  to these questions are summarized in Tables 6‐4a and 6‐4b.    Table 6-4a: Perceived Convenience of Parking at Third Avenue Village (Likert Scale) Respondent Always Usually Occasionally Never  Able to find parking within one or two  blocks of destination 30%  36%  28%  6%  Avoids parking in locations which cost  money 49%  20%  25%  6%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    When respondents were asked how often they could find parking within one or two blocks of their  destination,  a  combined  two‐thirds  of  respondents  answered always or usually  (30%  and  36%,  respectively).  A combined 34% chose answers (occasionally or never) indicating that they have some level  of difficulty finding parking close to their destination.    Another question asked if respondents try to avoid parking in locations which cost money (such as the  meters or paid parking lots).  Nearly half (49%) of the respondents claimed they always avoid parking in  those locations, while another 20% stated they usually avoid parking in those locations.  25% answered  that only occasionally avoid those locations, while 6% responded that they never avoid those locations.    When filtering the survey responses by the respondents who reported to always avoid parking in locations  which cost money, a combined 58% stated they still are always (21%) or usually (37%) able to find parking  within one or two blocks of their destination.      2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 468 of 617  Page 64  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Table 6-4b: Perceived Convenience of Parking at Third Avenue Village (Yes/No) Respondent Yes No Unsure  Has been discouraged to visit Third Avenue Village on a  previous occasion because of parking difficulties 54%  46%    Is aware of free parking structure at Third Avenue and F  Street 67%  33%  Considers the location of free parking structure  convenient to their destinations 65%  27%  8%  Would be willing to use meters if more convenient forms  of payment (such as credit cards) were accepted 64%  28%  8%  Would consider walking a longer distance from parking (3  to 4 blocks) under some circumstances 58%  42%   Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    Over half the respondents (54%) have, on a previous occasion, been discouraged to visit the Third Avenue  Village because of parking difficulties.  A third of those surveyed were not aware of the free Park Plaza  parking structure, while just over a quarter of those surveyed (27%) did not perceive the location of the  parking structure as conveniently‐situated to most  of their usual destinations.  When asked if more  convenient forms of payment (such as credit cards) would make respondents more willing to use the  metered parking along Third Avenue, 64% respondents indicated so.    42% of respondents stated they would not walk longer distances than two blocks under any circumstances,  though half of those indicated they might reconsider if walking conditions were improved.  The most  commonly‐cited conditions which deterred walkers included inadequate lighting, security concerns related  to the presence of a homeless population, ADA‐accessibility and lack of shade.    Other Forms of Transportation Utilized  Respondents were asked what other forms of transportation (allowing multiple answers) they have ever  previously utilized to visit the Third Avenue Village.  Table 6‐5 summarizes the percent of total respondents  who indicated each form of mobility.    Table 6-5: Other Forms of Transportation Previously Utilized Transportation Percent of  Respondents  Dropped‐off by a driving companion  42%  Taxi or ride‐hailing service  42%  Walking  42%  Bicycling  7%  Bus  7%  Have only reached the Village via personal vehicle  12%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    As noted in the table, 88% of the respondents have had at least one previous experience of arriving at the  Third Avenue Village without requiring vehicular parking.  A plurality of those respondents indicated they  had used a taxi or ride‐hailing service, received a drop‐off by a companion or walked in a previous instance.  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 469 of 617  Page 65  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  6.3 Results from Business Owners Survey Table 6‐6 summarizes the types of businesses run by the 40 business owners who took the survey.  Among  the respondents, almost half of businesses were professional services (20), while a quarter were retail (10).    Table 6-6: Respondents Business Type Business Type Number of Respondents  Professional Services  20 (50%)  Retail  10 (25%)  Food and Beverage  6 (15%)  Other  3 (7.5%)  Exercise or Recreation  1 (2.5%)  Total  40  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    Table 6‐7 shows the duration that customers or clients to the responding businesses spend on a typical visit  to their business.  A combined 87% of the businesses surveyed stated that under two hours is the typical  the length of stay for their patrons.  The short typical customer/client duration suggests that the two‐hour  parking time limit along Third Avenue is sufficient to accommodate visits to multiple businesses in one trip.    Table 6-7: Customers/Clients Typical Duration of Visit Typical Duration Percent of Respondents  Less than 30 Minutes  23%  30 Minutes to 2 Hours  64%  2 Hours to 4 Hours  8%  Longer than 4 Hours  5%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    Tables 6‐8 and 6‐9 show that a majority of the businesses surveyed (62.5%) do not have their own supply  of off‐street parking.  Three‐quarters (75%) of those businesses surveyed have no parking available for their  customers.  Almost half of the business owners surveyed indicate they instruct their staff to park remotely  in order to preserve parking spaces closer to their business for customers.    Table 6-8: Business Has Own Source of Off-Street Parking Has Source of Parking Percent of  Respondents  No  62.5%  Yes (for customers and staff)  15%  Yes (for staff use only)  12.5%  Yes (for customer use only)  10%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 470 of 617  Page 66  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  Table 6-9: Business Directs Staff to Park Remotely Instructs Staff to Park Remotely Percent of Respondents  Yes  47%  No  37%  Not Applicable  16%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)    Table 6‐10 shows that half of the business owners surveyed (50%) were unsatisfied with the quantity of  available parking close to their business.  Very few of the responding business owners (13%) regarded the  location of the Park Plaza parking structure as a convenient location for their customers to park.  A large  majority of business owners believed the meters along Third Avenue would receive better use from visitors  to the Third Avenue Village if they accepted more convenient forms of payment, such as credit cards.    Table 6-10: Business Owners Perception of Convenient Available Parking at Third Avenue Village Business Owner Strongly  Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly  Disagree  Is generally satisfied with quantity of  available parking close to their business 7.5%  25%  17.5%  30%  20%  Regards the location of the Park Plaza  parking structure as convenient place for  its customer/clients to park  5%  8%  18%  32%  37%  Believes visitors would use meters more  often if more convenient forms of payment  (such as credit cards) were accepted  Yes Unsure No  70%  12.5%  17.5%  Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2019)      2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 471 of 617  Page 67  Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan  Existing Conditions Report  7.0 Conclusions Based on extensive data collection and observations, there is a lot of underutilized parking within the  Parking District.  On the weekdays, a majority of the district peaks between 11am and 1pm with parking  occupancy ranging between 70% and 85% ‐ as shown in Figure 5‐1.  On the weekends, parking within the  Parking District is heavily underutilized – with most of the large parking lots observed to be at near‐vacant  occupancies.  However, there are some areas within the Parking District which experience higher peaks.   The parcels near Third Avenue and Madrona Street, experience higher evening peaks – partially influenced  by its proximity to both a cluster of restaurants and residential land uses.    The parking within the residential areas outside of the Parking District were observed to have much heavier  utilization, though most of the supply outside of the district is free and non‐time‐restricted – contributing  to lower‐turnover parking behavior.  The supply of parking serving the residential portions of the study area  is also much smaller in quantity than the Parking District.    Outreach efforts yielded a several notable observations.  One is that both the public and business owners  (64% and 70%, respectively) believe that the parking meters, provided that they accepted more convenient  forms of payment (such as credit cards), would be used more often.  This is notable because there is  capacity to spare at the metered parking locations during many of the observation times which coincided  with  enforcement  hours.  Metered  parking  spaces  along  Third  Avenue are also typically the most  conveniently‐situated parking spaces to the entrances of businesses within the Parking District.  Another  observation is that there are a substantial number of visitors who are either unaware of (33%) or do not  find the Park Plaza parking structure to be convenient (27%) to their usual destinations.  The vast size of  the parking structure and its central location to the district make it an ideal opportunity for the focus of a  “park once” district.  The lack of familiarity or desirability some visitors have with the parking structure  suggests that information, the general walkability of the surrounding area and wayfinding are possibly  lacking to the standards of the visiting population.      The occupancy within the Park Plaza parking structure peaks at 77% during the typical weekday lunch  period, but otherwise hovers at half‐occupancy or below the rest of the week.  The parking structure has  more than enough capacity to accommodate a larger number of visitors to the area, and its peak period is  complimentary with residential growth (peaking at during weekday mid‐day, when most residents are away  at work).    Conclusion Points  •Supply of available parking within Parking District was observed to be adequate during peak periods  •Residential peak time of day periods complimentary with commercial peak time of day periods  •Parking demand within Parking District not allocated efficiently; these are possible reasons:   Many visitors have lack of knowledge about where to park   Walking distances from areas with available parking to destination undesirable for some   Coin‐operated meters (not accepting credit cards) inconvenient to many patrons     2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 472 of 617   Appendix A  Public Survey and Business Owners Survey  Raw Data     2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 473 of 617     Individual Survey Results provided under separate cover       2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 474 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Appendix B - On-Site Parking Capacity and Future Parking Generation 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 475 of 617 Appendix B – Overview of Near‐Term Parking Conditions Analysis    This appendix explains how on‐site parking capacity and future parking generation was estimated for  each redeveloped parcel.        Ground floor parking capacity was estimated for parcels anticipated to redevelop in the near‐ term   Development capacity of parcels anticipated to redevelop was estimated in the near‐term, except  for entitled projects where the development quantities were known   Parking generation was estimated for noon and 9pm periods under near‐term conditions   Parking generation was assigned to on‐site parking per parcel and off‐site within the study area    Parking Capacity Estimation – Ground floor parking capacity for each parcel was estimated based on  typical parking feature dimensions and the dimensions and access characteristics of each parcel.  The  parking capacity per parcel would subsequently be used to subtract from parking generation estimates  per parcel of each development scenario in order to determine how much off‐site public parking each of  the scenarios would generate.  For entitled near‐term projects, the known parking quantities were  substituted in place of the estimates.    Based on typical parking lot feature dimensions shown in  Table 1, a series of basic possible ground floor parking  configurations were developed for all parcels within the  study area.  The accompanying image demonstrates a  couple of the basic parking configurations considered.      Table 1: Assumed Parking Lot Feature Dimensions  Feature Dimension  Parking Space Width 9’  Parking Space Length 18’  Driveway Aisle 24’  Driveway Entry Depth 18’  Driveway Backing Area Depth 18’    Each parking configuration within a parcel was contingent on if required conditions were present in the  parcel such as street access, alley access and minimum feasible width and depth to accommodate parking  in that configuration.  Parcels which are also zoned to have a ground floor mixed‐use component had 50’  subtracted from their lot depth to account for the ground floor non‐residential land uses.    Table 2 shows the formulas used to calculate estimated parking capacity under each possible  configuration for every parcel within the study area, provided it met the conditions of that configuration.   If multiple parking configurations were possible within a parcel, the configuration which could  accommodate the largest number of spaces possible was selected for that parcel and the corresponding  supply total was assumed for that parcel.  Irregular‐shaped parcels were divided into rectangles and the  same calculations were performed on the rectangular portions.  It was assumed that no future  development projects would construct underground or structured parking on site, or that no parcel  assembly would take place.    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 476 of 617   Table 2: Assumed Parking Lot Required Conditions and Formulas  Parking Configuration  Access  side (As)  Minimum  Non‐ Access  Side (Ns)  Minimum  Non‐Access  Side (Ns)  Minimum if  Ground Floor  Retail   Formula without  Ground Floor Retail  Formula with Ground  Floor Retail  Alley ≥9’ ≥18’ ≥68’ As / 9 As / 9  One Row / One Aisle /  No Alley ≥42’ ≥45’ ≥95’ (Ns – 36) / 9 ((Ns – 50) – 36) / 9  One Row / One Aisle /  Alley ≥42’ ≥45’ ≥95’ ((Ns – 36) / 9) + 2 ((Ns – 50) – 36) / 9) + 2  Two Rows / One Aisle /  No Alley ≥60’ ≥45’ ≥95’ ((Ns – 36) * 2) / 9 ((Ns – 50) – 36) * 2) / 9  Two Rows / One Aisle /  Alley ≥60’ ≥45’ ≥95’ (((Ns – 36) * 2) / 9) +  4  (((Ns – 50) – 36) * 2) / 9)  + 4  Three Rows / Two  Aisles / No Alley ≥102’ ≥45’ ≥95’ ((Ns – 36) * 3) / 9 ((Ns – 50) – 36) * 3) / 9  Three Rows / Two  Aisles / Alley ≥102’ ≥45’ ≥95’ (((Ns – 36) * 3) / 9) +  6  (((Ns – 50) – 36) * 3) / 9)  + 6  Four Rows / Circular  Aisle ≥120’ ≥57’ ≥107’ (((Ns – 48) / 9) * 4) +  8  (((Ns – 50) – 48) / 9) * 4)  + 8  Six Rows / Figure Eight  Circulation ≥180’ ≥57’ ≥107’ (((Ns – 48) / 9) * 6) +  8  (((Ns – 50) – 48) / 9) * 6)  + 8    Development Capacity Estimation – Development capacity for each parcel was estimated based on the  parcel’s dimensions and the permitted uses and development envelopes of the respective Urban Core  Specific Plan zones each parcel was located within.  For entitled near‐term projects, the known  development quantities were substituted in place of the estimates.    Table 3 shows the UCSP zones in the study area and their maximum allowed height, allowed Floor‐Area  Ratio (FAR), and residential parking requirements.  The non‐residential parking requirements are identical  in all the UCSP zones within the study area.  Except for UC‐3 Roosevelt, the UCSP zones allow both  residential and non‐residential land uses.  Where non‐residential uses are permitted, they are typically  allowed on the ground floor only.  The descriptions of the zone regulations within the UCSP1 specify the  blocks and streets where those land use types are forbidden or allowed within the zone.                  1 UCSP Chapter 6 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 477 of 617 Table 3:  UCSP Zone Building Envelope and Parking Regulations  Zone Name FAR Max  Height  Residential  Parking  Non‐Residential  Parking  V‐1 East Village 2.0 45’ 1.6 per DU 2 per 1,000 sf  V‐2 Village 2.0 45’ 1.6 per DU 2 per 1,000 sf  V‐3 West Village 4.5 84’ 1.6 per DU 2 per 1,000 sf  UC‐1 St. Rose 4.0 84’ 1.1 per DU 2 per 1,000 sf  UC‐2 Gateway 5.0 84’ 1.1 per DU 2 per 1,000 sf  UC‐3 Roosevelt 3.0 60’  n/a    Development capacity was estimated through a series of calculations.  FAR was divided by the maximum  allowed floors (an assumption converted from the maximum building height, specified in the UCSP)  generates a number which can be multiplied by the parcel area to determine a maximum building  footprint area possible allowed by the zone.    Maximum Building Footprint  (a / b) * c  a = FAR  b = floors  c = parcel square footage    The maximum building footprint represents the area of one floor plate, which can be multiplied by the  number of floors allowed by the zone.  On‐site parking was assumed to be configured on the ground  level, which eliminates the ground floor for residential use.  In locations where mixed land uses are  allowed, the commercial uses were assumed to go on the ground level.  In either situation, one floor plate  is subtracted from the maximum number of floors allowed when calculating residential square footage.   An assumption was made that 85% of space within the building is leasable (85% building efficiency), with  the remaining space accounting for common‐area or shared necessities of the building that are not  leasable, such as stairwells, hallways, and utility rooms.    Residential Square Footage  (b – 1) * (d * 0.85)  b = floors  d = maximum building footprint    To determine the number of dwelling units which can be accommodated on each parcel, the total  residential square footage was divided by 800 square feet.  This average square footage per dwelling unit  is comparable with recent development projects in Downtown Chula Vista.  It is representative of the  typical square footage of a one‐bedroom apartment, while also accounting for a diversity of a dwelling  unit sizes, roughly averaging the sizes of smaller apartment units such as studios and larger two‐bedroom  apartments.    Total Dwelling Units  e / 800  e = residential square footage  2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 478 of 617 Parking Generation Estimation    The Urban Land Institute (ULI) Shared Parking Analysis Manual (2020) was used to estimate the parking  generation for near‐term conditions.  To account for the different peaks by land use, future conditions  parking generation considered a noon snapshot representing a typical peak period for commercial land  uses and a 9pm representing a typical peak parking period for residential land uses were used.    Near‐term conditions analysis assumed three land uses within the study area, which each have an  estimate equation: residential, commercial shopping and commercial fine dining.  The ULI parking  generation estimates consider factors by time of day which account for the blending of various peak  times of different land uses.  As was documented during existing conditions, the more heavily commercial  portions of the study area (within the parking district boundary) were observed to have occupancy peaks  occurring mid‐day periods, while the more heavily residential portions of the study area peaked after  typical business hours.    Table 4 shows the ULI Shared Parking Analysis parking generation estimate equations.  Within the study  area, it was assumed commercial land use square footage would be split evenly between commercial  shopping and commercial fine dining.  As shown, each type of commercial has a different parking  generation estimate equation and different time of day factors – with the fine dining land use producing a  much higher parking generation.    Table 4: Parking Generation Estimate Equations  Land Use Unit Measure Equation Noon  Factor  9pm  Factor  Residential Per Dwelling Unit  (DU)  (1.7*DU) + (0.15*DU) 0.65 0.99  Commercial – Shopping Per 1,000 sq.ft.  (KSF)  (2.9*KSF) + (0.7*KSF) 0.95 0.5  Commercial – Fine Dining Per 1,000 sq.ft.  (KSF)  (15.25*KSF) + (2.48*KSF) 0.75 1.0  Source: Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Manual (2020)    Table 5 demonstrates a sample parking generation calculation for each land use considered under future  conditions, with the noon and 9pm factors applied.    Table 5: Parking Generation Sample Calculation  Land Use Raw Parking  Generation  Noon  Factor  9pm  Factor  25 Dwelling Units 47 31 47  5,000 sq.ft. Commercial Shopping 9 9 5  5,000 sq.ft. Commercial Fine Dining 44 33 44  Source: Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Manual (2020)    The calculations were applied to the redeveloping parcels in the study area, rounding the parking  generation of each parcel to multiples of 10. Table 6 summarizes the total rounded parking generation  within the study area under near‐term conditions using the noon and 9pm factors.    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 479 of 617 Table 6: Study Area Near‐Term Parking Generation  Time Period Parking  Generation  Near‐Term Conditions Noon 730  Near‐Term Conditions 9pm 1,070    2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 480 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Appendix C - Electric Vehicle Parking Analysis Memo 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 481 of 617 3900 5th Avenue, Suite 310  San Diego, CA 92103  619-795-6086 www.CRAmobility.com TO: Scott Barker, PE, AICP, DSD Facilities Financing, City of Chula Vista Kimberly Elliott, DSD Facilities Financing, City of Chula Vista FROM: Phuong Nguyen, PE, CR Associates Cristian Belmudez, CR Associates DATE: April 11, 2022 RE: Downtown Chula Vista Parking District – Electric Vehicle Charging The purpose of this technical memorandum is to provide the City of Chula Vista information on the current state of publicly accessible Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations, as well as to offer guidance on applying relevant best practices with respect to charging station siting in the Downtown Chula Vista Parking District (the District). Providing EV charging spaces for public use helps to encourage the use of electrical vehicles by providing convenient charging locations for people who live, work, and patronize business in the urban core. Additionally, locating EV stations in public areas helps to close the EV charging gap by assuring the availability of charging stations that may not be readily available in older multi-family and affordable housing neighborhoods. Electric Vehicle Ownership EV ownership is increasing every year. Vehicle manufacturers have demonstrated their commitment to the electrification of the automobile industry by offering consumers a wider range of EV options. In conjunction with the increased availability and choices of EV, federal, state, and local incentives (such as credit programs) further encourage consumers to transition from their traditional, fuel- powered vehicles to electric cars. Table 1 displays a five-year summary of the proportion of EVs and Non-EVs within San Diego County. Table 1 – Electric Vehicle Ownership Within County of San Diego Region Vehicle Type 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 San Diego Non-EV 2,165,637 2,434,649 2,443,399 2,453,443 2,426,015 EV 16,908 23,347 33,694 43,982 51,616 Total 2,182,545 2,457,996 2,477,093 2,497,425 2,477,631 % EV 0.8% 1.0% 1.4% 1.8% 2.1% Source: California Energy Commission (2021) 1 As shown in the table, the number of EV in the San Diego region increased from approximately 17,000 in 2016 to approximately 52,000 in 2020 while the total vehicle ownership remained relatively stable. This is a strong indication of the overall trend in consumer choice and behavior: EV ownership is on the rise in San Diego. However, the trends or patterns observed for a large and geographically diverse region may not necessarily be reflective of the consumer behavior at a more localized level. Table 2 displays the proportion of EV and non-EV within the South Bay region and specifically in the City of Chula Vista. 1 Source: California Energy Commission (2021). California Energy Commission Zero Emission Vehicle and Infrastructure Statistics. Data last updated April 1, 2021. Retrieved February 14, 2022 from http://www.energy.ca.gov/zevstats. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 482 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 2 Technical Memorandum Table 2 – Electric Vehicle Ownership Within South Bay Region and City of Chula Vista Region Vehicle Type 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 South Bay Non-EV 346,745 395,042 400,564 405,886 408,889 EV 1,090 1,511 2,220 3,172 3,934 Total 347,835 396,553 402,784 409,058 412,823 % EV 0.3% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% Chula Vista Non-EV 169,571 192,953 196,294 199,453 201,290 EV 720 993 1,496 2,162 2,694 Total 170291 193946 197,790 201,615 203,984 % EV 0.4% 0.5% 0.8% 1.1% 1.3% Source: California Energy Commission (2021)2 As shown in the table, similar to the San Diego region as a whole, both South Bay and Chula Vista also experienced same upward trend in EV ownership. Within the City of Chula Vista, EV ownership in 2020 almost quadrupled as compared to 2016. Relative to other EV manufacturers, Tesla has gained a significant increase in market share since 2016. The Tesla lineup includes a variety of vehicle sizes (i.e., coupe, sedan, and SUV) and price points, which have made it a popular choice for EV consumers. Figure 1 displays the percentage of EV owners that owned a Tesla during the five-year period between 2017 and 2021. Figure 1 – Five-Year Summary of Tesla Ownership As shown in Figure 1, between 2011 and 2016, Tesla ownership was approximately 10% of all EVs. During these years, EV were not popular due to the lack of options and functionality. Plug-in hybrids 2 Source: California Energy Commission (2021). California Energy Commission Zero Emission Vehicle and Infrastructure Statistics. Data last updated April 1, 2021. Retrieved February 14, 2022 from http://www.energy.ca.gov/zevstats. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%SouthbayChula VistaSouthbayChula VistaSouthbayChula VistaSouthbayChula VistaSouthbayChula VistaSouthbayChula Vista2011-2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Tesla Non-Tesla 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 483 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 3 Technical Memorandum were marketed specifically towards a unique market, such as urban commuters with short range travel needs. In 2012, Tesla introduced their Model S to the market. The Model S offered consumers increased range and amenities not typically found in other EVs at that time. By 2017, Tesla’s lineup included four models, including a more affordable mid-size sedan intended for the majority of consumers. Since then, as shown in this figure, the percentage of Tesla owners amongst all EV owners within the South Bay region and City of Chula Vista has increased from approximately 10% to 40%. It should be noted that the share of Tesla owners increased the most in 2018 and 2019 (up 10% from 2017) and continued to grow each year after but at a slower pace. The lower rate of growth is likely due to the growing competition from most major vehicle manufacturers, such as Ford, GM, BMW, Honda, and Toyota, which all have introduced EV models within the last five years. Back in 2017, there were only 15 EV models and of which four were made specifically for urban commuting (i.e., Leaf, Smart fortwo, Fiat 500e, Mitsubishi i-MiEV) and four were Tesla models. Today, there are 33 EV models available. As the EV market becomes saturated with more options ranging in affordability, amenities, and sizes, it is likely that Tesla’s share of the market will be reduced. Given the upward trend in EV demand, the industry’s commitment to meeting such demand, as well as the support from federal, state, and local governments, it is projected that EV ownership will continue to increase in the future. Within San Diego County, cumulative EV ownership is projected to increase from 52,000 in 2020 to 143,000 by 2030 3. Table 3 below summarizes EV ownership projections for the San Diego region, South Bay region, and the City of Chula Vista. Table 3 – EV Ownership Projections Through Year San Diego Region South Bay Region City of Chula Vista 2020 51,616 3,934 2,694 2022 71,177 5,425 3,715 2025 106,900 8,148 5,579 2030 142,517 10,862 7,438 Source :Center for Sustainable Energy (2022)4 Electric V ehicle Charging Station Features As EV ownership increases, the need for publicly available EV charging stations also increases. This section discusses the three major components for EV charging stations: (1) charging levels, (2) charging connectors, and (3) charging systems. “Charging levels” describes the different technologies and charging capacities available to EV. “Charging connectors” addresses the connectors used by different EV manufacturers and their compatibility. “Charging systems” describes the types of charging systems currently being used. Charging Levels Electric charging is categorized into the following three power levels:  Level 1 Charging uses a common 120-volt household outlet. Every electric or plug-in hybrid vehicle can be charged on Level 1 by plugging the charging equipment into a regular wall outlet. Level 1 is the slowest way to charge an EV. It adds between 2 and 5 miles of range per hour (RPH). RPH is a metric for drivers to estimate how far they can travel after charging. 3 Source: https://evcs.sandag.org/docs/PISDMethodology.pdf 4 Source: Center for Sustainable Energy (2022). California Air Resources Board Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, Rebate Statistic. Data last updated 1/21/2022. Retrieved 2/1/2022 from https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/en/rebate-statistics 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 484 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 4 Technical Memorandum  Level 2 Charging is the most commonly used level for daily EV charging. Level 2 charging equipment can be installed at home, at the workplace, as well as in public locations like shopping centers, transit stations and other destinations. Level 2 charging can replenish between 10 and 20 miles of RPH. Certain vehicles and chargers can achieve higher charging rate, up to 80 miles of RPH, depending on the power output of the Level 2 charger, and the vehicle’s maximum charge rate.  Level 3 Charging is the fastest type of charging available and can recharge an EV at a rate of 60 to 80 miles of range in 20 minutes (180 to 240 miles of RPH, depending on the maximum range of the vehicle). Unlike Levels 1 and 2 Charging that use alternating current (AC), Level 3 charging uses direct current (DC). Charging Connectors Chargers are also classified by the kind of connector on the charging cord. Except for Tesla, all vehicle manufacturers use the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) J1772 connectors for Level 1 and Level 2 charging. For Level 3 charging, there are two types of chargers for non-Tesla vehicles: Combined Charging System (CCS) and CHAdeMO. Detailed information about these two standards and the Tesla standard are provided below. Figure 2 displays the layout of the different charging standards.  Combined Charging System: The CCS connector, developed by SAE, uses the same plug type as the SAE J1772 connector with two additional high-speed charging pins underneath. CCS is the accepted standard in North America and almost every automaker today has agreed to use the CCS standard, including General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, Audi, Porsche, Honda, Kia, Fiat, Hyundai, Volvo, smart, MINI, Jaguar Land Rover, Bentley, Rolls Royce and others. It should be noted that while Tesla uses a proprietary connection in North America, it uses this CCS connector in its European market.  CHAdeMO: CHAdeMO was developed by the Japanese utility Tepco and is the official standard in Japan. In North America, only Nissan and Mitsubishi use this standard. However, Nissan is currently in the process of moving to the CCS standard. It should be noted that due to the low demand for CHAdeMO standard, charging station companies in North America are moving away from this model and adopting the CCS connector.  Tesla: In North America, Tesla uses a proprietary connection at all their DC fast charging (i.e., Level 3) stations. Tesla fast charging stations only charge Tesla vehicles, and non-Tesla vehicles are unable to charge even with an adapter cable because Tesla charging stations go through an authentication process before providing power. As of November 1, 2021, Tesla began a pilot program to allow other vehicles to utilize Tesla stations during off-peak hours, but this program is only available in the Netherlands, Germany, and Belgium. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 485 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 5 Technical Memorandum Figure 2 – Types of Charging Connectors J1772 CCS1 CHAdeMO Tesla Charging Systems To ensure compatibility between different charging systems and allow for open market charging, the charging industry developed the Open Charge Point Protocol (OCPP). Manufacturers who wish to be certified as OCPP compliant must go through a certification process via the Open Charge Alliance. This uniform standard ensures that charging system owners/hosts are less dependent upon individual system manufacturers. For example, if a charging station manufacturer goes out of business or increases their price, charging system owners/hosts can switch to another OCPP compliant manufacturer. As of January 2022, many major charging systems are OCPP compliant, including Blink, EVConnect, Evercharge, Enel X, Volta, and more. Tesla Super Charger Stations are not currently OCPP compliant, as Tesla uses a proprietary connector that is not compatible with the CCS1 system, and Tesla charging software does not allow non-Tesla EV to use the station even if an adapter is available. Non-Tesla owners cannot use Tesla charging stations; however, Tesla owners can use other types of chargers with a Tesla CCS Combo 2adapter. Electric Vehicle Charging Station Design Specifications The following specifications are recommended for public charging stations:  Commercial-grade, Level 2 chargers or DC Fast Charge  Ability to charge any EV using the SAE J-1772 coupler (North American standard)  Fast chargers should be CCS  Rated for outdoor usage  Network-ready (OCPP 2.0 or later)  ADA compliant  Include agreement for timely upgrades and maintenance Facilities with EV charging stations for public and common use must provide van accessible, standard accessible, and ambulatory EV charging stations as required per California Building Code (CBC 11B-8121). Standard specifications for each type of accessible EV charging stations are provided below: Van Accessible  12 feet minimum width  18 feet minimum length  Access aisle 5 feet minimum width located on passenger side with head- in parking Standard Accessible  9 feet minimum width  18 feet minimum length  Access aisle 5 feet minimum width located on passenger or driver side of EV space Ambulatory  10 feet minimum width  18 feet minimum length  No access aisle required Surface marking 12” high letters “EV CHARGING ONLY” 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 486 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 6 Technical Memorandum  Surface marking 12” high letter “EV CHARGING ONLY”  Surface marking 12” high letter “EV CHARGING ONLY” Table 4 displays the minimum number of ADA Compliant Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCS) required to comply with CBC 11B-8121. Table 4 – ADA Electric Vehicle Charging Stations for Public Use and Common Use Total Number of EVCS at a Facility Minimum Number of EVCS Required Van Accessible Standard Accessible Ambulatory 1 to 4 1 0 0 5 to 25 1 1 0 26 to 50 1 1 1 51 to 75 1 2 2 76 to 100 1 3 3 101 and over 1, plus 1 for each 300, or fraction thereof, over 100 3, plus 1 for each 60, or fraction thereof, over 100 3, plus 1 for each 50, or fraction thereof, over 100 Source: California Building Code (2022) Facilities with accessible EV charging stations should ensure that the charging stations are used exclusively for charging and not as ADA parking spaces. Signage should be clear enough to differentiate between non-accessible and accessible charging stations, without misleading users to believe the spaces can be used as non-EV, accessible parking. Figure 3 displays an example of an accessible EV charging station. Refer to the California Vehicle Code (CVC) for detailed ADA compliant design specifications. Figure 3 – Typical Accessible EV Charging Station 5 5 Source: https://www.access-board.gov/aba/guides/chapter-5-parking/#electric-vehicle-charging-stations 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 487 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 7 Technical Memorandum Regulations for E lectric V ehicle Charging Stations In November 2021, congress passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (“IIJA”) which includes funding to States to strategically deploy EV charging infrastructure and establish an interconnected network. The Federal Highway Administration has provided guidance to implement the legislation6. The IIJA bill establishes a discretionary grant program, Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Program, with $7.5 billion to create an interconnected EV charging network that includes alternative fuel corridors and locations that are accessible to all drivers. The State of California is expected to receive over $384 million over five years to support the expansion of an EV charging network and other types of alternative fuel infrastructure in the state. California will also be able to apply for grants out of the $2.5 billion available for EV charging. The federal funds, must be used for:  The acquisition and installation of EV charging infrastructure to serve as a catalyst for the deployment of such infrastructure and to connect it to a network and facilitate data collection, access, and reliability;  Proper operation and maintenance of EV charging infrastructure; and  Data sharing on EV charging infrastructure to ensure the long-term success of investments made under the program. Additionally, the legislation states the following: “The Federal share payable for projects funded under the EV Charging Program is 80 percent. EV Charging Program funds may be used to contract with a private entity for acquisition and installation of publicly accessible EV charging infrastructure, and the private entity may pay the non-Federal share of the project cost. However, funds must be used for projects directly related to vehicle charging and only for EV charging infrastructure that is open to the general public or to authorized commercial motor vehicle operators from more than one company. Further, any EV charging infrastructure acquired or installed with program funds must be located along a designated alternative fuel corridor, unless a State determines, and the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) certifies, that the designated alternative fuel corridors in the State are fully built out. In that case, the State could use the funds for EV charging infrastructure on any public road or in other publicly accessible locations.” In the State of California, Assembly Bill 1100 (AB-1100) was enacted to further deploy EV infrastructure. The Bill requires that standard spaces designated for EV are to be counted as at least one standard parking space when determining compliance with minimum parking standards established by local jurisdictions. Accessible parking spaces designated for EV should be counted as at least two standard parking spaces. Furthermore, California Health and Safety Code (HSC) 44268.2 prohibits charging stations that require users to subscribe to a service; EV charging stations shall be accessible to all types of users including nonsubscribers and nonmembers of subscription- based services. The California Green Building Standards Code specifies the standards for infrastructure to support the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment in building construction. 6 The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program Guidance (dot.gov) 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 488 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 8 Technical Memorandum In addition to above, the widespread adoption of EV infrastructure is also supported through the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), which oversees investor-owned utilities in the state of California. The CPUC is committed to providing access to clean transportation options, including safe and convenient EV charging, while increasing the availability and affordability of EV, such as equitable fueling prices 7. Electric Vehicle Charging in Study Area Existing Stations Within the Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan study area, there are currently a total of fourteen charging stations (note that addition EVCSs are located in the City of Chula Vista Civic Center, which lies outside of the District). A breakdown of the stations is provided below: • Seven (7) at Park Plaza Parking Structure (340 F Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910) – one DC Fast Charger station with two CHAdeMO connectors (one standard and one ADA charging space), five standard Level 2 chargers (J1772 port) and one ADA Level 2 charger. • Seven (7) at Parkway Community Center & Gym (373 Park Way, Chula Vista, CA 91910) – six Level 2 chargers (J1772 port) and one ADA Level 2 charger. The existing (2021) EV usage at the two charging locations above was obtained from the City of Chula Vista calendar year 2021 EV usage database. Table 5 displays the charging duration (how long a vehicle was plugged-in and charging) for each site. Table 5 – Year 2021 Charging Stations Statistics Duration (Hours) Number of Vehicles Park Plaza Parking Structure Parkway Community Center & Gym Not Charging 8 688 218 1 252 129 2 478 47 3 263 75 4 78 65 5 39 35 6 16 26 7 9 1 8 6 0 9 3 0 10 4 0 11 3 0 12 1 0 13 1 0 14 1 0 Total Actively Charging Vehicles 1,154 378 Average Charging Duration 2 hours 28 minutes 2 hours 46 minutes 7 Source: https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M326/K281/326281940.PDF 8 Vehicles that parked in an EV parking space for convenience and plugged in but not actively charging. These vehicles are not included in the average or median charging calculation. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 489 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 9 Technical Memorandum Source: City of Chula Vista (2022); CR Associates (2022) As shown in the table, in 2021, there were a total of 1,154 actively charging vehicles with an average charging time of 2 hours and 28 minutes at the Park Plaza Parking Structure and 378 actively charging vehicles with an average charging time of 2 hours and 46 minutes at the Parkway Community Center & Gym parking lot. There were 688 vehicles at the Park Plaza Parking Structure and 218 vehicles at the Parkway Community Center & Gym parking lot that were not actively charging. These vehicles were detected by the charging station; however, energy was not delivered to these vehicles (zero-kilowatt hour), indicating that these vehicles likely have used the charging station for the convenient parking location. The hours for parking and not charging represents approximately 37% of the total hours in 2021. Table 6 displays the number of charges by day of the week. As shown, Mondays have the highest usage with a total of 330 uses, followed by Thursdays with 291 uses. Furthermore, usage on a typical Monday is higher than the combined usage on Saturday and Sunday, indicating that users tend to charge on Monday and recharge prior to the weekend. Table 6 – Charging Station Usage by Day of the Week Day Park Plaza Parking Structure Parkway Community Center & Gym Total Sunday 121 8 129 Monday 207 123 330 Tuesday 173 20 193 Wednesday 180 37 117 Thursday 183 108 291 Friday 183 72 255 Saturday 107 10 117 Source: City of Chula Vista (2022); CR Associates (2022) Table 7 displays the starting time of when a vehicle is plugged into a charging station by time of day. As shown, the most frequent starting time is around 8 AM with 227 occurrences. This is likely related to people arriving to their places of work. The second highest starting time is around 12 PM with 197 occurrences. This could be associated with people charging their vehicles during lunch break. At the Park Plaza Parking Structure, 77 vehicles start their charging between 7 PM and 5 AM, these vehicles are likely residentials living nearby who need to charge their vehicles overnight due to lack of charging facilities near their places of residents. It should be noted that based on field observations and review of charging data, the fast-charging stations likely have a low demand due to having only CHAdeMo connectors, which limits charging to only a few EV models, such as the Nissan Leaf. Table 7 – Charging Station Usage Starting Time Time of Day Park Plaza Parking Structure Parkway Community Center & Gym Total 12 AM 0 1 1 1 AM 0 0 0 2 AM 3 0 3 3 AM 0 0 0 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 490 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 10 Technical Memorandum Time of Day Park Plaza Parking Structure Parkway Community Center & Gym Total 4 AM 0 0 0 5 AM 11 0 11 6 AM 29 0 29 7 AM 42 4 46 8 AM 130 97 227 9 AM 139 6 145 10 AM 90 13 103 11 AM 82 58 140 12 PM 133 64 197 1 PM 96 32 128 2 PM 89 39 128 3 PM 70 4 74 4 PM 56 26 82 5 PM 50 17 67 6 PM 46 7 53 7 PM 29 6 35 8 PM 27 0 27 9 PM 14 3 17 10 PM 3 0 3 11 PM 1 1 2 Source: City of Chula Vista (2022); CR Associates (2022) Stations Under Construction At the time of this memo, the City is in the process of installing 16 EVCSs at Pay Lot 2. These state- funded installations include 6 level 3 fast chargers and 5 dual-port level 2 chargers. Future Station Needs Based on a nationally representative survey conducted by Consumer Reports in July and August 20209, the majority of U.S. drivers would consider buying an EV in the future. Additionally, consumers expressed that the lack of charging stations is a barrier to EV ownership, especially for residents of large apartment buildings. These residents are more likely to charge at public fast charging stations since they don’t have access to a personal garage or driveway for charging at home. To alleviate consumer concerns about EV ownership, the location of future EV charging stations should be determined based on the projected demand for EV charging stations. As discussed previously, field observations and existing data indicate that EV charging stations are likely being utilized by employees who work in the vicinity of the charging station, followed by nearby residents who utilize these stations overnight. The amount of overnight charging vehicles is likely to increase as EV’s become more affordable. 9 https://www.consumerreports.org/hybrids-evs/cr-survey-shows-strong-interest-in-evs-a1481807376/ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 491 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 11 Technical Memorandum It is recommended that the Plug-in San Diego Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Map 10 be used for determining future charging locations. The map estimates the end location of EV trips using EV registration information, future EV sales projections, and trip destination data from the SANDAG Regional Transportation Model. Figure 4 highlights areas within the District where there is likely high EV charging demand, based on SANDAG data. As shown in Figure 4, the areas with the highest EV charging demand in the District are the Park Plaza Parking Structure (including adjacent surface parking) and Pay Lot 5, followed by the area surrounding Pay Lot 3, Pay Lot 8, Pay Lot 2, and Pay Lot 10. Recommended EVCS quantities for each lot (in addition to the 16 being added to Pay Lot 2) are provided in the next section. Recommended Siting Criteria and Policy Recommendations Future EVCS demands are calculated based on the projected EV ownership within the City of Chula Vista and the South Bay Region. As shown in Table 1, the number of EV in the San Diego region gradually increase over the year, while the total vehicle ownership remained relatively stable, indicating that aging non-electric vehicles are being replaced by newer EV. As such, for a conservative analysis, it is assumed that the total vehicles will remain the same, and the number of non-EV will decrease over the years as consumers replace their vehicles. Table 3 shows that the cumulative EV ownership within the South Bay Region would increase to 10,862 EV and the City of Chula Vista would increase to 7,438 EV, resulting in an EV ownership percentage of 2.6% and 3.6% respectively. As shown, the EV ownership would be less than 5% of the total vehicles in the South Bay Region and the City of Chula Vista. For a conservative estimate, and to accommodate additional future growth in EV ownership, it is assumed that 5% of the vehicles using parking lots in the District would be EVs. The following policies are recommended for EVCS siting and installation within the District: 1. Continue to monitor EVCS usage at the Park Plaza Parking Structure and nearby pay lots to determine EV charging usage. When EV charging usage reaches 85% daily per lot, consider additional EVCSs. 2. Consider an enforcement policy such as implementing a time limited charging program to ensure that vehicles are actively charging instead of just using a premium parking space. The recommended time limit is four hours or approximately fifty percent of the time required to charge an EV from empty. Consider adding provision to the Chula Vista Municipal Code (or other regulations as appropriate) to support enforcement. 3. EVCSs should be in compliance with the technical specifications documented in this report. 4. EVCSs should be an open system to be compliance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) 44268.2. 5. The recommended number of EVCSs is 5% of the total available parking spaces within City- operated parking facilities in areas having the highest EV charging demand, as shown in Table 8 below. 6. Provide information to the public about the location, cost, and type of charging stations available. (Ex: UCSD website: https://transportation.ucsd.edu/commute/ev-stations.html) Table 8 displays the recommended EV for parking lots within the District within areas having the highest EV charging demand. Given that 16 EVCSs are currently being installed in Pay Lot 2, no additional installation is recommended at this location, unless usage of those spaces reaches 85% 10 Source: https://evcs.sandag.org/# 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 492 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 12 Technical Memorandum daily. As discussed above, Figure 5 displays the additional surface parking lots where EVCSs are recommended. Note that additional EVCS installation should follow the recommendation provided above and occur only when the current EVCS reaches 85% usage to reduce loss of parking. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 493 of 617 Fourth Ave²Glo verAveGarrett AveLandi sAveThird AveChurch AveDel MarAveTwin OaksAveDavids o nSt ESt FSt Cen t er St Park W y GS t Va nce S t R oosev e ltSt HS t Al vara d o St Madrona St Cy pres s St ChurchAveGlover Ave Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicle Charging Figure 4 SANDAG EV Use Map Off-Street Public Parking EV Trip End Percentile 91% - 100% 81% - 90% 71% - 80% 61% - 70% 50% - 60% Existing EVCS EVCS Under Construction Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 3 Pay Lot 2 P Norman Park Sr. Ctr. Lot ay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Pay Lot 1 Recommended EVCS S t SS Parking District 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 494 of 617 Fourth AveGlo ver AveGarrett AveLandi s AveThird AveChurch AveDel Mar AveTwin Oaks Ave D avids o n St E S t F St Cente r S t P a rk W y G St Va n ce St Roo s ev elt St H St Alvar a do S t M a d ron a S t Cypre s s St Church AveDel Mar CtSecond AveD St Gl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicle Charging Figure 5 Public Parking Facilities with Recommended EVCS Installation Project Location Off-Street Public Parking Parking District Existing EVCS EVCS Under Construction Project Study Area Recommended EVCS Pay Lot 2 Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 3 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Pay Lot 1 Norman Park Sr. Ctr. Lot 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 495 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 15 Technical Memorandum Table 8 – Recommended EVCSs Off-Street Facility Total Parking Supply EVCSs Under Construction Recommended EVCSs (5%)11 Park Plaza Parking Structure 670 12 0 34 Pay Lot 2 74 16 - Pay Lot 3 118 0 6 Pay Lot 5 42 0 3 Pay Lot 8 53 0 3 Pay Lot 10 28 0 2 Totals 985 16 48 Since only building a couple EVCSs per lot may not be practical or cost-effective due to the cost of infrastructure, the City may need to consider a minimum number of EVCSs per lot. When siting ECVSs in the surface lot adjacent to the Park Plaza Parking Structure, consider adjacency of Memorial Park. Parking adjacent to the Park should not be constrained by EVCSs. Funding There are a variety of installation and operational structures currently being used in the marketplace. The following are four of the most common methods for financing EV charging stations through EV charging station providers:  Hybrid Owned – Charging station provider covers the cost of equipment, operations, and administration while the City covers the cost of installing EV chargers at desired locations.  Subscription – Subscription based service that provides the City with EV charging stations, low upfront costs, and control of ownership.  Provider Owned – Charging station provider covers the cost of installation, equipment, operations, and administration and shares a portion of the revenues with the City.  Host Owned – City covers the cost of installation, equipment, operations, and administration and is the sole owner and operator of the EV charging stations. Revenue generated by EV charging stations will vary based on the selected business model. For EV charging stations that are located within the Parking District, generated revenue could be used to supplement the Parking District Fund. Funding from the Federal IIJA legislation to assist with the installation of publicly accessible EV charging stations is likely to be available in the future, as federal and state agencies develop funding distribution mechanisms. Announcements are likely to be provided via one of the sources below. 11 All EVCS installations should comply with current ADA requirements. 12 Including adjacent surface lot near Third Avenue 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 496 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Electric Vehicles Page 16 Technical Memorandum Keeping Up with the Electric Vehicle Industry The EV industry is a fast changing and it’s in the interest of the City stay up to date with EV laws and regulations, and best practices. It is recommended that the City subscribes to EV industry newsletters that offer updates on new technologies. Recommended newsletters are provided below:  https://insideevs.com/news/category/charging/  https://www.traffictechnologytoday.com/  https://energycenter.org/energy-loop-newsletter  https://calevip.org/  https://www.openchargealliance.org/ Another valuable source is the California Legislative Information website. By creating an account, users can sign-up to receive email notifications of new government documents that contain information related to the EV industry. Once an account is created, the user can use keyboard tracking to receive emails regarding proposed legislations that match the tracking requirements. The new user registration website can be found here:  https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/keywordTrackingList.xhtml 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 497 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Appendix D - Parking District Pro-Forma 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 498 of 617 Number of Meters 481 Revenue Coin and Credit Card (On-Street)333,000.00$ Usage (hourly per year)444,208 Hourly Rate (On-Street)0.75$ Coin and Credit Card (Off-Street) $0.50/hour 245,000.00$ Usage (hourly per year)489,438.00 Hourly Rate (Off-Street)0.50$ Permit Rental 30,000.00$ Citations 217,000.00$ Park Plaza Structure Revenue 388,000.00$ Usage (hourly per year)776,437.00 Hourly Rate (Off-Street)0.50$ Total 1,213,000.00$ Expense Surface Lot Credit Card Fees @ 10 cents flat rate + 2.5%(40,000.00)$ Ace District Mangement Costs (208,000.00)$ Ace Structure Maintenance Costs (60,000.00)$ Other Contracted Services (18,000.00)$ Other Supplies and Services (22,000.00)$ Utilities (10,000.00)$ City Staff Services (a)(75,000.00)$ Curb Café Revenue Loss - assumes 10 cafes, 30 spaces)(50,000.00)$ Parking Citation Proceeds to County (b)(80,000.00)$ CIP Project Expense (59,000.00)$ Contribution to Operating Reserve (c)(34,000.00)$ Contribution to Capital Reserve (d)(150,000.00)$ Non-routine Structure Maintenance (5,000.00)$ Smart Meter Vendor Contract (55,000.00)$ Smart Meter Vendor Fee @ 6 cents per swipe (21,000.00)$ Smart Meter Credit Card Fees @ 10 cents flat rate + 2.5%(42,000.00)$ Park Plaza Annual Subscription Fees and Annual Call Center Fees (62,000.00)$ Park Plaza Structure Credit Card Fees @ 10 cents flat rate + 2.5%(70,000.00)$ Total Expense (1,061,000.00)$ (Deficit) / Surplus 152,000.00$ (a) City staff time to maintain parking facilities and manage the parking district. (b) Allocation of a portion of parking citation collections to the County of San Diego in accordance with relevant sections of the California Government Code, Vehicle Code, and Penal Code. (c) Six months of parking meter fund expenses to be built up over a six-month period. (d) Reserve fund to replace assets and build up fund for future parking structure. Install Smart Meters (excluding 15 meters at Senior Center), $0.75 On-street Meter Rate, $0.50 Off- street Meter Rate, $0.50 for Park Plaza Parking Structure J:\Planning\Downtown Parking District\Pro Forma\Downtown Parking Mgmt_Pro Forma_FINAL_26May222022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 499 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Appendix E - In-Lieu Fee Program Pro-Forma 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 500 of 617 Parking Demand Scenario Near‐term Parking Demand (excess of on‐site parking) 490 Parking Accomodated off‐site (existing infrastructure) 272 Parking Needs (Remaining and unmet parking needs) ‐ Note 1 218 Average Parking Cost per Space ‐ Note 2 23,368.00$                               Operation & Maintenance Cost/Space/Year 575.00$                                     Total O&M/Year ‐ Note 3 126,000.00$                             Total Construction Cost ‐ Note 4 5,095,000.00$                          Interest Rate (%)3.50% Bond Expense/Year 6,000.00$                                  Final Cost (30 year Fix)5,275,000.00$                          Existing Fund 136,726.82$                             Yearly Revenue (50% are allocated toward paying off structure bond) TBD 30 Years Revenue (50% are allocated toward paying off structure bond) TBD Total Available Fund 136,726.82$                             Net Cost (Final Bond Cost + Revenue Paid off) 5,138,273.18$                          In‐Lieu Fee (Cost / Space) ‐ Note 3 (10,486.00)$                              Operation & Maintenance Cost/Space/Year 275.00$                                     Total O&M/Year 60,000.00$                               Note 4:  Assumes all construction costs would be paid for by In‐Lieu program and no additional revenue from the parking district  would be used to supplement costs Expense Revenue Net Cost Downtown Chula Vista Parking Study ‐ Pro‐forma for Parking Structure Note 1: Calculations assume that excess existing capacity (up to 85% occupancy) would also be available for in‐lieu parking program  Note 2: Reflects development costs (2019 dollars) excluding land acquisition.  Source:  WGI Parking Structure Cost Outlook for 2019  report.  Included at the end of this appendix. Note 3:  Source:  Victoria Transport Policy Institute O&M per space for Central Business District ‐ 4‐Level Structure 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 501 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking District Parking Management Plan Appendix F - Third Avenue Village Signage Plan 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 502 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 503 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET 12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE C HU L A V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA V I S T ACIRCLE AND LETTER “P” TOP VIEW A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE DESIGN INTENT DRAWINGS Date: 01/04/2011 Revised: 06/09/2011 Revised: 02/06/2012 (SIGN TYPE “C”) Prepared by: GRAPHIC SOLUTIONS 2952 Main Street San Diego, California 92113 (619) 239-1335 B C D E G J K MEDIAN GATEWAY SIGN VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN MAST ARM DIRECTIONAL SIGN PARKING DIRECTIONAL SIGNS PEDESTRIAN DIRECTORY SIGN INTERPRETIVE SIGN SCOOTER PARKING SIGNS FACILITY IDENTIFIACTION SIGN 02/06/2012 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 504 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE C HU L A V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA V I S T ACIRCLE AND LETTER “P” TOP VIEW A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS ID COLOR FINISH DESCRIPTION METALLIC BRONZE SATIN-GLOSS CLEAR COAT TO MATCH MATTHEWS MEDIUM BRONZE 41-312 VOC281-312 METALLIC GOLD SEMI-GLOSS CLEAR COAT TO MATCH MATTHEWS BRILLIANT GOLD 46-400 VOC286-400 YELLOW SEMI-GLOSS TO MATCH MATTHEWS MP 08237 BURGUNDY SEMI-GLOSS TO MATCH MATTHEWS MP01126 BLUE SEMI-GLOSS TO MATCH MATTHEWS MP10259 GREY GREEN (DARK) SEMI-GLOSS TO MATCH MATTHEWS MP13462 GREY SEMI-GLOSS TO MATCH MATTHEWS DUNN EDWARDS DE6338 SHINY NICKEL P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 PAINTS P7 P8 SHEET 01 DATE SCALE 01/04/11 AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSID COLOR OPQ./TRNSL DESCRIPTION YELLOW GOLD TRANSLUCENT 3M 3630-75 MARIGOLD WHITE REFLECTIVE 3M DIAMOND GRADE WHITE VINYL 983-10 GREEN REFLECTIVE 3M DIAMOND GRADE GREEN VINYL 3997 GREEN TRANSLUCENT 3M 3630-76 HOLLY GREEN WHITE TRANSLUCENT 3M WHITE DIFFUSER OR WHITE FILM AS REQUIRED WHITE OPAQUE 3M 180C-10 V1 V2 V3 VINYLS V4 V5 V6 DANTON REGULAR - “VILLAGE” PILLSDON REGULAR - “CHULA VISTA” “THIRD AVENUE” MYRIAD PRO BOLD CONDENSED - DESTINATIONS 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/04/2011 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 505 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE C HU L A V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA VISTA CIRCLE AND LETTER “P” TOP VIEW A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS B MEDIAN GATEWAY SIGN SEE SHEET #22 SEE SHEET #7 C VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN SEE SHEET #10 SEE SHEET #16 V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA V I S T AG PEDESTRIAN DIRECTORY SIGN Sculpture Garden V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN UE C HULA V I S T ASculpture Garden FACILITY IDENTIFICATION SIGN SHEET 02 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPE FAMILY OF SIGNS ENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SEE SHEET #20 J INTERPRETIVE SIGN V H D SEE SHEET #14 MAST ARM DIRECTIONAL V I LLA G E THIRD AVENUE PARKING DIRECTIONAL SEE SHEET #15 E V I LLA G ETHIRD AVENU E C HULA V I S TASEE SHEET #21 K SCOOTER PARKING SIGN Scooter &MotorcycleParkingOnly 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/2012 V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA V I S T A2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 506 of 617 SHEET 03 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSC 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/26/12 01/04/11 3"SHEET10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/1101/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN UE CH ULA VISTA 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 100 0 50 100 200LOCATION MAP 1 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “E” - “F” STREETS 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN UE C HULA VISTA 4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA VISTACIRCLE AND LETTER “P” TOP VIEW A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS 1 KEY PLAN 2 3 PEDESTRIAN GATEWAY SIGN (SPECIFIC DESIGN SOLUTIONS T.B.D.) MEDIAN GATEWAY SIGN VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL MAST ARM DIRECTIONAL SIGN PARKING DIRECTIONAL SIGN PEDESTRIAN DIRECTIONAL SIGN (DESIGN SOLUTIONS & LOCATIONS T.B.D.) DIRECTORY: KIOSKS AND WALL MOUNTED BANNERS (NOT SHOWN) INTERPRETIVE SIGN (NOT SHOWN) SCOOTER PARKING SIGN (NOT SHOWN) FACILITY IDENTIFICATION SIGN (MOUNTING AND LAYOUTMAY CHANGE BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS). SIGN LOCATIONS WITH ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS A B C D E F G H J K A2 A1 E10 E9 E8 E7 E6 G16 G13 G15 G14 G11G12 MATCH LINE MAP 1 MATCH LINE MAP 2 D2 E11 E12 ADDITIONAL NON ILLUMINATED SIGN LOCATED AT THE LIBRARY ENTRY PLAZA G10 C12 C13 C14 C15 "F" STREET DAVIDSON ST THIRD AVE"E" STREET WALL MOUNTED 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 507 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET 12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET 04 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSC 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C7 MATCH LINE MAP 2 MATCH LINE MAP 3 100 0 50 100 200 MADRONA STREET "G" STREET LOCATION MAP 2 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “F” - “G” STREETS 01/26/12 01/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE C HU L A V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA V I S T ACIRCLE AND LETTER “P” TOP VIEW A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS 2 1 3 KEY PLAN PEDESTRIAN GATEWAY SIGN (SPECIFIC DESIGN SOLUTIONS T.B.D.) MEDIAN GATEWAY SIGN VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL MAST ARM DIRECTIONAL SIGN PARKING DIRECTIONAL SIGN PEDESTRIAN DIRECTIONAL SIGN (DESIGN SOLUTIONS & LOCATIONS T.B.D.) DIRECTORY: KIOSKS AND WALL MOUNTED BANNERS (NOT SHOWN) INTERPRETIVE SIGN (NOT SHOWN) SCOOTER PARKING SIGN (NOT SHOWN) FACILITY IDENTIFICATION SIGN (MOUNTING AND LAYOUTMAY CHANGE BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS). SIGN LOCATIONS WITH ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS A B C D E F G H J K C9 C10 C11 C7 C6 E5 E2 E1 E3 E6 E4 G7G8 G6 G9 G5 G3G4 MATCH LINE MAP 1 MATCH LINE MAP 2 CENTER STREET THIRD AVEPARK WAY WALL MOUNTED "F" STREET ADDITIONAL NON ILLUMINATED SIGN LOCATED AT THE LIBRARY ENTRY PLAZA G10 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. SEE SHEET #6 FOR CONCEPTUAL LOCATION 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 508 of 617 C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET 05 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS100 0 50 100 200LOCATION MAP 3 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “G” - “H” STREETS 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE C HU L A V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA V I S T ACIRCLE AND LETTER “P” TOP VIEW A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS B C1 C4 C3 C5 3 MATCH LINE MAP 2 MATCH LINE MAP 3 G2 G1 D1 2 1 KEY PLAN THIRD AVE"G" STREET "H" STREET ALVARADO STREET ROOSEVELT STREET PEDESTRIAN GATEWAY SIGN (SPECIFIC DESIGN SOLUTIONS T.B.D.) MEDIAN GATEWAY SIGN VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL MAST ARM DIRECTIONAL SIGN PARKING DIRECTIONAL SIGN PEDESTRIAN DIRECTIONAL SIGN (DESIGN SOLUTIONS & LOCATIONS T.B.D.) DIRECTORY: KIOSKS AND WALL MOUNTED BANNERS (NOT SHOWN) INTERPRETIVE SIGN (NOT SHOWN) SCOOTER PARKING SIGN (NOT SHOWN) FACILITY IDENTIFICATION SIGN (MOUNTING AND LAYOUTMAY CHANGE BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS). SIGN LOCATIONS WITH ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS A B C D E F G H J K FOR DETAIL OF LOCATION FOR SIGN TYPE “B” SEE SHEET #6 01/26/12 01/04/11 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 509 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE C HU L A V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA VISTA CIRCLE AND LETTER “P” TOP VIEW A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS SHEET 06 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSB NORTH “H” STREET ALVARADO STREET SIGN LOCATIONB PALM TREE TO BE REMOVED FROM PLANS25'-0"CL3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs DAVIDSO N S T R E E T F STREETFOURTH AVENUETHIRD AVENUEGLOVER AVE .GARRETT AVE .LANDIS AVE CHULA VISTAPUBLICLIBRARY G10 SCALE: 1’ = 30’-0” SIGN LOCATION NOT TO SCALE DIRECTORY SIGN LOCATION NORTH 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION.2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 510 of 617 3"SHEET10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/1101/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN UE CH ULA VISTA 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN UE C HULA VISTA 4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA VISTACIRCLE AND LETTER “P” TOP VIEW A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS SHEET 07 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS1 1 2 3 4 5 6 14 B SCALE: 3/8” = 1’-0” MEDIAN GATEWAY SIGN - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED)SIDE VIEW SIGN CABINET: FABRICATED MULTI LEVEL ALUMINUM SIGN CABINET WITH INTERNAL WELDED ALUMINUM STRUCTURE PER ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS. CABINET INTERNALY ILLUMINATED. PAINT FINISH. SIGN POLE: 8” DIAMETER STEEL POLE WITH WELDED STEEL BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH J-BOLTS. PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS. PAINT FINISH. DECORATIVE POLE BASE: 2 PIECE ALUMINUM CASTING (CLAMSHELL) # BCSTE2436. STERLING, OCTAGONAL SERIES FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. ATTACHMENT HARDWARE TO BE TAMPERPROOF. 24.5” WIDE X 36.5” HIGH. PAINT FINISH. REDUCER COLLAR: CUSTOM FABRICATED DECORATIVE ALUMINUM ROUND REDUCER COLLAR. ATTACHMENT HARDWARE TO BE TAMPERPROOF. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING: CONCRETE FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #23. TO BE FABRICATED BY SIGN CONTRACTOR. FOOTING TO INCLUDE STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. ELECTRICAL CONDUIT: CONDUIT RUNS UP THROUGH FOOTING INTO SIGN POLE. STUB OUT AT FOOTING LOCATION TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. (2) 20 AMP CIRCUIT. PHOTO CELL: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PHOTO CELL FOR ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. PROVIDE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH (NOT SHOWN) FOR PROGRAMED ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. LOCATE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH AT NEAREST POWER SOURCE. AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CUT OFF SWITCH. ISOLATE DISSIMILAR METALS. ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. 11'-2"6'-1"3'-1/2"16'-6"6"13'-0"20'-6 "8" 9" 1'-0" 1'-2" P12 P14 P13 5 6 A 08 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “B” 01/16/11 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 511 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET 12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS 1 2 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 OPEN SIGN CABINET: FABRICATED MULTI LEVEL ALUMINUM SIGN CABINET WITH INTERNAL WELDED ALUMINUM STRUCTURE PER ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS. CABINET INTERNALY ILLUMINATED. PAINT FINISH. SIGN POLE: 8” DIAMETER STEEL POLE WITH WELDED STEEL BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH J-BOLTS. PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS. PAINT FINISH. LETTERS “THIRD AVENUE” & “CHULA VISTA”: 1/2” DEEP POP-THRU ACRYLIC LETTERS WITH FACE ADHERED TRANSLUCENT VINYL. LETTER RETURNS SANDED. SUN AND WAVE CUT OUT SHAPES: 1/2” THICK CUT OUT ALUMINUM SHAPES, WELDED TO ALUMINUM SIGN CABINET. LETTERS “VILLAGE”: 1” DEEP POP-THRU ACRYLIC LETTERS WITH FACE ADHERED TRANSLUCENT VINYL. LETTER RETURNS SANDED. TRIM: 3/4“ HALF ROUND ALUMINUM TRIM. WITH WELDED JOINTS, SECURE TO FACE OF SIGN CABINET WITH STAINLESS STEEL BACKPINS AND NUTS. SIGN CABINET: FABRICATED AS PART OF MULTI LEVEL SIGN CABINET, BUT WITH NO INTERNAL ILUMINATION. 1/2” THICK CUT OUT ALUMINUM FLOURISHES AND CIRCLES ATTACHED TO FACE OF SIGN CABINET WITH STAINLESS STEEL BACK PINS AND NUTS. 1/2” THICK CUT OUT CIRCULAR SHAPE TO HAVE 1/2” RADIUS ROUND EDGES. PAINT FINISH. POLE CAP/NECK: FABRICATED RING TRIM/CAP CUT OUT FROM 1’ THICK ALUMINUM. 1/2” RADIUS ROUND EDGES. WELD TO SIGN CABINET. PAINT FINISH. INTERNAL STEEL POLE: POLE IS PART OF INTERNAL WELDED STEEL STRUCTURE FOR MULTI LEVEL SIGN CABINET. STEEL POLE SLEVES INTO 2 SIGN POLE AND IS SECURED WITH STAINLESS STEEL COUNTER SUNK FLAT HEAD SCREWS. STRUCTURAL SPECIFICATIONS AND ATTACHMENTS PER STURCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS. PHOTO CELL: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PHOTO CELL FOR ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. PROVIDE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH (NOT SHOWN) FOR PROGRAMED ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. LOCATE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH AT NEAREST POWER SOURCE. AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. SHEET 08 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSB SCALE: 3/4” = 1’-0” MEDIAN GATEWAY SIGN - FRONT VIEW 11'-2"6'-1"1'-9"11 1/2"1'-1 3/4"6"9'-1 1/2" 5 1/4" OPEN 1 7 8 8 10 1 9 14 P111 P112 P12 13 A B 09 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “B” 01/04/11 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 512 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/12 01/04/11 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS INTERNAL WHITE LED ILLUMINATION. INTERNAL WHITE LED ILLUMINATION INTERNAL WHITE LED ILLUMINATION SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEUNIFORM LED ILLUMINATION, NOHOT SPOTS.PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS DETAILING ACCESS PANELS, DRAINAGE ANDWEATHERPROOFING SPECIFIACTIONS. 1 P1 P1 P1 CLEAR ACRYLIC LENS. WEATHER PROOF. AMBER COLOR LEDLIGHTS UP LIGHT SHEET 09 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSB SCALE: 3/4” = 1’-0” MEDIAN GATEWAY SIGN - FRONT VIEWSIDE VIEW 6'-1"1'-9"11 1/2"1'-1 3/4"6"CONCEPTUAL SECTION-DETAIL SCALE: 3/4" =1'-0" B 09 9" 1'-0" 1'-2" 1'-3/4"3"11"1 1/4"7 9 8 CLEAR ACRYLIC LENS. WEATHER PROOF. AMBER COLOR LEDLIGHTS UP LIGHT 1 2 11 12 13 7 8 10 P1 P2 V1 P2 P2 P4 P4 P5 P5 P2 P4 P5 V1P4 P2 P2 P2 V1 P2 P5 P1 P1 P2 P4 P4 OPEN OPEN B 09 (TRIM) (PIN-LINE) CUT OUT SUN SHAPE UP LIGHTED WITH AMBER COLOR LED LIGHTS CUT OUT WAVE SHAPES UP-LIGHTED WITH AMBER COLOR LED LIGHTS 8 8 * * * * * * * * 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/04/11 P2 P2 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 513 of 617 C 3"SHEET 10 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSTREET SIDE 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 P6 V2 V3 P3 P1 OUTLINE 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0" V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE C HU L A V IS TA4'-8"3"1 3 V2 2 4 3’-6” CIRCLE AND LETTER “P” 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS 1 1/4" NOTES: ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. PROVIDE SAMPLES AND CUT SHEETS FOR CITY’S APPROVAL. COPY SHOWN IS TYPICAL (FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY). SEE SHEET #13 FOR MESSAGE SCHEDULE. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. 02/06/2012 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “C” SIGN PANEL: 3/16” THICK FLAT ALUMINUM SIGN PANEL. PAINT FINISHED ALL SIDES. “VILLAGE” LOGO: 4 COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT 3M STANDARD, ADHERED TO FACE OF SIGN PANEL. NEGATIVE AREAS IN SUN & WAVES TO BE REMOVED TO SHOW PAINTED BACKGROUND. ARROW AND DESTINATIONS: CUT OUT REFLECTIVE VINYL GRAPHICS APPLIED TO FACE OF SIGN PANEL. SIGN POLE: 41/2” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLE WITH WELDED ALUMINUM BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS. PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS. PAINT FINISH. STRAPS: 3/4” STAINLESS STEEL BANDING STRAPS (SIGNFIX OR BAND-IT BRANDS) SECURE CLAMP/SIGN FACE TO SIGN POLE. PAINT FINISH. CLAMP: UNIVERSAL CHANNEL STAINLESS STEEL CLAMP BY SIGNFIX, CLAMP SLIDES INTO EXTRUDED CHANNEL TO AFFIX SIGN FACE TO POLE. PART #SX0220. PAINT FINISH. ALUMINUM EXTRUSION: MEDIUM CHANNEL EXTRUSION BY SIGNFIX WELDED TO BACK OF SIGN PANEL. PART #SX0073. PAINT FINISH. POLE CAP: FABRICATE CUSTOM ALUMINUM CAP FOR POLE WITH 3“ ALUMINUM SPHERE FINIAL AT TOP. PAINT FINISH CAP TO MATCH POLE COLOR. ISOLATE DISSIMILAR MATERIALS. SECURE TO POLE WITH SILICONE ADHESIVE. DECORATIVE POLE BASE: 2 PIECE ALUMINUM CASTING (CLAMSHELL) #BCRVS1123. REVERE LARGE, FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. ATTACHMENT HARDWARE TO BE TAMPERPROOF. 12” WIDE X 23.25” HIGH. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING: CONCRETE FOOTING BY SIGN FABRICATOR TO INCLUDE STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. FOR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #29. THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 514 of 617 C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3"SHEET 11 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 STREET SIDE 02/06/12 01/04/11 SHEET12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D 1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/1101/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"VI LLA G ETHIRD AVEN UE CH ULA VISTA 7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/12 01/04/11 SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6" 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS 1 SIDE VIEW P1 P1 P1 P1 5 6 P17 BACK OF SIGN P14 P19 NOTES: ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. PROVIDE SAMPLES AND CUT SHEETS FOR CITY’S APPROVAL. COPY SHOWN IS TYPICAL (FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY). SEE SHEET #13 FOR MESSAGE SCHEDULE. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “C” SIGN PANEL: 3/16” THICK FLAT ALUMINUM SIGN PANEL. PAINT FINISHED ALL SIDES. “VILLAGE” LOGO: 4 COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT 3M STANDARD, ADHERED TO FACE OF SIGN PANEL. NEGATIVE AREAS IN SUN & WAVES TO BE REMOVED TO SHOW PAINTED BACKGROUND. ARROW AND DESTINATIONS: CUT OUT REFLECTIVE VINYL GRAPHICS APPLIED TO FACE OF SIGN PANEL. SIGN POLE: 41/2” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLE WITH WELDED ALUMINUM BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS. PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS. PAINT FINISH. STRAPS: 3/4” STAINLESS STEEL BANDING STRAPS (SIGNFIX OR BAND-IT BRANDS) SECURE CLAMP/SIGN FACE TO SIGN POLE. PAINT FINISH. CLAMP: UNIVERSAL CHANNEL STAINLESS STEEL CLAMP BY SIGNFIX, CLAMP SLIDES INTO EXTRUDED CHANNEL TO AFFIX SIGN FACE TO POLE. PART #SX0220. PAINT FINISH. ALUMINUM EXTRUSION: MEDIUM CHANNEL EXTRUSION BY SIGNFIX WELDED TO BACK OF SIGN PANEL. PART #SX0073. PAINT FINISH. POLE CAP: FABRICATE CUSTOM ALUMINUM CAP FOR POLE WITH 3“ ALUMINUM SPHERE FINIAL AT TOP. PAINT FINISH CAP TO MATCH POLE COLOR. ISOLATE DISSIMILAR MATERIALS. SECURE TO POLE WITH SILICONE ADHESIVE. DECORATIVE POLE BASE: 2 PIECE ALUMINUM CASTING (CLAMSHELL) #BCRVS1123. REVERE LARGE, FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. ATTACHMENT HARDWARE TO BE TAMPERPROOF. 12” WIDE X 23.25” HIGH. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING: CONCRETE FOOTING BY SIGN FABRICATOR TO INCLUDE STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. FOR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #29. THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 02/06/2012 1 A12 P17 10 10 P14 P19 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 515 of 617 NOT TO SCALE SECTION DETAIL C 3"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11 SHEET 12 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 02/06/12 01/04/11 P1 P1 P1 BACK FACE OF SIGN SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"A 12 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS 5 4 6 P17 1 MEDIUM CHANNEL EXTRUSION UNIVERSAL CHANNEL CLAMP PART #SX0220 AND 3/4” STAINLESS STEEL BANDING ATTACHMENT HARDWARE BY SIGNFIX 9 8 7 CL PART #SX0073 CL 8"8"P1 P1 P1 P1 94'-8"3'-6" 02/06/2012 4 1 5 P16 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 516 of 617 C 3"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS8 1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1 02/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11 SHEET 13 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/04/11 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS 01/04/2011 < = arrow direction on panel < = arrow direction on panel 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 517 of 617 3 3"1 2 3 2 EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS: STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINET WITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. GRAPHICS PANEL: RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS. TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED. NOTES: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN. 1 SHEET 14 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs D 01/04/11 1"3"5"6 1/4"8"1'-2 1/2" 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “D” FRONT VIEW - MAST ARM DIRECTIONAL - INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 1” = 1’-0” MAST ARM DIRECTIONAL STANDARD LENGHTS = 6'-0" to 8’-0” V I LLA G E THIRD AVENUE V4 V1 V5 1” WIDE OUTLINE COPY FONTS: DANTON REGULAR - “VILLAGE” PILLSDON REGULAR - “CHULA VISTA” “THIRD AVENUE” 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 518 of 617 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3"SHEET 15 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"01/16/11 PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW / SECTION TOP VIEW 1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “E” 3/4" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SIGN CABINET: INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED ALUMINUM SIGN CABINET WITH WELDED ALUMINUM ANGLE STRUCTURE. CUT OUT CIRCLE, LETTERS AND ARROW FROM ALUMINUM FACES AND ATTACH TRANSLUCENT ACRYLIC DIFFUSER PANELS TO INSIDE FACES. PAINT FINISH ALUMINUM CABINET. ADHERE TRANSLUCENT VINYL GRAPHICS TO FACE OF ACRYLIC DIFFUSER. ILLUMINATION = WHITE LED LIGHTS, ILLUMINATION TO BE EVEN, NO HOT OR DARK SPOTS. PROVIDE FULL REMOVABLE SIGN FACE AS ACCESS PANEL, SECURE WITH COUNTER SUNK STAINLESS STEEL FLAT HEAD SCREWS. PAINT FINISHED TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACE. WEATHER PROOF. “VILLAGE” LOGO: 4 COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT 3M STANDARD, ADHERED TO FACE OF SIGN CABINET. NEGATIVE AREAS IN SUN & WAVES TO BE REMOVED TO SHOW PAINTED BACKGROUND. SIGN POLE: 4” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLE WITH WELDED ALUMINUM BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS. PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS. PAINT FINISH. DECORATIVE POLE BASE: 2 PIECE ALUMINUM CASTING (CLAMSHELL) # BCRVS1123. REVERE SMALL, FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. ATTACHMENT HARDWARE TO BE TAMPERPROOF. 11” WIDE X 23” HIGH. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING: CONCRETE FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #24. TO BE FABRICATED BY SIGN CONTRACTOR. FOOTING TO INCLUDE STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. ELECTRICAL CONDUIT: CONDUIT RUNS UP THROUGH FOOTING INTO SIGN POLE. STUB OUT AT FOOTING LOCATION TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. (1) 20 AMP CIRCUIT. PHOTO CELL: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PHOTO CELL FOR ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. PROVIDE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH (NOT SHOWN) FOR PROGRAMED ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. LOCATE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH AT NEAREST POWER SOURCE. AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. NOTES: ISOLATE DISSIMILAR METALS. SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CUT OFF SWITCH. ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. P6 P3 V5 V4 1 7 P13 P14 5 6 2 WIDE OUTLINE BACKGROUND P6 1 CUT OUT CIRCLE REMOVABLE SIGN FACE V5 CUT OUT LETTERS AND ARROW E CUT OUT CIRCLE CUT OUT LETTERS AND ARROW TRANSLUCENT ARYLIC DIFFUSER WHITE LED LIGHTS 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 519 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11 1"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS G 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 304"1 3/4” X 36” X 48“ FRONT OPENING CABINET (OUTDOOR LED LIGHT BOX) 1 3/4” X 36” X 48“ FRONT OPENING CABINET (OUTDOOR LED LIGHT BOX) SPACE BETWEEN CABINET BACKS ALLOWS AREA TO RUN ELECTRICAL CABLES IF NEEDED. TRANSFROMERS/DRIVERS TO BE HOUSED INSIDE DIRECTORY CABINET31/2"SCALE: 3/4” = 1’-0” PEDESTRIAN DIRECTORY SIGN - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED) SIDE VIEW TOP VIEW 1'-6 3/4"10 1/4"21 P122 P122 P1 23 P126 P124 P124 P1 P1 25 P125 27 28 30 3'-4" B 17 BACKGROUND COLOR TO MATCH MATTHEWS GREEN SOLIDS SHEET #26, MP15671 (GREEN) SHEET 16 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS“VILLAGE” LOGO: CAST ALUMINUM PAINT FILLED OR PORCELAIN ENAMEL. ATTACH TO DIRECTORY CABINET WITH STAINLESS STEEL BACK PINS. DIRECTORY CABINET: FABRICATED ALUMINUM DIRECTORY CABINET WITH INTERNAL ALUMINUM STRUCTURE HOUSES (2 BACK TO BACK) FRONT OPENING CABINETS FROM DSA PHOTOTECH (OR EQUIVALENT), 1 3/4” X 36” X 48“ OUTDOOR LED LIGHT BOX WITH INTERNAL POWER SUPPLY. WEATHER PROOF, SEALED DOOR WITH SECURITY LOCK. CABINET ON BACK FACE OF DIRECTORY MAY NOT BE REQUIRED TO BE INTERNALY ILLUMINATED AT ALL LOCATIONS. PAINT FINISH. SIGN FABRICATOR TO VERIFY WITH CITY OF CHULA VISTA WHICH DIRECTORIES NEED ONLY ONE OF THE (2) CABINETS ILLUMINATED. DIRECTORY MAP: TRANSLUCENT 4-COLOR DIGITAL OUTPUT MAP GRAPHICS. SIGN CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR CREATING MAP ART WITH DESTINATION LOCATIONS AND TO GET FINAL ART APPROVAL FROM CLIENT. DESTINATION LOCATIONS TO BE PROVIDED BY CLIENT. SIGN POLE: 3 1/2” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLE WITH WELDED BASE PLATE HIDDEN WITHIN DECORATIVE BASE. PAINT FINISH. ANCHOR WITH “J” BOLTS PER ENGINEERING. DECORATIVE POLE BASE: 2 PIECE ALUMINUM CASTING (CLAMSHELL) # BCRVS1123. REVERE SERIES FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. ATTACHMENT HARDWARE TO BE TAMPERPROOF. 11” WIDE X 23” HIGH, FITS 3” TO 4” DIA. POLES. PAINT FINISH. DECORATIVE POLE CAP. ALUMINUM CAP FOR 3 1/2” DIAMETER POLE, WITH 2 1/2” ALUMINUM SPHERE. ATTACH TO POLE. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING: CONCRETE FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #25. FABRICATED BY SIGN CONTRACTOR. FOOTING TO INCLUDE J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. ELECTRICAL CONDUIT: CONDUIT RUNS UP THROUGH FOOTING INTO SIGN POLE. STUB OUT AT FOOTING LOCATION TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. (1) 15 AMP CIRCUIT. AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH: PROVIDE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH (NOT SHOWN) FOR PROGRAMED ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. LOCATE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH AT NEAREST POWER SOURCE. AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. CUT OFF SWITCH: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CUT OFF SWITCH IF REQUIRED (NOT SHOWN). NOTES: ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “G” 01/16/11 V I LLA G ETHIRD A VEN UE C HUL A V I S TA01/04/2011 1 3/4” X 36” X 48“ FRONT OPENING CABINET (OUTDOOR LED LIGHT BOX) THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION.2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 520 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/111 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS 1/8“ THICK FABRICATED ALUMINUM DIRECTORY CABINET. PAINT FINISH. INTERNAL WELDED ALUMINUM STRUCTURE. 1/2” SQ. ALUMINUM TUBE (ARM) WELDED TO DIRECTORY CABINET STRUCTURE. TUBE SLIDES INTO TABS (SLEEVE) WELDED TO SIGN POLE. CAP EXTERIOR ENDS. PAINT FINISH. POWER FOR OUTDOOR L.E.D. LIGHT BOXES RUNS THROUGH SIGN POLE, 1/2” SQ. ALUMINUM TUBE (ARM) INTO DIRECTORY CABINET G SHEET 17 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS24 22 1 1/2” X 1 1/2“ X 3/16” THICK ALUMINUM TABS WELDED TO SIGN POLES SUPPORT DIRECTORY SIGN CABINET. PAINT FINISH. STAINLESS STEEL TAMPER PROOF BOLTS AND NUTS WITH EXCESS THREAD CUT OFF. PAINT FINISH. 3 1/2” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLE. PAINT FINISH. CONCEPTUAL SECTION-DETAIL SCALE: 3/4" =1" B 17 P1 P1 P1 P1 1 1/2"3 1/2"3 1/2"4 1/4"3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/04/11 01/04/2011 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 521 of 617 3"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11 3"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V EN UE CH ULA V I S T A 7'-1"5'-1"1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS G SHEET 18 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS31 32 33 34 35 36 “VILLAGE” LOGO: CAST ALUMINUM PAINT FILLED OR PORCELAIN ENAMEL. ATTACH TO DIRECTORY CABINET WITH STAINLESS STEEL BACK PINS. DIRECTORY CABINET: FABRICATED ALUMINUM DIRECTORY CABINET WITH INTERNAL ALUMINUM STRUCTURE HOUSES A FRONT OPENING CABINET FROM DSA PHOTOTECH (OR EQUIVALENT), 1 3/4” X 36” X 48“ OUTDOOR LED LIGHT BOX WITH INTERNAL POWER SUPPLY. WEATHER PROOF, SEALED DOOR WITH SECURITY LOCK. PAINT FINISH. DIRECTORY MAP: TRANSLUCENT 4-COLOR DIGITAL OUTPUT MAP GRAPHICS 3M STANDARD. SIGN CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR CREATING MAP ART WITH DESTINATION LOCATIONS AND TO GET FINAL ART APPROVAL FROM CLIENT. DESTINATION LOCATIONS TO BE PROVIDED BY CLIENT. ELECTRICAL CONDUIT: CONDUIT RUNS UP THROUGH WALL INTO SIGN CABINET. CITY CONTRACTOR PROVIDE STUB OUT AT SIGN LOCATION. (1) 15 AMP CIRCUIT. TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH: PROVIDE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH FOR ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN AT NEAREST POWER SOURCE. (NOT SHOWN). TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. CUT OFF SWITCH: SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CUT OFF SWITCH IF REQUIRED. NOTES: ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. 1 3/4” X 36” X 48“ FRONT OPENING CABINET (OUTDOOR LED LIGHT BOX) EXISTING WALL SPACE AT BACK OF CABINET PROVIDES AREA FOR ELECTRICAL CABLES/CONDUITS. TRANSFROMERS/DRIVERS TO BE HOUSED INSIDE DIRECTORY CABINET. SCALE: 3/4” = 1’-0” WALL MOUNTED - PEDESTRIAN DIRECTORY SIGN - FRONT AND BACK VIEWSIDE VIEW TOP VIEW 1 1/2" 1'-6 3/4"10 1/4"31 P132 1 3/4” X 36” X 48“ FRONT OPENING CABINET (OUTDOOR LED LIGHT BOX) P132 P1 33 36 34 3'-4"1 1/2" C 19 BACKGROUND COLOR TO MATCH MATTHEWS GREEN SOLIDS SHEET #26, MP15671 (GREEN) EXISTING WALL 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “G” - WALL MOUNTED 31 32 MAY VARY DEPENDINGON SITE CONDITIONS01/04/112'-0"01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 522 of 617 3"SHEET10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/111 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS G SHEET 19 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS32 CONCEPTUAL SECTION-DETAIL SCALE: 3/4" =1" C 19 P1 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 1/8“ THICK FABRICATED ALUMINUM DIRECTORY CABINET. PAINT FINISH. INTERNAL WELDED ALUMINUM STRUCTURE. POWER FOR OUTDOOR L.E.D. LIGHT BOXES RUNS THROUGH EXISTING WALL, INTO DIRECTORY CABINET. MASONRY ANCHOR OR HARDWARE AS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT TO EXISTING WALL. FABRICATOR TO SPECIFY EXISTING WALL (VERIFY MATERIAL ON SITE, WILL VARY PER LOCATION) 01/04/11 SIGN CABINET:INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED ALUMINUM SIGN CABINET WITH WELDED ALUMINUM ANGLE STRUCTURE. CUT OUT CIRCLE, LETTERS AND ARROW FROM ALUMINUM FACES AND ATTACH TRANSLUCENT ACRYLIC DIFFUSER PANELSTO INSIDE FACES. PAINT FINISH ALUMINUM CABINET.ADHERE TRANSLUCENT VINYL GRAPHICS TO FACE OF ACRYLICDIFFUSER. ILLUMINATION = WHITE LED LIGHTS, ILLUMINATION TO BE EVEN, NO HOT OR DARK SPOTS. PROVIDE FULL REMOVABLE SIGN FACE AS ACCESS PANEL, SECURE WITH COUNTER SUNK STAINLESS STEEL FLAT HEAD SCREWS. PAINT FINISHED TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACE.WEATHER PROOF.“VILLAGE” LOGO:4 COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT 3M STANDARD, ADHERED TO FACE OF SIGN CABINET. NEGATIVE AREAS IN SUN & WAVES TO BE REMOVED TOSHOW PAINTED BACKGROUND. SIGN POLE:4” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLE WITH WELDED ALUMINUM BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS. PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS. PAINT FINISH.DECORATIVE POLE BASE:2 PIECE ALUMINUM CASTING (CLAMSHELL) # BCRVS1123. REVERE SMALL, FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. ATTACHMENT HARDWARE TO BE TAMPERPROOF. 11” WIDE X 23”HIGH. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING:CONCRETE FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #24.TO BE FABRICATED BY SIGN CONTRACTOR.FOOTING TO INCLUDE STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. ELECTRICAL CONDUIT:CONDUIT RUNS UP THROUGH FOOTING INTO SIGN POLE. STUB OUT AT FOOTING LOCATION TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS.(1) 20 AMP CIRCUIT. PHOTO CELL:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PHOTO CELL FOR ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. PROVIDE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH (NOT SHOWN) FOR PROGRAMED ON-OFF OPERATION OF SIGN. LOCATE AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH AT NEAREST POWER SOURCE. AUTOMATED TIMER SWITCH TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS.NOTES:ISOLATE DISSIMILAR METALS.SIGN CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CUT OFF SWITCH.ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT.ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING.VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. 01/04/2011 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 523 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAIL C3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11 4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"1'-10"1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS SHEET 20 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs J SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “J” 01/16/11 INTERPRETIVE SIGN (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW 10"7"1 1/4"H 1/2" 1 2 3 4 5 SIGN PANEL: FULL COLOR (12 INKS) DIGITAL HIGH PRESSURE LAMINATE PANEL BY FOSSIL INDUSTRIES OR EQUIVALENT. ATTACH TO ALUMINUM BACKING PANEL WITH 3M MARINE ADHESIVE/ SEALANT FAST CURE 4000 UV. ALUMINUM BACKING PANEL: 1/4” FLAT ALUMINUM PANEL WELDED TO TOP OF 3” DIAMETER ALUMINUM SIGN POLE. PAINT FINISH. SIGN POST: 3“ AND 4” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLES WELDED TO 3/8” ALUMINUM BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS. PAINT FINISH. DECORATIVE POST BASE: ONE PIECE ALUMINUM CASTING BASE SLEEVES OVER SIGN POST TO COVER ATTACHMENT BOLTS. ALUMINUM CASTING #BC1-4 FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. SECURE TO SIGN POLE WITH STAINLESS STEEL TAMPERPROOF HARDWARE AFTER SECURING SIGN POST TO J-BOLTS. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING: CONCRETE FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #26. FABRICATED BY SIGN CONTRACTOR. FOOTING TO INCLUDE J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. NOTES: ISOLATE DISSIMILAR METALS. ALL WELDS TO BE GROUND SMOOTH AND FILLED. ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. 55o 1 2 1 P13 P1 P1 4 5 FABRICATED ALUMINUM RINGS WELDED TO POST 4” DIAMETER POLE CAULKING AT JOINT FABRICATED ALUMINUM RING WELDED TO BASE V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HUL A V I S T A3” DIAMETER POLE SLEEVES INTO 4” DIAMETER POLE. 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 524 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAIL C3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11 7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"43/4"11/4"23/4" P6 P3 V6 1/4” WIDE OUTLINE BACKGROUND BACK OF PANEL V I LLA G ETHIRD AVEN U E C HULA V I S T A1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS K SHEET 21 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/16/11 SIDE VIEWSCOOTER PARKING SIGN (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" Scooter & Motorcycle Parking Only SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “K” 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SIGN PANEL: 1/8” THICK FLAT ALUMINUM SIGN PANEL. ALUMINUM ANGLES WELDED TO BACK AS BRACKETS. SECURE PANEL TO POST WITH STAINLESS STEEL TAMPER PROOF BOLTS. PAINT FINISH. COPY AND SCOOTER GRAPHICS: REFLECTIVE VINYL ADHERED TO SIGN PANEL FACE. “VILLAGE” LOGO: 4 COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT 3M STANDARD, ADHERED TO FACE OF SIGN CABINET. NEGATIVE AREAS IN SUN & WAVES TO BE REMOVED TO SHOW PAINT FINISHED BACKGROUND PANEL. SIGN POST: 3“ AND 4” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLES WELDED TO ALUMINUM BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS. PAINT FINISH. DECORATIVE POST BASE: ONE PIECE CAST ALUMINMUM BASE SLEEVES OVER SIGN POST. ALUMINUM CASTING #BC1-4 FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. SECURE TO SIGN POST WITH STAINLESS STEEL TAMPERPROOF HARDWARE AFTER SECURING SIGN POST TO J-BOLTS. PAINT FINISH. POLE CAP: STOCK ALUMINUM 3” DIAMETER POLE CAP WELDED IN PLACE. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING: CONCRETE FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #27. FABRICATED BY SIGN CONTRACTOR. FOOTING TO INCLUDE J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. NOTES: ISOLATE DISSIMILAR METALS. ALL WELDS TO BE GROUND SMOOTH AND FILLED. ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. 1 4 5 7 2 3 P1 6 P1 P1 FABRICATED ALUMINUM RINGS WELDED TO POST FABRICATED ALUMINUM RING WELDED TO BASE 1 1/4" TOP VIEW 6 P1 1 P6 P6ANGLE PAINT FINISH 3” DIAMETER POLE SLEEVES INTO 4” DIAMETER POLE. 4” DIAMETER POLE CAULKING AT JOINT 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 525 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAILC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11 1'-3"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"1 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS SPECIFICATIONS FOR SIGN TYPE “L” SHEET 22 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/16/11 FACILITY IDENTIFICATION SIGN (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" SIDE VIEW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SIGN PANEL: 3/16” THICK FLAT ALUMINUM SIGN PANEL. ALUMINUM ANGLES WELDED TO BACK AS BRACKETS. SECURE PANEL TO POST WITH STAINLESS STEEL TAMPER PROOF BOLTS. PAINT FINISH. FACILITY NAME: OPAQUE VINYL ADHERED TO SIGN PANEL FACE. (NAME SHOWN IS TYPICAL FOR REPRESENTATIONAL PURPOSE ONLY). “VILLAGE” LOGO: 4 COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT 3M STANDARD, ADHERED TO FACE OF SIGN CABINET. NEGATIVE AREAS IN SUN & WAVES TO BE REMOVED TO SHOW PAINTED BACKGROUND. SIGN POLE: 4” DIAMETER ALUMINUM POLE WITH WELDED ALUMINUM BASE PLATE, ANCHOR TO FOOTING WITH STAINLESS STEEL J-BOLTS. PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS. PAINT FINISH. DECORATIVE POLE BASE: 2 PIECE ALUMINUM CASTING (CLAMSHELL) # BCRVS1123. REVERE SMALL, FROM SOUTH COAST LIGHTING & DESIGN. ATTACHMENT HARDWARE TO BE TAMPERPROOF. 11” WIDE X 23” HIGH. PAINT FINISH. POLE CAP: STOCK ALUMINUM 4” DIAMETER POLE CAP WELDED IN PLACE. PAINT FINISH. CONCRETE FOOTING: CONCRETE FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CALCULATIONS SEE SHEET #28. FABRICATED BY SIGN CONTRACTOR. FOOTING TO INCLUDE J-BOLTS REQUIRED FOR ATTACHMENT OF SIGN. NOTES: MOUNTING AND LAYOUT MAY CHANGE BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS. ISOLATE DISSIMILAR METALS. ALL HARDWARE TO BE VANDAL RESISTANT. ALL SIGN ELEMENTS TO HAVE ANTI GRAFFITI COATING. VERIFY BELOW GRADE CONDITIONS BEFORE CORING FOOTINGS. TOP VIEW 2 V6 4 P1 5 P1 7 1 1 6 P6 P6 P6 6 P1 P3 3 FRONT AND BACK 1” WIDE OUTLINE P1 P6ANGLE PAINT FINISH 01/04/2011 THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MUST VISIT THE SITE AND FULLY INFORM THEMSELVES AS TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FIELD VERIFY EXACT LOCATIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH SIGN AND NOTIFY THE CITY IN WRITING, OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, OR CLARIFICATIONS AS THEY AFFECT SIGN DESIGN OR LOCATION. BACK OF PANEL 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 526 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAILC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsC C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/111 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS B SHEET 23 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/16/11 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 527 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAIL C3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11SHEET12DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/111"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V I S T A7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/1201/04/11 P6V2V3 P3 P1OUTLINEP1P1P1 100 0 50 100 200SHEET05 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS100 0 50 100 200 LOCATION MAP 1 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “E” - “F” STREETSLOCATION MAP 3 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “G” - “H” STREETSSHEET04 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsC7MATCH LINE MAP 2MATCH LINE MAP 3 100 0 50 100 200MADRONA STREET"G" STREETLOCATION MAP 2 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “F” - “G” STREETS 1"3"5"6 1/4"8"1'-2 1/2" P6 P3V6 1/4” WIDE OUTLINEBACKGROUNDBACK OF PANEL01/26/1201/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0”VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6"13V2243’-6”BACK FACE OF SIGNSCALE: 1"= 1'-0"PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED)SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0"SIDE VIEW / SECTIONVI LLA G ETHIRD AVENUECHULA V I S T ACIRCLE AND LETTER “P”TOP VIEWA121 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS SHEET 24 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs E 01/16/11 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 528 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAIL C3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11SHEET12DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/111"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V I S T A7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/1201/04/11 P6V2V3 P3 P1OUTLINEP1P1P1 100 0 50 100 200SHEET05 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS100 0 50 100 200 LOCATION MAP 1 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “E” - “F” STREETSLOCATION MAP 3 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “G” - “H” STREETSSHEET04 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsC7MATCH LINE MAP 2MATCH LINE MAP 31000 50 100200MADRONA STREET"G" STREETLOCATION MAP 2 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “F” - “G” STREETS 1"3"5"6 1/4"8"1'-2 1/2" P6 P3V6 1/4” WIDE OUTLINEBACKGROUNDBACK OF PANEL01/26/1201/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0”VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6"13V2243’-6”BACK FACE OF SIGNSCALE: 1"= 1'-0"PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED)SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0"SIDE VIEW / SECTIONVI LLA G ETHIRD AVENUECHULA V I S T ACIRCLE AND LETTER “P”TOP VIEWA121 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS SHEET 25 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs G 01/16/11 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 529 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAILC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11SHEET12DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET13DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/111"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V I S T A7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/1201/04/11 P6V2V3 P3 P1OUTLINEP1P1P1 100 0 50 100 200SHEET05 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS1000 50 100200 LOCATION MAP 1 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “E” - “F” STREETSLOCATION MAP 3 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “G” - “H” STREETSSHEET04 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsC7MATCH LINE MAP 2MATCH LINE MAP 31000 50 100200MADRONA STREET"G" STREETLOCATION MAP 2 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “F” - “G” STREETS 1"3"5"6 1/4"8"1'-2 1/2" P6 P3V61/4” WIDE OUTLINEBACKGROUNDBACK OF PANEL01/26/1201/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0”VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6"13V2243’-6”BACK FACE OF SIGNSCALE: 1"= 1'-0"PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED)SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0"SIDE VIEW / SECTIONVI LLA G ETHIRD AVENUECHULA VISTA CIRCLE AND LETTER “P”TOP VIEWA121 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS J SHEET 26 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/16/11 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 530 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAILC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsC C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11SHEET12DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET13DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsSHEET14DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/1101/04/111"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"VI LLA G ETHIRD AVENUECHULA VISTA7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/1201/04/11 P6V2V3 P3 P1OUTLINEP1P1P1 100 0 50 100 200SHEET05 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS1000 50 100200 LOCATION MAP 1 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “E” - “F” STREETSLOCATION MAP 3 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “G” - “H” STREETSSHEET04 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsC7MATCH LINE MAP 2MATCH LINE MAP 31000 50 100200MADRONA STREET"G" STREETLOCATION MAP 2 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “F” - “G” STREETS1"3"5"6 1/4"8"1'-2 1/2" P6 P3V61/4” WIDE OUTLINEBACKGROUNDBACK OF PANEL01/26/1201/04/113rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"VI LLA G ETHIRD AVENUECHULA VISTA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0”VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6"13V2243’-6”BACK FACE OF SIGNSCALE: 1"= 1'-0"PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED)SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0"SIDE VIEW / SECTIONVI LLA G ETHIRD AVENUECHULA VISTACIRCLE AND LETTER “P”TOP VIEWA121 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS K SHEET 27 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/16/11 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 531 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAIL C3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11SHEET12DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/111"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V I S T A7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/1201/04/11 P6V2V3 P3 P1OUTLINEP1P1P1 100 0 50 100 200SHEET05 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS100 0 50 100 200 LOCATION MAP 1 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “E” - “F” STREETSLOCATION MAP 3 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “G” - “H” STREETSSHEET04 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsC7MATCH LINE MAP 2MATCH LINE MAP 3 100 0 50 100 200MADRONA STREET"G" STREETLOCATION MAP 2 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “F” - “G” STREETS 1"3"5"6 1/4"8"1'-2 1/2" P6 P3V6 1/4” WIDE OUTLINEBACKGROUNDBACK OF PANEL01/26/1201/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0”VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6"13V2243’-6”BACK FACE OF SIGNSCALE: 1"= 1'-0"PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED)SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0"SIDE VIEW / SECTIONVI LLA G ETHIRD AVENUECHULA V I S T ACIRCLE AND LETTER “P”TOP VIEWA121 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS L SHEET 28 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 01/16/11 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 532 of 617 SHEET 03 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSCNOT TO SCALESECTION DETAIL C3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs C C C C 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs301/26/1201/04/113"SHEET 10 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 11 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS81232EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS:STANDARD INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGN CABINETWITH FLUORESCENT BULBS. SIGN CONTARCTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.GRAPHICS PANEL:RETROFIT EXISTING STREET NAME SIGN CABINETS WITH NEW TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANELS.TRANSCLUCENT VINYL FACE ADHERED TO TRANSLUCENT PANEL. BACKGROUND COLOR = GREEN, OUTLINE = YELLOW AND LETTERS = WHITE. “VILLAGE” LOGO:FOUR COLOR DIGITAL VINYL OUTPUT ADHERED TO FACE OF TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND PANEL. TRANSLUCENT GREEN VINYL BACKGROUND CUT OUT AND REMOVED.NOTES:SIGN CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTING SIGN CABINET DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF SIGN.STREET SIDE STREET SIDE3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs102/06/1201/04/11 02/06/1201/04/11SHEET12DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 13DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs SHEET 14DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSSHEET 15DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs4'-8"1'-3"1'-6"7'-0"1'-6"1'-0"1'-6"D1'-3"3"1'-10"43/4"11/4"23/4"2'-6"3'-7"6"7 1/4"1'-3 3/4"3 3/4"7'-6"1'-9"3'-6"4 1/4"7 3/4"8'-0"1'-11"01/04/11 01/04/111"1"2'-0"7'-1"5'-1"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V I S T A7'-1"5'-1"01/16/1102/06/1201/04/11 P6V2V3 P3 P1OUTLINEP1P1P1 100 0 50 100 200SHEET05 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS100 0 50 100 200 LOCATION MAP 1 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “E” - “F” STREETSLOCATION MAP 3 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “G” - “H” STREETSSHEET04 DATESCALEAS NOTEDDESIGNERFILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGSC3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL SignsC7MATCH LINE MAP 2MATCH LINE MAP 31000 50 100200MADRONA STREET"G" STREETLOCATION MAP 2 CHULA VISTA THIRD AVENUE VILLAGE “F” - “G” STREETS 1"3"5"6 1/4"8"1'-2 1/2" P6 P3V6 1/4” WIDE OUTLINEBACKGROUNDBACK OF PANEL01/26/1201/04/11 3rd. AVENUE VILLAGE - DIRECTIONAL (SINGLE FACED) SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"V I LLA G ETHIRD A V ENUECHULA V IS TA4'-8"3"SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0”VEHICULAR DIRECTIONAL SIGN - FRONT VIEW9'-6"4'-8"3'-6"13V2243’-6”BACK FACE OF SIGNSCALE: 1"= 1'-0"PARKING DIRECTIONAL - FRONT VIEW (DOUBLE FACED)SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0"SIDE VIEW / SECTIONVI LLA G ETHIRD AVENUECHULA V I S T ACIRCLE AND LETTER “P”TOP VIEWA121 1/2” RADIUS ROUNDED CORNERS C SHEET 29 DATE SCALE AS NOTED DESIGNER FILE NAMETHIRD AVENUE VILLAGESIGN TYPEENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC DESIGN2952 MAIN STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92113TEL (619) 239-1335 FAX (619) 235-6018DESIGN INTENT DRAWNIGS3rd AveVill_DesInt ALL Signs 02/06/11 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 533 of 617 7 279291235163630256 323 5 2 111 5 42 0 1 3 3 7 15621216529 1621 1 9767934 1 6 3 715 383 31354 3 4 0 5 83 6 1 4 2 1 2 0 334274 1 8 2 92411 1 058 1 7 1 9 12121 5 1918 3 1 17319 21349 348 361 4 7 1 6 1 7 1 5 317 35359164 1 9Fourth AveGl over AveGarrett AveLandi s AveThi rd AveChurch AveDel Mar AveTwi n Oaks AveD a v i d s o n S t E S t F S t C e n t e r S t P a r k W y G S t V a n c e S t R o o s e v e l t S t H S t A lv a r a d o S t M a d r o n a S t C y p r e s s S t Church AveDel Mar CtChurch AveSecond AveD S t Gl over AveDowntown Chula Vista Parking Management Study Attachment 2 Existing Public Parking Diagram Park Plaza Parking Structure Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 3 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 1 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Public Off-Street Parking Supply Norman Park Sr. Ctr. Lot Pay Lot 1 Pay Lot 2 Pay Lot 3 Park Plaza Parking Str ucture Pay Lot 5 Pay Lot 8 Pay Lot 10 Norman Park Senior Center Lot 14 74 118 670 42 53 28 15 Paid Off-Street Public Parking Free Off-Street Public Parking Parking Supply# Metered On-Street Parking Location Predominantly Metered On-Street Parking Block Predominantly Free On-Street Parking Block Parking District 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 534 of 617 From: Sent: Friday, September 23, 2022 2:18 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Cc: Subject: Written Comments for September 27, 2022 City Council Meeting -- Item 7.2 Parking Management Plan Dear Sir Or Madam, On behalf of Smiser Family Properties, Inc., and EAS, LLC, the owners of the properties located at 310 and 340 Third Avenue in Chula Vista, I write to submit the following comments regarding the ongoing Parking Management Plans for the Third Avenue District which will be discussed at the upcoming City Council meeting on September 27. The parking management plan is presented at section 7.2 of the agenda. The updated staff report attached to the agenda appears to indicate that recommendation #7, a $0.50/hour fee for the parking structure located at 340 F St. will not be taken up at the meeting and may be tabled until a later date. However, we are submitting the following comments that we had prepared in anticipation of a discussion of the proposal and respectfully request that Council consider these issues as it continues to assess the parking issues throughout the Third Avenue District: 1. By way of background, under a 1983 Agreement, the owners of the 6 parcels that surround the parking structure were obligated to make monthly payments to repay the city for the cost of constructing the parking garage. The original “Reciprocal Grant of Easement and Declaration Establishing Restrictions and Covenants” (“1983 Agreement”) was put in place around December 15, 1983, and had an original fixed term of 35 years, and expired on or around December 15, 2018. Under the 1983 Agreement, the same parcel owners were also fully responsible for the daily operation of the structure and for all costs to maintain and operate the structure. There was never a fee charged for parking in the structure that we are aware of during that term. Instead, these six parcel owners paid for all of the costs required to operate the garage such as electricity, lighting, sweeping, power washing, trash, elevator maintenance and repairs, insurance and everything else. However, despite this arrangement, the parking structure was fully open to the public for free parking. The net result is that (1) the 6 parcel owners paid for the costs to construct the parking structure; and (2) the 6 parcel owners paid all operational expenses during the 35 year term of the 1983 Agreement, yet the garage was open to the public for free parking. 2. In light of the monetary terms and history described in item 1, and in light of the design of the 6 parcel development surrounding the garage which provides the primary parking available for the 6 parcels, the 6 parcel owners’ needs should be factored into the future plans for the parking structure. In fact, at least two of the parcels are physically connected to the parking structure via stairs or a walking bridge, making the structure an integral part of these properties as originally designed. 3. Moreover, the entire Third Avenue Village is an area of redevelopment that features many small business operators that are working hard to revitalize this important part of Chula Vista. Many of these business owners, particularly in these economic times where the prices of everything Warning: External Email Written Communications - Received 9/23/22 Item #7.2 - Smiser 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 535 of 617 are skyrocketing, are already stretched thin. We do not want to see a decision made that would impose even more costs on such people and businesses without careful consideration. The worst case scenario would be a decision by the city council that risks reversing all of the years of hard work and progress that has been made to improve the Third Avenue Village area. 4. Given all of these important and competing interests, this is not a simple project. Yet, as we understand it, city staff plans to simply ask the city council to approve their proposed rate of a new $0.50/hour parking fee to be implemented at the parking structure. However, as discussed further below, no details on the specifics of how the new parking fee will be implemented are currently decided. 5. Representatives from Smiser Family Properties met with Mr. Barker and Ms. Elliott to discuss the Parking Management Plan, and Mr. Barker and Ms. Elliot separately provided a repeat presentation of the Parking Management Plan to Joe Warren from Smiser Family Properties as part of his recent joining of the board of the Third Avenue Village Association Board of Directors. During these meetings, the parties discussed many questions and concerns regarding how the $0.50/hour parking fee will be implemented. For example, will there be mechanical gates to control ingress and egress from the parking structure? How will that impact traffic congestion in an already busy area, particularly in front of the Castillejo’s Eye Institute where there are continually parked vehicles dropping off patients near one of the main parking garage entrances? Will there be a live cashier to process payments or will it all be handled electronically? Will there be any free short term parking? Will business owners and tenants of the 6 surrounding parcels receive any parking vouchers, monthly parking passes, discounted rates, etc., for their tenants and their employees? Mr. Barker and Ms. Elliott mentioned that one potential idea would be an entrance gate dedicated for employees of surrounding businesses, but that was just a potential idea at this point. In fact, for every one of these types of questions on how the parking fees will be implemented, the uniform response was that none of those details are currently decided, so those specifics cannot yet be addressed. Instead, they would solely be asking city council for approval of the $0.50/hour fee at this time. All details regarding the implementation of the fee parking program in the garage would be decided once the fee is approved. 6. It is frankly very difficult for us to support or oppose the $0.50/hour proposal without knowing any details of how the plan will be implemented and what impact it will have on our employees, our tenants, their customers, and the surrounding businesses in the Third Avenue Village. If a parking fee is going to be imposed, we would like to see it done in conjunction with a full plan to implement the new parking fee program. In our opinion, it is difficult to understand how the 0.50/hour rate was determined without knowing such details on the implementation, and therefore difficult to know if such a fee will meet whatever revenue needs exist. 7. Given the fact that the parking structure has successfully operated for over the past 35 plus years without a daily parking fee, what other avenues have been explored for funding the operations of the garage and why were they dismissed? 8. Is the goal of the parking structure to become a profit center to build reserves for the construction of additional parking structures in the future, and if so, is that appropriate and fair or even necessary at this time? Written Communications - Received 9/23/22 Item #7.2 - Smiser 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 536 of 617 9. In summary, while we recognize that there are costs required to operate the parking structure, we do not want to see this done in a way that becomes a deterrent to businesses and customers wanting to come visit Third Avenue, particularly at this time where so many efforts are being made to revitalize the area. Best regards, Joe Warren Smiser Family Properties CABRE 01977609/01987240 Coronado, CA 92178 Written Communications - Received 9/23/22 Item #7.2 - Smiser 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 537 of 617 Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan September 27, 2022 Item No. 7.2 1 City Council 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 538 of 617 Downtown Parking District 22022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 539 of 617 Map of Parking Facilities 32022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 540 of 617 Public Parking by Cost & Time Restriction 42022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 541 of 617 Breakdown on Off-Street Spaces 52022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 542 of 617 Parking Available within Walking Distance 62022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 543 of 617 Weekday Parking Occupancy 72022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 544 of 617 Parking Structure Park Plaza Parking Structure 8 •670 spaces •Completed in 1984 •1983 agreement with adjacent owners •Agreement expired in 2018 •City responsible for maintenance, operation and capital improvements 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 545 of 617 Objectives of the Downtown Chula Vista PMP •Develop a more holistic understanding of public parking demand within the Parking District •Assess the City’s parking infrastructure and operational practices •Forecast parking demand within the project study area •Provide recommendations to efficiently utilize parking resources and manage future parking demand 92022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 546 of 617 Analysis Tools •Parking data collection (inventory, occupancy, turnover, and walking distance) •Interviews and on- line questionnaires •Stakeholder meetings •Parking demand analysis 102022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 547 of 617 PMP Metrics and Goals •85% Occupancy within 1/8 of a Mile •Encourage Turnover of Spaces near Commercial Uses 112022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 548 of 617 Existing Parking Occupancy Existing Parking Supply Adequate for Current Demand 122022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 549 of 617 Patron/Business Interviews -1 Yes, 70% Unsure, 12.50% No, 17.50% BUSINESS: WOULD LIKE METERS TO HAVE A MORE CONVENIENT FORM OF PAYMENT (SUCH AS CREDIT CARDS) Yes, 64% No, 28% Unsure, 8% PATRONS: WOULD LIKE METERS TO HAVE A MORE CONVENIENT FORM OF PAYMENT (SUCH AS CREDIT CARDS) 132022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 550 of 617 Patron/Business Interviews -2 Yes, 54% No, 46% PATRONS: DISCOURAGED TO VISIT BECAUSE OF PARKING Strongly Agree, 7.50% Agree, 25% Neutral, 17.50% Disagree, 30% Strongly Disagree, 20% BUSINESS: SATISFIED WITH QUANTITY OF PARKING CLOSE TO THEIR BUSINESS 142022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 551 of 617 Parking District Financial Analysis 152022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 552 of 617 Recommendation #1 Install Smart Meters 162022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 553 of 617 Findings #1 17 •It was determined from the outreach surveys that 64% of respondents indicated that the lack of convenience of the coin-operated parking meters was a deterrent. •Both patrons and business owners indicated a strong preference for allowing more convenient forms of payment at meters. •Smart Meters increase parking efficiency and revenues by maximizing parking turn-over. •Smart meters have the following additional benefits: •Parking conditions can be monitored remotely and allow for real time parking analysis without the high cost of physical data collection •Financial metrics can easily be tracked •Allows City to adjust and control enforcement periods remotely, such as during special events. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 554 of 617 Recommendation #2 Shift Parking Enforcement Time from 9:00 AM - 6:00 pm to 10:00 AM -8:00 PM 182022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 555 of 617 Findings #2 19 •Altering the parking enforcement hours to coincide with business operation hours will enhance ability to manage supply during highest demand periods and facilitate parking turnover. •Parking in front of dining and drinking establishments peaks in the early evening. Since current enforcement ends at 6:00 pm, the prime spaces are taken up by longer term parkers such as residents and employees instead of patrons. •There is not high demand prior to 10:00 am. Starting enforcement later reduces staff time for ticketing when there are few cars parking and allows for early deliveries and pick-up at businesses 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 556 of 617 Recommendation #3 Update Parking Fees •$0.75 / hour -On-Street Parking (meters) •$0.50 / hour -Off-street Parking (lots & structure) 202022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 557 of 617 Findings #3 21 Jurisdiction Parking Rate City of San Diego $1.25 /hour City of La Mesa $0.75 / hour •Smart meters will necessitate operational costs such as software and credit card processing fees which range from $0.27 -$0.35 per swipe. The fee needs to be increased to cover these and other related costs •The parking fee is lower for the off-street lots and parking structure to encourage parking in these locations in order to free-up spaces in front of business. •The City is now responsible for maintenance and capital improvements to parking structure. The revenue from the parking structure will help off-set these costs. •Chula Vista’s parking user fees is currently among the lowest in the region indicating that it may be undercharging 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 558 of 617 Recommendation #4 Update Wayfinding Signage 222022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 559 of 617 Findings #4 23 •Existing signage is inconsistent •Wayfinding for off-street parking and parking structure is unclear •Parking enforcement hours and parking rates need to be visible and easily understood 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 560 of 617 Recommendation #5 Update In-Lieu Parking Fee Program 242022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 561 of 617 Findings #5 •Parking In-Lieu Fee is calculated based on the value of the land that would be occupied by a single parking space (not the cost of constructing a space) •Cost is insufficient to significantly contribute to construction of additional parking and should be based on parking construction costs. •Current In-Lieu Parking Fee Program should explicitly apply to residential land uses. 252022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 562 of 617 Recommendation #6 Facilitate Non- Vehicular Transportation Modes 262022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 563 of 617 Findings #6 27 •Accessible and visible non- vehicular parking spaces encourages less reliance on automobile and therefore reduces parking demand •The recommendation would help avoid potential sidewalk clutter and trip hazards from bicycles and scooters not having convenient, safe parking 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 564 of 617 Recommendation #7 Park Plaza Parking Structure Improvement and Maintenance •Implement parking fee of $0.50/hour •Various capital projects for physical improvements, including ADA •Signage and striping 282022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 565 of 617 Findings #7 29 •Agreement for adjacent businesses to maintain and operate structure expired at the end of 2018 and the City now has financial responsibility for all maintenance, operations, and capital improvements of parking structure. •The appropriate funding source is parking fee revenues from the Parking Meter Fund (and not the General Fund) •Implementation of a parking fee and access control would encourage parking turnover and reduce the number of vehicles occupying spaces for an extended period of time •There is deferred maintenance that needs to be addressed for the 38-year old structure 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 566 of 617 Recommendation #8 Curbside Management •Flexible curbside management for a variety of parking uses •Signage •Consider providing spaces for food delivery/app-based delivery 302022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 567 of 617 Findings #8 31 •Absence of adequate commercial loading and short-term parking areas encourages double-parking which was identified during field observations. This results in blocking through traffic and parking areas. •Increased use of food- delivery services has created a demand for short-term spaces. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 568 of 617 Recommendation #9 Norman Park Senior Center •Remove meters and increase time restriction to four hours •Permitted senior parking only •Consider 1-2 spaces with one-hour limit for short- term use 322022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 569 of 617 Finding #9 33 Parking Time Limitations Conflict with Norman Park Activities Yes, 85% No, 12% Not applicable, 3% NORMAN PARK PATRONS: DISCOURAGED TO VISIT NORMAN PARK SENIOR CENTER ON DUE TO PARKING 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 570 of 617 Recommendation #10 Special Events Management 342022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 571 of 617 Findings #10 35 •Field and drone observations identified that parking lots were less than 50% occupied during special community events. •On-street parking occupancy was over 85% indicating lack of awareness of surface parking locations and perception that they may be higher cost 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 572 of 617 Recommendation #11 Expand District Boundaries 362022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 573 of 617 Findings #11 37 •21 meters are technically located outside of the Parking District Boundaries though operated as if they are included •This administrative change would clarify the status of these 21 meters 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 574 of 617 Recommendation #12 Provide Funding for Future Parking Supply 382022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 575 of 617 Findings #12 39 •Based on analysis of future growth within and around the parking district approximately 200 spaces will be needed in the future depending on pace of redevelopment •No current funding source is identified to construct additional parking to accommodate anticipated future demand 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 576 of 617 Recommendation #13 Curb Café Recommendations 402022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 577 of 617 Findings #13 41 •Pandemic created need for outdoor dining •Curb café program has been generally successful •Limited number of curb cafes allowed by program does not have significant effect on parking supply 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 578 of 617 Recommendation #14 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCS) 422022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 579 of 617 Findings #14 43 •EV ownership in Chula Vista has increased every year since 2016 •Legislation that encourages EV use indicates that this trend will continue 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 580 of 617 Implementation Steps 44 Implementation Process PMP Recommendations 1. Smart meters 9. Modify Norman Park parking restrictions 11. Expand Parking District boundary 2. Shift parking enforcement hours 3. Update parking fees 5. Revise Parking In-Lieu Fee Program 7. Park Plaza Parking Structure improvement 4. Update wayfinding signage 6. Facilitate non-vehicular tranportation 8. Curbside management 10. Special events management 12. Future parking supply (capital reserve) 13. Curb Café recommendations 14. Electric vehicle charging stations Proposed for Approval Tonight Subsequent City Council Actions Staff-Level Administrative Actions 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 581 of 617 RECOMMENDATIONS 45 1.Adopt the Resolution approving the Downtown Chula Vista Parking Management Plan, dated August 2022 2.Implement Recommendation #1 –Smart Meters 3.Implement Recommendation #9 –Modify parking restrictions at Norman Park Senior Center Parking Lot 4.Implement Recommendation #11 –Expand the Parking District Boundary2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 582 of 617 (Backup slides)462022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 583 of 617 Data Collection and Outreach •Parking data collection •Inventory of public parking spaces •Parking occupancy surveys •Parking turnover observations •Walking distance analysis •Public outreach •Intercept online surveys •Pop-up booths at community event •TAVA presentations •Norman Park Senior Center presentations 472022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 584 of 617 Existing Parking Occupancy Parking Occupancy on Third Avenue 48 Percent Occupancy Segment 7AM - 9AM 11AM - 1PM 3PM - 5PM 6PM - 8 PM 9PM - 11PM E to Davidson 50% or below 70.1% - 85%50.1% - 70%50.1% - 70%50% or below Davidson to F 50% or below 70.1% to 85%Above 85%Above 85%70.1% - 85% F to Madrona 50.1% - 70%Above 85%Above 85%Above 85%Above 85% 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 585 of 617 PMP Results 492022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 586 of 617 v . 0 03 P a g e | 1 September 27, 2022 ITEM TITLE Employment Agreement: Extend and Amend City Manager Employment Agreement Location: No specific geographic location Department: Human Resources Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Recommended Action Adopt a resolution approving the amended City Manager employment agreement. SUMMARY On August 9, 2022, the City Council convened in closed session to evaluate the City Manager’s performance and consider possible terms for extension. Based on direction from City Council, terms for a contract amendment were prepared and agreed to by the City Manager. Terms provide for an extension of the contract until June 30, 2025, with 5% annual salary increases beginning the pay period that includes June 20, 2023 and June 20, 2024. The amendment also provides for a standard executive severance package in the event of early termination equivalent to 9 months of salary and health benefits. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Notice The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required. Environmental Determination The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 587 of 617 P a g e | 2 BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION On June 9, 2020, the City Council approved the appointment of Maria Kachadoorian as City Manager effective June 20, 2020, and Ms. Kachadoorian’s employment agreement. Council subsequently approved amended employment agreements at their meetings of August 10, 2021 and August 9, 2022. The existing agreement expires June 30, 2023. On August 9, 2022, the City Council convened in closed session to evaluate the City Manager’s performance. Based upon her performance, possible terms for an extension were also considered and directions given to the City Attorney. Consistent with that direction, terms for a contract amendment were prepared and agreed to by the City Manager. Terms provide for an extension of the contract until June 30 , 2025, with 5% salary increases to be implemented on the pay period that includes June 20, 2023 and June 20, 2024. The amendment also provides for a standard executive severance package in the event of City Council early termination of the contract equivalent to 9 months of salary and health benefits. Approval of the resolution will approve the amended employment agreement on the terms presented. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT Staff has determined that the action contemplated by this item is ministerial, secretarial, manual, or clerical in nature and, as such, does not require the City Council members to make or participate in making a governmental decision, pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 2, section 18702.4(a). Consequently, this item does not present a conflict under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.). Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter. CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT New personnel expenditures totaling approximately $633 are offset in full by unanticipated Property Tax revenues. ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT Ongoing fiscal impacts associated with the proposed amendment is estimated to total approximately $17, 105 for FY 24 and an additional $16,025 for FY 25 for the General Fund. Such costs will be incorporated into the City Manager’s office budget in future budget years. ATTACHMENTS Staff Contacts: Courtney Chase, Director of Human Resources/Risk Management GENERAL FUND BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS SUMMARY Department Personnel Services Revenues Net Cost Administration 633$ -$ 633$ Non-Departmental (633) (633) TOTAL EST. GENERAL FUND COST 633$ (633)$ -$ 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 588 of 617 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT TO EXTENT ITS TERM UNTIL JUNE 30, 2025, PROVIDE FOR TWO FIVE PERCENT ANNUAL SALARY INCREASES, AND PROVIDE STANDARD EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE BENEFITS WHEREAS, on June 9, 2020, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista approved the appointment of Maria Kachadoorian as City Manager effective June 20, 2020 and approved Maria Kachadoorian’s City Manager Employment Agreement; and WHEREAS, Section 7C of the City Manager Employment Agreement states, in part, “The City Council may increase the Manager’s Base Salary at any time in the sole discretion of the City Council”; and WHEREAS, Section 7D further reads, “Manager’s Base Salary increases approved by the City Council from time to time pursuant to this Agreement shall not require an amendment to this Agreement to be effective. Such may be set forth in an annual salary resolution or minute action approved by the City Council and ratified by resolution”; and WHEREAS, on August 10, 2021, after evaluating the City Manager’s performance, City Council approved an amendment to the City Manager salary and benefits effective August 13, 2021; and WHEREAS, on August 9, 2022, the City Council convened in closed session to evaluate the City Manager’s performance and consider possible terms for extension; and WHEREAS, based on direction from City Council, staff prepared terms for a contract amendment agreed to by the City Manager to provide for an extension of the contract until June 30, 2025, for 5% annual salary increases beginning June 20, 2023, and for a standard executive severance package in the event of early termination equivalent to nine months of salary and health benefits. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that the City Council: 1. Approves the amendment of the City Manager Employment Agreement to incorporate an extension of the contact to June 30, 2025, a 5% annual salary increase on June 20, 2023 and June 20, 2024, and the standard executive severance package in the event of early termination equivalent to nine months of salary and health benefits; 2. Authorizes and directs the City Attorney to prepare an amendment to the City Manager Employment Agreement consistent with the terms approved herein; 3. Authorizes and directs the Mayor to execute such amended City Manager Employment Agreement; and 4. Directs a copy of the amended City Manager Employment Agreement to be kept on file with the City Clerk’s Office. 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 589 of 617 Presented by Approved as to form by Courtney Chase Glen R. Googins Director of Human Resources/Risk Management City Attorney 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 590 of 617 Office of the City Attorney MEMORANDUM To: Hon. Mayor Mary Casillas Salas Kerry Bigelow, City Clerk CC: Karla Mendez, Senior Council Assistant Sheree, Kansas, Deputy City Clerk Via: Board of Ethics Interview Panel From: Glen Googins, City Attorney Date: September 12, 2022 Re: Nominations for Appointments to Board of Ethics Pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code section 2.28.050(A), a panel ("Panel") consisting of a Board of Ethics Member (Carmen Torres) and Charter Review Member (Dean Disharoon) interviewed applicants for appointment to the Board of Ethics (four vacancies ) on July 27, 2022 and August 29, 2022 and hereby nominate the following for appointment to the Board of Ethics: • Scott Wm. Davenport • William Gersten • Jose Torres, Jr. • Alexia Velissaropolos Scott Wm. Davenport would replace Mario Salzmann, William Gersten would replace Alex Welling, Jose Torres, Jr. would replace Stephanie Teel and Alexia Velissaropolos would replace Karla Chinn. The Panel would like to place the below nomination for appointment to the Board of Ethics on the September 27, 2022 Council Agenda for ratification and schedule the oaths of office for the following meeting. Thank you 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 591 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 592 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 593 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 594 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 595 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 596 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 597 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 598 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 599 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 600 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 601 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 602 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 603 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 604 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 605 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 606 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 607 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 608 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 609 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 610 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 611 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 612 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 613 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 614 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 615 of 617 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 616 of 617 Original Message----- From: Patti Boman < Sent: Friday, September 23, 2022 4:20 PM To: CityClerk <CityClerk@chulavistaca.gov> Subject: Public comment September 27, 2022 at 5:00 p.m item 10.1 in support of Warning: External Email Ín support of item 10.1 (Rainbow Ride)of Agenda September 27,2022 My name is Patricia Boman, I am president of Rainbow Spaces, past president of Pflag San Diego and a volunteer with SD Lgbt Center. I have lived in South Bay since I got married in 1975,been self employed since 1984 and I support the Rainbow Ride as a mom of a wonderful gay man in hopes that other lgbtqia kids see that they have the support of other adults, in case they are not supported at home. Lgbtqia kids have a high incidence of depression, anxiety and suicide due to the lack of support in their families and hate filled rhetoric of some churches that have no business in government which is supposed to be for all people. We would be very grateful to the City of Chula Vista for supporting our efforts. With gratitude Patti Boman Written Communications - Item 10.1 Received 9/26/22 - Boman 2022/09/27 City Council Post Agenda Page 617 of 617