HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1996/03/19
Tuesday, March 19. 1996
6:00 p.m.
1'1 ce:'<:!;rc ~n .~:" :.~jI"'\'t., ~~ ....0 ,~".... 1:1,.,'"- 1 :>m
em :0 i.; , '. c "_!' S :: :n t:.c
.. : ~;)s_ed
O,li(:e .,. .-
t;';is r~ _ C 11 " . " ., ~ .:~" Board at
the ~""u~L~ ,*(y~es [iu L.:n ; <.:on aL :;:t:; Hall ~n
DATED, 3//~ SIGNeD . ~'
Reeular M"ectme of the City of Chula Vis a itv Council
Council Chamhers
Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
l.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmemhers Alevy _, Moot _, Padilla _, Rindone _' and
MClyor Horton _'
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
March 12. 1996
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Meg Schofield, Litcrw.:y CoordinCltor. and David Palmer. Lihrary Director, will present the First
Place Exemplary Program Award and First Place Adult New Reader Award presented to the
Chula Vista Literacy Team from the State Collahorative Literacy Council.
*****
Effective April I, 1994, there have been nelV amendments to the BrolVn Act. The City Council must nolV
reconvene info open session to report any final actions taken in closed session and to adjourn the meeting.
Because of the cost im'olved, there will be no videotaping of the recon.'ened portion of the meeting. However,
final actions reported lVill be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
*****
CONSENT CALENDAR
(/rems 5 rhrough 9)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar lVill be enacted by
the Council by one motion lVithout discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the public or City staff
requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you lVish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a
"Request to Speak Fonn" amilable in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete
the green foml to speak in favor of the staff recoll/mendation; complete the pink fom, to speak in opposition to
the staff recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and
Commission Recommendations and Action Items. Itell/s pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter from the City Attorney stating: that there were no reportahle actions taken in Closed
Session on 3/12/96. It is rccomlllt:nded that the letter he re~eived and tiled.
Agenda
-2-
March 19. 1996
b. Letter from Coleen A. Scott, Memher, Cultural Art... Commission, requesting financial
assistance with the Fourth Annual Classical Music Competition. It is recommended that up
to $500 h~ provideJ if the winners of the competition agree to perform throughout the year at
various City functions.
6.
ORDINANCE 2664
7.
ORDINANCE 2665
8.
ORDINANCE 2666
AMENDING SECTION 10.48.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE,
INCREASING STATE LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN AREAS AND
ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS ON MAXWELL ROAD FROM OTAY
VALLEY ROAD TO THE LANDFILL ENTRANCE (1900' NORTH OF
OTAY VALLEY ROAD) AND ON OTAY VALLEY ROAD FROM
BRANDYWINE A VENUE TO NIRVANA A VENUE (second readin2 and
adoDtion) - Based on provisions of the California Vehicle:: Code Section 40803,
and pursuant to authority under the Municipal Code Section 10.48.030. staff has
determined thai in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and traffic
congestion. and for the promotion of ruhlic.~ safety. the speed limit on Maxwell
Road hetween Otay Valley Road and the landtill entrance (1900' north of Otay
Valley Road) he inneased from 30 m.p.h. to 35 m.p.h. and th~ speed limit on
Otay Valley Roau hetween Branuywine Avenlle and Nirvana Avenu~ b~
increast.':d from 45 m.p.h. to 50 m.p.h. Staff r~commends Council place the
ordinance on s~cond reading and adoption. (Director of Public Works)
AMENDING THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IN
ACCORDANCE WITH AMENDMENT 14 AMENDING CERTAIN
SECTIONS OF TIlE MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 19, SECTION 19.85.005
AND APPENDIX B, BA YFRONT SIGN PROGRAM, MODIFYING SIGN
REGULATIONS FOR THE INLAND PARCEL, SUBAREA 4 OF THE
CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (LCP) (secnnd readin2 and
adootion) - An amendment to the LCP has heen prepared to modify the sign
r~gulatlOns for the Inland Pared, Suharea 4 of the Coastal Zone. The
amemlment moditi~s the sign regulations for the Inland Pared hy deleting the
10 foot height limitatIOn for signs and allowing signs in Subarea 4 to be subject
only to the sign requirements of the rdated Central Commercial Zone with the
Pr~cise Plan Modifying District and Generallnuustrial Zon~. Staff recommends
Council place the orJinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of
Community Deve.lopment)
AMENDING SCHEDULE IX, SECTION 10.48.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE - INCREASING STATE LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN
AREAS FROM 30 M.P.H. AND ESTABLISHING A SPEED LIMIT OF 35
M.P.H. ON EAST "J" STREET FROM HILLTOP DRIVE TO CASSIA
PLACE (second readin1! and adoption) - Based on the provisions of the
California Vehicle Code Section 40803, and pursuant to authority under the
Municipal Code Section 10.48.030, staff has determined that in the interest of
minimizmg traffic hazards and traffic congestion, and for the promotion of
puhlic safety, the speed limit on East "J" Street hetween Hilltop Drive and
Cassia Place he increased from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H. Staff recommends
Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of
Puhlic Works)
Agenda
-3-
March 19, 1996
9. RESOLUTION 18231 AUTHORIZING STAFF TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDER TO
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY FOR RELOCATION OF 36"
TRANSMISSION WATER LINE IN BONITA ROAD - Approved in the
tiscal year 1995/96 hudget was a pr()ject for the replacement of a four 8"
malntold sewer main -.:rossing Bonita Road jusl east of 1-805 freeway. The
purpose of the projel;,;t was to replat,;c the four existing 8" sewer lines with one
18" sewer line to diminate the current bottleneck in the sewage system. In
order to accomplish the work, Sweetwater Authority needs to relocate a 36"
Transmission Water line. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Public Works)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. /f you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green fomi 10 speak in favor of the slaff recommendation; complete
the pink fonn to speak in opposition to the slaff recommendation.) Commenls are limited to five minutes per
individual.
None suhmitkd.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject maffer within the
Council'sjurisdicfion that is not an item on this agenda for public discussion. (Stafe law, howe.'er, generally
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) /f you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak,
please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up acrion. Your time is limited to three
minutes per speaker.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which hm'e been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None suhmitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Council
and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the altertlati~'e. Those who wish to speak, please
fill out a "Request to Speak" fomi aI'ailable in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to fi~'e minutes.
10.
ORDINANCE 2667
AMENDING SCHEDULE IX, SECTION 10.48.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE, INCREASING STATE LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN
AREAS FROM 30 M.P.H. AND ESTABLISHING A SPEED LIMIT OF 35
M.P.H. ON HILLTOP DRIVE FROM EAST RIENSTRA STREET TO
ORANGE A VENUE (first readin2) - Based on provisions of the California
Vehide Code Section 40803. anu pursuant to authority under the Municipal
Code Section 10.48.030, staff has ddermined that hased on a traffic and
engineering study, the sp~ed limit on Hilltop Drive between East Rienstra Street
and Orange Avenue he increaseu from 30 m.p.h. to 35 m.p.h. Staff
recommenus Council place the ordinance on first reading. (Director of Puhlic
Works)
"
Agenda
-4-
March 19, 1996
Il.A. RESOLUTION 18232 ACCEPTING DONATION, AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE AND
APPROPRIATING SAID DONATED FUNDS TO PA Y FOR REPAIR TO
THE ANIMAL SHELTER KENNEL'S HEATING SYSTEM AND
KENNEL T ARPS - The Animal Shelter received a donation of $2,000 from the
Mercy Crusade, Inc. Animal Welfare Organization and a donation of $500 from
th~ Foundation for the Care of indigent Animals to be used toward repairing the
heating system and replacing the tarps at the shelter. Remainder of the costs
would he funded hy minor CIP project funds. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions. (Chief of Polii.:e) 4/Sth's vot~ required.
B. RESOLUTION 18233 REAPPROPRIATING $11,900 FROM THE FUND BALANCE IN THE
PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING REROOFING PROJECT (GGI47) TO THE
ANIMAL SHELTER RECONF1GURATION PROJECT RD205 - 4/5th's
vote required.
12. RESOLUTION 18234 ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR "PLACEMENT
OF ASPHALT RUBBER HOT MIX OVERLAY FOR FISCAL YEAR
1995/96 OVERLA Y PROGRAM ON VARIOUS STREETS IN THE CITY
(STL-224)" AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INCREASE QUANTITIES
TO EXPEND ALL A V AILABLE FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT - On
2/28/96, hids were rel~eived. The work consists of providing asphalt rubber hot
mix 1112" thick overlay on various streets. The work includes the removal of
alligator pavement areas and replacement wIth asphalt concrete pavement, the
cold millmg of street pavement in certam areas, AC levding courses, signal
loops, traffic control, adjustment of sewer manholes, adjustment of survey well
monuments, freni.:h drain system, and other miscellaneous work. Staff
rel'ommem.ls approval of the resolution awarding the contract to SRM
Contracting and Paving in the amount of $517.322.20. (Director of Public
Works)
13. REPORT INVESTIGATING THE FEASIBILITY OF A FIESTAS PATRIAS
FESTIV AL - On 3/5/96, staff was directed to review ways in which a Fiestas
Patrias event could he made Inlo to city-sponsore:d celehration. Staff
recommc:nds Council approve the celehratlOn of Fiestas Patrias at the annual
Harhor Days event on 9/21/96. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items which hm'e been remm'ed from the Consent Calendar.
Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Counci/members.
Public comments are Limited 10 five minules per indil'idual.
OTHER BUSINESS
14. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
Agenda
-5-
March 19, 1996
15. MA YOR'S REPORT<S)
a. Ratification of appomtment to the Design Review Committee - John Stokes.
16. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmemht:r Rindone
a. Ratification of appointment to the Mohilehome Rent Review Commission - Christina Orozco.
ADIOURNMENT
The meeting will adJourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on March 26, 1996
at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamhers.
A Joint Meeting of the City CouncillReJevdopment Agency will he held immediately following the City Council
Meeting.
*****
CLOSED SESSION
Unless the City Allorney, the City Manager or the City COllncil states otherwise at this time, the Council will
discuss and deliberate on the following items of bllsiness which are permilled by law to be the subject of a closed
session discussion, and which the Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect the
interests of the City. The Council is required by law to return 10 open session, issue any reports of final action
taken in closed session, and the votes taken. How..'er, dlle to the typical length of time taken up by closed
sessions, the videotaping will be tenllinated at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from
closed session, reports of final action taken, and adjournment will not be videotaped, Nevertheless, the report
of final action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be amilable in the City Clerk's Office.
17. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
I. Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Chula Vista and nin~ other cities VS. the County of San Diego regarding solid waste
Issues (trash litigation).
. SNMB. L.P. ys. the City of Chula Vista.
2. Anticipated litj~ation pursuant to Government Code Sedion 54956.9
. Associated General Contractors of San Diego vs. the City of Chula Vista.
. EastLake Park issues.
Agenda
-6-
March 19, 1996
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8
.
Property:
ApproXimately 72.5 acres of property located at the southwest quadrant
of Otay Valley Road and Otay Rio Road, Chula Vista.
N~gotiating parties:
City of Chula Vista, Los AlIsos Company, and MCA Concerts, Inc.
Under negotiation:
Exknsion of escrow for Ground Lease, Tri-Party Agreement and
Suhlease Agreements for the above-described property proposed for
development into a 20,000 st':at amphitheater.
. Purchase of property from R. E. Hazard Contracting Company. 1855 Maxwell Road, Chula Vista,
CA.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA. WCE, POA, lAFF, Executive
Management. Mid-Management, ami Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WCE), P()lil'~ Offi-':crs Association (POA) anu International Assol'iation of Fire
Fighters (lAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, amI Unrepresented.
18. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
*****
March 14, 1996
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and city Council
John D. Goss, city Manager~
city council Meeting of March 26, 1996
TO:
SUBJECT:
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular
City Council meeting of Tuesday, March 26, 1996. Comments
regarding the written communications are as follows:
Sa. This is a letter from the city Attorney stating that there
were no observed reportable actions taken by the City council
in Closed Session on March 12, 1996.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
5b. This is a letter from Colleen Scott, Member of the Cultural
Arts Commission, requesting financial assistance with the
Fourth Annual Classical Music Competition. The Cultural Arts
commission has sponsored this event in the past, but funds
have been raised through solicitation of donations from the
private sector. In addition, the Commission provides some
financial support towards this event through their own fund
raising efforts.
The request, as we understand it, and as stated in this
application, does no~ meet the criteria established in Council
Policy 159-02, as it does not provide a specific tangible
benefit to the City. However, if Council wishes to consider
this request, STAFF WOULD RECOMMENDED THAT UP TO $500 BE
PROVIDED IF THE WINNERS OF THE COMPETITION AGREE TO PERFORM
THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AT VARIOUS CITY FUNCTIONS. As per Council
Policy 159-02, an agreement setting out the terms and
obligations of the parties would have to be entered into
before any expenditure of funds could be made.
JDG:mab
r
.
\.
)
(~~
~~~
~--~
~~~~
.......-~1ii:
CllY Of
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Date:
March 13, 1996
To:
The Honorable Mayor and city Council
The Chairman and Members of the Re~~v~elopment Agency
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney~
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed session
for the Meeting of 3/12/96
From:
Re:
The City Council met in Closed session to discuss the pending
litigation of Lyman Christopher v. city of Chula Vista, SNMB, L.P.
v. City of Chula vista and Chula vista and Nine other cities v. the
County of San Diego regarding solid waste issues and labor
negotiations. The Redevelopment Agency and City Council discussed
the property at the southwest quadrant of Otay Valley Road and Otay
Rio Road.
The city Attorney and General Legal Counsel for the Agency hereby
reports to the best of his knowledge from observance of actions
taken in the Closed Session of March 12, 1996, there were no
actions that are required to be reported under the Brown Act.
BMB:lgk
C:\lt\clossess.no
f.. --I
276 FOURTH AVENUE. CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
't.!>I'osI-GcrsII1Ew~f'i\e
.,1. \.
,-
.
fltECEIVED
'96 /tAR 11 P /1 :4 9
6I't IF CHULA VIS i,
em- CLERK'S OfFICI-
~~I""~
O {'. ii, ,', '--.'.'
. r--'.,.
/' n ~-'--~" '
-'.~
JU~' MAR - 8" ,
~ ,
''':10 , .
, \--..... ,I
CIJIi'I"f- I
CI "I" ' L III UI-"-l' 0---.1
I, i A V"'I' ,_,~
',J fi, cA
March 8, 1996
Cultural Arts Commission
Coleen A. Scott, Member
4 East San Miguel Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Chula Vista City Council
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Horton and City Council Members:
The Chula Vista Cultural Arts Commission is sponsoring the Fourth Annual Classical
Music Competition. This event will be held on May 18th at the Chula Vista Women's Club on G
Street. A recital of the winners will take place that evening.
We need $1000 to put on this program which helps promote classical music and
showcase the talent of our local Chula Vista children and young adults. Can we depend on you to
help us?
Q.
Coleen A. Scott
Cultural Arts Commission, Member
t:"? ~" :~,
'..".., .'
\Ii \f ~';.::.t.. *~
, .
i.. ~:i.;\.J
'" ,j
".;.J~,jj~
:'i "\!~:"_" :.-:~" ''',,>.:~ l:~;.. :'~~:':),';' ": "',~
!.:.1\;;J.~j,,, 'O,:;JiJ ..",,,,,'''-~'' i'..'! (;. . '.'.__'.1
~ '..a lJ I.) ~_.... '\:.,;';:':'i"
r y;/7?
C&~~(I)
0)h i/~
~~~
fb'l
.
..,
J - I.
I ~.\
,~ C ,'-ie",
L
.,.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ItJ~;J/
Meeting Date //}4?
REVIEWED BY:
Ordinance .2t~1 Amending Schedule IX, Section 10.48.030 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code - Increasing State Law Speed Limits in certa~eas and
establishing a speed limits on Maxwell Road from Otay Val.l.ef-'<<oad to the
Landfill Entrance (1900' north of Otay Valley Road) and onpdiy Valley Road
from Brandywine Avenue to Nirvana Avenue. 'r~'V
^,,) ",\0
Director of Public W orIes ( '1t' <<-<y'r'V
Ci'Y M=.<< J\ ~ ~ "~~o\,9
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
Based on the provisions of the California Vehicle Code Section 40803, and pursuant to authority under
the Chula Vista Municipal Code section 10.48.030, the City Engineer has determined that in the interest
of minimizing traffic hazards and traffic congestion, and for the promotion of public safety, the speed
limit on Maxwell Road between Otay Valley Road and the Landf1Il Entrance (1900' north of Otay
Valley Road) be increased from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H. and the speed limit on Otay Valley Road
between Brandywine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue be increased from 45 M.P.H. to 50 M.P.H.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council place the Ordinance on first reading, amending
Schedule IX of the Chula Vista Municipal Code establishing the speed limit of 35 M.P.H. on Maxwell
Road from Otay Valley Road to the Landfill Entrance (1900' north of Otay Valley Road) and
establishing the speed limit of 50 M.P.H. on Otay Valley Road from Brandywine Avenue to Nirvana
Avenue.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Safety Commission, in separate actions at their meeting of 2/08/96, voted MSC 6-0-1
(Miller/Smith), with Commissioner Acton absent, to approve staff's report. support staff's
recommendation and recommend to the Council. to adopt an ordinance amending Schedule IX. Section
10.48.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code thereby establishing the speed limit on Maxwell Road
from Otay Valley Road to the Landf1Il Entrance (1900' north of Otay Valley Road) at 35 M.P.H. and
establishing the speed limit on Otay Valley Road from Brandywine Avenue to Nirvana Avenue at 50
M.P.H.
DISCUSSION:
/'''1
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 3/12/96
The City Engineer has detennined the need to increase the posted speed limit on Maxwell Road between
Otay Valley Road and the Landf1ll Entrance (1900' north of Otay Valley Road) from 30 M.P.H. to 35
M.P.H. and on Otay Valley Road between Brandywine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue from 45 M.P.H.
to 50 M.P.H. to comply with the California Vehicle Code (CVC), Section 40803, Speed Trap Evidence.
Section 40803 requires evidence that an Engineering and Traffic Survey has been conducted within five
(5) years. The old survey on both roads expired on August 29, 1995. Staff has completed a new survey
on Maxwell Road which is now in effect as of 11/22/95, and expires on 6/14/2000. Staff also
completed a new survey on Otay Valley Road which is now in effect as of 1/8/96, and expires on
12/1/2000. Every five (5) years the existing speed limits will either be verified"increased or decreased
depending on the results of the survey investigation. The Engineering and Traffic Survey should contain
sufficient information to document that the conditions of CVC Section 627 have been complied with and
that other conditions not readily apparent to a motorist are properly identified.
Pbysical Conditions
Maxwell Road in this area ranges from 40' to 52' curb to curb and is an industrial road with commercial
properties fronting on both sides of the roadway. Maxwell Road is striped with a double yellow
centerline stripe leaving two lanes in the northbound direction (up-hill) and one lane southbound (down-
hill). There is generally no on-street parking allowed and the additional northbound lane is to
accommodate the slow moving, heavy truck traffic accessing the landfill at the top of the hill. The
design speed is less than 40 M.P.H. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is 1.500 on Maxwell Road in
this area. The Engineering and Traffic Survey shows an 85th percentile speed of 38 M.P.H. The
accident rate is 1.692 accidents per million vehicle miles (A VM) which is lower than the statewide
average of 2.07 A VM for similar roadways in the State of California. Based on the above data, it has
been determined that the speed limit should be posted at 35 M.P.H. in order to comply with the
California Vehicle Code requirements or else this roadway is considered a speed trap and police radar
enforcement of the posted speed limit cannot be conducted.
Otay Valley Road east of Brandywine Avenue to Nirvana Avenue has just been widened to a 6 lane
major street 117' curb to curb with some commercial properties fronting on both sides of the roadway.
The roadway in this area is divided by a raised concrete median with three lanes of travel in each
direction. There is no on-street parking allowed except for emergency parking. The design speed is
greater than 5S M.P.H. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) in this area is 11,100. The Engineering
and Traffic Survey shows an 85th percentile speed of 53 M.P.H. The accident rate is 0.71 accidents
per million vehicle miles (A VM) which is lower than the statewide average of 2.41 A VM for similar
roadways in the State of California. Based on the above data, it has been determined that the speed limit
should be posted at 50 M.P.H. in order to comply with the California Vehicle Code requirements or
else this roadway is considered a speed trap and police radar enforcement of the posted speed limit
cannot be conducted.
Ba~ic Speed Law
Speed limits in California are governed by the California Vehicle Code, Sections 22348 through 22413,
and Section 22350, The Basic Speed Law, of the Vehicle Code. This Basic Speed Law provides that
~..~
Page 3, Item~
Meeting Date 3/12/96
no person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent, having
due regard for weather, visibility, traffic and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at
a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. A more detailed discussion of the basic
speed law, the speed limit establishment process and speed enforcement is contained within a companion
agenda item on establishing a speed limit on East] Street.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the above data, it has been determined that the appropriate speed limit should be posted at 35
M.P.H. on Maxwell Road and at 50 M.P.H. on Otay Valley Road in accordance with the California
Vehicle Code requirements. Other City streets with 50 mph speed limits are: Telegraph Canyon Road
east of Paseo Del Rey; East H Street between Terra Nova Drive and Buena Vista Way; and Otay Lakes
Road from Camino del Cerro Grande to Avenida Del Rey/Ridgeview Way. The current survey on
Maxwell Road will expire on November 8, 2000 and on Otay Valley Road on December 1, 2000. It
is recommended that the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code be revised as follows:
10.48.030 Schedule IX - Increased Speed Limits in Certain Areas
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed
Limit
Maxwell Road Otay Valley Road Landfill Entrance 35 M.P.H.
1900' nlo Otay
Valley Road
Otay Valley Road Brandywine A venue Nirvana Avenue 50 M.P.H.
All property owners along Maxwell Road and Otay Valley Road and the Safety Commission have been
notified of tonight's City Council meeting and the mailing list is attached for Council information.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to replace signs and pavement legends is $450.00 for both streets.
Attachment: Area Plat
Engineering and Traffic Survey
Radar Speed Surveys
California Vehicle Code Sections
Minutes of the Safety Commission Meeting of February 8, 1996 (Excerpt)
File No.: 0760-95-CY029
DMW:FXR:dmw
M:\HOMEIENGlNEERIAGENDA IMAX-OT A Y .DMW
t";r / ~-4-
.
.
".
THIS PACiE BlANK
/
I
/
~"J/
.,
o~
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10.48.030 OF THE D~~~
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE, INCREASING STATE ~
LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN AREAS AND ESTA~'V
BLISHING SPEED LIMITS ON MAXWELL ROAD F~dM
OTAY VALLEY ROAD TO THE LANDFILL EN~CE
(1900' NORTH OF OTAY VALLEY ROAD) AND~~,6TAY
VALLEY ROAD FROM BRANDYWINE AVENUE ~~IRVANA
AVENUE VO~v
WHEREAS, based on the provisi~~S of the California
Vehicle Code section 40803, and pursuant to authority under the
Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 10.48.030, the City Engineer has
determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and
traffic congestion, and for the promotion of public safety, the
speed limit on Maxwell Road between Otay Valley Road and the
Landfill Entrance (1900' north of Otay Valley Road)) be increased
from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H. and the speed limit on Otay Valley Road
between Brandywine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue be increased from 45
M.P.H. to 50 M.P.H.; and
ORDINANCE NO. .2t~.y'
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission at its meeting of February
8, 1996 voted 6-0-1 (Miller/Smith) to support staff's
recommendation and recommend that the City Council adopt an
Ordinance increasing the speed limits.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula vista
does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Schedule IX of Section 10.48.030 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, Increasing State Law Maximum Speed Limits in
certain Areas, is hereby amended to include the following changes:
10.48.030 Schedule IX - Increased Speed Limits in Certain
Areas
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed
Limit
Maxwell Road Otay Valley Landfill 35 M.P.H.
Road Entrance
1900' n/o Otay
Valley Road
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption, or when the
appropriate signs are erected giving notice of th maximum speed
limit, whichever occurs last.
edt
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M. 800gaa
Attorney
~...f'/ Ct--I{
C:\or\epeed.1nc
-~~ \ .
\
\
~
r--_
......1 \
-
'~A. \\
N I-
- c:(
"- I
c ..J
. I
& 0..
i
..J ._1 ~
..J ~\....\.J
~ - c:(
Q ..
Z - II ~
C .. W
..J C
> -- ..
~ 1,/ Q a:
II
z '5 J
:I o. = c:(
0 /Jj ~
()
."
_:~_U."" ,..,.a.
J r ~ )~
t ~
. ---,10. '.
. '"
ii ~ ~
I!! II !:
~
V ~ ~ VJ
II It)
- (II
j .....
...
N
S .....
N
IS ...
, JD
I J ="' ,"" ..
..
T all
'LJ c: i
..l .
-{ '~~ ,"011 .. -
1 _ .. II
~~ - 1 Q Q
-........
~-7
SPEED LIMIT -- ENGINEERING/TRAFFIC SURVEY:
STREET :
LIMITS:
Maxvell Road
Otay Valley Road to landfill entrance (1900' north of Otay Valley Rd.)
lxiatina Post ad Spaad Limit:
30
MfB
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
Sapant:
Data Takan:
Numbar Vahiclaa on Sampla:
85th Parcantila Spaad:
Ian. a of Spaads Racordad:
Block No. 's :
ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Otay Valley Road to landfill entrance
6/14/95
100
38 MfH
17 - 45 MfH
1700 - 1800
Width 40 - 52'
Horizontal Alignment
Vartical Alignment
faat
R min. . 400'
5.71% to 8.11%
Numbar of lanas for both diractions
desi n a eed less than 40 MfH
over a 140' V.C. N 0 Desi n Ct.
3 (2 NB/1 SB)
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Averaga Daily Traffic
On-Straat Parking
1.500
Not allowed
Spacial
cond~~:~n:ercenta:~s~~e=:U:~dt;:~~~~~ia~u~=:~ne:r~::~~la~~:::
northbound lanes. One (down hill) Routhbound lane.
~~r l::~~'~p.
Accident Hiatory
million
similar
The accident
vehicle miles) is
roadways.
rate at this se~ent(1.692 acciderts Der
lower than the statewide .v.raae 2.07 for
'.
SURVEY RESULTS
Study vaa Praparad by
Laonardo Hernandez
Data
6/16/95
Racommandation Increaae apeed limit to 35 MfH baa ad on pravailing spaeda
and low accident history.
,.~<." ~ eo
Data racommandation approvad:
. ~--r
..
By
-.~
Approvad spud limit: 35 MfB
Par evc 40803. Survay Ezpiraa:
6/14/2000
~I
SEGMENT UNDER STIJDY
/YJ/.Jy't~:r// r:::?-/~
cm OF CHVIA VISTA. VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY
( 0;.; J Jll..j
h..-f "n(.,......~
.u@ WEAlliER
y-i -1:.0 L; /.fl/r..+)
POSTED SPEED ;;"
;;1....~ld (v. (J
Y"'TE r:;-/C(~q<;-
SURVEY smr:1uk-' 'lj it,..).
~ TIMEENO ..J.:-I'T
.ME START .:;.. ,(X?
DlREcnON ~ - 0 S -/ CUM.
MPH NUMBER OF VEHIaD TOTAL 'II> 'II>
. " II >>
4' /' J / )~
44 V -') .,-7
43 /") ;") "i'1
42 C I , "'7
41 /:, / I ='><
40 ./ '" ,,;L ~ "')7-
39 ./ ./ r '? ~ "5',-
38 ./ ./ V r ./ ./ J U I" ., ..., .,;2
37 V ./ V ./ ./ ", r~ , y~
-
36 V ./ r./ ./ ;" c.. .~ ~
3' ./ C I r r.J ,r ( ./ ./ / // ,/ 7'-/ .
34 Ie': ( ./ ./ ./ 5 .c; , ~
33 V '" 1(' ./ ./ r' ("'\ ~ .::r "''''
32 ./ C~ V ./ (' - -"" /J?
31 CJ ./ ", ../ ./ , "'" ''- -:
30 V \.J ./' ~ 'i'- 3c:;>
../ c;;;
.9 IC r ./ ,:." ~G
28 ") ("") < :. ';"''-1
27 ", C It"" 3 "\ ;1.,
26 ./' /' 0 / '/ ..-
2$ ,.. C ICJ r') ./ -, -, ,,-/
24 /J ::-,
23 U / / :7
22 ( ./ C. (" 4" / 'Y
21 U , / -/
20 ./ / 3
,
19 ( . ~ .:J
18 r~ / / .2
17 ( , / /
16 ~J r. .J
l' rJ
~ '-'
14 ~ ~ r';
13 ,,-., ,-. /~
12 ,..-, ,....., ,"
11 ~... ---. n
10 /"")
r~, C
9 . ,,'
_.
, r. .- , )
7 " . (J
6 - (" ,',
, <.' U
RECORDER: ~ r. '/ ....Y J TOTAL flAJaGU 0' 'o'lHIaA /00
6 ..
'~INllaVDtPD""'J
&, 1
'-
c c
. ~
- .
!. .
::I
CD IUNDYWIN[ M
.
,-
~
~ r
c:
~ x
~ "'
:D
~ Z 0
SIt ~ ~
.... z
I 0
"'
N
,
, ~
,
~ lllLo.SO
m
~
~
~ ~
,.
!:!
IIOIIIA CT.
>
~
m
>
"'C.
r-
> ~
.
-t -
I I
, I
I
i
z.
,
~ "/0
STREET:
LIMITS:
Otay Valley Road
Brandywine Avenue to Nirvana Avenue
Existing Posted Speed Limit:
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
45
MPH
Se,pnent:
Date Taken:
Number Vehicles on Sample:
85th Percentile Speed:
Range of Speeds Recorded:
Block No.:
ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Brandvwine Avenue to Nirvana Avenue
12/1/95
100
~,
35 - 60
500 - 700
Width 117
Horizontal Alignment
Vertical Alignment
feet
Rmin. - 2000'
400' V.C. G,
Number of lanes for both directions 6
- +1.65%. G, - -0.50% (near Roma Court)
Design speed greater than 55 MPH
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Average Daily Traffic
On-Street Parking
15.670
not allowed
Special Conditions Roadway reconstructed to six lane divided highway.
Accident History The accident at this se~ment (0.71 accidents per million vehicle
miles) is lower than the State avera~e accident rate (2.41) allowed for similar
roadwavs in California.
SURVEY RESt'LTS
Study was Prepared by
Leonardo Hernandez
Date
1/2/96
Recommendation IncreRse speed limit to 50 MPH due to low accident rate and
divided roadway conditions.
Date recommendation approved: ,/,/"
By ~-~~.c X. R..;",~-
Approved apeed limit: 50 MPH
,
rar cve 40803. Survey Expirea:
12/01/2000
~"'I/
ern OF CH\7lA VISTA. 'VIHlCU iPEED su.vn
,CMENT IJNDER S1\JDY {'1' ">)1,0 1112::1 12~~ ,,( (p, r~ ., ,'f,) 1'1 '} M J!,/,. - ;\I, 1"1"" I .<\ v,"" ')
4'Tt .i!1/,/r;~ IURVEYSJTE!L./ P---... /'.J. P0611.uSPElD ~.t:)
.
M.. ,ART I.' ,<::' AM(~ 'tIME END c!J .' tI ('. AMtfiM) WEATHER r I~.~ __
DIREcnON NOi .0 , ./ CUM.
L.. J
M!'H MlER OF VIKla.ES '!OrAL " "
. . . .
60 rJ 1 J 1M)
59 (' . I qq
III / I , qR
Sl (", / :;)' ~ "'}':;
16 (? 0 1/ / L./ oJ Q<::'
55 In rJ I,... / /' Ii:; = "'"
54 / 1 , ....(".
53 /'"') J f R,
52 n (j 1,.-, t'J ,-, 7 c. / 9</
iiI if () / ./ ./ <::' =:- ~'i?
10 n rJ n ,.., r) / /' /" ./ / ,,,.., /r. ..,...
4~ ~ ,-., I,., n 7' /' /' ./ ,/' / ~/) /-", ;.-;;:-
48 .~ ."J r> .-, r', -, /" / ~ q ~-:;
47 r> r'J r> /" /' /' /' /' /" Q '" (/"'{'
46 rl ./ ./ /' / 7 /' ~ =z ~I'-
e r? / / / /' &:: -. ? q
.. ,.-, n r, !(") ~ ,./ ;., '- ~_.J
- ,-, 1-, / 1./ ./ ~ r 18.
42 ",., -- "./ 1/ ./ ~ -~ ,~
./
41 n /' ~ ^ Po
40 ..-'j J 7 r_
39 1"1 " e;
38 ,.., a --:;. ..., '" ,..
37 ,., ,..., ."
J6 /' I , ..:a.
IS ./ J 1 I
:M
>>
R
II
JO
;aJ
ZI
V
26 .
>> -
It
;u
-
...
~ , I
I1COI\DEA I.. j-~//." L I ....-..-.... I,-V)
V
.,.-'}
0> ,
.
.
. "\~dI~
''''I.;J.
.
I '.j I. ~,: k; 11' .:. i k i "l~;';! : ~r J1lit~ j.. '11~:1 ]f1"' ! ~
111! J!. I d IJ '.11.1' Wh!iJ !I i!t1j I I
1:81''" tll 'I I I ....j I . I-IJI. 'I II !II! fU
. J~ll!jg~'1Ii !11 t. j . Jl~.l' illiilj;' ..11!11" f!!fi~1 !
~ .l1.!~! ~J 11 <<.11 . 1: I :111.1-81'1. I] t-l1)1j.. I
, . tl1alli~11111 II j III JI111' t!jl~~"IJ it. JI'f! i~~ II
b ii!gj" ~ lJ . :fi 11. ..i! 1HI -I 1- 111 i '1-1),11 i
, !.. =d~l-1 '! !:! -II Ii 1 d .!] I 'i." ..} 01 c: 1.1:11.
= eft !~..~ ". i:g eft! aIM . i1 ! ..11~:i]~j . ! eO.. ~~! ....1. .."
~ l~i~!dU:~ m liU~l}llijnll~Wid~f I~d.a~ mn.'
I'"
~ ~ 11! . r t..]~l ~i!~"1 J Ji]~iiJJji~f~j 1
"I !.., . il:.f. ill'1J:!IJ~l .IJ-rh!1:5. J-f,...s II I
t !!!Ii ~ j- Jil~i' ..~I . j 11:111" - :1 .J~ jit;[. ~!fi!!i
lUlU If. 'I fl~ .t;ll~' ,j; . e s~ .~It~l ~r.. JifjllUII
~1~UU tf)! ~ 1. ii!-JIII)sJ~I';;(Hifiltj ls~I.ll1tJlll :~]tU!.i
:c11U .f~ 11181. Is. ... t... ..I..'! 1'.. J 111"'i~. ..1JS~1U.JJ
I.~ti -I }zi:II.]!!"lh: :lUJI :lIJUii..i ~:!5~5itl!
d d ~.. ..1. ~ · I....f, I. 1 ~ J I J. j-l!3dd~dd
_ ~~ RJ i.eJ=;..e i~ af,111~' ~II~.' ~~~~!I -i
~~/3
[1 IWE i t~t~.1 ~l'~' H h~ 'lllf;riWi~rlh1. l
· 1 i.l.t' 1=: .l ~: III JI,.,..~l'I."i"
~[[..i!t If. ;jl, f ~== ~ I h~1 if I ~l
~
.I
fIll d!Uh I tJlt!nUIHIHfiIFH III~ I;!umitmnu ~
HI H flf Ilr n111tlht f [I ii It; I Md~frJ f
!~I... .till.', I. II' i I~t. attrt.: .)If 1.[ r '11.lltllll
II. 'rsll,,: t.r Ei[1 i..lllr .1 ~ J. t , ; ~':. ...fsl.
~ -1'/
.
.' '
I' 11- ", ~r - :'11:1 = !~ :'. '~'r IJ~ ~J "jl~ji-Il J' ~-, ~ ail ,'t"
- i. ti!.~nh 1.1:1ft~ it _~iIrI111._' U. _ 'I
, 1 ~"II" I l i I~ : 1.... .!-=, ij:1 ,I. t , ,~; 111 'aJ
1~ ii'lli !: Ifla1' j ! I i .j11 ~:!i II ~!U Ili
, I .. J .. J . ~ I ~~1 _.u..s ' ,
... ~~~dl..1 'aIU tl~ 11, I~t 11.15 i"~.Js ,- JJ) .. , ISI
~ t~;jJ i~11 R1~ 1el~!il R~11~li~~lfj iJi)i I ~Jh is!
r
I
~ J II" 1~~~~I,s.I~11, " J iiJ]lt 'Jt;J], :~~iit1)1 -
! I ....~ it 1 ~1~1a i Ji:f~1 i ,1 ft. !l~'~1:1",1
. I pi 1!11~fi1f I . ....I:lJ .,.!, " ~IP I
. · - JI I -IUI) }]ii~jic I Utii 1 ill .1~;!j1~n ~ tUhII~~
,J I j ..'I', " ~51 'a... . .. Ii J' ".I..u "....J~I
~'I Sf,l ~ t IIi'1' J' i 11 f i~f I! i1gf. - ! J 1 {I
. t1lilfi (iiliidifil!i liim~fii l,nU!iii li~fhu,t
t. -/,f'
~ ,1- f[. ~ i ~ "l~~~~~~~~' ~ ~ i J. r[ II~ f~
- f. f if ~ r rt !UU--5-"l"tl i..r .1 ftl"" oW'", i' 's'(
! l ft.!. ii" I~ I :.: t I., !>lll, ,lff1.J ~'~
~II t Itrh ilt ill: 1.11. " -' ~ ";' ~[J . ,.j . .lar~f ..~. .t~t,H::I'1. f!l,
.11 r. r ,rtf.. t ..f' .- - - I' '.' .fL f.f. lJJ.. J fir
"
..
p'
1 !11-t{II~ l'l(i~~t.l f~n IJi~ttJt.1 t i~ !dl~l;if.ril t 1~~i.J9s1 [ i
I J 11;..' 'fl" n ~ [ 0 if I,fl' i i ill"~..rl !p. ~ rita I I ~
1...... ..... ilf l t ,f It p. ",[1 i j I "'..
; : tt~ m lint. .JI~~ !fU ..1 uti J I}) d~ ~!( .
)1 .f i ~ . t 1" LI:.. !f (t I t] 'J I r [~ , ~ J r J " if. . .
..~ f.l l([{ ~ .. t... ~f t : 1 . I'J l "....1 , J ~
-- .. .- .--- ....----- --- . ---- - - ~-- _.
~-/~
Safety Commission Minutes
February 8, 1996
Page 4
7. ReDor! on Increasin2 Soeed Limits on Maxwell Road between Otav Vallev Road and the landfill Entrance
MSC (Miller/Smith) to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending th" Municipal Code
increasing the spe<!d limit on Maxwell Road between Otay Valley Road and the landfill Entrance to 3S mph.
Approved 6-0-1 with Commissioner Aclon absent.
8. R~Dort on Increasine. 5~ Limits on Olav Valle" Road b@tween Brandvwine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue
MSC (Miller/Smith) to recommend that the City Council adopt an Drdinance amending the Municipal Code
increasing the spe<!d limit on OIay Valley Road betwe<!n Brandywine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue to 3S mph.
Approved 6-0-1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
9. Reeort on ReQuest for two--hour ParkinS! Limit on north side of Kearnev Street east of Third Avenue
Frank Rivera presented staff's report.
Chair Liken asked if the parking survey was completed before or after the Lucky's Store ojJeneu. He .bu .,ked
if postal employees were parking in the Lucky's parking lot.
Frank Rivera responded that the parking survey was performed after the Lucky's Store opened. Regarding the
postal employees, he did not have any information. The Post Office had an agreement with the previous property
owner for parking.
Ms. Pandra Boyle, 739 Church Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, said if motorists were displaced with two-hour
parking, they would end up in front of her residence. The requestor of the item had turned a residence into a
commercial business, a hair salon. There was underground parking. The salon's employees were already parking
on the street in front of residences. The parking structure housed a parole office which did not allow parolees
to park in the structure. Some motorists parking on the street could park in the structure, but didn't.
Ms. Joan Berg, 270 Kearney Street Chula Vista, CA 91910, said there were many elderly people in the area and
the people who parked on the street all day made it difficult for the elderly people to get in and our of their
homes. If two-hour parking was installed, the motorists who parked all day would be parking up to Del Mar
Avenue. She felt a lot of the vehicles belonged to postal employees. She had complained to the Postmaster and
was told that it was a public street.
Chair Liken asked if there were parking space requirements for the Post Office and the Plaza.
Frank Rivera said parking space requirements were determined on a square footage basis. Postal employees
found it easier to park across the street. It was legal for motorists to park on the street.
Vice-Chair Miller agreed with the residents that if time limited parking was installed, residents further away would
be affected. She said the Post Office should be contacted to try and come up with other options such as parking
in the lucky's lot, rather than impact the residents.
Chair Liken asked if the residents were notified before a trail traffic regulation became permanent in order to
express their views and opinions.
Frank Rivera responded that the residents would be notified before an item would become permanent. If the time
limited parking was installed for the eight month period and area residents felt it had not been beneficial, the time
limited parking could be removed at that time.
&'-17
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
.cran( <Il .me. l.a .,~,L
9950 Marconi Drive
San Diego, CA 92173
R.E. Hazard Contracting Company
1855 Maxwell Road
Chu1a Vista, CA 91911'
Resident
755 Otay Valley Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Otay Valley Industrial Partners
c/o McDonald Partners
11440 W. Bernardo Court, Suite 265
San Diego, CA 92127
.)...."~c..,.:.
Land Management EB-7
P.O. Box 1831
San Diego, CA 92112
SutherlandlPalumbo
c/o GoldCoast Engineering, Inc.
189 Nirvana Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
759 Otay Valley Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Darling Properties, Inc.
251 O'Connor Ridge Blvd, Suite 300
Irving, TX 75038
t'/T
.....'..' ........J 'w.. ....,..". .wI ..'';'~!I;'''
Property Dept
202 C Street
San Diego, CA 92101
Resident
751 Otay Valley Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Octavio & Leticia Sanchez
745 Otay Valley Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
~
Item
Meeting Date 1 196 -;3,'/1)t?
(
SUBMITTED BY:
Public Hearing: Considering Amendment No. 14 to the Certified
Chula Vista Local Coastal Program (LCP) Modifying Sign
Regulations for the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 of the Chula Vista
Coastal Zone. O~
~"f' ~'\~
Ordinance: Amending Certain Sections of the Chula ~
Municipal Code, Title 19, Chapter 19.85.005 and Ap~ix B,
Bayfront Sign Program, Modifying Sign Regulations fgbihe Inland
Parcel, Subarea 4 of the Certified Chula Vis~~al Coastal
Program (LCP). s:> <('
O~ {\~. L~ .
C"," S.om,,",. Comnmni<y D''''lop~t ~rlD' lJII ~ .
John D. Goss, Executive Directo~ ~~\
(4/5thsQote: Yes _ No.lL)
Council Referral No.
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND
An amendment to the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program (LCP) has been prepared to
modify the sign regulations for the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 of the Chula Vista Coastal Zone.
The draft amendment, LCPA #14, modifies the sign regulations for the Inland Parcel by deleting
the 10 foot height limitation for signs in Subarea 4 and allows signs in Subarea 4 to be subject
only to the sign requirements of the related Central Commercial Zone with the Precise Plan
Modifying District and General Industrial Zone of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
The proposed amendment is a Class 5 exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) requirements in accordance with Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines.
The Planning Commission reviewed the amendment on February 28 and it is planned to be
submitted to the San Diego District office of the Coastal Commission on March 18. If accepted
by the Commission staff, it is anticipated that the amendment will be placed on the
Commission's April or May agenda for a public hearing.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1) Conduct a public hearing to consider Amendment No. 14 to the certified Chula Vista Local
Coastal Program (LCP) modifying sign regulations for the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 of the Chula
Vista Coastal Zone; and,
/IlftI( 7--j
Page 2, Item 1/
Meeting Date 3/12/96
2) Adopt Ordinance: Amending certain sections of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, Title 19, Chapter 19,85.005 and Appendix B, Bayfront Sign Program, Modifying Sign
Regulations for the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 of the Certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On February 28, 1996, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City Council
adopt Amendment No. 14 to the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program.
DISCUSSION:
In November 1995, the Gatlin Development Company, owner of the Channelside Commercial
Center located at the southeast quadrant of Broadway and Interstate-54 requested that a 35-foot
high, 150 sq. ft. freestanding identification sign be approved at the center's Broadway entry.
After reviewing the Chula Vista Local Coastal Program Sign Regulations, it was found that the
center's location within the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 of the LCP is subject to sign requirements
for the CC-P zone which allows a 35 ft. high, '150 sq. ft. freestanding sign. But, the height for
all freestanding signs under the LCP is limited to 10 feet by a general LCP sign requirement
which supersedes the zoning allowance. Further investigation resulted in finding that eastern
portion of the Channelside Center (outside the Coastal Zone) and surrounding developable
properties are allowed freestanding signs 35 feet or higher. It then was determined that the
height of signs for the entire Inland Parcel should be reviewed and modified to be consistent
with adjacent sign regulations.
The Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 consists of approximately 36 acres of property. Four acres are
developed with general industrial uses along the southern portion of the subarea and about 32
acres on the eastern part of the Parcel, are developed with the Channelside Commercial Center
of which about 10 acres in the southwest are a part of the historic Sweetwater River channel.
(Location map is attached as Exhibit A.)
At this time, the Local Coastal Program Specific Plan, Section 19.85.005, Sign Regulations
states that signs to be constructed within the Inland Parcel are subject to the sign requirements
of the Industrial General Zone, Chapter 19.46, of the Municipal Code and the Central
Commercial zone with Precise Plan, Chapters 19.36 and 19.56, except as modified by the Local
Coastal Program Specific Plan. The applicable modification to the above regulations is a general
height restriction for the entire Coastal Zone which states that no freestanding sign shall be
greater than 10 feet in height.
The proposed LCP Amendment (Attachment I to Ordinance) will eliminate the freestanding sign
10 feet height limitation within the Inland Parcel only. The restriction would continue to apply
to all other subareas of the Chula Vista Coastal Zone. Where the height limitation applies to
the Bayfront land areas contiguous to the bay and adjacent to views and vistas created by coastal
resources, height limitations are understandable to reduce blockage of public views to coastal
resources. The Inland Parcel is geographically removed from the Chula Vista Bayfront,
however, and does not afford coastal resource viewing opportunities to the public.
-h 7-~
Page 3, Item f"
Meeting Date 3/12/96
In addition, properties located immediately to the west and east of the Inland Parcel (City of
National City) and the property located to the south of the Inland Parcel (City of Chuta Visa)
are allowed signs substantially over 10 ft. in height. Of these three sites, the ImlWitrial and
Commercial properties located to the west of the Inland Parcel are within National City's Coastal
Zone and are allowed a maximum 75 ft. freeway oriented freestanding sign.
Sign height limitations for the Inland Parcel and adjacent sites are listed below and a map of the
sites is attached as Exhibit B.
Existing Sign Height Limitations
Site land Use Current
Freestandina
Sian - Maximum
Heiaht
A - National City Heavy Commercial Coastal Zone Freeway oriented
West of Inland Parcel 75 ft.
Other 50 ft.
B - National City Light Manufacturing Coastal Zone Freeway oriented
West of Inland Parcel 75 ft.
Other 70 ft.
C1 - National City Commercial General Planned Development All 50 ft.
East of Inland Parcel Zone
C2 - Chula Vista Light Industrial All 35 ft.
East of Inland Parcel
D - Chula Vista light Industrial and Residential All 35 ft.
South side of C Street
South of Inland Parcel
E1 - Chula Vista Commercial Thoroughfare/CC-P Coastal Zone All 10 ft.
Inland Parcel Industrial General Coastal Zone All 10 ft.
E2 - Chula Vista Commercial Thoroughfare/CC-P All 35 ft.
Adjacent to Inland Parcel Industrial General All 35 ft.
lCPA#14 Propo.ed Free.tanding Sign - Maximum Height
E 1 - Chula Vista Commercial Thoroughfare/CC-P Coastal Zone Maximum 35 ft.
Inland Parcel Industrial General Coastal Zone
i
If LCP Amendment #14 is approved, commercial and industrial type signs within the Inland-
Parcel will be allowed to be a maximum of 35 feet in height. This maximum height is consistent
with the maximum sign heights allowed on adjacent properties located both inside and outside
the Coastal Zone and will not result in the blockage of visual access to coastal resources. Also,
the Inland Parcel is developed and is physically similar in nature to the Cununercial and
Industrial parcels located to the west and east. For these reasons it is staffs conclusion that
~?-3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 3/12/96
rI
elimination of the 10 ft. freestanding sign height limitation within the Inland Parcel as proposed
in LCPA #14 is reasonable and appropriate.
FISCAL IMPACT
No direct fiscal impact will result from the approval of the LCP amendment. Indirect impact
such as increase in sales tax and increase in property tax may occur because the Inland Parcel
will be more equitably marketable relative to adjacent commercial and industrial properties.
prb/lcpaN14/lcpI4.113]
~?-/
ORDINANCE 2665
I
I.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE CERTIFIED CHULA VISTA >\\O~
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WI1:tt.O~
AMENDMENT 14 AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS ~~~Hr'
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 19,~! ION
19.85.005 AND APPENDIX B, BAYFRONT Slg~~GRAM,
MODIFYING SIGN REGULATIONS FOR THE I~'AND PARCEL,
SUBAREA 4 OF THE CERTIFIED CH~ VISTA LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM (LCP) <::;<r.-G
WHEREAS, the community development department prepared an amendment to the
Certified Local Coastal Program (Amendment #14) amending certain sections of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, Title 19, Chapter 19.85.005 and Appendix B, Bayfront Sign Program,
modifying sign regulations for the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 of the certified Chula Vista Local
Coastal Program; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Availability for Local Coastal Program Amendment #14 (LCPA
# 1 4) was published in the Chula Vista Star News newspaper on January 20, 1996 and said
notice was disseminated in accordance with Title 14, Division 5.5 of the California Code of
Regulations at least six weeks prior to the scheduled city council public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the planning director set the time and place for a planning commission
public hearing on LCPA # 1 4 and gave notice of said public hearing, together with its purpose,
by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and said notice was distributed
in accordance with Title 14, Division 5.5 of the California Code of Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the planning commission, at a public hearing held on February 28, 1996,
considered LCP Amendment #14, and recommended that city council adopt LCP Amendment
#14; and
WHEREAS, the city clerk set the time and place for a city council public hearing on said
amendment; and
WHEREAS, the community development director gave notice of the said hearing,
together with its purpose, by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and
said notice was distributed in accordance with Title 14, Division 5.5 of the California Code
of Regulations; and
WHEREAS, LCP #14 was found to be a Class 5 exemption from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements in accordance with Section 15305 of the
CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the city council of the City of Chula Vista held a public hearing on March
12, 1996 at the appointed time and place, heard testimony, closed the public hearing, and
considered the proposed LCP # 1 4.
The city council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows:
7-S-
Ordinance 2665
Page 2
SECTION I: Consistency with General Plan Findings.
The city council does hereby find that the LCP, as amended by Amendment #14, is
consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan as amended.
SECTION II: Local Coastal Program Amendment #14.
Section 19.85.005 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Title 19. and Appendix B of
Section 19.85.005. Bay/ront Sign Program. are amended as set forth in the attached
Attachment I for the purpose of modifying sign regulations for the Inland Parcel,
Subarea 4 of the certified Local Coastal Program.
SECTION III: The city council hereby directs the mayor to submit Amendment #14 to
the certified Chula Vista Coastal Program to the California Coastal Commission in
accordance with Section 13552 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
SECTION IV: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the 31 st day after
its adoption or immediately following approval of Amendment # 14 of the certified
Local Coastal Program by the California Coastal Commission, whichever is later.
SECTION V: Invalidity; Revocation.
It is the intention of the city council at its adoption of this ordinance is dependent upon
the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and
that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, this
ordinance shall be deemed at city's election fully revoked and of no further force and
effect.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
?~~
Ordinance 2665
Page 3
ATTACHMENT I
19.85.005 Sign Regulations.
The size, location and design of all signs in the Chula Vista Bayfront lCP shall be subject to
the following:
1. For Subareas 1,2.3.5.6. and 7: no freestanding sign shall be greater than 10 feet in
height and signs shall be subject to the regulations of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,
Title 19. Zoning, Chapter 19.60, Signs, incorporated herein by reference, unless
modified by the provisions of this Specific Plan.
2. For the Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 - land designated as Industrial General. signs shall be
subject to the Industrial General zone, Section 19.46 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code and for land designated as Commercial Thoroughfare. signs shall be subject to
the Central Commercial Zone with Precise Plan Modifying District as described in
Sections 19.36 and 19.56 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
3. For the Midbayfront and Industrial Subareas. Subareas 1 and 2. the following
regulations shall also apply:
a. Public Signs.
1) Street Name Signs: Street name signs shall have special mountings and
frames to identify streets as being a part of the new Bayfront
community. The sign copy and construction shall reflect a unified style
and colors.
2) Directional Signs: Directional signs at intersections will help establish
gateways to the redevelopment area, and may include such generic
information as convention center, marina, special-use park, wildlife
refuge, etc.. as necessary. Directional information for private
developments may be included also at the discretion of the design
review board. Information will be clustered on one sign per intersection.
Signs will have standardized mountings and trip. Each sign location
shall include specially designed landscaped areas to create a setting.
3) Information Signs: Public information signs are designed for public
facilities and services such as parks. marshes, marinas. trim. and colored
to be unified with the basic public sign theme.
4)
Traffic and Parking Control Signs: Traffic control and parking signs shall
be designed with standard copy faces. and shall be trimmed in a manner
consistent with Bayfront motif. Exact sizes and locations are required
by state regulation.
(
,
b. Private Signs
7-7
Ordinance 2665
Page 4
1) Commercial Uses Adjacent to Freeway: Commercial uses with freeway
exposure shall be allowed either wall or low-profile monument signs with
name and/or logo. If the business logo is well-established as an identity
mark, then use of logo alone is preferable. Each lot may have two wall
signs or one ground sign only. Only one wall sign shall be visible at a
time. Maximum total copy area shall be 100 square feet. Ground signs
may be doubled-faced or parallel to the roadway and are intended to be
low-profile monument signs.
2) Automotive Service: Service stations with freeway exposure shall be
allowed freeway identification signs. Sizes shall be as small as possible
and still have freeway identity, in no case to exceed 50 square feet total
sign area. Such signs shall be subject to strict review by the design
review board.
3) Corner Lots: The identification allowance for sign development on
corner lots may be divided to provide for a sign on each frontage;
however, the total allowance for both signs combined is not to exceed
50 square feet.
4) Multi-Tenant Buildings or Complexes: Office, retail-commercial and
industrial uses which are multi-tenant shall be allowed additional tenant
identification signs: each tenant shall be allowed a maximum of three
square feet on or adjacent to the entry door. These tenant signs
shall be visible from on-site parking and/or pedestrian walkways. but not
intended to be readable from public streets.
5) Directional and Information Signs: These signs shall be allowed on a
need basis. They shall be directional in nature and not intended as
identification signs. Their maximum height shall be four feet with four
square feet maximum copy area per side.
6) Special Event Signs (Temporary): Special events such as grand
openings shall be allowed temporary signs. Such signs shall have a
limited life as determined by the design review board.
7) Construction Signs (Temporary): Signs for owners, contractors and
subcontractors, architects, etc., for new projects under construction
shall be subject to design review board approval.
c. Allowable Copy Area
1) Hotel/Motel, RV Parks, Restaurants, and Retail-Commercial: Total copy
area for all identification signs combined shall be limited to not more
than 50 square feet per parcel (except additional signage for high- and
mid-rise hotels is permitted per Section E.3.b, below). Signs may be
wall signs and/or ground signs. Ground signs may be single- or
double-faced but may not exceed ten feet in height. An additional
changeable copy area of 25 square feet maximum shall be allowed for
7-1/
Ordinance 2665
Page 5
uses which include entertainment or convention facilities. Changeable
copy area shall be single-faced only.
2) Automotive Service: Service stations shall be allowed one identification
sign (non-freeway) per lot. Signs shall be ground signs or wall signs and
shall have no more than 40 square feet of copy area, six feet maximum
height.
3) Industrial and Office Uses: Industrial or office uses shall be allowed one
identification sign per lot, visible from the internal street. Signs shall not
exceed 40 square feet in area or six feet maximum in height. Total sign
area may include a directory or tenant listing if the project is
multi-tenant.
4. For the Midbayfront Subarea only: In addition to the provisions above, the following
shall apply in Subarea 1:
a. Midbayfront Sign Program: In addition to the regulations provided by this
Specific Plan and the Chula Vista Zoning Code for signs, additional more
specific and restrictive regulations shall be required for the Midbayfront Subarea
in the Midbayfront Sign Program. This sign program shall be approved by the
City of Chula Vista prior to the issuance of the first building permit in this
subarea. The purpose of the Midbayfront Sign Program is to provide a sign plan
for the midbayfront subarea consistent with the goals and policies of the Local
Coastal Program, and to meet these specific objectives:
1) To create a system of signs which serves as an important design
element in establishing an identifiable image for the area.
2) To provide identification for the special components which make up the
midbayfront area.
3) To reduce visual competition between signs, balancing the needs for
identification and aesthetic harmony.
4) To integrate signage with architectural and landscape design themes,
thereby reducing the prominence of signs.
5) To provide standards of acceptability for signs in order to facilitate the
review and approval process by the City of Chula Vista.
b. Scale of Signs for the Midbayfront subarea: The two most prominent signs in
the midbayfront will be the midbayfront gateway monument and the high- and
mid-rise hotel building wall signs. Because of the importance of these signs,
the following specific regulations are provided:
(
1)
Midbayfront Gateway Monument: The sign element containing copy
shall not exceed a maximum height of 5'-6". The architectural element
containing the sign shall not exceed 1 2 feet in height. The maximum
7-;
Ordinance 2665
Page 6
copy area per sign face shall not exceed 50 square feet. Illustrations of
a gateway monument meeting these standards follow as a guideline.
2) High-rise Hotel Building Wall Signs: Only allowed on hotel buildings
greater than eight stories in height. Two signs per building. 300 square
feet maximum each sign. Individual letters or logo only; maximum sign
height shall be 7 feet. An illustration of this type of sign follows as a
guideline. Sign design and lettering shall not permit perching by avian
predators of the California least tern. light-footed clapper rail. or
Belding's Savannah sparrow.
(Ord 2613,1994; Ord 2532, 1992; Res 11903. 1985).
19.85.006 Form and Appearance.
1. Form and Appearance Objectives.
The following objectives shall serve as guidelines for use of land and water resources
to preserve a sound natural environment:
a. Preserve existing wetlands in a healthy state to ensure the aesthetic enjoyment
of marshes and the wildlife which inhabit them.
b. Change the existing industrial image of the bayfront. and develop a new identity
consonant with its future prominent public and commercial recreational role.
c. Improve the visual quality of the shoreline by promoting public and private uses
which provide proper restoration, landscaping, and maintenance of shoreline
areas.
d. Remove. or mitigate by landscaping, structures or conditions which have a
blighting influence on the area.
e. Develop a readily understandable and memorable relationship of the Bayfront
(and the areas and elements which comprise it) to adjoinin9 areas of Chula
Vista and to the freeway and arterial approaches to the Bayfront.
7-/ tJ
Ordinance 2665
Page 7
(
APPENDIX B
TO SECTION 19.85.005
BA YFRONT SIGN PROGRAM
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Goal
The goal of the Chula Vista Bayfront Sign Program is to control signs--eliminating those which
are obtrusive and encouraging those that are creative and interesting while establishing a
sense of place for the area.
Objectives
1. To establish guidelines and criteria for all signs within the Chula Vista Bayfront
Redevelopment Project Area.
2. To establish a design review board charged with the following tasks:
(a) to make decisions regarding appropriateness of private signs;
(b) to preserve the integrity of the bayfront, and
(c) to encourage creative sign design.
3. To encourage vitality within a development through the use of sign design.
4. To avoid the proliferation of private business signs along the freeway.
5. To incorporate into the design of public signs the elements of the bayfront logo.
6. To promote bayfront development progress, special events, and to identify new
businesses coming into the area discretely but effectively.
7. To assure equality in sign impact.
8. To establish "Bayfront" identify through a cooperative program with Caltrans.
APPLICABILITY
The Bayfront Sign Program shall provide criteria for the regulation, design, and installation of
signs to be located within Subareas 1,2,3,5,6, and 7 of the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal
Program. Signs proposed for Subarea 4 (Inland Parcel) of the certified Local Coastal Program
shall be subject to the sign regulations of the related General Industrial (lG) and Central
Commercial Precise Plan Modifying District as described in the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
DESIGN REVIEW
The establishment of a design review board for the Chula Vista Bayfront is of primary
importance. The Board shall be established by the redevelopment agency of the City of Chula
7- /tJ- J
Ordinance 2665
Page 8
Vista. and should review all parts of the Bayfront project--the architecture. landscaping
proposals. and each sign proposed for the area. This mechanism will ensure the regulation
and control needed to create a distinctive atmosphere for the bayfront.
Chula Vista Design Review Board - Appointed
The Chuta Vista Design Review Board has been appointed to function as the design review
board herein described and has been charged with the responsibility of interpreting and
applying sign design guidelines contained in this document. The board is specifically directed
to encourage creative sign design and diversity. The Redevelopment Agency shall retain
ultimate authority for fair and equitable application.
7-/tJ-c2
."
I
I
(~;,
A
B
C1
C2
D
E1
E2
Max. 75 ft. freeway oriented I 50 ft. other (National City Coastal Zone)
Max. 75 ft. freeway oriented I 70 ft. other (National City Coastal Zone)
Max. 50 ft.
Max. 35 ft.
Max. 35 ft.
Max. 10 ft. (LCPA #14 proposed change to Max. 35 ft.1
Max. 35 ft. HIJ-~ ./_/;..;:
~
I
ADJACENT FREESTANDING SIGN HEIGHTS
EXHIBIT B
~ Inlaoo Parcel, Subarea 4 Chula Vista Coastal Zone Boundary
Coastall ZOlfilie B,(J)i(JliliI'Clarles
Ci~'y olf Ch'lll'la Vista
EXHIBIT A
~
?-//
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of 2/28/96
ITEM 2.
PUBLIC HEARING; PCM-96-19: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT #14
TO THE CERTIFIED CHULA VISTA LOCAL COASTAL PLAN (LCP)
MODIFYING SIGN REGULATIONS FOR THE INLAND PARCEL,
SUBAREA 4 OF THE CHULA VISTA COASTAL ZONE
Principal Community Development Specialist Buchan indicated Subarea 4 of the Local Coastal
Program and noted that Gatlin Development Company, who developed the WalMart property,
had requested a 35' sign on their property at the entryway along Broadway. In the entire coastal
zone, the allowed height is 10'. Looking at the area surrounding the parcel, there were variable
heights allowed, and it was felt WalMart was being penalized for being in the coastal area. By
allowing a 35' sign, there was no impediment to visual access. Also, a 44' high building could
be located in the coastal area, but there could only be a 10' sign. Ms. Buchan recommended
amending the LCP so that particular site in the coastal zone could have 35' signs, which is
actually lower than the surrounding signs.
Commissioner Thomas asked how staff arrived at a height of 35' if the maximum building height
was 44'. Ms. Buchan stated that she had considered the underlying zoning which allowed a 35'
sign. Under the LCP the land was developed under C-C-P and Industrial General land uses.
The only exception was the limitation to 10' signs.
Commissioner Thomas asked if with the 35' signs there would be an aesthetically pleasing
environment, or if there would be different heights in signs, which would be inconsistent. Ms.
Buchan stated that up to a 35' sign would be allowed; it would be ruled by the underlying
zoning. There could be variance in height, but the maximum would be 35'. Commissioner
Thomas asked if the 35' should be higher to match the surrounding area. Ms. Buchan replied
that it would not be her recommendation because in the City of Chula Vista and the property
adjacent in the City of Chula Vista was also a maximum of 35'.
This being the time and the place advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSC (Thomas/Willett) 6-0 (Chair Tuchscher absent) to accept staff's proposal.
CCf'lMl!a'll y [\: \,"f l ::....r.H ~~T
. , . ',:[ 'c;. ~;'
, . I
Gs 2 9 I:!h !
1_- _ - -~--
- ---- ----
-a4~
r--J ,.-;
/ -/__ 5
THIS PACE BLANK
.
.
fj'.;pf 7-/ ~
.I'
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
~8'"
Item /.
Meeting Date / ~};
sP'<
Ordinance .J.t."~ Amending Schedule IX, Section ml8.030 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code - Increasing State La~~peed Limits in
certain areas from 30 M.P.H. and establishing a sP#limit of 35 M.P.H.
on East "}" Street from Hilltop Dr" e to Cassi~ace.
'f
-~
-cF
-I.)
O:J'V
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: City Manager h ~
'\J1 U --r (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No..xJ
Based on the provisions of the California Vehicle Code Section 40803, and pursuant to authority
under the Chula Vista Municipal Code section 10.48.030, the City Engineer has determined that
in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and traffic congestion, and for the promotion of
public safety, the speed limit on East "1" Street between Hilltop Drive and Cassia Place be
increased from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council place the Ordinance on first reading, amending
Schedule IX of the Chula Vista Municipal Code establishing the speed limit of 35 M.P.H. on
East "}" Street from Hilltop Drive to Cassia Place.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of 2/08/96, voted MSC 6-0-1 (Smith/Miller), with
Commissioner Acton absent, to approve staffs report, support staffs recommendation and
recommend to the Council, to adopt an ordinance amending Schedule IX, Section 10.48.030 of
the Chula Vista Municipal Code thereby establishing the speed limit on East "}" Street from
Hilltop Drive to Cassia Place at 35 M.P.H. In a follow-up motion MSC 5-1-1
(Miller/Cochrane) with Commissioner Smith voting no and Commissioner Acton absent, the
Commission moved to have staff perform All-Way Stop evaluations at the intersections of East
"J" Street and Melrose Avenue and East "}" Street and Lori Lane, and return at the March 1996
Safety Commission meeting with a report on these two (2) intersections.
DISCUSSION:
The City Engineer has determined the need to increase the posted speed limit on East "1" Street
between Hilltop Drive and Cassia Place from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H. to comply with the
California Vehicle Code (CVC), Section 40803, Speed Trap Evidence. Section 40803 requires
evidence that a Traffic and Engineering Survey has been conducted within five years. The old
survey expired on July 16, 1995. Staff has completed a new survey which is now in effect as
~8"-/
Page 2, Item II}
Meeting Date 3/12/96
of 11/22/95, and expires on 11/8/2000. Every 5 years the existing speed limits will either be
verified, increased or decreased depending on the results of the survey investigation. The
Engineering and Traffic Survey should contain sufficient information to document that the
conditions of CVC Section 627 have been complied with and that other conditions not readily
apparent to a motorist are properly identified.
Phvsical Conditions
East "J" Street in this area ranges from 40' to 64' width curb to curb residential collector street
with residences fronting on both sides of the roadway. Most of East "1" Street is striped with
a double yellow centerline stripe leaving one lane in each direction with parking on both sides
of the street. The easterly most portion of this subject area of East "1" Street, between Floyd
Avenue and Cassia Place, has a raised median dividing the two lanes of opposing traffic. The
design speed of this street is slightly less than 40 M.P.H. with the exception of a sag vertical
curve near Gretchen Road which is designed for about 30 M.P.H. The Average Daily Traffic
(ADT) on East "1" Street in this area is 8,590.
Since this roadway segment also has Halecrest Elementary School and Hilltop Middle School
fronting on the street, there are "School" "25 M.P.H. Speed Limit" "When Children Are
Present" signs and markings in these areas which will not be changed. Therefore, the proposed
speed limit change will be applicable in these areas, only when children are !l21 present,
generally during non-school hours and on non-school days.
The Engineering and Traffic Survey for East "J" Street shows an 85th percentile speed of
between 36 M.P.H. and 38 M.P.H. The accident rate is 0.997 accidents per million vehicle
miles (A VM) which is much lower than the statewide average of 2.07 A VM for similar
roadways in the State of California. Based on the above data, it has been determined that the
speed limit should be posted at 35 M.P.H. in order to comply with the California Vehicle Code
requirements or else this roadway is considered a speed trap and police radar enforcement of the
posted speed limit cannot be legally conducted.
Area Resident's Concerns
At the Safety Commission meeting, the area resident's expressed concerns over increasing the
speed limit from 30 mph to 35 mph. Staff and the Police Sergeant explained the Basic Speed
Law and the Speed Trap Law and why there is a need to raise the posted speed limit. The
residents expressed a desire for additional police enforcement of the posted speed limit and two
all-way stops at the intersections of East "J" Street and: Melrose Avenue; and Lori Lane. Based
on the Safety Commission recommendation, staff will be returning to the Safety Commission
meeting of March 14, 1996 with a report addressing the all-way stops requested and other
alternatives available to the residents.
~. , (?~c1
.. _ 6'
Page 3, Item 10
Meeting Date 3/12/96
Basic Sneed Law
Speed limits in California are governed by the California Vehicle Code, Sections 22348 through
22413, and Section 22350, The Basic Speed Law, of the Vehicle Code. This Basic Speed Law
provides that no person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is
reasonable or prudent, having due regard for weather, visibility, traffic and the surface and
width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or
property. The basic speed law is founded on the belief that most motorists are able to modify
their driving behavior properly, as long as they are made aware of the conditions around them.
Section 22358.5 of the Vehicle Code states that it is the intent of the Legislature that physical
conditions such as width, curvature, grade and surface conditions, or any other condition readily
apparent to the driver, in the absence of other factors, would not require special downward
speed zoning. The speed limit normally should be established at the first five mile per hour
increment below the 85th percentile speed. However, in matching existing conditions with the
traffic safety needs of the community, engineering judgement may indicate the need for a further
reduction of five miles per hour. The factors justifying such a further reduction are the same
factors mentioned above. Whenever such factors are considered to establish the speed limit,
they should be documented on the speed zone surveyor the accompanying engineering report.
In determining the speed limit which is most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of
traffic and is reasonable and safe, important factors are prevailing speeds, unexpected conditions,
and accident records. Traffic regulations are based upon observations of the behavior of groups
of motorists under various conditions. Generally speaking, traffic regulations that reflect the
behavior of the majority of motorists are found to be most successful. Laws that arbitrarily
restrict the majority of drivers encourage wholesale violation of posted restrictions, lack public
support and usually fail to bring about the desired changes in driving behavior. This is
especially true of speed zoning. Before and after studies consistently demonstrate that there are
no significant changes in traffic speeds following the posting of new or revised speed limits.
I
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Sections 22357 and 22358 authorize local authorities to establish
intermediate prima facie speed limits on streets and roads under their jurisdiction, on the basis
of an Engineering and Traffic Survey. These state laws permit local authorities to lower the
maximum speed limit currently 55 M.P.H, (as of after March 31, 1996, this prima facie speed
limit increases to 65 M.P.H) or to raise business or residence district speed limits (25 M.P.H)
on the basis of a Engineering and Traffic Survey. These "intermediate limits" between 25 and
65 M.P.H. must be posted to define clearly the limits of the zone and the prima facie speed limit
established. Speed Trap-Section 40802(b) provides that prima facie speed limits established
under Sections 22352(b)(l), 22354, 22357, 22358 and 22358.3 may not be enforced by radar
unless the speed limit has been justified by an engineering and traffic survey within the last five
7,,,;J- t'~
Page 4, Item 1&1
Meeting Date 3/12/96
years. An "Engineering and Traffic Survey" is required where enforcement involves the use of
radar or other electronic speed measuring devices, under eve 40802(b).
The Sneed Limit Establishment Process
Speed limits should be established preferably at or near the 85th percentile speed, which is
defmed as a speed exceeding that which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. The 85th percentile
is often referred to as critical speed. Speed limits higher than the 85th percentile are not
generally considered reasonable and safe and limits significantly below the 85 percentile do not
facilitate the orderly movement of traffic. Speed limits established on this basis conform to the
consensus of those who drive highways as to what speed is reasonable and safe, and are not
dependent on the judgement of one or a few individuals. Realistic speed zones will invite public
compliance by conforming to the behavior of the majority and by giving a clear reminder to the
non-conforming violators. These realistic zones will also offer an effective enforcement tool to
the police by clearly separating the occasional violator from the reasonable majority.
The basic intent of speed zoning is to influence as many drivers as possible to operate at or near
the same speed, thus reducing the number of conflicts created by wide differentials in operating
speeds. Only when roadside development results in traffic conflicts and unusual conditions
which are not readily apparent to drivers, are speed limits somewhat below the 85th percentile
warranted. Realistic speed zoning is a traffic engineering tool used to derive the best traffic
service for a given set of conditions.
While the basic speed law states that no person shall drive at a speed greater than is reasonable
or prudent, the majority of drivers comply with this law, and disregard regulations which they
consider unreasonable. It is only the top fringe of drivers that are inclined to be reckless and
unreliable, or who have faulty judgement and must be controlled by enforcement. Speed limits
set at or slightly below the 85th percentile speed provide law enforcement officers with a means
of controlling the drivers who will not conform to what the majority considers reasonable and
prudent. Experience has shown that the 85th percentile speed is the one characteristic of traffic
speeds most nearly conforming to a safe and reasonable speed limit. Speed limits set higher than
the critical speed will make very few additional drivers "legal" for each 5 M.P.H. that the
posted speed limit is increased. Speed limits lower than the critical speed will make a large
number of reasonable drivers "illegal" for each 5 M.P.H. increment that the speed limit is
reduced. For practical purposes, the 5 M.P.H. increment at or immediately below the 85th
percentile is the numerical value best selected for the posting of a realistic and enforceable speed
limit.
- _u.....___
-Jd,'l f,-,,&
-
Page 5, Item IP
Meeting Date 3/12/96
Enforcement
Concurrence and support of enforcement officials are necessary for the successful operation of
a restricted speed zone. Realistic speed zones tend to minimize public antagonism toward police
enforcement of obviously unreasonably low speed limits. By posting and enforcing the
appropriate speed limits, local authorities invite the public to comply with the reasonable
behavior of the majority of the public, while giving a clear reminder to the non-conforming
violators. These regulations also offer an effective enforcement tool for the local police by
clearly distinguishing the intentional violator from the reasonable majority.
The establishment of a speed limit of more than 5 miles per hour below the 85th percentile
(critical) speed should be done with great care as this may make violators of a disproportionate
number of the reasonable majority of drivers. With all of this information taken into account,
staff has carefully reviewed the facts as they relate to the posting of speed limits on East .1"
Street and recommends the proposed change at this time to 35 M.P.H..
CONCLUSION:
Based on the above data, it has been determined that the appropriate speed limit should be posted
at 35 M.P.H. in accordance with the California Vehicle Code requirements. The current survey
will expire on November 8, 2000. It is recommended that the City of Chula Vista Municipal
Code be revised as follows:
10.48.030 Schedule IX - Increased Speed Limits in Certain Areas
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed Limit
East J Street Hilltop Drive Cassia Place 35 M.P.H.
All area residents, schools and businesses have been notified of tonight's City Council meeting
and the mailing list is attached for Council's information.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to replace signs and pavement legends is $1,000.00.
Attachment: Area Plat
Engineering and Traffic Survey
Radar Speed Surveys
California Vehicle Code Sections
Minutes of the Safety Commission Meeting of February 8, 1996 (Excerpt)
File No.: 0760.95-CY029
DMW:FXR:dmw
(M :\HOME\ENOINEER\AOENDA \EASTJSTR.DMW)
/P'.F 1 ~ ~/8 ~ (p
THIS PAGE BlANK
.
7P'-J;, 2/-6
~
,p~
ORDINANCE NO. ~~ 5:P<<A..;,
~
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10.48.030 OF Tll~~
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE, INCREASING~TE
LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN AREAS FR 30
M.P.H. AND ESTABLISHING A SPEED LIM~ F 35
M.P.H. ON EAST "J" STREET FROM HIL~'P DRIVE
TO CASSIA PLACE vO
'? <<)
WHEREAS, based on the provisions of the California
Vehicle Code section 40803, and pursuant to authority under the
Chula vista Municipal Code section 10.48.030, the City Engineer has
determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and
traffic congestion, and for the promotion of public safety, the
speed limit on East "J" Street between Hilltop Drive and Cassia
Place be increased from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H.; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission at its meeting of February
8, 1996 voted 6-0-1 (Smith/Miller) to support staff's recommen-
dation and recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance
establishing the speed limit of 35 M.P.H. on East "J" Street from
Hilltop Drive to Cassia Place.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Schedule IX of Section 10.48.030 of the Chula
vista Municipal Code, Increasing State Law Maximum Speed Limits in
certain Areas, is hereby amended to include the following changes:
10.48.030 Schedule IX - Increased Speed Limits in Certain
Areas
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed
Limit
East J Street Hilltop Drive Cassia Place 35 M.P.H.
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the thirtieth day from and after its doption, or when the
appropriate signs are erected giving not' e f the imum speed
limit, whichever occurs last.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
b2:-/- Y-7/Z-g
.
.
J'
THIS PACE BLANK
-10' y, {f,- :!
"
~)J.# / -rr",:"~a",, ~'~r '~
~ ~J ./ ~.I .'\ '._.,-(""~
~ ~ ~'-' "\J'~,"' T I ,""'<( '-:;';'\',~
~" "rTT ,'1 I.~ ,>.I
~ \ f1 '';''<"''.,J I,:)... ...-.- i ::.;. ~\ :\i,....\
.y.-- _, ,~ ~.\. f L. -..; '~~ V-, '., ",
~;...>: ..-....J ~ --,.
" ~ I \ ~. ~\X('C'. <L"/f"9 ::; ~-I \. ~ ;:::;:' ~
~ ~~ ----.." ......'!'\; ~
") ~/ ~>\~~~ G..l/. ~
--..... .f), / '?~___~ I@ '~~'i~'71.,{~~~
~. ......":?~;; - 't '. ,.. ~.....?~~~ ,"' ~
~::'F. , \::: '?:~ . y ~ .". r ".:.<
~ ~1Jt::J./ "- \ J\. t 1/.... ~ JP') .:.
'/1'JJ].d' \--' ~ r-litf#f~;;""': 'I r:;; ...... .
fYiJ.. ~ . \~;i v'~, -,...... f"I :;. ...;" \
~'fr;; .J: ?"-.~\ 10.'1 ~..-~ ~<"c' ~'
:",~~} 'Ii' , I ....~ ~J ~Yf:~'-:-::","""~ ~.'\~
~ ~~b~ ' " / ,,4; ~ ,=-Ir "r: r: ~~.>_., ~',.,,..
:'~I ,,: / ~~.~ "~~,''1"'..~~ B ~~~~
\ I .") "~ I $/\1 ~'~.~ ~ \ ,." ":::. ~/:2
'J. ..7::,i:tj,.>~/t/ / . J'~~~'~~~~?A:("" ":?-~~
f-< 1'-. "'~ (!-/<- ~ .~"" \1 ~ '" :-:/\. \ . ...:,... ~ ~
1 .~~~~j: 1i'2~\'~P' ~~, ,~~. '~~:~\ T.?'~~~~
) ~ ~ ~ .:;> ~1'\~ 6) \ ';:; ~ ,{7 t.:..:::\ ~ ::. .:.. \'\::i.Jr~
~~ ~ '. . "" '~ .w ' t:':',.\;\ ""< ::..:.....
\1 -= .~ J:J5.r ~ 44. S:'~\\j)l,. C"::::.\,,~"" ~
~ 'I' ({ .' ~"f k'o, __ ;.., I P'" ;;::: ^""
\ ' ~,# "..... :..-~~ .~. : =:.. D ,1\
, \~~ ..~;...... \~' ,_.....". '\'1:' ~..G :I;: ).-'
~\:f J \ C?;..~t ~.~ JJtI . \ ~ ~ .::..-2\;-:JI!~ ~ .-'
'.A \- ".....- Co) \ ":;;- ~ . 2t:: -&
,\". ,- ~6A' ),,-:. .,\>' ,1{;3...../ ",-';. ~..
. ,w,).( .' .... "I..X ;..0 WoI
~ ....... )">' '. li'-; ~ · =
_ '" , \ ..(P . V :L ~ ~~ \ ).' ~ ~~~~...: ~
~~\ ' ....... ',I\. .t\ ;;.., " ~ \1-' ::;. ;.)j ~'?t:
'\ ~""'1 \\.., , v' \ ':J ,'0 I
~~1 ~7":~--''':;;:'' ' \.'~I"G~ ''--;..c).,5 I
f\ l,_~ . \ .'i.... , :.0' -...~ ~ ...G ~ ~ ~ "Y
\ \=v -." ;"'. ". '-; ;JK~\ ~ A~,~",:'.,:;If~', "i ~ .
J--",~ -,~., " ~\" u.~ .'y,..:.U"'Y' ...,-:\e; ,";; -
j;-Y-\ ~\~~'" .\ 1~;~'\~' ~"~)~'k:;~~"~]' .~. ~ ~;Z~ i
~\ \\: ,~1'\'. ," ,\d \,~~~ ;,.. '.0$ ~ ~<).\. ';'. [\4 - r --' Q~
,''1''"" ~ .,,~ ,'< \ -:;;. ,;." t .:... y2.;J.. . ~ ~(
, . \_ ,\-~.):'i \' .. -' .~,?\-1 ..... ... 0
PJ..? t[-7
...
<(
.J
~
<(
UJ
a:
<(
I/')
CI>
....
...
N
....
N
...
..
-
.
Q
SPEED LIMIT--ENGINEERINGITRAFFIC SURVEY:
STREET: EAST "J" STREET
L1~IITS: HILLTOP DRIVE Tn r.AC:~TA "l.At:~
Existin& Posted Speed Umlt
30 MPB
MELROSE AVE. NACION AVE. FLOYD AVE.
NAtTON AVE. noYD A~. [AC:C:TA It,
1 t-a-9~ 11_R_Q~ , '_R_Q~
100 Inn 1nn
37 '8 ,,;
25-'1 Mf>1! ,,, _1&'\ ,-""J:I ?Ii-/.'\ ~~
200-300 300-500 500-600
HILLTOP DR.
Sqment: MELROSE AVE.
. Date Taken: 11-8-95
No Vehicles on Sample: 100
85th Percentile Speed: 38
RaD&e or Speeds Recorded: 26-43 MPH
Block n 00-200
/lOADHlO' CHAR4~RlS~
Width
'0-64 '
leet. No. or lAnes ror Both Directions
,
BoriloDtal Ali&nment
Venical Alignment
Tanllent v:/n 'Melroll!ie Cn,.U.ni",.,AT' ",,/n Melrose. R!o-in. '60'
160' V.C. G,. 0.94r.. Go . 6.6r.. Desi2n S~eed . 27 MY\!
(near Gretchen Road)
Avera&e Dail.)' Tramc 8 5~O
On.Street Parkin& Allowed.
Special Conditions Predominatelv sinde fnilv dwelHn~s. Hi11to~ Jr. Hh" school
and fire station west of 1-8Q5. Halecrest Elementarv Sthool ea~t of T_805.
Ex1stin2 25 MPH ~hen Children Are Pre~ent .iof'lc i" .,.eA.
Accident Bistol')'
The accident rate at thiK seoment (0.997 accidents ~er million
vehicle miles) is lower than the aVerAoe a~~fdf!nt ,..t~ (2.07' f",,". similar
roadwaVR in th~ .tAte of r..'ifn,.~i.
~
Study waf Prepared by Leonardo Hernandu Date 11 - 1 n 11j1j~
Recommendation 1t'1~'!"~AJlCf!! IInf!!~t! ''4'"'11,, t'n 'Ii M'PJt h..f!!t! 0'"' p,"(IrV.f1'4'~r .n~"".
Dote Recommendation Approved: I f -",:J- "S--
By ~-u~.:...:..... )L. ~~
Appl""ved Speed Limit 35 MPH
. Per evc 40803, SUl""ey Expires 11 - 08 - 2000
.
('::\WPS1\TRAFFIC.FRMi 711',", f-/'p
em or CHUIA VISTA. VEHICU: SPEED SURVEY
SEGMENT UNDER STUDY
1'''''1: II id.,~
,
~ '::r" S?..J.~,,*-I-
( 1-I1{h.,y> Dr'", -
U#I-rrjq,,-. AIIO"'....iD)
,
SURVEY SI1E r[~/n
~_"':<t:'" ~1j."""",O
POSTED SPEED :30
START /1) : "'!f) ~M
11MEEND /1") '~@M
WEA nfER
r Ik~ ,-
DIRECTION _ ~ -0 a) - -, CUM.
Mi'H NUMBER OF VEHJa.ES TOTAL '" '"
. II U .
45
41
43 / J / ,,,-,1'-'
42 /"'} t':J nq
41 r) n (') ,...~ ./ 1/ G (', 00
40 r';.> n L ../ .., , 'I q.~
39 rJ /' ./ ., "'I ~f
38 ./ /' ./ ./ ./ // ./ =1 7 5f(~
37 L~ ~ /" ./ L{ </ :;19
36 0 n 0 () n r- ./ L ./ ./ ./ II /I ~"
35 0 () 10 / ./ !/ ./ ./ / 1/ / / ./ 1/ / If'" ,,, r ~<J
34 \:) r:; IC) ~ ./ / ./ 7 ~ "q
33 v:; .J n t' 'J 7 ';. '1'2
32 .~ C I\: ./ / ./ ./ ./ q 9 ~"
31 .r n ./ ./ 'I L/ .,r
30 to) rJ It":) /'" I( ./ / ./ /' '9 Q .......,
0 n 10 t" n :J ./ -;z -::1 I:>
J I(~ 0 lQ ./ <( '-I /
27 '0. I , 7_
26 n I j I
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
II
J7
16
J5
14
13
12
II
10
9
.
0
5
RECORDEK J: ""'1" -I~ +-t.r."!"v. 'J",. 'ftn1lU. HVIOD 0' VIHIQ,D IO() /11.1/
,-
.
~:
. J C" _c......~
,t:-'/ I
em or CHUlA VISTA. VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY
;EGMENT UNDER 5'JUI)Y
~'TE II /,dt:;~
,
"T"" "<::,.4 +-
_T . r,D
(d.,/r--..._; A"","'..h - A)nr,',."" AUr'T?JP
SURVEYSTIE slo
u.~,'..')" 1""',., ~,f POS1EDSPEED ~r?
h~&r.START II :0,.)
@OM
TIME END
11'.;2<:;'" @'M
WEATHER c./ro=. r
.
DIRECI10N e:: -0 tV -/ CUM.
MPH NUMBER OF \EHlaD TOTAl. '" '"
. .. u .
4S
401
43
42
41 () i{'l i/ ./ u J ItJD
40 r'J 0 'fb
39 I") / /' ..".- " "" Co; qG
38 r- /' ,.- /' 'u <-I qt)
37 J r ..".- 1./ / r; I. ~ft
36 C~ IJ 0 I/'" 1') ./ /' /' ./ ./ /' l"l I'll ~~
3S Il"'>ln r- IrJ r / / /" /' i/' /' 1/ II /0
34 I~ III /' /" ,/ / '7 ./ <P- ~ """"
33 !"':; II'"") -r. r> /? i/J r 11"'\ ,/ /. I..!J ,-~ .;".,
32 ~ /'" I/"') 7 '7 i./ /. /' ./ /. If':> I';;' :>,....
31 /'" ( ,/ .,., .. ."
30 - r r) ,/ 1/ / ./ ./ ./ ,~ 9 .,,,
r- ,......, /' ./ /' 5 5 J'"
, 2AI r () "'?"\ ('" ("", 7i '7 ':;t ,'":J <:\
27 Ir"" J J :2.
2.6 - I,., I
2$ /" J J /
24
23
22
21
20
19
II
J7
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
~
. )
6
5 I
RECORDER: J_. -'~ ~/, -~, ,I.. . I 'l'VTM. JrfU...D or ~IH:IQ.D, / f'?rF)
A ", "
'\IS;
.
'J -- "~I
~ ,~,~
SJ-/~ :
.
cm OF CHlJL4 VISTA. VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY
SURVEY SITE
F/o
s:;-,~ g.".,~.I
- Flt.Vf"'1 A",,, up)
POS1n> SPEED
:fr.>
SEGMENT UNDER STUDY
, "If< It;>~
,
.,:- If .,
..:1
s;+ .,..,,,1-
r t-}I\f'":r"1'" ALI<<,.,uI)
nMESTART II.: 4<::'
AMn'M
TIME END
I..!J 1/.!J
~ WEATHER
r Jo.n r--
DIRECIJON F' .0 .....J.r2- . I CUM.
MPH NUMBER OF VEHJaD TOTAL .. ..
. II U .
45
...
43 /') / / J/>/)
42 ./ / 1 '19
4] ./ , I Q!\,
40 ,-.; I ('") /' ./ ./ / ./ 7- .,.. q-;j
39 'r> 1r'J r) /' <J l../ cn
38 ~ 0 ./ ./ ., "" S/ J'~
37 I~ in n rJ I"i Ir 7 7 / Q a ~:J
36 I"') n 0 Q /' ./ I':.. ,. ':1"
35 0 ,"") /"'") ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ J/) J^ '.::3
34 ,r. 0 ,--, ,-, /' /' ./ /' 1/ /' ./ ,.. , . .0;'::>
33 ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ / '" .., <1<1
32 1,.- f'1 /' 7 7 1 ./ 10 JJ' :><:-
31 () (") 'n ./ <.; LI "c-
'Q C f) ,-- ./ /' /' /' ,/ /' Z"'. !.~ '1/
~ /' ("j .3 ~ C)
28 r L 0 ~ ~ I.
27 r I I ~
26 /' / / ..,
-
25 /' / 1 ,
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
II
10
9
-
6 .
5
RECORDER:.,I",,_,; ".A" 4/. __ ~ --:-"'- - I TOT~ NlJIOU. OF V&HIQ.D. }O()
, k-.r-# -
tr
'.
'JIG~U_~I
~'i
'0 /_"
SEGMENT \!NDER SnJDY
p''''E 111~/9S-
....oE START 1.'Of)
CnY OF CHVlA VISTA. VEHlCU SPEED SURVEY
EQS~ H." S~r''''/ (;:-/o?lrl A,/I!. - rJ"2~'D. 'P/ )
.,
TUdE END
r./n C;)~rl .A,/p'
/: :3 ., ANIIfiJ WEATHER
POSTED SPEED ~ t*J
SURVEY sm ...YY) ,
.u@>
r/pD.'"
DIRECTJON ~ -0 (~ -I CUM.
MPH NUMBER OF VEHlaD TOTAL ~ ~
. .. u .
45
...
43 II'"> I I /'YI
42 ~ r> 'q
41 0 ,...., 'a
40 In / '/ .'\ < qq
39 1,-., .-, ./ ::! .'! q,.
38 /' J I q:2
37 r-" ,..., /" ./' /' ./ ,. " 0')
36 r. 0 ./ 7 ./ ./ ./ ./' ./' Q 0, ~
35 (j 0 1,..-, 0 1,.-, 0 1('") ./ /^ /r ':)':)
34 " ) r. ?"i It") I' ./ -:j ? ~
33 / ./ ./ / 1/ ./ /^ /,.. ",^
32 ./ /' /' ./ ./ /" / / 17 ? ''0 /" <:""~
31 r ./ / ./ ./ V ,,- ~ '~ ~
30 n n .., n Ii ./ / / ./ .q q ~::!
n''''' ?"i ./' 11 -./ r>('
28 ".- ./ r ./' ./' V ,', r. ....,.
27 /"') I" r-, r ./' /" ./ ":I ~ /.;/
26 I") 0 0 ./' // d -::J
2S .,." 1'"'1 ..-. ":I. .... "2.
24
23
22
21
20
19
II
17
16
15
14
13
12
n
10
,
,
I
6 '"
5 -.
RECORDER. /., ~I. _ .,.. .I'\A,?_. I TD'T~ HUMID or \'DOQ.D. /m
~>.
'J-:.&4 .~
:/1.171
:p ,?
?~/l/
.
iii .:- '1''- ".lIl":':'. ".i' "'!!. - :!JloolJllRl:: ':lI'~l.t;~.s 8'
~ ! ~~ - t=' I .' i I. It' .1." ..1 Jl11~t . .I' " 01 _. li1 ...,
II ~ l}ul i' III 1111 dJJh 1111~m j] 1
. !fd Ii .. ,I : it 11 it~t.':iUmi1~ U i~!hU!.
:8......1 .1, t I. t... J..J.91 . I I !II i 1
..lill i;11 II I}' hi .f~'. 1.! il~~i . jJJ WirEJ .
,t!IiJli~j IJi; I2ll Ja. !t"1U ii~j: I h ;-it ~ilI' ;t)1:.9
. ~ 'H~!M,t ~ ~ I. 1it i IJI i Wn.. 5J} 1.Jlil;:.:!1
1.1.3 ~~~1 ~ I~ 1.1 ';.1 ~I . .:lid. .11 !'UJ It Ij 1'11.1' 'II
::: "'..~._ I r: '" ~ic! ~ 8:2 ~.. l~.g.! . It..... ~.. i.
! a1e!dHli dl i ahe')j J aid'} ftWl1hf I ftd'6~ mn..
"
~ f 11 H . II PJll'iJ~lTlliHiiUHH~ 1
~ I . II 1i .. ~)~dlh i~n~t !~ ;Hr~inUnlt Jt I
II ... n' 1 .. .... . J. c: \1:. ~ - .! - :5..1 1....9. I
.. ~...... - '.:I.! .J"'1 ~ II . .. · ..
i ~!!! ]1I! I ~UFHi 1i1uim~i~HW nd~ )i!l!~!!
IU!U 1"fi,~ '1 l!il.tjjl~Jt1~1]t !ii~ .iiji!-1~lii1f;jUUI~
IU.U t I A 1 II "';].1' .1 i.&'.s. !ill II~ II! .i.JlllileUlh
l'U~~ III Iii! fltJll~lUtU~~..I~ tl.s]] IJitt!i11~. HUH
dt!dd ~. ~ :st. ~ · I....~ 1 ~ .s1,11' .J!lddddd
,. '-"7'
111 /.>. ,-(:.- / --7
'.
.. -lr i' ~!I} r l ~ I. I SLPPPPPPP~P 18:) I
pllfl- ( f~~l: il f~ .ll111 Illiij;i'hiS:it. l
f fi r . f f 1 r~l , ' "I, Ii ..!r
.
ll~Jtllt- )1;;- J it .. ~ f l~ I. ~ rLPe~:t ~if .11:1'
.
. In '~I r~: I '.~ lh~nhlhnt~I' di If ::: 1 :luh .1
1- ~ f .
. -. ,-/~
-
~r '1-'~I',:'iiH ~ ~~ ::~:~'.~': ~~ "ji~jill. ~" ~ ~it ,'II.
~ ~ I J i i ! I ~ J j ,',: ,,11 I J ~. ! 9 I -: 11 I
J J f ,~II f -11 ~ ~,~ !J ' ' 1 ~ J I ~ t J : I'! ~ ~ 1 · ' ' ~' i; ! J
I~~ I. -1' 1 I S __ t. . 111 '1
J mtl1 h! I hln1f;l.... I! lit; I:~ ~ U~l~ 1 II Iii II
T lid!! HI Lu~~h~. f 111-- 11tJ~~!~il t iii j~! ' ~~
1~pgilll,.: JJ!:lftS1" . ~! I f ,jli ~'~~1Jt t !~I 11i II
, C-I-JJ ~ 1J.a~ . .~ ~ -!__~1~ if j! ... is'l, -
= ~~~~] I 'a i~i,li~1~IIM 1st! (. i'I.,~1! si: Jj1j ..; "! s-l
~' t~!jU ~~I i ~1~iier~ il ~~II.!li~~jffi]ili J I ~Jh fR!
r
"
= J ~,i ;.:u!'Js J 'Ii ',~ 15 ~ '. 'oJ.J 15~::!."~
'I U~ I ;1s~!11Ii 1.1 '. ' ~II~lli1 . !tj iJ . if l~Jl~t
, I i -- ; 1 " '~ ,t f [1 JI ! ~}-I ~ ~ J 15 .J ~ -:i l:' i.! i:
01, 15 r.t jJ1 ,;'....JJI.', is'.. : ji' .~' :'~ fi.J.
-!-e! I ~1'lIl,i.J;i:!' J - l, ~ !Ij ( ~!! 11
JI ~ !I j 115~:p .. J~ I'" .. .1U~' ,J~ 'U 'l5J1j~ I
.I If ! 1:1 ! t i I f'1.J1. J1lf.t I.. iigt. ii.. .. t
alIi illi liiliidifmi It~n~lii lliillJiii jiahU,:
,,' II" ~ :?~. '"7
.
[fNttFH i~n!~dS IdmnnHlbihaUllh~S!rnm~ur.g.1
t S:l ff J ~ t~). ,f If A.,.....~~ i ~ : if fl. ~Ii I.;
l il. I ..I"f~{ I Jr ~ I.... : }.. I Ir' 1'] - f .
r, l ~HH: i ~t~ i,~ 'I! ..: i it~iJ . li~~ 1 f{t~U..r ['~f
. fru h~(itlJ Iff ..! f i. ...., rn ~r . tHir ..~... =hj!JU h l .
~.I t It t r l f 1.J l : 1.11. :. ;. ;":' f rJ" ,.I . .11 r r f .~. t f . it 2 r: . I. f s.
.1If. h.., t rS' ., f ". ... . I .f fof. 1. Ja,.. J fEr
";
...
l!lttf il~ IIli!~f.l i:gJ.I'Ii!ttJis t ~II Jlll~t.~If.ri.i t I~Si.JSSI [ i
I J ~a,:" I:f~~ n'rll.~..~rf I.i(:..i i il~~iirl ~r!~ i !ill}ll I ~
ItifiJil m~titr~i 11H} [tIil!J .nhJbU~h ~Wt!ih
ili.~ I mHd~di~1 1.lt It p,'nntUBi ~h In:~
; .Itl m linf .Jlf~ J!l . t uti J [I) Ii! J~[~
jl!u .. ilHU rtft, t~}t f bUJ! · d ,IU j h
] '( ,It. .1-.lfl'l ,,'} t f ,tt}' . .J: I~U J!r}l Ii I t..
1" ofi ~!.. !. t I. J[" ';~i j, ( ;..
a,. f.1 frlf r .. tf.. ~f t : I I..J l 't~IJ ,tIP ~
.
-- .. ..- .--- ----..- -?lJ.jg!g /y>'
- - ._- --.
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CHULA VISTA SAFETY COMMISSION
Thursday, February 8, 1996
7:11 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
CAll TO ORDER
1. Roll Call:
Present:
Chair liken, Vice-Chair Miller, Commissioners: Bierd, Cochrane, Hoke, and Smith
MSC to excuse Commissioner Acton due to vacation. Approved ~1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
Excused Absence:
Commissioner Acton
Also Present:
Steve Thomas, Senior Civil Engineer; Frank Rivera Associate Traffic Engineer; Sgt.
Gene d'Ablaing; Shirley Buxton, Recording Secretary; and Rhonda Basore,
Engineering Administrative Office Assistant III
2. Pled!!e of Alle!!iance/Silent Praver
3. ODe'nin!! Statement - Read by Chair Liken
4. Aooroval of Minutes:
MSC (Miller/Smith) to approve the minutes of January 11, 1996 as presented. Approved ~1 with
Commissioner Acton absent.
MEETING AGENDA
(The minutes reflect the published order of the agenda.)
Chair Liken asked staff to present an overview on how speed limits were determined.
Frank Rivera indicated that the State of California required valid speed surveys to be performed every five years
in order to justify retaining, increasing, or decreasing speed limits. He reviewed the information contained in all
Traffic Engineering Speed Surveys. Factors used to determine speed limits were: radar speeds for a minimum of
100 vehicles, the 85th percentile speed or "critical speed" of motorists, design of the roadway, accident history,
and type of street (residential, commercial, schools, etc.). Speeds of vehicles were obtained by a radar gun used
by a Traffic Engineering staff member in an unmarked City vehicle. He explained that the surveys were not
conducted during "peak" hours but, a random sample during the day. The Engineering Survey then indicated to
the Police Department the appropriate speed to be enforced. The speed was then used by the courts to assess
speeding tickets that were being contested. If a speed limit was set lower than the 85% speed, the judge could
and had determined in past cases, that the street was a speed trap and the ticket was dismissed. When tickets
were not upheld by the courts, the Police Department could not continue issuing citations in the area.
5. Re-Dort on Increasinv: SD~d Limits on EastJ Street between HilltOD Drive and Cassia Place
Frank Rivera presented staff's report and indicated that because of the design of the roadway, the speed limit
would most likely never be raised to 40 mph.
#.1' ~~~FFICIAL MINUTES
Safety Commission Minutes
February 8, 1996
Page 2
Those speaking in opposition 10 the speed limit increase due to concerns regarding the accuracy of the Traffic
Engineering Survey (time the speeds were recorded), safety concerns with increased speeds, increased accidents,
visibility issues, and that there were no stop signs in the area to slow traffic down were:
. Mr. John Horn, 480 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
. Mr. Lloyd Heiydl, 660 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Chair liken asked Mr. Heiydl about whal he had seen since the speed limit had already been raised on his section
of East J street
Mr. Heiydt indicated that he had not seen police enforcement He asked the Police Department to provide
enforcement, but the officers did not stay long.
. Mr. R. D. Brannen, 207 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
. Mr. Steve Letchworth, 600 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Vice-Chair Miller asked Sgt. d'Ablaing for clarification on ttie speed limit that was presently being enforced and
how many miles an hour over the speed limit it would take before a citation was issued.
Sgt. d' Ablaing said when officers defended citations, there were several factors involved. Visibility, weather, road
surface, traffic, width of the roadway, along with the survey from Engineering were used to defend a citation. The
Police Department did not keep track of how many citations were won or lost in court. The number of citations
written was available.
Vice-Chair Miller asked if the speed limit were left at 30 mph and the Police Department was not issuing tickets
unless vehicles were over the 85% speed of 37 mph, if it would still be considered a speed trap.
Frank Rivera said if citations were issued between 30 - 37 mph, it would not be for speeding, but for .unsafe
conditions. which would have to be proven in court.
. Mr. Robert Mudd, 203 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
. Mrs. Margaret Somervell, 627 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
. Mr. John Somervell, 627 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
. Mr. Frank Shultz, 615 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Commissioner Smith cpmmented that the residents kept complaining about the time the radar survey was
conducted. If the survey had been conducted during peak hours and the vehicles were going faster, the speed
limit might need to be raised to 40 mph based on the 85% speed, and therefore, the survey worked to their
benefit.
. Mr. Chester Culp, 338 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
. Mr. Leo Sandoval, 613 E. ) Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Mr. Letchworth asked the possibilities of reducing the remainder of East) Street to 30 mph in order to be
consistent and asked if the court would still perceive the street as a speed trap.
Sgt. d'Ablaing said there were officers that complained the court would look solely at the 85% speed and, if the
officer cited below the 85 % speed, the court threw the ticket out
Mr. LetchwMh said if 30 mph was not enforceable, he would support raising the speed limit to 35 mph. There
needed to be an enforceable speed limit on East J Street
I""~~ UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
y- c::2-?J
Safety Commission Minutes
February 8, 1996
Page 3
Vice-Chair Miller reiterated the need for an enforceable speed. She felt there needed to be an all-way stop
evaluation at East J Street and Lori Lane and East) Street and Melrose Avenue. She asked if all-way stop evaluation
had been performed at the intersections. East) Street was a long stretch of road without any stop signs.
Frank Rivera said an all-way stop evaluation had been conducted at Lori Lane and East) Street within the last five
years, and since there was not a stop sign at the intersection, it was probably not recommended. He was unaware
of an all-way stop study at Melrose Avenue and East J Street.
Chair Liken reviewed his experience as a former Chula Vista Police Department motor officer as it related to
defending citations in court and how the 85% speed was the determining factor. The current Traffic
Commissioner was only looking at 85% speeds when reviewing citations. Police officers did not like to lose
tickets, and if the Traffic Commissioner and/or judge was continuing to dismiss tickets, officers would no longer
enforce the area. The area needed to be enforceable.
Commissioner Hoke asked if enforcement would be stricter if the speed limit was raised.
Sgt. d' Ablaing said that the officers would have a new set of standards to enforce and the officers were eager to
begin enforcing the area.
Commissioner Hoke said that increasing the speed limit would help enforcement and possibly reduce some of
the excessive speeds.
Commissioner Cochrane commented that his concern was enforceability of the speed limit. He empathized with
the residents. The Commission was not a rubber stamp, but they were between a rock and a hard place. If the
speed limit was not increased, there would be no enforcement.
Chair Liken asked staff for a review of the sight distances in the area.
Frank Rivera reviewed the sight distances in the area. Parked vehicles and shrubbery could pose obstructions.
It was not convenient for residents to lose parking in front of their homes, but it could be done to increase sight
distance.
MSC (Smith/Miller) to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Municipal Code
increasing the speed limit on East J Street between Hilltop Drive and Cassia Place to 35 mph. Approved 6-0-1
with Commissioner Acton absent.
MSC (Miller/Cochrane) to direct staff to perform an all-way stop evaluation on East J Street at Lori Lane and
on East J Street at Melrose Avenue. Approved 5-1-1 with Commissioner Smith voting no and Commissioner
Acton absent.
6. R@oort on IncreasintZ SD@ed Limib on HUlton Drive betw@@n (ad Riendra Str@@t and Orantze Avenue
Frank Rivera stated that he had received one phone call from a resident expressing her desire to keep the speed
limit at 30 mph due to children in the area.
MSC (Miller/Smith) to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Municipal Code
increasing the speed limit on Hilltop Drive between East Rienstra Street and Orange Avenue to 35 mph.
Approved 6-0-1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
/i),~ l
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Y-v2/
Resident
207 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
213 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
188 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
194 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
.
Resident
202 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
206 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
218 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
222 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
232 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
238 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
246 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
262 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
.
Resident
328 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
334 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
358 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
364 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
.
Resident
374 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
380 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
365 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
377 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
319 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident tI'}~
325 East J Street It':
Chula Vista, CA 91910 .f'-~c;;b
Resident
184 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
198 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
212 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
228 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
242 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
324 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
348 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
368 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
361 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
422 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
339 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
302 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
308 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
ident
J18 East I Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
428 East I Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
438 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
442 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
452 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
458 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
468 East I Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
474 East I Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
, East J Street
~l1ula Vista, CA 91910
Chula Vista Community Church
301 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
715 Nacion Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
708 Nolan Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
714 Nolan Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
715 Nolan Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
698 Melrose Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
702 Melrose Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
699 Melrose Avenue
'ula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
709 Melrose Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident ~ t.J-EJ
694 Myra Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910 g- ;0
Resident
314 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
432 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
446 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
464 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
480 East I Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
705 Nacion Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
709 Nolan Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
694 Melrose Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
695 Melrose Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
706 Melrose Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
698 Myra Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
699 Myra A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
695 Myra Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
708 Monterey A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
490 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
495 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
498 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
508 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
694 Floyd Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
699 JWyd Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
692 Gilbert Place
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
695 Gilbert Place
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
525 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
512 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
518 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
530 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
534 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
545 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
546 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
554 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
557 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
562 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident 'Ill ~r:
565 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910 g ~~'f
Resident
702 Monterey Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Halecrest Elementary School
475 East J Street
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
Resident
502 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
695 Floyd Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
698 Gilbert Place
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
531 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
524 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
538 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
553 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
561 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
570 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
571 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
577 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
kt:sident
585 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
586 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
600 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
601 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
604 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
605 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
608 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
609 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
T 'dent
t,. _ East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
613 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
616 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
619 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
623 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
624 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
627 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
628 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
I"A" East J Street
.Jla Vista, CA 91910
Resident
635 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
640 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident "
641 East J Street ~
Chula Vista, CA 919IOF<~.L)
Resident
578 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
589 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
603 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
607 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
611 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
615 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
620 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
625 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
631 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
636 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
644 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
648 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
650 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
654 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
658 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
662 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
664 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
657 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
497 Berland Way
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
501 Berland Way
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
731 Lori Lane
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
770 Cassia Place
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
768 Cassia Place
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
767 Cassia Place
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
338 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
344 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
539 East J S+reet
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
656 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
~~ y- of6
Resident
652 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
660 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
655 East I Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
585 Berland Way
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
771 Cassia Place
Chula Vista. CA 91910
Resident
535 East I Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
CV Elementary School District
84 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
kesident
695 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
698 Arthur A venue
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
Resident
689 Gretchen Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
,ident
,.A Gretchen Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
15 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
41 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
57 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
. "1 East J Street
Jula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
195 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Hilltop Junior High School
44 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
.
Resident
695 Carla A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
704 Dennis A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
691 Gretchen Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
697 Gretchen Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
707 Gretchen Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
31 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
47 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
75 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
131 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
199 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
IS' ..a. 7
?~~/
Business Owner
72 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
694 Claire Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
Resident
705 Dennis A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
693 Gretchen Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
699 Gretchen Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
9 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
37 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
51 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
87 East ] Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
143 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
203 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
.
THIS PAGE BLANK
.
14 A.-Y /f--d.P
~
.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
'",:"
9
ITEM TITLE:
Item
Meeting Date 3/19/96
Resolution I S",2 3 iutllOrizmg staff to issue Purchase Order to Sweetwater Autllority for
relocation of 36" Transmission Water Line in Bonita Road
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Worksf}!
REVIEWED BY: City Manager G~
{(~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
Approved in the FY 1995-96 budget was a project for tlle replacement of a four 8" mainfold sewer main crossing
Bonita Road just east ofI-805 freeway (SW-207). The purpose of this project was to replace the four existing 8"
sewer lines witll one 18" sewer line to eliminate tlle current bottleneck in tlle sewage system. In order to accomplish
this work, Sweetwater Authority needs to relocate a 36" Transmission Water line.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve tlle resolution authorizing staff to issue a purchase order to
Sweetwater Autllority in tlle amount of $40,000 to provide for the relocation of an existing 36" transmission water
line in Bonita Road.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDA nON: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
In order to construct tlle new 18" sewer line in Bonita Road, Sweetwater Authority (SW A) must adjust tlleir existing
36" transmission main. This is tlle major water feed to the City of Chula Vista and SW A prohibits this main from
being turned off from May I to November I in any given year. SW A has provided us with a letter (Exhibit A)
indicating that the City's share of tlle cost to relocate this main is approximately $40,000. Staff is requesting
Council authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to SW A to allow tllis work to proceed
immediately.
Normally, staff would have Council authorize funds for relocations of utilities during the award oftlle contract.
However, because of tlle timing and tlle immediate need to have this line relocated prior to receipt of bids, staff is
requesting Council action at tllis time.
Staffis currently requesting bids for tlle construction oftlle sewer main and will be receiving bids on April I 0, 1996.
Award of tlle contract is scheduled to be April 23, 1996. Waiting for authorization until April 23, 1996 for
relocation of water facilities is not sufficient time for SWA to order parts and perform the work prior to May I.
FISCAL IMPACT: Approval oftllis action item will allow staff to issue tlle purchase order immediately and will
authorize tlle expenditure of $40,000 for tllat purpose. The estimated cost oftlle sewer construction work which
will be separate action after bids are received is $20,000. Adequate funds are available in project account SW207
to pay for tlle work.
M:IHOMEIENGINEERIAGENDA I W A TERLOC.SLH
9-/ /r-.?
RESOLUTION NO. /8'.2J I
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING STAFF TO ISSUE
PURCHASE ORDER TO SWEETWATER AUTHORITY FOR
RELOCATION OF 36" TRANSMISSION WATER LINE IN
BONITA ROAD
WHEREAS, approved in the FY 1995-96 budget was a project
for the replacement of a four 8" mainfold sewer main crossing
Bonita Road just east of I-805 freeway (SW-207); and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this project was to replace the
four existing 8" sewer lines with one 18" sewer line to eliminate
the current bottleneck in the sewage system; and
WHEREAS, in order to accomplish this work, Sweetwater
Authority needs to relocate a 36" Transmission Water line; and
WHEREAS, Sweetwater Authority has indicated that the
City's share of the cost to relocate this main is approximately
$40,000; and
WHEREAS, staff is requesting Council authorize the
Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to Sweetwater Authority
to allow this work to proceed immediately.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby authorize staff to issue a purchase
order to Sweetwater Authority in the amount of $40,000 to provide
for the relocation of an existing 36" transmission water line in
Bonita Road.
Presented by
, City
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c: \rs\SWA. PO
'-:1/f-f
EXHIBIT A
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY
505 GARRm AVENUE
POST OFFICE BOX 2328
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91912.2328
(619) 42().1413
FAX (619) 425-7469
March 6, 1996
;:.,.,,, -12 34$
r_, 6',
"" -
.~ <S>
,':;} ;:: .~ - ~
!;~ ~~ ~
.; ~".,..-'
0J -::;,;;;; ~ N
{, -~ C;f
..:;~ ~ ~
'" ~ ",'"
c", ,Cj
,cc"" .... <?>"
" L~ 01:6l Bll-\
GOVERNING BOARD
GEORGE H_ WATERS, CHAIRMAN
MARGARET COOK WelSH, VICE CHAIR
JAMES F DOUD, SA.
SUE JARRETT
BUD POCKLINGTON
JAMES S. WOLNIEWICZ
CARY F WRIGHT
WANDA AVERY
TREASURER
ClAN J. REEVES
SECRETARY
Mr. Shale Hanson
City of Chula Vista
Engineering Department
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, Ca. 91910
Subject:
BONITA ROAD CROSSING SEWER REPAIR
SWA FilE: STIMP.#95-10
CHULA VISTA WORK ORDER # SW207-9
Dear Mr. Hanson:
Sweetwater Authority has reviewed the plans for the replacement of four 8-inch
manifolded sewer lines with one 18-inch sewer line on Bonita Road, approximately 330
feet west of Plaza Bonita Road.
The Authority has determined that the proposed work will require the installation of an
offset fitting on our 36-inch transmission main at an estimated cost of $80,000.00. The
City's share of this cost (50%) would be $40,000.00. The cost to install the offset fitting
is so high due to the following reasons: the traffic in this location, the cost of pipe for
an offset of this size, and the requirement to hi-line the Ramada Inn, Denny's and other
businesses in this vicinity due to a 12-hour shut down of water to tie this offset into the
existing main. Upon receipt of the purchase order, the Authority will order the offset
fitting and schedule the required work.
It is estimated that the time required to have the offset fitting manufactured is
approximately five weeks and installation of the offset will take approximately one
week. Due to the fact that this water main is the main feed to Chula Vista, the Authority
prohibits this main being turned off from May 1 to November 1. Therefore, this work
must be completed before May 1, 1996, or it will have to wait until November 1996.
A Public Agency, 9,f
Serving National City, Chula Vista and Surrounding Areas
Mr. Shale Hanson
City of Chula Vista
Re: BONITA ROAD CROSSING SEWER REPAIR
SWA FILE: ST. IMP. #95-10
March 6, 1996
page two
If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact Mr. Tom Justo at 422-
8395, Ext. 611.
Very truly yours,
Jame . Smyth
Chief Engineer
-{..~ JL.. 5
JLS:TJ:ln
pc: Ms. Debbie Shaw, Sweetwater Authority
i:\eng_poollsewer.po
9#~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /.t?
Meeting Date 3/19/96
ITEM TITLE:
Ordinance JJ,~ 'J Amending Schedule IX, Section 10.48.030 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code - Increasing State Law Speed Limits in certain
areas from 30 M.P.H. and establishing a speed limit of 35 M.P.H. on
Hilltop Drive from East R7'ens ra Street to Orange Avenue.
Director of Public Works
City Manager &\'-'~
k~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Based on the provisions of the California Vehicle Code Section 40803, and pursuant to authority
under the Chula Vista Municipal Code section 10.48.030, the City Engineer has determined that
based on a Traffic and Engineering Study, the speed limit on Hilltop Drive between East Rienstra
Street and Orange Avenue be increased from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H.
Staff understands that in asking Council to approve the above ordinance that it will follow
direction given at Council's March 12, 1996 meeting. Council asked staff to recommend
modifications to existing speed laws which increase local speed limits and which may not be
acceptable to local agencies.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council place the Ordinance on first reading, amending
Schedule IX of the Chula Vista Municipal Code establishing the speed limit of 35 M.P.H. on
Hilltop Drive from East Rienstra Street to Orange Avenue.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of 2/08/96, voted 6-0-1 (Miller/Smith), with
Commissioner Acton absent, to support staff's recommendation and recommend to the Council,
to adopt an ordinance amending Schedule IX, Section 10.48.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code thereby establishing the speed limit on Hilltop Drive from East Rienstra Street to Orange
Avenue at 35 mph. Staff notified all area residents, businesses, and Lorna Verde Elementary
School. No written or verbal testimony for or against this recommendation was given by area
residents at this meeting. Staff did receive one phone call from an area resident requesting that
the speed limit stay at 30 mph due to children in the area.
DISCUSSION:
The City Engineer has determined the need to increase the posted speed limit on Hilltop Drive
between East Rienstra Street and Orange Avenue from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H. to comply with
the California Vehicle Code (CVC), Section 40803, Speed Trap Evidence. Section 40803 requires
evidence that a Traffic and Engineering Survey has been conducted within five years. The old
//)-/
Page 2, Item IP
Meeting Date 3/19/96
survey expired on February 19, 1995. Staff has completed a new survey which is now in effect
as of 11/22/95, and expires on 4/27/2000. According to the law, every 5 years the existing speed
limits will either be verified, increased or decreased depending on the results of the survey
investigation. The Engineering and Traffic Survey should contain sufficient information to
document that the conditions of CVC Section 627 have been complied with and that other
conditions not readily apparent to a motorist are properly identified.
Physical Conditions
Hilltop Drive in this area is a 64' curb to curb Class I collector street. Most of this roadway
segment has residences fronting on both sides of the roadway with a 250' fronting portion being
a park, under the San Diego Gas and Electric Company easement. Hilltop Drive in this area is
striped with a double yellow centerline stripe leaving two lanes in each direction with parking on
both sides. From East Rienstra Street to just south of Kingswood Drive, a distance of
approximately 300', the street has a two-way turn lane. In this area parking is prohibited due to
the constraints of width and the need for two lanes of traffic in each direction. The design speed
is slightly greater than 40 M.P.H. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is 9,960 on Hilltop Drive
in this area.
All of the signing for the curve, the signalized pedestrian crossing, and the school zone will
remain in place unchanged. This area is posted as a "School", "25 M.P.H. Speed Limit", "When
Children Are Present" zone which will remain in effect. Since this roadway segment also has
Loma Verde Elementary School and Castle Park High School fronting on the street, there are
"School" "25 M.P.H. Speed Limit" "When Children Are Present" signs and markings in this area
which will not be changed. Therefore, the proposed speed limit change will be applicable in these
areas, only when children are lli!t present, generally during non-school hours and on non-school
days.
The Engineering and Traffic Survey for Hilltop Drive in this area shows an 85th percentile speed
of 36 M.P.H.. The accident rate is 0.59 accidents per million vehicle miles (A VM) which is
much lower than the statewide average of 3.66 A VM for similar roadways in the State of
California. Based on the above data, it has been determined that the speed limit on this street
should be posted at 35 M.P.H. in order to comply with the California Vehicle Code requirements
or else this roadway is considered a speed trap and police radar enforcement of the posted speed
limit cannot be legally conducted.
Basic Speed Law
Speed limits in California are governed by the California Vehicle Code, Sections 22348 through
22413, and Section 22350, The Basic Speed Law, of the Vehicle Code. This Basic Speed Law
provides that no person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable
or prudent, having due regard for weather, visibility, traffic and the surface and width of the
highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. The basic
J)-:J.
Page 3, Item I ~
Meeting Date 3/19/96
speed law is founded on the belief that most motorists are able to modify their driving behavior
properly, as long as they are made aware of the conditions around them.
Section 22358.5 of the Vehicle Code states that it is the intent of the Legislature that physical
conditions such as width, curvature, grade and surface conditions, or any other condition readily
apparent to the driver, in the absence of other factors, would not require special downward speed
zoning. The speed limit normally should be established at the first five mile per hour increment
below the 85th percentile speed. However, in matching existing conditions with the traffic safety
needs of the community, engineering judgement may indicate the need for a further reduction of
five miles per hour. The factors justifying such a further reduction are the same factors mentioned
above. Whenever such factors are considered to establish the speed limit, they should be
documented on the speed zone surveyor the accompanying engineering report.
In determining the speed limit which is most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of
traffic and is reasonable and safe, important factors are prevailing speeds, unexpected conditions,
and accident records. Traffic regulations are based upon observations of the behavior of groups
of motorists under various conditions. Generally speaking, traffic regulations that reflect the
behavior of the majority of motorists are found to be most successful. Laws that arbitrarily
restrict the majority of drivers encourage wholesale violation of posted restrictions, lack public
support and usually fail to bring about the desired changes in driving behavior. This is especially
true of speed zoning. Before and after studies consistently demonstrate that there are no
significant changes in traffic speeds following the posting of new or revised speed limits.
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Sections 22357 and 22358 authorize local authorities to establish
intermediate prima facie speed limits on streets and roads under their jurisdiction, on the basis of
an Engineering and Traffic Survey. These state laws permit local authorities to lower the
maximum speed limit currently 55 M.P.H, (as of after March 31, 1996, this prima facie speed
limit increases to 65 M.P.H) or to raise business or residence district speed limits (25 M.P.H) on
the basis of a Engineering and Traffic Survey. These "intermediate limits" between 25 and 65
M.P.H. must be posted to define clearly the limits of the zone and the prima facie speed limit
established. Speed Trap-Section 40802(b) provides that prima facie speed limits established under
Sections 22352(b)(1), 22354, 22357, 22358 and 22358.3 may not be enforced by radar unless the
speed limit has been justified by an engineering and traffic survey within the last five years. An
"Engineering and Traffic Survey" is required where enforcement involves the use of radar or
other electronic speed measuring devices, under CVC 40802(b).
The Speed Limit Establishment Process
Speed limits should be established preferably at or near the 85th percentile speed, which is defmed
as a speed exceeding that which 85 percent of the traffic is moving. The 85th percentile is often
referred to as critical speed. Speed limits higher than the 85th percentile are not generally
considered reasonable and safe and limits significantly below the 85 percentile do not facilitate
the orderly movement of traffic. Speed limits established on this basis conform to the consensus
If)' :J
Page 4, Item I'
Meeting Date 3/19/96
of those who drive highways as to what speed is reasonable and safe, and are not dependent on
the judgement of one or a few individuals. Realistic speed zones will invite public compliance
by conforming to the behavior of the majority and by giving a clear reminder to the non-
conforming violators. These realistic zones will also offer an effective enforcement tool to the
police by clearly separating the occasional violator from the reasonable majority.
The basic intent of speed zoning is to influence as many drivers as possible to operate at or near
the same speed, thus reducing the number of conflicts created by wide differentials in operating
speeds. Only when roadside development results in traffic conflicts and unusual conditions which
are not readily apparent to drivers, are speed limits somewhat below the 85th percentile
warranted. Realistic speed zoning is a traffic engineering tool used to derive the best traffic
service for a given set of conditions.
While the basic speed law states that no person shall drive at a speed greater than is reasonable
or prudent, the majority of drivers comply with this law, and disregard regulations which they
consider unreasonable. It is only the top fringe of drivers that are inclined to be reckless and
unreliable, or who have faulty judgement and must be controlled by enforcement. Speed limits
set at or slightly below the 85th percentile speed provide law enforcement officers with a means
of controlling the drivers who will not conform to what the majority considers reasonable and
prudent. Experience has shown that the 85th percentile speed is the one characteristic of traffic
speeds most nearly conforming to a safe and reasonable speed limit. Speed limits set higher than
the critical speed will make very few additional drivers "legal" for each 5 M.P.H. that the posted
speed limit is increased. Speed limits lower than the critical speed will make a large number of
reasonable drivers "illegal" for each 5 M.P.H. increment that the speed limit is reduced. For
practical purposes, the 5 M.P.H. increment at or inynediately below the 85th percentile is the
numerical value best selected for the posting of a realistic and enforceable speed limit.
Enforcement
Concurrence and support of enforcement officials are necessary for the successful operation of a
restricted speed zone. Realistic speed zones tend to minimize public antagonism toward police
enforcement of obviously unreasonably low speed limits. By posting and enforcing the
appropriate speed limits, local authorities invite the public to comply with the reasonable behavior
of the majority of the public, while giving a clear reminder to the non-conforming violators.
These regulations also offer an effective enforcement tool for the local police by clearly
distinguishing the intentional violator from the reasonable majority.
The establishment of a speed limit of more than 5 miles per hour below the 85th percentile
(critical) speed should be done with great care as this may make violators of a disproportionate
number of the reasonable majority of drivers. With all of this information taken into account,
staff has carefully reviewed the facts as they relate to the posting of speed limits on Hilltop Drive
and recommends the proposed change at this time to 35 M.P.H..
11I"'1
Page 5, Item / ~
Meeting Date 3/19/96
CONCLUSION:
Based on the above data, it has been determined that the appropriate speed limit should be posted
at 35 M.P.H. in accordance with the California Vehicle Code requirements. The current survey
will expire on April 27, 2000. It is recommended that the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code
be revised as follows:
10.48.030 Schedule IX - Increased Speed Limits in Certain Areas
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed
Limit
Hilltop Drive E. Rienstra Street Orange A venue 35 M.P.H.
All area residents and businesses and Lorna Verde Elementary School Principal, Ms. Marjorie A.
Grigsby, have been notified of tonight's City Council meeting. The notification list is attached for
Council information.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to replace signs and pavement legends is $150.00.
Attachment: Area Plat
Engineering and Traffic Survey
Radar Speed Surveys
California Vehicle Code Sections
Minutes of the Safety Commission Meeting of February 8, 1996 (Excerpt)
File No.: 0760-95-CY029
DMW:FXR:dmw
M:\HOME\ENGlNEER\AGENDA \HILL TOPD.DMW
/fJ-'f fc'-p
ORDINANCE NO.
J,t,J, 7
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SCHEDULE IX, SECTION
10.48.030 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE,
INCREASING STATE LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN
AREAS FROM 30 M.P.H. AND ESTABLISHING A SPEED
LIMIT OF 35 M.P.H. ON HILLTOP DRIVE FROM EAST
RIENSTRA STREET TO ORANGE AVENUE
WHEREAS, based on the provisions of the California
Vehicle Code section 40803, and pursuant to authority under the
Chula vista Municipal Code section 10.48.030, the City Engineer has
determined that based on a Traffic and Engineering Study, the speed
limit on Hilltop Drive between East Rienstra Street and Orange
Avenue be increased from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H.; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission at its meeting of February
8, 1996 voted 6-0-1 (Miller/Smith) to approve staff's recommen-
dation and recommend that the city Council adopt an Ordinance
establishing the speed limit of 35 M.P.H. on Hilltop Drive from
East Rienstra Street to Orange Avenue.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the city of Chula vista
does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Schedule IX of section 10.48.030 of the Chula
vista Municipal Code, Increasing State Law Maximum Speed Limits in
certain Areas, is hereby amended to include the following changes:
10.48.030 Schedule IX - Increased Speed Limits in certain
Areas
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed
Limit
Hilltop Drive E. Rienstra orange Avenue 35 M.P.H.
Street
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption, or when the
appropriate signs are erected giving notice of the maximum speed
limit, whichever occurs last.
ved a~ t
~,-",--117
City
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\or\hilltop.spd
I~,. J !O-'l'
~'.IIf"'~, 'I..>ZVr<?\Iv II ,\ Jt::1 '.. J...""'"
;;;,.., y P,' ~ . 'I. '\-.::( ,...:/
\ .. II \:::B: ).,
.< f\: ~I ~~' 'Ii. 1~"". \ ;::rt:
J ..'... . '-' f[1 r
IJ ~y J ",._ '. " I I III ' I
'"'>( ~ .,.~ ~ II ^
I~. ........r:1 ,.
) "\->.... ,..~~,~. . '\~t:- C- .~ I = - ::
k' :t:: :~.,\\t~" '\ B.";;; \ = Y. J ~
I~i~ \)::j I)U_~~~ \ ~. I I. 1 = TJ:Z ~
~ ,.1U',~ ,,"-"-::::}~ I; I 11::1 ,~ ~a
.J..1..-": '( II I I r, 'JU,'~ ~ fi
~'~:~'~y;\\~?;~ ~.\'~'~" ' ~:- =
~m ~' IJ....\ \I ;y.V~::;:':I:""'!''::''::~ / -";: r.l11 n ~~ "" ~
:). 'V: :~,~;- ":~...~.~t~.\-.. ;~'''':'':''''''';': ;"'. ..... ~) ~-
~~ 'VL. ~' ~ \~ ~ ~~'A, '.'-:\.::i;{,;.,:-::::~:,:::,::r~:,;:. ......, 'l....Wl:'"
~~" \ t -., ';i~:" :'..:,-. .,' ~":/"\,, '.;" ,;',,; ........' ">.'- -.11 S
~r J." ~ '-'\'::+':,~:\\f': ','",' i III1 I--J II II t ~~
! :Y -:,\.:'"t.,.:"~...,,.. ~
~: \. ex ::"~~:_' '"',,.:,',":I.::-!.':"!.' II II TT 1 '
ilL \:..'B::~-:' I ~.I
...--' :"J:,~;~~. ~ ./'fIliI I I ~
C >---J;~:,~:. I A..@ 'U. 1.1 I I ' .::
\ ..e ~: 'y . "~!",:., ':1'~'1 I :....
-. ~ ~, ,." " t:,i."~ ," I I I~~ I r
... I'r , -tL Ai III "1" .
.
\ ~ .......:. ,\ '~ -.J ~
:\ '~~ .~~:::~;}~~ ~~~
I=.l. ~-..;~.)
~ ~~.. ~~~:~ m
~ 1" ,. ~,...~.
- ...... ~ .""...
.~::sxj./'r"' ~ ~ a';. . '::~.:~:i2;:';, 'b'
:!tr~ ~ .'f ....,l.t 11
~i~ 1'<>0; \3 ~~ . ·
~,,,'~~ .. \\
I-':\\j,):: ~ '\
\ ~~"\
~
u\
T
1
-
~.' .
;;
~
\~
l ~!~ I &B ..: I' i.i
n".-;' E
il~;i'= i ~~ I ·
=1; ~~I'
== :::::......
= Ji:;: ~~I 5
= == ==!'I :
==~ ::::: ..
! I':~ I
. m rTi ~f"'1 no..
--
\-
..
I
"...
;
~
l-
e(
.J
C.
e(
w
c:
e(
! It)
i GI
~
N
~ ....
N
..
..
..
ID
c: .
.
. -
.. .
Q Q
,
SPEED LlKIT -- ENGINEERING/TRAFFIC SURVEY:
STREET :
LlKlTS:
Hilltop Drive
E. Rienstra Street to Oranae Avenue (1400 block)
Existing Posted Speed Limit:
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
30
HPB
Segment: E. Rienstra Street to Oran~e Avenue (1400 block)
Date Taken: 4/27/95
Number Vehicles on Sample: 100
. 85th Perc.ntile Speed: 36 MPH
Range of Speeds Recorded: 25-43 MPH
ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Width 64
Horizontal Alignment
Vertical Alignment
feet Number of lanes for both directions
R min. . 1000'
flat. less than 2% 2rade
4
TRAFFIC CHARACTERI[LICS
Average Daily Traffic
On-Street Parking
A"owerl ~Ol1rh of ~An ni~in ~AC .~rl F'~rr~i~ FAc~m~~r PAT~
9.960
Specia' Conditions Sin~le family dwellin2s. elementary school. commercial
business. si~nalized school crosswalk in SDG&E easement nark. 2-wav
turn pocket E. Rienstra-Kinaswood.
Accident
History
million
similar
The accident rate at this seRment (0.59 accidents ner
vehicle miles) is lower than the avera~e rate (3.66) for
roadways in the State of California.
SURVEY RESULTS
Study vas Prepared by
Leonardo Hernandez
Date
5/17/95
RecommendatioD Increase .Deed limit to 35 MPH due to low .~~ident Tate
and roadwav characteristics.
~-I(/
Date recommendation approved: " I~/~~
By ?........<--;~ eo ><. ~~-
Approved .peed limit:
35 HPH
Per evc 40803. Survey Expire.:
4/n /2000
\
an OF CHt1I.A VISTA . VEHICLE &PEED SVRVEY
OATE ."=; - 11- <-;"\
SURVEY SITE -T,.c. ;::)rrJ~
('g }1'91.1
()
-n.,....>9,^i'1/?)
J /'
iECMENT UNDER STt1DY
..J-I; 11../,,-. Dr " 10
.'
(,r:::- ~'I.'''''-;.-/.''-/1
m.. rART 11.- ~/) JAM)PM TIME END 12:/5 AMtfM) WEAnIER (' /,o.-J::7~
DIRECJ10N ~ .0 c:- -/ CUM,
MPH NUMBER OF VEHICLES TOTAL ~ ~
. . . .
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
SO
49
48
U'fJ
46
4S
~, Ie -:; I lro, )
- . ,.-, 4'/'
r:J
-42 ~ c) ,-.c;'
41 ,..., A QV'
to II'"") I I ~'"
,
39 I I OJ"
3B f7 I I '-/'~
37 / 1/ 1/ 1/ / ,,...-. ,~ ;: <=;::
36 / '/ ./ 1/ / I' r --;- ""/',
35 / /' / 1/ n f' /'" 0 0 0 ,-.. II II ~4
34 / / / / / 1/ ./ ./ (" r ,.. n ,-... If'.> /. :7"1
33 7 .7 ,.. n r-' ,....- I'"" /3 =.~
32 / / ./ /' / 1/ r r7 y s;.. 4/J
31 ./ ./ ,/ ./ ./ , ,. Ir I" 1/'7 ::>f'~
I(
30 '7 /' ;/ ./ I/' (' :;t ? ~."'f
29 1/ ./ :/ /' 7- ,- I~
28 ./ ./ ./ ./' ./ "'i 7 II
2Y I I r.
26 1,"- . -< I"" ""
25 ,-, 0 7_
24 ,-, ,-, --;;;
13 7 I -j ?
II / I /
- r-, 0 ,....,
20 , ,...., 0 n
I RlCORDER:._/ L ~h' ~, ,t J, ......., .....-..... '/J,r'J
. .-
I T . ._....~, u -
I'CIS'J'w SPEED ~,....,
is-~
II) //
-.-. .-
!flnlll~ffrliliJJ.'tibmt!~mt~n~~~:ih r 11'11 ~ inn;' !
~~~~~~rifl ';-slt J", i'1 ! ,.'3 f! ..[!. - g I II. ppppl
luua[-! .r. [rlltSI fIfi f&'~- I&' IlII1 1 1111 UiUr
'r,ufrf .ti!f~itl~lr .41"1 ..'1 rll~1 ti't! ;f-" t " ..I ""11
t tit h ... " l ~ . ~ r I, 8 r S ~q a Jilt It S' a
...J~i~li - III rftl!. '.. I' h; ,i'1, '-rt!i I[ ~I"n
I [I !l:f il fila tit i~llU:i~i~ !Ih,fiir ~ .: !,'I
: I: jIj, .. II f [2: r .;: :21 g.;!I;- r, ! ,r" f ." ~
fS) s.! rr. fl ~r I ~r ts.i '- li~E~ U' II I.
r fr i s'~J.[~il--!i'~I~ 'lttf!t!1I1 rl!f '1i. ~f '
, 'il!t!rri!ib:r (. s"'i~~~ti If[''1 ..1. i U, J:;
J
~. Btlflfliega(rlll }.ftl!!lfl t (ti!.g r hl~r!~ Ili~ ~hnd~t~ I ~
il, ,.'-I,i- if "'l' (tii.rl .~ i iJ. ufi !II if irlU~-i1!11 =
I; t!id.J.}rt-j ~11~i~h Ulif .er flll .. fl~lll.hl
. [i:tflfJ if s 'if Ii f i s.h.; ,- ILf il I.: litil'
f f til;l t I Ii f I I '" - i I .11 ~... g: I
. r t~f _ f, ~r' 11~;-ftl'l"';' ,- tIll. 11' i . ~tr .
. ( I' ~i.!f~ it ,fpfl~f.I. ~ ift. 'I:\i ': Jf!r . {t It t. -
:i t}I'~lr-'I'1 "ffl!rJf:>~--;fl.'.t.'r It;:.- ';1 ~'"l'f-,I
/'''/~ '
1'1]IHtitf ::H!I: .jiU!ll!jtltl~jlI'" tJ 1 : '.filli '.'.~~!!
.. Is 1, 1:1.. . I ,;. 1 ~ .. ~ 1..1 .& 1 , .. i J J
.IJ~.: t~II~.. I. · I f ~ I! ;)!Is..] ~i
1~lii]11 Jl~h It j] ! t fil~jl,fn II JuiH H
. ~ ilmdelUdll~f dt I i!~h!~HmltitHet!J I Ulhw I ili
,
...
; . . . ! I z ...... .3 ~ I ~ f" .. t .. J. ~ I I I fi ·
. I :'~I!Uh; J . .11 -IJ . I! ~~:! ..1.1' ..
I~/,
fir II.. n I.. . f n II. . .. .. i . f. ., II' 1,11 t i I r
t;fbml i U'~ffl.!r : _I! i .,'!lII I JJlf~ln JIll f.- ~tf, I" .
It!if q I, fll rf' i'f -fir . a.].it1-;J~,:;t f.-I I.
. Ar~tir' [.U~ L.:~ !I, '1l!IW~U~. UI I.
. f....qi-~II ff. .. II f. I, r S .fff~ ~~ . r ...
}
.
r~i JI'~ I ((ih!UOfi .!Mth I 1;1€I~tt~t~ II!til ~ If[i~1 ~
f~ h r- 1:.' p .,.."~. II I t~ rl 'i iirUJ9, ~!t~ =
. n Sit m f dli:lfiinf1 i ; .t. Jim f ~h ii!!t~
f .. I,r.. I,II! J ~ i I SI. S ii'
f5' UJ 1tt1 II 'If ,.~.. 'f I J .J"1.
~~ Ht:I'! Ih!l!fU r;:. r I r~llliJJ'Wjr
t1 . ~lt :: ~ ,I G ,f~..if t:. !it '~:~ .... 'I t!lJ .' I~ d Ii. ~
If . I~f ~ -If th.il,irl. flf ..fa ..<.::.. .rt.. t. i . , 1 h . [Ii
. .
/1711 .
,
..- --- - -
---.-
,
-..----- ---. -.- . - ._-
~ t <<1.'. fl~i 1 (oS .f 1; 1t~; "'Uj"'! ~IJ1Jl fi~ .t"
~ 1 J 1 I! i i e r i :-r! i I ~ . ~!} 1. . i i- ~ i -11 ~ ~ 11
1 } ~ ~ ~lft ill ~ j I, :! (" ! f (~1 ... ~ .1 i ~ I~]"I
. I zt~! il! ~ B :a]tjit f: ! i1; fitj~ t~ [Ii] In ~ III' 111
-!'~'= il E 1 1.U l' ....~II .. r I -J Ii ':'': it. . ~
J aoj~1 j J" ttJ1 1~11(~ ~ _ . It- J 1~~ r" . 'E! I.] IiI 14 t' ~
-~ ...1 ! BI!~ I,,~ .11 ~ Il ~i II' !i~ i"'l...
.q 11~ h:U.- ~f! 1.~~~~lll! I .J!.! fi-.i;:j.I:1J Ill!: )1) ,.,,= j i a
I ] tS8j~~~11 iJI!I~i~111j~! 11~iil~~Jt [j$1 Ittl! .. ill'i~ I
..,
.
..] ~ ! ll~ I. 1 tt~t, ,s.l ~ ~ - . j Ii I . j . ~ I f ~~ 1 ~
....1..t! 11 ai: ".1 hUiiii':U' ~a aa li 1
0( '~.t ~ u ... ] J . 'j i oS I r:!r:!r:!r:!r:!r:!r:!r:!1~ ~ I ~ ] j It Ii
1 ~ 3U)~Itmt ia!~!lftfa~lliJ1lllJnmI!, Ii i it U!j [hi d~)11
. 11).../>
Safety Commission Minutes
February 8, 1996
Page 3
Vice-Chair Miller reiterated the need for an enforceable speed. She felt there needed to be an all-way stop
evaluation at East J Street and Lori Lane and East] Street and Melrose Avenue. She asked if all-way stop evaluation
had been performed at the intersections. East J Street was a long stretch of road without any stop signs.
Frank Rivera said an all-way stop evaluation had been conducted at Lori Lane and East] Street within the last five
years, and since there was not a stop sign at the intersection, it was probably not recommended. He was unaware
of an all-way stop study at Melrose Avenue and East J Street.
Chair Liken reviewed his experience as a former Chula Vista Police Department motor officer as it related to
defending citations in court and how the 85% speed was the determining factor. The current Traffic
Commissioner was only looking at 85% speeds when reviewing citations. Police officers did not like to lose
tickets, and if the Traffic Commissioner and/or judge was continuing to dismiss tickets, officers would no longer
enforce the area. The area needed to be enforceable.
Commissioner Hoke asked if enforcement would be stricter if the speed limit was raised.
Sgt. d'Ablaing said that the officers would have a new set of standards to enforce and the officers were eager to
begin enforcing the area.
Commissioner Hoke said that increasing the speed limit would help enforcement and possibly reduce some of
the excessive speeds.
Commissioner Cochrane commented that his concern was enforceability of the speed limit. He empathized with
the residents. The Commission was not a rubber stamp, but they were between a rock and a hard place. If the
speed limit was not increased, there would be no enforcement.
Chair Liken asked staff for a review of the sight distances in the area.
Frank Rivera reviewed the sight distances in the area. Parked vehicles and shrubbery could pose obstructions.
It was not convenient for residents to lose parking in front of their homes, but it could be done to increase sight
distance.
MSC (Smith/Miller) to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Municipal Code
increasing the speed limit on East J Street between Hilltop Drive and Cassia Place to 35 mph. Approved &-0-1
with Commissioner Acton absent.
MSC (Miller/Cochrane) to direct staff to perform an all-way stop evaluation on East J Street at Lori Lane and
on East J Street at Melrose Avenue. Approved 5-1-1 with Commissioner Smith voting no and Commissioner
Acton absent.
6. Renon on Increasine: Sneed limits on HUlton Drive between East Rienstra Str~t and Orantle Avenue
Frank Rivera stated that he had received one phone call from a resident expressing her desire to keep the speed
limit at 30 mph due to children in the area.
MSC (Miller/Smith) to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Municipal Code
increasing the speed limit on Hilltop Drive between East Rienstra Street and Orange Avenue to 35 mph.
Approved 6-0-1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
II),./~
Castle Park High School
1395 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Business Owner
1401 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Business Owner
1417 A Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Business Owner
1417B Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Business Owner
1419 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1 Kingswood Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
3 Kingswood Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
4 Kingswood Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1423 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1429 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1439 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1443 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1453 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1459 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1475 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1485 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
2 Jicama Way
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
8 Jicama Way
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
7 Jicama Way
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1405 Platano Court
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1444 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1446 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
1''/7
Business Owner
1415 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Business Owner
1417C Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
2 Kingswood Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Lorna Verde (Jementary School
1450 Lorna Lane
Chula Vista, Ca 91911
Resident
1433 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, Ca 91911
Resident
1449 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1465 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1495 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
14 Jicama Way
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1442 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1450 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1452 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1462 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Business Owner, 7-11
1482 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 1
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 3
Chula Yista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 4
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 6
Chula Vista. CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 7
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 9
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 10
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 12
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 13
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 15
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 16
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 18
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 19
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 21
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 22
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 24
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 25
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 27
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident ~/V'
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 28
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1472 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 2
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 5
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 8
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 11
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 14
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 17
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1436 Hilltop Drive, Unit 20
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 23
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 26
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 29
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 30
Chu1a Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 31
Chu1a Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 32
Chu1a Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 33
Chu1a Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 34
Chu1a Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 35
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 36
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 37
Chu1a Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 38
Chu1a Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 39
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
1434 Hilltop Drive, Unit 40
Chula Vista, CA 91911
~-I'
THIS PACE BLANK
I", .2.()
r
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
II
ITEM TITLE:
I~.v~
Resolution - Accepting Donation, Authorizing
Expenditure and Appropriating said Donated
Funds to pay for Repair to the Animal Shelter
Kennel's Heating System and Kennel Tarps.
J~~'33
Resolution - Reappropriating $11,900 from
the fund balance in the Public Safety Building
Reroofing Project (GG147) to the Animal Shelter
Reconfiguration project RD205.
MEETING DATE 3-19-96
SUBMITTED BY:
0....;-
Chief of Police V
City Manager~~ ;(b(4/5THS
VOTE: YES~ NO___)
REVIEWED BY:
The Animal Shelter recently received an unsolicited $2,000 donation
from the Mercy Crusade, Inc. Animal Welfare Organization, and a
$500 donation from the Foundation for the Care of Indigent Animals
Organization. The donations are designed to fund $1,500 of the
repair costs to the kennel floor heating system and $1,000 of the
repair costs to the kennel tarps. An additional $11,900 has been
identified by staff to make the remainder of the repairs to the
Animal Shelter in this fiscal year.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: That Council Approve the Resolutions.
On February 28, 1996, the Animal Shelter received an unsolicited
$2,000 from the Mercy Crusade, Inc. Animal Welfare Organization.
On March I, 1996, the Animal Shelter received an unsolicited $500
from the Foundation for the Care of Indigent Animals. The
donations were presented for the specific purpose of repairing the
heating system and replacing the tarps. The donations were
accepted by the Animal Shelter manager and deposited in the
Shelter Donation Account with the Finance Department.
At the request of the City Council, staff reviewed the conditions
at the Animal Shelter and proposed in an information item, to the
City Council, dated February 26, 1996 (attached) that the heating
element in the floor be repaired without delay and the remainder of
the repairs (tarp replacement, splash panels, reinforced fencing
and cables) be submitted as a minor CIP for 1996/97. Subsequently,
Ms. Toni Dimaggio of Mercy Crusade contacted staff to designate
$1,000 of the $2,000 donated specifically for the replacement of
//'1
RESOLUTION NO. 18".2;r~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING DONATION, AUTHORIZING
EXPENDITURE AND APPROPRIATING SAID DONATED
FUNDS TO PAY FOR REPAIR TO THE ANIMAL SHELTER
KENNEL'S HEATING SYSTEM AND KENNEL TARPS
WHEREAS, the Animal Shelter recently received an
unsolicited $2,000 donation from the Mercy Crusade, Inc. Animal
Welfare Organization, and a $500 donation from the Foundation for
the Care of Indigent Animals Organization; and
WHEREAS, the donations are designed to fund $1,500 of the
repair costs to the kennel floor heating system and $1,000 of the
repair costs to the kennel tarps; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby accept the $2,500 donation which
will be appropriated into Fund 408 4081 PD002, Animal Shelter
Donation Expenditure Account and authorize its expenditure to pay
for the repair to the Animal Shelter kennel's heating system and
kennel tarps.
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
Bruce M.
Attorney
l
Presented by
C:\rs\shelter.don
I/~"'I
RESOLUTION NO. /8').;13
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA REAPPROPRIATING $11,900 FROM THE
FUND BALANCE IN THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING
REROOFING PROJECT (GG147) TO THE ANIMAL
SHELTER RECONFIGURATION PROJECT RD205
WHEREAS, the City has received a $2,500 donation to make
repairs to the Animal Shelter; and
WHEREAS, taking the donations into account, an estimated
$11,900 is still needed to complete the repairs to the Animal
Shelter in this fiscal year as follows:
Repair heat system in the concrete slab
Replace all tarps around the kennels
Repair chain link fencing and replace bottom
cables around kennels and between cages
Replace metal panel between cages to stop fecal
matter from going from one kennel to another
$ 5,900
$ 4,300
$ 1,700
$ 2.500
$14,400
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby reappropriate $11,900 from the
remaining fund balance in the Public Services Building Reroofing
Capi tal Improvement proj ect GG147 to the Animal Shel ter
Reconfiguration Project RD205, to be spent for the identified
purpose.
Presented by
ved 1
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
Bo
110"/
PAGE 2, ITEM
/1
MEETING DATE 3-19-96
the shelter tarps. As a result, staff reevaluated the repair
schedule and identified funds for all of the repairs previously
mentioned.
The scope of work to be performed is as follows:
o
o
o
Repair heat system in the concrete slab
Replace all tarps around the kennels
Repair chain link fencing and replace
bottom cables around kennels and between
cages
Replace metal panels between cages to stop
fecal matter from going from one kennel to
another
$ 5,900
$ 4,300
$ 1,700
o
$ 2,500
Total
$14,400
The cost to have the repairs completed is $14,400. Taking the
donations into account, an estimated $11,900 is still needed to
complete the repairs. staff proposes that these funds be
reallocated from the remaining fund balance in a completed major
CIP project (Public services Building reroofing (GG147) to the
Animal Shelter Reconfiguration Project (RD 205). Appropriate
vendors have been identified by the Public Works Operations staff,
and it is estimated that work can begin within the next few weeks.
These repairs are being recommended to address conditions in need
of immediate repairs. The facility is a temporary facility. The
Master Plan for the City Corporation Yard Relocation and Expansion
includes plans for incorporating the Animal Shelter into that
project. Two possible locations for this yard include Phase II of
the Otay Rio Business Park and the SDG&E Corporate yard on Maxwell
Road. The Police and Public Works staff will continue to work with
Community Development to expedite the acquisition of a suitable
site for the shelter. ?
FISCAL IMPACT: This $14,400 repair will be done as part of the
Animal Shelter Reconfiguration Project (RD205) with $11,900 of the
funds reappropriated from the Public Services Reroofing Project
(GG147) and $2,500 appropriated from unanticipated donations.
11-,,2
ATTACHMENT A
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
February 27, 1996
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and Council
'-
VIA:
John D. Goss, City Manager .
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of pOlice~iIV
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Animal Shelter Conditions; immediate repair needs
The purpose of this memo is to respond to a request from the Mayor and City Council regarding current
conditions at the City's Animal Shelter. Specifically, the Council has received letters and phone calls from
citizens concerned that animals are not receiving adequate care at the City Shelter. This item is being
brought to the dais tonight in order to prepare Council for the possible attendance of individuals wishing
to address Council on this topic during Oral Communications.
The Police Department staff and the Building Services Superintendent have reviewed conditions at the
facility and determined that the heating element in the floor must be repaired without delay ($5,900). The
remainder of the repairs (tarp replacement, splash panels, reinforced fencing and cables) are projected
to cost approximately $8,500 and have been submitted as a minor CIP for 1996/97. This request will be
reviewed as part of the coming budget process.
The two groups which have written to the Mayor and Council (Mercy Crusade and the Foundation for the
Care of Indigent Animals) have made verbal offers to Animal Control staff to provide some funds toward
the cost of repairs for the facility, reportedly $2,500. Taking these offers into account, an additional $3,400
is still needed to complete the most critical need, the repair of the floor heating system. This amount of
money will be allocated from the remaining fund balance in a minor CIP account with the approval of the
City Manager's office. An appropriate vendor has been identified by the Public Works Operations staff and
it is estimated that work can begin within the next few weeks.
It has also come to staffs attention that Council has received a memo from Patty Wesp, secretary to the
Mayor and City Council, which compares the City facility to the County Animal Control Shelter on
Sweetwater Road in Bonita. The Chula Vista shelter is in a state of transition, and has never been viewed
as a permanent facility, despite the number of years it has been in use. Certainly there are differences
between the City and County shelters, just as there are differences in the fees charged by the City of
Chula Vista and those of the County Animal Control system.
As an example, an adoption from the County shelter in Bonita is $64 for a female dog, compared to $38
at the Chula Vista shelter. Reportedly, Chula Vista has the highest adoption rate in the County. The
impound fees for animals retrieved from the facility in Bonita are $6 per day for boarding plus $20 for the
first offense, $45 for the second, and $65 for every offense thereafter. Chula Vista charges $5 per day
for boarding plus $20 for the first offense, $40 for the second offense, and $60 for every offense thereafter.
If the Council would like a further comparison among other agencies, this can be provided during this
year's budget process as a budget supplemental report.
The Police Department staff is working with the Building Services Superintendent to make other needed
repairs, through a Minor CIP submission in the 1996/97 budget.
,
,
//., :1
February 27, 1996
Animal shelter conditions
page 2
The Master Plan for the City Corporation Yard Relocation and Expansion includes plans for incorporating
the animal shelter into that project. Two possible locations for this yard include Phase" of the Otay Rio
Business Park and the SDG&E Corporate Yard on Maxwell Road. The Police Department staff will
continue working with the Community Development staff to evaluate these and other sites, and expedite
the acquisition of a suitable site for the shelter.
Captain Dan Wolf and Animal Control Operations Manager Bill Will are contacting all of the parties
concerned to ensure their satisfaction with the progress being made by staff. Both Captain Wolf and Mr.
Will will be present at the February 27th Council meeting to answer any questions you may have.
cc; Captain Dan Wolf
Building Services Superintendent Rick Matkin
Animal Control Operations Manager aill Will
a:\ccm\ckanimar.ctl
.~
;
,
II-~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item /.,2..
Meeting Date 3/19/96
Resolution I 'if ~ :1'1 Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for the
"Placement of Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix Overlay for FY 1995-96 Overlay
Program on Various Streets in the City ofChula Vista, CA (STL-224)" and
au~orizing staff to increase qU7tities t expend all available funds for this
project
Director of Public workf
City Managerjff. (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..XJ
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
At 2:00 p.m. on February 28, 1996 in Conference Room 2 & 3 in the Public Services Building, the
Director of Public Works received bids for the "Placement of Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix Overlay for
FY 1995-96 Overlay Program on Various Streets in the City of Chula Vista, CA (STL-224)." The
work consists of providing asphalt rubber hot mix 1 \1," thick overlay on various streets in the City.
The work includes the removal of alligator pavement areas and replacement with asphalt concrete
pavement, the cold milling of street pavement in certain areas, AC leveling courses, signal loops,
traffic control, adjustment of sewer manholes, adjustment of survey well monuments, french drain
system, and other miscellaneous work as shown on the plans.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) accept bids and award the contract to SRM Contracting
and Paving in the amount of$517,322.20 for "Placement of Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix Overlay for
FY 1995-96 Overlay Program on Various Streets in the City ofChula Vista, CA (STL-224)" and
2) authorize staff to increase quantities to expend all available funds for this project.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Funds for this project are included in the FY 1995..96 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget.
The project was included in the budget to avoid further deterioration of pavement and base material
on selected streets in the City. The project is similar to past overlay programs in the City except this
year, we are using asphalt rubber hot mix in place of conventional asphalt concrete mix. The use
of asphalt rubber hot mix eliminates the need for the placement of pavement fabric and minimizes
the amount of digouts required. Sidewalks ramps associated with the placement of the overlay
program were awarded by a separate contract and are now under construction.
Bids for this project were received from three contractors as follows:
/~--I
Page 2, Item I;)
Meeting Date 3/16/96
Contractor Bid Amount
1. SRM Contracting and Paving - San Diego $517,322.20
2. Sim J Harris Company - San Diego 568,939.00
3. Daley Corporation - San Diego 620,736.00
The low bid by SRM Contracting and Paving is below the Engineer's estimate of $557,710 by
$40,387.80 or 7.2%. Staff received an excellent bid for the proposed work. The Engineer's estimate
was based on prices received for the FY 1994-95 Overlay Program and previous projects utilizing
asphalt rubber hot mix (ARHM).
The specifications require that the low bidder have experience in placement of conventional asphalt
concrete and asphalt rubber hot mix. SRM Contracting and Paving is also known as Superior Ready
Mix and previously as V. R. Dennis Corporation. They have worked for the City in the past and
their work has been satisfactory. Staff also checked their references with regard to the placement
of asphalt rubber hot mix and their work was satisfactory.
The project was budgeted as an overlay project based on a fixed amount of budgeted funds in the
CIP program. At the time the project was approved by the Council, specific streets to be overlaid
were not identified. Attached as Exhibit A is a table showing the streets included in the FY 1995-96
Overlay Program (Streets 1-30). Streets 31-34 were included in the bid documents with the intent
they would be added to the contract in the event funds remained in the project after completion of
the first 30 streets. Based on the bid amounts, staff estimates that there will be about $61,000 left
in the contingency fund. Therefore, staff proposes to overlay and/or repair existing deteriorated
portions of these streets (Items 31-34) with the remaining funds. The streets are to be overlaid in
order of priority. The City retained its right, however, to decrease the contract in the event that
unforseen conditions are encountered during the repair of the roadway (such as larger areas of dig
out and repair are necessary than were originally anticipated). The intent is to avoid a cost overrun
on the project due to quantity changes on individuals streets. In the unlikely chance that this
happens, streets will be deleted as necessary from the contract starting with number 30.
Disclosure Statement
Attached is a copy of the contractor's disclosure statement (Exhibit B).
Environmental Status
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved in this project and has
determined that the project is a Class 2 exemption under Section 15302 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Reconstruction of Existing Structures and Facilities)
/.2.~
Page 3, Itemj ;...
Meeting Date 3/16/96
Prevailing Wage Statement
The source of funding for this project is Gas Tax Funds and Transportation Partnership Funds.
Contractors bidding this project were not required to pay prevailing wages to persons employed by
them for the work under this contract. No special minority or women owned business requirements
were necessary as part of the bid documents. Disadvantaged businesses were encouraged to bid
through the sending of the Notice to Contractors to various minority trade publications.
Financial Statement
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Contract Amount $517,322.20
B. Staff (Design & Inspection) 70,000.00
C. Material Testing 10,000.00
D. Contingencies (Approximately 11 %) 61,127.78
TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $658,449.98
FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Pavement Overlay Program FY 1995-96 (STL-224) $658,449.98
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION $658,449.98
FISCAL IMPACT:
After construction, only routine City maintenance amounting to mainly street sweeping will be
required. Completion of the work will reduce the need for extraordinary maintenance such as pot
hole patching. No estimate can be made of this type of extraordinary work.
Exhibit A: FY 1995-96 Pavement Overlay Streets
Exhibit B: Contractor Disclosure Statement
SLH:sb
File No: 0735-10-STL-224
M:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \P A VEORVL.SLH
1.2-J )';-If
RESOLUTION NO. 18"'.2;1,y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR "PLACEMENT OF ASPHALT RUBBER HOT
MIX OVERLAY FOR FY 1995-96 OVERLAY PROGRAM ON
VARIOUS STREETS IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA
(STL-224)" AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INCREASE
QUANTITIES TO EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR
THIS PROJECT
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on February 28, 1996, in Conference
Room 2 and 3 in the Public Service Building, the Director of Public
Works received the following three bids for "Placement of Asphalt
Rubber Hot Mix Overlay for FY 1995-96 Overlay Program on Various
Streets in the City of Chula Vista, CA (STL-224).":
Contractor Bid Amount
SRM Contracting and Paving - San Diego $517,322.20
Sim J Harris - San Diego 568,939.00
Daley Corporation - San Diego 620,736.00
WHEREAS, the low bid by SRM Contracting and Paving is
below the Engineer's estimate of $557,710 by $40,387.80 or 7.2%;
and
WHEREAS, the specifications require that the low bidder
have experience in placement of conventional asphalt concrete and
asphalt rubber hot mix and SRM Contracting and Paving have worked
for the city in the past and their work has been satisfactory and,
therefore, staff recommends awarding the contract to SRM
Contracting and Paving for this project; and
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has
reviewed the work involved in this project and determined that the
project is a Class 2 exemption under section 15302 of the
California Environment Quality Act (Reconstruction of Existing
Structures and Facilities); and
WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is Gas
Tax Funds and Transportation Partnership Funds and prevailing wages
were not required for work under this project, however, no special
minority or women owned business requirements were necessary as
part of the bid documents.
1
12.,5
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby find, determine, order and resolve
as follows:
Section 1. That the city Council concurs in the
determination that this project is categorically exempt under
Section 15302, Class 2, "Reconstruction of Existing Structures and
Facilities" of the California Environmental Quality Act, and
directs the Environmental Review Coordinator file, or ratifies the
filing of, a notice of exemption for this project.
Section 2. That the Council does hereby accept the bid
of SRM Contracting and Paving as responsive and awards the contract
for "Placement of Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix Overlay for FY 1995-96
Overlay Program on Various Streets in the City of Chula Vista" to
SRM Contracting and Paving in the amount of $517,322.20.
Section 3. The Mayor of the City of Chula vista is
hereby authorized and directed to execute said contract for and on
behalf of the City of Chu1a Vista.
Section 4. That staff is hereby authorized to increase
quantities to expend all available funds for this project.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard, City
Attorney
c: \ rs\overlay
2
/~ - "
c
~
""
o
:=
:;1
"
"
I-~
ti
~
00
<
"
z
~
00
;;0
:;:
~
~"
::JO
,,~
<"
~
'"
:>
o
""
z
'"
:;:
'"
:>
<
"
'"
'"
.;,
'"
~
~
-
II
-
z
>C
III
00
"" .
;;0"
Ol.~
"'"
S
os;oog:
~ s:;
8~g~goo~ooo~S~~g~~~gogS~~
~~~~~ ~~~N~~ ~~ ~OOs:;
<0:
~I~
000
NN"
N~"
~,,-
~ ~
000000
;;~~~~~
:!;~~a,~~
0000000
'-O-.rO\~("1NO\
MOON'-OOOV'lO'\
MO\O\Oo:'1O\M
f")f")_'<tN M
0000
N""" \0 0"1
r--r--OOO
00 f'I'1 0
............_'<1"
000000
ez~~~~g;:
O'\;:;:::t- 00:;::
~~
~g
00
~..,.
-"
..,.~
"..,.
. . .
~ ~ "g .~ .~
:>:>:>
~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00
V V 0 Q '11 '11 '11 '11 '11 '11
~ '. '. '. '. '. '. '. '. '. ~ '. ~
:>:>:>:>:>:>:>:>:> :>
N"
~ ~
.
.~ ~
:>
. .
.~;;; ~.~
:> :>
. .
" "
~..
:>:>
~~
~~
. . .
" . "
"" S '. '. '. ~
0\>>>0'\
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o '11 '11 V '11 '11 '11 '11 '11 0\ '11
'. '. '. '. '. ..... ~.
>>>>>>~:>>->
. . .
'11 oU 0 __ <u 0
.~ 'a ~ ~ "s ~
>>......'-0:>......
. <
;g.~ 0 ~.~
~~~N~S
,,~
..,.-
NN
N _
00000000000000000000000000000
"I ~
13
~ 00("1......00000000000000000000000000
" .
1;; S
~::E
:i!
~~......_MNMO\M......V'I~_~M___~M~O___MVOV'l__M
g.;
," ~
'~ ::E
~ ~~~6~~:
~~~\O~:::~~~
o~
u
"'
I.Ol-N\D
O-:M......r--:
010\0\00
-~ ~
NON_~\Dr--_V'lr--",,"
f"'io.;t-=t-=oOot-=oo.;r..:.....;
O\OOO\C1>......t"-OO\D\DOOO
M_ _tr1 M ......
~O
000
~ 0
~
t--M OCt')O
~8\D~~;:::
MM~f")N
00000
. N 0 0 00 0
~~~M~~O\
~8
00
~~
~..,.
..,.N
00
~ -
~'"
N
0000000
S;~;~~;;!;rt
N N
0000000
N"<tM'<tO"lN\o
O\,Ot")V'lN\DO
NN-N- N
0000
t--Nt-O\
00.,.,.,...'<1"
NN
ssg
~~'"
" .
o "
o
Af-<
01.0:000\
0: 00..-)
~
"'''
g::i
~
('I"]~O\OONOOO
0c:iONOOO
~ ~ ~
O\'-ON-Q(l-Q(lNO':Oon("')\C~
~~~o\~;:jNto;;6~~~~
~
o
"
s
~ ~ ~ ~ ...
~~~~~5~-.:j~"O
~ ~ ~~~~~
i ~ ~ .~ .~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"
8:; ~ i g v ~
-E ~ 'E ~ ~ ..."d 5 "0 5
>]~~]]~~Q]~]]~u~~"O=~
~~__~~~~~~~"O~~~~~~
.~~~t;'€'€~~Et; O,€,€ SV1..s,E~,€~
OQ:3Qoo~;r:1:;<u~oo~~g:E~~~
E
8
"
. "
pa 5 "
'" ..:::i .~
~~~~~]
~~;@ -g ~ t;
~I~:-= 0.2 <1)
"
. "
~ g <u <u <1) ~ "E 'Ii) '0
s8 ~~~5_ ~ ~~ ~~<U
"0'" "Oooo~~'O~'O'O~~~ ~~oo~
oii~~~~~~,€~~~~~~~~~~~~
~.=~~.." ...'" .~..
<1) C '" = = r:: o:f = ~ = t:: t:: ~"r:: 0 1;1181";)
~ ~ 01) <1) 0 0 0 ;> 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. 0 1-0 ~I~I od
~
'O)'''ii)
.:> "
~~~
~~~
" "
~ is s
"0 O'~ <1) o~
~s s <1) .~o~ 0:1... o~ 8~ <1)
~8~o~~<u 5g~~8~o~~ ~~ o_~~~5]~
~ ..><: s: U C,j t<j' g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . "'". J 5 ..j:] 1::: ~ p-<.~ ~ is <U <.; 0 ../:I ;> U
~~?o ~Od-~~~~ ~OOododO>odo ~~oo~ ~
..:::i~ eod?;>~O~?"O od~~] ~~'''~d-Oo~
<1) I ~g ~ ,::3 ~_ <<! -<t <1) 5 '0 03 .a ~ = od ~ ~ .$ ~ ~ ~ $ '" ~ <1) t'i" ~- S ~ q)
~ 181~.~j~~~~ S~~5!~~i.!.!~o.!]~~~03 ~5
};'"
'1:;-5
o~-
~~
N("')~on~~~~S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M~~~~g
/tiI. - 7
00
o
"
"
~
0""
dC""i
"
o
"
~
:3
~
"'
~
~
u
"
@
:>
::J
~
~
u
S
0_
dC""i
o
~
s
~
o
~
"
o
..,.
..,.
"
o
o
'"
\;:
&,
""
'"
""
o
"
""
;;J
o
"
~
'"
..
z
~
'"
'"
""
00
~
""
00
'"
~
I::
""
z
"
;;
00
ON
N '"
;::;'"
00
~
~
00
..,.N
ON
" N
;!"
00
N..,.
..,.~
~ ~
"''''
" .
~.~::; .~
> :>
"
z
is
z
;;0
0<
'"
:;;
;;0
Ci
'"
'"
<
'"
~
I;j
~
~
u
~
'"
"
~
"
'"
~
"
z
o
"
z
~
'"
~
"
'"
'"
~
o
~
t;
~
""
z
o
u
o
""
~
'"
"
"
"
~
:=
u
~
:=
~
00
""
'"
~
""
00
""
~
~
I::
~
<
. .
~.~ ~.~
('<)>~>
o;;~o
0......00
~('<)s......
~1O~t-:
N-.:i
~ ~
::::'"
- '"
~ '"
..,.~
0000
IO~~~
~IO(,<)~
r--..".IO~
IO""'~O
~~~d
"'~
"
>
0"'
" .
= .
".1:
~ "
.::E
_0
0-
"
" "
S e
~~
"'"
.~~
"
>
.~.~ ~ ~
qql;:";!
o 'g."O -g
~ ~1'Elg
'''j..;:<Ir::I~
"
~ ~ s
"= .
"," >
ool;: ~
a ~ ~
~ a 'Q) ..2
~C5~~
~_.,€
:3 :3 ~ 0
-~('<)..".
('<)('<)('<)('<)
I
i
~,
I= ~ if,l.3/ T 13
JIU, LJJ I ur LUULA \ilI)IA VII)LLUSUKt; STATEMENT
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or tinancial interests Payments "r canlpa'l " ' I' h
. . .... .... g 1 \,;un n UtH1tt~.
on all matlers whIch wIll reqUIre dIscretionary actIon on the pan of the CIty CouncIl Planning Conunl'sSI'(1n and, II th t'ti' I
. .... '. a 0 ~r 0 lua
bodIes, The followmg mfonnatJon must be dIsclosed:
1.
.
List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the ConrrJ.d
. e.g., owner, applicant. Contractor. subcontractor, material supplier.
/Vol" If! f'f'u ( (I.:J!,_ -N 0
2. If any person'" identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals uwnil1l! IlH1r!:
than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any pannership interest in the partnership, "
II/or .t'1f"U(('&<!vJ
3, If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as
director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust
IJO r tJ;:'r'rJL<'6/.-_
.4,
Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, COnUllissiol1.<,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve month? Yes _ No v If yes, please indicate person(s):
5, Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent Contractors who you
have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
1'/ () ir" IJ ';Pu C ",,8 Le.-
6, Have you andlor your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the current
or preceding election period? Yes _ No X- If yes, stale which Couucil members(s):
· · · (NOTE: Attached additiona
Date:
2-/7:0/7(./
x
(3~~ (oo{^-
Print or type n.ame of Contractorl Applicant
. Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, aswciation, wcial club, frarernal organization,
corporation, estate, trust, receiver, ,ryndicate, thL, and any other county, city or country, city municipality, district, or other political
subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
15
I~"Y
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I :J
Meeting Date 03/19/96
ITEM TITLE:
Report: Investigating the Feasibility of a Fiestas Patrias Festival
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Parks and Recreation ?I~yv
City Manager j~)\. (4/Sths Vote: Yes _ No ~
REVIEWED BY:
On March 5, 1996, the Council requested that staff review ways the City could support Fiestas Patrias.
This is an important holiday in the Mexican culture, celebrating their official Independence Day. It was
suggested that the event be held on Saturday, September 14, 1996. The actual date of Fiestas Patrias is
September 16th. This report discusses the options on ways to conduct a Fiestas Patrias event and the
planning and coordination required.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the celebration of Fiestas Patrias at the
annual Harbor Days event on September 21, 1996.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Historical Background
Mexico Festival of Independence (Fiestas Patrias) celebrates the anniversary of Mexico's independence
from Spain. On this date, Mexicans remember the beginning of the revolution against Spain There are
fiestas all across the country with the biggest in Mexico City. The hero this day is Father Miguel
Hidalgo y Costilla, called "the Father of Mexican Independence" and who is known to have created the
phrase "Viva Mexico!lViva la independencia." Popular belief has been that Cinco de Mayo is the
significant Mexican celebration recognizing their independence from France. However, the September
16th event is even more significant to the Mexicans due to the length of time Spain ruled over Mexico.
Feasibilitv Ootions
Staff was directed to return to Council with options for holding a Fiestas Patrias Festival. Staff has
evaluated several options below.
Option #1 (Staff Recommendation): In 1995, a Fiestas Patrias celebration was held as part of the
annual Harbor Days event. Staff recommends that for 1996, the combination of these two events
continue.
Advantages: The Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, who currently co-sponsors Harbor Days with the
Port District and the City of Chula Vista, has in place a structure for celebrating Fiestas Patrias at Harbor
Days. Channel 12 and the associated radio station provide a Fiesta stage which features music, dance,
[m:\home\parksrec\A1l3\ PATRIAS.A13 - March 14, 1996]
1
1:>"'/
Item ~
Meeting Date 03/19/96
and entertainment; focusing on the Mexican culture. The radio station provides the entertainment groups
and publicity.
The Chamber hires a consultant, which spends 25-30 % of its resources to provide corporate sponsorships,
through in-kind and monetary donations. The remaining consultant resources are utilized for advertising,
setting up the layout for the event, solicitation of required pennits, enlisting the talent, booth rentals,
restrooms, traffic control and miscellaneous support equipment. The consultant is the liaison between
the Port District, the City and the Chamber and provides complete coordination of the event.
The Chamber's participation in Harbor Days is oversight of the consultant, problem-solving with the
consultant, and solicitation of business booths.
The City already provides $13,000 in FY 95/96 funding support for Harbor Days. Approving Option
#1 means no additional funding would be required.
A final advantage deals with the amount of limited City resources required for the planning and
coordination of several Special events clustered in the months of September and October. In addition to
Harbor Days, the City will also be preparing for the BonitaFest, the Arturo Barrios road race and the
Third Avenue Festival. This option will efficiently streamline the planning and coordination of Fiestas
Patrias by folding it into an already existing special event.
Disadvantages: Fiestas Patrias would not be held as a stand-alone event, or may not occur on the
weekend before the September 16th date. With respect to the first point, Fiestas Patrias wouldn't
necessarily be showcased as the primary event.
Option #2: Fiestas Patrias would be held as a separate event in 1996. Staff would return to the Council
during the FY 96/97 budget deliberations in June to offer an analysis of holding a Fiestas Patrias Festival
on Sunday, September 15, 1996. Council can then make a detennination as to whether or not to approve
the event while considering the competing priorities for budget funding for FY 96/97.
Advantages: Fiestas Patrias would receive full attention as a significant event to be celebrated in Chula
Vista. The Hispanic community in Chula Vista, with its significant history, would be able to participate
locally in the event.
In this option, a Fiestas Patrias Festival could focus on community involvement and participation,
emphasizing the importance of the holiday in Mexican culture and history. Some of the key points of
the community-oriented event are explored in more detail below:
. the target audience would primarily be Chula Vista residents
. entertainment provided by local groups
. entertainment would include music, performance, and art
[m;\home\parksrec\A113\ - PATRIAS.A13 March 14, 1996]
2
13-'.
Item JL
Meeting Date 03/19/96
. performing arts groups from local schools, Southwestern College, and other local organizations
. a visual art component would be encouraged for local arts organizations
. food and beverage services provided
. encouragement of local business participation
. the event could be conducted on the bayfront to encourage Port District funding opportunities
. local corporate sponsorship (fiscal and in-kind) could be solicited
. promotion of the event would target City of Chula Vista residents
Communitv Partners
Radio California, a multi-station corporation (includes Fiesta Radio and Radio Latino) has expressed an
interest in helping to plan this event. The Parks and Recreation Commission, International Friendship
Commission and the Cultural Arts Commission could become involved in this event.
Planning Committee
Staff suggests that a broad-based Planning Committee, coordinated by staff, be formed to begin planning
for this event. The Committee would be comprised of representatives from a number of community
groups, service organizations, local business interests public and private schools, City Commissions and
other organizations. Staff believes that the inclusion of diverse community groups in the event planning
will promote community involvement, increase participation at the event, and expand the City's ability
to solicit and secure in-kind services to conduct the event. Staff envisions that the Planning Committee
would function through a number of sub-committees that would pursue specific areas and responsibilities
associated with the event.
Planning/Consultant
Proper planning for a stand alone Fiestas Patrias requires the use of a planning/consultant. While staff
is performing basic coordination tasks, the consultant would:
I. work with the community partners to provide coordination and solicitation of the entertaimnent,
food and booth display including scheduling of events and determining site requirements;
2. coordinate publicity with the City;
3. solicit outside funding and in-kind services to ensure the appropriate fiscal management within
the approved budget;
[m:\home\parksrec\A1I3\ - PATRIAS.A13 - March 14, 19Q6]
3
13"J
j
Item
Meeting Date 03/19/96
/:J
4. obtain or enforce City or other agency's rules and regulations;
5. provide oversight on the day of the event including community volunteers and provide on-site
decisions as required; and
6. provide an evaluation of the event to the City with input from the citizens committee to ensure
all problems are addressed for resolution during the next years event.
Staff believes a budget of $25,250 would be required to support a separate event for Fiestas Patrias
(Attachment "A").
Disadvantages: Two other San Diego area events are being held on the weekend of September 14 and
15, 1996. Bayfair (a San Diego celebration held at San Diego's bayfront areas) and the Thunder Boat
races. The Chamber of Commerce advises that in their event planning strategy, they try not to have
Chula Vista events compete with regional events. The other main disadvantage would be the Fiestas
Patrias event would be held very close to Harbor Days, Bonitafest and the Third Avenue Festival.
However, staff wishes to note that a decision regarding whether to hold the Fiestas Patrias event as a
combined event with Harbor Days, or as a stand alone event, may necessitate the requirement that staff
return to the Council at the end of April with a request for initial funding for a stand alone event. Staff
believes that if planning and coordination is held in abeyance until funds are available in July, then the
scope of work involved in planning the event will be detrimentally affected by the timing of funding
availability.
Option #3: Move Harbor Days to another date earlier in the calendar year (Spring). This would occur
only after an evaluation is done of the April 13, 1996 EXPO '96. Depending upon the success of this
Spring's EXPO '96, Harbor Days could either be combined with EXPO '96, or substituted therefor.
Advantages: Conceptual approval of this option means that the Fiestas Patrias Festival could be held
as a stand alone event in September, 1997, without competing with Harbor Days.
Disadvantages: It is envisioned that the EXPO '96 constitutes a stand alone event that will continue to
highlight the benefits, resources, and talent available in Chula Vista, and thus would not likely be
combined with Harbor Days.
Option #4: Radio California would plan, coordinate, and implement the event in Chula Vista, with the
collaboration of City commissions, and staff liaisons from various Departments. The City would not fund
any of the event, would provide minimal in-kind support (including Police services, as necessary). If,
however, the City wished to provided staffing for park maintenance, police, transit shuttle, etc.; estimated
costs would be $9,000. This funding would be appropriated during the budget process.
Advantages: The Fiestas Patrias could be held as a separate event with local business taking the lead
in providing this event to the City. This is similar to what is provided in Coronado and National City.
[m:\home\parksrec\AI13\ - PATRIAS.A13 March 14, 1996]
4
l:r,y
Item
Meeting Date 03/19/96
J'
Disadvantages: If the event is held on Sunday, September 15,1996, it would be competing with the San
Diego events, and the upcoming events in the same month (Harbor Days, Bonitafest, and the Third
Avenue event).
OTHER ISSUES AFFECTING THE FEASIBILITY OF A FIESTAS PATRIAS FESTIVAL
Staff Planning and Coordination Requirements
The current staffing in the Parks and Recreation Department (and other City Departments) will allow
minimal staff availability for the Festival, due to the many other special events and regular assignments
including EXPO 96, the Summer Concerts in the Park, Symphony Pops, the Fourth of July Fireworks,
Harbor Days (September 21, 1996), Bonitafest (September 28, 1996), and the Third Avenue Festival
(held October 6, 1996 and sponsored by the Downtown Association).
Coordination and facilitation of a large special event involves solicitation and coordination of the planning
committee, and technical coordination of facility layout, for staging, electrical, rental items including
portable toilets, dumpsters, public address systems, tents, etc. There is a great deal of coordination
required among City Departments, which includes site meetings, work orders and funding sources with
Police, Fire, Library, Transit, Management Services and Public Works. There is also work required
organizing rental equipment including barricades, portable toilets, dumpsters, stages, tents, public address
systems etc. Staff ensures that equipment, supplies and part-time staff are available as required and City
equipment is delivered, set-up, and removed at completion of event.
All of these coordination items are workload issues for the Departments involved, especially if the special
events are held in close proximity to each other.
Events Coordinator ProDosal
In the last three years, the City of Chula Vista has increased the number of "special" events planned
during a year. This has placed a constraint on staff workload, especially in light of budget curtailments
and the budgeted positions have remained constant for over 5 years. As discussed below in the budget
proposal, there is $5,000 recommended for a "consultant." For EXPO 96, the special event being held
at the Bayfront on April 13th, Council approved $4,000 for the use of a consultant. The requested
amount of $5,000 for a planning/consultant for Fiestas Patrias is based on input from the consultant for
EXPO '96, stating additional funds are needed to fully support the work required of the consultant
because of the extra time involved for planning.
ProDosed Sites
Staff discusses below the funding potential for the event, in conjunction with the San Diego Unified Port
District, which requires that the event be held on the Bayfront. Should funding from the Port not be
available, other sites will be considered.
[m:\home\parksrec\Al13\ PATRIAS.AI3 - March 14, 1996J
5
I'''$''
.'
Potential Funding
J')
Item
Meeting Date 03/19/96
Should the most suitable site for a stand alone Fiestas Patrias be determined as the bayfront parks, staff
would propose applying for funding from the Port District during their next budget cycle which
commences in June. However, there is a some concern that one more activity request to the Port District
may not be considered, as it was difficult to secure funding for the EXPO 96 event. In FY 95/96, the
Port District funded $30,000 for events at the Chula Vista bayfront. In addition, the Fiestas Patrias
Festival would be held within one week of Harbor Days (September 21, 1996), and the Port may take
the closeness of the events into consideration when granting funding.
However, if Council wishes to support a separate date for a Fiestas Patrias in 1997, while moving Harbor
Days to the Spring, a funding request to the Port District may receive a higher priority consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Option #1:
Option #2:
Option #3:
Option #4:
Attachment:
Combination of Fiestas Patrias and Harbor Days in 1996. No new funding required.
City currently donates $13,000 for this event.
Fiestas Patrias as a separate event on Sunday, September 15, 1996. Staff suggests a
proposed budget of $25,250 (Attachment "A").
Fiestas Patrias would be held in conjunction with the 1996 Harbor Days event; but in
1997, Harbor Days would be moved to a Spring date. No new funding if Fiestas Patrias
is held in conjunction with the 1996 Harbor Days event. If Fiestas Patrias is held in
1997 as a separate event, there is proposed funding of $25,250. If Harbor Days is
moved to the Spring, as a separate event, or as a combination with EXPO '96, some
funding savings could be realized, but is unknown at this time.
City co-sponsors Fiestas Patrias on Sunday, September 15, 1996 with Radio California;
no City funding; a value of $9,000 for in-kind support (unless funded by sponsors).
"A" - Potential Budget for Option #2
[m:\home\parksrec\Al13\ - PATRIAS.A13 - March 14, 1996J
6
13-/'
ATTACHMENT "A"
Fiestas Patrias Event Budget
Promotion/Publicity
Traffic and Safety Equipment-rental
Portable Toilets/Dumpsters-rental
Professional Public Address Equipment-rental
Community Entertainment-stipend
Event Organizer/Planner
Transit/Shuttle Bus
Staff: Police, Parks and Recreation
Supplies/Other Equipment
Total
$2,500
$1,800
$ 950
$1,500
$2,500
$5,000
$1,000
$8,000
$2,000
$25,250
[m:\home\parksrec\Al13\ - PATRIAS,AI3 - March 14,1996]
1::1-7
r;;l
~
SAN DIEGO CITY SCHOOLS
EDUCATION CENTER . 4100 Normal Street, San Diego, CA 92103-2682
(619) 293-8268
FAX 294-2625
FACILITIES SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Architect's Office - Annex 2-107
March 5, 1996
City of Chula Vista
To Whom it May Concern:
Subject: City of Chula Vista Design Review Board Seat
As the School District Architect, I have overseen the work of Mr. John Stokes for over
seven years. He currently provides architectural/landscape design, estimating, project
management and construction drawing services for projects needing multi-faceted support
ranging from community relations to interaction with school board members. Projects he
has headed have been quite successful and, additionally, I am very pleased with John's
professionalism and integrity.
With regard to the above position John has applied for, my recommendation is that he will
provide an invaluable service to the Design Review Board and the community of
Chula Vista.
1~"3
rE;;l
~
SAN DIEGO CITY SCHOOLS
EDUCATION CENTER . 4100 Normal Street, San Diego, CA 92103-2682 .
(619) 293-8268
Fax (619) 294-2625
FACILITIES SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Architect's Office
Annex 2, Room 107
March 5, 1996
City of Chula Vista
To Whom It May Concern:
Subject: City of Chula Vista Design Review Board Seat
I have supervised the professional work of Mr. John Stokes for over three years, as he
continues to provide architectural and landscape design and construction drawing
services for San Diego Unified School District. I understand he has applied for a
volunteer position complimentary to his professional skills and in that regard, I endorse
his abilities and efforts in that matter.
Frequently John will be the Project Manager for significant projects which need strong
community support. John has consistently exhibited the leadership ability to bridge the
gap between SDUSD and citizens of community, thus enabling projects to come to a
successful conclusion. He is considered a valuable and resourceful member of our
organization.
Considering the above, it would be my assumption that his skills could be effectively
utilized to support and enhance the efforts of the Chula Vista Design Review Board.
"
I
Sincerely,
'7 .. 1
, ," //;/ /
/., .
y /, ~-""7' --j
/,::> -- ' // ,/
/." /;/ ,;/ ,/'
/ I -
William O. Henning ,/
Assistant Architect
/.5'4 "1/