Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1986/02/27 MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ThUrsday, February 27, 1986 Council Conference Room 4:15 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Mayor Cox, Councilmembers Moore, Scott, McCandliss (arrived late) ABSENT: Councilman Malcolm STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Goss, City Attorney Harron 2. GUIDELINES FOR FUTURE GROWTH OF THE CITY Director of Planning Krempl stated the Council requested this meeting four months ago in order to encourage hiring a consulting firm to do the study and to discuss the issue of processing major developments. Director Krempl, referring to exhibits and transparencies, discussed the following: presented a map showing the Sphere of Influence for the City of Chula Vista, National City, San Diego and other special areas; the General Plan communities, noting the eastern territories - Sweetwater/Bonita, Central Chula Vista/Bayfront and Montgomery/Otay; noted the existing Chula Vista general plans state mandated elements were land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, seismic safety and noise. The additional elements to the General Plan are: Parks and Recreation, public building, scenic highways and bicycle routes; and the proposed community design elements. (Mayor Cox left the meeting at this time.) The planning process for the General Plan Amendment preparation involves the Master Public Facilities Plan, Transportation Plan, Library MaSter Plan and the Master Environmental Impact Report. It also involves the private development proposals such as EastLake II, E1 Rancho del Rey, Bonita Meadows, Bonita Miguel, and Otay Ranch Master Planning. Director Krempl noted the planning organization, specifically the role of the General Plan Amendment Project Manager, Bud Gray, in working with the consultants in preparing the land use environmental library transportation and master public facilities plan. Under the timing and schedule: the General Plan Amendment scope of work will be due February 28. The Master Library Plan scope of work is due March 21. The Master Public Facilities Plan is in preparation and will be due April 30. The Transportation Plan is being prepared and will be due April 30. Minutes - 2 - February 27, 1986 Council Conference Under the General Plan issues, they are: (1) public participation in the planning process, (2) Council expectations of consultants, (3) participation of Otay Ranch in the General Plan program and, (4) planning for EastLake II and the Greens community. Director Krempl then noted the EastLake I boundaries which contain 1200 acres, EastLake II contains 1800 acres for a total acreage of 3000+ for the entire EastLake planned community. The future development project issues in the unincorporated eastern territories are (1) the public facilities and their financing which include water, sewer, infrastructure, circulation and drainage, and (2) growth plans and management which includes settlement pattern and form, open space green belts, phasing of growth and development, growth rate and planned holding capacity. Director Krempl concluded with the alternatives for the following planned processing in the eastern territories: 1. Accept the General Plan Amendment prezoning and annexation for (a) all of EastLake II; (b) The Green's Community Only. 2. Hold off on accepting any applications within EastLake II for General Plan Amendment until the General Plan Update is completed. 3. Authorize certain studies and analyses to occur but stop short of any Final Application or Public Hearing Schedule. Reevaluate periodically. (Councilwoman McCandliss arrived at the meeting at this time 4:48 p.m. Mayor Cox arrived at 4:50 p.m.) Councilman Scott noted the future planning growth for the City was a matter of great concern and quite important. Since the majority of the Council was not present for the entire presentation, he suggested it be continued to a Saturday meeting when a full Council can be present. MSUC (Scott/McCandliss) to schedule a workshop meeting for this matter on Saturday, March 15 beginning at 8:00 a.m. 1. REPORT THE SIGNAL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT STUDY FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (Director of Public Works) Mr. Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer, stated that the City's existing computerized traffic signal interconnect system is now over 10 years old and it has become obsolete and incapable of handing the City's future needs. PRC Engineering has been retained by the City to conduct a signal system feasibility study to determine a system improvement Minutes - 3 - February 27, 1986 Council Conference program which will best serve the City in the future. The study identifies and examines four candidate systems and recommends that a master computer system be implemented. Mr. Glass noted there are now 100 existing signalizations in the City with 10 won the books." Originally, the City had three timing plans but two have been out for some time now and are no longer operable; therefore, there is only one timing system now in operation. The City received a grant of $42,000 which provided some financial technical assistance for this study plan. Mr. Kahal Shah, consultant, Project Manager for PRC Engineering stated he would just cover the main parts of the study which was directed by a Technical Steering Committee. The Committee consisted of representatives from CalTrans, San Diego County, City of San Diego, Federal Highway Administration, and City staff. Mr. Shah stated the study comprised of four major tasks: the review of the existing system, determination of future systems needs and candidate systems, candidate system evaluation and development of a recommended control system. Mr. Shah discussed these systems, noting the advantages and disadvantages incorporated in the issues. He compared the recommended total computerized system with that now existing in the City. The City identified the need for a comprehensive analysis of its traffic signal system which would investigate alternative methods of updating the existing signal system. This upgraded system would provide for a level of control on operation which is not being obtained with the existing complement of equipment. There are experiences of consistent malfunctions and hardware failures in the present system limiting its capacity to provide effective traffic control. The first task performed by PRC was an inventory of the current traffic signal system and its condition. While the system inventory was being completed, seven major system objectives for the signal system were defined and weighed and these were: traffic operation/road - 40%, traffic operations system - 15%, reliability and maintainability - 15%, system monitoring 15%, flexibility - 10%, ease of installation 0, secondary use - 5%. Based on the data collected in this analysis, the following system functions were identified as having application in this City, they were: traffic responsive control, multiple timing plans, surveillance of field control equipment with malfunction reporting, ability to provide signal preemption for emergency vehicles, unique timing plans for special events and collection and storage of operational data for historical purposes and performance evaluation. Minutes - 2 - February 27, 1986 Council Conference Under the General Plan issues, they are: (1) public participation in the planning process, (2) Council expectations of consultants, (3) participation of Otay Ranch in the General Plan program and, (4) planning for EastLake II and the Greens community. Director Krempl then noted the EastLake I boundaries which contain 1200 acres, EastLake II contains 1800 acres for a total acreage of 3000+ for the entire EastLake planned community. The future development project issues in the unincorporated eastern territories are (1) the public facilities and their financing which include water, sewer, infrastructure, circulation and drainage, and (2) growth plans and management which includes settlement pattern and form, open space green belts, phasing of growth and development, growth rate and planned holding capacity. Director Krempl concluded with the alternatives for the following planned processing in the eastern territories: 1. Accept the General Plan Amendment prezoning and annexation for (a) all of EastLake II; (b) The Green's Community Only. 2. Hold off on accepting any applications within EastLake II for General Plan Amendment until the General Plan Update is completed. 3. Authorize certain studies and analyses to occur but stop short of any Final Application or Public Hearing Schedule. Reevaluate periodically. (Councilwoman McCandliss arrived at the meeting at this time 4:48 p.m. Mayor Cox arrived at 4:50 p.m.) Councilman Scott noted the future planning growth for the City was a matter of great concern and quite important. Since the majority of the Council was not present for the entire presentation, he suggested it be continued to a Saturday meeting when a full Council can be present. MSUC (Scott/McCandliss) to schedule a workshop meeting for this matter on Saturday, March 15 beginning at 8:00 a.m. 1. REPORT THE SIGNAL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT STUDY FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (Director of Public Works) Mr. Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer, stated that the City's existing computerized traffic signal interconnect system is now over 10 years old and it has become obsolete and incapable of handing the City's future needs. PRC Engineering has been retained by the City to conduct a signal system feasibility study to determine a system improvement Minutes - 3 - February 27, 1986 Council Conference program which will best serve the City in the future. The study identifies and examines four candidate systems and recommends that a master computer system be implemented. Mr. Glass noted there are now 100 existing signalizations in the City with 10 "on the books." Originally, the City had three timing plans but two have been out for some time now and are no longer operable; therefore, there is only one timing system now in operation. The City received a grant of ~42,000 which provided some financial technical assistance for this study plan. Mr. Kahal Shah, consultant, Project Manager for PRC Engineering stated he would just cover the main parts of the study which was directed by a Technical Steering Committee. The Committee consisted of representatives from CalTrans, San Diego County, City of San Diego, Federal Highway Administration, and City staff. Mr. Shah stated the study comprised of four major tasks: the review of the existing system, determination of future systems needs and candidate systems, candidate system evaluation and development of a recommended control system. Mr. Shah discussed these systems, noting the advantages and disadvantages incorporated in the issues. He compared the recommended total computerized system with that now existing in the City. The City identified the need for a comprehensive analysis of its traffic signal system which would investigate alternative methods of updating the existing signal system. This upgraded system would provide for a level of control on operation which is not being obtained with the existing complement of equipment. There are experiences of consistent malfunctions and hardware failures in the present system limiting its capacity to provide effective traffic control. The first task performed by PRC was an inventory of the current traffic signal system and its condition. While the system inventory was being completed, seven major system objectives for the signal system were defined and weighed and these were: traffic operation/road - 40%, traffic operations system - 15%, reliability and maintainability - 15%, system monitoring - 15%, flexibility - 10%, ease of installation - 0, secondary use - 5%. Based on the data collected in this analysis, the following system functions were identified as having application in this City, they were: traffic responsive control, multiple timing plans, surveillance of field control equipment with malfunction reporting, ability to provide signal preemption for emergency vehicles, unique timing plans for special events and collection and storage of operational data for historical purposes and performance evaluation. Minutes - 4-- February 27, 1986 Council Conference Four candidate systems were developed; they are: Alternative A: aid to modified existing system Alternative B: timebase coordination Alternative C: local master Alternative D: master computer system. Mr. Shah stated that based on the recommended candidate control system a preliminary system was designed. The design was characterized by: (a) the ability to control a minimum of 125 intersections in the Chula Vista area system with an expansion capability to 250 intersections with minimal changes at the central location, (b) the ability to simultaneously control multiple sub-systems with each having different timing plans, (c) multiple stored timing plans for various traffic demands and special events and (d) surveillance of operation of field equipment with central notification of malfunction. Mr. Shah then noted a summary o~ the cost estimates for systems A, B, C, or D along with the recurring annual cost. He discussed the annual cost based on a 20 year life and the utility cost comparison. In the event full funding is not available to accomplish a non-stage implementation, this system could be implemented in two stages. The recommendation is that all controls be replaced with model 170 controllers, (state of the art controllers). In the second stage when more funds become available the master computer using telephone line interconnect could be effected. Mr. Shah strongly recommended the system design be conducted based on the final implementation. To perform it piecemeal, design task would not only turn out to be more expensive but would tend to lack continuity which could significantly alter the original design concept. Traffic Engineer Glass stated the total one-time project cost for the recommended system is ~1,320,200. Fiscal Year 85-86 Capital Improvements Project contains ~425,000 Federal Aid Urban Program and ~75,000 traffic signal funds toward this project. Mr. Glass noted additional funding of $596,700 FAUP and $223,500 gas tax are recommended in the FY 1986-87 CIP. Councilman Moore noted the report states there is an additional one-half position which should be made available; however, the base of the report refers to one and one-half positions. Mr. Glass noted that the one position has been approved to be hired but that it would be only the one-half position under the PRC report which would need to be implemented. Minutes -'5 - February 27, 1986 Council Conference Councilwoman McCandliss indicated this was a "Cadillac" design system. She questioned whether when the City goes into the EastLake developments, the money now spent would be worth it. Is there anything in the technology that will make the system old before its time? There is so much interest in the field now that the system is constantly being upgraded. Mr. Shah responded that the key was the hardware. Since many cities are now using the same system, the hardware will always be maintained. MSUC (Scott/McCandliss) to approve it in concept and to bring this back at budget time for consideration. Discussion of the motion: Councilman Moore questioned the amount of signalizations in the Montgomery area and stated he would like to have the staff bring back a report on the full cost of the system vs the present system. City Manager Goss stated there may be a need to set up a reserve fund for replacement equipment for this system. Mayor Cox questioned alternative methods of financing such as a bond, the California Financing Plan and/or getting funds under the State energy efficient programs. Mayor Cox questioned the staff as to whether any feedback has been received from the City of National City and CalTrans for a portion of the cost for the traffic signalization at Bonita Road/I-805. City Engineer Lippitt stated his staff is meeting with the staff of National City this coming Tuesday and will be reporting to the Council. Mayor Cox questioned whether CalTrans has come through with the money the City had given them some time ago for the 1-54 off ramps. City Engineer Lippitt stated the City has an agreement with CalTrans and a report will be going to Council shortly. Mayor Cox asked how about the status with CalTrans on the two signalizations at "H"/805. City Engineer Lippitt responded staff is in the process of talking to CalTrans about it since the City will be paying a 1/2 cost of the signalizations. 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. Minutes February 27, 1986 Council Conference 6 4. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT a. In response to the City Manager's question, the Council concurred they would want to have lunch planned for the Saturday tour, March 1. b. City Manager Goss stated a verbal agreement has just been reached on the Chula Vista Teachers strike. c. Mr. Goss remarked that the timing of the Library Master Plan is very unlikely to give the Council a report at budget time; it will probably go to the Council some time in August. 6. COUNCIL COMMENTS a. Councilman Moore questioned whether the staff has been working on the highway entry signs to the City. b. Mayor Cox noted that going south along I-5 and 1-805 from National City the number of exits to Chula Vista is incorrect. c. City Manager Goss stated that staff is working with CalTrans on the population signs which currently state Chula Vista has a population of 83,000. ADJOURNMENT AT 6:30 p.m. to the Council Tour scheduled for Saturday, March 1 at 9:00 a.m. and to the regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, March 4 at 4:00 p.m. 0758C