HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1996/03/12
Pi ~'f'" I~,..,"
- ~...',
~ " .... ..:.,
.'~i' I ~fl,
d
.
Tuesday, March 12, 1996
6:00 p.m.
. ..!/:).;~ C;' ')'.' L.": /.. h~j.; .'"
.L..__._ ... ......'-"~~.=--
REVISED
Re1.':ular M~tin1! of the City of Chula Vista Citv Council
Council Chambers
Puhlic Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
I.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmemhers Alevy _, Moot
Mayor Horton _'
Padilla _, Rindone _, and
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROV AL OF MINUTES:
Mareh 5, 1996 (City Cooneil Meeting) and March 5, 1996 (Joint
Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency)
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF TilE DA Y:
a. ProcJaiminl: the week of March 10 thrnul:h March 17. 1996 as "Camp Fire Boys & Girls
Birthday Week." Mayor Horton will present the proclamation to Julie Duffield, South Bay
Cluster Leader of Camp Fire Boys & Girls Council of San Diego County.
*****
EffectitJe April 1, 1994, there have been new amendments 10 the Brown Act. The City Council must now
recontJene into open session to report any final actions taken in closed session and to adjourn the meeting.
Because of the cost intJolved, there will be flO .'ideotaping of the reconvened portion of the meeting. However,
final actions reported will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
*****
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 throuf!.h 7)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by
the Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the public or City staff
requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a
"Request to Speak Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete
the green fonn to speak in favor of the staff recommendationj complete the pink fonn 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. Items 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 ohserved reportahle actions taken
in Closed Session un 3/5/96. It is recommended that the letter he reccived and filed,
b, Letter from Paul Tryon, Executive Vice Pre.~ident, and Don \Vorley, Special Counsel,
Building Industry Association (RIA) of' Sail Dif..-'go County, requesting written re-;pnnse
reJ:ardinl: accountahility review for the City. It is recommeoded that staff follow op with the
BIA to forwaru rcsponses ami auJrcss any remaining qucstions.
C. Letter from Rohert L. McCauley, Buildinl: Chairman, American Lel:ion, Post 434,
reque"ilin).!: Council approve a \",aiver on all fees associated with an expansion to the building
the American Legion is pre."ientIy occup.ying. It is recommended that this item be referred back
to staff for further review and analysis regarding the proposcd addition's sewer capacity and
permit fees.
Agenda
-2-
Mareh 12, 1996
6. ORDINANCE 2664 AMENDING SECTION 10.48.030 OF TilE MUNICIPAL CODE,
INCREASING STATE LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN AREAS AND
EST ABLlSIIING SPEED LIMITS ON MAXWELL ROAD FROM OT A Y
V ALLEY ROAD TO THE LANDFILL ENTRANCE (1900' NORTH OF
OTAY VALLEY ROAD) AND ON OTAY YALLEY ROAD FROM
BRANDYWINE A VENUE TO NIRVANA A VENUE (first readin~) .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 that
in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and traffic congestion, and for the
promotion of puhlic safety, the speed limit on Maxwell Road between Otay
Valley Road and the landfill entrance (1900' north of Otay Valley Road) be
inereased from 30 m.p.h. to 35 m.p.h. aod the speed limit 00 Otay Valley Road
between Brandywine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue be increased from 45 m.p.h.
to 50 m.p.h. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading.
(Director of Public Works)
7. RESOLUTION 18229 APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT WITII THE YOUNG MEN'S
CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY FOR THE
YMCA'S USE Of TIlE fUTURE LIBRARY SITE AT TilE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF EAST "II" STREET AND PASEO RANCHERO. Due to the
imminent construction of the new YMCA t~lcilities, the YMCA wishes to lease
the future lihrary site anu temporarily move the soccer tield to the site. The
lease is for two years, With a one-year option to renew. The rent shall be one
Jollar per year anu the YMCA will he responsihle for all site improvements.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Lihrary Director)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been ath'fTtised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Fonn /I o.'ailable in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green fonl/ to speak ill favor of the staff recommendation; complete
the pink fonn to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to ji.'e minutes per
individual.
8.
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE 2665
CONSIDERING AMENDMENT NUMBER ]4 TO THE CERTIFIED
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (LCP) MODIFYING SIGN
REGULATIONS FOR THE INLAND PARCEL, SUBAREA 4 OF THE
COAST AL ZONE. An amendment to the LCP has heen prepared to modify
the sign regulations for the Inland Parcel, Suharea 4 of the Coastal Zone. The
amendment modi ties the sign regulations for the Inland Parcel by deleting the
10 foot height limitation for signs and allowing signs in Suharea 4 to be subject
only to the sign reqllir~ments of the related Central Commercial Zone with the
Precise Plan Modifying District and Gtnerallndustrial Zone. Staff recommt:nds
COlIO-.::i! pla-.::e the ordinance on first reading. (Director of Community
Development)
AMENDING TilE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IN
ACCORDANCE WITII AMENDMENT 14 AMENDING CERTAIN
SECTIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 19, CHAPTER
19.85.005 AND APPENDIX B, BAYFRONT SIGN PROGRAM,
MODIFYING SIGN REGULATIONS FOR THE INLAND PARCEL,
SUBAREA 40FTIIE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (LCP)
(first rl'adin1!l
Agljnda
9.
PUBLIC HEARING
.3.
March 12, 1996
PMC-96-17; CONSIDERA TION OF LOCAL/REGIONAL CONSISTENCY
CHECKLIST FOR THE REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY AND CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. The
Regional Growth Management Strategy which was prepared by the San Diego
Associations of Governments (SANDAG) in response to voter approval of
Proposition "C" in 1988 includes an annual "self certification" process for local
and regional agencies attained via completion of a Local/Regional Consistency
Checklist to determine their consistency with the standards, ohjectives and
recommended actions for ninlj Quality of Life factors contained therein. Chula
Vista is in substantial compliance with a majority of the checklist items. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning) Continued
from the meeting of 2/27/96.
RESOLUTION 18230 TRANSMITTING THE LOCAL/REGIONAL CONSISTENCY
CHECKLIST FOR TilE REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY AND CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM TO
SANDAG
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportuflity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject mailer within the
Council'sjurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda for public discussion. (State law, howetJer, generally
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not in eluded on the posted agenda.) If 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 meetiflg. Those who wish to speak,
please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three
minutes per speaker.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
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 staffrecommenllations may in certain cases he presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please
fill out a "Request to Speak" forol available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public COmmeflts are limited to five minutes.
10.
ORDINANCE 2666
AMENDING SCHEDULE IX, SECTION 10.48.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE - INCREASING STATE LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN
AREAS FROM 30 M.P.II. AND ESTABLISHING A SPEED LIMIT OF 35
M.P.H. ON EAST "J" STREET FROM HILLTOP DRIVE TO CASSIA
PLACE (first readin1!) ~ Based on thlj proviSIOns of the California Vehicle
Codlj Section 40803, and pursuant to authority under the Municipal Code
Secti<lI1 10.48.030, staff has determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic
hazards and traffic Longestion, and for the promotion of public safety, the speed
limit on East "]" Street hetween Hilltop Drive and Cassia Place be increased
from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance
on first reading. (Director of Puhlic Works)
Agenda
-4.
March 12, 1996
II.
REPORT
EST ABLlSIIING TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATION NUMBER 145 - TWO-
1I0UR PARKING LIMIT 8:00 A.M. TO 6:00 P.M., EXCEPT ON
SUNDA YS AND PUBLIC HOLIDAYS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
KEARNEY STREET BETWEEN THIRD A VENUE AND CHURCH
A VENUE - Staff has received a written request from the owner of the
commercial building at 745 Third Avenue, which has businesses that front on
Kearney Street, to provide time limited parking on the westerly portion of the
two hundred block of Kearney Street, citing the need for short term parking.
Staff has determined the need to establish a time limited, two-hour parking zone
on the north side of Kearney Street between Third Avenue and Church Avenue.
Staff recommends Council aecept the report and establish a Trial Traffic
Regulation. (Diredor of Puhlic Works)
ITEMS PULLED FROM TilE CONSENT CALENDAR
71lis is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been remo"efl from the Consefll Calendar.
Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers.
Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual.
OTIIER BUSINESS
12. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
13. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
14. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council member Rindone
a. 1995 ACES award (assuring compliance with the energy standards) - City ofChula Vista Building
Department.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on March 19, 1996
at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamhers.
Agenda
-5.
March 12, 1996
*****
CLOSED SESSION
Unless the City Allomey, the City Manager or the City Council states otherwise at this time, the Council will
discuss and deliberate on the following items of business which are penT/itted by Inw 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 to open session, issue any reports of final action
taken in closed session, and the votes taken. However, due to the typical length oj time taken up by closed
sessions, the videotaping will be tenninated at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from
closed session, reports of final action taken, and adjoumment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report
of final action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
15. CONFERENCE WITII LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING - Existinl: liti~ation pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9
. Christopher vs. the City of Chula Vista.
. Chula Vista and nine other cities vs. the County of San Diego regarding solid waste issues (trash
litigation).
. SNMB, L.P. vs. the City of Chula Vista.
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIA TOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8
.
Property:
Approximately 72.5 acres of property located at the southwest quadrant
of Otay Valley Road aod Otay Rio Road, Chula Vista.
Negotiating parties:
City of Chula Vista, Los Alisos Company, and MCA Concerts, Inc.
Under negotiation:
Extension of escrow for Ground Lease, Tri-Party Agreement and
Suhleasl.:': Agreements for the ahove-descrihed property proposed for
development into a 20,000 seat amphitheater.
CONFERENCE WITII LABOR NEGOTIATOR. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA. WeE, POA, IAFF, Executive
Maoagemeot, Mid.Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CYEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WeE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire
Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, ami Unrepresented.
16. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
*****
PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF
MARCH 10 THROUGH MARCH 17, 1996 AS
CAMP FIRE BOYS & GIRLS BIRTHDAY WEEK
WHEREAS, Camp Fire Boys & Girls Council of San Diego County serves
over 5,400 children and six clubs throughout the County, three of which are
located in Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, Camp Fire Programs are designed to help children grow through
a variety of constructive character building experiences, indoors and outdoors,
providing opportunities for fun and friendship; and
WHEREAS, Camp Fire boys and girls with disabilities, different religions and
ethnic backgrounds, learn to work and play together, to accept themselves and
each other; and
WHEREAS, 1996 marks the 86th Birthday of Camp Fire Boys and Girls
Council:
NOW, THEREFORE, I, SHIRLEY HORTON, Mayor of the City of Chula
Vista, California, do hereby proclaim the week of March 10 through March 17,
1996 as CAMP FIRE BOYS & GIRLS BIRTHDAY WEEK in the City of Chula
Vista, and urge all citizens to give cognizance to the wholesome and beneficial
influence exerted by this organization upon the development of these young people
who will become the future leaders of our community.
;'4 . I
March ]2, 1996
MEMO TO:
City Clerk's Office
FROM:
Patty Wesp
SUBJECT:
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 3/12/96
Councilman Rindone has asked to present a musical play Good News following
presentation of the proclamation already docketed for tonight's meeting.
Mayor pro Tempore Moot has already agreed to have Councilman Rindone
personally introduce the instructor and students who will perform a 5-8 min
excerpt from their play.
Thank you.
cc: Cn Rindone
1/CL
r?
/)
SUBJECT:
March 7, 1996
The Honorable Mayor and City counci~(
John D. Goss, City ManagerJGt ~ (!.N)'}
city Council Meeting of March 12, 19~
TO:
FROM:
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular
city Council meeting of Tuesday, March 12, 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 5, 1996.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
5b. This is a letter from the Building Industry Association (BIA)
regarding Chula vista's development impact fees (DIFs).
Responding to the points raised:
1) The BIA singles out Chula vista for having fully complied
with the letter and intent of applicable public reporting
laws. Staff will continue to devote the effort necessary to
manage DIF funds in a proper and conscientious manner.
2) They suggest inclusion of "budgeted vs. actually spent"
figures in the CIP. Staff concurs in this suggestion, and
will pursue implementing it with the proposed FY 1996-97 CIP
document.
3) In comparing initial administrative costs from when the DIF
was established and ongoing administrative fees, they question
whether some double-charging has occurred. As the City's DIFs
have been updated over the last several years, there has been
a significant staff time commitment in ensuring the amended
project costs continue to be apportioned properly. This
safeguards existing residents from bearing the costs of new
development. Combined with the need for ongoing accounting
and reporting (as cited in item 1), there is a continuing need
for appropriate administrative charges. The DIF fees are set
to apply this administrative cost as a percentage of the DIF
projects. As staff time is devoted to a project, only that
actual cost is billed to the DIF. As future updates occur,
staff evaluates actual staff hours charged for DIF
administration to adjust percentage estimates accordingly.
4) In reviewing certain DIF projects, they question the
percentage allocated to new development, specifically "almost
all" of the corporation yard and telephone system expansions.
The general public facilities share for new development is
approximately 35%, based on existing and planned equivalent
dwelling units (EDUs). For others facilities where the
existing city's needs are already met (e.g. fire stations),
the development share is 100%. These development shares are
decreased in those cases when the City has some existing
deficiency for which current residents should bear the cost.
since the city has an existing corporation yard, the
additional space (less the existing deficiency) is fully the
responsibility of new development. Nevertheless, when the
$22.8 million project is discounted for the city's existing
deficiency, transit's share of the yard, the present value of
the existing land, and reserve acreage programmed into the
project (e.g. for school bus parking), development's share of
the project falls to $12.8 million. This discounted
development share is reflected in the existing DIF document.
The telephone system expansion is likewise a response to
increasing numbers of employees since 1990. This cost,
however, is reduced by the application of a City share (65%)
toward the addition of the voice mail system. This is also
reflected in the existing DIF.
5) The BIA further questions whether expenses such as the GIS
system or computer and telephone systems are capital costs and
thus chargeable through a DIF. Considering the hundreds of
thousands of dollars sunk into these systems and hardware and
the anticipated life of the equipment, it is staff's
contention that these projects are appropriately defined as
capital costs, with a percentage allocated to new development.
Staff disagrees with the BIA on this point.
On this question and the others raised in the letter, the City
has conducted public meetings and discussions with the BIA,
construction Industry Federation and local developers in
conjunction with the initial DIF adoption and each subsequent
update. staff remains committed to seeking and responding to
the input of the development community while at the same time
implementing the intent of the city's Growth Management
Program.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT STAFF FOLLOW UP WITH THE BIA TO FORWARD
THESE RESPONSES AND ADDRESS ANY REMAINING QUESTIONS.
5c. This is a letter from Robert McCauley, Building Chairman,
American Legion, Post 434, requesting that Council approve a
waiver on all fees associated with an expansion to the
building the American Legion is presently occupying. The
project as proposed is to construct a' 2300 square foot
Addi tion to the existing building. The proposed addition will
be constructed on the north side of the existing structure.
The total of all Permit Fees and Sewer Capacity Fees for the
proposed addition is $7,531 which exceeds the authorized
amount of $2,500 which the City Manager may waive. Since the
American Legion is a tenant in the City owned structure, the
city did waive all Permit Fees ($1,425) for the American
Legion's last building project completed in 1993, which were
structural repairs for seismic safety upgrades and exterior
alteration improvements. However, due to the proposed two
restrooms incorporated into the proposed addition, the Sewer
capacity Fee is in excess of $5,039 which comprises the vast
majority of the total Permit Fees. To date, the City has not
waived Sewer Capacity Fees on any projects. IT IS RECOMMENDED
THAT THIS ITEM BE REFERRED BACK TO STAFF FOR FURTHER REVIEW
AND ANALYSIS REGARDING THE PROPOSED ADDITION'S SEWER CAPACITY
AND PERMIT FEES. Further, that staff's review include such
options as scheduled sewer fee payments over time and/or the
monitoring of actual usage to determine final sewer fees.
Staff review will also include input from the city Attorney
regarding whether sewer fees can be waived legally by the
city.
JDG:mab
~Jft...
~ ..~ ~
~~~~
.....""t..--_-
CITY Of
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Date:
March 6, 1996
From:
The Honorable Mayor and City cou~n'
The Chairman and Members of the Red pment Agency
Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session
for the Meeting of 3/5/96
To:
Re:
The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss the pending
litigation of Lyman Christopher Y. city of Chula vista. The
Redevelopment Agency and City Council discussed the disposition of
Marina View Park to the Port District and the terms and conditions
for the sale of said property; and the Redevelopment Agency
discussed the terms and conditions of an offer received to purchase
Agency owned property at 753 Broadway.
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 5, 1996, there were no actions
that are required to be reported under the Brown Act.
BMB: 19k
C:\lt\clossess.no
"'>;"'1
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
i .~. Post C<m.mJ F'.oc)Uld p"",,
BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION OF
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
" ,l, I~'
fr,1 ;1, ',,' Ii
: U J ,----'--"--...-
, ,.
: n \ ,
:: ! FER 2 f) Iqqf;
L_;,_,__ _ -____J
"
/;- ).'/'
[<:~J ~.f"'''-
~~ c:;.~':'
)
/,','; - .---,
cfI~Y"7 /~-Y"
( - / /
/ ~. J...., ..,-
-_L/ Y1 C- /' t.- 7-r......r~""'---L
-.---7. - / /.. /'% ...
,x /:p-,-~~,c-~/7 ~-C)
6336 Greenwich Drive, Suite A
San Diego, CA 92122-5994
(619)450.1221
FAX No. (619) 552-1445
PRESIDENT
Ian M.GiII
Highland Partnership, Inc.
VICE PRESIDENT
ChrIs J. Chambers
Continental Homes
TREASURER
Mark McMillin
McMillin Companies
SECRETARY
Mick Pattinson
Barratt American
IMMEDIATE PAST
PRESIDENT
Daren A. Groth
The Pacific Heritage
Company
EXECUTIVE
VICE PRESIDENT
Paul A. Tryon
Califomia Building
Industry Association
National Association
of Home Builders
SPONSOR OF THE
1996 Tour d'Elegance
C(
February 15. 1996
If! ~
=-
@Q m IT1
r-"" (")
I~ ~ l""I
.C:: <
v>r-
eX>- -,;) rTl
-n<:: ~ 0
-n-
~.- (/') lft
r:-' 0\
Mayor Slurky Horton
Councilmember John Moot
Councilmcmber Stcve Padilla
Councilmcmber Jerry Rindonc
Council member Scott Aky~
RE: Status of Fee Accountability ReYie" for City ofChula Vista
Dear Ma\'Of Horton and Members of the Council:
We first "TOtc to you in Junc of 1995 announcing the start of our annual Fee
Accountability Progranl Thc purpose of this program is to monitor. on behalf of our
mcmbers and ne" homc buyers. the collection and cxpcnditure of deyelopment impact
fees.
This included evaluating the accuracv of accounts, the segregation of funds. the proper use
of fees. the timeliness and preparatIOn of annual reports. and the existence and proper
recording of inter-fimd loans and transfers. all as required by law.
Follow ing arc somc obscrvatlOns regarding the handlmg of dcvclopcr impact fees in thc
city of Chula Vista
Govemment Code stipulates that within 60 days of the dose of each
fiscal year, the Council is to make available to the public thc beginning
and ending balance for the fiscal year for eaeh fee account This
information is to indude fee. interest, and other income. the amount of
expenditure by public facilitv. and anV refuods made in accordance "ith
SectIon 6600 I
/ \
('I)
The Government Code further states that the local agency shall review
this infom13tlon no later than the first regularly scheduled public meeting
that occurs 15 days after the information has been released to the public
Of the SIX municipalities reviewed. only Chula Vista was actually in
compliance with this reporting requirement
1
In the course of this reVlew. BfA staff examined a varicty of Chula
VISta documents for the pcriod 1989 through I <)95. including the Capital
1n,proyement Program reports. ComprehenSive Annual Financial
Reports. and the DfF ordinances
One common occurrence among:' of the six citi~s caused us concern
We rccogmzc the fact that each CounCIimcmbcr puts m a tremendous
anlount of time and effort m the preparation ofa CIP Each Ime Item of
eapltal cxpcnditures receives careful consideration and therefore a certam ? /, )7 i
pnon!\ dlfecth from the Calmcil ..J"2, -I r 1/)- ~
.. _ ,16f-
... \' ,PI........... <: ,"0- ""!"J ,,-; ,.
" .l- ,.~ ~
~, ':j
'.;.;/
,." ~ ':,j ",'-e,?
.. -''"''^'''~~;::''-9Y;:",,__.
February 15. 1996
Page 2
2 (Cont.)Most everyone seemed to start each year with a clean slate; at the very least they lacked any
side by side accounting for what was allocated and what was actually spent. This would seem
to be very important backup infonnation as the allocations for each new year are planned.
3 According to the infonnation provided by the City of Chula Vista, when the existing developer
impact fees were set, their basis included a component for administmtive costs for the City to
administer the DlF projects
Meanwhile, the City is charging each DlF account an administmtive fee to manage those
accounts. This appears to be a double charge for fees that were already billed for when the DIF
was ostablished
4. The basis used in establishing some of the public facility fee components appears questionable.
As an example. virtually the entire cost of a proposed new corpomtion yard facility is assigned
as an obligation of new development The benefit of such a facility appears to accrue equally
to existing and new development Similarly. the upgrading of telephone systems will benefit
more broadly than just new development
5. Finally. it is our contention that Chula Vista mav be stretching the definition of a capital
improvement too fur. Expenditures were made from DlF funds for items such as computers
GIS systems. and telephone upgrading
It is important to note that the documents we requested from City staff were complete in a
tinlcly manner We found the staff to be professional and knowledgeable.
Given all that. we would like to ask for your written response to the issues we have raised above, specifically:
the inclusion of "budgetcd vs. actually spent" figures in the CIP
the apparent double charging for administrative costs;
the basis used to attribute almost all the cost of a new corpomte yard - facility and the
upgrading of telephone systems to new development;
the use of DIF funds for non-<:apital items such as GIS, computers, or telephones;
Again. your assistance is appreciated. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact our legislative
consultant, Jack Monger. at the BIA.
Paul T non
Executive Vice President
~
5J,'~
THE AMERICAN LEGION'
CHULA VISTA POST 434
47 !5th AVE.
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
619-422-9309
I iD11 [t rr: I ri "
;, <.'
: I r ; . ;
rJl:r MAR - 1 Igq) .'~.
I L('i ,-;-;r:-~\.....J I
u.; ,:..' Ii;' : .~
,-
I'
Dea~ Mayo~ and City Council:
f! ~
;U
pst; ~ f'T1
I~ (")
I fTI
v;? -
CD)> <
~:s -0 m
IN CJ
._U>
~~__l (II
, 1f j_~. -
1 Mal'oh 1996
City of Chula Vista
The Honorable Shil'ley Ho~ton and Council
276 4th Av..nu..
Cbula Vista, CA 91910
Subj: Requ....t fol' WaiveI' of Fees
The Post has b..en laboring now with the city for two years to get
both p..rmission and aPPl'oval .. fol' a 2300 square foot 1'00m
addition to th.. p~......nt (oity owned) building. As you know. we
submitted building plans ovel' a year ago (to th.. Rec Dept) for the
addition that resulted in a mandated pa~king lot expansion because
of the additional squa~e footage to th.. building. The wisdom of why
additional parking was requi~ed still elud..s us, sine.. only our
membe~s use the Post Hall and the square footag.. addition doean't
give us any new members...it's like aaking fo~ MOl''' pa~king spaces
if you add a family ~oom to your house? The bu~eaucrats noW claim
that we need to pay fo~ having mo~e toilets available. as a aewer
fee charge. Again, if you add a bathl'oom to your houae how do you
add any mol'e discha~ge to th.. sewer? All W8 a~e doing is outting
down the wait time. On top of that, W8 are now b..ing asked to pay
city Fees f~om the Building and Houaing D..partment. The dil'ecto1"
has info~med us that he is not empowel'ed to waiv.. th.. f....s without
Council approval. Du~ing our last building p~oject (for eal'th
quake reaistance) the city waived all fees because the city legally
owns the p~operty (and still does).
We are paying through the nose for our share of the addition
including the Architect fees and .11 the engineering certificates
(title 24. soils testing vtc_) and aren't sure if we even bave
enough in our building fund for ~he conS~ruc~ion. W. never thought
the city would be trying ~o get in our pocke~ too, sinoe by
precedent the city has always waived fees in the past.
Now we respectfully request that council consider and approve this
waiver request tor all teel associated with the addition including
s.w..~ capaCity fees and building plan fees.
{' c '
FOR GOD AND COUNTRY
~t:~~
Building Cha;:~~Y(j
(:t!~/~ ('iJ
0- tf'; d; -L. .
(.. ) '.7 )
~)v I cr/ / /. )v/
J ':"' // ..:r.'l/ /..// ")1
~;..-, i)> .....---:r-.;~~
v
~ .".
1'", ,
&""~
-"~'it.j ':iJ:. i'~;:~:,
~ ',;;...J
i.' ;.j
..,,";w)
:/
&r1
7~i:
.,
~.
r,_~':: )
~
, .
-
.!j c ~I
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item "
Meeting Date 3/12/96
ITEM TITLE:
Ordinance .2t,~'1Amending Schedule IX, Section 10.48.030 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code - Increasing State Law Speed Limits in certain areas and
establishing a 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 Avenue to Nirvana Avenue.
,
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public W ork~ f'I///
REVIEWED BY: City Manager }\ ~ ).~\
....... '. \ /(,
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_No..K.)
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 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.
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 Landfill 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:
t,.../
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 3/12/96
The City Engineer has determined the need to increase the posted speed limit on Maxwell Road between
Otay Valley Road and the Landfill 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 6/1412000. 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.
Physical 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 afea 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 55 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,
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
~-~
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 weathef, 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 J 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: Telegfaph 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 0 0760.95.CY029
DMW:FXRdmw
M :\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA\MAX.OT A Y .DMW
t-J)-f
ORDINANCE NO. .2t~ Y
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10.48.030 OF THE
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE, INCREASING STATE
LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN AREAS AND ESTA-
BLISHING 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 AVENUE TO NIRVANA
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 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
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.
t
orm::}
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M.
~_?;;;n~
, City
C:\or\speed.inc
..J
=
u..
Q
Z
<
..J
>-
~
Z
::l
Q
U
..
..
II:
...
If
...
c
.
J
..
i
'"
CIl
...
<
...
U
CIl
D
='
III
, J_X'f"
(o.'
CJ
If
..
-
~
LJ
!~ '''Oil
~-?
\
\
....
<:t
..J
0.
<:t
UJ
a:
<:t
"
""
...
!:
...
CIl
-
i
s
c:i
It)
01
.....
...
N
.....
N
...
..
..
1ZI
l:
.
..
...
o
'.
-
..
o
SPEED LIMIT -- ENGINEERING/TRAFFIC SURVEY:
STREET:
LIMITS:
Maxwe 11 Road
Otay Valley Road to landfill entrance (1900' north of Otay Valley Rd.)
Existing Posted Speed Limit:
30
MFH
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
Segment:
Date Taken:
Number Vehicles on Sample:
85th Percentile Speed:
Range of Speeds Recorded:
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
Vertical Alignment
feet Number of lanes for both directions 3 (2 NB/1 SB)
R min. - 400' (design speed less than 40 MFH)
5.71% to 8.11% over a 140' V.C. N/O Design Ct.
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Average Daily Traffic
On-Street Parking
1.500
Not allowed
Special Conditions Bu~iness and Industrial use. Primary access to land(~tl.
HiQh nercentaQe of truck traffic. Sustained unhil1 2rade for both. '
northbound lanes. One (down hill) southbound lane.
Accident
History
million
similar
The accident
vehicle miles) is
roadways.
rate at this se2ment(1.692 acc1de~ts uer
lower than the statewide avera2e 2.07 for
SURVEY RESULTS
Study was Prepared by
Leonardo Hernandez
Date
6/16/95
Recommendation Increase speed limit to 35 MFH based on prevailing speeds
and low accident history.
By
tr'~<'4<<:>
-'~
Date recommendation approved:
~"r
Approved speed limit: 35 MFH
Per evc 40803. Survey Expires:
6/14/2000
CllY OF CHUU VISTA. VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY
m,uur// Prl_
SURVEY SI1E Prdk '0 L,+
~ TIMEENO ,:;l.'~')
SEGMENT UNDER STUDY
~'TE 0-''/'']''-
TIME START J 'I..XJ
MPH
DIREcnON AI = 0 S
NUMBER OF VEHlCU:S
..
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
.9
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
./
(
/..
./ "
.//(
././V t' 7 ./ v IU ,..,
/' ./1/ /'/ ,/
././ ~7 /,/
./ I (") iF ( /' / '" ./
,.,. 1./ ./ 7
1./ ./ 1 () / ./ (
./ (JI/ ./f
0./ //7 r
V 0 (/I~ ~
Ie r II"" /./ /""\1
~~
/' (
r./,/U
/' (u 7
r~
r
14
13
12
11
10
9
,
7
6
5
RECORDER: /' /
-z;::. -r<
"
/r!"j p.j ..{-, L (fll r,+)
POS1ED SPEED '5 c.-
c:;'Q(~""rr
WEA TIIER
=1
c
_ / I TOTAl. NI.Jlr.(BEJt OF VEHlC't..ES:
/00
F,\HQME\ENG lNEERlVEHSPO-SRl
"-1
V;'~lj (y. .IJ
CUM.
TOTAL % %
'"
, / ..)~
v ::J -7-;
.~.~ 97
/ I C) 7
/ / ..' x'
;;2 OL C;}.
'< '( "'),-
0; ,., .,:2. ll5
(0 ,;;.-,
~.' 7'-?-
// I( r/
5 5 c_ ;
'7 + ~"'
-". = /);:
-= './':
-i'- -'2 .,3c:.;l
~ w 30
< 7 /.-'--1
3 .2. ;l
/ . "
..., -, /7
,~ 'J
/ / )
";;"" / y
/ .. '/
I , 3
0-' - :]
"7 / 2
A / /
-, . J
~ '--J ,-)
,.. .." ",
..... . . -
....... r~ "
/"". C
I G ,/j
. , .
/. .' I)
r~ - 0
c..> l "
~. , . :-.J
STREET:
LIMITS:
Otay Valley Road
Brandywine Avenue to Nirvana Avenue
Existing Posted Speed Limit:
45
MPH
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
SeJlllent:
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
~1
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 segment (0.71 accidents per million vehicle
miles) is lower than the State average accident rate (2.41) allowed for similar
roadwavs in California.
SURVEY RESULTS
Study was Prepared by
Leonardo Hernandez
Date
1/2/96
Recommendation Increase speed limit to 50 MPH due to low accident rate and
divided roadway conditions.
Date recommendation approved: I /~ /'16
By ~ '1'. '(! i.J< ~ X. R..wM.D-
Approved speed limit: 50 MPH
"
Per cve 40803, Survey Expires:
12/01/2000
t~l/
ern' OF OWLA VISTA. VEHICU SPEED StmVEY
SECMENT UNDER STUDY (" 'u i 10/ Ie '{ 12^" "i,
~ / 'J
(" Rr/',~,,(, ~1 ').-..-- L!,/P - /\/rl'.-..uy ~:/P .)
DATE /t"l//r;'";'"""
SURVEY sm
2/ ;----;".?-:-" /'"lj..
v
POSnO SPEED r, r,
TIM.. ,ART /: I~ c' /;,( , I) r j~'~ __
DIREmON E: -0 ~ -/ CUM.
'-<
MPH NUMBER OF VEHICLES TOTAL " "
. . . .
60 Ii J I If'''
59 (/ J I GC
58 /' I , c(;'
57 ("" /' -") Q. "'-:;
56 n In /' /' <../ <./ q~
55 (' n (") ./ /' J::; = .,.1
54 ./ , , O~..
53 n J I 9,<:"
52 r; I~ {-c In .-.. ./ { /' ..u
51 (; In ./ ./ ./ ~ '" ~l<
50 n 1(") 0 'n n ./ ./ /' /' ./ //'0 ,~ -~
, 49 n In " n ./ ./ /' ./ / ./ //J "') ,"'"
4B ~ .-.. ,'" - - 1,-' /' /' <:l Q "''''
. 47 0 n n /' ./ /' ./ ./ /' a C> ;,;"
46 rJ /' ./ /' /' V ./ -;z ::;z "{ ,-
6S 0 /' V /" ./ ~ ..... ", Q
.. r,) n r n r') ./ /, ,- <.J
- /" 1/ /' ;<' K ,Q
,-. .-,
42 ,..-, ,- // ./ /' :5 '5 , ~
,-_/
41 (j /' ~ 0 a
.0 ..-. t I r,
, "C
39 CJ ",
38 .-:;. J ') "" - F"
37 ~ c:' ~
36 / I I ~
, 35 ./ I I I
3t
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26 ,
~
Z4
.,
..
-.
...
20
RICORDa L ,{[//.., .,In .. I TDIAL.""- orv~ /~vi
U
. ""
AMI~
'lIME END
,., ,
AMtpM-
WEATHER
~..~
'~~\~1
t,,, 1.2.
I '-; ll'~ 1.;.= 11-':' ik 1.1.. I~i .'r, ~f J~jJj - tl lli'li;1"!:
~ ! 1 I Ji 1 1 r;,~1 ' 8. a 81.~ J ' :! j ! i :]1 l
i 11.. J. {I' I. r l' 1~8 : J~lJl~!il' t~ .~~i!rB~ ~.
[kJ~ loJ 1 IJ ~ "J-s. '&1 ""1 1 ~ll ~'~~.i" f
~iijd II -Il ~'f j!}t iiJhljl~ 11 f~~ll~J ~
~:g 't II . t I. . ... · [g i I ~;.; ~ I E ~ =. J 1 ~.a J i
I .. till Ii' ",'i ~ 1.~-!1'" 5]-3 1j'3;zi
fa ~ ~.!!l.i:lil 'I J II J~. n.~l'a :; ".S li~'a i JI:3 t~. ~.!j .
I :iI .. : l" Il: Ii. I ~ J:t .......! :I ~ :ii 'il ..... I ..., B
l !1ui~~h Ii =t ,I a. ~j111 ~a .s]~ I h ; =~j ~i II- 'all ~.s
!!ilU~!tel ~ ~ I, ljJ. ~[I~! lll!i~i.s~ !!lit.~~!I;:IJ.i
I.h ~~Oi~. -Iu- )1 ~.Iu 11~:5r:! t-lJI>~'~-:lJ II jI>Jj"']'8t.I]'8j
= '" "i:l'1lt:! [I l=i cri, i:'hl ~ IIi)':' ~ St:.~o! fl . Ii; sl... j~~ t q .1~'
~ i ale]~dJi~ ~!I i ~!jei~i J Rjil 1 a]lej.U~f I aJj3a~ ~JJll t S .
(
.. ~ .' ... .' a" l '8 ~ 1 11-' ~ '1'8 E IJ j 1'" ~ .s Ii! j l.s.. · J j ,
~ ~ 11 .!i Illtj"'I" ~I~i j~' ..l~j~,&-j5~:S.Ji 1
is I Ii 1;1 . II .sl=..s Ii 511 '~l '8 .s!:!'Cl~! ;'l~l@ ~.s ~ Jl ~
. r. t.u . . iI]. ~,tfil t'a~ (J11sJe I il~ 1 dJ .~~ l:~il II I
I I~ Ji' ~:l51~";: 'ill I'~l 'al.s..c:ll ~a.s"'.!1Ji,i.I~.sJ
.' il I!'" ~!.. ill i! i'i].!i~ii~t ~iji11 !"Dj-!!iii ~~ ~
~~;: ~. ~j~jt j! ~ :~le~ h1; l 51 '~:!j hth P II I
t ~!~! ~It 1 Uilhi~~1 ~JW~JihIFh~.tmH11~~i!!i
IlnU ['Ii ~'.. : !lj-;t~I~1111~lil;! I~ll~! '.illj~.!jniHj
t f' ,,'. :!lll~i!:l"""'i,,,s.t.> .s.1 fa:!'; ...~"'.~~!.. ..
l~~~!U IfJi . ~ J ii]j.ll1.sJl~i.s!.; HIJ t~~' .&~lt.ilH~]~!~!!i
-1dU · j j:l~. II,! [.sl'8.'t!l'8 il..,! .. j :5'8'5'.l'8'i.B.s~lI~Ui.
.. ia'gai:, l~].: [l!! ... his. S:3 [i j 11'~~i~'1~1] ;'l!'~!!git:
d15r:!r:! ~: ~ ~: .'. ~ · il..'!.e. , 1..IS IIllS, ~j~llr:!15dr:!r:!
! ~~ J.s is j IIi i~~ ~il,t~ .!l11~lI~~~j~Jt . ~i
,,,/3
..I [,p.' - a!l I r .... t I. I ~l~~~~~~~~~ 1811' I
[l .1'liP- i t~~iCl a ~l' .;- lE1rt 1 e. I (rj~iJiU;;i"'il ti's
· h..J~ h 1i ~ ~r u. ~ t f ~J"f.~;i;r. l. i~1
Ii 1 t~l~ ;-! 1=;: .If ~ ~ IJ J~rP:i::::~.!~{lt 1 .il i .
f 0 i II Ii- iff :c '" :c "1 i' ~ ..,f .. S'" r
!~~Ji~~1 f I' t~Flll'fff! ,~i f (I !Fj ~ !r! i!l
~. p~ r ! F F. h B: .. I .. i ,. a !'*
~
.I
!I'II diiitg I hl~!IIHI!!llrPriif~llli~ h:llini~tl~!l!~ !'
} . . ~. ..". a . r _ ;- ! . 1. - -; If U 1- a: [ B. = " !.! ...
~(~ ilrllt i J I r~.~.~ .. a. II lIjl".!pJ;ltp l= il
iii . IlllU ! f }~mifIHmtll f; ~i I i~l. f( tttlh _
ikmr~. d Ihd.Jilhuf!p Iii I : II :InUI
1....1'/
-
; I)'. ~I'. J);. : ~~ -.~: I~.: ~~ ]i~]ijl Jl : -: ~ij' 1-1
! :.1 J!~. tl1i J ~ . _ .llt it ~~Il~.rl I. : 1!1 U
If if f' -J lJJ ~ .I~ 1~1 l~lJ:I' J..j Jl 0 I.; ~J
;t~J;. i . r -1i 1 it I Jill iijll ii'fi f-I . It 1 ii
! 1 ~ i ~ i I ~.: J Il j I'''' 1 ~ i . i =iU '1 ~ "
g'pJ!i II ~ ~IJ~~ i Ii I i ~ l~ ill IJ"1 ~ii I it .s~.. '1~
lji:i11f...: j J!: ll~li~a · ~ ~ ~ 1 i .ili!!.~!~ji j !!! iIi ij
. ~: f-;,iS ~ iJ.I r i !~" ~ ~~~;OI I P''ili! ilU is''. I.,.
= ~~~dl..1 O:li ri~l~ ~)JM J 81 I !oil "~'!~~.fJ~ '-':lB) 11);; .j i s.B
~ 1~~jJ i}1 i a ~~iieJ~ al j ~~ll~ii~ JiiJ Ui~iu I ~Jh I~!
{
= J "&.~ 1~~~}!'IS.a'!l~ ~ :11]{ . lf~~l' !~~~;~~lr
~ h I Is 'a 8 .8 .s r 8 ~ I ~ Ii" 1 !' .r III ..' i ~ U'O'i rE.
~ Ill! =1:11 1.j~~; i ii:Ui U 11]~t~ . !~i-~i~l".1
i Ua j=11i.1jIJI= . ~il:lil it] J . ~Jlj!'il~t
~ pS l!.ris.il].~d "S!iIJ.1 J~"!~ ~~t5 s~ 81 I:
I IlJi ..:gJ.t; !'liJ~s .'. iHi'!111. ;;1.1 r'1 .gl~lij =~.
r,-!,.s~ 1'1 '1 ~~i,l;~ l ! _<:IJ1-. I ~ ..i~j Ii .:!~ l'
. J . II j 1l'1~.8 'i's j ills... : 1l,U ,I' I~...!l 'U . . lll~ i,..
fM 8. '1d ]::. iii'11~fi:r;Jd IZ..;,,1l . .Idd 1 '1~J" dd ,!.1 d. '.
n III tiH1lfi!iifIHmtl 11!ldJ! JiJhUm II!d1U~t
t -/5'
rJf(!lJ~iI1 ri!tlai!~ f~Jll[lflll(lll~~!g8~1t.~le:ee~ti.~~t.I~itr g~ t
If r I ~ 51' i I >0 i r J'" ~ I' '" i a." ;.1 f lL f r i' ..'Jl"l n S' I h ~ '" I:!. >!. =- t. ~ ~
r! il ,1. it 1>0 if '"lPpppppppl..;- t t . h. Dos";lor f,1
r ptl [..1 r Ip~ rtt. Ililm'jjJi~ [I! l!~ flrf[1 tj t~j; irlrn}fi
(fldUff i~hWdf II !mml:!!UmhrhH<~mnit~~.~
3'; "" ,"~~'..I;'..r [,........ ..~s::..l Do'" f a -0 Ii r.. II a,i II
f II i.pU~~f~J nl! Ii jU!Wj~Jri[i~'J~f~tfHuf [ll~ nn
: ~ l I ~ J I ~ I . e I. I ~ Ii jJ i Ii'.. f I, ~!. i L" [&-
~ II t t r ! fIe J fl' ~ .. " f [J ". . . . "1 r &- . . l.a. it e [ . ~ f!.
.'11 r 1 h i' ~ r f n. ~. I f' .~ . ,.;- . . f f.f ;. U. J 1,.. t fir
~
~
1 I!. Ir ~ &"11 ~ ~. ~! ~~ I Do. 1 i ! r t I ~ t .. l f .. r U' t S' ... ~ [ -
~Hl'"III((l.f~f.~ f€f-I U'le B' ~ t.~ SL~ 1 de ~t~i rll~ I~Br.leei i
! JE =>s,' i i:~~~ n'~~~p'~.," ;J~.r(f" i ii il,~i..rl !~;4 ,ill' l[~1 ~
· tdl ~~~ .t~;lg l i fla II p ~ ,,[I.: i i Ii"..
i~: c tl HI ia I rr . Jj B.~~ !IlI . I U[:rJ ill. ..! ~ f! r
!i l~! .' : I.~~~, :'~'fh' .~1j I !li~~r . If ~ U i:
]! II Ei' ~"S.h.tl i'Ia-. f 11..1 .. I[ Ii f[,,:l ...1 e a
11 or i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !: .. ~ I' ~ J i i r l.i. J I J [:: · 1 i " r j Jf f ~
1,. f.i u-lti &- a... !:~'I, ~ful . I ;-J l1'".' . lit' I: ~
--- - ..- ----- ------.- ---- ----
- - --- -
~-/~
Safety Commission Minutes
February 8, 1996
Page 4
7. Reoorl 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 the Municipal Code
increasing the speed limit on Maxwell Road between Otay Valley Road and the landfill Entrance to 35 mph.
Approved 6-0-1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
8. Renort on Increasine: Sneed Limits on Otav Vallev Road between Brandvwine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue
MSC (Miller/Smith) to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Municipal Code
increasing the speed limit on Otay Valley Road between Brandywine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue to 35 mph.
Approved (,-0-1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
9. Reoort on Reouest for two-hour Parkin2 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 opened. He also asked
if postal employees were parking in the Lucky's parkiog 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 difficolt 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 poblic 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 ,f 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.
t, -/7
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Frank & Imelda Real
rf -f I . j' .
~ -. ". M''V
R.E. Hazard Contracting Company
1855 Maxwell Road
Chula Vista. CA 91911
Resident
755 Otay Valley Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Otay Valley Industrial Panners
c/o McDonald Panners
11440 W. Bernardo Coun, Suite 265
San Diego, CA 92127
SDG&E
Land Management EB-7
P.O. Box 1831
San Diego, CA 92112
Sutherland/Palumbo
c/o GoldCoast Engineering, Inc.
189 Nirvana Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Resident
759 Otay Valley Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Darling Propenies, Inc.
251 O'Connor Ridge Blvd, Suite 300
Irving, TX 75038
t'IY
County of San Diego
Property Dept
202 C Street
San Diego, CA 92101
Resident
751 Otay Valley Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Octavio & Leticia Sanchez
Tlr - . .- " J - ,
h" , H'. - r'~"
COllNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
JS'.:z~ ,
Resolution Approving a Lease Agreement with the Young
Men's Christian Association of San Diego County for the YMCA's
Use of the Future Library Site at the Northwest Comer of East H
Street and Paseo Ranchero
CX\D
SlIBMITTED BY: David Palmer, Library Director v ~ GA
REVIEWED BY: John Goss, City ManageJGt ~~fths Vote YES_NoD
The YMCA will soon begin construction of its permanent facility on the northeast comer of East H
Street and Paseo Ranchero, They are requesting that the soccer field, currently located where
construction will soon occur, be relocated temporarily to the future library site on the northwest
corner of East H Street and Paseo Ranchero A ground lease has been negotiated between the City
and the YMCA for such a purpose. (ATTACHMENT A)
ITEM
MEETING DATE: 3/12/96
7
ITEM TITLE:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution approving a lease agreement
agreement with the YMCA for the temporary use of the library site at East H Street and Paseo
Ranchero.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At their meeting ofJanuary 24, 1996 the
Library Board of Trustees approved the concept of the YMCA temporarily leasing the library site
from the City for use as a soccer field (A TT ACHMENT B)
DlSClISSION:
The YMCA's capital campaign to construct the first phase of the new community YMCA has been
very successful and, as a result, the "Y" is planning to begin construction this spring. However, the
soccer field currently located on the future construction site must be relocated in order to continue
that successful program. The YMCA's permanent soccef field is currently planned for Rancho Del
Rey Middle School which is scheduled to open in 1998/1999. As a result, the YMCA has asked to
temporarily lease, ITom the City, the future library site directly across Paseo Ranchero ITom the
current "Y" site. Library staff does not anticipate adequate Development Impact Fees to construct
the library until at least FY 1999/00. Therefore, collaborative use of the site is to the community's
benefit.
A two year lease of the site, with a one year option to renew, has been negotiated. The Agreement
has been reviewed by both the City Attorney and the Risk Manager. The rent shall be one ($ I) dollar
a year. The YMCA shall pay for all site improvements which, upon termination of the lease, will
revert to the ownership of the City (except for lights, soccer panels and goals, bleachers, trailers,
astro turrand fencing). Although the YMCA's conceptual design (ATTACHMENT C) has been
approved by the Fire Chief, the City Engineer and the Library Director, the "Y" has agreed to obtain
final approval ITom all three department's prior to construction. The YMCA will also provide all
basic maintenance, provide all repairs and replacements, and pay for the provision of all utilities.
')./
ltem..2..-.- Page 2
Meeting Date: 3/12/96
Should the City require use of the property prior to the end of the lease agreement (e.g., another
State Library grant to construct a library at that site), the YMCA has agreed to a clause which
would require the "Y" to vacate the site with six (6) months written notice.
FISCAL IMPACT: The lease provides for a payment to the City of$] per year. The YMCA is
obligated to pay for all improvements and all ongoing operational costs. The improvements made
by the YMCA will revert to the City at the conclusion of the lease. This should offer some cost
savings when the site is developed as a library
7,.2.
RESOLUTION NO. I f{.22.1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN
DIEGO COUNTY FOR THE YMCA'S USE OF THE FUTURE
LIBRARY SITE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST H
STREET AND PASEO RANCHERO
WHEREAS, the YMCA will soon begin construction of its
permanent facility on the northeast corner of East H Street and
Paseo Ranchero; and
WHEREAS, the YMCA is requesting that the soccer field,
currently located where construction will soon occur, be relocated
temporarily to the future library site on the northwest corner of
East H Street and Pas eo Ranchero; and
WHEREAS, a ground lease has been negotiated between the
City and YMCA for such a purpose.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve a Lease Agreement with the
Young Men's Christian Association of San Diego County for the
YMCA's Use of the Future Library site at the Northwest Corner of
East H Street and Paseo Ranchero, a copy of which is.on file in the
office of the City Clerk as Document No.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor
Chula vista is hereby authorized and dire
Agreement for and on behalf of the city of hul
C:\rs\ymca.lib
of the
to execu
vista.
Presented by
~ at
Bruce M. Booga rd, ity
Attorney
David Palmer, Library Director
7-3/7-f
ATTACHMENT A
LEASE
For Utilization of the Library Site at E. "H" Street and Paseo Ranchero by the YMCA as an
Interim Soccer Field
This Lease for the Library Site at E "H" Street and Paseo Ranchero ("Agreement")
is entered into effective as of March 6, 19% ("Effective Date"), by and between the YOUNG MEN'S
CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ("YMCA"), a California non-profit
public benefit corporation and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a chartered municipal corporation
("City") with reference to the following facts
A The City is the owner of certain undeveloped real property located within the City of
Chula Vista, Califomia, as more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Premises").
B. The YMCA desires to lease the Premises from the City for the purpose of developing
and operating an a soccer field.
C The City is willing to lease the Premises to the City for the development and operation
of the Facility, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein
NOW, TIIEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the mutual covenants contained
herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which the parties
hereby acknowledge, the parties hereby agree as follows:
I. Lease of Premises
I. I In General, The City hereby leases the Premises to the YMCA, and the YMCA
hereby accepts the lease of the Premises, for the purposes of constructing and using a soccer field,
and miscellaneous temporary buildings, associated with the use of the field for soccer and other
sports activities, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
1.2 Delivery of Possession. The City shall deliver to the YMCA exclusive possession
and leasehold title to the Premises within ten (10) calendar days after YMCA's request therefor (the
"Delivery of Possession Date") The YMCA's required Delivery Possession Date is currently
contemplated to be in or about March 1996. Without the City's prior written approval, in no event
shall the YMCA request a Delivery Possession Date any later than September 1996. The City
represents and warrants to the YMCA that, as of the Effective Date and as of the Delivery Possession
Date, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions, the City owns fee simple marketable title to the
Premises free of any liens, encumbrances, deeds of trust, mortgages, contracts, leases, tenancies,
possessory rights, agreements, restrictions, violations, encumbrances or other title defects or matters.
To the City's best knowledge, there are no hazardous materials at on or in the Premises which were
released or exist in violation of any applicable hazardous materials laws If hazardous materials are
found to exist on the site, the YMCA's sole remedy is to terminate the lease and the City will bear no
responsibility or liability to the YMCA for remediation of the site or for the YMCA's costs of
I
7-:>
improvements. The City expressly acknowledges and agrees that, subject to the terms and conditions
of this Agreement, the lease of the Premises to the YMCA effected hereby includes the YMCA's
exclusive right to use, enjoy the benefit of, and enforce all easements and restrictive covenants which
are appurtenant to run in favor of, or otherwise benefit the Premises, or any part thereof, and the City
shall not modifY, amend, cancel or terminate any such easements and restrictive covenants without
the YMCA's prior written consent.
2. Irnn
2.1 Initial Term The term of this Agreement ("Term") shall commence on the
Effective Date and, unless extended by the YMCA, pursuant to Section 2.2 hereof, shall terminate
on the second anniversary of the Delivery of Possession Date. This period shall sometimes be
referred to herein as the "Initial Term".
2.2 Extended Term. Upon the expiration of the Initial Term, the YMCA shall have
an option to extend the term of the lease for one (I) successive year period. The Initial Term, so
extended, shall be referred to herein as the "Extended Term". The YMCA shall exercise its extension
rights by written notice to and approval of the City, such notice to be provided by no later than
ninety (90) calendar days prior to the expiration of the lease term then in effect. Unless otherwise
mutua1ly agreed by the parties in writing, the terms and conditions of this Agreement in effect during
the Initial Term shall remain in effect during the Extended Term.
2.3 Holdover Tenancy. In the event that the YMCA elects not to extend the Term
but retains possession of the Premises upon the expiration thereof, with the City's consent the
YMCA's tenancy shall be converted to a year to year arrangement, subject to termination by the City
upon six (6) months written notice, but otherwise on the same terms and conditions then in effect
2.4 The City reserves the right to require the YMCA to vacate the premises and to
terminate this lease anytime during the course of the Agreement upon six (6) months written notice.
The City may require such termination only when necessary for construction of a City library facility.
3. Rent and Fees.
3.1 &nt. In consideration of the City's agreement to lease the Premises to the
YMCA, the YMCA shall pay rent to the City in the amount of One Dollar ($1.00) per year for each
year of the Term.
3.2 PossessoQl Interest Tax. Pursuant to Revenue and Taxation codes Section 107.6,
YMCA is notified that it may be liable for a possessory interest tax on its leasehold under this
Agreement, and therefore is subject to the payment of possessory interest taxes. The City will not
be responsible for such payment of YMCA's behalf
2
?.,t-
3.3 Permit Fee The YMCA shall pay all permit fees.
3.4 SewerlWater Ca.pacity Chariles. The YMCA shall pay all sewer and water
capacity charges
4. Improvements.
4.\ YMCA Responsible for Construction ofFaci\ity The YMCA shall exercise its
good faith efforts to construct the Facility on the Premises by no later than the date falling six (6)
months after the Delivery of Possession Date (the "Target Construction Date"). If the YMCA has
failed to commence site development work for such Facility by the Target Construction Date, then
the City shall have the right to cancel this Agreement by giving the YMCA thirty (30) day prior
written notice thereof, in which case neither party will have any further obligation hereunder. Except
as provided in Section 4.3 of this Agreement, below, all development costs for the Facility shall be
borne by the YMCA. The YMCA agrees to keep the Premises free and clear of liens during
construction of the Facility and shall indemnifY, protect, defend and hold the City harmless from
against such liens, including without limitation, mechanic's liens for Facility labor and materials.
4.2 Facility Specifications. Subject to the City's design requirements set forth in
Section 4.3 of this Agreement, the YMCA shall be solely responsible for developing the design and
specifications for the Facility. The existing conception design for the Facility, which the City has
previously reviewed and approved, is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The YMCA reserves the right
to modifY such design in its sole discretion; provided, however, prior to proceeding with any material
design modification, the YMCA shall submit the proposed design modifications to the City for its
prompt review and consideration. The YMCA acknowledges that the City's future use of the
property is for a public library building, and therefore will not grade the property beyond limits
approved by the City, which limits are congruous with any anticipated development of site by the
City. If the City desires to comment on or propose any changes to the YMCA's proposed
modification, it shall do so in writing within fifteen (15) calendar days of its receipt thereof Provided
that such comments or proposed changes do not significantly (a) increase the development costs for
the Facility, (b) delay the completion of the Facility, or (c) otherwise adversely impact the YMCA's
intended use ofthe Facility, the YMCA sha1l attempt, in good faith, to incorporate such changes into
its final design for the Facility. Failure by the City to notifY the YMCA by the end of fifteen (15) days
shall constitute approval.
4.3 Desii:" ReQuirements
4.3\ Approvals The YMCA's final development/design plan of
the Facility will be subject to the approval ofthe City Engineer, Fire Chief and Library Director.
4.3.2 Vehicular Entrance. The vehicular entrance into the Facility must
be separate from vehicular entrance into the Fire Training Tower and the entrance must line up with
3
?-'}
the center line of Paseo Magda. The YMCA shall obtain a construction permit for driveway
improvements in the right of way.
4.3.3 Gradinlil and Drainalile Plans. Grading and drainage plans must be
submitted for permit approval.
4.3.4 Sewer and Water Laterals. The location of sewer and water
sefVlce laterals will be subject to the approval of the Library Director and City Engineer.
4.3.5 Parkinlil Lot. The parking lot structural section shall meet City
standards
4.4 Ownership ofImprovements. During the term of this Agreement, the
improvements comprising Facility shall be owned by the YMCA. Upon the termination of this
Agreement, such improvements shall revert with the Premises to the ownership of the City, without
reimbursement or cost to the City, except for lights, light standards, soccer panels and goals,
bleachers, trailers, astro turf and fencing, which YMCA will remove. The YMCA may remove
temporary structures with City concurrence,
4.5 Prohibited Uses. The YMCA agrees that, excepting as otherwise expressly
provided elsewhere in this Agreement, they shall not engage in, nor shall either knowingly permit, the
conduct of any of the following prohibited activities at the Facility: (a) partisan political functions
or activities, (b) the sale, service or consumption of illegal drugs or alcohol, (c) activities which the
City determines, in its sole discretion, may cause material damage to the Facility, and/or (d) any
activities which violates applicable federal, state or local laws, regulations, rules or policies.
4.6 Basic Maintenance. The YMCA shall provide or contract for general maintenance
of the Facility, including sports fields, landscaping, parking lot, outbuildings, garbage clean-up and
removal and sweeping.
4.7 Rl;pairs Rl;placements and ClIpital Improvements. The YMCA shall provide or
contract and pay for any and all necessary and appropriate Facility repairs, replacements and capital
improvements.
4.8 Utilities. The YMCA shall contract and pay for the provision ofall necessary
utilities for the Facility including, without limitation, water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone and
garbage removal.
5. Insurance Damalile and Indemnities.
5.] Indemnification. The YMCA shall indemnifY, reimburse, hold harmless and
defend the City from any and all liability, damages, loss, costs and obligations, including but not
limited to, court costs and reasonable attorney's fees arising out of any claim, suit, judgment, loss or
4
/-8'
expense occasioned by, but not limited to, injury or death of any person or persons, or loss or damage
to any property, arising from the act or omission of the YMCA, or those of its officers, agents,
contractors, employees and invitees in the use, development, design or maintenance or possession of
the property.
5.2 Insurance. The YMCA shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain the following
insurance coverage in full force and effect throughout the term of this lease:
5.2.] Evidence of Coverai1e. Prior to commencement of this lease, the
YMCA shall provide on a form approved by the City's Risk Manager, an original, plus one (]) copy
of a Certificate of Insurance certifYing that coverage as required has been obtained and remains in
force for the period required by the lease naming the City as additional insured. An individual
endorsement form executed by the insurance carrier, if they provide the coverage as required, shall
accompany the certificates In addition, a certified copy of the policy or policies shall be provided
by the YMCA to the City.
5.2.2 Notice of Cancellation or Chqe ofCoveI1iie. All policies shall contain
a special provision for (30) calendar days prior written notice of any cancellation, or change in
coverage to be sent to the City's Risk Manager, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
5.2.3 OIl31ifj,rini1 Insurers. All policies shall be issued by companies which hold
a current policy holder's alphabetic and financial size category rating of not less than A, according to
the current Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City's Risk Manager
5.2.4 Liability Insurance, Throughout the term of this lease, the YMCA, at
its sole cost and expense, shall maintain in full force and effect, Comprehensive General Liabi]ity or
Commercial General Liability insurance covering bodily injury (including death), personal injury and
property damage.
a. Limits shall be in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per
occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate, if applicable.
b. Such insurance shall name the City, its officers, agents and employees, individually
and collectively, as additional insureds.
c. Such insurance for additional insureds shall apply as primary insurance, and any other
insurance maintained by the City, its officers, agents and employees shall be excess
only and not contributing with the insurance required under this paragraph.
5.2.5 Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance. Throughout the term
of this lease, the YMCA, at its sole cost and expense, shall maintain in full force and effect, insurance
coverage for bodily injury (including death) and property damage which provides total limits of not
less than one million dollars ($],000,000) combined single limit per occurrence applicable to all
5
7- ~
owned, non-owned and hired vehicles/aircraft/watercraft
5.2.6 Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance.
Throughout the term of this lease, the YMCA, at its sole cost and expense, shall maintain in full force
and effect, insurance coverage for:
a. Statutory California Workers' Compensation coverage including a broad form of all-
states endorsement.
b. Employer's Liability coverage for not less than one million dollars ($],000,000) per
occurrence for all employees engaged in services or operations under this lease.
c Inclusion of the City and its governing board, directors, officers, representatives,
agents and employees as additional insureds, or a waiver of subrogation.
5.2.7 Property Insurance. The YMCA shall maintain not less than fifty
thousand dollars ($50,000) Fire and Legal Liability coverage on all real property being leased,
included improvements and betterments owned by the City and shall name the City as a loss payee.
The YMCA shall also provide fire insurance on all personal property contained within or on the
leased premises. The policy shall be written on a standard "all risk" contract, excluding earthquake
and flood. The contract shall insure for not less than ninety (90) percent of the actual cash value of
the personal property, and the YMCA shall name the City (Agency) as an additional insured.
5.2.7 Waiver of Subro&ation. Except as may be specifically provided for
elsewhere in this lease, the City and the YMCA hereby each mutually waive and all rights of recovery
from the other in event of damage to the premises or property of either caused by acts of God, perils
of fire, lightning and extended coverage perils as defined in insurance policies and forms approved
for use in the state of California. Each party shall obtain any special endorsements, if required by
their insurer, to evidence compliance with the aforementioned waiver.
6. General Provisions.
6.1 Construction Aiainst Draftsman. This agreement has been fully negotiated by
all parties, and no construction or interpretation is to be made hereof on the basis of draftsmanship
of the document.
6.2 Provisions Bindin~ on Successors. All of the terms, covenants and conditions of
this lease shall apply to, benefit and bind the successors and assigns of the respective parties, jointly
and individually.
6.3 AssiiIDllent and Sublettin~. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, this
Agreement, and any of the rights granted or obligations imposed herein, may not be assigned,
subleased or licensed, without the express prior written consent of the other party. Any non-
6
?-/P
permitted assignment, sublease or license shall be void.
6.4 Quiet Enioyment. During the term of this lease, the YMCA shall enjoy the quiet
possession of said premises, subject only to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
6.5 No Inverse condemnation. The exercise of any City right under this lease shall
not be interpreted as an exercise of the power of eminent domain and shall not impose any liability
upon the City for inverse condemnation,
6.6 Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in
writing and may be seJVed personally or by United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the City
and the YMCA as follows:
For City:
City Manager
City ofChula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
For YMCA:
Executive Director
South Bay Family YMCA
50 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
6.7 Partial Invalidity. If any term, covenant, condition, or provision of this
Agreement is found invalid, void, or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining
provisions will remain in full force and effect.
6.8 ClIPtions. The section headings, and captions for various articles and
paragraphs in this Agreement shall not be held to define, limit, augment, or describe the scope,
content, or intent of any or all parts hereof
6.9 Entire Understandin2. This Agreement, as it may be amended from time to
time, and any exhibits or agreements expressly contemplated hereby or incorporate herein, contains
the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof By signing this
Agreement, each party agrees that there is not other written or oral understanding between the parties
with respect hereto. The failure or refusal of any party to read this Agreement or other documents,
inspect the premises, and obtain legal or other advice relevant to this transaction constitutes a waiver
of any objection, contention, or claim that might have been based on these actions.
7
'}-II
6.10 Amendments No modification, amendment, or alteration of this lease will be
valid unless it is in writing and signed by all parties.
6.11 Attorntq's Fees In the event of any litigation or arbitration in reference to this
Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive its costs and reasonable attorney's fees
6.12 Applicable Law. The laws of California shall govern of the interpretation and
enforcement of this Agreement. Venue for any action shall be within the County of San Diego, State
of California
(End of Page. Next Page is Signature Page)
g
?4-'-
Signature Page to Lease
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, having been duly authorized by their
respective boards to execute this Agreement, and having duly read and understood the terms and
provisions hereof, do hereby set their hand to indicate their intent to be bound by the terms
hereof
"CITY"
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Dated
By:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Approved as to form
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney
YMCA
YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN
ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
By:
~u-4 t2 A.eR.~
President/CEO
Date:
Exhibits Exhibit A -- Description of the Premises
Exhibit B -- Conceptual Site Plan of the Facility
9
7-IJ
.,
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OF
FIRE DEPARTMENT
AND
LIBRARY SITE
IN
RANCHO DEL REY
In the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, being Lot "I"
of Chula Vista Tract No. 88-1, Rancho Del Rey, Phase II, according to Map thereof
No. 12341 recorded in the Recorder of said San Diego County March 28, 1989, at File
No. 89-156320.
Contains 14.243 acres.
JWH 2/22/96
')"11
.,"
,
"
'. it:=---'i
lI/i-
~',. i,
I ,.~,-./,/I
. .~'
.,.
~;::~~:-;
f-/_- .Jf
;;":'::::,1l
<<~\
~>.JJ
J-_.,..-ori
!t-_---1i....JT
f:~i
,,>-j)
...-.---"-
/...
, (~-11
~.
I""-~
,__ I
,)I. ;;it;)]
]"{..... ~
f._.- "
, .
=
;t--~
"I--"~
f;,>)
~.,~C1
:r-~"~I
.l\. ~I'
.-~ ;:;:::~
rt__.--./?i
V'.-:~'~1I"
""
r',~
.... f'I .!"f1
"I'
.. ~t.o.
.j:'" ~ ;~
m j~ 1-'
.. . ~ 2. ::l
';/~'" i~ C.
. ..~ ;\~~' "
,(M
~::-,~;"'I'
I
I
.
I
.
--------
?'I>
EXHIBIT B
~
"'1J
.....
o
"'0
o
en
CD
0-
-<
s::
o
)>
(f)
o
o
o
CD
.....
~
o
;:;:
'<
\
\
\
ATTACHMENT B
.'
Library Board of Trustees
- 2-
January 24, 1996
C. Friends Book Endowment
The Friends of the Library have created a book endowment and have
committed over $5,000 toward this program. The endowment would gift
the interest from these funds to the library on a yearly basis for the
purchase of books. The Friends are also interested in creating a donor
plaque system with which to recognize individuals who make large
donations and will donate up to $2,000 towards this end.
D. CSL Linked Systems Grant
It seems certain that the Serra Library System will obtain a grant to link the
catalogs of the San Diego Public, San Diego County, Carlsbad and Chula
Vista's libraries. Once implemented, library users will be able to access the
data bases of the other three libraries to find materials. A inter-library loan
request could then be processed to obtain the materials.
E. Monthly Statistics
F. Legislative Update
News from Sacramento remains grim. New library bond act bills have not
gotten out of committee.
G. Other
Director Palmer introduced Susan Ward, the new Senior Librarian for
South Chula Vista. (Trustee Alexander arrived at 3:10)
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of December 6, 1995
MSUC (Donovan/Alexander) to adopt the minutes of the December 6th meeting as
mailed.
II. CONTINUED MATTERS
ACTION
B.
YMCA Request
Tina Williams, Executive Director of the YMCA, presented the YMCA's
request to use the library site at Paseo Ranchero as a temporary soccer
arena. The YMCA currently has a soccer arena on its Paseo Ranchero and
Paseo Magda site, which serves between 1,200 to 1,400 children per year.
?~ I"
~
Library Board of Trustees
- 3 -
January 24, 1996
The YMCA is planning to move the soccer arena to the library site while
its new facility was being built, probably in early 1998.
The library would ultimately benefit as its site would be improved and
utilities brought in at no cost to the City. The City could then install a
temporary facility to serve the Rancho del Rey community. YMCA staff is
currently negotiating with the Sweetwater School District for joint use of
their soccer fields at the middle school soon to be constructed.
Director Palmer suggested that the Library Board support a two-year
agreement with an option to renew for one year, with a six month notice to
vacate.
MSUC Donovan! Alexander) that the Library Board supports a two year
agreement with the YMCA with an option to extend it for one year and a
six month escape clause.
ACTION
C.
Literacy ABE Section 321 Grant
MSUC (Alexander/Donovan) that the Library Board supports the Literacy
Team's application for ABE, Section 321 grant funds.
(Trustee Viesca arrived at this time 3:30 pm)
"
ACTION
A.
1996-97 Budget
Dawn Herring, City Budget Manager, reported to the Trustees that the
City is transitioning to a more performance based budget. The budgets will
be input on a new local area network-based system which will allow staff
to use infonnation in many different ways. The new system will also have
the ability to evolve to future City needs. The City Manager has asked
departments to prepare potential 100/0 budget cuts. Staffwill go back to
Council in February or March to get feedback on their priorities before the
budget is finalized. (Trustee Williams arrived at this time 4:00 pm)
Chair Clover-Byram asked if the City took into consideration revenue from
new stores and businesses such as the new Wallman. Mrs. Herring stated
that the City Manager did indeed take this revenue into consideration.
7-/7
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 8'
Meeting Date 3/12/96
ITEM TITLE:
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.
;J./,/,f
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 (LCP).
Chris Salomone, Community Development ~rctor ~ ~ c.. S,
John D. Goss, Executive Directo~ btx~2\
(4/5thsQote: Yes No L)
Council Referral No.
SUBMITTED BY:
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,
<6"/
Page 2, Item $
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 35ft. 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.
~",;..
Page 3, Item Ir'
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 Chula Visa)
are allowed signs substantially over 10 ft. in height. Of these three sites, the Industrial 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
Freestandinq
Siqn - Maximum
Heiqht
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.
C 1 - 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 Proposed Freestanding Sign - Maximum Height
E1 - Chula Vista Commercial Thoroughfare/CC-P Coastal Zone Maximum 35 ft.
Inland Parcel Industrial General Coastal Zone
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 Commercial and
Industrial parcels located to the west and east. For these reasons it is staff's conclusion that
8"3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 3/12/96
~
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.
prh/lcpa#14/lcp14.113 ]
a-"J/
ORDINANCE
.2 t, &,f'
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE CERTIFIED CHULA VISTA
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH
AMENDMENT 14 AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 19, CHAPTER
19.85.005 AND APPENDIX B, BA YFRONT SIGN PROGRAM,
MODIFYING SIGN REGULATIONS FOR THE INLAND PARCEL,
SUBAREA 4 OF THE CERTIFIED CHULA VISTA LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM (LCPI
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department prepared an amendment
to the Certified Local Coastal Program (Amendment #141 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 #14) 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 # 14 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 #14.
8",f
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows:
SECTION I:
SECTION II:
SECTION III:
SECTION IV:
SECTION V:
Presented By:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
[LCP 14disk\ordnance.doc]
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.
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, Bayfront
Sign Pr09ram, are amended as set forth for the purpose
of modifying sign regulations for the Inland Parcel,
Subarea 4 of the certified Local Coastal Pr09ram.
The City Council hereby directs the Mayor to submit
Amendment #14 to the certified Chula Vista Coastal
Program to the California Coastal Commission tn
accordance with Section 13552 of Title 14 of the
California Code of Regulations.
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the
31 st day after its adoption or immediately followin9
approval of Amendment # 14 of the certified Local Coastal
Program by the California Coastal Commission, whichever
is later.
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.
Approved as to Form By:
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
r't
AnAeHM~Ni 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 all an~a!; ~~~@~~*)hf:m:;P:~Rq~TI47: no freestanding sign shall be greater than 10 feet in height and signs
shall be subject to tile regulations of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Title 19, Zoning, Chapter 19.60, Signs,
incorporated herein by reference. unless modified hy the provisions of this Specific Plan.
4 2. fg*m~ Inland Parcel, Subarea 4 - -WH: land designated as Industrial General, signs shall be subject to the
Industrial General zone, Section 19.46 of the Chuta Vista Municipal Code 8]:eB13t as HlBl4ifieJ.l:1y the flrsYi8isHS
Bf tlti" EflseiH6 PlaR 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 BXb:@j3t as mGEliti~HIl:t~, iliis SflBGitib: FlaR.
;13. For the Midbayfront and Industrial Subareas, Subareas I 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 arc required by state regulation.
b. Private Signs
1) Commen.:ial Uses Adjacem to freeway: Commercial uses with freeway exposure shall be
allowed either wall or low-profile monument signs with name andlor 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 he 100 square feet. Ground signs may be douhled.
faced or parallelLO 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.
1389
B"/
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 or three square feet on or adjacent to the entry door. These tenant signs
shall he 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
I) 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 he wall signs and/or ground signs. Ground signs may he 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 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 Offi.ce 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.
J 4. ror the Midbayfront Subarea only: In addition to the provisions above, the following shall apply in Subarea I:
a. Midbayfront Sign Program: In addition to the regulations provided by this Specific Plan and the Chula
Vista Zoning Code for sigos, additional more specific and restrictive regulations shall be required for
the Midbayfront Subarea in the Midhayfront Sign Program. This sign program shall be approved by
the City of ChuIa Vista prior to the issuance of the first huilding permit in this subarea. The purpose
of the Midbayfront Sign Program is to provide a sign plan for the Midbayfront subarea consistent with
lhe goals and policies of the Local Coastal Program, and to meet these specitic objectives:
1) To create a system of signs which serves as an important design element in establishing an
identifiahle image for the area.
2) To provide identification for the special components which make up the Midbayfront area.
1390
~,r
3) To reduce visual competition hetween signs, balancing the needs for identitication 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 hy the City of Chula Vista.
h. Scale of Signs for the Midbayfront subarea: The two most prominent signs in the Midhayfront 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:
I) Midbayfront Gateway Monument: The sign element containing copy shall not exceed a maxi-
mum height of 5'-6". The architectural element containing the sign shall not exceed 12 feet
in height. The maximum copy area per sign face shall not exceed 50 square feet. Illus~
trations 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.
h. Change the existing industrial image of the Bayfront, and develop a new identity consonant with its
future prominent puhlic 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.
c. Develop a readily understandable and memorable relationship of the Baytront (and the areas and
clements which comprise it) to adjoining areas of Chula Vista and to the freeway and arterial
approaches to the Bayfront.
1391
~'?
APPENDIX B
TO SECTION 19.85.005
BAYFRONT SIGN PROGRAM
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Goal
The goal of the Chula Vista Bayfront Sign Program is to control signs--eliminating those which are obstrusive and
encouraging those that are creative and interesting while establishing a sense of place for the area.
Objectives
I. 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;
(11) 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.
APPLlCABUJTY
The Bilyfrout Signl'rollram shall provide criteria for the rejlUlatiol\, desilll\.. iUlditlstaitatll>n of ~igris 10 be .I<i<:ated wi$in
S"bareas) ;2;3,$,1), jjod 7Mlhe ceriilied Clrnla Vista Loealo,astal Prog~am.Silln$Jitqpd~edf<)r Subarelt 4. (liIlarnj
Pan;el)ofthe cerdile<i Li)cal <:o<istall'rogram shall be subjllctrotl!e silln tegnlalion~(Jf the relaied(Ji:m~rani;di;slrial(i(J)
and Central Comweicial Precise Plan MOdifying District as described in the Chiila Viota' Muriicipal' Cooe~ .
DESIGN REVIEW
The establishment of a Design Review Board for the Chula Vista Bayfront is of primary importance. The Board shall
he established by the Redevelopment Agency of the CilY of Chula 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 Chula 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
1406
~-/Il
Coas~tall ZOi(1Jie B.(l)'IJNl1daries
C it.y (}If C hlUi a Vi sta
EXHIBIT A
~'II
ADJACENT FREESTANDING SIGN HEIGHTS
t
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.)
Max. 35 ft. ~'/:l-
EXHIBIT B
~ Inlanil Parcel, Subarea 4 Chula Vista Coastal Zone Boundary
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of 2/28/96
ITEM 2.
PUBLIC HEARING; PCM-96.l9: 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 entry way 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.
r---[
,
t
-- - ---
,.,
,--..-.--...-."P--.
\:i'-I
r'p
q.:o' ,
..:)
: ,V,.,,
B"j;J
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 9
Meeting Date 3/12/96
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Local/Regional Consistency Checklist for the Regional
Growth Management Strategy and Congestion Management Program
Resolution J f'.21fa'nsmitting the Local/Regional Consistency Checklist
for the Regional Growth Management Strategy to SANDAG
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Plannin~
, \
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~jA Dv,'),JlJ. (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No..XJ
'i ~_.,"
In November 1988, the voters approved Proposition "C", the County's Advisory Measure on
Growth Management. SANDAG, serving as the Regional Planning and Growth Management
Review Board prepared the Regional Growth Management Strategy (RGMS) which was
subsequently adopted by the City of Chula Vista on May 5, 1992. The RGMS takes a quality
of life approach to growth management, and contains standards and objectives and recommended
actions for nine quality of life factors: air quality and transportation/congestion management,
water, sewage treatment, sensitive lands and open space preservation and protection, solid waste
and hazardous waste management, housing, energy, and economic prosperity. The RGMS
includes a biennial "self-certification" process (formerly annually) for local and regional agencies
to determine their consistency with the Strategy's recommended actions. Attached is the City's
completed consistency checklist for Calendar Years 1994 and 1995 (Please see Attachment 2).
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the attached Resolution transmitting the
Local/Regional Consistency Checklist for the Regional Growth Management Strategy and
Congestion Management Program to SANDAG.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION:
A Negative Declaration was pfepared by SANDAG for the Draft RGMS in accordance with
CEQA. The checklist does not require any environmental review.
The attached "self.certification" checklist was prepared by SANDAG to be used by local and
regional governmental agencies to evaluate consistency of their general and community plans,
policies, regulations and ordinances with the RGMS. Moreover, the information contained in
the list is intended to be used by SANDAG to monitor the region's progress towards
implementing the Strategy. Compliance with the standards contained in the RGMS is not
mandatory; however, participating jurisdictions and agencies have made a commitment to
achieve consistency over a period of time. Where an agency is unable to take the actions
9'/
Page 2, Item L
Meeting Date 3/12/96
necessary to achieve consistency within the designated time frame, it is requested to notify
SANDAG in its next consistency review, and indicate how and when it will achieve consistency.
Achieving the standards and objectives is the goal of the Strategy and serves as the primary
measure of the Strategy's success.
On November 1, 1994, following the City's last review of the checklist, staff presented a copy
of the Draft Land Use Distribution Element of the RGMS along with Series 8 Population and
Housing Forecasts to the City Council for review and comment (Please see Attachment 5 for
Council minutes). The following two goals, and policies to implement them, are contained
within the Element: 1) Maximize access to jobs, shopping and services - as measured in travel
time, cost and distance - through the distribution and design of future development, and 2)
Provide sufficient urban land to accommodate forecasted population growth while preserving
adequate land for open space. After much discussion, Council directed that staff respond back
to SANDAG with comments regarding the draft element. In summary, Council concluded that
the element provided a good framework for future planning; however, the following issues
needed further attention (Please see Attachment 4 for prior response letter to SANDAG):
the element needs to discuss the possible impacts of higher intensity development on
public services (roads, schools, parks, etc.) and to ensure that these impacts are
mitigated,
the element should ensure that if residential densities are increased in currently developed
areas in order to accommodate growth, adequate schools are provided to meet the
increased school-aged population in those areas,
the element does not address the possible results of local jurisdictions deciding not to
implement the policies contained in it, and
incentives should be created for cities which comply with the element, such as giving
them priority in regional transportation funding or other financial programs.
Each of the above issues, with the exception of the last one, have been addressed in the final
Element, adopted by the SANDAG Board of Directors on February 24, 1995 (Please see
Attachment 3). SANDAG has requested that each of the member Cities and the County consider
the adoption of policies that are consistent with the Element when updating their plans.
Questions have been included in the attached checklist to assess each jurisdiction's consistency
with Element policies (Please see Attachment 2).
The consistency checklist covers calendar years 1994 and 1995 and represents the City's third
status report to SANDAG since adopting the survey (the first reflecting the Land Use
Distribution Element). Chula Vista is in substantial compliance with the majority of the
9"'.2.
Page 3, Item L
Meeting Date 3/12/96
checklist items; however, there are four main items on the checklist in which the City of Chula
Vista has not yet fully complied. Each of these items are discussed below.
1. Regional Trio Reduction Program - To date, the San Diego County Air Pollution Control
District (APCD) has not adopted the Regional Trip Reduction program or related
regulations for inclusion into the Congestion Management Program (CMP) and local
agency implementation. However, the City of Chula Vista has been active in the
development and implementation of several trip reduction programs that reduce
congestion and improve air quality. Some of the programs identified in previous
checklists include: employee carpools, mixed use development and the establishment of
specific design guidelines that support alternative travel modes (i.e., City employees car
pools, tele-commuting, Green Fleets program, alternative fuel vehicles, etc). While we
feel that these types of programs are consistent with the intent of the Regional Growth
Management Strategy, it is the intent of City staff to evaluate the need for an overall Trip
Reduction Program, or participation in a Regional Trip Reduction Program, as soon as
specific guidelines and regulations are adopted on a regional basis.
2. Agricultural and Rural Lands Preservation - The Chula Vista General Plan does not
currently contain any policies for the permanent preservation of agricultural lands within
the City, as these uses are generally considered interim uses until such time as urban
development, as specified by the General Plan, is appropriate. However, the City in
October 1993, adopted policies dealing with the interim management of agricultural lands
within the General Development Plan (GDP) for the 23,000 acre Otay Ranch. The GDP
includes a Resource Management Plan (RMP) aimed at resource protection, including
policies recognizing the further evaluation of important agricultural soils, and the interim
use of agriculture areas during project buildout. The County of San Diego jointly
adopted this Plan and considers the RMP to be the functional equivalent of the County's
Resource Protection Ordinance (RPO), previously recognized as a model resource
protection ordinance by SANDAG.
3. Floodolain Protection and Preservation Ordinance. The City presently does not have
ofdinances that contain the specific definitions and regulatory content as specified in the
Strategy's Definition of Regionally Significant Open Space. However, the City of Chula
Vista has made efforts to preserve and protect both sensitive lands and open space
through policies in its General Plan and regulations in its Municipal Code and
Subdivision Manual. In addition, the City's local CEQA review procedures are also used
in evaluating and protecting wetland and sensitive habitat areas located within the City.
On a regional level, the City is actively involved in the Otay Valley Regional Park
planning effort as well as the South County Multiple Species Conservation Program
(MSCP), the functional equivalent of a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP).
9.3
Page 4, Item L
Meeting Date 3/12/96
It is the intent of the Planning Department to complete a further evaluation of the
SANDAG policies regarding floodplains and wetlands during the next six to nine months,
and determine whether any new ordinances or amendments are required. Once this
evaluation is completed, and the City's MSCP Subarea Preserve Plan has been adopted,
staff will return to City Council with a report on this matter, and if further work is
required, staff will include it within the Planning Department's FY 1996-97 work
program.
4. Land Use Distribution Element - While the City has not updated its General Plan to
incorporate policies contained in the Land Use Distribution Element, it has however,
been active in establishing goals and objectives for two master planned development
projects (EastLake III & San Miguel Ranch) that afe consistent with the new element.
The City is also expected to adopt zoning regulations and design guidelines for the first
two villages on the Otay Ranch in the Spring of 1996 that will also be consistent with
this element.
In conclusion, staff reiterates that Chula Vista is in substantial compliance with the RGMS and,
with the exception of the areas identified above, is continuing to pursue full compliance with the
RGMS and associated elements.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City from this item.
Attachments:
1. City Council Resolution
2. Local/Regional Consistency Checklist
3. Land Use Distribution Element
4. SANDAG Response Letter
5. City Cooneil Minutes (11/1/96)
(m:\home\planning\RGMS2.113)
,..,/
RESOLUTION NO. /8'.2. 3t:J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
TRANSMITTING THE LOCAL/REGIONAL CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST FOR THE
REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY AND CONGESTION
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM TO SANDAG
WHEREAS, Proposition C, as an advisory ballot measure, was approved by the voters
in November 1988 and called for the establishment of a Regional Planning and Growth
Management Review Board and the preparation of a Regional Growth Management Strategy; and
WHEREAS, SANDAG, serving as the Regional Planning and Growth Management
Review Board, prepared the Regional Growth Management Strategy; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista considered and adopted the Regional Growth
Management Strategy on May 5, 1992; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Growth Management Strategy includes a biennial self-
certification process to ensure consistency between the Strategy's Recommended Actions and the
relevant plans, policies and ordinances of local jurisdictions and regional agencies; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has completed the Consistency Checklist which
provides a status report for Calendar year 1994 and 1995 regarding the consistency of its
relevant plans, policies and ordinances with the Strategy's Recommended Actions, and
information regarding the region's progress towards achieving regional Quality of Life Standards
and Objectives; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has held a public hearing on the Consistency
Checklist on February 27, 1996 and adopted a self-certification resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Chula Vista hereby transmits
the completed Consistency Checklist and self.certification resolution to the Regional Planning
and Growth Management Review Board, and intends to take the actions identified therein to
achieve consistency with the Strategy.
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
(M: \HOME\ PT.ANNING\PCM96-17 _ RES)
<J-f !r-g--
LOCAL/REGIONAL CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST
FOR THE
REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
A.~D CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1994/1995
~...
~'7
AIR QUALITY AND TRANSPORTATION/CONGESTION MANAGEMENT
Transportation Capacity Expansion to Help Provide Alternatives to Driving
Alone/Transit Performance Standards
Cities and County
1. Does your General/Community Plan(s) identify existing and proposed bicycle facilities
and coordinate with other bicycle facility projects included in the current RTP and
Regional Transponation Improvement Program?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
* 2. List the total number of miles of bicycle facilities by type (Class 1 Bike Path, Class 2
Bike Lane and Class 3 Bike Route) that have been built in your jurisdiction and the
number built during the last two years.
CLASS I Bike Path
CLASS II Bike Lane
CLASS III Bike Route
Total Miles
3.0
34.0
24.0
Miles Added
2.3
3.5
17.5
* 3. How many park-and-ride spaces are located within your jurisdiction, and how many
additional spaces were provided last year?
There are 25 park. and-ride spaces at one location. There were no additional spaces
added last year.
4. Are the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes shown in the current Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) along local streets and roads located in your jurisdiction
shown in your General/Community Plan(s)? Note: This currently applies only to
National City and the City of San Diego.
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
~L
1~/1)
Regional Trip Reduction Program
5. Has your jurisdiction adopted the Model Regional Trip Reduction Ordinance or an
equivalent ordinance which extends beyond the requirements of the APCD's county-
wide Emergency Traffic Abatement Program.
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
(Note: The U.S. EPA. in 1994, reclassified the San Diego region from a "severe"
non-attainment for ozone to "serious." This change removed the federal Clean Air
Act requirements for an employer commute ordinance. The California Congestion
Management Program (CMP) statutes require that each city and the County adopt
and implement a Trip Reduction Ordinance. In the absence of the federal requirement,
Ihe present county-wide Emergency Traffic Abatement Program would meet the
minimum requirements of the CMP statutes. Jurisdictions which have adopted trip
reduction ordinances beyond the county-wide traffic abatement program should check
"yes" here.)
To date, APCD has yet to adopt the Regional Trip Reduction Program or related
regulations for inclusion into the CMP and local agency implementation. However,
the City of Chula Vista has been active in the development and implementation of
several trip reduction programs that reduce congestion and improve air quality. Some
of the programs identified in previous checklists include City employee carpools, mixed
use development, and the establishment of specific design guidelines that support
alternative travel modes, including walking, bicycle and public transit. Trip, reduction
programs that have been developed since the City's initial checklist submittal include
the development of I) a van pool program for businesses ($50,000 grant received),
2) a Satellite Work Center or Telecenter ($279,000 grant received), 3) a telecommuting
program of which 75 employees 00% of City personnel) currently participate in at
this time, and 4) offering employees flexible scheduling, and staggered work hours -
all of which are designed to reduce commuter traffic during peak hours of travel.
The City is also implementing an alternative fuels vehicle program.
In addition, the City has been selected as one of twelve in the nation to participate
in the development of a carbon dioxide (C02) reduction demonstration program.
This program, also known as "Green Fleets - Reducing Urban Transportation Energy"
Program. is sponsored by the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives
(ICLEI). The Green Fleets Program is part II of a larger 10 year effort to design
and implement C02 reduction strategies in major urban areas around the world. The
primary objective of this program is to reduce greenhouse gases through strategic
energy conservation planning efforts.
.~
1'-//
Land Use Actions/Level of Service Standards for Arterials and Freeways
Cities and County
6. Are the traffic level of service objectives contained in your General/ Conununity Plan(s)
equal to or better than those specified in the Strategy, Le., LOS "D" for the freeways
and the Regional Anerial System identified in the 1990 RTP?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new infonnation, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
7. Has a traffic forecast been prepared based on the land uses and circulation system
contained in the General/Conununity Plan(s)?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented. enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new infonnation. if
applicable. Year 1/1993
8. Do your traffic forecasts make use of a SANDAG-approved traffic forecasting model
and incorporate SANDAG's Regional Growth Forecasts as a unifonn benchmark for
population and land use data? Note: This is a requirement of the CMP statutes.
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new infonnation, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
9. Is the projected future level of service on the regional arterial system routes consistent
with the level of service objective "D" in the Strategy?
NOTE: If a roadway will not be able to meet the Strategy's regional level of service
objectives for specific reasons such as preservation of landscaping, inadequate room
to widen. or other overriding considerations, these exceptions should be explained.
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new infonnation, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
~~
~-/~
10. Does your jurisdiction have a program(s) to achieve the traffic level of service
objectives identified in the Strategy?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
II. Has your agency adopted and implemented a process to evaluate and mitigate the traffic
impacts of large projects on the regional transponation system, including the level
of service standards and objectives of the CMP and Strategy? (The definition of a
"large" project as described in the CMP is any project that upon its completion would
be expected to generale either an equivalent of 2,400 or more average daily trips or
200 or more peak hour vehicle trips.) Note: The CMP statutes require that each
city and the County adopt and implement a program to analyze the impacts of land
use decisions, including mitigation costs, on the regional transponation system.
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
12. Does the process include the traffic impacts on all freeways and the regional anerial
system affected by the project (including anerials and freeways in adjacent
jurisdictions)?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable . Year 1/1993
13. Does the process consider existing and future planned land uses, and reasonably
foreseen projects within the jurisdiction, and adjoining jurisdictions?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
~
"7-8
14. Does your agency prepare and adopt CMP Deficiency Plans for any state highway
or CMP principal arterials within your jurisdiction that are forecast to fall below the
CMP traffic level of service standards? Note: The development and adoption of
Deficiency Plans is a requirement of the CMP statutes.
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
* 15. Is the existing traffic level of service on the regional arterial system routes in your
jurisdiction consistent with the Strategy's level of service objective of LOS "D"?
Note: If a roadway does not meet the Strategy's regional level of service objectives
for specific reasons such as preservation of landscaping, inadequate room to widen,
or other overriding considerations, these exceptions should be explained.
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
Transportation S)'stem Management
Cities and County
16. Is there a plan in place to optimize the traffic signals in your jurisdiction to improve
traffic flow through a centralized traffic control system?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
* 17. What is the status of the traffic signal optimization plan?
On November 14. 1995 the City Council approved resolutions #18105 and #18106
and charged DKS Associates with the task of evaluating our traffic signal system and
developing a pilot program for a traffic signal optimization plan. Award of the contact
is on hold pending release of Federal funds from Caltrans.
Miscellaneous
Cities and County
] 8. Have the recommendations included in regional transportation studies (e.g., the Route
78 Corridor Study and Mid-County Transportation Study) been incorporated into local
general plans?
NOTE: The recommendations in these studies do not apply to all jurisdictions.
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
WATER
Water Supply
Cities and County
] 9. Has a water reclamation ordinance based on the County Water Authority's model
ordinance been adopted?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
On November 22, ]994 the City Council adopted resolution no. ]7735 approving a
revised City Landscape Manual. This revised manual establishes a requirement for
reclaimed water to be used on project(s) when reclaimed water is available. This
manual also establishes design precepts for water conservation.
20. Has the State Department of Water Resources model xeriscape ordinance, or an
equivalent ordinance, been adopted for all new construction? (This also applies to
landscaping for single-family residential units installed by developers prior to
occupancy. )
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
Pursuant to AB 325 (California Water Conservation Landscaping Act) which requires
cities and counties to adopt a Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, the Planning
Department has incorporated amendments to the City Landscape Manual and Municipal
Code to implement the water conservation measures, as required by the State law.
~'
.. -
'?-/5
21. Have your local plumbing requirements been amended to be in compliance with the
minimum state requirements for water conservation?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG. and include any new infonnation, if applicable.
Year 1/1993
22. Has an ordinance been adopted to ensure that a sufficient supply of water is available
for development dependent on groundwater and that groundwater supplies will not
be overdrafted? (This question applies only to those jurisdictions with development
that is dependent on groundwater.)
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
23. Have the Best Management Practices (water conservation and demand management
programs and projects) contained in the CW A's Water Resources Plan been
implemented?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
The City of Chula Vista is not a water purveyor; however, it is working with the San
Diego Water Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water District to implement best
management practices. as stated within the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Sec. 19.09,
Growth Management Ordinance.
SEWAGE TREA TMEl'lT
Cities and Countv
24. Does your jurisdiction have guaranteed sewage treatment capacity, or does it contract
with another agency for capacity, prior to approving development projects.
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in which
it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, ifapplicable. Year
1/1993
.T-
-
9- /6
SESSITIYE LANDS AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION
Cities and Countv
25. Have ordinances been adopted that are consistent with the recommendations contained
in the Strategy's Definition of Regionally Significant Open Space for:
a) SteeD sloDes
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
b) FloodDlains
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
c) Wetlands
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
The City has made efforts to preserve and protect both sensitive lands and open space
through policies in its General Plan and regulations in its Municipal Code and
Subdivision Manual. In addition, the City's local CEQA review procedures are also
used in evaluating and protecting wetland and sensitive habitat areas located within
the City. On a regional level, the City is actively involved in the Otay Regional Park
planning effort as well as the South County Multiple Species Conservation Program
(MSCP), the functional equivalent of a Natural Communities Conservation Plan
(NCCP). However, the City presently does not have ordinances that contain the
specific definitions and regulatory content as specified in the Strategy's Definition
of Regionally Significant Open Space.
It is the intent of the Planning Department and Public Works Department to complete
a further evaluation of the SANDAG policies regarding floodplains and wetlands during
the next six to nine months, and determine whether any new ordinances or amendments
are required. Once this evaluation is completed, staff and the City's Subarea Preserve
Plan has been adopted, staff will return to City Council with a report on this maner,
and if further work is required, staff will include it with the Planning Department's
FY 1996-97 work program.
~-
4-/7
26. Are actions being taken to acquire lands within your jurisdiction designated in your
General/Community Plan(s) for regional parks?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
.. 27. How many acres of regional open space paries exist in your jurisdiction in accordance
with the Definition of Regionally Significant Open Space? (Please list parks and
acreages. )
There are currently 60.63 acres of land allocated for regional open space park use
(Rohr Park 39.09ac / Sweetwater Regional Park 21.54ac). The City of Chula Vista
is actively working jointly with the County and the City of San Diego to establish
the Otay Valley Regional Park and through this effort have acquired approximately -
78.07 acres of open space, of which II. 74 acres are located within the City of Chula
Vista.
28. Are actions being taken to encourage the preservation of agricultural uses and rural
lands?
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
The Chula Vista General Plan does not currently contain any policies for the permanent
preservation of agricultural lands within the City. as these uses are generally considered
interim uses until such time as urban development, as specified by the General Plan,
is appropriate.
However the City in October 1993, adopted policies dealing with the interim
management of agricultural lands within the General Development Plan (GDP) for
the 23,000 acre Otay Ranch. The GDP includes a Resource Management Plan (RMP)
aimed at resource protection, including policies recognizing the further evaluation
of important agricultural soils, and the interim use of agriculture areas during project
buildout. The County of San Diego jointly adopted this Plan and considers the RMP
to be the functional equivalent of the County's Resource Protection Ordinance (RPO),
recognized as a model resource protection ordinance by SANDAG.
.. 29. List the current and proposed funding sources/programs being used to acquire/protect
sensitive lands, and regional parks and open space.
In plalUling for the Otay Valley Regional Park, the City of Chula Vista received an
$88.000 grant from the California Coastal Conservancy to prepare a Resource
Enhancement Plan (REP) for an area from the Bay to approximately I-80S. The study
/ /'-\~
9-/f
area was later extended to the eastern reach of Otay Valley Road. The Coastal
Conservancy subsequently authorized funding through a Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement (JEP A) between the City and County of San Diego and the City of Chula
Vista in the amount of $1.5 million dollars towards the acquisition and enhancement
of several priority wetland parcels of land as identified in the REP. In addition, the
City is processing a Subarea Preserve Plan which will identify funding or acquisition
strategies for MSCP preserve lands, which includes a conveyance plan for
approximately 11,000 acres of open space within the Otay Ranch.
30. Have coastal jurisdictions incOlporated the following three objectives from the Shoreline
Preservation Strategy into their Local Coastal plans. The objectives can be modified
by each jurisdiction to reflect its participation in a cooperative, region-wide program.
a) Manage the region's shoreline to provide environmental quality, recreation and
property protection.
b) Develop and carry out a cost-effective combination of shoreline management
tactics that will have a positive impact on the region's economy.
c) Develop a program to pay for the shoreline management strategy which equitably
allocates costs throughout the region, and among local, state and federal sources.
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Cities and Countv
31. Has a Source Reduction and Recycling Element been adopted to achieve the 25 percent
reduction by 1995, and 50 percent reduction by 2000 goals of AB 939 as a part of
the county's Integrated Waste Management Plan?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in which
it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if applicable. Year
1/1993
The City has adopted a Non-disposal facility element and will consider adoption of
the County-wide summary plan and Siting Element on or about January 16, 1996.
* 32. Estimate the percentage of solid waste diverted in the past two years.
Based on the County Monthly/Quarterly Tonnage Reports the City will reduce or divert
approximately 30% of its total waste for 1995. Chula Vista is projected to dispose
~
ry-/;?
of approximately 110.000 tons of solid waste in 1995 compared to 180,000 tons of
solid waste that was disposed of in landfills in 1990. The California Integrated Waste
Management Board's Annual Report and Base Year Adjustment Methodology compares
the 1990 base year to the current year with adjustments for population, sales tax,
employment and inflation.
33. Has a Household Hazardous Waste Element which meets the requirements of AB 939
been adopted?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in which
it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if applicable. Year
1/1993
The City has applied for. received and implemented a Household Hazardous
Waste (HHW) Grant and four Used Oil Grants to provide public education
regarding source reduction and proper disposal of HHW.
* 34. Estimate the percentage of Household Hazardous Waste diverted in the past two years.
County Household Hazardous Waste Program data sheets for collection and drop-off
activities indicate that an estimated 2'7c ofHHW will be diverted. Furthermore County
data demonstrates that Chula Vista residents participate more than residents in almost
any of the other eighteen participating Cities in the County. The implementation of
Used Oil Recycling collection and public education programs, and HHW education
is expected to generate a significant increase in waste diversion in the coming years.
35. Have any permanent Household Hazardous Waste collection facilities been located
in your jurisdictionry
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable _
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
APTEC, is a private Household Hazardous Waste facility located within Chula Vista
that is used extensively by the City and County of San Diego for treatment and disposal
activities.
'('7-
/j~.;? !J
36. Has the Siting Element for solid waste disposal facilities required by AB 939 been
approved? (The Siting Element is required to be approved by the County of San Diego
and a majority of the cities by the beginning of 1994.)
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
Comments, SANDAG has not approved the Siting Element for Distribution. City
staff has submitted comments to the County regarding the preliminary and final drafts
of Summary Plan and Siting Element. The will be noticing the public and conducting
a public hearing after SANDAG releases the Siting Element. No date has been set
for said public hearing.
HAZARDOUS W ASTE M~"AGEMENT
Cities and County
37. Has the San Diego County Hazardous Waste Management Plan or an equivalent been
adopted as required by state law?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
38. Have facility siting criteria that are consistent with the San Diego County Hazardous
Waste Management Plan been adopted?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG. and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 111993
39. Has a procedure to process permits on a case-by-case basis (e.g., Conditional Use
Permit) been established for siting hazardous waste facilities?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
'8._
q-~/
Council adopted the final amendments to the City Zoning Ordinance establishing a
specialized conditional use permit procedure for hazardous waste facility proposals
on March 2, 1993 (Ordinance No. 2542).
40. Are the Southern California Hazardous Waste Management Plan and intergovernmental
agreements and incentives programs being used in the evaluation of facility proposals?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
41. Is your jurisdiction, with the assistance of the County of San Diego, working with
the private sector to provide information. technical assistance and incentives to achieve
the 30 percent waste minimization goal of the Plan?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable . Year 1/1993
Since 1993, the City has been continuing its Business Recycling Outreach Program
efforts with the County to develop and implement various hazardous waste
reduction/minimization programs, aimed primarily at small business and household
waste streams. The City has become Regional Administrator for a three-city (National
City. Imperial Beach, Chula Vista) $5,000,000.00 used oil recycling grant. To-date,
approximately $300,000.00 have been expended on a public education campaign
involving local schools and the setting-up of 200 point-of-purchase displays, and the
establishment of 30 local businesses as used oil collection centers. Additionally, a
mobile display promoting alternative products and proper disposal practices to reduce
household hazardous wastes were purchased, and printed materials were prepared
for public distribution at local businesses and community centers regarding household
and small business hazardous wastes. Lastly, the City completed a toxics use audit
for municipal services (maintenance and operations), and has instituted the use of
alternate materials based on the audit.
"42. How many hazardous waste facilities have been sited in your jurisdiction? One (large
size) to five (small size) facilities should be sited to meet San Diego's hazardous waste
management needs by the year 2000.
Greenfield Envirorunental, Appropriate Technologies II, Inc. (APTEC II). APTEC
II is the single largest, and only State and Federally permined hazardous waste
treatment facility in San Diego County, with an estimated total annual treatment
J ~
+
c:j-c:<~
capacity of 32,000 tons encompassing a spectrum of General Treaunent Methods.
(County HWMP, 1989 -using 1986 data).
HOUSIl"G
Cities and Countv
43. Has the Housing Element of your General Plan been updated as required by State
law?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG. and include any new information. if
applicable . Year 1/1993
44. Has your Housing Element been found to be in substantial compliance with state law?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
45. Does your Housing Element include the regional share objective from the Regional
Housing Needs Statement which indicates the number of new units needed by July.
1996 for all economic segments of the community consistent with state law?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG. and include any new information. if
applicable. Year 1/1993
46. Does your Housing Element contain policies to achieve the regional share objective
for all economic segments of the community consistent with state law?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG. and :nclude any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
~.
4-.:&
~ 7. What was your jurisdiction's progress toward meeting the regional share objective
during the past two years? Please note the number of units constructed by income
]evel.
Park Village Apartments/ 28du (moderate-13, ]ow-6, very ]ow-9)
Sanabelle Condos/ 12du (moderate)
48. Does your Housing Element include the fair share objective from the Regional Housing
Needs Statement which indicates how many new and existing lower income households
should be assisted by July, 1996?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicab]e
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reponed to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
49. Does your Housing Element contain policies to achieve the fair share objective?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented. enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
"50. What was your jurisdiction's progress toward meeting the fair share objectives last
year? Please note the number of households assisted.
Single Family Rehab.! 29 units (Low-14, Very Low-15)
Mobile home Rehab.! 19 units (Very Low)
Senior Handyman Prog.! 371 units (Very Low)
New Sect. 8 Certif./ 61 units (Very Low)
Mobilehome Rental Assist.! 39 units (Very Low)
At Risk Sect. 236.! 300 units (Low)
51. Has a Consolidated Plan been prepared and approved for your jurisdiction?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicab]e
If compliance has been previously achieved and documented, enter the year in
which it was reported to SANDAG, and include any new information, if
applicable. Year 1/1993
~
cJ~~~
EJIo'ERGY
Cities and County
52. Does your jurisdiction participate in a Clean Cities/Green Fleets program to encourage
use of high-efficiency, low-emission vehicles?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
The City of Chula Vista has recently joined the Clean Cities initiative by signing the
MOV, and in addition. the City is currently a pan of the Green Fleets program.
53. Has your jurisdiction participated in establishment of alternate fueling/charging stations?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
There is one compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling station in Chula Vista.
54. Has your jurisdiction converted existing vehicles or purchased new or replacement
vehicles with alternative fuels/technologies?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
The City currently owns 4 CNG and 2 electric vehicles and will be purchasing 6 CNG
vehicles in 1996.
55. Do your General Plan and development codes include energy-efficient site design
policies/standards?
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
The proposed C02 Emissions Reduction Plan. which will be presented to City Council
this spring, includes energy efficient site design guidelines.
56. Has your jurisdiction established or modified energy accounting systems to explicitly
track energy use and expenses for local public buildings and operations?
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
The City is currently undertaking an energy audit to identify rating structure changes
and other areas which may be available to conserve energy. In addition the City is
considering an energy management system as pan of a comprehensive retrofit program.
/: -
9-~5
57. Has your jurisdiction identified energy efficiency opportunities, and implemented such
projects in its public buildings and operations and maintenance activities?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
The City has completed the lighting retrofit of over 30 buildings as pan of the Phase
I and Phase II of the comprehensive retrofit program.
LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT
Cities and Countv
58. Does your jurisdiction have one or more transit focus areas?
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
The City of Chula Vista has a total of three transit focus areas; "E" Street, "H" Street
and Palomar Street stations along the trolley line. In addition, the City has approved
a General Development Plan that will contain five transit focus areas in the Olay Ranch.
59. Does your jurisdiction have one or more employment areas of 1,000 acres or more?
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
60. Is the General/Community Plan for these transit focus areas consistent with the Land
Use Distribution Element? If yes. do not answer question 92.
Yes
x
No
Not Applicable
The City of ChuJa Vista has policies that address both the redevelopment around trolley
stations sites in the western ponion of the City and plans for mixed-use village cores
on the Otay Ranch
61. Has the general and/or community plan been updated in the past two years?
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
_/, -
9- c1 ~
62. If a general/community plan was updated, did that planning process:
a) evaluate at least one alternative in which the intensity of development proposed
in the transit focus areas equal or exceed the intensities indicated in the Land
Use Distribution Element;
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
b) evaluate at least one alternative that would encourage the development of mixed
use cores in the transit focus areas and other community centers;
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
c) consider at least one alternative that would decrease allowed intensities in areas
outside of transit focus areas or in areas not served by an urban level of transit
service;
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
d) evaluate at least one alternative that would encourage the development of housing
and appropriate supporting facilities in employment areas of more than 1,000
acres;
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
e) adopt changes to bring the updated plan(s) into conformance with the Land Use
Distribution Element, consistent with the availability of public services (including
schools and local parks)1
Yes
No
Not Applicable
x
63. During the past two years:
a) How many projects in the transit focus area have been subject to discretionary
review?
None
b) How many of these projects conform with the Land Use Distribution Element?
Not applicable.
~
~
9-~;7
64. During the past two years:
a) How many acres of vacant land have been approved for development (final
subdivision map or building permit)?
During calendar years 1994 and 1995, 687 acres of vacant lands within the City
were authorized for development through approval of Final Parcel and Subdivision
Maps. This acreage includes residential, commercial and industrial lands.
b) How much of this land had a high natural habitat value?
Of the 687 acres, 256 acres were deemed to have a high habitat value under the
auspices of the Endangered Species Act, and required a 4(d) permit for the "take".
The City's case file number for that action is CS-95-0L All 256 acres were
within the larger 407.8 acre master final mapping area for Rancho del Rey
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) III.
65. Does your jurisdiction have:
a) zoning classifications and subdivision regulations that encourage mixed use
developments and higher intensities in transit focus areas;
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
However, the zoning regulations forthe first two village cores on the Otay Ranch,
which are mixed use transit focus areas located along a future light rail transit
line. are expected to be adopted in the Spring of 1996.
b) street and road standards that are consistent with the policies of the Land Use
Distribution Element (unless there are no tracts of developable land large enough
to require new streets or alleys); and
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
However, policies contained in the adopted 23,000 acre Otay Ranch General
Development Plan do support the Land Use Distribution Element and, the street
and road standards for the first two village cores on the OlaY Ranch, which are
located along a future light rail transit line, are expected to be adopted in the
Spring of 1996.
c. design guidelines for development that are consistent with th~ policies of the Land
Use Distribution Element?
Yes
No
x
Not Applicable
A ,
"9-~f
However. design guidelines in support of the Land Use Distribution Element
policies are anticipated to be adopted for the Otay Ranch development in the
Spring of 1996.
_",k..2
---~~-
Cp :""cl
/.-1/
(') .'.7/)
7- )~
LAND USE DISTRIBUTION
ELEMENT OF THE REGIONAL
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
February 1995
{
San Diego
~
ASSOCL\T10N OF
GOVERNMENTS
Sen Diego Auocietion of Governments
401 B Street. Suite 800
San Diego. CA 92101
(619) 595-5300
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities af C'Tllbld, Chull Vistl. Coronado. Del Mar, EI Cljon, Encinitls. Elcondido,lmperillBllch. LI Mell, Limon GrovI.
NI,'onl' CIty. Ocelnlide, POWlY, Sin OligO. Sin MarcoI, Slntee, Sollnl Belch, Villi, Ind Coun,y 01 Sin Diego. ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS:
California Dep'Mment of TransportatIon, U.S. Department of Oefenle, San Diego Unified Pon District and Tijulnl/Bljl C.lifomillMexico.
._-"l ';?- 7-33
,
.
Board of Directors
SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
I
The San Diego Association of Governments (SANOAGI is I public 1\lIncy formed voluntarily by
10cII governments to Issure overl" Irllwidl pllnning Ind coordinltion for the Sin Diego region.
Votin\l members include the incorporlted Citils of Clrlsbld, Chull Vistl, Coronldo, Del Mer, EI Cljon,
Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach. La Me.a, Lemon Grove, National City. Oc.anside.
Poway. San Diego. San Marcos. Slntee, Sollnl BIICh, Vistl. Ind thl County of Sin Diego.
Advisory Ind Lilison members include Clltrlns, U.S. Olplrtment of Olflnse,
Sin Diego Unified Port District, Ind Tijulnl/Bljl Cllifornil/Mexico.
I
I
CHAIRMAN: Hon. Mike Bixler
VICE CHAIRMAN: Hon. Elliot Plrks
SECRETARY-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Kenneth E. Sulzer
I
CITY OF CARlSIAD
Hon. Ramon. Finnila. Councilmember
(AI Hon. Bud l.ewis, Mayor
CITY OF POWAY
Hon. Don Higginson. Mayor
(AI Hon. Bob Emery. Councilmember
(AI Hon. Mickey C.f.gnl, Councilmember
I
CITY OF CHUlA VISTA
Hon. Shlrlev Honan, Mayor
(A) Hon. Jerry Rmdone. Mayor Pro Tem
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
Hon. Judy McC.ny. Councilmembe,
(AI Hon. B.rb.r. Warden, Councilmembe,
(A) Hon. Valerie Stlllingl. Councilmemb'r
I
CtTY OF CORONADO
Hon. Ma'Y' Herron. Mlyor
(AI Hon. David Blumenthal. Councilmember
)
CITY OF OEl MAR
Hon. Ethot Parks, Councitmember
(AI Hon. Mark Whitehead, Councitmember
tAl Hon. Henry Ab.rb,nel, Deputy Mayor
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
Hon. F.H. .Corky. Smith, Mayor
(A) Vac.nt
I
CITY OF ENCINITAS
Hon. Chuck Du Vivier, Meyor
(A) Hon. G.il Hano, CounCllmember
CITY OF SANTEE
Hon. Jack Dlle, Mayor
(A) Hon. Hal Ryan, CounCilme,mber
CITY OF SOLANA lEACH
Hon. M.rion Oodlon, Deputy M.yor
(A) Hon. T.ri R.nteri., M.yor
(AI Hon. Joe KIlI.ji'n, Councilm.mber
J
CITY OF El CAJON
Hon. Rrcherd R.mos, Councilmember
(AI Hon. Mark LeWIS. Councilmember
CITY OF ESCONOIOO
Hon. Jerry Harmon, Council member
(AI Hon. lor. Holt Pfeil." Councilmember
CITY OF VISTA
Hon. Gloria E. McClell.n, M.yor
(AI Hon. Ed Estes, Councilmember
I
CITY OF IMPERtAl lEACH
Hon. Mike Blld.r, Mayor
(AI Hon. Gail Benda, Councilmemb.r
COUNTY OF IAN DIEGO
Hon. Pam SI.tlr, Supervilor
(AI Hon. Bill Horn, Supervilor
(A~ Hon. Grlg Cox, Supervilor
I
CITY OF LEMON GROVE
Hon. Jerome Ltgetton, Mayor Pro Tem
(AI Hon. Craig Like, Councilmembtr
STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
(Advilory Memberl
Jame. van Loben 5.11, Director
(AI Glry GlIIoGOI. Diltrict 1 t Dirlctor
U.S. DEPAIITMENT OF DEFENSE
ILiailon Mambor)
CAPT. Tom Gunn. CEC. USN
Commanding OHic,r SouthWelt Diviaion
NavII Facilit... Engineering Command
J
CITY OF LA MESA
Hon. Art Madrid, Mayor
(AI Hon. elrry Jlnu, Councilmember
(AI Hon. Jay uSuer, Councilmember
J
J
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
Hon. Re.aH. Za, It I , Councilm.mber
(AI G.orge H. Wlter., Mayor
IAN DIEGO UNIFIED I'OlIT DISTRICT
(Adviaory Memberl
...... Van Deventlf. Commillioner
J
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
Hon. Dick Lyon, Mayor
(AI Hon. Coll.en O'HI"I, Oeputy Mayor
TUUANAIlIAJA CAllFORNlAlMEXICO
(Adviaory Member)
Hon. Hector G. Oluna Jaime
Pr"idente Municipal de liJu.na
)
111_ Februll'f 13, 1"&
i
J
ii
""~
~--3~
f
ABSTRACT
TITLE:
AUTHOR:
DATE:
SOURCE OF COPIES:
NUMBER OF PAGES:
ABSTRACT,
Land Use Distribution Element of the
Regional Growth Management Strategy
San Diego Association of Governments
February 1995
San Diego Association of Governments
401 B Street, Suite 800
San Diego, California 92101
(619) 595-5300
37
As part of the Regional Growth Management
Strategy, the Land Use Distribution Element
strives to distribute San Diego's future
population growth in a manner that maintains
and enhances the region's quality of life.
Specifically, it recommends that cities revise
their general plans to include policies that
would focus development in areas with good
transit access, improve pedestrian
circulation, and provide housing in
employment areas.
111
~o
~- -,.~/~ fA
../' - -.,'., """- O\f'
~ Sun Dlc!:(D
ASSOC(UIO~ OF
GOYER~;\IE~TS
FITst Interstate Plaza, Suite BOO
40' B Street
San Diego. California 921 01
(619) 595.5300 Fa, (6'9, 595.5305
RESOLLTIOS
So.
95-39
APPROVING THE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT
OF TIlE REGIONAL GROWTII MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
AS REGIONAL POllCY GUIDANCE
WHEREAS, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) selVes as the
Regional Planning and Growth Management Review Board (Regional Board) for the San Diego
region; and
WHEREAS, SANDAG, selVing as the Regional Board, is authorized to prepare a
strategy for managing growth, and
WHEREAS, the Regional Planning and Growth Control Initiative of 1988
recommended the preparation of a Land Use Distribution Element to balance jobs and housing
in the region; and
\VHEREAS, the cities, the County of San Diego and various regional agencies have
participated in the preparation of the Land Use Distribution Element of the Regional Growth
Management Strategy; and
WHEREAS, the cities and the County of San Diego have commented on the draft
Land Use Distribution Element; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Growth Management Technical Committee has
recommended approval of the Land Use Distribution Element; NOW lHEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the SANDAG Board of Directors, selVing as the Regional
Planning and Growth Management Review Board for the San Diego region, hereby approves the
Land Use Distribution Element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy as regional policy
guidance to local agencies for use in updating local general and community plans.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of February 1995.
~13~
ATTEST:
.....,---"'p;.'-
.....EMBEFl AGENCIES C,t,~s 01 Carlsbad C"'ula Vista, CorOl'1adc D.' Mar, EI C.jc...., EnoM,,u Esco,",{lido, Im~q.1 e..d1, LA. Mesa, L.mol"l Grove. NatIonal c,ry, Oc.ansidt',
Powa,. San 0..;0 Sa.., Marcos. Sanl.. $ola". B..ch, Vista and County of San OI.QO
A:JVIS::~Y/lIAiSO~. MEMBERS CaHo''1I. DE'~a"f""'I.,..,t 0' Tra"lsQonatlon, U S oeoartmel'll 0' o.l.nse and TJjua!"lalBaja Ca!,ior"1,a
7 ~~/ /1- 32
CHAIRPERSON
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Land Use Distribution Element was prepared with the cooperation and assistance of
the Regional Growth Management Teclutical Committee.
REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT
TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
San Diego Association of Governments
CHAIR: Dave Wear, City Manager
City of La Mesa
PAST CHAIR: Ray Patchett, City Manager
City of Carlsbad
City of CarIsbad
Michael Holzmiller. Planning Director
Dennis Turner. Principal Planner
City of Lemon Grove
James Butler, Community Development
Director
\
City of Chula Vista
Bob Leiu:r. Director of Planning
City of National City
Roger Post, Planning Director
City of Coronado
Ed Kleeman, Senior Planner
City of Oceanside
Mike Blessing, Planning Director
City of Del Mar
James Sandoval, Planning Director
City of Poway
Reba Wright-Quastier, Planning Director
City of EI Cajon
James Griffin, Planning Director
City of San Diego
Paul Fiske, Senior Planner
City of Encinitas
Sandy Holder, Planning Director
City of San Marcos
Jerry Backoff, Division Director of the
Planning Division
City of Escondido
Charles Grimm, Planning Director
Cll)' of Sanue
Niall Fritz, Director of Planning &:
Community Development
City of Imperial Beacb
Gary Barberio, Acting Planning
Director
City of La Mesa
David Win, Community Development
Director
City of Solana Beacb
Steven Apple, Community Development
Director
vii
-..1~~
?~3j1' ~
J
City of Vista
Tom Bell. Director of Community
Development
Port District
Fred Trull, Planning Director
t
Count). or San Diego
Gerry Hermanson, Deputy Director,
Regional Planning
Janel Pehau, Analyst IV or Economics
and Demographics
LotaI Alenoy Formation Commission
Michael On, Executive Officer
I
Metropolitan Tr&DSit Development Board
Bill Lieberman, Director of Planning
and Operation
Regional Waler Quality Control Board
Anhur Coe, Executive Officer
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
J
J
I
AIr PoUutlon Control District
Richard Sommerville, Air Pollution
Control Officer
Andre.. Hamilton. Air Quality
Specialisl Indirect Sources
North County TransIt District
Leslie Blanda, Principal Planner
County Warer Authority
Gordon Hess, Director of Water
Resources Planning
U.S. Department of DefellSt
A. Douglas Lemaire, Special Assistant
on Intergovernmental Affairs
The following staff of the San Diego Association of Governments contributed to the
preparation of this report:
Kenneth E. Sulzer, Executive Director
Stuart Shaffer, Deputy Executive Director
Michael Mclaughlin, Director of Land Use and Public Facilities Planning
Lee Hultgren, Director of Transportation
Bob Parrot. Director of Research
George Franck, Senior Regional Planner, Project Manager
Susan Baldwin, Senior Regional Planner
Jeffrey Tayman. Senior Regional Planner
Beth Strehle. Intern
Carolina Gregor. Intern
vii}
J
~
I
;.
, ' .
'~q~1()"
~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GOALS ............................................ 3
BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
SUMMARY OF THE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT ......... 4
IMPACTS OF THE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT .......... 5
OBJECTIVES ........................................ 7
POLICIES .......................................... 9
Land Use Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9
Related Trar.sportJltion Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16
ACTIOI'S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18
Cities and the County ................................ 18
San Diego Association of Govenunents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19
Transit Development Boards. SANDAG. the County,
and Affected Cities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 20
APPENDICES:
A. CHECKUST QUESTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23
B. ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION
ELEMENT POLICIES TRANSIT FOCUS AREAS . . . . . . . . . .. 27
_~_ q-Lf \1 CJ- 4'L
~i#t(/
Table A
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
LIST OF TABLES
Regional Access Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
LIST OF FIGURES
Travel Corridor Zones (TCZ) .................... 8
Bus Transit Focus Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11
Rail Transit Focus Areas ....................... 12
xi
'----:~ -,
'j' 45/ {}- LIt-/-
,
LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT
REGIONAL GROWTH
MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
.). .Sir'
e ._ --
c/? ~~;- / q - /1lf
LA1\T)) USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT
REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
The purpose of the Regional Growth Management Strategy is to identify the actions we
should take to protect and improve our quality of life. Private and public sector actions
should help make life in this growing region more convenient for all of us, and help us
do the right thing for the region and all of its inhabitants.
The Land Use Distribution Element addresses the location, intensity and design of urban
communities, and the relationship of these communities to the planned transportation
system. This Element is provided as guidance for local jurisdictions in updating their
general and community plans. Land use decisions would remain the prerogative of the
cities and the County. The maintenance r~ local control over land use decisions is a major
objective of the Growth Management SI
(
The intent of this element is to impr
guidelines for changes in the cities' ar
time, these changes would provide'
travel behavior. These changes
anticipated population growth over
~f2
c;Cp /
/Cess and to provide
.nmunity plans. Over
,idents to change their
.1 to accommodate its
GOALS
The following Goals are established for the Land Use Distribution Element:
MAXIMIZE ACCESS TO JOBS, SHOPPING AND SERVICES. AS MEASURED
IN TRAVEL TIME, COST A1\.'O DISTANCE. THROUGH THE DISTRIBUTION
A1\.'O DESIGN OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
PROVIDE sumCIEl'.'T URBAN LAND TO ACCOMMODATE FORECASTED
POPULATION GRO\\'TH WHILE PRESERVING ADEQUATE LAND FOR OPEN
SPACE.
BACKGROUND
During the 1980's, travel in metropolitan areas grew so quickly that today, numerous
federal and state laws and regulations require local governments and regional agencies to
deal directly with traffic congestion and the land use patterns which bellJ create that
congestion.
...
-rr---
9'-1/;7 IL#IIJ
SUMMARY OF THE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
)
I
J
I
I
I
I
J
J
J
I
I
California law now requires the adoption of a Congestion Management Program (CMP)
at the regional leveL The CMP establishes minimum service levels on freeways and major
roads, and requires local agencies to take direct action to maintain mobility in their
jurisdictions. The law funher requires that each city and the County adopt and implement
a Trip Reduction Ordinances (TRO) as pan of the CMP.
In adopting the 1994 Congestion Management Program, the region's Congestion
Management Agency (SANDAG) identified two potential types of TROs: land use based
and employer based. The Land Use Distribution Element includes policies, such as mixed
use development, that will reduce congestion at the regional and local leveL Therefore,
the Element provides the basis for the cities and the County to adopt a TRO that satisfies
the state CMP requirement.
Both state and federal law require local and regional agencies to prepare and implement
plans to improve air quality through controls on automobile traveL In addition, the
California Clean Air Act requires an "Indirect Source Control Program" to minimize air
pollution through land use actions. The best way to implement such a program is to build
in long term land use changes in the general plans of local jurisdictions. This Land Use
Distribution Element is designed to help create these long term changes.
The conventional way in which we locate our homes, businesses and public buildings has
been a major contributor to traffic congestion and poor air quality. Further, the design
of our newer neighborhoods has also forced most of us to make nearly all of our trips, and
our children's trips, by car. Congestion could be reduced if there were a better balance
of jobs and housing in each community, or if, by some other means, we could make travel
easier.
On average. the work trip is the longest daily trip which most of us make. But work trips
represent only about 20 % of the trips made on a normal work day, and nearly half of these
work trips are made during off-peak periods. While a community balance of jobs and
appropriately priced housing could lessen congestion, this balance would not solve all of
the mobility problems we face. To address the full range of mobility needs, the Land Use
Distribution Element addresses shopping and service trips as well as work trips.
In addition, the currently adopted general and community plans do not accommodate the
region's projected residential growth beyond the year 2005. Most of the land planned for
urban residential use would be developed by the year 2005 under current plans, leaving
very few acres available for habitat conservation and regional recreation uses.
This Land Use Distribution Element includes goals, objectives, policies, and actions to
help the region accommodate the forecasted population growth and improve traffic
congestion and air quality. The regional access objectives, shown in Table A, define a
maximum acceptable travel time and ii.tance for work trips, as well as tho~ other trips
which are made to satisfy our shopping, recreation and service needs.
..
": -
I,
~-~f
,
/
The transportation elements of the Regional Growth Management Strategy already identify
many of the actions needed to help meet the access objectives. These include new and
improved facilities identified in the Regional Transportation Plan. and congestion
management initiatives identified in the region's Congestion Management Program. In
addition. adopted air quality Transportation Control Measures include programs which will
help create alternatives to single-occupant automobile traveL
Improvements to the transportation system alone will not allow us to meet the regional
access objectives. Land use actions are needed. too. Therefore, the Land Use
Distribution Element reconunends that new office, residential and other development be
focused around rail transit stations and in major bus corridors. By focusing development
in mixed use centers, more trips will be able to be made by transit. walking and bicycling.
Local trips can be consolidated, the potential use of shoner-range alternative fuel vehicles
can be increased and some trips can be eliminated through the increased use of electronic
travel substitutes.
The Land Use Distribution Element does not reconunend changing the balance of single
family and multiple units which, in any case, is market driven. The Element does
reconunend clustering the multiple family units that would be built in conununities which
are served by a high level of transit. The Element does propose an increase in intensity
of employment and both single family and multiple family units which are built in areas
with good transit access during the next 20 years.
(
Appropriate design is required to make the focusing of development work. Therefore. the
Land Use Distribution Element reconunends the preparation of design guidelines which
identify desirable design characteristics of development, buildings and public facilities
(including streets. sidewalks and bicycle routes).
The ideas contained in this strategy are not new. They are an integral part of the adopted
Otay Ranch Plan, MTDB's Transit Development Guidelines, the County's Transportation
Demand Management Program and the City of San Diego's Land Guidance Program.
The Land Use Distribution Element also proposes that existing employment areas. which
are outside of potential transit focus areas, should be planned to include a residential
element. As long as environmental conditions do not prevent residential uses, major
employment areas should acconunodate appropriately priced housing and support facilities
to meet the needs of some of the employees working in these areas. The streets within
these employment areas should provide for transit. bicycle and pedestrian circulation as
well as automobile traveL
IMPACTS OF TIlE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION ELEMENT
With increased intensities and mixed-use development in transit focus areas, the land
proposed for urbanization in current general and conununity plans would more than
acconunodate the projected population growth. Vacant land also wO'lld remain to allow
for regional recreation and natural habitat preservation.
~
rCt.h.-
'l'-1/:?
j
6
I r
1
J
I
J
I
J
)
I
J
)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
The concepts contained in this Land Use Distribution Element were evaluated as a pan of
the regional growth forecasting process. This evaluation indicated that, when compared
with adopted general and community plans, the implementation of these concepts would
require the use of significantly fewer acres of vacant land to accommodate the region's
forecasted population growth.
The consequences of not accommodating the demand for urban housing include an increase
in the cost of housing due to reduced availability of residential land. Increased housing
cost and limited housing supply will lead to more people living in each house or
apartment, placing additional demands on the schools and other public facilities in existing
communities.
If the cities and the County do not adequately plan for growth, additional development
pressure will be placed on rural areas of the county: on both the existing rural
communities and on the areas of the county that are not currently planned for urbanization.
Roads, schools and other public facilities are not planned to serve urban development in
these communities.
Urban development of rural areas would result in longer shopping and service trips, as
well as longer home-to-work trips. In addition to reducing trip length, implementation of
the Land Use Distribution Element would reduce both the number of trips made in the
region and the total volume of automobile travel, as well as provide some improvement
in air quality. Implementation of the Land Use Distribution Element would reduce
pressure to develop areas planned for very low density residential use for urban density
housing and commercial uses.
While each station area would be affected in a different way, anerial street congestion
actually decreased when the land use element policies were compared with existing
development policies. This occurred primarily because people who live in more urban
places are able to combine trips and make fewer trips. Nevertheless, more intense
development near the transit stations could increase traffic congestion on local streets in
some neighborhoods. This potential impact should be addressed through the general and
community plan revision process.
If more homes are built near the transit stations, these communities will probably require
additional public services such as schools, parks and libraries. Expanding facilities in
urbanized communities is more difficult than building new facilities on the fringe because
of the lack of available land, the cost of tand and the lack of an adequate funding
mechanism (such as a facilities benefit assessment district).
Public facility needs must be addressed if the Land Use Distribution Element is CO improve
the region's quality of life. Therefore, the Element suggests that intensification be
considered only as pan of a general or community plan update. Such an update would
include an evaluation of public facilities needs. To suppon the Element, funding for
public facilities in the transit station areas should ~ive a high priority.
-/-5/J
There is also concern that higher intensity development may result in increased crime.
Studies at the state level have shown that characteristics like income levels are more
closely related to crime than is housing density. Also, multiple family housing will
continue to occur in the region, and transit station areas and major bus corridors are a
good place to focus this development to take advantage of the investments we are making
in transit infrastructure.
In fact, the Land Use Distribution Element is offered as one way to bener balance the
housing in each community. While the element would require special anention to the
adequacy of public facilities, it would help the region achieve its quality of life standards
and objectives for transponation, air quality, access, and open space.
OBJECTIVES
Objective 1: Average travel times and distances for borne-based trips in all parts of
the region should be no greater than those shown in Table A.
(
Table A
REGIONAL ACCESS OBJECTIVES
AREA! TRAVEL TIME TRAVEL DISTANCE
Travel Mode Minutes Miles
URBAN AREAS Work Other Work Other
Automobile 19 10 10.6 5.1
Transit SO 35 11.0 7.5
RURAL AREAS
Automobile 60 20 19.4 12.0
In addition to the quality of life standards and objectives that have been adopted for
transponation and air quality. the Land Use Distribution Element establishes access
objectives for maximum average travel times and distances for work trips and other trips
from or to the home. Objectives are provided for both transit and automobile trips in
urban areas and for automobile trips in rural areas.
The access objectives in Table A are based on forecasted 2015 travel times and distances
for the urban and rural zones shown on Figure 1. The travel time and distance are based
on approximately 60% of the zones meeting the objectives if the region developed under
current general plan and transponation policies.
The policies and actions in this Land Use Distribution Element are designed to help the
entire region achieve these access objectives within the 20-year time-frame of the Regional
Transponaticn Plan and :egional growth forecasts.
.:f/>
.~
;1-5/
1
--c::z I
I
I
I
J
It) )
...
I
C7l I
J
I
... J
CD
]
J
~Vl J
Ul co z'"'
~ ~ a: OZ
8 .Il:l
N g,t(:!
~ iE ...z
e a:N' i5~:l I
:l Ou · 8
:l a: ..~t:. i ~<
DO !I&I CIl
>1&1 j~ )
lCZ
~2
I
+ I
~
9'-5~ ,.
Achievement of these objectives would ensure that al1 residents of the region would have
equitable access to jobs, shopping and services regardless of where they live. Because of
multiple-worker households, home ownership or other factors, some of the region's
residents will continue to commute long distances. Individual mismatches of jobs and
housing wil1 inevitably occur; however, the opportunity would exist to work, shop and
receive services near home.
Objective 2: Adequate vacant land should be preserved to accommodate habitat
conservation areas and a full range of open space opportunities.
The Open Space Element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy is being prepared
based on the need for recreation areas as wel1 as natural habitat preservation. A policy
and actions promoting Sensitive Lands and Open Space Preservation and ProteCtion were
adopted as a part of the Phase 1 Regional Growth Management Strategy in 1993. This
policy is being refmed, and additional actions will be proposed as part open space planning
efforts.
Habitat conservation plans are being prepared based on an extensive data collection,
mapping and evaluation effort. Although many general and community plans preserve a
portion of the existing habitat areas, it is anticipated that the habitat plans will require
additional preservation of land planned for urbanization. Additional land also should be
reserved for other open space needs identified in SANDAG's open space planning studies.
Once these plans are defmed, this goal can be quantified.
(
This Land Use Distribution Element addresses growth during the next 20 years. Although
the policies in the Element would accommodate the anticipated population and preserve
adequate land for a habitat system, the region would face a similar shortage of vacant
residential land beyond the year 2015. As the forecast is updated and as conditions
change, the Regional Growth Management Strategy must continue to address the region's
future needs.
POUCIES
Land use policies will help the region achieve the goals and objectives of the Land Use
Distribution Element. In addition, related transportation Policies also will be needed if the
objectives are to be realized.
Land Use Policies:
The fol1owing land use policies, if implemented by the cities and the County, would result
in a better balance of residential, employment, commercial and institutional uses in the
region's major travel corridors. Implementation of these policies would make it easier for
the region's residents to avoid unnecessary travel and would help preserve an adequate
amount of vacant land for habitat preservation and recreation.
.!r
~-
'/- !J"-3
,
Existing residential densities in many of the major bus corridors, for example EI
Cajon Boulevard and University Avenue, already exceed the densities recommended
for consideration in the Land Use Distribution Element. Employment intensities in
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
J
I
I
1. Transportation facilities should be designed to meet the Deeds of pedestrians and
bicycle riders as weU as automobile drivers.
Circulation Elements of local general plans should emphasize pedestrian and bicycle
facilities for trips within communities. Direct pedestrian access should be provided
to transit stations and within transit corridors.
Street design can playa significant role in increasing pedestrian, bicycle and transit
trips throughout the region. In transit focus areas, pedestrian travel should receive
priority. To make walking easier, major streets in al1 areas should be as narrow as
possible, while still accommodating emergency vehicle, bus and automobile
circulation. The provision of medians on major streets is another way to facilitate
pedestrian movement.
Local general and community plans should also provide for streets and roads which
connect communities, reducing the need to use the region's freeways for relatively
short trips. These local streets and roads also facilitate more direct automobile and
bus transit access.
2. Higher land use intensities should be located in transit access areas.
The highest employment intensities and residential densities permitted in the region
should be located in major bus transit corridors (Figure 2) and within walking
distance -- about 1/4 mile - of planned rail transit stations (Figure 3). Two
classifications of transit stations are shown on Figure 3. The station areas located
on Regional (or funded) Transit Corridors are the primary focus of the Land Use
Distribution Element.
Potential Transit Corridors are identified in the Regional Transportation Plan as
corridors that could become major corridors, if land use policies that increase the
intensity of land uses in the corridors are adopted by local jurisdictions. Chula Vista
and the County have already taken this type of action in approving the Otay Ranch
Plan. Further study of the Potential Transit Corridors will be completed as
SANDAG refines the region's long-range transit plan for future Regional
Transportation Plans.
To insure sufficient ridership potential in major bus transit corridors and near the
stations, a minimum average net density of 20 housing units per acre is desirable.
Within a quarter mile of rail transit stations, average employment intensities should
be at least 60 workers per acre (a floor area ratio of approximately 0.50). In major
bus corridors, average employment intensities should be at least 45 workers per acre
(a floor area ratio of approximately 0.35).
.,
~- ;;d
,
~,
---
"-~~
-.~~~
----
'-"
Clom.
'.nal.l0n
"
Oc..nside
(
OeIM8r .,
Ion
Diogo
Figure 2
BUS TRANSIT FOCUS AREAS
_ lu. Servlc. Corridor.
. Trllnalt C.n..ra
o
.
MI..ES
"
Tijual'lll.C.
~
(il SaD Diego
" I ASSOCI.~ TlO:S' OF
~'GO'"ERS~1ESTS
tmpenai
".ct!
@
JtcR
, ~,
<:/-55
~
~~,
-----
eo...
""'dleUln
Figure 3
RAIL TRANSIT FOCUS AREAS
. Station A,... . Regional T""8tt Corrldora
o 'aUon ArM' . PotanUal T,.nllt Corridor.
o ,
"'ILlS
~Sall D1ego
. .o\SSOCu. TJO~ OF
GO'"ERSMEXTS
~
""~ri.1
".eh
TljYlna.I.C.
dlf;.
,
, ~-
'7-~5 6
j.
I
,
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
.
r
these areas generally do not. Intensification in these corridors should, therefore,
primarily focus on increasing job opportunities within these communities and on
providing needed community facilities and services in a walkable environment.
Where current economic conditions do not permit development at these intensities,
site plans should be designed to allow for a higher density on the project site in the
future. For example, surface parking could be planned for future conversion to
structured parking and additional economic uses, including housing.
Implementation of this action would require most jurisdictions to change their
general or community plans. Outside of downtown San Diego and several other
major activity centers, the employment intensities proposed in general and
community plans are relatively low.
This intensification could occur either by (a) a balance for the lowering of proposed
intensities in areas that are not served by a high level of transit service to balance
intensities or (b) increasing the permitted amount of development in a jurisdiction.
The second of these alternatives is preferable if the second regional objective (of
open space preservation) is to be achieved. However, local jurisdictions should
make this decision based on the needs of the community.
(
3. Mixed-use development should be encouraged in commuDity center areas,
including the areas surrounding rail transit stations and within the bus transit
corridors.
Within the transit focus areas, a higher intensity mix of residential, employment,
shopping and service uses should be required. Allowing residential uses above the
ground floor also should be considered for existing commercial areas. These mixed-
use areas will permit many of the local trips to be made by foot or bicycle, and will
make pedestrian access to transit stops more convenient.
Mixed use development also is appropriate for community centers which are outside
of the transit focus areas, because it provides the opportunity to consolidate trips and
encourages walking trips. These community center areas are located in several of
the suburban cities, as well as rural communities. As these centers intensify and add
residential uses, they may become appropriate locations for future transit facilities.
It is recognized that not al1 transit stations are suitable for higher intensity, mixed
use development. For example, a rail station located within the influence area of an
airport may have intensity limits that are below those recommended in this Element.
Similarly, some station areas may not be suitable for residential development because
of noise impacts from airports or from adjacent freeway facilities.
~
<::L;~
f?- 5;7
t
14
c;.- ~-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
J
I
J
J
1
)
I
4. A mix of housing types and prices should be provided within WalkiDg distance
of transit stations and in transit corridors.
This mix of housing should include smal1-lot single family units, town houses and
apartments. This mix would provide for a range of housing opportunities in each
community, and help each jurisdiction achieve the goals in the Regional Housing
Needs Statement. The higher density, more affordable housing in the transit
corridors would be balanced against the larger lot developments located farther from
the station.
5. More intensively used public facilities should be located Dear transit stations and
stops, within walking or biking distance of the communities they serve.
Libraries, urban paries, hospitals, churches and most civic buildings are examples of
more intensively used public facilities. The location of the more intensively used
public facilities in the denser areas near high level transit service will increase the
opportunity for people to travel to these facilities by walking, riding a bike and
transit. In rural areas, this type of public facility should also be located within
commercial centers.
Public facilities which require more land, such as schools and active recreation sites,
should be located near the edges of the mixed-use transit focus areas, adjacent to
lower density residential uses.
6. Parking requirements should be reduced within transit focus areas, with OD-
street parking provided in the mixed-use c:ommuDity core areas, whenever
possible.
In anticipation of decreased automobile use, the lowering of parking requirements
should be considered in coordination with the adoption of transportation demand
management programs. The lower parking requirement would lower costs and
provide an incentive to develop near the transit stations and in transit corridors.
On-street parking in the transit focus areas helps to create a more walkable
environment by separating the pedestrian from vehicular traffic. When on-street
parking is not possible, pedestrians should be separated from vehicular traffic by
landscaping or other suitable barrier.
7. Residential uses should be incorporated into existin& employmeDt areas that are
located outside of the transit focus areas.
Local general and community plans should permit appropriately sited residential uses
within large employment areas that are not provided with a high level of transit
service, unless potential environmental hazards exist. An objective of providing
housing for the workers employed in the area should be established in the general
planning process.
f
(
The potential price range of this housing should be based on the types of
employment in the area. The general plan also should ensure the adequate provision
of public facilities, including schools and recreation areas.
8.
Public facility Deeds In transit station areas, reKional bus corridors and major
employmeDt ceDters should receive a high priority If the plans for these areas
meet the objectives of the Land Use Distribution Element.
As intensities are increased in transit station areas, regional bus corridors and major
employment centers, there will be a need for improved schools, parks, libraries, and
other public facilities. Many of these areas are located in established communities,
where existing facilities do not meet current general and community plan standards.
Special funding programs to provide these facilities do Dot exist in many of these
established communities.
Adequate public facilities in these commurutles are needed if the Land Use
Distribution Element is to preserve the region's quality of life. The region should
support efforts at the State level to provide public facility funding programs for
existing communities. In addition, these areas should receive funding priority from
regional and local programs.
\.
9. A higher priority for the implementatioD of a high level of transit service should
be given to corridors where land use plans support transit services.
Transit services are most cost effective in corridors and communities which are
designed to be served by transit. These design characteristics include moderate
residential and employment intensities within walking distances of transit stations or
major transit streets, direct pedestrian circulation panerns and a pleasant walking
environment.
Areas and corridors with these characteristics should produce greater transit ridership
than conventionally designed areas where walking is difficult and more intense
development is dispersed. In funding new transit facilities and services, the region
should give a higher priority to places where cities or the County have adopted
general or community plans which support those facilities and services.
10. Design guidelines should be used to encourage the developmeDt of transit- and
pedestrian-friendly commuDities.
/
Local jurisdictions should adopt design guidelines for neW and redeveloping areas.
These guidelines should emphasize non-automobile travel, permitting more
convenient access by pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders. It is expected that
these guidelines will be based on the extensive planning work already completed by
several local jurisdictions in the region. Model guidelines could be developed by the
Regional Growth Management Technical Committee, if needed.
fF
~
P--5f 4.--
.
at>
,
I
I
J
I
J
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
r
While design guidelines are needed most in the transit focus areas, they also should
address the design of lower density areas as well. In the areas surrounding the
transit focus areas (between one-quarter and two miles from transit stations or major
bus corridors). pedestrian and bicycle linkages also are needed. These linkages
would provide for both internal circulation and access to the transit focus areas.
Even in rural communities, appropriate design would reduce the need for automobile
travel.
11. Lower land use intensities should be located in areas with low levels of transit
services or DO transit services.
In areas that are not proposed for a high level of transit service. higher intensity
development should be discouraged. For example, new development on conventional
single family lots should be located beyond walking distance of rail transit stations
or major bus corridors. In auto-oriented areas, intensities should be established that
will not diminish highway levels of service below those adopted in the Regional
Growth Management Strategy and Congestion Management Program, (see page 12
and 13).
Particularly for employment areas, local agencies should review proposed intensities
of areas that are not in transit focus areas. Many of the planned employment areas
in the region have low development intensities and therefore are difficult to serve
with transit. In those areas, employment intensities should be reduced to a level that
would not have an adverse impact on the region's highway system or proposed land
uses should be changed to permit an appropriate level of residential development.
Transit corridor planning considers, and should continue to consider, the location of
major activity centers within the region. High levels of transit service should not
be planned for open space and sensitive habitat areas.
Related Transportation Policies:
In order to achieve the access objectives of the Land Use Distribution Element, a
combination of land use and transportation policies and actions will be required. In
addition to the land use policies listed above, a range of transportation agency policies and
actions also are important in improving travel time.
The following policies are drawn from other elements of the Regional Growth
Management Strategy and the Regional Transportation Plan. Actions to implement these
policies also are contained in those elements or the Regional Transportation Plan. The
related transportation policies are listed below to acknowledge the important relationship
of land use and transportation programs in achieving regional objectives.
5'{~
':/--5 'J'
1. Traffic now improvements.
Through the adoption of the Transportation Control Measures (TCM) Plan, the
region has committed to making a substantial improvement in the optimization of
traffic signals to reduce congestion, energy use and improve air quality.
Approximately half of the region's 2,000 signals have been coordinated or optimized
through an existing State-funded program, with all signals scheduled for optimization
by the year 2000.
Traffic now improvements are the most cost-effective TCM evaluated as part of the
air quality planning program. Because they tend to decrease travel times, they are
criticized for potentially increasing trip distances and even inducing additional
automobile trips. Nevertheless, traffic flow improvements are included in the Air
Quality TCM's and Congestion Management Plan.
Traffic flow improvement projects near rail transit stations and in major bus
corridors should improve pedestrian access in the community. Projects which do
improve pedestrian circulation in these areas should receive a high priority for
regional funding.
2.
Transit improvements and expansion.
(
This measure expands the 20-year Regional Transportation Plan and the seven-year
Short Range Transit Plans of the region's two transit development boards. The
measure consists of the conversion of the current bus fleet to low emission vehicles,
the expansion of bus services, and the expansion of the rail transit services. The
lack of operating funds for transit service expansion remains a major problem in the
implementation of this policy.
The RTP identifies two types of regional transit corridors: those for which funding
has been identified (primarily the local transportation sales tax - TransNet) and those
which are not yet funded. Priorities for implementing regional transit improvements
in the unfunded corridors should be based primarily on the ability of existing and
planned land uses in the corridor to support the service. The Transit Development
Boards are encouraged to maintain or, when possible, increase transit service in the
bus corridors identified on Figure 2.
3. Transportation System ManagemeDt (priority treatments),
Transit will be given priority as a part of the proposed traffic flow improvements
through traffic signal preemption, signal timing and the designation of special lanes
for transit use. Within the transit focus areas, traffic flow improvements should
include the consideration of pedestrian and bicycle travel. On many freeways and
some arterial streets, High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes will decrease travel
tir.1es for transit riders and carpool users. These priority treatments are included in
'B'
rv
'7- ~ ('/
I
a. consider at least one alternative that would increase the intensity of
development in the transit focus areas,
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
J
J
J
I
J
I
I
I
the Regional Transportation Plan, Air Quality TCM's and Congestion Management
Plan.
4. Telecommuting, home-based shopping and other technological alternatives to the
single-occupant automobile trip.
Electronic communication provides a convenient alternative to many of the work,
shopping and service trips which most people make today. Alternatives to physical
travel should be encouraged, but specific governmental action is not recommended
at this time. Telecommuting is a permitted tactic in the regional trip reduction
program which is part of the TCM Plan.
S. Market-based strategies to reduce automobile travel.
Strategies that require auto drivers to pay more of the trUe cost of automobile travel
should result in shorter trips for employment, shopping and services. As part of the
Air Quality TCM's, SANDAG has adopted mileage- and pollution-based vehicle
registration fees as the region's primary "market-based" strategy for decreasing
automobile travel.
Market-based strategies are being evaluated through a Statewide study. The
Transportation Control Measures Plan will be reviewed periodically and when other
options are available, such as market-based measures, it can be revised accordingly.
ACTIOl'S
The following actions would implement the land use distribution policies listed above
(policies 1-9). Actions to implement the related transportation policies are contained in
the Regional Transportation Plan and other elements of the Regional Growth Management
Strategy. These actions also will help monitor the achievement of the two objectives of
the Land Use Distribution Element.
The "Transit Focus Areas" identified in the following actions are defmed as areas with a
high level of transit service. These areas include major bus corridors (shown in Figure 2)
and areas within walking distance of existing and planned rail transit stations (shown in
Figure 3 as Regional Transit Corridors - Station Areas). Figure 3 also identifies "Potential
Transit Corridors - Station Areas" referred to in action 10.
Cities and the County
1. During the comprehensive update of the land use, open space and transpOn&tion
elements of general or community plans, the cities and the County will:
e
~~"
?-~/
,
b. consider at least one alternative that would encourage the development of
mixed-use community cores in the transit focus areas and other community
centers,
c. consider at least one alternative that would decrease moderate and high
intensity development in areas which are not located in transit focus areas,
d. consider at least one alternative that would encourage the development of
housing and appropriate support facilities in employmcnt areas of more than
1,000 acres, and
e. adopt all reasonable changes to bring their updated general and community
plan elements into conformance with the Land Use Distribution Element,
provided that adequate public facilities (including schools and local parks) are
availablc or programmed to support these changes.
2. The cities and the County wil1 encourage the implementation of the Land Use
Distribution Element through the discretionary review of projects required by
existing plans and ordinances.
3. The cities and the County, with the assistance of SANDAG, wil1 evaluate the
potential impacts of land use alternatives that increase intensities and encourage
mixed use communities in the transit focus areas.
(
4. The cities and the County will monitor the consumption of total vacant land and
vacant land with high habitat value within its jurisdiction.
5. In implementing their general and community plans, the cities and the County wil1
consider zoning classifications and subdivision regulations that encourage mixed use
devclopments and higher intensities in transit focus areas and other community core
areas.
6. In implementing their general and community plans, the cities and the County wil1
consider changes to their street and road standards that are consistent with the
policies of this Land Use Distribution Element.
7. In implementing their general and community plans, the cities and the County will
prepare or consider changes to their design guidelines for development that are
consistent with the policies of this Land Use Distribution Element.
San Dieao AssociatiOD of Governments
8. SANDAG wil1 monitor the average travel times and distances for the 15 Travel
Corridor Zones.
".
""
.~f
'7~?c2
.
12. The County and affected cities will complete the multiple species habitat
cOllSiervation plans and incorporate those plans into the general and community plans.
I
,
I
I
1
I
I
I
~
,
9. SANDAG will provide the cities and the County with model zoning codes, ~esign
guidelines, subdivision ordinances and street design guidelines which are in
conformance with the Land Use Distribution Element policies.
Transit Development Boards, SAJIo'DAG, the County, and Affected Cities
10. The transit development boards, SANDAG and the affected cities will evaluate the
potential of transit service improvements in conjunction with increased land use
intensities and mixed-use development in the five potential regional transit corridors
identified in Figure 3.
11. SANDAG, the County and the affected cities, with the assistance of the transit
development boards, will address the issue of funding for needed public facilities,
especially in the areas near transit stations or in transit corridors.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Q-(P3
)
~
,
~
~
- .
APPENDIX A
CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
Land Use Distribution Element
Local and regional agencies self-certify the status of the Regional Growth Management
Strategy in their jurisdiction on a biennial basis. Each agency completes a detailed
checklist which summarizes its actions in implementing of the regional strategy. With the
approval of the Land Use Distribution Element, the following questions have been added
to the checklist.
Cities and Countv
,
I. Does your jurisdiction have one or more transit focus areas (Figure 2 and Figure 3,
Regional Transit Corridors - Station Areas)?
2. Does your jurisdiction have one or more employment areas of 1,000 acres or more?
3. Does the General/Community Plan for these transit focus areas consistent with the
Land Use Distribution Element? If yes, do not answer question 4.
4. Has the general and/or community plan been updated in the past year?
If a general/community plan was updated, did that planning process:
a. evaluate at least one alternative in which the intensity of development proposed
in the transit focus areas equal or exceed the intensities indicated in the Land
Use Distribution Element,
b. evaluate at least one alternative that would entourage the development of
mixed use cores in the transit focus areas and other community centers,
c. consider at least one alternative that would decrease allowed intensities in areas
outside of transit focus areas or in areas not served by an urban level of transit
service.
,
"
s
~ '
9'-&'/
d. evaluate at least one alternative that would encourage the development of
housing and appropriate supporting facilities in employment areas of more than
1,000 acres,
~
I
b. how much of this land had a high natural habitat value?
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
e. adopt changes to bring the updated plan(s) into conformance with the Land Use
Distribution Element, consistent with the availability of public services
(including schools and local parks)'?
S. During the past year:
a. how many projects in the transit focus area have been subject to discretionary
review'?
b. How many of these projects conform with the Land Use Distribution Element'?
6. During the past year:
a. how many acres of vacant land have been approved for development (fmal
subdivision map, building permit, etc.),
7. Does Your jurisdiction have:
Ool.
I
a. zoning classifications and subdivision regulations that encourage mixed use
developments and higher intensities in transit focus areas,
,
~
~-
'1-& '3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
b. street and road standards that are consistent with the policies of this Land Use
Distribution Element (unless there are no tracts of developable land large
enough to require new streets or alleys), and
c. design guidelines for development that are consistent with the policies of tl ~s
Land Use Distribution Element'?
SANDAG
8. What are the most current and forecasted average travel times and distances for the
15 Travel Corridor Zones (based on adopted general and community plans)'?
~qf?-
~..._~
-----
~~~
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
November 13, 1994
Kenneth Sulzer, Executive Director
San Diego Association of Governments
401 B Street, Suite 800
San Diego CA 92101
Subject: Draft Series 8 population and Housing Forecast and Land
Use Distribution Element
Dear Ken:
On November 1, 1994, the Chula Vista City Council reviewed the
above referenced SANDAG reports, along with an analysis prepared by
City staff. Based on their review, the City Council requested that
the following comments be forwarded to you:
1) Series 8 Forecast
We have reviewed the draft forecast in relation to previous
development forecasts prepared by the City. We have concluded
that the proposed forecast for the existing City of Chula
Vista boundary, as well as the current sphere of influence, is
consistent with local forecasts and analysis. However, we are
concerned that the forecast figures for the Otay Ranch area
(which is shown as part of the "unincorporated area" forecast)
are too high, and we are continuing to work with SANDAG staff
and County staff to resolve these concerns. We will be
contacting you with more specific input on this matter once we
have completed our review.
2) Land Use Distribution Element
We have also reviewed this document, and find that it provides
a good framework for future local planning to consider land
use and transportation measures that will reduce vehicle miles
travelled, mitigate air quality impacts, and reduce land
consumption. However, we would like to see the report discuss
the possible impacts of higher intensity development on public
services (roads, schools, parks, etc.) and the need to ensure
that these impacts are mitigated. For example, it may be
possible to create incentives for cities which comply with the
Land Use Distrihution Element, suC':h as giving them priority in
regional transportation funding or other financial programs.
Specifically, we want to ensure that if residential densities
are increased in currently developed areas in order to
--
c?-fltp
276 FOUFlTH AVENUEICHULA VISTA. CALI.FORNIA ""O/(e',) e,,-503'
Kenneth Sulzer
-2-
November 13, 1994
accomodate growth, adequate schools are provide to meet the
increased sChool-aged population in those areas.
In addition, we find that these reports do not adequately address
the issues regarding longer-range forecasting, and the possible
resul ts of local jurisdictions deciding not the implement the
policies contained in the Land Use Distribution Element. The
introduction to the Series 8 Forecast points out that the current
general plans of the County and 18 cities cannot accommodate
forecasted residential growth through the year 2015. It is
further pointed out that imple~entation of the policies contained
in the Land Use Distribution Element would result in more compact
urban growth, and could allow forecasted growth to be accommodated
through 2015. However, if local jurisdictions decide not to
implement these policies, and the growth forecasts are accurate,
then one or more of the following scenarios (or some combination
thereof) may be expected:
1) further urbanization in or near existing "country towns" in
the unincorporated area of the County;
2) establishment of "new towns" in outlying areas of the County;
3)
continued employment growth without corresponding
development, which would ultimately result
populations per household.
residential
in higher
Each of these scenarios, as well as others, would have certain
environmental and economic consequences which need to be considered
when evaluating the merits of adopting the policies contained in
the Land Use Distribution Element. This information should be
provided for consideration as part of the regional evaluation of
SANDAG's proposals.
We thank you for the opportunity to comment on these reports at
this time. Please contact Bob Leiter, Director of Planning, at
691-5101 if you have any questions regarding these comments, or
wish to discuss them further.
Sincerely,
./~ 1$14-
/
John D. Goss
City Manager
cc: Mayor and City Council
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning
(f:\h~.\plann~nl\.andag.'.ll
~~lp7
~-
CiTy OF CHU~ VISTA
Minutes
November 1. 1994
Page 10
lbe establishment of indebtedness. effective of Redevelopment Plans, and repayment of indebtedness. The legislation
requires thac a Redevelopment Plan which either lacks lbe required time limits or which contains time limits in
excess of lbe maximums establisbed by AB 1290 must be amended by ordinance before the end of the calendar year
to bring tbe plan into conformity with tbe requirements. Staff recommends Council place the ordinances on first
reading. (Director of Community Development)
B. ORDINANCE 2609 ESTABLISHING AND AMENDING CERTAIN TIME LIMITATIONS
WITH RESPECT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE TOWN CENTRE I REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT (first readilU!1
C. ORDINANCE 2610 ESTABLISHING AND AMENDING CERTAIN TIME LIMITATIONS
WITH RESPECT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE TOWN CENTRE n REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT flirst readilU!l
D. ORDINANCE 2611 ESTABLISHING AND AMENDING CERTAIN TIME LIMITATIONS
WITH RESPECT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD
REDE\'ELOPJ\IE]I,'T PROJECT (first readilU!)
E. ORDINANCE 2612 ESTABLISHING AND AMENDING CERTAIN TIME LIMITATIONS
'WITH RESPECT TO THE REDH'ELOPJ\IENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPJ\IENT
PROJECT (lirst readilU!l
Marcia Sculley. Special Counsel to tbe Redevelopment Agency. gave tbe background of the projecl. Council had
been given three sbeets showing minor non-substantive changes to the ordinances.
Councilmember Moore quesclOned if the legislation affe<:ted any redevelopment plan in effect prior to 1994.
..ls. Sculley responded that was corr",,1. II dealt with the expiration date and the periods in which debt could be
est4blished and tax increment fundmg could be r""eived.
ORDINANCES 2608, 2609, 2610, 261 I, AND 2612 PLACED ON FIRST READING BY COUNCll.MEMBER
MOORE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimouo;ly.
IS. REPORT SANDAG SERIES EIGHT POPULATION AND HOUSING FORECAST
A]I,'I) LA]I,'I) USE DISTRIBUTION ELEJ\IE]I,'T - SANDAG has released for public review a draft population and
bousing forecast to the year 2005. as well as a draft element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy which
purposes policies and implementation measures to minimize the impact of new development on transportation
systems, air quality, and open space. Staff recommends Council forward comments to the SANDAG Board of
Dm,ctors as contained 10 tbe agenda statemenl. (Director of Planning)
Susan Baldwin representing SANDAG gave a slide presentation on lbe Series 8 Foreast and the Land Use
Distribucion Element which were part of the Regional Growth Management Stracegy. The SANDAG Board had
requested comments OD both of tbe items.
COo1Dcilmember Fox staced that unless some of the staff recommendations were implemented other cities could be
carrying an unfair burden of population growth. The report needed to do something to make sure jurisdictions
complied. not witb punicive measures but with incentives. He questioned what happened if a jurisdiction deviated
from the policy.
Council member Moore stated SANDAG was an advisory body and not designed 10 mandate or police.
Mayor Nader stated the fore<:ast concerned him more than lbe proposed land use el."",nl. H. f.1t the land use
element was essentially a good stralegy. The foreast staled ov.r half of the expected growth was becaase of
'il1ralion and he questioned why lbat percentage was so high.
-~~
<!-(jZ
Minutes
November 1, 1994
Page 11
Jeff Tayman, representing SANDAG, stated the growth over the next IS yea", was less than in the 1980's wbere
migration averaged over 40.000 per year. The projected millration was in lbe low 20,000 per year. Employment
growth drove lbe migration, with part of thai migration lbe employmentllrowth. The demographic trends indicated
lbat some of lbe migration was from foreign countries whicb bad been increasinll over lbe last 10 years. In the
1980's lbey bad predicted that lbe migration would be over 7S~ of lbe population growth.
Mayor Nader stated that one of the staff concerns was that lbe forecast for growth appeared to be bigh and be
concurred witb that. He stated at some point the natural environment would impose limits on growth and be
questioned wbether thai bad been taken into account in the forecast.
Mr. Tayman responded that it had not been included.
Mayor Nader stated the Resource Conservation Commission supported lbe staff recommendation but made an
additional recommendation regarding the planning for school facilities that were in areas that would be up-zoned.
He questioned wbetber that recommendation bad been incorporated into the staff recommendation.
Robert Leiter, Director of Planning. responded that one of lbe slaff comments was that there should be incentives
for dealing witb public service impacts such as schools and parks. That was covered on page 1S-2 under Item 2.
If Council wanted to make that more specific, relaled to scbools, they could give staff lbat direction.
Mr. Goss stated tbe estimated population for either tbe Series 6 or 7 forecasl estimaled lbe population for Cbula
Vista lower than tbe actual population at that time. He questioned if the new population forecasts look into account
capacity. rale of growth. and family Sl"'.
Mr. Leiter did not fed Ibe 164,000 figure accurately reflected the year 2000 forecasl for lbe City as it only took
into account those areas in tbe City's sphere of anfluence as of 1990. A more accurate figure was the Cbula Vista
spbere of influence figure which was 186.249 for the year 2000 with approximalely 10,000 subtracted out for Ib,
unincorporated area of Bonita.
Council member Horton stated she was pleased that the City had mel the goals of the strategy with the Otay Rancb
Plan. Sbe questioned why there was a slower growth rale in Chula Vista wben the lasl few years Chula Vista had
higher new borne sales that other part., of Ihe Counly.
Mr. Tayman respondO<! the City had anneutions since 1990 and when looking at growth within the current City
boundaries as of 1994 that growth was faster than the region.
Councilmember Horton questioned whether staff agreed witb Ibe projections for residential absorption versus
commerciallandustrial.
Mr. Leiter responded that staff had reviewed their figures and agreed witb the caveat that the numbers were just
for the Cily limits as of 1990. He felt there bad been additional land added and additional commercial/industrial
growth thaI occurred in Ihe sphere of influence that was not reflected. The basic concepts that the Cily would not
build Oul as higb of a percentage of the commercial/industrial within the area as residential was basically correcl.
Councilmember Moore stated Ibe SANDAG Board had included thaI when an in depth study was done there would
also be a study on economics that would parallel it.
Mr. Tayman staled be was unaware of the policy.
Mr. Leiler stated Ihe forecast was basod partially on the economic prosperity strategy element of the SANDAG
Rellional Growth Management Strategy. The economic forecast and analysis was part of the proce...
MS (Nader/Moore) to adopt the staff recommendation which included the staff concerns and to add the
Resource Conservation Commission recommendation, i.e. ir land use plans were up-mned in order to
accommodate growth, part or the up-zoning process would be the siting or school sites to accommodate
increased school population.
~-
?-I/I
Minutes
November I, 1994
Page 12
Councilmember Moore stated the schools would have to do some type of study to parallel the General Plan.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously.
. · . Council met in Closed Session at 5:34 p.m. and reconvened at 6:08 p.m. · · ·
16. REPORT UPDATE ON SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be
given by staff. No report given.
17. REPORT UPDATE ON REGIONAL SEWER ISSUES - An oral report will be given
by staff. No report given.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Item pulled: 9. The minutes will reOect the published agenda order.
OTHER BUSINESS
18. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTtSl
a. ScheJuling of meetings. Me. Goss stated the TransDIF fee as it related to churches was on the 11115/94
"~enda. Thai ,ssue was being discussed by the City of San Diego and as a result of that the city attorney for the
.Iy of San D.ego was evaluatlOg the legality of the exemption. The City Attorney had been in contact with the
~an D.ego city attorney's office and if the CIty of San Diego did grant the exemption there could be a legal
challenge in court. Since the City of San Diego had more resources it was recommended that Council defer the
issue until 'I had been addressed and resnlved by the City of San Diego.
Councilmemher Fox felt it would be unfair to defer the ,tem. He wanted to hear from the churches. He questioned
whether nOllfication had been sent out regarding the 11/15/94 meeting.
John Lippitt, Dlfector of Public Works. responded that all interested parties had been notified of the meeting on
11/15/94. He staleJ there were approxiJrullely SIX new churches in the eastern area that had projects coming up
and they had been noticeJ.
M r. Gnss staled Ihe issue only came up recently regardlOg the City of San Diego. He recommended that if Council
delayed the item that there be a 10% charge of the fee to new churches and DO charge for existing churches in the
eastern area that had agreed to pay the fee until the issue was finally resolved and encourage the churches to work
With Caltrans and developers to develop Park & Ride lots.
Mayor Nader questioneJ whether the item had been agendized by the San Diegn City Council and who had
agendized it. Unless Council knew that it was already agendized or would be definitely agendized it could result
in an indefinite postponement.
Mr. Goss responded that it was his understanding that it had been agendized or would be agendized.
Council member Fox stated he had composed an up to date list of churches within the City which could be utilized
for notification purposes.
Councilmember Horton stated the TransDif fund only affected a certain number of churches, i.e. those churches
that were in the boundary of that area. It did not affect churches city-wide.
_ounciJmember Fox felt the interest was city.wide.
,-. .'-'
-"-~/~~
0_ '-7.c
1- Ii /
" .
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / Q
Meeting Date 3/12/96
ITEM TITLE:
Ordinance .Jt,tt. 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 East "]" Street from Hilltop Dr~ve to Cassia Place.
Director of Public work~(~
City Manager J1 Dvt ~Aii\ \
1'"
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_Noll
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
in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and traffic congestion, and for the promotion of
public safety, the speed limit on East "]" 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 HiUtop 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 staff's report, support staff's recommendation and
recommend to the Council, to adopt an ordinance amending Schedule [X, Section [0.48.030 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. [n a follow-up motion MSC 5-[-[
(Miller/Cochrane) with Commissioner Smith voting no and Commissioner Acton absent, the
Commission moved to have staff perform AU-Way Stop evaluations at the intersections of East
"]" Street and Melrose A venue 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 "J" Street
between Hilltop Drive and Cassia Place from 30 M.P.H. to 35 M.P.H. to comply with the
California Vehicle Code (CVe), 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 ]uly [6. 1995. Staff has completed a new survey which is now in effect as
/P., /
Page 2, Item /6
Meeting Date 3/12/96
of 11/22/95, and expires on 11/812000. 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 "]" 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 "J" 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 "J" Street, between Floyd
A venue 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 "J" 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 not 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 YM) 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.
/P-.;4
Page 3, Item /0
Meeting Date 3/12196
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 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 zonll1g. 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)(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
I~'J
Page 4, Item I p
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 Soeed Limit Establishment Process
Speed limits should be established preferably at or near the 85th percentile speed, which is
defined 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
generalJy 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 intluence as many drivers as possible to operate at or near
the same speed, thus reducing the number of contlicts created by wide differentials in operating
speeds. Only when roadside development results in traffic contlicts 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 mclined to be reckless and
unreliable. or who have faulty judgement and must be controlled by enforcement. Speed limits
set at or sl ightly 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 wilJ 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
l1mit.
10..1
Page 5, Item /1:1
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 "J"
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\RNGINEER\AGUNDA \EASTJSTR. DMW)
/t7.~ -6
'-
ORDINANCE NO. ~~
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING 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 EAST "J" STREET FROM HILLTOP DRIVE
TO CASSIA PLACE
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 adoption, 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
Jt)..1);o -~
~lt/ ~~:::':;; ~~~fC, ~,?
~.I/ ~ .... \~::, ,4..L.. L:i /~'} ~.
~ Q -6-1r '\'\: ..>~ =-'-<//'0'\'(,
'. i{f1flj' .r-'i.).FlIfSt,;>,,,,,,, W-:' '., 'II :', '>~~~
~ - \','. ,). . . ~. l'-;;\' \
~ :'~}. ' ~ ''LYi : " ~"'..\.'..:
~:b: ti 6 .- - 1:'- ,\:'1 \ ~~&.'"
~ ,\ ,\!j,-a;" ~~'.~ = ,,~ '~E ~'cB,
-., ~ u. ~~ .;2 ~~.J ~ ~'-:;:~
. I \ G tJI::::--- _ q _, --'
". l', \./ ..1, G"~' ;':W
- . / 7~C~
3 I\~ ~ xc ',;' ~,~~~
; .... u - ~- ..\:. ~ ~~ Jf;%~ "~~
? ;1", . .-. 5\, r' R Ie>>: 'l ,.~",."" x
~W~~"- ", ' ~ C;7 ~~~~. '~~~~\\'
'~. \",/ ~- i. 1 ~,~\~ ,J
:m..."'9. .~' ~ ~"~~E (0" ~~;'~
~~,Ti'[l. I //~~I~G' ..:.J"":"'::;:.' q~~.. \\
" <>".y. .;:-/ /:': V " k':)\'>:- " .; ~ (. . ' ,
, ,,', I ~" ~'\\\::~.('~)~:-:>:c;~ ' . .j.'
',; ~:::,)). '" / , ... ,~.~.hd0,.~~" ,\ . '":'~~ ',' \
':J.," )Y:l,J ........ , , e,. .~~\~, "~' '\\"1';, '
- i I", '-... \ ,. '\ ::--:.-c:,,'3 . i-- .~. ., ~ ,.......
. ~/ .",,-. '~.~," "~" '" ""$ ; ~ . \'Ii!' I-
· '~., '" - ~"', '" "" x~
;e '( ;. ~~ [/ ;~"0fjl, :...-: ~
\(", c....,-' ~Yv ..,\ \_ .~/)~ ~ '"':._ !:
At'~ --A \ ~ t.) ,', i ~c; ~ ..
w/'/ ' ....../, \VL:." '. f\'~;:::.~ ~
"-"- .""r """"", p,. \ ~",;[?'__ r\
y<....~ \.0 ~ ~ .' ,L. "'~~\
t \\....~ \11 . \.~~~~
l.. l\ . ~< :<z., r!""," .... /'. ~\~ ~
<<)" ~'~ ~-:-~ . ',', "5~~.'~ €I ,:~ ',\\' . 0 .\l!t. : ~ Y:F
~ ~~\~ \ .~ \ ;; . ~,., ~ IJ.. ..<\t,.\t\ :"\', ~~
~~\ \. . II ,~~ ~:; \"" 1 ' '. \"~\J). ~.,
~ 'Ii\~.,-<," -" \".?\ ?,,:~ "9"I~"("
'~,<",\\\'~ ..l.'.. ~~ \.c<:\\ l .t:<-".
.// u.",.-..,.. ~~ .', \... ~~:.., ~ '
~,~~-~~\. .\' \~\\\. .-'1"~\3.!\~';
~~1iL~~'f)\-,," , ',,'" 4 ~ ~.~ "'--
'\":I\'0J... ='-..::.. It), r
t-
<
..I
0..
<
LLJ
a:
<
I
.
II It)
.... al
i ....
..
N
S ....
('oj
Q ..
'';'
III
c: 'i
. -
. .
.. Q
Q
SPEED LIMIT--ENGINEERING/TRAFFIC SURVEY:
STREET: EAST "J" STREET
LIMITS: HILL TOP DRIVE TO CgSIA 'P] ACF
Existing Posted Speed Umlt
ft.
30
MPH
HILLTOP DR.
Segment: MELROSE AVE.
. Date TakeD: 11-8-95
No Vehicles OD Sample: 100
85th Percentile Speed: 38
Range of Speeds Recorded: 26-43 MPH
Block fl 00-200
ROADWA}' CHAR4 CTERISTICS
MELROSE AVE.
melON AVE.
NACION AVE.
Fl..OYD AVE.
FLOYD AVE.
CAC\~TA 'PI
Il-B-9'i
1] _R_QI)
, l_R_QC\
100
100
Inn
37
18
16
, 5-4 1 M'PH
200-300
,r; _4~ M'P1-1
300-500
,C;....G1 M'PH
500-600
Width
~ 0-64 '
feet No. of Lanes for Both Directions
?
Horizontal Alignment TanQent lAin Melro!;e CtlT"\.d1 iT'lP~T 'FIn Melrose. R!rin. 460'
Vertical Alignment
160' V.C.
G, . 0.94%. Go . 6.6%. Desi2n Speed. 27 MPH
(near Gretchen Road)
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Average Dail)' Tramc
On-Street Parking Allowed.
8 5~O
Special Conditions Predominatelv sinde familv dwellin2s. Hilltop Jr. Hig'! School
and fire station west of I-80S. Halecrest Elementarv School east of I-80S.
Exi5tin~ 25 MPH ~hen Children Are Pre~ent ~igT'l~ in A~~~.
Accident History
The accident rate at thi~ se~ment (0.997 accidents neT million
vehicle miles) is lower than the 8Vera~e accident rate r, 07) fnr similar
roadwavs in the state of C~lifnr~iA
~
Study waf Prepared by Leonardo Hernandez
Date
11 - 10
,qql)
['::\VlP51 \TRAFFIC.FRM]
J"/P
Recommendation Increa~e f;need limit" f"n ~I) M'P~ based nTl p,"pvAi1 iT'll'
and low cc den
Date Recommendation Approved: I ( _,;.;J.-.9r--
By '2., - ~..:...c...o >L. ~~
App1"'ved Speed Limit 35 MPH
. Per CVC 40803, Survey Expires 11 08 2000
.
SEGMENTUNDERSTUDY
f""E Id~/crc;-
.
cm OF CHULA VISTA. VEHICU: SPEED SURVEY
~ '::\''' S;;~r.>"'+ (ilIff",? 'Dr 'II'" -
SURVEY SITE
1....10 START If): '~n ~M
Mi'H
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
6
5
r11/1") ~"'I"J'" .l11!-::)t-"'l"O
TIME END /1') ,CZ:; @M
DIREcnON 'E" . 0 a}. 1
NUMBER OF VEHlOJ::S
,
/
..
"
/') () 0 ,-) / 1/
O:f)'//
n//
/ ./ /" / /' 1/ /
1,-., ; ,-., ,..../ I /""
o olr n n 1,- / ./ / /1/
()(\/'/I//.//I/ ///././
rt4 77//
1/1 ( I n J
Ir?"lr- ,-, / / / / /
rn//
f"""o,,,,-,,'-"n( //.//
n-n"')fJn")/
( 0")/
~1 .
(")
'~IJrG;DtlYDCIP'D.Dl
RECORDER: ....k"rO J_ _,(J'~M'V_.-io)"'" I =..."".....0"...=
/01')
.lip (Y"r~<?("7 A do", /, 0 )
..
POSTED SPEED 3D
WEA1lIER
r 110/1,-
CUM.
TOTAL 90 90
10
J / uv,
/"'> 1,--, oq
1"'.. 1"'.. 00
'-I <../ q3
"< "" S'i"
::1 " x/o S;:
'-I LI ~ Q
I J 1/ =;l(""
/r:- ,e- r_u
7 ';:;l </'1
7 + ~.']
q 9 "'-"
<./ <./ <)/'
. Q Q !1-;
? ~ /:<
'1' </ I_
I I 7_
I I I
ItJ'l/
em or CHUlA VISTA. VEHIClL SPEED SURVEY
SEGMENT UNDER SnIDY
rATE II/':;i/r;c:-
r " /. <:;. +
_I . ~('Po
(.d.~/Y""'~'./ AIJ~r'1"n -^)(lr/~,'1 Al}~y)dP
SURVEY sm:: siD
dc<:uV> (~,rJ POSTED SPEED Jr?
'l.l""6C START II ;0(")
@'M
TIME END
((,..2~ @'M
WEAlHER cleo. r
DIREcnON c.: -0 IV -/ CUM.
MPH NUMBER OF \E1DaD TOTAL 91\ 91\
. ,. .. ..
45
44
43
42
41 0 n ./ / <.J ,) (oD
40 n 0 10
39 /) ./ ./ ./ '" LJ qC,
38 r; /" /" ./ u J q"
37 ...- 1/ ./ ./ G -" Rf?
36 (" () 0 I.... n ./ /" ./ /' ./ ./ 1"'- /7 <i!;)..
35 ....... In r- In ( /' ./ ./ ./ /' /' /I Ii /,0
34 n l/j ./ ./ ./ /' ./ ./ ~ ~ .<;r;-
33 /""] ...., r irJ /'" rJ ....- ^ ./ ./ J ." , " "'(n
32 /"3 :,..-, rJ IrJ .....- /' /' ./ ./ /' /' / Jf':! Ia- :2,9"
31 I/" ./ -., z ..,r
30 irJ J 0 ./ j /' ./ /' /' .q q -2~
II /" /" ./ 5 5 1</
28 I" n in r I""") r ./ + I~ '1
27 Ir'l J J ~
26 '"' "" J
2,\ ./ J J J
24
2.3
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
II
10
9
,
.-
6
5
RECORDER: J _ I ~ -;'/... _ A,. '" ./,. .. I TOTAl. N'UaGEA Of ...1tH:IQ.D; /(')17
~ ...
gs:
'0 I~
.NtOI4\ENOlNIDtIYDal'D.Skl
cm OF CHUU VISTA. VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY
SEGMENT UNDER STUDY
- -'E fll",(9r:-
T1MESTART 11.'<1<:::
__ ,... 1
L...:r s;,.;-Y~RT
( fo,lr.f" ;r;n .<1 .Is n u" - FicO "I A.,,, " u.. )
w:> zo g y /~i' " POSTED SPEED ~n
SURVEY SITE ~/o
AM/PM
TIME END
1::1 ~ J!:J
~
WEAlHER
rJOr!"J -r
DIRECIlON F -0 ~r::L. - I CUM.
MPH NUMBER OF VEHlaES TOTAL 'lI, 'lI,
J .. .. '"
45
44
43 I"'J I I I/)()
42 ./ / 1 99
41 /' f I qf?
40 r; rJ ./ ./ ./ / "7 1- ? 1~
39 n rJ /' /'" << '-I Co
38 /) 0 ../ ./ </ ....t '>I/~
37 In rJ /") n Ir-; /" / 7 7 q q 5L"J
36 d n 0 0 1/ ./ t:. r, "'''
35 c::; n 0 0 II"") ./ 7 .7 ./ ./ IC! I,') t,=?
34 n 0 ;/ ./ i/ ../ ./ ./ ./ l"l 1 " .<;~
33 1-- /" /' ./ ./ ./ ./ --;7 7 '" '" </</
32 r (') (~ ,..... I,.., ./ ./ ./ / ./ 10 /rJ :><"'"
31 () () ,---, ./ </ 4 !J<:'"
'0 C " Ie:> r-- ../ 7' 7 /" ./ /" I", r .,1
<:' ../" ,....., 3 3 C,
28 0 ("') 0 '<: " r.
27 I"") I I =I
26 ./ / ! "
-
2.~ ./ ) ! /
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
]4
13
12
11
10
9
-
-
6
5
RECORDER::J,,,!C~/. V'/t'r. c/.I_ ,~~ ",.-t. - I TOTA.I. NU....P, or ___iHIc::L.D JOO
,
u.
/~ 1:1
'~INDItIVJHIPD,.U1
SEGMENT UNDER STUDY
D'''C /1/8/9S-
,..olE START roo
cm OF CHUU VISTA - VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY
E~s.,t "T' .s~r..d (F/c~{("( A,/",. - ('n!>'5/<< 'PI. )
TIME END
r. /r; h/J/r-/. L1 JP
/:3, ~ WEATHER
POSTED SPEED "< r')
SURVEY SITE .,::cc) ,
AA@
rlpar
DIREcnON E -0 (~ -/ CUM.
MPH "'UMBER OF VEHJa.ES TOTAL % %
. .. . u ..
45
44
43 /1 I J 1m
42 ,.-, n < ''1
41 0 n IQ
40 r / 7 .'3 ~ 99
39 I r'\ 0 /' ."l :~ C; /,
38 7 I I Q:;z
37 r> L) /' /' /" /' (, L' 0')
36 r: n / / ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ q 0-; SU~
35 n 0 0 0 0 0 rJ [) CJ /' ID It". '::.>:J
34 r In 0 ,..... n ,....., ./ =1 ? (.,=;
33 r / ./ ./ 7 .7 /' ir. /r, ,.,-.,
32 ./ /' ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ /' ./ I( /D In C'/"'oo.
31 () ./ ./ /' ./ ./ /' ~ ~ un
30 0 n rn n n / ./ 7 ./ .q q :=\,;;
If ,.,., Ir ./ JU ~ flU
28 1(' rrl ./ ./ /' C~ ('~ ...."'"
27 F 0 n n /' /' ./ ~ :; /-;/
26 0 0 /") ,/ .LI c/ '::;I
25 [0 r"I r, -=>, "'" <.
24
23
22
21
20
]9
18
]7
16
]5
]4
]3
12
II
]0
9
~
/
6
5
RECORDER, 7: ~I., ,r. /'V,b ".. I TOTA1. NUWlEJl. Of "'EKlc.D; / t'Jn
o$".
.~IN1Dt1YDf1P'O,.PI
I" -1'1
= '-111.-'~ ~=lf-'~:ll ~r-'I~.!.-.,~~~Cj~jll' 1-1._-11';:1;'1$!:
A .:fi 11 J.E - J ~ Jr.;~ II -- 8; 8 l:s II - j 8 i~' J'f 1-
.... i. · J I -' [1 l' ~. - 1;S t :'1 ~ ~ 'L~ B ~;8 I. . 'tl j l.l I -
gl -. I I I t.!! .!I-I !,$1 Jot> ,.!.'f j-I ':I
U.1's I:; - i IJ ~. iJ;"' '1) 1;;.9 I~ ~ II -! j~~ .i~ f
-~]11 -if .11 'It a 1 IHt. il1lhH .11 !lHJ.j.
I'" ~l' IJI i I I. .1~[1 }=-!.9 II~ ~ Ii .1.5-!-!l! I
. !~ll!l~i; 1 fi J Jl1 j~ . !rj.lt~ ill!))]: .~i fJ~li: i ..
~ ~ 1!~..rJ ~f ~~ ct .51- I :a"''i 1- iil~1-!1~ 51"" -t11 ...;25: j
.S ~.! Ii J . ~. , JIl ~ ~... .c: 'I S I :I f.e j
'~W'li~ll.~ ill JII d1i! ~~~h!IJ u!uihpi.
b ! ~ I ~ If h I ~ If I :fi III 'U 'O~:a flll! ~ I" Iii 'U ~ ~ 0...1 t ~
1:.. I.Ji.! ~ I_ l'B~1 I ~~l.e. !.!. JI..g'lI
.!l . -tSGli.;I.!!,& .!J .111 l~il d ~.!~I .s<! .. lie 1....0].
= =,,~'-~Hl~i ~~ =~ ~if g!gl ~"'l-l~:i]IlJ. ~N.. o~~.~~!.!I' ~'-
~ I at.~IJH:i dll aWll! J ajnJ 1 iiwlmf I ad.amHHs.
(
~ i ~1 If - (1 tt]-!11~i~~1Ij"ilJ ~iltji!Jliif~s -1
s I if 1;) 8 [..1= .}.\l i Ui I ill '0 .sJ~.:~i ;l~l[ t.!! ~ 1. 1
. . U!'e . ~l] ~~-;i 1 i'S~ III fi ;!e I i-!l~lh.s~ [:~]1 Ii I
I II i .. gj -1 · c"'~ 'i! 1 .~ 1 'll .!! ] I :5 lis .:.,,! .e-! i I II sJ r r
. : H j!- - t! fit~ i'~ ~l]Ji!jl! ~~ Ji~il!i~l!~l"i ~~ :
~~ II j i - ~ j ~! till ~ ~. ! ~:! ~ 11!1; ]! 1) e l'~ J h lh ~ I) I
11 ull tli." : 11j';1il.'1~I~li]! I I~ll~j ..rl1t~ 11 UtIli'
~~hU I 1 l~ .~11s I .~s:: II' {j Isi .1~]~.8'-!:B .jEUUi
liUU .!,J I i ;~t! I] [sl'1:1 fH'Ill..~ I.. j :5'O~ll'1'iUj;UUJ
I.. I_gas I ~J~ l~i~ lH!-! 1! Ut~! i~ III :I ;__]'~~i~'i~]] iI~~Sitt!
1 dr:l r:lr:l '~1 J-:.i:lill,oil..ll....hP ~!~.e.f..lll.!!.!r::~:a r:lddr:lr:ld.
... ~ :l 'I .e. i8~1l ~~~ ~1oC 1= 3<!1l! ..l!l! !;aJ ·
i ~~un lilt 1 i!tljaiU.uHs~!U~,hfl! Hl)l~j~dmJi
--..,..
/P ,/.):1
..I f'P -. .. t!S 1 r ~ t 9. I tlP~~~&l~~-~ 1 ~1' I
[l l'i:J1- i i~~l~ ~l~;- i'llH! ~:II I (fi~;~!J;;i"'fl Ii' l
. --tl!'4j- Ii ~S: ~ ~r If J t il)l''''''~''~''f; r e:1,1
i:tr1fl,lq I It;- r:il'I!Jr r ~ IJ h{i.!::::~,.~.;lt 1 .!.i~ .
=: .r ,~ 1 '41, 5 11:" d.~!:!I:.i-;e f 11'
I ~ f.! II f t &Ill r::: ~ j ~ J r i I ijl t = t 1 '!!. t}
..lrt!~li[i I t~ iiltfl~~I-~titj'41~~ .I~ !tl' ~ 11 !:(l ~
1,. ~.f i. r u "r r I .c h ~ i. ~ '4 t i f .a 9' , . II il. i .7 i! Ii ..
~
~
!JII dUlh I hi.nHHHIH}HF~ I n~ hf nrI!i'Fm!~ !
I ~~ t ~riit= ~ Hrrpiu S [ l~i:. il ; t ~i iih~~~~i~~lt;ll~ .-
.1 if (l~J-i:j.~."1 · i~r a'ii!rJ Iii i ;s fl~iUle!.ft!J~ti
'['i i ill t ~ J 1l.3 f~J~Cl .. III IJ Ihl"~!~lt.; -.;.. 1t
l S .. ti; =-. I f i .. '4 ~! . I 11 .... ! . J 1'S'
til.1lUil. I t hUUHUJ!bh f; ~I f ~~i fr hhh _
ik . Hm i Ilhd.UULUHL Jill ~llnHnl
/d-/t
~ 11. ~J' _ jiH ~!~ - .~.< I:.: ~: ]i~]il} Jl ~ ~ ~i1 .' J-l
it ~i Ji.i li~ J aJ - "ll~ 'l :.II~ ~ I : fl~ U
~; fi ~j I J! I j . .- . . ~}~ Ie Stllll i:[.~ :. l~it I!
...;a t 5 Ii :S I" t ~ .:;. .If I .1 D ~_ -a 1- . 11 . 5
. i~ H.., .1 l'r ~.s! . I'! I ;'!~.~ :1:1 R;~ 1 .:. i= :J-5
=B Hi .! ii.l:r . J .'J tli~ .."11 Jl 1.5} Jl
H~i! fl~ I~nl p~ !] I.d,tildh~ pu ~~ It
r'pJjJ 11"0 J~i~; J 11 . ~ ] 1! 1111- 1 :51'i 1 U .e:.. 'I:
lj~:;i II.: i J- H lW~' j ! ! i 1 [i1i i~!~jt ~ !!~ Iii. H
. ~:t-:!i l~ J ~JJ~ t o.sa~ :!.sl03iiiiil! iU .Sii. Ii.
= ~~;~l ~I~ 'O$~1.ll~1~)~M )80 ill; i.~...s;a~~i:-!I]ICll'" 'iI~ gi
.t Je~]U ~o E i ~~18ljer~ it c: ~ll~~t~e :ittj'~ li~i t ~.~h i ~1
= 8 '1J zl! ~ ..~l:. 06 ~ I SE:8 .~-a '1...lJJh~ E' ... :liE a I .e
\
= . tE-.i 1~.Jo5.t'J~"-~I'l .: I; il]l . [f::l" . 1;~~~..I~n'
~ i It! ~tl1Ij.J~i~! !Jf!i ~l .i~~ft! . !!! ii!i!i
I SEa ~ il'i1 i.l~ i1lli . 'isll;.l ~1~ Ji~'1J J ~JJ~.t'i1~ JI
1 Us .!ll'i~~!11..1 :i~' il.:I; ~I" i . jqi505~~'i
U; l:l.~ i .! 8: tI 1 S!:l! 1-6..1 :5-::1J I~: 'l5-::1 z:. 1 ,,!
I :J~ j.!J;t~::j~s.'. il~i 1~' ~i'.'1 . ~'~r']i~.
~~~i J 11'& ~Ii:l~~~jz ~ - il J 11 .. Jllji II .:~~ I!,
. J 4> II j=~'1i.i 'i.5 ~i~ '5... ....I;-a,U :. [".i!.u '. I;~~ i~
....~I s-05a' ] 0 11 051' l:f ! ,to....lIfl=ii ~ 'I ra> !!'.: Z 1 i l'jl'l}
:i~1 ~l'ld .~~.Iiii~1j'fi~!d 1~~j1l.l;;d I ~~lfigd~ :!.lI s~. it..
I tit ~III j1ihidiHUI jitmdn tiHmm tifinU~t
11/"1 '1
r~f ..' ;'::111'11 II: is I .~ J f Il" :3'12 "'llfo !.~'l"21 !iil t
: i il[i' ~ I t~1:: ~ :to!:i !~i'r(llilrr~I"1 tgigsi '[l~~ssa:~ ~!i ~ n:~~ ! ft
t( 1 oo! ~ 5 'E 'lII~~~r~",iI' ~u hi l-\;ifg.fli...J [~t':lS'~~.~ Bi"'~:!.>!~.~ ~
roo! el ~oo:to tl:. ~ if '"lPP&1PPPppl..1' Q.st i rl~Q.~n~llof f~1
I pf [!.llrs lp~tl,h Ihm!.!Wi~[11 tl' n~IJI tHI;hit.1ru1ii
~~!~jl:hf~~~i~!l fl! f n ~!!~!n!!!!rrir~t.iI"'ft~~i ~iiJ~r~i. tl~i~
lllli I. .. t I; Ii ~Q' 'lI, I 1 '" ~.,.. ~ U ~ ~ E: ~, i! S' Q. .i;'.. '" a ~ .." 8' . g ",
rJ'[jl i"'lo i ti;H!hd~ftl!1 mmmlhhH u~~HJh I bJ[~i lhi
~ I ""I~ilP"';-f-:q.i [l r........;I..t ~C~Q...f i8!'i,-oUIfoa.Bllloi A.ll'S-~
~ I [ tl~~~~~fl!~~t~h lil :HHW!:fH!hHftUUW f[lf~. f r...l= i'
l- It ~ ~;'. i!. ' e l i l t u! ~ ~.f.. t &: . ~ r- [ so 5:' h. ~ g Ifo i...
~r f 'Jt~ i ~'oo :" ~ '" . I l~ i. 11!t r'lS,e-ofiS' ;;:.t
~r..l~ f~lll~il? I ~lt . j I Ii , Ii! lte"' il:l~f ~ =.~j rlif. fr h
; I f= t f 1 t-l;- .(. I . JL I . t..::o. Illll> i!. iP;'" -g. f!
~ n 1 ~ !: ;: [. 1. .. I! .. t - "- .- ~ lJ'" . - - .. 3 i'S' -. ~t!: .. ~ 2 Er- i:.. i
.11 r ~ .. ~ 00 r S" 50 :. i f i . I' I - f u i of - ~ i.f s,!: t f Ifo
.;
1 p. Ifo ~ !;- p g. p [l u'. i H i' t I ~ t .. i i .. r ~~ t Ii"') r -
I ~,fii I (iIl~~~~ f€g'l U'l~ ftt.i i~ Ull ~~~] rt~.~ f~~rf9S1 ~ i
all "'s,~l p~&l~:f~~ n'r~~~~~i' Ii'~(;i If .l~~ri~1 ir!~ i !rlfl~[~i ~
1~1I f; ~ If ~.e.5~p ir~. ~q :rl [~!i'i III ~II- [la$~~13!: ~ ~~.I~. !! ~-
4~li.htnrs,If:~~~~ [s,Il~ "t!i,iJ rf~!~-\i[lifrI:!f t~tl
~i.:J!l g udll s'ftrl "i~ls' 1.lr 8 II ~~nJrl.1 [I j i !~i ir~l}
g~ lli'~ t ll"",..i.e!ri!.!; 1]- a.1i ~fll . I lIP I rr" "i:ll: ~ra t Irl
!i'O r i HUli.tt.-~I' irlJ~ l[ff . :. S .! !f~ l~~l' r.r~ ~llfj. ~
~i: ~ tl uI !~; rr' ~U ~~ rj'[l t ut~r. ti.~~ IiI! tlf.ff r
5115lf ':':': [~gllig i-di!'''s, 1I1foS,S,. Ft.~1 Irl("l~!I" ~~...r:.1
ill lI~l ~!U tl5[~ Q.[lit ~t"!;.J rrfiil& gilinial g~~i .
! I g.... . 1 5: [ s,. Ii' t f J s, i i '3 if. i t _ .. .. Ii~ ~ e: i ,,~ . ~ @: P.:J l\ 1 !t
:': [~j. :l!!~l ~lih. ~.;~.t - !ili~! i~;[it!~ .it f-r
H rli W~i. . l!]ii hit I I!J~J"i i fU i j=i i{ 11
] i ~l[ Il-I~i'll:U'iif ; HI . J {J~~ i l~IJl il ~f l ~
1 Jl, p g>;> i ~ ~.. -;> a 2' ~ s, a: .. . I ~ ll.:t I! .... · . i'';\ l....
s,. f.i' U'Q.'ij'S' S:~ 5:~'s, . in. - a. . I'JI 50 l-\I .. Li"' &; ~
------- -7d-I!r---- - -.- -
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 6-0-1 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. Pledee of Alleeiance/Silent Praver
3. Ooe'nine Statement - Read by Chair Liken
4. Aooroval of Minutes:
MSC (Miller/Smith) to approve the minutes of January 11, 1996 as presented. Approved 6-0-1 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. Reoort on Increasin. Soeed limits on EastJ Street between Hilltoo 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.
/~i/' UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Safety Commission Minutes
February 8, 1996
Page 2
Those speaking in opposition to 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 Heiydt, 660 E. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Chair Liken asked Mr. Heiydt about what 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 the 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. I Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Mr. lohn Somervell. 627 E. J Street. Chula Vista. CA 91910
Mr. Frank Shultz, 615 E. J Street. Chula Vista, CA 91910
Commissioner Smith commented 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. J Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Mr. Letchworth asked the possibilities of reducing the remainder of East J 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. Letchworth 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.
/t)..,;2tJ
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
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 J 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 J 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 850/~ 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 I 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. ReDort on Increasin2 SDeed Limits on HilltoG Drive between East Rienstra Street and Oran2e 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.
/{),,,,2./
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
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 EastJ 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
325 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
I&'.l ~
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
Resident
318 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
428 East J 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 J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
474 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
484 East J Street
Chula 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 A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
702 Melrose Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
699 Melrose Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
709 Melrose A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident //1 ".J.:J
694 Myra Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
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 J 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 Avenue
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 trOyd A venue
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 /II -.11/
565 East J Street ' ,
Chula Vista, CA 91910
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
Resident
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
Resident
612 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
632 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
635 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
640 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
,.
10 ,,,u;
Resident
641 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
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
652 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
660 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
655 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
585 Berland Way
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
731 Lori Lane
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
770 Cassia Place
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
771 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
535 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
I~' ..).v
CV Elementary School District
84 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
695 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
698 Arthur Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
Resident
689 Gretchen Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
704 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
10 1 East J Street
Chula 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 EastJ Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
199 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
117 -.2. 7
Business Owner
72 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
694 Claire A venue
Chula Vista, Ca91910
Resident
705 Dennis Avenue
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 J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
143 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
203 East J Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
THIS PACE BLANK
/1) "";J..y
f
March 12, 1996
MEMO TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Patty wesr(l4
SPEED LIMIT INCREASE - EAST 'J' STREET
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Mr. Leo Sandoval (613 East "J" Street) contacted our offices this afternoon with regard
to the above subject (Item #10) docketed for this evening's meeting.
Although Mr. Sandoval is unable to attend the meeting due to his employment
commitments, he asked that I relay his opposition to increasing the speed limit on East
"J" Street.
Should you wish to respond to his phone call, you may contact him at 482.2616. Thank
you.
cc: City Clerk
Frank Rivera
ItJ- ~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item II
Meeting Date 3/12/96
ITEM TITLE:
Report Establishing Trial Traffic Regulation #145 - Two-Hour Time
Limited Parking 800 AM. to 600 P.M., Except on Sundays and Public
Holidays on the North Side of Kearney Street between Third Avenue and
Church Avenue.
Director of Public W OrkS((}f"
^' \
City Manage~JJ. "9v\ ()i!\ \
\ j"l
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
,j
Staff has received a written request from the owner of the commercial building at 745 Third
A venue, which has businesses that front on Kearney Street, to provide time limited parking on
the westerly portion of the two hundred block of Kearney Street, citing the need for short term
parking. The City Engineer has determined the need to establish a time limited, two-hour
parking zone on the north side of Kearney Street between Third Avenue and Church Avenue
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept staffs report and establish a Trial
Traffic Regulation Two-Hour Time Limited Parking 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Except on
Sundays and Public Holidays on the North Side of Kearney Street between Third Avenue and
Church Avenue.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of 2/08/96, voted MSC 5-1-1 (Bierd/Liken), with
Commissioner Cochrane voting no and Commissioner Acton absent, to establish a Trial Traffic
Regulation for Two-Hour Parking Limit 800 A.M to 600 PM., Except on Sundays and
Public Holidays on the North Side of Kearney Street between Third Avenue and Church
Avenue. In a follow-up motion the Commission voted MSC 6-0-1 (Liken/Bierd) with
Commissioner Acton absent, to have staff contact the Post Office and the Plaza at Third
Avenue and Kearney Street and report back to the Commission about employees of the Post
Office parking off-site, and the issue raised by the residents of the patrons of the Parole Office
not being allowed to park in the parking structure.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has received a written request from the owner of a commercial building at 745 Third
Avenue to provide time limited parking on a portion of the 200 block of Kearney Street to
allow a higher parking turnover rate for businesses in her building. Staff has evaluated this
request and sees a need for time limited parking on Kearney Street between Third Avenue and
Church Avenue
Kearney Street is an east-west street 36' wide, with parking allowed on both sides. The block
of Kearney Street between Third Avenue and Church Avenue is mostly fronted by commercial
use. A parking structure is available for tenants of the commercial building on the south side
II"
Page 2, Item II
Meeting Date 3/12/96
of Kearney Street at Third A venue. Due to the proximity of the post otTice and the Third
A venue Plaza buildings, there are a large number of motorists which park all day on Kearney
Street. Approximately 9 cars can park along the south curb line and 8 cars along the north
curbline.
By restricting parking along the north curb line, only eight (8) vehicles will be displaced and
the impacts to the surrounding neighborhood minimal. Although these eight (8) proposed time
limited parking spaces will benefit all area business, they are not to be reserved parking spaces.
Therefore, anyone is entitled to park in this area as long as the time limit restriction is
complied with, on a first come first serve basis.
Several area residents attended the Safety Commission meeting and expressed concerns over
the impacts that the displaced vehicles would have in front of their homes. These residents live
on Church Avenue and on Kearney Street. east of Church Avenue. Staff has considered the
resident's concerns and will evaluate the impacts to the surrounding neighborhood once the
time limited parking is established. If necessary, staff can modify the length of the parking
restriction and/or provide the area residents with a parking permit which would exclude
vehicles which park all day. At the end of the eight month trial period, staff will then go back
to the Safety Commission and the City Council for a recommendation on whether or not to
make this trial traffic regulation permanent
Staff has contacted the Post Office and Me. Donald Marbrey, Post Master, has informed us that
the Post Office has recently provided adequate parking for all of their employees. He stated
that if employees are parking outside of the Post OtTice complex, they are doing so on their
own. He expressed concurrence with stairs recommendation claiming that it would create no
hardship for the Post Office.
StafT has also contacted the Parole Department at 745 Third Avenue and Ms. Kathy Swank,
Assistant Unit Manager, has informed us that the Parole Department has provided adequate
parking for all of their employees and all parolees. She stated that if employees or parolees
are parking outside of the parking provided at the complex, they are doing so of their own
choice She expressed concurrence with staffs recommendation claiming that it would create
no hardship for the Parole Department.
A field survey disclosed that the subject parking area is occupied by long term parkers.
Conversion of the all day parking spaces to two-hour time limited parking will induce parking
turnover and provide service to a greater number of users. TratTic safety is not an issue.
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that the said time limited parking restriction be
established
CONCLUSION:
It is stairs recommendation that the City Council adopt a Trial Traffic Regulation establishing
time limited parking zone on the north side of Kearney Street between Third Avenue and
11- .2.
Page 3, Item 1/
Meeting Date 3/12/96
Church Avenue as a "Two-Hour Parking Anytime Between 8:00 A.M. & 6:00 P.M. Except
on Sundays and Public Holidays" as follows
Section 10.52.340, Schedule VI - Parking Time Limited on Certain Streets
Two Hour Parking 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m Except Sundays and Public Holidays
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Side Length of Time
Permitted
Kearn ey Street Third Avenue Church Avenue North 2 Hour
All area businesses, the Postmaster and residents have been notified of tonight's City
Council meeting and the mailing list is attached for Council's information.
FISCAL IMPACT; None The cost of installIng 3-two hour signs and posts is $200.00
and will be paid by the requesting property owner.
Attachments
Area Plat
Letter from property owner dated 1/6/96
Parking Survey
Minutes of the 2/8/96 Safety Commission Meeting (Excerpt)
Apphcable Municipal Code Sections
Maihng List
File No.: 0760-95-CY029
FXR:dmw
(M:1l10ME\ENGINEERIAGENDA IKEARNEYS.FXR)
//'-3)I-t
~ ..-~-
.... -
~ I % oil.U'",'
..;- _.~
:I
~ . ~
-
- -~-
;: =--
'"'
0.0
I : '
1...' ~:.
}+-
II:
II:
C
"
-.. -'4
--"T' .....
,..-.. r'"
l !; I
STREET \
, " ,~,
I I , ", p-
~ .... I ,. a-J-.
__'- LA ...._
___ ~ .A...
A..
L-I __ ....
01[11 L-
>
;~
IT.
II:
>
~-
. _..a_
~~rT
~ ~ ! ! ~
...
,
..
III
III
IE
U
IE
III
>
,
L
I
~
II
~-
~-- u ;.-.
"'. ,
~.. I V----
~-- /') i- ~-
-... ~1I1
--- -- (~II ~
.. -- - --.,
_. _ .~ .. c_
----l "'" _ _~- . .__
- - . . -- ...: . t
"'_-... --..; , III
-, I- ....
7~- i ....~-.... . '-- - t -...
~ _ Ill... -'1?&~ ~
.'-.- ~~:-. iJ.. ~ ... ~ ~
'l ... - ~ r ,.., I.,... C 0_
I I , t-. I I . ~ ... .. III
. . .:: 0 III
oJo STffKl'
Ilii
~'}' E-:'
I __
I
I
II
>
c
~
!-
It
~ ..
11.........
-- .- --
- f-- - -
--......:. -
-.- - - - - .
.- .-
- . - -- --
z ... -
... =
a:
=
0 -
...- -
-, -
=
- 1
-
. .~ I
,
.
I I ! I I
II: . I I ~ '
- ---
III
j.. ~ =
" 0 -
u .. III
:t I/)
...
.
III
Z
POST OFFIC:) c
SITE a:
i
~~~ ...
,:;u~fc,'"
I
-
-
L.
I ~;X
~ ,'",.
i
J 0
It:
i..
..,.I
r
. . I . \...
- _.' . . . . .
. . . . . ....
. -1.......: -.-.,.) .l.,.
. ". . .
. : . : . : : . :
,
.....
I .
. ,
, .
: .
..-..-
-- --- '"
:t
Z
---- ~
C
..... -
-.. ---
.----
.--.....
,
.
. . - -. -' -. . . - .
. - - - --.:. . - . . .. .
III ----.--...---.,.~ C
= ...-.----.
Z I~.
III . .J
> ~____. 101
C ,.-~.-1.-.Q
-_._--r....~
- -,. -I-~'r-t!'"' -.
.._~ : ':::
, -
,
--- ~..-
-
-
-~ n
..
->
.n
-
,
i - .
.~
- .- a:
.n -%
-..
-
;- . . I'
. . , ; .
------.
I I
, .
.....
11~3
I
..... .
, :
---...
'-
---
---... -
........ .
-.
... - -..
....... .
....... .
-- - .-
....:- . I
~ I . .
'~J
,
.1.
._..
..-
---->
-
.. ...
--
,,~
C
.... ~
f- ..I
1&1
!- z
z
'. .., 0
: I , Q
, , . .; -;
2
. ' I
I
I
, I
I
I .
If
. . :
, I .
--..-
I
\
pol ~
, III
.- ~
'.;, J
'"b~
I-
<
...J
C.
<(
w
a:
<(
iii
- ::
i=
CD
01
....
..
....
('01
1II
-
.
Q
Elizabeth C. Lee
T.J.., A ~L . . _ "Ii'
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Jl:b ' - --1
January 6, 1996
Frank Rivera
Traffic Engineer
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Placement of 2 hour parking signs on Kearney Street at Third Avenue
Dear Mr. Rivera:
I am writing this letter asking that you consider placing 2 hour parking signs on Kearney
Street at Third Avenue for the use of the patrons of my beauty shop, as well as business
tenants in the same building.
You will find below signatures of persons joining me in a petition to have these signs
placed.
Sincerely,
?
~ // /7
~..~~~~0/d~
I ~ '8--10
r
Elizabeth Lee
EL:vn
J~-fl~c
Name
..., I ~ 6'
r / (! _
Address
Jh rt. 1.
, - if '
,
14 - '_
-n
1'hone
---..-:;,,~.;,n,.-- 'J
::.Ai.....~_ _ __--.-:;..oo:.~
~. "11P~
~(
I ., , . f,:D
11_" ~ ~ (}-i;t?>'lr~
lo,.~,~i 3() E. ii?,.. "'_ _ L. c:, L (l \). ~ ,q II
___r,,~__.~,......... -
~-~
c
o
p
y
/
Elizabeth C. Lee
.i -
Chula Vista, CA 91910
\V~/I ~_...
January 6, 1996
.
Frank Rivera
Traffic Engineer
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Placement of 2 hour parking signs on Kearney Street at Third Avenue
Dear Mr. Rivera:
I am writing this letter asking that you consider placing 2 hour parking signs on Kearney
Street at Third Avenue for the use of the patrons of my beauty shop, as well as business
tenants in the same building.
You will find below signatures of persons joining me in a petition to have these signs
placed.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Lee
EL:vn
~ ~
't:--- e r
Name '_ ~s Phone --(/ .
- '
.-1 .
'- //_I.aA "
I~
-
r
~
- , ~ ~
//-?
'd
"
iil
~
n~Z
II II II
nnn
. . .
, , ,
m . m
'd'd'd
. . .
, , "
"'''''''
ro ro ro
"'''''''
o 0 0
::l ::l::J
~ {fJ ::l
,...- 0 0
~ " ,
O'rrrr
~ ::r::r
. .
m f-'.....
.....-o..a.
'" ro .
.,
o 0
o "'"'
"'
""
n. .
0'. .
" " "
" " "
o . .
0''<'<
~~~
cTrT(T
II' ~
rtC1l>-:lrt>-:l;
::r~::rOJ::r
ro '1 ro "ro
~~~~;)"io
ro~ 1:1 OJ f-'
~rof-'rtf-'
'1ro\D~~
H> f-'. 1:1" f-'.
oOroO::l
~ 0. f-' Ol!l
::l' 0
o.~,.;OJ'O
G :3 OJ
C1l::r ' '1
rt f-'. f-'. "
OJ 0 rn I--' f-I-
rt::r f-'::l
f-'. OJ "l!l
o Ul 1-1-0
::l~ffiO~
:g.roo.OJ'1
ro :3 <:
rtrtrt~ (t)
::rOJO '<
ro::l f-'
'1 C1l" H>
roo.::rOO
Ul 0 011
f-'. ,.; '0 "
o.,.;:3ro
ro::r OJ
rt f-'. OJ '1
::ro::l::l
ro::ro.ro
'< '<
rtW
";::r" ({J
roroOrt
'1 0'1
ro f-''O ~
H> f-":3 rt
o 0,
~ro 1:1
::l ::l H> ro
0.0 '1 rt
ro 0 ,.;
~ '0 :3 ~
o.f-'Y::l
OJ OJ
:3rt::l>-:l
Oro~::r
Ul (f} OJ 1-1-
rt '1'1
f-'- 0 '< 0.
;3H>",p
'0 rt f-' <:
o::r' ro
'1 ro ::l
~ f-'~
::1()~ro
rr III (J') OJ
f-' '1 ::l
,<C1lrto.
'000
rt'1yro
::r ro OJ f-'
ro C1l::l
ro~~
~::lpjilJ
1) rt '1 '1
~o.'<p
::l ~ '" <:
rt'1O'1ro
o f-'., ::l
H> ::l ~
l!l f-' ro
rt \D
t-'. rt \D ~
;3::rO'lOJ
ro ro. C1l
>-:lnp"l f-'
'1 f-'.C1l '1 _____
OJrtC1lOJ '"
H>'< O::l 0'1
H> 0" _____
1-'- 0 1-'- \D
OH>OJ;d 0'1
rt f-'.
t<:lnro<:
::l::r ro
l!l ~ t<:l'1
f-'. f-' ::l OJ
::lOJl!l
ro f-'.
ro<:::l
11 l-'-fD
1-'-00 (D
::lrt'1
LQOJ
rzl
~
~
u u [J] [J] Z [J] [J] Z u [J] [J]
U U [J] [J] Z [J] [J] Z u [J] z [J]
\D
><m
~"- U U [J] [J] Z [J] [J] Z u [J] z [J]
D\D
HN
~"-
li<ri U U [J] [J] Z [J] [J] Z Z Z [J] Z [J]
u u [J] [J] Z Z [J] Z u [J] z [J] [J] [J]
>< U Z [J] [J] Z Z [J] Z u [J] z [J] [J] [J]
~\D
Dm
[J]"- U U [J] [J] Z Z [J] Z u [J] Z [J] [J] [J]
~U)
~N
::r:"-
t-<ri U U [J] [J] Z Z [J] Z u [J] Z [J] [J] [J]
>< U U Z Z u [J] z [J] [J] Z Z [J] Z Z [J] [J]
~
D\D
[J]m
1'iI"- U U Z Z U [J] Z [J] [J] Z Z [J] Z Z [J] [J]
Z'"
DN
1'iI"-
Sri U U Z Z u [J] Z [J] [J] Z Z [J] Z Z [J]
u u [J] [J] Z Z [J] [J] [J] Z [J]
u u [J] [J] Z Z [J] [J] [J] Z [J] Z
><\D
~m
D"- U U [J] [J] Z Z [J] [J] [J] Z [J] Z
[J]M
I'iIN
~"- U U [J] [J] Z Z [J] [J] [J] Z [J]
t-<ri
U U [J] en [J] Z [J] [J] [J] Z [J] en Z Z
U U [J] [J] [J] Z [J] [J] [J] Z [J] [J] Z Z
\D
><m
~"- u u [J] [J] [J] Z [J] [J] [J] Z [J] [J] Z Z
~~
0"-
:Eri
I'iI U) 00 r-- 00 ri \D m U) M 00 \D 00 U) M \D
U \D '" 0 U) M m P< \D 00 00 M ri 0 ~ \D r-- r--
Zl'il U) M r-- N r-- m Z 0 ri M '" \D 00 8 00 M \D
1'iIt-< \D t-< U) :E ~ D >< M :E I'iI t-< " :x: ~ N ~
U~ M a M ::r: I'iI D r-- m >-'! ~ ~ 0 a '" >-'! U) Ii<
H>-'! :E >< :x: :x: m N 0 I'iI t-o >-'! Z ~ t-o 0 " ~ ><
>-'!P< N N '" N N N r-- '" N M M ri '" r-- N M N
~
..:l
rzl
Q
~~
ocC
rzl
:><~
~~
<IlocC
~Q
:;I;l>:
HM
:-:
l>::;I;
ocCrzl
P4rzl
~
~
rzl
lQ
~
rzl
rzl
l>:
~
<Il
=
tJ
l>:
iil
t.I
//-,
~~~
~~m
"""'
. . 0
" " "
" " "
ro ro",
. . u
"'''
'"
'" '" 0
o 0
.
. . '0
"d'1J-rl
rl.rl 1Il
W W
"
"'"' .
~~"'
" " ~
o 0-.-1
" m .
" " "
000
'0'0'0
. . .
-"-"-"
" " "
ro ro ro
"'''''''
w ro ro
" " "
ro . .
uuu
II II II
Z('J}v
rl
'"
"
"
'"
n"'''
II II II
nnn
w w w
, ~ ~
m m m
"'''''''
w w .
~ ~ ~
;nn;,
000
'""''''
o 0 0
" " "
om"
1-'" 0 0
~ " ,
"'~~
ro "''''
"
m m
Ul f-'-....
1-'.p.Q..
'" 0 ro
ro
o 0
o ~~
~
"''''
no 0
'" w .
" ~ ,
, " "
o ro ro
"'''''''
[Jl(r.lCll
~~~
'"
"
Q
"
lJ1 W 1>1 N N N W W f-' '" N N W N '" W w 'LIt"
N "l '" ~ ~ G1 t" G1 ;0 1>1 n ;0 t" <: 1>1 3: tll t"H
'D C/l N 0< n ;;j t" "l w 0 G1 0 1>1 w 0 ~ p(J
0< ~ ..., 'LI >-'I ;0 ?'i "l '" C/l 0< N P '" N "-< >-'11>1
~ 0 '" '" W 00 00 lJ1 '" 0 W '" lJ1 N 0 '" 0 I>1Z
?'i ..., ..., ..., f-' 00 'D N 0 W '" ..., 0 '" W 0 lJ1 C/l(J
'D ..., 00 '" 00 N 'D 00 ..., '" W W N ..., f-' '" 1>1
f-'3:
"-.0
~S
Z C/l C/l (J Z n C/l Z n Z "-.p
'DO<
'"
Z C/l C/l n Z n C/l Z n Z
Z C/l C/l n Z (J C/l Z n Z
C/l n n z C/l >-'>-'1
"-.~
NI>1
Z WC/l
C/l C/l (J n C/l "-.0
'DP
"'0<
C/l C/l n z C/l
C/l C/l n
z n z C/l C/l >-'~
"-.1>1
NO
Z Z C/l "'Z
"-.1>1
'DC/l
"'0
Z P
><
C/l Z C/l n (J C/l >-'>-'1
"-.~
N~
Z n C/l lJ1;o
C/l C/l "-. C/l
'DO
",p
C/l Z C/l n C/l 0<
C/l Z C/l n C/l
Z C/l >-'''l
"-.;0
N H
Z "'tl
C/l "-.p
'DO<
'"
Z
Z
~
n
~
n
=
tt.l
>i
:o<l
1>1
l'l
>i
~
l'l
>i
:!!:
l'l
gj~
:o<l
>i~
IllH
tz:llz:
HG:l
:o<l
tltt.l
~~
l'lO<
~~
~
tl
l'l
t<
~
:o<l
I
/I,IIJ
rzl
~
~
I>:
~
00 00 00 Z 00 Z
00 00 00 Z 00 Z
'"
:><0\
~----- 00 00 00 Z 00 Z 00
Q'"
H'"
~-----
~M 00 00 00 Z 00 00
00 Ul 00
:>< 00 00
~'"
QO\
00 _____ 00 00 00
~lf1
::0'"
:r:_____
t-<M 00 00 00
>< 00
~
Q'"
000\
W_____ 00 00
Z.;<
Q'"
W_____
3:M 00
Z
:><'"
~O\
Q----- Z Z Z U
OOM
W",
::0----- Z U
t-<M
Z Z Z
Z Z Z
'"
:><0\ Z
~-----
~~
0-----
:EM
W M lf1 CO CO CO M lf1 '" lf1 lf1 .;< .;< t"- '" 0\ .;<
UOO 0 0 '" 0 M lf1 '" 0 '" M CO .;< CO M M '" 0
ZW lf1 0 t"- CO .;< '" CO 0 M '" t"- t"- M .;< M lf1 ~
Wt-< t"- U :r: ~ t-< Z r:o CO '" z :>< t-< Q ::0 Q ::0 Q
U~ Q t-< 3: :>< r:o :>< ...:I t"- 0\ ~ "' :r: :E U 0' :>< '"
H...:I ...:I 00 0.. 0' 3: Z 0 :>< z :>< IJ :E "' 0 N Z 0
...:10.. M M '" '" M '" M .;< M '" '" '" '" '" '" M .;<
...:l
rzl
Q
~
~rzl
<~
~rzl
~~
tIlQ
01>:
ZH
H:>::
:.:;~
I>:Z
<rzl
""rzl
~
~
rzl
lQ
~
rzl
rzl
I>:
~
tIl
:>::
U
I>:
~
tJ
//,//
vvv
"'''''''
",,"'
" 0 0
" " ><
>< >< "
. ."'
" 0 U
"''''
'"
'" '" 0
o 0
o
o 0'"
'"d'd-.-l
..-1.,., {/J
. .
><
",",0
vv",
>< " v
o 0 -.-j
" . 0
" " "
000
"'''''''
o 0 0
"'''''''
>< >< ><
. . .
'"'"'"
. . w
>< " "
. . .
UUU
II II II
,,<nU
M
OJ
~
"
'"
ntll2:
II II II
nnn
. . .
" " "
m m m
"'''''''
. . .
" " "
;no;,
(ll ill ill
"'''''''
o 0 0
" " "
m m "
f-'- 0 0
~ " "
'"~~
m '" '"
"
m m
(Jl f-'-f-'-
f-'. 0.. 0..
'" m m
m
o 0
O~~
~
"''''
n m m
'". .
" " "
" " "
o m m
::0'<'<
000
~~~
'd
"
Q
'"
N N W I-' P N tI1 N ~ '" W '" W W N W N 'Dt-<
~ 'D :;; 3: G'l ~ 0 G'l N ... ('J ... ('J 'D 3: p:: 0< t-<H
~ >-'I iO I-' G'l tI1 ~ c:: -.l t-< -.l t-< trI ... ~ iO p('J
m t-< ~ w 0< P '" m "l m "l >-'I ... >-'I >-'It<:!
w I-' W W Vl fi >-'I I-' Vl N N N N I-' '" ... w t<:!Z
'" '" ... ... N -.l >-'I -.l W ~ Vl ~ Vl '" '" I-' ... m('J
-.l a fi a ... w 0< '" a a ... '" a '" t<:!
1-'3:
___...0
~S
---...P
"'0<
fi
m ~;:j
Nt<:!
wm
('J m ('J m ___...tJ
"'P
fiO<
('J m ('J Z
m Z Z Z
I-'~
___...t<:t
NtJ
"'Z
___...t<:t
",m
fitJ
P
0<
('J Z Z ('J 1-'>-'1
---...p::
NC::
Z Z ('J Vl~
('J ___... m
",tJ
fiP
0<
I-'''l
---...~
NH
fitJ
---...P
"'0<
fi
Z
~
II'/,)a
n
El
:<l
n
=
~
~
tzl
tJl
tzl
>-i
~'tl
tzl:o-
Z:<l
:;j~
HZ
:<llil
tltJ:l
~~
~><
tzlti
~
tl
tzl
t"
~
I
Izl
~
Izl
~
I>:
;!
[J)
[J)
1.0
><m
<>:-......
or--
H N
~-......
li<rl
>< [J) [J)
<>: 1.0
om
[J)-""" [J] U U U Z
~Lf)
""N
er:-......
E-<rl
>< [J) U [J) [J)
<>:
01.0
[J)m
W-""" Z [J] [J) [J)
Z'"
ON
W-"""
~rl [J)
Z
><1.0
<>:m
0-"""
[J)M
WN
",,-"""
E-<rl
1.0
><m
<>:-......
~U~
0-"""
:Erl
W Lf) '" M 0 N M '" M ex) 1.0 r-- ex) M Lf) '" 0 rl
U[J) Lf) m rl Lf) N Lf) rl Lf) M ex) 0 M 1.0 rl Lf) ex) 0
ZW M rl Lf) N 0 m 1.0 r-- M [J] m N r-- 1.0 M ex) 0
WE-< ~ E-< ex) Ii< 0 ~ :E U m Z Ii< ~ "" m E-< :E 0
U<>: ~ D:1 rl ...:I er: ...:I 0 Lf) M :> ...:I ~ <>: Ii< ~
H...:I 0 0.. Lf) U U 0 t-:l D:1 E-< m t-:l CJ W t-:l W CJ
...:10.. N M '" N M N N M M Lf) M M M N rl rl N
H
Izl
Q
~
~Izl
~ffi
~~
tIlQ
t,?1>:
ZH
HlEI
loc:~
~~
P<1zl
~
~
Izl
lQ
Izl
~
Izl
~
lEI
U
I>:
~
U
1/" I;J
~~~
",en en
",,'"
v v u
" " "
" " "
" "'"
v v U
"''''
~
~~ 0
o 0
v
v v'"
'U'U-rl
'.-1..-1 f/J
. .
"
'" '" v
~~'"
" " ~
00.,,"
" . v
" " "
o 0 0
"'''''''
v v v
.v,'"
" " "
" " "
Po Po Po
. . .
" " "
" " "
UUU
II II II
"enU
~
~
"
()Ul~
II II II
nnn
. . .
" " "
ro . .
'0'0'0
. . .
" " "
"""
~ rtl rtl
Q,Q,Q,
o 0 0
::: ;:l:::
, m "
.....0 0
~ " "
",,,",,"
, "'"'
"
m m
(J1 f-'-f-'
....-0..0..
Q,' ,
,
o 0
o ~~
~
~'"
n' ,
"'. .
" " "
" " "
(l rtl ~
"'''''
UlUlUl
rT"-"-
'0
"
Q
'"
N >-' OJ N OJ >-' OJ >-' OJ '" N OJ N N OJ >-' >-' '1:Jt-<
><: ;0 ::I:: N ~ '" ;0 "'l t<:l tJj ::<: g; t1 a G1 tJj L' L'H
n 0 G1 tJj 00 V1 0 '" OJ iO '1:J L' -..J H pn
3: 00 (J] "'l ~ N 3: OJ -..J Z '1:J t<:l t<:l :>': -..J G1 >-"]t<:l
>-' V1 0 '" OJ ~ W V1 V1 '" >-' '" '" '" V1 N 0 t<:lZ
'" '" V1 '" '" -..J '" -..J 00 OJ 0 '" '" N '" '" (J](J]
>-' '" -..J V1 >-' OJ V1 N '" '" 0 '" V1 '" OJ V1 t<:l
>-'3:
"'--0
~s
"'--P
"'><:
'"
>-'>-.,]
"'--c::
Nt<:l
OJ(J]
"'--t1
"'p
"'><:
>-'::<:
"'--t<:l
Nt1
"'Z
"'--t<:l
"'(J]
"'t1
P
><:
>-'>-.,]
~a
V1;o
",--(J]
"'t1
",p
n n Z Z Z ><:
Z Z (J] n z
Z z Z >-''''l
"'--,.,
NH
"'t1
Z Z "'--P
"'><:
'"
Z n (J]
z Z
~
//-/'/
n
~
l<l
n
=
i
tzl
I:ll
tzl
>i
~
tzl",
!i!~
~~
HZ
i;lG'l
U>
~~
~o<
tzl~
>i
~
tl
tzl
t'
~
~
~
tzl
Safety Commission Minutes
February 8. 1996
Page 4
7. Reoort 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 the Municipal Code
increasing the speed limit on Maxwell Road between Otay Valley Road and the Landfill Entrance to 35 mph.
Approved 6-0-1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
8. Reoort on Increasin2 Soeed limits on Otav Vallev Road between Brandvwine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue
MSC (Miller/Smith) to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Municipal Code
increasing the speed limit on Otay Valley Road between Brandywine Avenue and Nirvana Avenue to 35 mph.
Approved 6-0-1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
9. Reoort on Reouest for two-hour Parkinl! 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 opened. He also asked
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.
//.,15" UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Safety Conimission Minutes
February 8, 1996
Page 5
MSC (Bierd/Liken) to recommend the establishment of a Trial Traffic Regulation to provide a "Two Hour
Parking Anytime between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. except on Sunday and Public Holidays" limit on the north
side of Kearney Street between Third Avenue and Church Avenue. Approve 5-1-1 with Commissioner Cochrane
voting no and Commissioner Acton absent.
Commissioner Cochrane said he voted against the item because he felt there was sufficient parking being denied
to motorists forced to park on the street, such as the parolees. If they were required to visit the office, they should
be allowed to park in the plaza. He felt it needed to be resolved before inconveniencing residents.
Vice-Chair Miller asked about contacting the parole office to discuss their rationale for not letting patrons park
in the structure.
MSC (Liken/Bierd) to have staff contact the Post Office and Plaza at Third and Kearney about resolving the issue
of patrons not being allowed to park in the structure and report back to the Commission. Approved 6-0-1 with
Commissioner Acton absent.
10. Reoort on 1996 Traffic Sienal Modification List
Commissioner Bierd wanted to know why the intersection of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue was not on the
list.
Frank Rivera responded that Third and Orange Avenues was part of the City's Hazard Elimination Program which
was funded by a grant from the Federal Government as part of the 1995-96 year. Because the Federal budget had
not been approved, the work could not proceed. The project might need to be re-advertised.
Chair Liken questioned why the audible pedestrian signal for Third Avenue and J Street was on the list, when at
the previous meeting. the Commission indicated they did not want to wait for the new fiscal year, but wanted the
signal installed as soon as possible. He wondered if it would be appropriate for the item to be referred to Council
at the next possible meeting expressing the need for the audible signal.
MSC (Liken/Cochrane) to recommend to the City Council the five safety related traffic signal modifications with
the exception that the audible pedestrian signal at Third Avenue and J Street be installed immediately if funds
were available in the FY 1995-96 budget. Approved 6-0-1 with Commissioner Acton absent.
11. Reoort on 1996 Traffic Siena I Prioritv List
MSC (Smith/Cochrane) to approve staff's recommendations for signal installation. Approved 6-0-1 with
Commissioner Acton absent.
12. Oral Communications
Mr. Steve Letchworth, 600 East I Street, Chu/a Vista, CA 91910, was responding to Vice-Chair Miller's motion
for the all-way stop evaluation at Lori Lane and East J Street. He lived at the corner and did not want a stop sign
at the intersection. He had been told by Mike Donnelly, Assistant Engineer II, that the limit line on Lori Lane had
been moved back approximately five feet over a previous position. Therefore, vehicles needed to "inch out" after
making their stop. Other motorists felt they made their stop and then were not carefur proceeding through the
Intersection. He would rather give up street parking in order to improve sight distance.
Mr. lohn Howard, 1150 Arbusto Corte, Chu/a Vista, CA 91911, lived in the development on the corner of Paseo
Ranchero and East J Street. At some p//:j;mlJ"NOFni=tfcIAecoMnINUTESEastJ
E. For the proper regulation, control and inspection of parking and traffic upon the public .treets;
f. To be pledged as security for the payment of principal and interest on off-street parking revenue bonds
issued by the city or any parking district organized within the city.
(Ord. 973 i1 (part), 1966; prior code fi19.17.13).
10.56.270 Permit partina-l!ltablisbed-Administratioo alllhority.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, there is hereby established a system of permit
, parking which the finance office shall administer subject to the standards and provisions .et forth in Sections
10.56.280 through 10.56.320 (Ord. 973 U (part), 1966; prior code U9.17.14 (part)).
10.56.280 Permit partdD&-AuJborized wMr-~""" 01' Tag required.
In those parking meter zones and municipal parking lots approved by ordinance of the city council,
and described in Section 10.56.290 and Schedule XII anached hereto and made a part of this chapter, no
person shall park any vehicle upon any of the following public parking lots owned or operated by the city
except when such vehicle is parked in accordance with regulations on appropriate signs erected giving notice
of the requirements to display the permit parking tag (or for a designated employee parking lot, a valid
pennit parking sticker obtained from the Director of Personnel in the manner required by Section 2.56.310)
and then only for the duration specified in said Schedule XII and on said signs. (Ord. 2436 56, 1991; Ord.
2131 ~1, 1985; Ord. 973 ~1 (part), 1966; prior code fi19.17.14(A)).
10,56.290 Permit parIdng-Areu des;l""'t..d-Schedule X1J.
Pursuant to Vehicle Code Sections 22508 and 22519 and in accordance with Sections 10.56.270 and
10.56.280, public parking lots 1-10 (parking meter zones) and the employee parking lot on the north .ide
of "F" Street west of intersection with Fourth Avenue are also designated as permit parking areas wherein
vehicles displaying appropriate parking permits or tags shall be allowed to park in .paces so marked for up
to nine hours (all day). (Ord. 2488 fi3, 1991; Ord. 2436 fi7, 1991; Ord. 2131 fi1, 1985; Ord. 973 fi1 (part),
1966; prior code i19.22.1 (part)).
10.56.300 Permits 01' Tap-eo.t-Period of validity-Prorating permitted wbm.
Said parking permits .hall be sold to cover a calendar quarter of three months duration only, for the
Required Fee(s). Said tags may be obtained at the city finance office. Applicants must be merchants or
employees of merchants owning or operating businesses within the Downtown Business Area or City officen
on behalf of City employees assigned to Norman Park Center. Applicants may request a proration of the
quarterly fee if they are purchasing permit for the balance of the calendar quarter, and such proration shall
be made at the sole discretion of the finance officer and no other proration .hall be allowed. for employee.
..signed at City HaJJ, permits may be obtained from the Director of Penonnel for parking in the adjacent
employee parking lot. (Ord. 2506 i1 (part), 1992; Ord. 2488 fi4, 1991; Ore!. 2436 i8, 1991; Ore!. 2131 fi1,
1985; Ord. 973 U (part), 1966; prior code fi19.17.14(B)).
(R 6/92)
//"/7
686
O1apter 10.86
PERMIT PARKING IN
RESIDENI1AL ZONES
Sections:
10.86.010 Purpose U1d IntenL
10.86.020 Permit parlting in excess of time limitations.
10.86.030 Citation of permit whicles.
10.86.010 Purpose U1d IntenL
The purpose and intent of the city council in adopting Section 10.86.010 through 10.86.030 is to
establish procedures for the issuance of permits to residential propeny owners or tenants to enable such
persons to park their vehicles in the street adjacent to their homes for periods in excess of the time
limitation established for parking on such streets. (Ord. 1904 ~1 (part), 1980).
10.86.020 Permit parlting in excess of time limitations.
Any owner or tenant resident of propeny located on a residential sITeet which has a two.hour parking
lunitation may obtain at no cost, by showing proof of address and vehicle registration, a permit from the
director of finance which authorizes said vehicle to be parked on residential streets, as designated on said
permit, where a two. hour time limitation has been imposed in excess of said time limitation. (Ord. 1904
~ 1 (part), 1980).
10.86.030 Citation of permit vehicles.
Police officers or other persons charged with the duty of enforcement of traffic regulations in the city
shall not issue citations to any vehicle displaying the authorized permit issued by the director of finance
regardless of the length of time that said vehicle may be parked on any residential street on which a
!Wo.hour parking time limitation has been imposed; provided, however, such permits shall not authorize
parking in excess of the seventy.!Wo.hourlimitation as imposed by Section 10.52.100. (Ord. 1904 ~1 (part),
1980).
II--IY 713
(R 11/91)
Resident
701 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
702 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
1 lent
707 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
710 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
714 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
717 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
721 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
722 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
728 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
730 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
7:?3Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
736 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
V' .L-'{
Resident
739 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
740 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
746 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
761 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
769 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
772 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
777 Church A venue
( 'a Vista, CA 91910
Resident
778 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
782 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
786 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
}/-/9
Resident
706 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
713 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
718 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
725 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
732 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
737 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
745 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
765 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
773 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
781 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
787 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
790 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
791 Church Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
794 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
dent
796 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
798 Church A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
258 Kearney Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
261 Kearney Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
270 Kearney Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Resident
283 Kearney Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
USPO
750 Third Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Occupant
745 Third Avenue, Suite A
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Occupant
745 Third Avenue, Suite B
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Elizabeth Lee
745 Third Avenue, Suite C
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Occupant
765 Third Ave., Ste. 100
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Occupant
765 Third Ave, Ste. 200
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Occupant
fc.sThird Ave.. Ste. 212
C:nula Vista, CA 91910
Occupant
765 Third Ave., Ste. 300
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Occupant
765 Third Ave., Ste. 301
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Occupant
765 Third Ave., Ste. 305
Chula Vista, CA 91910
/1 ;,)..P
February 29, 1996
Mr. Frank Rivera
Traffic Engineer
276 Fourth Ave
Chula Vista, CA 91910
_/':;;Jt- 5 6 78 9
....t-- ' 70
~ /7>
.;::'\
\l.~~ ~~~ -
~~~\)~t~
Dear Sir.
1 am a customer of the Blue Haven Coiffures at 745 3rd Ave., Chula Vista. The
shop itself opens onto Kearney St For the last six months there have been no parking
spaces in front of the Blue Haven on either side of Kearney Street, nor indeed in that
entire block 1 understand the spaces are being used by the employees of the Post Office
and that the cars remain there all day, till the employees' shifts are over. The postal
employees have a lot of their own, and by using street parking they are depriving
businesses of space for their customers
The customers seldom need more than two hours for their appointments, so it
seems logical that a 2-hour parking sign on Kearney Street would alleviate the matter. If
the residents of Church St have concerns that the Post Office employees will park all day
in front of their houses, maybe a 2-hour parking sign on Church St would be advisable
also. Those who live on Church could be given placards to put on their cars and their
guests cars in order to avoid tickets
It does not seem fair for a small business to lose customers because of lack of
parking spaces when these spaces are being used by people who already have adequate off
street parking provided for them
I hope you will consider the 2-hour parking signs as a solution to this problem.
Sincerely,
,/?~/J;~V~~
1/;'</
March 12, 1996
TO: The Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM: Armando Buelna, Assistant to the Mayor and Council
SUBJECT: ITEM 11 ON TONIGHT'S CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - TWO-HOUR
PARKING LIMIT ON KEARNEY STREET.
Mrs. Holt,_. . .J _ .. , called the office today to express her concern about
the proposed two-hour time limited parking on Kearney Street. This item is on tonight's
City Council Agenda as Item 11.
Mrs. Holt believes that placing a two-hour parking limit on Kearney Street will only
move the problem to Church Avenue. While staff asserts that the parking impact on
Church Avenue residents will be "minimal," Mrs. Holt said she is already experiencing
problems finding parking near her home. She noted that employees of businesses on
Kearney Street already park all day in front of her house. Mrs. Holt's husband is in ill
health, and she prefers to park close to the front of her house.
Mrs. Holt asked that if Council approves the two-hour parking limitation on Kearney
Street that you also place a similar restriction on Church Avenue. Another option she
supported would be to give residents of Church Avenue a parking permit that would
exclude nonresidents (this options is addressed by staff on page 11-2 of the report).
ab
/) --
/1./'
/",
/