Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1993/01/26 "'l' d'ecrare under penalty of per}W'Y that I alii em"lo,'ed by the City of Chula Vista In the miic'; of \he City Clerk and that I posted this Agenla/Nolice on the Bulletin B~ard at . Tuesday, January 26, 1993 the Public erv' e~Building and, at ~Ity Hall on, . Coun~lI Ch~b~rs 6:00 p.m. DATED, ! ~)', SIGNED t;;/rr~. Public Services BUlldmg Resrnlar Meednsrof the City of Chula Vista Citv'Council CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Fox ~ Horton ~ Moore ~ Rindone ~ and Mayor Nader _ 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINIITES: None submitted. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: None submitted. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 5 through JO) TIu! staff recornnrauImions regmding the foUowing items listed under the Consent CaImdm will be enocted by the Council by one motion without discussion unless a CoundJmember, a member of the public or City staff requests that the item be puIJedfor discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Items puIJed from the Consent CaImdm will be discussed after Board and Commission RecornnrauImions and Action Items.. Items puIJed by the public will be the first items of business. 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None submitted. 6. ORDINANCE 2540 AMENDING SECJ10N 2.05.010 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABUSH THE POSITION OF SPECIAL PLANNING PROJECTS MANAGER IN THE UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE (second readinsr and adoption) - The Fiscal Year 1992-93 budget included a position of Deputy Director of Planning to head the department's proposed Community Planning Group/OtayRanch project. After review of the revised implementation schedule of the City's takeover of the Otay Ranch project, it is recommended that the position tide be changed and a benefitted position be approved. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Administration) 4/5th's vote required. 7. RESOUmON 16969 APPROVING FIFTH THREE PARTY AGREEMENT FOR OTAY RANCH DEVELOPMENT PROCESSJNG BETWEEN THE CITY, ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST & ASSOCJATES AND BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES, !..P. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECIITE SAID AGREEMENT - The City is the agency designated in an agreement between Chula Vista and the County of San Diego to approve consulting contracts for the Otay Ranch. The budgeted amount of $248,000 proposed in the latest Agreement needs to be revised by increasing the amount by $94,000. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Deputy City Manager Kremp!) Agenda .2- January 26, 1993 8. RESOLUTION 16970 ESTABUSHINGALLOCATIONGUIDELlNESFORTIiEGAYLEMCCANDUSS MEMORIAL FUND - A memorial fund honoring the late Mayor Gayle McCandJiss was established in the early part of 1991. The fund was initially started with money that had been raised during her campaign, and was subsequently supplemented with numerous private donations. Consistent with her wishes, the fund was formed in order to establish a perpetual fund to recognize individuals or groups who make a substantial contribution toward the arts in the City. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation) 9. RESOLUTION 16971 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT Willi CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR PLAYGROUND IMPROVEMENTS AT 1liREE SCHOOL SITES AND JOINT USE TIlEREOF . In May 1992, Council allocated $50,000 of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to the Chula Vista Elementary School District for playground improvements, with the provision that the facilities would be open for public use during all non-school hours. The Agreement contains a scope of work, project schedule, budget, and joint use agreement. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) 10. REPORT MAJOR USE PERMIT MODIFICATION FOR DALEY QUARRY PROJECT, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. APPEAL TO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The report was provided to Council in November 1992 requesting authorization for staff to attend the County Planning Commission hearing on the proposed Daley rock quarry and to request a continuation on the major use permit item in order to provide staff sufficient time to meet with County staff members, as well as the applicant, to resolve certain issues. Staff appeared before the County Planning Commission on 11/20/92 and the requested extension was granted. However, the County Planning Commission voted on 12/4/92 to deny the applicant's request, and at the same time rejected the overriding consideration which has caused the applicant to appeal the County Planning Commission decision, which is now set for consideration by the Board of Supervisors on 2/3/93. Staff recommends Council provide direction on specific issues to be directed to the County Board of Supervisors. (Director of Planning) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES The foUowing items have been advertised and/or posted as publU: hemin&, as required by law. If you wish to speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" allailLlbk in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in fallor of the staffrecommendation; complete the pinkform to speak in opposition to the staff recommendatimL) Comments are 1imiJed to five mi1wteS per individuaL None submitted. Agenda -3- January 26, 1993 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is an opportunity for the general public to address the CiJy CoundI 011 any subject mntter wiJhin the CoundI's jurist1iction tIult is not an item 011 this agenda. (S_ law, however, generally prohibits the City CoundI from taking action 011 any issues not includRLl 011 the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the CoundI 011 suda a subject, pkase cotnpleU the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Cleric prior to the meeting. Those wha wish to speak, pkase give your 1IIl11U! and address for record purpases and faJ1aw up action. Your time is 1imiJed to three minutes per speaker. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS This is the time the CiJy CoundI will consider items whidl 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 individuaIIy by the CoundI and stoff recommendo1ions may in certain cases be presented in the aJtemative.. Those wha wish to speak, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the City ClerIc prior to the meeting. Public comments are 1imiJed to five minutes. 11. REPORT PROPOSED COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL MULTI-FAMILY AND YARDWASTE RECYCUNG PROGRAMS IN TIiE Cl1Y - State law (AB 939) requires all cities and counties to divert 25% of the "waste stream" from landf1lls by January, 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. The County's mandatory recycling ordinance is more restrictive and prohibits certain designated recyclables from being disposed at County owned landfills under a phased implementation timeline (March 1992 through July 1993). The City has already partially complied with these laws and ordinances. Staff believes that the City needs to move toward compliance with the State and County laws regarding recycling, and seeks Council's conceptual approval to institute a yard waste recycling program, and a commercial and multi-family recycling program development. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Administration) 12. REPORT REQUEST FOR AN AUrWAY STOP AT TIiE INTERSECTION OF EAST NAPLES STREET AND FOXBORO AVENUE - Staff received a request from Mrs. Norma Erhardt of 657 East Naples Street requesting the installation of an all-way stop at the intersection of East Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue. Staff recommends Council concur with previous Safety Commission recommendations and deny the request. (Director of Public Works) 13. REPORT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR OPERATION OF aIULA VISTA TRANSIT (CVO AND MAINTENANCE OF cvr BUS FLEET - The term of the current cvr contract operator, ATC/Vancom, expires on 6/30/93. Transit staff has prepared an RFP to solicit proposals to operate and maintain CVT buses beginning 7/1/93. This report summarizes significant requirements of the RFP. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Director of Public Works) Agenda .4- January 26, 1993 ITEMS PUU.ED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent CaIendar. Agmda items pulled at the request of the publU: will be considered prior to those pulled by COflIIciJmDnbers PubIU: comments ore limited to five mimItes per individuoL OTIIER BUSINESS 14. CI1Y MANAGER'S REPORTCS) a. Scheduling of meetings. 15. MAYOR'S REPORT(s) 16. COUN<JL COMMENTS Councilman Rindone a. Need to eliminate duplicity and conflict of responsibilities between "Business Response Team" (BRT), the "Employment Development Team" (EDT), and the "New Partnership Council" (NPC). ADJOURNMENT The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss: Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - IGOU vs. the City of Chula Vista. The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) a Special Council MeetingIWorksession on Thursday, January 28, 1993 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on February 2, 1993 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council meeting. A Meeting of the Industrial Development Authority will be held immediately following the Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency. . COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT . Meet.~D~qr~;J ITEM TITLE: Ordinance .l~i1~To amend s~~~~~C!.~~010 of the Municipal Code to establish th~~t~of Special Planning Projects Manager in the Uncl~led Service. Resolution "~1'~~mending Resolutions 16950 to add the Special Planning Projects Manager in Salary Band E-3 of the Executive Salary Schedule Resolution I"'~~ Amending Resolution 16889 to Place the position of Special Planning Projects Manager in the Fringe Benefit Resolution for Executive Managers SUBMITTED BY: City Manage~ 4/5ths Vote: Yes-I- No___) The Fiscal Year 1992-93 budget included a position that was identified as either Deputy Director of Planning or Special Projects Manager (see Page 129 of the budget commentary) that would head the department's proposed Community Planning Group/Otay Ranch project. After review of the revised implementation schedule of the City's takeover of the Otay Ranch project it is recommended that the position title be formalized and a benefitted position be approved. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: (1) Adopt the resolutions adding the Special Planning Projects Manager to Salary Band E-3 and placing the position in the executive fringe benefit resolution and (2) Place the Ordinance on first reading adding the position to the unclassified service. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: . Over the past several months City staff, in consultation with Baldwin, have refined the concept for this position. A clear need has been identified by staff and Baldwin for this position to be established at an executive level with a commensurate salary, reporting through the Planning Director to the City Manager. The Otay Ranch is the largest and most complex project the City will ever undertake. Three years of planning in a joint process with the County of San Diego have brought us to this point, and hopefully this Spring adoption of a General Plan Amendment and General Development Plan for the property. At that point, much work will remain to be accomplished. A sphere of influence will need to be adopted, tax sharing agreements put in place, and annexation brought to fruition, along with the more typical (or in this case, atypical) SPA plan processing. Many new and untried planning concepts espoused by this New Town General Plan need to be worked out at the SPA level to ensure that things such as the village t,"'j _ _~___...--"."",,~_________.._ _.".==-__~__.._._ ,_"_~-,,,,-::,'.___b'___'_'_'~'____-____ -- planning concept, mixed use, transit, pedestrian friendly design, and so forth, consistent with the City's and County's goals and objectives are properly ~ implemented. Setting the tone for the first two villages along Telegraph Canyon Road will be key. Major environmental and fiscal pieces, such as implementation of the wildlife, open space preserve, development phasing, and service revenue issues will be taken to a new level. Finally, coordination will be essential with the County of San Diego, City of San Diego, regional entities, special districts and environmental resource agencies. A citizen participation mechanism building upon the current process, as well as expanding it, will be vital to keep residents of Chula Vista in the process. All of these items point towards the position being at a high level as outlined herein. Subsequent to the processing of these first two villages, which will be the most complex and difficult, it is anticipated that future SPA processing will be able to be accomplished in a more normal fashion through the current structure of the City Planning Department. In other words, it is anticipated that the first SPA processing would take somewhere in the range of one to two years to complete, at which point the position would be eliminated or reconstituted as, say, a Deputy Planning Director or Principal Planner level within the hierarchy of the Planning Department and a more traditional processing of future SPAs would ensue from that point on. Staff will also be advising Council shortly on the implementation of the remaining positions comprising the Otay Ranch planning team and the further planning steps which were part of the FY 1992-93 adopted budget. During the preparation of the FY 1992-93 budget it was anticipated that we would be ready to transition the Joint City County review of the Otay Ranch plan to the City during October of 1992. Since these assumptions were made last sprin9 there ~ have been many delays in the transition process and it is now estimated that this ' transition will be phased in between February and September of 1993. The project "leader" during the budget process was not fully defined and the budget was approved for a non benefitted Deputy Planning Director, although the budget commentary as previously noted identified the new position as either a Deputy Director or Special Projects Manager. This was done to allow flexibility when it came time to making an actual selection. The original thought was that depending on the progress and needs of the Otay Ranch project we would need a high level administrator, and not knowing who might be available it may be a contract position or a benefitted staff position. We also feel that making this position a benefitted staff position better fits Council direction to avoid the use of consultants or contract employees in processing land use plans. This position will report to the City Manager via the Planning Director. The position will receive benefits as an executive manager. Funds are available within the Planning Department budget. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of the position and benefits for the remainder of this fiscal year is $46,048. The annual salary for this position will be $90,000. This cost shall be fully reimbursed by Baldwin. ~ " .. ..2 _.--_.._.-:-~_.._---_.. ::'~~-__'_~_~... __'.0' _._e _,'__ _ ....,_._~-.-.___..~__"_._....___._.__,_ __. . ORDINANCE NO. .15'1P r>O~\O~ "t-\.'i) t'I AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VI~J~o~~ING SECTION 2.05.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA ~~:.AL CODE TO ESTABLISH THE POSITION OF SP~~ PLANNING PROJECTS MANAGER IN THE UNCLASSIFIED SE$~'tE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA position proposed WHEREAS, the fiscal year 1992-93 budget included a of Deputy Director of Planning to head the department's Community Planning Group/otay Ranch project; and WHEREAS, after review of the revised implementation schedule of the city's takeover of the Otay Ranch project, it is recommended that the position title be changed and a benefitted position be approved; and WHEREAS, Charter sections 500(a) and 701(a) (8) authorize the city Council to create new Management level positions in the Unclassified Service by an ordinance adopted by a four-fifths vote. The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby ordain as follows: . SECTION I: That section 2.05.010 of the Chula vista Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as. follows: Sec. 2.05.010 Unclassified positions established. In addition to those unclassified positions specifically delineated in section 500 of the Charter of the City, there are established the unclassified positions entitled deputy city manager, assistant to the city manager, deputy city clerk, assistant fire chief, assistant director of planning, assistant director of finance, assistant director of personnel, assistant director of building and housing, city engineer, director of management and information services, redevelopment coordinator, housing coordinator, transit coordinator, assistant director of community development, deputy director of public works/city engineer, public information coordinator, traffic engineer, deputy director of public works/operations, budget manager, revenue manager, assistant director of management and information services, assistant library director eM police captain, and soecial olannina oroiects manaaer. John Goss, City Manager C:1oc'OO5OIO in . SECTION II: This ordinance full force on the thirtieth day from Presented by '-I - ~ V,'! kJ '""' " ~ ~ .t.~;>- - t, ~'f' COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ;/ Meeting Date 01/26/93 ITEM TfILE: Resolution I"'~ , Approving a Revision of a Three Party Agreement for Otay Ranch Development Processing Between the City of Chula Vista, Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates and Baldwin Vista Associates, L.P. and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Said Agreement VIA: General Manager, Otay Ranch Project SUBMlTlbD BY: Deputy City Manager Krempl ,~lll REVIEWED BY: City Manager tf (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No X) The City of Chula Vista is the agency designated in an agreement between Chula Vista and the County of San Diego to approve consulting contracts for the Otay Ranch. The budgeted amount of $248,000.00 proposed in the latest Agreement, which was the First Amendment to the Fourth Three Party Agreement, approved by the City Council (October 27, 1992) needs to be revised by increasing the amount by $69,000.00. Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates (RBF) and Baldwin Vista has reviewed this revised Agreement and agrees to all of the terms and conditions stated therein. The County is supportive of this Contract revision. RECOMMENDATIONS: Adopt a resolution modifying the existing Agreement with RBF to include an increase to the budget amount by $69,000.00, extend the Contract to June 30, 1993, change the past due payment schedule and authorize the Mayor to sign the attached Agreement. The work effort of the consultant is not projected to go past April 30, 1993. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: RBF has been under contract with the City of Chula Vista to provide planning services for the Otay Ranch since August 1989. First and second modifications to the Agreement were authorized by Council in February 1990, a third modification was approved in November 1990, a First Three Party Agreement was approved in April 1991, a Second Three Party Agreement for Otay Ranch Development Processing was approved in November 1991, a Third Three Party Agreement was approved in January 1992, a Fourth Three Party Agreement was approved in June 1992 and a First Amendment to the Fourth Three Party Agreement was approved in October 1992. ?-j Page 2, Item 7 Meeting Date 01/26/93 For information, the major purpose of the previous Agreements were as follows: . Original eontract - August 1, 1989: For planning services related to the Otay Ranch. Contract totalling $362,100.00. . Amendment No.1 - February 1, 1990: Additional work on goals and objectives as requested by the Executive Staff Committee. Contract totalling $8,588.00. . Amendment No. 2 - February 27, 1990: Development of four Project Team alternatives as requested by the Interjurisdictional Task Force. Contract totalling $180,000.00. . Amendment No.3 - November 13, 1990: RBF review of applicant's revised plans. Contract totalling $185,920.00. . First Three Party Agreement - April 21, 1991: Continuation of Task Force work program; establishment of payment schedule. Contract totalling $343,000.00. . Second Three Party Agreement - November 12, 1991: Continuation of Task Force work program through December 1991 and revision to payment schedule. Contract totalling $614,515.00. . Third Three Party Agreement - January 14, 1992: Continuation of Task Force work program through June 1992 and revision to payment schedule. No increase in contract. . Fourth Three Party Agreement - June 30, 1992: Continuation of Task Force work program through January 1993. Contract totalling $148,400.00 . First Amendment to the Fourth Three Party Agreement - October 27, 1992: Continuation of Task Force work program through June 30, 1993. Contract totalling $248,000.00 -- ($99,600.00 + $148,400.00). This modification is presented to the City Council due to the need to amend the Contract budget amount approved in the October 27, 1992 Agreement. (Contract budget amount of $248,000.00.) The request is being made to increase that amount by $69,000.00. The increase in the budgeted amount is due to the fact that RBF has been asked to attend meetings and hearings for the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan and provide special studies as requested through the month of April 1993 with the Contract to ?...~ Page 3, Item Meeting Date '} 01/26/93 remain open through June 1993. The modification also changes the payment schedule for past due invoices. The Scope-of-Services is amended by this modification (see attached Scope-of-Services, Exhibit "C"). The Scope-of-Services calls for attendance at public meetings as requested and preparation of special studies as requested. We intend to continue to hold workshops jointly with the City Council and Board of Supervisors through adoption of the plan. For Council information, we would also note that RBF received $454,801.00 in FY 91-92 and $505,280.00 to date in FY 92-93 which included not only work on Otay Ranch but work for the City on Telegraph Canyon Road survey staking, Rancho del Rey EIR, Broadway widening and improvement project, Naples Street drainage channel and Salt Creek SPA Plan review. For the above reasons, and with the acknowledgement that Baldwin Vista will continue to deposit funds to reimburse the City in full, it is appropriate to approve this Agreement modification. FISCAL IMPACf: As part of the Three Party Agreement, an Otay Ranch trust fund is established. That is not affected by this modification. The trust fund is designed to receive deposits and security from the Applicant and to disburse assets of fund. The City's exposure to pay on this Agreement is limited to the assets in this fund, and there will be no fiscal impact on the General Fund of the City because the Baldwin Company will be funding this continuing Scope-of-Services. The cost for funding these Scope-of-Services is $69,000.00. Attachment or.\rbfs&s.con ?*:J !7--i RESOLUTION NO.~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING FIFTH THREE PARTY AGREEMENT FOR OTAY RANCH DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES AND BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES, L.P. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista is the agency designated to approve consulting contracts for the Otay Ranch; and, WHEREAS, the budgeted amount of $248,000 proposed in the latest Agreement approved by the city Council (October 27, 1992) needs to be revised by increasing the amount by $69,000; and, WHEREAS, the increase in the budgeted amount is due to the fact that RBF has been asked to attend meetings and hearings for the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan and provide special studies as requested through the month of April 1993, with the contract to remain open through June 1993; and WHEREAS, the amendment has been reviewed by all parties and is acceptable to RBF, Baldwin and the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby approve Fifth Three Party Agreement for Otay Ranch Development Processing between the city of Chula Vista, Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates and Baldwin vista Associates, L.P., a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Amendment for and on behalf of the City. George Krempl, Deputy City Manager a) fo m Presented by Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney F:\home\auomey\RBF 7-S /7-6 EXHIBIT "C" SCOPE OF SERVICES A. Consultant agrees to perform the following Scope of Services as part of the General Plan Amendment and General Development Plan/Subregional Plan planning process for the Otay Ranch. The scope is general in nature in that the final products will be determined during the process through interaction with the Citizen and Executive Staff Committees; City and County Planning Commissions; City of Chula Vista City Council; and County of San Diego Board of Supervisors. For this reason, the scope is being prepared on a time and materials basis, and actual costs may vary from estimated costs. In performing its services hereunder, RBF has or will receive information prepared or compiled by others, the accuracy and completeness of which RBF is entitled to rely upon without independent evaluation or verification. TASK 1.0: Attend meetings/hearings, prepare special studies and respond to questions as directed by the Executive Staff Committee on issues pertaining to the preparation and review of the General Plan Amendments and the GDP /SRP for the Otay Ranch Project. It is anticipated that the San Diego County Community Planning Groups; the Planning Commissions of the City of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego; and the City Council of Chula Vista and the Board of Supervisors; will make requests for information, studies and analysis on various issues prior to and during the hearing process for the Otay Ranch GP A and GDP /SRP. TASK 2.0: Prepare reports and graphics for presentation as required for workshop and public hearings. This would include the Community Planning Groups of the County, the joint Planning Commission meetings and the joint City Council and Board of Supervisors meetings. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Services which are not specifically identified herein as services to be performed by REF or its consultants or considered "Additional Services" for purposes of this Agreement, Client may request that RBF perform services which are Additional Services, however, REF is not obligated to perform such Additional Services, unless an amendment to this Agreement has been fully executed setting forth the scope, schedule and fee for such Additional Services. In the event REF performs Additional Services before receipt of such executed amendments, Client acknowledges its obligation to pay for such services at REF's standard rate, within 30 days of receipt of REF's invoice. 7-7 EXHIBIT "C' ESTIMATED BUDGET MONlH ESTIMATED BUDGET December, 1992 $ 21,000* January, 1993 16,000 February, 1993 5,000 March, 1993 ** April, 1993 ** May, 1993 o June, 1993 o Subtotal 42,000 20,000 Extra Work - Contingency (December 1992 - June 1993) Estimated Direct Cost of Reimbursable Items 7,000 $69.000 TOTAL * This budget is in addition to the remaining budget in our current contract. ** The amount of staff assistance needed to complete the project will be determined and approved by the City Manager, Chief Administrative Officer, Applicant and Consultant. 7-8" EXHIBIT "C' COMPENSATION Client agrees to compensate Consultant for such services as follows unless otherwise agreed upon by both parties: Monthly on a time and materials basis based upon 2.85 times the wages paid for all personnel working on the project, with an initial estimated budget of $69,000.00, which includes a contingency of $20,000.00 for additional work requests outside the Scope-of- Services and an estimated direct cost of reimbursable items of $7,000.00. This budget amount is for authorization purposes only. Should the total of the monthly billings reach 80% of the budget amount, Client and Consultant will review the status of the work to determine the need for an increase in the budget amount, and whether additional budget authorization to complete the project is appropriate. memos#4:\Q/500295 ?-, /7-11) Fifth Fe~rtft Three Party Agreement for Otay Ranch Development Processing This Agreement ("This Agreement") is made this January , 1993 for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed between the parties, between the City of Chula Vista ("city") herein, a municipal corporation of the state of California, Baldwin vista Associates, Ltd., a California Limited Partnership, ("Applicant"), and Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates ("Consultant"), Professional engineers, Planners & Surveyors, and is made with reference to the following facts: Recitals Whereas, Applicant is the owner of a 23,000 acre parcel of land located outside the current City limits for the City of Chula Vista, and within the unincorporated area of the County of San Diego, and is commonly known as the "Otay Ranch"; and, Whereas, Applicant is the proponent of the development of the Otay Ranch according to the concept plan and description presented to the City Council ("Otay Ranch Project") and made a part of a Statement of Intentions adopted by the Council on April 25, 1989, and in that regard is the proponent of a General Plan Amendment and General Development Plan application; and Whereas, city has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with the County of San Diego ("County") to provide for the joint planning of the development of the Otay Ranch through a coordinated and cooperative effort of selected personnel from both the city and the County ("Joint Project Team", or alternatively "Team"); and, Whereas, pursuant to said MOU, City is primarily responsible for contracting for consulting services needed to plan for the development of the otay Ranch; and, Whereas, in order to fulfil the need of the Team for baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/CitY/Baldwin Agreement Page 1 7"'// planning services, City entered into an agreement with Consultant on August 1, 1989 ("original Agreement"), which agreement was amended in writing on February 1, 1990 ("First Amendment"), February 27, 1990 ("Second Amendment"), November 13, 1990 ("Third Amendment"), all of which shall herein be referred to as the "Agreement as Amended"; and, Whereas, thereafter, the parties entered into an agreement on or about April 21, 1991 entitled "Three Party Agreement for Otay Ranch Development Processing" ("First Processing Agreement") by which they terminated the Agreement as Amended and replaced their rights and duties with the First Processing Agreement; and, Whereas, the term of the First Processing Agreement has expired and the estimated budget limitations have been reached as provided therein; and Whereas, on November 12, 1991, the parties entered into a "Second Three Party Agreement for Otay Ranch Development Processing which has now expired also; and Whereas. on January 14. 1992. the uarties entered into a Third Three Party Aareement for otay Ranch Develoument processina which has now exoired: and Whereas. on June 30. 1992. the uarties entered into a Fourth Three Party Aareement for otay Ranch Develoument processina which has now exuired: and Whereas, Applicant owes Consultant, as a result of services performed under prior agreements the sum herein stated and reterred to as "Consultant's Bill for Previously-Provided Services" and the parties recognize that Consultant has performed all services required of it under the Agreement As Amended; and, Whereas, parties desire to continue the services of Consultant in connection with the planning of the development of the Otay Ranch and desire to keep their contractual relationship on according to the terms of this agreement; and, Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can pr~pare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City, Applicant and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 2 ? ~ /.2. I. Es~aBlisftmeft~ Extension and Operation of Otav Ranch Trust 1:Wls! . A. City to EstaBlisR Extent Otay Ranch Trust Fund. City has previouslv established, and is extendina as part of its books and records accounting for financial transactions of the City, and related entities, a separate fund ("Otay Ranch Trust Fund", or "Trust Fund") which is primarily designed to receive deposits and security (including the Trust Deed herein contemplated) from Applicant and to disburse assets of the fund, including proceeds realized from the foreclosure of any security devices, (1) to pay for all expenses and/or expenditures incurred by Team in connection with processing Applicant's application for the development of the Otay Ranch through the city and County; and, (2) to pay for all direct economic losses resulting from any contractual relationship entered into by the City or Team in connection with processing Applicant's application for the development of the Otay Ranch through the City and County provided that (a) such contractural relationship has been entered into with the written consent or at the direction of Applicant or the Applicant has accepted the benefits of'the contractual relationship without written objection after having knowledge thereof; and (b) either (i) the loss is not the result of any negligence or willful misconduct of the contracting party or (ii) Applicant has consented to or directed the actions by the contracting party giving rise to the loss. To the extent that City asserts a loss to which Applicant has consented to or directed, the City shall consult with Applicant and will allow Applicant the opportunity, at Applicant's election, to cure or to give its advice as to subsequent steps to be taken to mitigate the loss. B. Duty to Foreclose. City agrees that, to the extent necessary to do so in order to realize proceeds to meet the City's duty to pay for expenses baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 3 7-/J of the City and Team, and to the extent that Applicant is in default of the terms of this agreement, City will foreclose upon any security deposited with the City to secure the performance of Applicant. II. Duties Reaardina Consultant's Bill for previouslv Provided Services. This section II relates exclusively to the duties and rights of Applicant, City and Consultant with regard to the payment of Consultant's Bill for Previously Provided Services. A. ADDlicant's Duties. 1. Dutv to Pav. Applicant agrees to pay to city, for deposit to the Trust Fund, for Consultant's Bill for Previously Provided Services, Invoices dated in the months of ~~fteOctober, 1991 through atifte December, 1992, the sum of $459,999 $260.000, (which includes interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum, compounded monthly, on the outstanding balance due over 90 days from date of invoice) according to the following schedule: (1) $59,999 $85.000 per month beginning ~aly 15, 1992 Februarv 1. ~, and continuing on the 1st of each month thereafter (2) $89,999 pa}~e~~ iB adai~ieft ~e ~ke aBe~e, eft 3aly 1S, 1992 all af Yhiea will se aBed ~e pay ees~s iRsurred aRa 99 days pas~ daa. ~ Any remaining balance, all due and payable eft daft~ary 15, ~ June 30. 1993. hny wer]t i}\-;eieillfJ in J"aft1:lary weald se sac aRd payasle ~i~hift J~ days af ~he date af ~kat inveiee. 2. Dutv to Issue Note. As a duplicate duty to pay city for Consultant's Bill for Previously Provided Services, Applicant agrees to issue to the City a Negotiable Note Secured by Trust Deed in the form attached as Exhibit A. 3. Dutv to Secure Note. Applicant agrees to cause one or more Deeds of Trust in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B ("Trust Deed") to be executed by the fee owners thereof for the purpose of securing, in part, Applicant's obligations herein under said Note, and in other part, all of Applicant's obligations under this Agreement. a. Property. The real properties ("Property") which are the subject matter of said Trust Deeds are commonly known as: baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 4 ?,I'/ 12755 Dannan Court, San Diego, CA 92130, 12756 Dannan Court, San Diego, CA 92130, 12777 Dannan Court, san Diego, CA 92130, and are legally described as set forth in the legal descriptions of the property which is the subject matter of said Trust Deeds, attached as Exhibit B-1 through B-3, inclusive. b. Equity. Applicant warrants and represents that the value of Applicant's equity in said Property is at least $664,000.00 as of the effective date of this agreement and is free and clear of all encumbrances thereon, and that the amount of all liens except taxes and assessments against said property do not exceed $1,122,000, ancl are first deeds of trust against the property held by the foliowing persons in the following currently due amounts: (1) $390,000.00 to Western Financial Savings Bank as to Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. 15699. (2) $366,000.00 to Western Financial Savings Bank as to Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 15699. (3) $366,000.00 to Western Financial Savings Bank as to Parcel 5 of Parcel Map No. 15699. c. Appraisal. Applicant shall bear the cost of an appraisal of Property satisfactory to the City, and the cost of a title report demonstrating that Applicant's Designee, Baldwin Building Contractors, L.P., a California Limited Partnership, is the fee owner and that there are no prior encumbrances against title no~ shown above. B. citv's Duties. 1. Conditional Dutv to Pav Consultant. On the condition that Applicant pays city as herein in this Section II, set forth above, or if, as a result of prosecuting its foreclosure rights under the Trust Deed, sufficient funds are realized, City agrees to pay to Consultant the sum of approximately S459,999 $260.000 includina ~e,e~her ~ such interest as is realized from Applicant's Duty to Pay for Consultant's Bill for Previously-Provided Services as herein contained. (Taie is aft esti.a~e and will 7&ry ~aBed 8B 3tiBe, 1992 ift~eiee). The general funds of the City shall not be liable to make this payment to Consultant, and on Baldwin's failure to pay, Consultant's sole remedy as to the City shall be limited by the resources, w~atever they may be, in the Otay Ranch Trust Fund. baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/citY/Baldwin Agreement Page 5 ?-I> C. Consultant's Duties. In the event and on the condition that City pays Consultant according to the terms herein provided, Consultant agrees to accept same in consideration for all previously provided services rendered to the Team in connection with, or related to, the otay Ranch Project, including all services rendered under the Agreement as Ameaaea. III. Duties Relatina to processina of Aoolication for Develooment: Provision of Consultina Services. This Section III relates to the rights and duties between Applicant and the city for all costs associated with the processing of the otay Ranch Project, and does not involve the rights and duties of Consultant as to consulting services, or compensation therefore. A. Aoolicant's Duties to Deoosit Funds. 1. Dutv to Make Cash Deoosits on Demand. For the benefit of the City exclusively, Applicant shall, 20 days after demand, deposit with the City for application to the otay Ranch Fund, such cash amounts as City shall, from time to time, demand for the purpose of paying all processing costs incurred by the City and Team in processing Applicant's application for development of the otay Ranch Project. Deoosits. 2. Limits on Authoritv of ~itv to Demand Cash City demand for funds to be placed on deposit shall be reasonable based on expected cash flow and all unfunded obligations of the Team which the Team expects to experience based on existing and future contract commitments. 3. Dutv to Maintain Trust Asset Value at Prooer Level. upon receipt of notice by City to Applicant of the need to deposit, Applicant shall maintain on deposit with the City sufficient cash or value on deposit with the City to provide for the payment of all costs incurred by city, billed or otherwise, in connection with its processing of Applicant's application for the development of the otay Ranch Project, including all costs incurred by the City under this agreement. baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/city/Baldwin Agreement Page 6 ?~v 4. ADDlicant Liabilitv. Regardless of the adequacy of funds deposited, Applicant shall be liable to City for all costs incurred by city or Team for the City's processing of Applicant'.s application to develop the otay Ranch Project, including but not limited to all costs incurred by City in retaining the services of Consultant as herein provided. 5. ADDlicant Dutv to DeDosit Performance Trust Deed. Applicant shall cause deeds of trust in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B, to be executed by the fee owners thereof for the purpose of securing, in part, all of its duties contained in this Agreement, including monetarI or fiscal duties, and deliver same to City. a. Property. The real properties ("Property") which are the subject matter of the Trust Deed are commonly known as: 12755 Dannan court, San Diego, CA 92130, 12756 Dannan court, San Diego, CA 92130, 12777 Dannan Court, San Diego, CA 92130, and are legally described as set forth in the legal description of the property which is the subject matter of said Trust Deed. b. Equity. Applicant warrants and represents that the value of Applicant's equity in said Property is at least $664,000.00 as of the effective date of this agreement and is free and clear of all encumbrances thereon, and that the amount of all liens, except tax liens and assessments, against said property do not exceed $1,122,000, and are first deeds of trust against the property held by the following persons in the following currently due amounts: (1) $390,000.00 to Western Financial Savings Bank' as to Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. 15699. (2) $366,000.00 to Western Financial Savings Bank as to Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 15699. (3) $366,000.00 to Western Financial Savings Bank as to Parcel 5 of Parcel Map No. 15699. c. Appraisal. Applicant shall bear the cost of an appraisal of Property satisfactory to the City, and the cost of a title report demonstrating that Applicant's Designee, Baldwin Building Contractors, L.P., a California Limited baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 7 7"')? Partnership, is the fee owner and that there are no prior encumbrances against title not shown above, and that all encumbrance holders have certified to the amount above listed. 6. Non-Drocessina RemedY. In addition to any other remedies which City may have for breach of this Agreement, breach of this Agreement by Applicant in any manner, including but not limited to the failure of Applicant for any reason to deposit funds on demand, shall be grounds for the refusal of City and/or Team, and City and/or Team is hereby authorized to refuse, to continue processing the otay Ranch project development application. IV. Reconveyance Duties. A. Within 10 days of/upon request by Applicant, city shall execute a full reconveyance of the deeds of trust securing the Note delivered to the city under the terms of this Agreement at such time as the following conditions are satisfied: (1) the Note is paid in full in the manner herein provided or Applicant has deposited into the Trust Fund the sufficient amounts to permit the payment of Consultant's bill for Previously Provided Services as specified in Section II.A.1 of this Agreement; and (2), the City reasonably determines that there is sufficient cash or other value on deposit with the City to provide for the payment of all costs incurred by City, billed or otherwise, in connection with its processing of Applicant's application for the development of the otay Ranch Project, including all costs incurred by the City under this agreement. V. processina of otay Ranch Proiect. This Section V shall address the duties and rights of the parties regarding the processing of the otay Ranch Project, and compensation therefore. A. Desianatina ReDresentatives for Administration of Contract. 1. The City hereby designates the City Manager, or his written designee, ("city's Representative") as its representative for the review and administration of the work performed by Consultant herein required. 2. Consultant hereby designates John Sullard as Consultant's representative ("Consultant's Representative") to the project for the duration of the project. No substitution for this position shall be allowed without written approval from the baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 8 ?../~ city. 3. Applicant hereby designates Fred ArsHeltle, sr s~Rer wri~~eft desi!ftee sf Greg Smith, or his desianee. as Applicant's representative ("Applicant's Representative") to the project for ths duration of the project. B. Duties Relatina to Processina. 1. Duties of ADDlicant. a. Provide Information. The Applicant of the project shall provide to the Consultant, for the use by the Consultant, all site plans, grading plans, architectural elevations, project description, reports or any other documents, drawings, etc., which are available and could be of assistance to the Consultant in performing his services and preparing his Work Product. b. Permission to Access Pro;ect Area. The Proponent shall also provide Consultant with written permission for the Consultant and city staff to enter the Project Area, make any tests, conduct any surveys or reconnaissance necessary to permit the Consultant to perform the services herein required of the consultant, 2. Consultant Duties. a. primarv Dutv. On the condition that the Consultant is regularly paid in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, and notwithstanding said condition, on the further condition that the total amount due Consultant is less than $550,000, Consultant shall continue to assist in the preparation of a General Plan Amendment and General Development Plan/Community Plan ("GDP") for the development of Otay Ranch, and in conjunction therewith, perform the tasks set forth in "Scope of Services, attached hereto as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by reference, as same may be modified, added or reduced by the city. b. Reductions in SCODe of Work. City may from time to time reduce the Scope of Work by the Consultant to be performed under this Agreement. c. Additional SCODe of Work. baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 9 ?~, In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, city may require Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the General Duties and Scope of Services ("Additional Services"). Any professional consulting services or reimbursable services requested by City above and beyond their Scope of Services may be provided by Consultant as Additional Services for an additional fee. Additional Services require written authorization by City on Consultants' Additional Work Request Form. The citv Manaaer of the citv of Chula vista. with the concurrence of the San Dieao Countv Chief Administrator's office. Aoolicant and Consultant. is herebv authorized to exoand the scooe-of-work of this Aareement in a manner that would result in additional exoenditures not to exceed $10.000.00 for a sinale modification nor a total cumulative amount of $25.000.00 dur~na the term of this Aareement. Consultant shall invoice City monthly for any Additional Services and all terms and conditions of this agreement apply, and specifically City's responsibility to review and approve of invoices within 15 days of receipt. Interest will accrue on the unpaid balance of Additional Services fees from 90 days from date of invoice. On 3aR~ary 15, 1993 June 30. 1993, all fees for Additional Services, including interest are due and payable. d. Standard of Care. Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, shall perform such services in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. C. Duties Relatina to Comoensation. i. Dutv to Preoare Bill Monthlv. Consultant shall prepare and submit to the City on the twenty-fifth day of each month, a bill for its services rendered in the prior month which bill shall contain the number of authorized hours which Consultant or their agents or employees shall have spent in executing the Scope of Work herein contained in this section IV, which hours are to be extended by an hourly rate factor calculated at 2.85 times the normal hourly wage paid to said agent or employee. The extended cost of said individual employees and/or agents shall be totalled on said bill. Said bill shall also contain all reimbursable costs incurred during said billing period. 2. Dutv to Set Hourlv Rate of Aaents or Emolovees. baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 10 7"'cJ. () Consultant shall not adjust the hourly rates or its agents or employees as a result of this agreement. The hourly rates of its agents or employees currently assigned, or expected to be assigned to perform Consultant's duties under this agreement are set forth in the attached Exhibit D. Consultant warrants and represents that (1) Exhibit D truly and accurately reflects the hourly rates paid to such agents or employees as of the date of this agreement, (2) that such hourly rates are typical rates paid to similarly situated agents or employees in the trade or industry of Consultant, and (3) that the amounts so contained on Exhibit D have not been set as a result of this Agreement. 3. CODies of Consultant Billinas. Consultant agrees to submit to Applicant by mail copies of all billings submitted by Consultant for payment by the Trust. However, if Applicant has any objections to the bills submitted, Applicant will express its objection through the City within 15 days after receipt of same. 4. Dutv to Pav Bill. On the condition that sufficient assets and resources are in the Otay Ranch Trust Fund, City shall pay the properly calculated and prepared Consultant's bill on a monthly basis within 30 days after receipt of same, except as herein provided. The General Fund of the City shall not be obligated to pay any portion of the services of Consultant, and Consultant's remedy for non-payment, as to the City, is limited solely to the resources, whatever they may be, to the Otay Ranch Trust Fund. In the event of non-payment due to a deficiency in the Otay Ranch Trust Fund of assets or other resources, City shall assign such claim and security as it may have against Applicant to Consultant. Consultant has the right and obligation, prior to rendering services, to satisfy itself that the assets and other resources, including the security for payment, of the Otay Ranch Trust Fund is sufficient and adequate, during the term of this agreement, to meet the obligations of the otay Ranch Project, including the obligations to pay Consultant as provided in this agreement, and may, upon dissatisfaction, reasonably determined, may suspend services required of Consultant under this agreement. The City has the obligation, if requested by Consultant, to provide information on the Otay Ranch account in regards to balance and dissemination of funds within the account. 5. citv's Deferral Riahts. a. Definitions. The monthly difference between baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/city/Baldwin Agreement Page 11 7~1 the proper amount billed by the Consultant for a given Deferral Month and the amount paid on such bill shall be referred to as the Monthly Deferral Amount, and the cumulative difference between the proper amount billed by the Consultant in total, and the amount paid on such bill shall be referred to as the Cumulative Deferral Amount. b. Deferral Right. City shall not be required to pay any amount of Consultant's bill representing services performed dated in the months of 3~Re, October 1991 through December, 1992, inclusive, ("Deferral Months"), in excess of $25,999 85.000 per month until 3aR~aFY 15, June 30. 1993 (at which time all previously billed amounts are due and payable). For that portion of Consultant's bill representing directly reimburseable expenses as permitted by this Agreement in the months of atifte october, 1991 through December, 1992, City shall pay same in full each month out of such resources only as may be in the Otay Ranch Trust Fund without regard to the monthly limitation provided in this paragraph. c. Interest on Deferred Amount. The Monthly Deferral Amount shall bear interest from 90 days after billing at the rate 12% per annum, compounded monthly, until paid on which date all previously deferred amounts including accrued interest is due and payable. D. Miscellaneous Duties. 1. Insurance to citv. Consultant represents to and for the express benefit of City that it and its agents, staff and consultants employed by it are protected by worker's compensation insurance and the Consultant has the coverage under public liability and property damage insurance policies which this Agreement requires to be demonstrated in the form of a certificate of insurance. Consultant will provide, prior to the commencement of the services required under this agreement the following certificates of insurance to the City prior to beginning work: b. statutory Workers Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000 Employers liability coverage. General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000 combined single limit which names City as an additional insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("primary coverage"), and a. baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/city/Baldwin Agreement Page 12 7~2 which treats the employees of the city in the same manner as members of the general public ("cross-liability coverage"). The cost of such additional insurance shall be deemed as a reimbursable cost to consultant. c. Errors and Omissions insurance to $1,000,000 unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. All policies shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's Rating of "A, Class V", or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City's Risk Manager. All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the City. 2. Insurance to ADDlicant. Consultant represents to and for the express benefit of Applicant that it and its agents, staff and consultants employed by it are protected by worker's compensation insurance and the Consultant has the coverage under public liability and property damage insurance policies which this Agreement requires to be demonstrated in the form of a certificate of insurance. Consultant will provide, prior to the commencement of the services required under this agreement, the following certificates of insurance directly to the Applicant prior to beginning work: a. b. baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 statutory Workers Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000 Employers liability coverage. General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000 combined single limit which names Applicant as an additional insured, and which is primary to any policy which the Applicant may otherwise carry ("primary coverage"), and which treats the employees of the Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public ("cross-liability coverage"). The cost of such additional insurance shall be deemed as a reimbursable cost to consultant. c. Errors and Omissions insurance to $1,000,000 unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 13 ?~3 All policies shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's Rating of "A, Class V", or better, or shall meet with the approval of the Applicant. All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Applicant. E. ~. This Agreement should become effective upon execution as authorized by the Mayor of the City, or his designee, and shall terminate, if not terminated pursuant to other provisions contained herein, or otherwise extended by all parties, on Febr~ary 1 June 30, 1993. Term of aareement will be extended until the duties of all Darties have been discharaed. F. Financial Interests of Consultant: Consultant warrants and represents that neither he, nor his immediate family members, nor his employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in the property which is the subject matter of the Project, or in any property within 10 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of the property which is the subject matter of the project, or ("Prohibited Interest") except as listed on an attachment. . Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise ot future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant or Consultant's associates. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter. Consultant agrees that neither Consultant nor his immediate family members, nor his employees or agents, shall acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement. G. Hold Harmless. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Applicant and city, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/city/Baldwin Agreement Page 14 ?"'.2Jj cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the negligent conduct of the Consultant, or any agency or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the city, it officers agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the city, its officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of city shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. H. Termination of Aareement for Cause. If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner his/her obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the city, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused city by Consultant's breach. I. Termination of Aareement for Convenience of citv. City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason for giving specific written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. Consultant shall suspend any additional work not expressly directed by the City upon receipt of such notice. In that event, all finished and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the city, become City'S sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is ' terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 15 7'~ materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein. 1. upon receipt of a request from Applicant for suspension or termination of its Application, city will exercise its privileges to terminate Consultant under this Agreement. J. Assianabilitv. The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City which city may not unreasonably deny. K. Ownershio. Publication. Reoroduction and Use of Material. All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United states or in any other country without the express written consent of city. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act, distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. L. Indeoendent Contractor. city is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant'S work Products. Consultant and any of the Consultant'S agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, workers compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/city/Baldwin Agreement Page 16 ?-.J. ~ M. Errors and Omissions. In the event that the city Engineer determines that the Consultant's negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, or omissions in the plans or contract specifications, Consultant shall reimburse City for the additional expenses incurred by the City including engineering, construction and/or restoration expense. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement. N. Administrative Claims Reauirements and Procedures. No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by city, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with city for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. O. Attornev's Fees. Should a dispute result in litigation, and the procedure for claiming and resolving the dispute herein contained is adhered to, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the claim, including costs and attorney's fees. P. Statement of Costs. In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation of a report or document as a result of the scope of work required of Consultant, Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion, in said report or document a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document. Q. Consultant not authorized to ReDresent citv. baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 17 /~? Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consult- ant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever. R. Notices. All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United states mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified adjacent to the signatures of the parties represented. s. Entire Aareement. This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. T. CaDacitv of Parties. Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its prin~lpal to enter into this Agreement; that all resolutions or o~her actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. U. Governina Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, state of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. (End of Page. Next Page is Signature Page.) baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/city/Baldwin Agreement Page 18 ?"'.2~ Signature Page to Agreement with IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City, Consultant and Applicant have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth adjacent to their signature. Dated: January 21, 1993 CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 By: Tim Nader, Mayor Attest: Beverly City ruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney Dated: Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, 14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92718 Dated: By: Robert Bein, CEO Baldwin Vista Associates, L.P., a California Limited Partnership, 11975 EI Camino Real, suite 200, San Diego, CA 92130 By: Baldwin Builders, Inc., a California Corporation, its General Partner, By: Greg T. smith, President baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 RBF/city/Baldwin Agreement Page 19 ?"'..l7 Exhibit A. NOT SCANNED Exhibit B. NOT SCAi~NED Exhibit c. NOT SCANNED Exhibit D. NOT SCANNED baldwn3h.wp January 21, 1993 Exhibit List to Three Party for otay Ranch Development Processing Agreement Note Secured by Trust Deed issued by Applicant to City in the amount of Consultant's Bill for Previously Provided Services ($260,000.00). Trust Deed Securing Note in Exhibit A, and Performance, Including Monetary Performance, in Agreement. Scope of Services of Consultant. Hourly Rates of Consultant's Employees and Agents RBF/City/Baldwin Agreement Page 20 7- :J/) Item r Meeting Date 1/26/93 Resolution J'" t?a!?shing allocation guidelines for the Gayle McCandliss Memorial Fund. SUBMI'ITED BY: Director of Parks and Recreatio~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X) A memorial fund honoring the late Mayor Gayle McCandliss was established in the early part of 1991. The fund was initially started with money that had been raised during her campaign, and was subsequently supplemented with numerous private donations. Consistent with her wishes, the fund was formed in order to establish a perpetual fund to recognize individuals or groups who make a substantial contribution toward the arts in the City. The Cultural Arts Commission is prepared to proceed on the development of an awards and scholarship program utilizing the interest accrued on the money in the Fund, following the Council's consideration of the allocation guidelines. There is currently in excess of $10,000 in the Gayle McCandliss Memorial Fund. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the Resolution establishing an allocation plan for the Gayle McCandliss Memorial Fund. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Cultural Arts Commission met on November 10, 1992, and voted unanimously to accept the Allocation Plan. DISCUSSION: The Gayle McCandliss Memorial Fund was established in 1991, and was designated to be used to benefit the City's development of cultural arts through the recognition and provision of monetary support to groups and/or individuals making significant contributions to the Arts. The Cultural Arts Commission was selected to develop a program that would recognize the achievements and contributions of local artists and organizations supporting the arts. The attached allocation plan was developed to provide guidelines for the use of the fund. The key points of the allocation plan are noted below. 1. Since the Fund was designated to be a perpetual source of support, the plan indicates that only interest accrued on the principal amount in the fund is available for actual scholarships. The fund is designed to accept additional donations, which, unless otherwise designated, become a part of the principal of the Fund. 2. A small portion of the accrued interest on the Fund may be utilized to offset expenses in the solicitation of nominations and presentation of awards. These costs would be relatively low, and could included printing and binding, postage, advertising, and other publicity and processing costs. 3. The awards would be designated for groups or individuals that reside within the City, and/or that provide a significant amount of cultural opportunities or support for the arts in the City that directly g--/ benefit the residents of Chula Vista. Scholarships would be available for high school or college art students in financial need. Students would have to reside in the City of Chula Vista. The allocation plan was reviewed by the Director of Finance, and his recommendations were incorporated into the text of the plan that is attached to this report. FISCAL IMPAcr: None. The Fund is established and all expenses relating the award of scholarships will be taken directly from the interest accrued on the Fund. meca 113 8",).. RESOLUTION NO. J~'17o RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING ALLOCATION GUIDELINES FOR THE GAYLE McCANDLISS MEMORIAL FUND WHEREAS, a memorial fund honoring the late Mayor Gayle McCandliss was established in the early part of 1991 which fund was initially started with money that had been raised during her campaign, and was subsequently supplemented with numerous private donations; and WHEREAS, consistent with her wishes, the fund was formed in order to establish a perpetual fund to recognize individuals or groups who make a substantial contribution toward the arts in the City; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Arts Commission is prepared to proceed on the development of an awards and scholarship program utilizing the interest accrued on the money in the Fund, following the Council's consideration of the allocation guidelines; and WHEREAS, there is currently in excess of $10,000 in the Gayle McCandliss Memorial Fund; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Arts Commission met on November 10, 1992, and voted unanimously to accept the Allocation Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby establish Allocation Guidelines for the Gayle McCandliss Memorial Fund as set forth i Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by refer as if set forth in full. Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and Recreation Presented by F: \home\attorney\McCFund g--J /g-s Cultural Arts Commission Meetings Minutes 2 November 10, 1992 The FY 1992-93 budget was balanced with some one-time revenues. Because the City used $2.7 million in one-time revenues to balance the current year's budget, the budget for FY 1993-94 will be starting $2.7 million short. The city is looking for additional revenues. Consistent rumors from the state will result in more cuts in funding for the next fiscal year. The City uses four guidelines in deciding budget cuts: 1. No change in level of service 2. No access to the $9 million reserve 3 . Uphold Agreements made wi th existing Memorandum of Understanding with our Bargaining units 4. No lay-offs of new employees Ms. Herring distributed copies of the FY 1992-93 Cultural Arts Commissions budget. When all departments were asked this current fiscal year to cut their budgets 2%, the Boards and Commissions were not asked to due to a time constraint. The city is now asking the Boards and Commissions to voluntarily watch their Commission's budget spending and perhaps return back a 2% return at the end of the fiscal year. For the FY 1993-94 budget, staff normally takes the lead in helping the Commission developing their budgets. Guidelines will be distributed including a cut list which will represent 1%, 2%, and 5% of the total Commission's budget. 2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Action Items: a. Joint Meeting with Business community MSUC [Soriano-Cernitz/Souval] 7-0 to table the idea of an affiliation with the business community until a workplan has been developed and reviewed by the Commission. b. Acceptance of McCandliss Memorial Allocation Plan The Sub-Committee members have reviewed the Plan and gave their approval. MSUC (soriano-cernitz/Dumlao] 7-0 to accept the McCandliss Memorial Allocation Plan. Staff will proceed by having the Director of Finance review the Plan and then forward it to the Council for approval. 3">" ALLOCATION PLAN FOR GAYLE MCCANDLISS MEMORIAL FUND 1. Monies in the McCandliss Memorial Fund shall be invested by the Finance Department as part of the City's pooled investments. Interest earned on monies invested from the McCandliss Memorial Fund will be credited to the Fund. 2. The Finance Department, on request, shall provide financial information and status of the Fund. 3. The Fund shall be structured to allow for additional monetary donations by groups and/or individuals. Unless otherwise specified by the donor, all additional donations shall be added to and considered part of the principal. Parks and Recreation staff will be responsible for using good faith and best effort to expend the donations for the purposes specified by the donor. The staff will attempt to get permission from the Donor to use donations for other purposes if the original stated purpose cannot be achieved. 4. The Cultural Arts Commission shall be responsible for establishing a system to present one or more scholarships, awards, or endowments from the Fund, annually, to deserving groups, organizations or individuals, based on pre-determined criteria. 5. Scholarships, awards, or endowments from the Fund shall be in the form of monetary support. Recognition plaques or certificates may accompany the award. 6. Awards will be presented at appropriate City gatherings such as Boards and Commissions dinners or Council Meetings. 7. Scholarships, awards, and endowments from the Fund shall be limited to the interest accrued annually in the Fund. Fund principal will not be allocated for this purpose without approval from the Cultural Arts Commission and City Council. 8. A portion of the interest accrued on the Fund principal may be allocated by the Cultural Arts Commission to cover direct administrative processing costs of promoting and presenting the scholarships, awards, or endowments. 9. Scholarships, awards, or endowments from the Fund shall be presented to individuals, groups or organizations that reside within the boundaries of the City, and/or that provide cultural opportunities to the residents of the City of Chula Vista. 10. The Commission shall take into consideration the broad ethnic and cultural diversity of the City when determining criteria for each award. Awards may be based on solicited nominations from specific organizations, i.e., school districts, or from members of the general public. 8''''~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date 01126193 9 SUBMITTED BY: RESOLUTION I J. 9 ? I Approving an Agreement between the City and the Chula Vista Elementary School District for playground improvements at three school sites ann ff.int use thereof Community Development Director (J/Jd' City Manag1- (415ths Vote: YES _ NO _XJ ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: In May 1992, the Council allocated $50,000 of CDBG funds to the Chula Vista Elementary School District for playground improvements, with the provision that the facilities would be open for public use during all non-school hours. The Agreement contains a scope of work, project schedule, budget, and joint use agreement. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution approving an Agreement between the City and the Chula Vista Elementary School District for playground improvements at three school sites and joint use thereof BOARDSICOMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The Agreement between the City and the Chula Vista School District specifies that the District will build playground improvements at three elementary schools, including "ball walls" with asphalt courts at Rice and Lauderbach schools, and a "ball wall" (with existing asphalt area) and concrete curb oval for the track at Montgomery School. The project will be completed by September 30, 1993 at a cost not to exceed $50,000. The joint use agreement (Section 20 of the Agreement) requires the District to make the playgrounds available for public use during the daylight hours when school is not in session. The District will post signs at each entrance to the playgrounds to this effect. The District is responsible for maintenance of the playgrounds. This joint use agreement is in effect for 20 years. FISCAL IMPACT: The City has previously allocated $50,000 of CDBG funds for the playground improvements. '1-/ / '1-.7- RESOLUTION I J, , ? I RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR PLAYGROUND IMPROVEMENTS AT THREE SCHOOL SITES AND JOINT USE THEREOF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the City participates in the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, a principal goal of which is to fund programs and services which will benefit low and moderate-income Chula vista households; and, WHEREAS, the city has entered into a separate funding agreement with HUD for the City's annual CDBG entitlement and also anticipates program income from the Housing Rehabilitation Revolving Fund; and, WHEREAS, the city Council of the city of Chula vista held a public hearing and allocated CDBG entitlement and program income funds on May 19, 1992, a portion of which was allocated for the Grantee; and, WHEREAS, the City is desirous of having those certain improvements for the benefit of low income households, hereinafter enumerated, performed by the Grantee, and WHEREAS, HUD requires the execution agreement setting out the terms and obligations for of CDBG funds by the Grantee; and, of a written the expenditure WHEREAS, Grantee warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they can prepare and deliver the improvements required of Grantee within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and condition of this Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE ORDER, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The City Council does hereby approve the agreement with the Chula vista Elementary School District, know as document number , a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. SECTION II. The city Council does hereby direct and authorize the Mayor of the city of chula vista to execute said contract for and on behalf of the cit of Chula vista. SECTION III. This Resolution shall take and be in full force and effect immediately upon the passage and adoption hereof. '1.; ;J SECTION IV. The city Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall enter the same in the book of original Resolutions said City; and shall make a m" ute of the passage and adoption hereof in the minutes of the me i g at which the same is passed and adopted. C is Salomone community Develop ,~1 ruce M. Boogaar Agency General oun el ~~ AGREEMENT SETTING OUT TERMS AND OBLIGATIONS OF CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT IN REGARD TO THE EXPENDITURE OF CITY FUNDS APPROPRIATED THIS AGREEMENT is made this January 26, 1993, for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed between the parties, between the City of Chula Vista ("City") herein, a municipal corporation of the State of California, and Chula Vista Elementary School District, a public school district ("Grantee"), and is made with referel}ce to the following facts: RECITAL~ WHEREAS, the City participates in the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, a principal goal of which is to fund programs and services which will benefit low and moderate-income Chula Vista households; and, WHEREAS, the City has entered into a separate funding agreement with HUD for the City's annual CDBG entitlement and also anticipates program income from the Housing Rehabilitation Revolving Fund; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a public hearing and allocated CDBG entitlement and program income funds on May 19, 1992, a portion of which was allocated for the Grantee; and, WHEREAS, the City is desirous of having those certain improvements for the benefit of low income households, hereinafter enumerated, performed by the Grantee, and WHEREAS, HUD requires the execution of a written agreement setting out the terms and obligations for the expenditure of CDBG funds by the Grantee; and, WHEREAS, Grantee warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they can prepare and deliver the improvements required of Grantee within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and condition of this Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual obligations of the parties as herein expressed, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Term of A~:reement. The term of this agreement shall be for a period of twenty (20) years from the effective date of this agreement. 2. Statement of Work and Schedule. The Grantee shall perform those duties described in the Statement of Work in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. This work shall be completed by September 30, 1993 and according to the Performance Schedule in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. WPC F:\home\commdev\381.92 'I"' / Page 1 .~. 3. Compensation and Budg:et. The Grantee agrees to expend City-appropriated funds to meet bona fide obligations incurred for the installation of playground improvements at Montgomery, Rice, and Lauderbach Elementary Schools. The City shall. compensate Grantee for said work up to a maximum amount not to exceed $50,000 (Fifty Thousand Dollars). An itemized budget for said expenses is in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein. 4. Reimbursement Payments. Payment of those City appropriated funds shall be made to Grantee in a quarterly installments following receipt of the "CDBG Expense Reimbursement Claim" form from the Grantee. Expenses itemized on the "Expense Reimbursement Claim" form shall be limited to actual expenses incurred during the period specified on said form, and shall not include any anticipated costs. Grantee shall attach documentation, such as receipts, bills, payrolls, etc. as shall provide reasonable proof of actual expenses incurred. 5. Assil:mment. The Performance of this agreement may not, by subagreement, be assigned to any other entity without prior written consent of the City. 6. Financial Records and Audits. The Grantee shall maintain all financial records for three years following the term of this agreement. The City, at its discretion may require the Grantee to provide or allow the City to undertake a complete financial and program audit of its records. Those records shall contain receipts or other proof of all expenditures made with City CDBG funds. 7. Representatives. The Community Development Director, or his/her designated representative, shall represent the City in all matters pertaining to the services rendered pursuant to the agreement and shall administer this agreement on behalf of the City. The Superintendent of Chula Vista Elementary School District or his/her designated representative, shall represent the Grantee in all matters pertaining to the services rendered pursuant to the agreement and shall administer this agreement on behalf of the Grantee. 8. Uniform Administrative Reouirements. The Grantee shall comply with the applicable uniform administrative requirements as described in HUD regulation 24 CFR 570.502. This HUD regulation requires compliance with certain sections of 24 CFR Part 85 "Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. .. 9. Other Program Requirements. The Grantee shall carry out each activity specified under this agreement with all Federal laws and regulations described in 24 CFR 570, Subpart K, with the following exceptions: a) The Grantee does not assume environmental responsibilities described at 24 CFR 570.604; b) The Grantee does not assume responsibility for initiating the review process under the provisions of 24 CFR 570.612. 10. Accounting Procedure. The Grantee agrees to abide by the requirements of OMB Circular A-122 "Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations." The Grantee shall account for use of Block Grant funds separately from other funds so as to demonstrate that the funds are used for their designated purposes. 11. Program Income. Any program income derived from CDBG funds shall be reported to the City and shall only be used by Grantee for the services funded under this agreement. All provisions of this agreement shall apply to the use of program income for said activities. Said WPC F:\home\commdev\381.92 'f'~ Page 2 program income shall be substantially disbursed for said services before the City will make additional reimbursements to the Grantee. If said program income is on hand when this agreement expires, or is received after expiration of this agreement, then said program income shall be paid to the City. 12. Conditions for Relie:ious Ore:anizations. If the Grantee is a religious entity, affiliated with a religious entity, or sponsor of religious activities, then Grantee shall abide by the HUD regulations 24 CFR 570.200 (j) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion and prohibits the use of funds for religious activities, and places other restrictions and limitations on the Grantee. 13. Drue:-free Workplace. The Grantee shall maintain a drug-free workplace at all times for the duration of this contract. 14. Lobbyine: of Federal Officials. The Grantee shall not use any funds provided under this agreement to pay any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. If Grantee utilizes any other funds for any of the aforementioned purposes, then the Grantee shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. 15. Insurance. Grantee represents that it, and its agents, and staff employed by it are protected by worker's compensation insurance and has coverage under public liability and property damage insurance policies which this Agreement requires to be demonstrated in the form of a certificate of insurance. Grantee will provide, prior to the commencement of the services required under this agreement the following certificates of insurance to the City: a) Statutory Worker's Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000 Employers liability coverage; b) General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000 combined single limit which names the City as an additional insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("primary coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of the general public ("cross-liability coverage"). 16. Hold Harmless. Grantee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorney's fees) arising out of the conduct of the Grantee, or any agency or employee, or others in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Grantees indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorney's fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers and agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgement or not. Further, Grantee at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officer, agents, or employees. Grantee's indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Grantee. 17. Suspension and Termination. In accordance with HUD regulation 24 CFR 85.43, Grantee may be suspended or terminated by the City after 30 days written notice to the Grantee due to default by the Grantee or the Grantee's inability to perform, regardless of whether such inability is due to circumstances within or beyond the Grantee's control. The award may be terminated for convenience WPC F:\bome\cooundev\381.92 9"'') Page 3 in accordance with 24 CFR 85.44. Settlement of any disputes shall be based on the laws of the State of California. 18. Breach of Contract. The parties reserve the right to pursue any remedy provided under California law for remedy in instances where contractors violate or breach contract terms. 19. Reversion of Assets. Upon expiration of this agreement, Grantee shall transfer to the City any CDBG funds on hand at the time of expiration and any accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds, including any program income derived from CDBG funds. 20. Joint Use Al':reement. Grantee agrees to provide public access to the playgrounds and fields at Montgomery, Lauderbach, and Rice Schools during the daylight hours during which the schools are not in session, including weekends, holidays, and vacation breaks, for a period of twenty (20) years from the effective date of this agreement. The Grantee shall place signage, clearly visible to the general public, at each and every point of access to said playgrounds and fields. This signage shall inform the public that the playgrounds and fields are open to public use during the daylight hours when school is not in session. The Grantee is solely responsible for the maintenance of the playgrounds and fields, and agrees to maintain the playgrounds in a safe and useable condition. The Grantee may, for the purpose of performing repairs or maintenance, temporarily restrict public access for a reasonable period of time. In this event, or in the event that one or more persons are restricted from access to said playgrounds and fields for any reason, the Grantee shall inform the Director of Parks and Recreation within 48 hours of the reasons for the restriction of public access. In the event that one or more of said schools ceases operation as an elementary school, this section entitled "Joint Use Agreement" shall be null and void with respect to the non-operating school or schools. of IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Grantee have executed this Agreement this _ day , 1993. CITY OF CHULA VISTA CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT By: By: Tim Nader Mayor, City of Chula Vista ATTEST: II' City Clerk Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney Exhibit List Exhibit A. Statement of Work and Performance Schedule NOT SCANNED Exhibit B. Itemized Budget NOT SCANNED WPC P:\homc\commdev\381.92 9....r Page 4 JAH- 8-'93 FRX 7:51 CHULA VISTA SCHOOL DXST. P..02 CHUIA VISTA ELEKEHTARY SCHOOL DISTRIC'l' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDIBG YEAR 1991-92 SCOPE OF WORK/CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE ScOne of WOrk construct/install 3 concrete and steel ballwalls, 12' x 32' x 8' at Lauderbach, Montgomery and Rice Schools. construct/install 1,340 linear foot 6" x 6" concrete curb, separating grass field from DG track at Montgomery School. Work to include design and engineering to meet specifications of and be approved by Office of State Architect, and in compliance with all CDBG regulations. .......~.._~'....". .~....~~ .. '- ..... rnnst:ruction Schedule Qgj& Task 1/19/93 1/20 - 3/1/93 Board approval of Agreement Design and Enginecrin<3 3/1/93 4/1/93 OSA plan Check 4/1/93 - 4/15/93 4/15/93 - 5/15/93 6/8/93 6/9/93 - 8/10/93 8/10/93 - 8/20/93 9/7/93 Preparation of Bid Documents Bid Process Board Approval of contract construction Period Installation of Signage BOard Acceptance of Notice of COlnpletion 9...1 ~ CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT 1991-92 BUDGET School Proiect Cost Montgomery Construct/installl2' x 32' x 8' $12,000 concrete and steel ballwall Rice Construct/install] 2' x 32' x 8' 12,000 concrete and steel ball wall Lauderbach Construct/install J 2' x 32' x 8' ]2,000 concrete and steel ball wall Engineering and State Architect 4,000 fees for 3 walls Asphalt courts for Rice, 5,000 Lauderbach (Montgomery to use existing area) Montgomery Construct 1,340 linear foot 5,000 6" x 6" concrete curb, separating grass field from DG track TOTAL $50,000 11/20/92 ..."in-main:fmp..S:edhjl:"budf!et 9--j/) COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item It) Meeting Date 1/26/93 ITEM TITLE: Report: Major Use Permit Modification for Daley Quarry Project, County of San Diego - AJP~ to County Board of Supervisors SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planningp f (j. f5:!!!' REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No.XJ The attached report was provided to the City Council in November 1992 requesting authorization for the City staff to attend the County Planning Commission hearing on the proposed Daley rock quarry and to request a continuation on the major use permit item in order to provide staff sufficient time to meet with County staff members, as well as the applicant, to resolve certain issues. Staff appeared before the County Planning Commission on November 20, and the requested extension was granted; however, the County Planning Commission voted on December 4 to deny the applicant's request, and at the same time rejected the overriding considerations which has caused the applicant to appeal the County Planning Commission decision, which is now set for consideration by the Board of Supervisors on February 3, 1993. RECOMMENDATION: That Council provide direction on specific issues to be directed to the County Board of Supervisors (see draft letter attached). BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: . As noted in our attached report of November 1992, this project represents a request to modify a major use permit for an existing rip-rap quarry to add additional areas of extraction and to add a rock crushing operation, as well as concrete and asphalt plants, located on the south side of Otay Lakes Road approximately 1-112 miles east of Lower Otay Reservoir Dam (see Exhibits A and B). The proposed modification would increase the project area from the existing 28-acre site to 158 acres and would extend the life of the present permit for 20 years. The amount of extraction increases dramatically from 400,000 cubic yards to an estimated just over 15 million cubic yards and would result in the removal of hills located on the western and eastern ends of the project area. The zoning on the property is A 72 General Agriculture which requires a major use permit for mining and processing, and the present land use in the area is primarily agriculture involving grazing and crop production or is undeveloped. The land holdings of the Baldwin Company's Otay Ranch border the project to the south and to the west and additional land holdings of the project applicant to the north and east. While it is not anticipated that areas adjacent to the project site will develop in the near future, the land use plan ultimately approved /t:J,/ Page 2, Item I () Meeting Date 1/26/93 for the Otay Ranch and the phasing of any development toward the east end of the Lower Otay Reservoir would have to be evaluated for buffering strategies, which would likely involve separation of land uses as well as grading and landscaping programs to provide the necessary buffering. In the City's initial review of the applicant's proposal, a number of impacts which could affect Chula Vista residents directly were identified and correspondence sent to the City Council in September of last year. A number of those impacts have been recognized and covered in conditions of approval recommended for the project by the County Planning staff as well as being including as mitigation measures addressed in the environmental document and the mitigation monitoring program. While these issues had been looked at, identified and conditioned, the County Planning Commission in their denial of the project expressed concern over the size of the project, its impact on the community, the width of the open space wildlife corridor, all of the biological effects, and the ability to effectively monitor the operation. Because of the magnitude and the complexity of the conditions imposed by the County Planning Department in recommending approval of this project, we will attempt to briefly summarize these conditions and circumstances under which they would become effective. 1. The County indicated that prior to obtaining any building permit or other permit pursuant to this use permit operation, the applicant would be subject to some 21 conditions which include agreements to secure maintenance for County roads, providing a cash deposit of $15,000 annually for the first five years to a maximum of $75,000. The City of Chula Vista has requested that a similar condition be imposed relating to the road section now identified as Telegraph Canyon Road within the City limits of Chula Vista. Also, certain improvements to the road are required as well as contribution for an equivalent of $200,000 fair share to provide additional right-of-way along the south side of SR-94 and the dedication for approximately 158 acres of off-site coastal sage and grassland as a compensation for development of the site. The area so designated would be offered as a permanent open space easement dedicated to the County of San Diego. 2. In addition, the 400-foot-wide wildlife corridor which bisects the project would be also dedicated as a permanent open space easement to the County of San Diego. Further approvals from San Diego Air Pollution Control District, as well as a requirement to secure a necessary 404 Permit and the preparation of approval of Water Conservation Plan are included in the conditions of approval. Once the applicant has completed the 21 conditions in a satisfactory manner, the applicant would be able to proceed to construct and operate the rock crushing facility with a maximum of 300 trucks per day for a 12-month period, at which time three other conditions are to be complied with. These conditions relate to constructing improvements on Otay Lakes Road width through the 4-1/2 mile County area as well as an area through the City of Chula Vista almost 3/4 mile in length where the road width will be a maximum of 34 feet to a minimum of 32 /p- ,,2. Page 3, Item III Meeting Date 1/26/93 to accommodate the increased truck activity as well as providing some additional safety for cyclists on the road. 3. The applicant would be required to comply with seven conditions before obtaining any permit for the batch facility for the asphalt concrete batch plant. Those involve the improvement of the dip section of Otay Lakes Road where Dulzura Creek enters the east end of Lower Otay Reservoir, access points from the project onto Otay Lakes Road involving acceleration and deceleration, as well as left-turn lane safety features. 4. Prior to any occupancy of the premises, the applicant would required to obtain certain construction and encroachment permits subject to County approval, as well as having to obtain final inspection approval of landscaping and other improvements required of the site. 5. There are some 38 additional conditions the applicant would be required to meet upon certification of the project by the Director of Planning and Land Use. Those include restrictions on any loud speaker operation, requirement for parking areas and light fixtures, certain screening controls, as well as limitations on the use of the haul road. One of the major conditions identified at this stage is the limitation on the number of truck trips, citing that 450 outbound loads could occur between the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. for a maximum of 50 calendar days a year, and 350 outbound loads for all other operations during the year would be acceptable. Exceptions to the referenced hours of operations are couched under emergency. situations involving federal, state, or local government contracts as determined by the Director of the Department of Land Use for the County, and also placing a limitation on a maximum of 10 Sunday operations per year as well as prohibiting the plant from operating on major holidays unless a request is submitted and approved in advance by the Director of Public Works. 6. The conditions go on to identify limitations on the height of the material stockpiles, as well as providing earth berms to adequately attenuate noise from the site to avoid conflicts with the nearest occupied Least Bells Vireo bird population located along Jamul Creek. Part of the operation for Phase B of the plan, which calls for excavation at the east end of the project site would involve the use of a conveyor belt which would be located approximately 10 feet above the wildlife corridor which bisects the project in a northl south direction. Conditions of approval limit the operation of the conveyor belt to daylight hours defined as between sunrise and sunset. Of the issues first identified and of those that have surfaced upon closer examination of this project, it appears to staff that four stand out very prominently as having more potential for direct impacts on the City of Chula Vista. They are identified as follows: IP.;J Page 4, Item It) Meeting Date 1/26/93 1. Intensity - As noted in the description, the applicant has some 15 million cubic yards of material which equates to somewhere between 22 and 28 million tons (depending on which document is the most accurate) of aggregate to be extracted from this site over the proposed 20-year lifespan. Under the County's condition of approval, the applicant would be authorized a maximum of 450 loaded trucks for 50 days a year and 350 on all other days, giving them an average in excess of 360 loaded truck per day with the average truck accommodating a 25-ton load which would allow them to extract the material in a 10- to l2-year lifespan as opposed to the 20 years requested. Because of the nature of the operation, material is not going to be hauled unless there is a demand; therefore, there is going to be a number of peaks and valleys over the projected lifespan of the project. Studies and conditions placed on the project call for an 88% movement of materials to the west toward Chula Vista versus a 12 % movement back to the east through Highway 94 and Jamul. In addition, the applicant has stated in a number of documents that the need to have the ability for the high number of trips at any given time is based in a large part on an estimated high demand in the South Bay area, primarily relating to projects within Chula Vista such as Otay Ranch, EastLake, Sunbow, and the proposed SR-125 construction. However, that marketing analysis still projects only a 40% market in Chula Vista, which would equate to a maximum of 238 loaded trucks going through Chula Vista versus 158 loaded trucks serving Chula Vista, using 88% of the maximum 450 authorized by the County. Other documents indicated that the average number of loads per day would be 240 which would equate to some 84 trips going to Chula Vista versus 127 going through Chula Vista to other projects in the area. Staff is less concerned about any high demand of trips going to Chula Vista, since any aggregate coming to those projects would have to travel through Chula Vista regardless of the location of the plant. It should be further noted that staff's discussion with the representatives of the Nelson Sloan plant have indicated a life expectancy of that facility of approximately 20 years on the basis of the current operation, which is between 75 and 100 loaded trips per day. Thus the proposed number of loaded trips from the Daley facility could be four to five times as great on any given day. Staff is suggesting that, based upon the potential traffic, dust, and noise impacts associated with 238 loaded trucks going through Chula Vista, that a limit of 125 trips through Chula Vista be set as a maximum for any given day and that a monthly log be submitted to the City under a certified program. The number of through trips could be subject to an increase or decrease based upon the five- year review time schedule as described in Section 3-Lifespan of this report. Such increases or decreases would be evaluated on impacts to Chula Vista streets and residents. This would allow the applicant to maintain their maximum of 450 loaded trips, provided that the bulk of those trips were serving projects in Chula Vista. It is important for Council to note that the County report reflects that recent studies in San Diego have indicated the presence of six Portland Concrete Cement quality quarries, two /tJ-tj Page 5, Item 1(/ Meeting Date 1/26/93 of which are located south of Interstate 8 on the leasehold within the Otay Ranch operated by Nelson Sloan and Hestor's Granite Pit located east of Rancho San Diego. 2. Wildlife Corridor Width - Upon completion of the environmental analysis, the applicant is proposing a 400-foot-wide wildlife corridor easement which will bisect the development and is proposed to be kept intact by the utilization of a conveyor belt located lO feet above the ground as opposed to a haul road. As noted earlier, the conveyor belt is limited in its operations to daylight hours. Because this is a major wildlife corridor identified as Little Cedar Creek, which is linked directly with additional Daley ownership to the north as well as Baldwin or the Otay Ranch plan located to the south as well as to the northwest, this corridor was reviewed by Ogden Environmental on both the subject project as well as the Otay Ranch with further review by Ann Ewing, the County environmental representative, and have reached the conclusion that the proposed width and mitigation being imposed by this project applicant is sufficient to sustain an effective wildlife corridor (see Exhibit "C"). While the Chula Vista Planning staff may have its own reservations as to the effectiveness of the width and the mitigation, we have no evidence at this date to the contrary. As a safety precaution, the County certainly could require an offer for dedication of a wider corridor, subject to the study of more further evaluation in the future to accurately assess the effectiveness of the corridor as it is now planned. This could be done on the basis of the relatively short operation period of this plan versus the permanent nature of the wildlife corridor. 3. Lifespan - The proposed 20-year lifespan of this project, which staff has indicated could vary depending upon how fast the material is extracted, has been heavily conditioned by the County as well as suggested conditions added by the City. However, in trying to look ahead and anticipate 'all of the potential issues which might arise from a project spanning such a long permit approval, including what may result in possible conflicts with the Otay Ranch development at the east end of Lower Otay Reservoir in the latter years of operation, results in staff's opinion that further review of the project and conditions of approval should be carried on every five years by the County of San Diego in conjunction with the City and the applicant to determine the effectiveness of those conditions as well as the determination of whether additional conditions may be necessary due to the operation of the facility. This review would be conducted with the intent of providing positive modifications or additional conditions which would not result in the closing of the plant; therefore, it would have to be made very clear that the applicant has the ability to operate the plant for the full 20 years. 4. Road Maintenance - It is the opinion of the City Public Works Department that the question of road maintenance has been adequately identified with the condition that affects both the County and the City requiring the applicant to provide a $15,000 cash deposit each year for the first five years of operation to establish a maintenance fund of $75,000, the purpose of the deposit to secure a dollar figure to cover the estimated cost /' /P -,.> Page 6, Item 10 Meeting Date 1/26/93 of repairs for the hauling operation. It is noted that after five years if any portion of the $75,000 is utilized, then funds are to be replaced until the fund is again extended up to the $75,000 limit. Two issues were identified in the original staff concerns which have more of a secondary impact on the City of Chula Vista: 1. Exoloration of Alternate Sites - The County staff report indicates that an alternate site was reviewed on the project applicant's land, which is identified as a little over a half mile northeast of the proposed project. That site has similar rock qualities; however, it is on the north side of Dulzura Creek, thus presenting other issues in addition to the ones faced on the subject property with that site having the same impacts on the City of Chula Vista. To our knowledge, a further investigation of alternate sites not located on the applicant's property has not been conducted at this time; however, any sites located in eastern Chula Vista would have the potential of evoking the same impacts on the City with through traffic which might be serving South Bay projects other than the City of Chula Vista. 2. Landform Alteration - The proposed extraction off this site would significantly modify the landform in the area by essentially removing the two hills located on the west and east end of the project; however, a further evaluation of the Otay Ranch Plan indicates that any approval on the Otay Ranch will likely involve a major realignment of Otay Lakes Road in this general area, which in itself would involve considerable grading on the subject property since this portion of Otay Lakes Road is now a very curvilinear country road which accommodates a very limited amount of traffic. In staffs further review of the project, two issues have surfaced which are worthy of additional consideration: 1. The possible offer of dedication of this property for open space purposes since the area immediately to the north appears to be environmentally and topographically limited for any development and the realignment of Otay Lakes Road in this area will place the subject property on the north side of the road, which would provide a logical demarcation between permanent open space and any potential development in the area. 2. The applicant's statement throughout the document indicates that approval of this project is needed for economic reasons to retain the remainder of the site estimated at approximately 450 acres into its pristine, natural, open character. Therefore, one consideration of this major use permit would be to preclude any development of the 450 acres under this portion of the Daley ownership until such time as the quarry operation is complete. /~,~ Page 7, Item I tl Meeting Date 1/26/93 CONCLUSION In reviewing the proposal, staff hs concluded that the subject property is strategically located to provide aggregate material to the South Bay region, that with the conditions recommended by the County staff and the additional conditions suggested by City staff, the facility could be operated in a manner that would provide a service with minimum impacts on the City of Chula Vista. FISCAL IMPACT: None, if County Board accepts the conditions suggested by the City. (Daley.A1l3) /p-? /10-8 /Il- , :<: ~~~~l ~~ ~~::,5~ u ... Z Iol :::E ... ~ < A. Iol Q " Z - Z "- h: Z >::: '- < '-- ~ ... 2 '< A. "- Icx::ocr.~ EJ ~ :< ~I!I ~~ - - I ... ... ... ... ~ ~~ :~ 5~ e e t- t- - ~ t- ... ... .. w ... ~ w .. - e III ... ... t- Z a: t- Ol '" ~ Q e z " - N ::t= ~ e z ... ... w ... e ... 0 e w >< > ... t- Cl < - Z t- o:<W :a: w e - 0 0 Cl 0 a: ... ~ ~w", 0 t- e .. 0 ... xO:e e a: ... l- e w<:a: III 0 t- '" t- ... W t- Z W . lo: ... 0 Z I- '" e l- N - 0 ... ... - - 0 w e ... ... ... 0 a: = ... Cl ... ... ... i= 0: 0 0 :a: w z e e e w< z 0 a: 0 t- t- t- t- i= w> 0 0 I- Cl . 0 0:0: <,> e Cl e .. .. :a: '" '" ~w III e t- ... e ... i- ", lo:(/) z a: z <w z 0 w 0 2: w i= !t i= Og: w riil a: e 0 e 0 t- t- I- W ", '" '" ... :l! z ii: :a: Cl w z ", z w w w i- e N a: w Cl 0 a: a: llC !t ", '" 0 :) ", '" < lto. riil Q 0:- 0:'" O~ 00 '" we - - Z u.O ... ... -.. ... ... ..J' e - o~ e t. l- I- Z ..J - '" ;: .. .. t. ... i::: .. ... 2: ... '" i:: ... e 0 ! Cl t- >- < ... ! z " III Q ;., '" Ol " N (3 .. t- a: ~ ... ~ :) e 0 lto. 0 ... 0 < Q Z 0 e 2 e 0 o:<w t- o a: ~UJtf) " e ... xo:c t- w<:a: \ '" ... \ lo: ... z 0 0 w e w 0 0 a: 31....08 ON 0: a: 0 '" //J,/P EJ ..,. ......... -~.~ '-,;. ~.u .... .,," ,'.. . ,\,. . \ . I . . '" r 't'i~~ . ~ ~~~~l ~> ~~~~15~ . 0 "" Z fill '1 "" " -< II. fill Q ~ :z - :z ... .: :z ;:: ... < " ... .. OJ t II. 3''''08 ON ~ DRAFT January 18, 1993 Chairman of the Board Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors REFERENCE: APPEAL BY DALEY ENTERPRISES OF PROPOSED ROCK QUARRY OPERATION (P84-108W2) In considering approval of the above referenced project, the City of Chula Vista asks that the County Board of Supervisors consider: 1. imposing all of the conditions recommended by the County Planning staff in their report to the County Planning Commission in November 1992, which includes providing a cash deposit of $15,000 annually for the first five years to establish a maintenance fund of $75,000 to be retained through an annual $15,000 replacement funding as required to cover road maintenance within the City boundaries of Chula Vista. In additional, Otay Lakes Road located within the City limits is to be widened to a minimum of 32 feet and a maximum of 34 feet, subject to the approval of the City Engineer of Chula Vista (please note that portion of Otay Lakes Road located within the City limits of Chula Vista has been recently renamed to Telegraph Canyon Road). 2. Limit the maximum number of trips authorized through the City of Chula Vista on any given day to 125 and that a monthly log be submitted to the City on a certified basis to assure compliance. Any consideration for increases or decreases to this number would be considered as part of the five-year review periods suggested as Item #4 in this letter. This limitation on through trips would not effect the total of 450 trips per day authorized for any projects located within the City of Chula Vista, such as construction of SR-125 or projects on the Otay Ranch, Rancho del Rey, or EastLake. The pujrpose of limiting the number of through trips is to minimize impacts on Chula Vista residents. 3. Require the applicant to offer a much wider corridor for dedication which could be accepted by the County at any time in the future. (Note: Adjacent corridor abutting the subject property is planned at approximately 1200' in width.) 4. Impose a review every five years based on the requested 20-year lifespan for this permit and the many questions raised by the operation. The City of Chula Vista is suggesting that the 20-year permit be granted only on the basis that such a review be conducted every five years by the County of San Diego in conjunction with the City and the applicant to determine the effectiveness of the conditions imposed on the project with the /~,r) :J potential for adding conditions which may be necessary to retain compatibility with expanding development in the area. 5. Discussion and action as to the potential use of the property once the extraction operation is completed which would likely involve the relocation of Otay Lakes Road in conjunction with any approval of the Otay Ranch, thus placing this property on the north side of Otay Lakes Road as opposed to its present location on the south side. 6. Consider whether or not any other development of the 450+ acre ownership should be held in abeyance until such time as the quarry operation is complete. This consideration should be based on statements and findings in the report documents which indicate approval of this project is needed for economic reasons to retain the remainder of this site in an undeveloped fashion. Your attention and consideration of these suggested conditions will be greatly appreciated by the citizens of Chula Vista. Sincerely, Tim Nader Mayor cc: Bob Trettin, The Bob Trettin Company representing Daley Enterprises, 12785 Amaranth Street, San Diego 92129 (NOTE: Fax copy of agenda statement to Mr. Trettin at 484-6943 when finalized) (bdspvr .dal) /~'I'I COUNCn.. AGENDA STATEMENT ltem Meeting Date 11/17/92 SUBMITTED BY: (4/Sths Vote:Yes_No..x.) ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: INTRODUCTION: The Daley Corporation has applied for a modification to a County Major Use Permit requesting authorization to expand an aggregate production operation from 31 acres to 158 acres (see attached exhibit) while adding a rock crushing plant, an asphalt plant and a Portland cement concrete batch plant for an operation to extend 20 years. The proposed truck traffic on Otay Lakes Road would increase from 60 per day to 450 per day according to the County application. RECOMMENDATION: That City Council authorize the Planning and Public Works Departments to send representatives to the County Planning Commission hearing on November 20, 1992 and request an extension of time so that County staff, the Daley Corporation and City staff could meet to resolve issues. DISCUSSION: On September 24, 1992, the Planning Director provided the attached information item for Council's consideration noting, that it was staffs intent to monitor the project and provide input to the County when the Major Use Permit modification was scheduled for consideration by the County Planning Commission in November of this year. As indicated in the information document, it was our intent to return to Council with further information and a recommendation regarding the actions which the city might wish to take on this matter. On October 28, members of the City Planning and Engineering Departments met with representatives of the County Public Works Department as well as Bob Trettin representing Daley Corporation to discuss the various issues and conditions which might be appropriate for the project. At that meeting staff asked that the Daley representative report back to the Planning Department with information regarding the anticipated number of truck trips that would both be going through Chula Vista as well as those which would be serving the eastern Chula Vista area. ///.../5" Page 2, Item Meeting Date 11/17/92 In addition, the city requested the County's response to comments raised in earlier correspondence in the EIR. We also requested responses to the other issues raised in our letter of August 27, 1992. The information regarding truck activity that was supplied to the Planning Department earlier this week reflects that in the first year of operation the average daily truck volumes estimated by the Daley Corporation would be 186 trucks or 93 trucks going out loaded and 93 returning unloaded. Of those numbers it is estimated that 40% or approximately 37 of those loaded trucks would be serving eastern Chula Vista with some 56 loaded trucks accessing to I-80S destined for other areas. In addition, it is the applicant's estimate that in the second year of operation the average daily volume would increase to 326 trucks travelling west from the facility with again 163 of those loaded and 163 returning unloaded, with an estimated 65 trucks serving eastern Chula Vista and another 98 trucks proceeding on to access I-80S. In approximately the third year of operation the project would reach its ultimate peak which would continue on through the life of the project estimated at 20 years (barring any unknown lulls in construction). This would result in a total number of 492 trucks with again 246 loaded and 246 returning unloaded. The estimated number of trucks serving eastern Chula Vista would be 98 with the remaining 148 trucks accessing I-80S through Chula Vista. In providing these figures to the city, it is the applicant's position that even during the peak period the 98 loaded truck trips serving eastern Chula Vista would have to come from I-80S easterly to serve Chula Vista developments even if this facility were not in place. Therefore, the net increase in truck volumes on the area east of I-80S amounts to 50 loaded trucks per day. Since the anticipated hours of operation are from 6:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., or approximately 10 hours during the day, the average net increase would be 5 trucks per hour. While the Daley Corporation has asked for a maximum limitation of 900 trucks per day, they have stated that their expected average daily volume would be considerably less. Therefore, it is our understanding that they have offered to limit their outbound trips to Wa day, with the exception of 50 days a year in which they are asking to be allowed to have up to 450 trips. Attached is a copy of a letter outlining requested conditions by the County Public Works Department, and a letter from the City suggesting changes which would provide additional controls and maintenance guarantees. The staff has just learned that the County Planning Department report will not be available to the city staff until Friday, November 13. That report would include responses to comments and proposed County conditions which are unavailable to City staff at this time. It is still unknown as of this date whether all potential environmental concerns have been addressed. For example, the major wildlife corridor which bisects the site is proposed at 450 ft. in width rather than 1,000 ft. as recommended in the Otay Ranch plan. In addition to the conditions cited by the City Engineering Division, the Planning Department also has concerns over the length of time IP-/j, Page 3, Item Meeting Date 11/17/92 that this permit might be granted without further reviews of the impacts on residents of Chula Vista. There are also specific questions of staff that are not addressed, such as the method of arriving at the specific trip limit and the determination of an equitable way to monitor compliance. Staff has recommended to the County that the maximum number of trucks crossing the eastern City be limited to 792 per day for a maximum of 24 days a year, while limiting the annual average to 493 daily. We have noted our concerns that these numbers appear to be the extreme upper limit and a specific monitoring program needs to be in place with the ability to review and add conditions at a future date. In general, it is staffs conclusion that we have received only part of the information requested and will not receive a full analysis in time to provide a specific response back to the County without attending the proposed hearing on November 20 and raising issues. We are asking at this point that Council authorize the Planning Department and Engineering Department to send a representative to the County Planning Commission hearing and request a continuation of this item for at least a one month period to provide time for additional meetings with County staff and the applicant to resolve these issues. As an alternative we would ask Council at a minimum to urge the County Planning Commission to adopt the conditions as outlined by the County Director of Public Works (reference letter from John S. Burke, Deputy Director, County Public Works Department dated November 5, 1992) and . request for revisions in the letter dated November 11, 1992 from City of Chula Vista, Cliff Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works and Ken Lee, Assistant Director of Planning, and include any other conditions or concerns that Council wishes to identify. FISCAL IMPACT: None (DaIoy.AII3) It) --/7 ./ ... :"".-'-:-'"", ....--.. . "" , ,\ . " .- , :""1~ ' ...... ~. I \ -- - - 1\ " l j.. ~_, . --- " (, ....;- Z\ I" I ,. ~ : . . , .. ~ \ , I{ _.r ". . '-j"" , ' . "\0. , ,., . ',l. '--l, \ ..) " ()-. I \, i'( ", i 1'.="",- -,.... \ . '-'y".. ......_--~. , /. I \ ,.\ ~l-i. I' "Ii /', \..-' . , i I. " - \/, , "" '\ , - ! , .. ./ ,--" '-- \ \ I \ " -. \ . " ... ". . ", " '~' ", ..... -.. "\ "\ ) . '\ ' \ '," '- \. \' "" .) . ...... '. . " I."" ... '. \ . ,,,' ( \ " i I , .,' ~-"\ f ,) - "---. , ~. . \. , . , -, \ " --- \ ..........- , ,,-. i. . (' J i ., \ 'I , \. .. , I ' ....- \ /- .\ , ... \ '~_..' ..~, . .1- I>' \ j i \ l '. I "l," i ,c .""\ . "/'; "-..;.,. /'~ , .,~~: . '/ ....'{ : /.::-- : , ,. ._' : \. ' ".~ ~ \. \._ _-._ --<0- f r I I. I ,....- - r--;; ...... ,.i. _ ,.---.. /' ' - _.- . . < , .., r .. ;' ~- - - ...~. , \. : " : >-. : 1.,'.__ ! ( " . I I I .... \ r \ \. ~ :"'-....... '00(.....-.-' 'V , , \. - - .. tar~lAnlltr~ R ~'L A ~ORY " to RlJr?l1 PROPOSED N/A NO. OF D~~LLING UNllS ~ " I, I i. '-....(.-....."r-...... \- " '. . \. " \. " .... -.. ... . SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND LAND USE - PROJECT SUMMARY PROPOSEO USE Modification to permit for aQQreoate production O~NER/APPLICANT Dalev Enterprises ENGI NEER HCH Pa rtner~ NAME OF COMMUNITY OR SUB-REGIONAL PLAN PLAN DESIGNATION Mult. rural use lR ZONING DESIGNATION: EXIS1ING A-72 ACRES . '.<10 i:. NO. OF LOTS 1 ELE1~ENiARY SCKOOL DISTRICT ,111m,,1 1"~ Flnr'" IlniM HIGK SCHOOL OISTRICT Grossmont Union SE\.IER 01 STR I CT None WATER DISTRICT Otav M\oJD FIRE DISTRICT Rural Fire District (Jam5l Statign) BASE MI<P # 18~ BU(JK b41 PAGE 'lU P L 03 'I 'r-' REV ' - ., 85) 598 . b'U' 'UU ~::..LA . .\~-.t..:..- .1" /1)-/1 \- ..... '.- -', \ \ \ -', -- - -. " I ........ :. '~ I ,. .~ '. ' ." r: . .'-, ," - . \ .. .,.. ,... r I ,. , . \ .. .I I ,<{ E'CT SITE , , '\, .' I 'i, I /' '-- .. / - ~ \ .... l " "\ \ . DATE REC I 0 ,\- IS;- -q 0 HEARING DATE 1I-~6 -1)... SCALE: 1". 800' CASE # ---;:::1S~' 1M tv:; TKO.BROS, 401/F-5 (portion) .' ~Vt- ~~~ ~~~ ellY OF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DIVISION November 11, 1992 File # YE-OO 1 Mr. John S. Burke, Deputy Director Department of public Works County of San Diego 5555 Overland Ave. San Diego, CA 92123-1295 MAJOR USE PERMIT, OTAY LAKES ROAD PLANNING CASE P84-108Wl (TK4108) Your memorandum to Lauren M, Wasserman dated November 5, 1992, same subject, presented a number of recommended conditions of approval for the subject case. Several conditions affecting Chula Vista streets were included among them. We have reviewed these conditions and discussed them with your staff. As indicated earlier in a telephone discussion with Jeff Heikkila we preliminarily see these as minimum conditions based on information provided to the City to this point in time, subject to input by our City Council and would appreciate your revision of these conditions in the following manner. . 1. Change # A 7 to A 7a and add new'conditions A 7b and A 7c. These conditions would then read as follows: A 7a. "Execute an "Agreement to Secure Maintenance of City Streets" as a condition of this Use Permit for the truck haul routes on City of Chula Vista streets, to the satisfaction of the Chula Vista Director of Public Works. The specific haul route road is Otay Lakes Road from the easterly Chula Vista City limits to I-80S." A 7b. "Provide a cash deposit, annually, for the first five (5) years of operation in the amount of $15,000. The purpose of this deposit is to secure an estimated cost of repairs to the above identified road that is considered necessary by the hauling operation. Fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) is to be provided each year for five years to establish a maintenance fund of $75,000." A7c. "From thereafter, $75,000 is to be available for such repairs. If, after five (5) years, any portion of the $75,000 is utilized, such funds are to be replaced until a fund of $75,000 is available. This replacement shall be annually, in $15,000 increments." /P".,J. ) 276 FOURTH AVEICHULA VISTA. CAL:'ORNIA 9191C'{6'9) 69'.5021 John S. Burke 2 November 11, 1992 We realize that there may be certain environmental constraints to widening the portions of Otay Lakes Road within the unincorporated area to wider than 32 feet. However, the Olympic Training Center has indicated this road may be a training route for Olympic bicyclists. It is also the primary route for Chula Vista bicyclists to access the Lake and the County park. The City's Engineering and Planning staff believe that this road should be widened to wider than the 32 feet proposed for the County area in order to provide adequate safety to bicyclists when mixed with a large volume of heavy trucks. Therefore, we request that the first sentence of B2 be revised to read as follows: 2. . Improve Otay Lakes Road from the easterly boundary of the Chula Vista city limits westerly for approximately three thousand feet (to where it joins the existing wider section) to forty feet (40') overall width of asphaltic concrete pavement over approved base and an asphaltic concrete dike and spillway along the low points of the road. .. The remainder of this condition would be unchanged. 3. Revise condition El to read "Obtain a construction permit from the Department of Public Works for work in the County right of way and from the City of Chula Vista City Engineer's Office for work within right of way of the City of Chula Vista. The proponent has provided a breakdown of their anticipated truck traffic. The information provided indicated a maximum volume of 900 total trucks per day by year two with a daily average of 372 total trucks per day in year two and 560 in year three. The volume going through Chula Vista was indicated to be 88 % of the total. The information further indicated the average daily truck trips to the west (both directions) would be 493 in year four and beyond. Based on the avera2e daily volume, the information indicated 148 trucks accessing I-80S. These would be one-way trips. The number of total trips at I-80S would be twice that, or 296. While City staff believes even this average number of trips is extremely high, we have evaluated the impact on the City based on these figures and believe it would probably be manageable if the proponents were limited to those figures. Therefore, City Engineering and Planning staff requests on additional condition as follows: 4. The operation shall be limited to a maximum number of trucks crossing the City's eastern City Limit of 792 total (both directions) trucks (88 % of 900) a maximum of 24 days per year and that the annual average number of trucks crossing the City's eastern City Limit shall be limited to 493 total (both directions) trucks as indicated in the information provided by the proponent. /1) -.1~ r:r." OF CHIJ' /.. VISTA John S. Burke 3 November 11, 1992 However. both the Engineering Division and the Planning Department have continued concerns regarding this project and believe it should be reviewed by our City Council before a final recommendation can be made. To that end we have tentatively scheduled a review by the City Council on this matter at their meeting of November 17, 1992 and may be forwarding additional comments to you following that meeting. RD L. SWANSON D Y PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR! CITY ENGINEER CLS:RLD:rb (RLD\DaleyPmt.LTR) ('ITV n~ 1"'&..4111 4 \1lC!TA F ~ANf~= /~....2;J COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ItemlL Meeting DateOl/26/93 ITEM TITLE: Report Regarding Proposed Commercial, Industrial, MUlti-Family and Yardwaste Recycling Programs in the City of Chula vista SUBMITTED BY: Conservation coordinator~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No-K-) Council Referral #2400 state law (AB 939) requires all cities and counties to divert 25% of the "waste stream" from landfills by January, 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. The County's mandatory recycling ordinance is more restrictive and prohibits certain designated recyclables from being disposed at County-owned landfills under a phased implementation timeline (March 1992 through July 1993). The City has already partially complied with these laws and ordinances by (1) instituting a recycling program for single family residential waste and (2) adopting a mandatory recycling ordinance that requires that: (A) yardwaste be recycled by January, 1993; (B) restaurants and large office complexes recycle by July 1993; and, (C) multi-family residents recycle by July, 1993. Staff believes that we now need to move toward further compliance wi th the State and County laws regarding recycling, and, by this report, seeks Council's conceptual approval to institute a yard waste recycling program, and move forward with commercial and multi-family recycling program development. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) As to the residential yard waste portion of the recyclable waste stream: A. Adopt the policy that residential yard waste should be franchised exclusively to one recycler. B. Direct staff to meet and confer with Laidlaw to develop and implement a yard waste recycling program. 2) As to the commercial (including industrial!') portion of the recyclable waste steam: A. Adopt the policy that commercial recyclables should not be exclusively franchised to a single recycler, but be handled on a "free market" basis. 1. The industrial portion of the waste stream that is recyclable will relate to demolition and construction debris. /1-/ B. Reject Laidlaw Waste System's proposal for recycling the commercial waste stream.Y C. Direct staff to develop an ordinance creating a commercial and Industrial Recycling permitting system, and return it to council for adoption. 3) As to the multi-family portion of the recyclable waste steam: A. Adopt the policy that the territory of the city should be divided into approximately four geographically defined subareas, and that, as to each subarea, recyclables generated on mUlti-family land uses should be exclusively franchised to a single recycler, selected by the Council on the basis of proposals requested and submitted. B. Reject Laidlaw Waste System's proposal for exclusively recycling the city's entire commercial waste stream.~ C. Direct staff to define the various subareas and develop a request for qualifications for recycling the multi-family residential waste stream therein, and return to the Council prior to soliciting request for proposals for approval of the subareas and RFP.~ BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation commission reviewed these issues at their January 11, 1993 meeting. A motion to recommend support of the report failed, 3-1 (3 absent). The sole dissenting vote was cast because the individual wanted no additional vehicular traffic in the City as a result of recycling programs. Meeting minutes and staff responses are contained in Attachment A. NOT SCANNED DISCUSSION BACKGROUND Staff has explored a number of recycling program types from other cities, reviewed and consulted with the City Attorney as to legal issues associated with bidding recycling programs and conducted a survey of all cities in the County to determine the range of costs for yard waste, multi-family and commercial recycling collection. This survey is contained in Attachment B.N()TSCA~n with this background and taking into account Counc11~sllrrection that 2a As this report will indicate, this is necessary to finalize obligations under Ordinance 2427. 3. k3 th i s report wi II indicate, thi s is necessary to f i na I i ze obi igat ions under Ord i nance 2427. 4. At the time the Council is asked to approve the subareas and the RFPs, the staff will ask to be directed to solicit the proposals and return with their recommendations for a recycler for each area, and appropriate franchise ordinances. 2 11- ,J., collection services for additional recycling programs be awarded on a competitive bid basis, staff has outlined in this report a recommended plan for Chula vista's yard waste, commercial (including industrial) and mUlti-family recycling program development. staff feels that this unique, multi-faceted program plan both maximizes Council's concern for competitive rates while minimizing the impact of recycling market characteristics and administrative costs on recycling program development. LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY Ordinance 2427 amended the City's Refuse Franchise Ordinance to add Section 21. In section 2l thereof (containing the Residential Curbside Recycling Services provisions) the City has granted to Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. the exclusive right to collect "Recyclable Materials" (newspaper, cans, plastics, glass and such others as to which the City and Laidlaw may agree) from single family homes~ if deposited at curbside. Subsection I of Section 21 provides: "Both parties hereby agree that the City may not go out to bid for the expansion of this recycling program to other land uses (e.g., multiple family, commercial, industrial) or other recyclable materials (e.g., yard waste, etc.) until after the city has met and conferred with Grantee with regard to its intent to do so. [If] Separate amendments to the agreement for refuse collection and disposal are not negotiated between the ci ty and the Grantee [i. e., "Laidlaw"] the City may go out to separate bid." The Conservation Coordinator has "met and conferred" with Laidlaw regarding the city's intent to go to bid for collection of the recyclable materials generated from multi-family residential and commercial land uses. As a result of these meet and confer sessions, the Conservation Coordinator is recommending that the City Council include "yard waste" within the definition of Recyclable Materials, and expand the Laidlaw franchise for the collection of yard waste to include mUlti-family land uses as well as single family. However, staff is not recommending expansion of the recyclable materials collection franchise to include other recyclables generated from mUlti-family, commercial or industrial land uses. While Laidlaw may be disappointed as a result of this recommendation, the City Attorney advises that, by the Council's receipt of this report from the Conservation Coordinator explaining the reasons for rejecting the Laidlaw proposal on these recyclables, and rejection of the Laidlaw proposal for commercial and mUlti-family recycling, the City will have met the condition of its right to go out to bid for the collection of Recyclable Materials generated on multiple-family 5. Includes condos if they receive curbside collection services, but not if they have contracted for bin service. 3 I/~J residential and commercial land uses.~ While not required by the ordinance, the City Attorney also recommends that they first reject Laidlaw's proposal in this regard as being unsatisfactory. The staff recommendations achieve this result.II An overview of Laidlaw's proposals for commercial, multi-family and yard waste recycling are contained in Attachment C'~()TSC~D RECYCLING PROGRAM OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Staff proposes the following permit/contractual processes in order to allow for the comprehensive, integrated development of services to meet the City's commercial, multi-family, and yardwaste source reduction, recycling and composting needs. A summary of staff recommended options is contained in Attachment D'~()TSC~ED 1. Yardwaste Recycling Program Under the County's mandatory recycling ordinance, the city should begin developing a yard waste ("greens") collection program for single and multi-family residences shortly (April, 1993 is technically the date County fines could incur). Staff has advised the county of delay in program implementation, and has been assured that so long as a pilot yard waste program is in place by April, 1993, with intent to go Citywide, that fines would not incur. Most cities in the North County have implemented yard waste collection, with costs ranging from $1.41 to $2.75 per household per month for weekly collection. Proqram recommendation Staff proposes that residents be given four options for the diversion of yardwaste from the waste stream. Residents would have the option of any or a combination of the following "greens" recycling services: 1) Curbside Collection of Greens. Residents would purchase stickers or in some other way sign up for weekly or biweekly service for an 6. Because the staff is not proposing to go out to bid on commercial and industrial recyclables by this report, but is instead proposing to use an "open market system", it is not necessary to meet and confer with Laidlaw before doing so. The proposed rejection of their proposal is simply a matter of conservative legal advice. 7. As a result of the recent (September 1, 1992) decision in the case of City of Rancho Miraae v. Palm Sorinas Recvclina, the authority of a City to demand that a "recyclable" generator (e.g., a business) submit its recyclables to "curbside collection" has been placed in doubt. The Fourth District Court of Appeal stated: "We conclude that until ownership of the recyclable material has been surrendered to the City or its authorized recycling agent at a designated recycling collection location, the owner of such material may retain it or dispose of it as he, she or it chooses, e.g_, by donating or selling it to whomever he, she or it wishes, including a non-City-franchised private recycling enterprise. II However, the decision has been appealed to the State Supreme Court on October 8, 1992 by the City of Rancho Mirage and Waste Management Inc., and a decision is pending_ It will take at least a year for the case to be heard. 4 /1.;Lj established fee; 2) Backyard Composting. Residents would purchase a compost bin (or designate a composting area) and receive the City's composting instruction manual and/or attend a training session; 3) Self-Haul. Residents take all green materials to a composting site or to the County's mulching site at the otay landfill; or, 4) No Greens. Residents that do not have yard waste or who have it hauled by a landscaper, neighbor or through any other legal means have the material mulched or composted. The mandatory enforcement of yard waste recycling would operate similar to our curbside recycling program. If residents are found to have yard waste in their refuse, their refuse container would be tagged and they would receive follow-up letters and informational materials from staff, with legal enforcement a possibility for continued violations. Based upon staff's initial review of Laidlaw's yard waste proposal, acceptance of the proposal is recommended, as staff feels it is viable (based upon the criteria outlined above) and represents a fair rate of charge for the service. Laidlaw's preliminary cost analysis ranges from $1.00 to $1.25 per sticker (i.e., pick-up). This is a high cost estimation based upon only having a 50 percent participation rate because of the options plan. At this rate, residents participating each week could pay $4 to $6 per month. Through a pilot project, costs could be more accurately measured. Staff would also work with Laidlaw to formulate an option of providing a maximum monthly rate limiting the cost for higher generators (i.e., weekly users of the curbside collection option). Because of the range of demographics in the City, staff feels that although this proposed rate is high, residents would be given full options to only utilize the program as needed. This would also encourage source reduction efforts, such as composting and the use of mulching mowers, to limit the amount of yard waste generated. Staff assumes that many residents with large yards (and thus larger volumes of yard waste) often have landscapers attend to their yard. Landscapers often haul the materials away, thus many high volume generators would not need to have curbside collection. Staff will contact landscapers directly regarding the need to mulch or compost the collected greens materials. Advantaaes of staff recommendation Because the market for greens does not provide revenues, staff believes that the most prudent use of staff time and the best option for residents is to accept Laidlaw's yard waste collection proposal. Having only one hauler allows for economies of scale in terms of collection and marketing of materials, uniformity of services and rates, less vehicles in neighborhoods and easy monitoring. Laidlaw, by virtue of being the refuse hauler in the City, has the infrastructure and expertise to plan routes and utilize existing trucks for the pilot phase of the program. Additionally, the curbside recycling program hotline number is well known by residents, and this number can also be used for calls regarding yard waste recycling. 5 JI"f The options proposal, while possibly being somewhat confusing at first, should serve the city best by allowing residents to choose the type of yardwaste recycling system that best serves their needs. Through effective promotional material development, staff believes that any initial confusion can be overcome. Alternative options 1) Single hauler, through competitive bid process. The City could initiate a limited or full Request for Proposals process for yard waste collection to choose a single collector of yard waste. This would meet Council's direction for competitive bid, however the time required for this process would be significant, and relatively non- productive, since the results would probably not present the City with any more viable proposals than Laidlaw's. 2) Multiple haulers. Allowing for multiple haulers for the collection of yard waste would allow for a competitive bid process. However, this would not allow for economies of scale for the most efficient collection of yard waste and would bring an increased number of vehicles into our residential neighborhoods. Additionally, residents can already choose to use landscapers or self-haul if desired. 3) Universal rate charge. Another alternative to consider, regardless of the hauler, is to require all residents to pay for yard waste collection. The benefit of this is that the costs of collection per household would be lower, however, the disadvantage is that not all residents would be participating in the program, and thus resident dissatisfaction could be high. This alternative is similar to our curbside recycling program, however at least with curbside recycling virtually all residents generate some recyclables. Whereas with yardwaste collection, many residents generate little or no yard waste. Additionally, through this option residents are not encouraged to implement home composting or utilize other source reduction options. 2. Commercial Recycling Under the City's mandatory recycling ordinance timeline, commercial recycling goes mandatory in July, 1993. Moreover, staff has been moving ahead in implementing commercial recycling under our pilot Business Recycling Outreach Project. Proqram recommendation staff recommends that the City allow for an open process for recycling services whereby haulers interested in offering reCYCling services in the city must obtain a permit from the City. Permit applicants would submit a detailed outline. of the type(s) of services they intend to offer and the approximate rate structure for these services when applying for a permit. staff proposes that a permit application fee (or an annual fee) for permit application review, processing and monitoring be charged to each hauler based upon the number and type of accounts serviced by 6 //-~ the hauler or gross receipts of the hauler. Incentives, such as discounted fees, could be given to those collectors offering services for collection of "hard to cOllect/market" commodities (e.g., restaurant glass) and/or offering services to smaller, lower volume generators. staff recommends that permits be granted for a period of three years, with two, two-year extensions to be granted upon favorable completion of the service during the initial three year period. Each permitted hauler would be required to arrange for their own respective billing service requirements (including tonnage reports and revenues, if any), and to bill the establishments receiving services, directly. This arrangement occurs now in the city with businesses already receiving recycling collection services. customer service would also be handled by the permitted haulers. ci ty staff would continue to play an integral role in providing recycling and waste reduction information and promotional services to businesses. staff would work directly with the haulers to provide comprehensive and uniform services to businesses. Advantaoes of staff recommendation This type of "permitted" arrangement would allow for c;>pen, competition within the City for commercial recycling serv~ces. Permit registration will allow City staff to track these services and work with the haulers to provide services that best meet the needs of the City's businesses, as well as generate revenue to cover staff monitoring time and program development. Such a system would allow the City to meet its waste reduction goals in an atmosphere that is beneficial to businesses, as well as fostering a friendly environment for recyclers to provide services in our city. The variety of businesses in our City would most likely be best served by a range of haulers offering different "specialties" of services, while still allowing businesses to become a part of the city's comprehensive Business Recycling Outreach Project. Currently, there are several independent haulers servicing businesses in the City that offer free or low cost collection services, based upon the materials generated in each business. For example, there are several individuals who haul cardboard from small restaurants and retail outlets; a glass recycler that collects glass from restaura~ts; and, a number of independent haulers that collect white paper free of charge. While there are always costs involved in collection, some small independent haulers are able to collect a specific material at no (or low) charge to the business. oisadvantaoes of staff recommendation The primary disadvantage of aliowing multiple haulers in the City is the increased vehicular traffic that likely would occur. The City currently has multiple, independent haulers servicing businesses that are already recycling. Although some additional haulers will be brought into the city as a result of this action, staff does not 7 //-? anticipate a great increase in the variety of haulers, simply the number of businesses serviced. with a permit process, staff can monitor the impact of additional vehicular traffic on the city. If it seems that the number of permits is allowing too much truck traffic in certain areas, the number of permits could potentially be limited in heavily impacted areas. Additionally, a condition of the permit process could include proof of smog certificate and vehicular registration and insurance. Alternative options 1) Single-collection provider. The city could theoretically contract with one hauler to offer collection services to all businesses. The contract could be simply awarded to Laidlaw, or on a competitive bid basis. This arrangement would limit multiple vehicular traffic. Additionally, it would allow for collection of a franchise fee and easier service monitoring, however, there would be no competition between haulers (after awarding the contract), thus limiting the variety of services, costs and other choices for businesses. This alternative may also be difficult to justify and implement because it essentially eliminates opportunities for small independent recyclers who currently operate in the city. Addi tionally, staff has concerns regarding the ability of one hauler to service the entire commercial and industrial community according to the timeline established under the mandatory recycling ordinance and AB 939. staff recommends that Laidlaw's proposal for commercial recycling be rejected specifically for the above reasons. While Laidlaw states in its proposal that it can offer services to the entire City, staff has deep reservations about Laidlaw's (or any single service provider's) ability to meet these service goals, given the large number and wide diversity of businesses in the city. Additionally, Laidlaw charges all customers for their recycling collection services, regardless of the materials collected and the type of business. Laidlaw says that this charge would vary depending on the materials collected, however, to date staff's experience has shown that Laidlaw does not vary its rate but simply charges a flat collection fee. Having a permit system would allow Laidlaw to bid on a permit, as well as other haulers who may be better able to meet the specific needs of businesses at lower costs. 2) Permit limitations: Permits could be limited by allowing only a specific number of permits to be issued or through a geographic service areas allocation. Under a geographic service area permit processed haulers would compete for contracts to collect in established service areas. While practical for mUlti-family (proposal to follow), this may not be the best option for commercial, given the variety of commercial establishments and their dispersion throughout the city. Limi ting the number of permits would offer advantages for staff monitoring requirements, although with an open permit process, staff, as this time does not anticipate being over burdened with monitoring requirements. 8 //--r 3. MUlti-Family Recycling Under the City's mandatory recycling ordinance timeline, multi-family recycling goes mandatory in July, 1993. Staff has reviewed various options used in other cities for multi-family recycling, as well as conducted a survey of apartment and condominium complexes in Chula vista to determine space constraints and other pertinent information. A multi-family recycling roundtable was held on December 8, 1992, featuring panelists from the City, City of San Diego, the San Diego Apartment Association and two mUlti-family complexes that are currently recycling. The roundtable allowed staff to hear directly a number of concerns and suggestions for implementing recycling in mUlti-family dwellings in Chula vista. Proqram recommendation Staff recommends that recycling collection services for mUlti-family residences be developed through a "service subarea" recycling contract arrangement. These "recycling service subareas" could be derived from established geographical areas (e.g., North, South, East, West). Through an open request for proposal's (RFP) process, staff would accept proposals from haulers to service all multi-family dwellings within a subarea. (Staff will estimate the number of dwellings within each proposed subarea in order to ensure that the areas are reasonably close in size and of a scale to allow for hauler efficiencies.) The "service subarea" concept would be described in the RFP, however, all proposals would be required to be "generic" for all areas. Staff would then "assign" a service area to each respective contractor, based on assessed service area characteristics and corresponding contractor abilities. Each awarded service area contractor could be required to pay a "contract fee" to cover staff costs for monitoring and program development (perhaps a percentage of gross receipts, or a base amount plus a fee per account); a franchise fee could also be assessed. In order to establish a level of service uniformity throughout the City, a "baseline" of service requirements (e.g., specified materials, weekly collection days, customer service hotline, etc.) and all contract requirements will be fully outlined in the RFP. Each awarded contractor would be required to provide educational materials, containers, collection vehicles and other equipment, and establish their own billing and customer services. city staff would work closely with the haulers and monitor the recycling services, billing fees, and public information materials, once approved by Council. Each contractor would be required to submit a quarterly report on tonnages, participation and revenue received from the sale of collected materials. Contracts are recommended to be for four years, with two, one year extensions based upon satisfactory service. This provides haulers with an incentive to invest in necessary equipment, while allowing the City an avenue to change the program if deemed necessary. 9 //-<7 Contracted service providers would be required to submit plans for phased-in services to all multi-family dwellings within the subarea by the October, 1993 enforcement (fine implementation) date under the County's mandatory recycling ordinance. Prior to developing the request for proposals, staff recommends that a request for qualifications be issued to ascertain whether there is interest among haulers to collect recyclables in Chula vista. This could be done immediately and would ultimately conserve staff time in the event that no interest is expressed by haulers. If there is no interest, staff would recommend that an RFP be issued for a single hauler to collect recyclables from mUlti-family residences. Advantaqes of staff recommendation Through the service area concept, Council's direction for competitive bid would be addressed. Allowing for haulers to bid for a service area in the City may provide a competitive cost and service level advantage. Competition in service provision and rates between areas would occur due to the City's flexibility in awarding contracts for a relatively short duration of time. Multi-family rate payers, while benefiting from the service and cost competition between area service providers, would receive relatively uniform services, rates and billing requirements within their respective service area. Ongoing review of rate structures for each service area would allow for rate control measures to be established, if desired (e.g., a ceiling based on gross receipts). In order to ensure that different subareas of the City are not unfairly charged and that rates are relatively uniform, a "range" for rates could be established by Council, or staff could negotiate with haulers submitting proposals to match the lowest rate proposed. The geographic service area concept would eliminate concern for multiple vehicles servicing residential areas, as only one hauler would service each geographic subarea. Having service areas will allow for relatively easy monitoring and program overview to ensure that all residents are provided a base level of services. Additionally, in order to take advantage of economies of scale, the service subarea concept is recommended to allow respective haulers enough service units to make collection economically viable. Additionally, "contract fees" could be relatively easily assessed. Disadvantaqes of staff proposal Although not true for all cities, studies do indicate that franchises tend to be less costly than free competition for residential collection. This is primarily the case because of lower administrative costs. For example, if a city has a yard waste collection program, a recyclable collection program and a refuse collection program, and the city has three (or more) different entities providing these services, routes will be generated three times by three different entities. Additionally, in this example, customer service networks and billing would also be conducted by three different entities, potentially leading to higher costs because 10 !J.../Q of duplication of billing services. with the recycling service subarea proposal, duplicate administration would necessarily.occur because of separate haulers for recycling and refuse. Whether this duplication of effort would lead to relatively higher rates is unknown at this time. Unlike commercial recycling, where recyclable material values are relatively higher, thus leading to competitive service charges, costs of collection from mUlti-family complexes could potentially be higher having separate recycling and refuse collection in mUlti-family dwellings because of this administration duplication and the low value of materials collected from the residential waste stream. Property managers (or landlords, residents) may also be somewhat confused regarding the separate billing and collection requirements. The service subareas will need to be carefully designed because of demographic issues. Higher density, more transient (renter occupied) complexes tend to have fewer recyclables and lower material value, while having higher incidence of material contamination. This could impact the cost per unit, depending on the concentration of such complexes in a given area, potentially leading to significantly different rates per subarea and questions of equity in service. Additionally, with the highest concentration of multi-family dwellings being in the western portion of the City, the subareas may need to be devised to take this into account. staff has circulated the general conceptual outline of this geographic service area to several professionals in the field. It has met with a relatively positive response, with an indication that the concept is sound, however, it is unknown at this time how many haulers would bid on a contract. Again, because of economies of scale and administrative efficiencies, haulers want to collect both residential refuse and recyclables. Additionally, mUlti-family recycling tends to be more difficult to implement and monitor. As recommended above, a request for qualifications would indicate whether there is hauler interest in collecting recyclables from multi-family dwellings in Chula vista. Additionally, under the subarea permit system, considerable staff time would be required for development of the request for proposals and review of the proposals. Staff has a number of sample RFP's and has already outlined the service requirements, so while time consuming it should not overburden staff. Alternative options 1) Single-Collection Provider. The City could contract with one hauler to offer collection services to all multi-family units. This alternative could potentially best serve the City and staff recommends full consideration of this option, in lieu of dividing the city in subareas. Staff would recommend that a request for proposals be issued for a single hauler to provide recycling services. Although only one hauler would provide recycling services to multi- family residents, this option could benefit the City through the competitive bid process, allowing for competitive rates and services 11 //--// to be proposed. A primary advantage of this system would be the limited amount of time required by staff for program development and implementation. Additionally, staff feels that a single hauler could provide viable and cost effective services. As stated above, costs and types of collection for mUlti-family recycling do not vary significantly, the advantages to having multiple haulers are not as evident as with commercial recycling. Property managers and residents may benefit from having uniform rates and services throughout the city. Laidlaw submitted a proposal for servicing all multi-family complexes in Chula Vista; the cost would run approximately $1.10 to $1.50 per unit (e.g., household). This is a competitive cost compared with other cities, and because of Laidlaw's experience in refuse collection from residential mUlti-family complexes in the city, they may be able to offer the service more cost efficiently than other haulers. However, staff recommends rejection of Laidlaw's proposal because of concerns with their ability to offer the service to the entire city, particularly in terms of program design expertise, appropriate and adequate staffing, program promotion to residents, customer service and satisfactory program implementation. 2) Open Permit Process. As proposed for commercial recycling services, haulers would compete for permits on a "free market" basis. While potentially allowing for an increased level of competition, such an open permit process would be difficult to administer and monitor, given the high number of mUlti-family units in the City and the diversity of units to be serviced. Service levels and program implementation could be affected because of staff's inability to monitor the number of contracts effectively. Allowing multiple haulers throughout the City would greatly increase vehicular traffic and noise within residential areas of the city. This would be particularly disruptive because respective multi-family dwellings would inevitably have collection on different days of the week, thus potentially bringing a daily flow of collection vehicles into neighborhoods. FISCAL IMPACT: Costs associated with the proposed commercial, multi- family and yardwaste recycling programs will be individually determined and brought to Council prior to moving forward with program implementation. Service costs are expected to be borne by the user. At this time it is difficult to determine if there may be a potential loss in income to the city due to decreased revenues from current franchise fees. Although refuse collection franchise fees should decrease as refuse levels decline, there should be revenue offsets generated by new permit or contract fee revenues, as well as population increases. 12 //../,).. /820682 . EXPRESS SECRETARIAL Attachment A . MINUTES OF A SCHEDULEO REGULAR MEETING Resource Conservation commission Chula Vista, California 6:00 p.m. Monday, January 11, 1993 council Conference Room Public services 8uildini CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6: 11 p.m. I:ly Chair1llan Kracha. ci ty Staff Environmental Review coordinator Doug Reid called roll. Present: commissioners Hall, Kracha, Chougassian, Myers. Absent: Johnson, McNair. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was MSUP (Hall/Myers) to approve the minutes of November 23, 1992 with a correction to Paragraph 5, sentence ~ & 4: "...without the plan, waste will go into drains and l~ot the landfill. Questioned where waste material pickup collection points will be located and how it will be transported." Cancelled Agenda Item No. 2(A) Review of Negative Declaration for 1S-91-50B and Item No.3, Final Adoption of SRRE and HHWE. 1. Athena Bradley presented the resolution accepting a county of San oiego Program Grant to expand Chula Vista'S Business Recycling Outreach Project. It is noted that on Page S, para. 1, the date should I:le changed to July 1993. After clarification of a few items, it was MSUP (Hall/Myers) to recommend adoption of the resolution; motion passed 4-0. 2. ~he resolution approving agreement with County for the City's Household HazardOUS Waste Education Project was presented by Athena llrad...ey. Corrections noted: Page 1, paragraph 2 under Background, the following was deleted: "most of which ends up at the 'Otay landfill." Page 14, No.6, line 1 should be "...the County's HHMP program. . ." After a brief discussion, it was MSUP (Myers/Hall) to recommend adoption of the resolution; motion passed 4-0. 3. A discussion was held on the report regarding proposed commercial, industrial and multi-family recycling program. Hall's commented on: limiting permits on commercial recycling; monitoring fee; collection by geographic areas for multi-family; diseased trees and plants should not be recycled into the fresh eJreens collections. Correction on Page 1, para. 4, d81ete the .econd "that" in line 5. Clarification given on comment. from Myers regarding: the multi- family versus single family recyclinq colleotion bins; use of reeyclin9 stickers for collection; Laidlaw's handling of single tamily waste and multi-family collection still out tor bid; noted that recycling is still on a volunteer basis at this time. Kracha sugqested c:han9ing the title name -1:0 include ";reenS". Athena noted that "industrial" was already r,placed with the new title being "Commercial, Greens and Hult1-Family Recycling Program." Further suggestionsz per1ll1tbe issued for at least three years for competitive bidding rather than two; Paq. 4, JtI.o. 1 under Alternative options, reword to possibly readz "thers would.be no competition between haulers after thfll_~id...tt, page5,_para;raph )/-t:!. ~,t:JOt:le:. c.....rT"a:.:::.:::. :c.1,...T'U:. 1Mf";.J.ru.. ....",.... r'L.J..J - - Page :2 1 i. unclear an~ too wordy; Page 5, No.2, the geographioal areas be split differently with only one hauler; Page 9, one bidder to do all the haulir.g; in favor with the pilot project. Athena stated a final draft of this proposal will be redone and .ent to commissioners. COJUlIIente .hould go directly to her for pre.entation to the counoil at its next meeting. It was then moved and .econded (Hall/Krac:ha) to rec:ommend acceptance of the proposed recyclinq report. An amenc!lllent was made (Myers/Ghouga~sian) that there not be additional haulers than what is presently 1n existence to single faJUily residential areas; motion failed 1",3 (Aye: Myers; Nos: Kracha, Ghougassian, Hall). A vote was taken on the original motion; motion failed 3-1 (Ayes: Kracha, Ghouqassian, Hall; No: Myers). 4. Review of Neqative Declaration IS-93-17 and IS-93-19, the National University/LCi> Amendment No. 11. After a brief discussion on the proposal and conditional use permit on thi. item, it was moved and seconded (Hall/Chougassian) to recommend adoption of the Neqative Declaration; motion failed 3-1 (Ayes: Hall, Ghouqassian, Kracha; No: Myers). CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS: A workShop/training of new commissioners is deferred until new members can be present. Kracha reques~~d Tony Liu, Coordinator for the Earth Day event on January 23, make a brief presentation. STAFF REPORT: Schedule for review of the Otay Ranch project: . January 15 - County Dept. of Land Use . January 27 - Chula vista council Chambers, 5-7 p.~. . January 29 - County Dept. of Land Use . Joint Hearings (supervisors, Planning commission) in February Oiscussion on Otay Ranch will be held at the January 25 meeting. MeanWhile, a workshop with Baldwin an~ Oqden will be January 18. A copy of the RCC budget was handed out and briefly reviewed. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS: Myers C01Dlllented on the amount of reading ~aterial pre.ented to oommissioners and insufficient time allowed to review all docUlllents. Suggested a new .eeting tiJUe be discussed with all members present. ADJOURNMENT: J:t was HSUP (Hall/Myers) to adjourn t:he ..etin9. "1'he ~.eting was adjourned by Chairman ~acha at 7z56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ,. .,. " EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES ~~., Barbara 'l'aylor ~~ ~". ~ . . ,.',-~ <'."", . ~"';" - .. '. 'r7~~'-'>;- "J' ",__./0' , '. " " : . Y~~,' '.-5~;~~f.&i):ffi~lili;::~.i:ii~ :.':'. - ~ ,-......... c ~._, Attachment A, cant. Staff incorporated several of the Resource Conservation Commission comments into the Council report. Addi tionally, two concerns expressed by members are discussed below. Motion for recommendation of Council acceptance of report failed (3-1, with 3 members absent). 1. RCC member concern: RCC Motion failed because one member of the RCC did not want any additional vehicular traffic in Chula Vista because of recycling. Staff response: At this time, in order to implement the City and County mandatory recycling ordinance, additional vehicular traffic will occur in residential areas. As proposed in staff's report, this would be limited to one additional vehicle to collect recyclables from multi-family dwellings and one additional vehicle to transport separated yard waste. Additional vehicular traffic will also occur in commercial areas of the City. Options: a. Yardwaste Collection . City Council could elect not to collect yard waste, thus violating the County of San Diego mandatory recycling ordinance. This would potentially leave the City open to thousands of dollars in fines for failure to comply. Additionally, because yardwaste accounts for almost 20 percent of the City's waste stream, it would be beneficial in meeting the AB 939 goals to divert yardwaste from disposal. . City Council could mandate that all residents either compost their yard waste and/or take it themselves to the County's mulching area (at the Otay landfill). While this would alleviate the concern with having additional vehicular traffic down residential streets, it could lead to problems with illegal dumping from those residents that do not want to take their yard waste to the County mulching area. b. Multi-family Recycling . As with yardwaste, City Council could elect not to collect from multi-family residences, thus violating the County of San Diego mandatory recycling ordinance. This would potentially leave the City open to thousands of dollars in fines for failure to comply. Also, although collecting multi-family recyclables will not be too significant in volume (probably diverting 4-7 percent), as with single-family recycling, it will help to show residents the value of recycling and carry for our environment. Additionally, many single-family residents resent it that they have to separate their waste for recycling, while multi-family residents do not. Moreover, 1/..5 many multi-family residents have expressed interest in recycling if it were convenient for them. c. Commercial Recycling . Again, City Council could elect not to implement commercial recycling. As stated, this could leave the City upon to fines from the County, moreover, because the City will need to implement commercial recycling in order to meet the AB 939 mandates, the City could face fines of up to $10,000 per day from the State as well. Additionally, many businesses are turning to recycling as a way to reduce disposal costs. Thus, even if the City decided not to implement Citywide recycling, inevitably some additional traffic would come to the City as a result of businesses freely contracting with recyclers. Staff feels that additional vehicular traffic for commercial will be limited to the commercial areas of the City, usually not in residential areas. Many vehicles that collect commercial recyclables are small, pick-up trucks. Additionally, as commercial recycling expands, vehicles will pick up recyclables from these new businesses along already established routes. Thus, while some new traffic will inevitably be brought into the City, many of the businesses that will implement recycling in the future will be served by vehicles already serving the City. And, as discussed in the report, through the permit process staff can potentially monitor the impacts of vehicular traffic in our commercial areas. 2. RCC member concern: One member felt that the alternative option proposed for multi-family recycling, that of having a single- collection provider through an open bid process, might best serve the residents. He expressed concern regarding the geographic area spli t, since proposed boundaries of east-west/north-south would also cut across basic demographics, with the relatively higher- income portions of the City (e.g., Eastlake) on one side and the relatively middle and lower income portions of the City on the other (southwest, mobile homes). He also expressed concerns about the economies of scale necessary to make collection cost efficient, as well as the duplication of administration efforts. Staff response: Staff's alternative recommendation of contracting with a single-collection provider for multi-family residences through a competitive bid process is discussed in the report. //"/~ '0 0 ..'" CD ~ ::T- ~ ~ CD .. .. '" ::;; '" CD Q. ~ < :;- ~ CD CD ffi'O' "'tI CD ~ ::> n ?C c: en ""l CD e- n - CD -.... Q) 0. 0 c: cD' .. ~ CD en CD .. =.c: .. .. CD CD .. ::T-, .. .. CD iil ~ ctl < 5 3 .. CD .. .. .. "",'" Q) "' .. .. 0 - CD 2: ~. CD ::> .. 0 2'crgg. 0. 0 .. ~ .. n ::T< 3 ? en ~ .. iii' ~ .. CD '0.. 0 S ::;; a Cl. )> Q) ;;r -< 0. iii' ::;; .... Q. "0 (t) - ::;; CD '" o 0. (D (fI CD .. .. .... _.'" CD CD ;:+ .. =r e. ""l ~ 0 ::T lit CD CD 0 CD .. S N ::> n .. - .. tr Q) < CD <I> ::T 0.::> c:=n..cn CD ' Q. en < ctI Q. co '2, :3 :r" U; 0 0 - 0 '=- CD 3 ... :J 0 .. ,* ~~::rS ~ '0 ::;; ~.... ~:5" .. n ~ ~, . 0 n 0 .. 0 -0 - ::I '" -< .. _ c: ~ ::T-Q. " .. .. CD ~ CD 0 3 ~ n .. S' ::> .. CD 000. .. .. '0 ~=CD .. ~ CD S' CD ~ en _. "C n CD CD CT ::T :: CD ::) ~ CD 0 ~"C 0.. 0 S' c: CD .. CD ::> .. 0.'0 ::> '" CD ::T .. CD .. ::;; - ~ ::T =- 0 ~ ::T c: CD .. .. CD -< ::> c: CD '0 :To-CD E n CD CD n ~ 0 ~ "'" Q) ~ < 3 .. ~ .. CD ~ 0 S'o.c: CD ::> _go 0. .?- o..::T CT ~ ~ .. < ~Q... .~ ~-(') .. '" ::T '" c: 0 _ CD .. ~ ::J:l .. CD:::-(") ::T .. .. 0 n CD 0 c: .. 2.~ .. '" ::T '" .. ::> :' CD ~ ::> 0. ~ ::;; -,0. n iii' 00 ~ CD ? .. ::;; c: ::T 0 .. CD .. .. ~ ~ .. c: ::> .. .. :5" ai' CD .!'!- ~g-Cl ~ Q) 'C Dr _CD .. n o ::> .. 0 ::;;Q.::J:l :I CD CD CD .., a n 3 ~ ~ < CD .. CD n (l inS: ~ _.< co cn2.("') ~ ::J ~ 0 .. ~ en 3 S .. 00'0 .. ~."C Q) .. CD ::> iil ;Cl< - 0. t:t. .... 0 -~~ ~ 0"'.. 0 ~ S' ~ ::> ~ .. CD 3 '0 n C'i' < .. n n ::> 0 "" g:< ~ , c: 10 0 n '0 - -.. //.../,? Att,r R en en en ." 0 Z r r 3 m m !:!} Cl (") (") 0 Q) Q) 0 (') Q) C1l Q) '" ::l ~ 0 Q) iil ::l ::l :i: C1l .... 3 '0 (') ~, (") ..., ..., .... Q) 0' 0 s: C1l 0 ::l Q) s: 0 1il (") ::l C1l s: Q) C1l ..., ::l 0' ::l 0" ::::j Q) -< ::l ::l ::l Di' ;:+ C1l '" 0- Q) Q) Q) Q) '" Q) Q) Q) ::l ..., 0- -< OJ ..., c: G) c: '" 0- C1l (') C1l (") ..., OJ 0 0 Q) 0 ;:+' 0 C1l (') '" < Q) ::T -< C1l (') ::T <I> ::l ::l ::l <I> ::l ::l ::l ::l <I> <I> ::l <I> ::l <I> .... 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 .... .... 0 .... 0 .... -< OJ '0 '0 '0 -..I '0 '0 '0 '0 "" -..I '0 OJ '0 Ol ~ "" ..., ..., ..., U1 ..., ..., ..., ..., .... .... ..., OJ ::J:l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..., CO CO CO CO .. CO CO CO CO CO 0 '" 0 ..., ..., ..., ..., ..., ..., ..., ..., CO :E Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) 0) ..., 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0) 3 ~ en -I m <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> <I> ::l <I> Ol N Ol Ol U1 Ol Ol U1 U1 Ol Ol Ol -..I 0 Ol (") N CO "" W -..I N U1 (,() 0 W W W N '0 .... 0 , " ..., (,() "" -..I -..I Ol -..I (,() "" (,() -..I N 0 "" s: .... 0 .... 0 N U1 U1 U1 .... U1 U1 U1 CO U1 s: ..., 0) m 3 ::J:l (") i> r:. <I> ::l ::l ::l '0 ::l ::l '2, ::l ::l <I> ::l <I> ::l '0 s: .... 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 .... 0 .... 0 0 N '0 '0 '0 .... '0 '0 r+ '0 '0 .... '0 N '0 .... c: w ..., ..., ..., 0 ..., ..., ..., ..., (,() ..., .... ..., 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO CO CO ::l CO CO CO CO CO CO ::l ..., ..., ..., <' ..., ..., ::l ..., ..., ..., ..., <' ." 0) 0) 0) 0) Q) <' 0) 0) 0) 0) .. ~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 s: r -< (") <I> ::J:l .... m 0 w C1l N '" 3 U1 0- .... N 0) Z C 0" 0 '0 (') U1 ..., C1l (ii' -I Q) C1l .... ..., 0- ::l ::T m C1l C1l .... (') 3 CIl ..., '" >< 0) c C1l C .... '" ::l ..., 0- 0" 0) ::T C1l .... '" .... '" 0 c: ." 0 -0. N' c: en s: <I> ." C1l 0- (,() ." '" ..., ..., U1 C1l ..., ..., (') C1l (') 0 0) '" 0 -< .... 3 :i: 52 C1l ..., 3' (ii' C1l 3 ::T (') C1l C1l CO C -< ..., ::l '0 52 (') 3' -< (') Di' 0) 3' ..., 0 CO '0 0- 3 ..., CD :i: 3' 0) 3 0) CO .... '" C1l C1l .... ::l C1l .... C1l !20 0- ..., -< C1l :E -0. C '" C1l ::J:l m (") -< (") !: z C) ::J:l !i m CIl c: ::J:l < m -< Attachment C Summary of Laidlaw Waste System's proposals for collection of yard waste, commercial and mUlti-family recyclables. Please note that this is a preliminary proposal presented to staff several months ago. Costs and program specifics would need to be refined, as market forces, county yard waste tipping fees, and other variables may change. Yardwaste "Pay-as-you-go" system using prepaid stickers purchased by customers. stickers would be available for sale at retail outlets. . Collection will be offered weekly, ideally on the same day as garbage and recyclables. . No bags will be allowed in the program, containers would be provided by residents, or a bulk purchase of carts (on wheels) for residents could be done through Laidlaw if there is sufficient demand. Residents would simply affix the sticker on the container. Bundles of brush and tree trimmings could be set out with a sticker attached as well. . As part of the promotion for the program, Laidlaw would provide residents with two-to-three free stickers, as well as instructions on how to par.ticipate and where to purchase stickers. . Range of price for the service would be up to $1.00 per sticker or could be a fixed monthly rate of approximately $2.00. Commercial Recvclinq Proqram . Would collect all materials required to be recycled under the city's mandatory recycling ordinance, with flexibility to allow for additional materials as markets open up. . A combination of recycling bins and containers would be available to businesses for exterior storage of recyclables, at this time to be limited co 3 cubic yard bins and 90 gallon carts. Interior bins would also be provided, as requested. Collection systems would be designed to meet the individual needs of the customers. Promotional materials would be developed and distributed to businesses. Laidlaw would also cooperate with the City in its Business Recycling outreach Project. Customer training would also be provided. . Intent of proposal would be to have citywide implementation of commercial recycling by July 1, 1993. . Quarterly reports would be provided to the City. J/~/~ Special collection services would be offered to businesses, including special pick-ups for peak-demand. . Commercial garbage collection rate schedule would be the rate schedule for commercial recycling, with some adjustments. Disposal costs would be deducted from the garbage collection rate schedule, this reducing the recycling service charge; revenues from material sales would be used to recover initial start-up costs, including education and promotion, until these costs have been fully recovered. A special fee would be arranged for businesses using 90 gallon carts for recycling and receiving minimum trash collection. Multi-familv Recvclinq . All materials designated in the mandatory recycling ordinance will be collected in centrally located bins (three cubic yard dumpsters) or 90 gallon containers depending on the space available at respective complexes. Promotional and educational programs will be aimed at both building managers and residents. . Costs would be assessed similarly to commercial accounts, with estimates ranging from $1.10 to $1.50 per unit (e.g., household). This price could be higher depending on the number and type of bins provided to each complex. 11-/1 '" '" )> )> ::I '" '" c. c: () () '" 0 0 .... ~ c: c: 0;" ::I ::I 0 !2" Q) Cij" Cij" ::I C. Dl Dl c: ~ ~ '" Dl Dl CD ~ ~ ~ CD CD CD ~ .... ..... CD ::T CD ~ ..... Cij" '" c: '" ::T .... CD Dl 0 Cij" '" .... ::T ..... e1.. CD ~ ~ C. Dl CD ::I Dl CD 0 c. 3 ::T < 0 Cij" CD 0" ;=;" C. CD 0" CD .... ::I ::I 0 ..... Dl r- ~ ::I Dl Dl C. ::I c: 0 0 Q) ::T 0 ~ Cij" ::I CD '" ..... c. .... ~ 0 .... c: ~ 0 0 ~ .... CD r- 0" '" Dl ::I c: c: CD Q) ::I ::I ~ C. .... c: 0;" '" .... Dl ~ ::I < C. 0 0 3 3 CD ~ 0 0;" Q) ::I C. c: '" CD IJ-~ Attachment D :0 -< Cl () \l \l Z CD Dl Q) Dl Q) Dl CD -l ..... ~ ::I '" "0 ~ c: c. '" '" .... CD < '" ~ '" 0" ~ '" "0 CD "0 CD Dl 0- Dl '" 0" .... 0 ..... "0 0 CD ..... CD ..... .... 0" .... ~ :0 en CD CD '" 0 0 < .... 0 ::T Q) CD ~ 0" en r- - 01 CIl CIl CIl Z r- Dl o ~ Dl Dl Dl 0 Dl :0 c: "0 Dl 3 3 3 .... c: CD ~. :) '" Q) 0 0 CD CD CD Dl Q) c: ~ ::I ::T "0 ~ '" Cij" ~ CD ::I - "0 CD 0" - .... 01 ~ 01 0;" ~ .... Dl ~ Dl 0 0 0" Dl ::I :0 r- en ::I CIl 0 ~ 0 Dl Dl ::T 3 ::T ::I Cij" C. Cij" co CD -Q) CD en c. ~ C. 01 ...:: ...:: Dl 3 -< r- "0 01 CIl CIl CIl Z CIlo1 Dl ~ ~ Dl Dl Dl 0 ~ c: 0 Dl c: Dl co ::I 3 3 3 .... 0"::1 Q) ~ 0 CD CD CD Dl Dl 0 :0 ~ Dl ::T "0 (i; ::T CD 3 Cij" ~ Dl Cij" '" -CD 0" CD c: .... Dl :00 CD 0 0" 01::1 ::I .... r- CD \lCD 0;" Dl "0 ::T c: ~ Dl s: 0 Q) 0 c: c: ~ CD en ;::+ '" ~ ," "'"0 r- 0- 01 Dl CD Dl ::I "0 ~ 2" .... c. 0" -< C ::I '" '" CD r- CIl CIl CIl CIl CIl \l Dl Dl Dl Dl Dl Dl CD c: 3 3 3 3 3 ~ Q) CD CD CD CD CD 3 ~ - ;=;" .... '" 0- ::T Dl ~ ~ () "0 0 0 CD c: Dl 3 ::I co ~ ::T C. 3 3 CD Q) C. CD Dl ~ ~ ::I 0 0 '?<" C. ::I 0;" CD '" .... 0 Dl ..... Dl Dl - ::I 0 "0 ~ ~ CD CD C. S" ~ CD '" ::I C. 3 c. c: Dl c: '" ~ '" .... '?<" .... ~ CD ~ 0;" .... 0;" 0" - Dl '" Cij" CII c 3 3 III ~ < o ..... CII .... III - - :I:l Cl> n o 3 3 Cl> :::l C. III .... 0" :::l '" CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item I ~ Meeting Date 1/26/93 ITEM TITLE: Report - Request for an all-way stop at the intersection of East Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue ,,/ Director of Public Works o;;v SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: City Manager&' (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolU BACKGROUND: Staff received a request from Mrs. Norma Erhardt of 657 E. Naples Street requesting the installation of an all-way stop at the intersection of East Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue. PREVIOUS SAFETY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On May 14, 1992, the Safety Commission voted 7-0 to deny the request for an all-way stop at the intersection of East Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue and that staff: 1) extend the red curb along the south curb line west of this intersection by 50 feet and, 2) continue to work with the Chula Vista Elementary School District to keep the landscaping trimmed at the southwest corner of this intersection. On December 10, 1992, the Safety Commission voted 5-0-2 with Commissioners Braden and Matacia absent to deny the request for an all-way stop at the intersection of East Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council concur with both previous Safety Commission recommendations and deny the request for an all-way stop at the intersection of East Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue. DISCUSSION: Staff recently received a request from Mrs. Norma Erhardt of 657 East Naples Street requesting that an all-way stop be installed at the intersection of East Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue. Mrs. Erhardt was not aware of the previous Safety Commission action on this item in May 1992. She is requesting the all-way stop in an effort to reduce vehicular speeds and to eliminate rear-end accidents like the one which she was involved in on November 26, 1991, approximately 162 feet east of the subject intersection. Mrs. Erhardt was attempting to turn left into her driveway and was rear-ended by another motorist which was not paying attention and claims to not have seen Mrs. Erhardt's large Chevrolet Suburban. It should be noted that the visibility for eastbound motorists is in excess of 500 feet. East Naples Street, in the vicinity of Foxboro Avenue, is an east/west Class II collector with a curb-to-curb width of 40 feet. The speed limit is posted at 30 mph. In the vicinity of Greg 1,,2-/ Page 2, Item I ~ Meeting Date 1/26/93 Rogers Elementary School, it is posted "25 MPH WHEN CHILDREN ARE PRESENT". The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is approximately 3,295 vehicles per day. Foxboro Avenue is a north/south residential collector street with a curb-to-curb width of 40 feet, intersecting the south side of East Naples Street to form a T-intersection. The speed limit is a prima facie 25 mph. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on this street is approximately 1,040 vehicles per day. The northbound approach is controlled by a stop sign at East Naples Street. Staff has completed a sight distance visibility check at this intersection and has determined that the sight distance is adequate for the posted speed limit. There is a crest on East Naples Street, approximately 200 feet west of Foxboro Avenue. The subject intersection has yellow painted crosswalks across the south and east legs. There is the standard school zone and school crossing signs located in advance of the crosswalks. This intersection does have school safety patrol helping students cross East Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue. A pedestrian count completed by staff shows that there were 33 and 20 crossing at this intersection during the AM and PM school peak hours, respectively (see attached count). A review of the accident history for this intersection for the period from January 1, 1989 to October 2, 1992, shows only two reported accidents. The first, on August 19, 1989, involved two westbound vehicles, the first vehicle slowed down to make a left turn to go south on Foxboro Avenue and was rear-ended by an inattentive driver. The second accident occurred on January 30, 1992, and was a hit and run accident caused by a northbound to westbound motorist which ran the stop sign on Foxboro Avenue and clipped the front end of an eastbound vehicle. Staff has prepared the collision diagrams for East Naples Street from Foxboro Avenue to the intersection of Pacific Hill Street/Crescent Drive (see attached plats). The accident in which Mrs. Erhardt was involved in is included on the collision diagrams. An all-way stop study completed in April 1992 by staff for the subject intersection shows that this intersection does not justify the installation of an all-way stop, receiving 12 points out of a pOSSible 54. The minimum required to justify an all-way stop is 30 points. Pedestrian counts are less than 100 for the peak four-hour period in the day. Staff has also completed a second all-way stop study in December 1992. The subject intersection received 14 points due to the increase in traffic volumes for the 4 busiest hours of the day (1,172 versus 1,709 vehicles). It should be noted that unnecessary stop signs may increase the amount of rear-end accidents and increase the amount of air pollution and expense to motorists. The November 1992, APWA Reporter. page 9, lists the approximate expense to motorists and increase in pollution per stop sign. The data below was modified to show what the effect of the requested all-way stop sign on East Naples Street through traffic would be. Additional air pollutants expected for each additional stop sign generates the following amount of three major automobile exhaust products: 1).".2. Page 3, Item /.J.. Meeting Date 1/26/93 Carbon monoxide - 167.7 Ibs. per day (30.6 tons/year) Hydrocarbon - 14.9 Ibs. per day (2.7 tons/year) Nitrogen oxide - 12.3 Ibs. per day (2.2 tons/year) And the additional fuel consumption for the approximately 2,805 through vehicles on East Naples Street travelling at an average speed of 35 MPH would be 24.2 gallons of fuel per day (0.0086 gal/vehicle). This additional cost equates to 1 rt per stop per vehicle or approximately $11,480 per year to the extra 8,830.5 gallons of fuel consumption used if this all-way stop is installed. Increased wear on vehicle's brakes and tires is not included. In an effort to eliminate the concerns expressed by Mrs. Erhardt, staff has also looked into the possibility of installing a two-way left turn lane on East Naples Street east of Foxboro Avenue. Since East Naples Street is 40 ft. wide, the installation of a 10ft. wide two-way turn lane would necessitate prohibiting all on-street parking between Foxboro Avenue and Pacific Hill Street which would affect three residences fronting on East Naples Street. The cost to restripe this block and add the two-way left turn lane is estimated at $2,300. Staff does not feel that this expense is justified. CONCLUSION: Staff is recommending against the installation of an all-way stop at the subject intersection due to the good safety record of the intersection. None of the accidents which have occurred on East Naples Street in the vicinity of Foxboro Avenue could have been prevented, with an all- way stop. Studies have shown that where unnecessary stop signs are installed, motorists begin to disrespect the stop signs. In addition, accidents like the one in which Mrs. Erhardt was involved in may not be eliminated, since her driveway is over 150 ft. east of Foxboro Avenue and was caused by an inattentive driver. The existing stop sign on Foxboro Avenue is working satisfactorily and the subject intersection does not justify the criteria for the installation of an all-way stop. The reduced sight distance caused by the overgrowth of some weeds at the southwest corner of the intersection has been cleared up by the Chula Vista Elementary School District. Mrs. Erhardt has been notified of tonight's City Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: $200 for an all-way stop. $2,300 for two-way left-turn lane Attachments: Accident History (T-40 & T-41) ~ All-Way Stop Study Area Plat c..C Collision Diagrams (2) ~~ Pedestrian Count ~O Safety Commission Minutes dated May 14, 1992 and December 10, 1992 File: CY-Q29 WPC F:'<lOMElENGINEER\AGENOAIFOXSTOP /.;...:; ,~)d, H0 ClU.A VISTA IUI DATE: 12- 2-92 . TRAFFIC CtUISION lUAIL REPORT SITE LO"'cATION: at E NAPLES ST and FOXBORO AVE SEARCH DATES froll 01-01-89 to 10-02-92 LOCATION CODE: 16020- COLLISION VIC- TYPE POINT OF PRI" COL. REPORT COLLISION TI~ OF IIf'ACT FACTOR NO. DATE DA TI II: IN FA COL. LOCATION VC SEC GP 913~ ~H9-8'I" 1330 1 0 REAR e' ? 223S0 2 28123 01-30-92 F 720 o 0 BllOD 0' ? 22107 13 II-V OTHER ROAD IN\' RIW PED -vEHICl.E-- IIHV ./PED ASSOC IlEA LIT S ClJl WIT CTL ACT NO. TP I1V DIR AGE SEX SID FACTOR CI.R DAY A H C D A 1 A B W 18" A N 2 D A W 27" A N C1.R DAY A H C D AID B E 49 FAN 2 A E N 92 F G N . . " J'J / H- /;--5 T-41 CI<<.lA VISTA RlN DATE: 12- 2-92 -.. TRAFFIC COLLISION LOCATION SUIt1ARY SITE LOCATION: at E NAPLES ST and FOXBORO AVE SEARCH DAlES f~om tl-01-89 to 10-02-92 LOCATION CODE: 16020- 1. CCUISION TYPES 3. LIGHTI NO COODlTlONS TOTAL PERt. TOTAL PERC. IEAD-ON 0 .0 DAYlIGHT 2 100.0 SIDESWIPE 0 .0 llISK -DA"" . .. REAR [Ntl 1 S0.0 DARK, ST LIGHTS 0 .. BROAOSIDE 1 50.0 DARK, NO ST LIGHTS 0 .. HIT OB,UT 0 .0 DARK, ST LIGiTS NOT OVERTURNED 0 .0 FltICTIONING 0 .0 AUTO/PEDES 0 .0 OllER 0 .0 TOTAL 2 100.07. TOTAL 2 100.07. 2. MOTOR VEH. INVOLVED WITH 4. COlLISION SIJtltlARY DESCRIPTION TOTAL PERC. DESCRIPTION --T 0 TAL - -.. COlL PERS PERC tn,COLLlSWN 0 .0 PEDESTRIAN 0 .0 FATAL 0 t .0 OTHER MOTOR VEH. 2 100.0 INJJRY 1 1 S0.0 M. V. ON OTH RriWY 0 .0 PRCf DAI"OiGE 1 50.' PAAlID M.V. 0 .0 TRAIN 0 .0 TOTALS 2 1 100.07. F'EDICYCLE 0 .0 ~IMAL . .0 FIXED OB,ECT 0 .0 OTHER OE:..ECT 0 .0 TOTALS 2 100.07. -". !. r , :...-""""!'- /.,2....~ T-40 CIllA VISTA RIJi t\ilTE: 12- 2-92 TRAFFIC COLliSION DETAIL REPORT . SITE LOCATION: on E NAPLES ST bet.m PACIFIC HILL ST SEARCH t\ilTES froM 01~1-89 to IH2-92 and FOXBORO AVE LOCATION CODE: 16021-1602~ COLLISION VIC- TYPE PCl'iT~f PRill COL. II-V OTHER REPORT COLLISION TIllS OF !~, '\(,T FACTOR ROAD IN'>' RIW PED -VEHICLE-- lrUV./Ptr ASSOC NO. DATE DA TIllE IN FA COL. LOCATION VC SEC GP WEA LIT S CON WIT CTL ACT NO. TP IIV DIR AGE SEX SID FACTCfl 91949 IH7-89 F 1605 o 0 ElROD 242' W 22103 II CLR DAY A H C D A I A B W 21 II A F 2 A F W 18 F A N 11503 11-26-91 W 1610 I 0 REAR 162' E 22350 2 CLR DAY A H C D A I A B E 25 F A N 2 D E E 39 F A N 11644 12-21-91 SU 200 0 0 OBJT 78' W 22350 2 CLRSLAH I D A I " II 92 G 1'1 2 92 . . / /;J. - "1 -~ 1-41 CllILA VISTA RUN DATE: 12- 2-92 TRAFFIC COllISIlI< LOCATllI< SlJlt1ARY ""'" SITE LOCATION: 00 E NAPtES ST bttlt.ttn PACIFIC HIll ST SEARCH DATES fm, 01-01-89 to J0-02-92 iod FOXBORO AVE LOCATION CODE: Uitz!. '''OZD I. COLLISION TYPES 3. lIGHTI~ COOlITl(J;S TOTAl PERC. TOTAl PERC. IEAD-ON . .. DAYlIGHT 2 U.7 SIDESlIlPE 0 .. DlISK -DAItl 0 .0 REAR END I 33.3 DAAK, ST LIGHTS 1 33.3 BROADSIDE I 33.3 DAflI(, NO ST LIGHTS e .. HIT OB..iECT I 33.3 DARK, ST LIGHTS ~T OVERTURNED 0 .0 F~CTIl1<ING . .. AUTO/PEDES . .. OTHER 0 .. TOTAl 3 100.'7- TOTAL 3 100.07- 2. MOTOR VEH. INVOLVED WITH 4. COLLISION SlJI1MARY IeSCRIPTION TOTAL PERC. ItSCRIPTlON -T 0 TAL - COll PERS PERC ""'" NONCDLLlSJON . .. PEDESTRIAN 0 .. FATAL . . .. OTHER I'IOTOR l/EH. 2 U.7 INJ.!RY I I 33.3 II.V. ON OTH R[~ 0 .. PR(f' DAIlAC! 2 66.7 PARKED II.V. . .0 TRAIN . .0 TOTALS 3 100.07. PEDICYCLE . .0 ANIML . .0 FIXED 08.IECT . 1 33.3 OTfER OB..ECT . .0 TOTAlS 3 100.07- ""'" '"\ 1- 1 \ , 1.2.- ~ . . . . . CITY OF CHULA VISTA ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL WARRANTS INTERSECTION coN -;:)e.> . S+fee. t / Po)!. bOfO Avellve ajor Street/Minor Street Date: I~ -10-9;;) Total Points JiJ ( 160~O -00) GENERAL: A fully justified, properly installed all-way stop can effectively assign right of way, reduce vehicle delay, and decrease accidents. Generally, an all-way stop is reserved for the use at the intersection of two through highways, and only as an interim traffic control lIeasure prior to signalization. Stop signs are not to be used for speed control. The posting of an intersection for all-way stop control should be based on factual data. Warrants to be considered include: 1. Accident records 2. Unusual conditions 3. Traffic volumes 4. Traffic volume difference 5. Pedestrian volume Points are assigned to each of these warrants. The total points possible are 54. The installation of an all-way stop control is justified with a minimum of 30 points, unless anyone of the CalTrans criteria is met. ALL.WAY STOP POINT SYSTEM CRITERIA: 1. ACCIDENT WARRANT: Two points are assigned for each accident susceptible to correction by an all-way stop control during one full year prior to the investigation date. ~/1.. ,~ Total number of accidents correctible by all-way stop: Maximum 14 points JO/3hl -lo)~J91 SCORE: Points 2. UNUSUAL CONDITION WARRANT: Where unusual conditions exist, such as a school, fire station, playground, horizontal or vertical curves, etc., points are assigned on the basis of engineering judgment. Unusual conditions shall be considered only if within 500 feet of the subject intersection. In res ident i al neighborhoods where there is a concentration of school age children activities separated from the residential neighborhood by a " \ '/ - 1-2- r collector street and coupled with other conditions, the Citv Traffic Enaineer may apply traffic engineering judgment and waive the 30-point minimum point requirement to qualify the intersection for an all-way stop control. ~, The 30-point minimum requirement miY be waived and an all-way stop miY be installed only if less restrictive controls have not corrected a documented problem. All-way stops miY be justified based on projected volumes and accident frequency when traffic signals are warranted and will be installed within a specified period of time. Maximum 10 points SCORE: ? Points 3. PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES Consideration is given to large numbers of pedestrians crossing the major street during the four busiest hours of an average day. Pedestrian Crossina Maior Street. Total durina 4 busiest traffic hours Volumes: 1-50 ~ 101-150 151-200 201-0VER Points: 1 ~ 3 4 5 Maximum 5 points SCORE: ~ Points ~ 4. TRAFFIC VOLUMES Points are dependent upon the magnitude of vehicular volumes entering the intersection during the four busiest hours of an average day. APT Traffic Counts (circle four highest hour volumes): .:; EB _ .-vJP> Hour Ending At: f --,1- I ~~I 0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 AlB '" 9"10 WB -:.;rrs>o EB =;;lI{SO Dir 3b '13 Ss 7b ,'" rb ,38 lfb NB ;?/ ."., "Cf 7'" 3S 1./"1 !:i2. 3 I 3"1 S"i .Pf ti !1.4- S3g 3& 78 1;21 101 6~ - Al/c,:!AtJ,~ -- - - 31 3i ~ Si 57 70 s'" sr s;;\. '11 80 IO'.:? 10'0 6"1 Av6-. )( ~ /r.,o ,i.!.,,,, .:200 ,3S' 7q 710 7'- J(;)(;l /,.., 1'f0 II~ /10 10'1 g>a SB EB s.., /3 Ave~A..e 3~ WB J1~ lIS 117 T 3,1 13/ ImJ /.,7 ;1.03- -S8 ;l&.J 17S 85 S'I IS'I ~17 /;).7 6'7 7, "I .;:l 7 13<1 "/e.. ..!.ff.!i...EJ:......l.2S2 /3i 13"f IU:, ~ ~~-S' m..~~ ~ Cfcj .;.1.01 rn IOlj 13 I ~ Ii7 ;J.o{, .;lS~ ;2~ ;2'f7 "'/,; .,.., ;l'f~ 176 11;l /'(0 116 /.;27 133 1'1'f ~b /98'.;leX. Ira. 11'1 .;)5;'1 ..201 '..,3.E:l- ~Jl;:i. IS'- ~3 !JS" ~ J1S. J2.2 1&. .;.lSI Igc( I;;.g 131 I$.-(;. 131 1"i7 l"f'l ~ol ;2,g 1'"17 141 JOS Sb!,; $,/0 313 3)3 B.3 .3'1'1 "job 51" S"f'l b;2;;l ss't 3'1 I ~81 G) W -c -2- @ CD I~ -/(J ~ Traffic Volumes WarriD1 Points shall be assigned in accordance with the following tables: . Total of Total of JJf3 ^i/e Major Approach Legs C. ftJ/H'L&5 sr. Minor Approach Legs FOXBOfi!:.O 4...hour Volume Points 4-hour Volume Points o - 1000 0 'fq o - 400 33.' ~ 10'8 1001 - 1300 1 "zs-I 401 - 600 1 100 1301 - 1600 ~~I 601 - 800 2 70 1601 - 1900 - /7oCf 3 1~'1 801 - 1000 3 s& 1901 - 2200 i~:sg 1001 - 1200 4 - 2201 - 2600 5 ;l(JI 1201 - 1400 5 334 2601 - 2900 4 ;L 't~ 1401 - 1600 6 2901 - 3200 3 ~J!! 1601 - 1800 7 3201 - 3500 2 '70'1 1801 - 2000 8 3501 - 3800 1 2001 - 2200 9 3801 - over 0 2201 - over 10 SCORE: 3 Points SCORE: t;zj Points Maximum 5 Minimum 10 5. TRAFFIC VOLUME DIFFERENCE All-way stops operate best when the major and mi nor street approach traffic volumes are nearly equal. Points shall be assigned in accordance with the following table: 24-Hour Minor St. Aooroach Volumes "1<-)0 24-Hour Maior St. Aooroach Volumes X 100% - ;U~'1S0 Points . SCORE: 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 c z .-:> 1 0 OJ- Points CD (.I;' T ~ f... (.s 95 - 100 85 - 94 75 - 84 65 - 74 55 - 64 45 - 54 35 - 44 25 - 34 <1t~ Cf'1o X /00% - 5 - 14 ,;JS80 +~'/So 0-4 ler% Maximum 10 Poi nts :2 'i Acvr FOX.8oe.oA\'~. 1J/3 = ',/0 E. AJAfl.E5> ST. eB - .::24S0 vJJ!> :::;25" gO . Vi -3- '-../ /,;l;/ / CALTRANS CRITERIA IChaDter 4 CalTrans T~Manual) Any of the following conditions may warrant a multi-way STOP sign installation: 1. Where traffic signals are warranted and urgently needed, the multiway stop may be an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installation. ~ ~ 2. An ~ccident problem, as indicated by five or more reported accidents within a 12 month period of a type susceptible to correction by a multiway stop installation. Such accidents include right- and left-turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions. NO ~- ........ 3. Minimum traffic volumes (a) The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day, and ~v ~ The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but ~ When the 8S-percent 11 e apprClach speed of the major street traffi c exceeds 40 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements. (b) (c) "'""' ........ -4- 1,2. -je;J. ALL-WAY STOP SUMMARY . INTERSECTION: &.A1APLeS ST/Z-EET/FOXBDiaO AilE" (/60~O -00) DATE INVESTIGATION WAS COMPLETED: I;L -10- '7;}- / / r xP- TOTAL SCORE: /l-/ points out of a possible 54. required to justify an all-way stop control is 30 points. The minimum INTERSECTION DIAGRAM: x. N l' ,.. .... )<.)( ..J ~ 0 ~ 0 ':t - ~ ~ X I/) . v Y:. x t ~ - E. /oJAft..c.s S71UEET ~ (. ~ r- 1 r ",,' 100' fZ-~p f'Ar:..l&-INIT c:;.1.I~13 ~~3 A~A :.;oP f)i2tv~ Wily RECOMMENDATIONS: x (30120 AvE' po Do .,...:f JdP dI-'(/..i7" .:I G. I!-r Ji:;J);LA.... REMARKS: V~ L /ew I e.~ .AFd-...A ,/o~. . Ie- ~ ~.J~ #1# #-<-cLk ~~~ WPC 5S46E ,,;.. -5- 1(- ~ ~. 1.2--/:1 Y[l.l)IE COtJN"'INS PR06R~ "lT~ SYSTEIIS CORPORATlt)> - IEC3000 I 110lNB 12/8/52 1030 1100 15 2 I(J I(J 1 2 PASt ---! .inn! 1 NUIlber Location Code Date Real Tile Start TiE SiIIple Tille DiVIde &.alion 2-l1ay Operator NuJi~ Machine H..~ ~ FOXDORO AVENUE In Front of 1101 Foxboro Avenue NB Traffic Only APPROACH COUNT NB-Q40 12/8/92 ~~~~~~~00~~I~~I~~I~I~~17OOI~lm~2IOO~2~~ !QffiJ 44 J(, 43 55 76 64 56 38 4b 15 18 11 6 508 13 6 15 13 17 7 12 II 10 6 4 3 2 f 7 9 14 fi 15 17 9 12 3 1 4 3 ~ 10 3 12 JlJ 21 19 II 9 5 9 4 1 13 16 16 ~ 21 8 7 15 1 -4 0 0 12/9/52 OI00~0~~ooreUOO07OO~~I~I~1I001~~I~I~160017001~lm~2100~2~~ 0 0 3 I 6 16 78 121 101 be 42 31 39 58 59 64 48 53 ~ J(, 33 25 12 1 0 0 1 I 0 2 II ib 21 8 16 6 11 8 9 13 8 18 20 14 9 7 2 0 0 0 2 0 I 3 19 18 20 12 8 II 17 13 19 IT 17 25 5 9 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 24 :IT 41 28 10 8 7 16 23 7 'l7 8 15 12 II -, -- 4 I 0 0 0 0 0 5 Ei ~ 21 6 4 9 10 17 14 ~ ""2 10 5 5 4 3 3 0 12/HI/52 ~~~~~~~~~WI~lIoo1~1~1~1~1~17oo1~W~2Ioo~2~2400 I 0 2 6 6 14 81 94 ~ 76 3S 0 0 0 (1 0 I 14 21 2b 23 10 0 0 2 0 1 2 20 28 19 13 9 0 0 0 4 1 4 23 21 2b 21 II I 0 0 2 4 7 24 24 28 19 ~ TOTKS 954 """ TOTALS 414 "NI"" 24 HJ.~R TO,I\:. ~U - ~'E~ II 1200- 938 13((0- 925 1400- 928 1500- 943 1600- '347 17OD- 9351eoo- '191'300- 'J16 2000- 9,. 2:00- 933 "'(l(~ 951 2300- 958 2400- 959 01OD- 954 0200- '3SS 0300- '3SS 040D- 9S4 05((1- 959 or.oo- 959 0700- 1S7 ~:- SO . 0900- - 133 -1000- . 93ltl00-145 -- ---- - - Chinnel 1 Triffi~ 0lec:l<""5UII 0,K. .~ n _...___ __._... ~ :~ ,~--_~:~-~c;~\ .I?'/'j: VOU.I'IE tai.~; INS PRJeRA!l: "!TRIll SYSTEIIS alRPllRllTl~ - IISC3000 I SlIWB 1~/8/9C: 1037 1100 15 2 NO IlD I 10 PAGE --1 iin!'IEl ~;Jaber _HOTi toce .Tie Slirt TIle ~?IE TIle DIVIGE &.a~iOfI 2-1liy Operitor HUllber Ilichill! MUlDEr EAST NAPLES STREET In front of 611 East Naples Street UB Traffic Only APPROACH COUNT WB- 25eO 12/8/9C: ~~~~~~0~~~1~1I00~~1~~1~1~~1~~2100~~2400 lli 127 138 194 ~ 198 206 152 114 86 84 41 30 ~ ~ ~ 3B ~ ~ ~ ~ 30 ~ ~ n 7 ~ 31 39 43 41 ~ 47 45 ~ 23 25 II 8 ~ ~ ~ 52 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ 3B ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 3 12/9/9C: 0:O('O~~i~~~(~~~OO~I~1I001~~14001~160017001~1~~2100~~~ 9 1 4 2 8 40 115 ~ 201 143 121 IJS 1M 156 203 ICJS m 188 1~ 96 103 87 28 27 4 I 00 0 520~65423046~39~55~~M~312O 8 S 2 0 0 2 ~ 8 27 59 :!'l" 34 37 ~ ~ 36 51 35 44 40 19 26 ~ 4 5 104 0 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 26 ~ ~ 52 U M ~ ~ 20 " ~ 2 0 0 0 2 14 36 ~ 47 36 31 45 26 ~ 51 ~ ~ 41 21 27 24 15 2 3 ~O!9Z ~~~~~'~(Ki~~00~1000~I~~I~I~I~onOOI~I~~~~2~24(~ 12 3 3 I 6 41 118 248 17b 112 140 1 100032055,542837 3 I 2 1 I 928~37303O 4 1 1 0 3 16 27 ~ 50 18 26 4 0 0 0 ~ 13 43 ~ 35 36 47 ~VINS 24 ~jR TOT~ S'1IIP~E - D1AN~ 11 120(>- 2590 130(>- 2W3 1400- 2616 ISO(>- 2634 1600- 2f.43 17(1(>- ~ 1800- 2671 1900- 2t53 MO- 2630 2100- 261~ 2200- 26.."'3 2300- ~ 2400- 2619 0100- 2616 020<1- 2619 03(1(>- 2621 0400- 2620 0500- 2619 06(1(>- 26n 0700- 2618 oeoo- 2621 0900- 2615 1000- ~ 1100- 2559 Dmmel I Tnffic OlIck-sull O. II. ,- . I;")~ t,- ~ -...--.-.---.- - .. . - - - ~ 169~ TOTALS 2m ~ 860 YD..lJlIE cru'TINS PROORA~ "IlIO SYSTEllS alRPORATI(Jj - MSC3000 I 6((IEfi 12/8/92 1~4 1100 15 2 tfJ tfJ I 3 PIG -1 EAST NAPLES STREET 600 Blk of East Naples Street EB Traffic Only APPROACH COUNT --. anneI NUllber .ocat iorl Code Date Real Ti.e Start Ti.e Suple TiE DiVide s-ation 2-1lay Operator NUllber Machine NWlber Ea- 2..450 12/8/92 0100~0~~~~07oo~~1~11001~~I~I~I~17ool~I~~~~~~ Tm~S ill 144 147 202 258 e!1 175 85 ~ 3'l J'3 15 7 1580 ~ 41 27 45 62 I 53 18 20 11 11 6 I 32 43 41 66 52 26 7 11 18 6 2 ~ ~ ft n ~ ~ ~ " J t ~ ~ 12/9192 ~~0~(I~~~~OO~OO~I~II00I~I~14001~160017001~1~~2100~~~ m~ 3 0 I I 2 o 0 0 0 0 2 0 I I 0 I 000 I o 0 .0 0 I 2 13 46 1&4 126 120 l3l 139 166 210 258 29S ill 207 134 117 92 49 26 2645 00730362220393731618316533252511 6 o I 5 27 ~ 25 29 37 51 51 62 79 60 27 30 28 13 7 2 3 12 ~ 34 35 41 32 25 63 68 68 40"31 27" 13,------- o 9 22 ~ 31 38 41 31 53 65 67 69 ~ 42 43 35 17 12 6 .-, ~21101~ 0IOO~I('03~1~~~~~~~il~lIool~13ool~I~~~~~~2100~~~ ~ 678 13 5 5 4 5 10 ~ 151 217 127 87 5 0 I 0 2 I 1 18 61 36 19 2 3 2 4 0 3 8 26 4!; 36 23 3 I 2 0 1 1 12 4S F;j IS 21 3 I 0 0 2 5 33 58 ~ 36 24 I()VINS 24 f(l;;R TOT:i. SA:f.;'..E - OO~;EL .1 1200- 2078 1300- 2078 1400- 2073 15((1- 2092 16((1- 2100 1700- 2100 1800- 2115 1 !KlO- 2259 2O'JO- 238: 21(:(1- 2401 2200- 2539 230(1- 2592 2400- 2626 0100- 2645 0200- 2655 0300- 2660 0400- 2664 0500- 2667 0600- 2670 0700- 2678 ~. "VIS ~ 2824 1000- 2857 _Jl00:. 2858_ . .- - - , Diannel 1 Traffic Dietk-SlBl O.K. .-- --- ..- - ". .>-- --'-', """" ~-:,/~'IQ--~ ~.~ '--' . -. - - ~ ~-~ ~-~~-..,........,._-_. . --------40--- . ---'-- --. . CITY OF CHULA VISTA ALL-WAY STOP EVALUATION WORKSHEET G. NAPLeS 5TlZEfjT)FOJeB020 . (Major) (Minor) File Jc..o~O Date /.;2.. _10- 9~ Investigator f=~~ . Intersection .2. . Aile; Qualifies for All-Way Stop based on 30 or more points: Yes No X Points I '-I Qualifies for All-Way Stop based on other criteria: If yes, explain: JJ)J4 Sketch of intersection with visibility data On back Attached 5.a:2... ~ S- No X Yes 1. Accident History From /0 / 3 /~ I to /0 / .;2. / <J~ Accidents/year correctable by Stops x 2 points/accident Points Possible (25 14 Unusual ConditionS;1 -4- tJ ~o;>f2. ~7r..~,..fl) V~J ~ ~ ~. ~rJ. ?,,,,j2 r 10 3. Pedestrian Volume Pedestrians < IDD crossing the major street during 4 hour count ~ 5 4. Traffic Volumes (Peak 4 Hours) Major approaches )709 Minor approaches 334 .3 5 125 10 , .;;J.. 10 TOTAL )'1 54 MinilUa Points Required 30 S. Traffic Volume Difference 11% WPC 5546E -6- C - 1--\ /J. ,,17 . . ALL-WAY STOP SUMMARY INTERSECTION: E. ~a.{l~ ~tiu..'t I Fox boRo A~. -., (Il.O'lo -00) DATE INVESTIGATION WAS COMPLETED: "-15- 'I). / ~ 1f.1t ptttL TOTAL SCORE: _ 1;1. points out of a possible 54. The .inimum required to justify an Ill-way stop control is 30 points. INTERSECTION DIAGRAM: N 1 "1- * 'l(. )0; "I- -b-'') ~ 8 0 E.~T - .,. .... .c ~ \1\ "-JAf'LE.s.-. l'l ~ ~ 1 - - ... - 51/l.tEI ~ " ;r. ~ ( ~ Ci' --~ , p-- .. --"-t. \ E-" ~~ - . - - .' 6< I "~tlCllfJ" 1"IZo~eO r)(,S'I'I#I t ~lt f'I So'ee-t> 5o'~et> .~~., FOIt c......a.. Cuit e 3 f ...t,a,o,... Vt ~,c.U oS STOr o ~ o. ~~ i): RECOMMENDATIONS: 'bo ~a\ '''' irQ..\\ ~T(t.i'( I 'Fa. x. '00 A. 0 AtJe.o1.~. VDl~Mt iD., .tw I IJ() ..u- ~t1 s.~r At EM' ~~\~ f.~Rcc.r..k~ ,.~;:;Jdi REMARKS: ~ ~~c...t:;; 5"0' ~ ~,~ , ""h'~/,..JIJ~ k;t ~ So I k~t/C/ -., "b ' r /-..:I~ (~F~" f 3 v<<~4J. /,2-/(" ~.#"" IIPC 5546E . -5- ,-' - ,/ \\ ~\ ~ ........-v -~ ia ~ \- 1: ~lI1r ~ ~~_..~. l ~~ \~\':;.......-1 r }, t= -..;.., . ~ III I .~~":~ ....:,"l; ~ a 11/ J 1\ _ ;::~t~~~~y ~ ' I - ,"i -,:1!.;;~ ' Y'. ,?,~.. '.:. ' ''';;!.,~ :J '\ ',' r[~) ~:. ~, \.. ~-^'U. ~><~ ~r ~ \'~--- ~~ ~ t=;I)' .F [1~~' .... ~ l '\ ~" '- '" '< n......_" I .-. - ='j= :..:= ~ ~ Iffi ~':' <u ~. ,- ~ .,,'~ f: llto'L.... ~i11f1""" ~u. <.- if\ ;::: E ~ -' )4;:~)~E I'4'l\ .... - '" Eo ~ . #/-..1' "" - ~ ~ ~"JL /i;l ~ "I ~.~ k /'<' · "'",,--- ~ J v rJ;" 3ra~!Si~t;~( ~~~ c ,~, , )..; !JY'j' \." '"r .Il'-' I ~ r~ v~ ~\ .-4.-,--:, ,":', . '." '.J {j '(K"\ ~ l--\ ./~ ,-'\ . --- ~"" .'.':-.., ....... '" " - ~ .,' ="",.. .<.,~ i/.,""''' . ____,," ~ - ~""""IV" ',5>~ l::: ;:,' ,\\Y ~~ ~,-;::s.w" w >>-=,'; ;#"".'r.r,jji~.. ~. -.:;~t: ',..' ~ 7; -- -' l' ~ \"~'S!~~lit}tf.J.~t~l~i~.F14t:~:~: :;:,..'~ I-< \-\?~ "l>iC~~ '~.,w'{,,;.. t~r.W;,r,,:~.fj'b"';;'-'" ~ r..~..,.-' ". ".,;'" ~~ c:(;:.":i''':p'' .. ~ = ~c<A \ \ . '" ,~;;l'W.S'1<"":" .. " --. ~ " I ' :f\\" IY<' \ ,-- .~~""..~ 't! "W"- ~~ T~.tlfl~'?iC: >s~, w~'\ ,,<<" ~ : >", ~i; [l:l ~ I ,. A ',,,",U '.<. ,,' ~' ~ ' t: ..., : {::.L?>"" f\ \." n ~~~~' ~,..~ " ~ ~I i t:: ~'I<:\ '~'- ~~ m> ~. :>W ~ ,," _ .~ ' ,-r""'" " W' _ :--l -'c ""[\ . \" :-\;. '~:;l~~' .~ ~r\ "\ ! , :>; "'u y '.? .... -<\",,' ",. ~ · ~ ~ ':..J ~~. ~.\ ~ $ ~~~~.;'''~ ~ Qr '~f11 ~ ..,. J r- ~ ::; -<}'tv" ,A" -< ,0- 1'&':~ ,e.= ="" I .-'\ >-' ~ .../I,~...:rL.-' ~ \ ~~ ~y~~ \ \" '..<v '!': ~ rj;:J c.. '(~' .~ y.y -\~ ~/' 'i;J C l.r' \ , \ ~ --. . )..f,~ :r 7"- ....u '" ~' .,Jr. ~\Joo' ~ ~..J, .1-"\ ~ /fj u ~: i0 ~ ~ ~y.. . 1,7.-/ . ~ ..J 0- -< W 0: -< ; i ... I .. I It) >. CD c: J " .. Q iIi .. " Q LEGEND ACCIDENT . SUMMARY BY TYPES 1 Y YEAR. :' i-MO\IIN'MOTOR VEH TYPC FATAL 1N.lI.IR PFf'J TOT,d1 YFAR MVoM OT'H,<"R TOTAl) , I--PEOESTIUAN RT.ANGL OJ i7 d I ~tJ1 I9fV ~ . .:r-" .... =PARKED VEHICLE HE AD ON tII rzl 1000 r-J ~ ~ ;r- SIDE SWP ~ IIf 100/ C FIXED OBJECT MV.'I't.D -~ RDP. DAMAGE FIXED De. a jj ~PERSONAL INJURY OTHERS ffl1h III ~ I .... FATAL '. TOTAL ~ 2A/J.r ~ YAz TOTAL 3 tl ,s 3 DATE I. COMPILED BY 07'- ...1 ABREV/A TION i": - iic\'cll DCI - Drlvine Under Influenc. EO - l,uiy=ent Violation FTC - cl OVin; too Closely HR - Hit and tun l1.C - laprop.r Lane Chanll ~ , INATT - lnattentioa a: 653 ~:c - MOlore,'cl. 'ID - ,.deltrian f VO - Vision Oblcurr...nt VR~ - Violatton of ai~ht-of-WDV -J T -1 --r 651 rss - Vtol~tlon of Stor Sl~n . ~r- VTS - Violation of tr. fie Si~n~l VB - Uns3ie lackin, 641 us - Un.lt. Start I CUT - Un.lt. U-Turn gl I ~ST - Wrone Std. 01 load 1r,.aIt. 632 . xs - Eac.l.ivI Spe.d I fp.rCl-!'l ~v, ~I 605 1/ C\ c ::cr.~" 52; I 611 I 617 , 152! I au t:1 .- - 1 z - I 1I , - -J I t . -J ~ , I. ~ ~ . ~ .. - -;... - ~ - ~ - -I - t:1 VI' 0,," VI , ~ ~".:I'-.' .u.tr V.I L.ai-. . ..1t.-U~ ~vc: 107' t- . % GREG y,. I East Naples Street ~, ROGERS , 1101 J - .. n ~1 ELEM. ~ .. -It SCHOOL - , - ;..- .F >jbC ro Av nue " ~WN .v DfTlVJol~ TITLE COLLISION DIAGRAM gATE ,,/36 J fi7. . ""'" ""'" '" /,2 ,:Joe? I . . LEGEND ACC/DENT . SUMMARY BY TYPES ~ Y 'FAR. ~ _MOVIN'MOTOR VEH ryPC F'A rAL INJIIR PF" rr>r,A' YF'LJR MV.AI" MV.~r. OT'HF'R mr,A1 ~PEPESTRIAN RT.ANGL a ,II! III fiV.ir ,,.~ , . II , IElPARKED VEHICLE HEAD ON -. II -", . ,,"0 f/I IS . SIDE SWP . III III . "'11 . , , C FIXED OBJECT MV..PED I! . .- . "":I. e a .. ROP. DAMAGE FIXED oa - fie -olr ,'1f,61 ~ PERSONAL ..JURY OTHERS - - .. m ~FATAL TOTAL ~ ."/,, - ~ TOTAL , ~ , " DAre COMPILED BY /)In uJ./k I~ Ci I Pac fic . East Naples .fP=VI ~ " "'-21.", o:ao& III N~ 11 . , I 1% to) ~ c :E !!lIT .>C~/03 A3R:vIA TION i": - Jic\'ch DCI - Drlvint Under Influence EO - Egu1,mcnt ViolAtion FTC - ftl10vinG too Close17 tl~ - Hie and ~un lLC _ Inproper &.ane ChaDle l~ATT - Inattention t:C - !Sotorc\'c!. ,tD - 'edeltrian . fO - Vision Oblcurr...nt \'1': - \'iDlac1on of a1r,ht-of-l.:a,,' vss - Violation of Scop SiFft . \~S - V101~t1on of traflic 11~na UI - Unsafe lackin, US - Unl.t. Scate L~T - Unllf. v-turn a.:ST - "rone S1d. of IN, XS - Ixc..,..' ''''. TZTL.I: COLLISION DIAGRAM ~ 'l /.2"';"/ ,) A . . ~-i~ ~uctnl S:zo ~-At> A )(-,';1 /1J..,d .:2:'Ir-~:sS P.M. -M. '~ E.IJ/rPLES ~/hET .. ~ "C,fIUi.A VISTA . ~STOF' - n:: ....STSCV TILI.~~ 8..s 20' I zo' 1<19: NQl:LT)f lIOV S&:~aov F0>c.8eoW AI/E" ~ 8 :: loII5$'Tl'olJN 1 ~o' J . Nt> IVl> AID D f'\~TE. 5-"-91- LOCATION' &tJt..I\ESSr. \ ~O'".ve.. ......... 1 . D TIMEA.fo( A A B B C C D . T~ Ichool ao. Adu' ao. Ichoolao. Adul age IcI'loOl ao. A" age IcI'loOla,. AM age I ~~~ ;,lEa ':I'~8':~ , I ~WS . . I , 3 WB I , ~;3f.g:l(9 / / "i .s6 JI.f w,a .3 VJ6 , s8 00 r:"". '!: 01./ ./ / -OTAL I / 8 flJ 1'1 .5 I 0 33 . 0 , EMARKS' , , - T1MEr.,.t . . - 1~--;2:00 / / I wB - :Oo..,1~30 / /. . """'" . / / j . ',i':l/S' Ol.. EB J).1J~ .1IS'-3:oo V / '( Ala 10 . , sS ~ wS (2-'1 .OTAL J 5 ~ . ILl " ~ doO , . . . . .ot, PEDESTRIAN COUNTS ., S.fetV Commission Minutes _4, 1992 U I.J Of'.! r:~ ,.,. Rl '.'".... , r.t!~ r l}!' t !.yr ~ ". rr~"~ ~k. jl:.D:r.;~~.. ~"I VOTE ON MOnON: Motion Ipprov.d 1-' wI1h CommIallon.r Pins votlnll no. MSC IM.tacla) to plec. I pe_.nt b8rr\er 8t the kltara.ctIon of Apach. DrIv. 8ftd T"'lIraph C8nyon ROld now. Motion dies for lICk of Hcond. Commllslon.r M.tacl. Hid th.t he did not "' I raason to _It thirty d.ys If ....r. was I Hfety problem whil. contr.ctualld..s w.r. being ras.arched. Hal Rosenberg Hid that was not mff's racommendation In the Agenda Statement to lnatall a b.rrlcade, but It was the prerogstiv. of .... Commilllon to make the motion. This option was not publish.d to affect.d citizens. MSC 1Th0m.slPltts) to pl.ce a temporary barrier 8t the klt.ra.ction of Apach. Drlv. 8nd T.legr.ph C.nyon Ro.d now, remove It during the three day ra-rout. period. 8nd replace It eft.r the re-rout. period. Approved 6-1 with Commissioner Chidester voting no. Mr. Fulton r.turned to the microphone to say th.t.t the HOA meeting that was attended by City st.ff. the Issue of prohibiting left turns to Apache Drive from T.legreph Cenyon Road was raised. and that no.e homeowner agreed with this option. 'Mr. Fulton said a vast majoritY of the homeowners did n nt to see the Intersection closed, Mr, Fulton asked wh.t would happen when a serious accident o red at Telegraph Canyon end Otay LIkes Roads and the Inttrttction needed to be closed. This his h.ppened IIvera' times before and the police dep.rtment re-routes traffic onto Ap.che Drive, If a medi.n Is pl.ced, this c.nnot occur. 8. REPORT. Request for Stop Signs It east N.pl.. Street Ind Foxboro Ave'nue St.ff received. r.quest from the Foxhllls Homeown.rs Associltion Pr.sident to Install In IU,wlY atop It the inters.ction of East N.ples Street Ind Foxboro Avenue to help f.cllit.te the school crossing and incre.se the Iv.iI.ble sight dist.nce. Mr. River. reviewed.... Iccident history of the Interttction. St.ff's recommendation Is that the S.fetV Commission deny the r.quest for In IU,w.y atop It the Intersection of east Naples Street Ind Foxboro Avenue Ind thlt luff: 11 extend the red curb elong the louth curb line west of this Interl.ction by 50' Ind 21 continu. to work .wIth .... Chul. Vist. Elem.nury School District to ke.p .... !andsclplng trlmm.d 8t the lOuthweSt comer of thll Interttction. Chair BrIden reld e lett.r Into .... record by Ms. Marianne Gibson who opposed staff'l r.comm.ndltlon. Mr. Le. E1lwor1h.I64 Ntntuck.t Drive. Chute VIsta CA "9". reprettntlng the Foxhllls Homeowners Assocl.tlon 1htnktd StIff for the study....y performed end IIld.... recomm.ndltlon for.... extended red curb WIS e good improv.m.nt. He explllnld thlt .... crest on EIst Nlp"s Street Clus.d I light h.z.rd 'or relid.nu trying to exit Foxboro A ",nut Ind with Clra perked on .... roadway, It it difficult to., Mr. Elsworth understood that ItOP Ilgns wert not designed for lpetd control. but Clrs lpeed I . numb.r of vehicles hlv. Incrllsed alnc. the dev.lopment of Sunbow. H. f.1t I atop Ilgn w pr."'nt I Hrloul Iccident Ind make the Inters.ction lifer. . MSUC 1Th0meslPlns) to ICC.pt ltaff's recommend.tlon to deny the requ.st for 8ft e"-way Itop 8t the klttra.ctlon of East Nlples Strltt 8nd Foxboro Avenu. 8ftd th.t staff: "ext.nd the red curb "onll the 10uth curb 11n. west of thll klttra.ction by 10' 8ftd 21 contInu. to work wI1h the Chull Vlatl Elementery School District to keep the ItndsClpln1l trimmed 8t the IOVthwest comer of thit klteraection. }).;:1.; D-IO \ MINUTES OF A REGULAR MI!ETING OF THE CHULA VISTA SAFETY COMMISSION Thursday, December 10, 1992 7:03 p.m. Council Chambers Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER ~ 1. Roll Call: Present: Chair Thomas, Vice Chair Padilla, Commissioners Chidester, Koester, and Pitts Excused Absence: Commissioners Braden and Matacia Also Present: Hal Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer; Frank Rivera, Associate Traffic Engineer; Sgt. Tom Schaefer, Police Sergeant; Shirley Buxton, Recording Secretary 2. Pledoe of Alleoiance/Silent Praver 3. Ooenino Statement Read by Chair Thomas 4. Aooroval of Minutes August 13, 1992 and November 12, 1992 August 13, 1992 - No action taken. MSC IKoester/Chidesterl to approve the Safety Commission Minutes of November 12, 1992 as presented. Approved 4-0-2-1 with Vice Chair Padilla abstaining and Commissioners Braden and Matacia absent. MEETING AGENDA ') 5. REPORT on Traffic Concerns for 100 block of E Street Frank Rivera presented staff's report. Chair Thomas asked if the delineators mentioned in the report were the same delineators being used in the Country Club area. Frank Rivera said they were the same delineators. Chair Thomas if the 8' spacing between delineators would be adequate. Hal Rosenberg said they had found the 8' spacing satisfactory, but if there were any problems, delineators could be spaced closer together. Vice Chair Padilla asked the fiscal impact was of the painted median. Frank Rivera said the cost for the painted median was approximately $300. MSC (Thomas/Pitts I the Safety Commission recommend to the City Council that a raised asphalt median be installed on E Street between Second Avenue and the 100 block of Minot Avenue. Approved 5-0-2 with Commissioners Braden and Matacia absent. 6. REPORT on Request for an All-Way Stop at E. Naples Street and Foxboro Avenue -, J :1-') ~ D-II - Frank Rivera presented staff's report. Mr. Rivera added that new traffic counts were just completed and the intersection still did not meet the warrants necessary to install an all-way stoP. MSC (Chidester/Padilla) the Safety Commission deny the request for an all-way stop at tha intersection of East Naples and Foxboro Avenue. Approved 5-0-2 with Commissioners Braden and Mataciaabsent. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item J.3 Meeting Date 1/26/93 REVIEWED BY: Report on Request for Proposals (RFP) for operation of Chula Vista Transit (CVT) and maintenance of CVT bus fleet I , Director of Public Works f~\ City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolU ITEM TITLE: SUBMITTED BY: The last RFP to solicit proposals for operation of CVT and maintenance of the CVT fleet was issued in February 1988. As a result of that RFP process, ATC/Vancom was selected as the CVT contract operator for a three-year term with an optional two-year extension to June 26, 1993. Transit staff has prepared an RFP to be issued in February 1993 to solicit proposals for a management services contract to operate and maintain CVT buses beginning July 1, 1993. This report summarizes the significant requirements of the RFP. RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this report and authorize staff to issue an RFP for CVT operation and fleet maintenance. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Attached for Council's information (Attachment 1) are the specifications and requirements portion of the proposed RFP (Sections I-VIII) which includes the selection and evaluation process and the statement of work, and the Technical Proposal Form. This RFP is similar to the one issued in February 1988, although some changes have been made. The intent of these changes is to achieve two general objectives: to clarify and make more specific certain requirements in the RFP; and to add certain requirements which staff believes will improve contractor performance and service quality. The most significant requirements are summarized below for Council's information. (Please note: Items underlined in the RFP attachment are not changed in the RFP, but are for emphasis for the benefit of the proposers. ) Section liB - Tentative Schedule {Pace 3 of the RFPl - The schedule of events for the procurement process is contained in this section. The objective is to select a contact operator by April 27. This allows a two-month period for start-up in the event that a new contractor is selected. Section IIC - Selection (Pace 3 of RFPl - This section discusses the selection process, which involves the following: Transit staff reviews each proposal for responsiveness. J;J --') Page 2. Item J ;$ Meeting Date 1/26/93 An evaluation panel reviews each responsive proposal based on qualitative criteria and assigns proposals a score of up to 60 points. The panel then examines each proposer's cost. The panel recommends a proposer to Council based on consideration of high qualitative score and reasonable cost. Section IV - Evaluation Criteria (Pace 7 of RFP) - This section discusses the evaluation criteria that will be used to evaluate proposals. There are three types of evaluation criteria: non-scored criteria; qualitative criteria. which will be assigned a maximum of 60 points; and cost. One of the non-scored criterion (IV A 1 l. specifies that in order to be considered responsive, the proposer or the proposer's Location Manager must have at least three years' experience in providing publicly funded fixed route bus transportation service on a system of comparable size as CVT. Under the qualitative evaluation criteria section (lVBl. the basic categories for evaluation have not changed. These categories. and points assigned to each include: Approach to System Management (maximum 30 points); Maintenance Capability (maximum 15 points); Experience (maximum 10 points); and References (maximum 5 points). One major change included in the" Approach to System Management" section (Page 9. Section IV B1 (c) is to specify a minimum salary range for drivers of $7.00-$9.50 per hour after a training/probationary period, and a starting salary of $ 1 0.00 per hour for road supervisors. These salaries would be applicable during the first contract year beginning July 1. 1993. This section also includes a statement that "The City also encourages provision of reasonable benefits for contractor employees." The specification of salaries for these two positions was made primarily for two reasons: to establish salaries for these positions that are comparable to other private contract operations in the San Diego area; and to attempt to reduce the turnover rate for these positions. especially bus drivers. Salaries that are competitive with other private. fixed route transit operators should result in less turnover, reduced training costs for new drivers. and enhanced CVT services quality. Attachment 2 shows the current driver hourly salary range for other fixed route transit systems in the San Diego area. Please note that these salaries were in effect as of January 1993 and do not include any bonus provisions that may apply to the various systems. As indicated on Attachment 2. driver salaries for the systems operated under private contract (National City Transit. County Transit. A TC/MTDB contract services. and SCOOT/CVT) are all lower than the publicly operated systems (San Diego Transit. North County Transit. and San Diego Trolley). However. within the private system operations, there is also a variation of starting wages, with National City Transit being the highest at $7.18 after training and probation. In the current contract between ATC/Vancom and the Teamsters Union. the hourly wage for drivers after training/probation will increase from $6.00 to $6.25 effective May 1993. Therefore. the proposed starting wage of $7.00 contained in the RFP will be a 12% increase. In addition. based on the current contract between SCOOT and ATC/Vancom. J3",:J... Page 3, Item I;J Meeting Date 1/26/93 if this driver salary range were effective under the current contract, salary pay would increase an estimated $125,000, or $170,000 including fringe benefits, which represents an appropriate 8% total contract cost increase. The proposed $10.00 minimum starting salary for Road Supervisors would be an approximate $0.75 increase for these positions. In summary, the intent of the RFP is to emphasize quality in terms of both operations and maintenance at the most reasonable cost. FISCAL IMPACT: Based on the current contract between SCOOT and A TC/Vancom, the proposed specified salaries in the RFP would result in a contract cost increase of approximately 8%. Based on preliminary Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 4.0 funds for next fiscal year, sufficient TDA funds will be available to fund CVT operations, including the anticipated cost increases for salaries and benefits. File: 05.027 WPC F:IHOMEIENGINEERIBlllGICVTRPT.AS J :J';J /I.J- JI-- ~JJ I1-TTfJC/fllfevr I _ . REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR OPERATION OF CHULA VISTA TRANSIT (CVT) AND MAINTENANCE OF CVT BUS FLEET . Questions regarding the procurement process should be directed to: Bill Gustafson, Transit Coordinator City of Chula Vista 707 "F" Street Chula Vista, CA 91910. (619) 691-5260 , February 1993 . 1.1' v TABLE OF CONTENTS ""'\ I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 n. PROCUREMENT PROCESS ............................. 3 m. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS .......................... 6 IV. EV ALUA TION CRITERIA .............................. 7 V. STATEMENT OF WORK.............................. 11 VI. PAYMENT OF SERVICES PROVIDED.. . ... . .. . .. .. .. .. ..21 VII. COLLECTION OF FAREBOX REVENUES.. .... . .. . .... '" 26 VIII. INSURANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 ........ . TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FORM /VdT :IIVCl.UOt!1> Iv c.o.....""c;L ('lfc/rcr. PRICE PROPOSAL FORM ATTACHMENT 1 - DRAFT AGREEMENT ATTACHMENT 2 - PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE SUPPLEMENT ATTACHMENT 3 - EXPENSE OBJECT CLASS DEFINITIONS ATTACHMENT 4 - CVT SCHEDULES AND SYSTEM MAP ATTACHMENT 5 - CVT DRIVER DAILY RECORDIDEFECT SHEET ATTACHMENT 6 - BUS CLEANING CHECKLIST ""'\ ) J--" . REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR OPERATION OF CHULA VISTA TRANSIT I. Introduction The City of Chula Vista is soliciting proposals from qualified fmus to operate ChuJa Vista Transit (CV1), a fixed route transit system serving the City of Chula Vista and contiguous unincorporated areas in the County of San Diego. A TClVancom currently is operating CVT under contract with the South Coast Organization Operating Transit (SCOOT), a Joint Powers Agency between the City of ChuJa Vista and County of San Diego. SCOOT will be dissolved effective midnight June 30, 1993; the City of Chula Vista will assume sole authority over CVT effective July I, 1993. ATClVancom drivers are represented by Teamsters Union Local No. 481. SCOOT last issued Request for Proposals (RFP) to operate CVT in Spring 1988 and ATClVancom was awarded the contract to operate CVT commencing on July I, 1988. As a result of this RFP, it is anticipated that the City of Chula Vista will select a contract operator on or before Mav 1. 1993 and the new contract term will begin no later than July I, 1993 and terminate on June 30, 1996. The contract will contain a two-year option at a negotiated cost, until June 30, 1998. Cost proposals will be based on the contract term beginning on July I, 1993. . For the current fiscal year FY 1992-93, CVT operates approximately 1,120,000 annual revenue miles on eleven routes with a projected 2, I 80,000 total annual riders and $670,000 annual cash fare revenue. Service is provided seven days a week with reduced service on Saturdays and Sundays. Proposers shall submit proposals based on 1,125,000 revenue miles and 89,300 total hours estimated to be operated in FY 1993-94. (TOTAL HOURS is defined as the total number of hours in fixed route service a vehicle is operated, including hours consumed while traveling to and from Chula Vista Public Works yard. NOT included under total hours are: driver's "call time"; vacation/sick leave; charter service; bus exchanges; training; and road testing.) However, since the term of this agreement will be for a period of three years, modifications to the system routing and mileage may be made during the term of the contract as discussed in Section VI A. Chula Vista is a city with a 145,000 approximate population located eight miles south of the City of San Diego. Major areas and activity centers served by CVT include: Chula Vista Shopping Center, Plaza Bonita Shopping Center, Civic Center, Third Avenue commercial area, Southwestern College, Rohr Industries, and numerous public schools. In addition, CVT also coordinates its service with the San Diego Trolley, San Diego Transit Corporation (SDTC), National City Transit (NCT), and Route 932, a contract service operated by MTDB. Coordination between CVT and other area operators is accomplished primarily by the following: timed transfers at specific locations; a regional transfer policy agreement; and a regional monthly pass program agreement. . The CVT fleet consists of 31 buses. Major specifications are presented in Section V.B.5. CVT service requires: Monday, 21 buses on 10 routes; Tuesday through Friday, 22 buses WPC FNIOMINiNGINEEINJ/LLfJ\f3/.92 13" 7 Page I on 11 routes; Saturday, 17 buses on 11 routes; Sunday, 10 buses on 6 routes. There is no bus service on six holidays each calendar year. .--., The City will supply these 31 vehicles for contractor operation in CVT service. Contractor will furnish drivers and perform maintenance work on the 31 vehicles. Maintenance work performed on CVT vehicles will be monitored closely by City Transit staff and the City Fleet Manager. Proposers may submit proposals based on one or both of the following two (2) options: Option A: Maintenance of CVT buses, storage of buses and base of operations at City of Chula Vista Public Works Yard. Contractor to provide its own administrative/office facilities in mobile trailers similar to existing A TCIV ancom facilities. Option B: Maintenance of CVT buses, storage of buses, and base of operations offsite at a location furnished by contractor, at a distance no more than six (6) miles from the City of Chula Vista, Public Works Yard, 707 "F" Street. Contractor's responsibilities shall include but not be limited to: 1. Providing all personnel having management, operation, and maintenance expertise necessary to operate the system; 2. Operations supervision and dispatching. ~ 3. Fare collection and accounting. 4. Personnel administration; 5. Operation and maintenance of CVT buses. 6. Monitoring of on-time performance and road supervision. 7. Data collection and reporting. City's responsibilities shall include but not be limited to: 1. Service and route planning; . . 2. Establishing fare policies and fare structure; 3. Scheduling; 4. Marketing, including printing and distributing of public timetables and route system maps; .-. 5. Administration and monitoring of contract; WPC F,WOMBENG/NEEIM/LLG>43/.92 /Y-r Page 2 6. Bus stop signing and facilities maintenance. . 7. Monitoring of overall system operation and performance. In general, Contractor will be responsible for all matters pertaining to CVT day-to-day operations; City staff will be responsible for establishing system policies, overall management, and monitoring of contractor's performance. ll. Procurement Process A. General Proposals for this project !!!!ill be submitted in accordance with Section 1lI entitled "Submission of Proposals." This project requires special skills and expertise. B. Tentative Schedule The tentative schedule of events for this procurement is given below: Item Date (993) 1. RFP issued February 8 2. Pre-Proposal Conference February 18 . 3. Proposals due March 15 4. Proposal evaluation completed April 2 5. Award of contract by City Council April 27 6. Contractor starts service July 1 C. Selection 1. This RFP is for a management services contract requiring special skills, expertise, and operations and management capability. All timely proposals will be examined by City staff for responsiveness as def"med in Section IV.A. If deemed responsive, proposals will be examined by an evaluation panel and rated as described in Section IV.B. entitled, "Evaluation Criteria." The selection process will be as follows: a. The evaluation panel will review each proposal based on qualitative factors discussed in Section IVB, and assign each proposal a total score, with a maximum score of 60 points. . WPC F.VIOMUNGlNEE/NlILLGW3J.92 JJ-r Page 3 b. After the qualitative evaluation in Section IYB, the evaluation panel will examine the cost submitted by the proposer on the Price Proposal Form. """" c. Based on a consideration of high qualitative score and reasonable cost, the evaluation panel will recommend a finn for selection by the City Council. The evaluation panel mav request one or more !inns to make an oral presentation on its proposal before the panel makes a recommendation to the City Council. d. It should be emphasized that this selection process is a combination of cost and Qualitative factors. The award of this contract will not be based solelv upon low cost: nor will the award of contract necessarily be made to the proposer whose score is the highest as a result of the evaluation procedure outlined in the section "Evaluation Criteria" (Section IV). The Chula Vista City Council will award the contract to the proposer who best meets the needs of the Citv of Chula Vista for providing transit operations service. and maintenance of the CVT fleet at a reasonable cost. 2. Proposals will be evaluated on responses to questions and information contained in the Technical Proposal Form. Proposer's responses should be clear and specific. General or ambi gUOUS statements will be considered indicative of a lack of understanding of the scope of work reQuired for this contract. For example, statements about personnel to be hired by proposer without indicating the number of personnel and their duties, or inclusion of personnel in the proposal who will not be directly involved in CVT operations. will not be considered in the evaluation process. ..-, 3. The City reserves the right to withdraw this RFP at any time without prior notice. The City makes no representations that any agreement will be awarded to any proposer responding to this RFP. The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals 'responding to this RFP without indicating any reasons for such rejection(s). The City reserves the right to waive any minor irregularities as part of this RFP process. 4. Negotiations mayor may not be conducted with proposers. Therefore, proposers should make their proposal as advantageous to the City as possible, since selection may be made without discussion with any proposer. 5. All proposals and attached material submitted by proposers will be available for public review at the time of award by the City Council. 6. A draft agreement is included in this RFP as Attachment 1. -. WPC F.WOME.ENG/NEEINJ/lllM3/.92 /3-/t) Page 4 . . . D. RFP Addenda Any changes to this RFP will be made by addendum, sent by registered mail, return receipt requested. Proposer responses to all addenda shall be signed and attached to the respective Proposal Form. Failure to attach anv addenda shall cause the tlrotlosal to be considered non-restlonsive. Such tlrotlosals will be rejected. E. Federal Transtlortation Administration <FTA) Section 3 (e) Clearance of Public Transit Otlerators A proposal submitted by a public transit operator who is receiving or has received federal subsidy shall adhere to either of the following two requirements as part of the proposal: 1. A statement or certificate of compliance from the FT A or the operator's governing board that the proposal complies with Section 3 (e); or 2. Proposer shall submit a detailed breakdown of all cost allocations in proposer's bid ensuring compliance with Section 3 (e). Cost allocations shall insure that the full cost of operation with respect to this bid has been included in the cost proposal. F. Precontractual Extlenses Precontractual expenses are defined as expenses incurred by proposers and selected contractor in: 1. Preparing a proposal in response to this RFP; 2. Submitting a proposal to the City; 3. Negotiations (if any) with the City on any matter relating to the proposal; 4. Any other expenses incurred by proposer or contractor prior to date of award of any contract. " The City shall not be liable for any precontractual expenses incurred by any proposer or selected contractor. Proposers'shall not include any such expenses as part of the price proposed in response to this RFP. The City shall be held harmless and free from any and all liability claims or expenses whatsoever incurred by or on behalf of any person, or organization responding to this RFP. I:J~// Page 5 WPC F.WOMEViNGINEEfNj/lLCM3/.92 G. Verbal Agreement or Conversation .-, No prior, current, or post award verbal agreement or agreements with any officer, agent, or employee of the City shall affect or modify any terms or obligations of this RFP or any contract resulting from this procurement H. Special Funding Considerations Any contract resulting from this RFP will be financed with funds available under Article 4.0 of the California Transportation Development Act (TDA). The contract for this service is contingent upon the receipt of these funds. In the event that funding from this source is eliminated or decreased, the City reserves the right to terminate any contract or modify it accordingly. I. Alternatives and ExcePtions Proposers may not submit alternative proposals other than the two (2) options provided for in this RFP or take exception or make alterations to any requirements of the RFP. If more than one completed proposal is received from one organization for either options A and/or B, or alterations made thereto, all proposals from that organization will be reiected as nonresponsive. Since City desires to enter into one contract to provide all services as specified in this RFP, only those proposals to provide all services will be considered responsive. -... J. Preproposal Conference The Preproposal Conference will be held on Thursday. Februarv 18. 1993, starting at 10:00 a.m. in Conference Rooms 2/3 at Chula Vista Civic Center. 276 Fourth Ave.. Chula Vista. California. There are two main purposes of this Conference: to clarify any questions potential proposers may have about this RFP; and to present an opportunity for potential proposers to tour the Chula Vista Public Works Yard. Persons or firms intending to submit proposals in response to this RFP are strongly urged to attend this conference. III. Submission of Proposals Proposals must include eight (8) complete sets of signed copies of attached Technical Proposal Form and any additional sheets used to amplify responses to items in the Technical Proposal Form. Ei ght copies of the attached Price Proposal Form shall be submitted in a separate sealed envelope clearly marked Price Proposal Submitted By (Name of Proposer). Proposers may refer to Attachment 3, "Expense Object Class Definitions" for assistance in completing the Price Proposal Form. Proposals that do not include all required forms, correct number of complete copies, or do not have answers included for every question on all forms may be deemed nonresponsive and may be returned to the proposer. ........, WPC F.V10MlMNG/NEEJNJ/UfM3/.92 1~#J,;2. Page 6 . . . Proposals must be delivered to Bill Gustafson. Transit Coordinator. Chula Vista Public Works Buildinl!. 707 "F" Street. Chula Vista. California. 91910. Proposals must be received bv 2:00 p.m. on March 15. 1993. If mail delivery is used, the proposer should mail documents early enough to provide for arrival by this deadline. The proposer uses mail service at his own risk. City will not be liable or responsible for any late delivery of proposals. Proposals received after the date and time specified will not be considered, and will be returned to the proposer unopened. IV. Evaluation Criteria The evaluation component of this RFP process is divided into three parts: non-scored evaluation criteria; an evaluation of qualitative factors by a panel for a maximum score of 60 points; and a cost bid. Proposers may submit proposals for Option A and/or Option B as discussed in Sections I and IVC. Therefore each proposer mav submit a maximum of two options. Each option will be evaluated separately by the evaluation panel. Each evaluation panel member's score for each option will be averaged with all panel members' evaluation scores to determine one qualitative score for each option submitted. A. Non-Scored Evaluation Criteria. 1. In order to be considered a responsive proposer, the proposer/firm or proposer's Location Manager must have had at least three vears experience in providing publicly funded fixed-route bus transportation service of the same size as or larger than the CVT system in terms of total annual ridership (estimated 2,200,000) and/or total annual revenue miles (approximately 1,125,000). Therefore, a flnn which has operated onlv charter service, or school bus service, for example, will not be considered a responsive proposer. (pass/fail: Determination by City staff.) 2. Bonds Required In order to be considered a responsive proposer, the following bonding requirements must be submitted with the proposal: a) Bid Bond: equal to or greater than 10% of the first vear (FY 1993-94) proposed cost, b) Performance Bond. The proposal shall be accompanied bv a letter from a coroorate surety satisfactorv to City statim!: that proposer is bondable in the amount of $400.000. The successful contractor will be required to furnish a perfonnance bond as surety for the faithful perfonnance of this agreement within 10 days after selection by the City Council. The performance bond will be in the amount of $400,000. (passlFail: Detennination by City staff.) 3. City reserves the right to detennine if any proposal submitted in response" to the RFP shall be deemed responsive, and to waive any discrepancies or WPC F,WOMNNGINEEINJ/1liM3/.92 J' -IJ Page 7 minor irregularities pertaining to any proposal submitted in response to this RFP. --.. '1 B. Qualitative Evaluation Criteria (maximum of 60 points) 1. Approach to Svstem Management (maximum 30 points): An evaluation of how the proposer will ensure a high-quality, cost-effective, fIxed-route service. Considerations include: management processes; an effective safety program; key staff personnel and responsibilities that will be assigned exclusively to CVT operations, and plans to maintain a low turnover rate for bus driver staff, including employee salaries and benefIts proposed. In addition, City recognizes that the smooth and proper operation of the CVT fIxed route system depends largely on the competence, management ability, and experience of the Contractor's Location Manager, Operation Supervisor, Road Supervisors, and Maintenance Manager. Therefore, an evaluation will be made of the resumes and references of these key personnel whose names appear in the Technical Proposal Form. Following is a more detailed explanation of how the criteria will be evaluated. (a) Location Manager (maximum 5 points) POINTS ~. o 5 Experience: No operations management experience Experience: With system management experience of equal or larger system size than CVT (b) Operations Supervisor (maximum 5 points) POINTS o 5 Experience: No operations supervisory experience Experience: With system management or supervisory experience of equal or larger system size than CVT ~ WPC F:'JlOME-.ENGINEEJNJIUG43/.92 J;J...li Page 8 . . . (c) Manal!:ement Procram (maximum 20 points): Includes proposer's comprehensive plan for system start-up, dispatch location, and hiring and training of employees, and plans for minimizing driver turnover as described on page 9 of 11, Technical Pronosal Form. Please note: The City requires, as a minimum, a wage range of $7.00-$950 for Drivers and $10.00 for Road Supervisors during the first contract year after a probationary period which shall be described by proposer. The City also encourages provision of reasonable benefits for Contractor employees. POINTS o 10 Program nOl detailed or lacking quality control procedures. Detailed program to show how system will be operated to provide quality service. POINTS o 5 No detailed plan for minimizing driver tornover. Detailed plan for minimizing driver tornover. POINTS o 5 No commitment to interview and give special consideration to hiring existing employees. Commitment to interview and give special consideration to hiring existing employees. 2. Maintenance Canabilitv (maximum 15 points): An evaluation of the proposer's capability to carry out the required preventative maintenance and repair program as described on page 8 of 11, Technical Proposal Form. Consideration of personnel to be assigned exclusively to City operations and their experience; and an examination of maintenance costs shown in cost bid line items. These cost components for maintenance will be evaluated as indications of the proposer's understanding of the level of maintenance work to be performed. City and the evaluation panel may inspect existing or proposed maintenance operations and facilities. WPC F.'HOMNNGlNEEIM/1llN3/.92 13-1.>- Page 9 (a) Previous Maintenance EXDerience of Maintenance Manal!er (maximum 5 points) POINTS -... o 5 No previous maintenance experience of heavy duty diesel powered lranSit vehicles. Experience in maintaining heavy duty transit vehicles including installed hydraulic wheelchair lifts and registering fareboxes. (b) Maintenance Prol!Tam (maximum 10 points): Points for this critenon will be assigned based on a review of proposer's specific plans for an effective repair and maintenance program including Dlans for minimizing road calls and bus downtime due to mechanical breakdown or required body work; maintenance management technique to maximize and efficiently use available resources; whether a road call vehicle is provided or not; use of outside help to expedite repairs; and availability of technical expertise on complex repair problems. POINTS o 10 No detailed maintenance program for CVT buses. Detailed, comprehensive maintenance program for CVT buses including the experience and number of personnel directly involved exclusively to CVT operations. -... 3. EXDerience (maximum 10 points): Points for this criterion will be assigned based on a review of the length and amount of experience and relevancy of that experience which a proposer or Location Manager has had in management and operations of a fixed route public transit system of at least comparable size to CVT. This evaluation will also consider experience of personnel that will be directly involved in CVT operations. (Three [3] years' minimum experience required as per Section IV.A.) POINTS o 2 4 6 8 10 2-3 yrs experience 34 yrs experience 4-5 yrs experience 5-6 yrs experience 6-7 yrs experience -... WPC F:VlOMNiNGlNEElMlLLG\4Jl.92 I ::1-/ ~ Page 10 . . . 4. Evaluation of References (maximum 5 points): Evaluation panel members will contact at least three references listed by each proposer and will conduct an interview. A maximum of 5 points will be assigned for this criterion based on reference response which rates proposer on a scale from 5 to O. A score of "5" is "Excellent" and "0" means "Would Not Hire Again." C. Cost Total cost includes lump sum start-up costs, if any, and annual cost based on revenue miles. The total cost to be evaluated will include the total cost for the complete term of the contract In addition. ukase note the followinl!: In order to establish comparable costs between options A and B, City staff will add the following cost to the proposer's total three-year cost for each option as follows: Option A, $116,000; Option B $0. The $116,000 is an estimated cost charged to the Transit Division by the City of Chula Vista for use of City facilities over the three year contract term. Under Option A, proposer's cost bid should lli!1 include any rental or lease costs to the City of Chula Vista, but should include costs associated with providing office or maintenance storage/work spaces (such as office trailers, spare parts, sheds, etc.) that are lli!1 provided by the City of Chula Vista. V. Statement of Work A. Scope of Services 1. Contractor shall provide the management, technical, and operating personnel, service, equipment, and maintenance necessary for the operation of CVT services specified in this section including all exhibits. There are two options for contractor provision of facilities. These two options are as follows: A. Maintenance of CVT buses, storage of buses and base of operations at City of Chula Vista Public Works Yard. Contractor to provide its own administrative/office facilities in mobile trailers similar to existing A TCIV ancom facilities. " B. Maintenance of CVT buses, storage of vehicles, and base of operations off site at location provided by contractor. For Option A, buses may be fueled at City yard. For those proposers bidding on Option A ulease note: The City of Chula Vista Fleet Manager will provide limited space for contract operator to share City of Chula Vista maintenance facility. The location of the City Public Works Yard and Maintenance Facility is 707 "F" Street, Chula Vista, California. Contract operators bidding on Option A will have WPC F.'l!OMNNG1NE.E/M1UlM31.92 );3-/7 Page 1l priority use of one bay at the City's maintenance yard. However, storage facilities and space for contract operator are limited. For those proposers .......... choosing to bid Option A, contractor will be required to erect a storage shed for spare parts and office trailers for Contractor's administrative functions at sites in the City yard to be determined by the Fleet Manager. Before submitting a proposal based on ()Ption A. proposers should contact the City Transit Coordinator to discuss specific arrangements regarding sharing City of Chula Vista facilities for maintenance. Anv and all costs related to contractor providing additional facilities at the Chula Vista maintenance yard relative to this contract will be the responsibility of the contractor and should be included in the cost proposal for Option A. 2. City staff shall be responsible for all policy, administrative and overall management of CVT service including: determining and specifying routes and schedules; conducting service and route planning activities; providing . bus stop signs, route maps, service schedules, and marketing; and establishing fare policies. Contractor shall be responsible for CVT operations, fare collection, accounting, data collection and reporting, and insuring the implementation of all policies. 3. Contractor shall provide bus service on CVT routes 701, 702, 703,704, 705,706,707,708,709,711 and 712 as described in Attachment 3. Buses shall be operated on these routes according to the route descriptions and schedules included in Attachment 3 or any subsequent modification. City will supply: buses for this service; radio equipment, including an operating frequency; and registering fare boxes. .......... B. System Operation 1. Contractor shall operate the CVT system in compliance with CVT operating policies and all applicable federal, state and local laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 2. Management of day to day operation of the system and service will be vested in contractor's Location Manager who shall be thoroughly familiar with City's service area, policies, and system operation. The Location Manager will be available to meet with City staff in Chula Vista as deemed necessary by the Transit Coordinator. The Location Manager, or Contractor's management personnel, will be available to attend meetings pertaining to transit matters as deemed necessary by the City. Replacement of the Contractor's Location Manager will require written approval by the City at least 14 days in advance of proposed replacement. 3. In addition to the Location Manager, Contractor shall provide a knowledgeable, and experienced Operations Supervisor and a sufficient number of Road Supervisors to monitor CVT operations during all operating hours. The Operations Supervisor and Road Supervisors shall .......... WPC F.'J/OMNNG/NEEINJ/LUN3/.92 /")"'11' Page 12 . . . be responsible for supervlsmg and monitoring all activities of bus operators, including schedule adherence, road conditions, wheelchair lift operation, fare media collection, and bus operator performance, behavior, and observance of system procedures. 4. Road Supervisor duties shall also include: distributing transit information (CVT schedules, system maps, etc.) to various locations in Chula Vista (currently about 8 locations); and posting "service change" notices at affected bus stops are required. 5. The following equipment will be provided by City for CVT operation: a) Buses Rebuilt Miles (10/1/92) Cumulative CVT Veh. Seated Miles No. Last 4 Digits of VIN #'s Year Capacity (10/1/92) Engine Transmission 001 Orion #1105 1984 39 388,000 23,000 23,000 002 Orion #1106 1984 39 330,000 12,000 12,000 003 Orion #1094 1984 30 342,000 12,000 12,000 004 Orion #1096 1984 30 342,000 6,000 6,000 005 Orion # 1 097 1984 30 330,000 78,000 165,000 006 Orion #1098 1984 30 332,000 80,000 80.000 007 Orion # 1 099 1984 30 366,000 81.000 81,000 008 Orion #1100 1984 30 336.000 6,000 6,000 009 Orion #1102 1984 30 293,000 75,000 75,000 010 Orion #1103 1984 30 342,000 140..000 140,000 011 Orion #1104 1984 30 366,000 4,000 4,000 012 Goshen #5820 1992 25 Delivered after 10/1/92 013 Goshen #5822 1992 25 Same as 012 014 Orion #1377 1986 39 288,000 4,500 45,000 015 Orion #1378 1986 39 303,000 60,000 60,000 016 Orion #2524 1990 39 123,000 017 Chance Trolley #7460 1989 18 51,000 018 Chance Trolley #7461 1989 18 50,000 019 Chance Trolley #7462 1989 18 47,000 020 Chance Trolley #7463 1989 18 49,000 It1'C F.'J/OMNNGINEEJNJIUG\431.92 1:]"17 Page 13 021 Orion 1/2525 1990 39 114,000 022 Orion 1/2526 1990 39 117,000 023 Orion 1/2809 1991 39 70,000 024 Orion 1/2810 1991 39 81,000 025 Orion 1#2811 1991 39 81,000 026 Orion 1/2812 1991 39 82,000 027 Orion 1/2813 1991 39 76,000 028 Orion 1/2814 1991 39 75,000 029 Orion 1/2815 1991 39 78,000 030 Goshen 1/5823 1992 25 Same as 012 031 Goshen 1/5824 1992 25 Same as 012 b) Engines (1) (2) (3) (3) c) Goshens: Orions (0001.0011,11014, II01S): Orions (11016,11021.0029): Trolleys: Transmissions (1) (2) (3) (4) Goshens: Orions (IlOO1.0011,11014, II01S): Orions (11016,11021.0029): Trolleys: Cummins 6BT5.9 Detroit Diesel 6V92T AC Detroit 6V92T A Caterpillar Diesel, 3208-175 Allison AT-545 Allison 747 Voith D863 Allison AT-545 d) All CVT buses are wheelchair accessible. The wheelchair lift on 13 Orion buses is manufactured by Environmental Equipment Corp.; the lift on 10 Orion buses is manfactured by LiftU; the lift on the 4 Goshens is manufactured by Braun; the lift on the 4 Trolleys is manufactured by Mobil Tech. e) Radio Equipment - CVT Buses #001-031 -- Motorola Spectra UHF AS Mobile Units, Model DA5KM wI handset. f) Fare Boxes All buses: GFI Cents-a-Bill Electronic fareboxes W/'C F.'WOMElENG/NEElNJILLGI43/.92 Page /4 I:J'~O ,-, ,-, ,-, . . . g) Miscellaneous equipment on each bus: 3 triangular reflectors, passenger counter, transfer cutter, f1I'St-aid kit, fire extinguisher, and schedule rack. 6. There will be no scheduled CVT service on the days the City of Chula Vista observes the following holidays: Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, New Year's Day, Memorial Day, and July 4, except for Route 708 which has its own operating days. 7. Driver Hiring a) Contractor shall recruit and hire a sufficient number of drivers assigned exclusively to CVT service. Contractor shall have a sufficient number of backup drivers readily available for any and all contingencies such as absenteeism, illness, and other personnel emergencies without a disruption of CVT service. b) As a condition of employment under the agreement, all personnel assigned to CVT service must pass tests for drug and alcohol use. Drug and alcohol screening shall be conducted prior to employment in CVT service, and at a minimum, at two (2) year intervals in conjunction with a physical exam for Class B license renewal. Screening at more frequent intervals may be conducted by Contractor as permitted by law. c) The City requires Contractor to have all employees fmgerprinted and City will conduct a criminal history check on all personnel assigned to CVT service. The results of the criminal history check will be confidential information and City will not release this information to Contractor. However, information obtained on the criminal record of an individual assigned to CVT service may warrant CVT requesting Contractor to remove individual from CVT service. City will pay the cost of fingerprinting. 8. Driver Training and Procedures. Contractor shall provide such periodic driver training, orientation, and road supervision as is appropriate to fully familiarize all drivers assigned to CVT service with operating schedules, routes, transfer policy, and performance standards--including courtesy, safety, and schedule adherence of the CVT system. Training and orientation by contractor shall include no less than the following: a) DRIVER TRAINER 1) Must have a State of California, Department of Motor Vehicles approval to certify Class 2 driver's licenses, with WPC FNIOMf!.ENG/NEElM/I.IJ:M3/.92 I;) '-J-J PagelS a passenger, air brakes, and automatic transmission endorsements. .......... 2) Must have at least one year experience as an instructor. 3) Must be a National Safety Council Defensive Driving Instructor or equivalent. b. NEW DRIVERS 1) Must receive and pass the eight-hour minimum National Safety Council Defensive Driving Course or equivalent. This includes practical applications. 2) Must receive at least 20 hours of driving instruction (including both group and individual instruction) on CVT routes. At least one hour of actual driving for each route will be included. 3) At least four hours of classroom instruction regarding transfer policies, bus check-out procedures, accident report writing, vehicle code. and schedules, routes, and fares of the CVT system will be included. ~ 4) At least eight hours of the training program shall be devoted to the operation of lift equipment and courteous treatment of handicapped individuals. The lift training shall include instruction on the operation of lifts and tiedowns, experience boarding and alighting individuals in wheelchairs under various conditions and empathy training to help new operators gain insight into the special needs and specific obstacles handicapped individuals may encounter using public transportation. 5) Two hours' orientation to CVT system policies, procedures, and driver performance standards to be given to each driver by the City Transit Coordinator or his designated representative following completion of the four-hour classroom instruction by Con,tractor. 6) The City Transit Coordinator or his representative shall make the fmal determination as to the qualifications of prospective CVT drivers based on the satisfactory completion of the aforementioned training and orientation. Contractor shall provide City with a list of drivers who have completed the specified driver training program and shall update this list as necessary. .......... WPC F,WOMNNG/NEEIrJJ/IJ.G\43/,92 1:1' .J,).. Page 16 . . . 9. Driver Procedures Contractor shall require all drivers assigned to CVT service to adhere to the following CVT procedures: a) All buses shall be driven in a safe manner. Care should be exercised to ensure that passengers are safely seated or have safely deboarded before starting the bus. b) Adherence to schedule and routing is mandatory except for unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of contractor and his employees. (For example, road closures, breakdowns, etc.) c) Drivers shall be courteous to all passengers. d) Drivers shall carefully complete the CVT driver's daily record and Bus Defect Sheet as well as take accurate regular daily (and specially requested) passenger counts. e) Drivers shall wear uniforms which are similar in nature while on duty. CVT patches will be affIxed to the right sleeves of jackets and/or shirts. f) Drivers shall not smoke or eat on the bus at any time and shall enforce same policy for passengers as well. g) Drivers must provide transfer slips to passengers in conformance with CVT transfer policy upon request of passenger. h) Drivers shall not play am/fm radios on the bus at any time. i) Drivers must ensure that proper and exact fares are placed in the fare box by passengers. If any problems arise the drivers may accept the fare and inform the passenger to contact the CVT offIce. Under no circumstances will a driver handle any cash from passengers. " j) Drivers must notify Contractor's Location Manager or dispatcher immediately if the vehicle i.s u!1able to c.;mtinue operation. This information will also be immediately relayed to San Diego Transit Information and to City Transit Office by the Contractor. k) Drivers will report to the dispatchers any unusual occurrences observed on the road and any vandalism or damage to City property. WPC FNIOME>ENG/NEE/Nl/Ll.lN3/ .92 13'-'-;1 Page 17 I) All extra board drivers shall undergo driver training specified in this section before being assigned to Chula Vista Transit """'" m) For option A, drivers are responsible for properly securing and locking the gate to the City Yard at "F" Street and Woodlawn Avenue. This gate must be secured by drivers after 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, all day on weekends, and at any other time directed by the Transit Coordinator or his representative. n) For option A, drivers shall park vehicles in the City of Chula Vista yard in specific locations designated by the Transit Coordinator or his designated representative. 0) Drivers will not allow any articles longer than 5 feet to be carried on the bus by passengers. p) Prior to start of shift, drivers will conduct a "walk around" inspection of their vehicle, test and operate the wheelchair lift, and fill out a "Bus Condition Report." If the driver is uncertain about the safety condition of the vehicle, the vehicle must be inspected by maintenance personnel to determine if it is safe to operate. q) Drivers will be responsible for maintaining cleanliness of buses while on duty. -. r) Driver will not leave bus unattended with front door open as to allow passengers to board without having paid the correct fare. 10. The procedures in Section 9 shall not preclude the Contractor from enforcing its own policies and procedures which are not contrary to the above provisions. 11. Driver failure to follow the procedures in Section 9 shall be cause for Contractor to honor City Transit Coordinator's request for driver's dismissal from CVT service after appropriate written and/or verbal warnings have been given to Contractor by the City Transit Coordinator or his designated representative. Prior to Contractor reassigning driver previously dismissed from CVT service back.to CVT service, notice shall be given to the Transit Coordinator who will make a decision on whether or not this driver reassignment is acceptable to City. 12. Contractor shall provide a daily Vehicle Status Report to the Transit Office by 9:30 a.m. each weekday. The Report will list the narnes of drivers and their shift times, the bus number of those buses in-service and to which routes they are assigned, and the condition of each bus and wheelchair lift -. 13"~'I Page 18 WPC F.'J/OME.ENG/NEElNJ/u.G>43/.92 . . . 13. Contractor shall maintain a Lost and Found Service for articles inadvertently left by passengers on buses. 14. While in a CVT Uniform, Contractor employees will not purchase, consume, or be under the influence of any intoxicant, narcotic, or harmful drug. 15. Contractor employees may use CVT vehicles only in connection with their assigned duties and only within the CVT service area unless otherwise authorized by the Transit Coordinator or his representative. 16. For option A, Contractor and its employees shall observe all rules and regulations published by the Director of Public Works Operations pertaining to the use of the City Yard especially those that apply to yard cleanliness, vehicle parking, fueling, prohibition of private vehicles from entering the yard unless authorized, handling of toxic materials and spills and yard gate security. 17. In the event of an accident involving a CVT vehicle resulting in an injury or fatality, Contractor shall immediately notify the Transit Coordinator or his representative by phone (day or night) and a copy of the accident report forwarded to the Transit office no later than the next working day. C. Maintenance and Repairs 1. Contractor accepts full responsibility for maintenance and repair of all CVT buses, interior and exterior, including body and paint work, wheelchair lifts, registering fareboxes, communication equipment and to keep bus units including all installed equipment on buses in a safe and good operating condition. Preventive maintenance on all buses will be performed in conformance with the preventive maintenance schedule attached as Attachment 2. Paint and body work on each bus shall be completed within three (3) weeks of occurrence. 2. Contractor will be responsible for thoroughly washing all buses used in this operation at least three times each week. In addition, the interior of each bus used in CVT service shall be thoroughly cleaned daily in accordance with Bus Cleaning Check List, Attachment 6. 3. Contractor will institute and maintain a formalized preventive maintenance program for all buses in conformance with manufacturer's preventive maintenance schedule and any maintenance schedule required by the Transit Coordinator. The Chula Vista's Fleet Manager is the Transit Coordinator's designated representative to monitor and oversee contractor's maintenance and repair activities on owned buses. Contractor shall document anv and all Dreventive maintenance work or reDairs oerformed WPC F.V10MlMNGlNEEINJ//LG'.I3/.92 I J;'" .;.>- Page 19 on cvr buses. and submit this documentation to Transit staff no later than 72 hours after completion of work. """" 4. Contractor shall provide a road call service vehicle for mechanics in order to insure timely response to road calls. 5. Quality and regular maintenance of buses is essential and is required for efficient, reliable transit operation. Contractor shall report budget line items 501.02--Maintenance salaries and wages, and 504.03/504.04-- Materials and supplies, as maintenance categories within the budget. These line items shall be reported to City staff on a monthly basis. Deferred maintenance and/or shifting of funds from one line item to another within the budget are prohibited. The maintenance budget will be reviewed monthly by City staff and contractor. Changes to the maintenance budget or maintenance program may be made only upon written approval by the Transit Coordinator. 6. At the end of each fiscal year, City staff and Contractor will review maintenance and repair expenditures. If Contractor's expenditures for the year are less than budgeted amounts, then Contractor will reimburse City the difference between budgeted maintenance and repair costs and actual expenditures. 7. Contractor shall comply with all City, state and federal policies, procedures and laws and requirements regarding toxic waste disposal, fuel spills, City maintenance yard security, parking of vehicles and use of City vehicles. ~ D. Data Collection and Reporting 1. Contractor shall collect all data on operation of cvr. Contractor shall maintain a daily office log of vehicle breakdowns, road calls, missed trips (including cause), complaints and compliments received. Customer service calls shall be logged in the daily office log. Daily office log shall be made available to City staff upon request. 2. The combination Driver Daily Records (DDR's)!Bus Defect Sheet, Attachment 5, will be used by each shift of bus operators, a copy of which is to be submitted to the Transit Office on a daily basis. The DDR is the source document for use in determining the total miles, farebOx revenue, number of passengers and passenger categories. Missed miles and missed trips will be determined from the DDR's by comparing actual daily miles entered into the DDR' s against predetermined daily total miles for each route. 3. Contractor shall prepare and submit to City staff a Quarterly Maintenance Report which will include, but not be limited to, the following: a ........, WPC P,WOMlN':NG/NEEINl/UGI43/.92 13-.u Page 20 . . . summary of all maintenance work performed including preventive maintenance work, body and paint work, and major repair work, the cost of maintenance such as oil, parts, fuel, labor, all repairs; a status of each vehicle's condition; and highlights of problems and suggested solutions. 4. In addition, contractor will fulfill the following minimum written reporting requirements to City staff: REPORT FREQUENCY a. Driver dailv records Daily. by 9:30 Lm. of th. next working day b. Computation and reconciliation of fares collected Weekly c. SANDAG form B-IO, items IS. 16, 17,20,21 and Quarterly 22 d. Fuel costs and individual bus fuel consumption Monthly e. Road call reports Monthly f. California Highway Patrol periodic safety Forwarded to City within 3 days after receipt inspection , of report g. Accident reports Each occurrence 5. Contractor shall make available to City such reports free of charge as may be requested by the City Transit Coordinator, MTDB, or SANDAG, unless such reports are of such complex and time-consuming nature in which case City will reimburse bus company the reasonable cost of preparation of such reports. VI. Payment for services provided A. General 1. City will pay contractor for provision of services provided in accordance with the terms and conditions of the final agreement between City and contractor. Payment shall be made monthly in arrears based on revenue service miles operated in the preceding calendar month. 2. City estimates that 1,125,000 revenue miles shallbe operated by contractor during FY 1993-94 commencing on July I, 1993. It should be noted that this mileage figure is subject to change during the three-year contract term. 3. Upon a decision by City to provide additional or reduced scheduled fixed route service or a change in the number of revenue service miles provided by contractor due to strike, civil disaster, or other public calamity, the following cost per mile adjustments shall apply: WPC F.'lHOMEo.ENGlNEE/M/LLG\43/.92 1;r..J. 7 Page 21 a. The annual cost per mile for each year of the contract term shall be in effect for any variation in annual service miles up to 20%. For example, based upon an FY 1993-94 service miles operated of 1,125,000, service addition up to 1,350,000 miles or a service reduction to 900,000 miles, no adjustments will be made in the rate per mile for that year. .""" b. A service addition greater than 20% or a reduction greater than 20% of the annual revenue miles specified in the final agreement may be subject to negotiation of a new rate per mile. 4. During the course of this agreement, City may authorize Contractor to perform services not included in the Contractor's cost per mile rate for regular CVT operations. Examples of such services include: the use of CVT buses for "special" or "charter" services, "trippers" to accommodate peak loadings. Upon authorization of such services by the Transit Coordinator or his designated representative, City will pay Contractor the cost of these services as follows: a. The cost of "special" or "charter" service will be paid to Contractor based on specific rates to be negotiated between Contractor and City. b. The cost of "tripper" services will be the applicable cost per mile rate for regular CVT service. """ c. Reimbursement for other authorized costs will be made on a direct cost basis with proper supporting documentation of the incurred Contractor cost/expenditure. B. Penalty for Failure to Provide Service 2. 1. Each CVT route will have a designated daily total miles. The daily total miles is defmed as the sum of daily revenue miles and deadhead miles. The total miles for each route will be fmalized prior to contract formation and will be dependent upon the distance of contractor's base of bus operations to the beginning point of revenue service for each CVT route. For purposes of computing missed mile~, City will hold Contractor accountable for each route's scheduled minimum dailv mileae:e which is equal to 99% of the route's daily total miles. The 99% figure is the minimum total miles prescribed for each route below which payment adjustments will be required. The source document for determination of the daily total miles logged on each route will be the Driver Daily Record. For example, if a route's designated daily total miles is 300, the scheduled minimum daily mileage is 297. In the event that the total miles for the route as entered on the DDR is shown to be less than 297, the Contractor """ J j ".;l. 8"'" Page 22 WPC F,WOME.ENGlNEEIM//LGI43/.92 . . . shall pay City an amount equal to the difference between the scheduled minimum daily mileage and the reported total miles times the current cost per mile of service. 3. An example of CVT's scheduled minimum daily mileage with the City Yard as base of operations is as follows: CHULA VISTA TRANSIT DAn.. Y MILEAGE SUMMARY MINIMUM Mll..ES FY 1992-93 Scheduled Daily Mileage Totals Scheduled Minimum Daily Mileage Totals Weekdays Saturday Sunday Weekdays Saturday Sunday Route 701 743 622 559 736 616 553 Route 702 405 323 153 401 320 151 Route 703 505 391 0 500 387 0 Route 704 267 216 0 264 214 0 Route 705 490 344 292 485 341 289 Route 706 177 178 0 175 176 0 Route 706A 105 105 99 104 104 . 98 Route 707 168 156 0 166 154 0 Route 70s' 79 79 79 78 78 78 Route 708 52 52 52 51 51 51 Route 709 337 180 0 334 178 0 Route 711 212 0 0 210 0 0 Route 712 200 172 163 198 170 161 .SU1'N7'lLT season sCMduJe for Route 108: JUM 23-September 7.1992 NOTE: Total milu are based upon driver shift cluJngn 01 lhe respectiw trollry st.atiOftl and detuJJwui miles an from 1M Public Works Yard 10 route start points andfrom resp<<tivt troll~ IUJlions 10 Public Works Yard lor end poinls. . Adjustments for missed miles will be made monthly; any deduction for missed miles will be subtracted from the monthly payment for the month the miles were missed. Payments shall also be subject to adherence to all other contractual requirements including the prompt submission to City of required reports and source documents from which a computation of monthly payment adjustment is based. WPC F,'lIOMF>ENG/NEEIM/UG\43/.92 ) :1-.1.1 Page 23 C. Liquidated Damages .-, From the nature of the services to be provided, the Contractor and City agree that it is extremely difficult to fix actual damages which may result from failure on the part of the Contractor to perform any of its obligations herein and the resulting loss to City. Therefore, both parties agree that the Contractor liability should be limited to and fIxed at the sums stated in this Section of the Agreement, as liquidated damages and not as penalty, to be deducted automatically by City from Contractor invoices for the period(s) in which occurred. The decision of the Transit Coordinator is fmal with respect to any assessment of liquidated damages. The Transit Coordinator may rely on information supplied by Contractor, by the public or by staff, as well as by other means in determining assessment of liquidated damages. 1. Liquidated damages will be assessed at the rate of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per occurrence for failure to achieve a satisfactory rating in any category of the annual California Highway Patrol Safety Compliance report (CHP 343). 2. Liquidated damages may be assessed at the rate of one hundred dollars ($1 (0) per occurrence for each unauthorized failure to operate transit routes in accordance with the route descriptions given in Exhibit A. 3. Liquidated damages may be assessed at the rate of one hundred dollars ($100) per day for each day Contractor fails to employ and assign to the services covered by this agreement a Location Manager, Operations Supervisor, Road Supervisors, or Maintenance Manager. In the event Contractor's Location Manager, Operations Supervisor, or Maintenance Manager tenninates his or her employment with less than two (2) weeks notice, liquidated damages will not be assessed until the fIfteenth (15th) day following the notice of termination. ~ 4. Liquidated damages may be assessed at the rate of fIfty dollars ($50) per day for each incident of failure to comply with the following requirements and driver specifIcations herein: (a) (b) (c) Failure to clean vehicle interiors daily. Failure to clean vehicle exterior three times weekly. Failure to provide 8-hour National Safety Council. Defensive Driving Course or equivalent for each driver before that driver operates any vehicle in revenue service. Failure of driver to wear a presentable uniform while on duty. Failure to have a new driver undergo a two-hour orientation to CVT system policies, procedures, and performance standards prior to being assigned to a CVT route. (d) (e) ~ WPC F,WOMMNGlNEE/Nl/LL<M3/.92 . /;3-30 Page 24 . . . (0 (g) (h) Failure to provide a minimum of 8 hours of driver instruction/route familiarization to each driver before that driver operates vehicle in revenue service. Failure to repair vehicle body damage (interior or exterior) within 21 days of the occurrence. Failure to perform any required preventative maintenance procedures within +500 miles of the scheduled maintenance. 5. Liquidated damages may be assessed at the rate of fifty dollars ($50) per incident of a vehicle in revenue service leaving a schedule time point prior to the schedule departure time. 6. Liquidated damages may be assessed at the rate of fifty dollars ($50) per day for each incident of failure to submit to City any of the following reports: (a) Driver Daily Records/Defect Sheets, daily by 9:30 a.m. of the next working day. Computation and Reconciliation of fares coJlected for the week, by 2:00 p.m. of the foJlowing Monday or first working day. SANDAG Form B-lO Items 15, 16, 17,20,21, and 22, by October 20, January 20, April 20, and July 20. Fuel Cost and Fuel Consumption, by the 5th of each month. Road Call Reports, by 5th of the following month. California Highway Patrol Safety Inspection Reports, three days after receipt of report by Contractor. Accident Reports, within three days after occurrence. (b) (c) (d) (e) (0 (g) 7. Failure of City to assert any right which it has under this contract, or to assess any liquidated damage as provided herein, shaJl not act as a waiver as to the City right to enforce the provisions of this contract, or assess liquidated damages in the future, except as specified herein. 8. The assessment of liquidated damages and/or deductions as provided under this contract shall in no way relieve the Contractor of his obligation to provide sufficient service, buses or drivers, or to meet any of the terms of this contract. D. Fuel Cost City will pay the cost of diesel fuel as a separate expense from the cost per mile rate. Proposer's cost should!!Q! include diesel fuel. . E. Application of San Diego Consumer Price Index (CPO for all Urban Consumers The foJlowing expense object class items only are subject to a CPI adjustment. These are: Class #504.02 (Lubricants, gasoline, miscellaneous); Object Class WPC F.V/OMNNG/NEE/NJ/UG\43/.92 1;1"':1/ Page 25 #504.03 (Tires and tubes); Object Class #504.04 (Vehicle maintenance pans); and Object Class #504.05 (Other materials and supplies). These specific items will be ~ adjusted annually if the San Diego CPI as determined by the U. S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics exceeds 10% for any specific year. If the San Diego CPI exceeds 10%, then CITY will reimburse contractor only for the CPI percent increment greater than 10% for those items to be adjusted. VIT. Collection of Farebox Revenues Contractor is responsible for collection, counting and depositing of all revenues from all buses in CVT service including cash, passes, and any other fare media. Farebox revenue will be deposited at a bank designated by the City of Chula Vista Finance Director utilizing bank deposit slips provided by City. Until such time as the farebox revenues are deposited in the bank, revenues are the sole responsibility of the Contractor and Contractor shall be responsible for any loss. The specific procedure for collection, reconciliation, reporting and deposit of farebox revenues shall be finalized with Contractor prior to start of service. Any discrepancy in CVT revenues related to any fare media or transfers accepted on CVT is the responsibility of Contractor. VIII. Insurance Contractor represents that it and its agents, staff and subcontractors employed by it in connection with the services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City: ""'" A. Statutorv Worker's Compensation Insurance and Emplover's Liabilitv Insurance coverage in the amount of $1,000,000. B. Commercial General Liabilitv Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount of $10,000,000, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Contractor, which names City and Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City and Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage"). C. Performance Bond in the amount of $400,000 by a surety and in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney. . D. Fidelitv Bond in the amount of $50,000 which shall cover Contractor employees protecting City from employee theft with respect to any occurrence by Contractor's employees. ""'" J :J' :J.:J.. Page 26 W/'C F.'JIOMf).ENG/NEElM/U(JIA3/.92 . . . E. Proof of Insurance Coverage (1) Certificates of Insurance Contractor shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be cancelled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured. (2) Policy Endorsements Required In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under Contractor's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Contractor shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager. WPC F.'JIOMUNG/NEEIM/UCN3/.92 I.:J..;J ;J Page 27 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FORM ,-, MANAGEMENT & OPERATION OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Note: Technical Proposals shall be typed on tbis form, should be concise as possible, and shall not include promotional material. Additional sheets may be used to amplify responses to any item in this proposal form where space provided is not adequate. Additional sheets should clearly indicate which page and item they refer to, and shall be attached to this form. Responses to tbe questions on tbis form will be evaluated as discussed under Section IV of tbe RFP. Proposer bereby makes tbe following proposal, representations, and certifications: I) GENERAL Firm's Name: Firm's Telephone No. Firm's Address: ~ Name of Individual Responsible for Preparation of this Proposal: Title: (Check One): Proposer is a corporation/partnership/joint venture/sole proprietorship. Other: """'" /;J";J{ Page J of 11 Technical Proposal Form WPC F,VWMENiNG/NEE/M/lliN3/.92 . . . 2) If Proposer is a ioint venture: Name each member of the joint venture and identity their responsibility (include administrative, operational, and financial personnel) for each participating firm. PARTICIPATING FIRM RESPONSmnJTY Has this joint venture previously worked together? No Yes If yes: 1. For how long? 2. For how many ventures? 3. What type of ventures? " WPC F.'\HOMNNGINEEINJ/1.W\43/.92 /:J.. ::15' Page 2 of 11 Technical Proposal Form 3) Does the individual proposing fInn, any participating fIrm in any proposed joint venture, or any proposed subcontractor have any conflict of interest within the following context? """" No person performing services for the City of Chula Vista in connection with any project resulting from this proposal shall have fInancial or other personal interest, other than employment or retention by City, in any contract or subcontract in connection with such project. No officer or employee of such person performing services for City shall have any fmancial or other personal interest in any real property acquired for any such project, unless such interest is openly disclosed upon the public records of the City and such offlcer, employee, or person has not participated in property acquisition for or on behalf of City. Yes No 4) Provide a brief work history, length of time in business, ownership, and organization background for proposer, and all participating fInns for a joint venture. """" a. List all offlcers (including titles) of the organization. """" WPC F.wOME>ENGINEEIM/lliN3/.92 1:J .'"J " Page3 of 11 Technical Proposal Form . . . b. If proposer is a partially or fully owned subsidiary of another finn, an appropriate statement must be included identifying all levels of corporate management required to approve contracts relating to any project resulting from this proposal: c. Indicate whether a specific corporation or joint venture would be formed for sole purpose of any project resulting from this proposal: 5) AUDIT AND INSPECTION OF RECORDS: Proposer shall permit authorized representatives of City to inspect and audit Proposer's data and records relating to this proposal. Unsubstantiated statements or refusal to permit audit may cause the proposal to be declared nonresponsive. M'C F.VlOMElENGINEE/M//J.G'A3/.92 J3--37 Page 4 of 11 Technical Proposal Form 6) I agree that any contract resulting from the RFP will include a requirement that I obtain and maintain a Performance Bond in a form satisfactory to City in the amount of $400,000. The Bond will be delivered to the City Transit Coordinator within ten (10) days after selection of Contractor by City Council. The proposal shall be accompanied by a letter from a corporate surety stating that proposer is bondable in the amount of $400,000. ~ Signature """'\ """'\ WPC F,IJ/OMElf.NG/NEElM/UfM3/.92 1;1--3 ~ Page 5 of 11 Technical Proposal Form . . . 8) List your management and supervisory employees and their years of applicable public transit experience. List only employees expected to be directly involved in providing demand response transportation service for a contract resulting from this proposal. Employee Name Duties/Responsibilities on City Years of How Long Project Relevant with Your Experience Finn Specifically identify and describe the experience and qualifications of the Location Manager, Operations Supervisor, and Road Supervisors. Be sure to identify where the required experience was obtained as described in "MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS" and "REFERENCE" sections. Include a resume for each individual. Include an organization chart showing: (I) proposed management structure by job title and name of person, and (2) all other job categories including number of employees in each category. WPC F.'1IOMF>ENG/NEE/MI/LLGI43/.92 I:;" J' Page 6 of 11 Technical Proposal Form 8) State description and date Proposer or Proposer's Location Manager has provided fixed route public transportation service of similar size and complexity as CVT. List time spans, types of service provided. and size of each operation in terms of annual miles/hours, total passengers, fleet size, and population served. """'I -. -.. /3--f() Page 7 of 11 Technical Proposal Form WPC F,WOMlM.NGINEE/MIu.tN3/.92 . . . 9) Maintenance Proe:ram: Proposals may be submitted for Options A and/or B. a) For Options A and/or B: Describe the proposed maintenance program for each in detail. including preventative maintenance, handling of breakdowns and major repairs. b) For Option B): Identify location of maintenance yard and facilities. c) For Options A and/or B: Identify the thirty-six (36) month total cost contained in the Cost Breakdown, Price Proposal Form, for each option proposed, for the following expense object class items: Option A Option B Maintenance Salaries & Wage (501.02) Lubricants, Gasoline, etc. (504.02) Tire & Tubes (504.03) Vehicle Maintenance Parts (504.04) Other Materials & Supplies (504.05) d) Maintenance Manager: Identify individual and describe relevant experience. Identify proposed wage rate. Include resume for individual. e) Identify number of total mechanics proposed and wage scale for each position. f) Identify benefits, exclusive of wages, to be offered maintenance manager and other maintenance personnel. " WPC F.VlOM/N!.NGfNEEKJJ/LWI43/.92 1;1- ~I Page 8 of II Technical Proposal Form 10) Management Program: Proposer shall, at a minimum, address the following: -.. a) Describe the proposed management approach to operation of a fixed-route public transportation service. b) How will proposer ensure a high-quality cost-effective service? c) Describe the proposed method of scheduling trips and dispatching. d) Describe the proposed method of ensuring on-time performance or vehicle reliability. e) Describe proposed procedures for screening potential contractor employees before hiring and routinely screening employees for: (1) Drug use (2) DMV violations Discuss policies and procedures for disciplinary and/or terminating employees under various circumstances, including: drug/alcohol use; DMV violations; dishonesty; etc. f) CVT drivers will be required to operate vehicles safely and be knowledgeable of the regional fare media and regional transfer procedures. In order to perform these functions completely, it is essential that Contractor maintain knowledgeable drivers and a low turnover rate. Accordingly, proposal shall describe: -.., (I) Techniques to retain knowledgeable, experienced drivers; and (2) The wage scale and benefits to be paid drivers including new driver trainees, drivers on probation, and periodic wage increases. Please note: The City requires, as a minimum. the following wages for the positions of drivers and road supervisors during the first contract year (July 1 1993-June 30, 1994: Drivers: $7.00 - $950 Road Supervisors: $10.00 These wages shall be effective after a prescribed probationary period which shall be described by Contractor. The City also encourages the provision of reasonable benefits to cover Contractor employees. h) Describe management approach to data collection and reporting and how it would apply to CVT services. ~ 1.3...1,). Page 9 of 11 Technical Proposal Form wpc F.V10MEJf.NG/NEEIM/LLfN3/.92 11) REFERENCES . Provide names, addresses, and telephone numbers of at least four (4) people from different organizations who have personal knowledge of your firm's ability to provide public fixed-route transportation service and would be willing to provide information to the City. H a joint venture is proposed. provide four (4) references for each partner in the joint venture. 1) Name of Person Title Phone Number Firm Name Firm Address 2) Name of Person Title Phone Number Firm Name Firm Address . 3) Name of Person Title Phone Number Firm Name Firm Address 4) Name of Person Title Phone Number Firm Name Firm Address . WPC F.viOMElENG/NEElM/L/.GI.I3/.92 13..1..1 Page 10 of 11 Technical Proposal Form _c;';-~--;;;:::':::~-?';;-~"'f_,::~.-". 12) This Proposal is an offer to do the work as described in this proposal, including Price Proposal Form and the Request for Proposals. """'" This proposal shall remain valid for days from the deadline date for proposal receipt by the City. (minimum 120) SIGNATURE; (person with legal authority to bind Proposer) SIGNER'S NAME AND TITLE: DATE SIGNED: """'" """'" WPC F.'J/OME.ENGINEE/MIUG431.92 /j,J! Page 11 of 11 Technical Proposal Form . N ... C ~ E -= C.l '" ~ . 00 ~ r-l =:~ 000 ~~ Zt:: 000 ooz ...< =:=: ~~ ~r-l o~ Uo ~=: <~ Ur-l oo~ 1'0;1'" t".:l~ <~ ~=: >0< =:0 <t".:l ..:lr-l <... oo~ Z < 00 . '" "" .. .,., ~..~ ;;; ,'OJ GI.!to :iiiSe , " .. - e:.C!lI~ '" ....; '" - '" "i ~ ~O ~ 0' 00 '5U> '" '::CI'.I..! ~ <t u .. '" -..... '" -<U = ~ ~"'~ 00 .!!l.. ... ~ ~- , '- .. 00 &..8 - -< ~ EI f6 ~Ie-= ..,; '" - ~ I: III , ~ CI'.I = C '~ .. 8 f !j\ e:.~_E-- ~ '" '" '" a, "u= ~ ~ -; la , '- .. f !!i t.!2 Eo- --; &:i z ;>, -a <'> I;- .,., ~ ..; '" ~- - - 6'8 ~=1 '" -g8f , - 'C <'> .s 8- ~.E- ~ Z - w " - " 0 '" .~ "i ,- or> ~ g - tl.~ 0; r-- Iii "l !!l ,S .,., " " tJ'~ - ..8 'a '" :g 0 , .. " ~ <'> ,~ 11 0.. .- "1 ~"O'i1 -'" - .. ;;; -.5 Q) Jl ,1tbl~ D z.... :!loi .. '" = w w w .. .. .. -;;- ,- '5 '5 ,5 l;l0l0l 17 ~{,fJ{/) = ~~~ & -N<'> .;; w ~ ~ 8 1:;..-4/5' 0: " ~ i I '? .. ~ o