Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1988/04/05 Item 10COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT • Item Meeting Date 4/5/88 ITEM TITLE: Resolution ~ 3 ~ 3 Approving an agreement with San Diego Trust and Savings Sank for the installation and maintenance of traffic control facilities SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~, ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X ) ~~- The closure of Fig Avenue between H and I Streets to through traffic is a required mitigation measure for the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project. In September, 1987 Council approved a contract with San Diego Trust and Savings Bank to establish the location of a barricade on Fig Avenue and institute a series of traffic control measures on the bank's property. When local residents expressed displeasure with the barricade location and the approved agreement, the Fig Avenue Closure Committee was established to reevaluate the agreement and the alternatives for controlling traffic on Fig Avenue. The currently proposed agreement has been developed as a result of the comments and issues discussed by the Committee. The agreement specifies that the street barricade will remain in its current location and that the bank will • maintain driveway access to Fig Avenue both north and south of the barricade. The Committee also addressed the related issues of the installation of a cul-de-sac on Fig Avenue and the institution of restricted parking in the surrounding residential neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve an agreement with San Diego Trust and Savings Bank for the installation and maintenance of traffic control facilities. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Fig Avenue Closure Committee, at its meetings of January 27 and February 25, 1988, reviewed the proposed contract but has not reached a concensus recommendation on it. Residential representatives want the bank's southernmost driveway to be removed, whereas the bank's representatives insist that the driveway access is critical to the commercial success of the bank. DISCUSSION: The main issues addressed by the Fig Avenue Closure Committee have been: a) location of the Fig Avenue closure, b) proposed agreement with San Diego Trust and Savings Bank, c) installation of a cul-de-sac on Fig Avenue, and d) parking controls in the Fig Avenue residential area. • C, Page 2, Item l0 Meeting Date~j57$~ Street Closure Location San Diego Trust and Savings Bank, SDG&E and area residents have been unable to reach an agreement on the preferred location for closing Fig Avenue. A recent survey of the residents indicates almost unanimous residential support for closing the street such that the bank would not be able to access Fig Avenue south of Shasta Street. The survey results are summarized in Exhibit A. The bank's representatives insist that the driveway access to Fig Avenue south of Shasta Street is essential for their commercial success. The alternative of providing bank access to the Sears parking lot was found to be unacceptable to both the bank and Sears. Bank Agreement Despite opposition from area residents, the proposed agreement is recommended for approval. It is felt that the agreement satisfies the original intent of the Fig Avenue mitigation measure called for in the EIR for the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project. It is also felt that failure to approve an agreement which provides adequate street access for the bank could result in a claim of inverse condemnation. The residents' primary opposition to the agreement is that it would continue to allow driveway connections between the bank and Fig Avenue both north and south of the street barricade. Residents claim that during operating hours of the bank a significant number of vehicles will drive around the barricade, through the bank parking lot, and thereby use Fig Avenue • as a through street between H and I Streets. Although the agreement compels the bank to block access through its parking lot during non-operating hours, residents have expressed doubt that this contract provision would be enforced. The bank maintains that its commercial viability depends on its having street access both north and south of the street barricade. Bank counsel claims that blocking its driveway would be an inverse condemnation action by the City and the City Attorney states that this claim may have legal support. It is also the bank's position that traffic does not need to be further reduced in the local residential area because the Fig Avenue closure called for in the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project EIR was only intended to prevent traffic from increasing in the residential area as a result of the vacation of Fifth Avenue. Traffic counts indicate that, as a result of the placement of the Fig Avenue barricade, traffic on Fig Avenue south of Shasta Street has decreased 41% from the level prior to the vacation of Fifth Avenue. Recent counts indicate that the amount of traffic on Shasta Street is approximately the same as on Fig Avenue south of Shasta. Because earlier counts were not conducted on Shasta Street, it is not known whether the traffic is greater or less than what it was prior to the vacation of Fifth Avenue and the barricading of Fig Avenue. Terms of the Agreement As a result of discussions of the Fig Avenue Closure Committee, a number of additional mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed • agreement. They include the following: r- ,~ Page 3, Item 10 • Meeting Date~/$~ - bank to be fined $100 per violation and $500 per violation after six violations within 12 consecutive months for failure to close traffic barriers on bank parking lot; - City to monitor bank compliance in closing parking lot traffic barrier during bank's non-operating hours; - residents made third party beneficiaries of the agreement with enforcement rights as to bank compliance; - disputes over bank violations to go to binding arbitration; - bank pledges not to modify the configuration of its drive-through teller lanes so as to give them access to Fig Avenue south of the barricade; - if bank sells its property or leasehold it will require the purchaser or sublessee to assume bank's obligations. Local residents were recently polled on the terms of the current agreement. The results of the poll, summarized in Exhibit A, indicate that although most residents preferred to have the bank's southernmost driveway on Fig Avenue blocked off, they approved of the traffic control measures proposed for the • bank's parking lot. Proposed Cul-de-Sac The bank, SDG&E and local residents have all expressed conceptual support for the installation of a cul-de-sac on Fig Avenue, north of Shasta Street. The cul-de-sac is conceptually illustrated in Exhibit B. The agreement makes no specific mention of a cul-de-sac because it has not yet been approved by Council and it is not known how its implementation would affect the driveways, parking areas and other facilities of the bank and SDG&E. An RFP for design of the cul-de-sac is proceeding and will be presented to the Council in April. Restricted Parking The residents' poll also showed overwhelming support for restricting or controlling on-street parking in the residential neighborhood. The Fig Avenue Closure Committee has emphasized the need for controlling parking particularly on Shasta Street. The committee proposes that residents be issued stickers to exempt their vehicles from parking restrictions or limitations. This issue is being analyzed by the Engineering Department. A proposal will be submitted to Council at a later date. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff monitoring of bank compliance with the agreement can be incorporated into regular duties of City police staff and require no change in budget or staff time allocations. ~ e~r~` ~cz~/ ~ 7~~ JL:sc WPC 3477H ~ ~ ~~4 ~` ~ bf~ t`i~ C: y ~!:~t.~! of f~~ C;,u1a 'V;;;~~~, ,,._.~a~.:~ i~ia