HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/12/14 Item 5
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~If~ C1TYOF
~ CHULA VISTA
12/14/10, lteml
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ACCEPTING A GRANT OF $165,780 FOR STATE SAFE
ROUTES TO SCHOOL FUNDING CYCLE 9 FOR PEDESTRIAN
TRAFFIC CALMING FACILITIES NEAR MONTGOMERY
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT FURTH AVENUE AND
MONTGOMERY STREET
SUBMITTED BY: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ENG 1
REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER ~
ASSISTANT CITY ~~NAGER ~.-;-
4/5THS VOTE: YES 0 NO IZJ
SUMMARY
California legislated a Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program in 1999 with the enactment of AB
1475. The goals of the program are to reduce injuries and fatalities to school children anu to
encourage increased walking and bicycling among students. On June 22, 2010 Council
authorized staff to submit applications for three projects. The State recently notified staff that
tbe City bas been awarded a grant of $165,780 for improvements near Montgomery Elementary
Scbool to enhance pedestrian safety.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has detelmined that the project qualifies
for a Class I (c) categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the
State CEQA GUIdelines because the proposal involves negligible or no expansion of an existing
llse. Thus, no further enviromnental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopt the resolution.'
BOARDS/CO MiVlISSIONS
Not applicable.
5-1
12/14/10, Item~
Page 2 of 3
DISCUSSION
The Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program began in 1999 with the enactment of Assembly Bill
1475. The purpose of the program is to increase the number of children who walk or bicycle to
school by funding projects to improve safety and remove the barriers that prevent children from
doing so. A call for Cycle 9 grant applications was announced on April 15, 2010. Based on the
data gathered through Walk San Diego's community walking audit effort at 36 elementary
schools, which has been funded through Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project TF362,
staff prepared an application for pedestrian improvements and traffic calming near Montgomery
Elementary School to enhance pedestrian safety. Also, staff prepared applications for sidewalk
improvements at Moss and Quintard Streets.
On June 22, 2010, Council approved Resolution 2010-163, which authorized staff to submit
grant applications for State Safe Routes to School funding for improvements at these three
locations. Individual CIP projects were not created at that time; since it was not known which
projects would receive grant funding. However, it was assumed that the matching funds would
be provided from the City's TransNet allocation.
On October 20, 2010, City staff received a letter from Caltrans stating that the City of Chula
Vista had been awarded $165,780 in SR2S funds out of the Fiscal Year 2010-11 allocation for
the Montgomery Elementary School enhance pedestrian safety project. The City's grant
application provided a description of the location, scope and funding for this project. The
specific location of the project would be at the location of Fourth Avenue and Montgomery
Street. The scope of work was described as follows:
The scope of work of the proposed project consists of installing traffic calming at
Fourth Avenue and Montgomery Street which includes advanced warning signs,
enhanced crosswalks, school zone signs, curb bulbouts for safe crossing, striping,
pedestrians flashers signallbuttons, curb and gutter, ADA pedestrian ramps,
asphalt concrete pavement, programmable radar speed feed back signs, traffic
control, and other miscellaneous items of work necessary for the project.
The grant is $165,780, with a local match of $18,420. The matching funds will be appropriated
from an existing RTIP approved project - CHV33-TF345.
This project is recommended to be programmed in the FY 2011-12 CIP Program as a new
project, STL375 "Montgomery Elementary School Pedestrian Improvements", which will be
brought forward to Council for approval during the FY 2011-12 budget process and shall include
the local match of existing TransNet funds in the amount of $18,420 from TF345, Traffic
Calming Program..
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings
within 500 feet of the boundaries of the properties, which are the subject ofthis action.
5-2
12/14/10, Item~
Page 3 of 3
CURRENT FISCAL IMPACT
There is no impact to the General Fund. The funding for this project, which is anticipated to be
programmed in the FY2011-12 CIP Program will be provided for by State Grant and TransNet
funds.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Once the proj eet has been constructed, there may be minor routine maintenance costs.
ATT ACHlVlENTS
1. Resolution 2010-163
2. October 20,2010 -letter from CaJtrans
3. Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Program Application (9th Cycle)
J:\Engineet\AGENDA\CAS20U9\09-15 09\Safe Routes To School Grant Acceptance m1.doc
5-3
ATTACHMENT I
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-163
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVfNG THE SUBMITTAL OF GRANT
APPLICATIONS FOR STATE-LEGISLATED SAFE ROUTES
TO SCHOOL FUNDING CYCLE 9 TO IMPROVE
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES AT THREE
ELIGfBLE LOCA TrONS
WHEREAS, California legislated a Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program in 1999 with
the enactment of AB 1475. The goals of the program are to reduce injuries and fatalities to
schoolchildren and to encourage increased walking and bicycling among students; and
WHEREAS, Section 2333.5 of the Streets and Highways Code calls for the Department
of Transportation, in consultation with the California Highway Patrol (CHP), to make grants
available to local governmental agencies under the program based upon the results of a statewide
competition; and
WHEREAS, the goals of the program are to reduce injuries and fatalities to
schoolchildren and to encourage increased walking and bicycling among students; and
WHEREAS, a caH for Cycle 9 grant applications was announced on April 15, 2010.
Eligible applicants must be an incorporated city or a county within the State of California and the
eligible projects are infrastructure projects; and
\VHEREAS, for Cycle 9 of the State Safe Routes to School Program, it is recommended
that the City apply for funding for the following three pedestrian improvement projects:
1. Montgomery Elementary School Neighborhood Traffic Calming.
2. Quintard Street Sidewalk and Crosswalk Improvements from First Avenue to
Third Avenue.
3. Moss Street Sidewalk Improvements from Third Avenue to Fifth Avenue.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City ofChula
Vista approves the submittal of grant applications for State-Legislated Safe Routes to School
funding Cycle 9 to improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Ri~~~
c ar . op s
Director of Public Works
/
5-4
Reso]ution No. 20]0-]63
Page 2
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 22nd day of June 20] 0 by the following vote:
AYES:
Counci]members:
Bensoussan, Castaneda, Thompson and Cox
NAYS:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Ramirez
Cheryl2:!-V
ATTEST:
JD>1 JA a. f? ~n,Vvl
Donna R. Noms, Cl'V1C, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Donna R. Norris, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2010-163 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a
regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 22nd day of June 2010.
Executed this 22nd day of June 2010.
~(lUA'((:; P ~hl.'>J
Donna R. No;.ns,-CMC, City Clerk
5-5
A TT ACHMENT z.-,
STAT]: OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS TRA:-':SPORTATION ANI) HOUSING ,\GFNCY
ARNnl D ilCHWARZPNFif(iER (To\lerI:or
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
District 11, MS-124
4050 Taylor Street
S,", Diego, CA 9211 0
PHO:NE (619) 278-3756
FAX (619) 220-5432
T1Y 71l
~
Flex your power!
8e energy efficient!
October 20,2010
Mr. Roberto Solorzano
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Solorzano:
Congratulations! The following project has been approved for funding under Cycle 9 of the
State-legislated Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Program.
John J. Montgomery ES, Project ID: 09-11-008
$165,780 ofSR2S funds awarded in FY 2010/11
Eighty-five project applications were selected out of the 400 applications submitted statewide.
Each' California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District selected their highest scored
projects up to their funding target from the $24.25 million approved for FY 20 I 0/20 II.
All projects included in Cycle 9 will be funded with State Highway Account funds. Please submit
your Request for Allocation immediately or within 6 months of this notification.
Beginning with the release of this SR2S funding cycle, Caltrans is now requiring agencies to meet
delivery deadlines for three key milestones stated in Caltrans' Cycle 9 SR2S Guidelines. The
three milestones and delivery deadlines are as follows:
1. Project funds encumbered within 6 months of the date (10/20/1 0) of this notice
2. Construction contract awarded within 2 years after funds are encumbered
3. Close-out of Project within 2 years after award of Construction contract
Caltrans will track the delivery of these SR2S projects and prepare a quarterly report showing the
delivery performance of each project. Projects that are on or ahead of schedule will be identified
with a green checkmark. Projects that are behind schedule will be identified with a red flag. .
Flags will be removed in later reports if the agency has completed the milestone. If an agency has
a Cycle 9 SR2S project that has a red flag in a report that is released during a future SR2S 'call
for projects' cycle, Caltrans will not accept SR2S applications from that agency.
We encourage you to consider your agency's ability to deliver your project within the time frames
provided under the new delivery requirements. If you determine that the project has
environmental, right of way, or other conditions that may prevent your agency from meeting these
milestones and you do not want to risk being precluded from applying for future SR2S funding,
please contact me as soon as possible to discuss your options.
"Caltrllns improve;;;; mobility- ac.."'Oss California"
5-6
Mr. Robert Solorzano
October 20, 2010
Page 2
To view the complete project list and implementation guidelines, please visit the Safe Routes to
School Website at: www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalProEIams/saferoutes/sr2s.htm. The delivery
performance will be available on the SR2S website by July I, 2011.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Luis Z. Medina, District II-SR2S Program
Manager, at 619-278-3735, or at luis.medina(a).dot.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
~
ERWIN GOJUANGCO, Chief
Local Programs
<<Caltrms improves mobility a.cross Cahfornie."
5-7
\TTACHMENT .3
EXHIBIT A
STATE-LEGISLATED SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL (SR2S) PROGRAM
APPLICATION ( CYCLE 9)
Please read the Safe Routes to School Program Guidelines available on the SR2S web site and pay
special attention to Section 9 - Application Form Instructions - while preparing this application. An
incomplete or altered application fornIat will be disqualified from further review. The entire application
package, including attachments, shall not exceed 30 pages. Exceptions may be made on a case-by-case
basis on projects in large urban areas involving a large number of school or school districts.
This page must be the first page of the application. Applications must be stapled in the upper left
hand comer. Applications bound by any other means will not be accepted, e.g. binders, protective
covers, spiral threading. A transmittal letter, if submitted, should be attached to the application with a
removable binder clip.
I. ApPLICATION INFORMATION
(Designate Address as City or County)
Applicant (Agency): city of Chula Vista
Address: 276 Fourth Avenue
CaItrans District: 11
City: Chula Vista County: San Diego Zip: 91910
Contact Person: Roberto Solorzano
Phone: 619-~09-5420 Ext:
E-Mail: solo@ci.chula-vista.ca.us
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO): San Dieqo Association of Governments
Amount of SR2S funds requested: $167,200
II. PROJECT INFORMATION
(Each school to be listed separately in format provided. Insert additional sheet(s) as needed)
County-District-School Code (CDS)
Number: 37680236037915
Full School Name:
John J. Montgomery Elementary
School
School District:
Chula Vista Elementary School
District
Street Address/City/State/Zip code:
1601 Fourth Avenue/Chula Vista/CA/91911
Street Address/City/State/Zip code:
84 East J Street/Chula vista/CA/91910
Total Student Enrollment:
398
% of Students Eligible for the Free and Reduced
Meals Program(1):
76.1%
% of Students who Currently Walk or
Bicycle to School (optional):
Not Available
(1)H.efer to the Gailtamia Department of Education website: http://www.cde.ca.govldslshlcwlfifesafdc.asp
April,2010
1
5-8
Project Description: Provide a brief description of the proposed project improvements e.g. Construct
new sidewalks, curb ramps, and crosswalks; install bicycle racks and lockers.
Construct bulb-outs, enhanced crosswalks, overhead lighting, beacons, curb
ramps, pedestrian signal buttons, refuge islands, and other traffic control
devices around the school parcel of Montgomery Elementary School.
Project Location: Provide a brief description of the generallocation(s) of the proposed project e.g. The
intersection of First St and Second St.
The general location of the proposed project is along Fourth Avenue,
Montgomery Street, Anita Street, and Fresno Avenue in the City of Chula
Vista. Each of the proposed improvements is located around the school
parcel.
State Legislative District of project location:
Senate District: 40 Assembly District: 22
Total nUIllber of project applications being submitted by a single agency ~
1f more than one application is being submitted, what is the priority oftms application? !
Note: Cities and counties are strongly encouraged to apply environmental justice principles
in the process of prioritizing project applications. Refer to the Environmental Justice Desk
Guide at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hqlLocaIPrograms/saferoutes/sr2s.htm
lmprovement categories included in the proposed project: (check all that apply)
IZl Pedestrian Facilities
o Bicycle Facilities
IZl Traffic Control Devices
IZl Traffic Calming and Speed Reduction
IZl Public Outreach and Education
o Other (describe)
April, 2010
2
5-9
\
ill. PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
SR2S
Funds
Local Funds Other Funds Total Cost
IPrefiminary Engineering
I Environmental
1 PS&E
jRight of Way
1 Engineering
1 Appraisals, Acquisitions & Utilities
1 Construction
I Construction Engineering
I Construction(1)
!Public Outreach & Educatiod'J
!Includes education, enforcement,
and encouragement activities.
I Construction on school grounds
Isubtotal
I
IContingency(3)
I
Total Project Cost
$1,500
$18,000
$5,000
I
$1,5001
$23,0001
1
I
I
I
$10,000\
$132,2001
I
$1,5001
I
$168,2001
$16,000\
$184,200\
$10,000
$120,200
$12,000
$1,500
$151,200
$17,000
$16,000
$167,200
$17,000
(I) For construction cost, provide a detailed Engineer's Estimate (use farm provided on SR2S lVeb site).
(2) Public Outreach & Education or minor constructio1l improvemelHs to public school grounds "Total Cost II may lIot
exceed 10% of the Cons/metion "Total Cost".
(3) Contingenc)' "Total Cost/! may not e.tceed 10% of/he 'ISubtotat'.
(4) SR2Sjimds llIay lIot exceed 90% o["Total Cost" or $500,000.
In some cases, the review committee may recommend that a project be funded providing certain
components are removed from the project scope. Will the applicant proceed witb the construction of the
project if its scope and cost are reduced? YON [8'J
IV. PROJECT SCHEDULE
Estimated dates of completion for the major milestones shown below assnming the project is approved for
fnnding on Dec. 1,2010:
Request Allocation ofSR2S Funds: 1/15/2011
Complete Environmental Document: 4/15/2011
Obtain Right of Way Clearance: nla
Award Construction Contract: 9/15/2011
Complete Construction: 12/1512011
Project Close-out: 211512012
April, 2010 3
5-10
V. EVALUATION CRlTERlA
The applicant's responses to the following six questions (required in statute) will be used to evaluate the
proposed project. Scores from applicant responses to these questions will be totaled to yield the final
score.
The scoring rubrics accompanying the questions below are intended to help the applicant better
understand the depth and scope of information being sought and to help the reviewer strive for
consistency when evaluating applicant responses. Applicants should feel free to expand their responses
to include additional information not specifically asked but relevant to the project.
1. Existing Safety Hazards and Demonstrated Needs of tlte Applicant (rating factor 1).
Describe ClUTent conditions near schools that make it difficult for children to walk and/or bicycle to
school.
The project is located in the Montgomery area, which is an older,
infrastructure-poor area, in the southwest region of the City of Chula
Vista. The school is Montgomery Elementary School and the project is
specifically located at the intersection of Fourth Avenue and Montgomery
Street as well as minor improvements on each of the three other roadways
surrounding the school site.
The City of Chula Vista Traffic Engineering Department, in collaboration
with WalkSanDiego, a regional organization dedicated to making
neighborhoods more walkable, hosted a series of community meetings and
workshops at public elementary schools throughout the City. These
workshops gathered residents to conduct walk audits (walking neighborhood
assessments) and to create a plan for improvements in their neighborhood.
This effort was funded as part of the "Kids Walk and Bike to School"
program by a State Community-Based Transportation Planning grant. On
November 8, 2008, WalkSanDiego, in partnership with the City of Chula
Vista, conducted a community workshop with 25 residents and school staff
in attendance at Montgomery Elementary School located at 1601 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista. The purpose of the workshop was to identify
pedestrian and bicyclist safety and access issues for residents living in
the neighborhood surrounding Montgomery Elementary School (defined by
school attendance boundary), with an emphasis on making it safer for
children to walk and bike to school. Residents ranked the construction
of the proposed improvements around Montgomery ES as priorities four and
six out of twelve priorities.
This workshop is part of "Kids Walk & Bike to School" plan and project
funded to conduct school workshops and develop this improvement plan, but
does not have funding attached to it to install improvements.
The issues identified by residents include missing signs, speeding
traffic, missing crosswalks, around the area of Montgomery ES. Between
January 1998 and December 2008, there have been 60 collisions in the
general vicinity of the school along Fourth Avenue, Anita Street, Fresno
Avenue, and Montgomery Street. Four out of the sixty collisions involved
a pedestrian with two fatalities. The installation of the proposed
improvements would reduce the potential of serious accidents.
April, 2010
4
5-11
For a multi-lane road (4 or more lanes), with no raised median, posted
speed limit of 35 mph, and an ADT greater than 10,000, it is recommended
that marked crosswalks alone are insufficient and that additional
treatments should be provided (Zegeer Study). This section of Fourth
Avenue is a four-lane road with a 35 mph posted speed limit and an ADT of
10103. Therefore, as part of this project we are proposing raised
medians with refuge area, pedestrian signalsr roadway narrowing, enhanced
overhead lightingl beacons I traffic-calming measures, and curb
extensions.
Traffic calming treatments will benefit pedestrians who are crossing
Fourth Avenue by slowing down vehicular traffic, shortening crossing
distances, and enhancing motorist and pedestrian visibility. The
overhead flashers will increase the percentage of pedestrians for whom
motorists yield. Refuge islands will often serve to channelize
pedestrians into marked crosswalks. In conclusionl these improvements
and devices will improve the pedestrian environment.
Scoring Rubrics:
Applicant provides a clear, detailed description of all the safety hazards currently being
encountered and a compelling need for resources to address those hazards. Provides a full
description of the surrounding environment including issues related to roadway geometries,
vehicular speeds, sight distance, neighborhood characteristics, roadway shoulders, signage,
lighting, etc. Provides documentation of recent injuries and fatalities among children who
walklbicycle to school. Documentation may be in the fonn of reports from the Califomia
Highway Patrol, safety studies, walkability audits, school surveys, etc.
High (8-10 pts.):
Medium (5-7 pts.):
Low (0-4 pts.):
April, 2010
5
5-12
2. Potelltial of the Proposal for Reducing Child IlIjuries alld Fatalities (ratillg factor 2).
Describe how the proposed project will address the safety problems currently being
encountered.
The proposed pedestrian facilities will serve children attending
Montgomery Elementary School. The existing facilities will be enhanced
with a number of features to greatly improve the routes leading the
school campus, encourage more pedestrian use, heighten the awareness of
motorists driving through the school zone, and calm traffic. New curb
extensions, a pedestrian refuge on Fourth Avenue at Montgomery Street
directly in front of the school, signage upgrades, and prominent striping
around t1ontgomery ES will be provided. Additionally, the improvements
should encourage more pedestrian use and heighten the awareness of
motorists driving through the school zone.
The project \1ill increase the awareneSS of motorists by constructing a
prominent and highly visible crosswalk. Flashing yellow beacons and new
warning signage will also be installed in each direction on Fourth
Avenue. The crosswalk will be very prominent so drivers will more than
likely notice children crossing to and from the school.
The Traffic calming improvements proposed for this pro] ect encompass a
series of physical treatments that are meant to lower vehicle speeds and
volumes by creating the visual impression that certain streets are not
intended for high speed or cut-through traffic. Thus, traffic calming can
improve safety for pedestrians and reduce noise and pollution levels.
By constricting the roadway, proposed bulbouts are intended to slow
vehicles down and increase the likelihood that motorists will see
pedestrians sooner than they would otherwise. In other words, more
pedestrians would have the benefit of motorists yielding to them.
Bulbouts may slow vehicle speeds, thus increasing the number of adequate
gaps. Therefore, it is expected that bulbouts would shorten the time that
pedestrians must wait to cross the street. Bulbouts will also give
children an additional safety barrier between them and motor vehicles,
and give them a chance to safely retreat to the sidewalk, if necessary,
until a more appropriate time to cross. Refuge islands are also proposed
which will serve to channelize pedestrians into marked crosswalks.
In conclusion, proposed traffic calming treatments will benefit
pedestrians who are crossing the street by slowing down vehicle traffic,
shortening crossing distances, and enhancing motorist and pedestrian
visibility and environment.
The City has prepared a Pedestrian Master Plan -to guide the way the City
plans and implements pedestrian improvements considering the City's focus
on ensuring safe routes to schools. This plan was adopted by the Chula
Vista City Council on June 22, 2010. The Fourth Avenue corridor was
included as Priority #S of the top 30 priority corridors recommended for
pedestrian improvements. The recommended improvements for this corridor
consisted of high visibility ladder crosswalks and advance stop lines at
April, 2010
6
5-13
the Fourt.h Avenue and P!l.uita Street intersection. These recommendations
are included in this project.
An installation of a mid-block crossing on Fourth Avenue was not
considered because it would be too close to the intersection of Fourth
Avenue and Anita Street.
Scoring Rubrics:
Applicant links the proposed fixes within the project to the specific safety hazards currently
being encountered. Includes performance measures that will be used to determine project
effectiveness. Describes the full range of alternative solutions that were considered but were
rejected along with an explanation of why they were rejected. Provides a clear rationale as to
why the proposed project was determined to be the preferred alternative. May include a
description of past efforts undertaken or currently underway to address the safety hazards.
High (10-15 pts.):
Medium (5-9 pts.):
Low (0-4 pts.):
3. Poteutial of the Proposal for Encollraging Increased Walking and BiLyclillg Among Stlldellts
(ratillg factor 3). Describe how the project will help keep the momentum going after project is
completed.
Continued growth and decentralization throughout the City of Chula Vista
have increased the number of cars on streets and highways. High traffic
volumes and speeds, especially on a collector street, such as Fourth
Avenue, have raised residents concerns about safety, noise, and
pollution. The Fourth Avenue corridor is wide and has high traffic
volume and speed as compared to other streets in the neighborhood.
As part of WalkSanDiego school audits mobility study, community
members/parents specifically cited the importance of increasing safety
around Montgomery ES and Fourth Avenue corridor through the installation
of crosswalks at this location to create an environment that is
"pedestrian friendly.1I
It is expected that the proposed improvements will increase walking to
school for a number of reasons. Parents may be understandably wary of
allowing their children to walk or bicycle to school along the routes
that presently lack improvements. This is evidenced by the fact that
many parents drop their children off by car. The proposed improvements
are expected to go a long way towards eliminating physical barriers to
walking, alleviating safety concerns associated with the physical
amenities of the school rout.e, and increasing parental confidence in
allowing their children to walk to school.
The creation of a highly visible crosswalk along Fourth Avenue will warn
drivers to be more cautious approaching this crosswalk where none
currently exists. Parents will also feel more confident about the safety
of the new enhanced crosswalks I the bulbouts, and yellow beacons - all
designed to create a safe crossing area to the school. It is anticipated
that a greater number of children ".,rill walk to school when the major
April, 2010
7
5-14
obstacles to walkability that now exist are removed. Once parents
embrace the many health, economic, and environmental benefits of walking
versus driving, it is expected that there will be a significant decrease
in daily vehicular trips to and from Montgomery ES and a concurrent
increase in pedestrian traffic. As more parents observe larger numbers
of children safely walking to school, they are likely to have more
confidence in the safety of the school routes for their own children and
from "walking school busses."
City Engineering and Police staff participates in the Elementary School
District Steering Committee meetings. These meetings provide an avenue
for community outreach and input in order to improve school access and
the general health of students. This can include the promotion of events
such as "Walk to School Day" and pedestrian and bicycle education
programs that teachers can integrate into their everyday lesson plans.
An additional $1500 has been included in the grant application to promote
such activities at Montgomery ES.
Montgomery ES has recently started a daily school-wide walking club
called the "Montgomery Soaring Eagles". This takes place every morning
as students are waiting for class to begin. Parents have been notified
and are welcome to join in this activity. The proposed new improvements
should encourage more students to participate and encourage a healthier
lifestyle.
Based on an FHWA Study (Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks
at Uncontrolled Locations, Executive Summary and Recommended Guidelines,
2002), more than 70 percent of pedestrians under age 12 crossed at marked
crosswalks where available. We expect a greater percentage of children
would walk and bicycle to school on a daily basis due to the project.
The City of Chula vista's Bikeway Master Plan identifies Fourth Avenue as
a designated Class III bike facility.
Scoring Rubrics:
Applicant cites built-in sustainability measures in the project that will continue to keep students
motivated to walk or bicycle to school after the project is completed. Provides assurance that
once the project is completed, efforts will be taken to educate and encourage children on the
benefits of walkingfbicycling and on how to use the facility correctly. Examples might be the
inclusion of a bicycle/pedestrian safety element in the school curriculum, the formation of an on-
going task force with members committed to working with the school(s), the neighborhood, and
the community in promoting non-motorized commute modes for children and adults. Another
example might be the formation of incentive programs e.g. "Walking Wednesdays", "Preikers
Program" (Frequent Bikers), bicycle rodeos, walking school buses.
High (8-10 pts.): '
Medium (5-7 pts.):
Low (0-4 pts.):
April,2010
8
5-15
4. Idelltification of Current and Proposed Walkillg and Bicycling ROlltes to School (rating factor
4). Describe how commute routes will be improved.
As mentioned above, The City of Chula vista adopted its first pedestrian
Master Plan on June 22, 2010. This Plan will help the City develop
solutions for making it safer for children to walk and bike to school.
The Pedestrian r~aster Plan identifies and prioritizes pedestrian
improvement projects based on technical analysis and community input and
",ill aid the City's eligibility for grants such as the Safe Routes to
School Programs. The south Fourth Avenue corridor was included in the 30
recommended priority locations for construction of pedestrian
improvements.
The routes identified by the residents at the "Kids Walk and Bike to
School" workshop were Anita Street between Third Avenue and Fourth
Avenue, all streets around Montgomery ES, Beyer Way, Fourth Avenue
between Main Street and Montgomery Street. The location for the proposed
project was selected for this application because of the need for traffic
calming on Fourth Avenue in front of Montgomery ES.
This project is consistent with the Vision and Themes of the City's
General Plan (GP). Specifically, Theme 3: Strong and Safe
Neighborhoods! states that, "Citizens feel safe to walk within and among
neighborhoods and allow their children to do the same." The main purpose
of this project is to improve pedestrian safety. The Vision and Themes
(V&T) and the Land Use and Transportation (LilT) Elements of the currently
adopted GP serve as the foundation for the development of the Pedestrian
Master plan goals, objectives and policies. The Pedestrian Master Plan
elaborates upon the Vision and Themes established in the GP by developing
a,series of vision and policy' statements specific to walking. For
example: "Provide sidewalks throughout the main thoroughfares...1f This
project is consistent with the City's Pedestrian Master Plan.
Scoring Rubrics:
Applicant provides a detailed description of routes currentiy being used by children as they
commute to and from home to school, and how those routes will be improved. Includes
discussion of geographic configuration, infrastructure features (or lack thereof), neighborhood
characteristics, etc. Provides a graphic comparison of current vs. proposed routes illustrating the
specific safety hazards that will be addressed. Provides evidence that the proposed project is
consistent with a larger community vision as documented in the General Plan, School Safety
Plan, Community Circulation Plan, School Travel Plan etc.
High (4-5 pts.):
Medium (2-3 pts.):
Low (0-1 pts.):
5. Consultatioll and Support for Projects by School-based Associations, Local Traffic Engineers,
Local Elected Officials, Law Enfo/'cemellt Agencies, School Officials, and Other Relevant
Community Stakeholders (rating factor 5). Demonstrate strong local support for the project and an
integrated approach to improving safety.
April, 2010
9
5-16
As mentioned before, City staff in collaboration with WalkSanDiego,
hosted a series of community meetings and workshops at public elementary
schools throughout the City gathering residents to conduct walk audits
(walking neighborhood assessments) and create a plan for improvements in
their neighborhood. On November 8, 2008, WalkSanDiego, in partnership
with the City of Chula vista, conducted a community workshop with 25
residents and school staff at Montgomery ES located at 1601 Fourth
Avenue. The purpose was to identify pedestrian and bicyclist safety and
access issues for residents living in the neighborhood surrounding
Montgomery ES (defined by school attendance boundary). The goal was to
identify solutions with an emphasis on making it safer for children to
walk and bike to school. This workshop is part of "Kids Walk & Bike to
School" plan.
The walk audit gave Chula Vista residents an opportunity to walk through
their neighborhood with representatives from the City and WalkSanDiego,
pointing out specific challenges residents face when walking within their
own neighborhoods. After each walk audit, WalkSanDiego lead the efforts
in a discussion with residents to document and prioritize improvements,
thus creating a plan to improve pedestrian safety in every neighborhood
in Chula Vista.
WalkSanDiego prepared a report of all of the issues and suggested
solutions reported by residents during each school workshop. In turn,
these solutions were submitted to the City of Chula Vista and a copy is
provided to the school principal as well. The City of Chula Vista
reviewed the report in order to develop an improvement plan for this
school neighborhood based on the community input provided during this
school workshop. Additionally, this report was provided to the City's
consultant for the Pedestrian Master Plan and was considered in the
recommendations for improvements.
The Superintendent of the Chula vista Elementary School District has
given his support of this project (see attached letter). The problems
discussed in this application as well as the proposed solutions resulted
from a collaborative process of problem identification, problem solving
discussions, and modifications over the last few years with school
officials in concert with City staff including the Chula Vista Police
Department, and a stakeholders group that was convened several times
during the preparation of the Pedestrian Master Plan. Additionally, the
Pedestrian Master Plan and the results of the walking audits were
presented at four community open house workshops. Separate presentations
were also given to the Northwest Civic Association and the Southwest
Civic Association.
The proposed improvements will be a better alternative
enforcement activities that are generally deemed to
short-term measure, but less effective in the long run,
costly alternat;:i ve. The proposed improvements
facilitate safe walking, and prevent the accidents and
increasingly likely under current growth conditions.
to Police traffic
be an effective
as well as a more
will permanently
injuries that are
The maj or stakeholders/agencies/organizations that participated in the
development of the City of Chula Vista Pedestrian Master Plan were:
April,2010
10
5-17
. Chula vista Chamber of Commerce
. Chula vista Elementary School District
. Chula vista Planning & Building staff
. Chula vista Planning Commission
. Chula vista police Department
. Chula Vista Public Works/Engineering
. Chula vista Safety Commission
. Northwest Civic Association
. walkSanDiego
Scoring Rubrics:
Applicant provides evidence of strong community collaboration and partnership in the
assessment of safety needs and in the development of a project to address those needs. Cites a
high degree of participation by schools, parent groups, community coalitions, local champions,
neighborhood groups, organizations and agencies representing law enforcement, health,
education, and transportation safety.
High (4-5 pts.):
Medium (2-3 pts.):
Low (0-1 pts.):
6. Deliverability (ratillg factor 6). Describe the agency's past project implementation performance.
Describe any issues or concerns that may impact the delivery of the project.
The City of Chula Vista has received grants and other funds for similar
projects and has been able to complete the projects in a timely manner.
Completed proj ects include: pedestrian and traffic calming improvements
at Harborside ES completed in July of 2008 and pedestrian infrastructure
improvements near Chula Vista High School funded by Hazard Elimination
Safety (HES) grant. Other projects include: "major sidewalk and other
infrastructure construction near Castle Park Elementary School funded by
a low-interest HUD loan; Lauderbach ES to be completed in the spring of
2011, funded both by a State-Legislated Safe Routes to School grant; Rice
Elementary and Otay ES traffic calming projects funded by a
Federal-Legislated Safe Routes to School to be completed by the end of
2010.
There are no issues or concerns such as environment.alt right-of -",ay
acquisition, utility relocation, the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) requirements that would delay submittal of the Request for
allocation to proceed within six months.
In the case of this specific project at Montgomery Elementary School, the
Engineer'S Estimate shows only the construction costs. The Project Cost
Estimate above details all the costs associated with this project. The
most likely funding sources for the $17,000 local match would be the
Traffic Signal Fund or TransNet.
Scoring Rubrics:
April, 2010
11
5-18
Applicant verifies that there are no projects on the most recent Cooperative Work
Agreement (CW A). Refer to: http://www.dot.ca.govlhq/LocaIPrograms/CWNcwa.htm
There are no projects on the most recent CWA.
Applicant has no Projects on CW A (5 pts.):
Applicant has Projects on CW A (0 pts.):
The following attachments are required:
A. A general map showing the location of all proposed improvements and their proximity to
the school and school routes.
Note: The map should clearly identify the route that students take to school.
B. A site plan for each improvement location showing existing and proposed conditions.
C. Detailed Engineer's Estimate (Use form provided on SR2S web site)
D. Applicable 'warrants' for projects with traffic control devices.
Photographs supplementing "A" and "B" above and letters of support from partners and
advocacy groups are highly recommended.
April, 2010
12
5-19
VI. APPLICATION SIGNATURES
The undersigned affirms that the statements contained in the application package are true and complete
to the best of their knowledge.
Local Agency Official (City Engineer or Public Works Director)
Name: jZ.c/l"- HOfklt-f ~
Title: 0/17 f?Vp,
Signature: CO ~ /./7______
/~? . //!-/~ L-f7
School Official: The undersigned affirms that the school(s) benefited by this application is not on a
school closur~hat has been identified by the School DDZ~~
Name:~<lu.~tt) ~ \f' e;\o.oc;c.OSigna' , . \ .
Title:~{\(/\~o..\
Person to Contact for Questions
Name: Roberto Solorzano
Title: Associate Engineer
Phone Number: 619-409-5420
Email: solo@ci.~hula-vista.ca.us
Caltrans District Traffic Office Approval
If the SR2S project application proposes improvements on a freeway or state highway that affects the
safety or operations of the facility, it is required that the proposed improvements be reviewed by the
district traffic office and either a letter of support from the traffic office be provided or the signature of
the traffic personnel be secured below.
Caltrans District Traffic Office Approval:
(Signature)
(print Signing Traffic Personnel's Name and Title)
April, 2010
13
5-20
California Highway Patrol Approval
If the SR2S project application proposes improvements on a freeway, state highway, or county
road having California Highway Patrol (CHP) enforcement authority, a CHP Officer must
approve of the project.
California Highway Patrol Approval:
(Signature)
(Print Signing Officer's Name and Title)
Local Law Enforcement Agency Approval
- -
If the SR2S project application proposes improvements that do not require a CHP Officer's
approval, it is recommended that the applicant either obtain a letter of support from the local law
enforcement agency to show acknowledgem and support of the project or have a local law
enforcement representative sign below:
(Signature)
6>112<1 Locr.>6lC r c..~AI";
(Print Signing Officer's Name and Title)
April,2010
14
5-21
I '
'Wiif~\1~1lI1~~~I~r-
III' III, ,I
f}:- '1-/~'~l:~!l~:,:"';"~i~~i:t~)':;:~~_:_I; ;::::\ \_~~J
ANITA'ST- ....------.
1:x<~X,'~~'0>:
I ,(.(;<:~/' , \~." '
". -'< ... ~ '"
. . ">)" ':-('"
! ~~~<~SB~~': -";~~~~;
j ~,,">9.0<>~/ >-.:y.~'/x"
, MONTG~OMERY ST '
;1111[1,),1..,[1 ~~UUI[]ImJ
I I I' r' i II ! Z:~::li II Ii I,; ,
i~r:j-lf~l:j~1~;=': ~1:r~},,'ld'Lc=,I,_.
, I "11,,: ,c, ' 1'1 I ,1,.-
('-rIrT--TJ}!::': l/l'J[!I~t[J
MAIN ST
[_ _.LI'I_"-'-~ -' U i ,I "I
+t"I::'i":-:'~I'
'J)-'11 1 i'l
~ ''! 'l L ,I ~I I
J'/4" c II
L ,}' ,r.-
1'i '
, ;~;'; ~ .
I ,;,cc;:ry:.;-"cc:,7,;","'\": "'"
, ,IL' 1 :-11' .-- :--';~:.:Tr;:'!:~r"l'~-ri,:':"\ "r-J:Tr ~ r_H"rU",' '-r'I--"'[""-I'-\"""i'-,-"r:rr-r-
'i ! I ' I", ,,,,,,,,,iI'-r,,L,,, ClANNALlNDACT,' 'i I " "
~Jfi~~til~j~liilri~1~1:;if~jl1f
t j::l{jJ~i,:51~j;I'G!\=lii;; Ill,H~'I.ie+T~i;~I:rr:~ii:',n
I' . ". i ., r ..... J~!i;-~~ii~:\iit-li+HC'L\,J\111Ji-:
'\:" . Ii,:. :lil::"~'\IIF!SJr'~II~}ljJi~-:I.i}J.JLiLlTI
\jl "II n "Cl T['I,r"", ,-, I'
; :~.l 'T: "f~!H; i:ii: .:" 'i: :'1'"; }.. \--~:,{; ,'-I.J:.j (1-:11[1
..': 'j !:< .JUII. ~ 1" ,'.1- :'1'- 'ii \::i:::-_':::-Th1~.__,_:.i.,.L-
,,',!, [, .._,II '.'.,_1__,.,.," ,,' "Il' 'I
.__L..H-'__ -:."..__\0 I ' II I co:"",,__
'~ .;J) \.
\~.."
\\\
~
, ., Lr.l(
I ,-I'LiJ!] Lr}f~\~':i'.
.- <( ._, L' J r: )~.: i.:.; (' ;....ll.
\,l_f,._.iz~'.~_.;.:,:-."""':' 'II :;i in! j I[ :L: ! ie,il
'I il'':'' l'IIL\:
> i') I ~+~:..I:,I,."":"'" ,[i. ','i'~"~'~"~1 !~"I,:,.'",:r.':""~.:J.,!,,'.:I'I,,llll .111,.",,--,:,:,
i ,.!I..f,-,i.;-n}.i.,....!i.[:!".."J;": ,'1.1 "Iti i T.1.I,.;,)
~ I I' .'Ii ,,','~"",i,"" ['
I ""'i'-' .,1 _1\ I II I" L: , ;..;..
["'-"TITI ,; [!~~ln~:'IJ,:,,:;-; I}ti',1 " r::-:
~:~:,-i'JF';;i:~::\: LL;, (I
MONTGOMERY ES ,TREMONTST
1"I!i':"".'~:XI
._,..Li" :LL, ;"/.X
, '
'\
''>-'
):i'e
-. -"~~r ",:""
---._.:\J'j._,
ORANGE'AV
-",...-.,:
::~\>..'-
'0\"'"
~~\L~.'
,
j"'j--r
_~.i..,'".
1
i
i
;-rrcl-rT _.;-.~-.
! Ii; 1 II 'I \ I
C L!!.._cL1J~-t,:.i~J ,!:.-1.
I iiTI:-''j';''--'-T:''T-'-:rl'I
..J i.-lll.'.;"U.: J-,,;:L:J'_:.L:1
[~JTIJ~r'T.l}]~Y:'~;J l-lJ[ :-~ll .E j, i
I~.---"-""" - -q~~_;r:-] ;_ ~UJ_~ki.j:_'J:;;.:Il..,!.
""T',.",<T'T,f:',?,':l,'", L I a. j I I I'
I i JILL,!: l' it:'7i;"i7li:i
l__,:l?rr};.~~~~J.I:J~!I,.~:
BETHUN
CARVE
Ii ilT,
L.,~._,_:..- _,J -
JL\I;_.! ~
ANITA
b.~i:: (J..l'
.\:.1
IT:F:f~C':_] -~r:I"'
'..',-J,.
...TREMON
I' ,.l ';'1'): \"'1
.L':_L...l ;
~{~
~:~TFr.T.L1 i:
<:( MONTGOM
-mi' .rrlTJIJ]
1;,::rr'T'rr:--I!:;i
1""c!.i)j'l _'
~_ ~:_IJ:i.,__Lu..1
ZENITH
;.'1 LJJrI~]~tc
i"'"
. ~ ~
\" ~ i"
, I'
I.:
Ii
\'.(!. ;':L"-l
j,:1 ;~,. i:.-t
i,ill.],
rlL.:.L:
~.' >
"if
~':T~;:::i\:J::.:,J;:!':'7Li:~:! ,::( :-: ';"1
iiLijJjLi_ I
,,'If--
::s ~ OlY OF
. ~ CHULA VISTA
MONTGOMERY ES - LOCATION MAP
State-Legislated Safe Routes to School Program - Cycle 9
PREPARED BY'
ROBERTO SOLORZANO
July 2010
:$\!!?- CITY OF
..~ (HUlA VISTA
EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS - MONTGOMERY ELEMENTARYSCHOOL
Safe Routes to School Program - Cycle 9
PREPARED BY:
ROBERTO SOLORZANO
SHEET 1/1 July 2010
. . . I
"('.' i
/1-" l f 'I
L:I _~. ,"" \',.~ .!.~.})i, .:"~.,,, 1.
[' c~~
,1+
I i,.~ \
[t~crJ!llIl!lIl\:J I!UI'w
, , ,
I' ' I
',,_ l ' II'"
.~ '
1 ' '
U ' NO SCLE ' PROPOSED ENHANCED CROSSWALKS
j ; '~. "
,
;
i
,I,
.il
,
!_J.
.OJ'',
1:'''''':'
f'
~ j
T"
.::$.1'[-. CITY OF
::-~-:;- CHULA VISTA
\'1 '
, ) ~\, 1Jw.__
l___.___
",:,;;
j\
"-.<>
,;_.,
.~_1
,. -.Cl,C,-.c: -.'.~
"-~-"'~-"""''''~' ,. .~::~:..::--~_.~._--.::..~-_..__.
._---------------_.._;...:~---~-~
I!I:iI
j ,-.
""."ANITAST
,-,_,~,,,,,!'~~_.:,d~';i:i$ii~;;,,~4ti:('J;!~---'"
-, I
" '
\ I
:~.h~
<;-,,--,
'" ;.._.";.,~,,,~ .:'C. ..'",i>. 'l; c.,,,-.-,,
Ii!!!!I
Ii!!!!I
Ii!!!!I
"1:,,'
"-",,,,:;~,~""--"''''';~~--'-'''''''-''-'''''''''''-~''-1iii 00 llJ ,:
I
j
i
!
l..~'._.,
': _,~:~ I r'-~~:'\J~T{J~'
!~' 'i~',; .1 j'
1 .,' _. l' ~
'v'r'
1"'!0r:~
li'f~:'
1
.".~~""~
,
PROPOSED ENHANCED CROSSWALKS
Ili!lI
~" ";~;:;,'" ''',''''~, MON:r,GOMERRX, ST ,,,,,, f~H,\ : . rnm
,,~~"_. ,"',',:,;'}:;: ~~"i;;") " ,,:,;: :(~ .,<*::~~'" :,,;,r,:'Tft lJ!i'Ii~ifp;m.;' 'd'
:1'" '~~';1, , -- i 1l".i ';,; .---:~.. ~:~~.;,,<:~:~~:~L~, ~:-- ''::'' ~:~'~)<>:'i~5"ii' -=-~~:l;~~~:'-~~~c)~!,"~rrl!J [!] 111 [ijir:~~~k;;i,:;:,:"''-
~
:I:
h
[)!" ,_('. ~~;~~;t~
:Jiil
o:t\J..l ~
u.'10W~;,:!'t'
1;;\:\?l.,/,J:"
~r.~";~:":'\ j"~;!'F'"
~'.
>,;...,
M.o,NIGOMERY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
~&~.~\):~%'tl.?{i~;;;~;:j~\{::~:\:~;., . -^
.. .-; \. '.", ~2:;;~~l:'~;.~
;'1
'['"\'~:f;~\~t''CLi,i
,,1.'-
0,:'"
PROPOSED ENHANCED CROSSWALKS
Ji't:'
a_:1;,"'~\
;
,
i
i
,
1
!
I
,
I
I
I
I
!
,
~
o
z
(J')
w
0::
u.
TREMONT S
i
!
i
I
I
I
1
r~:;'" ,,,LC_ "
;
,
I
-'"-
.~ .
ie.,
!-:.t!:{:t\l'~'
._u___.._2':':':'._~
Ii!!l
PREPARED BY:
ROBERTO SOLORZANO
July 2010
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS - MONTGOMERY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
State-Legislated Safe Routes to School Program. Cycle 9
Detailed Engineer's Estimate
For Construction Items Only
Project Name:
prolect Location:
City of Chula Vista
Pedestrian Safety Improvements within the Montgomery Elementary School
Pedestrian Safety Imorovements on the oerimeter of Montaomerv Elementarv School
Anencv:
Date of Estimate:
Prenared bv:
Mav 20, 2010
Boushra Salem
Item No.
Description
Quantity
Units
Unit Cost
Tntal
1 Removal & disposal of eXIsting improvements ..............~.............. ...........~~.......... ,....~~9.~9.~~:.~.?_. ........m...__.~.~~~~.?~
............2......'. pcc"curb"&'gi:iii;;;'@'b\iib:oUiS'p;;;"s6RS6'G~2""""""'" 150 LF $20.00 $3,000
.........3......... 'pc'cA6A'P;;d;;siii~;;Raiii;;s"""'"'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''4''''''''''' .........E!i...........$s:000:.00..........$20;.OOO
""'4"""" ADA.18:..iio.ii~5Ifp.:;idewaikgraiing...................... .........80.................'[.1"........ """""$9iioif""""'$7;ZOD
.........5................ .stripi.;;g~.cro:;5w~ik.iiiii.ii'liiie..&.iege.;;d................................. .............'1............ .........LS.......... ........ii',soooo.. .................$3;50.0
.................6................. i~~taiT:;;e[iovizeb.ra..sLYle.cr~s~waW(.o.n.Mo.nig.ome.ry.St..&.... ..,...........1.............. .....~....[s.......... .....$1.o:o6o~o.o.. .................$1.0.;000
..........._........__.....__.~~t1b.8.Y.~..l.!:!~.f~ection-".---.-..._...._____...__ ~--.---. ---~- --.-.----.... ---......--..
7 Removal of existing striping & re-striping 1 LS $1,000.00 $1,000
.....-......-8-....--..--.. Pedestri~nsignaIlButtonStan.dard---.--... '-"---2-- --EA--'- $12,500.00' $25,000
....--..........fi...........- Advanc'ec;jWamfng S1gns witli- Flashing Beacons _.-~- -~.._... $4,500.00" $9,000
-.-........-10....---.tviedlan nose signs 2 EA $500.00 $1,000
-...............1'1................. ii1SiaiIS'chooTione-i;igiisiSpeed"Uiiilt'sig'nstSchool""- ''''-''15--- ...".... EA --- -.........$500.00-.....--...$7,500
Advanced Warning Signs/Stop Signs
........-.......1.2................. .Pu.biic..C'oriven.ance..&,..S.afetY.(Tr-afflc..Controi)'......................... ..............1...........~ ........'[8........-. ......1Hjj.:6oo~.oo.. ..................$1.0:.00'0
.........13............" P~vemeni.R.eSiorati;;.n'......................................................... ..........i._............LS...'.. ,..$12;000.:50...............$12;000
.............14.........con;;iructio;;.s.;;Ne;;st~k;ng..............,............"................................1....,...... ......LS..'.......$1.0.;000,00................$1.0.;600
.::.::::::::1:~::::::::::~:s.~:~r;;:.v.'!~~~r.:9.?:r;;.p.ii;;.n.~;;:',::::~:::::::::::::':::::::::'::::::::::::::.:::~:::':: :::.::::::T::::::::~ "::::::::~.s.:::.::::. :::::J~;:o.?o..5?:: :::::~::::..::::::~.3.;.o.?g
......m.__......_.................. .........._..................~.......__....................._...........................n.m................. ..._....................... ....m................... ............................. ............."..................
...................................... ....................................................-.................. ...................-.................... ............................. ...-..................... --...~...~.................. ....... .......................
TOTAL:
$132,200 I
SR2S Cycle 9 Montgomery Elementary Detailed Est.xlsMontogmery(@4TH)07l13/2010
5-25
Students crossing Fonrth Avenue at mid-block in front of Montgomery ES
::=~c='."- -5=2 &- .
--,,-~-~,._--_._---""
Student crossing Fourth Avenue at mid-block in front of Montgomery ES
. .5-21
Student's family crossing Fourth Avenue at Montgomery Street
5-28...
Installation of Pedestrian Crosswalk Warrant Study
Location: Montgomery Elementary (Fourth Avenue & Montgomery Street)
Speed Limit: 35 mph
85th percentile speed: 36 mph (12/24/2003)
Pedestrian Volume Warrant
Criterion: The total number of pedestrians crossing the street under study during the peak pedestrian hour.
This includes pedestrians in both crosswalks at an intersection. Crosswalks will not be installed
where the ped volume (peak ped hour) Is 10 or less.
Total Peds: 56
Point Assignments
Pedestrian Total
0-10
11 - 30
31 - 60
61 - 90
91 -100
Over 100
Points
o
2
4
6
8
10
Points 4
Points
2
2
2
2
Points 8
General Conditions Warrant
(a) Will clarity and define pedestrian routes across complex intersections
(b) Wil! channelize pedestrians into a significantly shorter path
(c) Will position pedestlrans to be seen better by motorists
(d) Will position pedestrian to expose her/him to fewer vehicles.
Gap Time Warrant
Criterion: The number of unimpeded vehicle time gaps equal to or exceeding the required
pedestrian crossing time in an average five-minute period during
Average Number of Gaps
per Five-Minute Period
0-0.99
1 -1.00
2 - 2.99
3 - 3.99
4 -4.99
5 or over
Points
10
8
6
4
2
o
2.35
Points 6
Total Points 18
5-29
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
84 EAST "J" STREET' CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910.619425.9600
EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
June 10, 2010
The Honorable Cheryl Cox
Mayor of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Letter of Support for Safe Routes to School Grant
Dear Mayor Cox:
It is with great pleasure that I provide this letter of support for the City of
Chula Vista's "Safe Routes to School" grant proposal. It is my understanding
that the proposal consists of infrastructure/capital improvements to the areas
surrounding John J. Montgomery Elementary School.
This grant proposal would allow the city to install traffic calming
improvements like sidewalk extensions, enhanced crosswalks, enhanced
overhead lighting, flashers, ADA pedestrian ramps, pedestrian traffic signals,
refuge islands, and warning signs to surrounding areas of John J.
Montgomery Elementary School, which has a student population of 398. We
also believe that these improvements will encourage'more students to walk
to school and become more physically active.
''-.,
Thank you for your,support of this proposal.
,
SOARD OF EDUCATION
DAVID BEJARANO . RUSSELL Y. CORONADO . LARRY CUNNINGHAM . DOUGLAS E. LUFFBOROUGH,I1I · PAMELA B. SMITH
SUPERINTENDENT
LOWELL J.SILLlNGS, ED.D.
5-30
RESOLUTION NO. 20 I 0-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING A GRANT OF $165,780 FOR
STATE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL FUNDING CYCLE 9
FOR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC CALMING F ACILTTIES NEAR
MONTGOMERY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT FOURTH
AVENUE AND MONT GOMER Y STREET
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2010, Council approved Resolution 2010-163, which authorized
staff to submit grant applications for State Safe Routes to School flmding for improvements at
three locations. It was proposed that the matching fumls would be provided from the City's
TransNet allocation; and
WHEREAS, on October 20,2010, City staff received a letter from Caltrans stating that
the City of Chula Vista had been awarded $165,780 in SR2S funds out of the Fiscal Year 20 I O-
Il allocation for the Montgomery Elementary School pedestrian safety project. Local matching
funds of$18,420 are required; and
WHEREAS, as part of the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Capital Improvement Program, $200,000
from the City's TransNet allocation was appropriated into TF345. Sufficient funds are therefore
available in this project to provide the required local match of$18,420; and
WHEREAS, this project is recommended to be programmed in the FY 2011-12 CIP
Program as a new project, STL375 "Montgomery Elementary School Pedestrian Improvements",
which will be brought forward to Council for approval during the FY 2011-12 budget process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby accept a grant of $165,780 for State Safe Routes to School Funding Cycle 9
for Montgomery Elementary School Pedestrian Improvements STL375 Project.
Richard A. Hopkins
Director of Public Works
Presented by
5-31