City Council
Infrastructure Workshop 2/7/08
Chula
Vista
Missing
and Non-Standard
Infrastructure
Part
II:
_Missing and Non-Standard
Street
Infrastructure
_Utility Wire
Undergrounding
On Thursday
February 7, 2008 the Chula Vista City Council revisited the Pavement and Drainage Infrastructure deficit previously
identified by staff in April of 2007 with these goals (video):
*
To present the second status report on infrastructure
management program, highlighting missing, non-
standard, and degraded street infrastructure and utility
wire undergrounding
* To obtain approval of the ADA
Curb Cuts Priority List
* To elicit
discussion on priorities among competing
infrastructure needs
* To elicit
discussion on potential revenue sources
Assistant City Manager
Scott Tulloch gave an introduction
(video) where he explained that this was the second of three workshops on
infrastructure. After the first the council adopted the Pavement Management
Program and the prioritized drainage projects. Staff has been implementing
these programs and starting on the drainage projects in the order adopted.
He explained that the purpose of the
workshop was to discuss needed capital projects to install missing
infrastructure and most importantly to maintain in good repair existing
infrastructure. These are projects that go to low bid contracts. Public Works
does maintenance things in house like pothole repair and graffiti removal (397-6000)
but most maintenance projects are contracted out. If all of these projects were
to be done at once the cost would be over 400 million dollars. The third
workshop latter in the year will deal with ways to fund missing and deferred
maintenance. He also mentioned that this was a nationwide problem. It is
estimated that to fix every bit of infrastructure in the U.S.A. would cost 1.6
Trillion dollars.
Assistant Manager Tulloch reviewed the
state infrastructure bonds passed by the voters and the local Transnet tax,
which was recently renewed by voters. He pointed out that 73% of the voters in
Chula Vista voted for it.
He also mentioned the sewer vote, which is a protest vote. 52,000 people got
a notice in the mail and only 47 wrote and submitted protest letters. The sewer
system in the city is the infrastructure in the best shape, because it is consistently
maintained. Video cameras are used to inspect the inside of the pipes and they
are regularly cleaned. This is because it is easier to get increases necessary to
maintain the system.
The public hearing for this sewer
increase was held on Tuesday, February 5 at 4PM. Only two retired people came
to complain. Several council members expressed a great deal of concern about
the increase and the discussion lasted quite a while. Click
here and then on 15 to see this discussion. YOUR SEWER BILL IS BASED
UPON 90% OF YOUR TWO LOWEST MONTHS' WATER USE BETWEEN SEPTEMBER AND APRIL.
The biggest issue with sewer is not the
state of repair of the 13 pump stations and over 477 miles of sewer lines in
Chula Vista, which are all in good shape. The issue is Metro Wastewater, which
treats all our sewage and that of 14 other cities. The Point Loma
Plant is now operating under a modified permit allowing it to avoid upgrading the level of treatment of the sewage it processes. The permit must be renewed every 5 years and is up for renewal this year. The City of San Diego has requested another Modified Permit. If that is denied, then the additional costs for the capital project and the additional operating costs would be necessary. It is likely such an upgrade would cost in the hundreds of millions,
and we would have to pay our share.
Click
here to read the article written by Tawny Maya McCray for the Star News on the
sewer issue.
Jack Griffin and other staff did a PowerPoint presentation, which is summarized here.
1. The Drainage Priority List (Video).
This is a status report:
_
Approval of
five-tier Priority List at April 2007 Workshop
_
Emerson St. Drainage project recently completed
_
Ongoing CMP
Replacement Project
_
Bonita and
Long Canyon listed as Tier 1 projects in
Regional
Water Management Plan
_
Telegraph
Canyon Channel improvements at Third Ave.
and
L Street under study
_
Second Ave.
Drainage project recently completed
2. The Pavement Management Program, basically no more worst first
(see Issue Three), was another point. The
emphasis now is on Pavement
Preservation (Video):
_ Pavement Management System
endorsed at April
2007
workshop
_ Pavement Management is
based on using most
cost-effective
rehabilitation strategies Citywide
_ Pavement transfer of $11.5
million into Pavement
Management
adopted on 5/1/07
_ $1.8 million and $3.2
million seal contracts
awarded
in Aug.-Sept. 2007
_ $450,000 digout contract
awarded Jan. 2008
3. Missing Infrastructure was emphasized:
_Pedestrian ramps (curb
cuts)
_Curb, gutter and sidewalk
on arterials
_Curb, gutter and sidewalk
on other local streets
_Bicycle infrastructure
To make the situation more graphic and
easier to grasp a quarter mile circle has been drawn around each elementary
school with a cost estimate for providing
all infrastructure (Video). This ties into grant funding available for Safe
Routes to School. The city has obtained some funding and will be holding
workshops at each of the elementary schools in the city where residents
will do "walking audits" and provide input as to what their
priorities are. Castle Park Elementary was used as an example.
Jack contrasted
the difference between Castle Park Elementary, which is west of Hilltop, and Kellogg,
which is east. The point being that the County had less stringent building
codes so the area annexed in 1985 is lacking more infrastructure than the area
that built up as part of the city, which required curbs, gutters and sidewalks
as a requirement of construction.
The requirements for pedestrian ramps has changed over the years so
almost everywhere these need to be put in and/or upgraded. The city does a lot
of slurry seal instead of other kinds of maintenance, because other kinds of
maintenance require them to put in the new ramps at the same time, and the city
can't afford to do this.
These are all the currently needed improvements and cost by school:
4. There is also a concern about
non-standard and degraded
Infrastructure (Video):
_Pedestrian ramps: constructed under older standards
_Sidewalks: narrow, gravel or asphalt material, cracking
_Cross-gutters (Video): condition and/ or drivability
_ Evaluated based on degree
of drivability
_ 87 locations evaluated,
including citizens. requests
and
all facilities crossing arterials or collectors
_ Criteria include: street
classification, traffic volume,
slope
and presence of stop sign
_ Location near pedestrian
access is also a consideration
_ Cost can vary
significantly from site to site
5. These are the city's Infrastructure Planning Efforts
(Video) Discussed:
_ 2005 Bicycle Master Plan
_Recommends 18 CIP
projects, $4.25 M est. cost
_ Pedestrian Master Plan
_Consultant selection in
process, est. award June 2008
_Kids Walk and Bike to
School Program
_Community meetings and
walking audits for 36 schools
_Western Chula Vista
Transportation DIF
There will soon
be a Western Chula Vista Transportation DIF (Development Impact Fee). The problem with this is that these fees can only pay for the
increase in traffic caused by the project. The project gets credit for existing
traffic. This means the fee will pay only an estimated 25% of the costs
(according to Jack). The question is where will the other 75% come from? This
is part of the financial problem the city now has. All the development in the
east that was supposedly paid for by the development actually only was
partially paid for by these fees. Things got put in the ground, but now the city must find funds for maintenance. New homes will
have assessment Districts to pay for maintenance but this is a new idea. All
the existing development is the city's responsibility to maintain.
6. The last item discussed was the
Status of Utility
Undergrounding (Video):
_ 16 undergrounding
districts completed during the past 15 years
·
_Districts in process:
· _Bayfront
in construction
· _Fourth
Ave. from L Street to Orange Ave. in construction
·
_L Street from Monserate Ave. to Nacion Ave.
in design
Rudy Ramirez was the first councilman to comment. He brought up tax
increment and how important it is to sell the infrastructure program to the community (Video).
Councilman Rindone commented last and made it clear he would not support a bond (Video).