Loading...
Agenda Packet 1992/03/03 óiJ der;!~re under penalty of perjury that I am em~roj'ej by tile City of C;1U¡a Vista in the o.:',::co 0;' the City C!erk an:::! that ¡ posted , ¡" ';'~'n""r""i"e t' ~ II" 8 ",.'.:J h,:,lw! ..;,.; ,.;U~.. en I~e ol1 e"m oard at Tuesday, March 3, 1992 ',;," ',l:"'i¡S'D)ces Bu!;:I;c1 ~at Cjt~! on Council Chambers 4:00 p.m. [. . i.-' , .~ ~ ..J) 9.2- SjG",1~~1 0"· c-. ". . . , - ,,-- "-'-r "___ Pubhc Services BUlldmg Resrular Meetinsz of the City of Chula Vista City Council CALL TO ORDER 1. ROU. CALL: Councilmembers Grasser Horton -' Malcolm -' Moore -' Rindone -' and Mayor Nader _. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SJLENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF M1NUTES: December 19,1991 and FebruarY 15,1992 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Proclaiming the Month of March 1992 as "MENTAL RETARDATION MONTH" - The proclamation will be presented by Mayor Nader to Mr. Anthony De Salis, Area Director of the Starlight Center. b. Proclamation commending the Bonita Optimist Club for their "Family Park Project" at Rohr- Sweetwater Park - The proclamation will be presented by Mayor Nader to Mr. Jerey Fulk, representing the Bonita Optimist Club. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 5 through 12) The staff recommendations regarding the foUowing items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the Councü by one motion without discussion unless a Coutu:iJmember, a member of the publú: or City staff requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a "Request to Speak Form" avaüable 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 recommendoiion.) Items pulkd from the Consent CaIendnr will be discussed after Action Items and Boards and Commission Recommendations. Items pulled by the pub1ú: will be the first items of business. 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter requesting a renewal of lease for The American Legion - Robert L. McCauley, Chairman Building Committee, The American Legion, Chula Vista Post 434, 47 Fifth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA b. Letter of resignation from the Design Review Committee - Adrienne Landers c. Letter requesting waiver offees in excess of $1,000 for Used Car Facility at 1506 Broadway· Fernando Durazo, 272 A Rancho Court, Chula Vista, CA 91911. _w_ ,______ --.-- __ ___....__._...____..____ _" ,u_·, _ Agenda -2· March 3, 1992 d. Claims against the City: Claimant No. 1) Mr. Cipriano Torres, c/o Law Office of Cesar E. Trevino, 860 Union Street, San Diego, CA 92101, and 2) Mr. Eliseo M. Villa, Paul W. Legler, Esq., Attorney at Law, 231 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. It is the recommendation of the claims adjustors, Carl Warren & Company, and Risk Management that the claims be denied. 6. ORDINANCE 2496 ADOPTING THE SAN DIEGO DMSION OF THE LEAGUE OF CAIJFORMA CITIES GRAFFITI ORDINANCE (second readinsz and adoption) - The San Diego Division of the League of California Cities appointed a task force to deal with the problems of graffiti throughout San Diego CounrY. The City of Chula Vista's City Attorney, in conjunction with the San Diego County City Attorney's Association, developed a model graffiti ordinance. The San Diego Division has requested that all cities adopt the model ordinance. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Councilman Moore) 7. ORDINANCE 2495 CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION FROM I-~P TO C-C-P FOR THE SOUTIiERN 1HREE ACRES OF THE PALOMAR TROIJ.EY CENTER PROJECT, AND MAKING FINDINGS TO PERMIT APPUCATION OF THE "P" MODIFIER; AND CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION FOR ZONING CONSISTENCY SUBAREA B-3-A FROM APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL (R-3) TO APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL WITH A P-MODIFIER, NOT MORE 11iAN TWENTY-1WO UNITS PER ACRE ("R-3-P-22") (second readinsz and adoption) - The City-initiated General Plan Amendment, MontgomerY Specific Plan Amendment, and rezone for three acres located on the southerly side of Palomar Street are required actions for implementation of an expanded 18.2 acre Palomar Trolley Center commercial project pursuant to Council/Redevelopment Agency direction in August 1990. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Plarming) 8. ORDINANCE 2497 AMENDING SECTION 2.05.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABUSH THE CLASSIFICATIONS OF POUCE CAPTAIN AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND HOUSING IN THE UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (first readinsz) . On 2/25/92, Council approved the movement of Police Captain classification from the Mid-Management group to the Executive group, subject to ordinance adoption. Additionally, Council approved placing the position of Assistant Director of Building and Housing in the Unclassified Service; however, the Municipal Code was inadvertently not amended at that time. Approval of the ordinance will place both positions in the Unclassified Executive Service. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on first reading. (Director of Personnel) 9. RESOLUTION 16528 DIRECTING CALL FOR CONSTRUCTION BIDS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD) - Preparations are being made to bring Assessment District 90-2, Otay Valley Road, to the Council in the near future for a public hearing. As a preliminary step in the proceedings, it is -..--..<-- --- -"_._._-,-~. - -..-.-.---..-..--,.---.-..------.-..---'-..-. ..----- Agenda ·3· March 3, 1992 recommended that the City advertise for construction bids at this time. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 10. RESOLUTION 16529 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RANCHO DEL REY FIRE TRAINING TOWER LOCATED AT "H" STREET AND PASEO RANCHERO· The general scope of the project is to construct a four-storY concrete fire training tower on a two-acre site on Paseo Ranchero adjacent to East "H" Street. Currently, the City's only existing fire training tower exists at the East "J" Street Fire Station. Construction of the new fire station at East" J" Street has restricted the use of the existing fife training tower and a new training facility is needed. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and award contract to Diversicon General Contractors in the amount of $236,775. (Director of Public Works) 11. RESOLUTION 16506 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WI1H FN PROJECTS TO PROVIDE LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING WITIilN SALT CREEK I - Condition No. 11 of the Tentative Map required the applicant to reach an agreement with the City to devote 10% of the project units to low and moderate income housing. The agreement provides for 2.5% low and 7.5% moderate income housing within the Salt Creek I "Condominium Project Area". The developer will subsidize the low income units be depositing $301,878.15 into an escrow account to be used by the City to assist approximately thirteen low income purchases in Salt Creek I. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) Continued from the meeting of 2/25/92. 12.A. RESOLUTION 16530 APPROVING AGREEMENTWITIiESGIL CORPORATION TO PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SERVICES . The agreement will provide engineering technical support to the Department of Building and Housing for plan review on projects which mandate greater expertise in structural engineering due to complexity of the structural or building envelope analysis. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. (Director of Building and Housing) B. RESOLUTION 16531 APPROVING AGREEMENT WI1H WIIJ.DAN ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SERVICES - The agreement will provide the Department of Building and Housing with plan review on projects which mandate greater expertise in structural engineering due to complexity of the structural or building envelope analysis. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. (Director of Building and Housing) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES The foUowing items have been advertised and/or posted as pub1ú: hearings as requÙ'ed by law. If you wish to speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form' avaüable in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior _ ._._......_,...._.'_'_M' _ _.. .____.._._____._ "-" -_._---_."_.,-_.~---_._._.._-- . Agenda ·4- March 3, 1992 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 recommenda1ion.) Comments are 1imiJed to five minutes per individual 13. PUBUC HEARING CONCERNING THE COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABIU1Y SfRATEGY . The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all jurisdictions applying for ftmding assistance under most programs administered by HUD to submit a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy. Staff recommends Council open the public hearing and take public comment. (Director of Community Development) Continued from the 2/25/92 meeting. REPORT DESCRIBING THE COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABIU1Y SfRATEGY (CHAS) 14. PUBUC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF THE DRAFT CHULA VISTA HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1991 - The City-initiated amendment to the City General Plan constitutes an update of the Housing Element of 1986 as required by State law. Staff recommends Council approve the resolution. (Director of Planning) RESOLUTION 16532 ADOPTING THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1991 AS A COMPONENT OF THE CI1Y GENERAL PLAN ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is an opportunity for the general pub1ú: to address the City Coundl on any subject matter within the Council's jurisdú:tion that is not an item on this agenda. (Stale law, however, generaIIy prohibits the City Councü from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Council on such a subjec~ please complete the yeUow "Request to Speak Undo Oral Communú:ations Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to spea1c, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. YOIIT time is 1imiJed to three minutes per speaker. ACTION ITEMS The items listed in this section of the agenda are erpected to e1ú:it substantial discussions and deliberations by the Council, staff, or members of the general pub1ú:. The items will be considered individuaI1y by the Councü and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the a1temotive. Those who wish to speak, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form avaüable in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Publú: comments are 1imiJed to five minutes. 15. RESOLUTION 16525 CAlJJNG AND GMNG NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION AND REQUESTING THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSOUDATE THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HElD ON TIJESDAY, JUNE 2,1992, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITI1NG TO THE VOTERS AN ADVISORY QUESTION REGARDING THE BI-NATIONALAIRPORT AND A CHARTER AMENDMENT REGARDING RUN-OFF ELECTIONS, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR - Staff recommends approval of the resolution an appropriating $25,000 from the unappropriated general fund to 100-0170-5202. (Assistant City Attorney Rudolf and City Clerk) 4/5th's vote required. Continued from the meeting of 2/25/92. Agenda ·5· March 3, 1992 16. RESOLUTION 16533 APPROVING AN APPROPRIATION OF $14,168 TO AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 91/92 BUDGET FOR NORMAN PARK CENTER AND PUBUC WORKS OPERATIONS; UPGRADING A RECREATION SUPERVISOR n POSmON TO SENIOR RECREATION SUPERVISOR; ADDING A ONE-TEN1H FUIJ. TIME EMPLOYEE RECREATION LEADER, AND A ONE-HALF TIME CUSTODIAN I - On 12118/90, the City awarded a $2.3 million contract for the renovation of Norman Park Center. Construction began in JanuarY 1991 and staff begins the move to the new Center on 2117/92. When the budget was being prepared for fiscal year 92, the anticipated completion date for the project was not definite. Therefore, the Norman Park Center budget was approved for twelve months of this budget year, for the 5,000 square foot building leased during construction of the new Center. The resolution will approve funding necessaey to operate for March through June in fiscal year 92 in the new building. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation) 4/5th's vote required. TInS rrnM HAS BEEN Puu.ED FROM THE AGENDA 17. REPORT CONSTRUCTION OF DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS NORTH OF EAST NAPLES STREET FROM HILLTOP DRIVE TO 767 FEET EAST . On 5/28/91, Council directed staff to set up a meeting with property owners directly impacted by this project. The meeting was held on 8/8/91 and at that meeting the Mayor and several residents requested a detailed construction alternatives study and cost estimate. The report summarizes the alternatives considered and staff recommendations. Staff recommends that Alternative No. 3 be adopted which consists of replacing the existing unimproved channel with a concrete lined invert and grass lined side slopes. (Director of Public Works) 18. REPORT APPEAL OF STAFF DENIAL OF THE DEFERRAL OF INSTALLATION OF PUBUC IMPROVEMENTS AT 619 MOSS STREET . Last September, Frank Jimenez applied for a deferral of the requirement to install the public improvements along the frontage of the property at 619 Moss Street. The ensuing investigation by staff revealed there was no basis for the granting ..... of that deferral request, and it was denied. In accordance with Section 12.24.070, the applicant is provided the opportunity to appeal the decision to the Council. Staff recommends Council accept the report and deny the request to defer the requirement to install public improvements. (Director of Public Works) BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS This is the ~ the City Council will consido items whida have been forwarded to them for considoation by one of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Commit:tu.s. 19. Letter requesting Council add the Child Care Commission to the list of those involved in the evaluation process for the CDBG applications - NancY Cavanagh, Chair, Child Care Commission , ,-.-- Agenda -6- March 3, 1992 ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR This is the ~ the City Council will discuss items whú:h have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agenda items pulkd at the request of the pub1ú: will be COIISÜlerril prior to those pulled by Cmuu:i1members. Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual. OTIiER BUSINESS 20. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) a. Scheduling of meetings. 21. MAYOR'S REPORTCS) 22. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Rindone: a. Council referral to Charter Review Committee regarding Mayor's salaey and fringe benefits. ADJOURNMENT The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss: Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Arciniaga v. CirY of Chula Vista Instructions to negotiators regarding personnel pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on March 10, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A special joint meeting of the City CounciVRedevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council meeting. --.--. "-.----,---..".--.. " - t~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATBMBNT \. ITEM ~ 0... MEETING DATE 3/03/92 ITBII TI'lLB: Proclamation - Proclaiming the Month of March 1992 as "MENTAL RETARDATION MONTH" SUBMITTED BY: Mayor Tim Nad~ (4/5TBS VOTE: YES_ NO""::' The proclamation declaring March 1992 as "MENTAL RETARDATION MONTH" will be presented by Mayor Nader to Mr. Anthony De Salis, Area Director of the Starlight Cente. 40..... , } , , , WHEREAS, mental retardation Is a condition which affects more than six-million . American citizens and their families; and WHEREAS, once isolated and ignored, people with mental rotardation now enjoy greater educational and social opportunities; and WHEREAS, es old stereotypes reflecting fear and ignorance crumble. away _. adults with mental retardation now hold responsible jobs and Ove in our communities; and WHEREAS, every five minutes a baby is born with mental retardation and through understanding and community support, these children now go to schools and interact with their non-disabled friends; and WHEREAS, during the month of March, state and local chapters of the Association for Retarded Citizens highlight existing programs for people with mental retardation; and WHEREAS, the Association for Retarded Citizens has served San Diego county;s citizens with mental retardation for over 37 years, helping our communities to realize that men, women and children with mental retardation are valuable people to know as . , neighbors and friends: NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby proclaim the month of March 1992 as ·MENTAL RETARDATION MONTH" in 'the City ofChula Vista, California and urge our citizens to understand that with their support, people with merr.al retardation will become more independent within the community: . , , :f)ateá t£~8t'!dry!ý- February. /9.2L· ~~-z.' _.~ - - .-..r...___~,,_.~.~ .-..--.. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item tt-b Meeting Date 3/3/92 ITEM 1TfLE: Proclamation: Commending the Bonita Optimist Club for their "Family Park Project" at Rohr-Sweetwater Park SUBMTITED BY: Director of Parks and Recreatio~ The Bonita Optimist Club has proposed to the Parks and Recreation Department, a "Family Park Project" at Rohr-Sweetwater Park in the Fort Apache Hill area. The Club will undertake a two-year fund-raising project to purchase various types of playground apparatus which will be located in the Fort Apache Hill area at the direction of the Parks and Recreation Department. The Bonita Optimist Club will solicit the local area businesses and private citizens to raise the necessary funding. Each business or individual who supports a particular piece of equipment will receive recognition via a plaque at the equipment site. The goal of the fund raising campaign is $20,000 which will purchase the following play apparatus. A. (1) Elephant slide B. (1) Bear twin rider C (1) Lifetime whirl D. (2) Rodeo rocky with spring E. (1) Seal with spring F. (1) Frog with spring G. (1) Space ship Columbia H. (1) Jt. interception with spring I. (1) Grand prix rider J. (1) 14' cyclone slide K (4) 38" square picnic tables L. (1) Tot table M. (4) Park benches N. (1) Custom play structure The Department endorses and supports the "Family Park Project." This partnership will be part of a continuing effort to form partnerships with the businesses and service organizations in the Community to improve the quality of life in Chula Vista. Me. Jerry Fulk of the Bonita Optimist Club will be present to accept the proclamation. fampark 4b ./ _...._^- ,.". "----- -~-,---_.._- --_..__.~----~-~ ,..,-,...... COMMENDING THE BONITA OPTIMIST CLUB FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FAMILY PARK IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Bonita Optimist Club has undertaken the goal and responsibility of developing a family park project; and WHEREAS, this family park project will be located in the Rohr Park area presently known as Fort Apache Hill; and WHEREAS, this park will directly benefit the families and children residing in the Bonita/Chula Vista area and strengthen family relationships; and WHEREAS, this project will encompass the joining of both private business and community residents funding for the mutual benefit and improvement of the area's quality of life: NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby COMMEND THE BONITA OPTIMIST CLUB for their development of a family park and with the strong endorsement of the Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Department, hereby authorize and encourage community involvement and support for the establishment of the BONITA OPTIMIST CLUB FAMILY PARK. 4b-2 "---.".-, - ---~-_._-_.~--.-.- ---.- "-.. ,. .__._-.-~----,_.__.,., February 28, 1992 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: John D. Goss, City Manag~ SUBJECT: City Council Meeting of arch 3, 1992 This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council meeting of Tuesday, March 3, 1992. Conunents regarding the Written Communications . are as follows: Sa. This is a letter from Robert L. McCauley, Chairman of the Building Committee, requesting renewal of the lease for the American Legion. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT STAFF BE DIRECTED TO CONTINUE NEGOTIATING WITH THE AMERICAN LEGION UNTIL AN AGREEMENT IS REACHED ON THE KEY BUSINESS TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF CONSTRUCTING A NEW FACILITY AT EUCALYPTUS PARK. 5b. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT ADRIENNE LANDERS I RESIGNATION FROM THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET AND THAT A LETTER OF APPRECIATION BE SENT TO MS. LANDERS. 5c. This is a request from Fernando Durazo requesting waiver of fees in excess of $1,000 for a used car facility at 1506 Broadway. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS REQUEST BE REFERRED TO STAFF AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW, EVALUATION, AND A REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL. 5d. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY FILED BY MR. CIPRIANO TORRES AND MR. ELISEO M. VILLA BE DENIED. ... JDG:mab trans -_..._.._._--.~----~._-_._._-_.__..__.~-----,._._----_.-~----_._--_. 5q The American Legion Chula Vista Post 434 ....' "." 47 Fifth Avenue ··~···-'''''''·'r. t,,\ C.:-' 1\ ,., ¡:-J ¡: Chula Vista, CA 92010 \r ìiJ I_~: 422-9309 ¡;;'''';;:;.;......'''"~,.- ,~."" .--" February 25, 1992 Æ8 2.4" Honorable Tim Nader , Mayor and City Counsel Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mayor; We at the Arner i can Legion would like the City to revisit where we are regarding our Veterans Memorial Hall located at 5th and C Street. Prior City administrations, armed with copious amounts of Community Block Grant money, envisioned relocation of our Post Home to make I way for progress (additional parking) . The initial plan by the I them Parks and Rec Director was to deny our lease renewal for a variety of reasons. He thought that that was the way to remove the I American Legion from HIS park, and allow for his expansion plans. I Since then, the Legion has been in a defensive pos ture trying to I work with the City for our survival. Much water has passed under the bridge since the last current lease renewal was objected to. At this time it looks like the agreed upon relocation of the Post Home to the swamp land below the existing site is becoming more and more unattainable. Reasons include cost to both of us, publlC hearing requirements (that may or may not be popular) , CEQA's, f inancin,~ agreements. use agreements (by who when) , design agreements and criteria, determination of the plot size, drainage requirements, access to the facility (ingress) issues, parking requirements, buildable pad issues and perk testing, liability and indemnification, to mention a few. In view of the above, the Legion feels it is in our mutual interests to just quietly renew the old lease. The Legion in turn will indemnify the City of any liability, and use our Building Fund monies to improve the aesthetics of the Post Home. For God and County C- t ~: 'B. ð. ~ flTI. Robert L. McCauley C,ly ~ 4il2\ Chairman Bldg. Committee ~~ ~~~) WRITTEN COMMUN~(';¿~'¡'~·~ ~'V.iII~S ~~Q.}K '5 Þo..-I - ----.- .,.,_...,__,_.,_m___'..__ .'.._ 5b RECEIVED "92 ÆB25 A8 :39 CITY G~ ~H" > "T.A. . Jr L UL.~ "J ~~'J . CITY- C' L~,. '".LC' f'E ~ LL(\f',.-j \..I¡ ;" L< , February 24, 1992 The Honorable Mayor and city council: This is to advise you of my resignation from the Design Review committee, effective March 1, 1992. I will be moving to the city of Oceanside and will no longer be able to participate on the Committee. I appreciated and enjoyed the opportunity to serve the city of Chula vista. I would like to take this time to commend the staff of the Planning Department. They are responsible for the superior quality of design that is evident throughout the city. I am sure their efforts are appreciated by residents of the community. Sincerely, ~~ Adrienne Landers WRITTEN COMMUNICA TJONS ~~~~ ll\) ~0\~ ~ ~\~ ~~\ 5b- \ -~----_.._.. _ _n_..~_.._~·__'_'__'_·__" ...-.. 5Ò February 21, 1992 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Ayenue Chula Vista, ,CA 91910 Subject: Waiver of Remaining Fees Conditional Use Permit PCC-92-12 Used'Car Facility, 1506 Broadway Chula Vista, CA 91911 Dear Mayor and City Council: On December 4, 1991, the planning department denied my request for subject permit and I did not appeal to the city council. On September 9, 1991, I mailed a check in the amount of $1,000.00 to the City of Chula Vista, per the planning department's request. Copy of canceled check is enclosed. On December 5, 1991, I received a letter from Steve Griffin, Senior Planner, informing me that I still owed $1,874.02 on the original application. Then, on January 9, 1992, I was informed that the amount had increased to $2,232.62, which is over and above the original $1,000.00. It is beyond my comprehension that the planning department can charge whatever they want, without any breakdown of fees incurred. The planning department's fee schedule dated June - 1990, does not even come close to what they are request- ing; therefore, I request that you waive ~4e fees in excess of $1,000.00. Your investigation into this greatly apprec- iated. - V~trUlY yours, ( , i ..... \ ,'j' ~~~ ~'o'~azo 272 A Rancho Court Chula Vista, CA 91911 Enclosure L"" ~\~ l'\) \1f'"'!!n'T"7'E~~ rr!nl ¿.~ ""1'>"8 "I'.:", ~'\:. ~ ',' ¡;'\i~ ~ ~ . ~ 'ÌJ J'f":O:' ;¡~ ~ \¡'~ ,,,,, ;,,"-'" " ,g,,'(",.(" ;'t t' ~\,~J!!IIIJ ... U.¡;J '~~:''¿" '~/ å .~ U .:. ~\, ~\- 0;.. "'" i.J 't¡¡¡ ~ ù\) }I\"~,,,^ ~. \ ~c.-I . , ---.-.... ,",:",,~, '" , ENDORSE HERE .oo (I)'..:; _. _... - - . . ~ " -..-- -.., . ,- <D - a:' ' 0 .... c( .' ~I 0 . 4 .... _ _.__. .~ _.~ ~- ..... . '10 ,- ,-' 0 I 16/£[160 1 l' ~~~2 ,(\ <t~ -' *~ 0 0 1 }i::tHJ. L!Ü' 0001 . -._':- .'. , c 0 ! z.¡)~;)S-ç¡::~;::·J~ ;;'J.~¡h~~·· ~.' ~'~-. ~ ... ri~~C: J.l;;;,.~3:J ~~i¿:~ ": :" ).DR;NOT.WR:TE, SIltMP OR SIGN BELO\'. TF!S ...¡¡-IE ....... ,'-' "'AE'!;rr.V~t)-Fo'R 'rrNAr~CIAlINST1TUTIC!\ :';, * , !!! t :- ., ~I , J " (V) "I .... ~ J - ,,, -, \ i ,..,-"........"..."'1 V ~ '~ &:~ - - . .'.., ""'Z ~~ .. ".1 F ".' . .... ~ ,- '... , ij"' '........:... ,-..-..i ~ ~ .. i..' J .~ ... ;..' <;J-- J ~~'A -..- ," 0 0" , ... '" ~ 0 S ~.... 'f-.- ..' '"... ,'. ra .;.o.¡.: ~ ru ['- 0 .. ['- -1220 ','.; j, J (a661- ru ,- 0 ,:wa:r: :OJ + _..Co;! (/) 0 N =;¡u.; .., a: 0 'm!....~ ._~ 0 ru p.. ~.- .... ru . co"" ,,' 0 <:::J w~o w =aeo o - - .... ::E - it ~ V),=~S 0; .. ~ ð - _"1900 u¡ >~C;; ::E~< ~gg ~ o~n- ¡¡;õ 0<'" I ª LD z°"- ['- oäi~ L11 , ,ØDCIO\'''' m~o i :::' O~> or.:;¡>' ru -~ w_:5 ~ g GI I ¡ .... ::> ~~i 0 0 :I: . ~,i U\ ""i '" ~ !; ! ¡ N G;§ I ....j , '- - a: I .-cr: JP :;) 0 W ;¡;) i",~ ..t, en ... .:.~) . , . ' '" I ! ,..- _o·r· 0 \ f ".~ ~ "0: ~ x.. f h" >-....., a: , iff!~ 0 .',' ... *FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD OF GOVERNORS REG CC ,..'....,... l --.- ~ 5"Q..--Z COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT 'SÁ. Item Meeting Date 3/3/92 ITEM TITLE: Claims Against the City tJ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___ No~) SUBMITTED BY: Director of personnelL: ,'7 " REVIEWED BY: ci ty Manager~ Claimant No. 1: Mr. Cipriano Torres c/o Law Office of Cesar E. Trevino 860 Union street San Diego, CA 92101 On January 31, 1992, Mr. Cipriano Torres filed a claim against the City of Chula vista for personal injuries he and his wife allegedly received on October 31, 1991, when their vehicle was rearended by a Public Works vehicle. The claim seeks damages within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Court. Although we are continuing our investigation, it is desirable to start the statute of limitations and it is our adjustor's recommendation, concurred in by Risk Management, that this claim be denied. Claimant No. 2: Mr. Eliseo M. Villa Paul W. Legler, Esq. Attorney at Law 231 Fourth Avenue Chula vista, CA 91910 On February 7, 1992, Mr. Eliseo M. Villa filed a claim against the City for an amount within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Court. Mr. Villa seeks damages for personal injuries he received when bitten by a Police canine during the dog's search of an area for burglary suspects. Mr. Villa was in the area where the burglary suspects had fled and was arrested for being under the influence of an inhalant. Due to remote liability on the part of the City, it is the recommen- dation of our claims adjustors, Carl Warren & Company, and Risk Management, that the above claim be denied. RECOMMENDATION: Deny the above two claims. j Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79) r¿;e1. ~ I ---.'''....-...".-.'''-.''-.---...-...".- -",.,-,..,---_.,-,,,_...._..._,-,,.,.,.._.- 0'('; Co ~b ORDINANCE NO. ~l. I)J«¡ ~.'l¡ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VQ CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 9.20 OF THE "'lvÔ MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT THE MODEL GRAFFITI 4 ORDINANCE SPONSORED BY THE SAN DIEGO DIVISION '(:b,ö OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES" 7ì-Q ~ WHEREAS, graffiti has become a nuisance of catestrophic proportions in all areas of the County of San Diego, including the City of Chula Vista, thereby requiring a uniform, county-wide solution; and, WHEREAS, based on an model graffiti ordinance initially sponsored by the City of Chula Vista, the San Diego Division of the League of California cities has ratified a proposed model graffiti ordinance, and encouraged each of the respective cities in the County of San Diego to adopt said model; and, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: section 1. Chapter 9.20 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended, in its entirety, to read as follows" " Chapter 9.20 PROPERTY DEFACEMENT 9.20.010. Purpose and intent. 9.20.020 Definitions. 9.20.030 Prohibition of defacement. 9.20.040. Punishment Provisions. 9.20.045. Detection Provisions. 9.20.050 Accessibility to Graffiti Implements. 9.20.055 Removal Provisions 9.20.060 Prevention Provisions 9.20.065 Parental Involvement Provisions 9.20.070 severability 9.20.010. Purpose and intent. It is the purpose and intent of the City Council of the City, through the adoption of this chapter, to provide additional enforcement tools to protect public and private property from acts of vandalism and defacement; especially, but not limited to, graffiti on privately and publicly owned walls, which are inimical and destructive of the rights and values of private property owners as well as the total community. It is further the intent of the City Council, through the adoption of this notice upon all of those who callously disregard the property rights of others, that the law enforcement agencies of the city, both the police department and the prosecutor's office, will strictly enforce the law and severely prosecute those persons engaging in the defacement graf41. wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 1 & J"',Æ E O~b ,/III11>1t.6 t-I stA/tINib FEð %5 ,.,'- A"S/lJþ* --_.__._~-,.. .... .._-,. ...~- - -- -----"-----.-. - -..----------- -----,-,---.-. of public and private properties. 9.20.020 Definitions. . A. Graffiti As used in this section, "graffiti" includes any word, figure, or design that is marked, etched, scratch , drawn, painted, pasted or otherwise affixed to or, on any su ace, regardless of the nature of the material of that structural com nent, to the extent that same was not authori~ed in advance by t e owner thereof, or, despite advance authori~ation, is otherwise deems by the Council to be a public nuisance. B. Aerosol Paint Container MAerosol paint container- mean. any osol container, regardle.s of the material from which it made, which adapted or made for the purpose of spraying paint or other subst capable of defacing property. C. Felt Tip Marker "Felt tip marker" means any in elible marker or similar implement with a tip which, at its broadest w dth is greater than one-eighth (1/8th) inch, containing an ink th is not water-soluble. D. Graffiti stick "Graffiti Stick" means a evice containing an solid form of paint, chalk, wax, epoxy, or other s' ilar substance capable of being applied to a surface by pressure, an upon application, leaving a mark at least one-eighth of an inch in wid h, visible from a distance of 20 feet, and not water-soluble. 1 E.. "Graffiti Implemen " means an Aerosol Paint Container, a Felt Tip Marker, or a Graffiti Sick. 1. La Mesa to add glass cutters. graf41.wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 2 ;l<;-~ (,~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item~" ~,\\p~ Meeting Date 1ri.",/~ ~1 ~l~ sJ> ITEM TITLE: a. o~e:èe"4qlø Amending Chapter 9.20 of the Municipal Code to Adopt tM!:M el Graffiti Ordinance Sponsored by the San Diego Division of the _<: ',~gue of California Cities' ,\..'...V çS:,9' b R 1 t' I~ S-¡IÞAd . th S D' D" . f th Lea f c'¡'" , "eso U Ion opting e an lego IVlSlon 0 e gue 0 ::> California Cities' Anti-Graffiti Program. SUBMfITED BY: Councilman Moor~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..1L) The San Diego Division of the League of California Cities appointed a task force to deal with the problems of graffiti throughout San Diego County. From Chula Vista, Councilman Moore, the City Manager, City Attorney and Deputy Director of PW/OPS were involved in the Task Force The City of Chula Vista's City Attorney developed a model graffiti ordinance which was reviewed by the task force and the San Diego County City Attorney's Association. At the same time, the League Task Force developed an anti-graffiti program. The San Diego Division has requested that all cities adopt both the model ordinance and the anti-graffiti program. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Ordinance which will delete the City's current Property Defacement chapter of the Municipal code and replace it with the Model Ordinance. Adopt the resolution which will adopt the anti-graffiti program. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: Graffiti has become a growing problem throughout much of San Diego County. During the Spring of 1991, then Mayor Pro-Tempore Moore along with the City Manager and City Attorney met with the Presiding Judge of the Juvenile Court to request his assistance in more severe sentencing of juvenile offenders involved in graffiti crimes. The Presiding Judge was very supportive of their request, but indicated that it would be beneficial to get all the cities in San Diego County to deal with graffiti in a similar manner. A Chula Vista subcommittee on graffiti problems had been formed in May 1991 and had reached the same conclusion. As a result, the San Diego Division of the League of California Cities formed a Graffiti Task Force to develop both a comprehensive Model Ordinance and Anti-Graffiti Program. Since Chula Vista's City Attorney wrote the Model Ordinance, it is very similar to Chula Vista's existing Graffiti Ordinance. There are, however, several improvements that have been incorporated in the Model Ordinance and will be discussed below. This listing represents all of the differences between the current and proposed Graffiti Ordinance. All of the following section numbers refer to the proposed amended ordinance. . SECTION 9"20.020.D This section defines a "graffiti stick" and adds graffiti sticks to the list of "graffiti implements". The first graffiti sticks were those used in construction trades to mark pipe, streets, sidewalks, etc. Now, however, new products with names such as "devil stick" are being sold which could be construed as just for graffiti. ~ ~( ~5~ -f .....--.---.------.. .._~---_.,_._.,-_._-- "--.._,-_._---~~_.._.._~-_._-,._._-, Page 2, Item~S~ Meeting Date 2/25/92 · SECTION 9.20.030.C This section makes it unlawful for not only minors, but also adults to have graffiti implements in many public places. · SECTION 9.20.040.A This section permits the City to require that minors that commit certain offenses in the City, perform Community Service in the City. It is expected that much of that service would involve graffiti eradication. · SECTION 9.20.04S.A This section memorializes the reward already authorized by City Council with the acceptance of Supplemental Budget Report #25 for FY92. · SECTION 9.20.040.B This section authorizes the payment of ceIlular telephone direct charges for individuals reporting either graffiti in progress or existing graffiti within the City limits. Staff is exploring free service similar to the Traffic reports currently provided by Pac Tel CeIlular. · SECTION 9.20.0S0.A This section differs from the current section in that it omits aerosol paint containers, but adds other Graffiti Implements. This was done since State law already prohibits the furnishing of aerosol paint containers to minors, but is silent on other Graffiti Implements. · SECTION 9.20.0S0.B This section is not changed from the current section. However, a similar provision applying to aerosol paint containers ordained by the City of Los Angeles has been found invalid on the presumption of State Preemption by a lower court. The City Attorney recommends that enforcement be suspended until final appeals are heard in that case. This wiII not prevent staff from requesting and encouraging merchants to foIlow the Ordinance as it relates to aerosol paint containers. It may be that in some cases a visit by an interested Council person would help encourage the merchant. · SECTION 9.20.0S0.D The Model Ordinance limits this provision to minors. Staff, however, recommends the adoption as proposed so that the damage caused by any person would fit under this section. · SECTION 9.20.0SS.B.2 This section is in response to requests Council made during various reviews of our current Graffiti Ordinance. · SECTION 9.20.0SS.C.! This section would permit the use of public funds to remove graffiti in very specific cases. The main purpose is not to use public funds, but to gain entry to private property. It may be, however, that in certain cases (such as financial difficulty) City Funds would be used to prevent further disfigurement to the neighborhood. · SECTION 9.20.0SS.D.! Electrical utility boxes are excluded since special anti- conductive paint must be used on them. AIl of the utility companies, including SDG&E, have been very cooperative in giving City Forces and volunteer groups graffiti removers. · SECTION 9.20.0SS.D.2&.3 Both of these sections came about as a result of Council discussions on preventing graffiti in future developments. · SECTION 9.20.060.A Again, this requires property owners to take responsibility for the design of their structures in ensuring that they do not encourage graffiti. · SECTION 9.20.060,B Permits the City to require that the owner of property that is a frequent target of graffiti take action to make it more difficult to apply graffiti in the future. , ~:::... - z h~¡' Page 3, Item ¡S~ Meeting Date 2/25192 The proposed Anti-Graffiti Program (which is attached) submitted by the League Task Force contains many of the elements already used by the City of Chula Vista. It was prepared to furnish other cities with the experience gained by Chula Vista, La Mesa, and San Marcos in their anti-graffiti efforts. Additionally, it attempts to provide for uniform treatment by juvenile offenders and provide the Juvenile Court with consistent diversion programs. Staff recommends that it be adopted by resolution to show Chula Vista's support for the program. None of Chula Vista's current practices will change as a result of the adoption of the program. F1SCAL IMPACT: None from this agenda statement. The Council has already appropriated a total of $200,000 for FY92 for graffiti control. - ¡.~.. ~ b-.3 - - ,-----.---.,..----.--....---..--..------.- - -- -~- "- --------,,-,-- 'IHIS PAGE BlANK " , . . ~<~ 'I ~.L-t 9.20.030 Anti-Vandalism Provisions. A. Unlawful to Apply Graffiti. It shall be unlawful for any person to apply graffiti on any public or privately owned structures located on public or privately owned real property within the City. B. Possession by Minors. It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of eighteen years to have in his or her possession any Graffiti Implement while upon public property or upon private property without the conaent of the owner of such private property whose consent is given in advance and whose consent shall be given as to the person's presence while in the possession of a Graffiti Implement. (i) School Exception for Felt Tip Markers. The foregoing provision shall not apply while (1) the person is attending, or travelling to or from a school at which the person is enrolled, if the person is participating in a class at said school which has, as a written requirement of said class, the need to use felt tip markers. C. Possession in Designated Public Places. No person shall have in his or her possession any Graffiti Implement while doing any activity in any public park, playground, swimming pool, recreational facility, or while loitering in or near an underpass, bridge abutment, storm drain, and other similar types of infrastructure not normally used by the public except as may be authorized by the City. 9.20.040. Punishment Provisions. A. Mandatory Juvenile Delinquent Community Service. Any minor determined to be a ward of the court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 as a result of committing an offense in the City shall be required, at the City's option, to perform community service, including graffiti removal service of not less than 6 hours nor more than 80 hours. B. Penalties for Violation. Any and all violations of this chapter shall be punishable either as an infraction or a misdemeanor, at the discretion of the City Attorney. 9.20.045. Detection Provisions. A. Reward Authority. (a) Pursuant to Section 53069.5 of the Government Code, the City does hereby offer a reward of $150.00 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of any person for violation of Penal Code Section 594 by the use of Graffiti, not to exceed $300.00 per incident of graffiti. In the event of multiple contributors of information, the reward amount shall be divided by the City in the manner it shall deem appropriate. For the purposes of this section, diversion of the offending violator to a community service program, or a plea bargain to graf4l.wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 3 Z-,~-7 -1 ----~----_...- _. ___ .~__.".___~.____..__ '..·'0.._..·_ .._ ____"M__..__·____···_···~__ a lesser offense, shall constitute a conviction. (b) Claims for rewards under this Section shall be filed with the City. Each claim shall. (1) Specifically identify the date, location and kind of property damaged or destroyed. (2) Identify by name the person who was convicted, or confessed to the damage or destruction of the City property. (3) Identify the court and the date upon which the conviction occurred or the place and the date of the confession. (c) No claim for a reward shall be allowed by the City Council unless an Authorized Representative of the City investigates and verifies the accuracy of the claim and recommends that it be allowed. (d) The person committing the graffiti, and if an unemancipated minor, then the custodial parent of said minor, shall be liable for reward paid pursuant to this section. B. Reimbursement of Car Phone Air Time. The City shall reimburse to any person reporting by means of a mobile or cellular phone an act of graffiti vandalism or existence of graffiti within the City limits in the amount of the direct phone charges, exclusive of taxes, etc. , incurred by said pereon. 9.20.050 Accessibility to Graffiti Implements. A. Furnishing to Minors Prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any person, other than a parent or legal guardian, to sell, exchange, give, loan, or otherwise furnieh, or cause or permit to be exchanged, given, loaned, or otherwise furnished, any Felt Tip Marker or Graffiti Stick to any person under the age of eighteen years without the consent of the parent or other lawfully designated custodian of the person, which custodial consent shall be given in advance in writing. B. Wrongful Display for Sale. No person, firm or entity engaged in a commercial enterpriee ("Seller") shall display for sale, trade or exchange, any Graffiti Implement except in an area from which the public shall be eecurely precluded without employee assistance. Two euch acceptable methode for displaying a Graffiti Implement for eale shall be by containment in (1) a completely enclosed cabinet or other etorage device which ehall be permanently affixed to a building or building etructure, and which shall, at all times except during access by authorized repreeentatives, remain securely locked; or (2) in an enclosed area behind a ealee or 2. La Mesa wants to add "Glass Cutter." graf4!. wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 4 ~ service counter from which the public i. precluded from entry.] C. Wrongful Storage. No person shall store any Graffiti Implement except in either (1) a completely enclosed room which shall, at all times except during access or substantial occupancy by the owner or an authorized adult representative of the owner, remain aecurely locked; or (2) in a completely enclosed cabinet or other atorage device which ahall be permanently affixed to a building or building atructure, and which shall, at all times except during access by the owner or an authorized adult representative of the owner, remain eecurely locked. por the purposes of this section, an owner or authorized repreaentative of the owner, shall be deemed to have aubatantial occupancy of a room even during short periods of absence if the room ia part of a larger structure which is occupied by the owner. l. Enforcement Policy on Wrongful Storage Offenses. It shall be the intention of the City to enforce this provision against the Wrongful Storage of Graffiti Implements only when its violation has caused or contributed to an act of vandalism by a third party. D. Civil Responsibility for Damages for Wrongful Display or Storage. Any person who displays or storea a Graffiti Implement in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be personally liable for any and all costs incurred by any party in connection with the removal of graffiti, of the repair of any property containing graffiti, caused by a anv person who shall use such Graffiti Implement in violation of the provisions of California Penal Code Section 594, and for all attorney's fees and court costs incurred in connection with the civil prosecution of any claim for damages. not to exceed 51.500. 9.20.055. Removal Provisions. A. Right of City to Require Removal. (Self-Removal). It is unlawful for any person who is the owner or who haa primary responsibility for control of property or who has primary responaibility for the repair or maintenance of property ("Responsible Party") to permit property which is defaced with graffiti to remain so defaced for a period of seven (7) days after notice of aame, unlesa (1) said peraon shall demonstrate by a preponderance of evidence that they do not have the financial or physical ability to remove the defacing graffiti; or (2) unless it can be demonstrated that the Reaponsible Party has an active program for the removal of graffiti and has scheduled the removal of the graffiti as part of that program, in which case it ahall be unlawful to permit such property defaced with graffiti to remain defaced for a period of fifteen (15) days after notice of same. 3. However, be mindful of the proposed attached enforcement policy presented in the Agenda Bill. 4. This is an change from the model ordinance, which used the word: "minor". graf41. wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 5 Z~'r 'f --,----"--- -- ----,- --- ,------~_._._"...,,_._-_..,"--_.- -----~- --.- B. Declaration of NuiBance. l. Graffiti aB a NuiBance. The exiBtence of graffiti within the City limits of the city iB a public and private nuiBance, and may be abated according to the provisions and procedures herein contained. 2. Graffiti Attracting Surface as a Nuisance. The exiBtence of any surface of a structure on a parcel of land which haB been defaced with graffiti after removal more than 5 timeB in 12 monthB ~B a public and private nuisance, and may be abated by minor modificationB thereto, or to the immediate area surrounding same, according to the provisions and procedures herein contained as followB' Said Burface or surfaces shall be required to be retrofitted, at the COBt of the property owner of said lot, not to exceed a total COBt of $500, or at the COBt of the City at the City's option, with such features or qualitieB as may be eBtablished by the City as neceBBary to reduce the attractiveness of the surface for graffiti, or as necessary to permit more convenient or efficient removal thereof. C. Right of City to Remove. l. Use of Public Funds. I Whenever the City becomes aware, or is notified and determines that graffiti is so located on public or privately owned property viewable from a public or quasi public place within the City, the City shall be authorized to UBe public funds for the removal of same, or for the painting or repairing of same, but shall not authorize or undertake to provide for the painting or repair of any more extenBive area than that where the graffiti is located, unless the City Manager, or hiB designee, determineB in writing that a more extenBive area iB required to be repainted or repaired in order to avoid an aeBthetic diBfigurement to the neighborhood or community, or unless the Responsible Party agrees to pay for the COstB of repainting or repairing the more extensive area. 2. Right of Entry on Private Property Provisions. (i) securing Owner Consent. Prior to entering upon private property or property owned by a public entity other than the City, for the purpose of removal of graffiti, the fity shall attempt to secure the consent of ,the Responsible Party , and a release of the City from liability for private or public property or liability damage. (H) Failure to Obtain Owner COnsent. If a ReBponsible Party fails to remove the offending Graffiti within the time herein specified, or if the City shall have requested consent to remove or paint over the offending Graffiti and the Responsible Party Bhall have refuBed consent for entry on terms 5. This represents a change from the model ordinance first proposed by La Mesa, from "property owner" to "Responsible Party" . graf4Lwp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 . February 20, 1992 Page 6 'l'i '" -/C l4~I ) . acceptable to the City consistent with the terms of this Section, the City shall commence Abatement and COst Recovery Proceedings for the removal of the graffiti according to the following procedure. (iii) Abatement and COst Recovery Proceedings. 1) Notice and conduct of Due Process Bearing. The City Manager, or his or her designee, ("Bearing Officer") shall give not less than 48 hours notice, served in the same manner as summons in a civil action in accordance with Article 3 (commencing with Section 415.10) of Chapter 4 of Title 5 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (If the owner of record, after diligent search cannot be found, the notice may be served by posting a copy thereof in a conspicuous place upon the property for a period of 10 days and publication thereof in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county in which the property is located pursuant to Section 6062.) to the Responsible Party or partys who are responsible for the maintenance of a parcel of property containing graffiti ("Property"), and, if a different person is the owner of record of the parcel of land or which the nuisance is maintained, based on the last equalized assessment roll or the supplemental roll, whichever is more current, then to said owner ("OWner") also, of a "due process" hearing at which said Responsible Party and OWner shall be entitled to present evidence and argue that his or her Property does not contain ' graffiti. The determination of the Bearing Officer after the "due process" hearing shall be final and not appealable. If, after the due process hearing, regardless of the attendance of the Responsible Party, OWner, or their respective agents, the Bearing Officer determines that the Property contains graffiti viewable from a public or quasi-public place, the Hearing Officer shall give written notice ("Eradication Order") that, unless the graffiti is removed within 5 days thereafter, the City shall enter upon the Property, cause the removal, painting over (in such color as shall meet with the approval of the Hearing Officer) or such other eradication thereof ("Eradication Effort") as the Hearing Officer determines appropriate, and shall provide the Responsibility Party and OWner thereafter with an accounting of the costs of such Eradication Effort on a "full cost recovery basis." 2) Eradication Effort. Not sooner than the time specified in the Order of the Hearing Officer, the City Manager, or his designee, shall implement the Eradication Order, and shall provide an accounting to the Responsible Party, and as appropriate, the OWner, of the costs thereof ("Eradication Accounting"). 3) Cost Hearing. If the Responsible Party or OWner fails to request a hearing before the Bearing Officer on the Eradication Accounting ("Cost Hearing"), or if requested, and a COst Hearing is conducted after extending due process to the qraf41.wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 7 2~ 'J- ... , ·I( ..,~_. -....-..--.- .-..----- ,------ -,.._..._..~- Responsible Party and, .. .ppropriate, the OWner, after such a Cost Hearing, the Hearing Officer determines that all or . portion of the Co.t. are appropriately chargeable to the Er.dication Effort, the total amount .et forth in the Er.dication Accounting, or .uch amount th.r.of d.t.rmined .. appropriate by the Hearing Offic.r, ( ·A.....ed Eradication Charges·) .hall be due .nd payable by the Responsible Party within 30 day.. Any amount of Assessed Eradication Charg.. .......d by the H.aring Officer which are le.. than the total amount ..t forth in the ErAdication Accounting .hall b. .xplained by written l.tter from the H.aring Offic.r to the City Councilmember.. 4) Lien. A. to .uch Property wh.re the Responsible Party i. the OWn.r, if .11 or eny portion of the Assessed Eradication Charges remain unpaid after 30 days, pur.uant to the .uthority created by law, including Government Code. Section 38773, et seq. , such portion th.reof a. .hall remain unpaid shall constitute and i. hereby declared to con.titute a lien on the Property which was the .ubject matter of the Eradication Effort. The Director of Public Work. shall pre.ent a Re.olution of Lien to the City Council, and upon pas.age and adoption thereof, .hall cause a certified copy thereof to be recorded with the San Diego County Recorder'. Office. D. Ease of Removal Provi.ion.. l. Common Utility Color. and Paint-type. Any gas, telephone, water, sewer, cable, telephone and other utility operating in the City, other than an elecfric utilitv6, shall paint their above-surface metal f xture. with a uniform paint type and color which meet. with the approval of the City Manager. 2. Condition Encroachment Permits. All encroachment permits issued by the City .hall, among such other things, be conditioned on (1) the permittee shall apply an anti-graffiti material to the encroaching object of a type and nature that is acceptable to the City Manager, or his or her designee, (2) the immediate removal by the permittee of any graffiti, (3) the right of the City to remove graffiti or to paint the encroaching object, (4) providing City with .ufficient matching paint and/or anti- graffiti material on demand for use in the painting of encroaching object containing graffiti. 6. Minor wording change from model ordinance. 7. La Mesa is proposing: "Except to the extent exempted by the city Manager." Staff has considered and reject such an amendment for our purposes. graf41. wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 8 't'A.-~ ~.../~ 3. Condition Tentative Maps. In approving tentative or parcel maps, conditional use permits, variances, or other .imilar land u.e entitlement., the City shall consider imposing any or all of the following conditions, or other .imilar or related condition., at the public hearing required by l.w for .pproval of the tent.tive map, conditional use permit, variance or other .imil.r l.nd use entitlement, is .pproved. (i) Use of Anti-Graffiti Kateri.l. Developer .hall apply an anti-graffiti material of . type and nature th.t is acceptable to the City Manager, or hi. or her designee, to such of the publicly-viewable .urf.ce. on the improvements to be constructed on the .ite deemed by the City Manger, or designee, to be likely to .ttr.ct graffiti ("Graffiti Attracting Surfaces"), (H) Right of Access to Remov. Gr.ffiti. Dev.loper shall grant, prior to resale of any of the parc.l. which are within the territory of .aid map, the right of entry over and access to such parcels, upon 48 hours posting of notice, by authorized City employ.es or ag.nt., to the City for the purpose of removing or "painting ov.r" graffiti from Graffiti Attracting Surfac.s previously designat.d by the Director, and the right to remove .uch graffiti, and, (Hi) Supply City with Graffiti-Removal Material. Developer shall, for a period of 2 y.ar. .ft.r the resale of their final lot, provide the City with .uffici.nt matching paint and/or anti-graffiti material on demand for use in the painting over or removal of designat.d Gr.ffiti Attr.cting Surfaces. (iv) Owner to Immedi.t.ly Remove Gr.ffiti. Developer shall, either as part of the COnditions, COv.nants and Restrictions, or as separate covenants recorded against individual lots, prior to resale of same, covenant, which covenant shall run with the land and be for the benefit of the City, in a form satisfactory to the City, that the owner of the lots shall immediately remove of any graffiti placed thereon. 9.20.060. Prevention Provisions. A. Design of New Graffiti-attracting Surf.ces. Any applicant for design revi.w approval, conditional us. permit, special use permit, unclassified use permit, d.velopm.nt .greem.nt, or other form of development or building permit .hall, to the extent deemed feasible by the City Manager, or his or her designe., have d.signed any building structures visible from any public or quasi-public pl.ce in such a manner to consider prevention of graffiti, including, but not limited to the following: (a) use of a protective coating to provide for the effective and expeditious removal of graffiti, (b) u.e of additional lighting, (c) use of non-solid fencing, (d) u.. of landscaping designed to cover large expansive wall. such .. ivy or . similar clinging vegetation, and (e) use of architectural design to break up long continuous walls or solid ar.... B. Retro-fit Existing Graffiti-.ttracting Surface., Non- graf4l. wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 9 ;2. ~e.. . t.! ~ - 1.3 _H' '"----_.._._-"-~,---- ._---,----_.,._._-----~---_._-_._--- ---..--...-.-- Residential Structures. This may be incorporated in the Eradication Order during an abatement hearing. (1) At owner's Expense. Any surface of a structure on a parcel of land placed in any land use other than residential which has been defaced with graffiti more than 5 times in 12 months, or the immediate area surrounding said surface, shall be required to be retrofitted, at the cost of the property owner of said lot, with such features or qualities as may be established by the City as necessary to reduce the attractiveness of the eurface for graffiti, or as necessary to permit more convenient or efficient removal thereof. In exercising the authority hereunder, the City may not impose a cost on the property owner greater than three times the cost of one year's expense to the property owner of graffiti removal. , (2) At City's Cost. The owner of property on which is located a surface of a structure other than residential which has been defaced with graffiti more than 5 times in 12 months, or the immediate area surrounding said surface, shall permit the City to enter upon and make such modifications thereto, at City's cost, which modifications shall include such features or qualities as may be established by the City as necessary to reduce the attractiveness of the surface for graffiti, or as necessary to permit more convenient or efficient removal thereof. 9.20.065 Parental Involvement Provisions. A. Parental Civil Liability. , Any parent or other legal guardian who consents to, permits, or otherwise knowingly allows her or his child under the age of eighteen to possess a Graffiti Implement shall be personally liable for any and all costs to any person incurred in connection with the removal of Graffiti caused by said child, or by said Graffiti Implement, and for all attorney's fees and court costs incurred in connection with the civil prosecution of any claim for damages. 9.20.070 Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this . Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional." . graf41.wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 10 ~S~ -111 Ið~ I~ Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and take effect thirty (30) days from the passage and adoption here f. I Presented by' rJ:d:t( = by, Leoni'lrd Moore Bruce M. Boogaard Councilman City Attorney graf41.wp Proposed Graffiti Chapter 9.20 February 20, 1992 Page 11 1;.~ ../£ ..IS- . ,,- ,--- -".'.-.-...-.----.----.-.---- ,-,-_..._- TInS PAqE BlANK . · , , · . ~-/I;; · ~,/~ Marked to Show the Jayken Interlineation and New Findings Language ORDINANCE NO. 2495 S£CO¡VD It~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VIST~D~V' CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION FROM I-L-P TO G "'1"'D C-C-P FOR THE SOUTHERN 3 ACRES OF THE PALOMAR ~h TROLLEY CENTER PROJECT, AND MAKING FINDINGS TO vOÞ~Q PERMIT APPLICATION OF THE IIplI MODIFIER; AND I'll CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION FOR ZONING CONSISTENCY SUBAREA B-3-A FROM APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL (R-3) TO APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL WITH A P-MODIFIER, NOT MORE THAN 22 UNITS PER ACRE (IR-3-P-22"). Palomar Trollev center proiect Matters Entire proiect Area WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of a commercial shopping center development referred to herein is a rectangular area of land approximately eighteen and 2/10ths (18.2) acres bounded on the north by Palomar Street on the east by Broadway, on the west by the San Diego Trolley Palomar Street station and on the south by San Diego Gas and Electric right-of- way, and is diagrammatically presented in Figure 5-5 of the Final Environmental Impact Report, Palomar Trolley Center, EIR 91-02 (FEIR), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A ("Entire Project Area") and if attached, as the area outlined with such designation; and, Amendment Area WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of an application herein referenced for general plan amendment, Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment, and change of zones is a portion of the Entire Project Area consisting of approximately three (3) acres in the southeast portion of the Entire Project Area, diagrammatically presented in Figure 5-5 of the Final Environmental Impact Report, Palomar Trolley Center, EIR 91-02 (FEIR), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A (" Amendment Area") and if attached, as the area shown in cross-hatch thereon; and, proiect WHEREAS, Pacific Scenes, Inc. ("PSI"), the entity which has development control over most of the Entire Project Area has proposed a plan for the construction of 198,200 gross square feet pal-zc2.wp Zone Ch~nge for Palomar and B-3-A February 26, 1992 Page 1 lCO.../ _ ,____._,.,"~___~._..m._~_ of commercial shopping center improvements on the Entire Project Area pursuant to a plan that is more fully described in the FEIR, section 3.0 ("Project Description"), page 3-1, which entire plan for improvement shall herein be referred to as the "Project"; and, Application for Entitlements WHEREAS, in conjunction with a plan for the construction of a 198,200 gross square foot shopping center located on the Entire Project Area, Pacific Scenes, Inc. (PSI) has filed an application ("Application") with the city for a General Plan Amendment, Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment and change of zone from Light Industrial with a P Modifier ("I-L-P") to Center Commercial with a P Modifier ("C-C-P") for the Amendment Area to allow for the use of the Entire project Area for a shopping center containing five major anchor tenants and other retail facilities such as five building pads, two of which will have drive-through capabilities for fast- food restaurants, sidewalks and landscaping, all as more fully set out in the proposed Palomar Trolley Center Semi-Exclusive Negotiating Agreement ("SENA"), and that Application on file with the Director of the Planning Department; and, certifvina Resolution WHEREAS, the city Council did, by the adoption of Resolution No. 16522 ("Certifying Resolution"), certify that the Final Environmental Impact Report, as defined therein, was prepared in accordance with the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act, and the guidelines lawfully promulgated thereunder; and, WHEREAS, the recitals and resolutions of the city council contained in said Certifying Resolution are incorporated herein as if set forth in full hereat; and, Findinas WHEREAS, an application for a city-initiated zone change was completed by the Planning Department of the City of Chula vista on February 4, 1991, and WHEREAS, the subject property is immediately surrounded by commercially zoned property to the north and west, and by existing commercial development to the east, and WHEREAS, without the proposed zone change, a 3-acre island of industrial land lacking street frontage would exist surrounded by commercial development to the north, west and east, and pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-3-A February 26, 1992 Page 2 '1~-2. .._--,.,--..._,._,--~~.._.._" Palomar Trollev Center Pro;ect Public Hearinq WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the City Council on PSI I s Application for a General Plan Amendment, Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment and Zone Change ("Public Hearing") on or about February 25, 1992 regarding the Palomar Trolley center ; WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m., February 25, 1992, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the city Council and said hearing was thereafter closed; and WHEREAS, the City Council certified that the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR-91-02) has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula vista and that the information contained in the FEIR has been reviewed and considered. Zone Consistency studY Area 3-B-A WHEREAS, the city council, by a pUblic hearing held on or about February 4, 1992 ("Public Hearing 91-5) at which it determined that, by a consolidated general plan amendment, that an approximate 5 acre, 21 parcel area bounded by E street, D street, Third Avenue and Landis Avenue, all as more particularly identified in Exhibit B, incorporated herein by reference ("Zone consistency study Area B-3-A"), should be replanned for General Plan purposes from "Low-Medium Residential (3 to 6 dwelling units per acre)" to "Medium-High Residential (11 to 18 dwelling units per acre)"; The city Council of the City of Chula vista does ordain as follows: SECTION I: Supplemental Findings for Application of "P" Modifier--Palomar Trollev Center Pro;ect As regards the Amendment Area with the Entire Project Area of the Palomar Trolley Center Project, pursuant to Zoning Ordinance section 19.56.041, the "P" modifying district is applied based on the following: 1. The property or area to which the "P" modifying district is applied is an area adjacent and contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses, and the development of a precise plan will allow the area so designated to coexist between land usages which might otherwise prove incompatible. pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-3-A February 26, 1992 Page 3 1c-~ -_...._."'-----_.._.._~~..--...,---_...- The SDG&E right-of-way to the south is zoned S94 and the surrounding commercial property to the north, west and east is zoned with a "p" modifier. The precise plan requirement for the subject J acres will ensure that the parcels are subject to the same design review as the surrounding property and that the project is compatible with the S94 zone to the south. 2. The area to which the "p" modifying district is applied consists of two or more properties under separate ownership wherein coordination regarding access, on-site circulation, site planning, building design and identification is necessary to enhance the public convenience, health, safety and general welfare. The subject property and the surrounding property to the north, west and east included within the IS.2-acre expanded Palomar Trolley Center project are under 10 different ownerships. The "p" modifier will require design review of future site planes) to ensure conformance with the design concept guideline booklet outlining the design objectives for the IS-acre expanded project. SECTION II. Guidelines--Palomar Trollev Center Proiect. The Precise Plan Guidelines to be attached to the property shall include the following provision: a. The city of Chula vista shall consider enforcement of appropriate legal mechanisms sponsored by the Chula vista Elementary School District and the Sweetwater Union High School District to mitigate impacts on school facilities, if such is determined to be necessary based on the results of a study the City may conduct similar in nature and scope to the study conducted in Fairfield, except this study will address the impacts of commercial and residential development on school facilities. b. Developer ".Jill commit§. to desian. financina and construction of a roadwav facilitv (includina streets. curbs. autters. sidewalks and utilities) connection between the current terminus of Jayken Way and the Proiect develepmeRt if it is determiRed citv determines based on Ðy traffic studies. to be performed to citv's satisfaction. and paid for bv Developer. and to be conducted term te Be limited pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-J-A February 26, 1992 Page 4 'lc -l} ----~-~----_._.._- ~ two years after the OCCUDanCy in the Entire Pro;ect Area Ceß~e£ first reaches 70% of Dlanned aross floor area aftå a s~~ày ~ha~ is aa~iafae~ery ~e ~fte Reàe~elepmEßß A~eßey ftetift~ that 7ckiealar 'traffie BR palemar fram IHà1:lst.rial Be\ilevarEl t.e B£aa&way mee~B GR~la ViB~a'B ~RreBRalà, that said roadway facility ~ is necessary for circulation. (i) BY "commit" as used herein. DeyeloDer shall. in addition to desianina. financina and constructina such a roadway facility. be reauired to desian the imDroyements on the Entire Pro;ect Area in such a manner that the roadway facility can be constructed on the Entire Pro;ect Area without reauirina the demolition of any sianificant structures. or any structures with sianificant value. Furthermore. DeveloDer shall absorb the sole risk of loss for the demolition of any such structures which are demolished in order to construct the roadway facility. (ii) If the city determines that such roadway facility is necessary. it shall be desianed and built to the sDecifications of the city which Drovide. and are not inconsistent with t~he public street portion ~aulà ending at the south property line of the àe~elapmeßt Entire Pro;ect Area consistina of aßà Be a minimum width of 36 feet of pavement, to include two lanes and two bike lanes, plus curb gutter and sidewalk on one side. The method to secure the commi ttment shall be determined prior to the City vacating any af tae paper Btreet unused riaht of wav easement currentlY encumberina said Entire Pro;ect Area. or any Dortion thereof. aerSS5 'tke àevelapmeftt.. SECTION III. Zone Change--Palomar Trolley Center, Southern Lots. As regards the Amendment Area of the Entire Project Area of the Palomar Trolley Center project, the City Council does hereby conditionally amend the Zoning Map of the City of Chula vista as maintained by the Director of Planning of the City of Chula vista to provide that the zone for the Amendment Area indicated thereon shall be Center Commercial with a P Modifier. The conditions of this amendment are as follows: pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-J-A February 26, 1992 Page 5 1e.-5 B. Certain Mitiqation Measures Feasible and Adopted. As more fullY identified and set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto. the Council herebY finds. pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEOA Guidelines Section 15091. that the mitiqation measures described in the EIR are feasible. and will become bindinq upon the city. ~ Infeasibilitv of Alternatives. As set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto. the Council herebY finds that it is unnecessary to determine that any of the proposed proiect alternatives set forth in the Final EIR can feasiblY and substantial Iv lessen or avoid the potentiallY siqnificant adverse environmental effects since all potentiallY siqnificant adverse environmental effects of the proiect will be eliminated or substantial Iv lessened bv virute of the mitiqation measures herewith imposed. D. Adoption of Mitiqation and Monitorinq Proqram. As required bv Public Resources Code section 21081.6. the city Council herebY adopts the mitiqation monitorinq and reportinq proqram ( "proqram") attached to the FEIR as Appendix B incorporated herein bv reference. The Council herebY finds the Proqram is desiqned to ensure that. durinq proiect implementation. the permittee/proiect applicant. and any other responsible parties. implement the Proiect components and complY with the feasible mitiqation measures identified in the Findinqs. ~ statement of Overridinq considerations Unnecessary. After the adoption of all feasible mitiqation measures certain siqnificant or potentiallY siqnificant adverse environmental effects caused bv the proiect will not remain. Therefore. the Council herebY finds that it is unnecessary to issue. pursuant to CEOA Guidelines section 15093 a statement of overridinq considera- tions identifvinq the specific economic. social. and other considerations that render that unavoidable siqnificant adverse environmental effect acceptable. SECTION V. Zone change--zone Consistency study Area B-3-A As regards the Zone Consistency Study Area B-3-A, the City Council does hereby conditionally amend the Zoning Map of the City of Chula vista as maintained by the Director of Planning of the city of Chula vista to provide that the zone for the Zone Consistency study Area B-3-A be changed from Apartment Residential ("R-3") to Apartment Residential with a P Modifier, but not to exceed 22 units per acre ("R-3-P-22"). pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-3-A February 26, 1992 Page 7 {c.. -It:, .. .._._.___..~.,._..__....__ ...___.. _ ~..,,__,._._,_"____.H..___·_·__ SECTION VI: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Approved as to IL./h . Robert A. Leiter, Director of Bruce M. Boogaard, City Planning Attorney pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-J-A February 26, 1992 Page 8 (CL-( --------"~_._,.__._- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM ~ MEETING DATE March 3. 1992 ITEM TITLE: ORDINANCE .2~'11 Amending section 2.05.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code to establish the classifications of Police Captain and Assistant Director of Building and Housing in the Unclassified Service of the City of Chula Vista. SUBMITTED BY: DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGEW (4/Sth Vote: Yes~ NO___> On February 25, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution 16514 which provided for movement of the Police Captain classification from the Mid-Management group to the Executive group, subject to ordinance adoption. The duties and authority of Police Captain, have been increased to be on a par with all other classes in the Executive, Unclassified Service. Additionally, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 2361, placing the position of Assistant Director of Building and Housing in the Unclassified Service; however, the Municipal Code was inadvertently not amended at that time. Approval of the ordinance will place both positions in the Unclassified Executive Service. RECOMMENDATION: Place ordinance on first reading. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: NONE DISCUSSION: On February 25, 1992, the City Council approved placement of the classification of Police Captain in the Executive group. This classification is currently Classified, an appropriate status at it's previous Mid-Management level; however, recognizing an increase in level of duties and responsibilities it was placed in the Executive Group, a group in which all classes are Unclassified. A change in status from Classified to Unclassified is not only consistent with comparable classes in that group, but appropriate, as it clearly qualifies under the Charter: Article V. Section 500 (a): It is further provided that the City Council may place Assistant and Deputy Department Heads, Assistants to the Ci ty Manager, and new Management level positions in the Unclassified Service by a four-fifth's vote of the Counc il and Section 701 (a) (8): The City may place Assistant and Deputy Department Heads, Assistants to the City Manager and new management level positions in the Unclassified Service by an ordinance adopted by a four-fifth's vote. ~ -, ,I . ,_._...-.,..._-~._.__..~ --,. In April, 1991, the City Council approved Ordinance 2361 creating the position of Assistant Director of Building and Housing in the Unclassified Service and Resolution 16103 placing the position in the Executive Group for fringe benefits; however, the Municipal Code, Section 2.05.010 was not amended at that time to include the classification. The request to include it at this time is merely a clean-up measure consistent with what the Council has already approved. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of placing these classifications in the Executive Group has already been appropriated. There is no fiscal impact of this ordinance placing these positions in the Unclassified Service. ¥~~ -. - ORDINANCE NO...( 4tt7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 2.05.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH THE CLASSIFICATIONS OF POLICE CAPTAIN AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR BUILDING AND HOUSING IN THE UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WHEREAS, on February 25, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution 16514 which provided for movement of the Police captain classification from the Mid-Management group to the Executive group subject to approval of an ordinance creating the position in the Unclassified Service; 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; and WHEREAS, the duties of Police captain have been modified to the level of responsibility and authority on a par with other classes in the Unclassified Service; and WHEREAS, additionally, the city council by Ordinance No. 2361 established the Unclassified position of Assistant Director of Building and Housing; however, the Municipal Code was not amended inadvertently at that time. 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 buildina and housina. city engineer, director of management 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 services, aftè assistant library director and police captain. 1 ~-~ _ _....~_.__..___.H__._____·_m SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by Candy Boshell, Director of Personnel C:\rs\2.0S,OIO 2 .9- 'f /8-5 -- _._""---~_._-"~.,._,.....--- MEMORANDUM DATE: March 2, 1992 TO: Hoomob!. Moyo' eod C7"00I VIA: John Goss, City Manager- FROM: Candy Boshell, Director of Personnel Å’.ff SUBJECT: MARCH 3,1992 AGENDA ITEM #8 - ATTACHMENT Agenda Item #8 has attached to it Ordinance 2497 amending section 2.05.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code to add the classifications of Police Captain and Assistant Director of Building and Housing. Section 2.05.010 as presented in that ordinance is, however, not the most current version and was included in error. A revision of Ordinance 2497, including the most up-to-date section 2.05.010 of the Municipal Code is attached and should be considered in place of the one originally attached to the Agenda Statement. ..' [wp:CBMEMO\GOSS.AGENDA ATTACH) ~/~ ~n .----.. Revised 3/2/92 ORDINANCE NO. 2497 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 2.05.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH THE CLASSIFICATIONS OF POLICE CAPTAIN AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR BUILDING AND HOUSING IN THE UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WHEREAS, on February 25, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution 16514 which provided for movement of the Police Captain classification from the Mid-Management group to the Executive group subject to approval of an ordinance creating the position in the Unclassified Service; 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; and WHEREAS, the duties of Police Captain have been modified to the level of responsibility and authority on a par with other classes in the Unclassified Service; and WHEREAS, additionally, the city Council by Ordinance No. 2361 established the Unclassified position of Assistant Director of Building and Housing; however, the Municipal Code was not amended inadvertently at that time. 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 buildinq and housinq, 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 1 ?5~t - ~_..._--~~_._--~...--..._-, information services, aftà assistant library director and police captain. SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by .", tJ-...J ,~~ Candy Boshell, Director of Bruce M. BOOgaardð y Attorney Personnel C:\rø\2.05.0l0 2 8--7 ._"-'.----_._..,.,...... COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item~ Meeting Date 3/3/92 \1øC;~i ITEM TITLE: Resolution Of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista directing call for construction bids in Assessment District 90-2, (Otay Valley Road) SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~ .7- Director of Community Development? REVIEWED BY: City Manager çi (4/5 Vote: Yes_No..x.l . () Preparations are being made to bring Assessment District 90-2, Otay Valley Road to the Council in the near future for a public hearing. As a preliminary step in the proceedings it is recommended that the City advertise for construction bids now. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The Redevelopment Agency and the staff have been working on improving Otay Valley Road between 1-805 and Nirvana for several years. In March of 1988, the Agency retained the firm of Leedshill-Hirkenhoff to prepare the plans for a six lane Major Street. On May 15, 1990, the Redevelopment Agency recommended hiring a team of consultants to form an assessment district, if feasible, for the improvement of Otay Valley Road east of 1-805. It is proposed that this district be a construction-type assessment district under the 1913 Act proceedings. In July of 1991, the City approved Resolution 16274 approving preliminary proceedings for the Otay Valley Road Assessment District and requesting the County of San Diego give Consent and Jurisdiction to include a portion of the Otay Ranch Property currently used as a quarry. The staff have held two meetings with the property owners in the area and we have received protests from some of the property owners (mostly in the Recycling Park area generally east of Maxwell Rd). Before the Public hearing is to be held staff believes it important that all the costs be as closely identified as possible. In fact we need accurate costs prior to the Assessment Engineer preparing the final report. We believe that now is a good time to go to bid for lower prices, and with known prices the Assessment Engineer can use a much lower contingency in developing the total cost of assessments to spread. C\ -, 'u.....__n__.___._._.. Page 2, Item Meeting Date 3/3/92 Plans and specifications for the improvement of Otay Valley Road Phase I (I-805 to Nirvana Avenue) are complete. Staff is prepared to advertise for bids on March 7, 1992 for Phase I. Plans and specifications for the improvement of Otay Valley Road Phase II (Nirvana Avenue to Otay Rio Industrial Park) will be completed and bid at a later date. It is anticipated that Phase II construction would lag behind Phase I construction by about eight months. Generally, approval to advertise for bids would be done in conjunction with the Resolution of Intention to form the district or even later. However, staff recommends advertising before the Resolution of Intention in this case 1) to obtain bid prices for Phase I construction so that the Engineer's Report can be revised to reflect these costs and 2) to start the process so that there is adequate time to complete all proceedings by June of this year. Staff proposes to complete the proceedings during this fiscal year because there will be SB 300 monies available to use on this project which amount to approximately $1.7 million depending on construction estimates and final costs. In order to obtain these funds, through reimbursement to the City, the contract needs to be awarded before June 30, 1992. SB 300 funds are funds that the state contributes to Agencies that construct Transportation projects with funds other than Gas Tax or Federal Funding. This year's contribution from SB 300 funding is estimated to be approximately 30%. Considering this, staff has proposed the following schedule: ~ Action March 7, 1992 Advertise for bids for Phase I March 17, 1992 Consent and Jurisdiction with County of San Diego to allow the City to assess property outside of the City limits March 24, 1992 Resolution of Intention to form district and set public hearing April 8, 1992 Receive bids for Phase I April 27, 1992 Hold public hearing May, 1992 30 day cash collection & litigation period June 9, 1992 Award construction contract for Phase I The above schedule allows some flexibility on the actions while still meeting the June 1992 deadline. ~- 2.. ,_....-._---,~,.._."_..-~,. Page 3, Item Meeting Date 3/3/92 Funds will not be available to construct the improvements in conjunction with this district until after all the proceedings have been completed. The bid documents have been prepared to reflect the uncertainty of funding and hence the uncertainty of the award of contract and notice to proceed. The bond counsel, F. Mac Kenzie Brown, has reviewed the documents. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the Otay Valley Road improvements (phases I and II) are estimaated to be $14,624,800. Funding sources for the Project are as follows: $ 2,860,000 Appropriated in Otay Valley Redevelopment Project Area 189,300 Appropriated in Traffic Signal Fund 1,700,000 SB 300 State-Local Transportation Partnership Program 9.875.500 Proceeds from planned Assessment District No. 90-2 $14,624,800 DDS/dds:A Y08l (OVRBID) q"~/q'Jf -----".--- ---",.,..--.--- RESOLUTION NO. (~~~~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DIRECTING CALL FOR CONSTRUCTION BIDS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD) WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has heretofore instituted proceedings pursuant to Resolutions 16274, 16275, and 16276 under the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 1 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the installation of certain public works of improvement in a special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD) (hereinafter referred to as the" Assessment Disttict"); and, WHEREAS, Resolution 16274 made appointments, Resolution 16275 adopted a map showing the proposed boundaries, and Resolution 16276 approved a proposed Resolution of Intention and approved requesting consent and jurisdiction from the County, all as a part of said Assessment District; and, WHEREAS, at this time there have been submitted for final review the plans and specifications for the works of improvement for the Assessment District; and, WHEREAS, it is the intention of the legislative body to also call for sealed proposals or bids for the doing of said work and improvements in said Assessment District in the event said Assessment District is created. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That the plans and specifications for Phase I of the works of improvement in the Assessment District are hereby approved and authorized for bidding. SECTION 3. That the proposals or bids shall be opened and examined at a public meeting so called; and said results of the bidding shall be reported at the next regular meeting of this legislative body after the opening of the bids. SECTION 4. That the terms and conditions for bidding on the works of improvement for this Assessment District are as set forth in full in the Bid Documents in the specifications as previously approved. Reference is hereby made to said Bid Documents heretofore approved and identified as 'NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS, ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD)". For all particulars as to bidding, the Notice to Contractors above referenced and all incorporated documents and laws, including but not limited to the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", shall control. SECTION 5. That any award of contract will be subject to the receipt of money from the sale of bonds and no bidder may withdraw his bid for a period of ninety ~-S ---..".- "". ,-,,~-_.~~,---~_."..,"'.- (90) days following the receipt of proposals. This ninety (90) day period may be extended by mutual consent of the lower responsible bidder(s) and the City. That the City shall not reimburse the contractor for any costs incurred in the preparation of the bid whether the contract be awarded or not. That the contractor shall not commence construction until receiving a written Notice of Commencement from the City, and no work shall be commenced or costs incurred until said Notice has been transmitted. SECTION 6. That it is hereby determined that in the event the contractor, contracting owners included, if applicable, does not complete the work within the time limit specified in the contract or within the time limit as shall be authorized, the contractor of contracting owners, as the case may be, shall pay as liquidated damages the amount or amounts as set forth in the specifications for the project, said amounts herein referenced and so incorporated. That it is impractical to determine the actual damage which will be sustained by reason of such delay, but that the state sum is a reasonable amount for said liquidated damages and is not being imposed as a penalty. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt J )J.&l-J ~~rf Bruce M. Boogaa . Public Works Director City Attorney PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, this day of , 1992, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Council members: ABSENT: Council members: ABSTAIN: Council members: Tim Nader, Mayor q-tc -_._--"-----~-,--,- ... .-. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 10 Meeting Date 3/3/92 ITEM TITLE: Resolution ) I. S :t.C¡ Accepting bids and awarding contract for the construction of the Rancho del Rey Fire Training Tower located at H Street and Pas eo Ranchero in the Ci ty of Chul a Vista, CA SUBMITTED BY: Director O~l ic Works~ r,J Fire Chief REVIEWED BY: City Managerv (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No...X...} At 2:00 p.m. on February 5, 1992, in the Public Services Building, the Di rector of Pub 1 i c Works recei ved sealed bids for the construction of the Rancho Del Rey Fire Training Tower located at H Street and Paseo Ranchero in the City of Chula Vista, CA. RECII'HENDATION: That Counc il accept bids and award contract to Diversicon General Contractors in the amount of $236,775. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The Rancho Del Rey Fire Training Facility was budgeted in the 1991-92 Capital Improvement Program. The project as approved in the current CIP includes both the fire training tower and a classroom. However, based on long term planning and util ization needs, only the training tower is proposed for immediate construction. The classroom portion of the proposed Rancho Del Rey Fire Station will be deferred until FY 1994 when existing Fire Station No. 4 will be relocated to this site. (The project engineering plans and specifications for this contract call for the construction of only the fire training tower and associated site improvements.) This project was advertised for a period of six weeks beginning December 21, 1991. During that period pl ans were purchased by 55 contractors, and on the bid opening date, bids were submitted by seven contractors. The bids received are as follows: Contractor Bid Amount 1. Diversicon General Contractors - San Diego $236,775 2. Trepte Construction Co. - San Diego 238,342 3. Cal Star Construction Co. - El Cajon 244,944 4. Abacus Development, Inc. - San Diego 248,000 5. Rancho Pacific Corp. - Carlsbad 249,000 6. MQ Construction Management - Escondido 251,416 7. L. R. Hubbard Construction - San Diego 256,000 /() - I ._.~_....~ .~_ H_ Page 2, IteAl ID Meeting Date 3/3/92 The low bid by Diversicon General Contractors is above the Architect's estimate of $220,000 by $16,775 or 7.6%. Diversicon is a one and half year old construction company. The owner of this construction company was the vice president of RCE, Inc. which performed excellent work in the Fire Station #1 renovation in the City of Chula Vista. Diversicon is near completion, on time and within budget, of a similar project for the U.S. Navy "Rapell ing Tower, HCRD. " Additionally, staff conducted a background check and past performance eva 1 uat i on wi th the mai n sub-contractor "LANTECH, Inc.". This is due to the fact that Lantech is responsible for all concrete work accounting for $128,500.00 or more than 50% of the total bid. Lantech's past performance were found to be satisfactory and they received an excellent recommendation from the San Diego Port District for their work on the Shelter Island Comfort station. We have revi ewed the bi d and recommend awarding the contract to Diversicon General Contractors. Attached is a copy of the Contractor's Disclosure Statement. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Funds Reauired for Construction A. Contract Amount $236,775.00 8. Contingencies (approx. 10%) 23,677.50 C. Staff Cost (approx. 10%) 23.677 .50 Total Funds Required for Construction $284,130.00 Funds Available for Construction Development Impact Fees and City DIF Credit: A. 800-8060-5569-PSI12 $262,673.39 8. 806-8060-5291-PSI12 21.456.61 Total Funds Available for Construction $284,130.00 FISCAL IMPACT: This reflects an expenditure of funds authorized in the CIP budget as indicated. Upon completion of the project, it will require routine City maintenance. Funds have been appropriated and are available in the FY 1992 CIP for the construction of this facil ity and the classroom facil ity in project PS 112-H. Additional funding will need to be appropri ated duri ng the FY 1993 (or subsequent) CIP budget process in order for the classroom port i on of the project to be constructed. This additional funding is being considered in the update to the Public Facilities DIF. SA:JX-004 WPC 5893E 10 -2.//0-1 ,-_.._~----_...__.._--- !H!tºßAfHH!.!t February 18, 1992 File: JX-004 TO: John Goss, City Manager Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance Beverly Authelet, City Clerk Gregg Hanson, Building Services Superintendent FROM: John Lippitt, Director of Public Work~ Sam Lopez, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Resolution - Accepting bids and awarding contract for the construction of the Rancho del Rey Fire Training Tower located at H Street and Paseo Ranchero in the City of Chula Vista, CA Funds Reauired for Construction A. Contract Amount $236,775.00 B. Contingencies (approx. 10%) 23,677.50 C. Staff Cost (approx. 10%) 23.677.50 Total Funds Required for Construction $284,130.00 Funds Available for Construction Development Impact Fees and DIF Credit: A. 800-8060-5569-PSI12 $262,673.39 B. 806-8060-5291-PSI12 21.456.61 Total Funds Available for Construction $284,130.00 WPC 5894E 11)-.3 -.----- THE CI7Y OF CHULA. VISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Statement of discJosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on aIJ matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City CounciJ, PJanning Commission, and aIJ other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: i. List the names of aU persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. L Í'<v-.:n~ \-t . ~ . \,)\\j~"'I~"", ~~I\ ,\ C' .L. 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of aU individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in t]¡e partnership. , \.J\~ \ 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. . \vIp.. t Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boar, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No _ If yes, please indicate person(s): 5. Please identify each and every person, incJuding any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. t-J\I\ 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed m~ than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No _ If yes, state which Councilmember(s ): Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, cO'pannership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organizarion, corporation, eSI{1(e, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and country, city, municipality, district or other political subdi\'ision, or allY other group or combination acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary) D;¡¡e: '1 A '\ 1..- ~\...~&.~ \)(M.);~ Signature of contractor/applicant \) \\J I: ~":) \ LeI' - ~\ \ U,Pr\;'l \:) A<.: .." Print or type name of contractor/applicant [,\,J 11.\:DISCLOSETXTj ¡Revised: J I!:\OfJO) II) -tJ. .. -,,_.,---~-_..._- u_. RESOLUTION NO.~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RANCHO DEL REY FIRE TRAINING TOWER LOCATED AT H STREET AND PAS EO RANCHERO IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA. WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on February 5, 1992, in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works received the following seven sealed bids for the construction of the Rancho del Rey Fire Training Tower located at H Street and Pas eo Ranchero in the City of Chula vista: Diversicon General Contractors $236,775 San Diego Trepte Construction Co. $238,342 San Diego Cal Star Construction Co. $244,944 El cajon Abacus Development, Inc. $248,000 San Diego Rancho Pacific Corp. $249,000 Carlsbad MQ Construction Management $251,416 Escondido L. R. Hubbard Construction $256,000 San Diego WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the bids and recommends awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Diversicon General Contractors, who has assured the ci ty that they are a licensed contractor in the State of California and can produce an acceptable performance bond. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of the city of Chula vista has reviewed the specifications for the construction of the Rancho del Rey Fire Training Tower and does hereby approve same. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby accept said seven bids and award the 1 10-5 __...___..______'___n_______.,__ contract for the construction of the Rancho del Rey Fire Training Tower to Diversicon General Contractors in the amount of $236,775. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to execute said contract for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista. Presented by Approved as to form by ~ John P. Lippitt, Director of D. Richard Rudol istant Public Works city Attorney C:\rs\RDR Fire Train Bid 2 If) - , --~_..,_.,_._-_..._-.._-_..__._--_._.- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item -U- Meeting Date 03/03/92 llø 1$1>(.. ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION lJó6(r Approving the Agreement Between FN Projects and the City of Chula Vista to provide low- and moderate- income housing SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director (,. ~, REVIEWED BY: City Manageró (4/Sths Vote: Yes _ No.xJ BACKGROUND: At its meeting of February 18, 1992, the City Council raised certain issues regarding the proposed agreement to provide low and moderate income housing in Salt Creek I. Council requested staff to return with a report addressing these issues relating to deed restrictions imposed on the low-income units at their next meeting, along with a revised agreement if appropriate. Attached hereto is the previous staff report and revised agreement. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution approving the Agreement between FN Projects and the City of Chula Vista to provide low- and moderate-income housing. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Council expressed the desire to impose an affordability duration on the Salt Creek I units of more than 10 years. The Council also desired that those units have an owner-occupancy requirement. Staff and the City Attorney have met with FN Projects and have come to agreement on the recommended revisions to the Salt Creek I agreement. DURATION: The agreement has been amended to require a deed restriction of 15 years, rather than 10 years (Section 4). Fifteen years affordability duration for for-sale housing is programmatically acceptable. It is recommended in light of legal issues discussed in the City Attorney's confidential memorandum provided to the Council with the agenda. Other revisions have been made which address the duration of affordability. They are: 1. When resales occur during the l5-year affordability period, they will be to low income buyers unless an exemption based on hardship is granted by the Community Development Director. 2. The City's deed restriction for affordability, where it must be subordinate to a lender's purchase money first Trust Deed, will have right to notice, cure, and subrogation in a \\ .., ...-.....,..--....--.-...-.-...., Item \) Meeting Date 03/03/92 foreclosure, unless the Community Development Director determines it is necessary to waive that right to secure lender fmancihg of the unit. The risk of such a waiver is that the City could not step in to "save" the unit for low income occupancy; the City would only receive its subsidy back, which it could then use for other housing assistance. This is a typical, acceptable risk in such programs. 3. The agreement calls for the City's deed restriction to be in a priority position to any lender's Purchase Money Trust Deed. However, FNMA, which is a likely secondary market purchaser of the Purchase Money Trust Deeds, does not by regulation allow subordination to third party deed restrictions. Therefore, the agreement calls for the City to accept a subordinate position for its deed restriction in cases where FNMA or a government or quasi-government agency with similar regulations to FNMA are purchasing the units' Trust Deeds, in order to assure that it is feasible to deliver the low- income units. This arrangement is considered feasible for the following reasons: [1] A survey of government low-income for sale housing programs indicates the default rates in such programs are very low. It appears that the programs represent such a valuable benefit to low-income buyers that those buyers are extremely careful about maintaining their mortgages. Therefore, default risk on the Baldwin low-income units does not seem great. [2] FNMA has been barraged with complaints about their subordination regulations, and there appears to be some possibility of change to those regulations. Such change could occur prior to the fmancing of the Baldwin units. [3] The subsidy funds provided by Baldwin for the low-income units will be provided by the City to the buyers with some debt mechanisms which will assure affordability for some period of years which may exceed the 15 years of the deed restrictions. Owner/Occupancy: The agreement has been revised to require that the low income units be owner/occupied (Section 4). This requirement will be enforced through deed restrictions and financing instruments; however, the Community Development Director is authorized to grant exceptions in what he deems special, hardship circumstances. Developing Deed Restrictions/Subsidy Mechanisms: Subsequent to this agreement, staff and FN Projects will develop the specifics of the deed restrictions and the subsidy mechanisms. As conceptual consensus already exists, staff and FN \\.d-. __. .,...____~____._.w__ Item --L Meeting Date 03/03/92 Projects anticipate quickly achieving those specifics which are consistent with the basic requirements of Section 4 of the agreement. Both parties are committed to completing that process in 30 days. The resolution authorized the Community Development Director to approve the deed restriction language. The agreement prevents FN Projects from closing escrow on the low income units in the unlikely event that agreement on the deed restriction language cannot be reached. FISCAL IMPACT: The City will receive $1300 from the applicant to pay for administrative costs incurred by City in connection with the Administration of this Agreement. The applicant will pay an affordable housing subsidy of $301,878.15 into an escrow account to be used by City to assist approximately 13 Low Income purchasers to purchase units in Salt Creek I. [AG/A:\SALT--CRK.113] \\.. ~ Þ /-1./ _..__.+_.-...,"--."_....~-- ATTACHMENT COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date 02/18/92 ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION 16506 Approving the Agreement Between FN Projects and the City of Chula Vista to provide low- and moderate- income housing SUBMI1TED BY: Community Development Director ¿,. <J . REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/Sths Vote: Yes _ No.xJ BACKGROUND: On September 12, 1989 the City Council approved a tentative map for the subdivision of Salt Creek 1. Condition No. 11 of the tentative map required the developer (FN Projects, a joint venture including the Baldwin Company) to reach an agreement with the City to devote at least 10 percent of the project units (approximately 55 units) to low- and moderate-income housing in conformance with the City's Housing Element. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution approving the Agreement between FN Projects and the City of Chula Vista to provide low- and moderate-income housing. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The Housing Element of the General Plan requires that subdivisions of 50 units or more address the provision of 10 percent of the subdivision's units as affordable to low- and moderate-income households. Discussions over time between staff and the Salt Creek I developer have been directed at most feasibly satisfying that requirement. As a result, condition No. 11 was imposed on the tentative map which required the applicant to reach an agreement to provide low- and moderate-income housing in Salt Creek 1. On May 14, 1991 the City and applicant entered into a Supplemental Subdivision Agreement which shifted the burden of condition No. 11 to the "attached housing area" of Salt Creek 1. Subsequently, on December 17, 1991 the City and applicant entered into an Amendment to the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement which further shifted the burden to the "condominium project area" of Salt Creek 1. To satisfy the affordable housing obligation, the applicant has agreed to provide 2.5 percent of the total Salt Creek I units as low-income units (13 units) and 7.5 percent as moderate-income units (39 units). All of those units will be provided in the condominium project of Salt Creek I, which is the highest density and most feasible for affordable housing. The most significant components of the agreement are as follows: \\. ~ ",^. -."'....----,---..-.,-*-.---..- Page 2 Item Meeting Date 02/18/92 1. Subsidy/Denvery or Units: FN Projects has agreed to subsidize the low-income units through a in-lieu payment of $600 per market rate unit throughout the Salt Creek I subdivision. As each Salt Creek I market rate unit sells, the developer will pay $600 to a fund maintained by the City. The maximum accrual to the fund will be $301,878, which will provide a potential subsidy to each low-income unit (13 units) averaging $23,221. This subsidy is approximately one-half of the amount necessary to subsidize the target units to an affordable level for low- income households. Given the subdivision densities, the for sale product types, and the ability of the market rate units to sustain additional financial burdens and still remain marketable, it is felt that such a subsidy level is a maximum feasible level for the developer to provide. The City agrees to attempt to provide additional subsidies to bring the 13 low-income units to an affordable level. This seems feasible with such programs as the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program. If the City cannot deliver additional subsidies sufficient to provide 13 low-income units, then the combined subsidies of the developer and the City would be applied to achieve as many low-income units as possible. At the City's sole option, the developer's subsidy could be switched to any other affordable housing project or program in the City. At the point at which 13 low-income units are provided in Salt Creek I through any combination of mechanisms, regardless of the status of the payments to the developer's subsidy fund, the developer would have no further obligation to pay into the subsidy fund, and the unused balance of the fund would be returned to the developer. No subsidy is necessary for the moderate-income affordable units, as market rate for these condominiums is currently affordable to moderate-income households. The 39 unit restriction in the agreement simply assures that the moderate-income units will be delivered if conditions change (Section 4.1). 2. Phasing: In accordance wifu marketing and lending practices, the condominium project, and the delivery of-affordable units within the project, will be phased. A phasing schedule has been incorporated in the agreement, and the affordable units have been spread throughout the project in that schedule. Affordable units can be "pre-sold" before release of a phase for sale. If an affordable unit remains unsold 30 days after issuance of a Certificate of Completion, the developer can obtain the City's release of that unit for non-low-income sale and "roll-over" that obligation to the next phase. No phase would have more than 20 percent concentration of low- income units (Section 11). 3. Resale Control: The City will be structuring a subsidy program for the developer subsidy and any City subsidy, which may include down-payment assistance or a silent second loan with equity participation. The agreement stipulates that for each low-income unit receiving a subsidy, the City will have the right to impose a resale deed restriction for 10 years. Through that deed restriction, the City would have the right to first refusal, which would be exercised or assigned to another low-income buyer. This would avoid "windfall profits" to the initial buyer and would sustain affordability of the units (Section 4.3.1,2, and 3). 4. Marketing Plan: The agreement requires the developer to provide a marketing plan for the low-and moderate-income units which is acceptable to the City. The City agrees to assist \\..L\...t ----,",,",...._-"-----,-----_.__. Page 3 Item Meeting Date 02/18/92 in the marketing and to call upon third-party non-profit organizations to assist where possible. Such organizations with specialized skills exist and could be brought into the marketing effort (Section 7). 5. Adm;n;~rative Costs: The developer will pay the City $100 per low-income unit for administrative costs (Section 8). 6. Special Consideration of Subsidies: The City agrees, to the maximum extent feasible, to give special consideration to obtaining cost reduction mechanisms for the Salt Creek I project affordable housing requirement. This is effectively a good faith pledge to provide subsidies that might become available to this development before providing them to other projects which have not yet negotiated an affordable housing agreement, as long as subsidy program regulations would allow such special considerations (Section 9). This agreement is not intended to be precedent setting for future negotiations to provide affordable housing in other developments. This project is considered to be unique for a variety of reasons including the configuration of the property, single access to the project area, and the inability to provide rental units. Based on these considerations, staff believes that the attached negotiated agreement is equitable and provides for the maximum number of low income for-sale units which were determined to be achievable within Salt Creek I. FISCAL IMPACT: The City will receive $1300 from the applicant to pay for administrative costs incurred by City in connection with the Administration of this Agreement. The applicant will pay an affordable housing subsidy of $301 ,878.15 into an escrow account to be used by City to assist approximately 13 Low Income purchasers to purchase units in Salt Creek I. [C:IWPS lICOUNCll.11 13SISALTCRK1.l 13] \\-\1. ..~ ~ .--,_._~_._--",,-,.,- RESOLUTION II.. 50(ø RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Approving the Agreement between FN Projects and the City of Chula Vista to Provide Low and Moderate Income Housing THE CITY COUNCn.. OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, FN Projects, a California Corporation is the owner of certain real property consisting of approximately 130 acres located in Chula Vista and commonly known as "Salt Creek I; and WHEREAS, A tentative map for the subdivision Of Salt Creek I has been approved subject to certain requirements and conditions, as contained in Resolution No. 15299, approved on September 12, 1989; and WHEREAS, Condition No. 11 of the tentative map requires Applicant to "reach an agreement with the City to devote at least 10% of the project units to low and moderate income housing; and WHEREAS, The City and Applicant entered into a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement known as document #C091-081 dated May 14, 1991 which shifted the burden of Condition No 11, as it applies to Chula Vista Tract 89-9, units 1, 2, and 3 to the remainder of Salt Creek I; and WHEREAS, City and Applicant entered into a First Amendment to the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement regarding Condition No. lIon December 171991 which further shifted the burden on Condition No. 11 as it applies to Chula Vista Tract 89-9, Unit 4, to the remainder of Salt Creek I ("Condominium Housing Area") and set forth that the applicants obligation is to provide 2.5% of the total project units as Low Income Housing Units and 7.5% of the total project units as Moderate Income Housing Units. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve an agreement with FN Projects to provide Low and Moderate Income Housing within Salt Creek 1, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTIIER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. Presented by: u¡ rlLv~ Chris Salomone, Executive Secretary and Bruce M. Boogaard Community Development Director Agency General Co nse1 [AGIA:\SALTCRK.RESO 11-5/11-6 , - -,-'-' ~--_._- RECORDING REQUESTED BY: ) City Clerk ) ) WHEN RECORDED, MAIL TO: ) ) City Of Chula Vista ) 276 Fourth Avenue ) Chula Vista, CA 91910 ) Attn: ) ) ) Space Above for Recorder's Use No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance to a public agency of less than a fee interest for which no cash consideration has been paid or received. AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING This AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ("Agreement") is made this , 1992, for the purposes of reference only, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, California, a municipal corporation ("City") and FN PROJECTS, a California Corporation ("Applicant"), with reference to the facts set forth below. RECITALS A. Applicant is the owner of certain real property consisting of approximately 130 acres, located in Chula Vista, California, as more particularly described on Exhibit "An attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Salt Creek I") . B. A tentative map ("Tentative Map") for the subdivision of Salt Creek I has been approved, subject to certain requirements and conditions, as contained in Resolution No. 15299, approved on September 12, 1989. C. Condition No. 11 of the Tentative Map ("Condition No. 11") requires Applicant to "reach an agreement with the City to devote at least 10\ of the protect units (approximately 55 units) to low and moderate income housing." D. City and Applicant entered into that certain Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement known as Document #C091-081, dated May 14, 1991, and recorded in the Of fic ial Records of San Diego County on June 18, 1991, as Instrument No. 91-0292169 ("Supplemental Agreement") which shifted the burden of Condition No. 11, as it applies to the Chula Vista Tract 89-9, Units 1, 2 and 3, to the remainder of Salt Creek I. E. City and Applicant also entered into that certain First Amendment to Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement regarding Condition No. 11 known as Document # , dated December 17, 1991, and recorded in the Official Records of San 'Diego County on , as Instrument No. ("First Amendment"), which further shifted the burden of Condition No. 11 as it applies to Chula Vista Tract 89-9, Unit 4, to the remainder of Salt Creek I ("Condominium Housing Area") as more particularly described on Exhibit "Bn fnl. wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 1 J/-7 ,""".__.u____,,__ attached hereto. As used herein, the term "Supplemental Agreement" shall refer to the Supplemental Agreement as modified by the First Amendment. F. In order to satisfy Applicant's obligations under the Supplemental Agreement, and in full and final satisfaction of Condition No. 11, Applicant has agreed to devote, or otherwise provide, 10% of the total dwelling units which are permitted by City to be constructed in Salt Creek I ("Total Salt Creek I Units") as Low Income Housing Units (as defined below) or Moderate Income Housing Units (as defined below). Applicant shall devote 2.5% of the Total Salt Creek I Units as Low Income Housing Units and 7.5% of the Total Salt Creek I Units as Moderate Income Housing Units. In addition, Owner has agreed to pay to City a low income housing subsidy which may be used by City to subsidize the purchase prices for the purchase of Low Income Housing Units by Low Income Purchasers (as defined below) or for certain other affordable housing purposes within the City. G. The parties desire to execute this Agreement to provide for the obligations and rights of Applicant and City with respect to the allocation of Low and Moderate Income Housing Units in the Condominium Housing Area of Salt Creek I. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as set forth below. 1. Definitions. 1.1 Low Income Housino Unit. The term "Low Income Housing Unit" shall mean a residential structure designed for sale to a Low Income Purchaser, and constructed pursuant to said design. 1.2 Low Income Purchaser. The term "Low Income Purchaser" shall mean an actual or prospective purchaser of a residential unit in the Condominium Housing Area, which is a household whose gross annual income does not exceed 80% of the San Diego Area Median Income, based upon household size. The parties acknowledge that all residential units to be sold in the Condominium Housing Area as Low Income Housing Units shall contain two bedrooms. Therefore, household size for purposes of determining the San Diego Median Income for Low Income Purchasers shall be a household of four. 1.3 Moderate Income Housino Unit. The term "Moderate Income Housing Unit" shall mean a residential structure designed for sale to a Moderate Income Purchaser, and constructed pursuant to said design. 1.4 Moderate Income Purchaser. The term "Moderate Income Purchaser" shall mean an actual or prospective purchaser of a residential unit in the Condominium Housing Area, which is a household whose gross annual income does not exceed 20% of the San Diego Median Income, based upon household size. The parties acknowledge that all residential units to be sold in the Condominium Housing Area as Moderate Income Housing Units shall contain two or three bedrooms. Therefore, household size for purposes of determining the San Diego Median Income for Moderate Income Purchasers shall be a household of four for a two-bedroom unit, and a household of six for a three-bedroom unit. 1.5 Phase. The term "Phase" shall refer to either a development or marketing phase within the Condominium Housing Area. 1.6 San Dieoo Median Income. The term "San Diego Median Income" shall mean the San Diego County Area Median Income level as determined from time to time by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, United States Government, based on household size. fnl.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 2 II -~ .___..".,_.,m__ _-0_" 2. Satisfaction of Tentative Mac Condition and Termination of First Amendment. The parties agree that the performance and satisfaction by Applicant of every term, covenant and condition of this Agreement will constitute full and complete satisfaction of Condition No. 11 and the Supplemental Agreement. Upon recordation of this Agreement, OWner and City agree that the First Amendment to the Supplemental Agreement shall terminate and both parties shall be released from all obligations set forth therein. City shall execute a quitclaim or other document requested by a title company to release the First Amendment. 3. Dutv to Provide Moderate and Low Income Housina Units. Applicant shall devote, or otherwise provide, 10% of the Total Salt Creek I Units as Low or Moderate Income Housing Units in the Condominium Housing Area. Applicant shall devote, or otherwise provide, 7.5% of the Total Salt Creek I Units as Moderate Income Housing Units within the Condominium Housing Area and 2.5% of the Total Salt Creek I Units as Low Income Housing Units within the Condominium Housing Area. As an example of such allocation, assume that the Total Salt Creek I Units is 523 units. In such case, Applicant shall be required to devote 52 of such units within the Condominium Housing Area as Low or Moderate Income Housing Units, 39 of which shall be devoted as Moderate Income Housing Units, and 13 of which shall be devoted as Low Income Housing Units. 4. Low Income Housina Units. 4.1 Low Income Housina Subsidy. Applicant will pay an affordable housing subsidy of $600 per Salt Creek I Unit ("Per Unit Subsidy") to City at the close of escrow for each unit sold in Salt Creek I, commencing as of the close of escrow on the twentieth unit sold in Salt Creek I; provided, however, that Applicant shall not be required to pay the Per Unit Subsidy at the close of escrow for the sale of any Low Income Housing Units. City will place the Per Unit Subsidies in an interest bearing escrow account. The Per Unit Subsidies will be paid until (a) 2.5% of the Total Salt Creek I Units are purchased by Low Income Purchasers as Low Income Housing Units or (b) until Three Hundred One Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Eight Dollars and Fifteen Cents ($301,878.15), plus the Administrative Cost (as defined in section 8), accrues in the escrow account (including interest), whichever occurs first. The escrow account shall be used to assist approximately 13 Low Income Purchasers to purchase units in Salt Creek I. However, if at the sole discretion of City, it is determined that any of the Low Income Housing Units cannot be provided on site, City shall use the funds to provide other affordable housing opportunities in the City of Chula Vista. At the point at which 2.5% of the Total Salt Creek I Units are sold as Low Income Housing Units in accordance with this Agreement, any unused funds in the escrow account shall be returned to Applicant within forty-five (45) days after the sale of the last unit comprising 2.5% of the total Salt Creek I Units. City shall deliver to Applicant, concurrently with the release of a Phase for sale by Applicant, an accounting of all payments made by City of such funds, together with a listing of all units to which such subsidy payments were applied. 4.2 Initial Sales Price for a Low Income Housina Unit. The initial sales price for a Low Income Housing Unit in the first Phase of the Condominium Housing Area shall be One Hundred Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($115,000) . If the San Diego Median Income is increased, then the sales price for Low Income Housing Units in any Phase may be increased to reflect the increased purchasing power of the Low Income Purchasers. 4.3 Proaram to Assist Low Income Purchasers. City will develop and implement a program to assist Low Income Purchasers with the purchase of units within the Condominium Housing Area. Such program shall be implemented subject to the provisions set forth below. 4.3.1 Deed Restrictions for Low Income Housina Units. For each Low Income fn1.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 3 II - 0; ...-.".~-'-"._'---' ".._,._-~._-- Housing Unit the city shall have the right to impress, prior to the initial sale of any such Low Income Housing Units, such covenants, conditions and restrictions against title ("Deed Restriction") to such units as City deems appropriate and necessary to implement and preserve the Low Income Housing Units, but at a minimum shall require (1) that the Low Income Housing Unit is occupied primarily by the owner of the Unit ("OWner-Occupancy Condition"); (2) that the Low Income Housing Unit is transferred only to subsequent purchasers who would qualify as Low Income Purchasers except under such conditions as may be deemed appropriate (such as death, divorce, or other hardship etc.) by the City's Director of Community Development ("Subsequent Purchaser Qualification Condition"); (3) that the gross sales proceeds on subsequent sales of the Low Income Housing Unit does not exceed the seller's investment in the unit plus an adjustment for cost of living increases ("Limitation on Gross Sales Proceeds Condition"); and (4) that the City shall have the right to be notified of a proposed subsequent sale, and to be offered the right to acquire the Low Income Housing Unit at the maximum permitted gross sales price ("Right to Purchase"), which Deed Restrictions shall remain operative for fifteen (15) years from the date of the initial sale of the unit by the Applicant ("Initial Sale"). Such Right of Purchase may be assigned by the City to a Low Income Purchaser who agrees to purchase such Low Income Housing Unit. The Deed Restrictions shall include a provision which states that, if the City or its assignee does not exercise its Right of Purchase, the Right to Purchase shall terminate. The Deed Restrictions shall be in a priority position to a purchase money lender's security interests; however, upon a good faith demonstration by the Applicant to City of need for subordination in order to secure financing, the City shall agree to subordinate the Deed Restrictions to the lien of a purchase money deed of trust provided the form of such subordination meets with the city's reasonable satisfaction, not unreasonably withheld, and provides City with the right to receive notice of, and the right to cure, any defaults and to be subrogated to the rights of the lender upon such cure, or contains such other terms as may be acceptable to the Director of Community Development. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city agrees that it will, through the Director of Community Development, waive such requirements for subordination only to the extent necessary to conform to requirements of the Federal National Mortgage Association and any other federal guarantor or purchaser of such first mortgages. 4.3.2 Non-Subsidy Deed Restrictions. Inasmuch as the City shall have the right to impose the Deed Restrictions as to Low Income Housing Units for which the City has not provided a subsidy or any other assistance, ("Non-Subsidy Deed Restrictions"), City acknowledges that the Non-Subsidy Deed Restrictions is being imposed upon Applicant as a requirement of the City, and Applicant makes no warranty or representation regarding the enforceability of any such Non-Subsidy Deed Restrictions. City hereby waives, relinquishes and covenants not to sue Applicant, any homeowners association formed to govern the Condominium Housing Area ("Association"), or any other owners in the Condominium Housing Area other than the Low Income Housing Unit Purchaser as a result of a breach by a Low Income Housing Unit Purchaser of any Non-Subsidy Deed Restrictions affecting such Low Income Purchaser's Unit. City further agrees that it will not take any actions during Applicant's Initial Sale Marketing efforts, but not for a period of longer than 3 years from the first Initial Sale, to enforce the Non-Subsidy Deed Restrictions if such actions will adversely impact Applicant's ability to market the remaining units in Salt Creek I. City shall indemnify, defend and hold Applicant and its successors and assigns and any Association harmless from and against any claims, actions, damages, and liabilities (including, without limitation, attorneys' fees) arising from or attributable to the Non-Subsidy Deed Restrictions and any actions filed by the City to enforce such Non-Subsidy Deed Restrictions. 4.3.3 Deed of Trust. In addition to the Deed Restrictions, City fnl.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 28, 1992 Page 4 }/ _ (D ---~,_.".,.._-,_._.__....-._,.-.-.....- shall, in cases where City provides a subsidy to a Low Income Purchaser, have the right to impose a Deed of Trust second in priority to a purchase money lender's deed of trust against such Low Income Housing Unit ("City's Deed of Trust"). The form and content of such Deed of Trust shall be agreed to by City and Applicant concurrently with City and Applicant's approval of the Deed Restrictions pursuant to section 4.3.4 below. 4.3.4 Reauirements Reaardina Deed Restrictions and Deed of Trust. Any Deed Restrictions or City's Deed of Trust imposed under Sections 4.3.1 or 4.3.3 shall be imposed in accordance with the requirements set forth below. Any Deed Restrictions or City's Deed of Trust permitted under Sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.3 shall be imposed at the time of the Initial Sale. City agrees that any additional Deed Restrictions, not contemplated under the provisions of 4.3.1, shall not unreasonably adversely impact Applicant's ability to market the remaining units within Salt Creek 1. City shall obtain the prior written approval of Applicant to any such additional Deed Restrictions at least nine months prior to the implementation of such programs or Deed Restrictions and City and Applicant shall use due diligence and good faith efforts to reach agreement on the form of such Deed Restrictions, additional Deed Restrictions, and City's Deed of Trust within 30 days of the recordation of this Agreement. The approval of Applicant to any additional Deed Restrictions shall not be unreasonably withheld by Applicant. If Applicant reasonably withholds its consent to the imposition of additional Deed Restriction, Applicant and the Director of Community Development shall meet, in good faith, to reach agreement on a form of Deed Restrictions which will be acceptable to both Applicant and City. Until there is an agreement on the content of the Deed Restrictions and City's Deed of Trust, the Applicant shall not engage in any Initial Sales of such Low Income Housing Units, unless permitted by the Director of Community Development. S. Construction Standards. The Low and Moderate Income Housing Units shall be constructed to substantially the same material quality standards as all other residential units to be constructed in the Condominium Housing Area. 6. ReDortina Reauirements. Commencing on the date on which the units in the first Phase are released for sale, and continuing on the dates on which the units in each subsequent Phase are released for sale, Applicant shall deliver to City a report ("Compliance Packet") which includes the information set forth below. 6.1 Actual Purchasers. With respect to each Low and Moderate Income Purchaser who enters into a purchase contract with Applicant since the previous report, the Compliance Packet shall include (a) a copy of each purchase contract entered into with such Low and Moderate Income Purchasers and (b) a qualifying form to be signed by a representative of Applicant or by any other person designated to qualify purchaser as a Low or Moderate Income Purchaser which includes the information which Applicant relied upon in determining that the purchaser qualifies as a Low or Moderate Income Purchaser. The qualifying form shall be in a form approved by City's Director of Community Development, in such person's reasonable discretion. 6.2 Non-Purchasers. With respect to each person who applies as a Low or Moderate Income Purchaser but did not qualify as a Low or Moderate Income Purchaser, the Compliance Packet shall include a report which sets forth each household's name, address, telephone number, size of household, gross annual income, ethnicity, date of application and reasons for not purchasing a unit. The report shall be prepared by Applicant or by any other person designated to qualify a purchaser. as a Low or Moderate Income Purchaser. 6.3 Authorization for Release. Each Compliance Packet which is delivered to City shall contain an acknowledgement by each household applying as fnl.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 5 1/-./1 -. _._--,----,-~_.._. a Low or Moderate Income Purchaser that (a) the information in the Compliance Packet is required by city, (b) the household authorizes the release of the Compliance Packet to city, (c) the information in the Compliance Packet is for use only by City in accordance with the sale of Low and Moderate Income Housing Units in Salt Creek I, and (d) such information may not be disclosed to any person or entity other than representatives of city who are administering Applicant's compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. 7. Dutv to Provide a Marketina Plan and Dutv to Market Low and Moderate Income HousinQ Units to Low and Moderate Income Purchasers. Applicant shall provide a plan ("Marketing Plan") acceptable to City, in its reasonable discretion, for proactively marketing the Low and Moderate Income Housing Units to Low and Moderate Income Purchasers. Applicant shall use good faith and reasonable best efforts to market the Low and Moderate Income Housing Units to Low and Moderate Income Purchasers, respectively, according to the Marketing Plan. City agrees to use good faith and reasonable best efforts to assist Applicant in marketing the Low and Moderate Income Housing Units and to assist in obtaining the services of a third-party organization in connection with such marketing efforts and in processing the applications of prospective purchasers of Low and Moderate Income Housing Units and complying with the reporting requirements set forth in Section 6 of this Agreement. 8. Administrative Costs. Applicant agrees to pay City for the reasonable administrative costs incurred by City in connection with the administration of this Agreement; provided, however, such administrative costs shall not exceed $100 for each Low Income Housing Unit sold to Low Income Purchasers ("Administrative Costs"). The Administrative Costs will be applied by the City, toward staff costs associated with the City's obligations under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, such things as costs relating to telephone questions and referring eligible buyers, advertising, assisting with marketing program, monitoring sale and phasing of Low/Moderate units, administering "silent 2nd" program, or applications for state and federal subsidies. 9. Additional Subsidies. The parties acknowledge that, due to the increased cost of land development, it is becoming increasingly difficult for developers such as Applicant to offer affordable housing units for sale to Low and Moderate Income Purchasers. Accordingly, during the term of this Agreement, city agrees to use good faith and reasonable best efforts to assist Applicant in providing affordable housing in Salt Creek I by obtaining the benefit of certain financing and other mechanisms which would reduce the cost of providing affordable housing in Salt Creek I, including, but not limited to, local, state and federal subsidies, density bonuses, planning, design and development techniques and standards which reduce the cost of providing affordable housing, the issuance of mortgage revenue bonds and application for Federal Mortgage Credit Certificates (collectively, the "Cost Reducing Mechanisms"). The parties acknowledge that city is unable to guarantee the availability of any Cost Reducing Mechanisms to Applicant or on a project specific basis for Salt Creek I. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in light of the fact that Applicant is one of the first developers in the City to enter into an agreement to provide affordable housing in the City, the parties agree that if, as a result of any legislation enacted after the date of this Agreement or any other changed circumstances, the City is able, both legally and as a result of the availability of such Cost Reducing Mechanism, to reserve or otherwise provide any Cost Reducing Mechanisms for the benefit of any developer in the City, or for the benefit of any specific project in the City, then City agrees that it will afford Applicant special consideration in obtaining the benefit of such Cost Reducing Mechanisms before such Cost Reducing Mechanisms are offered to other developers in the City. 10. Exceditina Issuance of Buildina Permits and processina of Maps. In fn1.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 6 II -/~ ....".--~..,,_..,---_..._, order to achieve the purpose of this Agreement which is to provide Low Income Housing Units and Moderate Income Housing Units within the Condominium Housing Area, City agrees that it will make a good faith effort to insure the timely issuance of building permits to Applicant and the timely processing of maps for Salt Creek I- ll. Phasina for Low and Moderate Income Housina Units. As a matter of economic practicality, the parties recognize that all of Applicant's compliance under the terms of this Agreement shall occur by the sale of units in the Condominium Housing Area. It is the plan of Applicant to construct and sell units in the Condominium Housing Area in various Phases, depending on market absorption. The parties agree that the sale of Low and Moderate Income Housing Units in various Phases shall occur as set forth below. 11.1 Phasina of Low Income Housina Units. 11.1.1 Phasino Schedule. Attached hereto as Schedule" 1· is a phasing schedule ("Phasing Schedule") which sets forth the number of phases in the Condominium Housing Area, the number of Low Income Housing Units which Applicant intends to sell in each phase and which individual units in each phase shall be sold as Low Income Housing Units. City acknowledges and agrees that it may be necessary for Applicant to make changes in such Phasing Schedule. city hereby delegates to the Director of Community Development the right and power-to agree to any changes to such Phasing Schedule. Any changes to such Phasing Schedule shall not require an amendment to this Agreement. The following provisions shall be applicable to the phasing of units in the Condominium Housing Area. 11.1. 2 ComDliance with Phasina Schedule. Applicant shall use good faith efforts to design, construct, price and sell Low Income Housing Units according to the Phasing Schedule. 11.1. 3 Modifications to PhasinQ Schedule. The Phasing Schedule may be modified by Applicant from time to time provided that any such modifications are approved in advance in writing by City's Community Development Director, in such person's reasonable discretion. In addition, the parties acknowledge and agree that if any unit which is designated in the Phasing Schedule as a Low Income Housing Unit is not sold at least thirty (30) days after the issuance of a certificate of completion then (a) Applicant shall be released from its obligation of selling such unit as a Low Income Housing Unit within such Phase and (b) the Phasing Schedule shall be modified such that Applicant shall designate a Low Income Housing Unit in the next Phase in which no Low Income Housing Units have been designated. Notwithstanding any modifications to the Phasing Schedule as provided in this Section, the parties agree that in no event shall the number of Low Income Housing Units in anyone Phase exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total number of units in such Phase ("Maximum Threshold") . 11.2 Phasina of Moderate Income Housina Units. Applicant and City agree that Applicant shall use good faith efforts to sell thirty percent (30%) of the total units to be sold in each Phase as Moderate Income Housing Units. 11.3 Phase 5 Meetino. If, as of the date which is ninety (90) days prior to the first sale of a Unit in the fifth Phase, Applicant has not sold all of the Low and Moderate Income Housing Units which Applicant is obligated to sell under this Agreement, then, at least ten (10) days prior to the first sale of a unit in the fifth Phase, Applicant and City shall meet in good faith to evaluate the Marketing Plan and to make any adjustments or modifications in the Marketing Plan or any of the other requirements and obligations of this Agreement as may be warranted. fn1.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 7 1/ -13 ,_.._----,.,-,.,..,,_......._- 12. Release. 12.1 Release of Units. city shall release units located in the Condominium Housing Area from this Agreement and the burden of the covenants set forth herein upon the satisfaction of any of the conditions set forth below. 12.1.1 If (a) Applicant enters into an agreement to sell a unit to a Low or Moderate Income Purchaser which, pursuant to the sales agreement, will be sold in compliance with this Agreement, and (b) Applicant pays the Per Unit Subsidy to City at the close of escrow, if required, then City shall release such unit from this Agreement concurrently with the close of escrow for such unit. 12.1.2 If (a) Applicant enters into an agreement to sell a unit to a purchaser who is not a Low or Moderate Income Purchaser, (b) sufficient units remain available to satisfy Applicant's obligations under this Agreement in the Condominium Housing Area, and (c) Applicant pays the Per Unit Subsidy to city at the close of escrow, then City shall release such unit from this Agreement concurrently with the close of escrow for such unit. 12.1.3 If, after thirty (30) days after the issuance of a certificate of completion by the City, Applicant, despite its good faith efforts, is unable to sell the Dwelling Unit to a Low Income Household or a Moderate Income Household, City shall release such Dwelling Unit from this Agreement. 12.1.4 If Applicant has reached the Maximum Threshold for Low Income Housing Units in each remaining Phase pursuant to Section 11.1.3, City shall release the Dwelling Units in excess of the Maximum Threshold from this Agreement. 12.2 Procedures for Release. If City is obligated to release a unit pursuant to Section 12.1 above, then Applicant may obtain the release by delivering the following to city: (a) a written request indicating the unit to be released, (b) if the release is requested pursuant to Section 12.1.1 or 12.1.2 above, a copy of the agreement evidencing the sale of the unit, (c) if the release is requested pursuant to Section 12.1.2 above, evidence that there are a sufficient number of units which remain available to satisfy Applicant· s obligations under this Agreement, (d) if the release is requested pursuant to Section 12.1.3, a copy of the certificate of completion, (e) if the release is requested pursuant to Section 12.1.4 a statement from Applicant certifying that the Maximum Threshold has been reached, (f) a Release of Property from Affordable Housing Agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "S" and incorporated herein or a quitclaim or any other document acceptable to a title company to remove this Agreement from title ("Release") to be executed by the Director of Community Development, and (g) such additional documentation as Applicant and the title company may reasonably require to effect the release. Within thirty (30) days after City's receipt of such documents, the Director of Community Development shall execute the Release and any other documentation reasonably required to effect the release and return it to the escrow agent designated by Applicant. The Release shall then be recorded by escrow agent in the Official Records of the San Diego County Recorder's Office at the close of escrow for the sale of the unit. 13. General Provisions. 13.1 Maintenance of Records. Applicant shall use reasonable efforts to keep and maintain complete records of information that it receives in connection with the application by individuals/households to become Low or Moderate Income Purchasers and all information received from lenders regarding the qualification of such individuals/households. fn1.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page S IJ _JY - -,---,~,.~-_._~,~._,..-.'~-_._- 13.2 Audit bv Citv. City shall have the right during normal business hours and following reasonable prior written notice, to inspect the records maintained by Applicant in connection with the fulfillment of Applicant's obligations under this Agreement, subject to any privacy rights afforded to any such purchasers. 13.3 Reliance bv At:>Dlicant. Applicant shall be entitled to reasonably rely on information furnished to it and to lenders by Low and Moderate Income Purchasers. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed to require Applicant to perform any extraordinary investigation or verification regarding such information, provided that Applicant and the lenders involved in financing the sale of Low or Moderate Income Units employ usual and customary means of information verification. 13.4 Notices. Unless otherwise provided herein, control and administration of this Agreement shall be vested in the Director of Community Development of City as to City's interest herein. Any communications relative to the terms or conditions or any changes thereto or any notice or notices provided for by this Agreement or by law to be given or served upon either party hereunder may be given or served by personal delivery or by certified or registered mail, deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid and return receipt requested, or by Federal Express or other similar overnight delivery service and addressed to the party for whom intended, as follows: To City at: City of Chula Vista Community Development Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 9I910 Attn: Director of Community Development To Applicant at: FN Projects c/o The Baldwin Company 11975 El Camino Real, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92130 Attn: Ms. Claudia Troisi With a copy to: First Nationwide Bank Salt Creek I 9800 S. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 202 Los Angeles, CA 90045 Attn: Rob Jepson Any party hereto may from time to time, by written notice to the other, designate a different address which shall be substituted for the one above specified. Unless otherwise specifically provided for herein, all notices, payments, demands or other communications given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given and received (1) upon personal delivery, or (i1) as of the third business day after mailing by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as set forth above, or (iii) the immediately succeeding business day after deposit with Federal Express or other equivalent overnight delivery system. 13.5 Gender: Number. The use herein of (i) the neuter gender includes the masculine and the feminine and (ii) singular number includes the fnl.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 9 /1 -/~ " "-"--'''. .-.,.. OF THIS AGREEMENT BY SETTING THEIR SIGNATURE HEREINBELOW, AND BY DOING SO, REPRESENT THAT THEY WERE AUTHORIZED BY THEIR PRINCIPAL TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR PRINCIPAL. CITY: Dated: THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation By: Tim Nader, Mayor APPLICANT: Dated: FN PROJECTS, a California corporation By: Its: By: Its: APPROVED as to form and content. Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney fnl. wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 11 I);/~ -_..~._-_..,..---- plural, whenever the context so requires. 13.6 Modification. No modification, waiver, amendment, discharge or change of this Agreement shall be valid unless the same is in writing and signed by the party against which the enforcement of such modification, waiver, amendment, discharge or change is or may be sought. 13.7 Attornevs' Fees. In the event either party shall institute any action in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party all of its costs of action, including without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees. 13.8 Bindina on Successors. All terms of this Agreement shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties hereto and their successors and assigns. 13.9 Entire Aareement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties relating to the transactions contemplated hereby and all prior and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, negotiations and statements, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged into this Agreement. 13.10 Burdens of Covenants Run with the Land. The parties agree that the burden of the covenants herein contained touches and concerns the Condominium Housing Area, and that it is the intent of the parties that such covenants shall be binding upon, and run with, the land. The property which is benefitted by such covenants shall be the property owned by City within City limits which is located adjacent to Salt Creek I. Accordingly, the burden of such covenants shall be binding upon and oblige the successors in interest to the Condominium Housing Area regardless of express assumption thereof by future owners at least until the covenants are performed or released according to the provisions hereof. 13.11 Remedies. Without limitation, City is authorized to exercise all remedies, including all discretionary and ministerial governmental powers, in order to obtain compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Applicant shall also be entitled to exercise all available remedies in order to enforce the terms of this Agreement. 13.12 Protection of Lenders. A breach by Applicant of any of its covenants under this Agreement shall not defeat or render invalid the lien of any first mortgage or first deed of trust made in good faith, without knowledge of the breach and for value by any lender of funds for the construction or improvement of the Property. 13.13 GoverninQ Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California. This Agreement shall be deemed made and entered into in San Diego County. 13.14 Severabilitv. In the event that any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, section, article or other portion of this Agreement shall become illegal, null or void or against public policy, for any reason, or shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal null or void or against public policy, the remaining portions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in force and effect to the fullest extent permissible by law. 13.15 CounterDarts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which, when taken together, shall constitute fully executed originals. WHEREUPON THE PARTIES HERETO DO HEREBY INDICATE THEIR CONSENT TO THE TERMS fn1.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 10 II-I? -- ----_._~_.- --,--_-.-__.." Exhibit List Exhibit 1. Phasing Schedule fn1.wp FN Projects Affordable Housing Agreement February 27, 1992 Page 12 II ...¿e .____.u COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No.: -.J z A Meeting Date: 3/3/92 ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION l\øc;~ APPROVING THE AGREEMENT BE1WEEN ESGIL CORPORATION AND THE CI1Y OF CHULA VISTA TO PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SER~ SUBIVll'rn£D BY: Director of Building and Housin REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No-1LJ BACKGROUND: Approval of Resolution I'SS 6 will provide engineering technical support to the Department of Building and Housing for plan review on projects which mandate greater expertise in structural engineering due to complexity of the structural or building envelope analysis. Staff diligently performed a comprehensive review of the six proposed vendors responding to the Request for Proposals (RFP) to perform such engineering services for the City. Esgil Corporation was selected as one of two firms b~ staff as being professionally competent and competitive in their proposed rate structure. taff has had extensive contact with Esgil CorporatIOn since 1987 and has concluded that their structural, mechanical and electrical engineering capabilities are extremely competent, thus insuring the highest quality plan check for our projects. This firm also provides comprehensive plan reviews for compliance with all State of California Energy and Disabled Access Standards. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Resolution and authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement with Esgil Corporation for plan review engineering services. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: This agreement provides the Department of Building and Housing with a necessary resource of engineerin~ expertise for projects which require complex engineering analysis. An example of a project of unique structural complexity would be the moment-space framed system contained in the 250,000 square foot Rohr Office Building which was designed by a team of structural engineers utilizing state-of-the-art computer aided design and computer modeled programs. While the Department has three Plans Examiners on staff, projects of this caliber are beyond staffs structural engineering capabilities. By sending this project to the Esgil Corporation, their structural engineers were able to precisely analyze the scope of the project's unique design and member connection schedule, thus insuring a comprehensive plan review. /ï.A -I ------~--"._--- -2- The operation of utilizing an outside structural engineering plan review consultant for the Department differs somewhat from that of a consultant hired to perform a specific task or a specific project design for the Planning Department or for Public Works contracts. The prime difference for our consultants is that they are involved on projects on a case-by-case basis, determined by the Department which mandate necessary advanced engineering skills. As such, a specific annual amount is difficult to assess due to unknown quantities of projects which may require advanced structural review. During the course of the past five years, the Department has dramatically reduced the number of projects sent out for consultant review. This reduction is premised primarily upon the addition of a third Plans Examiner with outstanding technical qualifications which has enabled staff to process a greater number of projects internally. The financial arrangements established ble the Department are such that projects requiring an outside plan review pay a plan review ee which is placed into a specific Derosit Account. Of this amount collected by staff for the plan review fee, only 80 percent 0 the collected amount will be paid to Esgil Corporation. The remaining 20 percent is retained by the City to recover administrative and processing costs. Attached for your reference is a bar graph illustrating fees paid to our two engineering consultants during the past five years and a one-page brief description of the consultant services. This contract has been reviewed by the City Attorney and has approved its content. Staff recommends approval of the contract through FY 92-93 due to the competitive rates proposed by Esgil Corporation, the professional competence exhibited by this engineering firm on their structural plan reviews and their continuous effort to interact closely with our staff while working with design engineers on their submitted projects during the plan review. FISCAL IMPACT: FY 91-92 - Not to exceed $25,000 FY 92-93 - Not to exceed $30,000 Staff believes that these proposed amounts will not be exceeded given the current projects waiting for project submittal. For the balance of FY 91-92, $25,000 is proposed to offset a current billing for the proposed Rohr, five-story parking structure of approximately $7,000 of engineerinl;\ services. While staff anticipates the Chula Vista Shopping Center expansion as the most significant project submittal, it is believed that a resource reserve is necessary should hrojects materialize outside of staffs anticipation. Funding source is an existing establis ed Deposit Account with funds available. FY 92-93 proposed amount of $30,000 is premised upon several proposed large projects, the Rohr Office Tower, the Chula Vista Shopping Center expansion and the Olympic Training Center. As previously indicated, revenue to fund this proposal is paid by the applicant, with only 80 percent paid to the consultant for structural, mechanical and electrical engineering services while the Department retains 20 percent for administrative and processing costs. KGL:yu (N,IESOIL113.DOC) /2A..2. - ---.------.---.,.-- RESOLUTION NO. ("OS '3b RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH ESGIL CORPORATION TO PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, it is necessary to provide engineering technical support to the Department of Building and Housing for plan review on projects which mandate greater expertise in structural engineering due to the complexity of the structural or building envelope analysis; and WHEREAS, staff performed a comprehensive review of the six proposed vendors responding to the Request for Proposals to perform such engineering services for the City; and WHEREAS, Esgil Corporation was selected as one of two firms by staff as being professionally competent and competitive in their proposed rate structure; and WHEREAS, staff has had extensive contact with Esgil Corporation since 1987 and has concluded that their structural, mechanical and electrical engineering capabilities are extremely competent, thus insuring the highest quality plan check for city projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement between Esgil Corporation and the city of Chula vista to Provide Plan Check Engineering Services, known as Document No. C092-32, a copy of which is on file on 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 Agreement for and on behalf of the city of Chula vista. Presented by Approved as to form by Kenneth G. Larsen, Director of D. ichard Rud SS1.stant Building and Housing City Attorney C:\rs\esgil 1 .A"3/11II-1 -- --+-+---"-~~-_.- DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & HOUSING PLANCHECK CONSULTANT FEES . 17-1 =87 THROUGH 2-18-92 I $250 .................................................. ...................................................................................... $200 Cñ ~ ~ $150 ......."".,,........................................................................ -' :J m.'.._..'.........·..·......·.·..,...,.........·.........,............,............, g ~ $100 '=- $50 ,.,......,..,..,.,,,,............................,.,.....................·...m...... $0 FY 87-88 FY 88-89 FY 89-90 FY 90-91 FY 91-92 $160,559 $206,081 $203,566 $38,829 $36,766 I ~ ESGIL CORP. II WILLDAN ASSOC. I " ,",.'~~ ) \ii" h-A -$ /11.1-' ..-.------.,-,.,.--...,.-. CONSULTANTS/CONTRACTUAL SERVICES SURVEY . Professional Consultant xx Contractual Service - Consultant Namel Company Name I ESGIL CORPORATION Address I 9320 CHESAPEAKE DRIVE, SUITE #208, SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 Vendor Numberl Area of expertise I Structural, Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review Engineering Services City Staff with same or similar expertise 1 Department of Building and Housing Plans Examiners (3) Why hire consultant rather than using existing staff or hiring staff with appropriate expertise? I Consultants are employed on projects of unique structural, mechanical or electrical engineering applications. Degree of complexity of structural or building analysis warrants outside engineering expertise. Department(s) work for: Building and Housing Duties I Work Type (ongoing, one time...)1 ongoing; as needed basis Date, Originally Hired: 1987 Contract term(renewal dates): Fiscal year to fiscal year Time remaining on Contract: Hourly rate or payment schedule 1 Based on percentage of building project valuation - does not exceed 80% of plan review fees collected by the City. Amount paid FY 1990-91: $30,029 Amount anticipated for FY199l-921 Unknown (Factors are depended upon degree of project complexity for future projects.) FY 1991-92 budget for Consultant: Deposit Account - Does not impact General Fund. FY 1992-93 and beyond expectations for use: Same as FY 1991-1992 .. FY91 FY92 Funding Source for Contract: General Fund Amountl (Deposit Account): Current balance, approx. $77,000 Redevelopment Amount: Other Attach pertinent information Contract Agenda Statement when Hired Consultant I).A -Iø .'"-~-"~.'-----.. , . . Agreement with ESGIL CORPORATION Plan Review Services This Agreement is made this 15th day of October 1991 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 ESGIL CORPORATION, a California Corporation, and is made with reference to the following facts: RECITALS WHEREAS, CITY desires to employ the services of a contractor to provide Building Inspection Department services involving providing plan checking of proposed building construction plans; and WHEREAS, CITY desires to implement a high level of professional and technical Building Inspection Department services at a cost less than the fees paid by the permit applicants; and WHEREAS, CITY does not wish to increase staff size where equal or better services, can be provided at a lesser cost to the CITY by using contractor services provided by the private sector; and WHEREAS, CITY does not wish to risk having to fund deficits incurred in the operation of the Building Inspection Department during low periods of activity in the cyclical construction industry; and WHEREAS, CITY wishes to avoid conflict of interest problems by contracting with a corporation that performs no work for the private sector and provides services exclusively to government entities; and WHEREAS, CITY wishes to contract with a firm directed by persons having experience and knowledge in the interpretation and application of complex regulations providing for protection of the public; and I.2A . ( - _~_.._"__ __...-'___n._ Esgil Corporation Page 2 Plan Check Services Agreement . WHEREAS, CITY desires to contract with firm presently successfully providing plan review services to Building Inspection Departments; and WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR'S founding directors are both registered Professional Engineers in the state of California and they have served fifteen and thirteen years, respectively, in high level regulatory management positions in local government; and WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR presently provide services to 66 cities and counties in California, and WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR is willing to enter into a contract with the CITY to provide Building Inspection Department plan check services to the CITY in accordance with this contract; and WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of CONTRACTOR 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 and CONTRACTOR do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. CONTRACTOR'S DUTIES a. General Duties CITY does hereby appoint ESGIL CORPORATION to provide professional services for the review of proposed building plans for conformance to regulations contained in the state mandated building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical codes, as those codes are amended by the CITY; in state laws governing energy conserVation in buildings, provisions for access to buildings by persons with disabilities and provisions to attenuate noise in buildings; to perform additional work when requested by CITY; and to perform all of the described work in accordance with the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. b. Scope of Work to be performed by Contractor and Schedule Plan Review Services Scope of Work i. Perform traditional preliminary plan review consultations in ESGIL CORPORATION'S main office by meetings or by telephone. ii. Perform traditional initial plan review of submitted plans to determine compliance with CITY 1~J4 -8 ._..... "__~___._,___. .u...~. . - Esgil corporation Page 3 Plan Check Services Agreement ' adopted: Uniform Building Code Uniform Plumbing Code Uniform Mechanical Code National Electrical Code California State, Title 24 (Energy Conservation; Disabled Access; and Noise Attenuation) iii. Provide the applicant's designee and the CITY, a typed list of items needing clarification or change to achieve conformance with the above regulations. iv. Perform all necessary liaison with the applicant's designee, either by telephone, mail or meeting in ESGIL CORPORATION'S main office, and perform all necessary rechecks to achieve conformance to the regulations. v. Perform all necessary liaison with the Building Official or his designee, either by mail, telephone or in Esgil Corporation's main office, to insure compliance with U.B.C. sections 105 and 106 and to insure compliance with local policy interpretations. vi. Perform plan reviews of revisions to plans that have previously been approved for permit issuance, or perform plan reviews of major changes to plans prior to such approval, when such major changes are not required to achieve code conformance. vii. Attend meetings related to proposed building projects at the request of the Building Official at locations other than Esgil Corporation's Plan Check Office. c. Standard of Care CONTRACTOR, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional services, shall perform 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. I~A-e¡ ----...-.-"'---.---.. Esgil Corporation Page 4 Plan Check Services Agreement . d. Insurance CONTRACTOR represents that it and its agents, staff and CONTRACTORS employed by it are protected by worker's compensation insurance and the CONTRACTOR 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. 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. The CITY shall be names as an additionally insured on this policy. CONTRACTOR shall furnish a certificate of said insurance to CITY prior to commencing any work. CONTRACTOR shall obtain and maintain a policy of Errors and omissions insurance from an insurance company authorized to be in business in the state of California, in an insurable amount no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit. This insurance shall be in force during the life of this agreement and the insurer shall agree to provide the CITY with thirty (30) days Notice of Cancellation change in the policy. e. Service Level Goals the CONTRACTOR agrees to provide adequate resources to achieve the following service delivery goals for timely performance of the work over which the CONTRACTOR has decision authority. ITEM SERVICE GOAL A. Buildings less than A. Complete initial four stories and plan review in of normal complexity. fifteen work days or less. B. Buildings four or more B. As agreed by the stories in height or CITY'S Chief of unusual complexity. Building Official I tlJ. -It> "."______.____,,.._u·,. Esgil Corporation Page 5 Plan Check Services Agreement . and CONTRAcr'OR. f. Work Day Definition For the purpose of measuring performance, the work days specified in Paragraph VI exclude the day plans were received and include the day a plan review has been completed. Work days do not include Saturdays, Sundays, or CITY holidays. g. contractor Performance Documentation The CONTRACTOR shall note on the initial plan check correspondence: A. The day of the week and the date the plans were received; B. the day of the week and the date the initial plan check was completed; C. The day of the week and date the applicant's designee was notified the initial plan check was completed; and D. the calculated number of work days to complete the initial plan check. h. Freedom From Liability .. The CONTRACTOR and CONTRACTOR staff, when performing duties as representative of the CITY, shall have the freedom from liability contained in section 202, of the 1988 Edition of the Uniform Building code. L Final Decision Authority The CITY'S Chief Building Official shall have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the CONTRACTOR and all work performed by the CONTRACTOR and all work performed by the CONTRACTOR shall be to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. 2. Work To Be Performed By The CITY /tA,.1I --..-,...",.--,....,-.,..--------...- Esgil corporation Page 6 Plan Check services Agreement . a. The CITY shall perform the following work: i. Arrange and pay the cost of shipping one set of plans and documents to the CONTRACTOR'S office in San Diego or such other location as the CONTRACTOR may designate in writing. ii. Obtain from the applicant, at the time of the project submittal, the necessary items to allow plan checking to be completed in the shortest overall time frame. Necessary items include, but are not limited to, complete plans, construction specifications, designated contact person and similar items that may be unique to a particular project. iii. Provide the valuation for the proposed construction or instruct the CONTRACTOR to calculate the valuation in accordance with section 2(b)i. iv. Provide the CONTRACTOR with copies of any CITY ordinances that modify the regulations listed in 1 (b) ii. v. collect sufficient plan check fees or deposits from project applicants to ensure the CITY will not suffer a loss if the applicant decides to abandon the permit process after the CONTRACTOR has completed the initial plan check. vi. CITY shall regularly consult the CONTRACTOR for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the Work Plan and to provide direction and guidance to achieve the objectives of the project. The CITY shall permit access to its office facilities, files and records by CONTRACTOR throughout the term of the Contract. b. Compensation For Plan Review Services i. Compensation for each plan reviewed under Section l(b) ii shall be 80% of the Plan Review Fee calculated per section 304 of the latest published edition of the Uniform Building Code for each building plan checked. The construction valuation shall be based on the most recent valuation multiplier published by the International Conference of Building Officials in Building /).11..)), ~--~,--,,"_..,._.--._~.,.- Esgil corporation Page 7 Plan Check services Agreement . Standards or on the architect's cost estimate, whichever is greater. The value to be used in computing the building permit and building plan review fees shall be the total value of all construction work. Construction work shall include all items listed in UBC Section 304 (b) Not withstanding the above, the minimum CONTRACTOR fee for any proposed project shall be one hundred dollars ($100.00). Plan check fee for repetitive identical buildings shall be 80% of the plan check fee as noted above for the first, or basic building, and 20% of the plan check fee as noted above for each additional building. ii. Compensation under section l(b)-vi shall be calculated either the same as 2(b)i, or shall be based on Esgil Corporation's current labor rates schedule. The method to be used will be at the discretion of Esgil Corporation. Hi. Compensation for work performed under 1(b)vii shall be based on the attached Labor Rates Schedule (Attachment A) as modified each January 1 and July 1st. iv. The CONTRACTOR shall submit on the first work day of each month his invoice for initial plan reviews performed during the prior month. Payment of approved items on the invoice shall be mailed to the CONTRACTOR prior to the twenty-fifth (25th) day of each month the invoice was submitted. Payments not made within the above time frame shall, when paid, be increased one and on-half percent per month, or portion of a month, for each month the payment was delayed. c. Reductions in Scope of Work i. CITY may from time to time reduce the Scope of work by the CONTRACTOR to be performed under this Agreement. CITY and CONTRACTOR agree to meet in good faith· and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the Fee associated with said reduction. I~A -ð - ~.--....._..._---_...._, --...-,.... · Esgil corporation Page 8 Plan Check Services Agreement . d. Extra Work L The CONTRACTOR shall not perform extra work without written authorization from the Chief Building Official. 3. ADMINISTRATION OF CONTRACT i. The CITY hereby designates the Director of Building and Housing or his written designee, as its representative for the review and administration of the work performed by CONTRACTOR herein required. 4 . TERMS A. Either party may terminate this agreement, with or without cause, by providing thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. This Agreement should become effective upon execution as authorized by the CITY Manager or Mayor of Chula vista, and shall terminate, if not terminated pursuant to other provisions contained herein, or otherwise extended by all parties, on June 3D, 1993. i. The CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless Esgil and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from this contract provided that any such claim, damage, loss or expense is caused by any negligent act, error, or omission of the CITY, its employees, officials or agents. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify arid hold harmless the CITY and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from this contract provided that any such claims, damage, loss or expense is caused by a negligent act, error or omission of the contractor, its employees or agents. I;.A,/lI ,--_.,--~--_._-_._._..~_..._-- Esgil Corporation Plan Check services Agreement Page 9 S. Conflict of Interest The CONTRACTOR expressly affirms that neither the CONTRACTOR corporation or any of its officers or directors will perform work or provide services to entities other than government entities during the time this agreement is in force in order to ensure the CITY that the CONTRACTOR will not have a conflict of interest in discharging the work covered by this agreement. 5. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CITY is interested only in the results obtained and CONTRACTOR 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 CONTRACTOR'S work products. CONTRACTOR and any of the CONTRACTOR'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. 6. ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS REQUIREMENTS 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, CONTRACTOR shall meet and confer in good faith with CITY for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. '7. ATTORNEY'S FEES Should that dispute result in 1i tigation, it is agree 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. 1.2.4.. )$ _ ._.__~_.__m...____ Esgil corporation Plan Check services Agreement Page 10 8. RESPONSIBLE CHARGE CONTRACTOR hereby designates that Richard Esqate shall be CONTRACTOR'S representative ("Project Manager") to the project for the duration of the project. No substitution for this position shall be allowed without written approval from the CITY. 9. MISCELLANEOUS a. CONTRACTOR not authorized to Represent CITY. Unless specifically authorized in writing by CITY, CONTRACTOR shall have no authority to act as CITY'S agent to bind CITY to any contractual agreements whatsoever. b. 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 request 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. c. Entire Agreement 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 subj ect 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. IJ.A -I/' , ."",-,,, -"--..-"",,,...., .-.,-- ....--. Esgil corporation Page 11 Plan Check Services Agreement d. Capacity 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 principal to enter into this agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. e. Governing Law/Venue This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. any actio arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the city of Chula Vista, CA or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the city of Chula Vista. 12A ,f? -,.----<---,-.-----..- , . . Esgil Corporation Page 12 Plan Check services Agreement ,. Signature Page to Agreement with ESGIL CORPORATION for Plan Review Services IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and CONTRACTOR have executed this Agreement this day of 1991- CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: , Tim Nader Mayor, city of Chula Vista 276 fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 Attest: Beverly Authelet, City Clerk Bruce M. Boogaar , City Attorney By: "'0' ;/?i:: :d 'Richard~mes Esgat , President 320 Chesap ake Drive, Suite 208 San Diego, California 92123 /,2.A../( _ __ ___~.._.. ..m, n__,_ · ESGIL CORPORATION 9320 CHESAPEAKE DR.. SUITE 208 SAN DIEGO. CA 92123 (819) 580-1488 LABOR RATES SCHEDULE* (EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1992) REGULAR PREFERRED CLASSIFICATION RATE RATE Division Manager $157.50 $118.65 Structural Engineer, S.E. 173.25 130.20 Civil, Electrical, R.C.E. 115.50 87.15 Mechanical Engineer, M.E. 115.50 87.15 Electrical Engineer, E.E. 115.50 87.15 Energy Plans Examiner, C.B.C.I 115.50 87.15 I.C.B.O. Plans Examiner 98.70 74.55 Supervising Building Inspector 105.00 78.75 Building Inspector 89.25 67.20 Permit Specialist 80.85 60.90 Word Processing 55.65 42.00 Clerical Support 37.80 28.35 Corporate Attorney 280.35 210.00 NOTES: *Hourly 1. Regular Rates apply where jurisdictions only utilize Esgil Corporation's services occasionally. Regular Rates will be increased 100% for expert witness instances, based on an average estimate of one hour of preparation for each hour of testimony. 2. Preferred rates apply to the following: Clients where Esgil Corporation, by contract, performs all multiple residential, industrial and commercial plan checking or provides all of the Building Inspection Services or provides staff on other than a short term intermittent basis. 3. The percentage increase stated in certain existing contracts need not be applied to the hourly rates. 4. The rates do not include expenses resulting from transportation, meals, lodging and similar costs when Esgil Corporation is providing services outside the greater San Diego County area. 5. Esgil staff normal work days are Monday thru Friday. Field inspection or office work on Saturdays, Sundays or City holidays, will be performed only at the specific request of the Building Official. Billings for work performed on Saturdays, Sundays or City holidays shall be at 1-1/2 times the rates shown above and a minimum of 4 hours if the person worked 4 hours or less and a minimum of 8 hours if the person worked more than 4 hours. (Rates are revised each January and July; maximum 5% increase when rates are revised) I.2A--Itt¡ ----~-- -~--_._.- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No.: 1l,ß Meeting Date: 3/3/92 ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION Ir.IS ~ I APPROVING THE AGREEMENT BE1WEEN WILLDAN ASSOCIATES AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SE~ SUBMITIED BY: Director of Building and Hous' ~ L- REVIEWED BY: CityManager~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No~ BACKGROUND: Approval of Resolution 11.5"31 will provide to the Department of Building and Housing with plan review on projects which mandate greater expertise in structural engineering due to complexity of the structural or building envelope analysis. Staff diligently performed a comprehensive review of proposed vendors reS80nding to the Request for Proposals (RFP) to perform such engineering services for the ity. Willdan Associates was selected as one of two firms by staff as being professionally competent and competitive in their proposed rate structure. Staff has utilized Willdan Associates on projects requiring extensive analysis on Post-Tension Concrete slabs which, due to recent trends in litigation, are becoming commonplace for project design teams to incorporate into the structural framework of the building. Due to Willdan Associates' strong expertise in the field of Post-Tension Concrete slabs and beams, the Department has benefitted greatly with their comretent engineering abilities in this highly specialized field. On projects requiring a specIalized review of the concrete framework which were sent to Willdan Associates for structural analysis, staff has also determined that they provide similar professional expertise on items involving mechanical and fire protection engineering. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Resolution and authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement with Willdan Associates for plan review engineering services. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: This agreement will provide the Department of Building and Housin~ with an instrumental resource of specialized engineering expertise. The advancement of ost-Tension Concrete slabs as a measure to counteract expansive soil characteristics is becoming commonplace among several residential and commercial builders. Since 1989, the Department has observed a trend to where approximately 10 percent of all projects would incorporate such a structural system to an average of 60 percent of all structures utilizing Post-Tension Concrete systems. Staff has exercised two options to date, that being on those of higher structural design properties would be sent to Willdan Associates due to their specialized expertise in this area, and those requiring a lesser degree of structural analysis would remain for staff review. Unfortunately, staff has reviewed only approximately 10 percent of all Post-Tension Concrete project applications. 17.6 -( ------ ... -_..-..,-" -2- As stated in the companion Agenda Statement, the operation of utilizing an outside structural engineering plan review consultant differs somewhat from that of a consultant hired to perform a specific task or a specific project design. The prime difference is that the consultant is involved on projects on a case-by-case basis, determined by the Defartment to mandate necessary advanced engineering skills. As such, a specific annua amount is difficult to assess due to unknown quantities of projects requiring advanced structural review. During the course of the past five years, the D1hartment has dramatically reduced the number of projects sent out for consultant review. is reduction is premised upon the addition of a third Plans Examiner with outstanding technical qualifications. The financial arrangements for Post-Tension Concrete slab systems structural analysis is based on services t::rformed on an hourly basis, rather than based on percentage of total plan review fees. us, the cost for service is funded by the applicant at time of plan check submittal. Willdan Associates also performs full review of building plan review services at the rate of 80 percent of Elan check fees collected with the City retaining 20 percent for administrative costs. The epartment has exercised Willdan Associates on projects for both specialized Post-Tension analysis and full project plan review on such projects. Attached for your reference is a bar graph illustrating fees paid to our engineering consultants during the past five years and a one-page brief description of the consultant services. This contract has been reviewed by the City Attorney and has approved its content. Staff recommends approval of the contract through FY 92-93 due to the competitive rates proposed by Willdan Associates, the professional competence exhibited by this engineering fIrm on their structural plan reviews and their continuous effort to interact closely with our staff while working with design engineers on their submitted projects during the plan review. FISCAL IMPACT: FY 91-92 - Not to exceed $10,000 FY 92-93 - Not to exceed $20,000 Staff believes that these proposed amounts will not be exceeded given the current projects waiting for project submittal. For the balance of FY 91-92, $10,000 is proposed to offset a current billing of approximately $3,000 for the Salvation Army structure on Third Avenue which inc~orated a complex structural foundation system to sUflPort the mid-rise structure. hile staff does not anticipate a major foundation system desIgn in the upcoming months, it is still likely that residential Post-Tension Concrete slabs on larger residential structures will be submitted. It is not anticipated that such structures will generate more than $5,000. As previously stated, all funds are placed in a Deposit Account which currently has funds available. FY 92-93 proposed amount of $20,000 is premised upon an expectation of projects mandating structural review on Post-Tension Concrete systems. Staff will also exercise Willdan Associates on full plan reviews as necessary when such systems involving complex structural analysis of the Post-Tension system extends to the full building envelope and fire protection system. As noted previously, these amounts are intended as maximum amounts as staff ascertains that it is unable to specifically request amounts due to the uncertainty of which projects may require an outside structural review. KGL:yu (N:\WILLAtl3.IX>C) /2d·2.. -----,.---.-------,--..---- -.- RESOLUTION NO. /Ios ~ I RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, it is necessary to provide engineering technical support to the Department of Building and Housing for plan review on projects which mandate greater expertise in structural engineering due to the complexity of the structural or building envelope analysis; and WHEREAS, staff performed a comprehensive review of the six proposed vendors responding to the Request for Proposals to perform such engineering services for the city; and WHEREAS, Willdan Associates was selected as one of two firms by staff as being professionally competent and competitive in their proposed rate structure; and WHEREAS, staff has utilized willdan on projects requiring extensive analysis on Post-Tension Concrete slabs which, due to recent trends in litigation, are becoming commonplace for project design teams to incorporate into the structural framework of the building; and WHEREAS, due to willdan Associates' strong expertise in the field of Post-Tension Concrete slabs and beams, Building and Housing has benefitted greatly with their competent engineering abilities in this highly specialized field. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council of the city of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement between willdan Associates and the city of Chula vista to Provide Plan Check Engineering Services, known as Document No. C092-33, a copy of which is on file on 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 Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista. Presented by Approved as to form by Rvl-.A Kenneth G. Larsen, Director of D. Richard Rudol Building and Housing city Attorney C:\rs\Willdan /J.¡ß..,3 /IJ.ß"£/ ~----,,----_..,"_._." DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & HOUSING PLANCHECK CONSUl..TANT FI;~S 17-1-87 THROUGH 2-18-921 $250 ...................................."..."......, ................."................"..........,.,..,.....................·.n.....·.. $200 - ~ ~ $150 "..,.........................,........................................,......."..,.. :5 í1Å¡ ..J :¡ g ,g $100 t::.. $50 $0 FY 87-88 FY 88-89 FY 89'=90 FY 90-91 FY 91-92 $160,559 $206,081 $20.3,566 $38,829 $36,766 I ~ ESGIL CORP. 1><1 WILLDAN ASSOC. I , , /J8-~ /1:lA-' . - .-, -- ------, " (, ï ! CONSULTANTS/CONTRACTUAL SERVICES SURVEY . Professional Consultant xx Contractual Service - Consultant Namel Company Name I WILLDAN AND ASSOCIATES Address I 6363 GREENWICH DRIVE, SUITE #250. SAN DIEGO. CA 92122-3939 Vendor Number I Area of expertise I Structural, Mechanical and Electrical Plan Review Engineering Services City Staff with same or similar expertise I Department of Building and Housing Plans Examiners (3) Why hire consultant rather than using existing staff or hiring staff with appropriate expertise? I Consultants are employed on projects of unique structural, mechanical or electrical engineering applications. Degree of complexity of structural or building analysis warrants outside engineering expertise. Department(s) work fori Building and Housing Duties I Work Type (ongoing, one time...)1 ongoing; as needed basis Date Originally Hiredl 1990 Contract term(renewal dates)1 Fiscal year to fiscal year Time remaining on Contract I Hourly rate or payment schedulel Based on percentage of building project valuation - Does not exceed 80% of plan review fees collected by the City. Amount paid FY 1990-911 $8,800 Amount anticipated for FY1991-921 Unknown (Factors are depended upon degree of project complexity for future projects.) FY 1991-92 budget for Consultant 1 Deposit Account - Does not impact General Fund. FY 1992-93 and beyond expectations for usel Same as FY 1991-1992 FY91 FY92 Funding Source for Contract 1 General Fund Amountl (Deposit Account): Current balance, approx. $?7.000 Redevelopment Amountl Other Attach pertinent information Contract Agenda Statement when Hired Consultant Il~"~ _._.__.__._~_...._. _......~...._-,. Agreement with WILLDAN ASSOCIATES for PLAN CHECK SERVICES lHIS AGREEMENT, is made this day of for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed between the parties, by and between the City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation located in the County of San Diego, State of California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and Willdan Associates, a California corporation with principal offices at 6363 Greenwich Drive, Suite 250, San Diego, CA 92122, hereinafter referred to as "ENGINEER", and is made with reference to the following facts: , RECITALS WHEREAS, CITY has the need for building plan review services; and WHEREAS, CITY desires to contract for such services with a private consultant; and WHEREAS, CITY wishes to retain ENGINEER for the performance of said services; and WHEREAS, ENGINEER represents that it is experienced and staffed in a manner such that it can deliver the services required of the consultant to the CITY within the time frames herein provided, all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; and NOW, lHEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, benefits and premises herein stated, the parties hereto agree as follows: CITY ,::fn-- --1 1- .L - - .L '<; _ . ~ .L· .....~·,.~-SBt Cede Eeeti8!1 36595, ~ does hereby appoint ENGINEER, in a contractual capacity, to perform the following services in accordance with the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; with the authorities, responsibilities and consideration ordinarily granted to an officer of the CITY. /tR~ ...7 \A7 --_..~-----' ---" Willdan Associates Page 2 Plan Check Services Contract I ENGINEER'S DUTIES: a. General Duties: 1. BUILDING PLAN REVIEW SERVICES: ENGINEER shall, upon request of the CITY, review plans for compliance with the CITY'S Building, Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical Codes and other pertinent CITY and State regulations falling within the purview of the Building Official. Employees of ENGINEER shall have the power and duties of the plan reviewer of the CITY when performing such work. Under UBC Section 202, the Building Official is directed to ~ perform certain tasks as described in the UBC. When acting in accordance with Section 202, the Building Official is afforded certain protection from liability. As CITY's authorized representa- tive, ENGINEER shall be deemed to have the same right to protection from liability to the maximum extent allowed by law. This section is not intended and shall not operate to in any way increase CITY's liability or decrease its lawful immunity from liability. 2. STRUCfURAL PLAN REVIEW SERVICES: ENGINEER shall, upon request of the CITY, review plans for compliance with only the engineering (structural) regulations of the CITY's Building Code and other structural engineering related CITY and State regulations falling within the purview of the Building Official. Employees of ENGINEER shall have the powers and duties of the plan reviewer of the CITY when perform- ing such work. 3. OTHER MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES: CITY may from time-to-time have the need for other services not specifically listed in this agreement for which ENGINEER has the necessary experience and capabilities to provide. CITY may authorize ENGINEER to perform such selected services on an as- needed basis. "AI , ; 1~Iß'f \~~ . - -... -.-..--- .._-_._--~ Willdan Associates Page 3 Plan Check Services Contract 4. COUECI10N OF FEE: H fees are collected by the CITY, and if requested by the CITY, ENGINEER shall review the appropriate ordinances and fee schedules in effect by the CITY and shall provide to the persons designated by the CITY for collection of fees, the amount of such fees to be collected. b. SCQpe Of Work To Be Performed By En~neer: 1. Perform traditional preliminary plan review consultations in Willdan Associates' main office by meetings or by telephone. 2. Perform traditional initial plan review of submitted plans to , determine compliance with CITY adopted: Uniform Building Code Uniform Plumbing Code Uniform Mechanical Code National Electrical Code California State, Title 24 (Energy Conservation; Disabled Access; and Noise Attenuation) 3. Provide the applicant's designee and the CITY, a typed list of items needing clarification or change to achieve conformance with the above regulations. 4. Perform all necessary liaison with the applicant's designee, either by telephone, mail or meeting in Willdan Associates' main office, and perform all necessary rechecks to achieve conformance to the regulations. 5. Perform all necessary liaison with the Building Official or his designee, either by mail, telephone or in Willdan Associates' main office, to insure compliance with U.B.C. Sections 105 and 106 and to insure compliance with local policy interpretations. 6. Perform plan reviews of revisions to plans that have previously been approved for permit issuance, or perform plan reviews of major changes to plans prior to such approval, when such major changes are not required to achieve code conformance. T ' , \ / /2.e.. c¡ \'=.J''-- ---,-~-_.._~.,.- ----, Willdan Associates Page 4 Plan Check Services Contract 7. Attend meetings related to proposed building projects at the request of the Building Official at locations other than Willdan Associates' plan check office. 8. The ENGINEER agrees to provide adequate resources to achieve the following service delivery goals for timely performance of the work over which the ENGINEER has decision authority. ITEM SERVICE GOAL Buildings less than Complete initial plan four stories and review in fifteen work of normal complexity. days or less. ~ Buildings four or more As agreed by the CITY'S stories in height or Chief Building Official of unusual complexity. and ENGINEER. 9. For the purposes of measuring performance. the work days specified in the paragraph above exclude the day plans were received and include the day a plan review has been completed. Work days do not include Saturdays, Sundays, or CITY holidays. 10. The ENGINEER shall note on the initial plan check correspon- dence: A The day of the week and the date the plans were received; B. The day of the week and the date the initial plan check was completed; C. The day of the week and date the applicant's designee was notified the initial plan check was completed; and D. The calculated number of work days to complete the initial plan check. II. FINAL DECISION AUTIlORITY: The CITY'S Chief Building Official shall have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the ENGINEER and all work performed by the ENGINEER shall be to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. 1218 .../tJ \A7 ~--.-'-..'...-----'.'---'-._.'-'." Willdan Associates Page 5 Plan Check Services Contract In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the ENGINEER'S interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed appropriate, the resources of the crrY Attorney and/or the Board of Appeals. c. Standard of Care: ENGINEER, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, 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. " d. Insurance: ENGINEER shall maintain in force at its own cost and expense at all times during the performance of this Agreement (except as noted under Professional liability Insurance) the following policy or policies of insurance: 1. Worker's Compensation and Employer's liability Insurance as prescribed by applicable law. 2. Comprehensive General liability Insurance (bodily injury and property damage), the limits of which shall not be less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence and annual aggregate. 3. Automobile bodily injury and property damage liability insurance, the limits of which shall not be less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence. Such insurance shall extend to owned, non-owned and hired automobiles used by ENGINEER'S employees, agents or assigns in the performance of this contract. 4. Design Professional liability Insurance covering negligent acts, errors or omissions of ENGINEER, the limits of which shall not be less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and annual aggregate. ~7 \ / 1.2id- II \~",--=- ,.-----. .-.-.--------- Willdan Associates Page 6 Plan Check Services Contract 5. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement, excepring policies for Workers' Compensation/Employers' liability and Professional liability, shall name the CITY, its officials and employees as additional insureds, and be primary and in excess of any coverages carried by the CITY. Prior to commencement of any work under this Agreement, ENGINEER shall deliver to the CITY insurance certificates confirming the existence of the insurance required by this Agree- ment, indicaring policy expiration dates and including the applica- ble provisions referenced above. All policies, except Design Professional liability Insurance, shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or . better, or shall meet with the approval or the CITY'S Risk Manager. Design Professional liability Insurance shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's Raring of "B+ :VIII" or better. II DUTIES OF TIlE CITY: a. Consultation and Coo,peration: CITY shall regularly consult the ENGINEER for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the work plan and to provide direction and guidance to achieve the objectives of the project. The CITY shall permit access to its office facilities, files and records by ENGINEER throughout the term of the Agreement b. Compensation for Plan Review Services: The compensation hereinafter presented is predicated upon the assump- tion that the CITY will maintain an adequate and current fee structure. The compensation to ENGINEER for the services rendered shall be as follows: 1. For services provided under Sections la.1 and la.2 the ENGINEER shall be compensated in an amount equal to the percentage of the plan check fee as shoW1l¡lÙ1 the Table below. Such fee shall be established by using the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) and be based on building valuations recommended by the San Diego Area Chapter of the International '\\.= r¡ \'A./ I "'~ ..It¿ \,-,-,' --- ... m____ ________~_~~__.~_" Willdan Associates Page 7 Plan Check Services Contract Conference of Building Officials (ICBO). For the percentage method, the minimum plan check fee shall be $150.00. Type of Percentage of Service UBC Plan Review Fee Full Service 80 Structural Only 50 2. For services provided under Sections la.l and Ia.2 such as prechec- king incomplete plans, special meetings required by the CITY, plan checks of addendum or changes to previously approved plans, for project rechecks after the third recheck (when approved by the Building Official) and for specially assigned services not specifically covered herein, ENGINEER shall be compensated at the then current hourly rates, per Exhibit "A" or as it may be adjusted annually each July 1. 3. For services provided under Section Ia.3 or for specially assigned services not specifically covered herein, ENGINEER shall be compensated at the then current hourly rates, per Exhibit" A", or as such rates may be adjusted each July 1. In the case of expedited plan reviews requested by the CITY, ENGINEER shall be compensated on a negotiated fixed fee amount. 4. ENGINEER shall invoice CITY for services rendered and CITY shall pay ENGINEER as soon thereafter as CITY's regular procedures provide. c. Reductions in Scope of Work: CITY may from time to time reduce the Scope of Work by the ENGI- NEER to be performed under this Agreement. CITY and ENGINEER agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the Fee associated with said reduction. !.2S...I.,a ~7 ~' = ,.--.- ------,-,. - Willdan Associates Page 8 Plan Check Services Contract d. Additional SCQpe of Work: In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, CITY may require ENGINEER to perform additional consulting services related to the General Duties and Scope of Work ("Addiûonal Services"), and upon doing so in writing, ENGINEER shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth on Exhibit" A". All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly by CITY as billed by ENGI- NEER. III ADMINISTRATION OF CONTRACf: The CITY hereby designates the Director of Building and Housing, or his written designee, as its representative for the review and administration of the _ work performed by ENGINEER herein required. IV FINANCIAL IN1ERESTS OF ENGINEER: ENGINEER shall provide no services for any private client for projects located within the corporate boundaries of CITY during the period that this Agreement is in effect which projects would be subject to review or approval by the CITY. V HOLD HARMT FSS: . ENGINEER shall 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 attorneys' fees) arising out of the negligence or willful misconduct of the ENGINEER, or any of its employees or subcontractors in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the negligence or willful conduct of the CITY, its officers or employees. ENGINEER's indemnificaûon shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the CITY, its officers or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgement or not. ENGINEER'S indemnification of CITY shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the ENGINEER. CITY shall save, keep, hold harmless and indemnify ENGINEER from all damages suffered in the performance of the work authorized by this Agreement that are not the result of wrongful acts of the ENGINEER, its officers, employees or subcontractors. /,2,¡ß ...1,/ 'VA/ , ' = - - - --~----~-_.._-_.__..- Willdan Associates Page 9 Plan Check Services Contract VI lERMINATION OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement may be terminated at will by either party with or without cause upon 30 days written notice. In the event of such termination, ENGINEER shall be compensated for such services up to the point of termination. Such compensation for work in progress shall be pro-rated as to the percentage of work completed at the date of termination. VII ASSIGNABILITY: The services of ENGINEER are personal to the CITY, and ENGINEER 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 reasonably deny. VIII OWNERSHIP. PUBLICATION. REPRODUCTION & USE OF MAlERIAL: 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 ENGINEER 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 provisions of 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. All documents, including but not limited to plans and specifications, prepared by ENGINEER are instruments of services, only. They are not intended nor represented to be suitable for reuse on extensions of this project or any other project. Any reuse without specific permission by ENGINEER shall be at the user's sole risk. CITY hereto agrees to save, keep and hold hannless ENGI- NEER from all damages, cost or expenses in law and equity including costs of suit and attorney's fees resulting form such reuse. "A'7 \ / /21ß.. tS , ~ '- - -- -....... "_..- ------,..,_....-- Willdan Associates Page 10 Plan Check Services Contract IX INDEPENDENT CONTRACfOR: CITY is interested only in the results obtained and ENGINEER 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 ENGINEER'S work projects. ENGINEER and any of the ENGINEER'S agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor 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. This provision is not intended to impair or diminish any governmental immunities that ENGINEER may have in performing the duties herein provided. X RESPONSIBT.R CHARGE: .' ENGINEER hereby designates that Gordon Murdoch shall be ENGINEER'S representative ("Project Manager") for the duration of the Agreement. No substitution for this position shall be allowed without written approval from the CITY. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Gordon Murdoch may designate such deputies as he deems appropriate to assist him in the performance of this Agreement. XI ADMINISTRATION CLAIMS REOUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES: No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this Agreement, against 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, ENGINEER shall meet and confer in good faith with CITY for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. XII ATIORNEY'S FEES: Should a dispute result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the claim, including costs of attorney's fees. ~7 1.2~JI¡' ~= -_._~---_._._-_._.._- Willdan Associates Page 11 Plan Check Services Contract XIII MISCP.T T ANEOUS: a. ENGINEER Not Authorized To Represent CITY: Unless specifically authorized in writing by CITY, ENGINEER shall have no authority to act as CITY'S agent to bind CITY to any contractual agreements whatsoever. b. 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 J 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. c. Entire A¡reement: 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. d. ~acity 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 principal to enter into this Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. 1~1ß../7 vK! '!":'~ -.-.- .-.--- Willdan Associates Page 12 Plan Check Services Contract e. Governin¡ 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 ü applicable, the City of Cbula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. f. The rides used in this Agreement are for general reference only and are not a part of the Agreement. g. This Agreement shall be interpreted as though prepared by both parties. ~ h. Any provision of the Agreement held to violate any law shall not invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. I,Z/ß,IJ' \Vj.7 \ . ~'~/ --~--- WilIdan Associates Page 13 Plan Check Services Contract Signature Page to Agreement with WIllJ)AN ASSOCIATES for Plan Check Services IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and ENGINEER have executed this Agreement this day of , 1991. CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Tim Nader - Mayor, City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 Attest: Beverly Authelet, City Clerk Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney WILlDAN ASSOCIATES By: Richard K. Jacobs 6363 Greenwich Drive, Suite 250 San Diego, California 92122-3939 / ~ß" 19 \A7 ._--"-----_.----_...,.~'- EXHIBIT A WILLDAN ASSOCIATES SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR PROFESSIONAL BUILDING AND SAFE'IY SERVICES July 1, 1991 - June 30, 1992 CLASSIFICATION RATE PER HOUR Division Manager $113.00 Supervising Plan Check Engineer 98.00 Plan Check Engineer 82.00 ~ Supervisor, Building Inspection 73.00 Building Plans Examiner 70.00 Building Inspector 63.00 Permit Specialist 45.00 Consultation in connection with litigation and court appearances will be quoted separately. The above schedule is for straight time. Overtime will be charged at 1.25 times the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will be charged at 1.70 times the standard hourly rates. Additional billing classifications may be added to the above listing during the year as new positions are created. It should be noted that the foregoing wage rates are effective through June 30, 1992. The rates may be adjusted after that date to compensate for labor adjustments and other increases in labor costs. \'A7 !¡2ß-P; ~'=' "'"-" COtJNC:IL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 15 Meeting Date: 2/25/92 :Item Title: Public Hearing Concerning the Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy Report Describing the Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy (CHAS) G ~, Submitted By: community Development Director . aeviewed By: ci ty Manageß/ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No-X ) The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all jurisdictions applying for funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to submit a Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy (CHAS). The CHAS is a planning document which identifies the City's housing needs and outlines a strategy to meet these needs. Recommendation: That the City Council open the public hearing and take public comment regarding the City's Draft Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy. Boards/Commissions Recommendation: The Housing Advisory Committee and the Commission on Aging will be reviewing the draft CHAS prior to returning the CHAS to the city council for final adoption. Discussion: The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all jurisdictions applying for funding assistance under most programs administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to submit a Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy (CHAS) to HUD for approval. The full CHAS is submitted to HUD every five years, but the CHAS is updated annually with a One Year Action Plan. The CHAS is a comprehensive planning document that identifies the city's overall needs for affordable and supportive housing and outlines ~ strategy to address these needs. The National Affordable Housing Act requires the City's CHAS to contain elements which describe the city's housing needs and market conditions, sets out a five year strategy which establishes \ ~. \ .-.-..,..---.,--. priorities for meeting these needs, identifies resources anticipated to be available for the development of housing, and establishes an investment plan that outlines the planned uses of resources. The Act also requires an extensive citizen participation which mandates a sixty day public comment period as well as a public hearing before the jurisdiction's legislative body. When the public comment period ends on April 15, 1992, the summary of citizen comments will be prepared, and staff will submit the CRAS to the City Council for adoption prior to submission to HUD. The City's Draft CRAS identifies the following housing priorities: 1- Preserve Castle Park Garden Apartments, Palomar Apartments, Rancho vista Apartments, and Oxford Terrace Apartments because they are "at-risk" of converting to market rate rentals; 2. continue the city's housing rehabilitation program entitled the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP); 3. continue to implement the City's Affordable Housing Program; 4. Assist low, moderate, and middle income residents to purchase a home; 5. Develop a transitional housing shelter; 6. continue to support non-profit corporations to develop affordable housing; 7. continue to assist mobile home park residents who are faced with rent increases and park closures; 8. continue to work with the San Diego County Housing Authority to provide public housing in Chula Vista; and, 9. continue to utilize CDBG funds for supportive services for residents with special needs. As you are probably aware, the City is required by the State of California to have a Housing Element as a part of the city's General Plan. The Housing Element has been presented to you in this meeting's agenda packet. Staff coordinated the current development of the City's Housing Element with the development of the CRAS. Goals and priorities are parallel. PISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. \~..¡ .~-_.,,---,- ~~\3 DRAFT CITY OF CHULA VISTA Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy Fiscal Years 1992-1996 . Portions of the Community Profi~e section Prepared for the city of Chula vista by the San Diego Association of Governments /J-) -..--., Comprehensive Housing u.s. Department of Housing ~ and Urban Development Affordability Strategy Office of Community Planning ,r (CHAS) and Development Name of Jurisdiction(s) or Consortium: ~ City of Chula Vista Conrad Person: Telephone Number: Alisa Duffe Ro ers (619) 691-5047 Address: 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Type of (mark one) Submission: [jiJ New Five Year CHAS For Fiscal Year 1992 through Fiscal Year 1996 o Annual Update' For Fiscal Year (mark one) ]] Initial Submission o Resubmission o .. Amendment . If an Annual Update, mark one: o Parts 4 (Resources) & 5 (Implementation) Only o Parts 4 & 5, plus minor changes: (mark all those Wh:ch apply) Part 1 - Needs Assessment o Narrative 0 Tables Part 2 - Market & Inventory Conditions o Narrative 0 Tables Part 3 - Strategies o Narrative 0 Tables .. For all amendments. specify the nature of t~e amendment below and attach amended portions to this cover sheet Jurisdiction HUD Approval Name of Authorized Official: Name of Authorized Offiåaf: -- Tim Nader, Mayor Signature & Date: Signature & Date: - X X fonn HUD-40090 (9/91) /)-1 COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILlTY STRATEGY (CHASI Table of Contents Summary of CHAS Development Process Introduction 3 Section I. Community Profile Part 1. Needs Assessment 4 Table 1 A 15 Table 1 B 20 Part 2. Market and Inventory Conditions 25 Table 2A 37 Table 2B 38 Table 2C 39 Section II. Five Year Strategy . Part 1. Priorities/Programs 40 . Table 3 48 Part 2. Available Resources 49 Part 3. Organization Capacity and Roles 51 Part 4. Barriers to Affordable Housing 54 Section III. One Year Action Plan Part 1. Resources 63 Table 4/5A 64 Part 2. One Year Action Plan for Fiscal Year 1991-1992 68 Table 5 70 Monitoring Plan 73 Certifications . Summary of Citizen Comments .-/ J]-þ ---.- Introduction The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all jurisdictions applying for funding assistance under certain programs administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to submit a Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy (CRAS) to HUD for approval. A full CRAS is submitted to HUD every five years, but the CRAS is updated on a yearly basis. The CRAS is a comprehensive planning document that identifies the city's overall needs for affordable and supportive housing and outlines a strategy to address these needs. The Act requires the City's CRAS to contain elements which describes the City's housing needs and market conditions, sets out a five-year strategy which establishes priorities for meeting these needs, identifies resources anticipated to be available for the development of housing, and establishes an investment plan that outlines the planned uses of the resources. . -3- /) ~? .....-.-. SECTION I. COMMUNITY PROFILE PART 1. NEEDS ASSESSMENT This part ,summarizes available data on the most significant current housing needs of very low income, other low income and moderate income families and projects those needs over the five-year CHAS period. This part also summarizes the most significant current supportive housing needs of homeless persons and other persons with special needs. A. Housing Assistance Needs 1. Current estimates. Table lA, "Housing Assistance Needs of Low and Moderate Income Households," provides data, updated to October 1, 1991, for the City of Chula vista on housing needs of households of very low income (0 to 50 percent of median income), other low income (51 to 80 percent of median income), and moderate income (81 to 95 percent of median income). The data is further analyzed by household characteristics: elderly, small and large family, non-elderly. Using this information, 47 percent (10,586 households) of the total number of renter households in the City of Chula vista are low income. Of this total, 7,199 households are very low income and 3,387 are other low income. A significant number of these households are experiencing cost burdens in terms of housing costs. Of the low income households, 65 percent (6,922 households) are small family households of 2 to 4 related persons. According to the 1990 Census, of the City's renter households, 3,399 or 15.2 percent live in overcrowded conditions. This percentage applied to low income renter households would result in 1,609 households. "Overcrowded" is defined as a housing unit containing more than 1.01 persons per room. The San Diego County Housing Authority estimates the number of low income households that meet Federal preferences for priority admission to rental assistance programs is 75 percent. Preference households include unassisted very low income renter households who pay more than half of their income for rent, those living in seriously substandard housing such as homeless people, or those households that have been involuntarily displaced. There are 1,887 households currently receiving housing assistance in the City through HUD- -4- /3-') . M·.__'._"'·_ _.._......_, administered programs, including section 8 vouchers/certificates, public housing, Section 202, and section 236. An additional 934 households are assisted through California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA) . The housing needs of the elderly and persons with disabilities not requiring supportive services require architectural design features that accommodate those with physical disabilities, access to health care, grocery stores/pharmacies, and a convenient, economical means of transportation. Location, planning and design of these facilities should facilitate social communication and independence. 2. Five-vear proiections. During the next five years as part of its regional share, the city of Chula vista is expected to need 1,428 new housing units for lower income households, of which 821 are very low income and 607 are low income housing units. In accordance with state law, regional share identifies the need for new housing units by jurisdiction and distributes that need to all income groups. These are: very low whose income does not exceed 50 percent of regional median, low whose income is between 50 percent and 80 percent of the regional median, moderate whose income is between 80 and 120 percent of the regional median, and above moderate whose income exceeds 120 percent of regional median. Foreseeable changes in housing needs that may result from those employed or expected to be employed in the City, but not currently residing there, are incorporated into the San Diego Association of Government's (SANDAG) regional share calculation. Foreseeable changes therefore would be reflected in the City's total regional share of the 3,569 housing units for the time frame of this CRAS. As calculated by SANDAG, the City of Chula vista is expected to assist 1,058 low income households during the next five years as part of its fair share. Fair share calculations utilize both the existing need and the projected need based on growth. Housing units for low income families, built to meet regional share goals, are but one means of meeting fair share goals. . -5- /)__$ . --- B. Supportive Housing Needs of Homeless Persons 1. Current estimates. Table IB, "Homeless Population-- Totals," provides the 1990 Census data on the homeless in the City of Chula vista. It shows a total count of 14 homeless persons. However, the Regional Task Force on the Homeless prepared a report for the South Bay sUb-region which includes National City, Chula vista, Imperial Beach and a portion of San Diego, and the report stated the number of homeless to be between 135-200 on any given night. Unfortunately, the report did not divide the City's homeless population into specific categories such as families, youth, single adults or elderly. Therefore, for the most part, the City is forced to use regionally accepted percentages for these categories. The San Diego Regional Task Force on the Homeless estimates that there are approximately 5,600 urban homeless persons in San Diego County, of which 1,600 sleep in emergency shelters. The Regional Task Force on the Homeless estimates that families account for approximately 33 percent of the homeless population in the region. Although the exact number of homeless families is unavailable, the estimate of 33 percent would result in 5 persons in families in the City if the census figures are used. These families tend to be resident homeless families or transient, intact families headed by a single parent, usually the female. The homeless youth population includes both runaway and throwaway youth. Regionally, homeless youth account for approximately 25 percent of the urban homeless population. This translates to 4 youths in Chula vista. Many of these youth, about 20 percent of the 25 percent, are within the family units described above. The balance, about 6 percent of the 25 percent, are teenagers on their own. Unfortunately, the census figures on the number of homeless youth do not give an accurate picture of the number of homeless youth in Chula vista. South Bay Community Services (SBCS) reports that they consistently shelter eight youths in their homeless youth facility, Casa Nuestra. In addition, the shelter turns away at least ten youths per month. The youth in their facility are 70% homeless and 30% runaways. Also, in the Street Outreach Program run by SBCS, their counselors reach approximately 150 youths per year. -6- )}-i ._--," Determining the number of homeless in Chula vista is difficult. However, the estimates provided by the Regional Task Force on the Homeless and South Bay Community Services are probably the best approximations available since these organizations specialize in the problems of the homeless. Adults account for approximately 75 percent, or 11, of the urban homeless. This homeless category includes families and single adults. The majority of single adults are young males seeking employment. Approximately 40 percent of urban single-homeless men are veterans, about 25 percent of the single adults are female, and 5 percent are elderly. It is estimated that 33 percent of the single- homeless-adult population suffer from severe and persistent mental illness. Evidence indicates that up to 50 percent of the County's homeless adult population may be active substance abusers. Data is currently unavailable regarding racial/ethnic status of homeless, special needs by family type, and special needs by sheltered and unsheltered status, as noted in Table lC, Special Needs. The facility and service needs of homeless families and individuals are many and varied. These include emergency shelter, transitional housing, social services such as job counseling/training, mental health services, and general health services. Existing service agencies indicate that a growing need exists for limited-term shelter or transitional facilities for homeless individuals and families. The special needs of the homeless who are mentally ill, alcohol and drug abusers, victims of domestic violence, and runaway and throwaway youth are group specific. Mentally ill homeless persons require housing supported by mental health care and counseling. Alcohol and drug abusers require treatment facilities and programs and medical and social support. victims of domestic violence need shelter and social services related to making the transition to independent living. Runaway and rejected youths require shelter and counseling and social services related to reintegrating them with their families or enabling them to live independently. For those homeless who are dually diagnosed, i.e., mentally ill and substance abuser, special treatment programs are needed. . -7- /}//O The county Department of Health Services is participating in two new projects directed at assisting mentally ill homeless persons: a. Stewart B. McKinney/MIMH Homeless Research Demonstration Project: A three-year research demonstration project targeting severely and persistently mentally ill homeless persons. Participants (360) are randomly assigned to one of four conditions involving case management services combined with various housing options. b. Collaborative Transitional Housing Project: A transitional, supported housing project for homeless persons managing severe and persistent mental illness and alcohol and/or drug abuse problems. 2. At-risk population. The "at-risk" population are low income families and individuals who, upon loss of employment, would lose their housing and end up residing in shelters or being homeless. Low income families, especially those that earn less than 30 percent of the regional median income, are especially at risk of becoming homeless. These families generally are experiencing a cost burden of paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing or, more likely, a severe cost burden of paying more than 50 percent of their income for housing. Based on regional percentages reported in the 1987 American Housing survey, there are an estimated 3,251 low income renter households paying more than 50 percent of their income on housing in the city of Chula vista. These households are at risk of becoming homeless. But it is not only the very low income households which are at risk. According to Lomas Mortgage USA, San Diego is the second least affordable city in the nation for housing. Sudden unemployment in a two- income family can precipitate homelessness when there is no cheaper housing available for the family. Overall, Harvard University estimates that nationally the average household is just four paychecks away from being homeless. The at-risk population also includes individuals who are in imminent danger of residing in shelters or being unsheltered because they lack access to permanent housing and do not have adequate support networks, such as a parental famil~or relatives whose homes they could temporarily reside. These individuals, especially those being released from -8- ) J//j - .~.~._- penal, mental, or substance abuse facilities, require social services that help them make the transition back into society and remain off the streets. Needed services include counseling, rental assistance, and job training/assistance. C. Supportive Housing Needs for others with special Needs 1. Current estimates. The following information was gathered from a variety of sources. It is typically regional in scope because of the lack of more specific local data. a. Elderlv and frail elderlY. Table 1A provides data for the City on elderly households. It shows that there are approximately 2,927 low income elderly renter households. Based on regional percentages, 43 percent of low income elderly renter households áre estimated to pay more than 50 percent of their income for housing. The health and social needs of these elderly persons are significantly impacted when so much of their limited resources goes to housing. According to the San Diego County Area Agency on Aging, the population over 65 years of age has four main concerns: (1) Income - People over 65 are usually retired and living on a fixed income which is typically half that of those under 65. (2) Health Care - Because the elderly have a higher rate of illness, easy access to health care facilities is crucial. (3) Transportation - Many seniors utilize public transportation. However, 13.8 percent of individuals age 65+ have a public transportation disability which necessitates the use of other modes of transportation. (4) Housing - Of those over 65 years of age, 40 percent rent and 25 percent live alone (Countywide figures). These characteristics indicate the need for smaller, low cost housing units which have easy access to public transportation and health care facilities. These factors should guide the development of new housing for ~ow income elderly households. -9- / } ~/,2 The housing needs of the elderly include supportive housing, such as intermediate care facilities, group homes, Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing, and other housing that includes a planned service component. Needed services include personal care, housekeeping, meals, personal emergency response, and transportation. A social worker should assist the elderly returning to the community from a health care institution. supportive services for households of the elderly and frail elderly are provided, in part, by the Area Agency on the Aging (AAA) in San Diego county. The major goals of the AAA are to secure maximum independence for the elderly, to prevent unnecessary institutionalization, to reduce isolation and loneliness, to improve health and well being, to assist the vulnerable or frail elderly, and to ensure quality of life in long- term care facilities. The AAA services include meals at senior centers, meals to homebound seniors, legal assistance, in- home support adult day care, transportation, and part-time employment. These are made available through contracts with service providers. The AAA also offers services through an Information and Referral Program and a Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program. Case management services include a Multi-purpose Senior Services Program, the Linkages Program, a Management and Assessment of Social and Health needs program, and an AIDS waiver Program. In addition to the services provided by AAA, the City of Chula vista operates the Norman Park Senior Center which provides social and recreational activities. Information and Referral Services, Meals on Wheels, Shared Housing Services legal services, and In Home Supportive Services are also based in the Center. b. Persons with physical disabilities. Based on the SANDAG factor of 7 percent of the total population having a disability, it is estimated that there are 4,782 households with a physical disability in the City of Chula vista. This segment of the population is increasing due to lower death rates and higher longevity rates resulting from advances in medicine. The special needs required for housing physically disabled individuals include not only affordability but also special construction features to provide for -10- )]---15 -'---' access and use according to the particular disability of the occupant. The location of housing for disabled people is also important because many such households need access to a variety of social services and to other specialized services throughout the County. In addition to the housing needs of physically disabled persons described above, there should be support services designed to meet the needs of the particular individual. A social worker should assist persons returning to the community from a health care institution. The city of Chula vista provides CDBG funds to the Community Service Center for the Disabled. The Center provides a whole range of activities for the disabled. c. Persons with mental illness. The following section provides conservative estimates of need based on the California Department of Mental Health standard that one to two percent of persons in the general population suffer a serious mental illness. There are an estimated 1,998 adults who suffer from serious and persistent mental illness, based on the city's 1990 Census adult population of 99,922. Among persons who suffer from serious and persistent mental illness, there is a substantial need for stable, decent housing. The lack of access to this basic need often leads to mentally ill persons being homeless, near- homeless, or living in unstable and/or substandard housing situations. It is estimated by the Regional Task Force on the Homeless that one-third of persons who are homeless also suffer from serious and persistent mental illness. Based on 1990 Census figures, this represents 5 persons in the City. An estimated 50 percent of the homeless mentally ill also have substance abuse problems. In the City of Chula vista, this translates to 7 persons. The major barrier to stable, decent housing for the seriously mentally ill is the availability of affordable housing. A substantial majority of persons in this population depend solely on Social Security Insurance payments of approximately $600 per month. Based on federal housing standards, affordable rent payments should be slightly over $200. Relative to their incom~, few persons in this population can afford rental housing on the open market. -11- /3-)1 -----" Of those persons living in the urban San Diego County area who are being served by San Diego County Mental Health Services (SDMHS), approximately 80 percent of clients have an annual income of $12,000 or less -- an income below the $13,600 maximum annual gross income for the Section 8 program. d. Persons with developmental disabilities. Area Board XIII, the advocacy organization for developmentally disabled persons in San Diego County, states that 25,450 to 54,620 developmentally disabled persons reside in San Diego County. Historically, housing for developmentally disabled persons in group homes is cited in the Annual Program Development Fund Needs Assessment. However, the Department of Developmental Services in Sacramento reports, in its recent study, that there are 25,450 developmentally disabled adults in San Diego County. The San Diego County Regional Center (SDCRC) prepares a Resource Development Plan annually which is presented to the State Department of Developmental Services. SDCRC's philosophy is that all developmentally disabled adults who are unable to live on their own should reside in group homes with 6 or less persons or with their families. SDCRC reports that in the past year there were at least 49 developmentally disabled persons whose housing needs were left unmet for six months. e. Persons with the HIV infection and with AIDS. The following provides a rough estimate of current and future housing assistance needs for persons living in San Diego county with the HIV infection, and with AIDS. These estimates are based on assumptions rather than solid data. The figures should be regarded as a "best guess" given current knowledge, particularly when they are broken down into small numbers by individual jurisdictions. Most available HIV/AIDS planning documents have not attempted to estimate or project housing needs. Several reports, however, have estimated that 5 percent of all people with HIV infection may need 90 days of temporary shelter during the course of a year, and that 5 percent of persons with AIDS need group home or long-term -12- /' /3/¿<-;' ..~...- , residential placement of up to 12 months. Countv-wide Estimates. It is estimated that there are nearly 30,000 persons with HIV infection in San Diego County. Five percent of that total would indicate that 1,450 to 1,500 people with HIV infection will need 90 days of temporary shelter during 1991, that is 130,000 to 135,000 bed-days or a daily average of 350 to 370 beds. This number would still be within the expected range for 1992-1995. To estimate the number of people living with AIDS in the County of San Diego, figures are extrapolated from the State projections for 1991 and 1992. These assume a similar growth in numbers of persons living with AIDS through 1995. Estimates by Specific Jurisdictions. The only basis to estimate distribution of HIV infection and/or AIDS by jurisdiction within the County is through zip code analysis of an individual's place of residence at the time of their diagnosis. Assumptions must then be made that this distribution does not change over time, and that HIV infection is distributed in the same proportions as AIDS case reporting. The percentage of cumulative case reporting in the City of Chula Vista, as a percentage of the regional total, is 2.26 percent. This translates to 50 cases when applied to the County case total of 2,211. This proportion of the County-wide estimates is also applicable in terms of 90-day shelter and long-term housing needs for 1991. Long-term housing need estimates for those with HIV should be increased 33 percent annually through 1995. f. Foster Children. The County Foster Care Program is financed by the State of California. Under this program, a licensed family may receive $350- $500 a month for foster child. The averqge number of monthly placements of foster children rose to 6,283 in 1989-90 from 2,781 placements in 1984-85, an increase of 126 percent. There are currently 6,283 children in foster care. Inadequate housing for families seeking foster care placement is not significant. The housing needs of foster children are greatest when the foster child reaches the age of-18 years and no longer qualifies for State-funded foster care. It is estimated that one-third of those currently -13- /]/ J~ in foster care will become homeless when they reach the age of 18 years. According to the Child Services Division of the County of San Diego Health Services Department, rental assistance is the best way to prevent homelessness among foster care children reaching the age of 18 years. However, given the limited funding and constraints involved with federally- funded rental assistance programs, it is not currently possible to target federal rental assistance to this population. g. Families ParticiDatina in Self-Sufficiencv Proaram. The County Housing Authority (CHA) estimates that between 1992-96, approximately 500 households currently on the federal section 8 Rental Assistance Program waiting lists would be eligible to participate in a Housing Authority self-sufficiency program. The CHA administers the section 8 Rental Assistance Program in the City of Chula vista through a cooperative agreement with the CHA. The City could therefore expect to have a certain number of eligible households residing in the City. The exact number is unknown due to the fact that this is a tenant-based assistance program and thereby allows for the mobility of participating households. The Housing Authority is currently formulating a self-sufficiency program to address the federal legislation which mandates this program in 1993. . -14- /]/)7 . "---'-_.. ~ ~ ..0 C '" ..~ ~.~ ~ >- - :¡: ~ :;( 8 . §' "f '8 - 0 ¡ £- ~ :) ~ ~~ ~ ~ '" (5 : N ~~E ~ . ,.0-. -!i - 2:> <0'" ~ ~ I . 'i_ t!! ;¡~ ~ æÉ~ ð "'15- , 1;", ...J- - j CJ) "'_ :2 æ~6 (.) -N- - '"- - >- ~ " C> . CI> E - "- ~ !". o - Ii " -- CJ) (5 ~¡ ~ jiú: .!:[ .¡= :.. N!!Í= ~.2 ~ .2:'1"'~ ..0 ~ 1:J - ::5¿¡ ê5 - ..,,::: ¡,; 15 "c < :2_ _CP 0 c: 0' r- -.D ~!!' ~ .r:: i1. W cr- co co "'2"iñ ~ _ ~.---i C"') 1.tì ::I C:::J ;:).s r- M <::) o.5! 0 0 ~ _ .--I :l;0..:I: :I: -¡,;. Q. 0._ ø ;:) - c > e". ""e '(is ...~ . en c> Å“i Ee c: :2 '= ': 0 ~ 0 .~ B;9 :to '" .r::.r::-! !Õ a. ~ w <~ . B E ð ~ I ~= 0 .. ::I: "(j l!") =>0 ü , = .. 'I;> . .... ìS<c::: ,æ- I i! ¡;:;;;]rl t!! ~ ~ . cr- co .... :! ÕU ~ a: eÔ..o ;c '" J!i i1. &~:::; '" N.... C 3~ ~ ~ " .... j '8 CJ) ~'¡'i' '" '!: N i 'C .... a: ~g; cr- N N a _ ~N-~ NO'S o ... ca_ "IIj'I N -.D VI .c .... ~ '2 G) ,.. \: .; _en ., III ¡¡. o :::J oS,.o 'i' lI) ! o t; 2~ .... 0.... É en.... ." <> ) ~¡ f:ë '" (5. N II. '. 'C ~ :> 0 i B~ ,- ~ co cr- 5 .:! CD ( ) :-:... N ð ¡¡ ( ) E ~C5 - .!l ~ Z 0 ::s.... c: ~ ..c:: -.. ~ .c: R 8g t) ~~ ¡ :... . ~ ~~ c- ~ i E :¡ :... ~ ~ ; i g CIS( )'j¡ :-:o,¡¡ £ ~ ': :!: II à:I <tû)-j! CSw.. I!c.. I!c 0 I!c=:r 15 Ii ,.. .- f!! B f, 'i .!'.Iõ ; ~ I!c ~ ;. ~, I!c ~ ; ~ I!c ~ ;; §.O ] CI)( ) . ~ -.JI ¡í!c:e.JI ¡í!c:e-'" ¡í!,,'¡ ~ .!! ~ 'C ~ ¡¡! II i 'ª j ^ ~ fi 'ª j ^ ~ E i 'ª j ^ ~:z: ~ ~ l~ f f! 1j j ÎIÎ I j ~ 1 ì i I i ~ j i l t I ! ~ j I ~ i <t:::J:C õ ;¡5.~ .. I-ti/o..ð! ! tið:ðÅ  3itio..ð8 :g~:! J ::I: 00 ~ :0.... ~ ~~ õ~ ~£~ 5i~ "'~- "......J. !lffi >- ,.',"'" J!'" ~ ~ Z. .. -···...0 NM.~~~Å“Å“o_ V - (\,I CO) .. 'i) ø ,.., lco Q) _ - - - - - N N ..: . / j- / t' ' , t - .....0 c: == v '" ~ ,., - .. 0·- ~ >- - ~ =< :;: ~ 8 ~ ~ ¿; :; -6_ ø ::> ~ ~~ ~ ~ .. (5 ~ N B ~E' l' CI .. 0' 5! s. z >- '" 0 ~ ~ :I: ¡¡- is :;~= c c::c e~ ð .. 11- !:'" ....- - j CJ) .._ < ø"'::: J: u a:~º <.) .0-1 -..N- - ~- -¡; 1;; ~ J¡ . G) t) E (¡j .~ I< go.:: ::r: ~~ õ E CJ) ~Ii¡¡-¡L >(1) >. :I "iLL' .!:[ != :... N!Í'" i.2 :g ZO¡...~ .D~ ~ - ~.. ~ ::::)0 0 - "'''' :::: "," c e « 3i!.! -co 0 c t- 0 "- ·n .~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ § "a::;] ::> J! N .... '" :h:£ ~ {! - 2:- C- 0,_ G) :) ë 5 .~ 2-8 Ë E ~ 0'1 c.? ã;15 _E ( ) :21/ -6";;:::00 .. o.&::. 0 ·c 0 Gi!'~ :!.O CD ~~ -!' - .õ a. ~w <0 c.. E :J.;::,,::C: I ·0 o~ ~ &1')= 0 ..:I: () r-I :;;0 () , = .. '9 I a<a: Ji- -!!nr;:;;¡r! ~~ .... .... N ! LJU ~ a: Éõ '" co N ' æ 8,b"'.... N 1!1 ~~ ~ '" ::> .... j 'i III g::.¡. _I '" .... '" ~ "C .... a:~¡¡¡:I::; r- co a -N-I~ ~ 0 g o .. aI_ I' N 110 .c .... J¡ ~ (I) '" .- _ III Q) I< ¡¡. o ;:, III.D i' .II) ! o t; B-3 '" co.... . ~ ::E: > 81 ~! i~ ~ ~ ~ f ! CII (I) III :7 ... d ¡¡ CIIe .... 15 - .Y~ Z ;:J.... c: E CII 0 ..c: -3" .. I:::~ oS] U U co ". w Uc: Iii i5 - . s c:- ~ i.s l:15 ~:... ~ ~ ; S~ g _(I) -- . '" ... j.... !l" II:I: ~ ~. ëã ~ ~ Zi'.'t !l" ~ ;; .. ~; .. ~ ~ '15 Ii .( )" co '011I oE ~^_e ~^.e ~^J! 2'j ~ ( ) ~ : ¡ -g ëI~ .. ~ j ~ ¡¡ ë ~ j ~,,¡.. ~ j ~ "æ j j .Q < 0 i e e 1... ~ Q. ~·I c: 1! 8 Q. ~ I ~ J 0 ~ <i: ~ I "f · ~ J! - = ~~ j ~ i !i t ~ {I:D j ~ t ~ j G ~ i f ~ ·f.a j ~ II ~ 1- VI ( )-.:¡ co> ~ .:I:!!~ ið"":!!~I5-ð....:!!~I5;¡O];!:z5 < ;:, ~~. ~ 3.~ 8: ~~I¡fc3¿S !1~¡fc38 ~!~¡fc38 :g:f:!_ :J: 00 E -!!ou. ~ >~ o~ ...."'~ 2;;: J¡ .-- (JJ:~~ .!Jr5a1l ....._...O":Nr)...r..nØr--:ajaio ð ~uu -NM~~Ø~Ø~----------NN ~. )3/1; . . ø ~ '" c __ ,,~ ð.~ ~ >- - g ~ =< 8 .. ~ '8 - 6 '~b_ ) ~ 0.. ..."C :t: . ""ð : N ~~E ~ . .. CJ' - ~ - ~> ;Co ~~ :I: '8_ ~ e õi~ .~ ê Æ É:i: ¡:: ð "15- ~ ~!2. :;¡ .... .~ ::t: - I j rJ) ¡:: ,,_ ~ 0 Æ~6 <.> z _..:~ _ '--" ø::I_ ':... E 'E C't ~ cJ) ë.ß? 0 go g ~ J-e -- en P::¡ f~¡¡"ð ! Ii ~ _ :if~f cK ,-- ~ "'!!! ~.2 ~ 'i"j! ~ ~ 1:) - :;~ 0 - n ~ ;,; ¡ _ø::s ~ - ø C> 2.1ij ",0 "" "" c::? .Ë :¡¡ II:!:!"" '" ~ ~-ë ~ :;, Å  lI) N r- oa 0 0 0 :c:ã: :I: I Þ- - 2:0 Q. 0._ CD ::I ë§ .~ 2-8 -EE ê en" i'i~ _E Q) :2 ;~ .. 0..c 0 .~ B;8. :\.<..> '" .<:.<:-!!! .õ èi ~w <0 c" E "",,:I: . 0 0 co I ~= 0 .'X"õ f'.. =>0 <.> . = co '9 .... ~<a: .æ- I jOr.::::li -¡to'", 0 '" 2 I!::j c: a: ~2 M N L!) 12 ~ &15 c: ~!2. ~ ~ " rl j ~ en CJ' ø::I_ ~ ~ ~~=N r- ~ a "0 rl a:j ~", '" rl a o ... -=~ M ...... to ~ or. rl J ~ Q) '" .- _ en Q) II ¡¡. o ::J ~.D J .ðl I!! ~ ~ Jj t ¡ ~! [~:3 ~. ~ f 1 Q) Q) 0.> 0 .!. B~ ð .:1 ~, ~.. .Ii "'E ..::: 15 - .s¡- Z 0 ] R:g "" ¿ ~ Q) ~.a .. It, - R og u.~ Ii :... . ~!!;!~ c- Ë ie 21:'" ~ ~ .a-~!;! :5 _0- e ~ . '" dJ - COeD) 000;", " .. III cr:I: - -- 15w ~ "" ~" ~I:T Ii ~ U'J ,0.. _. - ."25 ,.. .- ~ B :a'i 1;!i.;; E ~ A ~ e ~ A :; ~ ~ A 3! ~ ] eneD co:g~ -,S/ ¡i!c.'s/ ¡i!c.-''s/ ¡i!ci iI oS! ~ "0 :. õi ~ oj x ; 'ª j A 'ª e 'ª j A 'ª E ; 'ª jA 'ª X .II 'i....0 ð ,get!~ ð~c!lC:ci!8"'c!l~ci!§ð"'~~Cci!.'; b si .- ~:: j ~::!! ~ § .Iõ 1:5 ~ it 1 E ~ G ci! in !-~ ~ ~ ~ it II :!í .J U) ü;~ ~ ;:>;- ~ !1~ ið....l~5-ð§·1~5-ð1i! ~ < ::J:= õ ~5.~ 8: E',!! &3õ ll,!!ëf38 3.§'!!&38 ~~ of!!_ ::I: 00 ~ ."üu. .':: >3: I 03: ,.£::13: .::I<~-: ü::I:...Jz 3~n ....,..,.O_NM...W)(O,...,c:oÅ“o_ ð ~~ _NM...~ø,...,lc:oO)__________NN ~. J)/~O ' . ~ ~ -D C =: ..0' ~.~ @. >- - a: ~ ;( 8 ~ ~ ¿ '¡ b_ .ID :::> a.. - ~"'C :I: ~ "cs ~ '" £ii;::: E >- 0' ...-... 0w- 0 e .. U 5~ - ~> ..... ,,0 p,,¡. u.. Q :I: III g. 'i_ .~!! 1i ~ 7 ~ J! É;; ¡:; ð ,,~- o Iii", I Z .....- ~ - .. j CJ) Q) m_ et ..c: ~"':= J: 0.... c: j Ç! U -(\1- _ _ IØ_ - >- ¡:; Jj C C> III . ø _ E - "' go ~ <: J-s -- (f r:¡¡¡cs ! ¡ ~ ... :I~~ c[ - _ N!! i.2 ~ ~¡..~ ,Q~ 'C - :5,3 è5 - "'''' 'S '" ¡ cc - ~ - c:: . ca 0 c: ''OJ< ....c '"J? g> .c ~ ¡¡; <-- <-- or ~'2 ïñ ~ - ~ "" .... ¡it- "a::> "S 0_ 0 .Q' ~ :%:a. J: ~ - 2:0 Co 0._ Q) ~ ë § .2: 2...~ Ë E ~ Cf) c..? q)¡ _E Q) ~I/ £''''0 .. 0..c: O"c 0 :~ :to., .c.c -!! - 9Õ a. ~ü:i <0 c" E ::);:::.:X: I ·0 o~ 00 rI?:e 0 .. ::I: 'õ ....... =>0 Ü it = " '9 I ðeta: J!- "'OIS<'1!! -Æ~ .... .... cc ~ cd~ c: Éô '" .... <V'> ' æ ,,~"" {! 3~ ~ '" " .... j ~ ,'" C1' =_....... l:- v, G'- ~ . _ y -D <=> a 'C .... C:j ¡D'" .... -D ¡¡ -<\1- N r-I ("f"¡ S o ... 11I_ till .r: .... S ~ CD .. .- _ (f II> II ð- o ~ III.JJ i' .151 é o 1;; B-3 ...0 ....c N (f ... .~ OJ fli:c-<=> .... '" !.t 'C.... > 0 i i!!;. ,-.... .... ð .:! CD CD III :-: .. <'!I.e CDE .... 15 - .\l- Z ::J - c " o ..t: sfd ~ ..c E Be,) ü ~~ i :.. . ~~] 1:.5 ~ !~ ~ ~ ~ ! ; ~ g tUCD ~ .... no ~ S .. 1It~:%: < ëñ ëií I! ~ ~ ¡;:t 0.. ~ - .. ~ s ë ~ '7 15 s .....Ü;:i; <3 ~~ U ë,j ~~;-j ~~.;.¡ ~~~ l~ .!!! (f 'C ! .. _ ii:%: ; ~ j ^ .JI e ~ j ^ .JI E · '8 j ^ .JI:%: Jt j ~ < 0 ,i ~ ~ !!~ § ';. c! ! ~ 8 no c! I ~ ~ 0 l.t ~ ¡ ~.B ..; b ~ F g':æ ! ~:: ~ i - .S; I] ciI;¡ t .~] g ciI ;d i ,~ ~ ~ ciI Å¡ I I ~ ·1 en -o¡s ~ :i> !1~ iò.....~~I5-òs·1~15-<>'9;¡! < ~~ õ ~3.~ i ~~¡f3õ 11~¡f38 3i~¡f38 t~ ~ = ::t: 00 ~ ",üu. ~ >~ o~ .~::I~::I< ~ - uX...Jz.!Jr.x:trì ....,....O_NM..."'Ø,...COØ)O_ ð ;;;t LJL.J - N M . It) <Ø ,..... ICO O'J _ .- - - ..- - - - - - N N _ .. JJ/.,)/ '" -.D C _ 0' J -, " 0.'" > - ~ ;( ~ ~ ~ ! c ¡; æ·- ~ _-IS ìa u eÞ"ð Å“ N .- ¡;-æ= > .:: 0,: . _. 0' ro - ~ · > Po =< 0 . ~ ~ X .(f) ¥ i_ .::!! ¡;; ~ ~ ~ £ É£ ~ ð f~~ .:: .... '" 'u - .- j U) ~ ca_ q: '" 'a;'" :r 8 a:JõÌB 52.. « -a;ci.~ - >. '" cIS ; ~ > E - '.-4 g. g ~}-6 õ ë en Z J; i¡ Õ !" ~ - :I~~ 8. ]Å¡ $ "'!! ;.2 co i"~ .D ~ 'tJ i-- :5~ (5 "'''' :;; '" ¡ C~ _ ~_ . co 0 c: ("I") ~ '<;ff ~,W .~ ~ t2. @ '" N -.D .c ~ W _- ::3 c: =' ::t S o1!:! 0 .Q ~ xa. :r ~ -;0. a. 0._ Q) ::J ë: § .~ E-8 Ë E ~ CI) C) Cii¡ - E Q) :2 II -6 ;;:::0 .. 0 J:; O·c 0 it:::: :tu '" .c.c-!! t!õ C. ~w <~ . BEg ~ I (1)= 0 :J: ~ 0' ~õ (,) ;; = g 'Q "; ðq:a: JI!- ~rnj .¡~~c<> N U' 2 c a:~!¿ J!i t2. ..~ c !~ ~ '" :> ~ j ~ t/'J 0' CO::;:" CO ("f) r-: ~ "C ~ £ ~¡¡; N ~ '" ~ - -~: ~ o ~ -- ~ ~ ~ Jj ~ ~ ~ - _ en '" 10 ¡¡. o :;, "'.0 .. .ðj ! en 2 ~ t!: ~} ì<;::¡ '" I~ It t "C.... :> 0 i iB;. I'"' ð .~ ~~ '" :7 .. <'!J~ ~E ~ '5 - .II'; Z ::J.... C E ~ 0 .r:: i" .. I~ = R uU 0 ¡~ ~ =- . ~ ~~ c-= ~ !& ~ 1 S ! :ä ~g s~~ ij" Ii: iii ~s .. &!x <( )...~ W at o. _. .s!.. . '15& .,.. ,- e <3 :a 1: ~.s; ;; E ~ A ~ E ~ ~ :¡; E ~ ~ J! '"" '¥ ~ ~~ is ~i:g~ .~j ¡'¡ce.i!j ¡'¡ce.~j ¡'¡cii jj :Q oCt 0 ~ & I J~ ~ a. c! I j j ~ ~ c! I j j § i d: c! I j j ;" .§ . C/)f: ~~ J ~ 1: i ~ l~ .B ~ t f] g .B ;q ¡ ·1 ] .B;q II : .s! tñ..... ~ .. >:- _ .:I:!! ~ ¡ ð ....:!! !:!. II; ~ ð .... . :!! !:!. !5 ~ ð 1i! 25 oCt :s~ õ ~5.~ !t ¡"€&¿Sõ !!€if¿Sð ~f€&¿Sð ~~ ~ '= :I: 00 ~ ..,0'" ~ >3: 03: .223: 2;;( ~'_ CJJ:-JZ ~f5a11 -" .....O·Nri.u;:uj,...COO»o_ ð .2 L.JL.J -- '" CO) .... fol) CD ,..... co m (\ N ..; . )'}-~;J , CHAS Tables 18 & 1 C u.s. Department o' Hauling and Urban o.v.ktpment Office ot Communrry Ptanflfng and De~k)pm.nt Homeless Population , . Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) NItM or JunadtCDon(') or ConIorDurn: Mark one: fillOl v.., ~nocI: (~., "cat y..... IXJ All Homele.. FY: rwoug. FY: Chula Vista o RaciaVEthnic Group (Soooly 92 96 Table 18 !egO<)' otal Shetler"" Unlhellef8d tAl (B) (C) Totals . um ro ami ... wn Children - NA . A NA 2. Number'of Persons in famili.. with Children 0 5, 3. umber 0 Individuals nOl in Families w~h Children 9 0 9 4. olal ersonsllndividuals (Line. 2+3) 14 0 14 Table 1C Humber of f.mili.. Wid') Chitorwn- Humber of Inå~duall Special Needs Caregory SheI_ UnlhollOrod SheI...."" UnlhollOrod (A) (B) (C) (D) 1. Mentally III N/A 2. Drug Abuse 3. Alcohol Abu.e ". Victims of Domestc Violence 5. Runaway/Abandoned Youth 6. Otherc~" * Induôt famil.. wi'lh hMd of houMhok:f or .pou" having .... cnaraaerilÓCIIiIIlfd. . -20- I "J/cJ.;J form HU~OO~ (6I'.vg, CHAS Tables 18 & 1 C u.s. DepartrMnt 0' Houllng and Urban o.y.~pm.n. Offic:.e of Community Planning and O'...topm.nt Homeless Population Comptehensive Housing Atfotdability Sttategy (CHAS) NatM of JI..orttGlCOon(l) Of CoNortIum: Mttk one: FÍ¥t v.., Penoø; (WI., 6&ca1lra.J DAn Homeress FY: .........ftFY: Chu1a Vista liD RaciaJlEthnic Group ($ >tofy) His anic 92 96 Table 18 logOI)' 0101 Shallered Unshelcer.d (A) (8) (C) Totals . 2. N/A 3. 4. Table 1C Numb« of Fami6¡.. .,,.. Chitcnn- Numbo< of Indo"~". SpecIal Needs ClItgOty _toro<l Unohel_rwd _"'0<1 Uns.hettered (A) (8) (C) (0) 1. Mentally III N/A 2. Drug Abuse 3. Alcohol Abu.. 4. Victim. of Domestic Vol. nee 5. Runaway/Abandoned Youth 6. Othe«oooo'Y) . Inc::IudI 'ami.. wi#1 hMd of houMhoId or _pau.. haYing ". characHri.tica h-.d. '" -21- )'3~;2i torm HU~OO¡() (6I1L'91) -"-'--- . CHAS Tables 18 & 1 C u.s. Department of Houalng and Urban o.ftJopmenl Office of Community PlaI'Il'Wng and O'...k)pm.nt Homeless Population Comptehensive Housing Alfotdabilily Strategy (CHAS) Name of JunsdtCllon(') or CoNOl1lUI'TI: Uark one: F",- v.., "-nod: C"" ,"*, yr'.J o An Homeless FY: 0V0..ç_ FY: 00 RaciallEt/lnic GIDUp (Søool» Chu¡,i Vista Black 92 96 Table 18 legOty 0,", sne/lOfoø UnSheltered (A) (B) (C) Totals 1. um~ro amI Children - . 2. Number of Persons in N/A famili.s with Chi'd,.n 3. umber 01 Individuals not in Families wrth Children .. olal ersoll$llndividuals (Lines 2+3) Table 1C Number of F.mili.. WlIh CNIchn- Number of Inc*,-,'ÓJaI. Special Needs CaIOgOry Shelwad Un_tared Shelteroø Unlholltrad (A) (B) (C) (D) 1. Mantally III N/A 2. Drug Abuse 3. Alcohol Abuse .. Victims 01 Domeslic Violence 5. Runaway/Abandoned Youth 6, Othar(-,>Iy) . Induót '."..¡'h.. wi1h hMd of houMhoId or 'POU" having the c:haraaeril~ 1i1-.c1 .. -22- - /' torm HUD-400~ (61'419') / '3 --- 2_7 ,..-.-..-, , . . CHAS Tables 18 & 1 C u.s. Department of Hou.lng and Urbl" Development Office of Communrty Plat'lnU'lg anet DewlOpmenf Homeless Population , . Comprehensive Housing Alfotdabilily Sltalegy (CHAS) Name of Junadløoncl) Of Con.onl/."': ...."'one: Fw. y..,. Penod: (Miff' "ca. rrt.) o All Homolo.s FY: 0Y0ug^ FY: ~R~mncG~up~~ Chula Vista Asian/Other 92 96 Table 18 lOgOI)' 011I ShOllorld Un&neltet'8d (A) (8) (C) Totals 1. u~ro am, Ia, wit Childron - . 2. Number 01 Porsons in N/A families willi Childron 3. Number of Individuals not in FamiUos wilh Children 4. olal om>nsllndividuals (Line. 2+3) Table 1C Number 01 Fami... WI'" Chì~· Humber of lnâ'llduall Special Needs CoIogOry ShoI..1d Unahol_r.d ShoIIorId U"~tered (A) (e) (C) CD) 1. Monlally iii N/A 2. Drug Abuse 3. Ala>hol Abu.o 4. VICtims of Domostc Violonco 5. Runaway/Abandoned Youth 6. Othor¡-"'Y) . IndudIII lam".. wilh hMd of houMhdd or 'POU" t\aving ... c:harac:teriatic:a hlltd. : -23- /']---2/ð toon HUD-400~ (61'4/9') ---- .' . . i CHAS Tables 18 & 1 C u.s. Oepuunent of Hou.lng and Urban Development Office of CommunIty Plat\n.ng and O'...lOpm.nl Homeless Population ' Comprehensive Housing Aftotdability Strategy (CHAS) Name of JuntGtc:Don(I) Of CoNottIIoIm: Mattt one: Fiw v.., Penocl: (."... Alell 1".) o All Home'e., FY; """'-çnFY; Å’I RaciaJlEthnic Group (5<>oafy Chula Vista Nati e American 2 96 Table 18 IeQOty oral sn.llerld Un""'terod (A) (B) (C) Totals 1. . 2. N/A 3. .. otal l/'SOns/lndivlduals (Linls 2+3) Table 1 C Numb« of Famili" wlI" Chik:tt9n- Number of Indr"''''aJI SpecIal Needs CoIIgOty Sheltered Un_.rod Sheltored Una.heltervd (A) (B) (C) (D) 1. Mentally III N/A 2. Drug Abuse 3. Alcohol Abuse .. Victims of Domlstic VlOllncl 5. Aunowly/Abandonld Youth 6. Othlr¡_1 . tnduót familie. wiU\ hMd or houHhokf Of.pau.. hamg ... d\atac:teri.~ 1i.'Mi. , -24- / J -.2 7 loon HU~OO¡O (611411>') ~_..,_._~'" PART 2. MARKET AND INVENTORY CONDITIONS This part summarizes local housing market and inventory characteristics, including trends in population, household formation and housing, as well as information on the assisted housing and public housing stock. It also summarizes the facilities and services available for homeless persons and other persons with special needs. A. Housing Conditions 1. PODulation and Minoritv Data. Table 2A, "population and Minority Data," provides 1990 U.S. Census data for the City of Chula vista on the total population, and the numbers classified as White (non-Hispanic), Black (non-Hispanic) , Hispanic (all races), Native American (non-Hispanic), Asian/pacific Islander and Other (non-Hispanic). It provides similar information from the 1980 U.S. Census. The 1990 population totals 135,163 persons, of which 50 percent are White, 4 percent are Black, 37 percent are Hispanic, less than 1 percent are Native American, and 8 percent are Asian/Pacific Islanders and other. Of the total 1990 population, 1 percent or 1,726 persons lives in group quarters. Of these, 1,462 persons live in institutional quarters and 264 live in non-institutional quarters. From 1980 to 1990, the percentage of whites decreased from 68 to 50 percent. Hispanics registered the greatest increase from 23 to 37 percent. Blacks and Asian/Pacific Islanders and Other increased from 2 to 4 and 6 to 8 percent for the same time respectively. Native Americans remained relatively constant as percentages of total population. a. Concentrations of low income households. For purposes of this CHAS, a concentration of low income households is defined as a census tract where the number of low income households, as a percent of all households, exceeds the regional average of 38.4 percent. A high concentration is defined as a census tract where the number of low income households, as a percent of all households, equals or exceeds double the regional average or 76.8 percent. Household income information is not yet available from the 1990 Census. Therefore, 1990 SourcePoint income estimates we~e used to arrive at current estimates of concentrations of low income households. These are based on 1980 -25- j]/;2'fÅ¡ "--" census tracts. A small number of census tracts overlap with neighboring jurisdictions. There are thirteen low income concentrated census tracts in the City (100.07, 101. 03, 123.02, 124.01, 124.02, 125, 126, 127, 130, 131.01, 131.02, 132.01, 132.02). There is one high concentrated low income census tract (123.02) . b. Concentrations of racial/ethnic minoritv households. For purposes of this CRAS, a concentration is defined as a census tract that has a higher percentage of minority population than the regional average. A moderate concentration is defined as a census tract having more than one and one-half times the regional average of minority population. A severe concentration is defined as a census tract having more than two times the regional average. According to the 1990 Census, the regional population averages for racial/ethnic minority groups were 6 percent Black (non-Hispanic), 7.4 percent Asian/Pacific Islander (non-Hispanic), .7 percent Native American (non-Hispanic), .1 percent Other (non-Hispanic) and 20.4 percent Hispanic. Thus, the region's minority population as a percent of total population is 34.6 percent. Concentrated. There are twenty-eight minority concentrated census tracts (100.07, 101. 03, 123.02, 124.01, 124.02, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131.01, 131. 02, 132.01, 132.04, 132.03, 133.01, 133.02, 133.03, 133.04, 133.05, 134.01, 134.05, 134.06, 134.07, 134.08, 134.09) . Moderatelv concentrated. There are twelve minority moderately concentrated census tracts (100.07, 101. 03, 125, 126, 131.01, 132.01, 132.03, 132.04, 133.02, 133.03, 133.04, 133.05) . Severely concentrated. There are three minority severely concentrated census tracts (100.07, 101. 03, 132.04). 2. Housinq stock inventory. Table 2B, "Market and Inventory Conditions--Housing stock'" Inventory," provides data for the City of Chula vista on the total number of year-round housing units by occupancy -26- ) '3 ~ol1 .----, status and housing condition. Rehabilitation figures were arrived at based on the City's 1988 HAP. There are a total of 52,042 dwelling units, of which 96 percent are,occupied and 4 percent are vacant. Of the 49,908 occupied units, 23,307, or 47 percent are renter occupied. The remainder, 26,601, or 53 percent arè owner occupied units. Of the 2,096 vacant units, 973 are available for rent and 602 are available for sale. Of the total housing stock which is either occupied or available for rent or sale, 2,437 units are "needing rehab" and 184 units are not repairable". The City uses section 8 Housing Quality Standards as the basis for determining qualification for needing rehab and not rehabbable. Demand for all housing units, as measured by vacancy rates, varies by community. According to the Department of Finance (DOF), the vacancy rate on January 1, 1991 for the City was 4.0 percent, thus indicating a tight rental market. Siqnificant market and inventorv conditions. According to Dataquick, the median resale housing price for a single family detached house in the San Diego region in June, 1991 was $183,000. The median resale price for a single family detached house for the city of Chula vista was $171,500 for the same month. The California Association of Realtors estimates that only 21 percent of all households in the San Diego region could afford to buy the median priced home in 1990. The renter affordability gap, as defined by those low income renter households experiencing a cost burden or severe cost burden, is 6,396 and 3,251 respectively (see At Risk population discussion in Part 1, B.2) . Potential constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing are discussed in two contexts: governmental and non-governmental. Governmental constraints include Article 34 of the California Constitution, land use controls, building codes, site improvements, development fees, and processing and permit procedures. These constraints can be mitigated by the City through a variety of means including: designation of large amounts of land for all types of residential development, development fee waivers for affordable housing, and expeditious permit processing. In fact, as stated in the city's Housing Element, the City has designated -27- /3- JtJ .. ..-- large amounts of land for all types of residential development and provided for both expeditious permit processing and parallel processing. Non-governmental constraints include land costs, construction costs, and financing. All three of these costs tend to be determined at the regional, state and National levels by a variety of private and public factors. Local jurisdictions therefore, often have little influence or control over these cost constraints. 3. Assisted housinq inventorv. Table 2C, Assisted Housing Inventory, provides data on housing stock by federal assistance programs. Out of a total of 2,471 assisted units, there are 755 project-based tenant assistance units and 1,716 tenant-based tenant assistance units. At-risk rental units. The City of Chula vista does not anticipate the loss of rental housing from the assisted housing inventory through public housing demolition or conversion to homeownership during the time frame of this CHAS. According to the California Housing Partnership Corporation, the City presently has five projects that could be classified as at-risk of conversion to homeownership through prepayment or voluntary termination of a Federally assisted mortgage with the earliest possible termination date in parentheses: Congregational Tower (1990) , Palomar Apts. (1990) , Rancho vista Apts. (1991) , Castle Park Garden Apts. (1991) , and Oxford Terrace (1992) . The City does not anticipate a loss of these five rental projects because the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula vista is currently working to preserve these units. 4. Use of funds. Because of the factors cited above, priority in the use of funds will go to the preservation of at-risk rental units. B. Inventory of Facilities and Services for Homeless Persons The narrative for this section is reflective of the homeless facilities and services currently operating in the City of Chula vista. In addition, a listing of regionwide shelters is provided. 1. Emerqencv shelters and transitional housinq facilities. South Bay Community Services, Inc. þrovides youths a temporary shelter in licensed foster homes for up to a 2-week stay. -28- /3~;J / _.~.._---,. South Bay Community Services, Inc. also operates an eight bed shelter for both homeless and runaway youth. The Inter-faith Emergency Shelter Program provides twelve beds to homeless people during the months of December to April. Twelve Chula vista churches participate in the Program. The churches are allowed this temporary use because the city council has amended the Municipal Code. The La Quinta Motel in Chula vista participates in a nation-wide effort by the Motel Owners Association of America who volunteer to provide up to 10% of their rooms a year for the homeless. This program provides 28 free nights a year for up to three nights per family unit. The La Quinta Motel consistently uses its quota of rooms per year. 2. Dav shelters. soup kitchens and other facilities. Chula vista Welfare Council provides emergency assistance to individuals or families in need of food and clothing. South Bay Community Services, Inc. provides food and clothing to homeless and runaway youth. The Chula vista Human Services Center provides food to the homeless. Lutheran Social Services provides food to homeless people in Chula vista. The Good Neighbor Center provides food and clothing to homeless individuals in Chula vista. 3. Voucher proqrams. Lutheran Social Services, Project Hand, provides bus tokens and gas vouchers. Lutheran Social Services and the Good Neighbor Center administer the South Bay Voucher Program. The Program provides homeless families and some single adults with vouchers for a two-week stay in selected motels. During periods of shelter voucher availability, an average of five single adults and twenty-five family members can be found in the two participating motels. - -29- /)~;J;¿' 4. Social service proqrams for the homeless. a. Lutheran Social Services, Project Hand, provides, through a caseworker supported by the city's CDBG funds, emergency food, clothing, financial assistance for medical prescriptions, and information and referral to emergency shelters. b. South Bay Community Services, Inc. provides youths alternate long-term placement planning, ongoing support for the individual and/or family, fpmily reunification services, counseling, employment assistance, tutoring, and school assistance. 5. Homeless prevention programs and services. South Bay Community Services, Inc. provides crisis intervention and counseling to youths and their families who are experiencing problems that may lead to the youth leaving home. . -30- /3~}3 - ~-_.__.,.., Shelters for the Homeless in San Diego county Program Type Bed Spaces Central Region Casa de Paz Case-Managed 30 Catholic Charities - House of Rachel Transitional 11 CWSS - Project Safehouse Case-Managed 9 Dust Off Transitional 18 Emmanuel House Night Shelter 8 Emmanuel House Night Shelter 15 *ECS - Capri Hotel Transitional 8 ECS - Julian's Anchorage Transitional 15 ECS - Transitional Housing Program Transitional 14 Forgotten in America Case-Managed 5 **ISN - PB/La Jolla Case-Managed (Oct-May) 12 ISN - Pt. Lorna case-Managed (Dec-Mar) 12 ISN - College Area Case-Managed (Nov-Jan) 12 ISN - Clairemont Case-Managed (Nov-Dec) 12 ISN - North Park Case-Managed (Jan-Mar) 12 ISN - Southeast Case-Managed (Feb-Mar) 12 ISN - wings Transitional 20 San Diego Co. Mental Health Svcs Case-Managed 34 st. vincent de Paul - Emerg. Shelter Case-Managed 165 st. vincent de Paul - Maher Center Night Shelter 160 ***SVDP - Transitional Housing ProgramCase-Managed 110 SVDP - Transitional Housing Program Case-Managed 45 SVDP - Joshua House (AIDS Clients) Transitional 8 Salvation Army Case-Managed 60 Salvation Army Case-Managed 45 San Diego Rescue Mission Night Shelter 114 San Diego Rescue Mission Case-Managed 135 ****SDYCS - The Bridge Case-Managed 6 SDYCS - The Gatehouse Case-Managed 6 SDYCS - The Storefront Case-Managed 15 SDYCS - Southeast Emergency Qtrs. Case-Managed 23 serenity House Transitional 21 United States Mission Night Shelter 35 YWCA - Women in Transition Transitional 14 Total (including 72 ISN seasonal spaces) 1235 *ECS = Episcopal Community Services **ISN = Interfaith Shelter Network ***SVDP = st. Vincent de Paul ****SDYCS = San Diego Youth Community Services . -31- /3~Ji Shelters for the Homeless in San Diego County Program Type Bed Spaces East county *ISN Case-Managed (Feb-May) 12 Halcyon Center Case-Managed 12 San Diego Youth Involvement Case-Managed 23 **VOA - East County Emerg. ShelterCase-Managed 19 Total (including 12 ISN seasonal spaces) 66 North county Inland *ISN Case-Managed (Nov-May) 12 The EYE - Hidden Valley House crisis:Transitional 30 North County Interfaith Council Case-Managed 10 st. Clare's Home Transitional 60 ***NCIC Family Shelter Case-Managed 14 Total (including 12 ISN seasonal spaces) 126 North county Coastal Casa de Amparo Case-Managed 26 Catholic Charities - Good Samaritan Case-Managed 12 Community Resource Center Night Shelter 8 North County Chaplaincy Night Shelter 13 *ISN - Oceanside Carlsbad Case-Managed (Nov-Feb) 12 *ISN - San Dieguito Case-Managed (Jan-Mar) 12 House of Martha and Mary Case-Managed 6 Women's Resource Center - Gateway Case-Managed 22 YMCA - project Oz case-Managed 6 Total (including 24 ISN seasonal spaces) 117 South Bay Casa Nuestra Case-Managed 8 County-wide Total (including 120 ISN seasonal spaces and excluding inclement weather shelters) 1552 *VOA = Volunteers of America **NCIC = North County Interface Council ***ISN = Interfaith Shelter Network - -32- /3-3_C;- - ~_..- C. Inventory of Facilities and Services for Persons with other Special Needs 1- Elderlv and frail elderlv. A wide variety of facilities and services are presently available to serve the elderly population. Facilities for the elderly include licensed long-term care facilities, intermediate care facilities, unassisted living facilities, and senior centers through both the public and private sectors. Among services for the elderly are: adult day care, basic needs and resources (help for those temporarily unable to help themselves), crime/victim and legal services, education services, employment and training, emergency services, financial aid and benefits, health information, health services (inpatient and outpatient), housing services, in-home services, mental health services, protective and placement services, substance abuse services, and transportation services. The majority of elderly in the City of Chula vista have access to these programs either through the Chula vista Norman Park Senior Center or the Salvation Army, both of which are located in central Chula vista on major bus lines. 2. Disabled persons. A variety of facilities and services are available to serve disabled persons. a. Mentallv disabled. Regionwide, facilities for the mentally disabled include hospitals, medical centers, outpatient clinics, mental health centers, counseling and treatment centers, socialization centers, residential facilities for children, crisis centers, and adolescent and adult day treatment offices. Services available regionwide through the County Mental Health Services (SDMHS) and its contracting agencies include: screening and emergency, inpatient, partial day treatment, 24-hour residential treatment, outpatient, crisis, community support, probation, forensic, program review and development, case management, technical and administrative, "Totline" telephone counseling (for parents of children up to five years of age), homeless outreach, AB 3632 (mental health services for children in special education), and volunteer services. In addition to the services provided by SDMHS, Kinesis South provides vocational training, and the South Bay Guidance Center provides mental health counseling for senio~ citizens, adults, and children. -33- ) J /3 {; ... --,--," At present, there is a limited range of community- based rehabilitative and supportive housing options for persons not in crisis who need living accommodations. Current SDMHS housing resources for the region include the Supplemental Rate Program (providing board and care with supplemental services - 350 beds), Longterm/Transitional Residential Program (group living with supportive services - 26 beds), and Semi-Supervised Living Program (transitional living from the streets to group housing - 28 beds) . Additional resources outside the SDMHS system that are potentially available are referrals to community Care Facilities (board and care) - approximately 1300 beds. b. Developmentallv Disabled. The San Diego Regional Center for the Developmentally Disabled is an information clearinghouse and provider of services for developmentally disabled persons. It is responsible for providing diagnostic counseling and coordination services. Regional centers serve as a focal point within the community through which persons with developmental disabilities and their families receive comprehensive services. The San Diego Regional Center is responsible for providing preventive services, including genetic counseling to persons who have or may be at risk of having a child with a developmental disability. They are also responsible for planning and developing services for persons with developmental disabilities to ensure that a full continuum of services is available. Training and Education for Retarded Individuals, Inc. (TERI) is a private, nonprofit corporation created for the purpose of developing residential, educational and recreational programs designed to serve individuals with developmental disabilities. The united Cerebral Palsy Association of San Diego County provides communication training, prevocational testing and training, and social and recreational activities for developmentally disabled persons. Association of Retarded citizens, a private, nonprofit corporation, provides job training to the developmentally disabled in Chula vista. -34- /J/37 --,..,.---.--.,- --." The city of Chula vista Parks and Recreation Department assists with the Special Olympics. c. Phvsicallv disabled. The majority of the supportive services and housing assistance for physically disabled persons are provided through non-profit organizations. A primary provider is the Community Service Center for the Disabled Inc. (CSCD). CSCD services provide independence, dignity and access to physically-disabled persons. CSCD provides the following services: Intake and Referral services are set up to meet individual's needs and to seek appropriate services from CSCD or from other community agencies; Personal Assistance helps disabled individuals obtain personal care attendants or homemakers, thus enabling them to live independently in their own homes; Housing Referral assists individuals to obtain accessible and/or appropriate housinq that meets their individual needs; Benefits counseling helps disabled individuals apply for public benefits to which they may be entitled, such as Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicare, and Medi-Cal; Employment Services are provided through the Job Club that focuses on pre-employment preparation skills; community Living Program offers case management services to help individuals move out of institutional environments; Transition project provides assistance to young adults with disabilities moving from a school setting to independent community living arrangements; Peer counseling furnishes services and opportunities for social contact and involves areas such as individual, marital, family, and sexual counseling; - Transportation supplies limited service on a fee basis for disabled individuals in need of -35- 0~Y - transportation to medical, employment or personal appointments; Spoke Shop is a business enterprise which offers medical supplies and sales, service and repair of durable medical equipment such as wheelchairs; Public Relations and Development provides public information to the community, manages public relations events, produces fund development special projects, supervises volunteer coordination and membership recruitment. 3. AIDS. Facilities, available regionally, include residential units for persons with AIDS of 5 units containing 50 beds, 6 hospices, 1 skilled nursing facility, 2 resource centers, and 11 health centers/clinics. Facilities serve AIDS patients exclusively or in conjunction with other segments of the population. Services for persons with AIDS, funded by the County of San Diego Department of Health Services through Title I of the Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE) Act of 1990, include primary health care, mental health counseling, in-home care and treatment services, dental, case management, recreation/social, outreach and education, and transportation services. The city of Chula vista also provides CDBG funds to the AIDS Foundation of San Diego for services to Chula vista residents. . -36- ) '] /31 . .' . CHAS Table 2A u.s. DepaMment of Hou.lng and Urban Dewlopment . Office of Community Planmng and Development Population and Minority Data.. Comprehensive Housing AffOrdabilffy Sttategy (CHAS) Name at JunaØlCDon(l) or CoNol'llum: I F..... V.., PenOCl: (ento< 1IscI, r"l FY; OVOugh FY; Chu1a Vista I 92 96 . I 1;S0 CenIu. 0_ ,_ CenSUI 0... CaIegOty or Current eltmat. (A) (8) 1. Total Population 83.927 135.163 2. WMe (Non·Hispanic) 57.132 67,302 3. Black (Non-Hispanic) 1 617 5,721 4. Hispanic (All races) . 191-624 50.376 s. Native American 542 622 6, Asian and Pacific !slanders * 5 012 11,142 7. Group OUartera 751 1,726 8. Institutional 718 1,462 9. Non·lnSlitulional 33 264 10. Housahold Populallon 83 176 133.437 *lncludes "Other" '" -37- /JrIjD Ionn HUD-400~ (5I16191) ...-... , . ~ . CHAS Table 28 u.s. Department of Hou.lng and Urb.n Deyelopment Office of Community Planning and Dewlopment Market and Inventory Conditions Housing Stock Inventory Comptehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) NarM 01 Jun'ChCDon(' or Con.ortlum: Frve v..,. P.nocI: (~tIIf ~ yrs.) ~ - FY: 92 """'-'II"FY; 96 CNdtone: @ ,; CÀnWI Chula Vista Cunwnt estimate a. 01: (.",., Gate) October I, 1991 Cotegory Tolol o or 1 beci'ooma 2 _.... 3 or monrbtó'ooms (A) (B) (C) (0) 1. Total Y.at-Round Houllng 52 042 2. Total Occupiod Units 49 908 3. RClnter Occupied Units 23.307 4. Nooding Rohab 1 586 5. Not Rohabbablo 69 6, ONn.r Occupied Units 26 601 7. Nooding Rohab 766 S. Not Rohabbablo 112 9. Total Vacant Units 2 096 10. For Ront 973 11. .Needing Rehab 67 12, Not Rohabbablo 2 13, For Salo 602 14. Nooding Rohab 18 15. Not Rohabbablo 1 . 16. Awaiting Occupancy or Hold . 17. Other ~ -38- JJ~L/J to"" HUQ.400QO (&'14191) " . .. , CHAS Table 2C u.s. c..p..l'tJ'1"o«tt ot Hoc.aJng Ind Urban ~"'*'t Offi.Å“ of Community P¡anfllng and O.....-.O~ Assisted Housing Inventory Comprehensive Housing AtfOrclabil1ty Sltalegy (CHAS) Nwne ol ~.I or eon.:w.m: F,...y...~(.,..It.caI)'f1í_I- f'(: ""'-'Q"f'(:96 92 c.n.nr eN"*- .. ot eM'" G&IoeI Chula Vista October I, 1991 TotaJ$Þ:::Ica IJ'Id In...ntOI')' CaDOgOt)' Total SRO o 0( 1 beð'oom. 2~ 3 «more ~s (A) (BI (C) (0) (E) ,. p,oJ.c:t Ba..d T.nant .ulatanee 755 2. Public Housing , 83 ^ 3, SactlOn 202 100 ~. SactÌDn 8 0 5, 01.., HUD 572 6, FmHA 0 7. T.nam ala.1 T.nant A...launce 1,716 8. SKtion 8 1,716 9. 01.., St=ailoQJ 0 10.HonwownM' A...¡atance 0 . -39- /J -" i/d Iorm HU~ (511&/91) ...-..-. SECTION II. FIVE YEAR STRATEGY PART I PRIORITIES/PROGRAMS A. The Process Used to Arrive at a Five Year Strategy In determining the priorities and programs for the city of Chula vista to be included in the five year strategy, several sources were reviewed and analyzed. The sources were as follows: 1. The City of Chula vista is currently completing the required five year review of the Housing Element of the General Plan. The updated Housing Element for 1991 - 1996 describes housing needs and identifies eleven objectives to address the housing needs of the residents of the City. Portions of the Housing Element have been incorporated into the CHAS where applicable; and 2. Information from the Needs Assessment and Market Inventory sections of the CHAS which were provided by SANDAG based on the latest relevant census data. After reviewing these sources, it was evident that the City is faced with a significant portion of its current population earning less than 80% of County Median Income. In fact, according to SANDAG, 47% of the city's total number of renter housesholds are low income. As a result, it is evident that the City must attempt to meet the needs of these people. The city's Housing Element states that the market is currently meeting the rental housing needs of those people whose incomes are above 80% of County Median Income. For example, the average cost of a two bedroom apartment in Chula vista is $710.00, and this rent is less than 30% of the income for a family of four who earns 81% of County Median Income or $33,453. Since the City has a significant number of very low and low-income renters and the market is meeting the needs of moderate income families, the city is concentrating its resources toward very low and low-income renters since they are facing a severe cost burden due to rental rates in Chula vista. The City will also attempt to assist low- income renters to become homeowners. . -40- /7 ~Lj3 .-..-.-, " B. Priorities and Programs/services PRIORITY: Preserve the City's four apartment complexes which are at-risk of converting,to market rate rentals. 5-vear Results: Preserve 386 units of affordable housing Rational: For the last 20 years, these units have met the needs of very low and low- income households. If the city allows these units to convert to market rate rentals, a considerable amount of the City's affordable housing stock will vanish. Proqram: Currently, the city is working with a community-based non-profit corporation to preserve these units. It appears that the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula vista will likely provide some predevelopment costs and gap financing as well as issue the Mortgage Revenue Bonds needed to acquire these units. PRIORITY: continue the housing rehabilitation, rental rehabilitation, and mobile home rehabilitation programs in order to preserve the city's aging housing stock. Five Year Results: 200 mobile homes & single family homes 25 rental units Rational: Since the inception of the Redevelopment Agency's rehabilitation programs, these programs have served almost exclusively very-low income households whose dwellings units were in dire need of rehabilitation. In order to preserve the city's aging housing stock and provide decent places for people to live, the Agency will continue doing both moderate and substantial rehabilitations. Proqram: Currently, the Agency offers 3% deferred loans to very low-income households and 5% loans to low-income households in order to rehabilitate their single family dwellings. For mobile homes, the Agency offers grants up to $1995.00 for very low income households, and any additional rehabilitation costs are eligible for a 5% loan. For rental units, the Agency gives a 5% loan to landlords in exchange for rents restricted which are affordable to low-income households. The City expects to receive HOME funds in the near future and may use these funds for some of its -41- /J ~ijt./ .._.m. rehabilitation activities. PRIORITY: continue to implement the City's Affordable Housing Program so that more rental and for-sale units are made available to low, moderate, and ~iddle income households. Five Year Results: 250 low-income units (80% and below) 345 moderate/middle income units (81% - 120%) Rational: Chula vista is very fortunate because a large portion of the city is yet to be developed. In an effort to gain affordable units in the undeveloped areas and promote a balanced community the Affordable Housing Program was developed. Proqram: The city of Chula vista's Housing Element of the General Plan states that any development over 50 units must provide 10% of the units for low and moderate income households. currently, City staff are examining the possibility of modifying this requirement so that any development over 50 units would be required to provide 5% of the units to low-income households and 5% of the units to moderate and middle income households. The above units are based on current projects whose tentative maps have been conditioned under the existing Program, and the units are expected to be built by 1996. To date, developers have provided these units with little assistance from the City or the Agency, and the City has gained more affordable housing as a result. In the future, the Agency or the City may assist developers so that more low-income units are built, and the city is planning to assist developers provide for-sale units to moderate income households. In an effort to assist developers with their rental requirements, the City has suggested that for-profit developers join with non-profit housing developers so that the affordable units could remain affordable to low-income households for longer periods of time. - -42- )J--tþ ..._", PRIORITY: Assist low, moderate and middle income residents purchase a home. Five Year Results: 10 low-income homeownership opportunities 94 mOderate/middle income homeownership opportunities Rational: since only 21% of all households could afford to buy a home in the San Diego region in 1990, the city must address this problem in order to retain businesses and attract new ones. Proqram: Currently, the Agency administers a Mortgage Credit certificate Program (MCC) which allows eligible buyers to take 20% of their mortgage interest as a tax credit on their federal income taxes. To be eligible for the Program in non- targeted census tract, a household must be a first time home buyer, buy a home in Chula Vista, and earn less than 115% of County Median Income. (A targeted census tract is one where 70% or more of the households earn 80% or less of the County Median Income.) If someone buys in a targeted census tract, they do not have to be a first time home buyer, and they can earn up to 140% of County Median Income. In order to assure low-income households would have access to a MCC, the City set aside 10% of its allocation or 10 MCCs for low-income buyers (80% or less). The Agency is currently developing a "silent second" program for low income home buyers. The exact mechanics of the program have not been worked out, but the Agency expects to implement the program by fiscal year 1992- 1993. Silent seconds in conjunction with MCCs will make homeownerhip a reality for many low- income buyers who would otherwise never have been able to afford a home of their own. Currently, in conjunction with the MCC Program, the Agency is working with mortgage lenders who offer the Community Homebuyers Program to first time homebuyers. The Community Homebuyers Program is an effective way to assist people to qualify for a mortgage loan. The Program increases debt to income ratios, decreases the amount of a down payment to ~%, and allows part of the 5% down to be paid by a relative of the prospective buyer. In addition, the Program -43- /3 --Lj f, .---- ~equires applicants to attend a home buyers seminar which focuses on the escrow process, money management and home maintenance. This seminar provides the supportive services many first time home buyers need. The Community Homebuyers Program works well with the MCC Program because it gets people into homes while the MCC Program helps people stay there. In addition to the Community Homebuyers Program, a community based non-profit corporation, South Bay Commumnity Services, in conjunction with the San Diego Home Loan Counseling Service, is also providing homeownership counseling. PRIORITY: Transitional housing. Five Year Results: Develop or acquire and rehabilitate a facility to house the transitionally homeless. Rational: As discussed in Part I of the CHAS, Chula vista's homeless population is greater than previously thought. Since many programs are available to house the homeless temporarily, a transitional housing project is needed so that Chula vista's homeless can receive the needed supportive services to ensure their successful return to the community. Proqram: Currently, the city has encouraged the South Bay Directors Council, an organization of non-profit supportive services providers, to apply for Stewart McKinney funds and . other funding sources available for the development of a transitional housing project. To date, South Bay Community Services and Father Joe Carroll have been the only two non-profits to seriously investigate the feasibility of developing a transitional housing project, but Father Joe Carroll's project is currently on hold. The City will continue to give technical assistance to South Bay Community Services (SBCS), and SBCS is currently attempting to identify a site for the shelter. Once a site is identified, SBCS will apply for McKinney funds, and the Agency will most likely support the project with both technical and financial assistance. . -44- J], ~7I/ PRXOR:ITY: continue to support non-profit corporations to develop or rehabilitate rental housing for very-low and low income households. Five Year Results: 85 very low-income rental units 18 low income rental units Rational: In the past, the City or the Agency has assisted for-profit developers to develop units for low income households. However, these for-profit developers always insist upon these affordable units eventually converting to market rate rentals, and as a result, the City only realizes the benefit of their investment for a limited period of time. If a non-profit corporation develops the housing, the units will be affordable for the long-term, and the City or the Agency has invested in an affordable project which will benefit very low or low-income residents of the City for the usable life of the rental units. Proqram: The Agency or the City will continue to invest in quality projects by non-profits which provide rental units to very low and low-income households. In the future, the City may use HOME fund to assist non-profits with both the development or rehabilitation of the projects and rental assistance so that more units can be reserved for very low income households. PRXORITY: continue to assist mobile home park residents who are faced with paying increasing rents as well the closure of their mobile home parks. Five Year Results: Continue to enforce the city's Rent Review Ordinance so that mobile home residents are not faced with huge rent increases. continue to enforce the city's Mobile Home Park Closure Ordinance which requires park owners to provide relocation assistance to low-income park residents when the owner decides to close the park. Rational: In the City, 35 mobile home parks provide housing to many very low and low-income families and seniors. without this form of housing, many of these families and senior citizens would be facing a severe cost burden for housing, or they might not have adequate housing at all. As a result, the City has made a -45- /3'-YY ----" substantial commitment to regulate the City's parks so that the park residents can retain their affordable housing. Proqram: The City's Rent Review Ordinance only allows park owners to raise their rent by the Consumer Price Index once a year. without this control, the park owners would most likely continue to raise rents because they have a captive audience, and without rent control, park residents would be facing a severe cost burden. In addition to being a captive audience, the number of mobile home spaces are shrinking because of park closures; because of these two factors, the affordability of mobile home rents is endangered. Therefore, the City's Rent Review Ordinance was adopted. Since very few spaces are available and park closures are common if the land is zoned something other than mobile home park exclusive, the city also regulates park closures by requiring park owners to provide relocation assistance to park residents who are low-income. PRIORITY: continue to work with the San Diego County Housing Authority to provide public housing in Chula vista. Five Year Results: 38 very low-income rental units. Rational: In California, public housing is only allowed in those cities with referendum authority. In 1978, the voters voted to allow 400 units of public housing. Proqram: When the Housing Authority identifies a site, the city staff assist by facilitating the development process and assisting with site approvals from the City Council. In some cases, the city has waived fees for public housing projects, and in some cases, the Agency has paid the fees for the public housing project. The Redevelopment Agency has also written down land costs and made grants for project amenities. PRIORITY: continue to utilize CDBG funds for supportive services for residents with special needs. Five Year Results: Use 15% of the City's CDBG allocation for supportive servic~s every year for the next five years. -46- /'3/1¡ --.-.-.--,-- Rational: Many non-profit social service providers struggle to provide their services for the residents of Chula vista because of budget constraints. since the City believes the supportive services these non-profits provide are important to residents with special needs, the City funds these non-profits to ensure that their services will continue to meet the needs of the residents of Chula vista. Proqram: The City grants 15% of its CDBG entitlement and housing program funds to local non-profits who provide supportive services for the residents of Chula Vista. . -47- )3/~Ò .--~-, 0 .¡<¡ 0> C ~ <D ~ m '" "",Z 0 a...~-- M .-J M 0> .,; .... ~.~ 0 >' " i5 0 >. u. £ a. Y ~ o (/) C '" => æ ;¡: => " e E E £ 00 ~ ißc .2 ~ Q)°I .... .-J .-J EE ~ 0" " Ie.. Q. N :¡; '" " >- " it E > E" iI "5 " M M M .gëë E 0 I " c (jj EI" « et="U M M M Q). = I c~Ô u. ~ Ü:-s ¡; >. ;E 0> " Q) E (¡j I'! a. ~ 0 û5 æ" 'ië Cc ,~;o .-J N .-J > " ~ 00W . E .- " Co. :õ újE CO 0 00; '" I .Q> '0 ~" ~ =>0 0 ...... >= ~.¡<¡ Cc « 0" 0> "0 '" 0> £"'C .... N .-J CC c: 0" ëii ï:: ,ñ 0 ==> =>C => «0 0-'1 0 I ;¡:e.. I õ.~ Q) ... _c > c=> ,ñ ,,- ~ -" . E c: "'~ EE æ £Eo .-J N .-J I 1::0 Q) E CO "" "0 Q) " ~o ... 0._ ~ I "0 a. ..!I!- 0" E -' . " ~!E 0 =>0 Ü 'C " rn_ 0;" o::gca .... N .-J .-J ='" "'- E (/) ~-8 ~Eo .ß~-æ< M .... M M _ 0 W"'=> ..0 I c I" c I" 0 0 .~ 2 '~ => ,;; " ,;; 13 '5 'ii È ~ '5 'ii È 0 8' '~ 0 B ~ '~ ~ B '" « -ª~ '¡;: c ~ '¡;: +' - - g- a¡ '" c 0.E B ð! c 0.E 8 ð! 0 ,2 .Q'C 0 .Q'C .~ =>" C 'C ~ ~g C 'C s:: > ~ (/)- 9 :¡ 9 :¡ '" .'" '" 0 CI:S '" :.ö ¿Qj B 0 0 :.ö c;-Q¡ B '¡;¡ 0 - .. .20: c 0 " J! .2 a: c ~ " tII ~ '" 13 - 9 « ~ 13 . 9 ª Ë ::I " c " c Iii S.g 0 I'! 'õ S.,g 0 I'! ·õ " ..r: 0: lå " 8!. 0: lå " " tII 'e u S f!s >. S 0.. >. u. £ « => C_ « => « I!! 0:: .Q 1:: I!! 0:: .Q 1:: c "- O.Q S " 8. O.Q S " 0 (') 8 " ;oJ! E " ;oJ! E 2: 0 '8 c a. '8 c ... ð "" "" " 0 => "" " 0 => ~ 0 s:: >, 's; ::¡ ZO: 0: I (/) ::¡ ZO: 0: I (/) .. '~ - d ..a - +' " N <ri m tII~ c .~ « - ..; ..¡ oò .0 ,..: - ~ 0 U a¡Q. jJ '" . " - ... ~ E E en " .:: CI:S " 0" 0" « .., Oa¡ õ " c g c .Eo /:1--5 ) :I: .->- " ~~:! ~ õ' g ..... ~ ",;o~ () Q.I.O "0 " -0" Z >-'0.. O-'e.. "----,., PART 2: AVAILABLE RESOURCES Unlike in the past, the production of affordable housing today requires the utilization of many different funding sources. As a result, it is important for a public agency to be aware of the funding sources available to it and to the non-profits who operate within its boundaries. Below, is a listing of funding sources from which the City can draw from when implementing its housing priorities. A. Public Funds 1- Federal Funds Available to the City - Community Development Block Grant Program - section 8 Program (administered by the County of San Diego Housing Authority) - HOME Program - HOPE Program - New Construction Public Housing (The City has authority to build public housing in its jurisdiction.) - Supplemental Assistance for Facilities to Assist the Homeless (Other McKinney Funds) - Federal Tax Credit Low-Income Housing - LIHTC - Low Income Housing Tax Credit 2. Federal Funds Available Exclusively to Non-Profits - section 202 Program 3. Funding Available from the State of California - Proposition 84 Housing Funds - Proposition 77 Housing Funds - California Housing Finance Agency--New Construction - California Housing Rehabilitation Program - State HCD Predevelopment Loan Program - Mortgage Credit certificate Program - California Low-Income Tax Credits 4. Local Resources - Redevelopment Agency The State of California Health and Safety Code requires jurisdictions who incorporate redevelopment areas to set aside 20% of their tax increment for the production, improvement, and preservation of affordable housiftg. The city formed its Redevelopment Agency in 1978 and currently has five redevelopment areas. From -49- /3/5";)- ._.~ - -. ---- these areas, the Agency can expect to set aside approximately $960,500 per year. Currently, the Agency uses these funds for rehabilitation activities and operating expenses. Since several redevelopment projects will be completed in the next five years, the annual set aside will most likely increase. - Density Bonus - Affordable Housing Program 5. Funding from Private Sources - Savings Associations Mortgage Company (SAMCO) - Local Initiative Support Corporation (LISC) - Local Banks. Because of the Community Reinvestment Act, the Agency is working with several banks to provide favorable loans for both housing and economic development. - California Community Reinvestment Corporation (CCRC) - -50- 13<.53 ..-.., PART 3: ORGANIZATION CAPACITY AND ROLES INSTITUTIONS STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES PUblic Dept. of Housing and Provides funds for Amount of Urban Development affordable housing paperwork activities required to receive funding Limited funding Regulations City of Chula vista Supports Agency Insufficient housing activities staff resources with resources, permit processing practices, and zoning Support of Affordable Housing Program Redevelopment Agency Provides funding for Insufficient of the city of housing activities staff resources Chula vista Limited funding San Diego County Administers Insufficient Housing Authority section 8 rental number of Program & constructs vouchers & Public Housing in certificates Chula vista to serve the city County of San Diego Provides needed Limited supportive services resources to residents with special needs State of California Provides needed Amount of funds for paperwork affordable housing required to receive funding - Limited funding -51- )3-f~ ----~.. :INST:ITUT:IONS STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES Private Lenders CRA requirements Reluctance to lend to non- willingness to profits & very participate in low, low & the MCC Program moderate income households u. s. Escrow Loan servicer Amount of for rehabilitation paperwork programs For-Profit Developers Experience with the Reluctance to development of housing participate in city's Willingness, in the Affordable past, to develop Housing Program some affordable housing Reluctance to work with nonprofit Ability to subsidize developers some of the afford- ability gap by spreading costs amoung other units in a large development Real Estate Assistance with Concentrating Professionals identifying properties on high end for the Agency housing units Providing current information on for-sale housing costs Willingness to promote the MCC Program . -52- ) 3/ ~<5' ---.--..-, INSTITUTIONS STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES Non-Profits Support Service Services for the Limited Providers Homeless, the resources developmentally disabled, the physically disabled, mentally disabled, senior citizens, & youth Developers Preservation & Limited Development of units resources & for very low & low need to build income households capacity Ability to get financing not available to for- profit developers As the above chart displays, there are many organizations which playa role in implementing the City's five year strategy. The coordination of the above organizations rests with the Community Development Department of the city of Chula vista. This Department is responsible for policy coordination and implementing the five year strategy. The Department is currently working with the above described agencies to implement its housing and social services goals, and this coordination effort will continue. After reviewing the above chart, it is readily evident that each institution has its own strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, many of these weakness are beyond the control of the community Development Department. However, the Department is currently working with Lenders to improve their lending practices, with for-profit developers in order to enlist their support of the Affordable Housing Program, and with non-profit developers to develop capacity. The cost of providing affordable housing continues to escalate in San Diego County. The largest gap in the delivery system involves limited resources. Therefore, the city must continue to work with commercial lending institutions, non-profit housing developers, supportive service providers, and the County of San Diego to continue existing partnerships and find new methods of producing affordable housing. - -53- / 3r-->? ---," PART 4: BARRXERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSXNG This section of the CRAS is an excerpt from the City of Chula Vista's Housing Element of the General Plan which is required by the state of California. A. Overview As required by the National Affordable Housing Act, this section of the CRAS includes an identification and discussion of various constraints, both unique to and beyond the community, that may inhibit the development, maintenance, or improvement of housing. There are two primary realms of possible constraints; governmental and non-governmental. Governmental constraints address such matters as land use controls, building codes and enforcement, site improvements requirements, permits and processing procedures, and fees and other exactions. Non- governmental constraints include such issues as availability of financing, price of land, and costs of construction. B. Governmental constraints B.1 Land Use Controls The various policies and regulations contained in the city's General Plan and zoning Ordinance have a direct impact on the ability to provide not only affordable housing, but housing for all income groups. Excessive constraints exercised through inadequate land use and zoning opportunities to provide a wide variety of types and densities of housing can preclude the attainment of housing objectives. The City's recently updated General Plan designates substantial areas of vacant land for residential development at a variety of densities, and additional multi- family units are represented by underutilized land in the older central area. Much of the vacant land is proposed for development under the "Planned community (PC) Zone" which permits the use of flexible development standards, and tailored density and unit type mixes. In addition to the PC zone, the zoning Ordinance provides for a wide variety of residential uses, including its exclusive Mobile Home Park zone (MHP) , and further supports affordable housing through its density bonus provisions, and related allowances for reduced or modified standards through the Precise Plan (P) modifying district. Additionally, the Ordinance provides for mixed use development, and the construction of residential projects in certain commercial zones. Conclusively, the city's Land Use controls do not at this time present significant constraints to meeting housing objectives, and actually provide a generally supportive framework. -54- /3<.57 ."..-., "..-." General Plan/Zoninq Consistencv studv When the General Plan Update was adopted in July 1989, evaluation was undertaken for the older areas of the City west of Interstate 805 to determine in what specific areas the new General Plan and the existing zoning were not in full consistency as required by state law. The result was identification of several areas primarily within the Central Community, where zoning conflicts were present. The city is currently in the process of performing detailed analysis of these areas in developing a recommended course of action, involving both general plan amendments and rezonings, to achieve the required consistency. Where potential density reductions arise, the City will evaluate their impact on affordable housing provision prior to reaching a final recommendation for action. In order that the intents of the updated General Plan be recognized while the Consistency study is undertaken, the city Council adopted an interim measure to address processing of project proposals in affected areas. Where projects propose implementation in accordance with existing zoning in conflict with the new General Plan, the measure requires a general plan amendment to be processed. otav Water District Allocation Proqram One of two water districts serving Chula vista Planning Area, the otay Water District recently adopted an allocation program due to existing infrastructure inadequacies involving distribution and terminal storage facilities. Scheduled completion of an additional supply pipeline to the South Bay area in 1994-95 will correct inadequacies. In the interim, the District has restricted annual water allocation for development to approximately 1900 units. otay's projections indicate Chula vista will receive between 700- 1000 units/year of this total district-wide allocation, which compares favorably with the 714 units/year average derived from the Regional Housing Needs Statement Regional Share. Additionally, the western half of the City is served by the Sweetwater Authority which has no such restrictions on water availability. - -55- !3/~~ __...u....__.__ B.2 Growth Management In order to ensure the adequate and timely provision of facilities and services in conjunction with growth, Chula vista has adopted growth management provisions through a three-part effort consisting of the following: a. Threshold Standards: Provide performance criteria and standards for eleven public facilities and services which must be maintained with growth. Annual City-wide reviews are conducted by an oversight group to monitor compliance. b. Growth Manaqement Element: Incorporated with the General Plan Update in April 1989. Sets forth the City's goals, objectives, and policies related to protection of residents quality of life. c. Growth Manaqement Proqram: Currently draft form and under City Council review it serves as the implementing mechanism. It provides guidelines for relating development phasing to facilities master plans at the project level, and establishes performance requirements for facilities guarantees at various stages of project planning and review. Because Growth Management efforts are primarily targeted to the City's Eastern Territories, and several of the large developments there had approved development agreements prior to the Program, or have already satisfied program requirements for building permit issuance, direct constraints to housing construction are not anticipated. Current forecasts estimate construction of approximately 1200 units per year, which includes an average 200 units/year of infill on the city's west side generally not affected by the measures. Given Chula vista's Regional Share of 3,569 units from 7/91 to 7/96, or 714 units/year, total needs can be sufficiently accommodated. However, since the Growth Management Program document is still under review, the City will continue to evaluate potential impacts to housing development as refinements are made. B.3 Buildinq Codes and Enforcement The City Building Department administers and enforces the Uniform Building Code which ensures construction in accordance with widely adopted health and safety standards. While the City may establish standards bêyond those provided in the Code, these standards do not significantly affect or increase the cost of construction. The Code Enforcement -56- )3--5/ ,"-"-_.. Division administers a proactive program of community outreach to prevent Code violations from reaching a point of costly remedy. B.4 Improvement Requirements/Development Standards The City has a variety of requirements administered by both the Planning Department and the Engineering Department. The majority of these requirements are those necessary to ensure adequate livability and lasting value in housing such as sewers, streets, curb-gutter-sidewalk, lighting, drainage, recreational open space, parking, etc. While there are definite costs associated with these, they are those which are incidental to the provision of a sound living environment. In such instance that a developer is required to provide improvements which may offer service beyond that of the project, the City has and will use either reimbursement districts, or other methods of equitable compensation. In the case of certain affordable housing projects, such as housing for seniors, the City has allowed the reduction of standards to help offset costs. The City also proposes to consider possible financial participation in the construction of infrastructural improvements as a method of "additional incentive" under the state's revised Density Bonus Provisions. B.5 processina. Permits. Fees. and Exactions a. Project Processing The extent and duration of project processing varies widely by type of application. Residential projects requiring subdivision of land will experience an extended period of review, and/or those projects which require additional regulatory approval such as rezonings or conditional use permits. Regardless, the processing required is that necessary to comply with the law and ensure proper and thorough review without compromising environmental quality or public safety. The City has and will continue to use "fast track" processing to expedite projects, such as those providing affordable housing. This "fast-tracking" can be accomplished primarily in two ways: first, the re- priorization of work to focus staff resources to these affordable projects; second, the institution of "parallel processing" whereby normally sequential approval processes are run concurrently, such as design review and site plan review. The result is a substantial savings of time in achieving complete project approval and the start of construction. - -57- ) 3"'::;;0 -.-.-., ' b. Fee Schedules Like many other cities in San Diego County attempting to deal with substantial improvements to infrastructure and the expansion of services necessary to meet demands induced by rapid growth, Chula Vista has found the need to revise and expand its fees in order to maintain service levels. While fees have increased, the City has expended great efforts in developing equitable methods to ensure the fees are only those necessary to address the actual impacts of development, and ensure timely implementation of required facilities. The Figure 1 below provides the most recent County wide comparison of processing and impact fees available (1990) as provided by the Construction Industry Federation (CIF), and referenced in SANDAG's Regional Housing Needs Statement. As indicated in the table, Chula vista compares favorably with other jurisdictions of similar size and complexity. To further illustrate Chula vista's relative position within the region, and provide an estimate of impact useful in constraints assessment, CIF also compiled a comparison of total fees that would be required of a building permit application for a prototype home. Figure 2 illustrates the results of the survey, which ranked Chula vista #8 out of 19 jurisdictions. FIGURE 1 TOTAL FEE COSTS TO BUILD A PROTOTYPE HOME (JAN. 1991) I. Escondido $21,507 2. San Marcos 19,131 3. poway 16,740 4. City of San Diego 15,755 5. Carlsbad 15,742 6. Solana Beach 14,590 7. Encinitas 14,527 8. Chula vista 14,193 9. Santee 12,397 10. Oceanside 12,012 II. vista 10,791 12. County of San Diego 9,279 13. Imperial Beach 8,567 14. Lemon Grove 8,459 15. Del Mar 8,222 16. La Mesa 7,733 17. El Cajon 7,645 18. National City 6,443 19. Coronado 5,908 CIF PROTOTYPE HOME: Three bedroom, -two bath single -family detached home. 1800 square feet of living area. 400 square feet garage and 240 square feet -58- 13-h / patio. Approx. 139,000 valuation (calculated by each jurisdiction). Type V wood frame construction. 100 A single phase electrical. 100,000 Btu FAU gas service, and a common set of fixtures. The City will continue to consider subsidizing or reducing certain fees for affordable housing projects where such subsidies or reductions are clearly necessary to create the required project economics. C. NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS C.1 Financial Availabilitv The availability and cost of financing for both new construction and home mortgages are a major component of housing affordability. The following discussion looks at the availability of conventional lending for mUlti-family and home mortgages. Multi-familv According to 1988 HMDA data analysis, mUlti-family lending was made available in every census tract in the City for the purposes of new construction and/or purchasing of existing housing complexes. city-wide mUlti-family lending exceeded $30,000,000 on 36 loans, and $19,305,900 on 221 non-occupant loans. While it appears that money was available, without specific information regarding credit terms, it is not possible to determine if lending conditions were restrictive. However, as it can be stated that interest rates and other such changes in the finance arena tend to inhibit construction, the city is proposing to assist developers in availing themselves of alternative and supplemental financial assistance available through consortiums such as SAMCO and CCRC. Even though some alternative financial assistance is available, developers are reporting that conventional lending sources have dried up, and as a result, multi-family development has virtually disappeared. since density bonus projects and other for-profit developments which could avail themselves of some financial assistance in return for affordable units cannot get conventional financing, this lack of available conventional financing is directly impacting the development of affordable units. The lack of financing has been apparent for the last six to nine months, and no one knows how long this situation will continue. without financing, development does not occur. . -59- /3-6;2 ,.-..., Home Mortqaqe Lendinq Figure 2 below contains mortgage borrowing rates taken from The San Dieqo Union (1/12/92). It indicates that interest rates are around ~.2% for a 30-year fixed rate loan of under $191,250. The median resale price for a single family detached house for San Diego County in June of 1991 was $183,000. Using a 95% loan, a $183,000 home would be affordable to a household whose income was approximately $60,000 or 158% of County Median Income. Under current market conditions, condominiums become the "affordable home ownership opportunity." In summary, the high cost of housing restricts the number of new home buyers entering into the market place without special programs provided by the federal government, the state, or local agencies. FIGURE 2 Mortgage rates Loan rales below are ol1ercd as a guidê:only Lending institutions listed are 1I105e al ering mortgages with the lowest annual percentage ralc_ There are many olller factors 10 consider in evaluating a loan_ Alllendefs !isled are among the larger morigage prOViders in San DfCgO County, The San Diego Union does not endorse any particular lender or loan program 30.YEAR ADJUSTABLE'~"':'~~'" ~ .'. " -~ ... '-' ;....... - -,' ~1·t.-·,."t~"1;::;"';"~~ ~., .-"=.~',;,." ~ oJ'.'" 51." Down PoI"I, "'ulmu... LocI< AdJus.menl "'slll....on Aote!">.) Pml ~) SAmount ~d.y.) """,," ~.'oln In/l,/Ret¡ CAPS A.P,R, Citibank.. - -. 3?~ ___??__..!.:??O_ 600.000 ~~~.!!__~~??_ ~~M NEG/14_SOO 6.231 AmericanResidC~1ial - -,Ù_50 ,~0_._1:~?5 ___2?~'::~_ 30 __~C.D_ 2.:~OO 6M/6M ':0{)!~_1:?9~__6~~_ ·Bank-oTA-me~iCà-- '5S>o 20 1.500 750,000 60 6CD 2_500 6M/6M 1.00112.500 6,682 SecurityPacilic 5,750 ._~~-~~O_..,~OOO---~_~~__~,~_ n6~~__ _~~G-li1-,750- 67~ Fronlline Mortgage' --4_625 10 2000 --3.?~300 . ~O__ .6~B 2.500 6M/6M ~~~.:.625 6!~. Ho~scholdBa-~ 6_625 10 2_000 .:2.o?~~~___60 6TS 2,500 6M/6M 1~~/1~:?3~~~ NÕ~S! Moñgage 5,125 10 U50 2~:~~3? ITS 2_750 IY/1Y _?:00!1_~~~~ 6,836 Cou;;¡r:yw;de~-- 5_000 10 1_000 202.300 45 1TS 2875 1Y/1Y 2.00/11.000 6.851 CommonweaUhUnited 5_125 10 ~ 25 _202.300 ~~~_~S 2,750 1Y/.'_Y .2..??C_~~__~873 First Inlerstale. --5.250 10 2"000 '_~.?2.300 45 ."_~~_~750 'Y/1Y ._~,_O~~~:.?~_~!? WensFargoSa-ñk' 5_8!.~_ -ï·0--_~1.:..0?0-' .302.300 ~___~B___2..:.~!_5 6M/.6M 1_~!~~.,~?~?~_4 First Nationwide- -5_875,--20 2,000 -- 500,000 30 _~TS _~_50 . ~:!.~: __2.:...09!..'_~5OO 6_972. Chase Manhaná;; ·.---~-500 -25-2,000-",000.000 6O~~_3:2~~_ 1Y/1Y 2,00/12_500 7,066 _SanwaBan~_.. ~a6'.?'~~_---.3.9_.,1_,!.50 600.000 6O____1T'S,._2~6_~5 6M/6M 1.00/~_U50. 8.523 Glendale Fede'ral- 6000 10 1.500 202,300 45 1 TS 2750 6M!6M '00/13_000 8526 Union Bank--- --6-375 W - í.'so-õ- 300,000 60 --',-1'5'-2.750- 6M/6M -,~oö!í-'-37Å¡-'8566 "{1~4; H;j-J~~~·I!~¡iF.r....y,¡ ",~ ! ) ..:.. ,",., <r<, ...~_:~-';":',;'.t~. Down Points M...,rmum LocI< .....ttuAIon R.re(%) P.ml. (% 5.Amounl (".ys) A_P,R American Residential 7,875 5 2,500 202.300 30 8,179 ::a Household Bank, 8,000 5 2.000 202.300 30 R252! Nprwest Mortgage ROOO 5 2,250 202,300 30 8.279 Commonweahh United 8,000 5 2.375 202.300 45 8,293 Glendale Federal 8_125 5 1.500 202.300 45 R324 Western Fioancial 8,125 10 1.500 202.300 45 R324 Frontline Mortgage 8,125 5 1.625 202.300 30 8,337 First Nationwide 8.125 20 2,000 202.300 30 R379 Countrywide 8.250 5 1,000 202.300 45 8.395 Home Savings 8.200 10 1,500 202.300 45 8_400 HomeFed Bank 8.250 20 1.500 202,300 45 8.450 Union Bank 8,250, ,5 2,000 202,300 45 R506 ~Pacific ~_250 '5 2.000 202.300 45 8.506 30· YEAR FIXED (more· than $202.3001 ... Down PoInts MaxtIN.InI t.odc on5llluaon Riote("41 Pm. 1%) $AmounI: fdays "'-P.R. American Residential 8.375 20 2.000 400,000.,30 8.625 Norwest Mortgage 8.375 10 2.250 300,000 30 ft653 Commonweaflh·United 8,500 20 1.750 600.000 60 8.724 Frontfiflè:.Mortgage 8.500 20 1.750 500,000 30 8.724 Household BAiik 8,500 20 2.000 500,000 60 a.75-¿ Glendale Federal 8.625 20 1.500 500,000 45 8.623 ChaSe ~Mattan 8,575 25 2.000 1.000,000 60 8,828 F¡bt Nationwide 8,62S 20 1.750 500,000 30 8.851 Security Pacific 8,625 20 2.000 500.000 45 8,879 Countrywide 8.750 20 1,000 500.000 45 a,893 WestemFioancial 8.750 10 1.500 350.000 45 - R949 ) "7...- / "(' Union Bank 8.750 25 1,750 600,000 45 8,977 ./ ø ~ First Interstate 8.750 20 2,000 500,000 45 9.006 -60- C.2 Land and Constuction Costs The rising costs of land and construction in Southern California represent the single largest factors in the spiraling cost of housing. The most frequently encountered constraint in affordable housing provision is the "lack of economic feasibility" expressed by the private sector in attempting to make units available to lower-income households given the costs. Together land and construction costs comprise about 75% of the total cost of a residential dwelling. The following sections present an overview of local conditions, and provide information for use in addressing the level of economic barriers to lower-income affordability in new construction. The information was collected from local developers, the Construction Industry Federation, and The Myers Group - a local San Diego firm specializing in market analysis and consultation to the development community. a. Land Costs Residential land costs in Chula Vista, on average, are currently $200,000jacre, with the specific dollarjunit ratio obviously dependent upon density. In surveying recent land purchases for several proposed single family developments in the City, the average per lot cost for the raw land was approximately $40,000. Improved land costs can vary widely depending upon the amount of improvements necessary including, in Chula Vista, the amount of site grading to create buildable lots. As an example, a recently approved master planned project with 1900+ units, has an estimated per unit site cost of $22,500. In order to further illustrate total buildable lot costs for new development, the following table was provided by a local developer as an example of costs per type and density of residential development: Product Tvpe Finished Lot Cost Single Fam (8000 s.f. lot) $203,000 Single Fam (5000 s.f. lot) 130,000 Multi-Fam (8 dujac) 76,000* Multi-Fam (12 dujac) 62,000* Multi-Fam (22 dujac) 40,000* *per unit cost assuming 100+ units on a 12 acre site b. Construction Costs As mentioned, increased construction costs have also contributed significantly to the problem~f housìng affordability. Current estimates place single family costs between $36 and $42 per square foot depending on unit -61- 13-- øL/ 'HU_ ,....__.....____. amenities. Given an average 1,500 sq. ft. home on a 5,000 sq. ft. lot, construction costs would range between $55,800 and $65,100, which assuming a $225,000 purchase price, represents 25%-29% of the home. Costs for multi-family construction vary according to the type of structure generally as follows: - Wood frame low rise (1-3 stories)- $36 to $42 sq. ft. - Steel frame mid-rise (4-6 stories)-$65 to $70 sq. ft. - Steel frame high-rise - $75 to $100 sq. ft. (up to 20 stories) (add $25jsq.ft. if underground parking or parking structure) Component Costs in Multi-Familv Housinq New Construction unit Price $105,000 Land $ 25,000 (24%) Hard Costs (improvement, const. ) $ 60,000 (57%) Soft Costs (arch. , eng. , marketing, etc.) $ 20,000 (19%) C.3 Removinq Non-Governmental Barriers As demonstrated above, homeownership opportunities are limited for most people in Chula vista because of the high cost of housing. Since the City has no way of altering the price of housing, removing this barrier is almost impossible. However, the City will continue to offer the Mortgage Credit certificate Program. This Program will assist some households purchase a home who might otherwise miss out on the "American Dream." Given the above information, the biggest non-governmental constraints to affordable rental housing are land costs, construction costs, and financing. Unfortunately, the city has little or no control over these barriers. The city or the Agency can only attempt to mitigate the barriers by writing down land costs, pressuring conventional financial institutions to lend, and using any alternative financing sources available. However, these mitigation measures do not remove these barriers, and the City or the Agency is faced with increased need and shrinking resources. - -62- ----- ) 3----?> ------ SECTION III. ONE YEAR ACTION PLAN PART I. RESOURCES A. Sources and Commitment of funds (public and private) 1- Affordable Housing a. Community Development Block Grant for FY 1991- 1992 is 1,297,000. For the last several years, the City has used most of its CDBG allocation for public improvements in low income areas. However, the city did spend approximately $16,500 from its CDBG allocation for the Shared Housing Program. In addition, the Chula vista Community Development Corporation, a part of South Bay Community Services, received $48,000 in CDBG funds to support their housing activities. b. section 8 vouchers and certificates administered by the San Diego County Housing Authority. c. The City expects to receive $748,000 of HOME funds in FY 1991-1992. The city will probably use some of these funds to assist non-profit housing developers to develop lower income housing either by new construction or rehabilitation. In addition, the Redevelopment Agency may use the funds to supplement its own rehabilitation program. d. The Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund which is generated by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula vista ("Agency" ) will produce approximately $960,500 in FY 1991-1992 for affordable housing activities. These funds will be used to fund the Agency's rehabilitation programs. In addition, these funds may be' leveraged to provide equity for the Agency's preservation of the City's "at-risk" HUD section 236 units. e. The City recently received an allocation of private activity bonds from the State of California, and these bonds have been converted to Mortgage Credit certificates. The Agency, the governmental body administering the Program, will issue approximately 104 certificates to low and moderate income households in the next four years. The City, as a matter of policy, has set aside 10% of the certificates for low income home buyers. -63- I] ~ç fr . .-....,..---.- .,--.-, c;; ~ o 0 og o <=> 0 g "I' o N ~ '" ~ o oE o 0 02 o 0 0 000 ..00C> 0" <T .... N íñ <: :I: Q. ~ C) 0 0 0 >- 8 ~ g> ~ [ ~ (;: o - "ië en gs > CD >- 'C 0 C>e:= -ß a Ca. == 0 0 0 0 1:0.0 CfJ coã) ro: _~ .D>"O .- :>~ (; 'g ""0:::: (t cc « ~ 0 ~~ OJ ~ 0 g CC.~ '()' 0 0 ¡¡'ë tI) '- ¡;~ 5 gOO ~ ~~ I ~ N -þ " 0._ Q) =: _ c: > .- C::J·- E "E on E .. §E ~ 8 ëU :;8 ~ CD ~ ~w ~ Q._ '- .D (1)'__ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~o a. .2 ~ 0 .- Q) E < ø ~:Ë 0 g g ::>0 Ü 0 Q.. I ~ <T x <0 Q) :5 0 I o 0 0 ~~.-o 0 0 '-38.0 0 0 ~ '" 0 0 . . go "00 00 Q) c( 0 ~ .---I ~ .... - ~ ~ ~ ..... êØ c: C .~.g 0 <:,) 0 "\ ',p ctI 0 0 0 """ C~_ 0 0 0 E <::BOO COOoa .. 00 ..... ca-~C> .. LOC>C>O ~ en Q) "d" LO co ex) Q,)...... "d" ~ .---I > ItS ~ irt- C t 0 c> C> -......._ C> C> c> 00 aO :a",. , :> ü E 00 C> C> 0 C> c> C> o 2{.E'-' .. 0 C> .. 0 0 .. ...... to ><8 e:!.. ~ C> C> 0 ~.. C> C> C> c> .. "d" .-- w ...,. l!'> L!) (V) C;::::,: B r--.. ....... oo:::t.---l U1 I.D CO B ¡'¡ ~ ~ ~ ~ CL4- Æ C> C> C> _~ 0 Q).g c> 0 c> C> "'U ¡;;~ C> .. C> .. CJ) >, .g.~ - .. ,...... C> 0 c> C> JII'I\ -f-.) .0 oct ~ 0, C> c> c> en.. 0 0 C> 0 en -'r-~ LO N LO C> o U <cZ,...... .. 'o::T .. 10.. g ~ .---I ~ N ~.. ~ ~ E <t o~ å II) (/)0 '0 - .. c __ Q)~ -3 a.. en C) ø 0 '<:t II: 0 Cþ...-c >- c: - ......5 CD :::: ü o(QQ)C C) - CfJ .., 0 ø <D - U ... ... 3:-c 0 '- fh rn _::1..... CD - Q) ..,... 0 :Jet"'-;::: Q) a.. :J ~ C) 0 cu E ~ ""'w 0 CQo c IX 0 Q) c::I: () cÞ ..c Q)~ f/)Cð3:- W a:: J: E ._"'0 0 "C "" ...... § t:Q-g«~ ...."'. 0 ~[-æ ~ ::I: :J .."" CO - r::: 0- 0 a.. c - . ~ t- _ ~ ~ ~.a ~ -:; «i;:S I co .Q a.. «i 0 """"- ~ r:::- o~ ..- C'\ M ,.... 0 --:;:: _0''''' 0 .~ "-'" c::;::: _ - (f) 0_.... <U - 0 '" ~ ùJ ,,-.0:..' ....... .,- (I) "- .0:..- 0 - ,.. ~ ::I ... ... _ E Q) Q) Q),...,. (þ·0 -,...,.," E"'C c =:: Q)·O _ co A" --, LL.øo a.. a. a...... ..co .D............ "-c Q) ..co J:J _ ........:;:õ '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _0.. ::J 0 U) Q)CO ~ ..c _0.. :J 0 :r: c: E ~ I I I J: () a 0 ~ (f) ~ W D.:I r-: ~ ~ ~ . . ~ t--: ÜA"ca ....... .o..-(\, MVl() CD.....COC) ...... Z ~ '" C') ... '" <D.... '" en ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ í J _::;,? ~ o m o o .,. ¿, o 0 ~ E .2 t:r. 0 °u 0 tiQ a ::>.. 0 0 0 . Ww 0 0 ~ .-I N go", 'ë if c~_ ';ì £0 0 0 0 0 o o ~ ~ ~.. '" >'" c ::>5 '1: co sa- -6 ~.~- 0 a 0 ( ) 0.:2 0 0 0 .g :J: 'S .~ o '" I § § o . . 0. 0 0 ~ !;¡: o ~ <D ; ~ ~ g ~ ~ 'e 0 ~ ë1! c;, § ",jj- .~ '" ø c w ~ ~_ .0 Q)-~- 0 0 0 M ~ 0 g I-~ lD to (\ -g oCt ~ .. ~ õ ~ $ ~ & I ~ C Lt", CI) ~ 0 ~ 8.!!2ooo0o 0 5ð-- 00 00 0 o 0 0 0 0 .. :ß « 0 ~ .-I ~ - ¡; c .g- .~ 0 '.;::1 rn 0 :iª6 0 0 .0 - 0 0 .. ~ 000 0 0 0 000 0 ~ <D 00 oc .-I - ;¡'e ~ § § § 8 ~ ~ <De ..... ...... .. æ N ~o ~ 0 0 0 N C> LO 0...... 8 0 0 0 N æ wO Ll') "'? 0 0 ~ 0 C\J .. g .. r-I ..... 00::1" o::::t LO r-I C\J ~ r-I ~ ~ -b"T -b'T *~ ~. § ~ ~ a." - .... 0'>...:- æ ~ :,g~ 5. 0 0 N 0 ~ [0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 CJ 0 0 0 ...... CeI) 0 LO ... \D.. .. <..0 .. N...... ~ o::::t .9 lC) ~...... ~ ~ ¡;;;. Q).- å. cDe 8: 0 a.0 ~ ., ! >. (0 ê: ,0) 0 j a. ~~ CD B :;1- 0;: .Q (/) (I) ~ ~ a: Q) ~ ~ = ..~"C~ G) ~ ~ en O.E::J :E 0 0 à: C' ::Jc( j¡¡= :2 as co: ã; a: 0) 0 C) en 0) en W ë; o _ ~ C W "T" .2 ..c. C/) c......:x: c: c c cë L., .... rhi:j >w C\ ..... :=; 0 (ñ Q) _ ëñ'(ñ -ëij"u.¡ co CD CI) acc('" 0 t;:J..g:JQ. ru :J:J:J :J.... ..c "tJ C :J CD CD {\J a; CD 0 .c 0 a. Coo 0 oC> Õ .. ;; LL.,Q = ^'..... ceO > Q) :J: «I.Q :r::r::r: :r: Q) LL. c - 00 ...... .." "',1 - - a: u.~ 0 > « -:::: I. ::J co - Q) Q) CD 0 0 (t co: È~ (I) 0 0 0 .9__ "-:r=-- __ u..tõ.2 a.. a. a.. ü ü ë ë "00 .....c æ t;: :0 :0 :O:oê Ie 1?á1 ~ ~ "0 0 0 0 CD Q) Q) (¡) IV (I; ... ....... :J :J :J:J Q) ..... a. o· 0 .f I I I C/) CI) a: a: ¿ a..:r: I-- ::J c... a.. a.. a...c LL 0 ~ I- I- ci~(',jM-.it.ri<Ò"aj aici c..jC"i...:f t.ri<ò "ajaici C\l C\J C\l C\l C\l (\, C\I C\l C\I C\l ('f) ('f) C? C? ('f) (") C") ('f) C") (") ..q- 13-pg 0 m 0 0 '" "j 0 ·15n 0 0 ::> ecn:::;- 0 :I: ~8- 0 0 E 0 .g - 0 tL 0 0 Q. 2:'"' 0 . ~ð! 0 0 <:I' 0 .... N .... ~J! .- c- "e:I: 0 :ä - 0 0 ø ¡¡:C> 0 0 b 8 ~ >- ~B ~ ~ ~ LL '" ,H- E '5 Q).!!2e. U) 0 0 ::ß U) E" '" ~ " 0" ~ ~ ø :I: < ~ .... .... .... '~ .... .... .... " '~ 0 ~ " 0 § ]¡ ,Q 0 0 ~B- 0 0 ~ 0 0 õ' " LL · 0 . N C. Zø- 0 U) U) N " '" 2 0 ..... ..... 0 N N ..... " .... .... .... ~ " E ~ ~ E _0 M 8 "" õ "g- " "ØW 0 0 0 '" 1M .0 (1)--- 0 &3 "'~ I-¡:¡ 2 < .; "'Ii' " In. ~ .... ¡¡ ~ 0 x " 0 0 ~ .g 0 0 0 ø 0 0 0 ê '~ e: · . . '5 ~ a- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) U) '" ø « (V) (V) (V) ~ .... .... .... " ~ ;;; " 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 õ ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 " ê: · . « :õ 0 0 0 U) ~ 0 0 .c 0 CO ~ ..... ..... CO c: .... .... .... -'Ë ~ ~ ~ ~ o E ó) ~ ~o U) U) ~ XO - ::ß N 0 w2 (V) ..... . · .... .... .... N .... .... .... .... ~ ~ ~ ~ § ~:¡; -~ ~ ca= o.~ g t8 .... !§ ,- > f?!. 0 .g< " ~ . . ..... <.0 .... .... ~ .... 2 .... .... .... ø .. ." '0 " " " " '0 ., u.. :> " " ., ., '0 ë u.. " :> '0 '0 " - 5 u.. " c " .. < . LL ." 0 " " .. (f) õi LL LL <D u.. õi '" ; <D ñi õj C Õ c '0 õj g ,;" 0 I-- 'i5 <D èñ à: z C LL -' '0 " <= ñi ñi ñi õi c '" LL 0 D D D Õ ê5 z l- I-- I-- I-- /]/Þ5 ::; cií M ..¡ ui '<t '<t '<t '<t 2. Supportive Housing a. The Agency, through the use of the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund, has supported non- profits, such as the Salvation Army, who are attempting to provide supportive housing in Chula Vista. In fiscal year 1991-1992, the Agency provided the Salvation Army approximately $275,000 for the payment of the City's fees. The Salvation Army is planning to construct a 75 unit project which will provide supportive housing for the elderly. b. Community Development Block Grant funds have been committed to a local non-profit who plans to provide supportive housing for alcoholics in Chula Vista. In addition, the city Council recently approved the Conditional Use Permit for the facility, and the facility will open early in 1992. B. Leveraging 1- As is currently the practice, the City will encourage local non-profits to apply for funds from foundations, lending consortiums, the State of California and other institutions. Without local non-profits, the city will not be able to affectively provide low-income housing. The city needs non-profits for their expertise as well as the funds they are able to leverage. 2. In order to meet the matching fund requirements placed on the city by the HOME Program, the City will utilize the Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund. 3. Since funding for affordable housing has become difficult at best to secure, the City is attempting to leverage its resources by exploring the possibility of a county-wide Housing Trust Fund. In addition, the Agency is seriously investigating the Community Reinvestment Act activities of local banks so that Agency housing funds can be effectively leveraged with private dollars. - -67- /3----?O -,--~.,-,. PART :n:. One Year Action P1an for Fisca1 Year 1991-1992 According to HUD, the One Year Action Plan provides a annual framework for implementing the city's Five Year strategy. A. Affordable Housinq Action Plan 1- Actions to Meet Priorities a. continue to work with the community-based non-profit to attempt to acquire the city's 386 units which are "at risk" of converting to market rate rentals. Since these units are serving predominantly very low-income households, the Agency is anxious to maintain decent, safe, and sanitary housing for 386 very low-income househ01ds. In Fiscal Year 1991- 1992, it is likely that at least one project owner will file a Notice of Intent to sell. At that time, the Agency will most likely provide predevelopment funds as well as gap financing to the non-profit. b. Rehabilitate 40 mobile homes and single family homes and 5 rental units per the program described in the City's Five Year strategy. As previously stated, the Agency's rehabilitation program serves almost exclusively very low-income households. It is extremely possible that HOME funds will be used to enhance the Agency's rehabilitation program. c. continue to pursue the City's Affordable Housing Program so that private developers provide housing to low, moderate, and median income households. In FY 1991-1992, the city expects to see developers produce 72 median and moderate income for sale units. No low income units will be produced because the master planned developers have not reached the portions of their developments with the densities able to support the development of low-income housing. In other words, the phasing of developments will inhibit the production of more units under the Affordable Housing Program. d. continue to administer the Mortgage Credit certificate Program and provide homeownership opportunities to 21 low, moderate, and median income households. e. Attempt to gain site control for a transitional housing project. . -68- J}--J,) ~ - ._-- f. By continuing to support non-profit housing corporations, 103 rental units for very low and low income households will be developed. The Agency recently financially assisted two non- profits, and construction of these 103 units should be completed by the end of 1992. g. Continue to assist very low and low income mobilehome owners who are faced with increasing rents by enforcing the City's Rent Review Ordinance. The City has 35 mobile home and trailer parks which provide a significant amount of affordable housing, and as a result, the City has made a commitment to protect this housing by ensuring affordable rents. In addition, the City encourages senior citizenss to take part in the Mobilehome Rental Assistance Program (~P) administered by the San Diego County Housing Authority. h. Continue to support the San Diego Housing County Authority to develop public housing in Chula vista. Twenty-two public housing units will be constructed by the end of Fiscal Year 1992. Support any housing activity by the County such as the County's application for funds under the Shelter Plus Care Program. The City has a need for shelters which house the homeless with disabilities, but the City does not expect to receive funds from this Program. i. Continue to fund supportive services for residents with special needs by allocating 15% of the City's CDBG funds for these supportive services. The services provided by CDBG funds are elaborated upon in the Community Profile Section. 2. Meeting the Needs of Very Low Income Households a. Continue to enforce the city's Rent Review Ordinance and encourage participation in the County's MRAP. b. Continue to work with the San Diego County Housing Authority to provide Section 8 rental assistance. c. Continue to work the San Diego County Housing Authority to build public housing in Chula Vista. d. Continue to work with non-profits who are attempting to provide housing for the very low-income. - -69- )Yh~ e ø m c ~ 19 ~ - _ og ~ ~ 0 E LOq- 0 a LO::S_(J) o +: +: 0 s... g N :to OJ "t CTI >.W Ö 0'\ 4->. ~ ~ .~ ~ e o'O+' c Q) ..¡...) a x t: ;>: E 5: 0 0 0 0 0 aV)E~ .,g u. (þ s... r- aJ~ ... f! Q) it: +: "U or- 0 Q) E ...... ~ 4- ðOe ~wQ) m s.. ::c r- E - c.. ..c - - ft~ ..lo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OQJS-....- E_ UQJ.,.... - ic .,.... > to >aJ> - s...~tO ø e aJO « Q) V'lZQJ J: me ~ o :S~ f to o;:j- 0 0 LO 0 LO..f-J - !2G) - s.. .,...,. >. :>(E OIDr- 'E CJ) 0 it: c..>.,.... f.) Q) :J: c.. s... ::c E ëO :::SQJ g. .::: V)V)Q) -- ø c.. 4tc QJ>.>. ¡;Q) >. f! LO ........ 0 NS-<LI.f-) Q [-- ~~ 6' ....... N........!':: CO .D Q - ....... .-t::S.f-)"U Å“'i) ca a: ....... CT r- -fir; 'E Q}V'lO ~C 0 s...-a..c '1J't) ::= .-- Q) Cc: « "µOtn (II CG -8 O..c ::s aQ g> Q;'õ t':Q)O .s·ê '(¡) i3.r._ V't.,C ~c:;¡ o~~ 1,/)::3 oaJ 0 =:;) 0 a 0 0 0 a wo..µ :z:ä: I ~~ C\J o..c to õ.~ Q) "U 4- :5 1:5 .~ >.0 OE (I) "D ..µ a Ee c: S!<D" .r-(J)V) ':::0 Q) E ~o u c.. =o.r:: g Q) E - 0 a o::::t 0 o::::t >. V) g.õ e :5 ';...!:!:'.. co co Q)..¡...) E c a. a: 0)0 .-t ........J:: s.. .~ E Îij!:2. .µa;o I U1:!E 0 ~ ..s:.: 4- 0 ~o 0 ~..¡...) ........ 't) >. rn I Q) r-Q,lC Å“_ +->..a...... -"0' s:::...-..¡...> ~S6 a 0 <=> LO Q) s... s... =(\1- o::::ts..uo «1- o::::t s... (/) c.. E :::IQ)QJ ø u"Us... .. ~. , .c" '" ~Eõ c Q).c._ CD :E~Q. 0 0 cY) 0 CV) ~ N:;) ........ ........ :;, -cJj! o:::T o:::t"'[ OJ ~ +' S ~ a ~ 9 - 0 .--. ...... en > S<õ iñ "-' rn-g C) 00 _ ,... .... to .....0 '-' "5 s:::: ~ cry áf (J '" _ - ~ ~ ~ u ~ o 4- cJ'/ .~ ::I: 0 ]j.º.~ _ ..... '" CO = oü.....~ N ....... CD (J -5 .. >, '" ð!:2.... .... E ",,,.- E ~ (\I...... R ... ,.. ~ .~ .i: ==-'eu 0 CD·- g _ _ ::> E"C ë .Q g .Q. :to Il) 0 -¡¡ 2~ .;~!' g . c 0)0 -g - Cþ -".e c:::- 0 Q)ca"-ð a. g-c:fiS OI C'S-a:tiCÞ '" ~-o - LL t.n õñ" :25 .. 00( £Js ;¡ 5 ~~ 00( .as U '¡¡¡ B . _ ! -2a...tÏ)"§ 2ð gfi'.ø JJ;~ ~.~ 0_'" ø;-N ~ ~ ~ ;..Q ...., O'Ü Il. u;:¡:.c..:.:::·- ø Cþ go.Q ..:.:::.!! Q¡; (þ U ¡:::- .0 .;; rJi ~,,",-(J)._ (þCÞE Cõ ~ ~E ~ >- C/) õ"~~~.5::J >. C/) .5"CECO¡;cêij ~.... " U 'T. 8" "" ~ t: , . 8" "" ~ ;; 'c 8c _e - (J) (f).......~ ~8 ~g ex: ~ CiI .g 8. ~ a: !! ra -g ~ !ø c.G {!.M g. -,-Q)~ U)-= -'II) ~ E~ ~ 15 g. ...9"0 ~-m ~ g Q. =;-:4)'"0:; ~ .......' a:s.Q õ .~ >. ~.9 ~ z a: a: ::t en .! 'oft ~ z a: a: J: ~ J! ê ~.Q 5 ê g- ..,... 0 cþ U).D 011 õ.... 0-- Õ~ ¡,;;._ ..... oä < >2. ~ t-¿ .....0::"-. () CJ..... z ~ N (') ..,¡ Iri cO ,..: t;Ô oj ~ ;:: ~ ri ~ iii P /]~¡;) 3. Consistency of One Year Actions with the Five Year Stratedy All action plan goals listed for Fiscal Year 1991-1992 of the CRAS are indicated as priorities in the Five Year strategy section of the CHAS. 4. Geographic Targets The City and the Agency do not geographically target any housing programs. All programs can be implemented or utilized in any area of the city. 5. Responsible Agencies The following is a list of agencies responsible for implementing One Year Action Plan: city of Chula Vista; Redevelopment Agency of the city of Chula Vista; and San Diego County Housing Authority. 6. Actions to Remove Barriers to Affordabe Housing As stated in the Constraints section of the CRAS, the City does not have any governmental constraints that seriously affect affordable housing which can be removed. The City will, however, attempt the following actions: a. Review its density bonus ordinance which is currently not utilized to its fullest extent; b. Attempt to expedite the processing of affordable housing projects; c. Designate an Affordable Housing Ombudsman who will be responsible for overseeing the intradepartmental coordination of affordable housing projects; d. Establish procedures for evaluating requests for City assistance; e. consider the impacts to affordable housing which may result from rezoning involved with the General Plan/Zoning consistency Study; f. continue to encourage the use of flexible development standards through the Planned community (PC) Zone and the Precise Plan (P) Modifying District, where such are clearly identified with increased availability of affordable housing; and, - -71- /7/tt.j .. ...----. ,~-" ...-."'- g. Encourage demonstration or experimental housing projects which reduce building costs and increase affordability. As stated in the Contraints Section, the non-governmental barriers illustrated cannot be removed by the City in Fiscal Year 1992 or ever without significantly increased funding from the federal government. The city simply does not have the funds to remove barriers such as land costs and construction costs. However, the City may designate staff and develop resources to assist developers in availing themselves of alternative and supplemental financial assistance. B. SUDDortive Housinq Action Plan 1. Homeless a. Community Development Block Grant funds have been allocated to the fOllowing supportive service providers who assist the homeless by providing food, shelter vouchers, and clothes: Lutheran Social Services; South Bay Good Neighbor Center; MAAC Project; Chula Vista Human Services center; and, Shared Housing b. Community Development Block Grant funds were allocated to South Bay Community Services for the development of the Chula Vista Community Development Corporation. The CDC is attempting to find a suitable site for a transitional shelter. Once site control is achieved, the CDC will probably apply for MCKinney funds. c. In addition to services financially supported by the City or the Agency, the city of Chula vista has taken steps to assist the homeless in other ways. First, the City has passed an Ordinance to allow churches to house the homeless. Second, the City approved the Conditional Use Permit for the youth shelter operated by South Bay Community Services. In order to address the unmet needs of the homeless in the City, the City will continue to allocate CDBG funds, assist the CDC, and support organizations which attempt to meet the needs of the City's homeless. However, the most important activity the City can undertake will be the development of a shelter, and hopefully, with the CDC's assistance, a suitable site will be identified. -72- /3-65 ._,... 2. "At-Risk" Population Like all cities, ChulaVista has residents which are "at-risk" of losing their homes if the rent becomes too expensive. Chula Vista's largest at- risk population resides in the City's 35 mobile home parks. In order to address the unmet needs of these residents, the City will continue to enforce the City's Mobilehome Rent Review Ordinance. 3. others with Special Needs As outlined in the Community Profile Section, the city allocates 15% of its CDBG allocation to non- profits who provide supportive services to those with special needs. These services are provided to people with mental disabilities, physical disabilities, and AIDS. In addition, the City has a senior center which provides a complete range of services for the elderly and frail elderly, and the City financially supports South Bay Community Services who provides a full range of services to the City's youth. with limited resources, the city has little ability to provide supportive housing. However, the City has assisted various non-profits who provide supportive housing to the elderly and alcoholics. The City and the Agency will continue to attempt to provide financial assistance as non-profits request assistance. However, since funds and city staff are limited, the City will most likely attempt to meet the unmet needs of those with special needs by providing zoning concessions such as Conditional Use Permits. C. Monitorinq Plan All pUblic service providers receiving any CDBG funds are required to provide quarterly reports. which outline the progress of their work. In addition, any housing projects which have received or will receive Redevelopment Agency funding are required to submit quarterly reports which demonstrate that the affordable units are being charged the correct rent. In addition, any non-profit housing developers who receive HOME funds in the future will be required to submit the same quarterly reports to insure correct affordability levels. On a periodic basis, the City Council/Redevelopment Agency is provided with reports regarding the stãtus of all housing programs. In addition, all housing programs are reviewed and analyzed annually as a part of the budget process. -73- /3----¿{o ...---.-" COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item I~ Meeting Date 3/3/92 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing - GPA-90-09; Consideration of the Draft Chula Vista Housing Element of 1991 Resolution \ 1e'5 ~ 1- Adopting the Draft Housing Element of 1991 as a component of the City General Plan SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning Jf!/ { s . Community Development Director - REVIEWED BY: City Manager ç (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..x ¡/ This proposal involves a city-initiated amendment to the City General Plan through an update of the Housing Element of 1986 as mandated by State law. Article 10.6, Section 65580 et. seq. of the State Government Code requires that the Housing Element be updated at least every five years to ensure the appropriateness of housing goals, objectives, policies, and programs in response to changing needs and conditions. The Planning and Community Development Departments, in conjunction with a Blue Ribbon Housing Element Committee appointed by the Mayor, have thereby prepared the Draft Housing Element of 1991. An Initial Study, IS-92-08, of possible significant environmental impacts of the Update has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC). Based on that Initial Study and comments thereon, if any, the ERC has concluded that this Update would cause no significant environmental impacts and has issued a Negative Declaration. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Based on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration, find that the Draft Chula Vista Housing Element of 1991 will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued under IS-92-08. 2. Adopt a resolution adopting the Draft Housing Element of 1991 as a component of the City General Plan. 14 ... I --_._...._.__._.._...-_._.~,-.._._"-_.- , Page 2, Item 14 Meeting Date 3/3/92 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Resource Conservation Commission considered the Negative Declaration on IS-92-08 at its meeting of November 4, 1991, and unanimously recommended issuance of the Negative Declaration. 2. The Housing Advisory Committee reviewed the Draft Housing Element of 1991 at its meeting of February 26, 1992, and recommended that the Chula Vista Planning Commission and City Council adopt the Negative Declaration and Housing Element. (Vote: 6-0, 1 absent). 3. The City Planning Commission at its meeting of February 26, 1992, recommended that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration and Housing Element. (Vote: 5-0, 2 absent) . DISCUSSION 1. Document Preparation Along with most other jurisdictions in San Diego County, Chula Vista began the Housing Element update process in early 1990 in conjunction with SANDAG's preparation of the Regional Housing Needs Statement (RHNS) for 1991-96, which replaced the prior expiring statement for 1984-90. The Regional Housing Needs Statement is mandated by State law and serves to define regional housing conditions and needs for all income groups, and to equitably allocate those needs among the region's jurisdictions. It also serves as an information resource and technical reference. Each jurisdiction is required to incorporate the Regional Housing Needs Statement's revised regional needs into their Housing Elements. Employing the adopted Regional Housing Needs Statement, staff prepared the first two portions of the Housing Element, consisting of an implementation review of the 1986 Element, and an assessment of current and projected housing needs and conditions. A nine-member Blue Ribbon Housing Element Committee was then appointed by the Mayor in September 1990 to review that work and assist staff in formulating goals, objectives, policies and action programs for the 1991-96 planning period. The Committee, consisting of a broad-based membership representing the public, development community, realty community/Chamber of Commerce, County Housing Authority, non- profit housing and finance interests, and the local social service community met in a series of 11 workshops, and unanimously endorsed a Draft in March 1991. Planning Commissioner Casillas served as Committee chairman. 14-L _ _ ~m'___.,_._.,_.___. _"_,_,,, Page 3, Item  Meeting Date 3/3/92 2. Structure and Content: In meeting the requirements of State Housing Element Law, the Draft Housing Element of 1991 is divided into three principal parts. ~ reviews implementation of the 1986 Element. It outlines and quantifies housing production since 1985, and describes how the City has responded to the housing needs of its growing population. Various accomplishments are compared against previous goals, and a summary of performance successes and shortfalls is presented to establish indicators applied in development of the 1991-96 Action Plan in Part 3. ~ presents a statistical survey of existing and projected housing needs, resources and constraints utilizing available updated data provided primarily by SANDAG's Regional Housing Needs Statement and Series 7 Growth forecasts. It provides a quantified analysis of current unmet needs with respect to overpayment, overcrowding, substandard conditions, and various "special needs" groups such as the elderly, handicapped, single parent families, and the homeless. Projected needs based on anticipated regional growth and employment are provided, and the ability for Chula Vista's land base and regulatory framework to adequately support residential development is discussed. Finally, specific governmental and non-governmental constraints in the way ofland use controls, financing availability, and land and construction costs are evaluated. Part 3 establishes the City's goals, objectives, statements of policy, and action programs to address the performance indicators, needs and conditions identified in Parts 1 and 2. It emphasizes the City's commitment to ensuring adequate, decent housing opportunities in suitable living environments, for all economic segments of the community. In serving as a concise, comprehensive guide, the various policy and program proposals are organized around 12 specific housing objectives. Each objective is clearly stated, followed by applicable statements of policy, and a set of "implementing actions" identifying program proposals complete with associated costs, sources of financing, responsible agencies, and a recommended schedule. 3. Previous Actions The following actions have previously been taken in developing the Draft before you: - On March 13, 1990, by resolution 15552, the City Council adopted SANDAG's 1991-1996 Regional Housing Needs Statement for use in developing the Housing Element Update. That resolution recognized and accepted Chula Vista's Regional Share and Fair Share allocations as contained therein. \'4...~ - -,...-.-.-.----...---- Page 4, Item 19 Meeting Date 3/3/92 - On February 20, 1991, a preliminary draft was presented at a Planning Commission workshop, and supported for forwarding. - On March 14, 1991, the Blue Ribbon Committee unanimously authorized the document for forwarding for City Council review prior to its transmission to the State. - At a workshop held with the Blue Ribbon Committee on April 25, 1991, the City Council authorized submittal of the Draft to the State for initial compliance reviewed as required by law. That authorization excluded the Affordable Housing Policy (pg. III-4) , which Council referred back to staff and the Blue Ribbon Committee for further evaluation. The initial proposal was that the City's existing requirement for "10% low and moderate" income housing in projects over 50 units be revised to require the entire 10% as low-income. Staff subsequently prepared an Issues Paper to evaluate Council concerns, and serve as a basis for making recommendations regarding a [mal policy statement. That paper was presented to the Blue Ribbon Committee who discussed its contents at two meetings held January 30 and February 6, 1992, and reached consensus on eight final recommendations regarding the subject policy. Those recommendations are embodied in the Draft Housing Element under the Affordable Housing Policy and Program discussions on pages III-4 through III-8, which language the Committee also unanimously endorsed. That policy language proposes to amend the City's existing policy for" 10% low and moderate-income" in projects over 50 units by now requiring a minimum of one-half of those units (5 % project total) as low-income, and applying the policy to illl residential developments except owner-built single-family homes on existing lots of record. Additionally, through a set of Implementation Guidelines, a system of incentives would be established to achieve greater affordability by exceeding the 5% low-income minimum, and/or increasing the depth of affordability within the respective income range. Several alternate methods of compliance were added to achieve flexibility including land set-asides, off-site projects, and in-lieu fees. Subsequent to the Blue Ribbon Committee meeting, staff further considered the recommendation to apply the policy to all residential developments, and based on concerns regarding the administrative burden to both the City and applicant to prepare and monitor agreements for small projects, proposes an alternate recommendation which would have the policy apply only to developments of 10 or more units. Revised language for policy statement #2 on page III-4 is ) \.\. .. ~ _.'-_.__._--..~-~---,-_.,.._- Page S, Item ~ Meeting Date 3/3/92 presented in Attachment C. The revised recommendation and language were reviewed and unanimously supported by both the Housing Advisory Committee and Planning Commission at their February 26, 1992, meetings. Both the Issues Paper and the Draft Housing Element were forwarded for advance review as information items with the City Council's February 25, 1992, agenda package. - On July 9, 1991, the City received written response regarding the State's initial compliance review (please see Attachment A). While commending the City's efforts, that response indicated the need for several revisions in order to bring the document into full compliance with State housing element law, and outlined the areas for revision. Staff has made a variety of revisions which are represented in the Draft before you, and in conversation with the State, believes those revisions to adequately address the stated compliance issues. - On October 25, 1991, the document was distributed to several of the City's commissions and committees, and to a variety of interested local agencies for comment. Letters were subsequently received from South Bay Community Services, The Chicano Federation, and the Construction Industry Federation. Staff prepared responses to each of these, and believes the revised Draft Element to substantially address stated concerns (please see Attachment B). 4. Pending Actions As provided by law, upon adoption and refiling of this revised Housing Element, the State will conduct a final 120-day review period within which its final determination of compliance and certification must be issued. In such instance that the State should determine the document is still not in substantial compliance, the City may either further amend the document as necessary and re-adopt it, or adopt written findings stating why it believes the document to be in substantial compliance despite the State's position. CONCLUSIONS: The Draft Chula Vista Housing Element of 1991 represents the culmination of substantial review and input over the last 16 months, including an initial compliance review by the State Department of Housing and Community Development, as required by law. Staff has made several revisions which are believed to address the State's comments, and bring the document into substantial compliance with State laws. \~ ·5 ------_.,.,_...._,-, Page 6, Item ~ Meeting Date 3/3/92 Adoption of this amended document is necessary so that it may be refiled with the State for final compliance review and certification. FISCAL IMPACT: Implementation of the policy and program proposals in Part 3, many of which are ongoing, will be primarily supported from the Redevelopment Housing fund and CDBG entitlement funds, although the General Fund has been identified in several instances to support staff time. The City will also be receiving approximately $750,000 a year under the new federal HOME program, and recently received a Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) allocation of $2 million. The City will apply for additional MCC allocations in Spring 1992. A brief "cost/sources of financing" section has been provided with each of the 12 objectives in Part 3. In addition to City sources, the proposed involvement of non-profit housing interests and the County Housing Authority will create access to a variety of State and Federal funding sources which would otherwise not be available. Given these circumstances, overall implementation of the Housing Element is not seen to create a negative fiscal impact on the City. Subsequent proposals for the allocation of City resources to specific projects will be brought before the City Council on an individual basis. (OPA9().09.A113) \~..Iø ..---..- _.__..._~.,--_._- RESOLUTION NO. 1~'3 '3..;1.. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE HOUSING ELEMENT (1991 REVISION) AS A COMPONENT OF THE CITY GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the availability of housing is of statewide, regional and local importance, and the attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for Californians of all economic levels is a priority of the highest order; and WHEREAS, Article 10.6, section 65580 et. seq. of the Government Code requires that the Housing Element be updated at least every five years to ensure the appropriateness of housing goals, objectives, policies, and programs in response to changing needs and conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Community Development Departments, in conjunction with a Blue Ribbon Housing Element Committee appointed by the Mayor, have therefore prepared the Draft Housing Element (1991 Revision) as an update of the Housing Element of 1986; and WHEREAS, the Draft Housing Element (1991 Revision) contains an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs, resources and constraints, and a statement of goals, policies, and quantified objectives, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing through 1996; and WHEREAS, pursuant to state law, the state Department of Housing and Community Development has conducted a review of the draft element and found that certain revisions were necessary to bring it into substantial compliance with State Housing Element law; and WHEREAS, in response, the city has revised the Draft for local adoption and refiling; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study, IS-92-08, of possible significant environmental impacts of the Draft Housing Element (1991 Revision) has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator who has concluded that it would cause no significant environmental impacts and has issued a Negative Declaration thereon; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the revised Draft Housing Element (1991 Revision) and 1 14-1 -., _....~,- determined no new environmental issues not analyzed by Initial study IS-92-08 are raised; and WHEREAS, the City Planning commission considered said revised Draft at a duly noticed public hearing held February 26, 1992, and found that the revised Draft Chula vista Housing Element (1991 Revision) would have no significant environmental impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration, and unanimously approved said revised Draft Housing Element (1991 Revision) and recommended its adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council, conducted a public hearing on March 3, 1991" to consider said Negative Declaration and revised Draft Housing Element (1991 Revision) and recommendations thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby find that the revised Draft Chula vista Housing Element (1991 Revision) will have no significant environmental impacts and hereby adopts the Negative Declaration issued under IS-92-08. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city Council of the City of Chula vista does adopt the revised Draft Housing Element (1991 Revision) as the Housing Element (1991 Revision) component of the city General Plan, on file in the office of the city Clerk. Presented by Approved as to form by DL lv (ft/'?, Robert A. Leiter, Director of D. Richard RUdO~ AsSistant Planning City Attorney__..,J C:\n\housing element 2 )4-GJ. /1'1-'1 ~-----~-_.'--_...-'---....-.- COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO February 19, 1992 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Joho D. G~. aty Mmmg~ (t FROM: Robert A Leiter, Director of Planning S . Chris Salomone, Community Develop ent Director [- SUBJECT: Draft Housing Element of 1991 and Affordable Housing Policy Issues Paper Attached for review are copies of the Draft Housing Element of 1991 and the Affordable Housing Policy Issues Paper. The documents are being forewarded at this time to facilitate advance review prior to City Council consideration of the Draft Housing Element at a public hearing scheduled for March 3, 1992. A Council Agenda Statement will be included with the regular meeting package on Friday, February 28, 1992. The Issues Paper responds to the City Council's request at the April 25, 1991 workshop review of the initial Draft Housing Element, that staff and the Blue Ribbon Housing Element Committee further evaluate proposed revisions to the subject policy. After reviewing a draft Issues Paper at two meetings held January 30 and February 6, 1992, the Blue Ribbon Committee unanimously endorsed the attached final Issues Paper which contains eight specific recommendations. Those recommendations have been embodied into the Housing Element's policy and program discussions on pages III-4 through III-8, which language the Committee also unanimously endorsed. The Draft Housing Element of 1991 has been forwarded for consideration by the Housing Advisory Committee and City Planning Commission at their meetings of February 26, 1992. /7 ----~ .. u..."..__ .,....._. CITY OF CHULA VISTA DRAFr HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE OF 1991 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY AND PROGRAM ISSUES PAPER Prepared For: Chula Vista Planning Commission Chula Vista City Council Forwarded by: Blue Ribbon Housing Element Committee City Planning and Community Development Departments January, 1992 / Lj ~ /0 f\-/c'{3';' "....~ , .._-_.._.._---,._-_._--_.....~ , f INTRODUCTION: On April 25, 1991, at a joint workshop with the Blue Ribbon Housing Element Committee, the City Council reviewed the Draft Housing Element of 1991, and authorized its forwarding to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for initial review. That authorization excluded a revised Affordable Housing Policy which proposed to shift the current 5 % 10w/5 % moderate-income provision for projects over 50 units to 10% low-income. The City Council referred the item back to staff and the Blue Ribbon Committee requesting further information and evaluation as to the necessity for such a change, and its potential impacts. Council concern was two-fold: . The apparent inequity of such a change since the City, in comparison to other local jurisdictions, has historically provided more than its 'fair share' of affordable housing. . Potential impacts to project financing and economics. In response to that referral, this document reviews concerns raised, and provides an analysis and recommendations regarding a final policy for consideration by the City Council. Topics discussed include: I. Housing Element Law/Regional Share and Fair Share Allocations IT. Policy Background and Current Conditions ITI. Growth Forecasts and Housing Activity IV. Financial Issues V. Financial Implications of the Affordable Housing Program VI. Methods to Address Affordability VIT. Affordable Housing Policy Issues VID. Summary of Recommendations -2- j1-/~/1 ^---- -----^. , I. HOUSING F.T.EMENT LAWIREGIONAL AND FAIR SHARE ALLOCATIONS: Housing Element Law As a State-required component of city and county general plans, the Housing Element is intended to ensure adequate provision of housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community through efforts such as rehabilitation, conservation, and new construction. State law requires that the Housing Element be reviewed and updated every five years. This periodic update is required to assess existing and projected housing needs and set goals, objectives, policies and programs to address those identified needs. Part of this process evaluates the effectiveness of a City's present housing efforts in order to determine .those efforts to continue, refine, expand, or add in response to changing economic, physical, and social conditions affecting housing. The Housing Element Law (Gov. Code Article 10.6, Section 65580 et seq) sets forth specific requirements for the periodic update of local housing plans for review and certification by the State. Among those requirements is the establishment and allocation of regional housing needs for new construction to local jurisdictions by the Council of Governments (SANDAG). These determinations must be consistent with identified statewide needs, and reviewed in cooperation with the jurisdictions and the State Department of Housing and Community Development. Using statewide growth forecasts, SANDAG identifies total projected housing needs for all income levels and allocates those needs among the Region's jurisdictions. Each jurisdiction must then address its share of regional housing needs as part of the Housing Element update. Pursuant to the above noted requirements, SANDAG, in conjunction with the State Department of Housing and Community Development, prepared an update of the Regional Housing Needs Statement (RHNS) for the 1990-1996 planning period. The RHNS defines the Region's existing and projected housing needs, and distributes the needs for all economic segments of the market among the localities in accordance with seven criteria required by law (see Attachment A). The criteria are designed to ensure that all jurisdictions share proportionately the responsibility for addressing regional housing needs. The allocation process must also seek to reduce the concentration of lower-income households in cities or counties where high proportions of such housing already exist. To this end, SANDAG's allocations do take into consideration the City's past performance on affordable housing. Chula Vista's allocated share of regional housing needs ("Regional Share") has reduced over time, being 4.8% in 1981,4.7% in 1986, and 3.3% in 1991. The RHNS was completed in late 1989 and local jurisdictions were subsequently requested to approve the document for use in Housing Element revisions. City staff evaluated the RHNS and recommended its adoption by the City Council. On March 13, 1990, the City Council passed Resolution 15552 adopting the RHNS and the housing need allocations contained therein (see Attachment B). -3- JlI- / ;J- - -------_._~..- ...._.~-_._._. - Regional Share and Fair Share Allocations Rel!ional Share SANDAG's RHNS establishes two distinct forms of housing need allocation to jurisdictions: "Regional Share" and "Fair Share." "Regional Share" identifies needs for new construction housing units for all income groups (very low, low, moderate, and above moderate), and is the allocation the Housing Element is required to address by State Law. Each jurisdiction's total new construction need is assigned to these four income groups according to the following percentage distributions established by the State Department of Housing and Community Development with the State Department of Finance: 23 % very low 21 % moderate 17% low 39 % above moderate These distributions are based on existing and projected income and employment statistics within the San Diego region. For Chula Vista, a total of 5,354 units needed to be constructed within the City between 1/89 and 7/96 proportionate to these four income categories: 1232 very low 1,124 moderate 910 low 2,088 above moderate Based on actual construction activity between 1/89 and 7/91, 2326 units remain for construction through 7/96. Because a majority of the 3028 units constructed since 1/89 were affordable to moderate and above moderate ranges, the 2326 remaining Regional Share units should be distributed as follows (see Attachment C for further detail): 1232 very low 131 moderate 628 low 335 above moderate Fair Share The concept of "Fair Share" is established pursuant to local policy 'and identifies the number of lower-income households, both existing and future, needing housing assistance. Fair Share allocation is not applicable to Housing Element evaluation by the State, and is discussed here simply to make a clear distinction between it and Regional Share, which is the basis for State evaluation of the Housing Element. Fair Share differs further from Regional Share in that it can be met by activities other than new construction, such as rehabilitation and Section 8 assistance. Fair Share allocations are identified by the Regional Housing Allocation Formula which was first adopted by SANDAG in 1979 in conjunction with HUD's Areawide Housing Opportunities Plan (AHOP) proposal. The AHOP program was to provide incentives in the form of additional Block Grant monies and federal loans for housing development to jurisdictions -4- ø- / i~/J · , which cooperatively dealt with lower-income needs through a regional "fair share" approach. The Fair Share concept was supported by member jurisdictions with the intent that each community accept its share of the region's housing responsibilities in proportions similar to the demand created by existing lower-income needs, as well as new demands resulting from growth (see Attachment B). While the local fair share policy was enacted, the AHOP program was canceled by the Reagan Administration prior to ever reaching full fruition. At the request of member jurisdictions, however, the Fair Share concept was retained. The Fair Share formula identifies total lower-income needs for each jurisdiction, and then translates that need into a five-year goal defining the minimum level of effort that would be accepted as reasonable progress· toward meeting that need. That five-year goal amounts to about 12.5 % of total need (2.5 % per year), primarily in recognition that total need would exceed available resources over the five-year period. For Chula Vista that goal for the 1991-96 planning period is 1,058 households. Perceptions that additional lower-income assistance efforts on Chula Vista's part are inequitable, since the City has historically provided more than its share within the region, result primarily from periodic SANDAG performance reports on Fair Share goal achievement. The most recent of those reports reflects Chula Vista providing for more than 2.5% of actual lower-income needs annually. This relative "over-performance" pursuant to provisions of the local Fair Share policy is not synonymous with the "Regional Share" requirements of State Housing Element Law. The State has consistently noted that Fair Share criterion are not part of State law, and will not be applied to Housing Element compliance review (see Attachment D). Compliance Issues The State's compliance review will consider the total level of housing activity (termed "quantified objectives") proposed through various City policies and programs in comparison to identified needs. Those needs include a variety of assistance to existing households, as well as new housing units identified by Regional Share allocations. The City's quantified objectives must represent the "maximum number of housing units which can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over a five-year time frame." (Section 65583(b». Therefore, the City's Housing Element must include policies and programs to meet Regional Share allocations, or demonstrate why lesser objectives for new construction constitute maximum feasible performance. If City policies and programs can be geared to meet the new construction allocations, then compliance with the law on that point is clear, whereas the State's determination of compliance becomes more subjective when a lesser number is said to be the maximum feasible. -5- J 1 ~/1 .-------<-,---,-,-,----.--"--.---..-..-- - f Conseauences of Non-Compliance If a local agency's Draft Housing Element is found by HCD to be in non-compliance, there are two possible courses of action: . Amend the Element to substantially comply; or . Adopt the Element without amendments through a resolution containing written findings which explain the reasons the draft Element substantially complies with legal requirements, despite the State's findings. Upon submission ofa locally adopted Element to the State for its final 12D-day certification review, the status of "procedural compliance" is attained. However, through its final review, the State may determinè the findings inadequate, and deem the Element in non-compliance. In that instance, the City can either amend the document and re-adopt it, or ask a court to review and decide the compliance dispute. The consequences of a local agency not achieving compliance through the means described above can include legal challenges from outside organizations, or restrictions to funding from various State housing programs. -6- /1-/~ --,-- ---,.-.--_._"- - -,-_._~-~~---_._--- IT. POLICY BACKGROUND AND CURRENT CONDITIONS: City Policy History For the last 10 years, the City has required that affordable housing units be included within larger development projects. The requirement was incorporated with the Housing Element of 1981 as a sub-component of the broader" Affordable Housing Program" (AHP), which consisted of 20 or so activities intended to facilitate the provision of low and moderate income housing throughout the City. The requirement that 10% of the units in projects o~er 50 units be affordable to "low and moderate income" households was developed to assist in the accomplishment of two fundamental objectives: . To address Chula Vista's allocated share of regional housing needs, and . To achieve a "balanced community" exemplified by economic integration of neighborhoods and avoidance of affordable housing concentration within anyone area of the City. With the majority of the City's future growth to occur in proposed master planned developments east of I-80S, it was necessary to ensure that adequate opportunities be provided for all income levels. A "10% low and moderate" income provision was intended to guide planning efforts to develop a variety of housing essential to achieving the desired integration. With the majority of existing affordable units in Western Chula Vista, avoidance of undue concentration and the resulting east/west imbalance was also a strong consideration. The "10% low and moderate income" provision was broadly written to allow flexible application of actual low and moderate income percentage levels on individual projects, with the achievement of regional share allocations and economic balance in mind. The conditioning of projects at the rate of 5% low/5% moderate-income has evolved as a matter of practice, not as a specific policy provision. As housing and economic circumstances have changed, so have the needs for particular levels of housing affordability. In response, staff has recommended changes to the Affordable Housing Policy consistent with these needs and conditions,' as outlined in the following section. Current Policy Issues Providing for Chula Vista's allocated share of regional housing needs and achieving a balanced community continue to be important objectives. With the continuation of master planned developments in Eastern Chula Vista, the inclusion of affordable housing remains an important requirement toward meeting these objectives. -7- )&j-//p - ,~ - --_._---~-._-,~-----_.__._'. \ In ensuring that the Affordable Housing Policy responds to current and projected housing and economic conditions, several issues must be recognized: · Significant population and job growth, coupled with rising land and housing costs, have increased the number of households needing affordable housing. These increased needs require expanded efforts. · Demands for lower-income affordability are greatest as a significant amount of employment growth has been in the traditionally lower paying retail trade and service sectors. For Chula Vista, these jobs comprised 42 % of the local economy in 1985 and are projected to comprise 43% in 1995. These needs are reflected by the previously presented Regional Share allocations which require 40% of new construction to be lower-income affordable housing in order to meet needs. In the City, that allocation equates to 1860 such units over the next five years. · Changes in regional median income coupled with rising local housing costs have decreased the amount of lower-income needs being met by the market while continuing, however, to provide sufficient moderate-income opportunities in both rental and for-sale housing. · As land and housing costs in Eastern Chula Vista tend to exceed those in Western Chula Vista, a general tendency exists for lower-income units to be realized in the western area. With the majority of new construction to occur in the east, mechanisms for providing lower-income units within this area are necessary to maintain desired community balance. · Current housing finance and marketing are producing mainly single-family development for middle and upper income households, especially in Eastern Chula Vista. Policy support for construction of an adequate mix and density of housing types to provide sufficient lower-income opportunities is necessary. The following discussions elaborate on the land use and economic considerations of the policy revision proposed in response to these changes in housing circumstances since 1981. -8- / L/r /7 .--.-------------.-.--+-.-.- . . ; m. GROWTH FORECASTS AND HOUSING ACTIVITY: . As indicated earlier, achieving the City's Regional Share allocations must come from new housing production. There are several growth related factors to consider in developing policies and programs to provide sufficient new housing units: · anticipated growth rates; · land availability, and the capacity of zoning and general planning to provide the density and variety of housing needed to create affordability at all income levels; · a five-year construction forecast by unit type to determine if an adequate amount and variety of housing will be available during the time frame of the Housing Element. The following sections evaluate growth forecasts, Chula Vista's development base, and the local housing market's ability to produce sufficient units to address Regional Share. These sections evaluate whether additional actions by the City are necessary to provide an adequate number of units for all income levels. Series 7 Forecasts The City Council requested that staff review the SANDAG Series 7 growth forecasts, which were employed in the determination of Regional Share, to check their consistency with local conditions. This request resulted from observation of a 1995 forecasted City population of 132,304 as compared to the April 1990 Census population of 134,165. The primary cause of this discrepancy is that the Series 7 figure is restricted to the 1986 municipal boundary. In order to compensate for annexation and construction outside the 1986 boundary, a Sphere of Influence figure of 150,878 was also forecasted, and represents a more realistic comparison. Series 7 forecasts assume a 2.1 % annual housing growth rate for Chula Vista through 1995 (1113 units/yr. ave.), and are comparable to current City growth management forecasts which assume a 2.3% annual rate, roughly 1250 units per ye¡i1'. Chula Vista's actual growth rate between 1/89 and 7/91 was approximately 2.9%, or an average of 1430 units per year. Under these circumstances, it is advantageous that Regional Share allocations employ Series 7 forecasts, as total allocations are reflective of the lower growth rate assumptions. -9- )1///5 - ---,....-----...--..------ ._-,~ J Re¡:ional Share by Income Group While overall housing production is expected to exceed total Regional Share requirements, the City is required by law to address provision of units within the four income categories of Regional Share in its Housing Element. As previously indicated, Chula Vista needs to address the following levels of housing unit production over the next five years: 1232 very low 131 moderate 628 low 335 above moderate These totals are based on construction since 1989, and represent the remainders of the City's total Regional Share requirements through 1996. The 1860 low and very low- income units will not be provided by market forces alone, and must be assured, in part, through obligations for their inclusion within new residential developments. While moderate and above moderate units can be readily provided under current market conditions, unforeseen future changes could impact moderate-income affordability as well. In order to ensure continued production of sufficient moderate-income housing, the City should monitor market conditions, and while not a recommended policy requirement, encourage developers to make good faith efforts to provide such housing. This City must support these efforts through continued land use and zoning practices which allow for the necessary density and variety of housing. Housing Capacity and Local Construction Forecasts The ability of the City to address remaining lower-income Regional Share allocations will be largely established by the Affordable Housing Policy, since it is designed for application to larger development projects which will provide the majority of new construction. The feasibility and effectiveness of that policy rests initially with the available amount and density of housing from which the requirement could be satisfied. In general, multi-family units at densities between 15-30 dwelling units an acre present the greatest potential. The following two sections review the capacity of development in both Eastern and Western Chula Vista to provide lower-income units toward meeting Regional Share requirements. P".tern Chula Vista In order to measure the capacity of Eastern Chula Vista developments to provide low and very low-income units, staff reviewed approved and proposed plans, growth management forecasts, and developers' 5-year construction projections by unit type. The greatest potential for addressing remaining Regional Share allocations rests with these master planned communities which will provide over 80 % of new construction activity. Table 1 has been divided to indicate the total unit type capacity of both "approved" and "proposed" developments, and the level of construction projected over the time frame of the Housing Element (1991-1996). "Approved" developments are those which have -10- J 1.-/ / Ii --,---,._'"._._-"~-..._._.- · s received tentative map approval, and may proceed under the Growth Management Program. These projects have been conditioned to provide affordable housing under the existing 5% low/5% moderate-income practice. "Proposed" developments have not yet received tentative map approvals and would be subject to the 10% low-income policy under consideration. It is important to further distinguish proposed projects, since the construction activity indicated is not assured unless those projects, through their facilities financing plans, can demonstrate growth management compliance, particularly adequate circulation capacity prior to construction of an interim Highway 125 facility. Table 1 illustrates the potential difficulty faced in providing low and very low-income Regional Share units through Eastern Chula Vista new construction. Approximately 80% of the approved and proposed units to be built consist of detached and attached single- family products, which cannot reasonably be made affordable to lower-income households. The remainder of the units are multi-family for-sale condominiums (857 units, or 13.8%) and rental apartments (483 units, or 7.8%), at an average density of 14 dwelling units an acre. These 1340 units, combined with units which might be constructed in Western Chula Vista, represent the available housing base from which the very low and low-income allocations would have to be satisfied. -11- ) If -JO ._,._-------,-~-"'_. I -------------- ---------.. II . I .. II ""'...."'.0011'I0 I 0 O_~N""" 0 ... 0 -' II ,...1I'If'.-NII'\CO"'".,.., "'-.;tN"""'" 0 tr"" CII ,.,...... Oo....pt'JI'I"I'C) 0- ....,N tiN ~ II .....- I 11\ ,.... «..0 ..... 0 II . I ... en .... II . , .. C II . , « U II . . w -------------- --------- to QI: II . ~ IN.. N ' o II Lnll\O I ~.o ....N' ,..,..0« ",",CO I ~ II .0,.....,. I' ..,..0 IC·.CO· en II '........ I.... I..... CO tr ..,.,... >- ..... II I I ok to- ~ II I , 'II - C II . I .. > II . I « - II . , ... I- -------------- --------- tr ~~ II oeo..,. II'I:....~ 'O~:""~ QI!: w 0 II .......... N ..,. . 11'I . . if 11'I . W!A. ell ..........,. .... CO.... OtrCO,.., ~-~ ~:: : .... : :.... W ...J I- U II . , if 0-. LoU U >- II I I . >- > ~ (II II . , ... I- WCI: -------------- --------- 'II C I- II . N , ;a-e: it /tot .... en II CO"'" ~II'I 11'\.,..,0. è8 1'o()lI'Itlo.lI"I ;; ~ ell ;:!;:!..,.~ ~:~N .... :~'^:~ ::;) U .... II . _ N , .... if .... N Vol II . , ... CI IX II . , . Z ell. I ... _ W II I -10 ~ >- -------------- --------- it ~ 11"I :: U"III"I o II'IU"I 0 . o~ 0 <ONM' ....~:..-~ ::JI: 11....:8 o._~""':g' U"I ......'4"..;f',....·..Ln· .0 ~II.... 0011'I :N~ .0 ....:O'tc:~~ >- en II I . it ..... «I II : :: &: c ~ ----~----------~-- -------~--: o.~& ~ ------------------ ----------. ~~~ w II (( II'I 0 .....,R:~ co .c~:c~ ~:: II .....00 -4'1' co.. .0..·.00· «I e Cl)1I N..............., co N..... .11'I........""'..... .x:rl ..... to- II I . ... ~ ... Q ~ II I ... ~ ~ C II I ... Q, :z II I ,... CI) C W II I ,... «I ..... ~ -I---;~~;:-~:;~ --~~-----~:~~ ...~~ ...J ou 11'I,....0.....0.. -4'1(( ' ...0..... ...;t....CX). '-<,_ IoU QII ~""''''''CO-4' ~IN"'" -4'''''' COC...N..... O~E > ZU INN '~.N~ Q.CI)"C W 0 II I ... Q, ::J o CI) U II I .. '- ... (II ~ II I . ~ 0= _ II I . ~ (II ~ c :z: -------------- ---------... Q L. Q W :::J II I N I N... N CI"OCI >- :1~;:g.....;:;I; tc:~~ ~~IC :~~:""'''! '-'-'- 11'I ClUJ <II NN~"'" .....,COCO .....N-4' ,o,..,...è8-o Q, Q, Q, :z:~ .....11 I.....~ .~~"'N_ ~~~ I - >- CI) II I . . ...J ~ II I ..... .... .... ~ ~ >- _l__________i.._ _________: ~ ~ ~ , - Oc:Q II IN. N. N > II ~re t::~~::: ~- ~õg;1;~: ~o: ~~ :5 ci! ~!I -;: ~:=II'I.....:~~ -4'~~~.....'::x~:c~ ~ :::J ~ Cl)11 I ._ ,....~~ % 0 II I . co co ~ U ~ II I .. ~~ II I . ~ ~ ..c: Z II U 0= -------------- ------------ >'- WI ______________ ------------ u.....«I Þ- . II .... .... .... .... .... .... ... Q, ::J ::J: CI) , II .... N I 1""1 ...;t 11'I ...0 . 0. ~ c: . II .... .... I .... .... ......... ... W . ...J II I , . . c: II 0..0 1I'I...:t_N 0 I co Oll'lll'l...:tC ...:t . N C . ...11 -4'...:t0~01l'l(( 1~ -0.....::811'I11'I...0...0 CCCII ....: g II 1I'I~...:tN~II'I~: 0.. ~~N~"'" ~ : ~ ~~~ II I . .... ~ Q.. W . II I I.... ...J I II I I. C C U a:I I II I ,''' 0 0 c: I II I I. '- .... --------------- -------... ... ... .... II .. ItI ItI th c: II ..... .. ... N N '- ... II Q, ...... Q, ", ...J W 0. CI) II :z ca en. ...J cu C). < CI ..... _ II UJ "'(11. :z:wz ...«1......< Q, >" UCI) 0.... CI) ugo 0.....0... ........(1) c:~U ffi _=...~ ::: :i....~ "'5:it"'æ :::J:::J:::J 5~U - =~--- ~~ : ~=o=x5 .g::t ~ ~~"E i5ól:' ~ >CI::: th8. ...-~~:z: th~t ~ Cl)V)~ 0:110 IoU wwcncncn 0 WWW(I')Q.. . :z:o.IIW a&::~),t (II WI ~~a= cc ø. (,I) L.'-'- a:: liE;: U~C:C (II (,I), c:c:uoo: 1tIt! < Q, Q, Q, ~ II a:: ....cø~~a=o=a:: ~: ¡::¡::....5æ : ~c.Q..c. CI) II 0. ...J :z (,I) (I) 00.0. 0 I (I') (I) ...J :z ...J ... ... ...... .... .... , C 110. C::::J« .. 0=' C:«CCW t! O~N""" I W 11< (,I)cnwwo:a=cx c.. LUW(I')CXI- . z....""'.... -12- )Lj --;2 I I ------------- Western Chula Vista The total forecasted new construction activity for Western Chula Vista for the next five years is approximately 1250 dwelling units. In Table 2, staff has indicated the maximum feasible number of units within those 1250 units which could be provided as low and very low-income affordable through various assistance programs, by projects both approved and anticipated. Totals expected are 191 low-income units and 245 very low- income units. These 436 units represent about 24 % of the 1860 lower-income Regional Share units needed, and indicate a reasonable contribution from Western Chula Vista. Additional pressure to produce more lower-income units in the west over the next five years raises concerns on balanced community objectives. TABLE 2 WESTERN CHULA VISTA· 5 YEAR LOWER-INCOME NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT I PROGRAM I TYPE I TOTAL liVERY LOW ILOW I I I UNITS " INCOME II NCOME I ====================1==========1======== ========= ======== Approved or Pending I I ----------------- I I I I , SALVATION ARMY ¡seniors I 75 75 DOROTHY STREET I pub. hsg. I 22 22 FIFTH & L STREET I pub. hsg. I 16 16 THIRO & OXFORD I non profi t I 28 10 18 95 MAOISON I den. bonus 3 3 I I Anticipated I ---------------- I I PUBLIC HOUSING I family 42 42 DENSITY BONUS I family 60 60 DENSITY BONUS Isenior 50 50 TRANSITIONAL I family 20 20 OTHER NON'PROFIT I family 20 10 10 RELOC. HOUSING lfamily 100 50 50 I ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- Totals: 436 245 191 Regional Share No.: 1232 628 --------- -------- Rema i nder: 987 437 -13- / tf - ;2.2- -----,_. . . , Citywide Performance Implications The information presented in Tables 1 and 2 has significant implications for the City's ability to achieve its lower-income Regional Share, and for the structuring of the Housing Element and Affordable Housing Policy. In particular is the ability to respond to low vs. very low-income needs. In summary, the pertinent data from those tables include: · 7480 total dwelling units are forecast for construction. (It should be noted that this figure may be high, based on recent and projected slowdowns in residential development for economic reasons and due to water service limitations.) · 6230 (83 %) are in Eastern Chula Vista. 1,250 (17%) are in Western Chula Vista. · 1340 (21 %) of the 6230 units will be multi-family, the housing type most practical for low and very low income affordability. · Of those 1340 multi-family units, 64% are for-sale condominiums and 36% are rental apartments. The average density is about 14 du/ac. · Of the 1,250 units expected in Western Chula Vista, 191 (15%) are projected to be low income, and 245 (19%) very low income. · In addition to Western Chula Vista projections, 437 low-income and 987 very low-income regional share units remain to be addressed to the maximum extent feasible by efforts in Eastern Chula Vista. The following implications can be drawn from this information: · For balanced community objectives and Regional Share allocations to be met, Eastern Chula Vista must significantly contribute to lower-income unit production, as 83% of the City's new construction will occur there. · With a majority of the needed Regional Share lower-income units as very low- income, the Affordable Housing Policy must be structured to address not only low-income units, but to encourage that very low-income units be achieved when feasible. To ignore such would place the entire responsibility for very low- income unit production on Western Chula Vista. In indicating to the State that the City is providing opportunities to the "maximum extent feasible" for all income levels, it is imperative that the policy which governs 80+ % of the City's new construction address both low and very low-income units. · Since the ability to provide affordable housing for very low-income households has historically been linked to deep subsidies from the state and federal -14- /1/;)3 --,._-,-----_._~_..-----.._- ( government, the number of such units potentially produced through the policy could be limited to the availability of necessary funding assistance. In this manner, while the policy would be primarily focused on creating low-income units, the opportunity for very-low income units would be provided as the City is able to leverage its limited funds in cooperation with the County Housing Authority or non-profit entities. Without specifying a particular number of very low-income units, such a provision would link "maximum feasibility" to required funding. . Current land use and zoning in Eastern Chula Vista offers basic opportunity to achieve lower-in.come affordability, with 1340 multi-family units projected for construction over the next five years. The 437 low-income units would comprise 33% of available multi-family units. As those 1340 multi-family units are at average densities of 14 units an acre, the City may want to consider General Plan amendments or other forms of density increases (such as provided by the State Density Bonus law) which would not only increase the total supply of multi-family units, but also bring relative densities within the 15-30 unit/acre range typically associated with feasibly achieving lower-income affordability. As an example, the pro forma presented later in this Paper analyzes a project at a density of approximately 19 units an acre. . Because available multi-family units will be primarily for-sale condominiums, they as well as rental housing units must be considered as lower-income candidate. This will necessitate greater emphasis on developing ownership oriented assistance programs and controls. Affordable Housing Production Pursuant to the construction forecast data in Tables 1 and 2, the following table (Table 3) compares anticipated affordable housing production to Regional Share allocations under the following two AHP scenarios: Scenario A: No policy changes are made, and all new projectS continue to be conditioned at 5% 10w/5% moderate. Scenario B: New projects are conditioned under a revised AHP with 10% lower- income. Although the policy is being recommended to address both low and very low-income opportunities, its primary focus would be to meet low-income needs. For comparative purposes, the following analysis has been directed at the low-income portion of Regional Share allocations. -15- ;1)-02 '-I -^--- .--- ---^_..._-------_..~- TABLE 3 - AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY . SCENARIO SUHMARY OF LOW INCOME UNIT PRODUCTION ---------------------------------------.---------------.---------------.-----------. II TOTAL PROJECT REQUIREMENT II 5-YR. CONSTRUCTION FORECAST I II SCENARIO SCENARIO II SCENARIO SCENARIO I EASTERN TERRITORIES 1 APPROVED II A B II A 8 I PROJECT I UNITS II LOW MOO I LOWER MOO II LOW MOO I LOWER MOD 1 ====================1=============11================1================ ================1================1 APPROVED . I II I I I ····················1 II I I I I II I I I R.D.R. SPA III I 1380 II 23 I 23 I I SALT CREEK I 1 540 (1) II 14 41 I 14 41 I I SUNBOW I 1946 II 97 97 I 97 751 I EASTLAKE VIL. CEN. I 405 II 19 I 19 1 I EAST LAKE GREENS I 2774 II 138 139 I 138 139 1 I BREHM TERRA NOVA I 360 II 721 721 I ----.------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- sub total: 7405 291 349 0 0 291 327 Minus Regional Share: 628 131 ---------------- ---------------- Difference: ·337 196 Western t.V. Activity: 191 ---------------- PROPOSED - REGIONAL SHARE PERFORMANCE: -146 196 --------------------1 I EAST LAKE TRAILS I 1260 II 63 63 I 126 II I I EASTLAKE II I I 1835 II 92 92 I 184 II 1 10 I SALT CREEK RANCH I 2817 II 141 141 I 282 II 50 141 I 95 1 RANCHO SAN MIGUEL I 1654 II 82 83 I 165 II I 1 TELEGRAPH CANYON I 350 II 17 18 I 35 II 17 18 I 35 I 1·············11················1················1 1·-·-····-·-·--·-1-------------·-- I sub total: I 7916 II 395 397 I 792 o II 67 159 I 140 o I ·*****··********····*****************************11***********..***********..******* EAST. TERR. TOTALS: 15321 686 746 10B3 349 II 358 486 431 327 Minus Regional Share: 628 131 628 131 ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- Difference: ·270 355 ·197 196 Western C.V. Activity: 191 191 .....----....... ...--.----------- REGIONAL SHARE PERFORMANCE: -79 355 -6 196 NOTES: (1) REQUIREMENTS INDICATED BASED ON RECENT APPROVAL TO ALLOW 2.5% LOW / 7.5% MooERATE INCOME. -16- JL--I ~ ;)5' -----.- --"---_._.,-,_.._--~----,._- Table 3 has been subdivided to indicate total project requirements in comparison to those units which would be provided over the next five years. The purpose is to indicate the effect of the policy scenarios on long term affordable housing capacity in Eastern Chula Vista, as well as in addressing Regional Share allocations for the current planning period. This distinction is important to make, as the master plan format will see projects approved and conditioned today which will constitute the City's available housing base for the next 10 to IS years. As a result, current policy decisions will not only affect the City's ability to address Regional Share for the current planning period, but that of future periods as well. In establishing the need for an increased inclusionary percentage for lower-income units, the top half of Table 3 illustrates "approved" projects which have already been conditioned at the rate of S% 10w/S% moderate. (Data for Scenario B is not included as it is assumed these projects would not be re-conditioned under a revised policy.) A total of 291 low-income and 327 moderate-income units are indicated, which when factored with Western Chula Vista figures from Table 2, indicate a 146 unit under- peñormance on low-income Regional Share and a 196 unit over-peñormance on moderate-income. Of particular note is the EastLake Greens project for which Council has "deferred" peñormance on affordable housing requirements pending the evaluation of density reductions made during project approval in 1989. Those potential low-income units play a significant role in the City's total Regional Share peñormance picture. The lower half of Table 3 illustrates "proposed" projects which have not yet been conditioned and would be subject to a revised policy. Under the S% 10w/S% moderate practice (Scenario A), 67 additional low-income units would be produced, but that would still result in an 79 unit under-peñormance on low-income Regional Share. Under a revised policy at 10% lower-income (Scenario B), 140 additional low-income units would be produced and result in essentially meeting Regional Share for the current planning period. However, the difference in results between the two scenarios is relatively small during the 1991-96 period, and could be made up for by one or two additional subsidized projects outside of the affordable housing program. -17- J'i-02l -_.._-,._...,._~-_..._.~-_._"-,_.._._. , The greatest impact of a revised 10% low-income Affordable Housing Policy would be on the 1996-2001 planning period. While the 10% policy is projected to create an additional 73 low-income units in this planning period, it would create an additional 324 units in the next planning period, as illustrated in the table below. I'rQjected # of Units Under Present and PrQposed AHP 1991-1996 1996-2001 5% AHP 358 328 10% AHP ill ~ Difference +73 +324 Therefore, while a 10% low income requirement would slightly improve performance during the current 5 year period, it would appear to have a greater potential impact during the following five year period. In projecting the level of performance shown under Scenarios A and B, staff assumed that the affordable units would be built concurrent with the market-rate units and that the concentration of low-income units would not be limited. The implications of phasing and concentration issues on affordable housing production are discussed further in Section vn of this paper. Summary The analysis of growth forecasts and housing activity presented above suggests that, at a minimum, the City should continue its current policy, which requires that all developers address affordable housing needs, and for projects of fifty dwelling units or greater, requires developers to "explore methods to devote a minimum of 10% of said units to low and moderate income housing." In considering establishment of a more specific affordable housing requirement, certain issues need to be brought forward. The issues pertaining to establishment of a specific "inclusionary zoning program" are summarized in a recent article written by Timothy Coyle, Director of the State Department of Housing and Community Development (Attachment H). In this article, Mr. Coyle describes some of the potential benefits and problems associated with inclusionary zoning programs, and points out that in many cases a rigid inclusionary policy can actually reduce the overall affordability of housing being produced within the community. He suggests a more flexible approach, wherein cities provide incentives for production of housing meeting affordable housing objectives, rather than a strict regulatory approach. -18- jtj~;l7 -"- - -- --- -------.-...,----,---.---.,-. - It is also instructive to look at the approaches being taken by other cities in the region with regard to this issue (see Attachment I). While at least four cities have adopted Housing Element policies establishing "inclusionary zoning requirements" (Oceanside, Carlsbad, San Marcos, and Poway), to our knowledge none of these cities have yet established a specific pennanent program which implements those policies. Given the "uneven" track record of such programs throughout the State (as described in HCD Director Coyle's article), and the lack of successful local experience in inclusionary zoning programs, the City needs to approach this issue from a realistic and practical perspective. To summarize, while a Housing Element policy containing a specific requirement for 10% low-income housing in new developments would appear to improve the City's ability to meet future regional share requirements for low-income households, staff feels that the potential disadvantages of a specific inclusionary requirement of this type would outweigh the potential advantages. Therefore, a more flexible policy which provides incentives for providing low-income housing is preferable at this time. RECOMMENDATION 1: That the Council adopt a Housing Element policy which' shall be applied to all new housing developments except single-family, owner-built homes on individual lots-of-record. This Affordable Housing Policy (AHP) shall require a minimum of 10% of each housing development to be affordable to low and moderate- income households, with at least one half of those units (5 % of project total units) being designated for low-income households. For developments of less than 50 units, the developer may pay an in-lieu fee (to be established by the Council) in place of providing the affordable units. This policy should be periodically reevaluated to ensure that requirements placed on projects to be built after the current 5-year planning period will provide adequate affordable housing opportunities to meet the City's future housing needs. AHP implementation guidelines shall be developed to achieve flexibility and feasibility to meet this policy, and to maximize the use of available resources from the City, non- profit developers, and lenders. These Guidelines shall also establish a matrix of incentives to encourage developers to exceed the minimum requirem~nts by increasing the amount of low-income units provided within the 10%, andlor in producing units affordable to households in the "lower" range of both low-income and moderate-income standards. The matrix of incentives shall be structured to provide greater incentives for greater affordability. In conjunction with the policy implementation, the City shall evaluate the Land Use Element of the General Plan to determine the extent to which, in warranted cases, increases in density would facilitate the provision of affordable units. As appropriate, the City shall consider amendments to the Land Use Element. The City Council should make this evaluation a priority and request its completion within 6 months. -19- /¡j/d-c/ ---- --- ~._-,_._-_..,._"._"._.. IV. FINANCIAL ISSUES: The central issue facing Chula Vista and other cities in the region is how to balance growth, the quality of life, and housing opportunities. This section is an analysis of the factors which affect the cost of housing, the cost of producing affordable housing, and methods to address the affordability gap. The rise in regional housing costs over the past decade can be attributed to several interrelated factors. These include strong economic growth, rapid population growth, diminishing land resources, and stronger environmental regulation. These factors have created upward pressure on housing prices and have made affordable housing development largely unprofitable. The City has control over four factors which can significantly reduce the cost of housing development: density levels; parking and public facilities requirements; design standards; and development fees. While the City may wish to consider altering these standards to make affordable housing development feasible, any deviation should be evaluated to determine its effect on the quality of housing and quality of life. Current Market Conditions Over the last year, residential construction activity in San Diego County has been at its lowest levels in 10 years. New housing starts are down 40.5% and multi-family development activity is down approximately 70% from 1990 levels (San Diego Economic Bulletin, July 1991). The building industry attributes the slump in multi-family housing construction to lending conditions. The equity requirement for multi-family lending is as high as 40% (as compared to 10% previously) and the return on investment is lower than it was prior to 1986 (when the federal tax advantages were eliminated). Over the past five years, residential construction has been largely for-sale development, which produce profits in a shorter time frame. In a for-sale development, the developer is not required to make a long-term equity investment nor to secure long-term financing. In the 5-year construction forecast (Table 1), only 7.8% of anticipated construction is targeted for multi-family rental units. Low activity in rental housing construction could cause inflation in rents. Chula Vista's current rental vacancy rate is 3.4% (San Diego Apartment Association). If the rental vacancy rate remains low, rent escalation will directly decrease the supply of affordable housing (unless incomes rise as rapidly as rents). Homeownership Affordability The cost of a median-priced single-family home is beyond the means of 77% of San Diego County residents (San Diego Economic Bulletin, November 1991). Since 1975, housing prices have more than quadrupled. The American dream of owning a single-family home has moved -20- )L¡~J-I '--_.__.~-_._-_.__..-._".__... - , beyond the means of many moderate-income households in San Diego County, including families of police officers, teachers, and machinists. Lower-priced homes continue to rise in price even as the overall market declines, making it especially difficult for the first-time home buyer. During a recent 6 month period, a composite of lower-priced housing areas increased by 2.8 percent while the overall market declined by 1.6% (San Diego Economic Bulletin, July 1991; figures not adjusted for inflation). In Chula Vista, homeownership has become significantly less affordable for low and moderate-income families. During the past five years, housing prices increased by 60% while the local consumer price index rose by just 23% (San Diego Economic Bulletin, July 1991). Presently, single-family homes are selling in the $160,000 to $250,000 range (Multiple Listing Service). The median-priced home is selling for $180,000 (San Diego Union). Market Housine Prices and Affordable For-Rent Housine As shown in Attachment E, the AHP levels of affordability have been defined as 80% of median income for low-income and 120% of median income for moderate-income households. These defmitions target only the hi¡¡hest percentiles of the low-income and moderate-income ranges. As far as the State is concerned, these defmitions are satisfactory for the purpose of meeting regional share goals. One shortcoming of these definitions is that they do not guarantee that housing will be constructed which is affordable throughout the entire range: 51-80% of median income for low-income households and 81-120% of median income for moderate-income households. As shown in Attachment F, the lowest percentile of rental opportunities for households on the western side is 61 % and on the eastern side is 70%. The market is not providing affordability for the 51-60% range on the Western side nor for the 51-70% range on the Eastern side. If a primary purpose of the City's affordable housing program is to provide new housing opportunities for all economic segments of the population, then it should be designed to produce housing for the entire low-income range. The AHP should encourage an equitable geographic distribution of affordable housing, creating new housing opportunities on the eastern side comparable to those provided by the market on the western side. RECOMMENDATION 2: For the purpose of meeting regional share goals, the City's affordable housing program shall defme low-income and moderate-income in accordance with State law. (Current definitions are 51-80% of median-income for low-income and 81-120% of median income for moderate-income). -21- )L/~30 -.-....-..,.- -,-~--,._- '^' - ,..- --_.,--_._.,._-.-~----_._._, ----.., j Market Rate and Affordable For Sale Housinl! Low-income households cannot afford to purchase a home in Chula Vista without direct fmancial assistance. Condominium and townhome units, which are the most affordable for-sale housing units, are currently selling in the $100-160,000 price range in Chula Vista. From the data previously presented, it appears that the market will provide adequate for-sale housing opportunities for moderate income households to meet the City's regional share. However, on the eastern side of the City where the majority of new construction is expected to occur, the market is currently providing few moderate-income units. Two-bedroom attached units are selling for $140-168,000 and three bedroom units are selling for $165-190,000. A $165,000, 3 bedroom is barely affordable to a six-person moderate income household with a 10% downpayment. All the other prices are out of the moderate-income affordability range. Presently under the City's AHP, 111 moderate-income for-sale units are planned for development in the next two years. A project which includes 72 affordable condominiums will be built in Terra Nova, and the Baldwin Company will be building 39 affordable condominiums in Salt Creek 1. If the demand for above moderate-income housing is strong throughout the planning period, the Affordable Housing Program may be the only way to ensure moderate-income affordability on the eastern side of the City. RECOMMENDATION 3: The City shall encourage, through the plan review process and negotiations with developers, for-sale housing opportunities in the moderate-income range. Moderate-income affordability shall be based on not more than 33 % of gross household income applied toward the total housing payment, including principal, interest, taxes, insurance, homeowners fee, and assessment fees. -22- )tf -3 ( _ ~__ _._____ ______··_~____·_.__~.'·_m_ f v. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM: The Cost of the ¡nelusionary Housin2 Requirements A key question is what is the actual cost to provide affordable housing if the City requires developers of 50 units or greater to develop 10% affordable housing. The cost of the inclusionary requirements will vary greatly from development to development depending on the size of the project, the housing types, and the density allowed. Where the cost of developing affordable housing will not provide an adequate rate of return for the developer, the inclusionary requirement becomes, in essence, another development fee. For the developer, the affordable housing requirement is a cost which will either lower profits andlor be incorporated into the cost of the market-rate units in the development. This additional cost raises the concern that the market rate units may become less competitive with similar units in other developments. Financin~ Affordable Rental Housin~ Upon the request of staff, Eastlake and Baldwin submitted pro-formas for multi-family housing projects involving 80% market-rate and 20% low-income rental units (80/20 project). Based on these pro-formas, a generic pro-forma for a 80/20 project has been developed (see Attachment G, which was provided by South Bay Community Services Community Development Program). South Bay Community Services found that the generic project will provide an 11 % return on investment over the 40 year life of the project. The $23.4 million, 267 unit project will require a $9 million equity investment, which will be paid back to investors within 12 years. The equity investment represents 38 % of the development cost (net operating income will service debt covering 62 % of the development cost). Finding the equity to invest in the project would be a problem for developers. Given present economic conditions, lending regulations, and tax structure, this type of development is difficult to undertake. At this time, very few 100% market-rate apartment projects are being built. Without a change in market conditions, multi-family projects will need to be subsidized with local, state, and federal funds. Non-profit developers who have been successful in developing low-income housing have taken advantage of such subsidies, which include land write-down, below market-rate loans, loan guarantees, and state and federal tax credits. A joint venture between a non-profit and for-profit developer holds great potential for creating affordable housing. Four non-profit housing corporations are currently active in the South County. They are Casa Familiar, Civic Center Barrio/Hermandad Mexicana, MAAC Project, and South Bay Community Services. -23- ) ~/-J2 . -,._--_.,-"-------- - . Financin~ Affordable For-Sale Housin¡ Utilizing data on a proposed for-sale housing project planned for eastern Chula Vista, staff analyzed the impact of a 5% low/5% moderate-income requirement on a prototype 520 unit development. This development includes 166 single-family detached, 213 townhomes, and 141 condominiums; all 52 affordable units are to be built in the condominium project. Market prices are based on comparable area for-sale prices. In accordance with tables indicating affordability levels in Attachment E, a moderate-income household can afford current market-rate two- and three-bedroom condominium units. Therefore, it does not appear that a 5 % moderate income requirement places a financial burden upon the developer. The following criteria have' been used to analyze this project: 26 two-bedroom and 26 three-bedroom condominiums; household income = 80% of median adjusted for household size with two persons per bedroom; fixed rate loan at 9.5% with 5% down; 33% of household income for housing expenses, which includes principal, interest, taxes, mortgage and house insurance, homeowner association fees, and special assessments. The gap between the market price and the affordable low-income price is as follows: Unit size Market nrice Affordable price G~ 2bdrm $ 110,000 $ 75,550 $ 34,452 3bdrm 138,000 91,360 46,640 The total gap for providing the 52 low- and moderate-income units described above is $1,054,196. If this amount is spread evenly across the other market rate units, then the average cost increase per market-rate unit would be $2,253. However, as any price increase is limited by what the market will bear, the subsidy of the affordable units would probably be spread proportionately (e.g., on a percentage basis). . -24- ) i- 33 ----_.,---_._._"----_._._~,_._-- f VI. METHODS TO ADDRR\;S AFFORDABILITY: This affordability gap does not have to be filled solely by the developer. Various public and private resources can be utilized directly by the developer or through City assistance reducing the subsidy by 10 - 40%). Many of these resources are listed in the section below. State and Federal Housing Programs The Rental Housing Construction Program (RHCP) is a competitive program which provides construction and permanent financing at 3% interest. RHCP funds have been exhausted but additional funding will become available if California voters approve a new bond issue in June 1992. The California Housing Finance Agency (CHAFA) offers various subsidies to first-time home buyers, including below market rate loans (interest rates 1-2% below market) and $5,000 silent seconds. CHAFA is also initiating a new program to guarantee conventional home mortgages, similar to the FHA program (but at a lower cost). These programs are also dependent upon voter approval of housing bonds issues. Low-Income Housing Tax Credits is a highly competitive program which provides equity for affordable housing development. To raise equity, the tax credits are syndicated through private financial institutions or, for non-profit projects, through the California Equity Fund. The tax credit program must be renewed by Congress on an annual basis. Lender Assistance Under the Community Reinvestment Act, banks are required to increase lending for low-income housing. They have formed consortia and pooled their capital for such loans. A developer can secure pre-development, construction, and permanent financing for low-income housing projects through SAM CO, CCRC, Low Income Housing Fund, and other consortia. The funds available from these consortia are growing significantly. Many banks have initiated new loan programs targeted to first-time homebuyers (e.g., Community Homebuyers Program through G. E. Mortgage). These programs have relaxed underwriting standards which include a 33% debt to income ratio, 5% downpayment, and no cash reserve requirement. The Federal Home Loan Bank has a competitive program, the Affordable Housing Program, to subsidize construction and permanent loans for low-income housing through member institutions. Joint Venture with Non-profit Organizations Non-profit housing developers are typically given preference for affordable housing loans from both public and private sectors, as well as equity sources such as Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. These joint ventures do not necessarily prevent the developer from making a profit as is demonstrated in Attachment E. J1-! ~J 1 ----- ---~.._._-"--,~-------,._.__._.- - f Corporate-Assisted Housing Programs Some corporations in San Diego County have begun to assist their employees to purchase homes. Many companies do not pay their skilled and professional employees salaries sufficient to purchase housing in the high-priced local market. The company benefits from this program through higher retention of valued employees. City Participation in the Afl'ordable Housing Program The City's primary interest in implementing an inclusionary policy is to meet regional share goals and create balanced communities. While the City's direct participation in subsidizing lower-income housing is disCretionary, the City may wish to assist developers in providing affordable housing opportunities in one or more ways described below. Local Funds: The Redevelopment Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund receives revenues of about $1 million annually. In addition, the City will receive $748,000 of federal HOME funds over the next two years. Because these funds are very limited and are in high demand, projects providing very low-income units should be given priority. The City makes the best use of local funds when it is able to leverage other larger sources of funds or make gap financing loans. Competitive State and Federal Funds: The City of Chula Vista was recently awarded over $2 million of Mortgage Credit Certificates (MCC). The MCC can be used by the homeowner to reduce their taxes by 20 %, thus increasing income available for their housing payment. If these mortgage credit certificates (MCCs) were used by the 52 low-income hOlnebuyers in the prototype for-sale project described above, the affordability gap could be reduced by 38 %. The MCCs increase the purchasing power of the low income household by $10 to 15,000. Density Increases: Fifteen to thirty units of density per acre is necessary to build affordable multi-family housing. Some master-planned communities in Chula Vista do not have any density in this range (e.g. Rancho San Miguel) and others have very limited amounts. In approving general development plans and SPA plans, staff and Council may wish to look at creating sufficient density to allow affordable housing development. For projects already in the pipeline the City may want to consider density transfers or general plan amendments to increase density. Density Bonus Pro2ram: Under the new State Density Bonus law, the City is required to grant a 25 % density bonus if the developer agrees to restrict the 20% of the pre-bonus units to low or very low-income households occupancy for a period of ten years. If City gives other incentives, the duration of affordability would be increased to 30 years. Under the new law, the rent restrictions has been lowered to 30% of 60%; a developer will need to calculate whether the density bonus units and other incentives will compensate for the decreased income from rents . -26- / L/ - J.§' - -~._--- ---._"---.'-..--~----..- f Restructure DIF Fees or Participate with Infrastructure: The City could assist by restructuring the DIF fees to provide a fee reduction on the affordable units. One problem with the DIF fees is that the developer pays the same fees on a 800 sq. ft. townhouse as on a 2500 sq. ft. single family house. This creates an incentive to build larger, higher-priced housing units. One possible alternative approach would be to base the development impact fee either on the square footage of residential development or number of bedrooms, which may improve the affordability of smaller units. However, it should be noted the DIF fee is tied to the true cost of providing adequate public facilities and services. If the restructuring created a funding gap, the difference would either have to be made up with loca.l funds (e.g. redevelopment housing set-aside funds) or by the acceptance of a lower level of public facilities and services. Relax Desil!n Standards and Buildin~ Codes: Relaxing the City's design standards or building codes requires careful analysis by both the City and the developer. Lower parking standards, narrower streets, or reduced open space requirements may create a less desirable living environment; however, it could substantially increase the amount of developable land. Relaxing certain types of standards may make the overall community less desirable and lessen the value of market rate units. This approach could thus result in long-term negative social impacts to the community which would outweigh any short-term improvement to housing affordability. Down-sizing the affordable units can also reduce costs, although not as significantly as effectively increasing density. However, again the long-term social impact of this approach needs to be considered. RECOMMENDA nON 4: The AHP implementation guidelines shall identify ways in which the City, non-profit developers, and the private sector can assist developers to fulfill their affordable housing requirements. The developer should be required to demonstrate the feasibility of providing affordable housing. The City should make a good faith effort to assist the developer to address the cost of providing the affordable units. -27- /LJ -;Jt -,---..__.,,,.."--_..._----"----------- \ VB. AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY ISSUFS: Affordable Housing Types Although a majority of the housing units planned during the next five years are single-family detached, staff believes it is unreasonable to require these units to be designated as affordable units given the difference between the affordable price and the market price. The AHP implementation guidelines should allow developers to meet their requirement with for-sale attached housing and multi-family rental housing. The implementation guidelines should address the need for a variety of sizes of affordable units including 3 and 4 bedroom units for families. Limiting the Concentration oC Affordable Housing The percentage of affordable low-income units in a given project or neighborhood is an issue as is the distribution of these units throughout the complex or neighborhood. In the past the City has not limited concentration except in public family housing projects (to 25 units). One consideration is the limited amount of land in eastern Chula Vista with sufficient density to build affordable multi-family projects. Given the low percentage of medium high and high density in the eastern communities, a restriction on concentration may make it more difficult to achieve the affordable housing requirement. For example, a 25 % low-income concentration restriction would require a development to have 4 times its low-income requirement in approved multi-family units. To illustrate this example, a 2000 unit project with a 200 unit low-income requirement would need a base of 800 multifamily units in order to meet the concentration restriction. However, there may be creative approaches to project design which could also address this issue. Another consideration in restricting concentration is that certain types of projects require 100% concentration, e.g. Navy housing, HUD Section 202, senior density bonus housing, and public housing. The key to making these projects fit successfully into the community is good on-site management and appropriate design standards. RECOMMENDATION 5: The AHP implementation guidelines shall identify creative ways in which affordable housing projects can be successfully integrated into planned communities, taking into consideration social factors, programmatic constraints, and the 'amount of multi- family units in the project. Phasing oC the Affordable Units In order to meet Regional Share, the City will need to ensure that affordable units be built in proportion to overall development. The AHP implementation guidelines should phase in the construction of the affordable units throughout the development project time frame. It should not allow affordable units to be deferred to the end of a project. -28- /'--/-J7 ------ - ¡ The AHP implementation guidelines also need to factor in the relationship between the master plan developer and merchant builders. If the affordable units are deferred and become the responsibility of a single merchant builder in a late phase, it may make his/her project financially infeasible. Phasing requirements are especially critical as growth management policies may restrict implementation of later phases of a SPA. For example, a finite number of building permits will be allowed in eastern Chula Vista prior to Highway 125 completion. Consideration of this factor can help assure timely affordable housing development. Phasing may need to be reviewed on already conditioned projects. Because of the low percentage of planned multi-family development in the approved master-planned communities, the City should encourage the affordable housing to be developed in the early phases. This will be critical for meeting the low-income regional share goal during this planning period. RECOMMENDATION 6: The AHP implementation guidelines shall include phasing requirements which will ensure timely development of the affordable units in the earliest development phase possible. The guidelines shall allow consideration of the logical development of the units in terms of facilities, the general development plan, financing, and merchant builder involvement. Duration of Affordability Some criteria need to be established to maintain affordability over time. Under the City's AHP, the duration of past restrictions have ranged from 10 to 30 years on rental units (depending on the programmatic restrictions); no restrictions have been placed on for-sale units. For sale units are more problematic to restrict than rental units due to appreciation in value. Examination of past efforts under the City's affordable housing program can provide some insight on how to proceed into this new planning period. In Eastlake, for-sale units sold to low income families 5 years ago are presently selling in the moderate-income range as the result of rapid appreciation in value. (These units were not assisted by public funds.) Apartments complexes developed in Rancho Del Rey under the AHP will become market-rate by 1996 as the Io-year affordability restriction expires. (Due to the way in which low-income rents are calculated, some of the restricted rent levels permitted under housing cooperation agreements actually exceed market-rate rents.) RECOMMENDATION 7: The AHP implementation guidelines shall include specific methods to maximize the duration of affordability restrictions on low-income rental units produced under the Affordable Housing Program. The City shall ensure the continued affordability of assisted low-income and moderate-income for-sale units by recapturing a percentage of the appreciation at the time of sale. These recaptured funds shall be used to fund an on-going affordable homeownership program. An assisted unit is any unit so designated whose affordability has been created through a subsidy of public funds, special incentives, or other discretionary -29- /'1 / J g" ---...-,...."..-...,.....---.....,..,.. considerations to the unit or the project as a whole. State density bonus units and Section 8 assistance carry their own duration restrictions and therefore are excluded from this defInition. Impact of the AHP on Overall Development Fees The inclusionary housing requirement is like a development fee in that it should be calculated into a pro-forma as an overall development cost. The City should consider how this "fee" increases the level of total development fees in Chula Vista. There is a point at which the total amount of development fees could make a given project infeasible. The City should examine where this feasibility point is and consider placing a cap on the developer's "fee" for affordable housing. This cap could be determined according to a per market-rate unit cost for providing affordable units (e.g. $6,000 per market rate unit). If the cost of providing the affordable units exceeded the cap, then the affordable housing requirement would be reduced appropriately. Or as a last resort option, the cap amount per unit could be paid as an in-lieu fee or credited toward a land set-aside. A Regional Affordable Housing Program SANDAG has recently identifIed the infrastructure needs of the region for the next 20 years and estimated the cost of this at several billion dollars. It is anticipated that developers will have to pay for their fair share of this infrastructure cost as they undertake development. The cost of providing the regional share of affordable housing could also be calculated on a regional basis. Based on this calculation, SANDAG could develop a regional Affordable Housing Program and implement a fair Housing Development Impact Fee. SANDAG could also assist local jurisdictions to determine the value of various types of offsets, e.g. reduced parking standards. The advantage of a regional approach would be to "level the playing fIeld" for developers and local jurisdictions and establish comparable levels of development fees for all jurisdictions. Currently, a developer in a city with an inclusionary requirement or affordable housing policy is at a competitive disadvantage with a developer in a city without one. It should be recognized that the concept of regional impact fees is a controversial one, given its potential effects on overall housing affordability and economic development. However, there should at least be an effort to evaluate and monitor on a regional basis the "level of effort" which the various local jurisdictions are applying to meeting their regional share requirements, so that jurisdictions which are conscientiously attempting to meet their regional share obligations are not pen~ 1i7.ed either fiscally or economically. RECOMMENDATION 8: The City shall encourage SANDAG to develop a regional Affordable Housing Program in order to "level the playing fIeld" for developers and local jurisdictions. This regional program should create consistency in the requirements and incentives of local affordable housing programs, including the amount of in-lieu housing fees and the value of various offsets. /L/3( ----.-- -.--.-.-..----.-....-.- - -.-.-----.------...--.-" " ill. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDATION 1: That the Council adopt a Housing Element policy which shall be applied to all new housing developments except single-family, owner-built homes on individual lots-of-record. This Affordable Housing Policy (AHP) shall require a minimum of 10% of each housing development to be affordable to low and moderate-income households, with at least one half of those units (5 % of project total units) being designated for low-income households. For developments of less than 50 units, the developer may pay an in-lieu fee (to be established by the Council) in place of providing the affordable units. This policy should be periodically reevaluated to ensure that requirements placed on projects to be built after the current 5-year planning period will provide adequate affordable housing opportunities to meet the City's future housing needs. AHP implementation guidelines shall be developed to achieve flexibility and feasibility to meet this policy, and to maximize the use of available resources from the City, non-profit developers, and lenders. These Guidelines shall also establish a matrix of incentives to encourage developers to exceed the minimum requirements by increasing the amount of low-income units provided within the 10%, andlor in producing units affordable to households in the "lower" range of both low-income and moderate-income standards. The matrix of incentives shall be structured to provide greater incentives for greater affordability. . In conjunction with the policy implementation, the City shall evaluate the Land Use Element of the General Plan to determine the extent to which, in warranted cases, increases in density would facilitate the provision of affordable units. As appropriate, the City shall consider amendments to the Land Use Element. The City Council should make this evaluation a priority and request its completion within 6 months. RECOMMENDATION 2: For the purpose of meeting regional share goals, the City's affordable housing program shall define low-income and moderate-income in accordance with State law. (Current definitions are 51-80% of median-income for low-income and 81-120% of median income for moderate-income). RECOMMENDATION 3: The City shall encourage, through the plan review process and negotiations with developers, for-sale housing opportunities in the moderate-income range. Moderate-income affordability shall be based on not more than 33 % of gross household income applied toward the total housing payment, including principal, interest, taxes, insurance, homeowners fee, and assessment fees. RECOMMENDATION 4: The AHP implementation guidelines shall identify ways in which the City, non-profit developers, and the private sector can assist developers to fulfill their affordable housing requirements. The developer should be required to demonstrate the feasibility of providing affordable housing. The City should make a good faith effort to assist the developer to address the cost of providing the affordable units. -31- / t-j; yo --_..._--,...._--,--,.---,...."--------_...- RECOMMENDATION 5: The AHP implementation guidelines shall identify creative ways in which affordable housing projects can be successfully integrated into planned communities, taking into consideration social factors, programmatic constraints, and the amount of multi- family units in the project. RECOMMENDATION 6: The AHP implementation guidelines shall include phasing requirements which will ensure timely development of the affordable units in the earliest development phase possible. The guidelines shall allow consideration of the logical development of the units in terms of facilities, the general development plan, financing, and merchant builder involvement. RECOMMENDATION 7: The AHP implementation guidelines shall include specific methods to maximize the duration of affordability restrictions on low-income rental units produced under the Affordable Housing Program. The City shall ensure the continued affordability of assisted low-income and moderate-income for-sale units by recapturing a percentage of the appreciation at the time of sale. These recaptured funds shall be used to fund an on-going affordable homeownership program. An assisted unit is any unit so designated whose affordability has been created through a subsidy of public funds, special incentives, or other discretionary considerations to the unit or the project as a whole. State density bonus units and Section 8 assistance carry their own duration restrictions and therefore are excluded from this definition. RECOMMENDATION 8: The City shall encourage SANDAG to develop a regional Affordable Housing Program in order to "level the playing field" for developers and local jurisdictions. This regional program should create consistency in the requirements and incentives of local affordable housing programs, including the amount of in-lieu housing fees and the value of various offsets. -32- /1/'1/ -,_._.._,.__._-~-_.,----,.._._--_.., . ¡ ATTACHMENT A CRITERIA FOR CONSIDEliTION IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS TO LOCAL JURISDICTIONS Pursuant to State Housing Element Law, Government Code Section 6SS84, following are the seven factors to be employed by the Council of Governments (SANDAG) in establishing each jurisdiction's "Regional Share" of new housing needs for all income groups: · market demand for housing · employment opportunities . · availability of suitable sites and public facilities · community patterns · type and tenure of housing need · loss of units in assisted housing development to non-low-income use through mortgage/repayment, subsidy contract expiration, or termination of use restrictions · housing needs of farrnworkers and other disadvantaged segments of the housing market . , -31- /q--tj.2 - ~,--,-".,_..,-_._--,,,,.._._..- - . . ,'.... ! ATTACHMENT B' RESOLUTION NO. 15552 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD 1991-1996 AND ÂDOPTING THE REGIONAL SHARE AND FAIR SHARE ALLOCATIONS THEREIN The City Council of the City of Chul a Vista does hereby resol ve as follows: I WHEREAS, on January 17, 1984, the San Diego Association of Governments adopted a Regional Housing Needs Statement for the period 1984 to 1990, which reconunended the regi onal share and "fair sh~re" of housing needs for each jurisdiction as part of the San Diego region's total housing needs; and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista adopted the Regional Housing Needs Statement and the Regional Housing Allocation Formula as part of its Housing Element; and . WHEREAS, the existing Statement and Formul a relied upon the 1980 Census, Series 6 Regional Growth Forecasts, and other information available at that time; and WHEREAS, the effective period of the Statement and Formula (1984-1990) is about to lapse; and WHEREAS, the jurisdictions in the San Diego regi on are submitting revised Housing Elements for review and conunents by the State Department of Housing and Conununity Development; and , WHEREAS, the State Housi ng law requi res each juri sdi cti on to i denti fy its share of the region's housing need as part of its Housing Element and to avoid the concentration of lower income households; and . WHEREAS, the San Diego Association of Governments has revised the Regional Housing Needs Statement and Formula for 1991-1996 which uses the 1980 Census, Series 7 Regional Growth Forecasts, and other information currently available; and WHEREAS, the adoption of the revised Regional Housing Needs Statement would provide a step in a locally developed method of addressing housing needs of all households. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chu1a Vista does hereby resolve as follows: jt// '-/3 . .-.-...., _.---~_._"'_._._-,- - , Resolution No. 15552 . . - Page 2 1. The City of Chula Vista recognizes the Regional Housing Needs Statement, including the Regional Share and Fair Share goal numbers as indicated in Exhibit A & B attached hereto and incorporated as though fully set forth herein, for use in the City of Chula ~ista Housing Element revisions. 2. The City of Chula Vista hereby adopts its regional share of 3.3 percent, and its "fair share" allocation of 4.9 percent and a five-year goal to assist 1,058 lower income househol ds IS part of the total lower income household goal for the region (21,728). Presented by: Approved as .to form by: ~~df= f(~ert A. el er Director of Planning ) Jj 'tir- . ,- .,--'"-,-,--,.------.-- . I . Reso1 uti on No. 15552 Page3 - .. !¡ ! Þ".Þ--...---...--.., - ._~"D.__.."_~_"~._~ .. 0'" ~~"--.~ _".~.~~~_~o ..- -.. .. .. ft_ " "~__~ .- :ë .. ::: ! :!!.. ~ ~I .. ¡ ! Þ.._"~--_.Þ~"-"·---I Ii - J -."W"_..._"_N.~.__" j N ~~- .N~ "_"~_~~. _ft ..- - ..... .. C:IE - - -.. ·1 .o- J! c ~ '" j i - - . D t I! :; i 0 .. C -'Ii¡ ! .~o___o~····"___·""1 ~ '" . ;¡ cl~I" ..-.."'.""""__N.""Þ._ j - ~.- ""~ N__~.~." ·w. ..- S .,1_- .~ e E - - - ro- "1 ..- ;;; ... .. e ~ ÆE D :::: l!- e ~ - ~ ~ . '" ~- - .. Ii .. - c ! !Ü;g 'is II !i .a~_ 31¡ ! .. o¡: N ~ ~ < ... LI "1ft N »LI=..... :~::~:::==:~==:::~~I - .. .. =z=~ ~~ . "': i ~.- ...":: ... - N ... - Go ell .. - - ":1 N_ .. :is ~ r~:I'I ..; ~ .. ct~ - . ~ ~ i ~ .. .-;::a N .!! ~1o'I_"", - = - ~ .. 'is ... o " - '" Z ~ i=:l ... - ~ .c..... ::~~:::~:=;:====~:=I - .. - D. CI~ ~ Q .. - e .. e - c þoo MoI:- N~."O.~N."'D."...._.I .. .. ;; -: .. t'Æ J. II VJ_I ë~ "~_ ~ ~~"""~ "; .ö- ~ E ",.. D: ~ .. .. .. - .. .. .. ;;; '" - 'ii¡õ ¡¡; , - IJ -8 ;õt ~;- - "'I þo" .. . - _'!Ift~ .. .g~t- - Z .......,...... .'......., fill" _....0.,. 01_' '" .,. - . Ie õ'&t!!! D_......OIftNO..,N....O_N.... ..- eS';.e r ~~..~~~"~~~~~~~~.~~ .. N fol.lcncn .o- S '" :;1 _1ft ""0 "___...IftIftN ~O E IJ I! .. - - - .. .. .!.CCol :::. 0_ "Z ~ - !¿Z>.. ~!;I ...te~ i .- ....".""""...o."~...._ - ·"'ICE J! ~ ~I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~~~~~~ - Jt~-'= '" .. - ..G_" 0 ='" (!. C ..IJ '" < EE~- 0 ... ,,- .. < ... ;¡ 2õ°;) c ¥ =~ . I: ~ - "f,J!¿:ï; z ]1 . .! - 8 II I! f. - < ';;0 ...g I!IJ-Ij D ,g ~ .. .. .. .. ... -.... -, 1;;"CI" g~-. .0.- r~ ;¡ c~c! .1/' ¡ II .,Q ··_-i_MCC!~_."'! 8 5 E E E E ~~f~·~ot~o~..c~~ . ~ ~~ _u~Æ~ E-".ccc~~~ .. ::t :J :) :2 ðð8~~~ ~~~~~:~~~~~£ .. õõõõ 08 .., '" IJIJIJIJ EXHIBIT A /' 1'-/'" ¥-> _.",.__."----~.._._--".- - ( ! . Resolution No. 15552 . Page 4 . . . II . "1 ...- ~--~O__"".~~___ft__~ &t_ . ! "~~.~"..~~ft.._"~.~~ rc ~~" .-. .- --~..-.~ ..~ 0:- ¡;: -- .... - . c 1 i r", -.] "i ~ .!i ... -_R_-~~~"-_·_·_·""1 ¡:' :i .~.t !I D.~".O."_.~"_"""~." '" D...~"~".""~__""_.. -- ~ " :.s. --"ft.. ~~ þ....~"_ ":s .. ~ R R :! ' . -. ~ ë - .. .. .. - Of) . ..5 ~ ii!; .. - -"'~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .. .. ~.!: t - . ~ ..-0"""0"00·""""_"1 c ¡: .... . - ~ ... I: .,; 0 ! ~ - .. '" O~ = ~ ' f ~]I < i~ -¡ - .. ¡:~ . ¡jj ~ "-~~"..".O-..__.o._r .. - . ~ 2 ~ ~ ~.""-~~-NO~"N..~O~.I .. M - .. ~-- INN. "-,."~""_N~ ...- r~ CE C -¡ c - lit "I ~~ ~ o ~ :OEJ !: - - -- --.. -. - .!!.!~ .!!li!ig < ::1':~ ]~~.. . .~- ~~ ., ~ Of~ :. -.. :lCoIC:;cn CI ;,¡ . "Z - _ .. C ... ::ï>-: .t' I!' 1'. ' ~~ . N_-~~N.-._"-.._N_N.I .. "'~ ~ -~... - ~- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I - :!!~.: ,,-'-en ~ ~ C "'S°'" C- ~ , .. -I ..c.. .. -...~ JOr:- .. ~ 'Er- ;fJ=: 0 .!! ..... - ~- z C..:~~ õ: -. .. I!'> .; :j .., .!! a::;, E ..... - L" ::.- '" lit f:=, 2 .!! f.. ~ =: .E .. i t1 .. Å“ ClI 1- :.. lit c ¡¡ _ ~~.._~-"__".._NON_O 0 - :a:",_ .. ... ¡¡.!: !:: NO"_."cnN.cnNcn_.~.~..- IN_ =: ;:>~ :.. ~ ~ CI QJ ~~~·~~~"'~~"'~~~~~~~l:~C ft.. 1 ~E.! .~- ".~ "- ~.:ft._ft=ll; .: ~.'i -= ;:; ~ =.. g -c .. _ _0'[. '":' E - .- -'"lc.. . .. au 1;1 -_z .. ;; 1!'~:1 ~õ ~e.'r .. æ 11"1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~, :t¡';' "'.... ] j;r.~ - -1 ë"'cc}# .._Oo""ftO"O..""""O"_ - o ~EE- ..!: :"1 . - - CJ_ --:t:J_ .. 11:. A.I .8oIS~õ,,! Z "'- ~ . "'t,;tDU~r..HJ" .!.......:.... J ,þ-~...-...... ~r:~c,¡::cr:c E~Eii;§i C ~ ... .. eõfõ2õ'õ"3 < ~,... .c ~ "'¡';",t,lCl./l.;t,I - Co . . .!I r~ II ¡¡ f ~ Z .. oS! ~o .~- e ~, o~ u ~ - - - - ...:= :r. -"ft.. :!¡ ~~~~C=_~ftC¡~ ~~ = .. CC:C C C C ¡; a ~CC~~_MC· ~,..._.u. 0 g E = 5 E E = = ~' i~g2~~~t~=3~CC2!c.~ ~ .. = = = :I :I = == k ~' ~j!~~=~~_E.~~=c~~ië '3'ëõ'; --- .. C~~:~~~~~~z_~~~!~>~ :1: r..c...c...;.., e.è.è :1- EXHIBIT B . ) Lj --L/~ -,_..,,--~--~.----- . , I . Resolution No. 15552 . PageS PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, this 13th day of March, 1990 by the following vote: AYES: Councflmembers: Malcom, McCandliss, Moore, Nader, Cox NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councflmembers: None - ABSTAIN: Councflmembers: None . . ATTEST: ~l!r.~rt~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) , I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing 'Resolution No. 15552 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 13th day of March, 1990. Executed this 13th day of March, 1990. ~~(!.,{l~{f./, J'-i-,J/? - - ~~._._--_._--_._._~._.._-_...__..._- ATTACHMENT C Regional Share allocations apply to the period starting January 1989. In the RHNS, SANDAG proportionately reduced the allocations for the period from July 1991 to July 1996 to assist local jurisdictions, since that period closely coincides with local Housing Element update timeframes. While SANDAG's adjusted figures provide a benchmark, state law requires actual allocations for the 7/91-7/96 period to be determined by subtracting local housing construction activity for 1/89 to 7/91 (by income group) from the January 1989 total allocation figure. In Chula Vista's case, total construction activity for that period exceeded SANDAG's interpolation by 1,243 units, and thereby would constitute a reduction of Regional Share allocation figures shown in the RHNS as adopted by the City Coùnci1 on March 13, 1990. The revised remainder of needed construction activity by income group is shown in the right hand column. . The need to provide 628 new low-income units over the next five years will, in large part, be met by units required under the Affordable Housing Policy and Program, as the majority of new construction will occur in large projects east of 1-805. REGIONAL SHARE ALLOCATION CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO REGION 1989-1996 REGIONAL NEEDS STATEMENT' Region Actual City' City Re¡lanol Allocotlon by Chulo VIsto 1/89 to c.v. .. Construction Shere a.lance Jnc:ome GroUD 1/89 to 7/96 7/96 X Reaior. 1/89 to 7/91 7/91 to 7/96 Very Low (231) 1,232 37,313 3.3 . (OX) 1,232 low (1711:) 910 27,579 3.3 282 (9'1) 628 Moderote (211) 1,124 34,068 3.3 993 (331) 131 Other (39'1) U§.!! AUé2 3.3 Lm 1m2 ill TOTAL 5,354 162,229 3,028 2,326 - IBased on SANDAG Regional Housing Needs statement - Table A, July 1990. 2Based on city records, and construction activity in accordance with state Department of Finance annual reporting. ,34- JL-/ ~ 1/ g -- - _.~-- -. -~---_._--~------ - J~A1t Of '~IIFOINIA OIOI:OE DeUlM!JIAN. ~, ]t>EPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT @ Division of Housing Policy Development P. O. Sox 952053 J Sacramento, CA 94252-2053 ATTACHMENT D August 8. 1990 - Michael' McLaughlin Senior Regional Planner . San Diego Association of Governments 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 Dear Mr. McLaughlin: Thank you for Ihe copy of the dtaft "Regional Housing Needs Statement· for San Diego County which you provided to us. We understand that the plan is being reviewed by your members and will soon be presented to your Board for adoption. We have reviewed the plan for conformance with the provisions of Government Code Section 65584. Subject to Ihe understandings and actions described below, in our opinion, the draft plan conforms to statutory requirements. If there are any changes in the plan. we will review those independently of this finding. The Instructions in paragraph 2 on page 102 may not be sufficiently clear to prevent misunderstandings In the housing element review process. ., n reviewing housing ~ eiements, we will require that each locality account for Its allocation of construction needs from January 1, 1989 to July 1, 1996 by the four Income group percentages' shown In Table 56. Localities may subtract units completed since January 1, 1989. Subtractions by Income group should be based on evidence of the Income ,levels for which . the housing was provided. Tbe Instructions on page 102 refer 10 net surpluses and net . shortages. and this method can be used; but localities should understand that this is to be " done by Income group served by the new units. Because January 1990 DOF estimates will be helpful In updating construction needs, we recommend that you provide a copy of '~ those estimates. A copy of DOF's Report E-5. May 1990, Is enclosed. The plan Indicates that "Fair Share" goals are calculated on the basis of a "2.5 percent per year 'good faith' effort." As previously stated In our letter of June 11, 1984 on your last plan, we must note that this criterion Is not part of State housing element law, and that this Department will not apply It In Its housing element review..As your plan , Indicates on page 3, quantified objectives pursuant to Government Code Section . &5583(b) call for "the maximum number of housing units that can.be constructed, ...rehabilitated and conserved over. five-year time frame." . /Ll/t/f 24S ---"-,,--_..._-- , - .... Michael McLaughlin -- Page 2 , .A The plan does not discuss the eO-day local revision period provided for In Section 65584. We recommend that you provide each local government with written notice of .- this provision. - - If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Camilla Cleary of my Itaff at any - time at (916) 323·3180. We look forward to continuing to work with you on planning to meet the housing needs of San Diego County. . - - Sincerely, _. ; - 'i 1r;;;t. ':J. . . -. Na cy J. Jat-for, ~f Q - Div Ion of ousing Polic evelopmenl -~ - Enclosure -.. - -- -- -~ -- . -- -- -.J "] -J ~J -- I -.-J .~ -_J /Lj--þtJ - 1 246 ] _ ---.-.-- -.-. ..."'''.-"---..--- ---,.~--- Attachment E Affordable Housing Program-Definitions of Affordability The City bas not adopted specific definitions of affordable rental and for-sale housing. The affordable rent and housing payment levels which staff proposes is as follows: (Note: The size of household is assumed as follows: For rent units: I bedroom-2 persons; 2 bedroom-3 persons; 3 bedrooms-5 persons. For-sale units: 1 bedroom-2 persons; 2 bedrooms-4 persons; 3 bedrooms-6 persons.) AffnrrlHhleHousin~ Promun % for payment Income level x % of median lbedroom 2bedroom 3bedroom Rental Units low-income 30 x 80 $ 661 $744 $ 893 For Sale Units low-income 33 x 80 727 909 1,055 mod-income 33 x 120 1,089 1,363 1,581 /'1/_Ç/ - ----.~---_.__.,.~,.,"_._-- Assisted Housing Development-Def'mitioDS of Afl'ordabillty For housing assisted with the low and moderate housing set-aside funds or provided with a density bonus, State law provides the following definitions: Assisted Housin~ Develooment % for payment Income level x % of median lbed/2Å“r 2bed14Å“r 3bed/6Å“r Density Bonus-Rental very low 30 x 50 $413 $ 465 558 low '3Ox60 495 558 669 Redevelopment-Rental low-income 30x60 495 558 669 mod-income 30 x 110 909 1,023 1,226 Redevelopment-For Sale low 30x70 579 723 839 mod-income 35 x 110 1,059 1,325 1,537 For the AHP and Redevelopment For-Sale programs, the loan amount supported at various income levels is as follows: (Note: The figures below are based on 9.5% interest, 30 year loan, homeowner & assessment fees deducted, For units built on the western side of Chula Vista, add $10,000 to the figures. To calculate the affordable sales prices, add the amount of the downpayment to the figures.) Sqpportable Loan Amounts at Various Income Levels % for payment Income level x % of median lbed/2per 2bed/4per 3bed/6j)er Affordable Housing Program low-income 33 x 80 $ 52,000 $ 74,000 $ 90,000 mod-income 33 x 120 94,000 125,000 150,000 Redevelopment low 30x70 35,000 52,000 65,000 mod-income 35 x 110 90,000 120,000 145,000 .-- ) t.j ~)7 :J- ----.-.....----,...---...-"" ] a 'C 00 00 l"- I"- I"- tI. 1 ~ ..... !Q !Q .3 'C a on on ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ... e ø: ~ ~ ~ 0 1$ ~ ~ ~ . on I"- ~ r:.. ~ ..... Å“ on 11 ~ ~ ! i tI. ~ ~ .... 0\ :6 00 ~ ~ ~ 11 ~ ~ >. i on 00 ~ .&:I tI. 0\ on ~ .ã ¡ ;:t ~ ~ 1 ~ .3 ?;> tI. .... :a 00 .~ ..... ..... on .~ ~ ~ ;:t ;:t ~ ~ ~ 8 I .5 '" i '" I I I i ~ 'Ci N .... J ¡ .:¡ j j ~ '" 'is § ! ..... N .... i / t/ - ~0 ------.--------.--,-.....,.---.. , 'J. " Attachment G C:7Y 8F C1~ULA VISTA AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS ANALYSIS r:'''=.,,--r:; '-';"'--"". ----------------------------,---------------------- 1~/'?1 P'_',/' ;o1:'S=: . Ti:' ?val ;..·.¿It 2 'the impact ':'Îi -:q=.¡::-r at inç ·:z'\s!-, fl c,ws and : ï¡V(;:str:-,e;-,t - , a;.p¿..¡:tm2:lt development 1,.,¡it:-. 20~~ .:,f '-' , ~he units affoYdable to III ;:'\0.1- i nc ,:,me II (8C~~ elf AMI) ~e=ide;¡':5 . ASS~lmptic:'ns: - ? ¿~::,2d ,:,r, C:.ty i¡Ltm=;2";"S, Bald'...:in & ES5tla~~e proformas, and ssse reseaych. -- NF"J c ",1,: ~ased ':In a 40 yeal' bLlildi;-¡g ,.; .ç Very ccnservative. _,,¡, ,E. ~:;-¡c:'r;gË: . - Dpe'{2.'t :'C·;;SE· ,:an supp,:,·rt appr ,:':1;. 60~~ 0 'f devel cost - :::~~tity ir!\/::i'5tment I:' f $'3, Ot)O~ 000 p¿\id b=-,·: k irl 1:: years- - 'Jevel ;:,pmerlt yiel ds- an 11:~ 'r2tLl~"n t:lïJ i ÎI'/estmeï:t ':Iver 40 yea'( lif" Ea-!MATE~ DEVE~OPMENT B~DGE~ ------------------------------------------ OP~RAT!ONAL BASICS: 2E.. 7 T.:;t al units: 122 3 bed¡" ;:'I:,m, 74 2 :,d!' "7' 1 bd , . 2:24 !'1~rket F:ate units,: 102 3bd, E,2 2 bd, E·(J l!:d 4::::: L'ÏJ i-t:; a:fc'j"dab:e tel LI o¡"ente't"s: 20 3bd, 12 2td, 11 lbd ~EVE~OPMENT COË~S: $/UNIT :"'AND ACQUISITION ::'9000 480E,OOO C:ONS::TF:UCT I ON ($40/5f ~.-: 255,E.OO sf) (1) 10224000 SEE IMF'F:O'JEMENTS (Ctffsite C::/;istsY 12000 3204000 FEES 12500 333ï500 SC:t; C2S7S (¿¡,t 3. 5~~) 1833578 ----------- ----------- TOTAL EST!MAT~~ DEVEL COST $23,405,078 EST!MATED DEVEL COST / UNIT $87,E,59 NOTES: (1) 122-3 bd 12005f,74-2 bd 9005f,71-1 bd 60051=255,600sf )'-I/~/tj --..---- --..--....--. . CHU~A V!STA AFFOR~A8LE APARTMENTS SBCS SDUr-::~C¡::S ;~ND USES 11/'" 1 --------------------------------- --------------------------------- USES SOUF.:CES ----- ------- ------- ACG:!IJ:SIT!O!', 4805000 8.5i: LOAN 14482058 CONSTF.:UCT: ON 1 ~)224C'OO F'F: I '....'ATE ! ~.!'JSSTMENT 8'323010 SITE I !'"'!F'F:O·,')E1"1ENTS 3204000 80:-"7" C:OSTS 1833578 . r;.-r=:::::S 3237500 ---------- -,~ ,.-------- ----------- ----------- TOTAL USES $23,405,078 TOTI~L SOUF:C::::S $23,405,078 . \ / t./ ----._c;-5' ---,,_.. -"._.~ . ::::-iU~i~ :) I S;- A j~FF'JF:D¡':::.,Ð~E Ar-'ÞI:::;:T!'1Et\~¡S SBC2:: =::::;-A:L::::J SPr:::~:.oIT IN!; BCD!::;E: 11/9::. $/U/iilO $/¡¡¡ç, $/'year :'1ANA[3E!'1E!-'~T 28035 336420 ~:=.¡- ~ge/T¡er t Fe-=- "'='r:' ~~ Mgr. Apt. ::;~ent ~~ .:;",,;,¡ Sëlary . BEiiEfits ~- '~'. .:Ji MA::: ~JTEl'·JP¡NC:::: 22'~52 275544 Repairs/Mai~te~anc~ Mater :'a::'s ::'7 :"'!=-.int2:;~"\n,:æ L,3.t'Qr ~ '3 E~¡:':::e:~mi;¡G.t i;-;ç . - L.~~~=~~~æ/S~~,c~~s "'-'f_ J,. _..... ; _., ,_ 8 . .';;'..,,~ _·;:;1.....;: ~~~~sc~;a,/S~-~u~d= : - I- _ .... 17 -'':\'''''-'; . Paint:'~ç!rec~?ating - -, , ::,c:-~t·,~¿..c'~s :.C ;.;:.C;'-i: prn':E-:-j'~ Tr ~5h F:::~EiTloval j : .T'rl -""Tt=C 7743 '~2'31E, ....., ...0.-- ¡ ..._-' ~Jater ~,; Se'~Ë--: 29 ;~XESI I NSU¡:;::Ar\,ICE 10145 1'OO:"I~I::"OO:' ..........J... ~'1" ::,p 2Y' t Y Ta:'··;~s ~8 Other Ta;·':es 4 Fi\'e/Liabil ity Insu'(¿;ln,:e 15 ADMINISTF.:ATION 6408 768'36 Legal 5 Audit 6 Ma¡'ketir:g 11) Of f i,:e Phl:'ne/Sr..lppl ies . '" ~ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL EXPENSES 282 75294 903528 TOTAL Exp2nses/Unit/Year 3384 SC;L'are FClüt age 255600 TOTAL E;I~per¡seslSqL:are F"OClt 3.53 . )tj-.5? --.- _..,,-,._._-~._,--,-,_._.__._.'-, . CHULA V:STA AF~ORDA8LE APAR~MENTS SBCS CAS~! FLOW ANALYSIS 11/'31 MAR~:ET-RATE UNITS # unit:;; T F &': t ;:,'( e-'- $/171':' 13'33 1'2'34 . ~o 1 beer ':II:lm i"tiJ its SO 1.05 675 40500 4'-'c:r.-,C' , ..:;,--.:....; :2 bec'¡"':'I:,m i..tiiits 62 ~. 05 810 50220 52731 3 ~eer C":'iTl un i -::s 102 1.05 '3'30 100980 10602'=, -------- -------- -------- -------- TH Gross Re~t/year 2300400 2415420 ----------.----------------------------------------------- AFFORDABLE APTS. FOR LOW-INCOME RENTERS (based on 80% SD Co media~ i j¡': ': ~ be=~"!:ic.lm ur¡:' ts ~ 1 1.05 640 7040 7392 ::: bee u;-;i-:s '~¿\vg 3~~4 P'21"')' ~ .-:' 1. ':)5 743 8'J~¡; '? 3 E.2 -~ 3 =æè :.;ri:t=. (:;.vg 4~,;5 ;:¡ E"( ) :::0 1.. ':)5 863 i7260 18123 -------- -------- . -------- -------- , T '31'" ,:,·:;s.s ~:e-r:t /'~'ea,¡", 3'3'85'32 418522 --------------------------------------------------------- T ~.:. _ ~ 131" ':'S~ :-:::02:1:: /'/e:,¿,r 2S'?8'3'32 2832'~42 , \~, '.' ",...,i. ~ass \Jac~~cy Rese~ve C-.,t ~ 34'350 . ;j,1':::'::'¡-" __I,. ...'. _...J. ,. -------- -------- -------- -------- ;·:,tal Net Ef feet i -,,,'E ! rl ': i:,mE 2564042 25'3'::'::45 CPEF.:AT! ~G S>~F'!=:NSES '. ,~,,,:,,C' ';"31'378 1 0256'37 ,;.. '.'.......' MANAI3EME:!\lT 28035 :v!A!NTENANCE 2::'?62 UTIL!T!ES 7743 TAXES/!NeUF:ANCS 10145 ADMINISTF:ATION 5408 OPERATING RESERVES (3% I:IP e:f;p) 2259 REPLACEMT RESERVES (0. e.~~ .:,f c·:lnst I: CIst :> 5112 NET OPEF.:ATING INCOME 1572065 1555547 Debt C.:lver ag e Amc'Lln t 1. 15 23581'0 24'3832 -------- -------- -------- -------- Net !íJl:ome A\l&i:!.ab:!.e f .:,'¡" Dl?bt Servi,:e 1336255 1415715 Yeæ\Y'ly Debt Payrrlent 1835255 1335255 -------- -------- -------- -------- After-Debt Cash F11:lw 0 7'3450 Accumulated After-Debt Cash Flow 0 79450 Debt Service Supportable at fc.ll,:.\rJing yates: 10.00 12588945 (30 year term, mc.nthly calc.) 9.00 13839354 8.00 151757'30 \ 7.00 16737435 NPI,' c,f After-Debt Cash Fl,:,...., at cap rate clf: 8.00 18740027 9.00 15147318 NOTE - NF'V based .:In a. 4CJ year life 10.00 1237458'3 very c.onservative 11.00 10215078 12.00 8517747 ) L-/ /~Å¡'? - -.- ~.~,,-----,--_. --.---.-- · 1'~':,, 5 1'3'36 l'3'?ï ~ '=:.:::,.., 1'3'3'~ 2000 2001 :::002 __·..0 44S~.:!. 46884 4'3228 51S8';:1 54274 55'?82 5'?837 628:::'~ 553E,S 58135 51043 540'35 6ï300 70E,S5 741'?8 ¡7g0B 111330 1:'62'?7 122742 128879 1 ,,:,>e:..,.~''':I 14208'3 14'3193 156S~3 "'-''-'.....-.... ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 2~3S1'?: 25iS,3001 27'36151 2'335'358 308275E· 32358'34 33'3873'3 3558575 7752 8150 8557 8'385 '3434 '3'306 10401 10'321 '3830 10321 108~7 1" ":\-;-;~ 11':148 12545 13173 " ....,...,"'\.~, J....,¡I,", ....,:,0..:.,... 1'302'3 1 ':1'381 20';'80 2202'3 23130 24287 25501 ",:.r.: ..,-::: -'-"-'-' ~======= ======~= ======== ======== ======== ,======= ======== ======== 43'?'~48 4S,~42() 4344'31 5(:8715 534:'51 56085'3 588'302 518:A7 :::'37562':;' 312442: 2::eOE..42 3444E..74 3E, 16'~Oï 37'~7753 3'~87E.40 418702::: :4E,7~:::: :!. :::¿-:::::::1 lS4032 172234 18(:845 189888 1 '3';¡3S2 20'32:5 1 -------,- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- :28::::S857 2'~£8:::C'i=i 311E..f.l0 327 .:..'~~C 34360E::: 360ì8tS5 3788258 ~':"""""""r~ ...J...J It:!,... 10S:::531 10'3'?824 1138217 1178158 121 '33'34 1262073 :30E,245 13~1'3ËA 1764225 18E.8376 1978292 2094282 ' 2215558 23457'32 2482013 2525707 254534 280255 2':15744 314142 332500 35186'3 372302 393856 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 14'3':<5'31 1588120 1681548 178013'3 1884158 19'33'3'23 210';'711 ,-,,~,... oj 01:' 1 ....:........::.,¡,'-,~... 1 "=''''c ,~,C"C" 1 -....c '-,1:'1:' 1336255 1336255 1336255 1335255 1336255 1336255 _.....;....'.....~;.J ,:,¡,:,¡I-i........J...J ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== - 163337 251865 345293 443884 547'313 557559 773456 8'35596 2427':17 4':14552 83'3'355 1283840 1831753 2489421 3252877 4158474 I L/ /5:1 -"--".__.,~,.,-_._-_.-.,_....-- 2003 2004 2005 2COE. 2007 2008 200'3 2010 65'370 E,'?25'3 72732 7636'3 80187 841'37 88406 '~2827 81803 858'33 '30188 '34E/37 '3'~432 104404 109624 115105 164485 172710 181346 190413 19'3'=33 20'3930 220427 231448 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 374710':;: 3'334465 4131188 4337747 4554e.3~ 4782366 5021485 5272559 11467 12041 12643 13275 1393'3 14E.36 15367 16136 14523 1524'3 1601;2 16812 17653 18536 19463 2043E.. 28115 29520 30'3'36 32546 34174 35882 37676 3'3560 ===:==== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 6492EA 581728 715814 751E.05 78'3185 . 828644 870076 913580 43'36374 4e.161 '32 4847002 508'3352 ~343820 5611(>11 58'31561 E,18613'3 21'381'3 230810 242350 2544t:,S 267191 280551 2'34578 30'3307 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 4176555 4385383 4E,04E,52 4834884 507662'3 5330460 5596983 5876832 1 '":I'~'~·-:'O'":l 1448258 1498'347 1551410 160570'3 lE,61909 1720076 1780278 .w.I_",,":"'\-Iw.I 2777272 2'337125 3105705 3283475 347091'3 3668551 3876'307 40'36554 4165'31 440569 4é5856 4'32521 , 520638 550283 581536 614483 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 2360681 24';;'5556 263'384'3 27';;'0'353 2950282 3118268 32';'5371 3482071 1335255 1336255 1336255 1336255 1'336255 1336255 1336255 1336255 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 1024426 11 6030 1 13035'34 14546'39 1614027 1782014 1959116 2145816 5182'30C) 63432t)2 76467'36 9101495 10715521 124'37535 14456651 16602467 I /tJ /' ___0; _._---,._,-,-~.__.__._-- · ::011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015 2017 2018 974S8 102341 10745'~1 112831 118473 1243'?7 130E· 17 13ì14ì 12086() 126'303 133249 13'3'311 146':107 15·4252 161':165 17()(¡63 243020 255171 257'330 281327 .-:.c¡C'..,.:=a":'. 3::'0162 325671 341 '~54 ....~...J...J-'.... ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 5S3tS187 5812':1';:'6 5103645 5408828 672'3270 7055733 741'3020 778'?'371 16943 177'30 1867';' 19513 205'34 21524 22705 23840 :21457 22530 23ó57 2484.0 25082 27386 28755 301'33 41538 43615 457'35 48085 504'30 53015 55655 58448 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------- -------- -------- -------- '?5'~ 25'3 10072:::::: 1 r,~-:"C'C:·"=' 1110462 1165':J85 "22'~::85 12854'3'3 134S774 ..'.'....; ....~..... 64'35446 E.,820218 716122'? 7S 1 '32';:' 1 78'3:::255 82'300 ~ 8 870451';;1 '=139745 .,....,'~ ..,...,.,-. 341011 35S0e.~ 375'::~e.5 3'34763 414501 435226 455':187 '-'," 1_ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 5170574 647'3207 6803168 7143325 75004'33 7875517 826'3293 8582758 1842588 :1 '30707'3 ::. '37382E, 2042'310 2114412 2188417 2265011 2344287 4328085 457212'3 4829341 5100415 5386080 5687100 5004282 5338471 64'3213 E.,85819 724401 7550(;2 , 807'312 853065 900542 950771 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 3578873 388630'3 4104';:'40 4335353 4578158 4834035 510363'3 5387700 133Ë·255 1 ":I",:,.::.~,C'C' 1336255 1336255 1336255 1336255 1336255 1336255 _.......................; ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 2342518 2550055 2758585 2'3'3909';:' 3241913 3497781 37E.7385 4051445 18945085 21495140 24263825 27262923 30504837 34002617 37770002 41821447 I jL/~to -----""--_._-"--,._~-,- . . ':. 201.'3 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 :::026 144005 151205 158755 166703 17503'3 1837'31 192'380 20252'3 178556 187494 19585'3 20571:2 217048 227'300 23'3295 251260 35';:'052 377004 3'35855 415647 436430 458251 481154 505222 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 817'346':;- 8588443 9017865 9468758 99421 '36 1043930S 1 0';'5! 271 11509335 25032 25284 275'38 28'378 30425 31'348 33545 ,":,C'''''-''-' w~..:;,..:;,..::.. 31702 33287 34'352 36ó'3S1· 38534 40451 42484 44508 61371 6443'3 67661 71045 745'37 7°":1"":'-' 82243 86355 '-'0./":" ~ ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== 1':::·17:::63 :4e.812S :5G:::~32 15.:;;'05:5'3 1722Ë,.:)2 '180882S :. 8'3S!2S8 19'3.:.1-231 '?~'3Ë 732 10076569 1058('3'37 : 110'3417 11S64888 12248132 ::. 23S052'3 125035SE. ·'~-'~~S37 5('3828 52'=.1020 555471 52?·-':1··~ 512407 (:'.:1~l·)·-::" e.75178 u .."~ .'. ¡ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -,------- -------- 911Se'~5 '3572740 10051377 10553'?46 1108~S44 11635ï2E: 1:2217512 12828388 242E.337 2511258 :2~'3'~ 153 26'30123 2784277 2881727 2'382587 308E..978 S6'3055'3 7061482 7452225 7SE..3823 82'37355 8753'3'3'3 9234'325 9741410 1003584 1059222 1117834 1179574 1244505 1313100 138523'3 1451211 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 5586975 5002250 E..3343'31 5684250 7052761 7440899 7849585 82801'38 1336255 1336255 133(;255 1336255 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 4350720 4655005 4'3'~8135 5347'395 70527E·l 74408'3'3 784'3585 8280198 45172157 50838172 55835308 51184303 58237055 75577954 83527550 91807848 \ Itj/~/ ,-,.__._,.~~----_.~-~,_._-_.__._.._.- - . . , . 2027 2028 202'3 2030 2031 2032 212761 2223'3'3 23456'3 246297 258612 271542 263823 277C'14 2'=0865 305408 32067'3 336713 530483 557007 . 584858 614100 644805 677046 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 12084802 1268'3042 133234'34 13'38'366'3 14E.8'3152 15423610 3E,.384 38833 40774 42813 44'354 47201 4683'3 4'''181 51640 54222 56933 5'3780 '30673 '35206 9'3'367 104965 110213 115724 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------, -------- -------- 20'33'342 2:'38640 2308=:72 242400e 2S45:::00 '2672450 :'.::~·178ï44, 14887E.31 15632065 1E,4136(;9 17234352 180'?6070 708'327 744384 781S03 820583 Ot:1-~O '304803 1...'. .l.'-i -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 1346'3807 141432'?7 14850452 155'32'38~ 16372635 171'312E.6 31.'~5022 3306848 3422588 3542378 3666361 3794684 10274785 10836449 11427875 12050607 12706273 133'36582 . 1541218 1625467 1714181 1807591 1905'341 200'3487 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 8733567 9210982 '37136'33 ~J\:::43Ü16 10800332 113870'35 -------- -------- ----_..,,-- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -----.--- -------- -------- -------- 8738567 9210982 '?':"" .L36'33 10243016 1Ü800332 113870'35 ******************~~********************************** / tj - þ;L _.,.._-_.,,"_.~----_._-" , AT',TACHMENT H Timnthy L. Cnyl~ WHY INCLUSIONARY ZONING? Local governments have come to rec- ognize the primacy of their zoning pow· ers and are putting them to wod< on be- balf of affordable housing. Wbile some è~"''''''' places still exclude multifamily bousing, impose inordinate conditions on new res- , ~"~"~"~11 idential development, or arbitrarily limit growth or densities, more and more local INCLUSIONARY ZONING officials are responding to the housing needs of their constituents by upzoning sites, being creative and flexible with de- Is It Helping or Hurting Housing? sign standards, or otherwise helping to reduce the cost of affordable housing de- velopment Some cities and counties have turned to inclusionaey zoning when first wres· A s California struggles with its affordable housing crisis, it has be- tting with the affordable bousing issue and their responsibility to ensure that lo- cal planning supports the development of come clear that local governments will need to throw their creativity and bousing for all income levels. With the capability into the fight. Although state and federal governments have tak- best of intentions or in response to politi- en several approaches to provide housing subsidies, the success of any ef- cal pressure, many local governments fort to meet the state's housing needs will be determined by local land use bave established rules under wbicb 10 or planning. 20 percent of the units in any new devel- opment must be set aside at affordable prices. Sucb a response to California's The state has given cities and counties land use and housing affairs of local gov- bousing affordability problems is the authority to decide what to build ernments? The state-under direction of straigbtforward and simple, but frequent- where and under wbat conditions; this de- a Statewide Housing Plan and with the re- ly it is the wrong way to build bousing. termines the type, pattern, and amount of sponsibility of reviewing bousing ele- WHAT'S RIGHT AND WRONG WITH residential development. Increasingly, 10- ments in local general plans-provides INCLUSIONARY ZONING cal governments are using this authority, guidance and assistance to cities and Inclusionaey zotting appeals to local througb inclusionaey zoning, to compel counties in their efforts to address Cali- governments for several good reasons developers to provide affordable housing fornia's housing needs. See Planning for and because of a few very bad realities. as part of new develupment. Will this AffordiJble Housing, p 9. Sbould the First, affordable bomes in a mixed-in- belp solve California's bousing prob- state support or discourage inclusionaey come housing development look like , , lems, or will it be another barrier to de- zoning? How can it best work with local market-rate bousing and this avoids the velopment? government to provide affordable hous- stigma too often attacbed to subsidized What role should the state play in the ing? "affordable" housing. Integrating lower- income bouseholds into aparunent com- plexes, townbome villages, and planned communities gives all members of soci- 11mothy L Coyle was appointed Direct« of the De- ety access to the better schools, good , partment of Housiug aDd Cooununity Development parks, and higher quality of life often t by Governor Pete Wilson in February 1991. With a found in newer neighborboods. Impor- I $412 DI11lioD anooal buds'" HCD seu hous.Îllg....- tantly, it also gives lower-income resi- danis. assists local govenuncnts in developing hoos- dents access to new jobs, most of wbich ~ ins policy. ud oversees affocdabJe bousing ¡ro- grams for the elderly. the poex. and the bomeless. Mr. tend to open up in s¡¡burban locations. " , Coyle also.served in severa1 capacities in the Depart- In part, inclusionaey zoning bas spread ¡ mem of Housing and Urbaa Deve1opmeDL. iøc1udiag r Assistant Seaetary fÅ’ Legi.s1atioa &ad Coagressio- because local officials in land-short com- u! Relatiou-a position to wbicb be..... -""led munities recognize that every new devel· r by Proside.. Bush ill 1988. A groduate of San Die80 opment represents the use of land, a vital State UDÎvenity, Mr. Coyle holds. B.A. ill JournaJ- ~ ism &ad Busiøess Marketing. resource for affordable housing produc- tion. Sites using lower densities mean ~ less opportunity for more "land-efficient" ~.. Timothy L. Coyle higber-density construction. To the de- gree that local governments make more sites available for the construction of af- /Lj-'~ J 27 -..- -"~^. ....--. _._,."_.~-_..~----_.-.-_...-.-- ., , , . fordable housing, inclusionary zoning sionary zoning follows a decision by a Jaw to abide by the Statewide Housing may be a useful tool. community to limit or halt growth, re- Plan and accommodate their fair share of In those cities that provide deosity bo- duce allowable densities, or place vacant the housing needed by current and future . nuses and creatively apply design stan- land off limits to residential develop- residents of all income levels. The most dards or otherwise work with developers ment Stung by the criticism that these ac- effective tool cities can apply is their au- f to encourage housing, a requirement that tions constrain the housing market and thority over land use. a ponion of units be made available for reduce the sites available for subsidized We must find a way to ensure that 10- I low- and moderate-income households projects, many localities have adopted in- eal governments fully utilize their land clusionary zoning as a fig leaf to cover use powers to suppon aggressive afford. the nakedness of their land use and hous- able housing sttategies. Sacramento and "Au ing programs. Washington have, in the last few years, In these too common instances, inelu· increased their fmancia! commiunent to I too often sionary zoning becomes a constraint or lower-income housing, but their suppon , an exaction on new development For ex- alone cannot adequately deal with exist- inclusionary zoning ample, in cities or counties reluctant to ing and future needs. To get the most for follows a decision by approve new housing conslruction, sing- our subsidy dollars and catalyze new de- a community to limit or Ie-family homebuilders are forced to pro- velopments, local governments must vide inclusionary units or pay exorbitant create a regulatory environment that en- halt growth, reduce in-lieu fees as a condition of approval. To courages, not discourages, the develop- I allowable densities, or recover the cost of providing units at less ment of affordable housing. I place vacant land off than market-rate cost (or pay fees), build- ers have to raise the price of the other limits to residential houses. Thus, new homebuyers-arapid- development. Stung by ly shrinking group in California-must "As the criticism that these subsidize other new homeowners with practiced in lower incomes. actions constrain the To make housing affordable to lower- most of California, housing market and income families and individuals typically inclusionary zoning I reduce the sites requires a subsidy. Cities can provide this has become a tax on I available for subsidized subsidy through zoning. Raising the den- new homebuyers sity on a site increases its value and local projects, many localities governments can recapture this value in and renters. have adopted the fOtm of inelusionary units. These This is wrong. " I units may be provided as part of a specific inclusionary zoning as a project or separately as part of an altema- fig leaf to cover the tive public-private sttategy to build af- .... nakedness of their land fordable housing. However, cities moti- m use and housing vated more by a desire to generate funds favor in-lieu fees rather than actually programs. " building housing. As practiced in most of California, inclusionary zoning has be- Inclusionary zoning can be a part of ..... come a tax on new homebuyers and rent- local land use and regulatory sttategy that m et'S. This is wrong. Providing affordable also creates adequate sites, minimi7es de- housing is a community-wide responsi- sign requirements, waives fees, eases bility and should not be a burden placed growth controls, and-most imponant- on only those whose job it is to conslruct ly-helps meet state and regional hous- can usually be easily met. Most success- housing or on fU'St-time homebuyers ing objectives. The housing element of ful inelusionary programs are in cities wanting to share in the American dream. every city and county general plan points that allow homebuilders design flexibil- HOW TO USE INCLUSIONARY the way to the adoption of local plans that ity to integrate affordable housing into ZONING are pro-housing. The current reasses- new subdivisions, grant healthy density sment of the proper roles of local, region· honuses to apartment developers, or pro- At its worst and, unfortunately, most al, and state government in the manage· vide high-density sites in master planned common use, inelusionary zoning serves ment of California's growth offers the communities. as an inequitable tax to subsidize hous- way to fully institute housing element However, the record on inelusionary ing. At its best, inelusionary zoning re- law. This will enable local governments zoning in California shows rigid guide- fleets a local commiunent to encourage to not only carry out the Statewide Hous- lines being used by communities that are and work with developers to provide af- ing Plan, but also meet their affotdable Dot lruly interested in the development of fordable housing. Local governments housing needs in a much more productive affordable housing. All too often inelu- have a responsibility under California and equitable way. . 28 ) ¿)/? i "_ _..__._'''~____n_..,__·.m__..,.__._,__ ATTACHMENT X The Responses of other cities Similar to Chula Vista, several other cities in the region are considering some type of inclusionary housing policy/program as a principal means to addressing the state Regional Share new construction allocations for lower-income households. Given the growing need for this housing, and the markets tendancy toward higher priced single family units, the inclusionary approach becomes a logical, direct reaction to the opposing directions between needs and the housing market. without such an approach to ensuring affordable housing, cities' are finding it difficult to provide an adequate number of lower-income units as previous federal programs are scaled back, and the cities alone do not possess sufficient revenues to underwrite housing development. While most of the proposals are in their initial stages, the following offers an overview of the major components of each: CARLSBAD: - policy: Minimum of 15% of all units approved in master plans, specific plans, and residential subdivisions shall be affordable to lower- income households. For master plans involving more than 100 acres, an additional 5% of the units must be affordable to moderate-income homebuyers. Where it is demonstrated as economically infeasible to build the required units, an in-lieu contribution of funds, land, or other contributions may be made. The in-lieu fee may be attomatically used for developments of less than 5 units. The amount of contribution is to be studied and will be based on the cost differential in developing and constructing market rate .vs. lower-income affordable housing. - Affordability Levels/standards: 15% lower-income not specifically defined by policy as to amount of very low or low-income. The city recognizes that very low- income is essentially infeasible within private master planned developments, and will require other specialized programs such as public housing and SRO's. Future implementing ordinance will refer to the folowing ranges for low-income affordability consistant with state Law: * Non-government assisted - up to JO% of 80% of median income. * Gov. assisted rental - up to JO% of 60% of median income. * Gov. assisted for-sale - up to JO% of 70% of median income. / I t/ --kj, ~-~.._----_..~~"_.__..,- - - Financial Impact: Under study. Preliminary evaluations utilized a mUlti-family condominium project at 20 dulac, with no total project size assumed. Including land, construction and fee costs, a 2-bedroom unit production cost of 143,000 was reached. Utilizing a 3 person household size, a low-income family could qualify for a $43-45,000 loan, leaving approximately $100,000/unit to be addressed through down payment and various private sector and/or public subsidies. - Subsidy Approaches: Carlsbad is studying the following 5 methods to address the $80,000 - $90,000 gap per unit after a 10% or 5% down payment- * Density bonus * Fee waiver/reduction * Loans or other direct assistance * Flexible building/site planning standards * Expidited processing If all 5 methods are employed, general estimates are that about 50% of the gap can be closed, with the remaining $40,000 - $45,000/ unit to be addressed by the developer alone or through assistance external to the city.. - Status: City Council adopted policy statement as part of the Housing Element Update in November 1991. Staff and a committee, with local development representation, reviewed financial impacts and policy implementation and have issued a report. Staff is drafting an in-lieu fee ordinance based on a nexus study, which establishes relation between purpose and the amount of the fee. OCEANSIDE: - Ordinance: At least 10% of the units in all developments must be affordable to low and moderate-income households. Projects within the Redevelopment Area are exempted. An in-lieu fee option is offered to be used in-part or in-total for the required units. - Affordabi1ity Levels/standards: Different approaches are established for for-sale and rental units as follows: Rental- * Restricted units must be affordable to low-income households * Max. rent at 30% of 60% of area median income adjusted for family size, using a 2 person per bedroom rate. * If rental units are within a master plan development including for-sale units, 10% of the rental units must still be low-income affordable. * 30 year duration /~¡b . ,--"_._------,--"~-_...._" - For-Sale- * Price not to exceed 250% of area median income adjusted for family size using a 2 person per bedroom rate. * Restricted units must be affordable to moderate-income households at 100% of area median. * Re-sale restriction to other moderate-income households for 30 years. * units must be proportionate in square footage and number of bedrooms to market rate units. * units must be built prior to or concurrent with other units. In phased developments, affordable units must constitute 10% of the units in each phase. - pinancia1 Impacts: The in-lieu fee program requires each of the units which would have been reserved to pay an amount sufficient to subsidize the median priced home in Oceanside to be affordable to a moderate income household. The formula is; median sales price of homes in Oceanside -minus- affordable sales price for a 3-bedroom home = In-Lieu Pee. That affordable sales price is 250% of the area median income for a family of six. Based on a $170,755 median home price and $112,750 income figure, the current in-lieu fee per restricted unit is $58,500. The total fee for any project is then spread equally over all the units, with the resultant amount collected at the time of building permit issuance. - Subsidy Approaches: No formal assistance stategies were adopted, and the city expects developers to absord financial impacts through spreading costs to other units or by obtaining subsidies. The City is willing to assist developers in availing themselves of such external subsidies, participate in bond financing, and consider other requests on a case-by-case basis. - Status: Ordinance is in force, adopted by City council on October 2, 1991- VISTA: - policy: New policy requires 15% of the units in all projects to be set aside for lower-income households at affordable rents. (6% has been required since 1985) . Allows for payment of an in-lieu fee, or land dedication. - Affordabi1ity Levels/Standards: Draft policy uses 80% of median income and requires restricted units to be comparable to other units in the project (not all condo/apt.). Also includes 30 year duration for for-sale and rental. ) rj /Þ? - _____.___...~."_______.._~_,... n..__"__ - Financial Impact: Based on an intricate formula which employs construction costs per square foot, average square footage size of units, average number of rooms per unit, building fees, average persons per room and median income, the in-lieu fee for a prototype 2000 sq. ft. house is $8300. - Subsidy Approaches: None prescribed, but make referrals to San Diego County Housing Authority if developer choses to provide units. staff indicates the in-lieu fee payment is typically chosen. Approximately $2,000,000 have been collected since 1985. - Status: 15% policy adopted with Housing Element update. In-lieu fee ordinance revisions expected for adoption in March 1992. ENCINITAS: - Policy: Has adopted inclusionary housing ordinance which requires 10% very low-income housing in any development of 10 units or more. Provides for an in-lieu fee option but does not specify amount of fee. city is currently working onm establishing an in-lieu fee amount. SAN MARCOS: - policy: Residential developments over 4 units would be required to include 15% affordable housing as a condition of development. That 15% is generally intended to be split 5% very low/ 5% low/ 5% moderate-income, however these distributions can vary by project area and type. Alternate compliance through in-lieu fees or off-site options is available. - Affordability Levels/Standards: Proposed to vary for for-sale and rental housing, and by method of financing or subsidy used. * Moderate-income affordability in for-sale at 100% median income. Sales price not to exceed 2.5 times annual household income by family size. * Low-income affordability in rental housing between 50% and 80% median income. * Very low-income in rental housing at up to 50% median income. * Affordability restrictions to last 50 years. - Financial Impact: In-lieu fee approach is to require an amount sufficient to bring a market rate product to the particular level of affordability. In-lieu fee is based on the difference between a median priced home and 2.5 times the median income. Range may vary between $10-15,000 unit. }'I-¿,~ ,------~.~~._--~._._- - Subsidy Approach: Specific approaches are not outlined, however tax increment set asides, and design flexibility are identified as available incentives. In general the city is not focused on offering substantial subsidies to build units in larger projects, but rather for developers to directly absorb or spread costs to other units. - Status: Policy has been previously reviewed by ad-hoc housing committee and approved by city council with Housing Element Update. Ad-hoc committee to continue work on implementation strategies, in-lieu fees, alternative compliance options, and ordinance. CITY OF SAN DIEGO: - Policy: Considering a 15% requirement which would produce both for-sale and rental housing as folows: * 7.5% very low and low-income rental * 7.5% low and moderate-income ownership Half of that amount (3.75%) would then apply to each income group How and to what size projects the requirements will be applied is under study by a task force. It is anticipated that a variable program will be devised according to type and scale of project, and area of the City. In-lieu options are not being recommended. - Affordability Levels/Standards: To be determined by task force. Proposed levels are as follows; * very low-income rental - 40% of area median. * low-income rental - 60% area median. * low-income ownership - 70% area median. * moderate-income ownership - 90% area median. Calculation methods, persons per bedroom rates, and other standards also forthcoming. - Financial Impacts: Under study by task force and consultant. Housing Commissions position is that developer should not be excessively burdened, but rather empowered to provide units by the City through development and regulatory offsets. The idea of "robbing Peter to pay Paul" by spreading costs to market rates units is not viewed as sound housing policy. - Subsidy Approaches: The following are being studied as candidate areas for compensating the economic impact of the requirement on developers * street widths and other site planning and design standards which consume land area and increase development costs. * density bonuses * fees * processing JL-/~(/j -- - * non-profit joint venture partnerships The intent is to identify a level of offsets sufficient to avoid direct costs to the developer. - status: Task Force to review and vote on policy percentages and standards on Nov. 20, 1991. Consultant studying financial impacts and value of various development incentives. Draft report to be available in January 1992. COUNTY OF SAN .DIEGO: - Policy: An inclusionary "Balanced Communities Policy" is being suggested for development with the County's Housing Element Update to address provision of low and very low-income units. Changes to the existing "Affordable Housing Development Fund" are also proposed to support an in-lieu contributions program. - Affordability Levels/standards: The percentage of inclusionary requirement, tarket income groups, and standards for application to projects have not yet been defined. - Fiscal Impact: Unknown - Subsidy Approaches: Unknown - Status: Balanced Communities concept to be considered by Board of Supervisors with Hpusing Element Update on Nov. 20, 1991. Staff will be asking Board to authorize needed studies to develop a working policy and program. )?j-?O -, ,_.,.~..._-~----_..__..- ~¡"f~ ~ ~~ . ~- ';Alft,iitJ" ASSOCIATED BUILDING INDUSTRY ENGINEERING AND GENERAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION OF GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSOCIATION COIISTBVCTIOII I II DV ST BY rlDIBATION 6336 GREENWICH DRIVE, SUITE F, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92122 (619) 587-0292 FAX (619)455'1113 March 3, 1992 Agenda Item 14 Public Hearing on Housing Element Honorable Mayor Nader Chula Vista Councilmembers 276 Foutth Avenue Chula Vista, CA Dear Mayor Nader and Councilmembers: The Construction lndustry Federation again appreciates tlùs opportunity to provide comments on the draft Housing Element. We commend city staff and the Blue Ribbon Committee for a generally excellent draft document. However, ClF remains concerned about the proposed inclusionaey zoning program and therefore makes several recommendations to your Council. City of Chula Vista's Commitment Essential To Provide Affordable Housing! We recommend that Chula Vista remove affordability baniers, and become the leader in our region to provide incentives to make affordable housing projects feasible. We therefore request that several incentives be implemented to help provide affordable housing including: a. design flexibility for homebuilders to integrate affordable housing into subdivisions; b. allow density increases for apartment builders and units in master planned communities; c. conduct a thorough review of the land use element to remove conflicts with the housing element; d. shortening the development review process; e. provide assistance to boost non-profit groups to provide affordable housing: f. allow for narrower streets and fewer parking spaces especially near transit nodes; g. restructure the development impact fee rules to allow for fee exemptions and reductions; and h. review the impact of new and increased fees on affordable housing. Concern for Inclusionary Zoning Program We continue to be strongly concerned about inclusionaey zoning. lnclusionaey zoning programs in Oceanside, Carlsbad, San Marcos, and Poway have yet to establish workable and realistic programs to provide affordable housing. lnclusionaey zoning is a tax on new home buyers and renters to subsidize lower income units. This is an injustice that simply increases the cost of housing instead of making it more affordable. Conclusion Although ClF cannot support inclusionaey zoning, we ask for your strong commitment towards implementing the above incentives thus m3king housing more affordable. o~~ 1t-J./7/ -~_.,._,...".,- - '--~--"--"-""---~"----'-~'-'-'--'-'--------------------,----~_._- ----- -~~>~, - CITY OF CHULA VISTA HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1991 r:....... ., - '" Draft CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN DECEMBER 1991 CITY OF CHULA VISTA GENERAL PlAN HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1991 City Council Members/Administration Tim Nader Mayor Leonard Moore Mayor Pro Tempore .-..- David L. Malcolm Counc i 1 man Jerry Rindone Counc il man Shirley Grasser-Horton Councilwoman City ManaQer John D. Goss City Attorney Bruce Boogaard City Clerk Beverly Authelet City PlanninQ Commission Susan Fuller, Chairwoman Joe D. Casillas, Vice Chair Joanne E. Carson, Commissioner Robert E. Tugenberg, Commissioner Laverne E. Decker, Commissioner Thomas A. Martin, Commissioner William C. Tuchescher II, Commissioner Approved by the Plann i ng Commission on February 26, 1992, under Resolution GPA-90-09 Adopted by the City Council on March 10, 1991, under Resolution No. -.-- This Element amends the Chula Vista Housing Element of 1986. -,.~- ....-.... -----.---.---- -.-- -.-- HOUSING ELEMENT STAFF Administration ---- Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning Chris Salomone, Community Development Director Professional Assistance David Gustafson, Assistant Community Development Director Edgar Batchelder, Associate Planner David Harris, Community Development Specialist Margery Girbes, Housing Coordinator Alisa Duffey Rogers, Community Development Specialist Consultant Services Pamela Johannsen _., -- -..- -- -".- _.-.__._~-,-_._.... --,- "---- --_._-----_._..__._-~._---_._-----,-- --.-. ---- PREFACE -...- The principal of American freedom is rooted in the proposition that government exists for the purpose of enhancing and protecting the natural and fundamental -- rights of human beings. One such fundamental right is the access to suitable housing opportunities in decent neighborhoods. The good society has the obl igation to create the conditions under which these rights are protected, ~_.- and individuals can grow and work for a fuller life. In this respect, a free society is not just a nation of laws, it is an idea with a noble purpose. It seeks to create an environment for human ity' s most enduring aspirations including prosperity, sacrifice, idealism and beauty. - , -.--- -..- -- -..- h -- -..- _ ___~..._..m____ .,.._,_,_ --.. _._--_.."--~--_.,----~--~-_._----~---_.~-------~---- - , PUBLIC PARTICIPATION - THE MAYOR'S BLUE RIBBON HOUSING ELEMENT COMMITTEE As an important and integral component of developing a successful Housing --- Element, and as required by State law, the City has always sought public comment and input toward formulation of Hous i ng El ement updates. The Update of 1991 is no exception, and actually represents a different and broader based _...- approach to that participation. Given the significant changes in the housing environment and growth of the affordabi 1 ity gap since the El ement of 19B6, new efforts and solutions --.- employing increased coordination and cooperation those involved in among housing provision are needed to ensure adequate affordable housing opportunities. In response, the City felt it important to bring those ,.-..- segments of the community ultimately involved in housing provision (development, finance, social service, and government) together to assist in development of the 1991 Update. In this way, the setting for continued -- coordination is established, and the un i que perspect i ves of these "partners" could be utilized in focusing housing assistance priorities, and in developing the proposed solutions and strategies embodied in Part 3. -- To facil i tate this participation, the Mayor appointed a broad-base "Blue Ribbon Housing Element Committee" consisting of nine regular members and three alternates. The nine regular members consisted of the public (1), City Planning Commission (1) , development commun i ty (3), realty community/Chamber of Commerce (1), public housing authority (1), non-profit housing and finance (1), and the local social service community (1). Ass i stance was provi ded by staff from the City Planning and Community Development Departments. The _u_ Committee met in a series of eleven workshops which reviewed the main points of each sect i on in the Draft Element Update. They provi ded eva 1 uat i on and input regarding past performance and needs assessments, and then made - recommendations which were used to formulate the 1991-96 Comprehensive Housing Plan. Their input was invaluable in developing the Plan's structure of twelve (12) objectives, each with a set of implementing policies and program ---- proposals. -,- -,.-- -- -- -- _.--- ____....____'_ . ___~..,_....__,___._ - __, _____ __n___ _._"._..__.._._,__.".._,,_.,_~_"_._,_.,..___.__,__,___._____.,.________._.___~_...._'" INTRODUCTION Overview _...~ As we move into the 1990's housing continues to be an area of great importance and challenge for the City of Chula Vista. The Housing Element, as a State required component of the City's General Plan, provides citizens and public -- officials with an understanding of the housing needs of their cOllll1unity and the responses necessary to fulfill them. The Chu1a Vista Housing Element of 1991 embodies a comprehensive analysis and update of basic housing data and growth projections, as well as a refinement of the policies and programs of the previously adopted Hous i ng Element of 1986. The revisions incorporate the most current data and i nformat i on that are readily available regarding population, socio-economic characteristics, housing and 1 and use inventories, financial availabil ity, and new program approaches utilizing various subsidies and public/private financing. The purpose of the Housing Element Update of 1991 is the improvement of the City's hous i ng efforts, and the increasing of its responsiveness to changing local and regional housing needs. -'.- The Element's comprehensive analyses form the basis from which Chu1a Vista has deve loped goals, objectives, and action plans to address housing needs. By striving to accomplish these objectives to provide suitable, fair, and affordable housing opportunities for all segments of the population, the City will strengthen the economic and social vitality of the entire community. OrQanization of the Element UDdate In order to provide a logical and thorough analysis in formulating an appropriate plan of actions which respond to housing conditions and needs -- anticipated during the 1991-96 planning period, the Chu1a Vista Housing Element Update of 1991 is divided into three parts: -- Part 1: Review of the HousinQ Element of 1986 - Outlines and quantifies housing production since 1985, and describes how the City has responded to both the anticipated and urgent needs of its growi ng population. ---- Various affordable housing accomplishments are compared against the stated goals of the 1986 Hous i ng E1 ement, and a summary of performance successes and shortfalls is presented in establishing indicators for development of the 1991-96 comprehensive plan embodied in Part 3. u Part 2: Needs. Resources. and Constraints - Based on various socio-economic condit ions, projects what housing needs are anticipated during the 1991-96 planning period, and evaluates the capacity of the existing housing supply, and Chu1 a Vi sta' s land inventory to provide all income groups with decent housing opportunities. Part 3: Comorehensive HousinQ Plan - 1991 to 1996 - In concert with revised housing needs data, growth projections, and performance indicators estab1 ished in Parts 1 and 2, defi nes goals, objectives, policies, and programs designed to increase Chula Vi sta' s effect i veness in providing for housing needs during the coming planning period. -- -.--..-"'-"'...--.....-...--...---.,.. " __ __ __.....__.__._________._.____...._....________ __ _".,,___·.__."_··._,,~··.__"'.,"·___·····__w___·~__ HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1991 GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Paae -- PART 1: REVIEW OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1986 -...- I. Introduction/Overview 1-1 II. Affordable Housing Production for 1985-1990 1-3 -- A. Summary of Review Findings 1-5 B. Program Oescriptions 1-7 C. Affordable Housing in Progress 1-27 --- III. Conclusions -,- A. Areas for Special Consideration 1-28 B. Suggested Steps for 1991-96 Planning Period 1-29 PART 2: NEEDS, RESOURCES, AND CONSTRAINTS - I. Introduction II -1 II. Needs Analysis A. Existing Unmet Needs II -1 -- B. Special Need Populations 1I-14 C. At-Risk Housing II -18 D. Projected Needs II-22 _.._~ III. Resources A. Introduction/Overview II -30 -,- B. Chula Vista General Plan Update· II-30 C. Land Use/Resource Inventory II -32 IV. Constraints --- A. Overview II - 40 B. Governmental II -40 C. Non-Governmental II -51 PART 3: COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN - 1991 TO 1996 - I. Introduction III-l II. Statements of Purpose III-3 -,.- III. Objectives, Policies, and Programs III-4 -- -..- ---- _ _ _.__n__.~ ,~.__"."._"._._.__".__ ___.'u.._.,___,.__ _...,-.._."_._-"---_.,._._-,._---~---_._---- lIST OF TABLES AND MAPS -- Table No. Pace No. 1 Housing Unit Change by Type - 1980 to 1990 1-3 2 Overview of CDBG Expenditures 1985 to 1990 1-23 3 Vacancy Rates by Unit Type II-2 - 4 Rental Subsidy Needs for lower-Income Households II-3 1988-91 Housing Assistance Plan 5 Rent Schedules II -5 6 West Side City - Rehabilitation Needs II-11 -..- 7 Rehabilitation Needs - 1988-91 H.A.P. II-12 8 Special Housing Populations - Needs Indicators II-I? 9 Historic Population Growth - Chula Vista and II - 23 .--- San Diego Region 10 Total Housing Growth - Chula Vista and San II - 23 Diego Region ---- 11 % Relationship Population & Housing Growth - 11-23 Chula Vista and San Diego Region 12 Housing Supply 1985-1990 II-24 13 Projected Population Growth - Chula Vista and II - 25 -~.- San Diego Region 14 Projected Housing Growth - Chula Vista and II - 26 San Diego Region --, 15 Projected Employment Chula Vista GPA II-26 16 Regional Share Allocation II -28 17 Fair Share Allocation II - 29 -" 18 Population and Housing Projections - General II -31 Plan Update 19 land Use Capacity Increase - General Plan Update II-31 20 Residential Construction Capacity - Vacant & II - 33 Underutilized land 21 Residential Construction Capacity - Master Planned II -36 Projects (City) ,- 22 Residential Construction Capacity - Master Planned II-36 Projects (Planning Area) 23 Implementation Status - Master Planned Projects II-37 24 5 Year Construction Forecast - Master Planned Projects II-38 -- 25 County-wide Development Fee Comparison II -48 26 Average Residential Processing Fee I I - 50 27 "Marketplace" - Mortgage and Borrowing Rates II - 52 --- 28 Manufacturing Employment II-55 ~.--- MaD No. 1 Affordable Housing Location Map 1-31 - -- - --, --~--_.-_._-~_.__.,_____".._.__ __,,_________._ _. _____m.__..._~~_.__.__~._.__ ..._.._....,___,...,..._~_._._._.__ ..u._____,_. TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1: REVIEW OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1986 -,- fill J. Introduction/Overview 1-1 -.-- A. Policy & Goal Implementation 1-1 B. Summary of Housing Built Prior to 1985 1-3 --,- II. Production for 1985-1990 1-4 A. Summary of Review Findings 1-5 B. Program Descriptions 1-7 _..- B.l Guaranteed Housing 1-7 1. Public Housing 1-7 -...- 2. Section 8 1-8 3. Military Housing 1-8 -- B.2 Potential Housing 1-9 1. Senior Density Bonus 1-9 2. Affordable Housing Policy 1-9 a. For Sale Opportunities 1-10 b. Rental Opportunities 1-12 3. Tax-exempt Bond Financing 1-12 4. Family Density Bonus 1-13 --.- B.3 Redevelopment Housing Fund Programs 1-14 1. Home Ownership 1-14 a. Brandywine 1-14 b. Orange Tree 1-15 2. landbanki ng 1-15 3. Rental Housing New Construction 1-16 --.'- a. Mobilehome 1-16 b. Multi-Family 1-16 4. Rehab Programs 1-16 a. Single Family 1-17 b. Mobil ehome 1-17 c. Rental Rehab 1-17 5. Mobilehome Programs 1-19 -,.- 6. Relocation and Demolition 1-22 7. Weatherization Program 1-22 -- B.4 CDBG Funded Programs 1. Overview of Expenditures 1-23 2. Shared Housing 1-23 _...- 3. Homeless Sheltering and Referrals 1-25 a. South Bay Voucher Program 1-25 b. Inter-Faith Program 1-26 c. Hotels & Motels in Partnership 1-26 -""- d. Victory Outreach 1-26 e. St. Vincent de Paul 1-27 -- C. Affordable Housing in Progress 1-27 III. Conclusions 1-28 A. Areas for Special Consideration I -2B B. Suggested Steps for the 1991-96 Planning Period 1-29 ----_.-'-,... -'--"-"--- ---- - ---,._._----,-,---_._--_.._..~-~-----_._.._-- ,-- PART 1 - REVIEW OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1986 I. INTRODUCTION __ In relation to other Elements of Chula Vista's General Plan, the Housing Element is somewhat unique in that while it envisions long range community goals characteristic of general plans, its comprehensive directives for meeting the housing needs of all economic segments of -- Chula Vista's population must also be responsive to varying socio-economic conditions continually influenced by factors both internal and external to the San Diego region. In recognition of this, the __ Housing Element Law, Article 10.6 Section 65580 (et seq) of the Cal Hornia Government Code, requires that each city review and update previous housing pol icies and programs regarding their effectiveness in achieving stated goals and objectives. This law requires such a review at least every 5 years in order to make necessary changes in policies and programs responsive to changing local housing needs and conditions. The last local review was conducted in 1986. The following section of the Housing Element Update of 1991 reviews achievements during the 1986-1991 planning period, and also recaps the __ accomplishments of pre-1985 housing activity. A. POLICY AND GOAL IMPLEMENTATION -- Under the direction of the City Council, Chula Vista has, in accordance with Part 2 of the Housing Element of 1986, substantially undertaken the task of providing adequate and affordable housing opportunities for all segments of its population, including necessary publ ic facil ities and services to accommodate said housing. During the 1986-1991 planning period, as illustrated in _ the following pages, the City successfully endeavored to attain its goals to meet identified needs through provision of new construction in well-planned decent neighborhoods, as well as through systematic renewal, rehabilitation, conservation, and improvement of housing -- within the Planning Area. These efforts included substantial involvement of the private sector. _ As indicated in Table I, Chula Vista has consistently provided a variety of new housing opportunities, both single and multiple family, in seeking to achieve a truly "balanced community". Since __ 1985, the City has built an average of 1400+ housing units per year, with at least 50% of these in varying densities of multi-family construction. In this effort to broaden resident's choice of housing types and neighborhoods, the City has approved several large _., master-p 1 anned resi dent i a 1 communi ties each offeri ng a wide range of residential densities, commercial services/employment, industrial employment, and recreational opportunities in a coordinated living __ environment. Examples would include the EastLake, Rancho Del Rey, and Sunbow developments. In order to ensure economi c i ntegrat ion, the City's Affordable Housing Policy requires these and other developments over SO units to provide a minimum of 10% of the units to low and moderate-income households. I-I ,....---..- -.-"-...-.---.-....----...--,. -_._~._---~--_.,._~._.- .,._,..- --.-.,-..,-,.---.- --.-----.--- In accOl1lßOdating the residential growth indicated in Table 1, a variety of accompli shlllents were lAde toward ensuring provision of adequate public hcil ities, and toward protection of residents "quality-of-life". In Novelllber 1987 the City adopted growth IAnagement "Threshold Standards" which established perfonunce criteria for provision of 11 vital public facil ities and services such as traffic, parks, schools, sewer, water, drainage, police, and fire service. In July 1989, the City completed a cOIIprehens he update of the General Plan which included Major revisions to several key infrastructural ..aster pl ans such as circulation, wastewater, and drainage. The General Plan update also incorporated a new Growth Management El ement which set forth goals, objectives and policies related to protection of residents "quality-of-life" consistent with the intent of the Thresholds Standards. In Apri 1 1991, the Growth Management Program was adopted to serve as an implementing tool, providing guidelines for relating project level development phasing to facilities Master phns, and establi shing requirements for hcil ities guarantees at the various stages of project planning and review. A principal intent of the above noted actions was to address needed infrastructure and services in a pre-planning manner so as to avoid inadequacies which would result in growth limiting constraints. In addition to those measures, which are primarily aimed at development of vacant land in the City's eastern area, the City continued to prepare short and long term Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) for the expansion of publ ic facil it ies to support infill housing capacity in the developed western area. Those CIP's encompass a variety of major circulation, drainage and sewer improvements, with an average annual budget of approximately $15 mill ion supported from a variety of state, federal, and local funding sources. Specific infrastructural and other funding ass istance on individual projects is indicated in the Program Descriptions section starting on page 1-6. Along with the CIP for western Chula Vista, the City also supported the construction of substantial infrastructure in the developing eastern area through the use of all the fo 11 owi ng Rlechan isms; development agreements, reimbursement agreements, bonding, assessment districts, and cOlllllunity facilities districts such as Mello-Roos for schools. I 1-2 Continued commitment to the timely provision of adequate public _..- facilities and services to support sufficient res i dent ia 1 development for the new planning period is further discussed with the Land Use/Resource Inventory on page II -28, and supported under --- Objective 12 of the 1991-96 Action Plan on page 111-34. TABLE 1 HOUSING UNIT CHANGE BY TYPE -- ACCORDING TO STATE DEFINED CATEGORIES 1980 TO 1990 -.".. Single Family Multiple Family ÏU!: ill SFA è! ~ Totals *._- 1980 35 6 180 .221 1981 99 15 382 496 1982 42 36 14 37 129 1983 16 74 188 278 -- 1984 291 142 18 70 521 1985 490 207 10 845 1552 1986 518 29 17 556 H2O -- 1987 1077 195 200 1018 2490 1988 382 43 24 380 829 1989 599 147 575 1321 1990 590 17 133 812 1552 -- TOTALS 4139 669 658 5043 10,509 ---- B. SUMMARY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILT PRIOR TO 1985 -- I n order to prov i de reference to the "at-risk" housing analysis presented in Part 2, the fo 11 owi ng pre-1985 new construction activity overview is also provided: - Affordable Housina - New Construction Unit Total to Date: 1,950 -- Units Prior to 1985: 728 Elderly: HUD Section 202 100 -- HUD Section 236 186 (Non-Profit OWner) City Density Bonus 32 - Family: HUD Section 236 386 (4 projects) -- HUD Public Housing 24 (Melrose) - _...- 1-3 ._._-_.__._.~._--~'--_._.-.--- --------- ------ -~-~--"- --~-_._--_._----. . -_.__.----~._---~._-- II. AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION FOR 1985-i990 Chula Vista has demonstrated that affordable housing can be developed through 1 oca 1 directives and private sector i ncent ives. The City produced 1,242 units of affordable housing during the 1985-1990 planning period exclusive of Section 8, rental housing assistance, and IObilehome conversions to low and moderate-income households. Ninety-three percent of this new construction affordable housing production was developed by the private sector, with limited cash involvement by the City through the Redevelopment Housing Fund and tax-exempt bond revenue. More affordabl e housing was actually produced by the City's density bonus program in new construction (32%) then through any other program during this period. This program requires no actual cash commitment from any public funds. Units Durina 1985-1990: 1..lli · HUD Elderly Public Housing 59 Elderly Density Bonus 374 Affordable Housing Policy 275 Family Density Bonus 16 Multi-Family Bond Sale 121 Redevelopment Housing Fund 197 Navy Housing 200 In addition to the new construction units made affordable to low and moderate-income households during the past planning period, the City also provided: a) rental housing assistance through HUD Section 8; b) mobil ehome conversions to 1 ow- income renta 1 s and ownership; and c) , rehabilitation loans for owners and rental housing. 1- Section 8 Rental Housina Assistance Elderlv Famil v IWl Pre-1980 144 220 364 1980-85 101 117 218 1985-90 184 (33%) 366 (66%) 550 Source: SANDAG Revised Housing Needs Performance Report 10/90. Program activity implemented since 1/1/90 , will be tabulated in the next Element review. 2. Mobilehome Conversions In 1987, Chula Vista assisted a total of 55 households within the existing Orange Tree Mobilehome Tra il er Park. 24 mobil ehome spaces were purchased by the City and are being rented to low-income seniors, and 31 low-income senior households were assisted with low interest loans for the purchase of their spaces. · 3. Rehabilitation Lendina Activitv A total of 250 loans to single family and mobilehome owners were made. In addition to this, ten renta 1 units were rehabilitated using the HUD Rental Rehab Program. 1-4 · The City has conducted an aggressi ve market i ng program to rehabil i tate many homes in the newly annexed area of Montgomery. The City has also maintained a commitment to mobile home park rehabilitation, conversions, and relocation assistance, as well as continuing to expand its involvement in housing related social services, such as homeless shelter referrals, in order to create a well-balanced and comprehensive housing program. -"~- A. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION The following is a summary of Housing Program productivity over the ---, 1985-1990 planning period in accordance with quantified objectives: 1. Previous objectives stated the City needed to provide -.-.- assistance to 740 lower-income households during 1985-1990. During this time period, Chula Vista has provided 1,511 units of new construction, Section 8 rental assistance, and mobilehome conversions to low-income households. -- 2. Density Bonus production for senior housing in this planning period produced 374 units. The previously set objective of 60 ..-... uni ts was greatly exceeded. Although no object i ves were set for family housing in the 1 ast El ement, 16 low-income family units were built. ...-- 3. Homeownershi p opportunit i es were extended to 53 1 ow- income and 245 moderate-income first-time buyers, and 48 1 ow- income elderly buyers. No specific objectives were previously stated --.- for moderate- income famil ies, and the low-income elderly goal was exceeded by 8 units. __u 4. A HUD Section 202 senior housing project has remained unfunded pending new appropriations from Congress. The funding approval for this project was delayed in 1989 when the proposed structure was reduced from a 5-story building to a 4-story -- building. The non-profit sponsor, the Salvation Army, is still pursuing this 75 unit project, for which the City has approved a conditional use permit. -- 5. Low-Rent Public Housing production exceeded the stated elderly/ handicapped objective by 23 units, but did not achieve the .." family housing objective of 114. There are currently 22 units of 1 arge family housing in the construction phase of development (Dorothy Street Site), and another 295 units remaining to be built pending site selection. These units ~._.- represent the remaining balance of authority to ,·construct, acqu i re or develop· 400 1 ow- income hous i ng uni ts approved by the City voters in 1978. -- 6. The HUD Section 8 deep rental assistance subsidy objectives to assist 455 low-income households were exceeded in three out of the 1 ast fi ve years as reported by SANDAG. A total of 550 -- low-income households were assisted during the planning period with 33% of these units assisting elderly households, and 66% assisting family households. 1-5 ---"-~-------_.~-----~-.---_._--"-~---~--~--~--"----'.._------_..~--_.__.- 7. The housing rehabil itation loan programs taken together (Single-family and mobile home) exceeded the stated objective of 200 assisted households by 25% for a total of 250 rehab loan s . 8. The Shared Housing referral program also exceeded the number of successful annual matches performed. The annual objective was 60, but over the last fi ve years the actual annual average reached 80 matches per year. 9. The last quantified objective previously identified in the Housing Element was the renter rehab loan program. This program has averaged 2 units a year rather than the 15 per year previously stated. The COßlllunity Development Department has since hired new staff to aggressively lIIarket this program beginning January 1991. 10. Consideration should be given to the following areas in which substantial activity did not occur during the last five years: 1. Demonstration projects which reduce building costs, and provide a substantial number of affordable units. 2. Modular or factory built housing. , 3. Other experimental i nfi 11 projects utilizing tail ored standards. 4. Structured annual reviews of Element implementation. 5. Specific fast track procedures and check 1 i sts for the processing of low-income housing projects. 6. Enforcement of the existing requirement for an "Affirmative Fair Marketing Plan" for projects involving more than 50 units. · 7. Inter-departmental pre-planning conferences regarding affordable housing provision on res i dent ia 1 project submittals. · 1-6 · B. PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS -.-- The fo 11 owi ng is a more deta il ed discussion of each program's productivity during the last fi ve years. All guaranteed housing -..- provided either through new construction units or rental assistance will be described first, followed by a discussion of all potent ia 1 housing production through the City's various regulatory ordinances, policies, and the new Military Housing Project. Following this, the -- rehabil i tat ion, mobile home, and relocation programs will be discussed, and finally those soc i a 1 services related to housing funded by Commun ity Development Block Grants (CDBG) will be -- described. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) distinguishes between "guaranteed" and "potential" affordable housing units. -- Guaranteed unit rents are regulated according to an individual tenant's household income. Potent i a 1 units are given benchmark rents for the ent i re project whi ch cannot exceed 1/12 of 30% of -..,. either 80% (low) or 120% (moderate) of the area median income. The area median changes yearly. These HUD generated figures are suppl ied to the City through the Housing Authority of San Diego or -- SANDAG every year. (Median incomes rose significantly in 1990 which will affect the next planning period benchmark rents.) A list of all projects cl ass i fi ed by program a 1 on9 with a project --.- location map (#'s) have been included in this section as reference points to the narrative description. (Assisted housing map locator #' s are inserted throughout the text.) Thi s exhi bi tis located on -,- page 1-31 of thi s report. All affordable housing projects since 1971 are included in this exhibit because 386 units built prior to 1985 may be at-risk during the next five years. At-risk units are -- those units owned by private investors who may elect to convert the affordable units to market rate rentals within the next planning period. -- 8.1 Guaranteed Housina 1. Public Housina -..- All guaranteed housing units were HUD assisted. Chula Vi sta produced 59 guaranteed housi ng uni ts. These units -----. of new construction were funded through HUD Public Housing under a development contract the City has with the San Diego County Housing Authority. The Housing Authority al so manages the Section 8 certificate and voucher ---- programs for the City. -- -- -- 1-7 _._-_.,_._-_._-,-_.,--------~----~- ------- ~-------- _.,._"------_._~--~.~ On 4/11/78, and pursuant to State Constitution Article 34, Chula Vista voters passed a 400 unit referendum for low-income housing production. Subsequently, in 1978 and 1987 the City of Chula Vista entered contract agreements with the County Housing Authority to develop and manage 123 units within the City limits. Under this authori zat i on, one pub li c hous i ng project was developed within the planning period in 1985; "Town Center" (#27) a 59 unit senior project. Tenants Ire currently contributing between $150-200 a month for rent, making these affordable to those earning 50% or less of area median income. This project is extremely popular and currently has a 2 year waiting list. 2. Section 8 Certificates and Vouchers During the planning period, Existing Section 8 cert ifi cates and vouchers assisted over 550 households. HUD officials maintain that Chula Vista has been consistently over-leased in each of the five (5) planning years. Meaning that for every tenant whose eligibility expires, another equally qualified tenant replaces them immediately. Current waiting lists for large family units exceed 2 years. 3. Militarv HousinQ The Navy and a turn-key developer built a 200 unit family housing project call ed Lofgren Terrace (#13) . This project is subsidized and managed by the Navy. Senior enlisted families of class E4-E6 range, with a minimum of two years service, are el igible for un it s . In this project, the mil i tary does not distribute the "Basic Allowance for Quarters· (BAQ) and ·Variable Housing Allowance" (VHA) . These two bonuses are considered add-ons to fami ly household income, but according to SANDAG's Hous i ng Needs Performance Report, do not di sturb the "guaranteed" status of these family units because techn i ca lly each househol d is payi ng 0% of thei r mili tary income on housing. Currently, there is a 2-3 year waiting 1 i st for this and other mil itary family housing, indicating that the value of the Lofgren unit is greater than the $500-$600 combi ned value of the BAQ and VHA in the market place. , 1-8 B.2 Potential HousinQ Chula Vista has produced 963 newly constructed potential housing units in the last five (5) years. This represents about 93% of the new construction affordable housing developed during this period. The following table categorizes each project by the deeoest -- level of subsidy it received as some projects did receive more than one incent ive. Projects produced under the "Affordabl e Housing Program" usually received no cash or density bonus .., incentives. Projects receiving both a density bonus and bond financing are discussed under the bond program. The below listed categories follow the State HCD guidelines in order to avoid over or double counting of units. The units by category of housing are: -- Senior Density Bonus 374 units Affordable Housing Policy 255 units Family Density Bonus 16 units __ Multi-Family Bond Sale 121 units Redevelopment Housing Fund 197 units Total: 963 units 1. Senior Densitv Bonus -, In the Chula Vista Senior Density Bonus program 374 units in seven (7) complexes were produced (#'s 3, 4, 6, 14, 17, 23, 24). This represents 30% of the total new _, construction affordable housing produced during the planning period. Each project is under a separately negotiated Cooperation Agreement, which compels the owners to restrict the rents for. 10-25 years under a Conditional ., Use Permit (CUP) in exchange for significant density bonuses and reduced parking space requirements. -- The average rent in these units are $345 for a studio, $468 for a one bedroom, and $630 for a two-bedroom. In some complexes, 40-50% of the tenant rents are also _, subsidized by Section 8 programs. These subsidies, however, are not mandated as part of the dens i ty bonus cooperation agreement and may be terminated by the landlord. Each unit rent must fall within the guidelines -- of HUD Section 8 Fair Market Rents (FMR) by unit type and household size. The senior density bonus program has out-performed all other programs in the City. 2. Affordable Housina Policv The Affordable Housing Policy requires developers of - projects with more than 50 units to explore Federal and State subsidy programs and other economically feasible means of reducing the price of housing, in providing at -, least 5% of the units to low-income households, and 5% of 1-9 ~ ___...__"...,.,~___.___.___" ... ,. .·_..___m___ ..,.,.____,_,_,_.______ the units to moderate-income households. In reviewing the two development projects "EastLake" and " Beacon Cove" which produced units under this program, two main areas of concern arose: 1) the duration of restrictions are too short, i.e. , in the case of "for sale" EastLake properties, no restrictions on the next sale were required, so that these units would not necessarily be affordable after the first-qualified buyer takes title; duration of the rental restrictions is only ten years ( refer to Beacon Cove discussion page 12); 2) the affordability range of sales prices and rents appear to be at the high end of the low and moderate-income thresholds as illustrated below. a. For-Sale ODDortunities Under the Affordable HousinQ Policy The EastLake development, comprised of severa 1 subdivisions totaling 2,384 si ngl e-family and condominium units, produced 101 units for low-income buyers, and 139 units for moderate-income buyers. The following discussion analyzes the affordabil ity of the three EastLake tracts which qual Hied between 1986-1989: The three tracts of homes which sold over three years during planning period were: Camelot (#5), Villa Martinique (#28) and The Cottages (#9). , In the Camelot project, average sales prices were between $82,344-$105,127 for 1 ow- income buyers ($22,880-$29,360) annua 1 incomes), and $85,750- $117 ,041 for moderate- income buyers ($23,166-$44,040 annua 1 income). These units were sold in phases over a three-year period between 1987-1989. The Cottages sold during 1987 for· $107,072 and were affordable to moderate-income households. Finally, Villa Martinique was the most affordable project with sales prices ranging from $67,778-$74,061 for low-income households, and $74,527-$74,870 for moderate-income . households during 1986-1988. Unl i ke rental housing, many factors must be combined before a determination can be made about true affordabil i ty. In the analysis of for-sale affordabil i ty key factors are the terms and conditions of financing (i.e. , lending terms and underwriting ratios). . 1-10 According to performance data provided by the developer, about 36% of the 1 ow- income households appear to have qual i fi ed for FHA loans which only require 3%-5% down payment. Approximately 40% of the -~, low-income buyers had large (greater than 25%) down payments. Whil e no cl ear proof was provided by the developer, it could be that many of the buyers with 1 arge down payments and low annual incomes were "empty-nester" senior low-income homebuyers. In th i s way, the City JRet the stated goal to provide a ffordab 1 e housing to senior home buyers on fixed -_.~ incomes. In the total development, 61% of the moderate-income -- purchasers appeared to use some type of FHA financing or a conventional 95% adjustable rate mortgage (ARM) as evidenced by the very low « 5%) recorded down payments. Using Vill a Martinique as an example, estimated principal and interest payments for the 1 ow- income _.u buyers exceeded the prescri bed affordabl e 1 imi ts by about 23%, whil e the average moderate-income principal and interest payments only exceeded the affordable 1 imits by 10% at most. It should be noted, however, that this analysis does not take into account the tax advantages in homeownershi p or the long-term advantages of equity-building American home - owners have long enjoyed in markets such as Southern California with steadily rising appreciation rates. Additionally, it seems that as long as people continue to have confidence in the potential economic gains of homeownership, they are willing to pay more than 30% of their gross median income for the ability -- to own a home. For planning purposes, it may be time to develop another method of analysis to gauge homeownership affordabil ity which incorporates -- tax-incentives and appreciation factors. - ' -- 1-11 --.---...----.-----.---...--,-.,- _" __"._.'_'__n_..·__,. --,_.".".-- -- - .,---_..... _._"'--_._~._--_.,-,..,--_._...__.__._- b. Rental Housina Under the Affordable Housina Policy The second ¡ffordable housing policy project is Beacon Cove (#1) in which 35 rental units were set-aside out of 177 units for ¡ period of 10 years. Buil t in 1986, the current restricted rents are $585 with market rental rates of $630-650 for a one-bedroom; and $705 restricted rent with $750-785 market rate for a two bedroom. The current rents should be restricted to 30%, 1/12 of ~ of the area median ($37,900). This would mean, that to be truly affordable, a one-person household should pay no more than $530/month; a two-person household should pay no more than $606/month; and a four-person household (maximum allowable for a two-bedroom) should pay no IIOre than $758/lIOnth. Using this criteria, some of the tenants may be overpaying per their individual househo 1 d income 1 eve 1 though the project is operating within contract conditions. Restrictions will continue to be monitored until 1996 at wh i ch time the owner may convert th is complex to market rate rents. 3. Tax-ExemDt Bond Financina Tax-exempt bond revenues helped finance 608 units of which 20% were set-aside for restricted rents for a minimum of 10 years. Bond revenues were used to provide below market-rate construction and permanent financing in exchange for the foll owi ng 121 restri cted rental uni ts. The two projects include: Low Income Total Units Eucalyptus 75 units 376 Terra Nova 46 units 232 , Built in 1986, current rents at the Eucalyptus project are: Bedrooms Size: Sinale ILl ZLl Monthly Rent: $420 $475 $535 The owner is also restricted from any condo-conversions for 10 years. Vacancy rates fluctuated in the last 4 years but have stabilized at 5% in the total project. There are no vacancies in the affordable unit category. 1-12 . The second project is Terra Nova. Built in 1985, this 232 --- unit project has 46 restricted rental units. The current rental schedule is: -,,- Bedroom Size: ill ill Restricted Rent: $580 $685 - Market Rent: $630-635 $745-755 In review, the restricted rents under the the current bond programs appear to be more affordable than those provided under the "Affordable Housing Program". However, the ten year restriction of rents seems too low given the level of - - subsidy each developer received (below market interest on permanent financing for the life of the loan). 4. Familv Densitv Bonus -'..- Under thi s program, Cooperat i on Agreements are negotiated with each developer to set aside up to 25% of the project's pre-density bonus units for restricted rents in accordance wi th establ i shed contract guide li nes for 10-25 years. An annual review of current rent roll s is required. A total of three (3) projects involving 16 -_.- affordable units were produced under the family density bonus program. (#'s 11,29,21). - Restricted Total Units Units -- Fourth Avenue: 9 53 Woodlawn: 6 37 Zuniga: J ....8 Totals: 16 98 The following rent schedules ill ustrate both the current - restri cted rents and the market rates for dens ity bonus family projects: -, Restricted Rents/Market Rents Bedroom Size: Studio ill ill - Fourth Avenue: $420/ $475/585 $535/705 Woodlawn /595 /695 Zuniga/Oxford on /575* _-·0 Section 8 Contract 157*/ * The Zuniga project built in 1987 has only one restricted rental out of the eight (8) in the project. Current _.... contract rent is $575 for bedroom, bath. a one one However, this tenant is assisted by Section 8 and contributes $157 per month toward the rental payment. 1-13 --,-_._- -~-----,-_._~.- -~-_. The level of affordabil i ty, while within the acceptable contract range, does not effectively meet the needs of those famil i es earning between 50-80% of area median income. It is this groups' needs that the future comprehensive housing programs will address during the next planning period. 8.3 Redevelooment Housina Fund Proarams The Redevelopment Agency was incorporated in 1972. Since then, two Redevelopment Di stri cts have generated tax increment funds which have been used to increase and improve the supply of low and moderate-income housing. According to the Chul a Vi sta finance records, the following funds were available in the Housing Fund from 1987-1989. ~ ~ ~ New Funds: $742,890 $660,242 $ 595,693 , Total: 842,471 987,639 1,110,290 During the planning period, severa 1 very different projects have been funded. Following is a detailed description of the programs expanding home ownership opportunities for single family and mobile home owners, landbanking, and finally an equity share deferred loan rental complex. Wh il e 50% of the Fund is currently used by the COl1lllun i ty Housing Improvement Program (CHIP), the detailed discussion of that program follows under the separate heading of Rehab Programs. 1. Homeownershio · a. Brandvwine In addition to the home ownership opportunities offered through the affordable housing policy, between 1988-1989, a unique home-ownership program for qualified first-time home buyers was made available to 126 moderate-income households in a 168 unit condo complex ca 11 ed Brandywine ('2) . $1.6 Million of the Affordable Housing Fund supported this project in the form of a SO/SO loan and grant to Housing Opportunities, Inc. (HOI). HOI is a · non-profit, housing corporation that managed the project. The Hous i ng Fund made a SO/SO combi nat i on loan and grant to the non-profit who would market the program to first-time buyers. The program offered to reduce · 1-14 the principal amount to be financed in each unit by --,'- originating a "silent second" purchase RIOney loan which would have been secured by a second Trust Deed payable in 20 years. However, as previously -- mentioned, the interest rates became so attractive that 75% of the first-time buyers were able to qua 1 i fy for permanent financing using FHA and/or CHFA loans through Home Federal Bank at very - favorable interest rates and terms (8.8%, 30-year fixed rate). -- The loan to the Agency was paid in full and that portion of the profits in excess of 10% of the project sales were also returned to the Agency in 1990. The grant portion ($800,000) was used to -..- write-down the costs of needed project infrastructure. - b. Oranae Tree Mobile Home Loans The Community Development Department loaned $500,000 to the Orange Tree (#19) Homeowners Association to help existing res i dents purchase spaces within this mobi 1 ehome park. Addit i ona lly, in the FV 88/89, the Agency made direct loans in the total amount of ..- $250,000 from the Fund to another 26 el igible low-income residents to help purchase their spaces. In order to be eligible, borrowers had to be over 62 -.-- years of age and low-income (under 80% of area median income). These loans are secured by Deeds of Trust and are due in 2017 or when the property is sold. -- The Agency wi 11 also participate in an equity share of the appreciation of the mobile home property at the time of sale. --',- The Commun ity Development Department also secured a $600,000 loan from the State Housing and Community Development Department to help acquire the site for -..- the Homeowner's Association. In addition, $100,000 from the City Housing Fund helped make the necessary park improvements required by the final subdivision - map approval. 2. Landbankina -..- Lower Sweetwater Site In 1986, the Redevelopment Agency purchased a 14.5 acre ----- site known as Lower Sweetwater for $160,000. At the time this site was not committed to a specific use, however, in -,- -- I-IS -- "---,,----,,...---_..-,_.'---,-_._~-------,. . -~_.__.._-----,---------,.__. 1989, St. Vincent de Paul initiated a proposal to build a mobile home relocation park on the site. Since then, the site has been under consideration for this use and is currently awaiting a final EIR determination. 3. Rental Housina New Construction a. Oranae Tree Mobile Home Park In February 1989, Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency purchased 29 spaces and coaches in Orange Tree mobile home park using $600,000 as a 25~ down payment from the Redevelopment Hous i ng Fund. The balance of the sales price was financed through mortgage loans from the Bank of America. Loan payments are serviced through the rental income from the 24 space rentals. The park is a senior citizen park, and to qualify for residency at least one resident per trailer must be 62 years of age or older. Orange Tree is predominantly owned by the park residents who have retained a property manager to collect cOlll1lon area maintenance fees and enforce park rules. The Redevelopment Agency has retained the same property manager to collect the rents and manage the remaining 24 rental units it owns in the park. The space rents are $307jmonth and include association fees and $375jmonth for the one space and trailer available for rent. The long - term goal of these City-owned spaces is to sell them to low-income senior residents. To date five (5) spaces have been sold with the proceeds deposited back into the Housing Fund. b. Multi-familv Rentals In 1986, the One Park project (U8) restricted 71 units out of a 94-unit family complex in exchange for an $850,000 deferred second loan payable in 10 years, or at the time of sale. The Redevelopment Agency will participate in an equity share of the apprec i ated market value of 4. 5~ of the property at the time of sale. All of the City's profit share of the proceeds will be deposited into the Redevelopment Housing Fund. 4. Rehab Proarams Chul a Vista's rehabil itat ion program, known as the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) incorporates three elements of assistance in originating single family, mobile home, and renta 1 rehab loans. Together these elements offer low-interest or deferred loans to all 1-16 segments of housing in need of repair. Approximately 90% ....,. of the loans were originated through the Redevelopment Fund, while the remaining 10% of the funds utilized either CDBG or the HUD Rental Rehab Program. -- During the years of 1985 to early 1990, nearly $4 Million dollars have been loaned to 134 10w-incotlM! single family homeowners at an average of 27 loans a year. The City has -- also originated 107 loans and grants total 1 ing over $155,000 for mobile home rehab. In addition, 10 rental rehab uni ts benefited from the City's two Rental Rehab -.-"- Programs. a. Sinale-Familv Rehab loans -.....- The single family rehab loans include every facet of home repair and remodeling such as roof replacement, kitchen and bath renovation, complete floor-covering, -- fencing, and outdoor siding. loans cover the cost of room additions, and in some cases complete new home replacement when the existing home is beyond economical repair. The loan amounts vary but typically are $27,OOO-34,000/each. Terms are 5% interest for 15 years or deferred for the 1 i fe of anyone 62 years of age or older whose income is equal --..- to or under 80% of the medi an income, payable upon change of ownership and secured by a lien on the property. -- loans made to non-elderly individual s with incomes 1 ess than 50% of median income may have their loan -"-- payments deferred for two years and secured by a lien on the property. Recertification is mandatory to defer the loan for another two years or placing the owners in a paying status of 5% for 15 years. -..- b. Mobilehome Owner Rehabilitation Loans ~ This program provides a grant to eligible mobile home owners of up to $1 ,000 to cover the costs of rehabil i tat i on items. Under certain circumstances, this can be increased to $1,999 by approval of the .-,,- Trailer CHIP loan Committee. The Agency has originated 107 loans and grants over -- the past five years in excess of $155,000. The average grant is above $1,500 and usually is enough to complete the requi red work. Projects requiring - , more than $2,000 worth of work may be eligible for a 5% loan. Deferred loans are not made for mobilehomes and trailers. - --- 1-17 - - --,_...--,- - - --~"_.~--~--~,-_._._-,---,,~..""_. _.._--- Most eligible grantees chose to accept the full grant amount and make up the difference in any additional cost from thei r own resources. Approximately 70-90% of the mobile home loans were made to elderly households. The remaining loans were lItade to disabled individuals, of which ~ were Minority households. In the last five years, 3 coach replacement loans were made to owners whose existing coach was beyond repair. c. Rental Rehab Proaram There are two rental rehab loan programs owners can ava il themselves of in order to maintain their properties at acceptable level s, and keep rents withi n the levels required by Section 8 Rental Guidelines. (1 ) The City's own program will originate a loan to cover the full cost of rehabil itation in exchange for a 5% loan payable over 15 years. Annua 1 payments may be estimated at $8 of debt servi ce to every $1000.00 borrowed. Rents may be no higher than Sect i on 8 rental guidelines for a period of 10 years. (2) In this HUD Rental Rehab Program, the owner appl ies for a schedule of rehabil itation work. If all the work requested fa 11 s within the guidelines established by HUD as to per unit costs, the loan amount (including administrative costs) is matched on a 50/50 basis with HUD funds. The amount of money loaned is a 10 year deferred forgiveness loan in that every year 10% is deducted from the principal amount and at the end of 10 years the owner owes nothing. The owner must agree to continue renting to low-income fami 1 i es for 10 years and must not convert the units to condominiums. Maximum loan assistance is 50% of the per unit rehab costs to a maximum of $7,500 per unit for two bedroom units and $8,500 per unit for a three bedroom unit, but this can be increased 14% by permission from HUD. Eighty percent of the loan s were made to rehabil itate two bedroom units. Occupants in 50% of the units had incomes of below 50% of area median. 1-18 . During the planning period, 8 units were refurbished _.--~ using HUD rental rehab funds of $58,611.34. A total of (4) Section 8 vouchers and (4) Section 8 certificates were used in conjunction with this -...- program. SUl11llarv -,..- Overall the combined efforts of single-fa.ily, mobile home and rental rehab programs makes this one of the strongest performing elements of the City's housing ~._- programs. This program targets properties with substandard conditions which warrant structural repair loans. The residents of the rehabil itated -- units are predominantly (70%) occupied by lower income people (incomes below 80% of median). Either by direct lending or through Section 8 rental subsidies 1 ow- income household are receiving direct -,- benefits from these efforts. loan Screenina and Evaluation -- All proposed loans are screened and evaluated by the City staffed CHIP loan cOl11llittee. Approved loans are then referred to the Bank of America for loan - processing. Mobile home park loans are screened by a committee of mobil e home park residents and are processed through the Bank of America as well. -- 5. Mobilehome Proarams The City has made a deep COl11llitment to mobile home park issues with its ordinances regarding mobilehome relocation assistance, rent arbitration, mob il ehome assistance program, and mobile home rehab loans (previously - di scussed). Each program adds an important component to the overall assistance made to low-income mobile home park residents. ,.---- Mobile Home Park Relocation Ordinances -- Under the Mobile Home Park Relocation Ordinance, park owners are required to submit a relocation assistance plan with the COl11llunity Development Department prior to any park conversion/closure being .approved. -- During the planning period, one park closure occurred at Al's Trailer Haven. Th is park owner went beyond the requi rements of the ordinance and assisted all -- tenants who requested assistance regardless of their income or the length of time the tenants had resided - -- 1-19 ,.-- -_..._-",,-, -,,--------..., .....-.-,..- -~~---- --------- ....------ --------- -------- in the park. Thi s owner rented space in other parks and held them open unt il hi s former tenants had an opportunity to move the trailers into the new space. All relocation costs were borne by the park owner who a 1 so offered to buy tenant trail er and IIIObil e homes at negotiated rates. A total of 49 units were assisted in this park closure (3/31/89). Total costs of relocation assistance were all privately financed. Rent Arbitration Ordinance This ordinance outlines the procedures by which a mobile home park owner may raise space rents in their parks. A fund was set-up, initially with a $4,000.00 grant from an association of mobile home park owners, who wished to better coordinate and organize rental increase disputes. Not ice requi rements for regul ar rent increases up to the current annual rate of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) prevail. That is, if the space rent is a month , to month tenancy, a 60-day notice is required. However, if the 1 andl ord wi shes to rai se the rents above the current annual CPI a copy of the proposed rent increase must be sent to the Housing Coordinator of the City. This spec ia 11 y worded notice (see ordinance addenda) must be reviewed by the coordinator and then given to the park residents. Notice is hereby given to all affected lower income residents (those whose incomes fall between $13,000 - $15,000 per year) that they may be el igible for monetary assistance to defray part of the cost of arbitration in the event the residents dispute the , increase. As a result, the City's Housing Coordinator is responsible for monitoring compliance and managing the arbitration process of any disputed rent increases. Bavscene In 1987, the residents of Bayscene Mobile Home Park were given a rent increase above the appl icable CPI increase. At the time, the City's Ordinance provided a mechanism for the residents to request mediation by a third party. When mediation failed, the City . enacted a Binding Arbitration Ordinance. 1-20 , I n the interim period, specifically in February of -.-- 1989, the park was sold. Both owners were involved in the arbitration process. In July of 1990, the arbitrator lIade an award in favor of the clahlants, -~- the Bayscene resident negotiators. The award only covered the period in which the original owners were the owners. As a result, thousands of dollars in excess of increases in the CPI have been collected by -- the new owner which still need to be addressed. If the new owner is required to correct the error, he would have to refund over-charged rents and a rent -- roll-back to those residents on IIOnth-to-lIOnth tenancies. A major misconception has existed in that the -- residents believed the Ordinance was designed to avoid attorney fees, court costs, etc. and would be timely. This has not been the case. Having _..,- exhausted the arbitration remedy, the residents have since retained an attorney to bring this case to a final resolution. -.^- Mobilehome Assistance Proaram In June 1986, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of ---- Chula Vista (. Agency·) approved a program of assistance for the residents of Orange Tree Mobil ehome Park in response to their specific - requirements and also to provide a guide to evaluate future requests. While the actua 1 assistance provided to Orange Tree is di scussed under projects -- funded by the Redevelopment Housing Fund, the program provides loans to assist el igible mob 11 ehome park residents to purchase their mobilehome parks, convert parks to resident ownership and reduce the costs of -- mobilehome park ownership to an affordable level for eligible buyers. The intent of th is program is to preserve a 1 ow-i ncome hous i ng opt i on preference for -... low and, in some cases, moderate-income famil ies and seniors. Financial assistance may include: 0% interest on interim financing, long-term financing of both blanket loans or individual loans which may be -..- deferred interest or equity share loans due and payable 30 years from origination if no sale occurs within that time. ,..-.-, Summarv _..- The City has again been successful in creating a comprehensive program that meets the diverse needs of mobile home park residents in providing rehabil itation grants and loans, relocation assistance and rent --- arbitration resolution, in addition to expanded homeownership opportunities. -_.- 1-21 ---.-..----...-.------ ...,-,.- _ _ ~...,....._.____._ _. _.. __._n'._._.mu.,._·o_, ..___.,...__....__..__ _ __ ____ _______________._________. 6. Relocation and Demolition Ordinance In accordance with State and Federa 1 laws, the City provides assistance to any individual displaced through Redevelopment activities. During the pl anning period, three (3) el igible home owners and fifteen (15) tenants were relocated. , Di splaced tenants renting the acquired property for at 1 east three (3) months were el igible for up to a $4,000 displacement sum and an additional dislocation payment of $200, and up to $400 in moving costs. Relocated tenants with Section 8 vouchers received $850 for moving and dislocation costs. Displaced homeowners who had owned and occupied the acquired property for at least six (6) months prior to the initiation of negotiations for property acquisition were eligible for a $15,000 relocation payment. · Table of Relocation Assisted Households 1985 2 Tenant Relocations 1986 No Residential Relocations 1987 6 Tenant Relocations 1988 7 Tenant Relocations (incl. 5 Section 8 transfers) 1988 1 Owner - Occupant Relocations 1989 2 Owner - Occupant Relocations Total: 18 Relocated Households in the 5-year period · In the Coastal Zone, the City has demolished 3 low-income housing units since January 1, 1982. These 3 units are to be replaced by 3 units in the Dorothy Street family public housing project, to be completed in June 1992. These units are located within 1/2 mile of the Coastal Zone. No new housing units have been approved for construction in the Coastal Zone since January 1, 1982. 7. Weatherization Proaram · While the City does not operate a weatherization program, one of the 1 argest non-profit organizations in the San Diego area, Metropolitan Area Advisory Committee (MAAC) , use State monies of approximately $500,000 a year on a grant program targeted towards individuals whose annual incomes are below $9,264 (two person maximum). The maximum grant size is $1,600 but due to the reduction in tota 1 funds available each year, the program manager now only authorizes $400 grants per household. This allows the program to serve as many people as possible, approximately 254 households in the South Bay a year. These grants are used to weather-strip homes and replace · windows and/or doors. 1-22 B.4 CDBG Funded Proarams -..- l. Overview of EXDenditures -....- The City has used the Co.munity DevelOpMent Block Grant in a variety of ways to promote neighborhood iaprovement projects that directly affect the overall health of the cDlIII1unity. The following is a record of the CDBG -- performance from 1985-1990. TABLE 2 OVERVIEW OF CDBG EXPENDITURES 19B5-90 1985 - $890,103 Total Expenditures * Housing Related 47% Housing Loans 339,000 * Referra 1 s 42,000 * Code Enforcement 33,000 * Public Works 188,200 Social Service 52,500 Administration 69,403 Economic Dev. 166,000 1986 - $1,129,444 Total Expenditures * Housing Related 37% Housing Loans 351,000 * Referra 1 s 47,200 * Code Enforcement 9,000 * Public Works 426,100 Social Service 75,160 Administration 214,450 Economic Dev. 6,534 1987 - $351,000 Total Expenditures * Housing Related 20% Mobile Home Loans 42,600 * Housing Referrals 29,800 * Public Works 110,500 Social Service 103,100 Administration 64,900 Economic Dev. 100 1988 - $1,469,500 Total Expenditures * Housing Related 5% Housing Loans 17,100 * Referra 1 s 61,400 * Public Works 1,188,000 Social Service 57,100 Administration 57,000 Economic Dev. 88,900 1989 - $782,380 Total Expenditures * Housing Related 16% Housing Loans 44,107 * Referra 1 s 83,070 * Public Works 396,322 Social Service 111,802 Administration 84,670 Economic Dev. 62,409 1990 - $1,412,694 Approved Total Budget * Housing Related 3% Housing Referrals 40,000 * Public Works 967,094 Social Service 174,150 Econ Dev./Adm. 231,450 1-24 . 2. Shared HousinQ Approxi~ately 400 people were assisted in finding roOM and board through the South County Council on Aging in the last five years. This program has received approximately $18,000 a year from Chula Vista's CDBG allocation. They match seniors with single IOthers, and other single individual s who need room and board, with elderly _n' homeowners who have extra rooms which they are willing to rent. Typical rental rates are $250-275 per IOnth. __, 3. Homeless Shelter Referrals Although there is a lack of detailed information that accurately enumerates homeless individuals by geographic -- area, in 1988, The Regional Task Force on the Homeless prepared a report for the South Bay sub-region which includes National City, Chula Vista, llIIperial Beach and a __ portion of San Diego. The total number of South Bay homeless who spend the night on the streets, in an automobile, in a park, on the beach, in a campground or in unauthorized campsites on any given night, is estimated to - - be between 135-200. A more conservat i ve estimate of 125 is supported by observations reported in the Task Force on Homelessness in the South Bay published in 1988. Homelessness is recognized as a regional problem shared by all cities within the South Bay. To help meet its share __ of the problem, 12 churches in Chula Vista have been permitted to participate in the Inter-Faith Emergency Shelter Program, and two local motels participate in the South Bay Voucher Program within the City limits of Chula -- Vista. Additionally, the homeless may be referred to some of the other shelter programs listed below. _0' The homeless service screening agent in the South Bay is the Lutheran Social Service. They screen the South Bay cases and evaluate the emergency needs of these peopl e. __ The ultimate purpose is to refer them to the following facilities and/or programs: a. South Bav Voucher Prooram According the the Task Force Report on the Homeless (1988), "during some portions of the year, homeless ..' families and a limited number of single adults may receive vouchers for a two-week stay in selected motels through local social service agencies. During periods of shelter voucher availabil ity, an average of five single adults and twenty-five family members 1-25 _...___. _ _____..___..._____.. __..___'__'__ __.____,_.'.~_m____.._.___'_.._'.m.____' ""_"_' _..___~__..m___.____~,___....._,____._____ can be found in the two participating South Bay motels each night in Chula Vista and Bonita. During ...a vouchering period, nearly half of the 177 separate individuals sheltered were children." A voucher is issued to individuals and families which provides room and board for up to (2) two weeks. This system served 527 cases in two local hotels in the last year. The next cycl e of funds will not be available until December 1990. This program is funded through the Catholic Charities by the Federal · Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). b. Inter-faith EmerQencv Shelter PrOQram Twelve beds are available to homeless people during the months of December - Apri 1 each year for up to six weeks at a time. This is a volunteer effort done in cooper at i on wi th several South Bay churches including twelve in Chula Vista. To facilitate this program's success, the Chula Vista City Council adopted an urgency ordinance on September 13,1988 establishing an accessory use of 12 local churches as temporary shelters for the homeless. A permanent amendment to Section 19.58.110 of the City's municipal code became effective on 12-9-88 allowing the accommodation of up to 12 persons to be temporarily housed at church facilities subsequent to the adherence to specific conditions. c. La Quinta - Hotels and Motels in PartnershiD The La Qui nta motel in Chul a Vi sta part i ci pates in a nation-wide effort by the Motel Owners Association of · America who volunteer to provide up to 10% of their rooms a year for the homeless. This program provides 28 free nights a year up to three nights per family unit. This facil ity consistently uses its quota of rooms per year. d. Victorv Outreach This communal housing shelter has been operating in its downtown San Diego location for the past six years. Upon referral from Lutheran Services, prospective cl ients undergo further screening at the · Outreach facility. This is a live-in, total immersion training program for people with histories 1-26 · of substance abuse. Approxi.ately 120 people a year complete the 9-12 IIOnth training prog rail designed around Christian Fundiilllentalist practices. There are facilities for single lien and WOllen but no children. The project counselor lAintains that once enrollees ---~ complete the progrUl, IpproxilAtely 50% are completely successful It re-entering the working world and leading nOnlal lives. -- e. St. Vincent De Paul . Again, according to the Task Force study, " . .. approximately 1OJ. of the 900 shelter beds in San Diego are occupied by individuals who originated from the South Bay, according to shelter provider --- estimates and actual tallies... ." The St. Vincent De Paul shelter is just one of those -- centrally located in the City of San Diego. This shelter sponsors many 1 he-in, job-training programs. Also during the 89/90 llleasles epidemic, infectious cases were quarantined here. These -- programs depleted the supply of beds available to the homeless. -,- In conclusion, the South Bay homeless population, is estimated to be approximately 6OJ. homeless famil ies. Almost two-thirds of these family members are -_.~ children. These estimates are primarily based on the observations of social service agencies. In addition to the above referral efforts, an effort will be made during the next planning cycle to develop and ---- construct a new shelter or transitional home to help serve homeless families in the Chula Vista area. -- C. AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN PROGRESS -- Guaranteed Housina (392 units) Public Family Housing 40 units 22 Units Dorothy Street --- 18 Units l Street Remaining Balance of Referenda 277 units --- Authority (pendin9 site selections) Section 202 (Salvation Army) 75 units -- -- - 1-27 ,._----~_.---~_._------_....~-,.._.__._------_._--,-----,-- -..-'._."-.--~-----.--.~-~~-- Potential Housina (878 units) - Family Density Bonus 6 units - Rancho del Rey (balance due) 23 units - Terra Nova 72 units - Sun bow (pending) 195 units - EastLake I (balance due) 18 units - EastLake Greens (pending) 277 units - Salt Creek I (pending) 55 units - Salt Creek Ranch (pending) 250 units III. CONCLUSIONS , Areas Suaaested for SDecial Consideration Wh 11 e Chula Vista has an impressive record of affordable hausing production, some areas of improvement have been noted which will be one target of the proposed programs described in Part 3. There are four main areas which need special consideration: I) deficiencies in application of private sector programs in providing more units to lower-income famil ies for longer periods of time. · 2) expansion of funding sources including investigation of new state programs and public-private partnerships. 3) attention to ensuring full and equitable neighborhood integration of lower-income affordable housing within the City's new eastern territories development. 4) an increased inter-departmental effort in monitoring implementation of the goals and objectives of the Housing El ement. Wh 11 e these four special considerations form a broad framework, and · summari ze opportunit i es for improvement ident i fi ed through comprehensi ve review of the 1986 Housing El ement, more sped fi c refinements are necessary to meaningfully guide development of the Comprehensive Housing Plan embodied in Part 3. I n order to further direct pol icy and program development responsive to these special considerations, the following corollaries have been developed as suggestions for the 1991-96 planning period. · 1-28 SUGGested SteDs for the 1991-96 Plannina Period To assist the City in lleeting the next S-y.ar goals the following steps are recOMmended: - - 1. A IIOre coordinated and integrated approach .-ong MpartMnts in lleeting stated housing elt!llent goals which would tlK:l_¡ building and code enforcelllent referrals to the rehab coordinator for -- potential financial assistance, and increase in cUIRlUllication on project decisions between the Planning and C_nity Develo lllll!nt Departments during new construction project reviews. 2. A commitment to annual inter-departmental reviews of goals and objectives in order to keep all departments apprised of the nu.erous changes in the laws, regulations, financial constraints and ..rket -- condi t ions affect i ng hous ing develo lllll!nt. Thi s expanded COllllli tllent would include a. A review of the Housing Advisory Comittee llellbership, role, and function. Suggested expansion of responsibilities would include review and recolll11endation on all affordable housing proposals, and an annual review and report on all housing policy and program perfonaance from the Housing Advisory Committee to the Planning COMmission and City Council. b. Consideration of affordable housing early on in the planning process, including the General Plan Development (GDP) process for those projects utilizing Planned Community (PC) zoning. c. Standardized notification to the Housing Coordinator of all projects which require affordable housing provisions at the time of initial project application. 3. Exploration of non-profit sponsored low-income housing production as the best way to insure long-term affordability and the leveraging of -, 1 imited City doll ars into funding programs. 4. The Community Development Department .ay want to consider taking a ___ IIOre assertive role in packaging the first SAMCO (Savings Association Mortgage Company Organization) or CCRe (California Community Reinvestment Corporation) or Federal Home Loan Community Investment Fund (CIF) loan proposal for selected developer(s) in - Chula Vista. In this way, the City could lay the ground work for successive activity in this type of "layered-private-sector financing". Additionally, new State programs have now become available for which the City may want to take the lead in 1 and assembly and pre-development on behalf of selected non-profit social service agencies who provide a broad spectrum of services to particular segments of the population (i.e. the elderly, handicapped, the homeless, and the at-risk population). 1-29 ~_____.____....___________,_ __. ___. - '.__"'.,_____..___,.,..________..'_____n_ ._.________._ ,___,,_~_~ 5. In bringing the current density bonus ordinance into conformity with new State mandates, the City will alter current guidelines for density bonus family units, and put before Council an alternative calculation which better responds to the needs of lower-income households. 6. An alternative calculation might be considered for "for-sale" properties which would distinguish between two groups: first-time buyers and "empty-nesters". In other words, it .ay be too limiting to exclude people who would be paying more than 30% of the area median income on a housing payment and not make some adjustment for tax credit advantages, value of appreciation, and the value of upward mobility of home buying vs. renting. The City may develop an equity share formula on a deferred loan program for first-time homebuyers. This home ownership program would allow future re-sale and loan pay-backs to be reinvested in future affordable housing projects. 7. The Community Development Department has recently ass igned a staff person to the task of annual rent monitoring of all on-going cooperation agreements. A further recolll11endat ion is that on-goi ng cooperation agreements be filed separately and not stored away until the performance periods have expired. 8. In a joint effort between Community Development and Planning, a marketing program should be developed to fac il i tate applicant understanding of affordabl e housing requirements and compliance. This program would include brochures describing the various procedures, programs, and compliance requirements for affordable housing production in the City. 9. Establish specific requirements and procedures for the submission and review of an "Affirmative Marketing Plan" for the provision of 10% affordable housing in projects.over 50 units when the applicant claims such housing provision is not economically feasible. 10. Improve systematic monitoring of rents and sales of units reliant on conditional use permits or under cooperative agreements. These recommend at ions are the subject of further program addressment in Part 3. WPC 0143p 1-30 z ' O'CJ ~ - z '. I-¡: 0 C I/) . .u ~ . o '" Q ; I- II: .. U 0 a U .. '" '" 0 ~. a: ;: 0", . a: '" .. r-' .. I/) : , t::\ . __. ' \!J ~ ; : I .._,.~... r' , I ¡ .....1 I ....... n., '-'1 I ! ~-' ....,¡ l .., . j'JI / ¡: I:, , . ~ . L I ~ ~-~ -- I .-- ,..- , I I r---J ~ ~ , III I \ ~ , ~ __ ,I L, " '. I < :! " ~ ~ i CI)~. _..10 > ell = .. ! '" ..' ~,_._ <It Ie \ ",,' .----.. - - . ,.\ -..' , - - ' .--""'-- ; g to ,. ,.,......... ,...... .J Q ;.: _.....r::~.,.. _" ""'" '" co f .J ~ p . ~ I/) , ... ¡¡¡ \' ¡ 01/) \"¡ __ c, \., I ",4' I "I " - I \ ..'. _ __~.-:::':~..J.:".~~.._....r n._,_m__m _.__,.. _____. ____..________, - _n_.._._·_···_._··.·M+·_ ~__ _ --"'---"-- -,_. ~-,----- MaD No. Proiect Name Address I. Beacon Cove 536 East H St. 2. Brandywine 1501 Brandywine 3. Broadway Apts. 1053 Broadway St. 4. Burkhart Senior 1241 Fifth 5. Camelot Lakeridge Dr. & Brookstone Rd. 6. Canterbury Court 336 CSt. 7. Castle Park Garden 272 Kennedy St. 8. Congregational Tower 288 F St. 9. Cottages Clearwater Pl. II. Fourth Ave. Apts. 54-66 Fourth Ave. 12. Kiku Gardens 1260 Third Ave. 13. Lofgren Miracosta Circle 14. Meadows 1061 Granjas Rd. 15. Melrose Manor 1678 Melrose Ave. 16. Moss Street West 533 Moss St. 17. Oak Terrace 423 Church Ave. 18. One Park 350 Third Ave. 19. Orange Tree Mobile Park 521 Orange Ave. 20. Oxford Terrace 555 Oxford St. 21. Oxford-Zuniga 251 Oxford St. 22. Palomar Family 171 Palomar St. 23. Park Fifth Ave. 364 Fifth Ave. 24. Parkway Senior 411-415 Parkway Dr. 25. Rancho Vista 1419 Tobias Dr. 26. Terra Nova 440 East H St. 27. Town Centre Manor 436 F St. 28. Villa Martinique EastLake Terrace 29. Woodlawn #36, 38, 54 Woodlawn Ave. 1-32 , TABLE B CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPECIAL HOUSING POPULATIONS - NEED INDICATORS Estimated Pooulation Estimated Occuoied Households 135,163 47,824 The fo 11 owi ng tabl e enumerates the popul at ions whi ch present speci a 1 hous i ng needs. Previous sections of the report have already described the unmet needs of populations within the eastern territories, and among census tracts with the highest concentrations of minority populations. Estimated % Estimated Estimated of Total Individuals Households Elderly Population (65+ years) 11. 6% 15,767 9,751 _'·"0 Handicapped Population 10% 13,160 --- Large Families 14% 6,592 Single-Head of HH (Families) 10.2% 4,902 -...- Homeless (Regional) 350-500 Families 255 -- Single Persons 107 Children 22 Substance Abusers 22 _. Mentally III 22 Household Ethnicity Hispanic 37% 50,376 -,- Asian B% 10,BB5 Black 4% 5,721 White 50% 67,302 -,- American Indian .5% 622 Other .5% 257 Military Households 200 Mobilehome Park Households 3,613 Farmworkers 234 College-Student Population 9,602(1) Sources: SANDAG Regional Housing Need Statement, August 1990 - 1990 Federal Census, April 1990 1. Based on estimated population for 19B9 Census Designated Places (COP) - which use sl ightly different data boundaries than actual incorporated areas. - ...~ II-17 - --- - - -~ - --~-- --- -~ - --_.._---------.~- ----,--_._- B.7 Student Pooulation · Chula Vista is the location of one community college named Southwestern College with an enrollment of approximately 9,602. The college director indicated that in times of recession, full and part-time enrollment is expected to increase as adults re-enter school to enhance employment skills needed in the work force. Wh il e most of these community college students commute from outside the area, some do compete for local housing along with other low-income groups. C. AT-RISK HOUSING There are three types of housing potentially at risk of converting · to market type rentals between 1991 and 2001 as shown in the following table: Potential At-Risk Housinq 528 total units Family Units - HUD 236 386 units Family Non-236 Units 110 units Elderly Non-236 Units 32 units C.l Family Units - HUD 236 Contracts The fo 11 owi ng table illustrates the required information for · the City's HUD Section 236 units: a. Castle Park Garden Apartments 272 Kennedy Street Chula Vista, CA 91911 62 non-elderly, low income units Earliest Date of Conversion: December 1991 b. Oxford Terrace Apartments 555 Oxford Street Chula Vista, CA 91911 · 132 non-elderly, low-income units Earliest Date of Conversion: March 1993 (Owner may begin LlHPRHA process 18 months before the project's 20th birthday) c. Palomar Apartments 171 Palomar Chul a Vi sta, CA 91911 168 non-elderly, low-income units Earliest Date of Conversion: March 1993 (Owner may begin LlHPRHA process 18 months before the project's 20th birthday) · d. Rancho Vista Apartments 1419 Tobias Drive Chula Vista, CA 91910 24 non-elderly, low-income units Earliest Date of Conversion: November 1991 11-18 · In 1968, HUD developed the 236 program that provided both -..,. mortgage insurance and mortgage interest reduction to any for-profit or non-profit developer who agreed to bu il d affordabl e housing units for famil i es. Typically, the -- contracts for these projects included a 40 year mortgage which could be prepaid after 20 years, and if prepayment occurs, then the project no longer has an affordabi 1 i ty requi rement. This - prepayment option only applied to for-profit developers. Unfortunately, HUD did not consider the consequences of thi s prepayment option, and as a result, the nation now faces a seri ous threat to its available stock of affordable housing. - In 1987, this threat was brought to the attention of the federa 1 government, and Congress passed the Emergency Low- Income Housing Preservation Act (ELlHPA) . This Act --.. precluded any prepayment until February of 1990, and in February, the Act was extended until new permanent legislation could be adopted. In 1990, the National Affordable Housing Act was passed, and this Act included the Low- Income Housing - Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act (LIHPRHA). LlHPRHA wi 11 provi de a permanent sol ut i on to the preservat i on probl em if it is adequately funded. - Chula Vista has four projects which were HUD financed using the 236 program. Currently, two of these projects have fil ed a -- Notice of Intent which states that they intend to prepay their mortgages. In reality, these projects probably wi 11 not be able to prepay since both ELlHPA and LI HPRHA have strict requirements for prepayment. Under LlHPRHA, these property -- owners can elect to proceed under ELIHPA or LIHPRHA. Nonetheless, both acts require an owner to prove that - termination of the affordable units will not materially increase economic hardship for current tenants (which generally means annual rent increases of less than 10%) ; will not -- i nvo 1 untari 1 y d i sp 1 ace current tenants; or wi 11 not adversely affect affordable housing opportunities for low-income and very low-income famil ies, including those families seeki ng employment in the area, and minorities. -- Both ELlHPA and LlHPRHA state that these un its should be acquired by either a non-profit or a public agency whenever -,,, possible. Undoubtedly, the acquisition costs of these units will be high. Nonetheless, both laws provide acquisition incentives to non-profits and public agencies, but LlHPRHA mandates that the following incentives be given: (1 ) insurance - for financing to 95 percent of the preservation equ ity up (equ ity as determined by HUD) under the HUO Section 241 (f) program; (2) grants up to the present value of the total of the -..- projected published Fair Market Rent s for Sect ion 8 Exi st i ng Hous i ng for the next 10 years (or longer, if necessary); (3) reimbursement for transaction expenses relating to acquisition, -- such as ordinary transaction costs, financing fees and -- II-19 --.- - --" -_.._--_.~_._--.,-._..,-..._.- ......,-...-.,..-.. ---------~----- ,----- · operating deficit coverage. Subject to appropriations, LIHPRHA also states that HUD must provide assistance sufficient to enable acquisition at a purchase price not greater than the HUD defined preservation val ue, to pay the debt service of the mortgage and debt servi ce on any rehabil i tat ion loan, to meet project operating expenses and adequate reserves, and to receive an adequate return on any cash investment made to acquire the project. The approximate cost of acquisition for all four complexes is · $26 mi 11 ion. This figure was determined by using the Section 8 Fair Market Rents and a gross rent multiplier of 8. These "at-risk" projects should be preserved, whenever possible, since it would be impossible for the City to replace these lost units. The City has already received the notice to prepay from two owners, and the other two projects can file their notices in March of 1991. The owners of these bu i 1 ders are receiving very small rents since the average rent for a two bedroom apartment is $292, and for the most part, they have burned thei r tax deprec i at i on benefits. Therefore, it is very likely that they may attempt to sell or prepay. · To date, the City has identified the following resources which could be utilized for the preservation of these HUD Section 236 units: a. Redevelopment Agency Housing Set-Aside Funds: and, b. Community Development Block Grant Funds. Approximately $500,000 is available, but the City traditionally uses CDBG funds for public improvements. The Agency has $200,000 wh i ch could be leveraged in a bond issue to produce $2,000,000. If a bond issue is accompl i shed, · the Agency would have sufficient funds to provide a loan to a non-profit for predeve 1 opment and equ ity since the estimated cost, to the Agency, of preservation is $1,300,000. The cost of preservation is significantly less than the cost of replacement since this cost is estimated to be $40,530,000. In the past 12 months, City staff has identified the following non-profits which could assist with the preservation of the City's HUD Section 236 projects: a. Chicano Federation; b. Civic Center Barrio; · c. Interfaith Housing; d. MAAC Project; and, e. South Bay Community Services. 11-20 · C.2 Non-236 HousinQ Units At-Risk - In addition to the HUD Section 236 Projects, the City has three apartment projects which are at-risk because of expiring use restrictions. These projects are as follows: -..- a. Beacon Cove Apartments 536 East H Street -- Chula Vista, CA 91910 33 non-elderly, low-income units Earliest Date of Conversion: 1996 -- Type of Government Assistance Received: Fulfi 11 ment of the City's Affordable Housing Obl igat ion for the Terra Nova Subdivision ---- b. Eucalyptus Grove Apartments 67 East Flower Street Chula Vista, CA 91910 -- 75 non-elderly, low-income units Earliest Date of Conversion: 1995 Type of Government Ass i stance Recei ved: Dens i ty Bonus & ~ Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds c. The Meadows of Chula Vista 1055 Granjas Road -- Chul a Vi sta, CA 91911 32 elderly, low-income units Earliest Date of Conversion: 2000 -- Type of Government Assistance Received: Density Bonus To date, the City has identified the following resources which - could be utilized for the preservation of these units: a. Redevelopment Agency Housing Set Aside Funds; and, b. Community Development Block Grant Funds. -.,- Approximately $500,000 is available, but the City traditionally uses CDBG funds for public improvements. -- The estimated cost of replacing these units is $14,910,000. In order to preserve the family units in Beacon Cove, the only viable a lternat i ve is rent subs i dies since the existing -.-,. contract specifically states that restrictions will terminate ten years after the contract was executed. These rent subsidies would provide, for the number of units currently -- restricted, the difference between what the owners are allowed to charge which is currently market rate and what market rate may eventually be. - Estimating the cost of rental subsidies is extremely difficult since the City has no way of determi ni ng how much and when rents win increase. Therefore, estimating the cost of - preserving these units is nearly impossible. Since the Agency -- II -21 .-.- ~~~~- ----- --- ~-- --- ---------------- ----------- - -.-.---.----,. has 1 imited funds and this funding has been committed to preserving the City's HUD Section 236 units and the Agency's very viable rehabilitation program, the Agency would only have approximately $50,000 to spend on rent subsidies. The Agency is currently investigating the poss i bil ity of refinancing the bonds for Eucalyptus Grove, and if this occurs, · the Agency will require extended rental restrictions. With this alternative the Agency will incur no costs. Sen i or projects built were typically built under the density bonus program, and they are less 1 ikely to convert to market rents due to the Cond it i ona 1 Use Permits under which they operate. In order to convert, the owner would have to underwrite a considerable expense to bring the senior projects into code compliance mainly for parking requirements. For these reasons, it is unlikely that The Meadows will convert. The fo 11 owi ng non-profit corporations coul d assist with the · preservation of the above listed units; a. Chicano Federation; b. Civic Center Barrio; c. Interfaith Housing; d. MAAC Project; and, e. South Bay Community Services. Since the cooperation agreements with Eucalyptus Grove and Beacon Cove allow rents which are currently prevail ing market rates, the real impact of losing these units is minimal. When the cooperation agreements were written, the median income for · the San Di ego Standard Metropo 1 i tan Stat i st i ca 1 Area was much less, and the rent restrictions were considerable. D. PROJECTED NEEDS D.1 Introduction/Current Estimates Since the beginning of the last Element's planning period in 1985, the San Diego Region has experienced fairly rapid and cons i stent popul at i on growth at an average of 3.6% per year, coupled with an average growth in the number of housing units of 3.7% as illustrated in Table 11. By comparison, Chula Vista · has generally para 11 e 1 ed the reg i on wi th average growth rates for population and housing over the 5 year period being 0.1% higher than regional rates. Tables 9 and 10 provide the actual numerical growth in establishing the current population and housing totals for 1990. The fi gures in parenthes i sunder "% increase" represent the actual growth percentage without influence from the Montgomery Annexation in late 1985. · 11-22 -- TABLE 9 POPULATION GROWTH CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO REGION 1985-1990 Year Chula Vi sta as a (Jan 1) Chula Vista San Dieco Recion % of the Recion -,- 1985 91,166 2,102,502 4.3% 1986 116,295* 1,165,457 5.4%* 1987 120,285 2,248,482 5.3% 1988 124,253 2,327,684 5.3% 1989 128,028 2,418,176 5.3% 1990 131. 603 2.509.914 5.2% -- Total Increase: 40,437 407,412 % Increase: 44.3 (18.6) 19.4 *Also reflects the Montgomery annexation Source: State Dept. of Finance Annual Jan. 1 estimates TA8LE 10 -'.-. TOTAL HOUSING GROWTH CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO REGION 1985-1990 -,- Year Chula Vista as a (Jan 1\ Chul a Vi sta San Dieco Recion % of the Reci on -- 1985 33,544 787,210 4.3% 1986 43,951* 821,228 5.4%* 1987 45,101 857,098 5.3% 1988 47,696 894,333 5.3% _.'.'- 1989 48,691 921,940 5.3% 1990 49.863 946.362 5.3% - Total Increase: 16,319 159,152 % Increase: 48.6 (22.8) 20.2 ---. *Also reflects the Montgomery annexation Source: State Dept. of Finance Annual Jan. 1 estimates TA8LE 11 - PERCENTAGE RELATIONSHIP POPULATION AND HOUSING GROWTH CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO REGION -.. 1985-1990 % Chance POD % Chance Housinc Year Recion C.V. Recion C.V. - 1985 3.0% 4.9%* 4.3% 5.2%* 1986 3.8% 3.4% 4.4% 2.6% 1987 3.5% 3.3% 4.3% 5.7% -- 1988 3.9% 3.0% 3.1% 2.1% 1989 3.8% 2.8% 2.6% 2.4% Averages: 3.6% 3.5% 3.7% 3.6% -- *Excludes the Montgomery annexation. 11-23 --,-- -- -.-_._-_.._~"_."_..__.__._.,---_.__._,._-----,_. ----.,------..--------- --- - ---- --------- ---.......--.---- In further establishing the status of current conditions, Table 12 has been provided to illustrate the changes in Chula Vista's housing supply, by type, since 1985. As indicated by the footnote, the relative overall increase of 48.6% is influenced · by the Montgomery Annexation which included approximately 8,670 housing units and 23,500 persons according to City records. The 22.8% in parenthesis represents the actua 1 new growth excluding existing units annexed with Montgomery. As indicated by the bottom entries in the Table, while Chula Vista's overall housing stock has a slightly greater percentage of single family than multiple-family units (51.9% vs. 41.2%), the unit growth from 1985-1990 refl ects a trend toward greater balance, with new multi-family units exceeding single family (50.5% vs. 40.7%) . · TABLE 12 HOUSING SUPPLY CITY OF CHULA VISTA 1985-1990 Single 2-4 5 or more Mobil e Total Vacant Total Year Fami 1 y Units Units Homes Occupied Units !!!!.ill 1985 19,265 2,985 9,279 2,015 32,328 1,216 33,544 1986* 23,089 3,379 14,013 3,470 42,250 1,701 43,951 1987 23,641 3,396 14,569 3,495 43,948 1,153 45,101 1988 24,913 3,596 15,587 3,600 45,692 2,004 47,696 · 1989 25,388 3,784 16,003 3,566 47,006 1,685 48,691 1990 25,901 3,931 16,578 3,453 48,225 1,638 49,863 Total Change: 6,636 946 7,299 1,438 15,897 16,319 % Tot a 1 Change: 40.7 5.8 44.7 8.8 48.6* (22.8) % Total Housing 51.9 8.0 33.2 6.9 Stock: · *Also reflects the Montgomery Annexation Source: City Housing Inventory, State Dept. of Finance annual Jan. 1 estimates. · II - 24 - D.2 Pooulation and Housina Growth Forecasts -- The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is the primary agency responsible for the production of population, -- housing, employment, and land use projections for the San Diego region. In order to respond to changing economic and employment condit ions affecting population influx and the related needs for housing, SANDAG periodically produces updates -,- to its forecast models, the most recent of which is the Series 7 Regional Growth Forecast for 1986-2010. The forecast consists of two basic parts, the first being development of the -,- regional projections for population, housing, and employment constituting the overall expected demand for jobs and housing. The second part involves the process of distributing the expected population, employment, 1 and use growth, and the - related job/housing needs amongst the region's communities. The following tables and discussion present the Series 7 _.,-. Forecasts, adopted by 1 oca 1 jurisdictions, and provide a comparison of expected regional growth in relation to that anticipated for Chula Vista and its General Planning Area. The - comparison to the General Planning Area (GPA) is offered, since the figures projected for the "city only" in Series 7 are fixed within the 1986 municipal boundary. Since Chula Vista has annexed territory, and plans at least one additional annexation -'.... within this Housing Element's horizon, the GPA figures offer a more realistic picture for overall growth expectations. --, As indicated in Table 13, the Chula Vista GPA's population is expected to increase by 44.7% between 1986 and 2010; an increase of 57,749 people. At only 1% less than the 45.7% for the region, Chula Vi sta will continue to pace it se 1f to -- regional indicators, similar to the 1985-90 activity previously presented. - TABLE 13 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO REGION - 1986-2010 Total Increase 1986 1995 2000 2010 # % - Chula Vista (1) 116,430 132,304 140,682 158,112 41,682 35.8 Chula Vista GPA(2) 129,159 150,878 161, 997 186,908 57,749 44.7 -- San Diego Region 2,165,689 2,585,134 2,784,195 3,154,490 988,801 45.7 Source: SANDAG Series 7 Regional Growth Forecast _m_ <,) Within 1986 Municipal boundary area. (2) Based on 1986 adopted Sphere of Influence boundary. -- - 11-25 - . __,__".__n _ _..__.____....._...._ _+__~_._.__._._._,_..__ ___~_~__.______, . ___.'____'_"_.'.___". _____ _ __ _ _ · In conjunction with population growth estimates, Series 7 also projects and distributes figures for expected growth in the number of housing units. Table 14 identifies these projections and again offers comparisons between Chula Vista, its GPA, and the Reg ion. While the City GPA's rate of increase is projected to be slightly less than that of the Region (53.7% vs. 57.3%), the expected increase of 24,719 housing units will continue to keep pace with population increases shown in Table 13. TABLE 14 PROJECTED HOUSING GROWTH CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO REGION · 1986-2010 Total Increase 1986 1995 2000 2010 1/ % Chula Vista 42,203 50,251 54,027 60,950 18,747 44.4 Chula Vista GPA 46,068 56,088 60,956 70,787 24,719 53.7 San Diego Region 771,082 964,764 1,058,179 1,212,773 441,691 57.3 Source: SANDAG Series 7 Regional Growth Forecast Related to both population and housing growth is the expected growth in employment within the region. In order that adequate · housing be provided, the issue of jobs/housing balance be addressed, and an understanding of household economics as it ultimately relates to affordability be gained, projections of employment become important. Table 15 provides a 20-year project ion of employment growth by sector for the Chul a Vi sta GPA. The far right hand column indicates the employment profile for 1995 since that year best coincides with this Housing Element's planning horizon of 1996. TABLE 15 PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR CHULA VISTA GPA · 1986-2010 1986-2010 Increase % Total Sector 1986 1995 2000 2010 -1 % Emolovment 1995 Agri culture 533 533 533 533 0 0 1.1% Manufacturing 7557 8599 8848 9306 1749 23.1 18.3% Wholesale 1443 1639 1746 1958 515 35.7 3.5% Transportation 445 580 652 827 382 85.8 1.2% Hotel/Motel 332 332 358 424 92 27.7 0.8% Regional Govt. 877 957 1007 1112 235 26.8 2.0% Retail Trade 9666 11625 12661 15805 6136 63.5 24.7% · Retail Service 7203 8849 9730 12358 5155 71.6 18.8% Business Service 1757 2369 2713 3502 1745 99.3 5.0% F.I.R.E. 1676 2048 2395 3370 1694 101.1 4.4% Loca 1 Govt. 5609 7113 7593 8497 2888 51. 5 15.1% Other 2273 2396 2560 2863 590 26.0 5.1% TOTAL 39371 47040 50796 60552 21181 53.8 II-26 · As seen in Table 15, 1 oc a 1 planning area employment is projected to increase by 21,181 jobs or 53.8% by the Yflr 2010, ~--, with the greatest numeric increases occurring in the retail trade and service sectors (6136 and 5155 jobs respectively). In 1995, 43.5% of the Planning Area employment will be in ...,.- reta il trade and servi ces, wi th the next 1 argest sector bei ng manufacturing (18.3%). Given that retail trade and service jobs are traditionally lower paying, the impact of affordability in the 1 oc a 1 housing market may be magnified, -- assuming that those retail trade and service employees al so reside within the community. -,- 0.3 Chula Vista Share of the Reaion's Housina Needs As required by State Housing Element law, SANDAG, in --... conjunct i on wi th the State Department of Hous i ng and Commun i ty Development, has prepared an update of the Regional Housing Needs Statement (RHNS) for the 1990-1996 planning period. The RHNS serves to defi ne the Region's existing and projected -- hous i ng needs, and to equitably distribute the needs for all economic segments of the market amongst the localities. The purpose is to ensure that all jurisdictions share the ---- responsibility for addressing regional housing needs, and to avoid concentration of lower-income households in areas where high proportions of such housing already exist. All jurisdictions have adopted the current RHNS, and State law -- requires that each jurisdiction's Housing Element contain provisions for addressing its allocated share of Regional need. -.-.- The RHNS establ ishes two forms of housing need allocation to jurisdictions; Regional Share and Fair Share. Regional Share (Table 16) identifies needs for new construction housing units --- for all income groups (very low, low, moderate, and above moderate) , and is the allocation the Housing Element is requ i red to address by State law. Fair Share (Table 17) is established solely by SANDAG, and identifies the number of lower-income households needing assistance. In conjunction with the Fair Share allocation, SANDAG has developed a 5-year performance goal figure amounting to about 12.5% of total -- lower-income needs, which serves as a benchmark for the minimum number of households each jurisdiction should assist. As illustrated in Table 16, Regional Share allocations apply to the period starting January 1989. In the RHNS, SANDAG proportionately reduced the allocations for the period from July 1991 to July 1996 to assist local jurisdictions, since -, that period closely coincides with local Housing Element update time frames. Whil e thi s adjusted figure provides a benchmark, actual local all ocat ions for the 7/91-7/96 period must be -,...- determined by subtracting actual local housing construction -- -...- 11-27 ---- __________m_'._.'._"'.'___m_.' _ . ..' _.._. ,.__._._...~_..__..__,_ - ..-.,--..,.,-.'------.---------..------,-..-.------- --._--,_._- activity for 1/89 to 7/91, by income group, from the January 1989 total allocation figure. In Chula Vista's case, total construction activity for the period exceeded SANDAG's i nterpo 1 at i on by 1,243 units, and thereby woul d const i tute a reduction of the Regional Share allocation figures shown in the RHNS. The revised remainder of needed construction activity by income group is shown in the right hand column, 'and in part, forms the basis for the City's Quantified Assistance Objectives and Housing program proposals contained in Part 3. · As shown, Chula Vista was originally allocated 3.3% of the Region's new construction needs, or 5354 units between 1/89 and 7/96, which based on a 1/1/89 City estimate of 48,691 units, represents a 1.5% annual increase. The ability for Chula Vista to accommodate the remaining 2326 Regional Share units for the 7/91 to 7/96 period is discussed with the Resource Inventory on page 26. TABLE 16 REGIONAL SHARE ALLOCATION · CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO REGION 1989-1996 REGIONAL NEEDS STATEMENT(I) Region Actual City(2) City Regional All ocat; on by Chula Vista 1/89 to C. V. as Construction Share Balance Income GrouD 1/89 to 7/96 7/96 % Reqion 1/89 to 7/91 7/91 to 7/96 Very Low (23%) 1,232 37,313 3.3 - 1,232 Low (17%) 910 27,579 3.3 282 628 Moderate (21%) 1,124 34,068 3.3 993 131 Other (39%) 2.088 63.269 3.3 1. 753 --ill · TOTAL 5,354 162,229 3,028 2,326 (1) Based on SANDAG Regional Housing Needs Statement - Table A, July 1990. (2) Based on City records, and construction activity in accordance with State Department of Finance annual reporting. · · 11-28 Table 17 illustrates Chula Vista's Fair Share allocation for .-._, lower-income household assistance, and provides the 5-year goal for programs to reach at least 1,058 households, or approximately 212 households per year. In difference to Regional Share, Fair Share goals also include assistance from programs other than new construction such as rehabilitation and Section 8 assistance. Chula Vista's allocation of 4.9% of the region's total lower income households is determi ned rel at i ve to past income, housing, employment, and popul at i on trends as provided in SANDAG's RHNS. ..'... TABLE 17 FAIR SHARE -- HOUSING NEEDS STATEMENT CHULA VISTA AND SAN DIEGO REGION 1991-1996 Existing Growth Total Chula Vista "Fair Share" "Fair Share" "Fair Share" as % of Five-Year Households Households Households Reaion Goals -- Chula Vista 7,905 561 8,466 4.9 1,058 SD Region 161,320 12,467 173,787 21,728 .... -- -',- -- -,- -- - - -.-- II - 29 ,-- -------.,.---+- ---_..._.~-_._._-_....._----_.._-_. .----..------..-.-----..--.---.,- , -_...,,_.__.~_.__.__.,-,-- III. RESOURCES A. INTRODUCTION/OVERVIEW · Of equal or greater importance to the identification of existing and projected housing needs, is the communities ability, through its land use and infrastructure base, to accommodate these needs. In order to meet the existing and future demand for dwelling units, an adequate number of appropri ately zoned and publ icly served building sites must be available within the community. The following section presents the activities of the Chula Vista General Plan Update, and illustrates the adequacy of Chula Vista's land base, facilities, and projected development schedules to respond to the anticipated housing needs of all segments of the population, in accordance with projected income distributions identified by SANDAG's Regional Share allocation in Table 16. · B. CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE On July II, 1989, the City Council, after two years of work, adopted the first comprehensive update of the City's General Plan in 15 years. The rev i sed General Plan provides guidance for the City's development through the year 2010, and for the first time designates urbanizing 1 and use patterns for bu il dout of the entire Planning Area. It represents the potent i a 1 for significant growth, and is based on a "balanced community" concept providing for development of a variety of residential densities in conj unct i on with commerc i a 1 , industrial, and recreational development. The Udpate al so · incorporated major revisions to several facil ities master plans including circulation, wastewater, drainage, schools, and fire stations, and added a Growth Management El ement wh i ch defi nes the City's commitment to ensuring adequate provision of facilities and services in conjunction with growth. Tables 18 and 19 indicate the population, housing, and overall 1 and use growth projections contained in the General Plan Update, and ill ustrate Chul a Vi sta' s ability to continue to provide for its share of the region's housing needs. · · II - 30 TABLE 18 POPULATION AND HOUSING PROJECTIONS CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLANNING AREA 1988-2010 -.-- 1986- 1986 illQ ~ ZQQQ Zill lliQ lliQ pODulation: -- Tota 1 131,294 142,700 158,800 177 ,200 197,050 209,600 - - Change 11 ,406 16,100 18,400 19,800 12,550 78,306 Ave. Annl.Chg. 2,851 3,220 3,680 3,970 2,510 3,246 ---- Housinq: Total 48,609 53,570 60,420 67,920 75,911 80,945 -- -,,- Change 4,961 6,850 7,500 7,991 5,034 32,336 Ave. Annl.Chg. 1,240 1,370 1,500 1,598 1,007 1,343 Source: Chula Vista General Plan Update - Scenario 4, P&D Technologies -, As can be seen in Table 18, buildout projections through the year 2010 indicate an increase of 32,336 housing units, (67%) and a -p.~ population growth of 78,306 (60%). These increases in housing units and popul at i on will actua 11 y exceed the expected rates of growth forecast for Chula Vista's GPA in SANDAG's Series 7 as shown in Tables 13 and 14. TABLE 19 PLANNING AREA LAND USE ACREAGE -- CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE Existing City Total General Increase Land Use Update Land 1988-2010 1988 (acres) Use ( acres) (acres) Residential 5,621 19,328 13,707 -- Commercial 804 1,431 627 Industrial 1,278 2,404 1,126 Public, Quasi-Public 9,721 21,254 11 , 533 -- and Open Space* *Includes streets, vacant land, and water. --.-. Source: City Land Use Inventory; General Plan Update, P&D Technologies. -- Il-31 -- -..-.-" ------- "----~,~._.._.._~-- - ~.~_....- ---- -- - ---- --- - -- -,,- --,------------------- ~-_._--_._-- C. LAND USE/RESOURCE INVENTORY · In order to more specifically determine the amount of acreage available for residential development at various densities, the City conducted an inventory of sites using its computeri zed Land Use Inventory which contains information regarding the land use, general pl an, and zoning designations (among other data) for all 1 ands within the Planning Area. In recognition of the differences in residential development capacity and circumstances between the western and eastern areas of the City, the analysis was essentially performed in two parts; the fi rst reviewing the older, developed western area relative to primarily infill and redevelopment potential, and the second focus i ng on the devel opi ng eastern area comprised of 1 arge vacant tracts constituent to several master · planned communities in various stages of approval and implementation. Western Chula Vista CaDacitv Table 20 refl ects the total development capacity within western Chula Vista based on existing zoning conditions. As can be seen, while some vacant 1 and capacity exists (995 units), the primary capacity resides in "underutilized" land not currently built to its full zon i ng potent i a 1 (2,880 units). The 1 argest port i on of that growth is associated with parcels zoned for high density (R3) . · Whil e those 2,267 units represents a significant amount of the City's high density residential capacity, it should be noted that further potential is provided in Eastern Chula Vista (Tables 21 and 22) , including a sizeable amount of low and moderate income opportunit i es guaranteed by exi st ing and pending condi t ions appl i ed pursuant to the Affordable Housing Policy discussed in Part 3 (p. 111-4) . Based on historic construction activity, an annual average of approximately 250 infill units have been built in the western area. The majority of those units were higher dens ity multi-family on underutilized R3 zoned properties. While the City supported some of · that development through density bonus, publ ic housing and assistance to non-profits, the activity has largely occurred through the private sector without the need for specific pol icies/programs to encourage it. Given the remaining potential of such 1 and, and current project appl ication activity, the City anticipates s imil ar construction level s over the next five years, for a total of approximately 1,000 units. The City wi 11 cont i nue to support thi s development through density bonus, public housing, and non-profit ventures in conjunct i on wi th a variety of City and other fund i ng assistance as outlined under Objectives 2 and 3 in Part 3 of this · 11-32 · document. As an illustration, through projects either approved, pending, or anticipated, some 300 of the 1,000 total units forecast are expected to be lower-income affordable. TABLE 20 __ RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION CAPACITY VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED LAND CHULA VISTA CITY LIMITS _ 1990 Under- Utilized Land Total Residential Vacant Potential Potential Potential Density Zonina Districts Acres Units Units Units Low RE, R-I-15 32.61 69 13 82 (0-3 du/ac) Low-Medium R-I-I0, R-l, 154.51 569 157 726 (3-6 du/ac) R-I-5 _ Medium R2, R2T, R2X, 9.99 119 377 496 (6-11 du/ac) R3L _" Med. High R3M, R3T, R3G 2.28 35 66 101 (11-18 du/ac) __ High R3 8.58 203 2267 2470 (18-27+ du/ac) TOTALS 207.97 995 2880 3875 Note: Potential units indicated were derived using general density formulas and are subject to change predicated upon actual project __ proposa 1 s, and the outcome of the General Pl an/Zon i ng Cons i stency Study discussed on page 11-41. 1I-33 ,..-._-,~-- --~ --- -- ---..,---..-- --,------ -.--------,-.---- .-.,.,.-.---,..---.,------ · Public Facilities and Services The developed western area is already substantially served by existing public facilities and infrastructure. The City Engineering Department continues to develop and implement an ongoing 5-Year Capital Improvement Program which includes a one-year priority and funding strategy. That funding is provided from many sources including gas tax, state sales tax measures, CDBG, State and Federal grants, and 1 oca 1 fees and assessments. Current year funding commitments total approximately $11 million. Along with the CIP, · the City has initiated a 20-year Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP) in South Chu1a Vista. The purpose of NRP is to construct all of the missing public improvements in each targeted neighborhood. Within both the 5-year and one-year CIP, several major improvements are planned to provide capacity for growth in the western area including 2 main sewer trunk upgrades, the reconstruction and widening of 5 major streets, and the completion of a major drainage channe 1 with the Corps of Engi neers. With needed major facilities either in p1 ace, or planned and funded, most i nfi 11 residential projects only need to address mi nor on- s ite improvements, and the payment of general public facilities impact fees. · The City has two specific revenue sources which can be used to fund infrastructure projects which will support i nfil1 residential projects. CDBG funds ($1.3 million annually) can be used in conjunction with housing projects in low-income census tracts. The Redevelopment Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund ($1 million annually) can be used for offsite improvements which improve or increase the supply of affordable housing. Examples of how these funds have been used include: A grant of $800,000 from the Low and Moderate Income Housing · Fund for infrastructure development for the Brandywine project. Brandywine consists of 168 condominium units, 126 of which were sold to first-time moderate-income homebuyers. A grant of $275,000 from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund for sewer and development impact fees for the Si1vercrest senior housing project. When Si1vercrest is completed, it will provide 75 units for very low-income seniors. An appropriation of $345,000 from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund for mi ss i ng street and lighting improvements in · Otay, a low-income neighborhood. Expenditures of $2.3 million in CDBG funds to acquire a 6-acre site for a new library in a low-income area and $1.5 million in CDBG funds to renovate and expand the Norman Park Senior Center in downtown Chu1a Vista. · II - 34 · Expenditure of $1.8 mill ion in Redevelopment funds for a new _, Youth Community Center, which is located one block from a proposed 16-unit family public housing development. ~~ The City will cont i nue to undertake pre-pl anni ng efforts to ensure that adequate public facilities and services are in place to accommodate i nfi 11 res ident i a 1 capacity in western Chul a Vi sta, and will provide assistance, pursuant to Objective 12 on page 111-34. Growth Management __ The growth management measures discussed on pg. 11-41 are not seen to negatively impact the development capacity of parcels represented in Table 20 based on the following: _ Capacity is based on existing zoning. As Section 19.80.070 of the Mun i c i pa 1 Code pertains to upzon i ngs, th i s capaci ty woul d not be reduced by those provi s ions. Future rezoni ngs coul d potentially be impacted, but only in such instance that more than one incremental increase in residential zone{s) is being requested. As the majority of capacity exists on parcels __ already zoned as R2 or R3, the "2 year" clause is not a barrier. To date, no projects have been delayed by the Controlled Growth Measure. _ The Capital Improvement Program is, in part, intended to ident i fy and ameli orate cond it ions wh i ch coul d contri bute to project's inabil ity to comply with Threshold Standards. _' Adequate police and fire service are available, and the school districts are working to enSure adequate future capacity will be available. EASTERN CHULA VISTA Cacacity Table 21 illustrates the total remaining residential building capacity of the master planned projects in Eastern Chula Vista which _~ are within the City limits. These projects were approved under the City's Planned Community Zone (PC) which allows for development of a variety of housing densities, commercial, industrial, parks, and other uses in a comprehensive, coordinated living environment through submission and approval of a General Development Plan (GDP), or master plan. That GDP is then implemented through submission of a more detailed Sectional Planning Area Plan{s) (SPA), and -~ ultimately submission maps. 11-35 -'.-.'.- ,-._-----------~_._-~-_._- -------- . "- "_._..".,,".~-"-- -_..,_.-.,,------ - .-.."--- - - -- ---------- ".--,--...,...--.--.-- The City al so has three master planned projects currently under review which are outside the City limits but plan to annex; Salt Creek Ranch, and Rancho San Miguel, and Telegraph Canyon. Salt Creek Ranch has received GDP approval, and will be moving toward SPA and tentat i ve map review wi thi n the next year. Rancho San Mi guel and Telegraph Canyon are st i 11 in the prel iminary planning stages, but could see some construct ion prior to 1996. Table 22 indicates · the total residential capacity associated with each project. TABLE 21 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION CAPACITY EASTERN CHULA VISTA MASTER PLANNED PROJECTS CHULA VISTA CITY LIMITS 1990 Low Medium Med. HiQh High · Low (3-6 (6-11 ( 11-18 (18-27+ Proiect ( 0-3 ad du/ad du/ad du/ad du/ac) Totals EastLake Village Ctr - - - - - - - - 405 405 EastLake Greens 97 944 919 B14 - 2774 EastLake Trails -- 1260 - - -- -- 1260 EastLake I I I 746 255 260 374 200 1835 Sunbow - - 1128 160 444 214 1946 Rancho del Rey I 66 701 462 975 -- 2204 Rancho del Rey II -- 533 243 -- - - 776 Rancho del Rey III - - 314 838 228 - - 1380 Salt Creek I - - 169 237 144 - - 550 · Woodcrest S.W. - - 54 -- - - - - 54 Woodcrest T.N. - - -- 123 230 -- 353 - - - TOTALS: 909 5358 3242 3209 819 13,537 TABLE 22 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION CAPACITY EASTERN CHULA VISTA MASTER PLANNED PROJECTS CHULA VISTA PLANNING AREA 1990 · Low Low Med. Medium Proiect (0-3 du/ac) /3-6 du/ac) /6-11 du/ac) Totals Salt Creek Ranch 869 1442 405 2716 Rancho San Miguel 1522 96 -- 1618 Telegraph Canyon - - 350 - - ~ - - TOTALS: 2391 1888 405 4684 · II - 36 The master plans indicated in Tables 21 and 22 encompass thousands of acres of vacant land representing a substantial amount of variety of residential development. Each of the plans are at different stages of implementation ranging from an approved GDP to SPAs, subdivi sion maps, and under construction as indicated by Table 23. ---- In accordance with anticipated changes in this status as the projects progress over the next fi ve years, and through survey of I the respective developers, Table 24 represents a forecast of ,,- anticipated residential construction activity by unit type for the 1991-96 planning period. The uni t type format provides a better indication of potential housing costs, and serves as an indicator of the level of for- sa 1 e and rental assistance programs which may be ---- needed. The "approved" projects have sat i sfi ed growth management requirements, and "proposed" projects are those whose compliance plans are pending review and adoption concurrent with their SPA plan approva 1 s. The 6230 units anticipated represents about 34% of the 18,221 total units in Table 21 and 22. _..~ TABLE 23 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS EASTERN CHULA VISTA MASTER PLANNED PROJECTS ....-- 1991 Approved Approved Approved Under Proiect Submitted GDP SPArs) Subdivision Construction EastLake Village X Center - EastLake Greens X EastLake Trail s X EastLake III X -' Sunbow X RDR I X RDR II X -- RDR III X Salt Creek I X Woodcrest S.W. X Woodcrest T.N. X -- Salt Creek Ranch X Rancho San Miguel X Telegraph Canyon X -- -- -- - -..- 11-37 ---..-.--- _._~._- ...- ---.-----.-.----. --- ---- --------- · TABLE 24 5 YEAR CONSTRUCTION FORECAST EASTERN CHULA VISTA MASTER PLANNED PROJECTS 1991 EASTERN CHULA VISTA 1 DWELLING UNIT TYPE 1 PROJECTS 1 SFD I SFA I CONDO I APTS 1 TOTAL I ====================\=========\=========1=========1=========1========= APPROVED . I I I 1 I ···-··-··--·-·······1 1 I I I · 1 1 I I I SAL T CREEK I 1 115 1 148 1 110 I I 373 SUNBOW 1 665 I 143 1 178 I 165 I 1151 EAST LAKE VIL. CEN. I I I I 751 75 EAST LAKE GREENS I 890 I 472 I 424 1 140 1 1926 R.D.R. SPA I I 515 1 235 I 1 I 750 R.D.R. SPA II 1 385 I I I I 385 R.D.R. SPA 111 1 7D I 155 1 145 I I 370 ....-..-..1..-· -....1..·..·..·1-........1-....-..· sub total: 2640 I 1153 I 857 I 38D 1 5030 as percentage: 52.51'. 22.91'. 17.01'. 7.61'. · PROPOSED . ........··..·..·....1 I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I EASTLAKE TRAILS I 50 I I I I 50 I EASTLAKE III I I I I 41 I 41 I SAL1 CREEK RANCH 1 676 1 186 I I 62 I 924 1 RANCHO SAN MIGUEL 1 42 I I I I 42 I TELEGRAPH CANYON I 143 I I I 1 143 1 .... ..·..-1..·.. ·..·1..·..·..-1-....· ..·1" ....·..1 sub total: 911 I 186 1 o 1 103 I 120D 1 8S percentage: 75.91'. 15.51'. D.OX 8.61'. *************************.**.*...**************..*****...********.***** · TOTAL: 3551 1339 857 483 6230 AS PERCENTAGE: 57.01'. 21. 51'. 13.81'. 7.81'. With respect to low and moderate-income affordability, it shoul d be noted that the "approved" projects have already been conditioned to provide such units under the Affordable Housing Policy (AHP), and · proposed projects will be conditioned with subdivision map approval. The AHP is di scussed on pages llI-4 to 7. Pursuant to those conditions, more than 350 low-income units are anticipated as reflected by the Quantified Assistance Objectives on pg. III -2. II -38 · Public Facilities and Services In accordance with the City's various growth management requirements, public facilities and services needed to support the construction anticipated in Table 24, and beyond, are either already in place or have pl anned fi nanci ng and schedul es 1 inked to adopted phasing plans. These pl ans, known as Public Facilities Financing Plans (PFFP) , are requi red concurrent with SPA Plan approval. In addition to these PFFP's several projects had approved development agreements prior to - the onset of expanded growth management efforts in late 1989. The City has, and will continue to use, a variety of mechani sms to -.-- ensure that infrastructure and services are provided in a timely manner including assessment districts, reimbursement agreements, improvement districts, community facil ities districts, bonding, and the collection of public facility and transportation impact fees. As examples, three 6-lane roadways (East H Street, Otay Lakes Road, and Telegraph Canyon Road) needed to support master planned -~- developments were recently completed, and a principal flood cont ro 1 channel is nearing completion. An elementary school was built in EastLake, and the high school is nearing completion. Along with roadway improvements, several new main sewer trunk, and upgrades to several existing lines were also completed. -- Growth Manaqement As previously indicated, several of the master plans have sub stant i a 11 y complied with growth management requirements as provided through their development agreements and/or PFFP's. Therefore, the development forecast in Table 24 will not be impacted by growth management measures which are geared toward the provi sion -- of adequate facilities and services in advance of, or concurred with growth. To date, compliance with growth management measures has not created a barrier to residential development. The City has authori zed an average of 1100+ dwell ing units annually since 1987 -, when the first growth management measures were enacted. With respect to the Cont ro 11 ed Growth Measure adopted in 1988 (Chapter 19.80 of the Municipal Code), Section 19.80.070 exempts property zoned as part of a planned community. As all of the Eastern Chula Vista master planned developments presented in Tables -- 21 through 24 employ "Pl anned Community (PC) " zoning, they are exempt from the 2-year upzoning provision. -. ., -- 11-39 -..". ......._<'_...".".'_n."."..<___.____" -- -~-- ---~--~------~---~ ---.. -------- "".... "..--..-,.. -"'--."---.--"'--..- · IV. CONSTRAINTS A. OVERVIEW As required by State law, this section of the Housing Element includes an identification and discussion of vari ous constraints, both unique to and beyond the community, that may inhibit the development, maintenance, or improvement of housing for all income 1 eve 1 s . There are two primary realms of possible constraints; governmental and non-governmental. Governmental constraints address such matters as land use controls, building codes and enforcement, site improvement requirements, permits and processing procedures, · and fees and other exactions. Non-governmental constraints include such issues as availability of financing, price of land, and costs of construction. B. GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS B.l land Use Controls The various policies and regulations contained in the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance have a direct impact on the ability to provide not only affordable housing, but housing for all income groups. Excessive constraints exercised through · inadequate land use and zoning opportunities to provide a wide variety of types and densities of housing can preclude the attainment of housing objectives. As previously illustrated in the "Resource Inventory" discussion (pgs. 32-37) , the City's recently updated General Pl an des i gnates substantial areas of vacant 1 and for residential development at a variety of densities, and additional multi-family units are represented by underutilized 1 and in the older central area. Much of the vacant 1 and is proposed for development under the "Planned Commun ity (PC) Zone" which permits the use of flexible development standards, and tail ored dens ity and unit type mixes. In addition to the PC zone, the Zoning Ordinance · provides for a wide variety of residential uses, including its exclusive Mobilehome Park (MHP) zone, and further supports affordable housing through its density bonus provisions, and related allowances for reduced or modified standards through the Precise Pl an (P) modi fying district. Additionally, the Ordinance provides for mixed use development, and the construction of residential projects in certain commercial zones. Conclusively, the City's land Use controls do not at this time present significant constraints to meeting housing objectives, and actually provide a generally supportive framework. · II - 40 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 2: Needs. Resources. and Constraints -- ~ I. Introduction II-I -.,- II. Needs Analysis A. Existing Unmet Needs II -1 Vacancy and Absorption Rates A.l Overpayment in Rental Housing 11-3 A.2 Overpayment in Owned Housing II-6 A.3 Overcrowded Housing II-9 A.4 Substandard Housing II-I0 -'" B. Special Need Populations B.l The Elderly and Disabled II -14 B.2 Homeless Families II-IS B.3 Single Headed Households II-IS B.4 Large Famil ies II-16 B.5 Farmworkers/Dayworkers 11-16 B.6 Mobile Home Park Residents 11-16 B.7 Students II -18 , - C. At Risk Housing C .1 Family Units - HUD 236 Contracts II -18 C.2 Other Housing Units at Risk II -21 D. Projected Needs 0.1 Introduction/Current Estimates 11-22 0.2 Population and Housing Growth Forecasts II-25 0.3 Chula Vista's Share of the Region's Housing Needs 11-27 _.-- - Regional Share Allocation 11-28 - Fair Share Allocation 11-29 III. Resources A. Introduction/Overview II-3D B. Chula Vista General Plan Update II -30 C. Land Use/Resource Inventory II -32 -,-,- ---- -.--...---.,-.--,-.-,...---.--....-..--,-.---...-......._----~.._-- ._-_._--,_...__..._-_...__.,._~..__..,--- -------.------.-.-----.- TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) -.. PART 2: Needs. Resources. and Constraints ,,- ~ -- IV. Constraints A. Overview 11-40 B. Governmental Constraints 11-40 -- B.1 Land Use Controls 11- 40 B.2 Growth Management 11-41 .'-.,- B.3 Building Codes and Enforcement 11-46 B.4 Improvement Requirements/Development Standards 11-46 B.5 Processing, Permits, Fees, and Exactions 11-46 -- C. Non-Governmental Constraints II-51 C.1 Financing Availability 11- 51 -- C.2 Land and Construction Costs II-53 C.3 Employment Opportunities II-54 C.4 Other Impacts II-56 - V. Summary II-57 --- -- -.-.,.- -- ~,-, - - - - -- _.~...,._--~-~~-,_.._--_.._._-,--~-~._---~-------_...-.-......,.-, ,_.._,-_.,..,,-,-------------,-,- PART 2 NEEDS, RESOURCES, AND CONSTRAINTS _.,- I. INTRODUCTION As part of its response to the ever-growi ng and cri t i ca 1 need for not only affordable lower-income housing, but also decent and suitab1 e -- housing for families in all income groups in the rapidly growing State of Ca1 i fornia, the State Legislature has dec1 ared in Article 10.6 of the California Government Code, Section 65583, that as part of their Housing - Elements, cities shall periodically identify and analyze the existing and projected needs for housing within their cOlll11unities. Part of this analysis shall include an inventory of available resources, and an -- identification of constraints relative to the City's ability to provide for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing to meet the identified need. - In accordance wi th these requi rements, Part 2 of the Hous i ng El ement of 1991 has been structured to provide an assessment of 1 oca 1 needs, resources, and constraints in establishing the basis for a comprehensive - set of policies and programs, calculated to address Chula Vista's provision of adequate housing for all income groups through 1996. The resulting policies and programs are embodied in the five-year housing - plan outlined in Part 3. The following pages provide quantified analysis for current unmet needs in terms of overpayment, overcrowding, substandard condit ions, and -_.. various "special needs" groups such as the elderly, handicapped, single parent famil i es, and the homeless. Projected needs based on expected regional growth and employment are provided, and the abil i ty for Chula -- Vista's land base and regulatory framework to adequately respond is discussed. Finally, specific governmental and non-governmental constraints in the way of land use controls, financing availability,and land and construction costs are evaluated. ~..- II. NEEDS ANALYSIS ---- A. Existing Unmet Needs Vacancv and AbsorDtion Rates -- Within the following section, general population characteristics are discussed relative to the existing supply of housing to determine if -_.,- the level of production has ke~t,up with overall demand in the area as indicated by vacancy and 'absorption rates. Information was gathered from several sources: Department of Finance (January 1, 1991 estimates), 1990 Census, SANDAG Regional Housing Needs --... Statement and Seri es 7 Populat i on Forecast, and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Data for 1988. Generally, the older, well established neighborhoods with smaller .,,- homes have small er average households of 2.67 while the persons, newer census tracts (CT 134.03 and 134.04) east of HWY 805 have an average household of 3.5 persons. The Department of Finance - estimated an overall population per household size at 2.693 for January 1990. Although these are the best available estimates, all the researchers cautioned that the methodology for calculating these -.,- figures may not refl ect the actual 1 iving conditions of certain neighborhoods, especially those in Chu1a Vista south of L Street. II -1 -..- -'--....--...------..-----------..-.- -.._._,.,..._-"..._--~_.~"------"_..,.....,--"......,-~-"-----~----- The total estimated number of occupied dwelling units for April 1990 was 47,824 according to the of Census Bureau. Of these units, 24,487 (53%) were owner occupied and 22,337 (47%) were renter occupied. These figures are used by SANDAG to estimate the City's capacity to meet existing and future needs. The overall 1990 Census vacancy factor was 4.02%, however, the following table shows the difference in vacancy between types of housing. TABLE 3 VACANCY RATES BY UNIT TYPE 1990 FEDERAL CENSUS April, 1990 Vacancv Rate SFD 3.31 · SFA 3.84 2-4 3.29 5+ 5.66 HH 3.44 Overall 4.02 In analyzing SANDAG'S Series 7 Population Forecast information for 1988, four census tracts appeared to have higher than average vacancy rates. Three of these tracts (CT 131.01, 132.01 and 133.03), in older neighborhoods south of L Street, also had a large proportion of low-income rental housing units. The fourth tract · wh i ch est i mated higher than average vacancy rates (CT 134.04}is in the developing eastern side of the City where new growth is expected to exceed demand for the short-term. In a survey conducted by Communi ty Development, vacancy factors for new projects (Terra Nova and Beacon Cove) stabil ized at 5%, while those projects, especially senior projects, located south of "L" Street had vacancy rates between 8-10%. The apparent over-abundance of new senior housing projects which compete with other older low-rent units in the area may cause the vacancy rate to remain higher than average. Other possible explanations for the high vacancy rates could include poor marketing, or that these units are · located in an area which may not be considered attractive to seniors. Projections for 1995 growth estimate an 8-10% increase in total occupied dwelling units over the next planning period. The hous i ng programs outlined in Part 3, if fully eX2cuted will contribute approximately 240 units of affordable (low income) housing a year. · 11-2 · A.I Evidence of Over-PaYment in Rental Housina -- Backaround: According to SANDAG's Regional Housing Needs Study, "The - dynamics of supply and demand can be indicated by measuring the portion of a household's income that is spent for housing" and indicates the extent of the availability of affordable housing - in the market place. The incidence of over-payment is an area where sol id evidence is hard to find. SANDAG estimates from the 1980 Census Data - i nd i cate that there are 6,193 households in Chul a Vi sta who will pay more than 25% of their household income for rent. The tremendous popularity and waiting 1 i sts for Sect i on 8 rental - assistance in the City also suggests that over-payment is indeed a problem for many people in the area. The success of the Section 8 program is usually the result of two phenomenon -- 1) a 1 arge segment of the population who can not comfortabl y afford to pay rent and other 1 iving expenses and 2) the HUD renta 1 guidelines for the area reasonably reflect the true market conditions, allowing people to find units which can meet - the program guidelines for rent and unit condition. HUD officials have reported that Chu1a Vista has been consistently over-leased, which means that there is more than one eligible - household for every avail ab1 e cert ifi cate or voucher allocated. Current waiting lists are two to three years long for larger family units. -- In addition to SANDAG estimates derived from 1980 Census Data, Table 4 indicates the level of overpayment analyzed during 1988 and presented in the City's current Housing Assistance Plan -- (HAP). TABLE 4 ~, RENTAL SUBSIDY NEEDS FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS: 1988-91 HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN (OVERPAYMENT) -- Verv-10w Income Low-Income Total Elderly: 1,782 779 2,561 Small Family: 4,106 1,950 6,056 - Large Fami ly: 410 234 644 Total: 6,298 2,963 9,261 _...~ Analysis: Typical rental rates for the Chula Vista area are presented in Table 5. Rents suryeyed i ncl ude HUD fair market rents (FMR), -- the City assisted rents for housing complexes under both dens i ty bonus and bond programs, and by way of compari son, the all owab 1 e rents under the tax-credi t programs and new State --,- Prop. 84 programs. - 11-3 - - -"'._---_.~_._--_.,_.,_..._--------- --- ---~ ----."_. ----~~~ The City renta 1 projects surveyed are regulated by a cooper at i on agreement between the property owner and the City. The unit rents can not exceed 1/12 of 80% of either 25 % or 30 % of the area median. (Currently $37,900 adjusted for bedroom and maximum family household size.) Host of the density bonus and affordable housing program rents are restricted at the top of the affordabil ity range making these units unaffordable to these households whose incomes fall below 80% of median. This means, the population of those who earn less than 80% of the median may be subject to overpayment · of rents without additional subsidies such as Section 8 certificates or vouchers. In some cases, especially, in the senior density bonus projects, up to 40% of the units are being assisted by Section 8 subsidies. This program subsidizes the contract rent allowing the tenant to pay between $150-200 a month for rent. These contracts make the units truly affordable but the owner is not obligated to renew Section 8 contracts. In the case of family housing, only one out the 16 family density bonus units had a Section 8 rental contract. · The shortcomings of the current density bonus program are: 1) tenants may be paying more than 30% of their individual household income on housing costs for rent and 2) none of the City assisted complexes provide affordable housing beyond a time certain contract date which ultimately reduces the net affordable housing available City wide. · · 11-4 · -"'- TABLE 5 Rent Schedules-Area Median $37.900 -- SRO Studio ill ill ill ill SQ FT 850 900 -- HUD FMR $583 $684 $857 $959 .67 .74 -- COOP AQreements: @ 25 % 442-505 505-568 631 -- jSQFT .52-.59 . 56 - .63 @ 30 % 530-606 606-681 758 - ¡SQFT .62 .67-.75 Senior Density 80nus $345 $468 $630 jSQFT .57 .55 .70 - Family Density Bonus $460 $575 ¡SQFT .54 .63 -- F amil y 80nd $580 $685 ¡SQFT .68 .76 -- Family Market Rate $630-35 $745-55 ¡SQFT .74 .83 - HUD 236 Family Units $260 $305 $339 jSQFT .33 .38 .36 --- Tax-Credit : - >40 % $357-408 $378-432 jSQFT .42 .48 20-40% $298-340 $315-360 - jSQFT .35 .40 -.. ProD. B4: New Construction V.Low 232 232 265 298 332 Low 232 393 455 512 569 -- ProD. 77: Rehab Projects -- V.Low 249 332 379 426 474 Low 249 393 455 512 569 -- II -5 ~_..._---_.'----_.,---,,-------,_.,- "--.---..---..-----,-.---.-.----...,..--........------~--~.._---+-_._-- ------,~-~--~_. A.2 Over-Pavrnent in Owner-OccuDied HousinQ Overpayment among homeowners is 1 ess than that among renters according to 1980 Census Sunvnary Reports of Census Designated Places (COP). Overpaying homeowner households, according to these estimates, accounted for 1,248 of the Chula Vista (CDP) while 6,193 renter households were estimated to have overpaid · in 1980. This section describes the existing unmet needs as indicated by the over-payment of certa in sub-populations of homeowners. The underlying data analyzed for these purposes are provided by SANDAG's Regional Housing Needs Statement (RHNS) and Series-7 population forecasts, and the latest 1988 Home Mortgage Di scl osure Act (HMDA-88) data. The limitations of the HMDA data are that only one year of lending practices were analyzed. As previously stated, the attempt here is to suggest economic indicators of need rather than to provide proof positive of any economic trends. Census Tracts Analvzed · The fo 11 owi ng 22 (1980) census tracts were used as points of reference both by Series-7 and HMDA data. For a quick reference, the following tracts are arranged according to major geographical divisions in Chula Vista: North of L Street South of L Street East of 805 101. 03 131. 01 134.03 123.01 131.02 134.04 123.02 132.01 124.01 132.02 · 124.02 133.01 125.00 133.02 126.00 133.03 127.00 133.04 128.00 133.05 129.00 134.01 130.00 While census tracts 116, 121, 101. 07, 100.01, 32.04 and 32.07 not listed contain small sections of the City, the above census tracts reflect the main population of the City boundaries as of 1990. · In the fo 11 owi ng discussion, certain significant sub- populations are analyzed relative to 1988 mortgage lending to determine housing needs unmet by normal market conditions, thereby, gauging the 1 eve 1 of fi nanc i a 1 or other non-governmental constraints each sub-population has in meeting their housing needs. · II -6 These sub-populations include 1) tracts with the largest percent change in growth 2) tracts with the largest percentage of minority households and 3) tracts with the largest percentage of low-income households. _, Although all City tracts showed evidence of lending activity, affordability and balanced community issues surfaced in several of the above mentioned tracts. -- Growth Tracts ExamD 1 e: First, the newly developing "eastern territory" tracts of CT .., 134.03 and 134.04 reported a heavy concentrat i on of home purchase lending. Federally assisted mortgage lending, however, was less than 1% of the 955 home mortgages financed. _.. A total of $224,100,000 was 1 ent on home purchase loans and another $3,400,000 on home improvement loans. The socio-economic profile of the population in these tracts _ has undergone some major shifts in the 1 ast eight years. The total population of these two tracts has nearly doubled. Nearly all of the sub-populations have doubled except in the _ case of the Asian population which tripled in the same time frame. The fo 11 owi ng tabl e shows the percent change of each sub-population in CT 134.03 and 134.04 over the last eight _~ years: Ethnicitv CT 134.03 and 134.04 _ White Asian HisDanic Black Total '80: 75% 9% 13% 1.4% 17,240 '88: 66% 15% 17% 1.6% 32,195 Med i an incomes in these two tracks i nd i cate that over 50% of .._ the reporting households earned more than $50,000 in 1988 (in 1987 $) as demonstrated in the table below, out of a total 9,452 households: Median Incomes CT 134.03 & 134.04 9,452 Total Households <15K 15-25K 25-35K 35-50K +50K '88: 1. 7% 6% 12.5% 25% 53% II-7 _ _._+ _'_'_'."'___'_"'._"',.__.-..,",__ ..."~___.__ ,_"____ _______ _ _ '__'-_.'_M"".__.._._ " ..___...__________ _ ~__,_ "___" ~ __ _______.".'__,__ As an index of affordabi 1 i ty, assume that no real increase in income occurred between 1988 and 1990 and increases in medi an incomes only reflect the rate of increase in inflation. · Further assume, for a single family home in this area, a typical mortgage woul d be at least $160,000 (a 10% increase since 1988 when the average mortgage in this area was $144,315). Assuming a 10%, 30 year mortgage, monthly principal and interest payments would be $1,490 per month. A payment affordable to households earning in excess of $59,000 per year. That is to say, at least 14% of the population in this tract could not easily afford to finance a new single family home in this area. Minoritv Tract Examcle · The second tract analyzed was CT 132.02 south of L Street in the Montgomery area, reported as having the highest concentration of minority households at 57% of total tract population. The foll owi ng table demonstrates the percentage changes in the ethnic sub-populations of this tract over eight years: Ethnicitv CT 132.02 Hiscanic White Asian Black Tota 1 · '80: 47% 43% 6% 3% 8,173 '88: 51% 38% 7% 4% 7,267 A tot a 1 of 11 home purchase loans were made in this area in 1988, totaling $896,000. To test the affordability index in this census tract, assume the same 10% increase in the average mortgage amount (in 1988 average mortgage was $81,454). That is, an average mortgage now woul d be $89,500, at 10% amortized over 30 years with a monthly principal and interest payment of $871 per month. This mortgage would be affordabl e to households whose median was over $34,000. Just assuming · inflation increases, the median income in this tract is under $20,000 per year ($18,336 in 1988). Therefore, as demonstrated below, nearly 2,000 households would be unable to finance a conventional mortgage. Indeed, the debt service that could be supported by incomes under $20,000 are too low ($500/month) even to support market rate rents. This last fact may explain why this tract evidenced the least amount of multi-family and non-occupant lending in the whole City. Only two multi-family and one non-occupant loan were made during 1988, for a combined total of $1,196,000. · 11-8 · Median Incomes for CT 132.02 (INC-OI) -, Total Population 3,114 <15K 15-25K 25-35K 35-50K +50K __u 38% 31% 17% 9% 3% Lowest Income Tract Examcle: -,,- The last tract analyzed, CT 123.02, in the central city area demonstrated the lowest median income levels City-wide. In 1988, the median income in this tract was $9,846, and of the -- total reported households 91% (653 ) homeowners. Nearly were 70% of the total population of 1,030 were white, elderly (median age 64), and female (55%). --- Median Incomes CT 123.02 Total Population 633 -- <15K 15-25K 25-35K 35-50K +50K '88 68% 22.4% 7.4% 2% .16% -- Nearly 50% of the owner-occupied households received a home -" mortgage loan in 1988. No Federally assisted loans were originated. A total of $2,826,000 in home purchase loans were originated in that year, and three multi-family loans were -- originated for a total of $3,787,000. The affordabil ity test appl ied here woul d suggest an average mortgage loan of $115,500 (up from $104,666 in 1988) again at 10% interest amortized over 30 years for a monthly, mortgage payment of $1,100 which would be affordable to households with annua 1 incomes of $44,002. Even though 60% of the households in this tract reported low annual incomes, these households had other tangible assets available to them which would make them credit worthy customers. Conclusion This cursory analysis does suggest an affordabil i ty gap is _m_ present in the eastern territories, and where high concentrations of minority households live. If this a ffordabil ity gap is not addressed in the City's slate of _._- program responses, its goal of creat i ng affordabl e hous i ng in balanced communities could be seriously compromised. A.3 Over-Crowded HousinQ According to SANDAG's review of overcrowding region wide, the combination of low income and high housing costs has forced -- many households to live in overcrowded conditions. -,... 11-9 ---.-+- - - -- - ~- - - - - -- --- - - ~~---- --- ...-..-. .._._---_...,--------------,._---_.~._~._._--_.+ The term "overcrowded" is applied to units with 1.01 or more persons per room exclusive of the kitchen and bathroom(s). Ident ifyi ng the extent of overcrowded probl ems can serve as a warning sign that the convnunity does not have an adequate supply of affordable housing and/or housing units for large families. According to 1990 Census data, there are 5,193 overcrowded housing units in Chula Vista, representing about 10.4% of the 49,849 total housing units. Of those overcrowded uni ts 1,794 (35%) are owner occupied and 3,399 (65%) are renter occupi ed. · As an illustration of the type and degree of overcrowded condit ions present in Chula Vista, a review of the City/s Building and Housing Department code inspections for 1989 revealed that about 42 violations a year, or 17% of all code violations regarding substandard housing conditions, are the result of overcrowding. About 22 violations a year involve 8 to 10 people living in a single-family residence. Another 20 of these violations occurred in the older sections of the City, and involved people sleeping in cars, shacks, garages, and RV's parked on streets. These particular over-crowded condit ions may be the result of immigrant day works who have just crossed the border. Estimates from the U. S. Immigration and · Naturalization Service have indicated that 6,678 individuals claimed the South Bay as their home when fil i ng for Amnesty Immigration Status as seasonal agricultural workers in the South Bay reg i on (MAAC Report 1988) . Many of these workers move on to agricultural, gardening or construct ion day jobs outside the South Bay. Overcrowded condit ions are clearly intolerable and are inconsistent with 1986 Element policies. Whi 1 e cont i nued Code Enforcement activities wi 11 reduce the number of individuals 1 iving in overcrowded conditions, an assertive effort on the part of the City is necessary to provide more affordable, even · if temporary, shelter for very low-income people, and increased efforts to elevate overcrowding perhaps by referral to the City rehab programs for room addition loans where feasible. A.4 Substandard HousinQ Introduction Article 10.6, Secti on 65583 (a)(2) of the Government Code requires that as part of its assessment of housing needs, each City must include an analysis and documentation of its housing characteristics and housing stock condition. The primary · purpose of this analysis is to address the matter of "substandard" housing resulting from various degrees of physical decline, deterioration, and/or non-adherance to the standards of the Health and Safety Code and local bu il ding requirements. The required result of this analysis is to i dent ify the number of housing units needing rehabil i tat ion, and the number of units needing actual replacement. II-I0 · In order to determine the number of housing units needing rehabil i tat i on or replacement, the City consulted the Code Enforcement Section of its Buil di ng and Housing Department, which since 1987, has embarked on a systematic program of neighborhood by neighborhood inspections to improve conditions and appearance primarily through the "Neighborhood Revitalization Program" (NRP) and "Neighborhood Improvement Program" (NIP). Given that the City is virtually divided into eastern and western communities, with the eastern area the site of much of the City's new construction since 1980, the Code Enforcement/Inspection Division indicates that substandard conditions do not prevail there, and has thereby focused its -- efforts on the older western side of the City, including the Montgomery Community annexed in late 1985. The following sect ions provide an outl ine of the efforts and -...-.. findings of the systematic neighborhood inspection program, and divide the various substandard conditions into areas of major and minor rehabilitation needs. BuildinQ Code Enforcement and InsDection Activities -,- As previously indicated, the majority of the inspection activity has occurred west of 1-805 in the older part of the City, which has also been the focus area of the targeted Neighborhood Revital ization Program. The inspections are part ~..-~ of an external inspection program per departmental policy, and all code violation citations are compil ed and reviewed monthly. Currently, internal health and safety inspections are -- 1 i mited to multi-family dwellings (apartments), and are in response to complaints received from tenants. Internal inspections of single-family residences may be made on a request basis. HousinQ Stock Condition ---- Since the newer, eastern territories are primarily comprised of units built since 1980, and have thus far not been the focus of much code enforcement activity, the following estimates of -,.,- tot a 1 housing stock in need of some kind of rehabil itat ion pertain to the western half of the City in accordance with Building and Housing Department records. -- TABLE 6 WEST SIDE CITY HOUSING STOCK WITH REHABILITATION NEEDS - Total west side stock: 37,422 housing units 12% with rehab needs: 4,490 housing units -- Type % of total # of Single fam Multi-fam Rehab units% of need rehab need units % units % units owned rented --,-- Major rehab 37% 1661 30% 498 70% 1163 30% 70% Minor rehab 63% 2829 50% 1415 50% 1414 50% 50% -.'- Totals 100% 4490 1913 2577 II-11 _.____.m._._.___..__________" ..., ___.....,...,.._..___..__.'" _.____ ,.__________._..~__~___"__,,__..._.,_ -.-_.__~__..._._.~.__,.,__._ As a means of comparison to current Building Department findings, Table 7 indicates estimated City-wide rehabilitation needs as presented in the City's current Housing Assistance Plan (HAP). TABLE 7 REHABILITATION NEEDS - 1988 TO 1991 H.A.P. Stnd. Units Substnd. Units Suitable for Rehab · Lower Occ. Vac. ~ Vac. IQ1.... Income ~ Owner: 23,432 817 800 27 766 239 26 Renter: 20,861 1,119 1,594 85 1,527 1,032 82 Maior Rehabilitation Major Rehabilitation, that requiring some kind of financial assistance, would account for approximately 4.5% (1661 units) of the total housing stock in the western area. Typically, the · need for fi nanc i a 1 ass i stance from the City is seen to occur when necessary repa i rs exceed $1,000.00. Typi ca 1 loans cover the expense of roof replacements, room addi t ions, and kitchen modernization. In some cases, complete homes have been reconstructed on existing foundations, should the deterioration of the existing house warrant such. The rehab lending activities presented in Part I described the level of funding over the past planning period. It is anticipated that the same level of funding will be continued in the western half of the City for the 1991-96 planning period. · Deteriorated Units - Demolitions According to the Building and Housing Department's estimates, only about 1% (374 units) of the approximately 37,422 housing units on the western side of the City are in truly deteriorating condition with either crumbling foundations, seri ous dry rot, and/or termi te i nfestat i on. Thi s stock coul d be a potential candidate for demolition activity. Approximately 19 single family dwell ing units were demol ished during the last planning period due to serious deterioration. If deteri orat i ng units cannot be economi call y salvaged through · rehabilitation efforts, the City will continue to institute demolition to ameliorate serious health and safety concerns. Demol itions 1985-88 10 1989 6 1990 -1 Total 19 · 1I-12 Minor Rehabilitation -..,. Those items which can be classified as minor "fix-it· items, such as replacing hot water heater safety valves, wi ndow and door replacement, painting, weatherstripping, minor electrical _..... and plumbing repairs are the focus of the City initiated proactive program of inspection commenced in late 1987. This proact i ve approach is a preventative program that sets rul es and guidelines, and thereby seeks to educate cit i zens about code enforcement in an effort to correct problems before significant deterioration occurs. Since 1985, there have been severa 1 neighborhoods annexed (i .e. Montgomery) that are -- acutely problematic. Therefore, part of the proactive as inspection program, the Building Department has set monthly goals for its inspection teams, concentrating on the following ---" neighborhoods all south of "L" Street in the Montgomery Area: Woodlawn Park Broadway/Malta Square -"- Otay Town Bay Vi sta Connelly Park Harborside This community suffered from serious neglect of public -- services, and haphazard regulation for years while it was in unincorporated San Diego County. The results are neighborhoods with a great deal of deferred maintenance, non-conforming zoning violations, and a high concentration of low-income rental housing ( refer to project location map) . For this reason, both the departments of Buil di ng and Housing and --- Community Development have initiated a special program emphasis in rehabilitating this area through the use of CDBG funds for either capital improvements, sidewalks, street widening, new street lights or commun i ty facil ity enhancement such as the -~,- expansion of open space and parks and neighborhood clean-up and trash removal days subsidized by the Neighborhood Revital ization Program. These mini-programs give Code -- Enforcement Offi cers the opportunity to educate neighbors, property owners and resident-tenants on the value of Code compliance in maintaining high neighborhood health and safety --..- standards, and sponsoring community pride. Monthlv Insoections -.-- Monthly inspections are structured around the fo 11 owi ng three areas: - l. Housing (Overcrowding) 2. Health and Safety Items (Inadequate Sanitation Facilities) 3. Property Violations (Illegal Conversions) .,,- Annua 1 volumes of code violations are currently being internally mon itored to more accurately track the location, level, and type of violations occurring in the City. According _.-- to the records for 1989, approximately 247 housing-related code violations were cited in single family residential II-13 --- ---,--_.._-~..__..., .---,------ ---_.~-,.." ..- --~~-_._-,---------- ----~.,-_._~._._.,------- ---_._._----,,-----~ neighborhoods. Approximately 42 of the 247 citations involved issues of overcrowding, 61 citations involved the improper use of vehicles, shacks, garages or RV/s as permanent housing facil ities, but 144 citations involved the following items, , most of which were in neighborhoods south of L Street: Health and Safety Items (i.e. inadequate sanitation) 12% Minor "fix-it" repairs (leaky roofs, and deferred maintenance under $500) 6% Vermin Infestations (rats, roaches, maggots) 8% · Property Violations 32% (zoning violations, encroachments, and construction without a permit) Sub-Total 58% The Neiohborhood Revitalization Prooram (NRP\ The NRP focuses on the code enforcement of property standards which are based on " conditions affecting the general ... appearance, health and safety of the occupants, and are enforced as zon i ng regul at ions. " In effect, these guidel ines establ i sh the City / S property maintenance standards. The · concentration of these efforts has been to enhance the aesthetics of the neighborhood, educate inhabitants of code enforcement activities, inform res i dents of avail abl e low cost financing for rehabilitation projects involving at least $1,500 and up to $90,000, and to help coordinate trash removal and general neighborhood clean-up activities including inoperative vehicle removals. Again the departments of Building and Housing and Community Development have initiated this program in the neighborhoods south of "L" Street to augment the efforts of code enforcement and rehabilitation lending activities in these areas. · B. SPECIAL NEED POPULATIONS B.l The Elderly and the Disabled The elderly and disabled population comprise about 20% of the population in Chula Vista or 26,536 persons. This population is comprised of some 9,751 households, of which 6,667 are owners (68%) and 3,084 are renters (32%) . The previous discussion on homeowner over-payment suggests that this population is not as burdened by mortgage payments as some family households may be. Additionally, during the years · between 1971-1985, 45% of the affordabl e hous i ng produced was targeted toward elderly and disabled households. In the last 11-14 fi ve years, 35% of the affordable hous i ng produced benefited -,-- low-income seniors and the disabled households. Another 33% of all Sect i on 8 hous i ng ass i stance went to 1 ow- income seniors. These efforts are laudable, and clearly show senior housing being addressed in some what greater proportion to the -- expressed need. At this time, many of the senior housing projects located south of L Street reported high (over 8%) vacancy rates. The high vacancy rate among senior density -,- bonus projects monitored by the City may be the result of one of two things: the current supply of these units exceeds the demand for them; or these units may be in an inappropriate location. The demographics of the census tract where these -,- seniors density bonus projects exist indicate high a concentration of minority households and a low median age. - B.2 Homeless Families According to a report by the Reg i on a 1 Task Force On The --, Homeless prepared in 1988 for the South Bay Region of San Diego, " homeless families and a 1 imited number of single ... adults may receive vouchers for a two-week stay in -,- selected motels through local social service agencies. During periods of shelter voucher availability, an average of five single adults and twenty-five family fami ly --"" members can be found in two participating motels in Chula Vista each night. During a recent two month shelter voucher period, nearly half of the 177 separate -,- individuals sheltered were children." According to the statistics provided in the RHNS, 60% of the homeless population (350-500) in the South Bay are families, an - additional 5% of whom are children. B.3 SinQle-headed Households - Single individuals with dependent children represent an important group with speci al housing needs. The proport i on of single-parent households with children forms a significant -- portion of lower-income households "in need" . Single parent households require special consideration and assistance because they have a greater need for day care, health care, and related -- facilities. (SANDAG:RHNS:page 137) A rental survey conducted by Community Development of ass i sted - housing projects revealed that most family rental units were not aided by Sect ion 8 cert i fi cates, wh il e up to 40% of the senior units were. Thus, family units were not receiving the _.-. level of subsidy required to guarantee that no more than 30% of household income was spent on housing costs. Waiting lists for Section 8 certificates are the longest for family housing units. - ---- II-IS -- - -----,--~~~-_.__._-,_._..._._-_. "_._----~~_.__._- 1990 Census data indicates that 10.3% of the City's total · households are headed by single individuals for a total of 4,902 households. Of these households, 994 (20%) are male headed and 3,908 (80%) are female headed. B.4 LarQe Famil ies There are other sub-populations within the City which are being under-served, notably large famil ies with incomes below 80% of median. Almost all family housing produced in Chula Vista, with the exception of 24 Public Housing and Section 8 subsidized units, are not truly affordable to this group. Social service providers have testified that 1 arge families · have the most difficult time finding affordable housing. According to 1990 Census data, 6,592 (14%) of Chula Vista's 47,824 total households were 1 arge famil ies of fi ve or more persons. Of those 6,592 1 arge famil y households, 4,088 (62%) were owner and 2,504 (38%) were renter. One can 'assume that if famil ies have a difficult time finding affordable housing the s ituat i on becomes worse as the family size increases, and the family is within a lower income group. B.5 Farmworkers and Dav Workers · Due to the rapid suburbanization of Chula Vista, only 5% of the county's agri cultura 1 employment base is left in the area. Approximately 1% of the labor force is currently classified as farmworkers or day 1 aborers many of whom may work on sma 11 construct i on jobs. An estimated total of 234 people, mostly single-men, are thus descri bed. Many of these people may at various times also be counted among the homeless as they drift in and out of work. (SANDAG RHNS page 19) B.6 Hobilehome Park Residents and Relocation · County-wide, mobil ehomes account for 4 percent of the total housing stock. In Chula Vista, mobilehomes account for approximately 7% of the housing stock. Currently, two parks have given notice of their intent to convert the park to another commercial use within the next planning period. These two park owners are in the process of complying with the City's Mobilehome Park Relocation Ordinance provisions which were previously discussed in Part l. While some units may be last through these conversions at least the hardship of relocation is mitigated by the mandatory compliance by owner to the mobilehome relocation ordinance. · 11-16 · General Plan/ZoninQ Consistencv Studv -,- When the Genera 1 Plan Update was adopted in July 1989, evaluation was undertaken for the older areas of the City west _,m of Interstate 805 to determine in what specific areas the new Genera 1 Pl an and the existing zoning were not in full consistency as required by State law. The result was identification of several areas primarily within the Central -- Community, where zoning confl i cts were present. The City is currently in the process of performi ng deta i1 ed analysis of these areas in developing a recommended course of actions, -- involving both genera 1 pl an amendments and rezonings, to achieve required consistency. Where potent i a 1 residential dens ity reduct ions ari se, the City will evaluate thei r impact on affordable housing provision prior to reaching a final -- recommendation for action. In order that the intents of the updated General Pl an be -.. recogn i zed wh i 1 e the Cons i stency Study is undertaken, the City Council adopted an interim measure to address processing of project proposals in affected areas. Where projects propose - implementation in accordance with existing zoning in confl ict with the new General Pl an, the measure requi res a general pl an amendment to be processed. - Otav Water District Allocation PrOQram One of two water di stri cts serving the Chul a Vi sta Planning -- Area, Otay Water District recently adopted an allocation program due to existing infrastructure inadequacies involving di stri but i on and termi na 1 storage facilities. Scheduled - completion of an additional supply pipel ine to the South Bay area in 1994-95 will correct inadequacies. In the interim, the District has restricted annual water allocation for development to approximately 1,900 units. Otay' s projections indicate - Chula Vi sta will receive between 700-1000 units/year of thi s total district-wide allocation, whi ch compares favorably with the 714 units/year average derived from the RHNS' Regional -- Share (Table 16). Add i t i ona 11 y, the western half of the City is served by the Sweetwater Authority which has no such restrictions on water availability. ",,, B.2 Growth HanaQement In order to ensure the adequate and timely provision of ..,,, facilities and services in conjunction with growth, and to protect residents "quality-of-life", Chula Vista has adopted g rowt h management provisions through a series of efforts as -- follows: - -" 1I-41 -... ,..-"----.----.--..-"'.--.--- - -- ---- -- -- ...--"----.,----.-----"----,-- ..,..-..,-,.--.,.--..----" · a. Threshold Standards: Adopted in November 1987, the "thresholds" established performance criteria and standards for el even (11 ) public facilities and services to ensure residents "quality-of-life" in conjunction wi th 9rowth. They addressed such matters as minimum "level of Service (lOS)" to be maintained on roadways, police and fire response times, minimum park acreage and 1 i brary square footage per 1,000 persons, and guarantees for school, water, and sewer service as examples. · The Standards included two types of implementation measures, those for application by staff on a project-by-project basis, and those to be applied City-wide on a periodic basis. For the latter, a Growth Management Oversight Commi ss i on ( GMOC) was formed and tasked with an annual review and report on city-wide compliance. A survey of existing levels of service, and acceptable standards was performed so as to establ i sh a bas is from which measurements could occur. · b. Controlled Residential Develooment Ordinance (Citizens Initiative): Enacted in 1988, establ i shes residents desires to protect the "quality-of-life" by requiring all facilities and services needed to accommodate growth to be provided in a timely manner. In addressing the rate of growth in older areas, it established a cl ause limiting the degree of residential rezon i ng wh i ch could occur on property within any two-year period. c. Growth ManaQement El ement: Incorporated with the General Pl an Update in Apri 1 1989, it sets forth the City's goal, · objectives, and policies related to protection of residents qual ity-of-l ife. Establ ished a City commitment consistent with the concept of the Threshold Standards and Controlled Residential Development Ordinance. d. Growth ManaQement PrOQram: Adopted in April 1991, it serves as the implementing mechanism for the Growth Management Element of the General Pl an. It sets a foundation for carrying out City development policies by directing and coordinating future growth to ensure timely provision of public facilities and services. As such, its primary focus is Eastern Chula Vista where large tracts of · vacant land are to be developed. The Program document sets forth guidelines for relating development phasing to facilities master plans at the project level, and establishes requirements for facilities guarantees at various stages of project planning and review. · II-42 e. Growth Manaaement Ordi nance (C. V. Muni ci Da 1 Code ChaDter 19.09): Enacted in May 1991, it codifies Growth __ Management intents, standards, requirements and procedures related to the review and approval of development projects. _, The State Department of Housing and Convnunity Development (HCD) has developed several questions to evaluate the impacts of growth management measures on the provision of adequate housing __ opportunities, since some measures employ either directly, or indirectly, limits on the amount and type of growth to occur in a given time period. The following provides a response reflective of Chula Vista's growth measures impacts on housing - provision. _ Are the actions based upon actual and clearly defined envirocwental or __ public facilities constraints? The principal foundation of the City's various measures is recognit i on that 1 arge scale future growth creates __ tremendous demands for public facilities and services, which if not adequately addressed, will result in shortages detrimental to public health, safety and _ welfare. Development of the Growth Management Program involved preparation of several facilities master plans suffi c i ent to support the 1 and use base of the updated __ City General Plan consistent with adopted Threshold Standards. Preparation of those master plans included a comprehensive survey and analysis of existing conditions and levels of service. Thresholds Standards are applicable city-wide, although the Growth Management Program is targeted toward Eastern _, Chula Vista where large vacant tracts of land are being developed. Through the Implementing Ordinance (CVMC, 11-43 --~_.__._------ ------~ --------- -----~_...,_._-- ---- -~ - -- --- Chapter 19.90) discretion is reserved to exempt those projects which through their size and/or location do not possess potential to significantly impact facilities and services. This level of significance is defi ned through the environmental review process on each project which specifically measures related facility and service needs, · and in comparison to Threshold Standards performance, identifies if mitigating actions are necessary. In such instance that a project, due to its location and/or timing, is required to provide a facility(ies) exceeding its needs, a benefit assessment is made to determine the amount and/or location of additional development being served, and appropriate financing mechanisms and reimbursement agreements are established. - Do the actions let the local itie.' new construction ..xi__ above it. new construction need, including the jurisdiction's share of the region'. · housing needs? The City's abil i ty to accommodate Regional Share allocations is not impacted, as the measures do not establish any form of building cap. Rather than attempting to artificially limit growth, the measures are aimed at ensuring the adequate and timely provision of fac i 1 it i es and servi ces needed to support growth produced by market forces. As illustrated in Table 1 (pg. 1-3) substantial new construct i on occurred duri ng the previ ous pl anned period, and current forecasts i nd i cate an annual residential construction rate of approximately 1,200 units · City-wi de. That rate exceeds the average Regional Share rate of 714 units/year, and includes approximately 200 units/year of infill construction in Western Chula Vista generally not affected by the measures. - Is the locality taking all reasonable and availabLe steps to relieve the constraints that ~ke growth li.itation necessary? As indicated above, growth "management", rather than growth "limitation", is the City's focus. The various growth measures are designed to form a comprehensive program to ensure necessary infrastructural and service · provision in a pre-planning manner so as to avoid inadequacies which would result in growth limiting constraints. · 11-44 - Does the City pcovlde edequate Incentives to encourage the developMllt ---" of houaing affordable to low and .xIerate tnc~ houaeholda, con.i.tent with the locality" .hace of the caglon'. hou.lng needs foc all Inc_ levels? - With no specific 1 imits on the amount and type of development under the growth management measures, specific additional incentives to overcome growth management - created constraints on low and moderate income housing production are not necessary. Outside the scope of growth management, the City has provided adequate incentives - (density bonus, financial assistance, etc.) in the past as evidenced by performance in excess of previous affordable goals. Profil es of dwelling unit completions by type (Table 1) indicate construction of a vari ety of housing -.. products responsive to all income groups. As indicated in Part 3 of this document, the City proposes - to continue providing incentives to encourage and support the production of low and moderate income housing. Examples of those incentives include flexible development - standards through the PC zone (such as density aggregation or cl ustering), dens ity bonus; and direct and indirect fi nanc i a 1 assistance for land acquisition, infrastructure, and home purchase through programs such as Mortgage Credit -.. Certificates (MCC's). .. Does the City control industdal and c~rci.l develo~nt that MY - increase the need for housing? Whi 1 e commerc i a 1 and industrial developments are subject to compliance with applicable Threshold Standards, the - City's growth measures do not place specific controls on the amount or rate of that development. Wi th respect to concepts of "jobs/housing balance", the City possess a - substantial residential base from which housing needs created by commerc i a 1 and industrial development can be met. From an overall land use perspective, Table 19 (pg. -,- II-31 ) ill ustrates that Chul a Vista has been, and will continue to be, a predominantly residential community. - Ace the controls cond;tioned to be fetlOved upon fetlOval of the - justifying constraints? The Threshold Standards, and the Growth Management Element -- and Program are des i gned for the continued guidance and management of growth to ensure the timely and adequate provision of infrastructure and services. Should the -- matter of facil ity and service adequacy be resolved upon substant i a 1 buil dout of the Pl anni ng Area, it is feasible that changes in growth management measures could occur. -- -,- II-45 -~------,---._+-- -------.-.---.-.-..- ---..-.---.-,....- --, B.3 BuildinQ Codes and Enforcement The City Building Department administers and enforces the Uniform Building Code which ensures construction in accordance with widely adopted health and safety standards. While the City may establish standards beyond those provided in the Code, these standards do not significantly affect or increase the cost of construction. As previously discussed in the Needs Assessment, the Code Enforcement Division administers a proactive program of community outreach in attempt to prevent Code violations from reaching a point of costly remedy. B.4 ImDrovement ReQuirements/DeveloDment Standards · The City has a variety of requirements established by both the Zoning Ordinance, and plans and programs administered by the Engineering Department. The majority of these requirements are those necessary to ensure adequate livability and lasting value in housing such as sewers, streets, curb-gutter-sidewalk, lighting, drainage, recreational open space, parking, etc. While there are defi n i te costs associ ated to these, they are those which are incidental to the provision of a sound living env ironment. In such instance that a developer is required to provide improvements which may offer service beyond that of the project, the City has and will use either reimbursement · districts, or other methods of equitable compensation. In the case of certain affordable housing projects, such as those for seniors, the City has allowed the reduction of standards to help offset costs. The City also proposes to consider possible financial participation in the construction of infrastructural improvements as a method of "additional incentive" under the State's revised Density Bonus Provisions. B.5 ProcessinQ. Permits. Fees. and Exactions a. Project Processing · The extent and duration of project processing varies widely by type of application. Residential projects requiring subdivision of land will experience an extended period of review, and/or those projects which required addit ional regulatory approvals such as rezonings or conditional use permits. Regardless, the processing required is that necessary to comply with the law and ensure proper and thorough review without comprising environmental quality or public safety. · II - 46 · The City has and will continue to use "fast-track" -" processing to expedite projects, such as those providing affordable housing. This "fast-tracking" can be accomplished primarilY in two ways, the first being _.~. re-prioritization of work to focus staff resources to these projects. The second is the institution of "parallel processing" whereby normally sequential approval processes are run concurrently, such as env i ronmenta 1 ..- review, design review, site plan review and architectural pl an check. The result is a substantial savings of time in achieving complete project approval and the start of -- construction. However, to date, the application of fast-track procedures has not occurred in a consistent manner, and no specific policy or procedures exist for -- exped it i ng affordabl e housing project proposals. It is proposed in Part 3, that such policies and procedures be developed and implemented. ,,- b. Fee Schedules Like many other cities in San Diego County attempting to -- deal with substanti a 1 improvements to infrastructure and the expansion of services necessary to meet demands induced by rapid growth, Chula Vista has found the need to revise and expand its fees in order to ma i nta in service -" levels. While fees have increased, the City has expended great efforts in developing equitabl e methods to ensure the fees are only those necessary to address the actual -...- impacts of development, and ensure timely implementation of required facilities. Tabl e 23 provides the most recent County wide compari son of processing and impact fees available (1990) as provided by the Construction Industry Federation (CIF), and referenced in SANDAG' s RHNS. As indicated in the table, _Od Chula Vista compares favorably with other jurisdictions of similar size and complexity. To further ill ustrate Chul a Vista's relative position within the region, and prov i de -- an estimate of impact useful in constraints assessment, -- ,,- --.- - 1I-47 _."-,--,.._~---,,_..-.._.---~-'- -------- ..----.,--.-."--.,,-..-.". .-._---------, \ ~ ~ ~---;--~TH-!¡--! i-~--ã --;- !-~ ~ ~ili ii litH ! ,~;! ,- !' I-I ¡¡ I -, .¡; .I!IIII ì! illlil , ~" ¡-;-!, fi¡ ! -,-,fi. 'IIi! :.,¡¡¡i h H¡hi §~... ... §. tit :I......~ li .. --, - -- - ~-- --..-- -- 8 8 .§ II j _¡ ~ j 8 8 8 8 c 8 .. Q) _ z:¡ :!S_ ~ -<:2 g. < .. :¡ .. :i íi .. ~§ ... ...... ~ ~ ~...", ... ;; Q) ___,__~___'__________ ___ - u__, ~ i ~~ ~i H~~ ~~ n i ~ ~i ~ d ~ ~ I~ g ~ gI gI ~ - -~ -~--i-T;---¡ gf~'- ~-~ ... ~ a. ..... ... a. ~ ~ !. t& t¥ ;; $ C) - ----- - -- -- £ ~§~~~~~i~8U~Uª~ ... ........ .. ~ .. $ ...!! ... ...!! ... § c: --- -;,.--------.-- .-- .__...___.___u.__ - - o 8. .~. . ~: . · ~ · d 8~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z.ii ~ ~ ~ .... ~ N .. 5 ...... ~¡;¡ :!. ,... .. !i · .... ~~::¡;; t¥ ;;...~ . "" ... ;; ~ C") ~- ----------------- ~ N ~ ~ ~ i ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ¡¡ ~ ;1 ~ it Q) __n_____~__ o ~ . t W u.. ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ á ~ ~ i. ~ ! i ~ i -J ~ -- ---- N'\ v; § ~ : ¡¡ ; 5 i ~ ! iE· i I ~ § ~ ~ ~ ...~ ...... <C -g ~ ~-~-¡¡ i ~ I I ! ~ ~ I 1(1 I- c: --- .. .-- · 0 ~ 8 ~ & ~,~ § ~ It ~ 8 ~~ ~'~ I ~ '"8 ._ ~ ~ ;:1 ¡¡ ~ W _ !! ¡:¡ Ii _ ¡¡ ". - : ~ 6 ~ ...... :::.. ð'" ~ Ii tit + .. I .. t ~ ~ ~ H-i t! r tt ~ wI i ~ ¡ I i ¡ il i 'i ~-' c: ---,-' - 11 : 8 \~__¡¡_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i! ~~ I i ã l ~' ~ " T"" ",0 Ii Ii ~~ ~ª 'a! 'B "-:.-- en '\ ~~ ! ¡¡ ~ ¡¡ ~ ~ ~ ! ~1 ~~ h ~¡¡, & · ~§ , 11'\ ... ::¡J!;; .. L" I I : ~----~. : I !~I II) ___!. ,,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ! 8 ~8 ~i8~ ~! o ~ .. .. _¡ .. $ :a,....r¿ "i~IU ..! · UJ en '" ' _.1 ~ ~ ~ ¡ 'i,~ÌI!!I~?,!I:'l¡lllW I I II ; I, ö ~~ d i~ i~ ! U~. ~ ~ ~. ~ Ii· ~ ~ I ~ ¡ }1)lll I !~ I I III} IIi U ¡1tJ¡í: o ~ . iI, . i ~ It. I >.1 . ~ _I 1 Ê ¡¡I o ~ I. . ~ ~ I ~r I a: 0. · 11-48 -- . ~ ~ ~ ~= ~ C 12) . 9 -::... .. <c Ìi' .-:.. é Gõ!. 0 ëij ¡. I: ~.. E-ð. ;¡~2. Q,. 0= 0 1&1 . 8.~:¡ Ë;¡IIIC: __ i""l- < ~ .'.. e.=:Eiii ::,~.a oh~ ~ ~e 1,,..:8~E::I Z!Zl~ ~-!:D ;-.-:..'5 .~~.-bú."78~ OQ- -=-ra I- 1-'-«1-1-" ¡::~È ër2gg~~~..~~~sr: ~~~~~~~:i~Òb «_. åÕ:~ðlOI_Ø_"'--:'Q'2(\ -~ N.... '"01«1<0( __ ,,~12 ~M"'''''--~-'''''-ÕN- ~~co:i~:;~CO""O~ _~~~ ~~ ~~~~;~...~ ~M~"'MMMMM~'" I- _ _, 0 .. _ ç ....J - CZI .... c: :;:::- '= "=- - <;.;. :Ei5~ 0:; g~ ¡::.: :i....J C")W <ocr>l: ffi w ()oU)~ If)~ ...........õ. C;- d. _" u.-Ll.....t-...¡.O. 00 -,,- "O~ V)-2Z'Ð'iiI_."" ø~ (/))- ",,'0'" . u....._I.IJ.!c:>.!~." ~.!I.. w :;: .!~-¡¡.... c: .., <: !. ~ º . ~ .!II £ C t::- Q::I J .. a,:: . ~ Å¡ - c ~ I .' ~ ~ t; ,~ ~ ~ ~ :g i ~ § I ~ ¡ i i i ð ¡ ~ \i 8 I ~ i ¡ '! ;! ~ i 1í ~ r-.....'-a::ü<oWJwð~ (/)O').,>zu(,) .¡¡.:!ða.O') s; 15MM C ë _,_ _ _ _ "___ i .~. c: ~ ; i õ ~ ~ .!O.,. C :¡ . ~.!!'~&¡ . - & :;8;;0-. li'i _ C:«Ie·C:~ .. ~ .i ï55!.i~~ !. . 11 - "<II":::E Co '" CO) <II ~_ ,_ m 't) :::E" ... co CD c!.' co ' ~ ~(j oo!~.(j" tII tiC >o.-.;:uuCO. - c ..J~... cc",.~_ 0 Å“ ... _ _ ' 0 8. ~ & - - .. ,; '" \1# E ~ . - r-- - «Þ _ LU ~ ' a:~~ ~.¡;j~i2 ~ ~ LU ' ü ¡:. "'-c·r.n-· N M- ã." c Z"M'IDJCS<OI'!2 -- LL ~ '7 -:~.... 8:£ O!8~¡!õõ:;~\; ::?.,j~ _ ~ j L? ~ ~ <0 ! ~ I g t i j ! ~ i i i i~ ~ h ~ I ~t3~~S1RQ!P.5I18<;¡s(~!R2~£S!Å S 2~ 8~~¡¡2&~~~~:;-~~ .... <!~='ë;Sr--~~Ñ-:X~-¥~~:¡~'Þ.~ .....J2"''6Ñ-....¡..·~8.on .. .:¡".-' -,,,,-' "''''I §.. - u.tz."''''zz Z·"'E* ... Q.--g-E: .... 15u..:::EØ....u..u..u..u...!...._u.. ::E (/) H~~ __ -t~a- o! - - §Èt~~'ic ï...., 5St-J" UJi' IIIIII I I oIS :5 ~.s ; u ~ j "ï ï I, 1 ~ 1.. & & § § ~ ) ~ ~ 1 ¡. f i I :,cE'it >- ~ ....i!i!,.:Ì~ -!i >~ I -, ffi ~~ ~ ~~!~Ji!11 II!!~!ti~ ~!~ ~i) I! ! ~ ::E -- - ~ -- 0 .J LU > - LU -- Q :! - 0.- ë 0 _ ~ 0 J:;. - ~& . --8 ~ . '0 oZ'> 'r. 0 :;> j; c' :co ïD. _~' ~ ..-'i.!!. o c tscÞ'!i co·o - - ~ I,¡.,. :: .~,~. -.::1 «8 ffi"'200:;:~.oo:;:8·"''''<;¡S(88Q~ _ ~ ,;__g~ ....§:jE~ =~, r; ~~~ ~.~~ ..~g~~~~.~~ =_ r--f:::~c:. O· c~8- ~i.J!! iE~ ~.:. -' M~ _-N_'nN Ñ >I'CI MNN¡::Q -cÞ-· .I.~. ;> 8 êi ;::~! ~~:g!~¡' I P.g, l8'i"CO) 0 ~'i( ¡O;c ¡::~iPd ~I;- ~P. ~ 0 M" .ðC-, ,5..... ., __, ~ " - 0 .; '" '" - I = = - i 0 ~~ ..... ........0.". . c.. M !i0I~":_:;:2,.;-~ & I'~~I~ ffi5\o:;:~~o888-o"':í:"'Qo"'S(~ ~~. §~~~-Ëze~~~~~i ~-8i j.!JJ; ~N.~IÐ~:::::$~........~~.~~~_~~.~ì2S·"':. _ -(\I -:)4>(/'J,..:i:>~"'- -_~- :z.ÒoQ a:w....w _N.N_N...._NMNN.- og' r--O~(JI-'2N... .0_... ~:.,- ~~E en . if)~¡¡;, ~...~~M...~...¡~~..¡ VJS·~E Q.e~ W,.... ___ ~Il)Õ _20N~!·.-~-h. ~;:~ ,;:£. 1-;::. t-MJ: .............,._~u.-...A!: ~õ- 'r~. «0 ~ _ 1I.c 1- =IMeCl 3:lLI c =1 I IIII~~II i:!!~ ~¡;" o! ~ "'. ð ü i 1- .. ~ ~ .. ~ "... II . ~ ". 1 __ ~ I ~ H ;:! ~ ~ P ffi ~ .. h . 0 ; f ; ð ~ i H J! 1 ~ t i t t H nil ~ & ~ t 5:d ~ ~ I! H ~ ~~ Ilh ~ i;~ ~ ~ Ii ~ iId I> oi!I~lj' ~ .~~1-5~1~; u¡ü~fi~,!;¡¡'¡¡..~~.!¡o~,H!"é> =>" I<o~ I - ~ i:> >- c..ð ....3ií!l.~ s: I I 9 ~..-~£ - -- - -"----- 11-49 .. m.·~_'__.·_____,_,_··~_"______' _.___.....__.,._ __,,__ _ __ _~__ _._ ____"~"_._. ~_~_~.,_,__..___.__,___ _..______ CIF also compiled a comparison of total fees that would be required of a building permit appl ication for a prototype home. Table 24 ill ustrates the results of the survey, which ranked Chula Vista #8 out of 19 jurisdictions. TABLE 26 TOTAL FEE COSTS TO BUILD A PROTOTYPE HOME (JAN. '91) , 1 Escondido $21,507 2 San Marcos 19,131 3 Poway 16,740 4 San Diego City 15,755 5 Carlsbad 15,742 6 Solana Beach 14,590 7 Encinitas 14,527 8 Chula Vista 14,193 9 Santee 12,397 10 Oceanside 12,012 11 Vista 10,791 · 12 San Diego County 9,279 13 Imperial Beach 8,567 14 Lemon Grove 8,459 15 Del Mar 8,222 16 La Mesa 7,733 17 El Cajon 7,645 18 National City 6,443 19 Coronado 5,908 CIF PROTOTYPE HOME: Three bedroom, two bath single-family detached home. 1800 square feet 1 iving area. 400 square feet garage and 240 · square feet patio. Approx. $139,000 valuation (calculated by each jurisdiction). Type V wood frame construction. 100A single phase electrical. 100,000 Btu FAU gas service, and a common set of fixtures. As stated in past Housing Elements, and included in Part 3 of this El ement, the City will continue to consider subsidizing or reducing certain fees for affordable housing projects where such subsidies or reductions are clearly necessary to create the required project economics. · Since application of subsidies or reductions have previously not occurred in a consistent fashion, or under the direction of specific policies and procedures, it is proposed that such be developed. The policies and procedures should address analysi s which establish criteria for determining the level of assistance necessary, including pro-formas, and evaluate the relative impact reductions may have on overall budgets for facilities and service plans. · I I - 50 C. NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS -- C.l Financial Avail abil itv The availability and cost of financing for both new __ construction and home mortgages are a major component of housing affordability. The previous analysis of 1988 mortgage lending, in select census tracts, previewed lending practices in the newly developed areas, and older, more established areas _ of Chula Vista. The following discussion looks at the ava i 1 abil ity of convent i ona 1 1 end i ng for mult i -fami ly and home mortgages. Mult i -Fami 1 y _ According to 1988 HMDA data analysis, multi-family lending was made available in every census tract in the City for the purposes of new construction andlor purchasing of existing housing complexes. City-wide multi-family lending exceeded _ S30, 000,000 on 36 loans, and S19, 305,900 on 221 non-occupant loans. While it appears that money was available, without specific information regarding credit terms, it is inconclusive _ to find that lending conditions were restrictive. However, as it can be stated that increases in interest rates and other such changes in the finance arena tend to inhibit construction, _ the City is proposing to assist developers in availing themselves of alternative and supplemental financial assistance available through consortiums such as SAMCO and CCRC. _ Home Mortqaqe Lendinq The following page contains the table "marketplace" of mortgage _ borrowing rates taken from the San Diego Business Journal (10/90). It indicates that interest rates are still around 10% for a 30-year fixed rate loan of under S187,450 in value. The median resale price of homes in the San Diego area is _ S160,000-S170,000, which using a 95% loan, would be affordable to a household with income in excess of S60,000, of 158% of the area median. Under the current market conditions, condominiums _ become the "affordable home . ownership opportunity". In summary, the high cost of housing continues to rise which restricts the number of new homebuyers into the market place _ without spec i a 1 programs 1 i ke deferred secondary loans from parents, the State, or local agencies. As illustrated above, as interest rates rise more and more _ households can no longer qual ify for home mortgages without special assistance programs such as that mentioned above. Additional assistance programs are proposed in Part 3. II -51 ~ -...---------.--,."-..----,,,'-.. ---- .-- --,_.._~ - _._~--_._"._- - -------'---"- _."_n.__ ___________._..__._~,,_ ~._..__'" ______ N.lAKK..: .l.C"LAL.: . MORTGAGE AND BORROWING RATES, . \:! Adjultab/e-rst. mort¡¡s~ (below $IB7,45O) ." ! lande' IIoto-" Down-" PoIn" Indo' Ilal¡ ln AnnUli Clp-~ Plyment CIp-~ Uf.Ume Clp-~ Phon. res Mortgage Banking 6,85 10 1.25 , "IT ,Tobin 2,5 na 7,5 14,125 452-8000 · JJ.:_ Allegis Mongage 6,8 20 0 11th district 2,625 na 7,5 13,625 28&-7161 Ir-·-·· 6,9 20 0 "thdilitrict 2.625 na 7,5 13,625 722-0456 Foyts Financial 6,9 10 0 11th district 2.625 na 7.5 13,625 587·'400 ... Jolla Nawpon Financial 6.S 20 .25 '1thdiltrict 2,5 na 7.5 13,875 ....3385 U,S, Bancorp 6.S 20 0 "thdiltrict 2.75 na 7,5 '3,875 831-4900 Wastern Residential 6,9 20 1,25 11thdi.trict 2,625 na 7,5 13,5 576-2227 ,:1 Terrill Financia! 7,375 20 2 , 1m district 2 na 7,5 13.95 578.(1741 Itl Â, T.teçl'l & raleel'l 7,5 20 ',5 "thdistrict 2,25 na 7,5 13,50 <34-7079 Er Bank of Commerce 7,5 20 1,5 "thdistrict 2,35 na 7,5 13,95 (800)<54-2253 ~·I Greal Am.rican 7,5 20 1.5 11th district 2.25 na 7,5 ,< (800)423-2255 ~f I No!"Wesl Mortgage 7.5 '0 2 , yr. T·bill 2,75 2 na 13_5 720-0045 f :JO.y.~;"td'~$IB7,45O)- ..'...,::;:;.!.,'. ~ç.~;'If\ ' .:~,,-:.' ',' '·::-:::'Ì5-;:";X¡;;(btk,.,$IB7.450) . Lend,r Rat__"" Down-"" Polna Pho.. :i¡ Lender Rat__~ Down-\\ Points Phone l · Terrill Financial 9.75 20 2,5 578-0741 . Terrill Financial 9,375 20 25 578.0741 Allegis Mongage 9,875 10 1.875 286-7'6' A, Tllech & Telech 9,5 10 25 434-7079 BanK 01 Commerce 9,875 10 1.95 (8001<5(.2263 -, Bank 01 Commerce 9.5 '0 1.95 (8001464·2263l FoulS Financial 9.875 10 2 S87·1400 .,., Norwest Mortgage 9,5 5 2 72Q.0045 La Jolla Newpon Financial 9,875 10 2 454-3386 U,S, Bancorp 9,5 5 2 93'--4900 . Norwest Mongage 9,875 5 2 720-0045 Auegis Mongage 9,625 10 1,875 286-7161 , rcs Mortgage Banking 9.875 10 2 <52·8000 Fouts Financial 9.625 '0 2 587,1400 i US Bancorp 9,875 5 2 93'--4900 La Jona NewportFinancìal 9,525 10 1,75 454·3386 Unl·Fed Mongage Corp I 9.875 5 225 873·3630 American City Mortgage 9,75 '0 1.75 293-7283 A Telech & Telech '0 10 2 <34·7079 Household Bank 9,75 5 2 595-838 , " American City Mongage '0 '0 225 293-7283 " TCS MOr1gage Banking 9,75 '0 2 452-8000 I Household Bank. '0 5 2 595·8381 Uni·Fed Mortgage Corp ;,75 5 1,75 673-3630 I·. 3I>-y..' flX.d (above $1B7,450) .. Home Eqully Un. 01 Credit Søcond Trust Dt6d · Lender I Rate-~ Oown-~ ! Points : Phon. Lender Rlte-~ Typo I Points Phone I Norwes1 Mon,;age '0 20 2 72Q.0045 Allegis Mortgage 10 variable 2 286·7'6' TeS Mongage Banking '0,25 '0 2 452-8000 . . Fouts Financial '0 variable 2 587·1400 Terrill Financial 10,25 20 2 578·0741 - Glendale Federal '0 variable 0 (8001834·'000 Alle91s Mongage 10,375 10 1,875 286-7161 Nonh Island Federal CU 10 variable , 563·1600 Fouts Financial 10,375 '0 2 587·1400 '!¡. Mission Federal eu 11 variable 0 546·2039 La Jolla Newport Financial 10,375 20 2 454·3386 San Diego Teachers' CU 11,21 variable 0 49' ·3500 US Bancorp 10_375 '0 2 I 93'-4900 Sanwa Bank '1.23 variable 0 234-351 , I Ban..; of Commerce 10,5 . '0 1,95 (800)454-2263 Great American 11.47 ...ariable ,5 (8001423-2285 Uni·FeO Mortgage Corp 10,5 '0 1,625 573-3830 " Wells Fargo Bank 11,82 vanable I 0 (8001225,5932 Union BanK I '0,5 25 1,75 541-0'80 Coast Federal '2 variable I 0 531-8833 ' , I Western Reslde:'\llal I 10,5 10 '5 576-2227 USA F~eral CU '2 ...ariable 2 693-9360 I · American City Mortgage : 10,625 10 2 293-7283 Union Bank '2 variable 0 541·0'80 ,'. .. '.'- . '. SAVINGS INSTRUMENTS (Based on d2,5OO minimum) - T,e", .re IlstfC .!;¡,'JaÞÐ/icslly . Indic,'es irlsra¡¡tion pays SImple interest only rI" nor.vailllbiÐ ! Two--yur CD &-month CD i:/yMrCIJ 2¥J·Yllr CD ,JJ;t CD MoneyM.rtet In¡tltutlon I'Ittlyl.ld-'" III 1.ld-~ ..../ylold-" Id-~ Account-'" PhOn. . Fireside Thrift 8,3/8.53 8,35/869 na 8,35/8,69 5,75/5,9 234-4'01 - Foothill Thrift & L.oan 8,318.55 8,318.55 no na 616.18 234-55S5 ~ Tope Thrift & Loan 8,25/8,6 8,318,85 8,31885 8,318,55 7,18n,44 747-0715 Landmark Thrift & loan 8,12518,56 8,2518,69 8.375/8,83 8.37518.83 na 698-6121 Western Financial Savings 8,'2518,46 8,25/8,6 na 8.25/8,6 7.5n.79 588-0098 Cuyamaca Bank 805/8,38 ß,1/8,44 8.15/8,49 8,218,55 5,916,06 582-6400 " IDS American E.xpress· · 8 8 8,05 8,3 7,53 942·7258 Western Family Nat Bank 8/8,3 8,11841 8.118.4' 8.1/8.41 7n.25 434 6'31 Great American 7.955/8,279 8.072/8,406 7,76318.071 7.80918,121 5,25/5,39 (800)423-225- HomeFed BanK 7,95/8_27 8,0319,25 7,97/8,35 8.0218_35 5,2515,38 (8001504-282 . Shaarson Lehman Hutton' 7,8 8 8,15' 8< 7.46 456-4947 Home Savings of America 7.75/806 7,918.22 7,9/822 na 5,25/5.38 291·28'0 < North Island Federal CU 7,7~8,03 7.85/814 8.118,41 8,25/8_57 6,5'1671 563-'600 Coast Federal 7,74/8.047 7,8918,209 8.09/8,425 8,0918.425 5.2515_39 531-8833 - . l~ Union Ban.k 7,4{7.6S 7,4n,6S 7.617,9 7,617,9 5.9f606 I 541.0'80 - -",.,.-'--~ .,. ':~J.;:,....._",:,"'ø.~ ._'~,,,,,,-,,, ....._p. :0.... .._...'~. ".~...... ,"" .. .. . ~ .. . . ~p~- -.... ...... '"' - II-52 C.2 land and Construction Costs -...- The rising costs of 1 and and construction in Southern Cal ifornia represent the single 1 argest factors in the spiraling cost of housing. The most frequently encountered constraint in affordable housing provision is the "lack of economic feasibility" expressed by the private sector in attempting to make units available to lower-income households -..- given these costs. Together land and construction costs comprise about 75% of the tota 1 cost of a residential dwelling. The fo 11 owi ng sections present an overview of 1 oca 1 conditions, and provide information for use in addressing the ---- level of economic barriers to lower-income affordability in new construction. The information was collected from 1 oc a 1 developers, the Construction Industry Federation, and The Myers ."". Group-a local San Diego firm specializing in market analysis and consultation to the development community. -- a. Land Costs Residential 1 and costs in Chula Vi sta, on average, are currently $200,000/acre, with the spec ifi c doll ar/unit -".- ratio obviously dependent upon density. In surveying recent 1 and purchases for several proposed s i ngl e fami 1 y developments in the City, the average per lot cost for the --, raw land was approximately $40,000. Improved 1 and costs can vary widely depending upon the amount of improvements necessary including, in Chula Vista, the amount of site grading to create buildable lots. As an example, a -,.- recently approved master planned project with 1900+ units, has an estimated per unit site work cost of $22,500. -- In order to further illustrate total buildable lot costs for new development, the following table was provided by a 1 oc a 1 developer as an example of costs per type and density of residential development: Product Tvee Finished Lot Cost - Single Fam (BOOO s.f. lot) $203,000 Single Fam (5000 s.f. lot) 130,000 Multi-Fam (B du/ac) 76,000* -- Multi-Fam (12 du/ac) 62,000* Multi-Fam (22 du/ac) 40,000* -- *per unit cost assuming 100+ units on a 12± acre site. b. Construction Costs --- As mentioned, increased construction costs have al so contributed significantly to the problem of housing affordabil ity. Current estimates place single family ---- costs between $36 and $42 per square foot depending on unit amenities. Given an average 1,500 sq. ft. home on a -..- II-53 -_..._.~-~---_.._-_._._-.._.- --~---- ------- - -.._-----~..._--_._--_..,---'~----'---- ,..,---- · 5,000 sq. ft. lot, construction costs would range between $55,800 and $65,100, which assuming a $225,000 purchase price, represents 25%-29% of the home. Costs for multi-family construction vary according to the type of structure generally as follows: - Wood frame low rise (1-3 stories) - $36 to $42 sq. ft. - Steel frame mid-rise (4-6 stories) - $65 to $70 sq. ft. - Steel frame high-rise - $75 to $100 sq. ft. (up to 20 stories) · (add $25/sq. ft. if underground parking or parking structure) Est imates used for the sample development pro- formas followed these cost assumptions: Comoonent Costs in Multi-Familv HousinQ New Construction Unit Price $105,000 Land $ 25,000 (24%) Hard Costs (improvements, const.) $ 60,000 (57%) · Soft Costs (arch., eng., marketing, etc.) $ 20,000 (19%) C.3 EmDlovment DDDortunities In an effort to address the public policy issues involved in providing low-income housing, the rationale offered usually focuses on housing as a "social service", and a moral obl igation that City's must absorb. While this argument has merit, a more compelling public policy may be at stake. That is, the future economic vitality of the City may depend on its providing affordable housing for all segments of the · population, especially "the working poor". To defi ne what public purpose will be served by providing affordable housing to all economic segments of the population, three questions must be addressed: a. Will the City lose jobs? b. Will the City lose workers? c. Will the City lose economic opportunities? · II-54 · The probabl e answer in all three cases is yes. Thus, in an ---- effort to preserve as many of the nearly 36,000 employment opportunities in Chula Vista, the City should continue to provide as many affordable housing opportunities as possible --,- during the next planning period. According to an economic survey prepared by Southwestern _..- College in Chula Vista, the highest concentration of employment opportunit i es (# of firms) are in South Bay, wi th 2,481 fi rms physically located in Chula Vista. In general, the highest concentrations of employment opportunities are in the following -..- two sectors of employment (see also Table IS, pg. 11-26): 998 Service Firms 40% -- 717 Retail Firms 29% Therefore, within the City limits nearly 70% of all existing employment opportunities are offered by traditionally low paying service and retail industries. Most of these fi rms are very small with 1 - 5 employees. Manufacturing fad 1 it i es, _."- with the exception of Rohr Industries, employ under 200 employees. Ninety-nine percent of these firms are located in the older west side of the City (west side of I-80S). -,~ TABLE 28 MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT --.... Nellcor, Inc. 225 Rohr Industries, Inc. 7,213 Apparel Suppliers of California 130-200 (Seasonal) w__ Crower Cams and Equipment Co., Inc. 160 Hyspan Precision Products, Inc. 170 The Kedall Company 100 -- Ratner Corporation 500 Risi Industries, Inc. 45 Corsair Marine 45 C & B Steel, I nc. 35 Laing Thermotech, Inc. 40 Nelson and Sloan Concrete 235 ~--- SANDAG's Series-7 suggests that during 1986, 20-50% of the population in 14 of the City's census tracts left those tracts to work elsewhere in the City, or out of the City altogether. _u Considering the concentration of high-income households in the eastern territories, the overall cost of housing in the City, and the number of highly skill ed job opportunities in Chul a Vista, we can assume many residents commute to highly-skilled -~ and high paying jobs elsewhere. -- -- II - 55 ---- ...".--. -~ ---- -- - "- - - -~ - ----- - --- -- - - ---- ---- - - ~----------- --.-.-----,.-. C.4 Other Sianificant ImDacts International Border The regional business cl imate is cont i nua 11 y improving, affording industry new opportunities both within the City 1 imits and in nearby Tijuana, due in part to proximity to the i nternat i ona 1 border only seven miles away. A growi ng number of Ameri can companies are capitalizing on the twin-pl ant or · "maquiladora" concept which links labor-intensive American industries with Mexican 1 abor pools for assembly operations. Many of these American companies rent warehouse/distribution space within the City's light industrial business parks located along the southern edge of the City limits. While some critics decry the advent of dual-pl ant manufacturi ng, many experts say thi s is a growi ng trend whi ch will have significant impact on some 1 abor intensive industries. The University of Texas in the "El Paso Maauiladora ImDact Survey of 1987", reported to the Department · of Labor (DOL) that production sharing is a net creator of U.S. jobs in a rapidly evolving global marketplace. Much of the City's newly developing eastern territories are considering warehousing and mini-distribution operations within the new commercial/industrial centers. Many of these centers will provi de new jobs for the area. Most of these jobs, however, are neither highly skilled nor well paid which would create an addit i ona 1 demand for more affordable housing units if these workers chose to live in Chula Vista. · , , II-56 v. SUMMARY In order to assist the direction of policy and program development responsive to the needs, resources, and constraints analysis provided in .... Part 2, the following summary points have been compiled to highlight specific matters for focus in Part 3: - Investigate cause(s) of unusual vacancy rates in certain seniors projects, (i.e. , demand, location, Section 8 certificates, management, etc.) ..- - Addressment of overpayment (1980 estimates), especi ally in future City-monitored projects, in proportion to the following: ~_.- Rental housing - approximately 6,193 households Homeowners - approximately 1,248 - Address overcrowded conditions of 1,763 housing units. - Provide a minimum of 1,058 new housing opportunities to households below 80% of the area median income. These opportunities may include new construction rental and home ownership, public housing, Section 8 rental subsidies, and homeless sheltering. - Increase awareness and utilization of rental rehab programs in western side of the City through intensified staff commitment, (i.e. , 70% of major rehab work needed is within the rental housing stock). - - Encourage both affordabl e rental and home buying opportunit i es in the eastern territories to promote balanced and integrated communities within the City. - Investigate options which will mitigate the loss of all 386 family housing under HUD Section 236 mortgage subsidy contracts, including: Temporary rent control on all projects seeking conversion with specific relocation assistance cost shared by the tenant, owner, and the City. Limited equity coop conversion options for 1 ow- income renters -.,., willing to consider ownership responsibility. - Consideration of all unexplored financing opportun it i es with for- and non-profit developers seeking to build affordable housing. -"'- - Evaluate the nexus between the growth of service and reta il employment opportunities and affordable housing supply. In order to .. att ract and retain manufacturi ng and servi ce fi rms in Chula Vista, encourage affordable housing production for this work force as a matter of public policy. -- ---. II -57 _.___"'__.,__".,_uo_ ...._._,...__...__ " . u ... ___,._"__ ___________,___,,___ .,.._+.._ ._ .._~'.____'^___'_U'____~__"~ _~___,_ The fo 11 owi ng areas of need wi 11 be addressed under exi st i ng City Code enforcement and rehab efforts: l. Minor rehabilitation complaints which constitute 63% of all rehab activity in the City's older west side are usually mitigated through . the combined effort s of the Code Enforcement Officers, and the Community Development Rehab Loan Program funded by the Redevelopment Housing Fund. 2. Demol it ions of deteriorated units in such poor condition that rehabil itation would not be cost effective account for only 1% of the 37,422 units on the west side of the City. Existing Code enforcement sufficiently mitigates this problem. 3. Neighborhood awareness of the value of Code compliance in maintaining community pride-of-place is reinforced by the City's support of the Neighborhood Revitalization Program in conjunction . with CDBG funding for community social services, and enhanced infrastructure expenditures, (i .e., street widening, etc.). 4. Continued enforcement of the mobilehome relocation ordinance to mitigate displacement. WPC Ol44p 1I-5B APPENDIX Resources & Contacts Contents - Community Reinvestment Act Agreements: -..- Bank of America Jim Waegle (415) 953-3179 -- Wells Fargo Bank - Steve Ha 11 (213) 253-7146 .-., Union Bank Bob McNeely (213) 236-415B - Citibank Jose Arce (415) 891-8711 -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Savings & Loan Mortgage Company Organization (SAMCO) Doris R. Schnider, President (408) 985-8110 Michael Graves, Chairman SAMCO Loan Committee, Household Bank Representative ---- California Community Reinvestment Corporation (CCRC) - Dan Lopez (818) 972-2765 Community Investment Fund (CIF) Jim Yacenda (714) 598-8700 ---- WPC 0144p -- I I -59 ---- --_._----,_._.~--..__..- TABLE OF CONTENTS f.igg -.-. III. OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS (cont/d) Objective 5 - Renewal, Rehabilitation, and Conversion (cont'd) -- E. Rehabilitation Programs II 1-23 F. Neighborhood Revitalization Program II 1-24 G. Condominium Conversions III-24 - H. Educational Programs III- 24 Object i ve 6 - Housing Assistance for Homeless I II - 26 A. Participate in a Regional Approach -,- B. Facilitate Transitional Housing Programs C. Shelter Programs D. Support Existing Homeless Services - Objective 7 - Coordination, Monitoring, and Evaluation II 1-28 A. Affordable Housing Standards - B. Funding and Assistance Strategy Plan C. Monitoring and Evaluation Program D. Affordable Housing Threshold Standard - Objective 8 - Fair Housing and Lending III-31 A. Fair Housing Program B. Annual Fair Housing Assessment _..- C. Fair Marketing Plans Object i ve 9 - Reduction/Removal of Constraints 1II-32 A. Expedite Affordable Housing Projects - B. Affordable Housing Ombudsman C. City Assistance/Subsidies D. Reduction of Building Costs -- E. General Plan/Zoning Consistency Study F. Flexible Development Standards G. Alternative/Supplemental Financial Assistance - Objective 10 - Environmental Issues III-34 A. Energy and Water Conservation B. Weatherization Programs (MAAC) -- C. Piping for Reclaimed Water D. Air Quality and Water Management Plans E. Title 24 Energy Analysis -- Objective 11 - Other Housing Issues II I -35 A. Jobs/Housing Balance -- B. Housing Linkage Fee C. Coastal Zone Housing D. Relocation Assistance - Objective 12 - Public Improvements, Facilities and Services III-37 A. 5-Year Capital Improvement Program B. Neighborhood Revitalization Program - C. Public Facilities Financing Plans D. Maintenance of Public Improvements and Facilities - -- . --'---_.~--_.._---~..._--,-----._-._-,._-_._-_._------_.-- - .-.. ----.---- --, - --_.__...-_.__._----'------~..__.._._._,._--_._~_. TABLE OF CONTENTS -, PART 3: COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN - 1991 TO 1996 - Page 1. INTRODUCTION III-I - II. STATEMENTS OF PURPOSE III -3 - III. OBJECTIVES, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS Objective 1 - Balanced Communities III -4 A. The Affordable Housing Program III-S -- B. Implementation Guidelines I 11-6 Objective 2 - Rental Housing Opportunities III-I0 -- A. Facilitiate Use of Federal Funding III-I0 B. Facilitate Use of State Funding III - 11 C. Non-Profit Community Development Corp. 111-11 D. Federally-Assisted Housing Projects 111-12 - E. Shared Housing Program III-12 F. Family Publ ic Housing III-12 G. Density Bonus Program 111-12 -- H. Single Room Occupancy Program III - 13 Object i ve 3 - Home Ownership Opportunities III-IS -- A. Affordable Housing Program III-IS B. General Marketing Information III-IS C. First-Time Homebuyer Loan Programs III-IS D. Community Reinvestment Home Loan Programs III-16 -, E. Equity Share or Deferred Loan Program 111-16 F. Sweat Equity Projects I II -16 G. Reverse Annuity Mortgage Program III-16 -- H. Mortgage Credit Certificates III-16 I. Single-Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds 111-17 J. Educational Programs for Homeowners III-17 -,.- Objective 4 - Mobilehome Park Living III-19 A. Mobilehome Rehabilitation Grant Program III-19 B. Upgrade Trailer Parks III-19 -- C. Mobilehome Rent Arbitrationh Ordinance III-19 D. Mobilehome Park Conversion Ordinance III-19 E. Mobilehome Assistance Program III-19 -- F. County Mobilehome Rental Assistance Program 1II-19 G. Preserve Affordability III-19 Objective 5 _ Renewal, Rehabilitation, and Conservation 111-21 - A. Conserve At Risk Affordable Housing III-21 B. Community Appearance/Neighborhood Improvement III-22 C. Housing Inspection Program 1II-22 -- D. Abatement of Non-Conforming Uses and Dilapidated III - 22 Structures -- -- ,-,--_..,- -------- -- -- ---~- ---- -- -,- PART 3: COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN - 1991 TO 1996 - I. INTRODUCTION - A mandatory component of every Hous i ng Element is establishment of a comprehensive set of quantified objectives and related policies and programs des i gned to substant i all y address the development, mai ntenance, ..,,, and improvement of housing for all economic segments of the community (Article 10.6, Section 655BO, et. seq. of the State Government Code). This comprehensive housing plan must be responsive to identified local condit ions and needs, and address particular housing problems including - the reduction or removal of identified constraints. Part 3 of the Housing Element of 1991 constitutes the integrated series -- of directives and actions to be implemented by the City in discharging its responsibil ity and commitment to providing adequate and affordable housing opportunities for both the existing and future residents of Chula Vista. Its various policy and program proposals delineate the responses -.. designed to substantially address the needs, conditions, and problems identified in Parts 1 and 2 of the document, and together, form the 5-year pl an to ensure the development, maintenance, and improvement of - adequate housing opportunities and affordability for all economic segments of the community. - Based on the identification of local needs in Part 2, the City has establ i shed quantified assistance objectives for its 1991-96 Comprehensive Housing Plan. The assistance objectives are those anticipated through implementation of the policies and programs contained -- in Part 3. For ease of correlation, the table on the following page has been structured according to Part 3 objectives and programs, and indicates the level of projected ass i stance by program area and income --.. group. These objectives serve as benchmarks, and represent the maximum number of housing units that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over the 5-year timeframe. --- -- -, - - llI-l ~-'- ,---, --------_._----"-------_.~- -,,-_._---"-...--,"_.,.....---,,-----_.._,-,.__...,-,--- QUANTIFIED ASSISTANCE OBJECTIVES 1991-96 COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN Obiectives 1. 2. and 3 - New Construction Total Units: 1339 Very Low - 245 units 80 Public Housing Units (County Housing Authority) 75 Senior Housing Units (Section 202) 40 Non-Profit Family Housing Units 50 Family Relocation Housing Units Low - 628 units 63 Family Density Bonus 50 Senior Density Bonus 29 Family Non-Profit 358 Affordable Housing Program (Mandatory) 79 Affordable Housing Program (Incentives) 50 Family Relocation Housing Moderate - 131 units 131 Market Rate for Sale and Rental Units Other - 335 units 335 Market Rate for Sale and Rental Units Obiective 3 - ODDortunities for Very Low-Income Renters , Total Units: 500 200 New Section 8 (Certificates and Vouchers) 300 Shared Housing Program (Seniors) Obiective 5 - Rehabilitation and Conservation Total Units: 793 528 At Risk Units (Section 236 Family) . 200 Single Family and Mobilehome Rehab (CHIP) (180 very low income, 20 low income) 65 Rental Rehabilitation Obiective 6 - Transitional Housinq Total Units: 20 Very Low-Income (New construction or rehab) . 111-2 II. STATEMENTS OF PURPOSE --..- The following statements are meant to guide the decision-making process in formulating and implementing the Comprehensive Housing Plan. -- Together, they constitute the City's overall intentions in establishing the integrated series of objectives, policies, and programs contained in the following pages. - The City is convnitted to providing a comprehensive housing program for its residents and will pursue reasonable means to accomplish the following: -- A. Fulfillment of the City's share of the Regi ona 1 need for affordab1 e housing and progression towards the solution of problem areas -,- described in the performance review and needs assessment (Part I and 2) . B. The overall increase of the housing stock through provision of -- decent housing in well-p1 anned neighborhoods for families and individuals of all socioeconomic levels. - C. The effective utilization of all financial options avail abl e to promote decent, affordable housing production within the P1 anni ng Area. -- D. The development of "balanced convnunit i es" representing economi c and social integration of neighborhoods, and the availability of housing for all people regardless of their class, gender, age, race, -- national origin or religion. E. The provi s i on of quality residential and environmental amenities, - such as open space, landscaping, parks, convenient shopping and adequate parking for all communities. ---- F. The protection of residents' qual ity-of-l ife throughout the City through the provision and maintenance of adequate public improvements, facil ities, and services and expansion of this infrastructure in a manner consistent with the Growth Management -- Element of the General Plan. G. Conservation and rehabil itation of existing housing stock, in order -- to protect and preserve affordable housing opportunities that would otherwise be lost. H. Encouragement of private sector participation in the solution of - local and regional housing issues, and in development of innovative concepts for the provision of affordable housing. _..- I. Coordination of local affordable housing efforts through cooperation with the Federal Government, State of California, the County of San Diego, SANDAG, and neighboring municipalities. - - III -3 -,- _._m·_."_..___ -------- -~--~---+----- ---- --------------.,------..- -,._..._.__._~_.+-"---- -- III. OBJECTIVES. POLICIES. AND PROGRAMS The following section of the Comprehensive Housing Plan embodies policies and programs to be implemented by the City in addressing identified needs through the development, maintenance, and improvement of adequate and suitab1 e housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community, including achievement of the quantified assistance objections for lower-income households. As a means to providing a concise and comprehensive guide for addressment of housing conditions in the City, the pol icy and program proposals have been organi zed around el even (11) specific housing objectives. Each objective is clearly stated, followed by the applicable statement(s) of policy, and a set of "implementing actions" identifying program propos a 1 s complete wi th associated costs, sources of fi nanc i ng, responsible agencies, and a recommended schedul e. By associating objectives and responses in a straight-forward manner, a clear and comprehensive direction is created. OBJECTIVE 1 Achi evement of a balanced res ident i a 1 community through integration of low and moderate- income housing throughout the City, and the adequate d i spersa 1 of such housing to preclude establishment of spec ifi c low-income enclaves. Policy l. The City shall encourage citizens, developers, and bu il ders to · support the development of nei ghborhoods whi ch provide hous i ng for people of all economic classes, races, and age groups. 2. The Affordable Housing Policy (AHP) shall require a minimum of 10% of each housing development to be affordable to low and moderate- income households, with at least one half of those units (5% of project tot a 1 units) being designated for low-income households. For developments of less than 50 units, the developer may pay an in-lieu fee (to be established by the Council) in place of providing the affordable units. The AHP shall be applied to all new hous i ng developments except s i ng1 e-fami 1y, owner-buil t homes on individual 10ts-of-record. · This pol icy should be periodically reevaluated to ensure that requirements placed on projects to be built after the current 5-year planning period wi 11 provide adequate affordab1 e housing opportunities to meet the City's future housing needs. This shall be undertaken in conjunction with performance reviews specified under Objective 7, Section C.2. 3. AHP implementation guidelines shall be developed to achieve flexibility and feasibility to meet this policy, and to maximize the use of available resources from the City, non-profit developers, and lenders. These Guidelines sha 11 also estab1 i sh a matrix of · incentives to encourage developers to exceed the minimum requirements by increasing the amount of low-income units provided within the 10%, and/or in producing units affordable to households II 1-4 in the "1 ower II range of both 1 ow- income and moderate-income ---- standards. The matrix of incentives shall be constructed to provide greater incentives for greater affordability. - In conjunction with the policy implementation, the City shall evaluate the Land Use Element of the General Pl an to determi ne the extent to which, in warranted cases, increases in density would - facilitate the provision of affordable units. As appropri ate, the City shall consider amendments to the Land Use Element. 4. The City shall i dent i fy 1 ocat ions in newly developing areas where - siting opportunities for low and moderate income housing exist, and establish controls whereby such housing can be provided. These controls sha 11 include timely phasing of the affordabl e housing -- component. ImDlementinQ Actions -- A. The Affordable Housing Program (AHP) As a continuing program since 1981, the AHP is designed to guarantee - the provision of affordable housing opportunities within residential development projects of fifty (50) or more dwelling units. As such, the requirements are primarily directed at the Eastern Chula Vista -.-- master p 1 anned projects discussed in Part 2, although they al so apply to Western Chula Vista. A "project" shall be considered as the entire residential development proposal as set forth by the associated development appl ication, whether or not the subdivision -- of 1 and is i nvo 1 ved, or the uni ts are part of a mi xed-use project. In the case of master planned communi ties, the "project" shall be that development encompassed by the Spec i fi c Pl an, Preci se Pl an, or -- General Development Plan/Sectional Planning Area Plan(s). In order to guarantee provision of these units, the City requires -- each developer to formul ate, review with staff, and have adopted a specific program and agreement for the project which delineates how and when the units will be provided, including intended subsidies, income/rent restrictions, and methods to verify compliance. - Formulation of project-level programs and agreements is handled in a tiered fashion, starting at the General Development Plan (GDP) stage, or similar level of review, and progress i ng in specificity .- and detail through the planning process, with a final agreement required prior to recordation of the final map or final project approval where land subdivision is not applicable. -- As documented in Part 1, under such agreements two master planned projects produced 136 low-income and 139 moderate-income units, incuding both for-sale and rental opportunities, during the last -- planning period. Pursuant to additional master plan approvals in conjunction with the AHP, a minimum of 358 1 ow- income and 345 moderate-income opportunities are anticipated during this planning - period in conjunction with the minimum 5% low-income requirement. Additional low-income units are contemplated through application of incentives (refer also to Resource Inventory, Part 2). -- 111-5 -- --- ------- --- --.__...~"._" The City proposes to work with developers to identify locations in the newly devel opi ng eastern terri tori es for sit i ng these projects, including establishment of a minimum number of units to be provided at each site. Siting considerations will take into account proximity to mass transportation routes, and the avail abil i ty of incidental services such as shopping, medical, child care and schools. Since these considerations may make it infeasible to site a project within each development, those developments without sites will still be required to contribute to the provision of this housing through other means acceptable to the City. Affordable Housina Proaram lmolementation Guidelines While the AHP has, and will continue to produce low and moderate-income housing, a set of "Imp 1 ementat i on Guidel i nes" need to be formul ated and adopted for the Affordable Housing Program. The Implementation Guidelines will facil itate the successful appl ication of incentives and flexible approaches listed below in meeting requirements, maximizing 1 ow- income unit production, and ensuring an adequately ba 1 anced community. These guidelines will outline overall Program requirements throughout the development review process, define City and developer roles and responsibilities, establish low-income project siting, distribution, and phasing standards, define minimum standards for affordable housing · development agreements, establish allowable development incentives and criteria for their application, and defi ne conditions under which alternative methods of compliance may be considered, including an in-lieu contribution program and trust fund. The AHP implementation guidelines shall identify ways in which the City, non-profit developers, and the pri vate sector can assist developers to fulfi 11 thei r affordabl e hous ing requi rements. The developer should be required to demonstrate the feasibility of providing affordable housing. The City shoul d make a good faith effort to assist the developer to address the cost of providing the affordable units. Whenever sufficient · subsidies and resources are available, the City and developer shall attempt to provide very low-income affordability. The following mechanisms are offered to be used either singularly or in combination as means of reducing the cost burden normally placed on the developer, and in providing additional fl exi bil i ty for each project in achieving compliance. I. New Public/Private Partnerships As the cost of 1 and development and housing production continues to rise, developers are finding it even more · difficult to produce affordable housing, especially for low and very- low income households. In order to ass i st the provi s i on of affordable housing in new projects for the longest time possible, the following new publ ic/private partnership concept is offered. IlI-6 · a. Joint Venture Partnership - In the joint venture, a private and a non-profit developer join together so that each may use speci a 1 development i ncent i ves whi ch nei ther would have if they pursued a project separately. For - example, they can implement a "layered financing" proposal involving low-income housing tax credits and below market rate financing through the non-profit entity. The private - deve 1 oper coul d use these incent i ves to make construct ion of the units financially feasible, and then turn the units over to the non-profit for management responsibilities. - In using the tax credits and other financing assistance, specific affordability requirements and contract durations are applied depending upon the methods and financial -- entity used. 2. Development Incentives - As a means of reduc i ng overa 11 development costs, a developer may negotiate with the City early on in the planning process for application of various incentives such as flexible -- development standards and dens ity considerations. Such fl exi bil i ty might allow for in-project transfers or cl ustering of dens i ty to create affordable units, or other such means -, including use of State Density Bonus provisions to produce identifiable cost reductions associated with achieving the affordable units. An important step in producing acceptable incentives is development of guidelines to outline what types -- of incentives may be considered, criteria for when and how to apply them to specific developments, and a means to assess their financial value in equity to the units provided. -" 3. Alternative Methods --.- In order to respond to the unique conditions of each development, the City may consider methods other than actual developer built in-project unit production as a means to achieving affordable housing opportunity. These alternative -- methods wi 11 be cons i dered only when the City has determi ned that they wi 11 not be significantly detrimental to achieving balanced residential communities. Consideration of Alternative - - Methods shall be made according to the following order: a. Land Set Asides - Where unit construction by the developer is not feasible, consider the equitabl e donation of a - building site within the project, or elsewhere in the City as satisfying compliance. The City (or developer) could then make these sites available to the County Housing -- Authori ty or other non-profit entity to construct low or very low-income units. -,-- b. Off-Site Proiects - Consider developer construction, either individually or in partnership, of an affordabl e housing project at an off-site 1 ocat i on as long as the -- III-7 ------- --- ------ ~~ -----~-~ -~ - -- - --..,.".-,.-,...---.--".,,-.-.....-"-- ."..----".----.----.----- project satisfies the original requirements placed on the developer. Both new construction, rehabilitation, and "at-risk" preservation projects will be considered. c. In-Lieu Contributions - Where construction of units or provi s i on of 1 and withi n the project has been duly proven to be economically infeasible, then the City should consider the acceptance of in-lieu contributions to be placed in a trust fund and used to provide assistance to other identified affordable housing efforts. The level of contribution shall be evaluated to ensure its adequacy in relation to achieving assistance opportunities commensurate to the 1 eve 1 of the original project requirement. The AHP implementation guidelines shall identify creative ways in which affordable housing projects can be successfully integrated into planned communities, taking into consideration soc i a 1 factors, programmatic constraints, and the amount of multi-family units in the project. The AHP implementation guidelines shall also include phasing requirements · which will ensure timely development of the affordable units in the earl iest development phase possible. The guidelines sha 11 a 11 ow consideration of the logical development of the units in terms of facilities, the general development plan, financing, and merchant builder involvement. The AHP implementation guidelines sha 11 include specific methods to maximize the duration of affordability restrictions on low-income rental units produced under the Affordable Housing Program. The City shall ensure the continued affordability of assisted 1 ow- income and moderate-income for-sale units by recapturing a percentage of the appreciation at the time of sale. These recaptured funds shall be used · to fund an on-going affordable homeownership program. An assisted unit is any unit so designated whose affordability has been created through a subs i dy of public funds, special incentives, or other discretionary considerations to the uni t or the project as a whole. State density bonus units and Section 8 assistance carry their own duration restrictions and therefore would be excluded from this definition. cost/Sources of FinancinQ Wh il e the Affordabl e Housing Program places responsibil ity for unit production on the private sector, on a case-by-case basis the City consider util izing the Redevelopment Housing Fund, or other fund i ng to · assist provision of the units as necessary. Staff time incurred in developing and reviewing projects' Affordable Hous i ng Programs will be reimbursed through the exi st i ng depos i t account system. Staff time incurred in developing Affordable Housing Implementation Guidelines, development incentives, and in-lieu contribution programs will be supported by the General Fund and Redevelopment Housing Fund. · III -8 ResDonsible AQencies Planning Department Community Development Department -- Housing Advisory Committee Schedule -- The Affordable Housing Program Implementation Guidelines should be completed by December 1992 and utilized in evaluating specific Affordable Housing proposals. -_..- -'- -- -,- _m -.-- - --- -- -- -- - - -, III-9 M~'_.___..___~._______,___________ ,. ,,_ ___________".......__._~._....__ ---,~.,,- -----.-- --' -,-- OBJECTIVE 2 The provi s i on of adequate rental hous i ng opportunit i es and ass i stance to households with low and very low incomes, including those with special needs such as the elderly, handicapped, single-headed households, and 1 arge famil i es. Policy 1- The City supports and encourages usage of a broad spectrum of approaches to produce 1 ower- income affordabil ity in rental housing including: - Util ization of avail able Federal, State, and County programs and funding. - Participation of non-profit development corporations either · individually or in partnership with the private developers. - Exploration of innovative and experimental housing concepts which identifiably reduce costs in providing for lower-income needs. 2. The City wi 11 place primary emphasis on efforts to assist lower-income families, espec i ally 1 arge famil i es, and single headed famil i es. 3. The City wi 11 continue to ut i 1 i ze avail able Block Grant and Redeve 1 opment Hous i ng Funds to support and augment the provi s i on of · lower-income affordable housing. ImDlementinQ Actions A. Facilitate the Use of Federal Funding as Available The City will examine ways to directly secure and/or leverage Federal funding, or encourage other agencies to do the same. These Federal programs include, but are not limited to: Section 8 Certificates and Vouchers - The HUD Section 8 program continues to be in high demand in Chula Vista, with a 2-3 year · waiting 1 i st. The City will continue to encourage the County Hous i ng Authority to apply for an add it i ona 1 number of cert i fi cates and vouchers to be added to the current allocation. Communitv Deve 1 oDment Block Grant ProQram - The City wi 11 continue to receive CDBG ent it 1 ement funds. These monies can be used to facilitate affordable housing production by the following methods: 1 and acqu is it ion for low-income housing, assistance to non-profit development corporations, offsite infrastructure improvements, and funding for housing assistance services. · Familv Public HousinQ Funds - The City will encourage the County Housing Authority to pursue ,State and Federal Housing funds for at least 80 additional family units within the next five years. The Community Development Department will directly assist in this effort. II I -10 HUD 202 Senior Housing Funds - The City will encourage 1 oca 1 -..- non-profit development corporations to pursue HUD 202 senior housing funds. -- HOME Investment PartnershiDs Prooram Created under the Cranston-Gonzalez Hous i ng Act of 1990, HOME is designed to assist with new construction, substantial and moderate -- rehabil i tat i on, and tenant-based ass i stance. The City may receive up to $1. 5 mill ion during the first two years. HOME requires matching State and/or local funds. --, B. Facilitate the Use of State Funding as Available The City will examine ways to directly secure and/or leverage State -- funding, or encourage other agenci es to do the same. These State programs include, but are not limited to: --.- ProDosition 84 and 77 Funds - Encourage developers to apply for State Funds as primary sources of funding for new construction and rehabilitation projects. -- Mult i -Famil v Mortoaoe Revenue Bonds The City will the - pursue issuance of additional tax-exempt multi -family Mortgage Revenue bonds when feas i b 1 e under State and Federal gui del i nes. Bonds can -- be issued by the City, County or non-profit organizations for multi-family housing. Federa 1 1 aw requires that bond issues restrict at least 20% of tot a 1 available units for ten years to ---. households earning under 80% of the County median income. Tax-exempt bonds can also be issued for the purpose of refinancing un it s; this could be initiated for the existing County and City bond-financed apartment units pri or to the expiration of the ten year term of affordability. Low-Income Housino Tax Credits - State and Federal tax credits are -- avail abl e to both for-profit and non-profit hous i ng developers to subsidize 1 ow- income hous i ng projects. The State allocates these tax credits annually on a competitive basis. The tax credits can be -- syndicated through the Cal ifornia Equ ity Fund. The City will disseminate information to developers on how to apply for the tax credits. C. Non-profit Community Development Corporations (CDC) One purpose of a Community Development Corporation (CDC) is to -,- develop, rehabilitate, and hcil itate 1 ow- income housing. Non-profits can directly obtain Local, State, and Federal assistance for pre-development, construction, and permanent financing. -... Increasingly, private lenders are looking to non-profits to fulfill their Community Reinvestment Act obligations. Local non-profits have begun to work together to form a Chula Vista -- CDC. Once established, this CDC can become an active participant in local housing programs. The CDC could initiate its own projects or enter into joi nt ventures wi th the Redevelopment Agency or pri vate III -11 --.- - -- -------..--- -- - ------...- ----.------ - - ----.-.- ---------.-..---.-...--.----.,..- ---..--- _.___,_.._'._u·..m'.'.._..___. ------ developers. The CDC could enter into a cooperative relationship with the City to operate housing programs, e.g., screening occupants for low and moderate-income housing eligibility. The City will support the establ i shment of the local CDC and seek ways to work toward mutually beneficial housing goals. Whenever reasonable and feasible, the City will assist non-profit developers to create low-income housing opportunities. D. Encourage and Support Federally Assisted Housing Projects The City wi 11 promote avail abil ity of Federal Hous i ng funds tò the 1 oc a 1 development community, such as HUD Section 202 and multi-family mortgage revenue bonds, and will provide staff ass i stance to developers in appl i cat i on for those funds. The City will also provide administrative support regarding necessary permits and regulatory procedures for such projects. E. Support a Shared Housing Program The City has supported a Shared Housing program for several years and wi 11 continue to fund this type of effort as long as it is effective in creating affordable housing opportunities. The current Shared Hous i ng program is operated by the South County Counc il on Aging and facilitates approximately 80 matches a year between households with extra room and individuals seeking low-cost housing. Most matches involve senior citizens or disabled citizens. F. County Housing Authority - Family Public Housing Given the current need for 1 ow- income housing units and the remaining 295 units of Article 34 referendum authority (granted by voters in 1978), a minimum of 80 units of publ ic housing should be built over the next planning period. According to the County Housing Authority, HUD is encouraging the production of family housing units, 3 bedrooms and larger, rather than senior units. To avoid undue concentration of these units, publ ic housing projects should genera 11 y involve no more than 20-25 units each, and be · dispersed to sites throughout the City, as defined by the memorandum of understanding between the County Housing Authority and the City. The City will continue to aid the Housing Authority in site selection and permit processing as necessary. G. Density Bonus Program The City's density bonus ordinances are under staff review in order to bring them into compliance with new State law requirements. The density bonus ordinance is an appropriate incentive to produce lower-income affordable units and its use should be encouraged by · the City where appropriate. The new State law mandates that either 20% of the households in the restricted rent category be at the low-income level (under 80% of HUD Area Med i an) , or 10% of the households in the restricted rent category be at the very 1 ow- income 1 eve 1 (under 50% of HUD Area 1II-12 · Median). Rents for the 20% low-income must be set no higher than 30% of 60% of HUD Area Median Income, and rents for the 10% very low-income at no more than 30% of 50% of HUD Area Median Income. The affordabil ity time frame is reduced to a minimum of 10 years -- (rather 25 years), unless the City offers an additional development incentive, in which case the duration of the restriction could be lengthened to 30 years. Senior Dens ity Bonus projects remain unchanged and still must reserve 100% of the total units for seniors who are 60 years of age or older (or 55 years and up in senior developments of over 150 -..- units). Th is ord i nance wi 11 be revi ewed for its effect i veness and compliance with applicable State laws. H. Single-Room Occupancy Hotels (SRO) The City will further investigate the need for SRO housing in downtown Chula Vista and other act i vity centers. The growth in n_ low-paying service sector jobs may require this type of housing to be provided as an economical alternative. In addition, some 1 ow- income senior citizens may find an SRO unit to be the only -- economical housing. If it is determined that this type of housing is needed but is not adequately provided by the private sector, then the City will consider options for encourag i ng such development, such as those implemented by the City of San Diego. -.-- Cost/Sources of Financinq -- It is proposed that CDBG, redevelopment, or General Fund funds wi 11 be used to assist Federal projects (202's etc.), Family Public housing, and the Shared Hous i ng program. The Redevelopment Hous i ng Fund and General Funds will be utilized for staff time necessary to review and implement the density bonus ordinances. In addition to other sources of funding the Community Development - Corporation could be assisted with Redevelopment Housing funds for specific projects and/or operating expenses. -- Resoonsible Aqencies Planning Department -- Community Development Department City Attorney Schedule -- The 22-unit Dorothy Street Public Family Housing Project began construction in August 1991 and will be completed by June 1992. The City -..... contri buted $70,000 of Redevelopment funds. The 75-unit Salvation Army Silvercrest Senior Housing Project (Section 202) will begin construction in February 1992 and be completed in January 1993. The City contributed $275,000 of Redevelopment funds to offset development fees. The 28-unit -- Civic Center Barrio Housing Corp. project at 1250 Third Avenue will break ground in Apri 1 1992 and be completed by January 1993. This project is financed by a City Redevelopment Loan ($350,000), Cal ifornia Rental IIl-13 -~----~--- -- - - ----- .--.- -,......--.-.-.---..-- '" _.~-_. -..---,-...-.--- ---.---- - --...--. __u___ Housing Construction Program ($1.4 million), and F edera 1 tax credits ($1.9 mill ion). The County Housing Authority purchased a I-acre site at 588 L Street to construct 16 family rental units. The City has contributed $185,000 in Redevelopment funds and the Authority is applying for additional State funding (CHAFA and RHCP). If financing is in place by Summer 1992, construction could begin as early as Winter 1993. The Hous i ng Authori ty has secured HUD fund i ng for an 18-unit large family public housing project. Site selection will begin in Spring 1992. The local Community Development Corporation has been establ ished with a City CDBG grant of $48,000 to South Bay Communi ty Services. A staff coordinator was hired in July 1991 and an advisory board was established in September 1991. The CDC has begun predevelopment work on the conservation of at-risk units and a transitional housing project. The CDC has raised an additional $44,000 in other funding during the first six months of operation. The City anticipates adoption of a new density bonus ordinance in July 1992. The ordinance will include incentives to extend the duration of affordability to 30 years. · · · 111-14 OBJECTIVE 3 The broadening of available housing types and the increase of home ownership opportunities for low and moderate-income households. -,- Pol i cv 1. The City encourages the construction of projects offering a variety of housing types including townhomes, condominiums, and other units providing low and moderate-income ownership opportunities. -- 2. The City shall endeavor to provi de ass i stance to low and moderate income famil i es seeking homeownership, including exploration of available Federal and State programs and funding. -- 3. The City shall support and assist the development community in their efforts to provide units for low and moderate-income ownership. ImDlementinQ Actions A. Home Ownership Opportunities through the Affordable Housing Program -- Through its Affordable Housing Program, the City requires lower-priced homes to be built throughout the community. The City requires that each developer of for-sale projects over 50 units address the provision of affordable homeownership opportunities. As a means to providing this housing, the City will -"- assist the developer to explore creat i ve financing opportunities, and to develop a Marketing Plan to target low and moderate-income households. B. Distribution of General Marketing Information The City will endeavor to compile current information on home -'.-- mortgage lending including Federal, State and local programs, and to make this information available to the public. This information should include the names and phone numbers of lending institutions -" originating FHA, VA or other federally-guaranteed 1 oan s . All developers should be encouraged to work with FHA direct endorsement 1 enders or be requi red to provide such i nformat i on to prospect i ve home buyers. C. First-Time Home Buyer Loan Programs -- The City can assist low and moderate-income first-time homebuyers in the following ways: 1. Ident i fyi ng a loan counseling program through a lender participating in such programs as the General Electric First Time Home Buyer Counseling Program; - 2. Applying for a Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) allocation from the State; -- III-I5 - -~---~---~_._--.-- ,.,..__.,,-,- '''',,- --,...--..,-....-...----...--..- -_.._--_..,...._~._--- .------..-- ---- ".,--..-."---,,- ------- _._~_. 3. Disseminating i nformat i on on the Cal ifornia Housing Finance Agency (CHFA) first-time homebuyers assistance programs. 4. Investigating the establishment of a City-sponsored first-time homebuyers assistance program for both new construction and resa 1 e hous i ng. The City shall examine ways to leverage local funding to enable the program to create as many homeownership opportunities as is possible. D. Community Reinvestment Home Loan Programs The City can provide information and direction to prospective homebuyers on loan programs with modified underwriting standards for homes purchased in low-income census tracts. E. Equity Share or Deferred Loan Proposal The City will explore setting aside a portion of its Housing Fund, or util izing in-lieu contributions collected under the Affordable Housing Program, to assist families whose incomes are below 80% of median, and who do not have enough cash reserves to reduce a principal mortgage to an acceptable lending ratio. I n exchange for this, an equity share participation at the time of resale, or a deferred low interest loan option would allow the City not only to recoup the loan but build the fund for future program activity. F. Sweat-Equity Projects Sweat-equity projects reduce the production costs for housing as the homeowners prov i de some or all of the labor required to construct the homes. The City will explore assisting a low-income · sweat-equity project by participating in site selection and land write-down. The City will ensure that such projects meet accepted standards, and will investigate ways to promote better publ ic understanding and acceptance of such projects. G. Reverse Annuity Mortgage Program The concept of this program is to help elderly homeowners gain access to the considerable equity they may have in their homes. Under this program, the Federal government guarantees the loans to senior citizen homeowners which allows them to draw down a monthly stipend. The senior can enjoy the additional monthly income (with · no fear of eviction). The program has worked well in Northern California cities but suffers from inadequate funding appropriations from Congress. In the event new appropriations are available for San Diego, Chula Vista will explore participating in the program. H. Mortgage Credit Certificates The City will investigate the feasibility of applying for a Mortgage Credit Cert ifi cate (MCC) allocation for Chu 1 a Vista. The MCC authorizes the holder to take certain Federal income tax credits. Qua 1 ifi ed applicants may take an annua 1 credit against Federal income taxes up to twenty percent (20%) of the annual interest paid · III-16 ~".- on the applicant's mortgage. This value is taken into consideration by the mortgage 1 ender in underwri t i ng the home loan, and may be used to adjust the borrower's housing costs, thereby increasing the applicant's ability to afford a mortgage payment. -- I. Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds The City will pursue the issuance of additional tax-exempt Mortgage Revenue bonds when feasible under State and Federal guidelines. Bonds can be issued by the City, County or non-profit organizations for single-family housing. Federa 1 law requi res that bond issues restrict at least 20% of tot a 1 avail abl e units for households earning under 80% of the County median income for ten years. Tax-exempt bonds can al so be issued for the purpose of refinancing - , units; this could be initiated for the existing County and City bond-financed apartment units prior to the expiration of the ten year term of affordability. -- J. Educational Programs for Homeowners The City will encourage developers, lenders and soc i a 1 service -- organizations to provide educat i ona 1 programs and materials for homeowners and potent i a 1 homeowners on home maintenance, improvement, and financial management. The purpose of the -- educational programs will be to help, especially first-time homeowners, understand the importance of ma i ntenance, equity, and appreciation, and to budget properly to accompl ish such and avoid -- losing their homes. Cost/Source of FinancinQ -- The Redevelopment Housing Fund wi 11 fund the staff time necessary to research the potential app 1 i cabil ity of all of these recommendations. In-l ieu contributions potentially collected under the Affordable Housing - Program, and monies from loan repayments and equity shares coul d al so provide funding for assistance. ResDonsible AQencies Community Development -- Schedule The City applied for Mortgage Certificates in July 1991 and received a $2 -- million allocation which will fund 104 certificates. The City initiated the MCC program in September 1991 and issued the fi rst cert i fi cate in December 1991. The City will apply for additional certificates in Spring 1992. -,.- The City, in conjunction with private developer(s), will set-up a deferred loan/equity share program for low-income home purchasers in - Spring 1992. The first development to util ize the loan program is expected to be completed in Spring 1993. The program wi 11 be funded by fees paid by the Developer. - III-17 -- ---------- ._-_...,,--~--- ---- _ '.···m··'._"___" ___ __ _, ,...________.____ ----,-_.. ..-...,.----.---.-...-. - ----,. -----.- --, - --.,.-- The City plans to develop an i nformat i ona 1 program for first-time homebuyers by Sunmer 1992. The i nformat i ona 1 program wi 11 include all governmental and private resources. The City will explore other financing mechanisms for home ownership opportunities. such as sweat-equity and single family mortgage revenue bond programs. but wi 11 only pursue such programs in conjunction with requests from the development conmunity. , . . 111-18 __ OBJECTIVE 4 Preservation of mobilehome park living as a source of affordable housing. Policy 1. The City will evaluate programs related to mobilehome living and __ support those which are needed to preserve affordabil ity. ImDlementina Actions -- A. Continue to provide grants to low-income famil ies to rehabil itate their mobilehomes through the Mobile Home Rehabilitation Grant Program (Trailer/Mobilehome CHIP Program). B. Explore upgrading trailer parks to allow conversion to exclusive mobil ehome park zones. Prepare a staff report reconmendi ng whi ch _, trailer parks are the most viable for such conversions. Utilize both Redevelopment Hous i ng Fund trail er loans and CDBG ent i tl ement funds to upgrade infrastructure in these parks. _,_ C. Monitor and enforce the City's Rent Arbitration Ordinance to protect the rights of mobil ehome res i dents in preservi ng thi s affordabl e housing alternative. To provide financial assistance to low-income _, residents requesting arbitration through the Rent Arbitration Assistance Fund. D. Monitor and enforce the City's Mobilehome/Trailer Park Conversion -, Ordinance to protect the rights of mobilehome residents. In conjunct i on with ant i c i pated mobil ehome park closures, and the __ City's redevelopment efforts, undertake a comprehensive study to relocate or replace affordable housing opportunities at risk by such actions. Consider the establ i shment of a pol icy and/or program for replacement through acquisition and redevelopment of these sites with affordable housing projects. Where underlying zoning is commercial, consider the provision of affordable units as part of a mixed-use development. Additionally, consider a condition of "first right of refusal" to the City or non-profit on land acquisition and/or a "first right of refusal" on the new units to existing park residents. E. Assist mobilehome park residents to purchase their parks and convert to resident ownership by operating the City's Mobilehome Assistance ,_ Program and assisting with the appl ication for other funding sources such as the State Mobilehome Assistance Program. F. Promote participation by referring eligible residents to the San Diego County Mobilehome Rent Assistance Program. The County program assists by subsidizing space rent for low-income seniors. __ G. Ident ify new programs in cooper at i on wi th the Western Mobil ehome Park Owners Association to preserve the affordability of mobilehome park residency. III-19 _._.,.._---_._.__._._~--._._------ - --- -- ----------_...._--------._~-,._..__.._-^-- ---.---- - ----,"_.._- - -,--,-,-----,._,. .._----~----_.._~--- Cost/Source of Financinq Housing Fund Redevelopment Fund CDBG Fund General Fund WMA Responsible Aaencies Community Development Department City Attorney Planning Department Building and Housing Department Mobilehome Issues Committee Schedule The City anticipates an annual rehabil i tat i on budget of $700,000. In addi t i on to s i ngl e family rehabil itat ion, thi s money will fund abount 40 grants a year to eligible mobil ehome households, on a first-come, first-serve basis. The City/s Rent Arbitration and Park Conversion ordinances have established procedures for monitoring and compliance. The City has assigned a professional staff member to enforce these · ordinances. The City anticipates closure of one 51-unit park in 1992 and one 20-unit park in 1993. The staff report on upgradi ng trailer parks will be completed by June 1993. "Resident ownership of parks" and "replacement through acquisition" will be considered as these opportunities are ident ifi ed by mobi 1 ehome residents, park owners, or developers. · · 111- 20 · OBJECTIVE 5 -",- The systematic renewal, rehabilitation, conservation, and improvement of the residential neighborhoods of the Chula Vista Planning Area. ---- Pol icy -- 1. The City shall address the de vel opment of mechani sms designed to prevent at-ri sk affordable units from conversion to market rate rents. -- 2. The City will continue to initiate pro-active programs for neighborhood revi tali zat i on and improvement, and to supply support fundi ng for these efforts, especially in neighborhoods with higher - concentrations of lower-income households. 3. The City shall continue to advocate conservation measures to ---.- preserve existing housing stock, variety, and affordability. ImDlementinQ Actions -- A. Preserve At-Risk Affordable Housing Units A.l HUD Section 236 Units -- The City has 386 affordable housing units which are potentially "at-risk" during the planning period because the property owners have prepayment options in their mortgage contracts. -- Since Congress passed the Emergency Low-Income Housing Preservat i on Act in 1987 (ELlHPA) and the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LlHPRHA), the likelihood of prepayment has been reduced. Under both federal laws, the owner who is interested in the prepayment opt i on can take advantage of the incentives that both ELlHPA and LlHPRHA offer to provide a reasonable return and yet maintain affordability. Some property owners who feel frustrated by HUD may not want to take advantage of the i ncent i ves offered to them under ELlHPA and LlHPRHA. The law allows these owners to prepay if a -"- qual ified owner does not come forward in fifteen months. The City must be prepared to deal with owners who are determined to sell in order to preserve these units. The City has received Notice of Intent to Prepay from two projects, with a possible loss of 86 affordabl e units. The City shall involve itse-lf in the negot i at i on process that is -, mandated under Ell PHA and LlHPRHA to ensure that every opportunity to retain affordability is pursued. - The following actions are proposed to respond to the "at-risk" conditions in Chula Vista: ,--- III -21 --..-., --- -~ -- --- - -- - ------ -- - --- -------- -- ---- --'. '.._-%. ----_..,,_._._..~.,- -.-"--- --_.._..._._---~._--,., 1- The City will revi ew its inventory of rental hous i ng and determine which units have prepayment options and at what date. The City will monitor the process of negotiations and part i ci pate as necessary. The City will work to prevent prepayment based on a unsuccessful escrow or a finding of "not needed in the community". 2. The City will identify potent i a 1 buyers for "at risk" projects and assist in finding financing for purchase. The City will give assistance priority to non-profit community development corporations who can demonstrate capability and who will maintain long-term affordability. Joint ventures between non - profit and for-profit developers will also be considered. The City may consider providing predevelopment funding to enable non-profits to complete the initial steps in acquisition. 3. The City may form an ad-hoc committee comprised of non - profit and for-profit developers, City staff, other local government officials, and tenants of "at-risk" units to develop a formal strategy for preservation. A.2 Non-236 Units As identified in Section II, the City has 142 non-HUD Section 236 units which are at-risk of converting to market rate rentals. The fo 11 owi ng actions are proposed to respond to these units: 1- The City will continue to pursue the poss i bil ity of refinancing the bonds for Eucalyptus Grove Apartments so that rental restrictions will continue. · 2. As the current restri cted rents at Beacon Cove Apartments are close to market rate, preserving these units does not seem to be the best use of funds. Rent subsidies may be considered, but the City has other urgent needs such as preserving the HUD Section 236 units, continuing the Agency's rehabil i tat ion program, and funding non-profits who will provide units for very low-income households. 3. Since The Meadows was built with a senior density bonus, conversion probably will not occur. The City will continue to mon itor the project. If conversion is requested, the City attempt to negot i ate continued rent · restrictions. B. Community Appearance/Neighborhood Improvement Program The Building and Hous i ng Department wi 11 cont i nue to oversee and implement this pro-active program of neighborhood preservation and improvement. Initiated in March 1989, this program targets specific neighborhoods exhibiting high volumes of citizen complaints in which Code Enforcement Officers, teaming with residents and designated "Block Captains", · I II - 22 formulate c1ean-upjfix-up campaigns for the neighborhoods. -- Announcement handbi 11 s specifically describing what residents and homeowners can do to improve their property standards, and what items Code Enforcement Officers will be inspecting, -- including dates and times, are then distributed. Free trash dumpsters are a1 so provided. Each property is subsequently inspected by Code Enforcement Officers with specific deficiencies highlighted and aesthetic recOlllllendations -- identified. Notices are left with residents identifying targeted clean-up dates, follow-up reinspections, and available assistance. -- C. Housing Inspection Program -- The Building and Housing Department will continue to administer this program directed toward the maintenance of health and safety in multi -family rental housing. Under the program, a Code Enforcement Officer is designated to systematically - inspect all rental housing complexes and to issue reports on conditions in violation of current Health and Safety Codes. Where necessary work is fairly extensive, referrals to the -. City's rehabil itat i on loan coordinator are made. This pro-act i ve program pri ori t i zes inspections based on structure age and condition, with all complexes showing advanced ,.--- deterioration receiving annual inspections and complexes newer than 10 years being inspected every 2-3 years. D. Abatement of Non-Conforming Uses and Removal of Dilapidated Structures The Building and Hous i ng Department wi 11 continue to monitor -- adherence to minimum standards of habitabil ity and appearance in targeted neighborhoods, and upon request. Nonconforming uses and dil apidated structures will be removed from residential areas. Nonconforming uses, if allowed to remain on an i ndefi nite bas is, tend to encourage zoni ng vi 01 at ions and ill-advised zoning amendments. -- E. Rehabilitation Programs 1. Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) -, program provides favorable loans 1 ow- income The CHI P to owners for rehabil itation of mobi1ehomes and trail ers, owner-occupied homes, and rental units. In addition, the City provides grants of up to $1,000 for minor repairs. The City will maintain the same level of approximately 40 single-family and mobil e home rehabi 1 itat i on loans each year. If additional funding becomes available through the HOME Investment Partnership program, the City will consider increasing the level of rehabilitation activity. - - I II - 23 -,- --'~--~--~------"-~ -"-"...__._----_._---~--~._-~--------_.._~----".._- ---..-,--"--..-- -- -- - """ ..-... --------.. 2. Rental Rehabilitation As the Federal government is expected to phase-out thi s program within the next year, the City has a limited time to make use of th is fund i ng. The new federal program, HOME Investment Partnership, will provide a new source of funding for rental rehabilitation but with different rules and regul at ions. The City will coordinate an effort to inform apartment owners who are cited for code violations about the rental rehabil i tat i on program and ass i st those who are interested in applying for funding. F. Neighborbood Revitalization Program (NRP) The City will cont i nue to implement and fund the NRP wh i ch was developed in 1988 and targeted to the newly annexed Montgomery Commun ity. The NRP is a comprehensive resident-participation renewal-oriented program of housing and infrastructural rehabilitation within select target areas whose phys i ca 1 condition is in need of special attention. The program seeks to prioritize needs for housing and infrastructural improvements such as paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and drainage facil ities, and to develop a schedule to coordinate provision of improvements with available resources and the City's Capi tal Improvement Program (CIP) schedule, and the Housing Rehabilitation Program (CHIP). G. Condominium Conversions · The City shall continue to regulate residential condominium and stock cooperative conversions in order to protect existing tenants and promote the orderly growth and amenity of Chula Vista. If such conversions adversely affect the availabil ity of housing for low and moderate income households to an appreciable extent, the City shall adopt remedial measures. H. Educational programs for homeowners The City will encourage lenders and social service organizations to provide educational programs and materials for existing homeowners on home maintenance and fi nanci al · management. The purpose of the educational programs will be to he 1 p exi st i ng homeowners to understand equity and appreci at i on through maintaining their property in good condition and appearance and to budget properly to avoid losing their home. Cost/Source of Financinq Redevelopment Housing Fund, CDBG ent itl ement funds, HUD Rental Rehab Funds, State Rental Rehab Funds and General Funds. Resoonsible Aqencies · Community Development Department Housing and Building Department Planning Department II I - 24 Schedule -~ The City hired the non-profit California Housing Partnership as a consultant in January 1991 and selected a local CDC to participate in -~~ acquisition in September 1991. Staff met with owners of each of the four projects in Summer 1991 and inspected the buildings to determine rehab needed in the fi rst two projects. HUD is expected to promulgate final -, regulations in April 1992. During the following 12 months, the City will proceed wi th the best method of conservation or the owner(s) wi 11 elect to maintain ownership. In Spring 1993, the same process may begin with the second two projects. -~ In 1991-92, the City allocated $34,000 of CDBG funds for the Neighborhood Appearance Program and anticipates continuing the program as long as it -~ is needed. The first phase of missing street improvements in Otay, under the Neighborhood Revita 1 i zat ion Program, will begin construction in Spring 1992. Additional phases will be funded and constructed each year. The City has allocated $700,000 of Redevelopment housing funds for -.-.- 1991-92 and anticipates that comparable allocations will be made in subsequent years. -~- -- -- -... - - -- ---.- - -- III-25 -'-- ----- ---------- --------- -- - . --------,-_._~ --, ,----- ---_._-_._.~-~ --- OBJECTIVE 6 To provide housing assistance to individual s and famil ies who are homeless and enable them to move back into permanent housing. Policy The City shall actively participate in regional and local efforts to establ ish transitional housing and emergency shelter programs in the South Bay, and will encourage the involvement of local non-profits. lmolementina Actions A. Participate in a Regional Approach to Address Homelessness The City has identified the need for both transitional housing programs, in which famil i es are housed for up to one year and prov i ded wi th ass i stance to get back into permanent hous i ng, and emergency shelter beds, in which families are allowed to stay for up to 30 days. Any facilities sited within the City are likely to serve the entire South Bay subregion. With a regional plan and a commitment from all participating jurisdictions and interested social serv i ce prov i ders, it will be easier to site and develop transit i ona 1 and emergency housing · programs. The groundwork has already been laid with a study on homelessness in the South Bay conducted by the Regional Task Force on the Homeless. One obstacle to development of shelter programs outside the urban core is community opposition, as residents fear the effect homeless programs and people may have on their neighborhood. Regi ona 1 coordination in the establishment of transitional housing and shelters can help overcome community opposition. B. Facilitate Transitional Housing Programs · Although reg i ona 1 cooperation is a logical approach, the City will not depend solely on this strategy to address the homeless problem. The City will consider providing financial and technical assistance to any organization or consortium of organizations seeking to establish programs to serve the homeless population. The City will take other steps, as necessary, to fac il i tate these programs (such as amendi ng zoni ng regul at ions to allow temporary church- sponsored shelters). Site control is of paramount importance for securing State and Federal funding. The City will consider providing assistance in the site selection and acquisition process, and this may include loans, · land dedications, or land cost write-downs. C. Identify Non-profit Providers to Operate Emergency Shelter Programs Non-profit providers are hesitant to undertake emergency shelter and transit ional housing programs because of the difficulty in securing I II - 26 · adequate ope rat i ona 1 funds. In add it i on to room and board, most shelter programs provide some type of soci al services. Providers rely heavily on pri vate donations and volunteers to fill funding gaps. The City can directly assist shelter providers with CDBG or Redevelopment Housing funds, and encourage them to apply for avail abl e Federal and State Funding (McKinney, LS.P. etc.). If needed, the City may also consider assistance from General Fund revenues. --- D. Support Existing Services for the Homeless -- Four non-profit agencies distribute she 1 ter vouchers to needy famil i es, which allows them to stay at the St. Vincent de Paul Center or a designated local motel. One hotel provides free rooms -- on a limited basis through the Hotel/Motel Partnership Program. Duri ng the wi nter months, the Interfaith Shel ter Network provides shelter for up to 12 people at local participating churches. The City will cont i nue to encourage these efforts to provi de emergency -"- shelters and will ut il i ze CDBG fund i ng, as appropri ate, to aid in these efforts. -- Cost/Source of Financina Funding for acquisition and operation of shelters and transitional housing are avail abl e from F edera 1 and State programs and private -,- foundat ions. Staff time to facil itate a shelter project would be supported by CDBG entitlement funds, or Redevelopment Housing Funds. -- ResDonsible Aaencies Community Development Department -,- Non-profit social service providers Schedule - The process of establishing a shelter program will take approximately one year after the funding is approved. -..- The 1 oc a 1 F edera 1 Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) board has pl aced a high priority on funding a shelter program in the South Bay; a proposa 1 from Chula Vista will automatically receive extra points. The ---- City wi 11 support the appl i cat i on by aqua 1 ifi ed non -profi t organi zat i on for a she lter in Chula Vista and will assist the organization in se 1 ect i ng an appropri ate site. The Ci ty has represent at i on on the FEMA board and the Regional Task Force on Homelessness. -- - - - III-27 u _,.__~~~___._.__ '''"._._._.__________"_______ .··-'"___...0...._....--..----- -~-_.._--,._...- --..-,----..----...-.- - -,--- OBJECTIVE 7 Ensure the successful implementation of housing policies and programs through effective coordination, monitoring, and evaluation. Policy 1- The City will develop standards of performance upon which all affordable housing units will be measured, and will implement a monitoring and evaluation program to ensure that builders and beneficiaries meet program requirements. 2. The City shall annually review affordable housing efforts and make necessary adjustments to meet quantified objectives. 3. The City sha 11 play an active role in the encouragement of affordabl e hous i ng and will devote resources to ass i st developers, non-profits, and other providers as necessary. ImDlementina Actions A. Review and revise affordable housing standards Staff wi 11 review, revise, and establish affordable housing standards and performance guidelines for the City's various assistance programs. Definitions will include: 1) Acceptable affordability income and rent ranges 2) Minimum duration of restrictions 3) Percentages of units to be set aside per unit mix and by total project Once the updated standards and performance guidelines have been · completed, City staff will prepare a brochure explaining the various requirements, terms and conditions of each affordable housing program avail abl e. Staff will al so develop a flow chart which delineates project processing and indicates when and how affordable housing efforts are considered and by whom. In addition, the City will initiate a proactive information campaign to foster greater community awareness of affordable housing issues, available assistance programs, and associated City efforts. B. Implement an on-going monitoring and evaluation program · In order to improve methods of overseeing successful implementation of Housing Element policies and programs, and provide for ongoing evaluation crucial to ensuring achievement of goals and objectives, the following actions are proposed: 1- The Community Development Department sha 11 establish and maintain a standardized system of evaluation to ensure that projects adhere to restrictions and that beneficiaries qual ify I Il- 28 · for affordable hous i ng programs. The initial formulation of thi s system wi 11 include a compl iance study of existing units under contract restrictions. 2. The Departments of Planning and Convnunity Development shall establ i sh a monitoring and reporting system for evaluating policy and program implementation and progress in achieving _..-- quantified housing objectives. In accordance wi th reporting requirements under AB 2248, and HUD's Comprehensive Housing Assistance Strategy (CHAS) plans, an annual report of findings and reconvnendations will be complied. This annual report shall be reviewed by the Housing Advisory Convnittee, Pl anning Commi ssion, and City Council for their direction regarding its recommendations. - 3. The City shall review the existing Housing Advisory Convnittee (HAC) wi th intent to redefi ne and expand its role, functions, and makeup to include oversight of the Housing Element's implementation. In this expanded capacity the HAC would review all affordabl e hous i ng proposals and forward reconvnendat i on to the appropr; ate dec; s i on mak; ng body. They woul d al so provide observations and input to staff on overall Element implementation, and would be the body through which the annual evaluation report is formulated. 4. The Departments of Planning and Community Development shall establish procedures for notification on activities which affect hous i ng, including early notification and referral on residential project inquiries and applications to the designated ombudsman in each Department, as outlined under Objective 9(6), pg. 111-29. C. Establish an Affordable Housing Quality of Life Threshold Standard City staff will investigate the establishment of a threshold -- standard for affordable housing efforts to be added to the existing eleven (11 ) other standards, and annually reviewed by the Growth Management Overs i ght Convni ttee (GMOC) . Said standard would define minimum criteria for affordable housing efforts on an annual basis in conjunction with the Housing El ements needs assessment and Comprehensive Action Plan. -- cost/Source of FinancinQ Redevelopment Housing Funds, application fees, and limited General Funds will support this monitoring and evaluation effort. ResDonsible AQencies -,"- Community Development Planning Department Housing Advisory Committee ---- III - 29 'm____'___ ______ -- -- -- ~ ~ --- - - .. .-..,.----.-.,.-....- ..·,...._.__.._._....,__u_ -. --.-.'-- Schedule The informational brochure wi 11 be made available to the public within six months of the date the guidelines are adopted by City Council. After adoption of this E1 ement in Harch 1992, the Housing Advisory Committee expansion shall be analyzed, and the new roles and functions formally adopted. The first Housing E1 ement implementation progress review will be conducted one year from the date the Housing Element Update 1991 is adopted by the City Counc il . The approximate date for this review would be Harch 1993. The City's CHAS will be adopted in April 1992, after a 60 day pub1 ic review period and public hearing. The CHAS shall include a priority list of projects, anticipated costs, and potential sources of funding. The GMOC will consider an Affordable Housing Quality of Life Threshold in April 1992 with their recommendation to be forwarded to the City Council in Hay 1992. . . I ll- 30 OBJECTIVE 8 ~_..- The el imination of racial, age, rel igious, sexual and economi c bi as and discrimination in housing provi sion, and the ensurance of fair lending -- practices. Policy -- 1. The City will work to ensure the provision of fair housing practices in the sale, rental, and advert is i ng of hous i ng uni ts and in the lending practices of banks and thrifts. _..~ 2. The City will endeavor to create a working dialog with the lending community, and to actively encourage their involvement in affordable -- housing efforts. ImDlementina Actions A. Fair Housing Program The City will continue to provide fair housing counsel ing services and other referral activities which are designed to further the fair housing requirements of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The City currently has a part-time Fair Housing Officer who responds to any requests or complaints regarding fair housing practices within the City. B. Annual Fair Housing Assessment In accordance with HUD requirements for the CDBG program, the City will conduct an annual fair housing assessment to determine the actual level of discrimination in rental housing, for sale hous i ng, and 1 end i ng . This assessment shall al so incl ude a revi ew of the Community Reinvestment activity of local lenders. -- C. Affirmative Fair Marketing Plans The City will require all developers of housing projects which -- contain more than twenty (20) dwell ing units to prepare an "Affirmative Fair Marketing Plan", which will be designed to attract prospect i ve home buyers and/or tenants within the proposed market area, regardless of gender, age, race, national origin or religion. Cost/Source of Financina -- CDBG ResDonsible AQencies -- Community Development Department - Schedule Ongoing --- Ill-31 -.-- _..'M____.~ _._..___.,___~___, __ _____ ------- - ----, .. _..__.___..____._._._..-n_..... ____.u.____ OBJECTIVE 9 Reduct i on and/or removal to the greatest extent possible of identified constraints to the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing within the Planning Area. Pol icy 1- The City is committed to providing all feasible assistance to project applicants to reduce the time and costs associated with project review and approval. 2. The City will evaluate on an ongoing basis City policies and programs related to housing and infrastructure provision as they present potential constraints. 3. The City will continue to monitor finance and lending conditions and to offer assistance to applicants in obtaining supp 1 ementa 1 financing. Imolementina Actions A. Expedite the Processing of Affordable Housing Projects In order to reduce project costs associ ated with lengthy review, staff will develop a policy and set of guidelines which: 1- Specify the type of projects which will receive priority · processing 2. Establish procedures to evaluate projects to determine if they meet affordable housing goals. 3. Establish specific procedures for "fast tracking." This may include a central ized application process for all affordable housing projects, and tailored review procedures to reduce time and costs. In addition, staff wi 11 create a flow chart delineating project processing and indicating when and how affordable housing efforts · are considered and by whom. B. Designate an Affordable Housing Ombudsman The "ombudsman" position would be responsible for coordinating all affordable housing projects, and would oversee intradepartmental coordination of all aspects of a projects process i ng and revi ew as they relate to the Housing Element's objectives, policies, and programs. It is intended that this person would assist applicants in expediting projects. C. Establish specific procedures for evaluating requests for subsidies · involving fees, land write-downs, and other forms of City assistance. llI-32 D. Encourage demonstration or experimental housing projects which reduce building costs and increase affordabil ity. The City will study and identify viable and acceptable methods for reducing housing production costs and increasing affordability where such methods will not jeopardize the goal for equal amenities in housing for all incomes. Eo Consider the impacts to affordable housing which may result from - rezonings involved with the General Plan/Zoning Consistency Study. F. Continue to encourage the use of flexible development standards -- through the Pl anned Community (PC) Zone and Precise Plan (P) Modifying District, where such are clearly identified with increased availability of affordable housing. - G. Des i gnate staff and develop resources to assist developers in avail ing themselves of alternative and supplemental financial assistance. -, Cost/Source of Financinq -- Staff time for development and implementation of the "fast-track" processing will be provided by General Fund and Development fees. - ResDonsible Aqency Planning Department Community Development Department - Schedule -- Preparation of fast track procedures and an application process for affordable housing projects will be undertaken by July 1992. Staff will continue, on an ongoing basis, evaluation of City actions on housing as -- they present potential constraints. -- --- - -- - - II I -33 -_.~---- ~-- - ---- - ----- --- - -- ---- --" - d_._" ----- ---- OBJECTIVE 10 To encourage the development of new hous i ng, and the retrofitting of existing housing, with features to address environmental issues such as energy and water conservation and recycling. Pol icy The City will require new developments to comply with applicable Federal, State, regional, and local policies and regulations regarding energy and water conservation and air quality improvement. ImDlementina Actions A. Encourage energy and water conservation features and recycling storage areas in new housing in conjunction with the City's existing "Pol icy for the Conservation of Energy and Water within the City of Chula Vista". B. Continue to encourage the weatherization programs for low-income households currently sponsored by the MAAC project. C. Continue to require the installation of dual-piping systems in new projects to accommodate the use of reclaimed water for landscaping and other applications as feasible. D. Continue to requi re the submi ss i on of a "water management pl an" and "a i r quality improvement plan" for 1 arge development projects at the Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan stage or similar level of review. E. Title 24 Compliance Review - The Building and Housing Department will continue to perform residential Title 24 energy analyses as part of building plan check procedures. costs/Sources of Financina · There will be no direct cost to the City for encouraging water and energy conservation and recycling. The City will explore the possibility of providing CDBG funding for the retrofit of low and moderate-income housing with water and energy conservation features. ResDonsible Aaency Building and Housing Department Planning Department Community Development Department Schedule · Ongoing. II I -34 · OBJECTIVE 11 To fully address specific housing issues as they affect our community and to enforce applicable laws and ordinances. Policy __ 1. The Ci ty wi 11 seek to ma i nta in an appropri ate balance of hous i ng to jobs in order to provide adequate housing opportunities for employees of local businesses. __ 2. The City will require affordable housing construction and replacement in the Coastal Zone in accordance with State law and local ordinances. ImDlementinQ Actions A. The City will encourage a balance of housing to jobs The City will investigate the 1 inkage between employment generation to the increased demand for 1 ow- income hous i ng. As can be seen by __ the needs assessment findings in Part 2 of this Element Update, the most significant employment opportunities forecasted to be generated within the next five years will be in the traditionally lower paying __ service and retail sectors. In conjunction with this forecast, it is proposed that the City's Economic Development Commission and Housing Advisory Committee initiate a study and provide direction towards addressment of jobs-housing balance. If the housing demand is for non-family housing, the conversion and rehabil itation of existing hotels to Single Room Occupancy Hotels (SRO's), or the construction of new SRO's, for service sector employees should be investigated. Some zoning and code requirements may be amended in an effort to make these projects feas i bl e. The City may establish requirements which restrict City lending or assistance involvement to guaranteed affordability levels, and/or first priority to local persons in need. - B. Housing Linkage Fee In conjunction with the above referenced study on jobs/housing __ balance, the City will also investigate the establishment of a housing linkage fee for commercial and industrial development, and/or establishment of an affordable housing development impact fee system. Shoul d such fee program( s) be developed, a trust fund for ,.." the monies would be established concurrently. C. Protect Coastal Zone Housing In accordance with the Affordable Housing Program, any housing projects constructed within the Coastal Zone will be required to __ provide at least 10% of the housing units to low and moderate income households. The City will encourage those developers to investigate all financial and development incentives currently available to assist provision of the units. II I -35 ~---~-~-- - ---_..-..,.,--',,,,,,,,,- _.~~--~ -- ------"., "---"..- -,_.~ -_._.._"~..,.,_.._.- .,,_...__..__..__._...,--.~-- - _u_"".._.."'__,, Where conversion or demotion of housing units in the Coastal Zone occupied by low or moderate-income households is proposed, such activity will be undertaKen in accordance with State 1 aw and the City's adopted Coastal Plan as follows: 1- Replacement of such housing will be required within the Coastal Zone or, when infeasible, within three miles of the site of conversion or demolition. 2. Where conversion or demolition of low and moderate-income units is a result of a private action, the party taKing action will be required to provide the replacement units. 3. Where conversion or demo 1 it i on is a result of City or Redeve 1 opment Agency act i on, the City or Redevelopment Agency will provide the replacement housing units under existing Relocation Ordinances. D. Provide Relocation Assistance As Required by Law The provision of relocation assistance for famil ies forced to move due to government i ntervent i on will continue to be enforced through municipal ordinance and all applicable State and Federal guidelines. cost/Source of Financinq The staff time for research on the jobs/hous i ng balance, monitoring of coasta 1 zone projects, provision of relocation assistance, and enforcement of mobilehome ordinances will be supported by the Redevelopment Housing Fund. ResDonsible AQencies · Community Development Planning Department Building and Housing Department Schedule Prior to December 1992, the matter of jobs/housing balance will be brought before the City's Economic Development Commission for discussion. · · III - 36 OBJECTIVE 12 To provide and maintain adequate public improvements, facil ities, and services to support residential growth in a manner cons i stent wi th the -,- Growth Management Element and Program. Policy 1. The City shall cont i nue to plan, construct, and ma i nta inadequate public improvements, hcil ities, and services in order to preserve the quality of 1 He in existing neighborhoods and be able to -- accommodate residential growth as it occurs. 2. The City shall continue to utilize a variety of financial resources -_.~ and funding mechanisms to support infrastructure development. ImDlementina ActiDns A. 5-Year Capital Improvement Program - The City will continue to implement the on-going CIP program. Current funding commitments tot a 1 over $11 mill ion from a variety of funding sources and --, includes two main sewer trunk upgrades, reconstruction and widening of five major streets, and completion of a major drainage channel. -- B. Neighborhood Revitalization Program - As part of the CIP, the City has initiated a 20-year Neighborhood Revitalization Program. The purpose of NRP is to promote hous i ng rehabil i tat i on and construct all of the missing pub 1 i c improvements, neighborhood by -- neighborhood, in the Montgomery area (which was annexed to the City in 1986). The Otay neighborhood will benefit from the first five-year phase of the NRP. -'- C. Public Facil it i es Financing Pl an s - The City will continue to require public hcil ities financing plans for all master planned communities and will support various financing mechanisms including _"n development impact fees, assessment districts, reimbursement agreements, and bonding. -, D. Maintenance of Public Improvements and Facilities - The City Public Works Department wi 11 continue to maintain public hcil ities and improvements. - WPC 0145p -,._- ,--"" - III-37 ---_._-~~ - ---------- - -- -----~~---- -----~ _._ ,,_..__~_._._._______ ,·,·__·_··,.~·.·._.'d_ .~__~_ G~e SO .'E Ssn Diego Oss & Electric WEATHER PERMITTING . - , -- i / PLEASE PARDON US But it is necessary to interrupt your electric service in order to make improvements to the system, Contents of your refrigerator or freezer should not be affected if the door is kept closed. However, service to a security syStem. time clock, garage door opener, or com~uter will be af· fected, Work will be completed as quic Iy as possibie. SAFETY REDUIREMENTS: If you plan to connect a generator during this outage, THE STATE LAW REDUIRES that: 1) your electrical system must be isolated from SDG&E BEFORE connection. 2) you must notify SDG&E of the location of the generator by telephoning the number listed below. Failure 10 do so is a misdemeanor and could endanger Ives. SERVICE WILL BE OFF FROM TO . . DAY OATE REMARKS 6 hours duration TO NOTIFY us ABOUT A GENERATOR HOOK UP PLEASE CALL 482-3344 I COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE I tJ T. 'RT'pt"1dnri AiP fORM 107-4212J (02'0481 aøo û~~/~ - COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item J5 Meeting Date 01/03/92 Ib~1-~ ITEM TITLE: Resolution Calling and Giving Notice of the Holding of a Special Municipal Election and Requesting the San Diego County Board of Supervisors to Consolidate the Special Municipal Election to be held 9n Tuesday, June 2, 1992, for the purpose of submitting to the Voters an Advisory Question regarding the Bi-National Airport and a Charter Amendment regarding Run-Off Elections, and Appropriating Funds therefore. SUBMITTED BY:~ Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney and ~tf!everlY A. Authelet, City Clerk (4/5th Vote: Yes...x... No--> RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution calling a special municipal election, requesting consolidation with the June 2, 1992 election, and appropriating $25,000 from the unappropriated general fund to 100-0170-5202 account. DISCUSSION: At the February 25th meeting, Council directed staff to amend the Resolution and to bring it back for approval on March 3rd. Those changes have been made. As amended, the proposed Charter change regarding runoff elections contains the following: A. Changes the "plurality based" system to a "majority-or runoff" system. B. The threshold triggering a runoff election is "less than a majority" of the votes cast for the open seat. C. Moves the general municipal election from November to June, and the runoff, if necessary, will be conducted in November, and in either event, seating of the successful councilperson will be done in December. /5-1 .----"..---- Item /~- Date: 03/03/92 D. Requires a runoff election for tie candidates in the general election but provides that ties in a runoff are resolved by lot. E. No changes will be made in the authority to conduct mail ballot elections, which is currently precluded for CounciVMayor offices. F. Can not be implemented for the November, 1992 general municipal election. The next general municipal election to which it will apply will be the 1994. G. Results in no extension of the length of a term in the event a runoff is required. H. Does not address the issue of what happens if there is a death or with,drawal of one or both ofthe two successful candidates between a June general election and a November runoff election, despite the City Attorney's recommendation to the contrary. The Council desired to deal with that clarification on the November ballot rather than confuse this ballot measure with the issue. r. Makes the technical amendment to delete obsolete language regarding term extensions for Seats 1 through 4. In Section 900, the Council originally directed this change be delayed until November because the Section otherwise did not require amendment. However, because Section 900 now must be amended to establish the June general election, the technical cleanup is included. The following Calendar of Events for the June election is again being provided. It is important to note that the deadline to submit items to the Registrar of Voters is March 6. March 6 Registrar of Voters to receive resolution requesting consolidation. If proposition is on ballot, text must be included in the resolution. (E.C. 23302) March 12 Publish argument deadline notice. March 23 Last day to receive arguments (E.C. 5015) Date for city attorney to prepare impartial analysis (E.C. SOll) 15~2.. .__..___·__'~__'_·.m.'.·. Item Á Date: 03/03/92 April 3-22 Public examination period of election materials (E.C. 5025, 10013.5) April 13-22 Ballots typeset, proofed, and printed April 23 to May 23 Sample ballots mailed (E.C. 10010) May 4 to 26 Absentee/Mail Ballot voting period (E.C. 1002) May 4 Voter registration deadline June 2 ELECTION DAY Staff will prepare proposed arguments for the two ballot propositions to be signed by Council or its authorized representatives and bring them forward for your review and approval on or before your March 17, 1992 meeting in order to meet the March 23 deadline. FISCAL IMPAcr: The Registrar of Voters estimates the election will cost $25,000. Therefore, it is necessary that the funds be appropriated from the unappropriated reserve of the general fund to Account No. 0100-0170-5202. ¡c;·3 .__...._---~_.,...~--" --.. J/ø 5~.s RESOLUTION ***** RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION AND REQUESTING THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSOLIDATE THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, JUNE 2, 1992, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING TO THE VOTERS AN ADVISORY QUESTION REGARDING THE BI-NATIONAL AIRPORT AND A CHARTER AMENDMENT REGARDING RUN-OFF ELECTIONS, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR WHEREAS, under the provisions of the Chula Vista Charter, a Special Municipal Election shall be held on June 2, 1992 for the purpose of submitting to the voters an advi sory questi on regardi ng the Bi -Nati ona 1 Ai rport and a Charter Amendment regarding run-off elections; and WHEREAS, it is desirable that the Special Municipal Election be consolidated with the Statewide Primary election to be held on the same date and conducted in all respects as if there were only one election within the City with the same precincts, polling places, and election officers, and that the San Diego County Registrar of Voters canvass the returns of the Special Municipal Election; and WHEREAS, this is a Special Election, funds need to be appropriated to cover the cost of said election. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of the Chula Vista Charter, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Chula Vista on Tuesday, June 2, 1992, a Special Municipal Election for the purpose of submitting to the voters the following advisory question: ADVISORY VOTE ONLY -- Do the citizens of Chula YES Vista want a Bi-National Airport to be located at the border between the United States and NO Mexico on the Otay Mesa? SECTION 2. That the proposed Charter Amendment to be submitted to the voters is as follows: /C.!S ____·u___·___·_____·_.___ Resolution No. ***** Page 2 Runoff Elections: Should the Charter be amended to (1) advance the general municipal election YES from November to June of even numbered years; (2) require that, if no candidate secures a majority of votes cast at such election, a runoff election would be held at the November statewide election between the two highest candidates; and (3) establish that the NO successful candidate, whether elected in June or November, shall be seated the first Tuesday in December SECTION 3. Upon certification of the results of the election wherein it is truly and properly certified that the aforementioned ballot label has received an affirmative vote by a majority of votes cast, the following changes to the Charter shall be deemed ordained by the People of the City of Chula Vista: Sec. 300. Members. Eliqibilitv and Terms. Ai' There shall be a City Council of five members, consisfìng of four Council members and a Mayor, elected from the City at large at the times and in the manner provided in this Charter. ªK No person shall be eligible to hold office as members of the City Council unl ess they are resi dents of the City of Chul a Vista, and at the time of their election or appointment, qualified electors of the City or of territory annexed thereto. P¡ The term of each member of the City Council shall be for !!J®ºmií1~m;¡¡gmjîM¡Ifour years and shall commence on the first Tuesday fêlTè¡¡rii!leéffiffeatieR ef eleetieR resl:llts by the Re§istrar af ~~~~fSa~'~'~'~"'~~~I~~"I,~~r'~'P~II~I'~'i'i~la~~~ ~~~l~R~O~~~~~~ i.i.f.i._.Î._ ............................................,.....,..,...........,....,..,..,..,..,..,........,..,..,..,......,....,..,.. Pi No person shall be eligible for nomination and election to theóffice of City Council member or Mayor for more than two (2) consecutive terms, and no person who has held a Council office for a period of two (2) consecutive terms or the office of Mayor for two (2) consecutive terms, may again seek nomination and election to said offices of Councilor Mayor respectively until a period of one (1) year from the termination of the second term for Councilmember or Mayor has elapsed; provided, however, that any person who is appointed by the Council to fill the office of Councilor Mayor or elected in a special election for the balance of a regular term of I~.~ ."."..~ ----...--------".---- Resolution No. ***** Page 3 Mayor and/or Council for a period of two (2) years or less may seek nomination and election for two (2) full terms thereafter. ,§~ .Each Council seat shall be numbered one (1) through four (4) respectlVely. Persons seeking election to the City Council shall at the time of filing nomination papers, select one of said seats as the Council position for which they seek election. §@ Persons runni ng for a Council offi ce shall designate one of the"''two numbered Council seats as memori a 1 i zed by reso 1 uti on of the Chul a Vi sta City Counci 1 on fil e in the offi ce of the City Clerk. Shoul d a vacancy occur at any time in a Council seat or seats, if said vacancy is to be filled by a special election as provided in Section 303 of the Charter, candidates for said vacancy shall similarly designate the appropriate numbered seat on their nominating paper. IS-í ~ ----- .-~- Resolution No. ***** Page 4 II~it¡ililiiiiiiì1Iì¡}11{ti~iiiliijif.iiillll~!~iBii1!111~~1~~~111 Sec. 900. Genera 1 Muni ci va 1 El ecti ons.:i':rm:èîfflí§. ..,..,..........,..., .......,.............. General municipal elections for the election of Council members and for such purposes as the City Council may describe shall be held in the City of Chul a Vi sta on the fi rst Tuesday after the fi rst Monday in Nevember UnÖ! in each even numbered year. Said general municipal election f'ð'F'the election of Mayor and such other purposes shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in Nevember ª~~~ of 1990, and every four years thereafter. The e~rreRt terms fer't'êiiReil seats eRe aRE! tile shall Be e)(teRE!eE! ~Rtil NevemBer ef 1999. The e~rreRt term fer Ce~Rci1 seats three aRB fe~r shall BC exteRBeEl frem 1991 te 1992. SECTION 4. That pursuant to the requirements of Section 23302 of the Elections Code, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors is hereby requested to consent and agree to the consolidation of a Special Municipal Election with the Statewide Primary election to be held on the same date of Tuesday, June 2, 1992. SECTION 5. That funds in the amount of $25.000 be appropri ated from the unappropriated reserve of the general fund to Account No. 0100-0170-5202 to cover the estimated cost of the election. SECTION 6. That the San Diego County Registrar of Voters is authorized to canvass the returns of the Special Municipal Election. SECTION 7. That the City of Chula Vista recognizes that additional costs will be incurred by the Country by reason of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the County for any costs. SECTION 8. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of this resolution with the San Diego Country Board of Supervisors and Registrar of Voters. ........'.'.'.'...'....'.'.'."."....'.".".'''.''.......,.., "... ...,.., " ... , IÇ~¡ --", --------,_._-,--,-.. Resolution No. ***** Page 5 SECTION 10. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. Presented by Approved as to form Beverly A. Authelet Br~~~~'~ City Clerk City Attorney . IS -tj /15"'/0 . -_._._---~-_._---~--_.._-,- From the Office of the City Attorney City of Chula vista Memorandum Date: March 3, 1992 From: Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers cc: John Goss, Beverly Authelet Re: June Ballot Measures This is a supplemental report to Item 15 on tonight's agenda designed to respond to some post agenda preparation questions and with some other "matters" raised at the last meeting. Ballot Label for Runoff Elections: 1- The Ballot Label proposed in the Agenda Report (80 words, excluding numbers) reads as follows: Runoff Elections: Should the Charter be amended to (1) advance the general municipal election from November to June of even numbered years; (2) require that, if no candidate secures a majority of the votes cast at such June general election, a runoff election would be required to be held at the November statewide election between the two highest candidates; and (3) establish that the successful candidate, whether elected in June or November, shall be seated the first Tuesday in December? However, the Council may wish to consider some other alternative language: 2. Alternative A (69 words) This alternative clarifies the word advance; eliminates some verbiage for the purpose of increasing readability: Runoff Elections: Should the Charter be amended to ~ YR-aà¥aRee the general municipal election from November to June of even numbered years; require that, if no candidate secures a majority of the votes east! at sash J\iR6 at the general election, a runoff election ~e~là be ~e~uiFeà ~e se held at the in November B~a~e~iàe eleB~ieR between the two highest candidates; and establish that the successful candidate, whether elected in June or November, shall be /5--/ / --"-~--------~,. seated the first Tuesday in December? 3. Alternative B (76 words) This Alternative modifies Alternative A by clarify what is meant by "majority" and expounds on the seating issue: that is, the date of taking Office is not advanced bya June election (a matter which is important to avoid the impression that there may be a term shortening): Runoff Elections: Should the Charter be amended to move up the general municipal election from November to June of even numbered years; require that, if no candidate secures a majority (50% Dlus 1) of the votes at the general election, a runoff election be held in November between the two highest candidates; and establish that the successful candidate, whether elected in June or November, shall assume Office De seat.eà the first Tuesday in December (the date thev are currentlv seated)? d a ssue: Councilmember Rindone queried as to what could be done to address the "withdrawal issue" for this June's proposed amendment. The "withdrawal issue" is as follows: At the June general election, if no one candidate secures a majority of the votes, two candidates will be eligible to compete in the November runoff. What happens if one of them dies or withdraws from the race between June and November? Currently Subsection G, of Section 300 is proposed to be worded as follows, and in the absence of addressing it, there would substantial confusion as to whether the runoff election would be required forcing the matter into the lap of the legal analogy. ... G. Any person to be elected at a general municipal election for any numbered Council seat 1 through 4 or the office of Mayor for which nomination papers have been filed shall be deemed elected upon receipt of (1) the highest number of votes for the particular seat or the office of Mayor and (2) a majority of the votes cast for the particular seat or the Office of Mayor at the election If no candidate at such general municipal election receives both the highest number of votes and a majority of the votes cast, there shall be a special runoff election, to be held on the same date as the statewide election date in the November immediately following the general municipal election (if no statewide election is conducted, then on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November of each even-numbered year) , between the two candidates receiving the highest and second highest number of votes in the general municipal election for said seat or the office of Mayor, in order to determine the winner. By way of clarification, ties among the candidates receiving the two /~J;2 ,...... --,.._- -.-...- highest number of votes at the general municipal election shall be resolved by a special runoff election. At the Council's insistence, we omitted from this proposed Charter amendment the proposed method of dealing with the "with- drawal issue". It appeared to me that the Council reached a con- sensus, without vote, on the conclusion that the issue was too complicated and would confuse the matter of the runoff if it was made part of the same election. Councilman Rindone, in his questions, has asked what language could be proposed to address this issue at this time. This section responds to this inquiry: Various alternatives are available and tend, in the author's mind to revolve around the following philosophical principals: 1. Should the remaining candidate have to go through the runoff? 2. Are you concerned that one of the two remaining candidates may be induced into withdrawing by special interests? If so, you may wish to require the Runoff and permit the third highest candidate to compete. You may also wish to preclude the right of withdrawal, so that the candidate knows that if they go through with the June election, and they get the first or second place, there name will be on the November ballot regardless of whether they want it there of not, unless they die. 3. Should we permit an election to proceed if it may involve the risk of electing a dead person? Alternative 1: If you do not want to put the remaining candidate through a runoff election: the runoff election is cancelled; the remaining candidate is deemed elected without a runoff upon death or withdrawal of competing candidate. . .. By way of clarification, ties among the candidates receiving the two highest number of votes at the general municipal election shall be resolved by a special runoff election. If one of the two candidates eliaible for the sDecial runoff election dies or reaisters his withdrawal in writina with the Citv Clerk Drior to the sDecial runoff election. the remainina candidate shall be deemed elected as of the date of such death or filina of withdrawal. Alternative 2: If you are concerned that one of the two successful general election candidates may improperly be induced to withdraw, to avoid that risk, we should continue to have the runoff between the remaining candidate and the next highest candidate at the June election willing to participate in the runoff election. . .. By way of clarification, ties among the candidates /5- /] _-.-._~-~,- -----". --. r-....,.~. It¡jIJi@t~~ ( receiving the two highest number of votes the general municipal election shall be resolved by a special runoff election. If one of the two candidates eligible for the special runoff election dies or registers his withdrawal in writing with the City Clerk prior to the special runoff election, the remaiBiBg eaRàiàa~e shall ~e deemed eleated as af ~fte àa~e sf sQeft àea~h er filiftg af vithàrawal the sDecial runoff election shall be held between the remainina candidate and the candidate receivina the next hiahest number of votes at the aeneral election willina to DarticiDate in the sDecial runoff election. Alternative 3: If there was greater than a 15% spread between the remaining candidate and the next highest willing candidate, the runoff is cancelled and the remaining candidate is deemed elected effective on the death or withdrawal; otherwise, the runoff election is held between the remaining candidate and next highest vote-getter at the June election willing to participate in the runoff election. . .. By way of clarification, ties among the candidates receiving the two highest number of votes at the general municipal election shall be resolved by a special runoff election. If one of the two candidates eligible for the special runoff election dies or registers his withdrawal in writing with the City Clerk prior to the special runoff election, the remaining candidate shall be deemed elected as of the date of such death or withdrawal if the remainina candidate secured areater than 15 Dercent more of the votes cast at the aeneral election than the next hiahest aeneral election candidate willina to DarticiDate in the sDecial runoff election: otherwise. the sDecial runoff election shall be held as scheduled and shall be held between the remainina candidate and the candidate receivina the next hiahest number of votes at the aeneral municiDal election who is willina to DarticiDate in the sDecial runoff election. Alternative 4. You may wish to permit the remaining candidate to be declared a winner upon death, but not withdrawal. . .. By way of clarification, ties among the candidates receiving the two highest number of votes at the general municipal election shall be resolved by a special runoff election. If one of the two candidates eligible for the special runoff election dies sr re~ia~era kia witkàraval ift ·..i'ri'tift~ wi~k ~ke ei'ty Clerlt prior to the special runoff election, the remaining candidate shall be deemed elected as of the date of such death sr filift~ sf witkàrawal. Insufficient time precludes this Office from making a recommendation, although I would much prefer that this issue be dealt with now than in November. )~)L! --._---~-~-_.~--_.~-_..~.. ITEM 16 MEETING DATE 3-3-92 16. RESOLUTXON 16533 APPROVXNG AN APPROPRXATXON OF $14,168 TO AMEND THE PXSCAL YEAR 91/92 BUDGET FOR NORMAN PAlUt CENTER AND PUBLIC WORRS OPERATIONS; UPGRADING A RECREATXON SUPERVISOR :n: POSXTXON TO SENXOR RECREATXON SUPERVISOR; ADDXNG A ONE-TENTH PULL TXME EMPLOYEE RECREATION LEADER, AND A ONE-HALl' TIME CUSTODIAN I Staff had pulled this item from the Agenda. ... /& ---I ..--- ~ ~ ORDINANCE NO. 2495 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION FROM I-L-P TO C-C-P FOR THE SOUTHERN 3 ACRES OF THE PALOMAR TROLLEY CENTER PROJECT, AND MAKING FINDINGS TO PERMIT APPLICATION OF THE lip" MODIFIER; AND CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION FOR ZONING CONSISTENCY SUBAREA B-3-A FROM APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL (R-3) TO APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL .I WITH A P-MODIFIER, NOT MORE THAN 22 UNITS PER "x'·~ ACRE ("R-3-P-22"). ) ,; Palomar Trollev Center proiect Matters Entire proiect Area WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of a commercial shopping center development referred to herein is a rectangular area of land approximately eighteen and 2/10ths (18.2) acres bounded on the north by Palomar Street on the east by Broadway, on the west by the San Diego Trolley Palomar Street station and on the south by San Diego Gas and Electric right-of- way, and is diagrammatically presented in Figure 5-5 of the Final Environmental Impact Report, Palomar Trolley Center, EIR 91-02 (FEIR), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A ("Entire Project Area") and if attached, as the area outlined with such designation; and, . Amendment Area WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of an application herein referenced for general plan amendment, Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment, and change of zones is a portion of the Entire Project Area consisting of approximately three (3) acres in the southeast portion of the Entire proj ect Area, diagrammatically presented in Figure 5-5 of the Final Environmental Impact Report, Palomar Trolley Center, EIR 91-02 (FEIR), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A ("Amendment Area") and if attached, as the area shown in cross-hatch thereon; and, proiect WHEREAS, Pacific Scenes, Inc. ("PSI"), the entity which has development control over most of the Entire Project Area has proposed a plan for the construction of 198,200 gross square feet of commercial shopping center improvements on the Entire Project Area pursuant to a plan that is more fully described in the FEIR, pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-3-A February 25, 1992 Page 1 /(,- e-,3 - -,._---~----,_....-._---_._. .-- section 3.0 ("Project Description"), page 3-1, which entire plan for improvement shall herein be referred to as the "Project"; and, Application for Entitlements WHEREAS, in conjunction with a plan for the construction of a 198,200 gross square foot shopping center located on the Entire Project Area, Pacific Scenes, Inc. (PSI) has filed an application ("Application") with the City for a General Plan Þ.mendment, Montgomery Specific Plan Þ.mendment and change of zone from Light Industrial with a P Modifier ("I-L-P") to Center Commercial with a P Modifier ("C-C-P") for the Þ.mendment Area to allow for the use of the Entire Project Area for a shopping center containing five major anchor tenants and other retail facilities such as five building pads, two of which will have drive-through capabilities for fast- food restaurants, sidewalks and landscaping, all as more fully set out in the proposed Palomar Trolley Center Semi-Exclusive Negotiating Agreement ("SENA"), and that Application on file with the Director of the Planning Department; and, certifvinq Resolution WHEREAS, the City Council did, by the adoption of Resolution No. 16522 ("Certifying Resolution"), certify that the Final Environmental Impact Report, as defined therein, was prepared in accordance with the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act, and the guidelines lawfully promulgated thereunder; and, WHEREAS, the recitals and resolutions of the City Council contained in said Certifying Resolution are incorporated herein as if set forth in full hereat; and, Findinqs WHEREAS, an application for a City-initiated zone change was completed by the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on February 4, 1991, and WHEREAS, the subject property is immediately surrounded by commercially zoned property to the north and west, and by existing commercial development to the east, and WHEREAS, without the proposed zone change, a 3-acre island of industrial land lacking street frontage would exist surrounded by commercial development to the north, west and east, and Palomar Trollev Center Pro;ect Public Hearinq pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-3-A February 25, 1992 Page 2 't-~ ..--.--'.'----.-.--- WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the City Council on PSI's Application for a General Plan Amendment, Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment and Zone Change ("Public Hearing") on or about February 25, 1992 regarding the Palomar Trolley Center; æIER&r.~, 8ft Au~a~ 28, 1999, ~fte ci~} CauBe!! appr8veà the CCRcral Fla8 hmeftàmeR~:~peeifie FlaB Afteßæmeat. aRå YCS8Re ~e àesi~Ra~e ~hc 12.2 aare Palamar Trelley CaRter prejeet site fer eemmereial ase 8ft t.he eeRàitieR 1:.881:. l'aeifie ~eel\e, IRe. (J?G:I) a~ree t.e restrain it.self tram pursuing the 12.2 aere eeft'ter ~~ile P~I and the Reàe7clapmeRt. ^geßey purs~e aft expaaàeà seRt.er 6asempaaaiR§ 18.2 aercs, aaå WlIEREl.E, t.he Cit.y CeuReil desired ta c7alaat.e t.he expanded prejeet t.e det.ermiRe if it. ~el:11à previàc a eemprefteRai~e àe~ÐlepmeRt plaB fer the area anå te pre~iàc aààitieRal salsa tax aRà 'tau iReremeRt. gSßerat.isR, aRå mIEREA~, 3 af the £ aeree af the expanàeà projcet arc Ðurreß't1y 2IEJßeà I L P aftel mHÐt. se re2l0ßcå to 0 C P t.e a11s"',A.· àe~c1epmcftt af aft expaßàeà 18.2 aarc prejee~, aftà mIEREr.S, ~àe ci~y Ce~fteil set. 'Efte 'Eime aReI p1aee fer a fteariß~ 8R eaià BeRe eftaß~e and ßstiee af said heariß~, te~et.fter ·,,¡ità itø p~rpOÐe, vaø giveR S~f it.a plislieat.ieR iR a RetlSpaper af ~cßcral oiroulation iR ~àe city aRå it.s mai1iR~ t.a prepcrty eWRcro tJ'ithiR 3ÐB feet. ef 'the e1C'teriar saliftàaricB af the. proper~}'" at least. t.eR days prier t.a t.he heariRfJ, aßà WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m., February 25, 1992, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the city Council and said hearing was thereafter closed; and WHEREAS, the City Council certified that the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR-9l-02) has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula vista and that the information contained in the FEIR has been reviewed and considered. Zone Consistencv Studv Area 3-B-A WHEREAS, the City Council, by a public hearing held on or about February 4, 1992 ("Public Hearing 91-5) at which it determined that, by a consolidated general plan amendment, that an approximate 5 acre, 21 parcel area bounded by E Street, D Street, Third Avenue and Landis Avenue, all as more particularly identified in Exhibit B, incorporated herein by reference ("Zone consistency Study Area B-3-A"), should be replanned for General Plan purposes pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-3-A February 25, 1992 Page 3 (,c,#!) _,._'_____m_____________ - from "Low-Medium Residential (3 to 6 dwelling units per acre)" to "Medium-High Residential (11 to 18 dwelling units per acre)"; The city Council of the city of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: SECTION I: Supplemental Findings for Application of "P" Modifier--Palomar Trollev center Pro;ect As reaards the Amendment Area with the Entire Pro;ect Area of the Palomar Trollev Center Pro;ect. pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 19.56.041, the "POI modifying district is applied based on the following: 1. The property or area to which the "p" modifying district is applied is an area adjacent and contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses, and the development of a precise plan will allow the area so designated to coexist between land usages which might otherwise prove incompatible. The SDG&E right-of-way to the south is zoned S94 and the surrounding commercial property to the north, west and east is zoned with a "P" modifier. The precise plan requirement for the subject 3 acres will ensure that the parcels are subject to the same design review as the surrounding property and that the project is compatible with the S94 zone to the south. 2. The area to which the "p" modifying district is applied consists of two or more properties under separate ownership wherein coordination regarding access, on-site circulation, site planning, building design and identification is necessary to enhance the public convenience, health, safety and general welfare. The subject property and the surrounding property to the north, west and east included within the 18.2-acre expanded Palomar Trolley Center project are under 10 different ownerships. The Ifp" modifier will require design review of future site planes) to ensure conformance with the design concept guideline booklet outlining the design objectives for the 18-acre expanded project. SECTION II. Guidelines--Palomar Trollev Center Pro;ect. pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-J-A February 25, 1992 Page 4 J~ Co - (p -~.- The Precise Plan Guidelines to be attached to the property shall include the following provision: a. The City of Chula vista shall consider enforcement of eftferee aft:;" appropriate legal mechanisms sponsored by the Chula Vista Elementary School District and the Sweetwater Union High School District to mitigate impacts on school facilities~ if such is determined to be necessary based on the results of a study the city may conduct similar in nature and SCODe to the study conducted in Fairfield. exceDt this studY will address the imDacts of commercial and residential develoDment on school facilities. SECTION III I hrrI.ISA'PIOtl SF IIplt MODIFIER. PursuaR't. 'te ~el\i}\1J OrEiiftaftee. £ee"tisR 19.56. Ð'( 1, tJu:: lip" lIeàifyiß~ Bietriet is applied as par"t af the BaRe eaaftlJC tel 1. ERsure ~he 3 seres are sUBjee~ 'te ~he same àesilJR re~iew as 'the surrs1:ißàiftlJ prapcrty tha't is eaReå ·...·ith aUI'II msàifier sliå that t.he prejeet is eempatièlc ~ith the E94 BSRC 'ts the seuth, sAå 2. ERBUFC 'Ehat the 3 aeres sRå 51:irrs1:ißàiRIJ prepcrty ~Ràer àiffereRt e~ßerahip8 ~ill re~1:iire àeailJß review af fature site plaRCs) te seßfarm with ,t.he äceífJR eSl\eept. §\i.iàeliRe sse]tlet. 81:1t.liHiR'!J 'the àeaìfJR esjeet.i-,;es fer 'Eke 18 sere e1!paRàeà Palamar 'Pralle} GaRter Prejeet. EECTIOlI 11:.71 FULFILIlfEnT OF carTY COtRICIL DIRECTIon. Thc BeRe is re~uireà ~e fülfil ~fte city GeuRsills diree~ieR tha~ 'the PCS:I l1ursüe aft eupaßåcà 18.2 aere prejee'£ uhiah is Eleaircã fer rcãcvelef)lBcftt ef t.hc I1repert.y as part. af a ea~reheßai ·.·ely I1laßßeEl eammcreial ecft,£er ~~ieh viII impleæcß~ 'the Git.y1a reãe~ela~lBeRt. plans fer t.his l1er~iaft af ~he CS:aüth~eÐ't prajeet. Area. SECTION III. Zone Chanae--Palomar Trolley Center. Southern Lots. As reaards the Amendment Area of the Entire proiect Area of the Palomar Trolley Center Proiect. the city Council does hereby conditionally amend the Zonina MaD of the city of Chula Vista as maintained bY the Director of Plannina of the City of Chula vista to Drovide that the zone for the Amendment Area indicated thereon shall be Center Commercial with a P Modifier. The conditions of this amendment are as follows: / pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-J-A February 25, 1992 Page 5 l("t-7 _n.._.__ ___~___ a. "Pro;ect" as described in the EIR. shall. excect to the extent herein modified. shall be imclemented bv the PSI. or their successor in interest. ~ Environmental Imcact Mitiaation Measures Imclemented. All environmental imcact mitiaation measures ("EIMM") in the nature and to the extent attached to the FEIR as Accendix B shall be imclemented as soon as commerciallY cractical but in no event later than 3 years after the adoction hereof. unless extended bv Council resolution. excect for those EIMM which. bv their terms. reauire imolementation and maintenance over a lonaer oeriod ("Extended EIMM"). and in such event. that such Extended EIMM be commenced as soon as cractical. and diliaentlv. and with aood faith and best efforts. be . imolemented to comoletion. ~ Develooment Under Owner particication Aareement (OPA) PSI shall. within three years from the date of adootion hereof. reach an aareement as to the develocment of the Entire Pro;ect Area with the Redevelooment Aaencv of the city of Chula vista which aareement shall herein be referred to as an "Owner particioation Aareement" or alternativelY ("OPA"). and uoon aooroval. PSI shall oerform all covenants and oromises therein contained reauired of PSI bv said OPA. Uoon determination of the City made at a oublic hearina at which PSI shall be aiven notice and oooortunitv to attend. that the conditions of this amendment have not occurred. the Zone Chanae herewith aranted shall automaticallY terminate and be of no further force and effect. In such event. the zone desianations for the Amendment Area. as herein made shall automaticallY terminate. and such Amendment Area shall revert to the existina zone of Limited Industrial with a P Modifier. SECTION IV. Zone Chanae--Zone Consistency Study Area B-3-A As reaards the Zone Consistency Study Area B-3-A. the city Council does herebY conditionallY amend the Zonina Mao of the City of Chula vista as maintained bv the Director of Plannina of the city of Chula vista to orovide that the zone for the Zone Consistency StudY Area B-3-A be chanaed from Aoartment Residential ("R-3") to Acartment Residential with a P Modifier. but not to exceed 22 units oer acre ("R-3-P-22"). SECTION v: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-3-A February 25, 1992 Page 6 I~t - f .~~--~-~------,-- Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter, Director of Bruce M. Boogaard, City Planning Attorney pal-zc2.wp Zone Change for Palomar and B-3-A February 25, 1992 Page 7 "C.-9 _ _ __ ____·_n_~·~__.___._____ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item J I Meeting Date 3/3/92 ITEM TITlE: Report on the construction of drainage improvements north of East Naples Street from Hilltop Drive to 767 feet east SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works rJY REVIEWED BY: City Manager 9 (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X-) During the CIP budget review for FY 1991-92, the Ci ty Council requested a status report for this project. The report was presented by the City Manager on May 28, 1991. Subsequently, on August 9, 1991, the Mayor and staff met with affected property owners. At that meeting, several of the conønun ity residents requested a deta il ed construction alternatives study and cost estimate. Th is report wi 11 present the result of this study in addition to the result of a community survey conducted by the City staff to determine community preferences. REC0K4ENDATION: Accept the report wh i ch i ndi cates that staff wi 11 proceed with Alternative No. 3 consisting of replacing the existing unimproved channel with a concrete invert and stabilized grass side slopes. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: This project was first budgeted in the FY 1988-89 Capital Improvement. The purpose of the project was to install a concrete channel which will eliminate erosion and enhance flow characteristics, thus eliminating unsightly and unhealthy ponds of stagnant water (mosquito breeders) as well as reducing maintenance efforts and costs. A contract was awarded to the firm of Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates (RBF) on September 19, 1989 for the preparation of final construction plans, specifications, and cost estimates. The 85% complete plans, specifications, and cost estimates was submitted to Engineering staff on July 6, 1990. The project was scheduled to be advertised for bidding on August 11, 1990 with construction to begin on October 8, 1990. This schedule was not met because a letter dated July 9, 1990 was submitted to the City Council by a concerned property owner, Mr. Joseph M. Byrne, challenging the negative declaration for the project (IS-90-46). A1", th, City"""" . "" '" A","'t 17, 1"0 f,", th~;f',"" Department of Fish and Game notifying the City that a Streambed teration Agreement would have to be obtained from their department for this roject and the memo also listed some deficiencies in the negative decla. tion. The Department of Fish and Game recommended that a Mitigated Negatiye Declaration be recirculated with the appropriate assessments, alternativ~and mitigation measures provided in the document. The Department of Fis and Game also indicated a preference for an earthen channel that woul~ provide wildl ife habitat as well as provide flood measures, over the curr!lrit concrete channel design. / / / n_·\ // -----.-.--.--,----.--.-.--,, Page 2, Item 11 Meeting Date 3/3/92 The Planning Department prepared a Mit i gated Negative Declaration, incorporating the findings of a biological survey conducted in the project area by Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc. The Mitigated Negative Decl arat i on was ci rcul ated through the State cl eari ng house from April IS - June 7, 1991. Mr. Byrne on May 19, 1991 responded with an "opposition report" to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Department of Fish and Game has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and we are now in a position to enter into a Streambed Alteration Agreement once a decision is made on the design alternatives. The City Counc il , during the CIP budget review for FY 1991-92, requested a status report for this project. The report was presented by the City Manager which addressed most of the issues earlier mentioned. Subsequently, the Public Works Department set up a meeting with all the property owners affected by this project. On August S, 1991, the Mayor, Engineering and Planning staff and representat i ves from the fi rm of RBF met with 22 property owners affected by the project. At that meeting, the Mayor and severa 1 of the community residents requested that staff and the consultant review and provide a detailed cost estimate for the four alternatives discussed at the meeting. Staff indicated at the meeting that, because of the City's fiscal constraints, it can only recommend the minimum cost alternative which is acceptable to the regulatory agencies having any jurisdiction over this area. Staff also indicated that proceeding with an expensive solution would require a formation of an assessment district which would assess the additional costs to those property owners receiving benefit from the project. The four alternatives evaluated by consultant and staff are as follows: Alternative No. 1 - Replace the existing unimproved channel with a reinforced concrete pipe. Estimated Cost: $426,000. Alternative No. 2 - Redirect the East Naples Street drainage system to a new condu it in Naples Street flowing westerly to Hilltop Drive. Regrade the exi st i ng Napl es channel to convey rema i ni ng tri butary flows. Est i mated Cost: $563,000. Alternative No.3 - Replace the existing unimproved channel wi th a concrete lined invert and grass side slopes. This alternative appears to be acceptable to DFG. Estimated Cost: $306,000. Alternative No. 4 - Improve the existing earth channe 1 with reinforced concrete 1 i ned sect i on. Improvement plans were previously prepared for this alternative. Estimated Cost: $334,000. n ,2- -,...- Page 3, Item~ Meeting Date 3/3/92 On December 12, 1991, the Engineering Department sent a total of 26 letters to all affected property owners. These letters summarized the four alternatives eval uated. A statement was attached to each 1 etter to allow every property owner to indicate his/her preferred alternative. Additionally, a copy of the ent ire report was sent to Mr. and Mrs. Tumangan, Mr. Joseph Byrne and Ms. Laura Verdugo, and interested property owners were asked to contact the Ci ty or either of these people if they wanted to examine the report. The property owners were requested to return their response to Engineering by January 10, 1992 and a no response would be considered as a selection of alternative no. 3 since it is the most economical alternative. A total of II property owners have responded to our survey i ndi cat i ng thei r preferred alternatives. Of the II property owners who responded: One owner preferred Alternative No. I No owner preferred Alternative No. 2 Seven owners preferred Alternative No. 3 Three owners preferred Alternative No.4 The response staff received from property owners indicates that the overall communi ty interest in thi s project does not favor an assessment di stri ct and favors Alternative No.3. Engineering staff is recommending that the City proceed with Alternative No. 3 because: I) it is the preferred alternative by the majority of property owners; 2) it is the most economical; and 3) it appears to be acceptable to the Department of Fish and Game. All property owners on the enclosed list have been notified of tonight's meeting and have been sent a copy of the Council agenda statement. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in the budgeted Capital Improvement Project of drainage improvements north of East Naples Street from Hilltop Drive to 767 feet east. Additional funds are required for consultant fees to pay for the proposed design modification. SA:/AR-028 WPC S887E/Alex \l·~ '"~_. - -------_.~--,-,._- ADDRESSES 1077 Guatay Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91911 1081 Guatay Avenue Chula vista, CA 91911 1083 Guatay Avenue Chula vista, CA 91911 P.O. Box 1014 Chula Vista, CA 91912 . P. o. Box 5227 Chula Vista, CA 91912 1091 Hilltop Drive - y Chula Vista, CA 91911 5324 W. 121 Street Hawthorne, CA 90250 1061 Guatay Avenue Chula vista, CA 91911 1063 Guatay Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91911 . 1065 Guatay Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91911 1067 Guatay Avenue Chula vista, CA 91911 261 Rancho Court #B Chula Vista, CA 91911 \l-~ --.-..._- -2- 1073 Guatay Avenue Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 71 East Naples street Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 19 East Naples street Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 934 Nolan Way .. Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 29 East Naples street Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 35 East Naples street Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 - . ....-.. 39 East Naples street Chu1a vista, CA 91911 45 East Naples street Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 51 East Naples street Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 9 East Naples street lJllìila Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 15 East Naples street Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 . -- Il 65 East Naples street Chu1a Vista, CA 91911 l-t- S -,- _ ,--,.----.--...,---------,...-. -3- 61 East Naples street Chula Vista, CA 91911 J . . . 1971 Skybrook Place Chula vista, CA 91913 (SA1\ADDRESS) \î"t;, __ _._.__ ___m ---~-. -- ",. ,.--- -~...,,-_.._..,,~,,_._._--- - - r r' I , " r ALTERNATIVE EvALUATION AND COST ESTIMATE l r NAPLES STREET CHANNEL Octobts 11, 1991' I l Revised October 28,1991' r l ; ~ Pnopored for: The City of Chula Vista [ Pnopored by: Roben Bein, William Frost & Associates [ [ ( [ [ [ [ I ! [ ~ "It:Mt'Bllrt.'IHlliaI'9Ieot a.".." " -e.vr-.-I....,... --. [ J7~7 -~ - ~ -"-,, ..-.,..-...,..---.--.---.-..--.-....--.. -1- -~--<-- -~._. ---...-. ----- I L Cost &timate and Alternatives Analysis . for L Naples Street Channel Introduction [ Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, as a consultant to the Oty of Chula Vista, has I prepared this report of findings and recommendations concerning future improvements to the Naples Street Channel east of Hilltop Drive. The objective of this study is to examine alternatives to a concrete-lined trapezoidal channel which may better address concerns of I the community and California Department of Fish and Game. I Back~ound I The Naples Street Channel within the Oty of Chula Vista is one of the principal tributaries within the Judson drainage basin. The subject portion of the Naples Street Channel begins at Hilltop Drive and continues 950 ft. easterly to the confluence with the East Naples Street , drainage system. The existing channel is unimproved and exhibits heavy growth of shrubs, I grasses and small trees. Several encroachments exist along the generally rectilinear channel alignment in the fonn of fences and walls constructed of various materials. The average top I width of the existing channel is 15' with 2.5:1 (or flatter) side slopes, a 4' base, and an average invert slope of 2.4%. The channel discharges to an existing 60" reinforced concrete pipe about 115 ft. easterly of the centerline of Hilltop Drive. I The channel has a history of maintenance problems stemming primarily from standing water at lateral tributaries. Property owners abutting the channel indicate that mosquito and · I vector control are of primary concern. A scour hole forms where the East Naples Street drainage system discharges to the channel near the upstream limit of the project. Poor quality urban runoff accumulates in this area resulting in the aforementioned mosquito and I vector problems and an unpleasant odor. Some property owners are also concerned about security; construction of an open channel may facilitate access to the rear of adjacent properties thereby increasing the likelihood of vandalism. I The channel generally provides 50 year flood protection to adjacent properties throughout the project reach (with the exception of those located near Hilltop Drive) and may I reasonably be assumed to afford 100 year flood protection as well. The channel is not stable during peak flows and evidence of bank erosion and sloughing can be found along · the existing alignment. Residences in the vicinity of the inlet to the existing 60" RCP at I Hilltop Drive (Hilltop Storm Drain) do not receive 50 year flood protection. The Oty's stonn drain master plan entitled A Special Study of Storm Drainage Facilities by Lawrence, Fogg, Florer and Smith, dated June 1964, indicates a 50 year discharge for the Naples I Channel at Hilltop Drive of 407 cfs. The capacity of the Hilltop Storm Drain inlet to the r L/5IXX1JS 1 /7-~ · I I' I Naples Channel is about 210 cfs; discharge in excess of the inlet capacity ponds and flows through the storm drain easement westerly to Hilltop Drive. Residences adjacent to the l. storm drain easement are inundated under these conditions. l JIllprovement Alternatives Four alternatives for improvement of the channel have been selected by the aty for further L consideration. This study will evaluate, on a preliminary basis, the construction cost of each alternative and discuss the viability of each case with reference to flood control, maintenance, regulatory constraints and public support. A general discussion will also be L provided regarding financing alternatives available to the aty for chAnnel improvement. The four alternatives to be evaluated are as follows: I · Alternative No. ~ - Replace the existing unimproved channel with a Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP). I · Alternapye No.2 - Redirect the East Naples Street drainage system to a new conduit in Naples Street flowing westerly to Hilltop Drive. Regrade the existing Naples Channel to I convey remaining tributary flows. · Alternative No.3 - Replace the existing unimproved channel with a concrete lined invert I and grass side slopes. · Alternative No.4· Improve the existing earth channel with reinforced concrete lined I section. Improvement plans were previously prepared for this alternative. The best alternative wilI meet the stated objectives for the least cost. The objectives of the I improvement project include: · Provide 10 and 50 year flood protection per aty of Chula Vista criteria for a lateral I drainage course. · Exhibit reasonably low maintenance cost. I · Eliminate vector, mosquito and odor problems. I · Satisfy State Department of Fish and Game regulations. The alternatives listed above were developed in response to feedback from the community I and the State Department of Fish and Game (DFG) in attempt to address the concerns of both parties. The currently proposed project, a concrete lined trapezoidal channel I (Alternative No.4), would require extensive offsite mitigation to meet DFG requirements and was not received enthusiasticalIy by local residents for aesthetic reasons. I L/S«I.1JS 2 I ! 7~1 - , ^ - - ,.-----.." ..~,.__.,,_.,..._-- -'. - -~ -~._--,~ . ! ; I' The City Council of the City of Chula Vista recognizes that the channel is unstable and a health and fire hazard. The Council has directed the City staff to complete a design for I improvement of the subject channel reach. One of the alternaûves described in this study may be recommended by the City staff for final design. The primary City Council criteria for flood control projects of this type are contained in the following excerpt from Resoluûon L No. 4786: ·...establish the responsibility and criteria for the design and construction of L storm drainage faciliûes...: 1. Protection of life and prôperty of citizens; I 2. Protection of City -owned improvements and faciliûes; 3. Protection of vehicular and pedestrian traffic from damage, hazards and unusual delays; I 4. Elimination of unsightly and unsanitary ditches and ponds; 5. Reduction of maintenance costs of drainage facilities; 6. Availability and applicability of a variety of means of financing said [ drainage facilities." . I I I . I I I I , I I I L/SÅ’1J9S 3 ) 7- / tJ . ! r ., 1 L, t Alternative No. 1 L Description [ Alternative No. 1 consists of replacing the existing unimproved natural channel with a 72" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP). The existing channel area will be b9ckfilled to the grade [ of adjacent properties. A special overflow structure would be required where the proposed 72" RCP joins the existing 60" Hilltop Drive storm drain. Discharge in excess of the capacity of the Hilltop storm drain would be allowed to exit to the surface at this location and flow [ to the sump on Hilltop Drive. A paved maintenance road that would also act as an overflow channel is recommended from the overflow structure to Hilltop Drive. A 15 ft. wide section with 1.5 ft. high curbs is sufficient to carry the difference in discharge between L the estimated 50 year flow and the capacity of the Hilltop Drive storm drain. Table "A" presents an itemized cost estimate for this alternative. Total estimated I construction cost is $426,000. Mitigation for lost wetland habitat is assumed to be required. The DFG usualIy requires a two-to-one replacement ratio for lost habitat area. The proposed rilitigation would take place offsite on land owned by the City. The cost of offsite [ mitigation is estimated by the City to be $53,000/acre. Cost savings may be realized by using spiral rib pipe in lieu of reinforced concrete pipe for I this instalIation. Spiral Rib Pipe (SRP) generalIy costs from 20 to 30 percent less than comparable RCP for large diameter instalIations. Additional soil testing would be necessary to determine if soil resistivity is within the range that is considered acceptable for steel pipe. r Cost savings using SRP for this alternative could potentially be as high as $50,000 compared to RCP. [: .Level of Flood Protection 1: Alternative No. 1 will provide 50 year flood protection for the project reach to Hilltop Drive. The proposed overflow structure will discharge excess flows to the sump at Hilltop drive; there is no secondary outlet from the low-point in the street and flooding would I persist at this location until the downstream storm drain at Hilltop Drive is improved. . [ Pennit Constraints f- A Streamed Alteration Agreement would be required from the DFG. Since all habitat area within the channel would be removed, offsite mitigation at a two-to-one ratio for about 0.4 acres would be required. The streamed alteration agreement would require about 8 weeks I to process. I LfS0009S 4 I J 7-/ / -.._-,-----_._._,-----_.~--._~_.. ~,._. T t Construction Timin& L Manufacturing of RCP has a lead time of about 12 weeks F.O.B. job site. Construction could be completed in another 6 weeks. Manufacturing of SRP has a lead time of 4 to 6 weeks with a slightly shorter construction time. l Maintenance [ The system would be relatively maintenance free, similar to other closed conduit storm drain [ systems in the City. Ponded water and vector control problems would be c-liminated. [ Public Acceptance This alternative may receive the greatest public acceptance. It solves mosquito and vector ! control problems and maintains a "secure" area for the property owners by not constructing an attractive nuisance and providing a locked gate. The property owners do not view the , existing crèek as an amenity; consequently, any open channel solution will not receive full I public support. The cost estimate for Alternative No. I contains a provision for a security gate at the access road. The security gate would be of heavier construction than standard chain link swing gates to reduce property owner anxiety over unauthorized entry to the I channel area. I I · I I I · r I .I. LI_ S /1-1 ), I' · !; ! Construction Cost Estimate L Prepared by Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates Table A L [ engineer: SMT IN: 500095 Project: Naples Street Channel Date: 10/14/91 Description: _ [ Unit Total ITEM Quantitv Unit Price Cost I. 1 36" RCP 41 If $105 $4,305 2 48" RCP 45 If $144 $6,480 3 66" RCP 75 If $198 $14,850 I 4 72' RCP 741 If $216 $160,056 5 Storm Drain Clean out Type A 1 ea $3,500 $3,500 I 6 Reinforced Concrete Collar 1 ea $1,500 $1,500 7 6" A.B. Maintenance Rd. 650 ton $20 $13,000 8 Security Drive Gate 1 ea $3,000 $3,000 I. 9 Concrete Drive/Overflow Section 73 cy $300 $21,900 10 Overflow/Junction Structure 1 ea $4,500 $4,500 11 Fill 2950 cy $6 $17,700 I: 12 Cut 2300 If $6 $13,800 13 Pipe to Pipe Transition 1 ea $5,000 $5,000 r 14 Pipe to Channel Transition 10 cy $400 $4,000 15 Riprap 242 ton $50 $12,100 16 Remove Headwall 10 cy $400 $4,000 L 17 Clear and Grub 1 acre $5,000 $5,000 18 Protect/Restore Exist. Impmts. 1 Is $5,000 $5,000 19 Remove Exist. Transition 23 cy $400 $9,200 [ 20 Habitat Mitigation 0.8 acre $53,000 $42,400 21 Mobilization 1 Is $4,000 $4,000 . [ Construction Subtotal $355,291 Contingency @ 10% $35,529 r Engineering @10% $35,529 Total Estimated Cost $426.000 r 6 I: ;7-/) I -- -.-.'-,--..,..-."...<-<..---+.,-.-- ~'L ,----- u , I Alternative No. n . 1- Description Work proposed under this alternative includes construction of a new stonn drain in Naples l. Street from the East Naples drainage system (see Figure 1) to the outfall of the existing Hilltop Stonn drain on Naples Street, west of Tobias Drive (about 1,700 feet). The existing Naples Channel would be regraded and cleared to accept flow from the upstream portion L of the Judson Basin. About 290 cfs (50 year discharge) would be diverted to the new system in Naples Ave leaving about 125 cfs (50 year discharge) in the Naples Channel. Flow depths would be reduced throughout the project reach in the Naples Ch..nnel and urban runoff r would be significantly reduced. ! An optional construction item for this alternative is to construct a IS" RCP pipe below the grade of the existing Naples Channel to discharge urban runoff ("low flows") through the project reach. The low flow pipe would eliminate any remaining ponded water in localized I areas and the associated vector and mosquito control problems. The total tonstruction cost for Alternative No. 2 shown in Table B is 5505,000; with the I construction of the optional low flow pipe, the total construction cost is estimated to be 5563,000. Potential cost savings may be realized by using SRP rather than RCP for conduit construction. Cost savings using SRP may approach 540,000. . I Level of Flood Protection I The level of flood protection afforded by Alternative No.2 is the greatest of any of the options explored in this study. The redirection of the flow from the East Naples drainage (' system to the outfall of the Hilltop Drive stonn drain reduces the flow entering the Hilltop Drive storm drain inlet from the Naples channel by 70%. Residences throughout the project · reach will benefit from 50 year flood protection, including the properties located near the I low-point of Hilltop Drive; this portion of Hilltop Drive currently experiences chronic flooding and is the most severe current flood problem in the local area. Installation of the bypass conduit to the outfall of the Hilltop Drive storm drain will tend to increase the !' delivery capacity of the system to this point. Further study is required to assess the impact of potentially increased flows on existing downstream facilities. I Permit Constraints · ! A Streamed Alteration Agreement should not be required from the DFG for this alternative. Sufficient tributary area will remain to the Naples Channel to sustain the I current habitat area. Negotiation with the DFG may be required during the regrading and clearing phase of the Naples Channel improvement. 1- L/SlX1J9S 7 . ) 7-,) t/ · r -L -------.-.-- T I If the optional low flow pipe is constructed in the Naples Channel, offsite miûgaûon may be required since surface low Bows will be substantially c:urtailed. This point may be L negotiated with the DFG as the current habitat appears to be degraded. L Construction Timin~ Construction ûming and constraints will be similar to those previously described for [ Alternative No.1. Pipe availability may be somewhat better due to the smaller conduit size required. I Maintenance I Maintenance of the Naples Channel will remain relaûvely high. However, by removing the East Naples Drainage System confluence, a principal maintenance problem will be I eliminated. Maintenance would be further reduced by construction of the optional low flow conduit system. . I Public Acce,ptance r: This alternative should receive good public acceptance as the local residents believe that most of their problems stem from the East Naples drainage system. The major problems would ostensibly be solved by redirecting this flow however the existing Naples Channel will r remain essentially in its present condition which could lead to future disputes. r: I r I, ! . r r I r. LfS0009S 8 - /7-/!? [ _···_,___,,·,..w·__..··,..._ u__ . -~-----~-- ....... - -~--_._--_..- ----,-. L' l Construction Cost Estimate L Prepared by Robert Be/n. William Frost end Associates [ Table B [ Engineer: SMT IN: 500095 Date: 10/25/91 [ Unit Total ITEM Quantity Unit Price Cost L 1 57" RCP 1730 If $171 $295,830 2 Storm Drain Cleanout Type A 2 ea $3,500 $7,000 l 3 Fill 3200 cy $6 $19,200 4 Regrade .ExIst Channel 1000 cy $8 $8,000 5 Pipe to Pipe Transition 1 ea $5,000 $5,000 L 6 Remove Stacked RCP's 150 If $50 $7,500 7 Remove Headwall 10 cy $400 $4,000 8 Protect/Restore Exist. Impmts. 1 Js $5,000 $5,000 r 9 Replace Existing kC. Pavement 10350 sf $5 $51,750 10 Clear and Grub 1 acre $5,000 $5,000 r 11 Double Headwall 4.3 cy $1,000 $4,300 12 Traffic Control 1 Is $5,000 $5,000 13 Mobilization 1 Is $3,200 $3,200 L Construction Subtotal $420,780 · Contingency @ 10% $42,078 I Engineering @10% $42,078 Total Estimated Cost $505.000 I Optional Item 1 18" RCP Low Flow Pipe 900 If $54 $48,600 Construction Subtotal $469,380 i Contingency @ 10% $46,938 Engineering @10% $46,938 · ¡ Optional Total Cost $563,000 r 9 [ J7--/t . [ · l I Alternative No. m. L pescription l Alternative No. III consists of constructing a lined trapezoidal channel with a concrete invert and stabi1ized side slopes. The concrete invert will insure velocities high enough to prevent [ the buildup of silt and debris while stabili7:Íl1g the invert grade. Side slope stabilization is required since velocities will range from 10 to 15 it/50 excessive for a natural grass lining. For the purpose of the cost esÛ1nate shown on Table 'C', interlocking concrete block has I: been specified for bank stabilization although other mat type stabilization materials may be suitable. Concrete mat will provide the best performance for the least maintenance cost. L The total estimated cost for Alternative III is $306,000. The itemized cost breakdown is shown in Table C. As with Alternative I, a line item for habitat mitigation is included. It is assumed that channel slope area, which may be revegitated with the block revetment, will L not require mitigation. Construction cost for this alternative may be reduced ü open-cell concrete block is specified I for portions of the inlet that are relatively steep where ponding problems are not anticipated. Mitigation area may be reduced by increasing the use of concrete block thereby reducing overall construction cost. I: Level of Flood Protection I: Alternative No. III will provide 50 year flood protection for the entire reach of the project. The problem of flooding at the low point in Hilltop Avenue will remain. A combined r maintenance road/overflow channel is recommended from the inlet to the Hilltop Storm drain to Hilltop Avenue. [ Permit Constraints I A Streamed Alteration Agreement will be required from the DFG. The requirements of the permit and ûming would be similar to those described for Alternative No. 1. [' Co . TOO nstructlOn lmm~ ¡- Lead time for concrete block is about 3 weeks. Other construction materials required for this alternative are readily available. ¡ L Lf5OOO9S 10 /7-) 7 ,- -_...,--,,--_.--~~-----~--- - -_._--.l.~- ~___.__ . . . . - [; I Maintenance L Channel maintenance would be higher than that of a closed conduit but less than that required for a natural earth channel. It may be necessary to periodically remove debris or clear excessive growth from the side slopes. Ponding and vector control should not be a [ problem. [ Public Acceptance [ Public acceptance is likely to be guarded since mosquito and odor problems will be eliminated at the expense of the perceived level of security. Aesthetically, this alternative is less desirable than a buried conduit or completely natural channel. [~ I . I: I: I. r L I. I. r- . I. [: LfS(XX)9S 11 / 7~ / ~ [ [ Î Construction Cost Estimate L Prepared by Robert Seln, William Frost and Associates Table C l [ engineer: SMT IN: 500095 Project: Naples Street Channel Date: 10/14/91 Description: ~ l Unit Total ITEM Quantity Unit Price Cost [ 1 36" RCP 41 If $105 $4,305 2 Concrete Invert 128 cy $300 $38,400 L 3 Side Slope Revetment 14420 sf $6 $86.520 4 Concrete Transition 20 cy $400 $8,000 5 Type A éleanout 1 ea $3,500 $3.500 L 6 Reinforced Concrete Collar 1 ea $1.500 $1.500 7 6' Chain Unk Fence 1725 If $8 $13,800 8 Security Drive Gate 1 ea $3,000 $3.000 [ 9 Concrete Drive/Overflow Section 73 cy $300 $21,900 10 General Earthwork 2800 cy $6 $16,800 [ 11 Riprap 242 ton $50 $12, 100 12 Remove Headwalls 10 cy $400 $4.000 13 Remove Existing Transition 23 cy $400 $9,200 [ 14 Cutoff Wall 2 cy $400 $800 15 Clear and Grub 1 acre $5.000 $5,000 16 Mobilization 1 Is $4.000 $4.000 I: 17 Protect/Restore Exist. Imprmnts. 1 Is $5,000 $5.000 18 Habitat Mitiaatlon 0.32 acre $53,000 $16,960 [ Construction Subtotal $254.785 Contingency @ 10% $25,479 [ engineering @10% $25,479 Total Estimated Cost $306,000 r [ r 12 /7~/c¿ [ - ,_ _ __~'···___'_'·"______·___m._._. - ~- ,--- ~_..__..__.._..& . .-.-..----.- I: I Alternative No. IV I D .. escnptlon L The previously proposed final design configuration is included as Alternative No. IV. Improvement plans have been completed for a fully lined reinforced concrete trapezoidal channel. This alternative is similar to Alternative No. ill with the exception that the L channel side slopes are concrete lined. Alternative No. IV provides a base line comparison as it represents the best balance between economy, flood protection and maintenance considerations. L The total construction cost for Alternative No. IV as shown in Table D is $334,000. This cost is very competitive with Alternative No. ill ($306,000) and is slightly higher principally I due to additional assumed wetlands mitigation costs. L Level of Flood Protection The level òf flood protection is identical to that described for Alternative No. ill. L Permit Constraints , L A Stream bed Alteration Agreement will be required. Permit constraints and mitigation requirements are virtually equivalent to those described for Alternative No. 1. r Construction Timin~ I Construction could proceed the most rapidly of any alternative. There is no lead time required for the construction materials required for this alternative. . I Maintenance I The system would be essentially maintenance free, and monitoring during storms and I emergency maintenance access is the best for any alternative. Open cbannels tend to require some routine clearing of illegally dumped debris. r Public Acc~ptance . Public acceptance of this alternative is known to be poor. Support may be increased if other I alternatives require significant cost participation by property owners. The City has previously expressed the ability to fund this alternative in its entirety. [ L/SWbS 13 [ / /- 20 T . I Construction Cost Estimate ,- ( L Prepared by Robert Se/n, William Frost and Associates [ Tlble D [ Engineer: SMT IN: 500095 'Project: ~ Date: 10/25/91 Description:· . ' " r Unit Total ITEM Quantitv Unit Price Cost L 1 Protect/Restore Existing Improvm 1 Is $5,000.0 $5,000 2 Clearing and Grubbing 1 Is $8,160.0 $8,160 L 3 General Earthwork 1 Is $17,000.0 $17,000 4 Export Material 1 Is $6,300.0 $6,300 5 36" RCP 'Storm Drain 41 If $120.0 $4,920 [ 6 60" RCP Storm Drain 37 If $200.0 $7,400 7 Type A Headwall 1 ea $1,500.0 $1.500 8 Type A Cleanout 1 ea $3,310.0 $3,310 r( 9 Modified Pipe Collar 2 ea $500.0 $1,000 10 Trapezoidal Channel 773 If $277.0 $214,121 11 R.C. Trans - Downstream 1 Is $7.500.0 $7,500 I: 12 R.C. Trans. Upstream 1 Is $3.300.0 $3,300 13 Rlprap Transition 56 r;.¡ $100.0 $5,600 r 14 Chain Unk Fence and Gate 1725 If $8.1 $13,973 15 P.C.C Access Road 2000 sf $1.0 $2,000 16 Cutoff Wall 1 Is $2,960.0 $2.960 r: 17 Habitat Mitiaation 0.8 Is $53,000 $42,400 Construction Subtotal $304,044 Contingenr;.¡ @ 10% $30,404 ,. Total Estimated Cost $334.000 . f. r I 14 . r /7/).) r ~-----_._-_._---------_._--- --- ....~ ~ I,' ~-~ . ~ ,'. Þ" { , .. ., . _ ..... ',," +_.... ~ .,.... 'I' ~"" ' }4 ~t·~.' ~"'';,..; .' ,,~'.~ :~. ~'.~ -- ~'\-;~~. ..' "A"..~ - .~ ~' .. . ,L. It ..,.-;:c,+-~.; , ~.~t ~ " , woO ~. ~. - r:. ~ ,~. ~ .......... '1!'" ... . _. . . ,. .' ,., ',' . , -' , . "'" . '" ' ' "'.~.. µ '" _" ,y(" 'I. ,~¿ '. · . ., ,,' . . , '. ,. -.\' - .... .... '"¡ , ,....' . '--- ) ~''":'-~ ~, , ' \ ~......... .' :\--..' .. -r' .' . ç.,~ {;\\ -.?-~ ~ ;.,,~{~ '~."~' "';~"_.o'.. \~<;l~.. '.,.. ~. ''''~.,'''~S\''...\,-4'- \~.'~~ . '..... '~..~"" ~~....~~' ~...\~,,~- , , ','.,.. " "F" ;', , ....'. \ " '-' ,.. -," ' -' oQ "'. ' .. "'"" ~ ' '._ . _ . '- ' , _. , . ~. }.. " If ." _ . . - ¡.,r \I ..'~', .):ji_¡'-~~ ~)' ~' ."~~'~: ,/ " -. ~ (... '~. ,1--.. ~,~.ts'-- -~ ,:' '~I- ~.;..\ . . "" _ 0",....... ,.,. ,'I \..,. t. "" ,', J.... /~'" "1""('>\' ~,--\",., '. '~ '.. '. _~. '~. to '\. ,"'Q..... .- ". " \' .- ,,- . . - " .... -'~ . -- ,,- -~...... ., --- - - .' .",-.'" ., ,...-'.....,' ~ ... .....---- ,~-- ... " , - .....,. ' ~-, . -' '- " ~ ,. ",,!,!L: . \..II'..,...!ø' ~. ~ C .... ' ,+. . '. ".¡E.l~·. .:~.\ '~ "" ...... ~ · '\' '.~ " .... ~¡~~~..~.j . ....~~..¡ "'" ... ..!'. ~i;f.~ ;,;........,.;' ".c."~'-."".>" ,.. :[ \.... \ ~\f~.-....- .... .....,._ ,.~" . ~ 0 .."",fi'r . '. . . _" .. .. . '" _.-, ' ", ~i. "",.-,.",4'-" .# ,. ,or... ¡".f·. -~<I' .. \ '. ' -j' ... . ' ' . '.. _ .... "t... ':---. - , .', ~.'.... 'iðII.~" ",'" .ç,..... ~_. '. -, ~J. . "/~- .... "..:...... ~ , -.. ., ,.,. - - ~.~ ~ ~ -, . ;:. ~ .~' ~ ~' . ~\. 'L. ~ ..: .,}, , .' .",,'; "', ... "',~ . r . _.r, , . . r~ 0(" ; . 5 A . E ~. ~:, It' . \..~., _~ _ \' .~. ~ .' - .----~ ''', 7.. , ~, .0' ~ - C .:t': 01» . , . . "'.'- 'I' ' , ~..;P' -<"~_.f .' -., -:'f!"';;:"':;O '~1ì~' .·t~ ,¡. ~~ ~I'~-' , - - -'r-4 y" ......_' !:i .. , _.._'" 'IS . - .--.-- !:) _ ., 11\" , ~ / - -C- ~ ¡,.. " \...- .' ~.. 1\i '. J _ -- . "". ,~ N: ...t- ..... \1 -t .' 't. i. . t . ~ ~.,' .~. ' '.' ,.: - ~ ., . , \í'<.~. 0,:' ~ \í~, . ".' \..- .. " ,:t, . ¡. , . ~~ it') ~ ~\.i...¡, ~ ' ~. . ., . . ~ '" ~ . .-' ... \ . .-....,- - ._ , ;. e' ' ø,' ' '0ß-'; .... S·, . ..-. _ ._' . ¡ ~... ·v 'fJ;' -. - _ ~' ¡ _ _ ' _ . \ f:~'~.;. . ~r ." ' " OF' '" " -\ ,. t' - ,,' ,-, ,. ,. \ '...¡, ,... ot_ _' _' \ \ . " ,.. . J¡r _ 4'~ . t .' . ~ ... _ .. .. . ' - . .1.-' .. _ ., t" _r.' ' . ' _'" , ~ ....'" - t~' -r .. , ~.,. C) " ' ,,_.J t., . ,- ,. .' , <:i'" " '. ~ (. ".. ,.,. '.' "";I,- , . , . .' .' ',.., :,. , .. 1J .. ......"".>.,- "/") ',. ~ .' !.:"Ï. . ... ~ · '., . /-- ' . .. ...' . - > '. ~ \' -' . -" ... ,,""'-;:..1 ". t ....'- - '\.' '" . .. .,. ..' _.~ .-'r. .... r' or ~ ' - · 0" -, . ~ ,,_À,' ,,-;¡ ~:i'b,' '. , ~ ~ .,.. l' ~ '..'. -" ,., , . " ,'" , ~ .. G 'tc (- '. .. ~ -f'l .' . ".~....::' ,. . "..J.. . _. ' . 11'\ ." , '., ~.~,~~., \ ". "'. , .~ . ~' 'S .J.~ ~ '. ~ , .... - ., -..' ~.., <;¡' - .... ' ....- . . ,',. .., ~..' ~ ~~ ~ . ~.,~~~" , ~.... ~;S, -r ~ ,- ~ .. ~ k . ,...----- -, -io.~"'" ¿; , þ ~ -', ~ '" ~ ~ ~t t: 'jf. ',' . f ~ .t. ·ff'" .,'.. 'f" ... .;!II ~t ~,) "Or', ' " .... S _ . " ",;¡,,' . J . v V~,,· '. :.\ ~ . __--' V'" ~ ...... ". >' . . . . -£ ~ ., ",-.., ~ I ' ~~ ~ ~_ .....'\ - . !~ -~:k ". ,~ -:::--- ~~ --,~, ~ ~ "" ., ... ' . ~ _ _... . \';!;"i '\ .,. ~ ~_... -I ~ ~ ~ .,' ~7, ~"tt\ ~~ ::t>1. ~Ä~ '., ~":'" '\:,- :-- .', '.....,., ~ ~ I . _<,\,..-, -. .":.,,- ~. ~ .,~.. r"'- ",'.; ~ ¡ I ' --\'. ' . ..... ' k,' \If \.'~ , .~ .. ~ ~ , d" .' ...~, .. ~ "'.." 0;:. " 11:" ~S. \, ') 7-):;' .0r? ~' (:('1'": ". ~. 4;..,. ~ " - .,.., f , , , ", , ~ .'" ".!, ." , '" ";- c- ~ ..... . ~ IIÞ"" ~ -- I; I Decision Matrix L The table shown below lists the general evaluation criteria for each alternative and rates each alternative with respect to the evaluation criteria as either best, good, fair, or poor. l Criteria Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 [ Construction Fair Poor Best Good Cost L Flood Protection Good Best Good Good Construction Fair Fair Good Good I. Time DFG Poor Best Fair Poor r. Requirements Public . Best Good Poor Poor Acceptance I. Maintenance Best Poor Fair Good Sedimentation Best Fair Good Good r Construction cost receives a relative rating between each alternative. The flood protection r rating is "best" if existing flooding problems are solved, "good" if existing flooding problems are improved, "fair" if existing problems remain essentially unchanged. All of the alternatives will ~ erosion in the channel that could lead to potential failure during an r: intense storm event. Construction time is also a relative rating with materials such as RCP receiving a fair rating for their relatively long lead time. Ratings associated with the DFG reflect the amount and complexity of mitigation required to compensate for wetland loss [ associated with the alternative. Public acceptance is a subjective assessment of public reaction to each alternative based on the opinions expressed at the August 8, 1991 community meeting. The maintenance rating for each alternative indicates the relative level [ of maintenance effort that is anticipated in each case. [ r I . I L/S«11JS 16 ( /7<2] -..------." ,- -----_._._._-----~---_.__.. --- . I' l Project Fmancing Alternatives L Overview Historically, funding of capital stormwater facilities improvements has been provided by [ revenues from property taxes. With the advent of Proposition 13, stormwater infrastructure, ttaditionally viewed as low priority, must compete for increasingly scarce funds with other community improvement and maintenance programs. Several methods are available to the [ local municipality to fund stormwater infrastructure improvements that may be categorized as follows (Leithe and Joseph, 1990): I' · Pay-as-you-go financing - Infrastructure costs are paid directly from current revenues that may include taxes, fees or user charges. I · Debt financing . A local municipality may use the credit market to raise funds through the issuance of debt obligations. L · Public/Private ventures - Local governments enter into agreements with private seT9ice providers. L Public/Private ventures are generally applicable to infrastructure improvements that may produce revenue, or return on privately supplied capital. Funding of storm drain [ infrastructure is best provided through some form of pay-as-you-go or debt financing. [ Financin~ Alternatives Financing mechanisms that have gained acceptance within the last few years include special r: assessments, special districts (community facilities districts or CFD's) and user charges. Each of these mechanisms may be applied to pay-as-you-go financing or debt financing depending on the specific requirements of the project. I: ~pecial Assessments r: Special assessments are an excellent tool to finance projects that benefit specific properties such as improvement of the Naples Channel. Assessments are levied on property, similar ¡- to property taxes to fund all or part of an improvement project. Benefit areas are prescribed that may be tiered, reflecting diminished or increased benefit for individual r parcels. Assessments may be paid over a period of several years or on a one time basis. . Special assessment districts are created to define the benefit area; most municipalities may create special assessment districts without a referendum. , ! r L/Sl1X1JS 17 /7-).i r [~ I Special Districts [, Special Districts are created usually with the purpose of financing and maintaining specified capital improvements. Known as Mello-Roos or Community Facilities Districts (CFD's) they are special units of government that function independently to provide specific services. [ The creation of Special Districts was authorized by the CalÜomia state assembly. [ User Charies [ User fees are levied as consideration for specific serves provided by the jurisdictional agency. User fees may be pledged to repay revenue bonds issued to finance new infrastructure (Leithe and Joseph, 1990). Charges are computed based on benefit and I: revenue requirements. r: Debt Financin¡¡ Debt financing may take the form of borrowing through short term notes, General r Obligation (G.O.) Bonds, Revenue Bonds and Taxable Bonds [ Proposed Project Approximately 32 properties will receive direct benefit from the improvement of the Naples [ Channel by virtue of their proximity to the channel itself. Over 400 acres (roughly 2000 residences) are located upstream from the project and will therefor indirectly benefit from (or contribute to the need for) the project. Financing of the current project with r participants outside of the direct benefit area may require the development of a regional improvement program (master plan) that addresses all of the flood control deficiencies within the subject drainage basin. Historically, gaining property owner approval of r: assessments for storm drain improvements has been difficult because the need for improvements is not shared by most property owners. The major benefits of the project are shared by relatively few. I Based on an approximate project cost of $425,000, the "per lot" cost is $13.000/10t (distributed over the adjacent 32 lots) or $215/10t (distributed over the upstream tributary r watershed). [" f [, Lf50009S 18 } 7---15 r --.--,. ---,- .., -,,---- ,.,.,-,.-.---...---..-,-..-- .......... ~--_.__.._, --------.---.-----,. .---- ¡: I References Oted I l. Leithe, Joni L and Joseph, James C., Building Together: investing in Community Infrastructure, National Association of Counties of the United States, 1990. L I I I I I I. I I I I ¡ I . I I L/S0009S 19 J7~ .J.~ L f; I I I L I' I I Technical Appendix I. . I. [ I: [ I: [ [ r r r. [ J 7~;l 7 ~- - ---- _..~ ____._ . ,,~._m____._______ -_._._~- it .' , ~. JOB L ~.ðk:J ,,~.,l ~O n.ð-e/ ~ 'ft16etl CSeút. "William '5ROat c:ac51~ PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS. PLANNERS & SURllEYORS II£ET NO / OF J [ 7'1 NORTH FOURTH AVENUE· CHULA vtSTA,CAUFORNiA 92010-1099 CAlCU..ATED BY ..te).. It_ . .u ...... .-tns DATE O£CIÅ’DBY DATE [ ~ I .~-.-.._~/:~:t;k___r1' ~_~~.-u , .----- n~' ~ ~ .4r¿n;¡q~A~_~_~L£'~J?('L~ð:;1z~",;-_. t ;~'-''--~- ~(¡ß .. '. . ': i i I' -. 7. u~..~._~.' '. -~ ~ð.__ . .' 1Jp ~_1Ø ~ 1'~__~__~-L1~- ..//"2. ... = t2.J2ð/!1 :. .,.-- -"- < !. i ____~__.________..__ - I I . ________ '__n. I . - ..5/k ?~u~eb.f2Jð~.-á.<_~__7b dC~/.. . ~ HtdOY' /Ó5.X5.. ,..__.~___._________ - - .. I.. . __ "',: ._--~-~ -7Z"~cj;I.~£J,UJ92===:-'~~_-=-=u:_n. =:_.u.'~_' _n ., ._~" Itel> rn-L!2'.tJ/¢7.~.___,_m____ __u____ I _n·"· .n______' ,-, .' ------,.--.-- , -. . u~ 72" ,.eð~ ,;b æ ße¡)?,¡".vp~ ~r Lb!"'¿ ~~.-n;;~ I Lí:J&'1 .eeþl ¿1?c:Y .A:X/~~~ktJ~r~r~......ÞyéÝ~¿¿ .-. , . / /It/~/;'6~. _._. I' u_· - ..- _ Ii Ikr/Ja,jtk 4, g.--- ----.-.-- I ._.. . on_ -.- - _ , : _ . _ 9Ic I ~C}ð C'¿ I /Î1ß,ro.¡..€ ~../i--on? ét?.J~ A/opk/ .....-.-- _ , ;::h?u')q-?f::¿yJkø?ft .d.sdo~ftH7:r._~__ __. .___ . I: -- ußII~ _...ð#Y/1/ dnn;¡,. . --------~-.-.------.-.---- .___n'____ .-.. , --.4-..'..-----·· - --.------- .--...--"-~-.~--- r ,-., J; c /Ú>¡; S' - ~3Z, 72 .~ _~~.t)/6__7__. ----~-----..-- , .. __ ..1.7'" . u_ .. - -,------,-------------,. r " .- __~..,=..5, 5"I-N.==-O,02~==_=.~=~===,~=:-.=~~n . ..:þ 5'7"... {),o/C, ~ . . I ¿ . .P. j' . . (/~~. )"',I7:PG ~r O/{k,.J/D/'J r d~ /8" /0(.</ fi'DI,.c./ ,!?,- ,,;,¡ .~"u~,t. Nopk.J C'ht?/1~/ [ e/, oS /7l/1 ,Ie r-. ~ a. ------~.-.-~- - .---.-- - -~---_..- -. .J_~_~_.._. __~ ; ~ ~. ~ "Beú¿.CWilliam 'ÐfMt c:ac51~.. ~ .lOB , PROfESSIONAL ENGINEERS. PlANNERS & SUlVEYORS 8HEET NC), r OF ..3 l 71 NOR'THFOURTH/JNENUE . CHULAVlSTA,CAUFORNIA92O'I()..1098 ..te .. . tOO . NIl 1M.. _tS7S CALQJlAlEDB. 0.10 ØECKED BY I»tTE L &:Al£ , [' ·______n' m"._.. _,' '._. _.. . __.,. /i/-kl"MIrv-e. M. 3 ._~. _ ____=~=~__ I' ,T--~--,,-~~~;'.k. ;" .-k&m~~~.C:;Z---~~--'~' L- !~ i ~:;!¡;j~f2~i~~:;¡:~~~U¡;Z;..~-:-~.~~--' , . ~ /7"""", ,/_ . I,,, " .. .~---_----:.f.Ao'ß7P.//'~-~øJ¡I.k.~ . ." ."." . .____ . , I. ., . - .. .. - -~ - -, ~~~-~---~-'~-0---'-'~,-~'~-'= -=---~=--=-~=~-~~~~~~.~~ - -.. -- . ,-.-- I . ..4 .,.- , ,/l, 2 ~ A' n. z. , . .~. ,,¿$/_. . . ___~=~-'. .=.~. Vz.... , ,.... ---~- . ,., ___u·__·__.. -.----,¡C?-. _n_."_-'--__.__,_..,_.__~___._._.._ I, .. -ó'j~~', ~ d:~~:i~I-.·-=·u·~._ª~? ,~,~~-.~---=-~=~ =~=,..--. --~- --." - ..- - ~.- ----.. -.---. - - - o /. ~ . ., 1 ..', -¡-."".3 +VZ -- é" '7 , Pi-J,TJ¡ /)~ - ¿¡·.yO .. __, . ".. __ c_..L's'G/+, t/q/,.t.A-¿) I' ....... '---' ...- .-- ¡í'~ .. lv, 7Çø)Z rð¡;t:J/~e~ ~. 7(P.Pß)t;.}I/z,· ,._' r. 2 I- t/ 1/2.,.-. r . _ ._ __tZ: " p:liZIf'{. -.~~_...~~_~~~__~_____~~.,__ __ r --" ..,,,,,..n __on, '--- ,..---., -"" --,..-~-----.-- ,-.----- ,----.-----. -. ,n,__, "_, ~_____ _n___._~_..~ _________ _ ~_.. _ r . -- ~ -£k~M _tJnd r~¿,e:,·o/~.s -£~ -~--, - - r ~.. . -: - --::: ... =.,,"';£;. ,~~:_lftai2 .~.~..= --::= ., _ ~ -~ t1,()$~y . CH,~) r J ., . . . . AA~.' P14Jt. t/~ 6a~~ ~/d dCa/y ¿.J4 [ oA4/1~/ unt/~/~ktt" ð" e¡ nt.4/er- - (l5'S(/~ 77' t.46e. [ I 7~ .2.. J . ..~~~_._---~._---,.- ._-----_.._".,._._.._-_.~--- ~~,... -,- --'---~- ---,--" T ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ L OPEN CHANNEL HYDRAULIC DATA --------------------------- Q - 407.0000 n'" .0254 S - .006400 B - 8.000 ft Z - 2.000 L NORMAL DEPTH - 3.45326 ft D/B .. .43166 K' - .50478 A - 51.47612 V- 7.90658 V2/29 - .97102 HE .. 4.42428 [ NF '" .90702 P - 23.44345 R- 2.19576 K" 4.74 CRITICAL DEPTH - 3.27782 ft Sc - .007878 [ Dc/B - .40973 K'c - 2.24838 Ac - 47.71070 Vc - 8.53058 Vc2/29 - 1.13033 BEc- 4.40815 NFc - 1.00000 Pc .. 22.65884 Rc .. 2.10561 Kc - 4.91278 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Q- 407.0000 · B - 8.000 ft : · n - .0254 · Z - 2.000 . · . [S- .006400 : D .. unknown ft : ~ F1-Depth Units F2-Base Units F3-Set Unknown F6-Calc Unknown F8-Friction Loss F10-Main Menu +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ [~+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ . OPEN CHANNEL HYDRAULIC DATA -- r Q" --------------------------- 407.0000 n - .0254 S .. .056400 B - 8.000 ft Z .. 2.000 I NORMAL DEPTH .. 1. 96527 ft D/B - .24566 K' - .17004 A - 23.44677 V - 17.35846 V2/29 - 4.68028 HE, .. 6.64555 NF .. 2.51599 P .. 16.78897 R- 1. 39656 K- 7.18 I CRITICAL DEPTH - 3.27782 ft Sc .. .007878 Dc/B .. .40973 K'c .. 2.24838 I Ac .. 47.71070 Vc .. 8.53058 Vc2/29 .. 1.13033 HEc .. 4.40815 NFc - 1. 00000 Pc .. 22.65884 Rc - 2.10561 Kc .. 4.91278 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I Q .. 407.0000 : B .. 8.000 ft : n .. .0254 . Z .. 2.000 . . . S .. .056400 : D - unknown ft : l F2-Base Units Fl-Depth Units F3-Set Unknown F6-Calc Unknown F8-Friction Loss F10-Main Menu f++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ [ [ [ 11~ J f) -_.._...._------_..~- ,..... -.-- - __..._ u_____ ______.__.__..~__.__ _ ___.. .._ _ _._, t[ ; . cq¡p' ~øo-:_ car:w__.......~.... ~ ;.., """ ~ ~,~rr~ ~ "'CJ'II[ eI PROFESSIONAl ENGINEERS PIANIÐIS & SURVEYORS IIEET NO, Of . [ 71 NORTH FOURTH AVENUE . CH~LA YlSTA,CAUFORNIA 120IIH099 . 11I1.. 1'. .,.. .ø.."e¡......ns . CALal.ATEDBV D-'TE O£CKED BY DATE '[ ~ [ -~---,......, '-' _,n.. , , 1.-:~~~-q~,/~~w~~~7~u-7~ ~ ~k1- -€~--==.-.".. . ' ,I""'//- ~¡::?-Pr~:. . . , .. .....: ..~~,___ . ~ t " '¡ ;' ~ ¡' I, j ! . , ,____ ._..__ --.·0 [ -T-~2~A~k" ~t2~~~zk:~A'/i;L~?J'~¿ . ~=~=~- I. __d____ -¡»7ø?7j;_.ft::¡~~¡;.",('/~~¿¿ ~.-~:----__..__u.._._ [ ........--;._~~~~~~-;;~~)?:~~~~-~---=.~.. --;...~.~...-.=; I D -:r . - . - --. - -- - - - - - ---- -- - --.--..... -.. -.------ ,- -- .-+ -- -- --- ..._---~------- ,- .-- ------,,-- ._-----~_..- .-.. --- ----. . I c!5ln, . /dkl_&øh;;/ ~hd;'¡ ji;?~Jj,;'¿b¡ u - l3urec;,-/ I-?.6k¿ RCdc/S" u(1:,~(}C" ìCyc;í . I. äo"cJq/i/<t!''''¿j..J,Z/C) ~~. .,.. r U . LJ*~/lt'l.¿/ N7..~y,.Jkr,~~,- --.. -,....-~ 9h 7-?/o· /97t:!~ I' ., -. d. -. '''., --L _,J/~ ~ M&>"P¡cwCA(Jí'7171~/L_,___..=_____ r =~_n==~_kg;Y~~=iJf=.=_~=:=~~===- -==-==.. ,_ r __n n - ---- --.--.... -----.--,....---.----~--~'-----------~,.-,-- .-- -" - ____. S"/. '17 - S'(). ~7 _""..£?,_¿)L?ß_~________.__ _ "./1 ( -.--- -. -~- -_- . ym_-,______~__ n ,_~_,__..___~___ ___Un__. :,: -n-~nd~f/J-;i ,is-T--;;/IèJ¿kj¡~-~/.Z; n 7j~-' CQÆ-V .r , :1' /7-) .. --_...._-_.,,--~._.._-_.._.__.- -- . .. . . . . ,,- C ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++1111.+++++++ [ OPEN CHANNEL HYDRAULIC DATA --------------------------- Q .. 197.0000 n - .0150 S - .012800 B - 15.000 ft Z - .000 [ NORMAL DEPTH - 1.16521 ft D/B .. .07768 K' - .01909 A - 17.47816 V - 11.27121 V2/2Q so 1.97329 HE - 3.13850 [ NF .. 1.84010 P so 17.33042 R- 1.00852 K- 17.37 CRITICAL DEPTH - 1. 74970 ft Sc so .003601 [ Dc/B - .11665 K'c - .22607 Ac - 26.24557 Vc .. 7.50603 Vc2/2q - .87512 HEc - 2.62483 NFc - 1. 00000 Pc - 18.49941 Rc .. 1.41872 KC - 11.07731 [-:-=--::~~::::---~-------------:-=---::~:::---::-~---------------------------- n .. .0150 : Z .. .000 : [S" .012800 : D .. unknown ft : ~ F1-Depth Units F2-Base Units F3-Set Unknown F6-Calc Unknown F8-Friction Loss F10-Main Menu +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ' [ .r [ r I ·r [ r . [ [ J7./).J- r '.' , '1 I' COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item (% Meeting Date 3/3/92 ITEM TITLE: Report on the appeal of staff denial of the deferral of installation of public improvements at 619 Moss street 0.1 jI SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ (4/5 Vote: Yes____No~ Last September, Mr. Frank Jimenez applied for a deferral of the requirement to install the public improvements along the frontage of the property at 619 Moss Street. The ensuing investigation by staff revealed there was no basis for the granting of that deferral request and it was denied. In accordance with section 12.24.070, the applicant is provided the opportunity to appeal that decision to the city council and Mr. Jimenez has so appealed. RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this report and deny the request to defer the requirement to install public improvements. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: In August of 1991, the owner of the property at 619 Moss Street submitted plans to construct an addition to the existing house at that site. The proposed work involved the construction of two bedrooms and two bathrooms. The estimated cost of this work was approximately $78,000. When the plans and permit were routed through Engineering, staff's investigation revealed that the public improvements were missing. In accordance with section 12.24.040, staff determined that the proposed work on-site justified the imposition of the requirement to install those improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway and necessary pavement). The requirement was placed on the check list form on August 4, 1991. On October 10, 1991, Mr. Jimenez applied for a deferral of this requirement, citing that: 1) The work would be incompatible with the present development of the area and; 2) would be desirable to have the work done as an overall improvement project. Those are two of the five justifications given in section 12.24.070 of the Municipal Code regarding the granting of deferrals. (t- ( <- .....-.-.-...-,.--..-----.,-------'"'...-.-. Paqe 2, Item If Meeting Date 3/3/92 Upon a field investigation, it was found that there is existing curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to the east line of Mr. Jimenez' property, extending to the intersection to the east (see Exhibit "A"). Most deferrals are on properties located mid-block, with no improvements on either side of the properties. It is the opinion of staff that where curb, gutter and sidewalk exist and abut the property being built upon, the improvements should be extended. The above-mentioned section 12.24.070 states that if the installation of the street improvements would "create a hazardous or defective condition, or be impractical, or if said installation of any or all improvements would be incompatible with the present development of the neighborhood, or be impractical or premature because of the existing condition of the surrounding property, or that it would be desirable to install said improvements as a part of the overall plan for the development of public improvements in a certain area, the property owner may apply to the city Engineer for a deferral of the requirements..." The property owner could assert that it is "desirable" to him to do the improvements as part of an overall project. However the condition "would be disirable to install said improvements..." is a city finding from the city's viewpoint. since there are improvements next door, it is staff's opinion that it would be "desirable" to do the improvements now. Based on the foregoing information, Mr. Jimenez' request for a deferral was denied and was notified by letter dated November 22, 1991. In that letter he was directed to begin the procedure to have the improvements installed. He was also advised that he had the right to appeal the denial to the council in accordance with section 12.24.070. Mr. Jimenez has stated that his budget for the on-site work did not include the costs of the street improvements. However, he was informed of the requirement to install the public improvements by means of a check list completed by staff as the building permit and plans were routed through Engineering on August 4, 1991. The building permit was issued on September 18, 1991. The estimated value of the public improvements (including design and survey work and contingencies) totals approximately $8,400. Assuming the estimated building cost is $78,300, the public improvements represent 10.7% of the building costs. This is not considered by staff as being out of line. Since it is the city's desire to have missing public improvements installed where practicable using the provisions of Chapter 12 of Ig,¡ -'"...__.~,---,-_._,._._,. --,.. Page 3, :Item I~ Meeting Date 3/3/92 the city Code, staff recommends denial of the request to defer the requirement to install the public improvements. If Council opts to grant the deferral, it should be conditioned as follows: 1- The applicant shall submit a guarantee of future installation in the form of a cash bond or a lien against his property. 2. The deferral should expire in three years to allow the city to reassess the situation. 3. In the case of a block grant project causing the improvements to be installed, the cash bond will be used to pay the applicant's share of the cost. Therefore, should Mr. Jimenez be granted a deferral, he will either still have to put up the cash as a bond or allow the City to place a lien against his property, which could be called up at any time. The building addition has not yet reached the stage of framing inspection. In accordance with Section 12.24.050 of the city Code, no final inspection, completion certificate or certificate of occupancy shall be issued until the provisions of that chapter have been complied with. The Building Department has been advised to not finalize the building permit until the matter of the public improvements has been resolved. FISCAL IMPACT: None. JWH PD-135 1~,;.3 , --_..,...",,,~_. ---- - , ~ ~ IS IZOA owA y' ..... /' ..... / I,'} ~ cl'" tO~~~~ G~~~~(2. (,\~ I ý,Q) Q , I -l' l" ~ (,0 ",0 ¡ -- 11\ ¡ ,^~~i '^?\,~} ... ~ ~ ~(l.1 rß ~ ~ ~? 51J~é.CT I ~ I . ~ ~ SITE ~ 1- ~ ¡, - --- ~ . ~ r#~/' "- If)' - -ïz,· ~ I I , ~--- I I -- IJ) , ~ I \I) ~--I I ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~~ f,t- I I I ~ V .~ I _J I I I ~~ l !'! ~ ~O " ¡ . I FILE NO. PO-/35 OWN BY: .J ¡. APP~A'- ~F D£NIAL OF Þ&Fe¡¿,eAI- DATE: 1./11.19Z. OF Pl.l8l.IC IMPROVEMENTS "" MOSS ST. /t- '1 ,._, I /3,5 PD- CITY OF CHULA VISTA ,,- REQUEST POR WAIVER/DEFERRAL OF ! REQUIREMENT ~O ¡NSTALL,PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS SUBJECT SITE C, ('1 V\/I.l'">S3 .s'l,C,~ APN tb/,f~ //0 - 22 ì¿' fCr¿(J>-'-:',,,-.c IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS IN SECTIONS 12.24.868 AND 12.24.878 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE, THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY REQUESTS A: L><r DEFERRAL I ] WAIVER OF THE REQUIREMENT TO INSTALL THE IMPROVEMENTS AS SPECIFIED: I ] AC PAVING , BASE I ] CURB , GUTTER I ] SIDEWALK [ ] STREET LIGHT(S) [ ] DRAINAGE FACILITIES [ ] OTHER 1- DEFERRALS MAY BE GRANTED FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING REASONS (CHECK ITEM OR ITEMS WHICH APPLY IN THIS CASE): [ ] INSTALLATION WOULD CREATE A HAZARDOUS CONDITION þ<J INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE PRESENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE· AREA I ] PREMATURE BECAUSE OF EXISTING CONDITIONS OF SURROUNDING AREA ~ WOULD BE DESIRABLE TO HAVE INSTALLED AS AN OVERALL PROJECT [ ] IMPRACTICAL BECAUSE NOTE: DEFERRALS MAY NOT BE GRANTED POR REASON OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP. ,. ! 2. WAIVERS MUST BE CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND MAY BE GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: I ] TOPOGRAPHY IS SUCH THAT INSTALLATION WOULD BE IMPRACTICAL BECAUSE AREA CANNOT BE GRADED TO ESTABLISHED GRADE. I ] INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS WOULD BE HAZARDOUS TO PEDESTRIANS DUE TO EXISTING GRADES. THE UNDERSIGNED ACKNOWLEDGES THAT, IN THE EVENT A DEFERRAL IS GRANTED, IT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT A CASH BOND IN THE FOR OF CASH OR A CASHIER'S CHECK IN THE AMOUNT OF 110% OF THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE WORK BEING DEFERRED MUST BE POSTED WITH THE CITY FINANCE DEPARTMENT. APPLICANT: TR/);fJK JrJ1..11"'?1Ut5"? PHONE: 4;¿b'(;, 6 S-~ (PLEASE PRINT) MAILING ADDRESS: 6 (c¡ þ /1 ð.3S .51 Cl+u IA- 0srI'J C/J... 9/9// CITY STATE ZIP SIGNATURE: ~~:í:~ DATE 9'~/O' 71 ********************** ********* ********************************** , APPLICATION FEE: DEFERRAL - $234.88 WAIVER - $284.88 I AMT. PAID Z'3/¡.O'O RECEIPT # ere:¡ 63_3 DATE '7-/¿1- 7/ /f"S;- -'""-.. THE CITY 01" CHULA VISTA PARTY DISCLOSUl<E STATEMENT Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the contract or application, i.e., contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. r..ll.LJ...u..Jk=... JI ~AJ';='A...,J~~ 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. D.A. 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. f.J. Ii, 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No ~ If yes, please indicate person(s): 5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. AJ,A . 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No.!s.. If yes, state which Councilmember(s): lm!2II is defined as: "Any IlIdividlUÙ, firm, co-pannenhlp, joint _Il1'f!, assoc/Ql/on, social c1IIb, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, ncelver, syndiCflle, this and <my other county, city and country, city, numiclpa1ity, district or other political subdivision, or <my other group or combination acting as a unit. . (NOTE: Attach additiouai pages as neces5ftry) Date: 9- /0 ~ c¡ I ~~' Signature of con r/~ F'Jhl u /K:..., If ~6J0~? Print or type name of contractor/applicant [C:\A-113S\DISCLOIIL TXT) -, /~..~ --,.---.. _.__."--.~ -,.,---.---..----.---- February 24, 1992 ci ty Council City of Chula vista Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Members of the City Council: At our most recent Child Care Commission meeting we were informed of the upcoming community Development Block Grant Program. The application form outlines the Evaluation Procedures of applicants. Al though the Commission on Aging, the Human Relations Commission and the Youth Commission are all included, there is no one includ- ed who is primarily concerned about children and families. As many of these social service applications will benefit both children and families, it is our opinion that the Child Care Commission should be included on the list of those reviewing and making recommendations on the applications. When our commission was established, one of our primary responsi- bilities was: To encourage cooperative approaches toward the development and implementation of child care services. We can effectively address this goal by becoming part of this annual process. We respectfully request that you, the ci ty Council, add the Child Care Commission to the list of those involved in the evaluation process for the CDBG applications. We also urge you to make this commission an ongoing part of this procedure. Thank you for your time with this matter. ectfully submitted, ~~A Nancy vanagh, ~~ Chair ~~~~ l~) \ ~~.\.~\ ~À~ ~..MA- ~~ ?>\ ~\L)}.. \ 0..- \ ---------,---.,..-.,."-.--.-" ,! , If March 3, 1992 TO: Councilman Jerry Rindone FROM: John D. Goss, City Manage~ SUBJECT: Response to Questions regarding the March 3, 1992 Agenda Following are staff's responses to your conunents/questions regarding items on the above referenced Council agenda. ITEM 9 - Construction Bids in Assessment District 90-2 1. Is it prudent to go to bid on such, a large project until the assessment district is formed? Please explain. Staff believes it is most prudent to go to bid before the district is formed. The process that will be used is that after the bids come in, the assessment engineer will have the actual bid items, rather than an engineer's estimate, as the basis for calculating the assessment spread. If the district were formed first, staff would have to use a very generous estimate with a very generous contingency in order to have the necessary district funding available. Once the district is formed, if bids were to come in higher, there may not be sufficient assessment district funds available. That would mean that either the district and project would have to be canceled, or the City would have to come up with additional funding. By bidding first, we can keep the costs to the district as low as possible, thereby making it more likely that the district can be formed. If the costs come in too high and/or the district cannot be formed, the project would not be awarded and the bidders would not be hurt. 2. Due to the uncertainty of funding, would the major contractors or bidders be willing to participate? Is not this a most unusual step? Please explain. Staff believes that the process being recommended will not hurt the opportunity for good bids. It is clear to the bidders that, if funding of the district is not available, the project will not be awarded. The bidders may not get a contract as a result, however, as in all bids, only one contractor gets a bid anyway. ...-- "-------------_.,._--,. I ITEM 10 - Rancho del Rey Fire Training Center 1. What are staff's thoughts as to why the lowest bidder was 7.6% above the architect's estimate in spite of the competitive nature of this bid and the slow economy? Staff has discussed this question with the architect. He has indicated that he believes that his estimate may have been too low on one or two items. In particular, concrete wall panels were specified to have a textured and colored surface. In reviewing his estimate, he indicated that his estimate may have been appropriate for a plain concrete wall panel and did not take into account the texturing and color difference. In addition, his estimate was done on the basis of the favorable nature of the economy. However, since the plans were bid as a lump sum item, there is no way to verify this assumption. ITEM 11 - FN Projects 1. Now we have provided the protections for the low income housing, why does staff not support similar protections for moderate income housing? Please explain. In this specific project, all of the units are affordable to moderate income households based on the sales price. It was determined that the moderate income "designated" units should not have resale restrictions applied because the restrictions would discourage the sale of those units...basically, the purchaser does not receive a subsidy or incentive to purchase a so-called designated unit and therefore has no motivation to accept a deed placing restrictions on the resale of the unit when he could simply qualify to purchase a "market rate" unit with no restrictions. The moderate income units would remain unsold until all the same-priced market rate unrestricted units are sold. The low-income purchasers do receive a subsidy and therefore have an incentive to accept a deed containing resale restrictions. The 39 units committed for moderate income is for the purpose of qualifying and securing 39 moderate income purchasers whose actual income is below 120% of County median income. Resale deed restrictions would not help fo achieve this goal¡ however, the phasing clause in the agreement provides for the Community Development Director to verify that moderate income purchasers are buying and occupying the 39 market rate moderate income units. ITEM 12 - Contracts with Esgil and Willdan 1. When will staff have the expertise from at least one of the three Plans Examiners to eliminate the necessity of hiring a consultant with this expertise. Please provide a plan towards this direction. The Department considers the current situation of using consultants on a very limited and specialized basis for complex structural problems as the most practical and cost effective. Staff currently handles 90% of all day-to-day plan check activities. Projects requiring complex structural review only arise once or twice a year. ---,.--."-----....--- ! Currently, none of the three Plans Examiners have the educational background which would be required to perform these types of analyses. It would probably require them obtaining a separate Engineering Degree which would take several years. Another option would be to hire an engineer with the background (paid similar to the Chief Plans Examiner) to do the work. This gets to the second issue that this expertise is really only needed sporadically, estimated on a 10% basis. This would really result then in an underutilization and inefficiency of employing such an individual full time on staff. ITEM 15 - Special Municipal Election l. What is the City Attorney's recommendation to resolve the concern expressed under Item H on Page 15-2 2. Would the City Attorney be able to draft a proposal for consideration to resolve this concern for tonight's meeting? . The City Attorney will respond separately to the two above questions. JDG:mab cc: Mayor and City Council rlndone ,>, I~ i ""~"\ "" \ J'"' -> \ ) JI / j f / I ; - /. .' \:;-::::'J _.~- -...-.-." ,..--,.--..-.--...- ,----....,.---