HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 2002/05/30
I deela ~nder penalty of perjury that I am
emplo R1 by the City of Chula Vista in the
Office 0 ¡\he City Clerk and that I posted this
documon the bulletin board according-to
Brown it'requirements.'"
NOTICE OF ADJO~M~NT '~~,~
Dated 'cjf ~ned _ ---:" -
I
,IJ
Notice is hereby given that, at its Regular Meeting of May 14, 2002, the City
Council adjourned said meeting to the Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 and
thence to an Adjourned Regular Meeting to be held on Thursday, May 30,
2002, at 3:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, located at 276 Fourth
Avenue, for the purpose of holding a workshop with the Growth Management
Oversight Commission.
Dated: May 15, 2002
JfI1uAA. ,~~dJ
Donna Norris, Assistant City Clerk
\
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL,
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION, AND
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
May 30, 2002 COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM
3:30 P.M. CITY HALL
276 FOURTH AVENUE
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and Mayor Horton
Growth Management Oversight Commissioners Gray, Mufioz, O'Neill,
Spethman, Tripp, Tugenberg, Palma, and Chair Garcia
Planning Commissioners Castafieda, Cortes, Hall, McCann, Thomas, Willett,
and Chair O'Neill
1. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
OVERSIGHT COMMISSION'S 2001 ANNUAL REPORT
On April 25, 2002, the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) finalized
its 2001 annual report to Council regarding compliance with the City's eleven quality-of-
life threshold standards. The report focuses on the per/od from July 1, 2000 through June
30, 2001, although issues identified in the second half of 2001 and early 2002 are also
included where pertinent. The GMOC will discuss its findings and recommendations
with the Council and Planning Commission.
Staff recommendation:
A. Planning Commission accept the 2001 GMOC annual report and
recommendations as presented therein, and adopt a motion recommending that the
Council do the same; and
B. Council accept the GMOC's 2001 annual report and recommendations contained
therein, and direct the City Manager to undertake actions necessary to implement
those recommendations as presented in the 2001 GMOC
Recommendations/Proposed Implementing Actions Summary.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT to the Regular Meeting of June 4, 2002 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers.
SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOP/MEETING
OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
COUNCIL CONFERENCE AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1
Meeting Date 05/30/02
ITEM TITLE: Report: PCM-02-09, Review and Consideration of the Growth Management
Oversight Commission's (GMOC)~01/Annual Report
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building/~
/,.
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~'~¢/ ~ (4/5tbs Vote: Yes No X )
On April 25, 2002, the GMOC finalized its 2001 Annual Report to the City Council regarding
compliance with the City's eleven Quality-of-Life Threshold Standards. The report focuses on the
period from July 1,2000 through June 30, 2001, although issues identified in the second half of 2001
and early 2002 are also included where pertinent. The report discusses each threshold in terms of
threshold compliance, key issues, and corresponding recognition of acknowledgements and
recommendtions. A summary of the GMOC's recommendations and staffs proposed implementation
actions is included as Attachment 1. The workshop will give the GMOC an opportunity to discuss
their findings and recommendations with the Planning Commission and City Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
1 ) That the Planning Commission accept the 2001 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations
as presented herein, and adopt a motion recommending that Council do the same; and
2) That the City Council:
a) Accept the 2001 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations contained therein; and
b) Direct the City Manager to undertake actions necessary to implement those
recommendations as presented in the "2001 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed
implementing Actions Summary" (Attachment 1).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission will provide
comments and recommendations at the workshop.
Page 2, Item_~l
Meeting Date 05/30/02
DISCUSSION:
1. Summary of Findings
GMOC Development Forecast
The forecast for growth fi.om 2002 through 2006 reflects an average of approximately 2,600
dwelling unit completions per year, with minor fluctuations on an annual basis (assumes that there
will be 3,000 units finaled in year 2002 and 2,500 units finalcd for each year from 2003 through
2006). While this level of growth rate is below thc last two years, it is over twice the City's historic
annual average of about 1,000 units/year between 1980 and 2000.
Thc ability for this amount of growth to bc sustained over the 5-year period will be determined by
the strength of thc economy and housing market, but it will also be affected by thc timing of major
roadways and other infrastructure and facilities needed to support that growth. Construction of State
Route 125 is particularly strategic to supporting this 5-year forecast.
Threshold Compliance
Not In Compliance Potential for Non Compliance In Compliance
Police* Parks & Recreation Schools
Fire/EMS * Traffic
Parks & Recreation
Libraries*
Fiscal
Air Quality
Sewer
Drainage
Water
* Proposed Threshold Standard Amendment
2. Summary of Key Issues
Thresholds Not In Compliance
Police - As presented in past GMOC reports, the Police Department has been out of compliance
with the Threshold for several years. Two key factors are cited to explain the non-compliance: (1)
original measurement and data errors, and (2) staffing and deployment deficiencies.
Even with the proposed corrected threshold (to 81% from the original 84% of emergency calls
within 7 minutes) the current Police response time (75.9% of emergency calls within 7 minutes) is
Page 3, Iteml
Meeting Date 05/30/02
still not in compliance. Due to recent improvements and others measures still pending, response
times are improving and are expected to continue to shorten. With regard to staffing and deployment
deficiencies, the GMOC report reflects 8 action measures, as reported by the Police Department, that
when implemented will further reduce response time.
Despite the numeric non-compliance in threshold response time, community surveys conducted by
the Police Department in 1997 and 2000 indicate a respective 92% and 93% level of satisfaction in
regard to the community's sense of security, and overall satisfaction with police service. This fact
illustrates the obvious, that there is more to maintaining an effective police department than response
time rates alone. Clearly the police provide a broad range of services that combine to provide the
community with effective crime prevention and protection. The GMOC believes that these other
prevention and protection service programs are an important component of quality police services for
the community.
Fire/EMS As presented in past GMOC reports the Fire Department has been out of compliance
with the Threshold for several years. Two key reasons explain the non-compliance (1) original
measurement and data errors, and (2) operational changes.
With the corrected threshold (respond to 80% fi.om the original 85% of emergency calls within 7
minutes during the reporting period) the Fire/EMS response time will be in compliance with the Fire
Department responding to 80.8% of calls within 7 minutes. Response time has improved since last
year and with the recent change to a different dispatch service the Fire Department is cautiously
optimistic that response times will further improve.
The GMOC recognizes that there is more to maintaining an effective fire department than response
rates alone. Clearly the Fire Department provides a broad range of services that combine to provide
the community with fire and emergency medical services. The GMOC supports the Fire
Department's proposal to conduct community surveys similar to those done by the Police
Department.
Thresholds With Potential Non-Compliance
Parks and Recreation - The Threshold Standard of 3 acres of park land per 1,000 population for
eastern Chula Vista is being met and exceeded. The Threshold Standard also calls for appropriate
facilities. Evaluation of appropriate recreation facilities can now begin based upon the draft Parks
Master Plan. The draft has only recently been issued and GMOC review is continuing. Based upon
the preliminary review, the GMOC has determined that the draft Parks Master Plan may provide the
basis to evaluate the appropriateness of recreational facilities east of 1-805. However, a full
evaluation cannot be conducted unless there is a finance plan. In that regard, the GMOC cannot
conclude that there are adequate facilities, and therefore a potential for threshold non-compliance
exists.
In addition, currently the GMOC Threshold for Parks and Recreation only applies to eastem Chula
Vista. As western Chula Vista is experiencing growth due to demographic change and further land
use intensification is a possibility, the GMOC believes that this portion of the City should also be
/-3
Page 4, Item_~l
Meeting Date 05/30/02
covered in a Park and Recreation threshold standard.
Other Significant Issues/Recommendations
Traffic - Based upon traffic model analysis conducted through the City's Engineering Division,
without completion of SR-125, Telegraph Canyon Road east of 1-805 and East H Street could
experience a GMOC traffic threshold failure. The analysis concluded that beginning in January 2000,
after approximately 9,400 additional housing units are permitted a threshold failure could occur on
Telegraph Canyon Road. At the current rate of growth that number of permits will be issued by
March 2003. Currently, it is estimated that the first phase of SR-125 will be open for traffic in
November 2005. This raises the potential for a 2.5 year period during which time the traffic
threshold could be exceeded.
However, there are several traffic capacity enhancement projects and a transportation demand
management program that are far along in the planning stage so that implementation can occur in a
timely fashion and avert a traffic threshold failure. An update to Council on the traffic capacity
enhancement program is currently scheduled for May 28, 2002.
Schools - As was indicated in last year's report, even though the threshold standard is being met by
the elementary, middle, and high schools, the strains of growth are never the less being felt. As
original school design capacity is exceeded students are either bussed outside their schools service
area or new classrooms are being constructed on existing school campuses. This is particularly
evident at the older schools and the high school level with ever more "relocatable" classrooms being
placed on campuses consuming what was once outdoor activity space.
Both school districts have an aggressive construction program for new classrooms and campuses to
accommodate additional students. The GMOC recognizes and appreciates the effort of the school
districts to keep abreast of growth. Of particular importance is the construction of two high schools,
San Ysidro and Otay Ranch, and that a new middle school site in EastLake area is being graded.
General Plan Update - The GMOC has agreed that members of the GMOC will serve as the core
membership for the General Plan Infrastructure and Services subcommittee. In addition, the GMOC
wilt explore the possibility of incorporating updates or additional quality of life standards into the
GMOC program on topics such as transit, solid waste and energy.
New Direction - The GMOC will strive to become more forward looking, have greater community
visibility, and provide more meaningful input to Council regarding the relative priority of CIP
projects in respect to maintaining the quality of life thresholds.
Conclusions:
To assist Council in evaluating and acting upon the GMOC's recommendations, a concise summary
of the GMOC's recommendations and corresponding staff responses is presented in Attachment 1
(labeled as Appendix A in the GMOC Report). Staffrequests direction from Council to implement
Page 5, Item.~l
Meeting Date 05/30/02
those recommendations as outlined in the right-hand column of Attachment 1. Additional
appendices to the GMOC Report contains the Growth Forecast and Threshold Compliance
Questionnaire/supplemental reports presented to the GMOC by the various City Departments and
outside agencies.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None at this time. As specified follow-up actions are brought forward to the City Council, fiscal
analysis of these actions will be provided.
Attachments:
1 - 2001 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed Implementing Actions Summary (Will be included as
Appendix A, in the 2001 GMOC Annual Report)
2 Chairperson's Cover Memo and GMOC 2001 Annual Report
3 - Appendices (Is included under separate cover, as Volume II, 2001 GMOC Annual Report,
Appendices B and C).
Rev. May 22, 2002 (9:55AM)
Attachment 1
2001 GMOC Recommendations/
Proposed Staff and Agency Implementing Actions Summary
/
I- I~Y
Attachment 2
GMOC Chairperson's Cover Memo and GMOC 2001 Annual Report
May 15, 2002
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Members of the Planning Commission
City of Chula Vista
FROM: Arthur Garcia, Chairperson ~ ~ff~
Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC)
SUBJECT: 2001 GMOC Annual Report (July 2000 to June 30, 2001)
The GMOC is appreciative of the time and professional expertise given by the various City
department staff as well as the school districts, water authorities, and Air Pollution Control District
in helping us complete this year's annual report. The comprehensive written and verbal reports
presented to the GMOC illustrate the commitment of these dedicated professionals to serving the
Chula Vista community. A special thanks to Dan Forster, Cherryl Cisneros, and Mark Stephens
who provided excellent staff support.
I would like to recognize the commissioners of the GMOC: Gustavo Perez, Vice Chair, Rafael
Munoz, Kevin O'Neill, Michael Spethman, Bill Tripp, Robert Tugenberg, Bud Gray, and Steve
Palma. This dedicated and diverse team of citizens read numerous reports, listened to detailed
presentations, and participated in hours of thoughtful discussion about the effectiveness of the
General Plan and the impact of development on the "quality of life" in Chula Vista.
The City of Chula Vista continues to experience unprecedented growth. This underscores the
importance of managed growth to assure the "quality of life" the citizens of Chula Vista appreciate
and have come to expect. The GMOC recognizes the complexity of this issue and commends the
City Council for its commitment to managed growth.
Throughout the report, statements of recognition are made instead of recommendations. In this
way, we compliment department actions for taking proactive steps to protect our quality of life
threshold standards.
The GMOC found nine of the eleven threshold standards in compliance. Fire/EMS and Police
thresholds were not met. As reported to the City in previous years, Police and Fire/EMS have
instituted measures to improve response time. With the correction to the threshold standards, as
presented in detail last year, Police would remain in non-compliance. Fire/EMS would be in
compliance. Regardless, each organization is taking steps so that their response times are
continually improved.
We also recommend that Police continues and Fire/EMS initiate a public information program so
that the community clearly understands the nature of the response time error and reason for the
correction. In summary, in the pre-computer aided dispatch (CAD) period, error was introduced as
a result of manually recording response times on punch cards. These entries sometimes took place
after the fact since dispatchers were naturally most concemed with responding to the call. In
addition, some of these calls were entered as a "zero" time elapsed or response time for "hang-
ups". These were all included in the calculation to produce the average and resulted in stated times
being shorter than actual. The Police Emergency Response Threshold will be corrected from 84%
in 7 minutes to 81% in 7 minutes, and the Fire/EMS emergency response will be corrected from
85% in 7 minutes to 80% in 7 minutes.
The Parks and Recreation Threshold, while met, was judged to have a "Potential for Non-
Compliance". Based upon the preliminary review, the GMOC has determined that the draft Parks
Master Plan may provide the basis to evaluate the appropriateness of recreational facilities east of
1-805. However, a full evaluation cannot be conducted unless there is a finance plan. In that
regard, the GMOC cannot conclude that there is the provision for adequate facilities and therefore
a potential for threshold non-compliance exists.
Last year we were on the verge ora traffic threshold failure on Telegraph Canyon Road. However,
with the opening of Olympic Parkway in June 2001, additional east-west traffic capacity was
added resulting in improved performance on Telegraph Canyon Road. Due to proactive City
leadership, additional capacity enhancement and demand management projects are far along in the
plarming stage and can be implemented before our continued growth again posses an imminent
threshold failure. We urge that these measures be acted upon.
As was indicated in last year's report, even though the threshold standard is being met by the
elementary, middle, and high schools, the strains of growth are never the less being felt. As
original school design capacity is exceeded students are either bussed outside their schools service
area or new classrooms constructed on existing school campuses. This is particularly evident at
the older schools and the high school level with ever more "relocatable" classrooms being placed
on campuses consuming what was once outdoor activity space.
Both school districts have an aggressive construction program for new classrooms and campuses to
accommodate additional students. The GMOC recognizes and appreciates the effort of the school
districts to keep abreast of growth. Of particular importance is the construction of two high
schools, San Ysidro and Otay Ranch, and that a new middle school site in the EastLake area is
being graded.
The GMOC has agreed that members of the GMOC will serve as the core membership for the
General Plan Infrastructure and Services subcommittee. In addition, the GMOC will explore the
possibility of incorporating updates or additional quality of life standards into the GMOC program
on topics such as transit, solid waste and energy.
The GMOC will strive to become more forward looking, have greater community visibility, and
provide more meaningful input to Council regarding the relative priority of CIP projects in respect
to maintaining the quality of life thresholds.
The following report highlights the eleven threshold standards, with the issues and
recommendations to the City Council.
I look forward to the joint City Council, Planning Commission and GMOC workshop on May 30,
2002.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2001 REPORT
April 25, 2002
(Review Period 7/1/00 to 6/30/01)
Commission Members
Arthur M. Garcia, Chair (Education)
Gustavo Perez, Vice Chair (Business)
Bud Gray (Development)
Ra£ael Munoz (Eastern Territories)
Kevin O'Neill (Planning Commission)
Michael Spethman (Center City)~
William Tripp (Environmental)
Rober~ Tugenberg (Sweetwater/Bonita)
Steve Palma (Southwest)
Staff
Daniel Forster, Growth Management Coordinator
Cherryl Cisnems, Management Assistant
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2001 REPORT
Table of Contents
1.._.~0INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................................. 3
1.2 DEVELOPMENT FORECASTS ....................................................................................................... 3
1.2.1 18 Month Forecast ............................................................................................................................. 3
1.2.2 Five-Year Forecast for Eastern Chula Vista ...................................................................................... 4
1.3 REVIEW PROCESS ........................................................................................................................... 4
1.4 ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS .............................................................................................................. 4
2.._.~0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 5
3.~0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE ................................................................................................................ 6
3.1 POLICE ................................................................................................................................................ 6
3.1.1 Proposed Threshold Correction ........................................................................................................ 6
3.12 Additional Measures to Reduce Response Time .............................................................................. 7
3.1.3 False Alarms ..................................................................................................................................... 9
3.2 FIRE / EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES ............................................................................. 11
3.2.1 Proposed Threshold Correction Pending ......................................................................................... 11
3.2.2 Capital And Staffing Program ......................................................................................................... 12
3.3 SCItOOLS .......................................................................................................................................... 13
3.3.1 Monitoring Growth and Schools Construction ................................................................................ 13
3.3.2 Facility Standards and Maintenance ................................................................................................ 14
3.4 PARKS & RECREATION ................................................................................................................ 15
3.4.1 Facility Adequacy ............................................................................................................................ 15
3.4.2 Facility Staffing ............................................................................................................................... 15
3.4.3 Facility Maintenance ....................................................................................................................... 16
3.4.4 Equivalence of Recreational Opportunities ..................................................................................... 16
3.4.5 Completion of Greenbelt Master Plan ............................................................................................. 17
3.5 AIR QUALITY ................................................................................................................................... 18
3.5.1 Adoption of CO2 Reduction Plan .................................................................................................... 18
3.8.1 Library Threshold Amendment ....................................................................................................... 24
3.8.2 Library Building Plan ...................................................................................................................... 24
3.8.3 Facility Staffing ............................................................................................................................... 24
3.9 DRAINAGE ........................................................................................................................................ 26
3.9.1 Unfunded Drainage Projects in Western Chula Vista ..................................................................... 26
3.9.2 Maintenance of Environmentally Sensitive Drainage Channels & Detention Basins ..................... 26
3.10 SEWER ............................................................................................................................................... 28
3.10.1 Reported Threshold Incident ....................................................................................................... 28
3.10.2 Timely Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer .................................................................. 29
3.11 WATER .............................................................................................................................................. 30
3.11.1 Water Distribution System Capacity ........................................................................................... 30
3.12 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ............................................................................................................. 32
3.13 CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES IN THY; GMOC ................................................................... 33
4.0 ~4PPENDICES ......................................................................................................................................... 34
APPENDIX A .................................................................................................................................................. 35
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
In November 1987, the City Council adopted the original Threshold Standards Policy for Chula Vista
establishing "quality-of-life" indicators for eleven public facility and service topics. The Policy addresses each
topic in terms of a goal, objective(s), a "threshold" or standard, and implementation measures. Adherence to
these City-wide standards is intended to preserve and enhance both the environment and residents' quality of life
as growth occurs. To provide an independent, annual, City-wide Threshold Standards compliance review, the
Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) was created. It is composed of nme members
representing each of the City's four major geographic areas, a member of the Planning Commission, and a cross
section of interests including education, environment, business, and development.
The GMOC's review is structured around a fiscal year cycle to accommodate City Council review of GMOC
recommendations, which may have budget implications. The of~cial review period for this report is July 1,
2000 through June 30, 2001. Pertinent issues identified during the second half of 2001 and early 2002 are also
addressed.
During this process, the GMOC encourages each City Department and outside agency, which has responsibility
for reporting on the threshold status, to review the appropriateness of the threshold and whether new thresholds
and or standards should be considered.
1.2 DEVELOPMENT FORECASTS
The Threshold/Standards Policy calls for the City to prepare both short-range (18 months) and mid-range (five
to seven years) development forecasts at the beginning of the annual GMOC review process. Complementary to
threshold performance evaluation, which reviews the prior year period, these forecasts provide a common basis
by which the GMOC, City staff, and external agencies can identify and address any potential threshold issues
before a problem arises. A copy of this year's forecast information, provided to City Departments and outside
agencies, is included as Appendix B and summarized below.
1.2.1 18 Month Forecast
The 18 month forecast is the main development projection employed for annual threshold reviews. This focuses
on near-term development that will place demands on available infrastructure and services, and presents
int~nrmati~n ~t the village level
1.2.2 Five-Year Forecast for Eastern Chula Vista
As initially presented in the forecast two years ago, the San Diego Association of Government's (SANDAG)
Region 2020 Growth Forecast indicates that the South Bay sub reg/on will host a substantial amount of the
region's projected growth over the next 20 years. This stems mainly from the limited General Plan capacity in
several north county cities, as well as from the lower average price of housing in areas south of I-8. Based
largely on the amount of vacant land within master planned projects in Chula Vista's eastern area, SANDAG
projects that the City will add close to 40,000 housing units and over 120,000 new residents between the years
1995 and 2020. As evidenced by current building and permit activity, the City has already begun to see the
trend in increased development activity.
Using SANDAG's Region 2020 information as a base, the City has reviewed the status of local development
planning and regulatory processing in order to prepare a major residential development forecast for the next 5
years (2002 through 2006). The forecast reflects an average of approximately 2,600 dwelling unit completions
per year, with minor fluctuations on an annual basis (assumes that there will be 3,000 units finaled in year 2002
and 2,500 units finaled for each year from 2003 through 2006). Similar to trends in SANDAG's forecast, this
level of development activity is over twice the City's historic annual average of 1,008 units/year between 1980
and 2000.
The ability for this amount of growth to be sustained over the 5-year period will be largely driven by the
strength of the economy and housing market, but it will also be affected by the timing of major roadways and
other infrastructure and facilities needed to support that growth. Construction of State Route 125 is particularly
strategic to supporting this 5-year forecast. Based on the City's initial review, if this level of growth is
sustained, the GMOC traffic threshold may be exceeded sometime in 2003. Analysis is also being performed
with regard to the possible construction of physical roadway enhancements and Transportation Demand
Management (TDM), and what impact they may have on capacity.
1.3 REVIEW PROCESS
The GMOC held 12 regular meetings from October 2001 through April 2002. In addition~ GMOC members
participated in a City field trip on December 8, 2001. Threshold questionnaires were completed by a number of
City Departments and outside agencies. GMOC members reviewed the questionnaires, and where necessary,
asked department or agency representatives to appear in person to answer questions. The GMOC determined
whether it would be appropriate to issue a "statement of concern" or to make other recommendations regarding
each threshold. Once individual Threshold reviews were completed, this report was prepared for presentation at
a joint workshop with the GMOC, the Planning Commission and City Council. At that workshop the GMOC
requests that the Annual Report be accepted and the recommendations contained therein be approved by both
the Planning Commission and City Council.
3.0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE
3.1 POLICE
Threshold: Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall
respond to 84% of the Priority I emergency calls throughout the City
within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an average response time to
all Priority I calls of four minutes and thirty seconds (4.5 minutes) or less
(measured annually).
Urgent Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall
respond to 62% of the Priority 1I, urgent calls throughout the City within
seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an average response time to all
Priority II calls of seven minutes (7.0 minutes) or less (measured
annually).
THRESHOLD FINDING: NOT IN COMPLIANCE. Although it is noted that
emergency response time improved from 75.9% in FY 99-00 to
79.7% in FY 00-01.
Threshold Standard Percent Time Average Time
Emergency Response 84.0 7 minutes 4:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 62.0 7 minutes 7 minutes
Actual
Emergency Response 79.7 7 minutes 5:13 min./sec.
Urgent Response 47.9 7 minutes 9:38 min./sec.
3.1.1 Proposed Threshold Correction
Issues: Presentation to City Council Scheduled May 14, 2002
Threshold Standard Percent Time Average Time
Emergency Response 84 7 minutes 4:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 62 7 minutes 7 minutes
Proposed Corrected
Threshold
Emergency Response 81 7 minutes 5:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 57 7 minutes 7:30 min./sec.
Actual
Emergency Response 79.7 7 minutes 5:13 min./sec.
Urgent Response 47.9 7 minutes 9:38 min./sec.
2001GMOCReport 6 /~ ~7 april25,2002
Note: Even with the proposed threshold correction, Police response time remains in non-
compliance with the threshold except for Emergency Response "Average Time".
Recommendation: The GMOC continues to recommend correction of the Police threshold
standard.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Police Department continue a public
information campaign so that the reason for the threshold correction is
clearly understood by the community.
3.12 Additional Measures to Reduce Response Time
Issue: As the table below indicates, the Police Department has made progress in
reducing their response time over the past several years. Even with this
progress response times are still not in compliance. To account for this
the Police Department is engaged in several current or proposed
initiatives.
HISTORIC RESPONSE TIMES
PRIORITY I - Emergency Response, Calls For Service
Call Volume % of Call Response w/in Average Response
7 Minutes Time
Threshold 84.0% 4:30
FY 2000-01 1,734 of 73,977 79.7% 5:13
FY 1999-00 1,750 of 76,738 75.9% 5:21
CY 1999] 1,890 of 74,405 70.9% 5:50
These initiatives include:
· Dispatch staffed. The Dispatch section is now fully staffed.
· Additional police car in East during busy times. An additional car
has been added to the eastern beat.
· Greater area familiarity. Team policing has been instituted.
· Full Staffing. Due to the implementation of the advance hire
program staffing overall is at a record level with 22 positions filled
out of 27 (as of 3/31/02).
· Faster address location. The Department is upgrading the Mobil
Data Computers (MDCs) to allow for mapping capabilities.
I The FY98-99 GMOC report used calendar 1999 data due to the implementation of the new CAD system in mid-1998.
2001GMOCReport 7 / ~. ~ April25,2002
Approximately half the patrol fleet currently has this technology. In-
car mapping will help officers ascertain the quickest route to a call
location. In addition, these maps can be more easily updated to
include new streets in East Chula Vista.
· Global positioning system. The Department is working with several
vendors to integrate GPS in cars with the computer-aided dispatch
(CAD) system. This system will allow police dispatchers to route the
nearest available units to calls for service.
· Continuing efforts under the Advance Hire program. Under this
initiative, the Department is able to hire five officers over the
number authorized. This program takes into account anticipated
officer turnover and the lengthy lead-time required to place new
officers on the street. This initiative helps ensure that adequate
.numbers of officers will be available for patrol duties, which in turn,
favorably affects response times.
Recommendation: That the Police Department remain diligent in meeting and achieving
shorter response times than what is indicated as the Threshold Standard
through the active pursuit and implementation of their current and
planned programs and report on how these measures improved response
times to next years GMOC.
Specifically:
· The GMOC continues to support plans to conduct a dispatch staffing
study, including the Dispatch Manager Concept~. This study will aid
in identifying ways of reducing response time for priority calls for
service.
· The GMOC support continued use of the patrol staffing model and
the advance hiring program. Both enhance the department's ability to
respond to calls for service, maintain a 1:1 ratio of officer time spent
responding to calls for service: officer-initiated activities, and a zero
vacancy factor in patrol.
· The GMOC continues to support planned upgrades of police
technologies, such as MDCs, in-car mapping and global positioning
systems. It is imperative that the Department continues to build a
solid technology infrastructure in order to service a growing
community.
· The GMOC continues to support research and evaluation of call
management options, and alternative response and deployment
tactics, such as Intemet reporting, such as revised beat
2 The dispatch manager would be responsible for supervising all communications operators; scheduling and
assignn~ents; training of staff; and implementing policies. Ctwrently the lead communications operators (LCO) serve
as working communications operators as well as supervisors. A dispatch manager would increase efficiency of the
dispatch function by allowing the LCOs to spend more time handling calls.
2001GMOC Report 8 /~, ~ ~/ April25,2002
configurations, and evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of
an aerial platform. Research staff should be looking at several of
these issues over the next 18 to 24 months, as a means of
maximizing both the effectiveness and efficiency of the Department,
and report progress to the GMOC.
3.1.3 False Alarms
Issue: As indicated in the tables below, the number of false alarms within the
community continues to rise although the rate of increase has declined.
NUMBER OF FALSE ALARMS FY 1997-98 THROUGH FY 2000~01
FY 1997-98 FY 1998-99 FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01
6,073 6,287 6,690 7,027
Calendar Year Totals for False Alarms Per System Per Year
(available only for calendar year, but fiscal year totals should be similar)
1999 2000 2001 (annualized)
Commercial 2.13 1.93 1.44
Residential 0.90 0.71 0.52
Total (Comm. & Res.) 1.33 1.12 0.79
An alarm analyst was hired in October 2000. Between this time and June
30, 2001, she researched effective alarm policies across the country;
identified more than 1900 alarm users without permits and mailed these
users permits; developed an automatic daily mailing to locations that
generate alarms but do not have permits on file; developed a "Tip Sheet"
on alarms that will be mailed to all city residents in an upcoming water
bill; updated alarm forms to collect more complete subscriber
information; and, added alarm data to the current billing and tracking
systems. In addition, the Alarm Analyst was involved in discontinuing
the police response to one commercial location that had over 20 false
alarms during a 1-month period. She also worked with high repeat false
alarm locations, such as schools, to reduce the problems at those
locations. The analyst also assisted in the development of the Alarm
Reduction Alliance, a comprehensive plan that will be implemented
beginning this spring. This plan involves the following steps:
· Collect and analyze alarm data
· Identify individual stakeholders and establish the Alarm Reduction
Alliance
2001 GMOC Report 9 April 25, 2002
· Establish false alarm reduction measures intended for specific
offender groups
· Develop proactive versus punitive false alarm reduction education
programs aimed at specific offender groups
· Develop generalized alarm education programs for the public
· Revise Chula Vista's alarm ordinance and assess our penalty fine
structure
Reaffirmation: The GMOC supports the Police Department's actions to reduce false
alarms and looks forward to a report on the progress of the Alarm
Reduction Alliance program.
Recommendation: That the rehiring of an Alarm Analyst be made a priority so that
momentum in reducing the incidence of false alarms is not lost.
2001 GMOC Report 10 I ~) ~ April 25, 2002
/
3.2 FIRE / EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
Threshold: - Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical
units shall respond to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes
in 85% (current service to be verified) of the cases (measured annually).
THRESHOLD FINDING: NOT IN COMPLIANCE
Threshold Standard Percent Time
Emergency Response 85.0 7 minutes
Actual
Emergency Response 80.8 7 minutes
3.2.1 Proposed Threshold Correction Pending
Issues: Presentation to City Council Scheduled May 14, 2002
Proposed Threshold: Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical
units shall respond to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes
in 80% (current service to be verified) of the cases (measured annually).
Threshold Standard Percent Time
Emergency Response 85.0 7 minutes
Proposed Corrected Threshold
Emergency Response 80.0 7 minutes
Actual
Emergency Response 80.8 7 minutes
Recommendation: The GMOC supports the Fire Department's intent to conduct a
community wide survey on attitudes toward fire and medical services
that are being provided. As a component of this survey, it is
recommended that information regarding the reason for the threshold
correction be included.
2001 GMOC Report 11 April 25, 2002
3.2.2 Capital And Staffing Program
Issue: Building, equipping, and staffing fire stations in Chula Vista's growing
eastern area is essential to maintain response time and to provide
adequate community service. Fire Station No. 7, located in Otay Ranch
Village 2, is targeted to be operational by July of 2003. Funding for the
processing, design, construction, and equipment is over $6 million;
Construction is targeted to begin by September 2002. The station will
have a staffof 10.
In addition, Fire Station No. 6 is planned for Rolling Hills Ranch, to be
relocated from the temporary location in the EastLake Business Park.
The process to relocate the station will begin about 1 year after Fire
Station 7 is completed. The station will have a staff of 3.
Acknowledgment: The Fire/EMS Department has instituted a construction schedule that,
with aggressive implementation, should achieve their target timelines.
Accomplishment: In an effort to further reduce response time the Fire/EMS Department has
contracted with Heartland Communication Facility Authority, a non-
profit organization, for their dispatch services. The service was
inaugurated in October 2001 so that the effects of improved dispatch are
not reflected in the current threshold reporting. It is anticipated that the
new dispatch service will result in better and quicker call handling, but
not affect turnout or traveI time.
2001 GMOC Report 12 April 25, 2002
3.3 SCHOOLS
Threshold: The City of Chula Vista shall annually provide the two local School
Districts with a 12-18 month forecast and request an evaluation of their
ability to accommodate the forecasted and continuing growth. The
Districts' replies should address the following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities.
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
4. Other relevant information the Districts desire to communicate to the
City and GMOC.
THRESHOLD FINDING: CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DISTRICT - IN COMPLIANCE
SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT - IN COMPLIANCE
3.3.1 Monitoring Growth and Schools Construction
Issues: Both the Chula Vista Elementary and Sweetwater Union High School
Districts were judged to be technically in compliance with the threshold
standard.
As was indicated in last year's report, even though the threshold standard
is being met the strains of growth are never-the-less being felt. As
school design capacity is exceeded students are either bussed outside
their schools service area or new classrooms constructed on existing
school campuses. This is particularly evident at the older schools and the
high school level with ever more "relocatable" classrooms being placed
on campuses consuming what was once outdoor activity space.
The GMOC recognizes and appreciates the effort of the school districts
to keep abreast of growth. Of particular importance is the construction
of two high schools, San Ysidro High School, and Otay Ranch High
School, and that a new middle school site in EastLake area is being
graded.
2001 GMOC Report 13 April 25, 2002
Recommendation: That the school districts continue with their proactive efforts in
identifying funding and building new schools before the need is at an
even greater critical stage.
Recommendation: The education resources of the community are a major concern that
extends beyond the narrow limits of the GMOC threshold. The GMOC
needs to be kept informed with current and correct information on school
capacity and quality. In this regard, the GMOC would appreciate copies
of reports or studies that deal with school capacity and anticipated
demand when these reports are issued.
3.3.2 Facility Standards and Maintenance
Issues: Schools in western Chula Vista are typically over 40 years old and built
to a lower standard than their newer counterparts. Campus size is not
only smaller but the ability to expand in older already urbanized areas is
usually prohibitive. Given this situation, students are being housed on
ever crowded campuses with old and decaying facilities. The
Sweetwater Union High School District (SUHSD) is addressing this
issue with the phased renovation of schools, progressing at the rate of 3
schools every two years. Currently Sweetwater High School, Chula
Vista Middle School and Mar Vista High School are being renovated.
Funding for this program is from the $187 million bond issue passed in
November 2000. Additional funds are needed in order to carry the
necessary improvements to all needy schools.
Recommendation: The GMOC fully supports the current "Long Range Facility Master Plan
Needs Assessment" that has just commenced under contract to the
SUHSD. The GMOC requests to be kept abreast of progress on this
work and to receive a copy of the plan when finalized in October 2002.
Recognition: Supports the continued efforts of the SUHSD to identify additional
funding to upgrade existing schools.
2001 GMOC Report 14 April 25, 2002
3.4 PARKS & RECREATION
Threshold: Three acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate
facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents east of 1-805.
THRESHOLD FINDING: IN COMPLIANCE - POTENTIAL FOR NON-
COMPLIANCE
Standard: 3 acres per 1,000 residents east ofi-805
With Appropriate Facilities
Actual: 3.72 acres per 1,000 residents east ofi-805
Actual Facilities - Potential For Threshold Non-Compliance
3.4.1 Facility Adequacy
Issues: Facility Adequacy East of 1-805
Evaluation of appropriate recreation facilities can now begin based upon
the draft Parks Master Plan. The draft has only recently been issued and
GMOC review is continuing. Based upon the preliminary review, the
GMOC has determined that the draft Parks Master Plan may provide the
basis to evaluate the appropriateness of recreational facilities east of 1-
805. However, a full evaluation cannot be conducted unless there is a
finance plan. In that regard, the GMOC cannot conclude that there are
adequate facilities, and therefore a potential for threshold non-
compliance exists.
Recommendation: The GMOC will continue to review the draft and ultimately final Parks
Master Plan. It is imperative that a financing plan be finalized and
forwarded to the GMOC so that a realistic assessment on facility
adequacy can be made. In this regard, the GMOC recommends that the
City Council direct the City Manger to take the necessary steps to
finalize the finance plan and report on progress to the GMOC during next
year's Threshold review.
3.4.2 Facility Staffing
Issue: Facility staffing is a management issue. However, it is the opinion of the
GMOC that facility adequacy and staffing are inseparable. Having
physical facilities is meaningless unless there are adequate staff
resources available to properly operate the facilities that make the
facilities available to the community and therefore adequate.
2001 GMOC Report 15 /! ~,~ April 25, 2002
Recommendation: That the City Council direct the City Manager to prepare a staffing plan
which illustrates how the planned recreational facilities for eastern Chula
Vista will be staffed and operated and how it will be funded. A report on
the status of this effort to the GMOC will be appreciated by January
2003.
3.4.3 Facility Maintenance
Issue: With the pending completion of the Parks Master Plan and a financing
strategy, it is expected that the actual construction of facilities should
follow in relatively quick order. The capital expense for construction is
only the initial investment. Funds for the adequate maintenance of these
facilities also need to be identified. Facilities that are not maintained will
not be adequate. In addition, many innovative technologies are
emergtng, such as artificial turf, that while costing more at inception will
have a lower cost over the life of the project due to reduced maintenance
expense, which is the basis for what is known as "life cycle costing".
Recommendation: That the City Council direct the City Manager to use life cycle costing
principles in the selection of park and recreation facilities and that a long
term maintenance plan and budget be identified. A report on progress
for implementing this approach to the GMOC will be appreciated by
January 2003.
3.4.4 Equivalence of Recreational Opportunities
Issue: Recreational opportunities in eastern Chula Vista compared to westem
Chula Vista are different. That difference is expected to continue.
However, the GMOC believes that there can and should be a qualitative
equivalence in respective parks and recreations experiences in east and
west. With the draft of the Parks Master Plan and its pending approval,
focus can now be applied to innovative approaches to creating a quality
recreation experience for residents in western Chula Vista comparable to
what is being developed in the east.
Recommendation: That the City Cotmcil direct the City Manager to actively pursue
innovative recreational funding opportunities for western Chula Vista.
Grants from foundations, businesses, and state and federal government
sources should be pursued.
In conjunction with this, it is recommended that an amended GMOC
Threshold for Parks and Recreation, which includes western Chula Vista,
be proposed by the Departments of Recreation, and Building and Parks
Construction as appropriate. As western Chula Vista is experiencing
growth due to demographic change and further land use intensification is
a possibility, this portion of the City should also be covered in a Park and
2001 GMOC Report 16 / ~"5':~/;~ April 25, 2002
Recreation threshold standard. A report on the status of this
recommendation will be appreciated as a part of next year's GMOC
review.
It has been observed that there are areas in western Chula Vista where
current commercial buildings are vacant and or in a degraded condition.
An analysis is recommended on assessing whether the purchase of such
properties by the City could provide a practical means of adding
recreational space in western Chula Vista.
3.4.5 Completion of Greenbelt Master Plan
Issues: The City hired a staff person from the firm of Chapin Land Management
in June 2001 to work in concert with City staff to complete the Greenbelt
Master Plan. A draft version of the Master Plan is expected to be
completed this spring and possibly adopted this summer.
The GMOC looks forward to the completion of the Greenbelt Master
Plan.
2001 GMOC Report 17 April 25, 2002
3.5 AIR QUALITY
THRESHOLD: The GMOC Shall Be Provided With An Annual Report Which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed to foster air quality improvement
pursuant to relevant regional and local air quality improvement
strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies, and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable
federal, state, and regional air quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development related activities being undertaken by the
City toward compliance with relevant federal, state, and local
regulations regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved
compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Quality Pollution
Control District (APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the
APCD shall report on overall regional and local air quality conditions,
the status of regional air quality improvement implementation efforts
under the Regional Air Quality Strategy and related federal and state
programs, and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula
Vista and local planning and development activities.
THRESHOLD FINDING: IN COMPLIANCE
3.5.1 Adoption of CO2 Reduction Plan
Issues: On November 14, 2000 the City of Chula Vista adopted the CO2
Reduction Plan. The Plan approved a total of 20 implementing measures
dealing with land use, transportation, and construction that will lead to
cleaner air for Chula Vista and the region, fights global warming, and
promotes energy efficiency.
Recommendation: That the City Council continue to use the CO2 Reduction Plan as a guide
in implementing feasible measures to reduce CO2 emissions.
2001 GMOC Report 18 April 25, 2002
/-%,
3.5.2 Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines
Issues: Since 1991 the Growth Management Ordinance has required that all
major development projects (50 dwelling units or greater) include Air
Quality Improvement Plans (AQIP). The Plans are preparccl to address
State and Federal mandates regarding air quality. As a result o£the CO2
Reduction Plan the City initiated a pilot study leading to an updating of
the AQIP guidelines. In summary, the pilot study involves the
development of' a computer moctcl to evaluate the relative ef£ectiveness
o£ applying various site design and energy conservation features in new
development projects. The pilot study analyzed Otay Ranch Village
Eleven and Six, and Eastlake 1~I SPA projects and will result in
preparation of AQIPs £or these SPAs. On March 27, 2001 the City
Council approved a contract £or consultant services to prepare the
customized computer model analysis and associated reports.
Upon completion of the pilot studies, staff will review the results and
develop a final menu o£ energy conservation/air quality measures to be
used in new developments. Staff will also evaluate the feasibility of
requiring additional energy conservation measures en those projects that
have already been approved but are not built.
The establishment of formal guidelines for the preparation o£ AQIP's
based on the pilot study results will then be developed. Staff will also
review and determine any necessary amendments to the Growth
Management Ordinance and any other related Codes or documents.
Recommendation: The GMOC endorses the development of updated guidelines for the
AQIP. Any proposed change to the Growth Management Ordinance
should be brought be£ore the GMOC for comment.
2001 GMOC Report 19 April 25, 2002
3.6 TRAFFIC
Threshold: City-wide: Maintain Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better as measured
by observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments,
except that during peak hours a LOS "D" can occur for no more than two
hours of the day.
West of 1-805: Those signalized intersections that do not meet the
standard above, may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but
shall not worsen.
THRESHOLD FINDING: IN COMPLIANCE
3.6.1 Timely Construction of SR-125
Issues: The timely construction of SR-125 is critical if the City desires to
continue issuing building permits for additional construction east of 1-
805.
Recommendation: That City Cotmcil continue to support the timely construction of SR-125
to avoid a potential traffic threshold failure in eastern Chula Vista.
3.6.2 East - West Traffic Enhancement Opportunities
Issues: Based upon traffic model analysis conducted through the City's
Engineering Division, without completion of SR-125, Telegraph Canyon
Road east of I- 805 and East H Street could experience a GMOC traffic
threshold failure. The analysis concluded that beginning in January 2000,
after approximately 9,400 additional housing units are permitted a
threshold failure could occur on Telegraph Canyon Road. At the current
rate of growth beginning in January 2000 there will be 9,400 permits
issued by the end of March 2003. Currently, it is estimated that the first
phase of SR-125 will be open for traffic in November 2005. This raises
the potential for a 2.5 year period during which time the traffic threshold
could be exceeded.
Several traffic capacity enhancement initiatives are being implemented
by the City working in concert with the development commtmity to avert
a traffic threshold failure by increasing road capacity and decreasing
demand. These initiatives include:
· On-ramp improvements at the East H Street 1-805
interchange;
· On-ramp improvements at the Telegraph Canyon Road 1-805
interchange;
2001 GMOC Report 20 April 25, 2002
· Acceleration of completion of Olympic Parkway;
· Improvement of the Olympic Parkway 1-805 interchange;
· Mount Miguel Road Westerly Extension;
· Promoting Transportation Demand Management Techniques
(TDM).
The road capacity enhancement initiatives may add between 2,000 to
3,000 additional units that can be constructed without a threshold failure.
This figure does not include the effects of a TDM program that promotes
travel to shift to non-peak times and to encourage telecommuting,
carpooling and transit use. A multi-faceted TDM program is in
development. While not yet quantified, the impact of this program can
be significant.
In addition, model revisions will be conducted to assess if new road
segments, like Olympic Parkway, behave as modeled and if growth in
general is consistent with model estimates. Initial findings are that
Olympic Parkway is functioning better than what was anticipated in the
model. Therefore, a change is expected to raise the estimated number of
permits that could cause a threshold failure in the order of between 500
to 1 i000 units.
Recommendation: The GMOC compliments the City Council for engaging in a
collaborative and proactive program to avoid a potential traffic threshold
failure. As stated last year, the GMOC expects that the City Council will
continue to support and take action to protect the integrity of the Traffic
Threshold. Specifically, the GMOC endorses the action of the City to
address and avoid a threshold failure namely:
1. The road improvements, as indicated above, with an analysis off
· how soon these improvements can be done,
· how much additional capacity they afford,
· what that means in terms of additional housing
units that can be accommodated, and
· the cost of the improvement.
2. Examine and implement appropriate Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) programs that reduce vehicle trips at peak
periods that occur in the morning and evening hours. TDM
approaches include car pooling, express bus service, telecommuting
and flexible work time.
3. That the City continues to closely monitor the pace of development
and conduct ongoing Traffic Monitoring (TMP) of strategic road
segments.
4. The 9,429 unit estimated number of housing unit permits beginning
in January 2000 that may result in a traffic threshold failure should
be reevaluated based upon the actual impact to road capacity due to
2001GMOC Report 21 ~/ ~ ~/4 April25,2002
the capacity enhancement program, as identified above, when these
improvements and programs are operational and impacts can be
measured.
3.6.3 Proposed Changes: Traffic Monitoring Program Road Segments
and Classifications
Issue: Since the adoption of the original Arterial Network and Segment
Classification Map in 1991, and the several amendments which followed,
there has been substantial development in the eastern areas of the city.
This development has created new arterial segments and produced
notable changes in the patterns of traffic flow. Therefore the City's
Department of Public Works proposes to change the Arterial Highway
Segment Map in the following way:
I. Changes to Freeway Segments
2. Standardize the length of the Highway Segments.
3. Additions to the list of Segments.
4. Changes in the classification of portions of a Segment.
A report dated November 28, 2001 detailing the recommendations was
presented to the GMOC on December 13, 2001 (this report is included in
Appendix C, following the Traffic Threshold Questionnaire).
Recommendation: The GMOC has reviewed the report and is satisfied that the report is well
reasoned and technically sound and supports the recommendation for
changes to the Arterial Network & Segment Classification Map.
2001 GMOC Report 22 April 25, 2002
3.7 FISCAL
Threshold: The GMOC shall be provided with an annual Development Impact Fee
(DIF) Report, which provides an analysis of development impact fees
collected and expended over the previous 12-month period.
THRESHOLD FINDING: IN COMPLIANCE
3.7.1 DIF Fees
Issues: Collections and expenditures of DIF revenues have been sufficient to
ensure that necessary infrastructure and services are available to support
the demands of new growth. In addition, the GMOC was provided with
a presentation detailing the basis for the recent Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) increase.
Recommendation: No recommendations at this time.
2001GMOC Report 23 /~.~ ~Jpri125. 2002
3.8 LIBRARIES
Threshold: Five-hundred gross square feet of library facility adequately equipped
and staffed per 1,000 population.
THRESHOLD FINDING: IN COMPLIANCE
Actual: 544 gross square feet per 1,000 population.
3.8.1 Library Threshold Amendment
Issues: Presentation to City Council Scheduled May 14, 2002
Recommendation: The GMOC continues to support the Library Threshold change.
3.8.2 Library Building Plan
Issues: The Library Master Plan calls for the construction of a 30,000 square
foot full-service, regional library in Rancho Del Rey by 2005. This
library would be constructed on City-owned property located at East H
Street and Pasco Ranchero. If this library is expected to be open by
2005, planning must start on time and funding be identified for
construction; otherwise the City may violate the threshold standard.
Construction funding through a State Proposition 14 grant is being
pursued. Should the City not get the grant, there may be insufficient DIF
funds available to construct the library outright without debt financing.
The City will not face this decision point until late 2002 or early 2003.
Recommendation: That the City continue to actively pursue the Rancho Del Rey Library
Planning/Building Plan Program and place as a priority the identification
of adequate construction funding by the target date of December 31,
2002.
3.8.3 Facility Staffing
Issue: Facility staffing is a management issue. However, it is the opinion of the
GMOC that facility adequacy and staffing are inseparable. Having
physical facilities is meaningless unless there are staff resources
2001 GMOC Report 24 April 25, 2002
available to properly operate the facilities and maximize availability to
the community.
Recommendation: That the City Council direct the City Manager to prepare a staffing plan
which illustrates how the existing and planned library facilities for
Chula Vista will be staffed and operated in light of measured community
needs related to hours of operation and staffing and that this be reported
to the GMOC.
2001 GMOC Report 25 f~ ?:~ ~ April25, 2002
3.9 DRAINAGE
Threshold: Stormwater flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering
standards.
The GMOC shall annually review the performance of the City's storm
drain system to determine its ability to meet the goals and objectives
listed above.
THRESHOLD FINDING: IN COMPLIANCE
3.9.1 Unfunded Drainage Projects in Western Chula Vista
Issues: Council has approved funding for 13 current and future drainage
construction projects and a Drainage Master Plan in 01/02 and 02/03
FYs, for a total dollar amount of over $3.7 million (this does not include
the recently completed $3.9 million Telegraph Canyon Channel project).
Even with this impressive expenditure there are many drainage projects
in western Chula Vista most of which are not approved for funding.
Some of the projects date back to 1964. While completion of these
projects will take many years, and some are hampered due to lack of
access to private property, the GMOC believes addressing these projects
while they are still maintenance projects versus emergencies is
important. Emergencies cost more money than maintenance and can
result in harm to people and property.
Recommendation: That the City Council consider increasing the level of funding available
for these drainage projects and direct the City Manager to request that
appropriate City staff seek federal, state, and/or other funding sources to
complete the highest priority drainage projects in western Chula Vista.
3.9.2 Maintenance of Environmentally Sensitive Drainage Channels &
Detention Basins
Issues: Improved concrete drainage channels can sometimes be prevented from
having normal maintenance and cleaning due to environmental
regulations. These regulations can lead to drainage channels and
detention basins being classified as a wetland. Policies imposed by
federal and state environmental agencies (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and California Department of
Fish and Game) regulating wetlands have dramatically impacted the
overall cost of maintaining mai or storm drain facilities. Over time, plant
2001 GMOC Report 26 April 25, 2002
material can become established in drainage channels and detention
basins, rendering them "environmentally sensitive". New drainage
facilities are actually designed and constructed to be wetland habitat.
Maintenance of these facilities will require issuance of proper permits
from federal and state agencies as well as mitigation for impact. To
streamline the permitting process, Public Works and Planning and
Building Department staff are working with the applicable environmental
agencies to establish a master maintenance agreement.
Recommendation: The GMOC urges the City Council direct the City Manager to place as a
priority the efforts of Public Works and Planning and Building
Department staff to complete the preparation and submittal of a master
maintenance agreement with the environmental agencies for the periodic
maintenance of environmentally sensitive drainage channels and
detention basins as previously promised to be completed by July 31,
2002.
2001 GMOC Report 27 / ~ ~ April 25. 2002
3.10 SEWER
Threshold: 1. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering
Standards.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego Metropolitan
Wastewater Authority with a 12-18 month development forecast and
request confirmation that the projection is within the City's
purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their ability to
accommodate the forecasted and continuing growth, or the City
Public Works Department staff shall gather the necessary data. The
information provided to the GMOC shall include:
a. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
b. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecasted growth.
c. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
d. Other relevant information.
The Authority response letters shall be provided to the GMOC for
inclusion in its review.
THRESHOLD FINDING: IN COMPLIANCE
3.10.1 Reported Threshold Incident
Issues: As last year, in response to the Sewer questionnaire as prepared by
Engineering Division staff, it was indicated that there had been an
incident during the reporting period in which the threshold had been
exceeded. The event was a flow which exceeded the 75% design
capacity standard on a sewer segment on Telegraph Canyon Road. The
response further indicated that a corrective C1P project had been
identified, designed, and funded. Construction commenced in November
2001 and is expected to be completed by July 2002.
The technique being utilized involves the installation of new sewer lines
in the same location as the existing line utilizing the pipe-bursting
method. This, as the name indicates, involves the installation of a larger
sized diameter pipe in the same location as an existing pipe by bursting
through the existing pipe with a pneumatic head. The advantage of this
method is that it accomplishes the installation without creating a
continuous trench, thus minimizing disruptions to traffic and negating the
need for removing and replacing the pavement section.
2001 GMOC Report 28 April 25, 2002
Recognition: The GMOC recognizes the utilization of the state-of-the-art pipe
bursting technique, which allows the work to proceed without disrupting
traffic on this vital traffic link.
Threshold incidents that are not ora systemic nature or are one of a kind,
and that have already been identified with a project funded for taking
corrective action do not require action by the GMOC, except to verify
that appropriate action has already taken place. In an operational sense
the integrity of the Sewer Threshold is being maintained. The GMOC
appreciates the incident reporting and supports the proactive efforts of
the Engineering Division.
3.10.2 Timely Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer
Issues: Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer segments have been
identified as necessary to serve growth over the next five to seven years.
Until the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer is installed, new development in the
Poggi Canyon basin must temporarily pump sewage to the Telegraph
Canyon Trunk sewer. Unless the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer comes on line,
costly upgrades will be needed to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer to
accommodate additional pumped flows. Currently the developments
served by the Poggi Canyon sewer have limits placed on the number of
units that can be built until the Salt Creek Sewer is completed. The
estimated cost for the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer is $18 million.
Recognition: It is recognized that the City is pursuing an aggressive construction
program for the Salt Creek Sewer, as indicated in the current schedule:
Phase 1 - From Industrial Blvd. to 1-805
Construction Schedule - July 2001 through June 2002 (Construction is
already underway);
Phase 2 - From Industrial Blvd. past I-5 to West Frontage Rd.
Construction Schedule - October 2002 through April 2003;
Phase 3 & 4 - From Interstate 1-805 to Olympic Parkway
Construction Schedule - August 2002 through February 2003.
,( ~ ,~ April 25, 2002
2001 GMOC Report 29 ~J ~i~ ~
3.11 WATER
Threshold: 1. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability
letter from the Water District for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water
Authority, the Sweetwater Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water
District with a 12-18 month development forecast and request
evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and
continuing growth. The Districts' replies should address the
following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering
both short and long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now
used or committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
e. Other relevant information the Districts desire to communicate to
the City and GMOC.
THRESHOLD FINDING: IN COMPLIANCE
3.11.1 Water Distribution System Capacity
lssue: In western Chula Vista the ability of the existing water distribution
system to support land use in-fill and intensification is limited. The
ageing water system is between 40 and 50 years old and was built to a
standard much lower than today's fire fighting flow requirements. What
are now undersized pipes proliferate in the western portion of the city.
Such a state of infrastructure will have a limiting effect on development
and may lead to substandard conditions given recent trends in a shift to
larger household sizes.
Recommendation: That the City work in cooperation with the Sweetwater Authority in
identifying strategic water distribution improvements and funding
mechanisms.
2001 GMOC Report 30 ;j~ ~lpri125, 2002
Recommendation: hat the City produce a map which identifies those areas of western
Chula Vista that are served by 4" water pipe, or substandard water pipe
to insure adequate fire flow, and that this map be available to prospective
investors-developers in this area when they inquire or are advised of
constraints to development.
2001 GMOC Report 31 / ~. d'~¢ April 25, 2002
3.12 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Issue: The General Plan for Chula Vista is in the early stage of the update
process. Production of the update will span about two years and involve
input from many segments of the Chula Vista community. This input
will, in part, consider quality of life issues in Chula Vista, and how they
are measured and monitored.
Endorsement: That the GMOC fully endorses the necessity of a broad review of quality
of life issues facing the City and makes itself available for promoting and
participating in this effort as may be appropriate. The GMOC has agreed
that members of the GMOC will serve as the core membership for the
General Plan Infrastructure and Services subcommittee. In addition, the
GMOC will explore the possibility of incorporating updates or additional
quality of life standards into the GMOC program on topics such as
transit, solid waste and energy.
Issue: The vision for western Chula Vista in year 2020 will be one of an
evolving community. The form this community may ultimately take will
likely reflect strategies to support appropriate in-fill and intensification
as the City seeks "Smart Growth" to encourage transit orientation,
making the best use of infrastructure, and the revitalization of existing
neighborhoods.
Endorsement: The GMOC recognizes the unique qualities and promise ~f western
Chula Vista. The GMOC supports growth and change in this area to be
matched with commensurate and appropriate public services and
infrastructure. The GMOC understands that this principle will be a
component of the General Plan update and supports this direction.
2001 GMOC Report 32 / ~ ~,~,5' April 25, 2002
3.13 CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES IN THE GMOC
Issue: The GMOC has functioned effectively for over 12 years. Many changes
and programs have been instituted in response to GMOC
recommendations. As any organization the Commission needs to evolve
in order to meet the needs of a changing community.
New Focus: As it is currently structured the GMOC considers threshold compliance
in the previous fiscal year. There is also a focus on looking both 18
months and five years into the furore. It is the intent of the GMOC to
place an ever greater emphasis on this future orientation in order to be
more proactive. Efforts will be made in conjunction with reporting
departments and agencies to enhance this direction. One possibility is
for City departments to provide greater detail to the GMOC regarding
specific major capital improvement projects that are being proposed, or
could be proposed, in order to address existing and future threshold
compliance issues. These projects would then be discussed in a public
forum under the auspices of the GMOC. In this way, the GMOC's
Annual Report can provide more meaningful input to Council regarding
the relative priority of CIP projects in respect to maintaining the quality
of life thresholds.
New Focus: Future urbanization in the reg/on will be influenced by "Smart Growth"
principles, including maximization of infrastructure, and creating an
urban system that can be more fully integrated with transit. This trend
will be most apparent in western Chula Vista as most eastern
communities are already master planned. In this regard, greater
emphasis and attention will be focused on Chula Vista's developing west
side. The GMOC is well positioned to provide a forward-looking
perspective in addressing public facility needs associated with potential
development and redevelopment in western Chula Vista through the
General Plan Update, and in recommending Growth Management
Program revisions to reflect this focus.
New Focus: The GMOC holds publicly noticed meetings. However, more needs to
be done to both encourage public participation in, and public awareness
of, the GMOC effort. Among other possible efforts, the GMOC will
consider holding at least two advertised public hearings, the first to allow
public input at the beginning of the GMOC process and the second prior
to issuing the final annual report.
2001 GMOC Report 33 ~ , ~lpri125, 2002
/
GMOC 2001 Annual Report
-
'.~.~""""".>
", ""',
"
. ~;! '. ...... ,... ,
'I..,::.... .~\,..o<~ ...~c .
~. ,\..:.--s';.?~
~
10111,,,
..I 7J1I..IlJ & rece
t.16..1I..IU..l 2001
,4 If If MAt 7è'-t'ðJli
May 15, 2002
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Members of the Planning Commission
City of Chula Vista
Arthur Garcia, Chairperson ~ A~
Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC)
TO:
SUBJECT:
2001 GMOC Annual Report (July 2000 to June 30, 2001)
The GMOC is appreciative of the time and professional expertise given by the various City
department staff as well as the school districts, water authorities, and Air Pollution Control District
in helping us complete this year's annual report. The comprehensive written and verbal reports
presented to the GMOC illustrate the commitment of these dedicated professionals to serving the
Chula Vista community. A special thanks to Dan Forster, Cherryl Cisneros, and Mark Stephens
who provided excellent staff support.
I would like to recognize the commissioners of the GMOC: Gustavo Perez, Vice Chair, Rafael
Munoz, Kevin O'Neill, Michael Spethman, Bill Tripp, Robert Tugenberg, Bud Gray, and Steve
Palma. This dedicated and diverse team of citizens read numerous reports, listened to detailed
presentations, and participated in hours of thoughtful discussion about the effectiveness of the
General Plan and the impact of development on the "quality of life" in Chula Vista.
The City of Chula Vista continues to experience unprecedented growth. This underscores the
importance of managed growth to assure the "quality of life" the citizens of Chula Vista appreciate
and have come to expect. The GMOC recognizes the complexity of this issue and commends the
City Council for its commitment to managed growth.
Throughout the report, statements of recognition are made instead of recommendations. In this
way, we compliment department actions for taking proactive steps to protect our quality of life
threshold standards.
The GMOC found nine of the eleven threshold standards in compliance. FireÆMS and Police
thresholds were not met. As reported to the City in previous years, Police and FirelEMS have
instituted measures to improve response time. With the correction to the threshold standards, as
presented in detail last year, Police would remain in non-compliance. FirelEMS would be in
compliance. Regardless, each organization is taking steps so that their response times are
continually improved.
We also recommend that Police continues and FireÆMS initiate a public information program so
that the community clearly understands the nature of the response time error and reason for the
correction. In summary, in the pre-computer aided dispatch (CAD) period, error was introduced as
a result of manually recording response times on punch cards. These entries sometimes took place
after the fact since dispatchers were naturally most concerned with responding to the call. In
addition, some of these calls were entered as a "zero" time elapsed or response time for "hang-
ups". These were all included in the calculation to produce the average and resulted in stated times
being shorter than actual. The Police Emergency Response Threshold will be corrected from 84%
in 7 minutes to 81 % in 7 minutes, and the FireÆMS emergency response will be corrected from
85% in 7 minutes to 80% in 7 minutes.
The Parks and Recreation Threshold, while met, was judged to have a "Potential for Non-
Compliance". Based upon the preliminary review, the GMOC has determined that the draft Parks
Master Plan may provide the basis to evaluate the appropriateness of recreational facilities east of
I-80S. However, a full evaluation cannot be conducted unless there is a finance plan. In that
regard, the GMOC cannot conclude that there is the provision for adequate facilities and therefore
a potential for threshold non-compliance exists.
Last year we were on the verge of a traffic threshold failure on Telegraph Canyon Road. However,
with the opening of Olympic Parkway in June 2001, additional east-west traffic capacity was
added resulting in improved performance on Telegraph Canyon Road. Due to proactive City
leadership, additional capacity enhancement and demand management projects are far along in the
planning stage and can be implemented before our continued growth again posses an imminent
threshold failure. We urge that these measures be acted upon.
As was indicated in last year's report, even though the threshold standard is being met by the
elementary, middle, and high schools, the strains of growth arc never the less being felt. As
original school design capacity is exceeded students are either bussed outside their schools service
area or new classrooms constructed on existing school campuses. This is particularly evident at
the older schools and the high school level with ever more "relocatable" classrooms being placed
on campuses consuming what was once outdoor activity space.
Both school districts have an aggressive construction program for new classrooms and campuses to
accommodate additional students. The GMOC recognizes and appreciates the effort of the school
districts to keep abreast of growth. Of particular importance is the construction of two high
schools, San Ysidro and Otay Ranch, and that a new middle school site in the EastLake area is
being graded.
The GMOC has agreed that members of the GMOC will serve as the core membership for the
General Plan Infrastructure and Services subcommittee. In addition, the GMOC will explore the
possibility of incorporating updates or additional quality of life standards into the GMOC program
on topics such as transit, solid waste and energy.
The GMOC will strive to become more forward looking, have greater community visibility, and
provide more meaningful input to Council regarding the relative priority of CIP projects in respect
to maintaining the quality oflife thresholds.
The following report highlights the eleven threshold standards, with the Issues and
recommendations to the City Council.
I look forward to the joint City Council, Planning Commission and GMOC workshop on May 30,
2002.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2001 ANNUAL REPORT
(Review Period 7/1/00 to 6/30/01)
VOLUME I
Accepted by City of Chula Vista PlaOliÏng Commission, May 30, 2002
Accepted by City of Chula Vista City Council, May 30, 2002
Commission Members
Arthur M. Garcia, Chair (Education)
Gustavo Perez, Vice Chair (Business)
Bud Gray (Development)
Rafael Munoz (Eastern Territories)
Kevin O'Neill (Planning Commission)
Michael Spethman (Center City)
William Tripp (Environmental)
Robert Tugenberg (Sweetwater/Bonita)
Steve Palma (Southwest)
Staff
Daniel Forster, Growth Management Coordinator
Cherryl Cisneros, Management Assistant
Mark Stephens, Principal Planner
April 25, 2002
C: IdjJì/eslGMOCIgmoc 01 IReportlReport final.doc
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2001 REPORT
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................··...................................................................3
1.1 PURPOSE .............................................................................................................................................3
1.2 DEVELOPMENT FORECASTS.....................................................··.....·......·...·................................3
1.2.1 18 Month Forecast .............................................................................................................................3
1.2.2 Five-Year Forecast for Eastern Chula Vista ......................................................................................4
1.3 REVIEW PROCESS.................................................................··...·.....................................................4
1.4 ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS......................................................···...........·...·...........··.........................4
2.0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................5
3.0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE ................................................................................................................ 6
3.1 POLICE.................................................................................................................................................6
3.1.1 Proposed Threshold Correction ........................................................................................................6
3.12 Additional Measures to Reduce Response Time ..............................................................................7
3 .1.3 False Alarms........................................................................................·..·..·..·..·....·....·..·..·..·..····..··..· 9
3.2 FIRE I EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES.......................................................................··.....ll
3.2.1 Proposed Threshold Correction Pending .........................................................................................11
3.2.2 Capital And Staffing Program.......................................................·...........··..·..................................12
3.3 SCHOOLS...........................................................................................................................................13
3.3.1 Monitoring Growth and Schools Cons1ruction ................................................................................13
3.3.2 Facility Standards and Maintenance ................................................................................................14
3.4 PARKS & RECREATION ................................................................................................................15
3.4.1 Facility Adequacy ............................................................................................................................15
3.4.2 Facility Staffing.....................................................................··.........·..·..·..·..·..·....·..·..·..·..···..·..·..··.. 15
3 .4.3 Facility Maintenance................................... ..................................................................................... 16
3.4.4 Equivalence of Recreational Opportunities .....................................................................................16
3.4.5 Completion of Greenbelt Master Plan .............................................................................................17
3.5 AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................................................18
3.5.1 Adoption of CO, Reduction Plan..................................................................··....·..·.........................18
3.5.2 Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines ......................................................................................19
3.6 TRAFFIC ............................................................................................................................................20
3.6.1 Timely Cons1ruction of SR-125 .......................................................................................................20
3.6.2 East - West Traffic Enhancement Opportunities.............................................................................20
3.6.3 Proposed Changes: Traffic Monitoring Program Road Segments and Classifications....................22
3.7 FISCAL ...............................................................................................................................................23
3.7.1 D IF Fees............................................................................·............·...··..·..·..··....·..·..·..·..···..·..·····..· ..23
3.8 LIDRARlES........................................................................................................................................24
2001 GMOC Report
April 25.. 2002
3.8.1 Library Threshold Amendment..................................................·.........·...........................................24
3.8.2 Library Building Plan ......................................................................................................................24
3.8 .3 Facility Staffing.....................................................................··.........·..·..·..····....···..·..·..·..··....···..·..· .24
3.9 DRAINAGE ........................................................................................................................................26
3.9.1 Unfunded Drainage Projects in Western Chula Vista......................................................................26
3.9.2 Maintenance of Environrnentally Sensitive Drainage Channels & Detention Basins .....................26
3.10 SEWER ...............................................................................................................................................28
3.10.1 Reported Threshold Incident .......................................................................................................28
3.10.2 Timely Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer ..................................................................29
3.11 W ATER...............................................................................................................................................30
3.11.1 Water Distribution System Capacity ...........................................................................................30
3.12 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE..........................................................·..........·................·............·.........32
3.13 CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES IN THE GMOC....................................................................33
4.0 APPENDICES .........................................................................................................................................34
APPENDIX A...................................................................................................................................................35
200/ GMOC Report
2
April 25.. 2002
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
In November 1987, the City Council adopted the original Threshold Standards Policy for Chula Vista
establishing "quality-of-life" indicators for eleven public facility and service topics. The Policy addresses each
topic in tenns of a goal, objective(s), a "threshold" or standard, and implementation measures. Adherence to
these City-wide standards is intended to preserve and enhance both the environment and residents' quality of life
as growth occurs. To provide an independent, annual, City-wide Threshold Standards compliance review, the
Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) was created. It is composed of nine members
representing each of the City's four major geographic areas, a member ofthe Planning Commission, and a cross
section of interests including education, environment, business, and development.
The GMOC's review is structured around a fiscal year cycle to accommodate City Council review of GMOC
recommendations, which may have budget implications. The official review period for this report is July 1,
2000 through June 30, 2001. Pertinent issues identified during the second half of 2001 and early 2002 are also
addressed.
During this process, the GMOC encourages each City Department and outside agency, which has responsibility
for reporting on the threshold status, to review the appropriateness of the threshold and whether new thresholds
and or standards should be considered.
1.2 DEVELOPMENT FORECASTS
The Threshold/Standards Policy calls for the City to prepare both short-range (18 months) and mid-range (five
to seven years) development forecasts at the beginning of the annual GMOC review process. Complementary to
threshold perfonnance evaluation, which reviews the prior year period, these forecasts provide a common basis
by which the GMOC, City staff, and external agencies can identify and address any potential threshold issues
before a problem arises. A copy of this year's forecast infonnation, provided to City Departments and outside
agencies, is included as Appendix B and summarized below.
1.2.1 18 Month Forecast
The 18 month forecast is the main development projection employed for annual threshold reviews. This focuses
on near-tenn development that will place demands on available infrastructure and services, and presents
information at the village level.
The City conducts an annual survey of developers requesting what multifamily and single family housing units
they anticipated to be pennitted and fina1ed in three 6 month segments covering the period from July 2001
through December 2002. Using this information, Planning and Building Department staff compiles the forecast
that indicates that 4,490 dwelling units will be authorized for construction and 4,836 dwelling units will be
completed for occupancy over the 18-month period.
2001 GMOC Report
3
April 25.. 2002
1.2.2 Five-Year Forecast for Eastern Chula Vista
As initially presented in the forecast two years ago, the San Diego Association of Government's (SANDAG)
Region 2020 Growth Forecast indicates that the South Bay sub region will host a substantial amount of the
region's projected growth over the next 20 years. This stems mainly from the limited General Plan capacity in
several north county cities, as well as from the lower average price of housing in areas south of 1-8. Based
largely on the amount of vacant land within master planned projects in Chula Vista's eastern area, SANDAG
projects that the City will add close to 40,000 housing units and over 120,000 new residents between the years
1995 and 2020. As evidenced by current building and permit activity, the City has already begun to see the
trend in increased development activity.
Using SANDAG's Region 2020 information as a base, the City has reviewed the status of local development
planning and regulatory processing in order to prepare a major residential development forecast for the next 5
years (2002 through 2006). The forecast reflects an average of approximately 2,600 dwelling unit completions
per year, with minor fluctuations on an annual basis (assumes that there will be 3,000 units finaled in year 2002
and 2,500 units finaled for each year from 2003 through 2006). Similar to trends in SANDAG's forecast, this
level of development activity is over twice the City's historic annual average of 1,008 units/year between 1980
and 2000.
The ability for this amount of growth to be sustained over the 5-year period will be largely driven by the
strength of the economy and housing market, but it will also be affected by the timing of major roadways and
other infrastructure and facilities needed to support that growth. Construction of State Route 125 is particularly
strategic to supporting this 5-year forecast. Based on the City's initial review, if this level of growth is
sustained, the GMOC traffic threshold may be exceeded sometime in 2003. Analysis is also being perfonned
with regard to the possible construction of physical roadway enhancements and Transportation Demand
Management (TDM), and what impact they may have on capacity.
1.3 REVIEW PROCESS
The GMOC held 12 regular meetings from October 2001 through April 2002. In addition, GMOC members
participated in a City field trip on December 8, 200 I. Threshold questionnaires were completed by a number of
City Departments and outside agencies. GMOC members reviewed the questionnaires, and where necessary,
asked department or agency representatives to appear in person to answer questions. The GMOC determined
whether it would be appropriate to issue a "statement of concern" or to make other recommendations regarding
each threshold. Once individual Threshold reviews were completed, this report was prepared for presentation at
a joint workshop with the GMOC, the Planning Commission and City Council. At that workshop the GMOC
requests that the Annual Report be accepted and the recommendations contained therein be approved by both
the Planning Commission and City Council.
1.4 ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS
This year's review encompasses two additional elements:
I. The General Plan Update and its relationship to growth management, and
2. Directions for changes in the focus of the GMOC.
200/ GMOC Report
4
Apri/25" 2002
'"
.~
-
~ CI) II) ~
¡...; > u
"O.~ § '"
'"
.r: .- '"
§u"E, '"
ft-<e -
.~
I'loB8 ~
.g
-<
"0
-
..8 t/. N
00 fiE:
]] ~
¡...;"O.§~ >:: >:: >::
bI)§¡::....
s:: - aJ 0
:.ar.f.)~<
[3
¡:>..,
~ õ
:::E
"0
-< Õ >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >::
~
~ Q)
..E!
~ ¡...;
~ '"
00 0 Q)
0:::: u
~ «0 c2 .~
U -
00 õšl'lo
".= 8 >::
~ z_ ¡:: 0
«0:::: 2U
I-W o =
~ (l)Q. ¡:>.., 0
~ O~ Z
~ ....W
~ 0-
::1:>
(l)W
0 wO:::: "0_
- Q)
U 0:::: ..8:::E >:: >::
::I: '"
Q) -
~ I- ..E! 0
¡...;Z
~ '""
0
0 0
N
= -
00 u
~ ¡:: ',6 ¡::
o '" 0
"8 "õ .~ 1:
Q) ~- ~
= ~~ ... 0 c
::s e-
'" <I.) 0 u
'" õj.r: <I.) .€ ""
~ - r.f.) .- - ~ \.)
> ¡:: ~~ '" <I.)
:::E '" oj <I.) a(j õš <I.) ~ ~
<I.) ~ õ - e ~th ::s u .~ ... ...
= .~ 0 ::s <I.) '" CI !+:: õš ¡:: <I.) Q) "
.r:- ~ .- ~ .... u ... .~ ~ õj
. õ ~ .r: ... oj ~ -
u~ r.f.):I: '" '"
N .- u :.< ... ¡¡; ;:J CI ~ '"
¡:>.., ¡... r.f.) ¡:>.., ¡...; r.f.) '"
3.0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE
3.1 POLICE
Threshold:
Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall
respond to 84% of the Priority I emergency calls throughout the City
within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an average response time to
all Priority I calls offour minutes and thirty seconds (4.5 minutes) or less
(measured annually).
Urgent Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall
respond to 62% of the Priority IT, urgent calls throughout the City within
seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an average response time to all
Priority IT calls of seven minutes (7.0 minutes) or less (measured
annually).
THRESHOLD FINDING:
NOT IN COMPLIANCE. Although it is noted that
emergency response time improved from 75.9% in FY 99-00 to
79.7% in FY 00-01.
Threshold Standard Percent Time Average Time
Emergency Response 84.0 7 minutes 4:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 62.0 7 minutes 7 minutes
Actual
Emergency Response 79.7 7 minutes 5:13 min./sec.
Urgent Response 47.9 7 minutes 9:38 min./sec.
3.1.1
Proposed Threshold Correction
Issues:
Presentation to City Council Scheduled May 14,2002
Threshold Standard Percent Time Average Time
Emergencv Response 84 7 minutes 4:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 62 7 minutes 7 minutes
Proposed· Corrected
Threshold
Emergencv Response 81 7 minutes 5:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 57 7 minutes 7:30 min./sec.
Actual .
Emergencv Response 79.7 7 minutes 5:13 min./sec.
Urgent Response 47.9 7 minutes 9:38 min./sec.
2001 GMOC Report
6
April 25. 2002
Note: Even with the proposed threshold correction, Police response time remains in non-
compliance with the threshold except for Emergency Response "Average Time".
Recommendation:
The GMOC continues to recommend correction of the Police threshold
standard.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Police Department continue a public
information campaign so that the reason for the threshold correction is
clearly understood by the community.
3.12
Additional Measures to Reduce Response Time
Issue:
As the table below indicates, the Police Department has made progress in
reducing their response time over the past several years. Even with this
progress response times are still not in compliance. To account for this
the Police Department is engaged in several current or proposed
initiatives.
HISTORIC RESPONSE TIMES
PRIORITY I - Emerl!encv Response, Calls For Service
Call Volume % of Call Response w/in Average Response
7 Minutes Time
Threshold 84.0% 4:30
FY 2000-01 1,7340f73,977 79.7% 5:13
FY 1999-00 1,7500f76,738 75.9% 5:21
CY 1999' 1,8900[74,405 70.9% 5:50
These initiatives include:
· Dispatch staffed. The Dispatch section is now fully staffed.
· Additional police car in East during busy times. An additional car
has been added to the eastern beat.
· Greater area familiarity. Team policing has been instituted.
· Full Staffing. Due to the implementation of the advance hire
program staffing overall is at a record level with 22 positions filled
out of27 (as 00/31/02).
· Faster address location. The Department is upgrading the Mobil
Data Computers (MDCs) to allow for mapping capabilities.
1 The FY98-99 GMOC report used calendar 1999 data due to the implementation of the new CAD system in mid-199B.
2001 GMOC Report
7
April 25. 2002
Approximately half the patrol fleet currently has this technology. In-
car mapping will help officers ascertain the quickest route to a call
location. In addition, these maps can be more easily updated to
include new streets in East Chula Vista.
. Global positioning system. The Department is working with several
vendors to integrate GPS in cars with the computer-aided dispatch
(CAD) system. This system will allow police dispatchers to route the
nearest available units to calls for service.
. Continuing efforts under tbe Advance IDre program. Under this
initiative, the Department is able to hire five officers over the
number authorized. This program takes into account anticipated
officer turnover and the lengthy lead-time required to place new
officers on the street. This initiative helps ensure that adequate
numbers of officers will be available for patrol duties, which in turn,
favorably affects response times.
Recommendation:
That the Police Department remain diligent in meeting and achieving
shorter response times than what is indicated as the Threshold Standard
through the active pursuit and implementation of their current and
planned programs and report on how these measures improved response
times to next years GMOC.
Specifically:
· The GMOC continues to support plans to conduct a dispatch staffing
study, including the Dispatch Manager Concept'. This study will aid
in identifying ways of reducing response time for priority calls for
service.
· The GMOC support continued use of the patrol staffing model and
the advance hiring program. Both enhance the department's ability to
respond to calls for service, maintain a 1: I ratio of officer time spent
responding to calls for service: officer-initiated activities, and a zero
vacancy factor in patrol.
· The GMOC continues to support planned upgrades of police
technologies, such as MDCs, in-car mapping and global positioning
systems. It is imperative that the Department continues to build a
solid technology infrastructure in order to service a growing
community.
· The GMOC continues to support research and evaluation of call
management options, and alternative response and deployment
tactics, such as Internet reporting, such as revised beat
2 The dispatch manager would be responsible for supervising all conununications operators: scheduling and
assignments: training of staff; and implementing policies. Currently the lead conununications operators (LCO) serve
as working communications operators as well as supervisors. A dispatch manager would increase efficiency of the
dispatch function by allowing the LCOs to spend more time handling calls.
2001 GMOC Report
8
April 25, 2002
configurations, and evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of
an aerial platfonn. Research staff should be looking at several of
these issues over the next 18 to 24 months, as a means of
maximizing both the effectiveness and efficiency of the Department,
and report progress to the GMOC.
3.1.3
False Alarms
Issue:
As indicated in the tables below, the number of false alarms within the
conununity continues to rise although the rate of increase has declined.
NUMBER OF FALSE ALARMS FY 1997-98 THROUGH FY 2000-01
FY 1997-98 FY 1998-99 FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01
6,073 6,287 6,690 7,027
Calendar Year Totals for False Alarms Per Svstem Per Year
(available only for calendar year, but fiscal year totals should be similar)
1999 2000 2001 (annualized)
Commercial 2.13 1.93 1.44
Residential 0.90 0.71 0.52
Total (Comm. & Res.) 1.33 1.12 0.79
An alarm analyst was hired in October 2000. Between this time and June
30, 2001, she researched effective alarm policies across the country;
identified more than 1900 alarm users without permits and mailed these
users permits; developed an automatic daily mailing to locations that
generate alarms but do not have pennits on file; developed a "Tip Sheet"
on alanns that will be mailed to all city residents in an upcoming water
bill; updated alarm fonns to collect more complete subscriber
information; and, added alarm data to the current billing and tracking
systems. In addition, the Alann Analyst was involved in discontinuing
the police response to one conunercial location that had over 20 false
alanns during a I-month period. She also worked with high repeat false
alarm locations, such as schools, to reduce the problems at those
locations. The analyst also assisted in the development of the Alann
Reduction Alliance, a comprehensive plan that will be implemented
beginning this spring. This plan involves the following steps:
. Collect and analyze alarm data
. Identify individual stakeholders and establish the Alarm Reduction
Alliance
2001 GMOC Report
9
April 25. 2002
· Establish false alann reduction measures intended for specific
offender groups
· Develop proactive versus punitive false alann reduction education
programs aimed at specific offender groups
· Develop generalized alann education programs for the public
· Revise Chula Vista's alann ordinance and assess our penalty fine
structure
ReaffU'mation:
The GMOC supports the Police Department's actions to reduce false
alarms and looks forward to a report on the progress of the Alarm
Reduction Alliance program.
Recommendation:
That the rehiring of an Alarm Analyst be made a priority so that
momentum in reducing the incidence of false alarms is not lost.
200/ GMOCReporl
10
April 25. 2002
3.2 FIRE / EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
Threshold:
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical
units shall respond to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes
in 85% (current service to be verified) of the cases (measured annually).
THRESHOLD FINDING:
NOT IN COMPLIANCE
Percent
85.0
Time
7 minutes
80.8
7 minutes
3.2.1 Proposed Threshold Correction Pending
Issues: Presentation to City Council Scheduled May 14,2002
Proposed Threshold:
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical
units shall respond to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes
in 80% (current service to be verified) of the cases (measured annually).
Percent Time
85.0 7 minutes
80.0 7 minutes
80.8 7 minutes
Recommendation:
The GMOC supports the Fire Department's intent to conduct a
community wide survey on attitudes toward fire and medical services
that are being provided. As a component of this survey, it is
recommended that infonnation regarding the reason for the threshold
correction be included.
200/ GMOC Report
1l
April 25, 2002
3.2.2
Capital And Staffing Program
Issue:
Building, equipping, and staffing fire stations in Chula Vista's growing
eastern area is essential to maintain response time and to provide
adequate community service. Fire Station No.7, located in Otay Ranch
Village 2, is targeted to be operational by July of 2003. Funding for the
processing, design, construction, and equipment is over $6 million;
Construction is targeted to begin by September 2002. The station will
have a staff of 10.
In addition, Fire Station No.6 is planned for Rolling Hills Ranch, to be
relocated from the temporary location in the EastLake Business Park.
The process to relocate the station will begin about I year after Fire
Station 7 is completed. The station will have a staff of 3.
Acknowledgment:
The Fire/EMS Department has instituted a construction schedule that,
with aggressive implementation, should achieve their target timelines.
Accomplishment:
In an effort to further reduce response time the Fire/EMS Department has
contracted with Heartland Communication Facility Authority, a non-
profit organization, for their dispatch services. The service was
inaugurated in October 200 I so that the effects of improved dispatch are
not reflected in the current threshold reporting. It is anticipated that the
new dispatch service will result in better and quicker call handling, but
not affect turnout or travel time.
200/ GMOC Report
12
April 25. 2002
3.3 SCHOOLS
Threshold:
The City of Chula Vista shall annually provide the two local School
Districts with a 12-18 month forecast and request an evaluation of their
ability to accommodate the forecasted and continuing growth. The
Districts' replies should address the following:
I. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities.
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
4. Other relevant information the Districts desire to communicate to the
City and GMOC.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DISTRICT - IN COMPLIANCE
SWEETWATER UNION IDGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT - IN COMPLIANCE
3.3.1
Monitoring Growth and Schools Construction
Issues:
Both the Chula Vista Elementary and Sweetwater Union High School
Districts were judged to be technically in compliance with the threshold
standard.
As was indicated in last year's report, even though the threshold standard
is being met the strains of growth are never-the-less being felt. As
school design capacity is exceeded students are either bussed outside
their schools service area or new classrooms constructed on existing
school campuses. This is particularly evident at the older schools and the
high school level with ever more "relocatable" classrooms being placed
on campuses consuming what was once outdoor activity space.
The GMOC recognizes and appreciates the effort of the school districts
to keep abreast of growth. Of particular importance is the construction
of two high schools, San Ysidro High School, and Otay Ranch High
School, and that a new middle school site in EastLake area is being
graded.
2001 GMOC Report
13
April 25. 2002
Recommendation:
That the school districts continue with their proactive efforts in
identifYing funding and building new schools before the need is at an
even greater critical stage.
Recommendation:
The education resources of the community are a major concern that
extends beyond the narrow limits of the GMOC threshold. The GMOC
needs to be kept infonned with current and correct infonnation on school
capacity and quality. In this regard, the GMOC would appreciate copies
of reports or studies that deal with school capacity and anticipated
demand when these reports are issued.
3.3.2
Facility Standards and Maintenance
Issues:
Schools in western Chula Vista are typically over 40 years old and built
to a lower standard than their newer counterparts. Campus size is not
only smaller but the ability to expand in older already urbanized areas is
usually prohibitive. Given this situation, students are being housed on
ever crowded campuses with old and decaying facilities. The
Sweetwater Union High School District (SUHSD) is addressing this
issue with the phased renovation of schools, progressing at the rate of 3
schools every two years. Currently Sweetwater High School, Chula
Vista Middle School and Mar Vista High School are being renovated.
Funding for this program is from the $187 million bond issue passed in
November 2000. Additional funds are needed in order to carry the
necessary improvements to all needy schools.
Recommendation:
The GMOC fully supports the current "Long Range Facility Master Plan
Needs Assessment" that has just commenced under contract to the
SUHSD. The GMOC requests to be kept abreast of progress on this
work and to receive a copy of the plan when finalized in October 2002.
Recognition:
Supports the continued efforts of the SUHSD to identify additional
funding to upgrade existing schools.
200/ GMOC Report
14
April 25, 2002
3.4 PARKS & RECREATION
Threshold:
Three acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate
facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents east ofI-805.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
IN COMPLIANCE - POTENTIAL FOR NON-
COMPLIANCE
Standard: 3 acres per 1,000 residents east of I-80S
With Appropriate Facilities
Actual: 3.72 acres per 1,000 residents east ofI-805
Actual Facilities - Potential For Threshold Non-Compliance
3.4.1
Facility Adequacy
Issues:
Facility Adequacy East on-80S
Evaluation of appropriate recreation facilities can now begin based upon
the draft Parks Master Plan. The draft has only recently been issued and
GMOC review is continuing. Based upon the preliminary review, the
GMOC has determined that the draft Parks Master Plan may provide the
basis to evaluate the appropriateness of recreational facilities east of I-
805. However, a full evaluation cannot be conducted unless there is a
finance plan. In that regard, the GMOC cannot conclude that there are
adequate facilities, and therefore a potential for threshold non-
compliance exists.
Recommendation:
The GMOC will continue to review the draft and ultimately final Parks
Master Plan. It is imperative that a financing plan be finalized and
forwarded to the GMOC so that a realistic assessment on facility
adequacy can be made. In this regard, the GMOC recommends that the
City Council direct the City Manger to take the necessary steps to
finalize the finance plan and report on progress to the GMOC during next
year's Threshold review.
3.4.2
Facility Staffing
Issue:
Facility staffing is a management issue. However, it is the opinion of the
GMOC that facility adequacy and staffmg are inseparable. Having
physical facilities is meaningless unless there are adequate staff
resources available to properly operate the facilities that make the
facilities available to the community and therefore adequate.
2001 GMOCReport
15
April 25, 2002
Recommendation:
That the City Council direct the City Manager to prepare a staffing plan
which illustrates how the planned recreational facilities for eastern Chula
Vista will be staffed and operated and how it will be funded. A report on
the status of this effort to the GMOC will be appreciated by January
2003.
3.4.3
Facility Maintenance
Issue:
With the pending completion of the Parks Master Plan and a financing
strategy, it is expected that the actual construction of facilities should
follow in relatively quick order. The capital expense for construction is
only the initial investment. Funds for the adequate maintenance of these
facilities also need to be identified. Facilities that are not maintained will
not be adequate. In addition, many innovative technologies are
emerging, such as artificial turf, that while costing more at inception will
have a lower cost over the life of the project due to reduced maintenance
expense, which is the basis for what is known as "life cycle costing".
Recommendation:
That the City Council direct the City Manager to use life cycle costing
principles in the selection of park and recreation facilities and that a long
term maintenance plan and budget be identified. A report on progress
for implementing this approach to the GMOC will be appreciated by
January 2003.
3.4.4
Equivalence of Recreational Opportunities
Issue:
Recreational opportunities in eastern Chula Vista compared to western
Chula Vista are different. That difference is expected to continue.
However, the GMOC believes that there can and should be a qualitative
equivalence in respective parks and recreations experiences in east and
west. With the draft of the Parks Master Plan and its pending approval,
focus can now be applied to innovative approaches to creating a quality
recreation experience for residents in western Chula Vista comparable to
what is being developed in the east.
Reconunendation:
That the City Council direct the City Manager to actively pursue
innovative recreational funding opportunities for western Chula Vista.
Grants from foundations, businesses, and state and federal government
sources should be pursued.
In conjunction with this, it is reconunended that an amended GMOC
Threshold for Parks and Recreation, which includes western Chula Vista,
be proposed by the Departments of Recreation, and Building and Parks
Construction as appropriate. As western Chula Vista is experiencing
growth due to demographic change and further land use intensification is
a possibility, this portion of the City should also be covered in a Park and
200/ GMOC Report
16
April 25. 2002
Recreation threshold standard. A report on the status of this
recommendation will be appreciated as a part of next year's GMOC
review.
It has been observed that there are areas in western Chula Vista where
current commercial buildings are vacant and or in a degraded condition.
An analysis is recommended on assessing whether the purchase of such
properties by the City could provide a practical means of adding
recreational space in western Chula Vista.
3.4.5 Completion of Greenbelt Master Plan
Issues: The City hired a staff person ITom the fInn of Chapin Land Management
in June 2001 to work in concert with City staff to complete the Greenbelt
Master Plan. A draft version of the Master Plan is expected to be
completed this spring and possibly adopted this summer.
The GMOC looks forward to the completion of the Greenbelt Master
Plan.
2001 GMOC Report
17
Apri/25. 2002
3.5 AIR QUALITY
THRESHOLD:
The GMOC Shall Be Provided With An Annual Report Which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed to foster air quality improvement
pursuant to relevant regional and local air quality improvement
strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies, and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable
federal, state, and regional air quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development related activities being undertaken by the
City toward compliance with relevant federal, state, and local
regulations regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved
compliance.
The City shall- provide a copy of said report to the Air Quality Pollution
Control District (APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the
APCD shall report on overall regional and local air quality conditions,
the status of regional air quality improvement implementation efforts
under the Regional Air Quality Strategy and related federal and state
programs, and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula
Vista and local planning and development activities.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
IN COMPLIANCE
3.5.1
Adoption of CO2 Reduction Plan
Issues:
On November 14, 2000 the City of Chula Vista adopted the CO,
Reduction Plan. The Plan approved a total of 20 implementing measures
dealing with land use, transportation, and construction that will lead to
cleaner air for Chula Vista and the region, fights global warming, and
promotes energy efficiency.
Recommendation:
That the City Council continue to use the CO, Reduction Plan as a guide
in implementing feasible measures to reduce CO, emissions.
2001 GMOC Report
18
April 25. 2002
3.5.2
Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines
Issues:
Since 1991 the Growth Management Ordinance has required that all
major development projects (50 dwelling units or greater) include Air
Quality Improvement Plans (AQIP). The Plans are prepared to address
State and Federal mandates regarding air quality. As a result of the CO,
Reduction Plan the City initiated a pilot study leading to an updating of
the AQIP guidelines. In summary, the pilot study involves the
development of a computer model to evaluate the relative effectiveness
of applying various site design and energy conservation features in new
development projects. The pilot study analyzed Otay Ranch Village
Eleven and Six, and Eastlake ill SPA projects and will result in
preparation of AQIPs for these SPAs. On March 27, 2001 the City
Council approved a contract for consultant services to prepare the
customized computer model analysis and associated reports.
Upon completion of the pilot studies, staff will review the results and
develop a final menu of energy conservation/air quality measures to be
used in new developments. Staff will also evaluate the feasibility of
requiring additional energy conservation measures on those projects that
have already been approved but are not built.
The establishment of formal guidelines for the preparation of AQIP's
based on the pilot study results will then be developed. Staff will also
review and determine any necessary amendments to the Growth
Management Ordinance and any other related Codes or documents.
Recommendation:
The GMOC endorses the development of updated guidelines for the
AQIP. Any proposed change to the Growth Management Ordinance
should be brought before the GMOC for comment.
200/ GMOC Report
19
April 25, 2002
3.6 TRAFFIC
Threshold:
City-wide: Maintain Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better as measured
by observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments,
except that during peak hours a LOS "D" can occur for no more than two
hours of the day.
West of 1-805: Those signalized intersections that do not meet the
standard above, may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but
shall not worsen.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
IN COMPLIANCE
3.6.1 Timely Construction ofSR-125
Issues: The timely construction of SR-125 is critical if the City desires to
continue issuing building permits for additional construction east of 1- .
805.
Recommendation:
That City Council continue to support the timely construction of SR-125
to avoid a potential traffic threshold failure in eastern Chula Vista.
3.6.2
East - West Traffic Enhancement Opportunities
Issues:
Based upon traffic model analysis conducted through the City's
Engineering Division, without completion of SR-125, Telegraph Canyon
Road east of 1- 805 and East H Street could experience a GMOC traffic
threshold failure. The analysis concluded that beginning in January 2000,
after approximately 9,400 additional housing units are pennitted a
threshold failure could occur on Telegraph Canyon Road. At the current
rate of growth beginning in January 2000 there will be 9,400 permits
issued by the end of March 2003. Currently, it is estimated that the first
phase of SR-125 will be open for traffic in November 2005. This raises
the potential for a 2.5 year period during which time the traffic threshold
could be exceeded.
Several traffic capacity enhancement initiatives are being implemented
by the City working in concert with the development community to avert
a traffic threshold failure by increasing road capacity and decreasing
demand. These initiatives include:
. On-ramp improvements at the East H Street 1-805
interchange;
. On-ramp improvements at the Telegraph Canyon Road 1-805
interchange;
2001 GMOC Report
20
April 25, 2002
· Acceleration of completion of Olympic Parkway;
· Improvement of the Olympic Parkway 1-805 interchange;
· Mount Miguel Road Westerly Extension;
· Promoting Transportation Demand Management Techniques
(TOM).
The road capacity enhancement initiatives may add between 2,000 to
3,000 additional units that can be constructed without a threshold failure.
This figure does not include the effects of a TOM program that promotes
travel to shift to non-peak times and to encourage telecommuting,
carpooling and transit use. A multi-faceted TOM program is in
development. While not yet quantified, the impact of this program can
be significant.
In addition, model revisions will be conducted to assess if new road
segments, like Olympic Parkway, behave as modeled and if growth in
general is consistent with model estimates. Initial findings are that
Olympic Parkway is functioning better than what was anticipated in the
model. Therefore, a change is expected to raise the estimated number of
permits that could cause a threshold failure in the order of between 500
to 1,000 units.
Recommendation:
The GMOC compliments the City Council for engaging in a
collaborative and proactive program to avoid a potential traffic threshold
failure. As stated last year, the GMOC expects that the City Council will
continue to support and take action to protect the integrity of the Traffic
Threshold. Specifically, the GMOC endorses the action of the City to
address and avoid a threshold failure namely:
1. The road improvements, as indicated above, with an analysis of:
· how soon these improvements can be done,
· how much additional capacity they afford,
· what that means in terms of additional housing
units that can be accommodated, and
· the cost of the improvement.
2. Examine and implement appropriate Transportation Demand
Management (TOM) programs that reduce vehicle trips at peak
periods that occur in the morning and evening hours. TOM
approaches include car pooling, express bus service, telecommuting
and flexible work time.
3. That the City continues to closely monitor the pace of development
and conduct ongoing Traffic Monitoring (1MP) of strategic road
segments.
4. The 9,429 unit estimated number of housing unit permits beginning
in January 2000 that may result in a traffic threshold failure should
be reevaluated based upon the actual impact to road capacity due to
2001 GMOC Report
21
April 25.2002
the capacity enhancement program, as identified above, when these
improvements and programs are operational and impacts can be
measured.
3.6.3
Proposed Changes: Traffic Monitoring Program Road Segments
and Classifications
Issue:
Since the adoption of the original Arterial Network and Segment
Classification Map in 1991, and the several amendments which followed,
there has been substantial development in the eastern areas of the city.
This development has created new arterial segments and produced
notable changes in the patterns of traffic flow. Therefore the City's
Department of Public Works. proposes to change the Arterial Highway
Segment Map in the following way:
I. Changes to Freeway Segments
2. Standardize the length of the Highway Segments.
3. Additions to the list of Segments.
4. Changes in the classification of portions of a Segment.
A report dated November 28, 2001 detailing the recommendations was
presented to the GMOC on December 13,2001 (this report is included in
Appendix C, following the Traffic Threshold Questionnaire).
Recommendation:
The GMOC has reviewed the report and is satisfied that the report is well
reasoned and technically sound and supports the recommendation for
changes to the Arterial Network & Segment Classification Map.
200/ GMOC Report
22
April 25. 2002
3.7 FISCAL
Threshold:
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual Development Impact Fee
(DIF) Report, which provides an analysis of development impact fees
collected and expended over the previous 12-month period.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
IN COMPLIANCE
3.7.1
DIF Fees
Issues:
Collections and expenditures of DIF revenues have been sufficient to
ensure that necessary inftastructure and services are available to support
the demands of new growth. In addition, the GMOC was provided with
a presentation detailing the basis for the recent Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) increase.
Recommendation:
No recommendations at this time.
2001 GMOC Report
23
April 25, 2002
3.8 LIBRARIES
Threshold:
Five-hundred gross square feet of library facility adequately equipped
and staffed per 1,000 population.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
IN COMPLIANCE
Actual: 544 gross square feet per 1,000 population.
3.8.1
Library Threshold Amendment
Issues:
Presentation to City Council Scheduled May 14, 2002
Recommendation:
The GMOC continues to support the Library Threshold change.
3.8.2 Library Building Plan
Issues: The Library Master Plan calls for the construction of a 30,000 square
foot full-service, regional library in Rancho Del Rey by 2005. This
library would be constructed on City-owned property located at East H
Street and Paseo Ranchero. If this library is expected to be open by
2005, planning must start on time and funding be identified for
construction; otherwise the City may violate the threshold standard.
Construction funding through a State Proposition 14 grant is being
pursued. Should the City not get the grant, there may be insufficient DIF
funds available to construct the library outright without debt financing.
The City will not face this decision point until late 2002 or early 2003.
Recommendation:
That the City continue to actively pursue the Rancho Del Rey Library
PlanninglBuilding Plan Program and place as a priority the identification
of adequate construction funding by the target date of December 31,
2002.
3.8.3
Facility Staffing
Issue:
Facility staffing is a management issue. However, it is the opinion of the
GMOC that facility adequacy and staffing are inseparable. Having
physical facilities is meaningless unless there are staff resources
2001 GMOC Report
24
April 25. 2002
available to properly operate the facilities and maximize availability to
the community.
Recommendation:
That the City Council direct the City Manager to prepare a staffmg plan
which illustrates how the existing and planned library facilities for
Chula Vista will be staffed and operated in light of measured community
needs related to hours of operation and staffing and that this be reported
to the GMOC.
1001 GMOC Report
25
April 15. 1001
3.9 DRAINAGE
Threshold:
Stormwater flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering
standards.
The GMOC shall annually review the performance of the City's stonn
drain system to determine its ability to meet the goals and objectives
listed above.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
IN COMPLIANCE
3.9.1 Unfunded Drainage Projects in Western Chula Vista
Issues: Council has approved funding for 13 current and future drainage
construction projects and a Drainage Master Plan in 01102 and 02/03
FYs, for a total dollar amoWlt of over $3.7 million (this does not include
the recently completed $3.9 million Telegraph Canyon Channel project).
Even with this impressive expenditure there are many drainage projects
in western Chula Vista most of which are not approved for funding.
Some of the projects date back to 1964. While completion of these
projects will take many years, and some are hampered due to lack of
access to private property, the GMOC believes addressing these projects
while they are still maintenance projects versus emergencies is
important. Emergencies cost more money than maintenance and can
result in harm to people and property.
Recommendation:
That the City Council consider increasing the level of funding available
for these drainage projects and direct the City Manager to request that
appropriate City staff seek federal, state, and/or other funding sources to
complete the highest priority drainage projects in western Chula Vista.
3.9.2
Maintenance of Environmentally Sensitive Drainage Channels &
Detention Basins
Issues:
Improved concrete drainage channels can sometimes be prevented ITom
having normal maintenance and cleaning due to environmental
regulations. These regulations can lead to drainage channels and
detention basins being classified as a wetland. Policies imposed by
federal and state environmental agencies (U .S. Environmental Protection
Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and California Department of
Fish and Game) regulating wetlands have dramatically impacted the
overall cost of maintaining major storm drain facilities. Over time, plant
2001 GMOC Report
26
April 25, 2002
material can become established in drainage channels and detention
basins, rendering them "environmentally sensitive". New drainage
facilities are actually designed and constructed to be wetland habitat.
Maintenance of these facilities will require issuance of proper permits
from federal and state agencies as well as mitigation for impact. To
stream1ine the permitting process, Public Works and Planning and
Building Department staff are working with the applicable environmental
agencies to establish a master maintenance agreement.
Recommendation:
The GMOC urges the City Council direct the City Manager to place as a
priority the efforts of Public Works and Planning and Building
Department staff to complete the preparation and submittal of a master
maintenance agreement with the environmental agencies for the periodic
maintenance of environmentally sensitive drainage channels and
detention basins as previously promised to be completed by July 31,
2002.
2001 GMOC Report
27
Apri/25.2002
3.10 SEWER
Threshold:
I. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering
Standards.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego Metropolitan
Wastewater Authority with a 12-18 month development forecast and
request confinnation that the projection is within the City's
purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their ability to
accommodate the forecasted and continuing growth, or the City
Public Works Department staff shall gather the necessary data. The
information provided to the GMOC shall include:
a. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
b. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecasted growth.
c. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
d. Other relevant information.
The Authority response letters shall be provided to the GMOC for
inclusion in its review.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
IN COMPLIANCE
3.10.1
Reported Threshold Incident
Issues:
As last year, in response to the Sewer questionnaire as prepared by
Engineering Division staff, it was indicated that there had been an
incident during the reporting period in which the threshold had been
exceeded. The event was a flow which exceeded the 75% design
capacity standard on a sewer segment on Telegraph Canyon Road. The
response further indicated that a corrective CIP project had been
identified, designed, and funded. Construction commenced in November
200 I and is expected to be completed by July 2002.
The technique being utilized involves the installation of new sewer lines
in the same location as the existing line utilizing the pipe-bursting
method. This, as the name indicates, involves the installation of a larger
sized diameter pipe in the same location as an existing pipe by bursting
through the existing pipe with a pneumatic head. The advantage of this
method is that it accomplishes the installation without creating a
continuous trench, thus minimizing disruptions to traffic and negating the
need for removing and replacing the pavement section.
200/ GMOC Report
28
April 25. 2002
Recognition:
The GMOC recognizes the utilization of the state-of-the-art pipe
bursting technique, which allows the work to proceed without disrupting
traffic on this vital traffic link.
Threshold incidents that are not of a systemic nature or are one of a kind,
and that have already been identified with a project funded for taking
corrective action do not require action by the GMOC, except to verify
that appropriate action has already taken place. In an operational sense
the integrity of the Sewer Threshold is being maintained. The GMOC
appreciates the incident reporting and supports the proactive efforts of
the Engineering Division.
3.10.2 Timely Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer
Issues: Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer segments have been
identified as necessary to serve growth over the next five to seven years.
Until the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer is installed, new development in the
Poggi Canyon basin must temporarily pump sewage to the Telegraph
Canyon Trunk sewer. Unless the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer comes on line,
costly upgrades will be needed to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer to
accommodate additional pumped flows. Currently the developments
served by the Poggi Canyon sewer have limits placed on the number of
units that can be built until the Salt Creek Sewer is completed. The
estimated cost for the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer is $18 million.
Recognition: It is recognized that the City is pursuing an aggressive construction
program for the Salt Creek Sewer, as indicated in the current schedule:
Phase 1 - From Industrial Blvd. to 1-805
Construction Schedule - July 2001 through June 2002 (Construction is
already undetway);
Phase 2 - From Industrial Blvd. past 1-5 to West Frontage Rd.
Construction Schedule - October 2002 through April 2003;
Phase 3 & 4 - From Interstate 1-805 to Olympic Parkway
Construction Schedule - August 2002 through February 2003.
2001 GMOC Report
29
April 25. 2002
3.11 WATER
Threshold:
I. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability
letter from the Water District for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water
Authority, the Sweetwater Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water
District with a 12-18 month development forecast and request
evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and
continuing growth. The Districts' replies should address the
following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering
both short and long tenn perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now
used or committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities.
e. Other relevant infonnation the Districts desire to communicate to
the City and GMOC.
THRESHOLD FINDING:
IN COMPLIANCE
3.11.1
Water Distribution System Capacity
Issue:
In western Chula Vista the ability of the existing water distribution
system to support land use in-fill and intensification is limited. The
ageing water system is between 40 and 50 years old and was built to a
standard much lower than today's fire fighting flow requirements. What
are now undersized pipes proliferate in the western portion of the city.
Such a state of infrastructure will have a limiting effect on development
and may lead to substandard conditions given recent trends in a shift to
larger household sizes.
Recommendation:
That the City work in cooperation with the Sweetwater Authority in
identifying strategic water distribution improvements and funding
mechanisms.
2001 GMOC Report
30
April 25, 2002
Recommendation:
That the City produce a map which identifies those areas of western
Chula Vista that are served by 4" water pipe, or substandard water pipe
to insure adequate fire flow, and that this map be available to prospective
investors-developers in this area when they inquire or are advised of
constraints to development.
2001 GMOC Report
31
April 25. 2002
3.12
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Issue:
The General Plan for Chula Vista is in the early stage of the update
process. Production of the update will span about two years and involve
input from many segments of the Chula Vista community. This input
will, in part, consider quality of life issues in Chula Vista, and how they
are measured and monitored.
Endorsement:
That the GMOC fully endorses the necessity of a broad review of quality
of life issues facing the City and makes itself available for promoting and
participating in this effort as may be appropriate. The GMOC has agreed
that members of the GMOC will serve as the core membership for the
General Plan Infrastructure and Services subcommittee. In addition, the
GMOC will explore the possibility of incorporating updates or additional
quality of life standards into the GMOC program on topics such as
transit, solid waste and energy.
Issue:
The vision for western Chula Vista in year 2020 will be one of an
evolving community. The form this community may ultimately take will
likely reflect strategies to support appropriate in-fill and intensification
as the City seeks "Smart Growth" to encourage transit orientation,
making the best use of infrastructure, and the revitalization of existing
neighborhoods.
Endorsement:
The GMOC recognizes the unique qualities and promise of western
Chula Vista. The GMOC supports growth and change in this area to be
matched with commensurate and appropriate public services and
infrastructure. The GMOC understands that this principle will be a
component ofthe General Plan update and supports this direction.
2001 GMOC Report
32
April 25, 2002
3.13
CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES IN THE GMOC
Issue:
The GMOC has functioned effectively for over 12 years. Many changes
and programs have been instituted in response to GMOC
recommendations. As any organization the Commission needs to evolve
in order to meet the needs of a changing community.
New Focus:
As it is currently structured the GMOC considers threshold compliance
in the previous fiscal year. There is also a focus on looking both 18
months and five years into the future. It is the intent of the GMOC to
place an ever greater emphasis on this future orientation in order to be
more proactive. Efforts will be made in conjunction with reporting
departments and agencies to enhance this direction. One possibility is
for City departments to provide greater detail to the GMOC regarding
specific major capital improvement projects that are being proposed, or
could be proposed, in order to address existing and future threshold
compliance issues. These projects would then be discussed in a public
forum under the auspices of the GMOC. In this way, the GMOC's
Annual Report can provide more meaningful input to Council regarding
the relative priority of CIP projects in respect to maintaining the quality
oflife thresholds.
New Focus:
Future urbanization in the region will be influenced by "Smart Growth"
principles, including maximization of infrastructure, and creating an
urban system that can be more fully integrated with transit. This trend
will be most apparent in western Chula Vista as most eastern
communities are already master planned. In this regard, greater
emphasis and attention will be focused on Chula Vista's developing west
side. The GMOC is well positioned to provide a forward-looking
perspective in addressing public facility needs associated with potential
development and redevelopment in western Chula Vista through the
General Plan Update, and in recommending Growth Management
Program revisions to reflect this focus.
New Focus:
The GMOC holds publicly noticed meetings. However, more needs to
be done to both encourage public participation in, and public awareness
of, the GMOC effort. Among other possible efforts, the GMOC will
consider holding at least two advertised public hearings, the first to allow
public input at the beginning of the GMOC process and the second prior
to issuing the final annual report.
2001 GMOC Report
33
April 25, 2002
4.0 APPENDICES
4.1 Appendix A - Recommendations and Implementing Actions
(Presented as Attachment 1, in the Joint Planning Commission
and City Council Workshop version.)
4.2 Appendix B - Growth Forecast (Included in Volume II)
4.3 Appendix C - Threshold Questionnaires and Supplemental
Data (Included in Volume II)
1001 GMOC Report
34
April 15, 1001
-<
~
....
Q
Z
~
=-
=-
~
.....
¡...
z
~
~
==
u
-<
¡...
¡...
-<
,....,
u
0..-
~=:
~~
OZ~
~
;jCJ':J
CJ':JCJ':J
....Z
~o
~....
o~
UU
~<
=1;.';1
1;.';1~
....~
~~
r;¡¡¡~
>r;¡¡¡
O...;¡
~IQ.<
Z~
r;¡¡¡....
~--
r;¡¡¡CJ':J
I;.';1Z
<0
Z....
<~
~~
=Z
~r;¡¡¡
~~
o~
=:0
~~
Q
N
. '1'1)
Z
o
c
"'.j.:,b
-<
~
C
!'/}i7:
~¡;;¡
Ii
~~
¥.";¡
t¡:¡"
<a
r-<~
!'/}~
1'1]
o
,¡:¡.,
o
..~
¡:¡.,
-<
~
....
Q
Z
~
=-
=-
-<
CJ':J
~
~
.~
~
o
U
~
U
o
~
~I
'd.Þ
"".-
S 3
î~
"" 0
i) u
0""
",o£
1äo£
.c: .~
u
t¡ =
(l).~
'" ~
" '"
~ ã
§'E
.-
'" '"
= .-
.S £
1; "
õ t¡
~ii
.Þo
.- ~
§ "
~ ·ß
o =
u 8
""=
u._
:'=~N
o '" 0
~~O
.- '"
1J = =
E-<::> .-
....
.
....
....
il
u",
.- -
- 0
.g.c:
Po¡ß
",J3
....
'"
"" "
.5 £
....
= ....
8t.S Þ
'E: c::"S
"" 0 '"
~ ~ ~
Po"" 0
" u
o££
8 »
:.=~.o
¿:o£"8
" .s
.c: 0 '"
~ '" ....
"
1; 5b '"
O£.- §
'"
13 ø..Q
'" Iii t¡
C::u..2
" u
~ = .~
0.9 c::
u ~.9
~ãß
.~ <£ t::
~.5 8
....
.
....
....
U'd8.c:=~",·õ
~I:-' 13 'ã i iHP¡ 5
III!:¡ (/J ~ rt.:I OJ) ~ .....,.
'" .- 0 S ¡,;..s
~Q)"'Cs.oe
išg¡¡:¡~"U2g¡
11)~ ~ ~ tI.)
u _. o'=! .5 >'..J::::
>< Q) u.....,.¡:¡ ~ r.I.) (.)
""'0<£ ,,0 OJ)~
S "'§ "" .... u -.5 '"
"'" .... =.- = =
.... 1:-'0",.000
Q) p.. > 0......._
g í!J " Po'" ::E.<;::: P.
¡:;¡a£~"'",¡go
o 5h 0 "'..:-:' '" Po;::
.... 0......... CL'I,.d - 0)
"!5..»u"8 g,g S
.~ = 0 s '" 0 "
1ij1S~::E rnbh~
_ 5 5 I:-' gp'!!"ò §
:;:::li!;¡ "IE~§ 6
~ Po"ò -;5 '" 0 _
s= c:: \U tn tn] ~t;
Q) 0 '§ Q) _ U'- CJ
~ ø. ~ 0 C1.> o.~
tI.I 0'- ~ .... 0.. 0
~....C)1Tjo~
Pok,,~Pou6=
d)' 0.0 - p... :.= 0
r,0.0 Po··Ot¡ ''¡::
~ct::::(Ij-8ø.C,.)~
Q) '-""'.a ~ d -
u ~ ~ c:: '" 0._ C':S>
.- "'C aJ .
õ- VJ~e; ~~-Q) ~
~.8 gp~ =a¡ü I:H::
1J ¡ß:a PolE 5ho,€ 0
E-<.s.§~ ~ §'6<E ~
"!
-
"'C (1) c:: OJ
1ä £.$2 ¡ß
oo1Tj£
OJ)"'~
= = ~
''¡::"ò Ë 0
(U,SQ)..d
"",-
6 u Po = u
:a6°0
= =.- ""
.-.- "'C 1::: ~
.... '" = 8."
c:: .- Cod Q) 00
0...._1-0"""
co ctI'- ~
.......d = "'C (1)
:;::: :> ~ = »
"'r::I ;> ::s C'd..-
= Po '" ><
.5 Cd Q) ~ :g
",.c: > a
S~·,¡::~.s
( J fI) ~ 0 r.I)
1-0 0 1-0 <1.)
<;:::.§ 1J Po.§
..............""t:I....
~Ë~-§¡š~
= '" t¡¡ 0
00_ c..
e-~J3Po'"
o~...."'C~
"ò§"ò
" .... t¡¡ "
.~ -ê "'C .... >
ô.8B§S.
~",cn~6
(1) OJ:):E (.)";;;
..d ¡:: 0 1-0 U
""'S: ~"aJ 3
_ (1) .n...d {/.)
",'- ¡:; .... '"
.c:.c:..c¡ "
E-<~E-<'õS
"!
-
..d.~ 5
E.c:<+<
'" E-< "
.~ .6
"C "S..~
'" " "
u '"
~ = =
u 0 0
"'u p..
"ò '"
§ t> ~
u~~
0=·-
.... '" u
'" ::E -6
.§.c:~
Q..B4-.¡
.... '" 0
.... Po '"
o.~ ~
Poo '"
§' ~
tI:I~ bl)
o ~ =
~ OJ)S .
tI:I.5·,::: 8
<IJ "'CI 1::.....
'" '" " è:
.5 Û "'CI u
- !: .- Cf)
s·.... -=: 1-0
u ........ <.E
»"ò
u]·a~
o--'CÜ
;,:,::E "':;::: u
- "... OJ) ~ Ò
'CÜ v 5 ~.¡::
~Q)æ"'CIo
!.¡:;.c: '" "'.¡::
'û ~ tn 1;) 0..
"
~.
8:
'"
'"
'"
'"
-
.~
~
û]~iü
"'CI_dO_
o 's'- 0
6 " = ~ ~
bl) 0·.... 00
= § ~ ....
1E.c: ¡:;¡ <£ .5
CIS =... J-
tn<IJ~~.9
_ ..... 'CÜ u
e.c: è: u"¡:¡
~ Õ ~ 0
o..~ J- -; g
" <8 = '"
...c:: . fI)..... ~
';::F==]>
o ca ~ 0 0
" ~ u Po....
tI:I 0 0 Cf) <IJ
::s 1-0 - e N
"'CI 0.."'0 _ œ
" = ="ò
.13 gp ~ ~ §
-·c ( J 00'"
s·.... ""'" Q,) Q)
u.c: 0 6 ''¡::
Cf) ......;::.s:
1:: ( J .þ ""'" ..;::
o u._ <IJ U
Po §:;::: u '"
§'>-;¡IE"ò
Cf)"gtl:l0's
U .... ~.ss
O = 0.<;:::
"" =
::E.c:~.$2 'õ'
r'" - - 1-0
V e<IJ
(1) "'CI 0.. ~
ëI'I"-:-:1:S
r--oCd"'CI-O
'"
..,
1:
o
&
'"
u
~
~
.
-
'"
'"
'"
-<
~
..
~
z
~
=-
=-
~
....
E-i
Z
~
:;
=:
u
-<
E-i
E-i
-<
,-,
u
o~
~<
~~
~~
....rIj
rIj
rIjrlj
....z
~o
~....
oE-o
u~
E-oc;¡
Gi5
....E-o
~z
¡.;¡~
6¡.;¡
E-oæ:;
~!
~--
¡';¡rIj
c;¡Z
<0
z....
<E-o
~~
::Z
E-o~
~~
~o
c;¡U
....~
Q
Q
N
H>:-'iH'"
{iF;,'¡;;
II}
"Z
o
c:
."..U
-<
oëI ",..
II}'W
Z
f¡i ....
fl.!Fo;
~.Z
J: .¡[;IoJ
m;:i!;
~;j
t:ã
-<~
~f¡i
m
o
"J: .¡
~
J: .¡
rIj
~
~
~
.~
o
U
~
U
o
~
( )"";ë:B
c..> .... à) I-t
:'=õSo
8.õbt::'E
.... ¡ij 0
0] ¡¡. ~
en Cd O·~
o ...
"9 OJ) (I) ::s
'"""c::..s:=ü
!;¡¡.- - 2
§-8:~~
....c ..
"OS-. ::
o ~
5 !õ ~._
!õ t.>.- '"
- I cu bl)
t::::I.C::I-tO
t'- 8. Õ
0"'5] .
8:u·- U Þ
::s 0 f.I} E.-
'" :::E'-"O §
o _._ ª
...... """"'õ
~ gj . '" 0
::s rJ) ~ u
~..cS"Ooo
.- 0 ( ) - c::
"E ~ t:j .S ._
o "'or> ~
u "' tI.I 0 0
u~oo_!;¡¡
o '50.5 ~ eu
:::E ~ 8 ê ~
I:;) r:::".=..;:;._
..c'- ~ è
]uoo~
E-o £ ~ (,)
""'"00
...."O]]]N;¡-::;
o ~ '" ..
c:: Cd._ "C 0 VJ 0
o ~~3-~-
-.¡:: (I) I-t ( ) 000 c:: tI.)
"~u ~..c_o",
::s ¡..¡ co ( ) (/J > tU
- 0 > ......_ k
t':S Q.,.¡::.- ~ ~ õ ~
[;~gõt':S~~1-t
1-0 tI.I~..... 4-j p.,
""=' t,¡..¡ 00 Q)
~ooB°..c]ot:
èó>=uu-..s::o
..c''¡:'-..c !õ ... _ ¡¡.
t.>êt:o-oo..c...
!õ ¡:¡ .... '" ;. _
o 0 ¡¡.o~o 02"0
- ...
~ëd_= VJoo§
I-t ( ).~. ~.5
1:: "C E cu ë ~.~ -;::"'
o Co" 0.- '" _
ø.Cd ....._~ 5=i Q)
p.. .s.. _ 0,- '"
.... > Cd fI.) >< ¡:;
¡¡;"'gjoë5..o"<g
08 "d_-::;Sp..
...... ..... ~ c Cd ~ t: (1)
'" i5.. " ...¡:: 0 0
UOtð"'~ rg
;::S "' ~ "ii Cd ( )
c:: CI) ¡..¡ 1-0 ..c::
.- 'E (.) 0 C Q) v ......
I:i o·B·,¡:";. 5....
8 5 .. ..~.... ~ .. 0
o - 0
UbO..... _00>.-
~C::~>.œt':SC) .
Oco~t.> .~u
""'''¡:;o~oo'''o
ß 5 ~ t.> .~ ] ~ '§ ~
--"'ooIE
o=¡¡'¡:¡""oSoO
..s:=C':S_"oQ.>_
E-< t.> ~
.
0....
.~ 0
õ ~
¡:¡.. ~
o 8
..cp..
-
"
Jj,s
~
",'-
'E~
0-
·C 5
p.. S g
Cd U"';::
.-
00 Q) 0
.- !õ p..
-!::1 '"
~..:E
---
.. '" ...
1'i_<E
<t: C '"
~ t~
- p..-
<0ê;
o ..
ª ...: gp
~.-
~ 13 ~
:š <g '§
iJ ¡¡'I:i
~ 0._
,
.
~
'"
'"
",'
'"
-
"~
'"
'"
<"')
-
'"
M
=.....
..c '"
- 0
0-
'" -
Þ8
.¡:: '"
0'-
.¡:: '"
~~
"õi
~ 0
S.!!i
o~
or>....
_ 0
~o
_ t.>
.. ¡¡
~:'5!
5'~
<-5
;¡ gp
c..... 'õ
o "
00]
~ ...
.¡::
.- ~
..c .-
~ §
~~
- 0
õj 5
..c 0
E-< 5
1:
o
&
'"
w
~
c.::>
-
'"
'"
'"
<"')
-
-<
><
....
~
z
~
=-
=-
~
.....
Eo-;
z
~
~
=
u
-<
Eo-;
Eo-;
-<
,-,
U
0;;";
~~
S2,~
Zo~
;J
~CI.)
CI.)CI.)
"'z
~o
~...
o Eo-;
UU
Eo-; <
=~
~~
~~
~:;;
>~
O~
Eo-;"';¡
~~
~~
~CI.)
~z
<0
Z'"
<Eo-;
~~
=Z
Eo-;~
~~
~O
~~
Q
N
~
o
...
~
U
~~ <
.....~
,r/J~
.~~
.0 T_'
.¡-
r/J:E
!i1iI!i1iI
¡:¡:;,.;¡
~~
;<,~
~=
r/J iò1
r/J
o
.¡
o
~
CI.)
Z
o
...
~
~
~
o
u
~
U
o
~
'"
..
...
'E
..
r/J
-
01
...
:a
..
~
o Q) "0 .
~.;; õ s
fI) ~..= ~
§.D ~.~
" "13 §
s .. ~.~
o 1;;
bI)"1:I l! §
=~.....
J2.J::I-lt.8
0...... 0 ~
( ) 0 c,¡:¡.....
'" ~ '" ..
>.~..O
__Ocn
Õ'§ ~ oU
ê"c¡j ~ ~
:3 >. " t:;
o ".;; '"
{/J è: ..{' ~
..... ~ ~..c::
~ .D~
= (1,)"00 s::
o"t:l tIJ'-
"Bo"1:l
€'':= Q.. "
Cij~c...-g
Q.. ......-
oþ c..>
"'.~ ...
...... § ='~
<I) ê " "
::E ¡:¡~
~01i:::
"O¡¡'~
.!:: oU Q §
~ t) '.0
Q) ::s 8 ~
..c=]:.=t::
E-< 0 0 0
o~o
...
=
..
...
..
S
iò1
-
'"
...
~
....
......
N
'"
'"
...
'E
'"
<I)
-;
...
:a
..
~
t':j 'Cd >.".:s!
~ 0 0
O'~ t:;.c:
::s~.... t1.I
-g S ¡¡; "
o ",.s
c..> "t:I'-
c.:; 0.0
.s Cd c..-. .5
s:=~~]
~ t.:::: 6 Q..
.. .. >.
.- "t:I 0-::::
'" ~ Q.."
.... ~ s "
.. 0 0 ~
~U...... C) (,)
'" oU "
"",.c:
Q.."1:I..... ~
C ) ::s -..... "'"'
I""\'~ tS
~:::: .
Q) ~ 1š c::=
.... ...... 0
.~ .. ~ ~ .
~ 0';> " "8
o ...."1:1
~ >. "'"' (1) ::s
" Q...c:-
-?:oo_U
~ 3 c::= 00.5
o r.f. "õ3.5 Q)
Q.. .D"1:I.D
Q...g " ~:s!
"'.~ .... bI) '"
'" ~ oU " 0
r\ ...... "'"'..s:::
...... >. '" .. '"
~ .<;:: ';;.52 ..
~ == (/J ~.9
0-8§ü
" ê 'E,£ ~
.c: 0 " .. 0
~ (,) 00._ U
...
=
'"
...
'"
E
iò1
-
..
...
~
......
....
N
¡"++:
<IJ
~
o
...
~
~
oëI~
fIlZ
!i1iI..
filE-<
~~
~~
[;j~
t~
~Q
<IJ!i1iI
fIl
~
o
~
CI.)
Z
o
...
~
~
~
o
u
~
U
o
~
~
..".
.....
,.,
'"
-
c
c
-=
...
r/J
"0»
gl!
~
ü~
Ii ~
"'~
.~ "1:1
Q "
~
- oU
o 0
o·~
.c:"1:I
o ..
<I) ,~
~.'g
~t5
...~
"Q .
S...... §
Q) 0·-
-o~
~.c:~
'" 0 t::
~r:no
.~ <.,:¡
>~.S
~.- "'0
-:I::"
'" ~
.c: .. '"
U.52 ~
" .. <:r
-S=:>e
.c: .... "
......£0:5
o oU "
CtI~"1:I
,,'~
CtI " >
.Y ~ 8
"'" <I) Q..
-(oS
-= ~
......
..;
'"
'"
-
c
c
-=
...
r/J
.5 1a]
'" '" ~
t:..... 0.0
,£"1:1"
..... ".t::
" " '"
,,""1:1
> " '"
..:= .;; 1::
¡¡¡",£
0.........
.... tE (1)
Q..""
.....D '"
.~ "
""'.c:
-Sõ-
.c: .8" .
.~ (,) 0 "t:I
~ '" ~ "
.... 1;;
" ~ o.~
"',,¡¡.o
s::: = .... e
.~ gf -< §:
0._ ~
o "1:1 "
en:: U:..c
1::) ::s !;)J)_
"¡::..c 19=-=
t:1 "t:I tI.:I ~
'6§-;~
o "
Õ 0.0.-'-
0.5·1: [;
..s:::::"C!u....
~§"u
,,'" i5 0
-=gfS::E
1;;;&..0
~._ ~ 'Cd
(""""""" ~ Q) ::s
<:2§§
......
..;
'"
~
Q
'"
",'
'"
-
.~
~
E " ~ ".c:
C ,)..s::: g -:s.-:::
o E-< t: ~
..0"; 0"1:1--
oõo~~
.....c:"1:I ~"1:1
o 00 c .. ......
.~ 11) Cd .... cu
ou.... ",.c:
('j,.s::; ._......
$:;--..c
cuuG-~
~~~.5:g
"" 0 ~
>'0 '"
.~ 11) o:S Þ 5
§ -='~;'::: '"
S.....~~1::
S 0"1:1 <:r ~
8.~~-ge
"St::"'....
-".~ ,p 0
-:¡;¡......~þ'"
~ ~.5._ Q.'I
0::; 0'"
"'¡,,~ouë
Q.'ICije-g.u
r= = ~ u II,)
::111,) _~
0..c Q.'I 0·-
~~.Do¡¡
...."1:1 .c:~
.. .. 0 0
00- tI)
.-;>" c CI:I
"fl~~o:g
.g{j::J"6
" .. ".52 ~
" ~
"~uouu
¡5~o§o
.1;;::E'£ ::E
CtI .;; 0 .S 0
r--
M
1:
o
e-
'"
w
~
\:)
-
Q
Q
'"
-<
~
....
Q
Z
~
=--
=--
~
.....
Eo-;
z
~
~
:=
u
-<
Eo-;
Eo-;
-<
,-.
u
0;;-
~~
~~
~~
t;jv::¡
v::¡ v::¡
....z
~o
~....
o Eo<
uU
Eo< <
=~
~i5
....Eo<
~~
~~
>~
O..;¡
Eo< : .,
Z~
~....
~--
~v::¡
~Z
<0
Z....
<Eo<
~ð
=z
Eo<~
g~
~o
~~
=>
N
;,..-:,;;»;.;:.::.¡
""'.';:::"y;
rI.1
'Z
o
E
~<
rI.1'~
~z
~¡:
OZ
. ; ".[;O!
rI.1:8
"'!"'!
=...
5~
¡"Q
rI.1~
rI.1
o
; "
o
=:
; "
~
I .' en
t:
o
.... ~
. ~
"
..s
¡:¡
~
."
ã
CI'J ¡j
Z ."
o is
.... '¡;j
~ .~
@ .~
~."
~ ã
~ þ
o .~
u ê'
~ '-'
~ -00
U 0"
o ::s
O ..c en
U en
en.~
~
( )
OD
§
~
I
I
OD
<::
.3
I rI.1
Z
o
¡::
I;,)
~<
rI.1~
~Z
uq:::
~Z
~~
~~
5~
¡"Q
rI.1",!
rI.1
o
; "
o
g:
"
..c
-
..c
-
.~
u¡j
0'0
::S'i5..
CJ S
o
" U
..s .~
tU .-:::
~ s::
> "
o..c
... :;=
~ã
:-=ø::
:;= ...
_ "
u-
'5 ~
.~ ::s
o »
.<;::
(l);'::
..c U
E-< to
~
"!
'"
~UCÒ
..co"
-::s .~
'ã CJ g
- Il)....N
::""<:00
....E--t_O
" ."N
't) . ã t
~o,,~
~!Z)¡::.s
þ;I: 0 U
.~ ~:;= 0
:-:::cnl;l}~
(,) .- .-
Cl:Su..d_
~....-.....
... ':= .... Q)
... ~ ~
_ 0 0 ~
s:::::: ..... f/}.=,
" en U
j Õ ".~
::ì e 5b"-
U _ 0 ã
<:: ...
l! 0 ç¡..'¿
..... u ~ ~
f/) '-' 0:.=
... (1) ..... cd
"'"' "0 tI:I ~
&C~t.:::
ç¡..::S ...
::s.".;¡ ¡:¡
en" ..c
»'-'õ.¡;:
- <:: ( )
- ,,~ ã
<ES,,_
U S ~ ç¡..
08Bl!
::E-~~
d ~ {/j 0
'-' 0 >.
,,~g.ç¡..
~..c=~8
"!
'"
v::¡
Z
o
....
~
@
~. .
o
u
~
u
o
~
~
=
C>
;:::
..
..
..
...
~
't:I
=
..
'"
.>oi
..
..
; "
~cI¡J~~'E~'E
~ (/).-..... ë ""C
..c ~ > "... ¡;¡
,¡;¡"..ceno;"
~~~."';:::Q) r.;
-§¡"u~s..ã<E
;::S....d:'= tl).~ ( )
0~-!3 ~.E~
J3..c~ '-0
........... Q.. ~:::: (1)=
-'~ ~;:;s :;= ~.~
~ 00 "t:I C Q)'-
Q) rI) I =.s..c [)
P.. 8 ~ .- ~ ..... -
~e "Ot>0IJª,
u ç¡.. -< B ~ .5 .g
, "¡¡J ..~.... ~ "
ã >u:Š""'= g
is: e 0·- Q) 0 cd
ç¡..;:;s .:;~ <::
!:J ç¡.. '"' ~:> 0.= -'
-(d'-'~6) ·«1.>cò
~."." .~ ~.:; >
::Sãc->::s'-'8
= i:dEe~lr)p'
~ :;= <:: §.~ <:: !:J ê'
'..... Q) 0 - .- ...... ...
cò .- .- .0 p., ....
4.»~CJ=:=Cl:St.S:
t> ~ ·-ê.g ø. (,) ..d :-:::
0\1) C1>§.Uu
~.:; "':;0'13
"'..c8':;"'U~0
ãOJ) ...~»OU
tIJ 6 5 0 0:::: § Ò
~ ='+:J en'+:J u'+:Jû
cò-;::còu.¡..2O)ctI
Q... .... ~ CL) ø....c:: ~ OJ
l1.>ðju88-u£
"<:"2"'0020
E--4..o~p.,o_~_
.;
-
..t
=
C>
.~
...
..
..
..
...
..
=
't:I
=
..
'"
.>oi
..
..
=-
"':= ~ ~ .:;0 ~ 1:::
w _''¡;;¡ ~ 0
s:: tI:I 0() P.
~]]]~ ~ ¡i
Q) P. ""' OJ) "0 ( J
~ gp to ~.€ ã .~
.~ ." en U <:: _
..... \.J"",.- C'dv
-ccò..cu--
::s C'd...c:: -...c:: Po. 0
""C¡::-t:::j-u...c::
=~ .,;:;;;¡-otl)
tOto~ .~ã13
¢:: ".~ C E-<
to-u"''''o.=
~ ctI ca _ tI)
.".:; 0 S'õ " ¡;¡
l!,,::S"§':;~
->O..coQ,)_
:;='+:J <:: u.~ "
( ) e ( ) ctI 'Cd ~
._ ( )...c:: C) Þ =
> Po. - >,.- t.;:::: bl)
~ S ~ U .<::
o .- .s ::s Q,) .s §
- CI) sr-B U)"O
".~." ~ ç¡..
::S_"'g'¡;joUO
=-""C ...c::-
'+:J ¡;¡ þ- en::s
§ . ;";.::{J "'CJ
'-' ã ¡:;'õ = ~
_-c.Sœ( )tI).,g
:-=~ !.¡.;¡e~-
~~"O=SQ,)_o
uBãooc
O~ ¡::g,,¡:j
....;:;s.""....:;~
"'" "SU"OD
c:> U).~ ~ 0":":: 2
( )~ëa~~19Po.
¡::~..§~CJB§
.;
-
..t
tn ..
.~ en
."
!::: "
to "
1;1:::
»"¡¡J
.-=: =
'Cd .9
::S'¡;j
0""
...
os u
~
"
.!:: -
..c ¡(J
-
." to
ã-
"
=.:;
.~
¡;...
<:: 0
.¡¡¡
S-
ã
.9,13
~ gf
'J:: U
t;."
= ã
.~ -
to
Þ8
U .~
<.E
" 0
¡:: !5
N
..t
8
<:>
"
,,;
"
.~
~
OD'"
<::<E
S
to ¡(J
- .~
tI) .-=:
ctI:::
~~
ç¡..-
" os
... <::
ç¡..o
o ..=
- to
... ~
" U
OD"
to ...
ã."
::s "
þ§
Û-a
" "
.£;.£;
õ :;=
~ 0
;.a.::=
- en
.~ "
u'¡;j
§b
o en
uE!
>,:::
.~ ...c::
U '-'
Q,):E
..s :;=
'¡;j ã
¡::-a
N
..t
~
~
t:
&
'"
\..)
~
~
<:>
<:>
"
-<
~
-
~
z
~
~
~
~
-
E--
Z
~
:;E
=
u
-<
E--
E--
-<
,-.,
u
~~
~~
~š
t;Joo
0000
....Z
~O
~....
o Eo<
uU
Eo< <
=í.:I
í.:I~
....Eo<
~~
~~
Of;¡i¡
Eo<";¡
Z~
f;¡i¡~
~~
f;¡i¡OO
í.:IZ
<0
Z....
<Eo<
~~
=Z
Eo<f;¡i¡
~æ
O~
=:0
~~
-=
N
^ ·~·~il~]
i:", :~~..£.cgbO
f+:i.... .", .... =
";.";,, tI.I 0 !;)J) s::._.-
'",,,;..0 0 ¡:: o""=' ';)
cd 1-1 u::::::.- .....-
ell c;;;¡ VoI,::::< .
n. " 0.0 cd .-..... Q) (/J
;!;;;;~ j ¡::..... C:"S: .....2
..+~ e 13 :: 8. ::: <B ;E
L;(L;:;}1iWo' .s·ca 0 ::; Q... fI) 'õ
':;':d:Jg: :g Q ~ ~ = .2 c,fg
..9 () '¡¡ e .5 ~ .~ ~]
:~::~; E ~ C".Q e ètj
,">:",-, cd ..c: 0 u"" "'I'j
~..e··· .a ] ... -g õî ~ ¡¡¡
irl}U . ~ ~ ~"O e ¡:: e
z ... ¡; bQ 0 æ::E!5 0
2..i~ ] .g, ~ § .: ~ ~
:CI,);;~-..e tI.I.+=~ ';) ëa
t!'.~ eo bQ ~ ... 0 k
..^' > ¡:: 0 bQ
...s:,s 0 IS b ~ gß :::
·~:'~.~"'I'j~e8~~
,;('..... .... fl),..c:: e"'l'j 0
.¡;..'~ ~ <B ~.;:: r:o. æ "0
rI}.1iJi 'J:: _ ¡:: ~ bQ 0
;..ø 0 O'¡¡ 0 ¡:: E ¡Q
.... .....~. .~ ~ .~ ~.~ š ~
Q e1;; e ¡g"E.~:€
~ ~ e .. eo () if:;::
JIIIIII u {fJ .- _ 0
:§1:¡:::e~~~
-.- a 0 õî ~ 0
~ bQ () ... <=> ...,
S"t:Sout;5-0.2
~§!5..!¡¡~<B<E
o 0
~~
00
Z
o
....
~
ª
~
~
o
u
f:â
u
o
~
í.:I
--
--
.~ .~
·~u
~o
0::8
"<:c:J
"0
§]
"0'"
o 0
... ...
~...
b ...
r:o.@
o 0
"0 "'
§:E
"0':::
~ 0
s ~
(/J~r"'ì
0"'0
~"'o
_ON
:;::..<: Q
~ ';; ~
~ 0 ~
.~ 1:: §
>0'"
~r:o.>-,
_e.c
~....."O
..c:.....0
U õî
E -ci'û
Q)..2 !l>
... ~ -
¡Q ¡:: r:o.
0<Eê'
b/)"'e
].,g '"
... ;;:¡ 2J Ë!;1¡'
o 0 ¡:: æ
~.s 0
¡:: e:::
~ B ~ ::-
~ ¡:: 0.. ~
.- <> g
~ "'I'j ~
..c:... ~.s 5
Q '00 0 ~
o t1) ¡:o.....
~:<¡¡;~
p,,-o"'t;)
Q)..... (.) ~
QG..2c£
¡:: ~ ~ 0
o () "0
"13 ~ ~
.; if;.::: 0
ooQ"'I'j"'"
s:: Q) ~
o tn "t;S a
u~5..2
"'::':::O-CI)
!¡¡::: ~;.:::
¡:>., ~
'"0 tJ § tI}
§;§-50
bQ ~ .- ~
¡::¡:>.,~<=>
.- ..... Ol)
:9 ( ) ;:. t::
._.::: It)._
~ ... e "'
¡:Q r:o. ~
2 .£3 "S .t5
-'- 0"''''I'j
f-o ~ 0 ~
'"
~
..2~<U
().- 0
>-;E -ci ""
t.)._ Q) ~
~~Sç;,
:.= "Eo
C1.) § t1.>-B
tI.I._ "'CI
::; ......- 0
~ 0 ...
se..c..c::
() ... ()
.... Q) ( ) œ
o .... bO 0
bO"O "'I'j ....
~ ¡:: ~ r:o.
s::::: Cd..c g.
'" "0
::8 ~ æ'~
~ø. -5
.-:: t+-¡ æ 00
U 0-;:: ¡::r<)
-.- 0
<L>§u1:o
-5.- U <L> N
t>]~]~
~ <L> <L> ø. ;:s
.- "' 1: " ¡::
"'t:) (1)'- ¡::; Cd
_...c:: cd'- oooo:¡
.- - e """ >"
g<=¡::<B~
=:;'- t:: (/.) "0
o CIJ u (/.) u
U..2"'eõî
r:o. bQ bQ'-
þ'ü ~ 0 frl
.- ~ 0 """ """
U'J::- r:o.r:o.
uø.eu~ª"
...c:: 00 ~ 0
-~-5't:2
~.~ "0 0;::::
..<: 0 ¡:: r:o.._
f-o () ~ e ~
'"
~
>'11>1::'"
-...c::05
~ E-i .+=
.- ~~
õ . QJ.
cd ~ ts u
=.~ e ~
0'" 0
'''::: 2 """ 00
~-tE"O
.::~ ~
¡g 8 gf]
o .- Cd
u~"O
~ p.~ ~
~ """ t)
~cS§_"'
"O"Ok~
§]bQ]
bQo~e
.5.= ;:s 0
;g g.~<t=
;:s 0 ø. CIJ
~ cd .2
'ë;: ~.~
1:.,g.ê 0
Š13 ~§:
~ ~ Q ~
ifr:o. ¡::
Q r:o. ¡::.-
o 0.9;; .
,.c:~~ã~
f-o ~ e !;1¡ ~
~ () 0 ~
< 8.~ !5.. ~
'<t
~
-t'5]
> ...
.- tI) (1)
õu_
~~.¡g
o ... "'
-cS"'t:)
... "' §
o 0
~.;= rñ
§ 13 ~
"" ~ "'
"'" 1:: 8 .
0._ "0
~ø.{/.)( J
ð 8-.E. ~
~ ~¡g r:o.
+:i ~.g 2
õ!:j~",,=,
(1)~"'t:)-
... ¡:: ~
.- - ;:s 0
"0 cd o...s::::
-~~{/.)
._ 0 (/.)
u·;= 8 (1)
§ ~ 0 ()
o e <t= !3
u g fI] 0
...... "'
Þoæ¡¡
.- ~ .... .....
u''::: c:J S
o ~ E
-5 ~ t'\Š (1)
- ã.~ ~
.2 .- > bQ
~ <L> cò CI:S
~- ...
"' ~ "
.....<:"0
< 8.u ~
'<t
~
0011>
......S
"0>-,
B=~
¡:: ~ 0
o ~
~~2
r:o. ¡::
bQ"O 0
<= 0 8
'" ~ e
,.., (1).-
.......- ;:s
"' > 0"
.- e ~
]]"0
~.;:: §
,s...
¡Q~{j
::8-5¡¡
¡:: ~ ¡::
0'-
.- ~ 00
~ 0 =
Q) """ .-
...r:o.bQ
g 0 æ
~-5..<:
()
"'t:)...s::::~
¡::... 0
Cd'- ~
"' ~ 0
.1<:- !¡¡.- 0
¡:>., § -5.~
o 0 ¡::
..c:U"'~
f-o ~ e
Þ-t! e
.,- ""=' 0
¡:QU~()
'"
c
c
'"
",'
'"
-
1:
~
"'t:S fI] ..: CI:S ~ QJ "'t:S
<L> Q) "'" - ~"..s::-
"0 "0 .!2 E! -5 ... 0
~;:s""'- t+-¡..c
oü¡¡U]O~
¡¡¡.s t> E ~ ¡:: !::;
~ B Q).9';:¡
¡¡¡]'-~§'§§
~..c ~~...c:: ø.';=
..s:: ~ 1: (/.) o.~ ~
- IU « u..c ~
"0 ¡:: € .-... i¡)
o 0 .;..<:. ""
].;= =..... ª"þ~
°êëe--[!;1¡]]
() 0 0 g._ ~
Q) Q) .... ¡::; (/.)
o~-" 8:0 ~~
() <=> '" "0 r:o. '"
e",,=,~tfjO_~
¡:: ~ "'... w
.~ èd "'t:S 5 Q).~ cò
_ Q)._;:S =
._ fI] tI) ..... ""=' =.-
'" ti 8.. g ..c:.g "0
:E~e~~1U~
... ~ ¡:: 0 () 0
- 0 t..= ~
-5 ::> Q) U 5b'- 0
._ ~ ~ ~ 0
~ '" J:! ~ 0 0
~ :9 1;; :;.- ~ ~
o 0'- ~ u._
._ _ > ¡::"' 0
....._ "OQ)'U'CIJ
() "' ~ "'J:: ",-
~ <L> _ Cd <L> ;:s CI:S
.:;1;..ê Ol) r:o."O "0
§ F< U .5 ~ æ "3
u "0 - 0
U E 'š.~ ... ..<:
.so,s~.¡g]"'
~~~g;;]û
0-
M
1::
c
&
""
u
a
~
-
c
c
'"
-<
~
....
Q
Z
~
=-
=-
-<
--
....
E-i
Z
~
~
==
u
-<
E-i
E-i
-<
---
u
~~
S2,~
~~
t;JíI'.)
íI'.)íI'.)
....z
~o
~....
o Eo<
UU
Eo< <
=~
~~
....Eo<
;!¡Z
....~
~~
O~
Eo<~
Z=--
~~
~~
~íI'.)
~Z
<0
Z....
<Eo<
~~
=Z
Eo<~
g~
=:0
~~
=
N
I .
rJ'l
Z
o
~
ç;,¡
ofJ<
rJ'l~
f;I;1!j
rJ'lpoo
Zz
Of;l;1
~~
¡;¡~
~'~
pooQ
rJ'lf;l;1
rJ'l
o
.,
o
ØI:
.,
0>
~
-
-
.~
.. I::
o
o,ª
"C
d
Š ~
8.2
o :>
u 0>
0> ...
"'u
.~ 0
-S~
íI'.) 'Bc
Z
o ~.'"
.... 1¡ja
E:::: ~ ~
..... 0>-
~ -<= ><
- ~
", d....
~ 00
~ 15 i
~ go «I
...
o -< ~
U "C
~ 0>
.¿~
a '13
U "C ~
o §I:>.
~ ~ ê'
~
g]
'" æ
.- p..
.:::
, ,
l,
. "C
.~ d
~ «I oi
~ ~
b()'-
gf.5 >-
's:g ~
S::0'-; ::s
.- :S..s::
1S~u
8.... a
cu0,S
I:: '"
o _ 0>
"C 5 ~
~~B
0> "C
.- §
~ go-
~o~
a 0> I:>.
'" -<= 0>
.2 -- "'t:J
- .-
.- c..,. >
§ 0 e
1:: I:>.
0-0
1:>.«1_
I:>. 0 I::
o b() 0
11) ".,¡::
~ ~ ~
..s::::..... .:=
E-< 0 '"
b()1::
, 0
usu
rJ'l
Z
o
~
v
ofJ<
~
rJ'lZ
f;I;1....
~poo
Z
~~
¡;¡~
~~
pooQ
rJ'lf;l;1
rJ'l
'0
I .,
~
.
. ,
~q-5~
11) <r:: :;._
-<= '" "0
~=~~
.a .!2 0
",- ....
.- ~ !1) 0
>- d ~
~ o..c rI)
-OQã
.Ë"03"
u~'" 5
a ~]..
£:0)-0
~ "'0 t""8
~ ~ £ e
s::.E 11) ø.
.- .c:
I;/) ~ St t';I
'" 0 .
~ = QD.g ~
~ c ._ .....
"'~ ~.~ ~ >
:> 11) ...o ~
~ 11) ~ ø.;3
u~tO'"C..c
£(/}c:;u
~ ~ 0 8 ¡:::
..c.- "0 Ü
....."00) 1;;
"0 ;.::: '"C .ò 11)
" " d'~ ~
~.o"u
11) "'¡ E .S
$'- e] cu
oeo-u",
" u
5e~£ª"
" 5 -
.rJ o·~ VJ ~
~ 0 rI).2 0
..c 1::"ti] 1::'.;j
~ ~~8.~
U· ::I ~ e to}
u to ¡::¡. ~
íI'.)
Z
o
~
~
i
o
U
~
U
o
~
~
~
I'i
o
.-
1¡j
11
~
o
U
0>
...
0>
-s
-s
.~
'"
0>
~
§
'"
0>
b()
"C
0>
~
o
~
I::::
«I
-
r.IJ
-
or)
or)
~
~
~
.~
'"
'"
'"
ã rñ
¡;:; "
= .9
o '"
.~ '"
t) "ë
.g "
~ö
NU
0"
U g
~"O
... ~
~.s
" '"
o "
- 3
" '"
" '"
" "
...;:: E
§ "
u-
-~
.- '"
u '"
§~
o 00
u"
..¡::
þ"
.- "
U 5
]..2
- ".
1¡j .5
¡:: .5
or)
-
vi
"' II
5 ~
.- -5
1; "' ~
:2"0"
- " 5
Ë'Ë 5
5 " 0
o " u
o~"O
~ ~ §
1'=.."
0' " .,g
<: to '"
iU f1) t
oSg:g
... '" '"
tS .S §
","0 u
~ è5 .!=
..... ..... Q)
"i)=..c
"0"-
'~!:j..9
" bI)u
.c:¡'jo
-"':;¡s
'õ:;¡S0
.5~]
ê;o"'"
"0 ... 0
".0 -
::SOJ,E
]£ ~
- 0 0
"ª;.s
::s au
¡:: ".0
..s:::; co;::::
""'..c .....
=: u ~
"J
'"
~
'"
'"
...;
'"
-
.:
~
o
..
" "
.c: u
- §
.. "
c.S .-
"0
~è5
.5.....
- "
" "
:!2 5
" "
0000.
"0"'-
£ ã 5
.g:;¡sê
§'-€ 0
'- '" u
00"
-ð<E
~"u
"..c:o
o~:;¡s
"i)-e,:,
> " "
" bI).c:
"O§_
".c: "
oS (.) 5
","0'"
" " "
"''''~
.. 0-
o "..c:
"0000
" ... "
" "'0
U~;"..E
o "
:;¡s .0
o ."0
,,1'="3
,s:: 0' .is
E-<:",
1::
c
&
""
u
~
\:)
-
'"
'"
'"
"J
'"
-<
x
-
Q
Z
~
~
~
~
....
Eo-;
z
~
~
==
u
-<
Eo-;
Eo-;
-<
,-..
u
0....
::Ë=:
~~
~š
tijoo
0000
"'z
::ËO
::Ë'"
OE--
UU
E--<
=~
~~
~~
~~
Or-;¡
E--"';¡
~~
::Ë~
r-;¡oo
~z
<0
z'"
<E--
::Ë~
=z
E--r-;¡
~~
=:0
~~
=
N
.~ i1Uj:@¡j
<1.1
Z
o
"E=
u
~<
o
<I.IZ
¡¡¡¡-
~~
~:z;
CI1~
"Jitil ¡¡¡¡
'ø:¡ ..;¡
$~
~~
<l.lJitil
<1.1
o
.,
o
r::iI:
ø.
00
z
o
...
E--
<
I
0"....
U
~
U,
o
~
y
IS
"
..
...
J!~
-00
-0'-
¡¡¡ 0
..
> .9
¡-.-
u 2
. -
'" '"
¡¡¡ §
.,!::: tJ
OJ "
u.;::;
';::;2
.....~
~ "
»Po
- ><
'" '"
"'0 0
-
ü '"
'"
~¡;j
> "
bQ~
..
:;;¡ç
.... 0
0..
~-
.~ 6h
"
....
!::1
S~
'" ....
Þ~""
'-._ N
U-o-
~
-
IÓ
y
C
....
"
....
...
»-0
--
" 0
8.<::
".;:: ~
.Éi
"'-
.<:: tJ
-~
'-
1:: ~
0-
Po-
(l..~
~¡:
'"
-
o 0
-Po
"
gj~
Š 0 .
'';:: ~ S
s:: O'~
8->
"" '"
_N=
..... -..=
tJ~u
g <1.1 e
U~B
Þ.§ ~
Û ü.5
.Ë ~
~ (/) ='
,.d=:::
~8~
-
IÓ
~
"¡:;2J g¡ c:r.!!J~::·;:¡
C1) fa .9 ~ ~ g 8
e ~ ~'-=..2 .....O::s bQ
Po Ii) tJ "d QU..
o (.) 0 ""=' U·_ ._
;:¡ ¡¡¡'õ' '" S U Þ g¡
r;.<:: .... ..s '" ,,'._ 0
-0 "Po .!:i.. U.<::
Q) M tI:I.¡:: 00\
Q)>.¡:-~Q.,+-'~
..d..... ( J 00 0 '"
_.- 8 . 00 ¡..., tf.I 0'\
g 1:: '" Po § "
o:S ~ ~ 0 0 g...;::..=
..... œ cd fir +-' ::s .....
~u",,,,,,,,,,,,_,-
uCd~u( JOO
bQ~ :E - ::s ¿: ¡:¡ "
~ (,¡..j ~ .5 ~ ¡..., 0
~ .s ~ ~ § ~]',ª
o"æ<u~""=
~';::;8_ª-cit:~
.Qgj>Ö~ 5J¡] &~
¡: ..... 0 (I] o· >.
g1J §uð:] ~æ
::s8,.¡::obQ-¡¡¡0
tJ"":E"u",-
- 1::'''''':0''' '"
VJ p. 0 """'" 0 C ) ""='
'-.§ 1È"'<;:: ~ g liI .
!::1" ¡¡¡.;::; §'-' ~;g
'" 0 .... ,,"'" ,,~ .... 0
t:i ¡-'.-""';::; '¡;:¡ ,,~
Þ -0 ¡,¡ 0 bQ';; '"
Þ .-§ ~ " S - " 0.Éi
..... t!- ~ ~ CI)'C'';:: .....
u 8 " ~ .~ ~ g ~
e ~ ~- (,¡..j
-o"gc..=¡o-:=5œ
C-oCd~-5~~~.þ
N
IÓ
~caU"'d"¿.s
"''¡:: ° ..-
._" <II 0 »
bQ,,:E1::~'<;::
"õ"o"U
.~ Po" §:J::! "
bQ "'.<:: ::s ¡::; .;::;
= -wu<+-.
""d . 0 t:: 0
........ ; ..... t,¡...¡
tS~oo~="
_ cd >. ::S ~ .g b
..... ..... C ..... 0
(.) 0 rIJ''''' 11) ~ ¡::::
§-~¡:-5 ;s
o ~ 0 ~ Q) s::
uca"'dUo£u
k "- ....
>'OJJt;j:;:: >.~::s
- 0..... :>...........-
.- ... VJ ;;>'1:: ~.;;
u Po _ Oi) 0"'"
Q) fI)._ B ""=' "'CI
.<:: ,,< U§" "-0
-- > ..... 11)
(/J''''' ..d
.....õüo~U(/)
.."'....u'¡;:¡og
ë 8..= »õ:E-=
.- c.."¡:a.~ Q) 0 cd
i5.-o""'uõ -0
8 '" -0 " .... ".-
o <II -.<:: Po.;::; 0
uQ)]-.a ..~
U > fIJ êU ~~
0·.,: ".<:: " ;::: '"
'" !:; _ 0 '" <II
~ ~.:;:¡ fIJ"'¡:::: C,) fIJ
~o _U~cn
Cj.D (,,) t.) ~.... ( J
œ t.C u (,)....
" ;::: o;¡;¡ Po~ "-0
.<:: 0 '" ><<11 Po-o
~uJ:::3Q)_C.f.}œ
N
IÓ
§
,¡ .
§"E ~..
~!:ê-~
Q) d ~ ~
§ ~.g e
u-=~e
fIJ >. ""C:j 0
-= ..... ~ u .
oo ._ ~ u
Q) ~ 0 ¡;o;j ~
8 Po '" " 8
~~E~"
8ëa£;e
Po.."tJ
8 0 ._ <:: .Po§
.... .- fIJ """
".<;:: "'.<::
fIJ "'CI i:d - Q)
G,) ""0 Q).l!3..c
.;::; '" 8 .-§ .:::
c::-5êU 0
o ::s -" bQ_
~ 8 '¡;:¡.S ~
~ ~ êU ~ c..>
.8.8~.8-B
¡¡¡
~.;::;
.; .~
-
.. .
,,1::
8 0
" e-
u~
æ_
'€ ~
.~~
g-
ª,8
uN
1 U
00
"::E
0"
= "
.2 -=
-
i:d c:: .~.
'S.- -
,,-0 0
e B.~
" '" '" .
_tJ»
P-.;.a ëü
..s.S ¡¡¡
. .
-
:g
'"
'"
'"
-
.~
~
"
o
.~
1::
o
~]
~ '~
¡-.
..,.
"
..
'C
Po
8
§:;
-¡
~ t
5
î
.
-0
¡¡¡ .
" "
'"
.~
><
~
1:
Q
&
'"
lJ
~
"
N
-
'"
'"
'"
-<
~
-
Q
Z
röri:I
=--
=--
~
,...;
Eo-;
Z
röri:I
~
=
u
-<
Eo-;
Eo-;
-<
Ûo ~ !~i!l~
=: i~.~
~ < .Q.,;:s.
~~ ~¡~
S~ ~iiæ
rF.I io',....
rF.I rF.I {IJ'!io1
~ ~:»i~
~ ....¡.,Q.,
o Eo< ·i
u~ Q.,
~~
~~
....Eo<
~~
~~
o,..;¡
Eo<=-
~~
~.......
¡;o1rF.1z
~
<0
z....
<Eo<
~~
=:z
Eo<¡;o1
~~
~o
~~
Q
N
rF.I
Z
o
~
~
~
o
u
=
u
o
~
Ç.')
'" OJ) ~..2
"=,,~
:s.- ._
"t:I E '" ~
~o~c
E.a"t:l
10 "=
~ '" = OJ
-::::...c:: .-
- OJ)
'" =
"'!ä r:: Q).-
'-..s:::: ......
.... " :;
1;¡¡8~§
o (,) ~ 0
(5..°8:u
~CIj..2
~..<:: '"
;:8-;:8"':
o{j01$
E-< 0 ~._
"-".¡::.- ~
...... ~ 0
r:: - . {/.)
"'~ '" '"
5",3]
b.Q(:I...°oo
cu ...... ..s:::: tf.
= OJ '"
Cd 00 bl)t5..
;:8 r:>..5 ~ oJ
"t:I 'B 5 oB.5
=..2 i'; = -
Cdu :.=~
E'-"t:I 0 0
ö~¡¡¡8.~
'-OJ)
o =
.¡::
'" 0
~ .~
r:>.=
'" 0
-5;:8
.... "
,s¡¡:¡
.- co
§ ....
sE-<
OJ)
>, = .
"'i).- CI.:I
'" 0_
o OJ) ~
- = ¡::
" 0 5b
.9t)u
:; '"
~~"g
:; = 0
.5 8 ....
- "
= "t:I '50
8 ¡¡¡ '"
10
þ- ....
.- =: ~
uš'-
'" r:>. 0
..<::o~
--~
10"';:8
..<::i';E-<
E-<"t:I"-,,
M
"t:I-
oou=Þuucu
.~ E! o'ü 0 ~ 5
= co g. co ;:8 .¡:: ...,
5.b ª"e,:,~~
¡:¡"cIj] c..> Q,) ~
:::: = ¡:j '" ~ ~ 0
§.- J:¡ o:S +:J ti.i QJ
OJ)'= 0 = :; ~
= :;"t:I _._ e '"
.- '" '" ¡::
:g~!tU~t>ëa
o -:; '" co k
..s:::: >'ëa"T:It;:: 0.00
'- co > ._ e 0
o 8 (1) Þ is._ 0-
..... .... e·- QJ "'t::)
o ~ to) "T:I Q,) "0 .
.,&j...c:: Cd._...... C "0
e - '" ª" co OJ '"
:; 0 ~ " ¡:j.5 :J 3
= g::s!"t:I .1;; = ¡:j
"t:I N :; co ¡::: '" š '"
~ i»~ 8 ä ~ ~ ~
eo¡ =o<l;o~
..., :; "'.-.... !5. ¡¡¡
~ ~:ê ~ ~ ~.5 ~
.§ = ~ '" = r:>. '" _
.- .... Q) 0' {/.) tJ
" S ~ '" co
O\OJ)"t:I=" -"r:>.
N .5 - .- õ ëa ':¡:¡ e
""'. 2 ,g.. ¡¡¡ :; 5'-
C;; '50 ~ B 'ê 8..<:: §
..<:: "'..E g '" < ~
E-<~-
"'"
oc't
~.- a
'\;;t:",
.... 0 ¡:.
E-< &<8
....-
"'=ib
o:S.~ ::3
- 0
( ) '" ....
;>~..o
0..... CIJ
s.~.o
r:>.co",
co - e
U ( )
-="'O.~
." ¡¡¡ '"
= 10
6 ~"¡::
U = r:>.
'" 0
10 ~!5.¡>.
..<:: '" fir æ
-tIJ '"
'" '"
oo~£ 8
"CO"""iD
= ..... co =
'" ..... -5 '"
§ å ü ~
o OJ) e 0
u 0'-"':
e .... "0 c..>
~"t:Ico
t::: gf ¡¡¡ 'E
.s .¡:: _. §
tf. 0 p., 0
.'"::: Q,)u
>,="
- 0 = ....
.- 0 0
u;:8""",
'"'
'"
'"
'"'
..,-
'"'
-
"
"-
""
r<)
'D
"t:I"t:It:]ò<!
1;!~8.-~
O".J /1)- en 1-0
r:>...... .... t: 0
e-o.>°ì
r:>.~-5 8:'"
o:S~~ªZ
'--..s:::: _
~ ¡::: - "t:I·ê
OJ) o¡ is ¡¡¡ '"
:E 1;¡¡'tJ "t:I 1ii
Cd 0·- r::
..g..t'<~=Q)
- r.IJ 0..s::::
t:: CI] {/.)~
o ~.- >.
r:>..¡::"t:I_ 0
"'0=..-
.... ...... Cd (,)
Q) .- .- ~
o:S§~.ãOlJg.
"t:I ;:8.g ¡.¡ ¡¡¡;:8
Q) cu ..... ..c
'" "" "=
;;> ~ t+:: "0 0
\1) <.¡..¡._ c ....._
.> ~ rJ} t'd c.E ~
'" .... ¡:j "
....f-o_"'Ø¡::~
'" U '" o'¡;;
co ( ,) s=._ 00
..c=-=]~~.s
uoOj¡'J'gu
0-00....0_
- ..., =
;:8 '" = _ ¡:¡ '"
Ci"''''Q)S~
"'§~~8",
"=..c= ,.~ 00 ~ C/)
f-o U V.J._
r<)
'D
N
..,.
1::
&
'"
\.J
~
\.:J
-
'"
'"
'"'
<
;.<
-
~
Z
riiil
=--
=--
~
,...;
~
Z
riiil
~
=:
u
~
~
--
u
~~
e,~
z~
s~
00.00.
00.00.
....z
~o
~E=
u~
=E-o ~
Z
~....
....E-o
~z
~~
o~
E-o";¡ "
~
~
....
--
z
~
tS~
~s
~~
=z
E-o~
~~
~o
~u
s~
=
N
,,:..<,..'::.,,.:
i';/
:, 'T';
00
Z
o
E
~<
00~{,:1
~
z
o
II-<¡¡'¡
~~
s:
$!
t~
00
~
~
00.
Z
o
....
u
~
u
o
~
00
Z
o
....
¡.¡
t.)
~<
00{,:1
¡¡.¡z
r,r..¡,,'"
~~
!§
$ã
¡,..~
oo¡¡.¡
i:l)
~
~
~
00.
Z
o
....
E-o
~
~
o
u
~
u
o
~
-'
~"O II) ....
'Õ ;¡;9;;..s ~ ~~;¡
OJ <:> -11 '"
1I)=....<'I=¡¡¡<="''3
p:: .9..s . II) II) II)
OJ Ü ~ e ¡¡. e..o·!::
.. Ë = "'.... '" _..0
00 § ",.9 1;; ~ I'>. ¡ï¡ - ~.
>Z to=. c .... 5'0 tI.) '" cu
>0 :.=o~ <~.a
>~ as U'- = en Ol} ....
U - -< '" 6b'. ",.r>
. I'>."'=' ;>..;::¡
. ïãl'>.="O ~
<>ì$< ~ -< 0 Ž 6.~ ~
'{,:1 "'.... ~ ~"
oo;Z ¡¡;;J'§ "'~Õ6b=
"".... 0.. M .E C;.a 8 .~
~>.~ ~~O;::¡~'š-B 1'>.;9
o~ ;>,t:~..c::i::""
~t~ _ æ 6 " .g ¢:: .<;::: 'õ <B
~ ¡¡.¡ ¢:: <:> p:: § OJ ~.~
!':S"t:IO-.t; 8
,..;¡ ....... ã M 41) bO 11.> .-
~ .. " '" 0 ¡q s:: e 1:
"0 ~ -= ~.-
! ....... 0 "'t:I 0 11)
~5°..o~'3;¡"'00
~ '" e _ ¡¡¡ 1'>.- OJ).....
i:l) "" .= '" -< lS,.g [!).S 0
i:l) "'='> p::;::¡"''''"'='§
_ 0 >"'=' ¡¡;
'0 ._ ~ 41) u ~ --
"'=' ~ §..§'1!;9]"'=';:¡ i'f~
'" 0<+-0""'" ..<+-0.... I )
.... '" 8 ¡:Qo,,~o_;9
. ..
~ .. » s:: e .... e c.>
...
go " þg = o..::-S ~'.5 ~
.. ).. 0'- ~ 00
~ ..... ( J............ ~ "'t:I'-
u__c.> ;¡CI"
I ;:¡I ;::¡Oj2..o~ ~
u > ....... ....
.J:: 0 t:) Q) Q,) 0 - ~
¡",,",=,s::s::c.>"'eo
;¡ " 0 s:: 0
p:: u'.] "'..0....
oò " r:IJ_::E~;g
00
I
~ :>.-
, p::.¡: ~
_.g ¡¡;
'" -
o 1'>."
o~£
..o¡q»
c.> ~
§ '" OJ)
p:: ~.s
'" I'>."'='
;9"'='~
" § s::
~ § 0
00. .. ~ .-
z ~ 6b Ü
0 ~8Ë
ü~~
> °
'': § c.>
~ _ u
~-
o OJ) ¡; .
.... s= O"'N
u·- Q) 8
~"'='"'='
c::': roN
._::s ..
-~.....-
= 0 M
0 os::....
'" C,) C 0 (1)
u> >. .- .- ~
.. .<;::: § ~ e
~ ..
.. u c.>'"
" _t+=0 "
.. QJ ~._ G.> 0
U ~ ..0 ~ <= 0 e-
..
"';¡I - "'..... '"
0 ";j .... ~ 0 \.)
~ ..o~ '" ~
¡....;::¡]~
- -"'=' \:)
oò oò -
<>
<>
'"
..,
...
g
'"
'"
....
.~
~
~I
p::
'"
=
~
r-:
~I
¡¡
'"
'"
"
'"
.~
.
I"-
~
-<
~
....
~
z
~
=-
=-
-<
--
,...¡
E-<
Z
~
~
==
u
-<
E-<
E-<
-<
,-,
U
0>-
:;~
~~
~~
t;joo
0000
....z
:;0
:;....
o Eo-<
uU
Eo-< <
=~
C~
....Eo-<
ooz
~r.;¡
~:;
Or.;¡
Eo-<"';¡
~~
:;~
r.;¡oo
CZ
<0
Z....
~~
=Z
Eo-<r.;¡
~~
~O
~~
Q
N
, "..r ¡¡¡ 'i:! ..... blJe' .¿ £ gj ] ] 1š oô
" éa _ 11) .- é'd"" N
] ~ ~ ] ë-] ~ §¡ ~ .~ .<:
~.<: ~~ 8 ~ ~.- ~ ~
tS- ~tlSo~~""; ~
~ ~] o.~ C.).~ '"C 0 ~ ~
:'H)':: c.. O¡¡¡ - OJ QJ - ...t::: 0 "'--
,:'tJj M_=,.,~_N.~""""
'z "" 0 u 0 - OS·- e .J:J
o ã ~~ Q.tij:= Po. ~ [â.g <=
r¡:: ~ ~.!2 'Ø ~ ~ [â 1š ª ",·ß
,,::,::',8 """ .~ :<=~ ~ ~ ~:9 g ~ a ~
,....."".J:J.- <1) ....:i~....>""
~b := Ü ~;s ~ ~ ;;.. Po 0 ...¡¡;
~'z] <1) 3 ~+:J:;:;.J:J.9 <1);;..5
'm.;;.... ...... E5 g r.S ~ "5h 1š CIJ ~.~ CJ
z'E-'::; ""<1)=:=:g§""UbIJ
o)Z; ~ ...; bO -;¡ ~ C1) > - b() .s::
,,;,i"'3 <= u <= "" - 0 Po <= <1)-6
ø.::a ~ '~':>.- ..š OJ s.!:::: ï3 ;s §
J:o<¡:;¡¡Po8gf! 'õ~;gg,.<.¡:¡
~,~ ...... p. p...... = QJ rzJ 0 "'0
.~".. .i ¡¡.] e]:;~] _E{1
.. r~ g.: 8 os.3 :2'¡g ~ §¡ ¡¡. ~
,o:J00004 0 (,) tI.I._ ¡;:¡ QJ ~ tJ
t18 ~ ~ ~ §-<=01f~~.s æJ"8
......'<;¡ G.> QJ.~"':::: ( ,) ë..] Õ ~ ...... 0
o æ's;;s rJ.J:J 8 - 1:1.<: 8 g
.i Po~.<::="" u;S <=.<;::: '"
o 2-·-::: 8::; œ._ ~ ~ CI) """
,<:1IiJ 0.. S i3:: C'I:S o.~ ~ -<= ....- t.S
... 0 <= .<: . <=
< .i ::; ~.§ ª ~ ª ..ê~ š·g 5 §
tJ2......kal-L p.u·,::::",=
C1) 0 œ ~.- ~ 0 ~ ~ ~
.~ ......2 _. U Q,) .." ~ J::2 C,,) C,) .
..s:: ._ - ~ '" .., ..... en·-·- M
C) > c..o~ofi -;¡ ~ c=í5..'õ.o
æ ¡¡ ª,~E-<~,z;Q 8 ª'ª'~
I
I
I
00
Z
0'
......,
~
Q
Z
r.;¡
~..
o.
u
~
u
o
:;
c
B~<-5~~5
'"03 fäo-~
] ¡:: r.ñ .......s:: VJ .....
à8~ Q) ~c..
g¡._ ~ ;;.. u 0
.<: <= OS <1)'- g-
~S~::¡;í5.]
œS....otl.loot':S
-o~"t:JtJ=(1)
Cf.I (.) 0 ._!..t::-
'" >.0:Ct+-i c..
¡:::c:u........s::=t':So
o .- 0 ,..., +-' ~
._ -§ '-= e - '"
rtj ..ctd¡::;l-t~
uo'=:¡¡:'::<1)"'=
;.:= U'- p.,:= 0
PoæJ~]oe~
~ td...... (1)"C;; ~
0""0....- ~
õ~cc.S~td.;9 .
~.- t'd .......... CI) "'='
-"rJ'. ,,"t:)..£~ £
Q.} 00 (1) ....,..... ,,,,
"" -'< <1) -.- '" ."
¡:: ~cd u 4) {I.) ¡;:¡ U,) (1)
0~§í5.5..!:!æg.
~<co>euê~~
~..s::= ""C 8 ""'._ ~ rJ'.
¡¡¡~~ ..soo~
.... ed ë; 5 tI) ...... ...... u
;3 í5..~ <1).g '" N 0
bIJ 0.J:J·s; "8 ;<::E
].Eõ]8~~ö
...... <tJ ] 0.._ (1)]
....0 - u § - j»'<: -
OOQ,)_t":S;;a-o
ii cd ...... p.,-:S .... ts ......
~ ~.~ bIJ j»:9 0> ã
-CQ~=ca~ -
fI) 0..- S: .... «> Q,) p.,
< ~ ~ C':S:-9..c:::E.~
Po~t;....:iE-<~;S
....
Co
Co
....
,,>'
....
-
.~
"-
"'"
<"!
00
~ "" <= <=
U·- 0
I ) 5",,''¡::
æ æ I ) ~
p._ ';j ts
ec..t)(:I..
Po"" Po 0
o§o'õ
- "" '"
~gfã!3cj
bIJ·- "" 0 0
~t;<1)'<:"'"
g'¡;;;!fi 0 ""
""'<1)~-O
"" -""
(I) UJ 0 Q,)
.~ -B ] .š ~
u~=e-
].,g'~~~
-CI.:I.;guo
...... a.> tIJ s::: Q..
t) ......'- >. ( ,)
9J'e>.........
- ~ .- 4)
;a~~§..c
- OS e '"
:-a;'::Õe~
§-5~o~
o ._ c.S c.>..c::
U'<: ""-
~"'~""
Þ .2 OS g
.- g .<;::: g¡
U_:-=uOl)
Pou <=
I ) ~ e IE
;SblJj»""~
=cao.....
-;jE.....:ë;
.<: ~.J:J bIJ e
~-;):.=:.=œ
<"!
00
...
...
1:
o
¡¡¡.
""
\.)
~
(:>
-
:s
....
-<
~
..
~
z
~
=--
=--
~
,..;
Eo-;
z
~
~
==
u
-<
Eo-;
Eo-;
-<
---
u
0...
~~
~~
~ª
~c:I:J
c:I:Jc:I:J
....z
~O
~....
O~
uU
~<
=~
~~
....~
~z
~~
OJ;¡;¡
~....;¡
~~
~~
j;¡;¡c:I:J
~z
<0
z....
<~
~~
=z
~j;¡;¡
~~
~O
~~
<=
N
rIJ
Z
o
......
t
~~
fI. 'z
1iIiJ...
'rIJ~
Z
o
¡: ,,1iIiJ
fI. ~
IiIiJIiIiJ
='~
¡;.~
<"'"'
r-<'Q
fl. 1iIiJ
rIJ
o
¡: "
o
¡:II;
¡:I.
c:I:J
Z
o
~
Q
Z
i
o
u
=
u
o
~
I
-"'11)
.~ "'..c
'E~"""'tÛ
° 0 0 ...,
..... 0...... ;::::J
0-·- ......
Cl. 0 "C u
>.~ g, Ë
§ ~ ~ ~
>.:::::: ¢::
'"E ~ .s .5
o "0 °
.¡:: c ... 00
0.",0.",
"Éh '" 5·ª
..... g ~~
..c..".,
'" 8 c·'"
'" 0. '" Þ
'" .~
o ~ cU
::I cd'- <1.>
"'c ..c
9'- {/.)......
o.~ ~ "õ
o .- ¡::
... 0 c 0
Q) ...... t'd._
::;"O..c<¡:¡
I:: Q) tJ +:i
.... 1; ~:.=
"'S ...'" S::;'-
o Õ ~
(,) '-' OD...c:
- 8.5 ~
~ g ~ §
!::1 '" c''¡::
'" 00": "
t; c ;:s
.- ~ .:::
þ"O ° '"
.- c..s §
u<2o"
='
-
0;
I
bQ......u
coo 00
:a ~~ ~
c ¡ä ¡ä.(Ü
<2.... ...
"" . "0
"õ ÞË Þ
_.- VJ'¡::
o U 0
> -"'C
~.,g~p..
- "
0,).....""'='1;)
-= g ~ ( ,)
00'= ~ "Éh
= "C Q)'-
.- "C Q)..s::::
~ c '" "
~=~o:S
" '" '"
=............. Q)
._ (,) VJ.....
o 0
....~~-
Q) 0 ...... p., .
"0 ....- " '"
.- ø. C,) 0.. t;
'" .-
S ~~ u>
u !':S ~ 0 __
C::'C""" ..=
:;::: 'C; p.. CI) ]
g.a ~8u
U51˻,ge
° '" °
..c- -
~- ed OJ) ~
.~ 5 -B.5 ~
u~_"Os:::
C1) 4.) tIJ 5,-
..s:::-Q)~rn
_.,£:)::1 ......
~ g"... ~
~.- ¡.., Q).~
"d ~ 0.;3 e
E--4tU_OQ..
-
='
0-
00"'...11):::11)11)11)11)11)11)
.S ~ 5..s ~ g -= ..s ..s ..c ¡5
"O°e~¡;>Có"C ::::
] ~ g 0 ~ § ~:€ §.~ ~
¡:Q kt; c_ ~ 0
t.> 00·_ ~ ï.:a ø. 00 rn 0
"'d:§<=OSEbl)t)§N
C ;::S 0 ~ = 0 s:: ".- '-
CI:S~ u2 Q)::; o~ r== 0
c '" 0 <,::¡ c ....5b..¡::
00 ~ "8. ~"O ° 0 c 0..Q
.5] 0 ;::S '" 0:;: ~ ~ ~ ~
5-i::cU'J13:p""...cto-oC::o
J§ ..c'(Ü "':§ 1J .:<;:: 0 0 ~
p....<;::::iSooc"'§~"'¡ß1írñ
Q) ~ ts]'-': '';: "C ~.s .D fI}
..s::: ...... .- "C œ (I) Q) 0 11) Q)
- oo~ g.o..sõ.ou 'õí = 50
'- .;:¡ ::is S !> c = g ..s 0 8
o ....::IICO 0 >.- 0 ... >. (,) Cl.
~'" o~"o.~"O_c
= ~ ~.~ tJ .D bl)_ ~ 8 0
.2 0 {/.) Q)...c:.S::::::::: Cl. "0
_ ~ c ~ ..c " E:: ~ .~ >. 0
tJ-.o... cut'd -C,)~rn
Q) - ._ 0 0 Q) Q) \J._ t:!.-
~......- - I:: s::§-¡;:; >
5 ~ ~ "0.5 "'.9 ¡ä c-g
ëa t:: c. (,,) Q) ~.- õ çn tf.I 0 _
...... S 11)-'- ga Q) t} 0 Q)._.~ c.
c:: (,,) .... - ¡o.; ~ _ po,,'- Q) 11)-
Q) p.. .,J:J C':I :- \1.1. u ...... _ ~
a :::S:::::Q)çn C::-p..
¡:.~ c p... 'S:: ..c 15 t;j ~ = ~
o 00;;,>- -~ 0
........." 00 c..... ·u=
.- s:: I:: ¡;:; ~ = Q) 'E .-
¡;o"·.¡::..sï3rñ¡joo ~
~ ~ ~.~ '" '§ ~ 8 ~ 5 ;>, ~
o 0. o.-='S ° ¡:.'¡> ~ !\í t::;s
¡5öö<];& g,JJ~<]c.:J
'"
:5
'"
..;
'"
-
1:
~
N
0;
.s~~]'õ~
!> ¡ä ¡ä - .~
bl)~¡::..s::=8.c
~ .~ .g.~ ¡ä §
.... '" c·_
~-~ ~'E
>. p... go 13 .5 B
...... - ..... ~ 0
û ª !5.. Š = "0
° ° "0
.;3 ~ ~ ~.~ §
...... 0 œ].!!a
g ~ B .¡:: 0
.... Q) 0 Q) ~
.- (,,) - (,,) C.
"0:.= 0. c ..c
-..c='" "
.- ;::S 0 =. Q)
§~U~£~
o 'õ O'ca ~
u '" - = ~'(Ü
Þš!:¡¡¡ <,::¡.a.
U~t}B~~~
° ~ ._ ._ 0
-"0_,, ".<;::N
....cc..c~ .
...... Q) Q) """.....
¡ßþ= ~lÀM
OO·¡:: t '" >...Q
!3 0 OJ - ::;
.¡:: e- C+-t ëa ëa ~
U 0.0 01313 ¡ä
0'" o0..c
::is ~ gf~ ~ ~ <;:
~ ._.- 0 0 ~
8:g e.=:.=: Æ
1! ",·s..c > > 0
¡-,õ.¡:Q~55c
N
0;
'"
..
1:
&
'"
\.)
~
\:)
-
'"
'"
'"
-<
~
.....
Q
Z
r;r;¡
=-
=-
~
,...;
Eo-<
Z
r;r;¡
~
==
u
-<
Eo-<
Eo-<
-<
;;>'<i':
.-.
U
0>-
~~
~<
--~
~~
t;J"-J
"-J"-J
....Z
~O
~....
O¡'
UU
¡.<
=~
~[!¡
....¡.
"-JZ
~r;¡¡¡
~~
Or;¡¡¡
¡.,..;¡
Z~
r;¡¡¡~
~~
r;¡¡¡"-J
~Z
<0
Z....
<¡.
~~
=Z
¡.r;¡¡¡
~~
O~
~O
~U
c;~
<=
M
;"",;;';
;{~
-I:
,',t)
" '<
~,C
f;li Z
f2.;¡-
Q
p.,
rn"
~'~
~,â
¡..=
rn[ilil
<':iL<1:I.:I
',2
;~
rLI
Z
o
~
<
~
~
o
U'
~
U
o
Š
;j¡'~n~r:y'1j;
,,',
...
...
~
rn
]
.~
.,
~
.,
I':
o
Z
;~
Q
e
" <
~c
~.!¡
f2!2
2~
rn;:E
~'fj
~â
¡"Q
fl)f;IiI
",~
p.,
Q
, "~
T'"
ó
....
...
...
~
...
rn
.;
.,
::I
'"
.~
"-J
Z.
o·
....
~
~
I
o
u
~
u
o
Š
~
ó
....
....
o
....
ut!.:!!.:!~~
0"""- CI) 0 c::
"" ~~.c C'iJ
""'.."O~ .,
CJa¡§",-¡;¡<i:i
~._ 11)
.,~0I)"1:!'"
.crnl': 1;;., Po
-- .- ..... eø
-£3~§~8.e
._ ':¡:J _ 0 eø
~"g~..s5"
"'d_CfJ~U
en .... tn en ::s
!:I ~'~::I "0 '"
C)ë>~g88
= ~..=g.- Po"E:.=
o ~ = '"d Cf.I._ OJ
u 8 ..du .8 ª '"d .::-
>.. ( ) - ø.
..... ... ~ OJ ::s...
"C:: I-¡ 0 ... Q) 0 Q)
0">.21;;~'¿¡i
~;S.<;::<E OI)~
<.au 1;; ~·S"O
'" ~ ., '" ., 1;;
"'"'.- ':¡:J c:: tI) CI) '"d
ß':;..dOJ~eã
~ ..~..d ø.. fI} t:j
..¡g~~ :Eo<:>
"o~I':"OE-<::I
0.- Q)'- ã U)
~";j~~ 1Š]
00 1! "I': ., 0:1
"Þ"~eOl)
e·¡:: e 0 Po I':
~ S 0 '5 c ..2 "50
....... 0 ¿; p., CIJ eø
-C)::SQ)~>U
~<¡::¡....goS
0'/3
...
...
...
01
~
....
..;
....
....
....
...
...
...
01
~
þ"O
.¡:: §
o
oS '"
~fj
I:; ~
'¿¡i >
~ 8
., Po
., e
~.~
00 I':
., 0
..dO':::
~ ::I
.co<:>
~.¡::
.~ t:j
c:::.a
o
.~ ...
OJ .,
... '¿¡i
&~
o
o u
U '5j¡
1':., .
._..... fI)
-"'I... e e
~ '"
o CfJ._
~ 01) §
>'I':.c
~'<;:' U
.- 1.I:t~ u
u.~ e
]fjOl)
..... '"d .5
-;;.- '"0
¡::.5 ~
..;
....
....
....
....
8:
<0>
'"
",'
'"
-
.~
~
;>;~ &.9 ~
.'E ::s._ to
~ Õ ~:Ë ...
':;::i 4) ~ 0
3eOj~
-.. ß ~ ~ ~
¡.., CI:I "0 eø·s
.!:! ~ 1;; ., C'
0:1 "00<:> I':
~ '- I': .-
vosª">..
~g¡.Ee]
CI) CI) ::s tI)"'"
1;; "'.-
OJ .... -:S r::
....c:: Q) 0 ( )
..... tI.I 'UP, CU..::: .....
-:S ~ .9:-';; ~ 5
.~ '" ~"O '" e
., ., I': ...
0= ~ 1a ~ &..9
.- > ·0.,
·.:::'E¡;a.~u>
š.g~.g[;.g
-'- '"d
"¡:r..r:: >.. ( ) I ,g
o U 0<:> = ~ '"
o .- "'d ~ 0 -
..s:: Q) ..... =
.5 ~ b ~ ri!
~ go rn g..5 ~
~ " .,., 0
.- " 1;; "0
Ucd_cu~~
Q) CI:S 11)"';:: 0
-:S8£5~"E
::s cd rI) Q., r.I)
-:: '"C ... c:: en·-
~" r.I) .- >
158:'::08"0
[""""""" Q.,,.....- ... Q. CU
~
....
....
'"
...
t:
c
&
'"
<.J
~
\:)
-
<0>
<0>
'"
VOLUME II
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2001 ANNUAL REPORT
APPENCICES
Appendix B - Growth Forecast
Appendix C - Threshold Questionnaires and Supplemental Data
City of Chula Vista
2001 Annual Growth Management Review Cycle
18-MONTH and 5-YEAR
GROWTH FORECAST INFORMATION
April 25, 2002
City of Chula Vista
2001 Annual Growth Management Review Cycle
18-MONTH and 5-YEAR
GROWTH FORECAST INFORMATION
April 25, 2002
As a component of the City of Chula Vista's Growth Management Program, the City's
Planning and Building Department provides annual growth forecasts for two time frames:
18 months and 5 years. Providing this information enables City departments and other
service agencies to assess the probable impacts that growth may have on maintaining
compliance with the City's facility and service Threshold Standards. With this data, these
bodies will be able to report those impacts (if any) to the Chula Vista Growth Management
Oversight Commission. The 18 month forecast covers the period from July 1, 2001 through
December 31, 2002. The five year forecast spans the calendar years from 2002 through
2006.
Context
As last year, this report reflects a substantial inventory of potential development as a result
of continued strong regional demand for housing and the South Bay's increasing role in
meeting this demand. As presented in previous years' forecasts, the San Diego Association
of Governments' (SANDAG) Region 2020 Growth Forecast indicates that the South Bay
subregion will host a substantial amount of the region's projected growth over the next 20
years. This stems mainly from the limited General Plan capacity in several cities in the
county, as well as from the lower average price of housing in areas south of 1-8. Based
largely on the amount of vacant land within master planned projects in Chula Vista's eastern
area, SANDAG projects that the City will add close to 40,000 housing units and over
120,000 new residents between the years 1995 and 2020.
In order for the City of Chula Vista to accept this growth and maintain the quality of life there
must be the concurrent development of public facilities and services. It is the role of the
Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) to assess if the established quality of
life standards are being met and to make recommendations to the City Council to insure
future compliance.
18 Month Forecast
Annually, the City requests developers to indicate how many housing units will be permitted
and how many finaled over the next 18 month period. Based upon the response (Figure 3)
the City can expect to experience continued significant housing development. During the
18-month period from July 2001 through December 2002 housing developers anticipate the
issuance of buildina permits for 4.490 dwellina units. and the completion of 4.836 housina
units. During just calendar year 2002 the figures reflect building permit issuance for 2.944
dwelling units, and completion of 3.634 dwelling units.
Calendar year 2001 was record setting in the number of housing units receiving building
permits and for the number of units being finaled. Between 1998 and 2001 the number of
housing units issued permits and finaled per year in Chula Vista increased by almost 150%.
The number of units receiving permits increased form 1,093 to over 3,500 units, and the
number of units being finaled increased from 1,093 to over 3,200 in 2001.
2001 Annual Growth Forecast
Page 1 0(4
As presented on Figure 3, during calendar year 2002, housing developers are projecting
that they will request building permits for over 2,900 housing units, and that nearly 3,600
housing units will be completed. While such growth has the potential to occur, historically
these "raw" numbers have been consistently optimistic and resulted in overstating actual
growth by a factor ranging between 20 and 26%. In addition, limits to growth are created by
market conditions and the constraint of support facilities and services such as schools,
roads, highways, sewers, and even the number of building inspectors.
Normally a high/low range for the next calendar year is provided. The low range is derived
by taking the past years percent difference between forecasted and actual and applying this
to the 2002 developer forecast for permit issuance and housing units finaled. However,
since the developer forecast numbers units to receive permits is significantly lower than in
previous forecasts and that it is even lower than that experienced in the last calendar year,
the developer forecast will be used directly, rounding up from 2,944 to 3,000 units. The
number of developer forecasted finals is reduced by last years variance of 9%, to produce a
low of 3,300 units (Figures 4A and 4B).
HIGH - LOW HOUSING UNIT FORECAST FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2002
PERMITS FINALS
EXPECTED LOW HIGH
3,000 3,300 3,634
The recent dramatic upward trend in housing permits and finals is now expected to
moderate. Using the estimated permits at 3,000 represents a 15% decline as compared to
2001. Units being finaled will increase modestly at 2% from year 2001 levels, to 3,300
units. Although moderating in terms of the rate of increase, the numbers being permitted
and finaled still represent significant growth and pose a challenge to City departments and
service agencies to meet Growth Management Threshold compliance.
The number of finals can exceed the number of permits in calendar year 2002, since there
will be approximately 2,000 units under construction and as many as 900 units in plan
check on January 1, 2002. This "inventory" of yet to be finaled homes, combined with
additional units to be permitted during calendar year 2002 provide the justification for the
3,300 units expected to be finaled. However, the number of finals in calendar year 2003
can then be expected to decline, as there will be fewer units in "inventory" at year end 2002.
5 Year Forecast
Preparing a 5 year forecast always incorporates a significant degree of uncertainty. The
current forecast period, years 2002 through 2006, offers an even greater challenge given
the year long decline in the stock market and the events of September 11. Prior to the
September 11th terrorist attacks, the San Diego and specifically the Chula Vista housing
market seemed little impacted by the overall national economic downturn. Based upon
reports from the housing industry, housing sales immediately following the attacks fell
dramatically, but have since been steadily climbing and are essentially at pre-attack level.
In addition, the national recession has been mild and appears to now be in a state of
recovery and growth. The momentum of home sales combined with favorable interest
rates is expected to keep demand at forecasted levels through the end of the year 2002. A
2001 Annual Growth Forecast
Page 2 of 4
reassessment of the housing market in the fall of 2002 will be conducted to begin next
year's GMOC review cycle.
The 5 year forecast is based upon a variety of sources. These include the SANDAG 2020
forecast, housing market absorption rate studies, traffic forecasts, and development
utilization plans. As a baseline, the SANDAG 2020 forecast indicates that between 1995
and 2010 there will be an average annual increase of 1,790 housing units in Chula Vista
both east and west. In the early years of the forecast actual finals were well below this
estimate, but in recent years the numbers have been much higher. Even if the forecast of
3,300 finals in year 2002 is realized the city will still be below the cumulative SANDAG
forecast.
Given the sources cited above and provided that supporting infrastructure and services
keep pace and there is continuing market demand for the housing products offered, it is
anticipated that over the next five years (2002 through 2006) housing finals will average
approximately 2,600 units per year (3,000 in 2002 and 2,500 from years 2003 through
2006) adding a total of 13,000 units. While this sustained level of development activity is
lower than in the last two years, it is over twice the City's historic annual average of 1,008
units/year between 1980 and 2000.
In forecasting, the degree of accuracy for year to year numbers may vary but over the
longer term these variations should even out and converge on the target date. A
comparison of this forecast with the cumulative numbers generated by SANDAG 2020
shows a conversion in year 2003, with forecasted growth exceeding the SANDAG forecast
through year 2006 (Figure 6).
Followino is a summary of the materials provided as part of this forecast report:
FIGURE 1: Historic Housing and Population Growth
This figure shows the annual housing unit and population growth in Chula Vista
since 1980. Please note that significant annexations of vacant, developable land
have occurred during this time frame, in particular the inhabited Montgomery
annexation in 1986. From 1980 through 1990, the City averaged 970 housing unit
completions per year and an average annual growth in population of almost 5,400
persons. From 1991 through 1998, an average of 801 units per year were
completed. Beginning in 1998 the city broke 1,000 units a year and in 2001
exceeded 3,000 units.
FIGURE 2: Major Projects Map
This figure depicts the location of major residential projects in the City. The numeric
and alphabetic reference numbers on the map also appear on the Figure 3 forecast
table.
2001 Annual Growth Forecast
Page 3 of 4
FIGURE 3: 18 Month Residential Forecasts (7/1/00 -12/31/01)
Figure 3 represents the "upper-end" forecast, and reflects the results of a survey of
housing developers regarding the number of dwelling units they estimate will be
permitted and completed during each of the 3 six-month periods between 7/1/01 and
12/31/02. The projects are divided into two groups: those for major projects in the
City's developing eastern area, and those for smaller in-fill projects in the established
built-up western area. Project entries are keyed to the "Major Projects Map (Figure
2)."
FIGURE 4:
A. Historical Comparison of Forecast to Actual Permits Issued
1996 to 2001, With 2002 Forecast
B. Historical Comparison of Forecast to Actual Permits Finaled
1996 to 2001, With 2002 Forecast
These figures show a comparison of what housing providers have forecasted in
relation to what has actually occurred. The Figures cover a 7 year span beginning in
year 1996. Looking to the year 2002, it is estimated that the actual number of
permits issued will be 91% of that forecasted, and housing units finaled will be
rounded-up forecasted amount.
FIGURE 5:
5-year Forecast
The five year (2002-06) cumulative forecast in Figure 5 presents a variety of
information. The first columns list the major developments and the number of
housing units in active and future projects that are proposed in each. Following this
is a listing of what has been finaled as of year end 2001, followed by the "Future"
number of units to be built. A summation of units to be completed by unit type from
2002 to 2006 is listed next. Units remaining to be built from the current active
projects in eastern Chula Vista are then identified. This table does not include units
in western Chula Vista, as these numbers have historically been small and are
expected to remain so over the forecast period with the exception of a possible Bay
Front residential project.
FIGURE 6: SANDAG Forecast Comparison
Illustrates the cumulative number of housing units produced based upon the
SANDAG 2020 forecast and actual and GMOC forecasted units.
FIGURE 7: Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Project Status Table
This figure provides a point in time reflection of non-residential projects in various
stages of completion from those in Design Review, in Plan Check, and under
construction. The GMOC does not forecast non-residential development as this is
beyond their specific scope. However, this information is presented as an indicator
of commercial and industrial growth at a particular point in time and may be useful
for City Departments and service agencies.
2001 Annual Growth Forecast
Page 4 of 4
FIGURE 1
HISTORIC HOUSING AND POPULATION GROWTH
CITY OF CHULA VISTA 1980 - 2001
~ NDAR....··~.. ~:i~" ':'P;"~
EAR ."~ UII
. '"-:-.
No. % Chanoe
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
407
195
232
479
1,200
1,048
2,076
1,168
1,413
1,680
664
747
560
435
700
833
914
1,028
1,339
2,505
2,618
3,525
(1) Montgomery Annexation
(2) 1990 Census Figures 135.163
-52%
19%
106%
151%
-13%
98%
-44%
21%
19%
-60%
13%
-25%
-22%
61%
19%
10%
12%
30%
87%
5%
35%
Units::"- ~: .
It ".
.t ."~;;
No. % Chanoe
374
496
129
279
521
1,552
1,120
2,490
829
1,321
1,552
701
725
462
936
718
820
955
1,093
1,715
2,652
3,222
33%
-74%
116%
87%
198%
-28%
122%
-67%
59%
17%
-55%
3%
-36%
103%
-23%
14%
16%
14%
57%
55%
21%
Certified Year End.
.. ·(S~~~~:~~~.)::~t
No. % Chanoe
84,364
86,597 3%
88,023 2%
89,370 2%
91,166 2%
116,325 28% (1 )
120,285 3%
124,253 3%
128,028 3%
134,337 5%
138,262 3% (2)
141,015 2%
144,466 2%
146,525 1%
149,791 2%
153,164 2%
156,148 2%
162,106 4%
167,103 3%
174,319 4%
183,300 5%
193,082 5%
. Reflects Department of Finance (DOF) comprehensively revised population figures for the end of the
referenced year.
.. Year 2001 population is an estimate based upon the forecasted number of residential unit finals multiplied
by the State DOF unit size occupancy multiplier of 3.036.
Historic figure 2001.xls
·
¡;;
'"
1ii
"
'"
s.
¡;:
..
.,
;¡>
g
()..,.,rM 0 I;:I: >
...¡ n< <3: <1:1
o a. IJ':: ::: Q
"'¡.;-ii"~Ii"¡
>""IcfrnC-
r" >!!. 1:1 3- 0 :::
;; ¡¡ r')-
...;_....z
~ a Ii' õ' . ~ ~
= !!. ~ -. ."
o g. ¡= ~
B CI" ð
a a "
a '"
a
·
·
."
[
"
n
S
a;
~
o
~
1
~
N
~ooo¡:õo
~
i::o\O:Öoo~
~oooooo
1\
0\000000
N
o
-....1000000
§
""0000000
~coo¡:õc
~ _ IV
\00\010000_
W
N
OCOOOOOO
'"
~
,þ,QOOOOO
~oooooo
-
8;;00000
'"
~ooo¡:õo
.w
Bõõ>o:Öoo~
~
..
:g;;;\O::¡;¡:õ~
1s
.f>o.ooo¡:õo
~
'8
N;;\O::¡;OO~
~
'"
""_ ___N
0'\00100100....0_
~
.,
VlOOOOOO
N
W
~;;ooooo
f
,þ,ooooooo
v;
&iooo¡:õo
~;;IQ::¡;OO!::
w
8:: ___N
.r;.;;"'IoO....O-
w
o
'"
...>
,. Z
. :::
. -
.."
~"
» '"
:2.1:"'"
rI~
Z
n
=
o
o
o
o
o
.,
~
o
.,
~
o
.,
o
o
¡¡
o
N
~
~
o
~
~
o
N
~
~
o
~
N
~
N
'"
>"
Z
ii ~
.~
.
..
~
-
::¡
8
o
~
o
o
v;
o
w
w
~
'"
o
o
N
~
-
::¡
v;
o
-
::¡
~
w
~
~
.,
i::
w
i:;
o
.,
1\
o
~
w
~
w
~
~
w
N
.,
o
;j
w
;;
"
~o
~. ~
~2
i'''
=
=-
o t'"
a ¡;;
a ~
Z
n
=
~~~~~
~»3:n
-5===0
s·
"
'"
t'"
"
'"
'"
o
000
~
o
~ N N
NON
-
¡;;
000
~
~
~NW
-0-
o
000
~
o
000
o
000
~
o
000
o
000
N
~
000
o
000
-
v;
000
o
000
~
~
~NN
N 0 ~
~
~
~ N ~
NON
-
¡;;
000
!:i
o
~t5:::
W
~
~
~ N W
_ 0_
o
000
~
W
000
~
W
000
o
000
~
000
¡;;
~
000
~ ~
NNNN
........ 0'\ VI
'" '"
~:;E~...¡o¡:¡r;;
~UU~?
_ '" "'::J II >
.~¡:¡
.
....00....0
N ::¡
0-.000'10
., ~ ~
<)000000
$.008:0
~ ~
.... <:> IÑ 00 0
~::¡;::;~o
~oo~§
ü: v:
NOONO
~ N~
'-'0....000
~~1:
NO
~ _ W
1.1'10""00
N
s:g~l$o
~o~:go
~_ N
01'_1,0-..1
0'\"'" O'\....¡ 0
0'1__....
...... t-..I.....
N.......... 0\ 0
N __
.....¡ .... 0 VI
..... <:> 0. w....
gg~~L::J
N ~-
~g~~~
Eo!j~o
;;t:~êo
t=;::;::¡;
................. <:>
~oV:~§
W N
:::;g~to
~8$8§
W
.,
W W W
~ ~ N
<'"
n
. !j;
-.
-a:
'"
~
»
'"
?-«<~
~~~~~
... I') n n ;:
~~-
o
.
o
W W
""00'10
o
;;'0;;;0
o
~ ~
NONe
o
§og~
o
W W
0\00.0
o
N N
<:> <:> <:> <:>
o
0000
o
~ ~
....0'""0
o
0'10'100
o
::;;::;:00
o
~ ~
NONQ
o
0000
o
N N
00 0'1 N <:>
o
VI_"" N
_Vlo\O
o
Ñt>.)OO"-l
10-000
- -
o
:;0:;0
o
;: =.¡:,.
N 0"" \0
o
N N
N N~
0\ <:.>...¡ \0
o
~ W
N 0\ 0\ <:>
o
t;:::;;ol:::
o
.....¡ N.... t-.>
"":¡_O\O
o
~ N
NON 0
o
~ ~
..... 0.... <:>
o
Ñ Ñ
......0......0
'-''-''-''-'
...... - '-'-
'"
9-««2
õ:;:;:;:;"
g,iõiõiõiõ"
ro ro ro ro ..
O-......__:s
.
~
n
.
g g
NOOON
N
'-' 00000-
......0.þ.00'-'
;:¡ N
00000
W _ _
;:¡;o~~i:
-
N N
00000
t ~;;......
"""0 '-'0 N
~ ~
~ ~
NOOON
~ ~-
N N_OO
000>0-00
80800
~ _N
O_'-'.þ._
...... N -..I _......
N _
~ N ~
00000
~ ~:::¡-..I
õo,-,.þ.,-,
§ ~ g
NOOON
õ .,¡:........-
~Ñ~$~
N
§Ñ~~ij
~ - .,
~ N W
NOOON
= ..........N
00 ......0-0-
....0.................
1'-'
'"
~o
~ ~
N N
00000
., W~
......-......NO'I
ONO--..I
N -..I.þ.
-..I--..INo-
ONO -..I
., - ~
W ~ _
NOOON
00 .,¡:.. N_
0'1 N 00 0'1
00 0 N......_
:..,¡ ......NOO
go~~i:!
~
~
2j~~
W ~ ~
[:s:
~-!i
3:
."
~;s
V'Jiii~
" . '"
"
'"
n
'"
:::
'"
.,,'"
-"
Zw
V)~g
'T :_
3:
."
:::
."
¡;;,-
~~~
~
"
'"
~ :::
Z
."",
-w
"'~~
.",-
~
~~
~~~
"
'"
~ ¡;¡
:::
'"
.,,'"
V'Jz~
.,,~~
~
'"
,,-
'"
'"
1ii
..;
[
~
~:!!
z
>
t'"
õ'
..
~
'"
.,,¡;;
'"
1iiš
... ~
~ ¡;>
- ..
.
..
=
'"
¡
,
õ'
~:::!.
z-
>
,-
¡¡¡
i
:::
>
'-
o
"
~
"
I:
§
:;;
;Ii
..
~
!?O
&i::t
::rc::
0....
3):.
œ5:
¡¡:èi)
å:t;!
::r
:¡:::O
01'T1
c..; (I)
E.:ï6
'< CD I'T1
~C::i!:
~=. ~
--
.,,):1;
cor-
CD" ¡¡¡...
"....
CD.....
3 .. ..,
cr - 5:1'1ì
CD~
~õ ,...
0:5.0
0..._
N~:i
~~
5;'''''1
<"
~o
o
~Ã1
å~
0(1)
~""I
3
<:
"
~
:::
o
~
~
õ'
~
."
':i
=
.
w
N
W
III:
::)
c:)
-
II.
a..
III:
E
en
....
e
...
...
-=
a=
a..
a=
-=
...
III:
E~
dJ
·Ü
D
c
<~
....
z
~~
~II!! õ>~
~I 6g~
( :t:3:;
UZ
~
.....
....
;: ..
.... ;
.-
::!I-I III.
- ã _I
I.· II..
-.- .....
1!'II;;¡·"¡iil!
.,,-t! -. .!Ii
;11-1.1 II
II;I=I!!;
_.1115::..1
R=I...........
...
I! ..
.. II
~. iiiiii
i ! In':
-.. ...1
iii-5;;!
.. 1!;-¡ihuS
!il1l.l!I-!!ïï¡
::i::i::iål!illll¡
r.===¡;¡ ==IU¡;;:II:U¡18
I rl:_
E UIII.II.
.. _-....._1111·
1- 1I.!Si!lõii II
=iI1fiilll_;;
II~II... ::i::i::i::i
=
Q II. III. ¡::. ,! iuaUUI
...
-
=
-=
a.
-=
=
-
..
E
-
=
=
-
-
;;;
..;
N
:æ
-
...
"
..
..
.èi
~
Ii!
-
~
co
~
Ii!
1ñ
..
-c
~
!;
..
"
'æ
"
..
!
~.
II
11 ~ = i:
iJ_=shlii¡!
.¡---..ral 11
....=11......::.
.................__.;:::t:::I
f/
X
N
0
:J
~
"C :;
(1) Q)
N :õ
- 0 .!!!
- 't 0
.- 't N c:
E C» , 0
N f/
.¡::
... m
(1) c.
D.. E
0
u
tn
- ~
.-
c: 0
CD 0
~ N N
CD
C) 't-
,¡¿
c: 0
- ~
.- N
tn tn '" ,
~ ë;j
;:, ca CD ......................
Ñ ...................... ~
0 (,) 0 9
(1) ..... 0
J: 0 .c:
... CD N '"
0_ :J
0 0
- '" ~
ca LL :5
;:, CD
- N 9>
(,) 0 0- E
'" co
<t 0 .. e
0 )0-
N '" -
Ñ C» 0- m
0 C» ..
<I: .c: C» 'C :J
-
't - '" ~ c u
- C» .. m
Q) - ~
~ .- m '0
:J tn 3: N U c:
'" ca m
¡;¡: ûí
(,) ~ m
e r C» u
0 '" ........... ~
0 0 --' "'. ........... '" .E
~
LL N <I: C» c:
::::> '" C» Q)
N ~ Q)
- 0 f- "'- ~
0 ~ ~ Q)
- .c
c: CD If) Q)
u
0 Q) c:
Q)
.- CÐ ~
tn f- &
r en
.¡: <I: ..... 'C
() C» ~
ca ~ C»
uu N 0
~ Q)
C. ex: '" '"
E 0 ~ e!
LL Q)
0 In >
m
0 Q)
:5
- f/
ca CD Q)
(,) C» E
C» :J
.- ~ f/
... f/
m
0 m
- :J
tn -
u
.- m
J: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q)
0 '" 0 '" 0 '" 0 '" ~ '" ë;j
añ '<i 't- o? o? N N- ~ .~
S¡!Un 6U!IIÐMQ ûí
Q)
N
9
'"
X
I N
co 0
0 ::>
'" ...................................
C'Ô ................................... N ,5
0 Q)
.,. I 0 :ë
'" I ¡ N ,¡g
In <D
C'Ô e:
- I 0
ca '"
.¡::
£: '"
, I Q.
.- I I E
LL N
N 0
N .................................. U
- C'Ô ..................................
.- ~
£: 0
a> 0
:::) '" N
LO
C) C'Ô
£:
.- N
In LO
::s - <D
In Ñ ............................
0 ca ............................ 0
::I: 0
(,) a> 0
Q) ..... N
- N
ca ~ C'Ô ~
0 0
::s <D
N
- LL -
(,) '"
N ~ ~
c:( .. p
0 '"
0 0 >- .9
ID a> ~ <D
.,. - N a> ..
a> a> 'C 9'
'"
~ - .s::: a>_ e: E
In '"
::> - N ¡;¡ .g
'" ca
ü: .- u
(,) 3: ro
::>
Q) -
U
~ ~ '" '"
0 - a> '0
0 "'- ........... e:
LL ~ ........... '"
0 co êi)
.... a>
N LO a> '"
0 ~ U
LO Q)
0 -' "'- ~
£: « ~ .E
0 - :;:) e:
U) t- Q)
In ~ î
.- Q)
~ Q) () Q)
.c
ca_ LO Q)
LO
Q, t- a> ..... u
a> e:
E en '" a> ~
« co ~
U '" ~
0 UJ ~ 'ë
0 a::
0 ~
0
- L!- Q)
ca m £
(,) '"
Q)
.- E
~ <D
0 ::>
a> '"
..... a> '"
- 0 ~ '"
In N ro
.- ~ ::>
::I: Õ
'"
'0
Q)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ¡;;
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E
0 "'. 0 LO 0 LO 0 LO
.,.- N- ""
'" '" N ~ ~ '"
Q)
S¡!Un 6U!II8MC N
P
10
W
II::
;:)
CI
¡¡:
l-
t/) _
~ .~
W E
D:: ca
o LL
LL Æ!
..J CI
<C C
¡::: t/)
Zt/)II
WI-LL
ºßcn
cn., -
!:!:!O.~
~D::E
D::D..ca
<CD::1t
WO:;::l
>;-.,3
an<C:E
I- :E II
ZWLL
wD:::E
:E::I-CD
I-I-CDO
D:: ::I c. 0
<C LL >oN
D.. I-J:
W C ClC)
C~.5::1
C)w!r:I°
Z>OD::
C-J:J:
I- I-
::! 0 >ON
::I <c..c 0
CC<c'tIO
I-CDN
Ct/)'iii
Z_C
<C>ü:
C) <C CI
Z..JC
- ::I .-
ZJ:CD
ZOCC
<C J!
..J Z ._
D..D::C
<cW::I
I- I- CI
!!! ~ .5
>w(/)
:5 ð
::I ;:
J: 0
o ..
LL CD
o ~
~ ~
õ
]j
ClO
cf-
'2
ï;¡
EL1.
~<n
J!
'2
::;)L1.
:;
",ii
°õ
:¡:f-
o
-
N
0L1.
:¡:<n
-
..
II
U
e
oL1.
L1.::E
e
:>L1.
'5<n
...
_ii
oõ
:¡:f-
,&:
CI
:>
!!L1.
,&:<n
f-
..
ëii
c
¡¡:!::¡
ii
õ
f-
."
CI>
..
o
a.
!!L1.
a..<n
J!
'2
::;)
00
'" '"
'" '"
'"
'"
o
("') I , I t I
M
o
'"
o
o
-
w
X
N
..,
"
;;
~
'5'
~
;;
~
u
"
(;
u.
'"
o
o
N
'"
o
, , '"
M
....0 ....
"'''' ...
o CD I , I I , I I"'-
cr:i cD
V t---COC'\lLOOvO0
r-...,...."!tNIOLOC»-VO
LO"It v_cn,....~ 0
cöÑ,.... ,.... ri
-
a>(OCONNOMOO
(J)O"ltf"'-OIOCD'VCO
COil) .....10.....0 ('t)
cri~"': ...: as
10..... OM
1'-'1""" 1.010
COQ)'N'V
Ñ
~ ~
C"') (0
...
ii
õ
f-
~b~g ~~~~~
0)..... ..,.0).....('1) 0
liiri"': ...: M
_ N
~~~~~g~~g
Nil) .....U).....o ~
,..:...:.....- .....-.....
-
L1.
::E
N..... OM ,.... r--
MO 101() M CO
"'.CD.'N'V'('f')IC"').
eo_ _
-
LOI"'--.....(J)LO
"'..."'......
vv(!)œO'
ri ri"': .....-
.....M.....lOf'-..
.....1l)1l).....1l)
10 0 MO),..... ,
Ñ ri.....-
VVO"ll!tCO
Na>CX)MCCI
C)MC'\I N'
....
o
, '"
o
-
....
eo
''''
<ri
o
N
'~
-
"'..."'_00...0....
COLOr-... "OIOCbv10
MLOCOMO,....M LO
aiCÖ"':ÑÑ .....- ri
- '"
MO)œ......cnoMoa
.....lOœcoll)ll)CO"ll!t1"'-
I'-IO("')ON.....O N
ai"¡"':Ñ"': ...: ó
N
L1.
::E
co 10 o.q-.....
U')cnco co "'It
comNN"'"
0)"':
M ~
I M IN
M
-
'"
ii
õ
f-
-
.¡:
::;)
-
-
cD
oñ _
N: cð.c: J::ãi
..... - 0 u 5,
~ ¡;æ æ:¡
_ c::: c:: c::: -.
-5 Q)~_OQ)~
æQ)"C:E-cu:Jõ
c:: '" 0 - ;;: ...J '-::E
-~£.~..8(U~(U
œf1. -==C:=&::(¡)
_ aJ tU 0 :;¡ Q) (U ._
Owc::c::<nm<n>
(/)
f-
o
W
....,
o
0::
a..
'"
x
oj
:0
S
...J '" ro
tel 0
0
<c N W
0 ,.,
~ 0 on
l- N
0 ~ "'
0
0
<c (!) N
0 ~
I- 0 ... ro
r:x: 0 1ñ
C 0
N :>
W ~ '"
I- ::;
c:::: .<::
<c I- '" ()
0 -
tJ) 0 0
Q. N Þ
:æ: <c u
0 w
0 :6
W N .!:
0 0
c:::: 0 '"
N -
tJ) O~ ï::
:J
...J LLc Q)
<c c:
:J ;; ïñ
0'" :J
Z 0 0
O~ N .<::
- ~
LL :æ:,g :; .E
m
>- 1ñ
<0 (!) (!)§ '"
I!:' 0 0
0
Z C~ 0 W
:J <0 N ~
Q) - 0 .E
ü: tJ) Z .~ 0 0
'" ~
~ <c'Iii 1ñ 0
'" '"
0 '"
j 0 '" .9
~ - E I!:' ~ on
-j 0 m
00 u.. 1ñ m
r:x: () '" ~
0 0 0 w
0 N :;: I!:' :6
0 '"
C> u.. '" -
LL '" 0
0 ë
it) ~ '"
I- 0 0 w
Ø) 0 '" E
tJ) '"
Ø) .9 C> Q)
<c <t: w
- "- '"
ñj 0 '"
'" '"
0 I- :J Z
Õ <t: .!!1
W Z <t: en 'tJ
c:::: + + .æ
W c:
w
0 :æ: '" '"
'" w
'"
LL ~ ~
Q. a.
1ñ
(!) 0 '"
0
<c ...J "' I!:'
C W '" .E
'" 0
> ~
Z '"
0
<c w '"
c 0 0 0 0 0 0 C>
tJ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 <t:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ci .0 ci .0 ci .0 Z
'" N N <t:
peleUl:I S¡!Un 6u!SnOH jO JeqwnN 8^lte nWn:) en
W
.<::
f-
Figure 7
POTENTIAL COMMERCIAUINDUSTRIAL/INSTITUTIONAL ACTIVITY
As of September 2001
Under Construction Sauare Footaoe Total
Proiect Descrintion Address Office Retail Industrial Instituional Sa,Ft.
Office Buildina 891 Kuhn Dr 38,337 38,337
Industrial Plant 680 l St 36,326 36,326
Office Buildino 46 Third Av 4,950 4,950
Medical Office Buildino 765 Medical Center Ct 48,851 48,851
Recreation Buildina 1255 Trinidad Cove 700 700
Vehicle Renair Garaae 788 Eneroy Way 4,074 4,074
Industrial Office 3031 Main St 22,640 22,640
Office Buildinn 1425 Second Av 1,818 1,818
Retail Buildina 601 E Palomar SI 7,500 7,500
Retail BuiJdin 601 E Palomar SI 6,032 6,032
Gatewav - Office/Retaii Bldo 303 H SI 96,377 96,377
Carwash 3733 Main SI 1,268 1,268
Convenience Store/Carwash 695 E Palomar St 3,804 3,804
Dru store 645 E Palomar St 14,420 14,420
Grocerv Store 659 E Palomar St 56,841 56,841
Fastfood Restaurant 1361 Medical Center Dr 2,575 2,575
Industrial Buildinn 850 Laaean Dr 11,322 11,322
Gatewav - Office/Retail/Park Bldo 303 H St 5,557 113,400 118,957
Community Center City of Chula Vista 5,893 5,893
CIiVBuildino City of Chula Vista 5,065 5,065
Storane Buildinn 816 Miller Dr 12,340 12,340
Storane Buildina 816 Miller Dr 39,612 39,612
PW Church of Nazarene 1228 Eastlake Pkwv 8,193 8,193
Church of latter Dav 816 Miller Dr 16,674 16,674
Total 221,457 261,866 70,288 10,958 564,569
Plan Check Snuare Footane Total
Proiect Descrintion Address Office Retail Industrial Instituional Sn,Ft.
Office Buildin 596 Sandpiper Way 8.500 8.500
Retail Buildino 6,000 6,000
Warehouse 698 Anita St 35,119 35,119
OfficelWarehouse Buildinn 1480 Frontaoe Rd 4,721 7,243 11,964
Retail Buildina E Palomar (South Bav1 28,573 28,573
Davcare E Palomar (South Bav' 10,500 10,500
OfficelWarehouse Bulldino 850 laooon Dr 5,800 5,800
Total 19,021 45,073 42,362 0 106,456
Desion Review Souare Footaae Total
PrOfec! Descriation Address Office Retail Industrial Instituional Sn,Ft.
KFC Restaurant Palomar Rd. & Medical Center Dr. 2,665 2,665
MultTriie Tenant Shoo Buildino Medical Center Dr. 6,000 6,000
McDonald's Restaurant 625 Medical Center Dr. 0
Fire Station Brandvwine Fire Station #3 4,000 4,000
Church East Palomar & Santa Cora 48,194 48,194
Warehouse 694 Moss St. 11,700 11,700
Truck/Car Wash 3205 Main St. 9,000 9,000
Auto lube & Car Wash 1616 3rd Ave. 2,290 2,290
Warehouse 2365 Main St. 9,000 9,000
Office Buildino 1065 Tierra Del Rev 18,659 18,659
Mixed Use Commercial Near Palomar St. & Santa Rita 0
Total 18,659 19,955 20,700 52,194 111,508
CURRENT AND PROPOSED THRESHOLD STANDARD:
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 84% ofthe
Priority I emergency calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an
average response time to all Priority I calls of four minutes and thirty seconds (4.5 minutes)
or less (measured annually).
Urgent response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 62% of the
Priority II, urgent calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an
average response time to all Priority II calls of seven minutes (7.0 minutes) or less (measured
annually).
1A. Current Threshold Standard
PRIORITY1CFS - Emergency Response, Calls For Service :.: .
. Call Volume % of Call Response Average Response
w/in . Time
.. 0:. .0: 7 Minutes
Threshold .. . .); 84.0% 4:30
FY 2000-01 1,734 of 73,977 79.7% 5:13
FY 1999-00 1,750 of 76,738 75.9% 5:21
CY 1999' 1,890 of 74,405 70.9% 5:50
FY 1997-98 1,512 of 69,196 74.8% 5:47
FY 1996-97 1,968 of 69,904 83.8% 4:52
FY 1995-96 1,9150f71,197 83.0% 4:46
FY 1994-95 2,453 of 73,485 84.9% 4:37
$iPRIORltYlI.CFS·~U '( ¡i1tResponllê;îCî:allS"for. Service .. ::s;,........ ~
... .
;\Ttil'eshold .":';.,$',]:.." cO:, . A? _....~ 7:00
FY 2000-01 25,234 of 73,977 47.9% 9:38
FY 1999-00 23898 of 76,738 46.4% 9:37
CY 1999 20,405 of 74,405 45.8% 9:35
FY 1997-98 22,342 of 69,196 52.9% 8:13
FY 1996-97 22,140 of 69,904 62.2% 6:50
FY 1995-96 21,7430f71,197 64.5% 6:38
FY 1994-95 21,900 of 73,485 63.4% 6:49
1 The FY98-99 GMOC report used calendar 1999 data due to the implementation of the new CAD system in mid-199B.
C:ldffiles\GMOC~moc 01 \return quesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page'
1 B Proposed Threshold Standard
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 81% of
emergency calls within seven (7) minutes. Maintain an average response time offjve minutes
and thirty seconds (5.5 minutes) or less (measured annually).
Urgent response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 57% of the
Priority II, urgent calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an
average response time to all Priority II calls of seven minutes and thirty seconds (7.5
minutes) or less (measured annually).
Please fill in the blanks on this table.
1,734 of 73,977
1,7500f76,738
1,890 of 74,405
Res onsè~cCalls ForSèrvice
Volume % of Call Response
w/in
7 Minutes
81.0%
79.7%
75.9%
70.9%
Average Response
Time
Threshold·
FY 2000-01
FY 1999-00
CY 1999
5:30
5:13
5:21
5:50
FY 2000-01
FY 1999-00
CY 1999
25,234 of 73,977
23,898 of 76,738
20,405 of 74,405
7:30
9:38
9:37
9:35
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
2. Was the Police Department properly eauipped to deliver services at the level
necessary to maintain Prioñty I and II threshold standard compliance during the
reporting period?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
The Department was property equipped with patrol vehicles, motorcycles, officer safety equipment,
and communication equipment to deliver services,
3. Was the Police Department properly staffed to deliver services at the level necessary
to maintain Priority I and II Threshold Standard compliance during the reporting
period?
C:\dffilesIGMOC'gmoc 01 \return QuesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page 2
In addition, please include comment on the 16 new peace officers and 1 Community
Service Officer that were authorized by Council in December 1999, and the 19.5
additional staff approved for hiring in the previous fiscal year and what impact, if any,
these positions have had on threshold compliance.
Yes
x
No
-
Explain:
The authorized budget for Police staff was sufficient to handle calls for service, Staffing levels are
based on the Patrol Staffing Model. Although recruitment and background staff are working diligently
to fill all vacancies in the department, vacancies continued to be a problem during FY 00-01, The
Department is authorized 86 Officers in Patrol. Currently there are 69 officers in Patrol; there are an
additional 14 officers at differing points in the training process,
Dispatch Center staffing was affected by injuries and a lack of qualified candidates. In the Fall, this
unit was brought to full staffing; however, new dispatchers have a training period of six to nine
months, The City Manager's Office of Budget and Analysis is scheduled to begin a dispatch staffing
study in Spring 2002.
Strategic Planning Positions
Approved Actual Vacancy
Officers 16 16 0
Civilians 20.5 19 1,5
The impact of the new hires on threshold compliance has been moderate for this reporting period,
with most of the new hires being in the field by the Spring of 2001 (the last quarter of the FY 2000-
2001 reporting period), The Department has filled all of the positions approved from the Strategic
Plan but has experienced tumover in two of the civilian positions, neither of which are in Patrol.
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Departmenfs ability to
maintain service levels consistent with the threshold standard?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
Although traffic volume has increased each year, traffic volume is not correlated with East side travel
times, In other words, increasing traffic does not appear to have increased East side travel times,
which are generally higher than West side travel times, However, the estimated 40,000 housing
units and accompanying street infrastructure that will be built in Chula Vista between 1995 and 2020
poses a challenge for patrol officers trying to quickly respond to calls at addresses on new streets,
In-car mapping technology allows officers to rapidly locate addresses on newly built roadways, A
global positioning system and an in-car mapping program detailed in Question #19 are expected to
favorably impact response times in newer areas.
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\return quesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page 3
5. Are current facilities, equipment and staff able to absorb forecasted growth for both
the 12 to 18 month and 5-yeartime frame?
Yes
No
x
Explain:
Minor modifications are being made to the existing facility to accommodate new staff, The existing
facility is inadequate, A new facility is planned to accommodate growth. The new facility is estimated
to be completed by Winter 2004, Additionally, a Dispatch staffing study is scheduled to begin in
Spring 2002, and an Investigations staffing study is currently underway, These studies may impact
staffing.
6. Are new facilities, equipment and/or staff needed to accommodate the forecasted
growth?
Yes
x
No
If yes:
a. Are there sites/resources available for the needed facilities, equipment and/or
staff?
Yes,
b. How will these be funded?
Equipment will continue to be funded through the General Fund and police grants, The new facility is
to be financed; the total cost is estimated at $50M with $2M debt service payments,
c. Are there appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
Yes,
7. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the provision of police services?
Yes X
No
Explain:
Yes, false alarms, The estimated 40,000 housing units that will be built in Chula Vista between 1995
and 2020 pose challenges with respect to false alarm calls, Many of the new housing units will be
pre-wired for burglar alarms, facilitating the purchase and use of alarm devices.
C:\dffilesIGMOC'9moc 01\retum quesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page 4
MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities
and equipment?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
Currently there is a minor CIP for the upgrade of the existing facility to accommodate increases in
staff, Equipment replacement funds ensure the ongoing upgrades of equipment such as MDCs, The
new police facility will be financed; sufficient funds have been identified,
9. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the
current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
® New Police Facility
® Transition to County RCS - 800 MHz, including upgrade in dispatch, completed in Spring
2001
® New Animal Care Facility
® Police Technology Enhancements
FALSE ALARMS
The GMOC recommended that the Police Department create a course of action to reduce the
number of false alarms,
10. Please fill the blanks on the table below.
NUMBER OF FALSE
:::: FY1996-97'::';":" FY~1997-98
. 6,073
FY 199~"()O~3,.t:;;"
6,690
NOTE: Total false alarm statistics for FY 96-97 are not available,
11. Has the Department's goal oriented action plan to reduce the number of false alarms
been implemented?
Yes, in part
x
No
C:\dffilesIGMOC\gmoc 01\retum quesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page 5
Explain:
An alarm analyst was hired in October 2000, Between this time and June 30, 2001, she
researched effective alarm policies across the country; identified more than 1900 alarm users
without permits and mailed these users permits; developed an automatic daily mailing to
locations that generate alarms but do not have permits on file; developed a "Tip Sheet" on
alarms that will be mailed to all city residents in an upcoming water bill; updated alarm forms to
collect more complete subscriber information; and, added alarm data to the current billing and
tracking systems, In addition, the Alarm Analyst was involved in discontinuing the police
response to one commercial location that had over 20 false alarms during a 1-month period, She
also worked with high repeat false alarm locations, such as schools, to reduce the problems at
those locations, The analyst also assisted in the development of the Alarm Reduction Alliance, a
comprehensive plan that will be implemented beginning this Spring. This plan involves the
following steps:
t Collect and analyze alarm data
t Identify individual stakeholders and establish the Alarm Reduction Alliance
t Establish false alarm reduction measures intended for specific offender groups
t Develop proactive versus punitive false alarm reduction education programs aimed at
specific offender groups
t Develop generalized alarm education programs for the public
t Revise Chula Vista's alarm ordinance and assess our penalty fine structure
12. Describe the activities/effectiveness of the Alarm Analyst in reducing false alarms.
Although the raw number offalse alarms increased in FY 2000-2001, 16,5% fewer false alarm calls
were received in the first six months of 2001, as compared to the last six months of 2000. The
reduction corresponds to the time of employment of the Alarm Analyst.
JUL-DEC 2000 3,830
-16,5% second six month period
JAN-JUN 2001 3,197 compared to first six month period of
the fiscal vear
TOTAL 7,027
There was also a significant reduction in the false alarm rate, The false alarm rate factors an
increase in the number of alarm systems into an assessment of the magnitude of change in the
number of false alarms, The false alarm rate is a better measure of change than raw numbers,
because it indicates how many false alarms occurred per alarm system in use,
As the table on the next page shows, the false alarm rate for commercial systems was reduced 69%
between 1999 and 2001; the false alarm rate for residential systems was reduced 42% during the
same period,
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \return quesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page 6
Calendar Year Totals for False Alarms Per Svstem Per Year
lavailable only for calendar year, but fiscal year totals should be similar)
1999 2000 2001 (annualized)
Commercial 2.13 1.93 1.44
Residential 0.90 0.71 0.52
Total (Com & Res) 1.33 1.12 0.79
13. Provide an update on the possible requirement for residential alarm system owners to
contact with a private alarm company for the first level of response.
The Department continues to monitor developments in other municipalities that have implemented
this sort of requirement, also known as "verified response," Staff have consulted extensively with the
Salt Lake City alarm coordinator, who oversaw their transition from traditional false alarm response
to verified response. It is unclear whether Chula Vista residents, businesses, and public agencies
would accept a verified response policy regarding burglary alarms. On the one hand, adopting a
verified response policy would dramatically reduce the number of Priority II calls for service (Salt
Lake City experienced a 90% decrease in false alarms once they implemented this approach), A
reduction of this magnitude would positively affect response times to Priority II calls for service and
free up officer time for proactive crime prevention efforts. In Salt Lake City, the average priority call
response time was reduced from 5 minutes to 3 minutes as a result of the verified response policy,
However, a verified response policy may affect the perceived quality of life in Chula Vista,
particularly if private entities were not able to match police response times to burglary alarm calls. (In
Salt Lake City, private guard companies post response times of between 3 and 15 minutes.
Currently the average alarm response time in Chula Vista is a little under 12 minutes.) Also, it is
unclear whether the infrastructure for private response to burglary alarms currently exists in Chula
Vista. However, the San Diego Police Department has expressed some interest in exploring the
possibility of adopting a verified response policy, which may have an impact on Chula Vista, Also in
California, the City of Los Angeles is actively pursuing the adoption of a verified response policy,
MISCELLANEOUS
14. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council including additional threshold
indicators?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
C:\dffiles\GMOC'9moc 01lretum quesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page 7
Suggested Recommendations Comments
That the GMOC continue to support plans to This study will aid in identifying ways of
conduct a dispatch staffing study, including the reducing response time for priority calls for
Dispatch Manaaer Concept. service,
That the GMOC support continued use of the Both will enable the department to respond to
patrol staffing model and the advance hiring calls for service, maintain a 1: 1 ratio of officer
program, time spent responding to calls, for service:
officer-initiated activities, and a zero vacancy
factor in patrol.
That the GMOC continue to support planned It is imperative that the Department continues
upgrades of police technologies, such as to build a solid technology infrastructure in
MDCs, in-car mapping and global positioning order to service a growing community.
systems,
That the GMOC continue to support research Research staff will be looking at several of
and evaluation of call management options, these issues over the next 18 to 24 months, as
and alternative deployment tactics, such as a means of maximizing both the effectiveness
revised beat configurations, bike patrol, and an and efficiency of the Department.
aerial platform.
15. Do you have any other relevant information the department desires to communicate to
the GMOC?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
Several initiatives implemented in FY 2000-2001 likely helped reduce response times,
® An extra police car was added in the Eastern beats on swing and day shifts on July 1,
2001.
® Deployment methods were changed, Patrol teams were deployed on July 1, 2001,
GMOC RECOMMENDATIONS FROM 2000
16. Please describe the status of the proposed threshold change.
Describe:
At the May 31, 2001, joint meeting of the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC),
Planning Commission, and City Council, the GMOC presented the 2000 Growth Management
Annual Report, which calls for amendments to the threshold standards for Police, Fire/Emergency
Medical Services, and Libraries. The City Council and Planning Commission unanimously accepted
the report and directed staff to prepare the proposed changes in the threshold standards for formal
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\return quesIPOLICE 01 GMOC.doc
Page B
adoption,
On November 14, 2001, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted (5-0-1-1) to
recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment for Libraries, The Planning
Commission, however, citing both the need for further clarification and the adoption of broader
performance standards that rely on more than growth related standards, did not recommend
approval of the proposed amendments for Police and Fire/Emergency Services but did not oppose
the adjustments,
Consideration of the proposed threshold amendments by Council was scheduled on December 17,
2001, but the item was pulled prior to the meeting. Follow-up with the Planning Commission
regarding their questions about the proposed threshold corrections and amendments is anticipated
in 2002, prior to consideration of the threshold changes by Council.
17. What is the status of the strongly advocated vigorous public information effort,
recommended to begin June 2001, to present the reasons for the proposed response
threshold change to the public?
Describe:
In an effort to inform all members of the Chula Vista community about the proposed threshold
corrections, the Police Department submitted a short article on the suggested changes to the
Holiday issue of Spotlight. In October 2001, this newsletter was mailed to:
1; Approximately 108,000 people in 35,000 homes, These residents received the mailing
along with their Pacific Waste trash bills,
1; An estimated 60,000 people who reside in apartments, condos, and mobile home parks,
Chula Vista businesses also received the newsletter, which was direct-mailed to 35,000
addresses,
No complaints about story were received by the Department staff person designated to receive
calls, even though the direct phone line for that staff person was listed in newsletter article, The
only telephone call received by the staff person about the threshold came from a San Diego
State University nursing student involved in a class project,
Should the threshold corrections become enacted, the Department plans to issue a question-
and-answer fact sheet as well as a press release on the topic, Staff is also exploring the
possibility of sharing the information at a community meeting,
18. Please provide an analysis of the utility of maintaining the "Urgent Response"
(priority 2) portion of the Police threshold. Include in this analysis comment on
whether resources are diverted from priority 1 calls to meet the priority 2 threshold.
What is the Police Department's recommendation for keeping or eliminating this
threshold measure?
Given the current discussions regarding the proposed Police threshold corrections, it may be
premature at this point to recommend keeping or eliminating the Urgent Response threshold.
However, we would like to retain the option of revisiting the utility ofthe Urgent Response threshold
C:ldffilesIGMOC'9moc 01 \return quesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page 9
at a later date. As has been noted in the past, false alarm calls dominate the Urgent Response
category; 36% of all Priority 2 calls for service are false alarms, While resources are not diverted
from Priority 1 calls to meet the Priority 2 threshold, the sheer volume of Priority 2 false alarm calls
likely impacts the Department's ability to meet the Priority 2 threshold itself.
19. Please provide an update on what "Additional Measures" are being undertaken by the
Police Department in order to reduce response times.
® Faster address location, The Department is upgrading the MDCs to allow for mapping
capabilities, Approximately half the patrol fleet currently has this technology, In-car mapping
will help officers ascertain the quickest route to a call location, In addition, these maps can
be more easily updated to include new streets in East Chula Vista,
® Global positioning system. The Department is working with several vendors to integrate
GPS in cars with the computer-aided dispatch (CAD) system, This system will allow police
dispatchers to route the nearest available units to calls for service.
® Continuing efforts under the Advance Hire program. Under this initiative, the Department
is able to hire five officers over the number authorized, This program takes into account
anticipated officer turnover and the lengthy lead time required to place new officers on the
street. This initiative helps ensure that adequate numbers of officers will be available for
patrol duties, which in turn, favorably affects response times.
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Date:
Chief Rick Emerson
Karin SChmerler, Research Analyst
1/2/02
C:ldffiles\GMOClgmoc 01lreturn quesIPOLlCE 01 GMOC.doc
Page 10
CURRENT AND PROPOSED THRESHOLD STANDARD:
1A Current Threshold Standard
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall respond to
calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes in 85% (current service to be verified) of
the cases (measured annually).
Please fill in the blanks in the following tables using normalized data:
TH
FY 2000-01 7128 80.8% 7:29 3:18
FY 1 ggg-OO 6654 79.7% 7:36 3:29
CY 1999 6344 77.2% 7:42 3:41
CY 1998 4119 81.9% 7:18 3:40
CY 1997 6275 82.4% 7:18 3:32
CY 1996 6103 79.4% 7:30 3:44
CY 1995 5885 80.0% 7:30 3:45
CY 1994 5701 81.7% 7:18 3:35
18 Proposed Threshold Standard
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall respond
to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes in 80% (current service to be verified)
of the cases (measured annually).
Please fill in the blanks in the following table:
·Use normalized response time percentage rate,
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01\return ques\FIRE Final.doc
Page 1
Please provide brief responses to the foJ/owing:
2. Did the Fire Department have properly equipped fire and medical units as
necessary to maintain threshold standard service levels during the reporting
period?
Yes
x
No
Please explain: We met our requirement but we need to get Fire Station 7 built
and staffed. This staffing will help with all types of calls. It will make it safer for
the citizens and fire personnel.
3. Did the Fire Department have proper staffing for fire and medical units as
necessary to maintain threshold standard service levels during the reporting
period?
Yes
x
No
Explain: We are at a very critical time where our resources are being stretched
very thin. It is extremely important for us to have Fire Station built by July of 03.
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Department's
ability to maintain service levels?
Yes
No
x
Explain:
5. Are current facilities, equipment and staff able to absorb forecasted growth for
both the 12 to 18 month and 5-year time frame?
Yes
No_X
Explain: We need to have Fire Station 7 built in the east. This is a critical station
for fire and medical delivery. We are expecting to be operational in July of 2003.
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \return queslFIRE Final.doc
Page 2
6. Are new facilities, equipment and/or staff needed to accommodate the forecasted
growth?
Yes
x
No
fyes:
a. Are there sites/resources available for the needed facilities? Yes
b. How will these be funded? DIF
c. Are there appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this
funding? Yes, Marty Chase has a very good handle on this.
7. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the provision of fire services?
Yes
No _X_
Explain:
MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing
facilities and equipment?
Yes X
No
Explain:
9. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects are to be undertaken pursuant
to the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes
X
No
Explain: The building of Fire Station 7 in Village 2 of the Otay Ranch and building
of Fire Station 6 in Rolling Hills Ranch. We are writing the specifications for 2
truck companies, 1 rescue/light and air unit and a new engine. The re-build of
Fire Station 5, at 4th and Oxford should also be accomplished within the five-year
period.
PREVIOUS YEAR'S RECOMMENDATIONS
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum queslFIRE Final.doc
Page 3
The questions below are a follow up to previous year's GMOC recommendations.
10. Please describe the status of the proposed threshold change.
We went before the Planning Commission and they did not support the change. We were scheduled to go
before the City Council in December but had the topic taken off the agenda. Marty Chase is back with the City
and he will start the process over with the Planning Commission and then take the recommended change to the
Council during the first quarter of 2002,
11. What is the status of the strongly advocated vigorous public information effort,
recommended to begin June 2001, to present the reasons for the proposed response
threshold change to the public?
Describe: The City budgeted for a citywide questionnaire to be designed and
distributed to the community. This topic will be addressed in the questionnaire.
We are also going to ask questions about how well is the fire and medical
services being delivered.
MISCELLANEOUS
11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No _X_
Explain:
12. Do you have any other relevant information the Department desires to
communicate to the GMOC?
Yes
No _X
Explain:
Prepared by: Douglas A, Perry
Title: Acting Fire Chief
Date: 1-04-02
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 011retum queslFIRE Final.doc
Page 4
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2001 QUESTIONNAIRE (Review Period: 7/1/00 - 6130101)
.
SCHOOLS - CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
THRESHOLD
The City shall annually provide the two local school districts with a 12 to 18 month forecast and request an
evaluation oftheir ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The Districts' replies should
address the following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities
4. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and GMOC.
1. Please fill in the table below to indicate the existing enrollment conditions and capacity atthe end of
the review period noted above. Information the District has already compiled, which is close, or
subsequent to this date, is also acceptable.
EXISTING CONDITIONS (FY 00/01)
Schools Current Capacity Amount Overflowed Type of Comments
Enrollment Permanent Portables Under/Over Out School
(Date) Capaclty* Calendar
NORTHWEST
Cook 536 510 60 34 0 Trad
Feaster-Edison 1141 400 650 0 8 Ex!. Trad Charter
Hilltop Drive 559 500 75 15 3 Trad
Mueller 879 500 400 20 0 Ex!. Trad Charter: 6 permanent modular
classrooms set on concrete
Rosebank 723 450 300 27 0 Trad
Vista Square 721 525 275 79 0 YRS 4 add'l relos coming 02, 4 Part B
teachers,S DHH classes
SOUTHWEST
Learning Comm. 468 0 600 132 0 Ex!. Trad Charter, 30 permanent modular
classrooms set on concrete
Castle Park 596 550 140 94 6 Trad 2 Sp. Ed. classes
Harborside 766 450 325 9 16 Trad 2 Sp. Ed. classes
Kellogg 431 400 50 19 12 Trad 1 Sp. Ed. class
Lauderbach 941 510 485 54 21 YRS 2 Sp. Ed. classes; 9 permanent
modular classrooms set on
concrete
Loma Verde 680 475 275 70 0 YRS 1 Sp. Ed. class
Montgomery 460 425 125 gO 0 Trad 1 Sp. Ed. class; 4 permanent
modular classrooms set on
concrete
Olav 692 550 120 -22 77 Trad
Palomar 448 500 0 52 2 Trad 2 Sp. Ed. classes
Rice 678 570 165 57 1 Trad 1 Sp. Ed, class, 1 K-6 SH/SDC
class opeing 1·02. 6 relos
remained at site from CVLCC
Rohr 561 500 50 ·11 3 YRS 1 Sp. Ed. class
SOUTHEAST
Arroyo Vista 652 750 0 98 0 YRS
Olympic View 706 500 325 119 0 YRS
Parkview 441 500 50 109 0 Trad 3 Sp. Ed. classes, 1 Speech
Rogers 537 400 50 -87 28 YRS 5 relos coming for add'l space
capacity for reQ. Ed. shown
Valle Lindo 463 475 70 82 0 Trad 1 Sp. Ed class
Heritage 593 750 0 157 0 YRS
McMillin 390 750 0 360 0 YRS
NORTHEAST
Allen/Ann Daly 416 525 0 109 0 Trad 1 Sp. Ed. 2 SH. 1 NSH class
Casillas 708 600 150 42 1 YRS 1 Sp. Ed, 1 primary NSH coming
6 permanent modular classrooms
set on concrete
Chula Vista Hills 528 500 75 47 0 Trad
Clear View 534 475 115 56 0 Ex!. Trad Charter, 1 Sp. Ed. class; 6
permanent modular classrooms
set on concrete
Discovery 871 675 275 79 0 YRS Charter, 1 Sp. Ed. class; 3
permanent modular classrooms
set on concrete
Eastlake 630 500 200 70 0 YRS
Halecrest 528 500 100 72 0 Trad 1 Sp. Ed. class; 4 permanent
modular classrooms set on
concrete.
Marshall 489 655 95 261 0 YRS 5 permanent modular classrooms
set on concrete
Tiffany 670 610 210 150 0 Trad 2 Sp, Ed. classes
2. Please fill in the table below to indicate the projected conditions for 12/31/00 based on the City's 12-
18 month forecast.
12 -18 MONTH FORECASTED CONDITIONS
Schools Projected Projected Capacity Amount Overflow Type of Comments
Enrollment Permanent Portables Over/Under Out School
(Date) Capaclty* Calendar
NORTHWEST
Cook
Feaster-Edison
Hilltop Drive
Mueller
Rosebank
Vista Sauare
SOUTHWEST
Learning Comm.
Castle Park
Harborside
Kellog
Lauderbach
Lorna Verde
Montoomery
Otay
Palomar
Rice
Rohr
SOUTHEAST
Arroyo Vista
Olympic View
Parkview
Rooers
Valle Lindo
Heritage
McMillin
NORTHEAST
Allen/Ann Dalv
Casillas
Chula Vista Hills
Clear View
Discovery
Eastlake
Halecrest
Marshall
Tiffany
*(-) denotes amount over capacity
3. Please fill in the table below to indicate enrollment history.
NORTHWEST
Total Enrollment 4,559 4,500
% of Change Over the Previous Year 1% 3%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 98% 97%
SOUTHWEST SCHOOLS
Total Enrollment 6,721 6,709
% of Change Over the Previous Year 0% 2%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 98% 97%
ENROLLMENT HISTORY ,
..
FY 1998-99
,,,,,,,,,.,'
4,377
3%
98%
6,580
6%
98.5%
SOUTHEAST SCHOOLS .,'..
Total Enrollment 3,782 2,805 2,462
% of Change Over the Previous Year 26% 12% 10%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 98% 97% 98%
NORTHEAST SCHOOLS '.. '':
.. ......'.. , ...
Total Enrollment 5,374 5,598 5,254
% of Change Over the Previous Year -4% 6% 14%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 98% 97% 98.5%
DISTRICT WIDE
Total Enrollment 20,436 19,612 18,673
% of Change Over the Previous Year 4% 5% 8%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 98% 97% 98.5%
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Districts ability to accommodate
student enrollment?
Yes
No_X_
Explain: Heritage Elementary and McMillin Elementary opened July 2001, Chula Vista Learning
Community Charter School opened September 2001, Extra capacity exists at Thurgood Marshall
Elementary, Finney added substantial capacity during the summer 2001 modemization/renovation.
5. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 12 - 18-month time frame?
Yes _X
No
Explain: In addition to Heritage Elementary, McMillin Elementary and the Chula Vista Learning
Community Charter School opened adding additional capacity,
6. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth?
Yes_X_ No
Explain:
a. What facilities will be needed? One to two schools.
b. Are sites available for the needed facilities? Yes
c. How will these facilities be funded? CFD funding
d. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
7. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 5-year time frame?
Yes_X
No
Explain: Schools are in planning/phasing stage. One to two schools are planned per year,
8. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the maintenance of the level of service as Chula
Vista's population increases?
Yes_X____ No
Explain: Class size reduction increased the demand for extra classrooms, Special Education
and auxiliary space is also creating new facility demands, The modemization program has
been very helpful, We have completed modemization and renovation on 18 sites.
Five additional sites will be completed in the summer of 2002.
MAINTENANCE
9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes _X____ No
Explain: 3% of general fund maintenance and deferred maintenance program - $5,335,802
10. Are there any major upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuantto the School District's current 1-
year and 5-year CIP that will add capacity?
Yes _X
No
Explain: Five elementary schools will be modemized/renovated during the summer of 2002,
MISCELLANEOUS
11. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No _X____
Explain:
12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to
recommend to the City Council?
Yes _X
No
Explain: Please continue strong commitment to our public schools, Teamwork and communication
has been superlative with the City and its staff.
13. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and GMOC.
Yes _X_ No
Explain: The City has been a strong partner with the Chula Vista Elementary School District.
We are both building a community, not just schools, roads, or infrastructure,
GMOC REQUEST
14. Are there local or state standards for outdoor activity space for elementary schools, if so what are
they, and are they being met in both the older and newer schools?
Describe: All new sites and space standards are approved by the Califomia Department of Education,
In regards to growth demands, many older sites are small and restrictive, Historical and current mitigation
agreements provide for acquisition of 10 acre sites,
Prepared by: Lowell Billings, Ed.D.
Title: Assistant Superintendent for Business Service and Support
Date: December 10, 2001
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2001QUESTlONNAIRE (Review Period: 711100~ 6/30/01)
SCHOOLS - SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
THRESHOLD
The City shall annually provide the two local school districts with a 12 to 18 month forecast and
request an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The
Districts' replies should address the following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities
4. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and GMOC.
1. Please fill in the table below to indicate the existing enrollment conditions at the end of the
review period noted above. Information the District has already compiled, which is close, or
subsequent to this date, is acceptable.
CURRENT CONDITIONS (FY 00101)
Current Building Capacity Adjusted Physical Within Overflowed
Schools Enrollment Building Education Capacity Out Comments
11/2101* Permanent/Portables Capacity* Capacity
NORTHWEST
Chula Vista Middle 1,314 1,120 416 1,431 220 Yes 0
Hilltop Middle 1,251 1,395 124 1,504 220 Yes 0
Chula Vista High 2,554 1,581 899 2,420 220 Yes 0
Hilltop High 2,056 1,612 527 2,019 220 Yes 0
SOUTHWEST
Castle Park Middle 1,451 1,581 62 1,613 220 Yes 0
Castle Park Hinh 2,107 1,798 403 2,081 220 Yes 0
Palomar Hioh 566 527 186 713 220 Yes 0
Chula Vista Adult 4,703** N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A
SOUTHEAST
NONE -- - -- - I -- --- --
NORTHEAST
Bonita Vista Hinh 2,541 1,891 806 2,487 220 Yes 0
Bonita Vista Middle 1,259 1,519 279 1,738 220 Yes 0
Eastlake Hinh 2,660 2,684 -- 2,684 220 Yes 0
Rancho del Rey 1,534 1,643 -- 1,613 220 Yes 0
Middle
'Excludes students and capacity assigned to special education and learning centers.
**Number provided last year represented total annual enrollment. Figure for this time period represents current
daily enrollment.
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \return queslSUHSD final 01.doc
Page 1
2. Please fill in the table below to indicate the projected conditions for 12/31/02 based on the City's 12-
18 month forecast.
12-18 MONTHS FORECASTED CONDITIONS
Projected Building Capacity" Adjusted Physical Within Overflowed
Schools Enrollment Building Education Capacity Out Comments
12/31/02 PennanentlPortables Capacity" Capacity
NORTHWEST
Chula Vista Middle 1,195 1,120 416 1,431 220 Yes 0
Hilltop Middle 1,184 1,395 124 1,504 220 Yes °
Chula Vista Hioh 2,599 1,581 899 2,420 220 Yes 0
Hilltop Hioh 2,040 1,612 527 2,019 220 Yes 0
SOUTHWEST
Castle Park Middle 1,433 1,581 62 1,613 220 Yes 0
Castle Park High 2,133 1,798 403 2,081 220 Yes °
Palomar Hioh 550 527 186 713 ° Yes 0
Chula Vista Adult 4,703 N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes N/A
SOUTHEAST
NONE I -- -- --- --- -- -.- I -
NORTHEAST
Bonita Vista High 2,537 1,891 806 2,487 220 Yes 0
Bonita Vista Middle 1,273 1,519 279 1,738 220 Yes 0
Eastlake Hioh 3,030 2,684 1,320 3,004 220 Yes °
Rancho del Rey 1,700 1,673 62 1,675 220 Yes 0
Middle
C:\dffiles\GMOC~moc 01 \return queslSUHSD final 01.doc
Page 2
3. Please fill in the table below to indicate enrollment history.
..'.'.. .
I,;; ... ENROLLMENT HISTORY
I, ..,..'.. ....,... I· 2000-01 .." 1999-00 I 1998-99
NORTHWEST SCHOOLS , .......... .'....
Total Enrollment 7,175 6,867 6,879
% of Change Over the Previous Year 4.4% .02% 2.3%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 86% 86% 87%
SOUTHWEST SCHOOLS ' ....... .:.
Total Enrollment 4,124 3,807 3,747
% of Change Over the Previous Year 8.3% 1.6% -1.6%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 89% 89% 89%
NORTHEAST SCHOOLS . . .'.. ." ,
Total Enrollment 7,994 7,239 6,482
% of Change Over the Previous Year 10.4% 11.7% 6%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 95% 94% 93%
DISTRICT WIDE
Total Enrollment 37,275 35,330 34,114
% of Change Over the Previous Year 5,2% 3.6% 3.1%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 51% 51% 50%
1. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the District s ability to
accommodate student enrollment?
Yes
x
No
Explain: We have been able to handle the growth but we are nearing capacity levels,
5. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 12 -18-month time frame?
Yes X
No_
Explain: However, we will experience overcrowding at nearly all schools in the eastern territories
until the new high school open in July 2003. Temporary classrooms will satisfy the interim housing
needs,
6. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth?
Yes X
No_
C:\dffiles\GMOC~moc 01\return queslSUHSO final 01.doc
Page 3
Explain:
a. What facilities will be needed? Two new high schools and three new middle schools in the
build out scenario,
b. Are sites available for the needed facilities? Yes
c, How will these facilities be funded? Mello-Roos/State Funding
d, Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
When state funding is available.
7. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 5 year time frame?
Yes
x
No_
Explain: The district has two high schools under construction (Janaury 2002) and a middle school in
EastLake is in the planning stages, In 2001, the district worked with the City and the development
community to site two additional middle schools and one high school in Otay Ranch.
8. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting the maintenance of the level of service as
Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes
No ---X...:.
Explain: The district voters passed a bond measure in November 2001 and the district is funding
maintenance to the required state leve,
MAINTENANCE
9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes X
No
Explain: The district receives its full share of State Deferred Maintenance funds. The district funds
maintenance to state standards.
10. Are there any major upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the School District's
current 1-year and 5-year CIP that will add capacity?
Yes X No
Explain: See No, 7 above,
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01\retum ques\SUHSD final 01.doc
Page 4
GMOC'S PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS
11. What is the status of funding and construction for "Otay Ranch High School"?
Describe: The school is under construction and will open mid-year 2003, The district applied for state
funds and received an "unfunded approval" due to the depletion of state funding,
12. Are there local or state standards for outdoor activity space at middle and high schools, if so
what are they, and are they being met in both the older and newer schools?
The district has issued a Request for Proposals to develop a Long-Range Facility Master Plan, This
plan would establish facility guidelines for implementation of Proposition BB improvements.
13. What facility deficiencies have been identified for which there is no corresponding confirmed
funding source?
Site-by-site facility assessments will occur in the planning efforts associated with Proposition BB work,
It is anticipated that Proposition BB proceeds will be insufficient to meet all facility needs,
14. Are there local or state standards for non-classroom indoor facilities, such as restrooms per
student, if so what are they and are they being met in both the older and newer schools? If
there are no standards, please indicate how adequacy is determined.
Facility assessments will occur in the planning efforts associated with Proposition BB work,
15. Based upon the analysis of the SUHSD, can the increase in students be accommodated
without the need to bus students outside of their service areas or by placing relocatables on
campus? If not, what recommendations can the GMOC make to help avoid the need for
busing or bulding relocatables?
The district will utilize all available means and resources to accommodate student housing needs and
growth related impacts.
MISCELLANEOUS
16. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No X
Explain:
C:ldffilesIGMOC'9moc 01lreturn queslSUHSD final 01.doc
Page 5
17. Are there any suggestions that you would like the GMOC to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No~
Explain:
18. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and GMOC.
Yes X
No
Explain: I would like to receive summary information on building permits pulled west of Interstate 805
as infill projects also affect our enrollment numbers.
Prepared by: Katy Wright
Title: Director of Planning & Construction
Date: February 8, 2002
C:\dffiles\GMOC'9moc 01 \return ques\SUHSO final 01.doc
Page 6
THRESHOLD STANDARD
1. Population Ratio: three (3) acres of neighborhood and community parkland with
appropriate facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents east of I-80S.
The following table compares City of Chula Vista population estimates from previous years
with current and forecasted population estimates, Park acreage provided or anticipated to
be provided is also identified, Additionally, the table identifies the threshold standard,
(acres of parkland provided per 1,000 persons), for the respective reporting periods,
· ~~hOíd;~'¡~~';;,;;~~sons,
"..,..~~~..."..., .,
, :0;.F/S;;;2
,'$",,=,"
3 Acres per East 1-805 4.85 4.03 4.16
1,000 AC/1,OOO'" 3.72 3.30
Population
East West 1-805 1.13 1.04 1.02
AC/1,OOO 1,03 1.03
of 1-805
Citywide 2.25 2.01 2.05
AC/1,000 2.02 1.95
Acres of East 1-805 255.28 266.35 238.00 220.79 240.61
Parkland 122.43 122.43
West 1·805 129.45 119,37 120.65
Citywide 377.71 388.78 367.45 340.16 361.26
Population" East 1-805 68,644 80,600 49,025 54,783 57,866
West 1·805 118,800 119,100 114,392 114,482 118,473
Citywide 187,444 199,700 163,417 169,265 176,339
Acre Shortfall East 1-805 49.35 24,55 90,93 56.44 67.01
or Excess
West 1-805 -233.97 -234,87 -213,73 -224,08 -234.77
ide -184.62 -210.32 .80 -167.64 -167.76
" Planning Division Estimate (thru 6/30/01)
18 month projections (thru 12/31/02) are based on GMOC forecasted residential units and a population coefficient of
3,036 persons per household.
East·West distribution based on an approximate 97% of additional units being located in east Chula Vista, with a
population coefficient of 3.036 persons per household.
West parkland inventory includes Otay Recreation Center and Women's Ciub Facility,
C:\dffilesIGMOClgmoc 01 \return quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 1
Please provide a brief narrative response to the following:
2. Pursuant to the Parks Development Ordinance (PDO), has the eastern Chula
Vista parks system had the required parkland acreage (3 acres/1,OOO persons)
during the reporting period?
Yes X
No
Explain:
As identified in the preceding table, the Eastern Chula Vista park system met and
exceeded the parkland requirements for the reporting period with a ratio of 3.72
acres per one thousand persons.
a. What actions are being taken, or need to be taken, to correct any
parkland shortages?
No action is necessary since no shortages to Eastern Chula Vista parkland have
been experienced,
3. Pursuant to the Parks Development Ordinance (PDO), has the City's park
system provided the required facilities during the reporting period?
Yes
No X
Explain:
The required number of certain recreation facilities, as identified by the PDO, have
not been available during the reporting period, The following table identifies facilities
required under the existing PDO,
The Draft Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which is currently under
review, includes proposed recommendations to modify existing PDO recreational
facility needs ratios, The proposed ratios have been developed in response to a
comprehensive recreational facilities demands and needs assessment that was
conducted by a consultant, While the existing PDO needs ratios help identify the
number and type of new facilities which should be programmed; they are based on
national averages, Ratios based on national averages tend to not respond to an
individual community's specific needs, Realizing this, a Chula Vista Recreational
Demand Analysis and Needs Assessment report was prepared as one of the first
tasks in the preparation of the Draft Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan,
The Draft Master Plan concludes with a recommendation to modify and update the
Chu/a Vista needs ratios so that future park sites can be programmed to meet the
true needs of residents, With this in mind, the following table also identifies the
Draft Master Plan identified needs ratios and the anticipated numbers of
recreational facilities required,
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 2
Eastern Chula Vista Recreational Facility Needs 2001
PD~ (2001) PRMP
Recreation Facility PD~ Need PRMP (2001)
Ratio (Less Ratio ++ Need
Supply) (Less
Supply)
Softball 1/5,000* 2
Organized Adult 1/7,900 0
Organized Youth 1/12,700 0
Practice/Informal 1/2,850 12
Baseball 1/5,000* N/A*
Organized Adult 1/12,200 6
Organized Youth 1/4,400 11
Practice/Informal 1/3,300 3
Football N/A N/A 1/21,400 3
Soccer 1/10,000
Organized Games -2 1/5,400 4
Practicellnforrnal 1/2,450 15
Picnic Shelter 1/1,000 30 N/A N/A
Picnic Tables N/A N/A 1/600 -127
Tot LotsIPlaygrounds 2,000 12 1/2,650 4
Swimming Pool 1/20,000 3 1/45,800 1
Tennis 1/2,000 23 1/3,200 10
Basketball 1/5,000 1 1/2,150 19
Skateboarding N/A N/A 1 / 56,950 1
Roller Blading N/A N/A 1/59,100 1
Classrooms N/A N/A 1/3,900 16,5
Community Center/Gym 24,000 3 N/A N/A
'* PD~ combines softball and baseball demand into one ratio (115,000)
++ Praft Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan based needs ratio Parks & Recreation Department 2001.
Negative Value indicates overage.
C:ldffilesIGMOC'9moc 01lreturn quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 3
Based on the Needs Assessment prepared in December 1997 and modified in
September 1999, the City of Chula Vista recreational needs val}' from those
currently identified in the PDO. The new ratios result in both increases and
decreases in demand for certain recreational facilities as compared to the currently
established PDO ratios. Differences, between the PDO identified demand and the
PMP identified demand, occur due to the inherent differences that existing when
comparing national averages with local resident opinions and practices, Another
change proposed, with the introduction of the PRMP based ratios, is the addition of
new recreational categories to reflect current recreational trends,
As revealed in the table, sport field demand is greater under the PRMP based ratios
as compared to the existing PDO ratios, The PRMP identified demand confirms
what is currently being experienced in eastern Chula Vista, namely the need for
facilities to accommodate league activities, Lesser demand is anticipated for tennis
courts under the PRMP ratios than the existing PDO ratios, The inverse is true for
basketball court demand, New categories not identified in the existing PDO ratios
include skateboarding, roller blading, and classrooms/indoor programming space,
Once adopted, the PRMP identified ratios will be incorporated into the PDO,
Under the provisions of the existing PDO, the Eastern Chu/a Vista parks system is
deficient three 50meter swimming pools and two recreation community
center/gymnasium facilities, Under the proposed PRMP, the Eastern Chula Vista
parks system is deficient one 50 meter pool and the equivalent of approximately
60,000 square feet of recreational building (community center/gymnasium), The
differences in the demand for pools, once again, are due to the inherent differences
that exist between nationally based demands and local population defined
demands,
a. What actions are being taken, or need to be taken, to correct any
shortages of facilities?
The Draft Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which is currently being
reviewed, identifies current (2001) facility shortages and projected facility shortages,
In response to identified shortages, the Draft Master Plan includes a park
programming matrix which clearly defines where needed facilities will be located in
conjunction with the development of new park sites as well as upgrades to existing
park sites, This plan of action will serve to remedy facility shortages, The Draft
Master Plan also contains an action plan that identifies timing of planned facilities,
and funding sources,
Facilities being targeted for future parks include swim complexes with 50 meter
swimming pools and multi-purpose community centers with gymnasiums,
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to
maintain the threshold standard?
Yes
No X
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum ques\PARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 4
Explain:
While growth during the reporting period has not affected the ability to provide
required parkland acreaae. growth during the reporting period has further
exacerbated the shortage of certain recreation facilities, such as a community
center, a swimming pool, sports courts (basketball and tennis), and sport fields
(soccer, baseball/softball) for adult and youth leagues,
5. Are any additional parklands necessary to accommodate forecasted growth
for both the 12 - 18 month and 5 - 7 year time frames?
Yes X No
Explain:
a. What is the amount of needed parkland?
Current eastern Chula Vista parkland inventory will provide adequate acreage to
accommodate up to 85,093 persons, The 18-month forecast calls for an eastern
Chula Vista population of 80, 600, therefore current inventory will meet the 18-month
forecast. With an additional 11, 07 acres of parkland being developed over the next
18 months, and at least an additional 98,44 acres forecasted for 2006 time frame,
an additional 36, 503 persons can be accommodated, This translates to an eastern
Chula Vista parkland inventory of 353.72 acres, which is capable of accommodating
a total of 117,907 persons,
By end of 2006, the eastern Chula Vista population would be 109,438, This would
necessitate 328,31 acres of parkland in eastern Chula Vista to meet the threshold
standard. A total of 353,72 acres of park/and is forecasted, (existing inventory plus
acreage forecasted to come online), an amount adequate to meet the threshold
standard.
b. Are there sites available for the needed parklands?
Park sites are available and have been identified on SPA plans and Tentative Maps
for major projects within the eastern territory such as Otay Ranch, San Miguel
Ranch, Rolling Hills Ranch, and EastLake,
c. Is funding available for needed parklands?
Funding for needed parklands in eastern Chula Vista is available through the
development of turnkey park facilities and/or payment of Parkland Dedication
Ordinance Fees (PAD Fees),
6. Are any additional facilities necessary to accommodate forecasted growth for
both the 12 - 18 month and 5 year time frames?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
a. What facilities are needed?
C:ldffiles\GMOC~moc 01\retum quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 5
Based on current PDO defined facility needs ratios, to accommodate a population
increase of 40,794 (Year 2006) and taking into consideration existing (2001)
inventory, the following facilities will be needed in eastern Chula Vista,
PDO Based Needs Ratio - 2001 and 2006 Eastern Chula Vista
Recreation PD~ Ratio Current (2001) Future (2006) Combined Current
Facility Need Need and Future Need
Large Picnic
Shelter 1,000 30 41 71
Tennis Court 2,000 23 20 43
Baseball/Softball 5,000 2 8 10
Basketball 5,000 1 8 9
Soccer 10,000 -2 4 2
Swim Pool (50 20,000 3 2 5
meter)
Community 24,000 3 2 5
Center/Gym
Notes:
1. Number of facilities needed has been round up when one-half or greater.
2. Negative values represent number of facilities beyond numeric need.
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\return quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 6
The following table reflects results of the Draft Parks Master Plan facility needs ratios,
Draft Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan-Based
Needs Ratio - 2001 and 2006 (Not Adopted)
PRMP (2001) PRMP Combined
Recreation Facility PRMP Need (2006) 2001 &
Ratio ++ (Less Need 2006 Need
Supply) (Less
Supply
Softball
Organized Adult 1/7,900 0 5 5
Organized Youth 1/12,700 0 3 3
Practice/lnformal 1/2,850 12 14 26
Baseball
Organized Adult 1/12,200 6 3 9
Organized Youth 1/4,400 11 9 20
Practicellnformal 1/3,300 0 12 12
Football 1/21,400 3 2 5
Soccer
Organized Games 1/5,400 4 8 12
Practicellnformal 1/2,450 15 17 32
Picnic Shetter N/A N/A N/A N/A
Picnic Tables 1/600 -127 68 -59
Tot LotsIPlaygrounds 1/2,650 4 15 19
Swimming Pool 1/45,800 1 1 2
Tennis 1/3,200 10 13 23
Basketball 1/2,150 19 19 38
Skateboarding 1/56,950 1 1 2
Roller Bladin9 1/59,100 1 1 2
Classrooms (3) 1/3,900 17 10 27
Community Center/Gym N/A N/A N/A N/A
Notes:
1. Negative Value indicates overage.
2. Number of facilities needed has been round up when one-half or greater.
3. "Classroomsft refers to an increment of building facility utilized for recreation purposes. Each increment
represents approximately 3,250 square feet. Community Centers and Gymnasiums count toward this
requirement.
b. Are there sites available for the needed facilities?
Yes, sites become available and are reserved as part of the land development
process (Tentative Map, SPA Plan, and Final Map),
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01 Ireturn quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 7
c. Is funding available for needed parklands?
Yes, funding of needed parklands (turnkey parks) will be available at Final Map
recordation.
7. Are there any other growth related issues you see affecting the ability to
maintain the threshold standard as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes X
No
Explain:
If not properly phased, growth has the potential to affect the ability to provide
necessary parkland and facilities in a timely fashion, Future park sites need to be
developed early in the development phasing sequence, Furthermore, depending on
facility type needed, it may be necessary to develop community park sites prior to
neighborhood park sites in a given development. The Draft Citywide Parks Master
Plan will include goals, policies, and action items that address sequencing of park
development in conjunction with population increases,
PARKLAND AND FACILITIES MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing
parklands and facilities?
Yes X
No
Explain:
The maintenance of all parklands and facilities is a budget issue, As new parks
come online, additional maintenance staff will be needed to maintain parks that are
added to the park system,
8A. Is there adequate staff for park maintenance?
Yes X
No
Explain:
The Public Works Department has implemented a staffing strategy for ensuring that
staffing levels are commensurate with parklands maintenance needs, A standard,
based on identifying number of park maintenance staff persons per acre of
parkland, is being implemented to ensure that staffing levels are adequate to meet
current and forecasted maintenance needs,
During the reporting period the Public Works Department recruited an additional
Lead Park Ranger and two Park Maintenance Workers (Gardener I) to meet the
C:\dffiles\GMOC~moc 01 \return quesIPARKS GMOC o1.doc
Page B
park maintenance needs, An additional Gardener is to be hired during the next fiscal
year.
9. Were any major parkland or facilities maintenance/upgrade projects
completed during the reporting period? If yes, please list.
Yes X No
Explain:
The following programmed maintenance/upgrade projects have been completed or
started during the reporting period,
Proiects Completed or Started Durina the Reportina Period
Greg Rogers Park (Par/Mew Little League Field Upgrades)
Greg Rogers/Los Ninos Comfort Stations (Design Completed)
Feaster School Playground Renovation (Construction Scheduled)
Tiffany Park Playground Renovation (Construction Scheduled)
C/P Number
PR-169
PR-214
PR-222
PR-225
PARKS MASTER PLAN
The fol/owing questions are fol/ow-ups to previous GMOC recommendations.
10. Has the Parks Master Plan been completed and adopted?
Yes
No X
Explain:
The Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan has been completed as a draft
document, The document has been circulated to City staff members for review,
Following a review of the draft document a hearing before the Parks and Recreation
Commission and City Council will be held, The document is expected to be
adopted in late spring of this year,
If "No" please advise how the GMOC should evaluate the adequacy of park
and recreational facilities and how existing facilities can be judged as meeting
the threshold standard.
The municipal code identified threshold for Parks and Recreation Areas is: (CVMC
19,09,040E) Population ratio: Three acres of neiahborhood and community
parkland with appropriate facilities per 1.000 residents east of 1-805, The threshold
standard pertains to land and facilities, The threshold standard pertaining to land (3
acres per 1,000 persons east of 1-805) is currently being met and is anticipated to
be met through the next 5-year period, The threshold pertaining to recreation
facilities is being met if the threshold standard is interpreted to mean that as long as
3 acres per 1,000 persons being provided east of 1-805 contains "appropriate"
recreation facilities then the threshold is met, It is logical to conclude that the
threshold is in compliance since the facility portion of the threshold is being met in
C:\dffilesIGMOC\gmoc 01\return quesIPARKS GMOC 01 .doc
Page 9
the context of the qualifier of "three acres per 1,000. If the threshold stated that
appropriate facilities be provided regardless of how much land was required to
accommodate the facilities then it would be clear that the threshold was exceeded,
This is not the case, The term "appropriate" is somewhat subjective in nature, It is
accurate to state that all public parks currently planned and under construction will
be outfitted with "appropriate facilities" since said facilities are serving the
population's recreational needs, If "appropriate" is strictly interpreted to mean 100
percent of the recreational needs are being met then the conclusion statement
would be "no",
The GMOC could choose to evaluate the adequacy of park and recreational
facilities based on either the currently adopted recreation facility ratios or the draft
yet to be approved recreation facility ratios proposed in the Draft Chula Vista Parks
and Recreation Master Plan document, The analysis contained in the preceding
pages does exactly that. The analysis can serve as an overview of how the City is
meeting recreational demands, Recreational demand is not the same as the parks
and recreation threshold, The Draft Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan
clarifies the point that application of the parkland standard (3 acres per 1,000) alone
will not result in an adequate amount of parkland to meet all future projected needs,
In other words more land will be needed than can be required of future
development, This results in a situation where compliance with the threshold does
not necessarily correlate with 100 percent compliance with the population's desires,
at least not within public park land, This could be characterized as "inadequate",
The currently adopted Parklands and Public Facilities chapter of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code (Chapter 17,10) identifies the standards by which a judgment can
be made as to adequacy of facilities, The standards primarily focus on the number
of recreational facilities required for each 1,000 persons, The table contained on
page 6 identifies the recreational facilities needed to be in full compliance with the
current PDO, Once again, full compliance with the PD~ is not the same as full
compliance with the parks and recreation threshold standard, Likewise, page 7
contains a table that identifies recreational facilities needed to be in full compliance,
11. Has the Greenbelt Master Plan been completed?
Yes
No X
Explain:
City Staff is currently working with a consultant on the preparation of the Greenbelt
Master Plan, The Draft Greenbelt Master Plan is to be completed in
January/February 2002, Completion of the Final Greenbelt Master Plan is to occur
in 2002,
12. Has a comprehensive evaluation of projected growth and parkland phasing for
eastern Chula Vista been completed?
Yes X
No
Explain:
C:\dffiles\GMOC~moc 01\retum quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 10
As discussed in /tern 7, growth resulting from new development in the eastern
territories can only occur as long as threshold standards are maintained, Parkland
and recreational facility needs are identified early on in the planning phase of
residential development proposals, /n this regard, staff is monitoring planned
residential development and corresponding park demand associated with planned
residential development. The table on the following page represents an accounting
of park phasing,
Park Phasing
Park Anticipated Estimated Estimated
Park Name Acreage Status Construction Construction Acceptance
Start Date Completion Date
Date
Heritage (P-1) 10.17 Under Third First Second
(Otay Ranch Construction. Quarter Quarter Quarter
Village 1) of 2000 of 2002 of 2002
Santa Cora (P-7) 5.68 Master Plan Third First Third
(Otay Ranch Approved Quarter Quarter Quarter
Village 5) by Council of 2002 of 2003 of 2003
12/98.
Sreezewood (P-9) 0.9 Under Second First Second
(Otay Ranch Construction. Quarter Quarter Quarter
Village 5) of 2001 of 2002 2002
Otay Ranch 6.86 Master Plan Third First First
P-2 Park Approved by Quarter Quarter Quarter
C.C. 12/01, of 2002 of 2003 of 2004
Sunsetview Master Plan Third Second Third
(Eastlake Greens) 10,00 Approved by Quarter Quarter of Quarter
C.C.10/01 of 2002 2004 (Phase I) of 2004
Rolling Hills Master Plan
Ranch Preparation Second Second First
Community Park 20.00 Anticipated Quarter Quarter Quarter
Second Quarter of 2003 of 2004 of 2005
2002
EastLake Trails Master Plan Second Second First
Community Park 19.80 Preparation Quarter Quarter Quarter
Anticipated of 2003 of 2004 of 2005
Second Quarter
2002
EastLake Vistas Master Plan Second Second First
Neighborhood 10.00 Preparation Quarter Quarter Quarter
Park Anticipated of 2003 of 2004 of 2005
Second Quarter
2002
San Miguel Master Plan Second Second First
Ranch 16,10 Preparation Quarter Quarter Quarter
Community Park Anticipated of 2003 of 2004 of 2005
Second Quarter
2002
Sunbow Master Plan Second Second First
Neighborhood 10,00 Preparation Quarter Quarter Quarter
Park Anticipated of 2003 of 2004 of 2005
Second Quarter
2002
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 11
C:\dffiles\GMOC~moc 01 \return quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 12
MISCELLANEOUS
13. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes X
No
-
Explain:
Over the past GMOC cycles, recommendations have been forwarded to the City Council by
the GMOC to make the 3 acres/1,OOO population threshold a City-wide goal, Staff has
been supportive of this revised threshold recommendation; however, consideration by he
City Council has been delayed, pending completion of the Chula Vista Parks and
Recreation Master Plan, It is expected that with completion of the Master Plan, the revised
Threshold will again be forwarded to the City Council for consideration and possible
adoption,
14. Are there any suggestions you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No ..lL
Explain:
15. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC.
Yes
No ..Å..-
Explain:
Prepared by: Joe Gamble
Title: Landscape Planner
Date of Preparation: January 4, 2002
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum quesIPARKS GMOC 01.doc
Page 13
THRESHOLD
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed to foster air quality improvement
pursuant to relevant regional and local air quality improvement strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable Federal,
State and regional air quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development specific activities being undertaken by the City
toward compliance with relevant Federal, State and local regulations
regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Quality Pollution Control District
(APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the APCD shall report on overall regional
and local air quality conditions, the status of regional air quality improvement
implementation efforts under the Regional Air Quality Strategy and related Federal and
State programs, and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and
local planning and development activities.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
1. Please fill in the blanks on this table, and update any prior years' figures if they have
been revised.
SMOG TRENDS - Number of days over standards
STATE STANDARDS 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
San Dieoo Reaion 51 43 54 26 24 29
Chula Vista 1 10 2 4 0 2
FEDERAL
STANDARDS
San DieQO ReQion 2 1 9 0 0 2
Chula Vista 0 0 0 0 0 0
1a. Please note any additional information relevant to regional and local air quality
conditions during the reporting period.
C:\dffilesIGMOC\gmoc 01\retum queslGMOC APCD.doc
Page 1
Please provide brief responses to the following:
2. Were there any changes in Federal or State programs during the reporting period?
Yes No_X_
Explain
No changes, but the region has now achieved compliance with federal ozone
standards and will now petition EPA for redesignation to an ozone maintenance area.
3. Has the Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) been updated or revised during the
reporting period?
Yes No_X_
Explain:
a. What changes were made/adopted?
4. Will the above-noted changes (under questions 2 &3), if any, affect Chula Vista's local
planning and development activities and regulations?
Yes
No X
Explain:
MISCELLANEOUS
5. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No 1L-
If yes, explain:
6. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
X
No
Explain:
While Chula Vista has shown leadership in developing transit-oriented communities,
the District cautions that the Council must steadfastly hold to at least the residential
densities originally planned in the Otay Ranch plans to ensure the planned transit
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \return quesIGMOC APCD.doc
Page 2
services have sufficient patronage to function effectively.
7. Do you have any other relevant information that the APCD desires to communicate to
the City and GMOC?
Yes
No_X_
Explain:
Prepared by:
Title:
Date:
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \return queslGMOC APCD.doc
Page 3
THRESHOLD
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed to foster air quality improvement
pursuant to relevant regional and local air quality improvement strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable Federal,
State and regional air quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development related activities being undertaken by the City
toward compliance with relevant Federal, State and local regulations
regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Quality Pollution Control District
(APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the APCD shall report on overall regional
and local air quality conditions, the status of regional air quality improvement
implementation efforts under the Regional Air Quality Strategy and related Federal and
State programs, and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and
local planning and development activities.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
1. Have any major developments or Master Planned Communities been approved during
the reporting period?
Yes
No
x
a. List any approved projects and indicate to what extent these projects implement
measures designed to foster air quality improvement pursuant to relevant federal,
state, regional and/or local policies and regulations?
Although no major development projects were formally approved during the reporting period
there were three Master Planned Communities under preparation,
EastLake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and
related documents were adopted by the City Council on July 10, 2001, This development
contains two subdivisions, EastLake Woods and EastLake Vistas containing a total of 2061
dwelling units,
Otay Ranch Village Eleven SPA plan, EIR, and related documents were adopted by the City
Council on October 9, 2001, This development contains 2304 dwelling units.
Planning efforts have also occurred in another area of the Otay Ranch master planned
C:\dffilesIGMOClgmoc 01\return queslGMOC Planning AQ.doc
Page 1
community. Otay Ranch Village Six SPA plan proposes 2086 dwelling units.
All three projects are required to prepare an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP)
addressing the project's air quality impacts and proposing measures to reduce those
impacts.
As a result of the adoption of the Carbon Dioxide (C02) Reduction Plan on November 14,
2000, the City initiated a pilot study leading to the development of formal AQIP guidelines.
The three projects, EastLake III, Otay Ranch Village Eleven, and Otay Ranch Village Six are
participating in the pilot study. The study evaluates the relative effectiveness of applying
various site design and energy conservation features in the developments and will result in
the preparation of AQIP's for these SPA's. The study is nearing completion and those
projects that have received approval are conditioned to implement the study results identified
in the AQIP's,
2. Are Chula Vista's development regulations, policies and procedures consistent with
current applicable federal, state and regional air quality regulations and programs?
Yes X
No
Explain:
a. With respect to any inconsistencies, please indicate actions needed to
bring development regulations, policies and/or procedures into compliance.
3. Are there any non-development related air quality programs that the City is currently
implementing or participating in?
Yes X
No
Explain:
a. Identify and provide a brief explanation of each.
The City continues to implement several of the measures recommended in the C02
Reduction Plan adopted by City Council on November 14, 2000, The following nine non-
development related measures have been implemented and are on-going projects:
Measure 1 - Purchase of Alternative Fuel Vehicles
Council approved a CNG fueling and maintenance facility and has purchased a total of six
alternative fuel vehicles. The City recently placed an order for an additional CNG vehicle
and leased two electric vehicles for the Conservation Program. Chula Vista Transit has
completed replacing 15 diesel-powered buses with CNG buses, The City continues to work
with Metallic Power toward the development of a zinc fuel cell demonstration light-duty truck,
Measure 2 - Green Power
The City joined the SANDAG Power Pool in 1998 and switched twelve meters to "green
power" or electricity generated from renewable resources. Unfortunately, as of July 2000,
the Power Pool has ceased to operate and all of the meters defaulted back to SDG&E, Staff
is working to identify green electricity purchase options available to the City, The City
received funding and in-kind services to develop photovoltaic (PV) solar electricity at one
City facility. The installation of a 4Kw photovoltaic panel has been completed.
Measure 3 - Municipal Clean Fuel Demonstration Project
The City continues to work with the California Energy Commission (CEC) and SunLine
Transit Agency to demonstrate a hydrogen fuel cell transit bus in Chula Vista. In December
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01\return queslGMOC Planning AQ.doc
Page 2
1999, the City Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding to implement a multi-year
demonstration project. The City was awarded a $500,000 grant and Council approved
$36,000 in transit funds to further develop the program, The City received an additional
$500,000 in matching grant funds from the CEC. On December 11, 2001 the City Council
accepted the grant and entered into an agreement with SunLine to implement the project.
Measure 4 - Telecommuting and telecenters
City staff is evaluating the City's Telecommuting Policy for expansion and potential
redeployment. A draft policy is under review and a revised policy is expected before mid-
year 2002,
Measure 5 - Municipal Building Upgrades and Trip Reduction
Retrofits were implemented at all city facilities by upgrading lights, many HVAC systems and
other appliances with energy-saving devices. Additional improvements will be made as
major capital items are scheduled to be replaced or refurbished,
The addition of the Building Departments eastern office and permitting process via the
Internet has resulted in trip reduction by City employees and the public. Staff is also in the
process of expanding opportunities for the public to use the City's website to access
information and communicate with staff without traveling to the Civic Center and other City
facilities, City staff is currently evaluating the feasibility of implementing a Vanpool Program
for City employees who live in eastern Chula Vista and commute to the Chula Vista Civic
Center,
Measure 10 - Green Power Public Education Program
In June 1998 staff developed a public education program for Chula Vista residents. The
program provided information about renewal power choices as deregulation of the power
industry occurred, In the future this information will be made available on the City's web site.
In addition, a global warming education module has been successfully implemented in the
Chula Vista Elementary School District.
Measure 12 - Bicycle Integration with Transit and Employment
Encourages employers and transit providers to provide bike storage at major transit stops
and employment areas and includes bike racks on buses, Employers are also encouraged
to provide showers at major transit nodes.
Measure 16 - Traffic Signal and System Upgrades
The City has changed all 1874 red lamps in its traffic signals to LED lamps, resulting in a
33% savings in energy costs and a reduction of 1599 tons C02, The City completed retrofit
of all green traffic signal lights to LED in April 2001 and has initiated a project for minor LED
traffic signal modifications in 2002.
Measure 19 - Municipal Life-Cycle Purchasing Standards
This measure involves the inclusion of life-cycle energy costs as a selection criterion in a
comprehensive purchasing policy for energy-consuming equipment. The policy has lead
to the purchase of a number of Energy Star appliances and building design or equipment
changes that promote energy efficiency,
4. Are there additional non-development related program efforts that the City needs to
undertake pursuant to federal, state or regional air quality regulations?
Yes No ~
Explain:
a. If so, please identify.
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01 Ireturn queslGMOC Planning AQ.doc
Page 3
5. Are any new air quality programs scheduled for implementation during the next year?
Yes X
No_
Explain:
Two new programs having an indirect impact on reducing emissions have been
implemented during the next reporting period, The City offered a compact fluorescent light
bulb program that operated during the summer months of 2001. This program provided an
average of 8 compact florescent light bulbs to approximately 1,500 residences in Chula
Vista. In addition the City assisted 15 small businesses with lighting retrofits.
The second program involves providing an incentive to encourage the expanded use of
photovoltaic (PV) power systems in Chula Vista, On November 20, 2001 the City Council
adopted a resolution reducing the permit fees for installation of photovoltaic systems in
residential units to a flat fee of $45.00, This represents a reduction of fees to a level below
the average permit fees collected by other jurisdictions in San Diego County,
The Growth Management Ordinance requires that all major development projects (50
dwelling units or greater) prepare Air Quality Improvement Plans (AQIP's) to address
Federal, and State mandates and local issues regarding air quality. At present, the City does
not have formal guidelines for the preparation of AQIP's, As a result of the C02 Reduction
Plan a pilot study was initiated that will lead to the preparation and adoption of guidelines for
AQIP'S, As mentioned earlier, the pilot study involves the development of a computer model
to evaluate the relative effectiveness of applying various site design and energy
conservation features in new developments, Although the study is still underway it is
anticipated that new guidelines will be formulated during the next year, The guidelines will
include air quality and energy conservation measures identified in the pilot study,
Consistency with the C02 Reduction Plan will continue to be a requirement of all AQIP's,
Upon completion of the study, staff will review and determine any necessary amendments to
the Growth Management Ordinance and any other related Codes or documents.
PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATIONS
6. Has the City Council adopted the C02 Reduction Plan?
Yes X
No_
Explain:
The C02 Reduction Plan was adopted by the City Council on November 14, 2000. The
Plan consists of twenty action measures intended to promote clean fuel vehicles,
alternatives to driving, transportation efficient land use planning, and energy efficient building
construction, Staff is implementing the following action measures which make up the Plan:
Measure 1 - Purchase of Alternative Fuel Vehicles
Measure 2 - Green Power
Measure 3 - Municipal Clean Fuel Demonstration Project
Measure 4 - Telecommuting and telecenters (closed)
Measure 5 - Municipal Building Upgrades and Trip Reduction
Measure 6 - Enhanced Pedestrian Connections to Transit
Measure 7 - Increased Housing Density Near Transit
Measure 8 - Site Design with Transit Orientation
Measure 9 - Increased Land Use Mix
Measure 10 - Green Power Public Education Program
Measure 11 - Site design with Pedestrian/Bicycle Orientation
C:\dffilesIGMOClgmoc 01 \return queslGMOC Planning AQ.doc
Page 4
Measure 12 - Bicycle Integration with Transit and Employment
Measure 13 - Bicycle Lanes, Paths and Routes
Measure 14 - Energy Efficient Landscaping
Measure 15 - Solar Pool Heating
Measure 16 - Traffic Signal and System Upgrades
Measure 18 - Energy Efficient Building Program
Measure 19 - Municipal Life-Cycle Purchasing Standards
Measure 20 - Increased Employment Density Near Transit
7. Is the CO2 Reduction Plan being used as a guide to implement measures to reduce
CO2 emissions?
Yes X
No
Explain:
The C02 Reduction Plan is being used to assist in the development of the "Sustainable
Development Program" incorporating the land use measures into planning at the citywide,
sectional/community planning and project levels, C02 reduction, energy efficiency and
improvements in air quality will be addressed through the City's General Plan update in
addition to specific projects processed as new SPA plans and community plans,
8. In the context that this is a regional issue, has SANDAG been apprised of the City of
Chula Vista efforts in reducing CO2 emissions?
Yes
No
X
Explain:
Implementation ofthe C02 Reduction Plan measures continues, however, the application of
many of the measures has just begun. Once the measures have been in effect for a
sufficient period of time staff will provide a written report detailing the results. The report can
then be presented to SANDAG emphasizing the importance of participation in C02 reduction
programs at the regional level.
9. Have City Departments been tasked to identify alternative transportation options and
potential implementation measures?
Yes X
No
Explain:
The Planning Division, Engineering Division and the Community Development Department
staff are continuing work incorporating altemative transportation objectives and policies into
the comprehensive General Plan update that is now underway,
The Engineering Division is continuing to implement the Chula Vista Bikeway Master Plan. A
Bikeway Master Plan update is also under way,
Over the past year, the City has worked cooperatively with the Metropolitan Transit
Development Board (MTDB), San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), and
surrounding local jurisdictions to launch a South Bay Transit First Program. This program will
identify how to implement the recently adopted Transit First regional transportation vision in
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01 \return ques\GMOC Planning AQ.doc
Page 5
the South San Diego Bay area. It will identify transit routes, stations, and priority measures
for transit vehicles, as well as addressing integration with transit supportive land uses. City
participants include representatives of the Planning Division, Public Works Department and
Community Development Department. The project will commence in January 2002, and is
targeted for completion in April 2003. It will help define a transit-oriented alternative as part
of the City's ongoing General Plan update.
MISCELLANEOUS
10. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No -1L..:
Explain:
11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No X
Explain:
12. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC.
Yes
No X
Explain:
Prepared by: Mary Venables
Title: GreenStar Program Coordinator
Date: 12/14/01
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum quesIGMOC Planning AQ.doc
Page 6
THRESHOLD
City-wide: Maintain LOS "C" or better as measured by observed average travel speed on all
signalized arterial segments, except that during peak hours a LOS of "D" can occur for no
more than two hours of the day. West of 1-805: Those signalized intersections which do not
meet the standard above, may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but shall not
worsen.
1. Please fill in the blanks on this table for the current TMP.
.~t} ,..,w;FIC SEGMENTS with LOS "C" or"u .~. '.........'. ..' , ......
.'
.,'. ···.·i . 2..j'" .....2 1997 1998 TMP 1999 2001 TMP I
.,/....·"5'......,.. 2000 TMP
" TMP TMP
. (:. ,.. AM PEAK PERIOD 7 - 9 am '" ...
H Street (Bay Blvd. -Woodlawn Ave.) 2 EBIWB DID C/D4 C/D2 DSCS* I C4 DS/CS
H Street (1-5 NB - Third Ave) EBIWB C/B C/B B4/B
CS/BS C4/B4
E, H Street (SW College Enl - Corral Canyon Rd.l Rutgers B/C C/CS B4/C
Ave) B4/C4 C/CS
EBIWB
Olav lakes Rd. IE, H St. - Tel. Canvon Rd.! NBlSB C/B C/CS C/A4 B4/CS C/C4
;. MID-DAY PEAK PERIOD 11:30 am -1:30 DI11
H Street (Bav Blvd, - Woodlawn Ave) 2 WB lonlv} D D C4/D2 D DS
H Street (I-S NB ramps - Third Ave,) EBIWB C/C CIC CIC CIC C5/C4CS
E, H Street (SW Colleae Enl - Rutaers Ave.! EBIWB B/C B/C B/C B/B4 B/C
OIay lakes Rd, (E, H St, - Tel, Canvon Rd) NB/SB C/B C/B C/B C/A4 CS/C
Palomar St. (I-S NB ramps - Broadwavl EBIWB C/C CIC C/CDS C/CSD CS/CSC
.i/C· ···'...·2· '."'f.',!» .........'.. . ,.'PM PEAJ(PERlOD..... ~ 6 pm;C" ..... ..
E Street (Bay Blvd, - Woodlawn Ave,) 2 WB (only) DD* DD* 6 6 D
H Street (Bay Blvd, - Woodlawn Ave,) 2 WB (only) DD* DD* (ES) 2 ED4 DDS
Palomar Sl (Bay Blvd. -Industrial Blvd,) 2 EB (only) DD* DD* (FS) 2 D4D4 D4/C
E Street (I-S NB ramps - Third Ave,) EBIWB C/C C/C B4/C B/B4 1/1
H Street (I-S NB ramps - Third Ave,) EBIWB C/C CIC C/C CS/C C4CS
E, H Street ISW College Ent. - Rutgers Ave,) EBIWB B/C B/C B/C B/C B/CS
Olav lakes Rd. IE, H St. - Tel. Canvon Rd.! NB/SB C/B C/B C/B C/B B/C
Palomar Sl (I-S NB ramps - Broadway) EBIWB C/C DC/CS C4/C DSCI CC4/CS
CSC4
* First hour and second hour LOS.
1 Not studied because previous LOS was B or better.
2 These segments are at Freeway Interchanges and are not subject to threshold standards. For information only.
3 East of I-60S, LOS D was not exceeded for more than two hours, West of I-60S, only H Street (Bay Blvd,-Woodlawn Ave,)
exceeded Los D for more than two hours. See note 2.
4 LDS Improvement,
S LOS reduction,
6 Omitted because of road construction.
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \return queslTRAFFIC 01.DOC
Page 1
2. Should any street segments be added to the above list as a result of the current
TMP?
Yes X No
a. If yes, fill in the following table.
'.',......... ···....·...·.·,.....·:.·;·..·c,...···.....·...· ....;............ ............. ...;
TRAFFIC SEGMENTS NOW IDENTIFIED WITH LOS "C" or "D"
',2000 LOS
AMlMID/PM
DD
2001
AM/MID/PM
D5C4
AM
Palomar St (1-5 NB ramps - Broadway) EB I WB ( AM )
Hilltop Drive ( F Street - L Street) NB/SB ( PM)
"J" Street ( 1- 5 NB ramps - Third Ave. ) EBIWB ( PM )
Palomar St. ( Bay - Industrial) 2 EB IWB ( mid-day)
J St. (Bay - Woodlawn) 2 EB I WB ( PM )
East H SL Hillto Dr, - Hidden Vista 2 EB I WB PM
ESt (Bay-Woodlawn) 2 EB IWB (AM)
Mid - da
Broadway ( C St H St ) NB I SB (Mid-day)
PM
Telegraph Canyon Rd, ( Halecrest - Medical Cntr )
[ taken during road construction] EBI WB
(AM)
(Mid- day)
PM
B '93
B/B('99)
C
CIC
C/B
C/B
D5/C5
DID
CD5/B
C/D
C/C5D
B/C
B/C
B/B('92)
B/B('92)
D/C
C/C('95)
D/A
BC/C('99)
C/C '99
B/C
BIB '94
B/DC
A/B
AlA
BA I CC4
B/CB5
B/CB
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
3. Were any major streets, or other traffic improvements constructed during the
reporting period (00/01) fiscal year?
Yes X No
Explain:
1) Roadway Improvements at Olympic Parkway from 1-805 to Paseo Ranchero,
2) Traffic Signal Installation at Olympic Parkway and Brandywine Ave,
3) Traffic Signal Installation at Olympic Parkway and Oleander Ave,
4) Traffic Signal Installation at East Palomar Street and Paseo Ranchero,
5) Paseo Ranchero Street improvements between Olympic Parkway and East
Palomar Street.
6) Heritage Road improvements South of Main Street.
7) Traffic Signal improvements at Telegraph Canyon Rd, and Vons Shopping
Center.
8) Hunte Parkway from Otay Lakes Road to Proctor Valley Rd,
9) Proctor Valley Road from Mt. Miguel Road to Hunte Parkway,
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \return queslTRAFFIC 01.DOC
Page 2
FREEWAY ENTRANCES I EXITS
4. Use the following two tables to report the status of freeway entrance/exit studies
and/or improvement projects.
Information received Last vear- Please Undate Tables
...'. '. .....
INTERSTATE 5, .,...,'..» ..':... .' ...'
ENTRANCE / EXIT . CSTATUS ,
E Street North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2005.
H Street North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2005.
J Street North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2003.
L Street/Industrial North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2003.
Blvd.
Palomar Street North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2003.
Main Street North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2003.
.. . ....
INTERSTATE 805 .,. .. .... ,... .'... ",
ENTRANCE/EXIT .:,.,. /"c. STATUS ".:" ..'. .,
',' ..
Bonita Road North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2003.
East H Street There is a project report dated August 4. 1994 to provide 4 EB
lanes, 2 EB to NB on ramp lanes, 3 NB off ramp lanes, 2 WB to
NB on ramp lanes, ramp metering and other misc. Improvements.
North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2003.
Tele. Canyon Road City awarded a contract during June of 1999 to provide 3 EB
lanes, widen and square off the SB off ramp, remove SB to EB
access from Halecrest Drive, install a traffic signal at Yon's
Shopping Center and provide landscaping in the median. North
bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2003.
Olympic Parkway and Preliminary design and environmental assessment is
E. Palomar Street underway for interchange improvements and access to 1-805 at
Palomar Street. North and South bound ramp meters are
scheduled for 2003.
Main Street North bound ramp meter is scheduled for 2003.
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\return queslTRAFFIC 01.DOC
Page 3
GROWTH IMPACTS
5. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
LOS levels?
Yes No _X_
Explain: As a result of the construction activities on the major roads, noticeable
traffic delays are observed during the peak hours, However,
reductions are still within LOS Standards as set by the GMOC,
6. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth (without exceeding the LOS
threshold) for both the 18-month and 5 year time frame?
Yes X No
Yes for the short term, If SR-125 is constructed by the year 2005, then
current facilities will be able to absorb forecasted growth for the 5-year time
frame,
a. Please indicate those new roadways and/or improvements necessary to
accommodate forcasted growth consistent with maintaining the Threshold Standards.
18-month timeframe:
1) Palomar Street from 1- 5 to Industrial Blvd.
2) East Palomar Street from Medical Center Drive to Olympic Parkway,
3) La Media Road from East Palomar street to Olympic Parkway,
4) Olympic Parkway from Paseo Ranchero to Wueste Road,
5-vear timeframe:
1) Olympic Parkway Interchange at 1- 805
2) Olympic Parkway from Paseo Ranchero to Wueste Rd,
3) Birch Rd, from Eastlake Parkway to La Media Rd,
4) La Media Rd, from Olympic Parkway to Birch Rd,
b. How will these facilities be funded?
TDIF, TRANSNET and developer Obligations,
c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
Yes
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum queslTRAFFIC 01.DOC
Page 4
7. What is the Status of SR-125?
All environmental permits and required approvals have occurred, Financing is anticipated early this
summer, with construction to begin immediately thereafter.
8. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current
level of service as Chula Vista's transportation demand increases?
Yes X
No
Explain:
Please refer to attached memorandum regarding Status of Eastern Chula
Vista Traffic Enhancement projects,
MAINTENANCE
9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing
facilities?
Yes
No X
Explain:
The maintenance of public infrastructure is under-funded at this time,
10. Has the Public Works Department developed an annual list of priority streets
with deteriorated pavement?
Yes X No
Explain:
The Public Works Department established an annual priority list for all
deteriorating streets after pavement analysis was performed,
C:ldffilesIGMOC~moc 01\retum queslTRAFFIC 01.DOC
Page 5
11. a. Are any major roadway construction/upgrade or maintenance projects to
be undertaken pursuant to the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes X No
Explain:
1) East "H" Street Widening On The South Side, East of 1- 805 Off-ramp (2001 - 2002),
2) Olympic Parkway / I - 805 Interchange ( 2001 - 2004 ),
3) Palomar Street / I - 805 Interchange Improvements ( 2004 - 2005 ),
4) Olympic Parkway From Brandywine Avenue to Hunte Parkway ( 2000 - 2004 ),
5) Main Street pavement Rehab ( 2002 ),
6) "H" Street Reconstruction, 1- 5 To Broadway ( 2002 ),
7) Otay Lakes Road Overlay Near Eastlake Parkway (2001-2002 ).
8) Fourth Ave Resurfacing Between "E" Street And Brisbane Street ( 2001 - 2002 ),
9) Cross Gutter Removal At "E" Street And First Avenue ( 2002 - 2003 ),
10)Palomar Street Improvements From 1-5 To Industrial Blvd, (2002 - 2003),
11 )Median Modification At Telegraph Canyon Road East Of Medical Center Drive (2001).
12)Pavement Overlay Rehab Project - City Wide (2001-2002 ),
b. Has the Engineering Division included the $200,000 annual traffic signal
maintenance program in the five-year CIP?
Yes No X
Explain:
Maintenance is funded annually under the operating budget.
MISCELLANEOUS
12. What is the status of the City's public information efforts to inform citizens
and local businesses about its current and longer term transportation
planning efforts?
Describe:
The new neighborhoods, parks, schools and roads being built in eastem Chula Vista
are a result of many years of careful planning with extensive community input. Using
the current General Plan, a thorough review of each new development takes place,
which involves various community meetings, Otay Ranch, for example, which is
identified as a "Smart Growth" community because it features a number of
residential villages grouped around commercial core accessible by pedestrians and
bicyclists, is a result of a process that lasted a decade of extensive meetings with
developers, local and state agencies, City staff, members of the public, community
groups and environmental advocates,
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \return queslTRAFFIC 01.DOC
Page 6
The City of Chula Vista, in addition, has reconfirmed its commitment to long-range
planning, which involves the public input during all stages of proposed
developments, by updating its General Plan, This Process, which is expected to
take three years, is currently underway and will involve community meetings as well
as other opportunities to provide public input. Updates to the General Plan are given
in the quarterly published Chula Vista Spotlight newsletter, on the City's website and
in the local media,
13. a. What is the status of the comprehensive traffic model to identify eastern
Chula Vista street system capacity prior to construction of SR 125?
Describe:
City staff and consultant have finalized three environmental impact reports prepared
for Eastlake III, Otay Ranch Village 6 and Otay Ranch Village 11. These reports will
serve as the backbone for a comprehensive traffic modeling in the eastern
territories,
b. What is the status of establishing a monitoring system to manage Building
Permit approval prior to SR-125?
Describe:
City staff is closely monitoring the number of building permits being issued and the
construction of Olympic Parkway, East Palomar Street, and State Route 125, City
staff is also being proactive in efforts to expedite the construction of SR-125, At the
same time, staff is performing the annual TMP runs, including those critical
segments twice a year, unless construction would interfere with those runs, Through
the TMP runs and monitoring of the number of building permits, staff is able to plan
for those measures which may become necessary in order to prevent the Growth
Management Ordinances requirements from being exceeded
14. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No X
Explain:
However, as previously presented to the GMOC, the street segments need
to be modified,
C:\dllilesIGMOC\gmoc 01 \return queslTRAFFIC 01.DOC
Page 7
15. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes X No
Explain:
When traffic volumes on major roadways in eastern Chula Vista exceed 10,000
AD,T" then those roadways will be added to the TMP segment runs in order to
monitor the LOS and ensure that threshold standards are not exceeded,
16. Are there any other suggestions that you would like the Growth Management
Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
Explain:
Continue the support for the timely construction of SR - 125 and the support for
monitoring the level of service on our major streets,
Prepared By:
Title:
Date:
Majed AI-Ghafry
Civil Engineer
1 / 8 / 2002
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum queslTRAFFIC 01.DOC
Page 8
~\f?
--11--:
CllY Of
CHULA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
November 28, 2001
File: 0610-75-GY051
TO:
Grov.'th Management Oversight Commission
FROM:
Clifford L. Swanson, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engine~
Ralph R. Leyva, Senior Civil Engineer fJ 1/
Proposed Changes To The Arterial Nf~rk & Segment Classification Map
VIA:
SUBJECT:
Discussion
The purpose of the Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) is to ensure timely provisions of adequate
local circulation system capacity in response to planned growth while maintaining acceptable
levels of service, The TMP will also help plan new roadway segments and signalized
intersections to maintain acceptable levels of service (LOS) at various stages of developing the
circulation element as adopted by the General Plan,
The current threshold standard, city-wide, is to maintain LOS "C" or better, as measured by
observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments except that during peak hours a
LOS of "D" can occur for no more than any two hours of the day. West of Interstate 805, those
signalized intersections which do not meet the standard may continue to operate at their current
(1991) LOS, but shall not worsen. The Traffic Monitoring Program does not include urban and
suburban arterial highway segments with signal spacing of 2 miles or more and average weekday
traffic volumes 10,000 vehicles per day or less, Arterial segments LOS measurements shall be
for the average weekday peak hours, excluding seasonal and special circumstance variations,
Arterial segments are stratified into three classifications:
Class I Arterials are roadways where free flow traffic speeds range between 35 mph and 45
mph, and the number of signalized intersections per mile are less than four (4), There is no
parking and there is no access to abutting property,
Class II Arterials are roadways where free flow traffic speeds range between 30 mph and 35
mph, the number of signalized intersections per mile range between four (4) and eight (8), there
is some parking and access to abutting properties is limited,
Gro"1h Management
Oversight Commission
-2·
November 28,2001
Class III Arterials are roadways where free flow speeds range between 25 mph and 35 mph and
the number of signalized intersections per mile are close]y spaced. There is substantia] parking
and access to abutting property is unrestricted,
Free flow speed is the average speed of motorists over those portions of arteria] segments that are
not close to signalized intersections, as observed during very low traffic volume conditions while
drivers are not constrained by other vehicles or by traffic signals,
The subject map was developed in October ]991 by Willdan and Associates and revised by the
City in 1992 and in ]998, Since that date, there have been no other changes to the map. Exhibit
1 shows the Arterial Network as it existed in 1991. Exhibit 2 shows the Arteria] Network as it
was revised in 1992, Exhibit 3 shows the current Arteria] Network as revised in 1998. A
comparison of these exhibits shows that the following changes were made to the Arterial
Network used for the Traffic Monitoring Program:
1992
1. Broadwav ("L" Street to South Citv Limits) - Classification was changed from Class II to
Class III to be consistent with the rest of Broadway, It was felt that this segment of
Broadway had the same roadway characteristics as the rest of Broadway and should have
the same classification,
2, Main Street (Third Avenue to I-80S Southbound Ramps) - Classification was changed from
Class III to Class II due to the lower density of development along the segment compared
to the area of Main St. west of Third Ave,
3, Bonita Road (Plaza Bonita Road to Central Ave,) - The segment was split into three segments
to separate the City portion of Bonita Rd, (Willow St. to the east City limits) from the
County portion of the roadway. The County portion of Bonita Rd, from Plaza Bonita to
Willow St. was also changed from Class II to Class I due to the undeveloped nature of the
area and the high travel speed along the roadway coupled with few signals per mile and
generally no parking which is more consistent with the category for the Class I Arterial.
4, Otav Lakes Road Œonita Rd, to Te]egraph Canvon Rd,) - The segment was split into two
segments, one from Bonita Rd, to East H St. and the other from East H St. to Telegraph
Canyon Rd, to create a separate segment in front of Southwest em College,
1998
1. Third Ave. (C St. to H St.) - The segment was removed from the Traffic Monitoring Program
(TMP), The presence of the Downtown Business District between E St. and G St., with
on-street angle parking, reduced roadway widths at intersections and a 25 MPH speed
limit, creates a special condition where lower travel speeds are desired and encouraged,
It was not appropriate to have this portion of Third Ave, be subject to the City's
Thresho]d Standards, Additionally, Third Ave, from C St. to ESt, carries less than
Growth Management
Oversight Commission
-)-
November 28,2001
10,000 vehicles per day; therefore, that portion of the road does not meet the criteria for
study under the TMP, For those reasons, Third Ave, from C St. to G St. was removed
from the TMP and the remaining block from G St. to H St. was added to the existing
TMP segment to the south to create a new segment on Third Ave, from G SI. to Naples
St.
2, Otav Lakes Road (East H SI. to Telegraoh Canvon Rd,) - The classification oftne segment
was changed from class 1 to class II due to the nature of the area (single family residential
on the east side and Southwestern College on the west side),
Proposed Chanees To Arterial Hiehwav Seement Map
Since the adoption of the original Arterial Network and Segment Classification Map and several
amendments, there has been substantial development in the eastern areas of the city, This
development has created new arterial segments which are not currently on thè map and produce
notable changes in the patterns of traffic flow, Therefore, the Arterial Highway Segment Map
needs to be updated, The proposed changes will fall into the following categories:
I, Changes to Freeway Segments,
2, Increases or decreases to the length of the Highway Segments,
3. Additions to the list of Segments,
4, Changes in the classification of portions of a Segment
1. Changes to Freeway Segments
Currently, all the segments extending to 1-5 Freeway terminate at the nearest freeway ramp. The
segments extending to 1-805 terminate at the nearest ramp of the freeway or at the nearest
signalized intersection, There is little consistency or logic to the terminus point. Since the city
has no control of the traffic signal timing at the freeway ramps, at this time; and the city has no
control over the ability for traffic to move efficiently through those freeway segments, it is
proposed that all segments terminate at the nearest signalized intersection controlled by the city
closest to the freeway ramp or traffic signal controlled by Caltrans, However, this situation may
present special considerations at ramp intersections connecting to SR-12S. This is because the
nearest intersection may initially be a long distance from the freeway ramp, Most of the proposed
freeway segments will be shortened as growth continues with commercial and residential
development adjacent to the SR-12S Freeway, Traffic signals will be constructed on the various
east-west arterials as density continues to increase and limits of the freeway segments would
automatically change accordingly, Since construction of SR-12S is still some time away, this
special situation can be considered at a later time when more experience is developed at the 1-
805 freeway ramps, These segments would be monitored and reported, but are not subject to the
GMOC thresholds, The following is a list of the proposed freeway segments:
Growth Management
Oversight Commission
-4-
November 28, 2001
I-80S
Bonita Road
East H Street
"L" Street/Telegraph Canyon Road
Orange Ave./Olympic Parkway
Main Street
Se!!ment
Bonita Glenn Drive to Plaza Bonita Road
Hilltop Drive to Hidden Vista Drive
Nacion Avenue to Canyon Plaza Dwy,
Melrose Avenue to Oleander Ave.
Melrose Avenue to Oleander Ave,
SR-125
Se!!ment
East H StreetIProctor Valley Road
Otay Lakes Road
Olympic Parkway
Birch Road
Rock Mountain Road
Main Street
Eastlake Drive to Mount Miguel Road
St. Claire Drive/Santa Paula to Village Center Dwy,
East Palomar Street to Eastlake Parkway
La Media Road to Eastlake Parkway
La Media Road to Eastlake Parkway
La Media Road to Rock Mountain Road
2. Changes in Length
Existing TMP segments should be re-configured to accommodate provisions in the Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM, Special Report 209, Third Edition) and for consistency of limits, The
HCM states that the length of the arterial highway segment to be analyzed should be at least one
(1) mile long in downtown areas and at least two (2) miles long in other areas, In addition, the
TMP should measure the perfonnance of the longer trips that is more consistent with the home to
work commute trip, the home to school trip, and the home to other trip. Using infonnation in the
1995 San Diego Region Travel Behavior Survey, and using an average travel speed of 30 miles
per hour (mph), the average vehicle trip length for the above types is 8,6 miles, 3,3 miles and 5,6
miles respectively, Therefore, using an arterial highway segment of 2 miles or more would be
more consistent with the HCM and the length of trip by purpose or destination, Person trip
lengths are even longer depending on vehicle occupancy. Some of the proposed increases in
length will result in decreases with the fonner segment. The most notable reduction in length is
on East H Street between I-80S NB Ramp and the entrance into Southwestern College, This
segment is being reduced from its current length of 3,26 miles to the proposed terminus at Paseo
Ranchero which would be 2.32 miles, The proposed tenninus at Paseo Ranchero is consistent
with the tenninus of the arterial highway segments to the south. The most notable extension of
length is on Telegraph Canyon Road where the segment tenninating on Medical Center Drive
(1.03 mi.) was extended to Paseo Ranchero (1.91 mi,), The extension of this segment brings it
closer to compliance with the two mile length in the HCM and is consistent with the revised
segment limit on East "H" Street and the proposed new segment on the recently opened Olympic
Parkway. Paseo Ranchero was selected as the tenninus of all three arterial segments because
Paseo Ranchero is approximately halfway between the I-80S Freeway and the SR-125 Freeway,
Exhibit 3 shows the lengths of the IMP segments, in miles, as they currently exist, Please note
that there are currently several TMP segments east of I-80S that are less than two (2) miles in
length, Those highway segments are listed as follows:
Growth Management
Oversight Commission
-5-
Arterial
1. Tel. Cyn, Rd,
2, Otay Lakes Rd,
3, Otay Lakes Rd.
4. East "H" St.
5, Bonita Rd,
6, Bonita Rd,
7, Main St.
Limits
Halecrest Dr. to Medical Center Dr.
Tel. Cyn, Rd, to Eastlake Pkwy.
East "H" St. to Tel, Cyn. Rd.
Otay Lakes Rd, to Rutgers Ave,
Plaza Bonita Rd, to Willow Rd,
Willow Rd. to East City Limits
1-805 NB ramps to East City Limits
November 28,2001
Length
1.03 m
1.61 m
O,65m
O,86m
1.24 m
O,78m
1.78 m
Class
11
I
11
11
I
11
I
Table I identifies the existing highway segments along with infonnation on the length and
existing classification. The table also lists the proposed highway segments and similar
infonnation, This table was developed so that the existing and proposed highway segments
could be compared side by side,
3. Proposed Additions and Future Additions to the TMP Map
With the continued construction of additional street segments in the eastern Chula Vista area,
new roadway segments will have to be added to the TMP map. The primary addition to the TMP
map is Olympic Parkway rrom Brandywine A venue to Paseo Ranchero, East H Street is
extended rrom the current tenninus at Corral Canyon RoadJRutgers Avenue to Eastlake Parkway
(SR-125 rreeway segment). Both the addition and the extension are carrying in excess oflO,OOO
vehicles per day, The Olympic Parkway addition east of Brandywine Avenue was counted with
14, 400 vehicles per day during the inclusive three-day period rrom October 23 to October 25,
2001. East H Street east of Corral Canyon Road has been consistently been counted at 18,000
vehicles per day, Exhibit 4 illustrates the proposed arterial segments if they were a minimum of
two (2) miles in length, Please note that in some instances, the arterial segments changed
classification based on the HCM criteria, Exhibit 5 illustrates how the arterial highway segments
may be configured when those segments are constructed and start to operate in accordance with
the parameters described previously,
4. Changes in the Classification of the Segments
Exhibit 6 is a compilation of infonnation regarding the proposed arterial highway segments in
tenns of classification criteria, The last column on page two lists the proposed classification
based on posted speed limit, rree flow speed, signals per mile, parking and access conditions and
engineering judgment, Page three of this exhibit is a tabulation of the various classification
factors used to detennine the classification of each proposed segment. The determination of
classification was based on the various qualities identified in this exhibit. Since few of the
segments had all of the qualities of the specific classification, some engineering judgment was
employed in determining each classification. It is entirely possible that some classifications will
continue to change in time as more traffic signals are installed and more driveways and access
points are created to serve development. Allowing parking on the arterial will further reduce the
capacity of the roadway, thereby further reducing the level of service for a given traffic volume
demand,
Growth Management
Oversight Commission
-(,.
November 28, 2001
These proposed changes can be processed during the coming GMOC meetings for the 2001
Report or could be processed the following year, Waiting till next year would allow the city to
engage the services of a consulting engineering firm to make a more comprehensive study of the
segment lengths and classifications and provide input and recommendations as a disinterested
third party,
TABLE I
1--·-·
i·
Existing And Proposed Arterial Segments
"---.-._---_.,---,..-------~------------~-
,
,
..'---- I
Status
Limits
---~._---~~----_._-----------~-------------_.._._._---
Comments
Length/ Class
Miles
¡
I' Exist 1-805 NB to SW College Entrance . 3,26
I' iSW College Entrance to Rutgers Ave.lCorral Cyn, 0,86
P d !Hidden Vista Dr, to Paseo Ranchero 2.32
, .,...ropos~i~~~~~.~~~~~~~!~~~ti~~:~~~~~_~~..··......'~.. 2,16.::·._._..'"
Telegraph Canyon Road / Otay Lakes Road
!;._______.__~_____.,'_ . ....___..."n_.._...."...u.n....____.__.u..___._.u....m__m_...__.___..,._..._____..n....___._..__...._____.______'____.______.__ ...... ....________n___ ....._
Halecrest Dr, to Medical Center Dr, 1,03 II
Medical Center Dr, to Otay Lakes Rd, ' 2.45 ¡ I
!atay Lakes Rd,/La Media Rd, to Eastlake Parkway: 1.61 ' I .
¡Canyon Plaza Dwy. to Paseo Ranchero 1.91 I'
! Proposed ,....-.......--..........,.....,....,..--.-...---.................,.....---...-,... ..._,..........
'Paseo Ranchero to St. Claire/Santa Paula Dr, 2,31 I
....-.. ..-"
................-.......
.-....... ...
.....--...--..--....
....
¡:
,
[~ . _'_'n____ ,_.n....... .... ..._....._._.__._...______ _...._ ______ __.... ..._.._ ... ...... ._,_...".,.... ........,..... ..... ..........___.__"._
!'Plaza Bonita Rd. to Willow St.
!' Exist ,Willow St. to E, Chula Vista City Limits
'E, Chula City Limits to Central Ave,
¡,....,.._--- ....... -. ......"..,.......... ...--..------ ..-".-."....".."... -----_...~-.----.------_._--- -.......-. ..-...... -.. ........ ......-..-.....-
I' ¡Plaza Bonita Rd. to E, Chula Vista City Limits
1 Proposed ¡.".."'..'..'.'.--.;......'.""";'........'.'.'.....,..,..,..,................,....,..........,.,.........
¡, ,E, Chula CIty LImIts to Central Ave,
¡
Bonita Road
1.24
0,78
0,58
2,02
........_-,--,..,--_.._..
, 0,58
iE
"
East "H" Street
Exist
-.. _._._..._---~-
_........."^...__._..,..,...._...~.__.-_..._._.,......
..--...-..--.--
.-.-.......................-,.".".....,.-..-..,..,."."..,.--..-."..
._----~_....---
Olympic Parkway
i~-···-'-_·----~---·-,..·---·-----~-----..----·-····--'---....,........
..........----.-.-.---.-.-.-.
,
Ii
!'
Exist None
Proposed ¡Oleander Ave, to Paseo Ranchero
, 2,13 !
I
,.
!:
.--........-.,...-.,..".".
--- ---_._~-_._,...."...._..."..._._--_..--,-
I ' County
,
II
.. ..... 1!._.~_C;:()unt:t__
.., II_14~"0>Ç()~ty..._
II ' Delete
I
II
I
..-...........,..--.-..,.
II
I
I
I
.........,.....,.,.,.- ,I
I
!
I
I
............. ··..,·..·-·,1
I
I
I
I
u_.....1
1
,
u ..¡
···.._·....·..__..,_·..·_..~....-I
1
¡
...........,..,....._-----
I
.
Main Street / Heritage Road
(Otay Valley Rd, ftom 1-805 to Heritage Rd" St.Name Changed ftom Otay Valley Rd, to Main Street)
Exist iI-80S NB to E, Chula Vista City Limits , 1.78 I I
,.!'E()!.'()~~.~Jº!~~der A ~~t().~..~!eEainment CiE~___........ 2,10 __._._.!...._..._..._._
Paseo Ranchero
,
,
ii
,
"......._,._------,--
-
...-....
- -~-,_....,.._-
-------
.J:::c!~~...i~_()?~.._.__.._...,...__.._________.__:.._...J..__________
,__!'!()E()..:'~~_~~~~.o Del ~~¥..~!rn'Y...:. To q!ym!.'ic Pkwy, ,1.80..__1
Otay Lakes Road / La Media Road
-----
.'.......----..'---.----.--
, .
2.36
0,65
1.65
--_.._--_..__._._-_...._---_._--.,.-..__....."..._.._-~--_...----..--..----j
I I
II
I
.-.-..--.-...
.-.------
Bomta Rd, to East nHn Street
lEast nHn Street to Tel. Cyn. Rd.lOtay Lakes Rd.
,....--..
Proposed lEast nHn Street to Olympic Parkway
Exist
J:\ENGINEERITRAFFIClnnpmap,rr1.doc
-
-
ê3
~
n~::::!
:3-ib'""
0_ 'b
c5 Q.,<:
'bO'b
0-0
III III "1
1)'b....
'b"1\Q
n<::\Q
5;D.......
-..¡.
nõ':t>
111:)"1
'blll..¡.
(() 'b
:3~l
'b'j0
:)S--
..¡. (() v
!1 ~
o ?:3
~ ..¡.~
:t;~..¡.
i'ì'b
o Q
~~~
g"'tì!Q
\/I\/I~
o "¡'o
:)t:..¡.
Q.~õ'
\/1111:)
'b III
n :3 "
..¡.0iõ"
õ''<: 1j
:):31')'
_o..¡.
~9,~
(()-<
..¡. °
:3-..¡.:)
\'I:3-..¡.
'b:3-
0(;1'
~:3
"1~
ov
-
-0
:)"1
'bIb
"¡'"t!
~;J
""§=
oS-
:)0
Q.~
:-i
~~
~:'l
~:-r;
!'i~
~ ' )
¡¡¡
~~
~ c:;-¡ rr,
~ t;i ).;
...t::I ~ ;t
.. '" r"i .......
~~M ~
~~ ~ --t
¡s~ ~ ....
~~ C)
-
-
.....,~
J.S lI3J.S17T1H I
'(I..,
I
I
I I
I ~
c~.1 ~.
I
I
ø
- to
;;!
l~
. ....
'"
"
i3
11!1 3!I'i!1Ø
-
-
-
-
- -
- -
- -
- -
-"-"'--"7.."'C",o-,--.,.-,:C-','"'''''__:.,"'''
~~~"",,"_,_o,"~·:.:··
~_._-
.-"._, -
-.-""-' ~""'""~_.
* ;\.;
.....
. ~
....
~
q
o
'4:
'"
,.
&
~
"
'i.
....
...,~..~
.' 'I\V 0'"
ç
" ø...~
'i
." -
~~'··¡i1·1
-E
\~
.~
NE:IllCÄi.· êiilllR
- r-
-
- rr,
-
.. ~
-
-
-
- §
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
..
-
-
..
- £'AST£4.\ë PK
-
- Vy
..
..
..
..
-
-
-
~~ ~ p p p
¡;§ :0. :0. :0.
",¡:;J ¡:¡ ¡:¡ ¡:¡
q! :tj
3>:0; B ;::: :::: ...
...,....
f'" ... :0.
f:1:o. ,.... :0. :0. '"
("j?¡ [:J .", '" ¡:;J
M
;:!,.... ¡; ¡:;J ¡!! ¡!!
!::i~ ¡!! :0;
.:tj :0; ,....
:õ!:... ..., :0; ,....
..., ,.... .., ..,
..,
I
NO~tlV~
, ,Z ç
NOT DRA WN TO SCALE:
oq.
~
~
...
1<
~
- --
UI
~
::tJ
~ ~
'~ ~
~ -<
r-M!::J
)::;"'i
~::tJCJ
~""""::r:
~~~
~........~
~~"
~~'--1
8~~
'--1)::;
C--)CJ
~~~
ÇìtJt::J
A<:~
<~::;:!
~tj~
/tj
CJ~~
i:<<:
C--)C)~
~;g~
~t::J~
CJÇì!2J
~/tj<....
-..,~~
C3~'tJ
<: r-
:b.
~ <:
'tJ
-
>
~
,.
·
~
...
-
-<'<
.
- 0
z ~
· ~ (')
"fD~
~ It) c:
o N _
~ 0
7:' -t
Q ~
~ 0
0. ~ ·
~ ..
o
Q
en -
· n
IC 3:
:II 0
· :J
:J _
,...
(') 0
~
-
o :J
· 10
·
-"tJ
"" ~
-
'C') 0
Q .0
~
,. 0
- .
o
~
3:
Q
~
-
~
- Q
:J
o
10
.
:a
.
:J
..
t;:j
~
-
-
-*
0-
-.
.....
N
-
(')
-
o
""
<
-
C')
~
o
~
-.
~
"tJ
-
Q
:J
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
Z _
'" .
... -
o
...
>
-<
51
..-
~
f -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
'"
...
~
~
""
".
.p.
....
oft
...
"
...
~
o
-a3~~ \
"1~'" ~s
<;
-;.
-
....
'7
"~
....
~
\
!,
>II
".
~
"1-
,... ".
.,.. ....
...
>II
....
:
ric..... '
>--;~
V'''' ",.:.<;
"'~.
"3-"'"
Q"C;
"}t-'"
c:a-
;."",
.' .
......
....
~ .0-
....
...,-s..:1
.. "}~
<;Q
I
301~
. .
,
\
Y"...
}14
-
~
~#'
.(-
..
"..
^.
or
c?
>r
::I" -
0-"
'" . 0
0.... -
.-
a a n
....-.
I : I ~
I : 01 ~
I :
_ 0 a
I : I
I - ('
a
.
n (' n .
NO sCl.U
ï
fT1
C')
I'TT
Z
c
~,
3.,........~s-f1
- --
a a '"
. . .
. . . a
a
--- -
III> -
. ~ .
a a ..
-- -
-.... 0
o. .,
::r -.
.
o
~
.
. z:z ,r·
-
-
ç
.-
:-
~
-
(")
-
-
-
-
z -
c ...; =
,..,.'"!<::
::=-
... -. en
:::'-Ir-
._~
,,"<1
~::~
cnCC
Q =- ~
~~c:.
= c _
i5:!.-
- - ¡;:",
- - ;::
~ QQ -
1"'1-=
\ J '" -
-~C'Q
;:: c:; œ
en a::: _
Co" _ _
....,:: Q
- -
;= - -
..~ - ~
-
-
,..,.
-
-
-
-
;::
-
::
-
-
-
-
z'
o
-
(';
~ "'"':
... -
'" -
'< Q
:¡ >
o ::!.
0..'"
-. ~
..... --
'<=-
='CI:J
- '"
"'C':>
o :;
<: ëõ
Q -
..., -
- -
:'n
-
:; Q
t'"J ~
.-
~ ...,
o r.:
... -
~=.
= c
- -
-=-'"
~ ~
~ë
- -
= <:
CQ ::::
c: c
'"
ñ .-
'"'
--'"
.....
(;.. ;
"'.=:
co -
QQ =
... -
=aï
'"
... '"
~...,
...,
'"' '"
;::-0
t;; =.
'" <:
::;0
r;- =
= .-
- -
c -
-
....
-
'"
to _
;::
-
-
... -
... ...
- -
;: ?
'" -
r:: ·1
C'C Q
;; c..
... C
-<:"
-rn
'" co
- -
~ <
.- c:o
--
- --
'" 0
::
rn
Co '
C
..,
::
CC
...,
-
c::
....
<II
-:
3: ::0
þj - ..
~
<
>< en
- :::
-
_. ... '"
0' .......
-. .., 00
.... 'n CO
t.J
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
,:.
'"
-'
0 ~ r..
'11 '"
~~ -' -'
-'
..
-::-
t~
"
ç
\'......'
~~_.
-,..;~...
S ;:-
co
-'
.'""'
->
~
<:2-
'"'
~
U'I
-'
b
'"
'"
t'
~~
'" -'
-'
G
.~
7;
-
-
-'
..,.
..d
'0-
...¡~
I"-
~5
-;""¡
.,ü-'"
3l''i
c:>!~
-;""¡
"' ----
-'
"31'~
&-::
<;Q;;
-,~
-...J,S::::"-:=-
_\,-
:>-
~ -=/
"..>
*" Z _
en _
-t -
c
....
>
-<
3""¡
~G
\~
~
'¿'
~
-P
:=~
I - I >
.,
I -
I \7
- .,
I -
c
I - I
.-
f CJ ,
- r.
eo C
. r.
> ;t: ('J ('J ('J ..
::;::~ - --- -
a- :; a a a ç
C1 . " .. .. .
Co.... ... . .. .. "
:t - c
a a n - - -
'< - 0 ,-
I
;0
IJT> ¡=
.. '" ,~
n co n
--
-"< 0
c - -
= - -
.
J-.p.~3
..,.."..¡-U:
F'
I
/
I
:...!....
liu SCUE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
_.~-.~,""""'="'. .
.:-i Q ~ ()
~ I: I~ r- P;g
II · 8
-J .. f'1i -
~ <: " -
'< - ~ ¿;;~
~ -....¡ II -
~ ·
~ ~ II - t::::ì
-
~ - V)t::J
f:! II -
~ -
- ~V)
t::í II -
t ~. -
~ II - ~Q
~ ~ -
(") -
f!! II -
~ -
::r:: ~ r., II · ::D..::D.
-
-
~ ~ ..., ~ II
~ ~ lJ ;:::j~
t:; .
~ '< ~ C).
::D. . ,.. ~ p µ p ~~
-
..; . ~
C'j Iv >\ ~ ~ ,.. ,.. ,..
,o* f!! 'Ii t¡ t¡ t¡ ~
~ :0; 8 ;:: :::; ....
I"- ~~
'" ....
~ l"-
V) ~ ¡:¡ ~r--
¡::
);! jS I13.LS17 ~ 'Ii
...
~
d'-lI ~
«" ~
~,.. ~
S(o
-
:1 ,VI ._
-4.._,,-
·'r 'I/>
.. ,
:'""'1 --,,;,.,' '-t.
~
~
~
;¡¡
~
¡:¡
~
~
..'"
..",
~~
;§~
..~
i'¡¡;
~...
:¡:
"'~
ò~
~'%.
M'""
'""'""
~o
-
~-"
e:;::--
F'lITLfI£ SR-125
..
£'ASIZÀ.\i ..
"*'/,11'
L.J N£ A V
'?
'\
ö ¿
~ ltØ
-<
R
~
~
-....¡
~
, ,Z~
NOT BRA WN TO SCALE
------------------
. ~
3d q CD ~ ~- ~ n - I r-
: ("""':ì~ ·
-
b II - i8
-; '" ,,:) ,"'I f'ri -
~ II ·
-- " <:::. -
'"'"" · i~
-¡ II -
-
~ -
i!¡~ i!¡~ ~ t::::I II - -t:::;j
~ - I
-
~!ij ~2 (;) -
~ . 2 II -
~¡:¡ ~i!¡ ';Ii · I
1/ -
"í J;! -
"'<[;I "'<", -
",' 1/ - I
~ """, ""'0 '0 ~ -
2 ~¡;¡ ¡;¡ -
2'0 1/ - I
~ "'¡;¡ "'¡:!¡ ¡:!¡ -
"'<'Ii "'<", ~ r" 1/ -
';;: r- - I
~ ~ r- "" 1/ ·
2 . lJ · I
c;. "'\
~ ::D. t:; ~. '^
"'< . '^ -<
-. -I.;." ~ ;;¡ 5t ~ ~PR
Ci * .; ~ 3 2 ~ ¡;¡ is '" "''''
~ ?:.,. '" i!¡ ~ ¡:!¡ 'Ij t:Jt:Jt:J
~ ..,,~"'..::t,:;';-;?·;,··" .
<>
" '" 8 ;:::~....
-~~ "'< r-
r- '"
f:1 f:1 r-
V) '9> ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~, "'< ~ ~ a
'Ij
./ ¡;¡ ¡;¡
~;g
2~
~R
::D.Q
/t>
'::D.
~/t>
~~
~~
~
::D.r-
8::r:
I-...
~~
~~
~'"'""
'"'""~
~~
~~
~è::j
è::jS(o
~
~
~
~
"
~
~
¡:¡
~
~
:::",
~'"
~~
~~
~\'J
!'>'"
:.:!!¡
~
.¡¡,
<>;.
j ilRANDYWINE: A 1£'
i
~
)
<>
~
"'<
j
. êASTlÀKt;;"'II?-
II'AtIGue.
1/ \Ñ' ì
lANE AV II lP'1
I ¡..... "
II
1/
\ \ "¥,
\\~
JJ~
II~"
II,...:;>'
II ~
'~
,~
'-
"
\ \ ~ ~- \\
,,~ ,~ì\.\
\ \ 1, ~# ,OU, I
\\~ ~1P "II
\\~ //
\ \\~ì //
II ~·I II
J V'" II
II 1/
(~ U
~
~
~
-¡
lr1
,
, z r-
NOT DRAWN TO SCALE
'= ....,
¡¡;.
o
"
- ::;
j~
-
::;
¡¡¡
..
'-,,=
¡¡;
-
=~
~Co-'
<:
~
I ! {I)
, ..
I ; =
, ''''
H..¡
r¡'ë
i :~,
I
::;
~
c:Q
r-¡,
!
I ' '6,
i ~I~
c........;.: c:Q:
1 1-"= r-¡i
n;;-
I !~:..:
''''
Q
....'-1"'1
=1 c:
'Iio ._1 1
,oo¡
",' I I
~:c:Q1
=Qi~
r-:CCI,
=!~!
:f:t:¡ !
,
'"'
Q
r-¡
00
...
>
~
~
o
~ ' , :
~ =ll ~,';g
"-" Ci......·
rn Q.I i"';:
Eo< ,..¡ ¡¡;.:
¡z¡¡ ,I
~ . 1
Co-' '01,=11
~ ~I.§:
~ oo,"¡1
~ '1:
~ ~ CLli
~ ~¡Q.I¡
..¡ OC i OOli
c:Q
... '0 i I
~ ~! fI} :
o =¡~!
~ '£iÜI
,
~
or;
0--
N
-
,-
I_
I;:;;
,
I¡¡..,
I~:
-
ò'
,N'
!N;
,
1
I~I
'I~¡
, !
-I
-
'"
N
I;]
-
-
00
\0
1°1
1-:
lor; I
MI
o
or; i
*'
-,
"',
, '
0\]
("1'):
,
-'
-,
-"=,
c,
._,
"¡L
'~I-
..
...
-
00
,
i
,-'
I...,
I
I i
1°;
I-I
! !
'0
I
I
,
\01
I
1
......i
I
i
001
I
!N1
hi'
'N
I~I
iN.!
!~¡
, ,
,
I :1
'0
,v)
i~1
,
,
I
! I
,
I
10
I....
I~
,C
di!
o
..
£1
, ,
1
...;
o
.sl
;;1
CI
.,'
1'0 I
'0'
.....!
:I:i
~
o
o
o
~
~
\0
-
-
~
Ñ
r-
...,
N
-
...,
-
'N
,-
,...,
,
:0,
: O\!
I::
, ,
-
Ò
N
00
, ,
I
'I'- '
,
-,
1 i
!("Ij
!N
-,
...,
-
I~
IN
-
-
\0
C--
M
-I
-I
V)
V)
,
°
V)
V),
...,'
-,
~¡
-,
o
V)
N
V)
r-!-.i
...,!
,
I
-
:::
...;,
0'
I"
..I<
..s
-
'"
'"
¡¡¡
o
....
.,
..c
(,)
C
'"
~
o
.,
'"
'"
~
~I
, I
01
I
i-I
I
i
loi
I
I
¡v:
,""
100
,
10
,-
, '
IN
1-
I-
I-
'-
1-"
i-I
°
V)
-
!~I
:\0
V)
, ,
,00
,'"
1-
, I
'"'
001
':'1
OJ
-
ii
.¿ e
C
~ 'OJ
~i
.!! 'E:
·¡:I~
..
== I,
-
..:
00
C
.¡
~
~
r-
r-
-
-
N
-
...,
,
,...,
!Ñ
1
:-...1
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
1-
I;' "
...,'
;:;;1
1o!
I 1
I
1'-1
-
1°1
-I
0'
,I
NI
'"'
C
.2
i'18
... .,
_ ..c
'" (,)
§ ~
U 0
... .,
.. '"
,'0 '"
, C ~
;¡ I I
'-'
oj
>
<:
~!
'0
C
'"
.,
õ
>.
'"
~
; Q)
=;; <
.ë. ~,
e ""I
,~ 1å1
10 ~
, 0,
~
o
o
*
";f.
c:Qo
OOr-
Q:¡-
Z ~,
0'1'
I I.r)¡
-
°
~, !
= Ñ!
: en Ii i
'I! ~,Ë;i I i
,IN, .
I ;
!* I
1 c:Q1'O
r!;1¡-
, ~II!'
i I~
I
,'"
I
,
V)
°
*
c:QN
00_
=
! Z :!
I
,
i
-
\0
\C!
-
-,
-'
001
°1
\0 ,
Ô'
-'
I~I'
, I'-
iOÔ
: I
~
° ë
'" "
- ~
V) ~
..., "
U
*
°
'"
r-
...,
i
*1
N
'"
,
°
'"
,
-
I
1-
,
~
~
'"
E
o
>.;;
'" '"
~ ~
¡.S '" 0
,'0 ~ ..c:
.. 1: '
~ 'š.. gl 0
œ~:; t
~-§ "5
'OQc_C
'::'--'-'E-'~
.. 0 0
~ '" ..
~ ~ 1:
¡;. È
Õ §I
...; "
fZ) ~
:I: <E
i] ~ i
=~
~o
c:Qo
Z-
,
~ tz
ò 0
o 0
- -
.-.-----~
1("1')'
CQIÑ
fZ)
-
c:c --:
Z, I
...."
-I
N:
V)
.q:
1
c:Q "'I
rJ:¡ ,
-.., -..
~ ...,1
!
I iN!
I:
;
1 1-..
I I \0 I
I~I
,
°
:::!
V)
...,
i
'v)
1"'1'
'V)
1M
-
!
I
>.1
""
~i
~I
""
~,
(,)
'~
Õ
>.i
~.
..I<
~
>.
~
"ii
"0
o
]!
...,
I
'-"
I~
1-..
I-
i-
!("!î
1o"
-
I I
.¿
~
'" 8
.. .,
~ ..c
01 (,)
..¡ 1å
>.~
'"
- 0
!2 1A
.¿ '"
~ ~
=
o
6'~
ð CI
-= '"
c.. N
'" ..s
... ~
~ C
.!:! 0
~ 2
'"
u
'"
-
'Ë
i~
! >. '
:.";::1 !
u_1 g 110:
-' I 0 ..
~ ~ N i'"
~-g~v;
~C' 'II!:;
c:Q c.. ''''
,::. ! ¡¡¡
""0 V"I !
,~... :
! ~.: !
,-
i"S ü
'0 .:;¡:
c:Q
;~
I ~ .
i~
I : I '
i I c:Q!01
I I ~'_'
c:Q .
II : Z !
I I 1°1
I
I
I
...,
.--
-
,
,
"'"
:('<"),
. I
,
01
I
I
0,
-
,-I
°
I
[0
:
I i
V) '"
-
¡'"
-I
101
, I
-
-I
°
V)
-..
V)
'"
o
'"
I
...,
'v)
I,
IV)
'"
'N!
;('<'1:
iNi
, I
I__i
_I
...,1
N'
"";1
-I
:01
: V):
:
, \0
,V)
! ,
o
.V)
-,
I
-,
I
,
'"
:;
'"
~
'"
-
C
'"
fZ)
-
.,
~I
fZ),
o
....
.,
..c
(,)
C
'"
~
o
.,
'"
'"
10.
!;2
~
N
~
~
.E
~
-"
~
-"
c
;:¡
c..
::E
t
c..
::.
¡...
o
o
N
E!
§
~
"
'"
-
"
IE
'"
~
~
"
"
c
'bi¡
c
'"
-
~
-= '"
...¡;,;.
-0
=
_ N
-
-r.;¡
:><í.-'
r.;¡<
=-
'"
"'''''
_iZ:
"'¡'¡
;>;:õ
-¡,¡
<"
iZ:¡,¡
<'"
iZ:=-
O:õ
¡:""
<Q
U¡,¡
51'~
"'¡,¡
"'c:o::
<1-
...¡u ~
¡,¡
!Z
¡; ~I
~ ~
Q ..
c._
"u
.t
..
~
...~
;::-'!
"u
c.-
" ~
~~
ßQ
~::::I
E~
'" '
<=
¡,¡
~
~
..
coü
" -
-=
~~
=- ,
;
.. ~
" ~
c...
~Ü
~:!!
co ,-
¡¡;:õ
~
].!
~u
"'~
¡t¡
.5! _~
i :] i
'¡ :::1
'" =
;Œ::J
;; ~
I O.Ð._
f ~ ~
''''¡
,
LJ
, ,
'ì
I !
, ,
1 I
-
-
-
~
ë
"
=
=
Q
U
c..
::õ
'"
M ~
~ ~
'-1 QJ
ë¡g
GJ' ~
=''''
CO"
~ Õ
4-0. ï:
Q 1;;
'if..: ~
a, "
M';:>
: ,
,
~¡
ËI
~i
~I
~I
~[
-
-'
-
N'
M,
,.
-,
"I
-,
-
~
.
N·
0;'
::::I
¡,¡
";f.
-
,...¡ ;
-,
-
r-:
-
-
-
.'
.
-
vi
0..1
M¡
,
,
Vi!
M'
-,
o
'"
N'
0'
N:
!
~ I e
"Ë: ..8
:J g
~. ~
,i::)' ·1 ~ 0
~:~ g Q,I ~
c.:: If~: S .:: C':I
OI~ë-~ (I. '71
in' i~-'--= I
o!- W)
=::¡ IC::: 01
!::E [;¡;; 1
èS'
:.-0: or¡
!~:~
I co:'= col
!:=: 5 :51
i š:~ >1
,Q:- c
I" "
! ~ : :g
i¡;: :;::
...
",
::;¡'-
"s'-
"
..
-
'"
-
=
-
'"
M
:.~I ~ 0
-I U :I:
~[I~ .s
01) " ~
~ ü;;
10-0 "C
o - .s
";f. ~ ï:
o c á5
",;:>
,! ,
~I
N
-
00
-
-
"
"
Q
IZ
1 1
,:::11
I~
-
-
'"
'"
¿
'"
o
''''
1-
I~
I~
,
V>
I~
, V>
, "
,-
,0
V>
i~
'N
,
I..:
1°
:~
,"
,-
i~
!¡,¡
1
I
~I
"
..
r:::
Q
"
¡~I
-
-
-- ,-.
ë:
::õ
M
-
i
=1
-,
";f.
"
o
-
~I
T
-
-
"!
M,
,
-
-
N
V>
~
M
t:
=
~
:.<
£,
-
-
r-:
,-I
,
I :
i i
I
I
I
~
'"
~
..:
Û
ë
"
,. ê
c:o:: ';
~15
.:! E
'5 ¡.':'+-
=:i-'.L-
-
..;
'"
"
..
:õ oj
>
<
..
"
'"
"
..
"
õ
-,
=
,-
t-
,I
001
¡
I
I
-
i
1-
I~
1=
10
'Z
I
I
-
"
=
o
Z
-
-
'"
V>
,
00
"
o
V>
-
V>
I" 1
I;:
,...¡
~
"
.S
- 0
"'.. ,
= "
.. -=
- '"
~ "
" ..
,. r:::
u 0
.. "
,,~ I
'" "
" =-
e.. I I I
î I
:; ,I
=- ~!
'" <I
"a. ...;
= "I
b ]1
o -ªI
101
-
-
1
,~
Ô!
§:'S'
,'tl E
, 0' 0
0..--1
, "I
:r[;1
~ ~!
.. -,
";:I~i
.si5¡
i~ I
~I
]1
~=
~ -
I! :
'''' -
, ,
'::::I
¡iZ: I
I
::1= I
..-
gll~
=0
'" ,
'I~
::::I&'
iZ:""¡
1
,
-
-
"
=
o
Z
-
-
'"
N
I I
I-I
,-
!~I
I i
-
-I
-,
'1
N,
"il
01
"!
-
t-
M
0.2:-
ë
~ ~
M ð
*
o
"
o
,...¡
'"
'oC!
-
...
..
I.. ~
1=6 ~
" '"
:õ 's.
.:¡ ~
r~ Õ
c:o:: '
I::
1-;
,...¡
¡...
,..
,-
:0
i ¡¡;
II]
I
~ I
I~
IQI I
IfII ì::::
~-
Q"';
::::1M
'"
,
=
iZ:
~
~
..
ü:::
- "
= =
'" ,.
'Z
::::I 1
iZ: 1
I;:)
~I
1 I
II§: I
I I~
1 IN
i I:
I
...
..
it
..I<
..
..
=-
'"
o ï5.
~ ~
~õ
.. 'I
~
,. ...
" it
~ ..I<
.¡:=-
...
"
r:::
-¡;
'"
,.
-=
u
læ
r:::
-
-
-
-
-
'"
"
,
I,.
IC:O:: 0
i] ]
.. u
...¡ æ
...r:::
.. ,.
ê ~
.,; ..
~ ":
=
,.
...
¡ ~
U Q
.c ..
~ ~
.. -
CO=-
I~ [
æ
u
- -
~
..
E
u_..
..
u
:¡;
u
::õ
" £
:= :::'
E ~_
t):O
0.1 tIS
~I ~
~ i õ:
0.0: c
"Ü;¡ 0,
v: ~,
~ltlSl I
¡W,
¡,_.
='
-
1=
I
- -
-
"
=
o
Z
- -
-
'"
,...¡
-
-
M
V>
,
V>
"
,0
, V>
I.,
¡§
"
V>
a,
'''';
I '
io
I V)
~
N
I
I..!!
1=
,..
,=-
I..
,-
I~
'-
I~
I~
o
..
'!1
!ü
'=
! ~
, 0
! iÆ
!?
N
-
-
-
"
o
-
"
"
o
Z
-
r-:
-
-
-
'"
'"
¿
'"
~
-¡¡
~
...
c
;:¡
..
::<
~
...
8
'¡¡
c
~
'"
"
E
e
i
c
'õo
c
~
'"
--= ..., 0
¡..r... ~
0
-0 t2
CQ
- ...,
:c~
~í-'
~<
Q.c
0 """
<= "" þ z 0)
""" ...
... = » u
.. 0)
., .~ - ... '¡:;
., ... 0) -
... g,. ~ '5 ...
'" en
.. = <= 0) 0)
...0 .. c:: ;.:¡ E:
«=- 0) ~
"
"" ]
= 0) ...
'" æ
.. ~ 0 S
Q Z 0 ...
.. en
- .. '" .g
(J =-
..: '"
....
=
Q
.- """
-
..: ~ 0)
(J "0 .š u
t:: '" '" ..
" ... ~ 00 c..
.- .~ .. "'" '"
'" -;
'" '" v »
..: = ., .. "'" "
- "" ¡¡ '"
g,. en
U .~ ... 0
'" = ü
- -
=
I ,
e
t)1
I , "0
00 ~ '"
~ '"
<= g,.-. '" '" '"
~ ~ "':c "'" ..., ...,
..Q.c
Eo-< '" =::; '" 0 '"
'" ..., ..., N
.. ';'-'
r... .. ~
¡.. -¡¡
,,;
~
"
ü
"-
., ~
., - - "-
.. - - ::E
Ü - -
I-
-
0
0
N
ê
"
~
::J
~
"
IE
"
M
!¡:;
...
...
"
'óO
"
to¡
~
.:.;
'GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION ",,* '
2001 QUESTÎONNAIRE (Reporting Period: 7/1/00 ~ 6/3o;Õ1}?:{~"'qi: ,
I FlSCA¡§~;;' ~., .:fj[r,·~ ;:jiyf.,;' . , '
THRF~Hnln
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual develnpment imp"d fee repnr1:. which
provides an analysis of development impact fees collected and expended over the
previous 12-month period.
1 Please fill in the table below
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES OVERVIEW (7/1/00 - 6/30/01) ,
$FEE/X COLLECTED EXPENPED BALANCE Last Update ProPOSed *
DIF FUND Durino Durino (unaudited) Update
rePOrtino reportino (See also
period period question #2)
rRANSPORTATION $6,065/SFD* 3,639,078 3,664,051 10,231,084 Oct 2000 Annually on
Oct. 1/Update
March 2002
INTERIM PRE-SR 125 $ 820/SFD 3,151,946 219,284 10,405,541 Jan 1994 March 2002
TRAFFIC SIGNAL - $ 13/traffic trip 673,354 633,367 1,049,855 Feb 1993 Nov 2001
(Approved)
TELEGRAPH CYN $4,579/Acre 1,912,877 441,499 4,012,990 Apr 1998 Unscheduled
DRAINAGE
TELE, CYN GRAVITY $ 216.50/SFD 291,559 149,166 935,369 Sept 1998 Unscheduled
SEWER
TELE, CYN PUMPED $ 560/SFD 164,155 - 318,093 March 1994 Unscheduled
SEWER
SALT CREEK SEWER $ 284/SFD 8,008,279 307,810 8,085,633 Dec 1994 FY 2002
BASIN
POGGI CYN SEWER BASIN $ 400/SFD 588,464 389,573 1,506,040 Dec 1997 Unscheduled
OTAY RANCH VlLL 1 &5 $ 545ISFP 931,787 - 1.516,750 1997 May 2002
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE DIF
PUBLIC FACILITIES $2,618/SFD 13,898,71 ° 6,122,902 14,663,159 June 2000 Feb 2002
Administration $ 134 521,659 275,397 220,841
Civic Center Expansion $ 480 2,214,080 594,643 6,259,641
Police Facility $ 735 2,729,610 1,284.206 364,162
Corp. Yard Relocation $ 386 5.068,712 1,878.978 4,362,709
Libraries $ 638 2,554,133 129,837 4,683,625
Fire Suppression Sys. $ 203 646,480 1,612,658 ( 845,136)
Geographic Info. Sys. $ 16 64,362 228,568 ( 255,165)
Computer Systems $ 7 25,769 80,075 ( 91,705)
Telecommunications $ 13 60,493 4,308 130,628
Records Mgmnt. Sys. $ 6 13,412 34,232 (166,441)
*Single-Family Detached (SFD) housing unit shown. Fee varies by type of residential unit, and for
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum queslFinance GMOC Report.doc
Page 1
commercial and industrial development - see various fee schedules included in Attachment A.
Please provide bJ:kll narrative responses to the following:
2. In relation to the last column on the Table on Page 1, were any DIF updates
completed or are any DIF updates in progress during the reporting period? If yes,
please explain.
Yes x
No_
a. If any DIFs are currently being updated, where are they in the process?
b. How long it's been since each DIF has been updated?
c. Is there a need to update any of the DIFs?
d. Who is responsible for the update of each DIF?
Explain:
During the reporting period, the Public Facilities DIF (PFOIF) remained at $2,618 per
equivalent dwelling unit (EDU), A new study was initiated during the reporting period to
update the PFDIF and is currently in progress, with adoption anticipated in February
2002, The PFDIF update will increase the fee to account for changes incurred since the
last update (June 2000). The required increase will be largely due to higher project cost
estimates and significant increases in financing costs for two major capital projects the
new police facility and the Civic Center expansion. New master plans for both projects
were adopted by Council in July 2001, The Office of Budget & Analysis is responsible
for updates to the PFDIF,
Public Works, Engineering, is responsible for all of the following DIFs, An annual
update of the Transportation DIF (TransDIF) was approved during the reporting period
(October 2000), increasing the fee from $5,920 to $6,065 per single-family detached
dwelling unit (SFD). Additionally, late in the reporting period, Engineering started a
comprehensive update of the TransDIF, This update includes both a review of all
TrasnDIF eligible projects, land use assumptions and corresponding fee adjustments, It
should be noted that the potential fee adjustments may include recommended increases
as well as recommended decreases, It is anticipated that the update will be completed
in March 2002. A breakdown of fees for other housing types is provided in Attachment
A. The next annual update (October 2001) has been performed, increasing the fee to
$6,240 per SFD, The Interim Pre-SR 125 OIF, which has not been updated since 1993,
will be updated in March 2002, The Otay Ranch Village 1&5 Pedestrian Bridge DIF,
which was last updated in 1997, is also scheduled to be updated by May 2002, An
increase in the Traffic Signal Participation Fee, last updated in 1993, was approved by
Council in November 2001. The increase from $13 to $23 per average daily vehicle trip,.
was necessitated by increases in equipment and installation costs for the new traffic
signals needed to serve new development. An update of the Salt Creek Sewer Basin
DIF (last updated in 1994) is still pending.
There are no current plans to update the Telegraph Canyon Drainage, Telegraph
Canyon Gravity Sewer, Telegraph Canyon Pumped Sewer, or Poggi Canyon Sewer
Basin DIFs.
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc Q1\return quesIFinance GMOC Report.doc
Page 2
3, In reference to operations and capital improvements, is the City addressing the
impacts of growth?
Yes x
No_
Explain:
A citywide Operations fiscal impact model is being developed as part of the
comprehensive fiscal analysis component of the General Plan update, currently underway,
Also, city and county staff are working to update the Fiscal Impact of New Development
(FIND) model to determine the operating impacts of the first year of the Otay Ranch
Property Tax Agreement with the county,
With regard to capital expenditures, a preliminary Public Facilities DIF update revealed the
need for a maximum $304.6 million in new capital to complete all planned public facilities
projects through buildout. A number of points must be made with regard to this number,
It is largely based on newly-approved master plans for the Civic Center expansion and the
new police facility which corrected pre-existing space and equipment deficiencies, updated
construction costs and identified necessary work not included in previous estimates. The
PFDIF update represents the total for all projects including completion of the corporation
yard, new libraries, new fire stations and major public recreation facilities which are
proposed to become part of the PFDIF, In particular, it must be noted that the total
includes both developer (DIF) and city shares of project costs, as well as a significant debt
service that will be incurred in order to finance a number of projects, On the other hand,
the new Civic Center master plan was based on conceptual designs and may have
overstated the total. As the PFDIF update progresses, staff and development continue to
negotiate cost reductions in various components and it is anticipated that, ultimately, the
total will be reduced significantly.
In addition to developer impact fees, staff is also in the process of updating the city's Park
Acquisition and Development (PAD) fee, which was last updated in April 2001, The new
fee will be based on the FY2002 Parks & Recreation Master Plan update, now in progress,
I A!;T YFAR'!; r.MOr: RFr:OMMFNnATION!;
4. Has a standard procedure been adopted for an annual review of Development
Impact Fees (DIFs)
Yes
No
Pending x
Explain:
The GMOC has recommended that DIF updates be prepared annually, with the final report
available in January of each year, Currently, two departments Public Works
Engineering, and Administration's Office of Budget & Analysis have responsibility for
updating the various DIFs, as described previously. Within each of these departments,
DIF updates are scheduled for October of each year, However, an overarching
standardized procedure, which would (subject to Municipal Code requirements) create an
automatic annual review schedule for all DIFs, is currently in development. In addition to
ensuring timely updates, the standardized procedure will also ensure that the review
process and the resulting recommendations regarding each DIF are in accordance with
the City's accepted fiscal policies and procedures, conducting cash flow and other fiscal
analyses where necessary. Finally, the procedure will be comprehensive evaluating, for
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01\retum ques\Finance GMOC Report.doc
Page 3
example, growth impacts and capital project modifications that may affect fee structure.
The procedure is planned for completion during FY02.
C:\dffilesIGMOClgmoc 01\return quesIFinance GMOC Report.doc
Page 4
MI!'\CFI I ANFOIJ!'\
5. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No X
Explain:
6. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes_ No....x....-
Explain:
7. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes
No JL....
Explain:
Prepared by :
Title:
Date:
C:\dffilesIGMOClgmoc 01lreturn queslFinance GMOC Report.doc
Page 5
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 011retum quesIFinance GMOC Report,doc
Page 6
THRESHOLD STANDARD
Population ratio: 500 square feet (gross) of library facility adequately equipped and staffed
per 1,000 population.
1. Please fill in the blanks on this table.
'.'. \ " ..
LIBRARIES ..:".>... .)....;. .....,. .. ......, '. '\ .,.
.' .. Population Total Gross Square Gross Square Feet of
Footage of Library" Library Facilities Per 1000
.. Facilities PODulation
Threshold X . X 500 Sa. Fl
FY 1996-97 156,041 102,000 654
FY 1997-98 163,417 102,000 624
FY 1998-99 169,265 102,000 603
FY 1999-00 178,645 102,000 571
FY 2000-01 187,444 102,000 544
18 Month Projection 199,700 511
1(12131102)* 102,000
5 Year Projection 229,500 532
I (2006)** 122,000'"
Buildout Projection 275,455
(SANDAG 2020) 152,000 552
*Planning Division Estimate
**5-year projections are based on GMOC Forecast with an average of 2,500 residential units per year and a population
coefficient of 3.036 persons per household,
-Assumes successful award of State Library Bond Act funds to help construct a 30,000 square foot branch library in
Rancho del Rey and closure of the 10,000 square foot Eastlake Library,
Please provide brief naffative responses to the following:
2. Are libraries "adequately equipped"?
Yes
x
No_
Explain:
a. Have resources been provided to improve the library technology infrastructure
for the Civic Center, South Chula Vista, and EastLake Libraries?
C:ldffileslGMOClgmoc 01\return quesILibrary GMOC 01.doc
Page 1
On December 7, 1999, the City Council approved an agreement with Innovative Interfaces to
replace the Library's Inlex system with a fully integrated-online-library-system (IOLS). The
new system, which came on line on October 31,2000, is Web based and allows the Library
to offer its catalog and subscribed database to Library cardholders at home and at the office,
The "CV Links" system provides the public with the following services:
From home, school, or work:
View the library catalog and an individual's library record
Place books, CD's and audiotapes on hold
Access and download electronic books
Access the Library's Electronic Reference Shelf (e.g, magazines, joumals, newspaper
articles)
Access to book jacket art and reviews
From the Library (in addition to the above):
Access to trained Library staff to help with research strategies, computer skills and electronic
reference assistance
As part of the implementation of the new system, the technology infrastructure at all three-
branch libraries has been brought up to the current "state of the art." This includes
increasing the number of public computer workstations and PCs at the branches, increasing
the memory on all computers in the Circulation area for checkout of materials, and designing
and setting up a networked printing solution for the public that uses system-wide software,
barcode readers, and debit cards.
The Library also successfully applied for a Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation grant, which
was included in the 2000-01 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget, and which has
allowed us to purchase and install 12 new public access workstations lwith servers and
printers) at the three branches, and 11 additional PCs which are being used as in a
computer-training lab at the Civic Center branch,
The City also instituted a Technology Replacement Fund in FY2000-01 to replace older
computers and related equipment on an ongoing basis, in order to keep as current as
possible with changing technologies. The City's Management and Information Services
Department determines annually which computers to replace citywide, which includes the
Library's computers, Replacement is on a three-year schedule,
b. What is the current materials collection ratio per person and, if not already at
this point, what is necessary to bring this to 3.0 items per person?
The General Fund 2000-01 Library budget included $585,359 for the purchase of library
materials, which includes books, periodicals, 'reference materials, online databases, and
audiovisual items, such as videos and CDs, The materials collection for 00-01 was: 430,642
books, 9,218 microfilm items, 4,314 microforms, 18,480 audio materials, 17,149 video
materials, 873 periodical titles, and 1,424 CD-ROM data disks, This total of 482,100
materials equates to a materials collection ratio of 2,57 (based on the 187,444 population).
Please note that the figure for 1999-00 was 2,91, The major reason for this change is that in
preparation for the migration to the new automation system, we "weeded out" the collection
and removed out-of-date and non-circulating materials, As a result, the collection total did
decrease, The per capita collection rate also decreased due to the population increase over
the last year,
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum quesILibrary GMOC 01.doc
Page 2
The Library has also endeavored to build our collections through other means:
1; We are continuing our fund raising campaign to build our endowment fund at the
San Diego Foundation, In 2000-01, we deposited $31,225, bringing our total to
$115,796, as of June 30, 2001. Once the fund reaches our immediate goal of
$250,000, the Library will use the annual interest to purchase books it could not
otherwise afford,
1; Donors giving at least $250 to the Library are now recognized on beautiful
plaques mounted at both Civic Center and South Chula Vista Libraries. Donors
also receive the Library's new quarterly newsletter, "Collections".
1; In the 2000-01 Library budget, $20,000 was allocated for the hiring of a resource
development consultant to assist the Library with its fund raising efforts. The
consultant's scope of work included conducting three direct mail fundraising
campaigns, and performing a general evaluation of the Library's current
fund raising efforts and providing recommendations as to what the Library could
do to improve its methods, donor base, and the amount of funds raised, For
FY2000-01, the Library had received donations of $24,478, in addition to the
$31,225 deposited in the endowment fund. These donations will be appropriated
for book purchases (approximately 1,000 additional copies). The Library is
continuing to use the consultant in FY2001-02.
1; The Library also maintains a close relationship with the Friends of the Chula
Vista Library, whose chapters contributed significant funds for the summer
reading program in 2000-01, thus defraying costs for the Library and allowing for
the purchase of more materials from the operating budget.
1; With the construction of the new Rancho del Rey Library, the number of volumes
will increase by approximately 175,000, bringing the collection ratio up to 2.9.
3. Are libraries "adequately staffed"?
Yes x
No_
Explain:
In February/March 2001, the Library reorganized its management structured to implement a
matrix management system, This reorganization was instituted as a way to streamline
management while still providing excellent direct service to the public. It also institutes a
cost-effective management structure as the Library system becomes poised to expand on
the City's east side,
a. Have staffing levels been increased for the South Chula Vista Library?
The staffing levels have remained the same for 1999-00, and we consider South
Chula Vista Library to be fully and adequately staffed for providing library service,
Please see response to Question 12.
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes
No..lL...:
C:\dffileslGMOC'lgmoc 01 \return quesILibrary GMOC o1.doc
Page 3
Explain:
During this reporting period, growth has not negatively affected the ability of the Library to
maintain service levels. In fact, during 2000-01, library attendance increased 25%, and In-
Library use of materials increased 4%. From July through November 2001, circulation has
increased 11 % system wide, while Eastlake's circulation has increased 36%. We are able to
handle the increase, which is mainly due to growth, through management restructuring and
reallocation of staff, and new technology such as the improved automation system, The
Library is adding a self-checkout machine at Eastlake in January 2002 to handle the
increase in attendance and circulation.
5. Are current facilities able to serve forecasted growth for both the 18-month and 5 year
time frame?
Yes
x
No_
Explain:
The current library facilities (Civic Center, South Chula Vista, and Eastlake) totaling 102,000
square meets the threshold requirement to provide at least 500 square feet of library per
1000 population within the 18 month time frame.
With the planned construction of the proposed new library facility in Rancho del Rey, totaling
30,000 square feet (if approved for State Grant funding coupled with Public Facilities DIF
funding), and the closing of the 10,000 square foot Eastlake branch, the threshold
requirement to provide at least 500 square feet of library per 1000 population will be
maintained,
6. Will new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth?
Yes x
No
Explain:
a. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
In order to accommodate forecasted growth, the 1998 Library Master Plan calls for
the construction of a full service regional library of approximately 30,000 square feet
in the Rancho del Rey area at the corner of Paseo Ranchero and East H Street by
2005, and the construction of a second full service regional library of the same size
in the Eastern Urban Center in Otay Ranch, Public Facilities Development Impact
Fees are being collected to pay 100% of the costs of these facilities, The City will be
pursuing a State Library Bond Act grant in order to offset some of the DIF costs for
the Rancho del Rey Library. If the grant is approved, 65% of eligible costs will be
paid by the Bond funds.
7. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting the provision of library services?
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01 \return ques\Library GMOC 01.doc
Page 4
Yes
No
x
Explain:
MAINTENANCE/UPGRADE OF EQUIPMENT & COLLECTIONS
8. Has adequate funding been identified and/or secured for necessary maintenance
and/or upgrade of equipment and collections?
Yes
x
No x
Explain:
As discussed above, funding has been secured for the upgrade ofthe Library's automation
system, which was upgraded starting on October 31, 2000, The Department is also working
with the Management and Information Systems (MIS) Department, which has established a
Technology Replacement Fund, on upgrades of computers to meetfuture technology needs.
Also previously discussed are the Library's efforts to secure necessary funding to continue
the development and replacement of the materials collections, These efforts include
fund raising and grant development.
Although the Civic Center Library's HVAC system is being replaced and upgraded in
FY2001-02, funding has not been secured for the needed building upgrades, including the
replacement of the carpeting and banners, upgrading of the electrical system to handle the
increased number of computers and printers, refinishing or replacement of fumiture and
furnishings, improvement of the energy efficiency of the lighting system, and redesign of
underutilized non-public areas of the library and overcrowded staff cubicles in the Circulation
and Information and Reader Services sections,
a. Are there any major maintenance/upgrades to be undertaken over the 1-year
and 5-year time frames?
Yes x
No
Explain:
The Library will continue to pursue funding through the Capital Improvement Project budget
to fund the aforementioned interior renovation of the Civic Center Library, including
replacement of the carpeting, banners, repainting, and upgrading ofthe staff work areas in
Circulation, Information and Reader Services, and Technical Services whose layouts and
fumishings reflect programs from the 1970s, The 25th anniversary of the opening of the
Civic Center Library was held on July 4, 2001, The Library found funding in its operating
budget to re-cover many of the badly worn chairs and sofas
10. Have Library staff prepared the proposed Library Threshold Standard Amendment for
Council adoption?
C:\dffilesIGMOC'9moc 01 \return quesILibrary GMOC o1.doc
Page 5
Yes x
No
Explain:
The proposed change to the threshold standard was approved by the Planning
Commission at its November 14, 2001 meeting, The item was scheduled to be
considered by the City Council at its December 17, 2001 meeting, along with the
proposed Police and Fire threshold changes, but was pulled to be resubmitted at a later
meeting. The threshold change currently reads as follows: "In the area east of 1-805, the
City shall construct, by build out (approximately year 2030) 60,000 GSF of library space
beyond the city-wide June 30, 2000 GSF total. The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not fall below the citywide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000
population. Library facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed,"
11. Has the Library Department hired a consultant to begin the Rancho Del Rey Library
building Program?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
The Library has been working with a consultant, Beverley Simmons, on the Needs
Assessment for the new library, In addition, Beverley is working with staff on the review of
the Building Program, which is being developed internally by staff, The Library has also
been working with a consultant, The Alford Group, on the development of a Library Strategic
Plan, which will then form the basis for the plan of service for the new library, which staff will
develop. Staff will be selecting an architect for the development of a concept plan and
assistance with the Bond Act grant application by February 2002,
12. Has the Library Department explored the need for increased staffing hours at the
South Chula Vista Public Library?
Yes
x
No
Explain:
South Chula Vista Branch Library opened to the public in 1995, in the midst of the '90s
recession. As a result, every effort was made to keep the operating costs as low as
possible. One measure undertaken was to open the branch only 48 hours per week,
compared to the 64 hours of service provided weekly from the Civic Center Branch,
The Library receives numerous complaints on a weekly basis about the shorter hours at
South Chula Vista Branch, Additionally, the Growth Management Oversight Commission
has annually requested that City increase the hours at the branch,
Library staff did examine the possibility of reallocating hours from Civic Center Branch to
South Chula Vista Branch. After much effort, it became apparent, that this would be very
difficult to implement and would probably create a very negative public response over losing
hours at the older Civic Center Library.
The Library therefore proposed adding 8 additional hours in year two (FY2002-03) of the
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum quesILibrary GMOC 01.doc
Page 6
two-year budget cycle, which the City Council approved with the adoption of the two-year
operating budget in June 2001. With the opening of Olympic Parkway, it is expected that
many residents of Sunbow and perhaps even Otay Ranch will find using the South Chula
Vista Branch on Orange Avenue the easiest alternative, further justifying these additional
hours. As a result of this action, additional hours would be added to every service day
except Friday and Sunday, The new hours would be 10:00 am to 8:00 pm, Monday through
Thursday, 12:00 to 6:00 pm on Friday, 10:00 am to 4pm on Saturday, and 1 :00 to 5:00 pm
on Sunday. It is anticipated that the new hours will go into effect on July 1, 2002.
MISCELLANEOUS
13. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No x
Explain:
14. Do you have any other relevant information the department desires to communicate to
the GMOC?
Yes x
No
Explain:
As mentioned above, the Library is in the process of completing a five-year Strategic Plan,
which will be brought forward to City Council in late Winter/early Spring, The Plan will
address programming, facilities, financing, staff and volunteers and public
relations/marketing.
Prepared by: Shauna Stokes
Title: Administrative Services Manager
Date: January 4, 2002
C:ldffiles\GMOC~moc 01\retum quesILibrary GMOC 01.doc
Page 7
File No, 0610-75-GY051
THRESHOLD STANDARD:
1. Storm water flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
2. The GMOC shall annually review the performance of the City's storm drain system to
determine its ability to meet the goals and objectives above.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
1. Have storm water flows or volumes exceeded City Engineering Standards at any time
during this reporting period?
Yes
No
x
If yes:
a. Where did this occur? N/A
b. Why did it occur? N/A
c. What has been, or is being done to correct the situation? NIA
GROWTH IMPACTS
2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes
No
x
3. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 18-month and 5-
year time frame?
Yes
x
No
Explain: Based on current knowledge, current facilities are adequate for projected
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01\return ques\DRAINAGE 01 GMOC,doc
Page 1
File No. 0610-75-GY051
growth within the 18-month and 5-year time frame. The City will be hiring a consultant
to prepare a Drainage Master Plan, which we anticipate will present any deficiencies
to drainage structures throughout the City of Chula Vista. The Drainage Master Plan
was last updated in 1989. At the completion of the Drainage Master Plan, we will be
able to identify problematic areas and determine if the facilities are able to absorb
forecasted growth for the future years. Anticipated completion date for the Drainage
Master Plan update is December 2002.
4. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate this forecasted growth?
Yes
No
x
If yes:
a. Are there sites available for the needed facilities?
b. How will these facilities be funded?
c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
5. Are there, or do you foresee any growth related issues affecting the maintenance of
the current level of service as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes
No
x
Explain:
PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATION
6. What is the status of the master maintenance agreement with environmental
agencies?
Describe: The City of Chula Vista Environmental Section is currently working on the
initiation of a master maintenance agreement.
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01\return ques\DRAINAGE 01 GMOC,doc
Page 2
File No, 0610-75-GY051
7. Has the Drainage Master Facilities Plan Study, that will identify high priority drainage
projects and applicable federal funding, been initiated?
Yes X
No
Explain: The City of Chula Vista anticipates advertisement for RFP's for consultants
to perform the City's Drainage Master Plan in March 2002.
MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes
No -1L-
Explain: Maintenance of drainage facilities is generally supported from the General
Fund and to a lesser extent by Gas Tax and Storm Drain Fee funds. As a result ofthe
EI Nino storms of 1998, we became aware of a pressing need to rehabilitate the old
metal drainage pipes. The need was underscored by the "Malta Sinkhole" incident.
We think that this rehabilitation effort will use up most ofthe revenue from said funds
for a five to ten year period.
Rehabilitation and/or replacement of some of the City's drainage infrastructure
facilities are a priority. Specifically, corrugated metal pipe (CMP) facilities are in need
of rehabilitation and/or replacement due to corrosion.
In late 2000, the City received Assembly Bill 2928 Traffic Congestion Mitigation funds
that could only be used for "maintenance-related" work confined to the public right-
of-way. The City has earmarked approximately $300,000 per year for the next five
years solely to the CMP rehabilitation/replacement projects. Unfortunately, since the
funding source is short-termed and cannot be used for drainage projects located
within private property, those projects still require funding.
This year's AB·2928 funds will be used for the CMP pipe work along Bonita Road
between Willow Street and Otay Lakes Road and for other CMP work generally
located west of 1-805.
On February 21, 2001, the San Diego watershed area's National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit was adopted which requires that all runoff be
"treated" so that pollutant levels at the storm water outfalls are minimized to the
maximum extent practicable. This requirement will create additional work on the
City's behalf to modify or construct the drainage infrastructure so that "first flush"
pollutants are captured and treated during significant rainfall events. This is an un-
funded statewide requirement that all private development and City projects must
incorporate in all new projects and/or retrofit to the extent practicable. The costs
have been estimated to be in the millions of dollars and it is the City's intent to
establish a priority program, through the City's Storm Water Management Unit to
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01\return ques\DRAINAGE 01 GMOC,doc
Page 3
File No, 0610-75-GY051
prioritize these projects.
9. Are there any major maintenance projects to be undertaken pursuantto the current 1-
year and 5-year CIP? If yes, Please provide a list of projects in order of importance.
Yes
No
x
Explain:
MISCELLANEOUS
10. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No X
Explain:
11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes
No X
Explain: We suggest that all proposed CIP drainage projects be recommended for
Council approval due to the need to rehabilitate the existing metal pipes and other
drainage facilities. Funding drainage projects located in easements along private
property have been difficult to construct due to restrictions in funding sources.
Additionally, some resistance by property owners to allow drainage projects to be
constructed on their property has added time and expense to these types of projects.
12. Do you have any other relevant Information the Department desires to communicate
to the GMOC.
Yes
No X
Explain:
Prepared by (NamelTitle): Jeff Moneda-Civil Engineer
Frank Rivera-Senior Civil Engineer
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01\return ques\DRAINAGE 01 GMOC,doc
Page 4
THRESHOLD:
1. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego Metropolitan Sewer Authority with a 12
to 18 month development forecast and request confirmation that the projection is
within the City's purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their ability to
accommodate the forecast and continuing growth, or the City Public Works
Department staff shall gather the necessary data. The information provided to the
GMOC shall include the following:
a. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
b. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecasted growth.
c. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
d. Other relevant information.
The growth forecast and Authority response letters shall be provided to the GMOC for
inclusion in its review.
1. Please fill in the blanks on this table.
". ':
,SEWAGE Flow and TreatmentCapacity ,
., .'... 97/98 Fiscal 98/99 Fiscal 99/00 Fiscal 00/01Flscal Projection Projection Projection for
Year Year Year ··for next 18 for next 5 ' "Bulldouf'
.' ... .'. months years
Average 15.219 17.012 22.120
Flow (MGD) 11.820 12.918 14.262 14.756
Capacity 19.843" 19.843 19.843 19.843 19.843 20.784** 20.784
-Increase in capacity was based on the new agreement with the City of San Diego.
** Increase in capacity is based on the allocation of additional capacity rights resulting from the construction of the new Southbay
Treatment Plant
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
2. Have sewage flows or volumes exceeded City Engineering Standards at any time
during this reporting period?
Yes
x
No _
If yes:
a. Where did this occur? At manhole #49 located on Telegraph Canyon Road
C:\dffiles\GMOClgmoc 01\retum ques\GMOC-SEWER 01.ac.doc
Page 1
b. Why did it occur? The threshold was exceeded due to the volume of flow in the
system and the geometries of the sewer line, Studies indicate that the high
readings obtained could have been as a result of a hydraulic jump occurring in
the pipe just before the manhole location,
c. What has been, or will be done to correct the situation? On November 13,
2001, Council by Resolution Nos, 2001-378,20011-379 and 2001·380 approved
an agreement with The EastLake Co. to facilitate the construction of required
improvements at various locations along the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer
(including this location). Construction of the required improvements began on
November 20,2002 and is scheduled to be completed (at this location) by the
end of December 2001, Under the terms of this agreement EastLake will
construct the improvements and be reimbursed with a combination of funds
from the Telegraph Canyon Gravity Basin Development Impact Fee and Trunk
Sewer Capital Reserve Funds,
GROWTH IMPACTS
3. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes
No X .
Explain: Service levels were maintained during the reporting period despite the
increased pace in development in the eastern portion of the City,
4. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 18 month and 5
year time frame?
Yes
No
x .
Explain: Current sewerage facilities should be able to handle anticipated growth
during the 12 to 18 month period, However, due to the continued growth in development
expected to occur in the eastern portion of the City in the next 5 years (such as the Otay
Ranch Developments, the EastLake Developments and Rolling Hills Ranch), it is anticipated
that several major trunk sewer lines will either be constructed or upgraded during that time
period,
5. What new facilities have been constructed to accommodate the forecasted growth?
Explain: Portions of the Poggi Canyon and Salt Creek Trunk Sewers have already been
constructed by various developers during the construction of required improvements,
a. How have these facilities been funded?
The construction of these portions of these facilities was funded through Development
Impact Fees established for the construction of the sewer facilities within the Poggi Canyon
and Salt Creek Basins,
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum quesIGMOC-SEWER 01.ac.doc
Page 2
6. What facilities are needed to accommodate the forecasted growth?
The following new facilities or upgrades to existing facilities may be required within the next 5
to 7 year time frame:
i. Upgrades to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer (Estimated to cost $3,2 Million)
current construction schedule- November 2001 - March 2002,
ii, Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor· downstream portion (Reach 9) - (Estimated at
$9 Million) current construction schedule August 2001 - October 2002.
iii. Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor - upstream portion (Reaches 2 - 8) - (Estimated
at $13 Million) current construction schedule June 2002 - April 2003,
iv, The Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer (Total Estimated Cost $6,133 Million)· Currently the
Project is approximately 85% complete, Estimated completion date is April 2002.
v, Wolf Canyon Trunk Sewer- the project is still in preliminary planning(Total Estimated
Cost $3.24 Million). Estimated completion dote is June 2004,
a. How will these facilities be funded?
Explain: These projects will be primarily funded through Development Impact Fees
paid by developers at the time building permits are issued. However, the downstream
portion of the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor will be funded utilizing the Trunk Sewer
Capital Reserve funds, which is derived from the one-time payment ot the sewer capacity
charge paid for each new connection to the City's sewer system,
7. Has the City reached an agreement with the City of San Diego regarding the provision
of adequate treatment capacity to meet the buildout needs ofthe City's General Plan?
Yes
No
x
Explain: In 1998, the City signed a wastewater disposal agreement with the City of San
Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department and other participating agencies (Metro). This
agreement granted the City of Chula Vista 19,843 Million Gallons Per Day (mgd) of sewage
capacity rights within the Metro system, and lasts till 2050, At the time the agreement was
signed, this allocation seemed adequate to meet the City's buildaut needs, However,
recent data indicates that the City's overall sewer capacity needs at build out will be
approximately 22,120 mgd, Recently, there was an action taken by metro to allocate
additional capacity rights to participating agencies, The City at Chula Vista's share of this
additional allocation amounts to 0,941 mgd, However, the allocation process has not yet
been finalized, To further address this issue, the City sent a letter of request for additional
capacity to Metro indicating our need for additional capacity rights and our willingness to
pay the associated costs for the acquisition of additional capacity rights, This letter will be
kept on file and as the City's sewage generation approaches our capacity rights, Metro will
take appropriate steps to assist the City in acquiring additional capacity rights to meet our
buildout needs,
PREVIOUS GMOC COMMENT
8. Please indicate the status and schedule for the Salt Creek Interceptor Sewer.
Describe:
To expedite the construction of the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor, the
C:ldffiles\GMOC'gmoc 01\return ques\GMOC·SEWER 01 .ac.doc
Page 3
project was broken into four phases os follows:
Phase 1 - From Industrial Blvd easterly to Interstate -805 Freeway
This phose is currently under construction and will be completed by June 2002
Phase 2· From Industrial Blvd, westerly to W, Frontaae Rd, sliahtlv west of Interstate-5 Freewav
The design plans for this phose has been completed and is currently being reviewed by the
City of San Diego (in order to allow the city to connect to the City of San Diego Metro
Interceptor) and the Calitornia Department of Transportation (in order to allow the City to
tunnel under Interstate - 5 Freeway and install the pipe). Upon obtaining the required
permits from these two agencies and the required right·of-way easements needed to
facilitate the pipe installation by February 2002, construction of the improvements begin by
April 2002 and be completed by October 2002,
Phase 3 . From Interstate·805 Freeway easterlv alona Auto Park Drive (Main Street! to the
beGinninG of the existinG portion of the Salt Creek Grayity Sewer line (installed as a ioint
moiect with SDG&E a few years aaoL
The design plans for this phase is 30% complete, Construction is scheduled to begin in
September 2002 and be completed by April 2003,
Phase 4 . From the end of the existinG portion of the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer line to Olympic
Parkway (See Attachment NO.1 for details),
The design plans for this phase is 25% complete, Construction is scheduled to begin in
September 2002 and be completed by April 2003,
MAINTENANCE
9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes X
No _
Explain:
The City allocates approximately $300,000 each year for the repair and/or reconstruction of
sewer mains at various locations os part of the Sewer Rehabilitation Program, This program is
funded through a charge of $0.70 per month per single family, which is billed as part of the
sewer service charges, The remainder of operation and maintenance costs, including
salaries and equipment costs, are paid from the sewer service charges assessed to residents
or property owners connected to the sewer system,
10. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the
current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes
X
No_
Explain:
The Sewer Rehabilitation Program mentioned oboye is an annual program included in the
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \retum quesIGMOC-SEWER 01.ac.doc
Page 4
current CIP,
MISCELLANEOUS
11. Does the current Sewer Threshold Standard need any modification?
Yes
No
x
Explain: The City is in compliance with the current Sewer Threshold Standard for our
current and future needs, However, the current standard will be reviewed this year as a
result of recent developments resulting from the issuance of the new National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and its accompanying requirements, There is a
possibility that this new permit may necessitate revisions to our current standards,
12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the GMOC to recommend to the City
Council?
Yes
No
x .
Explain:
We have no suggestions at this time.
13. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes
No
x .
Explain:
All pertinent issues hove been addressed above,
Prepared by:
Title:
Date:
Anthony Chukwudolue
Civil Engineer
12/20/2001
C:\dffilesIGMOC\gmoc 01\return quesIGMOC-SEWER 01.ac.doc
Page 5
THRESHOLD
1. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the
Water District for each project
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water Authority, the Sweetwater
Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water District with a 12 to 18 month development
forecast and request an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and
continuing growth. The District's replies should address the following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering both short and
long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now used or
committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
e. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and
GMOC.
1. Please fill in the tables below.
I!wATER VOLUME (MILLION 'C'
GALLONS)
CURRENT YEAR DEMAND (Consumption) FY 00/01 ; HISTORICALDATA(FY ending)
~. :OS}' CUrrent... Current 121110. 1998 %of 1999 %óf 2000 % of
" Year Year"OA.()f< ~°tal<··.,ih Total
- MG Projectiol1..,.d Total
." Total····"······ MG·········;
.. o ;"<'i:'
Local 3380 42 3360 4, 1 1 00 78.9
Imported 4668 58 5040 ~5,9 0 21 .1
Total 8048 8400 1 00 1 00 1 00
Notes: 1)
Use of local vs. Imported water sources is highly dependent on weather conditions and
therefore unpredictable.
2)
Table values are for portion of Chula Vista served by Sweetwater Authority only.
C:ldffilesIGMOC';¡moc 01lretum queslSWEElWATER 01.doc
Page 1
WATER SUPPLY CAPACITY MILLION GALLONS) ..,." .
>..' FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY2001 5 Year
12-18 Mo
.>, . Pròjection Projection
Demand - (Purchased by 8048 8400 9200
consumers) 7,543 7,215 8234
Supply Capacity 26740 26740 26740 26740 26740 26740
Storage Capacity - Treated 42 42 42 42
Water 40 42
~torage Capacity - Raw
Water 16,712 16,712 16,712 16172 16172 16172
Notes: 1)Maximum supply capacity is from Pipeline 4 aqueduct (40mgd), wells (2mgd), Additional 30 mgd capacity is
available from treatment plant.
Please provide brief responses to the foJ/owing questions.
GROWTH IMPACTS
2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes
No
X_
Explain:
No significant growth expected within the Sweetwater Autohity service area.
3. Do current facilities have the ability to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18
month time frame?
Yes_X_ No
Explain:
No significant growth is forecasted
4. Will any new facilities will be required to accommodate the forecast growth for the
12-18 month time frame? Yes No_X_;
for the 5-7 year time frame? Yes No X_.
Explain:
a. Type offacility. N/A
b. Location of facility. N/A
c. Projected production, in gallons. N/A
d. Projected operational date. N/A
e. Are sites available for these facilities? N/A
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01lretum queslSWEETWATER Ot.doc
Page 2
f. How will these facilities be funded? N/A
g. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanismls) in place to provide this funding? NIA
5. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current level
of service as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes _X_ No
Explain:
Balance needs to be maintained between redevelopmentlfill-in population growth and
existing water supply infrastructure in older areas of Chula Vista to ensure the necessary
facilities are in place and adequate water supply is available. This needs to be accomplished
through communication between the City and utility agencies.
MAINTENANCE
6. Is adequate funding secured andlor identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes _X
No
Explain:
Construction funding for maintenance of existing facilities is based on pay as you
go basis collected from rate payers
7. Are there any new major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to
the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes _X_ No
Explain:
The Sweetwater Authority master plan and metallic main replacement program
includes $3,000,000 per year in improvements. Other CIP's to modernize and maintain the
water distribution system.
8. Does the District have any plans to produce or distribute reclaimed water?
Yes
No
X_
Explain:
No plans at this time because the Authority does not have the necessary plumbing,
sources or demand.
MISCELLANEÒUS
9. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes
No
X_
C:\dffilesIGMOC'9moc 01 \return queslSWEElWATER 01.doc
Page 3
Explain:
It appears to be adequate for water facilities
10. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes _x_ No
Explain:
Require developer funded infrastructure upgrades when redevelopment occurs in
older areas of Chula Vista.
11. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and the
GMOC?
Yes
No
x_
Explain:
Prepared by:
Title:
Date:
_Hector Martinez
_Deputy Chief Engineer
_12/5101
C:ldffiles\GMOC~moc 01\return queslSWEElWATER 01.doc
Page 4
THRESHOLD
1. Developer will requestand deliver to the City a service availability letter from the Otay
Water District or Sweetwater Authority for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water Authority, the Sweetwater
Authority, and the Otay Water District with a 12 to 18 month development forecast and
request an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing
growth. The replies should address the following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering both short and
long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now used or
committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
e. Other relevant information the agencies desire to communicate to the City and
GMOC.
1. Please fill in the tables below.
,,', '" , ",...,
WATER DEMAND (Million Gallons (MG)) ",:.ii
CURRENT YEAR: FY2000/2001 ",...:.:IL istorical Data (Fiscal year) "
I' "..:_...sc...¡...~;~~~~nt ~~~;~ of ~~~~on _ ~0~!iJ::18 ':10~9i!::19 ':1o~9.i:~IO
, ,.ii,... I'MG):"'''' ..otal'·... MG»-;'...,' ,'"
SDCWA 9,773 97% 10,219 96% 96% 97%
Helix WD 0 0% 0 0% 0% 0%
RWCWRF 313 3% 325 4% 4% 3%
rotal (MG)
10,086
10,544
.
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01 \return ques\OtayWater.doc Page 1
WATERSUPPL Y CAPACITY (Million Gallons Per Da (MGD)) ,. .'.'
FY1998/99 FY1999/00 FY2000/01 12-18 Mo 5 Year
..',. .. . Proiection Proiection
Total Flow Supply 122,8 122.8 131.8 139,8 148.8
Capacity
Potable Storage Capacity 173,3 173,3 173,7 190,7 216,5
Non-Potable Storage 28.3 28,3 28,3 31,7 43.7
Capacity
Potable Supply Flow 121.5 121,5 130,5 130,5 139.5
Capacity
Non-Potable Supply Flow 1,3 1,3 1,3 9.3 9,3
Capacity
GROWTH IMPACTS
2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the current ability to
maintain service levels?
Yes No X
Explain:
The Otay Water District (OWD) has anticipated growth, effectively managed the addition
of new facilities, and does not foresee any negative impacts to current or future service
levels, This is due to the extensive planning OWD has done over the past many years
including the development of a Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP) and the annual
efforts to have the CIP projects funded and constnucted in a timely manner
corresponding with growth that require new or upgraded facilities,
The process of planning followed by the OWD is to use WRMP as a guide and to revisit
each year the best altematives for providing a reliable water supply and system facilities
to provide continuous service,
The OWD Board of Directors adopted the WRMP that uses population growth projections
from SANDAG's Series 8 Regional Growth Forecast, Water and Sewer Agencies and input
from the City of Chula Vista and developers, It incorporates the concepts of water storage
and supply from neighboring water agencies to meet emergency water supply needs. The
OWD works closely with City of Chula Vista staff to insure the WRMP remains current and
incorporates changes in development activities within all areas such as the Otay Ranch.
The OWD is in the process of preparing a new Water Resources Master Plan scheduled to
be completed next November. This new WRMP is based on careful evaluation of
anticipated conditions using the best available data resources. Changing development
patterns, water use trends, environmental interests, and other factors will be incorporated
into the results of the WRMP.
C:ldffilesIGMOC'9moc 01 \return queslOtay Water.doc Page 2
3. Do current facilities have the ability to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18
month time frames?
Yes X No
-
Explain:
The short term and long term water supply is expected to meet the projected water
demand in the City of Chula Vista without any restrictions for the following reasons.
Many reservoirs, both statewide and local reservoirs, are expected to be at near normal
levels. Therefore, the water outlook for the next 12-18 months is that there will be no
restriction on the water supply,
The long-range prognosis is also very favorable in that the Metropolitan Water District
(MWD) adopted and has proceeded to implement an Integrated Resources Plan lIRP),
which includes six implementation policies. These policies are as follows:
<; Reliabilitv: Agencies will have full capability to meet full service demands at retail
levels at all times,
<; Balance: Maintaining a resource mix, which balances investments and additional
improved imported supply capability in local resource development and conservation,
<; Competitiveness: Provide affordable water service and maintain competitiveness by
assuring that the effective rate for MWD will be less than $500 per acre-foot in the
year 2005.
<; Diamond Vallev Reservoir: Commitment to complete the 800,000 acre-feet Diamond
Valley Reservoir Project with water deliveries to storage commencing in the year
2000, (Note: This has been successfully achieved,)
<; Colorado River Aaueduct: Assure that the Colorado River Aqueduct will be operated
at capacity for the benefit of all member agencies.
<; Adaptabilitv: Resource development and financial strategy to provide acceptable
water quality and financial security,
In addition, the OWD is actively pursuing the development local water supply through the
sharing of treatment plant capacity with other local agencies such as Sweetwater
Authority, Helix Water District, and the City of San Diego, An agreement with the City of
San Diego for 10 MGD from their Otay Water Treatment Plant has been achieved. In
addition 8 MGD from the Helix Water District's Levy Water Treatment Plant is currently
available to OWD.
The MWD, San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), and OWD have addressed the
availability of water supply in emergency conditions, The OWD need for a ten-day water
supply during a SDCWA shutdown has been fully addressed in OWD's WRMP. The
OWD is currently able to meet this requirement through its own storage and existing
interconnections with other agencies, MWD, SDCWA, and OWD all have programs to
continue to meet or exceed the emergency water needs of the region into the
foreseeable future, As mentioned above the OWD executed a 50-year renewable
C:\dffiles\GMOC"l,gmoc 01 \return ques\Otay Water.doc Page 3
agreement with the City of San Diego to provide 10 MGD of immediate capacity and an
additional 1 0 MGD capacity in the future from the Otay Water Treatment Plant.
The OWD, in concert with the City of Chula Vista, continues to expand the use of
recycled water. The City of San Diego is nearing construction completion of the first
phase its South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP) planned for to be capable of
producing approximately 7 MGD, Recycled water from this facility will be available for
distribution by the OWD.
The OWD continues to encourage water conservation through a school education
program and penalties on excessive use of water for irrigation, The education program
includes school site garden grants and classroom programs for elementary schools, as
well as science fair participation for elementary and junior high school levels. There is
water quality testing certification availability for the senior high levels and a video lending
library for all school grade levels, The school community continues to enthusiastically
receive the OWD school education program and including schools within the City of
Chula Vista,
4. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth for the 12-18
month time frame? Yes X No _;
For the 5 year time frame?
Yes X
No_
Explain:
a. Type offacility.
b. Location of facility.
c. Projected production, in gallons.
d. Projected operational date.
e. Are sites available for these facilities?
f. How will these facilities be funded?
g. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
The OWD WRMP defines and describes the new water facilities that are required to
accommodate the forecasted growth within the OWD, These facilities are incorporated into
the annual OWD Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for implementation when required to
support development activities. As major development plans are formulated and proceed
through the City of Chula Vista approval process, OWD requires the developer to prepare a
Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP) for the specific development project. This SAMP is a
document, which defines and describes all the water and recycled water system facilities to
be constructed to provide an acceptable and adequate level of service to the proposed land
uses, The SAMP also defines the financial responsibility ofthe facilities required for service.
Those facilities identified as OWD CIP projects are funded by the OWD through collection of
water meter capacity fees established to fund the WRMP facilities, The developer funds all
other required water system facilities to provide water service to their project, Examples of
this process are the Otay Ranch SPA One, EastLake Trials, Salt Creek Ranch, Village One
West, San Miguel Ranch, Village 6, and Sunbow II development projects, The SAMP
establishes typical major water transmission main and distribution pipeline facilities generally
aligned within the roadway alignments of the developments,
C:\dffiles\GMOC\gmoc 01\return ques\Otay Water.doc Page 4
Significant new CIP facilities include the following:
é, The 16.0 mg 711-3 Reservoir project is located within the OWD Use Area property.
The reservoir is planned to be in operation in March 2002. The developers entered
into an agreement with OWD that insures a water meter capacity fee income stream
to construct the needed reservoir.
é, The Central Area and Otay Mesa Interconnection Pipeline project is located primarily
in the San Diego County Water Authority's right-of-way. This major capital
investment has been completed. This water facility allows for water delivery from the
City of San Diego's Otay Water Treatment Plant into OWD Central Area and Otay
Mesa Systems and allows for the transfer of up to 47 MGD of water stored within the
Otay Mesa System to the rapidly growing Central Area System, This project has
been in operation since mid 2000 and was funded by water meter capacity fees,
é, The 680-1 Reservoir and 944-1 Pump Station projects are to be located
underground in the planned Sunset Park as a joint use project concept coordinated
with the City of Chula, These major recycled water storage and pumping facilities
are planned to begin construction in early 2002, These facilities will serve recycled
water to the communities of Rancho Del Rey, Sunbow II, Otay Ranch, etc. Funding
is from recycled water meter capacity fees.
5. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current level
of service as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes X No
Explain:
A positive component is the agreement between Imperial Irrigation District (liD) and
SDCWA to provide 200,000 acre-feet per year (ac-ftlyr) at 20,000 ac-ftlyr increments
over ten years into San Diego County. This agreement assures San Diego County a
reliable water supply, The SDCWA is working diligently to determine the best reliable
alternative to cost effectively bring this water to San Diego County. Also, the SDCWA is
in the process of developing a Regional Water Facilities Master Plan that will address
water supply needs through 2020.
Two potential areas that could affect growth are the Arizona Water Banking and the Bay-
Delta. The State of Arizona has implemented a Water Bank to store much of their
unused allotment l260,000 acre-feet per year) of Colorado River water in aquifers, This
action limits Califomia utilizing Arizona's unused allotment and MWD will have to find
alternative sources, The MWD believes that Arizona's Water Bank will not have an
immediate impact on Californians for a few years,
The Bay-Delta issue on the other hand is headed towards a solution, Califomia and
federal cooperation has formalized a CalFed Bay-Delta Program with signing of a
Framework Agreement. The Framework Agreement projected that state and federal
agencies would work together in the following areas of Bay-Delta Estuary Management:
C:ldffilesIGMOC'gmoc 01 \return queslOtay Water.doc Page 5
S Water quality standards formulation,
ç Coordination of State Water Project and Central Valley Project operations with
regulatory requirements.
1; Long-term solutions to problems in the Bay-Delta Estuary,
The state and federal cooperative process is to develop long-term solutions to problems
in the Bay-Delta Estuary related to fish and wildlife, water supply reliability, natural
disasters, and water supply. The intent is to develop a comprehensive and balanced
plan, which addresses all of the resource issues,
MAINTENANCE
6. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Explain:
Yes X No
-
The OWD has an established renewal and replacement fund within the Operating Budget.
There is adequate funding secured and identified for maintenance and replacement of
existing facilities, as they are required to be maintained or replaced.
7. Are there any new major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuantto
the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Explain:
Yes X No
The following list is the major maintenance, replacement, and upgrade CIP projects
within the current OWD Five-Year CIP project plan:
CIP Number
043
077
098
101
102
205
226
250
R076
W259
W261
W267
W268
W270
W366
ram
ram
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01\retum queslOtay Water.doc Page 6
RECYCLED WATER
8. Please updatelfill in the table below.
RECYCLED WATER DEMAND PER YEAR (Million Gallons (MG»)
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
TOTAL 290 252 299 415 894
USES
Irriaation 290 252 299 415 894
Industrv
Recharae
9. Please give a brief description of the impact the below items have on the District's
current efforts to market recycled water.
a Water quality
b. Price of water
c. Willing customers
d. Distribution lines
e. Other
Explain:
The total dissolved salt content of the recycled water supply, typically ranging between
900 and 1,000 TDS, is the primary factor potentially impacting the cost of recycled water
production to meet regulatory requirements on limitations of salt loading within reuse
areas, Currently, TSD levels are well below regulatory levels and do not impact water
quality requirements, nor increase the cost for the production, The landscape planting
materials, however, need to be selected such that those that are highly sensitivity to salt
levels are not integrated into the landscape planting scheme,
The OWD currently markets recycled water at 85% of the potable water rate and recently
removed the electrical pumping charges from the recycled water rate structure which
when combined represents about a 75% cost relative to potable water, This pricing level
has increased user willingness and acceptance of the OWD mandatory recycled water
use ordinance, Customer acceptance of recycled water overall has been positive. When
resistance is encountered it is typically due to concerns of increased capital cost to install
the necessary distribution pipelines to the reuse areas, The transmission mains, storage
and pumping capital facilities are funded by the OWD through collection of water meter
capacity fees,
C:\dffileslGMOClgmoc 01 \retum queslOtay Water.doc Page 7
MISCELLANEOUS
10. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No X
Explain:
The current threshold standard addresses all the significant aspects of water service and the
capability to accommodate the continuing growth within the City of Chula Vista.
11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
-
Explain:
That the City of Chula Vista continue support and encourage the use of recycled water,
Also, to encourage the joint use of City of Chula Vista and OWD facilities for mutual
benefit as the Sunset Park is an excellent example.
12. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and the
GMOC?
Yes X No
Explain:
Recvcled Water
On the recycled waterfront, OWD continues to actively pursue the development of
recycled water facilities within new development projects, and support the City of San
Diego's South Bay Water Reclamation Plant. The City of San Diego has identified OWD
as the major potential market for recycled water from the SBWRP, OWD has expressed
our interest in receiving recycled water from this plant and related joint use of storage
and transmission main facilities that could benefit the City of San Diego and OWD, The
OWD and the City of San Diego continue negotiating an agreement for the recycled
water supply,
Water Conservation
The OWD continues to have a Water Conservation Program Ordinance to reduce the
quantity of water used by customers for the purpose of conserving water supplies, The
program actually provides a water "budget," thereby requiring irrigation efficiency by water
accounts dedicated solely to the irrigation of landscaping, A study suggested that if users
could be encouraged to manage their landscape with a maximum annual amount of 48-
inches of water, approximately 1,000 acre-feet of water would be saved annually.
C:\dffilesIGMOC'9moc 01\retum queslOtay Water.doc Page 8
Conservation is also promoted by the education of the public through its school programs,
which include several schools in Chula Vista and many others throughout the District. The
District, in conjunction with Helix Water District and Cuyamaca College operate the
educational Water Conservation Garden,
Hiahliahts of Otav Water District's Operation
The following are a few highlights of the FY 2000-2001 accomplishments by OWD.
1. No water rate increases associated with OWD operations,
2, No water meter capacity fee increases,
3. $30.3 million capital improvement program budget.
4, The OWD is in the design phase to construct the Lower Otay Pump Station to supply the
currently available 10 MGD from the City of San Diego's Otay Water Treatment Plant.
5, Placed the Central Area and Otay Mesa Interconnection Pipeline project into operation,
which provides transmission capability from the OWD's Otay Mesa System reservoir
storage to the City of Chula Vista growth areas,
In summary, the water supply outlook is excellent and the City of Chula Vista's long-term
growth will be assured of a reliable water supply, Potential interruptions to the water supply
have been addressed by OWD, SDCWA, and MWD throughout the long-term emergency
water supply development of the SDCWA's Emergency Storage Project (90 days), the MWD
Diamond Valley Reservoir (six months) and OWD's ten-day storage/supply strategy, The
continued close coordination efforts with the City of Chula Vista and the other agencies have
brought forth significant enhancements for the effective utilization of the region's water
supply to the benefit of all citizens,
Prepared by:
Title:
Date:
James F, Peaslev
Enaineerina Plannina Manaaer
12/11/2000
C:ldffilesIGMOC'9moc Q1lreturn queslOtay Water.doc Page 9
-<
~
....
Q
Z
r.l
=--
=--
~
-
Eo-<
Z
r.l
:E
==
u
~
Eo-<
-<
-
mmr;ijWlV¡
;'1
IZI
Z
o
E
~<
1ZIt:)
¡¡;¡~
IZI
Z
O~
&J:a
~::3
=-
$!
,..Q
IZI¡¡;¡
~
o
~
=-
¡::
'"
'"
..;
'"
-
.~
~
,-.
U
~~
~~
Z~
S~
rr,rr,
rr,rr,
....Z
~O
ge=
uU
E--<
=í.:)
í.:)Z
~e=
=:Z
~~
O~
E--"';¡
Z~
~~
~rr,
í.:)Z
<0
Z....
<~
~¡::¡
=Z .
E--~ rr,
g~ ~
=:0 ~
í.:)U ~
~~ ~
~
U
'~
U
o
~
....
...
"
c
&
'"
u
~
-
'"
'"
'"