Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 2002/08/06
IJ . .""1 1<1. IIrllhl1l-l- I J" Jill." car at CIIIå'" II. e.. II tilt CIty a.rk and lilt , ......- cIoauInent on the bulletin board IDU... . BrownAct/re~lremenl8. ~.. I .... - _.-- '~17/C;;- - - _ __ .-.. (~ NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Public Hearing scheduled for Tuesday, August 6, 2002, to consider: MODIFICATION OF THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE AND AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 3.54 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE was opened on August 6,2002, and continued to Tuesday, August 13, 2002, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA. Dated: August 7, 2002 - ~CU-I----=::> ~.'Y ~ Susan Bigelow, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA August 6, 2002 4:00 p.m. Council Chambers Public Services Building 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista ~~ft- ~ - - -- -- ~~~~ CITY OF CHUlA VISTA City Council Patty Davis Stephen C. Padilla Jerry R. Rindone Mary Salas Shirley A. Horton, Mayor City Manager David D. Rowlands, Jr. City Attorney John M. Kaheny City Clerk Susan Bigelow ********** The City Council meets regularly on the first calendar Tuesday at 4:00 p.m. and on the second, third and fourth calendar Tuesdays at 6:00 p.m. Regular meetings may be viewed at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays on Cox Cable Channel 24 or Chula Vista Cable Channel 68 ********** CALL TO ORDER I declare under penalty of perjury that I am employed by the City of Chula Vista in the . Office of the City Clerk and that I posted this document on the bulletin board according to AG-",,_ ..IiY Dated f(;i(o r---Slgn .ðIIl'.M. August 6, 2002 ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and Mayor Horton. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY . INTRODUCTION BY SUSAN BIGELOW, CITY CLERK, OF THE EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH, LETICIA LAZO, ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE . OATH OF OFFICE: JOHN CHAVEZ COMMISSION RESOURCE CONSERVATION CONSENT CALENDAR (Items I through 19) The Council will enact the staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar by one motion, without discussion, unless a Councilmember, a member of the public. or City staff requests that an item be removed for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business. I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of July 23, 2002. Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes. 2. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE II PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION) Adoption of the ordinance approves amendments to the EastLake II Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map to change 16.4 acres from Village Center to Business Center, and changes 2.0 acres from Business Center and Open Space to Village Center. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council place the ordinance on second reading for adoption. -". '...I _J '. " h, . '\. \' .' . .:..-' ,~) 3 A. RESOLUTION.;.;QPc,Tb¡E OIY.Q)UNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 WITImT CÖMMtWIIY FAQbl'IìIÐS DISTRICTS 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3, 99-1, 99-2, 2000-1 AND 2001-1 AT THE MAXIMUM AUTHORIZED SPECIAL TAX RATES APPLICABLE TO EACH DISTRICT, AND .DELEGATING TO THE CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH THE SPECIFIC SPECIAL TAX RATE APPLICABLE TO EACH PARCEL SO LONG AS SUCH TAX RATE DOES NOT EXCEED THE APPLICABLE MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATE AUTHORIZED TO BE LEVIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $453,996 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 99-2 FOR MAINTENANCE, AND ESTABLISHING A NEW BUDGET FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 99-2 (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) C. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING MODIFICATIONS TO EXHIBIT C TO THE RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 98-3 (OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 35 [SUNBOW lID One new Community Facilities District (CFD) was established during Fiscal Year 2001/2002 in the San Miguel Ranch development, adding to the nine CFDs established rrom 1998 to 2001. Special taxes must be levied during Fiscal Year 2002/2003 in nine of these districts in order to pay for the maintenance of open space and preserve areas in CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 98-1, 99-2 and 98-3; and to begin repaying bondholders in CFDs 97-3, 99-1,2000-1 and 2001-1. Due to the separation ofCFD 99-2 rrom CFD 98-1, a budget amendment is required to include a new budget for CFD 99-2. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions. 4. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND WILLDAN FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO UPDATE THE TRANSPORTATION AND INTERIM STATE ROUTE 125 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT, AND APPROVING A BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING $36,000 FROM THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) Council approved an agreement with Willdan/Munifinancial to update the Transportation and Interim State Route 125 Development Impact Fees. Due to unexpected delays in completing the update, the consultant, with staff's support, is requesting an amendment to the agreement. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Page 2 - Council Agenda 08/06/02 5 A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A PORTION OF OTAY LAKES ROAD ADJACENT TO THE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH PROJECT B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE PARCEL MAP OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 01-14, EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH; ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE VARIOUS PUBLIC STREETS; ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY THE VARIOUS EASEMENTS, ALL AS GRANTED ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION; ACKNOWLEDGING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY ALL IRREVOCABLE OFFERS OF DEDICATION AS ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDMSION; VACATING CERTAIN EASEMENTS LOCATED WITHIN SAID PARCEL MAP; APPROVING THE PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDMSION; AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT C. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 01-14, VILLAGE CENTER NORTH, REQUIRING EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT On July 30, 2002, the Director of Planning and Building and the City Engineer approved a conditional tentative parcel map waiver for the Village Center North Project. Even though the Municipal Code authorizes staff to approve the subsequent fmal Parcel Map and associated agreements, developer requested and staff concurred that Council approval of the proposed map will expedite the project development by allowing the vacation on the map of several existing onsite easements which are no longer needed. Adoption of the resolutions approves the parcel map for Village Center North and the associated agreements. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions. 6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO.7 FOR THE "PHASE I OF THE SALT CREEK GRAVITY SEWER INTERCEPTOR (SW219) AND THE MAIN STREET PAVEMENT RECONSTRUCTION BETWEEN BROADWAY AND INTERSTATE 805 (STM-332)" PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE SAID CHANGE ORDER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY On September 18, 2001, Council awarded a contract to Hazard Construction Company/T.C. Construction Company, Inc., a Joint Venture, for the installation of a 42- inch gravity sewer line within Main Street between Broadway and Interstate 805 (Project SW-219), along with the reconstruction of the street pavement section on Main Street, between Broadway and Interstate 805 (project STM-332). The proposed change order, in the amount of $137,238.70, is for additional labor, equipment, and materials necessary to remove an existing shallow and deteriorated 42-inch corrugated metal pipe on Main Street that is no longer able to support traffic loads, and replace said pipe with a 36-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Page 3 - Council Agenda 08/06/02 7. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE CITY'S FORMAL BIDDING PROCESS, RATIFYING STAFF'S PREVIOUS ACTION, AND AWARDING THE ASBESTOS, LEAD, AND CONTAMINATED SOIL REMOVAL CONTRACT OF $144,071 FOR THE POLICE FACILITY CONSTRUCTION TO DESIGN FOR HEALTH The City of Chula Vista initially contracted with Design for Health to remove the lead and asbestos from the El Dorado and Town Center buildings scheduled for demolition. During excavation a large area of unanticipated contaminated soil was discovered that required immediate removal and treatment. Design for Health was requested to perform the urgent removal and disposal of the contaminated waste. (Director of Building and Park Construction) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 8. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING CONDITIONAL TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF RANCHO DEL REY PARKWAY ON SEPTEMBER 14 AND 15,2002 FOR THE ORANGE CRATE DERBY Adoption of the resolution will approve temporary closure on Rancho Del Rey Parkway on September 14 and 15,2002 to conduct the 23rd Annual Orange Crate Derby. (police Chief, Director of Human Resources) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 9. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING REQUESTS FROM BONITA BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION TO CONDUCT THE BONITAFEST AND BONITAFEST PARADE ON SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 28,2002 Adoption of the resolution approves temporary street closure of Bonita Road to conduct the 30th Annual Bonitafest Parade on Saturday, September 28, 2002 to conduct the 30th Annual Bonitafest Parade. (Police Chief, Director of Human Resources) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 10. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 BUDGET FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BY APPROPRIATING $4,163 FROM THE BULLETPROOF VEST PARTNERSHIP GRANT FOR BODY ARMOR (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) Earlier this year the Police Department applied for funding for vests under the Bulletproof Vest Program. Tbe Bureau of Justice Assistance notified the Police Department that the application was approved and awarded $4,163 to pay for 50 percent of the cost of bulletproof vests. This grant will partially fund ten vests; matching funds will come from the Police Department budget. (Police Chief) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Page 4 . Council Agenda 08/06/02 11. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $2,270 FROM TIlE SAN DIEGO COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT FOUNDATION, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 POLICE BUDGET, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,270 FOR POLICE EQUIPMENT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) Adoption of the resolution authorizes acceptance of $2,270 from the San Diego County Law Enforcement Foundation and appropriates the funds for gun lights and holsters for the K -9 officers. (police Chief) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 12. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES FOR CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND VENDORS PARTICIPATING IN THE CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA EVENT The Chamber of Commerce has requested that the business license tax for promotional events be waived for the Celebrate Chula Vista festival. The taxes involved include a five-dollar assessment to the sponsoring organization (Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce) and a requirement that each vendor have a Chula Vista business license (costing $12.50 to each business without a current business license). In the past, the City has waived the business license tax for numerous other festivals and events taking place in Chula Vista, and for vendors taking part in these events, in order to encourage participation. The rationale for waiving the fee is that the festivals attract thousands of visitors and residents to Chula Vista and promote our city, its attractions and businesses. (Deputy City Manager Palmer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 13. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS FOR TIDELAND USE FROM THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA AND TASTE OF THE ARTS The City is sponsoring or co-sponsoring two large special events on Chula Vista's bayfront this fiscal year. Since these events are being partially or completely operated on property owned by the San Diego Unified Port District, the Port is requiring the City to submit special event permits for tideland use, which include indemnification and hold hannless language. (Deputy City Manager Palmer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 14. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR $48,500 IN FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA EVENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT Page 5 - Council Agenda 08/06/02 The City is co-sponsoring the Celebrate Chula Vista event with the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, and has already provided $23,000 in funding to the Chamber via an agreement signed by the City Manager. There is $48,500 in funds remaining to be paid to the Chamber for this event, which will cause the total funds paid to the Chamber to exceed the $50,000 authorization limit for consultant services. The agreement must be approved by Council for payment of these remaining' funds. (Deputy City Manager Palmer) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 15. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A LETTER OF INTENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF SAN DIEGO AND CHULA VISTA REGARDING THE OTAY VALLEY REGIONAL PARK (OVRP) REORGANIZATION PLAN AND THE WEST FAIRFIELD REORGANIZATION PLAN, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID LETTER OF INTENT Staff ftom the City of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista have been working to move forward with a proposed reorganization that will restructure boundaries between the Cities in and adjacent to the Otay River Valley. The Letter ofIntent being presented to the City Council provides the initial principles that will form the basis of reorganization of the properties, and expresses the parties' agreement to cooperate with each other to accomplish the purpose and intent associated with the OVRP reorganization plan. The Letter of Intent is not a binding agreement, nor does it commit either City to approve or disapprove any of the applications, pre-zoning entitlements or other approvals required for the related projects. (Director of Community Development) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 16. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING DOWNTOWN PROPERTY AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ANNUAL COST OF LIVING ASSESSMENT ADJUSTMENT The Downtown Property and Business Improvement District (PBID) may authorize annual cost of living increases of up to 5 percent, pursuant to Section VI C of the adopted Management Plan. Said increases are recommended by the PBID Board of Directors and forwarded to the City Council for final approval. For the upcoming tax year, the PBID Board has recommended an assessment increase of 3.6 percent, which matches the regional consumer price index increase. (Director of Community Development) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 17. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DESIGNATING THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 462 E STREET, THE CLEATON ROBERTSON HOUSE, AS A HISTORIC SITE, AND PLACING THE HOUSE ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S LIST OF HISTORIC SITES, IN ACCORDANCE WITH MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.32.070 (A) The property owners of 462 E Street have requested that their property, the Cleaton Robertson House, be considered for inclusion on Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. The Resource Conservation Commission recommends that the house be placed on Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. Page 6 - Council Agenda 08/06/02 18. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DESIGNATING THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 840 FIRST AVENUE, THE MARY DREW HOUSE, AS A HISTORIC SITE, AND PLACING THE HOUSE ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S LIST OF mSTORIC SITES, IN ACCORDANCE WITH MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.32.070 (A) , The property owners of 840 First Avenue have requested that their property, the Mary Drew House, be considered for inclusion on Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. The Resource Conservation Commission recommends that the house be placed on Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. 19. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DESIGNATING THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 475 E STREET, THE WILLIAM DREW HOUSE, AS A HISTORIC SITE, AND PLACING THE HOUSE ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S LIST OF HISTORIC SITES, IN ACCORDANCE WITH MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.32.070 (A) The property owners of 475 E Street have requested that their property, the William Drew House, be considered for inclusion on Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. The Resource Conservation Commission recommends that the house be placed on Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons speaking during Oral Communications may address the Council on any subject matterwithin the Council's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the agenda. State law generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any issue not included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council may schedule the topic for future discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to three minutes. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have been advertised as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. 20. CONSIDERATION OF THE MODIFICATION OF THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE AND AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 3.54 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE Page 7 - Council Agenda 08/06/02 The City's Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) program was established on January 12, 1988. Since its inception, the program has been updated several times to reflect new land uses approvals, changes to the Circulation Element of the General Plan, and updated project cost estimates. Adoption of the resolution approves an increase from the current fee of $6,240 to $8,180 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). The proposed Urgency Ordinance will enable the City to collect the fee during the 60-day waiting period before the regular ordinance becomes effective. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing, adopt the following resolutions and urgency ordinance, and place the ordinance on first reading: A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING A REPORT PREPARED BY WlLLDAN RECOMMENDING AN UPDATED TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 3.54, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES C. URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 3.54, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES D. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $826,480 FROM THE AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE IN THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND TO REPAY SEWER LOAN AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION NO. 16706 (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) 21. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 23 (OT A Y RIO BUSINESS PARK) Open Space District No. 23 was originally established on September 15,1992 to maintain three open space lots and medians along the east side of the Otay Rio Business Park development. The current property owners wish to add a 2800-foot-long median on Main Street, which is currently being maintained by contract, to the areas being maintained by the District. On June 18,2002 Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-210, which initiated the proceedings for the amended annual levy of assessments within Open Space District No. 23, and for the amendment of the areas to be maintained to include the Main Street median in accordance with the provisions of Article XIIID of the California State Constitution. (Director of Public Works) Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the following resolutions: Page 8 - Council Agenda 08/06/02 A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CIillLA VISTA DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE ASSESSMENT BALLOT TABULATION WITHIN OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 23 (OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK), ORDERING MAINTENANCE WORK THEREIN, AND CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY OF THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT THEREIN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CIillLA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $24,260 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE OF OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 23 RESERVE FOR INCREASED MAINTENANCE (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED) 22. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AN IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC, AND CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSAL TO REPEAL AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS Adoption of the ordinance and resolution repeals the previously adopted development agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Kaiser Foundation Hospital, executed on July 2, 1992, and repeals an Improvement Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and The EastLake Company, executed on January 23, 1990, and approves an improvement agreement between the City of Chula Vista and The EastLake Company, LLC. (Director of Planning and Building) Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing, place the ordinance on first reading, and adopt the following resolutions: A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REPEALING THE AGREEMENT REGARDING A COMMUNITY TRAIL PEDESTRIAN FACILITY BETWEEN EASTLAKE I AND EASTLAKE II C. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CIillLA VISTA REPEALING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS FOR 30.4 ACRES NORTH OF OTAY LAKES ROAD AND WEST OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY Page 9 - Council Agenda 08/06/02 ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR OTHER BUSINESS 23. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS A. Scheduling of meetings. 24. MAYOR'S REPORTS A. Ratification of appointment to the Town Centre Project Area Committee - Catherine Radcliffe. 25. COUNCIL COMMENTS A. JERRY RINDONE: Ratification of reappointment to the Mobilehome Rent Review Commission - Mark Marchand. CLOSED SESSION Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by noon on Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Clerk's office in accordance with the Ralph M Brown Act (Government Code 54957.7). 26. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING ANTICIPATED LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(B) . One case 27. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) . William Pennerman v. City ofChula Vista (case no, 0lCV24 BTM [JFS]) ADJOURNMENT to a Regular Meeting of August 13, 2002, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Page \0 - Council Agenda 08/06/02 A<\O~ ORDINANCE NO. ~O'< ,. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY AD ~\)A VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLW.~u~LANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATION AND L~~SE DISTRICT MAP. Ç;,<';'r;:p' - 1. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the areas of land which are the subject of this Ordinance Amendment are diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A and hereto incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and for the purpose of General description herein consist of 68.1 acres at the northwest and northeast comers ofOtay Lakes Road (Project Site); and, B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval WHEREAS, on February 23, 2001, The Eastlake Company ("Developer") filed an application requesting approval of amendments to the EastLake II Planned Community District Regulation and Land Use District Map; and, C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, prior discretionary action of the development of the EastLake I portion of the Project Site has been the subject matter of prior General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan, EastLake II General Development Plan, Planned Community District Regulation and Land Use District Map amendments, resulting in the current land use designations, all previously approved by City Council Resolution No, 16702 and Ordinance No, 2522 on June 30, 1992; 2) a prior Development Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals previously approved by City Council Ordinance 2522 on July 6,1992; and, D, Planning Commission Record on Applications WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on said project on July 10, 2002, and voted to recommend that the City Council approve the amendments to the EastLake II Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map in accordance with the findings listed below. The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing on this Project held on July 10, 2002, and the minutes and resolutions resulting therefi-om, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding, E. City Council Record on Applications )-1 WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on July 23, 2002 on the Discretionary Approval Application, and to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to same; and, F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution and Ordinance WHEREAS, at the same City Council meeting at which this Ordinance was introduced for first reading on July 23, 2002, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista approved Resolution No. by which it adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-OI-042) and imposed amendments on EastLake II General Development Plan, and adopted a new Supplemental Sectional Planning Area (SPA) for 68.1 acres to be known as the Village Center North Supplemental SPA, including Design Guidelines, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Supplemental Public Facilities Finance Plan, Air Quality and Water Conservation Plans. II NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine and ordain as foJlows: A. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Amendments to the Planned Community District Regulation and Land Use District Map are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, as amended, and public necessity, convenience, the general welfare and good zoning practice support the amendments. B, APPROVAL OF PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE The City Council does hereby approve the Planned Community District Regulation and Land Use District Map as represented in Exhibit C. IlL INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Ordinance is dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio, IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day ftom and after its adoption, cP-) Presented by: Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning . H:\attomey\loraine\PCM-O 1-15 CCORD.doc Approved as to fonn by: (À "- ì^vtÆw.~ ~ John Kaheny City Attorney ):3 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item -3 Meeting Date 8/6/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Authorizing the levy of special taxes for Fiscal Year 2002-03 within Community Facilities Districts 97-1,97-2,97-3,98-1,98-3, 99-1,99-2,2000-1 and 2001-1 at the maximum authorized special tax rates applicable to each district and delegating to the City Manager the authority to establish the specific special tax rate applicable to each parcel so long as such tax rate does not exceed the applicable maximum special tax rate authorized to be levied by the City Council Resolution Amending the FY2002-03 budget by appropriating $453,996 from the un-appropriated Fund Balance for CFD 99-2 for maintenance and establish a new budget for CFD 99-2 SUBMITTED BY: Resolution Approving the Amendment to Exhibit C in the Special Tax Report for CFD 98-3 Director of Public wor~ City ManageJ{ÇI'- (4/5thsVote: Yes.xNo~ ", (c> y' REVIEWED BY: One new Community Facilities District (CFD) was established during Fiscal Year 2001-02 in the San Miguel Ranch development, in addition to the nine CFDs established during Fiscal Years 1998- 2001. Special taxes must be levied during Fiscal Year 2002-2003 in nine ofthese districts in order to pay for the maintenance of open space and preserve areas in CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 98-1, 99-2 and 98- 3; and to begin repaying bondholders in CFDs 97-3, 99-1, 2000-1 and 2001-1. Due to the separation ofCFD 99-2 from CFD 98-1, a budget amendment is required to include anew budget forCFD 99- 2, RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) Authorize the levy of special taxes for Fiscal Year 2002-03 within CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 97-3,98-3,99-1,99-2,2000-1 and 2001-1 at the maximum authorized special tax rates applicable to each district and delegate to the City Manager the authority to establish the specific special tax rate applicable to each parcel so long as such tax rate does not exceed the applicable maximum special tax rate authorized to be levied by the City Council; 2) Amend the FY2002-03 budget by appropriating $453,996 from the un-appropriated Fund Balance for CFD 99-2 for maintenance and establish a new budget for CFD 99-2; and 3) Approve the Amendment to Exhibit C in the Special Tax Report for CFD 98-3 3-1 Page 2, Item ~ Meeting Date 8/6/02 BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Background During Fiscal Years 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-0 I, the following Community Facilities Districts were formed in the Otay Ranch and Sunbow II areas: I. CFD 97-1: Open Space Maintenance District (Otay Ranch - SPA One, Villages I & 5) 2. CFD 97-2: Preserve Maintenance District (Otay Ranch) 3. CFD 97-3: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One) 4. CFD 98-1: Interim Open Space Maintenance District (Otay Project, LLC-OVP, Villages I West, 2, 2 West, 6, 7 & Planning Area 12) 5. CFD 98-2: Interim Open Space Maintenance District (McMillin - D.A. America, Otay - SPA Two, Villages 6& 7) 6, CFD 98-3: Open Space Maintenance District No. 35 (Sunbow II) 7, CFD 99-1: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (Otay Ranch - SPA One, Portions of Village 1,5 and I West) 8, CFD 99-2: Open Space Maintenance District (Otay Ranch SPA One - Village One West) 9, CFD 2000-1: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (Sunbow II Villages 5 -10) On August 7, 2001 Council adopted Resolution No. 2001-249, which established the maximum authorized special tax rates for Fiscal Year 2001-02 for CFDs 97-1,97-2,97-3,98-1,98-3,99-1, 99-2 and 2000-1, authorized the levy of special taxes on the maximum authorized special tax rates and delegated to the City Manager the authority to establish the specific special tax rate applicable to each parcel (Attachment A). Subsequent to the passage of this resolution, there were some minor rate revisions, as discussed herein. All revisions were within the maximum allowable rate for Fiscal Year 2001-02. One new Community Facilities District was formed during Fiscal Year 2001-02. CFD 2001-1 covers the San Miguel Ranch development and finances the acquisition or construction of infrastructure improvements, These improvements include, but are not limited to, Mount Miguel Road, Proctor Valley Road, Calle La Marina and Calle La Quinta. Levy of the Special Tax was authorized through adoption of Resolution No. 2001-415 on December 4,2001 (Attachment B). Bonds should have been priced by the end of July 2002. Scheduled debt service on the bonds is estimated to be $1,076,817.63 for Calendar Year 2003. Existing Infrastructure Districts The City has three existing CFDs for which bonds have been issued: 97-3,99-1 and 2000-1. CFD 97-3 finances improvements in Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One, such as portions of La Media Road and East Palomar Street. Administration costs for Fiscal Year 2002-03 for CFD 97-3 are projected to be $75,000 (as given in the bond indenture) and scheduled debt service on the bonds is $856,040. 3 -;).. Page 3, Item 3 Meeting Date 8/6/02 CFD 99-1 finances improvements in a portion of Otay Ranch Village I, Village 5 and Village I West. The main public facilities included are Olympic Parkway Phases I and 2, Paseo Ranchero Phase 2, and East Palomar Street. For CFD 99-1, administrative costs of $75,000 (as given in the bond indenture) and scheduled debt service on the Bonds of$I,983,828.76 are anticipated during Fiscal Year 2002-03. The third district, CFD 2000-1, relates to the financing of various public facilities serving the Sunbow II development such as Telegraph Canyon Road, Medical Center Road and East Palomar Street. For CFD 2000-1, administration costs for Fiscal Year 2002-03 are projected to be $50,000 and scheduled debt service on the bonds is $556,225, During Fiscal Year 2002-03, Parcel No. 641-200-21 was taxed as an undeveloped parcel within CFDs 2000-1 and 98-3, Although it was proposed to be acquired by the school district, the parcel had not yet changed ownership. During December 2001 the property owner, Ayers Land Company, sent a letter to the City, saying that they believed that this parcel was taxed in error for CFD 2000-1 and that they did not intend to pay this portion of their tax bill. Based on staffs investigation, it was determined that this parcel should not have been charged. Although this parcel was within the District's boundaries, it is not located within Villages 5 through 10, This refund of $53,342.34 required an increase in the rate for the other undeveloped properties from $5027.55 per acre to $5708.31 per acre, which needed to be billed by the City. This increase was approved by the City Manager on January 29,2002 (Attachment C) under authority given in Resolution No, 2001-249. Existing Open Space Maintenance Districts Community Facilities Districts 97 -1,98-1, 98-2 and 99-2 all finance the maintenance of open space within the Otay Ranch development. CFD 97-1, which finances open space maintenance for Otay Ranch SPA One Villages One and Five, is broken down into two Special Tax Areas. AreaAcovers the entire district and includes maintenance of parkways, medians and regional trails along Telegraph Canyon Road, Otay Lakes Road, Paseo Ranchero, La Media Road and Olympic Parkway; Telegraph and Poggi Canyon detention basins and channels; and pedestrian bridges. Area B, which excludes the McMillin development, includes maintenance of connector trails, slopes and perimeter walls or fences along m¡ljor streets in the district. A budget has been prepared for this District which totals $680,695,00 for Area A and $469,123.00 for Area B for Fiscal Year 2002-03. Community Facilities Districts 98-1 and 98-2 were set up as interim districts because the areas of Otay Ranch included in these districts were not developed and the density of development was not yet known at the time that these districts were established, These districts were formed to provide a guarantee for the financing of a portion of the cost of the maintenance of portions of the parkways and medians along Telegraph Canyon Road, Paseo Ranchero and Olympic Parkway and Telegraph and Poggi Canyon detention basins and channels allocable to the properties within these districts. The new CFD 99-2 has taken over the financing ofthat portion of costs of maintenance allocable to the property within CFD 98-1 from the centerline of Olympic Parkway north to Telegraph Canyon Road. A new total budget of $453,996.00 is projected for Fiscal Year 2002-03 (Attachment D), 3~"2 ,:;> Page 4, Item 3 Meeting Date 8/6/02 Since CFD 99-2 was not included in the City's two-year budget for Fiscal Years 2001-03, a budget amendment is required. As verified by the City's Special District Counsel, property owners within the remaining area ofCFD 98-1 will only be taxed for landscaped areas rrom the centerline of Olympic Parkway south to the District boundary, A total budget of$55,156,OO is projected for Fiscal Year 2002-03, None ofthe improvements in CFD 98-2 are expected to be turned over to the City for at least two years, so special taxes will not be levied within this district for Fiscal Year 2002-03. Community Facilities District 98-3 finances open space maintenance in the Sunbow II development. This includes maintenance of street medians, parkways, slopes, and drainage channels and basins, and biological monitoring of native and revegetated open space. A total budget of$790,733.00, with a revenue requirement (including reserves) of$892,339.04 was projected for Fiscal Year 2001-02 for this district, based on the improvements that staff anticipated accepting over a two-year period, Several weeks after the rates were adopted on August 7, 200 I, Ayers Land Company requested that we review the charges on undeveloped property based on the improvements that would actually be accepted during Fiscal Year 2001-02. As discussed in the November 5, 2001 memorandum to the City Manager (Attachment E), the revenue requirement was reduced to $734,451 and a refund of $157,887,58 was given to Ayers for payment on four undeveloped parcels. For Fiscal Year 2002-03 the budget is projected to be $798,448. Several Planning Areas within CFD 98-3 were modified during the past fiscal year. These changes occurred in Phase 2A, as shown on the Modified Exhibit C (Attachment F). Although the number of single family units (SF) in Phase 2A Planning Areas 20 and 21 increased rrom the July 2001 modification, Planning Areas 11 and 22 decreased rrom 154 to III condo units and III to 103 single family units, respectively, However, based on the original Exhibit C, there has still been a slight increase in units, rrom 818 condo/multi-family (MF) units and 1068 SF units in the original Exhibit C to 759 MF and 1128 SF units in the latest revision. Since only the industrial area remains undeveloped, it is unlikely that any additional revisions will occur. Staff therefore requests that Council accept the Modified Exhibit C (Attachment F). Community Facilities District 97-2 finances maintenance and biological monitoring ofthe preserve created in the Otay Ranch area, It is anticipated that the County of San Diego will take the lead in maintaining this area in cooperation with the City, Although no maintenance or monitoring costs were incurred during Fiscal Years 1999-2002, it is anticipated that this work will commence during Fiscal Year 2002-03, Based on the Community Facilities District Report and the spreadsheet estimating the first year's monitoring costs, a maintenance budget of$114,884.21 and a monitoring budget of $35,213.79 has been included for Fiscal Year 2002-03. The large monitoring budget is due to the several biological surveys that need to be conducted, particularly during the initial year, The Community Facilities District Reports for CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 98-1, 98-3 and 99-2 require the establishment of a reserve in the funds established for each district of up to 100 percent ofthe total budget in order to provide revenue for the first half of the fiscal year before any income is received and to provide for cost overruns and delinquencies, A 50 percent reserve has been provided by 3-L/ Page 5, Item ..3 Meeting Date 8/6/02 including an additional 50 percent of the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget. Additionally, in CFD 97-2 a buffer of $29,470.50 has been included to eliminate Special Tax swings. This should provide sufficient funding through December 31, 2003. Additional reserves may be provided depending on the schedule for accepting landscaping improvements. Fiscal Year 2002-03 Rates According to the Rate and Method of Apportionment for CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 98-1, 98-3, and 99-2, the maximum Special Tax Rates for each fiscal year after the initial year shall be increased or decreased by the lesser of the annual percentage change in the San Diego Metropolitan Area All Urban Consumer Price Index (CPr) or the annual percentage change in the estimated California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income as contained in the Governor's budget published in January. The CPI increase between the second half of 2000 and the second half of 2001 was approximately 3,6%, while the estimated California fourth quarter personal income decreased by 3.01 %. According to the State of California Department of Finance, the decrease in Per Capita Personal Income was due to, and reflects the use of, stock options as a portion of personal income in certain industries, particularly high technology corporations, and the drop of value in technology stocks during 200 I. Staff used the California fourth quarter personal income index, which produced the lower figures. The maximum authorized and projected annual special tax rates for all Community Facilities Districts are given below. Square footage (SF) refers to building floor area, while acreage refers to the total lot size, The proj ected annual rates are estimated based on square footage information given on the building permits. Staff proposes that the City Manager be authorized to modify the annual special tax rates based on actual square footage and acreage so long as such annual special tax rates do not exceed the maximum authorized special tax, Since the rates have been rounded, actual revenue may be slightly different. CFD 97-1 Otay Ranch Open Space Maintenance Category FY2001-02 FY2001-02 FY2002-03 FY2002-03 Estimated Maximum Actual Rate Maximum Projected Revenue Rate Rate Rate Area A $0.0958/SF $0.0958/SF $0.0929/SF $.0929/SF $522,920 Residential Area A Non- $1296.79/A $1296.79/A $1257.76/A $1257.76/A $5874 Residential Area A Vacant $1466.97/A $ 411.18/A $1422.82/A $254.45/A $26,635 Area B $O,2243/SF $0.1014/SF $O,2175/SF $0.06811SF $383,184 Residential 3-5 Page 6, Item 3 Meeting Date 8/6/02 CFD 97-1 Otay Ranch Open Space Maintenance Area B Non- $2879.49/A $1336.40/ A $2792.82/A $873.71/A $4080 Residential Area B Vacant $3256.16/ A $ O/A $3158,15/A $ o /A $0 CFD 97-2 Otay Ranch Preserve Category FY 2001-02 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY 2002-03 Estimated Maximum Actual Rate Maximum Projected Revenue Rate Rate Rate Area A: $O,OI44/SF $0.0037/SF $O,OI40/SF $O.OOI1/SF $ 8803 Residential Non- $232.93/ Acre $ 60,10/Acre $16.42/ $77 Residential $225,93/ Acre Acre Final Map $232.93/ Acre $ 0/ Acre $225.93/Acre $0 $0 Vacant $150,33/ Acre $ O/Acre $145.81/Acre $0 $0 Area B: $58,10/Acre $ 0/ Acre $ 56.35 / Acre $0 $0 Vacant CFD 97-3 Otay Ranch McMilliu Boud Issue Category Maximum FY 2001-02 FY02-03 Estimated Rate Actual Rate Projected Revenue Rate Residential $0.392/SF $O.392/SF $0.3084/ $786,287 SF Commercial $4000/ Acre N/A N/A $0 Community Purpose $1000/ Acre N/A N/A $0 Facility Undeveloped $7954/Acre $3419.73/A $0/ $0 (Unrestricted) Acre Undeveloped $7954/Acre N/A (Restricted) 3-~ Page 7, Item 3 Meeting Date 8/6/02 CFD 97-3 Otay Ranch McMillin Bond Issue Property Owner $7954/Acre N/A $0/ Acre 0 Association Land CFD 98-1 Otay Project Interim Open Space Maintenance District Category FY 2001-02 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY2002-03 Estimated Maximum Actual Rate Maximum Projected Revenue Rate Rate Rate Taxable Land $116.85/Acre $ 0/ Acre $113.34/A $17.10/ A $18,225 CFD 98-3 Opeu Space Maiutenance District No. 35 - Sunbow II Category FY 2001-02 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY 02-03 Estimated Maximum Actual Rate Maximum Projected Revenue Rate Rate Rate Residential $394.66/ EDU $394.66/ $382.79/ $330.57/ $579,426.11 EDU EDU EDU Industrial $3076.28/Acre N/A $2983,68/ N/A $0 Acre Commercial $3443.93/Acre $3443,93/ $3340.27/ $2576.68/ $35,768.90 Acre Acre Acre Undeveloped $2208/ Acre* $899.18 $2287.23/ $ 0/ $0 / Acre* Acre Acre Undeveloped- N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 Extraordinary Acre Special Tax * Due to a typographic error, the Fiscal Year 2000-0 I maximum rate of$2208 was shown for Fiscal Year 2001-02 on last year's agenda statement and resolution, This year's rate applies the deflation factor to the correct Fiscal Year 2001-02 maximum rate of $2358.21 per acre. Additionally, as previously explained, the actual undeveloped land tax was $0 because refunds were provided to the owners of undeveloped land. Note that a single family dwelling is equivalent to one EDU. Costs are spread to multiple family units on the basis of 0,8 EDUs per unit for street medians and parkways and 1.0 EDUs per unit for all other facilities in the CFD. 3-1 Page 8, Item .5 Meeting Date 8/6/02 CFD 99-1 Otay Ranch SPA One Bond Issue Category Maximum FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 Estimated Actual Rate Projected Revenue Rate Rate ZONE A Village I Residential $0.28/SF $O,28/SF $0.28/SF $802,416 Commercial $1600/ Acre $1600/ Acre $1600/ Acre $7472 Community Purpose $400/ Acre $400/ Acre N/A $0 Facility ZONE B Village 5 Residential $400 + $.29/SF $400 + $O,29/SF $400 + $759,379 $O,29/SF Commercial $3717/Acre $3717/Acre N/A $0 Community Purpose $929/Acre $929/ Acre N/A $0 Facility ZONE C Village 1West Residential $400 + $.44/SF $400 + $0.44/SF $400 + $392,723 $0.44/SF Commercial $4266/ Acre $4266/ Acre N/A $0 Community Purpose $1066/ Acre $1066/ Acre N/A $0 Facility COMBINED Undeveloped $8864/ Acre $2286,96/Acre $5750.56 $1,408,472 Property Owner $8864/Acre $O/Acre 0 $0 Association '3- g Page 9, Item 3 Meeting Date 8/6/02 The square footage of residential floor area is used to determine the charge for all developed residential properties. For all other categories, the parcel gross acreage is used. CFD 99-2 Otay Ranch SPA One Villal!e I West Category FY 2001-02 FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY2002-03 Estimated Maximum Actual Rate Maximum Projected Revenue Rate Rate Rate Residentia] $0.4004 ISF $0.4004 ISF $0.3883/SF $0.3883/SF $261,180 Vacant $49371 Acre $99, ] 31 Acre $4788.75IA $2546.59/A $377,807 The above rates include the Future Annexation Areas (Parce]s ] and 2), which have been annexed into CFD 99-2. CFD 2000-1 Sun bow II Villal!es 5 throu ,!h 11 Category Maximum Rate FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 Estimated Revenue Actual Rate Projected Rate Residentia] $.44/SF $.44/SF $0.44/SF $492,041 Undeveloped $785]1 Acre $5708.311 Acre* $2774,90 $97,393 Property Owner $785I1Acre $01 Acre $0 Association * As previously discussed, the rate of $5027.551 Acre was originally included on the tax roll but increased due to a refund on the schoo] parcel. CFD 2001-1 San Mil!uel Ranch FY 2002-03 Catel!ory Maximum Rate * Proiected Rate Estimated Revenue Improvement Area A Land Use Class ] - $475,00 per unit plus N/A $0 Residentia] $0.341 SF floor area Land Use Class 2 - $509] per acre N/A $0 Commercia] 3-Cj Page 10, Item 3 Meeting Date 8/6/02 Land Use Class 3 - $10,376 per acre $8,857.44 per acre $1,112,671 Undeveloped ImDrovement Area B Land Use Class 1 ~ $475.00 per unit plus N/A $0 Residential $0.32/ SF floor area Land Use Class 2 - $5091 per acre N/A $0 Commercial Land Use Class 3 - $4578 per acre N/A $0 Undeveloped The special taxes which will be applicable to typical single family dwelling units are shown in Attachment G for Otay Ranch Village I and 5, Otay Ranch McMillin, Sunbow II and San Miguel Ranch, Special taxes and assessments other than the Community Facilities Districts discussed herein are not included, Maps are provided for all districts in Attachment H. The final Special Tax Levy Reports will include a list of all parcel numbers and charges applicable to each parcel. Since the valid parcel numbers cannot be known for certain until after the assessment tape has been submitted to the County for inclusion on the County tax roll, the final reports will be prepared in August using the rates established in the draft reports. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted expenditures total approximately $2,607,579 for all maintenance CFDs for Fiscal Year 2002-2003, excluding reserves. The scheduled debt service on bonds will be $856,040 for CFD 97- 3, $1,983,828,76 for CFD 99-1, $556,225 for CFD 2000-1 for Fiscal Year 2002-03 and $1,076,817.63 for CFD 2001-1 for Calendar Year 2003. The projected revenues will be sufficient to cover this amount. The general fund will be reimbursed up to a maximum of$413,461 for City staff services perfonned for all maintenance CFDs during Fiscal Year 2002-2003, Attachments: A, Resolution 2001-249 and Agenda Statement B, Resolution 2001-415 C. Memorandum to City Manager dated January 7, 2002 D. Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget for CFD 99-2 E. Memorandum to City Manager dated November 5, 2001 F, Modified Exhibit C for CFD 98-3 G, Table on typical single family home charges H. Maps for all CFDs J:IENGINEERIAGENDAICFDLEVY03.EMCI,DOC FILE 0725-10-CFDOO 3-/0 /lrme#ß8A/T A RESOLUTION NO. 2001-249 RESOLUTION OF mE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE MAXIMUM AUTHORIZED SPECIAL TAX RATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO'S. 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3, 99-1, 99-2 AND 2000-1, AUTHORIZING TIlE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 AT TIlE MAXIMUM AUTHORIZED SPECIAL TAX RATES APPLICABLE TO EACH DISTRICT, AND DELEGATING TO TIlE CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH THE SPECIFlC SPECIAL TAX RATE APPLICABLE TO EACH PARCEL WHEREAS, pursuant to the rates and method of apportionment of the Special Tax for Community Facilities Districts No's. 97-1, 97-2, 98-1 and 98-3 approved by the qualified electors of each respective community facilities district, the maximum Special Tax rates for each fiscal year after 1998/1999, for each community facilities district, shall be increased or decreased by the lesser of the annual percentage change in the San Diego Metropolitan Area AIl Urban Consumer Price Index (nCPIn) or the annual percentage change in the estimated California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income as contained in the Governor's budget published in January; and WHEREAS, the CPI increase between the second half of calendar year 1999 and the second half of 2000 was 6.8% and the annual percentage change in the estimated California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income was 6.98%, therefore, the increase in the CPI index will apply to the increases in the maximum Special Tax rates for each community facilities district for Fiscal Year 2001/2002; and WHEREAS, the maximum Special Tax rates for Fiscal Year 200112002 for all community facilities districts are set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full; and WHEREAS, this City Council desires to establish the maximum Special Tax rate that may be levied in Community Facilities Districts Nos. 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3, 99-1, 99-2 and 2000-1 in Fiscal Year 2001/2002 at the rates as set forth in Exhibit A hereto and to delegate to and designate the City Manager as the official to prepare a certified list of all parcels subject to the Special Tax levy including the amount of the Special Tax to be levied on each parcel for Fiscal Year 200112002 as authorized by Government Code Section 53340. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City ofChula Vista, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities Districts Nos. 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98- 3, 99·} , 99-2 and 2000-1 respectively, as follows: SECTION L The foregoing recitals are true and correct. SECTION 2. This City Council does hereby establish the maximum Special Tax rates that may be levied for Fiscal Year 200112002 in Community Facilities Districts Nos. 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98- 1,98-3,99-1,99-2 and 2000-1 as the rates set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. 3-/1 Resolution 2001-249 Page 2 SECTION 3. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53340, this City Council hereby delegates the authority to and designates the City Manager as the official to prepare and submit a certified list of all parcels subject to the levy of the Special Tax within the community facilities districts to which this resolution applies, including the amount of the Special Tax to be levied on each parcel for Fiscal Year 200112002, and to file such list with the auditor of the County of San Diego on or before August 10, 2001, or such later date on or before August 21, 2001, with the prior written consent of such auditor. The amount of the Special Tax to be levied on each such parcel shall be based upon the budget for each such community facilities district as previously approved by this City Council and shaI1 not exceed the maximum Special Tax as set forth in Exhibit A, hereto applicable to the community facilities district in which such parcel being taxed is located. Presented by ~!/~ Jo P. LIPPitt' Pç! lic Works Director Approved as to form by ~4-" Jo . Kaheny , . Attorney ~ PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista, California, this 7th day of August, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas and Horton NAYS: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ATTEST: -~dt1, ~~ ~ 4">. ) Susan Bigelow, City Cler Jizw~Jkt-Zy¡ Shirley Hort , Mayor STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) CITY OF CHULA VISTA) I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2001-249 was dilly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 7th day of August, 2001. Executed this 7111 day of August, 2001. --')J L 1.u...-"3'g;:; ð ~ Susan Bigelow, City Clerk -,,~~,_. - B-1 ;;- THIS PAGE BLANK 3-/3 EXI41BIT A FY 01-02.MAXIlVlU~ RATES FOR CFDS CFI) 97-10tay Ranch Open Space Maintenance Category FY2000-01 FY2001-02 Maximum Maximum Area A 50.0897/SF $0.0958/SF Residential Area A Non- 51214.23/A $1296.79/A Residential AreaA Vacant $1373.57/A $1466.97/A Area B 50.2100/SF $0.2243/SF Residential Area B Non- 52696.15/A $2879.49/A Residential Area B Vacant 53048.84/A 53256.16/A CFD 97-20tay, Ranch Preserve Categor3.' FY 2000-01 FY 200~-02 Maximum Maximum Area A: 50.0135/SF $0.0144/SF Residential Non- 5224.84/Acre $232.93/Acre Residential Final Map $224.87/Acre $232.93/Acre Vacant $140.76/Acre $150.33/Acre ~Area B: $54.40/Acre $58.10/Acre Vacant CFD 97-30tay Ranch McMilliu Bond Issue Categ°r3-' Maximum Residential $0-39~SF ~Commercial $4000/Acre Community Purpose $1000/Acre ~ " Facility Undeveloped $7954/Acre ~ (Unrestricted) Undeveloped (Restricted) $7954/Acre Property Owner $7954/Acre Association Land CFD 98-10tay Project Interim Open Space Maintenance District Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 ~ __ Maximum Maximum Taxable $109.4l/Acre $1 ] 6.85/Acre Land CFI) 98-3 Open Space Maintenance District No. 35 ~ Sunbow II Categon., FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 Maximum Maxirnm~1 Residential $369.54/EDU $394.66/EDU Industrial $2880.41/Acre $3076.28)Acre Commercial $3224.65/Acre $3443.93/Anre- Undeveloped $2208.06/Acre $2208/Acre Undeveloped- N/A N/~---~ Extraordinary J Soeni~! T~,, CFD 97-3 0ray Ranch McMillln Bond Issue Categ°r3' Maximum Residential $0-39~SF Comm~m:.ial $4000/Acre Community Purpose $1000/Acre Facility Undeveloped $7954/Acre ~ (Unrestricted) Undeveloped ('Reslrieted) $7954/Acre Property Owner $7954/Acre Axsociation Land CFI) 98-10tay Project Interim Open Space Maintenance District Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 Maximum Maximum Taxable t $109.41/Acre $116.85/Acre Land CFI) 98-3 Open Space Maintenance District No. 35 - Sunbow II CategoD' FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 __ Maximum Maximum Residential $369.54/EDU $394.66/EDU Industrial $2gg0.41/Acre $3076.28/Acre Commercial $3224.65/Acre $3443.93/Aere Un____developed t $2208.06/Acre $2208/Acre Undeveloped_ N/A N/A ~Extraordinary CFI) 99,10tay Ranch SPA One Bond Issue Categ6ry Maximum ZONE A Village 1 Residential $0.28/SF Commercial $1600/Acre Community Purpose $400/Acre Facility ZONE B Village 5 Residential $400 + $.29/SF Commercial $3717/Acre Community Purpose $929/Acre Facility ZONE C Village 1 West Residential $400 + $.44/SF Commercial $4266/Acre Community Purpose $1066/Acre Facility COMBINED Undeveloped I $8864/Acre Property Owner $8864/Acre Association CFI) 99-20tay Ranch SPA One Village 1 West Category FY 2000-01 FY' 2001-02 Maximum Maximum Re___sidential $0.3749/SF $0.4004/SF Vacant $4623/Acre $4937/Acre CFI) 2000-1 Sunbow II Villages 5 through 11 Category Maximum Residential $.44/SF - Undeveloped $7851/Acre - Property Owner $7851/Acre Association CFD 99-20tay Ranch SPA One Village 1 West Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 Maximum Maximum Residential $0.3749/SF $0.4004/SF Vacant $4623/Acre $4937/Acre CFI) 2000-1 Sunbow II Villages 5 through 11 Category Maximum Residential $.44/SF Undevelope~d $7851/Acre Property Owner $7851/Acre Association R2000-267 EXHIBIT A CFD 2000-1 Sa~abow H Villages 5 through 11 Category Maximum FY2000-01 Estimated Revenue Actual Residential $.44/SF ~;.44/SF 0 Undeveloped $785 I/Acre. $3263.6 l/Acre $611,214 Property Owner $785 I/Acre SO/Acre 0 Association COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~ Meeting Date 8/7/01 ITEM TITLE: Resolufi on 2~Y-~'~st ab lishing the maximum authorized special tax rotes for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 for Community Facilities District NOs. 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3, 99-1, 99-2, and 2000-1, authorizing the levy of special taxes for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 at the maximum authorized special tax rotes applicable to each district and delegating to the City Manager the anthorityto establish the specific special tax rate spplicable to each parcel Resolutiorff-~/~'~/~kpproving a First Amendment to the contract with Special District Financing and Adm/nistrafion, LLC for Special District Administrative Services an,d authorizing the City Manager to execute the agree/nent_. SUBMITTED BY:' Dffector ofl~ublic Works ,~d ~ (4/5tbs Vote: Yes~X No_) One new Community Facilitie~ District (CFD) was established during Fiscal Year 2000-2001 in the Otay Ranch and Sunbow developments, in addition to the eight CFDs established during Fiscal Years 1998-2000. Special taxes must be levied during Fiscal Year 2001-2002 in seven of these districts in order to pay for the maintenance of open space and preserve areas in CFDs 97-I, 97-2, 99-2 and 98-3; and to begin repaying bondholders in CFDs 97-3, 99-1 and 2000-1. Due to the cost associated with this new district added to scope of services required to be provided by SDFA and the work associated with processing the large number ofbuydowns in CFDs 97-3 and 99-1, an increase in the contract mount with SDFA is required. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1. Authorize the levy of special taxes f~r Fiscal Year 2001-2002 within CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, '~ 98-3, 99-1, 99-2 and 2000-1 at the maximum authorized special tax rates applicable to each district and delegate to the City Manager the a_uthority to establish the specific special tax rate applicable to each parcel so long as such tax rate does not exceed the applicable maximum special tax rate authorized to be levied by the City Council. 2. Approve an amendment to the contract with SDFA to increase the maximum contract amount to $90,000 for these districts and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. ENVIRONMENTAL: ~ ~ff~ -' Page 2, Item ~ Meeting Date 8/7/0i The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the item before the City Council and · has determined that the levy of special taxes and the amendment to the contract with Special District Financing and Administration to increase the maximum three-year contract amount is not apmject as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15378, and therefore is not subject to CEQA. DISCUSSION: Background During Fiscal Years 1998-99 and 1999-2000, the following Community Facilities Districts were formed in the Otay Ranch and Sunbow II areas. 1. CFD 97-1: Open Space Maintenance District (Otay Ranch - SPA One, Villages 1 & 5) 2. CFD 97-2: Preserve Maintenance District (Otay Ranch) 3. CFD 97-3: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One) 4. CFD 98-1: Interim Open Space Maintenance District (Otay Project, LLC-OVP, Villages 1 West, 2, 2 West, 6, 7 & Planning Area 12) 5. CFD 98-2: Interim Open Space Maintenance District (McMillin - D.A. America, Otay- SPA Two, Villages 6& 7) 6. CFD 98-3: Open Space Maintenance District No. 35 (Sunbow I1) i 7. CFD 99-1: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (Otay Ranch- SPA One, Portions of Village 1, 5 and 1 West) 8. CFD 2000-1: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (Sunbow 11 Villages 5 -10) On August 1, 2000 Council adopted Resolution No. 2000-265, which established the maximum and actual special tax rates for Fiscal Year 2000~01 for CFDs 97-I, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3 and 99-1. On the same date, Council also adopted Resolution No. 2000-267, which established the annual special tax for CFD 2000-1. The exact rate for undeveloped properties for this district was not known at the time of the Council meeting because the bonds had not yet been priced. Resolution No. 2000-267 allowed for minor adjustment to the rate based on actual bond pricing (Attachment A). The special tax rate applicable to undeveloped property ~ this district was subsequently adjusted from $3263.61 per acre to $3273.90 per acre. ~ On August 11, 000, the C~ty s admlmstrator of the CommumtyFac~ht~es Districts was notified by the County that one of the parcels within CFD 99-1 had been acquired by the Chula Vista _Elementary School District and was therefore exempt fi.om the special tax levy. This would have meant a loss in revenue of approximately $30,000 unless the rates in CFD 99-1 were revised. Since any changes needed to be done immediately in order to accommodate the County's schedule, City staff and the administrator, upon consultation with the City's bond counsel, adjusted the rates of the City's special tax to recover the loss in revenue fi.om the undeveloped properties. On September 26, 2000 Council adopted Resolution No. 2000-327, which ratified the revised rates for CFD 99-1 (Attachment B). -' Page 2, Item - Meeting Date 8/7/01 The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the item before the City Council and · has determined that the levy of special taxes and the amendment to the contract with Special District Financing and Admlnistration to increase the maximum three-year contract amount is not aproject as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15378, and therefore is not subject to CEQA. DISCUSSION: Back~round During Fiscal Years 1998-99 and 1999-2000, the following Community Facilities Districts were formed in the Otay Ranch and Sunbow 1I areas. 1. CFD 97-1: Open Space Maintenance District (Otay Ranch - SPA One, Villages 1 & 5) 2. CFD 97-2: Preserve Maintenance District (Otay Ranch) 3. CFD 97-3: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One) 4. CFD 98-1: Interim Open Space Maintenance District (Otay Project, LLC-OVP, Villages I West, 2, 2 West, 6, 7 & Planning Area 12) 5. CFD 98-2: Interim open Space Maintenance Dis .,~ict (McMillin - D.A. America, Otay - SPA Two, Villages 6& 7) · 6. CFD 98-3: open Space Maintenance District No. 35 (Sunbow 11) (i 7. CFD 99-1: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (OtayRanch- SPA One, Portions of Village 1, 5 and 1 West) 8. CFD 2000-1: Bond Issue for Acquisition of Public Facilities (Sunbow II Villages 5 -I0) On August 1, 2000 Council adopted Resolution No. 2000-265, which established the maximum and actual special tax rates for Fiscal Year 2000-01 for CFDs 97-I, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3 and 99-1. On the same date, Council also adopted Resolution No. ~000-267, which established the annual special tax for CFI) 2000-I. The exact rate for undevel~)ped properties for this district was not known at the time of the Council meeting because the bonds had not yet been priced. Resolution No. 2000-267 allowed for minor adjnstment to the rate based on actual bond pricing (Attachment A). The special tax rate applicable to undeveloped property .in this district was subsequently adjusted from $3263.61 per acre to $3273.90 per acre. On August 11, 2000, the City's administrator of the Community Facilities Districts was notified by the County that one of the parcels within CFD 9'9-I had been acquired by the Chula Vista _Elementary School District and was therefore exempt-from the special tax levy. This would have meant a loss in revenue of approximately $30,000 unless the rates in CFD 99-1 were revised. Since any changes needed to be done immediately in order to accommodate the County's schedule, City staffand the administrator, upon consultation with the City's bond counsel, adjusted the rates of the City's special tax to recover the loss in revenue from the undeveloped properties. On September 26, 2000 Council adopted Resolution No. 2000-327, which ratified the revised rates for CFD 99-1 (Attachment B). Page 3, Item ~ Meeting Date 8/7/01 One new Community Facilities District was formed during Fiscal Year 2000/2001. CFD 99-2 covers .Otay Ranch Village One West and will fund the maintenance of public open space and landscaping tmprovements. These improvements will include medians, parkways and walls along Telegraph Canyon Road, Olympic Parkway, Paseo Ranchero and East Palomar Street. Levyofthe Special Tax was authorized through adoption of Ordinance No. 2820 on September 12, 2000 (Attachment C). The budget for Fiscal Year 2001-02 for this district is $54,011.00. Existing Districts The City has three existing CFDs for which bonds have been issued: 97-3, 99-1 and 2000-I. CFD 97-3 finances improvements in Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One, such as portions of La Media Road, East Palomar Street. Administration costs for Fiscal Year 2001-02 for CFD 97-3 are projected to be $75,000 (as given in the bond indenture) and scheduled debt service on the bonds is $854,140. CFD 99-1 finances improvements in a portion ofOtay Rach Village 1, Village 5 and Village 1 West. The main public facilities included are Olympic Parkway Phases 1 and 2, Pasco Ranchero Phase 2, and East Palomar Street. For CFD 99-I, administrative costs of $75,000 (as given in the bond indenture) and scheduled debt service on the Bonds of $1,985,473.76 are anticipated during Fiscal Year 2001- 02. The third district, CFD 2000-1, relates to the financing of various public facilities serving the Sunbow 13[ development such as Telegraph Canyon Road, Medical Center Road and East Palomar Street. For CFD 2000-1, administration costs for Fiscal Year 2001-02 are projected to be $50,000 (as given in the bond indenture) and scheduled debt service on the bonds is $550,740. Note that Parcel No. 641-200-21, which is located within CFDs 2000-1 and 98-3, is proposed to be acquired by the school district. However, since the parcel has not yet changed ownership, it must be taxed as an undeveloped parcel during Fiscal Year 2001-02. Community Facilities Districts 97-1, 98-1 and 98-2 all finance the maintenance of open space within the Otay Ranch development. CFD 97-1, which finances open space maintenance for Otay Ranch SPA One Villages One and Five, is broken down into two Special Tax Areas. Area A covers the entire district and includes maintenance of parkways; medians and regional trails along Telegraph Canyon Road, Otay Lakes Road, Paseo RanCher°, La Media Road and Olympic Parkway; Telegraph and Poggi Canyon detention basins and channels; and pedestrian bridges. Area B, which excludes the McMill~n development, includes maintenance of connector trails, Slopes and perimeter walls or fences along major streets in the district. A budget has been prepared for this District which totals $664,402 for Area A and $452,611 for Area B for Fiscal Year 2001-02. Community Facilities Districts 98-1 and 98-2 were set up as interim districts because the areas of Otay Ranch included in these districts were not developed and the density of development was not yet known at the time that these districts were established. These districts were formed to finance the portion of the cost of the maintenance of portions of the parkways and medians along Telegraph Canyon Road, Paseo Ranchero and Olympic Parkway and Telegraph and Poggi Canyon detention basins and channels allocable to the properties within these districts. The new CFD 99-2 has taken over the financing of that portion of costs of maintenance allocable to the property within CFD 98- I Page 4, Item Meeting Date 8/7/01 that is north of Olympic Parkway. All of the open space areas with. ha CFD 98-1 that are scheduled for maintenance during Fiscal Year 2001-02 are included in CFD 99-2. Therefore, special taxes will not be levied within CFD 98-1 during Fiscal Year 2001-02. The existing budget reserve for CFD 98- 1 will be divided between CFDs based on parcel acreage/payment during Fiscal Year 2000-01. None of the improvements in CFD 98-2 are expected to be turned over to the City for at least two years, so special taxes will not be levied within this district £or Fiscal Year 2001-02. Community Facilities Dis~ct 98-3 finances open space maintenance in the Sunbow II development. This includes maintenance of street medians, parkways, slopes, and drainage channels and basins, and biological monitoring of native and revegetated open space. A total budget of $781,165.00 is projected for Fiscal Year 2001-02 for this district. Several Planning Areas within CFD 98-3 were modified during the past fiscal year. The size of Planning Areas 10A and 10 both changed. This particularly affected Planning Area 10A, which was reduced from 7.83 Acres to 10.9 Acres. Additionally, Planning Areas 20, 21 and 22 were approved by the same final map and could be considered to be one consolidated planning area. In accordance with the Rate and Method for CFD 98-3 and subsequent interpretations adopted by the City Council, the City Engineer shall reapportion the projected developments within the modified SPA Planning Areas. These revisions are shown on the Modified Exhibit C (Attachment D). These revisions do not result in a decrease in revenue fi.om either Phase lC or Phase 2A. Community Facilities District 97-2 finances maintenance and biological monitoring of the preserve created in the Otay Ranch area. It is anticipated that the County of San Diego will take the lead in maintaining this area in cooperation with the City. Although no maintenance or monitoring costs were incurred during Fiscal Years 1999-2000 and 2000-01, it is anticipated that this work will commence during Fiscal Year 2001-02. Based on the Community Facilities District Report and the spreadsheet estimating the first year's monitoring ~osts, a maintenance budget of $35,137 and a monitoring budget of$114,635 has been included for Fiscal Year 2001-02. The large monitoring budget is due to the several biological surveys that need to be conducted, particularly during the initial year. The Community Facilities District Repo/ts for CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 98-1 and 98-3 require the establishment ora reserve in the funds established for each district of up to 100 percent of the total budget in order to provide revenue for the first half of the fiscal year before any income is received and to provide for cost overruns and delinquencies: A 50 percent reserve has been provided by including an additional 50 percent of the Fiscal Year 2/)01-02 budget. Additionally, in CFD 97-2 a buffer of $19,959 has been included to eliminate Special Tax swings. This should provide sufficient funding through December 31, 2002. Additional reserves may be provided depending on the schedule for accepting landscaping improvements. Fiscal Year 2001-02 Rates According to the Community Facilities District Reports for CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 98-1 and 98-3, the maximum Special Tax Rates for each fiscal year atter 1998-99 shall be increased or decreased by the Page 4, Item Meeting Date 8/7/01 that is north of Olympic Parkway. All of the open space areas within CFD 98-1 that are scheduled for maintenance during Fiscal Year 2001-02 are included in CFI) 99-2. Therefore, special taxes will not be levied within CFD 98-1 dining Fiscal Year 2001-02. The existing budget reserve for CFD 98- 1 will be divided between CFDs based on parcel acreage/payment dining Fiscal Year 2000-01. None of the improvements in CFD 98-2 are expected to be turned over to the City for at least two years, so special taxes will not be levied within this district for Fiscal Year 2001-02. Community Facilities District 98-3 finances open space maintenance in the Stmbow 1I development. This includes maintenance of street medians, parkways, slopes, and drainage channels and basins, and biological monitoring of native and revegetated open space. A total budget of $781,165.00 is projected for Fiscal Year 2001-02 for this district. Several Planning Areas within CFD 98-3 were modified during the past fiscal year. The size of Planning Areas I 0A and 10 both changed. This particularly affected Planning Area 10A, which was reduced from 7.83 Acres to 10.9 Acres. Additionally, Planning Areas 20, 21 and22 were approved by the same final map and could be considered to be one consolidated planning area~ In accordance with the Rate and Method for CFD 98-3 and subsequent interpretations adopted by the City Council, the City Engineer shall reapportion the projected developments within the modified SPA Planning Areas. These revisions are shown on the Modified Exln~oit C (Attachment D). These revisions do not result in a decrease in revenue from either Phase IC or Phase 2A. Community Facilities District 97-2 finances maintenance and biological monitoring of the preserve created in the Otay Ranch area. It is anticipated that the County of San Diego will take the lead in maintaining this area in cooperation with the City. Although no maintenance or monitoring costs were incurred during Fiscal Years 1999-2000 and 2000-01, it is anticipated that this work will commence during Fiscal Year 2001-02. Based on the Community Facilities District Report and the spreadsheet estimating the first year's monitoring c'osts, a maintenance budget of $35,137 and a monitoring budget orS114,635 has been included for Fiscal Year 2001-02, The large monitoring budget is due to the several biological surveys that need to be conducted,.particularly during the initial year. The Community Facilities District Reports for CFDs 97-1, 97-2~ 98-1 and 98-3 require the establishment ora reserve in the funds established for each district of up to 100 percent of the total budget in order to provide revenue for the first half of the fiscal year before any income is received and to provide for cost overruns and delinquencies: A 50 percent reserve has been provided by _including an additional 50 percent of the Fiscal Year 21)01'02 budget. Additionally, in CFD 97-2 a buffer ors 19,959 has been included.to eliminate Special Tax swings. This should provide sufficient funding through December 3 I, 2002. Additional ~eserves may be provided depending on the schedule for accepting landscaping improvements. Fiscal Year 2001-02 Rates According to the Community Facilities District Reports for CFDs 97-1, 97-2, 98-I and 98-3, the maximum Special Tax Rates for each fiscal year after 1998-99 shall be increased or decreased by the Page 5, Item Meeting Date 8F//01 lesser of the annual percentage change in the San Diego Metropolitan Area All Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI) or the annual percentage change in the estimated California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income as contained in the Governor's budget published in January. The CPI increase between the second half of 2000 and the second half of 2001 was 6.8%. The change in the estimated California fourth quarter personal income was 6.98%. Therefore, staff used the CPI increase, which was the lesser of the two figures. The maximum authorized and projected annual special tax rates for all Cornm~mity Facilities Districts are given below. Square footage (SF) refers to building floor area, while acreage refers to the total lot size. The projected annual rates are estimated based on square footage information given on the building permits. Staffproposes that the City Manager be authorized to modify the annual special tax rates based on actual square footage and acreage so long as such annual special tax rates do not exceed the maximum authorized special tax. Since the rates have been rounded, actual revenue may be slightly different. CFD 97-10tay Ranch Open Space Maintenance Category FY2000-01 FY2001-02 FY2000-01 FY2001-02 Estimated Maximum Maximum Annual Projected Revenue Annual AreaA $0.0897/SF $0.0958/SF $0.0897/SF $.0958/SF $519,281 Residential Area A Non- $1214.23/A $1296.79/A $1214.23/A $1296.79/A $0 Residential Area A Vacant $1373.57/A $1466.97/A $487.78/A $ 460.56/A $139,130 AreaB $0.2100/SF $0.2243/SF $0.2100/SF $.2243/SF $366,811 Residential Area B Non- $2696.15/A $2879.49/A $2696.15/A $2696.15/A $0 Residential AreaB Vacant $3048.84/A $3256.16/A $213.57/A $0/A $0 CFD 97-20tay Ranch Preserve Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2000-01 FY01-02 Estimated Maximum Maximum Annual Projected Revenue Annual Area A: $0.0135/SF $0.0144/SF $0.0069/SF $0.0038/SF $21,255 Page 6, Item ~9 Meeting Date 8/7/01 CFI) 97-20tay Ranch Preserve Residential Non- $224.84/Acre $232.93/Acre N/A $61.37/ $0 Residential Acre Final Map $224.87/Acre $232.93/Acre $0 $0 $0 Vacant $140.76/Acre $150.33/Acre $0 $0 $0 Area B: $54.40/Acre $58.10/Acre $11.21/Acre $0 $0 Vacant CFD 97-30tay Ranch McMillin Bond Issue Category Maximum FY 2000-01 FY01-02 Estimated Annual Projected Revenue Annual Residential $0.392/SF $0.392/SF $0.3920/ $815,335 SF Commercial $4000/Acre N/A $4000/ 0 Acre Community Purpose $1000/Acre N/A $1000/ 0 Facility Acre Undeveloped $7954/Acre $5013.62/A $1968.75/ $64,279 (Unrestricted) Acre Undeveloped $7954/Aere $1986.39/A (Restricted) Property Owner $7954/Acre N/A SO/Acre 0 Association Land CFI) 98-1 tray Project Interim Open Space Maintenance District Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2000- FY01-02 Estimated Maximum Maximum 01 Annual Projected Revenue Annual Taxable Land $109.41/Acre $I 16.85/Acre $15.56/A $0 $0 Page 6, Item ~9 Meeting Date 8/7/01. CFI) 97-20tay Ranch Preserve Residential Non- $224.84/Acre $232.93/Acre N/A $61.37/ $0 Residential Acre Final Map $224.87/Acre $232.93/Acre $0 $0 $0 Vacant $140.76/Acre $150.33/Acre $0 $0 $0 .Area B: $54.40/Acre $58.10/Acre $11.21/Acre $0 $0 Vacant CFI) 97-30tay Ranch McMillin Bond Issue Category Maximum FY 2000-01 FY01-02 Estimated Annual Projected Revenue Annual Residential $0.392/SF $0.392/SF $0.3920/ $815,335 SF Commercial $4000/Acre N/A $4000/ 0 Acre Community Purpose $1000/Acre N/A $1000/ 0 Facility Acre Undeveloped $7954/Acre $5013.62/A $1968.75/ $64,279 (Unrestricted) Acre Undeveloped $7954/Acre $1986.39/A (Restricted) Property Owner $7954/Acre N/A SO/Acre 0 Association Land CFD 98-10tay Project Interim Open Space Maintenance District Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2000- FY01-02 Estimated Maximum Maximum 01 Annual Projected Revenue Annual Taxable Land $109.41/Acre $116.85/Acre $15.56/A $0 $0 Page 7, Item ' ~q Meeting Date 8/7/01 ( CFD 98-3 Open Space Maintenance District No. 35 - Sunbow H Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY 2000- FY01-02 Estimated Maximum Maximum 01 Annual Projected Revenue Annual Residential $369.54/EDU $394.66/EDU $369.54 $394.66 $691,781.14 Industrial $2880.41/Acre $3076.28/Acrc N/A N/A 0 Commercial $3224.65/Acre $3443.93/Acre N/A $3443.93/ $42,670.32 Acre Undeveloped $2208.06/Acre $2208/Acrc ' $0/ $ 899.18/ $157,887.58 Acre Acre Undeveloped- N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 Extraordinary Acre Special Tax Note that a single family dwelling is equivalent to one EDU. Costs are spread to multiple family units on the basis of 0.8 EDUs per unit for street medians and parkways and 1.0 EDUs per unit for all other facilities in the CFD. CFI) 99-10tay Ranch SPA One Bond Issue Category Maximum FY2000-01 FY 2001-02 Estimated Annual Projected Revenue Annual ZONE A Village 1 Residential $0.28/SF $0.28/SF $0.28/SF $517,540 Commercial $1600/Acre $1600/Acre N/A $0 Community Purpose $400/Acrc $400/Acre N/A Facility $0 ZONE B Village 5 Residential $400 + $.29/SF $400 + $0.29/SF $400 + $0.29/SF $225,732 Commercial $3717/Acre $3717/Acre N/A $0 Page 8, Item ~ Meeting Date,,8/7/01 CFI) 99-10tay Ranch SPA One Bond Issue Community Purpose $929/Acre $929/Acre N/A Facility $0 ZONE C Village 1West Residential $400 + $.44/SF $400 + $0.44/SF $400 + $0.44/SF $77,110 commercial $4266/Acre $4266/Acre N/A $0 Community Purpose $1066/Acre $1066/Acre N/A Facility $0 COMBINED Undeveloped $8864/Acrc $2965.93/Acre $2286.96 $1,102,255 Property Owner $8864/Acrc $2965.93/Acre $0 Association $0 The square footage of residential floor area is used to determine the charge for all developed residential properties. For all other categories, the parcel gross acreage is used. CFD 99-20tay Ranch SPA One Village 1 West Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY2001-02 Estimated Maximum Maximum Projected Revenue Annual Residential $0.3749/SF $0.4004/SF $0.4004/SF $54,152.74 Vacant $4623/Acre $4937/Acre $99.13/A $21,277.44 The above rates assume that the Future Annexation Areas (Parcels 1 and 2) have been annexed into CFD 99-2. / Page 8, Item ¢ ._ Meeting Date 8/7/01 CFI) 99-10tay Ranch SPA One Bond Issue Commullity Purpose $929/Acre $929/Acre N/A Facility $0 ZONE C Village lWest Residential $400 + $.44/SF $400 + $0.44/SF $400 + $0.44/SF $77,110 Commercial $4266/Acre $4266/Acre N/A $0 Community Purpose $1066/Acre $1066/Acre N/A Facility $0 C01VlBINED Undeveloped $8864/Acre $2965.93/Acre $2286.96 $1,102,255 -- Property Owner $8864/Acre $2965.93/Acre $0 ~ Association $0 The square footage of residential floor area is used to determine the charge for all developed residential properties. For all other categories, the parcel gross acreage is used. CFD 99-2 Ota), Ranch SPA One Village 1 West Category FY 2000-01 FY 2001-02 FY2001-02 Estimated Maximum Maximum Projected Revenue Annual Residential $0.3749/SF $0.4004/SF $0.4004/SF $54,152.74 Vacant' $4623/Acre $4937/A~re $99.13/A $21,277.44 The above rates assume that the Future Annexation Areas (Parcels 1 and 2) have been annexed into CFD 99-2. Page 9, Item Meeting Date. 8/7/01 CFI) 2000-1 Sunbow H Villages 5 through 11 Category Maximum FY2000-01 FY 2001-02 Estimated Revenue Annual Projected Annual Residential $.44/SF $.44/SF $0.44/SF $111,272 Undeveloped $7851/Acre $3273.90/Acre $4832.17/A $429,902 Property Ov~?r $7851/Acre $0/Acre 0 Association $0 The special taxes which will be applicable to typical single family dwelling units are shown in Attachment E for Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5, Otay Ranch McMillin and Sunbow 1I. Special taxes and assessments other than the seven Community Facilities Districts discussed herein are not included. Maps are provided for all districts in Attachment F. The final Special Tax Levy Reports will include a list of all parcel numbers and charges applicable to each parcel. Since the valid parcel numbers cannot be known for certain until after the assessment tal~e has been submitted to the County for inclusion on the County tax roll, the final reports will be prepared in August using the rates established in the draft reports. Contract Amendment The City has an existing one-year contract, with a two-year extension, with Special District Financing and Administration (SDFA) to perform administrative services for the City's CFDs (Attachment G). The maximum three-year contract amount was set at $65,000, and there is a clause that allows the City to add additional CFDs to the contract as long as the maximum is not exceeded. However, the establishment of CFD 2000-1 in Fiscal Year 2000-01 was not anticipated when this estimate was prepared. The administrative cost for Fiscal Year 2000-01 was $4,379.50. Additionally, staff assumed a relatively low mount ~of buydowns based on past experience that indicates that few property owners would want to prepay their bonded indebtedness immediately after purchasing a new home. Although there were few buydown requests fi-om home buyers, the developers were required to prepay a portion of the bonds on several properties in order to meet the City's limitation on general taxes and bonded indebtedness (2% of the purchase rice er ear p p y ).The administrative cost for this work for CFD 97-3 was $9200 during calendar year 2000. In order to pay the additional administrative costs associated with CFD 2000-1 and the bond prepayments for Fiscal Years 2000-01 and 2001-02, staff therefore requests that the maximum Page 10, Item Meeting Date 8/7/01 contract amount with SDFA be increased by $25,000 for these two years to $90,000. These additional expenses will bc paid out of the budgets for the CFDs. Several other minor contract changes are also recommended. The date for completion of contract services will be changed to reflect the two-year contract extension. Staffhas also negotiated a lower variable rate for new CFDs, wkich will be added to the appropriate contract section. It is requested that the City Manager be authorized to execute an amendment to the agreement which reflects these changes (Attachment H). FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted expenditures total approximately $2,305,674 for all CFDs for Fiscal Year 2000-2001, excluding reserves. The scheduled debt servicb on bonds will be $854,140 for CFD 97-3, $1,985,473.76 for CFD 99-I, and $550,740 for CFD 2000-1. The projected revenues will be sufficient to cover this amount. The general fund will be reimbursed up to a maximum of $368,808 for City staff services performed during Fiscal Year 2000-2001. The additional $25,000 in administrative expenses has already been included in the budgets for the CFDs. Since these expenses will be paid through thc revenues of thc CFDs, there will be no impact on the City's general fund. Attachments: A. Resolution 2000-267 B. Resolution 2000-327 C. Ordinance 2820 authorizing the levy of Special Tax for CFD 99-2 D. Modified Exhibit C to CFD 98-3 E. Table on typical single family home charges F. Maps for all CFDs G. Original Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Special District Financing and Administration (SDFA) H. First Amendment to Agreement between City and SDFA J:~NGINEERXAGENDA~CFDLEVY02a. EMC.DOC FILE 0725-10-CFD00 Page 10, Item ~ Meeting Date 8/7/01 contract amount with SDFA be increased by $25,000 for these two years to $90,000. These additional expenses will be paid out of the budgets for the CFDs. Several other minor contract changes are also recommended. The date for completion of contract services will be changed to reflect the two-year contract extension. Staffhas also negotiated a lower variable rate for new CFDs, which will be added to the appropriate contract section. It is requested that the City Manager be authorized to execute an amendment to the agreement which reflects these changes (Attachment H). FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted expenditures total approximately $2,305,674 for all CFDs for Fiscal Year 2000-2001, excluding reserves. The scheduled debt servicb on bonds will be $854,140 for CFD 97-3, $1,985,473.76 for CFD 99-1, and $550,740 for CFD 2000-1. The projected revenues will be sufficient to cover this amount. The general fund will be reimbursed up to a maximum of $368,808 for City staff services performed during Fiscal Year 2000-2001. The additional $25,000 in administrative expenses has already been included in the budgets for the CFDs. Since these expenses will be paid through the revenues of the CFDs, there will be no impact on the City's general fund. Attachments: A. Resolution 2000-267 B. Resolution 2000-327 C. Ordinance 2820 authorizing the levy of Special Tax for CFD 99-2 D. Modified Exhibit C to CFD 98-3 E. Table on typical single family home charges F. Maps for all CFDs G. Original Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Special District Financing and Administration (SDFA) ' ' ~ H. First ~Amendment to Agreement between City and SDFA J :~GINEER'~AGENDA\CFDDEVYO2a. EMC.DOC FIlE 0725-10-CFD00 RESOLUTION NO. 2001-415 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FORMING AND ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-01 (SAN MIGUEL RANCH), DESIGNATING IMPROVEMENT AREAS TItEREIN AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN EACH SUCH IMPROVEMENT AREA TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS THEREOF WHEREAS, the City Council has previously declared its intention to form a community facilities district and to designate improvement areas (each, an "Improvement Area") therein and ordered the preparation cfa Special Tax Report relating to the initiation of proceedings to create such community facilities district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982," being Chapter 2.5, Part I, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act") and the City of Chula Vista Community Facilities District Ordinance enacted pursuant to the powers reserved by the City of Chula Vista under Sections 3, 5 and 7 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California (the "Ordinance") (the Act and the Ordinance may be referred to collectively as the "Community Facilities District Law"). This community facilities district shall hereinafter be referred to as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-01 (SAN MIGUEL RANCH) (the "District"); and WI-IEREAS, notice of a public hearing relating to the establishment of the District, the extent of the District, the designation of the Improvement Areas within the District, the financing of certain types of public facilities and all other related matters has been given, and a Community Facilities District Repo~t, as ordered by ttds City Council, has been presented to this City Council and has been made a part of the record of the heating to establish such District; and WHEREAS, all communications relating to the establishment of the District, the designation of the Improvement Areas within the District, the financing of certain types of public facilities and the proposed rate and method of apportionment of special tax have been presented, and it has further been determined that a majority protest as defined by law has not been received ' against these proceedings; and WHEREAS, inasmuch as there have been less than twelve (12) registered voters residing within the territory of each Improvement Area of the District for at least the preceding ninety (90) days, the authorization to levy special taxes within each Improvement Area of the District shall be submitted to the landowners of each such Improvement Area, such landowners being the qualified electors as authorized by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. RECITALS. The above recitals are all tree and correct. SECTION 2. DETE.R/VlINATIONS. It is hereby determined by this City Council that: A. All prior proceedings pertaining to the formation of the District and designation of the Improvement Areas were valid and taken in conformity with the requirements of thc law, and specifically the provisions of the Community Facilities District Law, and that this Resolution 2001-415 - Page 2 finding and determination is made pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 53325. l. B. The written protests received, if any, do not represent a majority protest as defined by the applicable provisions of the Community Facilities District Law and, therefore, the special tax proposed to be levied within each Improvement Area of the District has not been precluded by majority pretest pursuant to Section 53324 of the Government Code of the State of California. C_ The District as proposed conforms with the City of Chala Vista Statement of Goals and Policies Regarding the Establishment of Community Facilities Districts (the "Goals and Policies"), as mended; provided, however, the City Council has granted an exception to the requirements of such Goals and Policies as they pertain to certain of the facilities authorized to be financed by the District. D. Less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the territory of each Improvement Area within the District for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the close of the public hearing, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of each of the Improvement Areas within the District shall be the landowners of such Improvement Area as such term is defined in Government Code Secton 53317(t) and each such landowner who is the owner of record as of the close of the public hearing, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land that she or he owns within such Improvement Area. E. The time limit specified by the Community Facilities District Law for conducting an election to submit the lew of the special taxes to the qualified electors of each Improvement Area of the District and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of each such Improvement Area. F. The City Clerk, acting as the election official, has consented to conducting any required election on a date which is less than 125 days following the adoption of any resolution forming and establisl~mg the District. SECTION 3. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT REPORT. The Community Facilities District Report for the District (the "Report"), as now submitted by McGill Martin Self, Inc., Special Tax Consultant, shall stand as the report as reqff~red pursuant to Government Code Section 53321.5 for all future proceedings and all terms and contents are approved as set forth therein. SECTION 4. NAME OF DISTRICT. The City Council does hereby establish and declare the formation of the District known and designated as "COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-01 (SAN MIGUEL RANCH)." SECTION 5. BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT AND IMPROVEMENT AREAS. The boundaries of the District and each of the Improvement Areas are generally described as follows: Resolution 2001415 Page 3 All property within the boundaries of COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-01 (SAN MIGUEL RANCH), as shown on a boundary map as previously approved by this legislative body, such map designated by the name of this District, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. The boundary map of the proposed District and the Improvement Areas therein has been filed pursuant to Sections 3111 and 3113 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of San Diego, at Page 35 of Book 43 of the Book of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts, Recorder Document Number 2001-0727839, for such County. SECTION 6. DESIGNATION OF IIVlPROVEMENT AREAS. For purposes of financing of, or contributing to the financing of the types of facilities described in Section 7 below, this City Council, acting pursuant to Government Code Section 53350, hereby designates portions of the District as the following Improvement Areas as shown on the Boundary Map of the District: liVIPROVEMENT AREA A IMPROVEMENT AREA B SECTION T. DESCRIPTION OF TYPES OF FACILITIES AUTHORIZED TO BE FINANCED. A general description of the types of public facilities which this legislative body is authorized by law to construct, own or operation, which are the types of facilities proposed to be financed under these proceedings, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The types of facilities as above-described are facilities which the City Council is authorized by law to euntribute revenue to or to construct, own or operate. It is hereby further determined that the proposed types of facilities are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of development occurring within the District, and the costs and expenses charged to this District represent the fair share costs of the facilities attributable to this District and the Improvement Areas therein. For a full and complete description of such types of facilities, reference is made to the Report, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. In addition to financing the above described types of facilities, the financing of those incidental expenses described in the Report are also approved and authorized. SECTION 8. SPECIAL TAX. Except where funds are othenvise available a special tax, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in each of the Improvement Areas within the proposed District, is hereby authorized, subject to voter approval, to be levied within the boundaries of each such Improvement Area~ For particulars as to the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax proposed to be levied within each Improvement Area, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit "B" (the "Special Tax Formulas"), which sets forth in sufficient detail the method of apportionment of the special tax applicable to each Improvement Area to allow each landowner or resident within such Improvement Area to estimate the maximum amount that such person will have to pay. Such special tax shall be utilized to pay directly for the previously described types of facilities, to pay debt service on bonds issued by the District for each Improvement Area to assist in fmaneing Resolution 2001-415 Page 4 such types of facilities, to replenish any reserve fund established for such bonds, and to pay the costs of administering the bonds, the District and each respective Improvement Area. The special taxes herein authorized, to the extent possible, shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any ease of delinquency as epplieable for ad valorem taxes; provided, however, the District may utilize a direct billing procedure for any special taxes that eaunot be collected on the County tax roll or may, by resolution, elect to collect the special taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations. Under no circumstances will the special tax to be levied against any parcel within an Improvement Area used for private residential purposes be increased as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner of any other parcel or parcels within such Improvement Area by more than 10 percent. This legislative body further authorizes that special taxes may be prepaid and satisfied by payment of the prepayment amount calculated pursuant to the Special Tax Formulas. Upon recordation of a Notice of Special Tax Lien pursuant to Section 3114.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California against the property within each Improvement Area, a continuing lien to secure each levy of the special tax shall attach to all non- exempt real property in such Improvement Area and this lien shall enntinue in force and effect until the special tax obligation is prepaid and permanently satisfied and the lien canceled in accordance with law or until collection of the tax by the legislative body ceases. SECTION g. SPECIAL TAX ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES. Pursuant to and in compliance with the provisions of Government Code Section 50075.1, this City Council hereby establishes the following accountability measures pertaining to the levy by the District of the special taxes described in Section 8 above: A. Each such special tax shall be levied for the specific purposes set forth in Section 8. above. B. The proceeds of the levy of each such special tax shall be applied only to the specific applicable purposes set forth in Section 8. above. C. The District shall establish a separate account into which the proceeds of each such special tax shall be deposited. D. The City Manager or his or her designee, acting for and on behalf of the District, shall annually file a report with the City Council as required pursuant to Government Code Section 50075.3. SECTION 10. PREPARATION OF ANNUAL TAX ROLL. The name, address and telephone number of the office, department or bureau which will be responsible for preparing annually a current toll of special tax levy obligations by Assessor's parcel number and which shall be responsible for estimating future special tax levies pursuant to Section 53340.1 of the Government Code of the State of California, are as follows: Resolution 2001-415 Page 5 Engineering Department City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 (619) 691-5021 SECTION 11. SUBSTITUTION FACILITIES. The description of the types of public facilities, as set forth above, is general in its nature. The final nature and location of such facilities will be determined with the City's approval and upon the preparation of final plans and specifications therefor. Such final plans may show substitutes in lieu of, or modification to, the above described types of facilities and any such substitution shall not be a change or modification in the proceedings as long as the facilities provide a service substantially similar to that as set forth in this Resolution and has been approved by the City. SECTION 12. APPEALS AND INTERPRETATION PROCEDURE. Any landowner or resident who feels that the amount or formula of the special tax is in error may file a notice with the District appealing the levy of the special tax. An appeals panel of 3 members, as appointed by the District, will then meet and promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the applicant. If the findings of the appeals panel verify that the special tax should be modified or changed, a recommendation at that time will be made to the City Council, acting in its capacity as the legislative body of the District, and, as appropriate, the special tax levy shall be corrected, and if applicable in any ease, a refund shall be granted. Interpretations may be made by the City Council, acting in its capacity as the legislative body of the District, by Resolution for purposes of clarifying any vagueness or ambiguity as it relates to any category, zone, rate or definition contained in the applicable Special Tax Formula. SECTION 13. ELECTION. This City Council herewith submits the levy of the special tax within each Improvement Area to the qualified electors of each such Improvement Area, such electors being the landowners in each such Improvement Area, with each landowner having one (1) voter for each acre or portion thereof of land which he or she owns within such Improvement Area. Presented by Approved as to form by Jo pi J)Y~a/l*'d. K ah en y Public Works Director ~ Attorney Resolution 2001-415 Page 6 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, this 4th day of December, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas and Horton NAYS: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None Shirley; Horton, ~5~Iayor ATTEST: Susan Bigelow, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2001-415 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 4th day of December, 2001. Executed this 4th day of December, 2001. Susan Bigelow, City Clerk~ MEMORANDUM Janua 7,200 ~ ~ '- ''7' ' ~ [~' ~rFile#CFD2000-1 TO: r SUB~g on CFD 2000-1 - On December 7, 2001 the Ci~ received a copy of a le~er ~om S~uel Hol~, Vice-President of Ayers L~d Comply (a~ache~:~ M~ Hol~ stated that he felt Assessor's Parcel No. (~N) 641-200-21-00, a c~e~ly ~developed site proposed for ~ element~ school~ should not have been ch~ged fo~C~~ Facilities Dis~ct (CFD) 2000-1 because designmed as Village 11 of S~bow~ II in tentative maps approved by the City. CFD 2000-1 was intended to spread the costs of in~ast~ct~e const~ction in the Sunbow II development only to Villages 5 t~ough 10. Ci~ staff discussed ~is issue with the Ci~'s CFD a~i~s~ative consulter, Barbara Hale- C~er of SDFA. This p~cel w~ ch~ged for Fiscal Ye~ 2001-02 because it was within the dist~ct boodles as show~ on the recorded bo~d~ map for CFD 2000-1. SDFA decided that the p~cel s~l~be classified as undeveloped ~d billed it accordingly. Once the prope~ could be classi~ed as develope~ or the o~ership had transfe~ed to school ~is~ct, it could cle~ly be classified as exempt as public prope~ ~d would not ch~ged. However, this had not yet t~en place. Ms. Hale-Ca,er ~d Ci~ staff held a conference call on December 10, 2001 with Wa~en Diven, the City's consulting attorney on Special Dist~cts. In that conversation and subsequent comm~ications, Mr. Diven stated that the p~e~ ~uld~o~ ~p cha~ed due to the l~guage in ~e Exemptions section of the Rate ~d Meted of Appo~io~ent for CFD 2~ which states, "No Special Tax shall be levied on: (i) the land area that lies outsi~e the Plying ~eas...' Therefore, the proposed school site should not have been taxed F~scal Ye~ 2001-02. This p~cel was o~ginally included witch dist~ct boodles because at that time it was p~ of a l~ge~p~cel (~N 641-060-07-00) which also ~nctuded Village 7. According to Mr. Divert, the school site bec~e non-t~able the fiscal ye~ after ~N 641- 200-21-00 was cremed. The Fiscal Ye~ 2001-02 rate for undeveloped prope~ w~ set at $5,027.55 per acre in order to meet the undeveloped prope~y requirement of $447,284.39. This ~ount is below maxim~ special t~ rate of $7~851,00 per acre for undeveloped prope~y. For Fiscal Year 2001-02, ~N 641-200-21-00 was t~ed $53,342.34. Since this ~oum is larger than the excess rescue fund balance, it wi~e~necess~ to increase the t~ on other undeveloped prope~ies to make up for the lost revenue. Resolution No. 2001-249, which adopted the m~imum rates for Fiscal Year 2001-02, delegated to the City M~ager the autho~ty to David D. Rowlands, J ' 2 Decemt)er 28, 2001 establish the specific tax rate applicable to each parcel so long as it is below the maximum special tax rate. It has been determined that the undeveloped tax will need to be increased by $680.76 to $5,708.31 per acre in order to recoup the lost revenue. Tiffs rate is still below the maximum of $7,851.00 per acre. As of July l, 2001, Centex Homes or Kaufinan and Broad owned all the remaining billable undeveloped properties. The City's consultant is working with the two builders to determine the best way to obtain the additional revenue from both the properties still owned by Centex and Kaufman and Broad and the properties that have been subsequently sold. Please sign tiffs document and return the original to the Engineering Division if you agree with amending the tax bill on APN 641-200-21-00 to delete the CFD 2000-1 tax and increasing the undeveloped land tax on the remaining parcels to $5,708.31. David D. Rowlands, Jr. [// City Manager Attachments J:\ENGINEER~ASMTDIST~CFD00- I refund.emc.doc Land Company December 6, *001 - VIA ~SS~R Ms. Eii~be~ Chopp CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fo~h Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 ~: APN 641-200-21 / CFD 2000-1 De~ Ms. Chopp: It h~ come to my a~ention ~at ~N 641-200-21-00, a ten-acre p~cel o~ed by ACI S~bow. LLC. h~ been included within ~e boodles of CFD 2000-1 in e~or.. This p~cel is also ~o~ ~ S~bow Village I l~l~ing Mea 18. The subject p~cel is a proposed element~ school site ~d w~ never intended to be within the bound~ies of CFD 2000-I. I have enclosed copies of pages from the Official Statement of CFD 2000-1 ~d the p~cel's c~ent prope~ t~ bill, for yom reference. It is cle~ from these pages that Village 11 is not wi~ the boodles of CFD 2000-1. We have been i~o~ed by H~ B~owes ~d Jo~ Ni~z at McGill M~in Self,at this p~cel appe~s to be ~sessed ~" , ' ' ~devetoped prope~ ~m ~e CFD. Since ~s is ~ e~or. I would like to he~ yo~ solution for its co~ection. I ~ prepped ~o pay the first i~lment of 2001 prope~ t~es, which ~e due by December 10, 2001. I do not intend to pay the e~oneous assessment for CFD 2000-1, w~ch is approximately $26,671.17 per insmllmem. Ple~e let me ~ow how we c~ solve this problem. Th~ you for yo~ a~ention to this. Sincerely, A~S L~D COMPANY, INC. AS 5~AGER FOR ACI SUNBOW, LLC S~uel M. HolD, Vice President Enclosures cc: H~ Bu~owes 750 B Steer, Sffite ~70 (6~) ~ FAX "Share of Annual Debt Service" means, for each Planning Area, the maximum annual debt service on the Bonds multiplied by that Planning Area's percentage of the total Special Tax revenue, as shown in Table 3 below. A Planning Area's Share of Annual Debt Service shall be adjusted to reflect any prepayments within that Planning Area. 1. Expected Development and Special Tax Revenues Table 3 below identifies the amount of development and Special Tax revenue that is currently expected from each Planning Area. Any Planning Area's information in Table 3 may be revised by the CFD Administrator prior to the issuance of Bonds without limitation. TABLE 3 Expected Development and Special Tax Revenue by Planning Area EXPECTED ANNUAL TOTAL SPECIAL PERCENT PLANNING EXPECTED NUMBER RESIDENTIAL TAX OF TOTAL AREAS PRODUCT TYPE OF UNITS FLOOR AREA REVENUE REVENUE Village 5 Residential Property t 144 units 403,200 [ $177,408 [ 26.94% Village 6 ' Residential Property I 102 units I 234,600 103.224 I 15.68% Village 7 ' Residential Property 112 units 313,600 137,984 i 20.96% Vffiage 8 Residential Property 56 units 126,800 56,672 I 8-60% Village 9 Residential Property 70 units 161,000 70,840 I 10.76% Vill~kge-10 ' Residential Property. 111 units 255,300 112,332 [ 17.06% TOTAL [ I 595 units [ $658.460 i 100.00% 2. Calculation of Required Average Special Tax Per Unit At the time the first building permit application for a Planning Area is submitted to the City, the CFD Administrator shall calculate the Required Average Special Tax Per Unit. 3. Backup Special Tax due to Loss of Units tf at any time after the Required Average Special Tax Per Unit has been calculated initially for a Planning Area, the CFD Administrator determines that based on tentative maps, Final Residential Subdivision maps, the Development Projection, and any other available information there has been a reduction in the total expected number of dwelling units within that Planning Area, then a Backup Special Tax payment shall be required for each lost unit prior to the issuance of any additional building permits or the recordation of any additional final maps for such Planning Area. City of Chula Vista CFD 99-2 Budget 2002-03 Total Operating Fund: 6301 Professional Services 50,810.00 6501 CFD Administrative Costs and Contractual Services 16,086.00 6572 Utilities Gas and Electric 5,040.00 6573 Trash Collection and Disposal 1,490.00 6574 Water 108,550.00 6621 Maint - Building 5,480.00 7003 City Staff Services 63,390.00 6401 Other Contractual Services 188,110.00 6814 Landscape Supplies 5,640.00 6911 Matls to Main-Bldgs, Stru & Grds 9,400.00 8448 Transfer Out Corporation Yard 0.00 Total Operating Fund Budget: 453,996.00 Less Estimated End of Year Operating Fund Balance: 47,769.00 $4O6,227.00 07/19/2002 ¢~ '~ MEMORANDUM November 5, 2001 File # 0725-30-OSD35 TO: David D. Rowlands, Jr., City Manager FROM: John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works~ l~1/'/ SUBJECT: Refund on CFD 98-3 Special Tax on Undeveloped Property On August 7, 2001 City Council adopted Resolution No. 2001-249 which adopted the maximum authorized special tax rates for Fiscal Year 2001-02 for Community Facilities Districts (CFDs) 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3, 99-1, 99-2 and 2000-1 (enclosed). This resolution also authorized the levy of special taxes at these rates and delegated to the City Manager the authority to establish the specific special tax rate applicable to each parcel. These rates were based on budgets prepared by Public Works staff and approved by Council using the best cost information available' at the time. A copy of the proposed Council Agenda Statement was provided to each major developer prior to the Council meeting. Several weeks after passage of this resolution, Bill Hamlin, President of Ayers Land Development, requested that the City review its proposed charges for undeveloped property within this district. The rates were based on the budget of $781,165 (increased to $790,733) and a revenue requirement (including reserves) of $892,339.04. Mr. Hamlin felt that the budget requirement and the rates were too high, based on the anticipated turnover of landscaping improvements during Fiscal Year 2001-02. The budget originally prepared for CFD 98-3 was intended to cover the improvements that staff anticipated accepting over a two-year period. Upon further review, it was decided that the landscaping improvements for Phases lC, 2A and 2B could be deleted from the budget for Fiscal Year 2001-02. They have not yet been completed and accepted by the City and the one year period Of required maintenance by the developer has not yet begun. The enclosed table shows our revised calculations for the CFD 98-3 budget. Since we do not receive much revenue until the second half of the fiscal year, the analysis was extended to December 3 l, 2002 to provide an additional six month reserve. Based on the minimum amount of reserve required, the minimum revenue requirement is $397,846. The total amount levied is $892,339.04. Out of that amount, $157,887.58 was levied on four undeveloped parcels. Staff recommends that a refund be given to the four undeveloped parcels, since a total of $734,451 would be collected after the refund. This amount would be more than sufficient to cover the minimum revenue requirement, yet it would be less than the 12 month reserve maximum ($793,217) as of June 30, 2002 David D. Rowlands, Jr. 2 November 5, 2001 permitted for the next fiscal year by the Rate and Method of Apportionment for CFD 98- 3. If this refund is approved, staff will process the paperwork with the San Diego County Tax Collector to generate amended tax bills for the four parcels at a cost of $15 per parcel. Staff considered providing a refund to developed properties. This is not recommended due to the fact that there are over 1100 parcels classified as developed in this district. In order to be equitable, all parcels would need to receive an amended tax bill or refund. This would take a great deal of time and expense, both in County fees and staff effort. Property owners will benefit in Fiscal Year 2002-03 from a reduced tax bill if there is a large reserve at the end of this fiscal year. Please sign this document and remm the original to the Engineering Division if you agree with providing an amended tax bill for Fiscal Year 2001-02 to the four undeveloped parcels billed for CFD 98-3 expenses. David D. Rowlands, Jr. City Manager Attachment C:hMY DOCUMENTS\CFD98-3 REFUND.EMC.DOC BUDGET REVISION CFD 98-3 FISCAL YEAR 2001-02 $790,733 Approved Budget ($125,069) Less Phase lC ($137,687) Less Phase 2A ($ 72,736) Less Phase 2B ($17,292) Less 2 months of Phase lB $437,947 Revised Budget FIRST HALF FISCAL YEAR 2002-03 $395,367 Half of Approved Budget ($ 52,112) Less 5 months Phase 1C ($ 68,844) Less 6 months Phase 2A ($ 36,368) Less 6 months Phase 2B $238,043 x 1.05 Estimated Inflation $249,945 Revised Minimum Reserve Requirement REVENUE REQUIREMENT $437,947 Revised FY 2001-02 Budget $249,945 Revised Reserve Requirement ($305,480) Fund Balance as of 6/30/01 $ 15,434 Estimated Delinquencies $397,846 Minimum Revenue Requirement $395,367 Half of Approved Budget (Second Half of Fiscal Year 2002-03) $793,217 12-Month Reserve J:SENGINEER\ASMTDISTXNEW CFDSkBUDGET REVISION CFD98-3.DOC ~ g~ ~oo oooo oooo o ~ ~° ~ oooo ~oo oooo oooo o o~ ~ ,~o~oo ~oo ~oo oooo o ~~ TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY HOME CHARGES (2000 SQUARE FEET) COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS ONLY DISTRICT OTAY OTAY OTAY SAN NO. RANCH RANCH RANCH SUNBOW II MIGUEL SPA 1 MCMILLIN SPA 1 RANCH VILLAGES VILLAGE 1 1 & 5 WEST CFD 97-1 AreaA $185.80 $185.80 CFD 97-1 $ 435.00 Area B CFD 97-2 $ 2.20 $ 2.20 $ 2.20 Area A CFD 97-3 $ 616.80 CFD 98-1 Undeveloped property only CFD 98-3 $ 330.56* CFD 99-1 1 $1280.00 West CFD 99-1 $ 560.00 Village 1 CFD 99-1 $ 980.00 Village 5 CFD 99-2 $ 776.60 CFD 2000-1 $ 880.00 CFD 2001-1 Undeveloped parcels only TOTAL Village 1: Village 4-10: $1183.00 $804.80 $2063.80 $1210.56' N/A Village 5: Other areas: $1603.00 $330.56* * Change is due to rounding down to an even number of cents. J:\ENGINEER\ASMTDIST\OTAYCFDS\TYPICAL CFD CHARGES 03.DOC 1:: 0 x ? z~_ x ~ Zv 0 McMillin / Otay Ranch EXHIBIT'A' CFD No. 97-3 PLANNING AREA MAP ..~ ,,t~ P-6,4 P&D CONSULTANTS ~ I ~ o o C\J . o Z I- Ü - c:: I-Î a.(j)ü ~-z ~o~ ~CI)m ~w::> O_C> Zl-- :J ::¡¡: o-'z m:« ü~ «- u. ~ - Z :J ~ ,~ o ü o C> w 15 z <I: (/) 11.<1: Oz ~a:: zf2 :J- o~ 00 -II. ~o (/)w >1- ~~ :J(/) J: U II. o ~ 13 a:: o ... UJI- a::~ wa:: rol- ::¡;!:2 ~o ZUJ -JW W¡:: u- a:::! «u 11.< u.. ...... ,^ f"".. a) 1.0 U') .- 1"")0.... ../,.....,,,,.q-NNf') - >- I a..-NOO........... a:: I- I I I I I I I I I I Ozõ ,.........oooooggg ~::>o ::~~55oaoa-a w~N I I I I I I I I I I (I)...oIõ . LOLOI{)LOLOLOtOLOl/')lO (1)00 cca)tX)CJ)mmmmmO'l <oz LOLOLOLOLOLOtOL()LOLO .:!' u;. .3§ eQ .._.~ ..õ> - :g;;~t>. rj.š (.o¡~~~ U) ~ .; d:ci1j . a ~-"'''' Za:: ~~:~ ë:1 r... ;0;00 -. .·Lï -~ ';;15~1o;. <:!' ~i ~rn ¿;~ 0 Ukl ! :::;a ;:; . ro . < W a:: « I- Z W :;¡ ~ o a:: 11. ~ « W a:: « I- Z W :;¡ ~ o a:: 11. ~ ~ 1J :::t- Q) ~ <¡ , E:"!:c· > ~ i \0 ... ... &h, i ~i!j~ 1 ... 01'". iÞ 'E Ù > i ..., b ~ ~ Þ ~ft:ì J :~.~ 8 I ~ ~ ;~ . 'þ ~ ~i~·~i . ~ e~ i 8 ~ [j c::c ~ gii~5¡ ~~~~ .- -" . ~ 5 s ~i ~~~~ J ~i . . 1I~lê~ I · ~ :ih .,; J~5 I I ~ì~d~ I ~- < ~WÞJ;b · ~ ~ ~:>~æ j §~~~ Q I I ~ i~!~ ~ I § ~ ft ~';¡1~5 ~ ~ I I ~ 'l ~ I S ~ . . I . ~;m . ~š ~8 ~ I ~~ · ¡gb I!I I g .J · . ~i ~I~i;~ ~~~~~ ~- ~ !5:r¡¡:¡b > . ~ b ~ ~ ~ . <:s- f<) ~ "" l:"- e;:) - ~ '11 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE MAXIMUM AUTHORIZED SPECIAL TAX RATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NOS. 97-1,97-2,97-3,98-1,98-3,99-1,99-2,2000-1 AND 2001- 1, AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 AT THE MAXIMUM AUTHORIZED SPECIAL TAX RATES APPLICABLE TO EACH DISTRICT AND DELEGATING TO THE CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH THE SPECIFIC SPECIAL TAX RATE APPLICABLE TO EACH PARCEL WHEREAS, the maximum Special Tax rates for CFD 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98- 3, 99-1, 99-2, 2000-1 and 2001-1 authorized, pursuant to the approved rate and method of apportionment of special taxes for each respective community facilities district, to be levied within each such community facilities district for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 are set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full; and WHEREAS, this City Council desires to establish the maximum Special Tax rate that may be levied in Community Facilities Districts Nos. 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3, 99-1, 99-2,2000-1 and 2001-1 in Fiscal Year 2002-2003 at the rates as set forth in Exhibit A hereto and to delegate to and designate the City Manager as the official to prepare a certified list of all parcels subject to the Special Tax levy for each community facilities district including the amount of such Special Tax to be levied on each parcel for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 as authorized by Government Code Section 53340. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities Districts Nos. 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98- 1,98-3,99-1,99-2,2000-1 and 2001-1 respectively, as follows: SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct. SECTION 2. This City Council does hereby establish the maximum Special Tax rates that may be levied for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 in Community Facilities Districts Nos. 97-1, 97-2, 97-3, 98-1, 98-3, 99-1, 99-2, 2000-1 and 2001-1 as the rates set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. SECTION 3. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53340, this City Council hereby delegates the authority to and designates the City Manager as the official to prepare and submit a certified list of all parcels subject to the levy of the Special Tax within the community facilities districts to which this resolution applies including the amount of the Special Tax to be levied on each parcel for Fiscal Year 2002-2002 and to file such list with the auditor of the County of San 3-&.6 Diego on or before August 10, 2002 or such later date on or before August 21, 2002 with the prior written consent of such auditor. The amount of the Special Tax to be levied on each such parcel shall be based upon the budget for each such community facilities district as previously approved by this City Council and shall not exceed the maximum Special Tax as set forth in Exhibit A hereto applicable to the community facilities district in which such parcel being taxed is located. Presented by: Approved as to form by: W:h.~' c:/ J ob:ff"M. Kaheny Œy Attorney John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works J:/attomey/reso/res levy st 2002-03 2 ?- lpt¡ :::> . EXHIBIT A FY02-03 MAXIMUM RATES FOR CFDS CFD 97-1 Otay Ranch Open Space Maintenance Category FY2001-02 FY2002-03 Maximum Maximum Area A $0.0958/SF $0.0929/SF Residential Area A Non- $1296.79/A $1257.76/Acre Residential Area A Vacant $1466.97/A $1422.82/Acre Area B $O.2243/SF $O.2175/SF Residential Area B Non- $2879.49/A $2792.82/ Acre Residential Area B Vacant $3256.16/A $3158.15/ Acre CFD 97-2 Otay Ranch Preserve Category FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 Maximum Maximum Area A: $0.0144/SF $0.0140/SF Residential Non- $232.93/Acre $225.93/Acre Residential Final Map $232.93/Acre $225.93/Acre Vacant $150.33/Acre $145.81/Acre Area B: $58.10/ Acre $56.35/ Acre Vacant 1 3 r (Ptj EXHIBIT A FY02-03 MAXIMUM RATES FOR CFDS CFD 97-10tay Ranch Open Space Maintenance Category FY2001-02 FY2002-03 Maximum Maximum Area A $0.0958/SF $0.0929/SF Residential AreaANon- $1296.79/A $1257.76/Acre Residential Area A Vacant $1466.97/A $1422.82/Acre Area B $0.2243/SF $0.2175/SF Residential Area B Non- $2879.49/A $2792.82/Acre Residential AreaB Vacant $3256.16/A $3158.15/Acre CFD 97-20tay Ranch Preserve Category FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 Maximum Maximum Area A: $0.0144/SF $0.0140/SF Residential Non- $232.93/Acre $225.93/Acre Residential Final Map $232.93/Acre $225.93/Acre Vacant $150.33/Acre $145.81/Acre Area B: $58.10/Acre $56.35/Acre Vacant CFD 97-30tay Ranch McMillin Bond Issue Category Maximum Residential $0.392/SF Commercial $4000/Acre Community Purpose $1000/Acre Facility Undeveloped $7954/Acre (Unrestricted) Undeveloped $7954/Acre (Restricted) Property Owner $7954/Acre Association Land CFD 98-10tay Project Interim Open Space Maintenance District Category FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 Maximum Maximum Taxable Land $116.85/Acre $113.34/Acre CFI) 98-3 Open Space Maintenance District No. 35 - Sunbow H Category FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 Maximum Maximum Residential $394.66/EDU $382.79/EDU Industrial $3076.28/Acrc $2983.68/Acrc Commercial $3443.93/Acre $3340.27/Acre Undeveloped $2358.21/Acre* $2287.23/Acre Undeveloped- N/A N/A Extraordinary Special Tax *Corrected Rate CFD 99-10tay Ranch SPA One Bond Issue Category Maximum ZONE A Village 1 Residential $0.28/SF Commercial $1600/Acre Community Purpose $400/Acre Facility ZONE B Village 5 Residential $400 + $0.29/SF Commemial $3717/Acre Community Purpose $929/Acre Facility ZONE C Village 1West Residential $400 + $0.44/SF Commercial $4266/Acre Community Purpose $1066/Acre Facility COMBINED Undeveloped $8864/Acre Property Owner $8864/Acre Association CFD 99-20tay Ranch SPA One Village 1 West Category FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 Maximum Maximum Residential $0.4004/SF $0.3883/SF Vacant $4937/Acre $4788.75/Acre CFD 2000-1 Sunbow II ViIlal!es 5 throul!h 11 Category Maximum Residential $0.44/SF Undeveloped $7851/ Acre Property Owner $7851/Acre Association CFD 2001-1 San Mi!!uel Ranch Category Maximum Improvement Area A Land Use Class I - $475.00 per unit plus Residential $0.34/SF floor area Land Use Class 2 - $509 II Acre Commercial Land Use Class 3 - $1O,376/Acre Undeveloped Improvement Area B Land Use Class I - $475.00 per unit plus Residential $0.32/SF floor area Land Use Class 2 - $509I1Acre Commercial Land Use Class 3 - $4578/ Acre Undeveloped J; IHomelEngineerlAsmtdistlCFD Tables _ 02-03 4 _~ ¡ .r? ~-LPð RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FY 2002-03 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $453,996 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE FOR CFD 99-2 FOR MAINTENANCE AND ESTABLISHING A NEW BUDGET FOR CFD 99-2 WHEREAS, one new Community Facilities District (CFD) was established during FY 0 I -02 in the San Miguel Ranch development, in addition to the nine CFDs established during Fiscal Years 1998-2001; and WHEREAS, special taxes must be levied during FY 02-03 in nine of these districts in order to pay for the maintenance of open space and preserve areas in CFDs 97-1,97-2,98-1,99-2 and 98-3; and to begin repaying bondholders in CFDs 97-3, 99-1, 2000-1; and WHEREAS, due to the separation of CFD 99-2 trom CFD 98-1, a budget amendment is required to include a new budget for CFD 99-02. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby amend the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget by appropriating $453,996 from the unappropriated fund balance for CFD 99-2 for maintenance and establishing a new budget for CFD 99-2. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works Qe~ ~. Kaheny 0 . Attorney J:/attorney/reso/appropriation cfd 99-2 -3 ~ IP? RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING MODIFICATIONS TO EXHIBIT C TO THE RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 98-3 (OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 35 ¡SUNBOW II]) WHEREAS, the City Council has previously undertaken proceedings to form and did form Community Facilities District No. 98-3 (Open Space Maintenance District No. 35 [Sunbow II) ("CFD No. 98-3") to finance the maintenance of street medians, parkways, slopes and drainage channels and basins within the Sunbow II Community (the "Authorized Services"); and WHEREAS, the qualified electors within CFD No. 98-3 approved the levy of special taxes within CFD No. 98-3 to finance the Authorized Services pursuant to the rate and method of apportionment of special taxes established for CFD No. 98-3 (the "RMA"); and WHEREAS, Exhibit C to the RMA presents the proportionate share of the total maintenance cost allocated to each of the SPA Planning Areas at buildout of the Sunbow II Community; and WHEREAS, several of the SPA Planning Areas within Phase 2A of the Sunbow II Community that are also located within CFD No. 98-3 have been modified during Fiscal Year 2001-2002; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to modify Exhibit C to the RMA to conform to the modifications within the SPA Planning Areas within Phase 2A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities Districts No. 98-3 as follows: SECTION I. The foregoing recitals are true and correct. SECTION 2. This City Council does hereby approve the modification of Exhibit C to the RMA as set forth in Attachment A to this resolution. Presented by: Approved as to form by: John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works ~R~ J . Kaheny Ù ty Attorney J:/attorney/resolres amending Ex C to RMA 3-70 0000 ~00 0000 0000 0 ~ m ooo moo oooo oooo o ~ ooo~oooooooooooo ~ ~ ~ ooo~~ooooooooooo ~ ~°°°oooooooooooo COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item_~ Meeting Date 8/6/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving the first amendment to the agreement between City and Willdan for consulting services to update the Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee, authorizing the Mayor to execute the amendment, and approving a budget amendment appropriating $36,000 from the Transportation Development Impact Fee fund SUBMITTED BY: Direct°r °f Public W°rk~(~? REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~,'~q (4/Sths Vote: Yes X No ) Council approved an agreement with Willdan to update the Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fees. Due to the unexpected delays in completing the update, the consultant, with staff's support, is requesting an amendment to the agreement. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the first amendment to the agreement with Willdan, authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment and approve a budget amendment appropriating $36,000 from the unappropriated balance in Transportation Development Impact Fcc fund. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: NA DISCUSSION: On August 28, 200l, by Resolution 2001-283, Council approved the agreement with Willdan for consulting services to update both the Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) program and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee program (SR 125 DIF). The agreement provided tbr a total compensation in the amount of $66,000. At the time the agreement was approved, staff'anticipated the TDIF and SR 125 DIF updates to be completed within 3 months. However, the update to the SR 125 DIF has been postponed pending the outcome of CTV's financing for SR 125 and the update to the TDIF has taken longer than 3 months. This has necessitated the separation of the two elements of the update. The TDIF update extended beyond the 3 month completion date due to the complexity of analyzing the developer TDIF credits of $24.7 million, substantial work analyzing traffic scenarios for reducing the commercial and industrial rates, updating the land use table reflecting building permit activity and updating the developer credits for October 1, 2001 and then updating the information again due to delays and changes in entitlements, several meetings with the development community and responding to their concerns along with other related tasks. Staff recommends an amendment to the agreement to compensate the consultant for their work. Furthermore, if the two updates had been addressed separately from the inception of the work, the budget for each project would likely have been higher than the original $33,000 budgeted for each. It is staff's recommendation that compensation for the work be increased from $66,000 to $102,000. It is staff's opinion that the work performed to date by the consultant has been both Page 2, Item Meeting Date 8/6/02 appropriate and satisfactory. An appropriation of TDIF funds in the amount of $36,000 is necessary to accommodate this change. A 4/5ths vote is required for the appropriation. The agreement with Willdan included work for updating Interim SR 125 DIF program. This work is currently on hold pending the outcome of financing for the ultimate SR 125. Staff does not recommend eliminating the scope of work for the update to Interim SR 125 DIF at this time. An amount of $27,000 remains on account for this work. FISCAL 1MPACT: Approval of tonight's resolution includes a budget amendment appropriating $36,000 from the unappropriated balance in Transportation Development Impact Fee funds to pay additional compensation for the consultant's work related to the update. Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Agreement approved by Resolution No. 2001-283 Attachment A - First amendment to agreement FiIe: J:\engineer\aGENDA\tdifwilldanamlcc.doc dds 7/23/02 10:00 AM EXHIBIT_ Parties and Recital Page(s) Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Willdan for Consulting Services to Update the Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee Programs This agreement ("Agreement"), dated .¢Y~,.,/ .~ y, .~/ forthe purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last ex"ec~ted' unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A, Paragraph I is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such ("City"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts: Recitals Whereas, City desires to update its Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee programs; and, Whereas, City waived the Consultant Selection Policy as impractical and to be in the City's best interest to do so; and, Whereas, City staff informally requested bids from experienced consulting firms to perform the work and; and, Whereas, Willdan submitted a proposal to provide professional consulting services for updating the Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee programs; and, Whereas, City recommends the firm of Willdan to pedorm the work as the most qualified consulting firm; and, Whereas, City recommends Willdan because Willdan has extensive experience with our Development Impact Fee programs and other agency's programs and has performed well when previously retained by the City; and, 2ptyl 3.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 1 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can prepare ahd deliver the services required of Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; (End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.) 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 2 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL --. Obligatory Provisions Pages NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. Consultant's Duties A. General Duties Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties"; and, B. Scope of Work and Schedule In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time flames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate this Agreement. C. Reductions in Scope of Work City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction. D. Additional Services In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the-rates set forth in the "Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 3 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF~TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL E. Standard of Care Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. F. Insurance Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of '%, Class V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City: Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9. Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage"). Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. G. Proof of Insurance Coverage. (1) Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured. - (2) Policy Endorsements Required. In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 4 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL H. Security for Performance. ~ (1) Performance Bond. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (2) Letter of Credit. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to the bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (3) Other Security In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney. I. Business License Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 2. Duties of-the City A. Consultation and Cooperation City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide 2ptyl$.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 5 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF~TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL direction and guidance to achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities, files and records by CSnsultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance of this agreement. B. Compensation Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12. All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such payment. 3. Administration of Contract Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine administration of this agreement. 4. Term. This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory provisions hereof. 5. Liquidated Damages The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14. It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 6 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL Failure to complete the Defined Services within th~ allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate"). Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control, other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work. 6. Financial Interests of Consultant A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer. If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney. B. Decline to Participate. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shaJl not make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement. C. Search to Determine Economic Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this agreement. D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 7 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL Regardless of whether Consultant is designated aZ an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the-Fair Political Practices Act. E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder. F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests. Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15. Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter. Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. 7. Hold Harmless Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 8 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDl~TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL conduct of the Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the execution of the work covered by this'Agreement, except only for ' those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. 8. Termination of Agreement for Cause If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach. 9. Errors and Omissions In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than weuld have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's dghts under other provisions of this agreement. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 9 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIFATDIFupdateFINALdoc August 20, 2001 FINAL 10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein. 11. Assignability The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City. City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants". 12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. 13. Independent Contractor City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not limited 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 10 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or f~deral income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto. 14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 15. Attorney's Fees Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable attomey's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought. 16. Statement of Costs In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document. 17. Miscellaneous A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever. B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate brokers or salespersons. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 11 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIRTDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL C. Notices ' All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of the designated parties. D. Entire Agreement This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. F. Capacity of Parties Fach signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. F. Governing LawNenue This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. [end of page. next page is signature page.] 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 12 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL Signature Page to ' Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Willdan for Consulting Services to Update the Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee Programs IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their fult and complete consent to its terms: Dated: .~ ~r ,200~/ City of Chula Vista Shirley H~don, Mayor / Attest: Susan Bigelow, City Cle~ Approved as to form: J4;hrC/~"~.~h~ny, City Atto~.Cy Dated: Willd/~, .~ ~ By.'¢I ~ yu~ House, Sr. Vice President Exhibit List to Agreement (X) Exhibit A. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 13 S:\Projects\Chuia Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL Exhibit A to Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Willdan 1. Effective Date of Agreement: 2. City-Related Entity: (X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California ( ) Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of California ( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a ( ) Other: , a [insert business form] ("city") 3. Place of Business for City: City of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 4. Consultant: Willdan 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( ) Sole Proprietorship ( ) Partnership - (X) Corporation 6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant: 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 14 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL 9275 Sky Park Court, Suite 110 San Diego, California 92123 t Voice Phone (858) 467-6950 Fax Phone (858) 467-1346 7. General Duties: The Consultant shall complete necessary tasks, as assigned by the City Engineer to update the Transportation and Interim Development Impact Fee Programs ("Project"), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 8. Scope of Work and Schedule: A. Detailed Scope of Work: Task 1: Project Management The Consultant shall assign Tom Bandy, as Consultant's employee, as project manager to assemble and coordinate consultant staff resources to perform the work in a timely and effective manner. The Consultant shall meet with City and others as City deems necessary to complete the work. Task lA: Gather Relevant Studies And Information a. Consultant, through Tom Bandy, shall achieve an understanding and thorough knowledge of the study area and transportation improvements together with relevant City policies and programs. b. Consultant, through Tom Bandy, shall obtain all pertinent Project documents for review. Consultant shall make copies of such documents when necessary and appropriate. At a minimum, the documents will include the Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets report dated October 25, 1999; the Interim State Route 125 Facility Feasibility Study report dated May 1993; various roadway cost estimates and plans; Directives and Procedures; and other relevant documents. c. Consultant, through Tom Bandy, shall meet at least once with City staff to identify and collect the necessary documents. d. Consultant, through Tom Bandy, shall compile a bibliography of resource decuments and hard copies provided to the Consultant. Task lB: Provide Ongoing Project Management To Meet Schedules And Milestones 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 15 .. S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL a. Consultant, through Tom Bandy, shall provide ongoing project management to develop and meet schedules and milestones to en§ure that the project is properly executed in a timely manner in accordance with the Agreement. b. Consultant, through Tom Bandy, shall oversee the work being performed pursuant to the Agreement. Consultant shall oversee the schedule of work and take necessary steps to move the project toward timely completion while ensuring that all identified issues are addressed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Consultant shall communicate with the City's designated Contract administrator or his designee at least once per week regarding the status of Consultant's work effort, issues, and the projected completion of deliverables. Consultant shall also take the lead when making presentations before the public, property owners, business community, and City Council. c. Consultant, through Tom Bandy, shall meet with City staff, at least twelve (12) times, or as required by the City, during the course of the Project to review Project milestones and receive and discuss input regarding on-going Project Management or other related issues. d. Consultant shall prepare and provide written bi-weekly status reports on all phases of the project to the City's project administrator or his designee. Task 2: Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Update The Consultant shall identify all transportation capital facilities necessary to support new development in the eastern territories and calculate an in lieu development fee that represents new development's fair share of the cost of such facilities. Task 2A: Identify Public Transportation Capital Facilities a. The Consultant shall identify e!igible public transportation facilities that serve or will serve the project area and review these facilities with the City. b. The Consultant shall gather, catalogue and summarize existing reports, and relevant documents. Infrastructure reports shall be reviewed by Consultant's technical engineering staff. The October 25, 1999 TDIF report shall be used as the basis for updating the fee. c. The Consultant shall meet at least two (2) times with City staff to review the draft listing of facilities. d. The Consultant shall prepare and provide a final list(s) of eligible public transportation facilities incorporating City's input. Task 2B: Identify Future Development 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 16 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL a. The Consultant shall identify the land uses and anticipated growth to take place through build out of the study area. ' b. The Consultant shall consider future development that is and will be creating the demand for the transportation facilities and will benefit from the transportation facilities upon their completion. The Consultant shall coordinate with the City to obtain this information from the City and City records. If City records are not sufficient or complete for this Project, the Consultant shall take the necessarY steps to obtain the information. c. The Consultant shall meet at least two (2) times with City staff to review the land use information. d. The Consultant shall prepare and provide a list(s) of potential development that is expected to occur in the TDIF project area. Task 2C: Refine Facility Cost Estimates a. The Consultant shall obtain and update cost estimates for the identified facilities. b. The Consultant shall prepare a fee study to calculate current costs for eligible transportation facilities. The Consultant shall ensure that all facilities are accurately identified and up-to-date cost estimates are provided or calculated. c. The Consultant shall ensure that the TDIF reflects the most accurate costs in terms of transportation projects. The Consultant shall review the capital projects list and costs for the purpose of identifying project changes and new projects that should be added (i.e. changes in Hunte Parkway and Main Street alignments). Unit costs and cost extensions for each project shall be reviewed by Consultant. Cost factors will be updated and the Consultant shall calculate the revised costs. For purposes of this Agreement, it is anticipated that the majority of the TDIF facility costs will be updated using a construction index (i.e. ENR) factor. d. The Consultant shall meet at least two (2) times with City staff to review preliminary cost estimates. e. The Consultant shall prepare and provide spreadsheets for each facility listing the facility, its dimensions, special considerations, unit costs, and extended costs. Task 2D: Identify TDIF Credits and Reimbursements a. The Consultant shall prepare a matrix of TDIF credits, eligible reimbursements, City funded TDIF projects and funding and relevant TM conditions and document any City/developer agreements affecting TDIF. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 17 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL b. The Consultant's TDIF analysis will require an identification of TDIF credits and eligible reimbursements as a means of documenting the flow of funds within the account. Using this analysis, the Consultant shall prepare and present Consultant's draft findings to the City in written summary memorandum and spreadsheets. c. The Consultant shall meet at least two (2) times with City staff to review the summary memorandum and spreadsheets. e. The Consultant shall provide a final credit matrix and eligible reimbursements summary incorporating City's input. Task 2E: Prepare Impact Fee nexus to Commercial/Industrial Developments a. The Consultant shall prepare a draft analysis for potential reduction in TDIF/SR125 DIF allocation for commercial and industrial development in compliance with Government Code 66000 et. seq. b. The Consultant shall investigate the feasibility of reducing the TDIF and SR125 DIF allocation for commercial and industrial land-uses using the trip generation relation between these types of land-use and residential land-use (i.e. trips that originate from residential traffic zones and terminate in commercial and/or industrial traffic zones or vise versa). c. The Consultant shall meet at least two (2) times with City staff to review the draft Impact Fee nexus report and to solicit staff input. d. The Consultant shall prepare final recommendations for TDIF rate for commercial and industrial developments with appropriate nexus findings which incorporate City input. Task 2F: Prepare Impact Fee Report a. The Consultant shall prepare an update to the October 1999 repot[ in compliance with Government Code 66000 et. seq. b. The Consultant shall analyze the cost of transportation capital improvements needed for new development on an equivalent dwelling unit basis (EDU). The Consultant shall analyze if remaining project area development will provide adequate revenues to pay for required capital improvements. The Consultant's analysis shall conform to local and state law. The City shall provide all current d~tabases, financial models, historical budgets and other relevant City data on an as needed basis. The Consultant shall further analyze the existing fee program in terms of efficiency of use, effectiveness of revenue generation, consistency of nexus findings, and equitability between land uses. From this analysis, the Consultant shall prepare and provide draft findings to the City in written summary memorandum form. ' 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 18 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL c. The Consultant shall meet at least two (2) times ~,ith City staff to review the draft report and to solicit staff input. d. The Consultant shall prepare a final report incorporating City's input. e. The Consultant shall prepare both draft and final TDIF reports for the City to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Task 3: Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee (SR 125 DIF)Update The Consultant shall identify the interim SR 125 facilities necessary to support new development and calculate an in lieu development fee that represents new development's fair share of the cost of such facility. Task 3A: Identify Interim SR 125 Facilities a. The Consultant shall identify and prepare a draft listing of eligible Interim SR 125 facilities. b. The Consultant's analysis shall include the identification of the eligible Interim SR 125 facilities that serve or will serve the SR 125 DIF project area. The Consultant shall gather, catalogue, and summarize all existing reports and relevant documents. Infrastructure reports shall be reviewed by Consultant's technical engineering staff. The Interim SR-125 Facilities are a group of transportation facility enhancement projects necessary to meet the area growth in the event ultimate SR-125 is not built and includes some roadway and/or intersection improvements outside of the north/south corridor. The Consultant shall prepare a traffic capacity analysis for up to three alignments as identified by the City Engineer and intersections associated with Interim SR-125 Facility Study c. The Consultant shall meet at least one (1) time with City staff to review the draft listing(s) of eligible Interim SR 125 facilities. d. The Consultant shall prepare and provide a final listing(s) of eligible Interim SR 125 facilities incorporating City's input. Task 3B: Refine Facility Cost Estimates a. Tf~e Consultant shall update cost estimates contained in Interim SR 125 master plans and other relevant documents. b. The Consultant shall prepare a preliminary fee study to identify eligible public facilities and estimate their costs. The Consultant shall ensure that the facilities 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 19 . S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL are accurately identified and up-to-date cost estimates are provided or calculated. ~ c, The Consultant shall ensure that the SR 125 DIF report reflects the most accurate costs in terms of capital projects. The Consultant shall review the capital projects list and costs for the purpose of identifying project changes and new projects that should be added. The Consultant shall review unit costs and cost extensions for each SR 125 DIF project. Cost factors will be updated and the Consultant shall revise the costs. d. The Consultant shall meet at least one (1) time with City staff to review preliminary cost estimates e. The Consultant shall prepare and provide final spreadsheets for each facility listing the facility, its dimensions, special considerations, unit costs, and extended costs. Task 36: Prepare Impact Fee Report a. The Consultant shall prepare a draft and final development impact fee report in compliance with Government Code 66000 et. seq. b. The Consultant shall analyze the cost of transportation capital improvements needed for new development on an equivalent dwelling unit basis (EDU). The Consultant shall analyze if remaining SR 125 DIF project area development will provide adequate revenues to pay for required capital improvements. The Consultant's analysis shall conform to local and state law. The City shall provide all current databases, financial models, historical budgets and other relevant City data on an as needed basis. The Consultant will further analyze the existing fee program in terms of efficiency of use, effectiveness of revenue generation, consistency of nexus findings, and equitability between land uses. From this analysis, the Consultant will prepare and provide findings to the City in written summary memorandum form. c. The Consultant shall meet at least one (1) time with City staffto review the draft report and to solicit staff input. d. The Consultant shall prepare a final report incorporating all City input. e. The Consultant shall prepare both draft and final reports for the City to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services: (X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 20 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIRTDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL ( ) Other: C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables: Deliverable No. 1: The Consultant shall prepare and deliver a draft TDIF Report on or before October 28, 2001 and shall prepare and deliver one copy of a final TDIF Report and one reproducible copy of a final TDIF Report on or before November 28, 2001 all to the satisfaction of the City Engineer (Task 2). The Consultant shall also provide the Reports in digital format to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The City Manager may at his sole discretion, extend the dates for completion. Deliverable No. 2: The Consultant shall prepare and deliver a draft Interim SR 125 DIF Report on or before October 28, 2001 and shall prepare and deliver one copy of a final Interim SR 125 DIF Report and one reproducible copy of a final Interim SR 125 DIF Report on or before November 28, 2001 all to the satisfaction of the City Engineer (Task 3). The Consultant shall also provide the Reports in digital format to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The City Manager may, at his sole discretion, extend the dates for completion. D. Date for completion of all Consultant services: The Consultant shall complete all tasks identified in paragraphs 7 and 8 of this Exhibit A of the Agreement by November 28, 2001, unless otherwise extended in writing by the City Manager. 9. Insurance Requirements: (X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance (X) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,0~)0. (X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000. ( ) Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General Liability coverage). (X) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General Liability coverage). 10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant: The City shall provide documents for copying to include the current TDIF and SR 125 DIF reports, ordinances directives and procedures, land use information on an as needed basis. 11. Compensation: A. ( ) Single Fixed Fee Arrangement. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 21 ._ S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIRTDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set forth below:. ( X ) Single Fixed Fee Amount: Up to but not to exceed $ 66,000, payable as follows: Milestone or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee t. Signing of this Agreement by all parties $12,000 2. Deliverable No. I $24,000 3. Deliverable No. 2 $24,000 4. Contingency $ 6,000 Upon written approval by the City Manager, Additional Services may be performed by Consultant for additional fees not to exceed $6,000. Use of the contingency is at the sole discretion of the City Manager. ( ) 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans which must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be. applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage of - completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor. The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment. B. ( ) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement. 2ptyl$.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 22 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF~TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant as are separately identified below, City shall ply the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services, in the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set forth. Consultant shall not commence Services under any Phase, and shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase, unless City shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase. Phase Fee for Said Phase 1. $ 2. $ 3. $ ( ) 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans which must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor. The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment. C. ( )-Hourly Rate Arrangement For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule hereinbelow according to the following terms and conditions: 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 23 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL (1) ( ) Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Tim~ and Materials Arrangement Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all of the Defir~ed Services herein required of Consultant for __ including all Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation"). (2) ( ) Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to ("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and approved by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional Services at Consultant's own cost and expense. Rate Schedule Category of Employee Hourly of Consultant Name Rate ( ) Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after [month], 19 , if delay in providing services is caused by City. 12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of services herein required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below: (X) None, the compensation includes all costs. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 24 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIRTDIFupdateFINALdoc August 20, 2001 FINAL Cost or Rate ( ) Reports, not to exceed $ ( ) Copies, not to exceed $ ( ) Travel, not to exceed $ ( ) Printing, not to exceed $ ( ) Postage, not to exceed $ ( ) Delivery, not to exceed $ ( ) Long Distance Telephone Charges, not to exceed $. ( ) Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs: ., not to exceed $ 13. Contract Administrators: City: Sohaib AI-Agha Consultant: Tom Bandy 14. Liquidated Damages Rate: ( ) $ per day. ( ) Other: 15. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code: (X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer. ( ) FPPC Filer Category No. 1. Investments and sources of income. ( Category No. 2. Interests in real property. ( Category No. 3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department. ( Category No. 4. Investments in business entities and sources of income which engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property. 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 25 .. S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF~TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL ( ) Category No. 5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( ) Category No. 6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment. ( ) Category No. 7. Business positions. ( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any: 16. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman 17. Permitted Subconsultants: None 18. Bill Processing: A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time: ( ) Monthly ( ) Quarterly (X) Other: Milestones B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing: ( ) First of the Month -( ) 15th Day of each Month ( ) End of the Month (X) Other: Milestones C. City's Account Number: Transportation DIF and Interim SR 125 DIF accounts 2pty13.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) May 25, 1999 Page 26 S:\Projects\Chula Vista TDIF\TDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20, 2001 FINAL 1 19. Security for Performance ( ) Performance Bond, $ ( ) Letter of Credit, $ ( ) Other Security: Type: Amount: $ (X) Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or "Retention Amount" until the City determines that the Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred: (X) Retention Percentage: 10% ( ) Retention Amount: $ Retention Release Event: ( ) Completion of All Consultant Services (X) Other: Upon completion and delivery of the Final TDIF and SR 125 DIF Reports and digital files to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or other Retention Release Event as determined in the sole discretion of the City Engineer. " 2pty13.wp May 25, 1999 S:IProjectslChula Vista TDIFITDIFupdateFINAL.doc August 20,2001 FINAL Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Thirteenth Revision) Page 27 c¡ RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND WILLDAN FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO UPDATE THE TRANSPORTATION AND INTERIM SR 125 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT AND APPROVING A BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING $36,000 FROM THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND WHEREAS, by Resolution 2001-283, the Council approved the agreement with Willdan for consulting services to update both the Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee program; and WHEREAS, the agreement provided for a total compensation in the amount of $66,000 and at the time the agreement was approved, staff anticipated the TDIF and SR 125 DIF updates to be completed within 3 months; and WHEREAS, the update to the SR 125 DIF has been postponed pending the outcome of CTV's financing for SR 125 and the update to the TDIF has taken longer than 3 months which has necessitated the separation of the two elements of the update; and WHEREAS, due to the unexpected delays in completing the update, the consultant requested an amendment to the agreement; and WHEREAS, staff recommends an amendment to the agreement to compensate the consultant for their work and that compensation for the work be increased from $66,000 to $102,000 as the work performed to date by the consultant has been both appropriate and satisfactory; and WHEREAS, an appropriation of TDIF funds in the amount of $36,000 is necessary to accommodate this change. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the First Amendment to the Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Willdan for consulting services to update the Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee reports, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the amendment on behalf of the City ofChula Vista. I L-f ~ 3() BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that $36,000 is hereby appropriated from the unappropriated balance in Transportation Development Impact Fee Fund. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works __.JI)1 ~ 000 . aheny ~ City Attorney J:\attorney\reso\ wi1ldan SR 125 DIF 1 st amend 4-3/ 2 THE A TT ACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY A TTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL L~IJtC~ M. Kaheny City Attorney Dated: 7-31-02 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND WILLDAN FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO UPDATE THE TRANSPORTATION AND INTERIM STATE ROUTE 125 Lf- 3d- FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND WILLDAN FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO UPDATE THE TRANSPORTATION AND INTERIM SR 125 DEVELOMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAMS This first amendment to the agreement ("Agreement") dated for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed, and is made with reference to the following facts: RECITALS WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista, by Resolution 2001-283 on August 28, 2001, approved an Agreement with Willdan to provide professional services for updating the City's Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee programs; and WHEREAS, the Agreement anticipated a completion date of November 2001 for services or as extended by the City Manager; and WHEREAS, the Consultant has incurred costs beyond the original budget due to delays in the Transportation and Interim SR 125 Development Impact Fee projects; NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: SECTION I. Paragraph (A) of Section 11 of Exhibit A of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: 11. Compensation: A. () Single Fixed Fee Arrangement. For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set forth below: ( X) Single Fixed Fee Amount: Up to but not to exceed $ 102,000, payable as follows: Milestone or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee 1. Signing of this Agreement by all parties $12,000 C:\DOCUME-l \tbandyILOCALS-1 \Temp\TDlFwilldanaml.doc 7/26/02 version 4 ij,33 2. Deliverable No.1 $63,000 3. Deliverable NO.2 $24,000 4. Contingency $ 3,000 Upon written approval by the City Manager, Additional Services may be performed by Consultant for additional fees not to exceed $3,000. Use of the contingency is at the sole discretion of the City Manager. ( ) I. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans which must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor. The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment. SECTION 2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement not modified by this First Amendment to the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. [End of page. Next page is signature page.] C:\DOCUME-l \tbandyILOCALS-I \Temp\TDlFwilldanaml.doc 7/26/02 version 4 '1--31 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND WILLDAN FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO UPDATE THE TRANSPORTATION AND INTERIM SR 125 DEVELOMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAMS In witness whereof, City and Consultant have executed this First Amendment to the Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms: Dated: City of Chula Vista By: Shirley Horton, Mayor Attest: Susan Bigelow, City Clerk Approved as to form: John M. Kaheny, City Attorney By: Dated: ( r lA l ~ à (p! [J...op.:L- C:\DOCUME-l \tbandyILOCALS-l \Temp\TDlFwilldanaml.doc 7/26/02 version 4 if-3S COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date: 8/6/02 ITEM TITLE: A) Resolution Ordering the Summary Vacation ora portion of Otay Lakes Road adjacent to the Village Center North project. B) Resolution Approving the Parcel Map of Chula Vista Tract No. 01-14, Village Center North; accepting on behalf of the public the various public streets; accepting on behalf of the City of Chula Vista the various easements, all as granted on said map within said subdivision; acknowledging on behalf of the City of Chula Vista the Irrevocable Offer of Dedications granted on said map within said subdivision; vacating certain easements located within the Parcel Map; approving the Parcel Map Improvement Agreement for the completion of improvements required by said Subdivision; and authorizing the Mayor to execute said Agreement. C) Resolution Approving a Supplemental Parcel Map Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract No. 01-14, Village Center North, requiring Eastlake Company, LLC to comply with certain unfulfilled conditions, and authorizing the Mayor to execute said Agreement. A../ SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works REVIEWED BY: City Manager d ~'~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X On July 30, 2002, the Director of Planning and Building and the City Engineer approved a Conditional Tentative Pamel Map Waiver for the Village Center North Project. Even though the Municipal Code authorizes staffto approve the Parcel Map and associated agreements, developer requested and staff concurred that Council approval of the proposed parcel map will expedite the project development by allowing the vacation on the map of several existing onsite easements which are not needed anymore. Processing of those vacations by separate instruments rather than on the map would require preparation of extensive documentation, ~vhich would have to be brought to Council for approval. This would add more time to the development schedule proposed by the developer. The Parcel Map for Village Center North and the associated agreements are now before Council for consideration and approval. A portion of Otay Lakes Road, which is no longer needed for street purposes will be summarily vacated. Said portion of Otay Lakes Road is not located within the limits of the Parcel Map and therefore cannot be vacated on the map. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolutions: (A) Ordering the Summary Vacation of a portion of Otay Lakes Road adjacent to the Village Center North project, (B) Approving the Parcel Map and Parcel Map Improvement Agreement for the Village Center North project, and (C) Approving the Supplemental Parcel Map Improvement Agreement for the Village Center North project and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreements. Page 2, Item ~ Meeting Date: 8/06/02 BOARD/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: Summary Vacation of a portion of Otay Lakes Road The proposed summary vacation would vacate a small portion of Otay Lakes Road adjacent to the future SR- 125 originally dedicated by Chula Vista Map No. 11509 (see Exhibits 1 and 2). The final design for the ultimate widening of Otay Lakes Road adjacent to SR 125 does not require this right- of-way; therefore, staffrecommends Council approval of the proposed vacation. Parcel Map and Associated Improvement Agreements Village Center North is generally located at the northwestern quadrant of the intersection of Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake Parkway. The Parcel Map consists of the following: Number of Number of Final Map Commercial Lots for Public Total Acreage Lots Uses Village Center 13 2 53.5 acres North A plat for the project is shown in Exhibit 3. The Department of Public Works and Department of Planning & Building have reviewed the proposed map and consider it ready for Council approval. The tentative parcel map waiver includes conditions with whih the developer must comply. Condition 41 consists of items related to site upkeep. This condition will be memorialized in a letter agreement between the parties. It is staffs recommendation that the City Manager be authorized to execute that agreement and any amendments thereto containing Condition 41. All the applicable fees have been paid by the developer. Approval of the map constitutes acceptance by the City of all drainage and access, transit parking, sight visibility, traffic control devices and incidental purposes, and sidewalk and public access easements required to serve the project. Approval of the final map also constitutes acceptance, on behalf of the public, of portions of Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake Parkway required to increase the traffic capacity of the roads surrounding the project and to provide an exclusive right turn lane into SR-125. The developer is also granting Irrevocable Offers of Dedication in fee for Parcel 14 and Parcel 15 for transportation purposes. Parcel 14 will become the future SR-125 right-of-way. Parcel 15 would accommodate a future sweeping SR 125 northbound on-ramp, which is currently under consideration by Caltrans. In addition, developer is also offering for dedication in fee the area needed for accommodating the future regional transit stop along Eastlake Parkway to be operated by the MTDB. The City is acknowledging said offers of dedication on the Parcel Map. Approval of the map, therefore, does not constitute acceptance of these parcels. However, Section 7050 of the Government Code of the State of California provides that an offer of dedication shall remain open and subject to future acceptance by the City. Page 3, Item .~ Meeting Date: 8/06/02 Approval of the map also constitutes summary vacation of certain onsite easements located within the map. Several existing old road easements have been rendered obsolete due to the dedication and construction of the ultimate road system in Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake Parkway following a different alignment. In addition, certain easements associated with the previous Kaiser project are not needed anymore and should be vacated. The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the Parcel Map and has determined that it is consistent with the MND IS-01-042 and other related environmental documents. The Parcel Map will not result in any new environmental effects that were not previously identified, nor would the Parcel Map result in a substantial increase in severity in any impacts previously identified. The developer has executed the following agreements: · Supplemental Parcel Map Improvement Agreement for the Village Center North Project encumbering the land covered by the subject map in order to satisfy conditions of approval Nos. 1,2,4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 17, 22, 25, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, and 51 of the Village Center North Tentative Parcel map Waiver. · Parcel Map Improvement Agreements for the Village Center North Project and has provided bonds to guarantee construction of the required improvements and to guarantee the subdivision monumentation. The agreements have been reviewed by staffand are ready for Council approval. The City Attorney has already approved the agreements as to form. FISCAL IMPACT: None to the General Fund. All staff costs associated with processing of the improvement plans, final maps and associated agreements will be reimbursed from the developer's deposits. Exhibit 1: Otay Lakes Road Vacation Legal Description Exhibit 2: Otay Lakes Road Vacation Plat Exhibit 3: Plat -Village Center North Vicinity Map Exhibit 4: Developer's Disclosure Statement Attachment A: ParcelMap Improvement Agreement At[achment B: Supplemental Parcel Map Improvement Agreement $:\Engiaecr\LANDDEV\Projects\Eastlake VCN\CASParccl Map doc EXHIBIT 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL "A" · THAT PORTION OF OTAY LAKES ROAD OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 84-7, UNIT NO. 1, IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 11509, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER ON MAY 12, 1986, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT COURSE ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF OTAY LAKES ROAD AS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP NO. 11509, DESCRIBED AS NORTH 65°47'17" EAST, 330.67 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY, NORTH 65°47'45" EAST, 330.62 FEET (NORTH 65~47'17" EAST, 330.57 FEET PER SAID MAP NO. 11509); THENCE NORTH 24°12'15" WEST, 2.00 FEET (NORTH 24°12'43" WEST PER SAID MAP NO. 11509) TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF OTAY LAKES ROAD, THE FOLLOWING 3 COURSES: 1. NORTH 24°12'15" WEST, 8.00 FEET; 2. NORTH 65°47'45" EAST, 221.73 FEET (NORTH 55~47'17" EAST, 221.68 FEET PER SAID MAP NO. 11509) TO THE BEGINNING OF A 190.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; 3. THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°41'09'' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.33 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF OTAY LAKES ROAD, SOUTH 65~47'45" WEST, 276.28 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 2066 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. ....... DAVID W. AMBLER L.S. 7322 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES SAN DIEGO, INC. PAGE 1 OF FHE~T I OF 1 - ~%~... ~-~ ,,. [ EXHIBIT 2 a-~'~ ~ P.O.C. INDICATES POINT OF ~MM~C~T ~ ~.0.~, INDI~ ~UE POI~ OF BEGINNING ~ PARCEL 'A' - 2066 SO~E ~ ~,~ VICINI~ M~P ~EMAINDE~ PA~EL ~ARCEL MAP ND. ~557S EXHIBIT 3 4 5 1 ? 12 '& ASSOCIATES ~p~ ~ T SITE ~ ~~ VfCINI~ MAP EXHIBIT 4 'i-~-~. CITY OF C1YOTA VISTA DISCLOsuRE STATEM]ENT Pursuit to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any azfion u.'oon matt~,"-'~,'~ which will require dis=re~onm,"y by ~e Council. Plam-iing Commlssicm ~nd all o~er official bodies of be City, a smt~.-.~ment of diselosu=e of cer:~ain o~ner~hip or ..e-man¢ial interests: payment, or campai~ conm'bufiorm for a Ci~' of Chuia Vist~ elecffon mtmt be filed. The fotlox~ng infa~nmfion mugt be disclosed: t. List t~he ..--ames of all pm-sons having a :Z"ma¢iaI interest in t'ne property, r. ha~ is :he subject of the application or the ¢on~Xaet, e.g., owner, applicator, coniraztor, subcan~'actor, material supplier.. 5. if any person* id~tified pursuant to (!) above is a non-profit or_Fr~izarion or t:-ast, !is~ foe tames of ,=_ny .==z'son se'vi_rig as director of~: non-?ofit org=_qizz~ion or ~ =-7mtee or bereft:iow or .'w._,stor =f i've ~rust. Please id:zti~ every p~rsoo, maludir, g amy agents, employees, eonsultenm, or Lqdeoende."z :on.actors you have assi==ned :o represent you before the City in C-,is matter, 5. Has ~ny p..'~rson* associated with dais con'a-act had any finan=i~l dealings wiO_ an ofzS¢ia!** of the City. of Ch ,u!la Vi=--to as it relates to this coo'g--oat ;-viukLu the pa~t !2 montks'? Yes __No k5 If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official" may have in this contract. 6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (l2) months to a current member ofthe Chula Vista City C01lllcil? Yes No x:; If Yes, which Council member? 7. Have you or any member of your governing board (i.e. Corporate Board of DirectorsIExecutives, non-profit Board of Directors made contributions totaling mOre than $1,000 over the past four (4) years to a current member of the Chula Vis!a. City Council? Yes_No)(¡ _ If Yes, which Council member? 8. Have you provided more than $300 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official.... of the City of Chula Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan., etc.) Yes _ No' X If Yes, whicn official.... and what was the nature of item provided? é:;4' øMiL- Signature of Contractorl :"pplicant 8,11 Ø'/c;e;¡'hH1 - Print or type name of Contractor! Applicant Date, í IIC/O;;'" 'Person is defmed as: any individual, fmn, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fultemal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, rrmnicipaHty, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group Or combination acting as a unit. "Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board, commission, or committee ofthe City, employee, or staff members. J :\EngiI1eer\ADM IN\ÇONTRACT\DrSCl.OSE. DOC Y,' RESOLUTION NO.2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A PORTION OF OTAY LAKES ROAD ADJACENT TO THE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH PROJECT WHEREAS, the proposed summary vacation would vacate a small portion of Otay Lakes Road adjacent to the future SR-125 originally dedicated by Chula vista Map 11509; and WHEREAS, the final design for the ultimate widening of Otay Lakes Road adjacent to SR 125 does not require this right-of- way; therefore, staff recommends council approval of the proposed vacation; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 4, Section 8333 of the California Streets and Highways Code, this type of vacation may be performed summarily through adoption of a resolution ordering said summary vacation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby order the summary vacation of a portion of Otay Lakes Road adjacent to the village Center North project, as shown in Exhibits "A" and "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED directed to record this Resolution San Diego County Recorder. that the City Clerk is hereby of Vacation in the office of the Presented by Approved as to form by ~c~ John M. Kaheny city Attorney John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works J:\Attorney\Reso\Vacation summary street VC North 5~q EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCR.IPTION PARCEL "A" THAT PORTION OF OTAYLAKES ROAD OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 84-7, UNIT NO.1, IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 11509, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER ON MAY 12, 1986, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT COURSE ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY OFOTAY LAKES ROAD AS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP NO. 11509, DESCRIBED AS NORTH 65"47'17" EAST, 330.67 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY, NORTH 65"47'45" ~ST, 330.62 FEET (NORTH 65"47'17" EAST, 330.67 FEET PER SAID MAP NO. 11509); THENCE NORTH 24"12'15" WEST, 2.00 FEET (NORTH 24"12'43" WEST PER SAID MAP NO. 11509) TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY Of DrAY LAKES ROAD, THE FOLLOWING 3 COURSES: 1. NORTH 24"12'15" WEST, 8.00 FEET; 2. NORTH 65"47'45" EAST, 221.73 FEET (NORTH 65°47'17" EAST, 221.68 fEET PER SAID MAP NO, 11509) TO THE BEGINNING OF A 190.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; 3. THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16"41'09" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.33 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF OTAY LAKES ROAD SOUTH , 65"47'45" WEST, 276,28 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 2066 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. If)~,I# /j.;# 7-/~-2oo2- DAVID W. AMBLER L.S.7322 HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES SAN DIEGO, INC, PAGE 1 OF 1 5-10 SHEET 1 OF' J _RO.I ~ ~.ÞR. on '" í " '" 0 ... :<! ~ ¡::: I VICINITY "'AP "",. ..... EXHIBIT "B" LEGEND: INDICATES VACATION AREA P.O.C. T.p.a.B. INDICATES POINT OF COMMENCEMENT INDICATES TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING I//~ . PARCfL Ã" - 2066 SQUARE Æ£T '\)~ ..'-'" 'ô \J-, ~\~\)''J'J "'~':I':J' -! ~ ~ Ç¡' _c ~i 0, <=1 I REMAJNDER PARCEL PARCEL MAP No. 16878 -.:. "'. /" ~ . 00' .~" ,0· '1"'" -("\ 21;12 ~Q~Y ¡¡ S ~" V~ ()~ þ..i. ~ ../". .~~~ ../" ' r~ ../" _ , ~\V ../" ~~ .p !:I~ ....0 ,,"3 -:f..~S~O' Q\~ r¿.. 'J' '?~ ~ -" >. kJ- , "v ~<o "S¡ .~"i ~ < ~ .~ ~\ - \ ~ I ) 5/ "I'F.\t. . v/\oíf1 T.p..Q.e. ~ -" ~- ~ II HUNSAKER . ~. ~~~~~~ ¿ TES o ~ 50 100 I I SCALE 1"-SO' 150 ~ "IJ'D'!I.......... St.5&*- D B'I.I::ImN:. _"...c:asnz'1 .5I.Ð'£TICö "V~-·f"'No- 111M I't\g¡:;s..., 71-" 5-11 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE PARCEL MAP OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 01-14, EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH; ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE VARIOUS PUBLIC STREETS, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY THE VARIOUS EASEMENTS, ALL AS GRANTED ON SAID MAPS WlTHIN SAID SUBDIVISION; ACKNOWLEDGING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY ALL IRREVOCABLE OFFERS OF DEDICATION AS ON SAID MAP WlTHIN SAID SUBDIVISION; VACATING CERTAIN EASEMENTS LOCATED WITHIN SAID PARCEL MAP; APPROVING THE PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDIVISION, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby finds that certain map survey entitled Chula Vista Tract No. 01-14, EastLake Village Center North and more particularly described as follows Parcels 1 through ]5 of Chula Vista Tract Number 01-]4, in the City if Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California. Area: 53.5 Acres Number of Lots for Public Use: 2 No. of Lots: 15 Numbered Lots: 15 and is made in the manner and fonn prescribed by law and confonns to the surrounding surveys; and that said map and subdivision ofland shown thereon is hereby approved and accepted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City ofChula Vista hereby accepts on behalf of the public the portion of public street Otay Lakes Road, and portion of said street is hereby declared to be public and dedicated to the public use all as shown on Eastlake Village Center North map within said subdivision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby accepts on behalf of the City of Chula Vista the drainage and access, transit parking, sight visibility, traffic control devices and incidental purposes, and sidewalk and public access easements required to serve the project, all as shown on Eastlake Village Center North map within said subdivision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby acknowledges on behalf of the City of Chula Vista the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication of Fee Interest on Lots 14 and 15, and on portions of Lots 5 and 6, for transportation purposes all as shown on Eastlake Village Center North map within said subdivision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, said Council hereby vacates the following easements, or portions thereof, not shown on Eastlake Village Center North Map pursuant to Subdivision Map Act Section 66499.20-112: 5-1,:). ]) Public road and incidental purposes easement, recorded January ]5, 1898 in Book 257, Page 339, and March 25, 1899 in Book 257, Page 428, 2) County road and incidental purposes easement, recorded April 12, 1933 in Book 196, Page 474 of official records. 3) County road and incidental purposes easement, recorded September 27, 1933 in Book 242, Page 2] 7 of official records. 4) Sidewalk and incidental purposes easement, File No. 87-620941 of official records, recorded November 4, ] 987. 5) Light, air, view, and incidental purposes easement, File No. 1992-0418020 of official records, recorded July 2, 1992. 6) Traffic control and incidental purposes easement, File No. 1995-0099109 of official records, recorded March 9,1995. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City ofChula Vista be, and is hereby authorized and directed to endorse upon said map the action of said Council; that said Council has approved said parcel map, and that said public street is accepted on behalf of the public as therefore stated and that the Irrevocable Offers of Dedication of Fee Interests of said lots be acknowledged, that those certain easements as granted on said map within said subdivision are accepted on behalf of the City of Chula Vista as herein above stated, and that those certain easements be vacated as on said map within said subdivision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Parcel Map Improvement Agreement for the completion of improvements in said subdivision, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City an agreement and any amendments thereto which contains those provisions of Tentative Parcel Map Waiver Condition NO.4]. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Clerk be and she is hereby directed to transmit said map to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Diego. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. Presented by Approved as to fonn by John p, Lippitt Public Works Director J!~fi/ì1C~ City Attorney J:lattorney/reso/Village Center North 2 5-/3 THE A TT ACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL ~~C&,/, . aheny ~ City Attorney Dated: 7-31-02 PARCEL MAP AGREEMENT OF CHULA VISTA TRACT 01-14 VILLAGE CENTER NORTH 5-/¥ Recording Requested by: CITY CLERK When Recorded, Mail to: CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, Ca. 91910 No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance to a public agency of less than a fee interest for which no cash consideration has been paid or received. Declarant PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 2002, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC, 900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100, Chula Vista, CA 91914, hereinafter called "Subdivider" with reference to the facts set forth below, which Recitals constitute a part of this Agreement; RECITALS: WHEREAS, Subdivider is about to present to the City Council of the City of Chula Vista for approval and recordation, a parcel map of a proposed subdivision, to be known as EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH (CVT 01-14), pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and in compliance with the provisions of Title IS of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to the filing, approval and recordation of parcel map; and WHEREAS, the Code provides that before said map is finally approved by the City of Chula Vista, Subdivider must have either installed and completed all of the public improvements and/or land development work required by the Code to be installed in subdivisions before a parcel map is approved by the Council for purpose of recording in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, or, as an al ternati ve thereto , Subdivider shall enter into an agreement with City, secured by an approved improvement security to insure the performance of said work -l- 5-/5 pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, agreeing to install and complete, free of liens at Subdivider's own expense, all of the public improvements and/or land development work required in said subdivision within a definite period of time prescribed by said Council; and WHEREAS, Subdivider is willing in consideration of the approval and recordation of said map by the Council, to enter into this agreement wherein it is provided that Subdivider will install and complete, at Subdivider's own expense, all the public improvement work required by City in connection with the proposed map and will deliver to City improvement securities as approved by the City Attorney; and WHEREAS, a tentative map of said subdivision has been waived per City letter dated July 30, 2002; and WHEREAS, complete plans and specifications for the construction, installation and completion of said public improvement work have been prepared and submitted to the City Engineer, as shown on Drawings Nos. 02050-01 through 02050-06 inclusive, on file in the office of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, an estimate of the cost of constructing said public improvements according to said plans and specifications has been submitted and approved by the City in the amount of SEVEN HUNDRED THIRTY-NINE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED FOURTEEN DOLLARS AND NO CENTS $739,214.00) NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I . Subdivider, for itself and his successors in interest, an obligation the burden of which encumbers and runs with the land, agrees to comply with all of the terms, conditions and requirements of the Parcel Map Resolution; to do and perform or cause to be done and performed, at its own expense, without cost to City, in a good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the public improvement and/or land development work required to be done in and adjoining said subdivision, including the improvements described in the above Recitals ("Improvement Work"); and will furnish the necessary materials therefor, all in strict conformity and in accordance with the plans and specifications, which documents have heretofore been filed in the Office of the City Engineer and as described in the above Recitals this reference are incorporated herein and made a part -2- 5- J(p hereof. 2. It is expressly understood and agreed that all monuments have been or will be installed within thirty (30) days after the completion and acceptance of the Improvement Work, and that Subdivider has installed or will install temporary street name signs if permanent street name signs have not been installed. 3. It is expressly understood and agreed that Subdivider will cause all necessary materials to be furnished and all Improvement Work required under the provisions of this contract to be done on or before the second anniversary date of Council approval of the Parcel Map Improvement Agreement. 4. It is understood and agreed that Subdivider will perform said Improvement Work as set forth hereinabove, or that portion of said Improvement Work serving any buildings or structures ready for occupancy in said subdivision, prior to the issuance of any certificate of clearance for utility connections for said buildings or structures in said subdivision, and such certificate shall not be issued until the City Engineer has certified in writing the completion of said public improvements or the portion thereof serving said building or structures approved by the City; provided, however, that the improvement security shall not be required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. 5. It is expressly understood and agreed to by Subdivider that, in the performance of said Improvement Work, Subdivider will conform to and abide by all of the provisions of the ordinances of the City of Chula Vista, and the laws of the State of California applicable to said work. 6. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the City of Chula Vista, simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of THREE HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED SEVEN DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($369,607.00) which security shall guarantee the faithful performance of this contract by Subdivider and is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof. 7. Subdivider further agrees to furnish City of Chula Vista simultaneously with the agreement, an approved improvement security and deliver to the execution of this from a sufficient -3- 5-11 surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of THREE HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED SEVEN DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($369,607.00) to secure the payment of material and labor in connection with the installation of said public improvements, which security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof and the bond amounts as contained in Exhibit "B", and made a part hereof. 8. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the City of Chula Vista, simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of NINE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($9,200.00) to secure the installation of monuments, which security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "C" and made a part hereof. 9. It is further agreed that if the Improvement Work is not completed within the time agreed herein, the sums provided by said improvement securities may be used by City for the completion of the Improvement Work within said Map in accordance with such specifications herein contained or referred, or at the option of the City, as are approved by the City Council at the time of engaging the work to be performed. Upon certification of completion by the City Engineer and acceptance of said work by City, and after certification by the Director of Finance that all costs hereof are fully paid, the whole amount, or any part thereof not required for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider or its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the improvement security . Subdivider agrees to pay to the City any difference between the total costs incurred to perform the work, including design and administration of construction (including a reasonable allocation of overhead), and any proceeds from the improvement security. 10. It is also expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto that in no case will the City of Chula Vista, or any department, board or officer thereof, be liable for any portion of the costs and expenses of the work aforesaid, nor shall any officer, his sureties or bondsmen, be liable for the payment of any sum or sums for said work or any materials furnished therefor, except to the limits established by the approved improvement security in accordance with the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of Title IS of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 11. It is further understood and agreed by Subdivider that -4- 5-/~ any engineering costs (including plan checking, inspection, materials furnished and other incidental expenses) incurred by City in connection with the approval of the Improvement Work plans and installation of Improvement Work hereinabove provided for, and the cost of street signs and street trees as required by City and approved by the City Engineer shall be paid by Subdivider, and that Subdi vider shall deposi t, prior to recordation of the Parcel Map, with City a sum of money sufficient to cover said cost. 12. It is understood and agreed that until such time as all Improvement Work is fully completed and accepted by City, Subdivider will be responsible for the care, maintenance of, and any damage to, the streets, alleys, easements, water and sewer lines within the proposed subdivision. It is further understood and agreed that Subdivider shall guarantee all public improvements for a period of one year from date of final acceptance and correct any and all defects or deficiencies arising during said period as a result of the acts or omission of Subdivider, its agents or employees in the performance of this agreement, and that upon acceptance of the work by City, Subdivider shall grant to City, by appropriate conveyance, the public improvements constructed pursuant to this agreement; provided, however, that said acceptance shall not constitute a waiver of defects by City as set forth hereinabove. 13. It is understood and agreed that City, as indemnitee, or any officer or employee thereof, shall not be liable for any injury to person or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to this agreement. Subdivider further agrees to protect and hold the City, its officers and employees, harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of or arising out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to this agreement; provided, however, that the approved improvement security shall not be required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of property from owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as a result of the construction of said subdivision and the public improvements as provided herein. It shall also extend to damages resulting from diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow, modification of the velocity of the water, erosion or siltation, or the modification of the point of discharge as the result of the construction and maintenance of drainage systems. The approval of plans -5- 5-/9 providing for any or all of these conditions shall not constitute the assumption by City of any responsibility for such damage or taking, nor shall City, by said approval, be an insurer or surety for the construction of the subdivision pursuant to said approved improvement plans, The provisions of this paragraph shall become effective upon the execution of this agreement and shall remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following the acceptance by the City of the improvements. 14. Subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning a subdivision pursuant to the Parcel Map, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the State of California. 15. Assignability. Upon request of the Subdivider, any or all on-site duties and obligations set forth herein may be assigned to Subdivider's successor in interest if the City Manager in his/her sole discretion determines that such an assignment will not adversely affect the City's interest. The City Manager in his/her sole discretion may, if such assignment is requested, permit a substitution of securities by the successor in interest in place and stead of the original securities described herein so long as such substituted securities meet the criteria for security as set forth elsewhere in this Agreement. Such assignment will be in a form approved by the City Attorney. (NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE) -6- 5"-.;) 0 SIGNATURE PAGE PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH (CVT OI-14) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set forth. THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC Mayor of the City of Chula Vista By: r; I Guy Asaro/ Its: Vice President ATTEST City Clerk By:Q, l\¡ ¡1-i~ e ra Klingner Approved as to form by Its: Vice President City Attorney (Attach Notary Acknowledgment) -7- 5'-:;/ CALIFORNIA ALL·PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT I'~'Q-~___~_-<W'~~~_~~~~~A&~" I , I, State of califOrnia} I I 0 n· ss. ~ County of ..ð1fN.. I~ð"' . I. J ~ On ~ "3/, ÚI71-- before me, )f"'W b,<;.- r ----r¡=---o Date liliA _ A :' personally appeared... --(J Tt/J/L.W) I, I' ~ ~ ~.. I ~., ,. ~ ~ i !£j ~ I ~---~--------~ SILVANA C. BRAZELL ~ Commission # 1339922 ~' Notary Public· California ~ ! San Diego County f My CoIIYn. Expires Feb 12, 2006 __.":..J.8III"'1I1111¡rj'- . ',ï4.··· .. ~.-- --- to be the person(s) whose name(s) .ielare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that b&IeAe/they executed the same in ~thejr authorized capacity(ies), and that by Oia/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. .X d,;IL'-:Ll,:.í!:2~ OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: ftuui ih1~ I~~i ~1#I.û1--¡- Document Date: Number of Pages: ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I' Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: o Individual o Corporate Officer - Tltle(s): o Partner - 0 Limited 0 General o Attorney-ln·Fact o Trustee o Guardian or Conservator o Other: . TOp of thumb here ~ I I. ~ ~ S· I R . ~.. Igner S ,epresentlng: ,""',N~,ª,,,~~ ~ -- -~ ~ - - © 1999 Na!lonal Notary Association. 9350 Dø Seto Ave., PD. Box 2402' Chalsworth, CA 91313-2402' www.nallonalnotary.org Prod. No. 5907 Reon::ter:CaIlTolI-Free1-S00·S76-6827 5 -~:;;. ,I '1 I I ~I~"··.' 'I ,I I I I: '1 ,', "1 I I' ,I ~ ¡~ LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit "A" Improvement Security - Faithful Performance Form: Bond Amount: $369,607.00 Exhibit "B" Improvement Security - Material and Labor: Form: Bond Amount: $369,607.00 Exhibit "C" Improvement Security - Monuments: Form: Bond Amount: $9,200.00 Securities approved as to form and amount by City Attorney Improvement Completion Date: Two (2) years from date of City Council approval of the Parcel Map Improvement Agreement. J,\Attorney\SIA\EastLake Village Center North -8- 5 -.;)3 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 01-14, VILLAGE CENTER NORTH, REQUIRING EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the developer has executed a Supplemental Parcel Map Agreement for Chula vista Tract No. 01-14, Village Center North, requiring Eastlake Company, LLC to comply with certain unfulfilled conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby approve a Supplemental Parcel Map Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract No. 01-14, Village Center North, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City of Chula vista. Presented by Approved as to form by ~<--~ J~h Kaheny ~ city Attorney John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works (J\\ATTORNEYIRESOIssia Village Center North (July 25, 2002 (2:43PM)] 5-d-Lf THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL ðJ ~f1/l c û.¿l ~ : Kaheny ~ City Attorney Dated: 7-31-02 SUPPLEMENTAL PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 01-14 VILLAGE CENTER NORTH 5-;).0 , .!'! ( 0 RECORDING REQUEST BY: ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) City Clerk WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 919]0 Above Space for Recorder's Use EP-256 SUPPLEMENTAL PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORm (Conditions], 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 17,22,25,30,3],32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,43, 45,46,48,49,50, and 5] of Tentative Parcel Map Waiver) This Supplemental Parcel Map Improvement Agreement ("Agreement") is made this day of , 2002, by and between THE CITY OF CIIDLA VISTA. California ("City" for recording purposes only) and the signators of this Agreement, EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC, a California Limited Liability Corporation ("Developer" or "Owner"), with reference to the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute a part of this Agreement: RECITALS A. This Agreement concerns and affects certain real property located in Chula Vista, California, more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Property"). The Property is located on the Northwest quadrant of the Eastlake Parkway and Otay Lakes Road intersection and is more commonly referred to as Eastlake Village Center North. For purposes of this Agreement the term "Project" shall also mean "Property". B. "Owner" or "Developer" means the person, persons or entity having a legal or an equitable interest in the property or parts thereof and includes Owner's, successors-in-interest and assigns of any property within the boundaries of the Property. D. Developer or Developer's predecessor in interest has applied for and the City has 1 5 -;t(p approved a waiver of a tentative parcel map subject to certain conditions more particularly described in the letter dated July 30, 2002 on file in the office of the City Engineer ("TPM Waiver") attached as Exhibit "B." E. Developer has requested the City's approval of a [mal parcel map for the Property. F. City is willing, on the premises, security, terms and conditions herein contained to approve the [mal parcel map for which Developer has applied. G. The following defined terms shall have the meamng set forth herein, unless otherwise specifically indicated: a. For purposes of this Agreement, "Final Map" means the final parcel map for Eastlake Village Center North, b. "Guest Builder" means those entities obtaining any interest in the Property or a portion of the Property, after the Final Map has been recorded. c. "MND IS-0]-042" means Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by the City Council on July 23, 2002, pursuant to Resolution 2002-264. d, "SPA Plan" means the Village Center North Supplemental Sectional Planning Area as adopted by the City Council on July 23, 2002, pursuant to Resolution No. 2002-264. e, "PFFP" means the EastLake 1 Public Facilities Financing Plan adopted by the City Council on July 23, 2002, by Resolution No. 2002-264, and as may be further amended from time to time. f. "Complete Construction" shall mean that construction of the improvements have completed and have been inspected and accepted by the City. g. "VCNOA" shall mean Village Center North Owner's Association, and/or another financial mechanism responsible for maintaining all common areas within the Project acceptable to the Director of Planning and Building. NOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual covenants, terms and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as set forth below. 1. Agreement Applicable to Subsequent Owners. a. Agreement Binding Upon Successors. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors, assigns and interests of the parties as to any or all of the Property as described on Exhibit "A" until released by the mutual consent of the parties. 2 5-':;'7 b. Agreement Runs with the Land. The burden of the covenants contained in this Agreement ("Burden") is for the benefit of the Property and the City, its successors and assigns and any successor in interest thereto. City is deemed the beneficiary of such covenants for and in its own right and for the purposes of protecting the interest of the community and other parties public or private, in whose favor and for whose benefit of such covenants running with the land have been provided without regard to whether City has been, remained or are owners of any particular land or interest therein. If such covenants are breached, the City shaH have the right to exercise all rights and remedies and to maintain any actions or suits at law or in equity or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of such breach to which it or any other beneficiaries of this agreement and the covenants may be entitled. c. Developer Release on Guest Builder Assignments. If Developer assigns any portion of the Project to a Guest Builder, Developer may request to be released ITom Developer's obligations under this Agreement, that are expressly assumed by the Guest Builder, provided Developer obtains the prior written consent of the City to such release. Such assignment to the Guest Builder shall, however, be subject to this Agreement and the Burden of this Agreement shall remain a covenant running with the land. The City shall not withhold its consent to any such request for a release so long as the assignee acknowledges that the Burden of the Agreement runs with the land, assumes the obligations of the Developer under this Agreement, and demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City, its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement as it relates to the portion of the Project which is being acquired by the Assignee. d. Partial Release of Developer's Assignees. If Developer assigns any portion of the Project subject to the Burden of this Agreement, upon request by the Developer or its assignee, the City shall release the assignee of the Burden of this Agreement as to such assigned portion if such portion has complied with the requirements of this Agreement to the satisfaction of the City and such partial release will not, in the opinion of the City, jeopardize the likelihood that the remainder of the Burden will not be completed. e. Release of Individual Lots. Upon the occurrence of any of the following events, Developer shall, upon receipt of the prior written consent of the City Manager (or Manager's designee), have the right to release any lot(s) ITom Developer's obligation under this Agreement: i, The execution of a purchase agreement for the sale of a parcel to a buyer; ii. The conveyance of a lot to a Homeowner's Association andlor another financial mechanism acceptable to the City Manager; The City shall not withhold its consent to such release so long as the City finds in good faith that such release will not jeopardize the City's assurance that the obligations set forth in this Agreement will be performed. At the request of the Developer, the City Manager (or Manager's designee) shall execute an instrument drafted by Developer in a recordable form acceptable to the City Manager (or Manager's designee), which confirms the release of such lot or parcel ITom the encumbrance of this Agreement. 3 5-;)8 Notwithstanding the foregoing, at the close of escrow on any individual lot or parcel encumbered by this Agreement, such lot or parcel shall be automatically released ITom the encumbrance hereof. 2. Condition No. 1 - (General Preliminary). ln satisfaction of Condition I of the TPM Waiver, Developer hereby agrees, to comply with all of the tenns, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Developer as to any or all of the property. 3. Condition No.2 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition 2 of the TPM Waiver, Developer hereby agrees to comply, remain in compliance and implement, the tenns, conditions and provisions, as are applicable to the Property of: I) EastLake II General Development Plan (GDP); 2) Village Center North Supplemental Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan; 3) EastLake I Design Guidelines; and 4) Village Center North Supplemental Public Facilities Financing Plan all approved by the City Council on July 23, 2002 by Resolution No. 2002-264 and the EastLake II Planned Community District Regulation and Land Use Map approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2863 on July 23, 2002. The Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City, providing the City with such security (including recordation of covenants running with the land) and implementation procedures as the City may require to comply with the above regulatory documents. Said Agreement shall also ensure that, after approval of the parcel map, the developer will continue to comply, remain in compliance, and implement such Plans. 4. Condition No.4 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No.4 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees that, if Developer desires to do certain work on the property after approval or waiver of the tentative parcel map, but prior to recordation of the applicable fmal parcel map, he may do so by obtaining the required approvals and pennits rrom the City, The permits can be approved or denied by the City in accordance with the City's Municipal Code, regulations and policies. Said permits do not constitute a guarantee that subsequent submittals (i,e., grading or improvement plans) will be approved. All work perfonned by the Developer prior to approval of the applicable parcel map shall be at Developer's own risk. Prior to issuance of grading and/or construction pennit, the Developer shall acknowledge in writing that subsequent submittals (i.e., grading or improvement plans) may require extensive changes, at Developers cost, to work done under such early permit. Prior to the issuance of a permit, the Developer shaH post a bond or other security acceptable to the City in an amount detennined by the City to guarantee the rehabilitation of the land if the applicable parcel map does not record. 5. Condition No.5 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No, 5 of the TPM Waiver, Developer hereby agrees that if any of the tenns, covenants or conditions contained herein shall fail to occur, or if they are, by their tenns, to be implemented and maintained over time, and if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their tenns, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, including issuance of building pennits; deny, or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived rrom the approvals herein granted; and institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Developer shall be notified ten (10) days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by the City and shall be given the opportunity 4 5-;J~ to remedy any deficiencies identified by the City within a reasonable and diligent time rrame. 6. Condition No.6 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No.6 of the TPM Waiver, Developer hereby agrees to indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City hannless fÌ'om and against any and all claims, liabilities and costs, including Attorney's fees, arising fÌ'om challenges to MND 18-01-042, and any or all entitlements and approvals issued by the City in connection with the Project. 7. Condition No.8 - (General Preliminary). In satisfaction of Condition No.8 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees that subsequent development of a parcel, which does not require the filing of a subsequent parcel map, shall meet, prior to issuance of a building permit for that lot, all the applicable conditions of approval of the TPM Waiver, as determined by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and Building. 8. Condition No. 10 - (Environmental/Preservation). In satisfaction of Condition No. 10 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to implement, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building, all applicable mitigation measures identified in MND IS-Ol-042 and the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the requirements, provisions and schedules contained therein, and as further specified in these TPM Waiver conditions. If any permits are required to be obtained by Developer as set forth herein, Developer shall obtain said permits with applicable agencies in consultation with the City. 9. Condition No. 11 - (Environmental/Preservation). In satisfaction of Condition No.1 I of the TPM Waiver, the Developer agrees to implement, or cause the implementation of all mitigation measures pertaining to the Project identified in MND lS-01-042. Any such measures not satisfied by a specific condition of this Resolution or by the project design shaH be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building. Mitigation Measures shall be monitored via the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program approved in conjunction with MND 18-01- 042. Modification of the sequence of mitigation shall be at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Building should changes in the circumstances warrant such revision. 10. Condition No. 12 - (Fish and Game). In satisfaction of Condition No. 12 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of the Califomia Department ofFish and Game, the U.S. Department ofFish & Wildlife and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. 11. Condition No. 17 - (ADA Standards). In satisfaction of Condition No.1 7 of the TPM Waiver, the Developer agrees to Construct sidewalks and pedestrian ramps on all walkways to comply with the "Americans with Disabilities Act" (ADA) standards, as approved by the City Engineer. In the event the Federal Govemment adopts new ADA standards for street rights-of-way, which are in conflict with the standards and approvals for the Project, all such approvals conflicting with those new standards shall be updated to reflect the new standards. Unless otherwise required by federal law, City ADA standards may be considered vested, as determined by federal regulations, once construction has commenced. 5 5-30 12. Condition No. 22 - (protective Fencing). In satisfaction of Condition No, 22 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to design and secure a protective fencing system around all proposed pennanent detention basins, and the inlets and outlets of stonn drain structures, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The final fencing design and types of construction materials shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and Building. In addition, Developer agrees to construct the approved fencing system in conjunction with the rough grading for the Project. 13. Condition No. 25 - (Detention Basin Landscaping). In satisfaction of Condition No. 25 of the TPM Waiver, Developer shall obtain, prior to issuance of the first building pennit for the Project, approval of a landscape concept for the detention basin from the Director of Planning and Building and the Director of Public Works. The landscape concept shall satisfY requirements of the City Landscape Manual and provide a design that requires minimum maintenance. 14. Condition No. 30 - (LOMR). In satisfaction of Condition No. 30 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to obtain a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency revising the current National Flood Insurance Program Maps of the area to reflect the effect of the drainage improvements prior to City acceptance of the detention basin and release of the grading bond. 15. Condition No. 31 - (NPDES). In satisfaction of Condition No. 31 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to comply with all applicable regulations established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), as set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), permit requirements for urban runoff and storm water discharge, the Clean Water Act, and any regulations adopted by the City of Chula Vista, pursuant to the NPDES regulations or requirements. Further, the Developer shall file a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity and shall implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) concurrent with the commencement of grading activities. The SWPPP shall include both construction and post construction pollution prevention and pollution control measures and shall identifY funding mechanisms for post construction control measures. The developer shall comply with all the provisions of the NPDES and the Clean Water Program during and after all phases of the development process, including, but not limited to, mass grading, rough grading, construction of street and landscaping improvements, and construction of dwelling units. The Developer shall design the Project storm drains and other drainage facilities to include Best Management Practices to minimize non-point source pollution, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 16. Condition No. 32 - (No Protest of Funding Mechanism). In partial satisfaction of Condition No. 32 of the TPM Waiver, the Developer agrees to not protest the formation of a facilities benefit district or any other funding mechanism approved by the City to finance the operation, maintenance, inspection, and monitoring of NPDES facilities. This agreement to not protest shall not be deemed a waiver of the right to challenge the amount of any assessment, which may be imposed due to the addition of these improvements and shall not interfere with the right of 6 5-3/ any person to vote in a secret ballot election. The above noted agreement shall run with the entire land contained within the Project. 17. Condition No. 33 - (Siltation Removal). In satisfaction of Condition No, 33 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to provide for the removal of siltation ITom the detention basin located at the southwestern comer of the Project until all upstream grading within the Project is completed and erosion protection planting is adequately established as detennined by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and Building. Further, Developer understands and agrees that, in the perfonnance of the Developer's obligations hereunder, Developer shall confonn to and abide by all the provisions of the ordinances, standards and policies of the City, the laws and statutes of the State of California, and F ederailaws and statutes, as may be applicable to said work. The City Engineer shall be solely responsible for detennining what siltation, if any, is attributable to the Project. In addition, concurrent with the approval of the Final Map, Developer shall provide City with a cash deposit for Developer's removal of siltation obligations under this Agreement ("Siltation Security Deposit") in the amount of $6,500. City shall hold the Siltation Security Deposit for the duration of the Developer's obligations hereunder, and expend such deposit solely for purposes of said perfonnance of such obligations in the event of Developer's default in perfonnance of such obligations. Should the City expend the cash deposit due to Developer's default of its perfonnance obligations, Developer agrees to redeposit the equivalent sum of money needed to equal the amount of the Siltation Security Deposit required by this Agreement, within 30 days of the City's request for such deposit. All interest earnings on the Security Deposit shall be retained by the City during this period. Any unexpended amount of the Siltation Security Deposit, including any interest earned, shall be released and remitted to Developer upon the tennination of its removal of siltation obligations as set forth in this Agreement. 18. Condition No. 34 - (NPDES). In satisfaction of Condition No. 34 of the TPM Waiver, the Developer hereby agrees to the following: a. Construction of Treatment Control BMP Facilities. Developer hereby agrees to construct Treatment Control BMP facilities as specified in Exhibit "C" of this Agreement ("BMP Facilities"), in strict confonnity and in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the City Engineer. Developer shall complete the construction of the BMP Facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to final inspection for the first building structure that is constructed within the Project but not later that one (I) year after the City's approval of any grading and/or construction plans proposing the construction of said BMP Facilities. It is expressly understood and agreed to by the Developer that, in the perfonnance of the construction of said BMP Facilities, Developer shall confonn to and abide by all the provisions of the ordinances, standards, and policies of the City of Chula Vista, the laws of the state of California and federal law as applicable to said work as all may be modified ITom time to time. Developer further agrees that the requirements set forth in this condition shall be in addition to Developer's obligation to construct and maintain effective post-construction BMP's as set forth elsewhere in this Agreement. b. Maintenance ofBMP Facilities. Developer, hereby agrees to the following: i. Developer shall, at its sole expense, prepare and obtain the approval of the City 7 .5~- 3d-- Engineer of an Operation and Mailltenance Plan ("O&M Plan") concurrent with the approval of the grading and/or construction plans proposing the construction of the BMP Facilitites. Further, not later than thirty (30) days after the completion of construction of the BMP Facilities, Developer agrees to commence inspection and maintenance of the BMP Facilities in accordance with the approved O&M Plan or enter into a contract with an entity acceptable to the City Engineer to do so ("Maintenance Entity"). The Maintenance Entity shall provide a written report ("Inspection/Maintenance Report") that certifies that the inspection and maintenance under the O&M Plan has been performed and that the BMP Facilities continues to meet the original design standards. Any deficiencies in the performance of the BMP Facilities and the corresponding corrective action shall also be noted in the report. A copy of the Inspection/Maintenance Report shall be provided to the City Engineer or designee within one week of performing each inspection and monitoring operation. ü. Developer hereby grants permission to the City, its authorized agents and employees, to enter upon the Project and to inspect the BMP Facilities whenever the City deems necessary to review reported deficiencies and/or to respond to citizen complaints. The City shall provide the Developer copies of the inspection findings and, if necessary, a directive in writing requiring Developer to proceed with any necessary repairs ("BMP Repairs") within fourteen (14) days :&om receiving said notice to proceed. Any such BMP Repairs shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer not later than thirty (30) days after commencement of such ("Repair Completion Time"). In addition, Developer acknowledges and agrees that the City Engineer may, at hislher sole discretion, extend the Repair Completion Time for a reasonable time not to exceed thirty (30) additional days, if Developer provides evidence satisfactory to the City Engineer demonstrating that Developer is diligently pursuing such BMP Repairs. iii. Developer understands and agrees that, in the event of Developer's default in the performance of its obligations herein, Developer shall be subject to all the provisions of the ordinances, standards, and policies of the City of Chula Vista (including Section 14.20.310 of the Municipal Code), the laws of the state of California, and federal law as applicable to said work as all may be amended :&om time to time. c. Indemnity. Developer further understands and agrees that City, as indemnitee, or any officer or employee thereof, shall not be liable for any injury to person or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of Developer, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to the Developer's obligations described herein. Developer further agrees to protect and hold the City, its officers and employees, hannless :&om any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of or arising out of acts or omissions of Developer, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to the Developer's obligations described herein. The approved improvement securities referred to above shall not cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such indemnification and agreement to hold hannless shall extend to damages to adjacent or downstream 8 5-33 properties or the taking of property trom owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as a result of Developer's maintenance activities as provided herein. It shall also extend to damages resulting trom diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow, modification of the velocity of the water, erosion or siltation, or the modification of the point of discharge as the result of the Developer's obligations described herein, The approval of plans for the Developer's obligations described herein and any related improvements shall not constitute the assumption by City of any responsibility for such damage or taking, nor shall City, by said approval, be an insurer or surety for the Developer's obligations described herein and any related improvements. 19. Condition No. 35 - (8D8MP). In satisfaction of Condition No. 35 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees that Prior to approval of any grading, construction, and building permits for the project, Developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, compliance with all of the applicable provisions of the municipal code, Model SUSMP for the San Diego Region, and the City of Chula Vista SUSMP as may be adopted in the future. The Developer shall incorporate into the project planning and design effective post-construction BMP's and provide all necessary studies and reports demonstrating compliance with the applicable regulations and standards. BMP's shall be identified and implemented that specifically prevent pollution of storm drain systems trom the gas station, car wash, restaurants, parking lots, and trash collection areas. 20. Condition No. 36 - (Withhold Building Permits and Hold Harmless). In satisfaction of Condition No. 36 of the TPM Waiver, Developer understands and agrees that the performance of Developer's obligations hereunder is required for the health and safety of the residents of its Project. Therefore Developer agrees to the fo11owing: a. That the City may withhold building permits for the subject Project if anyone of the following occur: i. Regional development threshold limits set by the East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan, as amended trom time to time, have been reached or in order to have the Project comply with the Growth Management Program as may be amended trom time to time. ii. Traffic volumes, levels of service, public utilities and/or services either exceed the adopted City threshold standards or fail to comply with then effective Growth Management Ordinance, and Growth Management Program and any amendments thereto. Public utilities shall include, but not be limited to, air quality, drainage, sewer and water. iii. The required public facilities, as identified in the PFFP, or as amended or otherwise conditioned have not been completed or constructed to the satisfaction of the City. The Developer may propose changes in the timing and sequencing of development and the construction of improvements affected. In such case, the PFFP may be amended, as approved by the City's Director of Planning and Building and the Public Works Director. 9 5-3f b. Defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees, ITom any claim, action or proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees, to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City including approval by its Planning Commission, City Councilor any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to this subdivision pursuant to Section 66499.3 7 of the State Map Act; provided the City promptly notifies the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding, and on the further condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense. c. Permit all cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista equal opportunity to place conduit and provide cable television service for each lot or unit within tile Project. Developer further agrees to grant, by license or easement, and for the benefit of, and to be enforceable by, the City of Chula Vista, conditional access to cable television conduit within the properties situated within the parcel map only to those cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista, the condition of such grant being that: (a) such access is coordinated with Developer's construction schedule so that it does not delay or impede Developer's construction schedule and does not require the 1Tenches to be reopened to accommodate that placement of such conduits; and (b) any such cable company is and remains in compliance with, and promises to remain in compliance with the tenns and conditions of the franchise and with all other rules, regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or may ITOm time to time be, issued by the City of Chula Vista. Developer hereby conveys to the City of Chula Vista the authority to enforce said covenant by such remedies as the City detennines appropriate, including revocation of said grant upon detennination by the City of Chula Vista that they have violated the conditions of grant. d. That the City may withhold the issuance of building pennits for the Project, should the Developer be detennined by the City to be in breach of any of the tenns of the TPM Waiver conditions or any Supplemental Agreement. The City shall provide the Developer of notice of such detennination and allow the Developer reasonable time to cure said breach. e. Hold the City harmless ITom any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting ITom this Project. f. Participate, on a fair share basis, in any deficiency plan or financial program adopted by SANDAG to comply with the Congestion Management Program (CMP). g. To not protest the fonnation of any future regional impact fee program or facilities benefit district to finance the construction of regional facilities. This agreement not to protest shall not be deemed a waiver of the right to challenge the amount of any assessment which may be imposed due to the addition of these new improvements and shall not interfere with the right of any person to vote in a secret ballot election. h. lndemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all fmes, costs, and expenses arising out of non-compliance with the requirements of the NPDES regulations, in connection with the execution of any construction and/or grading work for the Project, whether the non-compliance results ITom any action by the 10 5-35 Developer, any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others. The Developer's indemnification shaH include any and aH costs, expenses, attorney's fees and liability incurred by the City. 21. Condition No. 37 - (previous Agreements). In satisfaction of Condition No, 37 of the TPM Waiver, the Developer agrees to comply with all previous agreements still in effect as they pertain to the Project. 22. Condition No. 38 and 39 - (Air Quality Improvement Plan). In satisfaction of Condition No. 38 and 39 of the TPM Waiver, Developer hereby acknowledges and agrees to implement the fmat AQIP measures as approved by the City Council, and to comply and remain in compliance with the Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP). The Developer shall also agree to waive any claim that the adoption of a final AQIP constitutes an improper subsequent imposition of the condition, The Developer also acknowledges that the City Council may, ITom time-to-time, modifY air quality improvement and energy conservation measures related to new development as various technologies and/or programs change or become available. The Developer shall be required to modifY the AQIP to incorporate those new measures, which are in effect at the time, prior to or concurrent with each Parcel map approval within the Project. The new measures shall apply, as applicable, to development within all future Parcel map areas, but shall not be retroactive to those areas, which receive Parcel map approval prior to effect of the subject new measures. 23. Condition No. 40 - (Water Conservation Plan). In satisfaction of Condition No. 40 of the TPM Waiver, Developer acknowledges and agrees that the City Council may, ITom time- to-time, modifY water conservation measures related to new development as various technologies and/or programs change or become available. The Developer shaH be required to modifY the WCP to incorporate those new measures, which are in effect at the time, prior to or concurrent with each parcel map approval within the Project. The new measures shall apply to development within all future parcel map areas, but shall not be retroactive to those areas, which received parcel map approval prior to effect of the subject measures. 24. Condition No. 41 - (Owners Association). In partial satisfaction of Condition No. 41 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to submit and obtain the approval of the Director of Planning and Building, prior to the approval ofthe first building permit for the project, ofCC&R's and/or other similar documentation (herein collectively referred to as "CC&R's") for the Project. Said CC&R's shall include all of the following: a) Maintenance of all common facilities located within the Project including, but not be limited to: walls, fences, water fountains, lighting structures, paths, trails, access roads, drainage structures, water treatment facilities, landscaping, trees, streets, parking lots, driveways, and sewage systems that are private. Common facilities are to be identified or labeled in an exhibit in the CC&R's. b) Language establishing the VCNOA responsibility to maintain landscaping improvements including trees within public parkways along, Eastlake Parkway and Otay Lakes Road. 11 5~3~ c) Provisions which clearly indicate the responsibility, if any, of the individual owners to water and maintain irrigation and planting within the parkways. The CC&R's shall also indicate that the VCNOA shall have both the authority and the obligation to enforce said maintenance. d) Language naming the City of Chula Vista as a party to the CC&R's, with the authority, but not the obligation, to enforce the terms and conditions of the CC&R's in the same manner as any owner within the VCNOA. e) Before any revisions to provisions of the CC&R's that may particularly affect the City can become effective, said revisions shall be approved by the City. The VCNOA shall not seek approval from the City of said revisions without the prior consent of 100 percent of the holders of first mortgages or property owners within the VCNOA unless otherwise approved by the Director of Planning and Building. f) The VCNOA shall inderrmif'y and hold the City harmless fiom any claims, demands, causes of action liability or loss related to or arising from the maintenance activities of the VCNOA. g) The VCNOA shall not seek to be released by the City from the maintenance obligations described herein without the prior consent of the City and 100 percent of the holders of first mortgages or property owners within the VCNOA. h) The VCNOA is required to procure and maintain a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance written on a per-occurrence basis in an amount not less than one million dollars combined single limit. The policy shall be acceptable to the City and name the City as additionally insured. i) Provisions reqUlnng daily sweepmg of common parking lots by a reputable sweeping company. j) Language assuring VCNOA membership in an advance notice such as the USA Dig Alert Service in perpetuity. k) Language requiring that the Park and Ride area (Parcel 14 of the Parcel Map) shall be maintained in first class condition at all times and that the insurance for the common areas will specifically cover the Park and Ride use. I) Language requiring that those portions of the future transit stop facility located within Parcels 5 and 6 of the project, shall be maintained in first class condition by the respective owners of said parcels until such time as the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for said transit stop facility granted on the final Parcel Map is accepted by the City, m) Language specif'ying that individual owners may not modif'y the planting located within the public right of way or landscape buffer easements. 12 5'37 25. Condition No. 43 - (Underground Utilities). ln satisfaction of Condition No. 43 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to immediately relocate, at Developer's sole expense, the necessary above and/or underground utilities to accommodate the required street trees and approved landscape and irrigation improvement plans to the satisfaction of the Department of Planning and Building and the City Engineer. 26. Condition No. 45 - (Fire Hydrants). In satisfaction of Condition No. 45 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to provide prior to delivery of combustible building materials, a 20 ft. wide all-weather access road (or an acceptable alternative approved by the Fire Marshal and in compliance with the Uniform Fire Code) and required fIre hydrants with required water pressure to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. 27. Condition No. 46 - (Code Requirements). In satisfaction of Condition No. 46 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code including Chapter 15.04 "Grading Ordinance" as amended. Preparation of the Final Map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual. 28. Condition No. 48 - (Clean Water Act). In satisfaction of Condition No. 48 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to comply with all relevant Federal, State, and Local regulations, including the Clean Water Act. The developer shall be responsible for providing all required testing and documentation to demonstrate said compliance as required by the City Engineer. 29. Condition No. 49 - (payment of Fees). In satisfaction of Condition No. 49 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to pay all required fees, including, but not limited to, the following fees in accordance with the City Code and Council Policy: The Transportation and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. Signal Participation Fees. All applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to sewer connection fees. Interim SR - I 25 impact fee Telegraph Canyon Gravity Sewer Basin DIF Telegraph Canyon Drainage Basin DIF Developer agrees to pay the amount of said fees in effect when payment is due. 30. Condition No. 50 - (Municipal Code). In satisfaction of Condition No. 50 of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to comply with Chapter 19.09 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Growth Management) as may be amended from time to time by the City. Said chapter includes but is not limited to: threshold standards (19.09.04), public facilities fmance plan implementation (19.09.090), and public facilities fInance plan amendment procedures (19.09.100). 31. Condition No. 51 - (public Facilities Financing Plan). In satisfaction of Condition No.5 I of the TPM Waiver, Developer agrees to install public facilities in accordance 13 5-38 with the PFFP as may be amended from time to time, or as required by the City Engineer to meet threshold standards adopted by the City of Chula Vista. The City Engineer and Director of Planning & Building may, at their discretion, modifY the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision. 32. Satisfaction of Conditions. City agrees that the execution of this Agreement constitutes satisfaction or partial satisfaction of Developer's obligation of Conditions 1,2,4,5,6,8, 10, II, 12, 17,22,25,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,43, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, and 51 of the TPM Waiver. 33. UnfulfIlled Conditions. Developer hereby agrees, unless otherwise conditioned, that Developer shaH comply with all unfulfiHed conditions of the TPM Waiver, and shaH remain in compliance with and implement the terms, conditions and provisions therein. 34. Assignability. Upon request of the Developer, any or all on-site duties and obligations set forth herein may be assigned to Developer's successor in interest if the City Manager in his/her sole discretion determines that such an assignment wiH not adversely affect the City's interest. The City Manager in hislher sole discretion may, if such an assignment is requested, permit a substitution of securities by the successor in interest in place and stead of the original securities described herein so long as such substituted securities meet the criteria for security as set forth elsewhere in this Agreement. Such assignment wiH be in a form approved by the City Attorney. 35. Recording. This Agreement, or an abstract hereof shaH be recorded simultaneously with the recordation of the Final Map. 36. Building Permits. Developer and Guest Builders acknowledge and agree that the City may withhold the issuance of building permits for the Project, should the Developer be determined by the City to be in breach of any of the terms of this Agreement. The City shall provide the Developer of notice of such determination and allow the Developer with reasonable time to cure said breach. 37. MisceUaneous. a. Notices. Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement or by law, any and all notices required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be served on or delivered to either party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served, delivered, and received when personally delivered to the party to whom it is directed, or in lieu thereof, when three (3) business days have elapsed foHowing deposit in the U.S. mail, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, first-class postage prepaid, addressed to the address indicated in this Agreement. A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other party. CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue 14 5-39 ChuJa Vista, CA. 91910 Attn: Director of Public Works Developer: Eastlake Company, LLC 900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100 Chula Vista, CA 9 I 9 I 4 Attn: Curt Smith, Vice President Tel: (619) 421-0127 A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided in this paragraph. b. Captions. Captions in this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference and do not define, describe or limit the scope or intent of this Agreement or any of its terms. c. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter hereof. Any prior oral or written representations, agreements, understandings, and/or statements shall be of no force and effect. This Agreement is not intended to supersede or amend any other agreement between the parties UlÙess expressly noted. d. Preparation of Agreement. No inference, assumption or presumption shall be drawn ITom the fact that a party or his attorney prepared and/or drafted this Agreement. It shall be conclusively presumed that both parties participated equally in the preparation and/or drafting this Agreement. e. Recitals; Attachments. Any recitals set forth above and exhibits attached hereto are incorporated by reference into this Agreement. f. Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences litigation for the judicial interpretation, reformation, enforcement or rescission hereof, the prevailing party will be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought. [NEXT PAGE IS PAGE ONE OF TWO SIGNATURE PAGES] 15 5~40 [PAGE ONE OF TWO SIGNATURE PAGES TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH] ~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set forth, -"-.. .' CITY OF CHULA VISTA Mayor Attest: Susan Bigelow City Clerk -'. Approved as to fonn: -. John M. Kaheny City Attorney [NEXT PAGE IS PAGE TWO OF TWO SIGNATURE PAGES] 16 5-'f1 [PAGE TWO OF TWO SIGNATURE PAGES TO'fIlÈSUPPLEMENTAL PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH] DEVELOPER/OWNER: EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC 900 LANE AVE, SUITE 100 CHULA VISTA, CA 91914 By: r;;f- Title: Guy Asaro, Vice President (Attach Notary Acknowledgment) '" Q '^ !'\,1/hV Its: Debra Klingner, Vice President 17 :5 - 1f:J... CALIFORNIA ALL·PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT r£'<'~~~~"""'-~,<,"""'-~.<w~~~A"" ~ ~ I ::~::fo~allforn)~~ } ss. I~ ~ ) ~~ !iiJ¡ On '3( :;'ò()"7- before me, C. fh ~ Dale Name and TiUs of Qffiœr {e.Q_, "Jane ~ personally appeared .&.'-' Å/Jd"tO 11M.."- D"fy,tt I<~ :&1 ~ Name(a)ofSir{s) ~. ersonally known to me \'ií D proved to me on the basis of satisfactory ~ evidence ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,'" ~ ,I SILVANA C. BRAZELL ~ Commission # 1339922 z ~, Notary Public· California ~ I Sin Diego County ~ M)' COrm1, EJipIrBtI Feb 12, 2006 ---------.,.,...---~,~-- to be the person(s) whose name(s) iefare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowiedged to me that -RelsAe/they executed the same in Aio/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by bi&'Rer/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. J..:iA;~"fJ}::~ OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: ~ Document Date: .p~1YI'1' Lr'4V~ ¥M~ Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: D Individual D Corporate Officer - Title(s): D Partner - D Limited D General D Attorney-in-Fact D Trustee D Guardian or Conservator D Other: . Top of thumb here ~ I ~ ~ Signer Is Representing: ~=~~~~~'<).¡;.~""'~~.,,'*'§';~~:. ~_. ~ © 1999 National Notary Association· 9350 De Solo Ave" P.O. BOK 2402· Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402. www.nationalnotary.org Prod. No_S907 Reorder:CaIlTolI·Free1-800-876-6B27 -5-f3 , 'I I ., ~ " , '1 , ~ ~ I '1 ., Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C List of Exhibits SUPPLEMENTAL PARCEL MAP IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH Legal Description of Property Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map Waiver Treatment Control BMP Facilities 18 5: 'ÍL/ Exhibit "A" Legal Description of Property Parcels 1 through 15 ofChula Vista Tract Number 01-14, in the City ifChula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. , filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on , 2002, as File No. of Official Records. 5-'16 EXHIBIT "B" C[1Y OF CHUIA VISTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC; WORKS ENGINEERING DIVISION July 30, 2002 File No. EP-256 Guy Asaro The Eastiake Company 900 Lane Avenue Suite 100 Chula Vista, CA 91914 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP WAVIER, TPM 01-14, FOR THE EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NOTH TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP The Public Works Department has completed review of your request for waiver of Tentative Parcel Map 01-14 for the proposed commercial project at the subject location. Staff has determined that your request for the subject waiver is hereby conditionally approved. Said waiver expires two ),ears from the date of this letter on July 30, 2004. The following are conditions of approval to the corresponding Final Parcel Map. 1. All of the terms, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to tile benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Developer as to any or all of the property. 2. Developer shall, comply, remain in compliance and implement, the terms, conditions and provisions, as are applicable to the Property., of: 1) EastLake II General Development Plan (GDP); 2) Village Center North Supplemental Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan; 3) EastLake I Design Guidelines; and 4) Village Center North Supplemental Public Facilities Financing Plan all approved by the City Council on July 23, 2002 by Resolution No. 2002-264 and the EastLake II Planned Community District Regulation and Land Use Map approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2863 on July 23, 2002. The Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City, providing the City with such security (including recordation of covenants running with the land) and implementation procedures as the City may require to comply with the above regulatory documents. Said Agreement shall also ensure that, after approval of the parcel map, the developer will continue to comply, remain in compliance, and implement such Plans. 3. In the event that oversizing of the improvements necessary to sen,e other properties is required by the City Engineer, Developer shall include the installation of all necessary improvements to serve the project, plus the necessary improvements for oversizing of facilities required to serve such other properties. At the request of Developer, City shall consider formation of a reimbursement district or any other reimbursement mechanism in accordance with the restrictions of State Law and City ordinances. Page 2 4. If Developer desires to do certain work on the property after approval or waiver of the tentative parcel map, but prior to recordation of the applicable final parcel map, he may do so by obtaining tile required approvals and permits from the City. The permits can be approved or denied by the CiD, in accordance with the City's Municipal Code, regulations and policies. Said permits do not constitute a g~arantee that subsequent submittals (i.e., grading or improvement plans) will be approved. All work performed by the Developer prior to approval of the applicable parcel map shall be at Developer's own risk. Prior to issuance of grading and/or construction permit, the Developer shall acknowledge in writing that subsequent submittals (i.e., grading or improvement plans) may require extensive changes, at Developers cost, to work done under such early permit. Prior to the issuance ora permit, the Developer shall post a bond or other security acceptable to the City in an amount determined by the City to guarantee the rehabilitation of the land if the applicable parcel map does not record. 5. If any of the terms, covenants or conditions contained herein shall fail to occur, or if they are, bv their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, and if any of such conditions fail to be s~ implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein ~anted, including issuance of building permits; deny, or further condition thk subsequent approvals that are derived from the approvals herein granted; and institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Developer shall be notified ten (10) days in advance prior to any of the above actions beine taken by the City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the ~i~, within a reasonable and diligent time frame. 6. Prior to approval of the final parcel map, Developer shall agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any and all claims, liabilities and costs, including Attorney's fees, arising fi-om challenges to the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND IS-01-042) for the Project. and any or all entitlements and approvals issued by the City in connection with the Project. 7. An5, and ali agreements that the Developer is required to enter into hereunder shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney. 8. The subsequent development of a parcel, which does not require the filing of a subsequent parcel map, shall meet, prior to issuance of a building permit for that lot, all the applicable conditions of approval of the Tentative Parcel Map waiver, as determined by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and Building. 9. Unless otherwise specified, "dedicate" means grant the appropriate easement, rather than fee title. Where an easement is required, the Developer shall be required to provide subordination of any prior lien holders in order to ensure that the City has a first priority interest in such land unless otherwise excused by the City. Where fee title is granted or dedicated to the City, said fee title shall be free and clear of ail encumbrances, unless_otherwise excused by the City. ENVIRONMENTAL/PRESERVATION I0. Prior to approval of the final parcel map, the Developer shall enter into a supplemental parcel map agreement to implement, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building, all applicable Page 3 mitigation measures identified in MND IS-01-042 and the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Pro,am in accordance with the requirements, provisions and schedules contained therein, and as further specified in these Tentative Parcel Map waiver conditions. If any permits are required Jo be obtained by Developer as set forth herein, Developer shall obtain said permits with applicable agencies in consultation with the City. 11. Implement, or cause the implementation of all mitigation measures pertaining to the Project identified in MND IS-01-042. Any such measures not satisfied by a specific condition of this Resolution or by the project design shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building. Mitigation Measures shall be monitored via the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program approved in conjunction with MND IS-01-042. 12. The Developer shall comply with atl applicable requirements of the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Department ofFish & Wildlife and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. PARCEL DESIGN 13. Prior to the issuance of any rough ~ading permit proposing to ~ade individual lots and streets for the Project, Developer shall submit a study showing that all curb returns for any intersection in excess of 4% ~ade, located within the permit boundaries, and all driveways, comply with ADA standards at the front and back of sidewalks to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. STREETS, RIGI:ITS-OF-WAY & PUBLIC [NIPROVEMENTS 14. Provide security in accordance with chapter 18.16 of the Municipal Code, dedicate, and construct the required street improvements for all public streets shown on the Parcel map within ihe subdivision boundary or off-site, as deemed necessary by the City Engineer to provide service to the sub. iect subdivision, in accordance with Chula Vista Design Standards, Chula Vista Streets Standards, Chula Vista Subdivision Manual, and approved Tentative parcel map waiver, unless otherwise approved by the City Eng/neer. Said street improvements shall include, but not limited to, asphalt concrete pavement. base, curb, gutter and sidewalk, sewer, drainage facilities, street lights, traffic signals, signs, stripping, fire hydrants and transitions to existing improvements in the manner required by the City. Engineer. If improvement plans have been approved by the City, the amount of the security for the above noted improvements shall be 110% of the construction cost estimate approved by the City Engineer. If improvement plans are being processed, 150% of approved cost estimate. Or, if improvement plans are not being processed by the City, 200% of construction cost estimate approved by the City Engineer. A lesser percentage may be required if it is demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the City. Engineer. that sufficient data or other information is available to warrant such reduction. 15. Developer shall construct and secure the following street improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and as referenced in the traffic report entitled "Final Traffic Impact Analysis Eastlake Village Center North Chula Vista, CA," prepared by LLG Engineering, and dated May 8, 2002 ("Traffic Report"): Facility No. I Page 4 Prior to approval of the Parcel Map the Applicant shall construct and secure the north leg of Otay Lakes Road/Project Driveway/Vons driveway intersection and provide one left-mm lane, one through/ri,,ht lane, one right-mm lane, and dual eastbound left-mm lanes and corresponding signal impmvements~in accordance with Figure 27 of the Traffic Report. Facility No. 2 Prior to approval of the Parcel Map the Applicant shall construct and secure the extension of the existing southbound right-mm lane on EastLake Parkway from Otay Lakes Road to the right4n/right-out driveway accessing VC-1 in accordance with Figure 27 of the Traffic Report. The Applicant shall also provide a fourth westbound through lane on Otay Lakes Road from EastLake Parkway to the project driveway such that the southbound fight-mm movement is fi'ee and provide an island to direct the flow of traffic in accordance with Figure 27 of the Traffic Report unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Facility No. 3 Prior to approval of the Parcel Map the Applicant shall construct and secure the necessary improvements for providing a fully activated traffic signal at the Otay Lakes Road/EastLake Parkway intersection, including interconnect wiring, mast arms, signal heads and associated equipment, underground improvements, standards and luminaries. Facility No. 4 Prior to approval of the Parcel Map the Applicant shall construct and secure a fully activated traffic sigual at the Fenton Street/EastLake Parkway intersection, including interconnect wiring, mast arms, sigual heads and associated equipment, underground improvements, standards and luminaries and provide the following intersection geometry in accordance with Figure 27 of the Traffic Report: Northbound - Two left-mm lanes, one through lane and one shared through/right lane. Eastbound - One shared through/left and one right-turn lane. Southbound - Two left-mm lanes, one through lane and one shared through/right Iane. Westbound - Two left-mm lanes and one shared through/right lane. In addition, the Applicant shall provide for 200 feet of storage for the planned dual southbound left-turn lanes. If only one lane is provided, a storage length of 350 feet would be necessary. Facility No. 5 Prior to approval of the Parcel Map the Applicant shall construct and secure a fourth westbound lane from the project driveway to the SR-125 northbound on-ramp. Facility No. 6 Prior to approval of the Parcel Map the Applicant shall construct and secure a second southbound left- turn lane at the Eastlake Parkway/Otay Lakes Road intersection to provide the necessary left-turn storage length required. Minimum storage to be 250 feet in a single lane or in dual lanes combined in accordance with Figure 27 of the Traffic Report. 16. Design all street vertical and horizontal curves and intersection sight distances to conform to the CalTrans' Highway Design Manual. All streets, which intersect other streets at or near a horizontal or Page 5 vertical curve, shall meet intersection design sight distance requirements in accordance with City Standards. Sight visibility easements shall be ~anted as necessary to comply with the requirements the CalTrans Highway Desig-n Manual and City of Chula Vista Policies. When a conflict between the CalTrans Highway Design Manual and adopted City policies exists, the adopted City Policies shall prevail. Lighted sag vertical curves will be permitted at intersections per AASHTO standards and with approval of the City Engineer. 17. Construct sidewalks and pedestrian ramps on all walk'ways to comply with the "Americans with Disabilities Act" (ADA) standards, as approved by the City Engineer. In the event the Federal Government adopts new ADA standards for street rights-of-way, which are in conflict with the standards and approvals for the Project, all such approvals conflicting with those new standards shall be updated to reflect the new standards. Unless otherwise required by federal law, City ADA standards may be considered vested, as determined by federal regulations, once construction has commenced. 18. Grant sight visibility easements to the City of Chula Vista as required by the City Engineer, to keep sight visibility areas clear of any obstructions. Sight visibility easements shall be shown on grading plans, improvement plans, and final Parcel Maps to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Street trees shall be located in accordance with section 18.32.10 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and the City's landscape manual. 19. Construct traffic signal interconnect conduit and all appropriate wiring for all proposed signalized intersections to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. GRad)lNG AND DRAINAGE 20. Provide graded vehicle access to all public storm drain clean-outs and the detention facility, or other access solutions approved by the City Engineer. Storm drain clean-outs shall not be located on slopes or inaccessible areas for maintenance equipment, and shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 21. Prior to approval of grading plans, demonstrate the adequacy of existing drainage runoff detention facilities or include, in the grading plans, the construction of additional detention facilities, to ensure that the maximum allowable discharges after development do not exceed pre-development discharges, all to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 22. Prior to approval of first rough grading plan for the Project, design and secure a protective fencing system around all proposed permanent detention basins, and the inlets and outlets of storm drain structures, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The final fencing design and types of construction materials shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and Building. Developer shall construct the approved fencing system in conjunction with the rough erading for the Project. 23. Construct energy dissipaters at all storm drain outlets, as required by the City Engineer to maintain non-erosive flow velocities. CITY OF CHULA VISTA Page 6 24. Submit to and obtain approval from the City Engineer and Director of Planning and Building of an erosion and sedimentation control plan as part of grading plans. 25. Developer shall obtain, prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, approval of a landscape concept for the detention basin from the Director of Planning and Building and the Director of Public Works. The landscape concept shall satisfy requirements of the City Landscape Manual and provide a desi~on that requires minimum maintenance. 26. Locate lot lines at the top of slopes except as shown on the Parcel Map or as approved by the City Engineer and Director of Planning & Building. Lots shall be so graded as to drain to the street or an approved drainage system. Drainage shall not be permitted to flow over slopes or onto adjacent properly. 27. Design and construct the inclination of each cut or fill surface, resulting in a slope, to not be steeper than 2:1 (two horizontal to one vertical), except for minor slopes as herein defined. All constructed minor slopes shall be designed for proper stability considering both geological and soil properties. A minor slope may be constructed no steeper than one and one-half horizontal to one vertical (1.5:1) contingent upon: a. Submittal and approval of reports by both a soils engineer and a certified engineering geologist containing the results of surface and sub-surface exploration, and analysis. These results should be sufficient for the soils engineer and engineering geologist to certify that in their professional opinion, the underlying bedrock and soil supporting the slope have stren~h characteristics sufficient to provide a stable slope and will not pose a danger to persons of property. b. The installation of an approved slope planting program and irrigation system. c. "Minor Slope" is defined as a slope four (4) feet or less in vertical dimension in either cut or fills, beva,een parcels and not parallel to any roadway. 28. Construct temporary desilting basins at all discharge points adjacent to drainage courses or xvhere substantial drainage alteration is proposed in the grading plan. The exact design and location of such facilities shall be based on hydrological modeling, and determined pursuant to direction by the City Engineer. 29. Provide a minimum of 6-inch thick PCC (reinforced with #4 BAR @ 18" on center each way) designed for H-20 loading and heavy broom finish for those access roads to the detention basin where grades are 10% or greater. All the other portions of the access road must be asphalt concrete designed to carry H-20 loading unless otherwise required by the City. Engineer. In addition, maintenance pads adjacent to the inlet structures shall be a minimum of 6-inch PCC (reinforced with #4 bar @ 18" on center each way) designed for H-20 loading with a hea~, broom finish. 30. Prior to acceptance of the detention basin and release of the grading bond by the City, Developer shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency revising the current National Flood Insurance Program Maps of the Project area to reflect the effect of the drainage improvements. CITY OF CHULA VISTA Page 7 31. The Development shall comply with all applicable regulations established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), as set forth in the National Pollutant Discharee Elimination System (NPDES), permit requirements for urban runoffand storm water discharge, the Cl~-an Water Act, and any regulations adopted by the City of Chula Vista, pursuant to the NPDES regulations or requirements. Further, the Developer shall file a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity and shall implement a Storm Water Polintion Prevention Plan (SWPPP) concurrent with the commencement of grading activities. The SWPPP shall include both construction and post construction pollution prevention and pollution control measures and shall identify funding mechanisms for post construction control measures. The developer shall comply with all the provisions of the NPDES and the Clean Water Program during and after all phases of the development process, including, but not limited to, mass grading, rough grading, construction of street and landscaping improvements, and construction of dwelling units. The Developer shall design the Project storm drains and other drainage facilities to include Best Management Practices to minimize non-point source pollution, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 32. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map for the project, Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City where Developer a~ees not to protest the formation of a facilities benefit district or any other funding mechanism approved by the City to finance the operation, maintenance, inspection, and monitoring of NPDES facilities. This a~eement to not protest shall not be deemed a waiver of the ri_oht to challenge the amount of any assessment, which may be imposed due to the addition of th~se improvements and shall not interfere with the right of any person to vote in a secret ballot election. The above noted agreement shall run with the entire land contained within the Project. 33. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map or issuance of the first ~ading permit for the Project, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall enter into an a~eement with the City of Chula Vista, wherein Developer a~ees to the following: a. Provide for the removal of siltation within the detention basin until all upstream ~mding within the Project is completed and all erosion protection planting is adequately established as d~termined by the CIE,' Engineer, Director of Planning and Building. b. Developer shall provide security, satisfactory to the City Engineer, guaranteeing the performance of the aforementioned siltation removal obligations. 34. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map, building permits, or at such time as required by the City Engineer for the Project, the Developer shall submit and obtain approval from the City Engineer of a maintenance program for the proposed post-construction BMP's. The maintenance program shall include, but not be limited to: 1) a manual describing the maintenance activities of said facilities, 2) an estimate of the cost of such maintenance activities, and 3) a funding mechanism for financing the maintenance program. In addition, the Developer shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City to ensure the maintenance and operation of said facilities. 35. Prior to approval of any grading, construction, and building permits for the project, the Developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer compliance with all of the applicable provisions of the municipal code, Model SUSMP for the San Diego Region, and the City of Chula Vista SUSMP as Page 8 may be adopted in the future. The Developer shall incorporate into the project planning and design effective post-construction BMP's and provide all necessary, studies and reports demonstratiu~o compliance with the applicable regulations and standards. BMP's shall be identified and imptemente~ that specifically prevent pollution of storm drain systems from the gas station, car wash, restaurants. parking lots, and trash collection areas. ' AGREEMENTS/FINANCIAL 36. Enter into a supplemental agreement with the City wherein the Developer a~ees as follows: a. That the City may withhold building permits for the subject subdivision if anv one of the following occur: ~ i. Regional development threshold limits set by the East Chula Vista Iransportation Phasing Plan, as amended from time to time, have been reached or in order to have the Project comply with the Growth Management Program as may be amended from time to time. ii. Traffic volumes, levels of service, public utilities and/or services either exceed the adopted City threshold standards or fail to comply with then effective Growth Management Ordinance. and Growth Management Program and any amendments thereto. Public utilities shall include, but not be limited to. air quality, drainage, sewer and water. iii. The required public facilities, as identified in the PFFP, or as amended or othem, ise conditioned have not been completed or constructed to the satisfaction of the City. The Developer may propose changes in the timing and sequencing of development and the construction of improvements affected. In such case, the PFFP may be amended, as approved by the Citys D'rector of Planning and Building and the Public Works Director. b. Defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, voi~t or annul any approval by the City including approval by its Planning Commission, City Council or auy approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to this subdivision pursuant to Section 66499.37 of the State Map Act; provided the City promptly notifies the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding, and on the further condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense. c. Permit all cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista equal opportunity to place conduit and provide cable television service for each lot or unit within the Parcel map area. Developer further a~ees to grant, by license or easement, and for the benefit of, and to be enforceable by, the City of Cbula Vista, conditional access to cable television conduit within the properties situated Within the parcel map only to those cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista, the condition of such pant being that: (a) such access is coordinated with Developer's construction schedule so that it does not delay or impede Developer's construction schedule and does not require the trenches to be.reo.pened to accommodate that placement of such conduits; and (b) any such cable company is and remmns tn compliance with, and promises to remain in compliance with the terms and conditions of the franchise and with all other rules, regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or may from time to time be, issued by Page 9 the City of Chula Vista. Developer hereby conveys to the City of Chuta Vista the authority to enforce said covenant by such remedies as the City determines appropriate, including revocation of said grant upon determination by the City of Chula Vista that they have violated the conditions of =grant. d. That the City may withhold the issuance of building permits for the Project, should the Developer be determined by the City to be in breach of any of the terms of the Tentative Parcel Map Waiver Conditions or any Supplemental A~eement. The City shall provide the Developer of notice of such determination and allow the Developer reasonable time to cure said breach. e. Hold the City harmless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from this project. f. Participate, on a fair share basis, in any deficiency plan or financial program adopted by SANDAG to comply with the Congestion Management Pro,am (CMP). g. To not protest the formation of any future regional impact fee program or facilities benefit district to finance the construction of regional facilities. This agreement not to protest shall not be deemed a waiver of the right to challenge the amount of any assessment which may be imposed due to the addition of these new facilities and shall not interfere with the right of any person to vote in a secret ballot election. h. Indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all fines, costs, and expenses arising out of non-compliance with the requirements of the NPDES regulations, in connection with the execution of any construction and/or ~ading work for the Project, whether the non-compliance results from any action by the Developer, any agent or employee. subcontractors, or others. The Developer's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses. attorney's fees and liability incurred by the City. 37. The Developer shall comply with ail previous agreements still in effect as they pertain to this parcel map. 38. The Developer shall implement the f'ma[ AQIP measures as approved by the City Council, and to comply and remain in compliance with the Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP). The Developer shall also waive any claim that the adoption of a final AQIP constitutes an improper subsequent imposition of the condition. 39. The Developer ac'knowledges that the City Council may, from time-to-time, modify air quality improvement and energT, conservation measures related to new development as various technologies and/or programs change or become available. The Developer shall modify the AQIP to ineorporate those new measures, which are in effect at the time, prior to or concurrent with each Parcel Map approval within the Project. The new measures shall apply, as applicable, to development within all future Parcel map areas, but shall not be retroactive to those areas, which receive Parcel map approval prior to effect of the subject new measures. Page 10 40. The Developer ac'knowledges that the City Council may, from time-to-time, modify water conservation measures related to new development as various technologies and/or progwams change or become available. The Developer shall be required to modify the WCP to incorporate those new measures, which are in effect at the time, prior to or concurrent with each parcel map approval within the Project_ The new measures shall apply to development within all future parcel map areas, but shall not be retroactive to those areas, which received parcel map approval prior to effect of the subject measures. 41. Submit, prior to the approval of the Parcel Map, evidence acceptable to the City Engineer and the Director of Planning and Building, of the formation of a Village Center North Owner's Association, and/or another financial mechanism acceptable to the City Manager (herein collectively referred to as "VCNOA"). The VCNOA formulation documents shall be approved by the City Attorney. CC&R's and/or other alternative similar documentation (herein collectively referred to as "CC&R's) for the Project shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Department for review and approval prior to approval of the first building permit for the project, and shall include all of the following: a) Provisions ensuring the maintenance of ail common facilities located within the project including, but not be limited to: walls, fences, water fountains, lighting structures, paths, trails, access roads, drainage structures, water treatment facilities, landscaping, trees, streets, parking lots, driveways, and sewage systems that are private. Common facilities are to be identified or labeled in an exhibit in the CC&R's. b) Language establishing the VCNOA responsibility to maintain landscaping improvements including trees within public parkways along, Eastlake Parkway and Otay Lakes Road. c) Provisions which clearly indicate the responsibility, if any, of the individual owners to water and maintain irrigation and planting within the parkways. The CC&R's shall also indicate ~hat the VCNOA shall have both the authority and the obligation to enforce said maintenance. d) Language naming the City of Chula Vista as a party to the CC&R's, with the authority, but not the obligation, to enforce the terms and conditions of the CC&R's in the same manner as any owner within the VCNOA. e) Before any revisions to provisions of the CC&R's that may particularly affect the City can become effective, said revisions shall be approved by the City. The VCNOA shall not seek approval from the City of said revisions without the prior consent of 100 percent of the holders of first mortgages or property, owners within the VCNOA unless otherwise approved by the Director of Planning and Building. f) The VCNOA shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any claims, demands, causes of action liability or loss related to or arising from the maintenance activities of the VCNOA. g) The VCNOA shall not seek to be released by the City. from the maintenance obligations described herein without the prior consent of the City and 100 percent of the holders of first mortgages or property o~mers within the VCNOA. Page 11 h) The VCNOA is required to procure and maintain a policy of comprehensive general liabiliD, insurance written on a per-occurrence basis in an amount not less than one million dollars combined single limit. The policy shall be acceptable to the City and name the City as additionally insured. i) Provisions requiring daily sweeping of common parking lots by a reputable sweeping company. j) Language assuring VCNOA membership in an advance notice such as the USA Dig Aler~ Service in perpetuity. k) Language requiring that the Park and Ride area (Parcel 14 of the Parcel Map) shall be maintained in first class condition at all times and that the insurance for the common areas will specifically cover the Park and Ride use. 1) Language requiring that those portions of the future transit stop facility located within Parcels 5 and 6 of the project, shall be maintained in first class condition by the respective owners of said parcels until such time as the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for said transit stop facility wanted on the final Parcel Map is accepted by the City. m) Language specifying that individual owners may not modify the planting located within the public right of way. LANDSCAPE 42. Pri°r t° the issuance of any construction permit, the Developer shall prepare, submit and obtain the approval of the City Engineer and the Director of Planning and Building for any landscape and irrigation plans. All plans shall be prepared in accordance with the current Chula Vista Landscape Manual and the SPA. Developer shall install all improvements in accordance with the approved plans to the satisfactian of the Directory of Plarming and Building. 43. Developer a~ees to immediately relocate, at Developer's sole expense, the necessary above and/or under~ound utilities to accommodate the required street trees and approved landscape and irrigatian improvement plans to the satisfaction of the Department of Planning and Building and the City Engineer. MISCELLA_NEoUS 44. Prior to approvaI of the parcel map, submit copies of the parcel map in a digital format. The drawing projection shall be in California State Plane Coordinate System (NAD 83, Zone 6). The digital file of the parcel map shall combine all map sheets into a single CADD drawing, in DXF, DWG or Arc View (GIS) format and shall contain the following individual layers: Subdivision Boundary (closed polygons), Lot Lines (closed polygons) Street Centerlines (polygons) Easements (polylines) Street names (annotation) CiTY OF CHULA VISTA Page 12 FIRE .i/VD BRUSH/VLad'qAGEMENT 45. Prior to delivery of combustible building materials to the Project site provide a 20 ft. wide all- weather access road (or an acceptable alternative approved by the Fire Marshal and in compliance with the U.F.C.) and required fire hydrants with required water pressure to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. CODE REQUIREMENTS 46. Comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code including Chapter 15.04 "Grading Ordinance" as amended. Preparation of the Parcel map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual. 47. Underground all utilities within the subdivision in accordance with Municipal Code requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 48. Comply with all relevant Federal, State, and Local regulations, including the Clean Water Act. The developer shall be responsible for providing all required testing and documentation to demonstrate said compliance as required by the City Engineer. 49. Pay all required fees, including the following fees, in accordance with the City Code and Council Policy: The Transportation and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. Signal Participation Fees. All applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to sewer connection fees. Interim SR- 125 impact fee Telegraph Canyon Gravity Sewer Basin DIF Telegraph Canyon Drainage Basin DIF Pay the amount of said fees in effect when payment is due. GROW IH MANAGEMENT/PUBLIC FACILITIES FlkNANCING PLAN (PFFP)/PFL4,SING 50. Developer shall comply with Chapter 19.09 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Growth Management) as may be amended from time to time by the City. Said chapter includes but is not limited to: threshold standards (19.09.04), public facilities finance plan implementation (19.09.090). and public facilities finance plan amendment procedures (19.09.100). 5I. Install public facilities in accordance with the EastLake i Village Center North Supplemental Public Facilities Finance Plan as may be amended from time to time, or as required by the City Engineer to meet threshold standards adopted by the City of Chula Vista. The City Engineer and Director of Planning & Building may, at their discretion, modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision. ?a~e 13 If you should have any questions regarding the waiver or any conditions, please contact Jim Ne~eton, Assistant Civil Engineer at 476-5363. . SO.AmA~-A~"' _.~tUS~'---~Z /- \ SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER ~ PR1NCI]?AL ~:*LANNER [ ~ J :kEn gin eerkLANDDEVLProj ects\Eastlake VCNkEP256TPM01 - 14waiver. doc Exhibit "C" BMPFacilities Type of BMP Facilities: Treatment Control Facilities, which may include, but are not limited to Hydrodynamic devices, catch basin inserts, or any other treatment control BMP approved by the City Engineer in accordance with the Water Quality Report prepared by Rick Engineering Company dated March 5, 2002. Location of BMP Facilities: The BMP facilities shall be constructed at those locations and in strict conformity and in accordance with plans and specifications to be approved by the City Engineer. Purpose of BMP Facilities: To provide treatment control, which will meet the requirements of the applicable provisions of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. 2001-01 (Municipal Permit), and Final Model SUSMP for the San Diego Region as all may be amended from time to time. Project Applicability: Developer ac'knowledges and agrees that should the assumptions for the selection and design of the BMP Facilities be modified in any way, the BMP Facilities may also require modification and/or updating to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date 08/06/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving Change Order No. 7 for the "Phase I of the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor (SW219) and the Main Street Pavement Reconstruction between Broadway and Interstate 805 (STM-332)" Project and Authorizing the Director of Public Works to Execute Said Change Order on Behalf of the City / SUBMITTED BY: Director of Publ)c/Wor~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~t~' ~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes No X ) .~- - On September 18, 2001, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2001-313 awarding a contract in the amount of $8,729,617.75 (plus contingencies of $875,000.00) to Hazard Construction Company/T.C. Construction Company, Inc., a Joint Venture, for the installation of a 42-inch gravity sewer line within Main Street between Broadway and Interstate 805 (SW-219). This contract also includes the reconstruction of the street pavement section on Main Street, between Broadway and Interstate 805 (STM-332). Proposed Change Order No. 7, in the amount of $137,238.70 (Attachment "A"), is for additional labor, equipment, and materials necessary to remove an existing shallow and deteriorated 42" Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP) on Main Street that is no longer able to support traffic loads and replace said pipe with a 36" diameter Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP). RECOMMENDATION: That Council Approve the Resolution Approving Change Order No. 7 for the "Phase I of the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor (SW219) and the Main Street Pavement Reconstruction between Broadway and Interstate 805 (STM-332)" Project and Authorizing the Director of Public Works to Execute Said Change Order on Behalf of the City. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: Proposed Contract Change Order No. 7 is necessary due to the poor structural condition of an existing 42" CMP storm drain. It is necessary to replace said CMP storm drain with a new 36" RCP storm drain in order to facilitate the completion of the pavement reconstruction on Main Street. The following is a summary of prior City Council actions with regard to this project and actions recommended by staff under the proposed resolution: Page 2, Item Meeting Date 08/06/02 Action Description Authorization Amount Original (Base Contractor's Base Bid as Awarded by City Council Res. 2001-313 $8,729,617.75 Contract) Council on September 18, 2001 Change Order No. 1 Additional Conduits for future utility use Council Res. 2001-423 $ 93,130.00 by the City Change Order No. 2 Change of depth of pipe in Phase I due to Council Res. 2002-209 $ 70,768.00 design changes in next sewer phase Change Order No. 3 Remove existing 42" Corrugated Metal Council Res. 2002-209 $ 76,036.00 Pipe (CMP) and replace with 36" Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) Change Order No.4 Install 24" and 36" RCP storm drain Dir. of Public Works * $ 49,205.00 Change Order No.5 Remobilization and provide traffic control Dir. of Public Works * $ 2,000.00 for the installation of an 8" diameter manhole Change Order No.6 Install 36" RCP storm drain and an A-4 Dir. of Public Works * $ 28,578.40 cleanotu Change Order No.7 Remove existing 42" Corrugated Metal Proposed for City $ 137,238.70 Pipe (CMP) and replace with 36" Council Approval Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) Total $9,186,573.85 · Approved by the Director of Public Works in accordance with City Council Policy No. 574-01 FISCAL IMPACTS: Proposed Change Order No. 7 totals $137,238.70. The Proposed Change Order, along with prior Change Order Nos. 1 through 6 for $319,717.40 will increase the contract amount from $8,729,617.75 to $9,186,573.85. Sufficient funds are available in the contingency funds encumbered for the SW-219 Project Account to cover the increase in the contract amount. Attachments: (A) Change Order No. 7 J:\Engineer\AGENDA\SW219_CCO7.113.doc Cl'ff OF CHUI.A VISTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC; WORKS ENGINEERING DIVISION CHANGE ORDER NO. 7 July 1, 2002 0735-10-SW219 CONTRACT: SALT CREEK GRAVITY SEWER INTERCEPTOR, REACH 9B CONTRACTOR: HAZARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY / TC CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (a joint venture) The following changes shall be made to the referenced contract between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA and HAZARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY fTC CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. (Contractor): 1. Contractor shall install 36"diameter 2500D Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) storm drain from Sta. 31+60 to Sta. 37+20 of Drawing No. 01029-02. 560 LF@ $194.27 $108,791.20 2. Contractor shall remove and dispOSe:of 42,'Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP) from Sta. 31+60 to Sta. 37+20 of Drawing No.01029-02. 560 LF @ $12.00 $ 6,720.00 3. Contractor shaii remove and dispose bf E~-2 .inle[ @ station 36+95 of Drawing No. 01029-02. 1-EACH @ $1,900.00 $ 1,900.00 4. Contractor shall Demo existing lug :cOnneCtion @ A-4 inlet, west-end. 1-EACH@ $1,400.00 $ 1,400.00 5. Contractor shall install A-4 Cleanout, D=6' @ Sta. 33+80 of Drawing No.01029-02. 1-EACH@ $2,733.00 $ 2,733.00 1 276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910-2631 / (619) 691-5021 6. Contractor shall install B-1 inlet, L=20' @ Station 33+80 of Drawing No. 01029-02. 1-EACH@ $4,400.00 $4,400.00 7. The contractor shall pothole (18) eighteen existing utilities. 18@ $205.25 each $3,694.50 8. Contractor shall provide concrete lug connection to A-4 cleanouts. 2-EACH@ $600.00 $1,200.00 9. Contractor shall provide all traffic control required to perform items 1through 8 of this change order. Lump sum $ 6,400.00 TOTAL PRICE: $137,238.70 This contract change order will add 15 working days to contract. The agreed upon total price includes all costs for furnishing all tools, labor, materials, equipment, incidental costs and fees for performing the work in this contract change and no additional compensation will be due. It is agreed by the undersigned that this work shall be performed and materials furnished in accordance with the original (base) contract, Green Book specifications and applicable standard drawings. ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE: $3,978,900.00 PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS: $368,921.80 THIS CHANGE ORDER: .~137~238.70 TOTAL CONTRACT PRICE: $4,485,060.50 A APPROVED BY rlFFORD L. SWANSON W.S. ROG'E'F tS JOHN P. LIPPITT Deputy Dir. of Public Work Hazard Construction / Director of Public Works City Engineer TC Construction CiTY OF CHULA VISTA RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 7 FOR THE "PHASE I OF THE SALT CREEK GRAVITY SEWER INTERCEPTOR (SW-2I9)" AND THE MAIN STREET PAVEMENT RECONSTRUCTION BETWEEN BROADWAY AND INTERSTATE 80S" (STM-332)" PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE SAID CHANGE ORDER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY WHEREAS, on September 18, 2001, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2001-313 awarding a contract in the amount of $8,729,617.75 (plus contingencies of $875,000) to Hazard Construction Company/T.C. Construction, Inc., a Joint Venture for the installation of a 42-inch gravity sewer line within Main Street between Broadway and Interstate 805 (SW-219) and also includes the reconstruction of the street pavement section on main Street, between Broadway and Interstate 805 (STM-332); and WHEREAS, proposed Change Order No.7, in the amount of $137,238.70 is for additional labor, equipment and materials necessary to remove an existing shallow and deteriorated 42" Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP) on Main Street that is no longer able to support traffic loads and replace said pipe with a 36" diameter Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chu1a Vista does hereby approve Change Order No. 7 for the "Phase I of the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor (SW-219) and for Main Street Pavement Reconstruction, between Broadway and Interstate 805 (STM-332)" in the amount of$137,238.70. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Public Works of the City ofChula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said change order on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. Presented by Approved as to form by D~~ ~ John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works John M. Kaheny City Attorney J:\Attorney\Reso\Salt Creek Sewer Interceptor CO? (p-5 ", "~~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM 7 MEETING DATE: August 6. 2002 ITEM TITLE: Resolution waiving the City's fonnal bidding process, ratify staffs previous action, and awarding the asbestos, lead, and contaminated soil removal contract for the police facility construction of $144,071 to Design For Health. SUBMITTED BY: Director Building and Park Construction Ø!-/ /(f REVIEWED BY: CityManager& þí\l (4/5thsVote: YES_NO_X~ ftl The City of Chula Vista initially contracted with Design for Health, a long-time vendor of the City, to remove the known lead and asbestos from the El Dorado and Town Center buildings scheduled for demolition to make way for the new police facility. An initial $40,000 was budgeted within the police facility, CIP PS-149, construction budget for this lead and asbestos removal. Due to the fact that until the process of removal started and the actual amount to be removed was established the cost could not be finalized. The total cost for the lead and asbestos removal for the El Dorado Building and the Chula Vista Town Center is $67,300. During excavation a large area of unanticipated plume contaminated soil was discovered that required immediate removal and treatment. As not to expose the City to a costly delay in the grading construction process, Design for Health was requested to perfonn this urgent removal and disposal of the contaminated waste. The first phase of the contaminated soil remediation scope of work included site evaluation and assessment, soil sample collection and testing, registered geologist, project management and coordination and development of a work plan and schematic drawings for impacted areas. Phase II of the project included continued monitoring, registered geologist, transportation and treatment and disposal of contaminated material. The project lasted four days and a total of 140 yards of contaminated soil were removed. The total cost for removal, treatment, and disposal of the contaminated soil is $76,771.00. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A RECOMMENDATION: That Council waive the City's fonnal bidding process, ratify staffs previous aciton, and award the asbestos, lead, and contaminated soil removal contract for the police facility construction of$144,071 to Design For Health, and appropriate funds therefore. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for the Police Facility Project, CIP PS-149, were approved by council in May 2002, Resolution 2002-161. There is a possibility that a portion of the Design for Health contract amount will be partially offset by funds set aside by the previous property owner for this type of unanticipated occurrence and sufficient funds are available to cover the amount of this contract. r;- RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE CITY'S FORMAL BIDDING PROCESS, RATIFYING STAFF'S PREVIOUS ACTION, AND AWARDING THE ASBESTOS, LEAD, AND CONTAMINATED SOIL REMOVAL CONTRACT FOR THE POLICE FACILITY CONSTRUCTION OF $144,071 TO DESIGN FOR HEALTH WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista initially contracted with Design for Health, a long-time vendor of the City, to remove the known lead and asbestos from the El Dorado and Town Center buildings scheduled for demolition to make way for the new police facility; and WHEREAS, an initial $40,000 was budgeted within the police department construction budget for this lead and asbestos removal; and WHEREAS, due to the fact that until the process of removal started and the actual amount to be removed was established, the cost could not be finalized; therefore, the total cost for the lead and asbestos removal for the El Dorado Building and the Chula Vista Town Center is $67,300; and WHEREAS, during excavation a large area of unanticipated plume contaminated soil was discovered that required immediate removal and treatment and so as not to expose the City to a costly delay in the grading construction process, Design for Health was requested to perfonn this urgent removal and disposal of the contaminated waste; and WHEREAS, the contaminated soil remediation project lasted four days and a total of 140 yards of contaminated soil were removed at a total cost for removal, treatment, and disposal ofthe contaminated soil of $76,771.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby waive the City's fonnal bidding process, ratify staffs previous action and award the asbestos, lead, and contaminated soil removal contract for the police facility construction of $144,071 to Design for Health. Presented by Approved as to fonn by iif~=Ð . Kaheny . y Attorney John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works J:lattorneylreso/design fOf health t1-d- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No ~ Meeting Date 8/6/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Authorizing conditional temporary closure of a portion of Rancho Del Ray Parkway on September 14 and 15, 2002, for the Orange Crate Derby SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Police~/~ Risk Manage~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~'~ ~' (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X ) The Bonita Orange Crate Derby Committee of the Bonita Valley Lions Club is requesting permission for temporary street closure on Rancho Del Ray Parkway on September 14 and 15, 2002 to conduct their 23® Annual Orange Crate Derby. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution and authorize conditional temporary closure of a portion of Rancho Del Ray Parkway on September 14 and 15, 2002 for the Orange Crate Derby, subject to staff conditions as stated in this report. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The Bonita Orange Crate Derby Committee is requesting permission to conduct the 23® Annual Orange Crate Derby on Saturday and Sunday, September 14 and 15, 2002. The event would be conducted on the west section of Rancho Del Ray Parkway, between Terra Nova Drive to the north, and Del Ray Boulevard to the south. Both Terra Nova Drive and Del Ray Boulevard, as well as all other sections of Rancho Del Ray Parkway, would remain open to traffic at all times. Diagrams of the event are attached (Attachment "A" and "B"). This is a two day event with street closed to all traffic from 6:00 AM Saturday, until 6:00 PM Sunday. The sponsor expects that approximately 150-200 youngsters, ages 7 to 13 years old, "driving" 75 separate derby cars, would be involved in the double elimination competition during the two day event. The derby cars are built by families, according to specifications provided by the sponsor. Each car is equipped with a steedng wheel (steering capacity is limited to avoid "over-steering" by young drivers) and a friction-drag braking device. Each car is inspected to verify that safety equipment is in working order, and drivers are required to wear helmets, long pants, and sturdy shoes. Page 2, Item <~' Meeting Date 8/6/0~ The race course is approximately 1,000 feet in length, with no curves or turns. The entire course is separated with traffic safety cones. The use of cones serves two purpose; they delineate lanes, and also act as brakes if cars accidentally run over them. The run-out area below the finish line is also lined with traffic cones. Only two cars are permitted on the course at any one time. Spectator areas are designated and separated from the course by flag lines. The sponsor would be required to provide insurance, portable toilets, appropriate trash containers and trash control, necessary traffic barricades, cones, and directional signs, and overnight security (most cars will remain at the event site overnight). The event has been conducted in the Rancho Del Ray area for the past eight years. No significant problems with this event have been noted. The event would have very little impact on residents in the area, since all residential areas are fully accessible by alternate streets, and there are no homes on the race route. Approval of the request will be subject to the following conditions: 1. The sponsor shall submit proof of insurance in the form of a Certificate of Insurance for $2 million Commercial General liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a policy endorsement naming the City as insured, making their insurance primary with respect to the City's insurance and providing notification of cancellation. 2. Provide a letter acceptable to the City Attorney from the sponsors in which they agree: (1) Not to sue the City, its agents and employees from any act arising from the Orange Crate Derby; or (2) To defend, indemnify, release, protect and hold harmless, the City, its agents and employees from any and all liability arising from the Orange Crate Derby, excluding only that liability which may arise from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City. 3. The sponsor shall provide, at their own expense, all necessary supplies and services required to safely conduct the event, including portable toilets, trash receptacles, trash control, crowd control, traffic control and traffic control equipment, signs and security. Any services provided by the City before, during, or after the event will be reimbursed at the full cost recovery rate by the sponsor. Page 3, Item ~ Meeting Date 8/6/02 4. Sponsor shall provide a fully refundable $250 cleaning/damage deposit. 5. Sponsor shall post applicable street closure signs at least 48 hours in advance of the event. 6. All event participants shall be required to sign liability waivers approved by the City Attorney as to form. These waivers must indicate that the City of Chula Vista will be indemnified and held harmless. 7. The sponsor shall provide adequate supervision of event spectators and participants to prevent damage to City property and landscaping. 8. The sponsor shall provide adequate and sufficient street barricades and supervision to insure that no vehicles are permitted into the event area throughout the duration of the event, including the overnight period. 9. Sponsors shall notify area residents that the event is being held 48 hours prior to the event. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City. The event sponsors will be responsible for all event costs. However, any services provided by the City before, during, or after the event will be fully reimbursed by the sponsor. Attachments: "A" - General Site Plan "B" - Detail Site Plan ATTACEIMENT A ~. ATTACHMENT B uETAIL [NJ EAS; Ow g-5 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING CONDITIONAL TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF RANCHO DEL REY PARKWAY ON SEPTEMBER 14 AND 15, 2002, FOR THE ORANGE CRATE DERBY WHEREAS, the Bonita Orange Crate Derby committee of the Bonita Valley Lions Club is requesting permission for a temporary street closure on Rancho Del Rey Parkway on September 14 and 15,2002 to conduct their 23rd Orange Crate Derby; and WHEREAS, the sponsors shall submit proof of insurance in the form of a Certificate of Insurance and Police Endorsement for $2 million Commercial General liability insurance, or equivalent form, acceptable to the City, with a policy endorsement naming the City as insured, making their insurance primary with respect to the City's insurance and providing notification of cancellation; and WHEREAS, the sponsors shall provide a letter acceptable to the City Attorney in which they agree to defend, indemnify, release, protect and hold harmless, the City, its agents and employees from any and all liability arising from the Orange Crate Derby, excluding only that liability which may arise from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City; and WHEREAS, the sponsors shall provide, at their own expense, all necessary supplies and services required to safely conduct the event, including portable toilets, trash receptacles, trash control, crowd control, traffic control and traffic control equipment, signs, and security; and WHEREAS, the sponsor shall develop and implement a solid waste management plan approved by the Conservation Program to prevent litter, provide recycling, and disposal throughout the affected area during the event including arrangements for professional street sweeping immediately following the event; and WHEREAS, the sponsors shall provide a fully refundable $250 cleaning/damage deposit; and WHEREAS, the sponsors shall post applicable street closure signs at least 48 hours in advance of the event; and WHEREAS, all event participants shall be required to sign liability waivers approved by the City Attorney as to form. These waivers must indicate that the City of Chula Vista will be indemnified and held harmless; and g~/¡; Resolution no. Page 2 WHEREAS, the sponsors shall provide adequate supervision of event spectators and participants to prevent damage to City property and landscaping: and WHEREAS, the sponsors shall provide adequate and sufficient street barricades and supervision to insure that no vehicles are permitted into the event area throughout the duration of the event, including the ovemight period; and WHEREAS, the sponsors shall notify area residents that the event is being held 48 hours prior to the event. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby authorizes temporary closure of Rancho Del Rey Parkway on September 14 and 15, 2002 for the Orange Crate Derby subject to conditions as noted above. Presented by Approved as to form by Richard P. Emerson Police Chief {1. g-1 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No c~ Meeting Date 8/6/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving request from Bonita Business and Professional Association to conduct the Bonitafest and Bonitafest parade on Saturday, September 28, 2002. SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Police Risk Manager,~J.~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~..b.~r' (4/5ths Vote' .(.~ . Yes No X ) The Bonitafest Committee and its sponsoring organization, the Bonita Business and Professional Association (BBPA), is requesting permission to conduct the 30th Annual Bonitafest on Saturday, September 28, 2002. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution approving a temporary closure of Bonita Road subject to staff conditions. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: The Bonita Business and Professional Association (BBPA) is sponsoring the 30th Annual Bonitafesi event on Saturday, September 28, 2002. They are also requesting a temporary ~treet closure of Bonita Road to stage the parade. The street closure would involve Bonita Road between Willow Street and Central Avenue. Both Willow Street and Central Avenue will remain open at all times during the closure. Streets intersecting Bonita Road between these points would also be affected during {he parade. The parade is scheduled to take place between 10:00 AM and 12:30 PM; the street closure would be in effect from approximately 8:00 AM and 1:00 PM to allow for staffing dispersion of the parade participants. A diagram of the area is attached (Attachment A). The BBPA is also requesting use of the vacant City-owned lot that is adjacent to and immediately west of the parking lot to the Municipal Golf Course, for staging and dispersal of the equestrian units participating in the parade. The parade will consist of marching units, marching bands, floats, and other motor driven units, as well as equestrian units. All horses will be ridden by their owners. Streamers, balloons and noise making devices will not be permitted along the parade route. The route will be marshaled by sponsor volunteers and the police. The street closures would have an impact on City bus service in the area. Transit has agreed to cancel and re-route bus service in the area during the parade. Transit has agreed to erect signs advising of interrupted service. Page 2, Item ~ Meeting Date 816102 Staff approval is recommended subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the event, both the BBPA (the Bonitafest sponsor) and Rotary District 5340 (sponsor of the parade) provide evidence, acceptable to the City, of insurance for their respective sponsorships in the form of a Certificate of Insurance and Policy Endorsement in the amount of $2 million naming the City of Chula Vista as additional insured, and their insurance as primary. 2. Provide adequate traffic control equipment and no parking signs as specified by the Chula Vista Police Department. This would include provision of adequate signage, barricades, and traffic control equipment as specified by the County of San Diego and the SherifFs Department. 3. Provide adequate Police coverage at the event as determined by the Chula Vista Police Department through coordination with the Chula Vista Police Department and the County of San Diego. 4. Return all City-owned property to pre-use condition including arrangements for professional street sweeping and adequate trash control and disposal throughout the affected area within twenty-four (24) hours after the event. 5. Provide a letter acceptable to the City Attorney from the BBPA in which the BBPA agrees: (1) Not to sue the City, its agents and employees for any act arising from Bonitafest; and (2) To defend, indemnify, release, protect and hold harmless, the City, its agents and employees from any and all liability arising from Bonitafest, excluding only that liability which may arise from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City. FISCAL IMPACT: The amount of $2,410 has been allocated in the City's FY 2002-2003 Community Promotions budget to offset the cost of the Chula Vista transit shuttle bus services. The BBPA would be responsible for all additional cost incurred in conducting the parade, including provisions for traffic safety equipment, street sweeping services, and other related and required services and supplies. No additional fiscal impact is anticipated. Attachment: "A"- Parade Diagram BONITA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION, INC. Sponsor of the Annual Bonitafest, & Bonita's Roolin' Toolin' Chili Cook-Off July 22, 2002 :; - '-' 2 i ,j :~:': City of Chula Vista Office of the City Attorney 276 4th Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 SUBJECT: 30th Annual Bonitafest Chuck Pugsley, Special Events coordinator forthe City ofChula Vista's Police Department has been attending our planning meetings regularly. At last evening's meeting, he asked me to write to your department regarding an acceptable letter of agreement for Bonitafest; I) BBPA agrees not to sue the City ofChula Vista, it's agents and employees for any act arising from Bonitafest: and 2) to defend, indemnify, release, protect and hold harmless the City ofChula Vista, it's agents and employees from any and all liability arising from Bonitafest, excluding only that liability which may arise from the negligence or willful conduct from the City ofChula Vista, it's agents or employees. /) ¿~ziu~ß~ Patricia R. Dolan, Executive Director q-L{ POST OFFICE BOX 284 . BONITA, CA 91908 . (619) 472-8520 Web Page: www.bonitacalifornia.org E-mail address: bbpa@bonitacalifornia.org RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING REQUEST FROM BONITA BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION TO CONDUCT BONITAFEST AND BONITAFEST PARADE WHEREAS, the Bonita business and Professional Association (BBPA) will be . conducting the Bonitafest event on Saturday, September 28, 2002; and WHEREAS, the Bonita Business and Professional Association will provide evidence of insurance in the form of a Certificate of insurance and policy endorsement, acceptable to the City, in the amount of $2 million dollars naming the City of Chula Vista as additional insured, and their insurance company as primary; and WHEREAS, the Bonita Business and Professional Association will provide adequate traffic control equipment and no parking signs as specified by the Chula Vista Police Department. This would include provision of adequate signage, barricades, and traffic control equipment as specified by the County of San Diego and the Sheriff's department on the portion of Allen School Road outside the city limits; and WHEREAS, the Bonita Business and Professional Association will provide adequate police coverage at the event as determined by the Chula Vista Police Department through coordination with the Chula Vista Police Department and the San Diego County Sheriff's Department; and WHEREAS, all City-owned property will be returned to pre-use condition; and WHEREAS, the sponsòr shall develop and implement a solid waste management plan approved by the Conservation Program to prevent litter, provide recycling, and disposal throughout the affected area during the event including arrangements for professional street sweeping immediately following the event; and WHEREAS, a letter of acceptance shall be provided to the City Attorney from the BBPA in which SSPA agrees to not sue the City, its agents and employees for any act arising from Bonitafest; and to defend, indemnify, release, protect and hold harmless, the City, its agents and employees from any and all liability arising from the Sonitafest, excluding only that liability which may arise from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approved the request from the SBPA to conduct the Sonitafest and Bonitafest parade on Saturday, September 28, 2002, subject to staffing conditions. Presented by Approved as to form by Richard P. Emerson Chief of Police 9-5 ~~~u J M. Kaheny ty Attorney COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item: Meeting Date: ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-03 BUDGET FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BY APPROPRIATING $4,163 FROM THE BULLETPROOF VEST PARTNERSHIP GRANT FOR BODY ARMOR SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Polic4,~/ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~/,~m (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No __) Earlier this year the Police Department applied for funding for vests under the Bulletproof Vest Program. The Bureau of Justice Assistance notified the Police Department that the application was approved and awarded $4,163 to pay for 50% of the cost of bulletproof vests. This grant will partially fund 10 vests; matching funds will come from the Police Department budget. RECOMMENDATION: That Council amend the fiscal year 2002-03 budget for the Police Department by appropriating $4,163 from the Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant for body armor. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A BACKGROUND: The Bulletproof Vest Partnership is a program of the U.S. Department of Justice administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). The program is designed to pay for up to 50% of bulletproof vests for law enforcement officers. DISCUSSION: On June 16, 1998, the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 1998 was signed as law. The purpose of the Act is to save the lives of law enforcement officers by helping states and units of local government equip their law enforcement officers with armor vests. To facilitate the process BJA has established an on-line application. Earlier this year the Police Department applied for funding for vests under the Bulletproof Vest Program. The Bureau of Justice Page 2,ltem: (0 Meeting Date: 8/06/02 Assistance awarded the department $4,163 to pay for 50% of the cost bulletproof vests. This grant will partially fund 10 vests; matching funds will come from the Police Department budget. LOCAL MATCH: The program is designed to pay for up to 50% of the cost of National Institute of Justice approved vests. A local match is required to pay for the remaining costs of the vests. The grant further stipulates that both LLEBG and BVP funds may not be used to purchase vests during the fiscal year in which LLEBG funds were awarded. Sufficient funds have been identified in the Police Department budget to meet the local match requirement. FISCAL IMPACT: The $4,163 will be used for the purchase of bulletproof vests; funds have been identified to meet the 50% local match requirement, resulting in no net impact to the General Fund. / () , ;)-- RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-03 BUDGET FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BY APPROPRIATING $4,163 FROM THE BULLETPROOF VEST PARTNERSHIP GRANT FOR BODY ARMOR WHEREAS, the Bulletproof Vest Partnership is a program of the U.S. Department of Justice designed to pay up to 50% of bulletproof vests for law enforcement officers; WHEREAS, the Police Department applied funding vests under the Bulletproof Vest Partnership program; WHEREAS, the grant requires a 50% local match that has been identified in the Police Department budget; WHEREAS, the Police Department was awarded $4,163 for the purchase of bulletproof vests; WHEREAS, acceptance of the Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant will allow the Department to purchase ten vests; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby amend the fiscal year 2002-03 budget for the Police Department by appropriating $4,163 from Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant for body armor. Presented by: Approved as to form by: Richard P. Emerson Police Chief ~4. K'...-<' J M. Kaheny 0 Ity Attomey /0-3 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item' // Meeting Date: 8/6/02 ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING $2,270 FROM THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT FOUNDATION, AMENDING THE FY 02 - 03 POLICE BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,270 FOR POLICE EQUIPMENT, SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Police REVIEWED BY: City Manager~'~ ~' (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No __) The Police Department was awarded a grant from the San Diego County Law Enforcement Foundation for gun lights and holsters for the K-9officers. RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept $2,270 from the San Diego County Law Enforcement Foundation, amending the FY 02'- 03 Police budget and appropriating funds in the amount of $2,270 for police equipment. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A BACKGROUND: The San Diego County Law Enforcement Foundation is a non- profit organization that provides financial support to the law enforcement community. DISCUSSION: The Police Department submitted a proposal to the San Diego County Law Enforcement Foundation requesting gun lights and holsters for the K-9 unit. This equipment increases safety for K-9 officers while deploying their dogs in the dark. The gun lights are mounted onto the officer's weapon, eliminating the need to hold a standard flashlight. The lights allow the officers to maintain adequate lighting without the burden of having to hold an additional piece of equipment while controlling their canines. FISCAL IMPACT: The $2,270 will be used for the purchase of gun lights and holsters for the K-9 unit. There is no net impact to the General Fund. //-/ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $2,270 FROM THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT FOUNDATION, AMENDING THE FY 02 - 03 POLICE BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,270 FOR POLICE EQUIPMENT. WHEREAS, the Police Department was awarded a grant from the San Diego County Law Enforcement Foundation for the purchase of equipment for the K-9 unit; WHEREAS, acceptance of the grant of $2,270 will allow the Department to purchase the gun lights and holsters for the K-9 unit; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby accept $2,270 from the San Diego County Law Enforcement Foundation, amending the FY 02 - 03 Police budget and appropriating funds in the amount of $2,270 for police equipment. Presented by: Approved as to form by: Richard P. Emerson Police Chief CÞh/d-o ~ M. Kaheny cJ ity Attorney //-g- COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~ Meeting Date 8/6]02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Waiving Business License Taxes For Chula Vista Chamber Of Commerce And Vendors Participating In The Celebrate Chula Vista Event SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager Palmer~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager .~ (4/$ths Vote: Yes__ No x ) The Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce is partnering with the City of Chula Vista and the Port of San Diego, to present the new "Celebrate Chula Vista" festival in Marina View Park on August 25, 2002. This event Celebrates and promotes Chula Vista's finest and most unique attributes including: Cultural diversity · A thriving economy and business sector Continued growth and development Sports and youth Celebrate Chula Vista is expected to attract 30,000 attendees from throughout Chula Vista and elsewhere in San Diego county, and will feature a variety of live entertainment along with approximately 150 arts, crafts and food vendors. Many of the vendors participating will already possess a Chula Vista business license, but the non-local vendors will not. The Chamber of Commeme requests that the Council waive the business license taxes for the Chamber of Commerce and for vendors taking part in the event. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution approving a waiver of the business license tax for the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce and for vendors taking part in the Celebrate Chula Vista festival on August 25, 2002. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: The Chamber of Commerce has requested that the business license tax for promotional events be waived for the Celebrate Chula Vista festival. The taxes involved include a $5 assessment to the sponsoring organization (Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce) and a requirement that each vendor have a Chula Vista business license (costing $12.50 to each business without a current business license). In the past, the City has waived the business license tax for numerous other festivals and events taking place in Chula Vista, and for vendors taking part in these events, in order to Page 2, Item ]~, Meeting Date 08/06/02 encourage participation. The rationale for waiving the fee is that the festivals attract thousands of visitors and residents to Chula Vista and promote our city, its attractions and businesses. The resulting effect will be the generation of additional commercial activity and increased sales tax revenue to the City. Waiving the business license taxes will encourage vendor participation. Since having a large number o£vendors will help ensure the success and continuation o£the event, staff recommends the waiver. The Celebrate Chula Vista festival will include food booths and a beer/wine tent. These areas will be operated in accordance with the regulations of the San Diego County Health Department, ABC and City Fire Department and Police Department. Fiscal Impact The City will incur the administrative costs of processing this request. The Chamber of Commerce has requested that the business license taxes be waived for the event. The tax involved is a tee of $5 to the sponsoring organization (Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce) and a $12.50 tax for each participating vendor not currently having a Chula Vista business license. By waiving this tax, the City will forego approximately $900 in fees. Costs £or staging the event are paid by the Chamber of Commerce and the City of Chula Vista. Costs incurred by individual City departments are itemized in their respective budgets. Attachments · Celebrate Chula Vista flyer · Hold Harmless Agreement · Notice o£ CEQA exemption Sunday, August 25, 21;I}2 hlat'ilttt '¢icss P:u'k I lam - 9Inn CeleBrate ~la Vista Js 8 citywide f~mily festiwl, which not only 8cknowledges, but ~lso celebrstes the greal contribution thst the city's diverse population m~d growing bgsinesses h~ve msde to our SouJhem g~lifomia community. ~ilh its ingressed 8bundm~ce of cultursI arts, ~ growing business economy, 8nd city leade[s dedicated to nol only meelJng lhe needs of diversity, but ~lso emb[~cing it, Chul8 Vist~ is indeed ~ city to celeb[ste. As the second largest city in Sail Diego OOLJnty, OhLlla Visla is a dynamic: inunicipality, which stretches horn the beautiful shores of San Diego Bay to the majestic Ssn Miguel Mountains in the easi. Witbin those bounds is a community of people rich in culture, spods, business, and a hometown hospitality that truly bdngs out the "s~irit o~ celebration" each and every day. THE EVENT expected attendance 30,000 1lam to 5pm - Daytime Festival Activities A fun and festive day with planned activities for the whole colnmunity The Spirit of Sports and The Spirit of Children and Culture Fitness Live BMX exhibition, Cultural music and dance, local sporls demonstrations, health school performances, and lois of & nutrition displays, Olympic arts, crafts, and entedairlment competitors and appearances for the young by select athletes The Spirit of Community The Spirit of Business Popular bands, a variety of A business to business enledainers, and local marketplace, hospitality pavilion, restaurants serving an array culinary chef demonstrations, of ethnic cuisines ; ', ' and relaxing entertainment 5pm to gpm - Evening Festival Activities 5:00pm Get ready for one of San Diego's nrost popular bands, Rockola 7:00pm Find a relaxing place on the lawn and enjoy the sounds of the San Diego Chamber Orchesua as they present their concert Americana The evening closes with a nlagical display of fireworks as we light up the skies with the "Spirit of Chula Vista" Parking available adjacent to the park. Shuttles from select lots off Marina Way. City of Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce 233 Fourth Avenue, Ohula Vista, CA 91910 (619) 420-6603 GROUP/ORGANIZATION WAIVER AND RELEASE OF LIABILITY ORGANIZATION/GROUP NAME: CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE EVENT NANIE: CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA FESTIVAL EVENT DATE: AUGUST 25, 2002 ON BEHALF OF THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION/GROUP, I cxpressly WAIVE, RELEASE and DISCHARGE the City of Chula Vista, its officers, agents, and employees or any other person from any and all LIABILITY for any death, disability, personal injury, property damage, property theft or actions, including any alleged or actual negligent act or omissions, regardless of whether such act or omission is active or passive which may accrue to myself or members of my organization/group or our heirs in connection with our participation in the above- described event. I fully understand and acknowledge that the CITY OF CHULA VISTA is relying on my representation that I have authorization to sign this document and that I will provide all members of my group a completed copy of this Waiver prior to our participation. I expressly INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS the City of Chula Vista, its elected and appointed officers, agents and employees from any and all liabilities or claims made by me or my organization/group, my/our heirs and any other individuals or entities as a result of any of my/our actions in connection with my/our participation in this event except for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, employees, volunteers or other representatives. Such indemnification includes liability settlements, damage awards, costs and attorney fees associated with any such claims. I hereby certify that I have read this document, understand its content, and am authorized to sign this document on behalf of all members of the group I represent. NAME: (Please Print) TITLE: ADDm SS: waivegr2 JUL 0 NOTICE OF EXEMPTION Community Development TO: County Clerk, County of San Diego From: City of Chula Vista P.O. Box 1750 276 Fourth Avenue San Diego, CA 921124147 Chula Vista, CA 91910 Project Title: Celebrate Chula Vista Event Project Location - Marina View Park, Chula Vista Bayfront Park & several adjacent vacant lots (identified by the San Diego Unified Port District as parcels 4, 8, 9 andl0). Project Location - City: Chula Vista Project Location - County: San Diego Description of Project: The Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce is parmering with the City of Chula Vista and the San Diego Unified Port District to present the new "Celebrate Chula Vista" festival in Marina View Park on August 25, 2002 from 11:130 A.m. to 9:00 P.M. The family festival is open to the public and is e:kpected to attract almut 30,000 attendees throughout the day and evening hours. The event will feature live entertainment on three stages, approximately 150 booths displaying aris and craf~ along with food vendors, a business expo, action sport demonstrations, children's rides, an evening concert and a fireworks display. A beer and wine tent is also planned from approximately 2:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. Chula Vista Police & Traffic Engineering will implement a traffic control plan affecting Marina Parkway, including closure of traffic lanes. Traffic control measures will be in effect from 6:00 A.M. on Sunday August 25, to 6:00 A.M. Monday, August 26, 2002. Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Chula Vista Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: City of Chula Vista Exempt Status: (check one) Ministerial [Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268]; Declared Emergency [Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a)]; Emergency Project [Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c)]; X Categorical Exempt. Sec.: 15304 Class 4(e) [lvlinor temporary use of land] Statutory Exemptions. State code number: 15280 General Rule Exemption [Sec. 15061Co)(3)] Reasons why project is exempt: The proposal consists of a single day city sponsored event. This controlled event is considered to be minor temporary use of land having negligible or no permanent effects on the environment. Sufficient safeguards have been included in the proposed event to ensure that no significant environmental effects occur. Lead Agency Contact Person: Benjamin Guerrero, Environmental Projects Manager Area Code/Telephone/Exteqsion: (619) 476-5311 Signature: ' Date 07109/02 Brian' Hunter, pITa~ing & EnVironmental Seryices Manager, (Filed and Signed by Lead Agency) RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES FOR CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND VENDORS PARTICIPATING IN THE CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA EVENT WHEREAS, the Chula vista Chamber of Commerce is partnering with the City of Chula vista and the Port of San Diego, to present the new "Celebrate Chula vista" festival in Marina View Park on August 25, 2002; and WHEREAS, this event celebrates and promotes Chula vista's finest and most unique attributes including: · Cultural diversity · A thriving economy and business sector · Continued growth and development · Sports and youth WHEREAS, Celebrate Chula Vista is expected to attract 30,000 attendees from throughout Chula Vista and elsewhere in San Diego county, and will feature a variety of live entertainment along with approximately 150 arts, crafts and food vendors; and WHEREAS, many of the vendors participating will already possess a Chula vista business license, but the non-local vendors will not; and WHEREAS, the Chamber of Commerce requests that the Council waive the business license taxes for the Chamber of Commerce and for vendors taking part in the event. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of Chula vista does hereby waive business license taxes for Chula vista Chamber of Commerce and vendors participating in the Celebrate Chula vista event. Presented by Approved as to form by David Palmer Deputy City Manager ~ð'h-tt<. J M. Kaheny ty Attorney {.) J:\attorney\reso\celebrate cv /d.-if; COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item: /3 Meeting Date: 08/06/01 ITEM TITLE: Resolution approving the application for Special Event Permits for Tideland Use from the San Diego Unified Port District for Celebrate Chula Vista and Tast?~ the Arts SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager PalmeVa/~'~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~: P ~v (4/5tbs Vote: Yes _ No ~ The City is sponsoring or co-sponsoring two large special events on Chula Vista's bayfront this fiscal year. Since these events are being partially or completely operated on property owned by the San Diego Unified Port District (SDUPD), the Port is requiring the City to submit Special Event Permits for Tideland Use, which include indemnification and hold harmless language. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution and authorize the City Manager to sign the Port District's Special Event Permits for Tideland Use. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The City is planning to host two large special events on the bayfront during the coming year: Celebrate Chula Vista on August 25, 2002 (co-hosted with the Chula Vista Chamber o£Commerce), and Taste of the Arts on April 5, 2003. Since these events are being conducted on Port District property, the City is required to complete the District's standard Special Event Permits for Tideland Use, which include indemnification language. It should be noted that the Port District Activity permit gives either party the right to a 24-hour cancellation notice, which, if exercised, would terminate the scheduled activity. Copies of the Tidelands Activity Permit for each event are included as Attachments A-C. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact involved with the approval of this resolution. Attachments: "A" Permit Celebrate Chula Vista "B" - Permit - Taste of the Arts Attachment A Receipt tl SPECIAL EVENT PERM1T APPLICATION PORT DISTRICT PUBLIC PARKS Community Services Park Permits, P. O. Box 120488, San Diego, CA 92112-0488 EVENT 'tli'x2E Celebrate Chula Vista TYPE OF EVENT: Free Family Festival EVENT DATE (S): Sunday, Aug. 25, 200~OT~LASrFiCmATEDATFENDANCF~ 20,000 Day andDate of Event ( X Participants) { X Spectators) PARK LOCATION: M~rina View Park, 800 West J Street ACTUAL Event Hours: 11:00 a.m. - 9:00 P.mA.M/PM SETUPDate: 8/24/02 StartTime: 12 noon - 9 D.m. AM/PM MOVE-OUTDate: 8/26/02 Completion Time: 2:00 p.m. AM/PM SPONSORINGORGANIZATIONORGROUP Chula Vista C'hamb~r of Conferee & City of Chula Vista APPLICANT OR CONTACT (NAME): Lisa Cohe~ ADDRESS: 233 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista CA 91910 Daytime Phone: (619_~L213--6603- FAX #: (63--9) 420--1269 NAME: Lisa Defino, CSEP ADDRESS: 8746 Dent CouP, San Diego CA 92119 City, State, Zip Code Contact Person "on site" day (ir'the event: Lisa Dofino, CSEP Pager/Cellular #: 619-572-9998 Internal Security (arran ements made if applicable to your cve. U City of ~la Vista Police ~Department Private Security Company ) TAX EXEMPTs'NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS: This section applies only to an organization that has been recognized as tax exempt by the Internal Revenue Service NO YES X Is your organization a "Tax Exempt, nonprofit ~ organization? If YES, you must attach to this application a copy of your IRS 501 tax exemption letter providing proof and certifying your current tax exempt, nonprofit status. ] Will entry, vendor or participant fee be required for your evenI? If YES, please explain the purpose and provide amount(s): X ~ Are you a Port District tenant? If YES, what is the name of your business? EVENT CHECKLIST Please provide a DETAILED DESCRIPTION of your event: Please see attached event information page. Each event area is labeled on attached site map. We will have 3 stages plus 2 exhibition areas, food vendors, arts and craft vendors and other exhibits to include Fire and Police Department displays, Navy Seal Team and boat unit displays, Navy "flyover", Highway and Border Patrol displays. Other businesses exhibiting will include (2) car dealerships, Knotts Soak City, Duke Energy providing First Aid Station as well as other Chula Vista Chamber businesses. In addition to the event description above, please enclose a site map tdiat;ram) indicating the layout and set-up plans for your event. Will your plans include any of the listed items below? Please check d where applicable. X Tables (#) 1 50 Chairs (#). 450 X Portable fencing or barricades (see page (3) the attached Special Event Guidelines) X Generators (3) 75I~~ Canopies (1 40':<40' / (8) 20'X20' / (150) 10'X10' / (20) 10'X20' Booths, exhibits or displays Within canopies Platforms, stages or related structures (1) 40'X40' / (1) 16'X33' / (1) 24'X16' Vehicles or trailers Fire Department, Police, Border Patrol, Highway Patrol, Ambulance Trash containers and dumpsters: ,/Number of trash cans: 60 ,~ Dumpsters: YES, NOI X Portable toilets: ~'Number of portable toilets: 50 plus ADA (One ( I ) for every 250 people or portion of is required) Parking; Off-site parking agreements YES NO if NONE. how will parking be accommodated'? Parcel Lot 9, 3 and 4 See map - parkinq & traffic I Request parking spaces? X YES i NO Number o f spaces: ~l~g i¥om (date): to (date): A fee of $8 per day per parl~xp~e will be charged for all parking space requests and must be paid at the time applicable permit fees are d~..~t District Traffic Enforcement Officer must be notified at least fourteen (14) days in advance of your eye--ill, er to post advisory signs or barricades in the parking lot. Call (619) 686~8176. I Request Port District portable staee? ~ YES; NO From (date):__ 8/24/02___-.___8/~6~0~2-- to date): A fee of $650 per day (weekdays~all~0 per day (weekends or holidays} will be charged for use of the Port District mobile stage. Requests are~&~reservation o~tlvand use is restricted to Port tideland property. ~ ~g~IVl~ FOR crl~ (IF ~ ~ PROVISION FOR EMERGENCY AID, CMS OR BOTH BASED ON EVENT RISK FACTOR. AS SET FORTH IN THE ATYACHED CATEGORIES OF EVENTS. Please indicate what arrangements you have made for providing First Aid Staffing and Equipment? # Ambulance(s)---How provided? PUC License # # Doctors---Name & Specialties: Phone# # Nurses---Name & Specialties # 2 Paramedics---How provided? American Medical Response # Emergency Medical Technicians---How provided? Please describe your procedures for both Crowd Control and Internal Security Chula Vista Police Department and Private Security Com~r~ny ACCESSIBILITY PLAN "Accessible" describes a site, building, facility or portion thereof that can be approached, entered and used by persons with disabilities. It is the applicant's responsibility to comply with all City, County, State and Federal Disability Access Requirements applicable to the event. All indoor and outdoor sites for special events must be accessible to persons with disabilities. Ifa portion of the area is inaccessible an alternate area must be provided with the same activities that are in the inaccessible areas. It cannot however, be offeredonly to patrons with disabilities. Disabled access may include parking, restrooms, telephones, clear paths of travel, transportation, accessible vendors and booths. If all areas are not accessible a map or program must be provided to attendees indicating the accessible restrooms, parking, phones, drinking fountains, etc. Please describe your Accessibility Plan tbr access at your event by individuals with disabilities: All areas are ADA accessible C I. NCELI.A lION NC)lICE REQIIIREI): If this event is canceled, please notil~, the Public Relations office at (619) 686-6225. Otherwise, Port District personnel may be needlessly dispatched and approval of your fi~ture permit application may be jeopardized. Receipt # I'HIS SPECIAL EVENT I'F~RNII] Xlqq.lC X ['ION FIIR PORT I)ISTRICT 'FIDELANI) USE IS ISSUED SIJILIE( 71' TO TIlE i;OI,Lt)WlN(; TERMS ANI) CONDITIONS: 1. Applicant shall comply with all applicable laws, rules, regulations and requirements of the Port District and other governmental entities. 2. All or any portion of the security deposit (if applicable), shall be available unconditionally to the Port District for the purpose of cleaning or repairing damages to the properly upon termination of this permit. 3. This permit may be canceled by either party by giving twenty-four (24) hours notice to the other party. In the event of an emergency, such cancellation shall be without liability of any nature. Applicant subject to cancellation fee of $500 if Applicant provides less than sixty days written notice to the District of cancellation ora scheduled event. 4. This permit shall not be transferred or assigned. 5. Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Port District, is officers and employees against all causes of action, for judicial relief of any kind, for damage to property of any kind whatsoever, and to whomever belonging, including Applicant, or injury to or death of any person or persons, including employees of Applicant, resulting directly or indirectly from activities in connection with the issuance and performance of this permit or arising from the use of the property, facilities or services of Port District, its officers or employees. 6. Applicant must provide certificate of insurance coverage naming the "San Diego Unified Port District" as an additional insured as defined in the attached Procedures & Guidelines. 7. The rights and privileges extended by this permit are non-exclusive. 8. Applicant shall not engage in any activity on Port District property other than the activity for which this permit is expressly issued. 9. In the event of failure of the Applicant to comply with any provision of this permit, this permit may, at the discretion of the Port District, be terminated immediately. I certify that the information contained in the special event application is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and understand and agree to abide by the rules and regulations governing the proposed Special Event under the San Diego Unified Port District Code. NameofA~ppFboa~/Pl~lNT)-~',/~ ~ '~-, '~/~lt~,n-~r Title: -'~'~'. ~','za~ J'~q~p Signature of Applicant: SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT Approval conditional upon Applicant fulfilling all requirements as listed: Attachment B Receipt # SPECIALEVENT PERMIT APPLICATION PORT DISTRICT PUBLIC PARKS Community Services Park Permits, P.O. Box 120488, San Diego, CA 92112-0488 EVENT'I'I'I'LI~ TASTE OF THE ARTS FESTIVAL 2003 ART FESTIVAL TYPE OF EVENT: EVENT DATE (S): April 5, 2003 TOTAL ANTICIPATED ATi'ENDANCE: 7500 DayandDateofEvent ( 100 Participants) ( 7400 Spectators) PARK MARIS~ VIEN PhRK LOCATION: ACTUAL Event Hours: 7: 00 A M/PM 7 ! f)f} AM/PM SETUPDate: April 4, 2003 Star, Time: 8:00 AM/PM MOVE_OUTDateA~ril 5, 2003 . .8:00 Complenon Time: AM/PM SPONSORING ORGANIZATION OR GROUP CITY' OF CHBI~ VISTA OFFICE OF CUL2URb~ bP, TS RIC 2T)DD APPLICANT OR CONTACT (NAME): ADDRESS: 365 F STR.t~l', CHIJr_~ VISTA CA 91 91 0 City. State, zip Code Daytime Phone: ( 619 585--5627 FAX #: I 619 427--4246 Please list any professional event organizer, event service provider or volunteer organization hired by you and/or autfiorized to work on your behalf to produce this event NAME: ADDRESS: City, State, Zip Code RIC TODD event) Chula Vista Police Dept ......... ~' TAX EXEMPT, NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS: This section applies only to an organization that has been recognized as tax exempt by the Internal Revenue Service. NO YES I ! [X ls your organization a "Tax Exempt, nonprofit *~ organization7 If YES, you must attach to this application a copy of your IRS 501 tax exemption letter providing proof and certifying your current tax exempt, nonprofit status. TAX T.I~ 95-6000-690 , IX Will entry, vendoror participant feebe re uired foryour event? lfY pi e explain the purpose and provide amount(s): NO Enti-y ee ~{: Food $1F~S.~[5 Artist $~00.00 'X Are you a Port District tenant? If YES, what is the name of your business7 EVENT CHECKLIST Please provide a DETAILED DESCRIPTION of your event: ~ A~A~ "A 2 13-1t Attachment "A" City of Chula Vista TASTE OF THE ARTS 2003 The City of Chula Vista witl conduct a one-day, community-based festival, TASTE OF THE ARTS 2003, On April 5, 2003, at Marina View Park and the adjacent Public Pier. Based on the overwhelming success of TASTE OF THE ARTS, since 1997 all of which were co-sponsored by the City and the Pod District, the City anticipates producing a similar but enhanced event in 2003 that will focus on additional community involvement and support, while attracting 9reater numbers of spectators and participants. (The previous events have attracted estimated crowds of between 8,000- 10,000 each.) Alt past events featured community display booth and exhibits, food and beverage services, specialized children's art and activity areas, performances by a wide variety of locally and regionally recognized musical and performing arts groups. The 2003 event will focus on additional participation by local non-profit service groups and organizations, and will fudher enhance several components including the Performing and Visual Arts. City Departments including Police, Transit, Public Works, Planning & Building, Parks & Recreation and Libraries will continue to expand information displays. The 2003 event will also capitalize on increased involvement by local schools including Sweetwater Union High School District, the Chula Vista Elementary School District, and Southwestern College. It should be noted that the event is not designed to feature commercial sales and/or re-sale vendors, and very few permits will be issued to retail vendors. There is no admission fee for the event, and all activities are provided free of charge to the public. Public parking is available near the site, and free shuttle bus service is provided from local trolley stations. Publicity efforts will be expanded for the 2003 event to attract new participants and increase aUendance at the event. In addition to the event description above, please enclose a site map (diagram) indicating the layout and set-up plans for your event. Will your plans include any of the listed items below? Please check ~] where applicable. Tables(g)_ Chairs (g) Po~ab]efencing or barricades (see page (3) the attached Special Event Guidelines) Generators~ 3 3 Canopies Booths, exhibits or 60+ Booths displays Platforms, stages or related structures '~ ~ Vehicles or trailers Showmobile ~ Trash containers and dumpsters: ff Number of trash cans: 25 g Dumpsters: ~ I Alcoholic or Beer Garden Area Does this event involve the sale or use of alcoholic beverages? YES; NO~ Portable toilets: ff Number of portable toilets: __ I 5) (One (1) for every 250 people or portion of is required) Parking: Off-site parking agreements ~XYES NO if NONE, how will parking be accommodated'? X~ Request narkin~ spaces? I YES t i NO In-kind Number ofspaces:~;~.~,~-~[oln (date): April ~ to (date): Aprl] S: 2003 A fee of $8 per day per parking space will be charged for all parking space requests and must be paid at the time applicable permit fees are due. A Port District Traffic Enforcement Officer must be notified at least fourteen (14) days in advance of your event in order to post advisory signs or barricades in the parking lot. Call (619) 686-8176. ]~ Request Port District portable staee? ~X YES I NO In-kind From (date): ~l~17~.~_~,003 to (date): A fee of $650 per day (weekdays) and $750 per day (weekends or holidays) will be charged for use of the Port District mobile stage. Requests are taken by reservation onlF and use is restricted to Port tideland property. 3 PROVISION FOR EMERGENCY AID, CMS OR BOTH BASED ON EVENT RISK FACTOR, AS SET FORTH IN THE ATTACHED CATEGORIES OF EVENTS. Please indicate what arrangements you have made for providing First Aid Staffing and Equipment? # Ambulance(s)---How provided? PUC License # # Doctors---Name & Specialties: Phone# # Nurses---Name & Specialties # Paramedics---How provided? # Emergency Medical Technicians---How provided? Please describe your procedures for both Crowd Control and Internal Security City Events Security and Chula Vista Police Dept. ACCESSIBILITY PLAN "Accessible" describes a site, building, facility or portion thereof that can be approached, entered and used by persons with disabiilties. It is the applicant's responsibility to comply with all City, County, State and Federal Disability Access Reqmrements applicable to the event. All indoor and outdoor sites for special events must be accessible to persons with disabilities. Ifa portion of the area is inaccessible an alternate area must be provided with the same activities that are in the inaccessible areas. It cannot however, be offeredon~v to patrons with disabilities. Disabled access may include parking, restrooms, telephones, clear paths of travel, transportation, accessible vendors and booths. If all areas are not accessible a map or program must be provided to attendees indicating the accessible restrooms, parking, phones, drinking tbuntains, etc. Please describe your Accessibility Plan tbr access at your event by individuals with disabilities: CAN( ELI,ATION NOTICE REQtllRED: If this event is canceled, please notify the Public Relations office at (619) 686-6225. Otherwise, Port District personnel may be needlessly dispatched and approval of your ~uture permit application may be)eopardized. Fills SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR PORT DISTRICI' TIDELAND USE IS ISSUED SUB,IECT TO THE FOI~LOWlNG TERMS AND ('ONDITIONS: Applicant shall comply with all applicable laws, roles, regulations and requirements of the Port District and other governmental entities. 4 /3-/¢ Attachment "B" City of Chuia Vista TASTE OF THE ARTS 2003 1. The City of Chula Vista has installed wheel chair accessible curbing at Madna View Park. The parking lot to the west end will be designated at the Handicapped Parking. There is a wheel chair ramp at the north end of the lot that leads directiy to the park venue, 2. Provision for Emergency: Chula Vista Fire Department will be on duty throughout the day. EMT, American Medical Response and paramedics can be reached by phone (911). Site Map Included 2. All or any portion of the security deposit (if applicable), shall be available unconditionally to the Port District for the purpose of cleaning or repairing damages to the property upon termination of this permit. 3. This permit may be canceled by either parry by giving twenW-four (24) hours notice to the other party. In the event of an emergency, such cancellation shall be without liability of any nature. Applicant subject to cancellation fee of $500 if Applicant provides less than sixty days written notice to the District of cancellation of a scheduled event. 4. This permit shall not be transferred or assigned. 5. Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Port District, is officers and employees against all causes of action, for judicial relief of any kind, for damage to property of any kind whatsoever, and to whomever belonging, including Applicant, or injury to or death of any person or persons, including employees of Applicant, resulting directly or indirectly from activities in connection with the issuance and performance of this permit or arising from the use of the property, facilities or services of Port District, its officers or employees. 6. Applicant must provide certificate of insurance coverage naming the "San Diego Unified Port District" as an additional insured as defined in the attached Procedures & Guidelines. 7. The rights and privileges extended by this permit are non-exclusive. 8. Applicant shall not engage in any activity on Port District property other than the activity for which this permit is expressly issued. 9. In the event of failure of the Applicant to comply with any provision of this permit, this permit may, at the discretion of the Port District, be terminated immediately. I certify that the information contained in the special event app}ication is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and understand and agree to abide by the rules and regulations governing the proposed Special Event under the San Diego Unified Port District Code. N am~~~J-_ P_~lmer Title: Deputy City Manager Date: ~ly 23r 20~2 Signature of Applicant: SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT Approval conditional upon Applicant fulfilling all requirements as listed: 5 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS FOR TIDELAND USE FROM THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA AND TASTE OF THE ARTS WHEREAS, the city is sponsoring or co-sponsoring two large special events on Chula vista's bayfront this fiscal year: Celebrate Chula Vista (co-hosted with the Chamber of Commerce) and Taste of the Arts on April 5, 2003; and WHEREAS, since these events are being conducted on Port District property, the City is required to complete the District's standard Special Event Permits for Tideland Use, which include indemnification language. NOW THEREFORE, BE Council of the city of Chula application for Special Event the San Diego Unified Port vista and Taste of the Arts. IT RESOLVED that the city Vista does hereby approve the Permits for Tideland Use from District for Celebrate Chula BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Port District's Special Event Permits for Tideland Use. Presented by Approved as to form by David Palmer Deputy City Manager A~ J:\attorney\reso\tideland permits 13~ I g COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item }4 Meeting Date 08/06/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving an agreement with the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce for $48,500 in financial assistance for Celebrate Chula Vista and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager Palmer~1~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager~¢~~'/ (4/5tbs Vote: Yes __ No x ) The City is co-sponsoring the Celebrate Chula Vista event with the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, and has already provided $23,000 in funding to the Chamber via an agreement signed by the City Manager. There is $48,500 in funds remaining to be paid to the Chamber for this event, which will cause the total funds paid to the Chamber to exceed the $50,000 authorization limit for consultant services. The City Council must therefore approve the attached agreement with the Chamber for payment of these remaining funds. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution approving an agreement with the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce for $48,500 in financial assistance for Celebrate Chula Vista and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement. BOARDS/COMMISSION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: There is $71,500 budgeted in the Office of Communications and Cultural Arts Community Events budgets for Harbor Days ($38,000) and Summer Legacy Concert ($33,500). This year, these two events have been combined into a single Celebrate Chula Vista event, co-sponsored by the City and the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce Sunday, to be held on Sunday, August 25 from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. in Marina View Park. In past years, the City gave the Chamber $38,000 for Harbor Days only, as the City sponsored and organized the Summer Legacy Concert. This year, the Chamber is coordinating the combined event, which is a free family festival featuring live music and dance on three stages, hundreds of vendors and exhibitors, children's activities, ethnic cuisine, evening concerts by classic rock band Rockola and the San Diego Chamber Orchestra, and a fireworks finale. The City has already paid $23,000 to the Chamber for this event, under an agreement signed by the City Manager. Because the remaining $48,500 to be paid to the Chamber for Celebrate Chula Vista will cause the total funds paid to the Chamber to exceed the $50,000 authorization limit, the City Council must approve payment of these remaining funds. The City has received Port District funding in the past to help offset these costs. The City just received word that the Port approved $78,500 in funding to the City, which the City must Page 2, Item/~_ Meeting Date 08/06/02 determine how to allocate among five events or projects. City staff is in the process of preparing a report to Council with funding recommendations for these Port dollars. FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds are budgeted to cover the costs of the Celebrate Chula Vista event. The budget also includes Port revenue of $26,000 for Harbor Days and $22,500 for the Summer Legacy Concert, for a total of $48,500, based on past allocations. However, the Port has informed the City that only $78,500 in funding was awarded to the City, which the City must allocate among five events or projects. Staff will therefore be bringing forward to Council a recommended funding allocation plan. Other City events or programs requesting Port funds include Taste of the Arts (City), Chula Vista Nature Center for the David A. Wergeland Shark and Ray Experience (City), Arturo Barrios Race (Elite Racing, Inc.), and San Diego Cajun- Zydeco Music and Food Festival (Festival Group, Inc.). The total funding request to the Port was $141,750. Therefore, it is likely that the Celebrate Chula Vista event will receive less than $48,500 in offsetting Port revenue. RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR $48,500 IN FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA EVENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City is co-sponsoring the Celebrate Chula vista event with the Chula vista Chamber of Commerce, and has already provided $23,000 in funding to the Chamber via an agreement signed by the city Manager; and WHEREAS, there is $48,500 in funds remaining to be paid to the Chamber for this event, which will cause the total funds paid to be Chamber to exceed the $50,000 authorization limit for consultant services; and WHEREAS, the city Council must therefore approve the attached agreement with the Chamber for payment of these remaining funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby approve an agreement with the Chula vista Chamber of Commerce for $48,500 in financial assistance for Celebrate Chula vista, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the city Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of Chula vista is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Chula vista. Presented by Approved as to form by D~ï.~ {.... David Palmer Deputy city Manager John M. Kaheny City Attorney J:\attorney\reso\celebrate cvl /'-/-3 THE A TT ACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY A TTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORM ALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL p~ ? H~,..... John M. Kaheny City Attorney Dated: 7-31-02 AGREEMENT WITH THE CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR $48,500 IN FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE CELBRATE CHULA VISTA EVENT ;i/-'I AGREEMENT SETTING OUR THE TERMS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR THE CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA FESTIVAL REGARD TO THE EXPENDITURE OF CITY FUNDS APPROPRIATED THIS AGREEMENT, effective as of July 16, 2002, by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", and the CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE for the CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA FESTIVAL, hereinafter referred to as "Chamber"; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Chamber is the primary organizer of Celebrate Chula Vista Festival, a special event promoting Chula Vista Harbor, to be conducted in the City of Chula Vista on August 25, 2002; and WHEREAS, both the City and the Chamber will benefit rrom the media exposure attendant to the Festival; and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista desires to encourage the beneficial aims of the Celebrate Chula Vista Festival through appropriation of reasonable amounts of City funds; and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has established a policy for consideration of requests for funding by private organizations and individuals; and WHEREAS, such policy stipulated that no expenditure may be made out of any appropriation awarded said organization unless an agreement has been reached between the parties setting out the terms and conditions for the expenditure of such funds. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. The Chamber agrees to produce the Celebrate Chula Vista Festival on Sunday August 25, 2002, including rree-to-the-public musical entertainment, and related activities for the one-day event. ' 2. The Chamber agrees to expend City appropriated funds to meet bona fide obligations incurred in planning, organizing, and participating in the Celebrate Chula Vista Festival, including the scheduling of a performance by the San Diego Chamber Orchestra, in an amount not to exceed $48,500. Funds shall be used only for Celebrate Chula Vista Festival and may not be transferred to other accounts. Any funds not expended on the Celebrate Chula Vista Festival shall be returned to the City. 3. The Chamber agrees to list the City as co-sponsor of the Celebrate Chula Vista Festival and publicize the City in all releases and fliers, print advertising, programs and information sheets. 4. The Chamber agrees to submit, within 60 days following the event, a complete report of all expenditures and shall specifically list the purposes furthered by the City- appropriated funds of $48,500. / LJ- 5 Celebrate CV Agreement Page 1 of2 5. That the City of Chula Vista, at its discretion, may require the Chamber to provide or allow the City to undertake a complete financial audit of their records. 6. In the event that the Port of San Diego provides funding to offset some or all of the funds appropriated by the City for the Celebrate Chula Vista Festival, the Chamber hereby agrees to abide by all of the terms and conditions set forth by the San Diego Unified Port District, which conditions are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. 7. The Chamber agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City against and rrom any and all damages in property or injuries to or death of any person, or persons, including employees or agents of the City, and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents and employees rrom any and all claims, demands, suits, actions or proceedings of any kind or nature of or by anyone whomsoever in any way resulting rrom or arising out of the negligent or intentional acts, errors or omissions of Chamber, or any of its officers, agents or employees relating to the event. 9. The Chamber shall throughout the duration of this Agreement maintain comprehensive general liability insurance covering all operations hereunder of Chamber, its agents and employees with minimum coverage of one million dollars ($1,000,000). Evidence of such coverage, in the form of a certificate of insurance and policy endorsement which names the City as additional insured, shall be submitted to the Risk Manager, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910, on or before August 7, 2002. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set forth. Dated: ,200_ THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE/ CELEBRATE CHULA VISTA FESTIVAL ê/:;-' ',-- . . ·..·..._,1 _ ~0-- C=~ Chamber CEO Mayor Approved as to form by: John M. Kaheny City Attorney jLJ- ~ Celebrate CV Agreement Page 2 of2 PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: / ~ MEETING DATE: 08/06/02 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING A LETTER OF INTENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF SAN DIEGO AND CHULA VISTA REGARDING THE OTAY VALLEY REGIONAL PARK (OVRP) AND THE WEST FAIRFIELD REORGANIZATION PLAN AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID LETTER OF INTENT SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR I REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER 4/5THS VOTE: YES BACKGROUND Staff from the City of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista have been jointly working to move forward with a proposed reorganization that will restructure boundaries between the Cities in and adjacent to the Otay River Valley. The reorganization will enable each City to accomplish mutual goals for redevelopment, open space conservation, parkland acquisition and development of park and recreation opportunities. At the same time, the H. G. Fenton Company is planning to develop its properties in the area known as West Fairfield, located west of Interstate 5 between Palomar Street (on the north} and Main Street (on the south). West Fairfield includes approximately 66 acres of land, which are located within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista and the City of San Diego. Development of the Fenton properties will require that portion within the City of San Diego to be annexed into the City of Chula Vista in order to be adequately provided with the necessary public services. The Letter of Intent (LOI) being presented to the City Council provides the initial principles that will form the basis of reorganization of the properties as outlined in this report, and expresses the parties agreement to cooperate with each other to accomplish the purposes and intent associated with the OVRP Reorganization Plan. The LOI is not a binding agreement, nor does it commit either City to approve or disapprove any of the applications, pre-zoning, entitlements or other approvals required for the related projects. The same LOI was presented to the City Council of the City of San Diego at its earlier meeting today. Staff will provide a verbal report on the results of that action. 15-/ PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: 08/06/02 RECOMMENDATION That the City Council adopt the resolution approving the Letter of Intent as presented and authorizing the Mayor to execute it, and directing staff to work with the City of San Diego staff on the implementation of the actions outlined in the Letter of Intent. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION DISCUSSION The Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego are, in partnership with the County of San Diego, participants in the Otay River Valley Park Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEPA). The purpose of the JEPA is to provide policy direction for coordination of the planning, acquisition, and design of the Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP) as outlined in the OVRP Concept Plan. To meet the goals of the OVRP Concept Plan, all three agencies have been endeavoring to acquire parkland in order to preserve valuable biological resources and to create recreational opportunities within the Otay River Valley. As part of this effort, an agreement has been reached between the Cities of San Diego and Chula Vista that will preserve specific natural open space areas, create two active recreational sites within the OVRP, and will also provide an opportunity for redevelopment. In order to accomplish these objectives, a reorganization of the jurisdictional boundaries of the two Cities will be required. Adoption of a Letter of Intent (LOI) between Chub Vista and San Diego is proposed in order to memorialize the intent of both Cities to initiate and implement an "OVRP Reorganization Plan" that would include the following: · Nakano-Davies Reorqanization Detachment of the properties known as "Nakano-Davies' (approximately 27 acres) from the City of Chula Vista and annexation into the City of San Diego (see Exhibit 1 attached to the LOI). The City of San Diego will be designated as the Lead Agency for this project. Pardee Homes has entered into an agreement to purchase approximately 18 acres of this area (currently the Nakano ownership). Annexation of this area into San Diego will provide for access and public services to be extended through the Pardee Oceanview Hills project. Development of an active park and institutional uses are proposed. · Ranchero Rios Reorqanization Detachment of the properly known as "Ranchero Rios" (approximately 76 acres) from the City of San Diego and annexation into the City of Chula Vista (see Exhibit 1 attached to PAGE 3, ITEM NO.: / 5' MEETING DATE: 08/06/02 the LOI). Chula Vista will serve as the Lead Agency for this project. The Ranchero Rios property was purchased by the City of Chula Vista for inclusion in the OVRP. Annexation into Chula Vista will provide access through Chula Vista, and enable a portion of the property to be developed for active park uses. The remainder is planned to provide natural open space within the OVRP. · West Fairfield Reorganization Detachment of properties in the West Fairfield area known as the 'Fenton' properties (approximately 34.5 acres) from the City of San Diego and annexation into the City of Chula Vista (see Exhibit 2 attached to the LOI). Chula Vista will be designated the Lead Agency for this project. Annexation into Chula Vista will allow for expansion of the West Fairfield Redevelopment Area and extension of public facilities and services from Chula Vista. Redevelopment of the site with commercial uses is being proposed. The LOI also provides that "as part of the West Fairfield Reorganization, the parties may enter into a revenue-sharing agreement that will fairly and equitably divide future municipal revenues generated from the project site." Staff is currently working with a financial consultant who is preparing a Fiscal Impact Analysis, which will provide information and guidelines for the two cities to equitably share the costs and revenues of the proiect. Based on the description above, the City of Chula Vista will be the Lead Agency for the West Fairfield and the Ranchero Rios reorganization. Since it has been agreed that Community Development staff will be doing the planning and environmental processing of the Fenton proposed redevelopment project, it has also been agreed that Community Development staff will also lead the Ranchero Rios reorganization and discretionary processes in order to take advantage of staff efficiencies. The Leffer of Intent is scheduled to go to both cities City Council meetings on July 16, 2002. For the properties annexed into the City of Chula Vista the following discretionary adions will be pursued by the Community Development Department, and will take place concurrent with the tax negotiation: General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Plan to include California Coastal Commission approval (West Fairfield only), pre-zoning preparation, Local Agency Formation Commission Resolution of Initiation, and a draft multi-species conservation plan requirement for an annexation agreement with the Fish and Wildlife Service. Staff will keep Council apprised of the schedule of these actions as they become clearer. As indicated previously, the LOI being presented tonight for Council consideration is a non- binding document, which allows the two cities to maintain their full and unfettered discretion on all discretionary actions that they will take in the future. The Letter of Intent being presented to the City Council is supported by staff from both Cities as a tool to accomplish important goals for redevelopment and implementation of the Otay River Valley Park Concept Plan. Therefore, City staff recommends that the City Council approved the LOI and direct staff to implement the actions therein. PAGE 4, ITEM NO..- /~ MEETING DATE: 08/06/02 FISCAL IMPACT No fiscal impact, other than staff time, is expected as a result of tonight's action by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS Letter of Intent with the following: Exhibit 1: Map of Nakano/Davis Properties and Ranchero Rios properties Exhibit 2: Map of West Fairfield properties J:\COMMDEV~STAFF REPORTS\O7-16-O2\Council Report on Letter of Intent.doc [07/24/2002 12:40 PM] EXHIBIT 1 ROHR AUTUMN HILLS Ranchero Rios Properties Nakano-Davis Properties (City Of San Diego) (city Of Chula Vista) EXHIBIT I CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: APPLICANT: CrTYOFCHULAVISTA OTAY VALLEY REGIONAL PARK REORGANIZATION SCALE: FILE NUMBER: NORTH No Scale CD(2) j:\home\planning\cherrylc\locators\cd2.cdr 07.10.02 / j~---,~ ..".. / / / J I I-~~-·-~-~- ) \ SDG&E POWER PLANT \ \~ / // ~// elf! OF C~ VISTA COUNTY OF SA.N DIEGO ~. ./ /' r----( "..-// I / I I PROJECT J LOCAnON / EXHIBIT 2 (' I \ r\ ./ . . iô' g..~ -.-------,~~- 'ò: c ; :E:i .'" ;;~'õ /~~L / /g¡£ . .¡: . . / \ ~.1jffi!1. ~.-J D \ ~ li::3JB CJI \ I I LAV A COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO EXHIBIT 2 CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Œ) APPLICANT CITY OF CHULA VISTA OTAY VALLEY REGIONAL PARK REORGANIZATION SCALE: FilE NUMBER: NORTH No Scale CD(1) j:\home\planning\cherrylc\locators\cd1.cdr 07.10.02 15-& COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING LETTER OF INTENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF SAN DIEGO AND CHULA VISTA REGARDING THE OTAY VALLEY REGIONAL PARK (OVRP) AND THE WEST FAIRFIELD REORGANIZATION AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID LETTER OF INTENT WHEREAS, The Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego are, in partnership with the County of San Diego, participants in the Otay River Valley Park Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEPA); and WHEREAS, the purpose of the JEP A is to provide policy direction for coordination of the planning, acquisition, and design of the Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP) as outlined in the OVRP Concept Plan; and WHEREAS, to meet the goals of the OVRP Concept Plan, all three agencies have been endeavoring to acquire parkland in order to preserve valuable biological resources and to create recreational opportunities within the Otay River Valley; and WHEREAS, as part of this effort, an agreement has been reached between the Cities of San Diego and Chula Vista that will preserve specific natural open space areas, create two active recreational sites with the OVRP, and will also provide an opportunity for redevelopment; and WHEREAS, in order to accomplish these objectives, a reorganization of the jurisdictional boundaries of the two Cities will be required; and WHEREAS, adoption of a Letter of Intent (LOI) between Chula Vista and San Diego is proposed in order to memorialize the intent of both Cities to initiate and implement an "OVRP Reorganization Plan" that would include the Nakano/Davis Reorganization, the Ranchero Rios Reorganization, and the West Fairfield Reorganization. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approves the Letter ofIntent between the City of Chula Vista and the City of San Diego as presented. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby authorizes the Mayor to execute said Letter of Intent and directs staff to work with the City of San Diego staff to implement the actions outlined in said Letter of Intent. Presented by Approved as to form by ~~~ Chris Salomone Director of Community Development File: J:\commdevIResoslLetter of Intent - Council ApprovaLdoc [07/1712002 3:52 PM] /5-7 LETTER OF INTENT Between the Cities of San Diego and Chula Vista Regarding the "OTAY VALLEY REGIONAL PARK (OVRP) REORGANIZATION PLAN" Date: August 5, 2002 This Letter of Intent ("LOI") is entered into by and between the City of San Diego (San Diego) and the City of Chula Vista (Chula Vista) for the purpose of memorializing and expressing the general intent of San Diego and Chula Vista to reorganize the San Diego and Chula Vista jurisdictional boundaries within and surrounding the Otay Valley Regional Park ("OVRP") Planning Area. Although this Letter of Intent is not meant by the parties to be a legally binding agreement, or an amendment to any existing agreement, it does contain some initial principals that would form the basis of the reorganization. RECITALS A. On January 30, 1990, San Diego, Chula Vista and the County of San Diego executed a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement ("JEPA") for coordinated acquisition, planning and design of the OVRP. The JEPA subsequently prepared and adopted an OVRP Concept Plan. In accordance with the JEPA and the OVRP Concept Plan, San Diego and Chula Vista have been working cooperatively to acquire land for the purpose of park development, and to develop land located within the OVRP Planning Area for park purposes. B. A series of staff level meetings were held between San Diego and Chula Vista to discuss the reorganization of the jurisdictional boundary between San Diego and Chula Vista within and surrounding the OVRP, in order to implement actions that will lead to parkland acquisition and/or development and implementation of the OVRP Concept Plan. As a result of those meetings, San Diego and Chula Vista have identified the actions contemplated which are described herein, and referred to as the "OVRP Reorganization Plan". C. In furtherance of implementing the OVRP Plan, San Diego and Chula Vista will pursue consideration of the reorganization of their municipal boundaries and a revenue-sharing agreement towards implementing the OVRP Concept Plan. D. Although this LOI presents a general plan of the implementing process to recognize the jurisdictional boundaries, San Diego and Chula Vista intend to follow any and all adopted laws, regulations, policies and procedures of their respective agencies, including City of San Diego Administrative Regulation 50.20, Annexation Procedures, and City of Chula Vista Policy 267-03, Annexation Fees. OVRP REORGANIZATION PLAN Now, therefore, in acknowledgement of the recitals above, San Diego and Chula Vista (the Parties) hereby agree to the following principals to implement the OVRP Reorganization Plan: 1. The parties will initiate the process of Reorganization for the following: a) Nakano-Davies Reorganization Detachment of the properties known as "Nakano-Davies" (APN #'s 624-071-01 and 624-071-02, and as described by Exhibit i attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein) from the City of Chula Vista, and annexation of the Nakano-Davies properties into the City of San Diego; b) Ranchero Rios Reorganization Detachment of the property known as the "Ranchero Rios" property (APN #'s 631-013-33,631-013-34, 631-013-35,631-013-36, 624-070- 22,624-070-26, and 624-070-01, and as described by Exhibit 1 attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein) from the City of San Diego, and annexation of the Ranchero Rios property into the City of Chula Vista; and c) West Fairfield Reorganization DetacNnent of the properties in the West Fairfield area known as the "Fenton" properties (APN #'s 621-010-037, 621-020-06, 622-101-02, 622-101-01,622-101-23, 622-101-15,622-101-04, and 622-101-17, and as described by Exhibit 2 attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein) from the City of San Diego, and annexation of the Fenton properties into the City of Chula Vista. 2. In order to implement the Nakano-Davies Reorganization, San Diego will be designated the "Lead Agency". As the Lead Agency, San Diego will initiate a Resolution of Initiation to LAFCO, and will work with affected property owner(s) to process any pre-zoning, entitlements, environmental review and/or other approvals required by LAFCO to complete the LAFCO application and review. Chula Vista will be designated as a JSAttorncy\EHull\OVRP\LOl Final.doc 2 FINAL DRAFT 7/31/2002 1:06 PM Responsible Agency and will initiate a Resolution of Initiation to LAFCO, substantially similar to that of San Diego. 3. In order to implement the Ranchero Rios Reorganization, Chula Vista will be designated the "Lead Agency". As the Lead Agency, Chula Vista will initiate a Resolution of Initiation to LAFCO, and will work with affected property owner(s) to process any pre-zoning, entitlements, environmental review and/or other approvals required by LAFCO to complete the LAFCO application and review. San Diego will be designated as a Responsible Agency and will initiate a Resolution of Initiation to LAFCO, substantially similar to that of Chula Vista. 4. In order to implement the West Fairfield Reorganization, Chula Vista will be designated the "Lead Agency". As the Lead Agency, Chula Vista will initiate a Resolution of Initiation to LAFCO and will work with affected property owner(s) to process any pre-zoning, entitlements, environmental review and/or other approvals required by LAFCO to complete the LAFCO application and review. San Diego will be designated as a Responsible Agency and will initiate a Resolution of Initiation to LAFCO, substantially similar to that of Chula Vista. Chula Vista will also consider designating the West Fairfield area as part of the expanded redevelopment survey area for the Southwest Redevelopment area. This designation shall be solely for study purposes. 5. As part of the West Fairfield Reorganization, the Parties may enter into a revenue-sharing agreement that will fairly and equitably divide future municipal revenues generated from the project site known as "West Fairfield". 6. By entering into this LOI, San Diego and Chula Vista do not agree to approve or disapprove any of the applications, pre-zoning, entitlements and/or other approvals described herein. San Diego and Chula Vista, however, will process such applications, pre-zoning, entitlements and/or other approvals in order to be able to make a timely decision on each of them. 7. The Parties hereto agree to cooperate with each other to accomplish the purposes and intent of this LOI and to support initiation and processing of the Nakano-Davies, Rancho Rios and West Fairfield LAFCO Reorganization Applications. 8. This letter is non-binding in all respects and should not and may not be construed as a commitment of or an approval of a project by San Diego or Chula Vista. San Diego and Chula Vista acknowledge that they neither intend to enter, nor have they entered, into any agreement to negotiate a definitive agreement pursuant to this LOI, and either party may, at any C:\WlNDOWS\Temporary lntemet Files\OLK9OB5\LOI Fihal.doc FINALDRAFT 7/24/2002 12:35PM / time prior to execution of such definitive agreement propose different terms from those summarized here or unilaterally terminate all negotiations without any liability whatsoever to the other party. Each party is and will be solely liable for all its own fees, costs and other expense in conjunction with negotiation and preparation of a final agreement pursuant to this LOI. 9. San Diego agrees to assume responsibility as the lead agency under CEQA for the environmental analysis necessary to proceed with the proposed Nakano~Davies Reorganization. Chula Vista agrees to assume responsibility as the lead agency under CEQA for the environmental analysis necessary to proceed with the proposed Ranchero Rios Reorganization and West Fairfield Reorganization. 10. It is understood that Chula Vista and San Diego reserve the right to exercise their discretion as to all matters which Chula Vista and San Diego are by law entitled or required to exercise their discretion. In addition, any agreements, amendments or approvals processed for either City Council approval will be subject to, and brought for consideration in accordance with applicable legal requirements. 11. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts (each of which shall be original) and by facsimile (which along with the originally executed Agreement) shall constitute one and the same document. 12. The parties are in agreement with the foregoing as indicated by their signatures below. The parties agree that any modification from the principles expressed herein will be in writing and signed by the parties. 13. The signatories below have authority to act on behalf of such party. 14. This LOI shall be effective on the date it is executed by the last Party to sign the LOI, and it shall be effective until December 31, 2003. CITY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CHULA VISTA A municipal corporation A municipal corporation By: By: Its: Its: C:\WINDOWS\Temporary Intemet Files\OLK90B5\LO1 Final.doc FINAL DRAFT 7/24/2002 12:35 PM / PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: / ~ MEETING DATE: 8/6/2002 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING DOWNTOWN PROPERTY AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ANNUAL COST OF LIVING ASSESSMENT ADJUSTMENT SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER ~ D(~ 4/STHS VOTE: YES ~ NO ~ BACKGROUND The Downtown Properly and Business Improvement District (PBID) may authorize annual cost of living increases of up to five percent, pursuant to Section VI (C) of the adopted Management Plan. Said increases are recommended by the PBID Board of Directors and forwarded to the Ci~/Council for final approval. For the upcoming tax year (2002-2003), the PBID Board of Directors has recommended an assessment increase of 3.6 percent, which matches the regional consumer price index increase. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Resolution Approving Downtown Property and Business Improvement District Annual Cost of Living Assessment Adjustment BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION The Downtown Properly and Business Improvement District Board of Directors voted unanimously to recommend approval of the cost of living assessment increase of 3.6 percent at their meeting of July 3, 2002. The Downtown Properfl/and Business Improvement District (PBID) was formed in 2001 and has begun aggressively implementing a number of "clean and safe" neighborhood programs, as well as 24-hour graffiti removal, enhanced landscape maintenance, and retail recruitment efforts in the Third Avenue District. The PBID was inaugurated for a five year term, with annual cost of living increases allowed up to 5 percent based upon the regional consumer price index. The proposed increase will take effect with the 2002-2003 tax year, for which property tax bills will be due in December, 2002 and April, 2003. PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: MEETING DATE: 8/6/2002 The current annual PBID budget is $303,285. This budget covers four broad areas including Economic Development, Marketing and Parking Management (50.6 percent}, District-wide Maintenance, including graffiti removal (9.5 percent), Third Avenue Enhanced Landscape Maintenance (13.1 percent}, and District Operations, including salaries (22.1 percent.} There is also a 4.8 percent budget reserve included in the PBID Management Plan. With the proposed 3.6 percent cost of living increase, the Downtown Business Association, which manages the PBID, will continue to budget based on the percentage breakdown noted above, with minor adjustments as may be needed from time to time. The following lists the completed accomplishments of the CVDBA for the first 6 months of the PBID: · Website www.downtownchulavista.com was designed to attract developers and new businesses to downtown. The site also gives information about downtown to visitors and DBA members. · Developed a brochure to attract developers. The brochure gives information on local demographics and essential information pertaining to downtown. · Hired an economic development consultant to attract developers and retailers and work with redevelopment agency staff. · Developed a membership brochure outlining DBA member benefits. · Porter service provided daily for Third Avenue between E and H Streets and weekly to Third Avenue from H to I Streets, Landis, Church, Center, Madrona, Davidson and G Streets. · Sidewalks steam cleaned 6 times per year from E to H Streets and 2 times per year for other areas within the district. · Flowers planted in the planter boxes. Projects currently underway or in process include: · Development of a restaurant and business guide to distribute throughout the area. · Removal of decayed trellises along Third Avenue. · Monument sign · Mural on Center Street using County of San Diego Grant and private donations from the Mobile Home Owners Association. The mural will depict early agricultural days in Chula Vista. Ongoing activities performed by the DBA include: · Graffiti eradication 5 days per week. The program has been very successful. In January we had 49 incidents, in February 55. Beginning March, we have averaged only 5 per month. This trend has continued through June. · Weekly events such as Farmers Market, Blast from the Past Car Show, and annual events such as Starlight Yule Parade, Lemon Festival and Cinco de Mayo. PAGE 3, ITEM NO.: I to MEETING DATE: 8/6/2002 FISCAL IMPACT The Redevelopment Agency is responsible for payment of the assessment on all City- and Redevelopment-owned properties within the PBID. The initial year's assessment was $42,000. With this increase, the estimoted assessment will rise to $43,572. Unspecified fiscal benefits should accrue to the City and Agency from the continuing improvement in the downtown physical environment and from the retail and developer recruitment efforts underway. AnACHMENTS None J :\COMMDEV\Estes\ TCI\PBID Projects\pbidcolo .doc If¡, ':3 COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING DOWNTOWN PROPERTY AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT COST OF LIVING· ASSESSMENT ADJUSTMENT WHEREAS, the Downtown Property and Business Improvement District (PBID) was established by a vote of affected property owners in 2001 and became effective on January 1, 2002 under a management agreement with the Downtown Business Association (DBA); and WHEREAS, the adopted Management Plan, Section VI (C) provides for annual Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) based on the regional San Diego Consumer Price Index (CPI) or 5 percent, whichever is less; and WHEREAS, the PBID Board of Directors voted unanimously to recommend the adoption of the COLA permitted by the Management Plan and based on the current CPI of 3.6 percent, said increase taking effect with property tax assessment bills sent out in December 2002 and April 2003; and WHEREAS, the City Of Chula Vista recognizes the important work of the PBID in the revitalization and improvement of the Downtown area and concurs with the provisions of the Management Plan with respect to annual COLA increases; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve a Downtown Property and Business Improvement District Cost of Living Assessment Adjustment of 3.6 percent for FY 2002/2003, and authorizes and directs staff to take all appropriate measures to implement same. Presented by Approved as to form by ~Å~ Chris Sa omone Director of Community Development J:ICOMMDEVlEstesITCIIPBID Projects\20022003COLARESO.doc /~-LJ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No.: Meeting Date: 8/06/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista designating the house located at 462 "E" Street, the Cleaton Robertson House, as a Historic Site and placing the house on the City of Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 2.32.070(A). SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building//'~"~~:/ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~-/~.gP' (4/5tbs Vote: Yes__ No X ) The property owners, Gerald and Carlene Scott have requested that their property, 462 "E" Street, be considered for inclusion on Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. (Attachment 1) The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 1533, Class 31, Historical Resources Restoration and Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council find that the Cleaton Robertson House meets the local criteria for designation of a site and therefore should designate 475 "E" Street as Historic Site #56 on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission considered the designation of the property at their July 1, 2002 meeting and recommends that the City Council designate the Cleaton Robertson House, 462 "E" Street as Historic Site #56 on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites. Attachment 2) I Page 2, Item No.: ~] Meeting Date: 8/06/02 DISCUSSION: 1. Municipal Code Authority In accordance with Section 2.32.070 of the City Of Chula Vista Municipal Code, the RCC shall recommend to the City Council the designation of any site, which it has found to meet the local criteria as a historical site and the Commission shall also recommend if the Historical Site Permit Process should be imposed on the site. The Historical Site Permit Process has provisions to stay the issuance of permits for demolition or modification in order for the RCC to make a recommendation to the City Council about potential actions that could be taken to preserve the site. The RCC elected not to recommend the Historic Site Permit for this site. The City has adopted six criteria that are used to determine if a particular property should be included on the Historic Site List (Attachment 3). A site must be found to meet at least one of the six criteria to be selected for designation. 2. Owner Participation The owners, Gerald and Carlene Scott, were in attendance when there house was considered for designation at the July 1, 2002 Resource Conservation Commission meeting. A letter has been sent to the property owners notifying them of the current pending City Council action regarding their property. (Attachment 4) 3. Past History This house was not included in the Historic Resources inventory conducted in 1985. There is no apparent reason as to why this home was not included in the inventory, as were others that surround it. However, the owner has provided staff with the chain of title from the San Diego County Recorders office and other information on the architecture and integrity of the home. (Attachment 3) The home was built for Mr. Cleaton Robertson in 1929. According to the applicants, Mr. Robertson was the branch manager for California Water and Telephone Company. Though the County records show several owners subsequent to that, a neighbor of the Scott's confirms that Mr. Robertson lived in the home until 1940, with only three other occupants subsequent to Mr. And Mrs. Scott. 4. Architectural Style: This house is an exa~nple of a stucco wall cladding Tudor style home. According to A Field Guide to American Houses by Virginia and Lee McAlester a relatively small percentage of Tudor houses have stucco walls. This house has several other features of the modest Tudor house as well, it has tall narrow casement windows, a steeply pitched roof, a tall chimney and overlapping gables of varying height. (Attachment 5) Page 3, Item No.: ] Meeting Date: 8/06/02 5. Conclusion: This relatively unique style home contributes to Chula Vista's eclectic housing inventory. Though it was not included in the 1985 Historic Inventory Survey, all available information shows that it is a home of distinctive architectural style and the house remains in generally the same character as it was built in 1929. Therefore, based on criteria #4, distinctive architecture and criteria #6, retains integrity of design and materials, staff recommends that Council designate 462 "E" Street as a historic site and list it on the Chula Vista List of Historic Sites as Historic Site #56. FISCAL 1MPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the inclusion of 462 "E" Street, the Cleaton Robertson House, on the Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. Attactmaents: 1.) Locator Map 2.) Resource Conservation Commission minutes/July 1, 2002. 3.) Local Historic Criteria 4.) Owner's application for historic designation 5.) Pholos of the property J:\ Planning\Lynnette\historic designation\462 E desigmtion Agexxta Statemet~t2.doc ARCO AM/PM GAS STATIOI~ PILGRIM LUTHERAN CHURCH "~ ,' s~~ PROPOSED HISTORIC DESIGNATION BAPTIST CHURCH CITY OF CHULA VISTA CIVIC CENTER CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: O APPUCANT: CLEATON ROBERTSON HOUSE HISTORIC DESIGNATION PROJECT ADDRESS: 462" E" STREET , ATTACHMENT 1 SCALE: FILE NUMBER: / ~"~ ~' · NORTH No Scale i:\hnm~\nl~nninn\nh~rrvln\lnnntc)r~14Fi?~t ndr ~17 ?R ¢37 RCC Minutes - 2- July 1,200? everyone within the Southwest review period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration ~n extended to Jul 2002. MSC (Reid/Jasek) to recomme Negative (4-0-0-3) with Burrascano ant. Ms. Marilyn Ponseggi re~cfuested that Item #4 taken of members the public were present fc that item. NEW BUSINESS 4. Historic Designation, 462 "E" Street Ms. Lynnette Tessitore-Lopez Scott of 462 "E" Street have requested desig qeir hom( door to Historic Site #50 (The Gaiiigan This home was ~cluded in the original historical resource inventory, has ~owledge as to wh~ not included. The homeowners have provid~ simihhave been contained in the inventor, for the house appears to retain evidence' the ~-4) and has distinguishing lends designation. Vice-Chair Reid noted the one owner Mr. Cie Rober[son (1929- 1940) was the branch Water & 2hone Company, the house should also MSC ( to hat this site be included in the list of historical sites )n Criteria #2#6. Vote: (5-0-0-2) with Thomas and in OLD ransit Fir r. Marl that, when he presented the General /~. Plan U he did not have enough time to properly discuss ram. Via PowerPoint, Mr. Stephens in detail: a) previous transit planning; b) First Program; and 4) Showcase Project. The Commi how traffic demand is determined, the width of the of energy would be utilized, and the Transit First Showcase responded to by Mr. Stephens. / c~_ ~.,~ ATTACHMENT 2 CRITERIA FOR LISTiNG: · BEARS A RELATIONSHIP TO OVERALL HERITAGE ON A LOCAL, STATE, OR NATIONAL BASIS. THIS MISSION OF SAN DIEGO, FOR EXAMPLE, IS LOCAL BUT IS ALSO PART OF A STATEWIDE SYSTEM THAT IS RECOGNIZED NATIONALLY. - · RELATES TO A HISTORIC PERSONAGE ~-IO PLAYED AN IMPORTANT ROLE HISTORICALLY, ON A LOCAL, STATE, OR NATIONAL BASIS. HOWEVER, ~ INDIVIDUI~L NEED NOT BE KNOWN NATIONALLY, AS LONG AS IT WAS SOMEONE WHO MADE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION ON A LOCAL BASIS. IDEALLY, THIS INCLUDES A SITE WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL LIVED OR WHERE A NOTEWORTHY HISTORICAL CONTRIBUTION OR ACHEIVEMENT TOOK PLACE. · MAY BE A SITE WHERE AN IMPORTANT EVENT TOOK PLACE. THIS WOULD BE AN EVENT SYMBOLIC OF A PHASE OF HISTORY THAT COULD REACH THE NATIONAL LEVEL. THE SITE OF THE SIGNING OF A HISTORIC DOCUMENt, FOR EXAMPLE, WILL SATISFY THIS CRITERION. · THE SITE SHOULD HAVE DISTINGUISHING ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE IDENTIFIABLE. THIS INCLUDES STRUCTURES OF A PARTICULAR ARCHITECTURAL STYLE RECOGNIZABLE TODAY. · THE SITE MAY BE ARCHAEOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT IN ITS ASSOCIATION WITH PRE-HISTORY OF THE AREA. A SITE DEMONSTRATING EXISTENCE OF AN ANCIENT COMMLrNITY 0NDIANS INDIGENOUS TO THE AREA, FOR EXAMPLE) COULD SATISFY THIS CRITERION. · HAS INTEGRITY. TH/S IS WHERE THE SITE CONTINUES TO HAVE EVIDENCE OF THE ORIGINAL FEATURES. ENOUGH OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE OR THE SITE IS INTACT TO BE DISTINGUISHABLE AS HAVING HISTORICAL VALUE. ATTACHMENT 3 , ~ CITY OF ChqJLA VISTA · PLANNING 8: BUILDING DEPARTMENT crrv o~ 276 Fourth Avenue Historic Designation CHUIAVISIA ChulaVistmCA 91910 APPLICATIONFORJM Case #: Applicant/OwnerName: Gerald & Carlene Scott /~ ./.~.~/ ApplicanqOwnerAddress: 462 E. Street Phone: (61_9) 426-6514 - Secondary Owner Name: None Owner Address: N/A Phone: N/A OWNER APPROVALISREQUIRED NAM_E: Gerald Scott NAIVfE: Carlene Scott SIGNA-I:URE: ~-'D,. ~.a · S=~t:~ SIGNATURE: DATE: October 17, 2001 DATE: October 17_~L__2001___~ Properb/Address: 462 E. Street, Chula Vista, CA. 91910 Common name: Re,-¢~ a ~- P~r] eno c,-,,,,- Historic name: k~pno Year Built: ]o')9 Approximate Property size (in feet) or approximate acr,~aoe Ownership is: Private X:( or Public Present Use: Residential Original Use: Residential Architectura Style: TUDOR ' Assessor's Parcel Number (Required):. 568-012-03 Zone: R-1 HISTORIC/LANDMARK INFORMATION Use the reverse side of this form or a separate piece of paper may be atlached for questions 1-3. 1. Please describe, in detail, historical aspects of the site or structure as well as any other significant factors which may determine the property as a historic site/landmark (i_e. special aesthetics; cultural, architectural, or engineering factors; and any dates, events, or persons associated with the site or structure). See attached established criteria for designation. 2. Has the site or structure been altered in any way from its org hal design? Yes No *X (if yes, explain) 3. Briefly describe the present physical condition of the property include a rating of poor, fair, good, or excellent. (see enclosed attachments) /~- ¢ ATTACHMENT 4 Gerald and Carlene Scott 462 E Street ChulaVista CA 91910 June 20, 2002 Dear Lyrmette, As per the San Diego County Recorders Office, the following title information is provided for inclusion in our application for Historical Home designation. Cleaton Robertson 1929 Joe Smailes 1930 Rodr/ques 1930 Morris Berlin 1940 Lucille Thompson 1946 Richard Coil/ns 1947 John & Ruth Williams 1948 Merle Day 1957 Joseph Souza 1959 "" Gerald & Carlene Scott 1980-present However, the actual occupancy of the house is quite different. Elizabeth Galligan, our next door neighbor, has resided continuously in her home since 1937. She stated these following owners were the only ones who physically occupied our home. Cleaton Robertson 1929-1940 Moms Berlin 1940-1948 John & Ruth Williams 1948-1959 Joseph Souza 1959-1980 Gerald & Carlene Scott 1980-present If we can be of further assistance please call. Thank you for your time and consideration. Cordially, ! ATTACHMENT 5 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DESIGNATING THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 462 E STREET, THE CLEATON ROBERTSON HOUSE, AS A HISTORIC SITE AND PLACING THE HOUSE ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S LIST OF HISTORIC SITES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.32.070(A). WHEREAS, the Cleaton Robertson House is a Tudor style house located at 462 "E" Street in the City OfChula Vista (APN 568-012 -03-00) constructed in 1929; and WHEREAS, staff received communication from the property owners, Gerald and Carlene Scott, requesting that the Cleaton Robertson House be designated as a historical site on the City ofChula Vista List of Historic Sites; and WHEREAS, State of California Historic Eligibility Criteria requires that a site be found significant at a local, state, or national level, under one or more of the criteria for designation; and WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that the Cleaton Robertson House meets two of the local criterion for designation because of its distinguishing architectural characteristics and the fact that the integrity of the site has not been significantly compromised; and WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission at their regular meeting on July I, 2002 voted 5-0-0-2 (with Commissioners Thomas and Bensoussan absent) to recommend that the City Council place the Cleaton Robertson House on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15331, Class 31, Historical Resources Restoration and Rehabilitation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the designation of the Cleaton Robertson House, 462 "E" Street, as a Historic Site and determines that it is hereby placed on the City ofChula Vista List of Historic Sites. Presented by: Approved as to form by: D~ ì. 4c:.-.-- - John M. Kaheny City Attorney Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning & Building /1-/0 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No.: 18 Meeting Date: 08/06/2002 ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista designating the house located at 840 First Avenue, The Mary Drew House, as a Historic Site and placing it on the City of Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 2.32.070(A). SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building/~/z~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~/~o,~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes__ No X ) The property owners, Alberto and Laura Guerra, have requested that their property at 840 First Avenue be considered for inclusion on Chuia Vista's List of Historic Sites. (Attachment l) The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 1533, Class 31, Historical Resources Restoration and Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council find that the Mary Drew House meets the local criteria for designation of a site and therefore should designate 840 First Avenue as Historic Site//55 on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission considered the designation of the property at their June 3, 2002 meeting and recommends that the City Council designate the Mary Drew House, 840 First Avenue as Historic Site #55 on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites. (Attachment 2) Page 2, Item No.: Meeting Date: 08/06/2002 DISCUSSION: 1. Municipal Code Authority In accordance with Section 2.32.070 of the City Of Chula Visa Municipal Code, the RCC shall recommend to the City Council the designation of any site, which it has found to meet the local criteria as a historical site and that the Commission shall also recommend if the Historical Site Permit Process should be imposed on the site. The Historical Site Permit Process has provisions to stay the issuance of permits for demolition or modification in order for the RCC to make a recommendation to the City Council about potential actions that could be taken to preserve the site. The RCC elected not to recommend the Historic Site Permit for this site. The City has adopted six criteria that are used to determine if a particular property should be included on the Historic Site List (Attachment 3). A site must be found to meet at least one of the six criteria to be selected for designation. 2. Owner Participation On April 15, 2002 staff received an application for historic designation from the property owners, Alberto and Laura Guerra. The owners were in attendance when their house was considered for designation at the June 3, 2002 Resource Conservation Commission meeting. A letter has been sent to the property owner notifying them of the current pending City Council action regarding their property. (Attachment 4) 3. Past History The Mary Drew House was part of the 1985 City Of Chula Visa Historic Resources inventory. However, at that time the home was not included on the Chula Vista List of Historic Sites. The City Of Chula Visa Historic Resources Inventory prepared in 1985 states that the home was built in 1927. (Attachment 5) Harold Doan built this house and another (834 First) on the same property. No further information is available on Mr. Doan. Mary Drew purchased the home in 1928 or 1929. Staff believes that Mary Drew was also the owner of 475 "E" Street and purchased this house after her husband, William died. 4. Architectural Style: Tudor style homes are based on a variety of late Medieval English prototypes, ranging from thatched roofed folk cottages to grand manor homes. American expressions of the Tudor style emphasize the steeply pitched, front facing gables. Most Tudor houies have stucco masonry, masonry-veneered walls and sometimes have wooden wall cladding. Page 3, Item No.: Meeting Date: 08/06i2~02 Other identifying features are: · steeply pitched roofs, usually side-gabled · a facade dominated by one or more prominent cross gables usually steeply pitched · decorative half timbering · tall narrow windows, usually in multiple groups and with multi-pane glazing · massive chimneys commonly crowned by decorative chimney pots. This house demonstrates several of these features. According to the Historic Resources Inventory, the Mary Drew House, is a large 1 th story stucco house that features a high, cross gable roof of the Tudor Style. It is an example of the American expression of the Tudor Style, which is demonstrated by the steeply pitched front facing gables. It has rectangular louvered vents that are visible in the gable ends. Other details include multiple pane, leaded glass casement windows. A corbelled brick chimney graces the front, as well. The entrance of this house is not visible from the street because of a concrete block wall and the dense foliage of an entry garden. A wrought iron gate graces an arched opening in the wall. Skylights are visible in the roof on the right end. Latticework, screen and a gate fence the area between the house and a street facing garage. The garage is a unique one car garage with a steeply pitched roof that contributes to the originality of this American Tudor style home. (Attachment 6) 6. Conclusion: This house is one of several Tudor style homes that add value to the City's eclectic housing inventory. The house has several interesting features of the Tudor style that contribute to its architectural character. The house meets criteria #4, distinctive architecture, because it represents an American eclectic expression of late Medieval English prototypes of the Tudor style. Further, the house generally, remains in the same character as it was built in 1927 and retains many of it's original features. Therefore, it also meets criteria #6, retains integrity of design and materials. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the inclusion of 840 First Avenue, the Mary Drew House, on t e Chula Vista s L~st of H~stor~c Sites. Attaclunents: 1.) Locator Map 2.) Resource Conservation Commission minutes/April 29, 2002. 3.) Local Historic Criteria 4.) Owner's application for historic designation 5.) Historic Resources inventory Worksheet 6.) Photos of the property J:\PIailning\Lynnette\historic designation\840 [ designation Agenda Statement2.doc PROJECT CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ^PPL,C^NT:AL~,O&LAUP.~GU~P.~ Historical Site Designation PROJECT ADDRESS: 840 FirstAvenue /~/~ ~/~ ATTACHMENT 1 SCALE: FILE NUMBER: · NORTH No Scale j:\home\planning\cherrylc\locators\840firstav, cdr 05.28.02 RCC Minutes - 3 - June 3, 2002 Commission Bensoussan asked if the applicant would be applying for the Mills Act Contract. Ms. Nancy Ruiz (Resident, 475 "E" Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910) responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Bensoussan questioned the, integrity of the apartment units. She recommended replacing the aluminum window screens on the house if the applicant should apply for the Mills Act. MSC (Bensoussan/Jasek) to recommend historic designation. Vote: (5-0-0-2) with Burrascano and Thomas absent. 3. Historic Designation, 840 First Avenue (Mary Drew House) Ms. Ponseggi indicated that this home was on the historic tour. The owners are in the process of restoring it. They were present at the meeting to answer questions. Commissioner Bensoussan wanted to make a point of including the garage because it is very rare to find a garage like this in tact. It is a very integral part of the structure and architect. MSC (Bensoussan/Diaz) to recommend historic designation. Vote: (5-0-0-2) with Burrascano and Thomas absent. Commissioner Bensoussan indicated that there is a relationship between this house and the house at 475 "E" Street. Mary Drew lived in the "E" Street house. Then, a few years after her husband died, she bought this house. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR COMMENTS Ms. Ponseggi wanted to make sure that the Commissioners knew that the awards banquet is Thursday, June 27, 2002. They should be getting invitations. Ms. Ponseggi indicated that she and Jim Sandoval (Assistant Planning Director) have been talking to the Clerk and Mayor's office. They are aware that Cindy Burrascano's term is up. A couple applications have come in, and staff anticipates someone will be appointed in July. CHAIR COMMENTS: Chair Bull talked about the kick-off for the historic home tour where he announced the Historic Preservationists of the year. It was well attended, and the recipients (Nancy and John Parks) were rather surprised. /~"'~ ATTACHMENT2 LOCAL CRITERIA FOR HISTORICAL SITE DESIGNATION: · Bears a relationship to overall heritage on a local, state, or national basis. This Mission of San Diego, for example, is local but is also part of a statewide system that is recognized nationally. · Relates to a historic personage who played an important role historically, on a local, state, or national basis. However, the individual need not be known nationally, as long as it was someone who made a significant contribution on a local basis. Ideally, this includes a site where the individual lived or where a noteworthy historical contribution or achievement took place. May be a site where an important event took place. This would be an event symbolic of a phase of history that could reach the national level. The site of the signing of a historic document, for ex~hnple, will satisfy this criterion. · The site should have distinguishing architectural characteristics that are identifiable. This includes structures of a particular architectural style recognizable today. · The site may be archaeologically significant in its association with pre-history of the area. a site demonstrating existence of an ancient community (indians indigenous to the area, for example) could satisfy this criterion. Has integrity. This is where the site continues to have evidence of the original features. Enough of the original structure or the site is intact to be distinguishable as having historical value. ATTACHMENT 3 ""%!si f~' CITY OF CHULA VISTA ~ PLANinG & BULLDOG DEPARTMENT Historic Designation ~ ~ 276 Fo~ Avenue CHU~V~A Chula Vis~ CA 91910 APPLICATION FORM ~ ~PLIC~T/O~R ~O~TION Case Applican~O~erName: ~L~O ~- ~,)~A~. DateSubmi~ed: Applican~Owner Address: ~ffO ~ Phone: ~Gt~} ~G -~G ~ Seconda~ Owner Name: ~ e -~N~ Owner Address: ~ffO ~ ~ __ O~PROV~ IS ~Q~D PROPERTY INFORMATION Property Address: ~'a/© ~'~ ~'5~' Et_ k)~. C/tt.t[~tJ,_q~ Common name:/¢~/' jCl4te.'t" /.,}).r'T'~6~tc, h Historic name: /'v/a.r~ Year Built: / ~',~ ~- Approximate PropeC~y size (in feet) or approximate acreage Ownership is: Private /v.., or Public Present Use: h=sld oe Original Use: PC Architectural Style: Assessor's Parcel Number (Required): ~- ~- 3 - ~'00 - ~ / Zone: [HI S T O RI C/L,.~Nq)NLARK ]]N-FORNL&TION [ Use the reverse side of this form or a separate piece of paper may be a~ached for questions 1-3. 1. Please describe, in detail, historical aspects of the site or structure as well as any other significant factors which may determine the property as a historic site/landmark (i.e. special aesthetics; cultural, architectural, or engineering factors; and any dates, events, or persons associated with the site or structure). See at,ached established criteria for designation. 2. Has the site or structure been altered in any way from its original design? Yes No ,X_ (Ifyes, exptain) l~O~SC 15 /n7ac~ fx[,~ uot~ ~ 7'~ &ax.K.. 3. Briefly describe the present physical condition of the properly include a rating of poor, fai~ or e×oelient. 571'~¢7g4*4//y Um-t-~ Socx.~. ATTACHMENT 4 uced onne / 7ek, k r sT rctT/o u /o¢-'7 I S~. ~o. DEPARTMIgNT OF ~'A~KS AND ~ECA~T~ON I ~ NAE~ NR SH~ ~ L~ HI~ORIC RE~URCES iNVENTORY C O IDENTIFI~TION Margaret wit~eyer House Ma~ Drew House 840 First Avenue C;~ Chula Vista ~, 92011 ~u,~, San Diego 573-500-31 4. ~l num~: 5. ~=~r: Marg~et A Wittmeyer 840 First Avenue C~ Chula Vista ~= 92011 ~ioi~:~ ~=~ x residential residential ~. ~ U~: Or,nm ~: O~RI~ON 7~ ~i~r~ ~le: Tudor ~gal: ~ S~, QS 121, pot Lot 7 This large 1 1/2 story stucco house features the high, cross gable roofs of the Tudor style. Rectangular louvered vents are visible in ~e gable ends. Other details include multiple pane, leaded glass casement windows. A corbelled brick chi~ey graces the front. The entr~e of this house oa~ot be seen from the street because of a concrete block wall and the dense foliage of an ent~ garden. A wrought iron gate graces an arched opening in the wall. Skylights are visible in the roof on the right end. Latticework, screen and a gate fence the area between the house and a street- facing garage. Hem B. Coma'uc~ : ~. A~hi~cc uz~cnown 10. ~il~l~f Arthur Doan 1I. r~'W size 3 1985 / ~'~ ATTACHHENT 5 ~ 3. Conai~ion: E~c~tl~m~ ~ ~ Irmr , O~eHorat~ No Io~ in ~g~ .. ~4, A~*~: skyli~hcs~ latticework and screenin~ Rmmt~f~r~: one car ~ara~e, trees & shrubs 51GNIFI~NCE 19. In the 1920s, the lot on which this house stands was part of the five acre Lot 7, QS 122 o~ed by Earold and ~argaret Doan. Seginning in 1923 or 1924, Harold Doan apparently built ~wo houses on ~he property, ~is one and the oma at 834 Firs~ Avenue. This house seems to have been constr~cted after the o~er. Water was connected to this lot on May 5, 1927, about the time this house was cons~ruc:ed. The house was sold in 1928 or 1929 to Mary Drew. Ivan ~agger amd his wife lived here from 1933 to i935. Dr. Jagger was a federal plant pathologist, who did experimental work in Chula Vista from 1922 to 1936. ~e is revered as having greatly imDroved the quality of lettuce in the Imperial Valley. Ds. Jagger died in 1939 at the age of 49. This cha~ing home is one of the few Tudor style homes zn Cku!a Vista. Although ~ere have been some alterations, the original intent of the designer can still be seen. ' ' : 20. ~ n~ in ~ of i~) A~ 1 21. Water records ~City directories CV Tax Asses~ent Rolls SD Union 2/18/39 ~ ~e~ 9-1-1985 By {~ K Webster RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DESIGNATING THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 840 FIRST AVENUE, THE MARY DREW HOUSE, AS A HISTORIC SITE AND PLACING THE HOUSE ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S LIST OF HISTORIC SITES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.32.070(A). WHEREAS, the Mary Drew House is a Tudor style house located at 840 First Avenue in the City OfChula Vista (APN 573-500 -31-00) constructed in 1927; and WHEREAS, staff received communication trom the property owners, Alberto and Laura Guerra, requesting that the Mary Drew House be designated as a historical site on the City ofChula Vista List of Historic Sites; and WHEREAS, State of California Historic Eligibility Criteria requires that a site be found significant at a local, state, or national level, under one or more of the criteria for designation; and WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that the Cleaton Robertson House meets two of the local criterion for designation because of its distinguishing architectural characteristics and the fact that the integrity of the site has not been significantly compromised; and WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission at their regular meeting on June 3, 2002 voted 5-0-0-2 (with Commissioners Burrascano and Thomas absent) to recommend that the City Council place the Mary Drew House on the City ofChula Vista List of Historic Sites; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15331, Class 31, Historical Resources Restoration and Rehabilitation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the designation of the Mary Drew House, 840 First Avenue, as a Historic Site and determines that it is hereby placed on the City ofChula Vista List of Historic Sites. Presented by: Approved as to form by: Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning & Building D~7.~ -. John M. Kaheny City Attorney It -' II COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No.: /6] Meeting Date: 8/06/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista designating the house located at 475 "E" Street, The William Drew House, as a Historic Site and placing the house on the City of Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 2.32.070(A). SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building /~.~r REVIEWED BY: City Manager ./:~t DO` (4/5ths Vote: Yes__ No X ) The property owners of 475 "E" Street have requested that their property be considered for inclusion on Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. (Attachment 1) The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 1533, Class 31, Historical Resources Restoration and Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council find that the William Drew House meets the local criteria for designation of a site and therefore should designate 475 "E" Street as Historic Site #54 on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission considered the designation of the property at their June 3, 2002 meeting and recommends that the City Council designate the William Drew House, 475 "E" Street as Historic Site #54 on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites. (Attachment 2) Page 2, Item No.: Meeting Date: 8/06/02 DISCUSSION: 1. Municipal Code Authority In accordance with Section 2.32.070 of the City Of Chula Vista Municipal Code, the RCC shall recommend to the City Council the designation of any site, which it has found to meet the local criteria as a historical site and the Commission shall also recommend if the Historical Site Permit Process should be imposed on the site. The Historical Site Permit Process has provisions to stay the issuance of permits for demolition or modification in order for the RCC to make a recommendation to the City Council about potential actions that could be taken to preserve the site. The RCC elected not to recommend the Historic Site Permit for this site. The City has adopted six criteria that are used to determine if a particular property should be included on the Historic Site List (Attachment 3). A site must be found to meet at least one of the six criteria to be selected for designation. 2. Owner Participation On April 8, 2002 staff received an application for historic designation from the property owners of 475 "E" Street. The owners representative was in attendance when the house was considered for designation at the June 3, 2002 Resource Conservation Commission meeting. A letter has been sent to the property owner notifying them of the current pending City Council action regarding their property. (Attachment 4) 3. Past History The William Drew House was part of the 1985 City Of Chula Vista Historic Resources inventory. However, at that time the home was not included on the Chula Vista List of Historic Sites. The City Of Chula Vista Historic Resources Inventory prepared in 1985 states that the home was built in 1913. (Attachment 4) William H. Drew, a rancher, and his wife Mary purchased the house the same year. 4. Architectural Style: The Craftsman style of architecture originated in southern California. This style of architecture was inspired by the work of two Californians, Charles Sumner Greene and Henry Mather Greene. The Greene Brothers were led to design and build these intricately detailed buildings by their interest in the English Arts and Crafts movement, their interest in oriental wooden architecture, and their training in the manual arts. Craftsman style homes were the dominant style for "smaller" houses built throughout the country during the early 1900's. Page 3, Item No.: Meeting Date: 8/06/02 Features include: Low-pitched roof, gabled (occasionally hipped) · Wide eaves with exposed roof rafters · Decorative braces or beams · Porch with square columns · Built in cabinets, shelves, and seating 5. Features of the site: According to the Historic Resources Inventory, the William Drew House, is a two story Craftsman house that has a medium, cross gable roof with wide eaves, exposed rafter ends and large knee braces. A front gabled, one story porch at the right front has a post support on a brick pier at each front corner. A pergola extending out to the left is supported by two identical posts on brick piers. Other details included wood shingle siding on the upper story, narrow clapboard on the first level, an exterior brick chimney, and double hung windows throughout most of the house. (Attachment 5) 6. Conclusion: This craftsman style house appears to retain many of its original features. It is representative of a style once common to southern California. Therefore, staff recommends that the house be considered for inclusion on the Chula Vista List of Historic Sites for meeting criteria //4, significant architecture and criteria #6, retains integrity of design and materials. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the inclusion of 475 "E" Street, the William Drew House, on the Chula Vista's List of Historic Sites. Attaclnnents: 1 .) Locator Map 2.) Resource Conservation Cormmission minutes/June 3, 2002. 3.) Local Historic Criteria 4.) Ow~er's application for historic desigtmtion 5.) Historic Resources Inventory Worksheet 6.) Photos of the property J :\Planning\Lym~ette\lfistoric designationS475 E designation Agenda Statement2.doc I CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT · LOCATOR P.O~ECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: APPLICANT: HOWARD & BARBARALEWALLEN Historical Site Desianation PROJECT ADDRESS: 475 "E" STREET SCALE: FILE NUMBER: / ~_ ~/ ATTACHMENT 1 · NORTH No Scale j:\home\pla nning\ch errylc\locators\475est.cdr 05.29.02 RCC Minutes - 2- June 3,200? NEW BUSINESS 1. Update on Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) Grant Ms. Mary Ladiana (Environmental Projects Manager) indicated that the City applied for and was awarded a State grant in August 2001 to do baseline biological surveys within the central City preserve management areas, which are the canyon systems around Rancho del Rey, Bonita Long Canyon and Sunbow. The entire grant request of approximately $228,000 was awarded. From September through January 2002, the City worked with California Fish & Game in developing a detailed scope-of-work to survey 1,350 acres. Because there are four distinct areas, four management plans will be prepared. These will determine what kind of management measures will need to be done within those open space areas. After the scope-of-work was finalized, a Request for Proposals was sent out. Five proposals were submitted with RECON Environmental being selected. Ms. Ladiana distributed a map showing the four management plan areas: (1) Rancho del Rey I, II and III and the Terra Nova Open Space System, (2) Rancho del Rey Ill, (3) Sunbow, and (4) Bonita Long Canyon. The City also had to enter into a contract with the State for them to give the City the money to do this work. The grant is time sensitive. The money has to be spent by February of 2004. Because some of the species are dependent, you can only survey during certain times of the year. Staff is losing time right now, so we are hoping to do some of the footwork this spring and then follow up with more detailed surveys next spring. Ms. Madlyn Ponseggi (Environmental Review Coordinator) explained that an important thing to remember with this grant is that these areas that are being looked at are the areas that are the established canyons that were mitigation from a variety of projects, and the City does not have the funding in place to do the area specific management plans. The City was looking at having to do one area a year or less over the next several years of the budget because it was going to be coming out of the General Fund. That is why getting the grant funding was so crucial. It was a real endorsement from the State that they were supporting the City in its efforts as far as the MSCP and where the City was headed. Commissioner Bensoussan asked if there were preserves in the major development areas. Ms. Ladiana stated that each major development (i.e., San Miguel Ranch, Otay Ranch, etc.) has its own management plan. 2. Historic Designation, 475 "E" Street (William Drew House) Ms. Ponseggi stated that the representative of the applicant was present to answer questions. Staff feels that the house should be designated under Criteria #4 (significant architecture) and Criteria #6 (retains integrity of design and materials). RCC Minutes - 3 - June 3, 2002 Commission Bensoussan asked if the applicant would be applying for the Mills Act Contract. Ms. Nancy Ruiz (Resident, 475 "E" Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910) responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Bensoussan questioned the integrity of the apartment units. She recommended replacing the aluminum window screens on the house if the applicant should apply for the Mills Act. MSC (Bensoussan/Jasek) to recommend historic designation. Vote: (5-0-0-2) with Burrascano and Thomas absent. 3. Historic Designation, 840 First Avenue (Mary Drew House) Ms. Ponseggi indicated that this home was on the historic tour. The owners are in the process of restoring it. They were present at the meeting to answer questions. Commissioner Bensoussan wanted to make a point of including the garage because it is very rare to find a garage like this in tact. It is a very integral part of the structure and architect. MSC (Bensoussan/Diaz) to recommend historic designation. Vote: (5-0-0-2) with Burrascano and Thomas absent. Commissioner Bensoussan indicated that there is a relationship between this house and the house at 475 "E" Street. Mary Drew lived in the "E" Street house. Then, a few years after her husband died, she bought this house. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR COMMENTS Ms. Ponseggi wanted to make sure that the Commissioners knew that the awards banquet is Thursday, June 27, 2002. They should be getting invitations. Ms. Ponseggi indicated that she and Jim Sandoval (Assistant Planning Director) have been talking to the Clerk and Mayor's office. They are aware that Cindy Burrascano's term is up. A couple applications have come in, and staff anticipates someone will be appointed in July. CHAIR COMMENTS: Chair Bull talked about the kick-off for the historic home tour where he announced the Historic Preservationists of the year. It was well attended, and the recipients (Nancy and John Parks) were rather surprised. CRITERIA FOR LISTING: · Bears a relationship to overall heritage on a local, state, or national basis. This Mission of San Diego, for example, is local but is also part of a statewide system that is recognized nationally. · Relates to a historic personage who played an important role historically, on a local, state, or national basis. However, the individual need not be known nationally, as long as it was someone who made a significant contribution on a local basis. Ideally, this includes a site where the individual lived or where a noteworthy historical contribution or achievement took place. · May be a site where an important event took place. This would be an event symbolic of a phase of history that could reach the national level. The site of the signing of a historic document, for example, will satisfy this criterion. · The site should have distinguishing architectural characteristics that are identifiable. This includes structures of a particular architectural style recognizable today. · The site may be archaeologically significant in its association with pre-history of the area. a site demonstrating existence of an ancient community (indians indigenous to the area, for example) could satisfy this criterion. Has integrity. This is where the site continues to have evidence of the original features. Enough of the original structure or the site is intact to be distinguishable as having historical value. ATTACHMENT 3 c T¥ ox ~O'IY Of PLAN~l.~G276 Fo~ Argue & BUILDING DEPARTMENT Historic Desi~ation ~A Chula Vi~ CA 91910 APPLICATION FORM ~PLIC~/O~R ~O~TI ON ApplimnUOwner Name: ApplicanUO~er Address: Secon~a~ Owner N~me: Owne~ Address: Phone: oWh~ER AP?ROYAL IS QUrRED PROFER~ ~O~TION Common name: ~q~ ~e-)~O~ ~1)~ /Historic name: ~ ~1e~ ~p~ Y~ SU~t ~%1% ~pro~ mate Prope~y size (in feet) or approximate acreage ID, I g (o .~ Owne~hip is: Pdvate ~ or Public Present Use: /~¢ X,~ ~ ~ Oriainal Use: ~St~ Architec~ral Style: ~ 5~ &~ Assessor's Parcel Number (Required): ~-~{o} - I~ ~5 Zone: ~- ~ Uss the averse gibe of this ~o~ or a separate pbee o~ paper may be a~mched {or questions ~-3. J. P~eas~ d~scfibe, in deceit, historical aspects of the site or strumurs ~s well as any other significant factom which m y d_t~;n~ ~h_ ~rope~y as a a ~ ¢ ' ¢ ~ hi,redo ste/sndms~ (i.e. special aesthetics; cultural, archite~ural, or engineering fa~ors; and any dates, events, er persons associated with the site or stm~ure). See a~ched es~blished criteria for designation. 2. Has the site or s~cture been altered in any way from its original design? Yes. X No (if yes, explain) 3. Briefly descd~ the present physical condition of the prope~ include a ratine of ~eor, fair, good, or .... h~nt. - . / q~' F ATTACHMENT 4 HISTORICAL LANDMARK INFORMATION FOR 475 "E" STREET THE WILLIAM DREW HOUSE When Chula Vista incorporated in 1910, the building restrictions required a minimum cost of $2,500:00 to build a new home. During the early 1900's Chula Vista became known as home for the well to do. The neighborhoods were also known as well manicured with a variety of exquisite architectural designs. In 1913 William H. and Mary C. Drew a rancher, purchased their lot and built their 2,408 square foot home. This three-bedroom home was built in the classical Craftsman design. The interior has all the features that were part of the craftsman style. Although we could not find any information through our research of any significant contributions by the Drew family, one can safely assume that they were well off. Just down the street lived the Greg Rogers family. Mr. Rogers was the president of Peoples State Bank (the first bank in Chula Vista) and founder of the Chula Vista Yacht Club. Around 1922 Mr. Drew passed away and Mary sold the home a year later. Records show that their garage located on Brightwood was converted into four apartment units with a second story addition in 1934. In 1962 the main house was a boarding home for nine and a residential family, the weekly charge was $18.50 and the apartments were renting for $60.00 per month. An exterior stairway and balcony have been added to the left side of the home. The main house also has had a room addition with a separate entrance, which is listed as a studio apartment and is currently rented for $545.00 per month. As the historical inventory report indicated, this home has a lot of detail and the integrity of design and materials are intact. DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HASS HAER__ NR au, ~ UTM: A ff~1770 B '5~ II ~ HISTORIC RE~URCES INVENTORY C D iDENTIFICATION David Sheldon House Willi~ Drew House 3. Street or rural address: 475 "E" Street city Chula Vista ~g 92010 ~unw.. San Diego 4. Parcel number: 565-261-12 5~ Present Owner; David L & Karen S Sheldon Addr~s: 3824 Alta Loma Dr Cky ~onita, CA 92002 Zip Owne~hig is: Public Private X 8. Present Use: ~esidential Original use: .. residential DESCRIPTION 7a. Ar~it~ral sWle: Craftsma~ 7b. Briefly de~ribe the present phy~/d~r/prion of ~e site or stru~ure and de~ribe any major alterations Eom its original condition: Legal: Brightwood, Blk 1, por Lots 8 & 9 This two story Craftsman house features a medi~, cross gable roof with wide eaves, exposed rafter ends and large knee b~aces. A front- gabled, one story porch at the right front has a post support on a brick pier at each front corner. A pergola extending out to the left is supported by two identical posts on brick piers. Other details of this charming home include wood shingle siding on the upper story, narrow clapboard on the first level, an exterior brick chimney, and double hung windows throughout most of the house. A decorative touch is added by a row of dentils across the front and sides of the porch gable and on a house gable. An exterior stairway and balcony ~ ~ been added to the left side of this large home. There is also a room addition at the rear. Attmc~ Photo(s) Here 8. Constructiondate: Estimated 1913 Factual__ 9. Architect unknown 10. Builder. unknown 11. Approx. pr%p~rty size (in fe~t) Frontage Depth 130 or approx, acreage 12. Date(s) of e~closed photogral~h(s) 1985 ATTACHMENT 5 D~'R ~ (Re'.. 4~73! The exterior of the home is in excellent condition because of the high quality of construction and materials used. Some of the special features inside the home are the built-ins, bookcases, sitting nooks, china cabinets, large pocket doors sephrating the living room and dinning room, and two large fireplaces. The interior of the home is in average condition. Throughout the years the previous owners have painted over all of the wood trim. Our intentions are to strip the paint and restore the wood to its original condition. The pocket doors need to be repaired, and the masonry of the fireplaces must be restored. There are many other repairs that will need to be done. The intention is to keep the original integrity of the home both inside and out as William H. and Mary C. Drew initiated. Sources City Directories San Diego County Assessment records Stories, Tales and Folklore of Chula Vista Mr. Frank Roseman, Manager of the Heritage Museum of Chula Vista 13. Condition: [xc~lle~t 14. Alterations: addition, exterior stairs a balcony 15. Surroun~n~: (~ mom ~ ~ if n~) O~n [a~ ~er~ buildin~ D~ly ~ilt-up X ;' R~idential X I~al ~mmercial ~.~her: 16. ~rea~ to ~te: No~ k~n ~ ~ivate development Zoning Va~ali~ Public Works proj~ ~ 7. Is the stru~re; On i~ origi~l site? X Move? Unkno~ 18. Retat~f~ur~:. SeCOn~ ~es~ent&al bu&~n~, ~:ees . SIGNIFICANCE 19. Briefly ~te hi~ori~l ~d/or a~it~raJ im~an~ (include dates, events, a~ ~ ~at~ wi~ ~e site.) A~oun~ 1913, H~llam H. D:ew, a :anche~, an~ h&s w&~e, Ha:y, acquired ~hls p~ope:ty ~n the B~&gh[wood Subdivision. ~ate~ was connected [o the lot in 1913 an~ the house p~obably built thai same yea=. Wilt~am D~e~ passe~ a~ay ~n ~921 o: 1922 and bls w~ow l~ved here a ~ew mo:e yea~s. The ~acade o~ th&s la:ge house :eta~ns ~n~eg=~ty DE ~esi~n and ma[e:ials, and ~he home is a 9oo~ ex~ple o~ the C~aEtsman s[yle popula~ &n ~he Uni~e~ S~aEes f~om 1895 to 1920. Locational sketch map (draw and label site and surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks): 20. Main theme of the historic re~)urce: (If more than one is /X NORTH checked, number in order of importance.) Architecture x A~ts & Leisure Economic/Ir~ustriaJ Exploration/~ettlem ent ~J Gove~nmen~ Military Relig~°n Social/Education 21. Sources (List books, ~, sun, eys. personal interviews and their datesJ. City directories Water records CV Tax Assessment Rolls THE WILLIAM DREW HOME Front view of 475 "E" Street ATTACHMENT 6 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DESIGNATING THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 475 E STREET, THE WILLIAM DREW HOUSE, AS A HISTORIC SITE AND PLACING THE HOUSE ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S LIST OF HISTORIC SITES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.32.070(A). WHEREAS, the William Drew House is a Craftsman style house located at 475 "E" Street in the City OfChula Vista (APN 565-261-12-00) constructed in 1913; and WHEREAS, staffreceived communication from the property owners of 475 "E" Street, requesting that the William Drew House be designated as a historical site on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites; and WHEREAS, State of California Historic Eligibility Criteria requires that a site be found significant at a local, state, or national level, under one or more of the criteria for designation; and WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that the William Drew House meets two of the local criterion for designation because of its distinguishing architectural characteristics and the fact that the integrity of the site has not been significantly compromised; and WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission at their regular meeting on June 3, 2002 voted 5-0-0-2 (with Commissioners Burrascano and Thomas absent) to recommend that the City Council place the William Drew House on the City of Chula Vista List of Historic Sites; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15331, Class 31, Historical Resources Restoration and Rehabilitation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the designation of the William Drew House, 475 "E" Street, as a Historic Site and determines that it is hereby placed on the City ofChula Vista List of Historic Sites. Presented by: Approved as to form by: D~ 7. ~.. John M. Kaheny City Attorney þ ~ ,.,... Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning & Building /q~ / if COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Date 8/6/02 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to consider the adoption of an ordinance and an urgency ordinance modifying the existing Transportation Development Impact Fee and amending Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code Resolution Accepting a report prepared by Willdan recommending an updated Transportation Development Impact Fee to mitigate transportation impacts within the City's Eastern Territories Ordinance Amending the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program, Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code Urgency Ordinance Amending the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program, Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2002-03 Budget by appropriating $826,480 from the Available Fund Balance in the Transportation Development Impact Fee Fund to repay sewer loan authorized by Resolufion No. 16706 SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works/~fl~P'/ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~,~ff (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No~) The City's Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Program was established on January 12, 1988 by Ordinance 2251. Since its inception, the program has been updated several times to reflect new land uses approvals, changes to the Circulation Element of the General Plan, and updated project cost estimates. The last TDIF update was approved on November 16, 1999. Tonight, Council will consider the approval of the 2002 TDIF update recommending an increase from the current fee of $6,240 to $8,180 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). The proposed Urgency Ordinance will enable the City to collect the fee during the 60-day waiting period before the regular ordinance becomes effective. The public hearing has been duly noticed. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1. Conduct the Public Hearing. 2. Approve the Resolution accepting the report prepared by Willdan. 3. Approve the Ordinance amending Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code (first reading). 4. Approve the Urgency Ordinance amending Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code 5. Approve of the budget amendment appropriating $826,480 from the Available Fund Balance in the TDIF Fund to repay a loan from Sewer fund. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Economic Development Commission has reviewed the proposed increase but offered no recommendation. Page2, Item 20 Meeting Date 8/6/02 DISCUSSION: 2002 TDIF Update New developments place demands on the existing transportation infrastructure, which can be mitigated by upgrading existing and/or constructing new transportation facilities. Chula Vista's TDIF program functions as a system to distribute the cost of constructing infrastructure facilities in an equitable manner among new development in Eastern Chula Vista. The proceeds from the fee are used to construct new transportation improvements. On August 2001, Council retained Willdan for updating the TDIF program. The amount of the TD1F fee has not been updated since 1999. During this time infrastructure cost and land uses have been modified. The 2002 update incorporates the following major changes: · Addition of Telegraph Canyon Road (I-805 to 200' E/O TC Shopping Ctr.), Main Street (I-805 underpass) widening projects, and East H Street (from 1-805 to 400' east of Hidden Vista). · Removal of East Palomar Street at 1-805 Interchange and La Media Road Bridge Crossing at Otay Valley projects · Completion of 13 projects or portions of projects · A provision to lower commercial, commercial high-rise and industrial Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) rates · A shift to residential density based on tentative map dwelling units per acre as the fee basis rather than the classic "attached", "detached" and "multi-family" land used categories · Update the project cost estimates to 2002 prices. · Addition ora provision in the municipal code to permit the City, in its discretion, to provide an economic enhancement to developments that provide the City with a long term revenues · Streamlining procedures for authorizing construction Exhibit 1 shows the Project Funding Requirements of $222,807,379. This amount includes $184,115,288 for facility construction, $6,684,221 for Program Monitoring (3% of the TDIF program cost), and $24,756,270 in TDIF credits. The Program Monitoring will fund City's TDIF administration, and the cost of consultants and City staff participating in related projects/activities (i.e. fee updates, traffic monitoring program, lobbying the State for ~nore transportation funds). Three percent of the TDIF program cost is $6,684,221. If spread equally over 20 years, the annual revenue would be $3341000 per year for program monitoring costs. The 2002 update recommends aTDIF of$8,180per EDU. Table 1 below presents therates for the different land uses. Page 3, Item ~ Meeting Date 8/6/02 Table 1. Proposed Fee Residential (LOW density) (0-8 $8,180/DU $6,240/DU DU/Acre)) Residential (MED density) (>8-20 $6,544/DU $4,992/DU DU/Acre) Residential (HIGH density) (> 20 $4,908/DU $3,744/DU DU/Acre) Senior Housing (Unit) $3,272/DU $2,496/DU Commercial (Acre) $171,780/acre $156,000/acre Commemial (High Rise) (Acre) $278,120/aere $249,600/acre Industrial (Acre) $65,440/acre $93,600/acre Medical Center (Acre) $531,700/acre $405,600/acre Golf Course (18 holes) $572,600/course $436,800/course Basis and Methodology The basis and methodology used in calculating the fee in this update is consistent with the basis and methodology used in the "Interim Eastern Area Development Impact Fee For Streets" adopted in January 1988 and also the "Eastern Area Development Impact Fees For Streets" adopted in January 1990. One of the primary assumptions in the formulation of the previous fees is that the need for additional public facilities is generated by new development and the cost of the facilities should be paid by that new development. The first step in this update was to determine which road improvements are required to be constructed in order to maintain an acceptable level of service on the City's circulation system east ofi~805 which are not included in normal subdivision exactions because those segments lie between two or more major developments rather than running through one development. The improvements that are to be constructed will serve the entire benefit area by either providing roads for residents, employees, or customers to use, or by providing new streets for existing traffic, thus freeing up capacity on existing streets that can be used by new development. After reviewing traffic models, development proposals, future connections to SR-125 and 1-805, and land use patterns, a system of local roads that carry traffic beyond limited development areas (i.e.: semi-regional in nature) was adopted. Some roads, which carry a lower volume of traffic, were included because they provided connections to future SR-125 and/or were between future development bubbles and would be needed by more than one of those areas to access other regional routes. The next step was to determine the method upon which the costs for the improvements would be spread. One of the most common tools used to equate benefit impact fees among the different land uses and densities is the "Equivalent Dwelling Unit" or "EDU". There is a clear relationship between the use of transportation facilities and the generation of traffic trips based on the land use and density of a specific parcel. As in previous methodologies, this update is based on the report "San Diego Traffic Generators", published by SANDAG. This report details the traffic trips Page 4, Item __ Meeting Date 8/6/02 generated by various classes ofland use. The cost of all the required improvements has been spread equally based on the number of "Equivalent Dwelling Units" regardless of the location of any particular improvement relative to the development. This update has relied on traffic modeling techniques to determine the pementage ofindustriaI and commercial trips that originate from within the TDIF benefit area that are already counted as part of other land uses in the TDIF program. Only those trips which originate outside of the TDIF benefit area are recommended for determining the fee for the commemial and industrial land uses. The analysis justifies reducing the commercial, commercial high-rise, and industrial rates from 25 to 21 EDU's per acre, from 40 to 34 EDU's per acre, and from 15 to 8 EDU's per acre respectively. The ordinances under consideration tonight also include provisions to charge the fee on the gross acreage of the development type for commercial, commercial (high rise), industrial and medical center of all parcels that the city manager's designee (i.e. director of public works) deems necessary for the development project. The proposed street improvements, which are required outside of normal subdivision exactions, are based on an analysis of the circulation system for various levels of development within the entire area of benefit, which is discussed below. All of proposed street projects included are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plans that have been adopted by the City Council and are required by the City's Growth Management Ordinance as a condition to all development within the area of benefit in order to maintain acceptable levels of service on the major roadways. The absence of contiguity to the proposed street projects is not essential to conferring a benefit to properties. The area of benefit is based on an analysis of impacts on the total circulation system east of 1-805 for various stages or increments of cumulative development within the total area of benefit. The circulation system must be viewed as a whole. Each of the proposed street projects will provide a benefit to every development because traffic from any one development will utilize the entire system to access work, commerce, schools, residences and the many other land uses throughout the City. It is difficult, if not impossible to isolate the value of any single street to any particular development because of the nature of traffic. A failure in any part of the system will have a negative impact in other parts of the system and traffic from the development closest to an impacted segment of street will be just as affected as traffic from a more distant development. The analogy ora water system is sometimes used where constrictions or breaks in any part of the system will have significant impacts on the whole system. Area of Benefit The TDIF program encompasses most properties within the City's jurisdiction located south of Bonita Road and east of 1-805 (see Exhibit 2). The proposed area of benefit contains a total of 27,236 EDU's. Table 2 below gives a summary of the development forecast within the Area of Benefit. Page 5, Item ~ Meeting Date 8/6/02 Table 2. Development Forecast Project 1999 Total Aggregate EDU's 2002 Total Aggregate EDU's Remaining Remaining Eastlake 9,026 4,386.9 Otay Ranch 22,930 19,353.9 Rolling Hills 1,752 1,270.8 Ranch Tan Miguel Ranch --1608.7 1,590.7 Bella Lago NA 150 Sunbow 1,551 484.2 TOTAL 36,867.7 27,236.5 The net decrease in Total Aggregate EDU's Remaining is due to building permit activity, changes to EDU credits, the revision to density based residential EDU's, and lowering EDU rates for commercial, commercial high rise and industrial land uses. The 2002 TDIF report has been revised to clearly exclude the area bounded by Assessment District No. 90-2, Otay Valley Road (now Main Street) on the benefit area map. This is consistent with the 1999 and 2002 land use table which never included the EDU's from this area. The area within the Assessment District is excluded from the TDIF boundary because the property owners paid for the Otay Valley Road widening and improvement via the assessment district. Transportation Facilities There are 45 remaining projects within the proposed TDIF program (See Table D). The cost estimate for constructing these roads is $184,115,288, including soft costs. Soft costs include 15% for contingencies, design costs, construction inspection/project management costs, and 2% on each project for the City's project specific administration/audit. This update includes most roads in the current Circulation Element of the General Plan in addition to capacity enhancement projects. These additional projects include.: · Main Street (I-805 underpass) widening · Telegraph Canyon Road (I-805 to 200' E/O TC Shopping Ctr.) widening · East H Street westbound widening (400' east of Hidden Vista) Two projects, East Palomar St. at 1-805 and La Media bridge crossing, were deleted from the TDIF program. Current build-out traffic model scenarios indicate that these projects may be deleted without substantial impacts to traffic cimulation. Page 6, Item Meeting Date 8/6/02 The TDIF program does not include those streets within the area of the Proposed University Site (Villages 9 and 10 of the Otay Ranch). It is anticipated that the University, if approved, would be responsible for constructing suitable transportation facilities. If the University is not constructed and the area develops according to the approved alternative, future updates will incorporate said area and related facilities into the program. This report also excludes the traffic EDU's contained within the proposed University site. TDIF Credit and Change to Credit Process There are a number of developers who have constructed TDIF roads in the past and maintain a credit against future TDIF fees in the estimated total amount of $24,756,270. The credits are summarized in Exhibit 4. Partial TDIF credits are provided to developers when building permits (and TDIF fees) are needed prior to the City acceptance of TD1F facilities. A 50% advance credit is made available to the developer for the time period after Director of Public Works has received sufficient bonds and approved the cost estimate but has no[ approved the bids. Once a bid has been approved, the Developer is provided with a 75% advance credit with the final 25% to be provided after the City has accepted and audited the facility. The existing TDIF Ordinance requires the developer to obtain Council authorization to construct a TDIF facility. Staff' recommends the ordinance be amended to eliminate this step as the authorization is typically granted through the development entitlement process. Additionally, staff recommends amending the ordinance to eliminate the requirement to obtain Council authorization prior to receiving TDIF credit or reimbursement for construction of TDIF roads. Staff recommends the developer direct the request for TDIF credit or reimbursement to the city manager, thereby streamlining the credit issuance process. A minor change in the ordinance is recommended whereby the city manager's designee, not the director of public works, makes the final determination in the amount of reimbursement or credit at the 50%, 75% or ! 00% levels. This change is recommended to address organizational changes approved for this year. EDU Rates Government Code 66000 requires that the City establish a reasonable relationship between the projects to be funded and the fee. The TDIF program uses the Average Daily Trip (ADT) which is converted to the Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) as the tool to equate benefit impact fees among the different land uses. As indicated above, ADT generation rates published by SANDAG are used to determine the impacts of the different land use categories on the transportation system. Each land use category is assigned a specific EDU rate. A low density (0-8 dwelling units/gross acre), residential unit is equal to 10 ADT or 1 EDU. Table 3 presents a comparison between the current and proposed rates. Page 7, Item ~0 Meeting Date 8/6/02 Table 3. EDU Rates Single Family Detached 1 EDU/DU Residential Low density 1 EDU/DU (SFD) (0-8 dwelling units/acre) Single Family Attached 0.8 EDU/DU Residential Medium density 0.8 EDU/DU (SFA) (>8 - 20 dwelling units/acm) Multi Family(MF) 0.6 EDU/DU Residential High density 0.6 EDU/DU (>20 dwelling units/acre) Senior Housing 0.4 EDU/Acre Senior Housing 0.4 EDU/Acre Commercial 25 EDU/Acre Commercial 21 EDU/Aere High Rise Commercial 40 EDU/Acre High Rise Commercial 34 EDU/Acre Industrial 15 EDU/Acre Industrial 8 EDU/Acre Medical Center 65 EDU/Acre Medical Center 65 EDU/Acre Golf Course (18 holes) 70 EDU/course Golf Course 70 EDU/course Following is a brief discussion on the EDU rate schedule: · The SANDAG Report ("San Diego Traffic Generators") identifies several categories of residential land use generating average daily trips (ADT's) ranging from 12 to 4 ADT's. The City historically has refined the SANDAG approach and has identified four categories based on the type of residential structure whether attached, detached, multi family or senior housing, which also related to the density of the residential development according to the SANDAG Report. This TDIF update eliminates the reference to product type and is based solely on the density of the residential development as a more accurate reflection of housing development within the Area of Benefit. The City, therefore, recommends the following: 10 ADT's generated from a residential unit with densities ranging on average from 0 to 8 dwelling units per gross acre; 8 ADT's from a residential unit with densities ranging from greater than 8 to 20 dwelling units per gross acre; 6 ADT's from a residential unit with greater than 20 dwelling units per gross acm; and 4 trips from a unit in a senior housing complex. ,, As part of this TDIF update, a traffic analysis of the industrial trip origin and destination was performed. This analysis was conducted to determine the percentage of the industrial trips that originate from within the TDIF benefit area that are already counted as part of other land uses in the TDIF program. The analysis found that approximately 60 percent of the industrial trips are generated from within the City of Chula Vista TDIF ama and 40 pement are from outside the TDIF area. Thus, the SANDAG industrial trip rate of 200 ADT could be reduced by up to 60 percent or to 80 trips per acre (8 EDU's per acre). This reduces the industrial trip generation rate fi:om 150 trips per acre (1999 TDIF Update) to 80 trips per acre. Page 8, Item cXL/ Meeting Date 8/6/02 · F or commemial development, as in previous updates, the "pass-by" trip phenomenon was included in setting the generation rate. Pass-by trips (also called undiverted linked trips) are trips in which a stop at a retail commercial facility is one part of a linked trip to or from home or work. In addition to the pass-by phenomenon, a traffic analysis for the commercial trip origin and destination was also performed as part of this TDIF update process. The analysis found that approximately 70 percent of the commercial trips are generated from within the City of Chula Vista TDIF area and 30 percent are from outside the TDIF area. Thus, the commemial trip rate for the purpose of the TDIF program could be reduced by up to 70 percent. Since the analysis was conducted using a Select Zone Analysis forecast for a representative Traffic Analysis Zone that had a SANDAG commercial trip rate of 700 trips per acre, the recommended TDIF commercial trip rate is 30 percent of 700 trips per acre or 210 trips per acre (21 EDU's per acre). · Based on the results of the traffic analysis for commercial land uses including commemial high rise, staff recommends a proportionate reduction in the high rise commercial trip generation rate from 400 trips to 340 trips per acre (34 EDU's per acre). Meetings with the Development Community Staff has had numerous meetings with the development community throughout the update process. Issues raised by the developers were discussed and resolved. As a result of these discussions, several changes and modifications were incorporated into the program. Generally, the development community reviewed the fee proposal to ensure that cost estimates were not too high or low and to ensure that land uses were consistent with current entitlement information. The development community did not express to staffany strong opposition to the fee proposal. However, McMillin recommends that the commercial rate be further reduced to 120 trips per acre (12 EDU's), that the high rise commercial rate be based on square footage instead of gross acre for buildings 5 stories and higher, and that the city add an office building category. Corky McMillin Companies recommended the commercial rate reduction be based on a commercial vehicle trip generation rate of 400 trips per acre. Applying the 70% reduction would yield 120 trips per acre (30% of 400) or 12 EDU's. Staffrecommends the reduction be based on 700 trips per acre, applying the 70% reduction yields 210 trips per acre or 21 EDU's. In reviewing SANDAG trip generation rates which range between 90 trips per acre and 2000 trips per acre and for the various commercial land uses, staff'believes the 700 trips per acre, typical for conununity shopping centers, to be a more representative figure for the commercial development in the Eastern Territories. Staff recommends that a comprehensive analysis for the high rise commercial rate and the office category rate be deferred for a future update of the TDIF program after adoption of the General Plan update. The specific uses anticipated for the high rise commercial land uses are not yet known and staff recommends deferring additional change to this land use category until such time as additional information is available. Staff further recommends that consideration ora medium or high-rise office rate be deferred as all of the medium to high-rise office acreage is expected to be located within the Eastern Urban Center, the land use mix and character of which is being refined at the present time. Upon refinement of the land use mix and character of the Eastern Urban Center, the medium or high-rise office land use character will be known and it would be appropriate for Council to consider a change to the TDIF program to add such a category. Page 9, Item (ALt Meeting Date 8/6/02 Environmental Review The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a"Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Although environmental review is not necessary at this time, environmental review will be required prior to the approval of final design plans and the awarding of construction contracts for facilities funded through Transportation Development Impact Fees. It should also be mentioned that the TDIF program includes funding for habitat mitigation that may be triggered by the construction of the facilities. Proposed Ordinances and Economic Incentive Credit By amending Chapter 3.54 of the Municipal Code, Council will establish a new TDIF rate of$8,180 per EDU, will modify the number of EDU's for various land uses, will streamline the developer TDIF process, and will amend the existing TD1F program to include all the properties and transportation facilities identified in the report. In addition, the amendment would enable the city to receive an Economic Incentive Credit, similar to the developer's credit, for TDIF eligible projects that the City funds, aside from current TDIF funding sources. The Economic Incentive Credit could be used to offset TDIF costs for projects that the Council deems beneficial to the City. With this change, the Council has the option to receive an Economic Incentive Credit and use it for specific projects. The overall TDIF program cost will not be affected by the change. However, the development community will now have an opportunity to offset the cost of their TDIF obligations for their projects if Council deems their project beneficial to the City and authorizes use of the Economic Incentive Credit. Projects previously being funded by the City or funds previously committed to the TDIF program will not be eligible to be converted to Economic Incentive Credits. This ordinance will become effective 60 days after the second reading. Assuming that the second reading and adoption of the TDIF update takes place at the August 13th Council Meeting, the new fee will be in effect as of October 12, 2002 and collected with building permits issued on or after October 12, 2002. The "Urgency Ordinance" would go into effect immediately and will enable the City to collect the fee during the 60-day waiting period for the regular ordinance to become effective. This ordinance is only valid for 30 days (from August 6 through September 5), and therefore, it will be necessary to notice and hold a second and third hearing in order to extend the urgency ordinance in 30 day increments until the permanent ordinance becomes effective. An approval of 4/5t~'s vote will be needed for all urgency Ordinances. Staffrecommends that the TDIF go into effect immediately by adopting the Urgency Ordinance in order that all developments pay their fair share of the cost of public transportation improvements relating to the impacts caused by their development. Immediate implementation of this fee is necessary due to the current and immediate threat to public safety which will result should there be a shortfall in the amount of money necessary to pay for the various transportation facilities thereby resulting in severe congestion and failure of the public transportation network necessary to serve the increased population. The prospect of a shortfall, failure of the street system and concerns about an increased charge to remaining property owners constitutes a current immediate threat to the public health, welfare and safety justifying the immediate imposition of this fee. Page 10, Item c~ Meeting Date 8/6/02 Appropriation of TDIF funds In 1992, during the Assessment District No. 90-02 proceedings for the Otay Valley Road project (Main Street), Council approved, by Resolution 16706, a loan from the sewer fund of $420,000 to the TDIF Fund to offset the cost of the assessments to the property owners in that area. The loan amount and the interest on the loan have been built into the TDIF program. Staff recommends that the loan be repaid this fiscal year. The estimated amount for repayment of the loan including interest is $826,480. A 4/5ths vote is required for the budget amendment. FISCAL IMPACT: The Transportation Development Impact Fee, as for all of the City's Development Impact Fees, maintains funds separate funds from the general fund. Them is no impact to the general fund from the TDIF update except the latent cost of additional maintenance as the cimulation network increases. These maintenance costs may be offset with additional gas tax funds resulting from the increased traffic. Approval of tonight's resolutions includes a budget amendment appropriating $826,480 from the Available Fund Balance in the TDIF Fund to repay a loan from Sewer Fund. Exhibits: 1. Program Funding Requirements 2. Area of Benefit 3. Transportation Facilities 4. TDIF credits Attachment: Engineer's Report 0730-95 HX068 and HX 001 J:\Engineer\AGENDA\2002TDIFUpdate.doc dds 7/26/02 12;00 PM EXHIBIT 1 Table H - Program Funding Requirements 2002 Update 1. Total Improvement Cost $133,409,398 2. Total Soft Cost $ 50,705,890 Approx. Subtotal Facility Costs $184,115,288 3. Add Credits Due Developers $ 24,756,270 4. Add cost of revenue deficit $ 7,251,600 5. Add TDIF Program Admin. (3%) $ 6,684,221 Total Project Cost $222,807,379 C:\My Documents\Donnas\tdifEXHIB1T 1.doc Exhibit 4 Table G - Remaining Cash Credits (Estimated) Eastlake Pacific Bay Homes (RHR) Trimark (SMR) Otay Ranch SPA 1 (McMillin) Otay Ranch SPA 1 (ORC) Sunbow II Total Credits to be Paid C:IMy DocumentslDonnasl TDIFExhibit 4.doc /)0 # / ~ $ 6,421,831 $ 5,702,040 $ 313,522 $ 1.779,826 $ 8,736,516 $ 1,802,535 $ 24,756,270 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING A REPORT PREPARED BY WILLDAN RECOMMENDING AN UPDATED TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES WHEREAS, on August 2001, Council retained Willdan for updating the Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) program; and WHEREAS, the amount of the TDIF fee has not been updated since 1999, however, during this time infrastructure cost and land uses have been modified; and WHEREAS, the 2002 update incorporates the following major changes: · Addition of Telegraph Canyon Road (1-805 to 200' E/O TC Shopping Ctr.) and Main Street (1-805 underpass) widening projects. · Removal of East Palomar Street at 1-805 Interchange and La Media Road Bridge Crossing at Otay Valley projects · Completion of 14 projects or portions ofprojects · A provision to lower commercial, commercial high-rise and industrial Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) rates · A shift to residential density based on tentative map dwelling units per acre as the fee basis rather than the classic "attached", "detached" and "multi-family" land used categories · Update the project cost estimates to 2002 prices. · Addition of a provision in the municipal code to permit the City, in its discretion, to provide an economic enhancement to developments that provide the City with a long term revenues · Streamlining procedures for authorizing construction NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby accept the report prepi).red by Willdan recommending an updated Transportation Development Impact Fee to mitigate transportation impacts within the City's Eastern Territories. Presented by Approved as to form by J~(~_. City Attorney John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works j:\attomey\reso\ wí11dan TDIF report ).0 - ¡.S ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 3.54, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES WHEREAS, in January 1988, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista adopted Ordinance No. 2251 establishing a development impact fee for transportation facilities in the City's eastern territories; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2251, the City has commenced the collection of development impact fees to be used to construct transportation facilities to accommodate increased traffic generated by new development within the City's eastern territories; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2251 as amended by Ordinance Nos. 2289, 2348, 2349, 2431, 2580, 2604, and 2671 were repealed by Ordinance No. 2802 in January 1999; and WHEREAS, by Ordinance 2802, the Transportation Development Impact Fee was placed in Municipal Code Chapter 3.54; and WHEREAS, Municipal Code Chapter 3.54 was amended by Ordinance 2823; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista is placing this ordinance on its first reading which will increase the development impact fee (per equivalent dwelling) unit to finance transportation facilities within the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66017(a), the fees increased by this ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its second reading; and WHEREAS, the average daily trips for residential development shall be based on its density, and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 66000, et. seq., the City Council has caused a study to be conducted to reanalyze and reevaluate the impacts of development on the transportation system for the City's eastern territories and, further re-analyze and evaluate the development impact fee necessary to pay for the transportation facilities which financial and engineering study prepared by Willdan, is entitled "Eastern Area Development Impact Fess for Streets" dated July 2002; and -1- {fO -If) WHEREAS, the financial and engineering studies and the City's General Plan show the transportation network will be adversely impacted by new development within the eastern territories unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new development; and WHEREAS, the financial and engineering studies and the City's General Plan establish that the transportation facilities necessitated by development in the eastern territories comprise and integrated network; and WHEREAS, the City's Municipal Code authorizes the City Council to amend or modify the list ofprojects to be financed by the fee; and WHEREAS, on August 6, 2002, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly noticed meeting at which oral or written presentations regarding the development impact fee for the City's eastern territories could be made; and WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060( c )(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA, and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: SECTION I: Findings The City Council finds that developers of land within the Eastern Territory should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the construction of transportation facilities within the boundaries of the development, the construction of those transportation facilities outside the boundaries of the development which are needed to provide service to the development in accordance with City standards and the payment of a development impact fee to finance the development's portion of costs of the transportation network; and, The City Council finds that the legislative findings and determinations set forth in Ordinance No.2802 continue to be true and correct; and The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" dated July 2002, that certain amendments to Chapter 3.54 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code are necessary in order to assure that there are sufficient funds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve the eastern territories by the development impact fee; and, -2 - J. 0 - /1 The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the meeting, the City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City Council in the ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all development in the eastern territories for which building permits have not been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare and in order to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and, The City Council finds that the amount of the amended fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities; and, The City Council finds that it is appropriate to refine the fees for industrial and commercial land uses, including high rise commercial, to reflect the findings of the analyses of the industrial and commercial trip origination and destination whereby only estimated trips generated fÌom outside the Transportation Development Impact Fee boundary shall be used in determining the fee for industrial, commercial and commercial high-rise land uses; and The City Council finds it is necessary to ensure the timely payment of the "DIF program monitoring" cost item, included in Table H "Program Funding Requirements" of the financial and engineering study, "Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" dated July, 2002, to adequately fund ongoing and future administration activities and studies. SECTION 2: That the Development Impact Fee Schedule set forth in Section 3.54.010(C) of the Municipal Code, and as adjusted annually by the 20 City Construction Cost Index as published monthly in the Engineering News Record, shall be amended to read as follows: C. The amount of the fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance based upon the following schedule: Development Type Transportation Fee Residential (Low density) 0-8 du/gross ac Single family (Macll@Q Qwelling $8,180$5,nO/dwelling unit (Medium density»8-20 du/gross ac Single family attached dwelling$6,544$1,736/dwelling unit (High density) >20 du/gross ac Multifamily dwelling $4,908$3,552/dwelling unit Senior housing $3,272$2,36g/dwelling unit Commercial $171,780$11g,OOO/gross ac High rise Gcommercial (high rise) $278,120$236,gOO/gross ac Industrial $65,440$gg,gOO/gross acre Golf course $572,600$411,400/golf course Medical center $531,700$3g1,gOO/gross acre -3 - ;;LO -I 'g The density of the development type shall be based on the number of dwelling units per gross acre for single-family or multi-family residential and shall be based upon the densities identified on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map entitling the development unless otherwise approved in writing by the city manager's designee. The gross acreage of the development type for commercial, high rise commercial, industrial and medical center shall include the gross acreage of all parcels that the city manager's designee deems necessary for the development project. The amount of the fee shall be adjusted, starting on October I, 2003 ;WOO, and on each October I st thereafter, based on the one-year change (from July to July) in the 20 City Construction Cost Index as published monthly in the Engineering News Record. For reference purposes, the July 2002.J-999, 20 City Construction Cost Index is 6604.82 6076.25. Adjustments to the above fees based upon the Construction Cost Index shall be automatic and shall not require further action of the city council. The city council shall at least annually review the amount of the fee. The city council may adjust the amount of the fee as necessary to reflect changes in the type, size, location or cost of the transportation facilities to be financed by the fee, changes in land use designations in the city's general plan, and upon other sound engineering, financing and planning information. Adjustments to the above fees resulting from the above reviews may be made by resolution amending the master fee schedule. SECTION 3: That the Definitions as set forth in Section 3.54.020 of the Municipal Code, shall be amended to read as follows: 3.54.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defined herein, unless fÌom the context it appears that a different meaning is intended. A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the Uniform Building Code. B. "Director of Public Works" means the director of public works, the director of public works' designee or the city manager's designee. C. "Density" means dwelling units per gross acre identified for each planning area shown on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map or as determined by the city manager's designee. D.E-, "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development. KG. "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision ordinance of the city. F.Ih"Development project" or "development" means any activity described in Section 66000 of the State Government Code. G.E. "Eastern Territories" generally means that area of the city located between Interstate 805 on the west, the city sphere of influence boundary on the east and northeast, the city boundary on the north and the city's southern boundary on the south, excepting Villages 9 -4- ;)0,/1 and 10 of the Otay Ranch (the University Site) as shown on the map entitled "Figure I" of the update of the financial and engineering studies. The property known as Bonita Gateway located at the northeast quadrant of Bonita Road and 1-805 intersection is also included. H.R- "Financial and engineering studies" means the "Interim Eastern Area Development Impact Fee for Streets" study prepared by George T. Simpson and Willdan Associates dated November 1987; the "Eastern Area Development Fee for Streets" study prepared by Willdan Associates dated November 19, 1990; the Eastern Development Impact Fee for Streets - 1993 Revision" study prepared by city staff dated July 13, 1993; anà the study prepared by Project Design Consultants ("Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets, 1999 Update") dated October 25 1999;, and the study prepared by WilIdan ("Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" dated July 2002), which are on file in the office of the city clerk. I.G, "High rise commercial" means commercial office usage five or more stories in height. J. "Transportation facility project" means that project or portion of project which involves the specified improvements authorized by Section 3.54.030. SECTION 4: That the transportation facilities to be financed by the fee as set forth III Section 3.54.030(A) shall be amended as follows: 3.54.30 Transportation facilities to be financed by the fee. A. The transportation facilities and programs to be financed by the fee established by this chapter are: 1.* 2.* 3.** 3a.** 4.** 5.** 6.** 7. 8.** 9** lOa. lOb. 11. 12. 13.* 14.** 15.** 16.** State Route 125 fÌom San Miguel Road to Telegraph Canyon Road. State Route 125 fÌom Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway Orange A.venu@. Telegraph Canyon Road from Paseo Del Rey to east of Pas eo Laderalnorth side Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 interchange/Phase II. Telegraph Canyon Road / Phase I Rutgers Avenue to Eastlake Boundary. Telegraph Canyon Road / Phase II Paseo Ladera to Apache Drive. Telegraph Canyon Road / Phase III Apache Drive to Rutgers Avenue. East H Street / 1-805 Interchange modifications. East H Street from Eastlake Drive to SR-125. Otay Lakes Road fÌom Camino del Cerro Grande to Ridgeback Road. La Media Road from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Palomar Street. La Media Road from East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway. Bonita Road fÌom Otay Lakes Road to Central Avenue. Bonita Road from Central Avenue to San Miguel Road. San Miguel Road from Bonita Road to SR-125. East H Street fÌom State Route 125 to San Miguel Road. Proctor Valley Road (East H Street) from San Miguel Road to Hunte Parkway. Olympic Parkway from Brandywine Avenue to Paseo Ranchero. -5 - ¿). 0 - d 0 17&** East Palomar Street from Oleander Avenue to Medical Center Drive £unoow Eastern BCHlndary. 17a. ** East Palomar Street from Medical Center Drive to Paseo Ladera. l7b. East Palomar Street from Paseo Ladera to Sunbow eastern boundary to Meàical Center Drive. 18** Telegraph Canyon Road from eastern boundary of Eastlake to Hunte Parkway. 19** Eastlake Parkway from Otay Lakes Road to Eastlake High School southern boundary. 20.** Hunte Parkway from Proctor Valley Road to Telegraph Canyon Road. 21.** Hunte Parkway from Telegraph Canyon Road to Club House Drive. 2Ia.** Hunte Parkway from Club House South Greensview Drive to Olympic Parkway. 22. Olympic Parkway from Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway. 22a. Olympic Parkway from SDGE easement to Hunte Parkway. 22b. Olympic Parkway from SR 125 to SDGE easement. 23a. ** Paseo Ranchero from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Palomar Street. 23b. **Paseo Ranchero from East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway. 24a. Olympic Parkway from Paseo Ranchero to La Media Road. 24b. Olympic Parkway from La Media Drive to East Palomar Street. 24c. Olympic Parkway from East Palomar Street to SR125. 24d. Olympic Parkway from SRI25 to Eastlake Parkway. 25a. Olympic Parkway /1-805 Interchange modifications to Brandywine Avenue. 25b. ** Olympic Parkway from Oleander to Brandywine 26a. ** East Palomar Street from eastern Sm1bow Boundary to Paseo Ranchero to Santa Maria. 26b. ** East Palomar Street from Sunbow eastern boundary to Santa Maria 27. Deleted project (East Palomar Street at 1-805 interchange). 28. Otay Lakes Road from Hunte Parkway to Wueste Road 29.** Olympic Parkway from Hunte Parkway to Wueste Road Olympic Training C@nt@r. Otay Lakes Road from SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway. Eastlake Parkway from Fenton Street to Otay Lakes Road. East "H" Street from 1-805 to HiddenVista Drive. East "H" Street eastbound to Terra Nova Shopping Center. Bonita Road at Otay Lakes Road intersection. Otay Lakes Road at Elmhurst Drive intersection. East "H" Street at Otay Lakes Road intersection. Traffic Signal Interconnection / Eastern Territories. EastLake Parkway from Eastlake High School southern boundary to Olympic Parkway. East "H" Street fÌom Paseo Del Rey to Tierra del Rey. Bonita Road from 1-805 to Plaza Bonita Road. Alta Road from SRI25 to Eastlake Parkway. Brandywine/Medical Center Drive from Medical Center Court to Olympic Parkway. Birch Road from La Media Road to SR 125. Birch Road from SRI25 to Eastlake Parkway. 30. 31. 32a. 32b. 33.** 34** 35.** 36. 37. 38.** 39** 40. 41. ** 42. 43. -6- dO 'JI 44. Deleted project (Birch Road from Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway). 45. Eastlake Parkway from Olympic Parkway to Birch Road. 46. Eastlake Parkway from Birch Road to Alta Road Rock Mountain Read. 47a. Mt. Miguel Road from Proctor Valley Road North to SR 125. South te Precter Valley Read NertÌ1. 47b. Mt. Miguel Road from SR 125 to Proctor Valley Road (South), previously named East "H" Street. 48. Hunte Parkway from Olympic Parkway to Eastlake Parkway BircÌ1 Read. 50. Deleted project. [La Media Road bridge crossing the Otay River (one-half the cost)]. 51. La Media Road from Olympic Parkway to Birch Road. 52. La Media Road from Birch Road to Rock Mountain Road. 53. La Media Road from Rock Mountain Road to Main Street (previously named Otay Valley Road). 54. La Media Road from Main Street Otay Vall@y Read to southern city boundary. 55. Otay Lakes Road from East H Street to Telegraph Canyon Road. 56a. Main Street Otay Valley Road from Nirvana ~ to Rock Mountain Road. 56b. Main Street Otay Valley Read from Rock Mountain Road to La Media Road. 56c. Main Street Otay Valley Road from La Media Road to SR125. 56d. Main Street at 1-805 Underpass widening. 57. Paseo Ranchero fÌom Olympic Parkway to Main Street Olay Valley Road. 58a. Paseo Ranchero from Main Street Otay Valley Road to southern City boundary (excludes including bridge crossing the Otay River) (one halftÌ1@ ce~t). 58b. Paseo Ranchero bridge crossing the Otay River (0% of cost). 59a. Proctor Valley Road from Hunte Parkway to Rolling Hills Ranch Neighborhood 9 west entrance eastern City boundary at Upp@r Otay Resefyeir. 59b. Proctor Valley Road from Rolling Hills Ranch Neighborhood 9 west entrance to easterly city boundary. 60. Rock Mountain Road from SRI25 to Main Street Otay Valley Road. 61. Willow Street from Bonita Road to Sweetwater Road (including bridge over Sweetwater River). 62. East H Street from Buena Vista Way to Otay Lakes Road. 63. Intersection signalization area wide within the Eastern Territories. 64. Development impact fee program support. * Project is now included in the interim pre-SRl25 transportation facility fee. ** Project has been completed. SECTION 5: That the developer authorization for construction of transportation facilities as set forth in Section 3.54.040(B) shall be deleted: B. A deyeleper may re¡¡uect autÌ1erizatien !Tern tÌ1e city cmmcil to censtruct one er mere oftÌ1e facilities li~ted in CVMC 3.51.030. -7 - ;J 0 -;Jé). SECTION 6: That the developer construction of transportation facilities as set forth III Section 3.54.040(C) shall be amended as follows: B.G. Whenever a developer requests reimbursement, or a credit against fees, for work to be done or paid for by the developer under subsections (A) e¡:...fß) of this section, the request shall be submitted in writing to the city manager's designee. ~9uncil Before commencement 9fthe w9rk. 1. The request shall contain the following inf-ormati9n and, if granted, shall Be wBject to the f9llowing cGnditions: a description of the project with a detailed cost estimate which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project and excludes any work attributable to a specific subdivision project. The estimate is preliminary and the amount of reimbursement or credit against fees is subject to final determination by the city manager's designee. Additional information shall be provided to the city by the developer upon request of the city. I. Detailed descri]3ti9n 9f the project with a pœliminar:,' C9St estimate. That p9rti9n of project wbich inY91\'es tbe specified impf9\'@m@nts aIlth9riz@d by CVMC 3.54.030 is referred t9 herein as the traasportati9n facility project 2. Such reimbursement or credit against fees shall be subject to the following conditions: 2-.a. Requirements of Developer. i.a. Preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the city; ii.Þ.Secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the transportation facility project; iii.6-,secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary for the transportation facility project; iV.à.Provision of performance bonds (where the developer intends to utilize provisions for immediate credit, the performance bond shall be 100 percent of the value of the transportation facility project); v.ßoPayment of all city fees and costs. b.J, The city will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the transportation facility project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the transportation facility project. c.4. The developer shall secure at least three qualified bids for work to be done and shall award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder. The developer may combine the construction of the transportation facility project with other development-related work and award one construction contract for the combined work based ori a clearly identified process for determining the low bidder, all as approved by the city manager's designee dir@ctor 9f public w9fks. Should the construction contract be awarded to a qualified bidder who did not submit the lowest bid for the transportation facility project portion of the contract, the developer will -8- ~O 'dB only receive transportation development impact fee IDW credit based on the lowest bid for the transportation facility portion of the contract. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or charges shall be justified, shall be documented to the satisfaction of the city manager's designee Giœctor of public works and shall only be reimbursed at the prices for similar work included in the lowest bid for the transportation facility portion of the contract. 5. The developer shall provide a detailed cost estimate which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the tranGportation facility project and excludes any 'Nork attributable to a specific subdivision project. The estimate is preliminary and wbject to final àetermination by n!@ director ofpllblic works upon completion ofth@ transportation facilitJ, proj ect. d.9.-Upon complying with conditions set forth in Section 3.54.040(B)1. and 2.a. above as determined by the city and upon approval of the estimated cost by the city manager's designee director of public works, the developer shall be entitled to immediate credit for 50 percent of the estimated cost of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project. Once the developer has received valid bids for the project which comply with Section 3.54.040(B)2.c., entered into binding contracts for the construction of the project, and met the conditions set forth in Section 3.54.040(B)1. and 2.a. above as determined by the city, all of which have been approved by the city manager's designee dir@ctor of pllblic works, the amount of the immediate credit shall be increased to 75 percent of the bid amount attributable to the transportation facility project. The immediate credits shall be applied to the developer's obligation to pay transportation development impact fees for building permits issued after the establishment of the credit. The developer shall specify ~ those building permits to which the credit is to be applied at the time the developer submits the building permit applications. f.+'-If the developer uses all of the immediate credit before final completion of the transportation facility project, then the developer may defer payment of development impact fees for other building permits by providing to the city liquid security such as cash or an irrevocable letter of credit, but not bonds or set-aside letters, in an amount equal to the remaining amount of the estimated cost of the transportation facility proj ect. g.&. When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the city, the developer shall submit verification of payments made for the construction of the transportation facility project to the city. The city manager's designee director of public works shall make the final determination on expenditures which are eligible for credit or cash reimbursement. h.9-.After final determination of eligible expenditures has been made by the city manager's designee director of public works and the developer has complied with the conditions set forth in this Section 3.54.040(B) as determined by the city, the final amount of transportation development impact fee credits shall be determined by the city manager's designee. The developer shall receive credit against the deferred fee obligation in an amount equal to the difference between the final expenditure determination and the amount of the 75 percent immediate credit used, if any. The city shall notify the developer of the final deferred fee obligation, and of the amount of the applicable credit. If the amount of the applicable credit is less than the -9- ~O ",;;4 deferred fee obligation, then the developer shall have 30 days to pay the deferred fee. If the deferred fees are not paid within the 30-day period, the city may make a demand against the liquid security and apply the proceeds to the fee obligation. i..w. At the time building permits are issued for the developer's project, the city will incrementally apply credit which the developer has accrued in lieu of collecting the required transportation development impact fees. The de'/eløper will receive any credit against reEfllired dev@lopment impact fees incrementally at the time building permits are issued for the developer's project The amount of the credit to be applied to each building permit shall be based upon the fee schedule in effect at the time of the building permit issuance. The city manager's designee director of p11blic works shall convert such credit to an EDU basis for residential development and/or a gross acre basis for commercial or industrial development for purposes of determining the amount of credit to be applied to each building permit. If the total eligible construction cost for the transportation facility project is more than the total transportation development impact fees which will be required for the developer's project, then the amount in excess of development impact fees will be paid in cash when funds are available as determined by the city manager,; a reimbursement agreement will be executed; or the developer may waive reimbursement and use the excess as credit against future transportation development impact fee obligations. The city may, in its discretion, enter into an agreement with the developer to convert excess credit into EDU and/or gross acre credits for use against future development impact fee obligations at the fee rate in effect on the date of the agreement. j.-l-h The requirements of t\lli; wbsSection 3.54.040(B)EGj may, in the city' s discretion, be modified through an agreement between @ntered into with the developer and the city and approved by city council. SECTION 7: That the developer construction of transportation facilities as set forth III Section 3.54.040(D) shall be amended as follows: C.Ih Whenever a transportation development impact fee credit is generated by constructing a transportation facility using assessment district or community facility district financing, the credit shall only be applied to the transportation development impact fee obligations within that district. SECTION 8: That Section 3.54.090 is added as follows: 3.54.090 Economic Incentive Credit The city council may authorize the city to participate in the financing of transportation facility projects or portions of transportation facility projects identified in Section 3.54.030. At the time of the appropriation of funds by city -10- ;¡O~;)5 council for the construction of an eligible transportation facility, the city shall be eligible to receive a credit known hereafter as an Economic Incentive Credit. Such economic incentive credit may be applied to development impact fee obligations for those projects which the city council determines, in its sole discretion, to be beneficial to the city. The use of the economic incentive credit may be subject to conditions which shall be set forth in a written agreement between the developer of the project and the city and approved by city council. The amount of the credit shall be determined pursuant to Section 3.54.040(B). The city may receive Economic Incentive Credit only for those eligible projects (i) identified in Section 3.54.030 and (ii) for amounts of funding not identified in the financial and engineering study, "Eastern Area Development Impact Fee for Streets" dated July 2002. SECTION 9: Expiration of this ordinance This ordinance shall be of no further force when the City Council determines that the amount of fees which have been collected reaches an amount equal to the cost of the transportation facilities or reimbursements. SECTION 10: Time limit for protest and iudicial action Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this ordinance shall be brought within the time period as established by Government Code Section 66020 after the effective date of this ordinance. In accordance with Government Code Section 66020(d)(I), the ninety-day approval period in which parties may protest begins upon the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION II: Effective Date This Ordinance shall become effective 60 days after its adoption. Presented by: Approved as to form by: ~11nMA John aheny - ~ City Attorney John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works J :/attorney/ordinance/tdi ford2002 -11 - :J().;) I, ORDINANCE NO, AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 3.54, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IN THE CITY'S EASTERN TERRITORIES WHEREAS, the City Council is placing an ordinance on its first reading which will increase the development impact fee (per equivalent dwel1ing) unit to finance transportation facilities within the City of Chula Vista, and WHEREAS, the average daily trips for residential development shall be based on its density, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66017(a), the fees increased by that ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its second reading, and WHEREAS, developments in the City which will impact various transportation facilities will be applying for building permits during the interim period before the development impact fee increase becomes effective, and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 66017(b) authorizes the City to adopt an interim fee as an urgency measure upon making a finding describing the current and immediate threat to the public health, welfare, and safety, and WHEREAS, said interim measure will be effective for thirty (30) days and may be extended twice for additional thirty (30) day periods upon subsequent action by the City Council, and WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060( c )(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA, and WHEREAS, state law requires said urgency ordinance to be adopted by a four- fifths vote. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: :J.o..;)7 SECTION I: Findings The City Council finds that developers ofland within the Eastern Territory should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the construction of transportation facilities within the boundaries of the development, the construction of those transportation facilities outside the boundaries of the development which are needed to provide service to the development in accordance with City standards and the payment of a development impact fee to finance the development's portion of costs of the transportation network; and, The City Council finds that the legislative findings and determinations set forth in Ordinance No.2802 and No. 2823 continue to be true and correct; and The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" dated July 2002, that certain amendments to Chapter 3.54 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code are necessary in order to assure that there are sufficient funds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve the eastern territories by the development impact fee; and, The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the meeting, the City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City Council in the ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all development in the eastern territories for which building permits have not been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare and in order to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and, The City Council finds that the amount of the amended fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities; and, The City Council finds that it is appropriate to refine the fees for industrial and commercial land uses, including commercial high-rise, to reflect the findings of the analyses of the industrial and commercial trip origination and destination whereby only estimated trips generated from outside the Transportation Development Impact Fee boundary shall be used in determining the fee for industrial, commercial and commercial high-rise land uses; and The City Council finds it is necessary to ensure the timely payment of the "DIF program monitoring" cost item, included in Table H "Program Funding Requirements" of the financial and engineering study, "Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" dated July, 2002, to adequately fund ongoing and future administration activities and studies. 2 JO- ;)f SECTION 2: Finding of Urgency That the City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds that it is necessary that its development impact fee for transportation facilities go into effect immediately in order that all properties in the eastern section of the City pay their fair share of the cost of public transportation improvements relating to the impacts caused by their development. Immediate implementation of this fee is necessary due to the current and immediate threat to public safety which will result should there be a shortfall in the amount of money necessary to pay for the various transportation facilities thereby resulting in severe congestion and failure of the public transportation network necessary to serve the increased population. The City Council finds that the prospect of a shortfall, failure of the street system and concerns about an increased charge to remaining property owners constitutes a current, immediate threat to the public health, welfare and safety justifying the immediate imposition of this fee. SECTION 3: That the Development Impact Fee Schedule set forth in Section 3.54.01O(C) of the Municipal Code, and as adjusted annually by the 20 City Construction Cost Index as published monthly in the Engineering News Record, shall be amended to read as follows: C. The amount of the fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance based upon the following schedule: Development Type Transportation Fee Residential (Low density) 0-8 du/gross ac Single family detacHed dwelling $8,180$5,nO/dwelling unit (Medium density»8-20 du/gross ac Single family attacHed d'.'ielling$6,544$1,73€i/dwelling unit (High density) >20 du/gross ac Multifamily dwelling $4,908$3,552/dwelling unit Senior housing $3,272$2,36g/dwelling unit Commercial $171,780$l4g,000/gross ac High rise Gcommercial (high rise) $278,120$238,gOO/gross ac Industrial $65,440$gg,gOO/gross acre Golf course $572,600$111,400/ golf course Medical center $531,700$n1,gOO/gross acre The density of the development type shall be based on the number of dwelling units per gross acre for single-family or multi-family residential and shall be based upon the densities identified on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map entitling the development unless otherwise approved in writing by the city manager's designee. The gross acreage of the development type for commercial, high rise commercial, industrial and medical center shall include the gross acreage of all parcels that the city manager's designee deems necessary for the development project. 3 d)O -;;1 The amount of the fee shall be adjusted, starting on October I, 2003 ;WOO, and on each October I st thereafter, based on the one-year change (from July to July) in the 20 City Construction Cost Index as published monthly in the Engineering News Record. For reference purposes, the July 2002+9JW., 20 City Construction Cost Index is 6604.82 6076.25. Adjustments to the above fees based upon the Construction Cost Index shall be automatic and shall not require further action of the city council. The city council shall at least annually review the amount of the fee. The city council may adjust the amount of the fee as necessary to reflect changes in the type, size, location or cost of the transportation facilities to be financed by the fee, changes in land use designations in the city's general plan, and upon other sound engineering, financing and planning information. Adjustments to the above fees resulting from the above reviews may be made by resolution amending the master fee schedule. SECTION 4: That the Definitions as set forth in Section 3.54.020 of the Municipal Code, shall be amended to read as follows: 3.54.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defined herein, unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended. A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the Uniform Building Code. B. "Director of Public Works" means the director of public works, the director of public works' designee or the city manager's designee. C. "Density" means dwelling units per gross acre identified for each planning area shown on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map or as determined by the city manager's designee. D.E-, "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development. E.G. "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision ordinance of the city. F.Ih"Deve1opment project" or "development" means any activity described in Section 66000 of the State Government Code. G.E. "Eastern Territories" generally means that area of the city located between Interstate 805 on the west, the city sphere of influence boundary on the east and northeast, the city boundary on the north and the city's southern boundary on the south, excepting Villages 9 and 10 of the Otay Ranch (the University Site) as shown on the map entitled "Figure In of the update of the financial and engineering studies. The property known as Bonita Gateway located at the northeast quadrant of Bonita Road and 1-805 intersection is also included. H.R- "Financial and engineering studies" means the "Interim Eastern Area Development Impact Fee for Streets" study prepared by George T. Simpson and Willdan Associates dated November 1987; the "Eastern Area Development Fee for Streets" study prepared by Willdan Associates dated November 19, 1990; the Eastern Development Impact Fee for Streets - 1993 Revision" study prepared by city staff dated July 13, 1993; anà the 4 ,,(- :>0' ~..,! i/-:) t/' study prepared by Project Design Consultants ("Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets, 1999 Update") dated October 25 1999;, and the study prepared by Willdan ("Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" dated July 2002), which are on file in the office of the city clerk. I.G, "High rise commercial" means commercial office usage five or more stories in height. J. "Transportation facility project" means that project or portion of project which involves the specified improvements authorized by Sectiou 3.54.030. SECTION 5: That the transportation facilities to be financed by the fee as set forth III Section 3.54.030(A) shall be amended as follows: 3.54.30 Transportation facilities to be financed by the fee. A. The transportation facilities and programs to be financed by the fee established by this chapter are: I * State Route 125 from San Miguel Road to Telegraph Canyon Road. 2.* State Route 125 fÌom Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway Orange Avenue. 3. ** Telegraph Canyon Road from Paseo Del Rey to east of Pas eo Ladera/north side 3a.** Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 interchange/Phase II. 4. ** Telegraph Canyon Road / Phase I Rutgers Avenue to Eastlake Boundary. 5. ** Telegraph Canyon Road / Phase II Paseo Ladera to Apache Drive. 6. ** Telegraph Canyon Road / Phase III Apache Drive to Rutgers Avenue. 7. East H Street / 1-805 Interchange modifications. 8** East H Street from Eastlake Drive to SR-125. 9.** Otay Lakes Road from Camino del Cerro Grande to Ridgeback Road. lOa. La Media Road from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Palomar Street. lOb. La Media Road from East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway. 11. Bonita Road from Otay Lakes Road to Central Avenue. 12. Bonita Road from Central Avenue to San Miguel Road. 13* San Miguel Road from Bonita Road to SR-125. 14** East H Street from State Route 125 to San Miguel Road. 15.** Proctor Valley Road (East H Street) from San Miguel Road to Hunte Parkway. 16.** Olympic Parkway from Brandywine Avenue to Paseo Ranchero. 17",,** East Palomar Street from Oleander Avenue to Medical Center Drive SlInÐow Eastern BOlllldary. 17a. ** East Palomar Street from Medical Center Drive to Paseo Ladera. l7b. East Palomar Street from Paseo Ladera to Sunbow eastern boundary to Medical Center Drive. 18.** Telegraph Canyon Road from eastern boundary of Eastlake to Hunte Parkway. 19.** Eastlake Parkway from Otay Lakes Road to Eastlake High School southern boundary. 20.** Hunte Parkway from Proctor Valley Road to Telegraph Canyon Road. 21. ** Hunte Parkway from Telegraph Canyon Road to Club House Drive. 5 ;J()~3/ 2Ia.** Hunte Parkway from Club House Soath Greens'.'i@v.'Driveto Olympic Parkway. 22. Olympic Park'Nay from Eastlaks Parkway to Rante Parkway. 22a. Olympic Parkway from SDGE easement to Hunte Parkway. 22b. Olympic Parkway from SR 125 to SDGE easement. 23a. ** Paseo Ranchero from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Palomar Street. 23b. **Paseo Ranchero from East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway. 24a. Olympic Parkway from Paseo Ranchero to La Media Road. 24b. Olympic Parkway from La Media Drive to East Palomar Street. 24c. Olympic Parkway from East Palomar Street to SR125. 24d. Olympic Parkway from SRl25 to Eastlake Parkway. 25a. Olympic Parkway / 1-805 Interchange modifications to Brandywine Avenue. 25b. ** Olympic Parkway from Oleander to Brandywine 26a. ** East Palomar Street from eastern Sunbow Boundary to Paseo Ranchero to Santa Maria. 26b. ** East Palomar Street from Sunbow eastern boundary to Santa Maria 27. Deleted project (East Palomar Street at I-805 interchange). 28. Otay Lakes Road from Hunte Parkway to Wueste Road 29.** Olympic Parkway from Hunte Parkway to Wueste Road OIYInJ3ic Training C@nter. Otay Lakes Road from SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway. Eastlake Parkway from Fenton Street to Otay Lakes Road. East "H" Street from 1-805 to HiddenVista Drive. East "H" Street eastbound to Terra Nova Shopping Center. Bonita Road at Otay Lakes Road intersection. Otay Lakes Road at Elmhurst Drive intersection. East "H" Street at Otay Lakes Road intersection. Traffic Signal Interconnection / Eastern Territories. EastLake Parkway fÌom Eastlake High School southern boundary to Olympic Parkway. East "H" Street from Paseo Del Rey to Tierra del Rey. Bonita Road from 1-805 to Plaza Bonita Road. Alta Road fÌom SRI25 to Eastlake Parkway. Brandywine/Medical Center Drive from Medical Center Court to Olympic Parkway. Birch Road from La Media Road to SR 125. Birch Road from SRI25 to Eastlake Parkway. Deleted project (Birch Road from Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway). Eastlake Parkway from Olympic Parkway to Birch Road. Eastlake Parkway from Birch Road to Alta Road Rock Mountain Road. Mt. Miguel Road from Proctor Valley Road North to SR 125. South to Proctor Valley Road North. 47b. Mt. Miguel Road from SR 125 to Proctor Valley Road (South), previously named East "H" Street. Hunte Parkway fÌom Olympic Parkway to Eastlake Parkway Birch Road. Deleted project. [La Media Road bridge crossing the Otay River (one-half the cost)]. 30. 31. 32a. 32b. 33** 34.** 35** 36. 37. 38** 39.** 40. 41. ** 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47a. 48. 50. 6 J)Ô -3d- 51. La Media Road from Olympic Parkway to Birch Road. 52. La Media Road from Birch Road to Rock Mountain Road. 53. La Media Road from Rock Mountain Road to Main Street (previously named Otay Valley Road). 54. La Media Road from Main Street Ota-y Vall@y Road to southern city boundary. 55. Otay Lakes Road from East H Street to Telegraph Canyon Road. 56a. Main Street Otay Valley Road from Nirvana ~ to Rock Mountain Road. 56b. Main Street Otay Valley Road from Rock Mountain Road to La Media Road. 56c. Main Street Otay Valley Road from La Media Road to SR125. 56d. Main Street at 1-805 Underpass widening. 57. Paseo Ranchero from Olympic Parkway to Main Street Otay Vall@y Road. 58a. Paseo Ranchero from Main Street Otay Valley Road to southern City boundary (excludes inclllding bridge crossing the Otay River) (one l1alfthe cost). 58b. Paseo Ranchero bridge crossing the Otay River (0% of cost). 59a. Proctor Valley Road from Hunte Parkway to RoIling Hills Ranch Neighborhood 9 west entrance eastern City boundary at '..!pper Ota-y Reservoir. 59b. Proctor Valley Road from Rolling Hills Ranch Neighborhood 9 west entrance to easterly city boundary. 60. Rock Mountain Road from SRI25 to Main Street Otay Valley Road. 61. Willow Street from Bonita Road to Sweetwater Road (including bridge over Sweetwater River). 62. East H Street from Buena Vista Way to Otay Lakes Road. 63. Intersection signalization area wide within the Eastern Territories. 64. Development impact fee program support. * Project is now included in the interim pre-SRl25 transportation facility fee. ** Project has been completed. SECTION 6: That the developer authorization for construction of transportation facilities as set forth in Section 3.54.040(B) shall be deleted: B. A developer may re~ueÐt authori3ation from the city cOllncil to construct one or more of the facilities listed in CVMC 3.54.030. SECTION 7: That the developer construction of transportation facilities as set forth III Section 3.54.040(C) shall be amended as follows: B.G. Whenever a developer requests reimbursement, or a credit against fees, for work to be done or paid for by the developer under subsections (A) eF-fE) of this section, the request shall be submitted in writing to the city manager's designee. council Þefore comm@ncement oftl1e work. 7 ... ,¡If",) ;j ....) t, , "', "', C/I./ .-..... 1. The request shall contain the fGllGwing informatiGn and, if granted, shallÞ@ subject tG th.. fGllGwing conditi9ns: a description of the project with a detailed cost estimate which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project and excludes any work attributable to a specific subdivision project. The estimate is preliminary and the amount of reimbursement or credit against fees is subject to final determination by the city manager's designee. Additional information shall be provided to the city by the developer upon request of the city. I. Detailed deseripti9n Gf the pmject with a preliminary cost ectimate. That portiGn Gf pmject which involves the speeifi@d improv@ments alÜhGrized BY CVMC 3.54.030 is r@ferred tG herein as the transpGrtatiGn facility prGject 2. Such reimbursement or credit against fees shall be subject to the following conditions: :ba. Requirements of Developer. i.& Preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the city; ii.&.-Secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the transportation facility project; iii.60Secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary for the transportation facility project; iV.à.Provision of performance bonds (where the developer intends to utilize provisions for immediate credit, the performance bond shall be 100 percent of the value of the transportation facility project); v.&Payment of all city fees and costs. b.J. The city will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the transportation facility project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the transportation facility project. c.4. The developer shall secure at least three qualified bids for work to be done and shall award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder. The developer may combine the construction of the transportation facility proj ect with other development-related work and award one construction contract for the combined work based on a clearly identified process for determining the low bidder, all as approved by the city manager's designee directGr Gf pUB lie wGrks. Should the construction contract be awarded to a qualified bidder who did not submit the lowest bid for the transportation facility project portion of the contract, the developer will only receive transportation development impact fee IDIF credit based on the lowest bid for the transportation facility portion of the contract. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or charges shall be justified, shall be documented to the satisfaction of the city manager's designee directGr Gf pUBlic works and shall only be reimbursed at the prices for similar work included in the lowest bid for the transportation facility portion of the contract. 5.The developer shall pm vide a detailed CGst estimate which itemizes th9se costs of the eGnstruetion attriButable tG the transportation f-acility project and excludes any wGrk attributable to a specific subdivisiGn project. The ectimate is preliminary and 8 "'O-;¿Li f:~"" .:.; 7 sHbject to final determination by the director of public works upon compl€tion of tHe transportation facility project. dAUpon complying with conditions set forth in Section 3.54.040(B)1. and 2.a. above as determined by the city and upon approval of the estimated cost by the city manager's designee director of public 'Norks, the developer shall be entitled to immediate credit for 50 percent of the estimated cost of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project. Once the developer has received valid bids for the project which comply with Section 3.54.040(B)2.c., entered into binding contracts for the construction of the project, and met the conditions set forth in Section 3.54.040(B)1. and 2.a. above as determined by the city, all of which have been approved by the city manager's designee director of public works, the amount of the immediate credit shall be increased to 75 percent of the bid amount attributable to the transportation facility project. The immediate credits shall be applied to the developer's obligation to pay transportation development impact fees for building permits issued after the establishment of the credit. The developer shall specify tOOw those building permits to which the credit is to be applied at the time the developer submits the building permit applications. f.+'If the developer uses all of the immediate credit before final completion of the transportation facility project, then the developer may defer payment of development impact fees for other building permits by providing to the city liquid security such as cash or an irrevocable letter of credit, but not bonds or set-aside letters, in an amount equal to the remaining amount of the estimated cost of the transportation facility project. g.~When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the city, the developer shall submit verification of payments made for the construction of the transportation facility project to the city. The city manager's designee director of public works shall make the final determination on expenditures which are eligible for credit or cash reimbursement. h.9.After final determination of eligible expenditures has been made by the city manager's designee director of public works and the developer has complied with the conditions set forth in this Section 3.54.040(B) as determined by the city, the final amount of transportation development impact fee credits shall be determined by the city manager's designee. The developer shall receive credit against the deferred fee obligation in an amount equal to the difference between the final expenditure determination and the amount of the 75 percent immediate credit used, if any. The city shall notify the developer of the final deferred fee obligation, and of the amount of the applicable credit. If the amount of the applicable credit is less than the deferred fee obligation, then the developer shall have 30 days to pay the deferred fee. If the deferred fees are not paid within the 30-day period, the city may make a demand against the liquid security and apply the proceeds to the fee obligation. i..w. At the time building permits are issued for the developer's project, the city will incrementally apply credit which the developer has accrued in lieu of collecting the required transportation development impact fees. THe à@velop@r will receive any credit against required developm@nt impact fees incrementally at the time Imilding permits are issued for the developer's project The amount of the credit to be applied to each building permit shall be based upon the fee schedule in effect at 9 f).. 0 ~ ":? ¡é:~ - .::.;:....J , the time of the building permit issuance. The city manager's designee dire¡;tor of fJubli¡; v.'orks shall convert such credit to an EDU basis for residential development and/or a gross acre basis for commercial or industrial development for purposes of determining the amount of credit to be applied to each building permit. If the total eligible construction cost for the transportation facility project is more than the total transportation development impact fees which will be required for the developer's project, then the amount in excess of development impact fees will be paid in cash when funds are available as determined by the city manager,; a reimbursement agreement will be executed; or the developer may waive reimbursement and use the excess as credit against future transportation development impact fee obligations. The city may, in its discretion, enter into an agreement with the developer to convert excess credit into EDU and/or gross acre credits for use against future development impact fee obligations at the fee rate in effect on the date of the agreement. j..l-hThe requirements of tIH£ 61!b&Section 3.54.040(B)fGj may, in the city' s discretion, be modified through an agreement between entered into with the developer and the city and approved by city council. SECTION 8: That the developer construction of transportation facilities as set forth III Section 3.54.040(D) shall be amended as follows: C.Ih Whenever a transportation development impact fee credit is generated by constructing a transportation facility using assessment district or community facility district financing, the credit shall only be applied to the transportation development impact fee obligations within that district. SECTION 9: That Section 3.54.090 is added as follows: 3.54.090 Economic Incentive Credit The city council may authorize the city to participate in the financing of transportation facility projects or portions of transportation facility projects identified in Section 3.54.030. At the time of the appropriation of funds by city council for the construction of an eligible transportation facility, the city shall be eligible to receive a credit known hereafter as an Economic Incentive Credit. Such economic incentive credit may be applied to development impact fee obligations for those projects which the city council determines, in its sole discretion, to be beneficial to the city. The use of the economic incentive credit may be subject to conditions which shall be set forth in a written agreement between the developer of the project and the city and approved by city council. The amount of the credit shall be determined pursuant to Section 3.54.040(B). 10 ø) 3b c.·/\)··.... .... The city may receive Economic Incentive Credit only for those eligible projects (i) identified in Section 3.54.030 and (ii) for amounts of funding not identified in the financial and engineering study, "Eastern Area Development Impact Fee for Streets" dated July 2002. SECTION 10: Expiration of this ordinance This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect 30 days after its adoption. SECTION] I: Time limit for protest and judicial action Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this ordinance shall be brought within the time period as established by law. In accordance with Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), the ninety-day approval period in which parties may protest begins upon the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 12: Effective Date This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon four-fifths vote. Presented by: Approved as to form by: John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works ~~1Yv\~~ Joh . Kaheny City Attorney J :/attorney/ord/tdifurgency cIs 11 ;2ó-31 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-03 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $826,480 FROM THE AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE IN THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND TO REPAY SEWER LOAN AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION NO. 16706 WHEREAS, in 1992, during the Assessment District No. 90-02 proceedings for the Otay Valley Road project (Main Street), Council approved, by Resolution 16706, a loan from the sewer fund of $420,000 to the TDIF Fund to offset the cost of the assessments to the property owners in that area; and WHEREAS, the loan amount and the interest on the loan have been built into the TDIF programs and staff recommends that the loan be repaid this fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the estimated amount for repayment of the loan including interest is $826,480. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby amend the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget by appropriating $826,480 from the available fund balance in the Transportation Development Impact Fee Fund to repay sewer loan authorized by Resolution No. 16706. Presented by Approved as to form by ~~ Joh . aheny City Attorney John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works J:lattomey/reso/appropriation sewer loan pO,3f COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item c>Q/ Meeting Date 8/6/02 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing on the amendment of Open Space District No. 23 (Otay Rio Business Park) Resolution Declaring the results of the Assessment Ballot Tabulation within Open Space District No. 23 (Otay Rio Business Park), ordering maintenance work therein and confirming the diagram and assessment and providing for the levy of the annual assessment therein for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget by appropriating $24,260 from the un-appropriated fund balance of Open Space District 23 for increased maintenance SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works (~/ q' REVIEWED BY: City Manager 4¢o ~ Open Space District No. 23 was originally established on September 15, 1992 to maintain three open space lots and medians along the east side of the Otay Rio Business Park development. The current property owners wish to add a 2800-foot long median on Main Street, which is currently being maintained by contract, to the areas being maintained by the District. On June 18, 2002 Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-210, which initiated the proceedings for the amended annual levy of assessments within Open Space District No. 23 and for the amendment of the areas to be maintained to include the Main Street median in accordance with the provisions of Article XIIID of the California State Constitution. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1. Hold the public hearing, receive testimony, and close the public hearing; 2. Tabulate the results of the Assessment Ballot procedure; and 3. If the tabulation of the Assessment Ballots reveals that a majority protest to the levy of assessments does not exist, approve the above resolution making findings pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; 4. Amend the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget by appropriating $24,260 from the un- appropriated fund balance of Open Space District 23 for increased maintenance BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. Page 2, Item ~ ] Meeting Date 8/6/02 DISCUSSION: Background On September 15, 1992 Council adopted Resolution No. 16810, which established Open Space District No. 23, Otay Rio Business Park (the "District"). This District was established in accordance with the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 to maintain three open space lots, medians and parkways totaling 61,500 square feet. The maintenance of open space areas within the original District has been estimated at $18,864 for Fiscal Year 2002-03. This includes expenses related to the City's Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) for maintaining native open space areas in a natural state. On March 28, 2000, thc City Council accepted the landscape and lighting improvements installed in the approximate 2800 linear-foot Main Street median located east of Nirvana Avenue parallel to the northern border of the Otay Rio Business Park (thc "Main Street Median"). The enhanced landscape serves as a gateway for the amphitheatrc and water park. Acceptance of these improvements anticipated that ongoing maintenance would be accomplished by amending the areas to be maintained within Open Space District 23 to include this landscaped median. The City has invoiced the two property owners in this area for maintenance costs since these improvements were accepted. Costs to maintain the median have been estimated at $24,260 for Fiscal Year 2002-03. On June 18, 2002 Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-210 (Attachment A), which initiated the proceedings to amend Open Space Maintenance District No. 23 by adding the Main Street median and to provide for the levy of annual assessments based on the amended district. The Preliminary Engineer's Report was also approved and the public hearing was set for August 6, 2002 at 4:00 p.m. Assessment Ballots and Assessment Ballot materials were mailed on June 21, 2002 to the addresses listed with the San Diego County Assessor for the two property owners, KnoWs Berry Farm (Knott's Soak City) and Universal Concerts (House of Blues/ Coors Amphitheater). This mailing met the requirements of Article XIIID of the California Constitution, which stipulates that the ballots be mailed a minimum of 45 days prior to the public hearing. Since the ballots were sent to the corporate offices located outside the San Diego area, the local managers were also notified of the mailing. The following are the charges per parcel that were included on the ballots sent to Knott's and Universal Concerts. Note that, since Universal Concerts owns several parcels, the assessment given on the ballot was the total of the assessments on these parcels. Parcel No. Annual Assessment Proper .ty Owner 645-020-17-00 $15,954.83 Knott's Berry Farm 645-021-01-00 $ 593.76 Universal Concerts 645-021-02-00 $ 1,340.74 Universal Concerts 645-021-03-00 $ 2,183.49 Universal Concerts 645-021-34-00 $ 512.35 Universal Concerts Page 3, Item <~ l Meeting Date 8/6/02 645-021-35-00 $ 474.05 Universal Concerts 645 -021-47-00 $15,634.01 Universal Concerts 645-022-11-00 $ 6,430.77 Universal Concerts $43,124.00 In accordance with Article XIIID of the California Constitution, property owners may give testimony at the public hearing for or against the proposed levy of assessments, may submit their Assessment Ballots at any time prior to the close of the public hearing or may withdraw their Assessment Ballots and submit new Assessment Ballots at any time prior to the close of the public hearing. The Assessment Ballots shall remain sealed until the public hearing is closed. At that point, the Assessment Ballots will be tabulated and ~veighted based on the financial responsibility of the property owners. Article XIIID, Section (e) provides that the City Council may not levy the assessments if a majority protest exists. A majority protest exists if the Assessment Ballots submitted in opposition to the assessments exceed the Assessment Ballots in favor of the assessments. If the Assessment Ballots submitted in favor of the assessments exceed the Assessment Ballots in opposition to the assessments and the City Council adopts the above resolution, the District property owners will be assessed the maximum total amount of $43,124 during Fiscal Year 2002-03 in order to maintain the minimum 50 percent reserve required for Open Space Districts in Chapter 17.07 of the Municipal Code. Both the maximum assessment amount and the collectible amount will be set at $478.8363 per acre in order to collect these funds. This maximum assessment amount shall be adjusted each fiscal year by the lesser of the annual pementage change in the San Diego Metropolitan Area All Urban Consumer Price Index or the estimated California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income as contained in the Governor's Budget. On July 23, 2002 Council approved several resolutions adopting the maximum assessment and collectible rates for all the City's Landscape and Lighting Districts. The actual rates (collectibles) for Open Space District 23 were based on the budget of $18,864 for the existing improvements and a projected revenue of $19,261, which were below the maximum allowable rates. If the ballot initiative fails, these funds will be used to maintain the existing improvements. The Main Street median improvements will need to be maintained using other funding methods. Options include continued maintenance by the City's contractor and billing the property owners, or maintenance by the property owners through an agreement with the City. Boundaries of the District and a complete discussion of the areas to be maintained, costs and method of apportionment are provided in the Assessment Engineer's Report (Attachment B). There are no changes from the Preliminary Engineer's Report. Page 4, Item 21 Meeting Date 8/6/02 FISCAL IMPACT: None. The cost to maintain the District improvements is paid by the property owners through the levy and collection of annual assessments. Annual staff and administration costs of $2,900 are also included in the increased assessment amount of $24,260 for the median maintenance. The City's General Fund would be reimbursed for these expenses. Contractual costs of $8,700 are also recovered from this amount, causing no net fiscal impact to the City. The exact amount of the maximum assessment and the collectible will be determined annually. Attachments: A. Resolution No. 2002-210 and Council Agenda Statement B. Assessment Engineer's Report J:\ENGINEER\AGENDA\OSD23 HEARING.EMCDOC FILE# 0725-30-OSD23 RESOLUTION NO. 2002-210 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO PROVIDE FOR THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS IN OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 23 (OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003, AND TO AMEND TItE AREAS TO BE MAINTAINED; APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT; SETI'tNG THE TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, AND ORDERING THE INITIATION OF ASSESSMENT BALLOT PROCEDURES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista has previously formed a District pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of Caiifomia. Such District is known and designated as Open Space District No. 23 (the "District"); and WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to take proceedings to amend the areas to be maintained in the District and provide for the annual levy of assessments for the next ensuing fiscal year to provide for the costs and expenses necessary to pay for the maintenance of the existing areas and proposed additional areas in said District; and WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council the Assessment Engineer's Report, as required by the State of California's "Assessment Law" (Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State of California; the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act-Government Code Section 53750, et seq.; the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 are collectively referred as the "Assessment Law"), and this City Council desires to continue with the proceedings for said annual levy; and WHEREAS, this City Council has now carefully examined and reviewed the Assessment Engineer's Report as presented, and is satisfied with each and ail of the items and documents as set forth therein, and is satisfied that the assessments, on a preliminary basis, have been spread in accordance with the special benefits received from the areas to be maintained, as set forth in the Assessment Engineer's Report and this City Council desires to preliminarily approve such report. NOW, TFIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED BY THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CAI ,IFORNLA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct. 2. Declaration of Intention. The public interest and convenience requires, and it is the intention of this legislative body, to levy and collect assessments to pay the annual costs and expenses for the maintenance and/or servicing of the existing areas and proposed additional area for the above-referenced District, said existing areas and proposed additional area generally described in Exhibit A hereto which is incorporated herein by this reference. 3 Boundaries of District. The existing areas and the proposed additional area to be maintained are of special benefit to the properties within the boundaries of said District. For particulars, reference is made to the boundary map as previously approved by this legislative body, a copy of Resolution 2002-210 Page 2 which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City' of Chula Vista and open for public inspection, and is designated by name of this District. 4. Report of Assessment Engineer. The Assessment Engineer's Report, as presented, is hereby approved on a preliminary basis, and is ordered to be filed in the office of the City Clerk as a permanent record and to remain open to public inspection. Reference is made to said Assessment Engineer's Report for a full and detailed description of the existing areas and the additional area proposed to be maintained, the boundaries of the District, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the District. 5. Assessments. All costs and expenses of the maintenance and incidental expenses have been apportioned and distributed to the benefiting parcels in accordance with the special benefits received from the existing and/or proposed additional improvements. Assessments are proposed to be levied within the range of assessments proposed to be established for properties within the District as set forth in the Assessment Engineer's Report. The maximum assessment within such range shall be increased or decreased every fiscal year thereafter by the lesser of the annual percentage change in the San Diego Metropolitan Area All Urban Consumer Price Index (all items) or the annual percentage increase, ff any, in the California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income as contained in the Governor's budget published every January. 6. Public Hearing. Notice is hereby given that a public hearing is hereby scheduled in the regular meeting place of this legislative body located at 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910 on the following date and time: August 6, 2002 at 4:00 P.M. At such time the legislative body will consider and finally determine whether to levy the proposed annual assessment. The City Council shall coasider all objections or protests, if any, to the armuai assessment proposed to be levied within the District. The City Council shall also determine whether assessment ballots submitted pursuant to the Assessment Law in opposition to the assessments proposed to be levied within the District exceed assessment ballots submitted in favor of such proposed assessments, as applicable. Pursuant to provisions of the Assessment Law, each record owner of property located within the District proposed to be assessed has the right to submit an assessment ballot in favor of or in opposition to the proposed assessment. Assessment ballots will be mailed to the record owner of each parcel located within the District subject to the proposed assessment. Each such owner may complete such assessment ballot and thereby indicate their support for or opposition to the proposed assessment. All such assessment ballots may be delivered by mail or personal delivery to the City Clerk at the following address at or before 4:00 P.M. on August 6, 2002: Resolution 2002-210 Page 3 City Clerk City of Chula Vista 276 Fourt~ Avenue Chnla Vista, CA 91910 All asseasment ballots must be received by the City Clerk prior to the close of thc public testimony during the public hearing on August 6, 2002. AN ASSESSMENT BALLOT RECEIVED Ae-I'~R THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL NOT BE TABULATED EVEN THOUGH THE POSTMARK ON THE ENVELOPE TRANSMITF1NG THE ASSESSMENT BALLOT IS DATED ON OR BEFORE AUGUST 6, 2002. At the conclusion of the public hearing on August 6, 2002, the City Council shall cause the f'mal tabulation of the assessment ballots timely received. If a majority protest exists as to the levy of the proposed assessment, the City Council shall not impose the assessment proposed to be levied. A majority pmt~st to the levy of an assessment exists if, upon the conclusion of the public hearing, assessment ballots submitted in opposition to the assesments exceed the assessment ballots submitted in favor of such assessments. In tabulating the assessment ballots, the ballots shall be weighted according to the proportional fmancial obligation of the affected property. ff a majority protest is found to exist, the City Council may nevertheless levy the assessment in the same amount as levied in Fiscal Year 2001/2002. 7. Notice of Public Hearing. The City Clerk is hereby directed to mail notice pursuant to the Assessment Law of the public hearing and assessment ballot proceedings and the adoption of the Resolution of Intention and of the filing of the Assessment Engineer's Report, together with the assessment ballot materials, to the record owners of all real property located within the District. 8. Proceedings Inquiries. For any and all information relating to these proceedings, including information relating to protest procedure, your attention is directed to the person designated below: John Lippit Director of Public Works City of Chnla Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 (619) 691-5021 9. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective upon its adoption. The provisions of this resolution shall supercede the provisions of Resolution No. 2002-194 adopted on June 11, 2002 only as such resolution applies to the District. Resolution 2002-210 Page 4 Presented by Approv6d as to form by Jo}(a P. Lippitte ' ' John ~{. Kaheny ~ Pfiblic Works Director ~/Attomey ~ PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, this 18~ day of June, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas and Horton NAYS: Councihnembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None Shiney no~n, May6r ' ATI'EST: Susan Bigelow, City Clerk STATE OF CAI.IFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2002-210 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 18th day of June, 2002. Executed this 18tl~ day of June, 2002. Susan Bigelow, Cit3/Clerk~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~ Meeting Date 6/18/02 ITEM TITLE: Resolution Declaring its intention to provide for the levy and collection of assessments in Open Space Maintenance District No. 23 (Otay Rio Business Park) for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 and to amend the areas to be maintained, approving the preliminary Engineer's Report, and setting the time and place £or a public hearing, and ordering the initiation of assessment ballot procedures SUBMITTED BY: Director o£Public Works~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager ,~( ~e/ Open Space District No. 23 was originally established on September 15, 1992 to maintain three open space lots and medians along the east side of the Otay Rio Business Park development. The current property owners wish to add a 2800~foot long median on Main Street, which is currently being maintained by contract, to the areas being maintained by the District. Passage of this resolution will initiate the proceedings for the annual levy of assessments within Open Space District No. 23 and for the amendment ogthe areas to be maintained to include the Main Street median in accordance with the provisions of Article XIIID of the California State Constitution. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution to: 1. Declare the intention of the City Council to provide for the levy of annual assessments within Open Space Maintenance District No. 23. 2. Declare the intention of the City Council to amend the areas to be maintained by adding the Main Street median. 3. Approve the preliminary Engineer's Report. 4. Order the initiation of ballot procedures in accordance with Article XIIID of the California Constitution 5. Direct the City Clerk to notice the public hearing 6. Set August 6, 2002, at 4:00 p.m. as the date and time for the public heating. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Page 2, Item (~ Meeting Date 6/18/02 Background On September 15, 1992 Council adopted Resolution No. 16810 (Attachment A), which established Open Space District No. 23, Otay Rio Business Park (the "District"). This District was established in accordance with the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 to maintain three open space lots, medians and parkways totaling 61,500 square feet. The annual maintenance cost was estimated at $16,260.00. This was to include the maintenance of theme walls, monuments and brow ditches located within open space lots. It was anticipated during the formation of the District that additional open space areas would be turned over for maintenance in future after additional maps were recorded. After formation of this Open Space District, the original plan to develop this area into an industrial park changed. These parcels were developed into Coors Amphitheater (owned by House of Blues) and a water park (currently known as Knott's Soak City). The areas maintained by the District include only medians and parkways along Heritage Road and Entertainment Circle (Otay Rio Road). The City has been required to keep the remaining open space in a natural state, with expenses related to the City's Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP). On March 28, 2000, the City Council accepted the landscape and lighting improvements to be installed in the approximate 2800 linear-foot Main Street median located east of Nirvana Avenue parallel to the northern border of the Otay Rio Business Park (the "Main Street Median"). The enhanced landscape serves as a gateway for the amphitheatre and water park. Acceptance of these improvements anticipated that ongoing maintenance would be accomplished by amending the areas to be maintained within Open Space District 23 to include this landscaped median. As of August 1, 2000, the improvements consisting of palm trees with uplighting and groundcover at both ends of the Main Street Median had been completed. Due to the timing of the completed construction, the City contracted with Blue Skies Landscape Maintenance Company to maintain these improvements for a period of one year. The House of Blues and Knott's Soak City reimbursed the City for the expenditure to maintain the Main Street Median during Fiscal Year 2000-01. Originally, it was anticipated that the District would be amended to include maintenance of the Main Street Median commencing with Fiscal Year 2001-02. However, City staff subsequently entered into discussions with Knott's and House of Blues, who had concluded that the landscaping work for both the Main Street Median and the other areas being maintained by the District could be performed more cost effectively by having the property owners contract directly with the firm performing this work for the City. Therefore, the property owners were not assessed for Open Space District 23 during Fiscal Year 2001-02, and a maintenance agreement with the City was prepared for the property owners' signatures. After a considerable amount of review and discussion, the property owners decided that it would not be desirable for them to accept the liability associated with performing the landscaping on City rights-of-way. On February 21, 2002 Knott's and House of Blues were invoiced a total of $37,840 to pay for maintenance for the period of July 1, 2001 Page 3, Item ~ Meeting Date 6/18/02 through December 31, 2002. This includes $23,890 for the area within the existing district and $13,950 for the Main Street Median. The revenue was collected through December 31, 2002 in anticipation that such costs for the amended Open Space District would be included in the annual assessments placed on the tax roll for Fiscal Year 2002- 03. Since revenue from the tax roll is generally not available until January, the City needed to collect funds to cover the estimated expenditures for July 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002. Open Space District Amendment Proposition 218, which took effect on July 1, 1997 and is incorporated into Article XIID of the California Constitution, requires that all existing, new, or increased assessments comply with the act unless they fall under several exempted categories. Districts established for landscaping and lighting maintenance are not considered automatically exempt. The original developers of the Otay Rio Business Park unanimously agreed to the formation of an open space district and thus the existing assessments authorized to be levied within the District are not directly subject to Proposition 218 requirements. Expanding the area to be maintained by the District, however, may subject the assessments levied within the District to the Proposition 218 requirements, which include prepahng a new Engineer's Report and conducting an assessment ballot procedure among all property owners. The boundaries of Open Space District No. 23 will remain unchanged and are consistent with Chula Vista Tract 87-60tay Rio Business Park Units 1, 2, 3, and 4. It has been determined that no additional properties can reasonably be considered to specially benefit from the Main Street Median. Although there are several industrial properties to the north of Main Street near Nirvana Avenue, a landscaped median does not really enhance the utility of industrial land. The land use designation of the vacant land east of Heritage Road, which is across from the pamels owned by Knott's and House of Blues, does not permit development. All other property bordering the median is permanently designated as open space. The amendment to the areas to be maintained will increase the amount of open space to be maintained by the District to include the Main Street Median located east of Nirvana Avenue parallel to the northern border of the Otay Rio Business Park. The median is approximately 2800 feet in length and approximately 1.03 acres in size. Boundaries of the District and a complete discussion of the areas to be maintained, costs and method of apportionment are provided in the Preliminary Engineer's Report (Attachment B). The total cost for the existing maintenance, based on Fiscal Year 2002- 03 dollars, is $18,864. This is mom than the original estimate of $16,260. However, since the maximum acreage rate adopted in Fiscal Year 2001-02 was 40 pement higher than the original rate calculated in Fiscal Year 1992-93, the new annual assessment amount may actually be considered a decrease from the maximum amount allowed under the District. Page 4, Item Meeting Date 6/18/02 The cost of the median maintenance is estimated at $24,260. This assumes once per year trimming for each tree. Other discussion is included in the preliminary Engineer's Report. Since the levy of the assessments within the District must ~omply with the provisions of Article XIIID, the method of allocating each property's fair share needs to be reevaluated to insure that it also complies with the substantive requirements of Article XIIID. Based on the advice of the City's Special District Counsel, it was determined that the use of acreage would be a reasonable and justifiable method to spread the cost over the parcels. This is the methodology which has been used to apportion the assessments for the District. Total area of the parcels within the District (excluding open space areas) is 90.06 acres. Based on the total cost of $43,124, the assessment cost per acre will he established at $478.8363. This maximum assessment amount shall be adjusted each fiscal year by the lesser of the annual percentage change in the San Diego Metropolitan Area All Urban Consumer Price Index or the estimated California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income as contained in the Governor's Budget. There was an actual fund balance of $9049 for Open Space District 23 as of July 1, 2001. The payments made by Knott's and House of Blues during Fiscal Year 2001-02 provide for a reserve of $12,613 to cover expenses during the first six months of Fiscal Year 2002-03. Since these combined funds provide an approximate reserve of 50 percent, it is recommended that the City levy the maximum assessment amount for the District for Fiscal Year 2002-03. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The cost to maintain the District improvements is paid by the property owners through the levy and collection of annual assessments. Annual staff and administration costs of $6580 are also included in the assessment. The City's General Fund would be reimbursed for these expenses. Contractual costs of $15,850 are recovered fi;om the amount collected, causing no net fiscal impact to the City. The exact amount of the maximum assessment and the collectible will be determined annually. Attachments: A. Resolution No. 16810 and Council Agenda Statement B. Preliminary Engineer's Report JSENGINEERL~,GENDA\OSD23REV2.EMC.DOC FILE# 0725-30-OSD23 ASSESSMENT ENGINEER'S REPORT OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 23) July 16, 2002 Introduction On August 18, 1992, the Chula Vista City Council accepted the Engineer's Report and initiated the proceedings for the formation of the landscape and lighting maintenance district for the Otay Rio Business Park (Open Space District No. 23) (the "District"). A public hearing was subsequently held on September 15, 1992 and Cotmcil authorized the formation of the District in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. Boundaries of the District and open space areas to be maintained are shown on Exhibit A. The botmdaries of the District originally corresponded to the boundaries of Chula Vista Tract 87-60tay Rio Business Park Units 1, 2, 3 and 4. The District boundaries will remain the same; however, a final map was approved only for Unit 1 (Map 12458). The following parcels are included within the District boundaries: 645-020-12, 13,15 and 16 Undeveloped Open Space 645 -020-17 645-021-01, 02, 03, 34, 35 and47 645-021-44 Landscaped Open Space 645-022-11 The landscaped open space areas within the District include medians and parkways along Heritage Road and the portion of Entertainment Circle (Otay Rio Road) perpendicular to Heritage Road. There is also approximately 79 acres of open space that is part of the City's Multiple Species Conservation Program. These open space lots need to be maintained in a natural state and cannot therefore be developed. The proposed additional area to be maintained includes landscape and lighting improvements installed in the Main Street median, which is approximately 2,800 feet in length and is located east of Nirvana Avenue parallel to the northern border of the Otay Rio Business Park. The area also includes ground cover and a row of palm trees. It serves as a gateway for the Coors (House of Blues) Amphitheatre and Knott's Soak City entertainment venues. The median has previously been maintained through an agreement between the City and landscape maintenance firm. The House of Blues and Knott's Soak City have reimbursed the City for the cost of this contract. Proposition 218, which took effect on July 1, 1997, requires that all existing, new, or increased assessments comply with this constitutional amendment unless they fall under several exempted categories. Districts established for landscaping and lighting maintenance are not considered automatically exempt. The developers of the Otay Rio Business Park did unanimously agree to the original formation of an open space district and thus, the existing assessments and areas being maintained are not directly subject to Proposition 218 requirements. Expanding the area to be maintained by the District, however, may subject the assessments to Proposition 218 requirements. The requirements include preparing a new Engineer's Report and conducting an assessment ballot procedure among all property owners. District Revisions Costs for open space areas located within the parameters of the District are shown on Table 1. The Fiscal Year 2002-03 cost has been determined to be $18,864.00 A separate cost estimate has been prepared for the Main Street median. The total for Fiscal Year 2002-03 is $24,260.00, as shown on Table 2. The estimate for tree maintenance assumes that the palm trees will be trimmed once per year. The professional services category includes the costs associated with amending this open space district. Although this category may be reduced in subsequent fiscal years, some of these funds will be needed to pay for staff costs other than in Public Works Operations. In order to determine what the rate would be for the annual maintenance, the parcels that would specially benefit from the areas to be maintained needed to be determined. Properties with zoning or land use designations as open space were excluded fi:om the assessment. Although some of these parcels would be maintained by the District, the parcels themselves would not be used by the public or any private entity and there would not be a special benefit. Therefore, APN Nos. 645-020-12, 13, 15 and 16, which are unimproved open space areas, will not be assessed for open space district maintenance. Note that a blanket easement over the entire parcel was granted to and accepted by the City for Parcel 645-020-13 on Map 12458. Parcel 645-020-15 is owned by the Environmental Trust and is to be preserved in its native state. The other parcels were zoned agricultural and noted on the City's General Plan as open space. Additionally, Parcel 645-021-44 was offered to and accepted by the City as an open space lot on Map 12458. This lot forms a portion of the landscaped parkway along Heritage Road, so it will also be excluded from the assessment. The parcel to the east of Heritage Road (APN 644-060-11), which is not within the current District boundaries, currently has a General Plan land use designation as open space and cannot be developed. This parcel has therefore not been included within the District, but annexation may be required in the future if the land use designation should change. The other parcels owned by the House of Blues and Knott's will be assessed by the District. This includes both parcels with constructed improvements and parcels with unimproved dirt areas which are used as overflow parking lots. All lots are integral parts of these entertaimnent facilities which benefit as a whole from the areas to be maintained. On the north side of Main Street just east of Nirvana Avenue, there are five parcels zoned and used for industrial purposes. Since landscaping does not enhance the use of industrial property, these parcels have not been included within the District. All other vacant properties adjacent to the landscaped improvements have land use designations either as open space or industrial. Since the median and parkway landscaping enhances the values of the properties in the District as a whole, it has been decided that the assessments would be apportioned based on acreage of the parcels. Total cost of District maintenance is $43,124. Total area of 3 the parcels benefiting from the landscaping is 90.06 Acres. Therefore, the Rate of Assessment for Fiscal Year 2002-03 was determined to be $478.8363. The assessment on each parcel is shown on Table 3. The area determined to be specially benefiting from the areas being maintained is larger than the original area assessed for the District, 55.99 acres, which was based on the original subdivision for Otay Rio Business Park Unit 1. Areas outside this subdivision were not originally charged. The maximum annual assessment shall be increased or decreased every fiscal year thereafter by the lesser of the annual percentage change in the San Diego Metropolitan Area All Urban Consumer Price Index (all items) or the annual percentage increase, if any, in the California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income as contained in the Governor's budget published every January. These factors are currently being used for the City's other Landscaping and Lighting Districts and are included in the Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 17.07.035. The Rate of Assessment recalculated for each Fiscal Year will be the maximum rate billable to the property owners. The end of year Operating Fund Balance and the Reserve Fund Requirement will need to be taken into account when determining the actual billing amounts for the fiscal year. The Reserve Fund is a fund or account that shall be maintained for the District in order to provide necessary cash flow for operation and maintenance during the first six months of the fiscal year, working capital to cover maintenance and repair cost overruns, or unanticipated maintenance expenses and funding shortfalls resulting from delinquencies that may ar/se in connection with the collection of the assessments. The Reserve Fund Requirement shall be a minimum of 50 percent and a maximum of 100 percent of the Total Budget Amount for the upcoming fiscal year. Should there be insufficient funds available to cover a 50 percent Reserve Fund Requirement, the reserve percent shall be as high as allowable at the Rate of Assessment for the upcoming fiscal year. The amount billable to parcels within the District for each fiscal year will therefore be calculated as follows: (Total Budget Amount) + (Reserve Fund Requirement) - (Operating Fund Balance) = (Total Billable Amount) (Total Billable Amount = Billing Rate, which shall be less than or equal to the (Total Number of Acres) Rate of Assessment Based on the actual fund balance in the District on July 1, 2001 and payments made by Knott's and House of Blues during Fiscal Year 2001-02, a reserve of approximately 50 percent of the new Assessment Amount is anticipated. The Billing Rate will therefore be the same as the Rate of Assessment. Since the Billing Rate is equal to the Rate of Assessment, the Billing Rate is permissible. It is my opinion as the Assessment Engineer that: a. The proportionate special benefit derived by each individual parcel assessed has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost ofthe maintenance expenses. b. The assessments do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each parcel. c. Only the special benefits have been assessed. d. There are no publicly owned parcels within the District that receive special benefit from the areas to be maintained. J:IENGINEERIASMTDISTlOSDSIOSD23 Preliminary Engineer's Report v2.doc 5 ,.t"') o 000 o 0 T""" o LO ~ ~ o \ C"0 T""" N I'- \ T""" N 0 o . NOLO o : 0 LO """ CD LO """ CD o ~CD """ '1: \ \ \ /1 =di6:~~~~ I 0 )..ii \ \ co I ,'" \. 8 !:11 ! 8 \\' LO-di/N O:5{liO . :::t~¡! 0 " ' , LO CD)..!¡! 0 <rIll - HI! " Si """ QI/' CD --; if-L- :' ii ! O,:/j I i/j Oil! CD ii¡¡ ! 0',/'1 I 0 I',I,~ "-.J LO 1,1,,1 I S2 I,"~ I "'-I '11,% ~' ....... ',1,'1i; I 'I I,~ ,,... "'I~ I ~ 'I"~ " ',~ -I ", I'I~ :L~ " ,','",\~- I ~\ /j,l¡ 0 ,i]! ~ .,~ / ;g ~j ! :::t Z7/ cò o o N o T""" N o LO """ CD o o C"0 o T""" N o LO """ CD o o T""" T""" o CD o """ """ CD o o co T""" o C"0 o LO """ CD o o I'- o o LO o """ ~ o o """ CD o """ o """ """ CD /::::;;;:..;::;:::::::c: ' =:'-::':.'C /~/. // X:."-\-{,P:-~'é-J0l! , ~ // " " -//.------... I'_//-~/- / o -g. T""" 0\ N\ o LO """ CD o o co o o T""" o LO """ CD ,cr ,ü II- ~ /z /~ /cr !w y~ Z LlJ o o C"0 T""" o N o LO """ CD \ : \ \ I o o I'- o o T""" o LO """ CD o o I'- """ T""" N o LO ~ I I I I I I , I I I I I o o I'- T""" o N o LO """ CD o o T""" T""" N N o ~/ ( i I I I I I I I I o o C"0 o o T""" o LO """ CD ! I I , I I , ,i ./ ! ¡ r - o o LO T""" o N o LO """ CD o o N T""" o N o LO """ CD ~!JII ~~ 'l,t~W6~ is ('I) ~ .¡.,a u ¡ i$ Q) u tS ~ r::: Q) ~ w --' f- ¡:: " 13 ~~ õ z <FJ ~ <U <U ~ -g « :;J " o Q) CJ !l t3 ~ ._ <FJ .¡" " <FJ C .- <U o -.J -:://1 / ö z w (9 w --' N Q <'? (õ 0.: ..: :>: CD o w ~ if: w ~ 0.. w !;;: o TABLEt EXISTING OPEN SPACE DISTRICT COSTS (' \ I'[COR' cosr Plantinl!/ fire clearance $400.00 Landscaping Contract $7,150.00 Backßow Certification $40.00 Gas and Electric $120.00 Trash Collection and Disposal $280.00 Water $4,900.00 Irri2ation System Repair $250.00 Materials and Supplies $1,110.00 City Staff Services $3,680.00 Share of Corporation Yard $380.00 Costs Multiple Species Conservation $554.00 Pro2ram TOTAL $18,864.00 I /1 TABLE 2 COSTS FOR ADDED MEDIAN (' \ I E<;OIn COST Tree Trimminl! $2530.00 Professional Services $4000.00 Landscaoinl! Contract $8700.00 Backflow Certification $80.00 Gas and Electric $720.00 Trash Collection and Disoosal $280.00 Water $4130.00 Irrigation Svstem Renair $190.00 Materials and Suoolies $450.00 City Staff Services (Public $2900.00 Works) Share of Corporation Yard $450.00 Costs TOTAL $24,260.00 I {J I TABLE 3 ASSESSMENT PER PARCEL PARCEL 1\0. \CRE \GE .\SSESSi\IENT 645-020-17-00 33.32 $15,954.83 645-021-01-00 1.24 $593.76 645-021-02-00 2.80 $1,340.74 645-021-03-00 4.56 $2,183.49 645-021-34-00 1.07 $512.35 645-021-35-00 0.99 $474.05 645-021-47-00 32.65 $15,634.01 645-022-11-00 13.43 $6,430.77 TOTAL 90.06 $43,124.00 Ii) /.,. ,? / cY " RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE ASSESSMENT BALLOT TABULATION WITHIN OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 23 (OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK), ORDERING MAINTENANCE WORK THEREIN AND CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY OF THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT THEREIN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has initiated proceedings for the levy of the annual assessment on property within an existing maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the "Landscaping Act"), Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State of California ("Article XIIID") and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act (Government Code Section 53750 and following) (the "Implementation Act") (the Landscaping Act, Article XIIID and the Implementation Act may be referred to collectively herein as the "Assessment Law") to finance the costs and expenses of maintenance of the existing open space and landscaped areas and proposed additional landscaped areas therein, such maintenance district known and designated as Open Space Maintenance District No. 23 (Otay Rio Business Park) (the "District"), and, WHEREAS, at this time all notice, public hearing and assessment ballot procedural requirements have been met relating to the levy of the annual assessments within the District, and, WHEREAS, the City Council previously received and preliminarily approved a report rrom the Assessment Engineer (the "Assessment Engineer's Report") and this City Council is now satisfied with the assessment and diagram and all other matters as contained in the Assessment Engineer's Report as now submitted for final consideration and approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. RECITALS. The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. PROCEDURES. This City Council hereby finds and determines that the procedures for the consideration of the levy of the assessments within the District have been undertaken in accordance with the Assessment Law. SECTION 3. ASSESSMENT BALLOT PROCEDURES Assessment ballots were mailed as required by Assessment Law to the record owners of all properties within the District which are proposed to be assessed. The assessment ballots that were completed and received by the City Clerk prior to the close of the public hearing have been tabulated in accordance with the procedures established by Assessment Law and this City Council and the results of such tabulation have been submitted to this City Council. 1 ;)j.;);';"'" This City Council hereby finds that the assessment ballots submitted in favor ofthe levy of assessments as shown in the Assessment Engineer's Report as weighted in accordance with Assessment Law exceed the assessment ballots submitted in opposition to such levy also as weighted in accordance with Assessment Law. Therefore, no majority protest to the levy of assessments within the District has been found to exist. SECTION 5. DETERMINATION AND CONFIRMATION. Based upon the Assessment Engineer's Report and the testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearing, the City Council hereby makes the following determinations regarding the assessments proposed to be imposed on the properties within the District for Fiscal Year 2002-2003: a. The proportionate special benefit derived by each individual parcel assessed has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the operations and maintenance expenses. b. The assessments do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each parcel from the existing open space and landscaped areas and the additional landscaped areas to be maintained. c. Only the special benefits have been assessed. d. There are no parcels within the District that are owned or used by a local government, the State of California or the United States. The assessments for the properties within the District contained in the Assessment Engineer's Report for the next fiscal year are hereby confirmed and levied upon the respective lots or parcels in the District in the amounts as set forth in such Assessment Engineer's Report. Assessments may be increased in next Fiscal Year and each Fiscal Year thereafter without further compliance with the assessment ballot procedures required under the Assessment Law by the lesser of the annual percentage change in the San Diego Metropolitan Area All Urban Consumer Price Index (all items) or the annual percentage increase, if any, in the California Fourth Quarter Per Capita Personal Income as contained in the Governor's budget published every January. SECTION 6. ORDERING OF MAINTENANCE. The public interest and convenience requires, and this legislative body does hereby order the maintenance work to be made and performed as said maintenance work is set forth in the Assessment Engineer's Report and as previously declared and set forth in the Resolution ofIntention. SECTION 7. FILING WITH CITY CLERK. assessment shall be filed in the Office of the City Clerk. certified copy thereof, shall be open for public inspection. The above-referenced diagram and Said diagram and assessment, and the SECTION 8. FILING WITH THE COUNTY AUDITOR. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to immediately file a certified copy of the diagram and assessment with the County Auditor. Said filing to be made no later than the 3rd Monday in August. 2 ,.;J I- <) 3 SECTION 9. ENTRY UPON THE ASSESSMENT ROLL After the filing ofthe diagram and assessment, the County Auditor shall enter on the County assessment roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount assessed thereupon, as shown in the assessment. SECTION 10. COLLECTION AND PAYMENT. The assessments shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as County taxes are collected, and all laws providing for the collection and enforcement of County taxes shall apply to the collection and enforcement of the assessments. SECTION 11. FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003. The assessments as above confirmed and levied for these proceedings will provide revenue to finance the maintenance of authorized improvements in the fiscal year commencing July 1,2002 and ending June 30, 2003. Presented by Approved as to form by ~4~' J . Kaheny Ity Attorney ¿:J John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works J:/attorney/res%sd 23 assessment ballot 3 l;J ;- ;} if RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-03 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $24,260 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE OF OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 23 FOR INCREASED MAINTENANCE WHEREAS, Open Space District No. 23 was originally established on September 15, 1992 to maintain three open space lots and medians along the east side of the Otay Rio Business Park development; and WHEREAS, the current property owners wish to add a 2800-foot long median on Main Street, which is currently being maintained by contract, to the areas being maintained by the District; and WHEREAS, on June 18,2002 Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-210, which initiated the proceedings for the amended annual levy of assessments within Open Space District No. 23 and for the amendment of the areas to be maintained to include the Main Street median in accordance with the provisions of Article XIIID of the California State Constitution; and WHEREAS, the cost to maintain the District improvements is paid by the property owners through the levy and collection of annual assessments; and WHEREAS, annual staff and administration costs of $2,900 are included in the increased assessment amount of$24,260 for the median maintenance; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to appropriate $24,260 for the maintenance, however, the City's General Fund will be reimbursed for these expenses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby amend the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget by appropriating $24,260 from the unappropriated fund balance of Open Space 23 for increased maintenance. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works c/ J :/attorney/reso/appropriation] osd 23 ;; /-;J5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No.: ~ Meeting Date: 08/06/02 ITEM TITLE: Public Heating: PCM-03-03, Consideration of an Improvement Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the EastLake Company, LLC., and consideration of a proposal to repeal an agreement between the City of Chuta Vista and the EastLake Development Company and a Development Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals. Resolution of the City of Chula Vista City Council approving the Eastlake Village Center North Improvement Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the EastLake Company LLC and authorizing the Mayor to execute the agreement. Resolution of the City of Chula Vista City Council repealing an agreement between the City of Chula Vista and EastLake Development Company regarding a Community Trail Pedestrian Facility between Eastlake I and Eastlake II. Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista repealing the Development Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals for 30.4 acres north of Otay Lakes Road and west of Eastlake Parkway. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building~~ Director of Public REVIEWED BY: City ManagerL~,°~ (4/SthsVote: Yes No X This item consists of: 1) approving an improvement agreement between the City of Chula Vista and The EastLake Company, LLC; 2) repealing an agreement between the City of Chula Vista and The EastLake Development Company, executed on January 23, 1990; and 3) repealing the previously adopted development agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, executed on July 2, 1992. The project involves two separate parcels: a 54.5-acre site north of Otay Lakes Road between the future SR-125 freeway alignment and EastLake Parkway and 13.6 acres on the north side of Otay Lakes Road east of EastLake Parkway (see Locator). The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that portions of the subject Improvement Agreement (trail enhancements and park and ride spaces) have been addressed by the previous EIR for the EastLake I Sectional Planning Area (SPA) or the MND for the EastLake Village Center North project (IS-01-042). The transit station component is speculative at this time, and environmental review in accordance with CEQA will be required at the time detailed plans are Page 2, Item No.: ~ Meeting Date: 08/06/02 developed. The other components of the Agreement are not considered projects under CEQA. No further environmental analysis is required for the Improvement Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt attached Resolutions and Ordinance approving: 1) an improvement agreement between the City of Chula Vista and The EastLake Company, LLC; 2) repealing an agreement between the City of Chula Vista and The EastLake Development Company, executed on January 23, 1990; and 3) repealing previously adopted development agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals executed on July 2, 1992. BOARDS AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Because the Planning Commission met a~er this report was completed, a summary of the Commission's discussion and recommendation will be presented at the City Council heating. DISCUSSION The following paragraphs provide a brief overview of the previously adopted the agreement for the community trail pedestrian bridge and Kaiser Development Agreement. Community trail and pedestrian facility between EastLake I and EastLake II On January 23, 1990, the City of Chula Vista entered into an agreement entitled "Agreement Regarding a Community Trail and Pedestrian Facility between EastLake I and EastLake II" (hereby referred to as the pedestrian trail agreement) with the EastLake Development Company (predecessor to The EastLake Company) to construct and secure financing for a pedestrian bridge (or altemative acceptable to the City Engineer) over Otay Lakes Road at the intersection with EastLake Parkway, which connects the community trails in EastLake I and the EastLake Greens neighborhood (EastLake II SPA). The pedestrian bridge obligation by the EastLake Company was to be fulfilled prior to or concurrent with the construction of EastLake commercial and retail centers located north of Otay Lakes Road and west of EastLake Parkway. On January 5, 1990, The EastLake Company executed a bond in the mount of $470,000 for the construction of the pedestrian bridge. Kaiser Development Agreement On July 2, 1992, the City of Chula Vista entered into a development agreement with the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, a California non-profit public benefit corporation, for the purpose of assuring the hospital's participation in the construction and financing of public facilities, and vesting the Hospital's right to develop and maintain the first two phases of the medical center project at the densities and intensities set forth in the existing approvals. The agreement also granted the Kaiser Foundation the right to develop the third phase of its medical center project subject only to the traffic condition stated in the Development Agreement. The benefits to the City under this Development Agreement are outlined in sections 1.7 of the Development Agreement. Page 3, Item No.: f~ Meeting Date: 08/06/02 Analysis EastLake Village Center North Improvement Agreement The Village Center North Improvement Agreement is intended tb secure the construction of transit facilities along EastLake Parkway (east and west sides) and establish Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) credits for the project site. The potential futm'e transit facility would be served by the Chula Vista Transit and MTDB's regional transit system, which is currently being planned. The new EastLake Village Center North Improvement Agreement involves two parcels totaling approximately 68.1 acres, commonly known as the EastLake Village Center North. The 54.5-acre parcel located on the west side of EastLake Parkway is hereby referenced as the western parcel, and the 13.6-acre parcel located on the east side of EastLake Parkway is hereby referenced as the eastern parcel. The new Improvement Agreement is intended to enhance the community pedestrian trail development, transit facilities and financing of these public facilities. The Improvement Agreement components are summarized in the following paragraphs: 1. The recently approved Village Center North commercial center project features restaurants and retail shops that will generate pedestrian activity connecting the east (future commercial site) and the north (future industrial employment site). This Improvement Agreement provides for transit facilities and additional community trail enhancements, not included in the original community trail design. These improvements will benefit the commercial center patrons, business center employees and EastLake residents. These additional amenities to the existing at-grade crossings are intended to provide a convenient and safe pedestrian trail. a. The enhancements consist of seating/shelter nodes between a future transit station on the west side of EastLake Parkway, just south of Fenton Street, and the newly created Research and Limited Manufacturing parcel at the north end of the village center (see Figure 2A and 2B). b. EastLake will grant the City Irrevocable Offers to Dedicate (IOD) for both transit facilities (see Figure 3A and 3B) and design and construction documents, as well as installation bond to guarantee the construction of these facilities. EastLake agrees to provide for the maintenance of the pedestrian trail nodes. 2. The installation bond is for a period of 10 years from the date of this agreement. If within this time the City have not requested EastLake to construct said facility, the obligation to design and construct such facilities and dedicate the land for the transit station will be terminated. 3. EastLake agrees to provide an easement within the eastern parcel for 10 Park and Ride spaces. These spaces shall be marked to indicate that the spaces are for shared use of commercial center patrons and park and ride users. EastLake also agrees to construct such facility as part of the parcel's development program. Page 4, Item No.: f~2~ Meeting Date: 08/06/02 4. TDIF Credits: Pursuant to Ordinance No. 22521, as amended, the City has adopted a transportation facility development impact fee ("TD1F") program, which is applicable to the Property. In connection with EastLake's obligation to pay TDIF, the following provisions shall apply to the Property. Western Parcel. The City acknowledges that EastLake has 933 equivalent dwelling units ("EDU") credits, which EastLake may use only for the purpose of reducing its obligation to pay TDIF on the Western Parcel. the number of EDUs for the Western Parcel shall be 884. Eastern Parcel. The City agrees that as of the Effective Date all TDIF associated with or allocatable to the Eastern Parcel has been fully satisfied by TDIF debt funded by the TDIF Assessment District; provided however, that the City's agreement is conditioned upon the construction and development of the Eastern Parcel. Community trail and pedestrian facility between EastLake I and EastLake II As indicated above, on January 23, 1990, the City of Chula Vista entered into an agreement with the EastLake Company to construct a pedestrian bridge over Otay Lakes Road at the intersection with EastLake Parkway, which connects the community trails in EastLake I and EastLake II at Otay Lakes Road (see Figure 1). The pedestrian bridge requirement was tied to the original EastLake I Town center concept, which contemplated a need for convenient pedestrian connection between the (now Von's) commercial center south of Otay Lakes Road and the Town Center and a community trail along the west side of EastLake Parkway, linking the EastLake I residential neighborhoods (Shores and Hills) to EastLake Greens and Trails (south of Otay Lakes Road). As a result of Kaiser's decision not to build the approved medical center complex and the re- acquisition of the property by The EastLake Company, the development concept changed from a pedestrian oriented center to cater to Kaiser employees to a more traditional commercial center designed to meet the needs of the EastLake and other surrounding communities. As part of the recently approved entitlements for the Village Center North project, and development proposal, Engineering and Planning staffs assessed the need for the pedestrian bridge at the prescribed location (west side of EastLake Parkway over Otay Lakes Road). Based on standards established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for pedestrian bridge usage (pedestrian volume, bridge location and topography), Planning and Engineering staff concluded that the pedestrian bridge will not be an effective route to cross Otay Lakes Road and, therefore not warranted for the following reasons: 1. The ITE standards recommends that heavy pedestrian traffic exist to justify a pedestrian bridge. Construction of such bridge requires prohibition of at-grade crossing, otherwise the bridge use will be minimum, and the traffic signal timing will not improve as a result of having the pedestrian bridge. ITE standards recommend a minimum of 300 pedestrians in a 4-hour peak period in a particular intersection. Engineering staff conducted a pedestrian volume count at the intersection of Otay Lakes Road and EastLake Parkway, and found that Page 5, Item No.: ~ ~ Meeting Date: 08/06/02 the pedestrian traffic is 100 pedestrians in a 4-hour peak-period, significantly less than the recommended pedestrian traffic Volume necessary to justify the installation of a bridge structure over Otay Lakes Road. Based on the ITE standards and Engineering staff's ~edestrian count at the subject intersection, it has been de~ermined that the pedestrian bridge is not warranted at this location. In addition, the existing Von's commercial center and the recently approved Village Center North Market Place commercial center are automobile oriented centers not designed to promote pedestrian flow form center-to-center. For this reason, it is not anticipated that future land uses in the immediate vicinity will generate significant additional pedestrian flow beyond present levels. In staffs opinion, the existing at-grade crosswalk provides safe and convenient pedestrian crossing for the existing and future pedestrian traffic volume crossing Otay Lakes Road. 2. In addition to the above, The ITE recommends that pedestrian bridges be located at mid- block between signalized intersections and at-grade crossings. Preferably, a pedestrian bridge should be located where there is a significant grade difference between the road and adjacent building pads in order to discourage at grade crossings. Otay Lakes Road and the two adjacent commercial centers are about the same elevation, and are connected by a signalized driveway (and pedestrian crossing) at about mid point between EastLake Parkway and the Future SR-125 freeway. Because the existing pedestrian crossings provide convenient at- grade pedestrian crossings at two separate points along Otay Lakes Road and because there is no elevation difference between either sides of the street, the pedestrian bridge cannot be justified. Based on the above factors, it is proposed that the City release EastLake from the obligation to construct the pedestrian bridge over Otay Lakes Road. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals Development Agreement Due to Kaiser Foundation Hospitals' decision to abandon the medical center project slated for the subject site, the development agreement, which benefits both the City and the developer, has become obsolete. The City, however, has retained the 1.2 million dollars received initially in consideration for vesting of hospital's right to develop the property. Certain components of the above mentioned agreement, which remain relevant despite the hospital's decision such as the Transportation Development Impact Fee credit, park and ride facility and other components have been incorporated in the new Village Center North Improvement Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and EastLake. Conclusion For the reasons mentioned above, staff recommends that the Kaiser Development Agreement and the Community Trail improvement agreement be repealed; and that the improvement agreement between the City of Chula Vista and The EastLake Company be approved based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed in the attached City Council Resolution and Ordinance. FISCAL IMPACT Page 6, Item No.: ~ Meeting Date: 08/06/02 The applicant has paid for all cost associated with the processing of the Improvement Agreement and will bc responsible for paying corresponding Development Impact fees and other applicable development and processing fees, as they may bc amended from time-to-time. Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Resolution 2. Figures 3. Kaiser Development Agreement 4. Community Trail/Pedestrian Bridge Improvement Agreement 5. Village Center Improvement Agreement 6. Ownership Disclosure Statement J:~Planning\LUIS\VC IMPR AGREEMENT REPORTS RESOS~PCM 034)3 CC Agenda Statement 06 Aug 02 .doc ATTACHMENT ! RESOLUTION NO. PCM-03-03 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL REPEAL THE KAISER FOUNDATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND THE AGREEMENT REGARDING A COMMUNITY TRAIL PEDESTRIAN FACILITY BETWEEN EASTLAKE I AND EASTLAKE Il. ALSO, APPROVE THE NEW VILLAGE CENI'ER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC FOR 68.1 ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF OTAY LAKES ROAD AND EASTLAKE PARKWAY - THE EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC. WHEREAS, on July 11, 2002, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department by The EastLake Company ("Developer"), requesting the Development Agreement by and between Kaiser Foundation and the City of Chula Vista, and the Improvement Agreement Regarding a Community Trail Pedestrian Facility between EastLake I and EastLake II be repealed; and, WHEREAS, the application also include a request to approve an Improvement Agreement for potential transit facilities involving 68.1 acres located at the northeast and northwest comer of Otay Lakes Road and EastLake Parkway ("Project); and, WHEREAS, the area of land which is subject matter of this Resolution is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A" and commonly known as portion of the Eastlake I Activity Center, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of approximately 68.1 acres located at the northeast and northwest comers of Otay Lakes Road and EastLake Parkway within the EastLake Planned Community ("Project Site"); and, WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that pot'lions the subject Agreement (trail enhancements and park and ride spaces) have been addressed by the previous EIR for the EastLake I Sectional Planning Area (SPA) or the MND for the EastLake Village Center North project (IS-01-042). The transit station component is speculative at this time, and environmental review in accordance with CEQA will he required at the time detailed plans are developed. The other components of the Agreement are not considered projects under CEQA. No further environmental analysis is required for the Improvement Agreement; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and it mailing to property owners and within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and, VCHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m., July 31,2002, in the Council Chan~bers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed. ATTACHMENT 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance approving the Project in accordance with the findings contained therein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 3P' Day of July, 2002, by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Kevin O'Neill, Chairperson ATTEST: Diana Vargas, Secretary J:\Planning\LUIS\ELK 1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT~PCM-03-03 EL VCN PCRESO (2).doc MANDATORY SITE PLAN ELEMENTS ACTIVITY CENTER ATTACHMENT 2 -,~ Figure 1 PROJECT LOCATION CHULA VISTA PLANNING Al"r`` D,,,,r-,,~,,-- DEPARTMENT LOCATER P.ojEc~ L O C ~[to1' aP~UC~U,n-: EASTI~KE DEVELOPMENT CO. I PROJECT Nodheastand Nodhwest Corner of Improvement agfuument for Eastlake Village ADDRESS: Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake Parkway Center North sc~E: I r,u~ .UMBE.: Related Case: GPA-02-07; PCM-01-15. NORTH No Scale PCM-03-03 COMMUNITY CHARACTER Thematic Corridor Trail System ~ (adjacent to VC- 1 and EastLako Parkway) ,,'\'-< 8' Community Trail Node Fenton Street _~ ..... *'~ '! \ i i ' ! : , ' Transit Station ' ~ Source: ~-- Village Center North Supplemental SPA Plan ~ Nowell & Assoc. *,~..~--...,~. ~,.,,, ~,, ~, ~o.,..,. .~. ATTACHMENT 2 Figure 2A (6/4/02) DESIG~ GUIDEUNES H4.3-2 PARCELS VC-I & VC-2 GUIDELINES Detail of Trail Node (along trail leading to Transit Station) 2: ~ ~ '~ zz', ~- /.:...~ .,,.:-'.. .:..(~ .... , ... . . Elevation of Trail Node Plan ~ew of Sourc~ ATTACHMENT 2 Figure 2B (6~4/02) DESIGN GUIDEL~ES I1.4 4-22 PARCELS VC-1 & VC-2 GUIDELINES Transit Station Plaza max. slopes to plaza Future Transit Planters Mini-mad Future Transit Station Fast food parking Source; Felhman-LaBarre ATTACHMENT 2 Figure 3A (6/4/02) DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.4-20 PARCELS VC- 1 & VC-2 GUIDELINES Transit Station Concepts Transit Station Pors pective Section "A" '.7 .' ..... .~ ~" t,,'?~ {~'./~:: ,:~ ,~:-~ S~i~ sh~n, but a~ernaflve Section "B" ,o,~ w,,~ provided z ATTACHMENT 2 Figure 3B (614102) DESIGN GUIDELINES II.4.4-21 Recording Re~ested By: ,) Latham & Watkins ) 701 "B" Street, Suite 2100 ) San Diego, ~ 92101 ) ATTN: Jon D. Demorest, Esq. ) DEVE LOPM]KNT AGR~k~SNT BY AND BETWeeN KAISER FOI/NDATION HOSPITALS, a California non-profit public benefit corporation, and CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a charter city Dated: July 2, 1992 ATTACHMENT 3 0~~ DERrE~LO p.w[ENT AGREEMENT california Government code Sections 65864-65869-5 AGREEMENT (-this Agre~ent") is entered Callfo~a non-p=u~- r m~icipal co~oration having cha~er ~e cITY OF ~ ~STA, powers (~e "city"), wi~ reference to ~e recitals set fo~h below. Recitals - 1- · , ritv to Enter . .Into ~evelopmen% ~ ~ city s Autho -- '~ -s au~orized~der ~-~ ~ ' er Cl~y~ ~ ~e city, as a cha~ ~ ~ =~ .... ~-~le~ powers' and ~~ N~.? ~933~ its ~er, ~'~ ~%-~ ~o~d~ng~ de%elopment Go%~t. code sec~xu~, ~ . agre~ents wi~ persons-hav~g legal'~ and e~it~l~ int~ests in real~ prope~y for ~e p~oses of ussur~g, ~°ng o~er ~ings (i) ce~ainty as to pe~itted l~d uses in the development of such real prope~y, (ii) const~ction of ade~ate P~!ic facilities to se~ice such real prope~y ~d (iii) e~it~le re~ursement of the cost of const~ion of excessive size or cap~city p~lic facilities - Hospitals DeveloRe~S Interest- 1.2 ~e Prope~; -- ac~ire fee title to ~e real or holds an enforce~le right to Drope~y descried in E~it "A" (~e ,,prope~y"), consisting ~pprox~ately 30.6 acres at ~e no--west co--er of EastLake par~ay and ~e ~ension of Fenton Street- Hospitals intends to const~ct and operate on ~e ~ope~y, in ~ree.phases, medical office buildings, u hospital, a parking st~cture and related suppo~ f~cilities, as is more pa~icularly described in ~e "~P," as defined herein, wi~ ~e following approximate ~o~ts of building s~re footage for each phase: Phase I 295,000 phase II 505,000 s-F-~J~ - Phase II! 5~0~0 ~F-J Total 1,340,000 S.F. ' - f v~llace Cente~. Hospitals has 1.3 ~oDe~ Pa~ ~--%~e prope~y from East~ke or will purchase lee ~ux= ~ purchased The ProDe~Y was planned for Development Company (,,East~ke") - - development by East~ke as pa~ of a larger area, consisting, including ~e Prope~y, of approx~ately 71.8 acres and referred to as the Village Center 1 (59.8 acreS) and village center 2 (12 acres) potions of ~e East~e SPA Plan - ~ea (the Kaiser Development Agreement kaisrl9a.~ Page June 30, 1992 Center") . 1.4 AD,roved ~roject Status of Vlllaqe Center. The Village Center was previously estimated to generate a n,~her of average daily trips which the City and Hospitals agrees is equivalent to 2,386 p.m. peak period traffic trips ("P.M. Peak Trips"), based on the following previously anticipated development of the Village Center, expressed in P.M. Peak Trips: Multi-Family Residential (405 D.U.) 324 Library (1 acre) 40 Commercial (22.2 acres) 1,554 0ffice.(12 acres)- ' 468 Total P.M. Peak Trips ~386 Based~ on the foregoing, and the city's determination~ that its '. trgnsportation facilities~ could still be operated~ within the ~i~i~affiC~threshhold~'~ith~ the~ development~ conte_mplated~ b~ Ea~tLake, s ~ plan ~ ~the~ city~i determined~ that it would not ~ object to~ the~ issuknce - of~ building- permits for the~ Village Center,' under EastLake' s plan, on the~basis of the development's impact on the "traffic threshhold" established by the "Quality of Life Threshholds," as defined~ herein. Accordingly, the Village Center was given "approved project" status by the City. 1.5 HosDitals' ~rojected Tya~f~c Demand. The proposed "medical center" use of the Property, under ~ospitals' plan, including all three phases, on the entire 30.6 acres, has been projected by the City to generate 2,630 P.M. Peak Trips. The P.M. Peak Trips allocated by phase are as follows: PhaseI 560~ Phase II !,010 ~ Phase III Total 2~630 ~-~1.~ Projected Traffic Demand of Villaqe Center. The ..-"-proposed u~s of the Village Center under the amended SPA Plan, including all three phases of Hospitals' proposed medical center development, has been projected by the City to generate 4,158 P.M. Peak Trips, based on the following anticipated development Of the Village Center: kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 3 Open Space (10.9 acres) 0 Library (1 acre) 40 Commercial (17.3 acres) 1,211 office (6 acres) 234 Industrial (2 acres) 31 Church (4 acres) 12 Medical Center (30.6 acres) 2.630 Total P.M. Peak Trips 41158 Accordingly, the city has projected that th~ proposed uses for the Village Center will create 1,772 (4,158 - 2,386) more P.M. Peak Trips than were projected for the.previously anticipated use. 1.7 Demerits to the City. This Agreement is entered into for the purpose of facilitating~ the development of the Property in a manner, that-will ensure certain anticipated benefits to the City (including, without l~m~tation,~the existingI and future residents andpopulations of~the City)-as~fo!lows: 1.7.1 To provide for a significant cash contribution to the city that will-enable the City to finance programs and improvements that otherwise would have to be financed from the city's general fund or from other sources. 1.7.2 To provide ~and assure to the City the accelerated, coordinated and more economic construction, funding and dedication to the public of certain vitally needed public facilities and benefits, and to provide for anticipated levels of service to residents and populations of the City and adjacent areas, all as provided for in the City's General Development Plan. 1.7.3 To provide and assure that the City receive enhanced sales tax revenues and an interim increase in property tax revenues. 1.7.4 To provide a major employment, education and training outreach opportunity for residents of the City. In this regard, Hospitals promises to use reasonable efforts to develop employment, education, and training outreach programs that encourage local employment, education and training of Chula Vista residents. 1.7.5 To provide additional high quality medical services to-s~ve the residents of the City. 1.8 Intentions of ~a%-ties ~n ~nterin~ Into This Aqreement. ~ospitals and the City intend to enter into this Agreement to: kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 4 1.8.1 Assure Hospitals' pa~-ticipation in the construction and financing of public facilities; 1.8.2 Provide the city with public facilities and improvements in excess of those public facilities and improvements to which it would otherwise be entitled and/or provide the City with' such public facilities and improv-ments at an earlier time than the city would otherwise have been able to obtain them; and 1.8.3 Provide Hospitals with certainty in the land use regulations and policies applicable to the development of the Property to the extent herein granted and-with a' vested right to proceed with the development of-the. Property to~the~ land~ uses, densities-and intensity of uses to the extent~ and~in the~manner as provided- below. - 1.8.4 It~ is~ the intention~-.of~ the~-parties~, to review the traffic~ analysis~, undertake.n with~r~t6~o~pi~als, proposed development for the..-~ express pUrPose~'f of '~ attempting'-~ to reduce or avoid the deferral of. development: of land~ owned-, by EastLake and otherwise authorized for development, as is contemplated by Section~ 6.5 hereof. 1.9 Effective Date; Adoption of Ordihance Approvinq ~creement. The ordinance approving this Agreement was first introduced at the City Council meeting of June 30, 1992. The city Council of the City adopted Ordinance No. 2522 approving this Agreement. The "Effective Date" of this Agreement shall be the date on which the thirty day-period for challenging the City's adoption of the environmental impact report prepared in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the CUP and this Agreement under the California Environmental Quality Act expires without any lawsuit having been filed, or the date on which the thirty day period for challenging this Agreement by referendum expires without such a challenge having been initiated, whichever is later. In the event any such lawsuit is filed or referendum is initiated, Hospitals and the city shall meet within thirty days and confer about the method for responding to the lawsuit or challenge, and the Effective Date shall be extended for such thirty days. If the city and Hospitals are unable to agree to the method for responding within said ~h~rty days, then this Agreement shall terminate and Hospitals and the ' City shall be released from all liability hereunder. 1.10 ¥indinus of the City Council. The city Council has found ~hat this Agreement is consistent with the City's General Pl~, EastLake II i(EastLake I Expansion) General Development Plan, the EastLake I Planned Community District Regulations, and the EastLake I Sectional Planning Area Plan, as well as all other applicable kaisrl9a.wp_ Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 5 policies, and reg~lations of the City. . 2.[~J~~9]1~. In t]mis Agreeanent, unless the context ~e:desi~del~es-for ~e Ease~ke.I actiMity c~ter, adopted coh~ly~79i~<~ ~e first read~g~ of ~is. A~e~ent as an Ordin&'~{' by ~e- City. . - ' -'["' "72-[2. "Air- ~ality Impr~uen~-- PI~" . shaii~-, mean ~e Ea~:-I'A~ivity ' cute= ~r. ~ality · ~provuent~ Pl~' a~ adopted c0n~~y, wi~: ~e first reading.- of" ~is~-A~euut as -~- .... ~'-J~-.-?~2.3 -City-~me~s-~e City of ~a Vista,~: a cha~er -': ..:~'~=2~ 4¥= ,~uF,'- ~h~l"~eu:~e~ Condltionat~.UseZPe~it-. grated bM% Re~oi~ti0n~ No. 16702~--': adopted-~ con~tly wi~ ~e first read~- of~ ~e Ord~ance~ approv~g ~is~ A~e~t.. 2.5 "East~ke" me~s East~e ~velopm~t Company, Califo~ia g~eral pa~ership comprised of co~rations. 2.6 "Effective Date" is defined ~ paragraph 1.9 hereof. 2.7 "Exist~g Approvals" shall mean all discretiona~ approvals ~d/or standards ~hi~ have be~ approved, est~lished or ~ended ~ conj~ion wi~ or prece~g approval of Developm~t A~e~ent, as it relates to ~e ~ope~y, consisting of, but not l~ited to: 2.7.1 The ~eral Pi~; 2.7.2 ~e . East~e II (East~ke I E~sion) G~eral Development Plan; 2.7.3 ~e SPA Pi~; ~d 2.7.4 ~e Fin~cing Plan; 2.7.5 ~e Water Conse~ation PI~. 2.7.6 The Air Quality Improv~ent Pi~; 2.7.7 ~e Activity Center ~ecise Pi~ Guidelines; 2.7.8 ~e Precise PI~; kaisrlga.~p Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 6 2.7.9 The CUP; 2.7.10 The East?~ke I Plaru~ed Community District Regulations; 2.7.11 The Lot I.t ne Adjustment;. 2.8 "Financing Plan" means the 3~ EastLake - I - Phblic Facilities Finance Plan, adopted~f6OncurrentlY~::.with~3fthe~.$first~- reading of this .Agreement. as an[~.0rdinan.c.~by~_th.~.~:.Cityv~-.it6~ther.-' with ~ any - exhiblts~3 a~d3'- app~ndices.~..~theret0~_=~.~cluding~$~Without llmita~io---: any % phasing~ ~lar~iatt~h~d~t~.e..~0~--_... ~ d .~,- any~ further ~odifiCations' or~i ame/%d~en~s%th~'~E{-Q~i~h~?~b_~?d~ly~'ad0Pted~. by -.---.~:. -. ~ 2.9>~ GeneraI~Plan"~ ~h~.!~mean~the~_,C~.~la=...V~ista~ General plan;~ tog~ _the~.~ %~1~h~ all%f i_T~.el.em. _.e~. t~ ~', currentl~:~ ln~ effect, at. the ~im~ :'of~adoptlon~ o fz~the: OrdinanceP approvtnga this~ Agreement. . 2.10 "General? Development'- Plan".. shall mean. the. EastLake II (EastLake I Exp~n-~ion). General-Development-Plan and all elements thereof, as amended, concurrently with the first reading of this Agreement as ~n ordinance by the city. ' 2.11 "Hospitals" means Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, a California non-profit public benefit corporation, and any affiliate owned, controlled by, o~ning, or under common control with the Kaiser pe~man~nte medical care program to which it may assign all or any portion of its rights under this Agreement. 2.12 "Lot Line Adjustment" means the lot line adjustment recorded on June 22, 1992 as docttment no. 1992-0384869 for the purpose of creating the Property as a separate legal lot. 2.13 "Platted Community District Regulations" shall refer to the EastImke I Planned Community District Regulations as approved pursuant to Ordinance No. 2103 on February 19, 1985, as amended concurrently with the first reading of the Ordinance approving this ~ Agreement. 2.14 "Planning Comm/ssion" means the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista. 2.15 "P.M. Peak Trips" is defined in paragraph 1.4 hereof. 2.16 "Precise Plan" means the Precise Plan with respect to Hospitals' proposed construction at the Property, adopted. concurrently with or prior to the first- reading of the Ordinance kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 7 by the city approving this Agreement. .- 2.17:"Pr°P~£ty" is defined in paragraph 1.2 hereof. - ..... ~-~ No.~.~ 1334 6~ and:. Section:~19.09.~: of_~.the~, glL-y. S.,.: ~u/~lclpa~ Resolutt ~ ........ : . ........ _.~ ...... - _ . . . ~A~A.~- :-~, vF~A~v:~-dikDaritv~ exists:between%=the:,~ Resolution:: and ?M~icf~l: C~e': Xs% to'.~e-.nature of%~e~th~eshold%, or:: ~e me, od for meas~tng~~' s~e:/':~e ~M~cipal c~'~a!!-~ ggye~ ~b .- 2L2~?Tr~'. D~F~'me~: ~e Ci~ ~ s.t~n~po~ation f~cility deveiopm~t.~act~ fee:p~o~ adopted p~su~ to Ordinance 2251, a~--~ded. 2.22 "Village Center" is defined in paragraph 1.3 hereof. 2.23 "Water Conse~ation Plan" shall mean ~e East~ke I A~ivity C~ter Water Conse~ation Plan, as amended concu~ently wi~ ~e fi~t reading of ~is Agre~ent as an Ordin~ce bY city. 3. Description of pro~e~y- ~e Prope~y consists of aDDrox~ate!y 30.6 acres located at ~e no~hwest co~er of ~e E~ke P~ay and Fenton Road in ~e city of ~ula Vista, County of San Diego, and is more pa~i~arly descried ~ ~it "A" attached hereto. ~ :'/~ Ext~aordina~ Benefits to ~e city. In addition to ~e ,~~s to ~e City as descried ~ para~ph 1.7 hereof, and as . f~er co~ideration for ~e vesting of Hospitals' right to develop ~e ~ope~y as provided herein, Hospitals zhall pay to ~e ci~ ~e ~ of one million two h~ed ~ous~d dollars ($1,200,000) wi~ five (5) bus,ess days after ~e Effective Date. Said s~ shall be used by ~e city to suppo~ progr~s or to build capital facilities ~at se~e heal~ and h~-semites needs. The ~ity shall advise Hospitals as to how ~e city proposes to u~e said s~, and Hospitals shall have ~e right to approve ~e uses proposed by ~e city. Hospitals a~ees not to ~reason~ly withhold or delay its approval of ~y use proposed by ~e city, kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agreement Judue 30, 1992 Page 8 ~_--long. as ~.the_proposed'~usejis', consistent with the intent .of the ~- "~_ --.--~- -' _ . "~The~vesting- o_f: Hospitals . right ~~'.~. de.r.k~parag~aph 4 ' hereof;.~_- are'~,-" contingent .~ upon ~Ea-~L~ke ;'~executlon ~and~delivery' of. an instrument~ in -the _form of ~ E-~i~it-_~ B".'~f ~tta ch ~ d ~ h~e r et o ~an d incorporated ~ herein ~ by~ ~eference. -?<-~in'~:~d~'~i6~'~%?~t~e-~i-~%esting - of Hospitals'-~: rtghtr t?l:develop, the - 'p~o-perty~'as' pr6vided herein',~ and all. of. the remainder3of-theYrights c0~ferred; in < this ~-Agreement ~ are. contingent- ~pon% Hospitals: -~ timely _ P~m-e~t ~t0 ~the. cityA of :.the % sum "referred ~. to ~.'in]paragrap_h. ~.~ ~ he~eof .. >- All ~-~ ~i~ht s, ?__- duties ;?~ waiver s; ~'?~' findings ~. ~d ~. determinations · </subse~htl¥~_~ ~ro~id~_d~in~_this~Agr~ment%$ aPPlyW bnly,,-- if._ the. a f 6~m&~i ~n~% ~. c~di-t t'6-~S~i p~e~ed~t ~ have ~ bccurr ed. -'. -- ~-- :~.-zc.~.-6l=l==Vestlnu~-~-of.~{osp%tal~' Right - to - .. Develop. ' In ~?C-onsid&-r-~ti6~_'6f~.~16$~i~al~s~?~arttcipationsln~the~'construction and - fxnanc~ng~.o.~_~p~qT_~.~_?q!l~ies,~and:- ot~.er~ beneflts to ~-he., C~ty ~s -, set~foz-~h:he~ein~.~_H.~_osPltal~.is .vested wxt_h the' right to d. evelop and maintain~ the firs~t~~of~ the-medical. center pro] eot at the Property, to the l~d~~sities and intensities end at such a rate~ of develbpmentv~d subject to~ such -~tandards~ as are set forth herein and: in the Exist.lng Approvals. ~Hospltals' right to develop the third phase of 1ts medical center project at the Property is vested presently, subject only to the condition that an additional 521 P.M. Peak Trips ~e allocated to the Property in the manner contempl.ated pursuant to Section 6.5 hereof and subject to the provisions of Section 6.6 hereof. 6.2 Benefit of ~arlier Vestinq. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed as adversely affecting Hospitals' obtaining a vested right to develop the Property, if any, pursuant to the provisions of California's constitutional, statutory and decisional law. 6.3 ~Dplicat~on o$ ~ew ~ules, ~e~ulat~ons and ~olioies. subject to the provisions of Section 8 hereof, the city may, during the term of this Agreement, apply to the Property only such new. rules, regulations, policies, ordinances and standards that (a) do not relate to land use and are generally applicable ~hroughout the city, or (b) will not prevent or delay the development of the Property .to the land uses, densities or intensities of development permitted herein and in the Existing Approvals. 6.4 Phasing. The parties acknowledge that Hospitals cannot at this t~e predict when or the rate at which the phases of its development at the Property will be developed. Such kaisrl9ao~p Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 9 decision~ depend upon nUmerous factors which are not within the controls of; H:o. spitals,- such~ as. membership growth and. other similar fa~t0~-~9]~-~.Lt'Si~c~'k the:j: California %. Supremely' Court~ held. in Pardee ..... ~-~'~ ~ ~-'"'~7~' ,'~ '~' of~Camarili0~_~371 Ca]~2~.3d!7465~ (1984) , Construct~on~ Co.--v.~ the- City . ~:.v~f-~d~l~ e~resulted~J~n'%a later~a~op~_~e~..~l~..~txa~.l_~e~eer-rlctlng :~::~-~-and~proviaing~:that~Hospitals sh~l~l~h~av~9.~._t~_e~rig~t.~_to~.~.develop the Pr6~'i~6~.~:t6~th~:~ d~ity~6d~, in~ai_ty.~_f.:%_u~.~{jc__o_n._t:.e~plated~:by: the... : ::,; Exlst/ng~Approval s ~ during _~the. ter~f~this~.Agreemen.t~ in~'suc]~: order:-. and.- at~ such~ ._rg.~. t_~e~ and~ at~ su~h~ tim~H_.~._~ii_~_~~ppropriate within ~ the:~.e~ ercise~ of~ i~'~ J ~~J u~-~_~i~in: the ~ dev e I opm ent _~ at'~m~t]ia _~i~ ~2~cy~~~a~. s m secures;?~ to~ the: :.=, satisfac~=on~ off~t~e= Ctt~.,~_an~ ~llocatto~from~the~Cityl.of~addxtlonal ':~ PSM~P~--~k~Trlps$ as~ provided~for-..~ander~e~te~rms~, of:% th~s:: S. ection 6 ~ 5 ~- l~cluslve= of- Subsection~ 6.5. I=~hrough. 6.5.8. An: additional 7123 P~Mf%~ Peak~ Trips. must: be~ secured~- in% order-.'-to> allow~ Hospitals to procure%bulldlng~ permits with- respect~to, the~= first two' phases of its r devel0pment-~' at ~ the'% Property>: (the~.,Phase/ I'% and:: Iii Required A~ount~") ,. and~ a to_tal' of 1772 P.Mi Peak' Trips (i. e. , another 1060 P.M.: P~ak:Tripss in excess: of the Phase~ I and: II'Required-Amount) must be secured in order to allow Hospitals to procure, building permits with respect to the third phase of its. development, at the Propert!m (the "Phase III Required Amount"). ~ne City further agrees that the obligations of city contained in Subsections 6.5.2 through 6.5.8, inclusive, Section 11 (exceptin~ the right to the payment of prevailing party attorney fees) , Section 12.3, and Section 13 are for the benefit of Hospitals and for the benefit of EastLake, as an exp_ress third party beneficiary. 6.5.1. CaDacit¥ Obtained by Deferzdl Agreements from Other ~ropert¥ Owners. ~gleemeD~s to W~thho%d Deve~oDment. To the extent that Hospitals secures an agreement and covenant running with the land ("Deferral Agreement") in a form satisfactory to the city and for the express benefit of the City, from one or more prope=ty oWners owning property ("Vicinity Propelty") within the City of Chula Vista east~ of 1-805, ~hich Vicinity Property j~not developed but wb_ich is determined by the City to generate a ~ giwen'n~:mber of P.M. Peak Trips, that said property owner(s) will withhold such Vicinity Property from development, then the n,~mber of P.'M. Pea]f Trips determined by the City to be allocable to such Vicinity Property shall be- credited to Hospitals ~owards the satisfaction of the Phase I and II Required Amount and the Phase III Required Amount. The city agrees that the Covenant Running kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agreement _ . June 30, 1992 Page 10 with the' Land& '" attached ~ hereto as Exhibit "B" (the "EastLake ~ executed, delivered, recorded in the county~ in a priority2 senior, to all ' towa~s~its~ Phase :- "i~e ' proposed .... :~ The~ Cost~ of~ said~ study ~ Hospi%~] s; {- ~nles$~ they=~ are ~: in%/delaulti~ or~, shall 0~f~e ~e~e:-t0~do~ so,~' ~ white--se;' ~e: cost of~ said study Shall~ibe~ paid by' East~e- To ~e. ~t ~e city M~ager of ~e such.~tudy, ~at ~e . . . ~ d~i~ee~ dete~esT~ based{ upon- _ C~tyz or3 hi ass~ed%rate~ of P.M.~ Pe~ ~ips g~eration ~ said ~v~o~ental ~pact repo~ is too high~ ~e in~ent shall' be allocated (a) first, to Hospitals, ~til a total of ~ ad~tional 521 P.M. Peak Trips have be~ allocated to ~osPitals p~ant to ~is Section 6.5, ~ereby fully ~tigating ~e traffic~ ~pacts of all ~ee phases of Ho~itals~-~ developm~t at ~e ~ope~y, ~d (b) second, to East~e, ~o ~e ~t of ~e ~o~t of P.M. Pe~ ~ips ~en rese~ed by Eastlake p~su~t to ~e Eas~e Defe~al Agre~ent (after giving effect' to ~y P.M. Pe~ ~ips previously allocated to Eust~ke p~su~t to ~is Se~ion 6.5), ~er~y releasing a coruscate .~o~t of developm~t from ~e restrictions of ~e Eas~e Dermal ~e~t. 6.5.3 Additional Capacity Based A~al Traffic ~eneration- To ~e ~t ~at Hospi~ls has not previouslx received sufficient credit tow~ its Phase III Re,ired ~o~t pursuit to ~h~s Se~ion 6.5, or ~at all or some potion of ~e Vic~ity ~ope~y s~je~ to ~e Eastl~ke ~f~al A~e~ent (~it B)' r~ains s~ject to a cov~ant to wi~old development (after giving effect to any P.M. Peak Trips previously allocated to East~e p~suant to ~is se~ion 6.5), and to ~e f~er e~ent ~at Hospitals or East~e z~ts a ~affic study of ~e a~ai P.M. Peak Trips generated by ~e first ~o phases of Hospitals' developm~t at ~e ~ope~y, ~d ~e city ~ager~ of ~e ci~ or his desi~ee dete~es, based upon su~ study, ~at ~e actual P.M. Pe~ Trips generated is less ~an ~at predi~ed by ~e Kaiser ~velopment Agre~ent kaisrl9a.~ Page 11 June 30, 1992 traffic model utilized for the environmental impact report prepared ._ in_conjunction with~ the approval of Hospitals'~ proposed development ~ J '~t ~ ?c.]~e~! in6rement',[ to the' ext~_~' %t-is not' duplicative ~ire~dY-;~ all°Cared% 0r,.¢ EastLake by (a) first, have~ been Y . ,~Sf~.'H6spitals ' 'JE~stLa~e, to the Eastlake -' ~ ..... =o[~ _ pursuant ~':~ develsp~-entku f~0~m~ ~i ? Deferral ~ received (Exhibit-': B) ect..-to: a: covenant-, to.~al~hhold; development.?. (after: giving : to:. ~ny:: P;M;:~ Peak::Trips.::;~evi'ouslY/allocated: .to '. EastLake : pur~uant:.to:: th1 .:~-Sectlon. z 6.5), the; Cxty: shall: continue with: and '. ffn~Ltorthe; point: of:. bexng:, able. to: drawl adequate: conclusions fron the: ~'tr~ffic: study: designed: t°: identify: the. ~ount of traffic capacity~:;-if-zany~? inzthe:~existing:: roadway~ system- that has' not ~ previoUsly been allocated to "approved projects, ~nd to the further _.-i: ) -extent:: that- the city. Council determines,: based upon such study, that such: capacity exists, the City shall allocate a fair percentage;: of such traffic capacity to the extent itls~ not duplicative of' Credits already extended previously, after due consideration of other proposed projects, (a) first, to Hospitals, until an: additional 521 P.M. Peak Trips have beer[ allocated to Hospitals:pursuant to this Section 6.5,-thereby fully mitigating the traffic impacts of all three phases of Hospitals' development at the Property, and: (b) second, to EastLake, to the extent of the amount of P.M2 Peak Trips then reserved by Eastlake pursuant to the EastLake Deferral Agreement (after giving effect to any P,M. Peak Trips-previously allocated to EastLake pursuant to this Section 6.5), thereby ireleasing a. co~ensurate amount of development from the restrictions of the EastLak~ Deferral Agreement. No other person shall be deemed to be a beneficiary of this SUbsection other than as expressly provided herein. 6.5.5 ~dditional Capacity Obtained from SR 125, Interim SR ~25 Facility, or Chan~es in Operation. To the extent that .Hospitals has not previously received sufficient credit toward its Phase III Required Amount pursuant to this Section 6.5, or that all or some portion, of the Vicinity Property subject to the kaisrl9a.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 12 EastLake Deferral Agreement .(Exhibit B) remains subject to a covenant to wi%hhold development (after giv~-~g effect' to any P.M. Peak. Trips~;. pr?.¥iously<- allocated, to '. EastLake :.-pursuant:. to this Sectioni_~ .6~5).-,~ ~i%a: .tof!'_the i further~ ext~nt~:<tha.t-L..th~ City. k Council d'e~ei~m~.tha.t__.?~a~d~ditio~al~-traffic~' ca~ACi~7 i~f 6reat6d~as~'~i re-suit._ such' . as. ? a' finding ~ there'.the. transpo.~ ration .-'~ d.ema.nd.~V management.-]~ Pr0~a~.'=.~WiliL:.a redu. de~il traffic?- allocate, to th~ extent._it~is.~no~.d..~plicat~y._egloflcredi~ extended~ prevlously, =- a~ fair- after~ n~l.d, erat ion.~ of~ allocated~ to .......... Hospm~als~ ]~ ursuant~'S~S ectio~ 5 ;_ ~ 6.~t~ere~¥~ fully. =:=' ~develop_m_en~t~_~at~tl~op.~, and (b_') se¢o.n~,~_.to as~e~o~,the: p~rsuant~to :~ ther. E dst Lake~ De lex x -.~1.~. '~gr e ement~ (after,~ gi_wing~ effeot tS~ ~n~y.]~ P: M :t: p&ak~ T~i~S~gi'6~si~a~_ l'S~{~d~to~, Ea'stLake{ p~SUant to::= th%~ Secti0h:: 6% 5 )";-:~th&r-~b~_~'~I~a~i~f'a~ commensurate: amoUnt- of development from<; th-e ; restrictions;, of the~ EastLake ~ Defe~zal A~reement. 6.5.6 ~dditional CaDacitv Generated by Cha~qed Conditions. To- the extentk_ that,: Hospitals ~ has not previously received~ sufficient credit toward its Phase III Required Amount pursuant to this-Section' 6.5, or that all er some port/on of the Vicinity Pr6perty subject to the EastLake Defe~al Agreement (E~b~bit B)-rennains subject to a covenant to wi~hhold development '(after~ giving effect to any P.M. Peak Trips previously allocated to EastL~ke: pursuant to this Section 6.5), and to the further extent that the City Council determines that additional traffic capacity exists within the mYisting roadway system as a result of changed conditions or assumptions relating to planned or assLlmed development within the eastern regions of the City, the city Council shall', to the extent it is not duplicative of-credits already extended previously, allocate a fair percentage of such traffic capacity, after due consideration of other proposed projects, (a) first, to Hospitals, until an additional 521 P.M. Peak Trips have been allocated :to Hospitals pursuant to this Section 6.5, thereby fully mitigating the traffic impacts of all three-phases of Hospitals' development at the Property,' and (b) second, to EastLake, to the e~tent of the amount of P.M. Peak Trips then reserved by Eastlake pursuant to the EastLake Deferral Agree~,ent (after giving effect to any P.M. Peak Trips previously allocated to EastLake pursuant to this Section 6.5), thereby releasing - a commensurate a~ount of development from the restrictions of the EastLake Deferral Agreement. kaisri9a,wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page !3 6.5.7 Certific~%e of Reallocation. As additional P.M. Peak Trips are allocated to Hospitals and EastLake pursuant to the provisions of this Section 6.5, the city will execute and deliver to EastLake and Hospitals a recordable instrument in form satisfactory to them verifying the reallocation, of P.M. Peak Trip under(2 the~ provisi0ns~- 0f.~ this Section;-~ andh releasing~, appropriate portion-s?of~ the~= vi'cinity? Property.J.otherwissf'subJ ect~_to:: deferral from the EastLake Deferral. Agreement~4~4 All~ P~M'~Pe~klT~tps, not to excee~ '~ 1,251, realIocated~ to Ea~tLak~'~-aS~D~'~id~d~-~0ve shall thereafter be available~ to- EastLake~ ors its_ s~ccessors~ and: assigns for the.~ purpose?0f?~mttig.ati~g.~a~y~.~.-.~f..f.!.d.~i~t~eated by. projects within the EastLak~ SPA%Pi~' ~.~V_,~i~ i.':' '' 6.5.8~ EastLake~ s-Rt~hL~~tu~:Ion~ of. Vicinity ':¥ obllgatlons~under~th~~.~ .~lt :.~B;" Wm~b~ n for~y~f-i~v.~e~ (45)~ days~from~EastIia][e~ s~r. equ~.e.s~.~.t_~.of.~_.the=~ C~tyr to use other~p~gpertle~= in ~ thlS~.~ner ,;a the.~_ city,~by~, the= city M~nager, wi~l'(!~m~3~e~q- its~determ~atiOnA]"~s~h-er~e~provlded/ and if City deter~%{~ that ~ the?~ substi~t-e~Vicinity.-? Property,- is ~ suff icient, City2 wili~ ex-ecute ~ and~ deliver3 t~o~-stLak-e~ a~ red6rdable, instrument in-~ a~ form~ satisfactory~t0~- EastLake-,-~3 releasing' =_ the.. appropriate portioh~L~-0f Village Center 1 from'~ the~ deferral agreement on the condition~ that~ the? substitute vicinity Property~ is enciphered'in the same~ manner/ and to the. same~ extent of security herein r~quired of the~Village'. Center I Nol-th Property described in Rwhibit B. 6.6 ~ffect o~ Vinancinq Plan and Quality of Life Thresholds. The city has determined that it is critically important-to adhere to the Quality of Life Threshholds and the Financing Plan in order to assure the orderly and timely construction of.public facilitie_s as the need for them arises as a~consequence; of new development within the City~ The. city has determined-that Phases I and II of Hospitals'. development at the Propert!r can, at present, be accommodated without violating any of the~Quality of Life Thresholds, and that Phase III of ~ospitals' proposed deveiopment at the Property at present can be acco~odated without violating any of the Quality of Life Threshholds, with the exception of the Quality of Life Threshhold pertaining to traffic and with the possible exception of the Quality of Life Threshold pertaining to the delivery of fire and police services. The City agree$~ that any change made to the n~mher of Thresholds or. the standard for measuring a violation of same shall not apply to Phase III at the Property, but that Phase III will be governed according to the current n~]mber and standards for measurement, and that the kaisrl9a.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June: 30, 1992 Page 14 only thresholds capable of limiting ~Lhe development of Phase III are thresholds pertaining to traffic and the delivery of fire and police services. The city fum-ther agrees that six (6) months prior to the time when Hospitals anticipates- pulling it~ buil~{ng~permits for Phase III, the City~ will- meet~ ana~,d~w.~.iSe~Ho~pi~a~s;~ at~ their request;~ -' if the: ehre~holds, as pertaining to fire: and. police are~.likely'.~ t6~; be~ _~i'ol&~ed~ by~ Phase III development of the medical center'-. ~ If' the · i cit~. det'~r~ines that a. violation is llkely to occur, ~heCCityi. will-~'dedi~&te?..!~a}'ailable DIF resource~ to cure the resources ~re deficient. ~o :-. and.-'(: rec.orded~in ~ the~ offtci~i_~0~of~_~]~n~Df~g~ c6~nty::,.- as balEce, of .~e Eas~e.I.~ area.shalI> con~inue~to. provisions: of O~ce: No.~.' -7. ~ility of City $o'Modif?~ ~si~lemen~'s; ~ ~e city will accept- for. ~editious proc~s~g.', ~d.rreview:: ~d, Shall use its reason~le, effo~s ~: to: assist'+ Hospi~ls pe~its or approvals~re~ired, in' co~e~ion issu~le fr~ ~e ci~M wi~. Mospit~s, proposed const~ion' at ~e; ~ope~M, includ~g wi~out l{~i~tion approvals: wi~ respe~ have not been ~ecificallM approved ~ ~e ~ecise P1E. The city shall :' ]JEi~ i~s review of ~M such -desi~ el~s ~o a de~ina~ion of where= ~eM are consist~ wi~ ~e ~ecise Plan amd ~e ~c~ivi~M Cen~er ~ecise Pi~ Guidel~es. -~~~~~~~~d for: ~e: ~ope~. 8.~ ~is~in~ ~ans~o~a~ion Facility ~ve~o~en~ Fees. The city hms' de~ed, pwsu~t-~o-Se~ion 5 of said Ord~ce No. 225~, ~a~ Mospi~als should ~:~ed a waiver or redu~ion of ~ranspo~a~ion facility developm~t ~a~ fees pay~le by Ho~i~als wi~ res~ ~o ~e ~ope~,. as follows: 8.1.1 ~e Tr~sD~ fees pay~le wi~ respec~ Hospitals' development shall be computed on ~e basis of a traffic gene~ion ra~e of 650 ~ips ~otal ~r~sDIF fees pay~le wi~ re~e~ ~o Mospi~lm' development shall be allocated ~o ~e firs~ ~wo phases of ~e development.' The Tr~sDIF fees for ~e f~s~ ~o phases of ~e developm~ will be paid (s~ject ~o ~e ~e of ~e~ as provided-below) no sooner kaisrlga.~ Kaiser ~velopmen~ A~e~ent J~e 30, 1972 Page 15 than the Effectiwe Date. The City shall estimate the increase in TransDIF fees that will result from the addition of the improvennents described in Section 8.1.2 to the TransDIF program, and the =mount of such estimate shall be included in the TransDIF fees p.ayable with respect to the first two phases of Hospitals' development,' regardless of whether the TransDIF Pr .c~-_am. is updated to include~ s~me. 8.1.2 For the purpose of calculating the TransDIF fee payable by Hospitals, the city shall estimate the cost of the widening of Eas~T~ke'~ Parkway. between- Otay~ Lakes?Roed~- and north of Fenton:.- Street,-- the, widening of Otay~- ?~kes~ Road'. between East?~ke Parkway - and State-.: Route 125, and the .. signalization- of the intersection- ofJ EastLake~- Parkway and- Fenton~Road. .... ]~ :~,: : 8.1.3%~.~he% cityfsh~l.l% ~sefitS~st; efforts%, subject ~- ~ th ~=wid~ f~g~o_ f~ E a stLak~ParkWa~f ~e~e~/~_ ot ay~I~kes~ Road~. and6north of~.Fento~?~..Stre~t7 ~_--:.nnd~e~ wiO-n~ ng~ of~ 0tal~. Lakes.~ Road -~- between EastLake=Parkwayz and~ State~oute~125,. a/~dtthe.~ signalization of. the in~e-~i~n~of? E~stLa~e-~Pa~ay~ and: Fenton~- Road' in the TransDIF in'the' next-annual' update-' thereof. 8.2 . ~xist~nq Pub%%c Facilities ~eveloDment ~mpact Fees. Hospitals shall pay- the' full amount~ of public facility development impact~fees-payable with respect to the Property pursuant to the City's-public facility development impact fee program, as the same say"be- from time to time amended. 8.3 ~Use of Credits for the Payment of DIF Fees. The TransDIF fees and the public facilities development impact fees payable with respect to Hospitals' development, as provided herein may be: paid~ using credits accumulated by' Hospitals. and/or using 8.5 Withhold of ~erm~ts. Hospitals agrees that the City shall have the right to withhold issuance of any building permit for construction within ~he area of the Property unless and until the~ appropriate TransDIF fees and public facilities development impac~ fees are paid by Hospitals. kaisrl9a.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 16 8.6 Other Development Fees and Exactions. No category of development impact/fees, assessments or other fees, charges or exactions shall be charged or levied with respect to the Property, except for fees, a. s4es.~ments, cha~rges or exaction~ in effect on the date 0f~this~Agre~ment, and except that the city 'may-impose a charge, Pursuan~ to ~ny lawful mea~.. (and~ Hospitals- shall}' be ' free to-oppose t~.e imposition Of such ~_~arge by a~y l~wful:means), imposing on..'Phase III of Hospitals' dew, elopment its fair share of the cost ,of an. interim State Route 125~ facility' pursuant to a financin, g program generally applicable to 'the~eastern territories. Notwit~ stand, lng the foregoing, the amount of'~.uch~fees, charges or exactions., is · subject to increase on a 'non-discriminatory, ~ ~6m~nityTwide basisl (recognizin~or the. purpp~$~~sDIF, ~' ~2~u~ .lic~ facilities~ DIF~ and%, ~_~e~elegraph~ Ca~yon~' ~Ifratnag~ Basin ~ ~e~w~fe-~&~tbe~ ar~a~ ~eaSt~ of I-B05~ as.~ a~ comm~n~~pitals. ?,~ ~p~uch~ fees ;× charges!.' or.~ exaotions~ at~ th~ rate~f~.effect~ on -~ d at _e ~. o ~ p~_ ~7~ ent -~=~ Th e~. f oreg o xng~ 1 imitation~ on~. new~ categories :~ ~-~dev~o~ment.=~fees_ -..._ ~ ~ is ~ not.~, intended ~. to:. preclude ~.the ~ Cit ~., from ~-,~i~i~s~ice~fees~ or use~. charges on. a non_dis~rimlna~ory, 9. Bimdin~ Effect; Encumbrance of ProDeztv; Status. 9.1 Bindinq. ~fSect. 'The provisions of this Agreement ' will be binding: upon and inure to the benefit of the parties successors-in-interest. 9.2 Discretion to En~mher. Nothing in this Agreement will prevent or limit Hospitals, in any manner, at Hospitals~ sole discretion, from encumbering all or any portion of the Property or improvement thereon by any deed of trust or other security device. 9.3 status. Each party will, within fifteen (15) days after written request, give written notice to the other party of whether the party giving the notice knows of any breach of this Agreement and its current understanding of status of performance under, this Agreement. A copy of any such notice which_ is sent to Hospitals shall also be sent to the holder of any-institutional first' trust deed encumbering, the Property if such holder has made written requesfi address for notice purposes. 10. ~nnual Revlew~ No~ce. The city will, once every twelve (12) months during the term of this Agreement, pursuant . to California Government Code Section 65865.1, undertake a periodic review of the parties' compliance with the terms of this Agreement- pursuant to the procedures set forth below. Hospitals shall present information with respect to Hospitals ' good-faith compliance with Paragraph 10.1. In addition to the information. provided by Hospitals in accord with Paragraph 10.1, the city may __-~ kaisrl9a.wp Kaiser Development Agreement Ju~e 30, 1992 ~age 17 request Hospitals to address additional issues with respect to Hospitals' good-faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. The City shall deliver no less than thirty (30) days' written notice to Hospitals. prior to any hearing of any requirement the Cityj~desires to be addressed, and applicable~:staff.~reports, in a manne~ sufficient., for Hospitals to. respond.>~ ~Either~Party may · address any requirement of this Agreement. du~ing the review period. If at any time of~ review, an issue not previously 3identified in writing~pursuant, to this Paragraph 9 is required.to:be addressed, the review at the request of either partyqmay-~ be.'. continued to afford'isufftcient time. for analysis~ and preparation. "%Such review by the~ City may be conducted by the~ city= Manager~ . 10 - 1-~ In format ion'- to~ be~'-Provtded~ Bv~ ~osDital ~ ~.~ Pursuant to G0y..e_rnment~ CodeP Section% 65865~ I:~- HospitalsgshaIl? have]~ the duty to~ d~mS~strate ~- tts~ '~'0~d+ faith'~'c6mPi ianC'e~i~th~,'~t~ ~. of ~_ thi~ ~ Ag~_~_~e..~nt_~ _at~ ~each?~ perlod.i.c~revieKk%7---~77~~ ~ospxtals.~duty~z may.- be · nonp_e~_formance~ or~ excusedz performance= of= the~ requirements~ of' this Agreement, or (ii) oralh Or~wrltte~ evidence~ubmitted% at the time of review. 10.1.1 The. parties~ recognize~ that~ this Agreement and the~ documents incorporated~ heretn~ could~be~"dee~ed to. contain thousands of requirements-~ (i. e., ~ ~. construction standards, landscaping standards, et al.), and'that evidence of each and every requirement: would be a wasteful~ use: of the parties' resources. Accordingly,. Hospitals shall be deemed to_ have satisfied its duty to demonstrate~ compliance when it~presents evidence~ of i~s good faith.: and substantial compliance withl any~ issues requested to be addressed by the City in accordance with Paragraph 9, and substantial compliance with the major provisions of the Existing Approvals. Generalized evidence or statements shall be accepted in the absence of any evidence that such evidence is untrue. 10.2 Findin~ by the city Durinq Annual Review Period that HosPitals is in Default.. If, during, any annual review period, the City, on the basis of ~ubstantial evidence, finds H6spitals has not- in gOod~ faith with this Agreement, it will give Hospitals thirty (30) days' notice'of default pursuant to Paragraph 10. 10.3 Delay in Annual Review. The City's failure to review annually-the Hospitals' compliance with the term~ and conditions of the Agreement shall not constitute or be asserted by the .City as a breach by Hospitals of any terms of the Agreement. '11. Default. If either party defaults under this Agreement, the party alleging such default will give the breaching party no less than thirty (30) days' notice of default in writing. The kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 18 notice of default will specify the nature of the alleged default and, where appropriate, the marn~er and period of ti~e in which ~aid default may be satisfactorily cured. Du~ing any period of ~ure, the party charged will not be considered in default for the purposes, of termination or institution of legal proceedings. If the default is .cured, then no default will exist and' the.noticing party will take no further action. 11.1 I~Ablio ~earinq Re~tred Prior to the Institution pf beqa~ Proceedinqs. After proper notic~ and the~ expiration of the cure period, the noticing party to - this~= Agreement, shall request hearings before the Planning ~ Commission/and~ the city Council for a determination as to whether this:Agreement~ ~hould he modified, suspended or~ terminated= asJ~ a'J~result~f ef.?eaCh~default, prior- to the institutioh of litigation. · - toQ. be~. a~_walver2 by¥ elther~_party~ of~ any~ri' h "W'~,~' ~i~i~W~h~Id~h · that~ partl~- pursuant-.to..' federal= or' state~iaw~,exce provided ..... hereLn. Any~ failure- or delay,- b of;its~ rights~ o= remedies~ as~ to~ any~ default'_ by? ther otl~er~ party~ will not operate as a waiver of any defaults; or of: anycsuchYrights~ or remedies or deprive, such party of its~ right~ to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings~ which· it~ may~ deem~ necessary to protect; assert or enforce any such rights- or-~re_m~dies. 11.3 Remedies Upon Default. In the event of a default by either party to this Agreement, the~ parties shall have the remedies of declaratory relief, specific performance, mandamus, injunction and other equitable remedies. Neither pa~ ty ~hal! have the remedy of monetary danages against~ the other except as to obligations requiring the payment of money; provided, however, that the prevailing - party shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs if they have offered prior to the institution of litigation, and continue, during the course of litigation, to meet and confer with the other, party to resolve in good faith their differences. 11.4 Third Partv BeneficiarV Rights UPOn Defaultl In the event that. Hospitals defaults in its ~performance under-this agreement, its:' default shall not be asserted by the City as a limitation on City' s obligations to Eas~l~ke 'under Paragraphs 6.5 and 13.8 herein; provided.however, in the event of Hospitals' default, City shall have a right to demand EastLake. to fund the traffic analyses and studies contemplated in Paragraphs 6.5.2 and 6.5.4, to the extent not performed .or funded by Hospitals. kaisrl9a.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 19 12. M~difications; SUspension; Termination. 12.1 Emer~enc-y Clrcumstances. If, as a result of specific fa~, events or cir~-t~ces, ~e City f~ds, following ~e proced~es outl~ in ~is Se~ion 11 ~d based upon ~e prepgnder~ce of all evid~ce pres~ted~ b¥.~e p~fes; ~at a severe- and ~ediate ~e~en~ threatJ to~ ~- heal~. ~d~ safety of ~e' citizens of ~e Ci~ re~ir~' ~e- m~ffi~tion or~ s6spension of ~is Agre~ent, ~s City will: 12.1.1 Notify Hospitals of. (i)~ ~e ~itiation of ~e City's dete~ination process;_ ~d¥~(ii)-.~e'~.reaso~ for ~e city' s d~t~ination~ ~d all fa~ upon- whi~: reaso~= are based; 12.1.3. 'Hold:a~he~g;lon: ~e: det~nation, at co--till At- ~e: concision-of~said~h~ing;~e_Ci~- Co~il may t~e action to:' suspend: ~iz:.A~e~titf.;:-based.upon ~e evidence presented by ~e::: p~ies,~ ~e~Y City~ Co~cil:.~ f~ds: ~at ~e suspension of ~is'A~e~ent is:red,ed:to: avoid ~ ~edlate ~d severe~ ~e~; ~reat' to': ~e~ heal~~- s~fe~:- and g~eral' welfare of ~e city; . 12.1.4 ~ere ~e citiz~ of ~e city iface a severe and ~ediate~ ~erg~ threat: to ~e~: heal~ ~d s~fety, ~e City ~y ~ilat~ally susp~d ~e-~=effe~iv~s of ~e A~eement for ~ period not to ~ceed ~e t~e reason~ly re~ired for notice ~d a p~lic hearing. 12.2 Change ~n State or yederal ~w o~ Re~lat~ons. If any state, or federal law or relation ~a~e~ d~g ~e te~ of ~is A~e~t or ~e-a~ion or ~action~ of ~y o~er~ affected gove~ent~ j~isdi~ion~ precludes~ compli~ce wi~ one: or more provisions of ~is:'A~e~ent, or re~ires ~ges ~ pl~,. maps or pe~its approved by ~e: City, ~e p~i~ 'will a~ p~su~t to Para~ap~ 1!.2.1 ~d 11.2.2. 12.2.1 ~e p~y first becoming a~e of such enac~ent or action or ~a~ion will provide ~e o~er pa~y wi~ ~itten notice of su~ state or federal law or re~lation ~d provSde a copy of such law or relation ~d a statist regard~g its confli~ wi~ ~e provisions of ~is A~e~t. ~e pa~ies will promptly meet ~d confer- ~ a good-fai~ ~d reason~le att~pt to modify or ~pend ~is A~e~ent to comply wi~ such kaisrlga.~ Kaiser ~velopment A~eement J~e 30, 1992 Page 20 federal or state law or regulation. A copy of any such notice which is sent to Hospitals shall also be sent to the holder of any institutional' first trust deed enc~,~ering the Property~ if such holder has the written request for notice and 'provided .the City with the holder's address for notice purposes. 12.2.2 Thereafter, regardless ' of:~'whether the parties reach agreement on the effect of much,federal-, or' state law or regulation, the matter will be- scheduled for. hearing~ before the City Council no sooner than-ten (10): days-, following:~writ~n~notice of such hearing to Hospitals. The City_ Council, at:~sUch~hearings, will determine the. exact: modification~ . suspension:: 0r~._t'~r~ination which is required:, bx~ the- federal: ore state:: lawk or.;:~tion;, if any. HosPitals, at:-the~hearingk- will~ haveith6~ri'ght-~-t6%'~ff~foral and. written.-_, test tmonyF regardin~± EMi DroDos~d~ aCti6n~ Any~ modlftc, atlons ,-~-;~'-'$uspension~' or~ terminat/~ ~re~ ~b4~ct-' to - ] u~lcl~ review. - ' ' :-.:.' -. · ~ :~ ' 12.3% Modif~cat~oD~ b¥~ }~utua~% Co~se~t% ~i This:Agreemen~ may be-modified."- from~time: toLt~ ~e~,~_ by:the: mutu al-~ c~n~ent_~ of~.the: parties o~ly<- inrt~eMsame-:..marmer~ ns: its-~ adoption:-by.~ an?- ordinance: as. set forths= in~ california- Government: Code:- Sectionsk 65867~-,' 65867.5 and 65868, -. ahdr Resolution.. 11933 of the.;. City~ of-- Chu/a - Vista. Any mod. ificatlon- that-: affectszthe~-rights= of:: E~stLaS(e-:-as:- an- express third party beneficiary-shall require-the consent Of EastLake- The term- "this- Agreement"-as- used: in"this Agreement will: include any such modification properly approved and executed. 12.4 Invalidation. If this agreement is invalidated following.the Effective Date, .and if Hospitals. has applied for but is unable-to obtain bu~]ding permits, with respect to the third phase of its development at the Property within twenty years following the Effective Date, then the city shall pay $480,000 to Hospitals. 12.5 ~otice of Te~-minat~on. In the event that this Agreement is terminated pursuant to-any of the-, methods- authorized in this-Article 12, the City shall prepare~ and record: a Notice of Termination,- containing a reference to this_ Agreement and the effective date_of any such termination in a form suitable for recordation with the County of San Diego. 13. General provisions. 13.1 Notice~. All notices required by or provided for under .this Agreement she/1 be in writing and delivered' in person or seht by certified mail, post~ge prepaid, return receipt required, to the principal offices of the City Hospitals and EastLake. Notice shall be effective on the date delivered in person or the date when the postal authorities indicate that the kaisrl9a.wp Kaiser Development Agreement June 30, 1992 Page 21 mailing was delivered to the address of the receiving party indicated below: Kaiser Foundation l~ospitals 393 East Walnut Street Pasadena, CA 91188 Attn: Manager, propertylAcquisition The city of Chula Vista · 276 Fourth Avenue C_hula Vista, CA 92010 Attn: City Manager EastLake !, Development'.. Company 900; T~ne A~enue~.' S~it~ 100 Chula~Vista ,'3. CA~: 91914 -[~ Such~ritten notices may be~ sent:' in:thei same~ manners- to such.- other hPe~and: addresses as-eitherf'~'party%-may:~from time to time d~i~nate~ by mail. 13.2 Jo~Dt and .SeveF$1- Liability.. if either party consists of more than one legal person, the 0bl_igations are joint and several. 13.3 Severabil~t¥. If any-material provision of this Agreement is held invalid, this Agreement will be automatically terminated unless within fifteen (15) days after such provision is held invalid the party holding rights' under the invalidated provision affirms the balance of this Agreement in writing~ This provision will not affect the right of the parties to modify or suspend~ this Agreement by mutual consent pursuant to Paragraph 11.3. 13.4 Recordation of Aqreement; Amendments. All amendments hereto must be in writing-signed by .the appropriate. agents of the city and. Hospitals, in a form suitable for recording in the Office of the Recorder, County of San Diego. Within ten (10) days of the date of this Agreement, a copy will be recorded in the official Records of San Diego County, California. Upon completion of ~ per fore,ante of this Agreement or its earlier termination, a statement evidencing said completion or termination, signed by-the appropriate agents of Hospitals and the city will be recorded in the official Records of San-Diego County, California. 13.5 ~pplicable Law. This Agreement will be construed and ' enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of California. ) kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agreement ~-" J~ne 30, 1992 Page 22 13.6 ~ssi~n~ent. Hospitals may transfer its rights and obligations under this AgTeement if such transfer or assignment is made as part of a transfer, assignment, sale or lease of all or a portion of the Property and the purchaser intends to put the Property to a medical center use of the same or a lesser-extent and intensity as allowed in the Existing Approvals : and~ the . City consents to said transfer. Said consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 13.7 ~e~m of ~qreement. - The term of this Agreement shall expire on the first to occur of (a) Hospitals'. completion of all three phases of its development at the Property, or (b) -twenty (20) years after the Effective Date. 13.8 Covenant of Good. Faith and Fair~- De~linq. Neither . party shall do, anlrthing, which') shallr,'-have~the'f~ffect~of~harming~or _: ihjuring{4the: right-" of-. the~; other*-p~r~tyz, to~'rec~ive%.~hes ben,fits of ~ this~Agree~ent; ~: each~. pa~ hyi ~hallfrefrain='- ~ ....... from._~'doLtlg='~ '-~" ¥ anything:' " ' which Would~ rehder: its:performance., under thisJ- Agreement: impossible ;: and ~ach'~ party, shall do everything which this:. Agreement contemplates that such party shall do in order to accomplish the objectives and' ATE OF CAW.T~OR3qIA ) )I/NrrY OF SAN DIEGO )ss : Agreement I5r OF CHULA VISTA ) ::' J ~lv 1.1~}72 ' bef°re mx, the undersigned, City Cle. rk in mad for said City of Chula Vista, p lista, a ·:axed T. N~dv, r persona~y known to me to be thc pemon who executed thc within imtn M~vor - o~' the C~ty of ~nula hrm ta, the co<'~orafion therein name, and ac3m owledged to me potation executed the within immmment pursuam to Municipal Cod-.. §12.28.030 FNESS my hand and ofScia] ~ potation) Executive Vice-President Sandra H. Cox, Assistant Secretary kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agaeement June 30, 1992 Page 23 13.6 ~ssiqn~ent. Hospitals may transfer its rights and obligations under this Agreement if such transfer or assignment is made as part of a transfer, assignment, sale or lease of all or a portion of the Property and the purchaser intends to put the Property to a medical center use of the same or a lesser extent and intensity as allowed in the Existing Approvals and the City consents to said transfer. Said consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.. 13.7 Term of A~reement. The term of this Agreement shall expire on the first to occur of (a) Hospitals' completion of all three phases of its development at the Property, or (b)' twenty (20) years after the Effective Date. 13.8 Covenant of Good Faith-and~Fair~Dealinq. - Neither party shall do anything~ which! shall-' have~ the~ effectt-6f~.~ harming or ~ injuring'- the right.~ of~ the: gther: party'~ to~ re~ei~J, the~benefits ~ of this .Agreement; each. party-shall_ refraLn~ fr.om ~ould~ render ~ lts~ perform~nce~under~thls~Agreem ~e._/~.._..~l]npossibIe ;~ and ~ each~ party,, shall:f do~; everythlng:~ whlch'~ thl$~ Agr~.~ment.~ c. 0nt .emplates t~at such~: party shallI do in order to accomplish%the ob]ectlwes- and purposes of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WR~REOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date first above written. The City of C-hula Vista, a municipal corporation By: By: KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPIT~I-~, a Californ~ ' non-profit public benefi~ ~orporation Execu i~e vi~-~-President Carlos Z~ragoz a Assistant Secretary kaisrlga.wp Kaiser Development Agreement J~une 30, 1992 Page 23 Sq-^TE OF C3J/FOkN1A COUI~q-Y OF Los knqeles On July 2, 199~ ~ ~or~ m~ Alice Toy , No~ PubH~ ~nnl~ ap~ Hpqb ~, J~n~v , ~nal~ ~ ~ ~ (or CO~ OF Los ~qeles On July 2 . 1992 , 1~ ~for~ m~ Alice Tow ~ , N0~ PubH~ ~n~ ap~ Carlos zara~oza , ~ ~ *o m~ (or - ~ au~o~ ~pad~i~), ~d ~t ~ ~cr~c~ si~(s) on ~c ~u~t ~c ~n(s), or ~c ~S ~ ~d ~d o~ ~ AGREEMENT REGARDING A COMMUNITY TRAIL PEDESTRIAN FACILITY BETWEEN EAST.LAKE I AND EASTLAKE II WherEAS, the City of Chula vista has approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for the EastLake Greens, Tentative Map 83-3; and Wh~EAS, the City in approving the Map requited, pursuant to Condition No. 64 that "A pedestrian bridge or an alternative acceptable to the City Engineer shall be constructed over Otay Lakes Road (Telegraph Canyon Road) to connect the community trail from EastLake I to EastLake II."; and W/~A~EAS, the City and Developer agree that it is appropriate to condition the development of the commercial/retail center in Unit 3, Lot 44, of Tentative Map 84-7, to the design and construction of a pedestrian facility outlined by Condition No. 64 of Tentative Map 88-3; and WHEREAS, in satisfaction of said Condition, this Agreement provides for the design, construction and security for such a facility; NOW, TRE~EFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. EastLake Development Company (hereinafter "Developer") shall design and plan a facility in conjunction with the EastLake Commercial and EastLake Retail Center located north of Otay Lakes Road (Telegraph Canyon Road) and west of EastLake Parkway (Unit 3, Lot 44 of Tentative Map 84-7) which connects the community trail from EastLake I to EastLake II. 2. The design for such facility shall be submitted to the City Engineer, provided however that the City Engineer shall, in lieu of a pedestrian bridge, consider alternatives and accept or reject them. 3. Developer shall post a labor, materials and faithful performance bond upon the execution of this Agreement in amounts acceptable to the City Engineer reflecting the estimated cost of a pedestrian bridge, notwithstanding the City Engineer's discretion to authorize an acceptable alternative. The amount of the bonds will be 150% of the estimated construction costs and may be reduced to 100% of the estimated construction costs upon plan approval of the pedestrian crossing facility. Upon any renewal of the security provided for under this Section, %he City Engineer may request an increase in the amount of any bond to reflect anticipated increases in the cost of the facilities based upon the inflation index of the "Engineering News Record" 4. In the event the City Engineer authorizes an acceptable alternative design for %he facility, the City shall, upon request of Developer, approve a modification in the bonds pursuant to the standards set forth hereinabove in Section 3, to reflect any J: / 0 ATTACHMENT 4 the City of Chula Vista pursuant ~ to Resolution No. 15480 on By: . , January 23 , 19 9--0. Robert L. Santos Its: President By: 2F~ , Its: Mayor ATTEST: Approved as to form and content: v/CKB/AG098CKB/ie 1/2/90 3 - -~ '"- 400 IA 2660 Premium: BOND FOR FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE WIIF. RF. AS, the City Council o[ th~ City o[ Chula Vista, State of CalifOrnia, and EASTLAKE DEVELOPHENT CO,I?ANY , (h~relna~er d~t~nal~, as 'Prlnclpa}~ ~nlcr~ inlo an. ugT~ment whereby Pri~lpal'agr~ 1o ~lall snd ~mploto ~rlain d~Jgnai~ publb imp~vcmon~, which said e~ment, datM .. 19 , and Identlfi~ prOJ~CtEASTL~ GREEfiS PEDESTRI~ BRIDGE OVER OTAY RO~ horcby rCf~rr~ ~ hnd mad~ a pa~t h~f; and ~tER~S, said Principal ~ r~ulr~ under ~ho t~ o~gold agreement to fumbh a bond for the fa~lhFul ~fforman~ of said agr~ment. NOW, THEREFORE, w~,. the Principal and ST. PAUL FI~ ~B ~I~E I~SH~GE GO~Y .~ as ~um~y, are held firmly ~u~d unto Iht CILy o[ Chula V~ta, hereinafter ~lled "G~, In thc penal mm of . FOIJR H~DRED SEVENTY THOUSAND AND NO f]OOTUS--= ............. = ........... (~. ~ 7o, oo9. oJ--:.----c ............ : ) I~w[ul money o[ the Unl~cd Sl~t~, for whiuh ~um ~11 and Italy R} ~ made, ~ b~d o~I~, our hcl~, ~u~o~, cx~utom, so.rally, fir~y ~ thio preenS. '~ ~mdltton of lhts obligation I, ~uch that [f the n~ ~und~ Prin~pal, h~ or Jb hcir~, cxm-uto~, ndminlst[ato~, suc~or~ or ~igns. ,h~ In all [hin~ ~land lo ~nd abide by, ~,ld well and truly k~p and ~rform lhe manana, mnditlom and pro~slons in lhe ~aid agr~mcnt and any alteration thm~f made as therch~ pro~d~, on hi~ or Ihei~ p~rt, to bo kept and ~rrormed time and la the manner lhcr~n ~p~ifi~, and in ~11 r~p~u ~)rd~ng to thclr truo intent m~d meanin$ ~nd ,lmll lndcmnif~ and s~ haml~ Ihe City, ils o[fi~, ~gen~ and emplo~¢% lhc~cln ~tlpulat~, lhcn lhi~ obligation ~hall ~m null ~nd m~; othe~[~o it shall ~ ~d remain In ~ull for~ and ~ a part of O~e obligation ~ur~ hcx~y and in addition to Ihe fa~ amount ,p~ifled thercfi~r, there ~hall ~ Included ~t* and rc~nable mpe~ and f~, in~ud[ng rosonable attorney's [~, lncur~cd by tho ~ty in ~u~fully enforcing ~u~ obligation, ~11 to ~ and includ~ in any judgem~t renderS. ~e ~urcty hereby ~lipulaim ~nd agr~ Ihat no dmnge, extension of lime, ~lteration or mldilion ~ lbo temps of the agreement or to the ~rk to be ~rform~ lhoreunder o[ ~he H~iflemio~ a~mpanylng the ~ame ~hall in ~n~i~e affect 1~ obligations on th~ bond, and it do~ hereby walm nolim of any ~uch chnngh exte~bn of tl~e, al~ralloa or addlllon tho agr~cnt or I~ the ~r} or t. the STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) On January 5, 1990 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Graham 3ones * * * * * * * * * * * * * lly , persona known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who executed the within instrument as the Vice President of DANIEL V, INC., a california corporation, the general partner of EASTLA/~E DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, the partnership that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same as such partner and that such partnership executed the WITNESS my hand and official seal Notary -~ubl i~ COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) On January 5, 1990 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary t~mblic in and for said State, personally appeared Graham 3ones * * * * * * * * * * * * * mersona!ly known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who executed the within instrument as the Vice President of DAVID V, INC., a California corporation, the general pa~ner of EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, the pa~nership that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same as such partner and that such partnership executed the WITNESS my hand and official seal Notary Public thePow~ofAttorneyC]erk Pleaseref ..... ~-~---:'~ ........... . -- :,,d~vidual s) '~ ~ ~: ~ ~ GENE~L POWER OF A~ORNEY - CERTIFIED COPY (Ori~nal on File at Home Office of Company. See Certification.) Willi~ R. To.erst, P~i T. ~, Gi~ G. P~ker. ~les L. He~l~, C~ol R~e, ~iel P. ~il~, ~a ~atch, ~ A. Pe~, ~t~e ~on, Gr~ N. O~ra, ~div~ua~y, ~ea, ~o~ its t~e ~d lawful aHo~-fa~ to ~ute, ~ and de~v~ for and on its beb ~f ~ surety, any and ~] bonds and under laking$, reco~i~nc~, contra~ of ~'l'~ ~ ~ ~R ~ ~ and the execution of all such instrument(s) in pursuance of these presents, shall be as binding upon said St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins~rane~ Company, as fully and amply, to all intent2¢ and, purposes, as if the same had been duly executed and acknowledged by its regularly elected officers at its principal office. Fhis Power of Atlorney is execuled, and may he certified to and may be ievoked, pursuant to and by authorh3~ of Arlicle ¥,;Section 6(C), of the By-Laws adopt ed by [he Board of Directors of ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPAN¥ at a meeting called and held on the 23rd day of January, 1970, of which the following is a true transcript of said Seclinn 6(C): "The President or any Vice President, Assist;mt ~ce President, Secretary or Resident Secretary shall have power and authority {1) To appoint Anorneys-inJact, and to authorize them to execute on behalf of the Company, and. atfach the Seal of the Company thereto, bondsand undertakings, rex:ognizances contracts of ndemnity and other writings obi gatory in ihe nature thereof, and {2) To appoint special Attorneys-in-fact who are hereby authorized Io certify lo copi!~]~~ power-of att0tney issued Jn pursuance of th s section and/or any of the By-Law~ of the Company, and ,~ ? ~ : (3) -Fo remove, at any time, any such Attorney-in-fact or Special Attorney-in-facl ar~'~. ~h-e auih~th~ given him Further, this Power of Attorney is signed and sealed by facsimile pursuanl lo resolution of the Board of D'i?ct $rs of said C~mpany adopted at a meeting duly called and held on the 6th day of May, 1959, of which lhe folinwing is a ~rue excerpt: "Now therefore the Signatures of such officers and Ihe seal of the Company may be affixed to any such P°wer of atto~ne~ or any certificate relaiing thereto by facsimile, and any such power of atlorney or cee fificate bearing such facsimile signatures or facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon the Company and any s~ch power so executed and cerlified by facsimile signatures and facsimile seal shall be valid and binding ~pon the Company in the fulme with re.~pect to any bond or undertaking to which it is altached.' ,~,~,,~'~"""% IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, SI. Paul Fire and Mariae I~surance Company has caused this instrument to be signed and its ~ff'~O_~.~ County Of Ramsey ' On ~h~s 27 th day of Septent~er ,19 89 , before me came lhe individual who executed the preced ng nstmment, to me ~ ~ 1N TESTIMONY WHEREOF, lhave hereunto !-el my hand and affixed my Official Seal, at the city of St. Paul, Minnesota, the day /~O~ , and year first above written. nd affidavit, and the copy of the Seclion of lhe By-Laws of said Company as set forlh in said Power of A torney, with the ORIGINALS ON FILE IN THE %'; -~- L'ff , 19 Secretary Premium included in BOND FOR LABOR AND MATERIAl, WIIEREAS, the City council of the City of Chula Vista, Stale ct' California, and EASTLAKE DEVELOPI'~NT COMPANY .. (hereinafter designated as "Principal') hava enlored into an agrt~ment whereby Prindpal agrr. es to in.stall and complete certain public Improvements, which gald agreement, datt~ ., 19 , and Identifiexl aa pFoJcc% EASTLAKE GREENS PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER OTAY ROAD __, is hercby referred to and made a part hereof; and WI IEREAS, under the ternm of.raid agreement, Principal Is required before entering upo. the pcrfi~rmance of the w~)lk, R) fil~ a good and sufficient payment bond with th~ City of Chula Vista to secure Ihe clairn~ to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Sectioo 30~q'2) of Part 4 of Division 3 of tho Civil Code of tho Slalo o[' Cali[omla. NOW, THEREFORE, said Prlndpai and thc undcrsl§ncd as corporate surety, arc hold ftmfly bound unto the City of Cliula Vista and all eonlraClOr% subconlractors, laborers, materlalmen and all other persons employed in the per[ormancc of Ih~ aforesaid agreemcnt and rei'¢rr~ to In the aforesaid Code or Civil Procedure in the sum of FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND AND N0/1DOTHS ............. L ................ ($ 470 or, D f)O .......... ~ ), for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amd{mrs due under ~h~ Unemployment Insurance Act wllh respect lo such work or labor, that said surely will pay the .~ame in an amount not ex,.:oeding the amount hereinatx~ve set forth, and also in czao suit is brought upon this bo~d, will pay, in addition to the face amount ther~f, costs and rc~sonablo ~penscs and Ices, Including re~sonable attorney's fees, Incurred by the City of Chula Vista in successfully enforcing such obligation, to be awarded and fixed by Ihe coua, and to be t~ed ~ co.sis and to be included In the judgement therein ri:adored, It is hereby cxprer, sly slipulated m~d agreed that this bond shall Inure to the benefiX of any and all pcrso~, companies and corporations cntltled to file clain'~ under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 o[ Division 3 of the CMl O~de, so ns lo give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit bwught upon this bond. Should the condition ~f thi.~ btmd he fully perfinmed, then this obligation shell bemme null and void, otherv&e it shall bo and remain in full force and effect. Tho surety hereby sfipulatc'~ and agrcca that no change, extension of lime., alteration or addition 1o the lerms of ~id ag:'ecmcnt or the spc, cifications accompan)dng lbo samo $hall in any manner STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On January 5, ]990 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Graham 3ones * * * * * * * * * * * * *, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who executed the within instrlLment as the Vice President of DA/~IEL V, INC., a California corporation, the general partner of EASTLA-KE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, the partnership that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same as such partner and that such partnership executed the WITNESS my hand and official seal ~~~~ Not arm Pub 1 i CO~TY OF S~ DIEGO ) On January 5, ]990 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Graham 3ones * * * * * * * * * * * * *, personally known to me or proved to i~e on the basis of satisfactol-y evidence to be the person who executed the within inst_~ament as the Vice President of DAVID V, INC., a California corporation, the general partner of EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT_ COMP.~NY, the partnership that executed the within inst~ment, and acknowledged to me that snch corporation executed the sa~e as such partner and that such partnership executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal ~- ~_-~.<f=~:~ N., . : _l~_~_.:~ ,IA (gENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY - CERTIFIED COPY (Original on File at Home Office of Company. See Certification.) William R. Torgerson, Pearl T. Lew, Glenn G. Parker, Charles L. Hezmathalch, Carol Reeve, Daniel P. A~uilar, Barbara Purgatch, Frank A. Pez~-y, Catherine Anderson, Gte9 N. Okura, individually, Brea, California UNLINLITED AS TO CHARAci'~R AND A!vlOUI~ md the execution of all such Jn~Irument(s) in pursuance of these presents, shall be as binding upon said St. Paul Fir~ and Marine Insurance Company, as fully tad amply, to all intenLs and purposes, a~ if lhe same had been duly executed and ack?owledged by i~s regularly elected officers at ils principal office. tdopted by the Board of Directors of S~ PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY at a meeting called and held on the 23rd day of January, 1970, which the follow~ng is a m~e transcript of smd Section 6(C): :ailed and held on the 6th day of May, 1959, 6f which the following is a true excerpt: *'~' ~'~g[ 4~'**o IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, SI. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company has caused this inslrumenl to be signed and its - ~ ST. PAUL FIRE AND MAR1NE INSURANCE COMPANY ~ ,'~ STATE OF MINNESOTA} ss. ~qi~ County of R~sey ~ this 27th . day of Septembo_r .19 ~9 , before me came the individual who execu ed the preced ng nslmment, to me >rder of the Board of Directors of said Company. t~ ~ andIN TESTlyear firs:~MONYaboveWHEREOF'wrJnen, l have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Official Seal, at the city of St. Paul, Minnesota, the day MARY C STEMPER, Notary Public, Ramsey Coumy, MN My Commission Expires November I, 1990 ndaffidavi~ ~dthevopyof he Section of the By Laws of smd Com a~ a ..... Po erofA orney p y s set forlh m sa d Power of A omey, wxth Ihe OR GlNALS ON FILE IN THE IOME OFFICE OF SAID COMPANy, and that the same a~e cm~ect transc p s hereof and of the whole of the said orisinals, and that the said Power of IN FFST]MONY WHFREOF, 1 have he~¢unlo set my hand Ihis ,~,,'~j -~ _ 2nd dayof Jan. 19 ~0 ~2.~.~'~ - Secretary ~¥ INS[RUME.NJ LSSUED IN EXCESS Of ~HE PENALJY AMOUNI SJAIEO ABOVE IS JO~ALLY VOID AND WlI}IOUI ANY YAJulDIPY. RECORDING REQUESTED BY: AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: The City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Attn: City Attorney NO RECORDING FEE PURSUANT TO GOVT. CODE §6103 VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a charter city and THE EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC, a California limited liability company Dated August 1, 2002 ATTACHMENT 5 1 VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT THIS VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into on August 1, 2002, between THE EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC, a California limited liability company ("EastLake"), and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation having charter powers (the "City"), with reference to the recitals set forth below. 1. Recitals. 1.1 City's Interest in Entering Agreement. The City wishes to encourage the development of the Property (as defined below) on the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. In connection with the development of the Property certain benefits relating to community trail enhancement, development of future transit stations, and financing of public facilities will accrue to the City's benefit. The City is entering this Agreement in the public interest and for the public benefit. 1.2 The Property; EastLake's Interest. EastLake owns that certain real property (consisting of two parcels totaling approximately 68.1 acres) commonly known as EastLake Village Center North ("the Property"), more particularly depicted on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein. The western parcel of the Property consists of approximately 54.5 acres ("Western Parcel") and is depicted on Exhibit A. The eastern parcel of the Property consists of approximately 13.6 acres ("Eastern Parcel") and is depicted on Exhibit A. EastLake Intends to construct and operate on the Property commercial, research, manufacturing, retail, office, industrial and other related support facilities ("Project"). 1.3 Status of the Property and Project. EastLake proposed and the City on July 23, 2002 approved EastLake's proposal to (1) amend the City's General Plan to change the land use designation for a portion of the Property, (2) amend the EastLake II General Development Plan to change the land use designation for portions of the Property, and (3) amend the EastLake II Planned Community District Regulations to accommodate the changes in land use. EastLake and the City are also proceeding to amend the EastLake I Sectional Planning Area ("SPA"). The SPA amendments shall be reflected in a separate document to be known as the EastLake I, Village Center North Supplemental SPA, which amendment shall include, among other requirements, updated Design Guidelines, and associate regulatory documents for the Property (collectively, the "Amended Project Approvals"). 1.4 Development of Property. In connection with the Project and the Amended Project Approvals, portions of the Property shall be identified and developed for particular uses. The Western Parcel is comprised of two components. The northerly portion of approximately 16 acres is designated for research and limited manufacturing. The southerly portion of approximately 38 acres is designated retail commercial ("Western Retail Commercial Site"). 2 1.5 Prior Development Agreements. A portion of the Western Parcel consisting of approximately 30.6 acres is subject to that certain Development Agreement by and between Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and the City, recorded August 20, 1992 in Official Records of San Diego County as Document No. 1992-0528395 ("Kaiser Agreement"). The Property is also subject to that certain Development Agreement by and between EastLake Development Company and the City, recorded in Official Records of San Diego County as Document No. 1985-198858 ("EastLake Development Agreement"). 1.6 Pedestrian Bridge Agreement. Pursuant to that certain Agreement Regarding a Community Trail Pedestrian Facility Between EastLake I and EastLake II approved by the City on January 23, 1990 pursuant to Resolution 15480 ("Bridge Agreement"), EastLake agreed to build a pedestrian bridge over Otay Lakes Road to connect the Western Parcel with the Von's shopping center located across said road at the time the Western Parcel is developed. 1.7 Effective Date. The "Effective Date" of this Agreement shall be the date on which this Agreement is adopted by the City Council. 2. Enhancement to Community Trails. EastLake agrees to provide trail enhancements of three (3) pedestrian nodes ("Trail Enhancements" on the Western Parcel in connection with its development as follows: 2.1.1 Site and Architectural Designs. EastLake shall prepare site and conceptual architectural designs for Trail Enhancements as depicted on Exhibit B-1 and Exhibit B-2. 2.1.2 Approval of Designs. EastLake shall submit such site and conceptual architectural designs and construction drawings concurrent with the landscape plans for the Western Parcel and shall obtain the City Director of Planning and Building's approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 2.1.3 Construction of Trail Enhancements. EastLake shall cause the construction of the Trail Enhancements substantially in the manner depicted on Exhibit B-1 and Exhibit B-2 and approved by the City Director of Planning and Building for the amount of the construction estimate (as defined below) and as adjusted annually to the index in the Engineering News Report commencing from the Effective Date. EastLake shall commence construction of the Trail Enhancements in conjunction with the construction of the Western Retail Commercial Site street improvements; provided, however, that such construction shall be complete no later than eighteen (18) months from the date the City approves the first parcel map for the Property. 2.1.4 Construction Estimate. EastLake shall prepare an estimate ("Construction Estimate") for the cost of constructing the Trail Enhancements. The Construction Estimate shall include all costs associated with construction of the Trail Enhancements including, without limitation, engineering designs, the site and conceptual architectural designs, and the construction drawings. EastLake shall submit the Construction Estimate to the City prior to approval of the first 3 building permit for the Project. The City's approval of the Construction Estimate shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. If the City Director of Planning and Building does not approve the Construction Estimate submitted pursuant to this paragraph, then the Director shall provide a reason for such rejection and suggestions for correction of the Construction Estimate. 2.1.5 Completion Bond Deposit. Based on the Construction Estimate, EastLake shall post a bond with the City, concurrent with the City's approval of the first parcel map for the Project, in the amount of one hundred fifty percent (i 50%) of the Construction Estimate to guarantee the faithful performance by EastLake (or its designee) of all work and the construction of the Trail Enhancements and securing the payment by EastLake (or its designee) for all labor and materials incurred in the construction of the Trail Enhancements. Upon completion and acceptance of all said improvements, the bond shall be released. 3. Future Transit Stations. The parties contemplate that the Project shall include transit stations on both the Western and Eastern Parcels and the parties agree that in connection with such facilities EastLake or its successors or assigns will perform, or cause to be performed, certain obligations as detailed herein. 3.1 Western Transit Station. EastLake agrees to perform the following obligations in connection with the Western Transit Station proposed to be located on a portion of the Western Parcel. 3.1.1 Payment for Western Transit Station. Prior to issuance of any building permits on the Western Parcel, EastLake shall pay $145,000 ("Western Transit Payment"), to the City to use exclusively for all costs of construction and landscaping of the Western Transit Station. The Western Transit Payment shall be full and complete satisfaction of any and all obligations EastLake may have in connection with the Western Transit Station. City shall deposit the Western Transit Payment in an interest bearing account, with all interest accruing to the account for the benefit of the Western Transit Station. If the City does not commence construction of the Western Transit Station before the end of the term of this Agreement, the Western Transit Payment, plus all accrued interest, shall be returned to EastLake. 3.1.2 Grant of Irrevocable Offer to Dedicate. EastLake agrees to grant with the first parcel map for the Property to the City an irrevocable offer to dedicate ("IOD") the site on which the Western Transit Station is located. The City Engineer shall have the discretion to accept such dedication as required by law. The City shall accept the IOD prior to beginning construction of the Western Transit Station and after proper environmental review. The Western Transit Station IOD shall automatically terminate on the tenth (10th) anniversary of the Effective Date if such IOD has not then been accepted by the City. The City shall provide a release in recordable form sufficient to remove the IOD upon ternfination. 3.2 Eastern Transit Station. The parties contemplate the need for the construction of a future transit station located in the Eastern Parcel ("Eastern Transit Station") as depicted on Exhibit 4 C-1 and Exhibit C-2. EastLake agrees to perform the following obligations in connection with the Eastern Transit Station proposed to be located on a portion of the Eastern Pamel. 3.2.1 Payment for Eastern Transit Station. Prior to issuance of any building permits on the Eastern Parcel, EastLake shall pay $48,000 ("Eastern Transit Payment"). The Eastern Transit Payment shall be full and complete satisfaction of any and all obligations EastLake may have in connection with the Eastern Transit Station. City shall deposit the Eastern Transit Payment in an interest bearing account, with all interest accruing to the account for the benefit of the Eastern Transit Station. If the City does not commence construction of the Eastern Transit Station before the end of the term of this Agreement, the Eastern Transit Payment, plus all accrued interest, shall be returned to EastLake. 3.2.2 Park and Ride Parking Spaces. EastLake agrees to provide an easement, at its sole cost and expense, for ten (10) parking spaces immediately adjacent to the Eastern Transit Station for the purpose of providing dedicated parking for the City's "Park and Ride" program. These spaces shall be marked to indicate that their sole purpose is for use for transit purposes. 3.2.3 Grant of Irrevocable Offer to Dedicate. EastLake agrees to grant with the first parcel map for the Property to the City an IOD the site on which the Eastern Transit Station is located. The City Engineer shall have the discretion to accept such dedication as required by law. The City shall accept the IOD prior to starting construction of the Eastern Transit Station and after proper environmental review. The Eastern Transit Station IOD shall automatically terminate on the tenth (10th) anniversary of the Effective Date if such IOD has not then been accepted by the City. The City shall provide a release in recordable form sufficient to remove the IOD upon termination. 4. Bus Turn - Outs. EastLake shall have no obligation, as a component of this Project or as a condition to any City approval of this Project, to provide construction designs, engineering designs or any funds or resoumes for any proposed turn-outs for MTDB bus service for the north- bound and south-bound segments of EastLake Parkway. 5. Maintenance Obligations. 5.1 Trail Enhancements. The Trail Enhancements shall be maintained in a first class manner and in perpetuity by the Property Owner, or its successor in interest, in accordance with the Design Guidelines contained in the SPA. Such maintenance shall also be a condition of the parcel map and included in the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions ("CC&Rs") for the Western Parcel or Project as determined to be appropriate by the City. 5.2 Western and Eastern Transit Stations. Upon the City's acceptance of either transit station IOD, the City shall have sole responsibility for all maintenance costs and maintenance obligations related to the Western Transit Station and the Eastern Transit Station. 5.3 Park and Ride Facilities. Parking spaces and ancillary improvements related to the "Park and Rid~" program will be maintained by the owner or owners of the Property. Such maintenance obligation shall be described in a manner approved by City in the CC&Rs and deed restrictions for the Property, and shall generally require maintenance in a first class manner in perpetuity similar to all other common space areas, with appropriate insurance. 5.4 Bus Turn-Outs. The City shall have sole responsibility for all maintenance costs and maintenance obligations related to the MTDB bus turn outs described in Paragraph 4. 6 Release of Pedestrian Bridge Obligation. In consideration of EastLake's obligations contained in this Agreement, the City hereby releases EastLake and its successors from any and all obligations contained in the Bridge Agreement, including, without limitation, the obligation to construct and maintain a pedestrian bridge. The City shall remove the obligations contained in the Bridge Agreement from the Property's chain of title. 7. TDIF Credits. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 22521, as amended, the City has adopted a transportation facility development impact fee ("TDIF") program, which is applicable to the Property. In connection with EastLake's obligation to pay TDIF, the following provisions shall apply to the Property. 7.1 Western Pamel. The City acknowledges that pursuant to the Kaiser Agreement, EastLake has 933 equivalent dwelling units ("EDU') TDIF credits, which EastLake may use only for the purpose of reducing its obligation to pay TDIF on the Westem Parcel. The City agrees that EastLake's TDIF obligations for the Western Parcel shall be no more than 933 EDUs regardless of the actual calculation of EDUs attributable to the Western Parcel provided the Western Parcel is developed in accordance with the Amended Approvals. A change to the Western Parcel from the Amended Approvals may cause an increase in the TDIF obligations. EastLake shall not be allowed to utilize or transfer surplus EDU credits if the City's EDU calculation is less than 933 EDUs. EastLake is entitled to such credits only for the rezoning that occurred as a result of the Amended Approvals. No EDU credits shall be allowed for any entitlement not consistent with the Amended Approvals. 7.2 Eastern Parcel. The City agrees that as of the Effective Date all TDIF associated with or allocatable to the Eastern Parcel has been fully satisfied by TDIF debt funded by the TDIF Assessment District; provided however, that the City's agreement pursuant to this Paragraph 7.2 is conditioned upon the construction and development of the Eastern Parcel with the development described in the TDIF Assessment District. 8. Effect of Kaiser Agreement. From and after the Effective Date, the Kaiser Agreement shall be and hereby is terminated. The City shall prepare and execute a recordable document to evidence this termination of the Kaiser Agreement. 9. Binding Effect; Encumbrance of Property; Status. 9.1 Runs with Land; Binding Effect This Agreement is intended to satisfy the provisions of California Civil Code section 1468. The obligations contained herein shall "run with the land" for the benefit of the City as described in Paragraph 1.1 and shall burden the Western Parcel and Eastern Parcel and shall be binding on future transferees of such real property. The provision of this Agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties successors- in-interest. 9.2 Discretion to Encumber. Nothing in this Agreement will prevent or limit EastLake, in any manner, at EastLake's sole discretion, from encumbering all or any portion of the Property or improvement thereon by any deed of trust or other security device. 9.3 Status. Each party will, within fifteen (15) days after written request, give ~vritten notice to the requesting party of whether the party giving the notice knows of any breach of this Agreement and its current understanding of status of performance under this Agreement. A copy of any such notice which is sent to EastLake shall also be sent to the holder of any institutional first trust deed encumbering the Property if such holder has made written request for notice and provided the City with the holder's address for notice purposes. 10. Default. If either party defaults under this Agreement, the party alleging such default will give the breaching party no less than thirty (30) days' notice of default in writing. The notice of default will specify the nature of the alleged default and, where appropriate, the manner and period of time in which said default may be satisfactorily cured. During any period of cure, the party charged will not be considered in default for the purposes of termination of institution of legal proceedings. If the default is cured, then no default will exist and the noticing party will take no further action. 10.1 Remedies Upon Default. In the event of a default by either party to this Agreement, the parties shall have the remedies of declaratory relief, specific performance, mandamus, injunction and other equitable remedies. Neither party shall have the remedy of monetary damages against the other except as to obligations requiring the payment of money; provided, however, that the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs if they have offered prior to the institution of litigation, and continue, during the course of litigation, to meet and confer with the other party to resolve in good faith their differences. 11. General Provisions. 11.1 Notices. All notices required by or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certi fled mail, postage prepaid, return receipt required, to the principal offices of the City or EastLake. Notice shall be effective on the date delivered in person or the date when the postal authorities indicate that the mailing was delivered to the address of the receiving party indicated below: The City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Attn: City Manager 7 The EastLake Company LLC 900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100 Chula Vista, CA 91914 Attn: Mr. William Ostrem Such written notices may be sent in the same manner to such other persons and addresses as either party may from time to time designate by mail. 11.2 Joint and Several Liability. If either party consists of more than one legal person, the obligations are joint and several. 11.3 No Partnership or Joint Venture. Nothing herein shall be construed to create a partnership or joint venture between the City and EastLake with respect to the development of the Property or any part thereof, nor shall the City or EastLake have any liability or obligation to any person whatsoever except as specifically set forth herein. 11.4 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person will have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 11.5 Severabilitv. If any material provision of this Agreement is held invalid, this Agreement will be automatically terminated unless within fifteen (15) days after such provision is held invalid, the party holding rights under the invalidated provision affirms the balance of this Agreement in writing. 11.6 Recordation of Agreement; Amendments. All amendments or operating memoranda hereto must be in writing signed by the appropriate agents of the City and EastLake, in a form suitable for recording in the Office of the Recorder, County of San Diego. Within ten (10) days of the date of this Agreement, a copy will be recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. Upon completion of performance of this Agreement or its earlier termination, a statement evidencing said completion or temfination signed by the appropriate agents of EastLake and the City will be recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. 11.7 Applicable Law. This Agreement will be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 11.8 Assignment. EastLake may transfer its rights and obligations under this Agreement if such transfer or assignment is made as part ora transfer, assignment, sale or lease of all or a portion of the Property and the pumhaser intends to put the Property to a use of the same or a lesser extent and intensity as allowed by any Project approvals (including the Amended Project Approvals) and the City consents to said transfer. Said consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 11.9 Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall expire ten (10) years after the Effective Date. 11.10 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. Neither party shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or injuring the right of the. other party to receive the benefits of this Agreement; each party shall refrain from doing anything which would render its performance under this Agreement impossible; and each party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates that such party shall do in order to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this Agreement. 11.11 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties relating to the transactions contemplated hereby and all prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into and superseded by this Agreement. 11.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, all of which together shall constitute on instrument. [THE NEXT PAGE IS THE SIGNATURE PAGE] 9 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this .Agreement on the date first above written. THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA a municipal corporation By: Name: Title: Approved as to form by Attest: Name: Susan Bigelow Title: City Clerk John M. Kaheny City Attorney THE EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC a California limited liability company By: Name: Title: 10 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ss On ,2002, before me, the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared C3 personally known to me, or ~3 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (S E A L) Signature of Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA } SS COUNTY OF On ,2002, before me, the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared Cl personally known to me, or Cl proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (S E A L) Signature of Notary Public I1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA } SS COUNTY OF On ,2002, before me, the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared ~ personally known to me, or ~ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (S E A L) Signature of Notary Public 12 PROJECT CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT APPLICANT: EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT CO VILLAGE CENTER NORTH FRO~EOT No,~he~t aod ~,~c~th,c,~st Co~ne~ or IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT ADDRESS: Otay Lakes Road aha EastlakeParkwAy SCALE: FILE NUMBER: NORTH No Scale PCM-03-O3 EXHIBIT A c ',DAiFILE',,Iocators\PCM0303 cdr 07/31/02 ~,~ T; ;.-;';,:,TIC CORRIDOR TRAIL SYSTEi~I (Adjacent to VC-1 and Eastlake Parkway) --- \\,,,\,-~ 8' Community Trail Node Fenton Street Node Transit Station VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT B-1 (Along ti'ail leading to Tcansit Station) /? ELEVATION OF TRAIL NODE :<?..' .::~..-.---~ ., ,..: , VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT PLAN VIEW OF TRAIL NODE EXHIBIT B-2 68'42 4J'E J89.~'-- ~ ! 18.0, FENTON STREET PARCEL 4 ~ + 50' l. lOJ ACRES I ~lS EXHIBIT IS ~E N 75-~V5~_ PORTION OF ~E PARCEL MAP SHOWING ~E LO.D FOR T~NSlT STA~ON m ~C~ 15 ~ D~NL ~ o. 165 ACRES ~ N N 7~OJ'4J' ~ ~ ~ 72.84' . ~ 50-~' P~CEL 6 0.9~5 ACRES 0. J77 195. VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT P~CEL 1 1 AGREEMENT O. 747 ACRES TRANSIT TRANSIT STATION PERSPECTIVE SECTION "A" _ :,j~t~ .~....~.~ ._.~'..:... ~ '~ -- Stairs shown, but alternative SECTION "B" ADA access will be provided VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT C-2 }u are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of cedain ownershiD or financial int,:,r~¢t¢ ,~,,m~nts' ....... ~,~,,~,~ buntributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the pad of the City ouncil, Planning Commission, and all other o~cial bodies The followin9 information must be disclosed: List the names of all persons having financial interest in the properly which is the subject of the application or the contract, e.9., owner applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any padnership interest in the partnership. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. Have you had more than $250 wodh of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past tweve months? Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s): Please identity each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter Councilmember in the current or preceding e~ection period? Yes ~ No ~ If yes, state which Councilmember(s): (NOTE: ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESSAR~ S actor/applicant Print or type name of contractor/applicant ATTACHMENT 6 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT I RECITALS A Project Site WHEREAS, the areas of land which are the subject of this Resolution are diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A and hereto incorporated heroin by this Resolution, and commonly known as EastLake I Activity Center, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of 54.5 acres at the northwest comer and 13.6 acres at the northeast comer of Otay Lakes Road and EastLake Parkway within the EastLake Planned Community ("Project Site"); and, B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on July 11, 2001 by The Eastlake Company ("Developer"), Village Center North Improvement Agreement ("Improvement Agreement"), involving 68.1 acres at the northeast and northwest comer of Otay Lakes Road and EastLake Parkway as represented in Exhibit C be approved ("Project); and, C Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, prior discretionary action of the development of the EastLake I portion of the Project Site has been the subject matter of prior General Plan, General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan, EastLake I General Development Plan, EastLake II Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use District Map, EastLake II Planned Community District Regulations, all previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 2002-64 and Ordinance No. 22863 on July 6, 1992; 2) a prior Improvement Agreement; and, D. Planning Commission Record of Application WHEREAS, the Planning Colnmission held an advertised public heating on the Project on July 31, 2002 and voted 5-0-0-2 to forward a recoIxmaendation to the City Council on the Project; and, WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduce before the Planning Commission at the public hearing on this project held on July 31, 2002 and the minutes and 1 Resolution resulting there from, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceedings; and, E. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the heating on the Project application and notices of said heatings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500 ft. of the exterior boundaries of the Project Sites at least ten days prior to the heating. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby find, determine and resolve as follows: II. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that portions the subject improvement Agreement (trail enhancements and park and ride spaces) have been addressed by the previous EIR for the EastLake I Sectional Planning Area (SPA) or the MND for the EastLake Village Center North project (IS-01-042). The transit station component is speculative at this time, and environmental review in accordance with CEQA will be required at the time detailed plans are developed. The other components of the Agreement are not considered projects under CEQA. No further environmental analysis is required for the Improvement Agreement. III. COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN The City Council has determined that the Village Center North Improvement Agreement, as shown in Exhibit C, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, is consistent with the City's General Plan, all applicable mandatory and optional elements of the General Plan and the EastLake II General Development Plan, as well as other applicable policies and regulations of the City; and, IV. APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby approves the document entitled "Village Center North Improvement Agreement" by and between the City of Chula Vista and The EastLake Company, LLC. dated August 1, 2002, as represented in Exhibit C, for 68.1 acres at the north east mhd northwest comer of Otay Lakes Road and EastLake Parkway. V. EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT The Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Chula Vista. 2 VI. RECORDATION OF DOCUMENT The City Clerk is hereby directed to record the Village Center North Improvement Agreement in the office of the County Recorder. IX. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon enfomeability of each and every term provision and condition heroin stated; and that in the event that any one or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by the Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, if the City so determines in its sole discretion, this resolution shall be deemed to be revoked and no further in force or in effect. Presented By: Approved as to form by: Robert A. Leiter John Kaheny Director of Planning City Attorney J:/Attomey/~cst*/VCN Agreement PROJECT CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR P.ojEc~ Exhibit A APPUCA~r: EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT CO. Improvement agreement for Eastlake Village PROJECT Northeast and Norlhwest Comer of ~D~SS: Ot~ Lakes Road and Ea~lake Pa~ay Center Nodh SC~E: I FIE NUMBER: NORTH No S~le PCM~3 Related Case: GPA~2-07; PCM~I-15. THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL John M. Kaheny City Attorney Dated: EXHIBIT C RECORDING REQUESTED BY: AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: The City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Attn: City Attorney NO RECORDING FEE PURSUANT TO GOVT. CODE {}6103 VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a charter city and THE EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC, a California limited liability company Dated August 1, 2002 VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT THIS VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into on August I, 2002, between THE EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC, a California limited liability company ("EastLake"), and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation having charter powers (the "City"), with reference to the recitals set forth below. 1. Recitals. 1.1 City's Interest in Entering Agreement. The City wishes to encourage the development of the Property (as defined below) on the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. In connection with the development of the Property certain benefits relating to community trail enhancement, development of future transit stations, and financing of public facilities will accrue to the City's benefit. The City is entering this Agreement in the public interest and for the public benefit. 1.2 The Property; EastLake's interest. EastLake owns that certain real property (consisting of two parcels totaling approximately 68.1 acres) commonly known as EastLake Village Center North ("the Property"), more particularly depicted on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein. The western parcel of the Property consists of approximately 54.5 acres ("Western Parcel") and is depicted on Exhibit A. The eastern parcel of the Property consists of approximately 13.6 acres ("Eastern Parcel") and is depicted on Exhibit A. EastLake Intends to construct and operate on the Property commercial, research, manufacturing, retail, office, industrial and other related support facilities ("Project"). 1.3 Status of the Property and Project. EastLake proposed and the City on July 23, 2002 approved EastLake's proposal to (1) amend the City's General Plan to change the land use designation for a portion of the Property, (2) amend the EastLake II General Development Plan to change the land use designation for portions of the Property, and (3) amend the EastLake II Planned Community District Regulations to accommodate the changes in land use. EastLake and the City are also proceeding to amend the EastLake I Sectional Planning Area ("SPA"). The SPA amendments shall be reflected in a separate document to be known as the EastLake I, Village Center North Supplemental SPA, which amendment shall include, among other requirements, updated Design Guidelines, and associate regulatory documents for the Property (collectively, the "Amended Project Approvals"). 1.4 Development of Property. In connection with the Project and the Amended Project Approvals, portions of the Property shall be identified and developed for particular uses. The Western Parcel is comprised of two components. The northerly portion of approximately 16 acres is designated for research and limited manufacturing. The southerly portion of approximately 38 acres is designated retail commercial ("Western Retail Commercial Site"). 1.5 Prior Development Agreements. A portion of the Western Parcel consisting of approximately 30.6 acres is subject to that certain Development Agreement by and between Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and the City, recorded August 20, 1992 in Official Records of San Diego County as Document No. 1992-0528395 ("Kaiser Agreement"). The Property is also subject to that certain Development Agreement by and between EastLake Development Company and the City, recorded in Official Records of San Diego County as Document No. 1985-198858 ("EastLake Development Agreement"). 1.6 Pedestrian Bridge Agreement. Pursuant to that certain Agreement Regarding a Community Trail Pedestrian Facility Between EastLake I and EastLake II approved by the City on January 23, 1990 pursuant to Resolution 15480 ("Bridge Agreement"), EastLake agreed to build a pedestrian bridge over Otay Lakes Road to connect the Western Pamel with the Von's shopping center located across said road at the time the Western Parcel is developed. 1.7 Effective Date. The "Effective Date" of this Agreement shall be the date on which this Agreement is adopted by the City Council. 2. Enhancement to Community Trails. EastLake agrees to provide trail enhancements of three (3) pedestrian nodes ("Trail Enhancements") on the Western Parcel in connection with its development as follows: 2.1.1 Site and Architectural Designs. EastLake shall prepare site and conceptual architectural designs for Trail Enhancements as depicted on Exhibit B-1 and Exhibit B-2. 2.1.2 Approval of Designs. EastLake shall submit such site and conceptual architectural designs and construction drawings concurrent with the landscape plans for the Western Parcel and shall obtain the City Director of Planning and Building's al~proval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 2.1.3 Construction of Trail Enhancements. EastLake shall cause the construction of the Trail Enhancements substantially in the manner depicted on Exhibit B-1 and Exhibit B-2 and approved by the City Director of Plarming and Building for the amount of the construction estimate (as defined below) and as adjusted annually to the index in the Engineering News Report commencing from the Effective Date. EastLake shall commence construction of the Trail Enhancements in conjunction with the construction of the Western Retail Commercial Site street improvements; provided, however, that such construction shall be complete no later than eighteen (18) months from the date the City approves the first parcel map for the Property. 2.1.4 Construction Estimate. EastLake shall prepare an estimate ("Construction Estimate") for the cost of constructing the Trail Enhancements. The Construction Estimate shall include all costs associated with construction of the Trail Enhancements including, without limitation, engineering designs, the site and conceptual architectural designs, and the construction drawings. EastLake shall submit the Construction Estimate to the City prior to approval of the first building permit for the Project. The City's approval of the Construction Estimate shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. If the City Director of Planning and Building does not approve the Construction Estimate submitted pursuant to this paragraph, then the Director shall provide a reason for such rejection and suggestions for correction of the Construction Estimate. 2.1.5 Completion Bond Deposit. Based on the Construction Estimate, EastLake shall post a bond with the City, concurrent with the City's approval of the first parcel map for the Project, in the amount of one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the Construction Estimate to guarantee the faithful performance by EastLake (or its designee) of all work and the construction of the Trail Enhancements and securing the payment by EastLake (or its designee) for all labor and materials incurred in the construction of the Trail Enhancements. Upon completion and acceptance of all said improvements, the bond shall be released. 3. Future Transit Stations. The parties contemplate that the Project shall include transit stations on both the Western and Eastern Parcels and the parties agree that in connection with such facilities EastLake or its successors or assigns will perform, or cause to be performed, certain obligations as detailed herein. 3.1 Western Transit Station. EastLake agrees to perform the following obligations in connection with the Western Transit Station proposed to be located on a portion of the Western Parcel. 3.1.1 Payment for Westem Transit Station. Priortoissuanceofanybuilding permits on the Western Parcel, EastLake shall pay $145,000 ("Western Transit Payment"), to the City to use exclusively for ail costs of construction and landscaping of the Western Transit Station. The Western Transit Payment shall be full and complete satisfaction of any and all obligations EastLake may have in connection with the Western Transit Station. City shall deposit the Western Transit Payment in an interest bearing account, with all interest accruing to the account for the benefit of the Western Transit Station. If the City does not commence construction of the Western Transit Station before the end of the term of this Agreement, the Western Transit Payment, plus all accrued interest, shall be returned to EastLake. 3.1.2 Grant of Irrevocable Offer to Dedicate. EastLake agrees to grant with the first parcel map for the Property to the City an irrevocable offer to dedicate ("IOD") the site on which the Western Transit Station is located. The City Engineer shall have the discretion to accept such dedication as required by law. The City shall accept the IOD prior to beginning construction of the Western Transit Station and after proper environmental review. The Western Transit Station IOD shall automatically terminate on the tenth (10th) anniversary of the Effective Date if such IOD has not then been accepted by the City. The City shall provide a release in recordable form sufficient to remove the IOD upon termination. 3.2 Eastern Transit Station. The parties contemplate the need for the construction of a future transit station located in the Eastern Parcel ("Eastern Transit Station") as depicted on Exhibit 4 C-1 and Exhibit C-2. EastLake agrees to perform the following obligations in connection with the Eastern Transit Station proposed to be located on a portion of the Eastern Parcel. 3.2.1 Payment for Eastern Transit Station. Prior to issuance of any building permits on the Eastern Parcel, EastLake shall pay $48,000 ("Eastern Transit Payment"). The Eastern Transit Payment shall be full and complete satisfaction of any and all obligations EastLake may have in connection with the Eastern Transit Station. City shall deposit the Eastern Transit Payment in an interest bearing account, with all interest accruing to the account for the benefit of the Eastern Transit Station. If the City does not commence construction of the Eastern Transit Station before the end of the term of this Agreement, the Eastern Transit Payment, plus all accrued interest, shall be returned to EastLake. 3.2.2 Park and Ride Parking Spaces. EastLake agrees to provide an easement, at its sole cost and expense, for ten (10) parking spaces immediately adjacent to the Eastern Transit Station for the purpose of providing dedicated parking for the City's "Park and Ride" program. These spaces shall be marked to indicate that their sole purpose is for use for transit purposes. 3.2.3 Grant of Irrevocable Offer to Dedicate. EastLake agrees to grant with the first parcel map for the Property to the City an IOD the site on which the Eastern Transit Station is located. The City Engineer shall have the discretion to accept such dedication as required by law. The City shall accept the IOD prior to starting construction of the Eastern Transit Station and after proper environmental review. The Eastern Transit Station IOD shall automatically terminate on the tenth (10th) anniversary of the Effective Date if such IOD has not then been accepted by the City. The City shall provide a release in recordable form sufficient to remove the IOD upon termination. 4. Bus Turn - Outs. EastLake shall have no obligation, as a component of this Project or as a condition to any City approval of this Project, to provide construction designs, engineering designs or any funds or resources for any proposed turn-outs for MTDB bus service for the north- bound and south-bound segments of EastLake Parkway. 5. Maintenance Obligations. 5.1 Trail Enhancements. The Trail Enhancements shall be maintained in a first class manner and in perpetuity by the Property Owner, or its successor in interest, in accordance with the Design Guidelines contained in the SPA. Such maintenance shall also be a condition of the parcel map and included in the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions ("CC&Rs") for the Western Parcel or Project as determined to be appropriate by the City. 5.2 Western and Eastern Transit Stations. Upon the City's acceptance of either transit station IOD, the City shall have sole responsibility, for all maintenance costs and maintenance obligations related to the Western Transit Station and the Eastern Transit Station. 5.3 Park and Ride Facilities. Parking spaces and ancillary improvements related to the "Park and Ride" program will be maintained by the owner or owners of the Property. Such 5 maintenance obligatio,n shall be described in a manner approved by City in the CC&Rs and deed restrictions for the Property, and shall generally require maintenance in a first class manner in perpetuity similar to alt other common space areas, with appropriate insurance. 5.4 Bus Turn-Outs. The City shall have sole responsibility for all maintenance costs and maintenance obligations related to the MTDB bus turn outs described in Paragraph 4. 6 Release of Pedestrian Bridge Obligation. In consideration of EastLake's obligations contained in this Agreement, the City hereby releases EastLake and its successors from any and all obligations contained in the Bridge Agreement, including, without limitation, the obligation to construct and maintain a pedestrian bridge. The City shall remove the obligations contained in the Bridge Agreement from the Property's chain of title. 7. TDIF Credits. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 22521, as amended, the City has adopted a transportation facility development impact fee ("TDIF") program, which is applicable to the Property. In connection with EastLake's obligation to pay TDIF, the following provisions shall apply to the Property. 7.1 Western Parcel. The City acknowledges that pursuant to the Kaiser Agreement, EastLake has 933 equivalent dwelling units ("EDU") TDIF credits, which EastLake may use only for the purpose of reducing its obligation to pay TDIF on the Western Parcel. The City agrees that EastLake's TDIF obligations for the Western Parcel shall be no more than 933 EDUs regardless of the actual calculation of EDUs attributable to the Western Parcel provided the Western Parcel is developed in accordance with the Amended Approvals. A change to the Western Parcel from the 3anended Approvals may cause an increase in the TDIF obligations. EastLake shall not be allowed to utilize or transfer surplus EDU credits if the City's EDU calculation is less than 933 EDUs. EastLake is entitled to such credits only for the rezoning that occurred as a result of the Amended Approvals. No EDU credits shall be allowed for any entitlement not consistent with the Amended Approvals. 7.2 Eastern Parcel. The City agrees that as of the Effective Date all TDIF associated with or allocatable to the Eastern Parcel has been fully satisfied by TDIF debt funded by the TDIF Assessment District; provided however, that the City's agreement pursuant to this Paragraph 7.2 is conditioned upon the construction and development of the Eastern Parcel with the development described in the TDIF Assessment District. 8. Effect o f Kaiser Agreement. From and after the Effective Date, the Kaiser Agreement shall be and hereby is terminated. The City shall prepare and execute a recordable document to evidence this termination of the Kaiser Agreement. 9. Binding Effect; Encumbrance of Property; Status. 9.1 Runs with Land; Binding Effect This Agreement is intended to satisfy the provisions of California Civil Code section 1468. The obligations contained herein shall "run with 6 the land" for the benefit of the City as described in Paragraph 1.1 and shall burden the Western Parcel and Eastern Parcel and shall be binding on future transferees of such real property. The provision of this Agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties successors- in-interest. 9.2 Discretion to Encumber. Nothing in this Agreement will prevent or limit EastLake, in any manner, at EastLake's sole discretion, from encumbering all or any portion of the Property or improvement thereon by any deed of trust or other security device. 9.3 Status. Each party will, within fifteen (15) days after written request, give written notice to the requesting party of whether the party giving the notice knows of any breach of this Agreement and its current understanding of status of performance under this Agreement. A copy of any such notice which is sent to EastLake shall also be sent to the holder of any institutional first trust deed encumbering the Property if such holder has made written request for notice and provided the City with the holder's address for notice purposes. 10. Default. If either party defaults under this Agreement, the party alleging such default will give the breaching party no less than thirty (30) days' notice of default in writing. The notice of default will specify the nature of the alleged default and, where appropriate, the manner and period of time in which said default may be satisfactorily cured. During any period of cure, the party charged will not be considered in default for the purposes of termination of institution of legal proceedings. If the default is cured, then no default will exist and the noticing party will take no further action. 10.1 Remedies Upon Default. In the event of a default by either party to this Agreement, the parties shall have the remedies of declaratory relief, specific performance, mandamus, injunction and other equitable remedies. Neither party shall have the remedy of monetary damages against the other except as to obligations requiring the payment of money; provided, however, that the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs if they have offered prior to the institution of litigation, and continue, during the course of litigation, to meet and confer with the other party to resolve in good faith their differences. 11. General Provisions. 11.1 Notices. All notices required by or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt required, to the principal offices of the City or EastLake. Notice shall be effective on the date delivered in person or the date when the postal authorities indicate that the mailing was delivered to the address of the receiving party indicated below: The City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Attn: City Manager 7 The EastLake Company LLC 900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100 Chula Vista, CA 91914 Attn: Mr. William Ostrem Such written notices may be sent in the same manner to such other persons and addresses as either party may from time to time designate by mail. 11.2 Joint and Several Liability. I f either party consists of more than one legal person, the obligations are joint and several. 11,3 No Partnership or Joint Venture. Nothing herein shall be construed to create a partnership or joint venture between the City and EastLake with respect to the development of the Property or any part thereof, nor shall the City or EastLake have any liability or obligation to any person whatsoever except as specifically set forth herein. 11.4 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person will have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 11.5 Severability. If any material provision of this Agreement is held invalid, this Agreement will be automatically terminated unless within fifteen (15) days after such provision is held invalid, the party holding rights under the invalidated provision affirms the balance of this Agreement in writing. 11.6 Recordation of Agreement; Amendments. All amendments or operating memoranda hereto must be in writing signed by the appropriate agents of the City and EastLake, in a form suitable for recording in the Office of the Recorder, County of San Diego. Within ten (10) days of the date of this Agreement, a copy will be recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. Upon completion of performance of this Agreement or its earlier termination, a statement evidencing said completion or termination signed by the appropriate agents of EastLake and the City will be recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. 11.7 Applicable Law. This Agreement will be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 11.8 Assignment. EastLake may transfer its rights and obligations under this Agreement if such transfer or assigurnent is made as part ora transfer, assignment, sale or lease of all or a portion of the Property and the purchaser intends to put the Property to a use of the same or a lesser extent and intensity as allowed by any Project approvals (including the Amended Project Approvals) and the City consents to said transfer. Said consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 11.9 Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall expire ten (10) years after the Effective Date. 11.10 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. Neither party shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or injuring the right of the.other party to receive the benefits of this Agreement; each party shall refrain from doing anything which would render its performance under this Agreement impossible; and each party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates that such party shall do in order to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this Agreement. 11.11 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties relating to the transactions contemplated hereby and all prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into and superseded by this Agreement. I1.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, all of which together shall constitute on instrument. [THE NEXT PAGE IS THE SIGNATURE PAGE] 9 SIGNATURt~ PAGE FOR VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date first above written. THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA a municipal corporation By: Name: Title: Approved as to form by Attest: Name: Susan Bigelow Title: City Clerk John M. Kaheny City Attorney THE EASTLAKE COMPANY LLC a California limited liability company Title: 10 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ~o,-'~ ~ 6 o ss On ~'. t- o 2_ ,2002, before me, "'V~t.~,4 ~.' ~2-oD~6,,~rz the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared ~ t c.~ t ~ '-V. (2> S"r',e-o~r*,~- ~1 personally known to me, or ~ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(~') whose name(~ is/arqPsubscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/h~/the~ authorized capacity(iv40, and that by his/he~tho/tr signature(~) on the instrument the person(O, or the entity upon behalf of which the person(~ acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ~~,~.~_~_~--~. ~T~gnatt~re of Notary Public ' - (S E~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA } ss COUNTY OF On ,2002, before me, the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared O personally known to me, or O proved to me on the basis o~'satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (S E A L) Signature of Notary Public 11 STATE OF CALIFORNIA } SS COUNTY OF On ,2002, before me, the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared Cl personally known to me, or ~ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (S E A L) Signature of Notary Public 12 PROJECT CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT APPUCANT; EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT CO. VILLAGE CENTER NORTH PROJECT Northeast and Northwest Corner of IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT ADORESS: Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake Parkway SCALE: FILE NUMBER: NORTH No Scale PCM-03-03 EXHIBIT A C:\DAlFILE\locators\PCM0303.cdr 07/31/02 ~ nr-:v,~: ,~., '"~r~r~iDOR TRAIL SYSTEM (Adjacent to VC-I and Eastlake Parkway) Nod --' ~\',,\ ~ 8' Community Trail Fenton Street Transit Station VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT B-1 DETAIL OF TT,,t;L (Along trail leading to Transit Station) .~_~,,~ ,-4.,,,z~.. ~,. '" ,''/ ELEVATION OF TRAIL NODE ~ - VILLAGE CENTER NORTH IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT PLAN VIEW OF T~IL NODE EXHIBIT B-2 6842 4J~E J89.~'-~ tS.O, FENTON STREET PARCEL 4 ~ + f0.0~6 ~CR[S /' 50' ~ 1.10J ACREE ~ / ~ ~15 EXHIBIT IS ~E N 75¥~' POETION OF ~E PAECEL MAP SHOWING ~E I.O.D FOR T~N$1T STA~ON ~p~CEL 15 N 7~OJ~ N ~0-~' P~CEL 6 0.9~3 ACRES 19~. ~ NORTH IMPROVEMENT P~C~ ~ [ AGREEMENT 0.747 ACRES, Z:-O /181HX:~ /N=IIN=I=I~IE)V/N=IIN3AOEIdlNI H/EION ~t31N:1~) =~DV-I'llA pe~^oJd eq I1!~ ssecoe VC]V ,,8,, eAp, euJe{le lnq 'u~oqs ,,~l,, NOLLO=IS e&-J_~:3NO:3 NOI.I.Y/S .I. ISNV'eLI RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REPEALING THE AGREEMENT REGARDING A COMMUNITY TRAIL PEDESTRIAN FACILITY BETWEEN EASTLAKE I AND EASTLAKE II I RECITALS A Project Site WHEREAS, the areas of land are generally known as the intersection of EastLake Parkway and Otay Lakes Road and the general locale is commonly known as EastLake I Activity Center ("Project Site"); and, B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on July 11, 2001 by The Eastlake Company ("Developer"), requesting that the agreement entitled "Agreement Regarding a Community Trail Pedestrian Facility between EastLake I and EastLake II" ("Agreement") be repealed; and, C Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, the Agreement was previously approved by Council Resolution No. 15480 on July 23,1990; and, D. Repeal of Agreement WHEREAS, based on technical information by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for pedestrian bridge usage (pedestrian volume, bridge location and topography), Planning and Engineering staff concluded that the pedestrian bridge will not be an effective route to cross Otay Lakes Road and, therefore not warranted for the following reasons: 1. To justify the construction of a pedestrian bridge over a road, the ITE recommends a minimum of 300 pedestrians in a 4-hour peak period using a particular intersection. The City's engineering staff conducted a pedestrian volume count at the intersection of Otay Lakes Road and EastLake Parkway, and found that the pedestrian traffic is significantly less than the recommended pedestrian traffic volume to justify the installation of a bridge structure over Otay Lakes Road. Based on this finding, it has been determined that the pedestrian bridge is not warranted at this location. In staffs opinion, the existing at-grade crossing provides safe and convenient pedestrian crossing. ,~);) ,. -// 2. In addition to the above, The ITE recommends that pedestrian bridges be located at mid-block between signalized intersections and at-grade crossings. Preferably, a pedestrian bridge should be where there is a significant grade difference between the road and adjacent building pads. Otay Lakes Road and the two adjacent commercial centers are about the same elevation, and are connected by a signalized driveway (and pedestrian crossing) at about mid point between EastLake Parkway and the Future SR-125 freeway. Because the existing pedestrian crossings provide convenient at- grade pedestrian crossings at two separate points along Otay Lakes Road and because there is no elevation difference between either sides of the street, the pedestrian bridge cannot be justified. Based on the above factors, it is proposed that the City release EastLake rrom the obligation to construct the pedestrian bridge over Otay Lakes Road. E. Planning Commission Record of Application WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on July 31, 2002 and voted 5-0-0-2 to forward a recommendation to the City Council on the Project; and, WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduce before the Planning Commission at the public hearing on this project held on July 31, 2002 and the minutes and resolution resulting there rrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceedings; and, E. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application and notices of said hearings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500 ft. of the exterior boundaries of the Project Sites at least ten days prior to the hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: II. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined the repeal of said Agreement is not a project according the California Environmental Quality Act. No further environmental analysis is required for the Improvement Agreement. 2 ~';J"/J III. REPEAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby repeals the Improvement Agreement document entitled "Agreement Regarding a Community Trail Pedestrian Facility between EastLake I and EastLake II". IV. RECORDATION OF DOCUMENT The City Clerk is hereby directed to record the Resolution repealing the Agreement in the office of the County Recorder. VIII. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon enforceability of each and every term provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by the Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, if the city so determines in its sole discretion, this resolution shall be deemed to be revoked and no further in force or in effect. Presented by: Approved as to form by: Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning J:/Attorney/resoNCN repeal community trail 3 ~-;¿.:< . ,):) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REPEALING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS FOR 30.4 ACRES NORTH OF OTAY LAKES ROAD AND WEST OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY. 1. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the areas of land which is the subject of this Ordinance is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A and incorporated herein; and for the purpose of General Description herein consist of: 30.4 acres located north of Otay Lakes Road between the future SR-125 freeway alignment and EastLake Parkway ("Project Site"); and, B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval WHEREAS, on July 11,2002, The EastLake Company, LLC ("Developer") filed an application requesting that said development agreement be repealed ("Project"); and, C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, the Development Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals was previously approved by City ofChula Vista Council Ordinance 2522 on July 6, 1992, and recorded in the San Diego County Recorders Office as Document 1992-0528395; and, D. Repeal of Development Agreement WHEREAS, the Kaiser Foundation decided not to construct the hospital complex and sold the property to the EastLake Company, which will not construct a hospital complex on the Site. Thus, the Development Agreement has become obsolete; and, E. Planning Commission Record on Applications WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on said project on July 31, 2002, and voted 5-0-0-2 to recommend that the City Council repeal the Development Agreement between the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and the City ofChula Vista; and, 1 -Z;), 71 The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing on this Project held on July 31, 2002, and the minutes and resolutions resulting there from, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. F. City Council Record on Applications WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council ofthe City ofChula Vista on August 6, 2002 on the Discretionary Approval Application, and to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to same; and, II NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City Chula Vista does hereby find, determine and ordain as follows: A. REPEAL OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT The City Council of the City ofChula Vista hereby repeals the document entitled "Development Agreement by and between Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and the City ofChula Vista." III. INV AUDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Ordinance is dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. V. RECORDATION OF DOCUMENT The City Clerk is hereby directed to record this Ordinance repealing the development agreement in the office of the County Recorder. Presented by: Approved as to form by: ~ ;~ City Attorney Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning J:\Attorney/ordinance/Kaiser Agreement repeal 2 ~~- 9.1- W~~~~'J~ {j)ß~~~ì/l~g~va_ ~ ~ ~ NJm' \IlLS: ~ ROLLING HILLS RANCH ~^~~". II (II ~,--~~§j#1'B'tiJ'D~ I~ ~,~ ' oo,Ul1l.~ , "--J '!~Tf:. ~~ E~STLAKE- '~ lr'ì I . ~ --- _ I- BUSINESS . ~ ~ I ~r CíNTi\___. ¥8~I· Iii cC \ "..' ~ I~~ ~ jf;"</r-.~ \ !IJŒffiJf:l1l fTt=1ffiffiB ~\ ~ 111111111111 \ ";' I ~?=ì \ 1I11111111111I111111I/I",LLl) 0::" ~ ~1-1111111 H 2- rnl 11-1\\1111 H I .( ""\'0\\'Ur =t} ~¡:: *1 \ 0 _~Ii~ ~ ~ ,\\íTlllllTìl ~E 11.1.> ~ Ì]j ~W~ / LOCATION~ \\I~E! ~~ cê'h / ", /:;B ìt ~ =; ::' ~S~V ¡;p¿~ AI ~~ I ~I YjJ < ~~~ c;(f I;~ HIGH SCHOOL ~~ Iri~rl\ -+}K~ V B:< ~ ~\DW' \, EASTLAKE GREENS ì. .:s:> 1~ ~ ~~~ I~ ~ ì I'" ~ /Ii c- ~~~ / À III ;:: Ä~'% CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT Development Agreement by and between C) APPLICANT: EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT CO. PROJECT Northwest of Eastlake Parkway Kaiser Foundation Hospital and the ADDRESS: and Fenton Street City of Chula Vista SCALE: FilE NUMBER: NORTH No Scale PCM-03-03 EXHIBIT A C:\DAIFILEllocators\PCM0303.cdr 07/31/02 ø?..;. 9....¡ ,...~.( .- , 10393 SAN DIEGO MISSION ROAD SUITE 205 SAN DIEGO. CALIF. 92108 San Diego Bus Drivers Union A.F.L.-C.I.O. Amalgamated Transit Union LOCAL 1309 TEL 619-563-1309 FAX 619-281-9184 CAL.IFORNIA TOWI(JII ....I...OA .....AI( August 5, 2002 Mr. Dwight Brashear General Manager/ATC-Vancom 3650A Main St. Chula Vista, CA 91911 w GEORGE THOMPSON PRESIDENTIBUSINESS AGENT Mr. Don Kilner Regional Director of Operations 3131 Camino Del Rio N. Suite 360 San Diego, CA 92108 SAN DIEGO BUS DRIVERS' UNION AFL-CIO LOCAL 1309 (619)563-1309 SUITE 205 FAX(619) 28,..,84 10393 SAN DIEGO MISSION RD. CELL (619)307·0618 .~- SAN DIEGO. CA92108 bjggeo@lasercom.net RE: Meal Breaks and Rest Periods for Bus Drivers Gentlemen: ATU Local 1309 represents the bus drivers of ATCjVancom in this area. I am writing because I believe that the Company has improperly failed to provide meal and rest breaks to its bus drivers as required by California law. Wage Order 9 set the work rules for employees in the transportation industry. (I attach a copy. It is codified at 8 California Code of Regulations Section 11090.) Section 11 of that Wage Order generally requires each employer to provide a meal period each work day of not less than 30 minutes. Employers who fail to provide the meal period must pay 1 hour of straight time pay to each affected employee. Section 12 of that Wage Order governs rest periods. A paid rest period of, at least, 10 minutes must provided every 4 hours. Failure to do so results in a requirement that the employer pay for each day worked where the required rest periods were not allowed. ~I " , Mr. Dwight Brashear Mr. Don Kilner August 5, 2002 Page 2 ATC/Vancom is required to follow the Wage Order as to its bus drivers. Please immediately begin to provide the required meal period and rest periods or the pay due if not provided. Please also pay each driver the amount owed, with applicable interest, for the denial of these break periods in the past. I would be happy to discuss the details of this with you. If you feel that my understanding of the rules is not correct. I would appreciate it if you would advise me of the reasons for your position in writing. If ATC/Vancom ignores its obligations under the Wage Order, I will refer this matter to the Labor Commissioner or to our attorneys for appropriate action. I look forward to hearing from you. Enclosure: Copy of Wage Order 9 Cc: William J. Flynn, Attorney at Law 'Jul-31-Z00Z OZ:IZpm From-NEYHART ANDERSON , TitleS 41S6TTB445 Industrial Welfare Comnússion T-m P. 004/010 F-r55 t 11111/U " bUI .hall continue to be given full fcm:e and effect IS if the pAn 10 hcld . i.v&lid ar uncon.ùoolional bad nol been inc1ulk:d berein. 22. Po.ning of Order Every empJOJIet shall keep a copy of Ibis order pos!ed in an .... fœ.. quenœd by employees wbeIe illlllY be eaaily read dutiAg the wOf~ay. Where the l.cation of worl< or other condiliOllS m8ke Ibis impnclical, rIV- er)' employer ,hall keep a copy of this order andm8keil available 10 evei)' employee upon requ.... NOtt: AUIboó!)' cired: S""¡.. 1173, Labor Code, and Califo"" CollitÍtUlion. AlIiclc XIV, SocIio. I. Rcf'mnœ; SocIiDDl 11&2 and 1184, Labor Code. HIst'ORY I. AmeII_' 6Ied ~8S; o.,.,mv. 7-1-88 (Regì- 88, No. 19). 2. R.epealcraf..blCelÍOl14(4)fi1èd 1-11-89; oporaIi\<el-1l-89(Re¡ØterS9,No. 3. ~ wilboul ",p!aI~. effect pun""'" .. .eedo. 100, dde I, OaW'omia Code DfRoga\llio.. ~ subseclion S (last ......'" ooJy) fiJcd 4-24-89 (RqiJter 89. No. 17). 4. lì<litoQII_o. afpdns """" (Re:si_91, No. 32). S. ~,of oubo=U0II3.(A)(I)(b) fi1Cc1 S-1ó-S6: opol1lÓve 7--1-96. Sub- mil104 '0 OAL tor prin... 0DI)0 (Rosi.œr 96, No. 20). 6. AIM.dmonl of soblCC1lOll4.W fiIcð 9-I!I-9ó; O >CIIlive 10-1-96, Sobmill<d .. OAL tor priooms only (lIep...r 96. No. 38). 7. Amen_t or.._.. 4.(A) 6Jcd 1-14-97; opmIÏvc :J-1-V7. Sobmil104 .. OALrorpålldosOllIy(Regìou:rt7, No.3). 8. Ame1>_ or order .....bar ad ...-li... 10.(11) filed S..s~1, openIive I-I~B. Sobmil104 to OAl. forprinùns only (Ro¡i_t7, No. 32). 9. ~cr ad.... .ectioa mod 2-22-2002; o~ve 1-1-2001. Sapplcnx:nlal fùlDI provicünl 'p1f01Uherical illformatiol 'below anic]c hOlm. tiled 4-15-1002. $abmllt~d toOALfDrpl::ùnÍDI oDlypumumlto LaborCodeaccxiOll 511 (Regiou:r2002.No.I6). Article 9. Transportation Industry (Order No. 9--2001, Effective 1-1-2001) -- § 11090. Order Règulatlng WagH, Hours, and Working Conditions In the TranaportBllon Industry. I. AppJicabilil)' or Order This order abaIJ apply to all penons employed ill Ibe tI3DsponaliOll illdusay whetber paid OIl a IÌØIC, piece IIIC, colDllliJaioo. ar olber bail, except thllt: (A) ProVÍlio.. or Sections 3 IIuoDgh 12 of thio order ohall nOI apply tD persons employed in admimstratìvc, execudve, orprofessiorW capad- Iieo. The fDilawing reqWrcmCDU aball apply in determining wbelllu an employee's dud.. meet Ibe œ51 to qualify far an exempli"" Iiom Ib..- lections: (I) Execulive Exemption A petson employed iD an execubve capacity to.... any employee: (.) Who.. dudes and mpo..ibilidcs involve the .....gemenl of the ..,œrpriae in wbichhelshe is employed orofaeD"omarily reco pÚzedde- panmenl or subdivision tbaeof; and (b) Who customori1y and regularly dir""tolbe work oflWo ormore oth- er employees Iberein; and (c) Who has the .uthoril)' 10 bite or rite olbet employees or whose suggestion. ond I'tcomroendadons as 10 the hiring or firing and .. 10 the advanc:cmcnt me! promotion or any othcr change of srams of other em- ployees will be given panicuJar weight; and (d) Who cu"amariJy and regnlar!y exe1'Ci.es disctelion and iDdepen- denl judgment; and (e) Who i. primwy englged in dulie, which meel the test of Ihe ex· emption. 1be aebvirie.s. COD.tiN-lÜJg exempt woñ;; and non-exempt wort shill be consØ\lCd in the same. manner as such items are CODlaued in die following reguladons under the Fair Labor SWldards Act effecdve as of the dale of this order. 29 C.FR Sections S4U02, 541.104-111, and 541.115-116. Exempl wor\c shall include, for example, .n worl< thai ¡a directly and closely related to exempt 11'011< and worl< whicb is properly viewed as . meons for eanyin8 oul exempt funcùans. The wotlc .etuolly performed by the employee during the eo"",. oCthe workweek mu,~ firot and foremast, be examined and the amount of ùme the employee spend. an such work. together with the employer's realisùc expectaûaDJ and the 1 Page 1316.25 realistic requiremet\~ of !be job, shall be comidered in determining whether the employee aaliJfies this RC uircmenL (f) Such an employee must allO eam a monthly sa1ary equlValenl to no less than two (2) rimes the .we DIÌIIÍIIUID1 wage far full-tbœ employ- menL FDll-dme employmenl is defined in Labor Code Section 5IS(e) as 40 hours per week. (2) Admini.tralive Exotnplion A ptrsOll employed in an admini.1J'a- Ii.e eapacil)' _ any employee: (a) Whose dulics and tespolllibilili.. involve eilber: (I) The pctfOlDllllCe of office ar non-tIIIIIIIW worlc dírec:tly rellllSd 10 mano¡¡cmcnt policies or general bU3Ù1css opcradons of his employer ar hisJher employer's customen; or (ü) The pctfmmance ofñmctions In the adminiaamion of a scboalsys- =m, or c:ducsdonal cstsbllsbment or inadJution, or or a depllUDeDl or subdivision thoreof, in _ direcdy re1a!ed 10 the academic ÍDJUllClÎon Of ttaining eanied on therein; and (b) Who e..",lIWÜy and regu1atiy ex~ diseretioo and indepen- dent judpent; and (e) Who regularly and ditee1Iy asalslS a proprietor, or an employee employed in a bona lide executive Or admIDIB1IIIIÍve capacity (as such rerms are Ik:fincd for P"'P"'" of this seedon), or , (d) Who perf"""" under only pnera\ supervision woñl: along special- j:red or !Oclmicolllnes requiring special ttaining, experience, or knowl- eti¡e: Of (e) Who execntes under only senen! supervision special...ignmet\ll and wks; aDd (f) Who is primarily ensased in dWiex ilia! meet the test ot th. e>leølp- lion. The aaivid.. consdm1ÎD exempl welt and DOII-aeØlpt woó: ohall be consD:Ued iD the same IDIIIIICI' as sueb tmnI are consmwl in the fol- lowing regulati.,.. under the Paìr Labor StandanIs Acte1fOClive II otme dare of Ihis order. 29 Cl'R SecùODS 541.201~, 541.207-208, 54l.210, and 541.215. Excmpl worl<.haIl inc1nde, toreotampl., &II \\Iork thai is directly SlId closely teI.a!ed 10 exempl worl< and woll< which i. properly viewed as a_ for carrying 0lIl exempt funclions. The woll< actnally pedormed by Ibe employee during the c:owse ot!be woltweek musl. Iim aod foremosl. be examined and the amount of tbœ the em- ployee spcncls on sDcb worl<. together with the employer'. realistic ex· pectations and the realistic reqWæmetlIS or the job, sball be CODlÏdered in detenninins whether the employee .mafias this requirement. <s> Such employee mtlSl also C8IU a monthly ,alary cqulvalCIU 10 110 1eaa Ihan two (2) Wnes Ibe .we lllÏllimum wage tor full-time cmploy- menL PIIIl-lime empIoymoo' ia deJined in Labor Code Section 515(e) 81 40 bøw$ per week. (3) Professional Exempóon A penon emplo~ ìn a ptofe..íonal ca- paOl)' "",ans any employee who IIIeet9 ø// of the foDowing requircmcnu: (a) Who is licensed orcerófied bytbe SIBle otCalifomia and ía prirnar- Uy engaged in the practice of one of lb. foIlowÍDg recognized profes- sions: law, medicine, denlistry, oplOmeay, archilCCtlllC, engiDcering, teaching, ar accounting; or (b) Who is primarily engaged in an OCC1lpalÏol1 commonly recognized 81 . learned or anistic profeasion. For Ibe purpolOl ot Ihi& lubsecüon. "learned or anistie profession" means an employee who ia primarily en- glged in the performan.. of: (i) Work requiring knowledge afan advanced type in a field or science or leuning customwy acquired by a prolcmsed cours. ofspeci.alizedin- œUcONBl ¡.aauction and study, IS diatinguisbed from ageno!B\ ..,ademic education and from an apprenticeship, and from trli11ing in the peri'or- mance of routine mental, manoal, or pbysical pn¡cesses, or wort that is an essential pan of ar necessarily ¡ncident to any of the above work; or (ii) Work thai is oriJinal and ouU YO in ehanoctcr in . recognized field of anisde endeavor (as oppnaed 10 wor\( which can be produced by a per- son endowed wllh geoeral manual or io~1\eca¡&I ability and trBÎJIÍns). and the result of whicb depcnœ ptlm1llily on the invenlion. imagination. or ra1ent of the employee orwori:rhal is ane$SCalial pan of orneceslBrily incident 10 any of the above wor\c: and Rqilwr 2ŒI2. No. 19;. J-IO-UIO! ( H58 P.005/010 F-T55 Title 8 . Ju H1-Z00Z OZ: 1 Zpm S U-")lU From-NEYHART ANDERSON 4156119445 DAJ(\;LAI~ I.ALU<VKNiA \,;VU.I\ Vlf M\iULU'!uNS - , (iii) Whose work is ¡?Rc1oudnandy imeIlCCllll! anc1 varied ID ~1Cr (ai opposed 10 rouline mental. manual, mechanicol. or ph¡sical wolk) and is of such characœr that the output produced at tile result accom- plished canoot be slandardized ill reladon 10 a given period of ti~ (c) Who cu.tomarily and "gularly exetl:Ìses discrttion and indepen- dent jUc1gmcm in Ibe pcñormance of duties setfol'lb in subparaçaplJJ (a) and (b). (d) Who eoms a monthly .alary CC ulvalcnt to no Ie.. ÙWI two (2) time< the srate _mum _ for fulkime cmploymeDL FuII-limc employ- ment Is deflned in LaborCodc Sealon SIS (c) U 40 hours per wcek. (c) Subpara"b (b) abovc is intendod to be CO'I$trUedin ecconlancc with thc following provi.iom offederallaw as they tJtisted as ofthecWc of this wage omer: 29 C.P.R. Sectio.. 541.207. 541.301(aHd), 541.302, 541.306, 541.307, 541.308. and 541.310. (f) Nolwirhsrandiøg the provl.lons of 1bI. subparasraph. pbllnlllltÍlts employed to eng... in the practice of phumacy, and ..gistcred nunel employed to engage in the practice ofDl1ßing, shoIlnot be COtISldered ex- empt professional Cltlployees. Dor sbolllbey be cDlUideted exempt 6'om eovenge far the pUlJ>ose. of this subparagr:aph unless they indivlduolly mæt the criteria establi,hed for exemption as executive oradminiaualive employ.... (g) Subpmgn¡ph (1) above sbollllOt apply ID the fo1lowiQg ac1vaneed practice nun..: (i) Conified nurse mìdwlvcs who arc primarily etlgaged ill performing duties for which cerdficalioo is rcqu\Ie<I pun¡uan, to Attide 2.5 (com- mencing with Section 2146) of ChapIcr 6 of Divisioo 2 or the Businc!. IIId Professions Code. (ii) Certified ounc ""..thed'($ who are primariJy engaged Í!1 pedorm- ing duti.. for which ecniJical!oo is soquired punUlDt to Atticle 7 (com- mencing wÎth Sectioo 2825) of Chapter 6 of Division 2 or the Business ODd Profession. Code.-.. (iii) Certified Dune praCtidonet$ who are primarily eogaged ill per- fomùng dulies for which eeniiicaâoo is requirod punWltll to Mcle 8 (commencing with Section 2834) of Chapler 6 of Division 2 of!be Busi· DCiS aDI! Ptofesoloos Code. (iv) Nothing ill !his .ubparagraph slWJ exempt the occupations set forth in clauae¡ (i). (ii), aDI! (Iii) from meeting them¡uiœments of subscc- don I(A)(3)(a)-(d) above. (h) Except, as provided in ,uhparagraph (i). lID employee in the com- putet' software field who i. psid OD lID hourly basis ,IWJ be exempt. if s11 of the foUowing apply: (i) The employee i. primarily eogagct! ill wolk that is intellectual or aeative anc1 that soquires the ex=ise of diSCRtiOD IIDd iII<Iepeocleol judgmeOL (Ii) The employee i. primarily eogageelin elude. that COOIÌSI or oDe or mon: of the foUowing: - The application of .y.œm, onaIysis œcIInique. IIDd procedures, in- cluding coo.ulling with users. to tIetenoine hanlware. software. or sys- tem functional speciJics.dDns. - The desi&n- developOlen.. doeumcnwlon. onaIysis. ....lioo. test· ing. Or mDdificatioo of compuler systems Dr programs. including protO- types. based on and reJated to UJCr or syslCm design spocificatioos. - The documentation, tosling. =alion, Or modificalÌon of COOlPUter prognuns related 10 the design of sollware or hanlware for computer op- cn.dng systems. (Iii) The employee i, highly sl:ùled and ì. proficienl ill !be rhcorcdeaJ and pracûcaJ appliealion of highly specialized information to compuler 'YStems analysis. pro¡rammiog, anel ,oftware Cllgineering. A job dtle sboD nOI be detennioative of the applicabilÍ!y of lID. exemption. (iv) The employee', hourly talC of pay i. no, less than fony-onc dol- 1m (S41.00). The Divi,ioo of Labor Stadsûcs and Rescsrcb shall adjust !hi, pay rate On ""tober 1 of each year to be offeclive on January 1 of the folJowins year by an amount equal \0 the percentage inc:røse in. me California Consumer Pri<:e Index for UIbID Wage I!amen IDd ClerlcaJ WOIiœD. (i) The exemption ptOvided in suhparagraph (b) d_ not .ppiy to an employee if any of the followlug apply: (i) The employee ;" a trainee or employee ill an ootry--Ievel positioD wbo j¡ learning 10 become proficient in the theoredcal aIIc1 pl¥!icalap- plication of highly spc.joH>.ed informatioD to computer'Y'1emI analYli¡. programming. and SOflwllC engineerlDg. (ii) The employ.. b In a computct<-teLaled ocwpation but has "01 at- adDed the ie.cI of sIciIl and cxpertise oecellary to woric iDdependcntly and without close supervl.ioo. (ill) The emplOyce ÌI engaged ill the oper.otion of compu.... or in the manufscwre, repair. or maiolCDaDce of e....puter hasdw'" and mmc1 eqllÌpmcot. (iv) The employee is an engineer. drafter. mu:hiJùs.. or other protea. alona! whose wolk;" highly depeodeot UpoD Dr taciliwcd by tile 1110 of computerS anc1 compuler .oftwa!e prograDIS and who io skî1Jed in eDm- puter~dod c1e.ign software, including CAD/CAM, but who is not in a computet ay>tcms analys;" or programming occupatiost. (v) The employee is a wrller enpged in Writing material, incIudiDg hox labels, product descriPtions. documenwioo, promotional rnaœrial. setUp and ÌDstaIlJIioo ÌDltnlcdoos. and other similarwrlttell IlII'ormarion, either for priDt or for 00 saeen media or who writea or provi4co COD!:DI material intended to be read by cus_en, .ublC!!bers. orvlsitotl to com- putc1'-l'Clated media such as the World Wide Wch or CD-ROMs. (vi) The employee is ensaged in QIIY of the actîVÌliea oct tonlt in sub- paragraph (b) for !be putpOSC of c:realiDg imasOlY far effects uoed in !be mOlÎon picture, television. or thntdcol ÎDdU$1I)'. (8) Except as provided In Sealoos 1.2, 4, 10. and 20, the provlsioD. or this order slWJ DOt apply to any employ... cIUectIy employed by tbe Swe or any politicaJ subdivision thereof, including any city. COUDI)/. Or IpcCialdiStrict. (C) The provilion. of this order shall ooupply tooouide lalespmOOS. (D) The provisions of this onIer shaJJ DOt apply to any inclivlc1uaJ who ;" the par..... .pou.e. child, or legally adopted child of !be employer. (E!) Eooeept as provided in Sections 4, 10. 1 I. 12, and 20 through 22. this order shaD 1101 be deemed 10 cover thole employ... who have co- tttcd into . collective bllrpining ogreemeot under and In accordance with the proviolons oCthe IWlway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. Sectioo. IS I e1 set¡. (F) The provisions of this Order shall DOt apply.. any iDdivic1ual par_ liclpaling in a o:uional service program. .uch as AmcriCorps, curicd out using assi.tance provided unc10r Section 12511 of Tide 42 of the United State, Code. (See Stall. 2000, ch. 365. ameoding Labor Code II 111.) 2. DetlnitiOllS (A) An "s1le1Da1ive workweek ..hedu1c..........1II)' IegUlarJy sched- uled workweek soquiring an eJDployee to work man: than eight (8) hours in a 24-hour period. (8) "Commission" means the Industrial Welfare Commissioo of the Swe or CalIfornia. (C) "Divisioo" means the Divlaloo ofLabot SlIIIdardo Enfon:emcnt of the State of California. (D) "Employ" means 10 engage. IUffer. or permit to wolll. (E!) "E!DIployee" mean, any porsoo cmplOyed by an employer. (F) "EmployeI" moan. anypersoo as ddlocd in Section 18 of the La- horCode. who dIs=tIy or iodireedy. orthrough an "P.tor...y othcrper- '00. emplOy' or exetcises coouol over the wages. houn, or working condilions of stly potsOll. (0) "Hours worked" mC&l1s the ûme dw:ing which an employee is sub. ject to the co.trol of an employer, and iocJudes 011 the time the employee is .uffered or permitICd 10 work. whether or 1101 ttqIIired to do 50. (H) "Minor" mew. (orthe purpo.. of this order. any person unelertllc "So of ¡ 8 years. [The nu~ P_IC i& 1317.] Page 1316.26 ¥IIR' D:. No. 19: S"10-~ 'Ju 1-31-2002 02 :13pm 11Ue15 From-NEYHART ANDERSON 4156779445 maUStnal wellBn \ADIIIUSSIon T-758 P.006/010 F-755 SlAII;!,U . (I) "OUllide salespenon" meaDS any petIOlI, 18 yean of age or over. wbo cU'lOmllrily and RguIarly worXs ",ore than baJf!be worlål1glÌme away from Ibe employer's place ofbusines. selliDg œn¡ible or lntangJ.õle items orabuWùn8 orders orcoratracts forprodu.cts. services or1:J;Sc aftaci.. lilies. (J) "Primarily" as wed in Seedon I, ApplicabililY, means men than on....baIf!be employee's woJ!¡ time. (K) "Sbít\" mean. àcoìgDII~d hours of wodt by an e"'ployee, with a dodgnued begjnning time and quilÜn¡ nme. (L) "Split ,biñ" _s a wod< .chedule, whieb is inWl1lpcoà by nOlI- paid ooo-wodcing periods established by the employer, olber!ban bona fide "'Sl or meal pttiøds. (M) "Teaching" means, for tile putpooe of Section I oflbis ordor, the profession of tea<hing under a cenifica!e from the COIDD1ÌSSiOD for Teacber PœpuaJion and LiceDSÙlg or tucbing in an =dílCd coIlegc or wü'YetSity. (N) .-r.....porwioo Ind""'Y" .neana any indusll)'. bu,in..., or ..tab- lisbmenlopaated for Ibe purpose of CODveyins p=s orpropen:y from one place 10 anotherwbctberby rail, highway, air. or \Natei'. BIId all open- lion. and services in connection therewirh: and 11'0 includel stoJing or warebousing of soo<IS or propen:y. and !be ¡q>aÏring, puldng, mila!, maUlICII8IICe, or cleaning of vehide¡. (0) "Wages" includes aII_ts for labor pedormed by employ,," of every descriplion, wheIber the amOUllI is fixed or "",crtaInod by the staDdard of lime. wIc, piece. commission basi., or other method of col· culalion. (1') "Workday" and "dey" mean any COII.Occuåve 24-bour period be- ginning at !be WDe lime eoch calendar day. (Q) "Workweek" and ....eek'. mean stly sevCD (7) consecutive day" swtiug wilb !be woe caJemior day each week. "Workweek" is a tiud IIId Rgularly recurring period of 168 boon, seven (7) con....d~ 24-boor periods-:- ~ 3. Hours and Days ofWoö; (A) Daily Ovettime~eraJ I'Iovisions (I) The foUowing ovc:nime provisíonl are applicable 10 employees IS yean of age or OYer and 10 employ.., 16 or 17 years of age wbo are nor required by law 10 aaeod school and are not orborwisc problbircd by law fzom mgaging ÌD !be subjCCl wode. Suc.b employees .baJ1 1101 be employed mon: Iban ci¡bt (S) bours io any workday or morc: than 40 bo... in any workweek uole.. Ibe employee receives 0'" and o_bllf (I 112) lime. sucb employee'. regulor nte of pay for all hours worked over 40 boUD in the wor:kweek. Eigbt (S) bo... of labor CODSlÍDttes a day's work. Employmcut beyond eigln (S) bours in any workday ortllOlC !ban six (6) day" in any worl<week is perlllÌ$SÌble provided the employee is compensated for such overtime II DOll... than: (a) One and ollHaIf (1112) limes lb. employee'l regular me of pay for III bOurs worked in excess of eight (S) bours up ED and illCludinS 12 ho... ÌD any workday, and for Ibe firsl eight (8) boUtS worked on Ibe seventh (71b) eonsecutive day of work ìn a workweek; and (b) Double the employ..·. regular me of pay for III hours worked in e.cess of 12 houn in any workday and for all hours worked in exec.. of eight (8) boun 00 the seventh (7th) consecutive clay of wodr. in I work· week. (e) The ovenime nile of compensation requited 10 be paid 10 a nonex- empt full-time ,lIaried employee sllaII be computed by uling !be em- ployee's regular hourly ,olory as ooc-fonietÞ (1/40) ot Ibe employee's weelcly salary. œ) Altcmadve Worl<week ScbeduJes (I) No employer sban be deemed to have violaœd the daily oveni..e provisions by inlÛtuting. pursUIIJlto the eleedon procedures lOt fORb in thi. wage order, a regularly scbeduled alœrnative workweek acbedule of not more man len (10) bours per day within a 40 bour worl<week without the payment or an overtime rate of compensation. All work performed in any workday be)'ond !be scbedule establiahed by the agreement up to 12 hours a day or be)'ond 40 how> peT week .hall be paid at oncand 000- hllf(1 112) times the employee's n:sularrate of pay. All work performed Pale 1317 in excess of 12 bours per day and any woö; in cxœss of eJøhl (8) bours on rho... da)'1 worked bqonci the regul...ly scheduled number of work· days established by the allClllative wodeweek ag¡-eemcnl sball be paid at double the employee's "' uIar ra~ of pay. Arry altemative workweek agreement adopted pursuant 10 this section shall provide for not Ie.. man four (4) bours of wode in any sbitt. NoIbing in tbiJ seedon shall prohibit an employer. It \be requCSI of the employee. to aubatlwœ one day of work for aoother day of the ,amelength in the lbitt provided by the aJ!etDative workweek agreement on an occa.sional ~aais to meet tbe penonaJ needa of the CIIIployee wilhOUI the payment of ovenime. No bours paid ateitber ODe and one-bait (I 112) or double the regu1ar raœ of pay shall be ¡n- eluded in delenlWJing when 40 bours have been worlced for !he purpose of CODIPU!ing overtime eompensSlÍon. (2) If an employer whose employee. have adopted an aJrematiye wodcweek agroomenl permitted by Ibis onIer requitea an employee 10 work fewer boon !ban tboJe !bat me reguJatly sclleduled by the .,..... men~ the employer sball pay 1he employee overlime compensation at a rate of one and oœ-bali (1112) timea1be employee', "'gular rare of pay for all bours worked in .,.e"l of eight (8) hours, and double Ibe em- ployee'. IO uIarme ofpayforalllloun wodcedin excess of 12 houn for Ibe day the employee is required to work rhe reduecd boan. (3) An employer.baII Dot reduce aD employee's rcgulllfnte ofbourly pay as a result of the adoptioft, "'peal or Dullifieation of an alremative workweek .ehedule. (4) An e"'ployer lbaIl explore any available ICIBonable llremative m..... of IICCOmmodaJiog !be religious belief Or observance of an af· fected employee that conflictS wilb an adoplCd lltemative workweek schedule, in !be I1WIDer provided by mbdi"¡¡¡OD G) of Sectioo 12940 of Ibe Govommenl Code. (5) An employerlball make areasonableeffOß 10 find a woJ!¡ scbedule DOl to e"coed eight (8) bours in a workday, in order to ac:eommod... any affec~d employee wbo was eligibtelO vote in 111 election authorized by Ibis section and wbo is unable 10 woderhe lIœmarive wodcweek sebedule establisbecl as Ibe reauJl of !bat eleedon. (6) AD O1Dployershall be permined, but not requited, 10 provide a work selledole not 10 ""eeed eight (S) bours in a _y 10 accommodate IDy employee wbo i. hired a1\er the d.... oflbe electioD and who is unable to wark the aIœmative wodcweek >cbedule e.tabliaÞed by !he election. (7) Arrangemcots adopted in a 'cae! ballot election bdd pursuanl to Ibis ordet priorlO 1998, orUDder the ruJ.. in effecl pñot 10 1998, IDd be- fore Ibe petform3nee of!be work, sÞaIJ "'IDIÎß valid after July I, 2000 provided mat Ibe results of the elecûon are reponed by Ibe e"'ployer to the Divi.ion of Labor Staô,dcs and Research by JanulI)' I. 2001, in ac- cordance with the requirements of subsectioo (C) boIow (1!1CCÜOD Pfoœ. dwes).If an employee was voluntarily wDrking an altemative workweek scbedule of 00' ",ore than ICtI (10) boun .day II of July I, 1m. that aI- œmative workweek schedule was based on an u,tlividllll ~t ",Ide after JllltlIr)' I, 1998 between !he employee and employer, and the employee sublDillCd. and Ibe employer approved. a wrincn request on or before May 30, 2000 t.o continue !he agreemen~ the employee IDlY con- dn.. 10 work mat lllOmative workweek scbedule with011t paymeDt of an overtime rate of co"'pensation for 1he bours provided in the agreemeDL The employee IDlY revoke bislÞer vollll1taty authorization 10 contioue sucb a schedule with 30 days written ootiee to the employer. New or· tange1Déß1S .,." ooly be entered ÍßIO punuant 10 !be provisions of this aection. (C) Eleeôon Procedures EJeedon procedures for the adoption IIId repeal of llremative work- week scbedules require the followin¡: (I) Each propo.1I (or an alœrnative workweek .ebcdule sblll be in the fonn of a wnllCD agreement propo.ed by the employer. The proposed asreemenl must designate a regularly ,cbeduled aItemative workweek in wbicb the specified number of work days and work hoon .... "'SOlarly recutrù:íg. The aeroal day. worked within thaI al~maIive workweek schedule need DOt be 'pecified. Tbe employer may propo.e a .ingle work .chedule WI wouJd become the .tandard schedule ror worken in mc Reømr2œ1"ND.I9¡ 5-'0..200'2 ·Jul-31-2DD2 02:13pm 9 11lD'U From-NEYHART ANDERSON JJAA\...LIn..." ""tI.&.I'.I.I'UN'a..n. """vu.a:. v.... .R»UV.I,U1t,"',IV...'U ...aw.~u ,. ", wotl< unil, or 1 menu of work schedule options, from wbich each em- ployee in tho unit would be enrided 10 cboose. If the employer propos.. 1 menu of wOtk schedule OpdOM,the employee may, wilb Ibe approval of the employer. move from one meau option to anomer. (2) In order 10 be valid. the proposed alœmaûve workweek schedule must be adopted in 1 lcael bIIIOt c\eCtion, before me pcrfolDWlCC of work, by 111_. 1 tw'Hhirós (213) VOte oflb. affected employ... in the work unit The election alWl b. held during regular wor1cillg bours al ¡be employw' work lite. For purpo.... of Ibis subsection. "affected em· ployees in tho woril: unie' may include all.mployeet in a readily identifl· abl. work unil, such as a division, a depanmCllt, a job çlassification, a shift. a seporaœ physica1locadon, at . recognized subdivision of allY such wadi: UDÎL A work uni, may COnsiSI of In individual employee as loagas the criœriaforUl idendñable workunilin lbislubscclion.... met. (3) Priar 10 ¡he scctel bIIIoc voce, any .mployer who proposed 10 insd- BIte an alœmative wotl<week scbcdule &hall have mad. a disclolur. in writing 10 th. affected CJDPIoyees, includin¡ the .ffects of the propos.d IIII1IDgemem on the .mployees' wag.., hours, and benefits. Such a dis- closute sball includ. me.lillg(s), duly notic:ed, beld at lean 14 daya prior 10 vOlÚlg, fOr the specific pll!l)o,. of discussingth. e1fects of the altema- dv. wotkweek schedul.. An .mployer shall ptOvide chat discI os"'" ÌD a noo-EagJisb lIUIguage, as well as in Ecglish, if at leas, five (S) petcen' of the affected employees primarily speak !bll noo-Sngl4b IaIIguage. The employer sball IIIIÜ the wn!lC1l disclosure to employees who do nOI ancnd the meeting. Failure 10 comply with th;s pangnoph shall make the clccd.on nu1l1lDd void. (4) MY .lecdon to establùh or ropcallll allI:111IIive workw.ek sched- ule shall be held.. ¡be worksitc of the affected employees. The employer ,hall bear the com of couduc:<ing my eleeúon held punullll to this see- don. Upon a eomplllÌllt by III affeeted .mploye., aDd after 11\ IIIvesdga- don by !b. labor ~on.r, the Jabor eommissioner may Jequil'e the employer 10 seleet a nculial. thin! pony 10 eooducl the eleedon. (v) Any type of alœmaûv. workweek schcdu e chat is authori2ed by the California Labor Code may be rope2Jcd by the aff....d.mploy.... Upon lpetition of ono-IbircI (1/3) of!be affectedemployccs. a new semI bailot elcedon shall be beld and a 'wo-!Iütd¡ (213) vote of ¡be affeeted employees shall be required to rovene the altcmadve workweek sched- ule. The e¡eedon to repeal the alternative workweek scheelule shall be held not mor. than 30 days after the pcdtlon is ,ubmiacdro the .mployer, except thaI tho election sball be be1cI not I... than 12monw after the date Ihat the same group of =ployees vP,ed 111 an .ICClion beld to adopt or repeal an alternadve wodcweek ¡cbeduIe. The election sball take place during rcgular working hounal the employees' wark SÎte.ltlhe all.."a- tive workweek schedule is rovok.cI.!be employer shall comply within 60 days. Upon proper showing of undue bardship. the Divioion of Labor Sl8IIdards Ent'OJCement may gnIIIt JIll extenSion of lime for compliance. (6) Only sec:ret ballots may be east by affected employe.s in !be wotk unit ar. any electÏOtl. held pursuant to this section. The results of any e1ec- lion condw:ted punuanc 10 Ibis section sball b. reponed by the employer to the Division of Labor SlIdsdcs and Research within 30 days after the results are final. and the tCpOlt of elcedon resuJlS shall be . pubUc docu- ment. The repolt sball inelude the final tally of the vote. the size of the uniL and ¡be na= of the bu.in..s of Ihe employer. (7) Employ... affected by . chang. in the work houtS rc.uJting from the adoption of an altemariv. wark...ek schedule may not be required to work tho,e new work bours for at lelSt 30 days after the announcement of the final re,ulu of th. elcelion. (8) Employcn sball no, ìnlÍmidatc or coe",e employe.slo vote either in suppon of or in opposition to a proposed alternative workweek. No employ... ,ban be di.chmged or di,criminated again.t for expres,ing opinions concerning th. alternative workweek election or for opposing or supponing its adoption Or repeal. Howev.r, nothing in this .ection shall prohibit an cmp10ycr hom c;tpn::ssing tûslhcr posidon concerning th.u aI~ativc wotkwcek to the affeçtc:d employees, A YÎolaDon oftbís paragraph ,hall be ,ubject to Califomia Labor Code Section 98 .1 Stq. Page 1318 41567i9445 T-75B P.DDT/01D F-755 (D) On. and one-half (11/2) dmes a minor'. IOpar raœ of pay ahall be paid for an work over 40 houn in any wod<week except minon 16 or 17 y..... old wbo art nOI required by law 10 atIOIId icbool and may!bere- foro by employed for the same hoUtS as an adull art .ubjecllO subsection (A) Or (B) acd (C) above. (VIOLATIONS OF CHILD LABOR LAWS at. ICIbjeec 10 Ô.., penalli.. orfrom SSoo 10 $10,000.. weIl8I1O crlmiDSll peulllu. Re- ter to California Labor Code Sec¡lono1285 10 1312 aDd 1390 10 1399 fot additional lO.drietiODil On Ibe elDploymeot of miDOl'S and (ot de- scriptions of criminal and chil penalties for 1'iolation of Ibe cbUdla· bor Ia.... Etnployen abould ask .cboot districtl .hont an,. required WQl'k permill.) (E) An .mployee may be employed 00 seven (7) workdays in one workweek when !be total hours of employment during such workweek do nOI.xceccl30 and the IOtaI bours of employOlCllt in any OlIO wor1cday thereot do nOI exceccl six (6). (1') Ji amc31 period oc:cun on a ahiñ beginningorcndin¡ at or betWeen the houn of 10 p.m. and 6 LID., faci1idCII .ball be available for sccutlng bot food and drink or for heating food or drink, and a suitable .bell<led place ,ball be ptovided in wbicb 10 c:onsume such food or drink. (G) The provision. of Labor Code Sections SSI and 552 "'gardlng o..e (I) day's ro.. in seven m "'all not be comlnled 10 preven. an ..cumula· don of daY' of res, when the namre of the employJDent reasonably re- quires lb. employee to wotk seven m or more consecudve days; pr0- vided. howevo<. that in each c31.ndat month, the CJDPIoyee sball tcœiv. ¡be equivalen, of one (!) day'. rest in sovea m. 00 Except as provided in subsections (E) and (G), Ibi, acetion sball no, apply 10 any employee covered by . valid coJleclìve bal¡einìng agrccmenr if the agreemOllt expressly providea for tho wag... boUD of ,.ode, and working coodi1ions of the =ployces. and if the 19RCIIlen~ provides premium ....ge me, fot all overtime boon wlSl:Ud and aregulJlr hourly ""e of p.y fot those e",ployees of DOl less thID 30 percent mOro than Ibe .we mioitIIum wage. (I) No'widl&taodiog subsection (H) above. where the employer and a labor orsanizalion xepreSCllliIIg employees of !be employer have eotered in,o a valid coDeclive bargaining agreemeJIt pcItIIi¡WIg 10 the hnun of wodi: of the =ploy..., the JequirclDCllt roprding the equlvalen, of one (I) day's....1 in seven (7) (see subaCClion (0) ahove) .lm11apply, unI... the agreement ""l're..1y provides otherwise. (J) Ji an employer approves a wrllleD roquea' of an employee 10 lOW up work lime that is or would b.lost as a resull of a personal obligation of lb. employee,lbe bours of that makeup work lime, itperformcd in the same workweek in which the work lime was losl, may nOI be counted to· ward computing th.IOW number of boun workccl ÌD . clay for P"'1'0se' of the overtime requirements. e"..pl tor boun in exc... of II hoon of wodi: in one (I) day ot40 bours of work in One (1) worl<week. Jianem· ployee know. ill advance that heI,hc will be requesting makeup time for a perlonal obllgadon that wßJ recut at . fIXed tilDe over a succession of weeles,lbe employ.. may Jequ", 10 make up work dm. fcrup to four (4) weelcs in advance: plOvided. how.ver.thaUhelllikeup work must be per. fonned in the ."",e w.ek thl! the ...ork lime wulOSL An employee ,ball provide a signed written request for each occasion that the employee makes a requc91 10 make up wodi: time pursuan' 10 Ibis subsection. While an employer may inform an employee of tlûs maIceIIp lime option, the employct is prohibited from encoURJ\n¡ Or oÙlerwi.. soUåting an .m- ploy.. '" request the CIIIployo<', apptovallO take perlonal time off and make up the work ho... within th. sam. workweek pUftlW1t co Ibi. sub- secnon. (K) The daily ovenimc provision of ,ubsection (A) above shall nOl ap- ply to ambuJancc driven and anendanrs acheduled for 2A-hOùI abifu¡ of duty who bave agreed In writing", .xclude from daÜy dme worted nat more than chtee (3) meal periods of noc more than one (1) hour eaeh and a regularly .eheduled unintclTUpted sI..ping period of no, more !ban eigll' (8) hours. The employer shall provic!c adcquolC donnitory and Jcitchen façilìdes for .mployees on such 1 scbedul.. R.eP_2IJJ2.}rlQ, 19; S-IO-::oœ ~ul-31-Z00Z OZ:14pm TIde 8 From-NEYHART ANDERSON 4156779445 Inclustrilll Welfare Commission T-758 P.008/0l0 F-755 IU",", 0-) The provisiom of !hi> scelioa ~ aot applicable 10 employees whc<e bcun of service are "'~ by: (1) The United Swes Depanmenl of Transporwien Cede of Federal Reguladcns, Tide 49. Sectic.. 39S.11O 39S.13, H0W'3 of Service of Driven, or; (2) Tide 13 of the CllitcmiaCede orResuladons. subcl>apœr6.S, Sec- tiOD 1200 ami the following seedoDS, Jeguladag bours ofdrivm. (M) The provi.ion. of tlùs seerio.. &hall not apply to <axioab drivers. (N) The provisio... ofùd. .eclÌOI1 shall not apply wbere any employee of an 8it1ine ceriliied by the federal os staœ governmenl wolts over 40 hours bul nOlIllCtO than 60hollr$ iu wcrl<w11Olc due 10 aœm lOI8l'y modi- f1C8lioa in tbe employee's normal work schedule DOl requùed by die em- ployer bUI amuged 1\ die fCqUOSt of the employee. inehuUna but ootJim- iled 10 situations wbere Ibe employee requests a cbange ia days oft or tndea daya oft with IDCtber employee. 4. MiDimUlll Wag.. (A) ¡¡vet)' employer sball pay 10 each employee wage. not lC3s !ban six dollars and tweIIty-five eenU ($6.25) pet hour for all hours worltecl. ettec1ive J8IIUary 1,2001, ami nol I... than six dollars ami seventy-Jive coats ($6.7S) per hour fos. all hours worlœcl. effective January I, 2002, euept: LIìARNERS: EmployCC3 during !beir firsl 160 hours of emplOymOllI in occupaIiOIlS in which !hey have no previOIU similar or mlated experi- eace, may he paidnollcss tba118S percent of the minimum wagelOWlded to tbe neæesl niekel. (11) Eve<y employer shall pay to each employe.. on the C3tablished payday for the period ¡"volvecl. nolI... than the applicable minimum wage for all hO\ll$ woriCed ¡" the payroll period. whether the remunera- tion is measured by time.. piece, commission. or otbc:rwise. (C) When an employee worl:s a apüt shift, 0110 (I) hour's pay 1\ the minimum wlge shall he paid In addition 10 the minimum wage for that workday, exeeptw!iëa.¡he emplny.. reaide. at the place of emplOymOll~ (D) The p¡ovi.iona o? this .seelÌoa shall not apply to apprentie.. regu- larly ind...tuted under the Sow: Divisio.. of Apprel1tiee,hip Standards. S. RepCSIÌDg TIme Pay (A):Each workday an employee is required to JepOrI for worlt and do.. report, but is nOI pot to work oris furnished I..s than hllfsald e",ployee's Il&oal or ",heduJed day's work, the employee .baII he paid for balf the usual or .eheduled day's work, but in DO event for less thlll two (2) hoUfJ nor more than four (4) hours, at the employee'. "'gular..... of pay, whiell shall not be 1ess dUUl the -;f'I;",~,,,, wace. (11) If an cmployee is required 10 report for wotlc; a seeond lime in any ene wotkday and is furnisbed Ie.. than two (2) hC1US of work on the .e- cond mporting, said employeelhall be paid for two (2) hoUtS at the em- ployee'. regular tate of pay, which shall not he IC3s than the minimum wage. (C) The f=golng repCSIÌDg time pay provisions are nOt app!il:able when: (I) Operadons cannot eo=cnce or cooåtlue due to ~ats 10 em- ploye.. or property; or when recommended by civiJ aullloriàes; or (2) Public ulililÌes f2Ùj to supply eleetricity, wlter, Or gas, or IIICI'O is a failure in the public uli!ilÌcs. os sewer system; or (3) Tho íntelTUprion ofwotk is caused by an ACt of God or oilier cause not within the employer's conD'OI. (D) Tbj¡ seetion sball nOI apply to an employee On paid standby sra"'" who is c:alled to perform uSigned work at . dmc: other thaa the em~ ployee's .cheduled reporting time. 6. License. for Disabled Wor1con (A) A license may be ¡ssoed by the Division authorizing employmont of a penon whose earning capacity is impaired by physical disability or mental deficiency at less than lIIeminimum wage. Such JJcenaes .hall he gt1IIIted only upon joinl applicalion of employer IIId employee and em- ployee's represenlalive if any. (B) A specialliœnse may he issued to a nonprofit organJzarion .ueb u a sheltered workshop or",habi61alÌon facility fi~ing special minimum . Page 1319 ~ to enable the employment of ¡ud! persODl without rcquisiu¡; iadi- vitllloIlic:eases of such employees. (C) All such üeeDJes and special licenses shall he renewed on I yearly buis or more frequeotly at the diserelioa of the Division. (5.. California Labor Code, Soericns 1191 an4 1191.5) 7. Reconls (A) Evei)' employer sball Jcecp accmm infarmatìon willt II:SpeçllO each employee including the foJlowial8: (1) FuD name, home addr...s. occupasioo and social aocurity number. (2) Birth dauo, if under 18 )'OII's'1IId desisoalion as a minor. (3) TIme record& showing when the employee begiJIs and ends each work period. Meal pcrloda. split ,111ft iDlervalJ and toW dally hcon woriCed ohaII alJo he reeonlod. Meal periods durÏl>C whiell operations cease and authorized resl periods need DOt be recorded. (4) Tow wage¡ paid each payroll pezíod; inclodlDg value of board. lodging, or olhet compe1Wlien aCClally furnished 10 the employee. (S) Total bcun worlced In !be plyroll period and applicable rata of pay. This infomwioo shall he made readily a..nable 10 the employee UpoD mscnshle request, (6) Whoa a piece rate or ineentive plan is in oper1!ion, piece rateS or 111 c:xplanalion of tho incentive plan forntuJa sball be provided 10 ern- ploy.... An ac<:unIe production record shall he maintained by the em- ployer. (3) EvOJy employer shall semimonthly or lit thelÙDe of elCb payment ofwages furnisb eacb employee. either as a detachable part of the cheek, draft, Or voucher paying the employee's wag.., or sopanstly. an 1I0IO- ìzed 'lI~rneøt ¡" wrilinB showing: (1) all deducdOSl8: (2) the iøclusive dlle. of the period for which tho employee io paid; (3) tbe name of tho employee or the employee'. social security number; and (4) tbe QIIIIe of the eDlployer, provided all deduClÌona made o. WfÌtIOII orders of the em- ployee may he aggregated and shown as one i!em. (C) All required records shall he in the EnsJisb languagellld iD ink or other indelible form. propetly dared, showing monrh. day and yeu, 1114 sball he IcoPI on file by the employer for at Icut three years at tho place of employmoot or ata =tralloeatioo withiø the Swe ofCaIiforniL An employee', ......,¡. .hall be available for inspecàon by the employee upon rel$onable roq.....t. (D) Clocks shall be provided in all major worlc areas or within a rea- aonable dis....ce thereto il>aofar IS praelicable. 8. Cash Shortage and BreaJcage No employer shall make any deduction !inm the was" or require troy relmhunCtDC1lt from :III employee fer ICy cash shonage. breakage, or 1011 of equipmoot, unless it can he SbOWD that the sherrage, breakage, or loss is caused by a dishoneal or willful act, or by the &JO" aegligence of the employee. 9. Uniforms and Equipment (A) When uniforms are required by the employerlO be woro by theem- ployee as a conditioo Of employment, such wIIf"""" shall he provided and n:>.aintalned by the employer. The 10rID "unifol1l\" includes wearing apparel and aa:e..cri.. of distinClÌve design or color. NO'Œ: This SCCÙOD ,baI1D.' "I'I'ly ID proteCIÌ"" >ppaIOI regulwd by the Ocoup" ".aol Safety ..d HcoIIh Standar1!a Board. (11) When toOls or equipment an: required by the employer or are nec- essary 10 the performance of ajob, suell_Is andequipment.baII he pro- vided and maintained by the employer, except thII an employee whose wage. are at leas"..o (2) limes the minimum wage provic!cd bCI<:Ù1 may he required 10 provide and maintain hand toOlSlCd oquipmenlcuslomari· Iy required by the cndc Or craft. This subsOClÌoD (11) shall nol apply to ap· prentices re¡ulariy indentured under the Swo Division of Apprenùec- ship Standards. NOTE: This ...oOD shall Dot a¡>ply ID ¡n'OtC.ovo oquip1P<lU ODd safer:y .ievi", 00 IDOl, .......001 by tile Oceupadonal Safety ODd HcoIth Slanden ¡ Boan!. (C) A rwoQable deposit may be sequired as security for the RNm of the lœms furnisbed by the employa under provlsiona of .ubscClÌon. (A) and (11) ofthi, seCIÌon upon issuance ofa receipt 10 the employee fo¡¡ueh ....iocr2OO1....10S J_IO_:m2 'JuHl-Z00Z OZ:15pm § 11090 From-NEYHART ANDERSON 4156779445 JSA.KUAt:\ \.JU.1J:IUllJ'llA'-UIJ !' u~ ....,,\:rUJJUIU¡'" .&IWÇU dee-Ill Such dcpositl .hall be made pursUlUlt to Secden 400 and (onow- ing of the L.aborCode or 8J\ employer with the priorwritlen anthodzlllion of the employee may dedUCt from the employee' Ilasl check the eo.. of 8J\ itom furnished pursuant to (A) and (B) above ¡., the event said item is ,,"<returned. No deducrion shall he mAde I\"'y rime for nonnal wear and tear. All ¡!emS furnisbod by the employer .hall be returned by the em- ployee upon completion of the job. 10. Meal. aød Lod&U>g (A) "'Meal" me.... an adequate, well-balanced .erving of a variety of wholesome. IUllririoU' foods. (B) "L04giag" means living ICCOlIImOdallons available 10 the em- ployee for fuU-lÌme occupancy which IIJe adequate, decent, and IIDÌIIt}' according Ie usual and CUSlonwy StaDdatðs. Employee. shall nol b. ... quùed 10 share a bed. (C) Meals or lodging may uot he credited against the minimum wage without a volucrsry wrillOU agreement betwe.. ÙIO employer and the em- ployee. When credit for meal. or lodsing ìa ...ed 10 meet pan of the em· ployer's minimum wage obJigadon, the amounts so credited may not be more than the following: Elfocrtv. Dour: ¡_" J. 200J ¡DnJU>" J, 2002 W,,,,: R.oom Occupied ilOIlo. $29.40 per .,001: 531.75 perwool: Room-..! S24.2S per wccIc S26.20 per week Ar=t-<wCHblnls (213) . dIo onIíaaJy "'W VII... aad ÌD DO f'VCD1 more thaD $352.95 per month $381.20 per ..cd: Wberc a cl?UPkc ue both employd by the ~.yer. tw"-<hirda (213) or . ontiDary ICDW vII... !!,Ii in S563.90 per month DO event morc tIwI ~ 5522.10 per moath M~t"s; ¡maid.., $2.2S $2.45 Leacb 53.10 53.35 DimIcr $4.15 $4..50 (D) Meal. evaluated as part of the mÌlùmum wage must he bona fide meals consistent with the employee'. wodc IIIùft. Deduetions sball OOt bç made for meals DOt receìved os lodgil>g not used. ( ¡) If. as a eondidon of emplo)'lilcal, tbe employee must live aI the place of employment or occupy quaners owoed or under the eonlSOl of the employer, then the employer may not eharge rent in exceu of the Y;Ù- ue.listed hereiD. II. Meal Periods (A) No empJoyer ohaII employ auy penon for a work period of mote than live (S) hours w;!hoU[ a meal period of not less than 30 DÛnutoa, ex- cept that when a workperiod of not!DOre than six (6) h0W'3 will complete the day's worlt the mcol period may be waived by mumal consent of the employer and the employee. (B) An employer may not employ an employce for a work period of more than ~n (10) hours per day without providing Ibe employee with a 'ccol1d n>oaI period of no. less than 30 minulOS, excopt Ibat if Ibe total hoUtS worl<ed is no mere than 12 houn, the seeood DIOaI period may he ..';ved by muma! eonsent of the employer and the employee only if the lint mea! period waJDOt waived. (C) Unless the employee;' relieved of all duty during a30 minute mea! period, the meal period shall he CðUSidered an "on duty" mcol period and eounted 1$ IÌme worked An "on duty" mea] period .hall be permined only when the n.CJtO of the wort prevents an employ.. from being re- lieved of all duty and wben by wrinen agreement between tbe panie. an on-the-job paid meal period is agree.d to. The wri[tcn qrccmenl shall ,,,..ilia< the employee may, ÌD wridng, revoke the agreemenlll any lime. (D) If an employer fails 10 provide an employee a meal period in ..cor· d8llCe willi the applicable provi.ion.s of tlùs order.lbe employer shaJl pay Page 1320 T-758 P.009/010 F-755 the employee one (I) bourofpay II the employee'. regularraœofcom- ) pousadon for e..b wolkday lIIaI the meal period Is not provided. (E) In all pIa... of employn>eot where employees are ICqUired 10 eat on the premises. a suillble plat:e for IhII purpose sball he designated. 12. Re.. Periods (A) EveI)' employer shall authorize ami permit all employ... 10 talce rest periods, which ÍIIsofar as pmcdc.bie sball he in Ibe llliddle of eadI wotlc period. The lud1crize<1 rest period time shall be based on the total hours wotkcd daily 1\1I1e talC of IOn (10) minute! Del teSllime per four (4) hours or major fnaicu thereof. However, a ""I period need DOl he authorized for employees whose total daily vtOIk lime is Ies. !ban tbsee aud o_balf (3 Ill) houn. Authorized reSt period time shall he COWIlCd as hours worlcod for which there Ihall he no doducdon from w..... (B) If an employer fail. 10 provide 811 employee a rest period ÌD =r· dan.. with the applioable provisions oftlùs order. the employer sball pay the employee 0110 (1) hour of pay 81 the employee'! regular me of com- pensation for eacb wOItday that tbe rort period ia nOt provided. 13. Chanao Rooms and ResdngPaeilld.. (A) Employ... ohaII provide .uitablelockcn, cloaers. o:equivalO1'llfor the safekeopmg of employees' outer clothing during woñcûIg bOlIn, aud when required. fortheir worlt elollùng durina noo-wotlc/ng hoUtS. When the oecuparien rcquita a chlllse of clothing, ehaI1geromna or equivalent space sball he provided in order that employ... may change their cloth- ing in reasonable privacy and comfort. These rcoma or spaces may he ad- jacent to but .hall he separate Iiorn leüO! rooms and &hall belcept clean. Non: tbI. sootioe abaD aot apply '" cbaDfe _ and .....SO faci rioa 1Csa- laø:d by tho 0ce1:p_ Sltcty and Health __ BoaId. (B) Suitable mång facilities shall he providedÎII asIlllCasepBRle from the toüet rooms and .hall he available 10 employees <Iurin¡ wnrk hours. 14. Sears (A) All worlcing employees shall be provided with suitable acats when the nature of the wod; reasonably pencilS tbe use of SOlIS. (11) When employees are UOt engaged in the ac1ive elude. of their em· . ploymcDt and the nasure oftbe wodc""luita standing, an adequate cum- her of suitable scats shall be placed in reasonable pro:dmity Ie the 'Notlc area and employee¡ .haJJ be permitted to uae such SOlIS wben it docs nOt inteñcre with the pet!ormanœ of their dudes. IS. Te¡nperanne (A) The tempo.l2lUt'O mol.,ol....! in each wotlc area.halI provide ...a. sonable coto!on consis_ with indusny-wide .tandards for the nature of the process and the work performed. (11) If excessive hell or hUIIÙdily is created by tbe wod; process, the employer shall take all feasible means 10 leduee sucb excessive heat or hwtúdi¡y to a de¡tee providiøg reasonable comfort. Where the Dasure of the employmentrcqui... a tempcratUR: ofloss than 6QO F.. a hCllOd 100m shall be provided to which employ... may II:IÌrC for warmth, and such 100m shall be maintained II Dot less ùaan 68°. (C) A œmpenmre ofnot less than 68· shall be maintained in the toilet rooms. resdng rooms, and change rooma during hours of use. (D) Federal aud S"œ ener¡yguidellnes aball prevail over any ennllict- ing provision of ÙlÌs seclÌon. 16. Elevat<m Adequate elevltOr, escalator or similar service eoasistellt with indus- ny-wide standards for the nature of the process and the work perfotmed shall be provided when employees are employed four lloon or more ab<>ve os below ground level. 17. ""empdon. If, ÌD the opinion of the Divi.ion afterdueinvesdgadon, it is found that the enforcement of any proviriou contaiDed in Section 7, Records; See- don \2, ReS! Periods; Section 13, Change Rooms and Resril1g Facilities; Secdon 14, SealS; SeclÌon IS, Temperawre; or Section 16, EIOValOl'S, would not materially ¡ fect the welfare or colllforl of employ... and wOUld ..ork an undue battI1hip on lheernployer, exemption may he made at d1e discretion of !he Division. Such exempdon. shall he in wriling to he effeclÌve and may be revoked after reøsonahl. notice is given in writ- ing. Applicadon for e.empdon shall be made by the employer or by the RtopW' 2œ1. No. 19; 5-IO-2OIn 'Jul-31-Z00Z OZ:15pm lïUell From-NEYHART ANDERSON 4156779445 JDUUJUJIU "CUQI C' """1.þ1.I.II:\CUUU .. --~- T-m P.Ol0/010 F-755 employee and/or the employee's rqnesenlative 10 tho Divis¡o. in writ- ins. A copy of the application sball be posred II the place of cmp}oyment at the time die applicalicn is filed with the Division. 18. Filing Reports (See California Labor Cede, Section I I 74(&) 19. Inspection (See California Labor Code, Section 1174) . 20. Penalò.. (See California Labor Code, Socdon 1199) (A) In addilio. to any 01h01' civil penallies provided by law, any CII1- ployer or any olher perso. ..,lÌng on behalf oftbe employer who violates, or c.....s 10 be violated, the provisions of this order. shall he IUhject 10 the civil penalty of: (1) hûòal Violwon - $50.00 for .ach underpaid .mployee fos'eacb pay period dwing which the employee was underpaid in addidon 10 the amollß'[ which is sufilcient 10 rceoYer unpaid wages. (2) Subsequent VioladoDl - $100.00 for eacb und"'J'3Íd employee for cachpay pcdoddutùlg which the employee was underpaidio addiòon to an IIDOUDt wbich is .sufñåent to recover unpakl wagc&. (3) ~ affected employee .han receive payment of all wages recov. ered. ' (B) Tho lahor commissioner may also i.sue citaticns pOZS!WIt to Caliromía Labos Code Section 1197.1 for non;¡aymeat of wages for ovcttime ww: in violalicn of tlùs order. 21. Separabùil)' lithe application of any provision ofùd. order, or any smon, .ubsec- don, subdivision. sentence, clau.e, phnue, wold, orpOrtion oflbi& order should be held invBlid or UDCODSlÎDldonal or unauthorized or prohibited by .tllUte. the remaiøiog provisiODJ thereof shall COt be affected thereby, but shall eonlÌnUC to he giveo full force aød effect as if the pan so hcld invBlid or lDIConstitutionallla4 nO! be.n included berein. 22. Postin¡ of Order Every employer shall Jcoep a copy of tl:ds old.r posted in an .....I're- qUODlOd by employees wbore it may b. easily read during the wOdi:day. Where !he Jocttion oHio:W: or otbercondidons make this impracdcal, ev· ery employer shall keep àcopy oftlùs order and maIce it availablelO .ve!)' employee upon_s. NOTE: Au'EboriI) \Sœd: Seaion J 173. Labor Code; ad CaliIorni. CoUlti\Ution. Anicle xJV. SOCIion 1. Ref....,..: Scedons 1182..1i 1184, Labor CocIe. HIsroRY I. Amendment meli 4-22~8; opemlive 7-1-88 (Regis.... 88. No. 19). 2.lI<p<aJerof"¡'u:erion4(3)fiIod 1-11-89; opemiv.I-I1~9 (Re¡iSllr89,No. 4). 3. Change withoœ "gulKOI)'. effcct ~a:at to section JOO, dde 1, CaIíloIlÚa Coðe of Re¡¡ulati... repcoJiug sub,oorioo 8 (!aslleerooe. only) filed 4-24-89 (Regi...r 8~, N.. 17). 4. Amendmom.r _lioDS I ..d 3 filed 3-1&-90: opcmivc 7-1-90 (Register 90, No. 13). S. EdilDrW """"';"0 ofptioting 0fI0I$ (Re¡il- 91, No. 32). 6. Am.nclmontof..blcctiOD 4.(A) filed 9-19-96; oJ"""'Ìve IG-I-96. Submill&Ó to OAL for priDIio¡ oDly (Rc;isu:r 96, No. 38). . 7. Amendment 0/"_00 4.(A) fiI.1i 1-14-97; opemive 3-1-97. Submitted ID OAL lor priming ooIy (Regis<cr 97, No.3). 8. Amcn_ofpamuhorieal infonlWioo below lI'Iiel. beading and ....._t of SOCIÌon filed7-31-97: opemivel-I-98. Submlaoli ID OAL /orptinlinsenJy pun.....". Labor Coðe soeriooll8S (Repstc:r 97, No. 31). 9. R.epc:aI""and ...fileli 5-7-2002: oponriv. 1-1-2001. Snbmined toOAL for priolin. onlypnnnan"oLaborCodeseWonlSl7 and lias (RcçÎ9rcr2002,No. 19). . Article 10. Amusement and Recreation Industry (Order No. 10-2001. £ffective 1-1-2001) ! 11100. Order Regutallng Wages, Hours, and Working Conditions in the Amusement and Reclllation Indu8lry. I. Applicshility of Order This order shall apply 10 aJl penons employed in the amuSement and recreaòon indus!!)' wheth.r paid on a \imc. piece t'l1.e. corrunìssion. or other basis, exceplmal: Page 13::1 (A) Provisions of Seç¡joas 3 thrOIlCh 12 of this order sball nOl apply to pcr80na employed in aduüniSIIIIÛve, execulive, orprofcssionaJ capaci. ries. The following rcquiremena shall apply In delerDlining whether an employee's dolies meet the lOSt [0 qualify for an exomplion from those .ections; (I) Execulive Ðtemption A person employed in an executive capacity means any employ.., (a) Who.. dwi.. and r.sponsibilities illvolvelhe matl8£oment of the cn!e11)ri<e In which heI.be is employed or of acustomarilyteeognized de. panmcnlOS subdivision thereof; and (b) WhocuslOlDarily ami JeguJariydireclS the wW: oflWoormoro 0111· er employees therein; and (c) Who has the authority 10 hire or lite olber employ..s or who.. suggestions and teeommendalicns as 10 the hirina or MOg aad as 10 the advan..ment and promoòon or any other change of Slltus of olher em- ploy..s will he giVOll particular weialu; and (d) Who Cl1&tomari!y and r.¡¡uIorly oxereb.. dis....tion and il>depel1- dent judJ:lllOÐ~ and (e) Who is primarily enpged in dudes which meet the tesl of the cx- empòon. The acdvili.. conslimdng exempt work and no.........mpt wot!: shall he conslNed in the samemmmer IS such items Ire COIISINed in the followiDg regoJariOl1l under the P8it Labor Standards Act e1foedve IS of the dale ofÙlis csdot: 29 C.P.It Seerions 541.102, 541.104-111, ami 541.I1S-116. Exempt work shall include, for example, all work that is directly and closely related 10 exempt work ami wode which is properly viewed as a 10.... for canying out exempt functions. Tho work acmally performed byth. employ.. during tho couno of the workweek mus~ fint and fcremos~ h. examined ami lIIe IDlOWlt of time the employee spends ca such worlc, together with th. employer's realisde expectalions aød the reBlistic requirements of the job, .hall he coD8idc:red in determining whether the employee swslles tIùs requiremcns. (t) Such an employee must also eam a IDOnthly salary equiv81enllO no less than two (2) times the swo minimum wage for fuIl-dme employ. menS. 'FuIl-<Üne employmom i. defined In Labor Code Socôon 515(.) IS 40 houn per wool<. (2) AdminislrlÒ.e Exemplion A petSon .mployed iI> an adminietra- tive capacity meana any employee: (a) Whose duri.. and respoosibiliri.. involve either: (i) The performance of office os nOlHllanual work ditecdy related to management policies or geIIetal business cpera¡ions ofhislhcr employer or bislber employer'! customers; Or (ii) The performance of functions in the adminisuadon of a schOOl sys- 10m. or eduearional es!Ablísbmeat Or inslitution, or of a depllltlllent or s.bdivision thoroof. in work diIl:CÙY reJated 10 the academic il>strllc:tion or traiolng eanied on therein; and (b) Who ....1Omari1y and regularly ex=1s" di$crelion ami indepen- dent judgment; and (e) Who regulorly and direc~y usbt> a propriotor, or an employee employed in . booa lide executive or administralÌve capacil¡l (as sueb terms are defined for purposes of tlùs section); or (d) Who performs under only general.upervision work along special- ited or IOChnical Un.. requiring special training, experiene.. or knowl- edge; or . (e) Who executes under only general supervision special assi¡:nmenlS and tasks: and (0 Who is primarily engaged in dutioa which meet the lOSt of rho .x- emption. The: aeliviues consrimtiDg exempt wort: and ftcm-exempr work shall he COlISl7Ued in the same manner as suoh W'IIIS ere construed in th. foUoWÙ!g regularion. under lb. Fair Labor SWldards Act .ffeetive IS of the date of this order. 29 C.F.R. Sccdons 541.201-205. 541.207-208, 541.210, and 541.21 5. Exempt work shall Include, for example, all work Iba! is dircedy and closely related 10 exempt werle and work which i. properly viewed IS a means for carrying ou..xempl functions. The wcrk sctuaJly perfOlll1ed by the employee during 1ho COUI'$C of the workweek mus~' first and foremos~ he examlned and the amount of time the em- ployee spends on such work, together with the employer'. realistic ex. RoP",:Am, NO.1" $-10-:1002 City of Chula Vista Office of the City Clerk 276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista, Calif. 91910 JC!!oíts' aM -... WATER PARK SAM DIEGO To whom it may concern: While we are voting "Yes" as part of our obligation on the proposed assessment for Open Space Maintenance District #23 there are still some issues we are not happy about. This attachment lists these issues. A meeting was held on Monday, August 5, 2002 with city officials who tried to assist in answering some of the concerns that both Coor's Amphitheater and Soak City Management had regarding the Open Space District #23, the median addition and other questions involving this area. 1. We have a 120-day operating season, meaning as a business, we are closed for 245 days a year. As part of the agreement we are listed as a participant because we "benefit" from this landscape area. How do we "benefit" when we are closed. We also pay for our share of electricity for lighting on the Palm Trees in this area. Why would we if we are never open after dark. So, our business and guests receive zero "benefit" from the lighting. When this was brought up at the meeting the answer from city personnel was" We hear you". That does not seem to be an answer. Why do we share in a cost that we receive little Of no benefit? Is it fair to signal out just two businesses for increased taxation when the "benefit" is truly questionable? 2. Since the agreement was written before us or the Amphitheater were built and was planned as a Industrial park where 15-20 businesses would share in that cost the burden of this cost is placed on only the two of us. No promises were ever made that this would change, however during the last three years when the issue comes up there is always talk from the city of additional businesses that are coming into this area that may be added to the District to reduce our cost. There aren't any in the foreseeable future. Be honest, if there aren't any, tell us that. 3. The only other business that could be added to agreement is Hanson Aggregates. In our opinion they should be added to the District and share in the costs. They are open year round and are a large contributor to the dust and dirt that turns to mud on all the vehicles due to their lack of maintenance in the winter. It also covers the lights, trees and minimal landscape in the area. When this issue was brought up at the meeting with the city they thought it would be hard to add them to the agreement, but they were going to look into it. This Open Space area does not sell one ticket to the Water Park. It improves the look of Main Street, which is exactly what it does for Hanson Aggregates. So why don't they share in the cost? 4. There was also an estimated charge of $4,000 for legal fees for the city to amend the District to include the median. Glen the city attorney was going to check on the actual cost, which he thought, may be lower. When it was asked why we would have to pay for the city's attorney fee once again it was explained that was the way Open Space district's work. This does not seem to be a fair practice. If the city wants to amend the agreement why do the businesses have to pay for their attorney? 5. When the city puts a District out to bid what is their incentive that they get the lowest price? I probably know the answer. 2052 Enterfainmenf Circle, Chula Vista, California 91911 · (619) 661-7373 · www.soakcityusa.com WA'I'ER PARK SAM DIEGO 6. When the issue of tree replacement or damage to fencing or other things within the district was brought up it was pointed out that the police try and get reimbursement from the individual first, if not, the city does not have funds SO.. .Soak City and the Amphitheater have to pay. ¡ was under the impression that we were only paying for the maintenance to this area not the liability. When asked why ¡ was told that this is just the way it is with open space districts. ¡ didn't consider that an answer. I think if we were around when this was originally written we would have never wanted it or agreed to this. Basically it comes down to cost. Soak City and the Amphitheater are the only businesses that pay an Admission tax. By the way, this is the only city in our company of 6 amusement parks and 7 water parks in various cities around the United States that charges one. We also pay our share of property taxes. As you know the costs of utilities are constantly going up, as has minimum wage in the last two years. Our increasing costs for running this operation are outpacing by far the increases we can pass on to our guests. We can not afford additional taxes and fees. Now comes this 37% increase. We respectfully feel these costs are too high and ask that you re-examine all costs associated with the Open Space District #23 and treat us fairly in this assessment. ~~ Marty Keithley General Manager Knott's Soak City San Diego 2052 Entertainment Circle, Chula Vista, California 9191 1 · (619) 661-7373 · www.soakcityusa.com COOM AMPHITlEATRE.- 1M 2050 Entertainment Circle, Chula Vista, CA 91911 Phone (619) 671·3500 Fax (619) 671·3550 . <-- <- - City of Chula Vista Office of the City Clerk 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910-2631 Honorable Mayor and City Council members, We wanted to submit this letter as an expression of our concerns regarding the proposed assessment for Open Space Maintenance District No. 23. We will be voting YES on the ballot for the district, but have concerns about the cost of maintaining the district and about containing future costs. In approximately February of this year a meeting was held at the new city public works yard to talk about the assessments of open space and landscaping districts. At this meeting a representative of House of Blues Concerts and Coors Amphitheatre gathered information presented by city staff about the upcoming assessments for the district in which the amphitheatre is located. At this meeting it was explained that the assessment figure proposed at that time might not be completely accurate and might be slightly higher. The figure proposed at that time was $13,670.00. The proposed assessment for the district as currently configured is now $18,864.00. This is a thirty-eight percent (38%) increase over the figure presented in February. We do not feel this can be construed as a "slight" increase in assessment. Further information provided by the city through Mr. Joel Chew indicated the increase was caused by the necessity to rebid the contract for landscape maintenance outside the norma1landscape bidding cycle. With those circumstances in mine, we are still concerned about the amouut of the increase and would like to work with the city to receive a full, detailed accounting of the assessmeut costs. We are also interested in working with the city to find ways to prevent such major increases in future years and to contain maintenance costs. We also consider the proposed cost of maintaining the median along Main Street, at $23,260, to be excessive. While the current boundaries of the district has large areas of vegetation which must be maintained, the land to be added by the Main Street median, approximately a 2,800 foot strip, has approximately 200 feet of area which is heavily planted in vegetation. The remaininl!: 2.600 feet of this median are Dlanted with palm trees and has the l!:Tound covered with a non-vel!:etative l!:Tound cover which should reauire very little maintenance. We were wondering why the cost of maintaining the median portion of the landscaping district would still be more costly than the other parts of the district which seem to be much more vegetation and labor intensive? While we understand the second phase of the development of the median calls for the installation of some street lighting, there was an indication that there would be only minimal addition of greenscape to the median. It has been stated that part of the increased costs for the assessment on this median are for replacing a palm tree which was struck by an automobile and destroyed. If the tree had died in the normal course of maintenance, we understand the cost of replacement is covered under the maintenance district. It was our understanding from someone at the city (police department, we think) that since the destruction of this tree was the result of a traffic accident, the person who had the accident would bear the cost of replacing that tree and not the landscape district. Luce Forward et. al. 8/2/02 3:17: PAGE 1/4 RightFAX LUCE FORWARD ATTORNEYS AT LAW, FOUNDED 1873 Luce, Forwwd, Ham~lon & Scripps LLP 600 wes. Brœd\.vay Suite 2600 San Diego, CA 92101 619.236.1414 619.232.8311 fax www.luce.cxxn . Facsimile Transmission To Name. . . . . . . . . . . . Alex Alagha Company......... Location ......... Fax Number. ... ...691-5171 Voice Number . . Froll1 Name. . . . . . . . . . . . Jeffrey A. Chine Fax Number. . . . . . . (619) 645-5337 Voice Number. . . . . (619) 699-2545 Message or comment ... Date and time of transmission: Friday, August 02,20023: 16:20 PM Number of pages: 04 (Including this cover page.) PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - All information 1ransmitted hereby is intended anIy for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient(s), please note !bat any dis1ribution or copying of this communication is s1rict1y prohibited. Anyone who receives this communication in mor should noti1ÿ us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us. Luce Forward et. al. 8/2/02 3:17: PAGE 4/4 RightFAX LUCE FORWARD AnORNEYS At LAW - FOUNDED- 1873 lute, F_AII!!, HoIiMl1JUI\I & ScIllI'l'S UJ' ChuIa Vista City Council August 2, 2002 Page 3 In mmmary, we urge the Council to approve the Update with the inclusion of funding for La Media Road and a clarification of the definition of"groas acyeage." Finally, we ask that in a future TDIF Update the Council provide funding for a Rock MOImtain RoadlSR 125 crossing. Thank you for this opportlmity to comment upon the TDIF Update. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. t:L- JAC/jr ce: Ann Moore, Esq. (via fax) Mr. George Kremph, (via fax) Alex Alagha (via fax) Mr. Simon Malk (via fax) 1165787.1 [WDrd] Luce Forward et. al. 8/2/02 3:17: PAGE 3/4 RightFAX LUCE FORWARD ATTORNE"TS AT LAW . FDUNDED 1813 LutE. FcII.W"RD, ttAM1at1t.1 & SCllltP'1'5 LLP Chula Vista City Council August 2, 2002 Page 2 Second, the staff has indicatcd its intention to clarify the definition of "gross acreage" as that term is used in Section 2.C of the proposed Ordinance:. As presently drafted, the e:alculation of gross acreage for COIlUllercial, high rise commercial, industrial and medical center development is not clearly defined. An objective defuútion is necessat)' to ensure that adequate fees are collected and to avoid gamesmanship in fee calculation. Fina1Iy,OLC has been negotiating in good faith with San Diego Expressway Limited Partnership, also known as crv, for the conveyance ofright-Qf-way for SR 125. Recently, crv revealed that it will not construct crossings at Rock Mountain Road or Olay Valley RdJMam Street when it builds SR 125. All otber SR 125 crossings or interchanges will be constructed concUIIently with the toll road. The City's contnIct with CTV does not assure: that crossings will be constructed at Rock Mountain Road or Otay Valley Rd.IMain Street when needed. As presently fi"...."...'! by the TDIF, Rock MountainlAlta Rd. and Otay ValleylMain Stm:t will dead-=d when they meet SR 125, and then pick up again on the other sidc of SR 125. The proposed TDIF does not correct this obvious gap in financing. Consequently, SR 125 will effectively sever OLC's property. Wc believe there arc two pOtentia! solutions to this serious problem. FiT6t, CTV can, and should, construct all inten:hanges and crossings concurrently with the construction of SR 125. Absent this commitment, we urge the City Council to consider a future TDIF modification to include funding for a crossing structure at one of the intersections, preferably Rock Mountain Road. The Rock Mountl\.Ïn Road crossing qualifies for inclusion in the TDIF as a critical east-west link 1hrough Otay Ranch. Staff recently indicated that it believes Rock Mountam Road as presently planned will be at a lower elevation than SR 125, such that no crossing structure is required. However, OLC's engineer, the Keith Companies, indicates that a crossing structure will be necessary. We will continue to work with City staff to accomplish this important change, wbich will reduce tile possibility Dftraffic problems in the southern portion of the Benefit Area and ensure equality of access to SR 125 for all scgmeots of the benefit area. L 76S7S~.! [Word) Luce Forward et. al. 8/2/02 3:17: PAGE 2/4 RightFAX /- d / /E-r¡ 1 LUCE FORWARD ATTORNEYS. AT L.QW . FQUNDED 1873 lutE, FoNAIID, HüulItllt & ScIlI~JIS LlJI RECEIVED 600 WMt Broadway Sulœ 2600 San Clegu. CA ,ZIOl 619.Z36.1414 619.232.8311 fal www.lllct.œm JEffREY A. CtUNE. P.Akl1'lQl DIR.!CTDIALNUMBI!K 6t9.699.2S4S nlREcrFAX NuMBER 619.645.5337 &cAlL ADDiŒ$S JOUNlí@LUCE..COM '02 AUG -2 P 4 :29 VIA FACSIMILE/U.S. MAIL etf'" OF CHULA VlST;, GIT'f ÖLERK'SOFFfCE August 2, 2002 26809-2 Chula Vista City Council cløCityClerk 276 Fourth St. Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: Transportation Devclopment lmpact Fcc Update Dear Honorablc Mayor Horton and City Council Members: This finn represents Otay Land Company, LLC C'OLC"), a land owncr within Otay Ranch. I am writing in regard to the City's Transportation Devclopment Impact Fee ("TDW) 2002 Update, w1úch you arc scheduled to consider on August 6th. OLe urges you to adopt the proposed TDIF increase at your August 6th hearing. The fee adjustment is necessary to fund infrastructure vital to Otay Ranch and delays in the adoption ofthc Update result in the loss of revenues to fund this infrastructure. We also woUld like to thank staff for thcir hard WOIX on the Updatc and willingness to consider OLC's comments and CDncems. We would like tD takc this opportunity to bring three issues to your attention, including (i) thc proposed delelion 0[$8,000,000 funding for La Media, (ii) the TDIF definition OfflgroSS acreagc," and (üi) the absence of funding for Rock Mountain Road and Main StreetlOtay Vallcy Road crossings over SR 125. Wc request that you address points (i) and (ii) in connection with this Update. The third issue may bc dcfcrred until the next TDIF Updatc. First, thc proposed TDIF eliminates funding for thcLa Media bridgc crossing ofOtay Valley. Our concern is that La Media is identified in thc General Development Plan ("GDP'') as a necessary roadway for Olay Ranch circulation. Thc proposed cli¡µination of funding effectivcly removes this portion ofLII Medill &om the GDP. OLe is conceroed that thceffects of such removal arc not known and have not been considered by the City Council and public. For cJtarnplc, traffic which would have used La Media now will hurden other roadways. Thc necessary infrastructure to accommodate the additional traffic and the mechanism to fund these improvements are not apparent on the face of thc Update. Thus, OLC requests that the City Council refi-ain &om eliminating funding for thc La Media bridge until further IUllllysis is completcd. CAHIEl "'ALlE:~'O[l Mu CAANElVAliEYiDELMAR' LosANGELEs' NEW\'_' SANDIEGO· SAHFRANCISCD' WEsTLosANGaES Los ANCoElE'5 . Nr.f Y~Rr . S:.N DJrlõf! . S ;N Fu...~tY.1I . Wtn I..os A~r.H~:!. August 6, 2002 Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council and Planning Commission, My name is Gary Stovall and I live at 790 Ada St. Chula Vista, CA. My wife and I are opposed to extending the eminent domain law. Our property falls in the area designated for eminent domain/redevelopment. We have spent at least 100,000 dollars over a period of 12 years upgrading and improving our property. We have done extensive repairs on the smaller house covering new walls, roof, electrical, and plumbing. We bought the property so that we could have an income property and a home as well since the property has two houses. When we bought our property we removed two construction dumpsters of trash plus several old cars. We paid over eighteen hundred dollars in taxes last year. We have a four-car parking pad on our property and maintain our property, which we have landscaped to make as beautiful as any park. We are retired and depend on income from the second house. The eminent domain law stipulates that we would receive fair market value for the property. I don't think there are many other properties in the area that has two houses and the amount of land we have. Our property value has doubled in the last five years. We recently had an offer from Flock & Avoyer, Commercial Real Estate, for an option to buy our property. We responded favorably to them but their response to us was they only wanted to purchase the "Pumpkin Patch" and were not interested in our property. We looked all over Chula Vista for something comparable. We did not fmd property with two houses for sale so we looked at properties with comparable land. The prices ranged from 400,000 thousand to 750,000 dollars. I do not believe the city would be prepared to pay that sum of money in the event of using the eminent domain law. Is fair market value what someone from the city decides? Who in the city makes that decision? Our neighbors, some, who recently purchased their property, are all upgrading their properties. They are making repairs-- landscaping and doing a very good job of removing any blight. Every one has off street parking and the only people who are parking on the street are from the new low income housing the city built two years ago. My personal belief is that the blight is the heavy traffic and 10 strip malls in the area. My wife and I retired from teaching this past year. We both taught a number of years with the Sweetwater Union High school District and work in the community as volunteers in the arts, our church and for other community projects. We believe we should be allowed to live in peace without the threat of an eminent domain law hanging over our head. We also request that our property be removed from the designated area. Thank you. 3131 Camino Del Rio North· Suite 190 San Diego, California 92108 (619) 280-2600· FAX (619) 280-3311 websne: www.flockeavoyer.com Commercial Real Estate William R. Thaxton, CCIM Senior Vice President June 18, 2002 Gary Stovall and Phyllis Welch-Stovall 790 Ada Street Chula Vista, CA 91911 RE: 790 ADA STREET CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Dear Gary and Phyllis: A very good client of mine, Jeff Sterk of GMS Realty, has expressed an interest in purchasing your property as part of a redevelopment of a number of properties in the area. He has an interest in entering into an option to purchase agreement at a price that would be acceptable to all parties for two periods of six months. He would be willing to pay you $5,000 for each six-month period, which would be non- refundable and not applicable to the purchase price. Additionally, you would be able to live on the property or rent out the property until the Buyer exercises his option and closes escrow. Please call me at (619) 398-4675 when you receive this letter. I look forward to discussing this with you. Sincerely, FLOCKE &.. A VOYER COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE fiï1 qLG William R. Thaxton, CCIM Senior Vice President WRT/mc cc: Jeff Sterk / GMS Realty Stephen E. Avoyer / Flocke & Avoyer Commercial Real Estate 1£ .. ..---.... 790 Ada Street Chula Vista CA 91911-2604 Phone: (619) 575-7811 e-mail: auilisi@earthlink.net July 2, 2002 Mr. William R. Thaxton, Senior Vice President Flocke & A voyer Commercial Real Estate 3131 Camino Del Rio North, Ste.190 San Diego, CA 92108 Dear Mr. Thaxton: This letter is to follow up our telephone conversation of July 2nd. As per the letter we received from you dated June lSth, you stated your client, Jeff Sterk ofGMS Realty, was interested in purchasing our property as part of a redevelopment of a number of properties in the area, at a price that would be acceptable to all parties. We look forward to hearing from you the week ofJuly 22"" after you have consulted with your client so we may meet and discuss this matter more fully. Sincerely, Gary and Phyllis Stovall -r.Lb:Jb4:J::1D'::I....)..... HQxut~~N HtNUtK~N ;:)(,,) r-\::.I.L hUI..:J t:.JO \::.I.:::: t1ci: R.J:Ã4 ~~:3 August 6, 2002 City Council of the City ofChula Vista City Council Chambers 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 Re: Fourth Amendment to the Reåevelo11ment Plan for the SOllthwe!t Reåevelo11ment Proiect Dear Sir or Madam: Please be advised that my wife and myself are the owners of the Moana Court Motel, 772 Broadway, Chula Vista, Califol'ßia, which is located in the above-referenced redevelopment project. By this letter we wish to voice our objection to the proposed amendment to the redevelopment project and request that the any amendment to the plan include, In addition to any compensation provided by the State Property Acquisition Law and Stale Relocation Guidelines, all economic damages suffered by a property owner as a result of the taking of property through the eminent domain process contemplated by this proposed fourth amendment to the redevelopment plan. Your consideration of our request is appreciated. /' ,~ ( . ~ Chan- Yung Chang