HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1991/04/09Tuesday, April 9, 1991
Re~lar Meeting of the ciw of Chula Vista Ci~ Council
CALt.RD TO ORD~
1. CAM. THE ROLL: Councilmembers Malcolm , Nader , Rindone and Mayor Pro
Tempore Moore __.
2. PLEDGE OF AIJJZGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 2, 1991
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Showing of award winning basketball video - This video received an "Award of Excellence"
from the California Park and Recreation Society.
(Items 5 through 12)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items lixted under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the
Council by one motion without discussion unless ~t Councilmember, a member of the public or City staff requests
that the item be pulled for discussior~ 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. (Complete the green form
to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff
recommendaiion.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Public Hearings and Oral
Communications. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRIt t~.N COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter requesting evaluation of location for cable box at corner of Gotham SWeet and Wayne
Avenue - Thomas A. Davis, 1657 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910. Continued fi-om
the meeting of April 2, 1991.
b. Letter requesting alteration of City Ordinance 6.04.060 pertaining to the keeping of hogs,
pigs or other swine or goats within the City - Dee Van Winkle, 501 Flower Street, Chula
Vista, CA ,n/O/' ..~qA/~&'~ o ~'~o Lt~:,¥~'
C. Letter of resignation - Safety Commission - Gene Militscher
d. Letter requesting a new City Franchise Ordinance - Don Lindberg, 280 "K" Street, #28,
Chula Vista, CA 92011.
e. Letters expressing concern over traffic problems on Main Street in the vicinity of Marshal's
Car Auction - Mary Villalobos, Border Marketing, 3648 Main Street, Suite 208, Chula Vista,
AGENDA -2- April 9, 1991
CA 91911; Andra J. Rigoli, Tratec of California, Inc., Irongate Business Park; and Michael
A. Vogt, International Real Estate, 701 B" Street, Suite 720, San Diego, CA 92101.
6. ORDINANCE 2450 AMENDING SECTION 2.05.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
TO ESTABLISH THE REVENUE MANAGER POSITION IN THE
UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE (second reading and adoption) - The report
concerns the establishment of a Revenue Manager position in the Finance
Department. After review of the expected financial benefits of this
position, it is concluded that the position should be established prior to the
start of the fiscal year. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on
second reading and adoption. (City Manager) 4/5's vote required.
7. RESOLUTION 16122 AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF $2,000 OUT OF THE COUNCIL
CONTINGENCY FUND SUPPORTING THE MUSIC MACHINE'S TRIP TO
WALT DISNEY WORLD - Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(City Manager)
8. RESOLUTION 16123 APPROVING CONTRACT AND APPROPRIATING FI3NDS FOR FISCAL
ANALYSIS AND ECONOMIC MONITORING REPORT WITH JOHN
MCTIGHE AND ASSOCIATES - The revised economic/fiscal threshold
contained in the Growth Management Program calls for an annual "fiscal
impact report" to provide an evaluation of the impacts of growth on the
City as well as an annual "economic monitoring report". These reports will
require the assistance of outside consultants because the City staff does not
have the available personnel and technical expertise to conduct the
analysis. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Planning) 4/5's vote required.
9. RESOLUTION 16124 AFFIRMING THE TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATION, INSTALLING AN ALL-WAY
STOP AT T}~ INTERSECTION OF IV~t.R.OSE AVENUE AND EAST
RIENSTRA STREET - An all-way stop was installed as a trial traffic
regulation on 8/21/90. Since the all-way stop has been installed, there
have been no reported accidents at the subject intersection. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
10. RESOLIYrlON 16125 APPROVING THE FY 1991-92 CIAIMS FOR THE FY 1991-92 TWO
PERCENT NON-MOTORIZR. r~ TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT
FUND - Annually the City submits an updated list of projects for inclusion
in the Seven-Year Implementation Program of the Non-Motorized Element
of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). In response
to SANDAG's request, staff has prepared and forwarded to SANDAG a draft
seven-year plan for construction of bicycle lanes and routes. In order that
claims for the projects may be considered for funding by the SANDAG
Board of Directors, Council must pass a resolution authorizing submittal
of the claims. An advance set of claims was submitted to SANDAG on
2/28/91. Staffrecommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public
Works)
AGENDA -3- April 9, 1991
11.A. RESOLLrrlON 16126 MAKING APP(~INTMENTS, APPROVING DOCUMENTS AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR Tro EXECUTE NEW ACQUISITION/FINANCING AGI~ RRMENT
IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD, PHASE
I) - On 6/20/89, Council accepted a petition from the Easflake
Development Company and other property owners to initiate acquisition
assessment al!strict proceedings, pursuant to the Municipal Improvement
Act of 1913, for the financing of Otay Lakes Road Phase I. This item
continues thei formal proceedings leading to the establishment of the Otay
Lakes Road Phase I assessment district. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions and set time and date of public hearing for May 14, 1991 at
6:00 p.m. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 16127 ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF
ASSESSMEN? DISTPdCT NIJMBER 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD, PHASE I)
C. RESOLUTION 16128 DECLARING ~ON TO ORDER THE INSTALLATION OF CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS IN A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; ORDERING
THE PREPARATION OF A REPORT DESCRIBING THE DISTRICT TO BE
ASSESSED 'FO PAY THE COSTS AND EXPENSES THEREOF; AND
PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
NUMBER 88-i (OTAY LAKES ROAD, PHASE I)
RESOLUTION 16129 PASSING ON iTHE 'REPORT' OF THE ENGINEER, GIVING PRRI.IMINARY
D.
APPROVAL, AND SE'FI'lNG A TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING
FOR ASSESSIVIENT DISTRICT NUMBER 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD, PHASE
I)
12. REPORT ON SECONDi AMENDMENT TO AGt~RRIVlENT BE'I~NEEN SCOOT AND
AMERICAN TRANSIT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION (ATC) FOR
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF CHULA VISTA TRANSIT (cv'r) FOR
THE PERIODi OF 7/1/88 THROUGH 6/30/91 - The current agreement
between SCOOT and ATC for Chula Vista Transit operation terminates on
6/30/91 and~ contains an option to extend the agreement for two
additional years. A two-year extension to the agreement has been
negotiated. Staff recommends that Council accept the report and
recommend t9 the SCOOT Board that they approve the second amendment
to the agreeraent. (Director of Public Works) Continued fi-om the April 2,
1991 meeting.
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
AGENDA -4- April 9, 1991
to any item, please fill out the 'Request to Speak Form' available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior
to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speb& in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form
to speak in opposition to the staff recommendati~on.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individual.
13. PUBLIC HEARING MAi imPS RELATED TO ADOPTION OF THE CITY'S GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM - The Growth Management Program and
implementin~ ordinances will create a comprehensive system to manage
future growth by directing and phasing development in order to guarantee
the timely pi ovision of public facilities and services. The ordinance to
establish the 3rowth Management Oversight Commission will replace the
original resolution adopted by Council in 1987. (Director of Planning)
Continued fr~ ,m the meeting of April 2, 1991.
A. ORDINANCE 2448 AMF. aX/DING ~ ITLE 19 OF THE CHULA VISTA ZONING CODE BY ADDING
CHAPTER 19409 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MANAGING THE CITY'S GROW'ITl
(first reading~
B. RESOLUTION 16101 ADOPTING THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
C. ORDINANCE 2447 ADDING ~ 2.40 TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
R~.I ATING TO CREATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT
COMMISSIO.I~ (first reading) - The ordinance does not require a public
hearing but i~ related to the following items. (City Attorney) Continued
from the me,ting of April 2, 1991.
14. PUBLIC HEARING AMENDING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOP, PCC-89-27 (REVISED) FOR
THE 75 UNiT LOW-INCOME HOUSING PROJECT FOR SENIORS AT
628/638 THIRD AVENUE - The Salvation Army is requesting to construct
a 75 unit low~income housing project at 628/638 Third Avenue. On
12/11/90, Cguncil adopted a resolution which approved the conditional
use permit (I~CC-89-27 Revised) for the Salvation Army. However, several
Conditions o( Approval were included which the Salvation Army cannot
satisfy. As ~ result, the Salvation Army is requesting to amend these
Conditions o~Approval. (Director of Community Development). Continued
from the melting of April 2, 1991.
RESOLUTION 16120 AUTHORIZING THE MODIFYING OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
PCC-89-27 (REVISED) FOR THE 75 UNIT LOW-INCOME HOUSING
PROJECT FOR SF_JqlORS AT 628/638 THIRD AVENUE
AGENDA -5- April 9, 1991
03 HER BUSINESS
15. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- th/s/s an, ~pportunity for the general public to ad, tress the City Council on
any subject matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law,
however, generally prohibits the City Cou tcil from taking action on any issues not included on the posted
agenda.) If you wish to address the CoUncil on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to
Speak Under Oral Communications Fort~" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to
the meeting 7hose who wish to speak, please give your name and address for recordpurposes and follow
up action. Your time is limited to three ~ninutes per speaker.
t CTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda ar~ expected to elicit discussions and deliberations by the Council,
staJ~, or members of the general public. The ~erns will be considered individually by the Council and staff
recommendations may in certain cases be presen !ed in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please fill out
a "Request to Speak" form available in the lob~ and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Public
comments are limited to five minutes.
16. ORDINANCE 2451 ADDING CH,a [XrER 2.31 AND AMENDING CHAPTER 9.50 OF THE CHULA
VISTA MUNI, .'IpAL CODE RRIATING TO MOBILE HOME PARKS RENT
REVIEW COI~ [MISSION (first reading) - At the present time, the City has
a rent arbitral [on ordinance which provides a mechanism for park residents
to appeal a rent increase when the increase exceeds the percentage
increase of ff e Consumer Price Index for any twelve month period. The
recommende~ Municipal Code changes address issues relating to the
efficacy of th~ ordinance. Staff recommends that Council place ordinance
on first readi: lg. (Director of Community Development)
17. RESOLL1T[ON 16096 APPROVING ['HE GREG ROGERS PARK MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTING
THE NEGA'E VE DECLARATION FOR IS-90-51 - Since July, 1989, the
department has been working with the architectural firm of
Gillespie/Del ~renzo to design a Master Plan for Greg Rogers Park. Staff
recommends lpproval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
Continued fn ~m the 3/19/91 meeting.
18. REPORT ADDITIONAl SAFETY MEASLIRF~ AT THE INTERSECTION OF MEt .ROSE
AVENUE Aba TALUS STREET - An area resident requested stop signs at
Melrose Aver le and Talus Street to slow down vehicles. An all-way stop
was not war~anted at the subject location. Staff recommends additional
speed limit s~gns and 30 mph pavement legends and that the request for
additional stlp signs be denied. (Director of Public Works)
19. REPORT LEF'r TURN ?HASING AT IN'rERSECTION OF HILLTOP DRIVE AND
STREET - At i :'s 1/8/91 meeting, Council referred a written communication
from Cynthia Ranyak of 2265 Manzana Way, City of San Diego, to staff and
the Safety C( mmission. Mrs. Ranyak is requesting that left-mm phasing
AGENDA -6- April 9, 1991
be installed fit the intersection of Hilltop Drive and "L" Street. Staff
recommends ~hat Council deny the request for left turn phasing at the
intersection o! Hilltop Drive and "L" Street. (Director of Public Works)
20. BOARD AND COMMISSION REGOMM~ATIONS: None
21. ITEMS pL1LI.RF~ FROM THE GONSENT GALENDAR - this is the time the City Council will discuss items
which have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agenda items pulled at the request of the public
will be considered prior to those pulled bJ Councilmembers. Public comments are limited to five minutes
per individual.
22. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
23. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Reconsideration by City and FI>PC of Conflict of Interest Code requirement by City Boards
and Commissions. ~
b. Ratification of Councilman de~ry Rindone to SCOOT Board.
24. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Nader
a. Hosting SANDAG airport worl shop on May 30, 1991.
ADjouRNMENT
The meeting will adjourn (closed session and tfience to) the Regular City Council Meeting on April 19, 1991
at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. /
!
April 5, 1991
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: E.R. Asmus, Assistant City Manager ~
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting of April 9, 1991
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council
meeting scheduled for Tuesday, April 9, 1991. Comments regarding Written Communica-
tions are as follows:
5a. This is the same letter from Mr. Thomas Davis that was on Written Comm-
unications last week when Mr. Davis asked that the letter be taken from
the Consent Calendar but inadvertently it was not. Council then asked
that the matter then be redocketed for the April 9th meeting. WE ARE
AGAIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE COUNCIL RECEIVE AND FILE MR. DAVIS' LETTER
BASED UPON THE THOROUGH INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS DONE BY THE TRAFFIC
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
5b. Mr. Van Winkle, a local resident, is requesting that the City consider
an ordinance amendment that would allow the keeping of Vietnamese pot
bellied pigs in the City. Staff has done a little investigation of
the ramifications of this request and our initial reaction is that allowing
such an animal to be kept within the City may be something that the
City Council may wish to seriously consider. Since staff has not had
sufficient time to adequately analyze the ramifications of such an amendment
to the City Code, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED BACK
TO STAFF FOR FURTHER STUDY AND A FINAL RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE CITY
CUUNCIL.
5c. This is a letter from Safety Commissioner Gene Militscher informing
the City Council that if he must file an annual statement of economic
interest, he is requesting that you accept his resignation from the
Safety Commission. It is staff's understanding that Mayor Pro Tem Moore
will be suggesting that the City Council consider reexamining the entire
question of who must file annual statements of economic interest with
the City. If it is the City Council's intent to reexamine this issue,
you may wish to hold in abeyance acceptance of this resignation. It
not, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT MR. MILITSCHER'S RESIGNATION BE ACCEPTED
WITH REGRETS.
5d. This is a request from Donald Lindberg representing Bay Cities Services,
Inc. that the City Council consider granting Bay Cities Services, Inc.
a franchise that would permit the Chula Vista City Elementary School
District to grant a contract for refuse collection services to Bay Cities.
As the City Council is aware, approximately a year ago, the High School
District also took bids for refuse collection services and Edco, a non-
franchised carrier within the City of Chula Vista was the successful
low bidder. In that instance, rather than litigate our position that
Laidlaw holds an exclusive contract for all types of refuse collection
within the City, the City Council approved a limited franchise which
allows Edco to service the Sweetwater Union High School District.
In order to be consisent, IT WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO NEGOTIATE AN APPROPRIATE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
WITH BAY CITIES SERVICES, INC. COMPARABLE TO THAT GRANTED TO EDCO.
5e. This is a letter from a number of businesses located on Main Street complaining
about the storing and auctioning of cars on the property located at 3650
Main Street. Staff's initial reaction to the problem was that the current
operation is clearly a violation of our zoning code, but further investigation
does not indicate a clear violation as originally thought. Staff is of the
opinion, however, that the activities being conducted at this location must
be controlled, if not totally prohibited, but in order to proceed in a manner
that is legally defensible, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED
BACK TO STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR FURTHER STUDY AND ANALYSIS.
ERA:mab/51
March 29, 1991
File # KY-175
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: John Lippitt, Director of ~blic Work
SU~ECT: Cox Cable Installation at Gotham Street and Wayne
Avenue
In the attached letter from Thomas A Davis of 1657 Gotham
Street, Mr. Davis has asked that the location of the Cox Cable
Box at the southwestern corner of Gotham Street and Wayne Avenue
to be carefully re-examined. .,
Cox Cable is constructing a major upgrade to their system. As
part of that program they are installing boxes (similar in size
and appearance to Traffic Signal Controller boxes) throughout the
City. Becausei of past complaints and staff concerns with the
boxes, we developed a procedure (attached) for them to follow for
installation of these boxes. A primary reason for the size and
shape of the box is that the power source from SDG&E has been
removed from the power poles, per SDG&E directive. Our goal has
been to install the boxes in the least obtrusive place, with the
input from the affected property owners. Unfortunately where
ever they are placed, they are likely to be objectionable to
someone. Although for the number of boxes installed
(approximately 80) we've received less than half a dozen ~
complaints.
In this particular instance, Cox Cable followed our process of
working with property owners in the area to select the best
location. According to Cox Cable, the original location proposed
for the installation of this box was on the north side of Gotham
between Mr. DaUis' house and his next door neighbor. This is
indicated on the attached sketch. Because of the particular
layout of the two properties, the box would actually have been
more in front of the neighbor's property than Mr. Davis'. Mr.
Davis objected to that location because of sight distance in
backing out of his driveway. Cox Cable then looked at alternate
sites. One of the alternate sites chosen was the location where
the box was ultimately installed. According to Cox Cable, the
proposed location was indicated to Mr. Davis prior to
installation and that he had no comment or acquiesced to the ~
location. __
City Council -2- March 29, 1991
We have discussed with Cox Cable, other possible locations for
the box based !on our field observations. The first location
shown on the a~tached map is on the east side of Wayne Avenue,
shown as Alternate A on the attached sketch. This location is a
side lot. In Order to install the box at that location, Cox
Cable would have had to take the power supply from the same power
pole where it is now taken and trench across Wayne Avenue and
down to the site. The costs would have been higher due to the
trenching in the street and it also would have put a trench cut
in the street, which we always try to avoid.
The Alternate B location that we discussed with them was around
the corner on GOtham Avenue, more to the west towards Otay Lakes
Road. That location was considered a possibility because it is a
side lot and would not be directly in front of someone's house on
the same side of the street. Cox Cable has indicated that it
might have been possible to install it at that location, however,
they are limited to a range of 150 feet or so from the power
source. This would have required additional trenching to bring
the power supply around the corner and down Gotham Street. They
would have had to do engineering calculations to be certain that
voltage drop inithe system would not be too great. Additionally,
this location would put it in full view of Mr. Davis' next door
neighbor. It Would also make the same impact that Mr. Davis
experiences now~except that it would not be able to be screened
from those people's view as was done on the installation. Other
locations on the north side of Gotham Street were also explored,
but this would wive the same general problem that Mr. Davis has
of being directly in front of someone's house and potentially
impeding the sight distance at a driveway.
Cox Cable has responded to our contacts with them as a result of
Mr. Davis' previous calls with us. They have also responded to
the property owner at 904 Wayne. That property owner indicated
that the site was left in an undesirable condition after the box
was completed. ~ In addition, Mr. Davis indicated the box was
unsightly. As a result, Cox went out, planted two twisted Cyprus
trees between the location of the box and Mr. Davis' house so
that Mr. Davis, view was screened by the trees. They also
repaired the sprinkler system and, in fact, extended it so that
it would irrigate the two new trees. In addition, they planted
sod in the parkWay to restore it to the original condition.
City Council -3- March 29, 1991
Regarding Mr. )avis' concerns about sight distance and that it
constitutes an lunnecessary obstacle to pedestrians, the Traffic
Engineering SeCtion, the City Engineer and the Assistant City
Manager all h~ve reviewed the location. We are all in
concurrence that there is no sight distance problem. The box is
back far enough!from the intersection, plus the intersection is a
three way stop. The box is not located within the sidewalk, and
therefore, it is not a pedestrian hazard and is back far enough
from the actual crosswalk. Cox Cable has also indicated that
they did in fact talk to some of the neighbors, including Mr.
Davis, and have attempted to place the box with the least impact
on all parties concerned.
CLS:nm
Enclosure
(CLSi\CBLINST.D0C)
! I
I
!
Wayne Avenue
-
Thomas A. Davis
1657 Gotha~ Street
Chula vista, CA 91913
March 25, ~991
Mayor and Members of the Chula Vista City Council
276 Forth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayoriand City Council Members:
! am Writing to you because of the installation of a
large box On the southwest corner of Gotham Street and Wayne
Avenue that is associated with a Cox Cable upgrade program.
This box, approximately five feet high, two feet wide and a
foot and alhalf deep, is installed about seven feet from the
point thatithe outside edge of the sidewalk meets the street
curbing at)the corner. The box is installed on the boule-
vard, or margin, which the city controls by easements. I
feel that this box is inconsistent with the general appear-
ance of the neighborhood, constitutes a visual hazard for
pedestrians and motor traffic, and was arbitrarily installed
without and adequate effort to place it where it would not
offend theieye or the view.
In November, 2990, before the box was installed, I
happened tQ see and talk to the crew that was surveying
'sites for ~he box, and was'assured that it would be placed
away from the intersection and made inconspicuous with
plantings, iIn December, 1990, when construction began at the
corner loc~tion, I called both the city Engineering Depart-
ment and Cqx Cable in an effort to have the box sited else-
where. Repeated telephone calls, and finally written corre-
spondence to the city and Cox either went unanswered or
produced only empty promises to look into the problem. After
four months of indecisiveness, evasiveness and delay the
residue of)construction was finally cleaned up, two trees
were planted alongside the box, and I received letters from
Cox Cable ~nd the City Engineer reporting that the box would
not be moved, was ruled not to be a sight hazard, and that
the matter)was closed.
In spiite of the minor nature of this matter, I appeal
to the City Council to cause the location of the Cox Cable
box at the )southwestern corner of Gotham Street and Wayne
Avenue to ~e carefully reexamined. The box is unsightly in
itself, maqe even more so by the exposed location, and
constitutes) an unnecessary obstacle to the pedestrians
(especially school children not as tall as the box) and the
large number of vehicles that pass through this intersection
Chula VistaJ City Counctl, Page 2
each day. All of the justification offered by Cox Cable and
the City Engineer for the location of this box has been
constructed retrospectively, has not fairly considered
alternate locations, and has never involved the views of the
home owners in the area.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
MEMORANDUM
March 26, 1991
File ~: PU-001
KY-157
TO: John Hardesty, Permits Engineer
FROM: ~Roberto Saucedo, Senior Sivil Engineer~
SUBJECT: Cox Cable Cabinet at 902 Wayne Avenue
This is in response to a memo from Cliff Swanson, dated
3/19/91, regarding Mr. Thomas Davis' complaint about the
subject cabinet.
We were instructed to investigate the allegation that the
area where the cabinet was installed~ was left in a
non-restored condition, and that a sprinkler system was
dam~ged and not repai~'ed.
From a field inspection we found out that the area has been
restored with new sod. Furthermore, on March 25, we spoke
~i th the property owner of 904 Wayne Avenue, and he
indicated that about 3 or 4 weeks ago Cox Cable, in fact.
}lad repaired the sprinkler system and that new sod had been
planted along the parkway adjacent to the ~,ower cabinet.
If you should have any questions, please call me at 422-0206
CI'IY OF
CHULA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
March 19, 1991
File No. PU-001
Mr. Thomas A. Davis
1657 Gotham Street
Chula Vista, CA 91913
POWER SUPPLY CABINET AT GOTHAM STREET AND WAYNE AVENUE
This is in reply to your letter dated 2/27/91 concerning the placement of the subject cabinet. We are
in contact with Cox Cable San Diego, the owner of the cabinet in an attempt to discern whether our
guidelines were followed prior to installing it. Previously, the City and Cox Cable had agreed that
cabinets such as this would be placed in areas which would have the least visual impact. It was
decided that the cabinets would not be placed directly in front of someone's property. In this situation,
it resulted in the cabinet being placed closer to the intersection of Gotham Street and Wayne Avenue.
Regarding the sight distance problem you mention in your letter, I have had it checked by our Traffic
Section and it was found not to be a h~7~rd, since the intersection is now a three-way arterial stop.
I am also checking on your allegation that the area was left in a non-restored condition after the
installation was completed. If Cox has been negligent in this matter, we will have it corrected.
Cox Cable has indicated to us that the cabinets are sized to meet requirements for clearances and
regulations relating to the equipment contained in them. Consequently, they are unable to reduce the
dimensions of this cabinet.
I appreciate the time and effort you took to bring this matter to our attention since several of the
cabinets were installed without the City's knowledge of exactly how large these facilities were. We
will be in contact with you when Cox Cable responds to our inquiry.
If you have additional questions, you may contact Iohn Hardesty, Permits Engineer, at 691-5115.
CITY ENGINEER
cc: Robeno Saucedo
Cox Cable San Diego, Atto: Bill LeVeau
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010/(619) 691-5021
Thomas A Davis "'~' ~.,:,~
1657 Gotham Street
Chula Vista, CA 91913
421-6577
February 27, 1991
Mr. Clifford L. Swanson, City Engineer
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Dear Mr. Swanson:
I am writing to you at the suggestion of Mr. John
Hardisty of your department in regard to the placement of a
large cabinet (56" high, 28" wide and 23" deep) installed by
Cox Cable San Diego, Inc. on the southwest corner of Gotham
Street and Wayne Avenue. This box, and two large bushes
planted next to it, interferes with the view of the traffic
on Gotham Street by cars approaching from the south on Wayne
Avenue. This obstruction creates a potential danger for
motorists and pedestrians in spite of the stop signs at this
intersection. The box is also haphazardly installed, painted
in a ghastly color green and is stenciled sloppily on all
sides with large black numbers (#902), all of which makes it
an eyesore in this residential neighborhood.
The installation of this offensive, industrial looking
box began about the first of December, 1990. Amazingly, the
process of digging, trenching, constructing a foundation and
installing the box took one month. Throughout construction,
equipment was parked at the corner without obstruction
markers, making the spot a hazard for an extended period.
The construction created a huge mess of sand and dirt which
has never been completely cleaned up. The margin, where my
neighbor had planted and maintained grass, is still bare
rubble and sand which supports only a poor crop of weeds,
more than two months after construction was basically com-
pleted. A sprinkling system my neighbor installed in the
margin was broken and partially destroyed during construc-
tion and not repaired.
Shortly after Cox Cable began digging on the site of
the box I contacted the permits section of your department
to see if the City of Chula Vista was aware of the apparent
hazard the location of this large box presented to traffic,
and the unsightliness of the installation. A number of
telephone calls produced no information on the sight hazard
presented by this box. On February 21st I once more called
Mr. Hardisty and he mentioned that, indeed, the traffic
department had told him they didn't think there was problem
with sight distance because there are stop signs at the
City Engineer. Page 2
intersection. He also said there was nothing that could be
done about the appearance of the box because all "specifica-
tions" of the permit Cox Cable had for the installation of
the box have been met. His advice was to write to you since
there was nothing more he could do.
It seems to me that the city has been unresponsive to
this annoying, albeit small, problem. While I understand the
margins are city easements, this particular Cox service
upgrade box patently ignores good sense in locating it in
close proximity to an intersection, and in the general
unsatisfactory appearance of the installation. Cox Cable is
obviously keeping their costs down by using the cheapest
equipment and installation methods, but we in the neighbor-
hood have to live with the thoughtless product of penny
pinching and poor design on a daily basis.
This situation now seems about to go beyond the level
of my nagging complaints regarding this Cox Cable box. In my
telephone conversations with Cox Cable representatives I was
assured that my neighbors in the immediate vicinity of the
box had been contacted about the installation, and all
approved of the location and appearance. I have discovered
that this is not the case, and that a petition is being
drafted by a group of my neighbors for circulation in the
area and delivery to the city protesting both the location
of this Cox Cable box and its appearance. While I strongly
support the thought behind the petition, I am once more
amazed that the city seems helpless to offer.assistance to
the citizens in simple matters such as this one before the
emotional feeling reaches an exaggerated level.
I am writing to you to see if there is a way to have
this box moved, as the preferred choice, or the appearance
of it improved. It seems a waste to have to resort to high
emotion and the involvement of department heads in the city
administration to work out a minor problem to grow out of
relative proportion through procrastination and inattention.
Sincerely,
CHULA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
June 19, 1990
File No.-PU-001
Mr. Bill LeVeau
Cox Cable San Diego
5159 Federal Boulevard
San Diego, CA 92105-9251
GUIDELINES FOR INSTAllATION OF POWER SUPPLY BOXES FOR CATV
UPGRADE
I appreciate the time taken by you and your colleagues on June 12 to meet with us. I feel
it was a productive meeting and that we now have a better understanding of the problems
facing both the City and Cox Cable.
This is the follow-up letter setting guidelines as were discussed in that meeting. The
g~idelines are:
1. The street as a whole should be thoroughly reviewed to choose the location
which will have the least impact on the neighborhood.
2. Permit applications submitted to the City will be accompanied by a sketch
showing proposed type and location of facilities to be installed (with
dimensions shown).
3. Box installation configuration shall be such that the narrowest side of the box
faces the street.
4. The boxes will be placed in line with the side property lines whenever
possible.
5. Notify owners of properties that will be impacted by placement of the boxes
along their frontages. In that notification include a number to call for any
questions/concerns they may have. These notifications may be by mail or
"front door knob" type.
. 276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010/(619) 691-5021
Mr. Bill LeVeau
Cox Cable San Diego -2- June 19, 1990
6. If a problem arises from the property owner, steps will be taken to lessen the
impact:
a. Landscaping to be installed around box.
b. Locate box
next to terraced yard
with group of other utilities
next to fenced yard
to front of vacant lot
to commercial area
If these guidelines are followed by your company, there is less chance of citizens calling you
and/or the City expressing their concerns.
We appreciate your cooperation in this matter, since the required size of the power supply
.boxes and sheer number of them being placed throughout the City does have a lot of visual
nnpact.
If you wish to discuss this matter further, please give me a call.
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works '
JH/bb
cc: John D. Goss, City Manager
Robeno Saucedo, Senior Civil Engineer
Permit Section
[B3~A:LEVEAU.LTR]
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECEIVED
" CLERK'S OFFICE
sta.~ n~ ~-=~ "~h~ -~ '
the c~', s ~:.:'pr~.==!v pr. nhibi~ed. . ." '! :,s ,~r..in ih~t m>. proo!e~
--,~' [escence fn V etnamese pcf-b~ii~d p~y.= ...... ~..- A~ pe~s~
Z wish tx: cia. r~> the malter so that this speci~*c type
seen ~s permissible .,~thin the c:,t':~ ',im[~s.~ ~na so :h~ Ibis
~rst o< ~il~ no~s !hal ~ ~a. me=. pot-bellied
bi~atus.[ is not li'es~oc~:, ~nd has vet.)' little in common w',!h ~a. rm
beagle, ~ ~, a. re c~.~n Anima. ls~ hAv~n9 no ~le~s no~ shedding~ ~nd
ha. ring !~xs bcd>. odor !hah the aver.~ge dog. TPe>' c.~n also ~"
h:~usebrok'en~ ~nd~ As A m~er o~ ~ac~ FPAn~
~i~l:~ pelle~s~ ~uch As 7ou would ~eed a. r.~bbl~, rr~nk
r~,s~rs <or a si:e: al tr'e~t.
Fran~< ~(no~s tricks~ such as sitting~ tunn~ng aroused, and dancing~ as
well as recognizing his name and coming when it is called. He is also
~earn~ng to walk on a ha~ess and, when this is mastered, Frank and
will be able to atto! a~'ound the 51ocr together.
Frank Is a ~ouing, affectionate animai~ as the literature and the
photos will attest. He ioues to just be w~th people~ whether the are
pi~/ing with him or letting him take a nap ~ith his head resting on
their-. !?m, i ~aue seer; the way he euen treats ~-.-~:~
they were long-lost ~riends, rushing righ~ up t~ see them, He nat
only gets a!ong with ne and other peop!e~ but with my dog~ Dodger. In
fac~ Dodger was ~he principal reason for getting Franck, Dodger is
15, and needs ~ompanionship, and I can't be at home all the time.
rranx sleeps wit~ Dooge~ and plays with him, and has become a friend
to man's best friend in his old age.
I realize that this tit7 ordinance was made with the idea of
Keeping the city a sanitary urban azea. Please tare the time
thoroughly peruse the enclosed materials, i hope you will see that
e~c~usion of Vietnamese pot-bellied pigs through this ordinance is
un~arrirxed and thai it should be altered, reflecting the vast
difference between exotic pets l~ke Crank and common swine. ! want to
keep m;, pet~ my little po~-be!lied friend, and I hope you'll help me
do that.
Dee Van Winkle
P.S. Enclosed is a self-addressed, stamped envelope~ I
f~nis,hed ~,,{t5 the~, ~',~c 'Js~, I j~Js~ t,~.snt the~ back a'~ter ~,'ou mr-e
tl-~rougt-,i ? done ,~',~i th tk~e~.
GENE MILITSCHER
190,~,a, ST [MER$ON 5TR£~"I' · CHUL.~VISTA. CALIFORNIA · g2011 · 422-2095
RECEIVED
CITY OF CHELA V~STA
March 29, Z99Z QTYCLER~ S OFFICE
Councilman Len Moore
City of Chula Vista
27G Fou=th Avenue
ChuIa Vista, CA 92010
Dear Councilman Moore:
I have been asked to file an Annual Statement Of ~conom[c
Interests. ?he last two times we discussed this
was decided that the Safety Commission Members we=e not
~equ[zed to [[le.
· he C[t~ Ciezk's o~[ce [n[o~ms me that this is not t=~e and
it w[li be necessazy [oz me to [[Ie ~h[s.
Since I choose not to ~o so~ ~lea~e acce~t this as
~es[gnat[on ~=om the Safety Co~[ss[on.
very respectfully yours,
G. DON LINDBERG
ATORNEY AT LAW (619) 420-6639
RECEIVED
· l BR-1 P3 9
March 23, 1991
Bruce Boogaard C~TYOFC~L~i~TA
City Attorney GTY CLERK'S OFFICE
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re:Refuse Removal Franchise for Bay Cities Services, Inc.
to Serve Chula Vista City Elementary School District
Dear Mr. Boogaard,
In accoradnce with our discussion last week I am requesting
that your office forward to the City Council a new franchise
ordinance, similar to the one granted to Edco to serve the
Sweetwater High School District, for the Bay Cities Services, Inc.,
a refuse removal service, to provide such service to the Chula
Vista City Elementary School District.
As you are aware, Bay Cities is the current low bidder for the
provision of such service, for a period of one year, commencing
last July, which will be extended by the district board for a
three year period concurrent with your grant of franchise.
We are hopeful that this matter will be set for public hearing
at the next meeting of the City Council since the award of contract
has been deferred for over nine months awaiting a legal determi-
nation by the attorneys for the school district and your office.
Further, it has long been the contention of my client that the
schools have the authority to, and in fact are mandated to, go
to bind for refuse removal services, and must accept the lowest
bid, even if it is not that of the City's franchisee, if one
has been granted. This is reinforced by the language of the 1982
franchise ordinance , which purported to grant a franchise to
Chula Vista Sanitary Service, which clearly contemplates the
existence of customers, other than residential, commericial and
industrial users required to use only the services of the franchisee.
SECTION 7. Obligations of the Grantee.
"Grantee shall provide bins as required for
commercial customers or whenever other customers
of Grantee request their use."
Thank you for your consideration.
cc: Bay City Services, Inc. ~
~, Mayor and City Council
· \ 280 'K" STREET#2., CHULA VIS~, CA 9~11 ~:
3648 MAIN, STE, 208
CHULA VISTA, CA 92011
(619) ,425-5901
CITY COUNCIL QFFICES
C~UL~ VISTA, CA
March 26, 1991
Chula Vista City Council
276 4th Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Council:
I ffna business owner on Main St. in C hula Vista. My office is located in the
vicinity of the Marshal~s car auction. I ~nwriting because the traffic caused
by this auction has created serious traffic problems on Main St. and in nearby
businesses. As an example, the tenants and customers in our building have been
having a hard time even finding a place to park because people frcm the auction
have been using the lot to park and to repair cars they are picking up. The
building Owners have tried towing cars that are parked illegally, however,
there is only somuch that they can do on their own.
I do not believe that this is the type of use that the City of Oaula Vista en-
visioned for this property. The traffic and parking problems are the worst,
however, the trash that is being left in the are and the nuisance this event
has caused ar seriously effecting our business.
I hope that the City Council will see the seriousness of this problem and take
appropriate action.
Sincerely,
TRATECOFCALIFORNIA. INC.
(619~4761155 ~X (619)4~ tlr
City of Chul a Vista March 25 199 ti. [ C[TYCOOhCItOFFtCES
I recently moved my business location to the Irongate
Business Park. I was shocked today to find that the
"Auction" put on at the back of the building had left thirty
oars blocking the rear dock doors (4) to my business and had
taken every assigned parking space (9) at our location.
My business is unusual in that we convince
manufacturers from around the world to produce their
products in Mexico through the Maquiladora Program. This
will become important to you' when you realize that we have
brought to Chul a Vista Mermen' s Aromatics Division, Rainbird
Sprinkler's Hyson company. Both bringing many 3cbs and
revenue to our city. I also I ive in Chula Vista.
My clients utilize TraTec's location for Corporate
meetings and for the delivery of raw materials and finished
product back and forth to the U.S.A. from Mexico. I could
not provide these services to my clients today because c,f
the absolute /ack of respect for assigned parkinE. It would
have been simple enough for the owner of fhis Auction to
have left one half of his property open for the "sold" cars
to be transferred to and the first half for the display of
cars for sale. He did not. He or his people time and again
refused to move oars blocking truck lanes for the movement
of product in and out of our location. Unacceptable.
[ am looking to the City to forever prevent this type
of auction in a location that is unsuitable for such an
event. If I must break my lease with Mike Vogt I wil I have
legal precedent to do so as this requires clear prior
written disclosure, which I can make an honest case that I
did not understand or receive. This is not what I want
do. I hope Chula Vista is looking ahead to the long ferm as
we are, in investing in Chula Vista.
The City must decide if it wants an ocassional Auction,
or constant full time light manufacturing / distributing
companies on Main Street in the future like TraTec of
California Inn, and our clients who include;
Mermen' s Aromatic Inc.
Industrial Design Laboratories lnc.
h SpringWel I Dispensers Inc.
~0 ~ Schlage Lock
~-~a~<N~ ~a,'~ Rainbird Sprinkler's Hyson Inc.
~---i e~e prevent this Auction from happening in this
agar. This is appropriate and this
Citi.~en respectfully
demands this on behalf of my clients al s~/ ~ '
C.c, M. Vogt Mr. An~ '? '
Industrial/Commercial Properties
Sales & Leasing
International Real Estate
March 26, 1991
Ms. Carole Stinnett
Code Enforcement Officer
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Ms. Stinnett:
I am a property owner and business owner at 3648 Main St. in the City of Chula Vista. My business,
International Real Estate, entails real estate sales, leasing, management, and development.
Recently, late February 1991 to the present date, the adjacent property owner at 3650 Main St.
(Assessor Parcel Numbers 623-250-22 & 23) has been parking, storing, and auctioning cars on their
property. This is in total zoning violation and has created a disastrous public nuisance.
Thousands of people come for this auction which has created parking, traffic, pedestrian safety, and
litter hazards. Absolutely no provisions have been made for customer parking, traffic control, litter
control, etc. The owner, Mr. Jack Shirey, has no regard whatsoever for his neighbors or the safety
of the public.
Before he does more damage to our neighborhood and businesses, we ask that the City of Chula Vista
pursue criminal charges against Mr. Shirey.
We need to be assured that this fiasco never occurs again!
Sincerely,
INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE
Michael A. Vogt
MAV:clb
cc: Tim Nader
Dave Malcolm
Jerry Rindone
Leonard Moore, iMa¥or Prote~
O'~ -} 'B' iego, aiornia92101,(619) 234-5800
--~ ~ 701 Street, Suite 720, San D If '
March 26, 1991
Chula Vista City Council
276 zlth Ave.
ChulaVista, CA 91910
Dear Council:
I am a business owner on Main St. in Chula Vista. Our office is located near the car auction that the
Marshal is holding. This auction is causing severe safety hazards in the area. This includes the
increased traffic on Main St. and people parking everywhere, including on private parking lots, to
go to the auction. I cannot tell you how many times over the past week or so that I've heard the
screech of tires on Main St. from another near miss between cars and/or pedestrians.
There is also an enormous amount of trash in the area that is a direct result of the people going to the
auction. All of the traffic, mess and confusion Caused by the auction has had a serious effect on my
business. My customers are having a difficult time even finding a place to park!
I believe that the City Council should take actions to ensure that steps are taken to remedy these
problems if this auction continues to be held at the present location.
Sincerely,
INT£R#ATIOh'AL COtdPllTER $~1~
3648 Main St., Suite E
Onda [qste, CA ~2011
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~___
Meeting Date 4/9/91
ITEM TITLE Resolution I~))'~''~,- Authorizing the Expenditure of $2,000
from the Council Contingency Fund for Financial Assistance
for the Music Machine to Attend the National Invitational
Show Choir Festival in Orlando, Florida
SUBMITTED BY: Assistant City Manager~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager 4/5ths Vote: Yes No X
At the City Council meeting of April 2, 1991, in response to a Written Communication
from the Bonita Vista High School Music Machine, Council directed staff to return
with a resolution authorizing the expenditure of $2,000 from the Council contingency
fund toward the Music Machine's travel, lodging and miscellaneous expenses to attend
the National Invitational Show Choir Festival in Orlando, Florida. The Music Machine
has been chosen to represent Chula Vista and the State of California as one of only
ten choirs nationwide invited to participate.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution.
DISCUSSION:
In 1983 the Council donated $2,000 towards the Music Machine's participation in
a European Festival Tour, and in 1987 gave $1,000 towards their attendance at a Festival
Tour in Washington, D. C. at the Kennedy Center. In exchange for this funding, the
Music Machine performs at City functions, such as the Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony,
etc.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds are available in the Council Contingency account.
mab/6
RESOLUTION NO. 1 I2Z
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF
$2,000 FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND FOR
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE MUSIC MACHINE TO
ATTEND THE NATIONAL INVITATIONAL SHOW CHOIR
FESTIVAL IN ORLANDO, FLORIDA
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting of April 2, 1991, in
response to a Written Communication from the Bonita Vista High
School Music Machine, Council directed staff to return with a
resolution authorizing the expenditure of $2,000 from the Council
contingency fund toward the Music Machine's travel, lodging and
miscellaneous expenses to attend the National Invitational Show
Choir Festival in Orlando, Florida; and
WHEREAS, the Music Machine has been chosen to represent
Chula Vista and the State of California as one of only ten choirs
nationwide invited to participate.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby authorize the expenditure of
$2,000 from the Council Contingency Fund for financial assistance
for the Music Machine to attend the National Invitational Show
Choir Festival in Orlando, Florida.
Presented by ~d~$~~
E. R. Asmus, Assistant · Bruce M. Boog~ar~, City Attorney
City Manager
c: \reso\musicmac
7-3
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 4/9/91
ITEM TITLE: Resolution g~ ~} Approwng Contract and Appropriating Funds for
Fiscal Analysis and Economic Monitoring Report with John McTighe and
Associates
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~ ~-}~ (4/$ths Vote: Yes X No_)
f
/
The revised economic/fiscal threshold contained in the Growth Management Program calls for
an annual "fiscal impact report" to provide an evaluation of the impacts of growth on the City
as well as an annual "economic monitoring report." These reports will require the assistance
of outside consultants because the city staff does not have the available personnel and technical
expertise to conduct the analysis.
RECOMMlZ~NDATION: That the City Council approve the attached resolution and authorize
the Mayor to execute the attached agreement on behalf of the City with John McTighe and
Associates.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
During the General Plan update, two studies were prepared to help the City Council deliberate
on the economic and fiscal consequences of the new General Plan adopted in 1989. The first
was a study by P&D Technologies which evaluated the economic base of the City (January
1987). The second was a fiscal study by John McTighe and Jun Onaka of P&D Technologies
of the General Plan Update (June 1989).
Mr. McTighe was one of the key people responsible for creating the first model used to evaluate
the fiscal impact of the General Plan Update. He has also worked with the Finance Department
in evaluating the fiscal impact of the EastLake I project on the City of Chula Vista for the last
two years. Due to his extensive experience and familiarity with City of Chula Vista revenue and
expenditure data, Mr. McTighe is able to provide the required analysis in the most timely
manner.
The current need is to update the information from these past studies on fiscal and economic
conditions to help the Growth Management Oversight Committee evaluate the economic/fiscal
threshold for 1990.
Page 2, Item 0
Meeting Date 4/9/91
The attached agreement with John McTighe and Associates will produce the fiscal analysis and
economic monitoring reports requested by the GMOC. Mr. McTighe has recent experience in
constructing the fiscal impact model used by the City to evaluate the General Plan Update. He
also has considerable experience with other cities in San Diego County in preparing economic
activity reports.
FISCAL IMPACT: An appropriation of $9,000 is requested to cover the cost of this study.
There would be no net cost to the City General Fund because the cost of the study would be
reimbursed from the Public Facilities Administration Development Impact Fee Account Number
801-8010-5201-OP106 ($8,000) and the Transportation Development Impact Fee Account
Number 621-6210-5201-OP106 ($1,000).
RESOLUTICN OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING CONTRACT AND APPROPRIATING
FUNDS FOR SERVICES OF JOHN MCTIGHE AND ASSOCIATES
TO PREPARE AN ECDNOMIC ACTIVITY AND FISCAL IMPACT
STUDY FOR THE CITY OF CEULA VISTA
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as
follows:
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista prepared comprehensive economic
activity and fiscal impact reports in conjunction with the General Plan
Update, 1989; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Quality of Life Threshold
Standards, 1987, including an economic/fiscal threshold standard; and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Oversight Committee, which is charged
with the responsibility of reviewing the threshold standards each year, has
requested updated information on economic activity and fiscal changes during
calendar 1990; and
WHEREAS, there is a need to retain outside consultant expertise to
prepare the required studies; and
WHEREAS, the City has retained John McTighe and Associates in the
past to prepare fiscal impact analysis of the General Plan Update and other
fiscal studies for EastLake I and other similar projects; and
WHEREAS, John McTighe and Associates is prepared to accomplish the
required studies within the specified time period.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby approve the contract between the City of Chula Vista
and John McTighe and Associates to prepare an economic activity report and
fiscal impact study of the City of Chula Vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is
hereby authorized and directed to execute said contract for and on behalf of
the City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amount of $8,000 is hereby
appropriated from the Public Facilities Administration Development Impact Fee
Account Number 801-8010-5201-0P106 and the amount of ~1,000 is hereby
appropriated from the Transportation Development Impact Fee Account Number
621-6210-5201-OP106 .
Presented by ~s~~
Robert A. Leiter B.ruce Boogaard ~ I
Director of Planning ~'5 %I Attorney ~
Agreement with
John McTighe and Associates
for Fiscal and Economic Consulting Services
This Agreement is made this 9th day of April, 1991, for the purposes of reference
only, and effective as of the date last executed between the parties, between the City of
Chula Vista ("City") herein, a municipal corporation of the State of California, and John
McTighe and Associates, a professional consulting firm ("Consultant"), and is made with
reference to the following facts:
Recitals
WHEREAS, the City is presently in need of additional professional services by
contract to prepare an economic and fiscal analysis of the city for the Growth Management
Oversight Committee; and
WHEREAS, Consultant has had extensive experience with the City in performing
similar duties, and is well qualified to provide these services, and,
WHEREAS, the City desires to retain the professional services of Consultant for the
specific performance of services as are hereinafter set forth.
WHEREAS, Consultant warrants and represents that he is experienced and staffed in
a manner such that he can prepare and 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; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
a. General Duties
1) Consultant shall prepare a report on the impacts of growth on the
City's fiscal and economic status between fiscal year 1988-89 and
1989-90.
2) Consultant shall prepare an analysis of the projected impacts of growth
on the City's status attributed to projected growth over the next 12-18
month period and 3-5 year period.
3) Consultant shall prepare a projection of changes in economic indicators
over the next 12-18 months and 3-5 year period.
(The duties of the Consultant as herein in this section contained may
hereinafter be referred to as "General Duties.")
b. Scope of Services and Schedule
In the process of preparing said reports, shall perform the duties and deliver
the "Work Product" as is set forth in the Scope of Services and Schedule,
attached hereto as Exhibit A, not inconsistent with the General Duties,
according to, and within the time frames therein established (time being of the
essence of this agreemen0. Crhe General Duties and the work required in the
Scope of Services and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined
Services").
c. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined
Services or Additional Services, shall be performed in a manner consistent
with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the
profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar
locations.
d. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against
the City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the
City of Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance
with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are
incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and
procedures used by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City
for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
e. Miscellaneous.
1) 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.
2) 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
-2-
States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or
certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified
adjacent to the signatures of the parties represented.
3) 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.
4) Capacity of Parties.
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the
other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its
principal to enter into this Agreement; that all resolutions or other
actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
5) Governing Law/Venue.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with
the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating
to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts
located in San Diego County, State of California, and 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.
6) Statement of Costs.
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or
participates in the preparation of a report or document as a result of the
scope of work required of Consultant, Consultant shall include, or
cause the inclusion, 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.
7) Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and consultants
employed by it are protected by worker's compensation insurance and
the Consultant has the coverage under public liability and property
-3-
damage insurance policies which this Agreement requires to be
demonstrated in the form of a certificate of insurance.
Consultant will provide, prior to the commencement of the services
required under this agreement the following certificates of insurance to
the City prior to beginning work:
Statutory Worker's Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000 Employers
liability coverage.
General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000 combined
single limit 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").
All policies shall be issued by a carrier that has a Pest's Rating of "A,
Class V", or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City's Risk
Manager.
All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled without at
least thirty (30) days written notice to the City.
2. Duties of the City:
a. Consultation and Cooperation.
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the
progress of the work and to provide direction and guidance to accomplish the
work. In addition thereto, City agrees to provide the information, data, items
and materials set forth on Exhibit C, 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.
The compensation to be paid by City to Consultant for all of the work required
herein shall be a fixed fee of $9,000.00 ("Fee") payable in monthly progress
payments in an amount that the Director of Planning, or his designee, shall
determine corresponds to the value provided to the City to the date of hilling.
Consultant agrees to perform all of the services and deliver the Work Product
-4-
herein required, and in the manner of the detailed Scope of Work set forth on
the attached Exhibit A, and shall incur all associated costs, including
reproduction and printing, secretarial work, telephone charges, travel including
automobile charges, for said Fee.
c. Reductions in Scope of Work.
City may from time to time reduce the Scope of Work by the Consultant to be
performed under this Agreement. City and Consultant agree to meet in good
faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the
Fee associated with said reduction.
d. Additional Scope of Work.
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may
require Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the
General Duties and Scope of Work ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so
in writing, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the
rates set forth on Exhibit B. All compensation for Additional Services shall be
paid monthly as billed.
3. Administration of Contract:
The City hereby designates the Director of Planning, or his written designee, as its
representative for the review and administration of the work performed by Consultant
herein required.
4. Term:
Consultant shall perform all of the Defined Services herein required of it by not later
than July 1, 1991, and shall abide by and comply with any interim time frames and
milestone dates that are or may be set forth in Exhibit A.
5. Financial Interests of Consultant:
Consultant warrants and represents that neither he, nor his immediate family
members, nor his employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any
interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in the property which is the subject matter
of the Project, or in any property within 10 radial miles from the exterior boundaries
of the property which is the subject matter of the Project, or ("Prohibited Interest")
except as listed on an attachment.
-5-
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. 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 neither Consultant nor his immediate family members, nor his
employees or agents, shall acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of
this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement.
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.
6. Hold Harmless:
Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability,
cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the
conduct of the Consultant, or any agency 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 conduct 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, it 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.
7. Termination of Agreement for Cause:
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
his/her 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.
-6-
8. Errors and Omissions:
In the event that the Director of Planning determines that the Consultants' negligence,
errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in
expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence,
errors, omissions in the plans or contract specifications, Consultant shall reimburse
City for the additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended to
limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
9. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City:
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason for 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.
10. 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 which City
may unreasonable deny.
11. 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 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.
-7-
12. 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 to, overtime, retirement benefits, workers compensation
benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits.
13. Responsible Charge:
Consultant hereby designates that John McTighe shall be Consultant's representative
("Project Manager") to the project for the duration of the project. No substitution for
this position shall be allowed without written approval from the City.
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 of Chula
Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the procedures set
forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to
time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if
fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the
implementation of same.
Upon request by City, 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 that dispute result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the claim, including
costs and attorney's fees.
16. Statement of Costs.
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document or participates in the
preparation of a report or document as a result of the scope of work required of
Consultant, Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion, 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.
-8-
Signature Page
to
Agreement with
John McTighe and Associates
for Preparation of a Fiscal and Economic Indicators Report
for the Growth Management Oversight Committee
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement this __
day of , 1991.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
Leonard M. Moore
Mayor, City of Chula Vista
Attest:
Beverly Authelet,
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Bruce M. Boogaard,
City Attomey
JOHN McTIGHE AND ASSOCIATES
By:
John J. McTighe
President
-9-
Exhibit List
to
Agreement with
John McTighe and Associates
for Preparation of a Fiscal and Economic Indicators Report
for the Growth Management Oversight Committee
Exhibit A. Scope of Services and Schedule
Exhibit B. Fee Schedule
Exhibit C. Information, data, items and materials to be provided by City of Chula Vista
-10-
Exhibit A
Scope of Services and Schedule
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Part I
John McTighe and Associates will prepare an analysis of the impacts of growth on the City's
fiscal well-being attributed to growth that has been reflected in the changes in the City's
finances between fiscal year 1988-89 and 1989-90. Such analysis will utilize actual City
expenditures and revenues for the two fiscal years concerned. Additionally, John McTighe
and Associates will prepare an economic indicators report that compares the change in
economic indicators effecting the City between fiscal year 1988-89 and 1989-90.
The results of the fiscal impact and economic indicators analyses will be summarized in a
written report to be presented to the Growth Management Oversight Committee on May 9,
1991.
Part II
John McTighe and Associates will prepare an analysis of the projected impacts of growth on
the City's fiscal well-being attributed to projected growth over the next 12-18 month period,
and 3-5 year period. Base data to be utilized for this analysis shall be supplied by the City
Planning Department.
The results of the projected fiscal impact analysis will be summarized in a written report to
be presented to the Growth Management Oversight Committee on May 9, 1991.
Part III
In conjunction with the City's Community Development Department, John McTighe and
Associates will prepare a projection of changes in economic indicators over the next 12-18
month period, and 3-5 year period.
The results of the projection of economic indicators will be summarized in a written report to
be presented to the Growth Management Oversight Committee on May 9, 1991.
SCHEDULE
Part I
Thc propose~l "Scol~ of Services" for Part 1 will be completed by May 1, 1991, provided
representatives of the City of Chula Vista and its consultants can respond to our requests for
information within three (3) working days of the requests. Any delay in the responses may
cause subsequent delays in the completion of the final report.
Part II
The proposed "Scope of Services" for Part II will be completed by May 1, 1991, provided
representatives of the City of Chula Vista and its consultants can respond to our requests for
information within three (3) working days of the requests. Any delay in the responses may
cause subsequent delays in the completion of the final report.
Part III
The proposed "Scope of Services" for Part III will be completed by May 1, 1991, provided
representatives of the City of Chula Vista and its consultants an respond to our request for
information within three (3) working days of the requests. Any delay in the responses may
cause subsequent delays in the completion of the final report.
-12-
Exhibit B
Fee Schedule
PROFESSIONAL FEE SCHEDULE
Principal $110.00 per hour
Associate $ 44.00 - 60.00 per hour
Word Processing $ 35.00 per hour
Research Assistant $ 25.00 per hour
FEE
Part I
The maximum charges on a time and materials basis for the proposed "Scope of Services"
for Part I is $2,500.00. This estimated charge includes one meeting with the Growth
Management Oversight Committee to present results of our analysis.
Part II
The maximum charges on a time and materials basis for the proposed "Scope of Services"
for Part II is $3,500.00. This estimated charge includes two public meetings, one with the
Planning Commission and one with the City Council to present results of our analysis.
Part III
The maximum charges on a time and materials basis for the proposed "Scope of Services"
for Part IH is $2,500.00
-13-
Exhibit C
1. Threshold Standards, 1990
2. Development Forecasts for 1989 and 1990
3. Miscellaneous Economic Studies prepared for City by other eonsul~ants
-14-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 4/9/9]
ITEM TITLE: Resolution ~(~1~ Affirming the trial traffic regulation,
installing an all-way stop at the intersection of Melrose
Avenue and E. Rienstra~Street..~/?
SUBMI1-FED BY: Director of Public Work)~y.~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~C/~ ~'~'/' (4/Sths Vote:
Yes__No
X
)
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.12.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, adopted by Ordinance No. 1625 on May 27, 1975, trial traffic regulations
were instituted installing an all-way stop at the intersection of Melrose
Avenue and E. Rienstra Street. These regulations have been in effect and
functioning as expected for seven months.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt a resolution making this trial traffic
regulation permanent.
BOARI)S/COI~4ISSIONS RECO~I4ENDATION: At the March 14, 1991 meeting, the
Safety Commission voted 7-0 to approve staff's recommendation and make
permanent the trial traffic regulation all-way stop at the intersection of
Melrose Avenue and E. Rienstra Street.
DISCUSSION:
On August 21, 1990, trial traffic regulations (see attachment) were
established for an all-way stop at the intersection of Melrose Avenue and E.
Rienstra Street.
An investigation of the subject intersection showed that two reported
accidents occurred during the one year period of August 24, 1989 to August 23,
1990. Both of these accidents were of the type that may be considered
susceptible to correction by installation of an all-way stop. Over a several
year time period, there have been numerous traffic accidents causing damage to
the adjacent properties. Since the installation of an all-way, there have
been no reported accidents at this intersection.
Using the established warrants for all-way stops, this intersection received a
total of 21 points out of a possible 50 points. The minimum requirement to
warrant an all-way stop is 30.
According to Section 10.12.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, a trial
traffic regulation ceases to be effective if a resolution embodying that
regulation, or any part of it, is not approved by the City Council after the
eight month trial period. Since the subject intersection is operating more
safely, it is staff's recommendation that this trial traffic regulation be
made permanent.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
File: CY-027/WPC 5530E
Attachment: Area Plat
Trial Traffic Regulation
Draft Safety Commission Minutes of 3/14/91 (excerpt)
RESOLUTION No.J_~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AFFIRMING THE TRIAL TRAFFIC
REGULATION, INSTALLING AN ALL-WAY STOP AT THE
INTERSECTION OF MELROSE AVENUE AND EAST
RIENSTRA STREET
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.12.030
of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, adopted by Ordinance No. 1625
on May 27, 1975, trial traffic regulations were instituted
installing an all-way stop at the intersection of Melrose Avenue
and E. Rienstra Street; and
WHEREAS, these regulations have been in effect and
functioning as expected for seven months; and
WHEREAS, at the March 14, 1991 meeting, the Safety
Commission voted 7-0 to approve staff's recommendation and make
permanent the trial traffic regulation all-way stop at the
intersection of Melrose Avenue and E. Rienstra Street.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby affirm the trial traffic
regulation and approve the installation of an all-way stop at the
intersection of Melrose Avenue and East Rienstra Street.
Presented by ~d~ ~~
John P. Lippitt, Director of Bruce M. Boogaar~,~City AttOrney
Public Works
8724a
AREA ?LAT
August 21, 1990
File: CY-027
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: John Goss, City Manager /
FROM: John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Trial Traffic Regulation
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.12.030 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, adopted by Ordinance No. 1625 .on
May 27, 1975, the City Engineer has determined that in the
interest of minimizing traffic hazards and congestion and for the
promotion of public safety, there is hereby established
SCHEDULE II - SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED
Intersection Traffic StoDped On Sians
Presently: Melrose Ave E. Rienstra St. 2
E. Rienstra St.
Proposed: Melrose Ave Melrose Ave 4
E. Rienstra St. E. Rienstra St.
The change shown above is a result of a review of traffic
accident records. There were two (2) repo~ted accidents in the
past year. Both of these accidents were of the type that may be
considered susceptible to correction by installation of an all-
way stop.
Using the established warrants for four-way stops, this
intersection received a total of twenty-one (21) points out of a
possible fifty (50) points. Thus not satisfying the warrants for
installation.
The City ~ngineer has determined the need to install stop signs
on Melrose Avenue at the intersection with East Rienstra Street.
Presently east/west East Rienstra Street traffic stops for
north/south Melrose Avenue traffic. The proposed stQp signs for
Melrose Avenue will establish an all-way stop controlled
intersection. This trial traffic regulation will reduce the
number of traffic accidents at the subject intersection.
Said regulations to become effective upon the posting of signs or
other appropriate notice, and shall run for a trial period of
eight (8) months from the date of such posting, at which time a
review of said regulation will be made to determine if it should
be made permanent.
FXR:das
cc: Safety Commissioners
(A:\FXRi\TRIAL.DOC)
11-2
Safety Commission Meeting March 14, 1991
Minutes
11. Trial Traffic Regulation: AH-way Stop at Melrose Avenue/East Rienstra Street
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Rivera gave staff's report. An all-way stop was installed on August 21, 1990 as a
trial traffic installation. We need to return to the City Council within eight months to
affirm it and keep it at that location. If we do not go back to the City Council within the
eight month timeframe, then we have to remove the stop sign. Tonight the item is
brought before you so that you can make your recommendation whether to affirm or
deny the all-way stop traffic installation at this intersection. Staff is recommending that
this all-way stop remain and be made permanent by the City Council.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
William Hedrick, 299 East Rienstra Street, CV 91911
I would like to thank the Traffic division for installing the temporary sign. I would like
to thank all the Police Officers who have been out there issuing tickets.
Tony Carbajal, 1432 Melrose Avenue, CV 91911
I have lived at this address for 15 years. Thank you for having recommended and having
installed this sign. I am here to support the permanent placing of the all-way stop. I
believe that the eight month trial period has proven to be very effective. There have
been no accidents, Mr. Henrick's wall is not being crashed into any more. I think we
are ail in agreement that that is a good placement.
MOTION
That the Safety Commission accept staff's recommendation: that the Safety Commission
recommend to the City Council to affirm the all-way stop trail traffic regulation at the
subject intersection.
MSUC [Militscher/Koester] 7-0.
7. Report on Suggested Route to School Maps
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Rivera informed the Commissioners that in their packet is only part of the material
they will be receiving on this item in the very near future. There will be a suggested
route to school map for each elementary school in the City. Each map is the boundary
of the school limit, it will show the stop signs in the area where the safety patrols are
located, where the crosswalks are located. This is given out to each child at the
elementary school and they are to go over it with their parents to make sure that they
follow the suggested route to school established by the parents and the schools. We have
approximately 26 schools and at present we have updated about 18 of the school maps.
We will be providing each of you a complete packet as soon as the others are updated
in the very near future. Earlier I passed out an excerpt from the CalTrans traffic manual
which covers the school zones and the types of signs and the school safety patrols.
-10-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /0
Meeting Oate 4/9/91
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /~J~" Approving the FY 91-92 claims for the
FY 91-92 2% Non-Motorized Transportation Development Act Fund
SUBMITTEO BY: Director of Public Work~J
Manager, S--~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes No x )
REVIENED
BY:
City
Annually the City of Chula Vista submits an updated list of projects for
inclusion in the Seven-Year Implementation Program of the Non-Motorized
Element of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). As
required by SANDAG regulations, a tentative set of claims was submitted to
SANDAG on February 28, 1991, which is subject to Council approval. In order
that claims for the projects may be considered for funding by the SANDAG Board
of Directors, Council must pass a resolution authorizing submittal of the
claims. In response to SANDAG's request, staff also prepared and forwarded to
SANDAG a draft seven-year plan for construction of bicycle lanes and routes.
A copy of the list of projects is attached.
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council adopt a resolution authorizing submittal
of the FY 91-92 bicycle projects claims for available Transportation
Development Act and Transportation Sales Tax {TransNet) funds.
BOAROS/CO~I4ISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Annually 2% of the Non-Motorized Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds
are made available for the regional planning and construction of bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. TDA funds currently contribute about $1,500,000 per
year to the implementation of non-motorized projects in the San Diego region.
Also, with the passage of Proposition A, an additional $1,000,000 of sales tax
revenue per year is available for the implementation of bicycle projects.
The following is a listing of the project claims that were submitted to SANDAG
for FY 91-92 funding.
Project Cost
Installation of Bicycle Path along Sweetwater Road $ 80,000
and Willow Street
Bicycle Loop Detectors, FY 91-92 100,000
Bicycle Path Study 120,000
TOTAL $300,000
/orr
Page 2, Item /0
Neeting Date 4/9/91
A brief description of the above projects is as follows:
Installation of Bicycle Path along Sweetwater Road and Willow Street
This project will eliminate all bicycle and pedestrian circulation hazards
within the vicinity of this intersection. The requested funding does not
contain any drainage costs which will be covered by a different funding
source.
Bicycle Loop Detectors - Phase FY 91-92. Current City policy is to
install all new traffic signals with bicycle traffic loop detectors. If
funded, this project will install bicycle loop detectors at street
intersections within the City's bicycle route system where traffic
actuated signals were previously installed. Specific locations are to be
determined based on bicycle traffic counts.
Bicycle Path Study Greenbelt Trail System. The City's General Plan
designates a Greenbelt and Trail system along the Otay River Valley east
to the Otay Lakes, north to the Sweetwater Park and west to the Bay. The
study will establish an alignment and design criteria for a bicycle path
within the general corridor of the Greenbelt and Trail System.
Projects submitted to SANDAG must meet, but are not limited to, the following
requirements: {1) Projects must be included in an adopted regional plan;
(2) they must follow CALT~NS Bike Route Standards, and (3) must contain
appropriate cross sections. Projects are also subject to prioritization
criteria such as: elimination of problem areas on routes to provide
relatively safe travel use; service to high use activity centers; connection
to and continuity of longer routes.
The FY 91-92 claims, totaling an estimated $300,000, will be reviewed and
prioritized by the Bicycle Facilities Committee, which is composed of
representatives from each SANDAG member agency. Based on the Committee's
recommendations, the SANDAG Board of Directors will authorize allocation of
the available TDA and TransNet Funds.
On March 21, 1991, the Parks and Recreation Commission indicated concurrence
with the FY 91-92 TDA claims discussed above.
FISCAL IMPACT: Potential total revenue to the City of $300,000. Actual
amount is dependent on which projects are approved for funding by SANDAG Board
of Directors.
SMN:fp/KY-036
WPC 5541E
RESOLUTION NO. !~1~""
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FY 1991-92 CLAIMS
FOR THE FY 91-92 2% NON-MOTORIZED
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FUND
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, each year agencies in the San Diego region can
apply for 2% non-motorized Transportation Development Act (TDA)
funds; and
WHEREAS, with the passage of Proposition A, an
additional $1 million of sales tax revenue per year is available
for the implementation of bicycle projects; and
WHEREAS, the following is a listing of the project
claims to be submitted:
COST
Installation of Bike Path along
Sweetwater Road & Willow Street $80,000
Bicycle Loop Detectors - FY 91-92 100,000
Bicycle Path Study 120,000
$300,000
WHEREAS, prior to official submittal of the claims for
funding, Council must pass a resolution authorizing official
submittal of the claims to the San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG) Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the FY 1991-92 claims
for the FY 91-92 2% Non-motorized Transportation Development Act
Fund and Transportation Sales Tax funds.
App ~ as/I bYa~y
Presented by ~B
John P. Lippitt, Director of ooga
Public Works
8709a
/0-3,
FY 1992
(O00'S Future)
Total Local
($) ($)
Bicycle Loop Detectors 100 100
Bicycle/Jogging Trail on the Chula Vista Municipal
Golf Course, adjacent to Sweetwater Road and
Willow Street 80 80
Bicycle Path Study for the City's Greenbelt 120 120
TOTAL $3O0 $3O0
FY 1993
(000'S Future)
Total L0 al
($) ($)
Hilltop Drive, J Street-Orange Avenue 12 12
J Street, Bay Boulevard-Pasco Del Rey 10 10
Naples Street, Hilltop Drive-Fourth Avenue 2 2
Sidewalk Safety Program, Phase II 74 74
C Street, Broadway-D Street 4 4
East Orange Avenue, Hilltop Drive-Brandywine 5 5
Second Avenue, Sweetwater River-K Street 4 4
Broadway, Main Street-Palomar Street 3 3
F Street, Fourth Avenue,-Third Avenue 48 48
TOTAL $162 $162
FY 1994
(000'S Future)
Total Local.
($) ($)
F Street, Fourth Avenue,-Third Avenue 122 122
F Street, Bay Boulevard-Broadway 111 111
MTDB R/W Phase I, Main Street-Naples Street 202 202
Telegraph Canyon Road, East L Street to Halecrest Drive 4 4
TOTAL $439 $439
(000'S Future)
T0t~ Local
($) ($)
MTDB R/W Phase II, Naples Street-H Street 202 202
MTDB R/W Phase III, H Street-Sweetwater Road 202 202
TOTAL $404 $404
FY 1996
(000'S Future)
Total Local
($) ($)
Broadway, Main Street-South City Limits 5 5
Third Avenue, Main Street to South City Limits 3.5 3.5
Hermosa Avenue-Main Street to South City Limits 3.5 3.5
Naples Street, Hilltop Drive-Oleander Street 5 5
Palomar Street, Bay Boulevard-Oleander Street 8 8
Fourth Avenue, North City Limits-Main Street 14 14
Main Street, Broadway-Brandywine 7.5 7.5
TOTAL $ 46.5 $ 46.5
FY 1997
No projects have been developed yet.
FY 1998
No projects have been developed yet.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ti
Meeting Date 4/9/91
ITEM TITLE: a) Resolution /~Ol~,~::~ Making appointments, approving
documents and authorizing the Mayor to execute new
acquisition/financing agreement in a Assessment District No.
88-1 (Otay Lakes Road Phase I)
b) Resolution /(el~"'/ Adopting a map showing the proposed
boundaries of Assessment District No. 88-1 (Otay Lakes Road,
Phase I)
c) Resolution Declaring intention to order the
installation of certain improvements in a proposed assessment
district; ordering the preparation of a report describing the
district to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof;
and providing for the issuance of bonds for Assessment
District No. 88-1 (Otay Lakes Road, Phase I)
d) Resolution /Gl~ Passing on the "report" of the
Engineer, giving preliminary approval, and setting a time and
place for public hearing for Assessment District No. 88-1
(Otay Lakes Road, Phase I)/~.~
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~,'
REVIEWED BY: C~ty Manager/~~ (4/5this Vote: Yes__No~__)
On June 20, 198g, Council accepted the petition of the EastLake Development
Company and other property owners to initiate acquisition assessment district
proceedings, pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, for the
financing of Otay Lakes Road Phase I. This item continues the formal
proceedings leading to the establishment of the Otay Lakes Road Phase I
assessment district.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolutions and execute said agreement. Set time
and date of public hearing for May 14, 1991, at 6:00 p.m.
BOARDS/COI~qISSIONS RECOHMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Tonight's action is a continuation of the proceedings initiated by City
Council on June 20, 1989, for the formation of special Assessment District
88-1 (Otay Lakes Road - Phase I). Through the approval of these resolutions
the following will generally be accomplished:
1. The RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS AND APPROVING DOCUMENTS is the formal
appointment of the Director of Public Works as Superintendent of Streets,
makes other administrative appointments and approves the Amended Petition
and the new Acquisition/Financing Agreement.
I1'1
II
Page 2, Item ~!
Meeting Oate 4/g/gl
2. The RESOLUTION APPROVING BOUNDARY MAP is the formal action establishing
and approving boundaries of the proposed Assessment District. The
boundary as proposed includes EastLake Business Center Unit 1 and Village
Center Unit 3.
3. The RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENTION is the jurisdictional Resolution under
"1913 Act" proceedings, declaring intent to finance improvements through
the issuance of bonds and declaring that the improvements are a benefit
to the properties within the district. This resolution also directs the
engineer-of-work, Willdan Associates to prepare a report on the plans,
specifications, cost estimate, assessment spread of the assessable costs
and a description of the improvements. Further, it provides for the
issuance of bonds on the project.
4. The RESOLUTION PASSING ON "REPORT" AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING is the
preliminary approval of the Engineer's "Report" as required in the
previous resolution and sets date, time and place for public hearing.
In January, 1988, the City entered into an acquisition/financing agreement
with EastLake Development Company which has since expired. A new agreement is
now before Council for approval. The agreement has been updated to include
any new City requirements and includes additional improvements to be
acquired. At the time the previous acquisition agreement was prepared, only
four lanes of the ultimate six lanes of Otay Lakes Road between Rutgers Avenue
and Lane Avenue were to be constructed. Subsequently, it was determined that
the full six lanes should be constructed. The increase from four lanes to six
lanes and the addition of the drainage channel from Rutgers Avenue to the
EastLake Business Center are included in this acquisition agreement. This
modification also increased the area upon which DIF assessments could be
levied. This is the subject of the petition's amendment which adds the
Village Center Unit 3 to the area covered by the original assessment district
petition.
The public improvements proposed to be financed through the acquisition
assessment district proceedings were completed in March 1991 and include
improvements to complete the full six lanes of Otay Lakes Road and the
Telegraph Canyon drainage channel. The estimated total amount proposed to be
assessed to the land in the district is $8,705,199 including $6,003,919 for
construction and $2,701,280 in expenses such as right-of-way acquisition,
design engineering and plan check costs, inspection costs, consultant fees,
city administration costs and bond reserve fund and discount allowances.
Otay Lakes Road Phase I is a part of the circulation element streets for the
Eastern Territories and as such, is also a part of the Eastern Territories
Transportation Development Impact Fee (DIF) program. It is proposed that the
DIF amount, currently $3,060 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU), be utilized
as the method of spreading the cost of Otay Lakes Road Phase I to the land
within the assessment district boundaries. With the bond issuance expenses
added to the DIF amount, the assessment is $3,656 per EDU. For those parcels
of land on which building permits were issued when the DIF was lower than it
is currently, the assessment will be the then current DIF plus bond issuance
expenses.
It' '
Page 3, Item I!
Meeting Oate 4/g/g!
A drainage development impact fee has also been established for the Telegraph
Canyon Drainage Channel. That fee, which is currently $3,922 per acre, is the
basis for drainage assessment in a similar manner to the Transportation D!F
described above. The assessment per acre is $4,685 including bond issuance
expenses. Parcels of land on which building permJts were issued prior to the
establishment of the Drainage OIF will not be assessed unless £astLake
Development Company is the owner of the property and chooses to be assessed;
otherwJse, they ~ill absorb the drainage DIF costs. Only that portion of the
proposed assessment district within the Telegraph Canyon Drainage basin will
be assessed the Drainage DIF.
The next step tn the assessment district proceedings is the public hearing.
Adoption of tonight's resolution will set the time and date of the public
hearing for Hay 14, !991, at which time the district ~ill be formed and the
assessments ~ill be levied.
Attached for Council's reference are Council Agenda Statements for the January
12, 1988, and June 6, 1989 meetings at which times the consultants' contracts,
the reimbursement and acquisition agreements and original petition were
approved.
FISCAL INPAC~: The Developer has advanced all City expenses related to the
proposed assessment district. In conformance with City policy on developer
requested assessment districts, recently adopted by Resolution 15897, £astLake
Development Company will deposit the origination charge of approximately
$85,000 prior to the public hearing. The actual amount will be based on the
Final £ngineer's Report.
DDS/AY-073
NPC 5524E
SOLUTIO..0.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, MAKING .APPOINTMENTS, APPROVING
DOCUMENTS AND AUTHORI.ZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE NEW
ACQUISITION/FINANCING AGREEMENT IN ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT NO 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD, PHASE I)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, is considering the
formation of a special assessment district, pursuant to the terms and provisions of
the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California, for the installation of certain public
works of improvement, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, said special
assessment district to be known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1 (OTAY
LAKES ROAD, PHASE I) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and,
WHEREAS, this legislative body is now desirous of making the required appointments
and designating persons to perform certain duties, in order to allow the proceedings
to go forward to completion in accordance with the provisions of law; and
WHEREAS, an Amendment to the Petition has been received, requesting certain
additional works of improvement which will also cause a modification and amendment
in the boundaries as proposed for this Assessment District; and,
WHEREAS, there has now been submitted a new Acquisition/Financing Agreement,
incorporating the original work, as well as-certain additional work which is now
deemed necessary and integral to the works of improvement proposed to be installed
in the Assessment District.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That the PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR is hereby appointed to perform all of the
duties and functions of the Superintendent of Streets as said duties are
specified and designated in the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913",
being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of
California, for the above-referenced Assessment District.
SECTION 3. That the place for recordation of the assessment roll and diagram shall
be in the Office of the Superintendent of Streets, and said assessment
roll and diagram, upon recordation, shall be kept as a permanent record.
SECTION 4. That the STAR NEWS is hereby designated as the newspaper for all publica-
tions as required by law and as necessary for completion of this Assess-
ment District.
SECTION 5. That MUNICIPAL FINANCE ADMINISTRATION is hereby appointed to act as
Project Manager for purposes of coordinating all phases of the proceed-
ings relating to this Assessment District.
SECTION 6. That WILLDAN ASSOCIATES is hereby appointed the Assessment Engineer for
said proceedings, and said Assessment Engineer shall perform all of the
duties and responsibilities as set forth by law as they relate to said
Assessment District.
SECTION 7. That BROWN, HARPER, BURNS & HENTSCHKE, Attorneys at Law, is hereby
appointed to act as Bond Counsel for the purposes of preparing proceed-
ings and issuing an approving opinion attesting to the validity of the
proceedings and the enforceability of the bonds.
SECTION 8. That KADIE-JENSEN, JOHNSON & BODNAR is hereby appointed as the Financial
Consultant and is authorized to obtain a proposal or bid for the sale of
bonds to be issued in order to finance said proceedings, said bonds to
be issued pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Improvement Bond
Act of 1915", being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California.
SECTION 9. That the Amendment to Petition as submitted is hereby approved and it is
hereby determined that said Amended Petition has been signed by property
owners of record and all interested persons, and meets the requirements
of Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of
California. It is hereby further expressly declared that said new and
additional improvements shall be consolidated for purposes of financing
in this Assessment District.
SECTION 10. That the new Acquisition/Financing Agreement by and between the City and
Eastlake Development Company is hereby approved and the Mayor is autho-
rized to execute said Agreement.
SECTION 11. That a copy of said new Acquisition/Financing Agreement shall be kept on
file in the Office of the City Clerk and remain open for public
inspection.
SECTION 12. That this legislative body hereby establishes a special IMPROVEMENT FUND
designated by the name and number of the Assessment District, and into
said fund shall be placed all proceeds from the sale of bonds and cash
collections. In order to expedite the improvements or acquisition under
these proceedings and as authorized by law, funds from any available
source may be transferred into said special fund. Any funds transferred
are a loan to the fund and shall be repaid out of the proceeds of the
sale of bonds, including authorized incidental expenses, as well as
costs for the installation of the authorized public improvements, all as
required and authorized by law, and specifically Section 10210 of the
Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1991.
MAYOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
/
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
I, BEVERLY A. AUTNELET, CITY CLERK of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. , was duly
passed, approved and adopted by the City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor,
and attested by the City Clerk, all at the meeting of said City Council
held on the day of , 1991, and that the same was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
BXECUTED this __ day of , 1991, at Chula Vista, California.
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
[SEAL]
THIS PAGE BLANK
//-x
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into thi~ day of ,
1991, by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a public agency of the State of
California (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT CO., (here-
inafter referred to as "Property Owner").
WHEREAS, the City is considering the formation of a special assessment district
under the terms and conditions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the
construction of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and appurte-
nant work within the Jurisdictional limits of said city, said special assessment
district known and designated ss ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD,
P~ASE I) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and,
WHEREAS, Section 66462 of the Government Code of the State of California ("Subdivi-
sion Map Act") expressly authorizes financing and completion of public improvements
under an appropriate e~ecial assessment act, and Section 10102 of the Streets and
Highways Code ("Municipal Improvement Act of 1913") expressly authorizes the acquisi-
tion of any improvements authorized to be constructed under said law; and,
WHEREAS, Property Owner, in order to proceed in a timely way with its development,
desires to construct and has constructed certain public works of improvement that
are proposed to be included with the works of improvement for the Assessment
District, namely, the improvements as set forth and described in the attached,
referenced and incorporated Exhibit "A"; and,
WHEREAS, the City and Property Owner are in agreement that the determined eligible
works of improvement may be included within the Assessment District financing at
prices determined by said City to be reasonable; and,
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this Agreement to provide that Property owner shall,
upon a successful confirmation of assessment and sale of bonds for the Assessment
District, be paid for the works of improvement which are integral and s part of the
Assessment District, as the prices as determined by the City; and,
WHEREAS, the properties within the boundaries of the Assessment District will be
assessed only for those portions of the works of improvement that benefit the proper-
ties within the boundaries of the Assessment District, and this Acquisition/
Financing Agreement and payment for the works of improvement will apply to and only
cover those portions of said works of improvement; and,
WHEREAS, in performing under this Agreement, it is mutually understood that Property
Owner is acting as an independent contractor and not an agent of the City, and City
shall have no responsibility for payment to any contractor, subcontractor or
supplier of the Property owner; and,
WHEREAS, Property Owner shall be the owner of and retain title to all of the works
of improvement constructed pursuant to this Agreement until such time as the City,
acting pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", shall
acquire such works of improvement. Upo~ such transfer, such improvements shall
become the property of the public agency and/or regulated utility authorized to
provide the service to the Assessment District; and,
WHEREAS, the City has no objection to purchasing the improvements from said Property
Owner, and Property Owner is desirous that the City purchase said improvements, and
at this time said improvements are owned by Property Owner; and,
WHEREAS, Pro~erty Owner hereby further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the
City of any challenge involving the validity or enforceability of this Agreement and
Property Owner further agrees to defend or provide the monies in advances for any
defense as it relates to a challenge to this Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, City may, at its option, terminate this Agreement at any time if any legal
challenge is filed relating to the validity or enforceability of this Agreement for
these assessment district proceedings.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED between the respective parties as follows:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. The City has no financial obligation to construct the improvements, and
all expense for said improvements, including all incidentals thereto,
shall be borne by owners of property within the Assessment District.
SECTION 3. That said City does intend to proceed with the adoption of a Resolution
of Intention and the formation of a special Assessment District for the
improvements above described; however, the City reserves the right to
determine those facilities which are eligible for final funding.
SECTION 4. That the City agrees to acquire and finance through the use of special
assessment proceedings, and Property Owner agrees to convey all
completed improvements to the City, those improvements being all as set
forth in the previously referenced Exhibit "A". Property Owner agrees
to post with the city the required bonds to guarantee the performance
of the work and payment of all labor and materials, said bonds to be in
the amounts as determined by the City.
Property Owner shall be responsible for the maintenance and shall
maintain said improvements in a satisfactory condition prior to any
final transfer and acceptance.
SECTION 5. No acquisition monies shall be paid until the described improvements
to be acquired have been transferred free and clear of all liens,
claims and encumbrances, and Property Owner does hereby indemnify the
City against any liens, claims or encumbrances relating to said
acquired improvements.
SECTION 6. The final facilities and actual prices to be paid for said improvements
are those that the City believes to be integral and reasonable and to
confer special benefit on pr6perties within the Assessment District.
//../o
The estimated prices for the improvements are set forth in the
attached, referenced and incorporated Exhibit "B". Final prices shall
be based upon unit prices and quantities as determined by the City to
be reasonable, and no other co,ts and expenses shall be allowed unless
expresaly authorized by the legislative body of the City. The Property
Owner shall provide all substantiating documentation and certifications
of authenticity as requested by the city in the determination of either
the quantities of work constructed or the prices to be paid for such
improvements.
SECTION 7. The estimated quantities set forth in the previously referenced Exhibit
"S" shall be revised to reflect the actual quantities of works of
improvement actually constructed at prices as determined by the City.
Any final determination shall be made by the City es to the prices and
quantities to be paid.
SECTION 8. The costs of acquisition shall also include the necessary engineering
and related incidental expenses, including, but not limited to, the
preparation of plans, specifications, bidding and all related documenta-
tion. Said final costs and expenses are to be determined upon the
completion of the works of improvement and certified by the City.
SECTION 9. The coat for said works of improvement shall be spread in accordance
with the benefits received, as determined by the Assessment Engineer
for the Assessment District.
SECTION 10. Ail plans and specifications shall be submitted by the Property Owner,
end all improvements shall be bid and constructed in full compliance
with all applicable local rules and laws. Property Owner agrees to
keep records and to allow the City to review said records for all bids
and contracts let for any of the improvements. City shall hays the
right to inspect all works of improvement as if said works of improve-
ment were being constructed as a public works contract let by the City.
SECTION 11. Upon execution of this Agreement and completion of the improvements,
the City shall have the right to use said improvements es determined
necessary and integral for the works of improvement within the Assess-
ment District.
SECTION 12. The acquisition monies, upon the sale of bonds, shall be distributed
pursuant to written instructions executed by all persons having an
interest in the property, as disclosed by a current title report.
"Interested parties" shall consist of property owners as shown on the
last equalized assessment roll for property taxes, as well as any
beneficiaries under any existing deeds of trust. No cash distribution
shall be made until all parties have executed the appropriate written
instructions.
SECTION 13. Acquisition monies may be withheld until all improvements required to
be installed by the Property Owner have been completed, and a reason-
able amount of monies due under this Agreement may be subsequently with-
held to cover final possible, corrections and/or adjustments in the
work, said work to be accomplished subsequent to the confirmation of
the assessment and sale of bonds.
SECTION 14. This Agreement is contingent upon the confirmation of assessments and
successful sale of bonds, and it shall be null and void if said bonds
are not sold within a three (3) year period following the date of this
Agreement, or any m~tually agreed extension; however, this time can be
extended by request of the Property Owner and concurrence of the
legislative body.
SECTION 15. Property Owner hereby agrees to provide written notice to any potential
purchasers of lots in a form satisfactory to City so advising the
potential owner of the fact of the proposed or confirmed Assessment
District, with said document being executed by the potential owner.
Such notice shall be provided to the potential owner a reasonable time
before the potential owner becomes contractually committed to purchase
the lot so that the Potential owner may knowingly consider the impact
of the assessment in the decision to purchase the lot. A copy of all
such notices executed by actual purchasers shall be sent to the City.
SECTION 16. Property Owner agrees to and shall assume the defense of, indemnify and
hold harmless the City, its officers and agents, from any action,
damages, claims or losses of any type resulting from this Agreement,
including without limitation the design, engineering, construction
bidding, award of the contract contract and construction of the improve-
ments. No provision as contained herein shall in any way limit the
extent of the responsibility of said Property Owner for payment of
damages resulting from the construction of the improvements and/or any
contractual relationships between Property Owner and contractor and/or
subcontractors.
SECTION 17. This Agreement is binding upon heirs, assigns, and successors-in-
interest.
SECTION 18. This Agreement, by its execution, amends and supercedes any terms and
conditions that may be inconsistent in any previous agreement, includ-
ing any subdivision improvement agreement, relating to the construc-
tion, installation or financing of said improvements.
SECTION 19. The prevailing party in any litigation relating to, interpreting or
enforcing this Agreement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's
fees as determined by the Court.
%
SECTION 20. This Agreement and the construction of the improvements shall be
subject to all local laws and ordinances relating to the requirement of
improvement agreements, land division, improvement security or other
applicable development requirements.
SECTION 21. Property Owner agrees to pay' origination charges pursuant to Council
policy.
EXECUTED by and between the parties hereto on the day and year first hereinabove
written.
"CITY"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
MAYOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ATTEST~
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CAIFORNIA
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
"PROPERTY OWNER"
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT CO.
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1
I. Full improvement of Otay Lakes Road to the ultimate 6 lane facility west of Rutgers
Avenue east approximately 4,400 feet to the western boundary of the EastLake
Business Center.
1. Acquiring additional right-of-way, removal of existing pavement, grading to the
ultimate right-of-way width of 134 feet, the installation of two 44 foot wide
pavement sections, a 24 foot wide raised, landscaped and irrigated median,
curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights.
2. Installing local drainage facilities consisting of closed conduit storm drains and
drainage ditches necessary to drain the street and associated slopes and runoff
areas.
3. Realigning existing 16, 18, 20, and 24 inch water lines and valves in Otay
lakes Road.
4. Implementing temporary construction detours consisting of paving, retaining
walls, guardrails, and drainpipes.
5. Installing, converting, or relocation of electric, gas, telephone, and cable TV
conduit systems.
II. Half-width improvements of Otay Lakes Road to complete the ultimate six lane
facility from the western boundary of the EastLake Business Center, east to Lane
Avenue.
1. Grading to ultimate right-of-way width of 134 feet, the installation of one 44-
foot wide pavement section, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and streetlight.
2. Installing local drainage facilities consisting of closed conduit storm drains
necessary to drain the street and associated slopes and runoff areas.
3. Implementing temporary construction detours consisting of paving, retaining
walls, guardrails, and drainpipes.
4. Installing, converting, or relocation of electricity, gas, telephone, and cable TV
conduit systems as necessary.
III. The construction of a vegetated drainage channel with rip rap drop structures that
runs parallel to Otay Lakes Road from Rutgers Avenue east approximately 4,450 feet
to the western boundary of the EastLake Business Center.
1. Grading and construction of the channel, including inlet and outlet structures,
rip rap aprons, lined drainage ditches, two access ramps, and landscaped sides.
2. A reinforced double box culvert under Otay Lakes Road.
3. Acquisition of approximately 16 acres of drainage easement.
//-/s--
PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 88-1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OTAY LAKES ROAD PHASE lAND
TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL SEGMENT I
....
I
LEGEND
DISTRICT BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
~ NOT A PART OF THE .DISTRICT
EXHIBIT B
ACQUISITION COSTS
A. Construction Costs
Telegraph Canyon Drainage Channel $ 230,735
Otay Lakes Road
(Rutgers to g~tlake Boundary) 4,940,250
Otay Lakes Road
(North Portion near Business Center) 833.176
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION $ 6,004,161
Contingency at 2% 120.08~
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION: $ 6,124,244
B. Incidental Expenses
Project Management $ 20,000
Design Engineering, Survey & Staking 547,091
Construction Management 11,925
Landscape Design 62,083
Utility Engineering 14,101
Plan Check & Inspection Fees 206,979
Legal Fees (right-of-way) 41,852
Special Studies Engineering 43,184
Soils Engineering 116,440
Miscellaneous 14.622
Subtotal Incidentals $ 1,078,277
TOTAL COST $7,202,521
III. The construction of a vegetated drainage channel with rip rap drop structures that
runs parallel to Otay Lakes Road from Rutgers Avenue east approximately 4,450 feet
to the western boundary of the EastLake Business Center.
1. Grading and construction of the channel, including inlet and outlet structures,
rip rap aprons, lined drainage ditches, two access ramps, and landscaped sides.
2. A reinforced double box culvert under Otay Lakes Road.
3. Acquisition of approximately 16 acres of drainage easement.
EXHIBIT A
DF~CRIPTION OF WORK
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 85-1
L Full improvement of Otay Lakes Road to the ultimate 6 lane facility west of Rutgers
Avenue east approximately 4-,400 feet to the western boundary of the EastLake
Business Center.
1. Acquiring additional right-of-way, removal of existing pavement, grading to the
ultimate fight-of-way width of 134 feet, the installation of two 44 foot wide
pavement sections, a 24 foot wide raised, landscaped and irrigated median,
curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights.
2. Installing local drainage facilities consisting of closed conduit storm drains and
drainage ditches necessary to drain the street and associated slopes and runoff
areas.
3. Realigning existing 16, 18, 20, and 24 inch water lines and valves in Otay
Lakes Road.
4. Implementing temporary construction detours consisting of paving, retaining
walls, guardrails, and drainpipes.
5. Installing, converting, or relocation of electric, gas, telephone, and cable TV
conduit systems.
II. Half-width improvements of Otay Lakes Road to complete the ultimate six lane
facility from the western boundary of the EastLake Business Center, east to Lane
Avenue.
1. Grading to ultimate fight-of-way width of 134 feet, the installation of one 44-
foot wide pavement section, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and streeflight.
2. Installing local drainage facilities consisting of closed conduit storm drains
necessary to drain the street and associated slopes and runoff areas.
3. Implementing temporary construction detours consisting of paving, retaining
walls, guardrails, and drainpipes.
4. Installing, converting, or relocation of electricity, gas, telephone, and cable TV
conduit systems as necessary.
TO: CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDMENT TO PgTITION FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS
~SESSHENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1 (OT&Y LAKES ROAD)
1. We, the undersigned, are the property owners of land shown on the map attached
aa Exhibit "A" and made a part of this document, which map shows additional
property now benefiting from new improvements and to be included within the
Assessment District.
2. We ~etition you to undertake special assessment proceedings for the following
described new public improvements as set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
3. We understand~
A. THAT the cost of the improvements will be charged to the land which bene-
fits from the improvements, including our land~
B. THAT the boundariea of the Assessment District will be modified and emended
to include benefiting properties from new and additional works of
improvement~
C. THAT each property owner may pay his assessment either in cash without
intereat or in installments with interest over a period of years~
D. THAT the estimated cost of the new and additional improvements ia
$1,441,089.
E. THAT property with an assessment lien is subject to foreclosure in cases of
delinquency and non-payment.
4. We consent to the formation of the Assessment District and waive any rights to
protest against the formation of said Aaaeaament District.
5. We further waive the thirty (30) day period aa authorized for the payment of
all or any portion of the assessments, and waive the notice by publication and
mailing of recordation of the assessment as authorized by Section 10404 of the
Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
THE UNDERSIGNED HERESY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THEY ARE
THE OWNERS OF RECORD OF T}{E PROPERTY AS SET FORTH HEREIN.
NAME OF PROPERTY
DATE OF OWNER AND STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION OR
SIGNING ADDRESS COUNTY TAX PARCEL NO. SIGNATURE
EastLake Development Co. 595-070-24 .,.~,r~'~ [
a California General Partnership
900 Lane Avenue # 100 ~
Chula Vista, CA 91914
It La hereby further stated that ~the property within the boundaries of the Assess-
ment District at this time is sub~ect to existing mortgages or deeds of trust.
THE UNDERSIGNED hereby state, as mortgagees o= beneficiaries under any existing
deeds of trust, that they acknowledge and Join in signature in the Retition for the
above-referenced Assessment District. For further particulars as to any mortgagees
or beneficiaries under any deeds of trust, reference is made to the tit~a re~ort, a
copy of which is attached hereto.
DATE OF SIGNING NAME OF LENDER SIGNATURE Security Pacific National Bank ,~-~,~f'~!
California RE Industries H8-55~/ . b//~'~ ,
Pacific Plaza
333 South Hope Street
FILEDIN OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK THIS DAY OF
THE
Said Amended Petition represents % of the assessable area, as shown on the
attached map.
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 88--
CITY OF' CHULA VISTA, COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OTAY LAKES ROAD PHASE lAND
TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL SEGMENT
LEGEND
PARCEL. ~OUNOAR Y
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ASSESSMEN~ DISTRICT NO. 88-1
(OTAY LAKES ROAD)
I. Full improvement of Otay Lakes Road to thc ult[mate 6 lane facility west of Rutgers
Avenue ernst approximately 4,400 f~t to the western boundary of U~e EastLakc
Business Center.
1. Acquiring addltional right-of-way, removal of existing pavement, grading to thc
ultimate right-of-way widith of 134 feet, thc installation of two 44 foot wide
pavement sections, a 24 foot wide raised, landscaped and irrigated median, curb,
gutter, sidewalk and street lights.
2. Installing local draLnage facilities consisting of closed conduit storm drains and
drainage ditches necessary to drain thc street and associated slopes and runoff
are, as.
3. Realigning ex~sdng 16, 18, 20 and 24 Lnch water lines and valves in Om), Lakes
Road.
4. Implementing temporary construction detours consisting of p.nv[ng, retaining walls
guardraLls and drainpipes.
5. Installing, converting or relocation of elec~c, gas, telephone, and cable TV
conduit systems.
The construction of -. trapezoidal drainage channel that runs parallel to Otay Lakes
Road from Rutgers Avenue east appr0xjmately 4,400 feet to the western boundary
of the EasLLake Business Center Coe[%veen stadons 48*60 and 97*85 as per City of
Chula Vista Drawing Numbers 88-175 to 88-189.
1. Grading and construction of the trapezoidal channel, including inlet and
outlet structures, rip rap aprons, lined drainage ditches, two access ramps,
and landscaped sides.
2. A reinforced double box culvert under Otay Lakes Road.
3. Acquisition of approximately 16 acres of drainage easement.
EXHIBIT "B"
SO DTION NO.
OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MAP
SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESS-
M~NT DISTRICT NO. 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD,
pHASE I)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has been presented
and has received a map showing and describing the boundaries of the area proposed to
be assessed in an assessment district under the provisions and authority of the
"Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways
Code of the State of California; said assessment district known and designated as
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1 (OTAY LAF~ES ROAD, pHASE I) (hereinafter referred to as
the "Assessment District").
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That a map of the Assessment District showing the boundaries of the
proposed Assessment District and lands and property to be assessed to
pay the costs and expenses of the proposed improvements designated as
"PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD,
PHASE I)" is hereby submitted, and the same is hereby approved and
adopted.
SECTION 3. That the original map of said proposed boundaries of the proposed
Assessment District and one copy thereof is to be filed in the Office of
the City Clerk.
SECTION 4. A certificate shall be endorsed on the original and on at least one copy
of the map of the AsSessment District, evidencing the date and adoption
of this Resolution, and within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of
the Resolution fixing the time and place of hearing on the formation or
extent of said Assessment District, a copy of said map shall be filed
with the correct and proper endorsements thereon with the County
Recorder, all in the manner and form provided for in Section 3111 of the
Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1991.
MAYOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
&
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CBULA VISTA
I, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CITY CLERK of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. , was duly
passed, approved and adopted by the City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor,
and attested by the City Clerk, all at the meeting of said City Council
held on the day of , 1991, and that the same was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT= COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
EXECUTED this __ day of , 1991, at Chula Vista, California.
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
[SEAL]
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF TNE CITY COUNCIL OF TME CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIa, DECLARING INTENTION
TO ORDER THE INSTALLATION OF CERTAIN IMPROVE-
MENTS IN A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT;
OPd)ERING THE PREPARATION OF A REPORT DESCRIB-
ING THE DISTRICT TO BE ASSESSED TO PAY THE
COSTS AND EXPENSES THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR
THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
NO 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD, PHASE I}
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The public interest and convenience require, and it is the intention of
this body, pursuant to the provisions of Division 12 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California (the "Municipal Improvement
Act 1913"), to order the installation of certain public improvements,
together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special assess-
ment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1
(OTAY LAKES ROAD, PHASE I) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment
District").
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS
A. The installation and financing of certain public improvements
described as street improvements, consisting of grading, base,
paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lighting, landscaping,
utility relocations, storm drains and drainage channel improvements,
together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, to serve and
benefit properties located within the boundaries of the Assessment
District.
E. Said streets, rights-of-way and easements shall be shown upon the
plans herein referred to and to be filed with these proceedings.
C. Ail of said work and improvements are to be installed at the places
and in the particular locations, of the forms, sizes, dimensions and
materials, and at the lines, grades and elevations as shown and
delineated upon the plane, profiles and specifications to be made
therefor, as hereinafter provided.
D. The description of the improvements and the termini of the work
contained in this Resolution are general in nature. Ail items of
work do not necessarily extend for the full length of the descrip-
tion thereof. The plans and profiles of the work as contained in
the Engineer's "Report" shall be controlling as to the correct and
detailed description thereof.
E. Whenever any public way is herein referred to as running between two
public ways, or from or to any public way, the intersections of the
public ways referred to are included to the extent that work shall
be shown on the plans to be done therein.
F. Notice is hereby given of the fact that in many cases said work and
improvement will bring the finished work to a grade different from
that formerly existing, and .that to said extent, said grades are
hereby changed and said work will be done to said changed grades.
DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
SECTION 2. That said improvements and work are of direct benefit to the properties
and land within the Assessment District, and this legislative body
hereby makes the expenses of said work and improvement chargeable upon
a district, which said Assessment District is hereby declared to be the
Assessment District benefited by said work and improvements and to be
assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, including incidental
expenses and costs and which is described as follows=
Ail that certain territory in the District included within the exterior
boundary lines shown on the plat exhibiting the property affected or
benefited by or to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses of said
work and improvements in the Assessment District, said map titled and
identified as "PROPOSED EOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1
(OTAY LAKES ROAD, PEASE I)", and which map was heretofore approved and
which said map or diagram Is on file with the transcript of these
proceedings, EXCEPTING therefrom the area shown within and delineated
upon said map or plat hereinabove referred to, the area of all public
streets, public avenues, public lanes, public roads, public drives,
public courts, public alleys, and all easements and rights-of-way
therein contained belonging to the public. For all particulars as to
the boundaries of the Assessment District, reference is hereby made to
said boundary map heretofore previously approved and on file.
REPORT OF ENGINEER
SECTION 3. That the proposed improvement is hereby referred to WILLDAN ASSOCIATES,
who is hereby directed to make and file a report in writing containing
the following=
A. Plans and specifications of the proposed improvements~
B. An estimate of the cost of the proposed works of improvement,
including the cost of the incidental expenses in connection
therewith~
C. A diagram showing the Assessment District above referred to, which
shall also show the boundaries and dimensions of the respective
subdivisions of land within said Assessment District, as the same
existed at the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention,
each of which subdivisions shall be given a separate number upon
said Diagram~
D. A proposed assessment of the total amount of the assessable costs
and expenses of the proposed improvement upon the several divisions
of land in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by
such subdivisions, respectively, from said improvement. Said
assessment shall refer to such subdivisions upon said diagram by
the respective numbers thereof~
E. The description of the works of improvement to be installed under
these proceedings, and acquisition, where necessary;
When any portion or percentage of the cost and expenses of the
improvements is to be paid from sources other than assessments, the
amount of such portion or percentage shall first be deducted from the
total estimated costs and expenses of said work and improvements, and
said assessment shall include only the remainder of the estimated costs
and expenses. Said assessment shall refer to said subdivisions by
their respective numbers ae assigned pursuant to Subsection D. of this
Section.
BONDS
SECTION 4. Notice is hereby given that bonds to represent the unpaid assessments,
and bear interest at the rate of not to exceed the current legal
maximum rate of 12% per annum, will be issued hereunder in the manner
provided in the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915", being Division 10 of
the Streets and Highways Code of the state of California, which bonds
shall mature a maximum of and not to exceed TWENTY-FOUR (24) YEARS from
the second day of September next succeeding twelve (12) months from
their date. The provisions of Part 11.1 of said Act, providing an
alternative procedure for the advance payment of assessments and the
calling of bonds shall apply.
The principal amount of the bonds maturing each year shall be other
than an amount equal to an even annual proportion of the aggregate
principal of the bonds, and the amount of principal maturing in each
year, plus the amount of interest payable in that year, will be
generally an aggregate amount that is equal each year, except for the
first year's adjustment.
Pursuant to the provisions of the Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California, specifically Section 10603, the Treasurer is
hereby designated as the officer to collect and receive the assessments
during the cash collection period. Sald bonds further shall be
serviced by the Treasurer or designated Paying Agent.
Refunding
Any bonds issued pursuant to these proceedings and Division (a) may be
refunded, (b) the interest rate on said bonds shall not exceed the
maximum interest rate as authorized for these proceedings, and the
number of years to maturity shall not exceed the maximum number as
authorized for these bonds unless a public hearing is expressly held as
authorized pursuant to said Division 11.5, and (c) any adjustments in
assessments resulting from any refundings will be done on a pro-rata
basis.
Any authorized refunding shall, be pursuant to the above conditions, and
pursuant to the provisions and restrictions of Division 11.5 of the
Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, commencing with
Section 9500, and all further conditions shall be set forth in the Bond
Indenture to be approved prior to any issuance of bonds.
"MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1913"
SECTION 5. That except as herein otherwise provided for the issuance of bonds, all
of said improvements shall be ~ade and ordered pursuant to the provi-
sions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of
the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
SURPLUS FUNDS
SECTION 6. That if any excess shall be realized from the assessment, it shall be
used, in such amounts as the legislative body may determine, in accor-
dance with the provisions of law for one or more of the following
purposes:
A. Transfer to the general fund; provided that the amount of any such
transfer shall not exceed the lesser of One Thousand Dollars
($1,000.00) or five percent (5%) of the total from the Improvement
Fund;
B. As a credit upon the assessment and any supplemental assessment; or
C. For the maintenance of the improvement.
SPECIAL FUND
SECTION 7. The legislative body hereby establishes a special improvement fund
identified and designated by the name of this Assessment District, and
into said Fund monies may be~ transferred at any time to expedite the
making of the improvements herein authorized, and any such advancement
of funds is a loan and shall be repaid out of the proceeds of the sale
of bonds as authorized by law.
PRIVATE CONTRACT
SECTION 8. Notice is hereby given that the public interest will not be served by
allowing the property owners to take the contract for the installation
of the improvements, and that, as authorized by law, no notice of award
of contract shall be published.
GRADES
SECTION 9. That notice is hereby given that the grade to which the work shall be
done is to be shown on the plans and profiles therefor, which grade may
vary from the existing grades. The work herein contemplated shall be
done to the grades as indicated on the plans and specifications, to
which reference is made for a description of the grade at which the
work is to be done. Any objections or protests to the proposed grade
shall be made at the public hearing to be conducted under these
proceedings.
PROCEEDINGS INQUIRIES
SECTION 10. 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 LIPPITT, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
P. O. BOX 1087
CHULA.VISTA, CA 92012
TELEPHONE: (619) 691-5021
PUBLIC PROPERTY
SECTION 11. Ail public property in the use and performance of a public function
shall be omitted from assessment in these proceedings unless expressly
provided and lasted herein.
ACQUISITION
SECTION 12. That the public interest, convenience and necessity requires that
certain land, rights-of-way or easements be obtained in order to allow
the works of improvement as proposed for this Assessment District to be
accomplished. For a general description of the location and extent of
the easements or land necessary to be acquired, reference is hereby made
to maps on file with the transcript of these proceedings.
NO CITY LIABILITY
SECTION 13. This legislative body hereby further declares not to obligate itself to
advance available funds from the Treasury to cure any deficiency which
may occur in the bond redemption fund. This determination is made
pursuant to the authority of Section 8769(b) of the Streets and Highways
Code of the State of California, and said determination shall further be
set forth in the text of the. bonds issued pursuant to the "Improvement
Bond Act of 1915".
PETITION
SECTION 14. That a petition signed by property owners representing more than 60% in
area of the property subject to assessment for said improvement has been
signed and filed with the legislative body, and said written petition
expressly contains a waiver of any of the proceedings and limitations as
set forth under Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State
of California, the "Special Assessment Investigation, Limitation and
Majority Protest Act of 1931".
WORK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
SECTION 15. It is hereby further determined to be in the best public interest and
convenience and more economical to do certain work on private property
to eliminate any disparity in level or size between the improvements and
the private property. The actual cost of such work is to be added to
the assessment on the lot on which the work is done, and no work of this
nature is to be performed until the written consent of the property
owner is first obtained.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
I, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CITY CLERK of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. , was duly
passed, approved and adopted by the City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor,
and attested by the City Clerk, all at the meeting of said City Council
held on the day of , 1991, and that the same was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES= COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
EXECUTED this day of , 1991, at Chula Vista, California.
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
[SEAL]
I/-33
ANNUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT
SECTION 16. It is hereby declared that this. legislat£ve body proposes to levy an
annual assessment pursuant to Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways
Code of the State of California, said annual assessment to pay costs
incurred by the City and not otherwise reimbursed which result from the
admin£strat£on and collection~of assessments or from the admin£stration
or registration of any associated bonds and reserve of other related
funds.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1991.
MAYOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ATTEST~
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SOLUTION NO. I 'IACl
R~SOLUTION O~ THE CIT~ COUNCIL OF THE CITY O~
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, PASSING ON THE "REPORT"
OF TEE ENGINEER, GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL,
AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING
FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. NO. 88-1 (OTAY LAKES
ROAD, PHASE I)
WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has instituted
proceedings for the installation of certain public works of improvement and
appurtenances under provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, in a
special assessment district known and designated as ASSESS~NT DISTRICT NO. 88-1
(OTA¥ LA~d~S ROM, PHASE I) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District");
and,
WHEREAS, there has been prepared and filed with the legislative body a "Report"
provided for in Sections 10203 and 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California, and this "Report" has been presented for consideration; and,
WHEREAS, a Resolution of Intention for this improvement was previously adopted by
the legislative body; and the "Report" as now presented shall stand as the "Report"
for the purpose of subsequent proceedings hereunder.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTION 2. That the "Report" of the Engineer referred to hereinabove is considered
adopted, passed upon, and preliminarily approved, as follows:
A. That the plans and specifications for the proposed improvements to
be made, contained in said "Report" be, and they are hereby prelimi-
narily approved and adopted;
B. That the Engineer's estimate of the itemized and total costs and
expenses of said acquisition, where necessary, and improvements, and
of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in
said "Report", be, and each of them are hereby preliminarily
approved and adopted;
C. That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and
described in said Resolution of Intention, and also the boundaries
and dimensions of the respective subdivisions of land within said
Assessment District, as the same existed at the time of the passage
of said Resolution of Intention, each of which subdivisions have
been given a separate number upon said diagram, as contained in said
"Report", be, and it is hereby preliminarily approved and adopted;
D. That the proposed assessment upon the several subdivisions of land
in said Assessment District, in proportion to the estimated benefits
to be received by such subdivisions, respectively, from said acquisi-
tion and improvements, and of the incidental expenses thereof, as
contained in said 'Report", be, and they are hereby preliminarily
approved and adopted;
/I-3Z
E. That the maps and descriptions of the lands and easements to be
acquired, as contained in said "Report" be, and the same are hereby
preliminarily approved.
SECTION 3. That said "Report" shall stand as the Engineer's "Report" for the
purpose of all subsequent proceedings had pursuant to said Resolution of
Intent£on.
SECTION 4. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT ON TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MAY, 1991, AT
THE HOUR OF 6~00 O'CLOCK P.M., IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THIS
LEGISLATIVE BODY, BEING THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, ANY AND ALL
PERSONS HAVING ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED WORK, OR ASSESSMENT, OR
EXTENT OF THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, OR TO THE PROPOSED GRADES, MAY APPEAR
AND SHOW CAUSE WHY SAID WORK SHOULD NOT BE DONE OR CARRIED OUT IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESOLUTION OF INTENTION AND THE "REPORT" OF THE
ENGINEER. PROTESTS MUST BE IN WRITING AND MUST BE DELIVERED TO THE CITY
CLERK AT OR BEFORE THE TIME SET FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to give notice of said Public
Hearing by causing to be conspicuously posted on all open streets within
the Assessment District, not more than 300 feet apart on each street so
posted, but not less than 3 in all, notice of the passage of the Resolu-
tion of Intention and of this Resolution, all in accordance with the
provisions of said Division 12.
SECTION 6. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to give notice of said Public
Hearing and of the passage of the Resolution of Intention and this
Resolution by causing such notice to be published in accordance with
Section 6066 of the Government Code, in the newspaper previously desig-
nated as the newspaper for all publications as required by law and as
necessary for completion of this Assessment District.
SECTION 7. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to mail notice of said Public
Hearing and the adoption of the Resolution of Intention and of the
filing of the "Report" to all persons owning real property proposed to
be assessed, whose na~es and addresses appear on the last equalized
assessment roll for County taxes prior thereto, or as known to said City
Clerk, and to all other persons as prescribed in accordance with the
provisions of said Division 12.
SECTION 8. That the City Clerk is hereby further directed to file a copy of the
proposed boundary map in the Office of the County Recorder within
fifteen (15) days of the adoption of the proposed boundary map; said
boundary map to be in the manner and form as set forth in Division 4.5
of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1991.
MAYOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ATTEST: STAT~ OF CALIFORNIA
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
I, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CITY CLERK of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. , was duly
passed, approved and adopted by the City ~ouncil, approved and signed by the Mayor,
and attested by the City Clerk, all at the meeting of said City Council
held on the day of , 1991, and that the same was
passed and adopted by the following votes
AYESs COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOESs COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT= COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAINs COUNCIL MEMBERS
EXECUTED this __ day of , 1991, at Chula Vista, California.
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
[SEAL]
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Ztem
Meeting Date 6/20/89
ITEM TITLE: Resolution I~l~q Approving a petition requesting the
formation of an assessment district for Otay Lakes Road
Phase I improvements /
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~/
REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/Sths Vote: Yes No X )
On January 12, 1988, City Council approved consultant contracts, a
reimbursement agreement and an acquisition/financing agreement for the
formation of the Otay Lakes Road/Telegraph Canyon Road Phase I Assessment
District. In order to proceed with the assessment district, EastLake
Development Company has submitted a petition for Council approval.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COf~4ISSIONS RECO~ENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
In January 1988, the EastLake Development Company requested the City to
initiate proceedings under the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913" for the
financing of improvements to Otay Lakes Road/Telegraph Canyon Road from
Rutgers Avenue to the westerly EastLake Business Center boundary and
continuing through the EastLake Business Center on the northerly half of the
street.
In response to this request (Resolution No. 13406), the Council approved
different agreements with a team of consultants to proceed with the initial
study to form an assessment district on Otay Lakes Road between Rutgers Avenue
and the EastLake Business Center.
This proposed assessment district is an acquisition district similar to East
"H" Street Assessment District.
The area which is proposed to be assessed for the Otay Lakes Road Phase I
improvements is the EastLake Business Center. In other words, the public
improvements to be financed by this district are outside of the proposed
district. In accordance with the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, this is
permissible as long as there is a specific nexus between the improvements and
the land to be assessed.
Page 2, Item ·
Meeting Oate~
Cass Construction Inc. has been retained by EastLake to construct the public
improvements including the drainage channel along Otay Lakes Road. This
contractor has been selected through the process of competitive bidding by
EastLake.
The improvements include the street widening and appurtenant street work
including: water, drainage, and landscaping.
The total estimated cost of the street improvements is estimated at
$5,740,839, which includes a 15% contingency. The EastLake Development
Company is advancing all necessary funds to construct the facilities and will
be reimbursed from bond proceeds when the Assessment District is brought to
completion. Work has commenced on the project and it is expected to be
completed this summer.
FISCAL I~ACT: None to the City. All costs will be paid by the EastLake
Development Company and/or the Assessment District.
WPC 4367E
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 5
Meeting Date 1/12/88
ITEM TITLE: Resolution J~x~9~ Approving agreements with George T.
Simpson, Uilldan Associates, Brown and Divert, and Kadie-Jensen
and Jollnson for consulting services to prepare a feasibility
analysis and implementation program for financing certain
public improvements to Telegraph Canyon Road pursuant to the
provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913" or the
"Cd~munity Facilities Act of 1982"; and, approving a
Reimbursement Agreement between the City and the EastLake
Development Company
,/
of Public Works ~
SUBMITTED
BY:
Director
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~J~{~/ (4/§ths Vote: Yes__No X )
The EastLake Development Company has requested the City to initiate
proceedings under the State 1913/15 Acts or Community Facilities Act of 1982
to finance the construction of certain improvements to Telegraph Canyon Road
from Paseo Ladera to Wueste Road in the City of Chula Vista.
In addition, the EastLake Development Company has signed an agreement to
advance funds to allow the City to pay for all initial consulting, City
administration, and appraisal expenses relating to the formation of a public
financing district.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The EastLake Development Company desires to utilize public financing to the
extent permissible to finance the construction of the widening Of segments of
Telegraph Canyon Road to provide a facility capable of providing the level of
service required to accommodate development in these areas. The construction
of the improvement will be phased over a period of time related to the amount
of development which occurs.
The final roadway will consist of a 6-lane prime arterial from Paseo Ladera
easterly to Hunte Parkway and a minimum 4-lane prime arterial easterly to
Wueste Road.
The EastLake Development Company has requested the City to retain consultants
to investigate the feasibility and to pursue the implementation of proceedings
for the use of public financing for the project. EastLake has requested that
the City analyze the applicability of both the 1913/15 Acts and Community
Facilities Act of 1982 under the I,lello-Roos legislation for financing the
improvements. The consultants will make a recommendation and the City will
make the final decision on ~hich financing mechanism will be used.
Page 2, Item 5
Meeting Oate-~[-/l~gTB1)
The City and the £astLake Development Company propose to enter into a
Reimbursement Agreement whereby the developer agrees to advance $104,000 to
pay all costs relating to the formation of the financing district. EastLake
will be reimbursed funds advanced from bond proceeds upon the successful
formation of a financing district.
Because of their familiarity with the area and demonstrated expertise in
financing public facilities, the EastLake Development Company has requested,
and City staff recommends, the following team of consultants be retained to
implement the project: George T. Simpson, Project Manager, Brown and Diven,
Bond Counsel, Kadie-Jensen and Johnson, Financial Consultant, and Willdan
Associates, Assessment Engineer.
FISCAL IMPACT: None to the City. The EastLake Development Company will
deposit $104,000 to fund initial consultant and City costs including an
appraisal of the property to be assessed.
WPC 3470E
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM OF
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 88-1
CiTY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OTAY LAKES ROAD PHASE I AND
TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL SEGMENT I
® ® ®
LEGEND
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM OF
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 88-1
CITY OF' CHULA VISTA, COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OTAY LAKES ROAD PHASE lAND
TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL SEGMENT I
°
PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPOR ~r~,/~-~ ~'~
CRY OF
CHULA VISTA
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
NO. 88-1
(ACQUISITION)
OTAY LAKES ROAD PHASE
AND ' .
TELEGRAPH CANYON DRAINAGE CHANNEL SEGMENT 1
~/WILLDAN ASSOCIATE~
AC~JUIS~TION/FINANCING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT 18 made and entered into thl~ day of ,
1991, by end between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a public agency of the State of
California (hereinafter referred to ss 'City"}, and SASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT CO., (here-
inafter referred to ae 'Property Owner'}.
WHEREAS, the City i8 considering the formation of a special 'eeoessment district
under the terms and conditions of the 'Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the
construction of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and appurte-
nant work within the Jurisdictional 1Emits of said City, said special assessment
district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT HO. 88-1 (STAY LAKES ROAD,
PHASE I} (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and,
WHEREAS, Section 66462 of the Government Code of the State of California ('Subdivi-
sion Map Act") expressly authorizes financing and completion of public improvement8
under an appropriate special assessment act, and Section 10102 of the Streets and
Highways Code ('Municipal Improvement Act of 1913') expressly authorizes the acquisi-
tion of any improvements authorized to be constructed under said law; and,
WHEREAS, Property Owner, in order to proceed in a timely way with its development,
desires to construct and has constructed certain public works of improvement that
are proposed to be included with the works of improvement for the Assessment
District, namely, the improvements as set forth and described in the attached,
referenced and incorporated Exhibit "A"; and,
WHEREAS, the City and Property Owner are in agreement that the determined eligible
works of improvement may be included within the Assessment District financing at
prices determined by said City to be reasonable; and,
WHEREAS, it is the intent of thee Agreement to provide that Property Owner shall,
u~on a successful confirmation of assessment and sale of bonds for the Assessment
District, bm paid for the works of improvement which are integral end s part of the
Assessment District, as the prices ae determined by the city; and,
WHEREAS, the properties within the boundaries of the Aseoeoment District will be
assessed only for those ~ortione of the work8 of improvement that benefit the proper-
ties within the boundaries of the Assessment District, and this Acquisition/
Financing Agreement and payment for the works of improvement will apply to end only
cover those portions of said works of improvement; and,
WHEREAS, in ~erforming under this Agreement, it Is mutually understood that Property
Owner is acting e8 an independent contractor and not an agent of the City, and City
shall have no responsibility for payment to any contractor, subcontractor or
supplier of the Property Owner; and,
WHEREAS, Property owner shall be the owner of and retain title to all of the works
of improvement constructed pursuant ho this Agreement until such time as the City,
acting pursuant to the provision8 of the #Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", shall
acquire such works of improvement. Upo~ such transfer, such improvements shall
become the property of the public agency and/or regulated utility authorized to
provide the service to the Assessment District; and,
WHEREAS, the City has no objection to purchasing the improvements from said Property
Owner, end Property Owner ks desirous that the City purchase said improvements, and
at this time said improvements are owned by Property Owner; and,
WHEREAS, Property Owner hereby further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the
City of any challenge involving the validity or enforceability of this Agreement and
Property Owner further agrees to defend or provide the monies in advances for any
defense as it relates to a challenge to this Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, City may, et its option, terminate this Agreement at any tame if any legal
challenge is filed relating to the validity or enforceability of this Agreement for
these assessment district proceedings.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED between the respective parties as follows:
SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.
SECTXON 2. The City has no financial obligation to construct the improvements, and
all expense for said improvements, including all incidentals thereto,
shall be borne by owners of property within the Assessment District.
SECTION 3. That said City does intend to proceed with the adoption of a Resolution
of Intention end t~e formation of a special Assessment District for the
improvements above described; however, the City reserves the right to
determine those facilities which are eligible for final funding.
SECTION 4. That the City agrees to acquire and finance through the use of special
assessment proceedings, and Property Owner agrees to convey all
completed improvements to the City, those improvements being all as set
forth in the previously referenced Exhibit "A". Property Owner agrees
to post with the City the required bonds to guarantee the performance
of the work and payment of all labor and materials, said bonds to be in
the amounts as determined by the City.
Property Owner shell be responsible for the maintenance and shall
maintain said improvements in a satisfactory condition prior to any
fins1 transfer and acceptance.
SECTION 5. No acquisition monies shall be paid until the described improvements
to be acquired have been transferred free and clear of all liens,
claims and encumbrances, and Property Owner does hereby indemnify the
City against any liens, claims or encumbrances relating to said
ecquired improvements.
SECTION 6. The final facilities and actual prices to be paid for said improvements
are those that the City believes to be integral end reasonable and to
confer special benefit on properties within the Assessment District.
The estimated prices for the improvements are set forth in the
attached, referenced and incorporated Exhibit "B". Final prices shall
be based upon unit prices and q~antities as de~ermined by the City to
be reasonable, and no other co,ts and expenses shall be allowed unless
expressly authorized by the legislative body of the City. The Property
Owner shall provide &ll substantiating documentation and certifications
the quantities of work constructed or the prices to be paid for such
improvements.
SECTION 7. The estimated quantities est forth in the previously referenced Exhibit
"B# shall be revised to reflect the actual quantities of works of
improvement actually constructed at prices as determined by the City.
Any fine1 determination shall be made by the City es to the prices and
quantities to be paid.
SECTION 8. The costs of acquisition shall also include the necessary engineering
and related incidental expenses, including, but not limited to, the
preparation of plans, specifications, bidding and all related documenta-
tion. Said final costs and expenses are to be determined upon the
completion of the works of improvement and certified by the City.
SECTION 9. The cost for said works of improvement 8hall be spread in accordance
with the benefits received, ss determined by the Assessment Engineer
for the Assessment District.
SECTION 10. All plans and specifications shall be submitted by the Property Owner,
and all improvements shall be bid end constructed in full compliance
with all applicable local rules and laws. Property Owner agrees to
keep records and to allow the City to review said records for all bids
and contracts let for any of the improvements. City shall have the
right to inspect ell works of improvement es if said works of improve-
ment were being constructed aea public works contract let by the City.
SECTION 11. Upon execution of this Agreement and Completion of the improvements,
the City shall have the right to use said improvements as determined
necessary and integral for the works of improvement within the Assess-
ment District.
SECTION 12. The acquisition monies, upon the sale of bonds, shall be distributed
pursuant to written instructions executed by all persons having an
interest in the property, es disclosed by a current title report.
"Interested parties" shall consist of property owners as shown on the
last equalized assessment roll for property taxes, as well as any
beneficiaries under any.existing deeds of trust. No cash distribution
shall be made until all parties have executed the appropriate written
instructions.
SECTION 13. Acquisition monies may be withheld until ell improvements required to
be installed by the Property Owner have been completed, and a reason-
able amount of monies due under this Agreement may be subsequently with-
held to cover final possible, corrections and/or adjustments in the
work, said work to be accomplished subsequent to the confirmation of
the assessment and sale of bonds.
SECTION'~14. This Agreement ia contingent upon the confirmation of assessments and
Successful sale of bonds, and it shall be null and'void if said bonds
&re not Bold within a three (3) year period following the date of this
Agreement, or any mutually agreed extension~ however, this time can be
extended by request of the Property Owner and concurrence of the
legislative body.
SECTION 15. Property Owner hereby agrees to provide written notice to &ny potential
purchasers of lots in a form satisfactory to city so advising the
potential owner of the fact of the proposed or confirmed Assessment
District, with said document being executed by the ~otential owner.
Such notice shall be provided to the potential owner a reasonable time
before the potential owner becomes contractually committed to purchase
the lot ac that the potential owner may knowingly consider the impact
of the assessment in the decision to purchase the lot. A copy of all
such notices executed by actual purchasers shall be sent to the City.
SECTION 16. Property Owner agrees to and shall assume the defense of, indemnify and
hold harmless the City, its officers and agents, from any action,
damages, claims or losses of any type resulting from this Agreement,
including without limitation the design, engineering, construction
bidding, award of the contract contract and construction of the improve-
ments. No provision as contained herein shall in any way limit the
extent of the responsibility of said Property Owner for payment of
damages resulting from the construction of the improvements and/or any
contractual relationships between Property Owner and contractor and/or
subcontractors.
SECTION 17. This Agreement is binding upon heirs, assigns, end successors-in-
interest.
SECTION 18. This Agreement, by its execution, amends and supercedes any terms and
conditions that may be inconsistent in any previous agreement, includ-
ing any subdivision improvement agreement, relating to the construc-
tion, installation or financing of said improvements.
SECTION 19. The prevailing party in any litigation relating to, interpreting or
enforcing this Agreement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's
fees aa determ£ned by the Court.
SECTION 20. This Agreement and the construction of the improvements shall be
eubjec~ to all local laws and ordinances relating to the requirement of
improvement agreements, land division, improvement security or other
applicable develol~e~t requirements.
SECTION 21. Property Owner agrees to pay' origination charges pursuant to Council
policy.
EXECUTED by and between the parties hereto on the day and year first hereinabove
written.
'CITY'
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
MAYOR
CITY OF CMULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CAIFORNIA
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
State of California
County of San Diego
On ~ before me, D.nl ~. ~_ -q.~l~-h , personally appeared
Graham ,Jones ., 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 on the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ~"~. ~ (Seal)
Denise M. Smith
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.
-4. Full improvement of Otay Lakes Road to the ultimate 6 lane facility west of Rutgers
Avenue east approximately 4,400 feet to the western boundary of the EastLake
Business Center.
1. Acquiring additional right-of-way, removal of existing pavement, grading to the
ultimate right-of-way width of 134 feet, the installation of two 44 foot wide
pavement sections, a 24 foot wide raised, landscaped and irrigated median,
curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights.
2. Installing local drainage facilities consisting of closed conduit storm drains and
drainage ditches necessary to drain the street and associated slopes and runoff
3. Realigning existing 16, 18, 20, and 24 inch water lines and valves in Otay
Lakes Road.
4. Implementing temporary construction detours consisting of paving, retaining
walls, guardrails, and drainpipes.
5. Installing, converting, or relocation of electric, gas, telephone, and cable TV
conduit systems.
Il. Half-width improvements of Otay Lakes Road to complete the ultimate six lane
facility from the western boundary of the EastLake Business Center, east to Lane
Avenue.
1. Grading to ultimate right-of-way width of 134 feet, the installation of one 44-
foot wide pavement section, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and streetlight.
2. Installing local drainage facilities consisting of closed conduit storm drains
necessary to drain the street and associated slopes and runoff areas.
3. Implementing temporary construction detours consisting of paving, retaining
walls, guardrails, and drainpipes.
4. Installing, converting, or relocation of electricity, gas, telephone, and cable TV
conduit systems as necessary.
The construction of a vegetated drainage channel with rip rap drop structures that
runs parallel to Otay Lakes Road from Rutgers Avenue east approximately 4,450 feet
to the western boundary of the EastLake Business Center.
1. Grading and construction of the channel, including inlet and outlet structures,
rip rap aprons, lined drainage ditches, two access ramps, and landscaped sides.
2. A reinforced double box culvert under Otay Lakes Road.
3. Acquisition of approximately 16 acres of drainage easement.
EXHIBIT B
ACQUISITION COSTS
A. Construction Costs
Telegraph Canyon Drainage Channel ' $ 230,735
Otay Lakes Road
(Rutgers to F-a~tlake Boundary) 4,940,250
Otay 1 ~kes Road
(North Portion near Business Center) 833.176
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION $ 6,004,161
Contingency at 2 % 120.083
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION: $ 6,124,244
B. Incidental Expenses
Project Management $ 20,000
Design Engineering, Survey & Staking 547,091
Construction Management 11,925
Landscape Design 62,083
Utility Engineering 14,101
Plan Check & Inspection Fees 206,979
Legal Fees (right-of-way) 41,852
Special Studies Engineering 43,184
Soils Engineering 116,440
lviis~llan~ous I~
Sublolal Incidentals $ 1,078,277
TOTAL COST $7,202,521
PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 88-1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OTAY LAKES ROAD PHASE lAND
TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL SEGMENT I
LEGEND
PARCEL BOUNDARY
TO: CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
~ENDNENT TO P~TITIO~ FOR SPEC'rAL ~'.SSE$SN~NT PROCEEDINGS
~%.~SRSSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1 (OTAY LAKES ROAD)
1. We, the undersigned, are the property owners of land shown on the map attached
as Exhibit "A" and made a part of this document, which map shows additional
property now benefiting from new improvements and to be included within the
Assessment District.
2. We petition you to undertake special assessment proceedings for the following
described new public improvements as set forth in Exhibit #B" attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
We understand=
A. THAT the cost of the improvements will be charged to the land which bene-
fits from the improvements, including our lsnd~
B. THAT the boundaries of the Azzessment District will be modified and amended
to include benefiting properties from new and additional works of
improvement~
C. THAT each property owner may pay his assessment either in cash without
interest or in installments with interest over a period of yesrs~
D. THAT the estimated cost of the new and additional improvements is
$1,441,089.
E. THAT property with an assessment lien is subject to foreclosure in cases of
delinquency and non-payment.
4. We consent to the fo~mstion of the Assessment District and waive any rights to
protest against the formation of said Azsessment Diztrict.
5. We further waive the thirty (30) day Period as authorized for the payment of
ell Or any portion of the assessments, and waive the notice by publication and
mailing of recordation of the assessment as authorized by Section 10404 of the
Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THEY ARE
THE OWNERS OF RECORD OF THE PROPERTY AS SET FORTH HEREIN.
NAME OF PROPERTY
DATE OF OWNER AND STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION OR
SIGNING ADDRESS COUNTY TAX PARCEL NO. SIGNATURE
_. EastLake Development Co. 595-070-2q j.~r-~'--'~ I~/.~
a California General Partnership
900 Lane Avenue # 100
Chula Vista, CA 9191a,
It is hereby further stated that the property within the boundaries of the Assess-
ment District at this time is subject to existing mortgages or deeds of trust.
THE UNDERSIGNED hereby state, as mortgagees or beneficiaries under any existing
deeds of trust, that they acknowledge and join in signature in the Petition for the
above-referenced Assessment District. For further particulars ss to any mortgagees
or beneficiaries under any deeds of trust, reference is made to the title report, a
copy of which is attached hereto.
DATE OF SIGNING NAME OF LENDER SIGNATURE
Security. Pacific National Bank
California RE Industries H0-55c:~-~//'~/..., ~/' ,/~ ~.'
Pacific Plaza
333 South Hope Street
Los Angeles, CA 90071 ~,
LED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK THIS -- DAY OF. , 1991.
id Amended Petition represents % of the assessable area, as shown on the
~&¢hed map.
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
..... it- S7
PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 88-
CiTY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OTAY LAKES ROAD PHASE lAND
TELEGRAPH C~NYON CHANNEL SEGMENT
....
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 88-1
(OTAY LAKES ROAD)
Full improvement of Omy lakes Read to thc ultimate 6 lane facilhy west of Rutgers
Avcnuc east approximately 4,400 fe~t to the western boundary of the EasLLake
Business Center.
1. Acquiring additional rigSt-of-way, removal ofexistlng pavement, grading to the
ultimate right-of-way width of 134 feet, the installation of two 44 foot wide
pavement sections, a 24 foot wide raised, landscaped and irrigated median, curb,
gutter, sidewalk and street lights.
2. Installing local drainage facilities consisting of closed conduit storm drains and
drainage ditches n¢cessa.ry to drain the street and associated slopes and runoff
a. re~.So
3. Realigning existing 16, 18, 20 and 24 inch water lines and valves in Otay Lakes
Road.
4. Implementing tempora.,'y construction detours consisting of paving, retaining walls
guardrails and drainpipes.
5. Installing, converting or relocation of electric, gas, telephone, and cable TV
conduk systems.
The construction of a trapezoidal drainage channel that runs parallel to Otay Lakes
Road from Rutgers Avenue east approximately 4.400 feet to the western boundary
of the EasLLake Business Center (between stations 48~-60 and 97,-85 as per City of
Chula Vista Drawing Numbers 88-175 to 88-189.
l. Grading and construction of the trapezoidal channel, including inlet and
outlet structures, rip rap aprons, lined drainage ditches, two access ramps,
and landscaped sides.
2. A reinforced double box culvert under Otay Lakes Road.
3. Acquisition of approximately 16 acres of drainage easement.
II-
EXHIBIT "B"
THIS PAGE BLANK
Agenda Item ~'~
Meeting Date 4/9/92
DATE: April 3, 1991
File: DS-027
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: John Goss, City Manager~ ~
VIA: John Lippitt, Director of Public Works Y~~
FROM: Bill Gustafson, Transit Coordinator ~-~
SUBJECT: Meeting with Chula Vista Transit (CVT) Drivers and Teamsters Union
Representative
On Tuesday, April 2, 1991, City staff met with CVT drivers and their Teamsters
Union representative, Tom Bernard. Although the drivers are employees of ATC
Management Corp., under contract with SCOOT for CVT operations and
maintenance, the drivers requested a meeting with City staff as an opportunity
to present some concerns related to their working conditions. Attending the
meeting were: myself; Greg Alabado, Assistant Transit Coordinator; Deputy
City Manager Sid Morris; Tom Bernard, Teamsters Union; and seven drivers.
This memo will summarize the concerns expressed by the drivers and staff's
response to those concerns:
1. Waqes and Benefits
The drivers and Mr. Bernard indicated that the current wages and benefits
under the Union contract with ATC should be increased. Staff responded
to the issue of wages and benefits that the Union contract with ATC runs
through June 1993, and that wages and benefits were negotiable items
between ATC and the Union. For Council's information, as of May 1990,
the starting wage for ATC drivers (when training is completed) was $5.25
per hour and the top wage was $6.10. The average top hourly wage for the
three small fixed route operators in San Diego County, which includes
Chula Vista Transit, National City Transit, and County Transit Suburban,
is $6.49. As of May 1991, the starting salary for ATC drivers will be
$5.50 and the top hourly wage will be $6.75. ATC driver benefits
include: five paid vacation days after one year full-time service; ten
paid vacation days after two years full-time service; $15,000 term life
insurance for full-time employees; health plan (Kaiser) for full-time
employees.
Mr. Bernard indicated that the wages resulted in high driver turnover at
CVT. Although wages and benefits are factors that affect turnover, many
other factors (job satisfaction, availability of other jobs, etc.) also
influence the turnover rate. Current CVT operations require 32 full-time
equivalent drivers, and during the past year, the turnover rate has
averaged about four drivers per month; this means that most drivers
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 2
April 3, 1991
remain with the system less than a year. When staff discussed this
turnover matter with ATC months ago in conjunction with negotiations for
the two-year extension to the contract, we looked at ways to provide
additional financial incentives to drivers in order to reduce the
turnover. Included in the second amendment to the ATC contract, which is
on Council's agenda for the April g, 1991 meeting, is a financial
incentive program which would result in a maximum additional amount of
approximately $1,000 per driver per year, or about 48¢ per hour. This
incentive program was mentioned to the drivers at the meeting; ATC had
not told the Union nor the drivers of this proposal, but was awaiting
approval of the two-year contract extension by Council and SCOOT Board.
In summary, on the issue of wages and benefits, staff indicated to the
drivers and Mr. Bernard that this matter was a bargaining issue between
ATC and the Union; however, a financial incentive program was being added
to the proposed two-year contract extension between SCOOT and ATC.
2. CVT Route Schedules
Drivers expressed concern that many CVT route schedules did not allow
sufficient time for a break or lunch. As a brief background for Council,
most transit systems do not build a specific break time into the
schedule, nor do they build a lunch break into the schedule. Drivers
normally use recovery time as time to take a break (recovery or layover
time is the time at the end of each trip before the bus begins service
again). Although on some trips the recovery time may be completely gone
by the time the bus reaches the end of the run {because of heavy loading
on that trip or heavy traffic or some other abnormal delay) generally,
the bus should arrive at the end of the trip on schedule and with
recovery time available for drivers to take a break. Over the past
years, due to increased ridership and increased traffic in Chula Vista,
staff has adjusted all CVT schedules many times; however, in some
schedules trip running time and layover time is "tight" resulting in
little or no recovery time on some trips. To address this situation,
staff has looked at each route in conjunction with the CVT service
expansion effective in July, and has redone each schedule with the
following objectives in mind: to make the running time of each schedule
(that is, the time between start and finish of each trip) realistic for
normal operating conditions; and to build a minimum of five minutes
recovery time at the end of each trip. For Council's information, San
Diego Transit builds 7 minutes recovery time into its routes and the
majority of SDT routes have considerably longer trip lengths than CVT
routes. Each new CVT schedule has been checked by operating a bus on the
route, and adjustments have been made in conjunction with ATC staff.
In order to increase communication with drivers on scheduling, and to
discuss any specific problems they may have, staff suggested two future
meetings with driver representatives after the new schedules go into
effect on July 1: the first meeting would be held in late July or early
part of August; and a second meeting would be held in late September or
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 3
April 3, lggl
early October after the start of the fall school semester. In addition
to these meetings, Transit staff has required in the contract extension
with ATC a new Operations Supervisor position, whose primary
responsibility would be to monitor bus operations with the objective of
providing both City and ATC staffs information on service conditions so
that any problems can be addressed in a timely manner.
3. Maintenance and Safety Issues
Drivers mentioned two specific instances regarding maintenance concerns
(one concerned a leaking Flxette bus used on Route 708 to the Nature
Center, and the other incident involved a brake failure on an Orion
bus). Drivers also expressed concern that items needing maintenance
attention sometimes were not responded to in a timely manner by
maintenance personnel. According to ATC, mechanics review driver
reported defects and generally prioritize them regarding items that
relate to safety and those that do not require immediate attention. Some
defects reported may be taken care of at the next scheduled preventive
maintenance inspection (PMI) for that particular bus. Since ATC Manager
Jim Cook and I believe that one aspect of the drivers concern may be a
lack of communication between the maintenance staff and drivers, Jim has
indicated that he is going to set up a new procedure whereby any defects
noted by a driver will be reviewed with that driver by maintenance staff;
this increased communication between drivers and mechanics should create
a better understanding of maintenance response to a reported item.
In a more general sense, I would like to summarize for Council the steps
that are taken to ensure proper maintenance on the CVT fleet and to
ensure a safe vehicle for both the drivers and the public:
The SCOOT/ATC contract contains the following maintenance
requirements.
.. Preventive maintenance on all SCOOT buses will be performed in
conformance wi th the PMI schedule issued by the bus
manufacturer.
.. All preventive maintenance work or repairs performed on buses
is documented and submitted to the Transit office within 72
hours after completion of work.
.. The Transit office monitors maintenance and repairs on the
fleet in the following ways: the PMI schedule for each bus is
on Transit Division computer to ensure completion by ATC on
schedule; engine oil and transmission oil analysis is monitored
by City staff; and all repair work on each bus is compiled and
tracked for each bus.
.. ATC is required to submit a quarterly maintenance report to
staff which includes a summary of all maintenance work
performed including preventive maintenance, body and paint
work, major repair work, the cost of maintenance parts, fuel,
labor, a status of each vehicle's condition and highlights of
problems and suggested solutions.
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 4
April 3, 1991
The City Equipment Maintenance Superintendent monitors maintenance
work done on SCOOT buses.
The California Highway Patrol performs an annual inspection of the
fleet {a copy of the last inspection conducted in May lggo is
attached for Council's information).
The SCOOT/ATC contract contains a liquidated damages section for
various failures to comply with specific contractual requirements.
Various maintenance requirements are included in this liquidated
damages section.
4. Communication Between Drivers and City Staff
Drivers asked if they could communicate any problems directly to CVT
staff. We responded that while we do not discourage any direct
communication with City staff, the drivers are employees of ATC, they are
members of a Union and we suggested that any problems should first be
discussed with ATC staff, then with the Union, and if there were still
concerns, to communicate them to City staff in writing. I also stated to
the drivers and to the Union that we like to think of all parties
involved in CVT service as part of a team, and to the extent that we
could all work together as a team through positive communication with
each other, then that attitude should benefit everyone.
There is a report on the April g, 1991 Council agenda which recommends that
SCOOT Board exercise its option under the present ATC/SCOOT agreement to
extend the agreement for two more years until June 1993. It is staff's
opinion that ATC's performance under the contract since July 1988 has been
satisfactory and that the changes proposed in the two-year contract extension
should result in even better service.
WPC 1434T
cc: Sid Morris, Deputy City Manager
D{~parlmen~ of California Highway Patrol
PULL NOTICE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
CliP 339 (Rev 7-89/ OPI 062
Transit operator name
· Zip code County ·
This is to certify that the above named transit operator was inspected on this date and found to be in compliance with California
t,~hicle Code Section 1808. I, regarding participation in the Department of Motor Vehicles' Pull Notice Program.
Issued by I.D. number Date
CHP 343 (Rev 4-89) 0P[062 ' '
FLEET AND EMERGENCY RESOURCE INFORMATION
TRUCKS AND TYPES TRAILERS AND TYPES BUSES BY TYPE REG. C.T. HW VEH. HW CONT. DRIVERS
/ INSPECTION RATINGS:
MAINTENANCE PROGRAM DRIVER RECORDS REGULATED EQUIPMENT HAZARDO~ MATERIALS TERMINAL
REQM'TS. VIOL. REMARKS
CONNECTING
DEV[CES
EQUi~ENT
CONTAINERS/ ~
I ~ereby ~ify that all violations de~ribed he,on and ~rded on attached vehicle inspection
will ~ corrected
An un~tisfactory rated carrier who believes the rating
by a Motor Carrier Eafety Unit Supe~isor.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEHENT
ITEN TITLE: Report on Second Amendment to Agreement between SCOOT and
American Transit Management Corp. (ATC) for operation and
maintenance of Chula Vista Transit (CVT) for the period July
l, 1988 through June 30, ]99]
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No x )
The current agreement between SCOOT and ATC for Chula Vista Transit operation
and maintenance terminates on June 30, 1991. The agreement contains an option
for SCOOT to extend the agreement for a two-year term until June 30, 1993.
Staff has negotiated a two-year extension to this agreement with ATC at a rate
per mile of $1.79 in FY ]991-92 and $1.91 in FY 1992-93. The relevant
components in the rate per mile were reviewed by the Risk Manager and
Equipment Maintenance Superintendent. These rates are based on the expanded
CVT service next fiscal year approved by Council at its meeting on March ]9,
199].
RECONMENDATION: That Council recommend to SCOOT Board that the Board
approve this Second Amendment between SCOOT and ATC. (The First Amendment to
this agreement, approved by SCOOT Board in May 1988, deleted diesel fuel costs
from the rate per mile paid ATC; SCOOT buys diesel fuel directly from the City
of Chula Vista and enjoys certain tax advantages because of its public
operator status.)
BOAROS/COt~ISSIONS RECOI~ENOATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
This Second Amendment extends the agreement between SCOOT and ATC for two
additional years, from July 1, 1991 through June 30, 1993. The rate per mile
for FY 1991-g2 negotiated with ATC is $1.79, a ten percent increase over the
current rate per mile of $1.62; and the rate per mile for FY 1992-93 is $1.gl,
a six percent increase over the $1.79 rate. Based on an estimated l.l million
revenue miles in both fiscal years, the estimated contract cost is $1,969,000
for FY 1991~92 and $2,101,000 for FY 1992-93. The contract cost for these two
fiscal years is based on a 63 percent increase in revenue miles operated
beginning on July 1, 1991.
In addition to the substantial CVT mileage increase proposed to begin next
fiscal year, the Second Amendment includes the following major changes from
the current SCOOT/ATC agreement:
Transit staff discussed with ATC various options to. increase the benefit
package for drivers. ATC will implement a financial Incentive program
next fiscal year based on performance, longevity, and will reimburse
drivers for California Driver's License expenses. The maximum benefit
per employee under this program will be approximately $1,000 annually.
Page 2, item
Meeting Date
In addition to more drivers, ATC will add five new positions to its
administrative and maintenance staffs, including two operations
positions, two mechanics and one servicer/bus washer. These additional
positions are necessary for two reasons: to oversee the greatly
increased CVT operations next year; and to perform adequate maintenance
on the CVT fleet, which will increase by seven buses in May 1991,
bringing the total fleet size to 29.
- Casualty and liability costs have increased approximately 90 percent next
fiscal year due to the 63 percent increase in service miles, the addition
of seven Orion buses to the fleet, and insurance industry cost increases.
Over the next two fiscal years, 9 of the original 13 Orion buses
purchased by SCOOT will have engine/transmission rebuilds (4 of the
original 13 Orion buses have had engine/transmission rebuilds during the
first three years of the ATC contract).
FISCAL IMPACT: All SCOOT operating and capital costs, including the ATC
agreement are funded with City of Chula Vista Transportation Development Act
(TDA) Article 4.0 funds). Sufficient TDA funds will be available for the next
two fiscal years to fund this agreement as well as additional SCOOT operating
and capital costs.
WPC 1398T
File: 05-027
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item i3
Meeting Date 4/9/91
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Matters Related to Adoption of the City's Growth
Management Program
a) Ordinance ~ t/~/~ Amending Title 19 of the Chula Vista
Zoning Code by Adding Chapter 19.09 for the Purpose of
Managing the City's Growth
b) Resolution l {~ ! O [ Adopting the Growth Management
Program
c) Ordinance ~"~/7 Adding Chapter 2.40 to the Chula
Vista Municipal Code Relating to Creation of the Growth
Management Oversight Commission
SUBMITTED mY: Director of Planning
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~ (4/$ths Vote: Yes_No X )
The Growth Management Element as adopted by the Council on April 17, 1990 is Part I of an
overall Growth Management Program designed to implement a comprehensive public facilities
phasing and financing system that is tied to the Threshold Standards and Facility Master Plans
including the Transportation Phasing Plan recently completed by the Engineering Department.
Part II of this overall program is the Growth Management Program and Implementation
Ordinance which is the subject of this public heating. During the time since the Planning
Commission hearing, the City Attorney and our outside counsel have changed the section
numbers and made modifications to the organization and format of the Implementation
Ordinance.
The Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-91-20, of potential
environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the project. Based on the attached
Initial Study and comments thereon, the Coordinator has concluded that there would be no
significant environmental impacts, and recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration issued
on IS-91-20.
13-1
Page 2, Item I ~
Meeting Date-4blqg~
Also attached to this report is an ordinance creating the Growth Management Oversight
Commission. This ordinance has been prepared by the City Attorney because the City Charter
calls for the creation of permanent advisory bodies such as the GMOC by ordinance. The
GMOC has been operating under Council resolution since 1987.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the
Negative Declaration issued on IS-91-20.
2. Adopt the proposed Growth Management Program and Implementation Ordinance
(Attachment 2).
3. Adopt the attached ordinance (Attachment 5) prepared by the City Attorney to establish
the Growth Management Oversight Commission pursuant to the City Charter.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On January 31, 1991, the Growth Management Oversight Committee reviewed the Growth
Management Program and Implementation Ordinance and concurred with the staff
recommendations. On February 11, 1991, the Resource Conservation Commission voted
unanimously to support the Growth Management Program and Implementation Ordinance with
the following exceptions:
1. That the threshold standards for Water, School, Air Quality and Economics should be
made more measurable.
2. That the City should send letters to the appropriate legislators to allow the City to
establish a specific measurable School threshold standard.
3. That specific standards be established for Civic Facilities and Coq0oration Yard within
the next six months.
The above RCC recommendations will be referred to the Growth Management Oversight
Committee for review and recommendation.
On February 13, 1991, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to support the staff
recommendation with one amendment to include life cycle cost analysis of public facilities.
DISCUSSION:
The Growth Management Element defines the growth management issues, goals, objectives and
policies. It also sets forth action programs to manage, oversee, and monitor the Growth
Management Program.
Page 3, Item I'~
Meeting Date 4/9/91
The action programs detailed in the Element focus on the following areas:
1. Continuation of Regional Growth Management efforts with SANDAG and adjacent cities
to respond to planning issues that transcend city boundaries.
2. Implement Phase II of the Growth Management Program to more fully respond to public
facility phasing and financing from a comprehensive planning perspective rather than on
a project-by-project review.
3. Develop ways to monitor the policies of the Growth Management Element that address
affordable housing, open space resources, regional growth management, and phasing of
development.
4. Prepare a Resource Protection Policy that will protect sensitive lands as defined by the
Chula Vista General Plan.
5. Prepare a plan to ensure the adequate provision of water facilities within the Chula Vista
Planning Area for both terminal storage and regional supply.
The City has focused on preparing a comprehensive program to implement Part II of the overall
program called for by the adopted Growth Management Element. During this program, we have
attempted to pull together all of the public facility master plans together with the City's
Threshold Standards and development phasing and finance policies to establish a coordinated
system that sets forth the City's growth management program. The program is generally
organized as follows:
1. Facility Thresholds - Existing threshold policies for 11 facilities and subject areas are
included, and facility standards for the Civic Center and City Corporation Yard are
proposed to be added.
2. F cilit Mas r Plan - Existing or proposed master plans are identified for each facility
category. These master plans are intended to identify facility needs, locations, and costs
at full build-out of the planning area, and to identify how such facilities should be phased
as development occurs.
3. Proiect Processing Requirements - For each facility category, a set of "project processing
requirements" is proposed. These requirements are set forth for each level of the
development review process, including General Development Plan, Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plan, Tentative Map, Final Map, and Building permits.
Page 4, Item [~
Meeting Date ~
In addition, the Program contains proposed specifications and requirements for Public
Facilities Finance Plans, which are required in conjunction with SPA Plan review. The
Public Facilities Finance Plan, as proposed, will become the primary tool for assuring
that project phasing is consistent with Facility Master Plans, and that facility threshold
standards are met.
4. Development Phasing Policies - The Growth Management Program sets forth proposed
development phasing policies, which are intended to ensure that the location and timing
of future development is directed to meet the City's public facilities needs, and monitored
to ensure compliance with threshold standards. These policies would include adoption
of a 5- to 7-year "development phasing forecast," which would be periodically updated
and monitored. In addition, an interim phasing policy is proposed, which would restrict
the approval of additional tentative maps, with limited exceptions, until a financing plan
for interim improvements along the SR-125 corridor is adopted. The limited exceptions
would include new projects that comply with the Growth Management Implementation
Ordinance and that can demonstrate no net increase in traffic generation by exchanging
development entitlements within the same ownership.
5. Compliance Monitorin~ and Implementation - The role of the Growth Management
Oversight Committee is proposed to be expanded to include review and approval of the
proposed "development phasing forecast." In addition, various other implementation
issues are addressed in the report.
In addition to the attached Growth Management Program, staff is proposing the adoption of a
Growth Management Implementation Ordinance to carry out the requirements of the Growth
Management Program that pertain to private development. The ordinance has been further
refined by the City Attorney with respect to the format and organization since the Planning
Commission public hearing. The attached ordinance also contains new section numbers, but is
substantively unchanged from the earlier draft ordinance reviewed by the public, RCC, GMOC
and the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission received two new letters from Kent Aden, representing the EastLake
Development Company, and Klm Kilkenny, representing The Baldwin Company, at its public
hearing. The letters and staff's response are attached to this report (Attachment 6). A new
letter from Brace Sloan of EastLake Development Company dated March 21, 1991, is also
contained in Attachment 6. Staffis in agreement with the letter and a statement has been added
to the last sentence of the Development Phasing Policies discussion above (#4) to clarify the
intent of the interim phasing policy.
Certain technical improvements to Section 3.3.5 (Police), Section 3.4.3 (Fire), and 3.6.1, 3.6.4,
and 3.6.5 (Libraries) have been added to the Growth Management Program document since the
Planning Commission public hearing at the request of City departments.
Meeting Date 4/9/91
The Growth Management Program and Implementing Ordinance has been distributed to
developers, environmental groups, as well as public agencies, the Resource Conservation
Commission and the Growth Management Oversight Committee. All of the comments and
recommendations received to date are attached to this report. A separate distribution of the
modified Implementation Ordinance was made on April 3, 1991.
FISCAL IMPACT: Unknown. This action, however, will create the need for the developer
to provide more information and greater detail on infrastructure and phasing issues. This could
have some negative short-term financial impact over the long term, though the growth
management program will result in greater predictability and financial stability for project
applicants.
In addition, the limitation on tentative maps processing until an SR 125 financing study is
completed could have some impact on proposed subdivisions. The study is expected to be
completed before most major new projects would be in a position to bring forward any maps
based on where those projects are in the planning process.
(GMPGM.A113)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING TITLE 19
OF THE CHULAVISTA ZONING CODE BY ADDING
CHAPTER 19.09 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MANAGING THE
CITY'S GROWTH.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California does
ordain as follows:
Section 1. This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the
Growth Management Ordinance of 1991.
Section 2. Title 19 of the Chula Vista Zoning Code is amended by
the addition of Chapter 19.09, which Chapter shall read as
follows.
" Chapter 19.09
Growth Management
Sections:
19.09.010 Purpose and Intent.
19.09.020 Definitions.
19.09.030 Growth Management Program.
19.09.040 Quality of Life Threshold Standards.
19.09.050 Requirement for Public Facilities Finance
Plans, Air Quality Improvement Plans and
Water Conservation Plans.
19.09.060 Public Facilities Finance Plan Contents.
19.09.070 Public Facilities Finance Plan Preparation.
19.09.080 Public Facilities Finance Plan Review.
19.09.090 Public Facility Finance Plan.
Implementation.
19.09.100 Public Facility Finance Plan Amendment.
19.09.110 Exceptions and Exclusions.
10.09.120 Extensions of Prior Approvals.
19.09.130 Obligation to Pay Fees or Install
Improvements Required by any other Law.
19.09.140 Implementing Guidelines.
19.09.150 Council Actions, Fees, Notice.
19.09.160 Severability.
19.09.170 Facility Master Plan Reference Documents
19.09.010 Purpose and Intent.
A. It is the policy of the City of Chula Vista to:
1. Provide quality housing opportunities for
all economic sections of the community;
2. Provide a balanced community with adequate
commercial, industrial, recreational and open space areas to
support the residential areas of the City;
3. Ensure that public facilities, services and
improvements meeting City standards exist or become available
concurrent with the need created by new development;
4. Balance the housing needs of the region
against the public service needs of Chula Vista residents and
available fiscal and environmental resources;
5. Ensure that all development is consistent
with the Chula Vista general plan;
6. Prevent growth unless adequate public
facilities and improvements are provided in a phased and logical
fashion as required by the general plan;
7. Control the timing and location of
development by tying the pace of development to the provision of
public facilities and improvements to conform to the City's
Threshold Standards and to meet the goals and objectives of the
Growth Management Program.
8. Ensure that the air quality of the City of
Chula Vista improves from existing conditions.
9. Ensure that the City of Chula Vista
conserve water so that an adequate supply be maintained to serve
the needs of current and future residents.
B. Findings.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby
finds:
1. The demand for facilities and improvements has
outpaced the supply resulting in shortages in public facilities
and improvements including but not limited to streets, schools,
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 2
libraries and general governmental facilities. These shortages
are detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare of the
citizens of Chula Vista.
2. Since 1986, the City of Chula Vista has
been undertaking a comprehensive review of its General Plan. As
part of that review a consultant team prepared a comprehensive
report and recommendation to the City Council. That report was
subject to public hearings by both the Planning Commission and
City Council. Included were recommendations that no new
development should occur unless adequate public facilities are
available concurrently with need to serve the new development.
3. Prohibiting new development unless adequate
public facilities are available concurrently is consistent with
the City's policy to provide housing opportunities for all
economic sectors of the community, because sufficient
opportunities for new housing continue to exist within the City
and this Chapter does not affect the number of houses which may
be built. In addition, development of housing for low and
moderate income persons and families would most likely occur in
areas of the City which are designated for highest development
priority.
4. Adoption of this Chapter will not adversely
affect the regional welfare. By ensuring that adequate and safe
public facilities and improvements will exist to serve all of the
development in Chula Vista and because many of these facilities
and improvements are used by persons residing in neighboring
areas and cities the safety and welfare of the whole region is
enhanced.
5. That the Growth Management Plan Traffic
Monitoring Report prepared in 1989 found that intersections
within areas in the developed portions of the City (as shown on
the figure contained in the Growth Management Program entitled
"potential development,, prepared in 1990 for 1989 traffic counts
, denoting both areas of future development as well as existing
development), are operating in conformance with the adopted
Threshold Standards; and, that future large scale developments
planned for the area east of 1-805 will require the provision of
major facilities including facility within the SR-125 corridor to
accommodate projected traffic and other needs of development in
accordance with the adopted Threshold Standards.
6. This chapter will further the policies,
goals and objectives set forth above, and will help eliminate the
public facility shortages identified above, by requiring
identification of all public facilities and improvements required
for development, by prohibiting development until adequate
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 3
provisions for the public facilities and improvements are made
within the City, as herein provided and by giving development
priority to areas of the City where public facilities and
improvements are already in place.
- 19.09.020. Definitions.
Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter
they shall have the meaning established by this section unless
from the context it is apparent that another meaning is intended:
A. "Available Facility and Service Capacity" shall be
determined by the Director of Planning using generally accepted
planning standards and criteria, including the Threshold
Standards established herein. Specific facility service capacity
shall be determined by subtracting from the total capacity for a
specific facility service, the demand of existing development
plus the demand that will be created by approved development.
B. "Development" means any land use, building or
other alteration of land and construction incident thereto.
C. "Discretionary planning approval" means any
permit, entitlement or approval issued under the authority of the
Zoning Chapter of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, and any
legislative actions such as zone changes, general plan
amendments, sectional planning area plans or general development
plan approval or amendment.
D. "Facilities" means any schools, parks, corporation
yard or recreational areas or structures providing for fire,
library, traffic controls, streets and highways, including curbs
gutters and sidewalks, bridges, overcrossings, street
interchanges, flood control or storm drain facilities, sewer
facilities, water facilities, lighting facilities or other
governmental services, required to be identified in a public
facilities finance plan.
E. "Facility and Service Capacity" means the maximum
amount of development which could take place prior to increasing
the number or size of a Facility or the level of Service as
determined by applying the appropriate threshold standard.
F. "Growth Management Program" means a plan prepared
and approved according to Section 19.09.030 which establishes
compliance with the Threshold Standards, as provided in Section
19.09.040
"Project" means the activity for which either an
application for a Sectional Planning Area Plan ("SPA") or a
Tentative Map has been or is required to be submitted and which
may be subject to discretionary approvals by the City.
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 4
13- io
"Public Facilities Finance Plan" ("PFFP") means a
project specific public facilities finance plan prepared and
approved in accordance with Section 19.09.050.
I. "Quality of Life Threshold Standards" means those
certain standards identified in Section 19.09.040 specifying the
facilities and services required to support the present and
future needs of the City.
J. "SPA Plan" means a Sectional Planning Area Plan.
K. "Substantial compliance" means performance meeting
the intent of the parties with respect to the obligations imposed
pursuant to the PFFP.
- 19.09.030 Growth Manaqement Program.
A. To implement the City's General Plan and to ensure
that development does not occur unless facilities and improve-
ments are available to support that development, the City Council
shall adopt, by resolution, a Growth Management Program. The
program shall: Identify all facilities and improvements
necessary to accommodate land uses specified in the General Plan
and by the Zoning chapter of the Municipal Code,, specify size,
capacity, service level and Threshold Standards for each
identified Facility; project total buildout development levels
and identify projected Facility and improvement needs; provide a
policy for timing the construction of each facility and
improvement; identify the financing method or methods for each
Facility and improvement.
B. The Growth Management Program will incorporate and
interpret the Threshold Standards as referenced in 19.09.040.
C. The Growth Management Program will incorporate the
Facility Master Plans for fire protection, schools, libraries,
parks, water, sewer, drainage, traffic, civic center, and
corporation yard. The Growth Management Program will also
address air quality and economic issues.
D. The Growth Management Program will incorporate a
defined public facilities development phasing policy. This
policy will inter-relate the timing, location, Facility capacity
limitations, and fiscal/economic considerations for each public
Facility and service identified in Section 19.09.040. This
phasing policy will insure that approved development has priority
to available public facility capacity and that developed areas of
the City have priority over undeveloped areas.
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 5
ii
E.. T~? Growth Management Oversight Commission should
annually review the Growth Management Program and prepare an
annual report and, upon doing so, shall submit such report to the
Planning Commission and the City Council.
F. The City Council should annually review the
Growth Management Oversight Commission annual report.
G. Amendments to the Growth Management Program may be
initiated by action of the Planning Commission or City Council,
or upon request of an applicant. The City Council shall act on
the requested application.
- 19.09.040 Quality of Life Threshold Standard~.
In order to ensure that public facilities and services,
government and other utility services, and improvements are
adequate to meet present and future needs of the City, the City
Council hereby adopts Quality of Life Threshold Standards for
each Facility or improvement listed below.
A. Police.
1. Emergency Response: Properly equipped and
staffed police units shall respond to 84 percent of "Priority
One" emergency calls within 7 minutes and maintain an average
response time to all "Priority One" emergency calls of 4.5
minutes or less.
2. Respond to 62 percent of "Priority Two
Urgent" calls within 7 minutes and maintain an average response
time to all "Priority Two" calls of 7 minutes or less.
B. Fire and Emerqenc¥ Medical.
1. Emergency response: Properly equipped and
staffed fire and medical units shall respond to calls throughout
the City within seven (7) minutes in 85 percent (current service
to be verified) of the cases (measured annually).
c. Schools.
The City shall annually provide the two local school
districts with a 12 to 18 month development forecast and request
an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and
continuing growth. The Districts, replies should address the
following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or
committed.
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 6
2. Ability to absorb forecast growth in
affected facilities.
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability
for projected new facilities.
4. Other relevant information the District(s)
desire(s) to communicate to the City and
GMOC.
The growth forecast and school district response
letters, shall be provided to the GMOC for inclusion in its
review.
D. Libraries.
1. Population ratio: 500 square feet (gross) of
adequately equipped and staffed library facility per 1,000
population.
E. Parks and Recreation Areas.
1. Population ratio: Three (3) acres of
neighborhood and community park land with appropriate facilities
per 1,000 residents.
F. Water.
Developer will request and deliver to the City a
service availability letter from the Water District for each
project.
G. Sewer.
1. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed
City Engineering Standards as set forth in the Subdivision Manual
adopted by City Council Resolution Number 11175 on 2/12/83 as may
be amended from time to time.
2. The City shall annually provide the San
Diego Metropolitan Sewer Authority with a 12-18 month development
forecast and request confirmation that the projection is within
the City's purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their
ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth, or the
City Engineering Department staff shall gather the necessary
data. The information provided to the GMOC shall include the
following:
gmo4(1).~-p Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 7
(A) Amount of current capacity now used or
committed.
(B) Ability of affected facilities to
absorb forecast growth.
(C) Evaluation of funding and site
availability for projected new facilities.
(D) Other relevant information.
The growth forecast and Authority response letters
shall be provided to the GMOC for inclusion in its review.
H. Drainaqe.
1. Storm water flows and volumes shall not exceed
City Engineering Standards as set forth in the Subdivision Manual
adopted by City Council Resolution Number 11175 on 2/23/83 as may
be amended from time to time.
2. The GMOC shall annually review the
performance of the City's storm drain system to determine its
ability to meet the goals and objectives above.
I. Traffic.
1. City-wide: The Level of Service ("LOS")
at all intersections, City-wide, shall be "C" or better, with the
exception that LOS "D" may occur at signalized intersections for
a period not to exceed a total of two hours per day. City-wide
no intersection shall operate at LOS "E" or "F" as measured for
the average weekday peak hour.
2. West of Interstate 805: Those signalized
intersections which do not meet Standard #1 above may continue to
operate at their 1987 Level of Service, but shall not worsen.
3. City-wide:
4. Notes to Traffic Standards:
(A) LOS measurements shall be for the
average weekday peak hour, excluding seasonal and special
circumstance variations.
(B) The measurement of LOS shall be by
the ICU (intersection Capacity Utilization) calculation utilizing
the City's published designs standards Policy adopted by City
Council Resolution Number 15349 on 10/17/89 as may be amended
from time to time.
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 8
(C) The measurement of LOS at City
arterials and freeway ramps shall be a growth management
consideration in situations where proposed developments have a
significant impact at interchanges.
(D) Circulation improvements should be
implemented prior to anticipated deterioration of LOS below
established standards.
J. Air Quality.
The City shall anually provide the San Diego Air
Pollution Control District with a 12 to 18 month development
forecast and request an evaluation of its impact on current and
future air quality management programs, along with recent air
quality data. The growth forecast and APCD response letters shall
be provided to the GMOC for inclusion in its review.
K. Economics.
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report
prepared by staff which addresses the economic condition of the
City and its residents, including a 12 to 15 month development
forecast and an evaluation of its anticipated economic effects.
The report will include statistics and data relevant to the
economic well being of residents in general (e.g., income level,
average home price, etc.), the vitality of local business (e.g.,
number of business licenses, commercial vacancy and lease rates,
etc.), and significant fiscal changes over the past year. The
Committee will evaluate the apparent economic effects of local
development policy decisions and report any adverse impacts or
recommended policy adjustments.
L. Amendments and Supplemental Thresholds.
The standards may be amended from time to time on
approval of the City Council. The Growth Management Commission,
following its annual review of the program, may make suggestions
on proposed recommendations to the City Council. Further, City
Council may supplement each Threshold Standards and adopt
procedures for its implementation through its Growth Management
Program and Facility Master Plans.
- 19.09.050 Requirement for Public Facilities Finance Plans,
Air Ouality Improvement Plans. and Water Conservation Plan~.
A. Public Facility Financing Plans.
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 9
/3-
No application for a SPA Plan, or, if a SPA Plan is not
required, no application for a Tentative Map, shall be deemed
complete or accepted for review unless:
(1) It is accompanied by an PFFP which
has been approved by the City; or
(2) An PFFP which includes the Project has
already been initiated; or
(3) The applicant initiates the
preparation of an PFFP.
The PFFP may be waived by the City Council upon a showing that
there are no public service, facility or phasing needs warranting
the preparation of an PFFP.
B. Air Quality Improvement Plans.
No application for an SPA Plan, or, if an SPA Plan is
not required, no application for a Tentative Map, shall be deemed
complete or accepted for review unless:
1. It is accompanied by an Air Quality
Improvement Plan which has been approved by the
City; or
2. An Air Quality Improvement Plan which
includes the project has already been initiated;
or
3. The applicant initiates the preparation of
an Air Quality Improvement Plan in such form
and/or containing such information including maps,
drawings, diagrams, etc., as the City Planning
Director shall require.
C. Water Conservation Plans.
No application for an SPA Plan, or, if an SPA Plan is
not required, no application for a Tentative Map, shall be deemed
complete or accepted for review unless:
1. It is accompanied by a Water Conservation
Plan which has been approved by the City; or
2. An Water Conservation Plan which includes
the project has already been initiated; or
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 10
3. The applicant initiates the preparation of
a Water Conservation Plan in such form and/or
containing such information including maps,
drawings, diagrams, etc., as the City Planning
Director shall require.
D. No SPA Plan, nor any Tentative Subdivision Map
shall be approved or deemed approved, without an approved PFFP,
an approved Air Quality Improvement Plan and a Water Conservation
Plan. To ensure consistency and implementation of said Plans,
the City Council may impose any condition to the approval of a
SPA Plan or Tentative Subdivision Map necessary to implement the
PFFP, the Air Quality Improvement Plan, the Water Conservation
Plan, the Growth Management Program, or the Master Facility
Plans.
E. No final map shall be approved until all of the
conditions of the PFFP, the Water Conservation Plan or the Air
Quality Plan have been met, or the Project applicant has provided
adequate security to the City that said Plans will be
implemented.
F. No other discretionary planning approvals shall be
granted unless the City Council finds that the Project is
consistent with an approved PFFP, an Air Quality Improvement
Plan, and a Water Conservation Plan.
G. No building permit shall be issued unless the
permit is consistent with any applicable PFFP, the Air Quality
Improvement Plan and the Water Conservation Plan and all
applicable fees, including but not limited to, development impact
fees, traffic impact fees, drainage fees, school fees, park fees,
sewer fees, water fees, or other development fees adopted by the
City Council have first been paid or provision for their payment
has been made to the satisfaction of the City Council.
H. No development shall occur in a PFFP area if the
demand for any public facilities or improvements exceeds capacity
and it is not feasible to increase capacity prior to completion
of development unless means, schedule and financing for
increasing the capacity is established through the execution of a
binding Agreement providing for installation and maintenance of
such facilities or improvements in advance of City's phasing
schedule.
- 19.09.060 Public Facilities Finance Plan Contents.
A. A PFFP shall contain a complete description of the
proposed development project and a complete description of all
public facilities included within the boundaries of the Plan as
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 11
13.- /'7
defined by the Director of Planning. The Plan shall contain a
description of the individual and cumulative impacts of the
proposed development on the community as it relates to the Growth
Management Program, the specific Facility Master Plans and the
Threshold Standards.
B. The PFFP shall consist of maps, graphs, tables,
and narrative text and shall be based upon the General Plan and
zoning applicable within the area of impact. The PFFP shall be
consistent with the Growth Management Program and Threshold
Standards and shall implement the Growth Management Program
within the area.
c. The boundaries of the PFFP shall be established by
the City at the time a SPA Plan or Tentative Map is submitted by
the applicant. The boundaries shall be based upon the impact
created by the Project on existing and future need for
facilities. The project boundaries will correlate the proposed
development project with existing and future development proposed
for the area of impact to ensure the economically efficient and
timely installation of both onsite and offsite facilities and
improvements required by the development. In establishing the
boundaries for the PFFP, the city shall be guided by the
following considerations:
1. Service areas or drainage or sewer basins
which serve the Project;
2. Extent to which facilities or improvements
are in place or available;
3. Ownership of property;
4. Project impact on public facilities
relationships, especially the impact on the city's planned major
circulation network;
5. Special district service territories;
6. Approved fire, drainage, sewer, or other
facilities or improvement master plans.
D. The boundaries shall be established by resolution
after a public hearing notice of which is given pursuant to
Section 19.12.070.
E. The PFFP shall show how and when the Facilities
and Services necessary to accommodate development within the area
will be installed or financed:
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 12
1. Police
2. Fire/EMS
3. Schools
4. Libraries
5. Parks and Recreation
6. Water
7. sewer
8. Drainage
9. Traffic
10. Civic Facilities
11. Corporation Yard
F. The PFFP shall include the following information
with regard to each facility and service listed in subsection E:
1. List of Facilities and Services
A list or schedule of facilities and service
requirements correlated to individual development projects within
the area.
2. Inventory
An inventory of present and future requirements
for each facility and service based upon the Threshold Standards.
The inventory shall include life cycle cost ("LCC") projections
for each element in 19.09.060(E) above as they pertain to City
fiscal responsibility. The LCC projections shall be for
estimated life cycle for each element analyzed. The model used
shall be able to identify and estimate initial and recurring life
cycle costs for the above elements. Because requirements for
certain facilities and services may overlap plan boundaries, the
plan shall address the need for coordination and shall propose a
coordination plan for facilities and services extending from one
project boundary area to another. Cost estimates for funding
public facilities and services directly related to the impact
created by the Project as well as for proposals for funding
existing deficiencies required by the project prior to the
phasing schedule set forth in the Growth Management Program shall
be included. It must be shown that development in the area will
not reduce the existing facilities or services capabilities
within the Project boundaries or create facilities or
improvements shortages in other areas or reduce capability in
any area below the Threshold Standard which is established
pursuant to Section 19.09.040. The growth inducing impact of the
out of area improvements shall be assessed and mitigation
provided if appropriate to the satisfaction of the City Council.
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 13
13-/?
3. Phasin Schedule
A phasing schedule, which complies with the
adopted development phasing policy as set forth in the Growth
Management Program and the Threshold Standards which establishes
the timing for installation or provision for facilities and
services required by the project. The phasing schedule shall
ensure that development of one area will not utilize more than
the area's prorata share of facility or service capacity within
the projected service area of a facility unless sufficient
capacity is ensured for other areas at the time of development.
The phasing schedule shall include a schedule of development
within the area and a cash flow analysis for financing of
facilities and services for the PFFP area. The phasing schedule
shall identify periods where the demand for facilities and
improvements may exceed the capacity and provide a plan for
eliminating the shortfall. If a Project cannot demonstrate
consistency with the phasing schedule, the PFFP must demonstrate
to the City's satisfaction, how facilities required for the
Project in advance of the phasing schedule as set forth in the
Master Plan will be provided. If no Facility Master Plan or
Threshold Standards exists for a particular facility, the PFFP
for the project must demonstrate how that facility will be
provided and financed in a phased and timely manner.
4. Fina~
A financing plan establishing specific methods of
funding each facility and service identified in the PFFP which
allocates the cost to the various properties within the plan
area. The plan shall identify those facilities and services
which would otherwise be provided as a requirement of processing
a development project (i.e. requirements imposed as a condition
of a development permit) or provided by the developer in order to
establish consistency with the General Plan, Growth Management
Program, Facility Master Plans or this Section, and those
facilities and improvements for which new funding methods which
shall be sufficient to ensure that funds are available to
construct or provide facilities or services when required by the
phasing schedule for the Project. Where facilities or services
are required for property within the PFFP area, other than the
Project, the phasing plan shall identify those other properties
and the PFFP for each property shall be coordinated.
Coordination, however, shall not require identical funding
methods.
G. The PFFP shall establish the proportionate share
of the cost of facilities and services identified in the Growth
Management Program and the Master Facilities Plans attributable
to the development of each property in the PFFP area.
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991
Page 14
H. In the event that an applicant provides private
financing for public facilities or services to service a Project
in advance of the normal time frame for constructing such
facilities, the approval of credits against any city fees for
such advanced private financing may be postponed until the
estimated time of such construction as specified in the specific
Facility Master Plan or the City's Capital Improvement Program
budget. In lieu of a Facility Master Plan phasing schedule, such
determination shall be made by the city Council after reviewing
information from the Planning Director, City Engineer, Finance
Director, and Deputy city Manager. In no event shall a developer
receive interest on funds for providing public facilities or
services in advance of the City's schedule. The developer shall
also become responsible for the maintenance and operation costs
associated with the early construction of said facility. No
repayment will be made to the developer for the funds provided
for maintenance and operational costs. All repayments will be
considered in accordance with the city's projected construction
dates for said facilities.
I. Assessment districts requested by the developer
shall not be given credit for facility fees when a facility is
constructed above the standards established by the respective
facility master plan or standards imposed as conditions on the
approval of the project by the city Council.
J. A fiscal analysis/economic impact report shall be
provided identifying capital budget impacts on the city as well
as maintenance and operation costs for each proposed phase of
development. The report shall include an analysis of the Project
impact on school districts and water agencies as well as the life
cycle analysis set forth in Section F.2. Each year during the
development of the Project, the Director of Planning may require
the applicant to provide the city with an updated fiscal impact
report reflecting the actual revenue and expenditure impacts
based upon the development of the Project. The project shall be
conditioned to provide funding for periods where expenditures
exceed projected revenues.
K. Developer contributions shall not be required as a
source of funding for that proportion of the cost of any facility
or service that is needed to reach Threshold Standards due to the
demands created by existing development.
19.09.70 Public Facilities Finance Plan Preparation.
(A.) An PFFP, an Air Quality Improvement Plan, and a
Water Conservation Plan may be processed concurrently with the
SPA Plan or Tentative Map.
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 15
13-
- B. A PFFP may be initiated by filing an application
with the Planning Director. The applicant shall pay a deposit at
the time any application for a PFFP is accepted.
C. A PFFP for a project shall be prepared by the
City, or a consultant selected by the City, according to the
procedures established by this section.
D. The cost of PFFP preparation shall be advanced to
the City by the applicant and any participating owner or owners
prior to PFFP preparation.
- 19.09.080 Public Facilities Finance Plan Review.
A. PFFP's shall be reviewed according to the
following procedure:
1. A completed PFFP complying with this
chapter, and accompanied by a processing fee in an amount
established by City Council resolution, may be submitted to the
Planning Director for processing. If the Planning Director
determines that the plan complies with the provisions of this
Chapter, the Director shall accept the PFFP for review. Once the
PFFP has been reviewed and complies with the provisions of this
Chapter, it shall be set for public hearing before the Planning
Commission together with the accompanying development plan.
2. The hearing shall be noticed according to
the provisions of Section 19.12.070. A staff report containing
recommendation on the PFFP shall be prepared and furnished to the
public, the applicant, and the Planning Commission prior to the
hearing.
3. The Planning Commission shall hear and
consider the application and shall by resolution prepare
recommendations and findings for the City Council. The action of
the Commission shall be filed with the City Clerk, and a copy
shall be mailed to the applicant.
4. When the Planning Commission action is
filed with the City Clerk, the Clerk shall set the matter for
public hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be
noticed according to the provisions of Section 19.12.070.
5. The City Council shall hear the matter, and
after considering the findings and recommendations of the
Planning Commission, may approve, conditionally approve, or deny
the plans. The City Council may include in the resolution
adopting the PFFP any fees or facilities improvement requirements
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 16
provided for in City ordinances in order to implement the Growth
Management Program, the Master Facility Plans and the PFFP.
B. A PFFP may be amended following the same
procedures for the original adoption.
- 19.09.090 Public Facility Finance Plan Implementation.
A. The City Manager shall monitor the development
activity for each PFFP and shall require the preparation of an
annual report by the applicant consisting of maps, graphs,
charts, tables and text and which includes a developmental
activity analysis, a facilities and improvements adequacy
analysis, a facility revenue/expenditure analysis and any
necessary amendments to the PFFP, if necessary.
B. In the event that the City Council finds that the
Project is not in substantial compliance with the PFFP as
modified or amended, the developer shall be deemed to be in
default and no further building or development permits shall be
issued and development shall cease.
- 19.09.100 Public Facility Finance Plan Amendment.
A. Adoption of a PFFP does not establish any
entitlement or right to any particular general plan or zoning
designation or any particular development proposal.
B. The City Council shall annually review the PFFP
Report prepared by the applicant at the time it considers the
Growth Management Oversight Commission Annual Report.
C. If, the City Manager determines that facilities or
improvements within a PFFP are inadequate to accommodate any
further development within that area the City Manager shall
immediately report the deficiency to the Council. If the City
Council determines that such events or changed circumstances
adversely affects the health, safety or welfare of City, the City
may require the amendment, modification, suspension, or
termination (hereinafter "change") of an approved PFFP. If the
City requires such change, the City shall (i) give Notice to
applicant or owner of (a) City's intended action to change the
PFFP, and (b) the reasons and factual basis for City's
determination; (ii) give Notice to the applicant or owner at
least thirty (30) days prior to the hearing Date, of the time and
place of the hearing; and (iii) hold a City Council hearing on
the determination, at which hearing the applicant or owner shall
have the right to present witnesses, reports, and oral and
written testimony. Prior to approving any change, the City shall
find that: (i) the circumstances were unknown or that the
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 17
circumstances have changed; and, (ii) the health, safety or
welfare of the co~ununity require the change of the PFFP. This
provision shall neither limit nor expand the rights of
liabilities of either of the Parties with respect to the PFFP or
the Development of the Property.
If, after notice and hearing, the Council determines
that a deficiency exists then no further building or development
permits shall be issued within the affected area, and development
shall cease until an amendment to the applicable PFFP which
mitigates the deficiency is approved by the City Council.
D. The City Council may initiate an amendment to any
PFFP at any time if in its discretion it determines that an
amendment is necessary to ensure adequate facilities and
improvements and subsequent permits will be conditioned on
conformance.
-- 19.09.110 Exceptions and Exclusions.
A. Buildinq Permits for Approved Projectm.
Building permits will be issued for Projects for which
all required development permits were issued or approved on or
before the effective date of the General Plan Update adopted
July 11, 1989, and upon payment of all required fees, except that
Projects with SPA Plans or Tentative Maps approved after July 11,
1989, and prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall not
be issued building permits until an Air Quality Improvement Plan
and a Water Conservation Plan has been approved by the City
Council. Nothing in this paragraph shall alter or amend the
terms and conditions of any Development Agreement entered into
between the City and a developer.
B. DeveloDed Portions of City.
It is the policy of the City to encourage
development in areas where public facility thresholds are met
before allowing development in areas where facilities and
improvements are not assured to meet the needs of such
development. Accordingly, pursuant to the findings in
Section 19.09.010 of this Ordinance, that adequate facilities
within the developed portions of the City as shown in the figure
of the Growth Management Program as referenced in 19.09.010 B5,
or their successor provisions, are operating in conformance with
adopted threshold standards, those portions of the City shall be
exempt from the provisions of this Ordinance requiring the
preparation of a PFFP, Air Quality Improvement Plan, or a Water
Conservation Plan.
gmo4(1).w-p Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991
Page 18
C. Exclusions.
Development projects which consist of facilities,
or structures constructed by a city, county, special district,
state, or federal government or any agency, department, or
subsidiary thereof for governmental purposes are excluded from
the provisions of this chapter. To the extent that the City has
authority to regulate such development projects, such projects
shall not be exempt. This exclusion shall not apply to
development projects to which a possessory interest tax would be
applicable.
- 19.09.120 Extensions of Prior ADDrovals.
After approval of an applicable PFFP for a development
project, an extension of the expiration date of a tentative
subdivision map may only be granted if the project is in
conformance with the PFFP and the Growth Management Program. The
extension may be conditioned on such matters as the City deems
just, including, but not limited to, compliance with the
applicable public facilities finance plan.
- 19.09.130 Obliqation to Pay Fees or Install Facilities
Required by any other Law.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as relieving a
builder, developer or subdivider from any requirement to provide
public facilities, to dedicate property or to pay fees, which
requirement is imposed pursuant to this Code or pursuant to any
City Council policy.
- 19.09.140 Implementinq Guidelines.
The city Council may adopt any guidelines it deems
necessary to implement this chapter, including a Growth
Management Program or Master Facility Plan.
- 19.09.150 Council Actions, Fees, Notice.
A. Whenever this chapter requires or permits an
action or decision of the City Council, that action or decision
shall be accomplished by resolution.
B. The City Council shall establish application and
processing fees for the submission and processing of public
facilities financing plans.
C. Whenever written notice is required to be given to
property owners under this section the notice shall be mailed by
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 19
first class mail to the owners shown on the last equalized
assessment roll.
- 19.09.160 Severability.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase
of the ordinance codified in this chapter is for any reason held
to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance codified in
this chapter. The City Council declares that it would have
passed the ordinance codified in this chapter and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of
the fact that any part thereof be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
- 19.09.170 Facility Master Plan Reference Documents
A. Police "A master Plan for the Chula Vista civic
Center Solving City Space Needs Through
Year 2010," dated May 8, 1989
B. Fire/EMS "Fire Station Master Plan," dated March 23,
1989
C. Schools Sweetwater Union High School District -
Sweetwater Union High School District
Long Range Comprehensive Master Plan,"
dated November 1984
D. Water Sweetwater - "Sweetwater Authority Water
Master Plan," dated December, 1989
E. Sewer "City of Chula Vista Wastewater Master
Plan," dated July 19, 1989
F. Libraries "Chula Vista Public Library Master Plan.
Facility Planning to the Year 2010,"
dated April 30, 1987
G. Parks & There is no existing detailed master
Recreation plan. The Chula Vista General Plan
Parks and Recreation Element dated July,
1990 serves as the parks master plan
H. Drainage "City of Chula Vista Public Facilities
Plan Flood Control Summary Report, dated
March 1989 (Phase II)"
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 20
I. Traffic "East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing
Plan," approval date pending
J. Air Quality No local Master Plan exists for Air
Quality. The Air Pollution Control
District is updating the Air Quality
Maintenance Program to comply with the
California Clean Air Act."
Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on
the 30th day after the final adoption hereof by the City Council
on the affirmative vote of three of its member~
ApP ore a to f ~ y:
Presented by: / ~ ~~
Robert Leiter B' ruce M. Bo~g~ard
Director of Planning city AttorneyI
gmo4(1).wp Growth Management Ordinance
April 5, 1991 Page 21
SELTZER CAPLAN WlLKIN$ & MCMAHON
..... CiTY COUNCIL OFFICES
April 8, 1991
City Council F~aLND DELIVERED
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Re: Amendments to the Growth Management Implementation Ordinance
City Council Hearing Date: April 9, 1991
Our File No. 3330.35685
Honorable Mayor Pro Tempore Moore and Councilmembers:
Our client, Rancho Del Sur Partnership, has requested our firm to
review the proposed Growth Management Ordinance ("Ordinance") with
regard to the provisions of the Ordinance which impose additional
requirements upon previously approved Tentative Maps and SPA Plans;
and, in particular, the provisions which deal with Air Quality
Improvement Plans and Water Conservation Plans.
~ted Action:
Our client respectfully requests that the Growth Management
Ordinance be revised to delete the provisions which impose the
requirement of the preparation and approval of an Air Quality
Improvement Plan and a Water Conservation Plan on previously
approved Tentative Maps and SPA Plans because these sections
impermissibly conflict with State law.
Discussion:
The Ordinance, as currently drafted, prohibits the issuance of
building permits for projects with SPA Plans or Tentative Maps
approved after July 11, 1989, but prior to the effective date of
the Growth Management Ordinance, until an Air Quality Improvement
Plan and a Water Conservation Plan have been approved by the City
Council (see, for example, Section 19.09.110.A). Our client's SPA
City Council
April 8, 1991
Page 2
Plan for its development, known as Sunbow II, was approved on
February 20, 1990, and our client's Tentative Map was approved on
May 22, 1990. The Ordinance also provides for production of these
plans at the final map stage and at the building permit stage (see,
for example, Sections 19.09.050.E and 19.09.050.G).
Certain provisions of the California Government Code, as discussed
below, preclude the imposition of new and/or additional
requirements at the time of issuance of building permits.
The Subdivision Map Act, at Government Code Section 66474.2(a),
provides that a:
[L]ocal agency shall apply only those ordinances,
policies, and standards in effect at the date the local
a~enc¥ has determined that the application is
complete .... [Emphasis added.]
Government Code Section 66474.3(f), which became effective on
January 1, 1989, provides, in pertinent part, that:
An approved or conditionally approved tentative
map...shall not limit a legislative body from imposing
reasonable conditions on subsequent required approvals
or permits necessary for the development and authorize~
by the ordinances, policies and standards described in
Section 66474.2 .... [Emphasis added.]
SPA plans are included within the meaning of "development"
pursuant to Government Code Section 66418.1 which provides as
follows:
"Development" means the uses to which the land which is
the subject of a map shall be put, the building to be
constructed on it, and all alteration of the land and
construction incident thereto.
Based upon these provisions in the Subdivision Map Act, it is our
client's position that, after a map application is deemed complete,
new or changed ordinances, policies and standards may not be
imposed as a condition to the issuance of building permits.
Accordingly, it is our client's position that any new requirements,
such as the preparation of an Air Quality Improvement Plan and a
Water Conservation Plan imposed by the proposed Amendment to the
Chula Vista Zoning Code impermissibly conflict with the Subdivision
Map Act. Therefore, the Growth Management Ordinance should be
revised to conform with State law.
Furthermore, Government Code Section 65961 prohibits the placement
of additional conditions on the issuance of subsequent building
City Council
April 8, 1991
Page 3
permits or other types of permits for residential cons%ruction.
Government Code Section 65961, in relevant part, states:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon approval
or conditional approval of a tentative map for a
subdivision of single- or multiple-family residential
units..., a city...shall not require as a condition to
the issuance of any building permit..., conformance with
or the performance of any conditions that the
city...could have lawfully imposed as a condition to the
previously approved tentative or parcel map.
Again, because our client has an approved Tentative Map, it is our
client's position that any new and/or additional requirements, such
as those imposed by the proposed Amendment to the Chula Vista
Zoning Code, impermissibly conflict with Government Code Section
65961. Therefore, the Growth Management Ordinance should be
revised to conform with State law.
Conclusion:
For the reasons stated above, we respectfully request that you
cause the Growth Management Ordinance to be revised to conform to
State law which provides that only ordinances, policies and
standards in effect at the time the map application was deemed
complete are applicable and precludes the application of additional
conditions at the time of issuance of building permits.
Thank you for your consideration of our request.
Thomas F. Steinke
SELTZER CAPLAN WILKINS & McMAHON
TFS/ms
Cc: Rancho Del Sur Partnership
James R. Dawe, Esq.
Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney
Ms. Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
LTRCVCC2.2?8/2
April 9, 1991
To: The Honorable Mayor pro Tempore and City Council
Via: $olm Goss, City Manager~
From: - Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning ,./~/~
Subject: Item 13, Growth Management Implementation Ordinance
The following comments and suggested changes are made in response to two issues raised by
Mayor pro Tempore Moore in discussion with staff on this item.
The first issue has to do with finding number 1 on page 2 of the Ordinance which states:
1. The demand for facilities and improvements has outpaced the
supply resulting in shortages in public facilities and improvements
including but not limited to streets, schools, libraries and general
governmental facilities. These shortages axe detrimental to the
public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Chula Vista.
The point is that public facilities such as traffic have improved, as evidenced by JI-IK's recent
report to GMOC showing a decline in intersections exceeding the threshold from 7 in 1989 to
1 in 1990. Staff would suggest an alternative finding for Council's consideration which would
read as follows:
1. Adoption of this Chapter is necessary to ensure that adequate
public facilities and services are available to serve new
development. Without this Chapter and the protections imposed
by it, adequate public facilities and services may not be available
to serve new development. New development without adequate
public facilities and services is contrary to the General Plan and to
the public health, safety and general welfare.
The second issue relates to the manner in which new school facilities are funded by the State.
It has been pointed out by School District representatives that certain State funding programs
require that existing facilities within the District be shown to be operating over capacity.
Mayor pro Tempore
and City Council -2- April 9, 1991
To address this issue in the Schools Threshold Standard on page 7 of the Ordinance, a new
criterion should be added as follows:
5. Stares of requests for State funding of new school facilities,
including consideration of criteria for State funding which give
highest priority to projects which alleviate existing school
overcrowding.
RAL:BG/nr
(OMORD.REV)
April 9, 1991
Typographic corrections to ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 19 OF
THE CHULA VISTA ZONING CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 19.09
FOR THE PURPOSE OF MANAGING THE CITY'S GROWTH.
1. At each reference to ?ublic Facilities Finance Plan" the word
"Facility" will be replaced with '~Facilities"
2. Section 19.09.040 (E) should read, "Population ratio : Three (3)
acres of neighborhood and community park land with appropriate
facilities per 1,000 residents east of 1-805."
3. Section 19.09.050 (E) should read, 'rNo final map shall be
approved until all conditions of the PFFP, the Water
Conservation Plan and the Air Quality Plan have been met, or
the Project applicant has provided adequate security to the City
that said Plans will be implemented."
4. Section 19.09.050 (H) replace the words in the second line "or
improvements" with "and services"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Meeting Date ~_.'~ ,al
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: Amending Conditions of
Approval for PCC-89-27 (Revised) for the 75
Unit Low-Income Housing Project for Seniors
at 628/638 Third Avenue
RESOLUTION;~Authorizing the Modifying of
Conditions of Approval for PCC-89-27
(Revised) for the 75 Unit Low-Income Housing
Project for Seniors at 628/638 Third Avenue
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director~
REVIEWED BY: City ManagerF (4/5ths Vote: Yes.. No. X )
The Salvation Army is requesting to construct a 75-unit,
low-income housing project for seniors on 1.1 acres located
at 628/638 Third Avenue in the C-O Commercial Office zone.
The Code provides that housing developments for low and
moderate income seniors are allowed in the C-O zone upon the
approval of a conditional use permit.
This proposal was originally approved by the Council on
March 14, 1989 (Resolution 14010) following recommendations
for approval by the Planning Commission and the Commission
on Aging. The site plan and design were approved by the
Design Review Committee on March 2, 1989. The conditional
use permit was allowed to expire after one year, and it
became necessary to refile in order to proceed with the
project.
On December 11, 1990, Resolution 15978 was adopted, and this
Resolution approved PCC-89-27 (Revised). However, several
Conditions of Approval were included in this Resolution that
the Salvation Army cannot satisfy.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council Open the Public Hearing for
PCC-89-27 (Revised), take public comments, and continue the
adoption of the attached Resolution till April 9, 1991.
Page 2, Item ~/~
Meeting
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On October 10, 1990, the
Planning Commission voted 4-2 to recommend that Council
approve the proposal in accordance with PCC-89-27 (Revised).
On November 14, 1990, the Commission on Aging voted 7-0 to
recommend approval of the project.
On March 2, 1989, the Design Review Committee voted 4-0 to
approve the project design.
On March 27, 1991, the Housing Advisory Committee voted 4-0
to recommend approval of the project. The Housing Advisory
Committee also recommended 4-0 to remove the Condition of
Approval from Resolution 15978 which required that the
owners of 642 Third Avenue give a parking easement to the
Silver Crest Senior Project.
DISCUSSION:
The Salvation Army was selected by the Department of Housing
and Urban Development to receive funding to construct 75
units of Section 8 rental housing for very low income
seniors (those with incomes which do not exceed 50% of
county median income). The project will house senior
citizens for the full 40-year term of the HUD mortgage. The
Section 8 Program provides subsidies so that residents pay
no more than 30% of their income for rent.
When Resolution 15978 was approved by the Council on
December 11, 1990, two Conditions of Approval were included
which the Salvation Army cannot satisfy. Staff realizes
that these conditions were placed on the proposed project
because of concerns by the Council, but staff believes that
the following recommendations will allay the concerns of the
Council.
First, the Resolution states that the Salvation Army "shall
grant preference to local residents in the leasing of the
proposed project." Unfortunately, after the Salvation Army
requested this change to their Affirmative Fair Housing
Marketing Plan, HUD responded by stating that giving
preference to local residents in a federally funded housing
project was not allowed because of HUD regulations. These
regulations state that the use of federal money mandates
that all people have an equal opportunity for residency.
Despite the fact that HUD mandates equal opportunity, the
h~story at other Salvation Army Senior projects has been
that they are occupied by residents from the local area.
For example, in E1 Cajon, 56% of the residents in the
project were residents of E1 Cajon, 26% of the residents
were from the suburbs surrounding E1 Cajon such as Lakeside
and Santee, and 16% were from San Diego. In other HUD
assisted senior projects such as Congregational Towers and
Town Centre Manor, the local occupancy rate is approximately
70%. Also, it is typical to have some non-local residents
in senior assisted projects who have moved to live near
their children who do reside in that locality. In addition
to the fact that statistics illustrate that most projects
are filled by local residents, the Salvation Army has
already stated that they will make every attempt to target
their marketing to residents of Chula Vista, and they intend
to do this by making pre-applications available at the
Norman Park Senior Center and at any other public building
or meeting that the Council might request.
As a second Condition of Approval, the Resolution also
states that the Salvation Army will "obtain an easement for
the benefit of quests and residents of the complex over the
parcel commonly known as 642 Third Avenue for use as
vehicular parking.,, The owners of 642 Third Avenue will not
grant this easement. Staff is exploring that either this
Condition of Approval be deleted from the Conditional Use
Permit (PCC-89-27 Revised) or that a contractual arrangement
be further discussed with the owners of 642 Third Ave. for
parking. As previously stated, 39 on-site parking places
should be adequate for the complex. After checking with
several federally funded very low-income senior projects
that also have a parking ratio of approximately .5, it is
even more apparent that the parking at Silver Crest is
adequate. Town Centre Manor, Kiku Gardens, and the
Salvation Army project in E1 Cajon all have stated that they
do not have a parking problem. In other words, they have
all the parking they need for residents of their complex.
However, in E1 Cajon, the management has stated that quests
typically park on the street. In an attempt to provide
guest parking, the Salvation Army has granted a easement
deed for the purpose of vehicular parking to the Silver
Crest Senior Housing Project so that guests can park in the
Salvation Army headquarters parking lot and walk to the
Silver Crest Senior Project. Staff visited the Salvation
Army headquarters parking lot during lunchtime, which is the
time that their parking lot is most impacted because of the
services that the Salvation Army offers to senior citizens,
and staff discovered an excess of parking spaces even at
peak operating periods. In reality, with the 39 on-site
parking spaces and the additional parking at the Salvation
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date~
Army headquarters, there is adequate parking for ~o/t~
residents and guests.
In addition to the standard practice of reducing parking
rations for senior projects, this project has an added
advantage because it is located on a bus line, near the
services of the Salvation Army, near doctors' offices and
pharmacies. Therefore, the need for residents to have a car
is reduced.
Since the State of California has mandated that the City of
Chula Vista meet its regional share of housing needs, this
project is very important to the City's ability to produce
and meet its regional share of very low income housing. If
the Salvation Army is not allowed to produce these units,
the City will be obligated to produce these units plus the
rest of its regional share. According to SANDAG's Regional
Housing Needs Statement which was published in July of 1990
and adopted by the City Council, the City of Chula Vista
must produce 821 units of very low income housing in the
next five years.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
(salall3)
1'4~JS PAPPAS PROF'E:SSlrtNAL LAW Cr'IRpr'IRATIrlN
ATTrlRNEY AT LAW
March 28, 1991
Dick Kau Land Co.
3404 Bonita Ro~d91910 .
Chula VistaI
Re: Salvation Army Retirement Home Project
(Jimmie and Judi Shinohara, owners of
real property at 642
Third Avenue, Chula Vista, CA)
Dear Mr. Kau:
I represent the above named owners of real property at
642 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, CA.
The owners, after consideration and consultation with me
and their other advisers, have concluded that it is not feasible
for them to grant parking and ingress/egress on their property for
use by the Salvation Army or by the Silver Crest Residential
Retirement residents and guests.
Therefore, we request that you notify the City of Chula
Vista officials of this decision by Mr. and Mrs. Shinohara, that
the~ will not grant an easement or license to Silver Crest or to
the Salvation Army.
Yo~s truly,
GUS PAPPAS ~
GP/e:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MODIFYING OF
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PCC-89-27
(REVISED) FOR THE 75 UNITS LOW-INCOME HOUSING
PROJECT FOR SENIORS AT 628/638 THIRD AVENUE
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve
as follows:
WHEREAS, the Salvation Army is requesting to construct
a 75-unit, low-income housing project for seniors on 1.1 acres
located at 628/638 Third Avenue in the C-O Commercial zone; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Resolution Number
15978 on December 11, 1990 which approved (PCC-89-27 Revised) the
Conditional Use Permit for this project; and,
WHEIAEAS, the Salvation Army is not able to comply with
two of the Conditions of Approval which were included in
Resolution 15978; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby amend the approved Conditions
of Approval for Resolution 15978 so that the Conditional Use
Permit PCC-89-27 (Revised) now is subject to the following
conditions of approval:
1. The project shall comply with the plan approved or
conditionally approved by the Design Review Committee.
2. The project shall provide 39 off-street parking spaces.
3. Upon initial opening of the project, if the parking
requirements of the occupants exceeds availability, the
Salvation Army will provide additional parking.
4. Should the local grocery store at Third Avenue and "J"
Street cease operation, the Salvation Army will provide
daily transportation service for occupants of the project
for groceries.
5. The Salvation Army shall grant an easement to the benefit of
the property upon which the project is located permitting
residents and guests of the proposed project to park their
vehicles in any available spaces at the parking lot of the
Salvation Army to be made available to such guests and
residents at such time as the parking lot at the complex
located at 628/638 Third Avenue is filled.
Presented by
cC°h~n~yl °~e°~ee 1 oPmerit Agency Attorney ~
Director
(salreso)
ID:FF~IJ~I~ILLI~/.I TEL 1'10:21::52581126 ~154 ~
:Falkenberg/Oilliam &.Associates, Inc.
Development · ~'~er ty Iv~r~ement
P.O. ~lfl ,~AJ. Pas,~:~r~. C~ifomla 91109-7070
Telephone:, ~2.13) 258-35/2
M~'ch 22, 1991
Plannin~ Depam.ent
276 4ih Avenue
Chula V'lsta, CA 91910
628/638 3rd Avenue
On behalf of The Salvation An~ we herebp request that the following two
conditions be deleted from the Conditional Use Permit for the above project:
1.That the local pre{erence provision be waived due to the fact that HUD
will not accept this condition.
2. That the easement requh~nt from the propert~ at 642 3rd Avenue be
waived because the owners of that proper~ are unwilling to ~rant an
easement.
Thank pou for pour Mienflon to this matter.
Sincerel~ yours,
FALKENBERG/Gn I lAM & ASSOCS., INC.
PrL.~II~ Gilli~,rn
Prmid~nt:
PG/ss
Falkenberg/Gilliam & Associates, Inc.
Housin~ Develol3rnent · Prooe~ Management
1~ ~st Co.ado BouleS, ~dena, ~li~rnia
Mailin8 ~dre~: P.O. ~in ~0, ~sadena, ~li~nia
meleDhone: (2[3)
Ci~ ~om~
Ci~ of Chula
276 Fo~ A~nue
Chu~ ~ ~ 92010
~: ~e Sal~fion ~ Chula VB~ Silvercr~t ~si&nce
D~ ~. B~rd:
I met ~ ~. Honore' su~equent to our le~er requ~ng ~e amen~ent
of our ~mfive F~r Ho~ing ~g Plan to allow preference for r~iden~
of Chula VB~ ~en ren~ng ~e pro~sed u~.
~e upshot of our ~ion ~ ~at ~ng preference to local r~idenm
~ a fe&~ ~n&d ho~ing project ~ not ~lowed ~ ~e re~lafio~. The ~e
of fe&~ mon~ requir~ ~at all ~ople ~ve an equ~ oppo~niW for resident.
M ~ Bare noted ~fore, our ~edence sho~ ~at ~e ~t ~jori~ of
applk~ for r~i&n~ ~e 1~ situated ~ a ~e ~le ~ of ~e project.
~o~on ~d Pre-applicafio~ ~ ~ ~ a~l~le to local r~idenm at ~e
~or ~nter ~d ~y public bu~ng you ~ requ~t (eg. Ciw HalD.
We ~1 fo~d ~y ~ co~n&nce re~ng ~B ~tter to you
i~am~.
Sincere~ yo~,
Fa~n~r~Gilli~ & ~socs., ~c.
~:e~
~. Veto Swemon, ~e S~mfion ~y
~. g~a ~ge~, Ci~ of Chula V~ ~
lq-I°
RESOLUTION NO. 15978
RESOL~ITION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROV~ING PCC-89-27 (REVISED) FOR 75 UNIT LOW-INCOME
ItOUSING PROJECT FOR SENIORS AT 628/638 THIRD AVENUE
:~ "n'q~e' Cll~j) Cound~:'of '~'&~Clt~ 'Of 'ChdTa iJ~ta "UOes~'~er&b~ resolve as
-foll~t~'~ rr~,~ ~.. ,.~ :-r-~,. ~-~ . - - . ·
~' . . ' .... · '.' ' ' ' ' ~' +q~' r~"~') .:,. ~:~.~
~EREAS, the
lo~*Jncome housing project for sen~ors on 1.1 acres located at &28/&38 Third
Rvenue tn ~e C-O Co~ercJal Office zone; and
~ERE~S, the Chula Vista ~unJc~al 'Code ~rovides ~t ho~s~ng
developments for low and moderate tnco~e seniors are allowed Jn the C-O zone
upon the approval of a conditional use ~e~t; and
. ~HE~S, th~s ropgsal ~s or~g~nall~ ap roved b the Council
· . - . ........ .P · .. ,. . ... P. ~ on March
~, l~8~Re~ol~tlon ]~)~O~o~ing r~b~n~a~O~s foF ~P~val .b~ the
r~ann~ng ~o~ss~on aea.. the. ~lSslo~, on 'Ag~ng'~an~'the ;'st(~ [~a~ and design
were approved b~ the OesJgn Revie~ Co~ittee on March 2, 1Bag; and
'~EREAS, the conditional use pemit was bllowed to expfre after one year,
however, and it became necessary to refile in order to .proceed with the
project; and
"~ r - ~EAS, ~ ihe~ Ent'f~o~eEtal ~ Rev few FC~'t n~o'r ~n'd~teO ': ~,.~n~ ti al' Study,
IS-88-77, of potential envi ronmental - "~Bc~' '""a~s'oct ated:~ with the
implementation of the project and has concluded that there would be no
significant environmental impacts, and reco~ends adoption of ~e Negative
Declaration issued on IS-88-77, and '
~EREAS, on October lO, 1990, the Planning Comission voted 4-2 to
reco~nd ~at Council approve the proposal tn accordance with Resolution
PCC-89-27 (Revised); and
~EREAS, on November 14, 1990, the Comission on Aging voted 7-0 to
reco~end approval of ~e project; and
WHEREAS, on March 2,-lgag, ~e Design Review Co~ittee voted 4-0 to
approve the project design.
. WHEREAS, said approval is based on ~e following findings:
1. ~at ~e proposed use at ~e location ts necessary or desirable to
provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general
well being of ~e neighborhood or the co~unity.
Resolution No. 15978
Page 2
The project will provide 75 units of affordable rental housing for
ve~ low income seniors within the community, and at a location
~ich provides ready access to a wide range of public services and
facilities.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular
case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of
persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity.
The bulk and mass of ~he structure are not inconsistent with-what
could be developed on the site under the existing C-O zone. The
building has been placed on the lot-tn a manner which minimizes the
impact on the adjacent residential uses to the west. The project
will be required to provide 39 parking spaces which is believed to
be adequate to serve a very low income senior development.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in the code for such use.
The use will be required to comply with all applicable codes,
conditions, and requirements prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not
adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan
of any government agency.
The proposal complies-with General Plan policy with regard to
density bonuses for senior citizen projects.
.NOW, ll~EREFORE,' BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby concur--in the environmental conclusions of the Environmental
Review Coordinator and approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-89-27 (Revised) to
construct 75 unit low-income housing project for seniors at 628/638 Third
Avenue subject to the. following conditions of approval:
1. The project shall comply with the plan approved or conditionally
approved by the Oesign Review Committee.
2. The project shall provide 39 off-street parking spaces.
3. Upon initial opening of the project, if the parking requirements of
,~ - r ,-~?~ the occupants exceeds-.~avatlahtli'ty;,~the~·Sal-va~t'ion ~Arntv'~ill .provide
~-,~ ...... . ~-i~ additional-~parking.,
4. Should the local grocery store at Third Avenue and ' '~;'Street cease
operation, the Salvation Army will provide daily transportation
service for occupants of the project for groceries.
That permittee shall grant preference to local residents in the
leasing of the proposed project.
Iq-I
Resolution No. 15978
Page 3
6. Permittee shall obtain, and demonstrate to the satisfaction of
City, )rior to the vesting of any rights hereunder, an easement for
the benefit of guests and residents of the complex over the parcel
commonly known as 642 Third Avenue for use as vehicular parking, an
ingress and egress thereto, to be made available to such guests and
residents of the complex during such times as all permitted parking
spaces at the project are occupied and that parking spaces are
available at the parking lot located at 642 Third Avenue.
7. The Salvation Army shall grant an easement to the benefit of the
property upon which the project is located permitting residents and
guests of the proposed project to park their vehicles in any
available spaces at the parking lot of the Salvation Army to be
made available to such guests and residents at such time as the
parking lot at the complex is filled.
Presented by proved as orm by
/~/f/~ /~---~ ~_r ~a]~~City tt rney
Director of Planning . .
Resolution No. 15978 _
Page 4
%
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this llth day)of December, lggO by the following vote:
AYES: Counctlmembers: McCandliss, Nader, Rindone
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: Malcolm, Moore
Gayle L. McCandliss, Mayor
ATTEST:
--.
Beverly ~A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 15978 was duly passed,
approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the llth day of
December, 1990.
Executed this llth day of December, lggO.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES
Wednesday March 27, 1991
MEMBERS PRESENT: Joe Casillas, Dan Dennison, Diane Flint (Ex-Officio)
Allen King, Vic Nolan
STAFF PRESENT: Margery Girbes, Housing Coordinator
David Harris, Community Development Specialist
Alisa Duffey Rogers, Community Development Specialist
GUEST: Carl Hanson, Habitat for Humanity
Minutes of February 27, 1991 approved as submitted.
New Business:
A. Duffey-Rogers discussed the proposed 75 unit very low-income Senior
Housing Project by the Salvation Army. She explained problems connected
with conditions the City Council imposed when approving the Conditional
Use Permit; those being:
1. Local Preference - Margery Girbes stated that Federal preferences
were mandated re: housing built with H.U.D. money. However,
advertising would be targeted in the local market area.
2. Adequacy of Parking: Alisa Rogers explained that .5/du of
parking space appears to be adequate and in fact several projects
already have been built using that standard. The Shinohara's
have refused to give an easement to Silvercrest for parking.
Allen King motioned, Dan Dennison seconded to support the project. Passed
4-0. Allen King noted that this was an impressive project to house
very low-income seniors who would pay only 30% of their gross income
for rent.
Vic Nolan, while supporting the project expressed his concern regarding
adequate parking.
Dan Dennison motioned, Allen King seconded to remove the condition from
the C.U.P. requiring a parking easement from Shinohara. Passed 4-0.
David Harris explained the process of the CDBG program. He gave hand-outs
to the members explaining the requests for funding for housing related
activities. He asked the members to review the proposals and be prepared
to comment at their next meeting.
Margery Girbes introduced Carl Hanson, a volunteer for Habitat for Humanity.
Mr. Hanson gave the history of Habitat and reviewed a proposal being
submitted to the City.
Allen King motioned, Dan Dennison second to support the project concept
as proposed in Woodlawn Park. Joe Cassillas requested staff to provide
analysis.to Committee before asking for recommendation to financially
support the project.
Margery Girbes briefly described the Civic Center Barrio project. Due
to time constraints, she will bring an analysis to the next meeting.
Margery Girbes passed-out a written overview of the National Affordable
Housing Act to the Committee.
Unfinished Business:
The draft E.I.R. on the Relocation Mobile Home Park is scheduled to go
before the Resource Conservation Commission on April 8th and then to
the Planning Commission on April lOth.
Allen King requested the minutes reflect his compliments to staff regarding
the outstanding level of service being provided to the committee.
Meeting adjourned 5:10 p.m.
Minutes
City of Chula Vista
COMMISSION ON AGING
Wednesday, 3:00 p.m. Parks & Recreation
November 14, 1990 Conference Room
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF AI ~ ~GIANCE
SILENT PRAYER
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Gilstrap, Commissioners Stokes, Dennison, Grindle, Hagedorn, Scrivener, Biggers
1.Approval of the minutes of the meeting of October 10, 1990.
MSUC STOKES/DENNISON (7-0)
2,UNFINISHED BUSINESS
MSUC SCRIVENER/GRINDLE to have the Commission address the issue of the Salvation Army Housing Project
(Item 2c.) prior to Item 2a. (7-0)
Ken Lee, Assistant Director of Planning, gave a background on the issues surrounding the proposed facility, He
addressed concerns about parking and size of the building and stated his support of the housing project.
Alisa Rogers, Community Development Specialist, spoke to the Commission about the need for Iow income senior
housing in Chula Vista and stated her full support of the project.
Margo Reid, Administrative Assistant for Falkenberg/Gilliam & Assoc, addressed Commissioners' questions and
spoke in support of the project.
MSUC DENNISON/HAGEDORN to suppon the Salvation Army Housing Project (7-0)
MSUC BIGGERS/HAGEDORN to send a representative from the Commission on Aging to the Cibj Council meeting
on December 4, 1990 in support of the Salvation Army Housing Project (7-0). Commissioners who volunteered
to attend: Chair Gilstrap, Commissioners Grindle, Dennison and Scrivener. Commissioners Stokes and Hagedom
will try to attend.
a. Human Services Council Update
Commissioner Dennison stated that the forum wes successful and that groups of providers will be meeting
tomorrow for a second meeting to decide on further details.
b. Norman Park Center Update
Recreation Supervisor Beardsley announced the Norman Park Senior Center combination Groundbreaking
Ceremony and 29th Anniversary Celebration.
3. NEW BUSINESS
a. Home Service Agencies: Allied Community Services
At Your Home Services
Jeanette Nichols, P.H.N. with Allied Community Services, discussed the services that this non-prof'~
organization provides to elderly, chronically ill and disabled persons. Handout pamphlets were distributed
to Commissioners.
/?'-/7
Commission on Aging -2- November 14, 1990
Laude E. Edwards, Executive Director of At Your Home Services, discussed the services of this non-profit
organization and gave a statistical overview of aging in America and future needs for in-home services.
Commissioner Scrivener offered to send thank-you notes to Jeanette Nichols and Laurie Edwards.
4. COMMUNICATIONS
a. Oral Communications
Commissioner Stokes announced that $750,000 worth of Carnation's Mighty Dog dog food is being stored
in a warehouse on Main Street. The dog food is available for seniors and Iow income persons for their
pets at a cost of 24 cans (1 case) for $1.00. Up to 100 cases can be purchased by one person or group.
Delivery is available for 10 to 100 cases. If interested, please contact Bernice at 589-9334, (Minimum
pumhase is 10 cases.)
b. Written Communications - None '
c. Commissioners' Remarks
Chair Gilstrap asked all Commissioners to submit any bills for subscription renewals to 'ASA' (Amedcar~
Society on Aging) to Recreation Supervisor Beardsley for payment.
Commissioner Stokes and all other Commissioners congratulated Councilman Moore on his reap-
pointment to Council and thanked him for attending the meeting.
5. STAFF REPORT
Now that the Commission on Aging is fully staffed, Recreation Supervisor Beardsley would like to agendize for
the December meeting printing of a brochure.
As part of the ongoing educational program on social service agencies, Recreation Supervisor Beardsley asked
for suggestions for any other agencies not on the list to make a presentation. Commissioner Dennison
recommended inviting the McDonald Center to make a presentation.
Recreation Supervisor Beardsley noted that a subcommittee needs to be formed to research and make
recommendations to the Commission on Aging as to what publication(s) the Commission should subscribe to this
fiscal year. Commissioners Biggers and Hagedorn volunteered to serve on this subcommittee and report back
by the January 1991 meeting,
Commissioner Dennison mentioned that she is on a Senior Substance Abuse Committee that takes in the VA in
most of the greater San Diego area. Twice a year seminars are held for caregivers and credits or units are given.
This year a seminar is scheduled at Lauderbach Center on Mamh 18, 1991. All Commissioners are invited to
attend. We plan to have pharmacists, bi-lingual speakers, and others speakers not yet determined.
Commissioner Dennison handed out material from the AARP.
The meeting was adjourned to the regularly scheduled meeting of December 19, 1990.
Submitted by:
Donna Toledo
MINUTES OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
March 2, 1989 Public Services Building
4:40 p.m. Conference Rooms 2 and 3
Members Present: Vice-Chairman Gilman, Members Alberdi and Landers
Members Absent: Chairman O'Neill (with notification)
Member Flach (with an announcement to be late)
Staff Present: Principal Planner Lee and Assistant Planner Hernandez
Vice-Chairman Gilman offered the introductory remarks by outlining the
composition of the Design Review Committee and explaining the format that
would be followed for the meeting.
Approval of Minutes of February 2, 1989.
MSUC (Gilman/Alberdi) 3-0 to approve the minutes as mailed.
1. DRC-89-32: Marjorie and Charles Johnson Proposed duplex at 95 Los
Flores Drive
Assistant Planner Hernandez gave a brief history of the project stating
that the proposed duplex was to be constructed on a vacant parcel located
on the northeast corner of Los Flores and "D" Street. The item was
continued from the Committee's January 19 meeting to allow the project
architect to rework the proposed design which was considered to be too
basic with consideration being given to utilizing a portion as a two-story
element as well as having the roofline and entry turn the corner fronting
on "D" Street and Los Flores. Mr. Hernandez explained that the
applicant's architect has developed a new design which accomplishes those
tasks resulting in a 2,134 sq. ft. living space as well as 882 sq. ft. of
storage space. The architectural change to the two-story element allows
for a smaller footprint and increases the private open space towards the
north end of the project substantially. He noted that staff was in favor
of the revisions as submitted. Member Alberdi commented that the design
works well in addressing both corners. Member Landers stated that she
felt it was also an improvement over the previous design.
MSUC (Landers/Alberdi) 3-0 to approve the project subject to the three
conditions listed in the staff report.
(Member Flach arrived at 4:50 p.m.)
2. DRC-89-28: Reconstruction of Arco Station at 407 "E" Street
Assistant Planner Hernandez stated that the 407 "E" Street project as well
as the next item on the agenda, 89-26 which involves 798 Third Avenue,
both involve Arco stations with similar design features; therefore, he
would cover both items at one time in his analysis. Mr. Hernandez gave a
brief history of the projects noting that both stations, were first
presented to the Committee at the January 19th meeting and that the
Committee directed the applicant to revise the plans addressing a number
lC-fl
Design Review Committee -2- March 2, 1989
of issues listed in the original staff report. The applicant has now
returned with the revised drawings and is requestin§ approval on that
basis. Mr. Hernandez complimented Arco in their very thoughtful response
which resulted in a major change to the circulation of both sites based on
additional landscaping, enclosure of driveways, and the reorientation of
the pump islands. Staff is now suggesting that some additional
landscaping be utilized near the entryways as well as pump island areas.
He pointed out that staff has no basic objection to the architecture of
either structure, each featuring primarily a stucco exterior with a tile
roof featured on the Fourth and "E" Street site as opposed to Third and
"K" site which will utilize a standing seam roof. He expressed a concern
over the general wall sign that is being proposed as well as the 24-hour
cabinet sign asking that each be reduced in size to be more in scale with
the building. Mr. Richard Kohler, representing Arco, stated in their
opinion the 4x16 wall sign as well as the 4x4 24-hour sign was necessary
to identify the buildings. He pointed out that they did not have a
problem with adding stucco to the columns but did not want to add
additional work on the canopy area. He also stated that while the company
has no objection to enhancing the station with hardscape, they did object
to utilizing stamp concrete near the entry points since this is a poor
walking surface. He then emphasized that the corner monument sign is a
fairly standard design, and they wished to stay with that design if at all
possible and eliminate the stucco as depicted by the staff to go on top of
the sign. Mr. Hernandez pointed out that a variance would be required on
the Fourth and "E" site with the various encroachments towards the
residential areas. Member Landers stated she thought both projects were a
vast improvement in design. After a brief discussion with the applicant,
it was agreed that a 3xlO wall sign would fit well with the building as
well as a 2x2 24-hour sign.
MSUC (Gilman/Alberdi) 3-0 that the project be approved subject to staff
condition 'a' as modified. The site plan will require additional
landscaping subject to staff approval to provide for adequate passing at
the pump island area. Condition 'b' was modified to note that the
enriched paving requirement would not stipulate stamp concrete only.
Condition 'e' was revised to allow for the monument sign to be retained as
submitted with a notation that the base of the sign shall be stucco to
match the building. Condition 'f' was modified allowing for a 3'xlO' wall
sign and a 2'x2' 24-hour sign. Condition 'i' was added that the subject
approval is predicated on approval of a variance allowing for a reduction
in setback towards the residential areas.
3. DRC-89-26 Arco Station, 798 Third Avenue
It was noted that the staff explanation on item 2 covered the 798 Third
station as well; therefore, motion was made by Gilman, seconded by
Landers, to approve the project subject to staff conditions 'a' through
'c' and a modification to condition 'd' that the monument sign will be
approved as submitted with a notation that the base shall be a stucco
finish in accordance with the building design. Condition 'e' was modified
to approve a 3'xlO' wall sign as well as a 2'x2' 24-hour sign. Condition
'g' was deleted. Motion carried by vote of 4-0.
Design Review Committee -3- March 2, 1989
4. DRC-89-38: Construction of a church facility at 450 Corral Canyon Road
Mr. Hernandez provided a locator for the 5+ acre site which is located at
the southeast corner of Corral Canyon and Country Vista Lane adjacent to a
daycare center and surrounded by single-family dwellings on the remaining
sides. He cited the fact that the land use was approved in the overall
Bonita Long Canyon Master Plan. The subject church consists of a 14,500
sq. ft. assembly hall with parking for up to 245 vehicles. Me cited the
excellent architectural design featuring a pyramidal roof form with
skylights along the ridge with the only staff concern relating to the
color of the tile which is in a blue tone as opposed to the majority of
the residential area adjacent which features terra cotta.
The architect for the project explained that the stucco color to be used
is an off-white and a blue color tile with a muted or matt finish. He
also pointed out that (patina) copper would be used throughout and
weathered beams to give the building an aged feeling once it is completed,
thus taking on more of a gothic design.
MSUC (Flach/Landers) 4-0 to recertify EIR 79-2.
MSUC (Flach/Gilman) 4-0 to approve the project subject to staff conditions
'a' through 'i' with a notation that condition 'b' was modified to reflect
that the standard sized parking stall may be reduced two feet in length to
accommodate planting. Two conditions were added, 1) relating to the
allowance for the monument sign to be approved by staff, and 2) that the
roof tile is to feature an appropriate color matt finish to be coordinated
with the building colors and to be approved by staff.
5. DRC-88-41: Salvation Army construction of a 75-unit senior citizen
project at 628-638 Third Avenue
Assistant Planner Hernandez pointed out the location of the parcel which
is just over an acre in size located on the west side of Third Avenue
between "I" and "J" Streets within a C-O Commercial Office district. He
explained that the adjacent area to the west is primarily single-family
homes with other commercial buildings located to the north, east, and
south. The proposed project consists of a 75-unit "L" shaped four-story
structure which features a combination of studio and one-bedroom units
having a single two-bedroom manager's unit. In addition, there is a 1,500
sq. ft. recreation room which opens onto a 3,000 sq. ft. landscaped patio
area to the south with parking originally designed for 29 spaces. He
explained that after discussion with the City's Nousing Coordinator and
reviewing other projects of a similar nature, it was decided that .5
parking spaces per unit was necessary to make this an acceptable design
from a staff perspective. Therefore, the applicant has provided alternate
site plans that provide additional parking. Staff is in support of Scheme
3 which allows the building to shift closer to Third Avenue and to provide
a total of 39 parking spaces while retaining a large portion of the
landscaping as originally conceived. He cited the architecture features a
warm colored stucco and a post-modern design with accent treatment and
articulation, highlighted with a tower-like element with the one comment
from staff that the accent element of the tower should be pulled away from
the building to give it more meaning and to break up the building mass.
There were further recommendations relating to the arches and balcony area
Design Review Committee -4- March 2, 1989
adjacent to the tower, with the explanation that staff endorses the
project architecture with the changes that were listed in the report.
Mr. Ralph Fellin§, architect for the project, indicated they would like to
move the building forward to gain a walk area as well as landscaping
adjacent to the west side of the structure. He pointed out that the
balconies had been revised so that only a portion is now open where the
lower elements are solid providing additional screening. He noted that
condition 'g' is a concern to him since the arch, in his opinion, needs to
die into a supporting element.
Member Alberdi commented that projection of the tower out approximately 4'
would allow it to read more as an element. Member Flach questioned
whether the mortar being used in the project would match block on the
lower floor. Member Landers noted that she was in favor of pulling the
building back from Third Avenue as far as possible to provide for adequate
landscaping.
MSUC (Flach/Landers) 4-0 to adopt Negative Declaration IS-88-77.
MSUC (Gilman/Landers) 4-0 to approve the project subject to the staff
conditions listed with the following revisions: condition 'a' requiring
39 parking spaces was approved as per Scheme 3 with the exception that the
landscaping is to be coordinated with the City Landscape Architect;
condition 'b' was modified to allow the building to move 11' easterly;
condition 'd' was modified to reflect approval of the landscaping per
Scheme 3; condition 'e' was modified to provide for clarification that the
existing and proposed concrete block walls to be treated with stucco is in
reference to the zoning wall located on the west property line; condition
'f' was modified allowing for the building tower element to be pulled 2'
away from the building; condition 'j' was added that the mortar to be used
with the split block shall match the masonry colors.
6. DRC-89-39: A1 Garr Construction, 29 apartment units at 338 Fifth Avenue
Assistant Planner Hernandez stated the subject site is located on the west
side of Fifth Avenue just south of "F" Street within the central part of
the City and is encumbered by a drainage channel which cuts through the
southeast corner of the site. The property abuts apartment units to the
north and south, with single-family homes located to the west, as well as
to the east. The applicant is proposing to construct three two-story
buildings over a parking garage, resulting in 21 units and 42 parking
spaces. He cited that while the design is very striking and well
articulated, that as the staff viewed all the specifics of the project,
there were a number of issues that were unresolved. Therefore, the staff
is recommending continuance unless these issues can be resolved at today's
meeting.
The architect, Mr. Bob Thompson, explained that he had a chance to review
the staff's concerns and is ready to submit a revised drawing which he
feels addresses all of those concerns. Mr. Thompson presented the drawing
and went through each of the issues relating from questions on texture,
location of facilities to go into the open space such as bar-b-que,
fencing details, required handicap spacing, column details, trash gates,
brick or stone color, corbel details, window muntins, gable massing,
Design Review Committee -5- March 2, 1989
elongated windows, south elevation treatment, roof overhang, and gabled
roof over the entry. In response from a question from Member Flach,
Architect Thompson stated that the window frames would be a dark gray
annodized.
Additional discussion followed concerning the possible color of the brick
which was now being proposed as a gray fieldstone which the Committee
would provide simply too much gray into the color scheme. Member Gilman
suggested that the open space be broken up with a texture or pattern. It
was staff's conclusion that Mr. Thompson had responded very well to the
concerns of the staff and generally were comfortable with the overall
design solutions.
MSUC (Flach/Alberdi) 4-0 to approve the Negative Declaration.
MSUC {Alberdi/Gilman) 4-0 to approve the project subject to the condition
that the applicant shall show on-site handicap ramp from the parking level
to the apartment unit's first level; condition 'b' that a common usable
open space shall be provided for outdoor activities such as outdoor
grills, benches, and tables with a detailed design; condition 'c' that the
hardscape between the two northerly structures shall incorporate a
textured paving with possible usage of cobblestones or a concrete pattern
in addition to plant materials with movable pots; condition 'd' to require
that a fencing program addressing specific location, design, and
construction details of all fencing including patios, entry and parking
areas will be submitted as part of the revised design; condition 'e'
requires that the trash enclosure design and construction details
utilizing the metal angle or square tubing to be used should be submitted
to staff for final approval; condition 'f' requires that the brick veneer
be returned to staff for final color selection to fit with the overall
building scheme; condition 'g' was added that the open space element shall
be coordinated with the City Landscape Architect and staff. It was noted
that approval of the project was subject to the drawing submitted at the
meeting which addressed the 10 concerns outlined in the staff report.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
WPC 6024P
Tape: 314
Side: 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
Wednesday, October 10, 1990 Public Services Buildin~
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Grasser Horton, Commissioners Carson,
Cartmill, Casillas, Decker, Fuller, and Tugenberg
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Lee, Principal
Planner Pass, Associate Planner Reid,
Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Assistant
Planner Herrera-A, Contract Planner Lettieri,
City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg, Senior Civil
Engineer Ullrich, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chair Grasser Horton and was
followed by a moment of silent prayer.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
Chair Grasser Horton reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its
responsibilities and the format of the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meetings of September 5 and September 12, 1990
MSC (Carson/Decker) 6-0-1 (Chair Grasser Horton abstained) to approve the
minutes of September 5, 1990.
MSUC (Carson/Decker) 7-0 to approve the minutes of September ]2, 1990.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
ITEM 1. PUBLIC HEARING: (A) PCZ-90-G: REQUEST TO REZONE 2.52 ACRES LOCATED
AT 647 EAST NAPLES STREET FROM R-1-10 TO R-1-7 George Merziotis
(continued from 9-12-90)
(B) Pcs-go-04: REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 2.52 ACRES KNOWN AS ELKS
RIDGE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 90-04, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
EAST NAPLES, EAST OF FOXBORO AVENUE George Merziotis
(continued from 9-]2-90)
Assistant Planning Director Lee informed the Commissioners that the applicant
had withdrawn the application, and no further action was required.
Plannina Commission -2- October 10, 1990
ITEM 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Pcz-go-Q-M: CITY-INITIATED PROPOSAL TO REZONE
CERTAIN TERRITORY, GENERALLY BOUNDED BY PALOMAR STREET WEST OF
BROADWAY TO THE NORTH, THE SOUTHERN CITY BOUNDARY TO THE SOUTH,
INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD TO THE WEST AND A LINE GENERALLY TENDING FROM
THE POWER EASEMENT EAST OF BROADWAY TO FOURTH AVENUE AND BEYER WAY
TO THE EAST, FROM THEIR CITY-ADOPTED COUNTY ZONE CLASSIFICATIONS TO
CITY CLASSIFICATIONS UTILIZED THROUGHOUT CHULA VISTA. SHORT FORM OF
TITLE OF PROPOSAL: "HARBORSIDE B PART II"
Planning Consultant Lettieri gave an overview of the property referred to as
Harborside B Part II proposed for rezoning. He noted this was the final
hearing on the Montgomery Specific Plan. Mr. Lettieri stated there were two
specific areas: 1) just east of Broadway at the Otay Market location which is
presently zoned C37; and 2) the residential area zoned M54 just south of Main
Street, for which staff recommended further study and to be brought back to
the Planning Commission in the future.
Mr. Lettieri reported that the Montgomery Planning Committee held a public
hearing on September 19, 1990, and unanimously recommended that the properties
be reclassified as designated on Exhibit A.
Chair Grasser Horton asked when the SDG&E property would come before the
Commission. Principal Planner Pass answered the SDG&E property was still
being studied primarily from the standpoint of its potential health hazards.
Mr. Pass stated staff felt it would be at least a year or two before there
would be any sufficient information to recommend a course of action.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was
opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Carson/Fuller) 7-0 that based on the Initial Study and comments on the
Initial Study and Negative Declaration, find that this reclassification will
have no significant environmental impacts and re-adopt the Negative
Declaration issued on IS-88-4M and IS-88-65M for the Montgomery Specific Plan.
MSUC (Carson/Fuller) 7-0 to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance
changing the zones as considered by the Montgomery Planning Committee and
described on the attached Exhibit A.
ITEM 3. PUBLIC HEARING: DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT,
EIR-8g-IO RANCHO DEL REY SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) III PLAN
Associate Planner Barbara Reid stated this was the Supplemental EIR for Rancho
del Rey SPA III which was prepared in conjunction with the previously prepared
Final EIR in 1983 which included the entire Rancho del Rey area. Ms. Reid
noted that the Park section of the report stated that all of the park
requirements had not been met but there is further work going on between
McMillin and the City and that by the time the final EIR comes forward, the
park land requirement will be met. She also noted that additional comments
had been received from the Clearinghouse. She then turned the presentation
over to Ms. Betty Dehoney of P&D Technologies.
Planninq Commission -3- October 10, 1990
Ms. Dehoney gave an overview of the mitigable impacts, including geology and
soil, drainage, air quality, cultural resources, transportation, parks and
recreation, and public service. She stated the biological impacts (coastal
sage scrub, gnat catcher, cactus wren, and snake cholla} still are
unmitigated. The landform alteration associated with the project were
considered significant and the impacts were similar to those anticipated in
the original review. Ms. Dehoney then discussed the different alternatives
evaluated.
Commissioner Casillas, referring to a letter from Dr. Gordon Snow, asked if
there was additional information on seismic hazards. Ms. Dehoney answered
that geologic hazards, volting seismicity, liquefaction, and ground water had
been evaluated in the technical report and a fairly extensive mitigation
requirements, including the technical requirement, are to be made as
conditions on the grading and technical work.
Commissioner Casillas asked that a graph in sufficient detail showing grading
be provided for review. Environmental Review Coordinator Reid answered that a
larger scale tentative map would be provided on November 14 when the project
would be coming back for final review.
Commissioner Tugenberg commented on the paragraph on page 6 of the staff
report regarding community tax structure, and his understanding that
residential dwelling units did not pay for themselves.
Commissioner Tugenberg, referring to Section AA, Figure 4-4, of page 17 of the
Draft EIR, questioned the height of the slope.
Commissioner Decker asked why the staff report did not comment on the lack of
Hidden Vista Road and Terra Nova Shopping Center and "H" Street intersections
which would be impacted.
Traffic Engineer Rosenberg stated that the TPP would govern the conditions of
the development to the extent it would require whatever improvements necessary
to satisfy the Transportation Phasing Plan. The project was only looking at
the on-site and adjacent intersection and reliance will be on the outcome of
the Transportation Phasing Plan which would identify the mitigations. A
report would be prepared to show the alternative mitigations that would be
possible to relieve that intersection of traffic.
In answer to Commissioner Tugenberg's previous question, Ms. Dehoney stated
that a fiscal impact evaluation was conducted in which the projected annual
operating revenues and costs associated with the project were evaluated from
an estimated start date of FY 1990 through 2010. The evaluation indicated
that the net revenues would vary from the projections based on unanticipated
and unforeseeable action. The revenue would decline as time progressed.
Commissioner Decker questioned the ADTs which were not in agreement. Traffic
Engineer Rosenberg answered that SPA III generated 11,400 trips, SPA I and II
generated 28,600, with a total of about 40,000 trips for the entire area.
Planninq Commission -4- October 10, 1990
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Duard Houck, 1125 Paseo del Cerro, Chula Vista, stated he found the EIR
inadequate in the areas of biology and open space and distribution of parks.
Peter Watry, 81 Second Avenue, Chula Vista, would like to have another
mitigation factor analyzed regarding natural slopes. He would like to see
more of the slopes and more of the canyons left in their natural form.
Craig Fukuyama, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, representing the Rancho del
Rey Partnership, offered to answer any questions the Commission might have.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked Mr. Fukuyama if any soil would be exported. Mr.
Fukuyama answered there would be none exported; they were going to try to
balance the project on-site.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Casillas, relating to the grading and the notion of maintaining
more of the natural slope, stated that Rice Canyon might be a good candidate.
He suggested that it might be terraced for housing. He did not want to
destroy the beauty of Rice Canyon. He asked that staff might take another
look at that.
Commissioner Carson commented on the air quality when grading was being done,
and the absenteeism of children from school. She asked if something could be
done to eliminate the amount of dust and poor air quality.
Commissioner Decker commented on the manufactured slopes. He stated that the
General Plan said the existing topography would be maintained as much as
possible, and he wondered if cutting a slope 70 feet was maintaining as much
as possible.
Commissioner Carson commented that no matter how they tried to mitigate it,
the endangered species would be impacted with each project.
Chair Grasser Horton directed that staff prepare the final EIR taking into
consideration the comments made.
ITEM 4: PCS-90-15 - CONSIDERATION OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EVERGREEN
GARDENS, CHULA VISTA TRACT 90-15, Conrad Previs Trust
Chair Grasser Horton stated she had a conflict of interest and left the dais.
Vice-Chair Fuller took over the Chair's responsibilities at this time.
Associate Planner Barbara Reid gave an overview of the project which had been
approved by the Montgomery Planning Committee with reservations, and by the
Design Review Committee. Ms. Reid noted that the Planning Commission's action
would determine whether the individual units could be rented or sold. Based
on the Initial Study and comments on the Initial Study and Negative
Declaration, staff recommended that the Commission find that the project would
have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the mitigated Negative
Declaration issued on IS-90-36.
Plannino Commission -5- October ]0, ]990
Associate Planner Reid asked that a new condition be added to the conditions
in the staff report, that the applicant annex to the Community Facilities
District 5. She then recommended approval of the tentative subdivision map,
subject to the conditions.
Ms. Reid reviewed the concerns of the Hontgomery Planning Committee which
included: ]) Mello RoDs' ability to meet the needs of the school children in
the area of the proposed project; 2) recycling.
Commissioner Tugenberg was concerned that the open space at the north end of
the project was an SDG&£ easement and that the children had no other open
space in which to play.
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the SDG&E easement was being
studied and that it could not be definitively stated that the area should not
be used. Hr. Lee stated this was a private open space area and, in addition,
each of the units had private open space.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked about the decision as to whether the units could
be sold or rented. Assistant Planning Director Lee explained the approval of
the subdivision map would allow them to sell units as opposed to building as a
rental project.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if CC&Rs would govern the project. Mr. Lee
answered in the affirmative.
Upon Commissioner Tugenberg's query, Assistant Planning Director Lee stated
there would be maintenance fees involved.
Commissioner Carson stated she was disappointed that the Parks & Recreation
Department withdrew their request that an open turf area be provided east of
the sand play area, and now only require the PAD fees. Since there is no
definite answer as to whether the SDG&E easement area would be safe, she felt
open space should be provided by the sand play area.
Commissioner Decker questioned the width of the central access driveway.
Assistant Planning Director Lee answered the driveway had been narrowed down
by Design Review to provide additional landscaping through the entry point.
Upon Commissioner Decker's query, Mr. Lee answered the project provided
parking in the parking bays in addition to two-car garages. Private streets
typically are narrower without parking allowed. Mr. Lee stated the project
had been approved by the Fire Department regarding the width of the streets
and the turning areas.
Commissioner Carson asked about moving one lot to create an open space--where
an appropriate place would be. Assistant Planning Director lee said that
normally the recreational amenities would be centralized~ but in this case, if
a lot were removed, it would be a cluster of units. He felt the area adjacent
to the present open area would be logical if there was a desire to have
additional open space provided as a guarantee if the SDG&£ easement proved to
be infeasible in the future.
Plannino Commission -6- October 10, 1990
Vice-Chair Fuller then opened the public hearing.
Conrad Previs, 5847 E1 Cajon Boulevard, San Diego~ stated the small-scale open
space areas were rather useless; he felt the SDG&E easement was very usable.
There would be CC&Rs and there would not be street parking.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Several of the Commissioners were concerned about the SDG&E easement and the
possibility of not being able to use it as open space. There was general
discussion as to whether a lot could be landscaped and available in such case,
and which lot would be most appropriate.
Assistant Planning Director Lee suggested that the Commission recommend the
project for approval with the stipulation that one lot at the north end
adjacent to the easement be reserved at this time for recreation purposes, to
be landscaped, and the area later utilized for the housing as shown on the
plan should the SDG&E easement study be completed and show that the area is
not a health hazard.
Assistant Attorney Rudolf noted that the Commission's action was final, unless
appealed to the City Council.
Vice-Chair Fuller asked the applicant for his response to reserving the lot
for open space.
Mr. Previs stated this project had been cut down already. He felt the large
back yards were sufficient. He felt it would be too much of a loss.
MSUC (Tugenberg/Fuller) 6-0 (Commissioner Grasser Horton-conflict of interest)
that based on the Initial Study and comments on the Initial Study and Negative
Declaration, find that this project will have no significant environmental
impacts and adopt the mitigated Negative Declaration issued on IS-90-36.
MS (Tugenberg/Cartmill) that based on the findings contained in Section "E" of
this report, recommend that the tentative subdivision map for Evergreen
Gardens, Chula Vista Tract 90-15 be approved, subject to the conditions
through 'r', with the additional condition to annex to Community Facilities
District No. 5.
Commissioner Tugenberg commented that he felt the back yards mitigated the
problem of open space.
VOTE: 5-1 (Carson voted against; Grasser Horton had conflict of interest.)
Chair Grasser Horton stated there would be a 5-minute recess.
Commissioner Cartmill stated he had a conflict of interest on the next item
and left the dais and the meeting.
Planninq Commission -7- October 10, 1990
ITEM $: PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-89-27; APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE ZONING
ADMINIST~TOR TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 75-UNIT LOW-INCOME HOUSING PROJECT FOR SENIORS AT
628/638 THIRD AVENUE
Assistant Planning Director Lee stated the project had been considered by the
Zoning Administrator and had been approved on September 14, 1990. This was
appealed, but in consultation with the City Attorney's office, it had been
decided to treat it as an application before the Planning Commission rather
than an appeal. Any recommendation would be forwarded on to the City Council
for final approval. The applicant had provided the City with the additional
fee to cover the cost of the hearing. The appellant's fee would be returned.
Mr. Lee continued with an overview of the project. He stated it had received
Design Review approval. He noted the appellant had objected to the overall
height of the building, the limited parking, lack of open space, and the
number of units proposed.
Assistant Planning Director Lee explained that the building was 4 stories in
height, as opposed to 3-1/2 stories allowed by the underlying zone; however,
the 44' height of the building was actually 1' under the maximum set in the
zone.
Mr. Lee stated the Commercial Office zone allows housing by use permit. The
parking needs and ratios for subsidized senior projects were substantially
lower than normal parking needs. The City Council and recent Zoning
Administrator approval of that particular project required the designation of
additional parking at the adjacent Salvation Army site, one lot to the south.
Assistant Planning Director Lee also pointed out the availability of services
within the immediate vicinity. He noted the open space had been reduced from
the traditional R-3 standards; but the units had private balconies, and there
was a separate unit designated for recreation. Regarding density, Mr. Lee
said the units average 1.1 persons per unit.
Mr. Lee stated that along with the appeal from an owner at 625 Third, staff
received a letter of protest from an owner at 659 Third. That particular
letter objected to various activities at the present Salvation Army activity,
which they felt caused traffic congestion and hazards in the area.
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that he had reviewed with the City
Traffic Engineer the accident rates in the area, and it had not proven to be a
problem at that location as far as accidents being recorded.
Mr. Lee noted that the Commission on Aging had indicated some concern
regarding parking and the scale of the building. Mr. Lee stated he had
offered to meet with the Commission on Aging at their next meeting of November
14, and the project would not be set for Council consideration until after the
Commission on Aging had the opportunity to provide the input prior to the
Council hearing.
Plannina Commission -8- October 10, 1990
Mr. Lee stated that based on the most recent analysis and the previous
assessment, staff considered this location and land use appropriate, subject
to the conditions required by the Zoning Administrator: 1) that the project
comply with Design Review approval; 2) provide the 39 parking spaces on-site;
3) upon initial opening of the project, the Salvation Army shall provide
additional parking if occupant demand exceeds availability; 4} the
Council-added provision that should the grocery store operation at Third and
"J" cease to operate, the Salvation Army would provide daily transportation
for occupants to get groceries. Mr. Lee asked that the Planning Commission
include the four conditions in its consideration.
Commissioner Fuller was concerned about the loading and unloading of the buses
when the seniors were taken to and from activities in the community.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked why the project had not been executed previously.
Commissioner Decker asked if the elevator shaft protruded from the top of the
building.
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted the architect would respond to the
foregoing when he spoke.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Priscilla Gilliam, Loan Consultant to the Salvation Army, stated she agreed
with the staff report. She noted this was Section 8 low-income housing, and
it was a very competitive process. This site had been selected previously and
they were not permitted to change sites, since the quality of the site was
part of the competitive process. It had originally been submitted as a
5-story building which had been reduced by the City to a 4-story building.
This required the Salvation Army to go back to HUD. It has now been approved
by HUD as a 4-story building in its present configuration.
Ralph Flewelling, 766 Colorado Blvd., Los Angeles, architect for the project,
stated there were two hydraulic elevators. He stated the project had gone
through several departments in the HUD system and now was in Mortgage Credit.
They were led to believe they would receive approval to go ahead within the
next month.
Pat Hutchins, Chairman of the Advisory Board of the Salvation Army, stated
there were spaces for buses and vans to load the seniors in the Salvation Army
parking lot, and the seniors were loaded there. There is, however, a City bus
stop by the curb in front of the Salvation Army.
Bess Pocklington, 656 Glover Place, Chula Vista, stated she was against the
Conditional Use Permit for the increased density; it would make a major
environmental impact on the people living in the surrounding area; there would
be an increase in density and a reduction in parking spaces. There was not
enough room in the Salvation Army parking lot for overflow parking; there
would be an increase in traffic.
Planninq Commission -9- October ]0, 1990
Ms. Pocklington disagreed with staff's estimation of the number of people
residing in the units. She was concerned with the Fire Department's ability
to respond to fires on the fourth floor. Ms. Pocklington disagreed with the
finding that the project would contribute to the general well-being of the
neighborhood and community. She asked other residents in opposition who were
in attendance to stand. (There were 8 residents against the project who did
not speak.)
Commissioner Tugenberg questioned City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg about the
level of service in the area. Mr. Rosenberg stated he would research the file
and report back.
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the Initial Study had been reviewed
by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator in conjunction with
Engineering. The Traffic Section of Engineering stated in the Initial Study
that they had determined it would not adversely affect the existing levels of
service on roads and intersections in the vicinity. It was estimated that
this project would have about half the number of trips the site would have
with an office complex. Mr. Lee discussed the setback from the residential
area, access oriented to Third Avenue rather than into the residential area,
parking, the surrounding amenities, and the typical number of residents per
unit.
In answer to Commissioner Decker's query, Assistant Planning Director Lee said
the Fire Department had no objection to the project and the building would be
sprinklered.
Chair Grasser Horton asked about the entry age of the residents. Mr. Lee
answered the age was 62 in this instance.
Richard Ballard, 65 Landis, Chula Vista, stated he was a firefighter in the
City of San Diego, and it was his experience that most of these types of
residences had two occupants. He was concerned with the number of units, the
additional noise, the elevation of the building, visual impact on the
neighbors, and open space. He also had a letter of opposition from another
neighbor which he gave to the Commission.
Michael Green, 535 "H" Street, representing James Malcolm who appealed the
action of the Zoning Administrator, stated his client was opposed to the
project as proposed. He noted the parking problem, the visual impact, impact
on future development, bad precedent, and asked what the neighborhood
residents were getting out of the project. Mr. Green asked that the project
be denied. Upon Chair Grasser Horton's request, Mr. Green gave James
Malcolm's address as 625 Third Avenue, the owner of the property across the
street.
Ron Floyd, 629 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, spoke in opposition of the project.
He felt the present C-O zoning should be preserved. He did not feel the
residential development in a commercial area would supplement the future
demand for offices. He also spoke of the height of the building, the density
bonus, parking, accidents because there is no turn lane, and open space.
Plannino Commission -10- October 10, 1990
Patrick Barajas, 375 "J" Street, Chula Vista, commented the Police Department
does not respond to traffic accidents unless there is an injury. Therefore,
all the accidents are not reported. There is no parking at the Salvation
Army, should be less density; there would be trash on the balconies along with
towels, beach umbrellas, etc. He thought it was the wrong location.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked Mr. Flewelling, the architect, if any
consideration had been given to underground parking. Mr. Flewelling answered
that the HUD loan would not support undergrounding parking, the "202 Program"
did not require that amount of parking.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if another location had been considered for the
project. Mr. Flewelling answered that the Salvation Army's intent was to get
this type of project immediately adjacent to their Corps building because they
have programs which the seniors can utilize. This was the Salvation Army~s
intent in most cases.
Upon Chair Grasser Horton~s query, Mr. Flewelling stated the Commissioners
could visit Grace Tower, Trinity Manor, or Cathedral Arms which were larger
than this project.
Commissioner Carson asked what the average clientele was. Mr. Flewelling
answered that approximately 90% were women.
Answering Chair Grasser Horton, Mr. Flewelling explained that the units had
kitchens; there was no central dining; there was a large central recreational
room with a kitchenette.
City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg, answering Commissioner Tugenberg~s previous
question, stated that the last study performed for the Growth Management
Program in 1989 revealed that the intersection of Third and "I" was operating
at LOS C during the P.M. period, Third and "J" was operating at LOS D, Third
and "K" LOS C, and Third and "L" LOS D, with approximately 23,000 cars per day
on Third Avenue. "J" Street and "I" Street carry around 9,000 cars a day.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Casillas stated that Mr. Green had asked what Chula Vista was
getting for this project. He noted there would be 75 units for low-income
people. The General Plan and the Housing Element of the City require
low-income housing.
Commissioner Fuller stated she felt it was a good location since there was
public transportation, there was access to facilities, and the height was not
an issue since there were other buildings of the same height in the area, and
patterns of traffic would be greater if it were an office complex. She
supported the project.
MSUC (Fuller/Casillas) 6-0 (Cartmill-conflict of interest) that based on the
Initial Study and comments on the Limited Study and Negative Declaration, find
that the project PCC-89-27, will have no significant environmental impacts and
readopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-88-77.
i,¢- SY
Plannina Commission -ll- October lO, 1990
MS (Fuller/Casillas) to recommend that the City Council approve the
Conditional Use Permit PCC-89-27 based on the Findings in Section E and
subject to the four conditions set forth in the report, and subject to an
added condition that the development will be available for occupancy by
seniors only.
Commissioner Tugenberg stated he would vote against the project, not because
the senior facility was not needed, but because he felt the opportunity to
develop the downtown area was being limited.
Chair Grasser Horton said she would abstain from voting because she was torn
between providing affordable housing for seniors, and also because of the
possible parking problem; and the whole picture of what is needed for the
downtown area.
VOTE: 3-2-1
AYES: Commissioners Fuller, Casillas, and Decker
NOES: Commissioner Carson and Tugenberg
ABSTENTIONS: Chair Grasser Horton
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Commissioner Cartmill
After referring to the City Code, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf informed
Chair Grasser Horton that a Commission member who abstains shall in effect
consent that a majority of the quorum may act for him/her. In this case, her
vote would act as an affirmative vote. Mr. Rudolf asked Chair Grasser Horton
if she was satisfied with her vote being affirmative. Chair Grasser Horton
answered that she would let the vote stand. Therefore, the VOTE WAS 4-2, with
Commissioners Carson and Tugenberg voting against.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
Assistant Planning Director Lee brought the Commission's attention to a
proposed ordinance which would allow Commissions and Boards to place items
directly onto the Council's agenda.
Mr. Lee advised the Commission that 15 E. "J" Street complied with the City's
requirement regarding FARs.
Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that the Community Development
Department was requesting that the Planning Commission consider two special
meetings: Monday, November 12, to consider the Southwest Redevelopment Area;
and Tuesday, November 13, at 6 p.m., a joint meeting with the City Council.
At Commissioner Carson's request, Mr. Lee explained that there was a deadline
of December and to meet that date, the meetings would need to be held by the
aforementioned dates.
Commissioner Tugenberg advised that he would be out of town November 9 through
November 19. Commissioner Carson noted she would not be able to attend on
November 12.
Plannino Commission -12- October 10, 1990
Assistant Planning Director Lee stated he would discuss the matter with
Community Development to try to shift the meeting to an earlier date and
possibly an earlier time. Mr. Lee stated that November 12 was not a legal
holiday for the City.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf asked for the Commission's response to the
proposal that the boards and commissions have the ability to place items
directly on the Council agenda. This, however, would have to be done by a
majority vote of the advisory board or commission. The Commissioners stated
it was a good idea to be able to go directly to the Council, because it could
streamline and get much faster action.
Chair Grasser Horton informed the people still remaining that the public
hearing PCC-Sg-27 passed.
Assistant Planning Director Lee pointed out this item would be going to the
Commission on Aging the latter part of November and then on to the City
Council in December. Notices would be sent out.
ADJOURNMENT at 9:55 p.m. to the Study Session Meeting of October 17, 1990, at
5:00 p.m. in Conference Rooms 2 & 3.
Nancy RimYley, SeCretary
P1 arming Commi ssi on
WPC 8520P
File No.
PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING DATE..
%
PUB L I CATI ON DATE ~ ~
MAILED 'NOTICES~ TO-PROPERTY OWNERS NO.MAILED
Legislative Staff, Construction Industr~y Fed.
PER GOVERNMENT CODE 54992: ~_3_~36 Greenwich Drive, Suite F, San Dieqo 921~
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK ~/,~/~
~OPIES TO:
Administration (4~)/~ ra
Planning./
_Ori~inatin~ D~.-_ ~ .~-. .
Engineering ~.~'::
Others:
,City Clerk's Office
POST on Bulletin Boards
Special Instructions:
. '1 ~ --3~" Rev.5/88
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL to consider the following item(s):
PCC-89-27: MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICATION - 75-unit, low-income senior housing project
located at 628-638 Third Avenue. Consideration to delete
preference to local residents in leasing proposed project
and modify requirement to secure easement at 642 Third
Ave for parking. (Contact Planning Department 691-5101)
If you wish to challenge the City's action on these requested
modifications by an appeal in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to
the City Clerk at or prior to the public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD on Tuesday, April 2, 1991, at 4:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appeal.
DATED:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
-
,
-,
- ,
'.~
PCC-89-27
M"';'j
/-- i ~
- - >-~ .,,' :; ~
~;>"'c r~
t_ -_,"", "'.
l'''"('"c' >-"'~k
't"'" -.
.::->~~
'<ct,
573-170-07-09
Wagner, Avis
jllaThird Ave. ~
ChU1a Vista, CA 92010
573-170-07-10
Pollock, Ray & Joan
.. K Street
~a Vista, CA 92010
,.;.._..--"- ~-_'''':':'' .-",_..:':':..,._-~_-,:",-_.-",~,';"....-",
573-170-07-01
Roach, Ronald & Leslie
_ Ynez Place
Coronado, CA 92118
573-170-07-11
Van Natta, Joan
_K Street
~a Vista, CA 92011
573-170-07-02
~ck, Rose & Elrich,
"Third Avenue, .
Chu1a Vista, CA 92~
573-170-07-12
. Holeman, Sheila
, _Third Avenue_
~a Vista, CA 92010
Harold
573-170-07-03
_ricks, Marga~
rhird Ave., .
ula Vista, CA 92010
573-170-07-13
Volpp, Alice S. R/ Clark,
, 0 Reiley, Carolyn C
tIIlThird Avenue, 11III
". ~a Vista, CA mTO
I
I
Richar
573-170-07-04
Copeland, Floy
~Third Ave....
CftUla Vista, C~92010
573-170-07-14
Itmill, James L Pepler,Ann M
Third Avenue
ula Vista, CA 92010 '
573-170~07-05
.e 1er/Esther F
Third Ave. .
u a Vista, CA 92010
573-170-07-15
Thichava, Arlene
. _ Douglas Street
; ~la Vista, CA 92010
573-170-07-06
!!i 1, Ray ,
brillo Ave.
oronado, CA 92118
! 573-170-07-16
,
i Irin, Daniel & Mary K
i Third Ave. 11II
; ula Vista, CA~010
I. . '" ,....
,
,
I
i 573-170-07-17
!~iyah, Noory H TR
1111II Nautilus St.
La Jolla, CA 92037
I
I
I 573-170-07-18
! .he ard, Ray .
i Third Avenue, till
; u a Vista, CA 9~
573-170-07-07
Juarez, Rudolph
IIIlThird Ave. ~
cnuTa Vista, CA 92010
573-170-07-08
.0 ,Ernie & Merri1u
Via Del Alazan
onita, CA 92002
,
-.........,.-,...",~.,.",...~....,..,,.,,..:-~....."-"----~'!"-,,,..,...""'.'.,.~"'~ = ",._,.~"-"'
14/ -3
i )
(
573-170-10
Floyd, Ronald & Oonna
~a, Gordon & Karen
_Third Ave., Ste."
Chula Vista, CA' 92010
573-170-11
R E Hazard Jr., Inc.
c/o Commercial Facilities
_ Sorrento Valley Rd. '.
~Diego,tA 92121 -
573-170-27
Malcolm, James C. Trust
~ Third Ave.
~la Vista, CA 92010
:~~~~~;';;~f,~'i-
I
f
I
j -
I
1
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFiCEOF THE CITY CLERK
TE'r"m. COPTER# (6~.9) 691-$17~.
TO: STAR NEWS - LEGALS
FIRM: STAR NEWS
TELECOPIER NO: ((,l~) 426-6346 PHONE NO.:(~(~ ) 427-3000
FROM: CHULA VISTA CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
DATE: ~/l~/~l TIME: I{ Oo ~
TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE:
WE ARE TRANSMITTING AT FOLLOWING SPEED:
4 MINUTES 6 MINUTES
FAST STANDARD
IF ALL PAGES ARE NOT RECEIVED, PLEASE CALL (6~9) 69~-5041 AND ASK
~UBLISH ON:
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010/(619) 691-5041
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL to consider the following item(s):
PCC-89-27: MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICATION - 75-unit, low-income senior housing project
located at 628-638 Third Avenue. Consideration to delete
preference to local residents in leasing proposed project
and modify requirement to secure easement at 642 Third
Ave for parking. (Contact Planning Department 691-5101)
If you wish to challenge the city's action on these requested
modifications by an appeal in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to
the city Clerk at or prior to the public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD on Tuesday, April 2, 1991, at 4:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appeal.
DATED:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
5731500'00
.s.2iNCER:AI.BERH PHILOA;; C t
~MITSCHER,ST, . .'
'CHULA VISTA!CAJ92010
,5731560700
'IMADO ,MAUA DOL.ORES
. ,WIHNETKA:DR
N TAl'CA192902
l '",,,-,,.., ,""-",'
5731500400
IrDWIN'WIL.lIAM1.,IRINE
. :.IlITSCllER,ST\
A VISTAdCA19Z010'
"..,.
.
.
.
L
.
.
.
.
.
.
5731500800
_GEORGE,M
LANDIS ;AVE
A!VIStAiCAI92010
5731501900 5731502000
;.' . RA'PHILLIPS5UVING ,TRUST'UilA 'RIlNOOllPH;R'RORI!lAcR'
- 89 LANDIS lAVE
L.ANDIS IVE A VISTABtAf92010
, . A)VISTA tAI92010,
.
5731502300
FIRST.METHOOIST~CRURCHlOF;CHUL
~ISTA THE
~IH~~~j:~EA 92010
';;;:'
5731600400
tlGESS FRED. A:TRUST 06-22-90
...___ I' GARRETT AVE
.. -' ,. L.A VISTA'CA 92010
.. Jt l
''''c .
... ;/I:
,~ . 5731601000
..... DUCKWORTH-FORD ROBERT"W/PIERET
..~.. · l.i.WINOSOR CIRCLE
.", mtA VISTA CA,92010
,
5731601500
.~E KIVOSHI
RIVERTONPL.
IEGO,CA 921~0
5731602100
M.ION ARMY,THE (CORP)
,HAWTHORNE BLVD
GELES CA:90274
/"
5731602700
MINT. ION"ARMY. (CORP) .THE
HAWTHORNE BLVD
o PALOS VERDES CA 90274
I
5731700200
.HAYES ROBERT/DORIS ,I
IMEPT
___ . N,HASKIL.l; ST
.....'.. S TX ,75240
...
.... 5731701HI0 1'-1- U2.
., ..' 'R EHAZARDJR INC 7
... . MOMMERCIAL. FACILITIES_
... . SORRENTO.VAUEY RD
...; OIEGO:CA 92121
5732400200
PIERI-DEB8AS ENTERPRISES
iMI:.PECTRUM PROP MGMT'
FORMULA PL flA
DIEGO CA 92121
.
5731600100
'iii' N6E8ARRY:W.1L.EONALM
80NITUVUOE 'OR
TA"CA 92002
5731600500
;lUOT. FAY:
I STREET
A'VISTA CA
92010
.
5731601600
II AlE KIYOSHIlALICE K
,THIRD AVE
LA VISTACtA 92010
.
-
.
5731602200
_NOHARA JIMMIE: Hl.fUDI lS
, OTA'VALLEY'ROAD
A VISTA CA 92011
.
.
.
57
iiI.ll.LT, ION
nftIIft>HAW
.
.
573170
HAYES R
MPT
.
5731101200
.s 'CHARLES
ORI 'L.H
, VISTA CA
.
iii TR
92010
.
5732400700
MIIATION AR"'THE
. W NINTH ST
. ANGELES "'.90015
.
.
5731502200
'~CllUK FRANK F
· -LANDIS ,AVE
" ULA!VISTA CA'92010
0.(";
~.(:..
~~ 1 5731600300
l .C;( SEEBER BONNIE C
c.t. '.1- ~aHT CA' 92010
(..a
Ce(
c..l.;"
573 600700
_ OE G
GARRETT
LA CA 9
'.
//
/
oee
( .c:
C;. C
l.C
C'.,.
l _C'
C.C
L.~
~"<;...,
5731500200
M.U - DANIEUllIlALLORY,
, MITSCHER,ST.
, A,VISTA'CA 92010
5731500600
'WERo'eRN1EJDIAHA
;LUlDIS' AVE
" ULA'VISTA"CA 92010,
-.
57315 01 000
'MTTSILAWRENCE'Z,TR
, :LANDIS AVE
'. LAVISTA?CA"2010
5731601400
jlINSKY;GUSTAVO B/IlARY P
QUI NARD , ST '1'
A,VISTA tA 92011.
5731601800
~ZER KEVIN J
DORY; DRIVE
. TA CA 92002
5731602600
'MA HILLS'ESTATES
. RD AVE
C L VISTA CA 92011
5731700100
TRUONG TUYEN:V/PHAN HAUT-LIEU
'--RD AVE
~ VISTA CA 92010
5731701000
MiD RONALD E/DONHA E
3RD AVE
. A VISTA CA 92010
5731102700
1f0LM.JAIlES;C TRUST
THIRD AVE
A VISTA CA 92010
573 2500200
_0 GAN UROLYN'J
THIRD AVE STE A
, A VISTA CA 92010
I L/ - 43
E
~-'
-,
,
r
L,
,
.. ,5731500100
", fl' n INEZ E
: . GARRETTUVE
.U~A~VISTA~CAt92010.
: ~
~ ~
t
~
"
,
:5731i~gfg~R8ARAcJ
:iMf:LANDI S,. VE
1~~A,VlST"'A 9i010.
~
- ~"
l
.
,
'57515004100 '
:W' ITf~"R09!RTA~l~<AKA<FUSON
; lANDIS AVE
i' ULA"VISTA~CAI92010 1
)
~'.
,
57131502100
,~NZUELA 6RACIElA
LANDIS AVE
I LA!VISTA3CA 920101
l'
.
5731600200
ilR VEDA L:
. I STll1/2
. A VISTA,CA 92010,
..-
5731600600
M!R KSHIREJOE,6/GLADYS'L
GARRETT: AVE
.' LA VISTA CA 92010
.5731601200
_TZER KEVIN J
'DORY DRIVE
IT A CA 92002
. 5711601700
:SALTZER CHARLES
.dReI~H CA 92010
.
.
573160
DUCKWO
TE
_WINDS
.ftOLA A
.
5731602900
NEUMEISTER DAVID ROSS/RllA W
.,THIRD AVE
.. LA VISTA CA 92010
.
5731100600
'~~~I~~E:U~N
. ~A VISTA CA
A/BRENDA'.M
92010.
.
5731102200 .
STEPP JOHNNIE E/SUE'H
C/O HIGHLAND PROPERTY_MGMT
POBOX 916
BONITA CA 92002
.
. 5732500100
.JENTZ EARLEIKAREN I
_,3RD AVE I#A
. !IWWlA VISTACA 92010.
,c:;;'''''.~".,._
"";::.<.~::-, ..._.', j.~."<,,, "'J"'", ~.~_.""
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULAVISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
CITY COUNCIL of Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of
considering a modification to an application for a conditional use
permit. The city Council previously approved a use permit for a
75-unit low-income senior housing project located at 628-638 Third
Avenue subject to several conditions. A request has been filed
with the city requesting a deletion and/or modification of two of
the conditions that were previously attached to this project.
1. The City Council had placed a condition on the project
requiring that the permittee grant preference to local
residents in leasing of the proposed project. The applicant
is asking that this condition be deleted, since they are
precluded from receiving federal funding with this condition
in place.
2. The permittee was required to secure an easement for the
benefit of guests and residents of the complex over an
adjacent parcel commonly known as 642 Third Avenue to be made
available for guests and residents during such times as
parking spaces on the subject property were occupied. The
applicant has indicated that they have been able to secure a
parking contract but not an easement. A copy of the requested
modification is on file in the office of the Planning
Department.
An Initial Study, IS-85-77, of possible significant environmental
impacts was previously conducted by the Environmental Review
Coordinator. A finding of no significant environmental impact was
recommended and is on file, along with the Initial Study, in the
office of the Planning Department. A plot plan and legal
description of the property are also on file in the office of the
Planning Department.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on these requested
modifications to the conditional use permit by an appeal in court,
you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else
raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written
correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
April 2, 1991, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public
Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person
desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: ..................
FILE PCC-89-27
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 16
Meeting Date 4/9/91
ITEM TITLE: ORDINANCE ~ Adding Chapter 2.31 and
amending Chapter 9.50 of the Municipal Code
relating to Mobilehome Parks and creation of
the Mobilehome Rent Review Commission
SUBMITTED BY: Community DevelopmeNt Director ~ city Attorney_9' ~ A 4, W~/
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ''(4/5th~Vote: Yes__No__X)
At the present time, the City has a rent arbitration
ordinance which provides a mechanism for park residents to
appeal a rent increase when the increase exceeds the
percentage increase of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for
any twelve month period. The appeal is to the American
Arbitration Association who after reviewing the rent
increase would be authorized to make a binding decision upon
the park residents and the park owner.
Since the adoption of the ordinance, only one park has gone
through the process. In this case, the arbitrator ruled in
favor of the park residents. The residents then must
petition to the San Diego County Superior Court for the
judge to affirm or deny the award. When the park residents
petitioned the court, the judge ruled that the City's
ordinance was unconstitutional and therefore did not affirm
the petitioners award. The basis for his ruling was that
the City had unlawfully delegated its police power authority
to the American Arbitration Association, a private entity,
by making it the final decision making power of the City.
The recommended Municipal Code changes address this issue
and other issues relating to the efficacy of the ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the
Ordinance amending Municipal Code Chapter 9.50 relating to
Mobilehome Park Space Rent and adding Chapter 2.31 to the
Municipal Code relating to Creation of the Mobilehome Rent
Review Commission.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Mobilehome Issues
Committee at their meeting on March 26, 1991 voted
unanimously to recommend approval of all of the proposed
amendments as contained herein. On April 2, 1991, the
Committee convened to further discuss the "safe harbor"
provision. At that meeting, the three park owners indicated
that they prefer a 67% (or two-thirds) as opposed to a 90%
Page 2, Item I~
Meeting Date 4/9/91
provision. Two residents said they are satisfied with 90%
and two were opposed to any"safe harbor" provision.
DISCUSSION:
Due to a variety of reasons including an unsuccessful
experience with "binding" arbitration, a judge's
determination that the ordinance in its present form is
unconstitutional, and pending litigation against the City,
staff is proposing the following amendments:
1. Section 9.50.010 APPLICABILITY
Staff proposes a time limit be imposed in which the rent
dispute be resolved. The proposed 120-day limitation should
be an adequate amount of time for the dispute resolution
process to be completed. The intent is to avoid the
recurrence of a long term dispute process as in the case of
Bayscene Mobilehome Park which has taken more than 2 years.
2. Section 9.50.020 EXEMPTIONS ("Safe Harbor")
This amendment would in effect exempt parks from the
ordinance in which 90% of the spaces have entered into long
term leases exempted by Civil Code 798.17 for a term of five
years or more.
3. Section 9.50.030 DEFINITIONS
Staff recommends that a park owner have the opportunity to
"pass-through" certain fees which are presently considered a
part of space rent. The allowable pass-thru's would be for
increases in rates for owner-provided utilities and
government assessments. These pass-thru's do not increase a
park owners profit; but, reimburse for direct expenditure
for these specific items. The park owner would be required
to demonstrate the actuality of these expenses to any park
resident who requested such proof. The pass-thru's would
not affect the maximum rent increase permitted by the CPI
limitation.
4. Section 9.50.070 INITIATION OF SPACE RENT REVIEW
Adding Items F and G limits the arbitrator's authority by
making his/her decision advisory to the Mobilehome Rent
Commission. This new Commission would be empowered to
affirm, modify, or revoke the arbitrator's decision. This
process would cure the alleged misuse of the police power by
Meeting Date 4/9/91
making the Commission a City authority for the purpose of
mobilehome rent disputes.
In addition to the above mentioned changes, a few
"housekeeping" changes are recommended basically relating to
the format of the ordinance.
In order to address the constitutionality issue of the Rent
Arbitration Ordinance, it is recommended that a Mobilehome
Rent Review Commission be established. In order to create
this commission, Chapter 2.31 needs to be added to the
Municipal Code.
The Commission's purpose is to be the official City body to
review rent disputes in mobilehome parks within the City.
The commission would have the authority to affirm, modify,
or revoke the arbitrator's decision. The commission's
decision is final, reviewable only by the courts, which
satisfies the requirements of "due process".
Conclusion
The intent of the ordinance is to provide a process in which
park residents may appeal rent increases. The recommended
changes allow this to be accomplished in an equitable manner
for both the residents and park owners. The changes also
bring the decision making body within the authority of the
City which alleviates the concern that a misuse of police
power may exist in the present ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
(mobile)
ORDINANCE NO. ~__~_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADDING
CHAPTER 2.31 AND AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF
CHAPTER 9.50 OF THE cHULAvISTAMUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO MOBILENOME PAP/rS AND CREATION OF
THE MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW COMMISSION
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as
follows:
SECTION I. That Chapter 2.31 is added to the Chula Vista
Municipal Code to read as follows:
Chapter 2.31 MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW COMMISSION
Section 2.31.010 Creation.
There is hereby created a Mobilehome Rent Review Commission.
Section 2.31.020 Purpose and Intent
It is the purpose and intent of the City Council in
establishing the Commission is to create an advisory body to
provide an independent review of the disputes over rent increases
in mobilehome parks within the City of Chula Vista under Chapter
9.50.
Section 2.31.030 Functions and Duties
The functions and duties of the Commission shall be as
follows:
A. Pursuant to Chapter 9.50, act as the "due process" unbiased
decisionmaker regarding mobilehome park rent disputes.
B. Adopt rules and regulations to procedurally administer hearings
under Chapter 9.50 to determine whether the park owner's rent
increase in excess of the applicable cost of living increase is a
fair return on the park owner's property.
Section 2.31.040 Membership.
A. Number of Members.
The Commission shall consist of seven (7) Voting Members, a
Staff Ex-officio Member and up to three (3) General Ex-officio
Members.
B. Designation of Members.
1
1. Voting Members.
The Voting Members shall be appointed by the City Council from
the qualified electors of the City in accordance with Section 600
et seq. of the Charter. No member shall own or be a tenant in a
mobilehome park.
2. Staff Ex-officio Member.
The City Manager or his/her designate representative shall be
an ex-officio member of the commission, who shall not be required
to be a qualified elector of the city, but who shall have no vote
("Staff Ex-officio Member").
3. General Ex-Officio Members.
The City Council, or its designee, may appoint not greater
than three (3) additional ex-officio members of the Commission, who
shall not be required to be qualified elector(s) of the City, but
any such appointed ex-officio members shall have no vote ("General
Ex-Officio Member").
Section 2.31.050 Term of Office.
A. Term of office--All Classes of Members.
1. Post-Initial Terms.
Except as otherwise provided in this Subsection A, the term of
office of all members, and all classes of members, of said
Commission shall be for a nominal period of four (4) years, and
shall terminate on June 30th of the fourth year of their term,
unless they shall otherwise sooner resign, die, become disqualified
or incompetent to hold Office.
2. Initial Terms of Voting Members.
Notwithstanding subsection A.i., the Initial Terms shall
commence upon appointment and shall conclude, for one (1) Voting
Member on June 30, 1992; for two (2) Voting Members on June 30,
1993; for two (2) Voting Member members on June 30, 1994; and for
two (2) Voting Members on June 30, 1995, unless they shall
otherwise sooner resign, die, become disqualified or incompetent to
hold Office.
a. Assignment to Initial Terms by Lot.
Voting Members shall be assigned to Initial Terms by lot
at the first regular meeting at which all Voting Members are
present, but in any event not later than the third month after
initial appointment of the 7th Voting Member.
2
3. General Ex-officio Member.
The term of General Ex-officio members shall be for a period
of four years from the time of appointment.
4. Staff Ex-officio Member.
The term of the Staff Ex-officio Member shall be indefinite.
5. Holdover Office.
Notwithstanding the end of any Member's Initial Term or Post-
initial Term as herein provided, a Member, other than the Staff Ex-
officio Member, shall be permitted to continue to exercise the
privileges of the former Office after the end of the term until the
Office to which he or she was assigned is filled byre-appointment
or by the appointment of a qualified successor to Office.
6. Vacancies.
Notwithstanding the term of Office to which a Member is
assigned, said Office shall be deemed vacant upon any of the
following events ("Event of Vacancy"):
a. The death or disability of said Member that renders
said Member incapable of performing the duties of office.
b. The termination of status as Member of the Commission
or the classification which was assigned to be represented on the
Commission.
c. The member's conviction of a felony or crime
involving moral turpitude.
d. The member's absence from three (3) regular,
consecutive meetings of the Commission, unless excused by majority
vote of such board or commission expressed in its official minutes.
e. The member has submitted a resignation which
resignation has been accepted by the City Council.
f. The membership has been terminated by a majority vote
of the City Council.
Upon the occurrence of an Event of Vacancy as hereinabove listed,
the City Council shall so declare the Office to be vacant, and
shall expeditiously take such steps as are necessary to fill said
vacancy.
B. Number of Terms.
1. Voting Members.
a. No Voting Member shall be appointed to more than two
(2) terms except as herein provided.
b. A Voting Member assigned to an Initial Term of less
than two (2) years may be appointed at the natural expiration of
their Initial Term to two (2) terms in addition to their Initial
Term. A Voting Member who currently occupies an Office under an
Initial Term may not be appointed to fill the Unexpired Term of
another Office which has become vacant.
c. A Voting Member appointed to the Commission to fill
the unexpired term of an office of a Voting Member which has become
vacant ("Unexpired Term") which has less than two (2) years
remaining on said Unexpired Term, may be appointed to two (2) terms
in addition to their Unexpired Term. A voting Member who currently
occupies an office may not be re-appointed to fill the Unexpired
Term of another office which has become vacant.
d. Any member may be re-appointed after two (2)
successive years of not serving on the Commission in any office or
Membership capacity--Voting, General Ex-officio or Staff Ex-
officio.
2. General Ex-officio Members.
General Ex-officio member may be reappointed without
limitation as to number of terms.
3. Staff Ex-officio Member.
The Staff Ex-officio member shall serve at the pleasure of the
City Council.
Section 2.31.060 Operation of Commission.
A. Time of Meetings.
1. "Organizational Meeting". Among such other meetings as
the Commission may desire to have, the Commission shall meet not
later than in the first week of July each year ("Organizational
Meeting"), and thereupon shall do the following:
a. Select a Chairperson and a Vice Chairperson from
among its Voting Members to serve for a period of one (1) year.
b. Assign such duties to its members as it determines
may be necessary.
c. Deliberate upon agenda issues for further
deliberation and discussion by the Commission.
4
2. Other Meetings. The Commission shall meet at such other
times as it shall establish by majority vote, or at such time as
the Chairperson thereof may call, or at such times as a majority of
the members thereof may call a meeting.
B. Place of Meetings.
Unless the Commission shall otherwise establish another
regular place for its meetings and advise the City Clerk
accordingly, the Commission shall meet in the Council Conference
Room in the Administrative Building at the City Hall Complex
located at 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, or at such other place
as may be posted upon the door of said Conference Room at least
thirty (30) minutes in advance of the Meeting.
C. Conduct of Meetings.
The meetings of the Commission, and notice thereof, shall be
governed by the same rules and regulations by which the City
Council is bound in the conduct of public meetings.
D. Quorum.
Four Voting Members shall constitute a quorum for the
transaction of business.
E. Resolutions.
The affirmative vote of a majority of the entire membership
shall be required for the passage of any resolution of the
Commission.
F. Reports and Recommendations.
Ail reports and recommendations shall be made in writing.
G. Staff Support.
All officers and department heads shall cooperate with and
render reasonable assistance to the Commission. The City Manager
may make available staff and clerical support to the Commission to
fulfill its functions and duties, provided such staff and clerical
support is available.
H. Rules and Regulations.
The Commission may make such rules and regulations not
inconsistent with the provisions of this Chapter.
SECTION II: The title of Chapter 9.50 is amended to read
MOBILEHOME PARK SPACE-RENT REVIEW-~qA~.
5
SECTION III: Section 9.50.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code is amend to read:
Section 9.50.010 Applicability.
This chapter shall apply to a mobilehome that requires a permit
to be moved on a street or highway.
The procedures contained in this chapter are intended to provide
a mechanism for the resolution of disputed increases in rents by
making it advantageous for mobilehomee owners and mohilehome park
owners to establish a better understanding for each other's
positions which will result in agreement on the amount of rent to
be charged. A binding arbitration provision is provided for. The
procedures of the ordinance are established with the intent that
they be accomplished in a timely fashion. The participating
parties shall commit to the goal of completing the arbitration
process within sixty (60) days of the serving of the notice of rent
increase, and that the entire dispute resolution process be
completed within one hundred-twenty (120~ days followina r~¢eiDt of
the notice of space rent increase. This chapter shall not apply to
leases exempted bv Civil Code Section 798.17 ¢"Green Bill" leases).
SECTION IV: That Section 9.50.020 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is added to read as follows:
9.50.020 Exemptions.
Mobilehome parks are exempt from the provisions of this Chapter if
they have:
A. Ninety percent ¢90%) of their spaces occupied by persons with
lona term leases exempted bv Civil Code Section 79~.~7; and
B. Non-lona term leases with provisions that require no greater
rents than those in lon~ term leases.
"Lon~ term leases" means, for the DurDoses of this exemption
section, leases for a term of five years or more. The park owner
shall file a written declaration under penalty of perjury with the
Director of Community Development in order to claim exemption. The
declaration shall clearly set forth the number of spaces available
for rent, rented with leases for five years or more, and any other
pertinent facts necessary to ~ualifv for. and establish the
existence of. this e~emDtion.
SECTION V: That Section 9.50.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code is amended to read:
9.50.030 Definitions.
Words used in this chapter shall have the meaning described to
6
them in this section:
A.~-~ "Space rent" means the consideration, including any bonus,
benefits, or gratuity demanded or received in connection with the
use and occupancy of the mobilehome space in a mobilehome park, or
for the transfer of the lease for parkspace, services,
owner-provided utilities, and amenities, subletting and .security
deposits, but exclusive of any amounts paid for the use of the
mobilehome dwelling or of major capital improvement or other
allowable pass-throughs as defined in this ordinance.
B2. "Mobilehome" means a mobilehome as defined in the California
Mobilehome Home Residency Law.
C3. "Mobilehome park owner" or "Owner" means the owner, lessor,
operator, manager of a mobilehome park within the purview of this
ordinance.
D4~ "Mobilehome resident" =f or "resident" means any person
entitled to occupy a mobilehome dwelling unit by virtue of
ownership thereof.
E~ "Dispute" or "controversy" means a disagreement or difference
which is subject to the arbitration process.
F6. "Consumer price index" or "CPI" shall mean the all urban
consumers/all items component of the San Diego Metropolitan Area U
(broader base) consumer price index.
C7. "Major Capital Improvement Pass-Through" means a separately
identified monthly charge to residents which represents the
repayment of a cost for a major capital improvement with the
following characteristics:
la. Said improvement shall have a cost of more than
$10,000.
2--b. Said improvement shall be exclusive of maintenance or
replacement of existing facilities.
3er Said improvement shall have been approved in concept by
more than fifty percent (50%) of the mobilehome spaces within the
mobilehome park after all spaces in the park have been informed of
the nature, general design, timing, and overall cost of said
improvement, and the amount and duration of the related
pass-through.
H. "Other Allowable Pass-Throuahs" means separately billed utility
service fees and charaes excluded from rent in accordance with thm
Provisions of Civil Code section 798.41: increases in rates of
owner-Provided utilities: and aovernmental assessments such as
real Property taxes, license fees, and assessments for municipal
7
/& //
~er¥~es or improvements . conies of bills, invoices, or other
~DproDriate suDDortina documentation shall be kent on file in the
Dark owner's on-site business office, and made available for review
kY affected resSdents upon reasonable request at any time durina
normal business hours.
SECTION VI: That Section 9.50.050 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read:
Section 9.50.050 Owner Meetings and Possible Voluntary
Negotiations.
Within five days, but not more than 10 days, after service of
a notice of increase as provided in Section 9.50.065, the park
owner must hold an informal meeting for the benefit of the affected
residents to discuss his or her increase. It is hoped that such a
meeting may lead to voluntary settlement of the dispute. The
meeting should be set for a time and date believed to be convenient
for residents and may be changed to a different date based on the
reasonable request of the residents.
The residents shall have the option to choose whether or not
to attend the meeting. Attendance at the meeting shall not affect
the residents' right to arbitrate under Section 9.50.070 cf tki=
Ck~t=r.
SECTION VII: That Section 9.50.065 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read:
Sec. 9.50.065 Notice of rent increase.
A. In any situation where a mobilehome park owner wishes to
increase the space rent above the applicable CPI, he or she must
first give notice to affected residents, at the same time the sixty
(60) day notice rec[~ired bv Civil Code Section 798.30 is ~iven. as
follows:
NOTICE - RENT INCREASE IN EXCESS OF CPI
IF YOU DO NOT TAKE ACTION TO ARBITRATE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS, THIS
INCREASE SHALL BE AUTOMATICALLY EFFECTIVE
This as a notice of space rent increase which exceeds the
nercenta~e increase currcnt annual r~tc of the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) for the most recent twelve (12) month period, as
Fep~ted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Drecedin~ this notice
~ The CPI is % and this increase is % of your current rent.
Under the City's Municipal Code, you are entitled to the following
rights:
1. T= ~- --~ I am required to hold a meeting with the
8
affected residents to discuss the reasons for the increase. The
meeting will be at (time and place). You are encouraged to attend
but are not required to do so. Under the City's ordinance, owners
and residents are encouraged to attempt to resolve differences
regarding this increase.
2. You have the right to file for arbitration with the city's
Community Development Department. You may file for arbitration
whether or not you attend the meeting to discuss the increase. To
file for arbitration, you must place a deposit of $ with the City's
Community Development Department within thirty days of the date
this notice is served on you. If you do not place the deposit, you
forfeit your right to arbitrate the rent increase.
If you or other affected residents are lower-income (below
$13,000-$15,000 per year), you may be eligible to receive
assistance with part of the cost of arbitration from the City's
Community Development Department. If you have questions regarding
arbitration or need more information, you can call the City at
691-5047.
This increase is in addition to the followinq allowable
pass-throughs: f identify tYPe and amount of maior capitol
improvement or other allowable Dass-throuqh]
The following space numbers are subject to this increase: [insert
numbers of affected spaces]
B~-~ If the residents within the affected mobilehome park have
established a representative body and notify the owner in writing
of its existence, a copy of the rent increase notice must be sent
to the chairperson of that body.
C~ A copy of the rent increase notice must be given to the
Community Development Department of the City of Chula Vista at the
~ ...... ~-- ~- issuance of the notice to the
same time as
residents
D3. The rent increase notice must contain the space numbers of all
residents who are subject to the increase which is above the amount
of the applicable CPI.
E4~ The notice shall advise recipients that a deposit of 25% of the
estimated cost of arbitration shall be made within thirty (30) days
of the date of service of notice or the right to arbitration is
waived. The deposit shall be made with the Director of Community
Development.
SECTION VIII: That Section 9.50.070 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read:
9
Section 9.50.070 Initiation of space rent review~b~t-~e~.
~, In any situation where the space rent Dercentaqe increases in
a twelve month period exceed cumulatively the Dercentaae increase
of the consumer price index a= ~cflncd harain for tha yea~ ,as
reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the most regent
twelve (12) month period preceding the rent increase notice, the
following procedures shall apply unless the owner receives written
consent to the increase from more than 50% of the spaces affected
by the notice of increase. The owner must file the original of the
written consent with the Community Development Department and
notify the residents that this has been filed.
B.1. Residents shall be required within thirty days of the date of
service of the notice of increase to deposit with the City
Community Development Department 25% of the estimated arbitration
cost for one day of arbitration. Arbitration shall begin in not
less than 20 days nor more than 30 days after the date of service
of the notice of increase, provided the residents' deposit has been
made.
C,2. Upon receipt of the residents' deposit and notification to the
park owner, the Dark owner shall have 7 days to provide a deposit
which shall he equal to 75% of the estimated cost for one day of
arbitration. The Dark owner shall sian an appropriate document
submittin~ the dispute to arbitration when makin~ the deDosit.
D.3. The cost of arbitration including costs incurred by the
American Arbitration Association in cases where a settlement is
reached prior to any hearing will be shared. The owner shall be
responsible for 75% and the residents responsible for 25% of the
first $750. Any costs of arbitration above $750 shall be shared
equally by both parties. Additional costs above the amount of
deposit shall be due and payable subject to the requirements of the
American Arbitration Association.
E.__4~The arbitration shall be conducted according to the applicable
rules of arbitration of the American Arbitration Association and
under the auspices of the American Arbitration Association.
F.~ The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding advisory to
the Mobilehome Rent Commission and shall be applicable to all
mobilehome residents subject to the rent increase being reviewed
arbitrated. Factors to be considered shall include but not be
limited to a just and reasonable return on the owner's property.
The burden of proof shall be on the park owner to demonstrate that
the rent increase is necessary to provide a just and reasonable
return on the property. The arbitrator's decision shall b,
submitted to the Mobilehome Rent Commission within thirty (30) days
from the be~innin~ of arbitration.
G.6~ The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted to the c~ty'~
10
Mobilehome Rent Commission Ccu.ncil.. which shall affirm, modify, or
revoke the arbitrator's decision at a public hearina held within
sixtv¢60~ days followin~ such submission. The parties may stiDulat~
to merely a review of the record at arbitration, or either side may
request a "de novo" hearina by the Commission. If a de novo
hearin~ is requested, it shall be conducted in accordance with
procedures adopted by the Commission which satisfy the recn/ireme~ts
of "due process" and will constitute a hearinu at which evidence ~s
required bv law. so that the Commission's decision is reviewable by
the courts by a writ of administrative mandamus pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure section 1094.5.
7 ~'-~-- i-f----ti-- -"~-~-~ ~- thc ~-- ~-----~ by ~
h Ii =- - ' ' City
H.~ In the event that the owner reduces the rent increase to the
applicable CPI, or more than 50% of the affected residents agree in
writing to settle the dispute,the review e~4~-t-r~e~e~ process
automatically terminates.
I. 9-~ The review process ' ' shall also be applicable to
the situation where space rent is increased upon change of
ownership of the mobilehome or removal of the unit. Either the
incoming or outgoing owner-occupant shall have the right to
arbitrate.
If an outgoing mobilehome owner intends to sell his or her
mobilehome, he or she may request, and the owner shall be
obligated to provide within 15 days of the request, a written
statement as to the rental rate to be offered to the incoming
owner-occupant. If the rate of increase in rent to the new
owner-occupant is above the amount of the applicable CPI as
provided in subs~ection D.SO.~TC A, then either the current
resident or incoming resident shall have the right to review
........ e the increase under the provisions of this ~ubs~ection
9-~8~q)gq). That Thc right~-~ is subject to the outgoing
or incoming resident placing a deposit pursuant to subs~ection & B
above, within 30 days of either (a) service of the owner's written
statement to the outgoing resident or (b) the date of execution of
a purchase contract between the incoming and outgoing residents,
whichever is thc latter.
The park owner's statement shall contain the following:
NOTICE - RENT INCREASE IN EXCESS OF CPI
IF YOU DO NOT TAKE ACTION TO ARBITRATE IN A TIMELY MANNER, THIS
INCREASE SHALL BE AUTOMATICALLY EFFECTIVE UPON THE SALE OF YOUR
MOBILEHOME.
This is a statement of space rept increase which exceeds the
Percentage increase-.......~ -....--.~ ....-'~' of the Consumer Price Index
11
(CPI) for the twelve f121 month period, as reported bv the Bureall
of Labor Statistics. Drecedina this statement. The CPI is % and
this increase is % of your current rent. This increase is in
addition to the followina allowable Dass-throuahs: [ identify type
and amount of ma40r capitol improvement or other allowable
Dass-throu~h ]
Under the City's Municipal Code, either the outgoing or the
incoming resident arc i__sentitled to file for arbitration with the
City's Community Development Department. In order to arbitrate,
you must place an arbitration deposit of $. with the City's
Community Development Department within thirty days of the date
this notice is served on you or the date of execution of a purchase
contract on the mobilehome. If you do not place the deposit, you
forfeit your right to arbitrate the rent increase.
If you are low income (below $13,000-15,000 per year), you may be
eligible to receive assistance for part of the cost of arbitration
from the City's Community Development Department. If you have
questions regarding arbitration or need more information, you can
call the City at 691-5047.
SECTION IX: That Section 9.50.090 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is repealed:
SECTION X: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Chris Salomone, Director of AB~oCre eM~ Boog0d, City
Community Development n
12
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /(oC)q~:) Approving the Greg Rogers Park Master
Plan and adopting the Negative ~ex~laration for IS-90-51
SUBMITTEO BY: Director of Parks and Recreatioh)~//j
City Manager~ '~L~/ff~~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes__No x .)
REVIEWED
BY:
Since July of 1989, the department has been working with the architectural
firm of Gillespie/DeLorenzo and Associates to design a master plan for Greg
Rogers Park. Numerous meetings have been held with the architects and staff.
Staff has conducted several public meetings to gather comments and concerns
from the community which have been addressed in the proposed plan.
The Master Plan was financed by the Great American Development Company as a
condition of approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map for Rancho del Sur,
Chula Vista Tract 87-8. In addition to financing preparation of the plan, the
developer will make $100,000 of improvements to Greg Rogers Park, per the
Sunbow Public Facilities Financing Plan approved by Council on February 20,
1990. These improvements shall be consistent with the Master Plan. Attached
to this report is a proposed phasing scheme for the implementation of this
park plan.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the Greg Rogers Park Master Plan, and
adopt Negative Declaration for IS-gO-51.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOI4MENOATION: The Parks and Recreation Commission at
the February 21, 1991 meeting, unanimously approved the plan.
DISCUSSION:
The development of the master plan has been a lengthy process which included a
series of community meetings, two reviews by the Parks and Recreation
Commission, and a review by the City Council. A brief history of review
process follows.
On November 2, 1989 a community meeting was held at the Girls and Boys Club of
Chula Vista. The Department utilized two strategies to inform the public
about this meeting: 1) a notice was sent on two occasions to 525 homes and 11
youth sports organizations, and 2) a press release was published in the
Star-News. Despite these efforts only 11 people participated. The public
comments included:
1. Drainage and erosion problems around the slopes and ballfields.
2. Insufficient lighting in the park.
3. Inadequate storage for Little League equipment.
4. Access to the ballfields for safety and emergency vehicles.
5. Concern about when the Master Plan will be implemented.
Meeting Oate.~l~J~
The Parks and Recreation Con~nission reviewed the plan on March 15, 1990, and
voted unanimously to support the plan and recommended its approval to the City
Council.
The City Council reviewed the plan at their meeting on November 20,
During this review, a number of citizens expressed concern about the
confi§uration and location of one of the parking areas. Council referred the
item back to staff for further community review and comment.
A second community meeting was conducted on January 16, 199! at the Girls and
Boys Club. The meeting was publicized in the Star News, and notices were
mailed to 550 homes in the vicinity of the park. Approximately 35 people were
in attendance at the meeting. The major areas of concern expressed by the
residents were the location of the parking areas, the location and
orientation of the ballfield at the north end of the park, and the involvement
of the school district property in the plan. Staff and the Architect
collected these concerns and formulated alternative park master plans.
Residents who attended the January 16 meeting were mailed an invitation to
attend a follow-up session concerning the park. Approximately 20 people
attended the second presentation. The group reached a consensus on the
selection of the park alternative which is before you tonight.
The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed master plan at their
meeting on February 21, 1991, and recommended approval of the proposed plan to
Council. There were, however, some questions about the night lighting of
ballfields and the feasibility of having turn-out lanes to the parking lots
off Oleander Avenue. The residents that were in attendance at the previous
presentations were notified of the Commission meeting.
Staff also presented the plan to the teachers and principal of Greg Rogers
Elementary School. Several members of the school's PTA and the school
district's administrative office were also in attendance. The school district
staff supported the alternative selected by the resident group, and expressed
an interest in a joint project between the City and the school district in
developing a jogging and walking trail at the north end of the park.
As a result of these meetings, staff supports the revised plan and recommends
its approval. The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the changes
and determined there is no need to revise or recirculate the negative
declaration.
The 47-acre Greg Rogers Park features a number of facilities at its Oleander
Avenue location. These include the security residence, restroom building,
playground, maintenance building, picnic area, Little League baseball fields
and the Girls and Boys Clubs. Other prominent features include panoramic
views, steep slopes and a passive area of grassy, rolling terrain. Although
these characteristics are compatible with a traditional "park" image, there
are some significant functional problems that need correcting:
1. The maintenance facility is located in the center of a passive picnicking
area. This facility dominates the entire area taking up space that could
be used for more appropriate park activities. In addition, the building
interferes with the view shed and inhibits the relationship between the
picnic area and the playground.
/7-z
Page 3, Item IQ
Meeting Oate~(,//~/C~ ~
2. The ballfield complex is poorly planned with the fields located on three
different levels, whose slopes have serious erosion problems. The
associated concessions building and spectator seating are in poor
physical condition.
3. There are no pedestrian circulation paths that connect the various parts
of the park or the surrounding community.
4. Several of the existing park facilities are not capable of serving their
intended functions. These include the security residence, the restroom
building and the concessions building. The security residents program
was first initiated in 1980. The Department views the effectiveness of
this program as marginal. The removal of the trailer would most likely
take place in Phase Three of the Master Plan's implementation.
The restroom building is an old concrete masonry structure built when the
park was first developed. It is in poor shape and needs to be replaced
with a facility that will meet modern standards (i.e., vandal resistant
fixtures). In addition, because of the poor condition of the existing
little league concession stand, the Master Plan proposes a new structure
and storage area be built.
5. The existing playground is too small and is not equipped with adequate
play facilities. It is also too far away from the picnic area and the
restroom.
E. The picnicking facilities for the park are inadequate and improperly
located. Also, there are no facilities to accommodate large groups.
7. Overall park landscaping (including planting, irrigation and lighting) is
in need of substantial upgrading.
The proposed Master Plan for this park addresses each of these and other
important design features, and proposes a solution that will benefit park
visitors, City maintenance personnel and Parks and Recreation staff. A copy
of the Park Plan and proposed phasing scheme is attached to this report. The
major recommendations for Greg Rogers Park are:
1. Develop the picnic area as the focal point of the passive portion of the
park. By relocating the maintenance facility, the center of the park is
opened up. This prime location is then occupied with large-group picnic
shelters, single family picnic units consisting of table, grill, waste
receptacle, new playground play equipment, new restroom building and
parking. These facilities will be sited to take advantage of the
excellent views from the park and to enhance the existing grassy terrain.
2. Improve the ballfields. This would include expansion of the lower field
by grading the lower area into a single continuous pad. This expansion
would allow for soccer play. The upper field would be the smaller "Pee
Wee" field and the lower area would be for softball and baseball. New
Page 4, 1tea I-I
Meeting Date ~.r~.'~:
restroom/concessions, storage building and spectator seating are also
proposed. The seating area would be built into the slopes separating the
upper and lower fields, creating a unique and functional complex.
Lighting of one field for night use is also recommended as an optional
item in this Master Plan. Final approval of ballfield lights would be
considered by Council prior to the implementation of Phase I2 of the
Master Plan.
3. Relocate the maintenance facility to a separate graded pad along East
Palomar Street. This location provides convenient access for City
maintenance crews without conflicting with the park users. Access to the
park from the maintenance facility is via a concrete walk that connects
with the park circulation system.
4. Develop a complete pedestrian trail system to link the various park
activity centers. The trail system would have 8 ft. concrete walks that
can accommodate maintenance and security vehicles as well as pedestrian
traffic. Main walks and circulation corridors should be handicapped
accessible, thus increasing the level of service the park can offer to
local residents.
5. Enhance several other items to park facilities and equipment. These
include expanded parking, an upgraded irrigation system, additional
plantings, new security lighting, park furniture, and picnic tables.
Rancho del Sur Partners has committed, per Council Resolution #15525, Sunbow
Public Facilities Financing Plan, $100,000 to implement a portion of Phase 2
of the Master Plan. Based on the community's input, particularly from
representatives of Orangeview Little League, the Department believes that
these funds should be expended on repairing the ballfields and re-establishing
the eroding slopes around the ballfields. The Department will also
investigate the possibility of installing a water efficient irrigation system
within this area.
Overall, the Oepartment believes that this Master Plan, if adopted and
implemented, will result in a much more functional and aesthetically pleasing
park for the community to enjoy.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of completing the Master Plan is $3,400,340. Staff
envisions the Master Plan could be incrementally funded as monies become
available from a variety of sources such as Park Acquisition and Development
fees, Residential Construction Tax, State grants, and other sources. Per the
Sunbow Public Facilities Financing Plan, $]00,000 has been set aside for
certain park and field improvements.
~PC 1617R
/?-
5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PHASING SCHEDULE FOR GREG ROGERS MASTER PLAN
Phase I Amount
Relocate power lines $ 50,000
Gradin9 90~000
Utility stub-outs 40,000
Baseball fields (4) & accessories 52,730
Slope planting irrigation 39,800
Turf planting & irrigation/ballfields 194,050
Contingency (15%), Mobilization (5%) 92,000
Architectural Fees (10%) 46,000
$604,680
Phase 2
Parking lot improvement/ballfield $111,834
Removal of park residence/existing playground 10,000
Grandstand seating/athletic complex 187,500
Contingency (15%), Mobilization (5%) 62,000
Architectural fees (10%) 31,000
$402,334
Phase 3
Demo of existing restroom, existing parking $ 12,000
lot, concession building
Replacement of sod, irrigation in demo areas 10,800
New restoom 120,000
New concession stand 135,000
New maintenance facility 150,000
New parking lot 34,300
Contingency (15%), Mobilization (5%) 92,000
Architectural fees (105) 46,000
$599,800
Phase 4
Picnic shelters (20x40) $ 45,500
Picnic shelters (3) (15x20) 106,500
Creative playground 75,000
Concrete picnic tables 14,400
Shelter picnic tables 4,900
Park accessories, barbecue grills, trash 73,680
receptacle, benches, drinking fountain, barbecue
pits, entry monument
Upgrade of park irrigation system:
School grounds 66,870
Park turf 163,170
Park slopes 68,460
Additional trees 79,500
Contingency (15%), Mobilization (5%) 140,000
Architectural fees (10%) 70,000
$838,050
Phase 5
Concrete walkways $164,850
Becompose granite trail 6,048
Security lighting throughout park 44,000
Parking lots lighting 24,000
Ballfield lighting 180,000
Contingency (15%), Mobilization (5%) 84,000
Architectural Fee {10%) 42.000
$544,898
GRAND TOTAL $2,989,762
WPC 1632R
RESOLUTION NO. 16096
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE GREG ROGERS PARK
MASTER PLAN AND ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR IS-90-51
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, since July, 1989, the Parks and Recreation
Department has been working with the architectural firm of
Gillespie/DeLorenzo and Associates to design a Master Plan for
Greg Rogers Park; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan was financed by Great American
Development Company as a condition of approval of the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Rancho del Sur, Chula Vista Tract 87-8; and
WHEREAS, in addition to financing preparation of the
plan, the developer will make ~100,000 of improvements to Greg
Rogers Park, per the Sunbow Public Facilities Financing Plan
approved by Council on February 20, 1990 and these improvements
shall be consistent with the Master Plan.
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission at its
February 21, 1991, meeting uninimously approved the Greg Rogers
Park Master Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Greg Rogers Park
Master Plan, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City
Clerk, and adopts the Negative Declaration for IS-90-51.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Jess Valenzuela, Director of Bruce M. Boog Attorney
Parks and Recreation
8048a
/7'7
Minutes of a
Regular Meeting of the
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
Thursday 6:00 p.m. **REVISED** Parks and Recreation
January 17, 1991 Conference Room
C~T.T. M EETING~)ORDEi~
ROT.T.C~T.T.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Lind, Roland, Willett
MEMBER LATE: Chair Sandoval-Fernandez (6:15)
MEMBER ABSENT: Commissioner Hall
1. APPROVAL OFMINUTES
Motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of December 13, 1990 as
distributed.
MSC LIND/ROLAND 3-0 (Sandoval-Fernandez out)
2. PUBLIC R~-~RINGS OR REMARF~
NONE
3. DNFINISHED BUSINESS
Criteria for Membership in EastLake Golf Courso
Item continued until February meeting.
4. NEW BUSINESS
a. Golf Course Fee Increas~
Director Valenzuela gave a brief overview of American Golf's proposal
for a fee increase. He stated that staff's review of the
request revealed that the proposed fees were below one third of all golf
courses in San Diego County. This proposal has also been endorsed by
the Men's Club. Johnny Gonzales and Bert Geisendorf were present to
represent American Golf.
The Commissioners discussed the potential Stage IV water alert and the
impact that this would have on the Golf Course. Mr. Geisendorf stated
that if necessary the golf course could go back to using well water for
irrigation, even though it is not considered desirable due to high
salinity.
Mr. Bill Anderson, a resident of Chula Vista, spoke in opposition to the
proposed fee increase. Mr. Anderson is not pleased with the current
physical condition of the golf course and he feels that he has been
treated in a rude manner by some A~erican Golf employees, because of
this, he opposes the currently proposed rate increase.
Mr. George Laury, a resident of Chula Vista, spoke in opposition to the
fee increase. Mr. Laury stated that while he has always been treated
with respect at the golf course, he has found some things in disrepair
such as the drinking fountain in the pro shop and some of the greens and
doesn't feel that there should be an increase in fees until these items
are handled.
Mr. Douglas Hawkins, a resident of Bonita, compared the rates of other
golf courses in the area; Balboa and Torrey Pines. He would like to see
a special rate for Chula Vista residents a monthly rate, and a rate for
seniors. He feels that a one year span is too short for another rate
increase. Mr. Hawkins stated that he could play EastLake cheaper than
he could play his own city-owned golf course.
Mr. Tom O'Connor, a resident of Chula Vista, finds the American Golf
employees to be extremely courteous and helpful. In addition, he feels
that American Golf has done a very good job in maintaining the golf
course. He has compared the green fees with other golf courses in the
area and finds them to be lower even though conditions at the Chula
Vista golf course are better maintained than the other courses.
Park Superintendent Foncerrada stated that the proposed fee increase is
in line with rates at other comparable courses in the area. He further
stated that American Golf has complied with all of the terms and
conditions of their contract. He has not received any complaints from
citizens or golf course patrons about conditions at the golf course.
It is his opinion that the golf course is in the best condition it has
ever been in. Mr. Foncerrada pointed out to the Commission that
American Golf has completed a number of capital improvement projects
that are above and beyond what the initial contract called for.
Chair Sandoval-Fernandez stated that, based on the input received, she
feels that is too soon for the Commission to make a decision. She would
like to see an example of a tiered fee schedule, with one fee for Chula
Vista residents and a different fee for non-residents, and also a
specification on timelines as to when some oft he improvement items are
to be done.
Commissioner Willett requested that staff verify some of the rates that
have been quoted by some of the members of the public. He also noted
that some clubs are trying to hold the amount of their rate increases
to the CPI this year, and stated that the rate increase currently
proposed by American Golf exceeds the CPI.
Motion to table this issue until February, have American Golf come back
with a two-tiered proposal or three-tiered proposal, have staff analyze
this proposal and have staff check on current rate structures at
comparable facilities in San Diego County and clarify the timelines on
issues related to the contract.
MSC SANDOVAL-FERNANDEZ//LIND 4-0
At the request of the Chair, Director Valenzuela briefed the Commission
on the report highlighting those recommendations which he considered
most significant, and gave a status report on those CV2000
recommendations which were currently being acted upon.
Commissioner Roland doesn't think it is a good idea for the City to buy
land in the immediate vicinity of a school because if the school needs
to expand with the growth of the City, the land will be needed by the
school.
Commissioner Willett feels that the City should acquire the property
under redevelopment so if you do need to increase the school or the park
the land will already be in the public domain.
Chair Sandoval-Fernandez referred to Page 6 and the statement about
multi-cultural and ethnic changes taking place in the community, and
cautioned staff not to frame that in a negative context. She feels that
the statement, while phrased very delicately, could be interpreted in
a manner that is derogatory to the Hispanic population.
Motion to approve in content the recommendations that are set forth in
the CV2000 report.
MSC WILLETT/LIND 4-0
c. GMOC Report - Park Issue~
Director Valenzuela recapped the concerns expressed by the GMOC, and
staff's response to these concerns.
One of the main concerns of the GMOC is that PAD fees be used
appropriately. Director Valenzuela stated that no PAD fees would be
used for park upgrades unless a nexus could be drawn.
Motion to approve the recommendations.
MSC ROLAND/WILLETT 4-0
d. as
Director Valenzuela introduced Principal Management Assistant Stokes who
gave the Commission a recap of the process and criteria used to arrive
at the proposed PAD fee increase.
Commissioner Willett stated that based on recent research he has done
in this area, it is his opinion that the figures proposed by staff are
appropriate.
Motion to accept the report and send it forward to Council with the
Commission's recommendation.
MSC WI?~TT/SANDOVAL-FERNANDEZ 4-0
e. EastLake Park Tour
Director Valenzuela stated Commissioner Hall had called him requesting
that the Commission accept Mr. Bob Santos invitation to go on a tour of
the EastLake Park site, and discuss the existing condition and future
plans for the area.
Commissioner Willett recommended that the Commission have an updated map
before the tour.
Chair Sandoval-Fernandez suggested that Commissioner Hall should be
consulted before setting a date for the tour as he had specifically
expressed an interest in attending. She further suggested that if
Commissioner Hall~s schedule could accommodate it, a lunch time tour
would be appropriate.
Commissioner Willett will be out of town through January 31, 1991.
f. 4th and Oranae Avenue Park Sit~
Director Valenzuela stated that based on actions taken at the Joint
meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Library Board,
the concept park plan has been tabled. It is hoped that deferring this
plan to the library will facilitate their acquisition of an $8 million
grant to build a library on the site.
Per the Commission,s request at that meeting, a letter has been drafted
to Council, reminding them that there still is a park plan for, and
interest in having a park at, that site. Director Valenzuela drew the
Commission's attention to the draft of that letter which was included
in their packets and asked for comments.
It was the consensus of the Commissioners that the letter, with minor
revision by Chair Sandoval-Fernandez, be signed and sent to Council.
g. Tennis Center Aareement
Acting Recreation Superintendent Gates gave an overview of Council,s
recommendation on the Tennis Center agreement, in particular, the GPA
requirement.
Commissioner Willett has done a detailed study of the situation, and
found that there has never been a student dismissed from the program
because of the scholastic requirement. He sees it as an incentive for
the students to keep their grades up.
Director Valenzuela pointed out that the California Interscholastic
Federationts standard is 2.0, and he felt that Council was trying to
make this program consistent with this standard.
Commissioner Lind stated that in his opinion, the scholastic requirement
was not a big issue either way, because the type of youth involved in
the program would be getting good grades anyway.
Motion to support Council,s recommendation and send the agreement back
to Council.
MSUC WILLETT/LIND 3-1 (Sandoval-Fernandez opposed)
h. Goals
Director Valenzuela presented the Commission with the Department,s goals
for the upcoming year.
Commissioner Willett commended the Director on the goals statement.
Motion to accept the departmental goals.
MSC WILLETT/ROLAND 4-0
** Motion to add Terra Nova Park Improvement plan revisions to the agenda
as an emergency item.
MSC WILLETT/ROLAND 4-0
i. Terra Nova Park Improvement Plan Revisionc
Director Valenzuela introduced Nick DeLorenzo of Gillespie/ DeLorenzo
who presented the revisions and refinements to the Terra Nova Park
Improvement Plan. He did a comparison of the former and current plan
and discussed the reasons why the changes were made.
In response to Commissioner Willett,s questions Mr. DeLorenzo assured
the Commission that the soccer field still meets AYSO standards.
Motion to accept the revised concept plan.
MSC WILLETT/ROLAND 4-0
5. COMMUNICATIONS
a. Written CorresDondenc,
NONE
b. Commissioner,s Comment~
WILLETT - Commended Director Valenzuela on his presentation of
I) 13
Department goals, and stated that he is going to present them to the
Chula Vista 21 Committee as a guideline.
Commissioner Willett would like the Commission to be notified of all
public hearings involving parks.
LIND - Requested that the Youth Sports Council be advised when playing
fields are going to be taken out of service.
Asked if the water restrictions will have an effect on ballfields.
The Director confirmed that all parks, open space and ballfields will
be affected by the water restrictions.
ROLAND - Expressed his concerns about placing parks under power lines.
6. MONTHLY I~EPORT OF DEPARTM~NTACTMTYAND COUNCIL ACTION
Director Valenzuela announced the appointment of Sunny Shy to the
position of Recreation Director for the Department.
ADJOURNM]~NT to the regularly scheduled meeting of February 21, 1991.
Respectively submitted,
C&ro~ Cramer Sto--hr
PROJECT NAME: Greg Rogers Park Master Plan
PROJECT LOCATION: 110! Oleander Avenue
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista Parks & Recreation Dept.
CASE NOr IS-90-51 DATE: July 18, 1990
A. Project Setting
The 47-acre project site is currently a partially developed,
partially natural open space community park in the middle of a
largely developed residential area. The Boys' and.Girls' Clubs
facilities are located within the park site. The site is bounded
on the west by Oleander Avenue, west of which are single-family
detached houses. It is bounded on the north by Greg Rogers
School. The Foxhills and Sunbow housing developments and associ-
ated recreational facilities are immediately east of the Park.
The southern part of the project site includes a drainage, south
of which is Parkview School. However, the City's General Plan
indicates that the future eastward extension of East Palomar
Street will probably cut across this area. In addition, the Park
boundaries include an irregularly-shaped parcel to the south of
East Palomar Avenue and west of Oleander Avenue.
B. Project pescription
The project proposes a Master Plan for the renovation and rede-
velopment of the existing park facilities to make the park more
useful. Specific Plan proposals include:
1. Relocation of the maintenance building.
2. Revising the layout of the ballfields and construction
of a new restroom/concession/storage building and
spectator seats.
3. Upgrading of landscaping and irrigation system,
including the addition of landscaping along the eastern
boundary to provide a visual buffer between the Park
and the pool/recreation area within the residential
development to the east.
D. Compliance W~/th ~he ~hreshold/Standards ~olicy
1. ¥ire/E~S
The Thresholds/standards Policy requires that fire and
medical units must be able to respond to calls within 7
minutes or less in 95% of the cases and within 5
minutes or less in 75% of the cases. The Fire
Department indicated that the nearest fire station is
approximately 3 miles from the site and that the. site
can be reached in approximately 5 minutes. Therefore,
the project is in compliance with this policy.
2. Police
The Thresholds/Standards Policy requires that police
units must respond to Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes
or less and maintain an average response time to all
Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units
must respond to Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or
less and maintain an average response time to all
Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The Police
Department is currently maintaining an acceptable level
of service based on the threshold standard and does not
anticipate any adverse impacts as a result of the
project. Therefore, the project is considered to be
compatible with this policy.
3. ~.raffic
The Thresholds/Standards Policy requires that all
intersections must operate at a Level of Service (LOS}
"C" or better, with the exception that LOS #D" may
occur during the peak two hours of the day at signal-
ized intersections. Intersections west of 1-805 are
not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No
intersection should reach LOS "F" during the average
weekday peak hour. The project' is expected to result
in approximately three trips per acre, or 141 daily
trips. The City Engineering Department noted that
Oleander Avenue in the project vicinity is currently
operating at LOS B and is not expected to change as a
result of the project. Therefore, the project is
considered to be compatible with this policy.
~dentification o__f Environmental ~ffects
1. ~ublic ~afetyt Light 9nd Glare
The project proposes to install security lighting and
lighting at the athletic fields. This will result in
the introduction of light into areas not currently
illuminated at night. This could potentially impact
nearby residents both directly and indirectly, and
could affect them both beneficially and adversely. ' The
increased night lighting may result in an increase in
the level of sports activity at night, such as baseball
or soccer games. This could beneficially impact the
community, by providing a wider range of accepted
recreational opportunities and also by possibly de-
creasing any illicit activities that may occur on the
Park grounds at night and, thus, increasing public
safety. It would also provide a close outlet for
youths.living in nearby houses. However, the increased
lighting could have indirect glare and light impacts on
nearby residents. It is anticipated that these
potential impacts wil! be reduced to 'a level of
insignificance by the proposed landscaping to be
installed along Oleander Avenue and by the type and
orientation of the lighting system to be used. The
large trees proposed will somewhat act as a visual
buffer between the residences to the west of Oleander
and the Park.
2. Noise
The potential for increasing use at the Park,
particularly at night, could increase the noise level
in the general vicinity of the Park. There are an
estimated five or six houses to the west of the
proposed athletic fields that could experience higher
levels of noise at night than currently exist but which
may not be considered significant. The prevailing
westerly wind will generally carry sound more to the
east than to the west. Since the area to the east
consists of a private recreation area, no impacts are
anticipated.
G. Findings o_~f ~.impact
1. The project does not have the potential to (a)
substantially degrade the quality of the environment;
(b) substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species; (c) cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining leYels; (d)
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; (e)
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal; (f} eliminate impo=rant
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory.
2. The project does not have the potential to achieve
short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of
long-term environmental goals.
3. The project does not have possible effects which are
individually limited but cumulatively considerable.
4. The environmental effects of the project will not cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly.
Consultation
1. Individuals .and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Barbara Reid, Planning Dept.
E. Haisfall, Fire Department
Carol Gore, Fire Department
Roger Daoust, Engineering Dept.
Ken Larson, Building & Housing
Department
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering Dept.
Shauna Stokes, Parks & Recreation
Department
Keith Hawkins, Police Dept.
R. Solorzano, Engineering Dept.
Maryann Miller, Planning Dept.
Lee McEachern, Planning Dept.
Doug Reid, Planning Dept.
2. pocuments
Title 19 (Zoning), ~hula yista Municipal Code
General ~lanf City o__f ~hula Vista
City of Chula Vista Policy: Threshold/Standards and
Growth Management Oversight Committee, as amended
November 30, 1989
17-t5
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date 4/9/9]
ITEM TITLE: Report on additional safety measures at the intersection of
Melrose Avenue and Talus Street/
SUB~II-[ED BY: Director of Public Work~_~v
REVIEWED BY: City Managery~z(~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X .)
Staff received a request from Ms. Browning requesting additional stop signs at
the intersection of Melrose Avenue and Talus Street to slow down speeding
vehicles on Melrose Avenue.
RECOt~4ENDATION: That the City Council:
I. Deny the request for additional stop signs; and
2. Approve additional speed limit signs and pavement markings to be added on
Melrose Avenue between E. Orange Avenue and Otay Valley Road.
BOARDS/COI~ISSIONS RECOt~IENDATION: At the Safety Commission meeting of
March 14, 1991, the Safety Commission voted 7-0 to concur with staff.
DISCUSSION:
Staff received a request by phone from Ms. Tina Browning of Melrose Avenue in
Chula Vista. Ms. Browning requested an all-way stop at the subject
intersection, or a stop sign for vehicles traveling southbound on Melrose
Avenue. Ms. Browning along with other residents in the area are concerned
with southbound vehicles exceeding the speed limit on Melrose Avenue and
misjudging the horizontal curve south of Talus Street.
Melrose Avenue is a north/south Class II collector with a curb to curb width
of 40 feet and a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour. Talus Street is a
east/west residential street with a curb to curb width of 36 feet and a prima
facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour. The average daily traffic (ADT) is
2800 vehicles on Melrose Avenue and 300 vehicles on Talus Street.
A review of the accident history at this intersection for the one year period
beginning January 1, 1990 and ending December 31, lggO shows that there were
no reported accidents. Accidents which have occurred in the area are usually
south of the subject intersection.
Staff completed Speed Counts over a forty eight hour period on February 25-27,
1991 which yielded the following results:
~orthbound Southbound
Posted Speed Limit 30.00 30.00
Average Speed{MPH) 32.35 34.68
Median Speed(MPH) 32.50 35.10
85th Percentile(MPH) 37.77 39.66
Mode Speed{MPH} 35.00 35.00
10 MPH Pace 27-37 27-39
10 MPH Pace % 69.60 79.34
Page 2, Item I~
Meeting Date 4/9/9!
Radar Speed Surveys have also been completed on Melrose Avenue, giving an 85th
percentile speed of 37 miles per hour between Talus Street and Main Street,
and 38 miles per hour between E. Orange Avenue and Talus Street.
An all-way stop evaluation study was completed on this intersection. This
intersection was compared to the other intersections that are on the City's
1991 All-Way Stop Evaluation List. Currently this intersection is ranked
No. 12 out of the 12 intersections on the list. It's total point score was 5,
where a minimum of 30 is required to justify the installation of an all-way
stop.
Staff is not recommending the installation of an all-way stop at the present
time because traffic engineering studies indicate that the intersection of
Melrose Avenue and Talus Street does not warrant an all-way stop. In
addition, an all-way stop would not be effective in reducing vehicular speeds
on Melrose Avenue except within 200 feet of the intersection.
Staff is recommending the relocation of existing speed limit signs to make
them more visible and the installation of additional speed limit signs along
the with appropriate pavement markings to aid motorists traveling in the area.
FISCAL IMPACT: If an all-way stop control at Melrose Avenue and Talus
Street was approved, its costs would be approximately $228.00 for signs and
pavement markings. Speed limit signs and pavement legends on Melrose Avenue
from E. Orange Avenue to 0tay Valley Road would cost approximately $250.00
WPC 5543E:KY-157
Attachments: All-Way Stop Study
Area Plats (2)
Excerpt Safety Commission minutes dated 3/14/9] {Draft)
C%TY OF CHULA V%STA POLICY
ALL'NAY ~IU¥ ~UNIRUL
PURPOSE:
A fully Justified, properly installed four-way stop can effectively assign right of way,
reduce vehicle delay and decrease accidents.' Generally, a four-way stop is reserved for
use at the Intersection of t~o through highways, and only as an tntertm trafftc contrel
· easure prior to signalization.
GENERAL:
The posting of an ~ntersectton for four-way stop contrel should be based on factual
data. ~arrants to be considered include:
1. Through street conditions.
2. Acctdent records.
3. Traffic and pedestrian volomes.
4. ¥olume spltts.
5. Unusual conditions such as proximity of schools, fire Stations, vision obscurement,
etc.
Polnta are asstgned to each of these warrants. The total possible potnts ts 50. The
Installation of four-way stop control ~s ~usttfted ~th a ~otal. of 30 points.
THROUGH STREET gARRA~T:
One of the approaching streets to the Intersection must be a through htgh~ay before the
intersection can be considered for four-way stop control. A through htgh~ay shall
extend at least one mile in both dlrecttons from the intersection under consideration
and shall meet conditions set forth on Page 8, Sectton 2f of the High~ay Capacity
Manual, 1965.
A. Zf only one of the tn*tersecttng streets ts & through htgh~ay 1-3 Points
B. Zf both streets are through htgh~ays 3-5 Potnts
Maximum 5 Points SCORE: _~> Points
ACCZDENT MARRANT:
Two points are asstgned for each acctdent susceptible to correction by four-~ay stop
contrel durtng one full year prior to the Investigation.
Total number of accidents correctlbleby four-way stop: 0
Maxtmum l4 Points SCORE: ~ Points
UNUSUAL CONDITION WARRANT:
((~.#here unusual conditions exist at the intersection such as a school, fire station,
~layground, vision obscurement, etc., points are assigned on the basis of engineering
Judgment. Unusual conditions shall be considered only if within ~00 feet of the
Maximum l0 Points SCORE: ~. Points
/g-3
-2-
t VOLUFI[ gARRANT:
A. Total entertng vehtcle volume must equal 2,000 vehtcles for four htghest hours
tn average da.v.
B. l~tn~mu~ side street vehicular and pedestrian volume must equal GO0 vehtcles
during same four hour period,
Points shall be assigned tn accordance with the following tables:
lq(NOR STREET PEDESTR][AN &
ALL APPROACHES VEH:~CLE VOLUHE (BOTH APPROACHES)
Htghest Four Hour Volume Points Highest Four Hour Volume Points
q 3- 1400
1401 - 1700 1 801 - 1200 2
1701 - 2000 2 1201 - 1400 3
2001 - 2300 3 1401 - 1600 4
2301 - 2600 4 1601 - Over 5
2601 - 2900 5
2901 - 3200 6
3201 - 3500 7
3501 - 3800 8
3801 - 4100 7 '
I 4101 - 4400 6 ·
· 4401 - 4700 5
4701 - 5000 4
5001 - 5300 3
5301 - 5600 2
5601 - 5900 1
Over 5900 0
Haxtmum 13 Points SCORE O Points
VOLUHE SPLIT ~ARRANT:
Four-way stops operate best where the minor approach volume and the ma~Jor approach
volume are nearly equal. Points shall be assigned tn accordance with the following
tab1 e:
24-Hour Mtnor St. Volumes 3o0
24-Hour Ma3or St. Volumes i~ ~4~ Points
95+ 8
35 - 94 7
75 - 84 6
65 - 74 5
55 - 64 4
45 - 54 3
35 - 44 2
25- 34 1
I~.o+
~taxtmum 8 Points II SCORE: (~ Points
ALL-gAY STOP SURMARY
DATE [NVESTZGATION COt4PLETED: /~'//~1/¢01''
TOTAL SCORE: ~-' ' points out of a possible total $0. Htntmum score for four-way
stop control
REMARKS: '
RECO~NDAT[ONS: ~
WPC 3287E
PW-[-23
SUBJECT AREA
OTAY VALLEY ROAD
--.- :~;.~ ' AR E-A PLAT ,.,,,T..~.~..
Safety Commission Meeting March 14, 1991
Minutes
future. We will be strongly recommending this project so that we do not have to have
half the street in asphalt and the other half in concrete. These delays cannot be attributed
to Shell Oil Company, but we hope the fxnished product will outweigh the few months
delay. Shell is not holding the project up. The work on the south curb line on Bonita
Road should be completed within two to three weeks. At that time, we hope to have
gone to Council to determine if we are to do the entire street width. Construction can
begin shortly thereafter. We are looking at construction to begin perhaps in late April
or no later than early May.
Commissioner Thomas express concern about the footage north of the 179 foot
reconstruction (along Bonita Road).
Mr. Rivera explained that Commissioner Thomas is mentioning that the limits of this
project are the extension of the south curbline of Bonita Road, basically where the
crosswalk would be located and working south to the extension of the south property line
of the Shell Gas Station--that is a distance of approximately 179 feet. The water is now
tracking onto Bonita Road and its covering the number 2 eastbound lane and the
number 3 lane. We will be addressing this issue after the reconstruction project is
complete.
Commissioner Thomas noted that in the initial meeting with Shell representatives there
was no problem at that time in this area, and that is why the projeet starts at the
crosswalk; but the water problem on Bonita Road has been exacerbated in the last three
months.
Mr. Rivera, in response to Chair Braden's comment that this may be the time to request
Shell to get the dryer, stated that this may be a recommendation that the Safety
Commission may wish to incorporate into the minutes.
Chair Braden stated that it is strongly recommended that Shell look at the water problem
now occurring on Bonita Road.
Mr. Rivera said that staff will bring a status report to next's months Safety Commission
meeting.
STAFF ACTION ITEM
Place Shell Oil Company project on the April agenda.
6. Report on Traffic Concerns for Melrose Avenue in the Vicinity of Talus Street
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Rivera gave staff's report. We have looked at this street and have conducted speed
surveys. The posted speed limit on this street is 30 mph. Staff is recommending that
the speed limit signs be relocated and the addition of pavement markings. We have
-6-
Safety Commission Meeting March 14, 1991
Minutes
found on a number of these north/south corridor streets that the only thing we have to
inform the motorists of what the speed limit is, is the signs. There is a long stretch with
no stop signs and motorists are traveling as fast as they can from Orange Avenue to Otay
Valley Road. They tend to forget they are on a residential street. We want to reinforce
the idea that the speed limit is enforced by radar. We do have signs attesting to that.
We do have 30 mph speed limit signs. We can relocate those signs to a more visible
location. We could not justify the installation of an all-way stop. The intersections are
spaced at quite a distance apart. To reduce speeds, especially in the area of the
intersection of Talus Street, and the curve, just north of Turquoise Street, police
enforcement, as they are continuing to do, will reduce speeds.
Chair Braden commended the Police Department. They have been out working and
writing a lot of tickets. In fact, they have written 76 percent more tickets this month
than they did last month. It is the local people that are really guilty of most of the
speeding.
In response to a question regarding reducing the speed limit from 30 mph to 25 mph,
Mr. Rivera stated that speed limits are established using the California Vehicle Code and
State laws. In that there are specific laws on speed traps, if the speed limit were to be
posted at 25 mph, and the police were citing, our radar speed surveys and the roadway
design would not justify a speeding ticket being valid. A judge would see that ticket and
say the speed limit is arbitrarily set too low, that this is a speed trap, the ticket is no
good and through it out of court. We have set the speed limit to be as close to the 85
percentile speed. The 85 percentile speed is 37 mph, so legally we could post the speed
at 35 mph. When there is a high discrepancy between what 85 percent of the motorists
are traveling at or below, then that tends to lose credibility with the speed limit.
Mr. Rosenberg noted that studies have shown that reducing the speed limit does not have
any effect at all on the speed that motorists will select. The law is written in a manner
that assumes a motorist will drive at a prudent and safe speed based on the surrounding
conditions. That is why it is called the primafacia speed limit, because on the face of
it, a motorist could actually be driving at the maximum speed limit of 55 mph under
certain conditions and claim that they are doing so safety and show the court, in fact, that
is acceptable. The courts have ruled that is the basis of the speed law.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
John Williams, 1608 Melrose Avenue, CV 91911
In talking to a police officer I found out that 40 mph in a 30 mph zone is not
unreasonable under certain conditions. I monitored traffic while the radar was in front
of my house. In 30 minutes I had cars going from 45 mph to 53 mph past the sign
saying the speed limit was 30 mph. What I am concerned with on Melrose Avenue is
that more and more people are finding out that you cannot get off the freeway at Main
Street. You have a hard time in the morning getting on the freeway, you cannot get off
the freeway very well, so they use the traffic signal at Melrose Avenue and Main Street
-7-
Safety Commlnsion Meeting March 14, 1991
Minutes
to go north. In our area it is transient motorists going to work who are using Orange
Avenue to Melrose Avenue, from Orange to Main Street in order to bypass the freeway.
Former Mayor Cox stated that we never want to create a situation where people will use
our side streets to avoid the freeway. We have. Its right there. They have two choices-
-they exit at Orange and go to Melrose Avenue or to Hilltop. If 40 mph is reasonable
in a 30 mph speed limit area, what is reasonable in a 25 mph speed limit area. In other
words, do they have to go above 35 mph to get a ticket. An officer told me that when
they go to court, the first thing a judge asks is, what were the conditions. If the
conditions weren't fight, then the judge won't allow the ticket.
Leonard Krall, 1627 Melrose Avenue, CV 91911
I don't know what we are waiting to happen here, right now I count the dead animals on
Melrose Avenue that I see laying in the street and I am wondering if next, it is going to
be my granddaughter. I notice that your report listing the accidents on Melrose Avenue
is not quite accurate. (At this point he presented photographs to the Commission.) He
stated that these were reported accidents, but not within the timeframe of those listed on
staff's report. People have moved from Melrose Avenue because of the traffic. Melrose
Avenue is a feeder road to 1-805. I agree with the Sergeant that most speeding is
probably by local residents. Something has got to be done to slow traffic down before
we have a fatality. I hope you consider this before you make a decision.
Commissioner Matacia asked if he thought the speed limit should be reduced to 25 mph.
Mr. Krall acknowledged that that would be better than nothing, but that he thought the
stop sign is needed to slow the traffic flow down.
Mr. Rosenberg pointed out that he agrees with the last two speakers that Melrose Avenue
is being used as a bypass because of the freeway problem. The problem is really at the
southbound off-ramp and well as the northbound on-ramp, where we do not have a traffic
signal. The problem is so severe that, I'm sure, a lot of motorists are bypassing the
interchange by turning off into a southbound direction, probably using Melrose Avenue
so that they can access Main Street by virtue of a traffic signal. We do have in our
Capital Improvement Program budgeted for FY91-92 signalization of the two ramps. We
think that will help tremendously and divert a lot of this non-local traffic which I believe
tends to speed because they are non-local and they are really trying to pass through the
neighborhood as opposed to starting from that area or traveling into the neighborhood.
I think the problem will probably abate with the signalization.
Deborah Frios, 1631 Melrose Avenue, CV 91911
She presented photographs to the Commission showing an accident that happened at her
house on Christmas morning--where her husband's car was pushed through the front door
of their home by another car. In December 1990 two more accidents happened right in
front of our house. People come flying down that hill and they lose control, skidding
down the hill.
-8-
Safety Commission Meeting March 14, 1991
Minutes
James Russell, 1628 Melrose Avenue, CV 91911
I think a stop sign would do a lot of good. I also go along with the fact of reducing the
speed limit. As you say, Melrose Avenue is used as a bypass. I agree with your putting
signalization at the freeway entrance/exit on Main Street. I believe there is no other way
to stop people from building speed coming down a hill other than putting a stop sign on
Talus Street. It is extremely difficult to back out of my driveway. I am teaching my 16
year old son to drive the proper way, so I have him park his car out on the street, facing
down hill. I don't want him to try and back out of my driveway. I agree with dropping
the speed limit to 25 mph, more enforcement of the speed limit for the next couple of
months, and really strongly stand behind the stop sign at Talus Street.
Tina Browning, 1634 Melrose Avenue, CV 91911
I would first like to point out that the petition that we handed in last month that only had
a few signatures, that was only an hour's worth of effort at the last minute. To review
the accident history from January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990 is inaccurate. I
know that we had two accidents in one week, of which one was reported. If you put a
25 mph sign in, they do not obey the 30 mph sign, what makes you think they will obey
the 25 mph sign. The stop sign is the only thing and I will not quit, I will bug you until
the day I die if I don't get the sign.
MOTION
That the Safety Commission accept staff's recommendation: I) that the request for
additional stop signs be denie& 2) additional speed limit signs and pavement markings
be added on Melrose Avenue.
MSC [Militscher/Chidester] 6-1 (Thomas)
Mr. Rosenberg informed those concerned with this item that staff is obligated to take the
item to the City Council at which time another hearing will be conducted and present to
the City Council the Safety Commission's decision. You can appear and present your
case to the Council and they certainly could overrule the Safety Commission and staff.
All of you will be advised when this item will be going before the City Council.
Mr. Rivera explained to those concerned with this item that the Safety Commission has
approved that we deny the request for the all-way stop at Talus Street and Melrose
Avenue. They have approved that staff add additional speed limit signs and pavement
markings on Melrose Avenue. This is just a recommendation. This recommendation,
with tonight's Minutes, and our report will be sent forward to the City Council. The
City Council is the one with the authority to adopt a recommendation and that work be
done. At that time you will all be notified of the City Council meeting.
Chair Braden called a recess at 8:18 pm.
Safety Commission reconvened at 8:28 pm.
Item 11 was taken out of order to accommodate the public.
-9-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Meeting Oate 4/9/91
]TEM TITLE: Report on left turn phasing at the intersection of Hilltop
Orive and "L' Street
SUBM]I'rED BY: Oirector of Public Work
Manager~/~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
REVXEWEO
BY:
City
Council Referral #2222
At the City Council meeting of January 8, 1991, Council referred a written
communication from Cynthia L. Ranyak of 2265 Manzana Way, City of San Diego,
to staff and the Safety Commission. Mrs. Ranyak is requesting that left-turn
phasing be installed at the intersection of Hilltop Drive and "L" Street.
RECONNENDATION: That the City Council deny the request for left turn
phasing at the intersection of Hilltop Drive and "L" Street.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOI4NENDATION: The Safety Commission at its February
14, 1991 meeting voted 5-0 to deny the request for left-turn phasing at the
intersection of Hilltop Drive and "L" Street.
DISCUSSION:
Hilltop Drive is a Class II collector with a curb-to-curb width of 36 feet on
the north leg, 52 feet on the south leg and a posted speed limit of 30 mph.
"L" Street is a Class I collector with a curb-to-curb width of 68 feet and a
posted speed limit of 35 mph. The average daily traffic {ADT) is 20,000
vehicles on "L" Street and 8,762 ADT on Hilltop Drive.
A review of the accident history at this intersection for the one year period
beginning December 28, 1989 and ending December 27, 1990 did not reveal a
pattern of accidents of the type susceptible to correction by the installation
of left turn phasing.
Observations of traffic during the PM peak period did not reveal any unusual
delays for left turning vehicles. During this period, the vehicular movement
with the greatest number of left turning vehicles was the westbound "L" Street
to southbound Hilltop Drive. For this movement, vehicles attempting to turn
left were able to do so during 91 percent of the signal cycles. The
percentage of completed left turns were greater for the other left turn moves.
It is staff's conclusion based on our traffic analysis of correctable
accidents and left-turn delays that vehicular conditions throughout the day at
Hilltop Drive and "L" Street do not justify the installation of left turn
phasing. Staff will continue to monitor this intersection for left-turn
phasing. At this time, left-turn phasing is not being recommended.
/q'l
Page 2, Item~C~
Meeting Date 4/9/91
Mrs. Ranyak was notified of tonight's City Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT: An estimated cost for the addition of left-turn phasing,
which would include the replacing of all signal standards at this location, is
$85,000.
WPC 5481E/KY-158 (2222)
Attachments: Area Plat
Intersection Diagram
Letter dated - December 11, 1990
Safety Commission Minutes dated February 14, 1991 (excerpt)
'3^¥
~ ,
DRAWN BY T I T L E
dCM
.... -.. A~EA PLAT
c_c_ffnthia Ran~ak 2265 Manzana Wa~
Telephone (619) 267-8175 FAX (619) 472~300
December 11, 1990
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Chula Vista City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Honorable Mayor and City Council members:
This letter is to request that a left turn signal be installed at the comers of 'L' Street and Hilltop
Drive. The traffic at this intersection has increased along with the development of Chula Vista.
At certain times there are many cars waiting to make this left mm at the light, while only one car
gets through on each green light. I am one of many parents who drive their children to
preschool through this intersection, and the Presbyterian Church on Hilltop Drive also relies on
this left mm. Earlier this year I was almost hit by a truck while making a left turn from west-
bound 'L' Street onto Hilltop Drive. It s not just the number of cars that cause the problem, but
i '
the BLIND SPOTS at the intersection.
We realize that the cost of such an installation is great, but the new growth in Chula Vista should
provide a source of funding for such problems. Although this is an older section of town, it is
effected by the cross-town traffic. It is evident that a left turn signal has been needed here for
some time.
We ask that you refer this request to the Safety Commission. Also, we would like to be notified
of the Safety Commission meeting when this request can be discussed. Thank you for your
consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Cynthia L. Ranyak
PETITION
This is a petition to install a left hand turn signal for west-bound L Street at the intersection of
Hilltop Drive. This request is sponsored by the Parent Advisory Committee of the Chula Vista
Presbyterian Preschool and concerned neighbors.
The Chula Vista Safety Commission will discuss this matter on Thursday, February 14th, 1991.
If you are concerned, please show your support by attending at 7:00 PM in the Council
Chambers,located in the Public Services Building at the northwest comer of F St. and 4th Ave.
Name.
1. c(tUA_ X (U A.{V).1-(Xrl
2. i;1 Jtk~ I&A~7
; j ( ., " )
3. I. {.vlA.-<! i" 't'>
I,
4. ,\ ..
5.!)1At1A.lt 1)(""., Al'-PA--f>V-{
6.'v:"PJ. k /j~~
\ \ -p ....97
7. ",~"~o <./ ~(--
8. ~~.~d :7tfYV7
9. (//1ifY{/~/'----
10. /i-[.,/~_4z-
) -:;-
::1t~~~
13.M, ,d,.,~ jJ~0-
f',. 'J. rJ--./
14t{-t'~f (/'I..+.)...,.',.lll._
15j2/v~ L"-;f.L~
, () \ i /'). ...fl)
16.. 'A,.N.. ~; / u~ If'
'; -'/ 0'" '\
17. . ; vI
Address
.. la i tLu) (!j. C(w0..- V6~. ~
_ /'Y1~a ?J:7 (7, V c( I'Cj 1\
--'j:j ,1/ fA I'.<..UA- c- (/ <::1 (CJ l/l)
,
_ j(.\lr.j A
"'TcJf!...cv..J C.4 \...' V <1' 1'1 1/
""'E'. J)t71~ .LV C; /1/1
~{1!~)Clla qjO/:O
__ Ji1!1i.vf ~. (I (/ (h C(;Yi'O
_ (~'U;-7f~ ;:f.oc.B,l'>
C' " (:'2 ]"
.. /VL"'Y1> 7. to. -,. , c, L-..),~ .,x"', U' >2.f,.c' , I
( l, ...-
./
_ -., 'I, l . ( I(
~ II I (c: f' ...~, C. l.i, c... I;> C .
~JJ.dad.(i,vj'1J2 tJa/81
_~~.v. .61J}. y~/.3 9
_jJ~ ~ (, V
_ r /J' .v // (,'761/
(1/1:Vf4.,~ t-- L/ / / -,
~ Q- t.f1 t;-f /I_~Oh--<"'r..i /~7;#1! c
." ~/1 ~Vf'_ +F I/O I (1/ fl'll/
.
... ll/e(r!(((71~ c,c) 9171/
if
II
(I
I'
-"'" ~~ du..t
&.C,J
Page 1
19 -(0
PETITION
This is a petition to install a left hand turn signal for west-bound L Street at the intersection of
Hilltop Drive. This request is sponsored by the Parent Advisory Committee of the Chula Vista
Presbyterian Preschool and concerned neighbors.
~
The Chula Vista Safety Commission will discuss this matter on Thursday, February 14th, 1991.
If you are concerned, please show your support by attending at 7:00 PM in the Council
Chambers, located in the Public Services Building at the northwest comer of F St. and 4th Ave.
15.
16.
1 1/1
20.. JIHthFj~ l.t')t:~Y'~qr
,~-"
/9-7
Address
__ AI P'Nt A"( 01 (fI <1101\
~ I1J 01"'/1 V/t (l 1/ {' /J '1/ q;1
__fYI1n~ I)01SDIJi9JU9
~4~t( 7'2!11
.~~~ CV:1'/'7//
~ Cwzr~A'~ C V ?1;;A 6Y
""7JJrilXt} /-La. 7L .?11 (1;/ 9d--!J / (
.iJIIII1 (..(..dJYLp<hiu)::.'-(~, &('u 919/1
.. ,~a--]~a2(./ (! Y 9Fl/O
__ ~~V;0z}ClJ ~~O/0
__ f Joiunm5' f' I j]~ 9/90L
__ GJelitJ QJ q/q/o
ttW-t1\.. ~ 'l tr oj V t () q (9/1
/
--'!!IIL~C\)( 0\)<? rver I Cj } \
----' ~ 4.L(l 6, /' :> 0 >< C U
~M.:I 'II I J<--ZP~ 11/1/ D
~1f~~IO
~ ~. L ~m\4\ 1'lqD~
M kJ'71lfV~LP:1-JJ OJ 9101 J
iilIt ~1!\fllp'Shtte t...- C ~) . 9,')C'(c:
Page 1
PETITION
For Left Turn Signal on West-bound L Street at Hilltop Drive
11.
12. .
13.
15.
16. ~/iA-[.k"jU/'t.tMl/:( .
i r. /)(/ {,
17 't1/L4X ~/, ,~~ '
. ~ / .. ..' ,,_.. i )I. ...-'!',.->'\. ~ ',-."
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
.PI,zC/(/ilvVCli (J. Ve, C/. '7/c;lj
_F Sf.tfJzJ~ ('{/ 0/c;(()
". Ifo..mp<:,/'r'ff. ill.) f. V. tp(q ((.
.Qvct 0((
"\
':1
,I'
..r ~~e-.sC!" "?/~ C'M V ?" "7/1'
__flt~'~~/~l [1U~ 9/'1//
JI/I1Vr {Yf'f'-v-- <-JL C +- C V '-'7/'1 ( (
..... Ccrvv ~ C-f-, Srv. I ~ '{ Ire:J...
~ t!orip je Cero.. (!i1 71'l/O
~e.ep~c\;Q'iefif P,o",;k(~. 9j90d.
__ c0.ef] on r l/ 0- 0/1Q(C( II
\ 1\0",0 AA to C'\J 9. ['1IG
QP CfI9;;O
/1 0 ,i'Jri -~ ~
~.., i/<, ,. ",h
~ L ll.,l-:j<t.l..Yf(Ji i.;:.1.<-L.i ~"'_t.:;.)-'.c'
~ rio'., : , /("" (I i,'
~(lJ l)i."'i1...t." /,,-/lf~. '--".;/ ,
", II (1 ,'1 I !
,_.-'....,~; l' '; ",." ~
:)/.) / ,J'"
I ",- ~)
,~ , i "
pageJ3- r
PETITION
For Left Turn Signal on West-bound L Street at Hilltop Drive
1. 2/~....o,~,,- 43~
(; ,. .
2. [1;-' ~ j}p~-,.crJ<.
3. (:;ttJrr1'!1{, 171,,{U~
, C '- k 11
4. :6Ulb{! nIQ-Vl(Z?j7,C!.
5. /:;r { (-1V\(\ () <~ ~f l~_~
6. ~'b:4A{ (J~~r~
7~V
8. A i ~f e,~
:; o;~-?~~
::~~~~
13. -
16.
IJn ,J",. '4f-<_ .,
17. ILMIIJlfhVVl, ',.- r;d.t'q
, If
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
--. ,,["of A v I~, C, J. C /1, 'i'r9/d
~ ,,/.' -1 (f /tel .-Lc~11"l/o
,-l (/(I.....CiZ7t...C< c'- c=6 cp ,'/ IV ( ~ (
--..r/?,llir/lllt/;C,L ~,IJ. Q/9IU
-
____ pnn la ~iCh1 /0) ) (iJ C//9/u
__, ,,(,,' , (;1" q 10
' dE L: ~ H vQ "-, v, ( \
~ PC1v-t Dv,.u'f? C v, 919 I (
.lllmkl r05e Alie,/ c.v. 1 pll
,- Key.,. ~-fu ~J, i?"",'.k, (lc-, ~\('\OA-
~, ,\l-d \
_IJ3le.c.ve..*-Dvc elf c;/f/\
__~G".'-t" ~j, ~"'^~"'- ~ L~ COO'0L
__~a..v.. p~ fi C;( - C.\I.1' I q I)
-WI Qif'Y'N1 'A'\) /Jr c.. (/ Cj I q I (
~,C "/9'//
9/0
~~~) DrL v{C((O
...... :S~q~ pl. OJ, q ;q/3
/J '
.- ;-/ , ,I '-1/
.. (!\to J1cJnl tr/'e ,) ~
.'l 1.,-,'-'
1..7 '-f ""'",
>1 1 -, ,
Page J!J - *?
..
PETITION
For Left Turn Signal on West-bound L Street at Hilltop Drive
1. 4;b-LJl7, ~)y
2.fku-P /J / sm a 11
3.A/~1&' ~/;~/:d~
4. ~.?}~-~ c( ~/,JJ-C
f7 /'
5.
6.
7.
8.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
-v/fi./~/4J ~ ~9;Ci/O
_.-fAth 5.J; -"'c tit q /9//
J I
J I
I I
I I
) I
-IIII/{ k
~r 1./
~, 0.&-c~ (,;,'{/ '1'/ '1/ ()
~r/1' efL (20- 9/9/(
__-ZonlqJ\,M' CjjCfIL
... t~o (~~ .Cr c; ,D. 9d/5,-/
_ (/~IV1Ce s.) S',D 9~') i ~i
.- ;?t.tT K,v. '11 rlO
,
_11&-1)( Avd,c.!..J 9/911
~~Ji{;;~JI c..,.\!. '1/ "II?
__ F~; (Jr c v 9JCJ/1
__~"1 <;,0. '7d-\~/'
7 0/1
c.; {/ -
7/1/ I
Page -1 f:{ -/0
Safety Commla~ion Meeting February 14, 1991
Minutes
where it intersects with Industrial Boulevard. We looked at the location and made
improvements to the traffic flow by adding signs; striping a right-turn curb lane 14 feet
wide southbound lane, better defining the southbound approach to the freeway; adding
red curbing; and adding pavement arrows. We have contacted CalTrans and they will
be relocating a sign that blocks vision of the intersection, closer to the freeway, so that
when a motorist stops at the stop limit line, you will have a clearer vision of oncoming
traffic. Staff is looking at additional modifications, south of the freeway off ramp, on
Industrial Boulevard, near the area of Moss Street. Staff is looking at minor widening
in order to add a left turn lane to go on to Moss Street. The Safety Commission will be
kept advised of the work performed by CalTrans.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Commissioner Arnold acknowledged that the CalTrans sign closer to the intersection does
present a problem. He thinks this is a good start.
Agenda item #6 was taken out of order to provide a concerned citizen, who notified staff that
he would be late to the meeting, an opportunity to speak before the Commission.
7. Report on Left-turn Phasing for Hilltop Drive and "L~ Street
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Rive~a presented staff's report, explaining that the Traffic Department received a
letter and phone call from Mrs. Cynthia Ranyak requesting that left-turn phasing be
installed at the intersection of H/lltop Drive and HL~ Street. ~L~ Street has a traffic
volume of 20,000 vehicles per day, is a Class 3 coliector, with a speed limit of 35 mph;
Hilltop Drive is a Class 2 collector, with a speed ]/mit of 30 mph, and a traffic volume
of almost 9000 vehicles per day. Staff reviewed the accident history for this intersection-
-for the one year study period, there were six reported accidents, two of the accidents
were types susceptible to correction by the installation of left-turn phasing. The
CalTrans criteria states that a minimum of five correctable accidents within a one year
period are needed to justify left-turn phasing. We also looked at the delay experienced
by motorists at the intersection who do not have a left-turn phasing, and we found that
appro~mately 9 percent of the phases for one hour, there was at least one vehicle
waiting to make a left turn. Eighty percent is the criteria mentioned by CalT~ans. Staff
has completed a left-turn phasing priority list and this intersection was evaluated along
with 12 other intersection in the City. After reviewing afl locations, we cannot
recommend the installation of a left-turn phasing at the Hilltop Drive and ~L~ Street
intersection. If we were to instafl the left-turn phasing at this intersection, it would be
very costly since we could not just add the additional lights that have the left turn arrows.
We would need to replace the mast arms because the current mast arms do not extend
far enough out to place the left-turn phasing light over the left-turn lane. The signal
standards would have to be replaced. What we have found after evaluating this
intersection during the peak hour is that most of the vehicles are clearing out for the left
turn. The left-turn phasing is not justified based upon the few people who go through
Safety Commission Meeting February 14, 1991
Minutes
the intersection who make the left turn. We will continue to evaluate this intersection
on an annual basis with other intersections so that we can prioritize intersections which
do need left-mm phasing. One intersection that we will be adding left-turn phasing in
the near future is the Broadway and "I# Street intersection.
Ms. Ranyak could not be present at tonight's meeting and dropped off another copy of
her December 11, 1990 letter to staff this afternoon with the request that it be read into
the record. Mr. Rivera read the letter to the Commissioners in its entirety, stating that
attached to the letter was a petition which was signed by 88 people. Also in your packet
is a copy of staff's letter of December 20, 1990 notifying her of the Safety Commission
meeting.
COMMI~qSIONER COMMF~NTS
Commissioner Matacia asked, that just to be sure the decision was not made solely on
the basis of cost you talked at some length about the mast arm on which that light hangs,
if that arm stretched all the way out to the left turn lane, would that have made a
difference in your determination.
Mr. Rivera responded that staff would have still recommended not to install the left-turn
phasing because it reduces the progression (of vehicles) that we are able to attain in an
east/west direction and in a north/south direction through the intersection.
Mr. Rosenberg commented that the answer to Commissioner M_atacia's question is no.
Mr. Rivera informed the Commissioners that the left-turn phasing warrants is Item 14
on tonight's agenda and will be discussed separately from this item.
MOTION
Approve staff's recommendation [That the request for left-turn phasing be denied at the
intersection of Hilltop Drive and 'L ' Street. ]
MSUC [Militscher/Koester] 5-0.
8. Request for an Adult Crossing Guard at Hilltop Drive and Telegraph Canyon Road
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Rivera noted that staff has been working with Hilltop Junior High School to see
what could be done, since we received some concerns for the pedestrians using the east
crosswalk at the intersection of Hilltop Drive and Telegraph Canyon Road. At the City
Council meeting of January 22, 1991, the City Council requested that the staff and the
Safety Commission evaluate the request for an adult crossing guard and that staff install
additional school series on Hilltop Drive and that the Police Department give special
attention to this intersection. Staff has added, on Hilltop Drive, in the vicinity of this
intersection additional school series signs, a school crossing sign, and have trimmed trees
in the area to improve visibility of these signs. We do not recommend any additional
RECEIVED cra' o¢
CHULA VI 'I'A
"~'~ ~ --2 A~ :~ULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY
~'~ '~!~; March 28, 1991
CITY '"
The Honorable City Council
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Members of the Council:
Recently the Chula Vista City Council voted against the unanimous recommendation
of the Library Board of Trustees, staff, and City Attorney to excuse the Board
from the requirement of financial disclosure. Our request was based on the
FPPC criteria which reads, "makes substantive recommendations which are, and
over an extended period of time have been, regularly approved without significant
amendment or modification by another governmental agency," (see attached).
The vote by the Council was made on the suggestion of Mr. Rindone, who took
Library Directory Lane's offhand remarks and inferred that the Board members
were less than dedicated to their unanimous motion. Mrs. Lane's comments were
hers alone and not to be construed as a "report" from the Board or anyone else.
We feel the City Council let us down by not following the rational and sensible
suggestions of the Board, staff, and City Attorney. We feel you based your
decision on conjecture rather than historical fact.
We suggest that all concerned might have been better served had you done your
homework and become more familiar with the language of the FPPC ordinance.
We have learned one thing, however. There is safety in numbers and next time
we want to be counted we will contact other Boards and Commissions.
Should this matter come up again, we hope the Council will consider our
suggestions. We are on record as one advisory board that objects to being defined
as "designated employees" of the City of Chula Vista.
For the Library Board of Trustees,
Ronal d Wi 11 i ams veggy~uonovan
Vice Chairman Trustee
cc: John Goss, City Manager
Bruce Boogard, City Attorney
~.~¢~,(%_~ osemary Lane, L~brary D~rector
~,~&~ 365F STREET/CHULA VISTA~CALI~"~I~91910/(~9) 69&168 ~x~ [ / /W~
DATE: March 20, 1990
TO: Rosemary Lane, Library Director
FROM: ~Rich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: Financial Disclosure by Members of the
Library Board of Trustees
You have received complaints from some members of the Library
Board of Trustees that they should not be required to fill out
financial disclosure forms in accordance with the Political
Reform Act, after they had received a letter from the City Clerk
directing them to disclose their interests in real property,
investments in business entities and sources of income of the
type which within the past two years have contracted with the
Library to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipment, and business positions pursuant to the City's Conflict
of Interest Code. This is to confirm our oral advice that the
members of the Library Board of Trustees are required to so
report by April 1, 1990, if the Library Board of Trustees has
made substantive recommendations which are, and over an extended
period of time have been regularly approved without significant
amendment by you or the City Council. This is a judgment call,
requiring analysis of whether the decisions of the Library
Trustees are "substantive", what is an "extended" period of time,
and whether their recommendations have been "regularly" approved
without "significant" amendments by yourself or the City
Council. You are assisting the City Clerk and me in reviewing
the necessary facts to require or excuse their status as
"designated employees" under the City's Conflict of Interest Code
(Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 2.02 and 2 California Code of
Regulations 18730).
DISCUSSION
A major purpose of the Political Reform Act (Government Code
~81000 et seq.) is that the "assets and income of public
officials which may be materially affected by their official
actions should be disclosed and in appropriate circumstances, the
officials should be disqualified from acting in order that
conflicts of interest may be avoided". Additionally, "adequate
enforcement mechanisms should be provided to public officials and
private citizens in order that this title will be vigorously
enforced". (Government Code §81002). The provisions of the
Political Reform Act are required to be liberally construed to
accomplish its purposes. (Government Code 281003).
The City is required to have a Conflict of Interest Code
(Government Code §87300). The code is supposed to provide
reasonable assurance that:
Rosemary Lane
March 20, 1990
Page 2
(1) All foreseeable potential conflicts will be disclosed or
prevented;
(2) Persons affected are provided with clear and specific
statements of duties; and
(3) Adequate differentiation is made between designated
employees with different powers and responsibilities.
(Government Code ~87309).
The code must designate positions determined by the code
reviewing body (the City Council) (Government Code ~82111) to
entail the making or participating in the making of decisions
which may foreseeably have a material financial effect on any
financial interest. (Government Code ~87302). The code must
specify the types of reportable interests (investments, business
positions, interests in real property and sources of income)
foreseeably affected in a material way by the decision of the
designated employee.
As to advisory boards and commissions, the statute defines a
"deSignated employee" to include any officer, employee, member or.
consultant of any agency whose position is designated in a
Conflict of Interest Code because the position entails the making
or participating in the making of decisions which may foreseeably
have a material effect on any financial interest. (Government
Code ~82019(c)). The terms "officer", "employee", "member", and
"consultant" are not defined in the statute, but are defined in
the regulations. However, Government Code ~821-~-6-9 expressly
provides that the term "designated employee" does not include
"any unsalaried member of any board or commission whic~serves a
solely advisory function .... · (Emphasis added).
The Fair Political Practices Commission is required to administer
the act and has the power to adopt rules and regulations to carry
out its purposes and provisions. The Commission has adopted
regulations, and they are found in Title 2, Division 6 of the
California Code of Regulations (commencing with Section 18100).
(Hereafter all section references are to the regulations unless
otherwise specified).
Both the statutes (Government Code §82048) and the regulations
(Section 18700(a)) define the term "public official" to include
"unsalaried members of boards or commissions with decision-makinq
authority". (Emphasis added). The regulations further specify
that "decision-making authority" includes either making a final
Rosemary Lane ... ~
March 20, 1990 '~
Page 3
governmental decision; or if the board or commission "makes
substantive recommendations which are, and over an extended
period of time have been, regularly approved without significant
amendment or modification by another governmental agency."
(Section 18700(a)(1)(C)).
The first question which must be answered is whether the
definition of "public official" in the regulations quoted above,
carries Out the purposes and provisions and is consistent with
the provisions of the act, especially with the exception found in
the statutory definition of "designated employee", which excludes
commission members who are members of a commission which is
"purely advisory"? It seems reasonably clear that the term
"purely advisory" is less than entirely clear and therefore a
term needing, and capable of definition by the FPPC through its
regulations. We believe the definition of "public official"
which makes a distinction between those commissions or boards
with decision-making authority as opposed to being purely
advisory, turning on whether their recommendations are regularly
approved without significant amendment over an extended period of
time, is consistent with the purposes of the act. Such a
definition will result in the disclosure and potential
disqualification of persons in a position to influence decisions,
where their assets and income may be materially affected by that
ability to influence the ultimate governmental decision.
The second questions is: What does the regulation require? We
believe that the regulation requires that the code reviewing body
(here the City Council) must approve a local Conflict of Interest
Code which includes designation of those advisory boards,
committees or commissions which have members meeting the
definitions set forth in the regulations. That requires a
case-by-case determination of whether the committee, board or
commission decisions are (a) substantive, (b) approved without
significant amendment, and (c) are so approved over an extended
period of time.
Our conclusion is bolstered by the informal advise of the FPPC in
a letter to the City of Carlsbad dated November 28, 1989
(I-89-671). That informal advise letter stated:
"Once there is a history of a particular advisory
board's recommendations being routine if accepted
without amendment or modifications, the board does
convert from a solely advisory function to one
making or participating in the making of a
governmental decision and would be covered by
Rosemary Lane .~
March 20, 1990
Page 4
the Conflict of Interest Code. We have in the
past advised new advisory commissions that they
are in fact solely advisory until a history of
recommendations has been established."
Our conclusion is also supported by the discussion in Commission
on California State Government Organization and Economy v. FPPC
(1970) 775 Cal.App.3d 716, 142 Cal.Rptr. 468, the only case to
have construed this language. There the Court of Appeal held
that uncompensated part-time, appointive members of the
Commission on State Government Organization and Economy were not
exempt from the Political Reform Act's requirement of filing
periodic financial disclosure statements, notwithstanding the
fact that the primary function of the Commission was advisory.
The Court held that the Commission's investigations were capable
of directly altering activities and decisions of State agencies,
and that the Commission members were vested with power to
influence decisions of State agencies which regulated or affected
their private businesses, property or income. The Court stated:
"Advisory is authoritatively defined as having
the attribute of advising; giving or tendi-~-q
to give advice; in the context of Section
82019 the signification of advice is opinion
given or offered as to action. (The Oxford
English Dictionary.) When these definitions
are flushed out by cognitive notions, the word
advisory denotes indirect, relatively passive,
hortatory and non-binding counsel or guidance,
as contrasted with active management,
decision-making and imposition of obligatory
orders or decrees." (75 Cal. App.3d 716 at
720-721, 142 Cal.Rptr. 468, at 470-471.
After observing that the presence or absence of decision-making
power is an important factor, the Court of Appeal found the
Commission was exercising decision-making power when it acted
indirectly, submitting its studies and recommendations to the
Governor and the Legislature which had the power to accept or
reject them.
"The indirection is only nominal and
theoretical. Executive agencies which are
vulnerable to charges of abuse, inefficiency
or waste, will tend to anticipate public.
criticism by voluntary self-improvement. The
Rosemary Lane
March 20, 1990
Page 5
more vulnerable the agency, the greater its
sensitivity to the Commission's investigatory
power. Like a biological organism, the
complex and interdependent array of executive
agencies responds to external stimuli and
internally secreted adrenalin. In real life,
the Commission's investigations are not all
indirect and advisory. They are capable of
directly altering the activities, that is, the
decisions of executive agencies, resulting in
tangible effects which far outdistance the
soft inducements of good counsel."
(Commission v. FPPC, supra, 75 Cal. App.3d 716
at 723, 142 Cal.Rptr. 468 at 471).
Finally, the Court emphasized that the purposes of the Political
Reform Act were preventive, acting upon tendencies as well as
prohibited results, and observed that an official participates in
a decision when he influences it directly or indirectly. With
regard to the often heard objection that requiring disclosure
would discourage membership on a public service advisory body,
the Court observed:
"Many citizens would rather hang on to their
privacy than damage it through public
service. The damage to privacy is inflated by
enterprising journalists who mistake gossip
for news. The cost, at any rate, is a concern
of the legislative branch, not the courts."
(75 Cal.App.3d 716, at 724, 142 Cal.Rptr. 468
at 473).
A third question is: What would happen if the City Council does
not include members of boards and commissions meeting the
regulatory test in the City's Conflict of Interest Code?
Initially, it should be pointed out that the City Council is the
Code reviewing body for the local Conflict of Interest Code for
the City of Chula Vista. Clearly, it is their initial
determination as to who are "designated" employees. However, an
officer, employee, member or consultant of the City or a resident
of the City may petition the City Council to amend the Conflict
of Interest Code (Government Code §87307). The statute then
provides judicial review of any action of the Code Reviewing Body
initiated by the FPPC, through the Attorney General, or by an
officer, employee, member or consultant of the City or a resident
of the City, directly or through the District Attorney.
Rosemary Lane
March 20, 1990
Page 6
(Government Code §~87308 and 91001). Theoretically, failure of
the City Council to designate members of boards or commissions
meeting the test could constitute a misdemeanor (Government Code
~91000), but it is hard to imagine either criminal or civil
penalties being invoked by the District Attorney (see Government
Code §91005.5) in such an event. Additionally, the statute
expressly provide for injunctive relief to enjoin violations or
compel compliance with the provisions of the Political Reform Act
by any resident of a city, including the right to reasonable
attorney's fees in the event such a resident prevails in the
litigation (Government Code §91003).
The City of Chula Vista's local Conflict of Interest Code is
found in Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 2.02. In Section
2.02.030, the City Council has delegated to the City Clerk and
City Attorney, acting together, authority to designate positions
other than those expressly set forth in the Code as positions
which must provide financial disclosure and under specified
circumstances, be disqualified from participation in governmental
decisions. Utilizing that authority, the following
committees/commission members have been designated:
Board of Appeals and Advisors; Board of Library Trustees; Civil
Service Commission, Design Review Committee; Growth Management
Oversight Committee; International Friendship Commission;
Montgomery Community Planning Committee; Otay Valley Road Project
Area Committee; Resource Conservation Commission; Safety
Commission; and the Town Centre Project Area Committee. The list
inadvertently omits the Parks and Recreation Commission. This
list of boards and committees was in a draft Appendix prepared
for a potential amendment to the Chula Vista Municipal Code
Conflict of Interest Code provisions which was not yet ready to
go to Council for approval. Since the City Clerk was unable to
determine from prior records of the previous City Clerk what
boards and commissions were sent disclosure form requirements,
she utilized the draft new Appendix for this year's mailing. We
have subsequently discovered that members of certain boards and
committees feel they should not be required to make financial
disclosures under the Act. The City Clerk and this office are
currently attempting to review the records of the City Council
with regard to those boards, commissions or committees to
determine their "track record" with their recommendations to the
City Council.
I have also advised you that this whole subject is a matter of
statewide concern and of current local concern to the City
Attorneys of the cities in San Diego County. We will be
Rosemary Lane
March 20, 1990
Page 7
discussing this very subject at our retreat in Palm Springs on
March 24, 1990. However, I am fairly confident that our ultimate
conclusion will be as stated herein. Accordingly, you should
begin an historical review to determine whether the decisions of
the Library Trustees are substantive and have been approved
without significant amendment over an extended period of time by
yourself or the City Council. I am fairly confident that your
research will conclude that those regulatory guidelines have been
met and that the members of the Library Board of Trustees are
required to disclose the specified, limited, financial
interests. However, if you discover through your historical
research that any of those requisites are not met, please discuss
with me as soon as possible. In the event that the regulatory
requirements are met, those members have been designated, and
must file their reports with the City Clerk by April 1, 1990 or
suffer a ~10.00 per day penalty for late filing. Accordingly, it
is important that you notify them of the risk involved in
noncompliance, the likelihood that the regulatory requisites will
have been met, and the relative simplicity of the reporting
requirements once they embark upon the process. The City Clerk's
Office will be happy to assist any Board of Library Trustees'
member with the process of filling out the requisite forms in the
limited categories in which they are required to report.
~lma~y t~ City ~ounci~, as the Code reviewing body,
~e ~nls ~eterm~nation based upon the advice of the City--s.
Attorney, City Manager, and City Clerk. The list was intended to~
~e. reviewed by the City Manager and the Director of Personnel~
De,ore being utilized, after Council approval. That process will/
be undertaken before next year's disclosure statements are called/
for by the City Clerk. ~
If I may be of further assistance in this matter, do not hesitate
to contact the me.
DRR:clb
cc: John Goss
Beverly Authelet
6975a