HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 2001/05/31 GMOC ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL,
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION, AND
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
Council Conference Room
Administration Building
276 Fourth Avenue
May 31, 2001 4:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and Mayor Horton
Growth Management Oversight Commissioners Dull, Garcia, Munoz, O'Neill, Perez, Spethman, Tripp,
Tugenberg, and Chair Gray
Planning Commissioners Castane l, McCann, O'Neill, Willett, and Chair Thomas
PUBLIC HEARING
1. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT
COMMISSION'S (GMOC) 2000 ANNUAL REPORT (PCM-01-06)
On May 3, 2001, the GMOC finalized its 2000 annual report to Council regarding compliance with the
City's eleven quality-of~life threshold standards. The report focuses on the period from July 1, 1999
through June 30, 2000, although issues identified in the second half of 2000 and early 2001 are also
included where pertinent. The GMOC will discuss its findings and recommendations with the Council
and Planning Commission.
Staffrecommendations:
A. That the Planning Commission accept the 2000 GMOC annual report and recommendations as
presented therein; and adopt a motion recommending that the Council do the same; and
B. That the City Council accept the GMOC's 2000 annual report and recommendations contained
therein; and direct the City Manager to undertake actions necessary to implement those
recommendations as presented in "2000 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed Implementing
Actions Summary."
ACTION
2. CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF A REPORT ON TRAFFIC ISSUES
City staff has been working with representatives of the development community to evaluate
current traffic capacity issues in Eastern Chula Vista, and is recommending a three-prong
program to address these issues:
A. Evaluation of possible roadway improvements that would enhance traffic capacity in
certain critical locations
B. Evaluation of transportation demand management measures that could reduce traffic
impacts during peak commute periods
C. An enhanced development monitoring and traffic threshold monitoring program to ensure
that traffic threshold standards are not exceeded
Staff will present the report on the traffic issues.
Staff recommendation: Council accept the report and direct staff to implement the program.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT of the City Council to the Regular Meeting on June 5, 2001 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers. The Planning Commission will adjourn to its Regular Meeting on June 13, 2001 at 6:00 p.m.
Page 2 5/31/01
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL, GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION, AND PLANNING
COMMISSION AGENDA
I declare under penalty of perjury thet I em
employed by the City of Chula Vista In the
Office of the City Clerk and that I posted thll
document on the bulletin board ar,,c, ording to
Brown Act requirementa.
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL,-- '
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIG~ ............. , ~ - .~)--~'~?
PLANNING COMMISSION ~
AGENDA
Council Conference Room
Administration Building
276 Fourth Avenue
May 31, 2001 4:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and Mayor Horton
Growth Management Oversight Commissioners Dull, Garcia, Munoz, O'Neill, Perez, Spethman, Tripp,
Tugenberg, and Chair Gray
Planning Commissioners Castaneda, Cortes, Hall, McCann, O'Neill, Willett, and Chair Thomas
PUBLIC HEARING
1. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT
COMMISSION'S (GMOC) 2000 ANNUAL REPORT (PCM-01-06)
On May 3, 2001, the GMOC finalized its 2000 annual report to Council regarding compliance with the
City's eleven quality-of-life threshold standards. The report focuses on the period from July 1, 1999
through June 30, 2000, although issues identified in the second half of 2000 and early 2001 are also
included where pertinent. The GMOC will discuss its findings and recommendations with the Council
and Planning Commission.
Staff recommendations:
A. That the Planning Commission accept the 2000 GMOC annual report and recommendations as
presented therein; and adopt a motion recommending that the Council do the same; and
B. That the City Council accept the GMOC's 2000 annual report and recommendations contained
therein; and direct the City Manager to undertake actions necessary to implement those
recommendations as presented in "2000 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed Implementing
Actions Summary."
ACTION
2. CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF A REPORT ON TRAFFIC ISSUES
City staff has been working with representatives of the development community to evaluate
current traffic capacity issues in Eastern Chula Vista, and is recommending a three-prong
program to address these issues:
a) evaluation of possible roadway improvements that would enhance traffic capacity in
certain critical locations;
b) evaluation of transportation demand management measures that could reduce traffic
impacts during peak commute periods; and
c) an enhanced development monitoring and traffic threshold monitoring program to ensure
that traffic threshold standards are not exceeded.
Staff will present the report on the traffic issues.
Staff recommendation: Council accept the report and direct staff to implement the program.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT of the City Council to the Regular Meeting on June 5, 2001 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers. The Planning Commission will adjourn to its Regular Meeting on June 13, 2001 at 6:00 p.m.
Page 2 5/31/01
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL, GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION, AND PLANNING
COMMISSION AGENDA
SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOP/MEETING
OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
COUNCIL CONFERENCE AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1
Meeting Date 05/31/01
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: PCM-01-06, Review And Consideration Of The Growth
Management Oversight Commission's (GMOC) 2000 Annual Report
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building
REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5tbs' Vote: Yes No X
On May 3, 2000, the GMOC finalized its 2000 Annual Report to the City Council regarding
compliance with the City's eleven Quality-of-Life Threshold Standards. The report focuses on the
period from July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2000, although issues identified in the second half of 2000
and early 2001 are also included where pertinent. The report discusses each threshold in terms of
threshold compliance, key issues, and corresponding mcommendtions. A summary of the GMOC's
recommendations and staffs proposed implementation actions is included as Attachment A. The
workshop will give the GMOC an oppommity to discuss their findings and recommendations with
the Planning Commission and City Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
1) That the Planning Commission accept the 2000 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations
as presented heroin, and adopt a motion recommending that Council do the same; and
2) That the City Council:
a) Accept the 2000 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations contained therein; and
b) Direct the City Manager to undertake actions necessary to implement those
recommendations as presented in the "2000 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed
Implementing Actions Summary" (Attachment A).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission will provide
comments and recommendations at the workshop.
Page 2, Iteml
Meeting Date 05/31/01
DISCUSSION:
I. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Not In Compliance Potential for Non Compliance In Compliance
Police* Traffic Schools
Fire/EMS* Schools (SUHSD) Traffic
Parks & Rec. Parks & Rec.
Libraries*
Fiscal
Air Quality
Sewer
Drainage
Water
* Proposed Threshold Standard Amendment
2. SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES
Thresholds Not In Compliance
Police - As presented in past GMOC reports, the Police Department has been out of compliance
with the Threshold for several years. Two key factors are cited to explain the non-compliance: (1)
original measurement and data errors, and (2) staffing and deployment deficiencies.
Based upon data from the new Computer Assisted Dispatch (CAD) system (installed in 1998), an in-
depth report investigating response times and Police Threshold performance was presented to the
GMOC last year and included in an appendix of that report. After an additional year of
consideration, the GMOC has a more thorough understanding of the reasons to correct for original
measurement and data errors, and is recommending the Threshold correction to the City Council.
The original measurement was derived through the use of manual punch cards were subject to human
error. In addition, dispatchers would sometimes enter the dispatch time on punch cards after the
fact based on memory and at times entered "zero" dispatch times. The zero times were, in turn,
included in calculating dispatch time averages, thus erroneously shortening dispatch times. With
the CAD system now in place this type of error does not occur. In making this recommendation for
the Threshold correction, the GMOC is also recommending that the Police Department engage in a
public information effort so that the community fully understands the reasons for the correction.
Even with the proposed corrected threshold (to 81% from the original 84% of emergency calls
within 7 minutes) the current Police response time (75.9% of emergency calls within 7 minutes) is
still not in compliance. Due to recent improvements and others measures still pending, response
times are improving and are expected to continue to shorten. With regard to staffing and deployment
Page 3, Iteml
Meeting Date 05/31/01
deficiencies, the GMOC report reflects 8 action measures, as reported by the Police Department, that
when implemented will further reduce response time.
Despite the numeric non-compliance in threshold response time, community surveys conducted by
the Police Department in 1997 and 2000 indicate a respective 92% and 93% level of satisfaction in
regard to the community's sense of security, and overall satisfaction with police service. This fact
illustrates the obvious, that there is more to maintaining an effective police department than response
time rates alone. Clearly the police provide a broad range of services that combine to provide the
community with effective crime prevention and protection. The GMOC believes that these other
prevention and protection service programs are an important component of quality police services for
the community.
Fire/EMS - As presented in past GMOC reports the Fire Department has been out of compliance
with the Threshold for several years. Two key reasons explain the non-compliance (1) original
measurement and data errors, and (2) operational changes.
Based upon data from the new Computer Assisted Dispatch (CAD) system (installed in 1998) an in-
depth report that investigates response times and Fire/EMS Threshold performance was presented
last year and included in an appendix of the GMOC's 1999 Annual Report. In brief, lack of
standardization and human error in the use of manual punch cards caused dispatch and turnout time
to be underestimated in 1987. The more sophisticated CAD system in use over the last few years
allowed for an analysis that confirmed dispatch and turnout time was erroneously shortened. After
an additional year of consideration, the GMOC has a more thorough understanding of the reasons to
correct the threshold and is making this recommendation to the City Council. In making this
recommendation for the Threshold correction, the GMOC is also recommending that the Fire
Department engage in a public information effort so that the community fully understands the
reasons for the correction.
Even with the corrected threshold (respond to 80% from the original 85% of emergency calls within
7 minutes) the Fire/EMS response time while close (79.7% of emergency calls within 7 minutes) is
still not in compliance. Response time has improved since last year and with the recent change to a
different dispatch service the Fire Department is cautiously optimistic that response times will
further improve.
The GMOC recognizes that there is more to maintaining an effective fire department than response
rates alone. Clearly the fire department provides a broad range of services that combine to provide
the community with fire and emergency medical services. The GMOC supports the Fire
Department's proposal to conduct community surveys similar to those done by the police
Department.
Thresholds With Potential Non-Compliance
Traffic - On both Telegraph Canyon Road and East H Street, morning westbound peak travel is
becoming more congested. The Threshold Standard has not yet been exceeded. With the scheduled
opening next month of Olympic Parkway substantial additional traffic capacity'will be added
Page 4, Iteml
Meeting Date 05/31/01
reducing the pressure n both Telegraph Canyon Road and East H Street. In addition, progress is
being made toward making SR125 a reality by as early as the end of 2004. However, given road
capacity and thc expected continuation of traffic growth trends the threshold may fail prior to SR125
completion. The GMOC supports the City's efforts at:
(1) examining short term additions to the roadways to increase capacity;
(2) considering traffic demand management techniques like staggered work hours and car
pooling, and;
(3) working with the development community to moderate the rate of growth as may be
needed.
The GMOC recommends that the City Council does what is necessary in order to preserve the traffic
threshold from failure.
A separate Staff Report providing additional detail on proposed efforts to address traffic issues is
included on this Council Agenda.
Schools - The GMOC's concerns with the Sweetwater Union High School District are the facility
conditions and standards of our older high schools. Although new residential construction is limited,
the western portion of the City is growing due to increased household size. This demographic
change is resulting in more children per home who in turn need to be accommodated into schools.
These schools have typically exceeded their original design capacity, are in developed locations and
are unable to expand in land area, have relocatable classrooms taking up outside space, and are in
need of upgrades past what current funding can provide.
Parks and Recreation - The Threshold Standard of 3 acres of park land per 1,000 population for
eastem Chula Vista is being met and exceeded. The Threshold Standard also calls for appropriate
facilities. The GMOC must therefore judge ifthere are appropriate recreation facilities east of1805.
At present, there are no public gymnasiums, pools, or other major recreation facilities in eastern
Chula Vista. The GMOC is waiting for the Parks Master Plan in order to evaluate if the facilities are
appropriate. In the absence of facilities and a Master Plan, the GMOC has determined that a
potential threshold failure exists. Next year's GMOC will consider other sources upon which to
judge facility appropriateness if the Master Plan is still not completed.
Other Significant Issues/Recommendations
Schools - To maintain compliance the Sweetwater Union High School District is currently planning
to construct a new high school in Otay Ranch Village Two. Acquisition of the site was completed in
April 2001and project completion is targeted for 2003. As ftmding for construction of the Otay
Ranch High School is uncertain, the completion target is subject to change. Currently, Eastlake
High School will be at capacity by mid-2001 and more relocatables will be installed to handle
additional students until the Otay Ranch High School is open. In addition, bussing may be instituted
to the high school on Otay Mesa (also referred to as San Ysidro High School) which is currently
under construction. Since the addition of more relocatables and busing are not viewed as desirable
by the GMOC efforts to insure that financing for the Otay Ranch High School are recommended as a
priority.
Page 5, Item1
Meeting Date 05/31/01
Libraries- The Library Department believes that the threshold should be defined as the total square
footage required at build out which is an additional 60,000 square feet based upon the 1998 Library
Master Plan. This new threshold recommendation should be brought before Council for adoption.
The City is currently pursuing funding for construction of a 30,000 square foot full-service regional
library the first element to meet the 60,000 square foot target. The construction must begin soon if it
is to open by the 2005 target date, and avoid a violation of the threshold, which requires that there
should be not less than 500 square feet of library per 1,000 population. Consistent with the GMOC
recommendation, library construction has been added to the City's 5 year Capital Improvement
Program.
CONCLUSIONS:
To assist Council in evaluating and acting upon the GMOC's 31 recommendations, a concise
summary of the GMOC's recommendations and corresponding staff responses is presented in
Attachment A (labeled as Appendix A in the GMOC Report). Staffrequests direction from Council
to implement those recommendations as outlined in the right-hand column of Attachment A.
Additional appendices to the GMOC Report contains the Growth Forecast and Threshold
Compliance Questionnaire/supplemental reports presented to the GMOC by the various City
Departments and outside agencies.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None at this time. As specified follow-up actions are brought forward to the City Council, fiscal
analysis of these actions will be provided.
Attachments: A - 2000 GMOC Recommendations~Proposed Implementing Actions Summary
B - Chairperson's Cover Memo and GMOC 2000 Annual Report
C - Appendices
Rev. May 18, 2001 (4:00PIVO
Attachment A
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2000 ANNUAL REPORT
RECOMMENDATIONS / IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS SUMMARY
(Referred to as Appendix A in the Growth Management 2000 Annual Report)
Attachment B
CHAIRPERSON'S COVER MEMO AND
GMOC 2000 ANNUAL REPORT
TO GMOC REPORT RECIPIENTS:
The enclosed GMOC 2000 Annual Report is being transmitted to you prior to the GMOC
Workshop on May 31, 2001. Although the enclosed copy is not bound it is the final
report.
In a departure from previous years, we will bind the GMOC Report after the joint City
Council, Planning Commission, and GMOC Workshop. This is being done so that we
can include "Appendix A" as part of the GMOC document. The GMOC report contains
the recommendations going to Council. However, it is not until the Workshop that the
Council approves and possibly alters the "Staff P~esponses" to those recommendations. It
is believed that having the recommendations and approved staff responses under one
cover will create a more useful product.
Therefore, immediately following the May 31,2001 Workshop the approved "Staff
Responses" will be appended to the GMOC Report as Appendix A, will be bound and
reissued.
May 18, 2001
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
City of Chula Vis~ /~
FROM: Bud Gray, Chair ~
Growth Managemefi~ Ove~ight Commission (GMOC)
SUBJECT: 2000 GMOC Annual Report (July 1999 to June 30, 2000)
The GMOC is appreciative of the time and professional expertise given by the various City
department staff as well as the school districts, water authorities, and Air Pollution Control District
in helping us complete this years annual report. The comprehensive written and verbal reports
presented to the GMOC illustrate the commitment of these dedicated professionals to serving the
Chula Vista community.
I would like to recognize the commissioners of the GMOC: Lynn Dull, Vice Chair, Arthur Garcia,
Rafael Munoz, Kevin O'Neill, Gustavo Perez, Michael Spethman, Bill Tripp, and Robert
Tugenberg. This dedicated and diverse team of citizens read numerous reports, listened to detailed
presentations, and participated in hours of thoughtful discussion about the effectiveness of the
General Plan and the impact of development on the "quality of life" in Chula Vista.
The City of Chula Vista continues to experience unprecedented growth. This underscores the
importance of managed growth to assure the "quality of life" the citizens of Chula Vista appreciate
and have come to expect. The GMOC recognizes the complexity of this issue and commends the
City Council for its commitment to managed growth.
The GMOC found nine of the eleven threshold standards in compliance. Fire/EMS and Police
thresholds were not met. As reported to the City in previous years, Police and Fire/EMS have
instituted measures to improve response time. In addition, based on an examination of how the
original threshold was calculated and upon more reliable measurement techniques, errors were
discovered in how the original response times were calculated. This issue was presented to the
GMOC last year and discussed in last years annual report. However, we delayed action for a year
to insure a more thorough consideration of how to correct for this error. It is the recommendation
of the GMOC that the Police and Fire thresholds should be changed to correct for these original
errors. We also recommend that Police and Fire/EMS initiate a public information program so
that the community clearly understands the nature of the error and why the correction is being
initiated.
Even with the change to the threshold standards both Police and Fire/EMS would remain in non-
compliance. Each organization is making efforts to improve so that their response time thresholds
will be met.
There are three thresholds that, while they were met in the last fiscal year, were judged to have a
"Potential for Non-Compliance". These are the Sweetwater Union High School District (SUHSD),
Parks and Recreation, and Traffic.
The GMOC's concem with the SUHSD is the facility conditions and standards of our older high
schools. The approval of the $187 million bond for modernization of the SUHSD was a significant
and needed financial infusion. Although the bond constitutes a major improvement, the funds fall
far short of what is needed. SUHSD indicated that the funding was about half of what is needed
for school facility upgrades and modernization. In addition, GMOC members have received
anecdotal information from students and school administrators regarding adequacy of non-
classroom facilities. While this information is not conclusive, the GMOC plans to request
additional follow-up information during next years assessment. The GMOC seeks to work
constructively with the SUHSD to assess the adequacy of funding to maintain facilities to support
and absorb growth both east and west.
Parks and Recreation is a case where the GMOC must judge if there are adequate parks and
recreation facilities east of I 805. The park land area is sufficient but we have no guidelines for
what are adequate park facilities. And, we are waiting for the long promised Parks Master Plan in
order to evaluate if the facilities are adequate. In the absence of a Master Plan the OMOC has
determined that a potential threshold failure exists. Hopefully, next year we will have an approved
Parks Master Plan to help in our evaluation.
With the scheduled opening next month of Olympic Parkway additional traffic capacity will be
added to our street system. And, progress is being made toward making SR125 a reality by the
end of 2004. Based upon forecasts of road capacity and the continued rate of growth the traffic
threshold may fail prior to SR125 completion. The GMOC supports the City's efforts at (1)
examining short term additions to the roadways to increase capacity, (2) considering traffic
demand management techniques like staggered work hours and car pooling, and (3) working with
the development community to moderate the rate of growth as may be needed. The GMOC
recommends that the City Council protect the traffic threshold from failure with a variety of
measures, including placing a cap on development if absolutely necessary.
The following report highlights the eleven threshold standards, the issues and recommendations to
the City Council, and proposed threshold amendments for Library, Police, and Fire/EMS. On
several of the recommendations the GMOC has indicated requested due dates. In setting these
due dates the GMOC is seeking greater accountability for results from City departments for follow
through with implementing GMOC recommendations. When the results of recommended actions
are to be considered during next years annual review a due date of December 31, 2001 is used. It
is typically after this date that the GMOC begins their systematic assessment of threshold
compliance.
I look forward to the joint City Council, Planning Commission and GMOC meeting on May 31,
2001.
Growth
Management
Oversight
Commission
2000 ANNUAL REPORT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2000 ANNUAL REPORT
(Review Period 7/1/99 to 6/30/00)
VOLUME I
Commission Members
Bud Gray, Chair (Development)
C. Lynn Dull, Vice Chair (Sweetwater)
Arthur M. Garcia (Education)
Rafael Munoz (Eastern Territories)
Kevin O'Neill (Planning Commission)
Gustavo Perez (Business)
Michael Spethman (Center City)
William Tripp (Environmental)
Robert Tugenberg (Montgomery)
Staff
Edgar Batchelder, Principal Planner
Daniel Forster, Growth Management Coordinator
Cherryl Cisneros, Management Assistant
May 3, 2001
.t'lPlanninglGMOC~Gmoc2OOO~ReportlGMOC Report 2000. doc
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2000 REPORT
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 3
l.l PURPOSE 3
1.2 DEVELOPMENT FORECASTS 3
1.2.1 18 Month Forecast 3
1.2.2 Five-Year Forecast for Eastern Chula Vista 4
1.3 REVIEW PROCESS 4
2.0 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 5
3.0 POLICE 6
3.1 POLICE THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE 6
3.1.1 Proposed Threshold Correction 6
3.1.2 Additional Measures to Reduce Response Time 8
3.1.3 Additional Threshold Standards 9
3.1.4 Utility of"Urgent Response" (Priority II) Threshold 9
3.2 FIRE / EMERGENCY M~DICAL SERVICES 10
3.2.1 Proposed Threshold Correction 10
3.2.2 Community Survey 11
3.3 SCHOOLS 12
3.3.1 Relocatable Classrooms At Existing Schools 12
3.3.2 Facility Standards and Maintenance 12
3.3.3 Construction of Otay Ranch High School 13
3.4 PARKS & RECREATION 14
3.4.1 Potential Non-Compliance 14
3.4.2 Completion of Greenbelt Master Plan 15
3.4.3 Park Threshold Amendment 15
3.5 AIR QUALITY 16
3.5.1 Adoption of CO: Reduction Plan 16
3.5.2 Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines 17
3.6 TRAFFIC 18
3.6.1 Timely Construction of SR- 125 18
2000 GMOC Report 1 May 3, 2001
3.6.2 East - West Traffic Potential for Non-Compliance 18
3.7 FISCAL 20
3.8 LIBRARIES 21
3.8.1 Library Threshold Amendment 21
3.8.2 Library Building Plan 22
3.9 DRAINAGE 23
3.9.1 Unfunded Drainage Projects in Western Chula Vista 23
3.9.2 Maintenance of Environmentally Sensitive Drainage & Detention Basins 23
3.10 SEWER 25
3.10.1 Reported Threshold Incident 25
3.10.2 Timely Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer 25
3.11 WATER 27
3.11.1 Water Conservation Plans 27
4.0 APPENDICES 29
4.1 Appendix A - Recommendations and Implementing Actions 29
2000 GMOC Report 2 May 3, 2001
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
In November 1987, the City Council adopted the original Threshold Standards Policy for Chula Vista
establishing "quality-of-life" indicators for eleven public facility and service topics. The Policy addresses each
topic in terms of a goal, objective(s), a "threshold" or standard, and implementation measures. Adherence to
these City-wide standards is intended to preserve and enhance both the environment and residents' quality of life
as growth occurs. To provide an independent, annual, City-wide Threshold Standards compliance review, the
Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) was created. It is composed of nine members
representing each of the City's four major geographic areas, a member of the Planning Commission, and a cross
section of interests including education, environment, business, and development.
The GMOC's review is structured around a fiscal year cycle to accommodate City Council review of GMOC
recommendations which may have budget implications. The official review period for this report is July 1, 1999
through June 30, 2000. Pertinent issues identified during the second half of 2000 and early 2001 are also
addressed.
During this l~rocess, the GMOC encourages each City Department and outside agency, that has responsibility for
reporting on the threshold status, to review the appropriateness of the threshold and whether new thresholds and
or standards should be considered.
1.2 DEVELOPMENT FORECASTS
The Threshold/Standards Policy calls for the City to prepare both short-range (18 months) and mid-range (five
to seven years) development forecasts at the beginning of the annual GMOC review process. Complementary to
threshold performance evaluation, which reviews the prior year period, these forecasts provide a common basis
by which the GMOC, City staff, and external agencies can identify and address any potential threshold issues
before a problem arises. A copy of this year's forecast information, provided to City Departments and outside
agencies, is included as Appendix B and summarized below.
1.2.1 18 Month Forecast
The 18 month forecast is the main development projection employed for annual threshold reviews. This focuses
on near-term development which will place demands on available infrastructure and services, and presents
information at the project level.
The City conducts an annual survey of developers requesting what multifamily and single family housing units
they anticipated to be permitted and finaled in three 6 month segments covering the period from July 2000
through December 2001. Using this information, Planning and Building Department staff creates the forecast
indicates that 6,091 dwelling units will be authorized for construction and 5,295 dwelling units will be
completed for occupancy over the 18-month period.
2000 GMOC Report 3 May 3. 2001
1.2.2 Five-Year Forecast for Eastern Chula Vista
As initially presented in last year's forecast, the San Diego Association of Government's (SANDAG) Region
2020 Growth Forecast indicates that the South Bay subregion will host a substantial amount of the region's
projected growth over the next 20 years. This stems mainly from the limited General Plan capacity in several
north county cities, as well as from the lower average price of housing in areas south of I-8. Based largely on the
amount of vacant land within master planned projects in Chula Vista's eastern area, SANDAG projects that the
City will add close to 40,000 housing units and over 120,000 new residents between the years 1995 and 2020.
As evidenced by building and permit activity presented earlier in this report, the City has already begun to see
the trend in increased development activity.
Using SANDAG's Region 2020 information as a base, the City has reviewed the status of local development
planning and regulatory processing in order to prepare a major residential development forecast for the next $
years (2000 through 2005). The forecast reflects an average of approximately 2~370 dwelling unit completions
per year, with minor fluctuations on an annual basis. Similar to trends in SANDAG's forecast, this level of
development activity is over twice the City's historic annual average of 1,008 units/year between 1980 and
2000.
The ability for this amount of growth to be sustained over the 5-year period will be largely driven by the
strength of the economy and housing market, but it will also be affected by the timing of major roadways and
other infrastructure and facilities needed to support that growth. Construction of State Route 125 is particularly
strategic to supporting this 5-year forecast. Based on the City's initial review, if these levels of growth are
sustained, SR125 might be needed sometime in early 2004 when planned arterial street capacity might otherwise
be reached. Analysis is also being performed with regard to the possible construction of an interim SR-125
facility, and what impact it might have on capacity. To ensure prudent management of street system capacity
prior to SR125, the City is currently evaluating a potential development allocation and monitoring system which
would pace development in relation to the anticipated timing for SR125 and other needed facilities.
1.3 REVIEW PROCESS
The GMOC held 12 regular meetings from December 2000 through May 2001. In addition, GMOC members
participated in a City field trip on January 6, 2001. Threshold questionnaires were completed and submitted by
a number of City Departments and outside agencies. GMOC members reviewed the questionnaires, and where
necessary, asked department or agency representatives to appear in person and answer questions. The GMOC
determined whether it would be appropriate to issue a "statement of concern" or to make other recommendations
regarding each threshold. Once individual Threshold reviews were completed, this report was prepared for
presentation to the Planning Commission and City Council.
2000 GMOC Report 4 May 3, 2001
3.0 POLICE
3.1 POLICE THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE
Threshold: Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond
to 84% of the Priority I emergency calls throughout the City within seven (7)
minutes and shall maintain an average response time to all Priority I calls of
four minutes and thirty seconds (4.5 minutes) or less (measured annually).
Urgent Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to
62% of the Priority II, urgent calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes
and shall maintain an average response time to all Priority II calls of seven
minutes (7.0 minutes) or less (measured annually).
Threshold Finding: Not in Compliance
Threshold Stan&ard Percent Time Average Time
Emergency Response 84.0 7 minutes 4:30 min./sec.
Ur[~ent Response 62.0 7 minutes 7 minutes
Actual
Emergency Response 75.9 7 minutes 5:21 min./sec.
Urgent Response 46.4 7 minutes 9:37 min./sec.
3.1.1 Proposed Threshold Correction
Issues: Errors in Original Response Time Calculation
Police response time consists of dispatch and travel. Dispatch is the time
between when a call is received and when a unit is given instructions to proceed
to the location. Travel time is the actual duration from receiving instructions to
arriving at the location. Errors in the manner dispatch time was calculated in
originally setting the threshold in 1987 have been known for several years, but
it has only been with the recent implementation of a more sophisticated
computer assisted dispatch (CAD) system that the errors could be
comprehensively and objectively assessed. With the assistance of the City of
Chula Vista's Special Projects Division the Police Department has conducted
such an investigation. The error in establishing the original threshold is
reported to have occurred because of two principal reasons, these are:
· The use of manual punch cards resulted in human error compared
to the current use of computer assisted dispatch (CAD).
Dispatchers would sometimes enter the dispatch time on punch
cards after the fact based on memory and at times entered "zero"
dispatch times. The zero times were, in turn, included in
2000 GMOC Report 6 May 3, 2001
calculating dispatch time averages, thus erroneously shortening
dispatch times.
· In order to account for natural statistical variations in data from
year to year, a factor of 2.5% is typically applied. This was applied
to the 1988 percentage threshold, but not the average response time
thresholds.
Additional information concerning the rational for the threshold correction is
contained in Appendix C as supplemental information with the completed
Police Department GMOC questionnaire.
Proposed Threshold: Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond
to 81% of the Priority I emergency calls throughout the City within seven (7)
minutes and shall maintain an average response time to all Priority I calls of
five minutes and thirty seconds (5.5 minutes) or less (measured annually).
Urgent Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to
57% of the Priority II, urgent calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes
and shall maintain an average response time to all Priority II calls of seven
minutes and thirty seconds (7.5 minutes) or less (measured annually).
Threshold Standard Percent Time Average Time
Emergency Response 84 7 minutes 4:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 62 7 minutes 7 minutes
Proposed Corrected Threshold
Emergency Response 81 7 minntes 5:30 min./sec.
Urgent Response 57 7 minutes 7:30 min./sec.
Actual
Emergency Response 75.9 7 minutes 5:21 min./sec.
Urgent Response 46.4 7 minutes 9:37 min./sec.
Note: Even with the proposed threshold correction, Police response time
remains in violation of the threshold except for Emergency Response "Average
Time".
Recommendation: The GMOC recognizes that an error occurred in calculating the original
dispatch time used to established the current threshold. Therefore, the GMOC
supports the Police Department's request for the threshold change.
It is further strongly recommended that beginning in June 2001 the Police
Department conduct a vigorous and thorough public information campaign so
that the reason for the threshold correction is clearly understood by the
community.
2000 GMOC Report 7 May 3, 2001
Note: The GMOC recommends that the Police Department bring the proposed
amendment to the threshold standard before the City Council for action no later
than December 31, 2001.
3.1.2 Additional Measures to Reduce Response Time
Issues: As indicated, the GMOC is recommending a correction in the response time
threshold, even so response time will still be in non compliance. In response to
this the Police Department is currently, or plans to implement, several
initiatives. This is viewed as a related second measure for the Police Threshold
Standard to ultimately come imo compliance. And, even if the Threshold
Standard is met these initiatives are expected to continue. They are:
1. Addition of an extra police car in the Eastern beats on swing and day shifts,
beginning July 13, 2001.
2. Change in deployment method through the use of patrol teams and
comprehensive training program, beginning July 13,2001.
3. Reduced officer vacancies through a planned advance hire program
beginning July 1, 2001.
4.Implementing programs to reduce false alarms- under development.
5. A newly hired police research analyst is examining response options and call
prioritization and dispatch policies and procedures. A dispatch staffing
study is scheduled to be conducted by the City Manager's Office of Budget
and Analysis - on-going and under development.
6. The Fire Department's switch to Heartland as their dispatch provider was
approved May 1, 2001. This is expected to increase efficiency in the police
dispatch service since police dispatch will be the sole focus of dispatchers.
7. The Police Department has began the process of upgrading mobile data
computers (MDCs). A total of 49 were funded this year, The new MDC's
will enable the Department to computerized in-car mapping which will
help to ascertain the quickest route to call locations. The in-car mapping
software and interface is not yet funded.
8. The city has entered into a 5-year Memorandum of Understanding with the
Police Officers Association with the expectation that this will help retain
existing sworn staff and, therefore, reduce patrol turnover.
Recommendation: That the Police Department remain diligent in meeting and achieving shorter
response times than what is indicated as the Threshold Standard through the
active pursuit and implementation of their current and planned programs and
report on how these measures improved response times to next years GMOC.
Recommendation: A dollar figure for the in-car mapping software and interface has not been
presented to the GMOC. But, given that the amount is reasonable the GMOC
recommends the City Council approve the Police Departmem's request for
funding of an appropriate system to allow computerized in-car mapping.
2000 GMOC Report 8 May 3, 2001
3.1.3 Additional Threshold Standards
Issue: Based upon a bi-annual survey (1997 and 2000) conducted by thc Police
Depar~ent, it was found that 93% and 92% of the community respectively
have a high satisfaction level with police service. The Police Department has
requested that community satisfaction as indicated through the survey be
included as an additional Police Department Threshold.
Recommendation: The GMOC recognizes the high quality of police service provided to the
residents of Chula Vista, and that this quality has been maintained even with
the city's rapid growth. It is obvious that there is more to quality police service
than just response time. The GMOC supports the continued bi-annual survey
of community satisfaction with police service. However, the GMOC is
uncertain if this measure can be directly linked with the impacts of growth and
has concluded that it should not be used as an additional threshold standard at
this time.
Issue: The Police Department is requesting that the percentage of officer time
available for problem solving/proactive crime reduction efforts, also be added
as a factor in the Threshold Standard.
Recommendation: Having time available for officers to focus on problem solving and proactive
crime reduction efforts is recognized by the GMOC as good police practice.
However, the GMOC is uncertain if this measure can be directly linked with the
impacts of growth but this measure should be further studied next year by the
GMOC for possible addition to the Police Threshold Standard.
3.1.4 Utility of "Urgent Response" (Priority II) Threshold
Issue: The utility of maintaining the "Urgent Response" portion of the Police
threshold has been questioned by the GMOC. First, urgent response statistics
are diluted with a large volume of false alarms (there were 16,315 urgent
response calls of which at least 35% are responding to false alarms)which cast
doubt on the significance of the threshold. And second, there is a concern that
resources used to respond to an urgent response could be undertaken to
maintain the threshold standard at the expense of an emergence response.
Recommendation: That as part of next years GMOC review, the Police Department prepare an
assessment of the consequences and advisability of removing the "Urgent
Response" threshold. In removing "Urgent Response" only the "Emergency
Response" threshold would be utilized to assess the ability of the Police
Department to maintain service in relation to continued growth activity.
2000 GMOC Report 9 May 3, 2001
3.2 FIRE / EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
Threshold: Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall
respond to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes in 85% (current
service to be verified) of the cases (measured annually).
Threshold Finding: Not in Compliance
Threshold Standard Percent Time
Emergency Response 85.0 7 minutes
Actual
Emergency Response 79.7 7 minutes
3.2.1 Proposed Threshold Correction
Issues: Errors in Original Response Time Calculation
Fire/EMS response time consists of dispatch, turnout and travel. Dispatch is
the time between when a call is received and when a unit is given instructions
to proceed to the location. Turnout is the time it takes to become equipped and
prepare the vehicles to leave the station. Travel time is the duration of time
from turnout to arrival at the location. Errors in the manner dispatch and
turnout time was originally calculated in 1987 have been known for several
years, but it has only been with the recent implementation of a more
sophisticated computer assisted dispatch system that the errors could be
comprehensively and objectively assessed. With the assistance of the City of
Chula Vista's Special Projects Division, the Fire Department has identified and
quantified the error in the manner the original dispatch/turnout time was
calculated.
In brief, lack of standardization and human error in the use of manual punch
cards caused dispatch and turnout time to be underestimated in 1988. The
more sophisticated computer assisted dispatch (CAD) system in use over the
last few years allowed for an analysis that concluded dispatch and turnout time
was erroneously shortened. The original estimate was .3 minutes for dispatch
and 1 minute for turnout. Now, it is concluded that correct turnout and dispatch
should be .4 and 1.6 minutes respectively for a total of 2 minutes. In keeping
the overall response time target the same at 7 minutes, the proportion of calls
that can be reached with a 5 minute travel time is 80%. This then becomes the
corrected response target.
2000 GMOC Report 10 May 3, 2001
Additional information concerning the rational for the threshold correction is
contained in Appendix C as supplemental information with the completed
Fire/EMS Department GMOC questionnaire.
Proposed Threshold: Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall
respond to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes in 80% (current
service to be verified) of the cases (measured annually).
Threshold Standard Percent Time
Emergency Response 85.0 7 minutes
Proposed Corrected Threshold
Emergency Response 80.0 7 minutes
Actual
Emergency Response 79.7 7 minutes
Note: Although close, even with the threshold correction, Fire/EMS response
time remains in violation of the threshold.
Recommendation: The GMOC recognizes that an error occurred in calculating the original
dispatch time used to established the current threshold. Therefore, the GMOC
supports the Fire Department's request for the threshold change.
It is further strongly recommended that beginning in June 2001 the Fire
Departments engage in a vigorous and thorough public information campaign
so that the reason for the threshold correction is clearly understood by the
community.
Note: The GMOC recommends that the Fire Department bring the amendment
to the threshold standard before the City Council no later than December 31,
2001.
3.2.2 Community Survey
Issue: The Fire Department seeks to implement a community survey in order to assess
service satisfaction levels.
Recommendation: The GMOC recognizes the value of community surveys in order to gauge
overall levels of service. There is more to quality fire service than just response
time. The GMOC supports the proposed survey of community satisfaction with
the service provided by the Fire Department.
2000 GMOC Report 11 May 3, 2001
3.3 SCHOOLS
Threshold: The City of Chula Vista shall annually provide the two local School Districts
with a 12-18 month forecast and request an evaluation of their ability to
accommodate the forecasted and continuing growth. The Districts' replies
should address the following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities.
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
4. Other relevant information the Districts desire to communicate to the City
and GMOC.
Threshold Finding: Chula Vista Elementary School District - In Compliance
Sweetwater Union High School District - In Compliance but with Potential
for Non Compliance in Relation to Condition and Adequacy of Facilities
3.3.1 Relocatable Classrooms At Existing Schools
Issues: Both the Chula Vista Elementary and Sweetwater Union High School Districts
were judged to be technically in compliance with the threshold standard.
Even with the ability to maintain the threshold standard the strains of growth
are never-the-less being felt. As school design capacity is exceeded students
will either have to be bussed outside their schools service area or new
classrooms constructed on existing school campuses. This is particularly
evident at the high school level with ever more "relocatable" classrooms being
placed on campuses consuming what was once outdoor activity space.
Recommendation: The GMOC requests that the Chula Vista Elementary School District and the
Sweetwater Union High School District prepare a minimum standard regarding
what constitutes adequate outdoor activity space to be reported to the GMOC in
next years Questionnaire.
3.3.2 Facility Standards and Maintenance
Issues: The approval of the $187 million bond for modernization of the Sweetwater
Union High School District (SUHSD) is a significant and needed financial
infusion. Based upon the SUHSD Facilities Improvement Plan Report to the
School Board and Community dated July 2000, the $187 million will be used
2000 GMOC Report 12 May 3, 2001
systematically to address priority needs. After having previous higher value
bond initiatives voted down, the $187 million bond was the amount ultimately
supported by the electorate.
Although the funding constitutes a major improvement, the funds fall far short
of what is needed. SUHSD indicated that the funding was about half of what
is needed for school facility upgrades and modernization.
In addition, GMOC members have received anecdotal information from
students and school administrators regarding adequacy of non-classroom
facilities. While this information is not conclusive, the GMOC would
appreciate the District's assessment on both the adequacy of the funding to
maintain facilities to support and absorb growth both east and west, as well as
maintaining and improving facility standards.
Recommendation: The GMOC requests that for next years GMOC review the Sweetwater Union
High School District identify facility deficiencies that will not be met by the
$187 million bond issue and describe how these deficiencies will be addressed.
Recommendation: The GMOC requests that the Sweetwater Union High School District present
current or develop standards of what constitutes adequate non-classroom in-
door facilities relative to student population and if these standards are being met
for presentation to next years GMOC.
3.3.3 Construction of Otay Ranch High School
Issues: The acquisition of the Otay Ranch High School Site was transacted on April 30,
2001. The next critical phase is obtaining the necessary funding for school
construction. Based upon growth forecasts to provide for adequate and
convenient facilities the school should be open by 2003. The completion date
is dependant on funding which is currently uncertain. Without this scheduled
completion the SUHSD, as a short term solution, may need to construct
additional relocatables on already crowded campuses or bus students to other
schools. Both of these options are not viewed as desirable by the GMOC.
Recommendation: That the City Council supports the Sweetwater Union High School District's
priority efforts for securing funding for the construction of the Otay Ranch
High School.
Recommendation: The GMOC requests, that as part of next years reporting by the SUHSD to the
GMOC, an update is provided on the construction schedule for the Otay Ranch
High School. And, in relation to this an assessment of the ability to absorb
growth and the need to bus students outside of their service area and/or to build
relocatables is identified.
2000 GMOC Report 13 May 3, 2001
3.4 PARKS & RECREATION
Threshold: Three acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate
facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents east of 1-805.
Threshold Finding: In Compliance - Potential for Threshold Non-Compliance
Standard 3 acres per 1,000 residents east ofi-805
With Appropriate Facilities - not defined
Actual 4.01 acres per 1,000 residents east ofi-805
Actual Facilities - Potential for Threshold Non-Compliance
3.4.1 Potential Non-Compliance
Issues: Facility Adequacy East of 1-805
While Parks and Recreation have met the land requirement for the Threshold,
evaluation of appropriate facilities is not possible without the Parks Master Plan
being completed. Unless the Parks Master Plan is available for next years
GMOC review, the GMOC will be compelled to consider alternative standards
to derive what are appropriate facilities. As such, the GMOC must advise that a
potential for threshold non-compliance exists. In particular, as the eastern areas
of the city have grown the need for a mix of public recreational facilities (i.e.
gymnasiums, pools, tennis courts) becomes greater while no facilities have
been added, and at the same time the GMOC is left without any meaningful
measure upon which to assess efforts to meet this need.
Completion of Parks Master Plan
GMOC members continue to emphasize the need to complete the preparation
and ultimate adoption of the City-wide Parks Master Plan. Completion of this
Master Plan has been promised variously over the last 3 years. It is recognized
that the city has undergone staff changes, encountered difficulties with
consultant services, and undergone departmental reorganizations, never-the-less
the GMOC finds the delay frustrating and simply intolerable. The delay is
intolerable as it results in denying the community appropriate and needed
recreation facilities.
Recommendation: That the City Council direct the City Manager to place completion of the Parks
Master Plan as a top priority and for presentation for City Council consideration
no later than December 31,2001.
2000 GMOC Report 14 May 3, 2001
3.4.2 Completion of Greenbelt Master Plan
Issues: GMOC members emphasize the need for a Greenbelt Master Plan to provide an
open space and trails system outlined by the General Plan. Work on the
Greenbelt Master Plan has been delayed due in part to the delay of the Parks
Master Plan and the City's MSCP Subarea Plan. The GMOC feels strongly that
it is time to move forward and urges that there be no further delays.
Recommendation: That the City Council direct the City Manager to assure that appropriate City
staff begin the Greenbelt Master Plan by June 2001 and to be completed by
June 2002 for consideration by the City Council.
3.4.3 Park Threshold Amendment
Issues: As early as 1994 the GMOC agreed in principle that the parks threshold
standard should be amended. Then in 1997 the GMOC recommended to
council that in order to provide balance and equity there was the need to amend
the park threshold standard so that it applied city-wide and not just east of i-
805. The city council agreed and approved draft language (as presented
below). However, to avoid an immediate threshold failure it was necessary to
establish a long term improvement program on how the western portion of the
city will be brought up to the area standards being applied in the east. For this
reason council requested that adoption of the new threshold occurs as part of
adoption of the city-wide parks master plan.
Due to the delay in the parks master plan the GMOC has now been waiting for
years to see the revised threshold adopted. This situation is frustrating and
intolerable not only for the GMOC but for the residents in the western portion
of the city who are also waiting to see a park and recreation program for their
area.
In principal the revised threshold is needed to address parkland deficiencies
west ofi-805. The threshold standard is to be implemented within the parks
master plan as the plan sets out a 20 plus year program for achieving adequate
parks that would achieve equity between east and west.
Recommendation: Given the length of time that has elapsed the GMOC now recommends that a
Parks Threshold Amendment and implementing measures be reevaluated by the
GMOC relative to the Parks Master Plan. This process can begin once the draft
of the Parks Master Plan is circulated.
2000GMOCRepon 15 May3, 2001
3.5 AIR QUALITY
Threshold: The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed to foster air quality improvement pursuant
to relevant regional and local air quality improvement strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies, and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable federal,
state, and regional air quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development related activities being undertaken by the City
toward compliance with relevant federal, state, and local regulations
regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Quality Pollution Control
District (APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the APCD shall report
on overall regional and local air quality conditions, the status of regional air
quality improvement implementation efforts under the Regional Air Quality
Strategy and related federal and state programs, and the affect of those
efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and local planning and
development activities.
Threshold Finding: In Compliance
3.5.1 Adoption of CO2 Reduction Plan
Issues: On November 14, 2000 the City of Chula Vista adopted the CO2 Reduction
Plan. The Plan approves a total of 20 implementing measures dealing with land
use, transportation, and construction that will lead to cleaner air for Chula Vista
and the region, fights global warming, and promotes energy efficiency.
Recommendation: That the City Council continue to use the CO2 Reduction Plan as a guide in
implementing feasible measures to reduce CO2 emissions.
2000 GMOC Report 16 May 3. 2001
3.5.2 Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines
Issues: Since 1991 the Growth Management Ordinance has required that all major
development projects (50 dwelling units or greater) include Air Quality
Improvement Plans (AQIP). The Plans are prepared to address State and
Federal mandates regarding air quality. As a result of the CO2 Reduction Plan
the City is initiating a pilot study leading to an updating of the AQIP
guidelines. In summary, the pilot study involves the development of a computer
model to evaluate the relative effectiveness of applying various site design and
energy conservation features in new development projects. The pilot study will
analyze the Otay Ranch Village Eleven and Six, and the Eastlake III SPA
projects and result in the preparation of AQIPs for these SPAs. The findings
will then be considered in conjunction with actions on the projects' Tentative
Subdivision Maps. On March 27, 2001 the City Council approved a contract
for consultant services to prepare the customized computer model analysis and
associated reports.
Upon completion of the pilot studies, staff will review the results and develop a
final menu of energy conservation/air quality measures to be used in new
developments. Staff will also evaluate the feasibility of requiring additional
energy conservation measures on those projects which have already been
approved but are not built.
The establishment of formal guidelines for the preparation of AQIP's based on
the pilot study results will then be developed. Staff will also review and
determine any necessary amendments to the Growth Management Ordinance
and any other related Codes or documents.
Recommendation: The GMOC endorses the development of updated guidelines for the AQIP.
Any proposed change to the Growth Management Ordinance should be brought
before the GMOC for comment.
2000 GMOC Report 17 May 3. 2001
3.6 TRAFFIC
Threshold: City-wide: Maintain Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better as measured by
observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments, except that
during peak hours a LOS "D" can occur for no more than two hours of the day.
West ofi-805: Those signalized intersections which do not meet the standard
above, may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but shall not worsen.
Threshold Finding: In Compliance - Potential for Non-Compliance
3.6.1 Timely Construction of SR-125
Issues: The timely construction of SR-125 is critical if the City desires to continue
issuing building permits for additional construction east of 1-805.
Recommendation: That City Council continue to support the timely construction of SR-125 to
avoid a potential traffic threshold failure in eastern Chula Vista.
3.6.2 East - West Traffic Potential for Non-Compliance
Issues: Based upon an analysis conducted by the Engineering Division that without
SR125 Telegraph Canyon Road east of I- 805 and East H Street could
experience a failure in the traffic threshold. The analysis concluded that
beginning in January 2000, after approximately 9,400 additional housing units
are constructed a threshold failure could occur on Telegraph Canyon Road.
Between January 2000 and the end of March 2001 3,417 houses have been
finaled. At the current rate of growth, roughly 2,500 housing units a year, the
threshold could fail prior to the end of 2003 unless action is taken.
Recommendation: That the City Council take what action is needed to protect the integrity of the
Traffic Threshold. Specifically, the GMOC endorses the action of City staff in
developing a 3 part program to address and avoid the pending threshold failure
namely:
1. In conjunction with the development community identify physical road
improvements that can be implemented in the short term and that are also
cost effective in increasing traffic capacity. Sites under investigation
include:
a. Interim SR-125
b. Pasco Ranehero to Otay Valley Road for southbound
access
2000 GMOC Report 18 May 3, 2001
c. 1-805/Telegraph Canyon Road an additional on-ramp lane
to 1-805.
d. 1-805/East H Street an additional on-ramp lane to 1-805.
e. 1-805/East Palomar Street new interchange.
With an analysis of:
· how soon these improvements can be done,
· how much additional capacity they afford,
· what that means in terms of additional housing
units that can be accommodated, and
· the cost of the improvement
2. Examine and implement appropriate Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) programs that reduce vehicle trips at peak periods, such as morning
and evening hours. Approaches include car pooling, express bus service,
flexible work time, and more. The City is currently working with
SANDAG to conduct a survey of eastern Chula Vista residents to help
gauge feasibility of the various approaches, and will be working with area
businesses to adopt practices and programs that support TDM.
3. Growth moderation may also be necessary. This approach is currently
being evaluated with each of the developers operating in eastern Chula
Vista. The development community working jointly with the City may
devise a housing construction phasing program that assures our Thresholds
are not exceeded. In addition, the City will continue to monitor traffic and
reassess the accuracy of the forecast model as part of the ongoing Traffic
Monitoring Program (TMP). Based upon the results of the monitoring
program adjustments will be made, either up or down, related to capacity
assessments. When new road improvements are completed the impacts on
traffic will be monitored. In particular, the opening in June 2001 of the first
phase of Olympic Parkway from Brandywine to Paso Ranchero is expected
to have a significant positive impact on peak traffic capacity. Also, as
TDM practices are put in practice, their impacts will be assessed.
2000 GMOC Report 19 May 3, 2001
3.7 FISCAL
Threshold: The GMOC shall be provided with an annual Development Impact Fee (DIF)
Report which provides an analysis of development impact fees collected and
expended over the previous 12-month period.
Threshold Finding: In Compliance
Issues: No discernable issues. Collections and expenditures of DIF revenues has been
sufficient to ensure that necessary infrastructure and services are available to
support the demands of new growth.
Recommendation: No recommendations
2000 GMOC Report 20 May 3, 2001
3.8 LIBRARIES
Threshold: Five-hundred gross square feet of library facility adequately equipped and
staffed per 1,000 population.
Threshold Finding: In compliance
3.8.1 Library Threshold Amendment
Issues: The City's current library threshold standard is 500 gross square feet (GSF) per
1,000 population. The 1987 Chula Vista Public Library Master Plan called for
a range of 500 to 700 GSF of library per 1,000 population. Based on the range,
new library facilities were being designed to provide 600 GSF per 1,000
population, and the library DIF was also predicated on a 600 SF/1,000
population standard.
The range provided in the 1987 Chula Vista Public Library Master Plan created
confusion among staff`and developers. To reduce the confusion, staffproposed
an amendment to the library threshold standard during the 1998 GMOC review
period. The proposed 1998 library threshold amendment would have changed
the threshold from 500 to 600 GSF per 1,000 population. After further
consideration Library Department staff believes the threshold should be defined
as the total square footage required at buildont based upon the 1998 Library
Master Plan.
Proposed Threshold: New development shall be responsible for paying sufficient fees to enable the
City to construct 60,000 gross square feet (GSF) of new library space in the
area east of Interstate 805. The construction of said facilities shall be phased
such that the City will not fall below the city-wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000
population. As presently configured in the current Library Master Plan (1998),
this will entail construction of a 30,000 GSF library in Rancho Del Rey and a
30,000 GSF library in the Otay Ranch. New library facilities are to be
adequately equipped and staffed.
Implementation Measures: Should the GMOC determine that the Threshold
Standard is not being satisfied, then the City Council shall formally adopt and
fund tactics to bring the library system into conformance. Construction or other
actual solutions shall be scheduled to commence within three years.
Recommendation: That the City Council direct the City Manager to schedule the proposed Library
Threshold Standard amendment for Council adoption no later than December
31, 2001.
2000 GMOC Report 21 May 3. 2001
3.8.2 Library Building Plan
Issues: The Library Master Plan calls for the construction ora 30,000 square foot full-
service, regional library in Rancho Del Rey by 2005. This library would be
constructed on City-owned property located at East H Street and Pasco
Ranchero. If this library is expected to be open by 2005, planning must start on
time and funding be identified for construction otherwise the City may violate
the threshold standard.
Construction funding through a State Prop 14 grant is being pursued. Should
the City not get the grant, there may be insufficient DIF funds available to
construct the library outright without debt financing. The City will not face this
decision point until late 2002 or early 2003.
Recommendation: That the City continue to actively pursue the Rancho Del Rey Library
Planning/Building Plan Program and place as a priority the identification of
adequate construction funding to be available no later than December 31, 2002.
Recommendation: The Rancho Del Rey Library should be added to the City's 5-year CIP Plan this
year since this facility must open by 2005 in order to avoid a threshold failure.
2000 GMOC Report 22 May 3, 2001
3.9 DRAINAGE
Threshold: Stormwater flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering standards.
The GMOC shall annually review the performance of the City's storm drain
system to determine its ability to meet the goals and objectives listed above.
Threshold Finding: In Compliance
3.9.1 Unfunded Drainage Projects in Western Chula Vista
Issues: There are 58 identified drainage projects in western Chula Vista for which
funding does not exist. Some of the projects on the list date back to 1964.
While completion of these projects will take many years, and some are
hampered due to lank of access to private property, the GMOC believes
addressing these projects while they are still maintenance projects versus
emergencies is important. Emergencies cost more money than maintenance and
can result in harm to people and property.
Recommendation: That the City Council direct the City Manager to request that appropriate City
staff seek federal, state, and/or other funding sources to complete the three
highest priority drainage projects in western Chula Vista from an identified list
of 58 total unfunded projects as presented in Appendix C.
3.9.2 Maintenance of Environmentally Sensitive Drainage & Detention
Basins
Issues: Policies imposed by federal and state environmental agencies (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and
California Department of Fish and Game) regulating wetlands have
dramatically impacted the overall cost of maintaining major storm drain
facilities. Over time, plant material can become established in drainage
channels and detention basins, rendering them environmentally sensitive. New
drainage facilities are actually designed and constructed to be wetland habitat.
Maintenance of these facilities will require issuance of proper permits from
federal and state agencies as well as mitigation for impact. To streamline the
permitting process, Public Works and Planning and Building Department staff
are working with the applicable environmental agencies to establish a master
maintenance agreement.
Recommendation: The process to develop a master maintenance agreement is now more than one
year old. The GMOC urges the City Council direct the City Manager to place
as a priority the efforts of Public Works and Planning and Building Department
2000 GMOC Report 23 May 3, 2001
staff to complete the preparation and submittal of a master maintenance
agreement with the environmental agencies for the periodic maintenance of
environmentally sensitive drainage channels and detention basins no later than
December 31,2001.
2000GMOCReport 24 May3, 2001
3.10 SEWER
Threshold: 1. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater
Authority with a 12-18 month development forecast and request
confirmation that the projection is within the City's purchased capacity
rights and an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecasted and
continuing growth, or the City Public Works Department staff shall gather
the necessary data. The information provided to the GMOC shall include:
a. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
b. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecasted growth.
c. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
d. Other relevant information.
The Authority response letters shall be provided to the GMOC for inclusion
in its review.
Threshold Finding: In Compliance
3.10.1 Reported Threshold Incident
Issues: In the response to the Sewer questionnaire as prepared by Engineering Division
staff, it was indicated that there had been an incident during the reporting
period in which the threshold had been exceeded. The event was a flow which
exceeded the 75% design capacity standard on a sewer segment on Telegraph
Canyon Road. The response further indicated that a corrective CIP project had
been identified, designed, and funded with construction expected to commence
and conclude by the end of calendar year 2001.
Recommendations: Threshold incidents that are not of a systemic nature or are one of a kind, and
that have already been identified with a project funded for taking corrective
action do not require action by the GMOC, except to verify that appropriate
action has already taken place. In an operational sense the integrity of the
Sewer Threshold is being maintained. The GMOC appreciates the incident
reporting and supports the proactive efforts of the Engineering Department.
3.10.2 Timely Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer
Issues: Construction of the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer segments have been identified as
necessary to serve growth over the next five to seven years. Until the Salt
2000 GMOC Report 25 May 3, 2001
Creek Trunk Sewer is installed, new development in the Poggi Canyon basin
must temporarily pump sewage to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk sewer. Unless
the Salt Creek Trunk Sewer comes on line, costly upgrades will be needed to
the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer to accommodate additional pumped flows.
Currently the developments served by the __ sewer have limits placed on
the number of units that can be built until the Salt Creek Sewer is completed.
The estimated cost for the Salt Creek trunk Sewer is $18 million.
Recommendations: No recommendation, all issues are being addressed.
2000 GMOC Report 26 May 3, 2001
3.11 WATER
Threshold: 1. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability letter
from the Water District for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water Authority, the
Sweetwater Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water District with a 12-18
month development forecast and request evaluation of their ability to
accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The Districts' replies
should address the following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering both short
and long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now used or
committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
e. Other relevant information the Districts desire to communicate to the
City and GMOC.
Threshold Finding: In Compliance
3.11.1 Water Conservation Plans
Issues: The Growth Management Ordinance requires that all major projects (50 or
more dwelling units) prepare a Water Conservation Plan (WCP) at the time of
SPA Plan review. At this time there are no formal guidelines for the WCPs and
as a result the format reflects State and Federal mandated conservation
measures placed on of local water districts.
The City is now engaged in a pilot study of water conservation measures that
go beyond current mandates. The pilot consists of three major development
SPA Plans (Otay Ranch Villages 6 and 11, and Eastlake III). As a product of
the pilot there will be an analysis of specific technical devices and their
associated water savings and implementation costs. The pilot will also include
a feasibility analysis and standards for gray water and expanded use of recycled
water irrigation systems. On April 3, 2001, the City Council approved a
consulting contract with a water reuse specialist to prepare the analysis and
reports.
The results of the evaluation will be presented in a report to be used to define
issues and establish new program guidelines for Water Conservation Plans.
2000 GMOC Report 27 May 3, 2001
Amendments to the Growth Management Ordinance will be considered if
necessary.
Recommendations: The GMOC endorses the development of updated guidelines for Water
Conservation Plans. Any proposed change to the Growth Management
Ordinance should be brought before the GMOC for comment.
2000 GMOC Report 28 May 3, 2001
4.0 APPENDICES
4.1 Appendix A- Recommendations and Implementing Actions
4.2 Appendix B - Growth Forecast (Included in Volume II)
4.3 Appendix C - Threshold Questionnaires and Supplemental Data
(Included n Volume II)
2000 GMOC Report 29 May 3, 2001
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL,
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION, AND
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
Council Conference Room
Administration Building
276 Fourth Avenue
May 31, 2001 4:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and Mayor Horton
Growth Management Oversight Commissioners Dull, Garcia, Munoz, O'Neill, Perez, Spethman, Tripp,
Tugenberg, and Chair Gray
Pla~ing Commissioners Castaneda, Cortes, Hall, McCann, O'Neill, Willett, and Chair Thomas
PUBLIC HEARING
1. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT
COMMISSION'S (GMOC) 2000 ANNUAL REPORT (PCM-01-06)
On May 3, 2001, the GMOC finalized its 2000 annual report to Council regarding compliance with the
City's eleven quality-of-life threshold standards. The report focuses on the period fi'om July 1, 1999
through June 30, 2000, although issues identified in the second half of 2000 and early 2001 are also
included where pertinent. The GMOC will discuss its findings and recommendations with the Council
and Planning Commission.
Staffrecommendations:
A. That the Planning Commission accept the 2000 GMOC annual report and recommendations as
presented therein; and adopt a motion recommending that the Council do the same; and
B. That the City Council accept the GMOC's 2000 annual report and recommendations contained
therein; and direct the City Manager to undertake actions necessary to implement those
recommendations as presented in "2000 GMOC Recommendations/Proposed Implementing
Actions Summary."
ACTION
2. CONSIDERATION OF ACCEPTANCE OF A REPORT ON TRAFFIC ISSUES
City staff has been working with representatives of the development community to evaluate
current traffic capacity .issues in Eastern Chula Vista, and is recommending a three-prong
program to address these issues:
A. Evaluation of possible roadway improvements that would enhance traffic capacity in
certain critical locations
B. Evaluation of transportation demand management measures that could reduce traffic
impacts during peak commute periods
C. An enhanced development monitoring and traffic threshold monitoring program to ensure
that traffic threshold standards are not exceeded
Staff will present the report on the traffic issues.
Staff recommendation: Council accept the report and direct staff to implement the program.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT of the City Council to the Regular Meeting on June 5, 2001 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers. The Planning Commission will adjourn to its Regular Meeting on June 13, 2001 at 6:00 p.m.
Page 2 5/31/01
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL, GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION, AND PLANNING
COMMISSION AGENDA
SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOP/MEETING
OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
COUNCIL CONFERENCE AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 2
Meeting Date 05/31/01
ITEM TITLE: Report on Growth and Traffic C~nditions in Eastern Chula Vista
SUBMITTED BY: Director o£Public Works /~/f-r
Director of Plarming and Building /~9'l
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
In this report, staff proposes an action plan with respect to critical traffic threshold limits within the City,
and discusses two areas with immediate potential threshold limit problems. As you are aware, the City
of Chula Vista has seen a consistent traffic volume increase east of 1-805 for the past several years.
Traffic on some s~eets have seen more g~owth than others due to their relative location to new
development as well as their proximity to the 1-805 Freeway. Today there are two locations worthy of
increased Council and Commission scrutiny. Telegraph Canyon Road between 1-805 and Medical
Center Drive has recently been measured and is at its upper most GMOC threshold limit. (two hours of
LOS D). East H street between I-$05 and Hidden Vista Drive is presently exhibiting potential for
conflict with the GMOC thresholds in the near future. This report discusses the proposed plan of action
concerning these two particular roads to relieve traffic congestion and avoid exceeding the thresholds.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the Report and direct staff to return with a
follow-up report for Council action to appropriate resources necessary to implement the action plan.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission and Growth
Management Oversight Commission will provide comments at the workshop.
DISCUSSION:
BACKGROUND
During the first half of Year 2000, as SR-125's completion became more imperative, City Staff,
recognized that traffic volumes were increasing on City streets while speeds were declining. Planning
and Engineering staff ran a series of annual transportation models for the years 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004
and 2005. In June, 2000, Linscot~, Law and Greenspan (LLG), took these models and wrote a report
entitled "Near Term Capacity Analysis of East H Street and Telegraph Canyon Road, Chula Vista,
California" in response to the City's request for a review of the City's street network capacity, east of 1-
805, during the pre-SR-125 time flame. The report concluded that based on the traffic model results,
Page 2, Item ~2
Meeting Date 5/31/01
Telegraph Canyon Road just east of 1-805 was determined to be the "constraint" in the short term for
eastern Chula Vista street system. Based on the land use assumptions utilized in this study, the report
forecasted that Telegraph Canyon Road will exceed City Growth Management Oversight Commission
(GMOC) Standards once 9,429 additional dwelling units are constructed, starting from Jan. 2000. To
date, 3,417 dwelling units have been finaled. The analysis assumed the current completion scheduled
for Olympic Parkway over the next two years.
Recently, City staff have been meeting with members of the Development Community to discuss
existing and future traffic conditions on the road network, east ofi-805 and to explore means to address
these conditions prior to construction of SR-125. The meetings discussed options available to prevent or
lessen future traffic impacts. In addition, the developers were also briefed that recent TMP runs have
indicated that threshold standards have been reached on Telegraph Canyon Road.
Given the pending approach of the forecasted limit of new dwelling units permitted, east of 1-805 prior
to completion of SR- 125, Staff proposes the following.
PROPOSED THREE PRONG ACTION PLAN
City Staff is recommending a three-prong approach to the traffic issues we are faced with as follows;
A. Increase capacity of the City's existing roadway network east ofi-805.
B. Initiate a Transportation Demand Management program.
C. Promote and enhance the City's existing Development & Traffic Monitoring Program.
It should be clearly understood that all three of these actions should be initiated in concert to realize the
maximum benefit. This combined effort will lead to a system wide improvement to the City's traffic
network.
Following is a more detailed description of each of the three parts.
A. CAPACITY ENHANCEMENTS
The City's first response is a thorough investigation of a variety of measures meant to increase capacity
of City streets in an attempt to alleviate traffic pressures at critical links and intersections. To this point,
Staff has been investigating a variety of measures to widen roadways, improve intersections or
accelerate planned improvements as described below. Some but not all of these measures have been
tested utilizing SANDAG's TRANPLAN traffic modeling software. In concert with the traffic
engineering firm of Linscott, La~v and Greenspan, the City has been running models for different
options and has shared the results with the Traffic Consultants hired by the Developers. Following are
the City and Developer's recommendations for increasing capacity on existing City streets as well as
some suggestions for future improvement strategies on proposed streets.
1. Accelerate the completion of Olympic Parkway. Olympic Parkway from 1-805 to Paseo
Ranchero and Paseo Ranchero from Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway are scheduled
to open to the public by mid June 2001. This constitutes completion of Phase 1 of the Olympic
Parkway improvements. Presently, Phase 1 improvements would directly assist morning
Page 3, Item ~2
Meeting Date 5/31/01
commuters from Otay Ranch Village 5 and Otay Ranch Village One and Village One West who
wish to pass up the 1-805/Telegraph Canyon Road morning rush. However, in order to make the
morning commute on Olympic Parkway more appealing to the maximum number of commuters,
consequently reducing traffic on Telegraph Canyon Road, the final phases of Olympic Parkway
from Pasco Ranchero to Hunte Parkway should be constructed as soon as practicable. Staff are
working in concert with the Development Community to expedite the overall completion
schedule for Olympic Parkway from Pasco Ranchero to Hunte Parkway from its original plarmed
completion date for the summer of 2003 to the summer of 2002.
Supporting analysis for this recommendation comes from recent traffic studies conducted by
LLG, where they have observed up to 30% of morning commuter traffic headed to southbound 1-
805 ramps from East H Street and Telegraph Canyon Road. Staff feels another southerly access
point would be extremely attractive to southbound traffic, consequently reducing demand on
Telegraph Canyon Road.
2. Add a westbound to northbound right-turn lane on Telegraph Canyon Road at the 1-805
interchange. This improvement will lead to an improved traffic flow for westbound traffic in
the morning peak period. The geometry of the improvement would include two through lanes
plus two exclusive right turn lanes onto the 1-805 northbound ramp. This improvement is also
important in the short term because Caltrans is planning to install ramp meters in the future. This
location is perhaps the most important improvement because of the recent TMP runs completed
in May 2001, which indicated that the GMOC segment on Telegraph Canyon Road from 1-805 to
Medical Center Road has just reached it threshold limit.
3. 1-805/East H Street Interchange improvement. To complement the additional capacity added
to Telegraph Canyon Road above, this enhancement will also improve traffic flow during the
morning and afternoon peak periods by adding a second westbound lane to northbound 1-805
ramp. The interchange improvement will also provide an additional eastbound lane over the
freeway to allow for three through traffic lanes in front of the Terra Nova Shopping Center from
1-805 to the first driveway. The addition of an additional eastbound lane would provide relief in
the PM Peak Hour for returning commuters.
4. Possible Interim SR-125 Alternatives. Due to a wide variety of financial, engineering,
environmental, and inter-jurisdictional issues associated with these alternatives, several Interim
SR-125 improvement options are under consideration. Each alternative has its own set of
assumptions and alignments. Some alignment assumptions included utilizing proposed SR-125
Right of Way and some options relied extensively on existing City streets, such as using Proctor
Valley Road and East H Street as part of the alignment. Another option is to extend Mt. Miguel
Road to Proctor Valley Road. Additional cost to benefit analysis must be conducted in order to
determine the most appropriate choice.
5. Accelerate the construction of half-diamond interchange at 1-805 and East Palomar Road.
Although this improvement is in the City's General Plan, it is presently planned for construction
in Year 2010 or later. With its accelerated completion, it would provide another access point to
1-805 for morning and evening commuters thereby reducing demand on Telegraph Canyon Road
Page 4, Item 2
Meeting Date 5/31/01
and possibly East H Street. There are a number of significant issues to be resolved with Caltrans
concerning the viability and implementation of this project.
6. Accelerate construction of Paseo Ranchero as a 2, 3, or 4-lane facility between Olympic
Parkway and Main Street. Vehicular flow to the south would be enhanced with this facility.
Construction of this facility would tie to adjacent development affording the Developer who
constructs it TDIF credits during the Building Permit stage of development. The proposed
alignment traverses two villages and several ownerships and also entails significant
environmental review.
Staff and Developers are reviewing ways to create an implementation team of City Staff and Consultants
with the goal of delivering timely results. Staff will recommend an organizational chart to define tasks
and responsibilities in order to ensure the timely and efficient completion of the first prong of the
program.
B. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM)
The second prong of the City's program is TDM. Capacity enhancements, as just described, act to
accommodate more vehicles. TDM is a set of techniques that seek to lower traffic congestion by taking
vehicles offthe road during peak travel periods. This is accomplished in two ways:
· Changing the time of travel, and
· Changing the mode of travel
Travel Time
Travel time change is a proven technique to implement TDM. It just takes an
employer/institution (schools, government agencies, hospitals) to allow or require employees to
come to work earlier - before the peak or later - after the peak, and leave work accordingly.
Another form is for businesses to offer telecommuting for their employees on one or more days a
week. Naturally, not all jobs will lend themselves to this approach, but some may. Computer
programmers and report writers are some examples of jobs where telecommuting may work.
Travel Mode
Changing the mode of travel is getting the lone rider to walk or bike, or to get more than one
person per vehicle which can be in a carpool, vanpool or bus. One incentive for doing this may
include, for those opting to car/van pool or by bus, a guaranteed ride home in case of an
emergency. In this event the TDM manager will have an agreement with say a cab company,
who will be on-call to do a pick-up and drop-off.
Financial incentives to participate in TDM can take many forms, from discounted or free bus
passes, discounts from local merchants, gas vouchers, providing a free or reduced cost van,
where the driver may or may not be responsible for paying operating costs, to direct cash
payments.
Page 5, Item ~2
Meeting Date 5/31/01
Current Proposed Program
Our approach to develop TDM has two elements, which is first working with individuals who
commute and second with businesses within who attract commuting.
Residents
We have identified that 270 City of Chula Vista employees live in the city east of 1-805. These
employees are candidates for TDM measures. A survey is being prepared to see who among
them may be interested in TDM, and if so what kind of program should be designed so they can
and will participate.
In similar fashion, we are proposing to contract with SANDAG to conduct a random sample
telephone survey of up to 500 city residents who live east ofi-805. The purpose of the survey is
to see what form of TDM may work for the population at large. SANDAG, in consultation with
the City, will design the survey, contract and monitor the firm to conduct the telephone
interview, and analyze the results. These results will be used to craft a TDM program proposal
that will attract the most riders and will be cost effective.
As part of this effort, a transportation planning consultant is proposed to provide an assessment
of TDM measures appropriate for Chula Vista, assist in designing the resident survey, estimate
costs for implementing the various TDM measures, match survey results with possible TDM
programs assessing efficiency and effectiveness, and provide an analysis on the cost and
organizational structure necessary for program administration.
Businesses/Institutions
Once we know what TDM measures have the greatest chance of success and implementation is
ready, SANDAG along with the City will present the TDM program to area businesses at group
meetings and individual sessions. At these meetings businesses will be encouraging to institute
flex time, and to assist in advertising the TDM incentives to their staff who may be eligible for
the program.
Implementation
It is anticipated that the TDM program will be brought forward in steps, with the first elements
ready by October 2001.
C. DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC MONITORING AND REPORTING
The third prong of the proposed effort involves enhanced monitoring and reporting of both the
amount of development at the various stages of review and construction, and of the amount of
traffic and level-of-service (LOS) ratings on the major streets in eastern Chula Vista. The
monitoring is intended to keep close watch over the amount of development in relation to the
approximately 9400 dwelling units discussed earlier in this report, and the relationship of
continued construction to changes in LOS conditions on the streets. Together, they will
comprise an effective early warning of any impending traffic threshold violation.
Page 6, Item ~2
Meeting Date 5/31/01
As presented earlier in this report, based on where we are today with new construction since
January 2000, and assuming the continuation of current, high annual growth levels and
considering the timely completion of Olympic Parkway, it will still be approximately another 2
years until potential Threshold violations occur on Telegraph Canyon Rd. During this 2-year
period there are a number of factors that could directly affect the amount of capacity remaining
in the pre-SR125 street system, and influence whether there is a need for a permit allocation
system or other steps to moderate the rate of development. Those are:
1. The actual effect of the opening of Olympic Parkway on eastern Chula Vista traffic
patterns.
2. The effect of potential TDM programs on peak hour traffic volumes.
3. The effect of potential capacity adding improvements to the street system.
4. The effect of the economy on slowing the rate of development.
5. The timing for permitting and construction of SR- 125.
Because of this, Staf?s position is that the most prudent action at this time is to establish an
enhanced development and traffic monitoring effort. Should monitoring indicate any problems,
staff will return to Council outlining further steps and implementation options.
Following is a description of the two monitoring program components.
Development Monitoring and Reporting System
Staff is near completion of an integrated computer database system involving the Planning,
Building and Engineering Divisions, whereby reports can be created on demand to show the
processing and construction status of each neighborhood within each of the major development
projects in eastern Chula Vista. The reports include the level of Tentative and Final Subdivision
Map activity, as well as activity levels for plan check, building permit issuance and construction
completion.
This development status information will be used in conjunction with the information from the
periodic monitoring of actual traffic volumes on the street system as discussed below. Together
the information will allow staff to monitor the relationship between ongoing development and
changes in traffic levels and patterns in eastern Chula Vista. Staff intends to present the results
of the monitoring to Council on a periodic basis. The next report will likely be in August and
October 2001 as discussed below.
Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) and Threshold LOS Evaluations
Results of the 2000 Traffic Monitoring Program have been reported and are included in the
GMOC report previously submitted to the Commission. Since that time, staff continued active
traffic monitoring on Telegraph Canyon Road in order to assess the current traffic status and to
improve the level of confidence in the statistical data. The results of these additional TMP runs
are shown graphically in Attachment A. Attachment A shows the data for year 2000 and year
2001 aggregated into one-hour time periods. This monitoring was performed to determine the
Page 7, Item ~2
Meeting Date 5/31/01
level of service prior to the opening of Olympic Parkway, which is scheduled for June of this
year. The latest results indicate that Telegraph Canyon Road has reached its thresholds limits of
two hours of LOS D. Traffic monitoring will continue during the period when Southwestern
Community College is not in regular session and before summer school restarts on June 8, 2001.
This analysis will determine the effect of traffic generated by Southwestern Community College.
Those results will be reported as soon as they become available.
D. CONCLUSIONS/NEXT STEPS
In order to implement the three-prong approach the following actions will be taken;
1. Within the next month, return to City Council with a work program and request for
appropriations for consultants and other preparations to commence the action plan.
2. Within four months;
a. Staff to return to City Council with the results of the latest monitoring conclusions.
The City will continue monitoring Telegraph Canyon Road as well as East H Street in
an attempt to garner future traffic data. The monitoring program will resume in
October 2001 after Olympic Parkway has been in operation for some time and all
schools are back in session.
b. Staff report on the initial results of cost/benefit analysis for the roadway improvement
proposals listed paragraph A, Capacity Enhancements above.
c. Results of future workshops with developers to determine what appropriate
improvements or actions are to be taken. These workshops shall occur in the October
2001 timeframe to allow residents of the eastern territories to become familiar with
the use of Olympic Parkway and to ensure all elementary, middle and high schools as
well as Southwestern Community College are in session.
E. FISCAL IMPACT
None with this report. As noted above, staff will return to Council in approximately one month with a
separate report on necessary appropriations and other financial proposals related to implementation of
the proposed action plan. The development community will be expected to provide the upfront funding
necessary to carry out the action plan.
Attachment: A. Traffic Monitoring Program, 2000 and 2001 results for Telegraph Canyon Road.
H:\HOME\ENGINEER\LANDDEV\GMOC mtg ENGa 5-25.doc
TRAVEL
7:00 - 8:00 AM SPEED
8:00 - 9:00 AM
11:30-12:30 PM
12:30 - 1:30 PM
3:00 - 4:00 PM
4:00 - 5:00 PM
5:00-6:00 ~ o~ ~
7:00- 8:00 AM ~ ~ ~
8:00-9:00 AM 2 ~
~
~:30- ~2:30 ~M
~2:30 - ~ :30 ~M
3:00 - 4:00 PM
4:00 - 5:00 PM
5:00 - 6:00
Travel Speed
11:~0-12:
PM
12:30-1:30
3-4
City of Chula Vista
2000 Annual Growth Management Review Cycle
18-MONTH and 5-YEAR
GROWTH FORECAST INFORMATION
As a component of the City of Chula Vista's Growth Management Program, the City
Planning and Building Department provides annual growth forecasts for two time frames;
18 months and a 5 year period. Providing this information enables City departments and
other service agencies to assess the probable impacts that growth may have on maintaining
compliance with the City's facility and service Threshold Standards. With this data these
bodies will be able to report those impacts (if any) to the Chula Vista Growth Management
Oversight Commission.
As last year, this report reflects a substantial inventory of potential development as a result
of the strong economy and the increasing role of the South Bay area in meeting the region's
need for new housing units. Between 1998 and 1999 the number of housing units
completed per year in Chula Vista increased by 57% from 1,093 units to 1,715 units. Year
2000 increased an additional 55% or 2,652 units, year 2001 is expected to continue this
trend, with housing developer's forecasts showing continued acceleration. This projected
increase in development activity reflects a strong economy and prosperous community, but
also the potential for Growth Management Threshold compliance issues.
As presented on Figure 3, during calendar year 2001, housing developers are projecting
that building permits will be requested for over 4,600 housing units, and that more than
3,500 housing units will be completed. While part of this recent surge in housing units is
attributable to increases in multi-family unit construction, it none-the-less represents what
would be a historic high for the City, and more than double the City's average annual
construction levels between 1980 and 1999. While such numbers may be reachable purely
from a land capacity perspective, it is questionable whether related facility and service
threshold requirements can be met, or whether the housing market can support that
volume. As a result, the City has again elected to present a high/Iow range for the 18-
month forecast.
Following is a summary of the materials provided as part of this forecast report:
FIGURE 1: Historic Housing and Population Growth
This figure shows the annual housing unit and population growth in Chula Vista
since 1980. Please note that significant annexations of vacant, developable land
have occurred during this time frame, in particular the inhabited Montgomery
annexation in 1986. From 1980 through 1990, the City averaged 970 housing unit
completions per year and an average annual growth in population of almost 5,400
persons. From 1991 through 1998, an average of 801 units per year were
completed. In 1999 there were 1,710 housing units completed with a population
growth of 7,200 persons, or just over twice the ten year average representing
continued strong growth. In year 2000, 2,652 housing units were completed
representing a 55% increase over 1999.
2000 Annual Growth Forecast Page 1 of 4
FIGURE 2: Major Projects Map
This figure depicts the location of major residential projects in the City. The numeric
and alphabetic reference numbers on the map also appear on the Figure 3 forecast
table.
FIGURE 3: 18 Month Residential Forecasts (7/1/00- 12131101)
As previously noted, because the forecast figures represent a continued, significant
increase in permit and construction activity over historical conditions, the City has
again elected to present the 18-month forecast figures as a range. With projected
development levels having the potential to create a number of threshold issues, use
of such a range allows for the identification of maximum potential facility and service
threshold impacts, but also affords the ability to determine which of those impacts
would not occur if development levels were more moderate.
Figure 3 represents the "upper-end" forecast, and largely reflects the results of a
survey of housing developers regarding the number of dwelling units they estimate
will be permitted and completed during each of the 3 six-month periods between
7/1/00 and 12/31/01. Some adjustments of raw inputs were made where warranted
due to known constraints. The projects are divided into two groups; those for major
projects in the City's developing eastern area, and those for smaller in-fill projects in
the established built-up western area. Project entries are keyed to the "Major
Projects Map (Figure 2)."
Based upon this forecast the City can expect to experience continued significant
increases in housing development. During the 18-month period from July 2000
through December 2001 housing developers anticipate the issuance of buldin.q
permits for 6,091 dwelling units, and the completion of 5,295 housin,q units. During
just calendar year 2001 the figures reflect building permit issuance for 4,656 dwelling
units, and completion of 3,569 dwelling units.
Due to a variety of reasons including market conditions and other building capacity
constraints, the City's tracking of forecast-to-actual permit and construction levels
shows that builder generated numbers are typically higher than actual development.
This difference between anticipated and actual housing development is further
discussed below, and presented on Figures 4A-C. Over the last 5 years, with the
exception of 1999, actual permit issuance levels have averaged 74% of those
forecast, and building finals 75% of those forecast. If these rates are applied to the
values in Figure 3, the resulting "lower-end" 18-month forecast figures would be for
4,507 dwellinq units to be permitted, and for 3971 dwellinq units to be flnaled.
Figures for calendar year 2001 alone would be for 3,445 units to be permitted, and
for 2,676 to be flnaled.
For further comparison, Figure 5 provides a recent City generated 5-year forecast of
housing units which projects that 2,324 housing units will be completed in year 2001,
and 2,458 in year 2002. Discussions below present the basis for these projections.
2000 Annual Growth Forecast Page 2 of 4
It should be noted that these construction levels are more closely aligned with the
above "lower-end" forecast values, and are also similar to figures in SANDAG's
Region 2020 Growth Forecast discussed under Figure 5.
FIGURES 4A, 4B, 4C: Previous Period's Forecast and Comparisons to Actual
Development
These figures show a comparison of what housing providers have forecasted in
relation to what has actually occurred. Figure 4A covers the 12-month period from
July 1999 to June 2000, while the graphs, depicted in Figures 4B and 4C, illustrate
calendar year differences. Generally, developer's forecasts during the recession
years following 1991 were optimistic; actual development averaged between 58-76%
of forecasts (in 1998 actual finals exceeded the number forecasted, this year is not
referenced). In calendar year 1999 the actual number of housing permits issued
exceeded the forecast, while actual completions in the same period was 58% of
forecast. Looking to the year 2000, it is estimated that the actual number of permits
issued will be 85% of that forecasted, and actual permits finaled will be 76% of the
forecasted amount.
FIGURE 5: 5-year Forecast for Eastern Chula Vista
As initially presented in last year's forecast, the San Diego Association of
Government's (SANDAG) Region 2020 Growth Forecast indicates that the South
Bay subregion will host a substantial amount of the region's projected growth over
the next 20 years. This stems mainly from the limited General Plan capacity in
several north county cities, as well as from the lower average price of housing in
areas south of I-8. Based largely on the amount of vacant land within master
planned projects in Chula Vista's eastern area, SANDAG projects that the City will
add close to 40,000 housing units and over 120,000 new residents between the
years 1995 and 2020. As evidenced by building and permit activity presented earlier
in this report, the City has already begun to see the trend in increased development
activity.
Using SANDAG's Region 2020 information as a base, the City has reviewed the
. status of local development planning and regulatory processing in order to prepare a
major residential development forecast for the next 5 years (2000 through 2005).
The forecast reflects an average of approximately 2370 dwelling unit completions
per year, with minor fluctuations on an annual basis. Similar to trends in SANDAG's
forecast, this level of development activity is over twice the City's historic annual
average of 1,008 units/year between 1980 and 2000.
The ability for this amount of growth to be sustained over the 5-year period will be
largely driven by the strength of the economy and housing market, but it will also be
affected by the timing of major roadways and other infrastructure and facilities
needed to support that growth. Construction of State Route 125 is particularly
strategic to supporting this 5-year forecast. Based on the City's initial review, if
these levels of growth are sustained, SR125 might be needed sometime in early
2004 when planned arterial street capacity might otherwise be reached. Analysis is
2000 Annual Growth Forecast Page 3 of 4
also being performed with regard to the possible construction of an interim SR-125
facility, and what impact it might have on capacity. To ensure prudent management
of street system capacity prior to SR125, the City is currently evaluating a potential
development allocation and monitoring system which would pace development in
relation to the anticipated timing for SR125 and other needed facilities. The
workings of this potential system and any related affects on anticipated levels of
growth will be better known by Spring 2001.
FIGURE 6: Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Project Status Table
This figure provides a point in time reflection of non-residential projects in various
stages of completion from those in Design Review, in Plan Check, and under
construction. This is not intended as a forecast for any particular timetable.
2000 Annua/ Growth Forecast Page 4 of 4
FIGURE 1'
HISTORIC HOUSING AND POPULATION GROWTH
CITY OF CHULA VISTA 1980 - 2000
~ ; ~ certified year E~d
CALE~D~R UiiitsA~ho~Zed for Units ~ompieted
~ POpUlation
(State DO ~)
No. % Change No. % Change No. % Change
1980 407 374 84,364
1981 195 -52% 496 33% 86,597 3%
1982 232 19% 129 -74% 88,023 2%
1983 479 106% 279 116% 89,370 2%
1984 1,200 151% 521 87% 91,166 2%
1985 1,048 -13% 1,552 198% 116,325 28% (1'.
1986 2,076 98% 1,120 -28% 120,285 3%
1987 1,168 -44% 2,490 122% 124,253 3%
1988 1,413 21% 829 -67% 128,028 3%
1989 1,680 19% 1,321 59% 134,337 5%
1990 664 -60% 1,552 17% 138,262 3%
1991 747 13% 701 -55% 141,015 2%
1992 560 -25% 725 3% 144,466 2%
1993 435 -22% 462 -36% 146,525 1%
1994 700 61% 936 103% 149,791 2%
1995 833 19% 718 -23% 153,164 2%
1996 914 10% 820 14% 156,148 2%
1997 1,028 12% 955 16% 162,106 4%
1998 1,339 30% 1,093 14% 167,103 3%
1999 2,505 87% 1,715 57% 174,319 4%
2000 2,618 5% 2,652 55% 179,158 3%
Montgomery Annexation
1990 Census Figures 135,163
Figure 1 was revised in early 2001 to reflect actual permits and finals for year 2000,
Reflects Department of Finance (DOF) comprehensively revised population figures for the end of the
referenced year.
ir-
s%!uA §U?lle,~O lelOl
FIGURE 6
POTENTIAL COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL/INSTITUTIONAL ACTIVITY
As of October 2000
Auto Repair Center 1510 Broadway 4,900 4,900
Fire Station No. 3 1410 Brandywine Ave. 9,949 9,949
Office Building 891 Kuhn Dr. 76,674 76,674
Leviton Manufacturing 860 Harold PI. 274,449 274,449
Wallgreens 621 I St. 43,611 43,611
Commercial Building 2290 Otay Lakes Rd. 9,000 9,000
Medical Building 1400 E~ Palomar St. 202,100 202,100
(not indicated) 1090 Third Ave. 11,322 11,322
Commercial Building 1415 Broadway 10,000 10,000
City Building 130 Beyer Way 15,934 15,934
Self Storage 816 Miller Dr. 96,697 96,697
Restaurant 2244 Otay Lakes Rd. 5,940 ! 5,940
Storage 810 Laze Ct. 86,361 86,361
Storage 812 Laze Ct. 103,800 103,800
Children Center 770 Rancho Del Rey 24,840 24,840
Sub-total 975,577
New Office NA 39,000 39,000
Medical Center 756 Medical Center Dr. 146,553 146,553
Shell Building - 2400 Boswell Rd. 115,400 115,400
Commercial Building 1425 Second Ave. 3,636 3,636
Grocery 1958 Third Ave. 173,799 173,799
Retail 601 E Palomar St. 7,500 7,500
Service Station 3733 Main St. 10,866 10,866
Sub-total 457,754
Address Office Retal Indus~T~:~,
South Bay Distribution Center 698 Main St. 3g,400 3g,400
Baha News Building Addition 296 H St. 4,000 4,000
Industrial/Warehouse 694 Moss St. 9,872 I g,872
Storage/Office 2556 Faivra St. 17,100 17100
Broadway & Main Broadway & Main 15,000 15000
Gateway 765 Third 38,085 38085
Gateway-Restaurant 765 Third 20,000 20000
Gateway 765 Third 276,775 276,775
Sub-total 420,232
Total Square Footage: 1,853,563
CURRENT AND PROPOSED THRESHOLD STANDARD:
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 84% of
the Priority I emergency calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall
maintain an average response time to all Priority I calls of four minutes and thirty seconds
(4.5 minutes) or less (measured annually).
Urgent response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 62% of the
Priority II, urgent calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an
average response time to all Priority II calls of seven minutes (7.0 minutes) or less
(measured annually).
lA. Current Threshold Standard
FY 1999-00 1,750 of 76,738 75.9%~ ~ 5:21 ~
CY 1999* 1,890 of 74,405 70.9%= ~ 5:50=
FY 1997-98 1,512 of 69,196 74.8% ] 5:47
FY 1996-97 1,968 of 69,904 83.8% { 4:52
FY 1995-96 1,915 of 71,197 83.0% ~ 4:46
FY 1994-95 2,453 of 73,485 84.9% J 4:37
CY 2000 25,165 of 76,200 45.1%: 9:57~
FY 1999-00 23,898 of 76,738 46.4%~ 9:37~
CY 1999' 20,405 of 74,405 45.8%~ 9:35~
FY 1997-98 22,342 of 69,196 52.9% 8:13
FY 1996-97 22,140 of 69,904 62.2% 6:50
FY 1995-96 21,743 of 71,197 64.5% 6:38
FY 1994-95 21,900 of 73,485 63.4% 6:49
;Does not include duress alarms, which were reclassified as Priodty II calls in 2000.
=Non-normalized data. The FY99-00 percentage for Priodty I calls was increased 0.7% after normalizing the data;
the FY99-00 percentage for Pdodty II calls was increased more than 3% after normalizing the data.
~Normalized data, which adjusts for the increasing proportion of calls originating in the East vs. the West over the
past ten years. Travel time in Eastern beats is considerably higher than in Western beats, so as the proportion of
East calls increases, response times will naturally decrease without a meaningfu~ change in service.
*The FY98-99 GMOC report used calendar 1999 data due to the implementation of the new
CAD system in mid-1998. As a result, the FY99-00 data in these charts understates the
improvement in response times, because half of the data being reported this year, specifically
data from July 99-December 99, was already reported last year in the Calendar 1999 box.
It is also worth noting that the gain in Priority I response time in FY99-00 is primarily due to
police improvements as opposed to the data normalization process. Priority I calls responded to
within 7 minutes were only adjusted +0.7% in FY 99-00. Additionally, the Calendar 2000
improvement in response times reflects nc) normalization of data.
A number of factors may continue to reduce travel times in future cycles, most notably in FY01-02.
These include:
· The addition of an extra police car in the Eastern beats on swing and day shifts,
which is scheduled to be implemented July 1,2001.
· A change in deployment method. The planned implementation of patrol teams, including
a comprehensive training plan, is scheduled to be implemented July 1, 2001.
· Reduced officer vacancies. Currently, the police department has 56 patrol officers and an
additional 21 officers in training. A planned advance hire program will help the Department
maintain a zero vacancy factor in patrol.
Several additional factors may continue to reduce both dispatch and travel times in future cycles.
These include:
· A reduction in false alarms. Fewer false alarms will reduce the number of calls handled
by dispatchers and reduce officer call load, which will free up additional time for Priority II
responses. Currently, false alarms and false duress alarms comprise 61% of Priority II calls
originating in beats East of Interstate 805, with an average false alarm response time of
13:51. False alarms and false duress alarms comprise 26% of Priority II calls originating in
beats West of Interstate 805, with an average false alarm response time of 9:17.
· Alternate call response methods. With the assistance of a newly-hired police research
analyst, the Department will be reviewing a variety of response options that will maintain
quality of life, including changes in call prioritization and dispatch policies and procedures,
and the possibility of an aerial platform. In addition, a dispatch manager may be hired, if this
approach is supported by the dispatch staffing study scheduled to begin in February 2001.
The study will be conducted by the City Manager's Office of Budget and Analysis.
· Dispatch of fire calls being handled by Heartland. The reduction in fire department call
volume may reduce dispatch and travel time, as call takers will be able to focus on
answering and dispatching police calls only.
· Faster address location. The Department will upgrade the MDCs to allow for mapping
capabilities. In-car mapping will help officers ascertain the quickest route to a call location.
In addition, these maps can be more easily updated to include new streets in East Chula
Vista.
· Reduced patrol turnover. The City recently entered into a 5-year Memorandum of
Understanding with the Police Officers' Association intended to aid in the recruitment of new
officers and the retention of existing sworn staff.
lB Proposed Threshold Standard
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 81% of
emergency calls within seven (7) minutes. Maintain an average response time of five
minutes and thirty seconds (5.5 minutes) or less (measured annually).
Urgent response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 57% of the
Priority II, urgent calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes and shall maintain an
average response time to all Priority II calls of seven minutes and thirty seconds (7.5
minutes) or less (measured annually).
Please fill in the blanks on this table.
2o00 1 1,637 of 76,200 79'6%4 I 5: 6'
FY '1999-00 I 1,750 of 76,738 75'9%s I 5:50~
CY 1999 I '1,890 of 74,405 70.9%~ I 6:08~
I
CY 2000
CY 1999
4Non-normalized data. The FY99-O0 pementage for Priority II calls was increased more than 3% after normalizing
the data,
5Normalized data, which adjusts for the increasing proportion of calls originating in the East vs. the West over the
past ten years. Travel time in Eastern beats is considerably higher than in Western beats, so as the proportion of
East calls increase, response times will naturally decrease without a meaningful change in service.
1C What additional threshold standards should be considered to provide a more
accurate measure of police services in response to community growth?
Describe:
Several additional measures should be considered in measuring police services in response to
community growth. These include:
· Resident satisfaction with police services. Well-designed and administered resident
surveys are important indicators of police responsiveness, respectfulness, and
professionalism in the eyes of their primar~ customers. Both the 1997 and 2000 surveys
documented high satisfaction levels with the Department. The Department earned 93%
and 92% satisfaction ratings, respectively, in those surveys.
· The percentage of officer time available for problem solving/proactive crime
reduction efforts. Under community policing and problem solving, a significant
proportion of an officer's time should be available for working with the community to
prevent crime and disorder. Consistent with the patrol staffing model adopted by the
Council, the ratio of officer time spent responding to calls for service: officer-initiated
activities would increase to 1:1.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
2. Was the Police Department properly equipped to deliver services at the level
necessary to maintain Priority I and II threshold standard compliance during the
reporting period?
Yes X No
Explain:
The Department was properly equipped with patrol vehicles, motorcycles, officer safety equipment,
-- and communication equipment to deliver services. Additionally, the Department added a Mobile
Command Post, prisoner transport van and a SWAT vehicle to its fleet. The Mobile Command Post
is a vital component in that it will enable the Department to deploy a "mobile station" in a growing
- community.
3. Was the Police Department properly staffed to deliver services at the level necessary
to maintain Priority I and II Threshold Standard compliance during the reporting
period?
In addition, please include comment on the 16 new peace officers and 1 Community
Service Officer that were authorized by Council in December 1999, and the 19.5
additional staff approved for hiring in the previous fiscal year and what impact ,if
any, these positions have had on threshold compliance.
Yes X No
Explain:
The authorized budget for Police staff was sufficient to handle calls for service. Staffing levels were
based on the Patrol Staffing Model. However, vacancies continued to be a problem during FY 99 -
00. Recruitment and background staff added during the Strategic Plan process has improved
staffing levels. Since the adoption of the Strategic Plan, the Department has been authorized 85
Officers in Patrol; on average there have been 56 Officers in this unit. The following factors have
affected the Department's ability to achieve zero vacancies in Patrol:
· Turnover throughout the Department has impacted staffing levels in Patrol.
The recent 5-year agreement with the POA should curtail further turnover;
the contract includes incentives to enhance the Department's ability to recruit
qualified candidates as well as incentives to retain experienced staff.
· Training for new recruits takes approximately 11 months - 7 months of
academy training, followed by 4 months of field training - contributing to a
shortage of "self-directed" officers in Patrol. With the implementation of the
Advanced Hire program, the Department will be able to achieve zero
vacancies in Patrol.
· The Dispatch Center's staffing fell short due to injuries and a lack of qualified
candidates. Currently, 23 Communication Operators are authorized, but only
20 positions are actual, with 2 being recent hires. Additionally, there are 2
Dispatchers on long-term disability. The City Manager's Office of Budget and
Analysis is scheduled to begin a dispatch staffing study in February 2001.
Strategic Planning Positions
Approved Actual Vacancy
Officers 16 15 1
Civilians 20.5 16 4.5
Ten Officers were hired for the Fall 1999 academy and have completed their training; one recruit
failed probation. Five Officers were hired for the Spring 2000 academy and most have completed
training. The Community Service Officer position has been filled. There are 4.5 vacancies in the
civilian positions; 2.5 of the positions are clerical and do not impact Patrol staffing. Training for new
recruits is approximately 11 months. For that reason, the impact of the new hires on threshold
compliance has been minimal for this reporting period. However, the new hires are instrumental in
accomplishing the Department's goal of zero vacancies in Patrol.
- GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Department's ability
to maintain service levels consistent with the threshold standard?
Yes No X
Explain:
Although traffic volume has increased each year, traffic volume is not correlated with East side
travel times. In other words, increasing traffic does not appear to have increased East side travel
times, which are generally higher than West side travel times.
5. Are current facilities, equipment and staff able to absorb forecasted growth for both
the 12 to 18 month and 5 year time frame?
Yes No X
Explain:
In the next 12 to 18 months, the Department is proposing the addition of 1 Lieutenant and 6
Officers as a result of the Patrol Staffing Study and the implementation of Teams in Patrol.
Additionally, a Dispatch staffing study is scheduled to begin in February 2001, and an
Investigations staffing study is planned for FY01-02. These studies may impact staffing. Minor
modifications are being made to the existing facility to accommodate new staff. The existing facility
is inadequate beyond two years. A new facility is planned to accommodate growth. The new facility
is estimated to be completed by December 2002.
6. Are new facilities, equipment and/or staff needed to accommodate the forecasted
growth?
Yes X No
If yes:
a. Are there sites/resources available for the needed facilities, equipment and/or
staff?
Yes.
b. How will these be funded?
Equipment will continue to be funded through the General Fund, police grants, and asset
seizure funds. The new facility is to be financed; the total cost is estimated at $50M with
$2M debt service payments to begin this fiscal year.
c. Are there appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this
funding?
Yes.
7. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the provision of police services?
Yes X No
Explain:
Yes, false alarms and construction site theft. The estimated 40,000 housing units that will be
built in Chula Vista between 1995 and 2020 will likely increase the rate of false alarms and
construction site theft. Many of the new housing units will be pre-wired for burglar alarms,
facilitating the purchase and use of alarm devices. Further, the unprecedented growth in new
construction creates significant opportunities for theft of costly materials, such as major appliances,
from construction sites.
MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities
and equipment?
Yes X No
Explain:
Currently there is a minor CIP for the upgrade of the existing facility to accommodate increases in
staff. Equipment replacement funds ensure the ongoing upgrades of equipment such as MDCs.
The new police facility will be financed; sufficient funds have been identified.
9. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the
current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes X No
Explain:
· New Police Facility
· Transition to County RCS - 800 MHz, including upgrade in dispatch, will be completed in
March 2001
· New Animal Control Facility
FALSE ALARMS
The GMOC recommended that the Police Department create a course of action to reduce the
number of false alarms.
10. Please fill the blanks on the table below.
6,073
NOTE: Total false alarm statistics for FY 95-96 and FY 96-97 are not available. Billable false
alarms for these years were as high as 4,863.
11. Has the Department's goal oriented action plan to reduce the number of false alarms
been implemented?
Yes No X
Explain:
In FY99-00, the department continued to identify and contact chronic alarm offenders, issue alarm
permits, and fine users with more than two false alarms in a 12-month period, but due to staffing
limitations was not able to implement a comprehensive plan to reduce false alarms. An Alarm
Analyst was recently hired to focus on reducing the level of false alarms.
Possible focus areas for FY00-01 include:
· Targeting efforts towards a small group of chronic false alarm locations that account for a
disproportionate number of false alarms. An analysis of alarm data indicated that 3% of
alarm users (174 locations) accounted for 28% of all false alarms (1,944 of 6,953 alarms).
These 174 locations each had six or more false alarms within a 12-month period. These
alarm users may be required to attend a false alarm class or be the focus of more intensive
false alarm reduction efforts. A problem-solving project involving school resource officers
aimed at reducing the high number of false alarms at schools may be implemented.
· Increasing fines or implementing fees for service, with the goal of recouping the costs of
false alarms to the city. Fines or fees would be kept within the typical range currently in
place in other San Diego County jurisdictions.
· Developing corrective action plans that involve the alarm company, alarm user, and Alarm
Analyst for systems generating chronic false alarms.
· Implementing proactive educational efforts aimed at current and potential alarm users. For
example, Senior Volunteer Patrol and Crime Prevention personnel may conduct on-site
assessments at locations that have generated more than two, but less than 6, false alarms
during a one-year period. In addition, potential alarm purchasers and new home
developers may be provided with information on false alarm rates for different systems.
Public education efforts may also include articles in Spotlight and other publications/city
mailings.
· Revising the existing alarm ordinance.
Evaluating the effectiveness of the false alarm program through a variety of measures that
may include the false alarm rate; the percentage of CVPD call load made up of false
alarms; the percentage of false alarm costs recovered by the city; and the level of
customer complaints to alarm companies.
12. Has an Alarm Analyst been hired, and if so with what results?
Yes X No
Explain:
An Alarm Analyst was hired in October 2000. Since October, the Alarm Analyst has researched
effective alarm policies across the country; identified more than 1900 alarm users without permits
and mailed these users permits; developed an automatic daily mailing to locations that generate
alarms but do not have permits on file; developed a "Tip Sheet" on alarms that will be mailed to all
city residents in an upcoming water bill; updated alarm forms to collect more complete subscriber
information; and, added alarm data to the current billing and tracking systems. In addition, the
Alarm Analyst was involved in discontinuing the police response to one commercial location that
had over 20 false alarms during a 1-month period.
· 13. As part of the recommended goal oriented action plan, has the Department evaluated
a requirement for residential alarm system owners to contact with a private alarm
company for the first level of response?
Yes X (a preliminary evaluation has been completed) No
Explain:
The Department has taken an initial look at such a requirement, but has not researched the
feasibility or implications of it extensively. To our knowledge, four municipalities -- Las Vegas,
Nevada; Salt Lake, City, Utah; Lane County, Oregon; and West Valley, Utah -- have implemented
"limited response" policies at this point in time. Under this approach, the police department will
typically only respond to burglar alarms at any type of location (residences, businesses, schools,
etc.) after another private entity has visually confirmed the need for a police response. Las Vegas
has relied on private response to burglar alarms since 1992; the other three municipalities have
implemented this policy in the last year or so.
It is unclear whether Chula Vista residents, businesses, and public agencies would accept a limited
response policy regarding burglary alarms. On the one hand, adopting a limited response policy
· would dramatically reduce the number of Priority II calls for service (Salt Lake City experienced a
90% decrease the first month this policy was in place). A reduction of this magnitude would
positively affect response times to Priority II calls for service and free up officer time for proactive
crime prevention efforts. However, a limited response policy may affect the perceived quality of life
in Chula Vista, particularly if private entities were not able to match police response times to
burglary alarm calls. It is unclear whether the infrastructure for private response to burglary alarms
currently exists in Chula Vista.
LONG RANGE PLAN FOR POLICE SERVICES
14. With the completion of the strategic plan, please list the findings (i.e., recommended
changes to the Threshold Standard, change in deployment methods, etc.)
Yes X No
Explain:
The Strategic Plan was completed in November 1999 and continues to serve as an operational
guide for the Department.
Key growth-related recommendations of the Strategic Plan included the following:
Update staffing formula annually
· Increase the ratio of officer time spent responding to calls for service: officer-initiated
activities to 1:1
· Identify use of alternate responders for appropriate calls
· Increase utilization of CSOs for non-priority calls for service
· Determine optimum beat configuration within the City of Chula Vista
· Evaluate, and modify as appropriate, response times established by the GMOC
· Continually assess the need for new initiatives and targeted programs as the Department
grows and new issues arise related to growth
Most of the above recommendations have been addressed, and, where appropriate, will
continue to receive attention. Building on work begun under the strategic plan, Department
research staff will also expand efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of Department initiatives,
and identify best practices that may be applicable to reducing crime and disorder in Chula
Vista.
MISCELLANEOUS
15. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
Explain:
That the GMOC adopt the proposed threshold The proposed threshold standard corrects for
standards for Priority I and Priority II Calls formeasurement and data errors in calculating
Service. 1988/89 dispatch and travel time figures. The
proposed threshold standard is no~t growth-
related.
That the GMOC adopt the proposed additional Leading police researchers assert that police
measures of police services, effectiveness in the face of increasing
demands should be measured by a variety of
innovative measures that go beyond response
times, numbers of arrests, and other traditional
measures of police.
That the GMOC support plans for the new The new facilitywill help accommodate current
police facility, and planned growth in service needs and
staffing to provide these services.
That the GMOC support plans to conduct a This study will aid in identifying ways of
dispatch staffing study, including the Dispatch reducing response time for priority calls for
Manager Concept. service.
That the GMOC support continued use of the Both will enable the department to respond to
patrol staffing model and the establishment of calls for service, maintain a 1:1 ratio of officer
an advance hiring program, time spent responding to calls for service:
officer-initiated activities, and a zero vacancy
factor in patrol.
That the GMOC continue to suppod planned It is imperative that the Department continue to
upgrades of police technologies, such as build a solid technology infrastructure in order
MDCs. to service a growing community.
That the GMOC continue to support research Recently the Department has added a
and evaluation of alternative deployment Research Analyst, which will enable the
tactics, such as revised beat configurations, Department to do a variety of focused studies
bike patrol, and an aerial platform, such as deployment methods in Patrol. This
addition will allow the Department to continue
to be forward thinking as we grow.
16. Do you have any other relevant information the department desires to communicate
to the GMOC?
Yes X No
Explain:
· In FY99-00, the Department pumhased a mobile station command post to help service a
growing community.
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Date: 1/9/01
MEMORANDUM
DATE: MARCH 19, 2001
FROM: RICK EMERSON, CHIEF OF POLICE~
SUBJECT: REQUESTED CHANGES/ADDITIONS TO THRESHOLD STANDARDS
Following up on the February 22, 2001, meeting with the GMOC, the Police Department
would like to request the GMOC's support for the following changes/additions to the
current threshold standards:
. (t) Correct the four original response time threshold standards to account for
errors made in t988 when calculating the standards. (The recommended
correction is not growth related.)
Specifically, we are requesting the following changes:
PRIORITY I CFS - Emergency Responser Calls For Service ' . ~. .
' ' ' Response w/in . Response Time
Current Threshold 84.0% 4.30 .....
Recommended Threshold 81.0% 5:30
CY 2000 1,637 of 76,200~ 79.6% 5:16
FY 1999-00 1,750 of 76,738 75.9% 5:50
CY 1999 1,890 of 74,405 70.9% 6:08
1Non-normalized data.
City of Chula Vista
PRIORITY II CFS ~ Urgent Response, Cells for Service /';r':'
Current Threshold ' 62.0% 7:00 :~ ?
Recommended Threshold 57.0% 7:30
CY 2000 25,165 of 76,2002 45.1% 9:57
FY 1999-00 23,898 of 76,738 46.4% 9:37
CY 1999 20,405 of 74,405 45.8% 9:35
Reason for recommended changes:
The thresholds were set during a pre-CAD period of time when record keeping was
rudimentary at best. Three factors in particular led to the erroneous original thresholds:
· Inaccurately Iow baseline dispatch times were used to set the standards.
Because dispatch time was recorded manually by punch cards, and dispatchers
were often extremely busy, card punching often occurred after the fact, which
created a disproportionate number of "zero" dispatch times. As a result, the
estimated average dispatch time in 1988 was 18 seconds shorter than it likely
. . was.
· Zero call times not deleted from database used to calculate response
· times. Some emergency calls have zero dispatch, travel and/or response times,
which give a false picture of within-threshold calls. These data errors should be
deleted from the database before calculating averages, but this was not always
- done in the past. If this adjustment were made, 0.26% fewer calls would have
met the 1988 Priority I CFS threshold.
- ~ · Natural fluctuations were not accounted for. Data typically fluctuates from
year to year or one measurement to another. Any threshold should account for
this natural, random statistical variation. A widely accepted factor of 2.5% should
' ' be (and was) applied to the 1988 percentage thresholds, but not the average
response time thresholds.
2Non-normalized data. The FY99-00 percentage for Priority II calls was increased more than 3% after normalizing the
data.
Details on the logic of the four proposed threshold changes are depicted
below:
Priority I Priority I CFS - Priority II Priority II CFS -
CFS - % Average CFS - % Average
Within 7 Response Time Within 7 Response Time
Minutes Minutes
Inaccurate -2.9% 18 seconds -4.4% 18 seconds
dispatch times
Zero call times -0.26% 22 seconds -0.26% 12 seconds
not deleted
Natural accounted for 8 seconds accounted 11 seconds
fluctuations for
Total -3.16% 48 seconds -4.66% 41 seconds
Adjustment
· 84%-3% = 4:30 + :48 = 62%-4.7 = 6:49 + :41 =
Recommended 81% 5:18 [rounded to 57% 7:30
Threshold nearest half min.]
(2) In conjunction with the request to correct the original threshold standards, we
would like to request the GMOC support normalizing response time data.
Reason for recommended change: Normalizing the data adjusts for the increasing
proportion of calls originating in the East vs. the West over the past ten years. Travel
time in Eastern beats has always been considerably higher than in Western beats, so
as the proportion of East calls increases, response times will naturally increase without
a meaningful change in service.
The logic of normalization is depicted in the hypothetical charts on the next page:
3
Hypothetical Example
1990 1999
East West East West
Average 10:00 5:00 Average '10:00 5:00
Response Response
Time Time
Number 500 2000 Number 943 = 2200
of Calls (25% of (75% of i of Calls (30% of (70% of
CFS) CFS) CFS) CFS)
I Total 5,000 10,000 Total 9,430 11,000
Response minutes minutes Response minutes minutes
Time Time
Average Average
Citywide 6 minutes Citywide 6.5 minutes
Response (15,000 minutes/2500 Response (20,430 minutes/3143
Time CFS) Time CFS)
These charts show how actual travel time can remain the same in both the East and
West, but overall response time increases because the proportion of East CFS
increases by lust 5%. (Normalization only adjusts for the change in proportion of CFS
originating in the East versus the West - not increases in actual travel times in the East
and the West.)
(3) Finally, we would like to request the GMOC support two additional growth-
related measurements of the Police Department: (a) resident satisfaction with the
police; and, (b) the percentage of officer time available for problem
solving/proactive crime reduction efforts.
Reason for recommended additions:
Resident satisfaction with police services. Well-designed and administered resident
surveys are important indicators of police responsiveness, respectfulness, and
professionalism in the eyes of their primary customers. Both the 1997 and 2000 surveys
documented high satisfaction levels with the Department. The Department earned 93%
and 92% satisfaction ratings, respectively, in those surveys -- despite a 12% increase
in population from 1997 to 2000. Satisfaction with police services was almost uniform
4
across all three policing sectors, as well. In 2000, 91% of residents in sectors 1 and 2
were satisfied with the police; 95% of residents of sector 3 were satisfied with the police.
The percentage of officer time available for problem solving/proactive crime
reduction efforts. Under community policing and problem solving, a significant
proportion of an officer's time should be available for working with the community to
prevent crime and disorder. Consistent with the patrol staffing model adopted by the
Council, the ratio of officer time spent responding to calls for service: officer-initiated
activities would increase to 1:1.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
cc: Assistant Chief Jim Zoll
Captain Ken Dyke
Captain Leonard Miranda
Iracsema Quilantan, Administrative Services Manager
· Ed Batchelder, Principal Planner
Dan Forster, Growth Management Coordinator
CURRENT AND PROPOSED THRESHOLD STANDARD:
lA Current Threshold Standard
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall respond to
calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes in 85% (current service to be verified) of
the cases (measured annually).
Please fill in the blanks in the following tables:
FY 1999-00 6654 78.5% 3:29
CY .1999 6344 76.2% 3:41
FY 1997-98 6848 81.89% 3:59
' FY 1996-97 6455 81.0% 3:40
FY .1995-96 6682 75.2% 4:30
FY '1994-95 6194 81.8% 4:05
Normalized Data Results:
FY 1999-00 6654 7:36 3:29
CY 1999 6344 7:42 3:41
CY 1998 4119 7:18 3:40
CY 1997 6275 7:18 3:32
CY 1996 6103 7:30 3:44
CY 1995 5885 7:30 3:45
CY 1994 5701 7:18 3:35
Notes:
· Call volume reflects adjustments for data errors from dispatcher or fire company errors,
These errors distorted the response time interval measurement components i.e.
_. dispatch, turnout, and travel times. For example, calls time coded as 00:00:00 for
dispatch, turnout, travel and/or arrive time were eliminated, so as not to artificially lower
response time averages. By the same measure, reponse time component measure
upper limits for dispatch (3 minutes), turnout (5 minutes) and travel times (12 minutes)
were establised in order to eliminate errors that would adificially increase average
response times. The threshold analysis is based on a data sample that controlled for
these elements,
· Average travel times through CY 1998 reflect adjustments made as a control to
measurement errors in turnout times. Turnout times through CY 1998 were understated
due to a rudimentary time measurement system that allocated a portion of the turnout
time to travel time. This resulted in travel times being overstated.
· The percentage of call volume responded to within the 85% threshold standard was
derived using the normalization statistical process. The application of this process was
adopted by the GMOC in order to discern actual changes in response times versus
changes in response times attributed to the distribution of call volume from the western
portion of the City to the eastern territories.
lB Proposed Threshold Standard
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall respond
to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes in 80% (current service to be verified)
of the cases (measured annually).
Please fill in the blanks in the following table:
FY 1999-00 6654 79.7%* 7:08 3:29
*Normalized response time percentage rate.
Please provide brief responses to the fo/lowing:
2. Did the Fire Department have properly equipped fire and medical units as
necessary to maintain threshold standard service levels during the reporting
period?
Yes X No
Please explain: The Fire Department emergency response vehicles are properly
equipped as necessary to respond to calls for service. The Fire Department Apparatus
Committee makes regular recommendations to improve equipment inventories.
3. Did the Fire Department have proper staffing for fire and medical units as
necessary to maintain threshold standard service levels during the reporting
period?
Yes X No
Explain: The Fire Department emergency response vehicles are properly staffed to
respond to cells for service. Staffing may be increased next year to improve response
standards (see question #10).
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the Department's
ability to maintain service levels?
Yes No X
Explain: Fire Department service levels have slightly improved since last reporting
period. Travel times as part of the overall response times were lower this responding period
than the last reporting period (see January 9, 2001 memo).
5. Are current facilities, equipment and staff able to absorb forecasted growth for
both the 12 to 18 month and 5 year time frame.
Yes X No
Explain: The Fire Department is sufficiently staffed and equipped for the near term (12-
18 month) period. For the 2 to 5-year period, however, growth-related needs have been
studied and am identified in the attached excerpt from the Proposed Fire Station Master Plan
Update, Executive Summary. (Appendix A)
6. Am new facilities, equipment and/or staff needed to accommodate the forecasted
growth?
Yes X No
If yes:
a. Am them sites/resources available for the needed facilities? Yes
b. How will these be funded? PFDIF
c. Am them appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this
funding? Yes
7. Are them any growth-related issues affecting the provision of fire services?
Yes X No
Explain: Due to the accelerated pace of development in Eastern Chula Vista it may be
necessary to build new fire stations earlier than what is projected in the adopted Fire
-- Station Master Plan.
MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing
facilities and equipment?
Yes X No
Explain: Taking recent economic conditions and the resulting budget constraints into
account, funding has been available to maintain existing facilities and equipment at a basic
level.
9. Are there any major maintenance/upgrade projects are to be undertaken pursuant
to the current 1-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes X No
Explain: Fire Station #5 is located in the Montgomery area, and is quite old. An
inspection performed by Risk Management and the Building Services Division of Public Works,
identified the need for a major remodel/reconstruction of the facility. As the project is not DIF-
eligible, funding depends on the availability of non-DIF sources. This project is scheduled for
completion in fiscal year 2004.
PREVIOUS YEAR'S RECOMMENDATIONS
The questions below are a follow up to previous year's GMOC recommendations.
10. What is the status of siting an ambulance company in Fire Station #5?
Describe: The remodel of Fire Station #5 is not scheduled to be completed until FY
2004. The Fire Department continues to discuss with the paramedic provider (AMR) ways to
improve service. The Fire Department proposes in next year's budget to increase staffing at
Station #5 in an effort to improve response standards.
- - MISCELLANEOUS
11. What potential additional Threshold Standard measures does the Fire Department
believes should be considered to provide a more accurate measure of the quality of
Fire/EMS services in response to community growth?
Yes X No
Explain: Other measures that should be considered in order to provide a more accurate
measure of quality would include fire loss data, EMT Defibrillator data, ICMA Performance
Measurements, and citizen surveys.
12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
Explain: It is recommended that the Fire Threshold Standard be amended to respond to
80% of emergency calls for service within 7 minutes. This threshold amendment will come from
original data measurement error and changes in operations (see insert from the Report on Fire
Threshold Performance 1990-1999). (Appendix B)
13. Do you have any other relevant information the Department desires to
communicate to the GMOC?
Yes X No
Explain: The Chula Vista Fire Department intends to contract dispatch services with
Heartland Fire Authority beginning July 2001.
Fire Station #4 (PS 120 & PS 127) is a fire station and training classroom complex under
construction at 850 Paseo Ranchero in the Rancho Del Rey Development. Funding for the
project is provided by the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee account. It will serve as a
4,000 square foot fire station and 1700 square foot training classroom. The project will provide
a complete training facility in conjunction with the existing training tower. The fire station will be
a relocation of the existing facility at 861 Otay Lakes Road in accordance with the adopted Fire
Station Master Plan (see Attachment A). The personnel and equipment will be transferred to
the new site at the completion of the project. The completion of the project has been delayed
due to unresolved issues of quality control. The current estimated completion date is March
2001.
Fire Station # 3 (PS 129) is a 4,000 square foot fire station under construction at 1410
Brandywine in the Sunbow Development. Funding for the project is provided by the Public
Facilities Development Impact Fee account. The facility is scheduled to be completed by March
2001. The project is a relocation of an existing fire station at 266 East Oneida in accordance
with the adopted Fire Station Master Plan (see Attachment A). As outlined in the Fire Station
Master Plan the relocation will provide improved fire service coverage to Eastern Chula Vista.
Fire Station # (PS 150) is a 7,000 square foot fire station scheduled to be built in Village 2 in
the Otay Ranch Development. The project is anticipated to be constructed in early 2003.
Funding for the project is provided by the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee account.
The facility will provide necessary fire service coverage in the Otay Ranch Development and
Eastern Chula Vista in accordance with the adopted Fire Station Master Plan (see Attachment
A). Unlike Stations #3 and ~ this is a new fire facility and not a relocation of existing personnel
and equipment from another site. Due to the accelerated pace of development in eastern
Chula Vista the Fire Department has made recommendations to the Planning Department to
ensure that this construction schedule is achieved.
Prepared by: James B. Hardiman
Title: Fire Chief
Date: January 12, 2001
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF BUDGET AND ANALYSIS
DATE: January 9, 2001
TO: Jim Hardiman, Fire Chief
City of Chula Vista
FROM: Pablo Quilantan
Principal Management Analyst
SUBJECT: GMOC ANALYSIS: THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE RESULTS
I have completed the analysis of the fire response time data for thc purpose of determining the level of compliance
achieved by the Chula Vista Fire Department for FY 1999-00. As you are aware, the findings reported to GMOC are
based on a fiscal year basis. However, the previous analysis conducted by Marty Chase and myself was based on data sets
that were arranged on a calendar year basis. Therefore, it should be understood that comparisons to last year's compliance
results should be made with the understanding that the data sample of 6,654 priority 1 calls used for the FY 1999-00
analysis, overlaps back into calendar year 1999. Next fiscal year's analysis will yield a more thorough assessment of the
threshold compliance, as FY 1999-00 data will be available for comparison. With this understanding of the data, the
findings for FY 1999-00 with respect to fire response times are as follows:
Threshold Compliance
During FY 1999-00 the Fire Department responded to 78.5% of the priority 1 calls within 7 minutes compared to the
established threshold of 85%. After normalizing, the threshold compliance level increased to 79.7%. Although these two
measures fall short of the compliance standard, both of these measures mark an improvement in performance when
compared to the calendar year 1999 results. The actual pementage of calls that were responded to within 7 minutes in
calendar year 1999 was 76.2% and the normalized measure was 77.2%. This improvement can be attributed to a change in
the average travel time that decreased from 3 minutes and 40 seconds to 3 minutes and 29 seconds for an improvement of
11 seconds. However, this improvement was offset by a change in the average turnout time that increased from I minute
and 47 seconds to 1 minute and 52 seconds for an increase of 5 seconds.
Emergency Medical Calls
Emergency medical calls totaled 6,102 in FY 1999-00 and accounted for 91.7% of the total call volume. When examined
by themselves, 80.2% of the emergency medical calls were responded to within 7 minutes. On the other hand, a separate
analysis of the non-emergency priority 1 (fire response) calls indicated that 57.1% of these calls were responded to within
7 minutes.
West vs. East
Analysis of the response times for stations in the west (stations 1 & 5) revealed that 87.4% of the priority 1 calls were
responded to within 7 minutes. The stations in the west accounted for 4,145 or 62.3% of the total response call volume.
By comparison, 64% of the calls in the east (stations 2,3,4,6) were responded within the 7-minute threshold. The eastern
stations responded to 2,509 or 37.7% of the call volume.
Traffic Volume Patterns and Travel Times
Comparison of the average travel times to measured traffic volume patterns for a 24-hour period revealed that there was
not a positive statistical correlation between these two factors. In other words, an increase in traffic volume did not
increase the average travel times.
GMOC: Report Results
I have attached the completed sections of the GMOC questionnaire for the fiseaI year 1999-00 which list the threshold
response times for the 85% and the 80% standards for integration into your report. In addition to the actual reported
results, I also included the historical normalized response times that were developed as part of last year's comprehensive
report. Also attached for your information, is a graph (Attachment I) depicting the comparison of average travel times to
measured traffic volume and spreadsheet (Attachment 1~) summarizing the call volume for calendar year 1999 and FY
1999-00. This spreadsheet provides a detailed comparison of the volume of the priority 1 medical emergency calls to non-
medical emergency calls and shows the change in call volume from calendar year 1999 to FY 1999-00.
Please call me if you have any questions or require further analysis.
Pablo Quilantan
Appendix A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FIRE STATION MASTER PLAN
ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL MAY 23, 2000
12..
Recommendations Regarding Fire Station Locations.
R4 The proposed 9-station network includes two fire stations within the Otay Ranch
- development (FS#7 and FS#9 in Figure 5). It's recommended that station sites be set
aside in Village 2 (FS#7) and in the Eastern Urban Center (FS#9).
RSA FS#7 in the Otay Ranch is recommended to have both an engine and ladder capability.
How this capability is to be provided and its timing is discussed in a latter section of
this summary.
Of the current 6 fire station network, no change in location is recommended for FS#1
(Civic Center); FS#5 (Fourth and Oxford) or FS#2 (East "J" Street). As currently
planned, FSg4 (Otay Lakes Road) is recommended to be relocated to Pasco Ranchero and
East "H" Street in the Rancho del Rey development (FS#4A in Fi~mare 5).
-'- R7A FS#3 (Melrose and East Oneida) is recommended to be relocated to a site proximate to
~ Orange Avenue and Medical Center Drive in the Sunbow-II development (Figure
#3A in Figure 5).
The relocation ofFS#3 Was proposed and tentatively approved in the original master plan.
The relocation will enhance coverage to the Waterpark and MCA Amphitheater, both
identified as special "risk" sites because of their "event" populations. First-in travel times
to these sites currently range bom 7.3-9. I minutes. From the proposed site, first-in travel
time gill iraprove to 5.6 minutes (conservative estimate). Additionally, the proposed
relocation will increase the number of dwelling units within a 5-minute travel time within
the di~rict. Currently, the travel times to nearly all residential areas east of 1-805 and
south of Orange Avenue are beyond the 5-minute target. Under the proposed relocation,
trave! times to 1,464 located in these areas would decrease from 6.3 minutes
(cor:esponding to an 8.3-minute response time) to 2.5 minutes (4.5-minute response
time). Additionally, the travel time to 358 dwelling units west ofi-805 and south of Main
Stree:.. would go from over 5 minutes to under 5 minutes. As in any relocation, travel
SLrMMARY- 16
times to some areas would lengthen. Past computer simulation data indic~.tes that travel
times to selected sites north of East Naples Avenue (77 dwelling units) would go from
under 5 minutes to 5.5 minutes. In most instances, however, travel times would remain
wqthin the 5-minute target.
RSA The proposed 9-station network recommends building a new fire station in the Salt
Creek (Rolling Hills) Ranch development, adjoining the project's park site just south of
East "H" Street/Proctor Valley Road. ('FS#8 in Figure 5.)
TMs station will prox4de first-in coverage to Salt Creek (Rolling Hills) Ranch, San Miguel
Ranch. and portions ofEastlake-l. FS#8 would also be the first-in provider to the
Watson-McCoy and Otay Ranch Inverted "L" project areas. The station would also
provide important second-in coverage for the Bonita Long Canyon area.
POA The proposed 9-station network recommends the relocation of the INTERIM FS#6
(currently in the Eastlake-I Business Park) to a new site in the Eastlake Trails
development CFS#6A in Fibre 5).
FS#6Awould principally serve portions of Eastlake-I as well as Eastlake Greens, Trails,
Woods and Vistas ind Village 13 of the Otay Ranch (Birch-Patrick Estates). Th/s station
would have a relatively light workload. At build-out, it's projected workload would be
331 emergency calls for service per year. Prior to station construction, staff'need to
up~e workload projections, assess the impact of any future changes in the General Plan
· th~ would affe~ FS#6A's primary district and assess threshold performance.
- - 'Fn-~ proposed 9-station network was assessed on the six service factors detailed earlier:
I. Efficiency (overall coverage)
- 2. Risk (coverage of special sites)
3. Equity (maximum response times)
. 4. Effectiveness (coverage of Ngh demand areas)
5. Workload
6. Cost
S UM/~(.A~R.y- 17
I. Efficiency
Plannine Guideline
Design coverage such that a projected 74% of dwelling units within new
developments will have a travel time of 5 minutes or less. As has been
noted, this target reflects the historical rates for FS#
s ~, 3 and 4.
As detailed in Table 12A, 77.7% of dwelling units would have a projected travel time of 5
minutes or less under the proposed network. This generally corresponds to a 7-minute
response time. It is important to note that the projections are considered to be
conservative. An example of the methodology used to project travel time rates is
provided in the main report on page 5-15. A more detailed discussion of the methodoIogy
is provided in Appendix A.
SLr~L~CARY- I g
Phasing
A proposed phasing plan for fire stations and related equipment has been developed and is
de,led in Table 19. Important things to note about that table are:
· Fire represents only 1 of 10 components in the PFDn: Program. There will be an
overall phasing plan prepared for all components as part of the main PFDIF
update. At this point in time, it is projected that all fire-related projects will be
financed directly, fi.om PFDII: balances on-hand supplemented as applicable by the
resale of existing facilities, the prepayment of fire-related fees and, in some
instances, City shares in the cost of a project (e.g. the new training classroom).
· Phasing plans for fire-related projects are generally based on the overall
development phasing plan. This plan, based on SANDAG Series 8 forecasts, is
included for reference in Appendix B of the report.
· FS~A. The relocation of FS~ to the preferred site in the Rancho del Key
development is part of the City's adopted cn) for FY 1997/98.
· FS#3A. The relocation ofFS#3 to the preferred site in the Sunbow-11
development is targeted for the first time increment: 1997-2000. This assumes a
fast start-up for the Sunbow-II project.
· FS#7. The construction of the first fire station in the Otay Ranch (Village
2) is targeted for the second increment: 2001-2005.
· Second Ladder Company. It is recommended that a second City ladder capability
be established at FS#7 to serve the area east of 1-805. A related issue to the
timing ofFS#7 is when this second ladder capability should come on-line. This is
principally an operational and budgetary issue (a $950,000 annual operating cost
for a full 4 person company). The capital costs related to establishing a second
ladder capability are also substantial. A second ladder capability will be needed
when the Otay Ranch EUC, with its proposed high-rise office buildings, is
developed. The salient question is whether the second ladder capability is needed
prior to EUC development and, if so, when?
- As detailed in the main report, the need for a second ladder capability east
of 1405 will NOT be justifiable on the basis of workload. In FY 1995/96
there were 9 structure fire calls in fire station districts 4 and 6 combined,
yielding a rate of 1 structure fire call per 1,000 dwelling units east of 1-
805. Comparatively, there were 4 structure fire ca. lls per. !.,000 dwelling
units west of 1-805. During the period, there were 172 structure fire cain
in the western portion of the City.
. -- The City's current ladder truck is stationed at FS#1. From FS#I the
projected run time to sites within Eastlake-I is 13.2 - 15.3 minutes; the run
time to the southern portion of Eastlake Greens is approximately 18
minutes; the run time to sites within Otay Ranch Village I and Village 5 are
projected to be 13.1 - 15.7 minutes. Operationally, the department seeks
to place 13 firefighters (three engine companies and a ladder company) at
the scene ora structure fire within I0 minutes. (It should be noted that
firefighting operations commence when the first engine company arrives on
scene and begins laying hose lines.)
-- The expenditure of resources for fire service is principally an insurance
question" balancing risk against cost. As in individual insurance decisions,
the 'c, vo critical factors in determining if insurance is purchased and, if so, in
what amount are: the cost of the policy and your ability to pay.
R16 It is recommended that staff explore alternatives to standard ladder company
staffing (e.g. "the cost of the insurance policy"), as part of the initial planning for
the FS#7 CIP.
· FS#8 and FS#6A. The opening of a fire station in Salt Creek Ranch (FS#8)
and the relocation of interim FS#6 (Eastlake) should be treated as a joint
project.. From a budgetary perspective, the timing of these PFD~ projects
need to be coordinated w/th plans for the construction ofFS#7 in Otay Ranch.
. Given that acceptable coverage can be provided to Salt Creek Ranch, Eastlake
Trails and San Miguel Ranch fi-om the current Eastlake-I site in the short-term,
these projects have been deferred in the phasing plan in favor ofFS#7. This
delay may create some negative impacts on threshold performance rates
depending on development phasing. If so, these impacts would exist only in
the short-term.
* Training Classroom This project can have a positive impact on the
department's threshold performance and is recommended for the first
increment: 1997-2000.
SLmlM.~UR.Y-3 0
Appendix B
REPORT ON
FIRE THRESHOLD PERFORMANCE
1990-1999
Prepared by:
Marry Chase and Pablo Quilantan, Special
Projects Division in concert with Fire Department
Staff.
April 13, 2000
PART 3. THE CORRECTED THRESHOLD
Unfortunately, we can't quite recreate history. Historical response time data
remains somewhat contaminated by the faulty dtspatch and turnout ttmes.
We can, however, review historical travel time data. In 1988-89, when
dispatch plus turnout time was thought to equal 1.3 minutes, we know that staff measured
the percentage of calls within a travel time of 5.7 minutes or less. This percentage,
adjusted for expected variation, was used to project the percentage of calls likely to fall
within a 7-minute response time.
Based upon the more accurate CAD data for CY 1999, 2.0 minutes rather than 1.3
minutes should have been applied in 1988-89 when calculating a threshold. 3 If these
more accurate measurements had been used in 1988-89, the travel time corresponding to
a 7 minute response would have been calculated at 5.0 minutes, since:
2.0 minutes dispatch/turnout time
+5.0 minutes travel time
~7.0 minute response time
The oldest fire data set available for analysis is CY 1990. For 1990, the percentage of
CFS within a 5.7 minute navel time was 90.4%, almost the exact percentage found in the
1988-89 survey. Applying the true dispatch and turnout time of 2.0 minutes to 1990 data,
83.4% rather than 90.4% of emergency CFS were within the corresponding 5.0 minute
travel time. As such, the unadjusted threshold should have been set to:
respond to 83.4% of emergency calls within 7 minutes
Actually, 1999 data indicate~ that dispatch + turnout time averages 2.2 minutes. However, as previously
discusse~, staff be!love that th, i~ time can be reduced to 2.0 minutes.
14
The present threshold was not only thought to represent the department's 1988-89
performance but to also account for:
· normal year-to-year variation
and for
· the lag between the time that new development generates additional workload and
the time that new fire stations are constructed to handle that workload.
In 1988-89 a 5% factor was applied to account for expected variation (5%). If this same
.. factor were applied to the updated travel time data, the threshold would have been set at
78.4%. However, staff believes that the original variance factor was set too high. It is
now recommended that the variance factor be set at 2.5%. Using this lower variance
- factor, the tb_reshold should have been set to:
respond to 80.9% of emergency calls within 7 minutes.
Travel Time/Response Time Correspondence
Recall that in establishing the threshold in 1988-89, staff, using the dispatctgtumout time
estimate of 1.3 minutes, calculated the percentage of calls within a 5.7 minute travel time.
It was presumed that the travel time percentage would correspond to the overall
percentage of calls within a 7-minute total response (1.3 minutes + 5.7 minutes -~ 7.0
minutes). This same assumption was maintained when the updated dispatch/turnout time
of 2.0 minutes was applied. As it tums out, there is not a 1:1 correspondence between the
two variables. Analysis indicates that in 1990, the percentage of calls having a travel
time Mthin 5.0 minutes was, on average 0.5% higher than the percentage receiving a 7
15
minute response. This is explained by variances in dispatch and turnout times around
their average values. As such, to account for this minor measurement error, the 1988-89
threshold should have been set to:
---- respond to 80.4% of emergency CFS within 7 minutes
One last adjustment needs to be made.
Chan~,ine O!~erations
. Since 1990 various operational changes have occurred which have affected the
department's response times. This category consists of factors, such as the increase in
mandated in-service training, which are independent of new development. These factors
have changed the operational environment, resulting in longer response times. For
example:
· increases in mandated training
· requires fire companies to be out of their district more often -*-~---*
__ * which results in more out-of-district responses from neighboring companies ---~--*
· which reduces the percentage of calls within 7-minutes since only 42.3% of out-
-- of-district responses fall within 7-minutes.
'- The threshold needs to take into account certain operational changes which will forever
alter the "playing field". The adju_qments are discussed in detail in PART ## and
account for a 0.8% reduction in in achievable 7-minute responses. To account for these
factors, the threshold should be set to:
16
respond to 79.6% of emergency calls within 7-minutes
In review,
83.4% --1990 % of CFS within 5.0 minute travel time
- 2.5% -expected variation
80.9%
- 0.5% -1990 lack of correspondence between travel time % and response time %
80.4%
0.8% -operational changes not related to new development
79.6% -what the threshold should have been set at if we knew then what we know
now!
RECOI~LMEDATION: To correct for original data measurement error and changes
in operations, round up the proposed threshold to be:
Respond to 80% of emergency CFS within 7 minutes.
-- Table 2 provides the reported 7-minute response time statistics for 1993-1999. 1993
represents the first year when dispatch + turnout data was reasonably close to the 2.0
minute standard.
The important point to note about the table is:
· Over the seven-year period, the depa~unent fell below the adjusted threshold in 3
years. It's important to remember that there is only a 2.5% chance that the
percentages achieved in any of these years (76.2% - 79.5%,) is accounted for by
normal variation.
17
Memo
To: Growth Management Oversight Commission Members
From: James B. Hardiman, Fire Chief/~t/~/,~
Date: 3/9/2001
Re: Fire Department Threshold Standard
In accordance with last year's report, an evaluation of the Fire Department Threshold
Standard has been completed. The current Fire Department Threshold Standard is
to respond to 85% of emergency calls for service within 7 minutes. After careful
consideration of fire response data analysis and review of historical fire department
performance, it is recommended to amend the Chula Vista Fire Department
Threshold Standard to respond to 80% of emergency calls within 7 minutes. This
amendment is recommended based upon facts that the original standard was
established with incomplete or inaccurate data. Marry Chase and Pablo Quilantan
provided a thorough discussion of this issue in an Apdl 2000 report entitled "Report
on Fire Threshold Performance 1990-1999". The section of the report dealing with
the recommendation of a Fire Department Threshold change has been included
(Appendix A).
Fire Department Threshold performance has been very consistent over the last ten
years. As the study indicates, there has been a consistent pattem of fire department
response times from 1990 to 1999. It is important to note that this new Threshold
Standard (80% within 7 minutes) is not recommended in anticipation of lower future
performance levels. To the contrary, as reported this year there has been an
improvement in performance from the previous year's data. It is anticipated that Fire
Department performance will d(~ntinue to improve in future years.
In addition to consistency, the Fire Department has also increased the quality of
service since adoption of the odginal Threshold Standard. Since 1989 the Fire
Department has undertaken significant training and certification in new rescue and
medical skills. Fire Department personnel have obtained advanced rescue training in
confined space and high dse rescues. The Chula Vista Fire Department has also
taken a leadership role in the national Urban Search and Rescue Program. In the
emergency medical field flrefighters are now trained and certified in cardiac
defibrillation and advanced airway management skills. This ongoing training and
certification has allowed the Chula Vista Fire Department to advance and establish
itself at a much higher performance level than when the Threshold Standard was first
established.
The Chula Vista Fire Department will continue to monitor and assess its
performance. We will request funds for the upcoming budget to conduct a
performance survey of citizens who have used the services of the Fire Department.
In addition we have begun to conduct an assessment of the department's
performance within the context of the International City Manager's Association
(ICMA) standards established through the Center for Performance Measurement
(CPM). The initial analysis indicates that in comparison to cities of equal size the
Chula Vista Fire Department is extremely efficient in its delivery of service. We will
include some of this data in future reports to the Growth Management Oversight
Commission.
In conclusion, we feel the Fire Threshold Standard of 80% within 7 minutes is more
consistent with the historical intent of a performance benchmark, it is the goal and
expectation of the Fire Department that we will continue to improve on the response
time performance. This will be accomplished by instituting a new dispatch system
with Heartland Fire Authority and by the realignment and opening of new fire stations
in Eastern Chula Vista. The Fire Department performance has been consistent and
will continue to improve in both quality and measured times.
If you have any further questions on this or any Fire Department matters, you may
contact me at 691-5055.
cc: David D. Rowlands Jr., City Manager
George Krempl, Assistant City Manager
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning and Building
Dan Forster, Growth Management Coordinator
APPENDIX A
PART 3. THE CORRECTED THRESHOLD
Unfortunately, we can't quite recreate history. Historical response time data
remains somewhat contaminated by the faulty dispatch and turnout times.
We can, however, review historical travel time data. In 1988-89, when
dispatch plus turnout time was thought to equal 1.3 minutes, we know that staffmeasured
the percentage of calls within a travel time of 5.7 minutes.or less. This percentage,
adjusted for expected variation, was used to project the percentage of calls likely to fall
within a 7-minute response time.
Based upon the more accurate CAD data for CY 1999, 2.0 minutes rather than 1.3
minutes should have been applied in 1988-89 when calculating a threshold. 3 If these
more accurate measurements had been used in 1988-89, the travel time corresponding to
a 7 minute response would have been calculated at 5.0 minutes, since:
2.0 minutes dispatch/turnout time
+5.0 minutes travel time
=7.0 minute response time
The oldest fire data set available for analysis is CY 1990. For 1990, the pementage of
CFS within a 5.7 minute navel time was 90.4%, almost the exact percentage found in the
1988-89 survey. Applying the true dispatch and turnout time of 2.0 minutes to 1990 data,
83.4% rather than 90.4% of emergency CFS were wathin the corresponding 5.0 minute
travel time. As such, the unadjusted threshold should have been set to:
respond to 83.4% of emergency calls within 7 minutes
3 Actually, 1999 data indicates that dispatch + turnout time averages 2.2 minutes. However, as previously
discussed, staff believe that this time can be reduced to 2.0 minutes.
14
The present threshold was not only thought to represent the department's 1988-89
performance but to also account for:
· normal year-to-year variation
and for
· the lag between the time that new development generates additional workload and
the time that new fire stations are constructed to hahdle that workload.
In 1988-89 a 5% factor was applied to account for expected variation (5%). If this same
factor were applied to the updated travel time data, the threshold would have been set at
78.4%. However, staff believes that the original variance factor was set too high. It is
now recommended that the variance factor be set at 2.5%. Using tiffs lower variance
factor, the threshold should have been set to:
respond to 80.9% of emergency calls within 7 minutes.
Travel Time/Response Time Correspondence
Recall that in establishing the threshold in 1988-89, staff, using the dispatch/turnout time
estimate of 1.3 minutes, calculated the percentage of calls within a 5.7 minute travel time.
It was presumed that the travel time percentage would correspond to the overall
percentage of calls within a 7-minfite total ~esponse (1.3 minutes + 5.7 minutes = 7.0
minutes). This same assumption was maintained, when the updated dispatch/turnout time
of 2.0 minutes was applied. As it tums out, there is not a 1:1 correspondence between the
two variables. Analysis indicates that in 1990, the percentage of calls having a travel
time within 5.0 minutes was, on average 0.5% higher than the percentage receiving a 7
15
minute response. This is explained by variances in dispatch and turnout times around
their average values. As such, to account for this minor measurement error, the 19g§-g9
threshold should have been set to:
respond to 80.4% of emergency CFS within 7 minutes
One last adjustment needs to be made.
Chanaing Operations
Since 1990 various operational changes have occurred which have affected the
department's response times. T~s category consists of factors, such as the increase in
mandated in-service training, which are independent of new development. These factors
have changed the operational environment, resulting in longer response times. For
example:
* increases in mandated training --~--~--~
· requires fire companies to be out of their district more often --.-*---~
· which results in more out-of-district responses from neighboring companies
· which reduces the percentage of calls within 7-minutes since only 42.3% of out-
of-district responses fall within 7-minutes.
The threshold needs to take into .'c~ount certain operational changes which will forever
alter the "playing field". The adjustments are discussed in detail in PART ## and
account for a 0.8% reduction in in achievable 7-minute responses. To account for these
factors, the threshold should be set to:
respond to 79.6% of emergency calls within 7-minutes
In review,
83.4% --1990 % of CFS within 5.0 minute travel time
- 2.5% --expected variation
80.9%
- 0.5% --1990 lack of correspondence between travel time
80.4%
0.8% --operational changes not related to new development
79.6% -what the threshold should have been set at if we knew then what we know
now!
RECOMMEDATION: To correct for original data measurement error and changes
in operations, round up the proposed threshold to be:
Respond to 80% of emergency CFS within 7 minutes.
Table 2 provides the reported 7-minute response time statistics for 1993-1999. 1993
represent~ the first year when dispatch + turnout data was reasonably close to the 2.0
minute standard.
The important point to note about the table is:
· * Over the seven-year period, the department fell below the adjusted threshold in 3
years. It's important tO..remember that there is only a 2.5% chance that the
percentages achieved in' any of these years (76.2% - 79.5%,) is accounted for by
' normal variation.
17
Table 2. Comparison of Calls With~ A 7.0-Minute Response Time To A~usted_ Threshold
Calendar
I Percent ~fCFS With~ 7 M~utes
Year
Adjusted 1988-89Threshold: Respond to 80% of CFS Within 7 Minutes
1993 82.1
1994 81.5
1995 79.5
1996 78.9
1997 .82.1
1998 81.8
1999 76.2
To recap:
1. For the base year 1990, 90.3% of emergency calls were within a 5.7~minute
travel time. This travel time would generally correspond to a 7-minute response
time if the original dispatch + turnout time estimate of 1.3 minutes had been
correct.
2. Based on current statistics, a 5-minute travel time NOT a 5.7-minute travel time
generally corresponds to a 7 minute response time. Had the 1988/89 threshold
been established with a 5.0 minute travel time component, 83.4% of calls would
have been projected to fall within a 7-minute response time.
3. After adjusting for year-to-year variation and other factors, the threshold would
have been set to respond to 79.6% of CFS within 7 minutes. Staff'me
recommending that this percentage be rounded up to 80%.
BUT,
eo
Irrespective of measurement er/or and ~perational changes, there is an intrinsic
contradiction in the way the threshold is calculated. This problem will "insure" that
performance falls below practically any threshold standard, sooner or later.
18
Memo
To: Growth Management Oversight Commission Members
From: James B. Hardiman, Fire Chief ~g/~'
Date: 2/22/2001
Re: Fire Department CIP Projects for FY 2002
The following is a short description of five (5) Fire Department CIP projects FY 2002. Two
projects are new. They are submitted in chronological order.
PS 150
Scheduled to be completed by July 2003 (FY 2004)
~ The Otay Ranch Fire Station - The Fire Station Master Plan calls for the facility to be
built between 2001 and 2005 due to the pace of development in the City, it is
proposed to be built earlier than 2005. A "double" station 7,000 square foot 3-Bay
facility to be located in Village 2 in the Otay Ranch. Initially it will be staffed with only
one company. Personnel in the Office of Budget and Analysis are still working on
accurate costs for initial staffing. Eventually it will be staffed with two companies.
This is anticipated to be after 2007. We will need to hire a minimum of 9 persons to
open this station in 2003. Planning, Engineering and Administration are working with
Fire Staff to meet the 2003 schedule. There are still some uncertain issues of
infrastructure needs (roads, utilities, grading etc.) to be worked out with McMillin and
Otay Ranch concerning this project. The following is specific information on the
timing of Fire Station #7 provided recently by Engineering:
The overall schedule for the completion of Fire Station # 7 depends on the method we
choose to deliver the project. The three available options are:
· Design/Build (D/B) approach: Following the development of programming and
conceptual drawings, a bid is awarded to a team (Architects, Engineers, General
Contractor) to design and build the facility. This is the method we're trying to apply to the
new Police building. D/B is known to be a time and cost effective method for delivering
projects.
· Design/Bid/Build approach.
· · 'q'umkey" approach to be implemented by the developer, as was the case on Fire Station
#3.
Design/Bid/Build (DBB) has been the traditional method used on past and some current
projects such as Fire Station # 4. I believe that DBB will take the longest time to implement,
especially for Fire Station # 7 where a whole new design is required. Under DBB, a
reasonable time for the completion of Fire Station # 7 is a minimum of two years. The
Budgeting/Planning, Architectural, Design Development, and Bidding phases could take a
minimum of 18 months. Under the other two approaches, the project can be delivered in less
than two years.
PS '126
This facility is scheduled to be completed in FY 2005
~ This is the Rolling Hills Fire Station (identified in the FSMP as Station #8) - This
facility will replace Intedm Fire Station #6 in the Eastlake Business Park, Fire Station
#8 will serve Rolling Hills Ranch, Bonita Long Canyon, and the San Miguel
Development. Fire Station #7 needs to be opened before relocating Interim Fire
Station #6. Personnel and equipment will be transferred from Station #6. This facility
may include the additional cost of a Brush Rig (the timing of that apparatus purchase
has not be established at this time).
PS 145
The schedule for this facility completion is in FY 2006
~ This project is the reconstruction of the old Montgomery Fire Station at Fourth and
Oxford - The project costs includes the estimate of rebuilding the facility to the design
and dimensions of other scheduled or completed tim stations (i.e. 4200 square foot
station). Temporary housing and demolition costs are included in this project. The
facility is no longer being considered to house a private paramedic company.
Eastern Urban Fire Station
Scheduled to be completed in FY 2007
I, Due to the accelerated development and pattern of development, this tire station in
the Eastern Urban Center has been moved up from the time outlined in the Fire
Station Master Plan (i.e. increment 3 years 2011-2015). Fire Staff now believes this
facility should precede the Eastlake Woods station that was scheduled between
2006-2010 according to the Fire Station Master Plan. This facility will be a single
company 2-bay station (4200 square foot) similar in design and cost to the Rolling
Hills Fire Station. A minimum of 9 personnel will need to be hired to open this station.
The facility will require the purchase of new apparatus and equipment. The Office of
Budget and Analysis are updating costs of equipment and personnel from the FSMP
document.
Eastlake Fire Station
Scheduled to be completed after FY 2008
~ The timing of this facility has been moved back (and the Eastern Urban Station
moved up). The Fire Station Master Plan originally called for this facility to be buitt
after FY2006. This facility will require hidng a minimum of 9 personnel and new
equipment and apparatus. The new updated costs are being worked on by the Office
of Budget and Analysis.
THRESHOLD
The City shall annually provide the two local school districts with a 12 to 18 month forecast and request an
evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The Districts= replies
should address the following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities
4. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and GMOC.
1. Please fill in the table below to indicate the existing enrollment conditions and capacity at the end
of the review period noted above. Information the District has already compiled, which is close, or
subsequent to this date, is also acceptable.
EXISTING CONDITIONS (FY 99~00)
Schools Current Capacity Amount Overflowed Type of Comments
Enrollment
I Capacity* Calendar
(Date) Permanent Portables Under/Over Out School
NORTHWEST
Cook 528 500 75 47 Traditional ;~ classrooms for Sp. Ed.
Feaster-Edison 1,123 400 650 3 70 ExtJTrad'l Charter, exceeds capacity Part B
teacher's
Hilltop Drive 550 500 75 25 Traditional
Mueller 863 500 400 37 3 Ext/Trad'l Charter; new relocatables
coming.
Rosebank 716 450 300 34 4 Traditional
Vista Square 723 525 275 77 40 YRS Part B teacher's; 5 classrooms fo~
DHH program
SOUTHWEST
_earning Comm. 349 350 0 9 --xt/Trad'l Charter
.~astle Park 300 550 125 75 8 Traditional 2 Sp. Ed. classes
Harborside 731 450 325 44 23 Traditional 2 Sp. Ed. Classes
Kellogg 431 400 50 19 5 Traditional I Sp. Ed. Class
Lauderbach 966 525 ¢75 34 43 Multi/YRS 2 Sp. Ed. Classes; Part B
teacher's
Loma Verde 724 475 275 26 25 YRS 1 Sp. Ed. Class
Montgomery 460 400 125 65 59 Traditional 1 Sp. Ed. Class
Otay 684 575 75 -34 67 Traditional
Palomar 448 500 0 52 3 Traditional 2 Sp. Ed. Classes
Rice 733 575 200 42 36 Traditional lSp. Ed. Class
Rohr 583 525 50 -8 4 YRS 1 Sp. Ed. Class
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 2
SOUTHEAST
Arroyo Vista 659 750 3 91 0 ~'RS
Olympic View 709 500 325 116 0 YRS
Parkview 399 500 75 176 0 Traditional 3 Sp. Ed. Classes; 1 SpEd
Speech class
Rogers 516 375 50 -91 10 YRS Capacity for reg. Ed shown
Valle Lindo 522 475 75 28 11 Traditional 1 Sp. Ed. class
NORTHEAST
Atlen/Ann Daly 430 525 ~) 95 6 Traditional .) SH and 1 Sp. Ed. Classes
Casillas 823 600 125 -98 22 YRS Part B teacher's
Chula Vista Hills 562 500 75 13 0 Traditional
Clear View 587 475 125 13 0 ExtJTrad'l Charter; 1 Sp. Ed. class
Discovery 909 675 275 41 0 YRS Charter; I Sp. Ed. Class
Eastlake 686 500 200 14 0 YRS
Halecrest 528 500 100 72 6 Traditional 1 Sp. Ed. Class
Marshall 407 400 125 118 0 YRS
Tiffany 666 625 175 134 0 Traditional 2 Sp. Ed. classes
*(-) denotes amount over capacity
**Part B teacher's definition: Sharing full size classroom with CSR teacher.
2. Please fill in the table below to indicate the projected conditions for 12/31/00 based on the City=s
12-18 month forecast.
Forecasts for 2000-01 and beyond indicate that the opening of two new schools in Otay Ranch, the addition of relocatable classrooms, and
internal modification will be sufficient to accommodate student growth.
12 - 18 MONTH FORECASTED CONDITIONS
Schools Projected Projected Capacity Amount Overflow Type of Comments
Enrollment I Over/Under Out School
(Ds{e) PermanentIP°rtables
Capaci~* Calendar
NORTHWEST
Cook
Feaster-Edison
Hilltop Drive
Mueller
Rosebank
Vista Square
SOUTHWEST
_earning Comm.
,~astle Park
-~arborside
<ellog
~auderbach
~oma Verde
Montgomery
Dtay
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 3
Palomar
Rice
Rohr
soUTHEAsT
Arroyo Vista
Olympic View
Parkview
Rogers
Valle Lindo
NORTHEAST
Allen/Ann Daly
Casillas
Chula Vista Hills
Clear View
Discovery
Eastlake
Halecrest
Marshall
Tiffany
*(-) denotes amount over capacity
3. Please fill in the table below to indicate enrollment history.
Total Enrollment 4,500 4,377 4,239
% of Change Over the Previous Year 3% 3% 8%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 97% 98% 98%
Total Enrollment 6,709 6,580 6,190
% of Change Over the Previous Year 2% 6% 3%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 97% 98.5% 98%
Total Enrollment 2,805 2,462 2,234
ge Over the Previous Year 12% 10% 9%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 97% 98% 98%
~1 Enrollment 5,598 5,254 4,621
% of Change Over the Previous Year 6% 14% 4%
I % of Enrollment from Chula Vista 97% 98.5% 98%
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 4
Total Enrotlment 19.612 18,673 17,284
% of Change Over the Previous Year 5% 8% 4%
I% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 97% 98.5% 98%
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the District=s ability to accommodate
student enrollment?
Yes No
Explain: Arroyo Vista opened in July 2000. Extra capacity exists at Thurgood Marshall Elementary.
Juarez-Lincoln, Mueller, and Lauderbach added substantial capacity during the summer 2000
"' modernization~renovation.
~ 5. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 12 - 18-month time frame?
Yes X No
Explain: Three schools are under construction and will open in summer 2001. Heritage, Mc Mi#in and
Chula Vista Learning Community Charter at Broadway & K Street will add 2,250 seats. Capacity will be added to
-- Finney Elementary in the summer 2001 with modernization.
6. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth?
Yes X No
Explain:
a. What facilities will be needed? One to two schools
b. Are sites available for the needed facilities? yes
c. How will these facilities be funded?
d. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
One to two schools will be added per year. Community Facilities District annexations will fund the growth.
7. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 5 to 7 year time frames?
Yes X No
Explain: Schools are in planning/phasing stage. One to two schools are planned per year.
8. Are there any growth-related issues affecting the maintenance of the level of service as Chula
Vista's population increases?
Yes X No
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 5
Explain: Class size reduction increased the demand for extra classrooms. Special Education and auxillary space
is also creating new facility demands. The modemization program has been very helpful. We have completed
modernization/renovation on 17 sites.
MAINTENANCE
9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes X No
Explain: 3% general fund maintenance and deferred maintenance program.
10. Are there any major upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the School District's current l-
year and 5-year ClP that will add capacity?
Yes X No
Explain: Modernization of Finney Elementary in 2001. Six additional sites in future years.
MISCELLANEOUS
11. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes N o __ X__
Explain:
12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight Commission to
recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
Explain: Please continue strong commitment to our public schools. Teamwork and communication has
been superlative with the City and its staff.
13. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and GMOC.
Yes X No
Explain: The City has been a strong partner with the Chula Vista Elementary School D/strict.
We are both building a community, not just schools or roads.
Prepared by: Lowell Billings, Ed. D
Title: Asst. Supt. For Business Service and Support
Date: December 15, 2000
THRESHOLD
The City shall annually provide the two local school districts with a 12 to 18 month forecast and
request an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The
Districts' replies should address the following:
1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities
4. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City and GMOC.
1. Please fill in the table below to indicate the existing enrollment conditions at the end of the
review period noted above. Information the District has already compiled, which is close, or
subsequent to this date, is acceptable.
CURRENT CONDITIONS ~F¥ 99100)
current capacity Adjusted ;Amount OverfloWed
S~hb~ls ~n~i ~n~ p~an~ntlp0rtables CapacitY Under/Over Out Comments
ttl5i00'~I capacity
NO~HWEs~
Chula Vista Middle 1.193 1,116 310 1,396 203 0
Hilltop Middle 1,247 1,395 124 1,504 257 0
Chula Vista High 2,471 1,581 899 2,420 (51 ) 0
-filttop High 1,956 1,612 527 2,019 63 0
sOuTHWEsT
~astle Park Middle 1,312 1,581 62 1,613 301 0
~,astle Park High 1,965 1,798 403 2,081 116 0
Palomar High 530 527 186 713 183 0
souTHEAST
I --- I-- I -I --I --- I -'
NORTHEAST
Bonita Vista High 2,521 1,891 806 2,487 (34) 0
Bonita Vista Middle 1,223 1,519 279 1,738 515 0
Eastlake High 2,219 2,604 --- 2,424 205 0
Rancho del Rey 1,276 1,643 --- 1,613 337 0
Middle
*(Exclades students and capacity assigned to Special Education and Learning Center enrollment)
SWEETVVATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 2
2. Please fill in the table below to indicate the projected conditions for t2/31100 based on the City's
~ 12-18 month forecast.
12~18 MONTHS FORECASTED CONDITIONS
Current Capacity Adjusted Amount Overflowed
I Underl~er Out COmments
SchO~i· E'~bliment permanent portables capa~!tY capaci~
NoRTHWEs~
Chula Vista Middle 1,230 1,116 310 1,396 166 0
Hilltop Middle 1,280 1,395 124 1,504 224 0
~hula Vista High 2,470 1,581 963 2,482 12 0
-filltop High 2,000 1,612 527 2,019 19 0
~astle Park Middle 1,340 1,581 62 1,613 273 0
~astte Park High 1,990 1,798 403 2,081 116 0
Palomar High 550 527 186 713 163 0
:hula Vista Adult 10,922 10,922 0 0 0
SOUTHEAST
NORTHEAST
Bonita Vista High 2,500 1,891 838 2,519 19 0
Bonita Vista Middle 1,240 1,519 279 1,738 498 0
Eastlake High 2,400 2,604 -- 2,424 24 0
Rancho del Rey 1,500 1,643 -- 1,613 113 0
Middle
*(Excludes students and capacity assigned to Special Education and Learning Center enrollment)
There are currently 10,922 full- and part-time students attending Chula Vista Adult School. Their facility needs are being met at this time.
SWEETVVATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 3
3. Please fill in the table below to Indicate enrollment history.
Total Enrollment 6,867 6,879 6,718
% of Change Over the Previous Year .02% 2.3% 2,8%
% of Enrollment from Chula Vista 86% 87% Not Available
Total Enrollment 3,807 3,747 3,808
% of Change Over the Previous Year 1.6% -1.6% 1.9%
of Enrollment from Chula Vista 89% 89% Not Available
~1 Enrollment 7,239 6,482 6,090
¥o of Change Over the Previous Year 11.7% 6% 6.2%
, of Enrollment from Chula Vista 94% 93% Not Available
Ilment 35,330 34,114 33,060
% of Change Over the Previous Year 3.6% 3.1% 3.9%
Enrollment from Chula Vista 51% 50% Not Available
1. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the District[]s ability to
accommodate student enrollment?
Yes No X
Explain: The district recently completed the installation of 86 additional classrooms.
5. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 12 - 18-month time frame?
Yes X No
Explain: New construction is planned to meet growth. A new high school in Otay Mesa will
commence grading in February 2001. Temporary classrooms will be installed to address interim
growth.
SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT PAGE 4
6. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth?
Yes X No
Explain:
a. What facilities will be needed? Two new high schools.
b. Are sites available for the needed facilities? One site has been acquired and the other
acquisition is in process.
c. How will these facilities be funded? State funds, Mello-Roos bonds, and General
Obligation bonds.
d. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding? Yes
7. Are existing facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for the 5 to 7 year time frames?
Yes No X
Explain: Not the existing facilities alone. However, two new high schools and one new middle
school are planned during 5 to 7 year time frame.
8. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting the maintenance of the level of service as
Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes No X
Explain: The voters passed a $187 million bond for modernization.
MAINTENANCE
9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes X No
Explain:
10. Are there any major upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the School District's
current 1-year and 5-year ClP that will add capacity?
Yes X No
Explain: Modernization at Chula Vista Middle School.
SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DIS, TRICT PAGE 5
GMOC'S PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS
11. Have efforts been made to provide the District with a graded high school pad site with all-
weather access, water, and power in Otay Ranch village Two?
Yes X No
Explain: Site is graded and utilities are in the process of being installed.
MISCELLANEOUS
12. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No X
Explain:
13. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes No X
Explain:
14. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and GMOC.
Yes X No
Explain: The State School Funding Program for new construction has been modified.
Prepared by: Katy Wright
Title: Director of Planning & Construction
Date: December 20, 2000
THRESHOLD STANDARD
1. Population Ratio: three (3) acres of neighborhood and community parkland with
appropriate facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents east of 1-805.
The following table compares City of Chula Vista population estimates from previous years
with current and forecasted population estimates. Park acreage provided or anticipated to
be provided is also identified. Additionally, the table identifies the threshold standard,
(acres of parkland provided per 1,000 persons), for the respective reporting periods.
1,000 AC/1,000'**
II
Population
East West 1-805 1.02 1.03 1.18 1.13 1.04
of 1-805 AC/1,000
Citywide 2.05 2.06 2.16 2.25 2.01
AC/1,000
AcreSparklandOf · East 1-805 240.61 264.16 210,40 238.00 220.79
West 1-805 120.65 120.65 129.45 129.45 119.37
Citywide 361.26 384.81 339,85 367.45 340.t6
Population ** East 1-805 57,866 69,990 47,780 49,025 54,783
West 1-805 118,473 117,068 109,647 114,392 114,482
Citywide 176,339 187,058 157,427 163,417 169,265
Acre Shortfall*** or East 1-805 67.01 54.19 67.06 90.93 56.44
Excess West 1-805 -234.77 -230.55 -199.49 -213.73 -224.08
Git/wide -167.76 -176.36 -132.43 -122.80 -167.64
Chula Vista Planning & Building Depa~rnent. .
· * Chula Vista Parks & Recreation Department
· **The number of acres necessary to bring the ratio up to 3 acres per 1,000 population.
· **Acres per 1,000 population.
Please provide a brief narrative response to the following:
-- 2. Pursuant to the Parks Development Ordinance (PDO), has the eastern Chula
Vista parks system had the required parkland acreage (3 acres/1,000 persons)
during the reporting period?
Yes X No
- Explain:
As identified in the preceding table, the Eastern Chula Vista park system met and
exceeded the parkland requirements for the reporting period with a 4.16 acres per
thousand ratio.
a. What actions are being taken, or need to be taken, to correct any
parkland shortages?
No action is necessaq/ since no shortages to Eastern Chula Vista parkland have
been experienced.
3. Pursuant to the Parks Development Ordinance (PDO), has the City's park
system provided the required facilities during the reporting period?
Yes No X
~ ' Explain:
The required number of certain recreation facilities, as identified by the PDO, have
not been available during the reporting period. The following table identifies facilities
required under the existing PDO.
The Draft Citywide Parks Master Plan, which is currently under preparation, includes
proposed recommendations to modify existing PDO recreational facility needs
-.- ret/os. The proposed ret/os have been developed in response to a comprehensive
recreational facilities demands and needs assessment which was conducted by a
consultant. While the existing PDO needs ratios help identify the number and type
of new facilities which should be programmed; they are based on national averages.
Ratios based on national averages tend to not respond to an individual
community's specific needs. Realizing this, a Chula Vista Recreational Demand
Analysis and Needs Assessment report was prepared as one of the first tasks in the
preparation of the Citywide Parks Master Plan. The Draft Master Plan concludes
with a recommendation to modify and update the Chula Vista needs ratios so that
future park sites can be programmed to meet the true needs of residents. With this
in mind, the following table also identifies the Draft Master Plan identified needs
ratios and the anticipated numbers of recreational facilities required.
Eastern Chula Vista Recreational Facility Needs 2000
PDO (2000) PMP (2000)
ReCreation Facility PDO Need PMP Need
Ratio (Less Ratio ++ (Less
Supply) Supply)
Softball I / 5.000* -1
Organized Adult I / 7,900 0
Organized Youth 1 / 12,700 1
Practice/Informal I / 2,850 9
Baseball 1 / 5.000* N/A*
Organized Adult 1 / 12.200 5
Organized Youth 1 / 4,400 8
Practice/Informal 1 / 3,300 3
Football N/A N/A 1 / 21.400 3
Soccer I / 10,000
Organized Games -4 I / 5,400 3
Practice/Informal I / 2,450 14
Picnic Shelter 1 / 1,000 27 N/A N/A
Picnic Tables N/A N/A I / 600 -122
Tot Lots/Playgrounds 2,000 9 1 / 2,650 2
Swimming Pool I / 20,000 3 I / 45,800 1
Tennis 1 / 2,000 20 1 / 3,200 9
Basketball 1 /5.000 8 I /2.150 21
Skateboarding N/A N/A I / 56,950 1
Roller Blading N/A N/A 1 / 59,100 1
Classrooms N/A N/A I / 3,900 15
Community Center/Gym
24,000 2 N/A N/A
· PDO combines softball and baseball demand into one ratio (1/5,000)
1. Negative Value indicates overage.
-t--t- Screen Draft Park Master Plan based needs ratio Parks & Recreation Department 2000.
Based on the Needs Assessment prepared in December 1997 and modified in
September 1999, the City of Chula Vista recreational needs vary from those
currently identified in the PDO. The new ratios result in both increases and
decreases in demand for certain recreational facilities as compared to the currently
established PDO ratios. Differences, between the PDO identified demand and the
PMP identified demand, occur due to the inherent differences that existing when
comparing national averages with local resident opinions and practices. Another
change proposed, with the introduction of the PMP based ratios, is the addition of
new recreational categories to reflect current recreational trends.
As revealed in the table, sport field demand is greater under the PMP based ratios
ascomparedtotheexistingPDOratios. ThePMPidentifieddemandcon£/rmswhat
is currently being experienced in eastern Chula Vista, namely the need for facilities
to accommodate league activities. Lessor demand is anticipated for tennis courts
under the PMP ratios than the existing PDO ratios. The inverse is true for
basketball court demand. New categories not identified in the existing PDO ratios
include skateboarding, roller blading, and classrooms/indoor programming space.
Once adopted, the PMP identified ratios will be incorporated into the PDO.
· Under the provisions of the existing PDO, the Eastern Chula Vista parks system is
deficient three 50meter swimming pools and two recreation community
center/gymnasium facilities. Under the proposed PMP, the Eastern Chula Vista
parks system is deficient one 50 meter pool and the equivalent of approximately
20, O00 square feet of recreational building (community center/gymnasium). The
differences in the demand for pools, once again, are due to the inherent differences
that exist between nationally based demands and local population defined
demands.
' a. What actions are being taken, or need to be taken, to correct any
shortages of facilities?
The Draft Citywide Parks Master Plan, which is currently being prepared, identifies
current (2000) facility shortages and projected facility shortages. In response to
identified shortages, the Draft Master Plan includes a park programming matrix
which clearly defines where needed facilities will be located in conjunction with the
development of new park sites as well as upgrades to existing park sites. This plan
of action wi//serve to remedyfacilityshortages. The Draft MasterPlan also contains
an action plan that identifies timing of planned facilities, and funding sources.
· - Facilities being targeted for future parks include swim complexes with 50 meter
swimming pools and multi-purpose community centers with gymnasiums.
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to
maintain the threshold standard?
Yes X No
Explain:
While growth during the reporting period has not affected the ability to provide
required parkland acreage, growth during the reporting pedod has further
exacerbated the shortage of certain recreation facilities, such as a community
center, a swimming pool, sports courts (basketball and tennis), and sport fields
(soccer, baseball/softball) for adult and youth leagues.
5. Are any additional parklands necessary to accommodate forecasted growth
for both the 12 - 18 month and 5 - 7 year time frames?
Yes X No
Explain:
a. What is the amount of needed parkland?
Current eastern Chula Vista parkland inventory will provide adequate acreage to
accommodate up to 80,203 persons. The 18-month forecast calls for an eastern
Chula Vista population of 69,990, therefore current inventory will meet the 18-month
forecast. With an additional 23.55 acres of parkland being developed overthe next
18 months, and at least an additional 58.58 acres forecasted for 2005 time frame,
an additional 27,377persons can be accommodated. This translates to an eastern
Chula Vista parkland inventory of 322. 74 acres, which is capable of accommodating
a total of 107,580 persons.
By end of 2005, the eastern Chula Vista population would be 100,640. This would
necessitate 301.92 acres of parkland in eastern Chula Vista to meet the threshold
standard. A total of 322.74 acres of parkland is forecasted, (existing inventory plus
acreage forecasted to come online), an amount adequate to meet the threshold
standard.
b. Are there sites available for the needed parklands?
Park sites are available and have been identified on SPA plans and Tentative Maps
for major projects within the eastern territory such as Otay Ranch, San Miguel
Ranch, Rolling Hills Ranch, and EastLake.
c. Is funding available for needed parklands?
Funding for needed parklands in eastern Chula Vista is available through the
development of turnkey park facilities and/or payment of Parkland Dedication
Ordinance Fees (PAD Fees).
6. Are any additional facilities necessary to accommodate forecasted growth for
both the 12 - 18 month and 5 -7 year time frames?
Yes X No
Explain:
a. What facilities are needed?
Based on current PDO defined facility needs ratios, to accommodate a population
· increase of 42,774 (Year 2005) and taking into consideration existing (2000)
inventory, the following facilities will be needed in eastern Chula Vista.
· PDO Based Needs Ratio - 2000 and 2005 Eastern Chula Vista
Recreation PDO Ratio Current (2000) Future (2005) Combined Current
Facility Need Need and Future Need
Large Picnic
Shelter 1,000 27 43 70
Tennis Court 2,000 20 21 41
Baseball/ 5,000 -1 9 8
Softball
Basketball 5,000 8 9 17
Soccer 10,000 -4 4 0
Swim Pool
(50 meter) 20,000 3 2 5
Community 24,000 2 2 4
Center/Gym
Notes: 1. Number of facilities needed has been round up when one-half or greater.
2. Negative values represent number of facilities beyond numeric need.
The following table reflects results of the Draft Parks Master P/an facility needs ratios,
Draft Citywide Park Master Plan-Based
Needs Ratio - 2000 and 2005 (Not Adopted)
PUP (2000) PMP (2005) Combined
Recreation Facility PMP Need Need 2000 &
Ratio ++ (Less (Less 2005 Need
Supply) Supply
Softball
Organized Adult I / 7,900 0 5 5
Organized Youth I / 12,700 I 3 4
Practice/Informal 1 / 2,850 9 15 24
Baseball
Organized Adult 1 / 12,200 5 4 9
Organized Youth 1 / 4,400 8 10 18
Practice/Informal 1 / 3,300 3 13 16
Football 1 / 21,400 3 2 5
Soccer
Organized Games 1 / 5,400 3 8 11
Practice/Informal I / 2,450 14 17 31
Picnic Shelter N/A N/A N/A N/A
Picnic Tables 1 / 600 -122 71 -51
Tot Lots/Playgrounds 1 / 2,650 2 16 18
Swimming Pool I / 45,800 I 1 2
Tennis 1 / 3,200 9 13 22
Basketball I / 2,150 21 20 41
Skateboarding 1 / 56,950 1 1 2
Roller Blading 1 / 59,100 I I 2
Classrooms I / 3,900 15 11 26
Community Center/Gym
N/A N/A N/A N/A
1. Negative Value indicates overage.
2. Number of facilities needed has been round up when one-half or greater.
b. Are there sites available for the needed facilities?
Yes, sites become available and are reserved as part of the land development
process (Tentative Map, SPA Plan, and Final Map).
c. Is funding available for needed parklands?
Yes, funding of needed parklands (turnkey parks) will be available at Final Map
recordation.
7. Are there any other growth related issues you see affecting the ability to
maintain the threshold standard as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes X No
Explain:
If not properly phased, growth has the potential to affect the ability to provide
necessary parkland and facilities in a timely fashion. Future park sites need to be
developed early in the development phasing sequence. Furthermore, depending on
facility type needed, it may be necessary to develop community park sites prior to
neighborhood park sites in a given development. The Draft Citywide Parks Master
Plan will include goals, policies, and action items that address sequencing of park
development in conjunction with population increases.
PARKLAND AND FACILITIES MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing
parklands and facilities?
Yes No X
Explain:
The maintenance of all parklands and facilities is a budget issue. As new parks
come online, additional maintenance staff will be needed to maintain parks that are
added to the park system.
8A. Is there adequate staff for park maintenance?
Yes No X
Explain:
The Public Works Department has implemented a staffing strategyfor ensuring that
staffing levels ara commensurate with park/ands maintenance needs. A standard,
based on identifying number of park maintenance staff persons per acre of
parkland, is being implemented to ensure that staffing levels are adequate to meet
current and forecasted maintenance needs.
9. Were any major parkland or facilities maintenance/upgrade projects
completed during the reporting period? If yes, please list.
Yes x No
Explain:
The following programmed maintenance/upgrade projects have been completed or
started during the reporting period.
Proiects Completed or Started During the Reporting Period CIP Number
Greg Rogers Perk (Parkview Little League Field Upgrades) PR-169
· Connoley Park Renovation (Contracted for Design) PR-215
Feaster School Playground Renovation (Contracted for Design) PR-222
Tiffany Park Playground Renovation (Contracted for Design) PR-225
~ Parkway PooI-Re-surfacing/Re-lamping PR-223
PARKS MASTER PLAN
The following questions are follow-ups to previous GMOC recommendations,
10, Has the Parks Master Plan been completed?
Yes No X
Explain:
During the first quarter of 199g the City retained the services ora consu/tant team to
prepare the City-wide Parks Master Plan. Staff is currently reviewing a preliminary
screencheck of the draft document. The document will require substantial
modifications before it can be released for public review. The document is
expected to be adopted in late summer of this year.
11. Has the Greenbelt Master Plan been completed?
Yes No X
Explain:
A consultant team wi// be preparing the Greenbelt A4aster Plan immediately
following completion of the City-wide Parks Master Plan.
Has a comprehensive evaluation of projected growth and parkland phasing
for eastern Chula Vista been completed?
Yes X No
Explain:
As discussed in Item 7, growth resulting from new development in the eastern
territories can only occur as long as threshold standards are maintained. Park/and
and recreational facility needs are identified early on in the planning phase of
residential development proposals. In this regard, staff is monitoring planned
residential development and corresponding park demand associated with planned
residential development. The table on the following page represents an accounting
of park phasing.
Park Phasing
Park Anticipated Estimated Estimated
Park Name Acreage Status Construction Construction Acceptance
Start Date Completion Date
Date
Mac Kenzie 7.50 Construction Fourth Second Second
Creek Park Completed. Quarter Quarter Quarter
Maintenance of 1999 of 2000 of 2001
Period
'' underway.
Heritage (P-l) 10.57 Under Third Third Third
(Otay Ranch Construction. Quarter Quarter Quarter
Village 1) of 2000 of 2001 of 2002
Cottonwood (P-6) 6.50 Under Second First First
(Otay Ranch Construction. Quarter Quarter Quarter
Village 5) Of 2000 of 2001 of 2002
- Santa Cora (P-7) 5.68 Master Plan Third Second Second
(Otay Ranch Approved Quarter Quarter Quarter
Village 5) by Council of 2001 of 2002 of 2003
12/98.
Breezewood (P-9) 2.00 Construction Second Third Second
(Otay Ranch Drawing Review Quarter Quarter Quarter
Village 5) underway, of 2001 of 2001 2002
Otay Ranch 6.20 Master Plan Third First First
P-2 Park Preparation Quarter Quarter Quarter
Underway. of 2001 of 2002 of 2003
· EastLake Sports Master Plan Third Third Third
Complex 10.00 Refinement Quarter Quarter Quarter
Pending of 2001 of 2002 of 2003
Rolling Hills Master Plan
Ranch Preparation First First First
Community Park 20.00 Anticipated Quarter Quarter Quarter
Second Quarter of 2002 of 2003 of 2004
2001
EastLake Trails Master Plan First First First
Community Park 19.80 Preparation Quarter Quarter Quarter
Anticipated of 2002 of 2003 of 2004
Second Quarter
2001
San Miguel Master Plan First First First
Ranch 16.10 Preparation Quarter Quarter Quarter
Anticipated of 2002 of 2003 of 2004
Second Quarter
2001
MISCELLANEOUS
13. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes X No
Explain:
Over the past GMOC cycles, recommendations have been forwarded to the City Council by
the GMOC to make the 3 acres/I,000 population threshold a City-wide goal. Staff has
been supportive of this revised threshold recommendation; however, consideration by he
City Council has been delayed, pending completion of the Citywide Parks Master Plan. It
is expected that with completion of the Parks Master Plan, the revised Threshold will again
be forwarded to the City Council for consideration and possible adoption.
14. Are there any suggestions you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes No X
Explain:
15. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC.
Yes No X
Explain:
Prepared by: Joe Gamble, Landscape Planner
Date of Preparation: January 16, 2001
H:~Shared~GMOC~Quesflon~00PARKS.versionl
THRESHOLD
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report which:
1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed to foster air quality improvement
pursuant to relevant regional and local air quality improvement strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable Federal,
State and regional air quality regulations and programs.
3. Identifies non-development specific activities being undertaken by the City
toward compliance with relevant Federal, State and local regulations
regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Quality Pollution Control District
(APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the APCD shall report on overall regional
and local air quality conditions, the status of regional air quality improvement
implementation efforts under the Regional Air Quality Strategy and related Federal and
State programs, and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and
local planning and development activities.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
1. Please fill in the blanks on this table, and update any prior years' figures if they have
been revised.
SMOG TRENDS - Number of days over standards
STATE STANDARDS 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
San Diego Region 96 51 43 54 26 24
Chula Vista 6 1 10 2 4 0
FEDERAL
STANDARDS
San Diego Region 12 2 1 9 0 0
Chula Vista 1 0 0 0 0 0
la. Please note any additional information relevant to regional and local air quality
conditions during the reporting period.
· P/ease provide bdef responses to the following:
2. Were there any changes in Federal or State programs during the reporting period?
Yes X No
Explain
The federal Environmental Protection Agency adopted a "Voluntary Credits"
program, whereby a region may take credit in its State Implementation Plan for any
non-mandated air quality measures or practices, such as "smart growth," Increased
use of transit, alternative fueled vehicles, etc. The District will not be updating the
Ozone SIP for at least another year, and has not decided whether or not to invoke the
voluntary credits allowance.
~ 3. Has the Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) been updated or revised during the
reporting period?
-~ Yes No X
Explain:
a. What changes were made/adopted?
4. Will the above-noted changes (under questions 2 &3), if any, affect Chula Vista's
-~ local planning and development activities and regulations?
Yes No X
Explain:
MISCELLANEOUS
5. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No X
If yes, explain:
6. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
E)~plain: The District has recently become aware of increased public demand in
neighborhoods throughout the region for "traffic calming" measures, to reduce speeding and
cut-through traffic on residential and neighborhood commercial streets. These measures, if
carefully employed, can make walking, bicycling, and transit use, safer and more feasible
for more people, reducing emissions. The measures now available go far beyond stop
signs and speed bumps, measures most people associate with "traffic calming". The
Oversight Committee should request the City Council, and/or appropriate departments to
consider drafting a traffic calming policy and appointing a traffic calming specialist to handle
requests, and inserting a budget item for traffic calming. The cities of San Diego, Del Mar,
and Oceanside have taken these steps. Chula Vista may have also, but I am unaware of
this.
7. Do you have any other relevant information that the APCD desires to communicate to
the City and GMOC?
- Yes X No
Explain:
It would helpful to hear from the Police Department and DPW as to the level of
complaints regarding speeding, cut-through traffic and similar issues.
Prepared by: Andy Hamilton
Title: Air Quality Specialist
Date: December 12, 2000
THRESHOLD
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual report which:
-~ 1. Provides an overview and evaluation of local development projects
approved during the prior year to determine to what extent they
implemented measures designed to foster air quality improvement
~ pursuant to relevant regional and local air quality improvement strategies.
2. Identifies whether the City's development regulations, policies and
~" procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with current applicable Federal,
State and regional air quality regulations and programs.
' ~ 3. Identifies non-development related activities being undertaken by the City
toward compliance with relevant Federal, State and local regulations
regarding air quality, and whether the City has achieved compliance.
The City shall provide a copy of said report to the Air Quality Pollution Control District
(APCD) for review and comment. In addition, the APCD shall report on overall regional
and local air quality conditions, the status of regional air quality improvement
implementation efforts under the Regional Air Quality Strategy and related Federal and
State programs, and the affect of those efforts/programs on the City of Chula Vista and
local planning and development activities.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
1. Have any major developments or Master Planned Communities been approved
during the reporting period?
Yes X No
a. Listanyapprovedprojectsandindicatetowhatextent these projects implement
measures designed to foster air quality improvement pursuant to relevant federal,
state, regional and/or local policies and regulations?
Although discussed in previous GMOC threshold reports, the following two projects were
approved during the reporting period. The Sectional Area Plan (SPA), EIR, and related
documents for the San Miguel Ranch master planned community were adopted by the City
Council on October 19, 1999. Also approved was the General Development Plan for
EastLake II, adopted by City Council on November 16, 1999.
An Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) was required for both of these projects. The
AQIP's contain an analysis of the project's air quality impacts and proposes measures to
reduce those impacts during and after construction. Design features listed in the CO2
Reduction Plan were required to be incorporated into each AQIP per the City's guidelines.
Otay Ranch is another master planned community in which planning efforts have occurred
this year. On February 16, 1999,0ity Council approved an amendment to Otay Ranch SPA
One which includes Village One, Village One West and Village Five. As required of all SPA
Plans, an AQIP was prepared. It also incorporates design features consistent with the 002
Reduction Plan to achieve emission reductions through various techniques related to land
use. ( Please refer to question 5.)
Currently in preparation stages are SPA Plans for Otay Ranch Village 11 containing
approximately 2304 dwelling units and Otay Ranch Village 6, with 2016 dwelling units
proposed.
The master planned community EastLake is also involved in the preparation of future
development projects. Approximately 2000 dwelling units are being proposed in the draft
EastLake III SPA Plan.
All of the SPA Plans that are in the planning stages are required to prepare an AQIP which
meets the City's guidelines. Again, these projects will be required to implement measures
that will effectively reduce impacts to air quality during and after construction in a manner
consistent with the CO2 Reduction Plan.
2. Are Chula Vista's development regulations, policies and procedures consistent with
current applicable federal, state and regional air quality regulations and programs?
Yes X No
Explain:
a. With respect to any inconsistencies, please indicate actions needed to
bring development regulations, policies and/or procedures into compliance.
-~ 3. Are there any non-development related air quality programs that the City is currently
implementing or participating in?
- * Yes X No
Explain:
a. Identify and provide a brief explanation of each.
The City has continued to implement several of the measures recommended in the CO2
Reduction Plan adopted by City Council on November 14, 2000. The following eight non-
development related measures have been implemented and are on-going projects:
Measure 1 - Purchase of Alternative Fuel Vehicles
Council approved a CNG fueling and maintenance facility and has purchased a total of six
alternative fuel vehicles during the past three years. The City is also working with Metallic
Power toward the development of a zinc fuel cell demonstration light-duty truck.
Measure 2 - Green Power
The City joined the SANDAG Power Pool in 1998 and switched twelve meters to "green
power" or electricity generated from renewable resources. Unfortunately, as of July 2000,
the Power Pool has ceased to operate and all of the meters defaulted back to SDG&E.
Staff is working to identify green electricity purchase options available to the City. The City
has negotiated with PG&E to receive funding and in-kind services to develop photovoltaic
(solar) electricity at one City facility.
Measure 3 - Municipal Clean Fuel Demonstration Project
The City continues to work with the California Energy Commission (CEC) and SunLine
Transit Agency to demonstrate a hydrogen fuel cell transit bus in Chula Vista. In December
1999, the City Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding to implement a multi-
year demonstration project. The City was awarded a $500,000 grant and Council approved
$36,000 in transit funds to further develop the program. An additional $500,000 in matching
grant funds is expected from the CEC in the near future.
Measure 5 - Municipal Building Upgrades and Trip Reduction
Retrofits were implemented at all city facilities by upgrading lights, many HVAC systems
and other appliances with energy-saving devices. Additional improvements will be made as
major capital items are scheduled to be replaced or refurbished.
The addition of the Building Departments eastern office and permitting process via the
Internet has resulted in trip reduction by City employees and the public. Staff is also in the
process of expanding opportunities for the public to use the City's website to access
information and communicate with staff without traveling to the Civic Center and other City
facilities. In addition, staff is working on the development and implementation of a Van/Car
Pool Program for City employees.
Measure 10 - Green Power Public Education Program
In June 1998 staff developed a public education program for Chuia Vista residents. The
program provided information about renewal power choices as deregulation of the power
industry occurred. In the future this information will be made available on the City's web
site. In addition, a global warming education module has been successfully implemented
in the Chula Vista Elementary School District.
Measure 12 - Bicycle Integration with Transit and Employment
Encourages employers and transit providers to provide bike storage at major transit stops
and employment areas and includes bike racks on buses. Employers are also encouraged
to provide showers at major transit nodes.
Measure 16 -Traffic Signal and System Upgrades
The City has changed all 1874 red lamps in its traffic signals to LED lamps, resulting in a
33% savings in energy costs and a reduction of 1599 tons CO2. Traffic Division staff
continues to work with SDG&E to identify change out opportunities for green lamps.
Measure 19- Municipal Life-Cycle Purchasing Standards
This measure involves the inclusion of life-cycle energy costs as a selection criteria in a
comprehensive purchasing policy for energy-consuming equipment. The policy has lead
to the purchase of a number of Energy Star appliances and building design or equipment
changes that promote energy efficiency.
4. Are there additional non-development related program efforts that the City needs to
undertake pursuant to federal, state or regional air quality regulations?
Yes No X
Explain:
- a. If so, please identify.
5. Are any new air quality programs scheduled for implementation during the next
year?
Yes X No
~ Explain:
On November 14, 2000, the CO2 Reduction Plan was adopted by City Council. A number
of the action measures are directly related to land use and will now be implemented as a
part of the uSustainable Development Program". The following measures will be included
in future planning efforts including the General Plan update and implementation. Recent
Air Quality Improvement Plans (AQIP's) required of major developments at the SPA level
have followed guidelines addressing these measures prior to formal adoption of the CO2
Reduction Plan. Consistency with the CO2 Reduction Plan will continue to be a
requirement of all AQIP's.
Measure 6 - Enhanced Pedestrian Connections to Transit
Installation of direct, convenient walkways and crossings between bus stops and
surrounding land uses.
Measure 7 - Increased Housing Density Near Transit
Consideration of increases in residential land use designations to reach an average of 14-
18 dwelling units per acre or more within a quarter mile of major transit routes and stops,
where adequate public services can be provided.
Measure 8 - Site Design with Transit Orientation
Placement of buildings and circulation routes to emphasize transit, including bus turn-outs
and other stop amenities.
Measure 9 - Increased Land Use Mix
Consideration of greater dispersion of a wide variety of land uses, such as siting of
neighborhood commercial uses in residential areas, and inclusion of housing in commercial
and light industrial areas where adequate public services can be provided.
Measure 11 - Site design with Pedestrian/Bicycle Orientation
Staff has been implementing this measure in several areas of the City through applicable
land use standards. It encourages the placement of buildings and circulation routes in key
areas and includes bike paths, bike racks and pedestrian benches.
Measure 13 - Bicycle Lanes, Paths and Routes
Continued implementation of the City's Bikeway Master Plan including futura needs update.
Bikeway feasibility Study for the Chula Vista Greenbelt Master Plan will be developed.
Measure 14 - Energy Efficient Landscaping
Promotes planting of shade trees for new single-family residences as part of an overall city-
- wide tree planting effort to reduce ambient temperatures, smog formation, energy use and
CO2 emissions.
· Measure 18 - Energy Efficient Building Program
This program, also known as "GreenStar" Building Incentive Program reduces CO2
emissions by developing building programs that increase energy efficiency beyond
California Title 24 Energy Code requirements. Builders are rewarded for their voluntary
participation with priority permit processing and recognition awards.
PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATIONS
6. Has the City Council adopted the CO2 Reduction Plan?
Yes X No
Explain:
The CO2 Reduction Plan was adopted bythe City Council on November 14, 2000, Staffis
now in the process of implementing the Action Measures which make up the Plan. (Refer to
Questions 3 and 5)
7. Is the CO2 Reduction Plan being used as a guide to implement measures to reduce
CO2 emissions?
Yes X No
Explain:
Since the recent adoption of the CO2 Reduction Plan, staffis moving forward to incorporate
the land use related measures into an expanded "Sustainable Development Program".
The program will result in a reduction in CO2 emissions through the development of Air
Quality Improvement Plan guidelines and a checklist for use by City staff and developers.
Staff is also moving ahead with development of the "GreenStar" Energy Efficient Building
Program. it is anticipated that both of these measures will be completed during the coming
year. (Refer to questions 3 and 5,)
8. In the context that this is a regional issue, has SANDAG been apprised of the City of
Chula Vista efforts in reducing CO~ emissions?
Yes No X
Explain:
The CO2 Reduction Plan was only recently adopted (November 2000) thus implementation
of many of the measures contained in the plan has not occurred. Once the measures have
been in effect for a sufficient period of time staff will provide a written report detailing the
results. This report can then be presented at a regional level through SANDAG to stress
the importance of participation by all jurisdictions to reduce 002 emissions.
9. Have City Departments been tasked to identify alternative transportation options and
- potential implementation measures?
Yes X No
Explain:
The Planning Division, Engineering Division and the Community Development Department
staff are working to incorporate alternative transportation objectives and policies into the
General Plan comprehensive update that is now underway.
The Engineering Division is continuing to implement the Chula Vista Bikeway Master Plan.
In addition a Bikeway Feasibility Study for the Chula Vista Greenbelt Master Plan is being
developed.
Planning Division staff continues to advocate that MTDB prioritize construction of new
trolley lines in the City of Chula Vista due to the current planning of new communities with
adequate densities and dedicated right-of-ways to support trolley lines. In addition, the
Planning Division staff will continue to pursue federal and state funding to complete transit
oriented development master plans for the E, H and Palomar Street trolley corridor and
surrounding areas.
MISCELLANEOUS
10, Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No X
Explain:
11. Are them any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes No X .
Explain:
12. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC.
Yes No X .
Explain:
THRESHOLD
City-wide: Maintain LOS "C" or better as measured by observed average travel speed on all
signalized arterial segments, except that during peak hours a LOS of "D" can occur for no
more than two hours of the day. West of 1-805: Those signalized intersections which do not
meet the standard above, may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but shall not
worsen.
1. Please fill in the blanks on this table for the current TMP.
1996 1997TMP 1998 1999TMP 2000TMP
TMP
DID CI D4 D5C5' / C4
CIB CIB B41B C51B5
BIC C/C5 B41C B41C4
CIB CIC5 C/A4 B4C5
H Street (Bay Blvd. - Woodlawn Ave) 2 WB (only) I D D D C4 / D2 D
Third Ave. (G Street- Naplus Street) NB/SB BIB B I B 111 BIB 111
Fourth Ave. (SR-54 EB ramps - H St.) NB/SB I B I B C I C S I B 4 111 t 1 t
Broadway IL St. - S. CVCL) NBISB C I B C I B B I B 4 t 1 t 11 t
H Street (I-5 NB ramps - Third Ave.) EB/WB CIC CIC CIC C/C C/C
E. H Street (SW College Ent. - Rutgers Ave.) EB/WB B I C B I C B / C B I C B / B4
Otayl:~k-,=Rd. (E. HSt.-TeI. CanyonRd) NB/SB I CIB CIB CIB C/B C/A4
Palomar St. (I-5 NB ramps - Brusdwa}/I EB/WB ~ CIC CIC CIC C/CD5 CICSD
E Street (Bay Blvd. - Woocilawn Ave.) 2 W~ (only) DC* DD* OD* 6 6
H Street (Bay Blvd. - Woodlawn Ave.) 2 WB (only) DD* DD* DD* (ES) 2 ED4
Palomar St. (Bay Blvd. - Industrial Blvd.) 2 EB (only) DD* DD* DD* (FS) 2 D4D4
E Street (I-5 NB ramps - Third Ave.) EB/WB CIC CIC CIC B41C BIB4
H Street (I.5 NB ramps - Third Ave.) EB/WB CIB CIC CIC CIC C51C
E. H Street (SW College Ent. - Rutgers Ave.) EB/WB C / C B I C B I C B / C B I C
L Street (Industrial - Third Ave) EB/WB C I B B I B t 1 t 11 t 111
Otay Lakee Rd. (E. H St. - Tel. Canyon Rd.) NB/SB ClB ClB CIB ClB ClB
Palomar St. (I-5 NB ramps - Broadway) EB/WB C I C C I C DC I C5 C41 C DSC I C5C4
* First hour and second hour LOS.
I Not studied because previous LOS was B or better.
2 These segments are at Freeway Interchanges and are not subject to threshold etandard~. For information only.
3 East of 1-805, LOS D was not exceeded for more than two hours. West of 1-805, only H Street (Say Blvd.-Woodlawn Ave.)
exceeded Los D for more than two hours. See note 2.
4 LOS improvement.
5 LOS reduction.
6 Omitted because of road construction.
2. Should any street segments be added to the above list as a result of the current
TMP?
Yes No X
a. If yes, fill in the following table.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
3. Were any major streets, or other traffic improvements constructed during the
reporting period (99/00) fiscal year)?
Yes X No
Explain:
1 ) Traffic Signal Installation @ East 'H" Street With Eastlake Dr.
2) Traffic Signal Installation @ Eastlake Pkwy. W/Greensgate Dr.
3) Signal Installation @ Otay Lakes Rd. W/Lane Avenue.
4) Traffic Signal Installation @ Otay Lakes Rd. W/Hunte Pkwy.
5) 1-805/Telegraph Canyon Road Interchange.
6) East Palomar Street- La Media To Paseo Ranchem.
7) Right-Turn Southbound To Westbound Lane @ Otay Lakes Road And Tel. Cnyn. Rd./La
Media/Otay Lakes Road.
H:\SHARED\GMOC2000\Question\TRAFFI 00_i.DOC
FREEWAY ENTRANCES / EXITS
4. Use the following two tables to report the status of freeway entrance/exit studies
and/or improvement projects.
E Street North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2005.
H Street North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2005.
J Street North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2003.
L StreetJIndustrial North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2003.
Blvd.
Palomar Avenue North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2003.
Main Street North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2003.
I
Bonita Road North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2003.
East H Street There is a project report dated August 4. 1994 to provide 4 EB
lanes, 2 EB to NB on ramp lanes, 3 NB off ramp lanes, 2 WB to
NB on ramp lanes, ramp metering and other misc. Improvements.
North bound ramp meters scheduled for 2003.
Tele. Canyon Road City awarded a contract during June of 1999 to provide 3 EB
lanes, widen and square off the SB off ramp, remove SB to EB
access from Halecrest Drive, install a traffic signal at Von's
Shopping Center and provide landscaping in the median. North
bound ramp meter scheduled for 2003.
Olympic Parkway and Preliminary design and environmental assessment is
E. Palomar Street underway for interchange improvements and access to 1-805 at
Palomar Street. North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2003.
North and South bound ramp meters scheduled for 2003.
Main Street North bound ramp meter scheduled for 2003.
H:\SHARED\GMOC2000\Question\TRAFFI 00_i.DOC
GROWTH IMPACTS
5. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
LOS levels?
Yes No __ X__
Explain:
As a result of the TMP runs, nine (9) locations were observed to have LOS improvement and six (6)
locations were observed to have reduction in LOS. However, reductions are still within LOS
standards as set by the GMOC. Please refer to the table on page 1 of the traffic section.
6. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth (without exceeding the LOS
threshold) for both the 18 month and 5 year time frame?
Yes __X__ No __X__
Yes for the short term. Current facilities will not be able to absorb forecasted growth during the 5-
year timeframe; however, roads are either under construction or planned, which will be able to
absorb forecasted growth up to the point when the need for SR-125 becomes necessary.
a. Please indicate those new roadways and/or improvements necessary to
accommodate forcasted growth consistent with maintaining the Threshold Standards.
18-month timeframe:
1 ) East Side Of Fourth Avenue From Brisbane Street To Sr-54 Eastbound Ramps.
2) Palomar Street From I-5 To Industrial Blvd.
3) Olympic Parkway Form Oleander Avenue To Paseo Ranchere.
4) East Paiomar Street From Medical Center Drive To Olympic Parkway.
5-year timeframe:
1) Olympic Parkway From Paseo Ranchero To Wueste Road.
2) Birch Road From La Media Road To Eastlake Parkway.
3) Eastlake Parkway From South Of Clubhouse Drive To Hunte Parkway.
4) Hunte Parkway From Olympic Parkway To Rock Mountain Rd.
b. How will these facilities be funded?
TDIF, TRANSNET, DEVELOPER OBLIGATIONS AND CTV (PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE).
H:\SHARED\GMOC2000\Question\TRAFFI 00_i.DOC
c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
YES.
7. What is the Status of SR-1257
Environmental document has been approved. Route adoption has been approved. Regional Water
Quality Control Board permit and 401 permit are pending.
8. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current
level of service as Chula Vista's transportation demand increases?
Yes X No
Explain:
The timely construction of SR-125 is the major contributor to maintaining acceptable LOS
on various segments in eastern Chula Vista.
MAINTENANCE
9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing
facilities?
Yes No X
Explain:
The maintenance program for streets, traffic signals, street lighting and other street related
issues is under-funded at this time. For example, the pavement rehab program requires
$33.6m over the next 5 years, but our CIP budget calls for spending $18.7m. In addition,
providing a preventative maintenance program for traffic signals and street lighting requires
an additional annual expenditure of $200,000.
H: \ SHARED\GMOC2000 \Question\TRAFFI 00_1. DOC
10. Has the Public Works Department developed an annual list of priority streets
with deteriorated pavement?
Yes X No
Explain:
The Engineering Division and the Public Works Operations Division participate in
establishing an annual priority list for all deteriorating streets after extensive field
investigations and analysis of the pavement management program.
11. a. Are any major roadway construction/upgrade or maintenance projects to
be undertaken pursuant to the current J-year and 5-year ClP?
Yes X No
Explain:
1) East "H" Street Widening On The South Side, East Of 1-805 Offramp (2001-
2002).
2)Olympic Parkway / 1-805 Interchange (2001-2004).
3)Palomar Street / 1-805 Interchange Improvements (2004-2005).
4)Olympic Parkway From Brandywine Avenue To Hunte Parkway (2000-2004).
5)Main Street Pavement Rehab (2001).
6)"H" Street Reconstruction, I-5 To Broadway (2001).
7)Otay Lakes Road Overlay Near Eastlake Parkway (2001).
8)Olympic Parkway, Oleander To Brandywine Avenue (2001).
9) Fourth Avenue Resurfacing Between "E' Street And Brisbane Street (2001-
2002).
10)Cross Gutter Removal At "E" Street And First Avenue (2001-2002).
11 )Palomar Street Improvements From I-5 To Industrial Blvd. (2001-2002).
12)Median Modification At Telegraph Canyon Road East Of Medical Center Drive
(2001).
13)Pavement Overlay Rehab Project- City Wide (2001).
H:\SHARED\GMOC2000\Question\TRAFFI 00 1.DOC
11. b. Has the Engineering Division included the $200,000 annual traffic signal
maintenance program in the one and five-year ClP?
Yes No X
Explain:
This process, however, will be analyzed and proposed beginning the fiscal year of 2001-
2002.
MISCELLANEOUS
12. What is the status of the City's public information efforts to inform citizens
and local businesses about its current and longer term transportation
planning efforts?
Describe:
The new neighborhoods, parks, schools and roads being built in eastern Chula Vista are a
result of many years of careful planning with extensive community input. Using the current
General Plan, a thorough review of each new development takes place, which involves
various community meetings. Otay Ranch, for example, which is identified as a "Smart
Growth" community because it features a number of residential villages grouped around
commercial core accessible by pedestrians and bicyclists, is a result of a process that
lasted a decade of extensive meetings with developers, local and state agencies, City staff,
members of the public, community groups and environmental advocates.
The City of Chula Vista, in addition, has recently reconfirmed its commitment to long-range
planning, which involves the public input during all stages of proposed developments, by
taking the first steps to update its General Plan. This process is expected to take three
years and wil involve community meetings as well as other opportunities to provide public
input. Updates to the General Plan will be given in the quarterly published Chula Vista
Spotlight newsletter, on the City's website and in the local media.
H:\SHARED\GMOC2000\Question\TRAFFI 00 1.DOC
-- 13. a. What is the status of the comprehensive traffic model to identify eastern
Chula Vista street system capacity prior to construction of SR 1257
Describe:
City staff and consultant are in the process of finalizing three environmental impact reports
'-- prepared for Eastlake Ill, Otay Ranch Village 6 and Otay Ranch Village 11. Once
completed, these reports will serve as the backbone for a comprehensive traffic modeling
in the eastern territories. A report of findings is anticipated in August, 2001.
13. b. What is the status of establishing a monitoring system to manage Building
Permit approval prior to SR-1257
Describe:
" City staff is closely monitoring the number of building permits being issued and the
construction of both Olympic Parkway and State Route 125. The construction of Olympic
Parkway is well under way with the first phase scheduled to be opened by mid 2001. City
staff is also being proactive in efforts to expedite the construction of SR-125. At the same
time, staff is performing the annual TMP runs, including those critical segments twice a
year, unless construction would interfere with those runs. Through the TMP runs and
monitoring of the number of building permits, staff is able to plan for those measures which
may become necessary in order to prevent the Growth Management Ordinance
.. requirements from being exceeded.
14, Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No X
Explain:
15. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes X No
~' Explain:
When traffic volumes on major roadways in eastern Chula Vista exceed 10,000 A.D.T.,
~ ~ then those roadways will be added to the TMP runs in order to monitor the LOS and ensure
that threshold standards are not exceeded.
H:\SHARED\GMOC2000\Question\TRAFFI O0 1.DOC
16. Are there any other suggestions that you would like the Growth Management
Oversight Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
Explain:
Continue the support for the timely construction of SR-125.
Prepared By: MAJED AL-GHAFRY
Title: CIVIL ENGINEER
Date: JANUARY 18, 2001
H:\SHARED\GMOC2000\Question\TRAFFI 00_i.DOC
CH L~L~. vJSrA
Date: April 5, 2001
To: GMOC Members
From: Sohaib "Alex" A1-Agha, Senior Civil Engineer, Engineering Dep, J~. ~
Ralph Leyva, Senior Civil Engineer, Engineering Dept. '~,FJ7 ~r v ~ ~
- Dan Forster, Growth Management Coordinator, Dept. of~3u~ling and Plannin?~
Subject: Status of City Efforts to Avoid Traffic Threshold Standard Failure
As you were advised at the GMOC meeting on March 8, 2001, all road segments within Chula
Vista during the reporting period meet the GMOC threshold standard. However, because of the
long delay of SR125 it is forecasted that unless action is taken there will be threshold failures.
Our traffic forecast indicates that after an additional 9,429 housing units are built in eastern
Chula Vista (beginning January 1, 2000) the traffic threshold will be exceeded. The first
segment to fail will be Telegraph Canyon Road east ofi-805 and then East H Street.
As with any forecast continued monitoring will be required to verify and correct the model.
Significantly, the first segment of Olympic Parkway will open this Spring. While the impact of
this road has been included in the model the actual versus the forecasted benefits will be
monitored.
Other steps that the city is taking to avoid a threshold failure:
1. Working together with the development community we have established weekly
meetings among our respective traffic engineers and policy makers. These meetings have
produced consensus and agreement on the City's modeling and a revised development
forecast.
2. Also with the development community, physical road improvements that can be
implemented in the short term and that are also cost effective in increasing traffic
capacity are under investigation, these include:
a. Interim SR-125
b. Paseo Ranchero for southbound access
c. 1-805/Telegraph Canyon Road
d. 1-805/East H Street
e. 1-805/East Palomar Street
An analysis of:
· how soon these improvements can be done,
· how much additional capacity they afford,
· what that means in terms of additional housing units that can be
accommodated, and
· the cost of the improvement
are all variables currently being assessed.
3. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is a term used to define a set of approaches
that reduce demand, particularly at peak periods. Such approaches include car pooling,
express bus service, flex work time, and more. The City is currently negotiating with
SANDAG to assist in expanding their "RideLink" program. This may involve a survey
of eastern Chula Vista residents to help gauge feasibility of the various approaches and
working with area businesses to adopt practices and programs that support TDM.
4. Growth moderating is also necessa~. This approach is currently being negotiated with
each of the developers operating in eastern Chula Vista. The City will continue to
monitor traffic and reassess the accuracy of the model as part of our ongoing Traffic
Monitoring Program (TMP). Based upon the results of the monitoring program
adjustments will be made to the 9,429 housing cap as appropriate, either up or down.
When new road improvements are completed they will be assessed, as TDM practices are
put in practice, they will be assessed. And, the development community working jointly
with the City will put in place a construction phasing program that assures our thresholds
are not exceeded.
THRESHOLD
The GMOC shall be provided with an annual development impact fee report, which
provides an analysis of development impact fees collected and expended over the
previous 12-month period.
The table below provides a summary of the Development Impact Fee (DIF) collections and
expenditures during the reporting period. The annual DIF report is included as Attachment A.
1. Please fill In the table below.
5,909,115 5,198,694 9,260,006 Nov 1999
2,102,692 24,717 7,472,878 Jan 94
** 130/SFD 431,628 550,266 1,009,868 Feb 93
rELEGRAPH CYN $4,579/Acre 638,006 2,718,870 2,541,612 Apr98 Unscheduled
~RAINAGE
rELE. CYN GRAVITY ,216.501SFD 279,282 792,977 Sept 98 Unscheduled
SEWER
rELE. CYN PUMPED $560/SFD 8,496 153,938 March 94 Unscheduled
SEWER
~ALT CREEK SEWER 12INISFD 125,754 21,422 385,164 Dec 94 FY01
E~ASIN
POGGI CYN SEWER BASIN ;400/SFD 233,417 115,895 1,446,626 Unscheduled
~TAY RANCH VILL 1 & 5 ;545/SFD 404,253 584,962 Unscheduled
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE DIF
PUBLIC FACILITIES $2,6181SFD June 00 FY02
Administration $134 222,999 453,814 (70,793)
Civic Center Expansion $480 1,316,831 1,612,961 4,642,584
Police Facility $735 611,748 379,899 1,081,24;
Corp. Yard Relocation $386 1,410,266 2,107,484 1,172,975
Libraries $638 1,240,861 251,585 2,259,329
Fire Suppression Sys. $203 256,462 738,132 106,632
Geographic Info. Sys. $ 16 92,034 25,270 93,339
Computer Systems $ 7 43,113 73,571 37,400
Telecommunications $ 13 106,846 52,612 74,443
Records Mgmnt. Sys. $ 6 10,626 130,089 131,209)
*Single-Family Detached (SFD) housing unit shown. Fee vades by type of residential unit, and for commercial
and industrial development - see vadous fee schedules included in Attachment A.
** Fee is $13.00 per traffic tdp. Tdp rates for vadous land uses are reflected in Attachment B.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
2. In relation to the last column on the Table on Page 1, were any DIF updates
completed or are any DIF updates in progress during the reporting period? If yes,
please explain.
Yes X No
a. If any DIFs are currently being updated, where are they in the process?
b. How long it's been since each DIF has been updated?
c. Is there a need to update any of the DIFs?
d. Who is responsible for the update of each DIF?
Explain:
An update of the Public Facilities DiF (PFDIF) was approved in June 2000,
resulting in an increase from $2,150 to $2,618 per equivalent dwelling unit
(EDU). A major portion of the increase comes from the new police facility
component, which added $316 (exclusive of financing costs). However, the
largest single change in the fee was an overall increase in financing costs of
$528 per EDU. A breakdown of fee components is provided in Attachment 1.
A new PFDIF update is currently in progress to account for subsequent changes
in project cost estimates. The Office of Budget & Analysis is responsible for
updates to the PFDIF.
An update of the Transportation DIF was approved in October 2000, increasing
the fee from $5,920 to $6,065 per single-family detached dwelling unit (SFD).
Since the TransDIF requires annual updates, the next update is scheduled for
October 2001. An update to the Salt Creek Basin DIF is in progress and
expected to be completed in FY01. There is no current plan to update the Traffic
Signal, Telegraph Canyon Drainage, Telegraph Canyon Gravity Sewer,
Telegraph Canyon Pumped Sewer or Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin DIFs. Public
Works, Engineering is responsible for the above DIFs.
3. In reference to operations and capital improvements, is the City addressing the
impacts of growth?
Yes X No
Explain:
The City's capital improvement needs that are related to growth are analyzed and
determined when the various Development Impact Fees are created. A capital
improvement plan is devised in each DIF based on the capital improvement
projects needed to provide the infrastructure necessary to retain services/facilities
at the level set by the applicable threshold. The costs for the needed projects are
then determined and spread over the amount of planned development to set the
individual DIF fees.
A cJtywide Operations fiscal impact model is being developed as part of a
comprehensive fiscal analysis component of the General Plan. Also, the Fiscal
Impact of New Development (FIND) model is being updated to determine the
operating impacts to implement the first year of the Otay Ranch Property Tax
Agreement with the county.
With regard to capital expenditures, the updated Public Facilities DIF details the.
need for approximately $190 million in new capital. This includes such major
structures as libraries, fire stations, a new police facility, the new corporation yard,
etc. Most of the expenditure is the obligation of the PFDIF (the City has a cost
share on some joint-impetus projects and to correct past space deficiencies).
Although the PFDIF will be able to directly fund many projects, it will not have cash
balances to fund all projects when they are needed. As such, some major projects
will have to be financed. Plans have gone forward for the new corporation yard.
To date, $23,730,000 has been financed. Also, the completion of the new animal
shelter is expected in March/April 2001, and details on the new police facility will be
available in FY01.
As part of the PFDIF update, staff developed a preliminary cash flow model. That
preliminary model projected that fee revenue would be sufficient to pay off the vast
majodty of PFDIF debt obligations as well as cover the smaller City obligation
through build out. However, as the capital schedule becomes more definitive, the
cash flow model needs to be updated. Staff will need to pay particular attention to
changes in financing costs, changes in total project costs, as well as the potential
that development itself might be constrained by traffic capacity, which would
impact the flow of fee revenues.
In addition to Developer Impact Fees, staff is also in the process of updating the
city's Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees, which were last updated in
1991.
LAST YEAR'S GMOC RECOMMENDATIONS
~ 4. Has a standard procedure been adopted for an annual review of Development
Impact Fees (DIFs)
· Yes No Pending X
Explain:
It has been recommended that the PFDIF updates be prepared annually, with the
final report available in January of each year. However, the next update may be
delayed for the following reasons:
· Staff will develop and implement tracking systems to facilitate future
PFDIF updates in FY01. Development of these systems could delay
the next update by at least 6 months.
· Single projects, such as the proposed police facility, can have a
significant impact on fees. It is therefore desirable to postpone the next
update until more definitive cost projections are available. A preliminary
cost projection for the police facility is expected February 2001.
For the other DIFs, it is the standard practice during any review to revisit all
projections and assumptions given the fact that more current information is
available. Updates for these DIFs are driven by a recently completed 31-year
growth projection, which is divided into five-year increments.
MISCELLANEOUS
5. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No X
Explain:
6. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes No X
Explain:
7. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes No X
Explain:
Prepared by: Evelyn Ong
Title: Senior Accountant
Date: December 18, 2000
Attachment 1
Updated Public Facilities DIF, by DIF Component
Effective June 2000 ~
Updated Fees
Project Cost Adjustment: Adjustment: Updated
Component Old Fees' w/o Financing Interest
Fees
Financing Costs Earnings
1. Civic Center Expansion "~ $527 $333 $180 ($33) $480
2, Police Facility & Equipment $235 $551 $212 ($28) $735
3. Corporation Yard Relocation $515 $298 $136 ($48) $386 2
4. Libraries $544 $681 $0 ($43) $638
5. Fire Suppression System $141 $216 $0 ($13) $203
6. G/S $49 $16 $0 $0 $16
7. Computer Systems $23 $7 $0 $0 $7
8. Telecommunications $32 $13 $0 $0 $13
9. Records Management System $5 $6 $0 $0 $6
lO. Administration $79 $134 $0 $0 $134
TOTAL FEE : $2,150 $2,255 $528 ($165) $2,618
~ Chula Vista City Ordinance 2810, adopted June, 2000.
2 Includes financing costs for both the Corporation Yard (former SDG&E f~cility) and the
Animal Shelter.
ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT A
,~,
ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT A
~ ~= --
ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT A
ATTACHMENT A
~,, , ~ ~
o:~o ~ ='~ ~ z~< ~
ATTACHMENT A
~ -
o~0 ~
~ ~ ~x o ,
ATTACHMENT B
x'FmqCl'! AR TRTP c;,F\'FR ~TI~\' Ta_B~ ;' tO\'F.w~.Y TRIP.q)
, ~e T~::~: S.~.,_] F~s a:e ~e~ o~ ~: ~. *'-'-~'lon f~o.s' - - ~ ac;o:dan:~ w:~ S.~.G' 's ~riel' G~de c~[ J'c,h:c'::]:r -~ r~'~/'~c'
Gc'ner~:ion A::~.for 1he S~n ~ieEo Eegion con~L~d h*r~m. 7ne fee ~s calculated o~ S13.00 per mp ge~:~a~ed p~'r day.
- " - Tfi~ Gene~don ~er ~y) Factor
I ~d 1 ~se C~,~O~ ("T" = ~p~ "/" =
Wi~ food-m~ ............................................... 160 T~uel~g space
Wi~ food-m~ md car wmh .................................... 155 T~uel~g sp~ce
Older'sen.ic~ station desi~ 150 T~uel~g ~aqe
Aum~e ................................................... 900 T~ay or 600/acre
Self-sen': .................................................... 100
'&uto sales (d~!~ & repaff) ......................................... 50 TI1000 S.E. or 300/acre or 60/sen'ice
kuto r~aff cem~ ................................................. 20 T/1000 S.F. or 400/acre or 20/sen'ice s~
~S~v~gs ~ Lorn:
B~ (wa~-~ o~y) ........................................... 150 TI1000 S.F. or 1000fa~e
B~ (~4~ ~ve-up ~dow) ................................... 200 T/lO00 S.F. or 1500/a~e
................................................ 60 T/1000S.F. or
~ch or S~go~e .............................................. g T/1000 S.F. or 40/a~
Cn~ch school
................................................... (S~ '*Schools")
~o~;2i~ c~ (~so s~p co~rcial) ........................ ~0 TI1000 S.E. or 400/acre
Co~' ~opp~g c~nm; (30-60 acres, ]00K-300K S.Y.) ............ 70 TI1000 S~. or 700/acre
N~ighbo~noo~ ~o~g c~; (~10 a~s, ~100K S.F.) ............... 120 T/1000 S.F. or 1200/acr~
Co~:;r~ shops:
Conv:~n~ ~vk~t ....................................... 700 T/1000 S.E. or 700
D~2o~t :tub ............................................. 60 T/1000 S~. or 800/~
L~o~or~ ............................................. 30 T/1000 S.~. ~r 150/a~
H~dw~ or P~t stor* ..................................... 60 T/1000 S~. or 600/a~
C~n~ .................................... ........ ~0 7/1000 S.E. or 90/~
Ho~i~:
Gm~
..................................................... 20 T~d or 20/]000 S.F. or
................................................. ~ T:~d
~d~ 9~k ~o co~) .................................. ~ T/A~ o~
~:~]Y ........................................ 4 T/~000 S~. or ~0/~s
W~ho~ .............. . ................................... ~ Tll000 S~. or 60/a~
Mo~el
....................................................... 9 T~oom or
Reso~ ho~
.................................................. g T~om or 100/a~
~c~d~ ~ ......................................... ~0 T/~O00 ~. ~ ~O0~c
THRESHOLD STANDARD
Population ratio: 500 square feet (gross) of library facility adequately equipped and staffed
per 1,000 population.
~ 1. Please fill in the blanks on this table,
FY 1996-97 156,041 102,000 654 ....
624 ....
FY 1997-98 163,417 102,000
FY 1998-99 169,265 102,000 603
FY 1999-00 178,645' 102,000 1 571
t8 Month Projection
(12131/01) 188,700 102,000 ! 541
Year Projection
(2005) 208,100 152,000, 730
Buildout Projection
(SANDAG 2020) 275,455 152,000 552
*Planning Division Estimate (thru 6/30/00)
***5-year projections are based on SANDAG's 2020 Regional Growth Forecast (Series 9) residential development will
average 2,330 dwelling units per year and a population coefficient of 3.036 persons per household~
.... Based on 500 square foot unrevised Threshold Standard; pending formal City Council adoption.
*Assumes construction of a 60,000 square foot east side regional branch library and closure of the 10,000
square foot EastLake Library. This branch library will be a joint use project with the Sweetwater Union High
School District on the Otay Ranch high school site. The 1998 Library Master Plan will need to be revised to
reflect this change to one 60,000 square foot library from two 30,000 square foot libraries on the eastside.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the following:
2. Are libraries "adequately equipped"?
Yes x No
Explain:
a. Have resources been provided to improve the library technology
infrastructure for the Civic Center, South Chula Vista, and EastLake Libraries?
On December 7, 1999, the City Council approved an agreement with Innovative
Interfaces to replace the Library's Inlex system with a fully integrated-online-library-
system (IOLS). The new system, which came on line on October 31,2000, is Web
based and allows the Library to offer its catalog and subscribed database to Library
cardholders at home and at the office.
,As part of that implementation, the technology infrastructure at all three-branch
libraries has been brought up to the current "state of the art." This includes
increasing the number of public computer workstations and PCs at the branches,
increasing the memory on all computers in the Circulation area for checkout of
materials, and designing and setting up a networked printing solution for the public
that uses system-wide software, barcode readers, and debit cards.
The Library also successfully applied for a Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation grant,
-* which was included in the 2000-01 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget, and
which has allowed us to purchase and install 12 new public access workstations
(with servers and printers) at the three branches, and 11 additional PCs which are
- being used as in a computer-training lab at the Civic Center branch.
b. Have resources been identified to upgrade the Libraries rlintegrated local
-~ computer system[] (inlex)?
Yes, the upgrade of the integrated system described above is budgeted in the City's
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget, and has occurred as described above.
c. Have adequate resources been allocated to bring the materials collection ratio
up from 2.8 items per person to 3.0 items per person?
~ The General Fund 1999-00 Library budget includes $551,737 for the purchase of
library materials, which includes books, periodicals, reference materials, online
databases, and audiovisual items, such as videos and CDs. The materials budget
was increased, for South Chula Vista Library, by $250,000 over the previous year,
with $178,000 in General Fund monies and $71,320 in Public Library Funds from
the California State Library. The materials collection for 99-00 was: 467,132 books,
9,218 microfilm items, 4,213 microforms, 21,487 audio materials, 16,939 video
materials, 898 periodical titles, and 667 CD-ROM data disks. This total of 520,554
materials equates to a materials collection ratio of 2.91.
The Library has also endeavored to build our collections through other means:
· We are continuing our fundraising campaign to build our endowment fund at the
-" San Diego Foundation. In 1999-00, we deposited $25,948, bringing our total to
$107,200, as of September 2000. Once the fund reaches our immediate goal of
$250,000, the Library will use the annual interest to purchase books it could not
~- otherwise afford.
· The Library's fundraising campaign also encourages donations for the
immediate purchase of books. In 1999-00, $4,140 of these donations was
~ received.
· Donors giving at least $250 to the Library are now recognized on beautiful
plaques mounted at both Civic Center and South Chula Vista Libraries. Donors
_ also receive the Library's new quarterly newsletter, "Collections".
· In the 2000-01 Library budget, $20,000 was allocated for the hiring of a
resource development consultant to assist the Library with its fundraising efforts.
The consultant's scope of work includes conducting three direct mail
fundraising campaigns, identifying and contacting three prospective major gift
donors to help secure gifts of $5,000 or more, and perform a general evaluation
of the Library's current fundraising efforts and provide recommendations as to
what the Library could do to improve its methods, donor base, and the amount
of funds raised.
· The Library also maintains a close relationship with the Friends of the Chula
~' Vista Library, whose chapters contributed $5,200 for the summer reading
program in 1999-00, thus defraying costs for the Library and allowing for the
purchase of more materials from the operating budget.
3. Are libraries "adequately staffed"?
- Yes x No
Explain:
a. Have staffing levels been increased for the South Chula Vista Library?
The staffing levels have remained the same for 1999-00, and we consider South
- - Chula Vista Library to be fully and adequately staffed for providing library service.
GROWTH IMPACTS
4. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes No x
Explain:
During this reporting period, growth has not negatively affected the ability of the Library to
maintain service levels. In fact, during 1999-00, library attendance increased 19%, In-
Library use of materials increased 66%, and program attendance increased 16%. This
increase in usage has been achieved by maximizing and redirecting resources and
providing better uses of technology.
5. Are current facilities able to serve forecasted growth for both the 18-month and 5
~ year time frame?
Yes x No x .
Explain:
-- No, the current library facilities (Civic Center, South Chula Vista, and Eastlake) totaling
102,000 square feet will not meet the new threshold of 600 square feet of library per 1000
population within the 12 to 18 month time frame.
Yes, with the construction of the proposed new library facility in Otay Ranch, totaling 60,000
square feet (if approved for State Grant funding coupled with Public Facilities DIF funding),
and the closing of the 10,000 square foot Eastlake branch, the new threshold will be
exceeded within the five to seven year time frame.
No, at build out, the threshold will be less than 600 square feet per 1000 population.
6. Will new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth?
Yes x No
Explain:
In order to accommodate forecasted growth, the 1998 Library Master Plan calls for the
construction of a full service regional library of approximately 30,000 square feet in the
Rancho del Rey area at the corner of Paseo Ranchero and East H Street by 2005, and the
~- construction of a second full service regional library of the same size in the Eastern Urban
Center in Otay Ranch. However, during the review of the 2000-01 budget, the City Council
gave direction to staff to consider an alternative, whereby one 60,000 square foot full
-~' service regional library would be built, as a joint project with the Sweetwater Union High
School District at the proposed Otay Ranch high school. The City is pursuing this idea of a
single, joint use facility because:
_7 · It is good public policy to provide cooperative services to benefit the public
· It is less costly to build a single facility rather than two facilities
· It is less costly to operate a single facility, especially in the areas of utility costs,
--- materials purchases, and staffing
· The site is in a good location to serve the needs of the public in the eastern
area.
a. Are there sites available for the needed facilities?
The City owns the property for the library proposed at East H Street and Paseo
__ Ranchero. A site for the other branch library has not been selected. The proposed
alternative site in Otay Ranch is currently owned by the school district, and would
have to be acquired by the City.
b, How will these facilities be funded?
Under either scenario, the costs are to be funded by the Public Facilities
. Development Impact Fee. The 60,000 square foot branch is estimated to cost over
$22 million.
The City will be applying for construction funds from the California State Library
under the Proposition 14 Bond Act, the Califomia Reading and Library Improvement
and Public Library Construction Bond Act, which was passed by voters in March
2000. The Bond Act could reimburse 65% of eligible costs for a new building, if
approved through a very competitive process. The South Chula Vista Library was
built under the auspices of a similar competitive process under the 1988 Library
Bond Act. If the City is unsuccessful in securing Bond Act funding, construction of
the 60,000 square foot library may be delayed for several years.
c, Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
Yes, as indicated above in Question 6b.
7. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting the provision of library services?
Yes x No
Explain:
The growth in population means that new elementary and secondary schools will be built in
the near future. Considering the general state of school libraries, there will be a continued
and growing number of students forced to turn to the Chula vista Public Library for all of
their book related needs.
MAINTENANCE/UPGRADE OF EQUIPMENT & COLLECTIONS
8. Has adequate funding been identified and/or secured for necessary maintenance
and/or upgrade of equipment and collections?
Yes x No
Explain:
As discussed above, funding has been secured for the upgrade of the Library's automation
system, which was upgraded starting on October 31, 2000. The Department is also
working with the Management and Information Systems (MIS) Department, which has
-- established a Technology Replacement Fund, on upgrades of computers to meet future
technology needs.
Also previously discussed are the Library's efforts to secure necessary funding to continue
the development of the materials collections. These efforts include fundraising and grant
development.
a. Are there any major maintenance/upgrades to be undertaken over the 1-year
and 5-year time frames?
Yes x No
Explain:
The Library is pursuing funding through the Capital Improvement Project budget to fund
interior renovation of the Civic Center Library, including replacement of the carpeting, chairs
and sofas, and banners, repainting, and upgrading of the staff work areas in Circulation,
Information and Reader Services, and Technical Services whose layouts and furnishings
reflect programs from the 1970s. The 25t~ anniversary of the opening of the Civic Center
Library will be on July 4, 2001.
The questions below are follow-ups to the GMOC's recommendations from last year.
.._ 10. Have Library staff prepared the proposed Library Threshold Standard Amendment
for Council adoption?
Yes No x
Explain:
The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee update, adopted by Council in April 2000,
reflects the change from 500 square feet of library space per 1,000 population to 600 square feet of
library space per 1,000 population. However, the threshold standard amendment has not yet been
prepared. Staff is working with the City Attorney's office to bring forward this item to Council.
11. Has the Library Department hired a consultant to begin the Rancho Del Rey Library
building Program?
Yes No x
- Explain:
As previously discussed in question 6, staff is working on a proposed 60,000 square foot
facility as a joint use project on the planned Otay Ranch high school site. Staff is in the
process of hiring a consulting librarian to begin the library programming process and hiring
the project manager and architect through the City's Construction Manager Constructor
(CMC) process which allows the City to hire a firm to act as the City's agent and
- subcontract out the work necessary to design the project.
12. Has the Library Department explored the need for increased staffing hours at the
- South Chula Vista Public Library?
Yes No
Explain:
This is a policy matter at the level of the City Manager and City Council.
MISCELLANEOUS
13. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes No x
Explain:
14. Do you have any other relevant information the department desires to communicate
to the GMOC?
Yes x No
Explain:
County Supervisor Greg Cox has asked the City to provide City-owned land, specifically a
portion of the vacant property adjacent to the Chula Vista golf course, for the replacement of the
County's Bonita Library. The new County library is proposed to be 8,000 square feet with another
2,000 square feet for a community meeting room. Staff has not fully analyzed the impacts of this
proposal on the City Library, but expects to have an analysis completed by this spring.
Prepared by: Shauna Stokes, David Palmer, Paula Brown
Title: Administrative Services Manager, Deputy City Manager, Assistant Library Director
Date: January 12, 2001
THRESHOLD STANDARD:
1. Storm water flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
2. The GMOC shall annually review the performance of the City's storm drain system to
determine its ability to meet the goals and objectives above.
Please provide brief narrative responses to the fo/lowing:
1. Have storm water flows or volumes exceeded City Engineering Standards at any time
during this reporting period?
Yes No X
If yes:
a. Where did this occur?
b. Why did it occur?
c. What has been, or is being done to correct the situation?
GROWTH IMPACTS
2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes No X
3. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 18 month and 5
year time frame?
Yes X No
Explain: Current facilities are adequate for projected growth within the next 12 to 18
months. New facilities within the Telegraph Canyon basin should be completed
within the next 5 to 7 years. Facilities in all other basins are adequate for the $ to 7
years time frame.
4. Will any new facilities be required to accommodate this forecasted growth?
Yes X No
If yes:
a. Are there sites available for the needed facilities? Yes
b. How will these facilities be funded? Through developer exaction and/or
Development Impact Fee.
c. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
Yes
5. Are there, or do you foresee any growth related issues affecting the maintenance of
the current level of service as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes X No
Explain: Policies imposed by the environmental agencies regulating wetlands have
dramatically impacted the overall cost of maintaining the major storm drain facilities.
Drainage channels and detention basins tend to become environmentally sensitive,
and require mitigation in order to clean and maintain. Natural channels are also
difficult to maintain and/or meet all the regulatory agencies requirements. New
drainage facilities are now being built with the environmental issues in mind. A long-
term maintenance plan and the establishment of a funding mechanism have been
established, such as Home Owner Association contribution and Community Facility
Districts.
PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATION
6. Has the Public Works Department initiated a master maintenance agreement with
environmental agencies?
Yes X No
Explain: The list of drainage facilities that needs to be maintained, as part of the
Master Maintenance Agreement with the environmental agencies, has been
developed and forwarded to the Planning Department for their review and process.
The Planning Department is currently working on the next phase of the Master
Maintenance Agreement.
7. Has the Drainage Master Facilities Plan Study, that will identify high priority drainage
projects and applicable federal funding, been initiated?
Yes X No
Explain: A CIP project has been initiated for a consultant to be hired in FY 01-02 to
develop a Master Drainage Facilities Plan to identify the City's needs for drainage
improvements. This project is expected to be completed by mid year of 2003.
MAINTENANCE
8. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes No X
Explain: Maintenance of drainage facilities is generally supported from the General
Fund and to a lesser extent by Gas Tax and Storm Drain Fee funds. As a result of the
El Nino storms of t998, we became aware of a pressing need to rehabilitate the old
metal drainage pipes. The need was underscored by the "Malta Sinkhole" incident.
We think that this rehabilitation effort will use up most of the revenue from said
funds fora five to ten year period. We have a new short-term funding source "Traffic
Relief Congestion" (AB2928) for the next six years of approximately $1.8 million.
This funding source is restricted since it can only be used for projects that do not
increase traffic capacity, in addition, projects must be located entirely within public
right-of-way and used for street and highway, pavement maintenance, rehabilitation
and reconstruction of necessary associated facilities such as drainage and traffic
control devices. City staff will be requesting during the next Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) budgeting cycle that some of these funds be used for drainage
improvements such as corrugated metal pipe rehabilitation/removal in streets.
9. Are there any major maintenance projects to be undertaken pursuant to the current
l-year and 5-year CIP? If yes, Please provide a list of projects in order of
importance.
Yes X No
Explain: The following drainage maintenance projects are in the current five-year
CIP program.
1. Long Canyon Dam, riprap repairs.
2. Storm Drain Lining - Fifth Avenue from Westby Street to Telegraph
Canyon Channel.
3. Corrugated Metal Pipe storm drain replacement program (Citywide)
MISCELLANEOUS
10. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No X
Explain: No changes are needed at this time.
11. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes No X
Explain:
t 2. Do you have any other relevant information the Department desires to communicate
to the GMOC.
Yes No X
Explain:
Prepared by: Muna Cuthbert
Title: Civil Engineer
Date: 12/20/00
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
2000
The following are Capital Improvements Projects completed between 7/1/1999 and 6/30/2000:
PROJECT NO. DESCRIPTION
1. DR-118 Telegraph Canyon Channel Improvements
2. DR-150 Storm Drain Installation at 632 Broadway
3. DR-142 Bonita Long Canyon Detention Basin - Silt
Removal.
H:\HOME\ENGINEER~DVPLAN\DRCOMP00.DOC
THRESHOLD:
1. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego Metropolitan Sewer Authority with a 12
to 18 month development forecast and request confirmation that the projection is
within the City's purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their ability to
accommodate the forecast and continuing growth, or the City Public Works
Department staff shall gather the necessary data. The information provided to the
GMOC shall include the following:
a. Amount of current capacity now used or committed.
b. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecasted growth.
c. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
d. Other relevant information.
The growth forecast and Authority response letters shall be provided to the GMOC
for inclusion in its review.
1. Please fill in the blanks on this table.
Average
Flow (MGD) 11.63t tl.820 12.918 14.262 15.017 t6.711 22.120
Capacity 19.34 19.843' 19.843 19.843 19.843 20.784** 20.784
*' ....... in capacity was based on the new agreement with the City of San Diego.
** Increase in capacity is based on the allocation of additional capacity rights resulting from the construction of the new Southbay
Treatment Plant
P/ease provide brief narrative responses to the fo/lowing:
2. Have sewage flows or volumes exceeded City Engineering Standards at any time
during this reporting period?
Yes X No
If yes:
a. Where did this occur? At manhole #49 located on Telegraph Canyon Road
b. Why did it occur? The threshold was exceeded due to the volume of flow in the
system and the geometrics of the sewer line. Studies indicate that the high
readings obtained could have been as a result of a hydraulic jump occurring in
the pipe just before the manhole location.
c. What has been, or will be done to correct the situation? There is an
approved and budgeted project (SW224) to build parallel sewer lines as a
means of increasing the capacity within the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer Line.
The design of these improvements is scheduled to begin in January 2001 and
completed by May 2001. Construction of the proposed improvements will begin
shodly afterwards in July 2001 and completed by November 2001.
GROWTH IMPACTS
3. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes No X .
Explain: Service levels were maintained during the repoding period despite the
increased pace in development in the eastern podion of the City.
4. Are current facilities able to absorb forecasted growth for both the 18 month and 5
year time frame?
Yes No X
Explain: Current sewerage facilities should be able to handle anticipated growth
during the 12 to 18 month period. However, due to the continued growth in development
expected to occur in the eastern portion of the City in the next 5 years Isuch as the Otay
Ranch Developments, the EastLake Developments and Rolling Hills Ranch), it is anticipated
that several major trunk sewer lines will either be constructed or upgraded during that time
period.
5. What new facilities have been constructed to accommodate the forecasted growth?
Explain: Portions of the Poggi Canyon and Salt Creek Trunk Sewers have already been
constructed by various developers during the construction of required improvements.
a. How have these facilities been funded?
The construction of these portions of these facilities was funded through Development
Impact Fees established for the construction af the sewer facilities within the Poggi Canyon
and Salt Creek Basins.
6. What facilities are needed to accommodate the forecasted growth?
The following new facilities or upgrades to existing facilities may be required within the next 5
fo 7 year time frame:
i. Upgrades to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer (estimated at $1.35 Million} current
construction schedule July 2001 - November 2001.
ii. Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor - downstream portion (Reach 9) - (Estimated at
- $7 Million) current construction schedule June 2001 - March 2002.
iii. Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor - upstream portion (Reaches 2 - 8) - (Estimated
at $9 Million) current construction schedule March 2002 - April 2003.
- iv. The Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer (Total Estimated Cost $6.133 Million)- Currently the
Project is approximately 50% complete. Estimated completion date is March 2002.
a, How will these facilities be funded?
Explain: These projects will be primarily funded through Development Impact Fees
paid by developers at the time building permits are issued. However, the downstream
podion of the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor will be funded utilizing the Trunk Sewer
Capital Reserve funds, which is derived from the one-time payment of the sewer capacity
charge paid for each new connection to the City's sewer system.
7. Has the City reached an agreement with the City of San Diego regarding the
provision of adequate treatment capacity to meet the buildout needs of the City's
-- General Plan?
Yes __ No X
Explain: In 1998, the City signed a wastewater disposal agreement with the City of San
Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department and other participating agencies (Metro). This
agreement granted the City of Chula Vista 19.843 Million Gallons Per Day (mgd) of sewage
capacity rights within the Metro system, and lasts till 2050. At the time the agreement was
signed, this allocation seemed adequate to meet the City's buildout needs. However,
recent data indicates that the City's overall sewer capacity needs at buildout will be
approximately 22.120 mgd. Recently, there was an action taken by metro to allocate
additional capacity rights to padicipating agencies. The City of Chula Vista's share of this
additional allocation amounts to 0.941 mgd. However, the allocation process has not yet
been finalized. To address this issue, the City is in the process of notifying Metro of our
additional capacity needs and through the allocation process we anticipate that we will
ultimately acquire capacity rights to meet the City's buildout needs.
PREVIOUS GMOC RECOMMENDATION
_ 8. Will the Salt Creek Interceptor Sewer be completed by the end of 2001 ?
Yes No X
Explain: The Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor is currently in the final design stages.
Initially, the preliminary project schedule anticipated that the construction of the trunk sewer
line would be completed by the end of 2001. However, as the project progressed, the
environmental and biological studies indicated that the project might have some impacts
deemed as significant by the environmental regulating agencies. This determination led to
the revision of the level of environmental document processing that was planned for the
proiect. The project is currently undergoing a proiect level detail environmental impact
review process. Upon approval of the environmental impact report and obtaining the
required permits from the agencies, we anticipate that construction will begin in June 2001
and the first phase of the project will be completed by March 2002. The second (last) phase
of the project will be completed by April 2003.
MAINTENANCE
9. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes X No
Explain: The City allocates approximately $300,000 each year for the repair and/or
reconstruction of sewer mains at various locations as part of the Sewer Rehabilitation Program. This
program is funded through a charge of $0.70 per month per single family, which is billed as part of
the sewer service charges. The remainder of operation and maintenance costs, including salaries
and equipment costs, are paid from the sewer service charges assessed to residents or property
owners connected to the sewer system.
10. Am them any major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to the
current l-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes X No
Explain: The Sewer Rehabilitation Program mentioned above is an annual program
included in the current CIP.
MISCELLANEOUS
11. Does the current Sewer Threshold Standard need any modification?
Yes No X
Explain: The City is in compliance with the current Sewer Threshold Standard for our
current and future needs. However, the current standard will be reviewed this year as a
result of recent developments resulting from the issuance of the new National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES} Permit and its accompanying requirements. There is a
possibility that this new permit may necessitate revisions to our current standards.
. 12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes No X
Explain: We hove no suggestions at this time.
13. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the GMOC?
Yes No X .
Explain: All pedinent issues have been addressed above.
Prepared by: Anthony Chukwudolue
Title: Civil Engineer
Date: 12/13/2000
Chapter :3.18
SEWERAGE FACILITIF~ REPLACEMENT FUND
Sections:
3.18.010 Esvablished-Disposition of Revanue-F. xpe. nditures Permitted.
3.18.010 Es~abll.shed-Disposition of revenue-l~- .~emdit~u-es permitted.
A. There is established a fund to be designated as the "Sewerage Facilities Replacement Fund."
B. From the revenue derived from the monthly sewer service charge set forrh in Chapter 13.20 the
following amounts shall be deposited into such sewerage facilities replacement fund:
1. Domestic: For each single family dwelling unit serviced by a separate water meter seventy cents
- ($0.70) per month.
2. Domestic: For other parcels of real property used for domestic purposes and serviced by a water
~ meter an amount calculated at the rate of $0.06 per each one hundred cubic feet of water usage
by such parcel, but in no case less than seventy cents ($0.70) per month, nor more than seventy
cents per dwelling unit per month.
· 3. Commercial and industrial: For premises used for other than domestic purposes an amount
calculated at the rare of $0.06 per each one hundred cubic feet of water usage by such premises
but in no case less than seventy cents ($0.70) per month.
C. Nothing herein shall be construed as superseding or conflicting with the existing sewer fund, sewer
service revenue fund, or the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund.
D. The fund shall be used solely for the purpose of paying the cost of refurbishment and/or replacement
in connection with the CIP Program and with Gouncil approval of structurally deficient sewerage
facilities including related evaluation, engineering, and utility modification costs unless the City
Council shall by four-£ffths vote approptiate such funds for another purpose provided such purpose
shall be for the construction, maintenance or operation of sewers or incidental thereto, including any
charge for its collection.
(Ord. 2212 §1, 1987).
219 (R 11/91)
THRESHOLD
1. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the
Water District for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water Authority, the
Sweetwater Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water District with a 12 to 18 month
development forecast and request an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the
forecast and continuing growth. The District's replies should address the following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering both short and
long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now used or
committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
e. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City
and GMOC.
1. Please fill in the tables below.
Imported 1770 21.1 5045/8'7 0
i'otal 8391 loo 9238 1100 100 100
Notes: 1) Use of local vs. Imported water sources is highly dependent on weather conditions and
therefore unpredictable.
2) Table values are for portion of Chula Vista served by Sweetwater Authority only.
8234
42
16,712 16,712
Notes: 1)Maximum supply capacity is from Pipeline 4 aqueduct (40mgd), wells (2mgd). Additional 30 mgd capacity is
available from treatment plant.
Please provide brief responses to the following questions.
GROWTH IMPACTS
2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the ability to maintain
service levels?
Yes. No X
Explain: No significant growth.
3. Do current facilities have the ability to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18
month time frame?
Yes X No
Explain: No significant growth forecasted.
4. Will any new facilities will be required to accommodate the forecast growth for the
12-18 month time frame? Yes No__x ;
for the 5-7 year time frame? Yes No x
Explain:
a. Type of facility.
b. Location of facility.
c. Projected production, in gallons,
d. Projected operational date.
e. Are sites available for these facilities?
f. How will these facilities be funded?
g. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
5. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current level
of service as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes No x
Explain:
MAINTENANCE
6. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes x No
Explain:
7. Are there any new major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to
the current l-year and 5-year CIP?
Yes x No
Explain: Sweetwater Authority has a metallic and master plan main replacement
program that addresses required infrastructure maintenance and required upgrades.
8. Does the District have any plans to produce or distribute reclaimed water?
Yes No x
Explain:
MISCELLANEOUS
9. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No x
Explain:
10. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes No
Explain: If zoning changes from SFR to MFR in the older part of Chula Vista are in
the horizon, consider the required upgrade of existing infrastructure to meet fire flow and
domestic demands.
11. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and the
GMOC?
Yes No X
Explain:
Prepared by: __Hector Martinez
Title: __Principal Engineer
Date: __1216100
THRESHOLD
1. Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the
Water District for each project.
2. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water Authority, the
Sweetwater Authority, and the Otay Municipal Water District with a 12 to 18 month
development forecast and request an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the
forecast and continuing growth. The District's replies should address the following:
a. Water availability to the City and Planning Area, considering both short and
long term perspectives.
b. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now used or
committed.
c. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth.
d. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities.
e. Other relevant information the District(s) desire to communicate to the City
and GMOC.
1. Please fill in the tables below.
96% 96W
Helix WDI 0 I°°/° I 0 0% 0% 0%
.wcw. 3% 313 40/o 4% 40/o
Total (MG) I 10,047 I I 9,725
136.~8
Supply Flow 1.3 1.3 1.3 7.3 7.3
Please provide b#ef responses to the following questions.
GROWTH IMPACTS
2. Has growth during the reporting period negatively affected the current ability to
maintain service levels?
Yes No X
Explain:
Otay Water District (OWD) has anticipated growth, effectively managed the addition of
new facilities, and does not foresee any negative impacts to current service levels. This
is due to the extensive planning OWD has done over the past several years including
the development of a Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP).
The process of planning followed by the OWD is to use WRMP as a guide and to revisit
each year the best alternatives for providing a reliable water supply.
The OWD Board of Directors has adopted the WRMP that uses population growth
projections from SANDAG's Series 8 Regional Growth Forecast, Water and Sewer
Agencies and input from the City of Chula Vista and developers. It incorporates the
concepts of water storage and supply from neighboring water agencies to meet operational
and emergency water supply. OWD works closely with City of Chula Vista staff to insure
the WRMP remains current and incorporates changes in development activities such as the
Otay Ranch.
3. Do current facilities have the ability to absorb forecasted growth for both the 12 to 18
month time frames?
Yes X No
Explain:
The short term and long term water supply is expected to meet the projected water
demand in Chula Vista without any restrictions for the following reasons.
Many reservoirs, both statewide and local reservoirs, are expected to be at near normal
levels. Therefore, the water outlook for the next 12-18 months is that there will be no
restriction on the water supply.
The long-range prognosis is also very favorable in that the Metropolitan Water District
(MWD) adopted and has proceeded to implement an Integrated Resources Plan (IRP),
which includes six implementation policies. These policies are as follows:
· Reliability: Agencies will have full capability to meet full service demands at retail
levels at all times.
· Balance: Maintaining a resource mix, which balances investments and additional
improved imported supply capability in local resource development and
conservation.
- · Competitiveness: Provide affordable water service and maintain competitiveness by
assuring that the effective rate for MWD will be less than $500 per acre-foot in the
year 2005.
· Eastside Reservoir: Commitment to complete the 800,000 acre-feet Eastside
Reservoir Project with water deliveries to storage commencing in the year 2000.
· Colorado River Aqueduct: Assure that the Colorado River Aqueduct will be operated
at capacity for the benefit of all member agencies.
· Adaptability: Resource development and financial strategy to provide acceptable
water quality and financial security.
In addition, the OWD is actively developing local water through the sharing of
treatment plant and storage capacity with other local agencies such as Sweetwater
Authority, Helix Water District, and the City of San Diego.
MWD, SDCWA, and OWD are addressing the availability of water in an emergency.
OWD's need for a ten-day water supply during a SDCWA shutdown has been fully
addressed in OWD's Water Resources Master Plan. The OWD is currently able to meet
this requirement through its own storage and existing interconnections with other
agencies. MWD, SDCWA, and OWD all have programs to continue to meet or exceed
the emergency water needs of the region into the foreseeable future. The OWD
executed a 50-year renewable agreement with the City of San Diego to provide 10 MGD
of immediate capacity and an additional 10 MGD capacity in the future from the Lower
Otay Reservoir Water Treatment Plant.
The OWD, in concert with the City of Chula Vista, continues to expand the use of
recycled water. Chula Vista and OWD are both evaluating opportunities to create more
recycled water and the City of San Diego has begun construction of its South Bay
Treatment Plant planned for completion in the year 2001. Recycled water from this
facility will be available for distribution by OWD.
The District continues to encourage water conservation through a school education
program and penalties on excessive use of water for irrigation. The education program
includes school site garden grants, treatment plant tours, and classroom programs for
elementary schools, as well as science fair participation for elementary and junior high
school levels. There is water quality testing certification availability for the senior high
levels and a video lending library for all school grade levels. The school community has
enthusiastically received the OWD school education program and twelve schools in
Chula Vista are currently participating.
Will any new facilities be required to accommodate the forecast growth for the 12-18
month time frame? Yes X No ; forthe5-7yeartimeframe?
Yes X No
Explain:
a. Type of facility.
b. Location of facility.
c. Projected production, in gallons.
d. Projected operational date.
e. Are sites available for these facilities?
f. How will these facilities be funded?
g. Is an appropriate/adequate mechanism(s) in place to provide this funding?
The OWD WRMP defines and describes the new water facilities that are required to
accommodate the forecasted growth within the OWD. As major development plans are
formulated and proceed through the City of Chula Vista approval process, OWD requires
the developer to prepare a Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP) for the specific development
project. This SAMP is a document, which defines and describes all the water and recycled
water system facilities to be constructed to provide an acceptable and adequate level of
service to the proposed land uses. The SAMP also defines the financial responsibility of
the facilities required for service. Those facilities identified as OWD Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) projects are funded by the OWD through collection of water meter capacity
fees established to fund the WRMP facilities. The developer for service to their project
funds all other required water facilities. Examples of this process are the planned Otay
Ranch SPA One, Eastlake Trials, Salt Creek Ranch, and Sunbow II development projects.
The SAMP establishes typical major water transmission main facilities generally aligned
within the roadway alignments of the developments.
Significant facilities include the following:
- · The 16.0 MG 711 Reservoir project to be located within the OWD Use Area prop-
erty. The reservoir is planned to be in operation within 8 months. The developers
entered into an agreement with OWD that insures a water meter capacity fee
income stream to construct the needed reservoir.
· The Central Area/Otay Mesa Inter-tie System located primarily in the San Diego
County Water Authodty's right-of-way. This major capital investment is currently
completing construction. It will allow for water delivery from the Lower Otay Water
Treatment Plant into OWD's Central Area/Otay Mesa Systems. This system has
been in operation since mid 2000 and has been funded by water meter capacity
fees.
· The Telegraph Canyon Road Pipeline located in Telegraph Canyon Road. This is a
major backbone recycled water pipeline that begun construction in eady 2000. This
pipeline will bring recycled water to the communities of Rancho Del Rey, Sunbow II,
and Otay Ranch, which have recycled water distribution systems temporarily being
fed from the potable system until this pipeline is completed. Funding is from
recycled water meter capacity fees.
5. Are there any other growth-related issues affecting maintenance of the current level
of service as Chula Vista's population increases?
Yes X No
-~ Explain:
Two potential areas that could affect growth are the Arizona Water Banking and the
Bay-Delta. The State of Arizona has implemented a Water Bank to store much of their
unused allotment (260,000 acre-feet) of Colorado River water in aquifers. This action
limits California utilizing Arizona's unused allotment and MWD will have to find
alternative sources. The MWD believes that Arizona's Water Bank will not have an
immediate impact on Californians for at least two or three years.
The Bay-Delta issue on the other hand is headed towards a solution. California and
federal cooperation has formalized a CalFed Bay-Delta Program with signing of a
Framework Agreement. The Framework Agreement projected that the state and federal
Agencies would work together in the following areas of Bay-Delta Estuary Management:
· Water quality standards formulation,
· Coordination of State Water Project and Central Valley Project operations with
regulatory requirements, and
· Long-term solutions to problems in the Bay-Delta Estuary.
State - federal process is to develop long-term solutions to problems in the Bay-Delta
Estuary related to fish and wildlife, water supply reliability, natural disasters, and water
supply. The intent is to develop a comprehensive and balanced plan, which addresses
all of the resource problems.
A positive component is the recent agreement between Imperial Irrigation District (liD)
and SDCWA to provide 200,000 AF/year at 20,000 AF/year increments over ten years
to San Diego County. This agreement assures San Diego a reliable water supply.
MAINTENANCE
6. Is adequate funding secured and/or identified for maintenance of existing facilities?
Yes X No
Explain:
The OWD has an established renewal and replacement fund within the Operating Budget.
There is adequate funding secured and identified for maintenance of existing facilities.
7. Are there any new major maintenance/upgrade projects to be undertaken pursuant to
the current l-year and 5-year ClP?
Yes X No
Explain:
The following list is the major maintenance/upgrade CIP projects within the current 5-
year CIP:
ClP Number Title
038 PL- I.D. 3 Upgrade/Replacements 12-inch
043 Cathodic Protection Program (Annual)
059 Jamacha Road Flume Connection with Helix Water
District
072 PL - Dictionary Hill Improvements
077 Reservoir Interior & Exterior Painting Program
(Annual)
083 PS -~ Roll Pump Stations Replacement
098 Res. - I.D. 1 (1004-2) 1.5 MG & Disinfect ion Facility
101 Service Replacement Program (Annual)
102 Valve Replacement Program (Annual)
149 Res. - Patzig Lining and Covedng
172 PS - 9-3 Rehabilitation
226 PS - Buena Vista Upgrades
W270 District Facilities Pavement Program (Annual)
RECYCLED WATER
8. Please update/fill in the table below.
RECYCLED WATER DEMAND PER FISCAL YEAR (million gallons (MG))
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
TOTAL 298 290 252 299 415
USES
Irrigation 298 290 252 299 415
Industry
Recharge
9. Please give a brief description of the impact the below items have on the District's
current efforts to market recycled water.
a Water quality
b. Price of water
c. Willing customers
d. Distribution lines
e. Other
Explain:
The total dissolved salt content of the water supply, typically ranging between 900 and
1,000 TDS of the water supply, is the primary factor potentially impacting the cost of
recycled water production to meet regulatory requirements on limitations of salt loading
within reuse areas. Currently, salination levels are well below regulatory levels and do
not impact water quality requirements, nor increase the cost for the production of salt
removal. The landscape planting materials, however, need to be selected such that
these are highly sensitivity to salt levels are not integrated into the landscape planting
scheme.
The OWD currently markets recycled water at 85% of the potable water rate. This
pricing level has increased user willingness and acceptance of the OWD mandatory
recycled water use ordinance. Customer acceptance of recycled water overall has been
positive. When resistance is encountered it is typically due to concerns of increased
capital cost to install the necessary distribution pipelines to the reuse areas. The
transmission mains, storage and.pumping capital facilities are funded by the OWD
through collection of the water meter capacity fees.
LAST YEARS GMOC RECOMMENDATION
10. What is the status and results from the bi-monthly meetings between OWD staff and
city of Chula Vista Engineering Division regarding the resolution of water supply
problems stemming from the relationship between Olympic Parkway construction
phasing and construction phasing of OWD water lines?
Explain:
The Otay Water District facilitated several meetings with the developing communities, these
meetings led to an agreement between the EastLake development and the Otay Water
District, which allows the developer to integrate the Olympic Parkway construction phasing
with the OWD water lines construction phasing, allowing growth south of Olympic Parkway.
The schedule of this construction will be timed with the City of Chula Vista requirements.
MISCELLANEOUS
tt. Does the current threshold standard need any modification?
Yes No X
Explain:
The current threshold standard addresses all the significant aspects of water service and
the capability to accommodate the continuing growth of the City of Chula Vista.
12. Are there any suggestions that you would like the Growth Management Oversight
Commission to recommend to the City Council?
Yes X No
Explain:
That the City of Chula Vista continues to support and encourage the use of recycled
water. Also, to encourage the joint use of City and OWD facilities for mutual benefit.
OWD would like to thank the Commission for encouraging the City of San Diego
Wastewater Department to expand the South Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant to 15 MGD.
This decision by the City of San Diego will benefit the South Bay Region's growing demand
for recycled water.
13. Do you have any other relevant information to communicate to the City and the
GMOC?
Yes X No
Explain:
Recycled Water
On the recycled waterfront, OWD continues to actively pursue the development of
recycled water facilities within new development projects, and continued support of the
City of San Diego's South Bay Water Reclamation Plant. The current projected date for
implementation of this plant is by the end of year 2001. The City of San Diego has
identified OWD as a potential market for recycled water from the South Bay Plant.
OWD has expressed our interest in receiving recycled water from this plant and related
joint use of storage and pipeline facilities that could benefit the City and OWD. With the
South Bay Business Plan complete, OWD and the City are negotiating an agreement to
receive the recycled water.
Support of several projects that OWD is currently designing and that will soon start
construction on that will increase the use of recycled water is recommended. These
include a pipeline in Telegraph Canyon Road that will allow for the extension of several
pipelines to open up new areas for use of recycled water. The construction of the 680
Reservoir and pump station underground in an Eastlake community park. Also, the
construction of major pipelines in Olympic Parkway.
OWD is also supportive of any efforts the City of Chula Vista makes to bdng large
pharmaceutical firms into the area that may have a large demand for recycled water.
Water Conservation
The OWD continues to have a Water Conservation Program Ordinance to reduce the
quantity of water used by customers for the purpose of conserving water supplies. The
program actually provides a water "budget," thereby requiring irrigation efficiency by
water accounts dedicated solely to the irrigation of landscaping. A study suggested that
if other users could be encouraged to manage their landscape with a maximum annual
amount of 48-inches of water, approximately 1,000 acre-feet of water would be saved
annually.
Conservation is also promoted by the education of the public through its school
programs, which include several schools in Chula Vista and many others throughout the
District. The District, in conjunction with Helix Water District and Cuyamaca College
completed the construction of an "Educational Conservation Garden" last spring.
Interagency Cooperation
Representatives from Sweetwater Authority, Chula Vista City Council and OWD have
continued to meet (Chula Vista Interagency meetings) during the past year to address
issues of joint concern as well as keep the City informed regarding statewide water issues
which may impact development within Chula Vista. These coordination meeting include:
Sweetwater Authority/Otay Water District Board Members and Chula Vista representatives.
Joint use, cooperation arrangements or mutual benefit efforts consist of the following:
· Telegraph Canyon Road pavement replacementJrenewal.
· · Use Area Golf Course project.
· Central Area Radio Antennae project.
· Veterans Home fee financing.
· Construction of recycled reservoirs under Eastlake park, a planned community.
Hi.qhli.qhts of Otay Water District's Operation
The following are a few highlights of the 1999-2000 accomplishments by OWD.
1. No water rate increases associated with OWD operations.
2. No capacity fee increases.
3. $30.2 million in capital improvements designed and/or constructed.
4. Negotiated agreement with City of San Diego for 10 MGD of local treatment capacity,
with option for an additional 10 MGD in the future. OWD is in the design phase to build
a pump station to supply 10 MGD from the City's treatment plant.
5. Completed the interconnection pipeline, which will provide transmission capability from
the OWD's southern reservoirs to the City of Chula Vista area.
6. Completed the "Educational Conservation Garden" within the Cuyamaca College area.
In summary, the water supply outlook is excellent and the City of Chula Vista's long-term
growth will be assured of a reliable water supply. Potential interruptions to the water supply
have been addressed by OWD, SDCWA, and MWD throughout the long-term emergency
water supply development of the SDCWA's Emergency Storage Project (90 days), the
MWD Eastside Reservoir (six months) and OWD's ten-day storage/supply plan. The
continued close coordination efforts with Chula Vista and the other agencies have brought
forth significant enhancements for the effective utilization of the region's water supply to the
benefit of all citizens.
Prepared by: Pedro Porras
Title: En.qineerin.q Mana.qer
Date: 12/12/2000
P:\Working\Gmoc\GMOC 2000 Questionnaire 7-99 thru 6-00.doc