HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1993/03/02
, "I declare under penalty of perjury \ha't í aìl'i
employed by the City of Chula Vista in the
Office 0'1 the City Clerk an:J th~ I posted
this Agenja{Notiçe on the B~lIetin Board at
Tuesday, March 2, 1993 the Public ~ervre3 Bu' jin:~ and at Cit~DII on ,
DATED. d, s.~ SIGi'\Ú)-~-~ ~n ,Coun~il Cha~b,ers
4:00 p.m. Public ServIces Buildmg
Res:ular Meetim: of the CitY of Chula Vista CitY Council
CAll. TO ORDER
1. ROu. CAlL: Councilmembers Fox ~ Horton ~ Moore ~ Rindone ~ and Mayor
Nader -
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO TIffi FLAG SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MlNlITES: None submitted.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF TIffi DAY:
a. Proclaûning 1993 as Senior Center Year in the City - The proclamation declaring 1993 as
Senior Center Year will be presented by Mayor Nader to Erna Lenihan.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 18)
The staff recommendalions regarding the following itons listed IU1lÚr1' the Consent Calendm wùI be enacted by the
Coundl by one motion without discussion unless a Coundlmember, a member of the publú: or City staff requ£sts
that the item be puJ]ed for discussion. If you wish to spei1k 011 one of these items, please fill out a .Request to
Speak Form. availßble in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form
to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to spei1k in opposition to the staff
recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent CaleruIar wùI be discussed after Board and Commission
Recommendations and Action Items. Items pulled by the publü: wùI be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter requesting funding of a traffic light on Otay Lakes Road at the Gotham Street comer -
Marilee Castenholz McKelvey, 1615 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA 91913. It is
recommended that Ms. McKelvey be advised by staff of the status of the proposed signal and
that staff will recommend a signal be installed at either Gotham or Elmhurst after a decision
has been made on the transit center.
b. Petition protesting auto repair shop at 363 "E. Street. Martin Torres, 178 Glover, Chula
Vista, CA 91910.2515, and Heinz Hemken, 183 Glover, Chula Vista, CA 91910.2515. It is
recommended that staff meet with the residents and return to Council with a
recommendation.
6. ORDINANCE 2541 AMENDING SECTIONS 12.24.020, 12.24.030, 12.24.040 AND 12.24.070
RELATING TO DEDICATION AND INSTALLATION OF PUBUC
IMPROVEMENTS (second readinsr and adoption) - Council requested that
staff review Municipal Code Section 12.24.040 which provides the City the
ability to require street dedications and public improvements associated
with building permits valued at $10,000 or more. The review was to
provide a recommendation for resetting the amount and consideration of
Agenda -2- March 2, 1993
other factors. In addition, policy needs to be set regarding the limits of
development on private property before triggering the requirement to
install or alter public improvements in the adjoining right-of-way. Several
years ago, Council accepted a staff report which included a
recommendation that an ordinance be brought back for adoption amending
Municipal Code Section 12.24.070 to abolish the acceptance of surety
bonds and accepting only cash bonds or liens as security for deferrals. It
has been discovered that the code change was never completed. Staff
recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption.
(Director of Public Works)
7. ORDINANCE 2542 ADDING SECTIONS 19.04.107 AND 19.58.178 TO, AND AMENDING
SECTIONS 19.14.070, 19.42.040, 19.44.040 AND 19.46.040 OF, TIffi
MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABUSH DEFINITIONS, REQillREMENTS AND
PROCEDURES FOR TIffi REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMlTS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE FACIUTIES (second readinsr and
adoption) - Pursuant to State law AB2948 (Tanner, 1986), the City is
required to adopt local provisions to implement the approved County of
San Diego Hazardous Waste Management Plan (COHWMP). The proposed
amendments establish the necessary provisions for the management of
hazardous waste and the siting and permitting of hazardous waste facilities
within the City, consistent with the COHWMP and State law. Staff
recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption.
(Director of Planning)
8. ORDINANCE 2543 AMENDING SECTIONS 2.36.010 AND 2.36.030 OF TIffi MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO TIffi ADVISORY DlITIES OF TIffi HUMAN RELATIONS
COMMlSSION (second readinsr and adoption) - In April 1992, the South
Coast Organization Operating Transit (SCOOT) Board directed staff to
investigate the ramifications of dissolving SCOOT, Both City and County
Transit staffs fmd no negative impacts to either the City or County if
SCOOT were dissolved. One result of dissolution would terminate the
SCOOT Senior and Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee. Staff
recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption.
(Director of Public Works)
9. ORDINANCE 2544 AMENDING SCHEDULE X, SECTION 10.48.050 OF TIffi MUNICIPAL CODE,
DECREASING STATE LAW MAXIMUM SPEED UMlTS IN CERTAIN AREAS,
MAIN SfREET/OTAY VALLEY ROAD FROM 1-5 TO 1-805 (first readinsr) -
In order to minimize traffic hazards and congestion and promote public
safety, speed prohibitions on these streets should be authorized by
ordinance. A review of trial traffic regulations initiated by the City
Engineer under the authority of the Municipal Code show that these
regulations are operating effectively and should be made permanent. Staff
recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading, (Director of
Public Works)
Agenda -3- March 2, 1993
10. RESOLlITION 17007 APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FROM TIffi UNAPPROPRIATED
PARK AND ACQillSITION DEVELOPMENT FUNDS (PAD) FOR TIffi DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND RELATED SERVICES FOR GREG
ROGERS PHASE I IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT
WI1H VAN DYKE AND ASSOCIATES FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT,
CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED SERVICES FOR GREG
ROGERS PARK, AND AUTHORIZING TIffi MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME -
The Greg Rogers Master Plan was approved by Council on 4/16/91. A
landscape consultant is required to prepare design and construction
documents and other related services for the project. There are insufficient
funds in the appropriated Capital Improvement Project to complete the
necessary services for the Phase I improvement of the Greg Rogers Master
Plan. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and
Recreation) 4/5th's vote required.
11. RESOLlITION 17008 GRANTING AN OPEN SPACE ENCROACHMENT TO AIJ.OW
SUPPLEMENTAL LANDSCAPING IN OPEN SPACE LOT B OF OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT 20, RANCHO DEL REY SPA I, PHASE 2 . California Pacific
Homes of San Diego (formerly Bren) is requesting that the City allow the
installation of supplemental landscaping along the south side of Ridgeback
Road, opposite Bonita Vista Middle School. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
12. RESOLlITION 17009 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WI1H TIffi SOUTH BAY BRANCH OF TIffi
YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION (YMCA) FOR TIffi LEASE OF
CERTAIN PROPERTY IN EUCALYPTUS PARK - The City and the South Bay
branch of the YMCA had a five-year agreement for the property at 50
Fourth Avenue which expired on 5/13/91. The City and YMCA have been
operating under a lease on a year-to-year basis. Staff has renegotiated a
five-year lease with the YMCA. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
13. RESOLlITION 17010 AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO TIffi METROPOUTAN TRANSIT
DEVELOPMENT BOARD (MIDB) FOR TIffi INITIAL CITY SHARE OF TIffi
COST OF TIffi MAIN STREET UNDERPASS PROJECT - The payment of
$330,000 to MTDB is an initial share of bridge construction and street
improvement costs for Main Street east of Industrial Boulevard. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
14. RESOLlITION 17011 SUPPORTING TIffi SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
(SANDAG) IN TIffi SUBMlTTAL OF AN APPUCATION FOR GRANT FUNDS
UNDER TIffi PROPOSITION 116 CLEAN AIR AND TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT ACT, BICYCLE PROGRAM The Clean Air and
Transportation Improvement Act (CATIA) makes available $20 million
state-wide to fund a five-year program of competitive grants to local
agencies for capital outlay for bicycle improvement projects which improve
safety and convenience for bicycle commuters. On 11/20/92, SANDAG
submitted an application for Proposition 116 Bicycle Funds totalling
$750,000 for a portion of the Bay Route Bikeway known as the Sweetwater
-.------- ..
Agenda .4. March2,1993
River crossing. The CATIA requires that a local public agency adopt a
resolution approving the submittal. In accordance with said requirements,
SANDAG has requested that the City support the subject application. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
15.A. RESOLlITION 17012 REVISING TENTATIVE MAP CONDITION OF APPROVAL E OF <:HULA
VISTA TRACT 92-05 AND CONDITION OF APPROVAL 1.1 OF <:HULA VISTA
TRACT 93-01 (RESOLlITION 16900) - On 11/11/92, by Resolution 16900,
Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Maps for Tracts 92-05 and 93-
01, Rancho del Rey Commercial Center west and east, respectively. The
final maps and associated agreements for both subdivisions are now before
Council for approval. Staff recommends Council continue the item to
3/16/93. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLlITION 17013 APPROVING TIffi FINAL MAP AND SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENf
AGREEMENT AND AUTI-IORlZING TIffi MAYOR TO SIGN TIffi MAP AND
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 92-05, RANCHO DEL REY
COMMERCIAL CENTER WEST
C. RESOLlITION 17014 APPROVING TIffi FINAL MAP AND SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENf
AGREEMENT AND AUTI-IORlZING TIffi MAYOR TO SIGN TIffi MAP AND
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 93-01, RANCHO DEL REY
COMMERCIAL CENTER EAST
D. RESOLlITION 17015 APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENTS TO SATISFY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL M, N, 0 AND P
OF TRACT 92-05 AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL S, T, U AND V OF
TRACT 93-01 AND AUTI-IORlZING TIffi MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
E. RESOLlITION 17016 AUTI-IORlZING TIffi MAYOR TO EXECUTE DEEDS QillTCLAIMlNG ANY
TITLE INTEREST IN PROPERTIES TO BE OWNED BY TIffi OTHER
PARTIES SIGNING TIffi MAPS AFrER RECORDATION OF SAID MAPS
16. RESOLlITION 17017 AUTI-IORlZING TEMPORARY CLOSURE AT MOSS STREET CROSSING FOR
TIffi METROPOUTAN TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT BOARD (MIDB) SOUTI-I
UNE GRADE CROSSING IMPROVEMENf - The MTDB has issued a change
order to add the Moss Street crossing to the "South Line Grade Crossing
Improvement Project, LRT.299." National Projects, Inc. has requested two
temporary weekend closures to complete the necessary work with minimal
delays to motorists. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Public Works)
17. RESOLUTION 17018 APPROVING A SEWER SERVICE AND STORM DRAIN CHARGE REFUND
FOR TIffi RANCHO BONITA MOBILE HOME PARK FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY)
1991-92; AND APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $16,633.10 INTO FUND
223, TIffi MONTGOMERY SEWER SERVICE REVENUE FUND AND
$5,810.65 INTO FUND 227, TIffi STORM DRAIN REVENUE FUND - In FY
1991-92, the Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park, located at 600 Anita
Street, was incorrectly billed for sewer service and storm drain charges on
the tax bills for parcels 622-041-19-00 and 622-091-24-00. They paid the
Agenda -5- March 2, 1993
full amounts and are entitled to a refund of $17,710.52 for the
overpayment. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Public Works) 4/5th's vote required.
18. REPORT CITY INITIATION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE TO
RESOLVE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING INCONSISTENCY FOR A
PORTION OF SPECIAL STUDY AREA B-4, WEST OF FIFlH AVENUE, EAST
OF BROADWAY, ALONG BOTH SIDES OF PARK WAY AND .G. STREET -
Alex Galchenko, representing property at 570.576 Park Way, has requested
initiation of a General Plan Amendment to resolve an inconsistency
between the General Plan and zoning for the subject property. Mr.
Galchenko's property is located amidst a larger area of such inconsistency,
located between Fifth Avenue and Broadway along both sides of Park Way
and "G" Street. Staff recommends Council direct the Planning Department
to initiate a General Plan Amendment and rezone for the area indicated.
(Director of Planning)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLlITIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following itons have been advertised and/or pasted as publú: hearingt as required by low. If you wish to spei1k
to any item, please fill out the .Request to Speak Form. available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior
to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation,- complete the pink form
to speak in Oppositioll to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individJJaL
19. PUBUC HEARING PCM-93-07: RECONSIDERATION OF PROPOSAL TO CHANGE TIffi NAME
OF OTAY LAKES ROAD BETWEEN TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD AND
WUESTE ROAD TO TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD - CI1Y INITIATED - On
1/12/93, Council approved changing the name of Otay Lakes Road
between Telegraph Canyon Road and Wueste Road to Telegraph Canyon
Road. It was later determined that the residents of Otay Lakes Lodge
Mobile Home Park had not been notified. The Council, therefore, directed
that the matter be noticed and reconsidered. Staff recommends Council
approve the resolution to become effective on 9/1/93 and direct staff to
continue to work with the County to have the name changed in the
unincorporated area east of Wueste Road. (Director of Planning)
RESOLlITION 17019 CHANGING TIffi NAME OF OTAY LAKES ROAD TO TELEGRAPH CANYON
ROAD BETWEEN TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD AND WUESTE ROAD
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general publú: to address the City Council on any subject matter within the Council's
jurisdü:tion that is !!Q! an item 011 this agenda. (Súlte low, however, generally prohibits the City Coundl from
taking action 011 any issues not included 011 the pasted agenda.) If you wish to address the Council 011 such a
subjec~ please complete the yellow .Request to Speak Under Oral Communü:aJions Form. available in the lobby
and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Tlwse who wish to speak, please give your name and address
for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per spea1œr.
Agenda -6- March 2, 1993
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
1ñis is the time the City Councü wùI consider itons whü:h have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the city's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The itons listed in this section of the agendß are expected to elú:it substo1úial discussions and deliberations by the
Council, stoff, or members of the general publü:. The itons wùI be considered individua11y by the Coundl and staff
recommendalions may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. 17wse who wish to speak, please fill out
a 'Request to Speak" form availßble in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Publú:
comments are limited to five minutes.
20. RESOLlITION 17020 CONCEPTIIAIJ.Y APPROVING TIffi FUNDING NOT TO EXCEED $700,000
TO SOUTIiBAY COMMUNITY SERVICES FOR ACQillSITION AND FIRST-
YEAR OPERATION COSTS OF A FOURTEEN UNIT APARTMENT BillWING
AT 31 FOURTH AVENUE TO BE USEDE AS A SHORT TERM HOUSING
FACIUTY - South Bay Community Services (SBCS) is interested in
acquiring a 14.unit apartment complex to develop a short. term housing
facility to serve homeless families in the South Bay. The site is adjacent to
the transitional housing project which will enable both projects to be
managed together. It is also close to National City, which has been
contacted to fmancially participate in the project. SBCS is submitting
grants for county, state, and federal funds and needs conditional site
approval. Staff recommends Council continue the item. (Director of
Community Development)
21.A RESOLlITION 17021 FINDING A SHORTAGE OF SAFE AND SANITARY DWElliNG
. ACCOMMODATIONS AVAILABLE TO PERSONS OF LOW INCOME AT RENT
LEVELS THEY CAN AFFORD, DECLARING TIffi NEED FOR A CHULA VISTA
HOUSING AUTHORITY TO FIlNCTION, DETERMINING TIffi POWERS AND
DUTIES OF TIffi HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND DECLARING TIffi CITY
COUNCIL TO BE TIffi COMMlSSIONERS OF TIffi HOUSING AUTHORITY -
In order to gain further insight into the formation of a Housing Authority,
staff has been in contact with representatives of the County Housing
Authority, other city housing authorities, and the Federal Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HOD). Staffs review and analysis
indicates that procedurally, the City must first form a housing authority
and designate officers and staff to serve the authority by resolution under
Section 34200 of the Government Code. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions. (Director of Community Development)
B. RESOLlITION 17022 DESIGNATING OFFICERS AND STAFF TO SERVE TIffi CHULA VISTA
HOUSING AUTHORITY
ITEMS Puu.ED FROM TIffi CONSENT CALENDAR
1ñis is the time the City Councü wùI discuss itons whü:h have been removed from the Consent CaleruIar. Agenda
itons puUed at the request of the publü: wùI be considered prior to those pulled by Councùmembers. Publú:
comments are limited to five minutes per individual
Agenda -7- March 2, 1993
OTHER BUSINESS
22. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTCS)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
23. MAYOR'S REPORTCS)
24. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss:
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9- Roller vs. the City of Chula Vista.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - EDCO Disposal Corp. vs. Laidlaw
Waste Systems, Inc., Sweetwater Union High School District, and the City of Chula Vista.
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) a Special Council Worksession/Meeting on
Thursday, March 4, 1993 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room and thence to the Regular City
Council Meeting on March 9, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council meeting.
-~ ~-------- ~-----~-----
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: l/-c...
Meeting date: 3-2-93
ITEM TITLE: PROCLAMATION: Proclaiming 1993 Senior Center Year
in the City of Chula Vista
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Parks and ReCreatiOn~
The City of Chula Vista has been a forerunner in providing quality programs and facilities
for its senior citizens. Norman Park Senior Center has been the focal point for senior
activities for thirty two years. Since the new center opened in March of 1992 it has been a
source of pride for all of the citizens of Chula Vista.
The Norman Park Senior Center will join in a year long celebration of the 50th Anniversary
of the Senior Center Movement which is sponsored by the National Council on Aging, Inc.
and its National Institute of Senior Centers (NCOA/NISC).
The ftrst Senior Center opened its doors in New York City fifty years ago under city
sponsorship. Today, local communities support over 15,000 Senior Centers across America,
serving millions of older adults daily. The Norman Park Senior Center is a community
focal point where older adults can get information, services and activities they need to
continue living actively and contributing to the City of Chula Vista.
The proclamation will be presented by Mayor Nader to Erna Lenihan.
lft - I
February 25, 1993
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: John D. Goss, City Manager J~ ~~
SUBJECT: City Council Meetin9 of March 2, 1993
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council
meeting of Tuesday, March 2, 19~3. Comments regarding the Written Communications
are as fo nows:
Sa. This is a letter from Marilee Castenholz McKelvey requesting a traffic
signal at Otay Lakes Rond and Gotham Street. This is the same location
for a traff i c signa 1 as requested by Mr. Tom Davi s and has been the
subject of several discussions with the City Council. Staff concurs that
Gotham Street is on the list of locations meeting signal warrants, as is
Elmhurst Street. However, since the traffic from the College, and not the
traffic from the residential area, is the basis of these locations meeting
warrants, the installation of a signal at only one of these locations
would cause the College traffic to change so that the second intersection
would no longer meet warrants. As previously discussed, the location of
the proposed transit center could haye an impact on the traffic flow
pattern, and the installation of a signal at Gotham Street now as
requested by Ms. McKelyey could have a negative impact on the operation of
the transit center and on Otay Lakes Road if the ultimate flow pattern as
a result of the transit c~nter results in the requirement for a signal at
Elmhurst Street. Staff has consistently recommended waiting until the
transit center issue h~s been resolyed before the final decision on
whether a signal is to be insta lled at Gotham or Elmhurst is made.
THEREFORE, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT MS. MCKELVEY BE ADVISED BY STAFF OF THE
STATUS OF THE PROPOSED SIGNAL AND THAT STAFF WILL RECOMMEND A SIGNAL BE
INSTALLED AT EITHER GOTHAM OR ELMHURST AFTER A DECISION HAS BEEN MADE ON
THE TRANSIT CENTER.
Sb. This is a letter from Martin Torres and other residents of the 100 block
of Glover Avenue regarding operation of an auto repair shop in their
neighborhood. Staff is aware of this situation and has been working with
the lessor of the repair shop in attempting to resolve the cited problems.
After reyiew of the sitJation by the various City departments involved,
staff will be meeting with Mr. Torres and will report back to Council. IT
IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE ACKNOWLEDGED, AND THAT MR. TORRES BE
INFORMED OF THE CITY'S PROPOSED EFFORTS IN THIS REGARD.
JDG:mab
trans
1615 Gotham Street
Chula Vista, California 91913
February 10, 1993
Chula Vista City Council
276 Fourth Street
Chula Vista, California 91910 FER I ï 1993
. í
Dear SIr or Madam: ! J i
L.,._n' ..._i
I am writing to urge the city of Chula Vista to fund a traffic light' on Otay Lakes Road at the
Gotham Street comer. I understand it is planned, meets the necessary criteria, and has priority.
Walking across Otay Lakes Road at Gotham Street is a difficult, often hazardous experience.
There is a crosswalk, but cars do not, with any consistency, stop for pedestrians there. During
the school year, many college students park on Gotham and the surrounding streets and walk to
class. One student who lives in the neighborhood is blind, uses the aid of a seeing eye dog and
walks to the College. It is my understanding that she has had a few close encounters with fast
moving cars while crossing Otay Lakes Road. I work at the College and walk to work. Some
days it is like playing dodge-ball to get across safely. During the summer my children and I
cross the street to use the College swimming pool and a couple of times cars drove through the
crosswalk while we were still in it. As an adult I get upset at the rudeness. As a parent I just get
scared for my children.
The installation of a traffic light at either Gotham Street or Elmhurst Street and Otay Lakes Road
will make crossing that street much safer. I urge you to move toward its installation with all
haste. Thank you very much for considering this request. And thank you for your service to the
city of Chula Vista, it is appreciated.
Sincerely,
~Î) " "',,, ';fvo {' J4. .IA-<:-<-:/-..
LtL'<lu Ç/f! ,j
Marilee Castenholz McKelvey ~ ~
-<-< :u
00 :D 1"1
¡:;;~ HI 0
~ê ~ fT1
<1>'- <
0 }> :þ 1"1
=+1~ Q: 0
ë=)~ UI
m:r:. 0
ce.' Cj::; .y~, (V)
ct{ ø4 WRlnEN COMMUNICA TIO~'¡5 ¿.,
éj)~ 4' ,P).) /:-!
~~&~~ þþ
uJ~~
50.. - I
RECEIVED
'93 FBI 24 AlI:45
h, Mayor & CIty CouncIl my OF CHULA VISTA
City of Chu]a Vista .. Y CLERK'S OFFICE
276 Fourth Avenue
February 24. 1993,
Dear Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Counc 11:
Enclosed please find a petitIon by a group of cItizens from
Glover Ave.to solve a situation that has been the source of
innumerable problems for several years, Some were solved by the
city but others still prevail,
We feel that operating an auto repair shop out of a narrow alley
IS not in the best interest of the CIty and all of u:,,' who have to
suffer the inconvenIences of such operation. We also feel that
the property at 363 E, St. 1S not adequate to rent a sectIon as
it is. and it is not conformIng to satisfy the basic needs of the
tenants and neighbors.
Hoping that you may be able to help us with this petition. we
remaIn.
sincerely,
~~~
Martin Torres and other res1dent eighbors.
178 Glover Ave,
WiI1'l~N COMMUNiCA 110NS
, ~ P-Y9J
('C t1:tr ¥)
~ ~ø:~.
0v- ¥~?~' t:6b - {
~'l'¿ß ~
,
P~CS" I
***"-'****' A PETInON *****.***'
-----
The undersigned respectfully request the c lty of Chula V1sta to
condemn åd permanently close the norttJ-west al ley access to ttJe
property at 363 E street used by an auto-repair stJop as ttJeir
maIn entrance, (Common sense IndIcates ttJat the entrance should
be at E Street). The proper entrance for this busslnes 1S from
Garrett Street. We also request that the owner of ttl1 s property
provide the necessary parkIng facil1tles for the people employed
there. customers and cars beIng repaIred.
At the council's meeting of 10-20-92 It was disussed the parking
problems at Glover Avåue and it was decided that Installing
parking restrIctions in this area would not solve the problem
mainly because it is INHERENT to this type of business to have a
continuos flow of cars parking In front for est1mates. tow trucJ<:s
delivering cars, vans sellIng tools etc.: therefore is
practically impossible to enforce a no-parking restriction. The
owner of thIs property is renting thIs space In detrIment of all
the residents of Glover Avenue. We can hardly park our cars at
Glover Avenue because it is always Cl-owded wittJ cars of people
that do not live here and now it has deterIorated to the poInt
that sometImes some of these cars are left overrl1ght.
The sIgns posted by the city at the ailey are totally diregarded
For years we have been suffering with this problem and other
problems associated with this operation and very little has been
done to alleviate this situation, In spite of the fact that a
dillapidated paint booth was removed, they paint cars 1n free
space polluting the aIr: noise pollution. hammerIng metals.
unnecessary horn use, high-power sound systems and lIttering the
alley with trash still remains. An inspection at any time during
working hours will reveal that cars are always parked in the
alley blocking the entrance to twelve apartments and making
di ffucul t for refuse trucks and other service vehicles to access
the area. This locatIon is totally inadequate for auto repair:
cars are sometimes cro\Ided like sardines Inside this small space.
We sincerely hope that this time the city w111 hear our plea,
Chula Vista, CA,.January 29. 1993
Name. AddresE SIgnature Date
Martin Torres 178 Glover ~~/ /-27- 73
(
'< ~ e(,,\ì.. We~~f~ ["63. 'Iovu j.J.~ L-ydi3
Cf/ 9/9/P-.:?5/Þ 5b- 2-
'Jb
J.M. '"Mike'" Sweeney, Jr.
1925-36 Otay Lakes Road
Chula Vista, CA 91913-3107
(619) 421-8032
3/ 2/1993
Open letter to the Chula Vista Ci ty Counci 1:
1 am not in favor of the renaming of a portion of Otay Lakes Road.
The resolution of 1/12/93 approving the name change has several points that
are sirq>ly not true.
1. Otay Lakes Road runs east from Telegraph Canyon Road for approxirnatel)
12.2 mil"" to Highway 94 not 8. At present Otay Lakes Road is Approximately
15 miles long only 6 of which is located in the City.
2. That the entire length of the proposed change is loacted within the
ci ty limits of Chula Vista may not be true if one is to believe the county
marker located approximately 1/2 mile west of Wueste Road.
3. The required sign changes have been under stated. Qni t led were Hunte
and Mira Costa. Not a big ælÌss ion but it does affect the fiscal in¡>act
statEment and show that the study was not thorough.
4. We know all the people affected were not notified.
Minor points they may be but they affect the credibility of the Council who
assm1eS all responsibility when they accept a reccmnendation and make it a
fact.
Son~ debatable points.
1. That the present al igrment causes confus ion and problems for motor ists
unfarni 1 iar with the area. The intersection has always been marked to show
which road went in which direction and such marking has been irq>roved wi th
larger and clearer signs that are at this moment in place. Because our
roads run through canyons and on hills the people of Southern California
have becane accustomed to unusual intersections. To accommodate them
cities have made good signing a carrocm pratice. If people choose to ignore
the signs there is little any of us can do for them.
2. That the change should be made because it appears to be and extension
of Telegraph Canyon Road. If that is the reason for the change then why do
we not follow through and correct the situation at L Street and run it
through to Wueste Road. Talk about confusion for motorists unfamiliar with
the area. L and Telegraph. If you tell saneone to go East on L to
Telegraph they will turn left at the intersection. Why because thats what
the signs say to do. If you tell saneone to go west on Telegraph to L they
will turn right at the intersection. Why because thats what the signs say
to do. Tell saneone at the intersection of Hill top and Telegraph to take
Telegrpah Canyon Road to Otay Lakes Road and see what they do when they
reach L. The exis ting signs that can be seen by the driver leaves one to
beleive Telegraph Canyon ends at L. Unlike the signs at Otay Lakes and
Telegraph no signs at the intersection of L and Telegraph clearly indicate
the change of road names nor the direction each takes.
I SO" ~
A similar situation exists with Main and Otay Valley Road. I do not
believe the ci ty wants to try changing thoses names because the number of
people affected. Well 196 famil ies (about 294 people estiræted) is not a
sræll mmber of voters.
Sane have tried to ræke light of the need to correct our addresses on
everything fran stationay to checking accounts. Lets list these
every things. Saving accounts, credit cards, vehicle registration, drivers
license, voter registration, retirement checks, telephone, tax assessor,
and social security. Not to mention friends, relitives and any local
business that we deal with that needs this inforrætion.
These things take time and often causes problems. Ever try to cash a cheek
when the address on it and your drivers license do not agree? For ræny
Seniors getting around to do these things is itself a probIelm. Those of
us who depend on the ræiI for our money each month can not accept the
possible SNARl that can occur if the address change is delayed in
processing. Please lets not hear the Big Brother statement, "Well use
direc t deposi t.'.
Otay Lakes Lodge is hidden from v iew and we like it that way. Changing the
name of the road will not ræke it v isable. To ræke it visually eas ier to
locate is not the responsibility of the city. The ræps that people and
business use will see ræny years before they are corrected. It well may be
decades before the county changes the name if they ever will. There will be
many more people frustrated by this change than will ever be affected by
the status quo.
It is the function of the City Council to act in the best interests of the
people but face it, you cannot idiot proof everything. There is sane logic
to the name change then, if it is a must thing to do, in a ræssi ve sweep
the logic should be applied throughout the city all at once. If you want
to take the heat why not get real warm.
When, after the fact, people were asked how they felt 38% responded, of
these 95% are opposed. We will never know how much higher the response
would have been had they known about this before the Council was comnitted
on the issue. But it's a good bet that the opposition would still have
been greater than 90%.
I request the Council to reverse it's decision and let it ranain Otay Lakes
Road. Further I would ask the Council to use the $1,400.00 (or a portion
thereof) to correct the signs at L and Telegraph and, Otay Valley and Main
where it wi 11 grea tly reduce the confus ion of the motor ing publ ic.
Respectfully;
c..>;¥?~~?í
2 5b-Þ
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 2/23/93
ITEM TITLE: Ordinance .7..f:'Y~mending certain sections of Chapter ~~ ~~~~Pal
Code relative to the requirement to dedicate *t -way and install
public improvements and bonding for defe~ lic improvements.
ç;.O -
Resolution /""1/ Adopting polit regarding development on properties
which triggers the requirement to install or alter public improvements in the
adjoining right-of-way.
SUBMITfED BY: Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ø (4/5 Vote: Yes- No...xJ
Referral No. 1853
The City Council requested that staff review Municipal Code Section 12.24.040 which provides
the City the ability to require street dedications and public improvements associated with
building permits valued at $10,000 or more (Council Referral 1853). The review was to provide
a recommendation for resetting the amount and consideration of other factors. In addition,
policy needs to be set regarding the limits of development on private property before triggering
the requirement to install or alter public improvements in the adjoining rights-of-way. The flfSt
portion of this agenda statement addresses that request.
In addition, Council accepted a staff report several years ago which included a recommendation
that an ord'nance be brought back for adoption amending Municipal Code Section 12.24.070 to
abolish the acceptance of surety bonds and accepting only cash bonds or liens as security for
deferrals. It has been discovered that the code change was never completed. This subject is
addressed at the latter part of this agenda statement.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the subject policy and place the subject ordinance
on its First Reading
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
&,-/
-----_.-------- - ------ -----------
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 2/23/93
DISCUSSION:
Backnound:
Chapter 12.24 of the Municipal Code provides a mechanism for the City to require the owners
to dedicate street right-of-way and install public improvements as part of development or
remodeling of an existing structure on their parcel of land. The last revision to this chapter was
in 1978, when the threshold valuation triggering the installation of public improvements doubled
from $5,000 to $10,000. No other amendments to that chapter were made at that time or have
been made since. With the rise in construction costs, this figure should be increased. In
addition, the nexus for requiring dedications and construction of improvements must be refined
in order to better determine if dedication or installation of improvements should be imposed.
.Building or structure. is defined in §12.24.020 as: '... any building or structure of which the
cost price of erecting the same is in excess of ten thousand dollars or any building or structure
moved or installed upon property for residential, commercial and industrial use, or such building
or structure for use as a place for the assemblage of persons.. It is this definition which triggers
the need for public improvements.
Council's concerns were raised when a project applicant requested a waiver of the City's
requirement to widen Hilltop Drive and Naples Street when he submitted plans for a remodel
of the exterior of the building in the Country Club Shopping Center at that site (see
Exhibit .C").
The current ordinance contained within Section 12.24.010 includes a statement of Purpose and
Intent which, in part, reads: " ... The nature and extent of the dedication or improvements
required pursuant to this chapter shall be limited to the danger that the proposed development
or construction will tend to create, add or impose a burden upon the public rights-of-way." Staff ..
needs more guidance to determine when improvements are required. The ordinance is proposed
to be revised to increase the dollar value and to provide for an annual update (see Exhibit. A").
The policy being proposed (see Exhibit .B") is to help City staff better determine when
dedication of right-Of-way, installation of missing improvements and modification of existing
improvements should be required. There are several areas to be examined, so each will be
addressed separately.
¿ ",2.
Page 3, hem~
Meeting Date 2/23/93
Staff has contacted a few agencies and found out what their amount was that triggered the
requirement to install public improvements. Following is a list of those agencies and the amount:
~:m Diego (City) $20,000
La Mesa $10,000
National City $10,000
El Cajon $30,000
Escondido $24,000
The .Construction Cost Index. quoted in the McGraw - Hill weekly publication Engineering
News Record has increased by a factor of 1. 74 since 1978, the year that the last Code revision
was made to raise the limit to $10,000. This would equal new total of $17,400 to trigger the
requirements. Based on that figure and the survey, staff recommends that the new limit be
$20,000 with the amount to be increased or decreased annually by a factor as indicated in the
.Construction Cost Index. contained in said Engineering News Record. If approved, there will
be no requirement(s) to dedicate right-of-way, install improvements or modify existing
improvements when the building permit valuation is below $20,000.
Sinl!le Famil"...B.äidmf:lI PrQDerf;y
The requirement to install public improvements is clear when a new single family home, a
move-on or mobile home is proposed. It becomes clouded when additions or remodels are being
requested.
A. Staff recommends that the property owner be required to: a) enter into an agreement to
not protest the fonnation of an improvement district or other similar act to cause the
improvements to be installed, and; b) dedicate additional right-of-way only (where
needed), but; c) will not be required to install or reconstruct public improvements in the
following circumstances:
1. The work being perfonned is remodeling with no additional square footage is added
to the structure, the building permit valuation exceeds the amount specified in the
C.V.M.C., Section 12.24,020 and a dangerous condition does not exist.
2. The work being perfonned adds square footage that is not providing a new bedroom,
the building permit valuation exceeds the amount specified in the C. V .M. C., Section
12.24.020 and a dangerous condition does not exist.
3. Where public improvements are in place and a traffic study or the City Engineer
detennines that the widening of the street to meet current standards is not warranted.
~"J
Page 4, Item~
Meeting Date 2/23/93
B. Staff recommends that the property owner be required to install improvements and dedicate
additional right-of-way in the following circumstances:
1. The work being performed includes adding a bedroom and the building permit
valuation for the work being performed, including other modifications, exceeds the
amount specified in the C.V.M.C., Section 12.24.020.
2, The work t.eing performed increases the size of the house more than 25 % and the
building permit valuation exceeds the amount specified in the C.V.M.C., Section
12.24.020.
3. Where a dangerous condition exists that can be corrected by the installation of the
improvements if the building permit valuation exceeds the amount specified in the
C.V.M.C., Section 12.24.020 no matter what type of work is being performed.
4. Improvements exist across the entire frontage and a traffic stu~y indicates a need to
widen or modify the street to eliminate a dangerous condition and the building permit
valuation exceeds the amount specified in the C.V.M.C., Section 12.24.020.
C. Sl4if further recommends that the requirements to install public improvements in any
rl. ~idential circumstance be limited to a maximum cost for those improvements of 25 % of
the building cost, excluding value of the right-of-way.
Commercial. Industrial and Multi-family Residential
A. Staff recommends that these types of developments be required to dedicate all required
additional right-of-way and install all required improvements where none exist whenever
the value of the work exceeds the amount specified in the C.V.M.C., Section 12.24.020
except in the following circumstances:
1. Where the work involves only exterior, cosmetic improvements which are intended
to improve the appearance of the building, or;
2. Where the work involves tenant improvements with no change in use and no
additional floor space.
Even in the above circumstances No's. 1 and 2, staff recommends that the owner still be
required to dedicate needed right-of-way and enter into an agreement with the City to not
protest the formation of a Block Act or similar process to cause the improvements to be
installed.
¿, ,'/
Page S, Item IP
Meeting Date 2/23/93
B. In circumstances where existing improvements do not meet current standards, staff
recommends that the reconstruction of street improvements, including widening, be limited
in cost to a maximum of 50% of the building permit valuation. (Example: A building
pennit valued at $20,000, the muimum cost of improvements that may be required would
be $10,000.) Further, staff recommends that Subsection 12.24.030 of the Code be
changed by striking the provision that dedication will not be required in the R-1 or R-2
zones unless 50% or more of the block has already been dedicated. There is no such
provision in Subsection 12.24.040 regarding installation of public improvements.
Therefore, there is a conflict if the improvements are required and there is insufficient
right-of-way in which to build them.
DEFERRAL BONDING:
At its meeting on 11/5/85, Council accepted a report (see Exhibit "D") discussing the
consequences of accepting surety bonds for security on deferrals of public improvements. In
that report, staff recommended that the City no longer accept surety bonds, since the bonds
could be canceled or expire without the City's knowledge. Staff was to return with an ordinance
amending the Code accordingly. While researching the above ordinance amendment, it was
noticed that the Code revision was never completed. A draft of the ordinance revision is
included in the same chapter as the re.ision on requirements to dedicate right-of-way and install
public improvements.
FISCAL IMPACT: Minimal impact from a decrease in the number of public improvement
impositions, resulting in less plan check fees being submitted due to fewer number of
improvement plans being checked by City and less inspection fees due to fewer construction
pennits needing inspection. An additional minor impact is that fewer projects triggering public
improvement result more chances that improvements might have to be put in by the City under
C.I.P. projects. However, most improvements along a block are done under 1911 Acts or
similar proceedings where property owners pay for the improvements.
JWHIW AU
PC-DOIIKYOO9/KY -058
[PAIORD_CHG.AI3]
~..f
construction or erection of any building or structure;
provided however, that the frame and electrical
inspection may be made upon the acceptance of an
appropriate acknowledgment of the nature and extent of
the obligations contained in this chapter, guaranteeing
compliance with the requirements contained herein prior
to the completion of said building or structure.
SECTION IV: That Section 12.24.070 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read:
8eo.12.24.070 Requir_ents def"rred when-Deposit or
bond required when-Appeal of denial.
A. In the event that the installation of all or allY of
the improvements required by Section 12.2~.040
would, if presently installed, create a hazardous
or defective condition or be impractical, or if
said installation of any or all of said
improvements would be incompatible with the present
development of the neighborhood or be impractical
or premature because of the existing condition of
the surrounding, property, or that it would be
desirable to install said improvements as a part of
the overall plan for the development of public
improvements in a certain area, the property owner
or his agent may apply to the city engineer for a
deferral of the requirements of this chapter,
stating the grounds and reasons therefor.
B. If the city engineer, at hi~ discretion, feels that
such grounds or exceptions are reasonable and that
the requested deferral should be granted, the city
engineer may defer imeosition of the reauirements
of this Chaeter on ~ such applicant fram ~he
reqliiFemeß~s af ~his ehap~er, subject to the
conditions set forth herein. Any deferral of
eueel'~ießs ~e the requirements for the installation
of public improvements may be limited to a specific
period of time by the city engineer, or may be
subject to the determination of the city engineer
as to the time at which said improvements should be
installed. but in no event lonaer than three (J)
veal's. In the event that the improvements are
deferred, the property owner shall deposit with the
city a sum equal to the estimated cost of the
improvements, as approved by the city engineer,
plus ten percent of such cost, er ift lieli ~heFeef,
shall pas~ a Beftd ift said amalift~ as apl'raved BY ~hc
ei~y at~aFftey. If it is determined that the
requirements for the installation of said public
improvements will not be necessary within a
J
(,',
reasonable and feasible time period, or if the
owner demonstrates a financial hardshio. the
property owner may grant to the city, in lieu of
said cash deposit a1' lsal'lEl, a lien upon ft.i.e ~
property in an amount estimated by the city
engineer to be sufficient"to install such public
improvements at such time as they shall be
required, and said lien shall also provide for
reasonable attorney fees and costs in the event
that it becomes necessary for the city to foreclose
upon such lien; provided further, that said
agreement shall ~tipulate that should said lien be
extinguished by foreclosure of prior liens or
otherwise, the improvements may be installed or
provided by city and the cost thereof become a lien
against said property as provided in
section 12.12.070.
c. The city engineer may, from time to time, extend
the period of deferral; however, such extension of
time shall be conditioned upon the continued
effectiveness of a valid cash deposit, Is a I'IEI or
lien, as established herein. The applicant for a
deferral of such improvements shall pay a fee as
presently designated, or as may be in the future
amended, in the master fee schedule to cover
investigation and processing of such requests.
D. The applicant for a deferral of such improvements
shall pay thL Required Fee(s) to cover
investigation ar'ri processing of such requests.
E. The denial of a request for a deferral of public
improvements may be appealed to the city council in
the same manner as provided for appeal for requests
for waiver of public improvements, as set forth in
section 12.24.060.
SECTION V: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
P:IllameIllllorDey\cbopl224,onI
4
¿, 'lei
ORDINANCE NO. ~ 5'11 ft\\Q~
~\P
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CI'rY OF CHULA VISTA ~~ ~~~
AMEND SECTIONS 12.24.020, 12.24.030, 12.24~
AND 12.24.070 RELATING TO DEDICATI~~ D
INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT~ç;Q~
SECTION I: That Section 12.24.020 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read:
Sec. 12.24.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following words and
phrases shall have the meanings aE\cribed to them by this
section:
A. "Alley" means a public or private way, permanently
reserved as a secondary means of access to abutting
property.
B. "Building or structure" means any building or
structure of which the construction cost ~riee sf
eree'til'\!J ~ße salBe is in excess of ~ ~
($20,000) thousand dollars, or any building or
structure moved or installed upon property for
residential, commercial and industrial use, or such
building or structure for use as a place for the
assemblage of persons. The twenty thousand dollar
amount shall be annuallv incl:eased. ef~ec~ive JU~Y
1 of each Year. bv the DroDortionate a ow h in t e
"Construction Cost Index" reDorted in the
Enaineerina News Record since the date of the last
adiustment.
SECTION II: That Section 12.24.030 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read:
Sec. 12.24.030 Requirements for dedication-Permit
prerequisites.
No building permit shall be issued for the erection,
construction, enlarging, altering, repairing, improving,
converting or relocation of any building or structure as
herein defined in the city until the owner of the parcel
or property upon which the building or structure is to be
situated shall have provided, by means of an offer of
dedication or other appropriate conveyance as approved by
the city attorney, a dedication of any necessary street,
highway, or alley right-of-way as shown or designated as
being necessary on the aàe~teà S~a~e Selee't SYS'telB, ~ße
1 1'-" M~ ,.
'-I ~ ....... c!-
~..~3.93
street and highway element of the general plan of the
city, or upon any specific plan adopted by the city
council, as such may presently exist or as they may, from
time to time, be amended. Said dedication of addit'onal
street, highway, or alley right-of-way is requi ed in
order to properly align curb, gutter, sidewalk 0 paving
with the existing or planned improvement in he same
block frontage in accordance with said
general plan or specific plans. In additio , the city
may require the dedication of necessary righ -of-way for
storm drain facilities in order to proper align said
facilities ~dth existing or planned st rm drains in
conformance with the adopted general p n or specific
plans and studies as approved by th city council.,.
preo:iEieEi ~fta
Br mere ef ~fte
SECTION III: That section the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is amended to read:
Sec. 12.24.040 Installation 0 public improv_ents
-Required-stand dB and specifications.
Every person erecting, constru ting, enlarging, altering,
repairing, improving, conv ting or relocating any
building or structure as def' ed herein in the city shall
install, prior to the com etion of such building or
structure, il conformity ith the provisions of this
chapter and other ordina ces of the city, sidewalks,
curbs and gutters, pave nt in streets, highways and
alleys from the gutter or edge of travelway, if no
gutters have been requ' ed, to the centerline or such
portion of major s reets as are required for
subdivisions, and ne ssary drainage facilities and
lighting structures. All public improvements required
pursuant to this sect' n shall be installed in accordance
with standards and ecifications adopted by the city
council, and i~ conf ity to ~fte B~a~e SeleB~ SYB~em ef
the circulation element of the
general plan of the city, and any specific plan adopted
by the city; prov ded further, that street lighting,
including ornament I street lighting, shall be installed
in those cases wh e specific plans have been adopted or
where adopted st ndards of lighting are in existence
which would re ire the installation of additional
lighting units.
The permits re red for the construction of said public
improvements s all be secured prior to the frame or
electrical ins ection approval in connection with the
2
,-'~
Chapter 12.24
DEDICATIONS
Sections:
12.24.010 Purpose and intent of provisions.
12.24.020 Dermitions.
12.24.030 Requirements for dedication-Permit Prerequisites.
12.24.040 Installation of public imp ro v em e nts- R eq uired-S tan dards and
specifications.
12.24.050 Compliance prerequisite to issuance of certain certificates.
12.24.060 Requirements waived when-Fee-Appeal of denial.
12.24.070 Requirements deferred when-Deposit or beBtl !im required
when-Appeal of denial.
12.24.010 Purpose and intent of provisions.
The city council finds that lack of sidewalks within the city often encourages or forces
pedestrians, especially school children, to walk in the streets, thus being subjected to the hazards
of vehicular traffic, and during the rainy season, waters create inconveniences constituting a
hazard to the health and safety of pedestrians; streets and highways of inadequate width and
design hinder vehicular movement and constitute a hazard to the health and safety of users; the
lack of curbs, storm drain facilities and improved alleys results in poor drainage and a collection
of fùth and waste matter; and the lack of adequate street lighting contributes to the criminal
infringement upon the rights of persons and property; therefore, such conditions are found and
declared to be dangerous to the public health and safety of the inhabitants of the city. It is the
purpose of the city council, in adopting the provisions of this chapter to impose reasonable
requirements of dedication and street improvement upon individuals and corporations engaged
in the development and construction of new buildings or structures which tend to make increased
demands upon the existing public rights-of-way and streets and highways in the city thereby
increasing the danger to the public health and safety.
It is the intent of the council to extend the basic requirements of the Subdivision Map Act
of the state by establishing standards and requirements for street dedication and improvement
in connection with land development in which no subdivision is involved. Further, it is the
purpose of the council to spread the costs of public improvements upon all abutting property in
an equitable manner and to cause the installation of those improvements required by the city to.
serve property about to be developed at the time of its development. The city council shall
require, in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, the dedication of portions of the
public rights-of-way, including streets, highways, alleys and storm drain facilities, and
construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and paving contiguous to the property from the property
line to the centerline of the public rights-of-way, and storm drain facilities and street lighting
as necessitated by the nature and type of the building or structure being constructed and the use
to which the property is being put. The nature and extent of the dedication or improvements
required pursuant to this chapter shall be limited to the danger that the proposed development
EXH I BIT "I(' (p- A-I
or construction will tend to create, add or impose a burden upon the public rights-of-way of the
city. (Ord. 1205 §2 (part), 1969; prior code §27.501).
12.24.020 DermitioDS.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings
ascribed to them by this section:
A. . Alley. means a public or private way, permanently reserved as a secondary means of
access to abutting property.
B. "Building or structure" means any building or structure of which the construction cost
priee af ereetiAg the same is in excess of tell ~ thousand dollars ($20.()()()). or any
buildine: or structure moved or installed uoon pro.¡x:rty for residential. commercial and
industrial use. or such buildin~ or structure for use as a place for the assembla!!e of
persons The $20.000 amount shall be annually increased. effective July 1 each year by
the pro.portionate ~rowth in the "Construction Cost Index" reoorted in McGraw - Hill
weekly publication ElIl!ineerillf News Record since the date of the last adjustment. ef-IIfIY
builåiRg ar sffiJetllre me'leå ar iRSt&lleå lIJIaR prep~' far resiàea.tial, e6mffiereialllAå
iftållstrial lise, ar stleil bllildiftg ar stfHetlire far llse ~ a pi- fer the ~semblage af
pef56ft9-.
(Ord. 1834 §l, 1978; Ord. 1205 §2 (part), 1969; prior code §27.502).
12.24.030 Requirements for dedication-Permit prerequisites.
No building permit shall be issued for the erection, construction, enlarging, altering,
repairing, improving, converting or relocation of any building or structure as herein defined in
the city until the owner of the parcel or property upon which the building or structure is to be
situated shall have provided, by means of an offer of dedication or other appropriate conveyance
as approved by the city attorney, a dedication of any necessary street, highway, or alley
right-of-way as shown or designated as being necessary on the adopted Slate Seleet System, the
skeet llAå higilwRy circulation element of the general plan of the city, or upon any specific plan
or standards adopted by the city council, as such may presently exist or as they may, from time
to time, be amended. Said dedication of additional street, highway, or alley right-of-way is
required in order to properly align curb, gutter, sidewalk or paving with the existing or planned
improvement in the same block frontage in accordance with said Seleet SysleHl, general plan~
ado,pted standards or specific plans. In addition, the city may require the dedication of necessary
rights-of-way for storm drain facilities in order to properly align said facilities with existing or
planned storm drains in conformance with the adopted general plan or specific plans and studies
as approved by the city council; pffl'¡iåeå that slieil åeèie&âaR sfiall Rat be Fel ,lIiFeEi iR the R 1
ar R 2 i56øes uAless fifty pefeeftt ar mere af tile stfeet ar alley wRy Ìft the blaek iR '¡¡ilieil the
stibjeet pr6fleft) is lae&teå ilas beell pre.iellsl.y åeåieeteè. (Ord. 1205 §2 (part), 1969; prior
code §27.503).
(p- A-2-
12.24.040 Installation of public Improvements-Required-Standards and specifications.
Every person erecting, constructing, enlarging, altering, repairing, improving, converting
or relocating any building or structure as defined herein in the city shall install, prior to the
completion of such building or structure, in conformity with the provisions of this chapter and
other ordinances of the city, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, pavement in streets, highways and
alleys from the gutter or edge of travelway, if no gutters have been required, to the centerline
or such portion of major streets as are required for subdivisions, and necessary drainage facilities
and lighting structures. All public improvements required pursuant to this section shall be
installed in accordance with standards and specifications adopted by the city council, and in
conformity to the slate Seleet Syslem ef Sft'eels ME! lligk';¡ays, the circulation element of the
general plan of the city and any specific plan adopted by the city; provided further, that street
lighting, including ornamental street lighting, shall be installed in those cases where specific
plans have been adopted or where adopted standards of lighting are in existence which would
require the installation of additional lighting units.
The permits required for the construction of said public improvements shall be secured
prior to the frame or electrical inspection approval in connection with the construction or
erection of any building or structure; provided however, that the frame and electrical inspection
may be made upon the acceptance of an appropriate acknowledgment of the nature and extent
of the obligations contained in this chapter, guaranteeing compliance with the requirements
contained herein prior to the completion of said building or structure. (Ord. 1566 §l, 1974;
Ord. 1205 §2 (part), 1969; prior code §27.504).
12.24.050 Compliance prerequisite to issuance of certain certificates.
No final inspection, completion certificate, or certificate of occupancy shall be issued for
any building or structure installed or erected after July 18, 1969 until complete compliance shall
be had with the terms and requirements of this chapter. (Ord. 1205 §2 (part), 1969; prior code
§27.505).
12.24.060 Requirements waived wben-Fee-Appeal of demal.
A. The property owner or his agent may apply to the planning commission for a waiver of
the requirements of Section 12.24.050 in circumstances and conditions including but not
limited to the following:
1. Where adequate improvements of the nature and type required already exist;
2. Sidewalks may be waived where the topography is such that the installation of
sidewalks would be impracticable;
3: Where the street or alley, for practical reasons, has not or cannot be readily
~-tt-3
graded to the established grade;
4. Where installation of sidewalks would be hazardous to pedestrians because of
grade;
5. Where the city council has, by resolution, in conjunction with the development
of a subdivision or otherwise, waived or modified requirement of curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, paving or dedication, or any combination thereof, which resolution
shall include a fmding that due to the nature of the topography or development
in the area, the installation of said improvements would not be feasible or
consistent therewith.
B. The applicant for a waiver of improvements shall pay, at the time the application is filed,
the Required Non-Refundable Fee(s) to cover the cost of investigation and processing of
such request. The fee is payable prior to planning commission consideration of the
request. Such fee is not refundable.
c. In the event that the planning commission shall deny the request for a waiver of said
improvements, the property owner or his agent may appeal said denial to the city
council, by filing said appeal with the city clerk within ten days from the date of such
ruling of the planning commission and paying the Required Appeal Fee therefor. The
council shall thereupon, at their next regular meeting, or at such time thereafter as they
may designate, consider the waiver of such requirements, in accordance with the
circumstances and conditions set forth herein, provided such findings shall be made by
resolution of the city council. If the city council shall fail to act upon said appeal within
twenty days of filing the appeal, the waiver shall be deemed to be approved.
D. If the erection of new structures as contemplated by this article is to be undertaken in
subdivisions approved by the city council wherein sidewalks have not been required as
a condition of the map and have purposely been omitted, no application for waiver or
deferral shall be required.
(Ord. 2506 §1 (part), 1992; Ord. 1811 §1 (part), 1978; Ord. 1240 §9, 1969; Ord. 1205 §2
(part), 1969; prior code §27.506).
12.24.070 Requirements deferred when-Deposit or Mød lim required when-Appeal of
denial.
A. In the event that the installation of all or any of the improvements required by
Section 12.24.040 would, if presently installed, create a hazardous or defective condition
or be impractical, or if said installation of any or all of said improvements would be
incompatible with the present development of the neighborhood or be impractical or
premature because of the existing condition of the surrounding property, or that it would
be desirable to install said improvements as a part of the overall plan for the development
of public improvements in a certain area, the property owner or his agent may apply to
l.o-A-I-f
the city engineer for a deferral of the requirements of this chapter, stating the grounds
and reasons therefor.
B. If the city engineer, at his discretion, feels that such grounds or exceptions are reasonable
and that the requested deferral should be granted, the city engineer may eempt ~
imposition of the reouirement of this cha,pter on such applicant Hem the ~iremeRts sf
thi3 ehapter, subject to the comlitions set forth herein. Any eeepâell3 16 deferral of the
requirements for the installation of public improvements may be limited to a specific
period of time by the city engineer, or may be subject to the determination of the city
engineer as to the time at which said improvements should be installed. but in no event
loneer than three years. In the event that the improvements are deferred, the property
owner shall deposit with the city a sum equal to the estimated cost of the improvements,
as approved by the city engineer, plus ten percent of such cost, ar in lieu ilieresf, shaH
pest a Belld ill said amelillt aa appre .-eEI BY ilie city aäeffley. If it is determined that the
requirements for the installation of said public improvements will not be necessary within
a reasonable and feasible time period, or if the owner demonstrates a financial hardship
the property owner may grant to the city, in lieu of said cash deposit 6f-beftå, a lien
upon IHs ~ property in an amount estimated by the city engineer to be sufficient to
install such public improvements at such time as they shall be required, and said lien
shall also provide fot reasonable attorney fees and costs in the event that it becomes
necessary for the city to foreclose upon such lien; provided further, that said agreement
shall stipulate that should said lien be extinguished by foreclosure of prior liens or
otherwise, the improvements may be installed or provided by city and the cost thereof
become a lien against said property as provided in Section 12.12.070.
C. The city engineer may, from time to time, extend the period of deferral; however, such
extension of time shall be conditioned upon the continued effectiveness of a valid cash
deposit.,.-Ðeftè or lien, as established herein. The applieant fer a åefeffill ef slieh
illlpf&veffieftt3 shall pay a fee as preS8litly desigfte.teEI, ar as may Be ill ilie future
lIHIeftdeEl, ill the master fee sekeEllile 16 eB'¡er ilWestiglHi.ell and preeessiag Bf SlIeR
~
D. The applicant for a deferral of such improvements shall pay the Required Fee(s) to cover
investigation and processing of such requests.
E. The denial of a request for a deferral of public improvements may be appealed to the city
council in the same manner as provided for appeal for requests for waiver of public
improvements, as set forth in Section 12.24.060.
(Ord. 2506 §l (part), 1992; Ord. 1880 §l, 1979; Ord. 1811 §1 (part), 1978; Ord. 1205
§2.27.507).
IJ-A-5
---.- --------------
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
POLICY EFFECTIVE PAGE
SUBJECT: NUMBER DATE NUMBER
On-site improvement activity to
trigger installation of public Page 1 of 3
improvements
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No. DATED:
BACKGROUND
Section 12.24.020 of the Municipal Code designates the dollar value of a building permit which
triggers the need to install public improvements. In addition, Section 12.24.010 states, "The
nature and extent of the dedication or improvements required pursuant to this chapter shall be
limited to the danger that the proposed development or construction will tend to create, add or
impose a burden upon the public rights-of-way of the City.. There are no guidelines as to what
constitutes a danger or what may impose a burden upon the public rights-of-way.
PURPOSE
It is the purpose of this policy to provide more defined guidelines for staff to determine when
to add the requirement to dedicate right-of-way and/or install/alter public improvements in the
rights-of-way adjoining a property under development or redevelopment.
POLICY
No building permit shall be issued unless the applicant shall fIrSt:
A. Single Family Residential Propel\y:
1. The owner shall only be required to: a) dedicate needed right-of-way and; b)
enter into an agreement with the City to not protest the formation of a Block Act
or similar proceeding to cause the improvements to be installed in the following
circumstances:
a. The work being peñormed is remodeling with no spuare footage is added
to the structure, the building permit valuation exceeds the amount
specified in C.V.M.C., Section 12.20.020 and lack of public
improvements is not known to create a danger to the general public.
EXHIBIT "B"
£,-13-1
POLICY EFFECTIVE PAGE
SUBJECT: NUMBER DATE NUMBER
On-site improvement activity to
trigger installation of public Page2of3
improvements
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No. DATED:
b. The work being performed adds square footage that is not providing a new
bedroom, the building permit valuation exceeds the amount specified in
C.V.M.C., Section 12.20.020 and lack of public improvements is not
known to create a danger to the general public.
c. Where improvements are in place and a traffic study or the City Engineer
determines that the widening of the street to meet current standards is not
warranted.
2. The owner shall dedicate of right-of-way and construction of public improvements
in the following circumstances:
a. In any case where a building is constructed or moved onto a site.
b. The on-site work being performed includes adding a bedroom and the total
valuation of the building permit exceeds the amount specified in
C.V.M.C., Section 12.20.020.
c. The on-site work being performed increases the size of the house more
than 25 % and the building permit valuation exceeds the amount specified
in C.V.M.C., Section 12.20.020.
d. Where a known danger exists that can be corrected by the installation of
the public improvements if the building permit valuation exceeds the
amount specified in C.V.M.C., Section 12.20.020, no matter what type
of work is being done on-site.
e. The public improvements are in place across the frontage and a traffic
study indicates a need to widen or modify the street and the building
permit valuation exceeds the amount specified in C.V.M.C., Section
12.20.020.
3. The cost of the public improvements shall be limited to 25 % of the building
permit valuation.
lø-"B"~
-------
POLICY EFFECTIVE PAGE
SUBJECr: NUMBER DATE NUMBER
On-site improvement activity to
trigger installation of public Page30f3
improvements
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No. DATED:
B. COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL:
1. The owners of these types of developments shall be required to dedicate needed
public right-of-way and install all required public improvements on or adjacent
to owners' property, whenever the building permit valuation exceeds the amount
specified in C.V.M.C., Section 12.20.020, except in the following circumstances:
a. The on-site work involves only exterior, cosmetic improvements which are
intended to improve the appearance of the building and the building permit
valuation exceeds the amount specified in C.V.M.C., Section 12.20.020.
b. The on-site work involves tenant or lessee improvements with no change
in use and/or no additional floor space and the building permit valuation
for said on-site work exceeds the amount specified in C.V.M.C., Section
12.20.020.
In the above-mentioned exceptions, the owner shall, never the less, dedicate needed
right-of-way and enter into an agreement with the City to not protest the formation of a
Block Act or similar proceeding to cause the improvements to be installed.
2. In circumstances where public improvements are in place, but do not meet current
adopted street standards, or as called out in the Circulation Element of the City's
General Plan or any Specific Plan adopted by the City, and the building permit
valuation exceeds the amount specified in C.V.M.C., Section 12.20.020, the
reconstruction of street improvements, including widening, will be required when
the valuation of said reconstruction of the improvements is 50% or less than that
of the on-site work. The owner shall dedicate any additional right-of-way needed
for such reconstruction or widening.
3. Construction of any new building, including a "move-on. building, shall trigger
the requirement to install missing public improvements, whether it be multi-
residential, commercial or industrial property.
~-'B-3
. .
.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
. Meeting Date 11/5/85
ITEM TITLE: Report on placement of liens on personal and/or other property
~'~""œ"" "t~. ",u'1<tf" Of~d '~~""M'
SUBMImD BY: Director of Public Works/City Engineer
REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5ths Vote: Yes---No-!-)
At its August 13 meeting, Council requested that staff prepare a report
regarding the following:
1. Placement of liens against personal and/or other property as a guarantee
of future installation of improvements.
2. Past problems that the City has had with surety bonds as guarantee of
faithful performance.
The following is that report with recommendations included.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept thi s report and that Counci 1 direct
staff to prepare Ci ty Code revi si ons to impl ement recol11Tlendati ons contai ned
herei n.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not appl icable.
DISCUSSION:
Background
Historically, when a developer of a parcel of land applies for a deferral of
the construction of public improvements and is granted such, he is required to
post securi ty to guarantee future performance of the deferred work. The
security generally is in the form of:
1. A cash bond submitted to the Finance Department.
2. A lien in favor of the City against the property being developed;
3. A bond issued by a company deal ing in securities and which must be
approved by the City Attorney;
According to the City Code, all these forms of guarantee are acceptable to the
City. The most desirable, from our standpoint, is the cash bond. It can most
readily be used for constructi on of the improvements should it become
necessa~ for the City to do the work.
E~U 81T 't" (o-~-l
.
Page 2. Item
Meeting Date 11/5/85
The findings required for the granting of a deferral by Section 12.24.070 of
the City Code make it obvious that the deferral is a temporary relief from
construction of improvements. Thi s temporary nature woul d be reinforced by
requi ring a cash bond, since there would be little incentive to pursue a
deferral as a means of avoiding the expense of doing the work.
If the applicant chooses not to post a cash bond, our next preference is a
lien against the property being developed. The lien is a soli d forn of
bonding as the City has a legal hold on real property and the lien is recorded
with the County Recorder.
Third on the list of guarantees is the surety bond which is valid only if the
premiums are paid, usually on an annual basis. A search of our records shows
that the City has not needed to collect on a surety bond for a deferral that
has been terninated.
The City has not to our knowledge accepted a lien on anything other than the
real property that the owner is developing. The prospect of placing a lien
against someone's personal property is not appealing. It would be impractical
to accept title to personal belongings such as vehicles, etc. It woul d be
possible, however to place a lien against real property other than that being
developed if it is under the same ownership.
Bonding Problems
1. Cash Bonds: This forn of guarantee is the least popular with develope"rs
and owners because they prefer to not tie their cash up for an indefinite
peri od. A record-search reveals only five instances where a cash bond has
been submitted in the approximately 90 deferrals that have been granted.
Cash bonds pose the least problem for the City. Even though the original
amount may be outdated after a few years, the interest gained by the City
will have helped offset the effects of inflation. Since justification for
a deferral is based upon physical surroundings (i.e., no improvements on
block thus because of drainage, impossible to install improvements now)
rather than availability of private financing, a cash deposit should be no
more restrictive than installation of the improvements.
2. Liens: The major problem with liens is that placing a dollar amount in
the lien without an inflation factor leads the property owner to believe
that his obligation is limited to that amount. In fact, the property
owner is responsible for the installation of the improvements regardless
of the estimated amount of the work at the time of the deferral. This was
the opinion of the City Attorney in 1975.
Another problem, more minor in nature, is that it takes court action to
foreclose on a lien should such a foreclosure be necessary. However, the
City Code provides for the inclusion of attorney's fees in the lien amount.
3. Surety Bonds: The largest problem with this form of guarantee is that the
bonds are val i d only as long as the premi ums are pai d. The most col1'l1lon
premium period is one year. Some surety companies send the City status
inquiries on the bonds each year to see whethe\ they must be renewed.
Many of the companies do not.
l.D- c.- ~
. " ..
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 11/5/85
The bond amounts do not include an inflation factor, therefore, the owner
may not be aware of his true total financial obligation.
Recommended Action
Section 12.24.070 of the City Code states that the City Engineer may grant a
deferral for a specified period and, from time to time, may extend the
deferral. Therefore, staff recommends the following:
1. Limit all deferrals of publi c improvements to three years, with the
stipulation that the deferral may be terminated upon written notice by the
City Engineer at any time within the three-year period.
2. Accept only cash bonds except in cases of demonstrated hardship, when a
lien on real property may be accepted.
The lien agreement would be worded in such a way as to bind the owner to
the full cost of installing the improvements at the time the deferral is
called up and not the amount estimated at the time the deferral is granted.
3. Initiate a tickler system whereby staff will be alerted in sufficient time
so as to let the applicant know his deferral is about to expi re and
further action is necessary on his part before the date of expiration.
FISCAl IMPACT: None
JWH:fp/PDOOl
WPC l678E
l.P-C!..-3
, \'.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
~2.
( Item ~
Meeting Date 1/9/90
ITEM TITLE: Report on Appeal to the Council on Planning Commission
decision to deny request for a waiver of requirement to
widen Hilltop Drive and N~S Street
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
City Manager ~~ -
REVIEWED BY: (4/5 Vote: Yes- No-L)
The owner of a portion of the Country Club Shopping Center in the
northwest quadrant of Hill top Drive and Naples Street is proposing to
remodel the exterior of the ooilding on his property. The work is
estimated to be $56,400. There is no additional floor space planned for
the building. The owner's architect was informed that the City would
require widening of the street along both Hilltop Drive and Naples Street
as part of the building permit process.
Prior to applying for a building permit, the owner applied for a waiver
of the widening requirement. All requests for waivers must be considered
by the Planning Commission. At its meeting on November 29, 1989, the
Commission denied the request. On November 30, 1989, Tim Jones, the
owner's architect, acting as agent for the owner, submitted an appeal of
( that decision to the City Council.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council deny the waiver request
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission denied the
waiver request at its meeting on 11/29/89 by unanimous vote (copy of
minutes attached).
DISCUSSION: Last October, Mr. Tim Jones, architect for Leonard Greaser,
owner of the easterly portion of the shopping center in the northwest
quadrant of Hilltop Drive and Naples Street, came to the Engineering
Division counter asking what requirements would be set on a building
permit for remodeling the exterior of his building. Mr. Jones emphasized
that no floor spaced was being added. (The buildings being remodeled do
not include the burned out market or Lou's Gym.) He has placed a
valuation of $56,400 on the remodeling work. In accordance with Section
12.24.040 of the City Code, remodeling costs in excess of $10,000
activates the requirement to install public improvements in accordance
with current City standards. The estimated cost of the public
improvements is approximately $12,500, or 22% of the remodeling costs.
On 10/5/89, Mr. Greaser applied for a waiver of the widening
requirements. The City Code provides that all waivers must be considered
by the Planning Commission. A report was prepared and submitted to the
Commission for its meeting held November 29th (copy of report and minutes
L attached). By unanimous vote. the request was denied.
Mr. Greaser's property has 150 feet of frontage on Hilltop Drive and 130
feet on Naples Street. He is being required to provide a transition in
éXHl 81 T -O:-D-I -
/
'. .f,
.'
Page 2 Item
H~eting date 1/9/90
(
roadway width from 32 feet to 20 feet from centerline along the Hilltop
frontage. The new General Plan calls for Naples to be a Class II
collector street, with an ultimate half-width of 26 feet. The result is
that the street will be widened six feet throughout the frontage.
It has been our goal to widen the intersections in the older parts of the
city in commercial areas. The widenings provide space to install left-
turn lanes and, overall, facilitate turning movements. Both Hilltop
Drive and Naples Street were built years ago to then-current residential
collector standards (1. e. 40 feet curb to curb), with BO-foot-wide rights
of way. Since that time, however, the increased traffic demands have
forced us to change our standards-
Recently, 7-Eleven Stores was required to widen Hilltop Drive 12 feet and
Naples Street 6 feet when the owners submitted plans to build a new store
at the northwest corner. The subject shopping center property surrounds
the 7-Eleven site and we are requiring similar improvements.
Section 12.24.060 of the City Code provides for the waiver of
requirements to install public improvements in circumstances and
conditions including but not limited to the following:
1. Where adequate improvements of the nature and type already exist;.c:
2. Sidewalks may be waived where the topography is such that the
installation of sidewalks would be impracticable;
3. Where the street has not or can not be readily graded to the
established grade;
4. Where installation of sidewalks would be hazardous to pedestrians
because of grade;
5. Where Council has, by resolution, previously waived or modified
the requirement for curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
Although Item 1 may be suitable as a reason for a waiver, the City has,
in several similar circumstances, required the widening of intersections
as a condition of approval of the development on the properties (Le. 7-
Eleven's project). The additional width is needed at this intersection,
as the present curb-to-curb width on both streets is only 40 feet.
Additionally, there are bus stops at all four of the corners, causing
further congestion.
Although the owner proposes no additional floor space for the buildings,
the facelift is likely being done to increase business. The result would
be the addition of traffic at the intersection.
The approximate traffic counts at the intersection are as follows: t:
Hilltop Drive - North of Naples: 13,020 cars per day
"OP1'."'(1'\- ,ht~ätïAx! ~:~: :~ ~:;
f 1 : , cars per day
(o-b-~
". ~.
Page 3 Item
Meeting date 1/9/90
(
There are a large number of turning movements made at this intersection.
The intersection is presently signalized on a timed cycle (no independent
left-turn signals). The proposed widening would help alleviate the
conjestion by providing left turn lanes on two legs of the intersection.
The opening of the 7-Eleven will result in additional traffic at the
intersection. The improvements being required of this applicant will
further help relieve the anticipated congestion.
The Circulation Element of the new General Plan specifies both Naples
Street and Hill top Drive as Class II Collector streets with ultimate
widths of 52 feet curb-to-curb. No additional dedication is needed along
the frontages of either street, since both street rights of way are now
80 feet wide.
Based on the contents of this report, we find that we cannot support the
grant of the requested waiver and recommend that the request be denied.
An alternative would be to grant a deferral for three years. Normally,
if a deferral is granted, it would be accompanied by a cash bond'
( submitted by the applicant in an amount of 110% of the estimated cost of
the improvements. In certain cases of hardship, however, we have
accepted liens on the property in lieu of cash.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
JH/PD-085
L
. ! . I I : ", ;, I
J , . ," ;:
, . f~~Þ-3 . ,.J
- 1,$1
~
( -
~
~.~ I
'-
~ .
"
;} POP TION OF
t>¡ I CENTER ":)
SHOPPING ~
.
(
7/11
PL
£XIS7'N(; el./1/8 --/ è:>
€ - NA/"LCS II¡ +
è:>
II¡
-
I LEGEND' r
U 1111'1 I ,1 - PORTIONS OF IMPROVEMENTS
REOUESTED TO 8E WAIVED
<. ~ OR. .." 9' < PD-()85
L. M. G.
----------- REOUEST FOR WAIVER OF WIDENING
0.'[ 11-3-89 filL L TOP DR. ð NAPLES ST.
----------
~- b-LJ
" .,
City ?lanning Commission
Agenda :~em for Mee~ing of November 29. :989 Page 1
( -'
2. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR A WAIVER OF THE REQUIREMENT TO WIDEN
H~LLTOP DRIVE AND NAPLES STREET
-
A. BACKGROUND
Recently. Mr. Leonard Greaser. owner of a portion of the shopping
.::enter .u ~~e northwest quadrant of Hilltop Drive and Naples Street,
su:,mitted plans for remodeling the exterior of his building on
Assessor's ?arcel No. 619-l00-10. His architect has placed a
valuation of $56,400 on the remodeling work. In accordance with
Section 12.24.040 of the City Code, Staff imposed the requirement to
>Jiden the road>Jay along the frontages to provide for future left-turn
lanes at the intersection.
On 10/5/89. ~1r. Greaser - applied for a waiver of the widening
requirements, The City Code provides that all waivers be considered
by the Planni~g Commission,
B. RECOMMF.NDATION
( Deny :.he request for a waiver of the requirement to install publiL
l.mprovemen't5.
C. DISCUSSION
~r. ;:;rea5er's propercY has 150 feet of frontage on Hilltop and 130
-~~- on ~'1ap:"es, He ~~ oe1.ng required to provide a transition in
r~3.dway wi¿-::.h from 32 feec cO 26 feet from centerline along the
-' - -- :: ro::c3.~e, The new G>:neral Plan calls for Naples to be a
..--- ---
,__555 - - .:o:;':"eccor Scr""31:.. with an ultimate half-width of 26 feet.
- u- resulc -- chat the storee:. will be widened six feet throughout the
::"'~:::.a~"'.
-. :-.as be>;;" ,our goal to widen :.he intersections in the older parts of
_u - ~i t:, in :::cmmercia1 areas, The widenings provide s-pace to install
>=::'-:"'1'.. :""nes and. oversl:". facilitate turning movements. Both
:: i : : c'.)? Drive and Naples Street were built years ago to t,hen-current
re5i.:.=n:.is:" c::ol1ector "'tan<i,"~'.i.j i 1..6, 40 feet, curb to curb). with 80-
::~~:'-'...ide ri.¡:i'It.s of way, ;Hr..::e that time. however. the increased
:.,.s:::: i: ::=IT,ar,c.s have forr.ed ilS to change our s~andards.
"e:e".-::..:.:,. 7-Eleven Stores was required to widen Hilltop Drive 12 feet
ör.i ~¡"ple5 6 fee~ when :.i:e owners submitted plans to build a new
~--r" 3-to the northwest corn~r, The suuject shopping center property
B1.',-rou:òds ""8 7-Eleven :3i te ar,ù we ar'3 requiring similar
l i~:;~'::v.;mèn':.5.
{p - b-~
"
Page ~
Sec1:i::m 12.24.060 of the City Code provides for the waiver of
( req:lirements 1:.0 install public improvements in circumstances and
conài-r.ions including bu-r. not limited to the following:
, Where adequaT.e improvements of the nature and type already
exist:
2. Sidewalks may be waived where the topography is such that the
installation of sidewalks would be imp_racticable;
3. Where the street or alley has nt)'L. or can not be readily
graded to the established grade;
., \-;'here installation of sidewalks would be hazardous to
"t.
pedes'L.rians because of grade;
5, Where Council has. by resolution, previously waived or
moài~ieà the requirement for curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
Although Item 1 may be suitable as a reason for a waiver, the City
has. in severa: similar circumstances. required the widening of
in't.ersections as part of the development on the properties (1. e. 7-
Eleven':; project.). The additional width is especially needed at this
intersection. as the presen-r. curb-to-curb width on both streets is
only 40 feet.. Additionally, there are bus stops at all four of the
corners. causing further congestion.
( The est.imated cost of the widening work is approximately $12,500 and
::s furt.her ~roken down as follows:
Unit
Ite::: Quantity Price Total
C;,.:rj :L "u"t.e~- 280 LF $L;. 00 $3.360,00
:>ri ','e;.;oa',. s :: .~ 35' ...D 640 SF 3.50 2.240.00
"i=ewa:f: i5.5'X 216) 1,188 SF 2.80 3,326.00
-. ' ....r~~ 4.090 SF 0.35 1.432.00
,,"'..;::;;:r=.::e
-----------
Subtotal $10.358.00
S';1--.;'=;; '..jea i:;:n 522,00
:onsL.r~~ticn s-r.aking 522.00
-----------
Subtotal $11,402,00
.' .', ~:.:-.t.in;;:~T.cic=a 1,140.00
-----------
TOTA¡L~STIMATE ~12.542,OO
7:-,e a;:;:r'~xim'\L.'" traffic COUIit.S at the inters~ct.ion are as follows:
Hilltop Drive - North of Naples: 13,020 cars per day
South of Naples: 8,870 cars per day
<. Naples Streeë - '!lest of Hilltop: 9.190 cars per day
East of Hilltop: 5,160 cars per day
;'.:30. a large nu::¡\::"r of turninq mOV":1!i=n t.3 are made at this
i:-.-:-:r:õection,
("-Þ-lo
- --...----------- ---.--.--.
Pal1:e 3
( The intersection is presently signalized on a timed cycle (no
independen" left-turn signals). However. the widening would provide
for a left "urn lane.
The Circulation Element of the new General Plan specifies both Naples
and Hilltop as Class II Collector streets with ultimate widths of 52
feet curb-to-curb. No additional dedication is needed, since both
street rights of way are 80 feet wide.
Based on the contents of this report. we find that we cannot support
the grant of "he requested waiver and recommend that the request be
denied.
(
L
0- f)-I
. ~'
0 RAEJ
Tape: 30?
( Side: 2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
Wednesday, November 29,1989 Public Services Building
ROLL CALL
COI1MISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman 'Tugenberg, Commissioners Cannon,
Carson, Casillas, Fuller, Grasser (7:30), and
Shipe
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Deputy City Manager Krempl, Director of Planning
Leiter, Principal Planner Lee, Associate Planner
Griffin, Senior Ci vi 1 Engineer Daoust,
Consultant Bud Gray, Assistant City Attorney
Rudolf
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Tugenberg and was
( followed by a moment of silent prayer.
INTRODUCTORY RE~1ARKS
Chai rman Tugenberg revi ewed the compositi on of the P1 anni ng Commi ssi on, its
responsibilities and the format of the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSC (Carson/Fuller) 4-0 Casillas and Shipe abstained (Grasser out), to approve
the Minutes of October 11, 1989, as mailed.
;,ISUC (Carson/Cannon) 6-0 (Grasser out) to approve the Minutes of November 8,
1989 with the following change: page 13, motion should read "disapprove the
EastLake III General Plan Amendment for 1,817 dl'¡elling units," not 8,817.
ORAL CC~::'IUNICATIONS
lIone.
l
(Carson/Cannon) 6-0
fJ-D-~
-----
',' -
-
PC MINUTES -2- Novembe~ 29,1989
(
2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR A WAIVER OF THE
REQUIREMENT TO WIDEN HILLTOP DRIVE AND NAPLES STREET
Senior Civil Engineer Roger Daoust expl ained that the appl icant' s architect
had submitted a preliminary plan showi ng exterior modifications for a
colmlerci al bui 1 di ng located i n the northwest quadrant of Hill top Drive and
Naples Street. He gave background information. on the project and stated that
the Engineeri ng Department woul d require that the appli cant i nstall curb,
gutter and sidewalk, along with street paving which would be required along
Hilltop Drive transitioning to 26' at the northerly property line. The
7-Eleven Store at the corner of the intersection had been required in
conjunction with their building permit to provide 6' of widening along both
Hilltop Drive and Naples Street and also to provide substantial traffic signal
improvements. The work i ndi cated that woul d be requi red for thi s project
wou1 d transi ti on from the end of the improvements provi ded by the 7-El even
Store to the ul timate curb line on Hilltop Drive, whi c'h was 26' from
centerl i ne. Along Naples Street, the widening requi rement would be 6'
throughout the frontage. The cost of that improvement work would be
approximately $12,540. The applicant felt the cost of the improvement work
was excessive with respect to the on-site work (approximately 22%) and
requested a waiver of the improyements. No deferral was requested.
Mr. Daoust stated that staff did not support the request for a waiyer, and
( recommended that the waiver not be granted, since the Ci ty Code does not
support a waiver.
Commissioner Cannon asked what proportion of the 7-Eleven construction
constituted street improvements.
r~r. Daoust di d not know the actual facil i ty cost of the improvement at the
7-E1eyen, but estimated the cost of the public improyement work to be
approximately $111,000--$60,000 was traffic signal; the remainder was street,
sidewalk, and curb and gutter.
Commissioner Fuller asked if the improyement included all of the buildings in
the shopping center other than the 7-Eleyen.
Mr. Daoust replied that it included the facade on all the buildings within the
particular property. He then explained that the 7-Eleven was one ownership,
the small shops extending from Hilltop Drive to the west was an ownership of
approximately 200'. Beyond that, there was an additional ownership.
This being the time and place adyertised, the public hearing was opened.
Tim Jones, 978 r~yra Avenue, Chula Vista 92011, representing Mr. Jay Pugh, the
present owner. 14r. Jones stated that Mr. Pugh had only owned the project for
approximately two years. He went on to explain that the pharmacy was the end
" of the; r project. Lou's Gym and the burned-out market was under different
. ownership. He gave some history of the project and presented a map showing
l the work previously done by 7-E1even. Mr. Jones stated that if Mr. Pugh had
ú-"D-9
. ,
.
PC MINUTES -3- November- 29, 1989
(
come in with his project before the 7-Eleven was put in, their costs would not
have been as high. Mr. Jones stated that the requirement of street widening
would be a burden to the owner and they didn't feel it was justified. He
stated that since there would be no expansion of the center, no additional
floor space or rentable lease area, the project would generate no additional
traffic. He referred to a 1 etter, addressed to Cl i ff Swanson regardi ng the
waiver, which had been handed to the Planning Commission prior to the meeting.
Commissioner Carson asked if r~r. Pugh originally owned the filling station
which had been removed and if he had paid to have the contaminated soil from
the filling station removed. Mr. Jones replied that Mr. Pugh had not; that it
was not part of his property.
Commi ssi oner Carson asked i f the street improvements are requi red, does the
owner plan to continue to make any kind of improvements in that area? Mr.
Jones stated the owner is going to improve the lot, but instead of the $12,000
improvement they are looking at more like $20,000 worth of street improvements.
Commissioner Fuller asked why Mr. Jones thought it would have been less cost
if they had come i n before the. 7 -El eyen was put i n. He stated the project
would have consisted only of repainting and signage. Now, after 7-Eleven,
they are being asked to re-color code, put in architectural columns, new tile
mansard, etc. which greatly boosted the cost of improvements.
( Seni or Ci vil Engineer Daoust pointed out that at the time the subject first
came up when the plans were submitted, it was suggested that the applicant
take this route--the request for a waiyer or a request for a deferral--as a
~relimi nary step to ayoi d the effort of goi ng through the appl i cati on for a
uilding permit or preparing plans for a design review.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Cannon said that while he may sympathize with the 20% improvement
cost, the Code is yery specific on the basis upon which there coul d be a
waiver.
Chairman Tugenberg stated that whatever the conditions were, this improvement
must be done because, although the improvements may not increase the traffic
on the site of the property, the volume of the traffic is increasing
consistently at that intersection. Now with Naples Avenue being opened up, it
will probably be one of the maj or thoroughfares out of the Sunbow
development. Naples will carry more traffic as the years go by, and
improvement of the intersection is necessary.
Commissioner Carson concurred that traffic is increasing and left-turn lanes
are needed.
, MSUC (Cannon/Casillas) 6-0 (Grasser out) to deny the request for a waiver.
l
~- þ-Io
COUNCn.. AGENDA STATEMENT '1
Item d
Meeting Date 2/23/93
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing:
A. GPA-92-02 - Entertaining reconsideration of amendments to the
Public Facilities Element of the General Plan previously adopted
in June 1992, which implement and supplement the approved
County of San Diego Hazardous Waste Management Plan - City
initiated. (continued from February 2, 1993)
B. GPA-92-02A - Consideration of additional amendments to the
Public Facilities Element of the General Plan refming portions of
the June 1992 amendments, and re-stating the City's "fair share"
concepts regarding hazardous waste facilities - City initiated,
(continued from February 2, 1993)
C. PCA-92-02 - Consideration of amendments to Title 19 of the
Municipal Code to define hazardous waste facilities as conditional
uses in the City's industrial zones, and to establish a specific
review procedure for conditional use pennit applications for such
facilities consistent with State law - City initiated, (continued from
February 2, 1993)
E: Resolution 17~~ting the proposed General Plan Amendments under
GPA-92-02A. O~
~\!
1). Ordinance ~%l Adding Sections 19.04.107 an~g.5tP?78 to, and
amending Sections 19.14.070, 19.42.040, ~ and 19.46.040 of,
the Chula Vista Municipal codeø-~'O ~
/'¿' ,
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning /c;ø;
REVIEWED BY: City Manager!- (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No..xJ
Pursuant to the requirements of State law (AB 2948 (Tanner, 1986», on June 30, 1992, the City
Council adopted Resolution No. 16794 approving amendments to the Public Facilities Element
of the City General Plan, incorporating necessary provisions related to the management of
hazardous waste and the siting and pennitting of hazardous waste facilities within the City,
consistent with the approved County of San Diego Hazardous Waste Management Plan
(COHWMP) , Those amendments are attached for reference as Exhibit A.
1-\
;Jr/
Page 2, Itemff
Meeting Date 2/23/93
In order to implement the provisions of the amended Public Facilities Element, it is necessary
to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance to establish appropriate conditional use pennit review
procedures for hazardous waste facilities, and staff was directed by the City Council to prepare
such amendments for consideration by Resolution No. 16794. The proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendments are attached as Exhibit C.
In the course of preparing the Zoning Ordinance amendments, staff found it necessary to make
additional revisions to the Pu....lic Facilities Element to clarify certain aspects of the June 1992
amendments, particularly the City's hazardous waste facility "fair share" concepts. These
additional amendments are att.ached as Exhibit B.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has detennined that the both the additional proposed
amendments to the Public Facilities Element (GPA-92-02A), and the proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendments (PCA-92-02) will not result in significant impacts upon the environment, and has
issued a Negative Declaration under 15-93-14. (please see Exhibit D),
RECOMMENDATIONS: That the City Council
1. Entertain reconsideration of the prior approval of the June 30, 1992 Public Facilities
Element amendments under Resolution No. 16794, take public testimony, and if no
satisfactory reason appears evident from that testimony, approve a motion denying
reconsideration.
2, Adopt the Negative Declaration prepared under 15-93-14.
3. Approve the General Plan Amendments currently proposed under GPA-92-02A and
contained in Exhibit B,
4. Introduce for first reading the proposed implementing amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance contained in Exhibit C.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On November 23, 1992, the Resource Conservation Commission (RCC) initially considered the
Negative Declaration under IS-93-14 and continued the matter for further infonnation. On
February 8, 1993, the RCC took fmal action, recommending approval of the Negative
Declaration to the City Council. (vote 4-1) Minutes are attached.
On December 16, 1992, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance Amendments. At that hearing, the Planning Commission was
presented with a letter from Latham & Watkins (legal counsel for Appropriate Technologies)
objecting to the proposed amendments. The Commission continued the hearing to January 13,
-1-'"
~
Page 3, ItemLt:
Meeting Date 2/23/93
1993 to allow staff sufficient opportunity to review and comment on the merits of those
objections. Staff's responses to that letter are contained in Attachment 1.
The Planning Commission held the continued hearing on January 13, 1993, and based on staff's
review and recommendations regarding Latham & Watkins' objections, and on the evidence
presented, took the following actions:
denied reconsideration of the June 30, 1992 General Plan Amendments. (vote 6-0)
adopted the Negative Declaration under IS-93-14, and recommended the City
Council adopt same. (vote 6-0)
recommended the City Council approve the General Plan Amendments currently
proposed under GPA-92-02A, and introduce for first reading the implementing
amendments to the Zoning Ordinance proposed under PCA-92-02, (vote 6-0)
Planning Commission minutes are attached.
DISCUSSION
Overview of ReQuirements and Prior AdoDtion
The San Diego County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (COHWMP) was prepared pursuant
to State Assembly Bill 2948 (Tanner, 1986). This legislation, commonly referred to as the
Tanner Act, sets forth the framework for local implementation of changes in federal and state
laws governing the way hazardous wastes should be managed. As required by the Tanner Act,
the COHWMP establishes comprehensive provisions for the safe and effective management of
industrial, small business and household hazardous wastes within the San Diego Region. It was
prepared through a 32 member Advisory Committee which contained representatives from each
of the Region's 18 cities, including Chula Vista. The COHWMP is based upon an approach
which focuses on the need to reduce the volume of wastes produced which require treatment,
and prescribes various planning, processing, siting and pennitting requirements to be applied in
evaluating proposals for needed hazardous waste treatment facilities to ensure the protection of
public health and safety, and the environment. It also contains comprehensive background
infonnation on waste management, and existing and projected waste generation and treatment
facility needs within the San Diego Region. The COHWMP serves as the primary planning
document providing overall policy direction for the effective management of 100% of the
Region's hazardous waste stream, and is the guide for local decisions regarding hazardous waste
Issues.
Each of the jurisdictions in the San Diego Region were to adopt the COHWMP as a policy and
decision making guide through the establishment of local hazardous waste management policies
and provisions consistent with the COHWMP.
1-?
J.tÞ:.:T
Page 4, Itemff
Meeting Date 2/23/93
The Public Facilities Element Amendments adopted on June 30, 1992 under Resolution No,
16794 (see Exhibit A) brought the City into compliance with these requirements, and as allowed
by law, set forth those more specific or stringent planning requirements and siting criteria which
shall be applied in Chula Vista in-lieu of the more general provisions of the COHWMP. Those
refInements have been designed to reflect those more specific local conditions and concerns
regarding hazardous waste management and facility siting proposals, in ensuring the utmost
protection of the health and welfare of citizens, and environmental resources within Chula Vista.
The nature of those refinements is as follc'ws:
a. strong local emphasis on pollution prevention and waste minimization through
source reduction, re-use and recycling of industrial, small business and household
hazardous waste to lessen the need for new or expanded hazardous waste
facilities.
screening processes for local businesses using hazardous materials and
generating hazardous wastes to ensure commitments to waste
minimization,
active promotion of recycling and alternative technologies through the
City's conservation coordinator in cooperation with the County.
b, development of an over", ) strategy regarding equitable facility siting
responsibilities which recog '.ÍZes the City's waste management commitments and
existing facilities in relation to those of other jurisdictions in a "fair share"
setting. (Please refer to the further fair share discussions on page 6 of this
report).
c, emphasis of the foremost protection of local public health and safety, and the
environment through the refInement of locational, siting and permitting
requirements for considering hazardous waste facility proposals.
the removal of certain industrial areas from the "general areas" inventory
of lands which are appropriate for considering facility applications. Those
areas removed include Montgomery, Eastlake and Rancho Del Rey
Business Paries, and a portion of the Otay Valley Rd. area.
requirements for preparation of a Health Risk Assessment and any related
technical studies at the discretion of the City for all facility proposals
regardless of their type, size or proximity to existing and future
populations,
'1'tf
~
Page 5, Herod
Meeting Date 2/23/93
refmement of the siting criteria addressing 32 separate subject areas, and
which must be satisfied for a facility to be sited. The criteria are arranged
under the following eight objectives:
Protect the Residents of Chula Vista
Ensure the Structural Stability of the Facility
Protect Surface Water Quality
Protect Groundwater Quality
Protect Air Quality
Protect Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Ensure Safe Transponation of Hazardous Waste
Protect Social and Economic Goals
Staff believes the above referenced refmements provide the City the level of discretion
and control over hazardous waste management issues within the City which will ensure
the protection of local residents, the environment, and economic stability.
Reconsideration of the June 30. 1992 Amendments (GPA-92-02)
During the Planning Commission and City Council public hearing adoption proceedings in June
1992, letters were received from Greenfield Environmental (the parent company of the APTEC
II hazardous waste treatment facility at Otay Landfill) requesting the opportunity to provide
additional comment on the amendments. The Planning Commission did, at that time, provide
for a continuation of the hearing from June 24, 1992 to June 29, 1992, however, Greenfield
continued to hold the position that this additional time was insufficient.
The current consideration of further clarifying amendments to the Public Facilities Element
under GPA-92-02A also gives occasion to respond to Greenfield's prior request, although not
legally required, for additional opportunity to review and comment on the June 1992
amendments. Accordingly, staff recommends that the City Council entenain reconsideration of
those amendments at this time, along with consideration of the currently proposed clarifying
amendments, Such an approach emphasizes the City's willingness to accommodate desired
input, and allows all parties to review and understand the full scope of General Plan's provisions
regarding hazardous waste management within the City.
For ease of reference, the amendments adopted in June 1992 are contained in Exhibit A, with
amended pages highlighted on colored paper. The currently proposed additional clarifying
amendments being considered under GPA-92-02A are contained in Exhibit B, with pages
involving amendments again highlighted on colored paper.
1~
+ø:.:-f
Page 6, Itemff
Meeting Date 2/23/93
Additional Proposed General Plan Amendments (GPA,92-02A)
As called for by Resolution 16974, staff was to prepare amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
necessary to implement the provisions of the June 30, 1992 Public Facilities Element
amendments. During the course of preparing the implementing ordinance, and based principally
upon input from the County Department of Health Services Hazardous Materials Management
Division, staff found it necessary to further clarify certain provisions of the prior amendments,
most of which are minor in nature and considered technical clean up, (please refer to Exhibit
B which indicates amended pages on colored paper for ease of reference).
The single substantive amendment involves a restatement of the City's "fair share" provisions
regarding the review and approval of hazardous waste facility proposals, and is contained on
pages 3-57 to 3-61 of Exhibit B. Simply stated, "fair share" relates to the fact that the minimum
economically viable size for any hazardous waste treatment facility will likely result in its
providing services to an area beyond the jurisdiction in which it is located, and in some instances
beyond the county in which it is located depending on the type of waste treated. This effectively
means that not all jurisdictions will be facility hosts. Therefore, the issue arises of how to
ensure that no one jurisdiction bears an undue burden for regional or multi-regional treatment
facility needs, and that all jurisdictions equitably recognize treatment responsibilities as they all
generate hazardous wastes,
The COHWMP addresses these issues through Fair Share Principles and a Fair Share Fonnula
which require each county to fully address its waste treatment needs through either siting
facilities within its borders, and/or establishing interçovernmental agreements for treatment
capacity at facilities in other counties. In order to assure that no one local jurisdiction or
subregional area becomes excessively burdened for county-wide or multi-county treattnent needs,
the Principles and Fonnula encourage facility siting where there is a, substantial umnet need for
the type(s) of treatment which the facility would provide. The Fonnula provides an allocation
of needed small and large facilities among Southern California counties based on their waste
generation, with the intent that sites be sought as close to the major generating sources as
possible.
In order to consistently translate these more general, geographically broad based principles of
the COHWMP into more succinctly stated concepts wluch can be readily understood and applied
in evaluating specific facility proposals within the City, staff has developed a four-tiered
approach which accommodates increasingly larger sized facilities provided certain conditions are
demonstrated by the applicant. In overview, those tiers are:
a, relates facility size to umnet treattnent needs within a reasonable service area of
the proposed facility, based on the location of the generating sources in
comparison to county-wide treattnent needs.
I~~
p-tr
Page 7, ItemLt"
Meeting Date 2/23/93
b. allows a facility size beyond that determined by reasonable service area needs,
if such increased size is necessary for minimum economic viability.
c. allows a facility size beyond both of the above if there are no other locations in
the county capable of permitting the siting of a facility, and/or the use of
intergovenunental agreements to handle all or a portion of the proposed facility
capacity i. infeasible,
d, allows a !"acility size beyond, and regardless of, the above unless the City has
already accepted a fair and reasonable share of regional serving land uses
generally considered adverse, including but not limited to prisons, landfills, and
power plants, etc. In applying this criterion, consideration could be given to the
number, size and length of time such uses (including hazardous waste facilities)
have existed or are planned to exist in the City.
To ensure that adequate opportunity was provided for interested parties, including Greenfield
Environmental (the parent company of the APTEC n hazardous waste treatment facility at Otay
Landfill) and Latham & Watkins (legal counsel foJ PTEC) , to review and comment on the
proposed General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Ame!: nts, staff distributed a cover letter and
copies for initial input between the period of October 1 "27,1992, and for final input between
the period of November 18,1992 and December 4,1\; The latter routing asked for comment
submittal no later than D. ::ember 4, No comments were received during either of these review
periods.
However, on Monday, December 7, 1992 the Planning Department received a letter dated
December 4, 1992 from Latham & Watkins (Attorneys for APTEC II), stating on behalf of
'APTEC II their belief that, due to time prescriptions in the Tanner Act, the City was effectively
without jurisdiction to act upon the cuITently proposed General Plan Amendments, and that the
item should be removed from the Planning Commission agenda. While the letter very briefly
stated their belief n... that Proposed Amendments are deficient in several respects... n, no
substantive discussion was provided as to those alleged deficiencies. The letter did go on to state
that should the City decide to proceed in this matter, APTEC will submit additional comments
at or prior to the hearing.
In a letter dated December 10, 1992, the Planning Department responded to Latham & Watkins'
December 4, 1992 letter, and indicated that the matters would be heard as scheduled at 7:00
p.m. on December 16, 1992.
At 5:30 p.m. on December 16, 1992, the Planning Department received a letter of response
from Latham & Watkins, reiterating many of their and Greenfield Environmental's previous
claims, but in addition more substantive comments were provided for the fIrst time on specific
portions of the June 30, 1992 General Plan Amendments (GPA-92-02) , and on the cuITently
proposed additional amendments (GPA-92-02A). That letter was presented to the Planning
;-1
~
-..L--.-.-------
Page 8, Item1-1
Meeting Date 2/23/93
Commission at the 7:00 p.m. hearing. Given the inability to adequately review and respond to
the letter's claims, the Commission granted staff's request to continue the hearing to the next
regular business meeting of January 13, 1993.
Staff reviewed the December 16, 1992 letter, and provided responses which the Commission
considered, and which are contained in Attachment I to this repon. For clarity, that Attachment
insens staff responses at appropriate points within the body of the letter.
On January 4, 1993, the Planning Depanment received another letter from Latham & Watkins
indicating preservation of their option to further comment in conjunction with the City Council's
consideration of the amendments. No additional letters or testimony were presented at the
January 13, 1993 Planning Commission hearing.
Based on review of the above letters, the Tanner Act, the COHWMP, and the City's General
Plan provisions, staff has found that reconsideration of the June 30, 1992 General Plan
amendments (GPA-92-02) adopted under Resolution No. 16794 is not warranted, and that the
currently proposed additional General Plan Amendments (GPA-92-02A)(see Exhibit B), and
Implementing Ordinance (PCA-92-02)(see Exhibit C) are consistent with the provisions of State
law and the COHWMP. Staff did however, make minor revisions to criteria nos. 4, 5, 7, and
8 on pages 3-47 and -48 of Exhibit B, to clarify the City's intent in response to Latham &
Watkins letter, Furthennore, it is the advice of the City Attorney that the City Council has
jurisdiction to hear the matters as scheduled,
Proposed ImDlementing Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
As previously noted, Resolution No. 16794 called for the preparation of Zoning ordinance
amendments necessary to implement provisions of the amended Public Facilities Element, The
focus of the Zoning Ordinance amendments is to define hazardous waste facilities, and to
establish a specialized conditional use pennit application and review procedure consistent with
the provisions of the Tanner Act contained in Section 25199 et seq. of the California Health and
Safety Code.
Those provisions of State law delineate unique procedural requirements for local consideration
of hazardous waste facility proposals which, in summary, include the following:
a, a 90 day pre-application period.
b. ongoing coordination with the State Office of Pennit Assistance (OPA), affected
agencies such as the State and County Departments of Health Services, Regional
Water Quality Control Board, and the Air Pollution Control District, and the
public and affected local jurisdictions.
c, a panicular series of public notification and input meetings.
d. Appointment by the City of a Local Assessment Committee whose membership
is specifically structUred, and whose role is to serve in an advisory capacity to the
1'~
~
Page 9, ItemLf5"
Meeting Date 2/23/93
City with respect to identifying the terms and conditions under which a proposed
facility may be acceptable to the community.
e. role and relation of environmental documents and health risk assessments in the
review process.
e. time frames for various portions of the review process.
f. the creation of Technical Assistance Grants which may be used by the LAC to
commission consultants or studies necessary to assist in the review of the project
and related technical documents, and in formulation of their recommendations.
g, an appeal process for local project decisions through the State Governor's Office,
Pursuant to the above, following is a summary of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments
contained in Exhibit C:
a. Adds Section 19.04.107 defming hazardous waste facilities.
b, Adds Section 19.58.178 adding further definitions, setting forth the specific
conditional use permit application and review procedures unique to hazardous
waste facility proposals, defining the LAC formation process and their role in
decision making, prescribing the required series of public information and input
meetings, indicating the role and preparation requirements for environmental and
health risk assessments, prescribing the process for initial General Plan
consistency determinations, outlining the process and guidelines for obtaining and
using Technical Assistance Grants, and delineating additional findings required
for the issuance of a conditional U5~ permit for a hazardous waste facility.
c. Amends Section 19,14,070 modifying the conditional use permit administrative
procedure to require the additional fmdings, and requiring consideration of the
use permit by both the Planning Commission and City Council, with the Planning
Commission's action forming a recommendation rather than a decision subject to
appeal, and making the City Council's action fmal.
d, Amends Sections 19.42.040, 19.44.040, and 19.46.040 to establish hazardous
waste facilities as conditional uses in the City's I-R, I-L, and I zones respectively,
subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.178 previously outlined.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable
(hwordcc.rp'¡
4~
~
1HIS PAGE BlÄNK
1-10
~
Ordinance No.-
Page 3
In those cases where the application conforms to the requirements of Section 19.14.030A, the
application shall be directed to the zoning administrator.
B.. In the case of hazardous waste facilities as defined in Section 19 04.107 =li~~~ns f~~
conditional use rermits or modifications thereto shall be made Dursuant ~~::~b li~-~.17;d
and shall be considered by the Plannin~ Commission with a recommr-nda . t e rward
to the Ci(y Council for final review and action. The reQuirements of Section 19 14 090 shall
lij!,ply to both the Plannin~ Commission recommendation and the Ci\.", Council resolution with
the followin!! modifications'
L The written findin!!s in addition to the reQuirements of Section 19.14.080. shall address
those matters as set forth in Section 19.58.178K.
2.. The decision of the Plannin!! Commission shall constitute a recommendation only. and
shall not become final or subject to 8,pJ>eaI as provided in Sections 19.14.100 t~
19.14.130.
3... The City Council's decision shall be considered final. and the Ci(y Clerk shall transmit
a coJ'Y of the resolution as Drovided by Section 19.14 130.
SECTION III: That Section 19.42.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 19.42
I-R - RESEARCH INDUSTRIAL ZONE
19.42.040 Conditional uses
Conditional uses permitted in an I-R zone include:
A. Retail commercial uses necessary to serve the I-R zone;
B. Manufacture of pharmaceuticals, drugs and the like;
C. Building height in excess of three and one-half stories or forty-five feet;
D. Unclassified uses, as set forth in Chapter 19.54.
E. Roof-mounted satellite dishes subject to the standards set forth in Section 19.30.040.
.., o-?
~
Ordinance No. -
Page 4
F. Recycling collection centers, subject to the provisions of Section 13.58.340.
ß. Hazardous waste facilities. subject to the provisions of Section 19 58.178
SECTION IV: That Section 19.44.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 19.44
I-L - LIMITED INDUSTRIAL ZONE
19.44.040 Conditional uses
Conditional uses permitted in an I-L zone include:
A. Machine shop and sheet metal shop;
B. Service stations, subject to the conditions in Section 19.58.280;
C. Steel fabrication;
D. Restaurants, delicatessens and similar uses;
E. Drive-in theaters, subject to the conditions of Section 19.58.120;
F. Major auto repair, engine rebuilding and paint shops;
G. Commercial parking lots and garages;
H. Plastic and other synthetics manufacturing;
1. Building heights exceeding three and one-half stories or forty-five feet;
J. Unclassified uses as set forth in Chapter 19.54;
K. Trucking yards, terminals and distributing operations;
L. The retail sale of such bulky items as furniture, carpets and other similar items;
M. Retail distribution centers and manufacturers' outlets which require extensive floor areas
for the storage and display of merchandise, and the high-volume, warehouse-type sale
,O-4.f
~
Ordinance No.-
PageS
of goods and, retail uses which are related to and supportive of existing, on-site retail
distribution centers of manufacturers' outlets. Conditional use permit applications for the
establishment of retail commercial uses, covered by the provisions of this subsection,
shall be considered by the city council subsequent to its receipt of recommendations
thereon from the planning commission.
N. Roof-mounted satellite dishes subject to the standards set forth in Section 19.30.040.
O. Recycling collection centers, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.340.
~ Hazardous waste facilities. subject to the Drovisions of Section 19.58.178.
SECTION V: That Section 19.46.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 19.46
I - GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE
19.46.040 Conditional uses
Conditional uses in an I district include:
A. Motels;
B. Restaurants;
C. Service stations, subject to the provisions of Sections 19.58.280;
D. The retail sale of such bulky items as furniture, carpets and other similar items;
E. Retail distribution centers and manufacturers' outlets which require extensive floor areas
for the storage and display of merchandise, and the high-volume, warehouse-type sale
of goods and, retail uses which are related to, and supportive of existing, on-site retail
distribution centers or manufacturers' outlets. Conditional use permit applications for
the establishment of retail commercial uses, covered by the provisions of this subsection,
shall be considered by the city council subsequent to its receipt of recommendations
thereon from the planning commission;
F. The following uses covered by this subsection, shall be considered by the city council
subsequent to its receipt of recommendations thereon from the planning commission:
.., Ð-5
~
Ordinance No.-
Page 6
1. Brewing or distilling of liquor, or perfume manufacture,
2. Meat packing,
3. Large scale bleaching, cleaning and dyeing establishments,
4. Railroad yards and freight stations,
5. Forges and foundries,
6. Automobile salvage and wrecking operations, and industrial metal and waste rag,
glass or paper salvage operations; provided, that all operations are conducted
within a solid screen not less than eight feet high, and that materials stored are
not piled higher than said screen;
G. Any other use which is determined by the commission to be of the same general
character as the above uses;
H. Unclassified uses, as provided in Chapter 19.54.
1. Roof-mounted satellite dishes subject to the standards set forth in Section 19.30.040.
J. Recycling collection centers, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.340.
K.. Hazardous waste facilities. subject to the urovisions of Section 19.58.178
SECTION VI: That Section 19.58.178 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal
Code to read as follows:
Chapter 19.58
USES
19.58.178 Hazardous waste facilities
A hazardous waste facility as defined in Section 1904.107 of this title m~ be considered for
permittin~ only within an industrial zone which is also located within a .General Area. identified
in Section 5.5 of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan as an area &PJlrQpriate for the
accc:ptance and consideration of an !\pulication for such a facilitY A hazardous waste facility
ma,y be allowed within a location as indicated above upon the issuance of a conditional use
permit. subject to the followinl?: standards and e:uidelines:
¡D{,p
~
Ordinance No.-
Page 7
A... PURPOSE AND INTENT
It is the intent of this section to establish and clarify local reauirements and procedures
for the review and aooroval of conditional use permit ~pplications f~; ~ h=d~~-;-~:;
facility. consistent with the provisions of Section 25199 et seq. of the C . rn~; Hifuh
and Safety Code (fanner Act). and with the objectives. policies and ~rite' 0 e
Public Facilities Element of the City General Plan re~ardinl! hazardous waste
manal!ement planninl! and the sitin!! and permittine of hazardous waste facilities
Il. APPLICABILITY
Any conditional use permit I!ranted for a hazardous waste facility pursuant to Sections
19.14.070 throu~h .130 shall comply with the aDDlicable provisions of this section which
are supplementary to. and in the event of conflict shall supersede the re~ulationsKset forth
in Sections 19 14.070 throueh 130 Subsections D. E. F. G. H. I. J. and of this
section shall ~ly to all hazardous waste facilities as defined in Section 19 04.107 ~d
as herein defined.
£. DEFINITIONS
1... "Hazardous waste" shall mean a waste or combination of wastes which because
of its quantity. concentration. or physical. chemical. or infectious characteristics
may either:
iL. Cause or sil!nificantIy contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase
in serious irreversible. or in~acitatin~ reversible. illness.
12. Pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the
environment when improperly treated. stored. tran~rted. di~sed of or
otherwise mana~ed.
In addition. hazardous waste shall include the followin~'
iL. Any waste identified as a hazardous waste QY the State DC<PaTtment of
Toxic Substances Control.
12. Any waste identified as a hazardous waste under the Resource
Conservation Recovery Act as amended 42 U.S C 66 6901 et seq. and
any rel!ulations Dromulvated thereunder.
£.. Extremely or acutely hazardous waste. which includes any hazardous
waste or mixture of hazardous wastes which. if human exposure should
10-1
~
~~ ---~--~
Ordinance No.-
Page8
occur. may likely result in death. disablinl! personal injury or serious
illness caused by the hazardous waste or mixture of hazardous wastes
because of its Quantity concentration. or chemical characteristics.
2. .Hazardous waste facility. means any facility used for the storaee. transfer.
treatment. recyclinl! and/or disoosal of hazardous wastes or associated residuals
as defined in Section 1904.107.
~ .Land use decision. shall mean a discretionary decision of the City concernine
a hazardous waste facility project. includinl! the issuance of a land use permit or
a conditional use permit. the ¡:rantine of a variance. the subdivision of pro,perty.
or the modification of existinl! pro.perty lines pursuant to Title 7 (commencine
with Section 6500Q) of the California Government Code.
D. NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPLY: APPLICATION FOR A LAND USE DECISION:
COMPLETENESS OF APPLICATION
L Pursuant to the Drovisions of State Health and Safety Code Section 25199.7(a)
and (b). at least ninety (90) days before filinl! an 1IP,plication for a conditional use
permit for a hazardous waste facility the IIPPlicant shall file with the Plannine
De.partment and with the Office of Permit Assistance in the State Office of
Plannine and Research. a Notice of Intent (.N.O.I. ") to make the aDDlication.
The N. 0 I shall be on such form as lIP,proved by the Director of Plannine and
shall specify the project location to which it 1IP,plies. and contain a complete
description of the nature. function. and sco,pe of the project.
b The Plannin~ De.partment shall Drovide public notice of the 1IP.,plicant's intent to
IIPply for a conditional use permit. pursuant to the noticine procedure in Section
19.12.070. and QY postine notices in the location where the pro"posed project is
located.
~ Costs incurred by the City in processinl! said public notice shall be paid by the
project pro,ponent throueh establishment of a de.posit account for such puq>oses
with the Plannine De.partment at the time the N.O.I. is filed
!.. The N.O.I. shall remain in effect for one year from the date it is filed. unless it
is withdrawn Qy the pro.,ponent. However. a N.O.I. is not transferable to a
location other than that specified in the N.O.!.. and in such instance the
pro"ponent proposes to chanee the project location. a new N.O I shall be
pre,pared. and the Drocedure shall beein aeain for the new location.
'-rO - 8'
~Y
Ordinance No.-
Page 9
~ Within 30 ~ys of the fi\in~ of the N.O.I . the IW>licant shall schedule a
pre-application conference with the Plannin~ Di<partment to be held not later th~
45 ~s thereafter. at which the aoolicant and the Plannin¡t ~~;;~~ sh~l
discuss information and materials necessarY to evaluate the ~lication. Within
30 days after this meetine. the Director of Plannin~ shall inform the a:wli~t.
in writin2. of all submittals necessmy in order to deem the conditional uSe permit
IW>lication complete.
n.. The lijI,plicant m~ not file an aD plication for a conditional use Dermit unless the
Iij)J)licant has first complied with the above items. and presented the l'e(Juired
lijI.,plication fee Furthermore said aDDlication shall not be considered and acted
l!pon until it is deemed complete as provided by Section 19.14.070. and until all
materials necessmy to evaluate the IijIplication as set forth by the Director of
Plannin~ Dursuant to Item 5 above have been received and acce.,pted as to content.
1.. An lijI,plication is not deemed to be complete until the Planhin2 D~artment
notifies the an¡;>licant. in writin2 that the !\pplication is complete. Said
notification of completeness or incompleteness shall be provided within 30 days
of the aDDlication submittal. or resubmittal as aDDlicable. After an application is
determined to be complete. the Plannin~ D~artment may request additional
information where necessmy to clarify. modify. or sup,plement previously
submitted materials. or where resultin~ from conditions which were not known.
and could not reasonably have been known at the time the aDDlication was
~
B... The Plannin~ De.partment shall notify the Office of Permit Assistance in the State
Office of Plannin~ and Research within ten (10) ~ys after an lijIj>lication for a
conditional use rermit is acce.,pted as comDlete by the Plannin2 DeDartment
~ PRE-APPLICATION PUBLIC MEETING
L Within ninety (90) days after a Notice of Intent is filed with the Plannin~
Department and Office of Permit Assistance in the State Office of Plannin2 and
Research pursuant to subsection D.!. the Office of Permit Assistance will in
cooperation with the Plannin2 Denartment. convene a public meetine (.Pre-
Apj>lication Meetin2") in the City of Chula Vista for the e~ress DUq>ose of
infonnin2 the public on the nature. function. and scope of the pro,posed project
and the procedures that are required for I\Wrovin2 IU'.plications for the project.
1. The City shall arran~e a meetine location in a public facility near the Dro,posed
Droject site. and shall i!Íve notice of said meetin2 pursuant to the noticin¡
procedures in Section 19 12.070 and by postine at the proposed project site.
1V-'t
~
~ - --- -~~~~---
Ordinance No.-
Page 10
~ All affected a~encies. includinl! but not limited to the State Dc:partment of Health
ServiceslToxic Substance Control Pro~ram. Re¡!Ïonal Water Ouality Control
Board. County Dc:partment of Health Services- Hazardous Materials Manal!ement
Division and the Air Pollution Control District. shall send a rc:presentative who
will explain to the Dublic their a¡!enc,y's procedures for I\Wrovin~ permit
ap,plications for the project. and outline the public's o.pportunities for review and
comment on those ap,plications.
£ LOCAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE: FORMATION AND ROLE
.L. At any time after filin~ of the N OJ.. but not later than 30 days after an
ap,plication for a land use decision has been a~ted as complete. the City
Council shall appoint a seven member Local Assessment Committee ("LAC") to
advise the City in considerin~ the hazardous waste facility proposal.
2. The membershiD of the LAC shall be broadly constituted to reflect the makeu,p
of the City. and shall include three renresentatives of the City at larl!e. two
re,presentatives of environmental or public interest I!roups. and two re,presentatives
of affected businesses and industries Members of the LAC shall have no direct
financial interest. as defined in Section 87103 of the California Government
Code. in the prooosed project
~ The LAC is solely an advisory committee and is not empowered with any
decision makini! authority relative to the prooosed project. nor with the lel!al
standinl! to assert ~ific Droiect conditions. Rather. the LAC Drovides a
mechanism for direct input on matters of concern to the ~eneral public into the
environmental review process and presents the oDportunity for framin~ Qllestions
that should be addressed in that process as well as in seeinl! that these Qllestions
are addressed as early in the process as possible.
~ As such the LAC shall within the time period Drescribed by the City Council.
advise the City of the terms and conditions under which the proposed hazardous
waste facility project may be a~table to the community. as follows.
i.. Ado,pt rules and procedures which are necessary to perform its duties.
b... Enter into a dialo~ue with the project proponent to reach an understandin~
QD.;.
ill the su~i!ested terms provisions and conditions for project ap,proval
and facility o.peration which would ensure protection of public
health. safety and welfare. and the environment of the City of
Chula Vista and adjacent communities. and
,0-10
~
Ordinance No.-
Page 11
æ the $peCiaI benefits and remuneration the prqponent will provide
the City as compensation for all local costs and impacts associated
with the facility and its o,peration Such discussions shall address
"fair share" con~ts as set forth in Section 5 5 of the General
Plan Public Facilities Element. inciudine the consideration of
establishine inter-eovernmental aereements and/or other
compensation and incentive nrol!rams.
Said dialoeue shall be responsive to the issues and concerns identified at
the meetine described in subsection G.t
ç... With reeard to subsection 'b.' above any resultinl! pro,posed mitil!ation
measures not already defined in the environmental review or nermittine
process would be subject to the nel!otiation process with the pro,ponent.
with the nel!otiation results forwarded as recommended terms of annroval
to the Planninl! Commission and City Council.
Q" Represent I!enerally in meetinl¡s with the project ; ,nnlicant. the interest of
the residents of the Ci(y of Chula Vista and the interests of adjacent
communities. as principaIly made known throueh'the Post-Application
~
~ Receive and expend. subiect to the aDJ>rovai of the City Manaçer and
authorization of the Ci(y Council. aJ1Y technical assistance ¡¡rants made
available as described in Subsection J
f. Advise the Planninl! Dc;partment. Plannine Commission. and the City
Council of the terms. nrovisions. and conditions for project IIPnrovai
which have been successfully ne¡¡otiated by the committee and the
proponent. and any additionaI information which the committee deems
'aJ',pro,priate. The Plannine Denartment. Plannine Commission. and City
Council may use this advice for their indc:pendent consideration of the
~
~ The City shaIl allocate staff resources to assist the LAC in performine its duties.
and the proiect nro.ponent shaIl be resoonsible to pay the City's costs in
establishine. convenine. and staffine the LAC. throueh establishment of a de,posit
account for such pUl:;poses with the Plannine Denartment at the time of filine an
ap,plication for a land use decision.
2. The LAC shall cease to exist after final administrative action by state and local
aeencies has been taken on the permit 1IP,plications for the prQject for which the
Committee was convened.
-,D-I J
.PiftI'l /
--
Ordinance No.-
Page 12
Q. NOTICE OF PERMIT APPLICATION: POST-APPLICATION MEETING
1... Within sixty (60) days after receivine: the notice of a coll1plete aD,plication as
reQuired by subsection D 8 the Office of Permit Assistance in the State Office
of Plannine: and Research will convene a (.Post-Ap,plication Meetin~.) in the City
of Chula Vista of the lead and resoonsible a!:encies for the project. the prOJX>nent.
the LAC. and the interested Dublic for the puqlOse of determinin~ the issues
which concern the a~encies that are reQuired to lijlprove the Droject and the
issues which concern the Dublic. The Plannin~ De.partment shall provide notice
to the public of the date. time. and Dlace of the meetin~.
b The issues of concern raised at the Post-A,p,plication Meetin~ must include all
environmental and permittine: issues which will need to be addressed in the
environmental document to ensure the document's adequa«y in sup,portin~ the
actions of all permittin~ and re~nsible a~encies for the project.
~ The Post-AD,plication Meetin~ should be held as soon as an environmental initial
study or notice of preparation is available for review and comment. so that
adequate op,portunity is provided for meetin~ input to be emDloyed in the sco,pin~
of subsequent environmental review activities.
lL ENVIRONMENTAL AND REALm RISK ASSESSMENTS
1... All hazardous waste facility proposals shall be required to under~o an
environmental review and health risk assessment ~~ardless of facility type. size.
or proximity to populations or immobile populations.
z.. As hazardous waste facilities m~ vary ~reat)y in their potential public health and
safety. and environmental risks the dc:pth and breadth of environmental review
and health risk assessments must be tailored on a case-by-case basis.
~ The environmental review and health risk assessment shall serve as the Drimary
vehicles for identifyin~ community and involved ae:ency concerns and providin~
data to be used by the LAC and the City in nee:otiatine: project conditions. As
such. within 30 days followin~ the Post-Application Meetin~. the City shall'
i. create an ad-hoc technical committee to advise the City and the LAC on
technical issues ~~ardin~ the SCQpin~ and pn,paration of the
environmental review and health risk assessment. The membership should
consist of staff from each of the involved permittin~ or re~nsible
'1D-I~
-H1P7;1...
Ordinance No.-
Page 13
aeencies an ~idemioloeist a toxicoloeist. and any other technical experts
deemed necessar.y or desirable.
Q. convene a meetin~ of involved CitY staff the environmentaJ document
Drenarer. the LAC. ad-hoc technical committee. and the proiect Dro,ponent
to establish the sco,pe and content for the environmenlaJ Ìloc~m~nt ;~
health risk assessmer-L and the need for anv other technical ;~J ie .
CitY Council shaH review the meetin!! outcome and aQprove a ~nal ~coJ::
for the environmen'al review and health risk assessment p . or t
commencement of work.
!. A traffic/tram¡portation study shall be reQuired as Dart of the environmentaJ
review for all hazardous waste facility proj)Osals. and at minimum Sh~~~cc:;;mt
for all factors addressed under the Safe Tran$pOrtation sitinl! criteria co . n in
Section 5.5 of the Public Facilities Element of the City General p¡~
~ Uj)On selection of a reasonable ran!!e of project alternatives under the California
EnvironmentaJ Duality Act. Public Resources Code Sections 21000 ~t ~b the
City. upon the advice of the LAC and ad-hoc technical committee sh I lish
a Dreferred hierarchy amonl! those alternatives for the DUI:pOse of determinine :h:
level of Qualitative and Quantitative analysis that should be performed for h
health risk assessment on those alternatives. In determinin~ this preferred
hierarchy and associated level of health risk assessment. consideration shall be
eiven to the relative feasibility of each alternative to attain the stated project
objectives. and the relative merits of each alternative.
§.. The health risk assessment shall serve as an evaluative and decision-makin~ tool
and shall not be construed as Drovidin~ definitive answers re!!ardin!! fu~ilitŸ
~
L. The ad-hoc technical committee shall remain in tact to assist as reauested. ~e
City and the LAC in the evaluation of the final health risk assessment and y
technical studies to determine a~table levels of risk and/or to determine the
extent and type of related conditions and mitiL!ation measures which should be
IIRPlied to the project
ß... The LAC shall not finalize its recommendations for forwardinL! for Plannin~
Commission and City Council consideration until after the Dublic review ~ri~
for the draft environmentaJ document has closed. and the LAC has had suffi ie t
time to review any comments received
~ Any costs associated to the formation or work of the ad-hoc technical committee,
in addition to any other consultant(s) the LAC deems necessar.y. includinL! costs
íD-13
P/I'lJ
Ordinance No.-
Page 14
incurred in the p1"eJ'aration of any technical studies. shall be mid for throul!h
technical assistance ~rants as described in subsection J.
L INITIAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION
L At the request of the ~,plicant. the City Council shall within sixty (60) d~s after
t'le Plannin~ D~artment has determined that an ~,plication for a conditional use
permit is complete and after a noticed public hearin~ issue an initial written
¡ietermination on whether the nro,posed project is consistent with both of the
followin~:
i.. The ~,plicable nrovisions of the City General Plan and Zonin~ Ordinances
in effect at the time the annlication was acce,pted as complete.
Q" The county hazardous waste mana~ement plan authorized by Article 3.5
(commencine with Section 25135) of the California Health and Safety
Code. if such plan is in effect at the time of ~Iication
z.. The Plannin~ De,partment shall send to the IIJInlicant a co,py of the written
determination made pursuant to item I above.
~ The determination required by item I above does not nrohibit the City from
makin~ a different determination when the final decision to ~rove or deny the
çonditional use permit is made if the final determination is based on information
:which was not considered at the time the initial determination was made
L TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS: LOCAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE
NEGOTIATIONS
L Followin~ the Post-Ap,plication Meetin~. the LAC and the nroponent shall meet
and confer on the project nroposal pursuant to the provisions of subsection F.
2. r.,iven that the rules rel!ulations. and conditions relative to hazardous waste
facility projects are extremely technical in nature. as are the associated
assessments of potential public health and environmental risks. the LAC ma,y find
that it requires assistance and indenendent advise to adeq lJltely review a pro,posed
project and make recommendations In such instance. the LAC m~ request
technical assistance ~rants from the City to enable the hirinl! of a consultant(s) to
do any. or all of the followin~:
i.. assist the LAC in the review and evaluation of the project ~plication
environmental documents technical studies and/or IIlIY other documents.
-;0-1 c. -
~
Ordinance No.-
Page 15
materials. and information I'eQJ.lired in connection with the proiect
aDplication.
h. inte¡:pret the potential public health and safe~ and environmentaJ risks
associated with the Droiect and help to define accc:ptable miti~ation
measures to substantially minimize or eliminate those risks.
£.. advise the LAC in its meetin~s and discussions with the DTOJ)Onent to seek
a~reement on the terms and conditions under which the proiect will be
accc:ptable to the communi~.
~ The pro,ponent shall be required to pay a fee ecual to the amount of any technical
assistance I!rant authorized for the LAC. Said fee(s) shall be paid to the City.
and deoosited in an account to be used exclusively for the pulJlOses set forth in
subsection J.2
~ If the local assessment committee and the apDlicant cannot resolve aI1Y differences
throu~h the meetings the Office of Permit Assistance in the State Office of
Planning and Research may be called upon to mediate disputes
~ The prooonent shall pay one-half of the costs of any mediation Drocess which may
be recommended or undertaken by the Office of Permit Assistance in the State
Office of Planninl! and Research. The remainin~ costs will be Daid. ¡¡oon
l\P.proDriation by the legislature. from the State General Fund.
K. ADDmONAL FINDINGS REOUIRED FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILmES
Before any conditional use permit for a hazardous waste facili~ may be ~ranted or
modified in addition to the findin¡¡s required by Section 19.14.080 it shall be found that
the pro,posed facility is in compliance with the followin¡¡:
L The .General Areas. policies of Section 5 5 of the Public Facilities Element of
the City General Plan.
2... The .siting criteria. as set forth in Section 5 5 of the Public Facilities Element
of the Ci~ General Plan
~ The .fair share. principles established in Section 5.5 of the Public Facilities
Element of the Ci~ General Plan
~ The County of San Die¡¡o Hazardous Waste Mana¡¡ement Plan.
1-o-/~
~
. --~-~---
:
Ordinance No.-
Page 16
SECTION VII: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day
from and after its adoption.
Presented by Approved as to form by
"¡~3
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Wlhomolplmnmclhwmp-a,onI)
l1)-tep
J.8f> - $
B~ þ.,f,~Î' ..,."
wfJ~ .tIU...,..ø~ ~
Z - Z3 - 93 tit"" ~RDINANCE NO. rfJ.> '/ ,)...
\O~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADDéONS
19.04.107 AND 19.58.178 TO, AND AMENDING S~ S 19.14.070,
19.42.040,19.44.040, AND 19.46.040 OF, THE C~CIPAL
CODE TO ESTABLISH DEFINITIONS, S AND
PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW AND ~~ AL OF CONDmONAL
USE PERMITS FOR HAZARDOUS WA~ ACILITIES.
~..
WHEREAS, on June 30, 1992, the City Council adopted amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the City General Plan ;ncorporating provisions related to the management
of hazardous wastes, and the siting and pennitting of hazardous waste facilities as required by
State law (Resolution No. 16794); and
WHEREAS, on February 23, 1993, the City Council adopted additional amendments to
the Public Facilities Element of the City General Plan to refine and clarify certain aspects of the
aforementioned June 30, 1992 amendments (Resolution No. --J; and
WHEREAS, in order to fully implement the provisions of the amended Public Facilities
Element it is necessary to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance, and staff was directed by the City
Council to complete said ordinance amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance amendments define hazardous waste facilities as
conditiolldJ uses in the City's industrial zon~ classifications, provided that the facility is also
located vithin one of the "general areas" designated in the General Plan Public Facilities
Element as an area appropriate for the consIderation of such facilities; and
WHEREAS, the amendments establish a specific review procedure for hazardous waste
facility conditional use permit applications consistent with State law; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the normal findings required for a conditional use permit, the
amendments would require the Planning Commission and City Council to find that the proposed
facility complies with the "General Areas" policies, siting criteria, and "fair share" principles
of Section 5.5 of the General Plan Public Facilities Element, and with the County of San Diego
Hazardous Waste Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, the amendments provide for a public hearing before both the Planning
Commission and City Council, with the Planning Commission action forming a recommendation
rather than a decision subject to appeal; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the amendments
will result in no significant impacts upon the environment, and has issued a Negative Declaration
under IS-93-14; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
. 7-1
._-_._~--
Ordinance No.-
Page 2
proposed amendments on December 16, 1992, and a continuation hearing on January 13, 1993,
and recommended that the City, Council introduce for first reading the proposed ordinance
amendments; and
WHEREAS, the City Cou cil held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Zoning
Ordinance Amendments on Feb 23, 1993.
Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as
SECTION I: That Section 19. .107 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code
to read as follows:
SECTION II: That Section 19.14.070 of the
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 19.14
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES, CONDmONA
19.14.070 Conditional use permit-Application-Fee-Public hearin
A" Applications for conditional use permits or modifications th to shall be made to the
Planning Commission in writing on a form prescribed by the Planning mmission and shall be
accompanied by plans and data sufficient to show the detail of the p sed use or building.
The application shall be accompanied by a fee as presently designated, or may in the future
be amended, in the master fee schedule. The director of planning shall cau the matter to be
set for hearing in the same manner as required for setting zoning matters for hearing. The
director of planning or the Planning Commission shall have the discretion to include in the notice
of the hearing on such application notice that the planning commission will consider
classifications of other than that for which application is made an/or additional properties and/or
uses.
Î O-a-
J-Iv ..} ~
!¡
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT èr
Item~
Meeting Date~
ITEM TITLE: Ordinance .;.5'¿¡:J Amending Sections ~.ijft\ and
2.36.030 of the Chula Vista MuniciP~Ø relating to the
advisory duties of the Human RelaB~ mmission
~'f;,.O
Resolution 1'7t:Jp5 Withdrawing from, and cauc;ing the
di¡¡solution of, the South Coast Organization Operating Transit
(SCOOT).
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works i
REVIEWED BY: City Manage# (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO
At its meeting on April 29. 1992 the SCOOT Board directed staff to investigate the
ramifications of dissolving SCOOT and to report back to the Board with a
recommendation on this matter. Both City and County Transit staffs have examined
issues relating to SCOOT dissolution, and find no negative impacts to either the City
or the County if this Joint Powers Agency (JPA) were dissolved. A positive result of
dissolution would be a reduction of time spent on SCOOT related matters by City and
County staffs, and the three elected officials on the SCOOT Board. Dissolution also
would terminate the SCOOT Senior and Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council introduce ordinance for first reading amending
Sections 2.36.010 and 2.36.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to the
advisory duties of the Human Relations Commission, and adopt resolution
withdrawing from SCOOT to cause the dissolution of SCOOT, effective at midnight
June 30, 1993.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
1. At its m"-eting on January 13, 1993, the SCOOT Senior and Disabled
Transportation Advisory Committee concurred with staff recommendation that
the Human Relations Commission become the advisory group for both Chula
Vista Transit and HandYtrans if SCOOT is dissolved on June 30, 1993. In
addition, the Committee indicated its continuing interest in senior and disabled
issues pertaining to both CVT and HandYtrans. Accordingly, the Committee
proposed that if the Human Relations Commission assumes advisory
responsibilities for both systems on July 1. 1993 as proposed, that the
Commission consider creating a subcommittee that would deal only with senior
and disabled public transportation issues.
~-I
~
-----------
Page 2, Item~ J
Meeting Date 2/23/93
2. The proposal to amend Sections 2.36.010 and 2.36.030 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code was on the Human Relations Commission agenda for its
February 10, 1993 meeting, and the Commission adopted the following motion:
"The Human Relations Commission is willing to accept
responsibility for advisory matters on Chura Vista Transit and
HandYtrans."
DISCUSSION:
Scoot Dissolution
SCOOT was formed in 1979 as a JPA between the City of Chula Vista and County
of San Diego in response to the Transportation Development Act (nTDA"). The TDA
required a mandatory 20% fare box recovery. If an agency failed to meet this
requirement, local funds were required to make up the difference. The TDA, however,
provided a five year grace period for recently formed transit authorities to meet this
percentage. At the time of its enactment, the City experienced a 15% farebox
recovery and the creation of SCOOT prevented the loss of City funds.
The reasons for SCOOT's formation are no longer valid. Chula Vista Transit's (CVT)
recovery ratio was around 15% in the late 1970's, but today exceeds 40%. In
addition, MTDB's legislative authority was changed in the mid-1980's to include all
the regional Article 4.0 funded operators under a regional recovery ratio requirement.
Therefore, the primary reason for SCOOT's formation - meeting the mandatory 20%
recovery ratio - is no longer relevant. Secondly, other operators, such as National City
Transit, were approached in the past about joining SCOOT but have declined, primarily
because there did not appear to be any operations or fiscal benefits from joining.
The disadvantages for retaining SCOOT are primarily administrative and include the
following:
- Staff time to prepare for meetings (Transit staff prepares Agenda
Statements; City Attorney prepares Resolutions and reviews
contracts; administrative support services for Agenda preparation,
mailing Agendas, meeting notices, attending meetings, and taking
minutes at meetings.)
- SCOOT meetings generally duplicate Council action, since all
policy matters are first presented to the Council before going to
the SCOOT Board.
- The necessity to take all Transit items to the SCOOT Board for
final approval tends to slow down the decision-making process
and implementation of Council approved actions, since SCOOT
~
~"
Page 3, ItemL
Meeting Date 2/23/93
meetings are called infrequently (about 4 times a year) and only
when items need to be considered by the Board.
The JPA provides that SCOOT may be dissolved if half of the JPA members withdraw
from SCOOT. Since there are only two members of SCOOT, if either the City or the
County withdraw, then SCOOT is dissolved. The Transit Coordinator checked with
MTDB, SANDAG, the City Finance Department, and Risk Manager, and the City
Attorney's Office regarding SCOOT dissolution. There do not appear to be any
negative impacts to either the City of Chula Vista or County of San Diego if SCOOT
were dissolved. Upon dissolution, the City's Article 4.0 TDA funds currently claimed
by SCOOT would be claimed directly by the City. Other changes would be primarily
administrative and include: changing SCOOT-owned fixed assets (buses, fare boxes,
etc.) to the City; changing the SCOOT budget to a City budget; and preparing future
contracts to be in the name of the City, rather than SCOOT. Rather than assigning
the five contracts that currently exist between SCOOT and other entities to the City,
they will expire by their terms on June 30, 1993.
The decision to dissolve SCOOT should occur now so that administrative changes
resulting from dissolution could become effective the next fiscal year beginning July
1, 1993. The effective date for the dissolution should occur on June 30, 1993 when
all operating and service agreements with SCOOT will expire.
Advisorv Issues for CVT and HandYtrans
If Council approves SCOOT dissolution, the SCOOT Senior and Disabled
Transportation Advisory Committee will cease to exist. This Committee is an advisory
group on senior and disabled issues pertaining to Chula Vista Transit and HandYtrans.
The Committee was established in 1979 as the Mayor's Elderly & Handicapped
Transportation Advisory Committee to assist in the start-up of HandYtrans. The
Committee originally was intended to disband after one year but it has continued
meeting on a quarterly basis. In 1985, its title was changed to the SCOOT Elderly
and Handicapped Transportation Advisory Committee (the term "elderly and
handicapped" was changed to "senior and disabled" in 1992). This change was for
two reasons: to expand its scope to include Chula Vista Transit; and to permit two
Committee members, who were residents of the Montgomery area prior to annexation
to the City, to continue serving on the Committee. However, the Committee's
primary focus has always been on senior and disabled issues pertaining to
HandYtrans, and to a lesser extent, CVT.
If SCOOT and the Committee are dissolved, staff considered options for providing
public input on transportation matters for both CVT and HandYtrans. These options
included: no advisory group for either system, one advisory group for both systems
and two advisory groups - one for each system.
~-3
~
~"--~--~~--~---
Page 4, Item ,;.. l
Meeting Date 2/23/93
No Advisorv GrouD
Ridership on both systems, particularly CVT, has grown considerably during recent
years. Last fiscal year CVT carried over 2 million passengers and HandYtrans
transported almost 34,000 passengers. HandYtrans has been designated the
Complementary Paratransit service under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
and its passengers generally are individuals who have difficulty riding CVT. CVT
carries a broader spectrum of riders including commuters, students, seniors and
disabled persons. Considering the large number of passengers carried on both
systems, it is staff's opinion that a mechanism to solicit community input on certain
planning and operations issues for both systems is appropriate.
Number of Advisorv GrouDs
Another consideration is whether there should be a separate advisory group for CVT
and HandYtrans or one advisory group for both systems. One advantage of a
separate advisory group for each system is the ability to focus on service and planning
issues that may be unique to each system. However, there are also many issues that
are common to both systems; and the ADA requirements encourage greater service
coordination between paratransit and fixed-route systems. Therefore, it is staff's
opinion that one advisory group would have the ability to deal effectively with
transportation issues applicable to both systems.
Advisorv Grouo for CVT and HandYtrans
Based on the assumption that one advisory group is adequate for CVT and
HandYtrans, staff considered two options: expand the function of the Human
Relations Commission (HRC) to include HandYtrans; or create a new commission
(perhaps called "Transit Advisory Commission") to deal exclusively with public
transportation issues related to CVT and HandYtrans.
ExDand HRC
The HRC currently has the authority to advise Council on CVT matters; modification
to the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to the advisory duties of the HRC could
expand its duties to include HandYtrans. One function listed in the ordinance
establishing the HRC (Section 2.36.010) states: "It is a further duty and function of
the Human Relations Commission to advise the City Council on matters involving
Chula Vista Transit, relating to operational activities and especially as to how well
Chula Vista Transit serves the needs of Chula Vista citizens." Transit staff has
presented CVT issues to the HRC on a few occasions in the past, but the use of the
Commission as a transportation advisory group has been underutilized.
The Transit Coordinator discussed this option to expand the role of the HRC with the
Commission at its meeting on February 10, 1993. In addition, in January 1993, the
~
¡-If
Page 5, Item d1/
Meeting Date 2/23/93
Transit Coordinator discussed the issue of an advisory group for CVT and HandYtrans
with the SCOOT Senior/Disabled Committee. The Committee also concurred with the
proposal for the HRC to assume advisory responsibilities for both CVT and
HandYtrans, but suggested that if the HRC's role is expanded that the HRC consider
establishing a subcommittee to focus on senior/disabled transportation issues, and
that existing Committee members might serve on this subcommittee.
At its February 10, 1993 meeting, the HRC expressed an interest in becoming more
involved in public transportation matters, and adopted a motion to expand its advisory
role to include both CVT and HandYtrans. Regarding the SCOOT Senior/Disabled
Committee's suggestion that the HRC establish a sub-committee to consider Senior
and Disabled issues, the Commission felt that any sub-committee of the Commission
should be composed of Commission members, and suggested that interested
committee members might apply for upcoming Commission vacancies. The HRC also
expressed the opinion that the full Commission should become more familiar with
transportation issues before appointing a sub-committee.
Create a New Commission
The other option staff considered is to establish a new commission that would deal
exclusively with public transportation issues related to CVT and HandYtrans. The
advantage to this option is that a new commission could be established, and
commissioners appointed, with a specific and exclusive interest in public
transportation matters. A disadvantage of this option is establishing another
commission and the costs associated with staffing that new advisory body.
In summary, staff recommends that the Human Relations Commission's advisory role
be expanded to include both CVT and HandYtrans. The HRC at its meeting on
February 1O, 1993 concurred with this proposal and expressed an interest in being
the advisory body for both Chula Vista public transportation systems. The ordinance
before Council amends the HRC duties and responsibilities to include HandYtrans. If
this ordinance is approved by Council, Transit staff would begin taking transportation
issues for both CVT and HandYtrans to the Commission in FY 1993-94.
FISCAL IMPACT: SCOOT dissolution would have no negative impact on the City of
Chula Vista TDA Article 4.0 funds. It would result in reduced administrative costs due
to time spent preparing for and attending SCOOT meetings by both city and county
staffs, and the three elected officials who are SCOOT board members. There would
be no cost associated with expanding the advisory role of the HRC.
1"'" Ds.o32
WPC F:IHOMElENGINEERlBILlG\102,82
~~
~/"£
~~~-~--_._-.
nns PAGE BlANK
~-(p
~
"-
*
;*'A-""'" ORDINANCE NO. .25'~
? ~~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VITA ~«
AMENDING SECTIONS 2.36.010 AND 2.36.030 OF ~~~
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATI~~~ E
ADVISORY DUTIES OF THE HUMAN IONS
COMMISSION ~~
';ì -
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby
ordains as follows:
SECTION I: Section 2.36.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code is amended to read:
2.3&.010 Purpose and Intent.
A. It is the purpose and intent of the city council to redefine
and broaden the duties and functions of the human relations
commission as an advisory body, to make recommendations and
offer advice to the city council and the city manager in the
improvement and effectiveness of the interrelationships
between the various racial, religious, ethnic, socioeconomic,
age and handicapped groups of citizens forming the social body
of the city and to advise the city on how it may best proceed
in the realization of its stated goal to provide both physical
and social answers to the human care needs of said groups and
to accomplish, among other things:
1. The development of a mutual understanding and respect
among all such groups in the city;
2. The establishment and maintenance of contacts with groups
in the community which are concerned with interracial and
intercultural understanding, and to report to the city
council and city manager regarding the activities of
these groups;
3. The promotion of new and imprC'ved programs of services to
all local citizens in cooperation with peer boards and
commissions as well as the city manager;
4. The encouragement of citizen participation in local
government by providing a forum for discussion so as to
avoid recourse to conflict and disorder as a means of
resolving community relationship problems;
5. The protection and strengthening of the rights of various
racial, religious, ethnic, socioeconomic, age and
handicapped groups of citizens of Chula Vista to insure
1
8-1
/"
------------
full enjoyment of their constitutional privileges without
regard to race, color, creed, national origin, sex or age
and the elimination thereby of prejudice, discrimination
or bigotry in this community;
6. The advancement of programs to assist senior citizens in
the realization and satisfaction of their needs for
adequa and decent housing, food, clothing and other
social oncerns.
7. ngthening and improvement of pro~rams to
housing for low and moderate income families
'duals;
8. The encou gement of policies and programs to fully
integrate the handicapped into the mainstream of
community 1 fe in the city.
B. It is a further uty and function of the human relations
commission to adv e the city council on matters involving
Chula Vista Dublic transDortation services, relating
to operational 'ties and especially as to how well ~
vis'ta'traftsit erv'ces serves the needs of Chula Vista
citizens.
C. It is the intent of he city council to create healthy,
enlightened attitudes, olicies and practices by establishing
this commission as an fficial body, not primarily as an
enforcement or audit age cy, but as a commission which will
conduct careful surveys, dvise intelligently, and use the
tools of education and mo 'vation to the realization of the
objectives stated herein, which are the fulfillment of
democracy's promises and ealization of constitutional
guarantees.
SECTION II: Section of the Chula vista
Municipal Code is amended to read:
2.36.030 Duties and functions.
In cooperation with other relevant boa ds and commissions, the
human relations commission shall perform t~ following duties and
functions:
A. Foster mutual understanding, respect
racial, religious, national, ethnic,
and handicapped groups in the city;
B. Enlist the cooperation of the various raciaI religious,
ethnic, socioeconomic, age, sex and handicap ed groups,
fraternal and benevolent associations and other groups in
2
ð-- ð'
~
\
Chula Vista in programs and campaigns devoted to eliminating
group prejudice, intolerance, bigotry and discrimination;
C. Study the problems of prejudice, intolerance, bigotry,
discrimination and disorder occasioned thereby in all or any
fields of human relationship;
D. Study, review, analyze and report to the city council and the
city manager the studies of state and federal agencies, and
legislative enactments of state and federal governments,
including but not limited to the several civil rights acts of
the united States government and the state;
E. Work together with city, state and federal agencies in
developing programs showing the contributions of the various
racial, religious, ethnic, age, sex and handicapped groups to
the culture and traditions of the city, state and nation;
F. Promote the establishment of local community organizations in
such neighborhoods as it may be necessary and desirable to
carry out programs to lessen tensions or improve group
relations in the community;
G. Create such advisory committees and subcommittees as, in its
judg1llent, will aid in effectuating the purposes of this
chapter;
H. Work with the several boards and commissions and departments
of the city toward the improvement of municipal services and
communi ty relatio:'1s including assistance in the development of
housing programs for low and moderate income families and
individuals, the full range of programs providing assistance
to senior citizens and the handicapped and actions to
eliminate age and sex discrimination;
1. Initiate and investigate complaints and initiate its own
investigation, after consul tation with the ci ty manager,
relative to the actions of city officials or city agencies,
except that instances of discrimination within the
jurisdiction of any federal or state commission or agency
shall be referred to such commission or agency.
J. Hold hearings and take testimony of any person under oath or
otherwise, relating to any matter under investigation or in
question before the commission;
K. Advise the city council and the city manager of policies and
programs of a formal and informal nature that will aid in
eliminating all types of discrimination based on race, creed,
national origin, ancestry, age or sex, and secure the
furnishing of equal services to all residents and maintain the
3 r¿,-,
~
---___.__M
quality of opportunity for employment and advancement in the
city government;
L. Prepare and submit to thÐ city council and the city manager,
not less than once each fiscal year, a written report of its
activities and recommendations;
M. Consider Chula Vista 1sraftsi1s spel!'a1sisftal it;:elBs ~
transportation services. including, but not limited to, route
structures; fares; esftàit;:isft sf s~ses vehicles; interface with
all other forms of transit and bench, bus stop and bus shelter
locations;
N. Assess Chula vista 1sraftsit public transportation service§. from
the standpoint of the Chula Vista citizen and keep the city
council informed of the adequacy of service;
o. Consider and recommend to the city council the levels of
public transportation service§. ~ in Chula vista 1sraftsit.
P. The commission shall be advisory in its function, and shall
have no police or enforcement powers. It shall issue no
reports or recommendations except through the city council and
the city manager.
SECTION III: This ordinance shall be in full force on
the thirtieth day after its adoption and effective as of July 1,
1993.
P-esented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
P,1bome1a1lorDey1onl236
4
sv- 1ó
~
EXHIBIT A
I,
!
I
'6/ J (
CHAPTER 3
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT
CONTENTS
Section Page
1. Introduction 3-1
2. Goals and Objectives 3-2
3. Inventory of Existing Public Facilities 3-6
3.1 Water Facilities Inventory 3-6
3.2 Wastewater Facilities Inventory 3-8
3.3 Drainage and Flood Control Facilities Inventory 3-9
3.4 Solid &lid HID'JlII'àells Waste Collection and Disposal 3-13
Facilities Inventory
3.5 Hazardous Waste. Treatment Storage and Disposal
Facilities Inventorv
M 3.6 Secondary Schools Inventory 3-20
J,é 3.7 Elementary Schools Inventory 3-20
:J-rl- 3.8 Library Inventory 3-21
4. Public Facilities Plan 3-21
4.1 Water Distribution Network 3-23
4.2 Wastewater Collection and Disposal System 3-24
4.3 Drainage and Flood Control System 3-27
4.4 Solid and HaæFàells Waste Collection and Disposal System 3-30
4.5 Hazardous Waste Treatment. Storage and Disposal Svstem 3-31
~ 4.6 Secondary School System 3-35
4,é 4.7 Elementary School System 3-35 .
4+ 4.8 Library system 3-35
5. Policies and Guidelines 3-36
5.1 Water Supply Policies 3-36
5.2 Wastewater Service Policies 3-37
5.3 Drainage and Flood Control Policies 3-38
5.4 Solid and Hazl!fàells Waste Control Policies 3-49
5.5 Hazardous Waste Control Policies 3-40
M 5.6 School Development Policies 3-60
M 5.7 Library Development Policies 3-61
6. References 3-62
O-)J
1. INTRODUCTION
The public facilities element of the Chula Vista General Plan focuses on the facilities and
services that are controlled by the City through direct administration or contractual agreement,
and facilities provided as obligatory services by other public agencies. In the case of hazardous
waste treatment. storage and disposal. non-obligatory facilities provided by the private sector and
not necessarily under the City's control through direct administration or contractual agreement.
are also addressed. Excluded are public facilities that fall directly within the scope of other
elements of the plan such as rarks and Recreation, Circulation and others.
2. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The general objective and goal of the City of Chula Vista, as it relates to the infrastructure
requirements of the general plan, is to promote an adequate and efficient range of public facilities
and services. This will be accomplished by identifying key issues that should be addressed by
the Public Facilities Element and establishing the goals and objectives in response to each issue.
Issues are statements of either opportunities or problems the City will encounter in providing
adequate infrastructure requirements. Goals and objectives are statements of value regarding
what should or should not take place during the course of the City's development The issues,
goals and objectives which are applicable to the water, wastewater. drainage and flood control
and solid and hazardous waste facility requirements are discussed in this section.
GOAL 1. WATER FACILITY PLANNING
As in many other areas of Southern California, Chula Vista has experienced significant growth
over the past two decades. This growth has placed an increased demand on the water distribution
and supply facilities for the area. Chula Vista is highly dependent on imported water supplies
from the Colorado River Basin and State Project Water from Northern California. In recent
years, below average rainfall throughout California coupled with a court decision reducing
California's share of Colorado River Water, has increased the importance of proper water
management and conservation. It is the goal of. Chula Vista take actions, appropriate to its
population and resources, to control the growth in demand for water and promote water
conservation.
Objective 1. Promote water conservation through increased efficiency in essentÍal uses and use
of low water demand landscaping.
Objective 2. Encourage, where safe and feasible, wastewater reclamation and use of reclaimed
water for irrigation and other uses.
Objective 3. Encourage suppliers to adopt a graduated rate structure designed to encourage
water conservation.
Objectiv.e 4. Actively participate in the agency planning for providing adequate emergency
storage and supply facilities for Chula Vista and neighboring communities.
WPC F~OMIN'LANNIN(N)324P 3-1 g/)3
GOAL 2. WASTEWATER FACILITY PLANNING
Chula Vista relies on the City of San Diego Metropolitan (Metro) Sewage System for treating
and disposing of the wastewater generated within the general plan area. The City of San Diego
has been mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency to upgrade the Metro system to
secondary treatment levels. This mandate, coupled with the increased demand on Metro, will
result in significant expansion to the existing system of which Chula Vista is part. It is the goal
of the City to participate in the regional decision-making process regarding this expansion and
to control thl:; growth in demand for wastewater treatment within the general plan area.
Objective 5. Continually monitor wastewater flows and anticipate future wastewater increases
that may result from changes in the adopted land use.
Objective 6. Promote low wastewater generating development where appropriate.
Objective 7. Actively participate in the Metro expansion planning process, and where
appropriate, evaluate reasonable alternatives to eliminating Chula Vista's dependence on Metro.
Objective 8. Assure that new development meets or exceeds a standard of high quality in
wastewater facility planning and design and that existing downstream facilities are not adversely
impacted by the addition of new development upstream.
Objective 9. Resist the addition of pennanent new pump stations where gravity flow is at all
possible.
GOAL 3. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL FACILITY PLANNING
As growth occurs in the future, the proportional amount of rainfall runoff from each drainage
area will increase. As a result, existing drainage and flood control facilities downstream will
begin to experience higher flow rates than they have been experiencing or were designed for.
It is the goal of the City to properly regulate design of future facilities such that the effectiveness
of the existing drainage facilities are not degraded.
Objective 10. Required deyelopment of on-site detention of stonn water flows such that
where practical, existing downstream structures will not be overloaded.
Objective 11. Assure that new development incorporates a high degree of sediment
control as part of their project.
Objective 12. Preserve the existing drainage structures in Central Chula Vista where
possible to núninúze the disruption to the public and the requirement for additional space for
larger facilities.
WPC F:\HOMiN'LANN1NCNJ324P 3-2 (f,)L-/
GOAL 4. SOLID ANI> IIf.l!.RI>QUS WASTE CONTROL PLANNING
The production of solid wastes in San Diego County, including Chula Vista, has steadily
increased on a per capita basis at about 10 percent per year since 1982. Similarly, Hazameus
waste preduetion Has also increased witH the addition ef Rev: industries and teeHnelogy. If this
ttend continues as more development occurs, and based on the availability of suitable disposal
sites, Chula Vista could experience a solid lIßà Ilazardeus waste disposal problem. This could
mean at minimum a significant cost increase for transporting IT'aterials great distances to available
disposal sites and the possibility of increasing the number of waste ttansfer sites within the City.
While control and siting of disposal sites falls under the jurisdiction of agencies other than Chula
Vista, including the County of San Diego and State of California, the City has the ability to
conttol waste production within its general plan area. It is the goal of Chula Vista to take action
appropriate to its population and resources, to promote reductions in solid and HazaFèeus waste
production and plan for adequate disposal.
Objective 13. Promote recycling of any material which has a reusable nature. Provide
public facilities to handle recycling of materials such as paper, glass and others.
Objective 14. Support waste reduction legislation.
Objective 15 EneouFage òe'/eleflment of law hazar-dous '¡laste produemg industries.
Objective I(t IS. Support the County Public Infonnation and Education Program regarding
solid waste reduction and recycling.
Objective 1+ 16. Participate in regional planning and evaluation of solid waste disposal sites
and alternative methods of solid waste disposal.
GOAL 5. HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANNING
Coupled with population growth in San Diego County is a growth in the need for consumer
goods and services. and the industries that produce them. in order to maintain economic stability.
Howeyer. man v of those goods and services contain chemicals or use chemicals in their
manufacture and/or packaging. While our aualitv-of-life and economic stability may be largely
dependent upon these products and services. we are also threatened bv the mismanagement of
their chemical remains or the hazardous waste generated.
Past practice has seen much of the County'S hazardous waste generated disposed of in off-site
hazardous waste landfills without pre-treatment. Awareness of the inherent public and
environmental dangers of such practices has been heightened bv recent federal and state
legislation regarding the management and disposal of hazardous wastes. The focus of this
legislation has been toward increasing public and environmental safety bv reducing the hazard
inherent in disposal through adeauate waste treatment. and toward reducing the volume of
hazardous waste produced reauiring treatment and disposal. Assemblv Bill 2948. State
Government Code Sections 25135 et. sea. and 25199 et. sea. (Tanner. 1986). referred to as the
Tanner Act. represents a significant move toward the management of hazardous waste in a
WPC F"'IOMlN'u.NNtNG'lJ324P 3-3 6> ) 5-
comprehensive and svstematic approach. and reauires every CountY to fonnulate and adoPt a
Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
The San Diego CountY Hazardous Waste Management Plan (COHWMP) was prepared in
cooperation with local jurisdictions and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG).
and approved bv the State Department of Health Services (DHS) in October 1991. Its principal
I!:oal is to "establish a system for manal!:inl!: hazardous materials. includinl!: wastes. to protect
public health. safetv and welfare. and maintain the economic viabilitY of San Diego Countv."
The COHWMP serves as the primary planning document providing overall policy direction
toward the effective management of hazardous waste within San Diego CountY. including that
within the Citv's General Planning Area. through establishment of goals. policies. and
implementation measures predicated upon the following management hierarchy:
1. Encourage and support hazardous waste reduction and minimization at its source through
methods such as alteration of manufacturing processes and/or material substitutions.
b Encourage recvcling and on-site treatment.
1. Provide for adeauate off-site multi-user facilities to physically or chemicallv eliminate
or diminish hazardous properties. or reduce residual volumes requiring disposal. in a
manner which protects public health. safety. and welfare. and
.4.. Provide for adeauate disposal facilities for treatment residuals.
The COHWMP functions as a guide for local decisions regarding hazardous waste issues. and
in addition to waste reduction strategies. it sets forth siting. pennitting and processing
reauirements for local review of applications for off-site hazardous waste treatment facilities.
As such. each City within the County is reauired to adopt necessary provisions to implement the
COHWMP. Therefore. the following related sections of the Public Facilities Element of the
Chula Vista General Plan incorporate the COHWMPbv reference as if set forth herein. and as
provided bv law. prescribe those more specific. or stringent. planning requirements and siting
criteria reflective of local conditions which shall prevail over the more general provisions of the
COHWMP in favor of ensuring the utmost protection of public health. safety and welfare. and
environmental resources within the Citv of Chula Vista.
Objective 17: Develop effective screening processes for new and existing local businesses
using hazardous materials and generating hazardous waste to encourage waste minimization.
Objective 18: Promote recycling and alternative technologies for industrial. small
business. and household hazardous wastes in cooperation with the CountY and other agencies.
WPC F;\HOMIN'U.NNIN<N>324P 3-4 g~Jb
Obiective 19: Establish effective hazardous waste management planning within the CitY
through involvement of the public. environmental grOUps. civic associations. waste generators.
and the waste management industrY in decisions on local waste issues and facilitY proposals.
Objective 20: Ensure the protection of the health. safety. and welfare of Chula Vista
residents and the integrity of the Citv's environmental resources. through establishment of
effective processing procedures. and siting and permitting criteria for hazardous wasteJacilities.
GOAL &~. SCHOOLS
As growth occurs in the City, particularly new residential development, increased demands for
school services and facilities will be placed on the school districts servicing the Chula Vista
Community. While the control and siting of school sites falls under the jurisdiction of the local
school districts, Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vita City Schools, it is the
goal of the City to facilitate the districts' provision of school services.
Objective 18 21. Coordinate the review of development proposals with the local school
districts to ensure that adequate school facilities are available to meet the needs required by the
development.
Objective 19 22. Coordinate with local school districts during the review of land use issues
which required discretionary approval such as tentative subdivision maps, planned unit
developments, zoning ordinance and general plan revisions and amendments.
Objective ;W 23. Provide the school districts with the development thresholds as proposed
by the growth management conunittee for the agencies' review and comment.
Objective U 24. To site new school land use designations in a central location within
residential neighborhoods.
GOAL' 1. LIBRARY
As growth occurs in the City, particularly residential development, increased demand for library
service will occur. It is the goal of the City to provide for the çxpansion of the library system
into the newly developing areas and areas not adequately served by existing library facilities.
Objective ~ 25. Coordinate the review of development proposals to ensure that adequate
library facilities are available to meet the needs of new development.
Objective ~ 26. Continue the process of planning and site selection to ensure that new
facilities are built in existing area that are not cUlTently served by an adequate library.
Objective ;W 27. To site new library facilities in a central location to conveniently serve the
sUITounding community.
WI'C F:\IIOMJN'IANNIN<N>324P 3-5 3~/7
3. INVENTORY OF EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES
The public utilities and service system is one of the most important considerations in urban
development. Urban development and growth is dependent upon the availability of public
utilities and services. Conversely, expansion of these is dependent upon thorough planning which
in turn is an extension of appropriate and well-reasoned land use analysis and proposal. The
facilities and networks which make up the public works "infrastructure" are generally considered
as the foundations upon which activity areas are facilitated and maintained. In the case of Chula
Vista, the infrastructure may be one of the primary criteria for determining future growth of
activity areas.
The infrastructure addressed in this element consists of the following facilities:
Water
Wastewater
Drainage and Flood Control
Solid and Hazardous Waste Control
Generally, the City of Chula Vista is being adequately served by its public works infrastructure.
Certain facilities. however, are in need of improvement and upgrading. The following sections
discussed in greater detail each of the infrastructure systems and the agencies controlling them.
3.1 WATER FACILITIES INVENTORY
The City of Chula Vista's general plan area is provided water service primarily by two major
water agencies. These will be discussed below and are shown on Figure 3-1.
Sweetwater Authority
Central Chula Vista is served by the Sweetwater Authority whose service area within the City
is bounded by Interstate 805 and Sweetwater Reservoir to the east, San Diego By to the west,
the Otay River Valley to the south and SR 54 Bonita Road to the north. Approximately sixty
percent of Sweetwater's system is supplied by gravity from the Sweetwater Filtration Plant. The
remainder of the system is comprised of pumped pressure zones at the higher elevations. Source
supply for the City's portion of the system is largely from surface water runoff and collection
at Sweetwater Reservoir augmented by the San Diego County Water Authority aqueduct system
when necessary. Transnússion and distribution pipelines ranging in size from 6 inches to 42
inches, deliver water to Chula Vista with a normal operating pressure range of 40 to 90 pounds
per square inch (psi). Daily and seasonal peak flow requirements, including fJre flows, are offset
by operational storage reservoirs located throughout the City. Total operational storage for
Sweetwater is approximately 38 núllions gallons with an average daily demand of about 24
núllion gallons per day.
WPC F:\IIOMiN'LANNlNG'D324P 3-6 0-/"
a:
>
~
2
I&!
...
(/)
>
(/)
c:J
z
......
I(/)
C"»e
.w -
. .
' , .
.. . ...,.~ <
¡¡;,. ". >
~ 't ~ ~
.. . ~
> > ~.
.. ¡.., ~ ~
rr: rr: ~.
w .".O'õ
!;¡ ~E~
¡¡: " I ëi)(
« III
. 5J--
...
~
l-
I&!
W
' ~
~ r ;;:/m
~YJ7
Otay Water District
The easterly portion of the general plan area is served by the Dtay Water District Dtay refers
to this area as the Central Area which encompasses three Improvement Districts including I.D.
No.5; I.D. No. 10; and I.D. No. 22. Improvement Districts are defined as areas which are
assessed fees in relation to the benefit received for constructing water or sewer facilities for that
area. These districts were formed on the following dates:
I.D. No.5, November 28, 1960 by Resolution No. 123
I.D. No. 10, February 11, 1963 by Resolution No. 265
I.D. No. 22, July 3, 1972 by Resolution No. 986
This portion of the general plan area is bounded by Interstate 805 to the west, the Otay River
Valley to the south the Lower Otay Reservoir to the east and the area known as Bonita to the
north. Approximately 39 percent of this area is served by gravity while the remainder requires
pumping. The system is comprised of five pressure zones (service areas), two water booster
pump stations, six reservoirs and two connections to the San Diego County Water Authority
filtered water aqueduct system. The aqueduct system supplied by Colorado River Water and
State Project Water provides the only supply source to this area. Pipelines range in size from
6 inches to 30 inches and current. total storage volume is approximately 32 nùllion gallons. The
average daily demand for the system is about 4.5 nùllion gallons per day.
WPC F:lHOMiN'1ANNING<J324P 3-7 '/~¿)
!
CI
z
t-
t-
W
rn
CI
z
¡::
ø "
M ~
W -
N , ~
' .
~'" =
. .. .
.... z
. .. 0
9> ~
.. .. .
..
~ .
~ .
~ .
~
w
t-
rn
~
,
,.
3.2 WASTEWATER FACILITIES INVENTORY
As a member of the City of San Diego Metropolitan Sewage System, Chula Vista currently has
contracted for capacity rights equaling 17.1 mgd average daily flow. Including the 2.0 mgd
metro capacity rights that were acquired when Chula Vista over the operation of the Montgomery
Sanitation District brings the total contract capacity to 19.1 mgd for Chula Vista.
The City of Chula Vista operates and maintains its own sanitary sewer system. This system
consists of approximately 270 miles of sewers ranging in size from 6 inches to 36 inches, 10 raw
sewage pump stations and three independent metered connections to the City of San Diego
Metropolitan Sewer System (Metro). Figure 3-2 illustrates the major components of the existing
wastewater system.
The northern portion of the City gravity flows into the Spring Valley Interceptor which is
generally located in Sweetwater Road. This line is owned and operated by the County of San
Diego. This line is owned and operated by the County of San Diego, which leases 11.4 million
gallons per day (mgd) to Chula Vista. Presently, the City contributes 1.4 mgd to this line, which
tenninates at a connection to Metro near Sea Vale Street.
Central Chula Vista transports its wastewater flows to Metro via two major trunk sewers. The
first major line being the "0" Street trunk sewer, which receives tributary flows from the area
bounded by "D" Street south to "H" Street. This trunk sewer terminates at a metered connection
to Metro located off "0" Street just west of Bay Boulevard. Existing wastewater flows in this
line represent approximately 2.6 mgd. The second trunk sewer serving Central Chula Vista from
"H" Street south to Naples Street is located in "J" Street and Telegraph Canyon Road. This line
begins in the east on Otay Lakes Road near EastLake Drive and tenninates at a metered
connection to Metro located at the end of "J" Street west of Bay Boulevard. This trunk sewer
currently transports 3.9 mgd of Chula Vista wastewater flows to Metro.
The southern portion of Chula Vista is served by the Main Street and Faivre Street trunk sewers.
These lines generally parallel each other beginning on the easterly side of the Interstate 805, and
ending at a single connection to Metro at the end of Faivre Street. The two lines join in
Industrial Boulevard prior to making the Metro connection. Presently, 4.1 mgd worth of flow
is being metered at this last connection. The total Chula Vista wastewater flow into Metro is
therefore 12.0 mgd at this time.
3.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES INVENTORY
The City of Chula Vista operates and maintains its own drainage and flood control facilities.
This system, as shown in Figure 3-3, is made up of improved and unimproved flood control
channels, storm drains, bridge crossings, detention basins and various other facilities. These
facilities range in age from recently constructed to in excess of 30 years old. In general, the
existing structures are in good condition and free of debris and sediment. The single, largest
maintenance problem the City has experienced over the years has been maintaining the
unimproved channels in a clear condition, free of vegetation and other debris such as shopping
carts. Obstructions of this nature have historically caused stream blockage and remote flooding
if left unàuended.
WI'C F"IIOMlN'u.NNING'Ð324P 3-9 t( - oL2,
-
..:
>
...
~
z
¡::
I-
ILl
en
~
z
I-
en
>ë
ILl
I
en
ILl
I-
;!
CO) ~
Á I&.
.-' ~
..0 ::
:lee > <
,g¡1- ~ >
I&.Z -'w..:..
0 i~~~~ii
U ~":!:!;tw~~
0 ~-'
Q ..t<:::...~~
0 002$~0<
0 ~f9U)0$1I.
-'
I&. CI ... N CO) ... ."
at..................
Q
Z
C . Z
z > -:
ILl > 0 II.
~ 0... ¡!:!::z: ~
C ~Zt:$:Z~¡¡¡~ -
Z <>":0»,,:,,: !J
- 200_0<0<:1 w
. c Q<:I...gw5~~ i
ee -'Z-' °:z:<W iiC
Q ¡9:¡~¡0:z:'" :z:
0
Q
... !:!
0
..:
Q II.
Z ~
w :I
<:I ~
w U)
-' ~
w
As in all systems of this nature, the existing drainage and flood control facilities have their
linùtations. Development of the system by the City has been guided, over the years, by the use
of numerous studies and reports including primarily the 1964 drainage master plan report
prepared by Lawrence, Fogg, Florer and Smith. The most significant hydraulic problem with
drainage in Chula Vista is the downstream portions of the numerous natural drainage channels
which have been developed over the years. Initially, runoff was directed into the natural, or
possibly improved channels, or into stonn drain trunk line. As the upstream portions of the
drainage areas developed, the load on the downstream system increased. In some instances tlús
has resulted in occasional downstream flooding because the existing systems are not able to
convey the runoff adequately. The problems and constraints of the major drainage courses are
described briefly.
Palm Canyon is located in southeast Chula Vista and drains to the atay River. The upstream
portion has been lined through the developed area and is in good condition. The downstream
section, with outfall to Otay River, is heavily vegetated and there are significant flow
constrictions at several culverts.
Poggi Canyon also is located in southeast Chula Vista and drains to Otay River. The upstream
portion has been lined through the developed areas. The downstream portion and outfall to Otay
River are heavily covered by brush. Sediment deposition ion a box culvert at Otay Valley Road
if left unattended will reduce the effective hydraulic capacity of this facility. There is potential
for substantially increased flows in this basin due to the availability of undeveloped land in the
upper canyon.
Telegraph Canyon is located in Central Chula Vista and drains to San Diego Bay. The portion
of channel above Hilltop Drive has been lined through the developed area and is in good
condition. Sections of the downstream portion below Hilltop Avenue appear undersized as
evidenced by recent high waters through the channel. There is a potential for substantially
increased flows in this channel due to new development in the upper canyon.
Central Area Basin is located in north Central Chula Vista and drains to San Diego Bay. The
channel has a few areas of lining but nothing significant. This area is not subject to substantial
new development so runoff should not be increased greatly in the future. Howeyer, this channel
appears too small to convey lOa-year storm flows,
Lower Sweetwater is located in norther Chula Vista and drains to San Diego Bay. This is an
area that will be channelized as part of the Corps of Engineers flood côntrol program. This area
has historically experienced flooding during significant rainfall, however, the Corps of Engineers
project should alleviate this problem.
WPC P,\IIOMElPLANNlNCNJ324P 3-12 O/~q
-___~__n
Upper Bonita Long Canyon is located in northeast Chulå Vista and drains to Sweetwater River.
The channel has been lined in the upstream areas and appears adequate for existing development.
There is a potential for substantially increased runoff due to the availability of land in the upper
canyon. The lower canyon development has encroached into the flood plain, and increased runoff
from developing areas in upper canyon may cause future problems.
3.4 SOLID f.ND Hf.lf.RDOtJS WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL FACll..ITIES
INVENTORY
MIlRieipal SeliE! Waste
Conttol of the solid and ka;:aroells waste collection and disposal for the general plan area fall
under several jurisdictions. Regional planning and management for San Diego County's solid
wastes are administered by the San Diego County Solid Waste Division of the Department of
Public Works. This agency is responsible for revising and updating the "Regional Solid Waste
Management Plan" (RSWMP) which reviews current solid waste collection and disposal practices,
predicts future waste generation ttends and reviews the possible means for accommodating future
collection and disposal needs. This document is the major planning tool for the County and
includes solid waste planning for all of the cities within the County.
Collection and disposal of solid wastes are the responsibility of each city for its residents. The
City of Chula Vista and the communities in the sphere of influence conttact private collection
agencies to assume collection and disposal responsibilities for their residents. The following
collection agencies services the sphere of influence at present:
Chula Vista Sanitary Service
American Trash Service
Jamul Services
EDCO Disposal Corporation
Chula Vista Sanitary Service collects municipal refuse from Centtal Chula Vista, Bayfront,
Montgomery/Otay, Telegraph Canyon/Lakes, Sunnyside and Bonita within the planning area.
This agency as a l7-year contract with the City of Chula Vista and has the ability to expand their
operation to meet the long range needs of Chula Vista area.
American Trash Service provides collection service for the South Bay area. Within the General
Plan Area, American Trash Service collects municipal refuse from the Bonita community. This
agency also services the communities of Sweetwater, Dulzura, Jamul, Spring Valley, and Casa
de Oro.
Jamul Services collects wastes in the Bonita, Jamul, Cas a de Oro, and Dulzura areas.
EDCO Disposal Corporation also provides collection service for the Bonita community.
/"'
WPC F:lHOME'<'LANNIN<NJ324P 3-13 g/~
For waste disposal, there are currently nine landfills in San Diego County. These are shown in
Table 3-1. Figure 3-4 depicts the existing solid and hazanlells waste disposal sites within the
general plan area. Wastes collected in the ChuIa Vista area (approximately 131,000 tons per year
in 1985) are disposed of at the Otay Landfill. This facility is located north of Otay Valley Road
on the south side of Chula Vista and serves the Cities of Chula Vista, Coronado, Imperial Beach,
National City, and San Diego. Otay Landfill was opened in February of 1966, and the expected
worst-case closure date is 1999. The worst-case scenario, according to the Regional Solid Waste
Management Plan, assumes that no new facilities are added to the region's existing disposal
system, and average annual waste generation increases by 5% per year. Under tlùs plan, Otay
Landfill will be the last landfilIing the region to close.
Specific data pertaining to the Otay Landfill design are as follows:
Landfill size - 294 acres
Tons received per day (1986) - 1,380 tons/day
Remaining volume - 25,800,000 CY or 15,480,000 tons
In-place density of compacted trash - 1,200 lbs/CY minimum
Propeny size - 515.64 acres
Cut slope - 1:1 or 1.5:1
Fill slope - 3:1
Existing disposal operations at each of the County's landfills are reviewed continually by the
County and the City of San Diego to determine if operation or design changes would allow
extended use of the site. Such changes may include height and slope modifications for active
work areas, increased in-place density of compacted trash and acquisition of additional acreage
to expand existing site capacity. There are at present no plans for expansion of the Otay Landfill
due to public resistance to additionallandfiIIing in the area.
3.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
INVENTORY
Hai!llFdeHS '~7aste
The San Diege CellRt)' HazaFdeHs Waste MaRagement Plan is tAt\. primary planning deellmeRt
previàiRg the everall peliey àimetieR teward the eff-eeti'/e management efthe CellRty's haamells
waste ef whieh the general plaR area is part. This plan was pllblished by the CeHnty ef San
Diege in draft f.eFffi en Mareh 31, 1988 and is eHffently Hndergeing an exteRsive r-e'/iew preeess.
The plan establishes pregmms te manage hazaFEleHs waste safely ,....ithin the CellAty and is the
guide fer leeal deeisiens regaræRg hazardeHs "l/aste issues. The plan "lias prepared pllfSllant Ie
State 1.ssemb!y lIill 2918 (TanAer, 1986) whieh atltherizes leeal gevemmeAt Ie àevelep
eempreheAsive hazaràeHs waste managemeRt plans, streamliRes the ptlffi1Ïtting preeess fer
ha25aFE1ells waste treatment faeilities and prehibits the àispesal ef IIntreated hai!amells waste iA
landfills as ef May 8, 1990.
WPC F<lHOMJN'UoNNING'D324P 3-14 (:( r 02- !r
..
TABLE 3-1
EXISTING LANDFn.LS IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
REMAINING EXPECTED
C'Y,ACITY CLOSURE
LANDFILL LOCATION yd /tons} DATE
Borrego Landfill Northeast Co. .510,000/ 200.5
306,000
Otay Landfill South Chula 2.5,8000,00/
Vista 1.5,480,000
Ramona Landfill Central Co. 104,000/ 1988
62,400
San Marcos LF San Marcos 7,000,000/ 1991
4,200,000
Sycamore Landfill Santee 36,400,0001 1997
21,840,000
West Miramor LF North of 29,400,000/ 199.5
Clairemont Mesa 17,640,000
Montgomery LF Kearny Mesa area 273,000(1) 1989
City of San Diego
Las Pulgas LF Camp Pendleton 2,600,000 2010
Ysidora Basin LF Camp Pendleton 12,000,000 2099
Source: "San Diego County Regional Solid Waste Management Plan", 1986.
.
. . .
()-- d- 7
-+
..
II:
C
eo
z
~ ::0
0
Z .
~ ... ..
... ..
... ¡¡: ¡¡
W eo ..
eI) z z
C 1M
~ ~ j!
! .. c
. ..
... ; !
eI)
>< eo ..
- ..
w ....
5: ;
I ...
w ~ ::0
..... 0 g
lei) . II:
:J .. c
!! N
M C
.. .. Z
:lei) =
,2'=-
11.0
Q
II:
~
N
~
:c
Q
Z
~
e
....
0
eI)
.
.. ..
!: !:
. .
~ ...
. c
.
,,2 2
z' !!
¡¡;
1M.. eo
eo.. ..
z. ..
IMc .
11:. ;
~!!: ...
:110 ~::o !
°eo 08
'11:
"c .11:
!!N "c
MC !!N
MC
..Z IMZ
--- ~
--
Collection, transporting, treatment. and disposal of hazardous wastes are the responsibility of the
generators of such wastes. Hazardous waste generators incur both fmancial and environmental
liability due to collection, transporting, treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes generated.
Therefore, hazardous waste generators must select transporters and treatment/storage/disposal
facilities (TSDF's) with utmost scrutiny. Similar scrutinv applies to State. CountY and local
20vernment whose responsibilitv it is to re2Ulate 2enerators and transporters, and to safelv site.
license, and monitor TSDF's to ensure adequate capacitv is available to handle the waste stream
in a manner which protects public health and safetv, and the environment.
Chapters III and IV of the COHWMP provide 2eneral information re2ardin2 waste 2eneration.
transportation. treatment, and facilitv operation. includin2 a le2islative history. Chapter Vß
provides a comprehensive inventory of existin2 TSDF's within San Die2o Countv, includin2 the
APTEC II facilitv located within the General Plannin2 Area at Otav Landfill. Fi2Ure 3-5 depicts
the location of existin2 TSDF's within the Countv. A COpy of the COHWMP, as mav be
amended or revised from time to time, is on file in the Office of the Citv Clerk.
Transporters
There are severallieensed hazaæoas waste traASfJorters operatiAg iR San Diego Coanty. These
agencies are licensed by EP.~. and are i5seed identification Rember5. Table 3 2 shows a li5t of
hazardoas '.vasle haalers along the services they provide.
~
Ther.e are '¡ery few fally operational hazardoes '.vaste diSfJosal facilities in Southern Calif-ernia.
Most facilities are operating ender permit states and are Aot fally permitted, while some faeilitie5
are no longer aeeeptiRg hazardoas '.vaste5.
I.t Jfesent, there are two major hazaæoas waste landfills in California Kettleman Hills Landfill
near Ket-tlemaR City, and Casmalia Re50aree5 Landfill near Santa Maria. The BKK Landfill iR
West CoviRa, CRee a hazardolls waste disposal facility, RO longer accepts hazardoas wastes a5
eH984-.
The Kettleman Hills Hazar-deas Waste Faeility i:s owRed and operated by Chemical W.aste
ManagemeRt, lne. The facility earreRtly eperates five surface impollndmeRt5 and ORe landf"ùl
(211 acres) whieh ar.e being expanded te 2é3 acres. SelveRts are permitted te be laRdfilled
aeeoràiRg te the 1984 reglilatiens and are sent elsewhere te be incinerated. Chemieal Waste
Management is iR the pr-eeess of permitting a hazardoas v,'aste ÌReiRerater fer this facility whieh
is expected te be en liRe by 1989. 1.lse, twe additional landfills ar.e prepesed as well as aGid
nelltralizatien at Kettleman Hills.
WPC F:IIIOMlN'LANNlNG\O324P 3-17 Q/d('
The CaGmalia Resollrees faoilily is located 10 miles SOli!!! of SaAIa Maria Call' à .
o"'Aed and I d '" H R ' I omla, an IS
.. opera e Y lIAIer esaeroes, lAc. This facility caAsists of a 2QO acre haZllFd
"'aste laAEIf¡I! If' ells
.. , Sill ace storage, an aH treatment eRit and acid/aikaliRe trealm t f tal
rema"aI :rh t; T eR or me s
. f .. e a?llty OViRers cllmmtly O'::R 4,399 acres OR the site, and it is likely that the
pr-eseRt aeIlIt)' will "'e expanded,
E\'eA with tlte aecessibility of these facilities, same hazardous '.'.'astes generated in this ma are
transported to otller slates stich as Texas and Loeisiana fer disposal Based OR 1984 tit
"'r tile De It I t: H aI It S . , . es mates
~~ meA o. e t, erv16es, transpartIßg of \,;astBs Ie otller Slates for disposal can "'e
east effeeti. e. If tIllS con~AlIes to "'e. tlte trend, it I!J!pears that diGposal of Itazardalls waGtes
oet of slate caeld "'e a feasible altemall.'le for meeting fet-¡¡re Itazardolls waste disposal needs,
There are presently t\':o non aative Itazaràae~ waste disposal sites within tile GeneFal Plan -'.rea.
Tltese ~ the. ~losed (ltazardalls waste) disposal sites at tile Otay Landfill and tile Omar
~endenA~ faeIlIty. batll 10c~tBd OA Otay Valley Road. The Otay Landfill Itazaråolls waste
diGposal.s~te oeceples I!J!proxlmately ~~ ac:es and received wastes ranging from acids to solvents
IIRd pestJel?~s. The Otay ~aAEIfill faolhty IS ellFFeAtly lIRdergoiRg pr-eliminary site investigations
fer detefffilmRg t-lte potential fe,r rele~se of hazardoes sllbslaaees, and a elasllre plan is Being
fernllllated, The Oma~ ReAdBn~gs SIte has been designated as a State Seperfllnd site and is
schedeled fer a RemedIal Ia"estigatioR Feasibility Study iR late 1988.
The areas located adjacent 10 a hazar-dolls waSle site are classified as ""'order zone prepeFty" and
a;e defined as any propert~ which is within 2,000 feet of a sigaifieant hazaråollS ",:aste dis;osal
Site.. '!'he lan~ sllrrollndlRg the aferemeRtiaaed dispasal sites '",.ill be sllbjeot to land use
reSInCllaas as barder zone preperty",
^ di It .
"ccor n~ to t e reglllatloAs, after a laRd is desigaaled a "hazardolls waste prapeFty" no
cons~etlØ~ eaR ocellr aR the land withaet a specific variance I!J!preved iR '",.riting BY the Šlate
of Callf-emla DepartmeRt of Health SeI'Vices. FlIrther evalllatioR af these sites wm "'e eampleted
by the DepartmeRt of Health Services in the Rext five years.
WPC F:lROMlN'LANN1N<M324P 3-18 s-~Ô
FIGURE 3-a I
EXISTING OFF-SITE FACILITIES IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
JUNE 1882
EXISTING OFF.SITE
HAZAROOUS WASTE
TREATMENT & STORAGE
FACILITIES
,. Appropriate Technologias
Chula Vista
2. PRC
San Diego
3. Ba......Blek- CD
San Diego
4. HAS NOl1h II/and
Coronado
5. P.nP8' Oil
National CIty
t. Ba'e,y K188n
San Diego
: 7. Triad Marine
Ban Diego
----.....
~ s.n Ilk....
.~""';On\TIOX Of 25' J /
(i()\"EK."'~IE.\"Th
3.& & SECONDARY SCHOOLS INVENTORY
Secondary school facilities within the City of Chula Vista are provided by the Sweetwater Union
High School District. the district operates senior high schools, junior/middle high schools, adult
education schools and a continuirig education school. Ten of these facilities are located in the
City.
The California Basic Education Data System (CBEDS) enrollment prepared for the 1988-89
school year showed that the district has an enrollment of 26,845. The schools in operation for
the 1988-89 year have been designed and constructed to house a total of 22,648 students. To
mitigate overcrowded conditions, the district houses students in temporary classrooms such as
trailers and relocatable structures.
Through the use of previous CBEDS enrollments and demographic analysis, the district projects
an enrollment in excess of 35,377 by the year 1993. Based on these projections, the district will
require a minimum of seven new secondary facilities to meet the increased demand.
A new senior high school will be located in the EastLake Planned Community. It is anticipated
that this school will house 2,400 students. Additionally, a middle school site is anticipated to
be located within the Rancho Del Rey Phase III development. That school should house
approximately 1,400 students.
3.' 1 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS INVENTORY
Elementary school facilities within the City of Chula Vista are provided by the Chula Vista City
School District. The district is currently operating 30 schools. Ten of these facilities are on
year-round schedules with the remainder on the traditional school calendar.
CBEDS enrollment prepared for the 1988-89 school year showed District enrollment at 16,179.
Existing schools have been designed to house a total of 600 students each. To mitigate
overcrowded conditions, the district currently utilizes relocatable classrooms.
Through the use of previous CBEDS enrollments and demographic analysis, an enrollment in
excess of 20,800 is projected by the year 1985. .Based on these projections, the district will
require a minimum of seven new elementary facilities to meet the increased demand.
A new elementary school will be located in the EastLake Planned Community. It is anticipated
that this school will house 650 students and be in operation in 1989. A second new school will
be located on the Windrose Way near the Terra Nova Center. Additionally, a school site located
within the Sunbow development is planned.
WPC FoIIIOMIN'LANNINCNJ324P 3-20 <¿(~3~
3.+ ~ LmRARY INVENTORY
The City of Chula Vista currently operates the Civic Center Public Library on "F" Street in
Central Chula Vista and two neighborhood branch libraries in the Montgomery area. The City
has adopted a standard of 0.5 to 0.7 square feet of library space per capita.
4. PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN
The required public facilities necessary to provide adequate service for the proposed land use is
discussed in this section. Recommended improvements presented herein were the results of
numerous studies and reports prepared by the control agencies and outside consultants. These
facilities would require implementation as development occurs in order to guarantee that he high
quality of public utilities and services continues to be the standard that Chula Vista enjoys today.
The infrastructure addressed in this element consists of the following facilities:
Water
Wastewater
Drainage and Flood Control
Solid and Hazardous Waste Control
4.1 WATER DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
The recommended future system improvements that will be required in order to accommodate
the planned growth for the general plan area are shown in Figure 3-,) Q and are discussed below.
Sweetwater Authority
In 1985, a Water Master Plan Update was prepared which reviewed the adequacy of the total
system, including Chula Vista, at buildout conditions. This report used the then current Chula
Vista General Plan for plotting various land use categories for the service area. Based on this
data, in conjunction with historic water usage data per land use category, ultimate water demands
were projected and hydraulic analyses were performed. The report concluded the following:
(1) The supply facilities will require expansion to meet future requirements. The supply
facilities are defined as the water treatment plant, the raw water pump station to supply
the treatment plant, the aqueduct service connection (filtered water) and the local wells.
Recommendations include treatment plant expansion to 45.4 mgd (30 mgd currently) and
a connection of the Water Authority's raw water aqueduct system to Sweetwater
Reservoir for off-peak storage.
WPC F,\IIOME\PLANNlN<NJ324P 3-21 't~ 3:>
'"":
...
>-
=
.,
II.
..
:
1/1
æ
<C
:z
z
S!
..
=
!
II:
..
!!
CI
'"
II:
=
..
=
...
Z
C
..I
a.
fØ:E
I..,
(')...
.(1)
">
&(1) -
ii:a:: 1/1
I æ
.., -Y1 <C
... . :z
; . i z
I Q!2
~~ i
I- i!
a: I .. 1/1
0 ~ Ci
êr II: .
I- ~ ~
=>: Ci;ë
<I '"
51---
I-
~
I-
' W
. i w
3:
' ~ i -;;;:r C/)
~.?~ ¡-- ~r 3 r ~~~.~ -
2:
(2) A comprehensive study needs to be initiated to review the long-term water supply of the
Sweetwater Authority.
(3) The existing water transnússion mains will need bolstering for buildout condition. Due
to the lack of interconnecting pipelines between National City and Chula Vista, Chula
Vista is dependent on a single 36-inch pipeline under the I-80S freeway for supply.
Should line fail, stored water in Chula Vista would soon be expended and supply
curtailed. The Authority is in the process of implementing a series of interconnections
which will help to alleviate this problem.
(4) Approximately 63 percent of the required ultimate storage volume is presently in place.
An additional 18 núllions gallons of storage will need constructing prior to buildouL
(5) Numerous pump station expansions will be required in order to meet future system
requirements.
(6) Within the City of Chula Vista, the existing water distribution system will require only
a nonúnal amount of improvements in order to accommodate buildout.
(7) Sweetwater's main water supply, the Sweetwater Reservoir, will require improvements
in order to protect the water quality from the degradation effects of urban runoff. The
Authority is currently in the first phase of implementing a runoff protection system for
the reservoir.
(8) The ongoing cast iron water main replacement program should be continued and the old
steel water mains, which are approaching their expected life span, should be added to the
program.
It was concluded by the Water Master Plan Update that future master plan updates should be
conducted at five-year intervals or whenever land use designations are modified.
Otay Water District
In 1987, Otay Water District prepared the Central Area Water Master Plan Update which
evaluated the system requirements at buildout conditions. Linúted land use data was available
for the majority of the service area. However, conservative land use assumptions were used in
conjunction with specific plan development proposals for definitive projects such as El Rancho
del Rey and EastLake as the basis for future water demand projections. The land use data used
in that report differs from the general plan designations panicularly in the easterly and southerly
areas of the service area. The system evaluation prepared by an outside consultant, subsequent
to the Otay report, used the general plan land use information and resulted in conclusions and
recommendations very sinúlar to the Otay report. The following presents the required future
system improvements based on the previous analyses:
(1) The projected ultimate average daily water demand for the general plan service area
within the Otay Water District is 45.5 mgd.
3-23 .---
WPC FelHOMJN'LANNlNG\D324P ()/3J
(2) The water supply connections to the SDCW A aqueduct system should be adequate for
ultimate conditions although they will require further analysis at a later date as water
demands on the aqueduct system increase.
(3) Numerous water transmission and distribution pipelines will be required in the future to
provide adequate service.
These generally fall into two categories including: a) paralleling existing lines. and b)
installing new lines into areas that pleviously had none.
(4) Approximately 70 percent of the required operational storage is presently in place. An
additional 14 million gallons of storage will require construction prior to buildout.
(5) The service area is seriously deficient of emergency storage in the event of an aqueduct
failure. Approximately 163 million gallons of storage will require construction in the
future to accommodate anticipated growth. The District is cun-ently pursuing the fITSt
phase of this objective.
(6) The two existing pump stations will require expansion in the future. In addition, a new
pump station will need to be built in the highest pressure zone to service the upper
elevations.
(7) The area within the Otay Ranch, east of Medical Center Drive, north of the Otay River,
west of Lower Otay Reservoir and south of Telegraph Canyon Road should be served by
separate facilities as detennined at the time development plans are proposed.
(8) A comprehensive study needs to be undertaken to review the long tenn water supply and
storage alternatives for the general plan area and the San Diego County as a whole.
4.2 W ASTEW A TER COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM
In 1987, the City retained an outside consultant to evaluate the adequacy of the existing
wastewater system for the year 2005 and buildout conditions. The proposed land use infonnation
and population densities contained in the general plan were used to estimate future wastewater
flows for the city. Based on these flows, each of the major wastewater facilities were examined
for deficiencies. In general, the study concluded that a major modification to the existing system
was not required at this time. However, the results did indicate that certain additions and
improvements to the system would b necessary to accommodate the projected future sewage
flows. The recommended major facility improvements are shown on Figure 3-6 and are reviewed
below.
WPC F:>HOMEIPLANN!N<NJ324P 3.24 g-,- J b
Based on that study, the average daily wastewater flow at buildout conditions is estimated to be
29.6 mgd. For the year 2005, the projected average daily wastewater flow is approximately 25.0
mgd. The following presents the conclusions and recommendations of the facility analyses based
on these flow rates:
(1) Numerous interceptor and trunk sewer improvements will be required in the future to
provide adequate service. The improvements generally fall into two categories including:
a) paralleling or replacing existing sewers, or b) installing new lines into areas that
previously had none.
The Central Chula Vista and Bayfront planning areas will require the least amount of new
lines. The exception in this area would be the southerly portion of the main Street and
Faivre Trunk Sewers which will require almost complete paralleling to accommodate
future flows. This is largely the result of having to provide transmission capacity for
flows generated in the Eastern Territories planning areas of Salt Creek, Wolf Canyon and
Poggi Canyon.
The Sweetwater planning area will require new sewers in the areas of Proctor Valley and
Wild Mans Canyon. The existing sewers east of Interstate 805 generally appear to have
adequate capacity for future growth.
The Eastern Territories planning area will require the highest amount of improvements
largely resulting from the predominantly undeveloped nature of the area. The majority
of the recommended sewers in this are would be categorized as new lines for service
areas that previously had none. Drainage basins to be improved include Telegraph
Canyon, Poggi Canyon, Wolf Canyon, Salt Creek and the Gtay Valley Area.
(2) Several pump stations will require expansion prior to ultimate flow conditions. In
addition, it is likely that new temporary pump stations will be constructed by developers
in Eastern Territories planning area as an interim measure for providing wastewater
service to areas that currently have no sewer system available. These temporary pump
stations should be avoided when reasonably feasible and should be taken out of service
as quickly as gravity service becomes available to the general area.
(3) Ground water or stonn water infiltration to the sewer system was not seen as being a
significant problem during the study period. However, the winter of 1987 was below
average in rainfall (11.6 inches as compared to the eleven year average of 16.0 inches)
and as such the results were considered non-conclusive. Infiltration should be further
analyzed in subsequent studies during periods of nonnal or above nonnal rainfall
conditions to properly evaluate this potential. The low lying areas of the Sweetwater
River Valley and Gtay River Valley should particularly receive close scrutiny.
WPC F"IIOMlN'LANNIN<N>324P 3-25 g>j?
(4) The City of Chula Vista has adequate capacity rights in the City of San Diego Metro
Sewer System to accommodate future growth. With a present total flow to Metro of
about 12.0 mgd and contract capacity of 19.1 mgd, 7.1 mgd is currently available for
future development. However, Chula Vista will require additional treatment capacity in
order to accommodate the ultimate buildout flow rate of 29.6 mgd.
The City of San Diego's Metro Sewer System is currently undergoing major changes.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has mandated that San Diego convert their
existing advanced primary treatment facility at Point Lorna to secondary treatment. The
net effect of this conversion is a significant reduction in that plant's treatment capacity.
With that reduction and without other system changes, it is likely that San Diego would
not be handle their contract flow rates from the member agencies including Chula Vista.
With this in mind, San Diego is in the planning process of upgrading the overall Metro
System which includes interceptors, pump stations and new treatment plants. Chula Vista
is an active member of this planning process to guarantee that their best interests are
being addressed.
Chula Vista has several options available to them for obtaining the necessary future
treatment capacity. They can continue to contract with San Diego for capacity in metro,
as they have in the recent past, including increasing the contract capacity to accommodate
the anticipated future flows. The required Metro upgrades will come out of the planning
process are likely to be quite expensive. These costs will be passed on, in part, to the
member agencies which will increase the cost of treatment to Chula Vista. Although no
definitive numbers are available at this time, it is thought that the cost San Diego would
have to charge member agencies for treatment could be between three to four times as
great as it is now.
Another option available to Chula Vista for obtaining the required treatment capacity
would be to construct their own treatment facility. Although this alternative would have
many obstacles in its way prior to being implemented such as environmental
considerations, land availability, and general acceptance by the Chula Vista citizenry, it
may prove to be the most cost effective method of wastewater treatment and disposal
available to Chula Vista.
Still another available alternative would be a blend of both above alternatives where
Chula Vista would treat a portion of their wastewater and divert the other part to Metro.
Due to the uncertainty with respect to the outcome of the Metro planning process, no
reasonable decision can be made at this time for directing Chula Vista's future preferred
method of treatment and disposal. This will be evaluated in greater detail in an
upcoming study presently authorized by the City.
WFC F:\IIOMlN'u.NNIN<NJ324P 3,26 g/}'t
. -_.~-~._-
(5) Reclamation should be reviewed in significant detail during the upconúng study already
authorized by the City. Although reclamation did not appear to be cost effective during
the most recent study, this conclusion could be significantly affected by the outcome of
the ongoing Metro planning process.
If Chula Vista were to construct their own treatment plant or the City of San Diego's new
plant were to be located in closer proximity to Chula Vista, the cost to provide
reclamation facilities would be reduced. Presently there appears to be about 0.35 mgd
worth of demand for reclaimed water within Chula Vista including greenbelt areas,
freeway landscaping and others. At ultimate this demand could be in excess of 1.0 mgd
for for similar areas in newly developed portions of the general plan area.
Conversely, if the use of reclaimed water was mandated by the City for developments
that could use it in an effort to lower the drinking water demand, reclamation would not
have to be completely cost effective to be implemented. With the scarcity of water in
Southern California, many agencies are approaching reclamation from this standpoint.
Chula Vista is currently reviewing their reclamation opportunities and long range
planning.
4.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM
In 1987, the City retained an outside consultant to evaluate the adequacy of the existing drainage
and flood control facilities at the General Plan buildout conditions. The proposed land use
infonnation contained in the General Plan was used to estimate future runoff volumes based on
the lOO-year flood conditions. Based on these estimates, each of the major basin and sub-basin
drainage and flood control facilities were examined for deficiencies. The level of effort expended
in these analyses was not intended to produce a comprehensive master plan, but to provide the
initial studies leading into a detailed master plan which Chula Vista has subsequently authorized.
The results of the initial study were sufficiently detailed to provide specific proposed
improvements as to the required hydraulic capacities, facility sizing and location and overall
system configuration.
In general, the study concluded that a major modification to the existing system configuration
was not required. However, the results did indicate that certain additions and improvements to
the system would be necessary to accommodate the lOa-year flood conditions (shown in Figure
3-7). The proposed improvements fall into two general categories including: 1) drainage and
flood control facility design criteria for use in guiding developer improvements, and 2) specific
basin improvements. The proposed design criteria and overall system philosophy included the
following:
(1) Hydrology. The City should use a lOa-year return frequency stonn as a basis of design.
This is because the lOa-year event is the accepted standard for most municipalities for
new development, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the California Coastal
Commission, the County of San Diego and most other State and Federal agencies.
WPC F:'IIOMlN'LANNING\O324P 3-27 ¿(r ~~ ]'
'":
II.
>-
!::
. a:
w
~
w
'"
'"
~
Ie
..
\ Q
'\ I
\ f
z
.~
..J ..,
Go ..
>-
..
:E -
III a:
w
...~ ~
,en w
..
"'t; '"
z
~ a: ::I
::I III ~
Q~
¡¡I
III
~
en
~
'":
' II.
>-
!:
:æ~
"-
w..
:lu
..:~
"z
68
,
(2) Sediment Control and Grading. The City of Chula Vista has no standard for sediment
control. Consideration should be given to instituting requirements for sediment control,
especially since Chula Vista is experiencing a significant amount of new development.
Much of this development is taking place in the upper canyon areas. These areas have
a high potential for large volumes of sediment. If there is no control over the sediment,
it is likely that problems will result in the lower canyon areas as the sediment falls out
and reduced cross-sectional areas of culyerts and channels.
(3) Detention Basins. Chula Vista is somewhat constrained by the existing storm drainage
facilities in the lower canyons and in the metropolitan area. Some of these facilities
were adequate for the initial development phase, but as the upstream areas of the
. drainage basins have developed there has been an increased load on the facilities.
Because of the cost and difficulty in increasing the capacity of the existing drainage
facilities, use of detention basins as an alternative means for flood control should be
considered. This should be determined on a case by case basis. These detention basins
can be constructed within the newly developing areas and serve to detain the runoff
peaks long enough to reduce the load on the downstream channels and storm drains.
(4) Hydraulics. The existing City criteria establishes minimum criteria for both open
channels and closed conduits. This criteria is consistent with similar requirements
throughout San Diego County and so no changes are proposed.
The following presents the proposed general drainage and flood control improvements for the
thirteen basins within the Chula Vista General Plan Area:
(5) Central Area and Judson Basins. For basins with peak stOIlTI flows approximately
equal to those in the Fogg Report, no new recommendations are made.
Recommendations included in the Fogg Report are considered still valid, especially for
the Central area and Judson basins. This includes channel lining, culvert installation and
other general improvements.
(6) Telegraph and Poggi Canyon Basins. These two basins will experience the highest
level of new development based on general plan. Both canyons have severely linùted
downstream capacities and will require significant improvements. For the most part, the
downstream capacities of the canyons are limited by the culyerts and to a lesser, but still
significant extent, channel conditions. The options considered in the improvement of
the channel conditions were cleaning and maintaining the natural channels, lining the
channels with rock riprap or lining the channels with concrete. The proposed channel
improvements for this basin were a combination of all three.
WPC F:lHOMElPLANNlNCNJ324P 3-29 ?~YI
The options used for increasing culvert capacity included larger box culverts and bridge
structures. The bridge structure resulted in a more cost effective solution for increasing
the capacity at crossing structures.
(7) Salt Creek Basin. Salt Creek Basin and Use development is proposed to occur around
the perimeter of the basin, with a large open area in the center. This open space would
incorporate the existing drainage path of the Salt Creek Basin. The proposed
improvements for this basin include requiring the developers to detain excess flows so
that the peak runoff and velocities do not exceed existing conditions. This would allow
the existing, natural channel to remain unchanged. Miscellaneous culverts and channel
outlets would be required.
(8) All Remaining Basins. For remaining basins including Palm Road Basin, Sunnyside
Basin, Wolf Canyon Basin, Rice Canyon Basin, Glenn Abbey Basin, Otay Lakes Road
Basin, Long Canyon Basin and Harborside Basin, proposed improvements included
detention basins, culverts, bridge structures, grade control structures and lined channels.
The City should prepare a comprehensive master plan to assist Chula Vista in guiding the orderly
and cost effective development of overall system up to the year 2005 and beyond. Chula Vista
is currently proceeding with this recommendation.
4.4 SOLID ANI) I.fAZ".RI)OUS WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM
In 1987, Chula Vista retained an outside consultant to evaluate the solid aRd hazaràÐlls waste
control requirements for the general plan area. Future waste projections for the planning area
were developed based on the general plan land use information and appropriate waste generation
factors. The results indicated that Chula Vista's needs are being well planned for althougn there
exists a few long range shortcomings. The conclusions and recommendations of that study are
presented below.
Solid waste collection by the private agencies is currently being handled satisfactorily. Each
company has the ability and inclination to expand their operations to meet the solid waste needs
of the general plan area at 2005 or at buildout. It is estimated that in excess of 400,000 tons per
year of solid waste could be generated within the p.1anning area by the year 2005. Expansion of
these operations will impact the roads and highways within the planning area which is discussed
in the Circulation Element of the general plan.
Solid waste disposal by the County of San Diego for the general plan area presents no immediate
problem. However, long range solid waste control planning for Chula Vista and the overall
County is less defined. The Regional Solid Waste Management Plan (RSWMP) was recently
revised (1986) and the revised version evaluates seven waste generation/disposal scenarios. The
worst-case scenario ("Do Nothing" alternative) indicated that there will be no landfills remaining
in San Diego County after the year 1988 if no new landfills were added to the region. The most
optimistic ("Best Case") scenario indicates closure of all landfills by the year 2011. This scenario
WPC F~OMlN'LANNINCNJ324P 3-30 %--Jj~
..:
>
~
- -
..: ..
> w
... Z
- Z
<
:z:
u
Q
w
>
0
IE
i
Q
w
Ø)
0
II.
0
II:
II.
Z
c(
..J
a.
..J
0
a:
I-
Z
0
~ U ~
10 Z
~ 0 ~
2 0 ~
::J..J > Q
at&l. w w
- ::I >
&1.0 > < 0
Z ~ > f
c( "wll:~ ~
. < Q W II: -
w ~;ffi~if~i
9 20>!wu~
.... ~S<W~"'s
z uo~~:i"~
c( ~f9Ø)u¡if
a:
0 CI)~;::~~:~
i i
> >
u ~. <wU ~
Ø) .wz :ï;Q% >-
ZZw>i-;¡~ 0":
<~II:U»II:II: 11:>
2 U-U<OI: ......
. 9 ~ t; :g w 5 ~ .~ ~ ;;
-o<o5æ:z:<w ="
~..Ø)"'II:U:Z:'" .;!
!il
..:z:
wU
Q
Z
w
I:
w ~
J ~ ¡ýf3
assumes extensive volume reduction and recycling projects. It is clear from the scenarios
evaluated in the RSWMP that new landfills must be sited in conjunction with developing and
using various waste reduction methods to prevent a serious crisis in solid waste management in
the next decade. The Department of Public Works is presently engaged in numerous studies to
locate landfill sites in the County. The selection process requires much analysis and public input
and more will be known within the next fiye years.
In addition to siting new landfill facilities, waste reduction and recovery projects are underway
1.y San Diego County. The County Board of Supervisors, as the agency responsible for regional
solid waste management, has adopted a policy to reduce waste quantities to the landfills and
promote alternative disposal methods. The policy establishes that landfilling is the preferred
disposal method only for wastes that cannot be recycled or processed and for the residual from
processing. This policy promotes the use of alternatives such as resource recoyery to produce
energy or animal food sources and seeks funding for such projects. The policy also encourages
lifestyle changes to reduce per capita waste generation and increase recycling, and it encourages
the use of additional volume reduction methods such as shredding. The city is currently applying
for a grant to fund a recycling feasibility study.
In summary, it was concluded that the solid waste master planning and long range goals, as
adnùnistered by San Diego County and updated regularly in the Regional Solid Waste
Management Plan, are considered adequate in addressing the future disposal needs of the County
(including the Chula Vista sphere of influence). Plans for site enhancement projects at existing
landfills, waste volume reduction and waste-to-energy projects, as well as the current studies to
locate new landfill sites in the County will benefit the planning area in the future by providing
additional landfill capacity. If these plans are implemented, capacity at the Otay Landfill should
be adequate for meeting future solid waste demands, and no alternative disposal methods should
be required for accommodating the planning area requirements in the next twenty years. Figure
3-9 depicts the current and proposed solid waste disposal site within the general plan area.
4.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL'SYSTEM
Hazardous wastt! collt!ctÏoR and diSfJosal is the reSfJoRsibility of the gt!Rt!rator as was identified
prt!\'iallsly. Hazar-dolls 'lo'aGtt! gt!ReratioR f-er tht! planning arM is ceRtert!d mainly iR the Ba-yfroRt
and Central Chlila Vista areas. i\p¡3rmdmately 9,000 tons of hazardolls wastes are geRemttJd per
year in t. ¡ese areas alene. Tht! estimated hazar-dous ..vaste generation f-er the remaining
communities iR tht! plaRRiRg area is about 500 tORS ptJr yt!ar.
PreseRt and fut-llf-e zaRing iR t-he planning area coliid greatly impact the rate af hazardolls waste
geRemtion f-er the art!a. TAt! specific land Ilse designations and acr-eages f.¡¡r tht! gtJReral plan lll'ea
are contained iR tht! Land Use ~:¡emeRt of the CI'lIIla Vista GeReral Plan.
WPC F"'OMlN'lANNINCNJ324P 3-31 ?5~J/i
Hazar-deus waste eellectieA services fer tHe plaAAiAg area are adequate. He.....ever, tllere are very
few dispesal facilities available fer Hazaràaus wastes iA Sellthern Califemia elliisiAg geaeflltafS
to tmAspart t-lleir wastes to atHer areas and states far disposal. This may be a factar ia àeteHÍIIg
industrial grO'Nth in the pl!lflaiag area. There are CUrr-eRtly twa fully aperati8RaI Haz:ardaus ',...aste
(Class I) landfills iR Calif-omia. THese are tHe Kettlem!lfl Hills Facility Hear Kettlemaa City in
Kiags CellRty aad tHe Casmalia Res81H'ces laadfill in Santa Maria, Califernia.
1\s with muHieipall!lfldfills, in ower to maximize tHe capacities of these sites, volume ræuetiaa
aetivities sllEIl as reeyeliag of seh'eals and ineiaeratian sHollld be empHaaizeà. Aba, same
Haz:ardOIlS .....astes ean be renàereà aon Hazardous by chemical treatment aad seat to ffiUnieipai
laadfills or to tHe mllRicipal sewer system f-or diap8sal. Withia tHe general plaa area there exists
II Hili!:ardoilS waste storage and transfer faeility wHieH treats wastes iR tHis fasHioa.
Appropriate TecHnologies II (f.PTEC II) is a flllly permitted Hazardous waste treatment facility
lacated witHin tHe City bollndaries as shewn on Figure 3 8. THe faeility is permitttld te reeei\'tls
all Hazawells waates f.or treatment, with the e'ŒeptieA of explosives, radioactive ',...aste and
PCB's. The wastes, wHieH ar-e treated an site, are Reutralized in a tatally enclosed system.
SlIspended solids are removed throllgH a settling processing wHÍ6H resilits ia a seweraèle ...:ater
IIBd filter Bake material. The water is tested to deten-niRe if it meets inàlistrial discharge
staHdards. If so, it is discHarged inte tHe City of San Diego se'.'Ier system. If Bet, tHe tr-eatffient
eoatinlies lintil it meets all specifications fer industrial discharge. The filter cake material is then
tr!lflsported to an apprepriate appre','ed facility. It is imperative t-llat preeesses SlieR as these be
utilized if flltlir-e hazardolls waste disposal Reeds are to be met.
The preposed expansioR of tRe KettlemaR Hills Landfill and t-lle addition of ehemical treatment
Jlreeesses (ineineratioR, adà nelltralizatioR) will greatly benefit tHe region's hazardous .waste
generators. Similar effoFts of e)(pansioR and addition of state of tRe art treatment teeHaelogies
at ether Hazardolis waste facilities ,-,:ilI assure adequate treatment and disposal eapabilities fer
aecommodating the flltlire demands of t-lle region.
4.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM
Pursuant to requirements of the Tanner Act, the COHWMP contains an evaluation of current and
projected hazardous waste generation and treatmeRt needs within San Diego Countv. Such an
evaluation enables a comparison of needs to existing facilitv capacities, and a detennination of
treatment surpluses and shortfalls upon which facilitv planning strategies can be developed.
Accurate forecasting and planning is difficult in that the volume of hazardous waste that will be
produced and require off-site treatment and disposal will be largelv affected bv regional growth,
the identification and clean-up of hazardous waste contaminated sites. legislative and regulatorv
changes regarding the definition and handling of wastes, and the effectiveness of on-site treatment
and waste minimization efforts including reuse. recycling, and promotion of safe substitutes.
WPC F;lHOMElPLANNIN(N)324P 3-33 7' ;¡~
-+
81:
1!:
81:
0
.
z ..
:!
~ II.
:I
Ë z
c
..
1&1 ..
~ ...
.
en ;
~
e
GI en ..
i
J, S ~
. c ~
.. II: 0
:I ~
GIN
-C
11.:1:
C
Z
~
e
...
~
,
.
::t
g
81:
C
N
C
Z
=
0
..
...
..
c
- - ~ -
Chapters VII and VTII of the COHWMP present a comprehensiye inventory and evaluation of
current and projected hazardous waste generation and facilitv needs. by each of the eight
generalized treatment methods (GTMs). from the base vear 1986 through the vear 2000. The
results of that evaluation. indicate both surplus and shortfalls in fullv addressing the region's
treatment needs depending upon the particular GTM.
Treatment capacitv shortfalls are indicated for the Oil Recvling. Stabilization. Solvent Recoverv.
Incineration and Other GTM's. Those shortfalls in the Oil Recycling and Stabilization GTM's
are large enough to sUPPort new facilities within the region. while those in the Solvent Recovery.
Incineration, and Other GTM's in and of themselves are not. There are two possible courses of
action for addressing shortfalls. the first being continuation of the existing practice of contracting
for needed treatment capacitv outside the region. the second is to site a facilitv within the region
of an economicallv viable size which would address these shortfalls. and provide capacitv to
adjacent regions experiencing identical circumstances. Projected capacitv surpluses occur in the
AQueous Treatment/Organics. AQueous Treatment Metals. and Oil/Water Separation GTM's. and
are based principallv upon alreadv existing capacities available at facilities within the San Diego
Region. although some 3.000 tons of additional annual capacitv for AQueous TreatmentlMetals
is anticipated through on-site activities proposed bv General Dynamics and Rohr Industries. With
the excePtion of these on-site operations, those surplus capacities will continue to be utilized by
generators outside the region.
There currently exists within the City a mu1ti-user hazardous waste treatment facility located
within the Otav Landfill as depicted on Figure 3-9. Appropriate Technologies II (APTEC II)
receives a variety of hazardous wastes for treatment. and was approved bv the City under a
Conditional Use Permit issued in 1981, with operating levels set forth in that pennit. As
indicated in COHWMP Table VII-4. APTEC II is one of the largest Treatment, Storag,e and
Disposal Facilities ITSDF's) within the San Diego Region. providing AQueous TreatmentlMetals,
AQueous Treatment/Organics. Solvent Recoverv. Oil/Water Separation. Stabilization. and Other
GTM's. Its combined estimated annual treatment capacitv for all GTM's is approximatelv 32.000
tons. greatlv exceeding the City's hazardous waste generation rate. which was last
comprehensively estimated in 1986 at 3.776 tons annuallv (COHWMP, Figure VII-C). According
to figures in the COHWMP. which mayor may not be consistent with operating levels authorized
bv the Citv's 1981 use permit, APTEC II's total annual treatment capacity equates to
approximatelv 26% of the Region's entire treatment needs. varying by GTM as follows:
APTEC II CapacitY as
GTM % of Regional Need
AQueous TreatmentlMetals 53%
AQueous Treatment/Organics 52%
Solvent Recovery 13%
Oil Recovery ~
Oil/Water Separation ..!!&
Incineration 0%
Stabilization 50%
Other 75%
WPC F:IIIOME\PLANNlNG\D324P 3-34 cr--- ~/ 7
The City is committed to DarticiDatin¡r in the necessary treatment of hazardous waste at a level
eQuivalent to waste generation within the Citv of Chula Vista. and a fair share of the San Diego
Rel!Íon's waste treatment needs. The CitY recol!l1izes that while APTEC ll's total capacitY far
exceeds Chula Vista's projected total waste treatment needs. not all of the Citv's treatment needs
are met bv APTEC ll. Some local wastes reQuire treatments not provided at APTEC ll. and as
in the case of incineration. not within San Diego County. Additionallv. selection of waste
treatment facilities is open to the generator. and as a result. wastes generated within the Citv mav
actuallv be treated elsewhere in the CountY. or outside the rel!Íon entirelv even though necessary
processes and capacitY are available at APTEC ll. Similar conditions exist for all cities within
the rel!Íon. and attempts to directlv rel!Ulate the geol!l"aDhic generation and treatment of wastes
presents tremendous complexities. Understanding that some cities mav not be host to a facilitv.
Chula Vista's commitment shall take into account the efforts of all jurisdictions to effectivelv
reduce their needs for off-site treatment. through on-site treatment and waste minimization efforts.
These hazardous waste management concepts are intended to reflect the Fair Share Principles of
the COHWMP. which while recol!l1izing that locallv sited facilities will exceed local needs. are
intended to ensure that the responsibilities for waste management are equitablv recognized and
addressed within San Diego CountY and neighboring regions.
4.~ Q SECONDARY SCHOOL SYSTEM
The Sweetwater Union High School District has prepared a master plan for the expansion of its
facilities. The plan includes the district's population composition, demographic profile,
enrollment history and facilities inventory. From this plan, the district establishes student
generation factors and development standards for the construction of new schools.
The Sweetwater Union High School District Master plan is a public document and available for
review and/or reproduction at the district offices.
4.61 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SYSTEM
The Master Plan for the Chula Vista City School District is anticipated for completion in 1989.
The plan will include the district's population composition, demographic profile, enrollment
history and facilities inventory. Based on this plan, the district will establish student generation
factors and project facility needs.
4.+ ~ LffiRARY SYSTEM
The City has prepared a master plan for the Chula Vista Library system. The basic role of the
Chula Vista Public Library will continue as a service and cultural center for people, a source of
infonnation in the community for purposes of business, social, governmental, practical and
enjoyment.
WPC F:lHOMIN'LANNtNG'D324P 3-35 ;? /£j(f'
The projected growth of the City will require more library space. The master plan calls for the
Central Library to continue to serve the Central Chula Vista and Bayfront areas at its present
size. In addition, the plans calls for the construction of two new full service libraries. The first
is to be in the Montgomery area to serve the approximately 50,000 existing residents. At the
time the new library is constructed, one or both of the small neighborhood branches are expected
to be closed. The second new library will be in the SweetwaterlBonita area and will also be a
full service facility. This library is planned to be built in two phases as population increases.
The fourth library of the master plan system is a smaller library for the Eastern Territories. This
will serve the population of this newly developing area and will be built as is warranted.
The master plan evaluated a total of seven sites in the Montgomery area. With little vacant land
available all alternatives to new construction should be thoroughly explored such as renovation
of exiting buildings. In the Sweetwater area a site has been set aside for a future library and five
other sites have been evaluated. An interim library and five other sites have been evaluated. An
interim library facility for Eastern Territories will be provided in the EastLake Village Shopping
Center when it is constructed. The location is available on a five-year rent free basis. The
pennanent facility is expected to be constructed on a site in EastLake. The total master planned
library system at buildout will include three full service libraries and one library in Eastern
Territories that will be sized in accordance with demand.
5. POLICIES AND GUIDELINES
Providing for adequate infrastructure development within the general area as it grows, requires
the application of certain policies and guidelines. Those policies and guidelines, as contained in
this section, will assist the user in interpreting the goals and objectives of Public Services Plan
which will assure that the quality of life in Chula Vista in maintained or enhanced in future
years.
5.1 WATER SUPPLY POLICIES
Water supply for the general plan area comes primarily from two sources: local water derived
from precipitation and stored in Sweetwater Reservoir, and imported water transported by the San
Diego County Water Authority. Proposed future development and conversion of now vacant land
to other uses will place ever-increasing demands on these supplies. Potential limitations on the
availability of both supplies highlights the need to combine long-tenn planning for water supply
with long-tenn planning for community development in Chula Vista.
(1) The City shall actively participate in the water master planning process by the Otay Water
Disnict and Sweetwater Authority. The City shall use the master plan to assist in
assigning the highest priorities to projects that will alleviate existing water supply
problems such as insufficient transmission capacity or storage.
WPC F:lHOMEll'LANNIN<NJ324P 3-36 o/i;
-~------------
(2) Prior to approval of development applications, the City shall detennine that there is
adequate water to accommodate the demand generated by the proposed development.
(3) The City shall encourage and monitor water conservation techniques and programs and
shall educate the community with respect to the importance of these efforts. This shall
include the following:
Mandate the use of water conservation devices in new development including low
water use toilets, shower fixture and other amenities.
Promote low water usage landscaping that is drought tolerant.
Mandate the use of reclaimed wastewater for all reasonable applications except in
severe hardship cases.
Establish, in concert with the water agencies, a public information program to
educate the community concerning water conservation and the use of reclaimed
wastewater.
Establish a water conservation monitoring program.
(4) The city shall strongly encourage the San Diego County Water Authority to make the
necessary improvements required to assure adequate water supply to Chula Vista.
5.2 WASTEWATER SERVICE POLICIES
The collection and disposal of wastewater generated within the general plan area will require
much study and planning in the future. With the Metro system undergoing significant change
coupled with the need to implement an effective reclamation program, the City will be faced with
major decisions regarding the ultimate wastewater system configuration. An up-to-date
Wastewater Master Plan, administered by the City, will ensure the adequacy of future facilities
to meet the demands imposed by future development. The extension of wastewater service and
the availability of capacity will greatly influence how much and where Chula Vista grows.
(1) The City shall use the Wastewater Master Plan as a guide to the future wastewater
collection and treatment facility requirements.
(2) Proposed facilities shall conform to this general plan's policies for land use, development
location and timing.
(3) Prior to approval of development applications, the City shall detennine that there is
adequate capacity to accommodate the wastewater generated by the proposed
development.
(4) Costs of improvements which are necessary to serve new development, such as extensions
of service and pump facilities, shall be financed by the developer. Facilities shall be
cónstructed to City standards and dedicated to the City. This policy does not preclude
WPC F:IIIOMEIPLANNIN(N)324P 3-37 0-- ç¿;:;
. .~..._----_.-
the use of assessment districts or similar mechanisms to fmance improvements. Existing
residents should not have to pay for improvements necessitated only by new development.
However, if existing residents benefit by increasing their property's housing density, they
shall be required to participate in the required improvements.
(5) New development to be served by septic systems in the City and in the County shall be
reviewed by the County Health Department to ensure the adequacy of the design, the
suitability of the soils to accommodate on-site disposal systems and the protection of
nearby surface and groundwater systems. Septic systems shall be pennitted only as a last
resort if gravity flow to the City's sewer system is not possible and only on parcels at
least one acre in size, provided that the City is satisfied that the above criteria are met.
(6) Actively participate in the Metro expansion planning process and, where appropriate,
evaluate reasonable alternatives which will eliminate Chula Vista's dependence on Metro.
(7) The City shall authorize a feasibility study with respect to implementing a phased
reclamation program to promote drinking water conservation. The study should address
participating in the Metro reclamation program or establishing an independent program.
5.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL POLICIES
Collecting and conveying stonnwater from present and future developed area is essential to
protecting lives and property. Development of the largely undeveloped Eastern Territories could
significantly affect the existing downstream drainage and flood control facilities in Central Chula
Vista if not properly regulated.
(1) The City shall use the Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan as a guide to the future
stonnwater facility development.
(2) If improvements are necessary to accommodate new development, it shall be the
developer's responsibility to bear the costs of such improvements, to construct the
facilities to City standards and to dedicate them to the City. As an alternative, the City
may establish and the developer shall pay (,Irainage basin fees for financing the required
facilities necessary to preclude a negative impact on the downstream facilities.
(3) Prior to approval of a development application, the City shall detennine that there is
adequate downstream stonnwater drainage capacity to accommodate the runoff generated
by future development within the project's drainage basin.
WPC F:>HOM!N'UNNING'<J324P 3-38 ?r~ 5/
-
(4) The City shall mandate the development of on-site detention of stonnwater flows such
that, where practical, existing downstream structures will not be overloaded.
(5) The City shall require the development of on-site sediment control a part of each project.
(6) The City shall discourage disruption of the naturallandfonns and encourage the maximum
use of natural drainageways in new development. Where possible, non-structural flood
protection methods, such as ~atural channels or improved channels which simulate natural
channels should be considered as an alternative to constructing concrete channels to
protect and stabilize land areas.
5.4 SOLID foND HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL POLICIES
The City's solid waste is disposed of in the Otay Landfill located within the general plan area.
The site is expected to close in the foreseeable future if waste reduction technologies are not
employed. The City's hazardElus '....aste is presently disposed Elf ElÐtside the general plan area in
other parts of California. It is critical that the City continue to participate in and support efforts
to extend the life of existing solid waste landfills and to locate and develop new landfills. aRà
deyelop He'll teelmEllogies related to treating and dispElsiRg of hazardoÐs wastes.
(1) The City shall continue to support efforts by the San Diego County Solid Waste Division
of Public Works to maintain adequate facilities for solid waste disposal.
(2) The City shall encourage efforts to recycle waste materials. Small collection facilities
should be permitted or provided in commercial and industrial areas. Provided adverse
circulation, parking and visual impacts can be mitigated.
(3) Sites for transfer stations, where garbage collected from individual collection routes are
transferred into larger trucks for disposal, should be pennitted within areas designated for
general industrial, provided circulation, visual and noise impacts do not adversely affect
adjacent uses.
(4) The City shall support waste reduction legislation and the County Public Infonnation and
Education Program. .
(5) The City shall eoHtiR1!e to S1!pport eff.erts by the SaH Diego CO1!Rty Hazardous W-aste
ManagemeHt Di"'¡sioH to maÍ11tain or establish adeqlJate facilities f-or hazaæo1!s waste anà
èispesah
WPC F:\HOMElPlANNIN<N>324P 3-39 g-3J
5.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL POLICIES
Effective and safe management of hazardous wastes within the Citv of Chula Vista. in accordance
with provisions of the COHWMP. reQuires the development of policies and implementation
measures which recognize not only the need for adeQuate waste treatment capacity. but also the
need to reduce the yolume of wastes produced, to establish a local regulatory framework to
coordinate the review of applications for new or expanded hazardous waste facilities among
involved agencies. parties and the public. and to set forth locational. siting. and permitting criteria
for hazardous waste facilities which will ensure the protection of public health and safety of
citizens, and enyironmental resources.
As a rapidly growing. mixed-use community characterized by the integration of industrial.
business and technological areas within a predominantly residential land use fabric. the City of
Chula Vita has special concerns with respect to local hazardous waste management. particularly
the safe siting or expansion of off-site hazardous waste treatment facilities. Based on particular
local conditions creating these concerns as further indicated in the following sections. it is the
City's intent to actively participate in. and promote efforts to reduce the volume of waste adding
to the necessity to site new. or expand existing. hazardous waste treatment facilities.
FurthelTl1ore. as provided by Section 25135.7(d) of the Health and Safety Code. the following sets
forth those planning and siting criteria. and other provisions intended to prevail over those of the
COHWMP. where their application is more stringent or restrictive in favor of the protection of
the public health. safetv and welfare. and environmental resources within the City of Chula Vista.
Hazardous Waste Minimization
Consistent with the provisions of Chapter VI of the COHWMP.
ill The City shall continue to participate in and support the efforts of the Countv Hazardous
Materials Management Division (HMMD) and other involved agencies to meet the goal
of a 30% reduction in county-wide hazardous waste generation over the next five years
through source reduction. reuse. and recycling approaches. This shall include the
exploration of funding and grant sources.
00
ill The City shall encourage the development of Ie'll lI~eas 'l:as~e preàaeiRg industries
within the general plan area which are negligible or minimal hazardous waste-producing.
and shall properly screen and identify new or proposed development that will be using
hazardous materials and generating hazardous wastes.
ill Prior to the issuance or renewal of a business license for businesses using hazardous
materials and generating hazardous waste. the City shall reQuire proof that the licensee
has prepared and submitted an acceptable Business Plan with the County HMMD. and
obtained all necessary licenses and pelTl1its. In cooperation with HMMD's Pollution
Prevention PrOgram. the City shall also consider the establishment of a local screening
process to ensure those businesses participation in waste minimization efforts.
WPC F~0MIN'LANNING'D324P 3-40 ~S3
ill In cooperation with the County HMMO, the City shall work to enhance community
awareness and public relations regarding hazardous waste management and minimization
through dissemination of literature. and the sponsoring of educational workshops and
forums with hazardous material and waste industrv leaders. product and business
associations. and local waste generators.
ill The Citv shall establish a program to recognize industries or businesses that effectivelv
eliminate or minimize hazardous wastes.
ill The City shall prepare periodic reports on the progress of hazardous waste minimization
efforts in the Citv.
Household Hazardous Waste
Pursuant to the requirements of AB 939, the Citv has prepared for adoPtion a Household
Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) as a component of countv-wide integrated waste management
plans. Consistent with Chapter V of the COHWMP. the HHWE addresses the safe collection.
recycling. treatment and disposal of household hazardous waste within the City over both the
short term 0991-1995) and mid-term 0996-2000).
~
(1) The City shall work with the County to encourage, through community education, a
reduction in household hazardous waste generation by promoting safe substitutes and
recycling.
fI1
(2) The City shall encourage the safe disposal of household hazardous wastes by working
with the County in providing convenient disposal alternatives to the residents of Chula
Vista, including support and sponsorship of communitv collection events, and
establishment of specialized criteria for evaluating the siting of temporary and permanent
collection centers.
General Areas
The Tanner Act (AB 2948) requires the mapping of "general areas" within which hazardous
waste facilities might be established. subject to evaluation based on the siting criteria set forth
in the subsequent section. "General areas" are intended to illustrate the extent and distribution
of potential siting opportunities within Chllla Vista and as such, are designed along with the
siting criteria as first step in analyzing the appropriateness of a particular site for a hazardous
waste facility. The "general areas" ARE NOT recommended locations for such facilities, nor are
they intended as a specific guide to locations where facility siting applications are encouraged.
However. facility proposals should be considered only if they are within the general areas
designated herein.
WPC F~OMlN'LANNING\D324P 3-41 'is ~-> if
Existing industrial areas. and future industrial areas designated in the Chula Vista General Plan
were included as "general areas" in Chapter IX and Appendix IX-B of the COHWMP. These
areas do not necessarily represent all the available locations for facilities. as additional land
designated as industrial through future General Plan amendments and rezonings should also be
considered for possible inclusion as a "general area". Likewise. application of siting criteria to
more specific local conditions may prove some of the identified generalized areas as
unacceptable.
Based on a reyiew of more specific local land use conditions in relation to several prominent
siting criteria. Figure 3-10 depicts a refinement of "general areas" within which hazardous waste
facility proposals would be considered in the Chula Vista Planning Area. These refined "general
areas" shall prevail over the "general areas" described in the COHWMP and its appendices. and
shall be subject to reyiew and amendment from time-to-time as necessitated bv chancing land
use and other local conditions. For clarification. the following prescribes those industrially
designated and zoned areas which have presently been removed from the COHWMP's "general
areas" inventory:
=. Montgomerv/Otav Communi tv: Bounded bv L Street on the north. Interstate
5 on the west. Otav River on the south. and Interstate 805 on the east. much of
the community's industrial areas are juxtaposed with residential uses and immobile
populations such as schools. resulting from an historic lack of zoning regulation
and enforcement under County jurisdiction prior to the area's annexation in 1985.
Potential location of a hazardous waste facility in this land use setting would
present substantial and unacceptable risks to public health and safetY. In addition.
the largest agl!J'egate industrial area located along the Main Street corridor. borders
the environmentally sensitive Otav River Valley. recentlv inventoried in
conjunction with preparation of the Otav River Resource Enhancement Plan. and
is entirely within the dam failure inundation area for Lower Otav Reservoir's
Savage Dam according to maps on file with the State Department of Water
Resources.
- EastLake and Rancho Del Rev Business Parks: These industrially
designated areas in Eastern Chula Vista are intel!J'ated components of
predominantly residential mixed-use master planned communities. Reflective of
this setting. thev are intended as el11Plovment areas comprised of light industrial
uses such as warehousing and distribution. and would be inappropriate for
hazardous waste facilities. Furthennore. principal access to these areas is bv way
of East H Street and Telel!J'aph Canyon Road which transect large residential areas
and serve as principal travel routes carrying in excess of 35.000 ADT. presenting
substantial transportation risks.
=. Otav Valley Road: The portion of the Otav Valley Road industrial area
east of Interstate 805 and south of Otav Vallev Road borders the Otav River
Valley. and is entirely within the dam failure inundation area for Lower Otav
Reservoir's Savage Dam.
,Y"': ('.r'"
WI'C F;\HOME'PU\NNIN<NJ324P 3-42 ð /' -53
The following policies regarding General Areas in the Chula Vista Planning Area shall prevail
over the seven General Area policies set forth on pages IX-46 and IX-47 of the COHWMP:
ill Proposals for hazardous waste facilities shall be accepted for review only if they are
within a designated "general area" as herein established at the time the application is
accepted as complete.
ill The review and evaluation of applications accepted pursuant to (I) above shall be based
upon the policies and siting criteria set forth in the City's General Plan. subject to
required risk assessments. environmental reviews and other applicable codes. ordinances.
and requirements.
ill "General Areas" shall be limited to existing developed industrial land. and land designated
for future industrial development in the present General Plan. except as herein restricted.
ill The City shall evaluate any future general plan revisions involving the establishment of
industrial land use designations for the appropriateness of their inclusion as a "general
area" within the City of Chula Vista.
ill The City may from time to time, as changes to local plans. policies. and conditions
warrant. determine that certain industrial land use designations or zoning districts are not
appropriate for inclusion as "general areas". as long as the ability to accept applications
and potentially site facilities is not significantlv restricted.
ill "General Areas" for household hazardous waste collection facilities shall be restricted to
lands designated for industrial use. All lands designated for industrial use within the
Planning Area shall be deemed included for accePting applications for such facilities
regardless of their possible exclusion from refined "general areas" for all other tVI>es of
transfer or treatment facilities.
ill Military lands should also be considered as part of the "general areas." It is the
Department of Defense policv to avoid siting of commercial hazardous waste treatment
and disposal facilities on militarv land. Siting on a case-by-case basis could be
considered in special circumstances. A relationship should be developed with the military
in which common local jurisdiction and military hazardous waste issues and needs can
be cooperatively addressed. The Memorandum of Agreement that currently exists
between the U.S. Navv and the SANDAG should be the basis for this relationship.
ill Land currently under the control of the Federal Bureau of Land Management (ELM) has
the potential to be acquired bv local government or bv private parties. BLM land
transferred from federal to non-federal ownership is subject to local government general
plan designation and zoning. All of the general area policies and other policies would
apply to this transferred land.
WPC F""OMEIPIANNIN<NJ324P 3-44 g>~~
ill Indian land is not subject to any federal. state and local enyironmental. health. safety and
Dlanning reQuirements. Therefore. Indian lands should not be considered Dotential
"general areas" unless these lands can meet all siting criteria as set forth herein. and
Dennission to use Indian land can be obtained.
Sitint! Criteria
Under the Tanner Act (AB 2948). local government is reQuired to adoDt "siting criteria" to be
aDDlied in evaluating hazardous waste facility DroDosals within the Dreviously established "general
areas". Siting criteria are those oDerational. financial. land use and transDortation conditions
which must be met if a hazardous waste management facility is to be Dennitted at a sDecific site.
Siting criteria are both Qualitative and Quantitative in nature. and as the focus of the siting
Drocess. are Drimarily intended to ensure the sufficient Drotection of Dublic health. safety and
welfare. and environmental resources.
The criteria are designed somewhat generically in that they aDDly to evaluation of a broad range
of hazardous waste facilities and management technologies which can Vary greatly in their size.
volume. and tVDe of waste stream(s) handled. and which inherentlv may differ substantiallv in
their Dotentialland use. environmental. and Dublic health imDacts. While this generic nature of
the criteria Drovides needed flexibility in the local review Drocess. it also necessitates that facilitv
review be conducted carefullv and thoroughly. As a result. all local facility aDDlication reviews
shall include an environmental review and health risk assessment. and any aDDrovals shall be
through a conditional use Dennit.
Recognizing the influence of more sDecific local conditions on the develoDment and aDDlication
of siting criteria. Section 25135.7(d) of the Health and Safety Code allows cities to establish
more stringent Dlanning reQuirements or siting criteria than those in the COHWMP. In order to
assure that hazardous waste facilities are considered with the highest regard for the health. safety
and welfare of the citizens of Chula Vista. and the continued Dreservation and Drotection of its
natural resources. the following modified siting criteria shall be emDloved in the evaluation of
hazardous waste facility DroDosals within the Citv's General Planning Area. and shall Drevail over
the siting criteria contained in ADDendix IX-A of the COHWMP.
PROTECT THE RESIDENTS OF CHULA VISTA
.1 Proximity to DoDulations
~ Proximity to DoDulations is defined as the distance from the boundary of the site
UDon which the facility is DroDosed to dwellings used by one or more Dersons as
a Dermanent Dlace of residence. or to dwellings inhabited by Dersons temDorarily
for DUfDoses of work (e.g.. migrant workers. construction camDs).
WFC F:II!OMElPlANN!NG'O324P 3-45 <¡),- 57
-
ci~ ;
~ -,r ~
, Z
::)
e '
z
z
Z
4C
....
Do
4C
~
W'o
- -
>
4C
...
::)
:z::
u
OW
....:z::
~~
¡z
, % (/)
II:~ 4(
- w
. '~
. ;l
en a:
4C w
W z
ac.~ w
-" ~
- c'
~ ~,
ac ' Ib ;,
W - a: I
~ .
Q
W
Z ,,~..~t.
¡¡: \.¡.~t.~
W
ac
~
~ For a residuals repository, the proximity of the facility to populations must be a
minimum of 2,000 feet, subject to increase pursuant to the reQuired risk
assessments and environmental review.
~ The active portion of a facility shall be subject to additional setbacks and
buffering from the property boundary as required by the underlying zone. or
through conditions established by the associated use permit(s).
~ All hazardous waste facility proposals shall be required to undergo an
environmental review and prepare a health risk assessment regardless of their tYPe.
size. or proximity to populations or immobile populations. Said health risk
assessment (HRA). as discussed on pages IX-28 through -33 of the COHWMP.
shall be prepared under the direction of the City, the Local Assessment Committee
(LAC). and any Ad Hoc Technical Committees which may be created to advise
the City and the LAC on such matters.
~ With respect to hazardous waste treatment facilities, there is no stated distance
from populations or immobile populations which is assumed to be safe. The
required HRA shall serve as a fundamental mechanism to present data. evaluations
and recommendations for use by the City Council in ultimately determining the
appropriate location and distance for a particular hazardous waste facility in
relation to any existing and proposed surrounding residential development or other
sensitive receptors.
~ The City shall establish a screening process to determine the scope and content
of each HRA, and the need for. and type of, any additional technical studies. It
is the intent of the City in developing this scope. that the HRA recognize the
alternative sites presented through the environmental review and provide
comparative evaluation of these sites so as to enable comprehensive consideration
of the relative public health. safety and welfare risks, and environmental protection
concerns in making siting decisions.
~ Existing hotels and motels shall also be considered residences.
~ Distance separation requirements for residuals repositories and other facilities shall
include all areas designated in General Plan for future residential development
regardless of their density. as well as existing residences.
~ Setback or buffer areas shall be precluded from future residential uses through
property restrictions such as easements or covenants. and where appropriate.
through general planning and zoning.
WPC F:\HOME'PlANNING\D324P 3-46 fj- ~ S-¡
b. Proximitv to immobile populations
~ Proximitv to immobile populations is defined as the distance from the boundary
of the site upon which the facility is located to areas where persons who cannot
or should not be moved are located.
~ The defmition of immobile populations includes childcare facilities and K-l2
schools as well as hospitals. convalescent homes and prisons.
~ Hazardous waste facilities shall not be located within one mile of any of these
populations unless the reQuired risk assessment satisfactorily indicates that the
attendant health and safetY risks are not appreciably increased. and then only at
the discretion of the CitY Council.
1. Capability of emergency services
~ Capability of emergency services is defined to include the extent of training and
eQuipment of fIre departments. police departments. and hospitals for handling
industrial emergencies. Particularly those involving hazardous materials and
~
~ All facilities shall be located in areas where fITe departments are trained to deal
with hazardous materials accidents. where mutual aid and immediate aid
agreements are well-established. and where demonstrated emergency response
times are the same or better than those recommended bv the National Fire
Prevention Association.
~ The City may reQuire additional facility design features and/or on-site emergency
services at the facility based on the type of wastes handled or the location of the
facilitY.
~ Pursuant to the reQuirements of State law. and subject to the satisfaction and
approval of the City Council. facilities may provide their own emergency response
capabilitY.
ENSURE THE STRUcruRAL STABILITY OF THE FACILITY
~ Flood hazard areas
~ Flood hazard areas are defined as areas which are prone to inundation bv lOa-year
freQuency floods. and bv flash floods and debris flows resulting from maior storm
events. Flood hazard areas can be determined bv checking Federal Emergencv
Management Agencv flood insurance maps or with local flood control districts.
~ Residuals repositories are expressly prohibited in areas subject to inundation bv
floods with a rOO-year return freQuency. and should not be located in areas subject
to flash floods and debris flows.
WPC F:>HOMIN'LANNIN<N>324P I 3-47 f5/ ~ 0
~ All facilities and accesses to such facilities shall be located outside the IOO-vear
floodplain. or areas subject to flash floods and debris flows. The risk assessment
and environmental review shall analvze such hazards. Anv exceptions based on
proposed engineering and design responses shall be at the discretion of the CitY
Council.
.2.. Areas subject to tsunamis. seiches. and storm surges
~ Areas subject to tsunamis. seiches. and storm surges are defined as areas bordering
oceans. bays. inlets. estuaries or similar bodies of water which may flood due to
tsunamis (commonly known as tidal waves). seiches (yertically oscillating standing
waves usually occurring in enclosed bodies of water such as lakes. reservoirs. and
harbors caused by seismic activity. violent winds. or changes in atmospheric
pressure). or storm surges.
~ All facilities. including reSidual repositories. shall be prohibited from locating in
areas subject to flooding from these occurrences. The risk assessment and
Environmental review shall analyze such hazards.
~ Proximity to active and potentially active faults
~ An active fault is defined as a fault along which surface displacement has
occurred during Holocene time (about the last 11.000 years) and is associated with
one or more of the following:
- a recorded earthquake with surface rupture
:. fault creep slippage
- displaced survey lines
A potentially active fault is defined as a fault showing eyidence of surface
displacement during Quaternarv time (from the last 11.000 years to about the last
2 to 3 million years. and is characterized by the following:
:. considerable length
:. association with an alignment of numerous earthquake epicenters
:. continuitY with faults having historic displacement association with
youthful maior mountain scarps or ranges
:. correlation with strong geophysical anomalies
~ All facilities are required to have a minimum 200-foot setback from a known
active or potentially active fault.
~ All facilities regardless of proximity to faults. shall as a minimum standard. be
constructed to seismic zone 4 building code standards. subject to requirements in
excess as determined necessary by the City to protect public health and safety.
WPC F:lHOMlN'L\NNIN<NI324P 3-48 ~ / ¿, /
1.. Slope stability
~ Slope stability is defined as the relative degree to which the site will be vulnerable
to the forces of gravitv. such as landslide. soil creep. earth flow. or anv other mass
movement of earth material which might cause a breach. carry wastes away from
the facility. or inundate the facilitv.
~ Residuals repositories are expressly prohibited in areas of potential slope
instability.
~ All other facilities shall be prohibited in areas of potential slope instability or
rapid geologic change. except as authorized by satisfactorv engineering and design
solutions. and upon approval of the City Council. The risk assessment and
environmental review shall include an analysis of such hazards.
~ Subsidenceniquefaction
~ Subsidence is defined as a sinking of the land surface following the removal of
solid mineral matter or fluids (e.g.. water or oil) from the subsurface.
~ Liquefaction refers to the surface materials that develop liquid properties upon
being physically disturbed.
~ All facilities. including residual repositories. shall be prohibited from locating in
areas subject to these disturbances. and the risk assessment and environmental
review shall include an analysis of such potential disturbances.
.2:. Dam failure inundation areas
~ Dam failure inundation areas are defined as the areas below a dam structure (i.e..
reservoir dam. debris basin) which would be inundated by the flow of water from
the impoundment created by the dam structure if it were to fail.
~ All hazardous waste management facilities shall be prohibited from locating within
dam failure inundation areas.
PRDTECf SURFACE WATER DUALITY
All facilities will be required to meet federal and state water quality requirements. administered
by the State and Regional Water Duality Control Boards.
10. Aqueducts and reservoirs
~ Aqueducts are defined as conduits for conveying drinking water supplies.
WPC F:\HOMlN'Lo\NNING'D324P 3-49 íf>t~
~ Reservoirs are derIDed as impoundments for containing drinking water supplies.
~ All facilities shall be located in areas posing minimal threats to the contamination
of drinking water supplies contained in reservoirs and aqueducts. Evaluation of
such threats shall include airborne emissions potential to contaminate surface
water.
.!h Discharge of treated effluent
~ Discharge of treated effluent is derIDed as the availabilitv of wastewater treatment
facilities to accept treated wastewater (effluent). or the ability to discharge treated
effluent directly into a stream. including a dry stream bed. or into the ocean
through a state-pennitted outfall.
~ Facilities generating wastewaters shall be located in areas with adequate sewer
capacity to accommodate the expected wastewater discharge. If sewers are not
available. sites should be evaluated for ease of connecting to a sewer. or for the
feasibility of discharging directly into a stream or the ocean.
PROTECT GROUNDWATER OUALITY
Residuals repositories:
Current State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regulations. as implemented by the
Regional Water Qualitv Control Board. including:
~ Immediately underlain by natural geologic materials with penneability of not more than
lXlO-7 cm/sec 0.24 in/yd.
~ Natural material shall be of sufficient thickness to prevent vertical movement of fluid.
including waste and leachate, to waters of the state for as long as they pose a threat to
water quality.
~ Lateral movement prevented by natural or 1Irtificial barriers.
In addition to the preceding siting criteria. the current SWRCB regulations also include the
following construction standards:
~ Compatibility of the wastes with construction materials.
~ Clay liner at least 2 feet thick (in addition to natural material and synthetic liner).
~ A leachate collection system adequate to collect and remove twice the maximum
anticipated daily yolume.
1 The interpretation of this requirement by Regional Water Quality Control Boards needs
to be clarified and standardized.
WPC F:IIIOMElPLANNlNG'O324P 3-50 ¿5 --- 6.3
~ A cover adequate to prevent percolation of precipitation through the wastes.
~ Precipitation and drainage controls.
~ Seismic design.
All other facilities:
Current State Department of Health Services regulations re<!uire double containment for
underground storage. In addition. the following criteria (Nos. 12 to 18) apply to non-repositorY
facilities.
12. Proximitv to supply wells and well fields
Proximitv to supply wells and well fields is defined as the distance to areas used for
extraction of groundwater for drinking water supplies bv high-capacity production wells
and identified bv the presence of several wells that constitute a well field.
Hazardous waste facilities shall locate outside the cone of depression created bv pumping
well or well field 90 days unless an effective hydrogeologic banier to vertical flow exists.
11. Depth to Groundwater
Depth to groundwater is defined as the minimal seasonal depth to the highest anticipated
elevation of underlying groundwater from the bottom of any proposed waste-containing
facility.
The foundation of all containment structures at the facilitY must be capable of
withstanding hydraulic pressure gradients to prevent failure due to settlement.
compression. or uplift as certified bv a registered civil engineer or engineering geologist
registered in California.
14. Groundwater monitoring reliability
Groundwater monitoring reliabilitY is defined as the dependabilitY of a scientifically
designed monitoring program to measure. observe. and evaluate groundwater Qualitv and
flow.
Where the risk assessment and/or environmental review have identified any potential
impacts to groundwater. in addition to reQuired mitigation measures. a reliable
groundwater monitoring program shall be reQuired as specified bv the Citv.
WPC F:\HOMlN'lANNING'<>324P 3-51 (J/¿;i'
.li:. Maior aauifer recharge areas
Maior aQuifer recharge areas are defined as regions of principal recharge to major
regional aQuifers. as identified in the existing literature or bv hydrogeological experts
familiar with the San Diego region. Such recharge areas are tvuicallv found in:
... Outcrop or subcrop areas of major water-yielding facies of confined aQuifers.
... Outcrop or subcrop areas of confining units that supply major recharge to
underlying regional aQuifers.
Facilities with surface or subsurface storage/treatment located within one-half mile of a
potential drinking water source shall have a groundwater study conducted to detennine
appropriate buffer zone and mitigation measures.
lQ" Permeability of surficial materials
PermeabilitY of surficial materials is defined as the ability of geologic materials at the
earth's surface to infiltrate and percolate water.
Facilities locating in areas where surficial materials are principally highly permeable
materials shall conduct an appropriate groundwater study. and provide for appropriate
mitigation measures such as increased spill containment and an inspection program.
lL Existing groundwater aualitv
Existing groundwater Qualitv is defined as the chemical Qualitv of the groundwater in
comparison to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencv Interim Primarv and Secondary
Drinking Water Standards and. for constituents with no standards. to guidelines suggested
bv research reported in the literature.
The Environmental Protection Agencv has released guidelines defining protection policies
for three classes of groundwater. based on their respective value and their vulnerability
to contamination. The three classes are:
... Class I: Groundwater that is highly vulnerable to contamination and characterized
bv being irreplaceable (no reasonable alternative source of drinking water is
available) or ecologically vital (if polluted. would destroy a uniQue habitat).
These are designed as Special Groundwaters.
... Class ll: Current or potential sources of drinking water and waters having other
beneficial uses.
WPC F'lHOME\PLANNIN(J'I)3:14P 3-52 (5 /tk~
~ Class Ill: Groundwaters not considered Dotential sources of drinking water and
of limited beneficial use (waters heavily saline [IDA levels 10.000 DDmn or
otherwise contaminated beyond levels that allow cleanup using reasonably
employed treatment methods).
Facilities located in areas where existing !!I'oundwater aualitv is Class I or Class II shall
conduct an appropriate !!I'oundwater impact study as Dart of the environmental review. and
shall provide increased spill containment and inspection measures in addition to other
identified mitigation.
~ Proximitv to !!I'oundwater dependent communities
Prohibit siting within !!I'oundwater drainage basin(s) within which !!I'oundwater dependent
communities exist. except for any portion of such basin(s) 5 miles or more
down-elevation from the boundaries of the subiect communitv(ies).
PROTECT AIR OUALITY
Current San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) regulations implementing federal. state
and local air aualitv regulations including Rules 20.2 and 20.3 governing new source review. the
APCD's standard prohibitions and Rule 51 covering public nuisances. Rule 51 would typically
apply to all types of hazardous waste treatment facilities. The County of San Diego Department
of Health Services implementation of response plans for acute and accidental hazards (pursuant
to AB 3777) would also cover air aualitv issues.
~ The City shall involve the APCD in the screening and scoping process for the reauired
Health Risk Assessment on all facilities. and the risk assessment shall address all Dotential
emissions and indicate whether any have the potential to adverse1v affect human health
and the environment. and to what extent.
PROTECT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSmVE AREAS
l2." Wetlands
Facilities shall not be located in wetlands such as saltwater. fresh water. and brackish
marshes. swamps and bogs inundated bv surface or !!I'oundwater with a freQuency to
support. under normal circumstances. a prevalence of vegetative or aQuatic life which
reQuires saturated soil conditions for !!I'owth and reproduction. as defined bv local.
regional. state or federal plans and guidelines.
20. Proximitv to habitats of threatened and endangered species
Habitats of threatened and endangered species are defined as areas known to be inhabited
permanently or seasonally or known to be critical at any state in the life cycle of any
species of wildlife or vegetation identified or being considered for identification as
"endangered" or "threatened" by the U.S. Department of Interior or the State of
California.
WI'C F:\IIOMlN'IANNINCNl324P 3-53 ?T-- ~¿,
Facilities shall not be located within critical habitat areas. as defined in local. regional.
state or federal plans.
lh Natural. recreational. cultural. and aesthetic resources
Natural. recreational. cultural. and aesthetic resources are defined as public and private
lands having local. regional. state. or national significance. value. or importance. These
lands include national. state. regional. countv. and local parks and recreation areas.
historic resources. wild and scenic rivers. scenic highways. ecological preserves. public
and private (e.g.. Natural Conservancy Trust for Public Lands) preservation areas. and
other lands of local. regional. state. or national significance.
All facilities shall avoid locating in. or near these areas. The risk assessment and
environmental review shall identify these resources proximate to the facility and its major
transportation routes. Pursuant to demonstrated necessity. and at the discretion of the City
Council. some facility operations or transportation routes may be allowed within unused
or compatible portions of certain public lands.
22. Prime agricultural lands
Prime agricultural lands. under California law. may not be used for urban purposes unless
an overriding public need is served. When siting hazardous waste management facilities
in these areas. overriding public service needs must be demonstrated to the satisfaction
of the Citv Council.
23. Mineral deposits
Facilities shall not be sited so as to preclude extraction of minerals necessary to sustain
the economv of the State.
24. Public facilities and militarY reservations
Public facilities and military reservations are defined as lands owned bv federal. state.
countv. or local governments on which facilities used to supplv public services and
Department of Defense (DaD) bases and installations are located. In particular. these
lands would include highwav maintenance and storage areas. airports. city or county
corporation yards. waste disposal facilities. sewage treatment facilities. state school lands
(lands deeded to the state when California was admitted to the Union). and militarY bases
and installations.
WPC F"IIOMlN'LANNING'D324P 3-54 '6-67
It is the policy of the Department of Defense that militarY land shall not be considered
for public hazardous waste management facilities. However. the militarY currently has
hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities located on militarY bases in the San
Diego region and has in the Dast leased militarY land to public agencies for waste
management functions (Miramar Landfill).
Therefore. militarY lands are potentially available for the siting of new facilities for the
handling of militarY hazardous waste (new facilities for the handling of militarY hazardous
waste (new facilities are DroDosed in the U.S. Navv's 5-vear budget. Militarv land mav
be considered for lease or sale for Dublic hazardous waste facilities. at the discretion of
the militarY.
SAFE TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
~ The City shall reauire DreDaration of a traffic/transDortation study as Dart of the
environmental review and risk assessment for all facility ProDoSalS. which study shall
account for all factors addressed in items #25 to #29. and consider both existing and
proiected land use and circulatory conditions pursuant to the General Plan.
25. Proximitv to areas of waste generation
Proximitv to areas of waste generation is defined as the travel time from the maior market
areas of waste generation to the proDosed facility.
All facilities except residuals repositories bv virtue of location. should minimize travel
time for all market areas of waste generation. on a weighted basis. with no maior market
areas beyond a one-way travel time of one day (including loading and unloading).
For the residuals reDositorv. one-way transDortation time. including loading and unloading.
from any maior market areas would not exceed one day. with the majority of the drivinl!:
time spent on maior routes (state and interstate divided highways).
Total transportation costs for incineration facilities should represent a modest portion of
the total cost of using such facilities including drop charges.
Transfer facilities should be located within each maior area of waste generation to
encourage maximum use.
Alternate transportation bv rail may be evaluated in regard to specific locations for
feasibility and efficiency.
In comparison with multiple small facilities. economies of scale for a single centralized
facility may offset the additional transportation cost.
WPC F:lHOMm'LANNIN<NI324P 3-55 ?/~Y
26. Distance from major route
Distance from a major route is defined as the distance along a nùnor route (citv street.
boulevard. or undivided highwav) that a truck must travel to reach the facilitv after
leaving the major route (state or interstate divided highwav).
Distance traveled on minor roads should be kept to a minimum. Facilities are best
located near an exit of a major route.
Only locations adiacent to major routes or accessed from maior routes via routes used
locally for truck traffic (e.g.. truck routes) should be considered for transfer or treatment
facilities.
The facilitY developers may propose to build a direct access road to avoid the minor
route(s).
27. Structures fronting minor routes
Structures fronting nùnor routes are defined as the number and type of residences.
schools. hospitals. and shopping centers having primary access from the transportation
route between the entrance of a facilitv and the nearest major route.
Facilities should be located such that any minor routes from the maior route (state or
interstate divided highway) to the facilitv are used primarilv by trucks. and the number
of non-industrial structures (homes. hospitals. schools. etc. is nùnimal.
The facility developer shall evaluate the "population at risk" based on the Federal
Highwav Administration's Guidelines for Applving Criteria to Designate Routes for
Transporting Hazardous Materials. The population at risk factor should not exceed that
for existing facilities. and sites with lower factors should be preferred.
Specific highway segments mav be scheduled for CAL TRANS improvement
Transportation could be curtailed during ooak: use by automobiles. school traffic. etc.
28. Highway accident rate
The highway accident rate is defined as the OCCUITence of nùnor to fatal accidents per
vehicle nùles traveled. as recorded by the California Department of Transportation.
The minimum time path from major market areas to a facilitY should follow highways
with low to moderate average annual dailv traffic and accident rates. as guided bv the
research and findings of state. regional. countY. and citY transportation planners.
WPC F:lHOMlN'LANNIN<NJ324P 3-56 ~ /t7
Specific highwav segments mav be scheduled for CAL TRANS improvements which mav
decrease highwav accident rates.
Hazardous waste transportation could be curtailed during periods of greatest automobile
traffic.
The facilitv developer should work with the region. county. and city transportation
planners in selecting alternate routes.
29. CapacitY versus AADT of access roads
Capacity versus average annual dailv traffic (AADT) of access roads is defined as the
number of vehicles that the road is designed to handle versus the number of vehicles it
does handle on a dailv basis. averaged over a period of one Vear.
The changes in the ratio of route capacity to average annual dailv traffic should be
negligible after calculating the number of trucks on the maior and minor routes expected
to service the facilitv.
Facilitv developer mav propose to upgrade the road(s) to provide additional capacitv.
PROTECT SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC GOALS
30. Consistencv with General Plan
~ Consistencv with the General Plan is defined as consistencv of the proposed
facilitv with the goals. objectives and policies of the Citv as expressed bv the
General Plan. Specific Plans. implementing ordinances. and other applicable
programs.
~ As provided bv Section 25199.5 of the California Health and Safetv Code, the
consistencv of anv proposal with the General Plan. Specific Plans. zoning
ordinances. and other applicable prOgrams shall be based on their provisions as in
place at the time the associated application for a land use decision is accepted as
complete.
~ The proposed facility should be sited at one of the most consistent locations
within the Citv as reflected in the General Plan. Specific Plans. zoning ordinances.
and other applicable planning programs.
~ The evaluation of consistencv shall be based directlv upon the provisions of the
General Plan. Specific Plans and zoning ordinances in effect. and shall not take
into consideration anv mitigation measures proposed bv the proponent to further
community goals which are not proiect specific and directlv related to identified
public health and safetv. and environmental concerns.
~ Developer mav petition for an amendment to the General Plan.
WPC F"'OMIN'LANN!N<N>324P 3-57 >5- 70
.R Direct revenue to the City
Direct revenue to the CitY is dermed as the Dresent worth of the dollar amount of annual
DroDertv tax revenue and any other direct Davrnents (e.g.. local usage and Der capita taxes.
hazardous waste taxes) that the facilitY will contribute to the CitY during the period of
construction and the facility's oDeratine: life.
The proposed facilitY's power for tax and revenue generation relative to both current site
users and other reasonably prospective site users in terms of amount. stability. and cost
to the City should not show a net loss.
The CitY may consider comDensation prOl!1"ams which could offset projected losses either
directly or indirectly.
32. Changes in emplovrnent
Chane:es in employment are defined as the total number of permanent full- and Part-time
jobs resulting from the construction and operation of the facility. including the number
of each tYPe of job expected to be followed bv local residents.
If this clearly is an issue causing disagreement between the facility developer and the
CitY. then the developer shall fund an independent study of the issue.
The developer and the CitY shall al!1"ee beforehand on the scope of the study and who will
conduct it. The sophistication of the study methods shall be appropriate to the nature and
size of the facilitY and the City's del!1"ee of concern with the particular issue.
If the number of jobs accounts for a sÍimificant portion of employment in the area. then
the developer should provide appropriate prol!1"ams to address the socio-economic and
public services impacts on the communitY.
Fair Share
The Southern California Hazardous Waste Management AuthoritY (SCHWMA) provides oversight
and coordination toward resolvine: local government sitine: issues in Southern California through
its Ree:ional Action Plan. which is in part founded upon the 10 Fair Share Principals and Fair
Share Formula discussed on pages IX-35 to -37 of the COHWMP. Those principles and formula
are desil!l1ed to recognize that the minimum size for an economically viable hazardous waste
facilitY willlikeiv exceed the needs of any local jurisdiction in which it is located. and in some
instances the countY-wide needs for certáin waste streams. As this situation exists in all counties.
rel!Íonal cooperation is necessary to address the siting of needed hazardous waste facilities both
between and within counties. Through the establishment of inter-e:overnmental al!1"eements.
assurances can be made that all cities and counties share in the responsibilitY for proper treatment
and disposal of their entire waste stream. The Fair Share principles and Formula have been
adopted as part of the COHWMP. and are to be considered bv local jurisdictions in making
facility siting decisions.
WPC F:\HOMlN'lANNlNGIO324P 3-58 ~//
At present, however, there does not exist clear direction as to how a local jurisdiction is to
consider and apply fair share principles to specific facility siting proposals. The principles
contained in the COHWMP. as derived from SCHWMA's Regional Action Plan. focus on
whether county-wide needs for waste treatment and disDosai are being met through either facility
capacity within the county. and/or effective inter-governmental agreements with other counties.
In such context. employment of fair share considerations at the local level in evaluating new or
expanded facility proposals may be sismificantlv impacted if County-wide needs. which the
jurisdiction has no direct authority over. are not being fully addressed. This situation does not
recognize iurisdictio>1s within the County which are already host to hazardous waste facilities,
nor does it prescribe how a County may acceptably develop internal fair share policies which
define when a local jurisdiction has met its reasonable fair share of regional resDonsibilities. As
the fair share concepts are somewhat new. further efforts are necessary to develop more sDecific
fair share policies within San Diego County to clarify eQuitable facility siting and other waste
management responsibilities among the Region's jurisdictions. Such policies might also take into
consideration the we and amount of other regional facilities to which a jurisdiction is host.
The City recognizes its responsibility for the management of hazardous waste, and the
COHWMP's fair share principles. and will apply an interim fair share concept in the local
regulatorv Drocess for hazardous waste facilities which addresses the City'S involvement in an
amount proportionate to waste generated within the Citv. and a reasonable fair share of overall
needs within San Diego County. The City's intent is to recognize other communities' needs to
accept responsibility for, and/or site. an equitable share of needed facilities. especially if the
generation of waste is from communities which are not actively undertaking efforts to achieve
on-site treatment and waste minimization.
In conjunction with the aforementioned. when reviewing applications for new or expanded
hazardous waste facilities. the City will consider the following in the fair share evaluative
process:
11 The Citv shall reQuire the proponent to identify the location of waste sources, and
the respective volumes of the particular waste stream(s) from each of those
sources it will serve. including those specifically known at the time of application.
as well as those estimated in the future. The City shall also require the proponent
to submit data with respect to county-wide waste needs. existing facility
capacities. and intergovernmental agreements. so as to provide a complete
comparative base.
11 The City shall evaluate and consider the minimum waste stream necessary to
ensure the economic feasibility of the proposed facility.
Jl The City will review the efforts put forth bv the communities generating the
involved wastes to reduce their off-site treatment needs through on-site treatment
and waste minimization techniques.
.1l Based on an analysis of this data. considering waste generated bv the City. other
South bay Communities, the remainder of San Diego County. and other
jurisdictions outside the Region. the City shall identify any concerns with respect
to fair share concepts. and as appropriate shall reQuire mitigation through
WPC F:lHOMm>lANNtNG'<I324P 3-59 0'.-- 7 d--
conditions of use limiting the volumes or tvDes of wastes received. and/or by
reQuiring comDensation/incentive DrogramS to be established.
ProcessiRl!: and Permittinl!:
ADDlication of the various Dolicies and criteria to the review of hazardous waste facility
DroDosals. and the necessary coordination for such DroDosals with involved Federal. State. and
Regional agencies. reQuires the establishment of sDecific imDlementation measures. A subseQuent
imDlementing ordinance(s) shall De DreDared which will set forth all aDDlicable Drocedural
reQuirements including. but not limited to. Dre-aDDlication Drocesses. submittal reQuirements for
environmental reviews. risk assessments and conditional use Dennits. coordination and
involvement of State and local agencies and the Local Assessment Committee. facilitv oDerational
controls such as emergencv contingencv Dlans and monitoring DrOgrams. and local enforcement
DrOVlSlons.
5.& 6 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
In 1987, with the passage of Assembly Bill 2926, the State of California declared the issue of
new school construction to be of statewide concern. That legislation authorized school districts
to collect fees as a prerequisite for residential and commercial/industrial development. Fee
collection of up to $1.50 per square foot of habitable area for residential development and $0.25
per square foot of new commercial/industrial development was approved. The levy may be
increased annually to accommodate inflation if authorized by the State of California State
Allocation Board.
Fees collected pursuant to AB 2926 may only be used to provide temporary facilities and/or
service the matching funds requirement should the district participate in the Leroy Green
Lease-Purchase School Facilities Program.
Additional revenue generating mechanisms, including financing for pennanent facilities are:
1. General Obligation Bonds
2. Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts
3. Certificates of Participation
4. District's share of Redevelopment Funds
5. Sale of Surplus Land
6. Developer fee programs.
All new school related development must be approved by the State of California Office of State
Architect prior to construction. To facilitate approval at the state level, the school districts use
the following criteria:
1. The new senior high schools shall be constructed to accommodate approximately
2,400 students and shall be designed to allow for a four-year curriculum.
2. New junior high/middle schools shall be constructed to accommodate
approximately 1,400 students.
WPC F:lHOMElPLANNlNG\O324P 3-60 ?~/J
3. New elementary schools shall be constructed to accommodate approximately 650
students.
4. A senior high school shall consist of at least 50 usable acres; a junior high/nùddle
school site; 20 usable acres. The acreages may be reduced to encourage the joint
use of community parks where appropriate.
5. An elementary school site shall consist of at least 10 usable acres. The district
encourages joint use with parks where appropriate.
6. School sites shall be located in proximity to major arterials, and primary ingress
and egress to the site shall be controlled by a signalized intersection.
7. The proposed land uses adjacent to a school site shall be planned in such a
manner as to minimize noise impacts and maxinùze hannonious development
between the two uses.
8. To further community development and enhance the quality of life, schools should
be centrally located in residential neighborhoods in order to best serve the
majority of the student population.
9. School development is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Therefore, prior to accepting the dedication of a school site, the district
will require an examination of the existing environmental conditions (seismology
and geology, etc.) to detennine its adequacy.
5.6 LffiRARY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
In order to serve the public in the most effective and efficient manner the selection of new library
sites should be based on the following criteria:
1. Proximity to Community Activity Centers or neighborhood retail centers.
2. High visibility from the streets providing access.
3. Primary ingress and egress to the site controlled by a signalized intersection or
other adequate vehicular control.
4. Compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood character.
5. Minimum displacement of existing residents and businesses.
6. Minimum costs.
In addition, site should be of sufficient size, shape and topography to provide for the
development of a library facility that will meet the following criteria:
1. One level structure of the required size to meet the service standards.
WPC P;lHOMEll'U.NNlNCNJ32AP 3-61 '6--)1
-
2. Public and staff parking in accordance with City standards.
3. Adequate allowances for landscaping and building setbacks requirements.
The planning and design for the library buildings should be in accordance with the following
guidelines.
1. Library space of .5 to .7 gross square feet per resident
2. Three books per capita, plus spoken word audio cassettes, video cassettes and
compact disks.
6. REFERENCES
The following reports and studies were used in the preparation of the Public Facilities Element:
1. P&D Technologies. Chula Vista General Plan, Land Use Element
2. Otay Water District. Central Area Water Master Plan Update. March 1987.
3. Sweetwater Authority. Water Master Plan Update, November 1985.
4. Engineering-Science, Inc. Water Feasibility Study. May 1987.
5. Engineering-Science, Inc. Wastewater Feasibility Study. May 1987.
6. San Diego County Water Authority. Water Market Assessment September 1988.
7. Lawrence, Fogg, Rorer and Smith. Drainage Master Plan Report. 1964.
8. Leedshill-Herkenhoff, Inc. Drainage and Rood Control Summary Report. August 1987.
9. County of San Diego, Division of Solid Waste. Regional Solid Waste Management Plan.
1986.
10. Engineering-Science, Inc. Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Feasibility Study. May
1987.
11. County of San Diego, Division of Hazardous Waste. Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
May 1989.
..........--
WPC F:\HOMIN'LANNINCNJ324P 3-62 ? ---7/
- ~~-----~~
eXlIlB IT ß
-
CHAPTER 3
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT
CONTENTS
Section Page
I. INTRODUCTION .................................. .~]
2. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................3-1
3. INVENTORY OF EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES .......... 3-6
3.1 WATER FACILITIES INVENTORY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-6
3.2 WASTEWATER FACILITIES INVENTORY. . . . . . . . . 3-8
3.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES
INVENTORY............................3-1O
3.4 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIESINVENTORY..................3-12
3.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE
AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES INVENTORY. . . . . 3-16
3.6 SECONDARY SCHOOLS INVENTORY ........... 3-16
3.7 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS INVENTORY .......... 3-18
3.8LIBRARYINVENTORY.......................3-I8
4. PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN .......................... 3-19
4. I WATER DISTRIBUTION NETWORK ............ 3-19
4.2 W ASTEW A TER COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SYSTEM ...............................3-22
4.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM. . . . . 3-26
4.4 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SYSTEM ...............................3-30
4.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE
AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM ..................3-31
4.6 SECONDARY SCHOOL SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-34
4.7 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SYSTEM .............. 3-34
4.8 LIBRARY SYSTEM ..........................3-34
5. POLICIES AND GUIDELINES .........................3-35
5.1 WATER SUPPLY POLICIES ...................3-35
5.2 WASTEWATER SERVICE POLICIES ............ 3-36
5.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL POLICIES. . . . 3-37
5.4 SOLID WASTE CONTROL POLICIES. . . . . . . . . . . . 3-38
5.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL POLICIES ...... 3-38
5.6 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES. . . . . . . . . . . . 3-61
5.7 LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES ........... 3-62
6. REFERENCES .....................................3-63
15-?~
I. INTRODUCTION
The public facilities element of the Chula Vista General Plan focuses on the
facilities and services that are controlled by the City through direct
administration or contractual agreement, and facilities provided as obligatory
services by other public agencies. In the case of hazardous waste treatment,
storage and disposal, non-obligatory facilities provided by the ptivate sector
and not necessarily under the City's control through direct administration or
contractual agreement, are also addressed. Excluded are public facilities that
fall directly within the scope of other elements of the plan such as Parks and
Recreation, Circulation and others.
2. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The general objective and goal of the City of Chula Vista, as it relates to the
infrastructure requirements of the general plan, is to promote an adequate and
efficient range of public facilities and services. This will be accomplished by
identifying key issues that should be addressed by the Public Facilities Element
and establishing the goals and objectives in response to each issue.
Issues are statements of either opportunities or problems the City will
encounter in providing adequate infrastructure requirements. Goals and
objectives are statements of value regarding what should or should not take
place during the course of the City's development. The issues, goals and
objectives which are applicable to the water, wastewater, drainage and flood
control and solid and hazardous waste facility requirements are discussed in
this section.
GOAL I. WATER FACILITY PLANNING
As in many other areas of Southem California, Chula Vista has experienced
significant growth over the past two decades. This growth has placed an
increased demand on the water distribution and supply facilities for the area.
Chula Vista is highly dependent on imported water supplies from the Colorado
River Basin and State Project Water from Northem California. In recent years,
below average rainfall throughout Califomia coupled with a court decision
reducing Califomia's share of Colorado River Water, has increased the
importance of proper water management and conservation. It is the goal of
Chula Vista take actions, appropriate to its population and resources, to control
the growth in demand for water and promote water conservation.
Objective I. Promote water conservation through increased efficiency in
essential uses and use of low water demand landscaping.
Objective 2. Encourage, where safe and feasible, wastewater reclamation
and use of reclaimed water for irrigation and other uses.
Objective 3. Encourage suppliers to adopt a graduated rate structure
designed to encourage water conservation.
Objective 4. Actively participate in the agency planning for providing
3-1
(f~??
. __'._n..'~-
adequate emergency storage and supply facilities for Chula Vista and
neighboring communities.
GOAL 2. WASTEWATER FACILITY PLANNING
Chula Vista relies on the City of San Diego Metropolitan (Metro) Sewage
System for treating and disposing of the wastewater generated within the
general plan area. The City of San Diego has been mandated by the
Environmental Protection Agency to upgrade the Metro system to secondary
treatment levels. This mandate, coupled with the increased demand on Metro,
will result in significant expansion to the existing system of which Chula Vista
is part. It is the goal of the City to participate in the regional decision-making
process regarding this expansion and to control the growth in demand for
wastewater treatment within the general plan area.
Objective 5. Continually monitor wastewater flows and anticipate future
wastewater increases that may result ftom changes in the adopted land use.
Objective 6. Promote low wastewater generating development where
appropriate.
Objective 7. Actively participate in the Metro expansion planning process,
and where appropriate, evaluate reasonable altematives to eliminating Chula
Vista's dependence on Metro.
Objective 8. Assure that new development meets or exceeds a standard of
high quality in wastewater facility planning and design and that existing
downstream facilities are not adversely impacted by the addition of new
development upstream.
Objective 9. Resist the addition of pennanent new pump stations where
gravity flow is at all possible.
GOAL 3. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL FACILITY
PLANNING
As growth occurs in the future, the proportional amount of rainfall runoff ftom
each drainage area will, increase. As a result, existing drainage and flood
control facilities downstream will begin to experience higher flow rates than
they have been experiencing or were designed for. It is the goal of the City
to properly regulate design of future facilities such that the effectiveness of the
existing drainage facilities are not degraded.
Objective 10. Required development of on-site detention of stonn water
flows such that where practical, existing downstream structures will not be
overloaded.
Objective 11. Assure that new development incorporates a high degree of
sediment control as part of their project.
Objective 12. Preserve the existing drainage structures in Central Chula
Vista where possible to minimize the disruption to the public and the
3-2
<¡)- tfš
..-------.
requirement for additional space for larger facilities.
GOAL 4. SOLID WASTE CONTROL PLANNING
The production of solid wastes in San Diego County, including Chula Vista,
has steadily increased on a per capita basis at about 10 percent per year since
1982. If this trend continues as more development occurs, and based on the
availability of suitable disposal sites, Chula Vista could expetience a solid
waste disposal problem. This could mean at minimum a significant cost
increase for transporting materials great distances to available disposal sites
and the possibility of increasing the number of waste transfer sites within the
City. While control and siting of disposal sites falls under the jurisdiction of
agencies other than Chula Vista, including the County of San Diego and State
of Califomia, the City has the ability to control waste production within its
general plan area. It is the goal of Chula Vista to take action appropriate to
its population and resources, to promote reductions in solid waste production
and plan for adequate disposal.
Objective 13. Promote recycling of any material which has a reusable
nature. Provide public facilities to handle recycling of materials such as paper,
glass and others.
Objective 14. Support waste reduction legislation.
Objective 15. Support the County Public Infonnation and Education
Program regarding solid waste reduction and recycling.
Objective 16. Participate in regional planning and evaluation of solid waste
disposal sites and alternative methods of solid waste disposal.
GOAL 5. HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANNING
Coupled with population growth in San Diego County is a growth in the need
for consumer goods and services, and the industries that produce them, in
order to maintain economic stability. However, many of those goods and
services contain chemicals or use chemicals in their manufacture and/or
packaging. While our quality-of-life and economic stability may be largely
dependent upon these products and services, we are also threatened by the
mismanagement of their chemical remains or the hazardous waste generated.
Past practice has seen much of the ~ hazardous waste generated ~!í!!!¡¡
$!ì#P!¡ij!Øli1m9!\W disposed of in off-site hazardous waste landfills without
pre-treatment. Awareness of the inherent public and environmental dangers of
such practices has been heightened by recent federal and state legislation
regarding the management and disposal of hazardous wastes. The focus of this
legislation has been toward increasing public and environmental safety by
reducing the hazard inherent in disposal through adequate waste treatment, and
toward reducing the volume of hazardous waste produced requiting treatment
and disposal. Assembly Bill 2948, State Government Code Sections 25135 et.
seq. and 25 I 99 et. seq. (Tanner, 1986), referred to as the Tanner Act,
represents a significant move toward the management of hazardous waste in
3-3
~-- /7
a comprehensive and systematic approach, and requires every County to
formulate and adopt a Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
The San Diego County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (COHWMP) was
prepared in cooperation with local jurisdictions and the San Diego Association
of Governments (SANDAG), and approved by the State Department of Health
Services (DHS) in October 1991. Its principal goal is to "establish a system
for managing hazardous materials, including wastes, to protect public health,
safety and welfare, and maintain the economic viability of San Diego
County." The COHWMP serves as the primary planning document providing
overall policy direction toward the effective management of hazardous waste
within San Diego County, including that within the City's General Planning
Area, through establishment of goals, policies, and implementation measures
predicated upon the following management hierarchy:
I. Encourage and support hazardous waste reduction and minimization
at its source through methods such as alteration of manufacturing
processes and/or material substitutions,
2. Encourage recycling and on-site treatment,
3. Provide for adequate off-site multi-user facilities to physically or
chemically eliminate or diminish hazardous properties, or reduce
residual volumes requiring disposal, in a manner which protects public
health, safety, and welfare, and
4. Provide for adequate disposal facilities for treatment residuals.
The COHWMP functions as a guide for local decisions regarding hazardous
waste issues, and in addition to waste reduction strategies, it sets forth siting,
permitting and processing requirements for local review of applications for
off-site hazardous waste treatment facilities. As such, each City within the
County is required to adopt necessary provisions to implement the COHWMP.
Therefore, the following related sections of the Public Facilities Element of the
Chula Vista General Plan incorporate the COHWMP by reference as if set
forth herein, and as provided by law, prescribe those more specific, or
stringent, planning requirements and siting criteria reflective of local conditions
which shall prevail over the more general provisions of the COHWMP in favor
of ensuring the utmost protection of public health, safety and welfare, and
environmental resources within the City of Chula Vista.
Ohjective 17: Develop effective screening processes for new and existing
local businesses using hazardous materials and generatiQg hazardous waste to
encourage waste minimization.
Objective 18: Promote recycling and alternative technologies for industrial,
small business, and household hazardous wastes in cooperation with the
County and other agencies.
Objective 19: Establish effective hazardous waste management planning
within the City through involvement of the public, environmental groups, civic
3-4
(»~O
- -----~--_._- --
associations, waste generators, and the waste management industry in decisions
on local waste issues and facility proposals.
Objective 20: Ensure the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of
Chula Vista residents and the integrity of the City's environmental resources,
through establishment of effective processing procedures, and siting and
permitting criteria for hazardous waste facilif
GOAL 6. SCHOOLS
As growth occurs in the City, particularly new residential development,
increased demands for school services and facilities will be placed on the
school districts servicing the Chula Vista Community. While the control and
siting of school sites falls under the jurisdiction of the local school districts,
Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vita City Schools, it is the
goal of the City to facilitate the districts' provision of school services.
Objective 21. Coordinate the review of development proposals with the
local school districts to ensure that adequate school facilities are available to
meet the needs required by the development.
Objective 22. Coordinate with local school districts during the review of
land use issues which required discretionary approval such as tentative
subdivision maps, planned unit developments, zoning ordinance and general
plan revisions and amendments.
Objective 23. Provide the school districts with the development thresholds
as proposed by the growth management committee for the agencies' review
and comment.
Objective 24. To site new school land use designations in a central location
within residential neighborhoods.
GOAL 7. LIBRARY
As growth occurs in the City, particularly residential development, increased
demand for library service will occur. It is the goal of the City to provide for
the expansion of the library system into the newly developing areas and areas
not adequately served by existing library facilities.
Objective 25. Coordinate the review of development proposals to ensure
that adequate library facilities are available to meet the needs of new
development.
Objective 26. Continue the process of planning and site selection to ensure
that new facilities are built in existing area that are not currently served by an
adequate library.
Objective 27. To site new library facilities in a central location to
conveniently serve the surrounding community.
3-5
g- ;-)11
3. INVENTORY OF EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES
The public utilities and service system is one of the most important
considerations in urban development. Urban development and growth is
dependent upon the availability of public utilities and services. Conversely,
expansion of these is dependent upon thorough planning which in turn is an
extension of appropriate and well-reasoned land use analysis and proposal.
The facilities and networks which make up the public works "infrastructure"
are generally considered as the foundations upon which activity areas are
facilitated and maintained. In the case of Chula Vista, the inftastructure may
be one of the primary criteria for determining future growth of activity areas.
The infrastructure addressed in this element consists of the following facilities:
Water
Wastewater
Drainage and Flood Control
Solid OR~ W"""~QUC Waste Control
a_ð.Ø\iíi\V~t¡fÇ¡¡¡¡m¡,
Generally, the City of Chula Vista is being adequately served by its public
works infrastructure. Certain facilities, however, are in need of improvement
and upgrading. The following sections discussed in greater detail each of the
infrastructure systems and the agencies controlling them.
3.1 WATER FACILITIES INVENTORY
The City of Chula Vista's general plan area is provided water service prÌmarily
by two major water agencies. These will be discussed below and are shown
on Figure 3-1.
Sweetwater Authority
Central Chula Vista is served by the Sweetwater Authority whose service area
within the City is bounded by Interstate 805 and Sweetwater Reservoir to the
east, San Diego By to the west, the Otay River Valley to the south and SR 54
Bonita Road to the north. Approximately sixty percent of Sweetwater's system
is supplied by gravity from the Sweetwater Filtration Plant. The remainder of
the system is comprised of pumped pressure zones at the higher elevations.
Source supply for the City's portion of the system is largely from surface
water runoff and collection at Sweetwater Reservoir augmented by the San
Diego County Water Authority aqueduct system when necessary.
Transmission and distribution pipelines ranging in size from 6 inches to 42
inches, deliver water to Chula Vista with a normal operating pressure range of
40 to 90 pounds per square inch (psi). Daily and seasonal peak flow
requirements, including fIre flows, are offset by operational storage reservoirs
located throughout the City. Total operational storage for Sweetwater is
approximately 38 millions gallons with an average daily demand of about 24
million gallons per day.
3-6
f5~M
-:
n.
>
!:
=
:IE
w
...
U)
>
U)
~
z
......
I U)
M>ë -
IIW .,
... æ
&1 ~ <
' ~
-:IE . I i ~
LJ.W
... 0 ~
z :>
U) > :>..
> !ff-g~
en
cr, ~!!!
a: .... 0 I ~ ~
W Er; ;
...
~ ::¡: 0)(
<I w
5l--
...
~
...
W
w
3:
. U)
Otay Water District
The easterly portion of the general plan area is served by the Otay Water
District. Otay refers to this area as the Central Area which encompasses three
Improvement Districts including J.D. No.5; J.D. No. 10; and J.D. No. 22.
Improvement Districts are defined as areas which are assessed fees in relation
to the benefit received for constructing water or sewer facilities for that area.
These districts were formed on the following dates:
J.D. No.5, November 28, 1960 by Resolution No. 123
J.D. No. 10, February II, 1963 by Resolution No. 265
J.D. No. 22, July 3, 1972 by Resolution No. 986
This portion of the general plan area is bounded by Interstate 805 to the west,
the Otay River Valley to the south the Lower Otay Reservoir to the east and
the area known as Bonita to the north. Approximately 39 percent of this area
is served by gravity while the remainder requires pumping. The system is
comprised of five pressure zones (service areas), two water booster pump
stations, six reservoirs and two connections to the San Diego County Water
Authority filtered water aqueduct system. The aqueduct system supplied by
Colorado River Water and State Project Water provides the only supply source
to this area. Pipelines range in size ftom 6 inches to 30 inches and current
total storage volume is approximately 32 million gallons. The average daily
demand for the system is about 4.5 million gallons per day.
3.2 WASTEWATER FACILITIES INVENTORY
As a member of the City of San Diego Metropolitan Sewage System, Chula
Vista currently has contracted for capacity rights equaling 17.1 mgd average
daily flow. Including the 2.0 mgd metro capacity rights that were acquired
when Chula Vista over the operation of the Montgomery Sanitation District
brings the total contract capacity to 19.1 mgd for Chula Vista.
The City of Chula Vista operates and maintains its own sanitary sewer system.
This system consists of approximately 270 miles of sewers ranging in size
from 6 inches to 36 inches, 10 raw sewage pump stations and three
independent metered connections to the City of San Diego Metropolitan Sewer
System (Metro). Figure' 3-2 illustrates the major components of the existing
wastewater system.
The northem portion of the City gravity flows into the Spring Valley
Interceptor which is generally located in Sweetwater Road. This line is owned
and operated by the County of San Diego. This line is owned and operated
by the County of San Diego, which leases I 1.4 million gallons per day (mgd)
to Chula Vista. Presently, the City contributes 1.4 mgd to this line, which
terminates at a connection to Metro near Sea Vale Street.
3-9
({ ,?)t!
ì
CJ
z
~
~
w
rn
CJ
z
~ "
0 ~
- .
~ -
W ffi
': , !
~ '" :
. w z
.... 0
&0 ~
->
u. rn
a:
w
~
;
w
~
rn
;
"
Central Chula Vista transports its wastewater flows to Metro via two major
trunk sewers. The first major line being the "G" Street trunk sewer, which
receives tributary flows ftom the area bounded by "D" Street south to "H"
Street. This trunk sewer tenninates at a metered connection to Metro located
off "G" Street just west of Bay Boulevard. Existing wastewater flows in this
line represent approximately 2.6 mgd. The second trunk sewer serving Central
Chula Vista ftom "H" Street south to Naples Street is located in "J" Street and
Telegraph Canyon Road. This line begins in the east on Otay Lakes Road
near EastLake Drive and tenninates at a metered connection to Metro located
at the end of "J" Street west of Bay Boulevard. This trunk sewer currently
transports 3.9 mgd of Chula Vista wastewater flows to Metro.
The southem portion of Chula Vista is served by the Main Street and Faivre
Street trunk sewers. These lines generally parallel each other beginning on the
easterly side of the Interstate 805, and ending at a single connection to Metro
at the end of Faivre Street. The two lines join in Industrial Boulevard prior
to making the Metro connection. Presently, 4.1 mgd worth of flow is being
metered at this last connection. The total Chula Vista wastewater flow into
Metro is therefore 12.0 mgd at this time.
3.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES INVENTORY
The City of Chula Vista operates and maintains its own drainage and flood
control facilities. This system, as shown in Figure 3-3, is made up of
improved and unimproved flood control channels, stonn drains, bridge
crossings, detention basins and various other facilities. These facilities range
in age from recently constructed to in excess of 30 years old. In general, the
existing structures are in good condition and ftee of debris and sediment. The
single, largest maintenance problem the City has experienced over the years
has been maintaining the unimproved channels in a clear condition, ftee of
vegetation and other debris such as shopping carts. Obstructions of this nature
have historically caused stream blockage and remote flooding if left
unattended.
As in all systems of this nature, the existing drainage and flood control
facilities have their limitations. Development of the system by the City has
been guided, over the years, by the use of numerous studies and reports
including primarily the 1964 drainage master plan report prepared by
Lawrence, Fogg, Florer and Smith. The most significant hydraulic problem
with drainage in ChuIa Vista is the downstream portions of the numerous
natural drainage channels which have been developed over the years. Initially,
runoff was directed into the natural, or possibly improved' channels, or into
stann drain trunk line. As the upstream portions of the drainage areas
developed, the load on the downstream system increased. In some instances
this has resulted in occasional downstream flooding because the existing
systems are not able to convey the runoff adequately. The problems and
constraints of the major drainage courses are described briefly.
3-1 I
~/7~
-
a:
>
...
0
Z
t-
t-
W
m
0
z
t-
m
><
w
I
m
w
!::
...I
.., ~
h I&.
CD ...I >
.. 0 ~
::I a: > ~
.2't- w >
I&.Z ::wa:><
0 i~c~!æ', ..:
0 "'a:~<~~~ ~
Q ~12>~~0(.) ¡;:¡
>< 0 < w ...'" 2
0 0O2~"'5""
0 ~Œg",~~~
...I
I&. - 0 ... N C') .,. &I)
Q v, ... ... ... ... ... ...
Z
C .
z
W >
0 0'" ><. ""
C . w z ~
Z ZZw>i >
<>a:O> ...
~OO-O -
, C CO...OW ~
a: ""Z....O(.) w
Q ig:¡~i ~
<
::
...NC').,. 0
c
w
C ð
Z a:
w ~
0 Z
w ~
.... ..:
'"
)ë
w
--...-- -
Palm Canyon is located in southeast Chula Vista and drains to the Otay River.
The upstream portion has been lined through the developed area and is in good
condition. The downstream section, with outfall to Otay River, is heavily
vegetated and there are significant flow constrictions at several culverts.
Poggi Canyon also is located in southeast Chula Vista and drains to Otay
River. The upstream portion has been lined through the developed areas. The
downstream portion and outfall to Otav River are heavily covered by brush.
Sediment deposition in a box culvert at Otay Valley Road if left unattended
will reduce the effective hydraulic capacity of this facility. There is potential
for substantially increased flows in this basin due to the availability of
undeveloped land in the upper canyon.
Telegraph Canyon is located in Central Chula Vista and drains to San Diego
Bay. The portion of channel above Hilltop Drive has been lined through the
developed area and is in good condition. Sections of the downstream portion
below Hilltop Avenue appear undersized as evidenced by recent high waters
through the channel. There is a potential for substantially increased flows in
this channel due to new development in the upper canyon.
Central Area Basin is located in north Central Chula Vista and drains to San
Diego Bay. The channel has a few areas of lining but nothing significant.
This area is not subject to substantial new development so runoff should not
be increased greatly in the future. However, this channel appears too small to
convey 100-year storm flows.
Lower Sweetwater is located in norther Chula Vista and drains to San Diego
Bay. This is an area that will be channelized as part of the Corps of Engineers
flood control program. This area has historically experienced flooding :during
significant rainfall, however, the Corps of Engineers project should alleviate
this problem.
Upper Bonita Long Canyon is located in northeast Chula Vista and drains to
Sweetwater River. The channel has been lined in the upstream areas and
appears adequate for existing development. There is a potential for
substantially increased runoff due to the availability of land in the upper
canyon. The lower canyon development has encroached into the flood plain,
and increased runoff from developing areas in upper canyon may cause future
problems.
3.4 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
INVENTORY
Control of solid waste collection and disposal for the general plan area fall
under several jurisdictions. Regional planning and management for San Diego
County's solid wastes are administered by the San Diego County Solid Waste
Division of the Department of Public Works. This agency is responsible for
revising and updating the "Regional Solid Waste Management Plan" (RSWMP)
which reviews current solid waste collection and disposal practices, predicts
futurewaste generation trends and reviews the possible means for
accommodating future collection and disposal needs. This document is the
major planning tool for the County and includes solid waste planning for all
3-13
~/g:ð
-----.----------- -
ofthe cities within the County.
Collection and disposal of solid wastes are the responsibility of each city for
its residents. The City of Chula Vista and the communities in the sphere of
influence contract private collection agencies to assume collection and disposal
responsibilities for their residents. The following collection agencies services
the sphere of influence at present:
Chula Vista Sanitary Service
American Trash Service
Jamul Services
EDCO Disposal Corporation
Chula Vista Sanitary Service collects municipal refuse !Tom Central Chula
Vista, Bay!Tont, Montgomery/Otay, Telegraph Canyon/Lakes, Sunnyside and
Bonita within the planning area. This agency as a I7-year contract with the
City of Chula Vista and has the ability to expand their operation to meet the
long range needs of Chula Vista area.
American Trash Service provides collection service for the South Bay area.
Within the General Plan Area, American Trash Service collects municipal
refuse !Tom the Bonita community. This agency also services the communities
of Sweetwater, Dulzura, Jamul, Spring Valley, and Casa de Oro.
Jamul Services collects wastes in the Bonita, Jamul, Casa de Oro, and Dulzura
areas.
EDCO Disposal Corporation also provides collection service for the Bonita
community.
For waste disposal, there are currently nine landfills in San Diego County.
These are shown in Table 3-1. Figure 3-4 depicts ¡he existing solid waste
disposal sites within the general plan area. Wastes collected in the Chula Vista
area (approximately 131,000 tons per year in 1985) are disposed of at the Otay
Landfill. This facility is located north of Otay Valley Road on the south side
ofChula Vista and serves the Cities ofChula Vista, Coronado, Imperial Beach,
National City, and San Diego. Otay Landfill was opened in February of 1966,
and the expected worst-ease closure date is 1999. The worst-case scenario,
according to the Regional Solid Waste Management Plan, assumes that no new
facilities are added to tbe region's existing disposal system, and average annual
waste generation increases by 5% per year. Under this plan, Otay Landfill will
be the last landfill in the region to close.
3-14
g/>5(
..--_.
~~---'o$.<:::>'**~~'I:::'~'~'~~'I~'~~~IIIIIIIIII" . ~ ,,~'
TABLE ~l
EXISTING LANDFILLS IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
REMAINING EXPECTED
C¥.ACITY CLOSURE
LANDFILL LOCATION yd Itons) DATE
Borrego Landfill Northeast Co. 510,0001 2005
306,000
Otay Landfill South Chula 25,8000,001
Vista 15,480,000
Ramona Landfill Central Co. 104,0001 1988
62,400
San Marcos LF San Marcos 7,000,0001 1991
4,200,000
Sycamore Landfill Santee 36,400,0001 1997
21,840,000
West Miramor LF North of 29,400,0001 1995
Clairemont Mesa 17,640,000
Montgomery LF Kearny Mesa area 273,000(1) 1989
City of San Diego
Las Pulgas LF Camp Pendleton 2,600,000 2010
Ysidora Basin LF Camp Pendleton 12,000,000 2099
.
Source: "San Diego County Regional Solid Waste Management Plan", 1986.
.
"" ~~ I~'" """'~"" 101;"""""" .
~, ;tv
---------,---
~ >-
a:
oC
0
Z
~
0
III IU
... ..
... -
;: III
0 ..
Z Z
oC IU
c:J ... i!
IU oC
Z :;; ::
.. ; ..
.. e ~
w ... III
en 0 oC
III ~
c:J >- III
Z ;! ::»
.. 0 g
. a:
~ .. oC
>< !!! N
)( oC
W IU :
I =
W 2
~..
I en
C')!IC
.:If
..
~en
DI:)
Ü:O
c
a:
0(
N
0(
X
C
Z
0(
C
-' IU IU
.. !:
0 ¡¡ '"
en ... ...
oC oC
'" '"
"f 0
L
z!!! !!!
cO 0
lUlU IU
0.. ..
Zlll '"
lUoC ;
a:~
a:", >-'"
oC::» oC::»
:10 "0
00 00
.a: .a:
"oC "oC
!!!N ;~
)(oC
III: IU:
s"~
Specific data pertaining to the Otay Landfill design are as follows:
Landfill size - 294 acres
Tons received per day (1986) - 1,380 tons/day
Remaining volume - 25,800,000 CY or 15,480,000 tons
In-place density of compacted trash - 1,200 lbs/CY minimum
Property size - 5\5.64 acres
Cut slope - 1:1 or 1.5:\
Fillslope-3:I
Existing disposal operations at each of the County's landfills are reviewed
continually by the County and the City of San Diego to detennine if operation
or desigo changes would allow extended use of the site. Such changes may
include height and slope modifications for active work areas, increased
in-place density of compacted trash and acquisition of additional acreage to
expand existing site capacity. There are at present no plans for expansion of
the Otay Landfill due to public resistance to additional landfilling in the area.
3.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE AND
DISPOSAL FACILITIES INVENTORY
Collection, transporting, treatment, and disposal of hazardous wastes are the
responsibility of the generators of such wastes. Hazardous waste generators
incur both financial and environmental liability due to collection, transporting,
treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes generated. Therefore, hazardous
waste generators must select transporters and treatment/storage/disposal
facilities (TSDF's) with utmost scrutiny. Similar scrutiny applies to 'W~~f!!!i
State, County and local government whose responsibility it is to regulate
generators and transporters, and to safely site, license, and monitor TSDF's to
ensure adequate capacity is available to handle the waste stream in a manner
which protects public health and safety, and the environment.
Chapters III and IV of the COHWMP provide general infonnation regarding
waste generation, transportation, treatment, and facility operation, including a
legislative history. Chapter VII provides a comprehensive inventory of
existing TSDF's within San Diego County, including the AÞTEC II facility
located within the General Planning Area at Otay Landfill. Figure 3-5 depicts
the location of existing "ffiDF's within the County. A copy of the COHWMP,
as may be amended or revised from time to time, is on file in the Office ofthe
City Clerk.
3.6 SECONDARY SCHOOLS INVENTORY
Secondary school facilities within the City of Chula Vista are provided by the
Sweetwater Union High School District. The district operates senior high
schools, junior/middle high schools, adult education schools and a continuing
education school. Ten of these facilities are located in the City.
3-17
?>-9~
FIGURE 3-5
EXISTING OFF-SITE FACILITIES IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
EXISTING OFF-SITE
HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT & STORAGE
FACILITIES
I. Appropriate Technologies
Chula Vista
2. PRC
San Diego
3. Baron-Bllkell.. CD
San Diego
I. NAS North .lllnd
Coronldo
5. PePPIr Oil
Notiona' City
e. Safety KI..n
San Dilgo
. 7. Triad Marine
. San Dilgo
----by'"
~s.nl""",'
.\!,..;¡K'LUIO:l; OF ?---93
GO\"EK.""~IEXTS
---------------
The California Basic Education Data System (CBEDS) enrollmeot prepared for
the 1988-89 school year showed that the district has an enrollment of 26,845.
The schools in operation for the 1988-89 year have been designed and
constructed to house a total of 22,648 students. To mitigate overcrowded
conditions, the district houses students in temporary classrooms such as trailers
and relocatable structures.
Through the use of previous CBEDS enrollments and demographic analysis,
the district projects an eorollment in excess of 35,377 by the year 1993. Based
on these projections, the district will require a minimum of seven new
secondary facilities to meet the increased demand.
A new senior high school will be located in the EastLake Planned Community.
It is anticipated that this school will house 2,400 students. Additionally, a
middle school site is anticipated to be located within the Rancho Del Rey
Phase III development. That school should house approximately 1,400
students.
3.7 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS INVENTORY
Elementary school facilities within the City ofChula Vista are provided by the
Chula Vista City School District. The district is currently operating 30
schools. Ten of these facilities are on year-round schedules with the remainder
on the traditional school calendar.
CBEDS enrollment prepared for the 1988-89 school year showed District
enrollment at 16,179. Existing schools have been designed to house a total of
600 students each. To mitigate overcrowded conditions, the district currently
utilizes relocatable classrooms.
Through the use of previous CBEDS enrollments and demographic analysis,
an enrollment in excess of 20,800 is projected by the year 1985. Based on
these projections, the district will require a minimum of seven new elementary
facilities to meet the increased demand.
A new elementary school will be located in the EastLake Planned Community.
It is anticipated that this school will house 650 students and be in operation in
1989. A second new school will be located on the Windrose Way near the
Terra Nova Center. Additionally, a school site located within the Sunbow
development is planned.
3.8 LIBRARY INVENTORY
The City of Chula Vista currently operates the Civic Ceoter Public Library on
"F" Street in Ceotral Chula Vista and two neighborhood branch libraries in the
Montgomery area. The City has adopted a standard of 0.5 to 0.7 square feet
of library space per capita.
3-19
g'~ 7f
4. PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN
The required public facilities necessary to provide adequate service for the
proposed land use is discussed in this section. Recommended improvements
presented herein were the results of numerous studies and reports prepared by
the control agencies and outside consultants. These facilities would require
implementation as development occurs in order to guarantee that the high
quality of public utilities and services continues to be the standard that Chula
Vista enjoys today.
The inftastructure addressed in this element consists of the following facilities:
Water
Wastewater
Drainage and Flood Control
Solid ORE! Wa;wà8US Waste Control
4.1 WATER DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
The recommended future system improvements that will be required in order
to accommodate the planned growth for the general plan area are shown in
Figure 3-6 and are discussed below.
Sweetwater Authority
,
In 1985, a Water Master Plan Update was prepared which reviewed the
adequacy of the total system, including Chula Vista, at buildout conditions.
This report used the then current Chula Vista General Plan for plotting various
land use categories for the service area. Based on this data, in conjunction
with historic water usage data per land use category, ultimate water demands
were projected and hydraulic analyses were performed. The report concluded
the following:
(I) The supply facilities will require expansion to meet future
requirements. The supply facilities are defined as the water treatment
plant, the raw water pump station to supply the treatment plant, the
aqueduct service connection (filtered water) and the local wells.
Recommendations include treatment plant expansion to 45.4 mgd (30
mgd currently) and a connection of the Water Authority's raw water
aqueduct system to Sweetwater Reservoir for off-peak storage.
(2) A comprehensive study needs to be initiated to review the long-term
water supply of the Sweetwater Authority.
3-20
g~75
oL
.:
..
0-
. -
= .
. .
~ -
. .
0 Z
. <
. .
. z
. 0
- -
. : I
0 -
. i
. z
. <
~ .
. -
...
z
0(
.J
Q.
'f::E
(')II!
.1-
..U)
:J>
~U)
u.a::
II!
I-
;
..}/l?-
I ~
>1 ~
~5
a:: . ID
01 Q
ra:
;1 ~,.;
<! õ ~
~w
.-
~
.-
. í ~
- L- .-J 3:
/1 .J ~;J-! "
r ~ ?~
(3) The existing water transmission mains will need bolstering for
buildout condition. Due to the lack of interconnecting pipelines
between National City and Chula Vista, Chula Vista is dependent on
a single 36-inch pipeline under the 1-805 !Teeway for supply. Should
line fail, stored water in Chula Vista would soon be expended and
supply curtailed. The Authority is in the process of iroplementing a
series of interconnections which will help to alleviate this problem.
(4) Approximately 63 percent of the required ultimate storage volume is
presently in place. An additional 18 millions gallons of storage will
need constructing prior to buildout.
(5) Numerous pump station expansions will be required in order to meet
future system requirements.
(6) Within the City of Chula Vista, the existing water distribution system
will require only a nominal amount of improvements in order to
accommodate buildout.
(7) Sweetwater's main water supply, the Sweetwater Reservoir, will
require improvements in order to protect the water quality !Tom the
degradation effects of urban runoff. The Authority is currently in the
first phase of implementing a runoff protection system for the
reservOIr.
(8) The ongoing cast iron water main replacement program should be
continued and the old steel water mains, which are approaching their
expected life span, should be added to the program.
It was concluded by the Water Master Plan Update that future master plan
updates should be conducted at five-year intervals or whenever land use
designations are modified.
Otay Water District
In 1987, Otay Water District prepared the Central Area Water Master Plan
Update which evaluated the system requirements at buildout conditions.
Limited land use data Was available for the majority of the service area.
However, conservative land use assumptions were used in conjunction with
specific plan development proposals for definitive projects such as EI Rancho
del Rey and EastLake as the basis for future water demand projections. The
land use data used in that report differs !Tom the general plan designations
particularly in the easterly and southerly areas of the service area. The system
evaluation prepared by an outside consultant, subsequent to the Otay report,
used the general plan land use information and resulted in conclusions and
recommendations very siroilar to the Otay report. The following presents the
required future system improvements based on the previous analyses:
(I) The projected ultimate average daily water demand for the general
plan service area within the Otay Water District is 45.5 mgd.
3-22
?~i?
~---~ ~ ~~-~~-~~--~--~~
.
(2) The water supply connections to the SDCW A aqueduct system should
be adequate for ultimate conditions although they will require further
~alysis at a later date as water demands on the aqueduct system
Increase.
(3) Numerous water transmission and distribution pipelines will be
required in the future to provide adequate service.
These generally fall into two categories including: a) paralleling
existing lines, and b) installing new lines into areas that previously
had none.
(4) Approximately 70 percent of the required operational storage is
presently in place. An additional 14 million gallons of storage will
require construction prior to buildout.
(5) The service area is seriously deficient of emergency storage in the
event of an aqueduct failure. Approximately 163 million gallons of
storage will require construction in the future to accommodate
anticipated growth. The District is currently pursuing the first phase
of this objective.
(6) The two existing pump stations will require expansion in the future.
In addition, a new pump station will need to be built in the highest
pressure zone to service the upper elevations.
(7) The area within the Otay Ranch, east of Medical Center Drive, north
of the Otay River, west of Lower Otay Reservoir and south of
Telegraph Canyon Road should be served by separate facilities as
detel111ined at the time development plans are proposed.
(8) A comprehensive study needs to be undertaken to review the long
tel111 water supply and storage altematives for the general plan area
and the San Diego County as a whole.
4.2 WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM
In 1987, the City retained an outside consultant to evaluate the adequacy of the
existing wastewater system for the year 2005 and buildout conditions. The
proposed land use infol111ation and population densities contained in the
general plan were used to estimate future wastewater flows for the city. Based
on these flows, each of the major wastewater facilities were examined for
deficiencies. In general, the study concluded that a major modification to the
existing system was not required at this time. However, the results did
indicate that certain additions and improvements to the system would b
necessary to accommodate the projected future sewage flows. The
recommended major facility improvements are shown on Figure 3-7 and are
reviewed below.
Based on that study, the average daily wastewater flow at buildout conditions
is estimated to be 29.6 mgd. For the year 2005, the projected average daily
wastewater flow is approximately 25.0 mgd. The following presents the
3-23
~/>-7ð
~ ---~~-~~- ~
.
conclusions and recommendations of the facility analyses based on these flow
rates:
(l) Numerous interceptor and trunk sewer improvements will be required
in the future to provide adequate service. The improvements
generally fall into two categories including: a) paralleling or replacing
existing sewers, or b) installing new lines into areas that previously
had none.
The Central Chula Vista and Bayftont planning areas will require the
least amount of new lines. The exception in this area would be the
southerly portion of the main Street and Faivre Trunk Sewers which
will require almost complete paralleling to accommodate future flows.
This is largely the result of having to provide transmission capacity
for flows generated in the Eastem Territories planning areas of Salt
Creek, Wolf Canyon and Poggi Canyon.
The Sweetwater planning area will require new sewers in the areas of
Proctor Valley and Wild Mans Canyon. The existing sewers east of
Interstate 805 generally appear to have adequate capacity for future
growth.
The Eastern Territories planning area will require the highest amount
of improvements largely resulting ¡¡-am the predominantly
undeveloped nature of the area. The majority of the recommended
sewers in this are would be categorized as new lines for service areas
that previously had none. Drainage basins to be improved include
Telegraph Canyon, Poggi Canyon, Wolf Canyon, Salt Creek and the
Otay Valley Area.
(2) Several pump stations will require expansion prior to ultimate flow
conditions. In addition, it is likely that new temporary pump stations
will be constructed by developers in Eastern Territories planning area
as an interim measure for providing wastewater service to areas that
currently have no sewer system available. These temporary pump
stations should be avoided when reasonably feasible and should be
taken out of seryice as quickly as gravity service becomes available
to the general area.
(3) Ground water or storm water infiltration to the sewer system was not
seen as being a significant problem during the study period.
However, the winter of 1987 was below average in rainfall (l 1.6
inches as compared to the eleven year average of 16.0 inches) and as
such the results were considered non-conclusive. Infiltration should
be further analyzed in subsequent studies during periods of normal or
above normal rainfall conditions to properly evaluate this potential.
The low lying areas of the Sweetwater River Valley and Otay River
Valley should particularly receive close scrutiny.
(4) The City of Chula Vista has adequate capacity rights in the City of
San Diego Metro Sewer System to accommodate future growth. With
a present total flow to Metro of about 12.0 mgd and contract capacity
3-24
?///(
-
of 19.1 mgd, 7.1 mgd is currently available for future development.
However, Chula Vista will require additional treatment capacity in
order to accommodate the ultimate buildout flow rate of 29.6 mgd.
The City of San Diego's Metro Sewer System is currently undergoing
major changes. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
mandated that San Diego convert their existing advanced primary
treatment facility at Point Lorna to secondary treatment. The net
effect of this conversion is a significant reduction in that plant's
treatment capacity. With that reduction and without other system
changes, it is likely that San Diego would not be handle their contract
flow rates fi'om the member agencies including Chula Vista.
With this in mind, San Diego is in the planning process of upgrading
the overall Metro System which includes interceptors, pump stations
and new treatment plants. Chula Vista is an active member of this
planning process to guarantee that their best interests are being
addressed.
Chula Vista has several options available to them for obtaining the
necessary future treatment capacity. They can continue to contract
with San Diego for capacity in metro, as they have in the recent past,
including increasing the contract capacity to accommodate the
anticipated future flows. The required Metro upgrades will come out
of the planning process are likely to be quite expensive. These costs
will be passed on, in part, to the member agencies which will increase
the cost of treatment to Chula Vista. Although no definitive numbers
are available at this time, it is thought that the cost San Diego would
have to charge member agencies for treatment could be between three
to four times as great as it is now.
Another option available to Chula Vista for obtaining the required
treatment capacity would be to construct their own treatment facility.
Although this altemative would have many obstacles in its way prior
to being implemented such as environmental considerations, land
availability, and general acceptance by the ChuIa Vista citizenry, it
may prove to be the most cost effective method of wastewater
treatment and dIsposal available to Chula Vista.
Still another available alternative would be a blend of both above
altematives where Chula Vista would treat a portion of their
wastewater and divert the other part to Metro. Due to the uncertainty
with respect to the outcome of the Metro planning process, no
reasonable decision can be made at this time for directing Chula
Vista's future preferred method of treatment and disposal. This will
be evaluated in greater detail in an upcoming study presently
authorized by the City.
3-25
?5 ~/ ¿JtJ
~
>-
....
' -
a:
~
w
en
"
z
::>
a:
....
Q
w
en
0
~
0
a:
~
Z
,C(
..J
~ -
..:
,. >
w =
.. .. ffi
' ~ ~
no> .
~ a: :
'w ,
"'.. .
- .. ~
"";0 ~
w .
~ .
en
~
(5) Reclamation should be reviewed in significant detail during the
upcoming study already authorized by the City. Although reclamation
did not appear to be cost effective during the most recent study, this
conclusion could be significantly affected by the outcome of the
ongoing Metro planning process.
IfChula Vista were to construct their own treatment plant or the City
of San Diego's new plant were to be located in closer proximity to
Chula Vista, the cost to provide reclamation facilities would be
reduced. Presently there appears to be about 0.35 mgd worth of
demand for reclaimed water within Chula Vista including greenbelt
areas, freeway landscaping and others. At ultimate this demand could
be in excess of 1.0 mgd for for similar areas in newly developed
portions of the general plan area.
Conversely, if the use of reclaimed water was mandated by the City
for developments that could use it in an effort to lower the drinking
water demand, reclamation would not have to be completely cost
effective to be implemented. With the scarcity of water in Southem
California, many agencies are approaching reclamation from this
standpoint. Chula Vista is currently reviewing their reclamation
opportunities and long range planning.
4.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM
In 1987, the City retained an outside consultant to evaluate the adequacy of the
existing drainage and flood control facilities at the General Plan buildout
conditions. The proposed land use information contained in the General Plan
was used to estimate future runoff volumes based on the IOO-year flood
conditions. Based on these estimates, each of the major basin and sub-basin
drainage and flood control facilities were examined for deficiencies. The level
of effort expended in these analyses was not intended to produce a
comprehensive master plan, but to provide the initial studies leading into a
detailed master plan which Chula Vista has subsequently authorized. The
results of the initial study were sufficiently detailed to provide specific
proposed improvements as to the required hydraulic capacities, facility sizing
and location and overall system configuration.
In general, the study concluded that a major modification to the existing
system configuration was not required. However, the results did indicate that
certain additions and improvements to the system would be necessary to
accommodate the IOO-year flood conditions (shown in Figure 3-7). The
proposed improvements fall into two general categories including: I) drainage
and flood control facility design criteria for use in guiding developer
improvements, and 2) specific basin improvements. The proposed design
criteria and overall system philosophy included the following:
(I) Hydrology. The City should use a 100-year return frequency storm
as a basis of design. This is because the 100-year event is the
accepted standard for most municipalities for new development, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, the California Coastal
Commission, the County of San Diego and most other State and
3-27
g>/¡j~
Federal agencies.
(2) Sediment Control and Grading. The City of Chula Vista has no
standard for sediment control. Consideration should be given to
instituting requirements for sediment control, especially since Chula
Vista is experiencing a significant amount of new development.
Much of this development is taking place in the upper canyon areas.
These areas have a high potential for large volumes of sediment. If
there is no control over the sediment, it is likely that problems will
result in the lower canyon areas as the sediment falls out and reduced
cross-sectional areas of culverts and channels.
(3) Detention Basins. Chula Vista is somewhat constrained by the
existing stann drainage facilities in the lower canyons and in the
metropolitan area. Some of these facilities were adequate for the
initial development phase, but as the upstream areas of the drainage
basins have developed there has been an increased load on the
facilities. Because of the cost and difficulty in increasing the capacity
of the existing drainage facilities, use of detention basins as an
altemative means for flood control should be considered. This should
be detennined on a case by case basis. These detention basins can be
constructed within the newly developing areas and serve to detain the
runoff peaks long enough to reduce the load on the downstream
channels and stonn drains.
(4) Hydraulics. The existing City criteria establishes minimum criteria
for both open channels and closed conduits. This criteria is consistent
with similar requirements throughout San Diego County and so no
changes are proposed.
The following presents the proposed general drainage and flood control
improvements for the thirteen basins within the Chula Vista General Plan
Area:
(5) Central Area and Judson Basins. For basins with peak stonn flows
approximately equal to those in the Fogg Report, no new
recommendations are made. Recommendations included in the Fogg
Report are considered still valid, especially for the Central area and
Judson basins. This includes channel lining, culvert installation and
other general improvements.
(6) Telegraph and Poggi Canyon Basins. These two basins will
experience the highest level of new development based on general
plan. Both canyons have severely limited downstream capacities and
will require significant improvements. For the most part, the
downstream capacities of the canyons are limited by the culverts and
to a lesser, but still significant extent, channel conditions. The
options considered in the improvement of the channel conditions were
cleaning and maintaining the natural channels, lining the channels
with rock riprap or lining the channels with concrete. The proposed
channel improvements for this basin were a combination of all three.
3-28
'iY~JO;?
----------.
-
The options used for increasing culvert capacity included larger box
culverts and bridge structures. The bridge structure resulted in a more
cost effective solution for increasing the capacity at crossing
structures.
(7) Salt Creek Basin. Salt Creek Basin and Use development is
proposed to occur around the perimeter of the basin, with a large open
area in the center. This open space would incorporate the existing
drainage path of the Salt Creek Basin. The proposed improvements
for this basin include requiring the developers to detain excess flows
so that the peak runoff and velocities do not exceed existing
conditions. This would allow the existing, natural channel to remain
unchanged. Miscellaneous culverts and channel outlets would be
required.
(8) All Remaining Basins. For remaining basins including Palm Road
Basin, Sunnyside Basin, Wolf Canyon Basin, Rice Canyon Basin,
Glenn Abbey Basin, Otay Lakes Road Basin, Long Canyon Basin and
Harborside Basin, proposed improvements included detention basins,
culverts, bridge structures, grade control structures and lined channels.
The City should prepare a comprehensive master plan to assist Chula Vista in
guiding the orderly and cost effective development of overall system up to the
year 2005 and beyond. ChuIa Vista is currently proceeding with this
recommendation.
3-29
~---)pr
~~---~-_._---~
..:
>
I-
- ~
~ w
> Z
I- Z
- <
::
0
Q
w
>
0
a::
...
!
Q
w
en
0
...
0
a::
...
Z
<
..J
a.
..J
0 -
~ ~
~ >
z =
0 en
~ U ~
, c z
'0 ~
~ 0 ~
~..J > w
01&1. w >
- : 0
&I. C > < f
z ~ > ~
< .~~ffi~ -
w ~~ffi!ë~t~
~ ~12>!~00
< ><:O<WI-"'~
Z go~~~E~
< a::fgeno~...
~
c ØI~::~::!:~
Z Q
~ ~-
en . ><: . 0 ~
z z ::: ~ . a:: >
<>a::o~ "'1-
~oo-o ~-
Q" " Zen
' ~z!:i,,~ ~¡¡:
; 0 < 0 - .z
,.. '"' en ... a:: :õ ¡
;(::
.-NC')'OtIOU) wo
Q
Z
W
"
~ Xr-/lJç
-""--"""-
4.4 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM
In 1987, Chula Vista retained an outside consultant to evaluate the solid waste
control requirements for the general plan area. Future waste projections for the
planning area were developed based on the general plan land use information
and appropriate waste generation factors. The results indicated that Chula
Vista's needs are being well pla'med for although there exists a few long range
shortcomings. The conclusions and recommendations of that study are
presented below.
Solid waste collection by the private agencies is currently being handled
satisfactorily. Each company has the ability and inclination to expand their
operations to meet the solid waste needs of the general plan area at 2005 or at
buildout. It is estimated that in excess of 400,000 tons per year of solid waste
could be generated within the planning area by the year 2005. Expansion of
these operations will impact the roads and highways within the planning area
which is discussed in the Circulation Element of the general plan.
Solid waste disposal by the County of San Diego for the general plan area
presents no immediate problem. However, long range solid waste control
planning for Chula Vista and the overall County is less defined. The Regional
Solid Waste Management Plan (RSWMP) was recently revised (1986) and the
revised version evaluates seven waste generation/disposal scenarios. The
worst-case scenario ("Do Nothing" altemative) indicated that there will be no
landfills remaining in San Diego County after the year 1988 if no new landfills
were added to the region. The most optimistic ("Best Case") scenario indicates
closure of all landfills by the year 201 I. This scenario assumes extensive
volume reduction and recycling projects. It is clear fi'om the sclmarios
evaluated in the RSWMP that new landfills must be sited in conjunction with
developing and using various waste reduction methods toprevent a serious
crisis in solid waste management in the next decade. The Department of
Public Works is presently engaged in numerous studies to locate landfill sites
in the County. The selection process requires much analysis and public input
and more will be known within the next five years.
In addition to siting new landfill facilities, waste reduction and recovery
projects are underway 'by San Diego County. The County Board of
Supervisors, as the agency responsible for regional solid waste management,
has adopted a policy to reduce waste quantities to the landfills and promote
altemative disposal methods. The policy establishes that landfilling is the
preferred disposal method only for wastes that cannot be recycled or processed
and for the residual fi'om processing. This policy promotes the use of
altematives such as resource recovery to produce energy or animal food
sources and seeks funding for such projects. The policy also encourages
lifestyle changes to reduce per capita waste generation and increase recycling,
and it encourages the use of additional volume reduction methods such as
shredding. The city is currently applying for a grant to fund a recycling
feasibility study.
In summary, it was concluded that the solid waste master planning and long
3-31
<;5--- / f} ?
range goals, as administered by San Diego County and updated regularly in the
Regional Solid Waste Management Plan, are considered adequate in addressing
the future disposal needs of the County (including the Chula Vista sphere of
influence). Plans for site enhancement projects at existing landfills, waste
volume reduction and waste-to-energy projects, as well as the' current studies
to locate new landfill sites in the County will benefit the planning area in the
future by providing additional landfill capacity. If these plans are
implemented, capacity at the Otay Landfill should be adequate for meeting
future solid waste demands, and no altemative disposal methods should be
required for accommodating the planning area requirements in the next twenty
years. Figure 3-9 depicts the current and proposed solid waste disposal site
within the general plan area.
4.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE AND
DISPOSAL SYSTEM
Pursuant to requirements of the Tanner Act, the COHWMP contains an
evaluation of current and projected hazardous waste generation and treatment
needs within San Diego County. Such an evaluation enables a comparison of
needs to existing facility capacities, and a determination of treatment surpluses
and shortfalls upon which facility planning strategies can be developed.
Accurate forecasting and planning is difficult in that the volume of hazardous
waste that will be produced and require off-site treatment and disposal will be
largely affected by regional growth, the identification and clean-up of
hazardous waste contaminated sites, legislative and regulatory changes
regarding the definition and handling of wastes, and the effectiveness of
on-site treatment and waste minimization efforts including reuse, recycling, and
promotion of safe substitutes.
Chapters VII and VIII of the COHWMP present a comprehensive inventory
and evaluation of current and projected hazardous waste gel\eration and facility
needs, by each of the eight generalized treatment methods (GTMs), ftom the
base year 1986 through the year 2000. The results of that evaluation, indicate
both surplus and shortfalls in fully addressing the region's treatment needs
depending upon the particular GTM.
3-32
~~/f}?
-+
a:
...
a
a:
0
.
...
Z =
~ .
J .
~ =
...
W .
~ .
0 :
; :
::¡
m ~ 8
b Ö =
. '" ~
... a:
=' c
g)N
-c
u..::c
Q
Z
C
Q
...
S =
;¡
..
z
...
:Ii
..
C
...
a:
..
III
..
..
;
..
:0
0
a
a:
c
N
c
:z:
U
III
..
...
c
ø
%~/tJr
Qg¡¡¡¡t!!~B9m_!~~~~§.Þi#1!;+veatment capacity shortfalls are
indicated for the Oil Recyling, Stabilization, Solvent Recovery, Incineration
and Other GTM's. Those shortfalls in the Oil Recycling and Stabilization
GTM's are large enough to support new facilities within the region, while
those in the Solvent Recovery, Incineration, and Other GTM's in and of
themselves are not. There are w.ø lIiW possible courses of action for
addressing m~~~!ìm¡m shortfalls, the firšibeing continuation of the existing
practice of contracting for needed treatment capacity outside the region, the
second is to site a *1$\ facility ~ within the region of an economically viable
size which would 'address these shortfalls, and provide capacity to adjacent
regions experiencing identical circumstances,...¡¡ij4m¡¡t!!íí'4Mj:Jj~~!m&f
¡¡¡¡í~~!î!i\~~t!!!#t!!~i'im¡¡¡~¡ Projected'ëapaëiìÿ" šUr¡;lïišëš 'oëëür , in' thë
Aqueous Treatment/Organics, Aqueous Treatment/Metals, and Oil/Water
Separation GTM's, and are based ptincipally upon already existing capacities
available at facilities within the San Diego Region, although some 3,000 tons
of additional annual capacity for Aqueous Treatment/Metals is anticipated
-through on-site activities proposed by General Dynamics and Rohr Industries.
With the exception of Iàes& !Wç1i on-site operations,
¡¡¡~~ij!ïiià\jj¡¡mWsijj¡j¡j ¡¡~ij§t
surplus ëapacitiës will continue to be utilized by generators outside the region.
There currently exists within the City a multi-user hazardous waste treatment
facility located within the Otay Landfill as depicted on Figure 3-9.
Appropriate Technologies II (APTEC II) receives a variety of hazardous
wastes for treatment, and was approved by the City under a Conditional Use
Permit issued in 1981, with operating levels set forth in that permit. As
indicated in COHWMP Table VII-4, APTEC II is one of the largest Treatment,
Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF's) within the San Diego Region,
providing Aqueous Treatment/Metals, Aqueous Treatment/Organics, Solvent
Recovery, Oil/Water Separation, Stabilization, and Other GTM's. Its
combined estimated annual treatment capacity for all GTM's is approximately
32,000 tons, greatly exceeding the City's hazardous waste generation rate,
which was last comprehensively estimated in 1986 at 3,776 tons annually
(COHWMP, Figure VII-C). According to figures in the COHWMP, which
mayor may not be consistent with operating levels authorized by the City's
1981 use permit, APTEC II's J!!$!i, total annual treatment capacity equates to
approximately 26% of the Region's entire treatment needs, varying by GTM
as follows:
APTEC II Capacity as
GTM % of Regional Need
Aqueous Treatment/Metals 53%
Aqueous Treatment/Organics 52%
Solvent Recovery 13%
Oil Recovery 0%
Oil/Water Separation 1%
Incineration 0%
Stabilization 50%
Other 75%
3-34
ý- / °7
Tho CiÞ; i~ se!!!millod te partisipatiRg iR 1110 ROSO~~ar;,' 1r0_ORt ef lIa"",nleus
..,...Ia at a 10"01 a~yi"alont t. ..,...to gaRaFatieR "'¡lIIiR tllo Ciþ'" ef Cllula "ista,
BREI a f.air 010... ef lIoa ~an ¡¡iog. RogieR's ...to Ire_oat Roads. The City
recognizes that while APTEC II's total capacity far exceeds Chula Vista's
projected total waste treatment needs, not all of the City's treatment needs are
met by APTEC II, Some local wastes require treatments not provided at
APTEC II, and as in the case of incineration, not within San Diego County.
Additionally, selection of waste treatment facilities is open to the generator,
and as a result, wastes generated within the City may actually be treated
elsewhere in the County, or outside the region entirely even though necessary
processes and capacity are available at APTEC II. The City recognizes that
conditions exist for all cities within the $i@Piiiiíi:i Region, ¡¡¡¡ß
. tim,j:j6~¡ and that attempts to directly reguÌåiethe geograpÎÏiê
generation and treatment of wastes presents tremendous complexities.
Understanding that some cities may not be host to a facility, Chula Vista's
se!!!!!!illBont """"": I
~~~ a""" -
!t~tæ~~mm!ìiii;¡¡¡¡¡¡ to effectively reduce their needs for off-site
treatiTIenï, " tIirough "on-site treatment and waste minimization efforts. These
hazardous waste management concepts are intended to reflect the Fair Share
Principles of the COHWMP, which while recognizing that locally sited
facilities will exceed local needs, are intended to ensure that the
responsibilities for waste management are equitably recognized and addressed
within San Diego County and neighboring regions.
4.6 SECONDARY SCHOOL SYSTEM
The Sweetwater Union High School District has prepared a master plan for the
expansion of its facilities. The plan includes the district's popu.lation
composition, demographic profile, enrollment history and facilities inventory.
From this plan, the district establishes student generation factors and
development standards for the construction of new schools.
The Sweetwater Union High School District Master plan is a public document
and available for review and/or reproduction at the district offices.
4.7 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SYSTEM
The Master Plan for the Chula Vista City School District is anticipated for
completion in 1989. The plan will include the district's population
composition, demographic profile, enrollment history and facilities inventory.
Based on this plan, the district will establish student generation factors and
project facility needs.
4.8 LIBRARY SYSTEM
The City has prepared a master plan for the Chula Vista Library system. The
basic role of the Chula Vista Public Library will continue as a service and
cultural center for people, a source of information in the community for
purposes of business, social, govemmental, practical and enjoyment.
The projected growth of the City will require more library space. The master
3-35
? ~ //{7
plan calls for the Central Library to continue to serve the Central Chula Vista
and Bayfront areas at its present size. In addition, the plans callsfor the
construction of two new full service libraries. The first is to be in the
Montgomery area to serve the approximately 50,000 existing residents. At the
time the new library is constructed, one or both of the small neighborhood
branches are expected to be closed. The second new library will be in the
Sweetwater/Bonita area and will also be a full service facility. This library is
planned to be built in two phases as population increases.
The fourth library of the master plan system is a smaller library for the Eastem
Territories. This will serve the population of this newly developing area and
will be built as is warranted.
The master plan evaluated a total of seven sites in the Montgomery area. With
little vacant land available all alternatives to new construction should be
thoroughly explored such as renovation of exiting buildings. In the
Sweetwater area a site has been set aside for a future library and five other
sites have been evaluated. An interim library and five other sites have been
evaluated. An interim library facility for Eastern Territories will be provided
in the EastLake Village Shopping Center when it is constructed. The location
is available on a five-year rent ftee basis. The pennanent facility is expected
to be constructed on a site in EastLake. The total master planned library
system at buildout will include three full service libraries and one library in
Eastern Territories that will be sized in accordance with demand.
5. POLICIES AND GUIDELINES
Providing for adequate infrastructure development within the general plan area
as it grows, requires the application of certain policies and guidelines. Those
policies and guidelines, as contained in this section, will assist the user in
interpreting the goals and objectives of Public Services Plan which will assure
that the quality of life in Chula Vista in maintained or enhanced in future
years.
5.1 WATER SUPPLY POLICIES
Water supply for the géneral plan area comes primarily from two sources:
local water derived from precipitation and stored in Sweetwater Reservoir, and
imported water transported by the San Diego County Water Authority.
Proposed future development and conversion of now vacant land to other uses
will place ever-increasing demands on these supplies. Potential limitations on
the availability of both supplies highlights the need to combine long-tenn
planning for water supply with long-tenn planning for community development
in Chula Vista.
(I) The City shall actively participate in the water master planning
process by the Otay Water District and Sweetwater Authority. The
City shall use the master plan to assist in assigning the highest
priorities to projects that will alleviate existing water supply problems
such as insufficient transmission capacity or storage.
3-36
(f~//)
----.-------.--
(2) Prior to approval of development applications, the City shall
detennine that there is adequate water to accommodate the demand
generated by the proposed development.
(3) The City shall encourage and monitor water conservation techniques
and programs and shall educate the community with respect to the
importance of these efforts. This shall include the following:
Mandate the use of water conservation devices in new
development including low water use toilets, shower fixture
and other amenities.
Promote low water usage landscaping that is drought tolerant.
Mandate the use of reclaimed wastewater for all reasonable
applications except in severe hardship cases.
. Establish, in concert with the water agencies, a public
infonnation program to educate the community concerning
water conservation and the use of reclaimed wastewater.
Establish a water conservation monitoring program.
(4) The city shall strongly encourage the San Diego County Water
Authority to make the necessary improvements required to assure
adequate water supply to Chula Vista.
5.2 WASTEWATER SERVICE POLICIES
The collection and disposal of wastewater generated within the general plan
area will require much study and planning in the future. With the Metro
system undergoing significant change coupled with the need to implement an
effective reclamation program, the City will be faced with major decisions
regarding the ultimate wastewater system configuration. An up-to-date
Wastewater Master Plan, administered by the City, will ensure the adequacy
of future facilities to meet the demands imposed by future development. The
extension of wastewater service and the availability of capacity will greatly
influence how much and' where Chula Vista grows.
(I) The City shall use the Wastewater Master Plan as a guide to the
future wastewater collection and treatment facility requirements.
(2) Proposed facilities shall confonn to this general plan's policies for
land use, development location and timing.
(3) Prior to approval of development applications, the City shall
detennine that there is adequate capacity to accommodate the
wastewater generated by the proposed development.
(4) Costs of improvements which are necessary to serve new
development, such as extensions of service and pump facilities, shall
be financed by the developer. facilities shall be constructed to City
3-37
~~));¿
~ ----
standards and dedicated to the City. This policy does not preclude the
use of assessment districts or similar mechanisms to finance
improvements. Existing residents should not have to pay for
improvements necessitated only by new development.
However, if existing residents benefit by increasing their property's
housing density, they shall be required to participate in the required
improvements.
(5) New development to be served by septic systems in the City and in
the County shall be reviewed by the County Health Department to
ensure the adequacy of the design, the suitability of the soils to
accommodate on-site disposal systems and the protection of nearby
surface and groundwater systems. Septic systems shall be pennitted
only as a last resort if gravity flow to the City's sewer system is not
possible and only on parcels at least one acre in size, provided that
the City is satisfied that the above criteria are met.
(6) Actively participate in the Metro expansion planning process and,
where appropriate, evaluate reasonable alternatives which will
eliminate Chula Vista's dependence on Metro.
(7) The City shall authorize a feasibility study with respect to
implementing a phased reclamation program to promote drinking
water conservation. The study should address participating in the
Metro reclamation program or establishing an independent program.
5.3 DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL POLICIES
Collecting and conveying stonnwater ftom present and future developed area
is essential to protecting lives and property. Development of the largely
undeveloped Eastern Territories could significantly affect the existing
downstream drainage and flood control facilities in Central Chula Vista if not
properly regulated.
(1) The City shall use the Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan as a
guide to the future stonnwater facility development.
(2) If improvements are necessary to accommodate new development, it
shall be the developer's responsibility to bear the costs of such
improvements, to construct the facilities to City standards and to
dedicate them to the City. As an alternative, the City may establish
and the developer shall pay drainage basin fees for financing the
required facilities necessary to preclude a negative impact on the
downstream facilities.
(3) Prior to approval of a development application, the City shall
detennine that there is adequate downstream stonnwater drainage
capacity to accommodate the runoff generated by future development
within the project's drainage basin.
(4) The City shall mandate the development of on-site detention of
3-38
g---//J
sto11llwater flows such that, where practical, existing downstream
structures will not be overloaded.
(5) The City shall require the development of on-site sediment control a
part of each project.
(6) The City shall discourage disruption of the natural landfo11lls and
encourage the maximum use of natural drainageways in new
development. Where possible, non-structural flood protection
methods, such as natural channels or improved channels which
simulate natural channels should be considered as an altemative to
constructing concrete channels to protect and stabilize land areas.
5.4 SOLID WASTE CONTROL POLICIES
The City's solid waste is disposed of in the Otay Landfill located within the
general plan area. The site is expected to close in the foreseeable future if
waste reduction technologies are not employed. It is critical that the City
continue to participate in and support efforts to extend the life of existing solid
waste landfills and to locate and develop new landfills.
(I) The City shall continue to support efforts by the San Diego County
Solid Waste Division of Public Works to maintain adequate facilities
for solid waste disposal.
(2) The City shall encourage efforts to recycle waste materials. Small
collection facilities should be pe11llitted or provided in commercial
and industrial areas. Provided adverse circulation, parking and visual
impacts can be mitigated.
(3) Sites for transfer stations, where garbage collected from individual
collection routes are transferred into larger trucks for disposal, should
be pe11llitted within areas designated for general industrial, provided
circulation, visual and noise impacts do not adversely affect adjacent
uses.
(4) The City shall support waste reduction legislation and the County
Public Info11llatitm and Education Program.
5.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL POLICIES
Effective and safe management of hazardous wastes within the City of Chula
Vista, in accordance with provisions of the COHWMP, requires the
development of policies and implementation measures which recognize not
only the need for adequate waste treatment capacity, but also the need to
reduce the volume of wastes produced, to establish a local regulatory
framework to coordinate the review of applications for new or expanded
hazardous waste facilities among involved agencies, parties and the public, and
to set forth locational, siting, and pe11llitting criteria for hazardous waste
facilities which will ensure the protection of public health and safety, and
environmental resources.
3-39
V)/¥
As a rapidly growing, mixed-use community charactetized by the integration
of industrial, business and technological areas within a predominantly
residential land use fabric, the City of Chula Vista has special concerns with
respect to local hazardous waste management, particularly the safe siting or
expansion of off-site hazardous waste treatment facilities. Based on particular
local conditions creating these concerns, as further indicated in the following
sections, it is the City's intent to actively participate in, and promote efforts
to reduce the volume of waste adding to the necessity to site new, or expand
existing, hazardous waste treatment facilities. Furthermore, as provided by
Section 25135.7(d) of the Health and Safety Code, the following sets forth
those planning and siting criteria, and other provisions intended to prevail over
those of the COHWMP, where their application is more stringent or restrictive
in favor of the protection of the public health, safety and welfare, and
environmental resources within the City of Chula Vista.
Hazardous Waste Minimization
Consistent with the provisions of Chapter VI of the COHWMP,
(1) The City shall continue to participate in and support the efforts of the
County Hazardous Materials Management Division (HMMD) and
other involved agencies to meet the goal of a 30% reduction in
county-wide hazardous waste generation over the next five years
through source reduction, reuse, and recycling approaches. This shall
include the exploration of funding and grant sources.
(2) The City shall encourage the development of industries within the
general plan area which are negligible or minimal hazardous
waste-producing, and shall properly screen and identify new or
proposed development that will be using hazardous materials and
generating hazardous wastes.
(3) Prior to the issuance or renewal of a business license for businesses
ijjìlìlW¡¡¡¡¡ IISÏÐg hazardous materials andj'j!r generating hazardous
waste, the City shall require proof that the licensee has prepared and
submitted an acceptable Business Plan;!Wj ¡:lj~K~~¡¡jj~w~jjt.
!!1'~Yiíi\jJ!Wffl'~!$¡¡¡¡¡¡!¡míÞ!~; with the County HMMD, and
obtained all neeessary licenses and permits. In cooperation with
HMMD's Pollution Prevention Program, the City shall also consider
the establishment of a local screening process to ensure those
businesses participation in waste minimization efforts.
(4) In cooperation with the County HMMD, the City shall work to
enhance community awareness and public relations regarding
hazardous waste management and minimization through dissemination
of literature, and the sponsoting of educational workshops and forums
with hazardous matetial and waste industry leaders, product and
business associations, and local waste generators.
(5) The City shall establish a program to recognize industries or
businesses that effectively eliminate or minimize hazardous wastes.
3-40
l)///þ
(6) The City shall prepare periodic reports on the progress of hazardous
waste minimization efforts in the City.
Household Hazardous Waste
Pursuant to the requirements of AB 939, the City has prepared for adoption a
Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) as a component of county-wide
integrated waste management plans. Consistent with Chapter V of the
COHWMP, the HHWE addresses the safe collection, recycling, treatment and
disposal of household hazardous waste within the City over both the short term
(1991-1995) and mid-term (1996-2000).
(I) The City shall work with the County to encourage, through
community education, a reduction in household hazardous waste
generation by promoting safe substitutes and recycling.
(2) The City shall encourage the safe disposal of household hazardous
wastes by working with the County in providing convenient disposal
altematives to the residents of ChuJa Vista, including support and
sponsorship of community collection events, and establishment of
specialized criteria for evaluating the siting of temporary and
permanent collection centers.
General Areas
The Tanner Act (AB 2948) requires the mapping of "general areas" within
which hazardous waste facilities might be established, subject to evaluation
based on the siting criteria set forth in the subsequent section. "General areas"
are intended to illustrate the extent and distribution of potential siting
opportunities within Chula Vista and as such, are designed along with the
siting criteria as first step in analyzing the appropriateness of a particular site
for a hazardous waste facility. The "general areas" ARE NOT recommended
locations for such facilities, nor are they intended as a specific guide to
locations where facility siting applications are encouraged. However, facility
proposals should be considered only if they are within the general areas
designated herein.
Existing industrial areas; and future industrial areas designated in the Chuta
Vista General Plan were included as "general areas" in Chapter IX and
Appendix IX-B of the COHWMP. These areas do not necessarily represent
all the available locations for facilities, as additional land designated as
industrial through future General Plan amendments and rezonings should also
be considered for possible inclusion as a "general area". Likewise, application
of siting criteria to more specific local conditions may prove some of the
identified generalized areas as unacceptable.
Based on a review of more specific local land use conditions in relation to
several prominent siting criteria, Figure 3-10 depicts a refinement of "general
areas" within which hazardous waste facility proposals would be considered
in the Chula Vista Planning Area. These refined "general areas" shall prevail
over the "general areas" described in the COHWMP and its appendices, and
shall be subject to review and amendment from time-to-time as necessitated
3-41
ð~//Þ
-____-0__-- -
C'I
GI
01
-+ ...
W
Z
=
C ..,
W
II:
C
CJ
z
z
z
c
...
a.
C
I-
(/)
>
c
...
=
:z:
Co)
OW
...:z:
J,I-
I~ (/)
<
.1J
'CC
~ <
. ëï!
(/) cc
C .1J
z
W .1J
II: (!
C c
... ~
c -If¡ .
II: cc,
W
Z
W
CJ
.
~ 8>//?
by changing land use and other local conditions. For clarification, the
following prescribes those industrially designated and zoned areas which have
presently been removed from the COHWMP's "general areas" inventory:
Montgomerv/Otav Community: Bounded by L Street on the north,
Interstate 5 on the west, Otay River on the south, and Interstate 805
on the east. Much of the community's industrial areas are juxtaposed
with residential uses and immobile populations such as schools,
resulting from an historic lack of zoning regulation and enforcement
under County jurisdiction prior to the area's annexation in 1985.
Potential location of a hazardous waste facility in this land use setting
would present substantial and unacceptable tisks to public health and
safety. In addition, the largest aggregate industrial area located along
the Main Street corridor borders the environmentally sensitive Otay
River Valley (recently inventoried in conjunction with preparation of
the Otay River Resource Enhancement Plan), and is entirely within
the dam failure inundation area for Lower Otay Reservoir's Savage
Dam according to maps on file with the State Department of Water
Resources.
EastLake and Rancho Del Rev Business Parks: These industrially
designated areas in Eastem Chula Vista are integrated components of
predominantly residential mixed-use master planned communities.
Reflective of this setting, they are intended as employment areas
comprised of light industrial uses such as warehousing and
distribution, and would be inappropriate for hazardous waste facilities.
Furthermore, principal access to these areas is by way of East H
Street and Telegraph Canyon Road which transect large residential
areas and serve as principal travel routes carrying in excess of 35,000
ADT, presenting substantial transportation risks.
Otav Vallev Road: The portion of the Otay Valley Road industrial
area east of Interstate 805 and south ofOtay Valley Road borders the
Otay River Valley, and is entirely within the dam failure inundation
area for Lower Otay Reservoir's Savage Dam.
The following policies regarding General Areas in the Chula Vista Planning
Area shall prevail over the seven General Area policies set forth on pages
IX-46 and IX-47 of the COHWMP:
(I) Proposals for hazardous waste facilities shall be accepted for review
only if they are within a designated "general area" as herein
established at the time the application is accepted as complete.
(2) The review and evaluation of applications accepted pursuant to (I)
above shall be based upon the policies and siting criteria set forth in
the City's General Plan, subject to required risk assessments,
environmental reviews and other applicable codes, ordinances, and
requirements.
(3) "General Areas" shall be limited to existing developed industrial land,
and land designated for future industrial development in the present
3-42
!f -- J /</
"-'-------.----
General Plan, except as herein restricted.
(4) The City shall evaluate any future general plan revisions involving the
establishment of industrial land use designations for the
appropriateness of their inclusion as a "general area" within the City
of Chula Vista.
(5) The City may, ÍÌ'om time to time, as changes to local plans, policies,
and conditions
etenmne n 10 ustrlaj
land use designations or zomng dIstricts are not appropriate for
inclusion as "general areas", as long as the ability to accept
applications and potentially site facilities is not significantly restricted.
(6) "General Areas" for household hazardous waste collection facilities
shall be restricted to lands designated for industrial use. All lands
designated for industrial use within the Planning Area shall be
deemed included for accepting applications for such facilities
regardless of !heW í1!9~~ì!@¥ possible exclusion ÍÌ'om refined
"general areas" for all other types of transfer or treatment facilities.
(7) Military lands should also be considered as part ofthe "general areas."
It is the Department of Defense policy to avoid siting of commercial
hazardous waste treatment and disposal facilities on military land.
Siting on a case-by-case basis could be considered in special
circumstances. A relationship should be developed with the military
in which common local jurisdiction and military hazardous waste
issues and needs can be cooperatively addressed. The Memorandum
of Agreement that currently exists between the U.S. Navy and the
SANDAG should be the basis for this relationship.
(8) Land currently under the control of the Federal Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) has the potential to be acquired by local
government or by private parties. BLM land transferred ÍÌ'om federal
to non-federal ownership is subject to local govemment general plan
designation and zoning. All of the general area policies and other
policies would apply to this transferred land.
(9) Indian land is not subject to any federal, state and local
environmental, health, safety and planning requirements. Therefore,
Indian lands should not be considered potential "general areas" unless
these lands can meet all siting ctiteria as set forth herein, and
pennission to use Indian land can be obtained.
3-43
%-;/;
Siting Criteria
Under the Taoner Act (AB 2948), local government is required to adopt "siting
criteria" to be applied in evaluating hazardous waste facility proposals within
the previously established "general areas". Siting criteria are those operational,
financial, land use and transportation conditions which must be met if a
hazardous waste management facility is to be permitted at a specific site.
Siting ctiteria are both qualitative and quantitative in nature, and as the focus
of the siting process are primarily intended to ensure the sufficient protection
of public health, safety and welfare, and environmental resources.
The criteria are designed somewhat generically in that they apply to evaluation
of a broad range of hazardous waste facilities and management technologies
which can vary greatly in their size, volume, and type of waste stream(s)
handled, and which inherently may differ substantially in their potential land
use, environmental, and public health impacts. While this generic nature of the
criteria provides needed flexibility in the local review process, it also
necessitates that facility review be conducted carefully and thoroughly. As a
result, all local facility application reviews shall include an environmental
review and health risk assessment, and any approvals shall be through a
conditional use pennit.
Recognizing the influence of more specific local conditions on the
development and application of siting criteria, Section 25l35.7(d) of the
Califomia Health and Safety Code allows cities to establish more stringent
planning requirements or siting criteria than those in the COHWMP. In order
to assure that hazardous waste facilities are considered with the highest regard
for the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Chula Vista, and the
continued preservation and protection of its natural resources, the following
modified siting criteria shall be employed in the evaluation of hazardous waste
facility proposals within the City's General Planning Area, and shall prevail
over the siting criteria contained in Appendix IX-A of the COHWMP:
PROTECT THE RESIDENTS OF CHULA VISTA
I. Proximity to populations
Proximity to populations is defined as the distance from the
boundary of the site upon which the facility is proposed to
dwellings used by one or more persons as a pennanent place
of residence, or to dwellings inhabited by persons
temporarily for purposes of work (e.g., migrant workers,
construction camps).
For a residuals repository, the proximity of the facility to
populations must be a minimum of 2,000 feet, subject to
increase pursuant to the required risk assessments and
environmental review.
The active portion of a facility shall be subject to additional
setbacks and buffering tram the property boundary as
3-45
3' ~/dO
--~~-~--~--~
required by the underlying zone, or through conditions
established by the associated use permit(s).
All hazardous waste facility proposals shall be required to
undergo an environmental review and prepare a health risk
assessment regardless of their type, size, or proximity to
populations or immobile populations. Said health risk
assessment (HRA), as discussed on pages IX-28 through -33
of the COHWMP, shall be prepared under the direction of
the City, the Local Assessment Committee (LAC), and any
Ad Hoc Technical Committees which may be created to
advise the City and the LAC on such matters.
With respect to hazardous waste treatment facilities, there is
no stated distance from populations or immobile populations
which is assumed to be safe. The required HRA shall serve
as a fundamental mechanism to present data, evaluations and
recommendations for use by the City Council in ~
determin.
~t~;
appropriate 10 n and distance or e particu ar
waste facility in relation to any existing and
surrounding residential development or other
receptors.
The City shall establish a screening process to determine the
scope and content of each HRA, and the need for, and type
of, any additional technical studies. It is the intent of the
City in developing this scope, that the HRA recognize the
altemative sites presented through the environmental review
and provide comparative evaluation of these sites........ to
enable ..m~t8 ¡.R~i'.. consideration of the relative public
health, safety and welfare risks, and environmental protection
concems in making siting decisions.
Existing hotels and motels shall also be considered
residences.
Distance separation requirements for residuals repositories
and other facilities shall include all areas designated in
General Plan for future residential development regardless of
their density, as well as existing residences.
Setback or buffer. areas shall be precluded from future
residential uses through property restrictions such as
easements or covenants, and where appropriate, through
general planning and zoning.
2. Proximity to immobile populations
Proximity to immobile populations is defined as the distance
from the boundary of the site upon which the facility is
3-46
~---Ic:2/
located to areas where persons who cannot or should not be
moved are located.
The definition of immobile populations includes childcare
facilities and K-12 schools as well as hospitals, convalescent
homes and prisons.
. Hazardous waste facilities shall not be located within one
mile of any of these populations unless the required risk
assessment satisfactorily indicates that the attendant health
and safety risks are not appreciably increased; anà lheR eRly
at tHe àis",olieR of IRe Cit;' CaliReil.
3. Capability of emergency services
Capability of emergency services is defined to include the
extent of training and equipment of fire departments, police
departments, and hospitals for handling industrial
emergencies, particularly those involving hazardous materials
and wastes.
All facilities shall be located in areas where fire departments
are trained to deal with hazardous materials accidents, where
mutual aid and immediate aid agreements are
well-established, and where demonstrated emergency
response times are the same or better than those
recommended by the National Fire Prevention Association.
. The City may require additional facility design features
and/or on-site emergency services at the facility based on the
type of wastes handled or the location of the facility.
Pursuant to the requirements of State law, and subject to the
satisfaction and approval of the City Council, facilities may
provide their own emergency response capability.
ENSURE THE STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF THE FACILITY
4, Flood hazard areas
Flood hazard areas are defined as areas which are prone to
inundation by IOO-year frequency floods, and by flash floods
and debris flows resulting from major storm events. Flood
hazard areas can be determined by checking Federal
Emergency Management Agency flood insurance maps or
with local flood control districts,
. Residuals repositories are expressly prohibited in areas
subject to inundation by floods with a IOO-year retum
frequency, and should not be located in areas subject to flash
floods and debris flows.
3-47
g ~ /cJc2
All
5. Areas subject to tsunamis, seiches, and storm surges
Areas subject to tsunamis, seiches, and storm surges are
defined as areas bordering oceans, bays, inlets, estuaries or
similar bodies of water which may flood due to tsunamis
(commonly known as tidal waves), seiches (vertically
oscillating standing waves usually occurring in enclosed
bodies of water such as lakes, reservoirs, and harbors caused
by seismic activity, violent winds, or changes in atmospheric
pressure), or storm surges.
All raoilities, iaoluEliRg Residual repositories, shall be
prohibited fTom locating in areas subject to !'IaaEling lÌ'aHl
these occurrences. The risk assessment and environmental
review shall analyze such hazards.
6. Proximity to active and potentially active faults
An active fault is defined as a fault along which surface
displacement has occurred during Holocene time (about the
last I 1,000 years) and is associated with one or more of the
following:
a recorded earthquake with surface rupture
fault creep slippage
displaced survey lines
A potentially active fault is defined as a fault showing
evidence of surface displacement during Quaternary time
(fTom the last 11,000 years to about the last 2 to 3 million
years, and is characterized by the following:
considerable length
association with an alignment of numerous
earthquake epicenters
continuity with faults having historic displacement
3-48
Y-J 2 ;;
association with youthful major mountain scarps or
ranges
correlation with strong geophysical anomalies
All facilities are required to have a minimum ZOO-foot
setback ITom a known active or potentially active fault.
All facilities regardless of proximity to faults, shall ¡¡¡;....a
æiRiællHi staRà..d, be constructed to seismic zone 4 building
code standards., s""jast 10 ,.""ir.....nts iR ."saos as
àola...Ün.d RasassOl'¡' b>' Iii. Cit>; to I'rolool I',,"lis Ii..lm anà
~
7. Slope stability
. Slope stability is defined as the relative degree to which the
site will be vulnerable t9 the forces of gravity, such as
landslide, soil creep, earth flow, or any other mass movement
of earth material which might cause a breach, carry wastes
away ITom the facility, or inundate the facility.
. Residuals repositories are expressly prohibited in areas of
potential slope instability,
. All other facilities shall be prohibited in areas of potential
slope instability or rapid geologic change. Except!m@m¡¡Yk~
i#!m#@¡!@#ì~Ç¡w~!!UË~îtJ!4p¥ as .Hïi.ëriiöilïi);
oali,fasIOF';' engineering and design ~
~'ìíi\î1íiitê'.
The risk assessment and
environmental review shall include an analysis of such
hazards.
8. Subsidence/liquefaction
. Subsidence is defined as a sinking of the land surface
following the removal of solid mineral matter or fluids (e,g.,
water or oil) ftom the subsurface.
Liquefaction refers to the surface materials that develop
liquid properties upon being physically disturbed.
All fasiliti." iRsl"àiRg Residual repositories, shall be
prohibited ITom locating in areas subject to these
disturbances, -<1114 The risk assessment and environmental
review shall include an analysis of such potential
disturbances.
.
3-49
~j;)Y
9. Dam failure inundation areas
. Dam failure inundation areas are defined as the areas below
a dam structure (i.e., reservoir dam, debris basin) which
would be inundated by the flow of water nom the
impoundment created by the dam structure if it were to fail.
All hazardous waste management facilities shall be prohibited
nom locating within dam failure inundation areas.
PROTECT SURFACE WATER QUALITY
All facilities will be required to meet federal and state water quality
requirements, administered by the State and Regional Water Quality Control
Boards.
10. Aqueducts and reservoirs
Aqueducts are defined as conduits for conveying drinking
water supplies.
Reservoirs are defined as impoundments for containing
drinking water supplies.
. All facilities shall be located in areas posing minimal threats
to the contamination of drinking water supplies contained in
reservoirs and aqueducts. Evaluation of such threats shall
include airborne emissions potential to contaminate surface
water.
11. Discharge of treated effluent
Discharge of treated effluent is defined as the availability of
wastew~ter treatment facilities to accept treated wastewater
(effluent), or the ability to discharge treated effluent directly
into a stream, including a dry stream bed, or into the ocean
through a state-permitted outfall.
Facilities generating wastewaters shall be located in areas
with adequate sewer capacity to accommodate the expected
wastewater discharge. If sewers are not available, sites
should be evaluated for ease of connecting to a sewer, or for
the feasibility of discharging directly into a stream or the
ocean.
PROTECT GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Residuals repositories:
3-50
<¿f/ /.:23
Current State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regulations, as
implemented by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, including:
Immediately underlain by natural geologic materials with permeability
of not more than IxlO-7 cmlsec (1.24 inlyr)'.
Natural material shall be of sufficient thickness to prevent vertical
movement of fluid, including waste and leachate, to waters of the
state for as long as they pose a threat to water quality.
Lateral movement prevented by natural or artificial barriers.
In addition to the preceding siting criteria, the current SWRCB regulations also
include the following construction standards:
Compatibility of the wastes with construction materials.
Clay liner at least 2 feet thick (in addition to natural material and
synthetic liner).
A leachate collection system adequate to collect and remove twice the
maximum anticipated daily volume.
A cover adequate to prevent percolation of precipitation through the
wastes.
. Precipitation and drainage controls.
Seismic design.
All other facilities:
Current State Department of Health Services regulations require double
containment for underground storage. In addition, the following criteria (Nos.
12 to 18) apply to non-repository facilities.
12. Proximity to supply wells and well fields
Proximity to supply wells and well fields is defined as the distance to
areas used for extraction of groundwater for drinking water supplies
by high-capacity production wells and identified by the presence of
several wells that constitute a well field.
Hazardous waste facilities shall locate outside the cone of depression
created by pumping well or well field for 90 days unless an effective
hydrogeologic barrier to vertical flow exists.
'The interpretation of this requirement by Regional Water Quality Control
Boards needs to be clarified and standardized.
3-51
2:{>/ ;2 /ç
---....-------
13. Depth to Groundwater
Depth to groundwater is defined as the minimal seasonal depth to the
highest anticipated elevation of underlying groundwater from the
bottom of any proposed waste-containing facility.
The foundation of all containment structures at the facility must be
capable of withstanding hydraulic pressure gradients to prevent failure
due to settlement, compression, or uplift as certified by a registered
civil engineer or engineering geologist registered in California.
14. Groundwater monitoring reliability
Groundwater monitoring reliability is defined as the dependability of
a scientifically designed monitoting program to measure, observe, and
evaluate groundwater quality and flow.
Where the risk assessment and/or environmental review have
identified any potential impacts to groundwater, in addition to
required mitigation measures, a reliable groundwater monitoring
program shall be required as 'p.,i¡¡.à ¡ijj4I\ýjiíWi!Wì by the City.
15. Major aquifer recharge areas
Major aquifer recharge areas are defined as regions of principal
recharge to major regional aquifers, as identified in the existing
literature or by hydrogeological experts familiar with the San.. Diego
region. Such recharge areas are typically found in:
Outcrop or subcrop areas of major water-yielding facies of
confined aquifers.
Outcrop or subcrop areas of confining units that supply major
recharge to underlying regional aquifers.
Facilities with sl1l'face or subsurface storage/treatment located within
one-half mile of a potential drinking water source shall have a
groundwater study conducted to determine appropriate buffer zone
and mitigation measures.
16. Permeability of surficial materials
Permeability of surficial materials is defined as the ability of geologic
materials at the earth's surface to infiltrate and percolate water.
Facilities locating in areas where surficial materials are principally
highly permeable matetials shall conduct an appropriate groundwater
study, and provide for appropriate mitigation measures such as
increased spill containment and an inspection program.
3-52
6- --- j,;¿ )
17. Existing groundwater quality
Existing groundwater quality is defined as the chemical quality of the
groundwater in comparison to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Interim Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Standards
and, for constituents with no standards, to guidelines suggested by
research reported in the literature.
The Environmental Protection Agency has released guidelines
defining protection policies for three classes of groundwater, based on
their respective value and their vulnerability to contamination. The
three classes are:
. Class I: Groundwater that is highly vulnerable to
contamination and characterized by being irreplaceable (no
reasonable alternative source of drinking water is available)
or ecologically vital (if polluted, would destroy a unique
habitat). These are designed as Special Groundwaters.
Class II: Current or potential sources of drinking water and
waters having other beneficial uses.
Class III: Groundwaters not considered potential sources of
drinking water and of limited beneficial use (waters heavily
saline [IDA levels 10,000 ppmJ) or otherwise contaminated
beyond levels that allow cleanup using reasonably employed
treatment methods).
Facilities located in areas where existing groundwater quality is Class
I or Class II shall conduct an appropriate groundwater impact study
as part of the environmental review, and shall provide increased spill
containment and inspection measures in addition to other identified
mitigation.
18. Proximity to groundwater dependent communities
Prohibit siting within groundwater drainage basin(s) within which
groundwater dependent communities exist, except for any portion of
such basin(s) 5 miles or more down-elevation from the boundaries of
the subject community(ies).
PROTECT AIR QUALITY
Current San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) regulations
implementing federal, state and local air quality regulations including Rules
20.2 and 20.3 goveming new source review, the APCD's standard prohibitions
and Rule 5 I covering public nuisances. Rule 51 would typically apply to all
types of hazardous waste treatment facilities. The County of San Diego
Department of Health Services implementation of response plans for acute and
accidental hazards (pursuant to AB 3777) would also cover air quality issues.
The City shall involve the APCD in the screening and scoping process
3-53
??--; ;2 ~
for the required Health Risk Assessment on all facilities, and the risk
assessment shall address all potential emissions and indicate whether
any have the potential to adversely affect human health and the
environment, and to what extent.
PROTECT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
19. Wetlands
Facilities shall not be located in wetlands such as saltwater, ftesh
water, and brackish marshes, swamps and bogs inundated by surface
or groundwater with a ftequency to support, under normal
circumstances, a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life which
requires saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction, as
defined by local, regional, state or federal plans and guidelines.
20. Proximity to habitats of threatened and endangered species
Habitats of threatened and endangered species are defined as areas
known to be inhabited permanently or seasonally or known to be
critical at any state in the life cycle of any species of wildlife or
vegetation identified or being considered for identification as
"endangered" or "threatened" by the U.s. Department of Interior or
the State of California.
Facilities shall not be located within critical habitat areas, as defined
in local, regional, state or federal plans.
21. Natural, recreational, cultural, and aesthetic resources
Natural, recreational, cultural, and aesthetic resources are defined as
public and private lands having local, regional, state, or national
significance, value, or importance. These lands include national, state,
regional, county, and local parks and recreation areas, historic
resources, wild and scenic rivers, scenic highways, ecological
preserves, public and private (e.g., Natural Conservancy Trust for
Public Lands) preservation areas, and other lands of local, regional,
state, or national significance.
All facilities shall avoid locating in, or near these areas. The risk
assessment and environmental review shall identify these resources
proximate to the facility and its major transportation routes. Pursuant
to demonstrated necessity, and at the discretion of the City Council,
some facility operations or transportation routes may be allowed
within unused or compatible portions of certain public lands.
22. Prime agricultural lands
Prime agricultural lands, under Califomia law, may not be used for
urban purposes unless an overriding public need is served. When
siting hazardous waste management facilities in these areas, overriding
public service needs must be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
3-54
f? //~ 7'
City Council.
23. Mineral deposits
Facilities shall not be sited so as to preclude extraction of minerals
necessary to sustain the economy of the State.
24. Public facilities and military reservations
Public facilities and military reservations are defined as lands owned
by federal, state, county, or local governments on which facilities used
to supply public services an'd Department of Defense (DOD) bases
and installations are located, In particular, these lands would include
highway maintenance and storage areas, airports, city or county
corporation yards, waste disposal facilities, sewage treatment facilities,
state school lands (lands deeded to the state when California was
admitted to the Union), and military bases and installations.
It is the policy of the Department of Defense that military land shall
not be considered for public hazardous waste management facilities.
However, the military currently has hazardous waste treatment and
storage facilities located on military bases in the San Diego region
and has in the past leased military land to public agencies for waste
management functions (Miramar Landfill).
Therefore, military lands are potentially available for the siting of new
facilities for the handling of military hazardous waste (new facilities
for the handling of military hazardous waste (new facilities are
proposed in the U.S. Navy's 5-year budget. Military land may be
considered for lease or sale for public hazardous waste facilities, at
the discretion of the military.
SAFE TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
The City shall require preparation of a traffic/transportation study as
part of the environmental review and risk assessment for all facility
proposals, which study shall account for all factors addressed in items
#25 to #29, and consider both existing and projected land use and
circulatory conditions pursuant to the General Plan.
25. Proximity to areas of waste generation
Proximity to areas of waste generation is defined as the travel time
from the major market areas of waste generation to the proposed
facility.
All facilities except residuals repositories by virtue of location, should
minimize travel time for all market areas of waste generation, on a
weighted basis, with no major market areas beyond a one-way travel
time of one day (including loading and unloading).
For the residuals repository, one-way transportation time, including
3-55
X---/JO
loading and unloading, from any major market areas would not
exceed one day, with the majority of the driving time spent on major
routes (state and interstate divided highways).
Total transportation costs for incineration facilities should represent
a modest portion of the total cost of using such facilities including
drop charges.
Transfer facilities should be located within each major area of waste
generation to encourage maximum use.
Alternate transportation by rail may be evaluated in regard to specific
locations for feasibility and efficiency.
In comparison with multiple small facilities, economies of scale for
a single centralized facility may offset the additional transportation
cost.
26. Distance from major route
Distance from a major route is defined as the distance along a minor
route (city street, boulevard, or undivided highway) that a truck must
travel to reach the facility after leaving the major route (state or
interstate divided highway).
Distance traveled on minor roads should be kept to a minimum.
Facilities are best located near an exit of a major route.
Only locations adjacent to major routes or accessed ftom major routes
via routes used locally for truck traffic (e.g., truck routes) should be
considered for transfer or treatment facilities.
The facility developers may propose to build a direct access road to
avoid the minor route(s).
27. Structures fronting minor routes
Structures ftontihg minor routes are defined as the number and type
of residences, schools, hospitals, and shopping centers having primary
access from the transportation route between the entrance of a facility
and the nearest major route.
Facilities should be located such that any minor routes from the major
route (state or interstate divided highway) to the facility are used
primarily by trucks, and the number of non-industrial structures
(homes, hospitals, schools, etc. is minimal.
The facility developer shall evaluate the "population at risk" based on
the Federal Highway Administration's Guidelines for Applying
Ctiteria to Designate Routes for Transporting Hazardous Materials.
The population at risk factor should not exceed that for existing
facilities, and sites with lower factors should be preferred.
3-56
¿; ---j J /
..~---
Specific highway segments may be scheduled for CAL TRANS
Improvement.
Transportation could be curtailed during peak use by automobiles,
school traffic, etc.
28. Highway accident rate
The highway accident rate is defined as the occurrence of minor to
fatal accidents per vehicle miles traveled, as recorded by the
Califomia Department of Transportation.
The minimum time path from major market areas to a facility should
follow highways with low to moderate average annuaJ daily traffic
and accident rates, as guided by the research and findings of state,
regional, county, and city transportation planners.
Specific highway segments may be scheduled for CALTRANS
improvements which may decrease highway accident rates.
Hazardous waste transportation could be curtailed during periods of
greatest automobile traffic.
The facility developer should work with the region, county, and city
transportation planners in selecting alternate routes.
29. Capacity versus AADT of access roads
Capacity versus average annual daily traffic (AADT) of access roads
is defined as the number of vehicles that the road is designed to
handle versus the number of vehicles it does handle on a daily basis,
averaged over a period of one year.
The changes in the ratio of route capacity to average annual daily
traffic should be negligible after calculating the number of trucks on
the major and minor routes expected to service the facility.
Facility developer may propose to upgrade the road(s) to provide
additional capacity.
PROTECT SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC GOALS
30. Consistency with General Plan
Consistency with the General Plan is defined as consistency
of the proposed facility with the goaJs, objectives and
policies of the City as expressed by the General Plan,
Specific Plans, implementing ordinances, and other applicable
programs.
As provided by Section 25199.5 of the California Health and
Safety Code, the consistency of any proposal with the
3-57
;J/ / 3-2
_.._-----.~---
General Plan, Specific Plans, zoning ordinances, and other
applicable programs shall be based on their provisions as in
place at the time the associated application for a land use
decision is accepted as complete.
. The proposed facility should be sited at one of the most
consistent locations within the City as reflected in the
General Plan, Specific Plans, zoning ordinances, and other
applicable planning programs.
The evaluation of consistency shall be based directly upon
the provisions of the General Plan, Specific Plans and zoning
ordinances in effect, and shall not take into consideration any
mitigation measures proposed by the proponent to further
community goals which are not project specific and directly
related to identified public health and safety, and
environmental concerns.
Developer may petition for an amendment to the General
Plan.
31. Direct revenue to the City
Direct revenue to the City is defined as the present worth of the dollar
amount of annual property tax revenue and any other direct payments
(e.g., local usage and per capita taxes, hazardous waste taxes) that the
facility will contribute to the City during the period of construction
and the facility's operating life.
The proposed facility's power for tax and revenue generation relative
to both current site users and other reasonably prospective site users
in terms of amount, stability, and cost to the City should not show a
net loss.
The City may consider compensation programs which could offset
projected losses either directly or indirectly.
32. Changes in employment
Changes in employment are defined as the total number of permanent
full- and part-time jobs resulting from the construction and operation
of the facility, including the number of each type of job expected to
be followed by local residents.
If this clearly is an issue causing disagreement between the facility
developer and the ~mmWììw¡ then the developer shall fund an
independent study of the issue.
The developer and the City shall agree beforehand on the scope of the
study and who will conduct it. The sophistication of the study
methods shall be appropriate to the nature and size of the facility and
the City's degree of concern with the particular issue.
3-58
f:~J3}
If the number of jobs accounts for a significant portion of
employment in the area, then the developer should provide appropriate
programs to address the socio-economic and public services impacts
on the community,
Fair Share
The Southern Califomia Hazardous Waste Management Authority (SCHWMA)
provides oversight and coordination toward resolving local government siting
issues in Southem California through its Regional Action Plan, which is in part
founded upon the .w (Fair Share "Principles") and (Fair Share "Fonnula")
~;.]ff:~i~f¡.s ~::e t~;:~p~~sth.:¡~~=: '!!~~~~!;!=
!hat 1"0 ",iai",- .i.o far aa o.aaa",iGall~' "iaBlo "---èau. "'asto fa.ilil'; "'ill
likely ..,.ooè tIIo Rood. af an,' la.al j.....èi.tiaa ia ""'i." it i. la.atoè, aaè ia
assurances can be made that all cities and counties share
responsibility for proper treatment and disposal of their entire waste
stream, The Fair Share I'rinciples and Fonnula have been adopted as part of
the COHWMP, and are to be considered by local jurisdictions in making
facility siting decisions,
^ t Iuoseal, "B"'o"er, t"o.. èeo. aet ..d.t .1.... èi...tiaa as Ie "a'" a la.al
jllri,èiGtiaa is ta .aasidor aaè apl'l~' fair sh...o I'da.il'los Ie 'I'°.ili. fa.iliÞ;
,itiag I'ral'asals, Tho I'riacil'los .eRlaiaoè ia !he COWWHP, as èOR"oè Ha",
~cwn(þ~ 's Rogiaaal ^ .tiaa Plaa, fa.us aR ..."ath... saIlR\ò' "'iè. aooès for
...""to Ire_oat aad èi'l'a,al ...0 BoiRg ",ot thrBlIgh either facili\ò' capa.i\ò
"'ililia 1110 .aua\ò', aad/Br off..ti"o iDler ga"ora",oalal agFoo",OIIt. "'itB alll.r
.B\latios, In .u." .aate"l, oml'la,....ont af f..ir .""'0 .ea.iè...atiBa. at tho lesal
10 01 ia 0' aillatiag ao'" ar o"l'anèoè fa.ili\ò' I'raI'B.al. "'~' BO .igaili.antl~'
i"'l'actoè if Caua\ò' "'ièo a.od., "'hiol! tBo jlH'i.èi.tiaa "as aa èiroct a\l!heR\ò'
a"OF, ...0 Rat ¡'oiag fully adèro,.oè, Thi. .illlatiaa èae. aet ro.agai..
jurisèi.tiBas "'ililia 1110 Call11\ò' "<II.i.h "'0 alroaè~' "a,t ta "......èall. ...asto
3-59
25--/31'
f~ilities, Aer lIaes it pressrie. ho"" a Ce ' ,
fair oh".l'elioies hish 1I0ti "'h IIA~, AlB) aEsO !taBly 90"olel' iAt.FAa!
~ ' AO .A . leGal j"" If .
air 01",.. ofrogieAal ,0sl'oAsibilities A h f¡ ~s IsilaA h... Alol ils ,"...aRaBl.
A~"'" fuFth.r .ffORS ...0 Aosess9l'>' ts' lIo'~o~a. air S8...0 S,aASOI'!S "'0 saAlo,"h.1
"'lduA ~an ];)ioga COIlAþ'" la sl' ,I' AlS'. SI'OSltiO fair sh... I'olisi.s
"'I~; o~llltaBle ~ T~' "
AlaAagO,..ORt ,.spaAsieiIities ameAg III. R ' ,as~,I, Sl!l~g and BIller ..,...to
Allghl, a!sa 101<0 iRIs saAsill.ratiaA Iho eg~aA s junsàlsllens, ~"sh 1'0Iisi.s
faSlhtlos ta "'hish a jllfisàislioA is hasl. 1';1' anll amauAI af alilor ,0gioAal
The Ciþ'" rosagAi~.s its resl'aAsibil' ,~
and the C9W"tHP's fair sh !Iõ, sr tIle Alanago,..oAt afh""",àous ""asto
...e I'RAsIl'los...1I 'II I' '
SOAS°l't iA Ihe losa! .ogulato,y [. I ""I')' an IAI.FiAl fair sh..o
aàà I'rasess er h.....àa"s "'asl ~ T'
.o"os III. Ci~"s iR"al". t' 0 aslltles "'hish
AI.A IA all amallAI I' '
g.AOI'atoà "'illIiA tho CiÞ,,', alllI a .0...aAaBle f¡ , FBI'SFtl8AatO ta ..,...10
~aII 91Oge Cellnþ" Th. Cil" 't' air sh....o af a".rall Aoolls ""ilhiA
, , S IA OAt IS te rosag' h
Ie asoepl rosl'oAsieilil' for anà" , AIZ. ot or s9A1,..IIAitios' Ao.às
asl'osi.I1;' if Ill. goR~rati¿A a/~':t~ ~ o~ultaelo sharo efAooàoà f""ilities,
asli-'elj IIRà.RaldAg o¡raFts te h,IS.. frOAl soAlAluAilios .. hish ... Aat
AliAiAlj¡",liaA, as 10 0 OA SIlo l,"at"'OAt and "'ast.
3-60
6/ /;J3
I) The proponent shall identify the location of waste sources,
and the respective volumes of the particular waste stream(s)i:
II}! om each of
those sources it serve, . Including those
specifically known at the time of application, as well as those
estimated in the future. Tho Cit~, DRall also ro~ui.. tRo
~r.~.R.Rt t. submit <lata "'ilh 'OD~..t t. ..URp'" "'¡<lo "'asto
Roods, onistiRg fa.ilit,' D!lfJa.itios, aR<I iRlo.gÐ"o"uÐontal
ogro.monls, s. as I. pFÐ"i<l. a ..m~lot. ..m~..ati"o easo,
f)
!Ii
;1~) The GiIy I#§ji§ijrn¡ shall o"a¡uat. and
6OBSiàef. the' ininimum waste stream;
necessary to ensure the economIc Jt!ìm!!!W of the
proposed facility.
3-61
8:-/3b
survey the efforts put forth by the communities
. volved wastes ~~¡'¡¡¡W~.~~~i1ì!i!$ to
educe their off-site treatment needs
through p#im9tiþg on-site treatment and waste minimization. lochRi~ue'. Based
on an analysis of IIH£ !!í!i~Þ¡¡¥~¡¡\í!i@!!ìr9ì'ffiì!!!i!jj Elata, ,oR,iEleriRg .....Ie
g...erateà by lIIe Çip"', other South Ga;,' ÇoR1R1l111itios, Ihe remaiRàor of San
t>iege ÇOIlTII>.,', OIIà etller jIlRsài.tioR' eutsiàe Ille RogieR, the City shall
identify any concerns with respect to fair share concepts, and as appropriate
shall require mitigation through conditions of use limiting the volumes or types
of wastes ~Q!1~ received, and/or by requiring compensation/incentive programs
to be established.
Processing and Permitting
Application of the various policies and criteria to the review of hazardous
waste facility proposals, and the necessary coordination for such proposals
with involved Federal, State and Regional agencies, requires the establishment
of specific implementation measures. A subsequent implementing ordinance(s)
shall be prepared which will set forth all applicable procedural requirements
including, but not limited to, IRHIpplication processes, submittal requirements
for environmental reviews, risk assessments and conditional use pennits,
coordination and involvement of State and local agencies and the Local
Assessment Committee, facility operational controls such as em,,!gency
contingency plans and monitoring programs, and local enforcement provisions.
5.6 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
In 1987, with the passage of Assembly Bi\l 2926, the State of California
declared the issue of new school construction to be of statewide concern. That
legislation authorized school districts to collect fees as a prerequisite for
residential and commercial/industrial development. Fee collection of up to
$1.50 per square foot of habitable area for residential development and $0.25
per square foot of new commercial/industrial development was approved. The
levy may be increased annually to accommodate inflation if authorized by the
State of Califomia State Allocation Board.
Fees collected pursuant to AB 2926 may only be used to provide temporary
facilities and/or service the matching funds requirement should the district
participate in the Leroy Green Lease-Purchase School Facilities Program.
Additional revenue generating mechanisms, including financing for pennanent
facilities are:
1. General Obligation Bonds
2. Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts
3. Certificates of Participation
3-62
[?-/3?
4. District's share of Redevelopment Funds
5. Sale of Surplus Land
6. Developer fee programs.
All new school related development must be approved by the State of
California Office of State Architect prior to construction. To facilitate
approval at the state level, the school districts use the following criteria:
I. The new senior high schools shall be constructed to
accommodate approximately 2,400 students and shall be
designed to allow for a four-year curriculum.
2. New junior high/middle schools shall be constructed to
accommodate approximately 1,400 students.
3. New elementary schools shall be constructed to accommodate
approximately 650 students.
4. A senior high school shall consist of at least 50 usable acres;
a junior high/middle school site; 20 usable acres. The
acreages may be reduced to encourage the joint use of
community parks where appropriate.
5. An elementary school site shall consist of at least 10 usable
acres. The district encourages joint use with parks where
appropriate.
6. School sites shall be located in proximity to major arterials,
and primary ingress and egress to the site shall be controlled
by a signalized intersection.
7. The proposed land uses adjacent to a school site shall be
planned in such a manner as to minimize noise impacts and
maximize hannonious development between the two uses.
8. To further community development and enhance the quality
of life, schools should be centrally located in residential
neighbórhoods in order to best serve the majotity of the
student population.
9. School development is subject to the Califomia
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, prior to
accepting the dedication of a school site, the district will
require an examination of the existing environmental
conditions (seismology and geology, etc.) to determine its
adequacy.
5.7 LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
In order to serve the public in the most effective and efficient manner the
selection of new library sites should be based on the following criteria:
3-63
6/ / ;3 ð
I. Proximity to Community Activity Centers or neighborhood
retail centers.
2. High visibility /Tom the streets providing access.
3. Primary ingress and egress to the site controlled by a
signalized intersection or other adequate vehicular control.
4. Compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood character.
5. Minimum displacement of existing residents and businesses.
6. Minimum costs.
In addition, site should be of sufficient size, shape and topography to provide
for the development of a library facility that will meet the following criteria:
I. One level structure of the required size to meet the service
standards.
2. Public and staff parking in accordance with City standards.
3. Adequate allowances for landscaping and building setbacks
requirements.
The planning and design for the library buildings should be in accordance with
the following guidelines.
I. Library space of .5 to .7 gross square feet per resident.
2. Three books per capita, plus spoken word audio cassettes,
video cassettes and compact disks.
6. REFERENCES
The following reports arid studies were used in the preparation of the Public
Facilities Element:
I. P&D Technologies. Chula Vista General Plan, Land Use Element.
2. Otay Water District. Central Area Water Master Plan Update. March
1987.
3. Sweetwater Authority. Water Master Plan Update, November 1985.
4. Engineering-Science, Inc. Water Feasibility Study. May 1987.
5. Engineering-Science, Inc. Wastewater Feasibility Study. May 1987.
6. San Diego County Water Authority. Water Market Assessment.
3-64
b /j5;
...,--..--.
-
September 1988.
7. Lawrence, Fogg, Florer and Smith. Drainage Master Plan Report.
1964.
8. Leedshill-Herkenboff, Inc. Drainage and Flood Control Summary
Report. August 1987.
9. County of San Diego, Division of Solid Waste. Regional Solid Waste
Management Plan. 1986.
10. Engineeting-Scienoe, Inc. Solid and Hazardous Waste Control
Feasibility Study. May 1987.
II. County of San Diego, Division of Hazardous Waste. Hazardous
Waste Management Plan. May 1989.
g/)tj{J 3-65
;'XNII5/7 C
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADDING SECTIONS
19.04.107 AND 19.58.178 TO, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 19.14.070,
19.42.040,19.44.040, AND 19.46.040 OF, THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL
CODE TO ESTABUSH DEFINITIONS, REQ lliREMENTS AND
PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL
USE PERMITS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE FACIUTIES.
WHEREAS, on June 30, 1992, the City Council adopted amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the City General Plan incorporating provisions related to the management
of hazardous wastes, and the siting and permitting of hazardous waste facilities as required by
State law (Resolution No. 16794); and
WHEREAS, on February 23, 1993, the City Council adopted additional amendments to
the Public Facilities Element of the City General Plan to refine and clarify certain aspects of the
aforementioned June 30, 1992 amendments (Resolution No. ~; and
WHEREAS, in order to fully implement the provisions of the amended Public Facilities
Element it is necessary to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance, and staff was directed by the City
Council to complete said ordinance amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance amendments define hazardous waste facilities as
conditional uses in the City's industrial zone classifications, provided that the facility is also
located within one of the "general areas" designated in the General Plan Public Facilities
Element as an area appropriate for the consideration of such facilities; and
WHEREAS, the amendments establish a specific review procedure for hazardous waste
facility conditional use permit applications consistent with State law; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the normal findings required for a conditional use permit, the
amendments would require the Planning Commission and City Council to fmd that the proposed
facility complies with the "General Areas" policies, siting criteria, and "fair share" principles
of Section 5.5 of the General Plan Public Facilities Element, and with the County of San Diego
Hazardous Waste Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, the amendments provide for a public hearing before both the Planning
Commission and City Council, with the Planning Commission action forming a recommendation
rather than a decision subject to appeal; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the amendments
will result in no significant impacts upon the environment, and has issued a Negative Declaration
under IS-93-14; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
Z5 //t/!
--~----- -
Ordinance No. -
Page 2
proposed amendments on December 16, 1992, and a continuation hearing on January 13, 1993,
and recommended that the City Council introduce for first reading the proposed ordinance
amendments; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Zoning
Ordinance Amendments on February 23, 1993.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as
follows:
SECTION I: That Section 19.04.107 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code
to read as follows:
Chapter 19.04
DEFINITIONS
19.04.107 Hazardous Waste Facilitv
A "Hazardous Waste Facility" means. as aDDlicable. a hazardous waste facility Droiect.
suecified hazardous waste facilitv. sDecified hazardous waste facility Droiect. or land disDosal
facility as defined in Section 25199.1 of the California Health and Safety Code. and shall include
any structures. other aDDurtenances. and imuroyements on the land. and all contiguous land.
used for the treatment. transfer. storal!e. resource recoyerv. disDosal. or recyclinl! of hazardous
waste.
SECTION II: That Section 19.14.070 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 19.14
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES, CONDITIONAL USES AND VARIANCES
19.14.070 Conditional use pennit-Application-Fee-Public hearing.
A. Applications for conditional use pennits or modifications thereto shall be made to the
Planning Commission in writing on a fonn prescribed by the Planning Commission and shall be
accompanied by plans and data sufficient to show the detail of the proposed use or building.
The application shall be accompanied by a fee as presently designated, or as may in the future
be amended, in the master fee schedule. The director of planning shall cause the matter to be
set for hearing in the same manner as required for setting zoning matters for hearing. The
director of planning or the Planning Commission shall haye the discretion to include in the notice
of the hearing on such application notice that the planning commission will consider
classifications of other than that for which application is made an/or additional properties and/or
uses.
If/ It/)
---------------
Ordinance No. -
Page 3
In those cases where the application confonns to the requirements of Section 19.14.030A, the
application shall be directed to the zoning administrator.
B. In the case of hazardous waste facilities as defined in Section 19.04 .107. aDD1ications for
conditional use Dennits or modifications thereto shall be made Dursuant to Section 19.58.178.
and shall be considered bv the Planning Commission with a recommendation to be forwarded
to the City Council for final review and action. The reQuirements of Section 19.14.090 shall
applv to both the Planning Commission recommendation and the City Council resolution with
the following modifications:
L The written findings. in addition to the reQuirements of Section 19.14.080. shall address
those matters as set forth in Section 19.58.178K.
b. The decision of the Planning Commission shall constitute a recommendation onlv. and
shall not become final or subject to appeal as provided in Sections 19.14.100 to
19.14.130.
~ The City Council's decision shall be considered final. and the CitY Clerk shall transmit
a COpy of the resolution as provided bv Section 19.14.130.
SECTION III: That Section 19.42.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 19.42
1-R - RESEARCH INDUSTRIAL ZONE
19.42.040 Conditional uses
Conditional uses pennitted in an I-R zone include:
A. Retail commercial uses necessary to serve the I-R zone;
B. Manufacture of phannaceuticals, drugs and the like;
C. Building height in excess of three and one-half stories or forty-five feet;
D. Unclassified uses, as set forth in Chapter 19.54.
E. ~oof-mounted satellite dishes subject to the standards set forth in Section 19.30.040.
(f>/L/;>
- ..._._---~._--
Ordinance No.
Page 4
F. Recycling collection centers, subject to the provisions of Section 13.58.340.
G. Hazardous waste facilities. subject to the Drovisions of Section 19.58.178
SECTION IV: That Section 19.44.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 19.44
I-L - LIMITED INDUSTRIAL ZONE
19.44.040 Conditional uses
Conditional uses permitted in an I-L zone include:
A. Machine shop and sheet metal shop;
B. Service stations, subject to the conditions in Section 19.58.280;
C. Steel fabrication;
D. Restaurants, delicatessens and similar uses;
E. Drive-in theaters, subject to the conditions of Section 19.58.120;
F. Major auto repair, engine rebuilding and paint shops;
G. Commercial parking lots and garages;
H. Plastic and other synthetics manufacturing;
I. Building heights exceeding three and one-half stories or forty-five feet;
J. Unclassified uses as set forth in Chapter 19.54;
K. Trucking yards, terminals and distributing operations;
L. The retail sale of such bulky items as furniture, carpets and other similar items;
M. Retail distribution centers and manufacturers' outlets which require extensive floor areas
fór the storage and display of merchandise, and the high-volume, warehouse-type sale
~/!L/1'
Ordinance No. -
Page 5
of goods and, retail uses which are related to and supportive of existing, on-site retail
distribution centers of manufacturers' outlets. Conditional use pennit applications for the
establishment of retail commercial uses, covered by the provisions of this subsection,
shall be considered by tlie city council subsequent to its receipt of recommendations
thereon from the planning commission.
N. Roof-mounted satellite dishes subject to the standards set forth in Section 19.30.040.
O. Recycling collection centers, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.340.
~ Hazardous waste facilities. subject to the Drovisions of Section 19.58.178.
SECTION V: That Section 19.46.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Chapter 19.46
I - GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE
19.46.040 Conditional uses
Conditional uses in an I district include:
A. Motels;
B. Restaurants;
C. Service stations, subject to the provisions of Sections 19.58.280;
D. The retail sale of such bulky items as furniture, carpets and other similar items;
E. Retail distribution centers and manufacturers' outlets which require extensive floor areas
for the storage and display of merchandise, and the high-volume, warehouse-type sale
of goods and, retail uses which are related to, and supportive of existing, on-site retail
distribution centers or manufacturers' outlets. Conditional use pennit applications for
the establishment of retail commercial uses, covered by the provisions of this subsection,
shall be considered by the city council subsequent to its receipt of recommendations
thereon from the planning commission;
F. The following uses covered by this subsection, shall be considered by the city council
subsequent to its receipt of recommendations thereon from the planning commission:
?~/~
------~--------
-
Ordinance No. -
Page 6
1. Brewing or distilling of liquor, or perfume manufacture,
2. Meat packing,
3. Large scale bleaching, cleaning and dyeing establishments,
4. Railroad yards and freight stations,
5. Forges and foundries,
6. Automobile salvage and wrecking operations, and industrial metal and waste rag,
glass or paper salvage operations; provided, that all operations are conducted
within a solid screen not less than eight feet high, and that materials stored are
not piled higher than said screen;
G. Any other use which is detennined by the commission to be of the same general
character as the above uses;
H. Unclassified uses, as provided in Chapter 19.54.
I. Roof-mounted satellite dishes subject to the standards set forth in Section 19.30.040.
J. Recycling collection centers, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.340.
K. Hazardous waste facilities. subiect to the orovisions of Section 19.58.178
SECTION VI: That Section 19.58.178 is .hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal
Code to read as follows:
Chapter 19.58
USES
19.58.178 Hazardous waste facilities
A hazardous waste facilitY as defined in Section 19.04.107 of this title mav be considered for
oennitting onlv within an industrial zone which is also located within a "General Area" identified
in Section 5.5 of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan as an area aoorooriate for the
acceotance and consideration of an aoolication for such a facilitv. A hazardous waste facilitv
mav be allowed within a location as indicated above uoon the issuance of a conditional use
oennit. subject to the following standards and guidelines:
?5--- It//;
..~._.~-_._~.
Ordinance No.
Page 7
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT
It is the intent of this section to establish and clarify local reauirements and Drocedures
for the review and approval of conditional use j>ermit applications for a hazardous waste
facilitv. consistent with the Provisions of Section 25199 et sea. of the California Health
and SafetY Code (Tanner Act). and with the objectives. Dolicies. and criteria of the
Public Facilities Element of the CitY General Plan rel!:ardinl!: hazardous waste
manal!:ement Dlanninl!:. and the sitinl!: and Dermittinl!: of hazardous waste facilities.
B. APPLICABILITY
Anv conditional use Dermit I!:ranted for a hazardous waste facilitY Dursuant to Sections
19.14.070 throul!:h .130 shaIl comply with the aDj>licable Provisions of this section which
are suDDlementarv to. and in the event of conflict shaIl suoersede the rel!:Ulations set forth
in Sections 19.14.070 throul!:h .130. Subsections D. E. F. G. H. I. J. and K of this
section shaIl aDDlv to all hazardous waste facilities as defined in Section 19.04.107. and.
as herein defined.
C. DEFINITIONS
L "Hazardous waste" shaIl mean a waste. or combination of wastes. which because
of its auantitv. concentration. or Dhvsical. chemical. or infectious characteristics
may either:
1h Cause or sil!:nificantIv contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase
in serious irreversible. or incaDacitatinl!: reversible. illness.
!L Pose a substantial Dresent or Dotential hazard to human health or the
environment when ÎmProoerIv treated. stored. transported. disposed of. or
otherwise manal!:ed.
In addition. hazardous waste shaIl include the foIlowing::
1h Anv waste identified as a hazardous waste bv the State DeDartment of
Toxic Substances Control.
!L Anv waste identified as a hazardous waste under the Resource
Conservation Recoverv Act. as amended. 42 U.S.C. &§ 6901 et sea. and
any rel!:Ulations Dromull!:ated thereunder.
£.,. Extremelv or acutely hazardous waste. which includes any hazardous
waste or mixture of hazardous wastes which. if human exposure should
?-/L/?
--~~~~-- -
Ordinance No.-
Page 8
occur. may likely result in death. disablinl! personal injury or serious
illness caused by the hazardous waste or mixture of hazardous wastes
because of its Quantitv. concentration. or chemical characteristics.
b "Hazardous waste facilitv" means any facilitY used for the storage. transfer.
treatment. recycling. and/or disposal of hazardous wastes or associated residuals
as defined in Section 19.04.107.
~ "Land use decision" shall mean a discretionary decision of the CitY concerning
a hazardous waste facilitY Droiect. includinl! the issuance of a land use vennit or
a conditional use Dennit. the I!rantinl! of a yariance. the subdiyision of DfoDerty.
or the modification of existing DrODertv lines Dursuant to Title 7 (commencing
with Section 65000) of the California Goyermnent Code.
D. NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPLY: APPLICATION FOR A LAND USE DECISION:
COMPLETENESS OF APPLICATION
L Pursuant to the Droyisions of State Health and Safety Code Section 25199.7(a)
and (b). at least ninety (90) days before filing an application for a conditional use
pennit for a hazardous waste facility. the applicant shall file with the Planning
DeDartment and with the Office of Pennit Assistance in the State Office of
Planning and Research. a Notice of Intent ("N .0.1. ") to make the application.
The N.O.I. shall be on such fonn as aDDroyed by the Director of Planning. and
shall specify the Droiect location to which it applies. and contain a complete
description of the nature. function. and scope of the Droject.
b The Planning DeDartment shall Dfoyide Dublic notice of the applicant's intent to
aDDly for a conditional use vennit. iJUrsuant to the noticinl! Drocedure in Section
19.12.070. and by Dosting notices in the location where the DroDosed Droiect is
located.
~ Costs incurred by the CitY in Drocessinl! said Dublic notice shall be Daid by the
Droiect DroDonent through establishment of a deposit account for such Durooses
with the Planning DeDartment at the time the N.O.l. is filed.
~ The N.O.l. shall remain in effect for one year from the date it is filed. unless it
is withdrawn by the DrODonent. Howeyer. a N.O.I. is not transferable to a
location other than that specified in the N.O.I.. and in such instance the
Droponent Dfoposes to change the Dfoject location. a new N.O.I. shall be
DreDared. and the procedure shall begin al!ain for the new location.
6'" /L/~
""'0"'-'---
Ordinance No. -
Page 9
~ Within 30 days of the filing of the N.O.!.. the applicant shall schedule a
pre-application conference with the Planninl! Department to be held not later than
45 days thereafter. at which the applicant and the Planning Department shall
discuss infonnation and materials neCeSSary to evaluate the application. Within
30 days after this meeting. the Director of Planninl! shall infonn the applicant.
in writing. of all submittals necessary in order to deem the conditional use uennit
application complete.
~ The applicant may not file an application for a conditional use uennit unless the
applicant has first complied with the above items. and presented the required
application fee. Furthennore. said application shall not be considered and acted
upon until it is deemed complete as provided bv Section 19.14.070. and until all
materials necessary to evaluate the application as set forth bv the Director of
Planning pursuant to Item 5 above have been received and accepted as to content.
L An application is not deemed to be complete until the Planning Department
notifies the applicant. in writing. that the application is complete. Said
notification of completeness. or incompleteness. shall be provided within 30 days
of the application submittal. or resubmittal as applicable. After an application is
detennined to be complete. the Planning Department may request additional
infonnation where necessary to clarifv. modifv. or supplement previously
submitted materials. or where resulting from conditions which were not known.
and could not reasonably have been known at the time the application was
received.
~ The Planning Department shall notify the Office of Pennit Assistance in the State
Office of Planning and Research within ten (10) days after an application for a
conditional use uennit is accepted as complete bv the Planning Department.
E. PRE-APPLICATION PUBLIC MEETING
L Within ninety (90) days after a Notice of Intent is filed with the Planning
Department and Office of Pennit Assistance in the State Office of Planning and
Research pursuant to subsection D.l. the Office of Pennit Assistance will. in
cooperation with the Planninl! Department. convene a public meetinl! ("Pre-
Application Meeting") in the City of Chula Vista for the express pumose of
infonning the public on the nature. function. and scope of the proposed project
and the procedures that are required for approvinl! applications for the project.
b The City shall arrange a meetinl! location in a public facility near the proposed
project site. and shall give notice of said meeting pursuant to the noticing
procedures in Section 19.12.070 and bv posting at the proposed project site.
~- /t/c¡
-.--------------
Ordinance No.
Page 10
.1. All affected al!encies. includinl! but not limited to the State DeDartment of Health
Services/Toxic Substance Control Prol!ram. Rel!ional Water Oualitv Control
Board. County DeDartment of Health Services- Hazardous Materials Manal!ement
Division. and the Air Pollution Control District. shall send a reDfesentative who
will exDlain to the Dublic their al!encv's Drocedures for aDDfovinl! Dennit
aDDlications for the Droiect. and outline the Dublic's OI!Dortunities for review and
comment on those aDDlications.
E LOCAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE: FORMATION AND ROLE
1.... At any time after minI! of the N.O.I.. but not later than 30 days after an
aDDlication for a land use decision has been acceDted as comDlete. the City
Council shall aDDoint a seven member Local Assessment Committee ("LAC") to
advise the City in considerinl! the hazardous waste facility DfoDosal.
L The membershiD of the LAC shall be broadly constituted to reflect the makeup
of the City. and shall include three reDresentatives of the City at larl!e. two
reDresentatives of enviromnental or Dublic interest I!roUDS. and two reDfesentatives
of affected businesses and industries. Members of the LAC shall have no direct
financial interest. as defined in Section 87103 of the California Government
Code. in the DroDosed Dfoiect.
.1. The LAC is solely an advisory committee. and is not emDowered with any
decision makinl! authority relative to the DfoDosed Droiect. nor with the lel!al
standinl! to assert sDecific Dfoiect conditions. Rather. the LAC Drovides a
mechanism for direct inDut on matters of concern to the I!eneral Dublic into the
enviromnental review Drocess. and Dresents the oDDortunitv for framinl! Questions
that should be addressed in that process. as well as in seeinl! that these Questions
are addressed as early in the process as possible.
£ As such. the LAC shall. within the time Deriod Drescribed bv the City Council.
advise the City of the tenns and conditions under which the DroDosed hazardous
waste facility Droiect may be acceDtable to the community. as follows:
Jh AdoDt rules and Drocedures which are necessary to oerfonn its duties.
Q,. Enter into a dialo!!Ue with the Droiect oroDonent to reach an understandinl!
on:
ill the sul!l!ested tenns. Drovisions and conditions for Droiect aDDfoval
and facility oDeration which would ensure Dfotection of Dublic
health. safety and welfare. and the enviromnent of the City of
Chula Vista and adjacent communities. and
<¿ç-/Stl
..__._~-_..
Ordinance No.-
Page 11
ill the special benefits and remuneration the proponent will Drovide
the CitY as comœnsation for all local costs and impacts associated
with the facilitY and its operation. Such discussions shall address
"fair share" concepts as set forth in Section 5.5 of the General
Plan Public Facilities Element. includilll! the consideration of
establishinl! inter-I!overnmental al!reements. and/or other
comœnsation and incentive urol!rams.
Said dialo!!Ue shall be responsive to the issues and concerns identified at
the meetinl! described in subsection G .1.
~ With rel!ard to subsection 'b.' above. any resultinl! urooosed mitil!ation
measures not already defined in the environmental review or œrmittinl!
process would be subject to the nel!otiation Drocess with the orooonent.
with the nel!otiation results forwarded as recommended terms of aooroval
to the Planninl! Commission and CitY Council.
!l Reoresent I!enerallv. in meetinl!s with the oroiect aoolicant. the interest of
the residents of the City of Chula Vista and the interests of adjacent
communities. as urincioallv made known through the Post-Application
Meetinl!.
~ Receive and expend. subiect to the aDoroval of the CitY Manal!er and
authorization of the City Council. any technical assistance grants made
available as described in Subsection J.
L Advise the Planning Deoartment. Planning Commission. and the CitY
Council of the terms. provisions. and conditions for oroiect aooroval
which have been successfully negotiated bv the committee and the
orooonent. and any additional information which the committee deems
aourooriate. The Planning Deoartment. Planning Commission. and CitY
Council may use this advice for their indeoendent consideration of the
oroiect.
~ The CitY shall allocate staff resources to assist the LAC in oerforminl! its duties.
and the uroiect urooonent shall be resoonsible to Day the CitY's costs in
establishinl!. conveninl!. and staffing the LAC. through establishment of a deposit
account for such ourooses with the Planninl! Deoartment at the time of filing an
aoolication for a land use decision.
2.c The LAC shall cease to exist after final administrative action bv state and local
al!encies has been taken on the permit aoolications for the oroiect for which the
Committee was convened.
2j-/ý /
.--.-..-..---.-
Ordinance No. -
Page 12
G. NOTICE OF PERMIT APPLICATION: POST-APPLICATION MEETING
1,. Within sixtY (60) days after receivin!! the notice of a comDlete aDDlication as
reQuired bv subsection D.S. the Office of Pennit Assistance in the State Office
of Plannin!! and Research will convene a ("Post-ADDlication Meetin!!") in the CitY
of Chula Vista of the lead and resDonsible a!!encies for the Droiect. the DroDonent.
the LAC. and the interested Dublic for the Duroose of detenninin!! the issues
which concern the a!!encies that are reQuired to aDDrOVe the Droiect. and the
issues which concern the Dublic. The Plannin!! DeDartment shall Drovide notice
to the Dublic of the date. time. and Dlace of the meetin!!.
b The issues of concern raised at the Post-ADDlication Meetin!! must include all
enviromnental and Dennittin!! issues which will need to be addressed in the
enviromnental document to ensure the document's adeQuacy in suDportin!! the
actions of all Dennittin!! and resDonsible a!!encies for the Droiect.
1.. The Post-ADDlication Meetin!! should be held as soon as an enviromnental initial
study or notice of DreDaration is available for review and comment. so that
adeQuate oDDortunitv is Drovided for meetin!! inDut to be emDloved in the scoDin\!
of subseQuent enviromnental review activities.
I:L.- ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS
1,. All hazardous waste facilitY Droposals shall be reQuired to under!!o an
enviromnental review and health risk assessment re!!ardless of facility tvDe. size.
or Droximitv to DoDulations or immobile DoDulations.
b As hazardous waste facilities may varv !!reatlv in their Dotential Dublic health and
safetv. and enviromnental risks. the deDth and breadth of enviromnental review
and health risk assessments must be tailored on a case-by-case basis.
1.. The enviromnental review and health risk assessment shall serve as the Drimarv
vehicles for identifvin!! communitY and involved a!!encv concerns. and Drovidin!!
data to be used bv the LAC and the CitY in ne!!otiatin!! Droiect conditions. As
such. within 30 days followin!! the Post-ADDlication Meetin!!. the CitY shall:
1h create an ad-hoc technical committee to advise the CitY and the LAC on
technical issues re!!ardin!! the scoDin!! and DreDaration of the
enviromnental review and health risk assessment. The membershiD should
consist of staff from each of the involved Dennittin!! or resDonsible
g ~ /5d)-
- -.- -----_____m
Ordinance No. -
Page 13
agencies. an eDidemiologist. a toxicologist. and any other technical exDerts
deemed necessarv or desirable.
11. convene a meeting of involved CitY staff. the environmental document
ureDarer. the LAC. ad-hoc technical committee. and the Droiect DroDonent
to establish the scooe and content for the environmental document and
health risk assessment. and the need for anv other technical studies. The
CitY Council shall review the meeting outcome. and aDDrove a final SCODe
for the environmental review and health risk assessment Drior to the
commencement of work.
~ A traffic/transDortation studv shall be reQuired as Dart of the environmental
review for all hazardous waste facilitY DroDosals. and at minimum shall account
for all factors addressed under the Safe TransDortation siting criteria contained in
Section 5.5 of the Public Facilities Element of the CitY General Plan.
~ UDon selection of a reasonable range of Droiect alternatives under the California
Environmental Oualitv Act. Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et sea.. the
Citv. UDon the advice of the LAC and ad-hoc technical committee. shall establish
a Dreferred hierarchv among those alternatives for the Duroose of determining the
level of Qualitative and Quantitative analvsis that should be Derformed for the
health risk assessment on those alternatives. In determining this Dreferred
hierarchv and associated level of health risk assessment. consideration shall be
given to the relative feasibilitY of each alternative to attain the stated Droiect
objectives. and the relative merits of each alternative.
Q..,. The health risk assessment shall serve as an evaluative and decision-making tool.
and shall not be construed as Drovidinl! definitive answers regarding facilitv
siting.
L The ad-hoc technical committee shall remain in tact to assist. as reQuested. the
Citv and the LAC in the evaluation of the [mal health risk assessment and anv
technical studies to determine acceDtable levels of risk. and/or to determine the
extent and tvoe of related conditions and mitigation measures which should be
aDDlied to the Droiect.
.8..,. The LAC shall not finalize its recommendations for forwarding for Planning
Commission and Citv Council consideration until after the Dublic review Deriod
for the draft environmental document has closed. and the LAC has had sufficient
time to review anv comments received.
2.,. Anv costs associated to the formation or work of the ad-hoc technical committee.
in addition to anv other consultantCs) the LAC deems necessarv. including costs
>!~J53
Ordinance No. -
Page 14
incurred in the DreDaration of any technical studies. shall be Daid for through
technical assistance !!rants as described in subsection J.
L INITIAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION
.L At the request of the applicant. the CitY Council shall. within sixtY (60) days after
the Plannin!! DeDartment has determined that an application for a conditional use
Dermit is complete and after a noticed Dublic hearin!!. issue an initial written
determination on whether the DroDosed Droiect is consistent with both of the
followin!!:
1h The applicable Drovisions of the CitY General Plan and Zonin!! Ordinances
in effect at the time the application was accepted as complete.
!L The county hazardous waste mana!!ement Dlan authorized bv Article 3.5
(commencin!! with Section 25135) of the California Health and SafetY
Code. if such Dlan is in effect at the time of application.
~ The Plannin!! DeDartment shall send to the applicant a CODY of the written
determination made Dursuant to item I above.
1,. The determination reQuired bv item 1 above does not Drohibit the City from
makin!! a different determination when the final decision to approve or deny the
conditional use Dermit is made. if the final determination is based on information
which was not considered at the time the initial determination was made.
L TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS: LOCAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE
NEGOTIATIONS
.L Followin!! the Post-Application Meetin!!. the LAC and the DroDonent shall meet
and confer on the Droiect DroDosal Dursuant to the Drovisions of subsection F.
~ Given that the rules. re!!lllations. and conditions relative to hazardous waste
facility Droiects are extremely technical in nature. as are the associated
assessments of Dotential Dublic health and environmental risks. the LAC may find
that it reQuires assistance and independent advise to adeQuately review a DroDosed
Droiect and make recommendations. In such instance. the LAC may reQuest
technical assistance !!rants from the City to enable the hirin!! of a consultant(s) to
do anv. or all. of the followin!!:
1h assist the LAC in the review and evaluation of the Droiect application.
environmental documents. technical studies. and/or anv other documents.
F> /51/
Ordinance No.-
Page 15
materials and information required in connection with the project
application.
.!h interoret the Dotential Dublic health and safety and environmental risks
associated with the project. and help to define acceptable mitÌ!!ation
measures to substantially minimize or eliminate those risks.
f,. advise the LAC in its meetings and discussions with the proponent to seek
agreement on the terms and conditions under which the project will be
acceptable to the communitv.
1. The proponent shall be reQuired to pay a fee eQual to the amount of any technical
assistance grant authorized for the LAC. Said fee(s) shall be Daid to the City.
and deposited in an account to be used exclusively for the Durooses set forth in
subsection J.2.
~ If the local assessment committee and the applicant cannot resolve any differences
through the meetings. the Office of Permit Assistance in the State Office of
Planning and Research may be called upon to mediate disputes.
i,. The proponent shall Day one-half of the costs of any mediation Drocess which may
be recommended or undertaken by the Office of Permit Assistance in the State
Office of Planning and Research. The remaining costs will be Daid. upon
appropriation by the legislature. from the State General Fund.
K. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS REOUIRED FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
Before any conditional use Dermit for a hazardous waste facility may be granted or
modified. in addition to the findings reQuired by Section 19.14.080. it shall be found that
the proposed facility is in compliance with the following:
1.,. The "General Areas" Dolicies of Section 5.5 of the Public Facilities Element of
the City General Plan.
b. The "siting criteria" as set forth in Section 5.5 of the Public Facilities Element
of the City General Plan.
1. The "fair share" DrinciDles established in Section 5.5 of the Public Facilities
Element of the City General Plan
~ The County of San Diego Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
?--JPç
. ~._~...._.._..
Ordinance No.-
Page 16
SECTION VII: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day
from and after its adoption.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter Bruce M. Boogaard
Director of Planning City Attorney
(F,lhomelplannlnglhwmp-a.o,d)
<¡; /~ 6
----.-----_.
. eXHIIJ.IT D
,.
negative declaration -
PROJECT NAME: Hazardous Waste Management Plan Implementing
Ordinance and Amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the Chula Vista General
Plan
P~OJECT LOCATION: City-wide
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista
CASE NUMBER: IS 93-14
A. Proiect Settinq
The proposed Hazardous Waste Management Plan Implementing
Ordinance and amendments to the Public Facilities Element of
the Chula Vista General Plan wo~ld be applied city-wide,
therefore there is no specific site within the city which
corresponds to the proposed project.
B. Proiect Description
The proposed project consists of the Hazardous Waste
Management. Plan Implementing Ordinance and associated
revisions to the recently amended Public Facilities Element of
the Chula Vista General Plan. These proposed amendments to
the City's Zoning ordinance, and the Chula Vista General Plan,
incorporate provisions for the management of hazardous waste,
and the siting and permitting of hazardous waste facilities,
as required by State Law. These amendments are intended to
comprise the City's policy and regulatory provisions regarding
hazardous waste management and hazardous waste facilities.
C. Compatibility with Zoninq and Plans
The proposed project consists of amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the General Plan to c1arify previously
adopted hazardous waste policies, and Zoning Ordinance
amendments to establish a Conditional Use Permit process to
implement the General Plan's provisions pertaining to the
siting and permitting of proposed hazardous waste facilities.
Implementation of the proposed amendments (which constitute
the project), city-wide, will ensure that hazardous wastes are
,/,
J»/ ---7 ~{~
~ . ._~"""
. ~
city of chul. YIlt. pIInnlnll dep.rtment CßY OF
environment., review Hdlon. OiUIA VISTA
-
2
properly managed, and that proposed hazardous waste facilities
are safely sited and compatible with underlying land use
designations and zoning, as well as with surrounding land
uses.
D. Compliance with Threshold/Standards Policies
1. Fire/EMS
The Threshold Standards require that fire and medical
units must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes
or less in 85% of the cases and within 5 minutes or less
in 75% of the cases. The proposed project is exempt from
this Threshold Standard, as the project is comprised of
policy and regulatory provisions, and not a specific
development proposal for which a measure of Fire/EMS
response would otherwise apply.
2. Police
The Threshold Standards require that police units must
respond to 84% of the Priority I calls within 7 minutes
or less and maintain an average response time to all
Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units
must respond to 62.1 % of Priority 2 calls within 7
minutes or less and maintain an average response time to
all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The propòsed
project is exempt from this Threshold Standards, as the
project is comprised of policy and regulatory provisions,
and not a specific development proposal for which a
measure of Police response would otherwise apply.
3. Traffic
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections
must operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better,
with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may
occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized
intersections. Intersections west of I-80S are not to
operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection
may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak
hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are
exempted from this policy. The proposed project is
exempt from this Threshold Standards, as the project is
comprised of policy and regulatory provisions, and not a
specific development proposal for which a measurement of
direct traffic impacts would apply.
,.
!š~ /~)/
--.____-0
.
3
4. Parks/Recreation
The Threshold Standards for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres/1,OOO population. The proposed project is exempt
from this Threshold Standards, as the project is
comprised of policy and regulatory provisions, and not a
specific development proposal for which a measurement of
parks and recreational impacts would apply.
5. Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows
and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provided necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Plan (s) and City
Engineering Standards. The proposed project is exempt
from this Threshold Standard, as the project is comprised
of policy and regulatory provisions, and not a specific
development proposal for which a measurement of drainage
impacts would apply.
6. Sewer
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Plan (s) and City Engineering
Standards. The proposed project is exempt from this
Threshold Standard, as the project is comprised of policy
and regulatory provisions, and not a specific development
proposal for which a measurement of sewer impacts would
apply.
7. Water
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed
concurrently with planned growth and construction. The
proposed project is exempt from this Threshold Standard,
as the project is comprised of policy and regulatory
provisions, and not a specific development proposal for
which a measurement of water impacts would apply.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An initial study (IS 93-14) conducted by the Ci ty of Chula
Vista determined that the proposed project will not have a
significant environmental effect, and the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will not be required. A
Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
Section 15070 of the S~ate CEQA Guidelines.
~ //}:5
--~----------
4
The following impacts have been determined to be less than
significant:
Land Use
Adoption of the Imple~enting Ordinance and amendments to the
Public Facilities Element of the City General Plan would not
create direct land use impacts. Together, the Implementing
Ordinance and General Plan amendments provide policy
clarification and direction regarding the planning, siting,
and permitting review of proposed hazardous waste facilities
and, therefore, do not relate to a specific geographic site or
project.
Indirect land use impacts associated with implementation of
the proposed project are the potential for future land use
compatibility impacts associated with the siting and operation
of hazardous waste facilities within the City. Indirect land
use compatibility impacts could occur between future, proposed
hazardous waste facilities and other types of land uses,
particularly sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptors include
residential land uses, as well as uses associated with
immobile populations, such as congregate care facilities,
schools, hospitals and jails which could not easily be
mobilized for evacuation in the event of upset conditions.
The amendments to the Public Facilities Element of the General
Plan clarify previously adopted hazardous waste policies
pertaining to the management of hazardous wastes, and the
siting and permitting of hazardous waste facilities within the
City. These policies will ensure that businesses using
hazardous materials will be properly screened, and that
proposed hazardous waste facilities are safely sited and
compatible with underlying land use designations and zoning,
as well as surrounding land uses.
The Implementing Ordinance establishes a process which would
ensure that potential land use impacts associated with
proposed facilities are considered and that the "General
Areas" policies, siting criteria and fair share principles of
the General Plan and the County Hazardous Waste management
Plan are complied with.
Therefore, through compliance with the cri~eria set forth in
the Public Facilities Element of the Chula Vista General Plan,
and adherence to the conditional use permit procedures
outlined in the Implementing Ordinance, the City will ensure
that potential land use impacts associated with future
applications for hazardous waste facilities are adequately
addressed and analyzed. Therefore, land use impacts are
áéemed to be less than significant.
% r- / ¡;;{;J
~~----~-
.
5
Risk of UDset
Potential risk of upset impacts could occur if hazardous waste
facilities are not appropriately sited relative to sensitive
receptors and immobile populations, and with respect to the
protection of environmental resources. Implementation of the
proposed project would reduce potential risk of upset impacts
caused by inadequate planning and siting of such facilities by
setting forth appropriate criteria for storage,
transportation, disposal, and siting associated with hazardous
waste facilities and businesses generating such wastes.
Releases of hazardous materials or waste via air, land, or
water exposure pathways could occur during upset conditions,
such as an earthquake or other natural disaster. The
potential prevention of risk of upset impacts associated with
geotechnical conditions require compliance with federal,
state, and local agencies.
Locally, site feasibility and suitability issues are regulated
through compliance with the Uniform Building Code (UBC) , Chula
Vista Grading Ordinance, and Chula Vista Subdivision Ordinance
which requires that a geotechnical report be prepared prior to
any grading or development. Site feasibility and suitability
will be further addressed by the siting criteria contained in
the amended General Plan Public Facilities Element.
At the state level, releases to groundwater resources are
regulated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
Suspected releases to groundwater would require site specific
analysis to determine appropriate mitigation and remediation.
In addition, site specific environmental review for any
proposed hazardous waste facility would be required pursuant
to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to address
potential risk of upset impacts on a case by case basis.
Risk of upset impacts could also occur through releases and
spills during the transport of hazardous waste or hazardous
materials to and from hazardous waste facilitie~, and the
businesses using such materials and generating such wastes.
Risk of upset impacts associated with traffic safety can be
mitigated by compliance with Federal, State, and local agency
routing requirements and other appropriate conditions of use.
Appropriate traffic safety standards are discussed further
under "Transportation/Circulation." These requirements shall
be ensured through the adoption of the Implementing Ordinance
and amendments to the General Plan.
The County of San Diego Hazardous Materials Management
Division (HMMD) mandates that emergency response plans be
ïmplemented for hazardous waste facilities. Presently,
emergency releases of h~zardous materials into the environment
f)//t /
- -
.
6
are handled jointly by the Chula Vista Fire Department and the
County Hazardous Materials Management Division (HMMD) through
a mutual aid agreement. The proposed project will require
intimate involvement of HMMD in the local management of
hazardous materials and wastes, and in the siting and
permitting of proposed hazardous waste facilities.
Implementation of the proposed project would reduce potential
risk of upset impacts by setting forth appropriate criteria
for the comprehensive management of hazardous materials and
wastes, the siting and permitting of hazardous waste
facilities, and the licensing review of businesses using such
materials and generating such wastes. With compliance to the
criteria established through the amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the General Plan, and through processes
set forth in the Implementing Ordinance, as well as to
federal, state, and local regulatory criteria already in
place, risk of upset impacts are deemed to be below a level of
significance.
TransDortation/Circulation
The transportation of hazardous waste is regulated by Federal
agencies, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). State
and local laws require that producers, transporters, and
receivers of hazardous waste materials follow specific
monitoring and tracking procedures and enlist specific
emergency response systems in case of a hazardous material or
waste release during transport.
The State Department of Health Services (DHS) is in charge of
tracking hazardous waste through the State in accordance with
the Federal manifest system. DHS requires that transporters
have valid vehicle registration with their agency, and the
California Highway Patrol (CHP) annually inspects each vehicle
for compliance with the California Vehicle Code. The CHP also
determines whether the construction, design, equipment, and
safety features of the vehicles are in compliance with the
standards established by the DHS for the safe transportation
of hazardous wastes.
Federal routing regulations state that a v.ehicle containing
reportable quantities of hazardous materials must be operated
over routes which do not traverse heavily populated areas,
places where crowds of people assemble, tunnels, narrow
streets, or alleys. State routing regulations specify that
transportation be limited to State or interstate highways
offering the least overall transit time and that vehicles
t+ansporting hazardous materials may use highways providing
necessary access to local pickup or delivery points,
consistent with safe vehicle operation. The CHP has the
g- --/b.2
--
7
authority to determine routing requirements, safe stopping
places and inspection stops for the transportation of
hazardous wastes.
The Federal, State, and local regulations already in place
provide the regulatory framework for addressing potential
traffic safety impacts. Project-specific analysis should be
conducted for a proposed hazardous waste facility site,
however, to determine if the surrounding circulation network
can safely and adequately handle the potential traffic safety
impacts associated with the transport of hazardous waste.
As set forth in the proposed Implementing Ordinance and
amendments to the General Plan, a traffic study will be
required for any future, proposed hazardous waste facilities
in order to comprehensively address compliance with the
criteria established in the General Plan for the safe
transportation of wastes. By requiring compliance to the
criteria and process set forth by amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the General Plan, and by the
Implementing Ordinance, as well as the existing federal, state
and local regulations already in place, future
transportation/circulation impacts associated with future
applications for hazardous waste facilities will be adequately
addressed and analyzed. Transportation/circulation impacts
are therefore, at this time, deemed to be below a level of
significance.
Public Services/Facilities
Because the proposed project consists of policy and regulatory
provisions, and is therefore not site specific, it is
difficult to ascertain direct impacts to public services and
facilities, at this time. However, the Implementing Ordinance
and amendments to the Public Facilities Element of the General
Plan set forth criteria to ensure that potential, future
impacts to public services and facilities associated with
future applications for hazardous waste facilities are
addressed and analyzed.
Emergency situations associated with the release of hazardous
waste or materials into the environment require specially
trained personnel capable of containing. the release and
preventing human exposure, as well as releases into the
environment. The County Hazardous Materials Management
Division (HMMD) currently provides hazardous materials
emergency response capabilities to the City, in association
with a mutual aid agreement with the Chula Vista Fire
Department.
Á~ such, impacts to public services and facilities within the
City and to special districts would be positive in that the
%~/øJ
- ----------_u-
-
I
8
establishment of planning and siting criteria would ensure
that hazardous waste facilities are located in areas where
adequate public services and facilities are available and are
capable of being provided in the future. Therefore, potential
public services and facilities impacts are deemed to be below
a level of significance.
Human Health
The criteria set forth in the amendments to the General Plan
Public Facilities Element and the Implementing Ordinance are
directed at ensuring the accountability of hazardous waste
facilities within the City, the encouragement of safe
treatment and disposal practices, and the promotion of waste
minimization. In addition, the proposed project will ensure
the adequate training of facility employees and safe work
practices. Therefore, potential human health impacts are
deemed to be below a level of significance.
F. Mitiqation necessary to avoid siqnificant effects
The proposed project is not associated with any significant
environmental impacts, therefore no further mitigation is
necessary. With compliance to the criteria set forth in the
proposed Implementing Ordinance and amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the General Plan, potential
environmental impacts will be below a level of significance.
G. Mandatorv Findinqs of Siqnificance
Based on the following findings, it is determined that the
project described above will not have a significant
environmental impact and no environmental impact report needs
to be prepared.
1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a ~are or endangered
plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of california history or prehistory.
Implementation of the proposed project will ensure that
potential impacts to fish or wildlife species through an
accidental release of hazardous waste or materials will
u be reduced through compliance with the Implementing
Ordinance and General Plan amendments, as well as the
federal, state, aFld local regulations. Therefore, the
g~/6f
t.
9
proposed project will not degrade the quality of the
environment, adversely affect fish or wildlife species,
or eliminate cultural or paleontological resources.
2. The project has the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term
environmental goals.
The proposed project will strengthen long-term
environmental goals associated with effective hazardous
waste management planning, and the appropriate siting,
permitting and operation of hazardous waste facilities,
through the establishment of local policies and criteria.
Therefore, both short-term and long-term environmental
goals will be maintained.
3. The project has possible effects which are individually
limited but cumulatively considerable. As used in the
subsection, ncumulatively considerablen means that the
incremental effects of an individual project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects.
The proposed project is not anticipated to have
cumulative impacts. Adoption of the Implementing
Ordinance and associated amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the General Plan will provide
appropriate siting criteria to ensure that cumulative
hazardous waste management impacts are reduced to a level
below significance.
4. The environmental effects of a project will cause
substantial, adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly.
The protection of human health will be upheld through the
adoption of the Implementing Ordinance and associated
documents. Human health will be protected through
compliance with the criteria set forth by the proposed
project.
"
?)--/þ>
10
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Orqanizations
City of ~hula Vista: Roger Daoust, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Garry Williams, Planning
Ken Larsen, Building & Housing
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Cptn. Keith Hawkins, Police
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Rec.
Maryann Miller, Planning
Ed Batchelder, Planning
Chula Vista Elem. School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
2. References
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended
(Public Resources Code 21000 et. seq) and the State EIR
Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regulations et.seq).
Chula Vista, City of, 1987. MuniciDal Code.
Chula Vista, City of, 1989a. General Plan UDdate. ,
Chula Vista, City of, 1989b. General Plan UDdate EIR.
County of San Diego, 1989. Final Environmental ImDact
ReDort for the Hazardous Waste Manaqement Plan.
County of San Diego, 1989. Hazardous Waste Manaqement
Plan.
3. Initial Studv:
This environmental determination is based on the attached
Initial Study, any comments on the Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration, and reflects the
independent judgment of the City of Chula Vista. Further
information regarding the environment.al review of the
project is available from the Chura Vista Planning
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California
91910.
~~Q.~
ENVIRONM NTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
/
(hazwst" nO)
¿r--)¿¿,
"-----"----"
Excerot from Planninl! Commission Minutes of 1/13/93
ITEM 1. PUBLIC HEARING:
A. GPA-92-02 - ENTERTAINING RECONSIDERATION OF CITY-
INInA TED AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES
ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED IN
JUNE 1992, WHICH IMPLEMENT AND SUPPLEMENT THE
APPROVED COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT PLAN (continued from December 16, 1992)
B. GP A-92-02A - CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONALCITY-INITIA TED
AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN REFINING PORTIONS OF THE JUNE 1992
AMENDMENTS, AND RESTATING THE CITY'S "FAIR SHARE"
CONCEPTS REGARDING HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES
(continued from December 16, 1992)
C. PCA-92-02 - CONSIDERATION OF CITY-INITIATED AMENDMENTS
TO TITLE 19 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE
HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES AS CONDITIONAL USES IN
THE CITY'S INDUSTRIAL ZONES, AND TO ESTABLISH A
SPECIFIC REVIEW PROCEDURE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICATIONS FOR SUCH FACILITIES CONSISTENT WITH
STATE LAW (continued from December 16, 1992)
Associate Planner Batchelder gave the staff report and recommended, based on the responses
provided in Attachment 1 to the staff report, and through prior responses, that the
reconsideration of the previously adopted amendments be denied, the Negative Declaration be
adopted, the Planning Commission resolution adopted recommending that the City Council
approve the amendments contained in Exhibit B of the staff report, and recommending that the
City Council adopt the implementing ordinance amendments contained in Exhibit C of the staff
report.
Commissioner Tarantino questioned whether references to the "Chula Vista City School District"
should be changed to "Chula Vista Elementary School District" in the Public Facilities Element
of the General Plan. Mr. Batchelder answered that the language was outside the context of the
proposed amendments, and would need to be handled under another amendment. Chair Fuller
thought it may be handled administratively; however, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf felt it was
more than just housekeeping revisions and should be made as part of .he next General Plan
amendment.
Regarding the LAC, Commissioner Tarantino asked if the LAC was for each project or if the
environmental and public interest members change and City representatives remain the same.
(S/Jt-?
Mr. Batchelder said the LAC was a project specific group to be appointed and then disbanded
after each project had gone through the approval process.
Commissioner Tarantino, regarding the fair share policy, page 3-59, found Exhibits A and
Exhibit B confusing. Mr. Batchelder explained that Exhibit A referred to the amendments
previously adopted in June 1992, and was included for reference, and that Exhibit B reflected
the amendments currently being proposed. He said Exhibit B was the fmal document.
Commissioner Moot, referring to the Ogden lawsuit, asked if the City challenging it was the
City of San Diego. Mr. Batchelder answered afflnnatively, and added the last communication
received from them was a January 4, 1993, letter indicating reservation of their option to
comment further in conjunction with the City Council's consideration of the amendments.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Commissioner Moot asked if the attorney for Latham & Watkins had contacted staff indicating
if they were to be in attendance. Mr. Batchelder answered negatively.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
M8UC (Martin/Carson) 6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher excused) to deny reconsideration of
Resolution GPA-92-02.
M8UC (Carson/Martin) 6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher excused) to adopt the Negative
Declaration prepared under 18-93-14 and further recommend that the City Council adopt
the Negative Declaration prepared under 18-93-14.
M8 (Carson/Martin) to recommend that the City Council approve the draft City Council
resolution approving the General Plan Amendment currently proposed under GPA-92-02A,
contained in Exhibit B, and further recommend that City Council introduce for first
reading the attached draft City Council ordinance implementing the amendments to zoning
ordinance as contained in Exhibit C.
Commissioner Ray was concerned with the statement in the resolution stating that the public
hearing would be set by the Planning Commission. He questioned the Planning Commission
setting the time and date of the public hearings. Assistant City Attorney said he believed it was
boiler plate language and that the Environmental Coordinator closed the public review period
on the EIR and the Director of Planning actually set the public hearing date.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf asked if the Commissioners would approve the resolution with
the potential correction by staff to confonn with the actual party to set the time and place of the
public hearing. The maker agreed.
Commissioner Moot, referring to the recommendation setting the conditional use pennits, said
the Ogden case challenged the City of San Diego's criteria.
Associate Planner Batchelder said the challenge was that the City of San Diego did not have any
adopted procedures for the review of hazardous waste facilities, and yet was attempting to
impose conditions and procedures in absence of regulation. In this instance, the City of Chula
Vista is attempting to establish a process to be used to review such facilities.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf concurred, and stated the purpose of Chula Vista's ordinance was
to establish processing requirements, and the criteria to grant or deny.
VOTE: 6-0
(5 j/P r
-~._._._..
482<1582 EXPRESS SECRETAR I AL 534 PI1I2 FEB 11 '93 11:57
A '
. UNO1r:'?l1IP;1 ,^, ~ f>/;\nf':~~~"fi'r;l'"
, "/; ¡j'tJ ::.-:c: '~. ,,' .... ", ' , ,- -
MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
Resource Conservation Commission
Chu1a Vista, California
6:00 p.m. Conference Room #1
Monday, February 8, 1993 Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:07 p.m, by
Vice-Chairman Hall. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll.
Present: Commissioners Hall, Johnson, McNair, Myers. Absent: Kracha, Ghou¡assian.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was MSUC (Johnson/Myers) to approve the minutes of the
meeting of January 25, 1993. It was MSUC"(Myers/Johnson) to approve the minutes of the
meetin¡ of February 1,1993. "
OLD BUSINESS was moved up on the agenda:
1. Review of Negative Declaration 15-93-14: Ed Batchelder presented the document with
comments by Commissioners from the January 25th meeting incorporated. Letter received this
date from Latham & Watkins, attorneys for APTEC, was also distributed and presented. This
letter raised concerns as to the appropriateness of the Negative Declaration. Further discussion
of this Negative Declaration was trailed until Mr. Kracha arrives later in the meeting.
2. Final Action on Draft Supplemental EIR-90-02, Rancho San Miguel: Discussion on this
item was continued from the meeting of February 1, 1993 for final approval. Myers stated she
still does not approve the project due to too many issues being unmitigable (see comments
summary in minutes of February 1, 1993, page 2). She specifically noted the unavailability of
water and sewage capacity, potential hazards of electro-magnetic fields from 5DG&E towers,
environmental impact, and concerns on the future of 125. Additionally, the EIR does not
comply with CEQA requirements,
[Mr. Kracha arrived at 6:34 p.m.].
After discussion, it was then moved and seconded (Myers/McNair) that Draft Supplemental EIR-
90-02 not be accepted due to the number of unmitigable impacts, specifically: m the unknown
future of 125; (2) impact of the run-off waters polluting the reservoir with development of the
northern portion; (3) potential health hazard in the southern portion near 5DG&E power lines;
(4) inadequate funding of schools; (5) unavaiJability of water and sewa¡e capacity: and (6)
impact on plant life and endangered species. (Ayes - Myers, McNair, Hall, Johnson; no -
Kracha); motion carried 4-1.
3. With Mr. Kracha's arrival, Ed Batchelder highlighted the changes to the Negative
Declaration and discussed the letter of February 8 from Latham & Watkins. Mr. Batchelder
noted that the letter's allegations were synonymous to those previously presented by Latham &
Watkins tó the Planning Commission and addressed in Attachment I to their January 13, 1993
staff report, a copy of which was provided to the RCC for this meeting. It was noted that as
g-/1~ , ,---------
4820682 EXPRESS SECRETARIAL 534 P03 FEE 11 '93 11:58
"
,
Page 2
reflected in that attachment, it is the opinion of the city attorney's office that the allegations are
without merit. These and other allegations regarding the subject amendments are currently in
litigation. Further, it is staff's recommendation to approve the Negative Declaration. Kracha
asked if APTEC was specifically notified of tonight's meeting. It was confirmed by staff that
they were notified, and that all other parties involved were also notified that this matter was
rescheduled for consideration by RCC. It was then moved and seconded (HaIl/Johnson) to
recommend approval of Negative Declaration IS-93-14: Ayes: Hall, Kracha, Johnson, McNair;
no: Myers; motion carried 4-1.
[Mr. Johnson left the meeting at 6:50 p.m.].
NEW BUSINESS
1. Kim Glasgow of Ogden and Kim KilkeMY of Baldwin were present for the discussion
on the Otay Ranch Final Program EIR, Doug Reid displayed the maps depicting the Resource
Sensitivity Analysis, Environmental Alternative and Phase I and II Progress Plan.
Issues discussed and reviewed by the Otay Ranch representatives included: mass transit,
environmental impact and sensitive areas, archeological surveys, the new village concept,
Resource Management Plan, water master plan, schools and population estimation. Kim
Kilkenny noted that neither the UC campus nor the Olympic Training Center (located in Salt
Creek) are part of this project and not included in any of the studies.
Kim Glasgow summarized that the Otay Ranch project was examined with a very programmatic
approach, Le" very general but not necessarily detailed. Regarding questions on the specific
flora and fauna impacted, this is documented in the 12/18/92 staffreport. Page 15 of that report
summarizes the biological impacts with an appendix listed of the details.
Myers stated her objection to the current alternative and questioned why the environmental
alternative is not acceptable. Staff pointed out that the U.S. Fish &: Wildlife made a presentation
to the Planning Commission but did not fully support the environmental alternative because it
contained too many unmitigable impacts.
McNair stated she favors the Otay Ranch project but its large scale would changë the character
of the community. Staff responded that an off-site alternative analysis was done. From the
regional perspective, Otay Ranch is a better land use, it is environment.a11y sensitive, and has
better mitigation measures than it would if located elsewhere in the county.
Kracha received clarification of specific wording of the document relating to air pollution, the
sewer district, greenbelt of Chula Vista and plans for the expansion of the landfill. He also
asked what would happen if 125 is never built, The City of Chula Vista would then monitor its
thresholds annually to ensure the circulation of element operated at a Level C. If it fell below
that set th~shold, an alternate north/south corridor would still have to be built.
4820682 EXPRESS SECRETARIAL 534 P04 FEB 11 '93 11:59
.. .
.
Page 3
The next meeting on Otay Ranch is scheduled for a special meeting on February IS, 1993.
McNair requested that issues concerning the environmental impact and what is considered
sensitive be reviewed at that time. Myers requested information on why the environmental
alternative is not viable. She also stated that mass transit reports for the State of CalifornIa
show it is not feasible; additionally, the environment would be destroyed.
STAFF REPORT: Workshop on CEQA is tentatively scheduled for March 1 for new members.
CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS: Kracha announced a workshop by the Save Our Heritage
Organization on February 18th.
Planning Commission Agenda - Rancho San Miguel: no further action by RCC.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Kracha at 9:28 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES
~Jr ~~
Barbara Taylor
:;5/ /70
-
MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California
6:00 p.m. Conference Room #1
Monday, November 23, 1992 Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDERIROlL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:16 p.m. by
Chairman Kracha. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll.
Present: Commissioners Fox, Hall, Kracha, Myers. Absent: McNair, Ghougassian. [Johnson
arrived at 6:37 p.m.!
Welcome of new member, Adrien Myers, who was sworn in to RCC earlier this date. Barbara
Hall suggested a workshop on the scope and purpose of RCC be conducted for new members.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of November 9, 1992 could not be approved due to
lack of quorum from that meeting. However, a correction was noted on #8, sentence #2 and
3 should be replaced with "She questioned whether residents would be relocated."
1. Air Quality Improvement Plan/Eastlake Greens - Martin Miller presented information to
RCC. To alleviate traffic congestion, Hall suggested public transportation be stressed
for high school students and that businesses in Eastlake be supportive of jobs
specifically for residents who live in the area. It was moved and seconded (Fox/Hall)
to recommend adoption of PCM-93-06, Air Quality Improvement; motion passed 4-0-1.
Myers abstained due to inadequate time to review the packet information.
2. Water Conservation Plan - After presentation, it was moved and seconded (Fox/Hall)
to recommend adoption of the Water Conservation Plan; motion passed 4-0-1. Myers
abstained due to inadequate time to review the packet information.
3. Schedule for review of the Otay Ranch:
. December 18 - County Dept. of Land Use, 3 p.m. (Final EIR due for review)
. January 15 - County Dept. of land Use
. January 27 - Chura Vista Council Chambers, 5-7 p.m.
. January 29 - County Dept. of Land Use (Action to be taken after public hearings)
. Joint Hearings (Supervisors, Planning Commission) scheduled for February
4. Reviewed Neg Dee IS-93-11 on C.V. Nature Interpretive Center Sewer Line Extension
and affirmed the improvement of the existing condition. It was moved and seconded
(Fox/Hall) to recommend adoption of Neg Dee IS-93-11; motion passed 4-0-1. Myers
abstained due to inadequate time to review the packet information.
e Reviewed Neg Dec IS-93-14 Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Kracha's comments:
questioned how this plan will impact the existing county program and whether it will
work in conjunction with its existing plan. Waste will go into drains and not the
landfill. Questioned where waste material pickup collection points are located and how
it will be transported.
Fox questioned how this plan will effect the environment. He noted that the Neg Dec
is adequate, however the plan is not favorable. Doug Reid pointed out the EIR was
conducted on the City Hazardous Waste and was approved. Kracha contended there
is still insufficient information on what will happen with the waste materials.
?]----- / ? /
.
Resource Conservation Commission Page 2
It was moved and seconded (Hall/Fox) to continue discussion on Neg Dec IS 93-14 to
the December 7th meeting with further information and clarification from staff; motion
passed 5-0.
STAFF REPORT:
With the upcoming scheduling conflicts, Doug Reid announced the change in next
month's meetings to be held on December 7 and December 14.
Chula Vista Historical Society is replacing its current newsletter with quarterly books
for $20/year; membership is $35/year. In that regard. Kracha suggested the $200 in
RCC's budget for the Society could be a place to cut funds. Doug recommended to
wait until after the final budget review.
CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS:
Kracha commented about government control over the high school and elementary
school districts and suggested they work together with city law enforcement.
Kracha presented information on the Earth Day Committee. Meetings are held the
second Thursday of each month, 7 p.m. in Council Conference room.
COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS:
Fox - resignation is effective November 30. Commended the Commission on its quality
at the present time.
Johnson - Inquired as to the impact of RCC's comments/recommendations to the
Planning Commission; there is currently no feedback. Also. on a side note to Kracha's
comments on the school systems. school districts should not be controlling or work
autonomously, but should be in collaboration with the City.
Myers asked what recommendations RCC has made on Rancho Del Rey.
Hall brought newspaper article on annexation and asked whether it would effect the
Otay Ranch.
The Resource Conservation Commission thanked Bob Fox for his outstanding service
on this commission and wished him well as he serves on the City Council.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Kracha at 7:44 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES
\~~ (f//7;2
Barbara Taylor
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item-.:L....
Meeting Date 3/2/93
ITEM TITLE: Ordinance 2.5~~ Amending Schedule X, Section 10.48.050 of
the Municipal Code - Decreasing State Law Maximum Speed Limits in
Certain Areas - Main Street/Otay Valley Road from "1-5" to "1-805"
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works Y'
REVIEWED BY: City Manager! (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No..x....)
In order to minimize traffic hazards and congestion and for the promotion of public safety, speed
prohibitions on these streets should be authorized by ordinance. A review of trial traffic
regulations initiated by the City Engineer under the authority of the Municipal Code show that
these regulations are operating effectively and should be made permanent.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council place the ordinance on flfSt reading.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Safety Commission, at their meeting
of June 11, 1992, voted MSUC (Braden/Koester) to accept staff's establishing a Trial Traffic
Regulation to lower the speed limit on Main Street from Industrial Boulevard to Otay Valley
Road and Otay Valley Road from Main Street to 1-805 southbound ramps from 45 MPH to 40
MPH.
DISCUSSION: The City Engineer has determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic
hazards and congestion and for the promotion of public safety that the posted speed limit of 40
MPH be made permanent on the following roadway sections:
a) On Main Street from Industrial Boulevard to Otay Valley Road for both
directions.
b) On Otay Valley Road from Main Street to "1-805" Freeway for both
directions.
The speed limit on Main Street and Otay Valley Road is currently posted at 40 MPH. The
Traffic Engineer's Survey showed 85th percentile speeds on Main Street of 39 MPH between
Industrial Blvd. and Broadway, 41 MPH between Broadway and Fourth Avenue, 43 MPH
between Fourth Avenue and Albany Avenue and 43 MPH between Albany Avenue and Otay
Valley Road. Main Street and Otay Valley Road are primarily a commercial district with some
residential homes.
q-I
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date~
The speed limit normally should be established at the first five mile per hour increment below
the 85 percentile speed. Per Section 627 of the California Vehicle Code, staff has evaluated the
prevailing speeds, accident records and highway, traffic and roadside conditions and has
determined that over the past seven months, prevailing speeds have been reduced and accident
rates have remained unchanged.
Said regulations were initiated on a trial basis upon the posting of the signs on July 27, 1992.
Staff has reviewed the above installations and determined the prohibition should be made
permanent.
SCHEDULE X - DECREASING STATE LAW MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS IN
CERTAIN AREAS
Name of Street Be~innilll! At Endin~ At Speed Limit
Main Street "1-5" Freeway Otay Valley Road 40 MPH
*EB&WB
Otay Valley Road Main Street "1-805" Freeway 40 MPH
*EB&WB
*EB & WB - Eastbound and Westbound
A review of the traffic conditions at both locations show that they are operating effectively.
Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance amending Schedule X
of the Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 10.48.050.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
Attachments: Area Plat
Engineering/Traffic Survey
Trial Traffic Regulation #112 NOT SCANNED
FileNo.: CY-rm
WFC F:\home\ong""",\..mda\460.93
q-¿
-
.
1--
«
.J
c..
«
LU
a:
«
Ii
=
¡:
C\I
~ g:
<po
:I ~
Jt
Ii
.-
.
0'
SPEED LIMIT--ENGINEERlNG/TRAFFIC SURVEY:
/"-
STREET: Main Street
LIMITS: Industrial Blvd. - Otay Valley Road
Existing Posted Speed Limit 40 MPH sign~ posted on 7/17/92
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
Industrial Blvd Broadway Fourth Ave. Albany Ave.
Segment: to Broadway to Fourth Ave. to Albany Ave. to Otay Valley R,
Date Taken: 1/20/93 1/21'/93 1/21/93 1/22/93
::- No Vehicles on Sample:
100 100 100 100
85th Percentile Speed: 39 41 43 43
Range of Speeds Recorded: 24-47 23-50 22-49 24-55
ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Width 64 - 82 feet No. of Lanes for Both Directions 4
Horizontal Alignment Tangent
Vertical Alignment +4.89% to 4.52% over 1,000' V.C. east of Sycamore Dr. design speed
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS 47 MPH
Average Daily Traffic 19,860 - 22,310
On-Street Parking Generally restricted.
Special Conditions Mostly commercial and industrial. Most segments of Main Street
have unimproved shoulders (missing curb, gutter and sidewalks).
Accident History Accident rate (2.58 accidents per mi11ion-vehic1e-mile) !s lower than
the average accident rate (3.99) for similar roadways in the State of California.
, SURVEY RESULTS
Study was Prepared by Francisco X. Rivera Date 02 ee 18 ee 93
Recommendation Retain 40 MPH speed limit which was established via a trial traffic
re ulation on June 30 1992. '~~;::::,...
Date Recommendation Approved: 0;2.. --/"7--"13
/ By ~ . X. ~-€1u7-
~
Approved Speed Limit 40 MPH
Per evc 40803, Survey Expires 0] ee 20 ee 98
[C:\ WP51 \TRAFFlc.FRM] q-rJq..S
- ------------- - --------_.---.--
. -
. ,! ) r~rë-
I..!:;.Ù~-, . fA'/!.. /)1";",,.1,... ,
l '
i
("", June 30, 1992
File: CY-027
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: John D. Goss, City Manager~
FRO~:: John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Trial T~affic Regulation ~
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.12.030 of the Chub
Vista Municipal Code, adopted by Ordinance No. 1625 on May 27,
1975, the City Engineer has determined that in the interest of
minimizing traffic hazards and congestion and for the purpose of
the promotion of public safety, there is hereby established
SCHEDULE X - DECREASING STATE LAW MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS IN
CERTAIN AREAS
Proposed
Name of street Beainnina At Endina At SDeed Limit
Main Street "I-S" Freeway otay Valley 40 M.P.H.
*EB&WB Road
---' otay Valley Main street "I-80S" 40 M.P.H.
Road Freeway
* EB & WB
* EB & WB. Eastbound and Westbound
The speed limit on Main Street and Otay Valley Road is a posted
45 M.P.H. A Traffic and Engineering Study, as required by State
Law, was conducted. The area study showed 85th percentile speeds
on Main Street of 44 M.P.H. between Industrial Boulevard and
Broadway, 41 M.P.H. between Broadway and Hermosa Avenue, 42
M.P.H. between Hermosa Avenue and Albany Avenue, 47 M.P.H.
between Albany Avenue and Otay Valley Road, and on Otay Valley
Road of 45 M.P.H. between Main street and Oleander Avenue.
Main Street and Otay Valley Road are primarily a commercial
district. The speed ~imit is presently posted at 45 M.P.H. Based
on the above radar studies, the speed limit shall be reduced to
40 M.P.H. on Main Street from the "I-S" Freeway to Otay Valley
Road and on Otay Valley Road from Main Street to "I-80S" Freeway.
.
Said regulation to become effective upon the posting of signs or
other appropriate notice, and shall run for a trial period of
eight (8) months from the date of such posting, at which time a
review of said regulation will be made to determine if it should
r be made permanent.
FXR:dmw .:.Jp ~ ï)11 )cr;
Safety Commission ncl€.: ljO ,Mf'¡.\ ~r
cc:
(C:\DENNIS\TRIALSPD.DOC) 9-5 112
" ~-- _._---
ORDINANCE NO. '2.5 lit¡.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SCHEDULE X, SECTION
10.48.050 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE -
DECREASING STATE LAW MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS IN
CERTAIN AREAS - MAIN STREET/OTAY VALLEY ROAD
FROM "1-5" TO "I-80S"
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission, at their meeting of June
11, 1992, voted MSUC (Braden/Koester) to accept staff's
establishing a Trial Traffic Regulation to lower the speed limit on
Main street from Industrial Boulevard to Otay Valley Road and otay
Valley Road from Main street to I-80S southbound ramps from 45 MPH
to 40 MPH¡ and
WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineer performed a Traffic and
Engineering Survey in January, 1993, the results of which justify
lowering the prima facie speed limit to 40 mph¡ and
WHEREAS, a review of trial traffic regulations initiated
by the City Engineer under the authority of the Municipal Code show
that these regulations are operating effectively and should be made
permanent by ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Schedule X of section 10.48.050 of the
Chula vista Municipal Code, Decreasing State Law Maximum Speed
Limits in certain Areas, is hereby amended to include the following
changes on Main Street/Otay Valley Road from 1-5 to I-80S:
SCHEDULE X - DECREASING STATE LAW MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS IN
CERTAIN AREAS
Name of Beainnina Endina At Speed
Street At Limit
Main Street "1-5" Otay Valley 40 MPH
*EB & WB Freeway Road
Otay Valley Main "I-80S" 40 MPH
Road Street Freeway
*EB & WB
*EB & WB - Eastbound and Westbound
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the thirtieth day from and after its ption.
Presented by if; :1~
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works Attorney
P,\home\_\460.93
9-iP
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Iremk
Meeting Dare ..lIl:fll..
TIEM TITLE: Resolution )70°7 Appropriating additional funds from the
unappropriated Park and Acquisition Development Funds (PAD) for the
design construction documents and related services for Greg Rogers Phase I
Improvement Project, and
Approving an agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Van Dyke and
Associates for design development, construction development and related
services for Greg Rogers Park.
SUBMITIED BY: Director of Parks and Recreati~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~- (4/5ths Vote: Yes.x. No_)
The Greg Rogers Master Plan was approved by Council on April 16, 1991. A landscape consultant
is required to prepare design, construction documents and other related services for the project.
There are insufficient funds in the appropriated CIP to complete the necessary services for the Phase
I improvement of the Greg Rogers Master Plan.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the Resolution which:
1. Appropriates $28,000 from the unappropriated PAD funds to complete the necessary
design construction, document development, and related services for the Phase I
improvements; and
2. Authorizes the Mayor to execute the agreement with Van Dyke and Associates for
consultant services for Greg Rogers Park Phase I.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: In 1990, the Rancho del Sur Partnership commissioned a landscape architectural firm
to Master Plan Greg Rogers Park. The Master Plan was a condition in the Public Facilities Financing
Plan, approved by Council on February 20, 1990. The Master Plan Study received extensive input
from three community meetings and the school faculty at Greg Rogers School. The conceptual plan
was approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission in February, 1991, and by Council on April
16, 1991. As per Council's request, a proposed phasing scheme for the implementation of the plan
was developed. A five-year capital improvement phasing schedule was proposed, with the initial
phasing to begin in FY 92/93 for the Phase I Improvement Design.
[F'\bom'\pa,"'=~39_931
LO-(
-----------
The Greg Rogers Master Plan addressed the park needs to improve the ballfields, parking, picnic
facilities, restroom, relocation of maintenance building, enhancement of play lots, and other park
amenities. The estimated cost of the total improvements was $3.4 million, with the improvements
incrementally phased over a five-year period.
For FY 1992-93, $46,000 was appropriated for Phase I, which includes design, construction documents
and related services. Phase II funding for the improvements is proposed for the 1993-94 Capital
Improv~ment Program. These improvements would include: relocation of power lines; grading of
ballfield areas; utility slab-out for future snack bar/restroom and storage facility; construction of four
baseball fields and accessories; slope planting, turf, and irrigation; and the construction of a ballfield
parking lot. At an estimated construction cost of $700,000, funding for the construction phase will
be considered with other Department's CIP projects for FY 93/94.
The Department made a thorough analysis to determine the need for an outside consultant to
prepare the necessary construction documents for this project. The Department evaluated this need
based on the following criteria:
1. Does existing staff have the required expertise or equipment?
The City has the staff expertise and equipment to prepare a portion of the necessary plans;
however, the workload of the Department's Landscape Architect and Engineering
Department's Engineers would need to be re-prioritized, and current projects in process by
staff would be deferred indefinitely. The Department's special projects and current CIP
work list includes: Otay Valley Regional Park project, Rohr Park Impro\'t:ments (Phase II),
Memorial Park Improvements (Phase II), Hilltop Park Improvements, McCandliss Memorial
GrovelPark (Phase II), and Playground Renovations at various sites. In addition, the
Landscape Architect provides extensive work and plan checking services for the development
projects, providing revenue, at full cost recovery, to the City's General Fund. These projects
are Salt Creek I, Salt Creek Ranch, the Bayfront Plan, EI Rancho del Rey, and Otay Ranch,
etc. The work necessary for the current project would require additional staffing if the Greg
Rogers Park project design is performed in-house.
2. Can the work project's short time frame be met by City Staff?
For a project as complex as the Greg Rogers Park Plan, considerable organization of the
various disciplines (i.e., electrical, civil engineering, architectural, and landscape) need close
coordination, which would be difficult for existing City staff to accomplish under the current
work load schedule. There is a short window of time available to get the project design and
construction complete, in order to minimize the impact to the users of the park, primarily the
Park View Little League.
3. Is it more cost effective to have the work completed by an outside provider?
The design work will take approximately twenty (20) weeks to complete by the consultant.
They projected 390 hours for landscape architectural design. This would necessitate an
average of twenty (20) hours a week for the Department's Landscape Architect to complete
the project in the same time frame. This work effort would seriously affect the current
schedule of projects in the Department.
[F'\hom""',"'=~39.93]
1/)-2-
.---...----
A cost comparison for the Landscape Architect consultant is $80.00 per hour. The
Department's Landscape Architect's hourly salary (including full cost recovery) is $61.00 per
hour. There would be non-General Fund savings if performed in-house; however, there
would be a negative impact on the revenue stream from outside resources if the work
program were re-directed to this project.
After analyzing the above criteria, it was the Department's conclusion that the Greg Rogers Park
Phase I plans should be performed by an outside consultant.
The Department solicited a Request for Proposal (RFP) on September 16, 1992, for interested
landscape architectural firms to provide the landscape architectural services necessary to prepare the
construction documents for the Phase I improvements. Notices were sent to over 50 firms in the San
Diego and Orange County area. The Department received 17 proposals by the October 16, 1992
deadline.
The selection procedure, as outlined in CYMC Sections 2.5.220 and .230 and Council Policy #102-05,
was utilized in reviewing the proposals. A selection committee comprised of representatives from
Engineering, Planning, Building and Housing and Parks and Recreation Departments evaluated the
seventeen (17) RFP utilizing a "qualification based selection process" to short-list the candidates to
five firms. The five finalists were invited to make an oral presentation to the selection committee.
A grading criteria based on qualifications, presentation, knowledge of the project and design approach
and fee proposals was used to rank the firms. The final ranking of the finalists were:
FIRM FEE PROPOSAL
1. Van Dyke and Associates $52,700
2. DeLorenzo & Associates $39,700
3. Estrada Landscape, Inc. $68,071
4. KTU+A $53,550
5. T.I. Maloney $58,500
In comparing the top two firms which have provided consulting services for other City park projects,
Van Dyke and Associates maintained an excellent and cooperative working relationship with staff,
and stayed witlún the agreed contract price and project schedule. DeLorenzo and Associates had
a less harmonious relationship with staff, was not as cost conscious and exceeded project time
schedules.
The fee proposal by Van Dyke and Associates is higher than the second ranked firm, however, the
Cities are authorized to select professional consultant services on the basis of demonstrated
competence and professional qualifications and not necessarily to the "low bidder." Fees are only
one of the considerations in the evaluation process. Van Dyke and Associates demonstrates these
qualities in the consultant services provided for the Marina View Park project. The Department was
extremely pleased with Van Dyke's cooperation, quality of work and the final product. A total of
$69,000 was paid to Van Dyke during 1991-92 for this contract.
[F'\hom""',k,,~~3'."]
) 0.,3
--- -,0.._-
The original fee required for Van Dyke and Associates came to $52,700. After a preliminary
negotiating meeting to define the scope of services required, it was decided to include, in Phase I,
design and construction document services required for improvements to the parking lot for the
ballfields. This additional design and construction service document increased consultant fee by
$8,800 for a total of $61,500. A parking lot was not considered when the cost for the first phase
construction documents were calculated. However, after further review by staff, it has become quite
evident that the parking lot should be included in this phase of construction documents. Staff is
thereby recommending expanding the original scope of service, which includes a parking lot, because
of the following reasons:
1. The Federal mandate to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act requires that public
parking facilities be accessible to the physically challenged. This new law was not in effect
when the CIP was developed.
2. The existing dirt parking lot has historically been a nuisance due to excessive dust during dry
months and mud during inclement weather. Severe erosion problems (ruts and holes) have
adversely affected this dirt lot.
3. A new lot will efficiently delineate specific areas where cars must park versus the random and
inefficient use of space which presently exists.
The revised fee of $61,500 does not include funds for reimbursables and any necessary reports to
complete the project. The consultant has requested:
1. $2,500 for reimbursable expenses i.e. reproductions, copying, additional blueprints, etc.
2. $2,000 for a title report to locate all easements, utilities on the project site.
The Department believes these are legitimate expenses that were not included in the original scope
of services and therefore recommend approvaL The total cost for the consultant services will be
$66,000.
The Department is requesting an additional $28,000 from the unappropriated PAD funds. The
Department believes this proposal is appropriate and recommends approvaL The total consultant
fee is $66,000, and an additional $4,000 is needed for Parks and Recreation staff services. There is
$46,000 available in the FY 92/93 CIP budget, with $42,000 earmarked for design work, and $4,000
for engineering staff services reimbursement.
IF'\hom,\p,,"~,~".93]
)0-'1
FISCALIMPAcr: An additional $28,000 from the unappropriated PAD funds will be required for
the desired landscape services and staff services reimbursement.
I. Funding Required
A Consultant Services $66,000
B. Engineering Staff Cost 4,000
C. Park Recreation Staff Cost 4.000
TOTAL $74,000
II. Funding Available
A Consultant Services 42,000
B. Engineering Staff Cost 4.000
TOTAL $46,000
III. Additional Funds Required $28,000
Attachments: Schematic Map NOT SCANNED
Agreement
[F'\hom,\p."'~~39_93]
/0-:> /If)'~ ..-.-.- - --..-----
. - .-.-.-
RESOLUTION NO. )7DO7
.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL FUNDS
FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED PARK AND ACQUISITION
DEVELOPMENT FUNDS (PAD) FOR THE DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND RELATED SERVICES
FOR GREG ROGERS PHASE I IMPROVEMENT PROJECT,
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND VAN DYKE AND ASSOCIATES FOR
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT
AND RELATED SERVICES FOR GREG ROGERS PARK, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, the Greg Rogers Master Plan was approved by
Council on April 16, 1991; and
WHEREAS, a landscape consultant is required to prepare
design, construction documents and other related services for the
project; and
WHEREAS, there are insufficient funds in the appropriated
CIP to complete the necessary services, for the Phase I improvement
of the Greg Rogers Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Department solicited Request for Proposals
(RFP) on September 16,1992, for interested landscape architectural
firms to provide the landscape architectural services necessary to
prepare the construction documents for the Phase I improvements;
and
WHEREAS, the selection procedure, as outlined in Council
Policy #102-05, was utilized in reviewing the proposals, short-
listing the five candidates and conducting a final interview to
recommend a finalist; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends the selection of Van Dyke and
Associates.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve an agreement between
the City of Chula vista and Van Dyke and Associates for design
development, construction development and related services for Greg
Rogers Phase I Improvement Project, a copy of which is on file in
the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
1
10- ï
- --------- -
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sum of $28,000 is hereby
appropriated from the unappropriated PAD Fund 600-6004 to Account
600-6004-PR169 to complete the necessary design construction,
document development, and related services for the Phase I
improvements.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Director of
Jess Valenzuela, Parks and Recreation
P,\homclaltomoylgrocen
2
I ()-K
Agreement between
City of Chula VISta
and
Van Dyke and AssocIates, Inc.
for landscape architectural services
This agreement for landscape architectural services, dated February 16, 1993, for the
purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is
otherwise specified In Exhibit A, Paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on
Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such ("City"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph
3, and the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business
form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers
are set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following
facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City desires to have consultant services for the construction of new
facilities at Greg Rogers Park; and,
Whereas, Van Dyke and Associates, Inc. was selected by a selection committee to be
the best qualified; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in
a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant
to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions
of this 6.greement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby
mutually agree as follows:
I. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A,
Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties"; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also
perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames
set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of
this agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliyerables required in the Scope of
Work and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2, 1993 Page 1
10-1
._._._---~
the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate
to terminate this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce
the Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing
so, City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating
a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services
("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services
offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the
rates set forth in the "Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C), unless a separate fixed
fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly
as billed.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined
Services or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with. that level of care
and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar
conditions and in similar locations.
F. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and subconsultants employed by it in
connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss
by the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified,
policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V"
or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City:
Statutory Wor.ker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Uability Insurance
coverage in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9.
CommerciAl General Uability Insurance including ,Business Automobile Insurance
coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied
separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names
City and Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City
may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City and
Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage").
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9,
unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Uability policy.
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2, 1993 Page 2
I ()#I'{)
.--..-.--....-.--
G. Proof of Insurance Coverage.
1. Certificates of Insurance.
Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the
commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of
Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured.
2. Policy Endorsements Required.
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage
and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Uability
Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating
same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager.
H. Performance Bond.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 9, Indicates the need for Consultant to
provide a Performance Bond, which indication shall be made by checking the parenthetical
space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", then Consultant shall provide to the City a
performance bond by a surety and in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney in an amount
indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 9, Exhibit
A.
II. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of
the Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance
to achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities,
files and records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto,
City agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A,
Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these
materials beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the
justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City
periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1 B. but in no event more frequently than
monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1 B, City shall compensate
Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set
forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 adjacent to the governing compensation relationship
indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, and shall compensate
Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12.
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2, 1993 Page 3
/1>-1/
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the
propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable
thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on
Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such payment.
III. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals C'Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit
A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to
represent them in the routine administration of this agreement.
rI/. Term
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory
provisions hereof.
V. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this
Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in per-
formance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to
compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this
Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess
of the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the
consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated
Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate").
Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control, other than delays caused
by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee,
prior to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based
upon the effect of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of
work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work.
VI. Rnanciallnterests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant
is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest
and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the
required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in
Paragraph 15 of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney.
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2, 1993 Page 4
ID ~ I~
..---....-...
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not
make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence
a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a
financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants
and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of
Consultant's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the
Fair Political Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best
of Consultant's knowledge, have an economic interest v.nich would conflict with Consultant's
duties under this agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further
warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic
interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as
prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further
warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if
Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of
interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated
thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's
immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates")
presently haye any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be
the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the
exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services,
("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or
Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement.
Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of
this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter.
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2, 1993 Page 5
/0 - /"..3
. ----~-~---_.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited
Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this
Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or
for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this
Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
VII. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and
expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the negligent acts, errors
or omissions of the Consultant, or any agent or employee or subconsultants, in connection
with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims
arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees.
Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and
liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such
claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own
expense shall, upon written request by t~e City, defend any such suit or action brought
against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall
not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant.
VIII. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement by giYing written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that
event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports
and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the
property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials
up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable
hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach.
IX. Errors and Omissions
In the eyent that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence,
errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in
expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors,
omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City.
Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 25, 1993 Page 6
/~-I'f
X. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific
written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at
least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished
and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of
the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as
provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to
the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims
for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
XI. As$ignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign
any intarest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City, which City may not
unreasonably deny. City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined
Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the subconsultants identified thereat as
.Permitted Subconsultants".
XII. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures,
systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the
sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in
part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by
Consult!!nt in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of
City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by
the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent,
in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement.
XIII. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an
independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's
work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives
are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be
"deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to
which City employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits,
worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits.
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2,1993 Page 7
/()-/~
XIV. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City
unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by
the City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are
incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures
used by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
XV. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the
claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
XVI. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall
include, or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers
and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the
report or document.
XVII. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to
act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals
is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker
or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals
are licensed real estate brokers or salespersons.
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party
shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in
the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2, 1993 Page 8
I~-/~
return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each
of the designated parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended,
modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party
against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party
that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this
Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to
enter into this Agreement.
F. Governing LawNenue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought
only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if
applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement,
and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. .
.
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2, 1993 Page 9
I t:>-/7
. _.__._---~~--_.
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula VISta and Van Dyke and Associates, Inc.
for landscape architectural services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby
indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete
consent to its terms:
Dated: January 19, 1993 City of Chula Vista
by:
Tim Nader, Mayor
Attest:
Dated: Van Dyke and Associates, Inc.
B, I~~~~
Thomas G. Van Dyke
Exhibit Ust to Agreement
(X) Exhibit A.
() Exhibit B:
VNDYKEGR.AGT
February 2, 1993 Page 10
It) -/8'
---------- --
Exhibit A
to Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Van Dyke and Associates, Inc.
I. Effectiye Date of Agreement: February 23, 1993
II. City-Related Entity:
(X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered rorporation of the State of California
() Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chu:a Vista, a political subdivision of the
State of California
() Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a
() Other: ,a
("City")
III. Place of Business for City: City of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
91910
IV. Consultant: Van Dyke and Associates, Inc.
V. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
(X) Corporation
VI. Place of Business, Telephone and FAX Number of Consultant: 2741 Fourth Avenue, San
Diego, California 92103-6205, Voice Phone (619) 294-8484, Fax Phone (619) 574-0626
VII. General Duties
The consultant will provide landscape architectural and engineering services for
specifications, working drawings and construction bid documents for the improvements.
grading of parking lot and ballfields, utilities stubouts, baseball field and slope
improvements planting and turf planting and Irrigation, paving of parking lot to Greg
Rogers Park.
VIII. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
ExhbtAij.rgr Page 1
/0-1'1
----.----.-..-....
1. Proiect initiation
a. Detail work program
b. Procedures for project management
c. Topographic survey and utility mapping
d. Data collection
2. Preliminarv Desian
a. Preliminary Plan Process and Documentation
b. Estimate of Probably Construction Cost
3. Construction Documents
a. Design Development Documentation
1) grading and drainage
2) utilities and utility stubs
3) horizontal control plan
4) construction layout plans
5) site furnishings
6) planting plan
7) irrigation plan
B) site electrical and lighting plan
9) water pressure report
10) earthwork
11) cost estimate
c. Final construction document submittal
4. Construction Observation
Construction period services will be provided as directed by the City of Chula
Vista on an hourly basis.
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
(X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( ) Other:
C. Dates or Time Umits for Delivery of Deliverables:
Deliverable No.1: - Preliminary Design & Design Development
April 15, 1993
Deliverable No.2: - Construction Documents
August 30, 1993
D. Date for completion of all Consultant services: October 9, 1993
ExhbtA1J.rgr Page 2
/1)... 20
'0-0'-_""
VII. Insurance Requirements:
(X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance
() Employer's Uability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(X) Commercial General Uability Insurance: $1 ,000,000.
() Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General
Uability coverage).
(X) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General
Uability coverage).
() Performance Bond, $ (insert amount)
VIII. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant
Not Applicable
IX. Compensation:
A. () Single Fixed Fee Arrangement
For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall
pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set
forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount , payable as follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
B. (X) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement
For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant as
are separately identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of
Services, in the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set forth. Consultant
shall not commence Services under any Phase, and shall not be entitled to the compensation
for a Phase, unless City shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase.
Phase Fee for Said Phase
1. Project Initiation $ 5,950
2. Preliminary Plans $12,925
3. Design Development $16,075
4. Construction Documents $24,425
5. Bid Phase $ 2.125
$61 ,500
C. () Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay
Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said
ExhbtA-g.rgr Page 3
Ib-2/
Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule hereinbelow according to the
following terms and conditions:
D. () Not-to-Exceed Umitation on Time and Materials Arrangement
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials In excess of said
Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all of the
Defined Services herein required of Consultant for $ including all Materials, and
other "reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation").
E. ( ) Umitation without Further Authorization on TIme and Materials Arrangement
At such time as Consultant shall have Incurred time and materials equal to
("Authorization Umit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any addi-
tional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and approyed by the
City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional Services at
Consultant's own cost and expense.
Rate Schedule
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A-1
() Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after'[month], 19 ,if delay
in proYiding services is caused by City.
X. Materials Rein~bursement Arrangement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of
services herein required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
() None, the compensation includes all costs.
Cost or Rate
(x) Reports, not to exceed $2,000, $ 2,000
(x) Reimbursables, to include: Copies $ 2,500
Travel
Printing
Postage
Delivery
Long Distance Telephone Charges
() Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs:
XI. Contract Administrators:
City: Jerry Foncerrada, Deputy Director/Parks, City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula
Vista, CA 91910 (619) 691-5071
ExhbtA-g.rgr Page 4
/tJ.."lZ
Consultant: Thomas G. Van Dyke, Van Dyke and Associates, Inc., 27441 Fourth
Avenue, San Diego, California 92103-6205
XII. LIquidated Damages Rate: NOT APPLICABLE
XIII. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest
Code:
(X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
( ) FPPC Filer
() Category NO.1. Investments and sources of income.
() Category No.2. Interests in real property.
() Category No.3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income
subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department.
() Category No.4. Investments in business entities and sources of income which
engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real
property.
() Category No.5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the
type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista
(Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipment.
() Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the
type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated
employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipment.
() Category No.7. Business positions.
() List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of
Project Property, if any:
XIV. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
ExhbtA-g.rgr Page 5
/O..,J :3
'X:II. Permitted Subconsultants:
Christensen Engineering & Surveying
Randall Lamb Associates
Shepardson Engineering
'X:III. Bill Processing:
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time:
(X) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
() Other:
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
( ) First of the Month
( ) 15th Day of each Month
(X) End of the Month
() Other:
C. City's Account Number: 600-6004-PR-169
ExhbtA-g.rgr Page 6
/~",¿'I
-------------
EXHIBIT A-I
.. r
æ:. $95.00
MaMler $80.00
Sr. =. Arthitect $70.00
Project ~ Arthitect 565.00
v-oi<hcare Architect 560.00
~n 545.00
$40.00
Administrative $30.00
. REIMBURSABLHS:
Employee Car~ S.30/mile
Rental Car, Airbnc Tickets, and any other trànsportation clUU'¡es
Sublil1ençe
ReproduCtIon (includes all blueprints, xerox, photography. etc.)
Misçellaneous (includes postale, Federa1 Express, telephone,
meløen¡er, etc.)
Consulllnts
There il a 15% adminisU'ative fee on ill reimbursables.
Invoiçes are due in 30 days. 1.5% interest per month (18% annua]) or $15.00
per month, whichever is ¡:teater, will be chu¡ed 011 any invoiçes which are not
jlaid within 30 days of !he date of the invoice.
/ Þ--.1S'" ".ENO...
.. -., -------
niB CITY OF 0fUlA VISTA DJSa.OSURE STA'IEMENT
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of tenain ownership or liDaneial interests, payments, or campaign
contributions, on aU matters which will require discretionary action on the pan ofthe Qty Council, Planning Commission, and
aU other official bodies. The foUowing information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of aU persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
2. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or pannership, list the names of all individuals owning
more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any pannership interest in the pannership.
3. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person
serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trusL
4- Have you had more than $250 wonh of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past tWelve months? Yes- No- If yes, please indicate person(s):-
s. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who
you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
1;. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contn"buted more tban $1,000 to a CounciImember in the
current or preceding election period? Yes- No- If yes, state which CounciImember(s):
. . . (NOTE: At1ad1 8dditional pap as aec:a;s;uy) . . .
Date:
Signature of contractor/applicant
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
" f!!F!! is dejÏ11<d œ: ':Nry 1NIividw1J, fûm, co-fK1T'1I=Jùp, joinl - IIØO<ÎDtiOII, IØCÙl/ club, frøu:nu¡I orpnizmioII, co¡ponuion, - ........ -. ~
this .,UI "1)' oWr CDUIU)', cûy tI1Id <OWIÞ)', cûy -iptliity, disrrit:~ or orher po/iIicQl aIbdiviIion, or ""Y orher f?oup or - IJCIing øs Q WIÎL .
/ If)- ,;.¡,
-------------
."
,t ~'!
-~ ~
~
~
~
@b
/' ~
/"",
I;" ~
ó¡. . I
: ~
~
GJ
()
(t
:c:
CJ oq:
...,J
Lu Cl
a:
0: ~
D¡ CI)
C, (:J ;¡
~'-"-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date~
ITEM mLE: Resolution \î () Oß Granting an open space encroachment to
allow supplemental landscaping in Open Space Lot B of Open Space
District 20, Rancho Del Rey SPA 1, Phase 2
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Parks and Recreati~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager 8' (4/5ths Vote: Yes_Noll)
California Pacific Homes of San Diego (formerly Bren) is requesting an encroachment on Open
Space property for the purpose of allowing installation of supplemental landscaping along the
south side of Ridgeback Road, opposite Bonita Vista Middle School.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the Resolution approYing an encroachment permit
authorizing supplemental landscaping in Open Space District 20, Rancho Del Rey Subdivision
subject to staff conditions.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
California Pacific Homes of San Diego, developers of the Tiara (Bren) project within the Rancho
Del Rey Subdivision, is requesting to install and maintain supplemental landscaping in Open
Space Lot B along the south side of Ridgeback Road, opposite Bonita Vista Middle School. This
area of open space bisects both halves of the Tiara project. The goal of California Pacific Homes
of San Diego is to "dress up" the area adjacent to their project, which is presently in sales.
The Proiect
The site to be landscaped is in a natural unimproved state San Diego Gas & Electric easement
devoid of shrubs and trees. The existing yegetation consists primarily of annual grasses.
The plan submitted by the applicant has met with the approval of the Director of Parks and
Recreation. Details of the plan include the following:
1. The groundcover for the sloped areas will consist of a hydroseed mix composed entirely
of native species.
2. The high visibility area immediately adjacent to Ridgeback Road will consist of ground
covers, shrubs and trees which are both drought resistant and native.
3. An eight-foot wide AC. footpath will cross open space Lot B from west to east,
connecting both halves of the Tiara project. This pathway roughly parallels Ridgeback
Road approximately 150 feet south of Ridgeback.
4. The irrigation requirements of the project will be supplied by the applicant, at no further
cost or financial impact to the existing open space maintenance district. Upon
{{ -/
Page 2, ftem~
Meeting Date 2/23/93
establishment of the native species hydroseed mix used in the 1.35 acres of slopes, the
temporary irrigation system will be removed as the crop will be self-sustaining. The
remaining 0.275 acres immediately adjacent to Ridgeback will receive ongoing
maintenance from the homeowners association (HOA) of the Tiara project at no cost to
the property owner in the Open Space Maintenance District.
Staff recommends that Council approve the granting of an encroachment permit based on the
following staff conditions:
1. The applicant will be responsible for the installation and establishment of the approved
landscape plan.
2. Successful establishment of the plant material is required prior to City turnover for
maintenance. The maintenance period required for establishment will be no shorter than
1 year, nor longer than 3 years. Successful establishment will be at the determination of
the Landscape Architect of the Parks and Recreation Department.
3. Any areas disturbed or destroyed by materials or equipment accessing the work site shall
be restored to original condition.
4. The Developer shall have an agreement sastisfactory to the City with the Tiara
Homeowners Association (HOA) for the ongoing maintenance of the street frontage area
and footpath.
5. The City shall be held harmless from any damages or injuries to persons which may
occur through the installation or maintenance of these improvements.
Summary: This landscaping project will enhance the area because 1) the aesthetics of
Ridgeback Road will be improved; and 2) erosion control of the sloped hydroseed areas will be
made with no fiscal impact to the existing district homeowners.
FISCAL IMPACT: None to the City or the property owners of the Open Space Maintenance
District.
WPC F:\HOME\PARKSREC\556.93
II'~ /11-'
--,--
"
"'" .. i ~
"'" \~ . . Q.. I
\ 0' I '
~ . . fÝ('--
.-' ~ .,/~' ~
."'-
'~
\' (ß
0 Õ
~ ~
~ ~
Ä Š
~ '3:
(J) . .
a:
~ ~
~ ~
<
t:
z
~
RESOLUTION NO. \î Oö 8'
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA GRANTING AN OPEN SPACE
ENCROACHMENT TO ALLOW SUPPLEMENTAL LANDSCAPING
IN OPEN SPACE LOT B OF OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 20,
RANCHO DEL REY SPA 1, PHASE 2
WHEREAS, California Pacific Homes of San Diego (formerly
Bren) is requesting that the City allow the installation of
supplemental landscaping along the south side of Ridgeback Road,
opposite Bonita vista Middle School; and
WHEREAS, the plan submitted by the applicant meets with
the approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby grant an open space
encroachment to allow supplemental landscaping in Open Space Lot B
of Open Space District 20, Rancho Del Ray SPA 1, Phase 2 subject to
the following staff conditions:
1. The applicant is responsible for the installation and
establishment of the approved landscape plan.
2. Successful establishment of the plant material is required
prior to City turnover for maintenance. The maintenance
period required for establishment will be no shorter than 1
year, nor longer than 3 years. Successful establishment will
be at the determination of the Landscape Architect of the
Parks and Recreation Department.
3. Any areas disturbed or destroyed by materials or equipment
accessing the work site shall be restored to original
condition.
4. The Developer shall have an agreement satisfactory to the City
with the Tiara Homeowners Association (HOA) for the ongoing
maintenance of the street frontage area and footpath.
5.
Presented by
Director of
Jess Valenzuela,
Parks and Recreation
F:\bcmclattomey\RDR"",
\l- \f
.._~._.-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item )2
Meeting Date~
1lbo"l
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving an agreement with the South Bay branch of the
Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) for the lease of certain property
in Eucalyptus Park
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Parks and Recreati~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager If! (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO
The City and the South Bay branch of the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) had a 5-
year lease agreement for the property at 50 Fourth Avenue, which expired on May 13, 1991. The
City and YMCA have been operating under a lease on a year-to-year basis. Staff has
renegotiated a fiye year lease with the YMCA, a copy of which is attached to the resolution for
your information.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the lease agreement with the South Bay
YMCA for certain property in Eucalyptus Park and authorize the Mayor to sign.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The term of the proposed lease is for 5 years because the YMCA plans to construct new facilities
in the eastern area of the City and relocate its operations there.
The agreement is similar to previous agreement negotiated in 1986. The amount of property and
commercial general liability insurance is two million dollars ($2,000,000). The agreement requires
the YMCA to pay for all utilities and services for the use of the facility; that YMCA is liable for any
taxes, including possessory interest tax, that may be levied; that YMCA will make no
improvements or additions to the premises without prior written approval of the Director of Parks
and Recreation; that if the YMCA abandons the premises, the City may terminate the lease; and
that the agreement may be modified if the City and YMCA agree in writing. An indemnity clause
has also been added to protect the City against any liabilities cause by YMCA.
FISCAL IMPACT: The City shall receiye $1.00 in rental revenue per year for five years.
ymcaleas.a13
12.-1
- ~_..__... ---- . ----~--------
RESOLUTION NO. II DO 1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE
SOUTH BAY BRANCH OF THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN
ASSOCIATION (YMCA) FOR THE LEASE OF CERTAIN
PROPERTY IN EUCALYPTUS PARK
WHEREAS, the city and the South Bay branch of the Young
Men's Christian Association (YMCA) lease agreement for the property
at 50 Fourth Avenue, expired on May 13, 1991; and
WHEREAS, staff has negotiated a new five-year lease with
the YMCA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement with the
South Bay branch of the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA)
for the lease of certain property in Eucalyptus Park, a copy of
which is on file on the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to
agreement for and on behalf of the city hula vis a.
Presented by
Jess Valenzuela, Director of
Parks and Recreation
F:\home\attomoyIYMCA
/2-2.
----------------
.
LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF CHULA VISTA
FOR THE LEASE OF CERTAIN PROPERTY IN EUCALYPTUS PARK
THIS LEASE AGREEMENT is made and entered into this----
day of , between the
City of Chula Vista, a Municipal Corporation, as lessor,
hereinafter called "City," and Young Men's Christian Association of
San Diego County, a California non-profit corporation, as lessee,
hereinafter called "YMCA;"
R Eel TAL S:
WHEREAS, the city owns certain property at Eucalyptus
Park in the'City of Chula Vista.
WHEREAS, the YMCA desires to lease said property to
conduct their Community Service programs.
WHEREAS, the activities offered by the YMCA benefit the
community.
WIT N E SSE T H:
City hereby leases to YMCA and YMCA hereby leases from
City, certain property hereinafter described under the following
terms and conditions:
1. Subject Premises. City leases to YMCA a certain
parcel of real property, together with all current improvements
thereon, situated in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego,
State of California, commonly known as 50 Fourth Avenue, Chula
Vista, and more particularly described as follows:
The southerly 150.00 feet of the easterly 200.00 feet of Lot
15 in Quarter Section 150 per Record Map No. 505 ("Subject
Premises").
2. Term. The term of this lease shall expire June 25,
1998, unless sooner terminated by the destruction of Subject
Premises, as herein defined.
a. The Subject Premises shall be deemed destroyed
for the purpose of terminating this Lease at such time as (1) the
improvements thereon are, in whole or in part, ruined by a calamity
or a progressive degenerative process, such as rot, termites, etc.,
and, (2) the amount the City receives as compensation for the
damage from an insurance source or the YMCA exceeds the City's
ymca2 . wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 1
/2- 3
---- --------
estimate of the cost of the repair. If the Subject Premises are
deemed terminated, the City may retain all of the proceeds for the
damage from the insurance source. Nothing herein shall be deemed
to relieve the YMCA for damage to the premises they may have
otherwise caused.
b. If the improvements on the Subject Premises are,
in whole or ,in part, ruined by a calamity or a progressive
degenerative process, the City shall be under no duty to the YMCA
to provide substitute or replacement facilities or premises during
any repair or reconstruction of the Subject Premises, or to pay the
rental value thereof, regardless of cause of the damage to the
Subject Premises.
3. Rent. YMCA agrees to pay to City as rental for
Subject Premises the sum of $1.00 per year payable on July 1 of
each year during the term hereof; and in addition hereto, YMCA
agrees to do and perform the other covenants and agreements in this
lease contained each of which shall be considered as additional
rent.
4. Purpose. YMCA shall use the Subject Premises solely
for the following purposes to wit: maintaining and operating
thereon the building and other facilities for use as a service and
recreational center for young people residing in th~ South Bay area
according to the standards of YMCA and for all reasonable and
lawful purposes incidental thereto. YMCA agrees to use Subject
Premises solely for the purposes herein stated.
5. Responsibility of YMCA.
a. YMCA shall keep the Subject Premises, building
and the property upon which the building is situated, free from any
liens arising out of the work performed, materials furnished, or
obligations incurred by YMCA. Failure to keep Subject Premises
free of liens shall constitute a major breach, and default, of the
covenants of this agreement and grounds for termination by City, at
City's sole option. It is intended by the parties hereto that City
has no obligation, in any manner whatsoever, to repair and maintain
the Subject Premises nor the structural improvements, including any
buildings, now located or to be constructed thereon, nor the
equipment now located or to be constructed therein, whether
structural or non structural, all of which obligations are intended
to be that of the YMCA. YMCA expressly waives the benefit of any
statute now, or hereinafter in effect which would otherwise afford
YMCA the right to make repairs at city's expense or to terminate
this Lease because of City's failure to keep the Subject Premises
in good order, condition and repair.
ymca2.wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 2
/2- 'f
b. YMCA hereby covenants and agrees that all
utilities and services necessary for the use and occupation of
Subject Premises shall be provided and paid for by YMCA.
c. YMCA shall not make any improvements or
additions to the building and Subject Premises without prior
written approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation. Said
improvements and additions shall include, but not be limited to,
changes to the exterior or interior, room additions, signs, and new
plantings.
d. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 107.6 of
the Revenue and Taxation Code, the property interest which is the
subject matter of this lease may be subject to property taxation
and that the YMCA, as lessee, may be subject to the payment of such
property taxes levied on such interest. YMCA shall be liable for
and shall pay, at least ten days before delinquency, taxes levied
against any personal property or fixtures placed by YMCA in or
about the Subject Premises. Further, YMCA shall be obligated to
pay any and all other taxes, including but not limited to
possessory interest tax, which may be from time to time assessed
upon the facility. The failure of YMCA to pay such levied tax,
resulting in the establishment of a tax lien by any taxing agency,
shall constitute a major breach, and default, of this lease and
constitute grounds for recovery of possession by City.
e. YMCA agrees to accept full responsibility for
the maintenance and repair of Subject Premises, including
landscaping. YMCA shall, at YMCA's sole cost and expense, keep the
Subject Premises and every part thereof in good condition and
repair, comparable to other property held by the City in the
general vicinity. YMCA shall, upon the expiration or sooner
termination of the term hereof surrender the Subject Premises to
City in the same condition as when received. City shall have no
obligations to alter, remodel, repair, decorate, or paint the
structures located upon the land which is the subject of this
lease.
f. Anti-Discrimination
YMCA, for itself and its successors and assigns,
agrees that during the occupancy and use of the Subject Premises,
YMCA will not, with respect to its operation of the Subject
Premises, discriminate against any person because of race, color,
creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, age,
handicaps, ancestry or national origin. In addition, YMCA agrees
ymca2 . wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 3
1~-5'
---------
to cause the Subject Premises to be in compliance with the
requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act, and
regulations promulgated thereunder.
6. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. YMCA agrees
to maintain and operate Subject Premises in compliance with all
laws, rules and regulations applicable thereto.
7. Termination.
a. In the event that YMCA fails to maintain and
operate Subject Premises for the principal purpose for which the
same are hereby demised or fails to maintain reasonable and
adequate supervision and maintenance of Subject Premises or further
fails to remedy any such faults or defects within 30 days after
written notice to do so from the City, then City may elect to
terminate and cancel this lease.
b. All of the conditions and covenants contained
herein to be performed by YMCA shall be deemed to be conditions of
YMCA's right to possession of the Subject Premises, and if after 30
days written notice to YMCA, any default in said conditions is not
remedied or corrected or performed to City's satisfaction, City
shall have the right to re-enter the Subject Premises, remove YMCA
and retake possession thereof.
c. In the event that YMCA abandons Subject
Premises, the City may elect to terminate this lease. Abandonment
is herein defined to include, but is not limited to, any absence of
YMCA from the Subject Premises for fifteen (15) days or longer
while in default of any provision of this lease except where
excused by law or circumstances beyond YMCA's control.
8. Representatives of Parties to Agreement. The
following are designated as representatives of parties to this
agreement:
a. city designates the Director of Parks and
Recreation as its representative in all matters under this contract
(except execution hereof) and all notices given to the City shall
be so addressed to the above designated representative at 276
Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
b. YMCA designates its President as the
representative under this contract and all notices sent to YMCA
shall be addressed to the above designated representative at 4715
Viewridge, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92123.
9. Assignment. Neither this agreement nor any duties
or obligations hereunder shall be assignable by YMCA without prior
written consent of the City, which consent may be withheld in the
ymca2.wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 4
1;;.- (,
. -----.- ..-----
discretion of the City. In the event of an assignment by YMCA to
which the City has consented, the assignee or its legal
representative shall agree in writing with the City to assume,
perform, and be bound by the covenants, obligations, and agreement
contained herein. Any consent to an assignment shall not, in the
absence of express provisions to the contrary, constitute a release
of the YMCA from the provisions of this Agreement.
10. Successors and Assigns. Subject to the provision
regarding assignment, this agreement shall be binding on the heirs,
executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the
respective parties.
11. Attorney's Fees. If any action at law or inequity
is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this
agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable
attorney's fees in addition to any other relief to which it may be
entitled.
12. Modification of Agreement. This Agreement may be
amended by reason of changes in the scope of the purpose as
described herein and the amount of any adjustment shall be
determined by negotiations to the mutual satisfaction of the City
and YMCA. Said amendments must be in writing.
13. Indemnity and Insurance.
a. Indemnity.
YMCA shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and
against any and all claims arising from YMCA's use of the Subject
Premises (including specifically, but not limited to, deposit of
toxic or hazardous material in or about the Subject Premises, or
uses of such material in any structure on the premises) or from the
conduct of YMCA's business or from any activity, work or things
done, permitted or suffered by YMCA in or about the Subject
Premises or elsewhere and shall further indemnify and hold harmless
City from and against any and all claims arising from any breach or
default in the performance of any obligation on YMCA's part to be
performed under the terms of this Lease, or arising from any
negligence of the YMCA, or any of YMCA's agents, contractors, or
employees, and from and against all cost, attorney's fees, expenses
and liabilities incurred in the defense of any such claim or any
action or proceeding brought thereon; and in case any action or
proceeding be brought against City by reason of any such claim,
YMCA upon notice from City, shall defend the same at YMCA's expense
by counsel satisfactory to city. YMCA, as a material part of the
consideration to City, hereby assumes all risk of damage to
property or injury to persons, in, upon or about the Subject
Premises arising from any cause and YMCA hereby waives all claims
in respect thereof against City.
ymca2.wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 5
;;'-7
------
b. Exemption of City from Liability.
YMCA hereby agrees that City shall not be liable for
injury to YMCA's business or any loss of income therefrom or for
damage to the goods, wares, merchandise or other property of YMCA,
YMCA's employees, invitees, customers, or any other person in or
about the Subject Premises, nor shall City be liable for injury to
the YMCA, YMCA's employees, agents or contractors, whether such
damage or injury is caused by or results from fire, flood, rain,
water, steam, electricity, gas, or from the breakage, leakage,
obstruction or other defects of the land, grading, elevation of the
land, pipes, wires, appliances, plumbing, or from any other cause,
whether the said damage or injury results from conditions arising
upon the Subj ect Premises or from other sources or places and
regardless of whether the cause of such damage or injury or the
means of repairing the same are inaccessible to YMCA. city shall
not be liable for any damages arising from any act or neglect of
any other tenant, if any, of the land adjacent to the Subject
Premises leased by City.
c. Liability Insurance.
YMCA shall, at YMCA's expense obtain and keep in
force during the term of this lease a policy of Bodily Injury
insurance insuring City and YMCA against any liability arising out
of the ownership, use, occupancy or maintenance of the Subject
Premises and all areas appurtenant thereto. Such insurance shall
be a combined single limit policy in an amount not less than
$2,000,000 per occurrence. The limits of said insurance shall not,
however, limit the liability of YMCA hereunder.
d. Property Insurance.
YMCA shall obtain and keep in force during the term
of this Lease a policy or policies of insurance covering loss or
damage to the Subject Premises, in the amount of the full
replacement value thereof, as the same may exist from time to time,
which replacement value is now $500,000, but in no event less than
the total amount required by lenders having liens on the Subject
Premises, against all perils included with the classification of
fire, extended coverage, vandalism, malicious mischief, flood, and
special extended perils ("all risk" as such term is used in the
insurance industry). Said insurance shall provide for payment of
loss thereunder to City and to the holders of mortgages or deeds of
trust on the Subject Premises. If the YMCA shall fail to procure
and maintain said insurance the City may, but shall not be required
to, procure and maintain the same, but at the expense of YMCA. If
such insurance coverage has a deductible clause, the deductible
amount shall not~exceed $1,000 per occurrence, and YMCA shall be
liable for such deductible amount.
ymca2.wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 6
12-11
..- ~.. ~.. . ._----~.-
e. Insurance Policies.
Insurance required hereunder shall be in companies
holding a "General Policyholders Rating" of at least A, or such
other rating as may be required by a lender having a lien on the
Subject Premises, as set forth in the most current issue of "Best's
Insurance Guide." The YMCA shall deliver to the City copies of
policies of such insurance or certificates evidencing the existence
and amounts of such insurance with loss payable clauses as required
by this Section. No such policy shall be cancelable or subject to
reduction of coverage or other modification except after thirty
(30) days prior written notice to City. YMCA shall, at least
thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of such policies, furnish
City with renewals or "binders" thereof, or City may order such
insurance and charge the cost thereof to YMCA, which amount shall
be payable by YMCA upon demand. YMCA shall not do or permit to be
done anything which shall invalidate the insurance policies
referred to in this Section. If YMCA does or permits to be done
anything which shall increase the cost of the insurance policies
referred to in this Section, then YMCA shall forthwith upon City's
demand reimburse City for any additional premiums attributable to
any act or omission or operation of YMCA causing such increase in
the cost of insurance. All insurance policies shall name the City
as an additional insured.
f. Waiver of Subrogation.
YMCA and City each hereby release and relieve the
other, and waive their entire right of recovery against the other
for loss or damage arising out of or incident to the perils insured
against under this section, which perils occur in, on or about the
Subject Premises, whether due to the negligence of City or YMCA or
their agents, employees, contractors and/or invitees. YMCA and
City shall, upon obtaining the policies of insurance required
hereunder, give notice to the insurance carrier or carriers that
the foregoing mutual waiver of subrogation is contained in this
Lease.
g. The amount of coverage required by the City
pursuant to this agreement may be amended by the City upon 120 days
notice to YMCA. Failure of YMCA to maintain said policy shall be
grounds for termination of this lease.
14. Subleases. YMCA shall not sublease any portion of the
building or Subject Premises without prior written approval of the
Director of Parks and Recreation.
15. Entire Agreement.
This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement and
contains the entire agreement of the Parties on the matters
ymca2.wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 7
1.2. -9
~~~~~~-~~~--~~~~-~ ~~
covered. No other agreement, statement or promise made by any
Party or by any employee, officer or agent of any Party that is not
in writing and signed by all Parties shall be binding.
16. Governing Law
This Agreement has been executed in and shall be governed
by the laws of the state of California.
17. Invalidity
If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this
Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, void or enforceable, the remainder of the provisions
hereof shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be
affected, impaired or invalidated thereby.
18. Waivers
The waiver by one Party of the performance of any
covenant, condition or promise shall not invalidate this Agreement,
nor shall it be considered a waiver by him of any other covenant,
condition or promise. The waiver by either or both Parties of the
time for performing any act shall not constitute a waiver of the
time for performing any other act or an identical ~ct required to
be performed at a later time. The exercise of any remedy provided
in this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any consistent remedy
provided by law, and any provision of this Agreement for any remedy
..hall not exclude other consistent remedies unless they are
~xpressly excluded.
19. Condemnation.
If the Subject Premises or any portion thereof are taken under
the power of eminent domain, or sold under the threat of the
exercise of said power (all of which are herein called
"condemnation"), this Lease shall terminate as to the part so taken
as of the date.the condemning authority takes title or possession,
whichever first occurs.
(end of page. Next page is signature.)
ymca2 . wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 8
/2-1 D
.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this lease the
day and year first above written.
Dated: F'ebruary 11, 1993 City of Chula Vista
by: Tim Nader, its Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION
OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY
by: Id-~~
R'~chard ~ato,
pres(jnt ¡( (¿
by: Á-^-. ,
f
Assistant Secretary
ymca2 . wp Lease Agreement with YMCA
February 11, 1993 Page 9
I;"-/J
"~~---"-~-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
ITEM TITLE: Resolution !iDIe::, Authorizing payment to Metropolitan
Transit Development Board for the initial City share of the cost of
the Main Street Underpass Project
!
SUBMITTED BY: Director Of Public WOrkS~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage(5i (4/5ths Vote:Yes_No.lLJ
On December 14, 1989 the City indicated to the Metropolitan Transit Development
Board in a letter that Chula Vista was willing to pay 10% of the cost of the Main
Street Underpass Project. This indication was affirmed by Council on February 27,
1990 by passage of Resolution 15537, which approved the expenditure of $600,000
for this purpose. Resolution 15575 authorized the expenditure of an additional
$150,000 for the construction of street improvements under the bridge and was
approved on April 3, 1990.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve a resolution authorizing the payment
of $330,000 to MTDB as an initial payment against the City's full participation in this
project.
DISCUSSION: Following receipt of the City's commitment to participate in the
undercrossing project and our later request to incorporate street improvement work
into its contract MTDB awarded a contract for the overall project. The contract was
entered into on July 11, 1991, and is now nearing completion.
The estimated cost of the bridge construction was approximately $6,000,000 when
the City's decision to participate was made. Funding of the bridge construction is
80% by the Public Utility Commission, and 10% each by MTDB and Chula Vista.
The bridge cost dropped to approximately $4,030,000 when the contract was
actually awarded. However, we are advised that the cost of the street improvements
requested by Chula Vista to be included in the MTDB project increased from a
preliminary estimate of $150,000 to $229,000. MTDB has provided contract
documents showing items and unit prices for the City work to City staff and these
items are presently being reviewed.
The total City cost for participation in the undercrossing project and the street
improvement work is anticipated to amount to approximately $632,000 ($403,000
for the bridge and $229,000 for the street). Thus, the currently requested payment
I~ ~ I
~~ -~~----~----"~ -
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date: 3/2/93
of $330,000 (invoice attached) is approximately 52% of the higher probable cost and
44% of the original estimated cost. It appears that the City will owe MTDB at least
an additional $300,000 before final accounting is accomplished.
The 1990-91 Capital Improvement Program included $750,000 in Transnet funds for
this work. These funds were received in July 1990. Also, we received a check from
the State on February 4, 1993 for $214,043 in matching funds from the State/Local
Transportation Partnership Program (SL TPP).
MTDB has carried the City's participation in the project on the basis of our simple
request up to this point. In consideration of the facts that: 1, This payment of
$330,000 is approximately half of the City's total estimated obligation to MTDB and
2, We have already received reimbursement from Transnet for the entire project cost,
we believe that it is reasonable to make this payment in advance of the completion
of the final agreement with MTDB.
FISCAL IMPACT: The 1990-91 CIP included $600,000 for participation in the Main
Street Undercrossing Project and $150,000 for the Main Street improvement work.
Both amounts were to be taken from Transnet funds. This payment represents only
a portion of the City's cost. Both this proposed payment and the final amount
estimated to be paid to MTDB are within the budgeted amount for the overall project.
This $750,000 was appropriated for the project when Council approved the 1990-91
CIP in June, 1990.
RLD;SB
F;HDME/ENGINEERIA GENDAlMTDB
\~'2.
---------
RESOLUTION NO. /70JD
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO
METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT BOARD FOR THE
INITIAL CITY SHARE OF THE COST OF THE MAIN
STREET UNDERPASS PROJECT
WHEREAS, on December 14, 1989, the City indicated to the
Metropolitan Transit Development Board in a letter that Chula Vista
was willing to pay 10% of the cost of the Main Street Underpass
Project; and
WHEREAS, this indication was affirmed by Council on
February 27, 1990 by passage of Resolution 15537, which approved
the expenditure of $600,000 for this purpose; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 15575 authorized the expenditure of
an additional $150,000 for the construction of street improvements
under the bridge and was approved on April 3, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the total City cost for participation in the
undercrossing project and the street improvement work is
anticipated to amount to approximately $632,000 ($403,000 for the
bridge and $229,000 for the street); and
WHEREAS, the currently requested payment of $330,000 is
approximately 52% of the higher probable cost and 44% of the
original estimated cost; and
WHEREAS, it appears that the city will owe MTDB at least
an additional $300,000 before final accounting is accomplished; and
WHEREAS, the 1990-91 Capital Improvement Program included
$750,000 in Transnet funds for this work, which funds were received
in July 1990, and the city additionally received a check from the
State on February 4, 1993 for $214,043 in matching funds from the
State/Local Transportation Partnership Program; and
WHEREAS, staff will return to Council for approval of
future payments under a proposed agreement with MTDB or a single
final payment in the event that the project is finalized before the
agreement is completed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby authorize payment of $330,000
to Metropolitan Transit Development Board for the initial City
share of the cost of the Main Street Underpass Project.
Presented by APPZ as to
th.
John P. Lippitt, Director of Bruce M.
Public Works Attorney
F:\homolaUomeylMainStUP
/3~3
---
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ItemJ.l............
Meeting Date 3/2/93
ITEM TITLE: Resolution \1011 Supporting SANDAG in the submittal of an
application for grant funds under the Proposition 116 Clean Air and
Transportation Improvement Act, Bicycle Program
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~
/}
REVIEWED BY: City Manager 8 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_XJ
The Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act (CA TIA) makes available $20 million State-
wide to fund a 5-year program of competitive grants to local agencies for capital outlay for
bicycle improvement projects which improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters.
On November 20, 1992, SANDAG submitted an application for Proposition 116 Bicycle Funds
totalling $750,000 for a portion of the Bay Route Bikeway known as the Sweetwater River
crossing. The Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act requires that a local public
agency adopts a resolution approving the submittal. In accordance with said requirements,
SANDAG has requested that the City of Chula Vista support the subject application. The City
Council has supported the construction of the Bay Route Bikeway in the past and actively pursed
its completion.
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council approve the resolution as stated above.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On November 20, 1992, San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) staff submitted one
application for grant funds under the Proposition 116 Clean Air and Transportation Improvement
Act, Bicycle Program. The application is for a portion of the Bay Route Bikeway known as the
Sweetwater River Crossing. SANDAG is the lead agency coordinating funding and planning for
this project. CalTrans has completed the initial project report and is in the process of
completing the environmental work. CalTrans will also be responsible for the design and
construction of the project.
The Sweetwater River Crossing is one of last unconstructed segments on the 23-mile commuter
facility linking coastal cities with numerous military bases, port facilities, and aircraft plants.
Many of San Diego County's largest employers are located along the San Diego Bay. The
project involves the construction of a Class I bikeway along the western slope of the Interstate
5 Freeway from F Street in the City of Chula Vista to 24th Street in the City of National City.
The total length of the project is approximately 1.5 miles. The total project cost is $3.59
11./ ~ I
.-..------.-.-.-.--
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
million. CATIA funds requested in FY 1992-93 for the subject project amount to $750,000.
This leaves a balance of $2.84 million to be funded through ISTEA's Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality (CMAQ) program.
Applications will be evaluated by the California Transportation Commission on how the project
encourages bicycle commuting and coordinates with other transportation modes. Eligible
projects include the construction, improvement, acquisition and other capital expenditures
associated with bicycle projects which improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
SMN:FileKY-036
WFC F:\HOME\ENOINBBRIAOENDA\oatia
l4. -2...
--------- --
,..?-S OF 8~ San Diego
.;,~'<, ."" ~~C> ASSOCIÄfION OF
'Ii ~ (\\ GOVERt,MENTS
,.,' Suite 800, First Interstate Plaza
~401BStreet
November 20, 1992 ro r¡.¡ G\o~ San Diego, California 92101
ERE (819)595-5300 Fax (619)595-5305
Mr. Rick Blunden, Chief
CALTRANS Office of Bicycle Facilities
P.O. Box 942874, M.S. #38
Sacramento, CA 94274-0001
Dear Mr. Blunden:
Enclosed is an application for Proposition 116 bicycle funds for a portion of the Bay Route
Bikeway known as the Sweetwater River Crossing. SANDAG is the lead agency
coordinating funding and planning for this project. CALTRANS has completed the Initial
Project Report and will do the environmental work, as well as design and construction,
on the project.
The Sweetwater River Crossing is one of the last unconstructed segments on the 23 mile
commuter facility linking coastal cities with numerous military bases, port facilities, and
aircraft plants. Many of San Diego County's largest employers are located on San Diego
Bay.
If you have any questions or require additional infonnation, please contact me at (619)
595-5300, or Dennis Thompson at (619) 595-5325.
Sincerely,
Gr~ -dx cr
LEE F. HULTGREN
Director of Transportation
LFHIDT/cd
Enclosure
I~'~
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, EI Cajon, Encinìtas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa,
Lemon Grove, National City, Ocaanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista and County of San Diego.
ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS: Calìtornia Department of Transportation, U.S. Department of Defense and TijuanalBaja California.
.
.
CALIPORNIA TRANSPORTATION CO1"JUSSION
PROPOSITION 11'
CLEAN AIR AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT ACT
BICYCLE PROJECT APPLICATION 'OR FY 1992/93 FUNDS
PAKT 1. XNPORHATION SHEETS
A. Title a,,4 Certification Sbeat
.
Applicant Agency: San Diego Association of Governments
.
Address:.. First Interstate Plaza
'.'. . ,,'. " .. ., .., .. ... . . , .. -
401 B Street, Suite 800
:
San Diego, Ca. 92101
Contact Person: Dennis Thompson
Telephone No.:(619, 595-5325
project Title: Bay Route Bikeway - Sweetwater Crossing
Project Location (County. City or Cities): Ci ties of Chula Vista & National City
CATIA FI.Inds Requested in FY 199i2~3: $ 750,000
To the best of my knowledge and belief, the information in this application i.
true and correct, and I am authorized to file this application on behalf of
the applicant.
Nama ¡, Title: Dennis Thompson, Associate Transportation Planner
.
Signature: Date:
-
\ L\ - t.t-
10
..... ......-..........----......-.....
.
CALIPORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIOII
PROPOSITION 115
CLEAN AIR AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT ACT
BICYCLE PROJECT APPLICATION POR PY lU2/n PUNJ)8
8. Project Summar:y Pact Sheet
Applicant Agency: San Diego Association of Governments
Address: 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, Ca. 92101 .
Contact" "Person~ Dennis Thompson
Telephone No.: (61 9) 595-5325
Project Title: Bay Route Bikeway - Sweetwater Crossing
Project Location (County, City or Cities): Cities of Chula Vista & National CLty
Project Type: CL I~CL II---CL III~or OTHER (Specify)
Project Description: Class I Bikeway along the western slope of the
Interstate 5 Freeway from F Street ~n the C~ty 01 Chu~a v~sta
to 24th Street in the C~ty ot Nat~onal C~ty
Project Length (if appropriate) in miles 1 5
Project Completion Date: 1996
CATIA Funds Requested in FY 1992-93: $ 750,000
~tal CATIA Funds Requested for this project
in prior and future years: $ None
~tal Other Funds requested or
received for this project: $ 2,840,000
~tal Project Cost: $ 3,590,000
Plea.e attach a copy of a map that clearly de.ignates the project and project
limits. The map .hould be 8 1/2" x 11", with a north arrow, 8cale, and
legend, and be reproducible in black and white.
\~- 5
, ,
. .__.~..~_._.~-_.~
. .
.
.
PART 2. PROJECT SCREENING CRITERIA
A. Screening Criteria
Applicants shall satisfy the following screening criteria to be eligible for
CATIA bicycle program funds. An applicant may satisfy this requirement ~
providing a single master resolution from its governing board/bodY for all
screening criteria.
If the governing board/body has delegated authority for making these screening
criteria assurances to an executive officer, general manager, or other person,
he or she may certify that the applicant agency satisfies the screening
criteria.
If an ~pplicant elects to cer'tHy 'compHan_"with"the"screeniD9 criteria",the.
application must incl~de a copy of the governing board resolution delegating
such authority to the ~erson making the certification.
If the applicant is unable to submit the required resolutions/certifications
at the time of the application, the applicant shall indicate when the
documentation will be submitted. .
The screening criteria are listed below:
1. Statutory Eligibility - Does your agency/project meet the statutory
requirement to be eligible for CATIA funding, pursuant to Section 99650 of the
Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act of 1990?
[Jt Yes [) No
2. Policy Board Approval - Has your agency's policy board/body approved
the project and the project fund application'
PJ Yes [) No
3. Financial/Management Capacity - Does your agency have the resourCes
and the financial capacity to construct, operate, and maintain the project,
and will your agency operate and maintain the project until at least 2010?
}(J Yes [) No
4. Timely Use of Funds - Will your agency be able to expend the state
bond proceeds approved for your agency for reimbursements of eligible capital
cOsts within 24 months of 'the close of the bond sale and reimbursements of
eligible right-of-way acquisition cOsts within six months of the close of the
bond aale'
- te) Yes () No
5. Commuter Use ~ If the projact is a new Class I Bikeway, has your
agency documented a method for determining that the bikeway will be
principally used ~ bicycle commuters'. If, yes, please provide a description
of the method.
t) Yes [) No
\4 -(."
12 .
--u.,.-------
a.
<C ,...
om-~w)«~ ~ ~ ~
Z[!] c I- -
~ ~ m«>- ITO:JI-W ~ ~ ~
. :;
: !O\
¡J IS!¡
I, ~!
I ~¡
i'(
/ ~
z
r
, z
. "
:¡
C
"'
~
¡¡
p
"'
>
; 0 ~¡:~
,.C,.
Z ~ ~ i
W ~ ~ Ii: !
¡¡ C is r
[!] "Ii: ¡:!
W z....
¡¡¡ 2 ...
.J ;c ¡ :;;
"'I ~ ~.
I : I .
I :t
I Ii
I ..
11/-7"" !
..--....--....--..--..
,
6. Environmental Documentation - Has your agency completed, or will it
complete prior to allocation of state funds, the required environmental
documentation. pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)?
fJ Yes~ (J No
7. Design Standards - If the project is a bikeway, is it or will it be
designed in conformity with the standards set forth in Chapter 1000 of the
Highway Design Manual. 'Bikeway Planning and Design'? .
¥j{ Yes [J No .
8. Other Resolution/Certification Requira..ents
In addition to the resolutions/certifications required to meet the above.
screening criteria, each applicant shall submit resolutions or certifications
satisfying the Commission policies and CATIA requirements listed below. A'
master resolution/certification may be used in the same manner as for the
screening criteria.
1. No other capital funds previously programmed. planned, or approved
for bicycle projects will be used for other purposes.
2. New development fees, taxes or exactions. or permit fees have not
and will not be included in the operating budgets for this project.
3. No other state funding sources will be used to complete this
project if costs exceed those identified in the approved application.
4. The applicant agency has the financial and institutional ability
to accept the legal liabilities associated with this project.
PAJlT J. J)ESCRIP:I'ION OP PROJECT
Describe the project for which you are applying for funds using the following
format:
'ect1oD 1. Project J)escr1pt1oD
a. Describe the proposed project in detail including:
0 ~e of facility (e.g. roadway widening for bicycles, Class I. II.
or III bikeway, bicycle parking).
0 If the project is part of a larger project. describe the overall
project. If other projects need to be completed for this project to be
operational. list the other projects. their estimated cost, and propo.ed
completion datels).
~. Identify whether the implementing public agency will do the work
or will contract the work out.
c. Attach a copy of a map and project drawings that clearly designate
.the project. project limits, and type of bikeway. if appropriate. The map
13 f'I~fI
-- --- - - - ---- n ----------------~-------- ------------- ---------
APPLICATION SUPPLEMENT FOR PROPOSITION 116
Part 3. Description of Project
Section 1. Proiect Description
a. This project is to provide a Class I bike path along Interstate 5 from F Street in the City
of Chula Vista to 24th Street in the City of National City. Construction of this project
would replace an existing interim Class ill segment of the Bay Route Bikeway, a 23-mile
bike facility around San Diego Bay.
b. CALTRANS will complete an Environmental Impact Report and fmal design, and
advertise the project for construction.
c. See Attached Map.
Section 2. Proiect Scorin¡: Criteria
1. Need. The Sweetwater Crossing project will convert a 3.8 mile interim Class ill bike
route into a 1.5 mile Class I bike path. The bike path facility was chosen because there
are very few ways to cross the Sweetwater River in the western portions of the Cities of
Chula Vista and National City. This facility will also connect with an existing 1.5 mile
bike path along the Sweetwater Channel that provides access for cyclists from the eastern
areas of Churn Vista and National City.
Existing bike counts taken during peak periods on weekdays are documented in "Bicycle
Counts at Selected Intersections in San Diego County 1990". These peak period counts
show that at least 500 cycling trips are made in the area of these large employers. A
check of the large employer rideshare survey shows that there are now 160 employees that
cycle several times a week in the vicinity of the project. Plaza Bonita Shopping Mall is
located at the east end of the Sweetwater Channel Bike Path.
2. Convenience. The Sweetwater Crossing Project will eliminate many obstacles to bicycle
commuting. Cyclists now have to traverse two freeway interchanges, one channel bridge
with inadequate shoulders, and several extra miles of high volume city streets on the
existing interim route. Also, employees living in the eastern areas of Churn Vista and
National City can go west on the Sweetwater Channel Bike Path and be distributed north
and south on the Sweetwater River Crossing Project.
The Sweetwater Crossing project will para1lel the existing MTDB south light rail line and
have convenient access to the 24th Street Station in National City and the E Street and H
Street Stations in Churn Vista. One alignment will put the bike path right through the E
Street Station. Bike lockers located at all these stations are operated by Commuter
1
11.f~1
--------. --- ----------------_._-~---_._--_._- - -------
Computer of San Diego. Much of the Bay Route Bikeway parallels the MTDB South
Line.
3. Safety. The existing accident count for the interim route is summarized below from
Caltrans Traffic Accident Surveillance Analysis System (T ASAS), City of Chula Vista and
City of National City accident fIles. The accident data is for a 48-month period from
January 1988 through December 1991.
- F Street Overcrossing 32 Accidents
- 24th Street Overcrossing 37 Accidents
- Local Streets 302 Accidents
Total 451 Accidents
Analysis of the accident data revealed that of the 451 accidents, 25 involved bicycles.
This data shows reported accidents. There are usually a number of unreported accidents
involving cyclists on these kinds of surface streets. The proposed project should reduce
the exposure to cyclists caused by two freeway interchanges, a narrow channel bridge, and
several miles of interim bike route on surface streets.
4. Funding Considerations. A cost estimate was prepared by CALTRANS as part of the
attached Initial Project Report (IPR). This is a complex project with a number of
constraints and requirements. Value engineering sessions have been conducted for this
project, but providing a maintainable facility is also of major importance to the local
agencies involved. The $3.5 million project will be funded mostly from Congestion
Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. Local Transnet Funds have also been
programmed by the SANDAG Board of Directors for this project.
The San Diego region has had a long tenD commitment to the funding of bicycle projects.
Transportation Development Act (IDA) funds have always been spent on a competitive
project-by-project basis at the maximum 2 % level. In 1988, a transportation sales tax was
approved in San Diego County which provided a guaranteed funding level for bike projects
through the life of the tax. These sources have allowed the region to provide over 500
miles of bicycle facilities in the last decade.
5. Locol Support. The Bay Route Bikeway has been a major part of the region's non-
motorized plan and program. The Nonmotorized Tactic of the Regional Air Quality
Strategy also contains the development of these major facilities as an important part of the
plan. This project was chosen as one of three large projects to receive CMAQ funds
recommended by the SANDAG Bicycle Facilities Committee. The Bicycle Facilities
Committee at SANDAG is composed of a representative from each city, the County of San
Diego, a number of single purpose agencies, and three citizen representatives.
2
11./ -1O
-----~------------ - -------------
Section 3. Project Status
The Bay Route Bikeway - Sweetwater River Crossing has advanced through the Initial Project
Report stage at CALTRANS. CALTRANS is now producing the Environmental Impact Report
for the project. Various environmental agencies have been working with the project for the past
two years to ensure that the project is environmentally sound. CALTRANS is handling the
project as part of a TRANSNET interagency agreement for the construction of local projects of
regional importance.
3
N-I/
-"-"- -"-"~-- "----"--- . ------"-------"--"
.
c. Describe your agency's ongoing financial commitment to bikeway
development as demonstrated by Local Transportation Funds (Transportation
Development Act) or other local funds expended on bicycle facilities during
the current and past two fiscal years.
5. LOCAL SUPPORT
a. Include letters of support for the project.
b. Describe the public participation in your agency's bikeway
planning process and in the selection of your project. Is the project
consistent with an adopted bikeway master plan. transportation plan. or air
quality improvement plan? If so, please include a copy of the plants).
'0
sectioll 3. project status
Please describe'the current status of the project. :
PART C. PROJECT BUDGET
1. Please provide a project budget. including a breakdown of all
project costs and revenues and any multi-year phases of the
project:
In Thousands of Dollars
91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 9~/C¡6
PROJECT COST
Engineering/Design I I I 1690 I
Property Acquisition I I I I 100 I
Construction/Rehabilitation I I I I I 2800
TOTAL PROJECT COST I I I 1790 I 2800
PROJECT REVENUES
General Fund Transnet I I 1750 I I
Private I I I I I
Other (Specify) I I I I I
State:
Proposition 0116 Funds I I I 1750 I
Other (Specify) I I I I I
Faderal: CMAQ I I I J I 2090
Other (Specify) I I I I I
TOTAL PROJECT REVENUES I I 1750 1750 I 2090
2. Please describe the assumptions on which your cost/revenue .stimates are
baaed.
11/ ~/2-
15
-~------- _n- ------------..---- ---.--~--_.._-
. .
.
. .
. '
PART 5. ENVIP.ONHENTAL DOCUHENTATIOII
Please describe the status of the environmental clearance for the project.
Appropriat. Actll.l or Eat1mat.4
Environmantal Pocllm.nt Compl.tion Pat.
Categorical Exemption
Other exemption (cite) .
Notice of Exemption
Negative Declaration. .
Draft EIR/EIS Sept. 93
Final. EIBJE.IS._Certiticat~on..of..EIR March, 94
Notice of Determination .'.......... - -.- -..--..'....
PART C. PROJECT CONSTP.UCTION/IMPLEMENTATION SCHEPULJ:
Please describe the schedule for the project.
..l1in Work Compl.t. Work
(Kontb/Y.az) (Kontb/Yeaz)
Environmental Assessment october 92 November 93
Preliminary Engineering M"Tl"'h en !';pptpmhF!T 93
Final Design December 93 December 94
Property Acquisition M"Tl"'h C¡4 FphTI1"TY 95
Construction/Rehabilitation !,;pptpmhPT 95 f)pl"'pmhPT 96
. -
. . ... .' ...
EN ) or APPLICA'l'ION
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
A copy of the Evaluation Form is attached for information to applicants.
It will Þe used only by RTPAs and Caltrans to evaluate project applications.
If you are an applicant. do not complete the Evaluation Form. and do not
include it as part of your application.
16 1c.¡.-I.3/II/-I¿¡
-.-.- ..-.. . .--.... .-.------"."---.."---.-"-.. ..
RESOLUTION NO.
\'1DIL
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA SUPPORTING SANDAG IN THE SUBMITTAL
OF AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS UNDER THE
PROPOSITION 116 CLEAN AIR AND TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT ACT, BICYCLE PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act
(CATIA) makes available $20 million State-wide to fund a 5-year
program of competitive grants to local agencies for capital outlay
for bicycle improvement projects which improve safety and
convenience for bicycle commuters; and
WHEREAS, on November 20, 1992, SANDAG submitted an
application for proposition 116 Bicycle Funds totalling $750,000
for a portion of the Bay Route Bikeway known as the Sweetwater
River crossing; and
WHEREAS, the Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act
requires that a local public agency adopts a resolution approving
the submittal; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with said requirements, SANDAG has
requested that the City of Chula vista support the subject
application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby support SANDAG in the submittal
of an application for grant funds under the Proposition 116 Clean
Air and Transportation Improvement Act, Bicycle Progr
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Presented by
F:\home\attomey\582.93
Ilf- IS
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
;' ;;-
Meeting Date
March 2. 1993
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution 17012
approval E of Chula
approval 1.1 of Chula
Revising tentative map condition of
vista Tract 92-05 and condition of
vista Tract 93-01 (Resolution 16900)
Resolution 17013 Approving the final map and
subdivision improvement agreement and authorizing the Mayor to
sign the map and execute said agreement for tract 92-05,
Rancho Del Rey Commercial Center West
Resolution 17014 Approving the final map and
subdivision improvement agreement and authorizing the Mayor to
sign the map and execute said agreement for Tract 93-01,
Rancho Del Rey Commercial Center East
Resolution 17015 Approving supplemental subdivision
improvement agreements to satisfy conditions of approval M, N,
o and P of Tract 92-05 and conditions of approval S, T, U and
V of Tract 93-01 and authorizing the Mayor to execute same
Resolution 17016 Authorizing the Mayor to execute
deeds quitclaiming any title interest in properties to be
owned by the other parties signing the maps after recordation
of said maps
Works ~ (4/5ths Vote:
Yes_ No-Ll
SUBMITTED BY: Director of of PUblic
REVIEWED BY: City Manager rfl
RECOMMENDATION: That Council continue
this item one week to March 9, 1993.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NfA
DISCUSSION: with the concurrence of the City, Price Club and McMillin, this
item is requested to be continued one week to March 9, 1993 in order to
further review and finalize the necessary documents.
'6-1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
ITEM TITLE: Resolution )1011 Approving temporary closure at Moss Street
=,,',' f~ ", MTDB SO?,' Grnd, Cro"", Imp'~_' P,"j~'
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: City Manager f1 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.lO
BACKGROUND:
The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) has recently completed the "South Line
Grade Crossing Improvement Project, LRT-299", which reconstructed the San Diego Trolley
railroad crossings at the intersections of: F Street, H Street, J Street and Anita Street. MTDB
has added a change order to reconstruct the trolley crossing at Moss Street. To complete the
necessary work, within the railroad right-of-way, the contractor, National Projects, Inc., has
requested approval of two temporary weekend road closures at Moss Street. This project will
provide for smoother railroad crossings by motorists.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the resolution which approves two
temporary weekend street closures subject to certain conditions.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) has issued a change order to add the
Moss Street crossing to the "South Line Grade Crossing Improvement Project, LRT-299."
National Projects, Inc. has requested to the Public Works Department permission to temporarily
close the street/trolley crossing at Moss Street so that the trolley crossing can be improved. This
project will provide for a smoother railroad crossing by all vehicular users. This crossing is in
need of repair to eliminate the severe jolt experienced by motorists as they cross the railroad
tracks. The work consists, in general, of removing and replacing two at-grade crossings on the
South Line, and procuring all materials and performing all other work necessary to complete the
work in accordance with the Contract LRT-299 Plans and Special Provisions. Similar work was
recently completed at the railroad crossings of: F Street, H Street, J Street and Anita Street.
Existing asphalt and timber roadbeds, trackwork and trackbed at each crossing will be removed;
this includes rail, ties, and ballast. New ties and heavier (larger cross-section) 115# rail will
replace existing wooden ties and rail section. A Hi-Rail rubber crossing system will be placed
at the road crossing surface and asphalt will be used to fill in areas surrounding the rubber
crossing. Heavy duty deflector shields will be placed at ends of the new crossings. If any City
It.. -I
---------
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
property such as sidewalk or traffic control device is disturbed during construction, it will be
replaced.
It is being requested that the temporary street closure be from 8:00 p.m. Friday to 6:00 a.m.
Monday for two consecutive weekends starting Friday, March 26 and end by Monday, April 5,
1993. This work requires one weekend per track with two tracks per crossing. The trolley will
have continuous service throughout the construction period, but will be sharing one track through
the construction area. Staff has reviewed the plans for this work and recommends temporary
closure subject to the following similar conditions which the City Council, on August 4, 1992
by Resolution #16742, approved for previous work on F Street, H Street, J Street and Anita
Street:
1. Each closure will be from 8:00 p.m. Friday through 6:00 a.m. Monday, a
period of 58 consecutive hours.
2. An approved traffic control plan be submitted to the Chula Vista
Department of Public Works at least two weeks prior to the
commencement of the closure.
3. All detour signing to be maintained by the contractor throughout the length
of time that street crossing is closed to through traffic.
4. The contractor is to notify the Chula Vista Star News, San Diego Union
Tribune, Chula Vista Police Department, Chula Vista Fire Department,
Chula Vista Transit and the Chula Vista Public Works Department at least
one week in advance of each road closure.
5. If applicable, the contractor is to work with CalTrans and obtain any
necessary permits needed to allow for the placement of any traffic control
detour signing within CalTrans right-of-way.
6. The contractor will make available to all listed above in number 4, 24-hour
emergency telephone numbers and names of contact personnel.
7. No closure shall be made until the traffic control plan has been approved
by the City and signs are erected at least one week in advance notifying
the public of the closure in accordance with California Vehicle Code
Sections 21101 and 21103.
8. If work is completed early, then the roadway will be opened to through
traffic as soon as practically possible.
/ I-~ 2.
- -----------_.-
Page 3, Item~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
The scope of the work is as follows:
Work crews will be setting up the traffic control signs no later than 5 days in
advance of the street/railroad crossing closure. All traffic control plans must be
submitted at least two weeks prior to the proposed weekend closure for approval
from the Traffic Engineering Division. Workers will then close off the street
crossing and begin work at that crossing. This construction work will take place
within the 58-hour weekend closure period. It is anticipated that having the
closures on the weekend and providing alternate routes will pose less of a
hardship to area businesses and delivery drivers. This intersection must be closed
for two weekends maximum, one weekend per track. Due to the type of
construction work required, the roadway cannot be maintained opened to one
direction of traffic or two-way traffic on one-half of the roadway. If this done,
the work will take twice as long and involve more cutting and welding of the
rails. In addition, vehicular traffic cannot be diverted to share one-half of the
roadway with opposing vehicular traffic, since the existing crossing gate will be
on the opposite side of the railroad tracks for the vehicular traffic diverted to the
opposite half of the roadway. Also, if the area is partially left open, pedestrian
and bicycle access must also be provided. If partial vehicular access in
maintained, the length of work for this location will be increased from 2 weekends
to 4 weekends. Since the trolley crossing is only 32 ft. wide, it may be possible
to do the entire street crossing one weekend.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that City Council approve the resolution to temporarily close Moss Street for
a period not to exceed two weekends subject to the conditions listed above.
Representatives from MTDB and NPI, Mr. Lynn R. Taylor, MTDB Resident Engineer; and Mr.
Wilson Velasquez, NPI Site Engineer, have infonned staff that they will be in attendance to
answer any questions that the City Council may have regarding this matter. The Chamber of
Commerce has been infonned of this construction project and meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
FXR,CY-O29
WPC F""om"<»gin""'g.."'\S70.93
Attachments:
Area Plat
California Vehicle Code Sections 21101 and 21103
I t.. ...3
z
.
, c c
0
.
I
.
---------u_-----
"ë5S1DE
.
/b~C¡
TIT L E M.T.D.S. GRADE CROSSING
AREA PLAl: CONTRACT WORK LOCATION
- --------- - ---
~ '~.$~~-=!i~,ã" 'ð~~ j'S' B~.š'='8§!;'HJ!' r;¡ . tgÞ'=,~l.8,ãBU
.... ã! ~itt ,.'f! c>- ~ ã~ _0,,-1);. ã! } §-=:c_~:c~"
C:, §..ã'S~.g, ~"'s..g J iii.:ir¡ ~P'ä~~~.š'S~ ..=1 2~~i.š,$1~~
- :C-8~.l;;~i-~ "'¡ .!I$ o.ii-¡¡o~~B~ ::: -¡:a..it..!!ê¡_ã 2
,0.., -=' >--=-, """. ~ ,,0"""
i:a~~;å':8.hl i U fõl ~;it-5j2!;g~1 ã:a ' ~n~lS' !;ri;!
f .:'St~~ ",11 it ' ~ 'pJ! ,,8.....:. h.a ¡¡ ii"¡jii oo:!!. :c!i "~- "- ~. B'ã.B
-- 1~'" 8.a!äå;.~ ~¡¡S .8~~, tC!ãii~a:~,5g. , ~~ .8~~1""g~g.~1
, o~"..ã -¡¡ "b," ~'S~""i ~ :ca, o60!;,= !;!5' 2'= ~J!-"'-=B
. rJ~¡::c!; !ill!;! j õI.:ä..,$~ ,..;-: "~1~.8Z!C. §b] 8'S!;co~d,$$
. 28.'S~~~"i:¡¡~ ~ .H~~g>.~~ii ~~§""c>-t:1~ ",õI~~ 1~~1!~~~ii~'S§
~~ ë.~~j1!§,~~:å ~ gã~~~l!ð!~ ;~ä:~ë.~~1 § ~~g~g~ e,ãij~~~~§1
I ...; o~ " (0 ~$ ,¿ ....~o h c,t 2~-'~ ~ '" -..; .,s-f..; "'1 -~ OZC'-
~ ii "i~~~~ ~ie§ '1 ~.>j2i'S~~J ë.bl~~bUh i g~~õ.~i ~,,",e,~¡:h"å~~g;
I H ¡1~.š,~J!}8.gj ~ Jl~~12:lðli !iri;iiih ~ i~!~!~ 1~'~1~~ii~]~
1'" Ii! -,~~""~-¡eor::r > i!i .. ~ I"'" "-j=" 0">" -1 C'" ~~.
:~ ~ Hi~ifnj ~ i j {if ¡~~m ~ i!j i no N! ¡4 ~! t :j~ m ~~ ¡,¡ 1
~~ is ¡j iiU~:a ~~b ~ ~~'S hfO é! ~ ~,oo~~~,"'..!! ".š~ ~ i l~ ~~~ III ,; ¡¡ t .;c3~ ã'Sj'$ I
~~ .!õI~!t8."i~.,s1k21!~ r~I:,~ h!.! ¡joo".šj.š.8h¡:~ '-$.,s~¿;~ 1~..-gãl!B2õ1ai!a
~¡¡¡ Jj--"""';~iit.¡j!; f°!;f;I.šC28c f-¡"'~.,s-" ~ã' 'S~] 0§2i~¡¡¡ o~" ~-!:a~!;]~
é!ð !;oq 4Î!; ã~.,s ~1~ ~ z ð!.8 ~~ã! >~ 1 lh'S.s~:a ~ §ë d :l ~ ~ ddd' :l~g.šs ~"~l~
.... .,;..000..... cò-:;¡~"", " .cor":c "" ,>...
~ U J ~h~tWfti Î i ~,¡jt~jla i ~~nll~mU l~H m l~i!fJ~m!
. ou",;a c2.,sb .. "'.. ,= .. olio !;¡, f..-= -=",a ,=it,,;a;a
. ""=>-""c~ ".8 or""~~ >-~~"""¡jõl ð ~
::: .š~ ~ .5 ; ;81 .š ~,$ . t.š ~1 ~ ~!; ~:ã~~1;], :~ l¡.¡i ::~ ~U~ 1
.¡¿ 2,§ § ~ ~"ã :5 -81 1ã:5 '¡-ë..~ iIB~]U!! ,E,e 1i'~" ~'¡¡6.,~.,so ~ I
0 ii .5 i 1 !!~ ~ §~ '"ã ~~ '1:a: 8.å1!."'-=~ ~~i~~: :J."¡j~¡~. ð
11 ; : i nH~ji . ~i ~~ lit! !~~t!]h ]~ ~1U ithtn 1 i
rJ.. 1 .. .g-:~.,s~~= -8!; .8~ ;~H .~....:lj"'ll ii,~ H=~ £e~~~;; ,~
12 ã ï~ -8 ë-81t2,2j't. §j itit i,.>'S~ ~;Í!ã,;e.,s.. l r~ .8..:'Sã.,s~ ~ i
~g.¡: ~ .¡¡§ ~"iË' ~ ~ U} ;a-8>-~ ~:C~H,$08 b 5' 5' . "~~-ð!-=" s! ~
'¡j"i~l 8. :I !äil1:;;;8.:eit ~ it' ~"ir-.,ã~;a J!~Zã!:ã f~,;,," ]~ o.~=~2'~!~. j
.š'ë ð! ¡¡ -=]~OO" ~ }" .,s "b 0 "-= """",:: oo'c~O",u eo"",, ã-i
I 100]] ~. ~~l '~u'H1¡ ': i.: ~ U~ i.,s'~M] ~~ 'ë"'~ ã t.šZ .g :f~.§¡S~-= ¡;j~ j
~ 'S'~'~~ ~ -=§ If;að!II'': ~..",~..!-¡¡ ,g~~c, ,,& .g..!!;ä:c~"~ ¡¡]ii]';'~l §z í
I i=5,g~ 'S .5 ;hj.i!!ijH! .,s§ i1:a~'ii~ ~"g:~,=~§ :li~&l~o '" ~ 88-=~'i.t
0 .:~' ::::o~ . ':: >-b > c"" it" ¡¡ u-=...13-= ,,:: ¡
b.š""'" 0 ..."e'ë~ ,>!; 0' .. '" """"""j-= ¡.. o~..' it.o" j~ .,sglJ!
. ,,0 :c .:1">" >- =. ... ~ it 0, "'" b~oo' c c
!'~; i l~;; hI .-¡,¡~ !¡i~ ii ~~, ¡ ! ~h ~~~I ; 'iii'il¡J'~~ ~!~~:I I
~"O' ;a ~= ~"~5" :c", , - ' 00 o~",,~,,>-or"'3.u ,,~-
'%h.š ~ ~~'Ilt)" ~ ~~ t~l }~<i 5'Ë i'if ..š,!i~~gjl lh:]j;~H'å ii ~ §l jJ f
!]!~ l~ßfi!nÞ1~ti!lg~~~i~HI~; ~~UuU~~f;~~~
s ¡I ¡1 dUl!~~£i ~t i n I it f!Wi i 1 ~~ ~ ¡~i ~~1. ~ tt:¡U¥ìti~~ ¡ 1) It
... ' f;I ~t~'~~ :s~-' i .... """">Ã>" "1!§~'" t ,;'" i" õI ,c;;-, ¡.. >~
; ..~~~' ~~~!->-..~] . ' ¡;;U~.š!;-:;¡g~S=-l!a,..j2.š~~- '" -U1J-~u'S~g,.,.! .B
-.,so,~ ..,"'.~ III ...
)1c~511'-L
,_._~~-------,----
RESOLUTION NO. 170 I(
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY CLOSURE AT
MOSS STREET CROSSING FOR THE MTDB SOUTH LINE
GRADE CROSSING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transit Development Board
(MTDB) has recently completed the "South Line Grade Crossing
Improvement project, LRT-299", which reconstructed the San Diego
Trolley railroad crossings at the intersections of F street, H
street, J Street and Anita Street; and
WHEREAS, MTDB has added a change order to reconstruct the
trolley crossing at Moss Street and in order to complete the
necessary work, within the railroad right-of-way, the contractor,
National Projects, Inc., has requested approval of two temporary
weekend road closures at Moss Street; and
WHEREAS, it is being requested that the temporary street
closure be from 8:00 p.m. Friday to 6:00 a.m. Monday for two
consecutive weekends starting Friday, March 26 and end by Monday,
April 5, 1993; and
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the plans for this work and
recommends temporary closure subject to the following similar
conditions which the City Council, on August 4, 1992 by Resolution
#16742, approved for previous work on F street, H Street, J Street
and Anita Street.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby approve the temporary closure
at Moss Street crossing for the MTDB South Grade Crossing
Improvement Project subject to the following conditions:
1. Each closure will be from 8:00 p.m.
Friday through 6:00 a.m. Monday, a period
of 58 consecutive hours.
2. An approved traffic control plan be submitted
to the Chula vista Department of Public Works
at least two weeks prior to the commencement
of the closure.
3. All detour signing to be maintained by the
contractor throughout the length of time that
street crossing is closed to through traffic.
4. The contractor is to notify the Chula vista
Star News, San Diego Union Tribune, Chula
1
11..-1
Vista Police Department, Chula vista Fire
Department, Chula vista Transit and the Chula
vista Public Works Department at least one
week in advance of each road closure.
5. If applicable, the contractor is to work with
CalTrans and obtain any necessary permits
needed to allow for the placement of any
traffic control detour signing within CalTrans
right-of-way.
6. The contractor will make available to all
listed above in number 4, 24-hour emergency
telephone numbers and names of contact
personnel.
7. No closure shall be made until the traffic
control plan has been approved by the City and
signs are erected at least one week in advance
notifying the public of the closure in
accordance with California Vehicle Code
sections 21101 and 21103.
8. If work is completed early, then the roadway
will be opened to through traffic as soon as
practically possible.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
F:Ihome\aaomey\570.93
2
II:.-?
_._-~_._--_.-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM J2
MEETING DATE 3/2/93
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /701B Approving a sewer service and storm
drain charge refund for the Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park for
Fiscal Year 1991-92; and appropriating an additional $16,663.10
into Fund 223, the Montgomery Sewer Service Revenue Fund and
$5,810.65 into Fund 227, the Storm Drain Revenue Fund.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public of wor~ ~
REVIEWED BY: City ManageØ
(4/5ths Vote: Yes..x. No_)
In Fiscal Year 1991-92, the Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park, located at 600 Anita
Street, was incorrectly billed for sewer service and storm drain charges on the tax bills
for parcels 622-041-19-00 and 622-091-24-00. They paid the full amounts and are
entitled to a refund of $17,710.52 for the overpayment of the correct charges.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolutions approving the
sewer service charge refund and the appropriation of additional funds.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: None
DISCUSSION:
Dolly Nustrum, manager of Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park, requested information
from City staff on how the sewer service and storm drain charges for Fiscal Years
1991-92 and 1992-93 were calculated. The staff investigation indicated that the
mobile home park was correctly billed for sewer service and storm drain charges for
Fiscal Year 1992-93, but was overbilled for Fiscal Year 1991-92. Ms. Nustrum was
informed that the mobile home park could submit a letter requesting a refund for this
overbilling. We subsequently received a letter dated October 12, 1992 from J.R.
Phillips Company, Inc., property management company for Rancho Bonita Mobile
Home Park, requesting a refund for overpayment of sewer service and storm drain
charges.
The Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park consists of 90 spaces on four parcels located
in the Montgomery area of Chula Vista. Prior to Fiscal Year 1991-92, Parcel
622-091-24-00 was billed for the sewer service and storm drain charge for the entire
park. However, in Fiscal Year 1991-92 three of the four parcels were accidently
charged for the total sewer service and storm drain fees as discussed below.
/7 -I
- ------------
PAGE 2, ITEM -.!:L
MEETING DATE 3/2/93
Parcel 622-082-09-00 was billed $12,562.20 on the Fiscal Year 1991-92 tax bill.
This charge represents the correct sewer service and storm drain charge for the entire
mobile home park, based on the rate of $139,58 per year per space. However, the
correct billing on this parcel should have been $2,233.28, based on 16 spaces within
the parcel.
Parcel 622-091-24-00 was incorrectly billed a total of $12,563,16 on the Fiscal Year
1991-92 tax bill. This charge also represented the sewer service and storm drain
charge for the entire mobile home park. The correct billing on this parcel should have
been $4,466,56, based on 32 spaces.
During Fiscal Year 1991-92, sewer service and storm drain charges for commercial
properties were based on the previous year's water usage (from April 1990 to April
1991) for the first time. The Sweetwater Authority incorrectly coded water account
no. 719-1340-2 serving 600 Anita Street as commercial. The computer matched the
water usage for this address to parcel 622-041-19-00. This resulted in the parcel
being incorrectly charged $5,147.36 based on the low-strength commercial sewer
service and storm drain rate. The correct total billing on this parcel should have
$1,954.12, based on 14 spaces.
Parcel 622-082-06-00 was not charged for sewer service and storm drain charges on
the Fiscal Year 1991-92 tax bill. The total charge on this parcel should have been
$3,908.24, based on 28 spaces.
The Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park was charged a total of $30,272.72 for sewer
service and storm drain charges for Fiscal Year 1991-92, although they should have
been charged only $12,562.20. Therefore, they are entitled to a refund of
$17,710,52, which includes a sewer service refund of $16,663.10 and a storm drain
refund of $1,047.42. This figure was included in our response dated November 18,
1992 to the J.R. Phillips Company.
For Fiscal Year 1992-93, the sewer service and storm drain charges for both multi-
family residential and commercial properties were based on actual water usage. Since
only one method was used to calculate fees for both types of users, the possibility of
double billing customers was reduced. The mobile home park has only one water
account and one address for the four parcels, therefore the charge was billed to one
parcel. The correct charge for the entire mobile home park appears on the Fiscal Year
1992-93 tax bill for parcel 622-041-19-00. The total water use for account no. 719-
1340-2 from April 1991 to April 1992 was 4510 HCF. Based on our multiple family
rate of $1,67 per HCF, the total sewer service and storm drain charge was $7,531.70
for the entire mobile home park.
In order to avoid future errors in the sewer service and storm drain billings, a database
has been created for all the mobile home parks in the City of Chula Vista. It will allow
staff to review and determine the correct charges based on the parcel number, water
)7~2
PAGE 3. ITEM J:L
MEETING DATE 3/2/93
account number and the number of mobile home spaces. City staff will verify the
sewer service and storm drain charges for all mobile home parks before the billing list
is sent to the County of San Diego Accessors Office for the Fiscal Year 1993-94 tax
bills.
FISCAL IMPACT: For Fiscal Year 1992-93, $15,000 was budgeted for Refund of
Fees, in the Montgomery Sewer Service Revenue Fund. As of February 12, 1993,
$4,291.26 remained in this account. Since insufficient funds are available in account
#223-2230-5420 for this refund, an additional $16.663.10 must be appropriated
from Fund 223 into this account. Also, insufficient funds are available in the Storm
Drain Revenue Fund, account #227-2271-5420. A refund of $1047.42 for the
Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park and $4,763.23 for a previous transaction for a total
of $5.810.65. must be appropriated from Fund 227 into this account.
BVH: KR-001
n eng;n e e"ag ende' RANCH AGE. MH P
17- 3
. .--.-..--......
RESOLUTION NO. lìD/r
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A SEWER SERVICE AND
STORM DRAIN CHARGE REFUND FOR THE RANCHO
BONITA MOBILE HOME PARK FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991-
92; AND APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $16,663.10
INTO FUND 223, THE MONTGOMERY SEWER SERVICE
REVENUE FUND AND $5,810.65 INTO FUND 227, THE
STORM DRAIN REVENUE FUND
WHEREAS, in Fiscal Year 1991-92, the Rancho Bonita Mobile
Home Park, located at 600 Anita Street, was incorrectly billed for
sewer service and storm drain charges on the tax bills for parcels
622-041-19-00 and 622-091-24-00; and
WHEREAS, the full amounts were paid and they are entitled
to a refund of $17,710.52 for the overpayment of the correct
charges; and
WHEREAS, since insufficient funds are available for this
refund, an additional $16,663.10 must be appropriated into Fund 223
and $5,810.65 into Fund 227.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve a sewer service and
storm drain charge refund for the Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park
for fiscal year 1991-92.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sum of $16,663.10 is
hereby appropriated from the unappropriated balance of Montgomery
Sewer Service Revenue Fund 223 and transferred into Account 223-
2230-5420 and the sum of $5,810.65 is hereby appropriated from the
unappropriated balance of the Storm Drain Revenue Fund 227 and
transferred into Account 227-2271-5420.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
P,lbomclaltomcy\""'hoo'.mhp
/7 - 'I
."-"-"--"..
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
ITEM TITLE: REPORT: City initiation of a General Plan Amendment and Rezone to
resolve General Plan & Zoning inconsistency for a portion of Special
Study Area B-4, west of Fifth A venue, east of Broadway, along both sides
of Park Way and "G" Street.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning pI
REVIEWED BY: City Manager çj:1/ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
Mr. Alex Ga1chenko, the owner of property located at 570-576 Park Way, has requested
initiation of a general plan amendment to resolve an inconsistency between the General Plan and
zoning for the subject property. Mr. Ga1chenko's property is located amidst a larger area of
such inconsistency (a portion of Zoning Consistency Study Area B-4), located between Fifth
Avenue and Broadway along both sides of Park Way and "G" Street.
RECOMMENDATION: Direct the Planning Department to initiate a General Plan Amendment
and rezone for the area indicated on the attached map.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On February 9, 1993, Mr. Alex Ga1chenko spoke before the City Council and requested that
resolution of the General Plan/Zoning inconsistency on property which he represents at 570-576
Park Way. The current General Plan land use designation for the property is Residential
Medium (6-11 du/ac.) while the property's zoning is R-3 (Apartment Residential) which allows
up to 32 dwelling units per acre on the property.
Resolution of Mr. Ga1chenko's and other property owners' problem with General Plan/Zoning
inconsistency has been delayed due to an issue regarding school impacts raised by the Chula
Vista Elementary School District during two previous General Plan/Zoning consistency actions.
After taking action on the second of these General Plan Amendments, the City committed to not
going forward with any further actions to resolve General Plan/Zoning inconsistencies until a
program which would fully mitigate impacts to schools from new residential development was
considered by the City Council.
Staff and the School Districts have had meetings to prepare a work program for a school impact
mitigation program. We have worked with Sourcepoint, which is associated with SANDAG,
/ ¥ - J
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
to prepare a scope of work and timetable for this project. Unfortunately, other priorities have
consumed the time of Planning Department and School District staff, resulting in a delay in
finalizing this program. Staff has recently re-initiated the process, and expects to return to the
Council with a request to authorize work on this project in early April. Once the school impact
mitigation program is authorized, staff expects to return to the Council with a final action by
October, 1993.
Meanwhile, Mr. Galchenko wishes to proceed with the General Plan Amendment on his property
on a faster schedule. In discussion with the school district staff and the City Attorney, staff has
determined that General Plan Amendments and Rezones for Mr. Ga1chenko's property and other
properties can proceed if the city imposes a requirement that all lots within this area agree to
annex to a Mello-Roos Facilities Financing District prior to issuance of building permits for new
development, or agree to participate in a future city/school district impact mitigation program
to be determined.
Given this understanding, staff recommends that the City Council direct initiation of a General
Plan Amendment and Rezone for the area which encompasses Mr. Ga1chenko's property, along
with many others. This area is generally located along Park Way and "G" Streets between Fifth
Avenue and Broadway (see attached map). If the Council authorizes this General Plan
Amendment, staff will prepare an Initial Study leading to an environmental determination, will
hold a public forum on the proposed changes, and will return to the City Planning Commission
and City Council for final action at a noticed public hearing. Staff anticipates that this process
can be completed by June, 1993.
It should also be noted that the Planning Department will develop a revised work program and
schedule for completing the remainder of the Central Chula Vista Zoning Consistency Study,
as well as a related study of mixed use zoning options for the Broadway commercial corridor,
based on further input to be provided by the City Council regarding priority of major projects
currently assigned to the Planning Department.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project will be conducted by existing city staff, but staff time on this project will not be
reimbursed through a deposit or fee account.
(galca113.gh)
I~~L
-
z z >
« '" II: «..
> -- '"
-' « .n 0 ::>
C>
-- -- -'
'"
'-
~
--j
..-1
- -- :I: CIVIC
:I: I u
V> I '" _..J- 1 L- -- i CENTER
« w ---- L,- ---
I <D ,-,-,-,-I-UrT':--- -,-' I ,
.. - - I I '
I I I ¡ I I r- , FS
, , . ,
"F"
o=:J j J,U_L,:"-
o=:J ' ' " ,
, , I
CENTER ' , ':
EE3
MADRONA
« ,
,
>- ,
I «
- ::>
I I C>
" . _'H
- : : ;---
- II ,~-~--
- -- , "
- , , ,-~
, , "
STREET
-
- VISTA
SQUARE CHUlA VISTA --
Q
, . ---<
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY STUDY
d-
"'REA RECOMMENDED FOR INITIATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE
- --
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION - RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM Cð-11 du/ac.)
_.,- , -t
EXISTING ZONING -- R3 (apartment residentiaO
- - -.. .-
11-3
I 4¿O'
0
-----1EE1--
~/~" cÂ9
I ATIACHMENT 1
Page 1
ATTACHMENT 1
LETTER FROM LATHAM & WATKINS ATTORNEYS AT LAW
RECEIVED IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICE
DECEMBER 16, 1992 AT 5:30 P.M.
AND
RESPONSES TO THAT LETTER
NOTE: The Latham and Watkins letter is shown in small, bold print, with City staff
responses in larger print.
December 16, 1992
BY HAND DELIVERY
Members of the City Planning Commission
Planning Department
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Re: Citv Imolementation of the Countv of San Die20 Hazardous Waste Mannement Plan
Ladies/Gentlemen:
I write to comment on the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zoning Ordinances (the
"Proposed Amendments") regarding the City of Chula Vista's (the "City") implementation of the County
Hazardous Waste Management Plan (the "COHWMP"), item 5 on this evening's agenda. I submit the following
comments on behalf of Appropriate Technologies II, Inc. ("Aptec").
As a threshold matter, the Tanner Act requires the City to consider and act upon the Proposed
Amendments within 180 days of the County's written notification that its COHWMP had been approved by the
state. Cal. Health & Safety Code § 25135.7(c). The County informed the CIty of this approval on January 6,
1992. The 180-day period lapsed on July 4, 1992. Therefore, the City now lacks jurisdiction to effect any
modifications to the COHWMP's application in the City.
The City bas already recognized this limitation on its authority. In its report supporting tbe
Planning Commission's June 30,1992 meeting on this matter, the City acknowledged that itS authority for taking
action regarding the COHWMP would expire on July 4, 1992.
Due to tbis deficiency, Aptec, in a December 4,1992 letter to Mr. Ed Batcbelder, urged the City
to remove consideration of tbe Proposed Amendments from the Planning Commission's agenda for December 16,
1992. Mr. Batcbelder responded by letter dated
-1-
Members of the City Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 1
December 16, 1992 Page 2
December 10, 1992, in which he stated that consideration of the Proposed Amendments will remain on the
Planning Commission's agenda for December 16, 1992 and asserted the City's authority to act on this matter. We
renew our request that the Commission take no action.
As outlined in that December 10, 1992 letter, the City adopted amendments to the Public
Facilities Element of the General Plan incorporating applicable provisions of the COHWMP on
June 30, 1992 as required by law, and prior to the statutory deadline provided for in the Tanner
Act. The amendments currently being proposed consist of Zoning Ordinance Amendments
necessary to implement the provisions of the June 30, 1992 General Plan Amendments, along
with additional clarifying amendments to the Public Facilities Element found necessary during
the course of preparing the Zoning Ordinance Amendments. In addition, the City will also be
entertaining reconsideration of the June 30, 1992 amendments as a procedural courtesy to ensure
that all parties are provided sufficient opportunity to comment on the City's entire hazardous
waste management provisions.
As the City has already adopted provisions, it is an invalid claim that the City does not have
authority to amend those provisions because the July 4, 1992 deadline has past. Under such a
theory the City could never amend our HWMP absent permission from the State Legislature.
Courts have held, however, that "[t]he power to legislate includes by necessary implication the
power to amend existing legislation." Citv of Sausalito v. CountY of Marin (1970) 12
Cal.App.3d 550, 563-64, 90 Cal.Rptr. 843, 852. In addition, where a statute prescribes
deadlines but does not provide for enforcement, these deadlines are usually directory.
Lindbor!z/Dahl Investors v. Garden Grove (1986) 225 Cal.Rptr. 154, 179 Cal.App.3d 956, 960,
n. 2; Anderson v. Pittenger (1961) 17 Cal.Rptr. 54, 197 Cal.App.2d 188, 194; 58 Cal.Jur. (3rd
ed. 1980) Statutes § 150, pp. 546-48. Nothing in the Tanner Act indicates that the time
requirements are intended to act as a limitation on the City to act. Furthermore, the Tanner Act
subserves a public purpose for the location of hazardous waste facilities, and legislative findings
stress the importance of having a local procedure for considering such facilities.
In the event that the Commission decides to proceed with this matter, we submit the following
comments.
1. The Pronosed Amendments Are Preempted Bv Federal Law
The City's actions have been aimed at effecting de iure and de facto hans on hazardous waste
facilities in the City. On their face, the Proposed Amendments represent an attempt by the City to rU"mly establish
those bans. The Proposed Amendments are, therefore, preempted by the comprehensive legislation addressing
hazardous waste management which the United States Congress has enacted. See Oeden Environmental Services
v. City of San Djeeo, 687 F. Supp. 1436 (S.D. Cal. 1988) (city's ban on hazardous waste facilities held preempted
by federal legislation). Therefore, we urge the Planning Commission to revise the Proposed Amendments in order
to bring them within the requirements of federal law.
The "de jure and de facto ban" theory is currently being challenged by the City in federal court.
The proposed amendments do not constitute a "de facto ban" because the regulations are
specifically authorized under the Tanner Act, Health & Safety Code § 25135.7(c)(2).
The case cited for this proposition, Ogden Environmental Services v. City of San Diego,
687 F. Supp. 1436 ,S.D. Cal. 1988), is easily distinguishable. In Ogden, the court struck down
the City of San Diego's CUP process where it failed to contain.!illY standards for evaluating
-~-
Members of the City Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 1
December 16, 1992 Page 3
hazardous waste facilities. Here, we are attempting to establish such standards in accordance
with the procedure established by the State.
2. The Proposed Amendments Violate The Commerce Clause Of The United States
Constitution
The Commerce Clause prohibits local governments from interfering with the now of interstate
commerce. The intent of the Proposed Amendments is to limit the now of hazardous waste into the City. While
this result may appear attractive to the City, it is precisely the sort of parochial protectionist measure which
unconstitutionally impedes the now of interstate commerce. Measures much like the Proposed Amendments have
been repeatedly struck down by the United States Supreme Court and lower courts as violative of the Commerce
Clause.
The Commerce Clause does not restrict all local regulation, only such regulation as unduly
burdens interstate commerce. The intent of the proposed amendments is to establish provisions
for the comprehensive management of hazardous wastes, including criteria for the proper siting
of hazardous waste facilities within the City as authorized by the State in the Tanner Act, Gov.
Code § 25135.7 (c). The development of siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities is critical
in protecting the health and safety of the City's residents and businesses and is not a violation
of the Commerce Clause.
3. The Proposed Amendments Are Preemoted Bv State Law
Much like Congress, the California legislature has enacted legislation to address the challenges
posed by hazardous waste management. This legislation provides comprehensive regulation of the treatment,
storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous waste, and establishes priorities in managing hazardous waste
in California. Since tbe Proposed Amendments would serve to institute de iure and de facto bans on hazardous
waste facilities in the City, they are also preempted by state law. Consequently, we urge the Planning Commission
to reject the Proposed Amendments in favor of amendments not violative of applicable state laws.
4. The Proposed Amendments Violate The Tanner Act
To foster a cohesive state-wide strategy for the management of bazardous waste, the California
legisiature enacted the Tanner Act, wbose goal is to facilitate the siting of hazardous waste facilities
notwithstanding frequent local opposition. The Tanner Act requires each county to prepare a hazardous waste
management pl~n. This plan must then be implemented by all cities witbin the county.
The City may not take action whicb is inconsistent with the COHWMP. The CIty's Proposed
Amendments are inconsistent with the COHWMP siting criteria and fair share principles.
,
The proposed amendments are not preempted by state law, nor do they violate the Tanner Act,
because they are specifically authorized under the Tanner Act, Health & Safety Code §
25135.7(c). In addition to requiring local jurisdictions to adopt provisions consistent with the
County hazardous waste management plan, Health and Safety Code §25135.7(d) (Tanner Act)
expressly provides, in reference to § 25135.7(c), that "This section does not limit the authority
of arTY city to attach appropriate conditions to the issuance of any land use approval for a
hazardous waste facility in order to protect the public health, safety, or welfare, and does not
limit the authority of a city to establish more stringent planning requirements or siting criteria
than those specified in the county hazardous waste management plan." To the extent that the
- 3-
Members of the City Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 1
December 16, 1992 Page 4
City modified or made more stringent certain of the COHWMP'S requirements and criteria, does
not of itself constitute inconsistency, or amount to the claimed" de jure and de facto bans" on
hazardous waste facilities within the City previously rebutted under item #1.
The COHWMP itself indicates that its provi;;ions are more broadly based given the document's
county-wide scope, and that local jurisdictions may fmd the need to refine them based on more
specific local conditions. Accordingly, the City has modified the COHWMP's General Areas
inventory and siting criteria to ensure the utmost recognition for, and protection of, the health,
safety and welfare of its citizens and environment.
For example, City criteria Nos. 1 and 2 cbange tbe dermitlon of "proximity to populations" so
as to significantly Increase the required buffer zone. Moveover, City criterion No.1 explicitly states that the "active
portion of the facility shall be subject to additional setbacks and buffering."
It should be noted that the above comments pertain to the General Plan provisions adopted on
June 30, 1992.
The above sited criteria changes do not significantly increase the required buffer zone because
they merely involve tying the measurement of a facility's separation from populations to a more
fixed and recognizable feature, i.e. the property boundary on which the facility is sited, rather
than from the more ambiguous" active portion of the facility" as stated in the COHWMP. Given
this change, the City also added a qualifying criteria stating that "The active portion of a facility
shall be subject to additional setbacks and buffering from the property boundary as r~quired by
the underlying zone, or through conditions established by the associated use permit(s). "
In practical application, the only increase in buffering created by these changes would be the
setback distance from the property boundary to the "active portion" of a facility as required by
the underlying industrial zone. Such zoning setbacks, which are normally less than 50 feet,
would by comparison to the COHWMP's recommended minimum distance to populations of
2000 feet, not amount to a significant increase. Perhaps Latham & Watkins' perception arises
from a situation similar to that at the Otay Landfill, where a facility is set within a substantially
larger property. In such particular instances however, it would not the City's intent to
unreasonably apply the criteria, but rather to recognize that a smaller facilty site or "property"
exists.
Additionally, eventhough the City's changes do not amount to a significant increase, such
refinement of the COHWMP's criteria is authorized by the Tanner Act as discussed in the
prevIOus responses.
The City criteria also mandate that the City require a health risk assessment ("HRA"), determine its scope, and
use it to decide whether a CUP should be issued. This is contrary to the terms of the COHWMP, which permits
a city to require an HRA only when a facility handling ignitable, volatile or reactive wastes proposes to locate
within 2,000 feet of a residential development.
The COHWMP contains no such prohibition on the ability of a city to require preparation of a
health risk assessment (HRA). The terms of the COHWMP referenced read as follows:
- +-
\
Members or the City Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 1
December 16, 1992 Page 5
- "For facilities handling ignitable, volatile, or reactive waste, the minimum distance of
2000 feet should be required unless the facility developer can show that the public is
adequately protected in the event of an accident. (Risk Assessment)"
This criteria simply indicates that a minimum 2000 foot buffer to populations should always be
required unless the applicant can demonstrate, through the HRA, that the public can be
adequately protected at a lesser distance. Not that a city's ability to call for an HRA is limited.
Preparation of HRA's is a standard practice in evaluating certain potential siting impacts of
hazardous waste facilities.
The City's criteria correctly recognize that there is no particular distance which is automatically
assumed to be safe, and simply call for an HRA to assess specific circumstances, and
demonstrate if the facility can safely operate at the proposed distance. In recognition that each
hazardous waste facility proposal will be unique in its potential health risks, the City's criteria
call for a screening process to determine an appropriate scope and depth for eâch HRA. That
screening process is designed to be objective, and as set forth in Section 19.58.178H of the
proposed Implementing Ordinance, involves the Local Assessment Committee, an Ad Hoc
Technical Committee experts in the waste field, and the proponent, not solely City staff.
Implementing Ordinance Section 19.58. 178H(6) further clarifies that the HRA is an evaluative
tool, and is not to be construed as providing defmitive answers regarding facility siting.
In addition, while the COHWMP allows the siting or hazardous waste racilities in certain hazard
areas as long as those racilities are "designed, constructed, operated, and maintained" to address the hazard, the
City flatly reruses to permit such siting except "at the discretion or the City Council." ~ City criteria Nos. 4,
5,7,8.)
It should be noted that the above comment pertains to the General Plan provisions adopted on
June 30, 1992.
The noted City criteria are intended to implement those of the COHWMP by similarly
prohibiting facilities in certain hazard areas (floodplains, faults, geologic/soil instability, etc.)
except where satisfactory design and other controls are provided. The effective difference is that
the City's criteria require that the proposed design and other controls be reviewed and approved
by the City Council, in order to provide the City's decision makers the ability to ensure that the
health, safety and welfare of the public and the environment will be adequately protected.
In reviewing the criteria, staff felt that the current wording may have been slightly ambiguous
in conveying that intent, and has thereby made clarifying revisions. In addition, it was
discovered that criterias No.5 and 8 did not contain the same Council approval provision, and
therefore it was added. These revisions are reflected on pages 3-47 and 3-48 of Exhibit B, and
will thereby be included in your action on GPA-92-02(A).
Perhaps the City's most telling deviation rrom the COHWMP is in the area or rair share
guidelines., In drafting the COHWMP, the County recognized that without cooperation and regard ror county-
and state-wide needs, hazardous waste racilities would not be sited in Southern Calirornia at all, which would make
environmentally sare waste management impossible.
-S'-
-
.
Members of the City Planning Commission ATTACHMENT I
December 16, 1992 Page 6
The City, in addition to requiring an applicant to meet all of its siting criteria and Ibe
COHWMP's fair share guidelines, would require the applicant to "submit evidence convincing to the City
consistent with" one of four standards. The applicant must also submit extensive data regarding currently existing
and projected waste generation, existing treatment facilities, and intergovernmental agreements. The City also
reserved for itself tbe authority to "survey the efforts put forth by the communities from within which the involved
wastes are being generated, to recognize treatment responsibilities and reduCt their off-site treatment needs
through promoting on-site treatment and waste minimization. "
As stated in the second paragraph above, the City's provisÍons require the COHWMP's fair
share guidelines to be met, and further, establish a four-tiered approach which translates those
guidelines into more succinctly stated concepts which can be readily applied by City staff in the
local evaluation of specific facility proposals. Therefore, rather than a "telling deviation from
the COHWMP", the City's fair share provisions implement the COHWMP's.
Furthermore, the COHWMP expressly recognizes that the basis for fair share determinations is
dynamic, and subsequently calls for waste generation and treatment data to be updated annually,
or whenever a new facility is sited or an existing facility expanded or restricted. The City's
requirement for the applicant's submittal of such data is consistent with the COHWMP's
provisions, and is necessary to create an accurate basis for fair share evaluations.
The City's intent in providing for the possible survey of other community's efforts, is to ensure
that those jurisdictions which are large waste generators, but do not provide treatment facilities,
at least actively recognize treatment responsibilities and promote waste minimization. Such a
provision may also provide the basis upon which future compensation/incentive programs could
be established. In this regard, the City's provisions indicate we mID: survey the efforts, but in
no way indicated that such a survey would form the sole basis for facility approval or denial.
The preceding sample of the City's efforts to supplant the COHWMP is by no means exhaustive,
but is offered to illustrate the onerous nature of the City's siting criteria and fair share requirements. The City
has, in effect, refused to implement the COHWMP as it is required to do by the Tanner Act. The City's actions,
therefore, have violated the Tanner Act and have undermined Ibe state-wide strategy for hazardous waste
management. We urge the Planning Commission to reexamine the Propo§fd Amendments and require the City
to draft amendments which are consistent with the COHWMP.
As delineated throughout the preceding responses, the City's adoption hazardous waste
management provisions is intended to implement, not supplant, the COHWMP. The Tanner Act
expressly provides that the City may adopt provisions which are "more stringent" than those of
the COHWMP. While the City has adopted such provisions, they .are not materially more
"onerous" than those of the COHWMP, and are entirely consistent with the intent of the
COHWMP, and provisions of the Tanner Act.
5. The CitY Cannot Relv On Its June 30. 1992 Amendments
Aptec has challenged, in federal court, the City's enactment of Ibe June 30, 1992 amendments due to the
City's failure to comply with the notice provisions of Cal. Gov't Code §§ 65090 and 65091. To the extent that the
Proposed Amendments are dependent on the June 30, 1992 amendments, they are barred by the lack of proper
notice in the enactment of those amendments, and for the other reasons alleged in Aptec's federal lawsuit.
-t .-
I
Members of the City Planning Commission A IT ACHMENT 1
December 16, 1992 Page 7
The City has consistently encouraged Aptes's participation and comments on our amendments.
In response to Aptec's alleged notice objections, the City Planning Commission continued its
hearing on June 24, 1992 to June 29, 1992 to provide Aptec with more than the required 10
days in the Government Code and City Charter to comment on these amendments. To
accommodate Aptec's request for even more time to comment, and in an overabundance of
caution, the City is also now entertaining reconsideration to provide for further comment by
Aptec, eventhough the City is not required to do so. The City has consistently responded to
Aptec's objections, and has provided Aptec with far more notice and time to comment than is
required by law.
6. The CitY's Reliance On An EIR Addendum To SuDDon The ProDosed Amendments Violates CEOA
The proposed "Addendum To The County of San Diego Hazardous Waste Management Plan
Environmental Impact Report" ("EIR Addendum") appears to violate both procedural and suhstantive
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The Notice oftoday's Planning Commission
hearing indicates that the EIR Addendum "previously prepared by the City under EIR-92-O3, and considered iu
conjunction with the Juue 1992 amendments. . . shall be reconsidered." Aptec objected to the City's reliance on
this EIR Addendum in euacting the June 30, 1992 amendments and, since the City proposes to rely on the same
EIR Addendum for the Proposed Amendments to be considered today, Aptec renews its objection on the same
grounds.
CEQA procedural standards do not allow the City to proceed by an EIR Addendum with respect
to the Proposed Amendments because those amendments constitute a separate project. However, even if the
amendments are considered to be part of the same project, an EIR Addendum is inadequate because the
amendments have the potential for new significant environmental impacts which are not accounted for in the EIR
prepared for the COHWMP. We urge the Planning Commission to require the City to perform the environmental
review mandated by CEQA.
Finally, the proposed EIR Addendum is substantively inadequate hecause it completely lacks any
substantive discussion of the environmental impact of modifying siting and other requirements for hazardous waste
facilities in Chula Vista. For example, the EIR Addendum fails to discuss the significance of the environmental
impact of "implement[ingl more restrictive hazardous waste regulations." This enactment can have a substantial
impact on the rest of the Southern California region.
The City's issuance of an Addendum to the COHWMP EIR in adopting the June 30, 1992
amendments was appropriate under CEQA. An Addendum to an EIR is authorized for projects
which "do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment"
(CEQA Guidelines, § 15164). The City Staff analyzed the potential for significant, new
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project that were not analyzed in the
COHWMP EIR. As a result, the City concluded that its proposed amendments to the
COHWMP would not require major modifications to the COHWMP EIR, since the City's
amendments represented minor technical changes. Furthermore, those amendments would not
create significant, new environmental impacts, since the amendments favored protection of public
health and the environment with respect to the location and siting of hazardous waste facilities.
The use of an Addendum to the COHWMP EIR is deemed to be adequate under CEQA.
Furthermore, it should be clarified that reconsideration of said Addendum would olÙY occur in
conjunction with the City's reconsideration of its prior approval of the June 3D, 1992 General
Plan Amendments. It is currently staff's recommendation that said reconsideration be denied.
In addition, the currently proposed additional General Plan Amendments (GPA 92-02A) and
-~-
,
Members of the City Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 1
December 16, 1992 Page 8
Implementing Ordinance have been separately evaluated under CEQA (IS 93-14), and it was
determined that the proposed projects would not create significant environmental effects. As a
result, a negative declaration was issued for these proposed amendments.
7. The City's Reliance On A Ne2ative Declaration To SuDOOrt The ImDlementii:2
Ordinances And Associated Revisions Violates CEOA
A negative declaration is appropriate only if "[tlhere is no substantial evidence" that the project
in question wiD have a significant adverse impact on the environment. CEQA Guidelines, § 15070, subd. (a).
Because the Proposed Amendments would cause hazardous waste facilities to be sited outside of the City's
boundaries, a significant adverse impact on other areas in the Southern California region may well occur.
The negative declaration prepared by the City expressly relies on an initial study conducted by
the City. Aptec has already objected to the complete failure of the City to comply with CEQA requirements for
conducting initial studies. Aptec's letter voicing this objection is attached to these comments as Exhibit A.
In light of the jurisdictional considerations discussed above, Aptec urges the City to remove
consideration orthe Proposed Amendments from the Planning Commission's agenda for today, December 16, 1992.
If, however, the Planning Commission does proceed to consider this item, Aptec urges it to reject the Proposed
Amendments due to the considerations discussed above in favor of amendments which are consonant with federal
and state laws.
The City conducted an initial study to assess the potential environmental impacts associated with
the proposed Implementing Ordinance and amendments to the Public Facilities Element of the
Chula Vista General Plan, pursuant to CEQA. The initial study analyzed the po~ntial
environmental effects associated with the implementation of local siting criteria for hazardous
waste facilities located within the City of Chula Vista. As a result of the initial study, the City
determined that there was no substantial evidence that the proposed project would have a
significant adverse impact on the environment, and a negative' declaration was issued pursuant
to the CEQA Guidelines, § 15070.
Furthermore, the City previously responded to the issue concerning CEQA compliance in
conducting the initial study, as raised by Latham & Watkins in a letter dated October 16, 1992.
Clarification was provided to demonstrate that the initial study packet that was distributed to the
public was complete, in a response letter from the City's Environmental Review Coordinator
dated November 19, 1992.
Very truly yours,
Roman Urson
of LATHAM & WATKINS
Enclosure
cc: Tom Vernon, Esq.
Mr. Kelly McGregor
B,\hwpcrpl.an
-?-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-93-07: Reconsideration of proposal to change
the name of Otay Lakes Road between Telegraph Canyon Road and
Wueste Road to Telegraph Canyon Road - City initiated
RESOLUTION /7ð/1 Approving PCM-93-07
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning ;i't
REVIEWED BY: City Manageg:' (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.1O
Council Referral No. 2641
On January 12, 1993, Council approved changing the name of Otay Lakes road between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Wueste Road to Telegraph Canyon Road. It was later determined
that the residents of Otay Lakes Lodge Mobile Home Park had not been notified as had originally
been reported to Council. A street name change does not require noticing or a public hearing,
but it has been Council practice to do so.
Staff provided a public notice regarding the name change to all affected property owners along
the Otay Lakes Road frontage; however, when it was determined that the residents had not been
noticed, either by staff or the property owner who did receive a notice, a letter from staff
explaining the name change and requesting comments was distributed to each resident within the
park. Several residents voiced opposition to the change, and thus the Council directed that the
matter be noticed for reconsideration at the meeting of March 2, 1993.
The proposal is exempt from environmental review as a general rule exemption.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Adopt the resolution approving PCM-93-07, to become effective on
September 1, 1993; and
2. Direct staff to continue to work with the County to have the name changed
in the unincorporated area east of Wueste Road.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On December 2, 1992, the Planning
Conunission voted unanimously (7-0) recommending that Council approve the street name change
in accordance with Resolution PCM-93-07.
)q~(
- .-----.--
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 3/2/93
DISCUSSION:
Otay Lakes Road originates at Bonita Road and extends in a southeasterly direction to the
intersection with Telegraph Canyon Road, proceeding in an easterly direction for approximately
8 miles ending at Highway 94. Otay Lakes Road makes a right angle turn at Telegraph Canyon
Road and appears visually and physically like an extension of Telegraph Canyon Road rather than
Otay Lakes Road. This alignment causes confusion and problems for motorists unfamiliar with
the area.
The County has indicated that there is no interest in changing the name in the unincorporated
area at this time. The failure of the County to rename that portion of Otay Lakes Road extending
east from Wueste Road to Highway 94 could lead to some confusion by motorists in the less
heavily travelled unincorporated area. At Council direction, it would be the intent of staff to
continue to encourage the County to initiate the name change east of Wueste Road.
The proposed name change would affect the segment of Otay Lakes Road from Telegraph
Canyon Road to Wueste Road, a distance of approximately 3.5 miles (see Exhibit "A"). The
entire length of the roadway proposed for change is located within the city limits of Chula Vista.
There are a very limited number of properties with addresses on this segment of Otay Lakes
Road, the vast majority being the residents within the Otay Lakes Lodge Mobile Home Park.
In response to the earlier request for resident comments, staff received 19 telephone responses
and 12 written responses, representing a total of 33 of the 196 mobile home spaces within the
park (see attached for written comments). Of these responses, four were in favor of the name
change and 29 were opposed. Those supporting the change cited the confusion for those
attempting to locate their address. Those opposed to the change were primarily concerned with
the time, trouble and expense of effecting an address change, particularly since many of the
residents are elderly and on fixed incomes. This reason was also cited on a petition of opposition
received in response to the Council hearing notice and signed by 71 residents representing
approximately 54 of the mobile home spaces (see attached petition).
Several residents also noted that the street presently has three different names, and have
questioned why, if the objective is to avoid confusion, the entire street isn't being renamed to "L"
Street or Telegraph Canyon Road. Some stated that any existing confusion would be alleviated
by the installation of the new street signs and a traffic signal at the intersection. By renaming
only the City portion, it was stated, the present confusion over Telegraph Canyon Road would
simply be moved east to Wueste Road, and the resulting two bisected and unconnected sections
of Otay Lakes Road would create further confusion.
Residents both in favor and opposed to the change expressed concern with the timing if it were
to be approved. They wanted ample time to accomplish the address change in a systematic and
economical manner, i.e., use up existing checks, notify friends and relatives as normal
correspondence was exchanged. Several seemed to believe that three or four months would be
helpful in this regard.
)9~2
- ----,0__.___-..
Page 3, Item-1f..
Meeting Date 3/2/93
The name change will not eliminate all confusion with respect to "L" Street - Telegraph Canyon
Road, or Otay Lakes Road. It will, however, improve the present situation for the more heavily
travelled incorporated sections between the 1-805 Freeway and the developing areas directly to
the east of the intersection. Also, as a practical matter, other renaming schemes would have a
far greater impact on existing addresses than does this proposal. Staff would continue to work
with the County to change the name of the unincorporated portion of Otay Lakes Road, although
this is not considered essential to the success of the proposal at hand.
In order to provide the residents of Otay Lakes Lodge additional time to accomplish the change
of addresses, we have recommended that the name change become effective in six months, on
September 1, 1993. It should also be noted that the Post Office will forward mail to a new
address for one full year.
FISCAL IMP ACT: If this name change is approved, there will be a number of signs which will
have to be replaced. The signs are located at the following intersections: Telegraph Canyon
Road (2 signs); Rutgers Road (1 sign); Eastlake Parkway (2 signs); Lane Avenue (1 sign); and
Wueste Road (1 sign). Total cost of sign replacement is estimated at approximately $1,400.00.
These funds would be requested in the FY 1993-94 operating budget.
WFC P,lhomo\planning\S88.93
/9,3
_'_H____~_-,_.-
'1 - ~I~ ei
I
<
-. ~~:' 6~
í £-c
-
=
."~-
=
Þ<
I ~
. =..
~
OZ
. = CIC III
-- .- <Z :IE
. r¡¡¡00
C!CIC~"
. Z tÐZ .
.. < <
=:0 <
. 0 ~= ..
r¡¡¡ .11:1.. iii
:I ~= G
. «0
Z £-<r:¡
\ £-<O..
r:¡ "DiII ~
r:¡ :I£-<Z
. CIC 0...
£-<ClCO-
; i tÐl'8c£-<z
...
! ~ Z
I::
to .. <
i I:: ..
a
~ ..
.'YOIOII
~
EJ
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-93-O7
RESOLUTION. OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL CHANGE THE NAME OF OTAY LAIŒS ROAD
TO TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD BETWEEN TELEGR.APH
CANYON ROAD AND WUESTE ROAD
WHEREAS, on July 28, 1992 the City Council directed that the City initiate a street
name change for the cast/west segment of Otay Lakes Road to Telegraph Canyon Road between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Wueste Road, and
WHEREAS, the proposal is to change the name because it is confusing to people
unfamiliar with the area to encounter an unexpected street name change when there is no change
in direction, and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said street
name change and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners and major
developers affected by said change at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely December
2, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
WHEREAS, the proposal is exempt from environmental review as a general rule
exemption.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
based on the facts presented at the hearing, the Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council adopt the attached City Council Resolution changing the name of Otay Lakes Road to
Telegraph Canyon Road between Telegraph Canyon Road and Wueste Road,
That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council.
"
,...9307,.pc
)e¡,5
--'-~____'_H ,
.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
I CALIFORNIA, tlUs day 2nd day of December 1992 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Fuller, Carson, Martin, Moot, Ray, Tarantino, and Tuchscher
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Susan Fuller, Chair
Attest:
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
.'
""'307,.,.,
ft-(,¡,
-~._-,----- ,
,_n I
15. PUBUC HEARING PCM-93-07: CONSIDERATION 1'0 OiANGE'!HE NAME OF MAY I-'IŒS
ROAD TO TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD BElWEEN '!HE IN'ŒRSEcnON OF OTAY I-'IŒS ROAD AND
TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD 1'0 WUESTE ROAD - C1Y INI11ATED . In July 1992, Council directed staff
to proceed with the renaming of the east/west segment of Otay Lakes Road (approximately 3.5 miles) to
Telegraph Canyon Road. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning)'
Councilman Fox questioned why the County was not interested in changing their portion of the road.
Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, responded that staff did colTespond with the County and had received
a response. He felt there was confusion on the part of the County staff regarding the specific areas being
changed. He suggested that staff contact the County staff at a higher level and try to get a better
understanding of what their objections were.
City Manager Goss stated it was a historical issue due to the fact that Otay Lakes Road served Otay Lakes.
In past years staff had talked to the County at a higher level and they were not receptive to any change.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. There being no public
testimony, the public hearing was declared closed.
Councilman Moore requested that staff contact the post office and affected properties and infonn them of
the effective date of change.
RESOLU110N 16959 OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MOORE, reading of the ten was waived, passed and
approved 441 with Nader absent.
RESOLU110N 16959 APPROVING '!HE smEET NAME CHANGE FOR MAY I-'IŒS ROAD 1'0
TELEGRAPH CANYqN ROAD BElWEEN '!HE IN'ŒRSEcnON OF MAY LAIŒS ROAD AND TELEGRAPH
CANYON ROAD TO WUESTE ROAD
.
¡q. 7
..,,"---- -"--"-~--
---.
"
" Exce1:pt from Draft Plannin¡¡ Commission Minutes of 12/2/92
ITEM 5: PUBliC HEARING: PCM-93-o7; CONSIDERATION TO CHANGE THE
NAME OF CYrAY LAKES ROAD TO TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD
BE1WEEN THE INTERSECI'ION OF C1fAY LAKES ROAD AND
TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD TO WUESTE ROAD - City Initiated
At the Commission's suggestion, there was no fonnal presentation. Commissioner Tuchscher
asked if there would be some confusion further east in the County portion of Otay Lakes Road.
Principal Planner Griffin agreed that it could, but the County had been contacted and they were
not interested in changing the name of that section, If the Otay Ranch proceeded as scheduled,
the City would have jurisdiction over a further portion of that in the future and would change
the name at that time. The demarcation between Telegraph and Otay would occur at Wueste
Road and there would be a sign there, At Commissioner Tuchscher's request, Assistant
Planning Director Lee stated staff would contact the County again regarding renaming the
eastern portion of Otay Lakes Road.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed,
MSUC (Ray/Tuchscher) 7-0 to adopt Resolution PCM-90-07 chan&in& the name of Otay
Lakes Road to Telegraph Canyon Road between Tele&rapb Canyon Road and Wueste
Road.
.'
) C¡...i'
---~----
--- January 25, 1993
1925 Otay Lakes Road, 1/103
Chula Vista, CA 91913 '
l
- '-
J¡J'
,¡.¿
Mr. Steve Griffin t:c
-.
Principal Planner, City of Chula Vista ". '.",'
276 Fourth Avenue
Chu1a Vista, CA 91910
Dear Sir:
I received your letter regarding the name change of Otay Lakes Road to
Telegraph Canyon Road. I do have a couple of comments. I am writing this
letter as an occupant (of four months) and not as a representative of the
Home Owners' Association, I still feel that my concerns may be shared by
many. Further, since the owner did not notify us of this, I question
whether our concerns will get to you.
First of all, there is an expense involved to each person for the change of
address on checks and the notification of all people and businesses who may
have reason to send correspondence. (I know that monthly statements have a
place to change the address.) In my own case, I had to mail about 25 more
than I could note on a monthly statement. Included in these are a number of
periodicals which require six to eight weeks to change the address.
I think that it is imperative that we know the exact time frame involved in
this matter, Also, I would like to know how long the post office will
cooperate with the delivery of "mis-marked" mail and if we all have to notify
them of the change?
As usual, the constituents are the last ones notified in these matters; for
example:
1. The subject project
2. Why njthought was given to an eastern direction exit at
the entrance to Otay Lakes Lodge since there is going to
be a new shopping center and medical center built?
I thank you for your time in this and I would appreciate hearing from you.
I may be reached at 656-1242 (home) or 482-6366 (office at Southwestern
College),
Yours truly,
/~p~
Michael C. Conlin
MCC:lk
¡q,t¡
--
, . ~~f?-
. ::-~_-:::
""'--::' .....-
01Y OF
CHULA VISTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT ' '.
-... '
January 21, 1993
Dear Resident:
On January 12,1993, the Chula Vista City Council approved changing
the name of otay Lakes Road between Telegraph Canyon Road and
Wueste Road to Telegraph Canyon Road (please see atta~hed staff
report anq exhibit). Unfortunately, we later became aware that
only the property owner and not the residents of Otay Lakes Lodge
had been notified by City staff of the proposed change and public
hearings that were held.
We would like to take this belated opportunity to request your
input and comments on the street name change. If there are
objections to the change, we will request that the City Council
reconsider the matter and schedule another public hearing to accept
your :written comments and/or public testimony. Each of the
residents of otay Lakes Lodge would receive a written notice of any
such future hearing. ~:
Please direct your questions or comments to me, steve Griffin, at
691-5257, or at the address listed below. If you prefer, Mr. Harry
Brown has kindly agreed to accept written comments on my behalf at
the office.
We would appreciate receiving any.comments yo may have no later
than February 1, 1993.
~ U.JE Jo./fA RTLY A Cïll..é F£ W ITJ-I
"
steve Griffin TI-IJ5 A DDI<EJ;S C 1--1 liNe: £
Principal Planner 1-1 0 \.J !:'Ý EIZ s,ev E J'\ A L ~V~TlDf\j
attachments fVEGD To BE '1l N~\.J E F- cD
ßo8 l;Í J..JL"L EbJ NO /?K I.!.
wpSl\patty\telcnyn.let .s. 'Þj). Œ.E SC;..
19..//) {DUE~J
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA. CAliFORNIA 91910116191 691.5101
.
'ì\J F..5T¡Q N5
!) VO D~IVE.RS t tJf:f.-l1eVLE LI F: C. !'"N C e..s
~a~\JE rO B'F.. CRH4tJG.EÐ IMM'bDIm"LY
DR ~T II t.f\f" OJ:" ~E lJE,\JAL e::
.
.J) \.¡.j }LL MfllL 'To BO7+-1 ()L 0 AN JJ Nf:ùV flJJIJRf.SS
Br; VELI vlEe ED ~lJ~ SOIYl r; PE6<Job
DF fl ~E.: tr...5fJ HblV LlJN G
3) W IL 'L TN E Af)DR FE OF DVR {rJbBJl1£
/...¡ D fV1 E..s 15 E C HIU'VG CD AT TJ./E Tim E.
W¡TI-1 H .V.D AS IJ BLIU¡fk:ET CHIìft,Ir;E
D 1<. DOE:S E Fie. H {VRc.H OUùNER RAffE
Tò /nDJVI[)V~Ll.Yt!tffJ fúlJTJF'( ¡-1,V.D ,
,s/ tJc-r:r¿Lj
@J Ò15 J d'I'~
11.~ II
, ______d_,_.-
/
(rJ[(rJ0 TO: 5~eve ç~~tt~n.~~~nc~pa~ P~anne~ [
C~~V ot Chu~a V~4~a ~~ann~n~ Depa~~men~
FRO(r¡: [',.
F~ed & (r¡~~d~ed Fe~~u4on.O~ay Lake4 Lod~e
SUBJECT:
5~~ee~ Name Chan~e
We a~e 4~~ong~y oppo4ed ~o ~he 4~~ee~
name change t~om a~av Lake4 Road ~o Te~eg~aph Can-
yon Road.
at ~he 196 4pace4 ~n ~he pa~k. mO4:t ot
wh~ch a~e occup~ed by 2 peop~e. ~h~4 wou~d attec~
c~o4e :to 400 peop~e.
A~~ ~he documen:t4 ~ha~ wou~d need ~o be
changed wou~d be ve~v :t~me con4um~ng and CO4:t~y. A
good many ot ~he ~e4~den:t4 a~e ~e~~~ed andlo~ on
Soc~a~ Secu~~~V. The add~e44 wou~d a~4o have ~o
be changed on d~~ve~4 ~~cen4e4. check4 and a~~
c~ed~:t ca~d compan~e4 and u:t~~~:t~e4 no:t~t~ed.
We ~mp~o~e you :to ~econ4~de~ :th~4 change
ð".....¡. 4- 'n-k.t~ -d-.v11 ......--
F~ed & (r¡~~d~ed Fe~gu4on
1925 O:tay Lake4 Rd.#126
Chu~a V~4~a, Ca. 91913
Te~ephone:421-82J5
1~-I.2...
r3/¡ /C¡13
~~~ .- '-:;. - .---
ó2(k~ . :
~ t ~~~ CZ)dv -_. -.-- -. -------
..- - -- -- --
..... _UH --.
j/;:R- k'-h-<-Ll M L ;fp ~ tL f2v.:t1.. -f-
,6--il~ ---'"";ff>-L d.-.x;? r ~"/~.Æ'd,
~'l .;tht41-k ..d ¡~J4 /Î ,~~-----
{~f:.u+?t- cd -ií~ ~ . 7fa~ .
~~ KÆ rf :1JJ7v;-~L I!c-¿ _~-¡-I tJ-ðz,'jí i2.
{! ÆA<-~ /h-z.-..t/lL- &--? ~L4.¿-t!"Þ~ /v-IW::L a-
.~-cT~ .~ .y ri! tcC/ $b<L Ref. Á-.2- &d. -
~j- ~ ~,-tz',~~7. .,j~a~ ~
f?di, k ,1!I~-<J---6. R . ú~ ~ ~ .
. /& ~-z-1:'~-?-t<_t--(2/. -
f' ~ ~4a.l1rik Rd. ..
<f- æta¡- cft;~ . h'--ð-u-!¿J ~--tZ¡. ~
c;L--¡(J- ~~*{'-h"- 'On '- ~. -,- ... -
Jti.-L- (jÆa.rt?-L-~:/ ~¥;dz -
cui.tuéVf. d~?1~ -:i;; tt#~d!:, 1(~ -~
(èt::;(f ~a-h~ ~ct;. .. -
.;g~-- 'e¿Æ.L-~ ' -
)' q;25' 'Î~ii:::a);t ~~":-7Þd--¡-~~
8P/I 2. I cf;t;.~ ~.. Rd", e/~ i~
1&¡~/3
"-
- , -
To: 1-23-93
Steve Griffin, Principal Planner
City of Chula Vista, CA
Dear Sir: Re Council Resolution PCM-93-07
Please register us as being in PROTEST against the name
change of Otay lakes Rd to Telegraph Canyon Rd. in our area-
We have already sustained damages (costs) due to two former
changes of ZIP codes from 92010 to 92013 and later 91913.
We have had to change our letterhead, mail stamps already
twice. And this street renaming which is otherwise unnecessary
would add a third.
I have little thought that this objection will carry any weight,
but I might suggest that we short-cut a future change in four
or five years, and rename the whole of Telegraph Canyon AND
Otay Lakes Rds as "L" street as they are rightfully extensions
of the same.
;=~
Harrison K. Shirley
~Sh::~~
1925 Otay Lakes Rd #169
Chula vista, CA 91913
¡q.-I't
-----.-..-----,.--
~
57~ /£ ¿ÇÄi'::N""'/~ ~""'é:/p~t! ~;g^, ^' ~ If:: ..:;r,..,,; ?~ ,-, '])3
é".:."7' (""'"Y""LA Ý.:..r:r;g (:""
ø".- .~ .-
-
~.
/?cr.' ?'<'ØP4J"£P /1;'9 ""'4 <'",y""""'ÍE e>F A ...r.rtfniF""" ð.F éJrr ~","I'J
~""P,
p~,q~..r:,..e: :
./';'I",? ,..Ppð...riFP r<> .-9"-)/' /'oJ-"9"'1'.: C.y,.q AI tt £' "?1!'.<!"£7 r"..
,A'~ÇAJ'E /'?ð 7""~~/.r7J' t./~,.... ..-:?/t! /"'1A!: ..v .:. :r '7' rMJ -"/1("£.-<1,
¿.J -v/ ' ?
5-'7'ðV¿ÇJ ;;r-Yê C/7 SP£AlP /~ðð "'-"A!" ,..--'>'/$ .
..T-r W/CL C e>...r r ^?-= -;T"/"",E .qAJþ ~e:>.v£?, r<> A.JØ7;t7
é yo' ê' "';7 P€RJ..v e>A::, 8uJ /A..J ~.r / .r"A:°"1 """'~tI> '"1' ..r
"Rc C £' / VC" "? '" n: .
/¥/J ......., tI> lJ c..P <!"";Jr..,/¿, A"'AI!"<>X /-'?A7'-='7 oS.::>
Ala 7/"::-/C'-'9T/o^"" e:>-../ ~/ """.6} Æ r.
5/-./ £.e'£ ~./
~ p' ~ ~-z::...:.
Roy H. Martin
1'25 OIay. Lakes Road 12
Cbola Vis", CA '1'13
Iq.../~
Warren A. Lindsey
1925 Otay Lakes Raod
Space 195
Chula Vista, CA.eee1i3 crt '1 r 3
C(~ ð[ CtJa isk ,-"--c:.o ,,',_..,J
JAN 2:-, 1~ '
fila»» Z. Dep<>e+""'-;- PLANI\;r:::::
d-.7t rfh A-ve..
c~jL1 \£~ Ctç 9Jt¡/ò Sa-n.'l3/ )qç 3
M/î Shrj~ (;r'(+çIYl: ))~ tl. D I cka0L'¡'¡'~ ~ 0" e 4 í' -/-J, ~
f?ðY-hrn p(ð~ LL J -h, 7èlo/rofh Crnýð'Y1
R (tad!
Óhf ht(hdr--¿j nlhe...~ ~JX fe5tdeYtJ c»tj O}¡e
blôm¿g$' a IJ.'('~e..s Wt5ù (j be. a-JJ¿rsely
cr çkk1!
I~ wCU 11 'f.ð'u L ke. 0 II ~e d'5n~fJ¡um
I ~ '1£r¡,(r- lnn~ alitress (,,-J(¡OS c~a-kfeJ..r
¡+us -Ih~ p(}U¡~rkl ~ðd-Lk~ 'H./-u.~-f'
\'"" e..~ú t!541 +-hLS?
CM~~~
,
ICJ-Ib
1925 Otay Lakes Road
Number 167
Chula Vista, CA 91913
January 25, 1993
Steve Griffin, Principal Planner J'
City of Chula Vista lAt.,?
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910 F .:..-";.., '" ..;~~~'
Dear Mr. Griffin,
In response to your letter of January 21,
1993, belatedly informing us of the changing
the name of Otay Lakes Road, one would almost
.. have to wonder whether or not this was an in-
tentional oversight.
Was any consideration given to the hard-
ship this would cause many of the elderly
residents of Otay Lakes Lodge? Obviously,
this name change would involve not only paper
work but expense in making this change plus
the stress of having to take care of this.
Is the City of Chula Vista going to
offer their assistance to these residents?
You may register this as an objection to
this change.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
c;?J. 75~4,
D. J. Dulin
~17~~
;:J~ þ~ sf>. ILI.3/
R~., ~ t2~ 3fT IJ'S-
/9- /1
,-------
/
1925-159 Otay Lakes Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
January 25, 1993 "- -..
J.4:, 2-
Steve Griffin
Principal Planner
276 Fourth Avenue - :,"'.':;
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr, Griffin:
..
Altho I am not surprised at the decision to re-name
part of Otay Lakes Road to Telegraph Canyon Road, I
wish to voice my EPposition to the change,
There are several reasons why I oppose this change.
One is the association with the Otay Lakes area and
the old Otay Ranch going back many years but all of
the historical reasons aside, the one reason that
will affect all of residents and businesses on that
section of Otay Lakes Road is the time, difficulty
and expense it takes to do any address change, As
you know the zip code was recently changed by the
Postal Department, To notify all of the insurance
companies, DMV, Social Security, IRS, magizines, etc"
etc., etc" can take months, if ever. Changes in
their computer systems SOmetimes takes five to ten
notifications, I have purchased new stationary,
address labels and stamps and now they would all need
to be repl«ced, not an inexpensive concern for those
of us who are retired and on a fixed income,
,
I am also extremely upset that We are being notified !
of this matter in this waY".LATE! If we were 192
big homes along Otay Lakes Road instead of being the
192 Mobile Homes in a Senior Citizen Park, perhaps
our voices would have been more important. The Park I
Owners have again shown Our status with them by I
failing to notify us of the hearing on Janrary 12.
Thank you for your interest and concern.
Sincerely,
~~~
I
I
i
I~-/f -
9/VtV .;1.', I 'if3
ílþw. ~ ~ !
û>~ tP~ . '-.. ',- ,
-'- . '- ,
&::l¡ 'J ~ tJ ~ JA/1¡ 2 '. - -J
ól~¿" d~ a-. '. i:>;}^
P v -
~ c.J~,(1b.-{Ir-"~. ~/<jIO i.L'.. " v
. ""I':NG
fJ.uvv~. ¥: .
J-:i ~ tZ. d~ ~~ ~
~ e;5~ U~ ~:.;t~
{M/ ~ r~ ~~ ;da:L
"w-¿ ~;--¡~'
W¿ ~ -i~ ~ ~ ~ AL?t7
,/~ ~"~ ltf!træ~ '
'k 4..e..rr-Þ fE---r /Îd-. -J.....L ð
~ ~ q' rJ:::: ~
1 cfJz..¡ or ~ ¡Ü '(J ~ ~
11 ~ r tf!~;:2d - ~.-J
tik.d ~ ~ .. ~ þ -!::¡;
a-.v ~ j L ;ct. ~ ~ .
~ ~ '11~~~J
-¡ d~r~' .
~ ~/C¡b~~~
~LMÞ ~.~ ~~ ~ ~.J~~r
~.
! tt-/7
--"'-----"--'"
kJ b aA-L --n<>-W ø-n-- ~ ..:I .......,{ h
~-~~~ ¿L~
rrJ ~h<L ~'r¡
~-h ~rld.71~1/~ ~
~J ~ :Z dA ~~
~ '11~. J~ ~ ~¡¡ ~
a ~~d~-~~ ~
..Á! tvU þ.::t ~ <-It ~ ~ ~....
~~ð-~~~?~
'~?
~~~(~)~
~ &k¡ ~~ ¡Ú -t c-i~
~Le.U .1 7u> ~.?
(J~ ~ ~ ~ ÞZd--
~ ~A~ ~~
J ¡ Þ /U-n~L "- ~
~? tO2¡ ~ ~.
-!l-iJ~ 'ff~ /
~~J¡.J~
/q,2S ~ 8dLJ,,/lZd#3/
~ ¿J~, ~. q/<¡/d
b 1'1- 4~.J-.2.t..-5?
/9 ~2Þ
, -- - -"_'..- -- --' -'--
~
c%a4"~ ,ú. 7/"t'/j
/9;{G Ï' ~ k tt'7,t
~. .!!. fJ,) ('Ire?
e~'V~9~~ .,"
-::: 7~ -?-~~ . rJI-J-"j ,
~:¿~~~ r-" " '
J~~~~~.
'7i.v ~ 1i I ~,(l~ r
~ (J~ :K~
~ ¿~~~ ,~~ ;t
cQ(~~ ~-d! ~ ~~ --
þ.utdm~, -
I "~M~.z~cz..,.;Z~
w-Il1 ~ ~ á2l'4f ~ Æ4. ~
~~c~)~ot'~~
r:::r:I~ ~~ ~ ~~
~~:d~~~~z:
W~~
ofr~ ~
)9;2...1
,,---------,,-
-
I
-!
I
¡ f':.:::::"-:~;',(¿D-----
1-- ______n-~/lL-¡g9r--2~,JÐA/.~..5'_-
I PLANNING'
In Sf:;e:Y'e (3-T'JffJ/1I
I ?YJI./(;'!iJl rÙþ/A?~J"-
1 -
¡ J)c&T' MI'"'-G-Tlff'v ..
I-~ - ---
I fA/ Ye"fly -/;ø- jot/to' /stiel'" ch,tt!)'d 21 JãAl 93
¡ IV 1" v h-::r: )""¿ c, /!!W£!: d br}¡w Ih2-l'8" _1;4"... -!fI//PW/A<.9
;c,dl'>? h-o e;" ts 'j'e,r .rdu':.J--1:;'.he_vJ,.;,v,Je"..dF-hlW1¿--
:0 foray J-p)f~$ 1?dt;d -Tdë.fr.4.fJ. -Cll.l..lfqpßrf----
¡ As s-t8-/;e:d j..,Y"vr' /sfhtr-£JnYnj..;/uuJ?cf--
! (J t" I:¡ I A/ Þ-h: s IV/;; 1>0/.11 'Í:ð R v/' ~¡(/¡;/ (:;~)( t ~"'/(¡J
¡ $dt/i;he;1-str:.,./y'i/-// tt.ë ¡,vs.v bd f/¡JÆsv;ly 91{.
i w;tJr¡ -thè! PVI'"1'°,ti! YlII-Mi!!'(;i,;IVDb- t/fã.y
:1-tJ./<í",s Rei, wIll J,è /.4/ IwO (2-) ¡/¡JIt-'flV,f fr,;.,;zþflll'JJ'
: 13",.,.1-0 'Rd. 1õ Te-//!!".,?Y'ðf>h (/;""Y"'# /?d ;,vø/ ('-¡-"""
: Wc.J6'5 -be Rd- £" H(..!j"hW¡¡y ''f-í¡"~I1/~.tIJ>lë..d'
'~ C. eo y -/; tJ-III.II r ju:: C/ .!.!::.:/ eo k..,. .c. Q IV f v oJI D .. --
i t;Jl/c! pyoJ/ðh->J f!-o~ "...,q{;q,.lS~ VAlF....,,¡;~r-
:wit:h í:/.,e-$)-a-d)AI'Clt t,8).(,/l.Idt:' _--__d-
: gh--1&T',!/I!:A/c.y ¡)eJ,u..-!r?.t're-sp"tVd,PJ /:P.c.;.//.r
; 1:;0 t::h t? s ¿.- IQ~ ~f./llN'{. -- ------- --____H
i At -th ë f"r~5¿;A/t .-&,'..., ..w.f:;'J. t:!!'" c..;f'(41 f "I
I c,t. u Je Ýí,t fa.? ¡U -f;.h t;-- .s 3-" -s;Í:u~ fu"v~ --- -- -
I. ex-IS, 1:-1"t$ of; 'j... '$ "t"'r"$'e. inJl..",,".-d_Td'"/-=:r4T.. "'.'~' C3My., '<'41
jf.d-;j<.lsf N~;tof--I-80$".-TJ,~.s_a .8 ~..,..d----
I (,,$9$ If! Þ C. {)y¡lfU.J/(lAl~ - - --
j -:F' 1f!'/I't?Þe'-é:"/,1iT v".....,.r c,./,;rvj'C?" /s A/~f'_------ ,,"
1/Yt?'c.e-S.$'c7Y, t f'H.Y'n/.~'~.$--,sÞ. .II "b:l, ~,4. _tJ,¿,.DVß .,,~-q' -
¡ 9-/5(1 for '1'%e c,-?;lV'ilŠu"-f' -,¿elI'"¿-SJ -éhJ1:i~,//
1.6.: rerv/~ed PM "plŠt7l'/ð.sL:-j. trt:.ksl¡zc-~~u.vt/7 -
I w;/I./f ÍÝL-'~ fs ;;;'P¿P'tJ,d""J- ./"'-'/"ay-f""uj- . ., -
¡tlffU,,';¡1/ f/gc... "'m~vt.5" /vc.ILnf,hr Fe-d~I'.J//sJ'ifd"
j '7";;"f., Pór-.......t 7/(.1$ ,II rJ,c?r-.clut:. V¡..I?PT.r ,.e-"J'/ß'
l.h;.nJ""" -" - -- - u_-
; I
; 19~J.2
, - ---.-".---...------
I
.
j
- __n- ,---- - -- -,-, ._------~---- -
-~ 1t?/..I'r_Jcr n-~~-i/v--.ß/s(J -sf;/--'e---1:/' 0>"..._--
fi.:t&-~l;¡::;¡;¡¡G + "r-i¿ "Ic/ß--'fD'" -»_t!r~..s".7 b$ _n_-
'J;f.J-T- »d 0 t J .¥_'" Iv r/ è' _CJ!!' £ h-fLJ_'r....Ln.iilh j.1)þ rJ --
-.I» pq/y<##,-w...e J"t!T4t'1A/1, _r¡, ".£~ ~'./NS _lJr--()f
--iJ ~f' c...¿. -?.¿~ S 1!)1..l/vi?J-l&j.,r-.II!.~l>-r-;¡f:~..r-.w-U'i<
.e ~-.21/ ;J.,-vvf,lt;-.h,~~L'Í_.h rT..JA/..c.Jv.deql__-
, _P;~I~j'-f6 }'-J'B"ß-r-~,!,-j;-4-J<\4~w-th~---
-~c.- f vB - ~t!>_s't~--f.b r-.-:-rALS~B{j ~_d.... .l'V..3- N'---- _n
-C-~~~-y¡;- -~--til'¿r cð"t" W;/I"._.6IL;c(d",'t/-
.(/~ $GJC/h '#~ mli-f h í1-ð"'nc-6;>.v¡~J'6:-'r&~ ----
::¡:: sfrd"':!.! Jtr/)9ver- 171J.s_....A/;1-">-~~Ì1~.f~-
Is ~ Re- 1..1/ 'ï~d .
-~X~--- n- -
US'NiW(-Rf!;T;______.- - -
------ --- -
__--_n_n__-
--__HOB_' ,_..,--,.,-- -----.- -
- - -- -- - -
-
. --...- --- --
.
------, -
- ---------______m _._----~,._----------
,---- n__f9ø;:--S-_------------- ------
'-,._-----,---------~-_. ,- -,------------
- _.._._--~-
Otay Lakes Lodge
1925 Otay Lakes Road
Chula Vista, CA 91913 "'-
February 17, 1993
City Council of Chula Vista:
We, the undersigned, submit this petition in opposition to re-
naming our segment of "Otay L~kes Road" to "Telegraph Canyon
Road'.',
This would create a very stressful situation for the elderly
residents of Otay Lakes Lodge plus the hardship and expense
involved in making all of the required changes. Most of us
are living on very fixed incomes.
We, therefore, urge the City Council to reconsider this situ-
ation and NOT make this change, Thank you.
Respectfully submitted.
?7
#- (D
'">?1. 4ø -d /';:-
.
~1J1J~ II?
-a-:~) It, t{ ~ .:I:tr-v 3
~ ~~;~ ~
~~ ~~~
~ot~/}~
3!-.~ ' /0Z-
(j" ]'7 n U)2
Æ./¿,J! /J t;Jd ;9 /.F.r
m ~M..rz-./ #< 9 ¿
1:t
....
(O~l a8Bd) uo,~,~ad
B~S,^ Blnq~ JO 1,~uno~ ^~,~
/ c¡; J.~ -' . .
,----,-~'--'---~
RESOLUTION NO. 17Df1
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY C',(.)UNCIL
CHANGING THE NAME OF OT A Y LAKES ROAD TO TELEGRAPH CANYON
ROAD BETWEEN TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD AND WUESTE ROAD
WHEREAS, on July 28, 1992 the City Council directed that the City initiate a street name change for the
east/west segment of Otay Lakes Road to Telegraph Canyon Road between Telegraph Canyon Road and Wueste
Road; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 2, 1992 and voted 7 to 0
recommending that the City Council change the name of Otay Lakes Road to Telegraph Canyon Road between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Wueste Road; and
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said application and notice of said
hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and
its mailing to property owners and major developers affected by said change at least ten days prior to the hearing
in accordance with Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.12.070; and
WHEREAS, the proposal is exempt from environmental review as a general rule exemption.
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. January 12, 1993
in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
the Council, by a vote of 4-0, adopted Resolution 16959 approving the street name change; and
WHEREAS, it was later determined that the residents of Otay Lakes Mobile Home Park had not been
notified of the proposal and the public hearings; and
WHEREAS, on February 9,1993, the City Council directed staff to notice the hearing on PCM-93-07 for
reconsideration on March 2, 1993; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was duly noticed and held at the time and place as advertised, namely 4:00 p.m.
March 2, 1993 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was
thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the City Council, the Council
finds that the proposed change will eliminate the confusion to persons unfamiliar with the area.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves, directs and authorizes the change
of street name of Otay Lakes Road to Telegraph Canyon Road between Telegraph Canyon Road and Wueste Road,
to become effective onSeptember 1, 1993.
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
WFC P,\home\PIomUna\pom9307<.oo 1C¡~271Iq'JI
'--~-,._-'-
RECEIVED IqiE ~~~~~q
~7,- .~ qlq\3
'93 FIB 25 P2 :37 i~U,lqq3
~hJJ~~iSTA
FlCE
J.1l¡ ~~
UwwI¡JJ.A4j ,Cß qlq\O
¥ t; u .f'ß! q ðO1
ILMw ~
. '-'~W~
~, ~~'~
~~~
JY..u ðJJJ ~~ ~JL, LJ k1v ~ r U~ ¡W
.l<1....v~~fßwl ~~' ~
~;f I~,~~,~ ~
{[;~~~~~~
r 'tu-uJJ ~ ~ L ,~~ ~ rl ~ .
~ ~ " ~ ¡" ~xub,Æ_'i ~ ~
c
, , J.uyw ,:lL.' :::J:"~" "" ctL~ ~'~
.~(JJ,f1cu~ '-<J~, ~VUuU~'
~ ~~~)WkJv JL' ~~
~. ~I ~~;:JyJ~~IUJ
~~^i~'~~' 'iJl~~
.vtJi~ q~ ~ '. ~JJj~~~ #.L,
~t~Ü~M ' .
.1 ~~., -~~U~~,OJ
't:J-~~~~ ~o-!~
" .,~-n~jLJJ. ~~~llW~J .
~.tò~(UC->.,~-,~~
~\~~. ~l~ n~~~
\ - -. I,!:.:<fl- .
-- - - ---- -
~ )~
25 February, 1993 RECEIVED
MAYOR '9J 11M -1 P 3:32
Tim Nader
CITY COUNCIL gfY OF CHUlA VISTA
Shirley Grasser Horton
David L Malcolm Y CLERK'S OFFICE
Leonard M. Moore
Jerry R. Rindone
Re; Name change, otay Lakes Road.
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
The reason given for the road change was because it was
to prevent confusion to visitors, and new people in the area.
The truth of the matter is that.a developer decided to call
an area in the East Lake development, TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES.
The confusion would only be for the development and not the
rest of the citizens of the city of Chula Vista.
Are you also going to change "L" Street to Telegraph Road?
It stops at telegraph canyon road as well. As many other streets
in the city, "E" street to Banito Rd., Broadway to Beyer Blvd.
Main Street to Otay Mesa, 3rd to Beyer Way, 4th to National
Ave. and so on. Are we then going to change all these as well?
It seems that the change is selfserving. Consideration for the
300 plus residents, who have been living in the Mobilehome park
for the past 20 years, was given no thought to, in fact was
not considered at all. Referring to the map that was presented
for the proposed change, that the Mobilehome Park is not even
on the Map. We have 195 homes in our community, with all of
them SENIOR CITIZENS, as it is an adult park.
Is the city going to provide the necessary assistance to
the many residents that are not going to be able to change all
the important documents that are going to be required such as
insurance's, Medical, Medicare, Social Security, Drivers
licenses, car registration, Mobilehome registration, banks,
retirement benefits, not éounting relatives, subscriptions,
newspapers, friends, and many other correspondences that they
have. Including Doctors, hospitals, attorneys, replacing checks,
and numerous other items. This going to provide an expense to
many of the residents that they can not afford, as many are
living on only social security, and have little to spend on
anything else.
The City also cannot afford the expense of all the signs
that will be required. Your complaint that you do not have the
funds to take care of many other needs in the city, yet you
can spend it on street signs.A simple solution would be to make
a single sign where Telegraph Canyon Road meets otay Lakes Road,
to read TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD ENDS HERE. Or is that too simple?
Or would that require a commission to review the request and
spend a lot more money that we do not have. I suggest that you
leave our street name alone, as for the developers name of his
development, they generally have no direct relationship to our
city, it is only an identity of a piece of land and is not
) 9 - 3J
include in the requirement for addressing for the residents
that will some day live there. We were heæ first and should
be given the first right of refusal as to if we want the street
to be changed not the newcomer.
I for one, REFUSE THE CHANGE.
~/U'~/
Frederiek Du"e..~
1925 OTAY LAKES ROA Sp 102
Chula Vista Calif. 91913
)9~3Y
File No.
PUBUC HEARING CHECK UST
CITY COUNCIL PUBUC HEARING DATE 3/.;¡1q3
SUBJECT f2.-.......... ~JJ."'" ~ c.J--r ~f ~ 1l..I-. (~/-..J ~"....l') J..,
\
Lv~uöH i.J..,.."'M'1- ~ rz...J.
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBUCATION -- BY FAX /" ; BY HAND_; BY MAIL
PUBUCATION DATE ~/ ~/0¡3
MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS r ~J.~<L NO. MAILED
PER GC 54992 Legisladve Staff, Construcdon Industry Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK .J I \~ 1C13
COPIES TO:
Administration (4) /'
Planning ./
Originating Department
Engineering ,/'
Others
City Clerk's Office (2) /
POST ON BUll.ETIN BOARDS ~ II 'ì ('j ~
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
-58-
/1 / 3~
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY
COUNCIL of Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of reconsidering a change in the name
of the east/west segment of "Otay Lakes Road" from the intersection of Otay Lakes Road and
Telegraph Canyon Road easterly to Wueste Road (Chula Vista City limits) to "Telegraph Canyon
Road." The proposal has been initiated by the City of Chula Vista. Copies of the proposed
project are on file in the office of the Planning Department.
Any written comments or petitions to be submitted to the City Council must be received by the
City Clerk's office no later than noon of the hearing date. Any written comments regarding this
matter received by the City to date will be forwarded to the City Council and do not need to be
duplicated in response to this notice.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this street name change in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described
in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to the public
hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, March 2,
1993, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at
which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: February 15, 1993
CASE NO: PCM-93-07
COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American With Disahilities Act, requests individuals who require
special accommodation to access, attend and/or participate in a City meeting, activity or service request such
accommodation at least 48 hours in advance for meetings and 5 days for scheduled services and activities. Please
contact the City Clerk for specific information at (619) 691-5041. California Relay Service is availahle for the
hearing impaired.
/1 '/J~
---~------
,
ìI I . ~~~ al
~ .
-< ~l ~I !~
' -.
¡ f-
\
-
=
."~-
=
Þ<
~
=..
. ~Z
. . = CIC III
... <2: :IE
. IiQQQ
e CIC~ ..
, 2: 11)2: .
.. < 1iQ~ C
. - . =l1li
. Co) <= ..
IiQ ..,' iii. III
:I ~< G
<CClC
, 2:t-oe
t-oQ~
\ IiQ "1iII ~
' , IiQ :I t-o Z
i . CIC Q...
t-oClCQ -
! II) III. t-o Z
; .. Z
r:
! c: C
' i
...
..
.":>8 Oil
~
EJ
- -
::nn****************************************nn******************n*********n************************
* P,Ol *
~ TRANSACTION REPORT *
* FEB-17-93 WED 16:31 *
* *
* DATE START RECEIVER TX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE *
* *
* FEB-17 16:30 STAR NEWS LEGAL 1'14" 2 SEND OK *
* *
n********n*nn*****n********************************************************************************
/9~;?g/
~~ft-
-::~~-;
CllY OF
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
TELEF AX COVER LEITER
Telecopier No. (619) 425-6184
DATE: ~ 11'1 I 't3
TO: Star News LeIrnI / Julie
FAX NO: (619) 426-6346
FROM: ~\ Q.Q..J ~ ~ ~
SUBJECT: (7~~ ~~
~
TOTAL NO. PAGES (including cover): "'Z-
PUBUCATION DATE: a./è)O/ ,,~
If all pages are not received, please call Lorna @ (619)691-5041.
/9/ 31
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 92010/(619) 691-5041
-.-... -..--,,-----------...-.---.----....----- ------------
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold
a public hearing to consider the following:
Reconsidering a change in name of east/west segment of "Otay Lakes Road"
from the intersection of Otay Lakes Road & Telegraph Canyon Road easterly
to Wueste Road (CV City limits) to "Telegraph Canyon Road".
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this matter in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk's Office at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
March 2, 1993, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: February 17, 1993
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
/9~Jj¡}
-----..---..-
XXXXXXXXXX^XXAXX^X^A^AXAXXXXX) A^XXXXXXAXXXAXXXXXXXXXX^XXXXX)
^XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXAXXXXXXXAX) AXXXXXXXAXXXXXXXAXfXxXXXXXXXXX )
XXXXXXXXXXXAXXXAXXXXXXXAXXXXX) xXXXXXXXxXXXXXXXXXxXxXXXxXXXX)
XXXxYXXxXXXXXXXXXXXAXXXXXXXAX) xXXXXXXXxXXXXXXXxXXXxXxXXXXXXX
XXXxXXXXXXXXXxXXXxXXXxXxXXXxX) XXXXXXXXXX^XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
^XXXXXXXxxxxXXXXXXXXXxXXXXXX^¡ XXXXXXXXXXxxxXXXXXXXxXXXxXXXXX .
XXXXXXXxXXXxXxXxXXXxXxXXXXXXX¡ XXXXXXXXAXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXxXxXxXxXXXXXXXXXXXX^XXXXX^) XxxxxxxXxXXXXXXXXXXXxXXXxXxXX) ()
XXXXXxXXXxXXXXXxXXXXXXXxXXXXX¡ xXXXXXXXxXXXxXXXXXXXxXxXxXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXxXxXxXxXxXXXXXXX¡ XxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxXXXXXXXX)
XXXXXXXXXxXxXXXXXXXXXXXxXxXXX) xXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXAXXXXXXXXXA^XXXXXX¡ XXXXXXxXxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ()
~"?v"lJI"Ov ~C¡~OoU,OuO
"E, S ¡ " ...~, <;AL1 LO ..ESTLkr, ~A,-T CL ')
P [) c Lo», 1.", r L CCA ~4..,
SM. L' I E (,lJ C.. ~Z Ü¿ ~A¡' L.I~G", LA 9.::11Z
)
S<,5LcLoO..,CL' ~9~(hO.OuO
.. lSi t di S HL 'I ([ .. EST c R " ~AL T Cu ')
F C1 ""X 1.,<, , v LOX ~4'1
:'A:' D if V: C~ '12.1 ( "A r, "It G", LA 9.::1..Z
)
t.,Zû6UI<ClJ c4~OJ.Uveuo
(,In LiF ChU,-t V 1ST;. uALJ... Ii. ,I:' T.. ;,S:'OLl"HS L p :)
Ur,K"rJ.N A"D..." oS dLJ cALD..Jr. oUIL"E¡.,S
.I"7~ tL eH~'¡NU i<E AL Þ¿Ov
;,tr, "I t G u LA nI:'O
:)
7(S""'1';L~è nS9~I~IÓ
tdLK:>Gh ('D~f'\~r: ~ ",Rt¡';~ tDnlh h/UOKO1HY ~ )
1 <,2 ~ ~ T ~ Y L,KLS ~ c' .5" ~9¿5 OTA Y LAKE~ kD #lZ~
L heJ u 4 VISTA C;:, 71 "I j LHUL", d~TA "A 9~<¡d
:)
775"~i5~4Q 77~9~l?I..d
TYO ~"'V ¡û :'TtV~R;,Oi. A OJ h :)
1 (; Z? ",1" Y Li"VcS KL .I4( 19¿5 úT A Y LAKE) ,,0 Þ .4"
C h'J...:. V¡STA C" ~I~I.> LHuLA VI:,TA LA 9~9i3
.:)
77S'1S:5i7b :)
eLl NE f áhA...D
1 "2? è;1HY U,K"S >: tJ .178
e rU L A V 1 SI A e" .,1..,1 ~
)
/9 /1//
LAfL OC3~3 1:(1',-'13-07 XXAXAXAXAXAXAXXXAXAXXXAXXXAXA:
ST NA~,E Ct-At,GI:: OTAYtlAK=S ,,0 XXXXAXAXAXAX"X"YÄXXXAXAXXXAXA:
XX,X"XXXX,XXXXXX'~X" XXn ~'XX,XXX: X"XA,X,AXXXX,X,AX,AXXXA XAXX, XXX,X,X,X XA)
XXXXXAXXXXXXX X ~. XAXXX; XXXXAXAXAXXXAXxXXXAXXXXXXXt.XA:
XXXXXXXXYXXXX L\. AXXXXX: XXXXXXAX"XAXAXAXXXAXAXAXAXAXA:
< xxyxxxxxxxxxx X xxXXXXXXAXXX; AXXXAXXXX,YXXAXAYAXAXAXAXXXAXX)
1 gg~ ~g~ ~~~g~G ~~G G~gg~; G~g~g~~~~~gg~~~~~~~~~~~~~
x xxxx xx xx xx xx xxxx xx xx xx xx AX xx; xX XX AX AX XX XX AX AX XX XX XX AX XX XX A:
X XX X X XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX: XX XX XX AXXX XXAX xX XX xX AX AXXX XXX)
X XX X X XXXX XX XX XX XX )lXXX)lX XX AX AX; XX AX XX AAAX AX AX xX XX AX XX AX XXAXA:
t XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXYXX: XXAYAXXXXXAXAXAXXXAXAXAXXXAAX)
5 ~507(;;> LOC ,C¡5C'cOL5 GO
1 S¡,LDWIN VISTA ASS,-CIATES '- I: "SSTe,!, SALT CoJ
C/O Pt.L[",I', SLILOtoRS F L oUA 1""
11975 EL LA~IIt,O ReAL ;.2liO oAr, lili:G~ ~A ~L112
SAN DIEGO CA ,{l3C
5~5li9CO;OL ,c,?fJ'10v;:liO
, ~¡'LO;;lN VISTA A5SLCIATES L F bALD...!r, vlST" ¡,S~,OLIATeS L P
C/O SALO"n: PIJILOâS LIe' tALD..Ih ùhLLS"S
11~75 EL L'~INO ~I:AL ¡2liO 11~75 Ll C~~.Nu ~to.L ,~OC
SAN OlEé,O C... '213C ::'At, UIí:C'L LA 'iLl~O
\,
5'9515c010(, b4¿Où01H'O
t CTAY LAKES LO[,I',I: H,(. tA,-l^It, vIST. .So,[Jl!...TcS L P
P 0 PLX 4(05 C/~ cAlD"I ~ i:UILLEKS
SANTA ~LNICA LA ~(;411 Ll.7~ i:L CMM.N~ KE~L 'LOD
SAI, LId", ~A "L150
{
643v?L24rC 77?~5150Ln
( RALD,:IN VISIt. ASSuCIATES '- l' FISht~ JlHI, "
C/O F...LC~I~ E~ILDERS 19i? 016Y ,-6~E::' kD 'La
1197~ EL LA~INO Pi:AL ~2Ga LH"L~ wIST. LA ~.qL3
SM; DIE('(: C;. <,213l
7759515134 77,9,15136
tiEeLLS ¡;OY TA1LlR A¡'Tr'J¡,Y/Ei.I<id~E K
1'125 LTAY LAKI:S R~ hl34 1925 01AY LAKE~ ,,[' ".i.3~
CHULA VISTA CA '11<,13 LH~L~ wlSTA LA ~~913
7759515156 7759515176
~ TYCEe I",UnEL R H. ALóUtFUúKS G"Ei, L
1925 LTAY LAKi:S RL #156 192': úlAY LAI\Ee::. ,.0 ~.7b
ChUL6 VISTA CA <,1,13 CH~LA wISTA ~A ~¿O13
C
/9 -1/;<
- ~ ~----,- ,-
~ cZò
EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SERVICES e.
SOUTH BAY HEAD START RECEIV .
r' . -2 P1:28
œUllillW
February 26, 1993 - gJ\\ ~ CHULA VISTA
MM 2 - \ RK'S OFFICE
Mayor Tim Nadar ÇlTY COUNCil OffICES
City of Chula Vista CHUlA VISTA. CA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Nadar:
I am writing to you to express ECS South Bay Head Start's support
of the proposed short-term housing program being presented by South
Bay Community Services to the City Council on March 2.
Our agency works closely with many Chula vista families who are
living in poverty, are at risk of becoming homeless, and many times
do end up on the streets. The proj ect proposed by South bay
Community Services would be a great support service to these
families with young children. The project will offer services like
job training and child care, designed to meet the needs of the
families and help them achieve the goal of self-sufficiency.
We are asking you to approve South Bay Community Services' proposed
program and funding request. This will allow SBCS to leverage
funds from National City, the State of California, HUD, and other
resources to house and serve needy local families.
Sincerely,
~t!/Y2Ù¿ ~
Gene. Merlino
Director of Youth Services
~I$ '637 TID'" AVE. SUITE I * CHULA \IISTI\, CA 91911 Ii
(6UH 422-1642 c2tJ--:J
~~ c2tJ
CHAIRMAN,
Banking, Flna"ca and Public
Assembly Indebtedness
COMMITTEES,
California Legislature Insurance
UII,"'es and Commerce
Water, Parks and Wildlife
MEMBER
STEVE PEACE Commission of tf1e Californias
ASSEMBLYMAN ¡----
r-, Œ' (¡"-I<'
ili'"~!U n w œ m
-'/ ' -~---1
March 1, 1993 l MAA 1 .~J
::¡ Y roi1d;Il OFæs
-<-< CHULA VISTA.
0 i
r-m
mo (")
~:z: I IT1
The Honorable Tim Nader .C N -
~ç <
Mayor, City of Chula Vista -n< "'1J I'Tt
276 Fourth Avenue :!li/) - 0
Chula Vista, CA 91910 ("')-, N
Dear May~~ ""'iþ CD
This letter is in support of the housing program proposed by South
Bay Community Services on your agenda for consideration March 2,
1993,
Housing for the homeless was recognized by you and the council
recently as deserving top priority. This housing facility for
homeless families will significantly add to the ability of the
South Bay to provide shelter for families in need.
South Bay Community Services has an excellent reputation in
providing a variety of services to the community. Along with the
housing component, this project will also offer job training and
child care, in an effort to help families become self-sufficient.
I urge your support for this worthwhile program proposed by South
Bay Community Services and look forward to a favòrable decision by
you and the Chula Vista City Council.
E
P/mz
cc: Leonard Moore, Councilman
Jerry Rindone, Councilman
Shirley Horton, Councilwoman
Bob Fox, Councilman
0 S"teCapitol 0 430 °".'°0 "e~ - S"ite B 0 1101Alnx>rtRoad-Su""C
P.O. eo, 942849
Sa"amooto, Cal"'mia 94249-0001 ChulaVI"',Ca,"omla91910 02 ¡)/ i Imperial, Calitomla 92251
T~ephona, 191")"5-7556 Telephone, 191") ""-1"17 Telephone, 1"'9) '52-'101
FAX 91 "-322-22?1 FAX "'9-"96-5'30 FAX "'9-'55-48"
~
Printed on Recycled P_,
'-------.---------------
~ óZi)
CHURCH OF THE MOST PRECIOUS BLOOD
RECEIVED
February 26, 1993
Councilman Leonard Moore IMR -2 PI:28
City of Chula VISta
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula VISta, CA 9191D
Dear Councilman Moore:
I am writing in support of the proposed short-term housing program being presented by Šouth
Bay Community Services to the City Council on March 2, 1993.
There is a need for this program because many Chula VISta families are homeless or on the
verge of homelessness. The City's Housing Element estimates the number of homaiess persons
in the South Bay as 350-500, of which 60% are families. However, the area has only eight shelter
beds and these are for youths only), compared to over 1500 beds in other parts of San Diego
County.
The City Council recognized this by making homeless housing a top priority in the recently
adopted Housing Strategy. Local service organizations, including MAAC Project and Lutheran
Social Services, also recognized the need. This proposal is the result of their three-year planning
process and needs assessment.
Short-term housing gets families off the street and provides shelter for those on the verge of
becoming homeless. The project offers services, like job training an d child care, designed to
meet families' needs and help them achieve the goal of self-sufficiency. Short-term housing is
not for cIn1g addicts, the mentally ill or people unwilling to work to change their lives.
Families "graduating" from the program can move next door into SBCS' transitional housing
units, and continue easily accessing their support network. Dollars will be saved through
operating efficiencies such as shared property management, case management, and
administration. Additionally, transitional housing residents will serve as role rnoclels for short-
term housing residents.
The location ideal because it is on a major bus line, across the street from Eucalyptus Park and
the YMCA, and within one mile of schools, a trolley station, fire and police stations, City Hall, off-
site services and shopping I\I\d employment centers.
I am asking you to approve South Bay Community Services' proposed program and funding
request. This will allow SBCS to leverage funds from National City, the State of California, HUD,
and other resources to house and serve needy local families.
Sincerely,
J, /i--r~-
Rev. Emmanuel Omema a
Administrator
:¿() r 5
1245 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91911-3012 - (619) 422-2100 - Fax (619) 422-1375
------------..-. -- "'-,,-"------ ------,--------..--------..-.- -----------
~~ ;),0
San Diego
~ "-C, Œ
Ii ù) r,: l~ Œ il W
æ~ IU(~I..OO3I~
>" CiTY COUNCIL OFfiCES ,:'1
101 West Broadway, Ste. \120, San Diego, CA 9210 '. CHULA VISTA. CA .
(619) 239-8815 Fax: (619) 239-1710
February 26, 1993
nn ~
=;:::¡
Mayor Tim Nader -<-< :0
no i f"1
City Hall r-"TI
m" 0
276 Fourth Avenue ::O::z: ~ fI'1
"5c:::
Chula Vista CA 91910 (F>i-' <
oÞ'
-.,< ;e f"1
-n- - 0
Dear Mayor Nader: --U>
(") . -¡ ù'I
¡"T1> N
San Diego Community Foundation supports the proposed short-term housing program being
presented by South Bay Community Services to the City Council on March 2. The need is
well-documented and vastly exceeds the current supply. SBCS is very competent, and we
support them. Their proposal to you will leverage funds from National City, the State, HUD
and other quarters.
Thank you for your attention and consideration.
V~ßL-
Reed MOrgt
Program Of er
cc: L. Moore
S. Grasser Horton
R. Fox
J. Rindone
S¡""SoIly ",," ""gmS._h" Fæ,' H. A,h EI,i, v. "',,'" J,h,A. McColl A,,"'rod, læ R. "'.
"'"id.." Wa"",id",.Di,"ib..~., fim Wa F,..id,,'. fi,~a Via "",id",. Morl<,"" Wa"",id,",. l,~"m"" S,,""n T"",",
",mpC.D"i,'""Dloi,'Mo.,.O.C","F. P.C_ll"".,",C,..~,'P""'&"'.h 'H~mGoid_,'A"iœS.H"""rt, "'D. 'AI""rtA. K,""""'S,~,A Modd..
Art M..rid . Olmio Do~" M,Coll ' Job, M,~", . So"'æ Fi=' M~" . Wllh.m E. N,lw, ' D. J~" "'i"" ' Tho~ D. ",""rt"" ' M~iœ T. w..w,
'_F.""","" c2ó'--f:;,
"'c..., D",'"
,-------------..--- ---- -----------------
315 4th Avenue, Suite E . Chula Vista. CA 91910 . (619) 420~62~ / ~7!:)O / 5051
, 5 :~1::;1
February 22, 1993 '\
LL-_--"
Mr. Reed Morgan
San Diego Community Foundation
101 W. Broadway, 111120
San Diego, CA 92101
Dear Reed:
South Bay Community Services is working to acquire and rehabilitate
the apartment at 31 Fourth Avenue in Chula Vista to create 50 new
beds for homeless families. The project will include a wide
variety of human services, like job training, counseling, and child
care, provided by a coalition of local agencies.
On March 2, the Chula Vista City Council will hear SBCS' proposal
to fund the project. We are asking you to express your support for
this project by writing TODAY to the five Council members (Mayor
Tim Nader, Bob Fox, Jerry Rindone, Leonard Moore, and Shirley
Grasser Horton).
Please feel free to adapt the enclosed sample letter by including
your thoughts on the need for homeless housing in Chula Vista,
experiences working with needy families, knowledge of local service
providers, or other items.
Everyone at SBCS greatly appreciates your assistance in this team
effort.
Cordially,
W
Dan Marcus
Community Development Coordinator
Enclosures
~"par\by
. )O~7
Unlttld WIly
01 San [>ego Cardy
February 25, 1993
Councilman Leonard Moore
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Councilman Moore:
I am writing in support of the proposed short-term housing program
being presented by South Bay Community Services to the City Council
on March 2.
There is a need for this program because many Chula Vista families
are homeless or on the verge of homelessness. The City's Housing
Element estimates the number of homeless persons in the South Bay
as 350-500, of which 60% are families. However, the area has only
eight shelter beds (and these are for youths only), compared to
over 1500 beds in other parts of San Diego County.
The City Council recognized this by making homeless housing a top
priority in the recently adopted Housing Strategy. Local service
organizations, including MAAC Project and Lutheran Social Services,
also recognized the need. This proposal is the result of their
three-year planning process and needs assessment.
Short-term housing gets families off the street and provides
shelter for those on the verge of becoming homeless. The project
offers services, like job training and child care, designed to meet
families' needs and help them achieve the goal of self-sUfficiency.
Short-term housing is not for drug addicts, the mentally ill, or
people unwilling to work to change their lives.
Families "graduating" from the program can move next door into
SBCS' transitional housing units, and continue easily accessing
their support network. Dollars will be saved through operating
efficiencies such as shared property management, case management,
and administration. Additionally, transitional housing residents
will serve as role models for short-term housing residents.
The location is ideal because it is on a major bus line, across the
street from Eucalyptus Park and the YMCA, and within one mile of
schools, a trolley station, fire and police stations, City Hall,
off-site services, and shopping and employment centers.
I am asking you to approve South Bay Community Services' proposed
program and funding request. This will allow SBCS to leverage
funds from National City, the State of California, HUD, and other
resources to house and serve needy local families.
Sincerely,
dO - ~
-~- --~------------- - ---------- --__un ---UUU_~------___n nunn
-----n__un~_n_- -
~ ;¿tJ
_~fI ê§ æ :0
p~ i fT1
~ ç;,,"
""'c- I f/'
v>,..- N -
0> <
""'<: ~ m
21¡:;; - c
Lutheran Social Services of Southern Cål1for¥#ia
February 25, 1993
Mayor Tim Nader
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Nader:
I am writing in support of South Bay Community Services' effort to acquire
and rehabilitate the apartments at 31 Fourth Avenue in Chula Vista. They
would then be able to provide 50 beds for homeless families. South Bay
Community Services has developed a new and innovative way to offer
services to the homeless. The program plans include job training, counseling
and child care provided by a coalition of local agencies. I strongly support
this effort and am asking you to support them as well.
Sincerely,
~~~e~
Son,,!e Jerome-Edmonds
Emergency Assistance Coordinator
BJE/br
3101 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103. (619) 291~~A:(Z 291-8724
c:I1hn c2 0
A MUL TI-PURP ICE AGENCY
'93 !tAR -2 A1152
CI¡V OF CHUlA VISTA ADMINISTRATION
CI ~ GtfR1<f6 ~FtfÆ!iona\ City, CA 9\950 (619) 474-2232, FAX (619) 474-5035
Febrnary 26, 1993
Honorable Mayor Tim Nader
City of Chula VIsta
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula VIsta, C4 91910
Dear Mayor TIm Nader:
On Tuesday, March 2, 1993 the City Council will consider a proposal by South Bay Community Services (SBCS)
for a short term housing program at 31 Fourth Avenue, Chula VIsta, C4. MAA C Project is in full support for this
proposal and encourages your affirmative vote.
There is a need for this program because many Chula VIsta families are homeless or on the verge of homelessness.
The City's Housing Element estimates the number of homeless persons in the South Bay as 300-5()(), of which 60%
are families. However, the area has only eight shelter beds (and these are for youths only), compared to over 15()()
beds in other parts of San Diego County.
The City Council recognized this by making homeless housing a top priority in the recently adopted Housing StriUegy.
Local service organizations, including MAAC Project and Lutheran Social Services, also recognized the need. This
proposal is the result of their three-year planning process and needs assessment.
Short-term housing gets families off the street and provides shelter for those on the verge of becoming homeless.
The project offers services, like job training and child care, designed to meet families' needs and help them achieve
the goal of self-sufficiency. Short-term housing is not for drug addicts, the mentally il~ or people unwilling to work
to change their lives.
Families "graduating" from the program can move next door into SBCS' transitional housing units, and continue
easily accessing their support network. Dollars will be saved through operating efficiencies such as shared property
management, case managemen4 and administration. Additionally, transitional housing residents will serve as role
models for short-term housing residents.
We are asking that you please vote to approve the proposed program.
.~
~ ClQ r "S
/. ~\,O. \
. ~"" '\. 0
Roger Cazares ."
Executive Director ~ ~ , V
RC/gjn ~-v-
United way. I ~~ NCLR .20 -' / tJ SAN DIEGO ~
~ ""O""'O"""O""""-"
OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ~. COUNTY CAP
~~ .20
THe
,ÞrMUNITY CONGReGATIONAL CHURCH
276 F Street, Chula Ví.øta, CaIífomia 91910
Phone: (619) 422-9263
~., mL~';:;I~
,A
}i"'/;q -.. ~
.
February 26, 1993 .:.~, C¡I\' œ'J~""t c~:;,;~-,~--J ::u
". CY!]41; ::;~:i.i: C:\"'" i f11
Mayor Tim Nader (')
City of Chula Vista ~ f11
276 Fourth Avenue <
Chula Vista, CA 91910 ~ f11
(J 0
Dear Mayor Nader: N
I am writing in support of the proposed short-term housing program being
presented by South Bay Community Services to the City Council on March 2.
There is a need for this program because many Chula Vista families are
homeless or on the verge of homelessness. The City's Housing Element
estimates the number of homeless persons in the South Bay as 350-500, of which
60% are families. However, the area has only eight shelter beds (and these
are for youths only), compared to over 1500 beds in other parts of San Diego
County.
The City Council recognized this by making homeless housing a top priority
in the recently adopted Housing Strategy. Local service organizations,
including MAAC Proj ect and Lutheran Social Services, also recognized the
need. This proposal is the result of their three-year planning process and
needs assessment.
Short-term housing gets families off the street and provides shelter for those
on the verge of becoming homeless. The project offers services, like job
training and child care, designed to meet families' needs and help them
achieve the goal of self-sufficiency. Short-term housing is not for drug
addicts, the mentally ill, or people unwilling to work to change their lives.
Families "graduating" from the program can move next door into SBCS'
trans itiona 1 housing units, and continue easily accessing their support
network. Dollars will be saved through operating efficiencies such as shared
property management, case management, and administration. Additionally,
transitional housing residents will serve as role models for short-term housing
residents.
MINISTERIAL STAFF,
f"d,'¡,k M. Bmdl,y
(continued) Sh",o" R. Gmf[
Joh" Thoma<
Oomthe, U,;odl,
;20/)1 O,bomh Stmod
L""" Pog,ley
E",," L. So,,""o. D.O. p"to, Em"ito,
-~-_.__..,......_--
2)
The location is ideal because it is on a major bus line, across the street from
Eucalyptus Park and the YMCA, and wi thin one mile of schools, a trolley
station, fire and police stations, City Hall, off-site services, and shopping
and employment centers.
I am asking you to approve South Bay Community Services' proposed program
and funding request. This will allow SBCS to leverage funds from National
City, the State of California, HUD, and other resources to house and serve
needy local families.
Sincerely,
3-~!11, úJ-~r
c2c- /;t,
-----.----- -----------,---------------------- -.-. - -----
San 4"~ 20
Diego Hunger Coalition
3255 Wing Street, Suite 109
San Diego, CA92110
(619) 223-7101 œ ~ u n WI< ~1
B<
26 February 1993 ClrYCOmiC!l.O!~' ~
CH!);_~ '1:::1.' -4
'---"--"--"""'...;-<' .-'-- ::0
Mayor Tim Nader nO i fT1
,-n
Members of the City Council mC") (")
City of Chula Vista ::Ox I fT1
"'::<::: IV <:
276 Fourth Avenue (/)c-
Chula Vista CA 91910 0» a fT1
-n<: - C
~V;
Members: C")-< Ut
Honorable Mayor and Council r-r1þ u.o
I am writing to state my support of the proposed short-term
housing program being presented by South Bay Community Services
to you on March 2.
Your Council has recognized the need for such a program by making
homeless housing a top priority in the recently adopted Housing
Strategy.
You well know the numbers involved:
350-500 Homeless persons in South Bay
60% Are Families
only 8 Shelter Beds Available in Chula Vista
Knowing the good work of South Bay Community Services, I strongly
urge you to approve the proposed program and funding request.
Sincerely,
W q;¡~
Al Alferos
Executive Director
d-{}/);5
"'.'-... -""'- - .._"-~._-_.._-.".... ..
~~~ ~ 2cJ
:-ør~-:;
-~-.....
C.a¡~D
HUMA~3E~E~2coNï~
~
February 25, 1993 ~TY OF CHOU. VI'
TY CLERK'S OF
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
I am writing on behalf of the entire Chula Vista Human Services
Council in support of the proposed short-term housing program being
presented by South Bay Community services to the city Council on
March 2.
There is a need for this program because many Chula vista families
are homeless or on the verge of homelessness. The City's Housing
Element estimates the number of homeless persons in the South Bay
as 350-500, of which 60% are families, However, the area has only
eight shelter beds (and these are for youths only), compared to
over 1500 beds in other parts of San Diego County,
The City Council recognized this by making homeless housing a top
priority in the recently adopted Housing Strategy, Local service
organizations, including MAAC Project and Lutheran Social Services,
also recognized the need. This proposal is the result of their
three-year planning process and needs assessment.
Short-term housing gets families off the street and provides
shelter for those on the verge of becoming homeless, The project
offers services, like job training and child care, designed to meet
families needs and help them achieve the goal of self-sufficiency.
Short-term housing is not for drug addicts, the mentally ill, or
people unwilling to work to change their lives,
Families "graduating" from the program can move next door into
SBCS' transitional housing units, and continue easily accessing
their support network. Dollars will be saved through operating
efficiencies such as shared property management, case management,
and administration. Additionally, transitional housing residents
will serve as role model for short-term housing residents,
The location is ideal because it is on a major bus line, across the
street from Eucalyptus Park and the YMCA, and within one mile of
schools, a trolley station, fire and police stations, City Hall,
off-site services, and shopping and employment centers.
I am asking you to approve South Bay Community services' proposed
program and funding request, This will allow SBCS to leverage
;2¿)~/1
360 THIRD AVE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5087
funds from National City, The state of California, HUD and other
resources to house and serve needy local families.
õ::::k t3~
Pamela B. Smith
Chair, Chula vista Human Services Council
c1V~/5
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 2.0
Meeting Date 03/2/93
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION 1702.0 Conceptually approving funding not to exceed
$700,000 to South Bay Community Services for acquisition and first-year
operational costs of a 14 unit apartment building at 31 Fourth Avenue to
be 0"" " . ,hOO "'"' hoo,",. "J
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY: City ManagerÇ'
(4/5ths Vote: YES..x.. NO ->
BACKGROUND: South Bay Community Services (SBCS) has submitted a funding request to
purchase and rehabilitate a 14-unit apartment complex to develop a short-term housing facility
to serve homeless families in the South Bay. The site is adjacent to the proposed SBCS
transitional housing project which will enable both projects to be managed together. It is also
close to National City, which has been contacted to financially participate in this project. SBCS
is applying for grants from county, state, and federal funds and needs to match these source with
City funding; therefore they are asking for conceptual funding at this time.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuance of this item as additional information
was not received in time to be analyzed and incorporated into the staff report.
;2tJ - I
-------.'------
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 03/02/93
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION 11 0.;\ ( Finding a shortage of safe and sanitary
dwelling accommodations available to persons of low income at rent levels
they can afford, declaring the need for a Housing Authority to function,
determining the powers and duties of the Housing Authority, and declaring
the City Council of the City to be the Commissioners of the Housing
Authority.
RESOLUTION n 06d-. designating officers and staff to serve
the Chula Vista Housing Authority.
SUBMITTED BY: C . 1 . (£7.
ommumty Deve opment Director'
REVIEWED BY: City Manager f
(4/5ths Vote: Yes - No -X"'>
BACKGROUND: At the July 28, 1992 City Council meeting, in response to a Council
referral, staff presented a lengthy report to council which analyzed the desirability of creating
a housing authority in Chula Vista. The report addressed the purpose of having a local housing
authority, existing county housing authority functions, and advantages and disadvantages to
having a local authority. Concurring that local autonomy is a major advantage of having a local
housing authority, the City Council authorized staff to initiate a process to form the Chula Vista
Housing Authority (CVHA) and return with a schedule of actions.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution declaring the need for a
Chula Vista Housing Authority and a resolution designating officers and staff to serve the Chula
Vista Housing Authority.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Advisory Committee at its
meeting of November 18, 1992 recommended that City Council establish the Chula Vista
Housing Authority.
DISCUSSION: State law provides for jurisdictions to create Housing Authorities and governs
the authority, structure, and operation of Housing Authorities (Section 34200 et. seq. of the
Health and Safety Code). Housing Authorities are empowered to develop, finance and own low
income housing. In addition, many Federal low-income housing subsidy programs provide
funding solely to Housing Authorities.
In order to gain further insight into the formation of a Housing Authority, staff has been in
contact with representatives of the County Housing Authority, other city housing authorities, and
the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Our review and analysis
indicates that, procedurally, the City of Chula Vista must first declare the need for a housing
authority and designate officers and staff to serve the authority by resolution under Section
34200 of the Government Code.
:;)./ - I
.,.,..------
Item ~
Meeting Date 03/02/93
Existing Housing Authority Function
Over the past 15 years the County Housing Authority has implemented Federal affordable
housing programs in Chula Vista under agreement with the City. The authority has built three
public housing projects in Chula Vista (Town Center Manor, Melrose Manor, and Dorothy
Street Manor) with city assistance, and it administers approximately 1,000 Section 8 Rental
Assistance subsidies in the city. Section 8 certificates are awarded to the County Housing
Authority by HUD in lump sum, and the housing authority then allocates them to the various
participating jurisdictions by demographic need.
The other jurisdictions under the County are the cities of Coronado, Del Mar, Imperial Beach,
Lemon Grove, Poway, Solana Beach, San Marcos, La Mesa, El Cajon, Escondido, Vista,
Encinitas, and Santee.
Local autonomy is the major advantage of having a local housing authority. As a housing
authority, Chula Vista could choose which Federal housing programs to apply for and how to
allocate resources from those programs. Chula Vista would have more flexibility in combining
and tailoring a number of programs to accomplish housing projects without Board of Supervisors
approval. As an example, the County Housing Authority has the option to commit Section 8
Rental Assistance certificates to specific housing projects ("project-based certificates"), but the
County Housing Authority has refused to do so for any of their participating jurisdictions,
preferring to issue all certificates to individual clients to be used freely on the open rental market
(a very small pilot program for project-based certificates has been initiated by the County
Housing Authority). As the housing authority, Chula Vista could choose to issue project-based
certificates to support (make financable) a specific project the City wanted to see developed.
Self-SuDDorting Operation Over Time
Housing authorities, over time, have been able to generate enough revenues from their
administrative fees sufficient not only to pay for their operational costs but also to pay for,
supplement or expand city programs designed to increase housing opportunities. In addition,
housing authority administrative funds can be used to pay for city overhead costs and for existing
city staff that provide services to the authority. However, this could take years before the
CVHA can reach a self-supporting level. Research of other existing housing authorities indicates
that it takes about 200 new rental subsidies under contract to reach a financial break-even point.
At that point, assuming no significant programmatic or fiscal changes, economies of scale would
typically allow the administrative fee of 8.2 % of monthly subsidies to carry the housing
authority's administrative costs. The idea of transferring the existing rental subsidies from the
County to the CVHA was explored with officials at HUD and the County Housing Authority.
HUD indicated that this could be possible, but only if the County accepted such a proposal. As
expected, County officials could not support such a transfer because it would mean a loss of
revenue at a critical financial period.
d-/~2
._~-~--
Item ~
Meeting Date 03/02/93
Staffing and Fiscal Implications
The greatest administrative burden on the housing authority is typically the Section 8 Rental
Assistance Program. Serving Section 8 clients is very labor-intensive. Housing authority
functions include keeping waiting lists, determining program eligibility, counseling clients on
tenancy responsibilities, physically inspecting units, negotiating rental agreements with landlords,
paying out monthly subsidies, negotiating tenant/landlord disputes, and conducting grievance
hearings.
The housing authority would be staffed by the Community Development Department. Initially,
existing staff would assume administrative tasks. After approximately two years, as new
certificates were obtained, the following staffing modifications to the department would be
needed to begin formal operation as a housing authority: the current Housing Coordinator would
administer the housing authority operation on a day-to-day basis; a new entry level Community
Development Specialist would be added to handle the necessary casework; a new Secretary
would provide clerical support and reception; and the department's existing Administrative
Analyst II would provide budgeting and accounting support in conjunction with a new part-time
accounting clerk. The CVHA could gradually add the required staff as revenues become
available. In the first year of operation the CVHA could contract with the County Housing
Authority or any other authority to assume any part of the operation which it is not yet prepared
to undertake such as. preparing agreements with tenants and landlords, conducting unit
inspections and managing the caseload. The County Housing Authority has indicated a
willingness to assume these tasks for a fee which would be paid by the administrative fee
generated by the rental subsidies. This approach will allow for the CVHA to immediately begin
to apply for new rental subsidies, be in a position to train staff and handle other duties without
having to fully staff the operation.
The Community Development Department building would not be able to accommodate future
housing authority activities. Separate office space and a capital plan to accommodate housing
authority activity would need to be developed that would look at anticipated growth of the
housing authority.
Organizational Structural Options
Upon the City adopting a resolution declaring a need for an authority, the following
organizational options can be considered; 1) The mayor, subject to the confirmation of a
majority of the members of the Council, can appoint either five or seven persons as
commissioners of the authority. If seven rather than five commissioners are appointed, the two
additional commissioners, upon becoming available, shall be project tenants and one shall be
over 62 years of age. 2) The City Council may declare itself to be the commissioners of the
authority and shall appoint, upon becoming available, two tenants of the authority as
commissioners, one which shall be over 62 years of age. 3) The City council may declare itself
to be the authority commissioners and may create an Advisory Housing Commission and make
?-( ~ .3
. '---'-"'-"'- u
Item ~
Meeting Date 03/02/93
two tenant appointments (one being 62+) to that commission. The creation of a housing
commission can be done in the future through separate action by way of an ordinance. Staff
recommends that option three be considered because this approach would not require any
changes to the current council structure and it may coordinate well with the pending
consideration of the status of the existing Housing Advisory Committee.
Desi~nation of officers
As part of the formation process of the CVHA it is required for City Council to designate
officers and staff to serve the CVHA. In the interest of economy and efficiency it is desirable
to designate existing officers and staff of the City to such positions within the housing authority.
As such it is recommended that the City Manager be designated Director, the Community
Development Department Director as Assistant Director, the City Attorney as Legal Counsel,
the City Clerk as Secretary and the Finance Director as the Controller of the authority.
Sequence of Actions
In summary the following is a list of actions required in the formation of the CVHA.
8 City Council adopts a resolution with findings, declaring the need for a housing
authority to operate and declaring the Council to be the commissioners.
8 City Council adopts a resolution designating officers and staff to serve the Chula
Vista Housing Authority.
8 Housing Authority meets to elect Chairman and Vice Chairman and passes its by
laws.
8 Housing Authority notifies HUD and State of formation.
8 Housing Authority applies for rental subsidies and exercises other powers.
FISCAL IMPACT: Initially, existing Community Development staff would assume the
administrative tasks of the CVHA within its existing budget. As new rental subsidies are
contracted for by the authority, increasing staffing and physical facilities costs will result.
Administrative revenues from HUD rental subsidies could cover the costs and it is possible to
negotiate with any housing authority to contractually administer any rental subsidies the CVHA
receives until the level of 200 rental subsidies is achieved and local administration becomes cost
effective. It is projected that this will take approximately 2 years.
[AOIA,IHOU-AUTH.113
DISK 1/9
;¿I- ~
--~---~"
~'ft.
ñ'.-
.~
mvOF
QUA \'SA
MEMORANDUM
February 19, 1993
TO : Jerry R. Rindone, Councilmember
FROM : John D. Goss, City Manage~
SUBJECT : Housing Advisory Commission
Jerry, per your request, attached is staff's response regarding the current status of
the Housing Advisory Commission. You will note that the Housing Advisory
Committee has recommended that they be replaced with a commission. Staff
anticipates a report to the City Council on this subject by March 3.
Please advise if you require additional followup.
Attachment: Memo from Chris Salomone (2/9/93)
cc: Mayor and City Council
IkISIDWA C.MEM
,-
'\ . ~,
MEMORANDUM
February 9, 1993
TO: John D. Goss, City Manager
VIA: Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager ~\
FROM: Chris Salomone, Community Development Director {- S .
SUBJECT: Proposed Housing Advisory Commission
Three years ago, the Housing Advisory Committee evolved out of the Mobilehome Relocation
Park Task Force at the direction of the City Council. At that time, the City Council did not
establish the Committee by ordinance, nor did it define the Committee's membership or goals.
Although it has served in an advisory capacity to the City Council, this role is not spelled out
in any written document.
At its meeting on November 18, 1992, the Housing Advisory Committee voted to recommend
that the City estab]ish a Housing Advisory Commission. The HAC members believe that the
number of affordable housing plans and projects has grown and that a formal Commission with
clearly defined goals and representative membership can best serve the needs of the City. They
recommend a Commission with nine members, including the following representation:
1 Lender/Mortgage broker
1 Developer/rea1 estate broker
1 Non-profit staff or board member
1 Low-income senior tenant
1 Low-income tenant
2 Community representatIves
2 Ex-officio members
They also recommended the following goals:
1. To assess the housing needs of the residents of Chula Vista and to identify new
directions for the City's housing programs in order to meet changing needs;
2. To review and make recommendations concerning housing plans and annual reviews
of housing plans (including the Housing Element and CHAS);
3. To review and make recommendations on all assisted housing developments and on
housing developed under the City's Affordable Housing Program, including such housing
in SPA plans, tentative maps, final maps, and housing cooperation agreements;
- - ------------
4. To review and make recommendations regarding community education and outreach
for low and moderate income housing opportunities;
5. To serve as an advisory body to the (proposed) Housing Authority.
Staff is evaluating this recommendation in light of the formation of the new Housing Authority.
Because the proposed Housing Advisory Commission is likely to be advisory to the proposed
Housing Authority, it makes sense to bring these proposals forward at the same time.
Tentatively, the Housing Authority is scheduled for the City Council meeting of March 3, 1993.
!
- ------,-
FER 2 - ,--
27 January 1993
Dear Mayor Nader,
The Chula Vista Housing Committee had it's monthly meeting today.
In the course of the meeting it was learned that you had called a
"Housing Summit", Many members were quite concerned that this
committee was not invited, We understood that our sole function
was to advise the Mayor and City Council on policy formulation
pertaing to housing in the City of Chula Vista. The very dedicated
people on this colTUTlittee would like to feel that our efforts are
needed and appreciated.
At our November meeting, we recommended ~ the City Council
consider replacing our committee with a ew Housin Advisor
Çommission. As proposed, the Housing Adviso omm~ssrl* wrrr-hav~
a well-defined scope of responsibilities and broader
representation. As a commission, we believe that we will be
taken more seriously and be able to contribute more to the
improvement of o~r community. We hope the City Council will act
favorably on our proposal.
Respectfully,
;/ß., J ~
Allen L, K'n , Vice-Chairman
On behalf the members of the
Housing Advisory Committee
)/ '1
__M"",__ , -",--"--"""-- "--------
RESOLUTION '10~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA FINDING A SHORTAGE OF SAFE AND SANITARY DWELLING
ACCOMMODATIONS AVAILABLE TO PERSONS OF LOW INCOME AT
RENT LEVELS THEY CAN AFFORD, DECLARING THE NEED FOR A
HOUSING AUTHORITY TO FUNCTION, DETERMINING THE POWERS
AND DUTIES OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND DECLARING THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY TO BE THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE
HOUSING AUTHORITY.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Chula Vista
has analyzed Federal Government Census data information, conducted surveys of the housing
stock within the City of Chula Vista, and reviewed other available information and data relating
to the housing stock and living conditions within the City of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, an analysis of this data and information indicates that there are in
excess of 5,000 families requiring housing assistance because they are paying more than 25
percent of their income for rent, or occupying housing more than 30 years old or living in over-
crowded conditions or occupying housing units lacking some or all plumbing and/or heating
facilities; and
WHEREAS, the analysis further indicates that there are in excess of 5,000
housing units in sub-standard condition in the City of Chula Vista, said sub-standard conditions
cause an increase and spread of sub-standard housing conditions, disease, crime and constitute
a menace to the health, safety, morals, and welfare of the residents of the City of Chula Vista
and impair economic values, and these conditions necessitate excessive and disproportionate
expenditure of public funds for crime prevention, public health and safety, fire and accident
protection, and other public services and facilities; and
WHEREAS, said sub-standard conditions are due to the high degree of over
crowding in such units, the high percentage of land coverage, the light, air, space and access
available to the habitants of such dwelling accommodations, the size and arrangement of the
rooms within such housing units, the condition of sanitary facilities within such housing units,
and the conditions existing in such structures which endanger life or property by fire or other
causes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds that it is in the best
interest of the City of Chula Vista to enable a housing authority to function within the City of
Chula Vista.
-:LlA - (
------,-----
Resolution No.
Page 2
NOW, TIlEREFORE, TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby fmd, order, detennine, and resolve as follows:
Section 1 The City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California pursuant to the
Housing Authorities Law of the State of California, Health and Safety Code, Sections 34200,
et. sec., hereby determines, finds and declares that there is a shortage of safe and sanitary
dwelling accommodations in the City of Chula Vista, California, available to persons of low-
income at rentals they can afford.
Section 2 Pursuant to the provision of Section 34241 of Part 2 of division 24 of
the Health and Safety Code, it is hereby declared that there is a need for a housing authority to
function in the City of Chula Vista. That authority shall be known as the "Chula Vista Housing
Authority", a public body.
Section 3 There is a need for the Housing Authority to transact the business of
a housing authority as prescribed in the Housing Authorities Law.
Section 4 The Housing Authority shall have the powers and duties vested in a
housing authority, which powers and duties are set forth in Section 34310 et. seq. of the
Housing Authorities Law of the State of California including such additional powers and duties
as may be vested in the Housing Authority.
Section 5 Pursuant to Section 34290 of the Health and Safety Code, the City
Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby declares itself to be the Commissioners of the Housing
Authority created under Section 34240 of the Housing Authorities Law, and that all rights,
powers duties, privileges and immunities, vested by the Housing Authorities Law in such
Housing Authority shall be and are vested in said Commissioners except as otherwise provided
by law.
Section 6 Pursuant to Section 34290 (c) ofthe Health and Safety Code, applicable
to situations where the governing body of the City has declared itself to be the Commissioners
of the authority, the governing body hereby commits to create a Housing Advisory Commission
as provided in Section 34291 of the Health and Safety Code and make tenant appointments to
the Commission rather than to the authority.
Section 7 Commissioners shall receive $50 per day for attending meetings of the
Authority, but not for more than four meetings per month (Section 34274).
~I A -.2..
Resolution No.
Page 3
Presented by:
CL~~~
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
[AGIA:\HOU-AUTH.RSO
DISK#<)
:2IA~3
RESOLUTION /1IJt1.Ã.
RESOLUTION OF THE C1TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DESIGNATING OFFICERS AND STAFF TO SERVE THE CHULA VISTA
HOUSING AUTHORITY.
WHEREAS, the City Council has created a housing authority pursuant to the
Housing Authorities Law of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, the effective functioning of the Housing Authority will necessitate
the assignment of certain officers and staff; and
WHEREAS, in the interests of economy and efficiency it appears desirable to
designate existing officers and staff of the City to such positions within the housing authority.
NOW, TIlEREFORE, TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby find, order, determine, and designates the following employees of the
City to serve as the Chula Vista Housing Authority in the capacities as indicated:
City Position Housin~ Authority Position
City Manager Director
Community Development Director Assistant Director
City Attorney Legal Counsel
City Clerk Secretary
Controller Finance Director
BE IT FURTIlER RESOLVED, that the City Manager is authorized to assign
other employees of the City to perform staff functions for the Housing Authority from time to
time;
BE IT FURTIlER RESOLVED, that such officers and employees shall serve the
Authority without additional compensation but may compensate for travel and other incidental
~""~' Jnowred whi!, 00 Hom. Auiliority bU~
Pre&: ~ ^W ~ 2~
Chris Salomone, Executive Secretary and Bruce M. Boogaard
Community Development Director Agency General Couns I
[AG\A:\HOU-AUTH.RES, DISK #10]
?-Iß -