HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1998/06/09
.., declare llridflr penaìty of perJury that I alii
employed by the City of Chula Vista in the
Office of the City Clerk and that I posted
this Agenda/Notice on the Bulletin B~ard at
Tuesday, June 9, 1998 the Public ~f;ce. Building and at City H¡li on Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. DATED'1 ,9~SIGNED ~~/~~ Public Services Building
Re1!ular Meetinl! of the Citv of Chula Vista Citv Council
CALL TO ORDER
l. ROLL CALL: Councilmemhers Moot_, Padilla_, Rindone_, Salas_, and Mayor Horton_.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE fLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE
3. APPROVAL Of MINUTES: May 19, 1998 and May 26,1998.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
A. Oath of Office: Town Centre Project Area Committee - James D. Fergus and David Ruch.
B. Proclaiming the week of June 8 through June 12, 1998 as "Affordable Housing Week."
Mayor Horton will present the proclamation to Ken Saunder of South Bay Community Services.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(lte"", 5 through 9)
The staff recammendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Colendar will be enacted by
the Council by ane motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the public, or City staff
requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a
"Request to Speak Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled
from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and Commission Recommendations and Action Items.
Items pulled by the public will be the first items of bl/siness.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
A. Letter from the City Attorney stating that tn the best of his knowledge from observance of
actions taken in Closed Session on 6/2/98, that there were no reportable actions under the
Brown Act to be reported. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed.
6. RESOLUTION 19027 ACCEPTING THE CALIFORNIA ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL
(ABC) GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 AND AUTHORIZING THE POLICE CHIEF TO
WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENT Of ABC TO CONTINUE THE ABC PROGRAM -The Police
Department has received second year ("nding to continue its ABC Program. The grant funds will be used
for education, prevention and enforcement of alcohol related activities in the City. The funds are available
for a one-year period and will he used to cover the expenses of a full-time Peace Officer, overtime,
training, travel and related equipment. Adoption of the resolution is necessary for implementation of the
program to occur. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Chid of Police)
7. RESOLUTION 19028 AMENDING SECTION 2.2.2 Of THE AGREEMENT REGARDING THE
DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION Of WHiTEWATER CANYON WATER PARK - On July 23,
1996, Council approved an agreement regarding the Development and Operation of Whitewater Canyon
Water Park (Water Park). Staff is recommending an amendment to the agreement requiring the Water Park
to remit the City's portion of shared rewnue on a quarlérly basis as opposed to the currently required
annual basis. Water Park management concurs with the recommendation. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Director of Finance)
Agenda -2- June 9, 1998
8. RESOLUTION 19029 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING PURCHASING AGREEMENTS FOR
TREE TRIMMING SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 TO AZTEC LANDSCAPING, INC.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,116.31, THE DAVEY TREES EXPERT COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT
OF $39,576.00, AND WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,635.00, AND
APPROVING TRANSFER Of fUNDS - On March 14, 1998, an advertisement was placed soliciting bids
for tree trimming services. In addition, ten potential bidders were contacted directly by tbe Purchasing
Agent. Of those ten potential hidders contacted, three were local vendors. On April 16, 1998, the bids
for tree trimming services were opened. Five hids were received. No local vendors submitted a bid.
Considering the low bidder for each item, four different vendors submitted low bids. Three vendors are
recommended to be awarded contracts. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public
Works)
9. RESOLUTION 19030 WAIVING IMMATERIAL DEFECT, ACCEPTING BIDS, AND
A WARDING CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF "MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS
FROM INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD TO BROADWAY, IN THE CITY (ST961)" - Funding for this
project was budgeted during the fiscal year 1996/97 Capital Improvement Program budget process with
an additional appropriation in the fiscal year 1997/98 budget. The project was hudgeted to facilitate the
widening and reconstruction of Main Street from Industrial Boulevard to Broadway. As the development
or redevelopment of parcels along Main Street occurred, various portions of Main Street have been
widened and improved. This project is part of a phased process to reconstmct, improve, and widen Main
Street to its ultimate location. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
* * * tiN/J OF CONSENT CAI.ENOAR * * *
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the
Council's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda for public discussion. (State law, however, generally
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Foro." avaiÚlble in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. 17lOse who wish to speak,
please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Forot" available in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting.
10. PUBLIC HEARING PCM 98-15 - CONSIDERATION Of AN AMENDMENT TO THE OTAY
RANCH PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN TO ADD LANDS IN THE PROCTOR
V ALLEY PARCEL TO THE CONVEYANCE SCHEDULE AREA - The Otay Ranch Company has
applied to amend the Conveyance Schedule in the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan to add open space
and preserve land they own in central Proctor Valley to the first conveyance for SPA One. Staff
recommends approvaluf the resolution. (Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 19031 ADOPTING THE fIFTH ADDENDUM TO THE fiNAL SECOND-TIER
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (fEIR 95-01) fOR THE OTA Y RANCH SPA ONE PLAN
AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE OT A Y RANCH PHASE 2 RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT PLAN ADDING THE "KEYSTONE" PARCELS TO THE CONVEYANCE
SCHEDULE
Agenda -3- June9,1998
¡LA. PUBLIC HEARING PCM 98-21 - CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE OTAY
RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN/SUBREGIONAL PLAN (GDP/SRP) TO ALLOW
REDUCTION IN VILLAGE CORE DENSITIES - The McMillin Companies has submitted an
application to amend the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) and the Otay
Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan. In addition, they have submitted a revised Tentative Tract
Map, PCS 98-04, which covers the Village Five Core area south of East Palomar Street and Park and
Community Purpose Facility uses north of East Palomar Street. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions. (Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 19032 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE OTAY RANCH GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PCM 98-21)
B. PUBLIC HEARING PCM 98-16 - CONSIDERATION Of AN AMENDMENT TO THE OTAY
RANCH SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) ONE PLAN ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ON 1,110 ACRES SOUTH OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD BETWEEN PASEO
RANCHERO AND THE FUTURE SR-125 ALIGNMENT
RESOLUTION 19033 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT PCM 98-16 TO THE OTAY RANCH
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) ONE PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES THE OVERALL
DESIGN PLAN, VILLAGE DESIGN PLAN AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, PARKS,
RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS PLAN, REGIONAL fACILITIES REPORT, PHASE
2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUPPORTING PLANS, NON-RENEW ABLE ENERGY
CONSERVATION PLAN, RANCH-WIDE AffORDABLE HOUSING PLAN, SPA ONE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN AND THE GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT
C. PUBLIC HEARING PCS 98-04 - CONSIDERATION OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
FOR 101.4 ACRES OF THE OTA Y RANCH SPA ONE, TRACT 98-04, GENERALLY LOCATED
OFF THE SOUTHERN EXTENSION OF OTAY LAKES ROAD, SOUTH OF TELEGRAPH
CANYON ROAD
RESOLUTION 19034 ADOPTING THE fOURTH ADDENDUM TO THE fINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT fEIR 95-01 (SCH #95021012) AND APPROVING A
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP fOR PORTIONS OF THE OTA Y RANCH SPA ONE, TRACT
98-04, AND MAKING THE NECESSARY fINDINGS
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have beenfonvarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions, and/or Committees.
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of tire agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Council
and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please
fill out a "Request to Speak" fonn available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to tire meeting.
12. RESOLUTION 19002 APPROVING A SPECIFIC SITE PLAN fOR TWO ART PIECES AT
BAYSIDE PARK FOR POTENTIAL PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION BY THE SAN DIEGO
UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT PUBLIC ART PROJECT - On December 17, 1996, Council approved the
selection of two outdoor sculptures for potential purchase and installation by the San Diego Unified Port
District through the Port's Puhlic Art Program. The two proposed art pieces are "The Wave" by Ron
Jermyn and "Wind and Sea" hy Scott Hanson. Council also approved three optional installation sites (the
terminus of "F" Street: Bayside Park: and the southwest corner of the "J" Street Marina). Staff presented
the selected pieces and the optional installation sites to the San Diego Unified Port District's Public Art
Committee at their meeting on June 4, 1997. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Library
Director and Director of Community Development) Continued from the meeting of 5/26/98,
Agenda -4- June 9, 1998
13. REPORT APPLICATION FOR THE FORMATION OF COMMUNITY fACILITIES DISTRICT
NUMBER 97-3 (OT A Y RANCH MCMILLIN SPA ONE) - Otay Ranch McMillin has formally petitioned
the City to form a Community Facilities District (CFD) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Act of 1982 for
financing the construction and/or acquisition of certain public improvements serving the Otay Ranch
McMillin SPA One project. In keeping with Council policy, the developer has submitted an application
containing information required for reviewing the feasibility of the proposed CFD. Staff has reviewed the
application and concluded that the financial information provided is preliminary and general in nature and
that a final analysis on the financial feasihility of the project can not be made at this time. Compliance
with Council policy can not be confirmed until various documents such as appraisal, market absorption
study, disclosure form, Special Tax Report, Preliminary Official Statement, etc. are complete. These
documents will be prepared during the district proceedings and brought to Council for consideration prior
to bond sale. Staff considers that this process will provide adequate infunnation ensuring that the developer
has the financial ability to bring the project to completion. Staff recommends Council accept the report
and approve the resolution. (Director of Public Works) Continued from the meeting of 6/2/98.
RESOLUTION 19026 APPROVING THE INITIATION Of PROCEEDINGS TO CONSIDER THE
FORMATION OF A COMMUNITY fACILITIES DISTRICT FOR OTAY RANCH MCMILLIN
SPA ONE
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar.
Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers.
OTHER BUSINESS
14. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT<S)
A. Scheduling of meetings.
B. Fiscal Year 1998/99 proposed hudget overview.
15. MAYOR'S REPORT<S)
A. RESOLUTION 19035 OPPOSING THE INFRASTRUCTURE ACCESS CHARGE
PROPOSED BY THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPON
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY CUSTOMERS IN CHULA VISTA
B. Recommendation to retain a consultant to advise the City on possible aviation noise impacts that
could result from the master planning of the Brown Field Air Cargu facility and increased
helicopter activity.
16. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Salas
A. RESOLUTION 19020B AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 19020A URGING
INVESTIGATION OF CALIFORNIA'S MILK PRICING STRUCTURE
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) a specialmeeting/worksession on Thursday, June 11,
1998 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, Administration Building, and thence to the regular City Council
meeting on June 16, 1998 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A special joint meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Ageocy will he held immediately following the City
Council meeting.
". declare tInder penalty of perjury that I am
employed by the City of Chula Vista in the
Office of the City Clerk and that I posted
this Agenda/Notice on the Bulletin Board at
the Public ~)9;'~i'ding ~n
Tuesday, June 9, 1998 DATED, f . SIGNED . -" .' Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. Public ServIces Bulldmg
(inunediately following the City Council Meeting)
Citv of Chula Vista Citv Council
CLOSED SESSION AGENDA
Effective April 1, 1994, there have been new amendments to the Brown Act. Unless the City Attorney, the City
Manager or the City Council states otherwise at this time, the Council will discuss and deliberate on the following
items of business which are pennitted by law to be the subject of a closed session discussion, and which the
Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect the interests of the City. The Council is
required by law to return to open session, issue any reports of.û!111l action taken in closed session, and the votes
taken, However, due to the typical length of time taken up by closed sessions, the videotaping will be tenninated
at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from closed session, reports of.û!111l action taken,
and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report of final action taken will be recorded in the
minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
1. Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Wolfe v. City of Chula Vista.
. Griffin v. City of Chula Vista.
. Chula Vista Police Officers Association v. City of Chula Vista.
2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b): Three case.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957,6
. Agency negotiator: David Rowlands or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, IAFF, Executive
Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire
Fighters (lAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
2. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
June 4, 1998
TO: The Honorable Mayor and city Council ~
FROM: David D. Rowlands, Jr., City Manager "DR \;~ ~ \
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting of June 9, 1998
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular
City Council meeting of Tuesday, June 9, 1998. Comments regarding
the Written Communications are as follows:
Sa. This is a letter from the city Attorney stating that to the
best of his knowledge from observance of actions taken in
Closed Session on 6/2/98, there were no actions taken which
are required under the Brown Act to be reported.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
DDR:mab
~~ft..
-!!18.. -
._""-""""~
~-::~~
OlY OF
CHUIA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Date: June 3, 1998
To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: John M. Kaheny, City Attorne~~
Re: Report Regarding Actions Tak n in Closed Session
for the Meeting of 6/2/98
The City Council met in Closed Session on 6/2/98 to discuss Wolfe
v. City of Chula Vista, Griffin v. City of Chula Vista; Chula Vista
Police Officers Association v, City of Chula Vista; In the Matter
of the Application of San Diego Gas & Electric Company (U 902-E)
for Authority to Sell Electrical Generation Facilities and Power
Contracts; Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation-
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of
Section 54956.9: Two cases; and labor negotiations.
The City Attorney hereby reports to the best of his knowledge from
observance of actions taken in the Closed Session in which the City
Attorney participated, that there were no reportable actions which
are required under the Brown Act to be reported,
JMK: 19k
c, \It \010"." . no
M-/
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910 . (119) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
# """'"""-""
,
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: ¿,
Meeting Date: 06/09/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /7'¿?.z?Acceptance of the California Alcoholic
Beverage Control (ABC) Grant in the Amount of $1 00,000 and
Authorizing the Police Chief to Work with the Department of
ABC to Continue the ABC Program.
SUBMITTED BY: Chief of PoII""fY' ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~~ 4'
4/5ths Vote Required: - Yes -L No
The Chula Vista Police Department has received second year funding to continue its
Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Program. The grant funds will be used for education,
prevention and enforcement of alcohol related activities in the City. The funds are
available for a one-year period and will be used to cover the expenses of a full-time peace
officer, overtime, training, travel and related equipment. Adoption of the resolution is
necessary for implementation of the program to occur.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council adopt this resolution accepting the ABC grant and
authorizing the Police Chief to work with the Department of ABC to continue the ABC
Program.
Backaround
The Chula Vista Police Department was awarded a $100,000 grant for FY 97-98, The
grant afforded the department the opportunity to implement a comprehensive alcohol
enforcement, education and prevention program. Measurable results were achieved in the
following areas:
. a reduction of crime at ABC licensed establishments,
. a reduction in sales of alcohol to minors from 25% to 18%,
. partnerships with the business community and schools,
. regular training for all alcohol licensees,
. training of all sworn personnel in ABC enforcement and intervention,
. alcohol training and programs for each high school.
&-¡
"
Item: - Page: L
Meeting Date: 06/09/98
Discussion
The Police Department is one of three agencies receiving second year ABC funding.
During FY 98-99 the program will focus on three goals:
. Reduce crime at ABC licensed establishments, We will provide problem solving
training to officers to enforce the laws at problem ABC locations. Additionally, our
lead officer will manage a multi-jurisdictional effort towards licensees involved in
narcotic trafficking. The department will also continue Retail Operating Standards
Inspections (ROSI), decoy, and COPS in Shops operations,
. Continue educating the community, licensees and providing our patrol staff with
specialized training.
. Establish campus Student Advisory Boards, and educate young people and parents
through the schools regarding underage drinking.
The funds are available for a one-year period and will be used to cover the expenses of
a full-time peace officer, overtime, training, travel and related equipment. Adoption of the
resolution is necessary for implementation of the program to occur. The program is
proposed to begin July 1 and end June 30,1999.
FiscallmDact
Acceptance of the $100,000 grant award from ABC for the one-year project duration has
been included in the General Fund proposed budget for FY98-99. Moreover, staff believes
additional revenues will be derived from enforcement related activity. These revenues
could be used to partially offset the cost of the additional officer in subsequent years.
Based on these potential revenues and other potential funding sources; staff recommends
that future funding of this position be reevaluated in the FY 99-00 Budget.
[F:\usrladmin\scs\a113s\abcgra-2.113]
~--t:Â,
RESOLUTION NO, /9~~ '/
-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE CALIFORNIA ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGE CONTROL (ABC) GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$100,000 AND AUTHORIZING THE POLICE CHIEF TO
WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ABC TO CONTINUE
THE ABC PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Police Department has received
second year funding to continue its Alcoholic Beverage Control
(ABC) Program; and
WHEREAS, the grant funds will be used for education,
prevention and enforcement of alcohol related activities in the
City; and
WHEREAS, the funds are available for a one-year period
and will be used to cover the expenses of a full-time Peace
Officer, overtime, training, travel and related equipment; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to adopt a resolution in order
for implementation of the program to occur.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby accept the California Alcoholic
Beverage Control (ABC) Grant in the amount of $100,000,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Police Chief is hereby
authorized to work with the Department of ABC to continue the ABC
Program.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of torney
Police
C,lr,lgrant.abc
~-3
PART ONE Village Design Plan
VILLAGE DESIGN PLAN FRAMEWORK
-
Otay £'i~.bt+.
~riI Ranch
1-125
November9,1995 ~
~-_._-_.._--- . -------.----..-- _._._-----.._~--
PART ONE Village Design Plan
VilLAGE DESIGN PLAN FRAMEWORK
fa- 2- Otay
Ranch
1-125
November 9,1995
-~~~---"----"'-~-"----'---"'-'" ..--------...
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
111-1. Village Identity and Character
A. Village Setting
The SPA One project area is located within the Otay Valley
Parcel of the Otay Ranch GDP area and roughly in the center of
the Eastern Territories Planning Area described in the Chula
Vista General Plan. SPA One includes all of Village Five and the
portion of Village One east of the future extension of Paseo
Ranchero, as depicted by the GDP Land Use Plan,
Village Five is located directly east of Village One, with the
planned extension of La Media Road separating the two villages.
The extension of O{vmpir Parkway East Orange A.amc will
define the southern edge of both villages. Village Five is also to
be served by the light-rail transit system, with a station planned
within its core. The 115 acre core is also planned to include
commercial, neighborhood parks, an elementary school site, CPF
zoned land, and medium-high density housing uses. The GDP
designates 1,263 single-family homes and 1,615 multi-family
homes with the village.
Village Five is bounded on the north by Telegraph Canyon
RoadJOtay Lakes Road and the south by Poggi Canyon, The
entire Otay Valley Parcel has been farmed or grazed, leaving only
isolated areas of very fragmented sensitive habitat. The southern
edge of the village consists of the undulating slopes of eastern
Poggi Canyon. The northern edge of Village Five is Telegraph
Canyon (Vicinity Map),
Limited scenic views extend to Village Five from along
Telegraph Canyon Road and Olympic Parkway East Oran~e
:Avem1e, both identified in the Otay Ranch GDP as scenic
corridors. The village site has views to the surrounding
mountains to the northeast and east and to the Pacific Ocean to
the west.
(a-3 Otay
RDnch
111-1
March 1n 199R No.en.be, 3, 1935
-..-.----. -- -----'-------------------'---
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
C. Village Type and Orientation
The organization of traditional communities takes on a familiar
and logical form: a central community core with higher intensity
mixed uses, and a sUITOunding residential area. This organization
creates an understandable land use pattern and concentrates inter-
related land uses in an area which becomes a viable transit
service area. The GDP states that urban and transit-oriented
villages within the Otay Ranch should emulate this pattern and
include the components needed to allow the village to serve the
needs of its residents without unnecessary automobile trips,
Village Five is both an urban and transit-oriented village. The
village core is located in the southwestern portion of the village
and includes çingle-family and multi-fami~v meditml. high densit)
residential units, an elementary school, two neighborhood park
sites, mixed-me (rp-çidential ahove~commerciaVretail~, and CPF
sites, The Village Five core identity is based on a traditional
town square design, This will be implemented with commercial,
office and public/quasi-public uses organized around a small tree-
lined square, The town square park will provide a focal point for
the village center and reflect a pedestrian orientation and urban
character due to its proximity to higher-density residential and
commercial uses. The town square is connected by a "paseo"
extending to the secondary area of the village located to the
northeast. The secondary area includes single-family residential
neighborhoods, with a range of lot sizes and product types, and
several pedestrian park sites,
D. Pedestrian/Transit Orientation
The land use plan for Village Five is consistent with the
pedestrian and transit oriented guidelines presented in Part One
of this document. The plan includes a more intense Village Core
area which includes a commercial area close to a transit stop.
The SUITOunding Secondary Area includes a range of housing and
parks, The street system includes two promenade streets leading
directly to the Core, The Village Core includes a traditional
"Town Square" commercial
Otay {o- f
Ranch
111-6
MRmh1n IQQRNo..n,b.rJ,l~~S
-------------
~ ~. 'H~
.~ l:j "" = ~
- ~ r" ;
~ ~ ~- ~
¡ , 0 '0
'" ë > .
¡ -i ~ ~
'N, " - .
'ffi~ ,~¡ ¡ ~ ~ . :.:.. ;
: ~ð "" < ¡ :
,¡ ~N !, ~ ~ ! ¡ ,
¡ ~ ~ ~ 1-~. ~ ~ "=0 U~ ;
" w() " . .
. ~ ~¡g ~ FB1 ~mr11
,~ j~ g> l21[]f18l§~
;.: >..J ..J
~- . ---
œ ~ ~.-;¡;;~
~ .u]' ò~æ~
- ~ "c i
~ ~ ~" ~
' , = "
w c > 0
. - . .
' . .
.! ~. ,
.. . - .
'ffim '!, ¡ ~ > 0
't;;z "" > , .
' '~ß g". ¡ ~ =
:' ffi~ ¡ I ¡ I ~ 8 -
i~ Co « .:: a: a: ~ >
'~ ~~ ~ It]~1(¡1 [lrlr51 .
-", .Jz CI .~ ~tSJ
<. .J« II> .,
;:: >.J .J
g
~
g
~ ~ <H<
~ ~ »f ;;: U~.; ð r¡~
~ ~~»'¡¡:!2~ ;, !
~¡:: .§.E.¡¡g:,m~ ..;<:~
. Z E~...!!!<:2 = ..
:~W g§~5!'!~ -,;;:
)~ @ ~ u 5 ¡; ~ g > 0 <:
~c g! ~ ~ ¡; -g en ~ '"
c> <C a:~.§~§ g ~
,,~ en<Ò:en~ Æ ..
¡j ~ I ~~r¿J[:][fi EJ ~
>
J:
C ,~
g
5
0 ~
G ~ ~~~.
> ~ is ~=!
~ ~ ~ i ~ ~! ~-j
.¡¡ e ë~ ~ m Ie
> "'~~~.;-1i =.~
~!:: e<:w",2!~ -'a.
:;!ž ê ê ~; ~ Q; > 'c
=~ ~ ð 8 ; ~ ~ 5 !:}
~(; ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ :
t.= > c::~~¡¡¡~:; c
=~ ~ en < a. en >- 0:: G
~~. ~ J ~~~Q~ EJ ;
~
~
d
:i
~
:t
"'"
Zw
<0
c::<
,.-,
<-'
..;
0
~
5
.
0
,.n
--------~-------------_.- - . --------~--_._-
ci
~ ~ '" ~ ,~ S n~~
1! ë c e Ii.. " ..;
~ ~ ~ ~ œ~ ~
8 Æ ~ g õK "', c z
- - w () "e ~ .
:g :go;o; " ':'~:Q,ê -.~
¿ 0: Œ Œ ~ ~ ~ :g ~~ ~-g¡ ; E' 0-
~ OU) ~ ~ UJ UJ 5 iñ iñ" ijiJ c
:õ ä:w ë,,¡ -8 -8 ~ -¡;;'" -¡;;,ê 'Oc. '"
) 0 wOo w a. ê ê ~ Ë g 'Ë;; ,5§ -;¡
.u 1-< ~ ~ " CD 2! .g" -8.g ~ ~ CD
(~~~ ~ ~ ê ê ~~g '~~ g~ 0
:~ gt;j] >~>[ijQ.~Q.~ ~UJ. ~rr:.() mrr:1ii 0'" - ~
-., ...w .. . . "", ..
': ~!: ~ . \ \\\ (-; =
H- >U)..J. . \.,.... >
15
.
à
~
:c
"w
",.
<=;:
,.-'
. -'
>- .
"
,
0
.
~
.
0
..
II
< ~C7'\~'
j 1 i i : ~~' ! è5]~~I'
is :; ~ ~ _ê ;,
'-' a: c 8 00. .. 'c
- -, w '" c .
;mö;ö; "'ö;':'~:!2.ê =,~
a: êñ èÌš jg jg ~ e !!~;-¡¡ ;: '...
Oen ~ IS tJ) tJ) > êñ êñ c Ba: ' c
ä;w E.!!! ~ ~ ~ ;¡<;¡~ '60. '"
we. w""",.. =c ;'1; .!õ,s -
¡.oct "" aI aI "B ¡,g aI'¡ !(i VI
:¡:CJ :¡r Z ê ê ~ n ¡... g"g :;
~~ ~ ~> >lij"'~"'~ ~tJ). ~a:'-' Ija:m D<e ~
ct w CI) . , "'..' ..
;;;! ~ g' \ \\\ r',.: -
>en..J. . . \""" >
:z:
c'"
Zw
Co
"'c
>-'
c-'
...;
0
~
§
g
---.-.....-- ----------~~--------
~ Co., ~1"~
~ '" - lCj "'=-
~ ~ ~ ... ~1 "'.;
'" ~ -:g, '"
~ U m j¥ ~ '"
a: c3 « ~ $ .g ~ '~ z
0 ~.~ c - ~ ~-.-
~¡;; .;,~~ 8&!¡¡~ ¡¡~ E>'o.
. ~ ~.~ ~ ~~ ~ w '> 0
:~,~ ,:: ~ ~¡¡ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ £,.. ~~ ~ ~~ ~
)0 Z.-J 'iij W ;;'" o.'~ ~ ~~;; ~";:o ~ "'~
:" øæl ~'.s .§~ 8,j¡ ¡¡¡ ¡¡¡ ~§ 0 1J,~ ~ .g'5 -g,.. .~~ :
:: ¡:¡;5:! -g, § g>,g¡ n ~ ~ ~'g> ~ ~;; ,g¡ .~ 5 ~-E *.g c
:~ S'~ ~ ~~ a:m r7l im~~ ~>~ []m Rilww H ~
¡~ j~ J liJ~[ZJllJ ~~ bð LJ~ \ Wrn ]I ~
'!\
:x:
g
~
>
<
0
{p -(I
~~-------------~---~-~-- ---- ------ - ----
~ t:7'I n~.
~ ~ ~ ;;: ~~ o",~
~ð ~<i~ m- i
!:';3 ~ -~~ ~~¡.~
õ, e]:¡¡ mi':, ¡g=,~
-~ ~. ~ c3 &! m~ m $ ~;: - c..
c: ¡;¡ 'æ.¡g~ ~'æ ~ "'> 0<.
oct ¡: ~ ¡:~~. ~ ~ 11¡: $ ]1< ~ õc. '"
.J -æ '" <i!i"--@ ~ ~~;; "-»., ëg~"1ii -
Z¡;¡) 0:"'..,;;; æ æ~.om~¡¡m;2! ~-" ..
§!-(,) :E ê -Q~ ¡¡'~ E E ~-§, œ ¡¡'", ;; :2'6 o~ œ1ñ m
~.ffi 3 ~ Is s;~ £ £ ~Æ Æ H ~ £8 JJ~ ~~ '"
II J llJ[l]0lZJ ~rn 0 ~~ [\J~rn If ~
:t
"..
0
.
~
w
5
>
.
0
--~------------------------- ---------------
~ r;,-,
.- U
ø ~ ]'
~ ~ ,c
<,<,UJ -r--~
~ .î:.î: hH 'fila = ~, ~
$ E E¡;¡;;;.î:~~ ::.. > c c
¿ iÌ5 & ~H~ :¡.!'!!'! '"
:;. en !! ~ g'22.î:ï¡¡¡¡¡¡ -;;
E ~ 8 Co Q::§>:§>!!.g¡¡¡¡ .
0 a: i:' ..øøoøa.a. '"
"<t g Ë ~;~~~~= .
! ~ "C ~~- o..~c ~ó.ó.ó.ó.ó.ó. ~
. <t C -
'" ..J CD ;
~ == ~
~ > ..J
:;:
'-"->
"w
~~
)-~
"'~
....;
0
g
.
5
0
'00 "0'."
&-/3
-- .-- ------
~ ~ ~~".
: ~ ~~! è!~~
~ ~ E
~ .
~~UJ :;' ¡ 0 ,¡
~ ~ ~ ¡j,x ~ ~ - ~
;; ¡¡> "8"8~~~~ = ; ~
Æ 'é êH~~H > . 0
(/) e ~ g>ßß~H~ :::
~ 8 ~ ê:~~!,~¡¡¡¡ 0
<t 8. ~ ~:H8æ~~ ~
c.. = E ~""""","--
~ ~ c-[\J> -~ê: ~å.å.å.å.å.å. i
~ ~ =
= ø >
> ~
J:
"'"
Zw
<"
"'<
>--'
<-'
....;;
0
~
5
.
0
----------- ----
--------- - ------
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
~ VILLAGE PARKS - VILLAGE FIVE
.',': "';""""" Neighborhood Park P-6
;:~¡~;,? .
Description: This park is designed to be an active recreation park
with potential for adjacent community purpose facilities, The park
site has a link to the village square and will have, landscape
characteristics that complement the urban core, The local
promenade streëtscape character will be maintained at the park
perimeter with linkages to the paseo.
The school site, although separated nom the park by the Pase.o, will
have the outdoor tUrf areas for practice and other sports during non-
school activity. ~"
'" ~fIt? a-
Cf' ~ "" ""5trp..
'7($.
III-54
November 3,1995
---- .-------- - - -_-_m--___--.------
-------
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
~ VILLAGE PARKS - VILLAGE FIVE
.'.". "" '.... Neighborhood Park P-6
,,' ;""',,'....: 8
:':::', , ", ,'. ':
"', :~:::.:.~:::;::,' Description: This park is designed to be an active recreation park
with potential for adjacent community purpose facilities, The park
site has a link to the village square and will have landscape
characteristics that complement the urban core, The local
promenade streetscape character will be maintained at the park
perimeter with linkages to the paseo,
The school site, although separated nom the park by the Paseo, will
have the outdoor turf areas fo~ practice and other sports during non-
school activity,
,
CFf-
'7(11ft
III-54
November 3,1995
-~-------_.. -------~-------
PART THREE - - Village Five Design Plan
VILLAGE PARKS - VILLAGE FIVE
. Neighborhood Park P-7
Description: This park is designed to provide active recreation amenities
intended for use by the nearby multi-family residents of the Village Five
core area. The park will have open areas for casual play and activities.
This park is surrounded by the promenade streetscape proposed for the
adjacent streets.
Location: In the center of the ml!lt.i-family complex, southwest of the
core area..
~..
,.
ì
TO V/~
C~
M//q - ¡=-/1/'>'I//..-)/
(Pe~~~D
~
r MI/f--TT - F;'¡W:¿)
f<?é35 ?eN17 /Jí-. '
\y
(p -/7 III-55
November 3,1995
-----_.- --..-.-.-. ~--
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
VILLAGE PARKS - VILLAGE FIVE
. Neighborhood Park P-7
Description: This park is designed to provide active recreation amenities
intended for use by the nearby multi-family residents of the Village Five
core area. The park will have open areas for casual play and activities.
This park is surrounded by the promenade streetscape proposed for the
adjacent streets.
Location: In the center of the multi-family complex, southwest of the
core area.
I
. TO V/~
C~
/Y1?,q - F/f/'o1/l-Y
/ f<e5/Pe:NTI/'fl-
~
~
r MVm-F,'Y>1ltY ~
f?b5?eNT7;!Jt-. .
~
& - IC?' 111.55
November3,1995
---~---
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
. VILLAGE PARKS - VILLAGE FIVE ~I
-<.~, . Village Square P-8
~9;.. Description: The Village Five Core area park is designated a town
-'f,'
, ,<, /. ; square in the Otay Ranch Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails
Plan. The town square concept is emphasized by locating retail and
commercial functions at the edges. The village core identity and
fonn are based on a traditional town square character with village-
serving retail around a village green. A transit station is proposed
adjacent to the town square. Introduction of fonnal tree planting and
pedestrian wa1ks will reinforce the urban town square concept.
Location: The south side of the Village Core Street is surrounded on
two sides by the commercial area.
- ç;;; ~~~.
,ÞASGi? ~
7TJj/erblf -
~$OD
III-56 ~-I(
November 3,1995
~~-~------------~------- ------.
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
VILLAGE PARKS - VILLAGE FIVE
. Village Square P-8
Description: The Village Five Core area park is designated a town
square in the Ctay Ranch Parks, Recreation, OpenSpace and Trails
Plan. The town square concept is emphasized by locating retail and
commercia! functions at the edges. The village core identity and
form are based on a traditional town square character with village-
serving retail around a village green, A transit station is proposed
adjacent to the town square, Introduction of forma! tree planting and
pedestrian walks will reinforce the urban town square concept.
Location: The south side of the Village Core Street is surrounded on
two sides by the commercia! area.
ç:;; ~~~.
/'ASðil/ ~
-¡r¿Netfbf/-
~77'OO¿)S ~
, .
III-56 &>- ¿j)
November 3, 1995
.~--- ---------------
~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~~ !1~~
: ~" . ~ § I ;'. 1 ¡
~ u.::¡ 11." ~ ~ ~ ~ . 0 z
~ ~< ~I\ ~ ~ 0. 2~~ro = I ~
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~< æ § ~ ~:H~ :;; 11. I>.
~ <i ~ ~ ~~ H!£ ~ a h]!~ ~
~~:¡: ~ Jj ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~2~ .~
~"C ~ 8. ~.= ~j1 ~ ~ "" :d¡~~" .
<: Z .ê ~~~ '~1ij E ~ rE i~ g"§ 0
c' <t >- > 1>.- 1>.- - u.. >~ .~~=~u ~
3 fß -g B0 W ŒJE][S]" ~ ~~~~~ ~
~~ ~ ~ .). ~ \ \ ,) ~~ ~H ::
).: æ ~ ' §1 ~£ ã.ð >
g
.
~
"
"w
~~
,.-'
..,..'
...',
C
.o..,o'w'"
--------------------- -----~._--
~ : C1 ~.~.
f B B ~ ~ ;;: O~; ð.i!'~!-
16 g;;; g 11 ê ~
Ë ~e"-¡æ!:J1:. ,,:c
IJ) " :¡¡<]!-c_S'ii\ -'!-ê~16 -."
-J E ~~ ~< C E '" !""Q ~ - '0-
-J ~ '¡iE '¡i~: :;; ~ ¡;¡~~'" > .
« - ~ ;;:~ ;;:-Ë'¡i'" 0 8.'¡ij.!!~ C
~ ~.¡¡:;;.!!! :;;~;;: ~ -g 1i\7ii!o" ~
C "" m~ m"§ 1i ,,~= 1!~~--§ ~
Z ~ go -ê<õ -ê::¡; ~ g ~ ~ ~;;;;;: ~~ ..
<t r= ~ .n æ~ Ë æ ~o; ~~ j'~ 0
~ ! B. 0 W W\ Q [j, ~ ~I::J ~
W.... a¡ - " ) ö-~H-é; ;:
. - Z~_c.u
:::
;,; ,~
~
~
.
c
--_.~. -------------
--------
s E ~h } ! ~ ~! ~ ~ ~ ~~~
~ ",,~, , .ca'"" w" '" ,
"," 3:"00 -'" wë ._u. .0
§~~æ ê'~¡¡;1ñ¡¡;3""'.1J ::I.i;' ~I-"'
~ f- :§.g,g:~ gh ~ @. ~ .~~ ~¡¡¡ ~§ :: 1- ë;:
~ a. ::æ ~'ð,~ ~gæ en - w ð" U II: "E > I
- ~ ~ ~~ ~.c-ð ;:t:g, ~ ~ ~ t~ w w ~8 ~
;0 Z ~~ ~~~§c\j~ ã: ¿ ~:g c\j~ ~ ~~!Ê ~
" 0 00> ",,:ß Ew.~ w " .cW ww w w 0 .~o w
': U ~.¡¡~§,¡;¡ EF£ F :¡¡ g::; FF § § ~ ~~ c
:' " û1t:. <iñ;; 8>3 > ~ ~ ¿» à: à: r;. (j)~ w
~ Z"C
:~ ~ g ~
. ,,01 -
~ - '"
>~ -' -' >
.;"
"..:
,- -.
~=
, ~
c
5
.
c
._--_._---_.~----- ---------~~
"C :è .,; ~ E] q~~
- ~ H~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~' ! ¿;~.~
~ ~ ~~§ ~ ~.;¡; ~~ ~ ~ ¡
g>~ ,-g ~ ~g ~ - ~"i: ~ ~ .~';, ., 0 ~
ËO g1iJ ti.§E æ Æ ~ ~8 ~ ~ ~¡; =, ~
I- g~ ¡:- ~ o.g,-g = - cñ .~;: Õ ~ ~ ~ -, 0.
ft ~8 ~g~ ~~: ~ ~ ~ ~1 u a: :§§ >, 0
~ H h 8 .f~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .~
0 g>~ ;¡;~'¡; "~.!2' " u ~¡¡ ~~ ~ ~ 0 ;¡;!!? ~
U .~~ .~~~ êF~ F .~ g::; FF § § ~¡;.§ ~
" ~t:. ~¡¡;¡¡; 8:>~ :> ~ Q'!¿» ò: ò: ~ &~
iJw~ ~ ~EJrn~~~~~ ~
t;<>
Zw
<Co
C:"
)- ~
,,~
~;
0
Ii!
5
.
0
~ .~ ~ ~
~Z '. .
~~ ,
~. ,
uJ~ 1!.\
~~ ~
oJ..:
~~ .~.
§ it ~-~ . ~~."
"=--- I ¡ ~"
0 " Π"-, .~"'-
U .., ¡ '- ~
I L[.~ I ¡ >,,~ "-
I \ 'v-1', '~~ ',:E:1
;1; r ! //~
}¡ . \: ¡// <:/-'
/" I , " ¡, i .I
II I ~ n i/ Æ(,i , (
~ ~ ~
II') è'i ~Æ' ("
I / I ð ~~,
II' / ~ ~~~ '\ \" "
I '" ~,,~
( 'I'
! : ('
¡J) , '~J\.~
I~J / ~ e '\
~'( ~~~
~~I l ~, -æ , '
,f] \ g ~ \ \
I~,") ~ .
- "'f /
~ IÐI, " L-_,' -'-, -, '-.... '\u¡'~
- ~ 'L '~ ~ ,
,~"""; =-~ ,I
~ < ~ I ~,,-"',. ' ì'l5'
~ ~ , \ {j§./. Z~
. ", ."" ,
':: \-'\ \) .. '"", )0
" ." " ,
~ , ,,' '-, ~. ~ù5'
. ,.- ~----,
~ ,'!.. ~.....,..,
õb ~~ ~.,
"-- g~
.iI
9~
I§
w
w
a:
:r
l-
I- --
~ Iø - :&"
-,--~
----
l.!.Jz
>-<
¡;:~
l.!.J~
0;;;
<..J
....J<
::!t
>",
u ~,
z
0
u
'"
'"
0 -'~~,~
u
~ _-ñ . ""
. -- I' w .
ß" ~ :ët;
. , \" 'J .~
\ rr~ \,gg. .~~. .~
'I' 'y~ ~~
} ) .... $~J 4-'
I , ~ . $
I 'iJ I '" ,
'< "~' 'j¡'
.. I UJ ~....~ ~
I/!" 'i " .¡
" ~ lot,. I"
' « .. '8¡, ,
1/ ; ! . !¡¡Z, . (
k' . . 1\ 1
) Z Iñb ~!::
J I II Ii U~¡
~I t---- ~í
"I , ~
~I ,( Ii ~
Õ I \ 'Ii. ¡ \
if. I l;;/!
~I I I ¡ ,
. L \_---'-~ l
~ r--:-~~.9 ~
~ "fi§ ....~kD
~!::~ . ~
,~ ,,~, ~
::¡....~ fZO- ~
....g~ g~..
~ ~ê~
~giJ
rc-~
--
-- -
" ~ o.
," '2"
- ;, "-
~
I
~
I
I I
U
. \
I \
rl
\ W\
\ :>
¡I' It
H~ W\
...... c¡
~~ \À¡~ i?~~h-J )~:
-~ l_. ï '\ I I
- _~p.?ìi~~tïl
. trIo' ~/ '"
--- '3 ;1¡ "'"
~-¿7 ~l (:3\
" L/
. I '
-- ---- -- -. - ______f 1t"
-
-<: .
~~. ~
",'" x:
< - ;;>.~
OJ ,!! ¡;
"<. '/
°s:õ
! 1/
I '
, (
! \ II,!
æ ~gß
&-"Lf
- - --
~
- -
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
CONCEPTUAL TOWN SQUARE PLAN
~- 21 /$
OIU!'
Ru1!clt
111-80
November 3, 1995
---~----, -----
PART THREE. Village Five Design Plan
CONCEPTUAL TOWN SQUARE PLAN
~
-
Uta, b-~D
I/allc'¡'
111.80
No,emO., , 1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
. Provide CPF, commercial district and neighborhood park
synergy.
. Reserve light rail transit ROWand station site,
. Provide the "paseo" and other non-vehicular circulation
connections to Secondary Area(s),
. Utilize formal landscape and hardscape schemes in the design
for the Town Square commercial area,
2. Design Districts
The Village Core is divided into three design "districts" based on
the proposed land uses and the level of pedestrian orientation.
The most intense pedestrian orientation occurs at the commercial
core or "Town Square" and decreases generally with distance
from that focus area. A second district includes the park
site/pasco terminus, multi-family residential and CPF sites CCHI1~ c:a<ß/
immediately adjacent to the commercial district and along the
Village Entry Street. The third district includes the remaining {R/J/¡(/ ~{/trt-e .
parcels within the Village Core which are primarily ~in.gJp.-fnmily {J6fflq-
andmulti-family residential..mui a park and-€PF sites. ~ 7Tf£ðí
°mfi<=7
B. Design Features
This section highlights imponant features of the Village Core
Concept Plan and provides guidelines by design district in four
design areas: building/siting, pedestrian/vehicle/transit access,
urban character (landscape and/or hardscape), and
lighting/ signing/street furnishings.
1. Commercial CoreITown Square District
The guidelines set forth in this section relate primarily to the
"Town Square" pedestrian oriented plaza/commercial area which
fronts on Parcels C-3 &4J-1IDd-€-4. In applying these guidelines,
it should remembered that each of these parcels
fa-"?j oray
Ranch
111-81
M",r.h 1n 1 qqR No..n,bu 3, 1995
..-----.--
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
. Within building groups, architectural and accent lighting
should be indirect and subtle. Increased lighting levels
should highlight pedestrian areas to clearly derIDe the
pedestrian path, Service area lighting should be contained
within the service area boundaries/enclosure. The actual light
bulb for service area lighting should not be visible from
adjacent properties.
. A Town Square Design Program should be formulated to
establish specific design parameters for all signage, theme
lighting, and street furnishings within the town square
commercial area. Signs and fixtures in this district should be
located and scaled for a pedestrian district. Signage should
inform and direct but not dominate the visual character of the
area.
2. Entry Street District
This district relates primarily to the Park, CPF and multi-family
residential parcels found near the plaza commercial district and
fronting on the Village Entry Street. Although not a part of the
shopping street their visually prominent locations, proximity and
potential roles in providing access to the commercial area set
them apart from the other parcels in the Core. Because these
parcels front on the most highly trafficked street in the village,
the aesthetics and building design on these sites will generally be
more important than pedestrian orientation.
Rl1i1ding Design/Siting
. Village landmark buildings should be sited in visual1y
prominent locations along the Village Entry Street (parcels
CPF-4,!'& CPF-5, & cpr 6). A landmark structure should be
similarly sited in the park (P-6) across from the Town
SquareIVillage Entry Street intersection.
(p-32- Otay
Ranch
111-85
M"rch10 199RNo..n,borJ,1:J:J5
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
Response: Village Five meets the park standards through the
provision of pedestrian parks, neighborhood parks and a
community park located outside of the village per GDP policy.
Thefollowingpolicies shall guide the design of parks and open
spaces in Village Five:
Setbacks and landscaping shall be provided along Telegraph
Canyon Road/Poggi Canyon in lœeping with the open space
scenic corridor guidelines which will be developed in the Overall
Ranch Design Plan.
Response: Setbacks are provided on Telegraph Canyon Road and
Olympic Parkway East Orange Avenue (Poggi Canyon) varying
from 100 feet to 700 feet, Development of the coITidors will be
consistent with the concepts in the Overall Ranch Design Plan.
The proposed underground water storage facility on the villages
eastern edge may include open spacelrecreation uses on its
surface, designed to include access from the village.
Response: Access is provided to the water storage facilities
in the event future recreation uses are deemed to be feasible.
Other Village Five Pnlicie~ .
A visual analysis with photo simulations shall be performed at the
SPA level to assess the visual impacts of development adjacent to
Poggi Canyon and Telegraph Canyon Road. Visual analysis
requirements will be defined in the Overall Ranch Design Plan,
Response: A visual analysis at key points along the Telegraph
Canyon and Poggi Canyon coITidors is included in the SPA One
Environmental Impact Report.
Right-ol-way for a transit line shall be reserved at the SPA level
and irrevocably offered for dedication at the Tentative Map level.
Otay
~-33 Ranch
111-91
MRrr.h 10 1998 No.ember 3, 1 :):)5
.~ ;-
...:;¡:
cu "
iff:
::<
>""
c
.2
c
'"
¡¡:
ðH¡1
~--
y
i~
gê
tp-3Y
" Q.
;>"
¡¡:¿
~~ ~J~~
"""
:=..<
;>CJ>
.:
"
"
t
:::
~
:::
.!:p
~
~ J
~
;:.
k:
~
~
:::: ]-- ~
~--
w
w
a::
J:
I-
1--
a:::
<t:
0..
&;-3<)
---------
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "J"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcels &2LR-23, & R-24, R 25, R 26 & R 27
Village Five Secondary Area
Allowable UseslMix: SF ResidentiallPC District SF3
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: None
Building/Siting: Adjacent lots and buildings should be oriented
toward park site P-9.
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian edges along Promenade Streets.
Trail connections to Telegraph Canyon Road at
northern t=inus of the Promenade Streets,
Trail connection to Telegraph Canyon Road at
the northern t=inus of the pedestrian Paseo.
Pede~trian Paseo between parcels R-242 and
R-27, R 23 and R-26,R-14 and R-25 (plannir¡g
area "K") link.\: Trail emmeetion with ta park
P-9...E=D and school S-2. Pasco along the
southcm edge ofparecl R 27.
Vehicle Access: None
Parking: None
Edges: Scenic edge along Telegraph Canyon Road.
Transition edge to Ranch Theme Street
landscaping on the western edge, Transition
edge to R-464 along southwestern edge of
parcel R-22. Transition edge to S-2 along
southeastern edge of parcel R-24~
Signing: None
Otay (p - 3?
Ranch
111-102
March 10 1998 No.ember 3, 1 ~~S
. D ign Plan
Village Flve es
PART THREE
.-J L --- ---=---.J L =------ ---------- -J (
. T~!cEGRA~H..~.~.. -------" .~
---;~~ I ~ I . .~..~
5-2
~J
.
Olay
I Ranch
&- 37 111-103
November 3,1995
- - -
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
Planning Area "J"
~ L.. .. ..~L.. "-"-
TEL~GRAPH C.~NYON RfO
..
"--.
OJ
P-9.2 ¡ r
'~C:
5-2
~-3~ Olay
Ranch
111.103
November 3.1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "K"
PLANNING AREA DE.WGN,W1MMARY.(¡HEET
Plannilllf Area De~criptinn: Parcel~ R-25, R-26 & R-27 Village Five
Secondary Area
AUnwable IJ~e<VMix" SF Residential/PC DMrict SF~
,WTE DESIGN I,(¡SUE.(¡
Special Criteria" NfJnE.
BuildinglSitilllf" Adjacent lot~ and huildir¡g~ ~hould he oriented
towardpark ~ite P-9
PedP.'ò/rian Acce~~: Pede~trian edge~ alol1g Promenade Street~
Trail connectiom to Telegraph Canvon Road at
northern terminu~ qfthe Promenade Street~
Trail connection to Telegraph Canyon Road at
the northern terminu~ qf the pede~trian Pa~eo
Pa~eo between parcel~ R-24 (plannil1g area" 1")
and R-27 R-26 and R-25 link Trail connection
with park P-9 and ~chool S-2 Pa~eo alol1g the
wuthern edge a/parcel R-27
Vehicle Acce~~" NfJnE.
~ NfJnE.
Edge£:. Scenic edge alol1g Telf!graph Canyon Road
Signing:. NfJnE.
Otay ra-~'1
Rßnch
111-104
MRrr.h 1D 199R No.on,bol J, 1 ::J::JS
. Plan
Village Five DesIgn
PART THREE
~ L~ -=------.J L =--- ------------
" TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD .. -.J (
--'~r..~..-=:.I.~.~~
. /
4l
8-2
,,4
Þ
o/ay
(p-ýD 1 Ranch
111-105
November 3, 1995
P.02
619 223 5108
. L nd Planning SPT
10:36 Cintl a
JUN-1!-1900 . D ign Plan
Village Flve es
PART THREE olK"
Planning Area
,,---1 C..
- TELE~RAPH C4~YON F?Q;;¡;---...
"
,-.:_..JL_- .
" -"---.. - 1Er
,.,
"--"--.. _..Jil
-"" "" ""-"-"---¡:r
1, i""': '-e.' . . t
1.>- . 'iiûo. ,J:l
. .~ """"""~r
. "~",.
..
..
"--"--.._..JiL
C,--....:,_.. l:r
..
~:.
~"--"--" E}
. .----... U'ì rj!'
U . U:L
: .......
.....................~ir----
.~
ìfr
Olay
Ranch
(p- Iff III'J!!.~.
November 3, '995 TOTAL P.02
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "LK"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcels R-31, R-32, R-33, R-34, R-35, R-36,
R-~7 & R-~R Village Five Secondary Area
Allowable UseslMix: SF ResidentiallPC District SF3
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: None
Building/Siting: Adjacent lots and buildings in parcel R-:3+imd
R-35 &3.ó should be oriented toward park site
P-IO,
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian edges along Promenade Street and
Secondary Village Entry Streets. Trail
connection to Telegraph Canyon Road at
northern terminus of the Promenade Street,
Vehicle Access: None
Parking: None
Edges: Scenic edge along Telegraph Canyon Road,
Transition edge to EastLake along the eastern
edge of parcel R-36&lZ. Transition edge to
Otay Water District along southern edges of
parcels R-31 8!1d-R-35,
Signing: None
Otay {g-lf2-
Ranch
111-106
MRr~h 1n 1 t¡t¡R No.on,be, 3, 1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
Planning Area ilL II
ST. CLAIRE
DRIVE
L ROAD
OTAY WATER
DISTRICT
OTAY WATER
DISTRICT
{p-<f3 Otay
Ranch
111-107
MRrr.h 10 1qqR No..n,b.r J, 1:J95
------------
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "MJ,"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcels R-464 & CPF-4 Village Five Core Area
Allowable UseslMix: Multi-Family Residential/Community
Purpose FacilitylPC District RM2/CPF
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: This planning area includes a Village Landmark
building site at the southwest comer of CPF-4.
Building/Siting: Buildings in parcel R-464 should be located
along and fronted on the Promenade Street.
Other primary building edge is along the
southwestern edge. Primary building edge for
the CPF site is along the Village Entry Street.
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian edges along Promenade Street and
Village Entry Street. Pedestrian Paseo along the
southeastern edge of CPF-4.
Vehicle Access: Vehicle access should be limited along the
Promenade Street.
Parking: Parking should be in the central portion of the
multi-family site and behind the community
purpose building, away from pedestrian edges.
Edges: Transition edge to Ranch Theme Street
landscaping on the northwest edge of parcel R-
464. Transition edge to single family parcel to
the north of parcel R-464, Transition edge to
Village Entry landscaping along the
southwestern edge of parcel R-464. Transition
edge to S-2 along the northeastern edge of CPF
Parcel.
Signing: Village core sign program,
Otay & - ctý
Rand¡
111-108
Mømh 1n 1 99B No.6n,bcr 3, 1995
. ----.
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
J L
')
"
/
P-8
p#'J
~-cfÇ Otay
Ranch
111-109
MRr~h 10 1 99B No.on.ber 3, 1995
- -. Design Plan
Village Fzve
"M"
PART THREE Planning Area
/ /
III
~/'~ 5-2
Otay
Ranch
& - tf-? 111-109
3 1395
10 1 QQR No.o "ber ,
March
-- - -
--- - ----
- --- -
-- -- -
~
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "N"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcel R-28, R-29 & R-30 (& pnrtinn if
&l1)Village Five Core Area
Allowable UseslMix: SF Residentia1/PC District SF4
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: None
Building/Siting: Lots and buildings across from P -11 should be
oriented toward the park.
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian edges along Promenade Street.
Vehicle Access: None
Parking: None
Edges: Scenic edge along East Orange Avenue.
Transition edge to Village Entry landscaping.
Transition edge to multi-family along the
southeastern edge of parcel R-30. Transition
edge to Otay Water District along a portion of
the eastern and northeastern edges of parcel R-
30.
Signing: None
Otay (p- Y 7
Ranch
111-110
Marr.h10 1998No.en,berJ,1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "0"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcel R-39 Village Five Core Area
Allowable Uses/Mix: Multi Family Residentia1/PC District RMI
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: None
Building/Siting: Lots and buildings across from P II should be
öriented to.. ard the park if fcasiblc.Ial1e
determined dllrir¡g review nrnce~~
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian edges along Promenade Street.
Vehicle Access: None
Parking: None
Edges: Scenic edge along East Orange Avenue.
Transition edge to Village Entry landscaping,
Transition edge to multi-family along the
southeastern edge of parcel R-30. Transition
edge to Otay Water District along a portion of
the eastern and northeastern edges of parcel
R-3ØR:.i2.
Signing: None
otay & - cf8
Ranch
111-112
March 10 199R No.o",bor J, 1335
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "EM"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcel CPF-.l-9- Village Five Core Area
Allowable UseslMix: Community Purpose Facility/PC District
CPF
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: This planning area includes a Village Landmark
building site at the southern comer of CPF-i9'.
Building/Siting: Buildings should be located along and fronted
on the Village Entry Street.
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian edges along Promenade Street and
Village Entry Street.
Vehicle Access: Vehicle access should be limited along the
Promenade Street. Shared parking potential
with park P-6. if grades permit,
Parking: Parking should be behind the community
purpose building, away from pedestrian edges.
Shared parking potential with park P-6J1
gradeç permit,
Edges: Transition edge of Park P-6 along the northern
edges,
Signing: Village core sign program.
Otay & - yo¡
Ranch
111-114
March 1Q 199R No.en,ber J. 1395
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
P-6
~J
&-0 Otay
-~ Ranch
111-115
MRr~h 10 1 '1'18 NO.61"bcr 3, 1 ~95
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
Planning Area "P"
CPF-5
(ç-C:;( Otay
Ranch
111-115
MRrch1Q 1C C RNo..n,~GI3,1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "QP"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcels R-4l-,R-43 & cpr 6 Village Five Core Area
Allowable Uses/Mix: Multi-Family Residential/Commtmit» Purpose raeilit)/PC
Districts RM2f€PF
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: This pJ~,,'l'ti"g are:a incluocs a Village Landmark building site
at the sötlth\'\estem edge öfthe cpr 6 F./evation detailing of
huilding' at entrie, ,hould he enhanced.
Building/Siting: Buildings in parcels R-e-and R-43 should be located along
and fronted on the Promenade Street, especially on the park8 p..
1-1md P-8 edges to the southeast. . Other primary building edge
in pareel R 42 is alöng the slope abo,e La Media Road and
tmning the eömer abö,e the Village Entry. Other primary
building edge in parecl R 43 is along the Village Entry Street.
Primary Imilding edge for the cpr parcel is the sotlth\'\estcm
edge facing öntö park P 7.
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access along Promenade Streets and Village Entry
Street. Paseö eonneetiön between parcel R 42 and R 43
leading creating pedestrian tra1llinkage along East Orange
Avenue:
Vehicle Access: Vehicle access should be limited to Promenade Streets,
Parking: Parking shollid be in the not in the central portion of the site,
away from pedestrian edges and Ranch Theme Street,~
he attractivelv de'igned and ,creened. Parking for the cpr
paled should be behmd the Commtmit) purpose building.
Edges: Transition edge to Ranch Theme Street landscaping on the
western edge of pared R 42. Tramition edge to ,ir¡gJe-family
develfl[1ment on parcel R-42 to the wuthwe,t Transition edge
to "Town Sqllare" parcel along the northeastern edge of CPF 6
parcel-.
Signing: Village core sign program,
Otay
Ranch b- :;L
111-116
March 10 1998 No,., "OGr 3, 1335
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
V
~"
(
Otay
Ranch
111-117
November 3, 1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
V Planning Area "a"
I
..
) ~
/8, ...... '~.
. ~
~#~, ...." ". ."'°,,. -J
~ . ~~ . <
~ . "'11..
: Q , "1"1 .
$' " m ~ :~{
;; : ~~ r..
o. ".
~¡':"":.:."".. ;:¡ 0..0 ..
/"W~ ~f p~ ...
1:.. ..~
..
.
..
..
..
Otay
~ - S-f Ranch
1I1.11?
November 3,1995
--~-----~-------
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "R~"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcels C-3!.Bd5. & Bd4€-4 Village Five Core Area
Allowable UseslMix: Commercial Mixed Use/PC Districts C/RM2
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: This planning area defmes two sides of the "Town Square" and
will be the focal point for the Village Core. The planned
transit station is located in the Village Entry Street median
adjacent to the "Town Square" parcel P-8. Good exposure and
pedestrian connections to the transit station, through the park
parcel should be provided.;, Pedf'-çtrian cnnner.tinn frnm park
P-7 thrnugh R-44 multi-family tn tnwn çquare area çhnuld he
pJ:J1J!kJ&1.
Building/Siting: Building fronts should be oriented toward the square with a
well articulated, pedestrian friendly sidewalk experience, The
rear of the buildings should provide secondary access to the
parking areas. Sidewalk along "Town Square" is the primary
building edge,; Central pedf'-çtrian path and prnmenade çtreet
are primary huildir¡g edgeç fnr multi-family area
Pedestrian Access: Strong pedestrian edge along "Town Square" perimeter,
Strong pedestrian access should be provided across Village
Entry Street to median transit station and on to parklpaseo
pedestrian path, '.AIm thrnugh multi-family area frnm park P-7
and inter-villagp cnnnectinns tn the muth
Vehicle Access: Vehicle access should be to the rear of the buildings and
separated from pedestrian oriented "Town Square",
Parking: Parking should be in the rear,qfthe mixed-uçe area and central
areaç ofmulti-family develnpment separated by the buildings
from pedestrian oriented "Town Square""andprnmenade
sJ:rJ:.eL
Edges: Transition edge along the southwest edge of parcel Bd4€-4 to
the park P-7multi family residential parcel R 38. Transition
Otay (p-5S-
Ranch
111-118
MRrr.h 10 1995 No.on,ber 3, 1995
-~ ---~--~---- ---------
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
edges aL£æa1ong the public pede<trian way hi<ecting the mlÛti-
family project southwest edge of parcel C 3 to cpr 6 parcel
and along the southeast edge of pared C 4 to cpr 7,
Signing: "Town Square" design program for signs, lighting and street
furnishings.
t,-)~ Otay
I/m1ch
111-119
March 10 199R NO.ðl..b~r 3, 1995
-~-------
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
~ pJJPJ
-
.
{¡;:- ~7 Otay
Ranch
111-120
M8rch1Q 7qqRNo.~n,b. 3,1995
---
PART THREE
Villaae F.'
ò Eve Des'
. 19n Plan
Plann'
Ing Area "R"
'.
---
.'
.
.
.
&-58
- Otay
-~ - Ranch
- ~ - MBrr.h 10 1998N 111-120
".em~er J, 1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "S"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcels R-4E & R-42:J. Village Five Core Area
Allowable UseslMix: Sir¡gJe-family attached and detached Multi-
Family R-csidcntiallPC Districts SE4 RM2
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: Pedeçtrian trail cnnnectinnfrnm park P-7
thrnugh the plannir¡g area tn cnnnect with
Olympic Parkwav crŒçir¡g tn VillQge Sir tn the
SI1JJ1h None,
Building/Siting: Building¡: should be located along and facing on
the Promenade Streets, especially along the park
P- 7 edge. The other primary bui:lding edge is
al¡mg the sotrth west comer of the parcels.
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian edge along Promenade Streets,
Pedestrian trail connection between JlfJrkJ!=Z
Parcels R-..42 and wuthern erigf! ofR-41 R-<B
leading to nlympic Parkway crnççir¡g East
Onmge A.cnue alð11g the slope to the south,
below the development site.
Vehicle Access: Street inte1:'1ectinnçVebie1e access should be
limited along Promenade Street and possibly
located neil/grouped at parcel boundaries.
Parking: Ntm£. Parking should bc in the cœtral pðrtÎð11 of
the mttlti family sites, away from the pedestrian
edges.
Edges: Scenic edges along nlympic Parkway and La
Media Rnad East Orange A.cntlC. Transition
edge\: to multi-fami(v reçidential Ranch Thane
Strcd landscaping on hnth çideç of the plannir¡g
ar£fJ. the I'\cstcm edge ofparc:el R 42,
b -51 Otay
Ranch
111-121
MRrr.h 111. 1 99R No.en,ber 3, 1995
---
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
Signing: Village core sign program.
Otay ~- b1J
Rimch
111-122
Mør"h 1n IqqR Ne.en,ber 3,1 33S
-
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
.
I EAST
".1
h- (or Olay
Ranch
111-123
November 3,1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
/ Planning Area "S"
..
/ "'" f
..
.
:. .
"" ...00
/ fZ
..
((r ..~<.
°l °
jj, ..
\. Pol: ~
. .
:::r "'Z.:..
..'. ..
fiJ ..~ ..
"1 .. . . ...
::fE " " ".,~.."":; .~
/3 ' : wi~\
. ~~'
~ «
:
I
.
: "
: L.
~ o' ~
,0 - ~..---
OL'lWt?\ .
----- ..
I roo " ----- 0'
(ß-(PL Otay
Ranch
111-123
November3,1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
PLANNING AREA "LR"
PLANNING AREA DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
Planning Area Description: Parcels R-40, R 41 & cpr 7 Village Five Core Area
Allowable UseslMix: Multi-Family ResidentiaL'Community Purpose raeility/PC
Districts RM2f€PF
SITE DESIGN ISSUES
Special Criteria: This pl"""'ing area incltldes a Village Landmark Building site
in parecl cpr 7 along the Village Entry StreetNone
Building/Siting: Building\: should be located along and facing on-the
Promenade Streets, espceially in pareel R 38 o.crlooking the
park P 7. The primary building edge for the cpr pareel is
along the Village Entry Street.
Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian edge along Promenade Streets and the Village Entry
Street Pedestrian trail eolmectÏon in the sotitht:ast comer of
parcel R 39lcading to Village Pathway pedestrian/cart
o.apass to Village Six, below the dc.dopmcnt sioc.
Vehicle Access: Vehicle access should be limited along Promenade Street and
possibly grouped at parcel boundaries. V chicle aeeess to the
cpr pared should be limited along the Village Entry Stred.
Parking: Parking should be in the central portion of the multi-family
sites, and behind the community purpose building, away from
the pedestrian edges.
Edges: Scenic edge along Olympic Parkway East Orange A.cntIC.
Transition edge to Village Entry Street landscaping on the
eastern edge ofparecl R 39. Transition edge tn <ir¡gJ"-family
rf'-<id"ntia! ta th" Wf'-<t in cpr pared to "Tol'm Square"
commereialparcel along the northwest edge and the multi
family R 38 parecl along the sotithcm edge.
Signing: Village core sign program.
Otay & - ftJ)
Ranch
111-124
MaT"h 10 1 QQR N"'ðl..bör 3. 1995
-
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
- ~J
.
.
.
"' .. "
EAST ORANGE AVENUE
t~r Otay
Rflnch
111-125
March 10 1 QQR '¡e.an.bar J, 1995
PART THREE Village Five Design Plan
Planning Area 'T"
P-6.1
I
\'
\
L
..
., "
..
.. Otay
- -
fo-~:j IIrmch
111-125
M8rr.h 10 1C¡C¡R N".en,~el' J, 1995
k --- ro~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ?
Meeting Date 6/09/98
ITEM TITLE, Resolution 1'l¿:J,zt:" amending section 2.2.2 of
the Agreement Regarding the Development and
Operation of Whitewater Canyon Water Park
. f i
SUBMITTED BY, Dlrector 0 Flnance
REVIEWED BY, City Manage;D{<..~ Vote, Yes_No~)
SUMMARY,
On July 23, 1996, the Council adopted Resolution 18382, approving
an Agreement Regarding the Development and Operation of Whitewater
Canyon Water Park (Water Park). staff is recommending an amendment
to the Agreement requiring the Water Park to remit the city's
portion of shared revenue on a quarterly basis as opposed to the
currently required annual basis. Water Park management concurs
with the recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION,
Adopt Resolution ¡QO2.'8 amending the Agreement Regarding the
Development and Operation of Whitewater Canyon Water Park to
require the Water Park to remit the City's portion of shared
revenue on a quarterly basis as opposed to the currently required
annual basis.
DISCUSSION,
As part of the application process for Council approval of the
Water Park in 1996, the applicant requested assistance from the
city in order to facilitate and reduce the cost of developing and
operating the Project. In exchange for such assistance, the
Applicant offered the city ,among other things, a 2% share in
certain project revenues. Under the section 2.2,2 of the
Agreement, the Water Park is to pay the City each January an amount
equal to 2% of gross cash receipts from certain Project revenues,
including a) admission fees, b) parking fees, c) equipment and
locker rentals, d) arcade games, and e) any and all other sources
of income which is not subject to sales tax,
7-/
Page 2, Item -7_-
Meeting Date -JìlOBl98.-
In calendar year 1997, their inaugural season, the Water Park got
off to a very slow start. According to Water Park management,
revenues were significantly down due to a shorter operating period,
causing serious cash flow problems. Section 2.2.2 of the Agreement
establishes a January 15 due date for an annual payment to the City
of the 2% of shared revenues. The report filed by the Water Park
for 1997 indicates that the City's share amounted to $41,636.62.
To. date, the Water Park has only been able to remit $23,335.64 of
this amount, with a promise to pay the remaining $18,300.98 owed
plus $2,081. 83 in late penalties and 6% interest this summer.
In the interest of better insuring that the City's share of
revenues are not spent for park operations, staff proposed to Water
Park management, and they concurred, that the Agreement be modified
by substituting the following language requiring quarterly
remittances in place of the current language requiring only one
annual remittance.
SECTION 2.2.2 Developer shall submit to ci ty on or
before April 15, July 15, and October 15 of each calendar
year, a report estimating the portion of the City's Share
of Project Revenues that is payable to City with respect
to the preceding calendar quarter. Said report shall be
accompanied by a payment in the amount of the estimated
City Share of Project Revenues. On or before December 31
of each calendar year, Developer shall submit to City a
written statement certified by a financial officer of the
Developer showing in reasonable detail the gross cash
receipts derived from Project operations at the Project
Site for the preceding calendar year and the calculation
of the City Share of Project Revenues based thereon.
Said certified statement shall be accompanied by a
payment in the total amount of the City Share of Project
Revenues for the preceding calendar year, reduced by the
quarterly payments previously remitted for that year. In
the event that the Developer fails to remit either a
quarterly or annual payment of the City Share of Project
Revenues by the dates listed herein, in addition to the
City Share of Project Revenues then due, Developer shall
be obligated to pay a penalty equal to five percent (5%)
of such amount plus interest on such amount at the rate
of six percent (6%) per annum until paid.
7-d-.
Page 3,ltem_Z-_-
Meeting Date ---6lO9l91L
FISCAL IMPACT,
Approval of the recommendation should have no impact on the amount
of the City's share of Water Park revenues, but earlier receipt of
the funds will generate a small amount of additional interest
revenue to the City, estimated at between $1,500 and $2,500.
?-3
RESOLUTION NO. /9,,;,r
-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 2.2.2 OF THE
AGREEMENT REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND
OPERATION OF WHITEWATER CANYON WATER PARK
WHEREAS, on July 23,1996, the Council adopted Resolution
18382 approving an Agreement Regarding the Development and
Operation of Whitewater Canyon Water Park (Water Park); and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending an amendment to the
Agreement requiring the Water Park to remit the City's portion of
shared revenue on a quarterly basis as opposed to the currently
required annual basis; and
WHEREAS, Water Park management concurs with the
recommendation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby approve an amendment to Section
2.2.2 of the Agreement regarding the Development and Operation of
Whitewater Canyon Water Park such that such Section shall read as
follows:
Section 2.2.2. Developer shall submit to City on or before
April 15, July 15, and October 15 of each calendar year, a
report estimating the portion of the City's Share of Project
Revenues that is payable to City with respect to the preceding
calendar quarter. Said report shall be accompanied by a
payment in the amount of the estimated City Share of Project
Revenues, On or before December 31 of each calendar year,
Developer shall submit to City a written statement certified
by a financial officer of the Developer showing in reasonable
detail the gross cash receipts derived from Project operations
at the Project Site for the preceding calendar year and the
calculation of the Ci ty share of proj ect Revenues based
thereon. Said certified statement shall be accompanied by a
payment in the total amount of the City Share of Project
Revenues for the preceding calendar year, reduced by the
quarterly payments previously remitted for that year. In the
event that the Developer fails to remit either a quarterly or
annual payment of the City Share of Project Revenues by the
dates listed herein, in addition to the City Share of Project
Revenues then due, Developer shall be obligated to pay a
penalty equal to five percent (5%) of such amount plus
interest on such amount at the rate of six percent (6%) per
annum until paid.
7-{
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is instructed to
prepare the appropriate amendment and obtain all necessary
signatures thereto.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Robert Powell, Director of
Finance
c, \rs\waterprk. 222
?-- .5'
:; !
¡¡: t
...!! .
~ ~
~ "'."
)( C
W ~
~
u
~
"-
'"
c
~
"-
0
c
0
~
f
u
~
II:
i
:.
"-
6..
~~
¡¿~
....>
0
c:i
a:
<
Õ
w
,.
:5
~ ~
§ w
w w
~ ~" ~ ~ >- ..
8 ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~,
~ ~ ~ 8 .. ~ ~,,~
~9~~~:! ~~~~ ,,::
Zzo :5;æ ,,:lzc >; "I
wwz .. 0 oJ - x'
i\i\8¡;¡~~~~~iã~ t~ ::,',
c ~ ~ ~ f,. :I ~ ~ .... a: m i~ ;
~:I:lli¡:(11 ,. ---;) Q~
w".. 1'1 I ( ~"
....:.. I; I . -'-- >-~
! "? ~~
\' 0
\ "
'----_':c-
~
7-1 ~~ ~~\tv\b1't7
.Qiè
c
"
¡¡:
... .!!
~ ~
J:. ...
" c
W "
II
...
"
"-
III
~
0
c
.2
~
f
...
II
a::
i
:;
...
X
u~
Zw
~"
?;:~
ö>
~
~
?<
Ö g
«
Õ
~
S
;I ~
~ w
w ~ ~ Iii I:: .. .. 0
8~~-,~~ ~wä h
' , > 0 .. ¡: ... ¡¡ ¡: ~
~~~§3~ ~\€~~H
ffi ffi !i! ~!i 0" ~ 0 ~.... >".
11 g in :c" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ nh~
c .. .. .. "?", X
ffi:I:lli¡¡{II\d>5 ~~
c¡.l. _1':/ I. ~s
~ ¡I: ¡ : I I ~g
0
~
~ 7
7- 2- ~~ tt~bit
~I:
~
~
..a
~ ~..~
W ISJ!
/
u
~ .Ii..oo
~ ~ ~ ~
ì! "2 ..~u "
Co ~ 8",8 oo~
.., "," N "'!!g ~-
g ~~ @~oo ...~
j ~iI ~!2~~~£~
= Il:!! Ii! " ~< '" "
.!æ to) ~=>c8"J!! "'¡PE~ '"
.. "~~~""~Uf!'o).E
i~ hh.@lhUt~
..< " . N
7 -"3 ~; "'N,.;"':ori<D"';<D"~;:-
I
-
.2 (II
c: ~
0
=¡ijë: ~ <
- - 0 ~
äj~ ~ ¡¡ c: 6
Õ .¡: oX :s ,2 UI U
e::.~ 8a¡ ¡g]! g,!-g
C)(II Nc: "8 '-::I !:: (II
c:(!) @~:i? < ~ < ~
.- - ~ - ~ >'U '-
"CUI '-::10(11(11 LL.(II
'§ 8 ~(!) g,en ~ ë: UI a.. 6-
a¡ (II :2 5ì ..- ~< t::: ~ ~ ~ en
~ Co .~ => ~ ~ >'::1 ÒI= c) ~
.- en LL. ~"C c: ..!J! 8 c: en ,!:; C)
§g '->ãi~a.. 32LL.~(II
E g ~ïii!E ~'t:~ æa.. (115
~ E~gj gjiiim.=:x:a..ua..
.- UI 0 0 a.. en a.. a¡
u..~ u "
CÞb O"":NC">
g'< " , "000)..-..-..-..-
=~ "":N~~I()CO""
>co
7--'1 Exhibit 12
- - -
-
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan SPA ONE
OTAY RANCH
Village Five Neighborhood Park (P-7) . ~
5.2_. ~
1. BasketbalWolleyball Courts I Þ
2. Park Maintenance Building
3. Children's Play Area
4. Tennis Courts (2 Courts)
5, Open Turf Play Area (180' x 300':1:)
6, Passive Uses/Green Buffer
Exhibit 13
Otay 7-5
Ranch
Page.e
-----.
:
Village Five Neighborhood Park (P.7) \
5.7 Acres
1. Hardcourt Play Area
2. Restroom Building
3. Tennis Courts (2 courts)
4. Children's Play Area
5. Soccer Field (1 @ 200'x350')
6. Outdoor Spaces, Gathering Picnic
7. Passive Uses/Green Buffer
8. Pedestrian Linkage to Town Square
and Regional Trail '7-- Þ Exhibit 13
. SPA ONE Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan
OTAVRANCH
Village Five Village Square (P-8) "J
1.7 Acres
1. Gazebo/Band Stand
2. Plaza Space
3. Passive Play Area
4. Commercial Building
5, Casual Picnic and Family Activity Area Exhibit 14
7-1 Otay
Ronch
PII 847
Village Five - Village Square (P-8)
0.9 Acres
1, Vertical Focal Point
2. PlazafTown Square
3. Commercial Building
4, Landmark Building
5. Town Square/Regional Trail Linkage
6. Transit Stop
í -'l Exhibit 14
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan SPA ONE
OTAY RANCH
J LJ L
] L
"\ r ..., r
Village Five Pedestrian Parks (P-9, P-10, P-11)
.6 to 2.0 Acres "J
Pedestrian Park
1. Open Turf Play Area
2. Hardcourt Le.: Half Court
3. Children's Play Area, Seating Area
Otay 7-1 Exhibit 15
Ranch
Page 48
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan SPA ONE
OTAY RANCH
J LJ L
] L
\ r ~ r
Village Five Pedestrian Parks (P-10, P-11)
.6 to 2.0 Acres
Pedestrian Park
1. Open Turf Play Area
2, Hardcourt Le.: Half Court
3. Children's Play Area, Seating Area
Otay 7-10 Exhibit 15 A
Ranch
Page 48
\
-
~
Village Five. Pedestrian Park (P-9)
2,0 Acres
1. Children's Play Area
2. Hardcourt Play Area
3. Passive Use/Green Area
4. Outdoor Spaces, Gathering, Picnic
5. Paseo
7-11 Exhibit 158
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan SPA ONE
OTAY RANCH
II
LA MEDIA RD.
Potential Community Garden Locations - Village Five Exhibit 23
"J .
Gtay 7 -!¿,
Ranch
Page 74
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan SPA ONE
DrAY RANCH
EASl1.AKE
R.26
EASTlAKE
LA MEDIA RD.
Potential Community Garden Locations - Village Five
7-/)
Exhibit 23
Olay
"n"n~
Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - May 13, 1998
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 98-21: Consideration of an amendment to the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) to allow
reduction in Village Core densities.
PCM 98-16: Consideration og an amendment to the OtayRanch
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan on property generally located
on 1,110 acres south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo
Ranchero and the future SR-125 alignment.
PCS 98-04: Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map for 101.4
acres of the Olay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 98-04, generally
located off the southern extension of Otay lakes Road, south of
Telegraph Canyon Road.
Background: Beverly Blessent reported that McMillin Companies received approval of their
Tentative Map in June 1997, approving the single family lots north of East Palomar and
indicated at that time that they would come back seeking a GDP and SPA amendment in the
multi-family areas to reduce density and dwelling units.
The applicant is requesting to do a text change to the GDP, which would reduce density on
a case by case basis as long as density in the core area is provided, which would be sufficient
enough to maintain support for the bus and light rail systems. It would still allow for the
maximum densities which are cited in the GDP to be built and would give some flexibilities
in reductions.
When the GDP was approved, the core density was approximately 18 dwelling units per acre
in the Village Five Core and approximately 1,615 units. When the GDP was adopted, density
was being looked at on a gross density basis. As a result, when the units were planned at the
SPA level with streets deleted from the area calculations, the net density of the building sites
increased dramatically.
The applicant believes these densities are too high and, while there is a growing demand in the
multi-family market, the approved densities would not be absorbed by the market. They are
proposing that flexibility be added to maintain the 18 du/ac as the maximum density as policy
but allow less density to be bui It. Staff supports the proposal as long a sufficient densities are
achieved to support light rail transit. The City will continue to coordinate with MTDB to ensure
the transit village cores contain enough density to support the trolley line.
SPA Amendment
The applicant is proposing text changes which reflect the reduction in density changes in the
application. The number, location and size of the Village Five parks and CPF sites has been
revised based upon the reduction in density and population. The applicant is proposing to
consolidate the three CPF sites into one larger site, which is CPF 4 (4.8 acres) and has stated
that they feel the optimum size for a CPF is about 4.5 to 5 acres and is not only more
marketable, but is necessary in order to attract a large user such as an established church,
Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - May 13, 1998
which generally require 4.5 to 5 acres.
The applicant has also reconfigured the parks in size and location. P-7 has slightly increased
in size and remains in the same location as a neighborhood park. P-6 has been reduced in size
from 10.6 to 6.4 acres. These proposals were reviewed by Technical Committee and P&R
Executive Committee and have determined that they are in conformity with park requirements.
In addition, Santa Rosa Drive has been deleted and Santa Cora has been slightly reconfigured.
The commercial acreage in Village Five Core has been reduced from 3.6 acres to 2.8 acres and
applicant is requesting that a mixed-use zone be created which would allow ground floor
commercial with two stories of residential above.
Tentative Map
There are two neighborhoods that are mapped and are shown as R-41 and R-42. R-41 is
proposed for 90 small lot single-family products on 14.5 acres. All lots adjacent to Santa Cora
will face onto the park giving it a greater sense of security on the park and a sense of ownership
by adjacent residents.
R-42 consists of 74 duplex or single-family attached units on 9.6 acres. The R-42 lots on Santa
Core will also front onto the park.
Staff supports the GDP and SPA One Amendment and believes there are good pedestrian
amenities in the project, supports the mix-use development and believe the density maintained
is adequate enough to support the transit and bus system.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
approval of:
1. The Fourth Addendum to FEIR 95-01 for the OtayRanch SPA One,
2. An amendment to the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP (PCM-98-21),
3. An amendment to the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan (PCM 98-16),
4. A revised Tentative Subdivision Map for the 101.4 acres in the Village Five Core area.
Commission Discussion:
. Commissioner Ray asked if any other consideration had been given regarding
pedestrian safety on the street crossing.
Rick Rosaler responded that pedestrian safety will be maintained by a median break
with a controlled traffic signal at the interesection by the Town Square Park.
. Commissioner Thomas asked why Santa Rosa Drive, which connected to East Palomar
Street was removed.
Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - May 13, 1998
Ms. Blessent responded that with the reduction in density and reconfiguration of the
neighborhoods, the applicant felt it was not needed and there was no objection from
public safety entities. In addition, because there was a curve and a rise in grade, staff
felt it was not an optimal location.
Public Hearing Opened 7:47
Craig Fukuyama, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, commended staff for the countless
hours they put into this project; concurs with staff's recommendation and is there to answer any
question from Commission.
Public Hearing Closed 7:48
MSC (Willett/Thomas) that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
approval of:
1. The Fourth Addendum to FEIR 95-01 for the OtayRanch SPA One,
2. An amendment to the Otay Ranch GDP!SRP (PCM-98-21),
3. An amendment to the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan (PCM 98-16),
4. A revised Tentative Subdivision
Motion carried (6-0-1).
FILE
Interoffice Memorandum
Purchasing Division crrq() ~ 2Ò r- fl¡Ç
Date: April 24, 1998
To: Dave Byers, Deputy Director of Public Works/Operations
From: John P. Coggins, Purchasing Agen~
Subject: Bid #14-97/98, Tree Trimming Se - Public Works
Bids for Tree Trimming Service - Public Works opened on April 16, 1998. Ten potential bidders
were contacted; five bids were received. The bid was also advertised in the Chula Vista Star News
on March 14, 1998. Of the ten potential bidders contacted, three were local vendors. None ofthe local
vendors contacted submitted a bid.
Summary of low bids by item:
Atlas Environmental Item 1
Aztec landscaping, Inc. Items 2, 5, 6, 7
The Davey Tree Expert Co. Items 3, 4
West Coast Arborists Item 8
/' The City reserves the right to award as a lot, by item, or by groups of items. However, if a low bid
is rejected, it must be justified.
I've enclosed copies of the four bids and a tabulation sheet for your review. Please prepare the A-I 13
for Council and provide me with a copy. A purchase order(s) will be issued once Council approval has
been obtained.
cc: Bill Ullrich
Tom Levesque
Robert W. Powell (tab only)
Q§;
~~~
:;~:;
0lY OF
CHUlA VISTA
PURCHASING DIVISION
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
Addendum No.1
Tree Trimming Service - Public Works 'jil"
Tree Trimming Service - Parks and Recreation
Bids No. 14-97/98 & 15-97/98
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE FOLLOWING cHANGES TO THE
SPECIFICATIONS ARE IN EFFECT AS OF TIllS DATE:
1) Change Bid Opening Date to:
3:00 p.m., Thursday, April 16, 1998
2) Unit Price shall include all labor, equipment, materials, insurance, permit and license costs,
dislJOsal, profit, overhead, supervision, transportation, and applicable sales tax.
3) The City reserves the right to negotiate out disposal costs in lieu of a City-financed disposal
arrangement.
4) Traffic Engineering permit costs are waived for work performed under this agreement. AIl other
costs associated with Traffic Control remain in force.
5) Add to Bid #15-97/98:
Item 2a. (3) ea, Fan Palm, OSD-18, Trimmed of Seed Growth
One (I) tree to be trimmed three (3) times throughout the year.
$~ea $ ;vb- total
I
6) Change Bid #15-97/98, Page 17, SUPPLEMENTAL CONDmONS, Arborist, to read:
The Contractor shall provide a CerJfied Arboñst, on-site, at least once daily to interface with
City staff as may be required for all work performed under this agreement.
7) An optional site inspection tour for all areas covered under Bid #15-97/98 has been scheduled for
Thursday, April 2, 1998, from 8:00 a.m. to approximately 2:00 p.m. One (1) representative
only &om each firm present at the pre-bid conference may attend. Attendance to be at bidder's
sole expense. Bidders are to meet at the City of Chula Vista Purchasing Office.
.' All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
JohoP. Coggins, C.P.M.
Purchasing Agent
March 27,1998
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNtA 91910' (619) 691.5141 . FAX (619) 691.5174
@---
BID NO. 14-97/98 .s-!~ PageS
-TI
~
æv Of
QfUlA VJSrA
BID FORM
The undersigœd hereby offers, subject to all specifications, terms aIXl conditions, and Geritl ~ovisions
herein, to furnish the City of Chula Vista the following: " " ,
TREE TRIMMING SERVICE - PUBLIC WORKS"
and that helshe has examined the location of the proposed work and has read the accompanying
instructions to bidders, and hereby proposes to provide all materials, equipment, and labor to complete
the work for the unit price or lump sum set forth in the following schedule.
The Contractor has Sixty Worldnl! Davs (60) to complete the project,
Estimated Items with Unit Price UM Price in Extension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures Total
L 953 EArn Queen (Cocos) Pahn
'T»te-n:etJ \)o¡}~~ Ð<J"7'/ tEÆS $ IS. eD $13,15/.40
PER EACH EA /
2. 952 EArn Fan Palm
'ÎW~ ~;)( bo Jf)~ $ ?b.OO $ ':2'1. 75::<
,
PERE CH EA
3, 179EArn Podocarpus
9XJ1; PilE" OoIJ~ $ '-5:00 $ 11.6:55
EA /
PERE rn
4. 997 EArn Broodlesf'"
P-P:;î fiv€" ()of/~ $ 55;00 $5q.~
EA '
PER CH
"'Defuútion of Broodlesf Trees: All trees other than those called out as specific bid items.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~'f? Page 6
---
-
01Y Of
GIUIA VISfA
>
Estimated Items with Unit Price Unit Price in .~. Extension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures '~, ~", Total
,,',
5. 26 EAΠEucalyptus Trees (Large) -.,
"1llREE' JkN/J~ i~ $ 320.//0 $ B3-::?O
PER EAΠEA /
6. 112 EACH Eucalyptus Trees (Medium)
'5eG?~ FIvE (XJ1J1~$ $ 75,()O $ 8 L¡OO
EA /
PEREA
7 232 EAΠEucalyptus Trees (Small)
~'FàA~ DoInzs $ 'I'I./X) $ /0. 'Z'fJB
EA /'
PERE CH
8. 157 EAΠPine
fï:;g EHjIft- ~(?)J1<2> $ 5TlOD $ ~ /tJb
PE AΠEA
Note: A list of specific trees, by address, is included as an attachment to the bid specifications,
Disposal Costs f1W?- M"'P
Cost per Ton for MuiclñnglComposting Debris $ -Ø- ~ ~\~s.
Estimated # of Tons
Cost per Ton for Disposal ofNon-MuicbinglComposting Debris $ ~ ,00 (fon
Estimated # of Tons
Disposal Site Name /111(?4f11hfè Ù}(IJnFJ /I (FoR "ALrY/ ~NL-~)
Disposal Site Loèåti~t3ó Cwlley / q to! flCY¡E-lftJl7FAl h.
/ I
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~I~ Page 7
-
OIY Of
0ilJIA VISTA
Award
Award of contract may be made as a lot, by item, or by groups of items, as may 1x;Jr the City's
best interest. '" "
Payment Terms / / to Days
Terms: % _.
Prompt payment discounts offered for less than fifteen (15) days will not be considered in evaluating
bids for award, However, discounts offered ofless than fifteen (15) days will be taken if payment is
made by the City within the discount period. In the absence of terms, payment shall be Net Thirty
(30) Days.
Public Agency Participation
Other public agencies (e.g. city, county, public corporation, political subdivision, school district, or
water authority) may want to participate in any award as a result of this bid. The City of Chula Vista
shall incur no financial responsibility in connection with any purchase by another public agency. The
public agency shall accept sole responsibility for placing orders and making payments to the
successfu1 bidder. This option will not be considered in bid evaluation. Please indicate whether this
will be granted. '>(
Yes No
Contractor's License
Licensed in accordance with the State of California Act providing for the registration of Contractors,
~ No. ~ ~ ~ ' ~ - """ 5- ;:¡::3 8'. "",,"-', """ l.iœœ<
Classification ( Cd 1
Company Name &/05 fJì\lironrY"'f'ntnQ ~r\llrfS) JVìê.
Address qo~ Of i VP~ ur.
City 9+x~ ~~~ State~ Zip q ,Q77 -- d::£) /
Fu(LPICf) ~?--;-IQ u I
Telephone~ ( 17. ìl
==~~ Title 5eΠ. /reO:5 .
Date 4- /~- q f(
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~'f? Page 8
---
~
01Y Of
OiUIA VISTA
The bidder shall list the name and address of each subcontractor to whom the bidder proposes to
subcontract ponions of the work. The City reserves the right to approve any and alJ~bcontractors
proposed. All Contractors and subcontractors must obtain a business license from the' ity of ChuIa
Vista before a notice to proceed may be issued. ---{- ,
LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS* -
Description (Type) of Ponion
Náme & Address (City) of Work Subcontracted
I)JJMì~
2)
3)
* Contractor is obligated to provide License Number and complete address and phone numbers of
subcontractors pri()1' to award of Contract, The Contractor shall comply with Section 2-3.1 of the
Standard Specifications and Regional Supplement Amendments and shall perfonn at least 50% of the
contract work with hislher own organization.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~{~ Page 9
-T!-
~
01Y Of
CHUIA VISTA
WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE DECLARATION~
I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code wmch require every employer
to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in
accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before
~ of <he _ok of "'" <'.oom<o<
.~
Si
"'---
Q1J(]~ PflVÎ mnrrenf:oÆ &rVLCCS, Line.
Contractor
5Q3úúD
State Contractor's License No.
QO?iJ--DlJ"vò /Jr.
Address
(Jpr~ \J1jJe1j; Cb. q /977 - cQ 30 /
Clty/S
(ú/~) 4új-/707
Phone Number
<.j-/5 -q!
Date
,
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~,~ Page 5
-T!-
~-'f.",
œv Of
CHUI.A VISTA
BID FORM
"11"
The UIXlersigned hereby offers, subject to all specifications, tenns and conditions, and General ~ovisions
herein, to furnish the City of Chula Vista the following:
TREE TRIMMING SERVICE - PUBLIC WORKS .
and that he/she has examined the location of the proposed work and has read the accompanying
instructions to bidders, and hereby proposes to provide all materials, equipment; and labor to complete
the work for the unit price or lwnp sum set forth in the following schedule.
The Contractor has Sixtv Workine Days (60) to complete the project.
Estimated Items with Unit Price Unit Price in Extension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures Total
1. 953 EACH Queen (Cocos) Palm
SI1(teen doHars ~ Wy cents $ l(ó. 50 $15/124.50
PER EACH EA
2. 952 EACH Fan Palm
eì~\'t~i~Gcents $ ICò.25 $17,Õì1.00
PER EACH EA
3. 179EACH Podocarpus
~"~ ~i\lc. ddlars $15.00 $/3/425.00
PERE CH EA
4. m EACH Broadleaf*
+~ $ ~7. 00 $ !Iô.9fb9.00
PER EACH EA
*Definition of Broadleaf Trees: All trees other than those called out as specific bid items.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~!f? Page 6
-T!-
-
01V Of
OIUIA VISTA
Estimated Items with Unit Price Unit Price in , 'ji Extension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures' '., Total
5, 26 EACH Eucalyptus Trees (Large)
Ct\e hundred t¡ ~I'.:I dollars $ 150.00 $ ~900. 00
PER EACH EA
6. 112 EACH Eucalyptus Trees (Medium)
4'!IJeY\~ t'\I~ Aollars $ 15.00 $ 81400.00
PERE CH EA
7 232 EACH Eucalyptus Trees (Small)
.forlý fbree dollars ~ +i~~ cetlts $43.50 $ \0,0.92.00
PER EACH EA
8. 157 EACH Pine
nirle~ ~our dollars $~ $14,r¡5~. 00
PER ACH EA
Note: A list of specific trees, by address, is included as an attacbmeot to the bid specifications.
Disposal Costs $~rron
Cost per Ton for Mulching/Composting Debris
Estimated # ofTons ~ A
$~on
Cost per Ton for Disposal ofNon~Mr;hing/COmposting Debris
Estimated # of Tons
....... Sit< N_, ~
Disposal Site Location ~
. ,
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~II~ Page 7
--
cnv Of
QUA VISTA
Award
Aw~ of contract may be made as a lot, by item, or by groups of items, as may bp,Jn the City's
best Interest. . . .
Payment Terms I~ /5
Terms: % Days
Prompt payment discounts offered for less than fifteen (15) days will oot be considered in evaluating
bids for award. However, discounts offered ofless than fifteen (15) days will be taken ifpayment is
made by the City witlún the discount period. In the absence of terms, payment shall be Net Thirty
(30) Days.
Public Ageucy Participation
Other public agencies (e.g. city, county, public corporation, political subdivision, school district, or
water authority) may want to participate in any award as a result of tlùs bid. The City of Chula Vista
shall incur no financial respoI1S1òility in connection with any purchase by another public agency. The
public agency shall accept sole responsibility for placing orders and making payments to the
successful bidder. This option will not be considered in bid evaluation. Please indicate whether this
will be granted. @V
Yes
Contractor's license
Licensed in accordance with the State of California Act providing for fëEgisttation of Contractors,
License NO.~; License Expiration DateA.!W Contractor's State License
Classification C27
:::'E7~~~g~Jf
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~,~ Page 8
---
01Y OF
CHUIA VISTA
The bidder shall list the name and address of each subcontractor to whom the bidder proposes to
subcontract portions of the work. The City reserves the right to approve any and all,~bcontractors
proposed. All Contractors and subcontractors must obtain a business license from the', ,ity of ChuIa
Vista before a notice to proceed may be issued. ' ,
LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS*
Description (Type) of Portion
Name & Address (City) of Work Subcontracted
1)~~
I\~ ~ .
:z.kc. T ír,~ r V ICe.
'IS PRIME Cbh+ro.CtOr-"
2)
3)
* Contractor is obligated to provide License Number and complete address and phone numbers of
subcontractors prior to award of Contract. The Contractor shall comply with Section 2-3.1 of the
Standard Specifications and Regional Supplement Amendments and shall perform at least 50% of the
contract work with hislher own organization.
-,~--
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~!f? Page 9
-n-
~
æv Of
CHUlA VISrA
WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE DECLARATION,I
I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer
to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertàke self-insurance in
accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before
commencing the peñonnance of the work of this Contract.
~(.~
Signature
~lOt1d=ciAplh~ I {nc.
Contractor
J£¿\~ ~
State Contractor's License No.
~
lfmon 6\1)/e. . Co. I
City ¡State
~
Phone Number
~
Date
, ,
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~,~ Page 7
-iT
OIV Of
CHUI.A VISfA
Award
Aw~ of contract may be made as a lot, by item, or by groups of items, as may b <~n me City's
best Interest. ""
Payment Terms
Terms: % Days
Prompt payment discounts offered for less than fifteen (15) days will not be considered in evaluating
bids for award. However, discounts offered ofless than fifteen (15) days will be taken if payment is
made by the City within me discount period. In the absence of terms, payment shall be Net Thirty
(30) Days.
Public Agency Participation
Other public agencies (e.g. city, county, public corporation, political subdivision, school district, or
water authority) may want to participate in any award as a result of this bid. The City of Chula Vista
shall incur no financial responsibility in connection with any purchase by another public agency. The
public agency shall accept sole responsibility for placing orders and making payments to me
successful bidder. This option will not be considered in bid evaluation. Please indicate whether this
will be granted.
Yes No X
Contractor's License
Licensed in accordance with the State of California Act providing for the registration of Contractors,
License No. 694001 ; License Expiration Date 8-29-98 , Contractor's State License
Classification C10 C27 C61/D49
Company Name The Davey Tree Expert Company
Address 6914 Mission Gorge Rd.
City San Diego State ~ Zip 92120
Telephone 619/229-5000 Fax 619/265-9353
Print Name ~s Title District Manager
Date y A-'~ .¿¡~
Signature ~
, .
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~{~ Page 8
-;- Q1 '" '"
01Y OF
CHlJ.A VISfA
The bidder shall list the name and address of each subcontractor to whom the bidder proposes to
subcontract portions of the work. TIle City reserves the right to approve any and al~ tbcontractors
proposed. All Contractors and subcontractors must obtain a business license from the '. ity of Chula
Vista before a notice to proceed may be issued. ., '
LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS*
Description (Type) of Portion
Name & Address (City) of Work Subcontracted
1) N/ A
2)
3)
* Contractor is obligated to provide License Number and complete address and phone numbers of
subcontractors prior to award of Contract. TIle Contractor shall comply with Section 2-3,1 of the
Standard Specifications and Regional Supplement Amendments and shall perform at least 50% of the
contract work with hislher own organization.
BID NO: 14-97/98 ~'f? Page 5
,
~-
"t"'t'~::
mY Of
OilAA VISTA
BID FORM
'11
The W1dersigned hereby offers, subject to all specificaûom,tenm and condiûom, and Gerleral Provisiom
herein, to furnish the City of Chula Visla the following: ..
þ
TREE TRIMMING SERVICE - PUBLIC WORKS ...
and that heJshe has examined the location of the proposed work and has read the accompanying
instructiom to bidders, and hereby proposes to provide all materials, equipment, and labor to complete
the work for the unit price or Iwnp swn set forth in the following schedule.
... The Contractor has Sixf,y Workinll D~ (60) to complete the project.
Estimated Items with Unit Price Unit Price in Extemion
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures Tolal
1. 953 EACH Queen (Cocos) Palm
Sixteen Dollars and 16.50 15,724.50
$ $
PER EACH Fifty cents EA
2. 952 EACH Fan Palm
Thirty Eight $ 38.00 $ 36,176.00
PER EACH EA
3. 179 EACH Podocarpus
...,.
Fifty Four $ 54.00 $ 9,6~6.oo
PER EACH EA
4. m EACH Broadleaf*
Thirty $ 30.00 $ 29,910.00
PER EACH EA
*Defmition of Broodleaf Trees: All trees other than those called out as specific bid items.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~If? Page 6
"
-.
~=~~
OIV OF
QllJA VISTA
Estimated Items with Unit Price Unit Price in 'iExtension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures '.. Total
.
5. 26 EACH Euculyptus Trees (Large)
Three Hundred Twenty $ 320.00 $ 8,320.00
PER EACH EA
. 6. 112 EACH Eucalyptus Trees (Medium)
One Hundred Twenty $ 120.00 $ 13,440.00
PER EACH EA
7 232 EAΠEucalyptus Trees (Small)
Sixty Two $ 62.00 $ 14,384.00
PER EACH EA
8. 157 EACH Pine
Eighty $ 80.00 12,560.00
$ .
PER EACH EA
Note: A list of specific trees, by address, is included as an attachment to the bid specifications.
Disposal Costs
Cost' per Ton for MulchinglComposting Debris $ 20.00 fron
Estimated # of Tons 300
All debris will be cn1pped
Cost per Ton for Disposal ofNon-MulchinglComposting Debris $ fron
Estimated # ofTons
Disposal Site Name Miramar Landfill
Disposal Site Location 5180 Convoy St., San Diego, CA 92111
(
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~,~ Page 9
~T!-
~~...-=
cnv Of
OiUIA VISfA
WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE DECLARATIONi
I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer
to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in
accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before
commencing the perfonnance of the work of this Contract,
)( ~
Signature
The Davey Tree Expert Company
Contractor
694001
State Contractor's License No.
6914 Mission Gorge Road
Address
San Diego, CA 92120
City/State
619/229-5000
Phone Number
4,\t? .I(q
Date
. ---~~.__.__._._-
West Coast Arborists, Inc.
2200 E. Via Burton Street Anaheim, CA 92806
(714) 991-1900 - (800) 521-3714 - Fax (714) 956-3745
',11
April 15, 1998
City of Chula Vista
Attn: John Coggins
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca. 91910
RE: Sealed Bid: Tree Trimming Service
Bid# 14-97/98
BID DATE: 04116/98 @ 3:00 PM
Enclosed, please find our firm's bid proposal for the above listed tree maintenance
project.
We would greatly appreciate a copy of the final bid results. A stamped, self-addressed
envelope is also included for your convenience in mailing this information to us. Thank
you in advance for your help.
Sincerely,
~~
Sales Coordinator
A Professional Tree Maintenance Organization
,
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~I~ Page 5
-11-
~
ŒVOf
CHU1A VISrA
BID FORM
The WJdersigoed hereby offers, subject to all specifications, term¡ and conditions, and ~1a1 Provisions
herein, to furnish the City of Chula Vista the following:
TREE TRIMMING SERVICE - PUBLIC WORKS.
and that he/she has examined the location of the proposed work and has read the accompanying
instructions to bidders, and hereby proposes to provide all materials, equipment, and moor to complete
the work for the unit price or lwnp swn set forth in the following schedule.
The Contractor has Sixty Workine Days (60) to complete the project.
Estimated Items with UlÚt Price UlÚt Price in Extension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures Total
1. 953 EACH Queen (Cocos) Palm
Fifteen Dollars $ 15.00 $14,295.00
PER EACH EA
2. 952 EAΠFan Palm
Thirty-Five Dollars $ 35.00 $33,320.00
PER EACH EA
3. 179 EACH Podocarpus
Sixty-Five Dollars $ 65.00 $11,635.00
PER EACH EA
4, m EACH Broadleaf*
Fifty-Five Dollars $ 55..00 $ 54,835.00
PER EAΠEA
*Definition of Broodleaf Trees: All trees other than those called out as specific bid items.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~I~ Page 6
--0-
,~~~
01V OF
0iUIA VISrA
Estimated Items with Unit Price Unit Price in , ')1' Extension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures '" Total
5. 26EAΠEucalyptus Trees (Large)
Five Hundred Dollars $ 500.00 $13,000.00
PER EArn EA
6. 112 EACH Eucalyptus Trees (Medium)
One Hundred Twenty- Five $ 125.00 $ 14,000.00
PER EACH EA
7 232 EAΠEucalyptus Trees (Small)
Forty-Five Dollars $ 45.00 $10,440.00
PER EACH EA
8. 157 EACH Pine
Fifty- Five Dollars $ 55.00 $ 8,635.00
PER EACH EA
Note: A list of specific trees, by address, is included as an attachment to the bid specifications,
Disposal Costs
Cost per Ton for Mulclùng/Compo8Ûng Debris $ 10.00 tron
Estimated # of Tons 300
Cost per Ton for Disposal ofNon-Mulcbing/Compo8Ûng Debris $ 40.00 ffon
Estimated # of Tons 300
Disposal Site Name Oraganic West
Disposal Site Location Otay Mesa
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~!~ Page 7
- -
OJY OF
CHUIA VISTA
Award
Award of contract may be made as a lot, by item, or by groups of items, as may b :~n Úle City's
best interest. . '..
Payment Terms
Terms: 2 % 10 Days
Prompt payment discounts offered for less than fifteen (15) days will not be considered in evaluating
bids for award. However, discounts offered ofless than fifteen (15) days will be taken ifpayment is
made by the City within the discount period. In the absence of terms, payment shall be Net Thirty
(30) Days.
Public Agency Participation
Other public agencies (e.g. city, county, public corporation, political subdivision, school district, or
watec authority) may want to participate in any award as a result of this bid. The City of Chula Vista
shall incur no financial responsibility in connection with any purchase by another public agency. The
public agency shall accept sole responsibility for placing orders and making payments to the
successful bidder. This option will not be considered in bid evaluation. Please indicate whether this
will be granted.
Yes x No
Contractor's License
Licensed in accordance wiÚl the State of California Act providing for the registration of Contractors,
License No. 366764 ; License Expiration Date 12/31/98, Conttactor's State License
Classification C27/C61/D49
Company Name West Coast Arborists, Inc.
Address 2200 E. Via Burton St.
City Anaheim State ~Zip 92806
Telephone (714) 991-1900 Fax (714) 956-3745
Print Name ~7.' Title President
Signature Date April 15, 1998
f
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~,~ Page 8
---
~
01V OF
CHUIA VISfA
The bidder shall list the name and address of each subcontractor to whom the bidder proposes to
subcontract portions of the work. The City reserves the right to approve any and all,~bcontractors
proposed. All Contractors and subcontractors must obtain a business license from the , ity of ChuIa
Vista before a notice to proceed may be issued. ' . .
LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS*
Description (Type) of Portion
Name & Address (City) of Work Subcontracted
I) **None**
2)
3)
* Contractor is obligated to provide License Number and complete address and phone numbers of
subcontractors prior to award of Contract. The Contractor shall comply with Section 2-3,1 of the
Standard Specifications and Regional Supplement Amendments and shall perfonn at least 50% of the
contract work with hisiher own organization.
~~ft-
:-:e-:
-:::.-:::.- --
CI1Y OF
CHUIA VISTA
PURCHASING DIVISION
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
Addendum No.1
Tree' Trimming Service - Public Works "iÌ
Tree Trimming Service - Parks and Recreation
Bids No. 14-97/98 & 15-97/98
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO THE
SPECIFICATIONS ARE IN EFFECT AS OF THIS DATE:
1) Change Bid Opening Date to:
3:00 p.m., Thursday, April 16, 1998
2) Unit Price shall include all labor, equipment, materials, insurance, pennit and license costs,
disposal, profit, overhead, supelVÎsion, transportation, and applicable sales tax.
3) The City reserves the right to negotiate out disposal costs in lieu of a City-financed disposal
arrangement,
4) Traffic Engineering pernût costs are waived for work performed under this agreement. All other
costs associated with Traffic Control remain in force.
5) Add to Bid #15-97/98:
Item 2a. (3) ea, Fan Palm, OSD-18, Trimmed of Seed Growth
One (1) tree to be trimmed three (3) times throughout the year.
S eaS total
6) Change Bid #15-97/98, Page 17, SUPPLEMENTAL CONDmONS, Arborist, to read:
The Contractor shall provide a Certified Arborist, on-site, at least once daily to interface with
City staff as may be required for all work performed under this agreement.
7) An optional site inspection tour for all areas covered under Bid #15-97/98 has been scheduled for
Thunday, April 2, 1998, from 8:00 a.m. to approximately 2:00 p.m. One (1) representative
only ftom each firm present at the pre-bid conference may attend. Attendance to be at bidder's
sole expense. Bidders are to meet at the City of Chula Vista Purchasing Office.
All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
John P. Coggins, C.P.M.
Purchasing Agent
March 27, 1998
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VtSTA . CALIFORNIA 91910' (619) 691-5141 . FAX (619) 691-5174
@---
IIIII""" ~ ~ -'"
~ ZZ if -:¡- C [
i!='!=' o>""""".e."""~ :I ¡¡¡ ~ 6
1:* ~ ~ ~ '" CD ~ CD CD Db ~ 0 j;!
l~tC'< """~"'CD""""" 8... 'i [
ë:/D """"""""'CD"'", Ii íi i c:
.. à. /D /D /D /D /D /D '" '" c:i:!;¡: ¡s, !þ
'iiI ° I» I» I» I» I» I» I» I» 2.¡!!. z ... ::I
oiil ~ C) .:. 0
/D "U -I 00 m 0 -0 m O-l"UmmmID"U"O (1J CD Z
-.0", '" -.-. '" oQ_. '" 3_,o-"""""aol» m.l. "
a Cli°tT ::3 !/!~ =: 3:::1~ =: 5.~S'ÆoOO o.:::Iffi ;Q ¡¡¡ [
!í'.o.¡¡ .= ::s Õ'Õ 3 "2Oõ 3 g.IÕ- ~I»!!!.!!!.~O"U'" S'-
u",o""""'I»O:::l"'I»"" -<"R-£I»:::I n"'c
'" !:I..;!,> !!!.!!!. CD g .,3!!!. CD g!!!. -¡;¡.rsm!5 3'" m!!! Zo
g /Dm ~ø 0. ,:=",0 0. 0 """"'-~ ° .
9>Ulo.:::I O;::¡: 'II: ~-o 'II: êo """'" '" ° =-r}J ~
i" ill 0", ° 0.°'" o,,~ -1-1-1 o..~ ;Q'"
... I~ !!!. -",=-;_o¡;,,; ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ "':Iii' j!cØ
~""'tP, ëï õ tT/ê", õ g .,1(¡¡ "'/D'" 'P. ç c ¡¡J
sOl» :::I :::I¡¡¡'~"':::I,=... I~~I'" I» (' CD CD
~ g. '" õ '" ~õ "'3~ 3' f ¡a.
tP: :::I /D :::I 3 '" ,::1 .g ð.
I» Õ' tT Õ' !!!. 9:"""" í' '"
g: ... ¡¡¡.... F§~ V' ~ ~
~ ~ Q 0 ~ .~
"' i\J ¡;,~ c: ñ'....
0 II) r " ~ :IE 0
~~ ~ 8" !¡ Õ
!if [ ¡ ~ ~ '" " :;;, i':' :::I'
= "" ... "'CDRJ""""""'" g'(/) < C
0 :; ~ :; ~¡;o¡;:;;;;¡;~ ~!!.3 iIi
0 0 0 0 00000000 -t ~ <
f ii ~
"'", ~ "'~""" þOI~ '0
.t .'" .'" .'" .'" .0 .'" .'" ."" ~ 'ft :Þ
~"'""~"'",,"'o~ c !5
t>~fS~¡;;~~~~ a 1/1
000000000
000000000
~ ~ ~~ m
ã) ~~ c: Þ
,~ ~ 2. if
&~ ; ~
1m [ ¡ :J. "
if"" '" """""~""""'~ g~ ~
;¡¡-g '" !"'~~!=>~~!'>~ Is-g
"3' 8 8888888g: <II:I
:¡: ~ 0
- lit ~'"
þff;¡¡ CD !
~ :I CD t: Q,
.t ~ ~ :: ~ ~ '" ~ E g So 8.~
tooo""""""", " ~ ..."
~ ~ 6 :; ¡; g; g; ~ ';: ~ ':';. !r
000000000 ~g
5 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
~ ~ ~ ;ai
'" ~ ~ ~"
~t¡;i~~¡;i¡;;¡;; ~~ ~ ~~
0"'0000""" 0" c
000000"'0 ~ i II
~~~ "'~~~ Þ¡i i i!
.°."'.0."'."'."'."'."".'" ~ :; þ
~~~88~~~~ a " ~
,"0000000'" ~
000000000
z () ;¡:
0 ~ ~. c: -t
~ ~ ~ if
~r ~ C
~ '" '" '" ~ ~ '" '" '" ~ ~ ~
[ ¡ !=> !=> "'!=>!=>!=> ~!"'!'> CD (/) ~
= g 8 8888888g: ~-t
i æ
þ 0 !:'
¡:;~~~ '" "'~ 9 ~
.° .'" !'- .'" .'" .'" ,'" ,'" .'" g ~
g~L~£g~§!~~ a ~
i!: g' g g g g g g g¡
~ ~ I~ ~
"' ::J: ~ II) c:
0 ¡f~' -, 14 ~;:
g¡ ~ ,~ !!
I ... ~ "'... ~ g: '" '" '" ~ . n
'" ¡; '" ¡; g;g;g;¡;g;g;g;g; ~ 2
8 08 0 00000000 II)~
". Þ
CD ~
3" 8"
~ þ ~
g: '" 0 ¡:; ~ ~ ~ ¡:; ~ ~
~~£'g'g~~t¡~ a ¡¡
ggggggggg
Page 4, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
EXIllBIT 3
STAFF RECOMMENDED CONTRACT AMOUNT BY CONTRACTOR
BID ITEM CONTRACTOR CONTRACT AMOUNT
1 Aztec $15,724.50
2 Aztec 17,374.00
5 Aztec 3,900.00
6 Aztec 8,400.00
7 Aztec 5,481.00
SUBTOTAL AZTEC $50,879.50
LESS 1.5 % $763.19
1/)J1) I - q E 3 2). ~ /
There is a price difference of $4,611 between Aztec's bid item 7 in Exhibit 2 and the recommended
contract amount for Item 7 in Exhibit 3. This is due to the removal of 106 small Eucalyptus trees in
the Telegraph Canyon Road median east of Paseo Ladera, which were removed by the Sunbow
developer as part of the street-widening project. This occurred after the trimming list was
formulated.
ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUESTED
Staff has requested the additional funding to do all of the trees that were included in the bid
proposal for the following reasons:
The City has approximately 35,000 trees. As the City grows and we add more trees, we will get
further behind unless more funds are budgeted. The more trees we can trim each year the smaller
number of complaints we can anticipate being called in by the citizens as a result of trees
uprooting or limbs falling on vehicles, homes or people. The number of trees uprooted or limbs
broken will depend upon the amount of rainfall, severity of Santa Anna winds or winds
MEMQRANIHIM
October 29, 1998
File: 0940-20-AG
TO: John Lippitt, Director of Public Works
Robert Leiter, Director of Planning & Building
Robert Powell, Director of Finance
VIA: Dave Byers, Deputy Director of Public Works/operatio~
FROM: Tom Levesque, Supervising Tree Trimmer T C
SURJECT: TEMPORARY EVACUATION OF P.S.B. EAST PARKING LOT
Davey Tree Company has completed their portion of the current tree trimming contract with the exception
of the coral trees at Civic Center. They wish to accomplish this large task in one day by dispatching two
lift trucks, two chipper body dump trucks, and several workers. The logistics for the accomplishment of
this goal include the complete evacuation of all vehicles from the Public Services building east parking lot
on Saturday, November 7th, by 7:30 a.m. This could be accomplished by parking all city vehicles in the
employee parking lot west of Fire Station #1 at the close of the day, Friday, November 6th. Our contractors
are working on very thin profit margins, therefore cooperation in situations like this will help to ensure
continued low bids in the future.
TL:mr
(TMPEVPSB.MEM)
,IY
I
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item r
Meeting Date 6/9/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution) 9¿J.2. 9Accepting bids and awarding Purchasing Agreements
for tree trimming services for fiscal year 1997-1998 to Aztec Landscaping
Inc. in the amount of $50,116.31, The Davey Trees Expert Company in
the amount of $39,576.00 and West Coast Arborists Inc. in the amount of
$8,635.00, and approving transfer of funds.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works cf
Director of Finance
REVIEWEDBV, City",",,;~ ~~ (4ISTHS,,"'" Y~_NoXi
On March 14,1998, an advertisement was placed III the Chula Vista Star News soliciting bids for
tree trimming services. In addition, ten potential bidders were contacted directly by the Purchasing
Agent. Of those ten potential bidders contacted, three were local vendors. On April 16, 1998, the
bids for tree trimming services were opened. Five bids were received. No local vendors submitted
a bid. Considering the low bidder for each item, four different vendors submitted low bids. Three
vendors are recommended to be awarded contracts.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution accepting bids and awarding
Purchasing Agreements to Aztec Landscaping Inc. in the amount of $50,116.31, The Davey
Trees Expert Company in the amount of $39,576.00 and West Coast Arborists, Inc. in the
amount of$8,635.00,and approving the transfer of funds.
BOARDS & COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: Since 1985, the goal of the Public Works Tree Division has been to
complete a citywide trimming cycle within a five-year time frame. This had been accomplished by
augmenting the City tree crew production of approximately 1200 block trims with outside
contractors. In addition to this cycle, city crews perfonned annual decorative trimming in select
high visibility areas, complaint trimming, clearance trimming, and hazard reduction trimming on
trees that cannot safely go without trimming for more than three years.
Since 1985, the tree crew has gone from three two-person crews and a supervisor to two two-person
crews and a supervisor. As a result of the reduction of City staffing, an increase in complaint calls,
and requests for special events, the amount of block trimming completed by City crews has
diminished. During FY96/97, we were limited to accomplishing 385 block trims. Through
extrapolation of the production from July 1997 through December 1997, we are on a pace to
accomplish 406 block trims in the current fiscal year. However, due to impacts from EI Nino
during January through March, this total may be reduced. This compounding annual deficit
coupled with the increasing number of trees in the City, results in a projected seven years to
complete the cycle with the annual in-house budgeted amount of$70,250.00.
~~I
Page 2, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
Last year's contract was increased to $95,002.24 through budget transfers available as a result of
savings within the Public Works Budget. This provided sufficient funds to trim 3,362 trees. This
represented an increase of only 430 trees over the previous year's contract. That increase is not
enough to meet a five year cycle, which is our objective. This year we are requesting an increase
from the budgeted $70,250.00 to $98,327.31 to allow for the trimming of 3,608 trees. This
represents an increase of 676 trees over the FY95/96 contract. While this increase falls short of the
800 trees we need added to get back on a five-year cycle, excluding recent development, it would
go a long way toward closing the ever widening gap.
Bids were received from the five contractors listed below. The contract was bid by the Purchasing
Agent so that the contract could be awarded by item, groups of items, or as a lot, whichever was
in the best interest of the City. Each bid item was evaluated to determine which contractor was
the lowest bidder. Exhibit I lists the total contract amount bid by each of the bidders for all of
the separate items. Exhibit 2 indicates the amount of the bid from the lowest bidder of a
particular item. Exhibit 3 lists the bid items recommended to be awarded to each contractor.
The City considers prompt payment discount terms of 15 days or more in evaluation of bids.
Accordingly, Exhibit 3 includes a reduction of 1.5% in Aztec's total cost, if payment is received
within 15 days of the City being invoiced. Staff has, therefore, deducted the 1.5% from the
amount of the bid for Aztec's items. West Coast Arborists, Inc offered 2 percent if paid at 10
days. The bid only allowed the prompt payment discount to be considered in awarding an item if
15 days or more were allowed for the City to process payment. West Coast Arborists' bid for
Item 8 was not adjusted because they only allowed 10 days to process payment. Staff also
examined all of the bid items to determine if the discount indicated by the various bidders would
have made that bidder the low bidder for an item. Atlas Environmental provided a 1 % discount
if paid within 16 days. Atlas was low bidder for Item I, but for reasons discussed below, is not
recommended to be awarded the contract for that item. Attached as Appendix 1 is the Bid
Tabulation by item of each bid received.
EXHIBIT 1
FULL BID FOR EACH BID BY CONTRACTOR
NO. CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
1. Arbor West Tree Surgeons $240,143.00
2. Atlas Environmental Services $140,407.40
3. Aztec Landscaping Inc. $120,562.50
4. The Davey Tree Expert Co. $140,180.50
5. West Coast Arborists Inc. $160,160.00
l5'e2
Page 3, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
EXHIBIT 2
LOWEST BID BY ITEM
BID ITEM DESCRIPTION LOWEST BIDDER BID AMOUNT
1. Cocos Palm Atlas Envirorunentall $13,151.40
2. Fan Palm Aztec Landscaping 17,374.00
3. Podocarpus Davey Tree Exp. 9,666.00
4. Broad Leaf Davey Tree Exp. 29,910.00
5. Eucalyptus Large Aztec 3,900.00
6. Eucalyptus Medium Aztec' 8,400.00
7. Eucalyptus Small Aztec 10,092.00
8. Pines West Coast Arborist 8,635.00
TOTAL $101,128.40
1 Although Atlas Envirorunental Services was the low bidder for Item 1, the Street Tree
Supervisor has indicated that he recommends awarding the two palm items to a single vendor for
the following reasons: One, he can not adequately oversee four contractors performing this work;
two, there will be less administrative costs by reducing the time and cost to process progress
payments for one less contractor; three, many of the streets and parks within the scope of the
contract are forested intermittently with both types of Palm Trees which would require disruption
to the citizens at two different times; and four, when working in a park, a single entry will help
coordination with the park maintenance crews and, therefore, reduce damage and disruption of
those parks. Therefore, Items I and 2 were combined and it is proposed to award them as a lot to
the lowest combined bidder which was Aztec Landscaping Inc. (Aztec at $33,098.50 with 1.5%
discount $32,602.23 compared to Atlas at $37,903.40 with 1% discount $37,524.37)
, Both Aztec and Atlas bid $8,400.00 for this item but Aztec was considered the low bidder
because they offered 1.5 % reduction compared to 1.0% for Atlas if the City made prompt
payment.
?'~3
Page 4, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
EXIllBIT 3
STAFF RECOMMENDED CONTRACT AMOUNT BY CONTRACTOR
BID ITEM CONTRACTOR CONTRACT AMOUNT
1 Aztec $15,724.50
2 Aztec 17,374.00
5 Aztec 3,900.00
6 Aztec 8,400.00
7 Aztec 5,481.00
SUBTOTAL AZTEC $50,879.50
LESS 1.5 % $763.19
There is a price difference of $4,611 between Aztec's bid item 7 in Exhibit 2 and the recommended
contract amount for Item 7 in Exhibit 3. This is due to the removal of 106 small Eucalyptus trees in
the Telegraph Canyon Road median east of Paseo Ladera, which were removed by the Sunbow
developer as part of the street-widening project. This occurred after the trimming list was
formulated.
ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUESTED
Staff has requested the additional funding to do all of the trees that were included in the bid
proposal for the following reasons:
The City has approximately 35,000 trees. As the City grows and we add more trees, we will get
further behind unless more funds are budgeted. The more trees we can trim each year the smaller
number of complaints we can anticipate being called in by the citizens as a result of trees
uprooting or limbs falling on vehicles, homes or people. The number of trees uprooted or limbs
broken will depend upon the amount of rainfall, severity of Santa Anna winds or winds
D-1
Page 5, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
associated with the rainfall, type of tree, and the length of time since the last time the tree was
trimmed. As the time frame between trimming increases, so will the potential for limbs being
dislodged from trees and the potential for damage to personal property or injury from those
occurrences. Staff had a larger budget in the past and was able to trim more trees. In FY 1992-
1993, approximately 5,000 trees were trimmed by contract with a budget of $85,500. At some
point, unless additional funds are budgeted, we will become reactive to hazardous conditions
rather than proactive in perfonning the work as prevention.
Funds for the contract tree trimming services are included in the FY 1997-98 budget in the
amount of $70,250. Additional funds are required to trim all trees included in the bid.
Therefore, staff is recommending that $28,080. of remaining funds from account 100-1431-5251
(Traffic Signal & Street Light Maintenance Utilities) be transferred to the tree trimming account.
All of the funds in both the Tree Trimming and Traffic Signal and Street Light Maintenance
Utility accounts are Gas Tax funds. The subject contract includes the trimming of a total of
3,608 trees located at various locations throughout the City. A listing of all trees and locations is
on file in the City Clerk's Office.
ALTERNATE IF COUNCIL DOES NOT APPROVE ADDITIONAL FUNDING
In the event that Council does not approve additional funds, staff would recommend that the
contract awards be as shown in the following table, Exhibit 4.
EXHIBIT 4
BID ITEM CONTRACTOR CONTRACT AMOUNT
1. Aztec $13,151.40
2. Aztec 17,374.00
5. Aztec 3,900.00
6. Aztec 8,400.00
7. Aztec 10,092.00
3. Davey Tree 9,666.00
8. West Coast Arborist 7,645.00
Total Contract Amount $70,228.40
ITEM(S) REMOVED FROM CONTRACT USING CURRENT FUNDING
The only bid item which could be removed from this contract without significantly impacting both
the short tenn City workload from citizen calls and possible damage to trees and property is the
broadleaf category. The location of streets containing broadleaf trees within the list of trees bid
were on lettered streets from D to L, Naples and Moss, and 35 trees in Halecrest, Friendship and
Independence Parks, which are not already included in other categories. That is not to say that the
majority of these trees do not need trimming at this time, they merely constitute trees that can wait
?Ç~~
Page 6, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
to be trimmed with the least impact to the City.
Areas by Blocks were chosen to be removed rather than species of trees. This is proposed by
staff because by doing so, the cost per tree is reduced, administration of the contract and
inspection of the work is easier, it is easier to add all trees within an area to a future contract, and
keeping track when trees within the City have been trimmed requires less record keeping.
If Council eliminates some of the trees from this year's tree trimming contract, they will be
included in next year's contract. The total number of trees deleted under this scenario would be
1,004 leaving 2,604 trees to be trimmed rather than the 3,608 trees recommended by staff. Staff
will survey the trees eliminated and if any are considered an immediate hazard, those trees would
be trimmed by City staff.
COUNCIL REQUEST IN 1997
Last year when the tree trimming contract was considered by Council, Council requested that future
reports discuss the impact if City forces were to do all of the tree trimming work. What would it
cost for the City to gear up and do all of the block trimming with City employees?
Staff has determined that it is much more expensive per tree for City staff to do block trimming
as opposed to a contractor. There are several reasons for this. The most important is that City
crews are not set up to do block trimming but rather to perform tree removal & replanting in
conjunction with the sidewalk repair program and complaint, hazard, and decorative trimming,
while the contractor's crews are set up just for block trimming.
City tree crews consist of two people, a large truck with a high ranger lift and a chipper body,
and a chipper. Conversely, the crews used by the contractor might consist of ten people with
some high rangers, a fÌont-end loader equipped with a bucket that can pick up tree branches, and
large trash bins which are shuttled back and forth to the dump. This permits the contractor to
shuttle vehicles back and forth to the dump while keeping the remaining crew members
productively working. This large crew size also permits the contractor to pay their employees at
a lower average rate per employee since most of the employees do not need the skill level
required by our small crew size.
Staff has compared costs per tree figures for both the contractor and City staff (see Table 1) and
believes it is most productive for our crews to be used for complaint and hazard trimming while
continuing to use contractors for major block and park trimming.
8'~¡;
Page 7, Item-
Meeting Date 6/9/98
Table 1
TYPE OF TREE CONTRACTOR CITY COSTffREE
COSTffREE
Broadleaf $30.00 $58.44
Eucalyptus - Small $43.50 $73.00
Eucalyptus - Medium $75.00 $154.92
Eucalyptus - Large $150.00 $309.84
Coco Palm $13.80 $50.62
Podocarpus $54.00 $100.00
Fan Palm $18.25 $52.55
Pine $55.00 $117.00
Staff has estimated the cost for the City to hire and equip enough employees to do all the City's
block trimming. This figure is difficult to arrive at since the crew structure currently used by the
City is not at all appropriate for large scale block trimming. In evaluating alternatives, staff
looked at providing a new block trimming tree crew large enough to provide for as low cost per
tree trimmed as possible. Staff also determined that in order to most effectively trim all trees
currently trimmed by the contractor, this smaller crew size would take a full year to trim the trees
currently able to be trimmed by a contractor's larger crews. It was finally determined that the
crew size and make-up that best met the two above criteria would have the following
characteristics. (See Table 2 on the following page)
[5' ?
Page 8, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
Table 2
SUBJECT DESCRIPTION COSTS
FIRST YEAR SUBSEQUENT
YRS
Personnel (5) 1 Sr. Tree Trimmer $182,000 $182,000
1 Tree Trimmer
3 Maintenance Worker I's
Equipment 2 Lift Trucks $205,000 $30,800
2 Dump Trucks $132,000 $16,000
1 Chipper $25,000 $3,500
Other Trash Fees $5,100 $5,100
Shovels, Brooms, Rope, Etc. $500 $500
Chain Saws, Blowers $5,500 $2,800
Wearing Apparel & Small Tools $900 $900
I I
*These subsequent year costs reflect the equipment maintenance and equipment
replacement costs that would accrue to these vehicles each year. What this means is the
City would have to spend the initial costs to purchase the equipment and then set aside
money (as we do with all other equipment) on an annual basis to operate and then re-
purchase the equipment when it was worn out.
Staff does not recommend attempting to do this work with City employees since the cost for
doing so would be $556,00 the first year and $241,600 per year for subsequent years as
compared to this current contract price of approximately $98,000. Also, this is not an exact
comparison since the contract this year is for 3,608 trees, while this five person crew could be
expected to trim 3,300 trees per year (our past annual contract). The other big advantage, of
course, is that as the City's financial circumstances change, a decision can be made on service
level adjustments without the need to either hire new employees or layoff existing employees.
This is a reaffirmation of an extensive study done in 1985 that set up our current crew design.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is categorically
exempt under Class 1 Section 15301 (h)" Maintenance of Existing Landscaping".
g'rg/
Page 9, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FUNDS REQUIRED TO AWARD ENTIRE CONTRACT
Proposed Contract Amount Atlas I $50,116.31
Proposed Contract Amount Davey Trees I $39,576.00
Proposed Contract Amount West Coast I $8,635.00
FUNDS AVAILABLE TO AWARD CONTRACT
Fund 100-1450-5230 FY 1997-1998 $70,250.00
Transfer From Account 100-1431-5251 $28,080.00
I. IDR(;,!~OO" .:' ~-
FISCAL IMPACT:
This action will authorize the expenditure of $98,327.31 of previously appropriated funds of
$70,250.00 [100-1450-5203], and $28,080.00 [100-1431-5251] of transferred funds. The project
is funded initially by the City's General Fund then reimbursed by the Gas Tax Fund. All funds
proposed to be used are reimbursable from the Gas Tax Fund.
Attachment I-Bid Tabulation Fonn
C:\My DocumentslB.ckup ofTRIMCYCL.wbkwu
06/04/98 9:07 AM
&Y~7
RESOLUTION NO. /9(J.2. c¡
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
PURCHASING AGREEMENTS FOR TREE TRIMMING
SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997-98 TO AZTEC
LANDSCAPING INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,116.31,
THE DAVEY TREES EXPERT COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT
OF $39,576.00 AND WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC. IN
THE AMOUNT OF $8,635.00, AND APPROVING
TRANSFER OF FUNDS
WHEREAS, on April 16, 1998, the Purchasing Agent received
five sealed bids for tree trimming services in the City of Chula
Vista for FY 1997-98; and
WHEREAS, three contractors, Aztec Landscaping, The Davey
Trees Expert Company and West Coast Arborists Inc. were the lowest
bidder on various items; and
WHEREAS, staff has evaluated the bids and recommends that
three contracts be awarded; and
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that this project is categorically exempt under Class 1
Section 15301(h) "Maintenance of Existing Landscaping", and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to transfer funds to include
trimming all the trees included in the bid.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby accept the five bids and awards
a Purchasing Agreement to Aztec Landscaping Inc. in the amount of
$50,116.31, to The Davey Trees Expert Company in the amount of
$39,576.00 and to West Coast Arborists Inc. in the amount of
$8,635.00.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that $28,080.00 is hereby
transferred from Account 100-1441-5251 and $70,250,00 of previously
appropriated funds of $70,250.00 from 100-1450-5203 be transferred
Account 100-1450-5203,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Purchasing Agent is
hereby authorized and directed to execute said Purchasing
Agreements for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c, Irsltree trim
~~/tJ
" 0 '" '"0 0.,'.,0 -, ~O '-0 -0 NO'" , I 0 0 0 r I r I I r r r r r r r r I r
888888g88
g c ~. ~. ~ ~. 8. 8. ~. ~ ê.
l! ~ ;!:;¡ ;: ;:\ ~ ;!: :: ~ :;¡
!J "
~ .!i
:( ~ 0
..~ 00008°go g 80 0
8 8 ~~~~g~~~ ~ ~:; ~ 11
.. ¡: . '" - ;:: ~
~ -¡; '. .' .~ ~ 0
" 'E J! ¡f. ~
00 N >-
~8888888:;¡
.3 õ ~:e¡pg~;i~g
i ~ ~~",~:;i~~
; " -
~ j
f Õ
I- C ogooooog 0 g
'~.;!.g :J,,;~:;:;:;~o:; ~ ~
8 .. -~ ~~~""" N ~-
~ -¡; ~ ~
I- " . ~
;; 8 ;ê
~ :;¡88888g8~
Ii g § ;!; ;! i'J :¡j g g ¡;: :g :;
! ~.~ ;;;~~:~~g
.E 1ii >" -
~ ~ ~ ð
----- '@.¡¡!! 5 o~oooooo
""'IIr"'J æ~-:J~. :J:J;j::':;;j::i~
.!f~ j¡ -'~ --....~~....~'" ~
<>0 ¡¡ -
8'" § ~ --.-.-
~ <4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ :: g
~~ ~g88gg88~
-..,'" .........
a ...Q ~ Õ ;;;¡;j~~~8:88~
~i ~ g ;;;:~~:::;:;¿~:;;ô
i" C E -N-~ -..
72 c~ ~~"
H š.!!
~ ~ 0 00 000 E
bJ s'g ..8008000 8 ~Ii
=§. ~~:ß:g~~:¡::g ¡:j ;¡¡~
^ ~ ""¡ ~ ~I .
... .. .. .'"
^ ~ 'Ë ~I~
~ " " Eig ~
8 .g:; ¡f. "
-< ,,:¡o' - z
0000goog8
~ õ ::'~:;¡::',,;~~..;:i
.. ~ ~ ~~:.~~;s~;;
". J¡o" ~~-~ --N;:
~ f ~
:;: ¡¡- ~ Ii 88888888 8 ~ 8 8
] '; ~"~ ¡¡¡:<;;;;;;~!P;!!! ~ R ~..
:: ~ ] ~ :¡;~
~~:(§ ~-!i¡j"
~ :g õ (j ~ ~
~ -f~ ,,~= 5~ 5 ~
~ ~ lë-g~ ';;" ';;-
~ J E '"E'" °l~ 0 .,¿-
~~'E" ñi """'" -::<=~-::-{!~ <= 1io.
~~'I::J """ "",o :!!.co ° m
~ l ~ l ~ 8 '" ~ U ~I ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ g - "' ~
g ,,~ 8§"1;¡H~ ~~:¡j ~~~ :¡j ~~ ~~ I
e ~ ~ ¡j~g,¡jñi~ñi ;;~~ ~ ,š1õo.~ I~:g ¡¡ ,g~'C~
~~w ~æ-gëggg.~õ.!!!~;¡¡'.!1~g;¡¡.!!!.!!!,,-g8~o
is ~ ~ - a...a.<Dwwwa.I-C w c_u w cc ... a.f!2:-
¡:: ~ ]!; ",ë .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ° i!! ~
:3 ¡¡ ,,~" " " " " " " " " -g " !
" C ~.. '" N "',... '" N N,... ~:¡¡ ~
~ §. :;; ~a :g:g~g:N::¡:¡~ 'õ'õ.
~ ~ ~ ~ -N""'"""""" ~~~
)< ,//
PcYÐ
FILE
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEME~'T ¥
Ocr ~tf ,-- lO ~ Item Y
Meeting Date 6/9/98
ITEM TITLE: Resolution If! 0 zr Accepting bids and awarding Purchasing Agreements
for tree t.ri.rnnrihg services for fiscal year 1997-1998 to Aztec Landscaping
Inc. in the amount of $50,116.31, The Davey Trees Expert Company in
the amount of $39,576.00 and West Coast Arborists Inc. in the amount of
$8,635.00, and approving transfer of funds.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works . ~
Director of Finance
REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5TIIS vote: Yes_NolO
On March 14,1998, an advertisement was placed in the Chula Vista Star News soliciting bids for
tree trimming services. In addition, ten potential bidders were contacted directly by the Purchasing
Agent. Of those ten potential bidders contacted, three were local vendors. On April 16, 1998, the
bids for tree trimming services were opened. Five bids were received. No local vendors submitted
a bid. Considering the low bidder for each item, four different vendors submitted low bids. Three
vendors are recommended to be awarded contracts.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution accepting bids and awarding
Purchasing Agreements to Aztec Landscaping Inc. in the amount of $50,116.31, The Davey
Trees Expert Company.in the amount of $39,576.00 and West Coast Arborists, Inc. in the
amount of $8,635.00,and approving the transfer of funds.
BOARDS & COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: Since 1985, the goal of the Public Works Tree Division has been to
complete a citywide trimming cycle within a five-year time frame. This had been accomplished by
augmenting the City tree crew production of approximately 1200 block trims with outside
contractors. In addition to this cycle, city crews performed annual decorative trimming in select
high visibility areas, complaint trimming, clearance trimming, and hazard reduction trimming on
trees that cannot safely go without trimming for more than three years.
Since 1985, the tree crew has gone ITom three two-person crews and a supervisor to two two-person
crews and a supervisor. As a result of the reduction of City staffing, an increase in complaint calls,
and requests for special events, the amount of block trimming completed by City crews has
diminished. During FY96/97, we were limited to accomplishing 385 block trims. Through
extrapolation of the production ITom July 1997 through December 1997, we are on a pace to
accomplish 406 block trims in the CUITent fiscal year. However, due to impacts ITom El Nino
during January through March, this total may be reduced. This compounding annual deficit
coupled with the increasing number of trees in the City, results in a projected seven years to
complete the cycle with the annual in-house budgeted amount of $70,250.00.
\'.
Page 2, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
Last year's contract was increased to $95,002.24 through budget transfers available as a result of
savings within the Public Works Budget. This provided sufficient funds to trim 3,362 trees. This
represented an increase of only 430 trees over the previous year's contract. That increase is not
enough to meet a five year cycle, which is our objective. This year we are requesting an increase
fÌ'om the budgeted $70,250.00 to $98,327.31 to allow for the trimming of 3,608 trees. This
represents an increase of 676 trees over the FY95/96 contract. While this increase falls short of the
800 trees we need added to get back on a five-year cycle, excluding recent development, it would
go a long way toward closing the ever widening gap.
Bids were received fÌ'om the five con1ractors listed below. The contract was bid by the Purchasing
Agent so that the contract could be awarded by item, groups of items, or as a lot, whichever was
in the best interest of the City. Each bid item was evaluated to determine which contractor was
the lowest bidder. Exhibit 1 lists the total contract amount bid by each of the bidders for all of
the separate items. Exhibit 2 indicates the amount of the bid fÌ'om the lowest bidder of a
particular item. Exhibit 3 lists the bid items recommended to be awarded to each contractor.
The City considers prompt payment discount tenns of 15 days or more in evaluation of bids.
Accordingly, Exhibit 3 includes a reduction of 1.5% in Aztec's total cost, if payment is received
within 15 days of the City being invoiced. Staff has, therefore, deducted the 1.5% fÌ'om the
amount of the bid for Aztec's items. West Coast Arborists, Inc offered 2 percent if paid at 10
days. The bid only allowed the prompt payment discount to be considered in awarding an item if
15 days or more were allowed for the City to process payment. West Coast Arborists' bid for
Item 8 was not adjusted because they only allowed 10 days to process payment. Staff also
examined all of the bid items to determine if the discount indicated by the various bidders would
have made that bidder the low bidder for an item. Atlas Environmental provided a 1 % discount
if paid within 16 days. Atlas was low bidder for Item 1, but for reasons discussed below, is not
recommended to be awarded the contract for that item. Attached as Appendix 1 is the Bid
Tabulation by item of each bid received.
EXIllBIT 1
FULL BID FOR EACH BID BY CONTRACTOR
NO. CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
1. Arbor West Tree Surgeons $240,143.00
2. Atlas Environmental Services $140,407.40
3. Aztec Landscaping Inc. $120,562.50
4. The Davey Tree Expert Co. $140,180.50
5. West Coast Arborists Inc. $160,160.00
~
Page 3, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
EXIllBIT 2
LOWEST BID BY ITEM
BID ITEM DESCRIPTION LOWEST BIDDER BID AMOUNT
1. Cocos Palm Atlas Environmental! $13,151.40
2. Fan Palm Aztec Landscaping 17,374.00
3. Podocarpus Davey Tree Exp. 9,666.00
4. Broad Leaf Davey Tree Exp. 29,910.00
5. Eucalyptus Large Aztec 3,900.00
6. Eucalyptus Medium Aztec2 8,400.00
7. Eucalyptus Small Aztec 10,092.00
8. Pines West Coast Arbonst 8,635.00
TOTAL $101,128.40
1 Although Atlas Environmental Services was the low bidder for Item 1, the Street Tree
Supervisor has indicated that he recommends awarding the two palm items to a single vendor for
the following reasons: One, he can not adequately oversee four contractors perfonning this work;
two, there will be less administrative costs by reducing the time and cost to process progress
payments for one less contractor; three, many of the streets and parks within the scope of the
contract are forested intennittently with both types of Palm Trees which would require disruption
to the citizens at two different times; and four, when working in a park, a single entry will help
coordination with the park maintenance crews and, therefore, reduce damage and disruption of
those parks. Therefore, Items 1 and 2 were combined and it is proposed to award them as a lot to
the lowest combined bidder which was Aztec Landscaping Inc. (Aztec at $33,098.50 with 1.5%
discount $32,602.23 compared to Atlas at $37,903.40 with 1% discount $37,524.37)
2 Both Aztec and Atlas bid $8,400.00 for this item but Aztec was considered the low bidder
because they offered 1.5 % reduction compared to 1.0% for Atlas if the City made prompt
payment.
Page 4, Item-
Meeting Date 6/9/98
EXIllBIT 3
STAFFRECO~NDEDCONTRACTAMOUNTBYCONTRACTOR
BID ITEM CONTRACTOR CONTRACT AMOUNT
I Aztec $15,724.50
2 Aztec 17,374.00
5 Aztec 3,900.00
6 Aztec 8,400.00
7 Aztec 5,481.00
SUBTOTAL AZTEC $50,879.50
LESS 1.5 % $763.19
There is a price difference of $4,61 I between Aztec's bid item 7 in Exhibit 2 and the recommended
contract amount for Item 7 in Exhibit 3. TIris is due to the removal of 106 small Eucalyptus trees in
the Telegraph Canyon Road median east of Paseo Ladera, which were removed by the Sunbow
developer as part of the street-widening project. TIris occurred after the trimming list was
formulated.
ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUESTED
Staff has requested the additional funding to do all of the trees that were included in the bid
proposal for the following reasons:
The City has approximately 35,000 trees. As the City grows and we add more trees, we will get
further behind unless more funds are budgeted. The more trees we can trim each year the smaller
number of complaints we can anticipate being called in by the citizens as a result of trees
uprooting or limbs falling on vehicles, homes or people. The number of trees uprooted or limbs
broken will depend upon the amount of rainfall, severity of Santa Anna winds or winds
Page 5, Item-
Meeting Date 6/9/98
associated with the rainfall, type of tree, and the length of time since the last time the tree was
trimmed. As the time frame between trimming increases, so will the potential for limbs being
dislodged from trees and the potential for damage to personal property or injury from those
occurrences. Staff had a larger budget in the past and was able to trim more trees. In FY 1992-
1993, approximately 5,000 trees were trimmed by contract with a budget of $85,500. At some
point, unless additional funds are budgeted, we will become reactive to hazardous conditions
rather than proactive in performing the work as prevention.
Funds for the contract tree trimming services are included in the FY 1997-98 budget in the
amount of $70,250. Additional funds are required to trim all trees included in the bid.
Therefore, staff is recommending that $28,080. of remaining funds from account 100-1431-5251
(Traffic Signal & Street Light Maintenance Utilities) be transferred to the tree trimming account.
All of the funds in both the Tree Trimming and Traffic Signal and Street Light Maintenance
Utility accounts are Gas Tax funds. The subject contract includes the trimming of a total of
3,608 trees located at various locations throughout the City. A listing of all trees and locations is
on file in the City Clerk's Office.
ALTERNATE IF COUNCIL DOES NOT APPROVE ADDmONAL FUNDING
In the event that Council does not approve additional funds, staff would recommend that the
contract awards be as shown in the following table, Exhibit 4.
EXIllBIT 4
BID ITEM CONTRACTOR CONTRACT AMOUNT
1. Aztec $13,151.40
2. Aztec 17,374,00
5. Aztec 3,900.00
6. Aztec 8,400.00
7. . Aztec 10,092.00
3. Davey Tree 9,666.00
8. West Coast Arborist 7,645.00
Total Contract Amount $70,228.40
ITEM(S) REMOVED FROM CONTRACT USING CURRENT FUNDING
The only bid item which could be removed from this contract without significantly impacting both
the short tenn City workload from citizen calls and possible damage to trees and property is the
broadleaf category. The location of streets containing broadleaf trees within the list of trees bid
were on lettered streets from D to L, Naples and Moss, and 35 trees in Halecrest, Friendship and
Independence Parks, which are not already included in other categories. That is not to say that the
majority of these trees do not need trimming at this time, they merely constitute trees that can wait
Page 6, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
to be trimmed with the least impact to the City.
Areas by Blocks were chosen to be removed rather than species of trees. TIlls is proposed by
staff because by doing so, the cost per tree is reduced, administration of the contract and
inspection of the work is easier, it is easier to add all trees within an area to a future contract, and
keeping track when trees within the City have been trimmed requires less record keeping.
If Council eliminates some of the trees from this year's tree trimming contract, they will be
included in next year's contract. The total number of trees deleted under this scenario would be
1,004 leaving 2,604 trees to be trimmed rather than the 3,608 trees recommended by staff. Staff
will survey the trees eliminated and if any are considered an immediate hazard, those trees would
be trimmed by City staff.
COUNCIL REQUEST IN 1997
Last year when the tree trimming contract was considered by Council, Council requested that future
reports discuss the impact if City forces were to do all of the tree trimming work. What would it
cost for the City to gear up and do all of the block trimming with City employees?
Staff has detennined that it is much more expensive per tree for City staff to do block trimming
as opposed to a contractor. There are several reasons for this. The most important is that City
crews are not set up to do block trimming but rather to perfonn tree removal & replanting in
conjunction with the sidewalk repair program and complaint, hazard, and decorative trimming,
while the contractor's crews are set up just for block trimming.
City tree crews consist of two people; a hirge truck with a high ranger lift and a chipper body,
and a chipper. Conversely, the crews used by the contractor might consist of ten people with
some high rangers, a front-end loader equipped with a bucket that can pick up tree branches, and
large trash bins which are shuttled back and forth to the dump. TIlls permits the contractor to
shuttle vehicles back and forth to the dump while keeping the remaining crew members
productively working. TIlls large crew size also permits the contractor to pay their employees at
a lower average rate per employee since most of the employees do not need the skill level
required by our small crew size.
Staff has compared costs per tree figures for both the contractor and City staff (see Table 1) and
believes it is most productive for our crews to be used for complaint and hazard trimming while
continuing to use contractors for major block and park trimming.
Page7,Item-
Meeting Date 6/9/98
Table 1
TYPE OF TREE CONTRACTOR CITY COSTrrREE
COSTrrREE
Broadleaf $30.00 $58.44
Eucalyptus - Small $43.50 $73.00
Eucalyptus - Medium $75.00 $154.92
Eucalyptus - Large $150.00 $309.84
Coco Palm $13.80 $50.62
Podocarpus $54.00 $100.00
Fan Palm $18.25 $52.55
Pine $55.00 $117.00
Staff has estimated the cost for the City to hire and equip enough employees to do all the City's
block trimming. This figure is difficult to arrive at since the crew structure currently used by the
City is not at all appropriate for large scale block trimming. In evaluating alternatives, staff
looked at providing a new block trimming tree crew large enough to provide for as low cost per
tree trimmed as possible. Staff also determined that in order to most effectively trim all trees
currently trimmed by the contractor, this smaller crew size would take a full year to trim the trees
currently able to be trimmed by a contractor's larger crews. It was fmally determined that the
crew size and make-up that best met the two above criteria would have the following
characteristics. (See Table 2 on the following page)
Page 8, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
Table 2
SUBJECT DESCRIPTION COSTS
FIRST YEAR SUBSEQUENT
YRS
Personnel (5) 1 Sr. Tree Trimmer $182,000 $182,000
I Tree Trimmer
3 Maintenance Worker I's
"n'1'Vf~'r\;T 'T~"1"fí'; ~,' "'..,..,ji:;¡;).'ììi1T." -.',~~
Equipment 2 Lift Trucks $205,000 $30,800
2 Dump Trucks $132,000 $16,000
1 Chipper $25,000 $3,500
L -. l;¡1I!R". [/:-' l'..mø¡'L:HEfl.'¡'JJ¡.e_~.r1J}'!,i.!,,3t-,!:.t;,r,-~,,-~.. =-.'r~~']r::~=.C~[. .'Z:-~B.l]:f,j
Other Trash Fees $5,100 $5,100
Shovels, Brooms, Rope, Etc. $500 $500
Chain Saws, Blowers $5,500 $2,800
Wearing Apparel & Small Tools $900 $900
*These subsequent year costs reflect the equipment maintenance and equipment
replacement costs that would ãccrue to these vehicles each year. What this means is the
City would have to spend the initial costs to purchase the equipment and then set aside
money (as we do with all other equipment) on an annual basis to operate and then re-
purchase the equipment when it was worn out.
Staff does not recommend attempting to do this work with City employees since the cost for
doing so would be $556,00 the fIrst year and $241,600 per year for subsequent years as
compared to this current contract price of approximately $98,000. Also, this is not an exact
comparison since the contract this year is for 3,608 trees, while this five person crew could be
expected to trim 3,300 trees per year (our past annual contract). The other big advantage, of
course, is that as the City's fInancial circumstances change, a decision can be made on service
level adjustments without the need to either hire new employees or layoff existing employees.
This is a reaffinnation of an extensive study done in 1985 that set up our current crew design.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is categorically
exempt under Class 1 Section 15301 (h)" Maintenance of Existing Landscaping".
Page 9, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FUNDS REQUIRED TO AWARD ENTIRE CONTRACT
Proposed Contract Amount Atlas $50,116.31
Proposed Contract Amount Davey Trees $39,576.00
Proposed Contract Amount West Coast $8,635.00
[~_O~;~::"7'-;:T'7"~~~"-_. .~'?"-7-":'1
FUNDS AVAILABLE TO AWARD CONTRACT
Fund 100-1450-5230 FY 1997-1998 I $70,250.00
Transfer From Account 100-1431-5251 I $28,080.00
.. ~I
00
FISCAL IMPACT:
This action will authorize the expenditure of $98,327.31 of previously appropriated funds of
$70,250.00 [100-1450-5203], and $28,080.00 [100-1431-5251] of transferred funds. The project
is funded initially by the City's General Fund then reimbursed by the Gas Tax Fund. All funds
proposed to be used are reimbursable from the Gas Tax Fund.
Attachment I-Bid Tabulation Form
C:\My DocumeotslBackup ofTRIMCYCL.wbkwu
061114/98 9:07 AM
gig g g g g g g g
0 § ~¡:;_~~iU~~~
~ :!::¡:::; ~:! ~.. ~
.& .Ë
~~ °googooo 0 g g g ~
8 <8 ~:q~~g~~~ g ~ si ~]j
- ,,~ ;: .
~ ~ t-- .- .d 0
gg ~ E
:;:gggggg.g:;:
.3 "é ~ :è :8 ~ ¡;¡ si :; .~ g
"; ~ ~~~~:;i~~
e "
~ j
8 õ
~L ~~~~~~~~ ~ ¡¡¡ "
> " -~~~NN"'" N 0
~ ;¡: ~ - ~;;
~ ~ ~ï
:!i8 ~
:;:ggggggg:;:
~ 0 § N~~ggg~~~
! ~ ~ ~;;;~~~~g
t ~~"
h 8 ð
~ ~~ 'Ii § o~oooooo
.t:;- :¡E.. :'ri:;;:;¡::~:;¡~:;;
.-- ....2 --...~~...~..
~~ ~ ~ ~
Eo: :¡ ~ ~ ----.
~ ~¥' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : g
~~ 000000000
- C-. ~""""'oooo"
A ~~ ~ "é ;;;:;!::¡::¡¡;¡¡gi88:;
"" " Q -"'<o."~"_N-""
i~ 1: ~ ~<'I:::;""~"~
2. .~.g >"
H ~ ~
. >
ill E -- 00 0 0 0 0 gOO E
c .š .. '" '" '" '" '" . '" 0 ~ Ii
~~. ~iEi:g:B¡;¡¡:e::¡:;: ¡:j =~
^ >"" ~ '5~
~ ,¡¡ ;¡: .-8>
^ = '¡! -=~
---- ;¡ " ~o ~
d' ] ~ð ~ ~
~ 000000000
~ "é :::': :;: :::;; :;; :': :;:::
g Q ~8~:e;;;:!~:;¡;!
;3 2 ~ ¡;;~:!g"':;!:;!['.¡~
- cï: c" '"
~ g ì
;;; ,,~';: ooooogoo 0 g 0 g
~ c!; ~ ój~ ~~~~~&j~~ ~ N ~ -
~ ~ .8 ~ N- H
~ ~ :¡ :5 ~-1J § .
¡:¡ :g õ <3 ~ ~
.. - ~ e" 0
1> ~~ I~~~ £:g £ ]
:¡;!¡3 e 1!Ë~ §-c § :2 -
¡;j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~n: ~ "ii§ § "ii S! }¡ § § ~ c ~
~~~~Æ ~ ~U 1ñ~:¿¡1ñ~-8:¿¡,,~ ~-~
- I:r-- " """", oË" o-~ .. =0 c.,,'" ~
~ "'.;, 8.sgõ;.;!.;!.;! ~8]1 ~~~ :¡¡~:.ï: ~t; ~
e ¡; ~ ¡¡ ~ g ~i~~ - ~ ~ Ë ~ §~Ë ~ ç¡ ;g .2:¡." ~
.. .;; a: ..,,-c:g"""~:!;;;3 = ","e = ",:t t: :ë§~J2
, .. w ""O-"""-O-e '" -60 '" --- .. ",,-
:z .. (/) Ou.a.IDUJUJUJa.>-O UJ 0_" UJ 00 >- a. ..
0 ,,- f.! ~ .
¡:"¡¡¡.ë """.."...." .g~~
:'5-¡¡~¡; .....",...."" ,,"'æ
" c ;!i" ..,N""..CDNN,.. ..:E ~
~ g. := Iii" g¡g¡::mN::¡:¡~ .::~ §
0- WOO ~
e : ~ ¡¡ -N"""" CD'" '" OO~
.. C L.!:;. t: zz É
-~'
." ..
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~ Ilç.. Page 1
---
=t:~4;",
(]JY Of
CHUtA VISfA
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, THAT SEALED PROPOSALS ON A FORM OBTAINED FROM
THE PURCHASING DMSION WILL BE RECEIVED UNTIL 3:00 P,M. ON THE !ITH DAY OF
APRH.., 1998 AT WHIΠTIME THE PROPOSALS WILL BE PUBLICLY OPENED AND READ
FOR FURNISHING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA:
TREE TRIMMING SERVICE - PUBUC WORKS
ALL BIDDERS ARE HEREBY REFERRED TO THE BIDDING INSTRUCTIONS, GENERAL
PROVISIONS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND TERMS AND CONDmONS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE PURæASING DIVISION FOR FULL DETAlLS AND DESCRIPI'ION OF MATERIALS
AND/OR SERVICES REQUIRED.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND COPIES OF BIDDING INSIRUCTIONS, CONTACT THE
PURCHASING DIVISION.
Mailing Address: Physiœl Locotion:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PURCHASING DMSION PURCHASING DMSION
276 FOURTH AVENUE 430 DAVIDSON STREET
CHULA VISTA, CA 91910 CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
TELEPHONE (619) 691-5141 FAX (619) 691-5174
ALL BIDS MUST BE SUBMITfED TO THE PURCHASING DIVISION IN SEALED
ENVELOPES PLAINLY MARKED WITH THE BID NUMBER AND TIME SET FOR
OPENING. BIDS RECEIVED AFI'ER THE TIME SET FOR OPENING WILL BE
REJECTED,
THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECI' ANY OR ALL BIDS OR ANY PORTION
OF ANY BID, OR TO WAIVE ANY IRREGULARITIES OR INFORMALITIES IN THE BIDS
OR IN THE BIDDING,
JOHN P. COGGINS, C.P.M. DATED: MARŒ26, 1998
PURCHASING AGENT
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~ ! ft.. Page 2
~--
-
cnv Of
QUA VISTA
BID AND OFFER TO CONTRACT
THE BIDDER, HEREINAFfER SOMETIMES CALLED CONTRACTOR OR
VENDOR, SUBMITS A BID AND OFFERS TO ENTER INTO THIS
CONTRAcr WITH THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, HEREINAFTER CALLED
CITY, THIS 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 1998 AS FOLLOWS:
THIS BID AND OFFER, SUBJEcr TO THE SPECIFICATIONS,
TERMS AND CONDITIONS, AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
HEREIN, WHEN DULY ACCEPTED BY THE CITY SHALL
CONSTITUTE THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE PAYMENTS TO BE PROVIDED BY
THE CITY, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS
EXPRESSED IN THE BID FORMS AND SPECIFICATIONS
ATTACHED AND BY THIS REFERENCE INCORPORATED
HEREIN, CONTRAcrOR AGREES TO FURNISH TREE TRIMMING
SERVICE - PUBLIC WORKS TO THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~ I ft.. Page 3
---
~...."
(1JY Of
GlUIA VISTA
SEAlED BIDS will be received at the office of the Purchasing Agent, 276 Fourth Avenue, (The physical
location of the office is 430 Davidson, Suite C) City of Chula Vista, CA 91910 until 3:00 p.m. on
Thursday, April 9, 1998 at which time they will be publicly opened and read for performing work as
follows:
TREE TRIMMING SERVICE - PUBLIC WORKS
The City of Chula Vista hereby notifies all bidders that it will afflI'Illatively ensure that in any Conttact
entered into pursuant to this Notice, minority business enterprises will be afforded full opportunity to
submit bids in response to this invitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race,
color, sex, or national origin in consideration for an award.
A MANDATORY pre-bid meeting is scheduled for 9:00 a.m., Thursday, March 26,1998, in the
Purchasing Conference Room, Legislative Office Building, 430 Davidson Street, Suite C, Chula
VISta, Catifornia. Please allow at least 1 hour for this meeting. Attendance at this meeting shall
be at bidder's sole expense. Contractors not represented at this meeting may not submit a bid, The
purpose of this conference is to review the requirements and to receive questions regarding the bid
documents.
No bid shall be received unless it is made on a Bid Form furnished by the City Purchasing Agent. Bid
fOnDS, specifications, and Geœral Provisions may be obtaiœd from the Purchasing Office, 430 Davidson
Street, Suite C, Chula Vista, CaliforJÙa,
Contractors are not required by bid specifications to pay prevailing wage ("NOT Prevailing Wage
Rates") to persons employed by them for work under this Contract in accordance with Section 2.58.070
of the Chula Vista Municipal Code regulating payment of prevailing wages for Contracts let by the City.
No bid will be accepted from a Contractor who has not been licensed in accordance with the provisions
of Chapter 9, Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code and its implementing regu1ations.
Contractors and subcontractors are required to have a valid City of Chu1a Vista business license prior
to start of work.
Bids will be evaluated by the Purchasing Agent and the Deputy Director of Public Works Operations or
designee. The City Council reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to waive any irregularity or
infonnality in any bid to the extent permitted by law. All Conttactors should read the attached General
Provisions, which are considered part of your bid and any contract awarded.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~ ! ft.. Page 4
- -
~... " "
01Y Of
CHUlA VISTA
BID REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS
EXAMINATION OF SPECIFICATIONS, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, AND SITE OF WORK:
The bidder is required to examine carefully the site, proposal, specifications, and General Provisions for
the work required. It is further assumed that the bidder has investigated and is satisfied as to the
conditions to be encountered; as to the character, quality, and quantities of work to be performed; and
materials to be furnished; and as to the requirements of the specifications, special provisions, and
General Provisions. It is mutually agreed that submission of a bid shall be considered prima facie
evidence that the bidder has made such an examination.
The following documents must be completed and submitted with the bid:
1. Bid Form
2. List of Subcontractors
3, Addenda (if any)
After award of the Contract, the successful bidder must provide the following additional documents:
1. Commercial Liability and Property Damage Insurance
2. Worker's Compensation Insurance Declaration
3. Guaranty (if required)
RFÆCI10N OF BIDS CONTAINING ALTERATIONS ERASURES. OR IRREGULARITIES'
Bids may be rejected if they show any alterations of form, additions not called for, conditional or
alternative bids, incomplete bids, erasures, or irregularities of any kind.
In case of disparity in the bid between the unit bid or lwnp sum price shown in figures and words, the
unit bid price as stated in words shall prevail and take precedence.
PUBliC OPENING OF BIDS
Bids will be opened and read publicly at the time and place indicated in the Notice to Bidders. Bidders
or their authorized representatives are invited to be present.
The City reserves the right to reject any or all bids.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~,~ Page 5
...1. ..
CIIY Of
CHtJIA VISTA
BID FORM
The wxlersigned hereby offers. subject to all specifications, tenns and conditions, and General Provisions
herein, to furnish the City of Chula Vista the following:
TREE TRIMMING SERVICE - PUBLIC WORKS'
and that he/she has examined the location of the proposed work and has read the accompanying
instructions to bidders. and hereby proposes to provide all materials, equipment, and labor to complete
the work for the UIÚt price or lump swn set forth in the following schedule,
The Contractor has Sixty Worldne Days (60) to complete the project.
Estimated Items with Unit Price Unit Price in Extension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures Total
I. 953 EACH Queen (Cocos) Palm
$ $
PER EACH EA
2. 952 EAΠFan Palm
$ $
PER EACH EA
3. 179EAΠPodocarpus
$ $
PER EACH EA
4. 9fJ7EAΠBroadleaf*
$ $
PER EACH EA
*Definition of Broadleaf Trees: All trees other than those called out as specific bid items.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ..s.' It.- Page 6
---
~,.....
OIY Of
CHUIA VISrA
Estimated Items with Unit Price Unit Price in Extension
Item Quantities Written in Words Figures Total
5. 26EAΠEucalyptus Trees (Large)
$ $
PER EACH EA
6. 112 EAΠEucalyptus Trees (Medium)
$ $
PER EACH EA
7 232 EAΠEucalyptus Trees (Small)
- l1.b
~ $ $
/oh PER EACH EA
8. 157 EAΠPine
$ $
PER EACH EA
Note: A list of specific trees, by address, is included as an attachment to the bid specifications.
Disposal Costs
Cost per Ton for MulchinglComposting Debris $ tron
Estimated # of Tons
Cost per Ton for Disposal ofNon-MulchinglComposting Debris $ tron
Estimated # of ToRS
Disposal Site Name
Disposal Site Location
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~,~ Page 7
-
(JJY Of
CHUI.A VISTA
Award
Award of contract may be made as a lot, by item, or by groups of items, as may be in the City's
best interest.
Payment Terms
Terms: % Days
Prompt payment discounts offered for less than fifteen (15) days will not be considered in evaluating
bids for award. However, discounts offered of less than fifteen (15) days will be taken ifpayment is
made by the City within the discount period. In the absence oftenns, payment shall be Net Thirty
(30) Days.
Public Agency Participation
Other public agencies (e.g. city, county, public corporation, political subdivision, school district, or
water authority) may want to participate in any award as a result of this bid. The City of Chula Vista
shall incur no financial responsibility in connection with any purchase by another public agency. The
public agency shall accept sole responsibility for placing orders and making payments to the
successful bidder. This option will not be considered in bid evaluation. Please indicate whether this
will be granted.
Yes No
Contractor's License
Licensed in accordance with the State of California Act providing for the registration of Contractors,
License No. ; License Expiration Date , Contractor's State License
Classification
Company Name
Address
City State - Zip
Telephone Fax
Print Name Title
Signature Date
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~!~ Page8
7Qf;;;
OIYOf
CHUIA VISfA
The bidder shall list the name and address of each subcontractor to whom the bidder proposes to
subcontract portions of the work. The City reserves the right to approve any and all subcontractors
proposed. All Contractors and subcontractors must obtain a business license from the City of CImIa
Vista before a notice to proceed may be issued.
USTOFSUBCONTRACTORS*
Description (Type) of Portion
Name & Address (City) of Work Subcontracted
1)
2)
3)
* Contractor is obligated to provide License Number and complete address and phone numbers of
subcontrac(ors prior to award of Contract. The Contractor shall comply with Section 2-3.1 of the
Standard Specifications and Regional Supplement Amendments and shall perform at least 50 % of the
contract work with hislher own organization.
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~!~ Page 9
~--
~-'t'..""
Cß\' Of
CHUIA VJSrA
WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE DECLARATION
I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer
to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to underiake self-insurance in
accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before
commencing the perfonnance of the work of this Contract.
Signature
Contractor
State Contractor's License No.
Address
City/State
Phone Number
Date
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~!~ Page 10
---
't... ...
CßYOf
0iUIA VISTA
SPECIAL PROVISIONS - GENERAL
Bodily Iniury and Pro.pe~ Damage Insurance
The Contractor shall, throughout the duration of this Contract maintain comprehensive general
liability and propeny damage insurance covering all operations hereunder of the Contractor, its
agents and employees, including but not limited to premises and automobile, with minimum
coverage of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit. Evidence of
such coverage, in the fonn of a Cenificate of Insurance and Policy Endorsement which names the
City as an additional insured, shall be submitted to the Purchasing Division. This endorsement
must be on a separate "Schedule B".
Said policy or policies shall provide THIRTY (30) day written notice to the City of Chula Vista
of cancellation or material change, Insurance Certificates shall not include "Modified Occurrence"
restrictions, No substitutions shall be allowed.
The City reserves the right to require insurance for a higher coverage than the minimum limits.
All insurance carriers shall have a Best's Rating of "A-", or better; "Admitted" (Best's code "L"
or "0"),
The Contractor shall, within ten (10) days after the awarding of the Contract, and before
commencing the work, to deposit with the Purchasing Agent of the City of Chula Vista, a
certificate certifying that such insurance is, and will be, in full force and effect from the time the
work is commenced until completed. This certificate must be renewed and received by the City
at least 15 days prior to expiration,
Worker's Compensation Insurance
The Contractor shall also carry Worker's Compensation insurance in statutory amount and
Employer's Liability coverage in the amount of $500,000; evidence of which is to be furnished
to the City in the fonn of Certificate of Insurance,
Hold Hannless
The Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Chula Vista against and from
any and all damages to propeny or injuries to or death of any person or persons, including
property and employees or agents of the City, and shall defend, indemnify and save hannless the
City, its officers, agents and employees, for any and all claims, demands, suits, actions, or
proceedings of any kind or nature including worker's compensations claims, of or by anyone
whomsoever, in any way resulting from or arising out of the negligent or intentional acts, errors
or omissions of the Contractor or any of its officers, agents, or employees,
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~'ft. Page 11
f
alYOF
QIUI.A VISfA
~
All applicable State or Federal taxes shall be considered as included in the amount paid for the
various items of work. The Contractor shall be responsible for payment of such taxes to the
proper governmental authority.
Licenses and Pennits
Contractors and all sulx:ontractors shall be licensed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter
9 of Division III of the Business and Professions Code, State of California.
Unless otherwise specified, the Contractor shall procure all licenses and pennits, pay all charges
and fees, and give all notices necessary and incidental to the due and lawful prosecution of work.
The Contractor and subcontractors shall have a valid City of Chula Vista Business License.
Traffic and Access
All traffic control shall be done in accordance with the latest revised edition of the Manual of
Traffic Controls prepared by the California Department of Transportation~ The latest revised
edition of the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook (WATCH) may be used as a handy reference
for compliance but does not excuse the Contractor from not complying with the State manual,
Measurement of Quantities for Unit Price Work
The estimate of the quantities of work to be done and materials to be furnished are approximate
only, being given as a basis for the comparison of bids, and the City of Chula Vista does not
expressly or by implication agree that the actual amount of work will correspond therewith, but
reserves the right to increase or decrease by any amount or to ornit portions of the work that may
be deemed necessary or expedient by the City with no adjusttnent in unit price.
Di~uted Work
ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES
No suit shall be brought arising out of this Contract, against the City, unless a claim has first been
presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula
Vista in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1,34 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, as same may be 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 the City, Contractor shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose
of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Contract.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~I~ Page 12
---
~...% '"
OIY Of
0iUIA VJSrA
SPECIAL PROVISIONS - TECHNICAL
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
The Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction 1994 commonly referred to as the
"Greenbook" , San Diego Regional Supplement Amendments, Chula Vista Standard Special
Provisions (1995, and Chula Vista Construction Standards (1995), all as adopted by the City of
Chula Vista are made a part of the specification.
TRIMMING OF TREES
Trimming shall include the removal of all dead, broken and diseased branches and the removal
of crossovers and suckers.
Skirts shall be raised to nine feet over sidewalks, 11 feet over curbs and 13 feet over traffic lanes.
Fmal cuts shall be made without leaving a stub and in a marmer that favors the earliest covering
of the wound in callus growth, This requires that the wood area be as small as practicable, that
the cut be reasonably flush with the shoulder ring area, and the cambium tissues at the edge of the
cut be alive and healthy. All cuts shall be made cleanly with no ragged edges.
All work complete shall be logged on fonns provided. These logs shall be submitted to the Tree
Maintenance Supervisor on a weekly basis no later than 1:00 p.m. on Friday of that work week.
The Contractor shall submit a work schedule for trees to be trimmed one week in advance of
acb.Jal trimming. City shall approve the work schedule proposed prior to commencing of work.
The Supervisor (Foreman) shall be on sight once a day to inspect the work and meet with theTree
MaintenanCe Supervisor.
TrimmÜ1g - Performance Standards
1.
2. "Cocos Palms" shall be raised up to two mature fronds and a immature center bundle, All
seed pods and flower bundles shall be removed whether alive or dead. All loose and semi-
tight butt plateS shall be removed up to the point where forcefully dislodging them could tear
or otherwise damage trunk tissue.
----- ----~---------~~---------------~-~-----
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~!~ Page 13
---
~
atY Of
GIUIA VISfA
Trimming - Performance Standards (Continued)
3. "Eucalwtns Trees" shall have their crowns reduced in height and in diameter. This shall be
accomplished through drop-crotch pruning main leaders to laterals that are close to % of the
diameter of the cut being made. Limbs shall be cut back to laterals that are at least % the size
of the parent limb. Topping of trees is not pennitted.
4. "Pine Trees" with a single main trunk, such as Canary Island Pines, shall not have their
central leader reduced in height by any means. The top % of the tree shall be thinned to
reduce weight and provide light and air penetration only. The lower % of the tree shall be
thinned by removing small branches at the point of the attachment and shortening long
overweight limbs to a lateral large enough to assume the tenninal role.
5. "Pine Trees" which do not have a single main trunk, such as Stone Pines, may be reduced in
height by drop-crotch or thinning cuts. Large lateral branches and scaffold limbs shall be
reduced % or more in length and thinned without stripping of secondary branches.
6. "Podoca{¡)I1.~ Trees" shall have every limb thinned and tipped back to reduce weight and open
the crown.
7. "Coral Trees" shall be headed back as near to last year's cuts as possible while retaining some
foliage.
8, "Broadleaf" includes all other trees not specifically named elsewhere. They shall have end
weight reduced and crowns opened by means of thinning cuts to a lateral large enough to
assume the terminal role.
DISPOSAL
All trimmings shaH become the responsibility of the Contractor, Trimmings shall be legally
disposed of at an authorized disposal site. Cost and disposal site for trimmings shall be indicated
on ~id Fonn. No other compensation will be allowed.
t ,.
PUBliC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY
Public convenience and safety shall be in accordance with Section 7-10 of the Standard
Specifications for Public Works Construction and Section 7-10 and Part 1, Special Provisions,
General. Parlång on the street may be eliminated if needed for trimming. Property owners shall
be notified 48 hours in advance. The Contractor shall obtain prior approval of parking restrictions
from the City Engineer. Parking prohibition and driveway closures shall only be from 7 a.m. to
6 p.m. and shall not exceed three consecutive days in lengtq.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~'f? Page 14
-111..-
~
OIY Of
ŒllJIA VISTA
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY (Continued)
Compensation for perfonning all the work necessary to comply with these provisions is considered
included in the contract unit price paid for the various kinds of trees and no additional
compensation shall be made.
WAGE RATES
Contractors are obligated only to pay minimum wage to persons employed by them for work
under this contract,
TRAFFIC CONTROL
The Contractor shall prepare and submit traffic control plans for approval to Traffic Engineering
for work to be done adjacent to any street. The traffic control plans submitted by the Contractor
shall confonn to "Manual of Traffic Controls," latest edition.
The Contractor is responsible for maintaining all traffic control devices and confonning to the
State of California Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones and
the City of Chula Vista Standards and Specifications.
Full compensation for the preparation of traffic control plans, and perfonning all the work
necessary to comply with these provisions is considered included in the contract unit prices paid
for various items of work, and no additional compensation is allowed.
CHANGE IN QUANTITY OF WORK
The City shall have the option to increase or decrease the unit quantity of any items of work in
the bid by any amount without a change in contract unit prices.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~!f? Page 15
7(".
01Y Of
CHUIA VlSTA
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Please Read Carefully
These ProvtslonsAre a Part of Your Bid and a'!Y Contract Awarded
The bidder agrees that:
A. Bidder bas carefully examined the specifications, and all provisions relating to the item(s) to be tiunished or the
worl< to be done; understands the meaning, intent, snd requirements; and
B. Bidder will enter into a written con1ract snd furnish the item(s) or complete the work in the time specified, and
in strict conformity with the City of Chnla Vista specifications for the prices quoted.
Note: Bidder is defined as sny indMduaI, partnership, or corporation submittin~id, Pr.:¡:saI. or quotation in response
to a request for bid, request fur proposal, or request for quotation. A bi may be referred to as consultant,
con1ractor, supplier, or vendor.
1. Priceo:
AD prices and notations must be in ink or typewritten. Mistakes may be crossed out snd _tions typed or written
with ink adjacent to the error, _tions must be initialed in ink by the person signing the bid.
Bids shall indicate the unit price extended to indicate the total price for each item bid. Any difference between the unit
price comoct1y extended and the total price shown for all items bid shaIJ be resolved in favor of the unit prices, except
when the bidder clearly indicates that the total price for all items bid is based on con.sideration of being awarded the
entire lot snd that sn adjUS1ment of the total price is being made in consideration of receiving the entire bid.
2, Bidder's Security:
A bid deposit in sn amount equal to at least 10% of the bid may be required as a bid security by the City. The bid
security may only be in cash, a cashier's check, a certified check made payable to the City of Chula Vista, or a bidder's
bond. If the bid security is a bond, it shall be executed by a surety insurer authorized to issue surety bonds in the State
of California. The bid security must be executed by the bidder snd enclosed with the bid proposal in the sealed bid
envelope.
3. Items Offered:
If the item offered bas a 1rade name, bnmd and/or catalog number, such shaIJ be stated in the bid. If the bidder proposes
to furnish sn item of a manufacturer or vendor other than that mentioned on the face hereof, bidder must specify maker,
brand, quality, catalog number, or other 1rade designation. Unless such is noted on the bid form, it will be deemed that
the item offered is that designated even though the bid may state "or equal".
4. Brand Names:
Whenever reference to a specific brand name is made, it is intended to describe a component that bas been determined
to best meet operational, perfonnsnce, or reliability standards of the City, thereby incoq>orating these standards by
reference within the specifications. An equivalent ("or equal") may be offered by the bidder, subject to evaluation snd
acceptance by the City. It is the bidder's responsibility to provide, at bidder's expense, samples, test data, or other
documentation the City may require to fully evaluate snd determine acceptability of sn offered substitute. The City
reserves the sole right to ~ect a substituted component that will not meet or exceed City standards.
5, Samples:
Samples may be required for bid evaluation and testing purposes. Bidders shaIJ agree to provide samples within forty-
eight (48) hours upon request snd at no additional cost to the City.
6. Verify Quotations:
Prices shall be verified prior to bid submittal, as withdrawal or _lion may not be pennitted after the bid bas been
opened.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~{f? Page 16
---
-
cnYOf
CHUlA VISrA
7. Finn Prices:
Prices on bid shall be firm prices not subject to escalation. In the event the specifications provide for escalation, the
maximwn limit shall be shown, or the bid shall not be considered. In the event of a decline in market price below a
price bid, the City of Chula Vista shall receive the benefit of such decline.
8. ModJIIc:ation or Withdrawal of BId.:
Bids may be modified or withdrawn by written or facsimile notice received prior to the exact hour and date specified
for receipt of bid. A bid may also be withdrawn in person by a bidder, or bidder's authorized representative, prior to
the exact hour and date set for receipt of bids. Telephone withdrawals are not permitted.
9. Late Blda and Modifications or Withdrawals:
(a) Bids and modifications of bids (or withdrawals thereof, if this solicitation is advertised) received at the office
designated in Ihe solicitation after Ihe exact hour and date specified for receipt will not be considered unless: (1)
Ihey are received before award is made; J!!I!! either (2) Ihey are sent by registered, express, or certified mail for
which an official dated post office stamp (postmark) on the original mail receipt has been obtained and it is
determined by the City that the late receipt was due solely to delay in the mails for which the bidder was not
responsible; or (3) if submitted by mail, it is determined by the City that the late receipt was due solely to
mishandling by the City after receipt, provided that timely receipt is established upon examination of an
appropriate date or time stamp (if any) or of olher documentary evidence of receipt (if readily available) within
the control of the City or of the Post Office selVÌltg it. However, a modification of a successful bid which makes
the terms of the bid more favorable to Ihe City will be considered at any time it is received and may thereafter be
"""""ted.
(b) The time ofmailing of late bids submitted by registered, express, or certified mail shall be deemed to be the last
minute of the date shown in the postmark on the mail receipt or registered mail wrapper, unless the bidder
furnishes evidence ftom the post office station of mailing which establishes an earlier time.
10. MiItaIœ in Bid:
(a) If the bidder discovers a mistake in bid prior to Ihe hour and date specified for receipt of bid, bidder may correct
Ihe mistake by modifying or wilhdrawing the bid in accordance with Items 8 and 9 above.
(b) If within seventy-two hours of the bid closing and prior to the issuance of a purchase order or a contract, Ihe
apparent low and best bidder discovers a mistake in bid of a serions and significant nature which is unfavorable
to bidder, bidder may request consideration be given to modifying the bid if it remains the lowest bid or to
withdrawal oflhe bid iflhe result oflhe com:ction of the mistake makes another bidder lowest and best bidder.
The mistake must be evident and provable. The right is reserved by the City to reject any and all requests for
COI1"eCÛoIl of mistakes in bids received after the hour and date of the bid closing. The decision of the Purchasing
Agent is final as regards """""lance or rejection of requests for com:ction of bids.
(c) A mistake in bid cannot be considered once a purchase order or contract is issued.
11. Signature:
All bids shall be signed and the title and firm name indicated. A bid by a corporation shall be signed by an authorized
officer, employee or agent wilh his or her title.
12. No BIds:
If no bid is to be submitted, the bid should be marked ~No Bid" and returned to maintain the bidder's name in Ihe
vendor file fur future solicitations. A letter or postcard may be submitted. If a bidder fails to respond to a reasonable
number of bids without returning a ~No Bid", the Purchasing Agent reserves the right to delete the bidder from the
vendor file for future solicitations.
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~!f? Page 17
~
em Of
0ilJIA VISrA
13. Alternative Proposals:
To be respousive to die bid. bidder must submit a proposaJ diat meets all specific bid requirements. Once bidder has
proposed a product which is responsive to die specification, bidder may include widi die bid any additional proposals
or a1ternative products that bidder believes can meet or exceed die Ci1y's requirements and that may offer additional
advantages, beœfits, or cost savings. The City reserves die right to evaluate, and accept or reject, such alternatives as
diough diey were part of die original specifications widiout advertising for further bids, when in die best interests of
die City. Any awards so made will be based on operational and cost analysis consideraiions diat would resuIt in the
optimum economic advantage to die City.
14. Confidential Information:
Any infunnation deemed confidential or proprietsIy should be clearly identified by the bidder as such. It may then be
protected and 1rea!ed wiIh confidentiali1y only to die extent pennitted by state law. Otherwise the information shall be
consideIed a public record. Information or data submitted with a bid will not be returned.
15. Quality:
Unless otherwise required in the specifications, all goods furnished shall be new and unused.
Hi. litigation Warranty:
The biddet, by bidding, wanants that bidder is not cummtJy involved in litigation or arbitration concerning the materials
or bidder's petfonnance concerning the same or similar material or service to be supplied pursuant to this contract of
specification, and that 00 judgments or awards have been made against bidder on the basis of bidder's ped'ormance in
supplying or installing the same or similar material or service, unless such fact is disclosed to the Ci1y in the bid.
Disclosure will not disqualifY the bidder. The Ci1y reserves the right to evaluate bids on the basis of die facts
surrounding such litigation or arbittation and to reqWre bidder to furnish die Ci1y wiIh a surety bond executed by a
surety company authorized to do business in the State of California and approved by The City of Chula Vista in a sum
equal to one hUDdred perœnt (100%) of die conttact price conditional on die faithfnl petformance by bidder of the
conttact in die event die bid is awarded to bidder, notwithstanding die litigation or arbittation.
17. RoyaItIes, Licenses and Patents:
Unless otherwise specified, the bidder shall pay all royalties, license and patent f_. The bidder wlllrants that the
materials to be supplied do not iDftinge any patent, trademadc or copyright and further agrees to defend any and all suits,
actions and claims for infringement that are brought against die City, and to defend. indemnify and hold harmless the
City ftom all loss or damages, whether general, exemplmy or punitive, as a resuIt of any actual or claimed inftingement
asserted against the City, the bidder or those furnishing material to bidder pursuant to this contract.
18. Performance Standards:
Perfonnance ofworl< and acceptabili1y of equipment or materials supplied pursuant to any contract or award shall be
to die satisfaction of die Ci1y.
19. Warranties:
(a) All maœrial, labor or equipment provided onder the contract shall be wammted by bidder and/or manufacturer for
at least twelve (12) months after acceptance by City. Greater wamm1y protection will be accepted. Lesser
wamm1y protection must be indicated by bidder on die bid proposaJ as an exception.
(b) Bidder shall be consideœd primarily responsible to the City for all wamm1y service, parts and labor applicable to
die goods or equipment provided by bidder under this bid or award, irrespective of whether bidder is an agent,
broker, fabricator or manufacturer's dealer. Bidder shall be responsible for ensuring that wuranty work is
performed at allocal agency or facili1y convenient to Ci1y and that services, parts and labor are available and
provided to meet Ci1y's schedules and deadlines. Ci1y may require bidder to post a ped'ormance bond after
BID NO. 14-97/98 .s. 'ft.. Page 18
---
~~'10~
mvOF
CHlJIA VISTA
contract awan! to guarantee perfonnanœ of these obligations. Bidder may establish a service contract with a local
agency satisfactory to City to meet this obligation ifbidder does not ordinarily provide warranty service.
20. Addenda:
The effect of all addenda to the bid documents sha1l be considered in the bid, and said addenda sha1l be made part of
die bid documents and sball be œtumed with 1hem. Before submitting a bid, each bidder sha1l ascertain whether or not
any addeDda have been issued, and failure to cover in this bid any such addenda issued may render the bid invalid and
result in its rejection.
21. Spec:IIIeations to prevan:
The detailed requirements of the specifications shall sup~ any conflicting reference in these General Provisions
which are in conflict therewith.
22. Tues:
The City willfumish Exemption CertificaœsforFederalExcise Tax. The City is liable for State, City and County Sales
Taxes. Do not inclnde this tax in die amount bid. However, tax is to be added by the successfiù bidder to the net
amount invoiced. All or any portion of die City Sales Tax returned to the City will be considered in the evalnation of
bids.
23. Confliet of Interest:
No City employee or elected or appointed member of City government, or member of the employee's immediate family,
may participate directly or indirectly in the procurement process pertaining to this bid if they:
( a) Have a fioanciaI interest or other personal interest which is incompatible with the proper discharge of their official
duties in die public interest or would tend to impair their independence, judgment or action in the performance of
their official duties.
(b) Are œgotiating for or have an arrangement concerning prospective employment with bidder. The bidder warrants
to 1be best ofhis Imowledge that 1be submission ofdle bid will not create such conflict of interest. In the event such
a conflict occors, the bidder is to report it immediately to the Purchasing Agent. For breach or violation of this
warranty, the City sha1l have the right to annul this contract without liability at its discretion, and bidder may be
subject to damages and/or debarment or suspension.
24. Gratnltlea:
The City may rescind 1be right of die bidder to proceed under this agreement if it is found that gratuities in the form of
œtertaioment, gifts, or otherwise are offered or given by the bidder, or any agent or representative of the bidder, to any
oI&eroremployee of the City with the intent of influencing award of this agreement or securing favorable lreaunent
with respect to performance of this agreement.
25. FùthfalPerform8Dee Bond:
The soccessful bidder may be requiœd to fumish 1be City with a surety bond conditioned upon the faithful perfonnance
of1becontra<:t. This may take the fonnof a bond executed by a surety company authorized to do business in the State
of California and approved by the City of Chula Vista, an endorsed Certificate of Deposit, or a money order or a
certified check drawn on a solvent bauk. The bond shan be in a sum equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the
amount of1be contract price. Such bond or deposit sha1l be forfeited to the City in the event that bidder receiving the
contract sha1l fail or refuse to fuIfiIl1he requirements and all terms and conditions of the contract.
26. Inanrpee:
Should wOO< be requiœd on City premises, bidder sha1l provide proof of Iiability and property damage insurance prior
10 pafunnmce of duties. Coverage sha1l be ftom a company au1horized to transact business in the State of California
andsball be in an amountnot1ess than SI,OOO,OOO combined single limit (CSL), unless o1herwise specified. The City
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~I~ Page 19
---
QIY OF
CHUIA VISfA
of ChuJa Vista shall be named as an additional insured and thirty (30) days notice of cancellation shall be indicated.
Worker's Compensation coverage for each employee engaged in work on City premises is reqnired. Bidder is solely
responsible for all insurance premium payments.
27. Indemnification:
Bidder sha1I deti:nd, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers, employees, and
agents, from and against all claims for damages, liability, and expenses (including attorney's fees) arising out of this
&greema1t and/or bidder's perfOlIWlDCe hereunder, except as to such damages, liability, and expenses due to the sole
negligence or wiIIfuI acts of the City, its officers, employees or agents.
28. AwardofContrad:
(a) Bids will be analyzed and award will be made to the lowest, respousive and responsible bidder whose bid conforms
to the solicitation and whose bid is considered to be most advantageous to the City, price and other factors
considered. factors to be considered. may include, but are not limited to: bidder's past performance, total unit cost,
economic cost analysis, life cycle costs, warranty and quality, maintenance cost, durability, the operational
requjrements of the City and any other factors which will result in the optimum economic benefit to the City.
(b) The City reserves the right to reject any item or items, to waive informalities, tecImicaI defects and minor
ineguJarities in bids received; and to select the bid(s) deemed most advantageous to the City. The City will,
however, consider bids submitted on an "all or notbing" basis if the bid is clearly designated as such.
(c) The City reserves the right to award one or more con1racts on the bids submitted, either by award of all items to
one bidder or by award of separate items or groups of items to various bidders as the interests of the City may
require, unless the bidder clearly specifies otherwise in his bid.
(d) For the purpose ofevalnating bids for multiple awards, the sum of $ 100.00 is considered to be the administrative
cost to the City for issuing and administering each con1ract awarded under this solicitation, and individual awards
will be made for the items and combinations of items which resuIt in the lowest aggregate price to the City,
including such administrative cost.
(e) Upon acceptance by the City of Chnla VISta, the solicitation, bid, proposal, or price quotation and a purchase order
issued to the successful bidder shall be deemed to result in a binding con1ract incorporating those terms and these
General Provisions without further action required by either party. Items are to be furnished as described in the
bid and in strict confomrity with aD instructions, conditions, specifications, and provisions in the complete contract,
as defined by this clause 28 or any related integrated agreement.
29. Bid Results:
To obtain bid results, either (I) attend bid opening or (2) provide a self-addressed, stamped envelope referencing bid
nmnber, and bid tabuIation will be mailed to you upon verification of extensions or (3) visit the Purchasing Department
no sooner than three woIking days a1Ier bid opening to review bid tabulation. Due to time constraints, bid results cannot
be given out over the phone.
30. Protests:
Protests by unsuccessfuI bidders to the selection for award sha1I be submitted in writing to the Purchasing Agent no later
than ten (10) calendar days a1Ier award recommendation. The unsuccessful bidder shall have the right to appear at the
City Council to protest any award to be confirmed by CounciL Failure to submit a timely written protest to the
Purchasing Agent shall bar consideration of such protest.
31. Documentation:
Due to the time consIraiuts 1hat affect contract performance, all reqnired documents, certificates of insurance and bonds
shall be provided to the City within ten (10) calendar days following award or date of request by City, whichever is
BID NO. 14-97/98 ~If? Page 20
---
;:'-1f.!l ~
01Y Of
ŒIUIA VISTA
later. Any failure to comply may result in bid being declared non-responsive and rejected, and at City's option the bid
bond may be attached for damages suffered.
32. DiIeounta:
(a) Prompt payment discounts offered for payment within less than fifteen (15) calendar days will not be considered
in evaluating bids for awsrd. However, offered discounts of less than 15 days will be taken if payment is made
within the discount period, even thongh not considered in the evaluation of bids.
(b) In connection with any discount offered, time will be computed ftom date of delivery and acceptance, or invoice
receipt, wbicbever is later. Payment is deemed to be made for the purpose of earning the discount on the date of
mailing of the City check.
(c) Any discount offered other than for prompt payment should be included in the net price quoted and not included
in separate terms. In the event this is not done, the City reserves the right to accept the discount offered and adjust
prices accordingly on the Purchase Order.
33. Seller'. InvoIce:
Invoi<:es sball be prepared and submitted in duplicate to address shown on the Purchase Order. Separate invoices are
required for each Purchase Order. Invoices shall contain the following infoxmation: Purchase Order number, item
number, description of supplies or services, sizes, unit of measure, quantity, unit price and extended totals.
34. Inapeetioa...d Aeœptanœ:
InspecIion and acceptance will be at destination unless specified otherwise, and will be made by the City department
shown in !be shipping address or other duly authorized representative of the City. Until delivery and acceptance, and
after any rejection, risk ofloss will be on the bidder unless loss results ftom negligence of the City.
35. Lost...d Damaged Shipments:
Risk ofloss or damage to items prior to the time of their receipt and acceptance by the City is upon the bidder. The
City has no obligation to accept damaged shipments and reserves the right to return at the bidder's expense damaged
merchandise even though the damage was not apparent or discovered until after receipt of the items.
36, Late ShIp_nts:
Bidder is responsible to notitYthe City department receiving the items and the Purchasing Agent of any late or delayed
shipments. The City reserves the right to cancel all or any part of an order if the shipment is not made as promised.
37. Doc:ameat Ownenbip:
(a) All technical documents and records originated or prepared pursuant 10 this contract, including papers, reports,
charts, md computer programs, sball be delivered to and become the exclusive property of the City and may be
copyrighted by the City. Bidder assigns all copyrights to City by undertaking this agreement
(b) All inventions, discoveries, enhancements, changes, or improvements of computer programs developed pursuant
to this contract shall be the property of the City, and all patents or copyrights shall be assigned to City, unless
otherwise agreed. Bidder agrees that City may make modifications to computer software furnished by bidder
without inftinging bidder's copyright or any license granted to City.
38. Advertbements, Product Eadonemeata:
City employees and agencies or organizations fimded by the City of Chula Vista are prohibited from making
endorsements, either implied or direct, of commercial products or services without written approval of the City
Manag¡:r. No bidder may represent that the City of ChuIa VISta has endorsed their product or service without the
Purchasing Agenfs prior written approval.
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~!~ Page 21
-,
C1Y Of
CHUIA VISfA
39. City Provision. to PrevaH:
Except as indicated in the specifications, the City's standard General Provisions shall govern any contract award. Any
staodanI tenns and condiIions of bidder submitted by bidder shall not be acceptable to City unless expressly agreed to
by the City. The City reserves the right to reject bidder's bid as non-responsive, to consider the bid without bidder's
standard tenns and conditions, or to require bidder to delete reference to such as a condition of evaluation or award of
the bid. If, after award of contract, bidder (contract vendor) shaH provide materials to services accompanied by new
or additiœaI standard tenns or conditions, they too shall be considered void and City may require deletion as a further
condition of perfurmance by vendor. To the extent not otherwise provided for by the contract documents, the California
Commercial Code shall apply.
40. Invalid Provisions:
In the event that anyone or more of the provisions of this agreement shall be found to be invalid, illegal or
unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall remain in effect and be enforceable.
41. Amendments and ModJfieatIons:
The Purchasing Ap may at any time, by written order, and without notice to the sureties, 1ll/l1<e a modification to the
contract or an amendment to the Purchase Order, within the general scope of this contract, in (I) quantity of materials
or service, whether more or less; (2) drawings, designs, or specifications, where the supplies to be furnished are to be
specially manufactured for the City; (3) method of shipment or packing; and (4) place of delivery. If any such change
causes an increase or decrease in the cost or the time required for the performance of this contract, an equitable
a¡ljustment shall be made by written modification of the contract or amendment to the Purchase Order. Any claim by
the bidder for adjustment under this clause must be asserted within 30 calendar days ftom the notification date.
42. AJlSignment:
Vendor shall not assign or delegate duties or responsibilities under this agreement, in whole or in part, without prior
written approval of the City.
43. Disputes:
Except as otherwise provided in these provisions, any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this contract
which is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the Purchasing Agent, who shall reduce this decision to
writing and mail a copy to the bidder. The decision of the Purchasing Agent shall be final and conclusive, unless bidder
requests mediation within ten (10) calendar days. Pending final decision of a dispute, the bidder shall proceed diligently
with the perfonnance of the contract and in accordance with the Purchasing Agent's decision.
44. Mediation:
Should an unresolved dispute arise out of this agreement, any party may request that it be submitted to mediation. The
parties shall meet in mediation within thirty (30) days of a request. The mediator shall be agreed to by the mediating
parties; in the absence of an agreement, the parties shall each submit one name IÌom mediators listed by either the
American Arbitration Association, the California State Board of Mediation and Conciliation, or other agreed-upon
service. The mediator shall be selected by a "blindfold" process.
The cost of mediation shall be borne equally by both parties. Neither party shall be deemed the prevailing party. No
party shall be pennitted to file a legaI action without first meeting in mediation and making a good faith attempt to reach
a mediated settlement The mediation process, once commenced by a meeting with the mediator, shall last until
agreement is reached by the parties but not more than sixty (60) days, unless the maximum time is extended by both
parties.
45, Lawful PeÏformanee:
Vendor shall abide by all FederaI, State and Local Laws, Ordinances, Regulations, and Statutes as may be related to
i
BID NO, 14-97/98 ~I~ Page 22
7.!f~ ;-
CIIY OF
ætJIA VISTA
the performance of duties under this agreement. In addition, all applicable permits and licenses required shall be
obtained by the vendor, at vendor's sole expense.
46. Annual Appropriation of Funds:
Multi-year tenn supply and service contracts and leases are subject to annual appropriation of funds by the City
Council. Payments made under term contracts and leases are considered items of cum:nt expense. Purchase Orders
are funded whœ issued; therefore, they are cmrent expense items and are not subject to any subsequent appropriation
offunds.
In the event sufficient funds are not appropriated for the payment of lease payments or anticipated term contract
payments required to be paid in the next occurring lease or contract term, and if no funds are legally available from
other SOIIICCS, the lease or con1ract may be terminated at the end of the original term or renewal term and the City shall
not be obligated to make further payments beyond the then current original or renewal term. The City will provide
notice of its inability to continue the lease or contract at such time as the Purchasing Agent is aware of the non-
appropriation of funds. However, failure to notify does not renew the tenn of the lease or contract The City has no
monetaJy obligation in event of tennination or reduction of a term contract since such contracts represent estimated
quantities and are not funded as a contract except to the extent of the Purchase Orders issued.
47. Extension:
When in the City's best interest, this agreement may be extended on a daily, month-to-month, or annual basis by
mntuaI agœemœt ofboth parties. Services and/or materials received under and extension shall be in accordance with
pricing, terms, and conditions, as described herein.
48, Debarment:
The PmclIasing Agent may recommend to the City Council that the person or business be debarred from consideration
for awanl of con1nIcts. The period of debarment will be contingent upon the severity of cause. Causes for debarment
include:
(a) Conviction under state or federal statutes of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of
recmds, receiving stolen property, or other offense indicating a lack of business integrity or business honesty which
directly affects responsibility as a City bidder.
(b) VIOlation of con1ract provisions wbich is regarded by the Purcbasing Agent to be so serious as to justify debarment
action, including:
(1) Deliberate failure without good cause to perform in accordance with the specifications or within the time
limit provided in the contract; or
(2) A n:cent œcord offailure to perform or of unsatisfactory performance in accordance with the terms of one
or more contracts;
(3) Two or more claims of computatioual error in bid submission within a two year period.
(c) Debarment by another governmental entity.
(d) Any other cause the PmclIasing Agent deems to be so serions and compelling as to affect responsibi1ity as a City
bidder.
A bidder may be permanently debarred for the following causes:
(1) Collusion in bidding.
(2) Conviction for commission of a criminal offense as an incident to obtaining or attempting to obtain a
cœtract or subcontnct with the City of Chula Vista or in the performance of such contract or subcontract.
(3) Conviction under State or Federal antitrust statotes arising out of the submission of bids or proposals.
BID NO. 14-97/98 .s-{~ Page 23
< no -
CI1Y OF
CHUIA VJSrA
49, Termination:
The City may temJinaIe this ag¡eemeot and be relieved of any consideration to the vendor should vendor fail to perform
in the manner n:quired. Furthermore, the City may temJinaIe this agreement for any reason without penalty upon giving
1hirty (30) days written notice to the vendor. In the event of termination, the full extent of City liability shall be limited
to an equitable adjustment and payment for materials and/or services authorized by and received to the satisfaction of
the City prior to tennination.
50. Venue:
This ag¡eemeot sbaIl be govemed by and interpreted according to the laws of the State of California, and venue for any
proceeding shall be in the County of San Diego.
DETAILED LISTING OF
BID ITEMS
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date ~
ITEM TITLE: Resolution / 9 ¿13~aiVing immaterial defect, accepting bids, and
awarding contract for the construction of "Main Street Improvements, From
1DI~1riID Bool<=l to ~ "" City of C1w1, V.". CA (ST96I)"
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: City Manager J::::f( 1 (4/5ths Vote: Yes - No _XJ
-7
At 2:00 p.m. on May 13, 1998, in Conference Room 2 in the Public Services Building, the
Director of Public Works received sealed bids for the construction of "Main Street Improvements,
From Industrial Boulevard to Broadway, in the City of Chula Vista, CA (ST961)". The general
scope of the project involves the widening and reconstruction of Main Street from Industrial
Boulevard to Broadway. The work to be done includes removal and disposal of existing
improvements, excavation and grading, placement of asphalt concrete pavement and crushed
aggregate base, installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk, driveways, bus pads, reconstruction of
cross-gutters, medians with colored concrete slabwork, pedestrian ramps, various drainage
structures, adjustment of sewer manholes and survey monuments, traffic signal modifications,
street lighting, striping and signing, landscaping and irrigation, traffic control, the installation of
survey monuments and all other miscellaneous items of work as shown on the plans.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve resolution:
1. Waiving the immaterial defect (Not submitting signed addendum as part of the bid proposal
at the bid opening).
2. Accepting bids and awarding a contract for the construction of "Main Street
Improvements, From Industrial Boulevard to Broadway, in the City of Chula Vista, CA
(ST961)" to Wier Construction Corporation, Escondido, in the amount of $2,800,178.40.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Funding for this project was budgeted during the FY 1996-97 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
budget process with an additional appropriation in the FY 1997-98 budget. The project was
budgeted to facilitate the widening and reconstruction of Main Street from Industrial Boulevard
to Broadway. As the development or redevelopment of parcels along Main Street occurred,
various portions of Main Street have been widened and improved. This project will reconstruct,
improve, and widen Main Street to its ultimate location between the project limits.
9-/
Page 2, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
The project was advertised for a period of six weeks, and 22 sets of plans were purchased. Bids
were received from five contractors, and they are as follows:
Contractor Bid Amount
1. Wier Construction, Escondido, CA $2,800,178.40
2. EI Cajon Grading, Corporation, Lakeside, CA $2,887,806.00
3. West Coast General Corporation, Lakeside, CA $2,898,214.35
4. Sim J. Harris Company, San Diego, CA $2,989,820.00
5. Archer Western Contractors, CA $2,995,270.00
The low bid by Wier Construction Corporation, Escondido, is below the Engineer's estimate of
$3,111,735.00 by $311,556.60 or by 10%. The engineer's estimate was based on bids received for
similar projects in the last several years. It is our opinion that staff received excellent bids for the
project.
Sometime during the advertising of the project, staff realized that very few contractors had picked
up plans for this project, so staff initiated inquiries to ascertain why there was a lukewarm
response to the project. Staff was informed by some contractors that CAL TRANS also had a
large scale project for which the bid opening date coincided with that of this project and that a lot
of the contractors would have been bidding this project if not for that conflict. Staff decided to
move the bid opening date and issued an addendum notifying all contractors to that effect. Staff
requested that contractors submit the addendum as part of their bid proposal, the omission of
which could be grounds for rejection of the bid proposal. This is a standard requirement that
basically serves as an acknowledgment of the receipt of the addendum. On the bid opening date
Wier Construction submitted their bid without attaching the addendum. When later notified that
it was missing, they submitted it immediately. Staff discussed this omission with the City Attorney
and determined that the omission was insignificant and did not give the contractor any advantage
in the bidding process. Staff, therefore, recommends that Council consider the omission an
immaterial defect and waive this requirement as a condition of awarding the contract.
Due to the location and complexity of the work to be done on this project, staff included three
conditions to be met by the successful bidder prior to the award of the contract. They are as
follows:
1. Completion of at least 2 previous projects (within the past 5 years) in a commercial district
of a value of at least 50% of their bid for this contract;
2, Completion of at least 1 additional project (within the past 5 years) of this nature
(widening of existing roadway) of a value of at least 50% of their bid for this contract;
3. Completion of at least 3 previous projects (which may include 1 of 2 above) in San Diego
County, regardless of size.
9-.,2
Page 3, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
The contractor has recently completed projects for the Warner Springs High School District, the
City of Oceanside, and the California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS). Some of
these projects were of the same size and complexity as this project and required almost the same
level of coordination. Staff has contacted these agencies, and their recommendations and
comments about the contractor have been excellent. Staff has also verified the contractor's license
and other qualifications and determined that they are in good order. The low bidder has
satisfactorily met all the requirements. Staff, therefore, recommends awarding the contract to
Wier Construction Corporation, Escondido.
Proiect Restrictions
Since this project is being done in a predominantly commercial area, there were restrictions put
on the contractor that mitigates the impact of the construction on business activities. Staff will
coordinate the work with the contractor to hold the disruption during the construction period to
a minimum. The contractor is required to hold a project meeting prior to the commencement of
the project. The intention of this meeting is to brief area merchants on the construction schedule
and to receive and answer questions from them regarding the flow of traffic and other impacts the
project would have on business activity. Other restrictions in the contract include keeping access
and parking to businesses open at all times, maintaining both lanes of through traffic at all times
no matter what side of the street is under construction, and working on one part of the street at
a time. The contractor is required to complete the construction before the expiration of two
hundred and eighty working days.
Disclosure Statement
A copy of the contractor's Disclosure Statement is attached.
PrevailinlJ" Wa~e Statement:
This project is primarily funded through the Transportation Sales Tax Funds (TRANSNET).
Based on the current project funding guidelines, no prevailing wage requirements were necessary
as a part of the bid documents.
Environmental Status
A Negative Declaration (IS-96-03) pursuant to CEQA requirements was adopted by Council on
January 20, 1998 by Resolution Nos. 1 8879A & 18879B (See attached Exhibit B). The impacts
of the project also required that staff obtain permits from the u.s. Army Corps of Engineers
(NW26A Nationwide Permit), California Department of Fish and Game (Streambed Alteration
Agreement), City of San Diego (Resource Protection Ordinance Permit) and from the California
Coastal Commission (Coastal Development Permit). All these permits were approved prior to
advertising of the project.
Status of Ri lht-of-Wa,y Acquisition
To facilitate the construction of this project, it was necessary to acquire right-of-way from 17
properties. Most of the property owners involved granted the needed right-of-way to the City for
a mutually agreed just compensation based on current market values determined by the appraisers.
9-3
Page 4, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
To date staff has reached agreements with the owners of 12 of the properties. The remaining 5
properties are owned by 3 companies with whom staff has reached an impasse in negotiations,
On January 20, 1998 Council approved Resolution Nos. 18879A & 18879B (See attached Exhibit
B) authorizing staff to proceed with condemnation proceedings by outside counsel to acquire the
remaining properties. The proceedings have begun and the City will have the order of possession
prior to the commencement of construction activities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Financial Statement
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Contract Amount $2,800,178.40
B. Contingencies (Approximately 20%) $574,821.60
C. Right-Of-Way Acquisition $150,000.00
D. Water Facilities Relocation (Payment to Sweetwater District) $80,000.00
E. Materials and Lab Testing $30,000.00
F. Staff Costs (Construction Inspection, Traffic Inspection, Surveying $195,000.00
and Design)
TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $3,830,000.00
FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Main Street Improvements Acct. (ST-961) - including funds $4,889,668.00
available for other projects
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION $4,889,668.00
Funding for this project was originally budgeted in the FY 96-97 CIP budget process with an
additional appropriation in the FY 97-98 CIP budget. The original scope and budgeting of the
project provided for the installation of street improvements on Broadway south of Main Street.
However, during the course of the design of the project, it was determined that acquisition of
needed right-of-way within that region of the project would present a significant challenge,
resulting in the delay of the construction of the entire project. The scope was revised to end this
phase of the project at just southerly of the intersection of Main Street and Broadway, and the
remaining portion to be improved in a later phase of the improvement. Thus, resulting in the
significant balance of funds in the project accounts. The project as budgeted will utilize
Transportation Sales Tax Funds (TRANSNET). The balance currently shown as not needed for
9-Y
Page S, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
construction will be transferred back to the TRANSNET Fund after completion of construction
and utilized for other projects as directed by Council. Upon completion of the project, only
routine City maintenance, mainly street sweeping and landscape maintenance will be required.
This project will also generate State Partnership Funds in the amount ofc 24 % of the fmal
construction costs (approximately $672,000). Partnership Funds can be used for a similar
purpose, i.e.. street construction or overlay program.
'"""" A ~ C_', ".""'" --) ~-J~~/J-Q~
Exhibit: B - Resolution Nos. 18879A & 18879B H, \HOME\ENGtNEER \AGENDA \ST961.AC
9-5
RESOLUTION NO. 19.tJ;1CJ
-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA WAIVING IMMATERIAL DEFECT,
ACCEPTING BIDS, AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF "MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM
INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD TO BROADWAY, IN THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA, CA. (ST961) "
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on May 13, 1998, in Conference Room
2 in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works
received the following five sealed bids for the construction of
"Main Street Improvements, From Industrial Boulevard to Broadway,
in the City of Chula Vista, CA (ST961)"; and
Contractor Bid Amount
1. Wier Construction, Escondido, CA $2,800,178.40
2. El Cajon Grading, Corporation, $2,887,806.00
Lakeside, CA
3. West Coast General Corporation, $2,898,214.35
Lakeside, CA
4. Sim J. Harris Company, San Diego, CA $2,989,820.00
5. Archer Western Contractors, CA $2,995,270.00
WHEREAS, the low bid by Wier Construction Corporation,
Escondido, is below the Engineer's estimate of $3,111,735.00 by
$311,556.60 or by 10%, which estimate was based on bids received
for similar projects in the last several years; and
WHEREAS, on the bid opening date Wier Construction
submitted their bid without attaching the addendum and when later
notified that it was missing, they submitted it immediately; and
WHEREAS, staff discussed this omission with the City
Attorney and determined that the omission was insignificant and did
not give the contractor any advantage in the bidding process and
recommends that Council consider the omission an immaterial defect
and waive this requirement as a condition of awarding the contract;
and
WHEREAS, this project is primarily funded through the
Transportation Sales Tax Funds (TRANSNET) and based on the current
project funding guidelines, no prevailing wage requirements were
necessary as a part of the bid documents; and
1
9/~
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration (IS-96-03) pursuant to
CEQA requirements was adopted by Council on January 20, 1998 by
Resolution Nos.18879A & 18879B and the impacts of the project also
required that we obtain permits from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (NW26A Nationwide Permit), California Department of Fish
and Game (Streambed Alteration Agreement), City of San Diego
(Resource Protection Ordinance Permit) and from the California
Coastal Commission (Coastal Development Permit) and all these
permits were approved prior to advertising of the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby waive the immaterial defect (not
submitting signed addendum as part of the bid proposal at the bid
opening).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
accept bids and award the contract for the construction of "Main
Street Improvements, From Industrial Boulevard to Broadway, in the
city of Chula vista, Ca. (ST961)" to Wier Construction Corporation,
Escondido, in the amount of $2,800,178.40.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
contract for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director
of Public Works
C:\rB\..inBt.bid
2
1-¡!?- j/)
18 THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
18 You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions,
on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official
bodies. The following infonnalion must be di~closed:
. 1. List the names of all 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.
~y~
.
III
2. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more
18 than 10% of the shares in the corporati or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
..
.. 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 organizanon 0 as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the truSt
II
It
II 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any m ber of the City Staff, Boards. Commissions.
Committees, and Council within the past twelve month? Yes - No If yes, please indicate person(s).
.. 5 Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent Contractors who you
have assigned to represent you before the Ci~~ matter.
..
II
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in t~regate. contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the current
II or preceding election pertod? Yes - No - If yes. state which Council members(s):
II Date: l') - 13-qi . . . (NOTE: Attached additional pages
.------
Signature of ntractor/ Ap!,licam
II \ I 1--f>Î r £Y'<:}L-rliOD ~
Print or type name of ContractOr/Applicant
.. " Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, co-parrnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal arganization,
corporation, estare, trust, receiver, rynd/care, this and any ather county, city or country, city municipality, district, or ather palirical
.. subdivision, or any other group or combinarian acting as a unit. 9 -~
34
RESOW-liON NO. 13379A :ffC¡
-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVEDECLARATION ON IS-
96-D3; DETERMINING AND DECLARING THE PUBLIC
NECESSITY TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN RIGHTS-OF-WAY AT 1725
BROADWAY. 1689-1E95 BROADWAY. AND 2681 MAIN
STREET FDR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE "MAIN STREET
WIDENING FROM INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD TO BROADWAY"
PROJECT (ST-961); AND AUTHORIZING THE COMMENCEMENT
of.CoNDEMNATloN PROCEEDINGS BY OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO
ACQUIRE SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY
WHEREAS. the City desires to widen Main Street from Industrial Boulevard to
Broadway (Project No. "ST-961.) ("Project") in order to accommodate increased traffic flows
and for other public .health. safë'tyand welfare purposes; and
WHEREAS. in ordér to complete the Project. the City must acquire certain rights-of-
way over property located at 1725 Broadway, 1689-1695 Broadway and 2681 Main Street
as more particularly described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference (collectively, the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, j1;¡,accordance with Government Code Section 7267.2. the City made an
offer to acquire tmr site at 2681 Main Street (APN: 622-140-36) to Mr. Heriberto Gutierrez;
the site at 1689 and 1695 Broadway (APN: 622-112-13 and 14) to Abode Development
Corporation; and the site at 1725 Broadway (APN: 629-Dl D-04 and 1 D) to Thrifty Oil
Company; all such offers were based on appraisals and each such offer constitutes just
compensation for the .property to which each pertains; and
WHEREAS, the City has been unable to reachterms forthe voluntary acquisition ofthe
Property in a timely fashion after good "faith efforts to do so; and
WHEREAS, in order.10 acquire the necessary interest in each of the properties which
together comprise the Pro¡i!rty, it is necessary that the City Council conduct a public hearing
on the matter of adopting a resolution of necessity to t:ommencethe eminent domain process;
and .... .
WHEREAS. pursuant to certified letters dated December 23. 1997. the owners of
record of the affected Property were duly notified of the public hearing and their right to
appear and be heard on the matter of the interest to adopt the resolution of necessity; and
WHEREAS, the owners were also informed that the adoption of the resolution of
necessity will authorize the acquisition of the necessary property rights through eminent
domain; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235
- the City properly noticed, and on January 2D, 1998. properly conducted a public hearing to
co"nsider the adoption of this Resolution; and ..
. .
'.
/
Resolution 1 BB79A
Page 2
WH::REAS, a;: such public hearing .the City Council considered all of the evidence
submined induding. all relevant staff reports, and all evidence relating to the need for the
Project and the Prop<>..rty; and
WHEREAS, thB City of Chula Vista possesses the right to acquire said Property by the
use of the power of eminent domain in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedure and
Section 1240.030 which provides that the power of eminent domain may be exercised to
acquire property for a proposed project if the following conditions are established:
A. The public interest and necessity require the project.
B. The project is planned or located in a manner that will be the most compatible
with the greatest public good and least private injury; and
C. The property sought 'to be acquired is necessary for the projeCt.
WHEREAS, the public interest and f1ecessity require .the proposed projeCt in that public
safety dic--..atesthat the City of Chu1aVista z:naintain a public road system, concrete curb and
guner, sidewalks and driveways, ~esignE!d -and constructed to accommodate traffic, health
and safety demands; and
WHEREAS, the proposed prqject is planned and located in the mannerthat will be most -
compatible with the greatest ~c good and the least private injury in that an existing
roadway is being widened and only the Property necessary for the widening is being acquired;
and
WHEREAS, the Property to be acquired as depicted on Exhibit A is necessary for the
proposed Project in that no other property is available which affords the capability for the
widening of Main Street to currently accepted traffic and engineering standards; and
\,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study was conducted pursuant to CEQA for the entire project,
consisting of.roadway and drainage improvements; and,
.~. . . .,
WHEREAS. 'the Initial Study cOllcl4cted that the project VvoulcL ~ot result in significant
environmental impacts. and. therefore. a Mitig'ated Negative Dedaration (lS-96-03) and
accompanying Mitigation Monitoring Program was prepared and issued for the appropriate
public review; and
WHEREAS. no public comments were received as part of that public review.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY FIND. RESOLVE AND
DETERMINE, BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN TWO-THIRDS OF ITS MEMBERS, AS
FOLLOWS:
1. Prooosed Use and Descriotion of Prooertv to be Acouired.
The Property, as more particularly described in the above recitals and on Exhibit
A anached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, shall be used forthe construction
of a portion of the Main Street widening project (ST-961) and related appurtenances between
:2-
Resolution 18879A
Page 3
Industria! Boulevard and Broadway (the "Project") in the City of Chula Vista. The interest in
eaèt1 of the properties comprising the Property is an easement.
2. Findinas Related to Necessity and other Public Uses.
A. Publiè Interest and Necessitv Reauire the Project.
The public interest, convenience and necessity of the City of Chula Vista, and
its residents, require the installation and maintenance of the Project to provide for safe and
proper traffic flows through this section of Main Street. Generally accepted traffic and
engineering standards dictate that Main Street be widened 10 a 102 foot wide right-of-way.
B. Proiect Planned and Located for Greatest Public Good and Least Private
Injurv.
The Project has been planned and located to be most compatible with the
greatest public good and t!1e least private injury in that an existing roadway is being widened
and only the +Jroperty nåcessary for the widening land related appurtenanCes) is being
acquired. Any other feasible plan or location would cause even more significant impacts on
private property-
C. Propertv to be Acouired is Necessary for the Project.
"" .'" .
The hoperty is necessary for the Project because it underlies the property over
which 1he widened roadway, curb, guner and sidewalk must be located.
D. Public Use Property.
To the extïmt that any portion of the Property includes property previously
dedicated to public use, the taking by the City as to any such portion is either for a compatible
public use consistent with and authorized by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.510, or
for a more necessary public use consistent with and authorized by Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1240.610. - - "-
~
E. Other Evidence Incoroorated Hereir1.
Any and all other evidence in support of the findings, above, presented in the
written staff Teport or otherwise at the public hearing considering this Resolution is hereby
incorporated "herein by this reference.
3. Voluntarv Offer to Purchase the Property Made.
As set forth in the recitals, above, offers to purchase the necessary easements
in. the. properties comprising the Property for an amount constituting just compensation. as
determined by ¡m -appraisal. have been made to the owners of record of such properties,
respectively, in accordance with Government Code Section 7267.2.
:3
ResolUtion 18879A
Page 4
4. Authori'v to Proceed in Eminent Domain Granted.
The City of Chula Vista, as the designated responsible lead agency for the
Project, and all appropriate officers, representatives and attorneys, are hereby authorized and
empowered, as provided by and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the
ConstitUtion of California, Government Code, Code of Civil Procedure, the City Charter and
Municipal Code related to eminent domain, to acquire the necessary easements to the
Property by condemnation is the name of the City of Chula Vista to be used for the municipal
purpose of enhancing a transportation facility, and for Health and Safety ¡:Jurposes, as and
to that end, it is authorized and directed to commence and to prosecute an action or actions
in eminent domain for the purpos!" of acquiring easements to the Property.
5. ~ Retention of 'Eminent Domain Counsel' AUthorized.
The City Attorney for the City of Chula Vista, as General Counsel, and the law
firm of Daley & Heft, special attorneys for City are hereby authorized to prepare and prosecUte
in the name of the City, such proceeding or proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction
thereof, as are necessary for such acquisition; and to prepare and file such pleadings,
documents, 'briefs, and other instruments and to make such arguments and to take such
actions as may be necessary in the opinion of said attorneys to acquire for said City the said
real property. Said attorneys are specifically authorized to' take whatever steps and/or
procedures are available to them under the Eminent Domain Law of the State of California ~
including but not limited to C~ff of Civil Procedure, Title 7, Chapters 1-12, Sections
1230.01D~1273.050}' .
6. Appropriation of Necessarv Proceeds.
The proceeds required to fund the Project have previously been appropriated and
can be used for purposes of acquiring the Property and paying Daley & Heft in connection
therewith.
\..
7. Issues of Uroencv, Exoediencv Desirabilitv and Necessitv.
~
The acquisition of the Propè,f1Y is urgently need~d to e.xpediently complete the
Project and is manifestly desirable and essential tothe declared objects'ohhe City. The City
of Chula Vista has urgent need for the immediate possession of such Property, and the
designated attorneys on behalf of the City are authorized and directed to secure an order of
court authorizing the City of Chula Vista to take possession of said Property at the earliest
possible date.
8. CEQA Compliance.
The City Council hereby adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration 15-96-03 forthe
Project, and Monitoring Program prepared in connection therewith, as required bý' the'
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA ").' . ., "
If
ResolUtion 1 BB79A
Page 5
9-- IndependenT Judoment.
-- -- -'- . - - - ---
The City hereby finds and determines that their approval of eminent domain
pro¡:eedings. adoptions of this ResolUtion and related findings made in ¡:onne¡:tion therewith.
were the product of their exercise of their independent review and judgment.
Presented by Approved as to form by
þL11~
~hn ?- Uppin --
ubh:: Works DIrector
-- .. . --
. --
h
-- . --.-
--. ---- - .---
--. . -- -.. ----_..
--
',/'"
'u-
----
--
\,
~
.
-
-- -- - -- p- -- - -
--. -- --. ---.- -.-- .. ._------ - ..-. --.
-_.. -- - - .-.--.-
---.- - -- - -- -.-- -.- - ---- -
:5
ReSDlutiDr1 1 B879A
Page 5
BAS1S DF BEARINGS
ReS J5149
I
1
, " ' I
" 1 1
'\ ' -J " 1 1
'\ " 1 1
\1 "A¡:¡C:-11 2
.' --I
1\ 529-01 D,; D
'\ 1
1
J
I
1
-
I 5 IS . 7
-
A¡¡;:AS: CURVl /JA11\: C1
@ = 527.155, fi=50.00'
(31 =10:31.565, ¡¡:¿L1A:11~-l5-DJ
0 = E9B.B6S, 7=77..35'
L=22.7D'
1725 3::-oadwey !D> =í3LB.925f"
EXHIBIT " 1\ "
,-. f'j¡DJECT mE f5!9õ1
-"'~
- Bt .DO< mIE5 I[ IC4 mLI: CITY OF CHULA VlSïA p¡¡¡p,r,¡¡¡¡¡ltto
JIJ. ¡;ro¡¡¡¡,
...r.; 1:51-3 J RIGHï-OF-WAY ACQUISITION A'!'Ii!IIù>Itt;
>-"... - MAIN SïREET CJr.J.J<PIIXI
"':I~
(ß
ReSDIU1íDn 18879A
Page 7
-
--, -- "-,-' ,- -
. ".
I //" - ~~'~~
' I~~~-:-~; 1n;: iD!lDl'lllr., iL()/'lll~ U_:d":::" ~G :
h 1& r= . 'c,", -::-?.îõ1 ~.s-~ ?I?C..=-L N~",:r:>. ,-
i\ ::;¡ -' ,---~ -', p22-"'-13&KND~~LC:AI.DI,:> ,
¡ ! e. pEN ¡-æ.. 16;: õ}EõI.[~;S, :
i\"'.:::1S 0::: ?:::A?!J\'G:::'-"' =-",?:_-,:~ ~'S¡p,-\l:,v- '-""--'--'---.--"""1"'
: ~r,-~-",~-" -\- -"'"-'-",;;"-'::::~-~:-~"-~'==..!..!:l_~:J-':
I, ..0;:, _:>J~g ffi'" . ,'r cox CIa..:. :.r-- ¿B, 1.B2 DO.; Ol-~, i
D ~~- -,:'"-- ?A::IFF'. =:lL A."R 2:3,198£ DO:! 8>-1572".5, I
, " ¿' /;~: -"""-"W"='5'","""" '
\ , . Ù - 522-112- K ~'D ;¡::COiID-:D DDC, CDUill :::
. , - ~ ,wn "" -'" """'" "'" m "
\ I, ,_?-","'". -, ,1 ¡¡70, :>h'DWN ON 1H;: Þ.ss::ssœs !'].A;, lr3>
" : .--- lNiDi!UIJI:JN E imttay .DIri'BttNi .IN!) !l<3
\ t'J --\- , .. - ". , EN SI'.:JWN ;;;:¡¡rem.
~ --- SM-'
\- -.-- 1'-- 522-112-13,14 ; "
-I.:>.
~ r I
' 1
1\ ~;:¿ I
' , 7. "'- ?t.;:¡CE:L J PA¡¡C::L
1\ ':-.'ì;. -c-,';.).-, 1 I 2
"\ ' \ ., -'f;--..?;::'i-"::~-~ ¡ ¡ ~
I, ---- "t\' , N
'.. . ---- ,,"'~-'o'~-: -I -
.,."" \ ~~--- '__;:;0 ~ Ó, 51 -
'.<".' - v" '".: => J
\--ø \.- '~~" ...,1 N
I, ",,;,' -." , æ::ï' ~
~ : ~~I ~
\O : RDW I
I . - ,,~., "" : '~usmON I
;-c-- ~.\ % : 1181.29'
L ~i'-~- --~~.~:.:.:: / / ~(~-
' .,é.\ ,;L=-- : ')~ //// '/:/;?', ~
L " "~ ¿ 't",-,7 '" j I
' \ 1\ ,. ,":, ~
' ,...., , -'" I ~:1)'
__L_- JVl..~ - \~-~-1;3~~__~~~T ~_I_-1£D.SLl_J :
I'L :..j\' 1;5 J7Z3) ""!'"" 77 -.1/
,,~ 72,"!d " (330'). iè$ !511.9 --.
I \ ' !I!J.'S.,.' 333.19' ~,~lH\~ 10
, I. \. \.2~.o'L D¡¡=¡ ß-S2ë31
! .; , \ .to:::.:o Wo.Y £,1*5,
ì ".. \ ~I"""- ,- "",'"
¡?OW ¡;R.\IrclJ TO in;: Sï¡,¡¡: ?A¡¡CE:L.2= g¡;O 5r
p=: D.!F- i-1i? 5i¡,¡¡: h<;;H\','¡'Y \ . ïDï AL PIC= 23455F
¡;¡Er:DiID-:D Wo.Y -I. 1£34 13 -O54AC
IDe: f 2£1..<.9 IN 3K 295,~;;57 \
--- __":~B~::~5_1!,:,:,aaw" ---.. - eX HI B IT" ^ " ..: ...--
':'...- ~ 1""1 1'RD.E1:T f1!I ~1
-- '" "'--=-.c >
,c."" - m:'.af< ISE5 ¡¡: D:I. 1TTlI: CITY OF CHU!.A VISTA PiEIW!iD B!; .JO: z;a
._- OO!:~HISIE';,; f" RIGHT-Or-WAY ACQUISITION-_- A~i!".:
MAIN STRttl "'" ~ It."CŒ
-
7
R~solutio" 1 B879A
Page 8
I
Ii:. r:o? IJ,j,P ; 0 1 \
-- Ny,' !:D? W!' 59E~ 1 -- ,
. C ;1j15 to;>. ~,¡: :z2" ' - \
M....t"IN - N5:D3"2ôW l¡So,¡¡¿v,' S3II.. 'I ~T, ,
---1-- - -:;--l- ~---_. - - ---:- - ---- -\-:--
J ~D' , I \ ?
;" 11' I ' D
I : , -- I '~
'//////'/// ////1 " " " " " " " " '.: ,,:, :----- \, ~
I l' -- --'-'. 'I \:...1.
... - .:25" ~ I
1"-- iJ"",1<:1o/T I [:"'li7" .);:>
~ l;æ ~~ HI~HWAYI ' v.l1¡:S- 32-21 1 -- \
¡a Æ.::/pu No--
lIID-ia"'S1 I ' \
I ,JlJIi:. iï 19aO A?N L.33'
N ,-- -- 522-1LD-35 ~ :
I ~ I ;-:
In 7'~
J r~' ,/-" 150.DO' DO ---- ~I ti ~
A?N lmi ~ / ,
522-14~ -- ~I~ / .. ::
i51",,@ 1~=¡¡=- 7 I' =-
"l"'¡\~ I@U~ I I ~
I I -
I I ¡¡:
t I ::::
- I /" \. '"
, '=
I -- /..,.., 33'-
~1D~ ""
DiEtO'SDUT!8!N iAlLWAY :
-"'---,-"" ro,iEt"Dlì-:t.~.19œ - .
IN BK -G2, "lK
~~
25£1 MaiD S~~~~ ~ I
=--> 1AREA:(~~ I
,-XUIBI- "^ "
- ... ""'"-~-- L... I I' I" 'ffiDJECI FIll fST951
J)RoQO I!:: -1I:IIE5 Œ ro. mŒ: CITY or CHULA VISîA PlS'oIIED 11'1, JO: IZtIIüJ
~ 19-3.- -- RIGHFOF-WAY ACQUISITION '-"OIl:>/¡ ) 11'1'
~~ - c;;¡ S!!S MAJN SBill ' II"'.J. I<>"I:D)
-----.--'-----"."---"-'--,--.. -..-- --------,
<?;
Resolution 18879A
Page 9
-
PASSED, APPROVED. and ADC>PTED by the City Counc:ii of the City of Chula Vista.
Caìifornia, this 20th day of January, 199B, by thè following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers: Moot, Padilla, Rindone, Salas and Horton
NAYES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABST AIN:-. Councilmembers: None
S=~
ATTEST:
~tl~
Beverly !o.. Authelet, City Clerk
~ '~~'"
STATE OF CALIFDRNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CrTY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Autheleti City Clerk oithe City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 18879A was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting of the ChuJa Vista City Council held on the 20th day of January,
1998.
Executed this 20th day of..January, 1998.
~
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT IS i .
CORRECT COpy OF THE ORIGfNAL ON ~mq,~
FILE IN TH OFFICE."
ATTEST:
BE(ù
BY: Ù
-
q
- - .THIS PAGE BLANK
,<""
-.
'"
.
-
/¡}
Resolution 1887913
Page 2
Section, 240.03q which provides that the power of eminent domain may be exercised to
acquire property for. a proposed project if the following conditions are established:
A. The public interest and necessity require the project.
E. The project is planned or located in a manner that will be the most compatible
with thE greatest public good and least private injury; and
C. The property soug,ht to be acquired is necessary for the project.
WHEREAS, the public interest and necessity require the proposed project in that public
safety dictates that the City of Chula Vista maintain a public road system, concrete curb and
gutter, sidewalks and drive'ways, designed and constructed to accommodate traffic, health
and safety demands; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project is planned and located in the manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury in that an existing
roadway is being widened and only the Property necessary for the widening is being acquired;
and
WHEREAS, the Property to be acquired as depicted on "Exhibit A is necessary for the
- proposed Project in that no other property is available which affords the capability for the
widening of Main Street to curr~ jy accepted traffic and engineering standards; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study was conducted pursuant to CEOA for the entire project,
consisting of roadway and drainage improvements; and ..
WHEREAS, the Initial Study concluded that the project would not result in significant
environmental impacts, and, therefore, a Mitigated' Negative Declaration (lS-96-03) and
accompanying Mitigation Monitoring Program was prepared and issued for the appropriate
public review; and . . "\ .., . '.'
WHE~EAS, no public comments ~re received -a~ part o(that .public review.
.
NDW, THEREFDRÉ, THE CITY DF DHUlA VJSTA DDES HEREBY FIND, RESDlVE AND
DETERMINE, BY. A VDTE DF NDT, lESS THAN:rwD-THIRDS DF ITS MEMBERS, AS
FDllDWS:' . .
1. PrODosed Use and DescriDtion of ProDertv to be Acouired.
The Property, as more particularly described in the above-recitàls and on Exhibit
A attached hereto and incorporated herein 'by this reference, shall be used for the .construction
of a portion ofthe Main Street widening project (ST-961) and related appurtenances between
Industrial Boulevard and Broadway (the "Project") in .the City of Chula Vista. ~he. interest in
'!ach of the propert!es comprisi~g the Property is an easement.
2. Findinas Related to Necessitv and other Public Uses.
A. Public Interest and Necessitv Require the Project.
.' .
¡;¿
RESOLU"TION NO. í 8879B
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON IS-
96-03; DETERMINING AND DECLARING THE PUBLIC
NECESSITY TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN RIGHTS-OF-WAY AT 2451
FAIVRE STREET FOR TH:: CONSTRUCTION OF THE "MAIN
STREET WIDENING FROM INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD TO
BROADWAY" PROJECT (ST-961); AND AUTHORIZING THE
COMMENCEMENT OF CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS BY
OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO ACQUIRE SAID RIGHT-Of-WAY
WHEREAS, the City desires to widen Main Street from Industrial Boulevard to
Broadway (Project No. ST-961) ("Project") in order to accommodate increased traffic flows
and for other public health, safety and welfare purposes; and
WHEREAS, in order to complete the Project, the City must acquire certain rights-of-
way over property located at 2451 Faivre Street, as more particularly described on Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (collectively, the ~Property"); and
WH::REAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 7267.2, the City made an
offer to acquire the site at 2451 Faivre Street (APN: 622-190-15) to H. G. Fenton Material
Company; said offer was based on appraisals and constitutes just compensation for ò
property; and '/"
WHEREAS, the City has been unable to reach terms for the voluntary acquisition of the
Property in a timely fashion after good faith efforts to do so; and
WHEREAS, in order to acquire the necessary interest in the property, it is necessary
that the City Council conduct a public hearing on the matter of adopting a resolution of
necessity to commence the eminent domain,process; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to a certified letter dated December 23,1997. the owner of
record of the affected Pro¡j'èrty was duly notified of the public hearing and their righno appear
and be heard on the matt~rof the interest to adopt 1he resolU!ion of necessity; and
- .
WHEREAS, the owner was also informed that the adoption of the resolUtion of
necessity will authorize the acquisition of the necessary property rights through eminent
domain; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235
the City properly noticed, and on January 20,1998, properly conducted a public hearing to
consider th~ adoption of this Resolution; and
~'WHEREAS, at such public hearing the' City Cou~cil considered all of the evidr 'ò
submitted including all relevant staff reports, and all evidence relating to the need for ...e
- Project and the Property; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista possesses the right to acquire said Property by the
use of the power of eminent domain in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedure and
II
Resolution 188798
Page 3
-
The public interest, convenience and necessity of the City of Chula Vista, and
its ~esidents, require the installation and maintenance of the Project to provide for safe and
proper traffic flows through this section of Main Street. Generally accepted traffic and
engineering standards dictate that Main Street be widened to a 102 foot wide right-of-way.
B. Proiect Planned and Located for Greatest Public Good and Least Private
Injury.
The Project has been planned and located to be most compatible with the
greatest public good and the least private injury in that an existing roadway is being widened
and only the pro1?erty necessary for the widening (and reiated appurtenances) is being
acquired. Any other feasible plan or location would cause even more significant impacts on
.private property. The selection ofthestorm drain alignment over"the property will cause the
least pñvate damage b~~ause it is located at the easterly property line and it isnot.partitioning
that parcel, -
C. Property to be Acquired is Necessary for the Proiect.
The Property is necessary for the Project because it underlies the property over
which the widened roadway, curb. gutter and sidewalk must be located. The property is
necessary for the Project because it underlies the property over which a drainage system
needs to be installed to drain run-off from the Project into the otay River.
-,:.. .
D. -\~. Public Use Prooertv.
To the extent that any portion of the Property includes property previously
dedicated to public use; thetaking -by the City as to any such portion is either for a compatible
public use consistent with and authorized by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.510, or
for a more necessary public use consistent with and authorized by Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1240.610.
"
- Eo- Other Evidence Incoroorated Herein.
Any and alIibther evidence in support of the findings, above, presented in the
wrinen staff report or otherwise at the public heari'ng considering this Resolution is hereby
incorporat€d herein by this reference. -- -
3. Voluntary Offer to Purchase the Prooerty Made.
As set forth in the recitals, above, offers to purchase the necessary easements
in the property for an amount constituting just compensation, as determined by an appraisal,
has been made to the owner of record of such property. in accordance with Government Code
Section 7267.2.
4. Authoritv to Proceed in Eminent Domain Granted.
- The City of Chula Vista, as the designated responsible lead agency for the
Project, and all appropriate officers, representatives and anorneys, are hereby authorized and
empowered, as provided by and in accordance with the appiicable provisions of the"
Constitution of California. Government Code, Code of Civil Procedure. the City Charter and
/~
ResolUtion 188793
Page 4
Municipal Code related to emin~ml domain. to acquire the necessary easements to the
Property by condèmnation is the name of the City of Chula Vista to be used for the municipal
purpose of enhancing a transportation facility. and for Health and Safety purposes, as and
to that end. it is aUthorized and directed to commence and to prosecUte an action or actions
in eminent domain for the purpose of acquiring easements to the Property.
5. Retention of Eminent Domain Counsel AUthorized.
The City Attorney for the City of Chula Vista. as General Counsel, and the law
firm of Daley & Heft. special attorneys ior City are hereby aUthorized to prepare and prosecute
in the name of the City. such proceeding or -proceedings in the proper court having juriSdiction
thereof, as are necessary for such acquisition; and to prepare and file such pleadings,
documents. briefs, and other instruments and to make such arguments and to take such
ar:tions as may be necessary in the opinion of said attomeys to acquire for said City the said
real property. Said attorneys are specifically aUthorized to take whatever steps and/or
procedures are available to them under the Eminent Domain Law of the State of California
including bUt not limited to Code of Civil Procedure. Title 7, Chapters 1-12. Ser:tions
1230.01 0-1273.050J.
5. Appropriation of Necessarv Proceeds.
The proceeds required toiund the Projer:t have previously been appropriated and
can be used for purposes of ac9j1wng the Property and paying Daley & Heft in connection
therewith. \' .
7. Issues of Uroency' Expediency Desirability and Necessity.
The acquisition of the Property is urgently needed to expediently complete the
Projer:t and is manifestly desirable and essential to the declared objects of the City. The City
of Chula Vista has urgent need for the immediate possession of such Property. and the
designated attorneys on behalf of the City are aUthorized an'd direr:ted to secure an order of
court aUthorizing the City of Chula Vista 1.0 take possèssion of said Property at the earliest
possible date. ~
.
8. CEOA Compliance. .
The City Council hereby adopts Mitigated Negative DeclarationIS-95-03 forthe
Project. and Monitoring Program prepared in conner:tion therewith. as required by the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA ftJ.
/1/
Resolu!ion i 3379B
Page 6
-'---
§> .
'i= ' U)
êb <
~ :=>
~ 8"
n fMl~::; ~~
l
:A11':-,,:, -< j!; ~ NSS'"D6'27"W STREET -< J<:
- - --~-¡-----""1<- - - - - ---- - - -~--- -,,--
// / // / / / /
1 ~
II'LY 16 fa" Di LDì 7, /I.;,:> 10 '
:;RANJ!D 10 1;£ tIIY Di CHUIA ===--
I'5TA FDR '>,=, PUñ?rE3 Æ? ?RD".D3ED..,..--"
/00: !Œ91-D6¡":EÞ, ŒC 2.3.1991. ~~ I R
5/.',1 a ',,"-,
: I : 'i..,
IAN V.:dENi tDR A LlIE Di PD'..3 WITH W6 c::L--' ~
1:;RANJ!D'1D 3D~£, ñil:DRD-::D IM!IL 211,j91, IN ..-t=j '"
131: 6DE, ?;;221 Di D:::I5 D5E AWNG 1;£ .- ~: ~
II'Gi LIt£. or LDì E, 'NO WIDlrl or I:A5õMENi , ,
u-.,IIÐJ, : ~
, I -'
:!lAC})]' ~; I: . TI..Æ)!'j}' 7/ ;: ~
a ill ~Lrn-
522-130-21 ~ ,,<,.,. 522-'30-15 ~ (ffi'
3A5!S I Dr E::ARINGS R I
¡¡oS j51~3 R
n 1=10:22-190-18
U R=-190-1.
/U.S. 8 )
NSS-17'D2"W L.J-/
I"'UITITIn I'- 'll1II1!¡;>-'èl'- E67.!!B' -.:..1
",,¡¡] I;!I~~ \'Ijj@ß~ . (EõD') ';'
~ jþ]~OO ~
.
AN IA5::MEN) i'DR 1!AIliIDAD RJ;;1íI-Di-WAY
IXS!5 DN APO;¡¡IDN Di lDi 7 !.II? 10,
~ i!'I' JOHN W, Al5JIN, R::Wi¡O-::D
AU;;L5T 30,195 IN BK QE,?~ 3m; Di
DorlClA!. R::cœI:S, 2~51 !'aivre S=ee~
11üf.,A TO 3~ ACQUIRED= 9020,85 Sf I
0.207 AC J
FXHIBIT " A " -
=-- '" --...-- - PRD.ECT FlU: f5!%1
DOAWN 1<:: -UI< ICI6IE to. m~ cm OF CHULA VISïA PP?AIS> 1<:: =: ¡¡:¡¡¡¡¡¡
1><1:: '...3 1 RIGHT-Of-WAY ACQUISITION 4"PRIWED 1<::
11-1t-ö7 0; 1 SH'<- MAIN SïREEï ~ OOJI!
/{¡
Resolution 18879B
Page S
-
9. IndependenT Judomenl.
The City hereby finds and determines that their approval of eminent domain
proc::eedings. adoptions of this Resolution and related findings made in c::onnec::tion therewith,
were thB produc::t of their exerc::ise of their independent review and judgment.
Presented by Approved 2S to form by
Q-e~ K'~
~M. Kaheny {)
y Attorney
. >",
',<
~,
~
.
...-' - '-'.-
-
---
/~
ResDIUtiDn 18879B
Page 7
-
, PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPïED by the City Council Df the City Df Chula Vista,
California, this 20th day Df January, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES: CDunc:ilmembers: Padilla, RindDne, Salas and HDrtDn
NAYES: CDuncilmembers: NDne
ABSENT: CDuncilmembers: NDne
A£STAIN:" CDuncilmembers: MDDt
..1¿/A h 'f /k¡¡;;
Shirley HD Dn, MaYDr
ATTEST:
~¡¿tJ ~~
BeverlylA. AUthelet, City Clerk
'/'"
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ,J
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CrTY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A, Authelet, 'City Clerk Df the City Df Chula Vista, California, dD hereby certify that
the foregoing ResDIUtiDn ND. 18879B was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting Df the Chula Vista City Council held Dn the 20th day Df January,
1998. "
ExecUted this 20th day Df ~nuary, 1998.
T , E .O"!;OO1NC¡ INSTRUMENT IS A ;§d.ÇJ.,~
CORRECT COpy 0, Ti": DRIGINAL ON
FILE IN THIS 0;,1(;0
A::r~Sï: CL,";:J " ,-; {J (:-, - ,19~
BcV"RLYf' þ,~rTH:õ,-"T, CiTY CLùRlC
BY'\cI- ii. \.J." J;;
, '-m , i", <, " .:JfêF"\¡':)~'
-
/7
THIS PAGE BLANK
.. -
-
-
~
.
/r¡(
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /tJ
-
Meeting Date: Jnne 9. 1998
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 98-15: Consideration of an amendment to the
Otay Ranch Phase 2 Resource Management Plan to add lands in the Proctor
Valley Parcel to the Conveyance Schedule area.
RESOLUTION: / 9 tl31dopting the Fifth Addendum to the Final Second-
Tier Environmental Impact Report (FEIR 95-01) for the Otay Ranch SPA
One Plan and approving an amendment to the Otay Ranch Phase 2 Resource
Management Plan adding the "Keystone" parcels to the Conveyance Schedule.
SUBMITTED BY: D"_ofPI_, ~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ ~ /7 \ 4/5 Vote: (Yes- NoX)
The Otay Ranch Company has applied to amend the Conveyance Schedule in the Phase 2 Resource
Management Plan (RMP 2) to add open space and preserve land they currently own in the central
Proctor Valley Parcel to the first conveyance for SPA One. The applicant is proposing that this land
be conveyed to the Preserve Owner/Manager (PaM) with their first final "B" Map which is
anticipated to be approved in July, 1998. Staff is recommending additional lands identified in the
Phase I Resource Management Plan as "Keystone" parcels be added to the Conveyance Schedule
to address concerns of other property owners within the Otay Ranch
The Environmental Review Coordinator detennined that revisions to the SPA One EIR Findings of
Fact were necessary in order to amend the Conveyance Schedule. Staff has prepared an Addendum
to the SPA One EIR revising the Findings to approve the Conveyance Schedule amendment adding
the "Keystone" parcels. All ofthe "Keystone" parcels are of high biological value and the Phase I
RMP indicates that first priority shall be given to these high quality resources. The RPM 1 indicates
it is to the publics' benefit to have these parcels conveyed as early as possible in the development
process. The Addendum and Findings are attached for City Council consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt the Fifth Addendum to the Final Second-Tier Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR 95-01) for the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan and approve the amendment to the Otay
Ranch Phase 2 Resource Management Plan adding the "Keystone" parcels to the Conveyance
Schedule for SPA One.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission considered the RMP 2 Amendment at their March 11 and May 13, 1998
meetings. The Commission adopted Resolution PCM 98-15 (6-0-1 Aguilar) recommending that the
JtJ -/
Page 2, Item: ~
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
City Council approve the amendment to the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan adding the
"Keystone" parcels to the Conveyance Schedule for SPA One. In addition, the Commission
recommended that the Estate of Mary Patrick lands east of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
ownership in the Proctor Valley Parcel be added to the Conveyance Schedule if the land met the
biological criteria as a "Keystone" parcel.
BACKGROUND:
The Phase I Resource Management Plan (RMP I) was approved concurrently with the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) in October, 1993. The goal of the RMP
I is the establishment of an open space system that will become a permanent management preserve
dedicated to the protection and enhancement ofthe multiple resources present on Otay Ranch. The
RMP I identifies the conceptual Open Space Preserve boundaries and required further refinement
of those boundaries in the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (RMP 2). The RMP 2 implements
the RMP I and was approved concurrently with the Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan for
development of the fust 1,000 acres located within Villages One and Five. The GDP/SRP required
the County of San Diego to approve three sections of the RMP 2, which included the Conveyance
Schedule, the Funding Plan and the establishment of the paM. These sections were approved by
Minute Order of the Board of Supervisors on March 6, 1996.
Both RMP I and 2 contain policies which require a total of 11,375 acres of private open space land
to be conveyed to the paM for preservation. The conveyance of open space land is required by the
GDP to mitigate the approximately 9,500 acres of development. The Conveyance Schedule outlined
in the RMP 2 provides for the orderly conveyance of open space land to the paM in compliance
with the conveyance criteria established in the GDP/SRP (page 376) and the RMP I (pages 97-98
and 125).
RMP I (page 126) indicates that the goal of the Conveyance Schedule is to "maintain long-term
biological diversity and assure the survival and recovery of native species and habitats within the
Preserve". The RMP I also indicates that "protection and enhancement of biological resources shall
be the primary guiding principle behind development of the Conveyance Schedule". The RMP 2
identifies the first parcels to be conveyed to the paM based on the approved GDP conveyance
criteria and further implements the established guidelines for future conveyances. The required areas
of first conveyance are identified as the Coastal sage scrub habitat in Salt Creek and the vernal pools
on the Otay Mesa and are identified as Exhibits 14A and 14B of the RMP 2 (see Exhibit I). There
are currently 1,248 acres of land in the first conveyance parcels. These areas were selected to meet
the guidelines of the Otay Ranch GDP and the RMP I since they are "Keystone" parcels and were
considered vulnerable to development and a high quality resource immediately adjacent to
developing areas. The conveyance ofland is required concurrently with final map approval. The fust
final map is anticipated in July 1998. Final maps in SPA One will be obligated to convey
approximately 1,243 acres of land to the paM.
/¿:J-2
Page 3, Item: ~
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
As indicated above, the RMP 1 (page 97-98 and 125) outlines guidelines that identify those areas
to be conveyed early in the process but subsequent to the Salt Creek area being conveyed to the
paM. These guidelines are reiterated in the RMP 2 (page 57-58) as follows:
. First priority shall be given to conveyance of highest quality resources (such
resources may include vernal pools on Otay Mesa, Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat
in the Salt Creek area, gnatcatcher population areas in the western San Y sidro and
central Proctor Valley areas, or potential wetlands restoration areas in the Otay
Valley [depending upon the status of regional park plans and wetlands restoráfion
plans at the time Otay Valley parcels are conveyed]).
. First priority shall be given to conveyance of most vulnerable areas (i,e., those most
subject to potential or ongoing disturbance).
. Conveyance shall occur in an orderly manner beginning with an identified
"Keystone" parcels (e.g., vernal pool areas, Salt Creek area, Otay Valley, central
Proctor Valley, western San Y sidro) and proceed to the next logical block ofland.
. l\reas with restoration potential shall be conveyed early in order to begin long-t=
research and restoration activities early in the process (e.g., atay Valley, vernal pool
areas, potential Diegan coastal sage scrub/maritime succulent scrub restoration areas
north and south of the Otay Valley).
. Cumulative acreage conveyed shall be greater than or equal to the cumulative
a...,-eage of the proposed SP AlSpecific Plan development.
. General guidelines regarding in-kind mitigation and no net loss of wetlands shall be
considered in the development of the Conveyance Schedule, particularly in the
context of applicable State and Federal regulations, .(It is understood that in-kind
mitigation may not always be the preferable approach to achieve the goal of
establishing a functioning manageable Preserve.)
. Applicable State and Federal regulations regarding protection of sensitive habitat and
species shall be followed in the development of the Conveyance Schedule.
. The Preserve Owner( s )/Manager( s) shall participate in preparation of the Conveyance
Schedule.
/f)- J
Page 4, Item: ~
Meeting Date: ~
DISCUSSION:
1. Proposal
The Otay Ranch Company has applied to amend the Conveyance Schedule to add approximately 800
acres in the Proctor Valley parcel to the first conveyance. These additional lands are located north
and east of the resort site (Village 13), are cUlTently in their ownership, and meet therfirst
conveyance criteria established in the GDP and RMP 1 since the area containsgnatcatcher
population. At the rime the conveyance plan was adopted, the various Baldwin entities (Otay Ranch
LP., Baldwin Builders, Tiger Development II and Village Properties) owned all of the land within
SPA One and most of the land proposed for SPA One conveyance detailed in Exhibits 14A and 14B
of the RMP 2. The.first conveyance parcels are cUlTently owned by the Estate ofPa1rick and New
Millennium Homes. S1rict adherence to the Conveyance Schedule, as approved in the RMP 2, would
require the current owners of SPA One (Otay Ranch Company and McMillin Companies) to acquire
land from the two entities (the Estate and New Millennium). The McMillin Companies do not own
any preserve land within atay Ranch, therefore, their alt=ative to land conveyance is to pay the
in-lieu fee which is cUlTently being developed. While this option is available to the atay Ranch
Company, they believe it to be an unfair financial burden, particularly since they cUlTently own
Preserve land elsewhere on Otay Ranch.
The land proposed to be added to the first conveyance complies with the GDP and RMP 1 guidelines
since it is part of the Otay Ranch Open Space Preserve, is part of a key wildlife corridor, is
environmentally sensitive and is immediately adjacent to properties already within the San Diego
National Wildlife Refuge, atay-Sweetwater Unit which is controlled by public entities. The San
Diego National Wildlife Refuge, atay-Sweetwater Unit Planning Area consists of approximately
43,000 acres and will be managed by the US, Fish and Wildlife Service. Gnatcatchers have been
sited and mapped on the land proposed to be added to the first conveyance. The land proposed to be
conveyed is not located within the City or the City's sphere of influence, but is within the General
Plan and GDP area.
The amendment to the Conveyance Schedule will also have to be approved by the County of San
Diego. Staff met with County staffregarding this issue on February 18, 1998. They indicated that
they would have to review the proposal with the Board of Supervisors Subcommittee for Otay Ranch
on July 1, 1998. Any available updates will be presented to the Council at the public hearing.
2. Analysis
Staffhas reviewed the applicant's proposal to amend the conveyance schedule and sought input from
other affected parties. Staffhas conducted several meetings regarding this issue and the related in-
lieu fee proposal with all affected property owners, the California Department of Fish and Game,
J,tJ ~'I
Page 5, Item: ~
Meeting Date: ..fJ1!l/!l1L
the u.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the County of San Diego Department of Planning and Land
Use and Parks and Recreation.
A. Proper1;y Owner Concerns:
All Otay Ranch property owners met with the Executive Committee on November 12, 1997 to
discuss the proposed amendment to the Conveyance Schedule. The Executive Committee (formerly
known as the Policy Committee) consists of the City Manager and all department heads and was
formed during the processing of the Otay Ranch SPA One to discuss and make decisions on policy
issues. During the meeting, the McMillin Companies stated that they would be in favor of
eliminating all guidelines governing the acquisition ofland by the paM. It is their opinion that the
properties in the Preserve have essentially been preserved anyway, due to their open space
designation, regardless ofthe order in which they are conveyed. They believe that forcing priority
acquisitions would not benefit the purchasers of open space property and would not provide any
incentive for the developer to purchase and convey land over paying the in-lieu fee.
Greg Smith, one of the property owners on the Otay Ranch, was represented by his attorney at the
meeting who indicated that he was in favor of retaining the guidelines. The other property owners
have not expressed an opinion.
Staff ResDonse:
It is staffs opinion that the guidelines are necessary to ensure that the most sensitive areas will be
conveyed to the paM early in the process. The Findings of Fact for the SPA One EIR indicate that
the first conveyance will contain substantial acreage of upland scrub habitats and populations of
California gnatcatchers and cactus wrens. Early conveyance to the paM will result in earlier
monitoring and maintenance of habitat and species. Elimination of the Conveyance Schedule and
guidelines may require a new environmental impact report according to Tina Thomas, the City's
special legal counsel.
B. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Deoartment of Fish and Game
Concerns:
The Wildlife Agencies both commented on the applicant's proposal to amend the Conveyance
Schedule. Both agencies indicated awareness of the change in circumstances of land ownership on
Otay Ranch that would necessitate amendments to the Conveyance Schedule. The agencies agreed
that the amendment to the Conveyance Schedule was acceptable as long as three provisions were
addressed:
1. The guidelines established in the RMP I should still be adhered to, and all of the first
priority lands should be acquired prior to starting assemblage of the lower priority
land regardless of ownership.
,......--
/61~..>
Page 6, Item: ~
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
2. Observed cattle grazing adjacent to the SR 125 alignment, which has resulted in
degradation of vernal pool habitat, should be ceased.
3. High quality biological resource areas, such as the vernal pools on Otay Mesa and
the Salt Creek Canyon, should be conveyed into the preserve early. Biological
resource values are to be maintained by the current landowners until such time as
parcels are conveyed to the Preserve OwnerlManager.
Staff ResDonse:
Staff is in agreement with the comments received &om the Wildlife Agencies. The guidelines
established in the RMP 1 are not being amended and will be retained in order to guide future
conveyance of land to the paM. The land proposed for inclusion in the first conveyance is in
compliance with the established guidelines. High quality biological resource areas (as noted in #3)
are included in the priority guidelines, which will require them to be conveyed earlier in the process
than other open space lands. Additionally, City staff has discussed the cattle grazing issue with the
applicant. He has indicated that the rancher has been directed to relocate the cattle to a different part
of the Ranch. This will occur upon approval of the first final map. City staff has also contacted the
property owner of the subject vernal pools, New Millennium, to alert them of the problem.
C, Plam1Ïn!!: Commission Concerns:
Several concerns where raised at the March 11, 1998 Planning Commission meeting concerning the
Conveyance Schedule and its processing. The developers of SPA One (Otay Ranch and McMillin)
have complained that the limited conveyance area restrains the market for acquisition of the
conveyance area. The restraint they believe will increase the cost ofland if acquired for the Preserve.
Other potential owners (William Tuchscher and Frank Ohrmund) have also agreed with the
perspective and provided testimony at the March 11 Planning Commission meeting. The
Commission continued their public hearing and requested staff address these concerns.
Staff Resnonse:
As part of the in-lieu fee program, staff has had an appraisal of the Preserve land conducted. The
appraiser selected by the City concurs that a constrained market for conveyance land will increase
the conveyance area cost due to a lack of competition. One solution to this problem is to expand the
area in the Conveyance Plan to reflect the first priority lands listed in the RMP 1 guidelines. The
RMP 1 guidelines indicates that first priority shall be given to these highest quality resources. Those
resources are indicated as the "Keystone" parcels which are:
. vernal pools on Otay Mesa,
. Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat in the Salt Creek area,
. gnatcatcher population areas in the western San Y sidro and central Proctor Valley
areas, or
. potential wetlands restoration areas in the Otay Valley.
/?J .... ~
,- /
Page 7, Item: ~
Meeting Date: ~
Adding these lands to the Conveyance Schedule will increase the competition among the preserve
property owners and reduce the acquisition cost of the Preserve either by one of the developers or
the City with the in-lieu fee. The additional owners of Keystone parcels include: the Otay Ranch
Company, Stephen and Mary Birch Foundation, Jewels of Charity, Marian Communities and Greg
Smith. The amount ofland in the first conveyance will increase from approximately 800 acres to
over 3,400 acres. This amendment requires only the conveyance map in RMP 2 be modified to
indicated the "Keystone" parcels.
At the May 13, 1998 Planning Commission hearing, William Tuchscher requested that the
Commission consider adding approximately 320 acres ofland owned by the Estate of Mary Patrick
in the Proctor Valley Parcel to the Keystone parcels. This land is located east of the u.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service property in the Otay Ranch adjacent to the Daley Ranch area of the Sweetwater
Refuge. The Commission agreed to recommend this addition if the area qualified biologically as
Keystone parcel. The biologist who did the surveys for the RMP 2 has indicated that this area
contains habitat of a high biological value and meets the criteria for a Keystone parcel. Therefore,
staff and the Commission recommend this area be added to the Keystone parcels and the
Conveyance Schedule in the RMP 2. The Wildlife Agencies concur with this amendment
3. Conclusion
The proposal by the Otay Ranch Company to add their Proctor Valley land to the Conveyance
Schedule complies with GDP policies. However, in staff opinion, this amendment does not add
sufficient land to the Conveyance Schedule to address the concerns raised by the property owners
and developers. Therefore, staff proposes that the "Keystone" parcels be added to the Conveyance
Schedule for the following reasons:
1. The lands proposed to be added to the first conveyance parcels are all high biological
quality and early conveyance would implement guidelines identified in the RMP 1
and 2.
2. The additional land maintains the biologically sensitive as first conveyance parcels
and would also allow less sensitive portions of Salt Creek to be utilized for
university-related facilities, if desired.
3. The proposal adds land to the first conveyance and does not delete any first priority
lands. The guidelines for acquisition will remain in tact.
4. The early conveyance of these important biological resources is of public benefit.
FISCAL IMP ACT: The direct cost of processing the Conveyance Schedule amendment is covered
under the Otay Ranch Company staffmg agreement. Ultimately, the cost of acquiring the open space
/pJ-?
Page 8, Item: ~
Meeting Date: ..fJl!l/!lJL
identified in the amended conveyance schedule under the City's in-lieu fee program should be less
due to increased competition among the Preserve property owners.
Exhibits: 1r;~
1. Planning Commission Resolution and Minutes
2. Existing Exhibit 14A and 14B of Phase 2 RMP
3. Recommended Conveyance Amendment (new Exhibit 14 ofRMP 2)
4. fifth Addendum to fhe SPA One EIR 7J I' or
/¿:J~ g--
RESOLUTION NO. J9¿JJ3)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE FIFTH ADDENDUM TO
THE FINAL SECOND-TIER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (FEIR 95-01) FOR THE OTAY RANCH SPA ONE
PLAN AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE OTAY
RANCH PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
CONVEYANCE SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, on October 28, 1993, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors and the
Chula Vista City Council jointly adopted the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional
Plan (GDP/SRP), including the Otay Ranch Phase I Resource Management Plan (Phase I RMP),
governing the development of the 23,000 acre Otay Ranch project, and;
WHEREAS, the GDP and Phase I RMP require, as a condition of the development of
Otay Ranch, the phased creation of an 11,375 acre Resource Preserve to be owned and operated
by a public or quasi-public Preserve OwnerlManager, and;
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch GDP Program ErR and Findings of Fact find that the
creation of the 11,375 acre Resource Preserve mitigates identified biological impacts of the Otay
Ranch project, including cumulative biological impacts, and;
WHEREAS, on March 6, 1996, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted the
Otay Ranch Preserve Conveyance Plan, which identifies specific open space areas within Otay
Ranch which must be conveyed to the Otay Ranch Preserve OwnerlManager as a condition of
the development of the Otay Ranch SPA One, and;
WHEREAS, on June 4, 1996, the City of Chula Vista City Council adopted the Otay
Ranch Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (Phase 2 RMP), including a Preserve Conveyance
Plan essentially identical to the plan previously adopted by the San Diego County Board of
Supervisors, and;
WHEREAS, a duly verified application, PCM 98-15, for a Miscellaneous Amendment
("Project") was filed with the Chula Vista Planning Department on October 17, 1997 by the Otay
Ranch Company ("Applicant") ; and
WHEREAS, said application requested an amendment to the Otay Ranch Resource
Management Plan, Phase 2, Exhibits 14A and 14B, otherwise known as the Conveyance
Schedule; and,
WHEREAS, circumstances have changed since the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP was adopted
in 1993 which impact the Preserve Conveyance Schedule. At the time the GDP/SRP, including
the RMP I was adopted, the entire Otay Ranch project was controlled by one entity, the Baldwin
lð-;
Company. Four years later, when Otay Ranch SPA One is required to convey lands to the
preserve, Otay Ranch is controlled by ten separate owners. Open space and developable lands
are not proportionately shared by all owners; and
WHEREAS, said application adds additional environmentally sensitive land in central
Proctor Valley which meets the GDP and RMP 1 guidelines to the first order of conveyance; and
WHEREAS, virtually all of the eastern portions of Otay Ranch have been included in the
San Diego National Wildlife Refuge, Otay-Sweetwater Unit. Furthennore, the City of San Diego
and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service have certified the EIR/EIS for the San Diego
Multi-Species Conservation Program (MSCP). Including the County of San Diego and the City
of Chula Vista Subarea Plans which incorporate the Otay Ranch preserve system. The County
of San Diego has adopted the South County MSCP Subarea Plan including the land plan changes
reflected in the agreement between Baldwin entities and the Resource Agencies; and
WHEREAS, Dudek & Associates, the biological finn which worked on the RMP 2, has
detennined that the lands proposed to be added to the first conveyance parcels are of a high
biological value, which meets the criteria for a Keystone parcel, as set forth in their letters dated
April 27, 1998 and May 28, 1998, incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, USFWS has submitted a letter, incorporated herein by this reference, in
support of the amendment to the conveyance schedule indicating that the land to be added is of
high biological quality; and
WHEREAS, while the multiplicity of owners seriously complicates the ordered
conveyance of preserve properties, the creation of the National Wildlife Refuge and the
emergence of the MSCP provide greater opportunities to convey preserve lands in a flexible
manner; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a public hearing on said
amendment 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
within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten (10) days prior to the
hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends that an additional 320 acres owned
by the Estate of Patrick in the Proctor Valley parcel be added to the conveyance schedule, if it
meets the biological criteria of a Keystone parcel. Dudek & Associates by letter dated May 28,
1998 has detennined that the 320 acres does meet this criteria. Therefore, Exhibit 14 includes
the additional 320 acres; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00
p.m. on March 11, 1998 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was continued to March 25, 1998 and was thereafter closed and
readvertised for May 13, 1998 at the same time and place; and
I tJ --'J tJ
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a public hearing on said
amendment 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
within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten (10) days prior to the
hearing; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00
p.m. on June 9, 1998 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the Project and
prepared the Fifth Addendum to the SPA One Plan Environmental Impact Report which
concluded that adding the "Keystone" parcels to the Conveyance Schedule would be consistent
with the Otay Ranch RMP guidelines. The guidelines indicate the Keystone parcels have the
highest quality resources and early conveyance to the Otay Ranch Preserve Owner/Manager is
in the public interest. The change to the Conveyance Schedule, with respect to the inclusion of
additional land, would not result in significant impacts in that all such additional lands are
Keystone parcels having the highest quality resources as described in the Dudek & Associates
letters dated April 27, 1998 and May 28, 1998 and the USFWS letter dated May 12, 1998.
Therefore, pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Environmental Review
Coordinator found that the revisions would result in only minor technical changes or additions
which are necessary to make the EIR adequate under CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL, hereby finds
that adding any of the Keystone parcels to the Conveyance Schedule would be consistent the
RMP Phase I and 2 guidelines and that none of the modifications to the first conveyance would
result in significant impacts, either plan-to-plan or on a plan-to-ground basis and hereby adopts
the Fifth Addendum to the Final Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report EIR 95-01 and
Addendum.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL, ITom the facts presented
to the City Council, the Council has detennined that the amendment to the Conveyance Schedule
of the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (i.e., deleting Exhibits l4A and l4B and substituting
with Exhibit 14) is consistent with the goals and policies set forth in the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan/Subregional Plan regarding the establishment of the Otay Ranch Open Space
Preserve.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL hereby approves the
amendment to the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (i.e., delete Exhibits 14A and 14B and
insert Exhibit 14), and that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of the property.
Presented By: Approved as to fonn by:
CL-~ ~
Robert A. Leiter John Kaheny
Director of Planning City Attorney
/tJ-j /
4-rr4CIiME:AJT I
~/¿:;?
RESOLUTION NO. PCM 98-15
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
OTY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE PROPOSAL TO AMEND
THE OTAY RANCH PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
PLAN CONVEYANCE SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, on October 28,1993, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors and the Chula
Vista City Council jointly adopted the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan
(GDP/SRP), including the Otay Ranch Phase 1 Resource Management Plan (phase 1 RMP),
governing the development of the 23,000 acre Otay Ranch project, and;
WHEREAS, the GDP and Phase I RMP require, as a condition of the development of Otay
Ranch, the phased creation of an 11,375 acre Resource Preserve to be owned and operated by a
public or quasi-public Preserve OwnerlManage, and;
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch GDP Program EIR and Findings of Fact fmd that the creation
of the 11,375 acre Resource Preserve mitigates identified biological impacts of the Otay Ranch
project, including cumulative biological impacts, and;
WHEREAS, on March 6, 1996, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted the
Otay Ranch Preserve Conveyance Plan, which identifies specific open space areas within Otay
Ranch which must be conveyed to the Otay Ranch Preserve OwnerlManager as a condition of the
development of the Otay Ranch SPA One, and;
WHEREAS, on June 4, 1996, the City of Chula Vista City Council adopted the Otay Ranch
Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (phase 2 RMP), including a Preserve Conveyance Plan
essentially identical to the plan previously adopted by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors,
and;
WHEREAS, a duly verified application, PCM 98-15, for a Miscellaneous Amendment
("Project") was :filed with the Chula Vista Planning Department on October 17, 1997 by the Otay
Ranch Company ("Applicant") ; and
WHEREAS, said application requested an amendment to the Otay Ranch Resource
Management Plan, Phase 2, Exhibits 14A and 14B, otherwise known as the Conveyance Schedule;
and,
WHEREAS, circumstances have changed since the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP was adopted in
1993 which impact the Preserve Conveyance Schedule. At the time the GDP/SRP, including the
RMP 1 was adopted, the entire Otay Ranch project was controlled by one entity, the Baldwin
I-;
Company. Four years later, when Otay Ranch SPA One is required to convey lands to the preserve,
Otay Ranch is controlled by ten separate owners. Open space and developable lands are not
proportionately shared by all owners; and
WHEREAS, said application adds additional environmentally sensitive land in central
Proctor Valley which meets the GDP and RMP I, guidelines to the first order of conveyance; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is currently the owner of said land; and
WHEREAS, virtually all of the eastern portions of Otay Ranch have been included in the San
Diego National Wildlife Refuge, Otay-Sweetwater Unit. Furthennore, the City of San Diego and
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service have certified the EIRÆIS for the San Diego Multi-
Species Conservation Program (MSCP). Including the County of San Diego and the City of Chula
Vista Subarea Plans which incorporate the Otay Ranch preserve system. The County of San Diego
has adopted the South County MSCP Subarea Plan including the land plan changes reflected in the
agreement between Baldwin entities and the Resource Agencies; and
WHEREAS, while the multiplicity of owners seriously complicates the ordered conveyance
of preserve properties, the creation of the National Wildlife Refuge and the emergence of the MSCP
provide greater opportunities to convey preserve lands in a flexible manner; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a public hearing on said
amendment 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
within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the public hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00
p.m. on March 11, 1998 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was continued to March 25, 1998 and was thereafter closed and
readvertised for May 13, 1998 at the same time and place; and
WHEREAS, the City Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the Project and
prepared the fifth addendum to the SPA One Plan Environmental hnpact Report which concluded
that adding the "Keystone" parcels to the conveyance schedule would be consistent with the Otay
Ranch RMP guidelines and that the changes to the Conveyance Schedule would not result in
significant impacts and pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines found that the
revisions would result in only minor technical changes or additions which are necessary to make the
EIR adequate under CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby
adopts the Fifth Addendum to the Final Second-Tier Environmental hnapct Report EIR 95-01 and
Addendum.
f- 2.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION from the facts
presented has detennined that the amendment adding the "Keystone" parcels to the Conveyance
Schedule of the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (i.e., deleting Exhibits 14A and 14B and
substituting with Exhibit 14) is consistent with the goals and policies set forth in the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan/Subregional Plan regarding the establishment of the Otay Ranch Open
Space Preserve; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that
the City Council approve the proposal to amend the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (i.e., delete
Exhibits 14A and 14B and insert Exhibit 14), in accordance with the attached draft City Council
Resolution and that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of the property and the
City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this day 25th day of March, 1998 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Chair Davis, Commissioners Ray, Willett, Tarantino, Thomas, O'Neill
NOES:
ABSENT: Commi ss i oner Aguil ar
ABSTENTIONS:
Patty Davis, Chair
Diana Vargas, Secretary
I-?;;
H, \HOME\PLANNING\BEV\IN-LIEU\REPORTS\PC513 .RES
if
z..
i~
¡:~
~
I O~
t O~
. ~~
<~
(1)0
'«
0)(1)
~c.
0
(1)
:Þ
~
(1)
D)
ndi
¡;:¡¡ lJi !j);"
Ir .~"
p~
18' z
. Q
~ 5-
m ~13J~r-
>< ~ CD
¡¡;" ~: Ë ~ co
= 8. :: ~ CD
.g F ~ i::J
m~i;a. I
>< ¡¡ R E
~ ~ K i
-" R ~ Ii
.. I:
... R ~
t ~
i!-
I» £
~ 'It" ill .
.þ. 1 > >
till 2, ! :¡¡
g, ~ õ ~
<, 0 1!.
~ ~ ;; ?
I: ~ ~ j
CD Q 3' .
N § ~
:I . ~
s:
~ ¡-If
.."
:1'.
"'¡;
I~
..i
~
.
.
~
¡ O~
, om
! ::In
<0
(1)3
~3
:J(I)
('):J
(l)Q.
:þ(I)
"'to.
CD
m
~o
3;:
!!.~
.".
O'
2.-
fO?
:g i ;~
g ~a
0 ; Z
3 ,. g
3 ' ~
CD
::I
c..
CD
c..
C')
0
::I
< ~
~ vt E]EJ~¡g""
::I ó'" ~ CD
C'I ..¡¡~~(Q
~ ! ~ ~ .. ~ CD
.. ,,-~"8":::I ~
g ~ I ~ i ; ~
3. .¡: ~ . ;¡
tr ~~~~~
=. ~~~~
~ . ~
...
,þ.
0
-
:g
3:
'"II
N
MINUTES OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m. Public Services Building
Wednesday, May 13, 1998 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
ROLL CAW MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Present: Chair Davis, Commissioners Willett, Ray, Tarantino, Thomas,
O'Neill
Absent: Commissioner Aguilar
Staff Present: Rick Rosaler, Principal Planner
Beverly Blessent, Associate Planner
Jeff Steichen, Acting Associate Planner
Miguel Tapia, Community Development Specialist
Ann Moore, Assistant City Attorney
MSC (Willett/Ray) (6-0-1) to excuse Commissioner Aguilar. Motion carried.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Chair Davis
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 98-15; An amendment to the Otay Ranch Phase 2 Resource
Management Plan to add additional lands in the Proctor Valley Parcel
to the area currently designated as the first conveyance.
Background: Rick Rosaler, Principal Planner, reported that this application was continued from
March whereby staff was directed to do additional environmental review on expanding the
conveyance schedule. That analysis was completed as the fifth addendum to the SPA I EIR and
is before the Commission tonight. As a matter of review, Mr. Rosaler pointed out that in the
Resource Management Plan for the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, open space is to
be conveyed to the Preserve Owner Manager to mitigate 9,500 acres of development that is
going to occur and calls for that land to be conveyed in an orderly manner and a schedule be
prepared, which was done in the Resource Management Plan II. What is being proposed is to
amend that plan.
The GDP sets forth priorities for the conveyance of land and states that the first priority shall
be the highest quality habitat focusing on lands most vulnerable to development; it addresses
lands that have restoration potential; the acreage to be conveyed is to be greater than the
acreage of development; and is to have in-kind mitigation and no net loss of wetlands. The
lands are to be conveyed to the Preserve Owner Manager, which is currently the City and the
County of San Diego.
1-<-
u n__, .- ..-..-,...-- '..._J ...~. W.. u~
Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - May 13, 1998
The required areas of first conveyance are identified as the coastal sage scrub habitat in Salt
Creek and a portion of the vernal pools on the Otay Mesa, owned by New Milleniurn and the
Estate of Patrick.
There was discussion at a previous meeting by several property owners and developers that this
would put a constraint on the market. The appraiser for the City agrees with that position, that
it would constrain the City in its ability to acquire open space with the in-lieu-fee and it would
be more expensive to acquire this property, therefore, they are also recommending that the
conveyance area be expanded.
The guidelines identify the "Keystone" parcels as those to be given first priority to conveyance
of highest quality resources such as the vernal pools on Otay Mesa, coastal sage scrub habitat
in the Salt Creek area, gnatcatcher population areas in the western San Ysidro and Proctor
Valley areas, and wetlands restoration area in the Otay Valley.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCM 98-15
recommending that the City Council approve the amendment to the Phase 2 Resource
Management Plan adding the "Keystone" parcels to the Conveyance Schedule for SPA One and
that the fifth addendum to the EIR be adopted.
Public Hearing Opened 7:12
Kim Kilkenny, Otay Ranch Company, 11975 EI Camino Real, San Diego, applicant requesting
amendment to the RMP conveyance schedule, stated he supports staff's recommendation and
looks forward to action being taken in the creation of the largest urban open space system in
San Diego County, if not the nation, and stated he is available to answer any questions the
Commission may have.
Frank Ormand, 11149 Red Cedar Drive, San Diego, stated he supports opening up the
conveyance of land into the preserve which will be a cost benefit and the number of acres set
into the preserve will be increased.
Craig Fukuyama, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, stated that although he supported doing
away with the preferences altogether, he is encouraged by the way staff worked toward
significantly expanding the conveyance areas.
Mr. Fukuyama is concerned that limiting the amount of conveyance lands that can be
purchased can artificially inflat the costs.
He further stated that they are under a time constraint and have no land to convey, so we need
both the conveyance and In-Lieu-Fee be adopted before we can proceed with our final maps
sometime in August. He urged the Commission to keep things on track.
William Tuscher, 3130 Bonita Road, Chula Vista, stated he supports staff's recommendation,
however he would like to propose including one additional parcel to the "keystone" parcels,
which is a piece of property that is surrounded on three sides by property managed by the Fish
1-7
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - May 13, 1998
and Wildlife Service. There currently exists a Sweetwater atay National Wildlife Refuge in this
area, and this property becomes an important connecting link between this and other
"keystone" properties in the Ranch.
He urged the Commission to include this property as a "keystone" property in the Resource
Conveyance Plan Amendment contingent upon and subject to approval by the City's biologist
and the Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Public Hearing Closed 7:25
Commission Discussion:
. Commissioner Willett asked why this area that Mr. Tuscher referred to was not
designated to be included as a "keystone" parcel.
Rick Rosaler, Principal Planner, stated that the habitat and species maps that were
prepared as part of the RMP I, identified the cluster of the gnatcatcher population in the
western San Ysidro and central Proctor Valley areas. The area that Mr. Tuscher is
suggesting be added to the conveyance schedule has not been evaluated by the City's
biologist and would need further environmental review, which would result in an
addendum to the EIR.
. Commissioner O'Neill asked if the additional environmental review would hold up this
item going forward to City Council.
Mr. Rosaler stated that this item is going to Council on June 9th and the environmental
review could be accomplished within that time frame.
MSC (Thomas/Ray) (6-0-1) that the Planning Commission approve Resolution PCM 98-15
recommending that the City Council appr90ve the amendment to the Phase 2 Resource
Management Plan adding the "keystone" parcels to the Conveyance Schedule for SPA One
and include one additional parcel to be added as a "keystone" parcel, identified as the estate
property east of the Fish and Wildlife Service ownership on the Otay Ranch. Motion carried.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 98-21: Consideration of an amendment to the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) to allow
reduction in Village Core densities.
PCM 98-16: Consideration og an amendment to the OtayRanch
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan on property generally located
on 1,110 acres south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo
/-f
D..
::E
~ u a:
~ B N
u <I: . CD
! ~ ~ :I
~ ~ ~ ¡f
1! 0 ~ -
~ 9 .. 0
~ ~ '~ a:I
.. .. ~ o:t
. [[[] Yt" ~
3 CtI
.;¡ c:t
I ~ ~ ::
~ i 3 :ë
¡¡ - .;¡ .-
. ~ g .c
~ ~ ~ ><
't:I~ ~ ~ w
c::! ~ ~ g'
G) ;- :: 11 ~
0) 0 ~ :~ .!!
G) ~ ><
.....IïIEJ~ w
~B: .,'
¡; ~
z ~
~d
r...,.'"",'",....'.':."'....:..,'.'~:""',"" d
';," .. . ,
of;;' !!EEl
Íf!.t;g
1Ij«
ca
C1)
Jo..
<C
C1)
(.)
'as:::
Cl)CO
>~
OC1)
c.~> '
c '
~O i
<to I
2--( !
~~
:;;1
~~
N
c..
:::E
a::
...
0
'<t
...
....
~ . ;e
. . < . ..c
~ ~ € ~, ><
E I ~ t W
.~~~8 III
<: '" 0 >. CD
"0 ~ Ë .:1,!:" êi:
c: ~ ~ '!! ~ CD
ø I ~ ~ - I U
0)_:> .0- C
~ '" .!i~~;,'; ~ ~
-l cQ::==-" ' L.J L.J 't: >
, --" c
,J ~.~ 8
\ ~
"'C
\ i
~ E:3. E
lL> É .~' E
. z . 0
r ' .
; CD
-~ C;:J ~
r.,.l......'......:~ ~.;
I5it
CO
Q)
"CI..
Q)«
"CQ)
c(.)
Q)C
Eco
E~ E
~ i
0> ¡
QC: ¡
ØO I
a:: 0 I
3- ( ~~
"'~
';;£
~:
ADDENDUM TO PROGRAM EIR-90-01 DRAFT
(Initial Study for Otay Land Company)
Otay Ranch Resource Management Program Phase 2 Modification
PROJECT NAME: Change in the conveyance schedule which would add lands to the
initial conveyance.
PROJECT LOCATION: The Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan Area
(see attached map)
PROJECT APPLICANT: Otay Land Company
PROJECT AGEJII"T: N/A
CASE NO.: IS-98-20 DATE: April 28, 1998
I. INTRODUCTION
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental
Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) if one of the following conditions is present:
1. The minor changes in the project which have occurred since completion of the
Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration have not created any new
significant environmental impacts not previously addressed.
2. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Environmental
Impact Report of Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental
impact of the project, or regarding the measures or alternatives available to
mitigate potential environmental effects of the project, does not show that the
project will have one or more significant impacts which were not previously
addressed.
This addendum has been prepared in order to provide additional information and analysis
concerning potential overall impacts.
ll. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Policy 5.6 of the Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan (RMP) Phase 1 contains
guidelines for conveyance of land to the atay Ranch preserve, These guidelines are
(,,\llblnegdecs\is982().add) 'I -( Page 1
presented below:
1. First priority shaH be given to conveyance of highest. quality resources. Such
resources may include vernal pools on Dtay Mesa, Diegan coastal sage scrub
habitat in the Salt Creek area, Gnatcatcher population areas in the WestefIÌ San
Ysidro and Central Proctor Valley areas or potential wetlands restoration areas in
the Dtay Valley (depending upon the status of regional park plans and wetlands
restoration plans at the time Dtay Valley parcels are conveyed.)
2. First priority shall be given to conveyance of most vulnerable areas (i.e., those
most subject to potential or ongoing disturbance).
3. Conveyance shall occur in an orderly manner beginning with an identified
"keystone" parcel (e.g., vernal pool areas, Salt Creek area, Otay Valley, Central
Proctor Valley, Western San Ysidro) and proceed to the next logical block of land.
4. Areas with restoration potential shall be conveyed early in order to begin long-tenD
research and restoration activities early in the process (e,g., Dtay Valley, vernal
pool areas, potential Diegan coastal sage scrub/maritime succulent scrub
restoration areas north and south of the Dtay Valley).
5. Cumulative acreage conveyed shall be greater than or equal to the cumulative
acreage of the proposed SPA/Specific Plan development.
6. General guidelines regarding in-kind mitigation and no net loss of wetlands shall
be considered in the development of the conveyance schedule, particularly in the
context of applicable State and Federal regulations. (It is understood that in-kind
mitigation may not always be the preferable approach to achieve the goal of
establishing a functioning manageable preserve).
7. Applicable State and Federal regulations regarding protection of sensitive habitat
and species shall be followed in the development of the conveyance table.
8. The Preserve Owner(s)/Manager(s) shall participate in preparation of the
conveyance schedule.
.In response to the guidelines included in the Otay Ranch RMP Phase 1, Section II.B of the
Otay Ranch RMP Phase 2 included a preserve conveyance plan. The conveyance plan was
prepared in accordance with the guidelines contained in the Dtay Ranch RMP Phase 1 and
identified specific conveyance locations based on the following guidance:
1. Priority is given to high quality resources
(a,\llblncgdccsüs9820.add) 'f-L Page 2
2. Priority is given to most vulnerable resources
3. Conveyance should begin with "keystone" parcels (vernal pool areas, Salt Creek,
Otay Valley, Central Proctor Valley, Western San Ysidro)
4. Potential Restoration areas should be conveyed early.
The Omy Ranch RMP Phase 2 also includes Exhibits 14A and 14B depicting the Salt
Creek and Omy Mesa areas as the first conveyances for SPA One.
The SPA One EIR (SCH #94101046) includes the following mitigation measure relating
to preserve conveyance:
"With SPA One, provide for conveyance of 1,186 acres to the Otay Ranch
preserve, with the first conveyance of 593 acres occurring in Year 3 of the
Omy Ranch development program. The first conveyance area will be
located on the Otay River parcel and will contain substantial acreage of
upland scrub habitats and populations of California Gnatcatchers and cactus
wrens."
ill. STATEMENT OF PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS
Since the Otay Ranch RMP Phase 2 and SPA One EIR were approved, the ownership of
Omy Ranch has become fragmented making it difficult for the SPA One landowner to
provide for the first conveyance on the Otay River parcel as called for in the SPA One
EIR mitigation measure, and in the locations shown on Exhibits 14A and 14B of the Otay
Ranch RMP Phase 2. Adherence to the preserve conveyance guidelines conmined in both
the Phase 1 and Phase 2 RMPs can still, however, be achieved. The proposed amendment/
modifications would therefore not make any changes to the preserve conveyance guidelines
but would do the following:
1. Eliminate Exhibits 14A and 14B from the Otay Ranch RMP Phase 2 (no other
changes to the RMP Phase 2 are proposed); and
2. Revise the mitigation measure contained in the SPA One EIR to state the
following:
"With SPA One, provide for conveyance of open space preserve
land to the Otay Ranch preserve located in one of the keystone areas
consistent with the conveyance guidelines included in both the Phase
1 and Phase 2 RMPs. The keystone areas are identified in the RMP
as vernal pool areas, Salt Creek area, Otay Valley, Central Proctor
Valley, Western San Ysidro," as depicted in the attached exhibits.
(a:l1lblncgdccslis9820.add) '-f -J Page 3
IV. EFFECTS OF PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS
No direct effects would be associated with the proposed modifications to the conveyance
schedule since no changes to the overall Otay Ranch designated preserve boundary or
development area are proposed. In addition, no changes to the guidelines for préserve
conveyance are proposed. The proposed modifications would simply allow conveyance of
anyone of the keystone areas as opposed to the limited keystone areas on the Otay River
parcel as identified in Exhibits 14A and 14B of the RMP Phase 2 and the SPA One ElR.
Anyone of the keystone areas would meet the RMP conveyance guidelines as summarized
below:
1. Vernal Pool Areas: Vernal pool areas are consistent with the conveyance
guidelines because these areas contain high quality resources, are vulnerable due
to easy aœess and existing grazing activities and have restoration potential. Vernal
pool areas are present in several keystone areas including Otay Mesa, the Otay
River Valley, portions of Western San Ysidro; on the Proctor Valley parcel, vernal
pools have been identified on the resort site,
2. Salt Creek: Conveyances in the Salt Creek area would be consistent with the
conveyance guidelines because Salt Creek is known to contain high quality upland
resources including cactus wren and Gnatcatcher habitat, the area is vulnerable and
would benefit from management due to easy aœess and recent fires; and recent
fires have created restoration potential within Salt Creek.
3. Otay Valley: Conveyances in the Otay Valley area would be consistent with the
conveyance guidelines because the Otay Valley contains valuable wetland resources
and is a recognized wildlife movement corridor, is subject to unauthorized use and
could benefit from management, and exhibits substantial restoration potential due
to past sand mining activities. Portions of the Otay Valley area are also being
planned by the Otay Valley Regional Park JEPA for regional park uses, and any
early conveyance in the Otay Valley area would need to be coordinated with those
efforts.
4. Central Proctor Valley: Conveyances in the Central Proctor Valley area would
be consistent with the RMP conveyance guidelines because this area contains
substantial upland resources including Gnatcatchers, Munz's sage, San Diego
thornmint and represents a large habitat block providing linkages to other preserve
areas identified as part of the MSCP, the area could benefit from management due
to disturbances caused by grazing activities; and contains opportunities for passive
restoration in previously grazed areas.
5, Western San Ysidro: Conveyances in the Western San Ysidro area would be
consistent with the RMP conveyance guidelines because this area contains
(a:\llblnegdecslis9820.add) 4--0..{ Page 4
substantial resources including Gnatcatcher habitat and vernal pool resources and
is identified as an important habitat block as part of the MSCP. This area is less
vulnerable than the other keystone parcels since it is not readily accessible and has
not been previously grazed. Restoration potential in this area has not been
evaluated. . .
V. CONCLUSIONS
Any of the identified keystone areas would be consistent with the conveyance guidelines
incorporated in the Otay Ranch RMP Phase 1 and 2 and no features of the currently
proposed modifications relating to alternation in the location of the first conveyance to the
preserve would result in significant impacts, either on a plan-to-plan basis or on a plan-to-
ground basis.
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines and based on the above
discussion, I hereby fmd that the project revisions to the proposed project will result in
only minor technical changes or additions which are necessary to make the EIR adequate
under CEQA.
Douglas D. Reid,
Environmental Review Coordinator
References:
Otay Ranch Program EIR-90-01
Otay Ranch SPA One Subsequent EIR
Resource Management Plan Phase 1 and 2
(a:\llblnegdec.ü.9820.add) Y.':;- Page 5
fT3 ¡;;~ "OJ i;::;,::;,:'rM OTRf f'-Rf+::rI C()f'.ri-ir<r r.c-/(
@l
~d.
d
. f
j j
i ~
~ I ¡
~ s
~ J
.[1]
~
i
<: ~ .
} t ~
~ ..
" [
... ~ ..
'1:S~;\ ~
c::! i ~
& 8 J ~
311J~~
~..
--"""'"
.........."""or","",v-
<1-\0
SPA One Conveyance Areas
Exhibit 14
-, - --~ ""L!.A '.l~U "',"'" i¡¡ OOl
II
- II -
TUCHSCHER DEVEr .OPMENT ENTERPRISES, Ine:.
.-.
Post-it" Fax Note 7571
To
April 28, 1998 Com.pI.
Phon..
Fax. fax.
Ms. Anne MOOIC
Assistant CIty Attorney
City of ChuIa VISta
276 FourthAvcnuc
Chula VISta, CA 91910
Re: Olav RtUlc1r R/!8oUI'CI! MtUlQl!l!!numt Pion Anuuuime1rt
AIme,
Per our =nt discussions, the fOllowing rcprescc1 posÏl:ians proposed to be incorporated into thc
p!amIiDg dcpartmeat's Ia1cst ccmcept to resolve the first c:ouvey:mce sequence issue. As we
um:lcrsnmd it, the planning department is assembling II map which will idcmify the "kcystDm:
properties" within the Clay Ranch preserve area. Wítb:in the can1I:rt of assembling this exhibit or
tc:Irtrcvisions to the kMP ß, the fOllowing should be explicitly delineated:
I. The ide:lltified "keystone properties" should act (per the guidelines) 85 IIIC8S of first
conveyance with an orderly sequential subsequeot conveyance of ether land areas
surrounding these keystone properties.
II. The "keystone properties" shall act as an appropriate initial conveyance for II larger mea
of ccmtiguous land to be conveyed which will ensure: the long = viability and
preservation of the keystone resource assets.
III. The "keystone propertics" should inclnde properties that arc amtiguous to those &heady
managed as open space preserve such as, properties CODtrolled by b Bureau of Land
Maœgemcnt,. the fish and wildlife agencies, and other public and private ownerships.
With these issues ìncorpQIatl:d ÎIItD the expansion of the first canvcyaucc area, we feel co.nfidcDt
that all interest including owners ofprcservc land, developers of the Dray Ranch, land amscrvation
organizations, and the fish and wildlife agencies will be: satisfied in regarding to theirparticuIar
interest em this issue.
3130 BONITA ROAD. SUITE 200. CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 919'" 619.691.1800 FAX 619.691.9854
¥--7
~~ ---- ., ..- - _u_-. . --_.. ....-- ~ ---
Page 2
Anm: Moore
Please: coDtact me: should you have: any questions regarding this ma!:œr as I will be available at
yt>UI' conVCDi= to funhcr dis¡;uss this issue.
Warmest perscmal regards,
;;~
William C. Tuc:hscher n
Prcsidalt
WCT:vcs
cc: George Kremple
Sid Marris
Bob Lighœr
Km1 Lee
Rick Rossler
'-(-- 'ð
lbr.¡-,jOU!'~" j. ¡ L : JL "/ù filA N\;. IOU ~J J"UL -. ¡
. US Fish & Wildlife Service CA Dept. ofFish & Game
-"'" Cnrlsblld Field Office " '1416 Ninth Street
2730 Loker Avenue, West \.'" PO Box 944209
Carlsbad, CA 92008 ~.~ Sacramento, CA 94244-2090
(760) 431-9440 (916) 653-9767
_...' FAX (760) 431-9624 FAX (916) 653-2588
May 12, 1998
Ms. Patty Davis, Chair
Chula Vista Planning Commission
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Comments on Item PCM 98-15
Dear Ms. Davis:
The California Department offjsh and Game (Department) and U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), the wildlife agencies, have reviewed the proposed amendment to the Otay
Ranch Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (RMP 2) to add additional lands to the lands that are
designated as the first priority conveyance, Item PCM 98-15 on the May 13 Planning
Commission agenda. The wildlife agencies have worked with the City ofChula Vista and the
County of San Diego for several years to refine the details of development and open space
(preserve) conveyance that will result from implementing the Otay Ranch General Development
Plan (GDP). Concurrent with the proposal to amend the RMP 2 conveyance is the preparation of
an addendum to the Specific Plan Amendment One Environmentallrnpact Report. The wildlife
agencies concur that the proposed amendment to RMP 2 and EIR Addendum effectively address
the modification of the first priority conveyance process for biologically valuable habitat lands to
be conveyed tp the Preserve Owner Manager.
As indicated in the staff report on this item, the wildlife agencies previously have stated
that any modification must still adhere to the RMP 1 guidelines for priority conveyance. High
quality biological resource areas such as Salt Creek Canyon, Otay Mesa vernal pools, Otay River
Valley riparian habitat, and areas that support ~ignificant numbers of California gnateateher~
should be acquired prior to lower resource value lands. The wildlife agencies also have indicated
that ongoing protection must be assured for sensitive vernal pool areas to ensure that their
biological value is maintained prior to their conveyance.
We do not agree with the Conclusion Item #2, which states that the additional lands that
are being added to the priority conveyance would allow less sensitive portions of Salt Creek to be
utilized for university-related facilities, if desired.1J!ilt Çreek sUPpOrts several sen~itive ~necies
OPTIONAL FORM 00 ('-001
2-
'-f-~ IU.:tt
'.'7't:D -4:51 -r¡ 1('10
¡\jAj-¡TôD ilL" J. j" ¡II. If';' rill lIU. IOU 4j JôU¿ r. 2
Ms. Patty Davis
May 12, 1998
Page Two
and is one of the key California gnatcatcher habitat areas within Otay Ranch. The wildlife
agencies have not agreed to any development within Salt Creek, and our acceptance of the RMP
2 amendment does not represent settlement of this issue.
The proposed additions to the priority conveyance lands are consistent with the goals of
the Dtay Ranch GDP and RMPs and will benefit wildlife and plant species. If you have any
questions regarding this response, please contact Mr. Bill Tippets (Department), at (619) 467-
4212 or Ms. Nancy Gilbert (Service) at (760) 431-9440.
Sincerely,
Jfwl ~ ~
Gail L. Presley
NCCP Program Manager
Department ofFish and Game
cc: Department ofFish and Game
Ron Rempel
BiIITippets
u.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Ken Berg
Nancy Gilbert
otyrmp2.bt
'f--(ð
DRAFï
April 27, 1998 1469-01
M::. Doug Reid
Environmental ",,"view Coorciinator
City of Chula Vista
276 :ourthAve~ue
Cbu1o Vista, C!'" ;;2010
Subject: Envž,.onmenuù Documentation in Support of AdJiendJlm far OtIZY RlZnch
GDP A""",dmen.t - AJnendment to Pluzsc 2 RMP Regarding ModifiClÚÍotlS
to Convey""c", Sc1redN.¡e
Dear Doug:
This 1:tt.". provides environmental documentation in support of an Addcndum to be prepared for an
amendment to Section n.B of the Phase 2 Dtay Ran<:h Resource Management Plan (RMP) addressing
tÍlc pre""TVe c=veyance plan. It is understood that the Addendum will also address a modification
to a biological reSources mitigation measure incluci~ìn the Dtay Ranch SPA One Second-Tier EIR X
(SCB No. 94101046) relating to the first prEserve conveyance within Dtay Ranch. This letter
presents a swmna"'y ofbackgrounci into=tion regarding the proposed modifications and an analysis
of the effects or the proposed modilic.a tions.
SummaI)' of Background Infonnation: Policy 5.6 ofthe Phase 1 Dtay Ranch RMP contains guidelines
for conveyance of land to the Otay Ranch preserve. These guiddmes arc presented below:
. Fitst priority shall be given to conveyance of highest quality resources (such resources may
include vemal pools on Dtay Mesa, Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat in the. Salt Creek area,
gnatcatcher population areas in the western San Ysidro and central Proctor Valley areas, or
potential wetlands reston.tion areas in the Dtay Valley (depending upon the statUs 0:
regional park plans and wetlands .restoration plans at the time Dtay Valley parcels arc
conveyed).
. First priority sb.all be given to conveyancr of most vu1nerab1: areas (i.e., those most subject
to potential or ongoing disturbance);
. Convryancc shall occur in an orderly manner beginning with an identified "keystone" paIcd
(e.g., vernAl pool areas, Salt Creek area, Otay Valley, crntral Proctor Valley, western San
Ysidro) and proceed to tbc m;xllogical block of land;
. Areas with restoration potcntial shall be conveyed early in order to begin long-term rcsearcb
and restoration activities early in the process (c,g., Dtay Valley, vcmal pool areas, potential
Diegan coastal sage scrub/maritime ,"Ucculent scrub restoration areas north and south of the
DtayValley)¡
4- (/
,\1r. Doug núJ
R,.. feviro"mmlal TJnwmmlntloo In SuI'pon ,f-4dd,"JI,"' fo, Ora) Ra"ch '-Of .4mtnumfn, -
-'"""do"", '" l'huM 7 RAil' Rrf!~rdlNl; ,1I"âi{¡Clil"",,/o (",.v..,""" S'¡"dl1h
. :":u:nuJatlve acr""ge =veyed ,1",0 b, g'."", than or e9uo.! to Lho mmlllarivc acreage ot the
propoooc! ~l'I\!Spccif¡¡; !'lan tiev"lop=~;
. General guIdelines regardi.n¡; ¡".bnå mitigation anå II" "el 1m" of wctlanåe :h¡¡,fi b:
::>nclå",:d in th:: dev:Jnpmenr of the conveyance .ch<ú"I". panicu.lady in tb: eon teXt u[
aF';'Ji""bk State .",rI EederaJ regulotlOI1B íi~ i, uwJcr.rnnd that in-kmd mitigation ""Y nOt
olway, bc rh~ preferable -pproach to ""hi"ve the soa! ef establli;hj,¡~ " funcrioníng
"""'"seablc Preserve);
Appli""bk St". anå Feàc¡oJ regulatio"" "ct"";¡ng protecticn of =.itivo ¡.."ita' ."rlSPO:10£
s"..il Of Íollowed 1!". the aeVdOpl1!t:l!l of t,;,; :o""'yonee ;.ook,
0 .-h: I'¡e,:rve Own..'"1'(,)/Mam.gcr(.) ;¡halJ ¡""Lid?atc I.D pr""oratien "f r1:: ccmveyanec
scheJ"i..
In re'pea,e ", I.¡... guiåclinet induded ia the Pi=< 1 Or.y Riae;.. KMP. Section 1!.B n¡:he Phase 3
Otay R.n:" R1v<..P II1cluåeå 0 preserve w"w:yon:e plan. The eenVcy..uce 1"1." Was prepared it:
a""",rl.= with the .r;uiåclinc.s CuliLain,ñ in ,iu; Fiu... 1 Otay T\4Jle,Í, RMP and identified 3pecifie
cnlo"ey....,e.locotio,o3 "osed 01' Lf... foliowing g",:l.JDe:
0) ¡:::jo:ity is e;ve" ro higr. 9uality resourc=>;
b! p.;urity i, gj"<n to most vulnera"Jo resD,U ,.",;
cJ """""yonce should begin "Villi "k:yötcm," pued. (vem.:ti pcoi or<a'; S.ll r.r..J, Otay V:¡JJ"y,
C':nt:a!Proe'or V¡¡]]ey, Weste", San Y,iåro);
nì potentJO.! reStoration an:a, "bould be coDveyed eorly.
Tb.e fh..e2 Otdy Ranc~ R.MP alsoincluåe3hhibit> í4A .nd 14J¡ åepi:tIngthe SaltCLe:k anti Oray
Mesa orei; o. L~e fus, conveyanCC3 tor SPA O"e.
ïf,,: SPA O=HR rSCHNo. 94101046) i1).duåcsti1Ûo.liowiDgmitigarinTl measure reJ¿ting '0 preserve
conveY>nce:
'Wi:!, "PA Onc, proviåe for ConveY.lice of 1, lB6 >er.. to ~ OtoyPvmch ¡"e"""e..
with rh. first cOllveyone< of 59,9 .cr.. oc::urrin¡; 111 Year 3 of i.lu:: Ouy Ranch
d...'elcpment program. Thr fm:r rl)IJvey= areo will be locat:J I.1D the Ouy River
parcel and will contai" ."""rantiil>erea!',o or upland "",ub l1.hir." and popu.l.ltÎons
ot Laliior-l1io ¡¡nar.r.rçb.rs anå coctuo wren.:>.'
--!t "'9-01
-~~,,'.:..?I~::::::~ ..", :7....' z
4-- 1'-
Mr. Do,,£; Rád
Rc' =~viranmcn¡a! Documentation in Sup!""r o(Addmdurr. for Orav Ranch CD? Amendmmr -
:..mendmcnr :c Phas< 2. FJI'iP Rrgo.rdine lv]odif¡ca:Í<"" In Convevo."ce Schedulc
Statement of proposed Modifications: Since the O~ay Ranch Phas: 2 RMP and SPA One ErR were
approved, the ownership of Otay Ranch has become fragmented, :making it difficult for tbe SPA One
landown~1' to provide for the fu~'t conv:yanc: on truo Dray River parcd as called for in the SPA One
EIR mitigation measure, and in th: locations shown on Exhibits 14A and 14B of th: Phase 2 Otay
Ranch RMP. .Adh~rence to the preserve conveyance guidelines contained in both th~ Phase 1 and
Phas: 2 F-MPs caD S1:ill, howev:r, b: achiev~d. Tht proposed amendment/modifications would
thercbro not mak: any ohang:" to the prest:rve convoyancc guid:Ìlncs but would do tbe following:
. Eliminate Exhibits 14A and 14B from the Phase 2 Otay Ran::b RMP (no other chang"" to the
Phase 2 RMP are proposed); and
. Revise tru, mitigation measure contained in the SPA One ";:IR to state tbe followmg: "With
SPA On:, provide for conveyance of 01'= space preserve land to the Otay Ranch preserve
located in on" of the keystonE areas consistent with the conveyance guidelines included in
both th: Pha~ 1 and Phas: 2 RMPs. The uyston: areas are identili"d in the RMP as vernal
?ool areas, Salt Creek aree., Otay Valley, central Proctor Valley, western San Ysidro: as
depict<.:d in th: attached exhibit.
Effects of Proposed Modifications: No direct efiects ""ould be associated with th~ proposed
modifications to the conveyance schedule since no changes to the overall Otay Ranch d~signated
preserve boundary or development arca arc proposed. In addition, no chang~s to the guidelin~s for
preservE conveyance are proposed. The proposed modifications would simply allow conveyance of
anyone of the k<ystone areas as opposed to the limited keystone areas on th~ Otay River parcel as
identified in Exhibits 14A and 14B of the Phase 2 RMP and the SPA One EIR. Anyone of the
keystone areas would meet th~ RMP conv<.:yancc guidchn~s as summarized below:
Vernal Pool Areas: V~mal pool areas arc consistent with the conveyance guid~1ines because
these arcas contain high c¡uality r~sources, arc vulnerable due to easy a=ss and existing
grazing activitics, and have restoration potentiaL Vernal pool arcas are present in s~veral
keystone areas including Otay Mesa, the Otay River Valley, portions of western San Y sidro;
on the Proctor Valley parcd, vernal pools have been identified on the r"sort site.
Salt Creek: Conveyances in the Salt Creek area would be consistent with th" conveyance
guid<.:hnes because Salt Creek is known to contain high quality upland resources including
cactus wren and gnarcatchcr habitat, the area is vuh",rabl" and would benefit from
management du" to easy access and re=t fires; and recent fires have cr"ated restoration
potential within Salt Creek.
1469.111
.,.."....".......... April:7.1?9X 3
11--1'5
Mr. D~ug Rcid
Rc: E""ironmer.lp'! Dc:umenzaz:ar. in Support o(Addendum (ar Olav Ranch GD? Am<ndmertl -
,"",endmcr.: I" Ph'ISE 2 RJv1f' keeardin!'.lvIodtf¡:arians 10 ConvEyanCE ScizEduiE
Otay Valley: Conveyances in the Otay Valley area would be consist~nt with the conveyance
guidelin"-S because th. Otay Valley contains valuable wetland resources and is a recognized
wildlife movement corridor, is subject to unauthorllid use and could benefit from
manag=nt, and exhibits substantial restoration pot=ntial due to past sand mining
activities. Portions of th. Otay Valley area are also being planned by the Otay Valley
Region;Ü Park JEPA for regional park uses and any early convo/ance.ill the Otay Valley area
would ne"" to be coordinated with thosE efforts.
Central Proctor Valley: Conveyances in th. central Proctor Valley area would be consistent
with the RMP convo/anc< guidelines because this area contains substantial upland resources
including gnatcatchers, Munz's sagE, and San Diego thornmint and represents a large habitat
bloc:k providing linkages to other preservE areas identified as part of the MSCP, thc area could
benefit from management due to disturbances caused by grazing activities; and contains
opportur.ities for passive r.sloration in previously grazed areas.
Western San Ysidro: Conveyances in the western San Ysidrc area would be consistent with
the RMP conveyance guidelines because this area contains substantial resources including
gnatcatcher habitat and ve:rnlÙ pool reSOUrce" and is identified as an important habitat block
as part of the MSCP. This area is ¡"ss vulnerable than the other keystone parcels since it is
not readily accessible and has not been previously grazed. &:storation potential in this area
has not been evaluated.
In summary, any 0: the identified keystone areas would be consistenr with the conveyance guidelines
incorporated in the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Otay Ranch RMP and no features of the currently proposed
modifications relating to alteration in the location of the first conveyance to the preserve would
result in s.ignificanr ilnpacts, either On a plan-to-plan basi~ or on a plan-co-ground basis.
Very truly yours,
DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INC
June S. Collins
Principal
Environmental Sciences Division
jSC/tsf
1469-01
IU5&001'1" .
^,.",.~..,-...:.~.. A¡>ril27.1998 L/.. - ((- 4
"M; L~ ~~ H'~~M" VUVL" '" HOOOOVUH'LOO "'."'4
- E.,i...,;." PI...i." Corporat. Office: 760.942.5147
E..lmnmant.' Sciøncc. ..d 605 Thinl Str.s! Fax 760.632.016"
M...,em.n' Se",;.e. En,in;t.., C.lifcrni. 92024
A C.Ii/".." cO'",.",.
May 28, 1998 298000-300
Mr. Rick Rossl<r
Principal Planner
City of Chula Vista
276 FourthAv~nue
Chura Vista, CA 92010
Subject: Relliew of Tuchsc;her Development Ent£r'P"Ïses, Inc. OtllY R-c;h Parcel
with Respect to Plurse Z Otøy R_ch RMP Preserve Concept Pù",
Dear Rick:
At your request, Dudek & Associates, Inc. (DUDEK) has reviewed the T uchscher Development
Enterprises, Ine parcd (see attached Exhibit) located in the east-central portion of the Otay Ranch
Proctor Valley parcel in the context of the conveyance criteria incorporated in Phases 1 and 2 of the
Otay Ranch Resource Manag~ment Plan (RMP), Our review focused on the degree to which the
T uchscher parcel exhibits characteristics that would meet the definition of a "keystone" parcel,
deemed desirable for early convcyance in the Phase 2 RMP. Background information regarding the
conveyance criteria included in the Phase 1 ane! Phase 2 RMP i. provided below.
Summary of Background Information: Poli~y 5.6 of the Phase 1 Otay Ranch RMP contain...
guidclines for conveyance of land to the Otay Ranch preserve. These guidelines arc presented below;
. First priority shall be given to conveyance of highest quality resources (such resources may
include vernal pools on Otay Mesa, Diegan coastal sage .crub habitat in the Salt Crcek area,
gnatcatcher population areaS in the western San Ysidro and central Proctor Valley areas, ",
potential wctlands restoration areas in the Gray Vall~y (depending upon th~ status of
regional park plans and wetlands restoration plans at the time Otay Valley parcels are
conveyed).
. First priority shall b~ given to conveyance of most vulnerable areas (i.e" those most subject
to pot~"1ltial or ongoing disturbance)¡
. Conveyance shall occur in an orderly manner beginning with an identified "keystone" parcel
(e.g., vernal pool areas, Salt Creek atea, Otay Valley, central Proctor Valley, western San
Y sidra) and proceed to the next logical block of land;
. Areas with restoration potential shall be conveyed early in order to begin long-term research
and restoration activities early in the process (e.g., Otay Valley, vernal pool areas, potential
Dicgan coastal sage scrub/maritime succulent scrub restoration areaS north and south of the
Otay Valley)¡
Lf- C\
P.3/4
-- -- H' _~n', UUUL~ ~ n~~U~"n' L~
Mr, Rick Rossler
Reo' Review c(Tuchscher Development Enterprises Inc. D/ay Ranch Parcel with Rtspect /0 Pha" 2
Otay Ranch RMf PresetVe Concept Pia"
. Cumulative acreage conveycd shall be greater than or equal to the cwnulative dcreage of the
proposed SPNSpecific Plan development;
. General guidelines regarding in-kind mitigation and no net loss of wetlands shall be
considered in the do:velopInent of the conveyance schedule, particularly in the context of
applicable State and federal regulations (it is understood that in-kind mitigation may not
always be the preferable approach to achieve the goal of establishing a functioning
manageable Preserve);
. Applicable State and Federal regulatioll5 regarding protection of sensitive habitat and species
shall be followed in the development of the conveyance table;
. The Preserve Owner(s)/Manager(s) shall participate in preparation of the conveyance
schedule.
In respoI se to the guidelines included in the Phase 1 Otay Ranch RMP, Section ILB, of the Phase 2
Otay Ranch RMP includcd a preserve convey¡mee plan, The conveyance plan WitS prepared ill
accordance with the guidelines contained in the Phase 1 Otay Ranch RMP and identified specific
conveyance locations based on the following guidance:
a) priority is given to high quality resOUrCes;
b) priority is given to most vulnerable resourc",;
c) conveyance should begin with 'keystone" parcels (vernal pool arcas, Salt Creek, Otay Valley,
CentralProetor Valley, Western San Ysidro);
d) potential restoration areas should be n>nveyed early.
The Phase 2 Otay Ranch RMP also includes Exhibits 14A and 14 B depicting the Salt Creek and Dtay
Mesa areas as the first conveyances for SPA One.
The T uchscher Development Enterprises parcd is located in the cast-central portion of the Otay
Ranch Proctor Valley parcel The parcel is designated for preservation on the Dtay Ranch GDP and
in the County of SanDiego's adopted MSCP Subarea Plan, The parcel has therefore been determined
to be desirable for preservation,
Based on the biological data bases assembled for both the Otay Ranch GDP and the MSCP Plan, as
well as anecdotal observations by DUDEK biologists during several walkovers of the overall Proctor
Valley pared from 1989-1993, it appCars that the parcel is charaeterizedlargdy by coastalsage scrub
habitat with a substantial area of coast live oak woodland in the southern portioD. of the parcel
Portions of two minor drainage traverse the parcel, generally trending in a northwest to southeast
29BOOO-BUD
2
<-P-( {o
H'~JH" UUU~~ ~ H""U'-"Hlt.~ P.4/4
,,~, ~U ~U
Mr. Rick.Rossler
Re: Rtvicw of Tuchscher Developmenr Enterprise> Inc. Otay Ranch Pared with Re¡;rJut to Pha<, 2
Otay Ranch RMP PresefVe Concept Plan
direction. Previous sœsiti.l1e species observations on the parcel include California gnatcatcher (3
observations), rufous crowncdsparrow (4 observations), sage sparrow(! observation), androountain
lion sign at the western border of the parcel. Plant species observed include San Diego viguiera,
nightshade,Muilla, and Stirn diegoensis, a native grass. The parcelis strategically located north of the
Dulzura Creek drainage, an ÌInportant area for least Bell'. vireo, and the Otay Ranch San Ysidro
parcel. The portion of the San Y sidro pared located directly south of the T uchscher Development
parcel is designated for development on the Dtay Ranch GDP but has been identified for acquisition
and preservation in the MSCP Plan. With the additional preservation on the San Ysidro parcd, the
T uchscher Dcvclopment parcd will provide a portion of a strategic habitat block linking San Y sidro
parcel, Dulzura Creek, and Proctor Valley parcel resOUrces together and to habitat blocks located to
the north, such as San Miguel Mountain.
The biological resourccs and functional valucs of the T uchscher Development parcel would conform
with the "keystone" parcel definition incorporated in the Dtay Ranch GDP in several ways. The
parcel is generally located in central Proctor Valley ..nd contair¡s high quality biological ""sources. It
is also .tra tegically loea ted to provide bœefits to overall preserve functions and values. Although the
parcel is not considered to be vulnerable sincc it is designated for preservation in the Dray Ranch
GDP, and is not considered to have substantial restoration potential due to the relative lack of
disturbance on the pared, it docs generally sati«fy the requirements of a "keystone" parcel as set forth
in the Otay Ranch RMP. It is anticipated that an additional advantage of early conveyance of this
parcel would include immediate elimination of any grazing activities on the parcd
I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if r can be of additional assistance.
Very truly yours,
DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INe.
~~~ C~~~,,~
June. Collins
Principal
Environmental Sci<:nces Division
JSC/rsf
cc: William T uchscher, T uchscher Development Enterprises, Inc-
29BOOO,'IDO
&ASSOCIA,H
""""""""""- M.y2B,I998 R
'f -I)
~
ë II>
- '" ...,
- '" >
~~" ~ - . :; f-
~.o - . ~ 0 Z
- ¡; ¡¡OJ;;"'. S.~ ~
~--~,-~ .-- :E
~ 0--"-"" _.- _.
LU "'GCI C> - - = c..;> I ¡::; r-
~.. .~~~~~H~' ~ ~¡¡ð~ ~
0 ~";;,,,,=;;; =;:_. ::;; ¡¡¡
. E . . ." =-" . "'~ 711 ~<!"
0 ~ ~ õ.ê . . e "" ." ' "; ü...;¡ 0
~"~,, -,,- ' ::>"
;;; ==" :!:z
~ u-
-~~u= Z
~=~o- Z
-- j
dJ ~
~
""
~
~
f
<Ii
r- ,;-
n: "
0 ~ .
z .;¿
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: /1
Meeting Date: June 9. 1998
ITEM TITLE: IJ. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 98-21: Consideration ofan amendment
to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan
(GDP/SRP) to allow reduction in Village Core densities.
RES 10 190.:1;1.1' f h' '1 .
OLUT N NO. : Reso utlon 0 t e CIty Councl of the City
of Chula Vista approving an amendment to the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan/Subregional Plan.
ß. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 98-16: Consideration of an amendment
to the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan on
property generally located on 1,110 acres south of Telegraph Canyon
Road between Paseo Ranchero and the future SR-125 alignment.
RESOLUTION NO. /~V'.J"¡esolution of the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista approving an amendment to the Otay Ranch
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan, which includes the Overall
Design Plan, Village Design Plan and supporting documents, Parks,
Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, Regional Facilities Report,
Phase 2 Resource Management Plan and supporting plans, Non-
Renewable Energy ConseIVation Plan, Ranch-wide Affordable Housing
Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan and the Geotechnical
Reconnaissance Report.
C. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS 98-04: Consideration of a Tentative
Subdivision Map for 101.4 acres of the Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula
Vista Tract 98-04, generally located off the southern extension of Otay
Lakes Road, south of Telegraph Canyon Road.
RESOLUTION NO. /1t7J,i'esolution of the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista adopting the Fourth Addendum to the Final
Environmental Impact Report FEIR 95-01 (SCH #95021012) and
approving Tentative Subdivision Map for portions of the Otay Ranch
SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 98-04, and making the necessary findings.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning øt
REVIEWED BY: Ci<y M~ ~ l (4¡5th' Yo<" y~ - No XJ
//~/
Page 2, Item: -
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
The McMillin Companies has submitted an application to amend the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) and the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area
(SPA) One Plan. In addition, they have submitted a revised Tentative Tract Map, PCS 98-04,
which covers the Village Five Core area south of East Palomar Street and the neighborhood
park and Community Purpose Facility (CPF) sites north of East Palomar Street. The
proposed GDP/SRP amendment requests that flexibility be granted in reducing the density of
village core areas, as long as core vitality and the ability to serve transit needs are maintained.
The requested SPA amendment makes adjustments to neighborhood boundaries in the Village
Five Core area, reconfigures the Park and CPF sites based on the reduced density and
population and revises the circulation system around the Core area.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared Initial Study 98- I 6 and concluded that
the existing Program EIR for the GDP/SRP and Second-Tier EIR for the SPA One Plan
provide adequate prior review of the projects' environmental impacts. The Coordinator has
prepared an addendum to the Second-Tier EIR substantiating this position. The addendum
is attached to the draft City Council Resolution for the SPA amendment.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve:
1. the Fourth Addendum to FEIR 95-01 for the Otay Ranch SPA One; and
2 an amendment to the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP (pCM 98-21); and
3. an amendment to the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan (pCM 98-16); and
4. a revised Tentative Subdivision Map for the 101.4 acres in the Village Five core area.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission reviewed and approved (6-0-1) the Fourth Addendum to FEIR 95-
01, PCM 98-21, PCM 98-16 and a revised Tentative Map for the Village Five Core area at
their May 13, 1998 meeting.
DISCUSSION:
I. Backl!round:
In October of 1993, the City Council and County Board of Supervisors jointly adopted the Otay
Ranch GDP/SRP for the 23,000-acre Otay Ranch. On June 4, 1996, the City Council approved
the SPA One Plan for Villages One and Five of the Otay Ranch. The SPA One Plan was
processed by Otay Ranch Company (then known as Village Development). Subsequent to SPA
One approval, West Coast Land Fund (WCLF) foreclosed on approximately 1,036 acres of the
Otay Ranch, a portion of which was located within SPA One. In response to this, Village
Development processed a tentative map excluding approximately 290 acres of SPA One that was
subject to the WCLF foreclosure action.
McMillin Companies subsequently purchased the WCLF property and filed a Tentative Map on
the 290 acres that was in substantial conformance with the SPA One Plan. This Tentative Map
(PCS 97-02) was approved by the City Council on June 3, 1997 and was processed to receive
1/-;2
Page 3, Item: -
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
approval of the single-family areas north of East Palomar Street. The originally approved map
had a total of 1,877 dwelling units on 290 acres as shown in Exhibit 2. The area south of East
Palomar Street was originally mapped identical to the SPA One Plan and divided the core into
lots as indicated on the SPA One Plan. At the time of approval, McMillin Companies indicated
that they would most likely propose revisions to this area in the future. At this time, the applicant
is proposing to amend the Village Five Core area as indicated in the discussion below.
ll. Anplicants Proposal:
A. GDP Amendment
In order to allow for the reduction in density in the Village Five Core area, McMillin Companies
is requesting that the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP be amended to allow for flexibility on a case-by-
case-basis. The suggested amendment is indicated as Exhibit 3. The applicant is requesting that
an additional criterion be added to the Implementation Mechanism section of the GDP/SRP (page
117) as follows:
The number of homes identified for the village core represents an urban planning
I!oal Reductions in the number of multi-family units may be IIPDroved at the SPA
and tentative IruW level asl°!l¥ as sufficient densities are provided to SUDport bus
and light rail transit
Additionally, the applicant is requesting that one of the Village Core policies (page 144) be
modified as follows:
Tlk, u~"bv' ufhv"'v~ idv"ti£...d fì:¡, t ,v ,iHàõ<' vv,<';o a Ilhu;mu,u .tud Int.] nol
b<, ¡"duv"d. The number of homes identified for the villal!e core represents
an urban plannin¡¡¡ I!oal Reductions in the number of multi-family units mllY
be ap.proved at the SPA and tentative mllP level as lonl! as sufficient densities
are provided to SlWDort bus and light rail transit
Analysis
Existing GDP/SRP policies indicate a maximum of 1,615 multi-family dwelling units in the Village
Five Core at an average density of 18 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). During the preparation of
the GDP/SRP, the Otay Ranch Project Team had proposed a density of 14.5 du/ac for all the
urban village cores. This density was supported by the Planning Commission, however, during
the City Council and Board of Supervisors public review of the GDP/SRP, the Metropolitan
Transit Development Board (MTDB) requested higher densities up to 22 du/ac in the transit
villages to support the future trolley line. The Council and Board ultimately determined that 18
du/ac would be the appropriate density for the village cores, but they could not be reduced.
These densities were calculated on a "gross area" basis. The GDP identified broad development
bubbles and indicated that 1,615 multi-family units could be built on 89.7 acres in the Village 5
Core. Streets were included in the Core acreage. As a result, when the units were planned at the
SPA level, with the streets deleted from the area calculations, the net densities of the building
sites increased dramatically. There are six neighborhoods in McMillin's existing SPA One Village
J)- :)
Page 4, Item: -
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
Five core with the following net densities:
Neighborhood Density ~
R-40 23.7 du/ac 204
R-41 24.4 du/ac 127
R-42 33.0 du/ac 241
R-43 33.7 du/ac 175
R-44 22.3 du/ac 261
R-45 29.5 du/ac 165
IillaL 1,173
The applicant believes these densities are too high and, while there is a growing demand in the
multi-family market, the approved densities would not be absorbed by the market. They are
proposing that flexibility be added to the GDP/SRP to maintain the 18 du/ac as the maximum
density as policy but allow less density to be built. Staff supports the amendment as long as
sufficient densities are achieved to support the light rail transit. The City will continue to
coordinate with MTDB to ensure the transit village cores contain enough density to support the
trolley line.
The applicant is proposing this text amendment in order to allow them to reduce the density in
the Village Five Core on the SPA One Plan ITom an average of 18 du/ac to an average of 15
du/acre on the SPA One Plan. The applicant is still proposing to maintain the following multiple
family densities in the Village Five Core area south of East Palomar Street:
Nei!!hborhood Density !lni1J¡
R-40 16.2 du/ac 201
R-43 29.3 du/ac 240
R-44 30.9 du/ac 210
R-45 Mixed Use 18 multi-family units above ground floor
commercial
Additionally, Neighborhood R-46 located north of East Palomar Street is maintaining a density
of 16.3 du/ac which is consistent with the originally approved Tentative Map.
In reviewing the proposal, and in discussions with the MTDB, City staff is in support of the
proposed amendment. MTDB has indicated that an average density of 15 du/ac is still within
their parameters for transit-oriented development. A letter of support ITom MTDB is attached
as Exhibit 4.
B. SPA Amendment
The applicant is proposing several amendments to the SPA One Plan as summarized below.
The specific amendments to text, maps and tables have been included as Exhibit 5.
II-if
Page 5, Item: -
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
1. Reduction in density of the Village Five Core
Following is a table which indicates the overall change in dwelling units ITom the GDP/SRP to
the SPA One Plan which maintains 15 du/ac in the Village Core. This table indicates a decrease
in one single-family unit and a decrease in 422 multi-family units.
GDP/SRP Approved SPA Proposed SPA Proposed TM
SF Units 1,263 1,263 1,262 1,262
MF Units 1,615 1,615 1,193 1,193
Population 8,289 8,289 7,070 7,070
2. Parks and Community Purpose Facilities (CPF)
The number, location and size of the Village Five parks and CPF sites has been revised based
upon the reduction in density and population. The approved SPA indicated four CPF sites,
ranging in size from 2.4 to 3.7 acres and totaling 11.6 acres. The applicant is proposing to
consolidate the three CPF sites located on their portion of SPA One (CPF 4,6 and 7) into one
location at the northeast comer of East Palomar Street and Santa Cora Avenue (CPF 4). This
new site totals 4.8 acres. The CPF 5 site in the Otay Ranch Company portion of SPA One would
be increased in size ITom 3.7 to 5.3 acres. The applicant has indicated that the larger CPF sites
are much more marketable than smaller sites. They noted that most churches require a minimum
size of 4.5 - 5 acres.
Similarly, the parks within Village Five have been relocated and reduced in size based on the
reduction in density and population. Park P- 7 has remained in essentially the same location and
has changed in size ITom 5.2 to 5.7 acres; Park P-8, the Town Square Park, has been reduced
from 1.8 to 1.0 acres. Park P-6 has been reconfigured and reduced in size from a total of 10.6
to 6.4 acres. The table below compares the CPF and Parks requirements for the approved and
proposed SPA Plans.
Approved SPA Proposed SPA
Required Provided Required Provided
CPF 11.52 ac. 11.6 ac. 9.8 ac. 10.1 ac.
Parks 16.6 ac. 21.3 ac. 1414 ac. 17 ac.
The table below further breaks down the sizes of parks proposed for Village Five and indicates
the amount of park credit allowed. City policy does not allow parks to receive park credit if they
are less than 5 acres in size. However, since small pedestrian parks are an integral neighborhood
component of the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP and SPA One Plan, the SPA One Plan permits 25% to
50% credit for the pedestrian parks and 100% park credit for the Town Square Park.
/'
//<~
Page 6, Item: -
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
Additionally, the City Council allowed in their approval of the McMillin Tentative Map, credit
for pedestrian Park P-9 since it would be a public park.
Park Size % Credit Allowed/Acres
P-6.1 (McM) 5.3 ac. 100%/5.3 ac.
P-6.2 (ORC) 1.1 ac. 100%/1.1 ac.
P- 7 (McM) 5.7 ac. 100%/5.7 ac.
P-8 (McM) 1.0 ac. 100%/1.0 ac.
P-9.1 (McM) 1.0 ac. 50%/.5 ac.
P-9.2 (ORC) 1.0 ac. 50%/.5 ac.
P-IO 1.3 ac. - -
P-ll (ORC) 0.6 ac. - -
Total: 17 ac. 14.1 ac.
3. Street Reconfiguration
As proposed, Santa Cora remains a promenade street which loops around Park P- 7, the Town
Square Park and the multi-family area within the Village Five Core. Due to the reconfiguration
of the residential neighborhoods south of East Palomar Street, Santa Rosa Drive has been deleted,
resulting in aT-intersection at East Palomar Street.
4, Commercial
The commercial acreage in the Village Five Core area has been reduced from 3.6 acres in the
approved SPA to approximately 2.8 acres. The commercial area will surround the Town Square
Park on the south and east sides. A mixed use land use designation is being proposed which
would allow commercial uses on the ground floor with two stories of residential above. The
reduction in commercial acres reflects the specific site plan proposed for the Mixed Use area.
5. Reconfiguration of Neighborhoods
Neil!hborhood R-40
This area is located east of the easterly extension of Santa Cora and is a multi-family site
consisting of 12.4 acres with 201 units. The resulting density is 16.2 dulac.
Neil!hborhood R-41
This area is sited directly west of Neighborhood R-40, and is located south of Santa Cora and
Park P-7. This is a single family area consisting of90 units on 14.4 acres with a density of6.3
dulac.
H: III 0 MEIP LANNIN GIB EV\CCO 60 9 . DOC
I;-?
Page 7, Item: -
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
Nei!!hborhood R-42
This neighborhood is a multi-family site located north of Neighborhood R-4l and west of Park
P-7. Seventy four (74) units are sited on 9.6 acres with a resultant density of7.7 dulac.
Nei¡¡hborhood R-43
This multi-family site is located at the southeast corner of La Media Road and East Palomar
Street. The applicant is proposing 240 units on 8.2 acres, with a resultant density of 29.3 dulac.
Nei!!hborhood R-44
This area is located directly south and east of the Mixed Use area. The applicant is proposing 210
units on 6.8 acres, with a resultant density ofJO.9 dulac.
Nei!!hborhood R-45
This area is directly adjacent to the Town Square Park and is situated above the commercial
ground floor buildings. Approximately 18 units are planned for this area. The SPA One Plan is
proposed to be amended to allow this area to be Mixed Use.
6. Village Design Plan
Minor amendments to exhibits and maps in the Village Design Plan are required in order to reflect
the proposed SPA amendment and maintain consistency between the documents. These proposed
changes are noted in Exhibit 6.
7. Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan
Minor amendments are also required to maps within this document to reflect the revised
configuration of Parks P- 7 and P-6. These proposed changes are noted in Exhibit 7.
~
The proposed SPA amendment has been reviewed on several occasions by the Technical
Committee, which consists of City stafffrom the Engineering, Planning, Parks and Recreation,
Police and Fire Departments. Additionally, the location and configuration of the CPF and park
sites north of East Palomar Street were reviewed and approved by the Executive Committee. The
size of the sites was also approved by the Executive Committee. The size of the CPF sites are
in COnfOImÌty with City requirements, and staff believes that the single larger site will provide the
opportunity for a significant architectural statement as opposed to the smaller more dispersed
sites. The overall creditable acreage for the park sites is consistent with the Otay Ranch
GDP/SRP requirement of2 acres per 1,000 residents. The additional I acre per 1,000 residents
will be met through the payment of PAD fees which will be used to construct the community
parks as contained in a condition of approval of the Tentative Map.
The deletion of Santa Rosa and the slight realignment of Santa Cora are necessary due to the
reconfiguration of the neighborhoods south of East Palomar Street. The loop promenade street
(Santa Cora) will provide a strong landscape and visual element unifYing this area. Additionally,
H: \II 0 ME IP LANNIN GIB E Vlceo 60 9 . Doe
11- 7
Page 8, Item: -
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
the reconfiguration of the neighborhoods and the location of single-family and multi-family uses
is consistent with the goals of the GDP/SRP which encourages multi-family uses closer to the
transIt stop.
Staff is in support of the Mixed Use proposal which surrounds the Town Square Park and
believes this furthers the neo-traditional concepts outlined in the GDP/SRP and will provide a
strong focal backdrop for the Town Square Park. The Town Square Park will be ftamed with
commercial on two sides, multi-family on the west and a CPF site to the north.
c. Tentative Map
The applicant has submitted a Tentative Map which is consistent with the proposed SPA and
GDP/SRP amendment. Neighborhoods R-40, 43 and 44 are multi-family sites that are not
specifically designed with this Tentative Map, however, staff has been working with the guest
builder in development of their Detailed Site Plans for Neighborhoods R-43 and 44. These multi-
family development sites will be reviewed by the Design Review Committee in the near future.
The City Council has recently raised concerns regarding proposed reductions in side yard setbacks
forR-I-710ts ftom 10 and 3 feet to 5 and 5 feet. The lots proposed for Neighborhoods R-41 and
42 are consistent with the SF-4 standards in the Planned Community District Regulations which
were previously approved with the SPA One Plan. Side yard setbacks for SF-4 are 5 and 5 feet
with 13 feet at corner side yards. No changes in these standards are proposed at this time.
The Council has also recently expressed concerns regarding cul-de-sac streets and how their
design provides for pedestrian access. Neighborhoods R-41 and 42 both have cul-de-sacs at the
perimeter of the site, but are also provided with a through connection. Pedestrian access is also
provided between these two neighborhoods and the Village Five Core.
1. Neighborhood R-41
This neighborhood is proposed for 90 single-family lots on 44' x 90' pads. This neighborhood
is directly south of Neighborhood Park P- 7 and Santa Cora, a promenade street encircling the
park. All lots adjacent to Santa Cora will face onto the park. This design will provide "eyes on
the park" security and a greater sense of ownership of the park by adjacent residents. Lots in this
neighborhood are served by the Residential Street Section A, which contains a 6- foot landscaped
parkway adjacent to the curb and a 4- foot sidewalk. Maintenance of the parkways will be by the
homeowner with enforcement by the Homeowner's Association, similar to the other McMillin
neighborhoods within SPA One.
2. Neighborhood R-42
This neighborhood consists of74 duplex or single-family attached units on 9.6 acres. Consistent
with other neighborhoods in SPA One, these small lots are allowed to be served by Residential
Street Section B, which provides for a contiguous sidewalk. The through street (Sierra Verde
Drive) linking Neighborhoods R-41 and 42 is required to be Residential Street Section A to
provide continuity. Lots in Neighborhood R-42 on Santa Cora will also front onto the park.
H: \II 0 MEIPLANNIN GIBE V\CCO 6 09 . DOC
II~r
Page 9, Item: -
Meeting Date: 6/9/98
Analysis
The proposed Tentative Map was reviewed concurrently with the SPA One and GDP
Amendments at the Technical Committee. The Tentative Map is consistent with the proposed
GDP and SPA One amendments. Conditions of approval have been developed by the various
City departments and are included for the Commission's review as an attachment to the
Resolution of Approval for the Tentative Map. Staff has some concerns regarding the appearance
of the lots in Neighborhood R-41 adjacent to the slopes along Olympic Parkway. Conditions of
approval have been incorporated to address this aesthetic issue.
Conclusion
Staffis in support of the GDP and SPA One Amendment including the proposed modifications
to the Village Design Plan and Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Space Plan. Additionally, staff
is in support of the proposed Tentative Map with the recommended conditions of approval.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact to the General Fund since the McMillin Companies application
has been processed under their staffing agreement.
Attachments.
I: Locator ¡ j
2: McMillin original Tentative Map 97-02
3: GDP Amendment {
4: MTDB letter!
Oo,'J.' 5: SPA One Amendment
t-fv fI' ..c:.. 6: Village Design Plan Amendment
~ tI 7: Parks, Open Space and Trails Plan Amendment
C/ iØ \' PI""';", C="",.o" ",,01°'," POM 98-21 Rerom_dm, Appm"'" to th,
City Council of the Fourth Addendum to FEIR 95-01 and GDP Amendments; Planning
., """"",,,on R.rom"oo PCM 9~ 16 -~""';"g Appro", .. th, C"' Cooncil om,
~ SPA One Plan Amendment; Plarnúng Commission Resolution PCS 98-04 Recommending
~~ Approval to the City Council ofChula Vista Tract 98-04; Planning Commission
~ Minutes for May 13, 1998.
~
H: IH 0 MEIP LANNIN OlE E V\CCO6 0 9 . DOC
/1-9
RESOLUTION NO. 191J3,:¿
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
OT A Y RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PCM 98-
21)
WHEREAS, an application for an amendment to the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan (GDP) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on
December 3, 1997 by the McMillin Companies ("Applicant"), and;
WHEREAS, the amendment to the Otay Ranch GDP involves allowing for
additional flexibility in determining the density for the village cores. This text amendment
applies to the entire area affected by the Otay Ranch GDP ("Project"), and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for hearings on said
GDP amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and mailing to property owners within 500
feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on May 13,
1998 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission, and;
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Second-tier
Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR 95-01, a Recirculated Second-tier Draft ErR and
Fourth Addendum, and Findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
have been issued to address environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the
Project, and;
WHEREAS, this Second-tier EIR, the Recirculated ErR and Addendum
incorporates, by reference, two prior EIRs: the Otay Ranch General Development
Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) EIR 90-01 and the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Update
EIR 94-03 as well as their associated Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program. Program EIR 90-01 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego
County Board of Supervisors on October 28, 1993, and the Sphere of Influence Update EIR 94-
03 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council on March 21, 1995, and;
WHEREAS, to the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation
measures outlined in the Final EIR and Addendum are feasible and have not been modified,
superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its
successors in interest, to implement those measures. These findings are not merely informational
or advisory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City
adopts the resolution approving the Project. The adopted mitigation measures are express
I
///1-/
conditions of approval. Other requirements are referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the
process of implementing the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby find, detennine, resolve and order as follows:
I. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public hearings on the Draft EIR, the Recirculated DEIR and Addendum held on
November 8, 1995, November 15, 1995, March 27, 1996 and March 28, 1996, and their
public hearing held on this Project on March 22, 1998 and the minutes and resolutions
resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. These
documents, along with any documents submitted to the decision makers, shall comprise
the entire record of the proceedings for any California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) claims.
II. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
That the City Council does hereby find that FEIR 95-01 and Addendum, the Findings of
Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations are prepared in accordance with the requirements of the CEQA, the State
EIR Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
III. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan for the following reasons:
A. THE PROPOSED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT .S IN
CONFORMITY WITH THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN.
The Otay Ranch General Development Plan was found consistent with the Chula
Vista General Plan when it was approved on October 23, 1993. The Otay Ranch
General Development Plan Amendment is minor in nature and does not impact the
land use, circulation system, open space and recreational uses, and public facility
uses set out in the GDP. This amendment will still advance the goals and
objectives of the Otay Ranch GDP.
B. THE PROPOSED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT WILL
PROMOTE THE ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE
INVOLVED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA.
2
1//9-2
The SPA One Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan contain provisions and
requirements to ensure the orderly, phased development of the project. The Public
Facilities Financing Plan specifies the public facilities required by the Otay Ranch,
and also the regional facilities needed to serve it. The proposed amendments to
master-planned villages, transit, irrigation of fannland, solar energy requirements,
residential noise mitigation, habitat mitigation noise standards and habitat
perfonnance standards will not have an impact on the sequential development of
SPA One.
C. THE PROPOSED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT WILL
NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL
ENJOYMENT, CIRCULATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.
The villages within Otay Ranch are designed with an open space buffer adjacent
to other existing projects, and future developments off-site and within the Otay
Ranch Planning Area One. Four neighborhood parks will be located within the
SPA One area to serve the project residents, and the project will provide a wide
range of housing types for all economic levels. A comprehensive street network
serves the project and provides for access to off-site adjacent properties. The
proposed plan follows all existing environmental protection guidelines and will
avoid unacceptable off-site impacts through the provision of mitigation measures
specified in the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact Report. The proposed GDP
amendments will not adversely affect adjacent land use, residential enjoyment,
circulation or environmental quality.
IV. CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A. ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT
The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the
Findings of Fact, Attachment "A" of this Resolution known as document number
-' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
B. CERTAIN MITIGATION MEASURES FEASIBLE AND ADOPTED
As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and in the
Findings of Fact for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this Resolution
known as document number -' a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that the mitigation measures
described in the above referenced documents are feasible and hereby binds itself
and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures.
3
///9"-3
C. INFEASIBILITY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and in the
Findings of Fact for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this Resolution
known as document number -' a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk, the mitigation measure regarding habitat noise mitigation described in
the above referenced documents is infeasible.
D. INFEASIBILITY OF ALTERNATIVES
As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and in the
Findings of Fact, Section XI, for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this
Resolution known as document number -, a copy of which is on file in the
office of the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that
alternatives to the project, which were identified as potentially feasible in FEIR
95-01 and Addendum were found not to be feasible.
E. ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, City Council hereby adopts
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set forth in Attachment
"B" of this Resolution known as document number -' a copy of which is on file
in the office of the City Clerk. The City Council hereby finds that the Program
is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the permittee/project
applicant and any other responsible parties and the successors in interest
implement the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation
measures identified in the Findings of Fact and the Program.
F. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible alternatives, certain
significant or potentially significant environmental effects caused by the project,
or cumulatively, will remain. Therefore, the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations in the form set forth in Attachment "C", known as
document number -' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk,
identifying the specific economic, social and other considerations that render the
unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable.
V. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
That the Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after City
Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination filed with the County
4
/J/9-Lj
Clerk of the County of San Diego. This document along with any documents submitted to the
decision makers shall comprise the record of proceedings for any CEQA claims.
VI. ATTACHMENTS
All attachments and exhibits are incorporated herein by reference as set forth in full.
VII. The City Council hereby approves an Amendment to the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan (PCM 98-21), attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A".
Presented by Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
H,~h","'lattom,y\98-21.",
5
///1/5
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 9th day of June, 1998 by the following vote:
YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA)
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. - was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a City Council meeting held on the 9th day of June, 1998.
Executed this 9th day of June, 1998.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
Attachments:
Attachment A: GDP Amendment
Attachment B: Findings of Fact
Attachment C: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Attachment D: Statement of Overriding Considerations
6
/ J /'9-rf,
RESOLUTION NO. ) 9¿J.:J3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT PCM 98-16
TO THE OT A Y RANCH SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA)
ONE PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES THE OVERALL DESIGN
PLAN, VILLAGE DESIGN PLAN AND SUPPORTING
DOCUMENTS, PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND
TRAILS PLAN, REGIONAL FACILITIES REPORT, PHASE 2
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUPPORTING
PLANS, NON-RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION
PLAN, RANCH-WIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN, SPA
ONE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN AND THE
GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT
WHEREAS, an application for an amendment to the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area
(SPA) One Plan, was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department in December 3,
1997 by the McMillin Companies ("Applicant"); and
WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan also includes the following documents: Overall Design
Plan, Village Design Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan and Supporting Documents, Parks,
Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, Regional Facilities Report, Phase 2 Resource
Management Plan and Supporting Plans, Non-Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, Ranch-Wide
Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan and the Geotechnical
Reconnaissance Report (all documents referred to herein as "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan project area includes all of Villages One and Five and is
comprised of approximately 1,061.2 acres of land located south of Telegraph Canyon Road
between Paseo Ranchero and the future alignment of SR-125 ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS, the SPA refines and implements the land plans, goals, objectives and policies
of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) adopted by the Chula Vista City Council
on October 28, 1993, and amended on May 14, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for hearings on said Project
and notice of said hearings, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper
of general circulation in the City and its mailing to Property Owners within 500 feet of the
exterior boundaries of Village Five at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on May 13, 1998
in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, a Second-tier Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR 95-01, a
1
/)ß-/
Recirculated Second-tier Draft EIR and Addendum, and Findings of Fact and a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program have been issued to address environmental impacts associated
with the implementation of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Second-tier EIR 95-01, the Recirculated EIR and Addendum incorporates,
by reference, two prior EIRs: the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan
(GDP/SRP) EIR 90-01 and the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Update EIR 94-03 as well as
their associated Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Program
EIR 90-01 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of
Supervisors on October 28, 1993, and the Sphere ofInfluence Update EIR 94-03 was certified
by the Chula Vista City Council on March 21, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Chula Vista certified EIR 95-01 as adequate in
compliance with CEQA at a duly noticed public hearing on May 14, 1996 and recertified said
EIR on May 21, 1996 to assure compliance with Public Resources Code Section 2IOn.5(a). The
City now desires to once again recertify this document as adequate in compliance with CEQA;
and
WHEREAS, to the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures
outlined in the Final EIR and Addendum are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or
withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in
interest, to complement those measures. These findings are not merely informational or advisory,
but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts this
resolution approving the Project. The adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of
approval. Other requirements are references in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the process of
implementing the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Chula Vista held a duly noticed public hearing on June
9, 1998 regarding the Project.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve, and order as follows:
I. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
The proceedings of all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission and City
Council at their public hearings on this Project held on May 13 and June 9, 1998 and the minutes
and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
These documents, along with any documents submitted to the decision makers, including
documents specified in Public Resources Code Section 21167.6 subdivision(s), shall comprise the
entire record of the proceedings for any California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) claims.
2
/J ß-)..,
II. FEIR 95-01 REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered the
FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and the environmental impacts therein identified for this Project.
III. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that FEIR 95-01 and Addendum, the Findings of Fact,
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the Statement of Overriding Considerations
are prepared in accordance with the requirements of the CEQA, the State EIR Guidelines and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council finds that the FEIR 95-01 and Addendum reflects the independent
judgment of the City of Chula Vista City Council.
V. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan for the following reasons:
A. The proposed amendment to the Sectional Planning Area Plan is in conformity
with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and the Chula Vista General Plan.
The Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan reflects the land uses, circulation
system, open space and recreational uses, and public facility uses consistent with the Otay
Ranch General Development Plan and Chula Vista General Plan.
B. The proposed amendment to the Sectional Planning Area Plan will promote the
orderly sequentialized development of the involved sectional planning area.
The SPA One Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan contain provisions and
requirements to ensure the orderly, phased development of the project. The Public
Facilities Financing Plan specifies the public facilities required by Otay Ranch, and also
the regional facilities needed to serve it.
C. The proposed amendment to the Sectional Planning Area Plan will not adversely
affect adjacent land use, residential enjoyment, circulation or environmental quality.
The land uses within Otay Ranch are designed with a grade-separated open space buffer
adjacent to other existing projects, and future developments off-site and within the Otay
Ranch Planning Area One, four neighborhood parks will be located within the SPA One
area to serve the project residents, and the project will provide a wide range of housing
types for all economic levels. A comprehensive street network serves the project and
provides for access to off-site adjacent properties. The proposed plan closely follows all
existing environmental protection guidelines and will avoid unacceptable off-site impacts
through the provision of mitigation measures specified in the Otay Ranch Environmental
Impact Report.
3 J/ [j-:J
VI. CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council hereby finds that: (I) there were no changes in the project from the
Program EIR and the FEIR which would require revisions of said reports; (2) no substantial
changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken
since the previous reports; (3) and no new information of substantial importance to the project
has become available since the issuance and approval of the prior reports; and that, therefore, no
new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures will be required in addition to those
already in existence and made a condition for Project implementation. Therefore, the City Council
approves the Project as an activity that is within the scope of the project covered by the Program
EIR and FEIR, and a third Addendum has been prepared (Guideline 15168 (c)(2) and 15162 (a)).
VII. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
That the Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after
City Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination is filed with the
County Clerk of the County of San Diego. This document along with any documents submitted
to the decision makers shall comprise the record of proceedings for any CEQA claims.
VIII. ATTACHMENTS
All attachments and exhibits are incorporated herein by reference as set forth in full.
IX. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The Property Owner and/or Applicants shall execute the document attached as Exhibit
"A", said execution indicating that the Property Owner and/or Applicant have each read,
understand and agree to the conditions contained herein. This does not provide the Property
Owner and/or Applicant with any "vesting" of entitlements to this Project or any of the
corresponding documents approved herein, that is not otherwise provided by state and federal law.
Said document to be placed on file in the City Clerk's office as Document No.
X. The City Council hereby approves the Amendment PCM 98-16 to the SPA One Plan
attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A".
Presented by: Approved as to form by:
/'9 -:TfU- é ~ ~
Robert A. Leiter J:~ny
Planning Director City Attorney
H/lshanx¡Iottomoy\9816.'"
4 //ß-f
RESOLUTION NO. 1'1¿J:3'/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE FOURTH ADDENDUM TO
THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FEIR 95-01
(SCH #95021012) AND APPROVING A TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PORTIONS OF THE OTAY RANCH
SPA ONE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 98-04, AND MAKING THE
NECESSARY FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this resolution is identified and
described on Chula Vista Tract 98-04 and is commonly known as Otay Ranch Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) One ("Property"); and
WHEREAS, McMillin Companies filed a duly verified application for the subdivision of
the Property in the form of the tentative subdivision map known as Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula
Vista Tract 98-04, with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on December 3,
1997; and
WHEREAS, the application requested the approval for the subdivision of approximately
101.4 acres located south of the intersection of Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road
into 164 single family residential lots, 669 multi-family units, one 10-acre school site, 12 acres
of neighborhood parks, 4.8 acres of community purpose facility lots and one commercial site on
2.8 acres; and
WHEREAS, the development of the Property has been the subject matter of a General
Development Plan ("GDP") previously approved by the City Council on October 28, 1993 by
Resolution No. 17298 and as amended on May 14, 1996 by Resolution No. 18285 ("GDP
Resolution") wherein the City Council, in the environmental evaluation of said GDP, relied in
part on the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, Environmental Impact Report No. 90-01,
SCH #9010154 ("Program EIR 90-01"); and
WHEREAS, the development of the Property has been the subject matter of a Sectional
Planning Area Plan ("SPA Plan") previously approved by the City Council on June 9, 1996 by
Resolution No. 18286 ("SPA Plan Resolution") wherein the City Council, in the environmental
evaluation of said SPA Plan, relied in part on the Otay Ranch SPA Plan Final Environmental
Impact Report No. 95-01, SCH #95021012 ("FEIR 95-01"); and
WHEREAS, this Project is a subsequent activity in the program of development
environmentally evaluated under Program EIR 90-01, FEIR 95-01, and addendums thereto, that
is virtually identical in all relevant respects, including lot size, lot numbers, lot configurations,
transportation corridors, etc., to the project descriptions in said former environmental evaluations;
and
1
I)C-¡
WHEREAS, the City Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
alternative tentative maps (including the Project's) as part ofIS-98-16 and determined that they
are in substantial conformance with the SPA Plan and the related environmental documents and
that the proposed alternative tentative maps would not result in any new environmental effects
that were not previously identified, nor would the proposed alternative tentative maps result in
a substantial increase in severity in any environmental effects previously identified; therefore only
an Addendum to FEIR 95-01 is required in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the original
tentative map application on May 13, 1998 at which time the Planning Commission voted to
adopt the Fourth Addendum to FEIR 95-01 and recommend that the City Council approve the
Project in accordance with staffs recommendation and the findings and conditions listed below;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said tentative
subdivision map application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by
its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten days prior to the
hearing; and
WHEREAS, a hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on June 9, 1998 in
the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was
thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL finds, determines, and resolves as follows:
SECTION 1. CEQA Finding Regarding Previously Examined Effects
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, as described and analyzed in the Program
EIR 90-01, Second-tier FEIR 95-01, and addendums thereto, would have no new effects that were
not examined in the preceding Program EIR 90-01 and subsequent Second-tier FEIR 95-01
(Guideline 15168 (c)(2»; and
SECTION 2. CEQA Finding Regarding Project within Scope of Prior Program EIR
The City Council hereby finds that: (I) there were no changes in the project from the
Program EIR and the FEIR which would require revisions of said reports; (2) no substantial
changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken
since the previous reports; (3) and no new information of substantial importance to the project
has become available since the issuance and approval of the prior reports; and that, therefore, no
new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures will be required in addition to those
already in existence and made a condition for Proj ect implementation. Therefore, the City Council
approves the Project as an activity that is within the scope of the project covered by the Program
EIR and FEIR, and a fourth Addendum has been prepared (Guideline 15168 (c)(2) and 15162
(a».
SECTION 3. Notice with Later Activities
The City Council does hereby give notice, to the extent required by law, that this Project
was fully described and analyzed and is within the scope of the GDP EIR (90-01) and the SPA
2 /JC--;¿
Plan EIR (95-01) and the Final EIR with first, second, third and fourth addendum's adequately
describes and analyzes this project for the purposes of CEQA (Guideline 15168 (e)). Notice on
the SPA EIR was given on June 9, 1996.
SECTION 4. Tentative Map Findings
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the revised tentative subdivision map for the Village Five core as
conditioned herein for Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 98-04, is in conformance
with all the various elements of the City's General Plan, the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan based on the following:
1. Land Use - The Project is a planned community which provides a variety of land
uses and residential densities ranging between 6.3 and 30.9 dwelling units per acre.
The project is also consistent with General Plan policies related to grading and
landforms.
2. Circulation - All of the on-site and off-site public and private streets required to
serve the subdivision consist of Circulation Element roads and local streets in
locations required by said Element. The Applicant shall construct those facilities
in accordance with City standards or pay in-lieu fees in accordance with the
Transportation Development Impact Fee program.
3. Housing - The Applicant is required to enter into an agreement with the City to
provide and implement a low and moderate income program within the Project
prior to the approval of any Final Map for the Project.
4. Parks and Recreation Open Space - The Project will provide 12 acres (gross) of
neighborhood parks and the payment of PAD fees or additional improvements as
approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation. In addition, a recreational trail
system will be provided throughout the Project, ultimately connecting with other
open space areas and trail systems in the region.
Open Space - The Project provides 20.4 acres of open space, 14% of the total 290
acres recommended for approval. A program to preserve 83% of slopes greater
than 25% has been established ranch-wide and is detailed in the recirculated FEIR
95-01.
5. Conservation - The Program EIR and FEIR addressed the goals and policies of the
Conservation Element of the General Plan and found development of this site to
be consistent with these goals and policies.
6. Seismic Safety - The proposed subdivision is in conformance with the goals and
policies of the Seismic Element of the General Plan for this site. No seismic
faults have been identified in the vicinity of the Project.
7. Public Safety - All public and private facilities are expected to be reachable within
the threshold response times for fire and police services.
3 JIC-';
8. Public Facilities - The Applicant will provide all on-site and off-site streets, sewers
and water facilities necessary to serve this Project. The developer will also
contribute to the Otay Water District's improvement requirements to provide
terminal water storage for this Project as well as other major project in the eastern
territories.
9. Noise - The Project will include noise attenuation walls as required by an acoustic
study dated June 6, 1995 prepared for the Project. In addition, all units are
required to meet the standards of the UBC with regard to acceptable interior noise
levels.
10. Scenic Highway - The roadway design provides wide landscaped buffers along the
two scenic highways, Telegraph Canyon Road and East Orange Avenue (Olympic
Parkway).
11. Bicycle Routes - Bicycle paths are provided throughout the Project.
12. Public Buildings - The Project provides one elementary school site to serve the
area. The Project will also be subject to Public Facilities Development Impact
Fees.
B. Balance of Housing Needs and Public Service Needs
Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council certifies that it has
considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced
those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available
fiscal and environmental resources. The development will provide for a variety of
housing types from single family detached homes to attached single-family and multiple-
family housing and will provide low and moderate priced housing consistent with regional
goals.
C. Opportunities for Natural Heating and Cooling Incorporated
The configuration, orientation and topography of the site partially allows for the optimum
siting of lots for passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities as required by
Government Code Section 66473.1.
D. Finding regarding Suitability for Residential Development
The Village Five site is physically suitable for residential development and the proposal
conforms to all standards established by the City for such projects.
E. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact created
by the proposed development.
SECTION 5. Tentative Map Findings In Support Of Approval Of The Tentative Map
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 (a) in the Subdivision Map Act, the
4 IIC-,!
tentative subdivision map for the McMillin Companies properties in Otay Ranch SPA One,
Chula Vista Tract 98-04, is in confonnance with all the various elements of the City's General
Plan, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan based on the
following:
A. Public Facilities
McMillin Companies has filed a tentative map that is consistent with the SPA One Plan
including the school and park locations.
SECTION 6. Approval of Tentative Subdivision Map
The City Council does hereby approve, subject to the following conditions, as Exhibit A
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, the Project tentative subdivision map
for only McMillin Companies Village Five core of the Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract
98-04, based upon the findings and detenninations on the record for the project.
SECTION 7. Adoption of Addendum
The City Council does hereby adopt the Fourth Addendum to the Final ErR 95-01.
SECTION 8. Notice of Detennination
City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of
Detennination for the project and file the same with the County Clerk.
SECTION 9. Consequence of Failure of Conditions
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their tenns, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and
maintained according to their tenns, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all
approvals herein granted, deny, revoke or further condition issuance of all future building pennits
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel
their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation.
SECTION 10. Invalidity; Automatic Revocation
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent
upon the enforceability of each and every tenn, provision and condition herein stated; and that
in the event that anyone or more tenns, provisions, or conditions are detennined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to
be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
Presented by: Approved as to fonn by:
rJl:;;¡¡ J)jl '{~/;J/v;í
Robert A. Leiter 0 aneny J
Planning Director City Attorney
5 //ê-S-
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 9th day of June, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilrnembers:
NAYES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. - was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 9th day of June, 1998.
Executed this 9th day of June, 1998.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
H,lsluuod'ottomey\98
6 //C-6
MCMILLIN Exhibit "A"
Otay Ranch SPA One Reso. No. 19034
Tentative Subdivision Map PCS 98-04
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Uilless otherwise specified or required by law: (a). the conditions and Code requirements set forth below shall be
completed prior to the related final map as determined by the Directors of Planning, Parks and Recreation and/or the
City Engineer; (b). unless otherwise specified, "dedicate" means grant the appropriate easement, rather than fee
title. Where an easement is required the applicant shall be required to provide subordination of any prior lien holders
in order to ensure that the City has a first priority interest in such land unless otherwise excused by the City. Where
fee title is granted or dedicated to the City, said fee title shall be free and clear of all encumbrances, unless otherwise
excused by the City.
The Developer has requested" A" Maps for the fmt Final Map on the project. An "A" Map shall be defined as a
master subdivision or parcel map, filed in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, which shows "Super Block" lots corresponding to the units and phasing or combination of units and phasing
thereof, and which does not contain individual single or multi-family lots or a subdivision of the multi-family lots
shown on the tentative map. Subsequent to the approval of any "A" Map, the applicant may process the necessary
fmal "B" Maps. A Final "B" Map is defmed as a fmal subdivision or parcel map, filed in accordance with the
Suhdivision Map Act and the Chula Vista Municipal Code, which proposes to subdivide land into individual single or
multi-family lots, or contains a subdivision of the multi-family lots shown on the tentative map. The "B" Map shall
be in substantial confonnance with the related approved final "A" Map.
Should conflicting wording or standards occur betWeen these conditions of approval, any conflict shall be resolved by
the City Manager or designee.
GENERAL/PRELIMINARY
1. Prior to each final applicable map, the Developer will comply with all requirements and guidelines of the
Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Ranch Wide Affordable Housing
Plan, Spa One Affordable Housing Plan, and the Non-Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, unless specifically
modified by the appropriate deparnnent head, with the approval of the City Manager. These plans may be subject to
minor modifications by the appropriate department head, with the approval of the City Manager, however, any
material modifications shall be subject to approval by the City Council.
2. All of the tenus, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of
the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Developer as to any or all of the Property. For purposes of
this document, the tenn "Developer" shall also mean "Applicant".
3. If any of the tenus, covenants or conditions contained herein shall fail to occur or if they are, by their tenus,
to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained
according to their tenus, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted including
issuance of building pennits, deny, or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived from the approvals
herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for
their violation. The applicant shall be notified 10 days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by the
City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the City.
4. The applicant shall comply with all applicable SPA conditions of approval.
5. Any and all agreements that the applicant is required to enter in hereunder, shall be in a form approved by
the City Attorney.
. Resolution No. 19034 Page 2 of 22
ENVIRONMENTAL
6. Prior to approval of each finaI "B" Map, the applicant shall enter into a supplemental subdivision agreement
to implement all applicable mitigation measures identified in EIR 95-01, the CEQA Findings of Fact for this Project
and the Mitigation MonilOring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior 10 the approval of each finaI "B" Map, the applicant shall comply with all applicable requirements of
the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (RMP) as approved by the City Council on June 4, 1996 and as may be
amended from time 10 time by the City.
8. The Applicant shall comply with any applicable requirements of the Callfornia Department of Fish and
Game, the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.. The applicant shall apply
for and receive a take permit from the appropriate resource agencies or comply with an approved MSCP or other
equivalent lO(a) penuit or Section 7 consultation applicable to the property.
DESIGN
9. In addition to the requirements outlined in the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual, privately maintained
slopes in excess of 25 feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated to.soften their appearance as follows: an
equivalent of one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 square feet of slope area, one I-gallon or larger size shrub
per each 100 square feet of slope area, and appropriate groundcover. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered
clusters to soften and vary the slope plane. Landscape and irrigation plans for private slopes shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Director prior to approval of the appropriate fmal map.
10. A comprehensive wall plan indicating color, materials, height and location shall be submitted for review and
approval by the Planning DireclOr prior 10 approval of each finaI "B" Map. Materials and color used shall be
compatible and all walls located in comer side-yards or rear yards facing public or private streets or pedestrian
connections shall be constructed of a decorative masonry and/or wrought iron material.
A revised acoustical analysis indicating if view fencing, such as a combination of masonry and wrought iron, is
allowable at the ends of cul-de-sacs baclOng up 10 Telegraph Canyon Road, Olympic Parkway and La Media Road,
shall be prepared prior 10 submittal of the wall plan indicated above. View fencing shall be provided at the ends of all
open cul-de-sacs where a sound wall is not required, as required by a fmal acoustical analysis.
The exposed portion of any combination free standing/retaining wall as measured from fmish grade shall not exceed
8.5 feet. The applicant shall submit a detail and/or cross section of the maximum/rninimwn conditions for all
"combination walls" which include retaining and free standing walls. Said detail shall be included in the grading
plans submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning prior to the approval of the first grading pennit.
The maximum height of all retaining walls shall be 2.5 feet in height when combined with freestanding walls which
are six feet in height. A 2-3 foot separation shall be provided betWeen free standing and retaining walls where the
combined height would otherwise exceed 8.5 feet.
The 8.5 foot wall located in the open space slope adjacent to Neighborhood R-41 shall be reduced in height if
possible, when fina1 design grades of the subdivision, trail and drainage channel are determined. If the wall height
cannot be minimized, then several smaller walls (2-4 feet in height) shall provided.
11. Lots backing or siding onto pedestrian paseos or parks shall be provided with view fencing such as four feet
of wrought iron on top of a two foot masonry wall, in accordance with the comprehensive wall plan and subject to
approval by the Fire Marshal and the Planning and Parks and Recreation Directors. Where said wall/fencing is
located adjacent 10 any public park, the wall/fencing, including footing shall be located wholly within the park and
maintained by the City.
. ._--_._-_....~-~--_.._.._._-
Resoluùon No. 19034 Page 3 of 22
12. Should the applicant propose an amendment to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan to reduce density
within the Village Cores at some time in the future. the provision of alley product shall be analyzed and considered
concurrently with said amendment.
13. Approval of lot widths and the final number of lots in Neighborhood 42 is subject to building design and
product site plan approval by the Planning Department. A reducùon in the number of currently proposed lots may
occur prior to approval of actual building pennits for this Neighborhood.
14. Applicant shall eliminate the flat areas at the tops of slopes which are in excess of what is required to
memtain and install perimeter walls adjacent to cul-de-sacs backing onto La Media Road.
15. Applicant shall reconfigure the following lots to eliminate odd property line alignments: 44 and 74 in
Neighborhood R-42 and 67 and 70 in Neighborhood R-4l.
16. Prior to approval of the improvement plans for Valley Bend Conn, a plan detailing guard rail and landscape
screening for Valley Bend Drive shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Engineering Departments.
STREETS, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
17. Prior to approval of each fmal "B" Map, the applicant shall accomplish the following: 1) dedicate for public
use all the public streets shown on the tentative map within said final "Boo Map, and 2) enter into an agreement to
consttuct and guarantee the construction of all the public streets shown on the tentative map within said fmal "B"
Map.
18. Prior to the approval of the ftrst final "B" Map for the indicated phase, the applicant shall enter into an
agreement to construct and guarantee the construction of the street improvements indicated in Matrix A, which are
required by the PFFP for each panicular phase:
MATRIX "A"
PHASE 3
Facilitv # Street Description Sel!Illent
I Telegraph Cyn. Rd. Paseo del Rey to E. of Paseo Ladera Full Improvements
2 Telegraph Cyn. Rd. 1-805 interchange Phase II Full Improvements
7 Olympic Pkwy. 1-805 to Paseo Ranchero Full Improvements
9 Olympic Pkwy. 1-805 interchange modifications Full Improvements
11 East Palomar St. Paseo Ranchero to La Media Full Improvements
12 East Palomar St. La Media to Olympic Parkway Full Improvements
13 Intersection East "R" St./Otay Lakes Rd. Full Improvements
14 Intersection Telegraph Cyn. Rd. to Otay Lakes Rd. Full Improvements
16 Paseo Ranchero Telegraph Cyn. Rd. To E. Palomar St. Partial improvements(1)
17 Paseo Ranchero E. Palomar St. to Olympic Parkway Partial improvements (1)
18 La Media Rd. Telegraph Cyn. Rd. To E. Palomar St. Partial improvements (I)
. ResolUtion No. 19034 Page 4 of 22
PHASE 6
1 Telegraph Cyn. Rd. Paseo del Rey to east of Paseo Ladera Full Improvements
2 Telegraph Cyn. Rd. I-80S imerchange Phase II Full improvements
4 Paseo Ranchero East Palomar St. to Olympic parkway Full improvements
5 La Media Rd. Telegraph Cyn. Rd. To E. Palomar St. Full improvements
6 La Media Rd. E. Palomar St. to Olympic Pkwy. Full improvements
7 Olympic Pkwy. 1-805 to Paseo Ranchero Fulllmprovements
9 Olympic Pkwy. 1-8O5Imerchange modifications Fulllmprovements
10 E. Palomar St. Existing improvements to Paseo Ranchero Fulllmprovements
11 E. Palomar St. Paseo Ranchero to La Media Rd. Full Improvements
12 E. Palomar St. La Media to Olympic Pkwy. Full Improvements
13 Intersection E. "R" St.lOtay Lakes Rd. Full Improvements
14 Intersection Telegraph Cyn. Rd.lOtay Lakes Rd. Full Improvements
16 Paseo Ranchero Telegraph Cyn. Rd. To E. Palomar St. Panial improvements (1)
21 Olympic Pkwy. Paseo Ranchero to La Media Partial improvements (1)
22 Olympic Pkwy. La Media to E. Palomar St. Partial improvements (I)
(1) Partial Improvements are described in the PFFP as may be amended from time to time.
Matrix "A" is based upon the PFFP approved by the City Council on June 4, 1996. The City Engineer and Director
of Planning may modify Matrix. A" as needed to conform to any future amendment to the PFFP.
19. Secure in accordance with Section 18.16.220 of the Municipal Code, as necessary, the construction and/or
construct stteet improvements for all on-site and off-site streets deemed by the City Engineer necessary to provide
service to the subject subdivision. Said improvements may include, but not be limited to, asphalt concrete pavement,
base, concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk, sewer, reclaimed water and water utilities, drainage facilities, street lights,
signs, landscaping, irrigation, fencing, fire hydrants and traffic signal interconnection conduits and wiring.
Street cross sections shal1 conform to the cross sections shown on the Tentative Map. All other desigu criteria shall
comply with the Chula Vista Design Standards, Chula Vista Street Design Standards, the Chula Vista Subdivision
Manual and the City Landscape Manual current at the time of approval of the appropriate fina1 "B" Map, unless
otherwise conditioned or approved herein. Exhibit A indicates the relationship between the Otay Ranch SPA One
roadway designations and the approved City designations in the Circulation Element of the General Plan for purposes
of determining the appropriate design standards for all streets within SPA One.
Should the City Engineer deem that the construction of sidewalks along the offsite portions of Olympic Parkway and
East Palomar Street west of Paseo Ranchero is not necessary to provide service to the subject subdivision, such
construction may be delayed.
20. Include a fully activated traffic signal at the following intersections as part of the improvement plans
associated with the fina1 "B" Map which triggers the installation of the related street improvement¡;.
a. East Palomar Street and Paseo Ranchero
b. East Palomar Street and La Media Road
-_m___..__-~- -- ------------------------------
. Resolution No. 19034 Page 5 of 22
c. East Palomar Street and Olympic Parkway
d. Olympic Parkway and Paseo Ranchero
e. Olympic Parkway and La Media Road
Install underground improvements, standards and street lights with the construction of street improvements, and
install mast arms, signal heads and associated equipment as detenuined by the City Engineer.
21. Applicant shall subnùt to and obtain approval by the City Engineer of striping plans for all collector or
higher classification streets simultaneously with the associated improvement plans.
22. All vertical and horiwntal curves and intersections of all streets sha1l meet the sight distance requirements of
the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Sight visibility easements shall be granted as necessary to comply with the
requirements in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Any conflict between the Caltrans Highway Design Manual
and the City standards sha1l be resolved by the City Engineer.
23. Prior to the approval of any final "B" Map containing parkways, the Developer shall agree to plant trees
within all street parkways and street tree easements which have been selected from the revised list of appropriate tree
species described in the Village Design Plan which shall be approved by the Directors of Planning, Parks and
Recreation and Public Works. The applicant sha1l provide root control methods per the requirements of the Parks
and Recreation Director, install an irrigation line from each individual home to the adjacent parkway, and provide a
deep watering irrigation system for the trees. The improvement plans, including final selection of street trees, for the
street parkways shall be approved by the Directors of Planning, Parks and Recreation and the City Engineer.
24. The developer shall install irrigation and landscaping for each parkway prior to owner occupancy of the
residence benefited by the parkway, in accordance with plans suhnùtted to, and reviewed and approved by, the
Planning Deparnnent.
25. CC&Rs for the project sha1l be subnùtted to the Planning Department for review and approval, and shall
include provisions which clearly indicate the responsibility of the individual homeowners to water and maintain
irrigation and planting within the parkways. The CC&Rs shall also indicate that the Master Homeowner's
Association shall have both the authority and the obligation to enforce said maintenance.
26. Homeowner Landscape Guidelines for Parkway Landscape Maintenance sha1l be subnùtted to the City for
review and approval, and sha1l be included as an attachment to the CC&Rs, thereby providing specific maintenance
guidelines as an integral part of the CC&R documents.
27. The City of Chula Vista shall be named as party to the CC&Rs, with the authority, but not the obligation, to
enforce the tenDS and conditions of the CC&Rs in the same manner as any owner within the subdivision.
28. The CC&Rs for the project shall include language which specifies that individual residents may not modify
the parkway planting.
29. Enter into an agreement with the City, prior to approval of the fITst final Map (including an "A" Map), in
which the developer agrees to the following;
a. Fund and install Chula Vista transit stop facilities (i.e., bus stops) when directed by the Director of
Public Works. The improvement plans for said stops sha1l be prepared in accordance with the
transit stop details described in the Village Design Plans and approved by the Directors of Planning
and Public Works.
b. Not protest the formation of any future regional benefit assessment district to finance the Light Rail
Transit.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 6 of 22
c. Fund its fair share of the cost of construction of the tWo pedestrian bridges connecting Village One
to Village Two and Village Five to Village Six as determined by the City Engineer based on the
proponionate benefit received from the improvements. The developer shall also identify the
financing mechanism to be used to fund said cost.
30. Prior to approval of the appropriate fina1 map, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, the
Developer shall grant in fee to the City the right-of-way for the Light Rail Transit as indicated on the typical cross
section of East Palomar Street on the approved Tentative Map. Said right-of-way shall be granted to the City for
open space, transportation, and other public purposes. Said right-of-way shall not extend across street intersections
unless approved by the City Engineer. Said right-of-way shall be included in an open space district.
31. Developer shall guarantæ the construction and enter into an agreement to construct the pedestrian bridge
connecting Village One to Village Five in accordance with improvement plans approved by the City prior to approval
of the fina1 map that requires construction of La Media Road betWeen East Palomar Street and Olympic Parkway.
The developer shall construct said bridge-, at the time when that ponion of La Media Road is constructed and may
seek, with the conCUITence of the City, repayment from other benefiting property owners through a reimbursement
district.
32. In the event the Federal Government adopts ADA standards for street rights-of-way which are in conflict
with the standards and approvals contained herein, all such approvals conflicting with those standards shall be updated
to reflect those standards. Unless otherwise required by federal law, City ADA standards may be considered vested,
as determined by Federal regulations, only after construction has commenced.
33. Applicant shall include the necessary modifications to the applicable existing traffic signals at the intersection
of Telegraph Canyon Road at Otay Lakes Road as part of the improvement plans associated with the first fmal "B"
Map which triggers the construction of La Media Road.
Applicant shall install underground improvements, standards and street lights with the construction of street
improvements, and install mast arms, signal heads and associated equipment as determined by the City Engineer.
34. Applicant shall provide: (1) a minimum setback of 19.5 feet on driveways from the back of sidewalk to
garage, (2) a minimum 7-foot parkway (face of curb to property line) around the turnaround area of the cul-de-sac,
and (3) sectional roll-up type garage doors at all propenies fronting on streets which are proposed for construction in
accordance with the detail of the "typical cul-de-sac, 150 feet or less" shown on Sheet 1 of the tentative map, except
as provided for in the Planned Community District Regulations or approved by the City Engineer and the Planning
Director. At the ends of open cul-de-sacs, where no residential lots are located, the sidewalk may be contiguous with
the curb, with an open view fence located directly behind the sidewalk.
35. Applicant shall not install privately owned water, reclaimed water, or other utilities crossing any public
street. This shall include the prohibition of the installation of sleeves for furore construction of privately owned
facilities. The City Engineer may waive this requirement if the following is accomplished:
a. The developer enters into an agreement with the City where the developer agreesto the following:
1. Apply for an encroachment permit for installation of the private facilities within the public
right-of-way.
2. Maintain membership in an advance notice service such as the USA Dig Alert Service.
3. Mark out any private facilities owned by the developer whenever work is performed in the
area.
4. The terms of this agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the
developer.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 7 of 22
b. Shutoff devices as determined by the City Engineer are provided at those locations where private
facilities traverse puhlic streets.
36. Residential Street Condition A as denoted on the cover page of the tentative map is the preferred section and
shall be implemented on all residential streets, excluding the duplex product, unless otherwise approved hy the City
Engineer and Planning Director. Following is a list of streets where Residential Street Condition A shall be
implemented:
Neighborhood R-41: Sierra Verde Drive, Corral View Avenue, Valley Bend Drive, Ranchette COM, Misty
Ridge Avenue.
Neighborhood R-42: Sierra Verde Drive.
Residential street Condition B may be used in Neighborhood R-42, except for Sierra Verde Drive.
37. The applicant shall submit a conceptual design for the bridge connections between Village One and Village
Five which indicates materials, height, location, etc. Said design plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director prior to approval of the fina1 "B" Map that requires construction of La Media Road between East
Palomar Street and Olympic Parkway.
3S. Requested General Waivers I, 2 and 3, as indicated on the cover sheet of the renUltive map, are hereby
approved.
39. The developer shall dedicate the right of way and easements within the boundaries of the tentative map for
other land owners to pioneer public facilities in the property as required by the Public Facilities Financing Plan
(PFFP): provided, however, that such dedications shall be restricted to those reasonably necessary for the
construction of the facilities identified in the PFFP.
40. The Developer shall be responsible for the construction of full improvements of that portion of East Palomar
Street contained within the proposed tentative Iru!p, including the installation of full transit stop improvements at the
Village Five core. In the event said portion of East Palomar Street is proposed for construction in phases, the
Developer shall: (1) submit and obtain approval of the City Engineer of a construction phasing pian, whicb shall
determine the improvements, facilities, and/or dedications to be provided with each phase, and (2) enter into an
agreement with the City, prior to the issuance of any grant of approval for the construction of the initial phase of East
Palomar Street, where the Developer agrees to construct the remaining phases at such time as required by the PFFP.
41. In order to finance the construction of the backbone facilities (which include but are not limited to East
Palomar Street within the tentative map, transit stops, pedestrian bridges, Telegraph Canyon detention basin and
Poggi Canyon Channel and detention basin) not included within a City development fee program and which would
provide benefit to areas beyond a single ownership within the Otay Ranch SPA One, the Developer may seek, with
the concurrence of the City, payment of the fair share of the construction cost of said facilities from other benefiting
properties through the establishment of a reimbursement mechanism, a development impact fee program, an
assessment mechanism or other equitable facility financing program within the City's discretion.
42. Santa Cora A venue shall be designed to provide a 10- foot dry lane at each side of the centerline for the 10-
year frequency drainage flow.
43. The developer shall be responsible for grading that offsite portion of East Palomar Street extending from the
eastern subdivision boundary (R-40) to the intersection with SanUl Rosa Drive, as determined by the City Engineer.
Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, this grading shall be performed in conjunction with the grading for
that portion of East Palomar Street extending from Santa Cora Avenue to the eastern subdivision boundary.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 8 of 22
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
44. A. Applicant shall provide a setback, as determined by the City Engineer, and based on the soils
engineering study, between the property lines of the proposed lots and the top or toe of any slope to be constructed
where the proposed grading adjoins undeveloped property or property owned by others. The City Engineer shall not
approve the creation of any lot that does not meet the required setback.
B. The developer shall submit notarized letters of permission to grade for all off-site grading.
45. In conjunction with the as built grading plans, the applicant shall submit a list of proposed lots with the
appropriate grading plan indicating whether the structure will be located on fill, cut or a transition between the two
situations.
46. Applicant shall comply with all the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) and the Clean Water Program.
47. Applicant shall provide runoff detention basins or any other facility approved by the City Engineer to reduce
the peak runoff from the development to an amount equal to or less than the present l00-year frequency peak runoff.
48. Prior to approval of: the first fina1 "B" Map or grading permit whichever occurs first for land draining into
the Poggi Canyon, the developer shall:
a. Guarantee the construction of a runoff detention/desilting basin and naturalized channel in Poggi
Canyon unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The Developer may construct these
facilities at a later time if approved by the City Engineer and if the developer provides private
temporary runoff detention basins or other facilities, approved by the City Engineer, which would
reduce the peak runoff from the development to an amount equal to less than the present l00-year
peak flow. Said temporary facilities shall comply with all the provisions of the National Pollutant
Discharge E1imination System (NPDES) and the Clean Water Program. Prior to issuance of any
grading permit which approves any temporary facility, the developer shall enter into an agreement
with the City to guarantee the adequate operation and maintenance (O&M) of said facility. The
developer shall provide security satisfactory to the City to guarantee the O&M activities, in the
event said facilities are not maintained to City standards as determined by the City Engineer.
1. Runoff detentionldesilting basin and naturalized channel in Poggi Canyon;
The developer shall be responsible for obtaining all permits and agreements with the environmental
regulatory agencies required to perform this work.
b. Prepare a maintenance program including a schedule, estimate of cost, operations manual and a
financing mechanism for the maintenance of the facilities. Said program shall be subject to
approval of the City Engineer, the Director of Parks and Recreation, and the applicable
environmental agencies.
c. Enter into an agreement with the City of Chula Vista and the applicable environmental agencies
(Fish and Game, Fish and Wildlife) wherein the parties agree to implement the maintenance
program.
d. Enter into an agreement with the City where the developer agrees to the following:
1. Provide for the maintenance of the proposed naturalized channel and detention basin in
Poggi Canyon until such time as maintenance of such facilities is assumed by the City or
an open space district.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 9 of 22
2. Provide for the removal of siltation in the Poggi Canyon Channel and detention basin for a
period of five years after all upStream grading of the area contained within the tentative
map is completed and erosion protection planting is adequately established as detennined
by the City Engineer and Director of Parks and Recreation.
3. Provide for the removal of any siltation in the Poggi Canyon Channel and detention basin
atttibutable to the development for a minimum period of five years after maintenance of
such facility is accepted by the City or an Open Space District.
49. Applicant shall ensure that brow channels and ditches emanating from and/or running through City Open
Space are not routed through private property and vice versa.
50. Applicant shall provide a graded access (12 feet minimum width) and access easements as required by the
City Engineer to all public storm drain structures including inlet and outlet structures. Improved access as
detennined by the City Engineer shall be provided to public drainage structures located in the rear yard of any
residential lot.
51. Applicant shall provide a protective fencing system around: (1) the proposed detention basin at Poggi
Canyon, and (2) inlets and outlets of storm drain structures, as directed by the City Engineer. The final design and
types of construction materials shall be subject to approval of the Director of Planning and the City Engineer.
52. Applicant shall designate all drainage facilities draining private property to the point of connection with
public facilities as private.
53. Applicant shall provide a 6 inch thick concrete access road to the bottom of the proposed detention basins.
This access shall have a minimum width of 12 feet, a maximum slope of 8%, and a heavy broom finish on the ramp
as directed by the City Engineer.
54. Applicant shall provide graded maintenance access roads along both sides of the proposed on-site and off-site
portions of the Poggi Canyon Channel. The width of said roads shall be 12 feet unless otherwise approved by the
City Engineer. The final dimensions and location of the access roads shall be as determined by the City Engineer.
55. As part of the construction of the regional trail, applicant shall install a fence along those portions of the
proposed maintenance access road of the Poggi Canyon Channel, which is proposed to be incorporated into the
Regional Trail System. The fence shall be erected only at those locations where its installation will not interfere with
the normal channel maintenance. The specific locations where the fence will be allowed and the fence details shall be
as detennined by the City Engineer and Director of Planning or Parks and Recreation.
56. Prior to approval of mass grading plans. the Developer shall prepare and obtain approval by the City
Engineer, Director of Planning and Director of Parks and Recreation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan.
Prior to approval of the street improvement plans for Neighborhoods R-40, 41, 42 and 43 the Developer shall obtain
approval of lanclscape/irrigation plans.
57. Landform grading, similar to what was proposed along Telegraph Canyon Road on tentative map 97-02 and
consistent with City policy and the approved tentative maps for the adjacent properties, shall be implemented adjacent
to all off-site major roacls (i.e., East Palomar Street and Olympic Parkway).
58. Applicant shall indicate on all affected grading plans that all walls which are to be maintained by open space
districts or other sinrilar methocls shall be constructed entirely within open space lots.
59. The grading plans for the intersection at Olympic Parkway/Paseo Ranchero shall include a partial grading of
the area that would accommodate the future grade separated intersection. The elevations and extent of the required
grading shall be detennined by the City Engineer to: (I) allow in the future the construction of any additional grading
Resolution No. 19034 Page 10 of 22
necessary for the ultimate intersection configuration, and (2) construct the Poggi Canyon Channel at its ultimate
location.
60. Prior to approval of the flI'St grading pennit for any land contained within the tentative map, the developer
shall submit and obtain the approval of the City Engineer of the following:
a. A grading study demonstrating that the grading depicted in the tentative map will generate the
necessary fill to construct those portions of Olympic Parkway and the Poggi Canyon- Channel located within
the subdivision boundaries. This study shall incorporate the most recent design lnfonnatlon for those
facilities, including the findings and recommendations, if available, of CIP project No. STM 331, Olympic
Parkway from Oleander Avenue to SR-125. Said grading study shall identify the proposed location for
stockpiling of fill material.
b. A grading study of the area required for the emergency storage reservoir of the proposed sewer
pump station.
c. A phasing program identifying the extent of the interim grading which would provide (1) adequate
setbacks from the existing Poggi Canyon natural channel that may be required by the appropriate resources
agencies and (2) adequate setbacks from the proposed alignments of Olympic Parkway and Poggi Canyon
Channel required to accommodate the ultimate improvements for said facilities.
61. In the event the City Council approves construction of the proposed pump station, the intersection of La
Media Road and Olympic Parkway may be required to be graded concurrently with the earliest to occur of the
following grading operations: 1) first grading pennit for neighborhood R-4I; 2) grading required for the construction
of the proposed sewer pump station and associated emergency storage reservoir, or 3) prior to the grading of La
Media Road.
62. Prior to approval of any grading pennit for any land contained within the tentative map, the developer shall
accomplish the following:
a. Identify on the applicable grading plans the quantity and the proposed location for stockpiling of
material reserved for constructing Olympic Parkway and Poggi Canyon Channel. In the event it is proposed
to stockpile material over areas where the ultimate improvements for Olympic Parkway and Poggi Canyon
Channel will be located, the developer shall be responsible for perfomting any remedial work (i.e.,
removal, compacting, etc.) of the native soils recommended by the soils engineer, prior to placement of such
stockpiled material.
b. Enter into an agreement with the City where the developer agrees to make available to the City or
any developer pioneering the construction of Olympic Parkway and the Poggi Canyon Channel within the
subdivision, the fill material identified for constructing said facilities. In the event the material is deposited
on a land owned by other property owner, the developer shall be responsible for ensuring that said party is
among the signatories to the agreement.
SEWER
63. Developer shall provide an improved access road with a minimum width of 12 feet to all sanitary sewer
manholes. The roadway shall be designed for an H-20 wheel load or other loading as approved by the City Engineer.
64. Prior to approval of any fmal "B" Map for any property located within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Trunk
gravity basin, the developer shall construct or secure the construction, in accordance with Section 18.16.220 of the
Municipal Code, of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Trunk improvements required to serve the properties located within said
final map. As an alternative to the gravity sewer line the developer may propose the construction of the sewage
pump station shown on the tentative map at the northeastern quadrant of the intersection of East Orange A venue and
La Media Road. Prior to the issuance of any grant of approval for the construction of said "pump station" and
Resolution No. 19034 Page II of 22
associated improvementS, the developer shall comply with all the requirementS of Council Policy No. 570-03
(Sewage Pump Station Financing Policy). In addition to the requirementS imposed by said Council Policy No. 570-
03, the developer shall accomplish the following:
a. Provide an emergency storage reservoir. The design, capacity and location of said reservoir shall
be approved by the City Engineer.
h. Deposit with the City, prior to the issuance of any grant of approval for the construction of said
"pump station" and associated improvements, a cash bond or other type of improvement security approved
and in an amount to be detennined by the City Engineer to secure, upon construction of the Poggi Canyon
Sewer Trunk, the following activities: (1) removal of the pump station improvements, and (2) connection by
gravity to the future Poggi Canyon Sewer Trunk.
c. Provide funding for the update of the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer Pumped Flows DIP. Said
update shall be prepared by the City, as directed by the City Engineer, and approved by City Council prior
to the issuance of any grant of approval for the construction of said "pump station" and associated
improvements. The developer shall not receive credits towards future fees for funding this update. All cost
of performing said update shall be borne by the developer.
65. Fund a revision of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee reflecting the land use of the
proposed tentative map. Said revision shall be prepared by the City, as directed by the City Engineer, and approved
by the City Council prior to approval of the first fina1 "B" Map. The developer shall not receive credits towards
future fees for funding this revision. All cost of revising the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee
shall be borne by the developer.
PARKS/OPEN SPACEIWILDLIFE PRESERVATION
General
66. The project shall satisfy the requirements of the Park Land Dedication Ordinance (PLDO). The ordinance
establishes a requirement that the project provide three (3) acres of local parks and related improvements per I, 000
residents. Local parks are comprised of community parks and neighborhood parks. A minimum of two thirds (2
acres/l,OOO residents) of local park requirement shall be satisfied through the provision of turn-key neighborhood
parks. The remaining requirement (1 acrel1,OOO residents) shall be satisfied through the payment of fees.
67. All local parks shall be consistent with the SPA One PFFP and shall be installed by the Applicant. A
construction schedule, requiring all parks to be completed in a timely manner, shall be approved by the Director of
Planning and/or Parks and Recreation.
68. All local parks shall be designed and constructed consistent with the provisions of the Chula Vista Landscape
Manual and related Parks and Recreation and Planning Department specifications and policies.
69. All aspects of the neighborhood parks, shall be designed in accordance with the City Landscape Manual.
70. The Applicant shall receive surplus park credit to the extent the combined park credit for neighborhood
parks, and the town square park exceeds the 3 acres per 1,000 residents standard. This surplus park credit may be
utilized by the Applicant to satisfy local park requirements in future SPAs.
71. The Applicant and the City shall mutually agree on a PAD fee reimbursement schedule in coordination with
the adopted construction schedule. Milestones will be established for partial reimbursement during the construction
process. The City may withhold up to 20% of the park construction funds until the park has been completed and
accepted. Reimbursement of PAD fees shall include the interest accrued by the City on said PAD fees minus the
City's cost of processing and administering this reimbursement program.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 12 of22
72. Urness otherwise specifically stated herein, Developer shall provide the City with an irrevocable offer of
dedication, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for all designated public park lands prior to approvaJ of the fITS!
fmal "B" Map within the phase identified in the PFFP for said parks.
73. Neighborhood Parks: Developer shall provide the City with an irrevocable offer of dedication, in a form
approved by the City Attorney, for the parks identified in the PFFP as P-6, 7 and 8 prior to the approvaJ of the fmaJ
map in accordance with the PFFP phasing.
a. In addition to those required PAD fees, the Applic.ant shall pay PAD fees based on a formula of 2
acres per 1,000 residents for the first 833 dwelling units. In the City's sole discretion, PAD fees
may be required for units in excess of the first 833 dwelling units.
b. Prior to the approvaJ of the first fina1 map which creates residentiaJ lots ("B" Map), the applicant
shall enter into a supplemental agreement where the applicant agrees to construct and guarantees
construction of the first neighborhood park, no later than issuance of the building permit for the
833rd dwelling unit. The agreement sha11 also provide the following:
1. The level of amenities required in the neighborhood park shall be determined by the
Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation in conjunction with the park master
planning effort required by the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual. The applicant
shall complete construction of the neighborhood park within six (6) months of
conunencing construction of said park.
2. The timing of construction of Parks P-6, P- 7, P-8 and the regioual trails shall be addressed
in the revised PFFP.
3. At no time following completion of construction of the first phase of the ftrst
neighborhood park sha11 there be a deficit in "constructed neighborhood park" based upon
2 acresll,OOO residents. Applic.ant agrees that the City may withhold the isSUJUlce of
building permits should said deficit occur. For purposes of this condition, the term
"constructed neighborhood park" sha11 mean that construction of the park has been
completed and accepted by the Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation as being
in compliance with the Park Master Plan, but prior to the mandatory one year
maintenance period. This condition is not intended to supersede any of the City's
maintenance guarantee requirements.
4. The Applic.ant shall receive reimbursement of PAD fees for any amount above their pro-
rata share for the costs of constructing a turn-key park constructed in accordance with the
Parks Master Plan.
c. The applic.ant sha11 grant to the City, at the "A" Map stage, an irrevocable offer of dedication for
all neighborhood parks shown on the Tentative Map.
74. Community Parks: Prior to the approval of each fina1 "B" Map the Applicant shall pay PAD fees for the
Conununity Park,§ based upon a formula of 1 acre per 1, 000 residents
75. Trails/Oven Space:
a. All trails shall connect to adjoining, existing and/or proposed trails in neighboring development
projects, as determined by the Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation.
b. The maximum gradient for connector trails shall be 10%. Steeper grades of up to 12% for short
runs of 50 feet may be permitted subject to the approval by the Director of Planning and/or Parks
and Recreation.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 13 of 22
c. The graded section upon which the connecùng trails are constructed shaD be 10 feet in width. Six
feet shall be provided for the trail bed, with a 2 foot graded sboulder on either side.
d. Landscape and irrigation plans for the transit right-of-way shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation in conjunction with the landscape plans for East
Palomar Street.
OPEN SPACE/ASSESSMENTS
76. Prior to the approval of the first final "B" Map, the developer shall:
a. Submit and obtain approval of the SPA One Open Space Master Plan from the Director of Planning
and/or Parks and Recreation. The Open Space Master Plan shall be based upon the approved
Concept and Analysis Plan, the requirements of which are outlined in the City of Chula Vista
Landscape Manual and include but are not limited to elements such as final recreational trail
alignments and fencing and phasing.
b. Request the formation of an Open Space District consistent with a financing mechanism approved
by the City Council. The district formation shall be submitted to Council for consideration prior to
approval of the first final "B" Map. Maintenance of the open space improvements shall be
accomplished by the developer for a minimum period of one year or until such time as accepted
into the open space district by the Director of Parks and Recreation. If Council does not approve
the open space district formation. some other financing mechanism shall be identified and submitted
to Council for consideration prior to approval of the fITst final map.
c. Submit evidence acceptable to the City Engineer and the Director of Plannin/Land/or Parks and
Recreation of the formation of a Master Homeowner's Association (MHOA), or another financial
mechanism acceptable to the City, which includes all'the properties within the approved tentative
map prior to approval of the first "B" Map. The MHOA shall be responsible for the maintenance
of the improvements listed in Condition 74<1. The City Engineer and the Director of Planning
and/or Parks and Recreation may require that some of those improvements be maintained by the
Open Space District. The final determination of which improvements are to be included in the
Open Space District and those to be maintained by the MHOA shall be made during the Open
Space District Proceedings. The MHOA shall be structured to allow annexation of future tentative
map areas in the event the City Engineer and Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation
require such annexation of future tentative map areas. The MHOA formation documents shall be
approved by the City Attorney.
d. Submit a list of all Otay Ranch SPA One facilities and other items to be maintained by the proposed
district. Separate lists shall be submitted for the improvements and facilities to be maintained by the
Open Space District and those to be maintained by a Master Homeowner's Association. Include a
description, quantity and cost per year for the perpetual maintenance of said improvements. These
lists shall include but are not limited to the following facilities and improvements:
1. AU facilities located on open space lots to include but not be limited to: walls, fences,
water fountains, lighùng structures, paths, trails, access roads, drainage structures and
landscaping. Each open space lot shall also be broken down by the number of acres of
turf, irrigated, and non-irrigated open space to aid in the estimation of a maintenance
budget thereof.
2. Medians and parkways along Olympic Parkway (onsite and offsite), Paseo Ranchero, La
Media Road, East Palomar Street (onsite and offsite) and all other street parkways
proposed for maintenance by the open space district or Homeowners' Association.
. -~--~~-- -
. Resolution No. 19034 Page 14 of 22
3. The proposed detention basin in Telegraph Canyon and the fair share of the maintenance
of the existing naturalized Telegraph Canyon Channel east of Paseo Ladera as determined
by the City Engineer based on the proportional benefit received from the improvements.
This includes but is not linùted to the cost of maintenance and all cost to comply with the
Deparnnent of Fish and Game and Corps of Engineers permit requirements.
4. The proposed detention basin and naturalized channel in Poggi Canyon. This includes but
is not linùted to the cost of maintenance and all cost to comply with the Deparnnent of
Fish and Game and the Corps of Engineers permit requirements.
5. Pedestrian Bridges.
e. All costs of formation and other costs associated with the processing of the open space district shall
be borne by the developer.
f. Provide all the necessary information and materials (e.g., exhibits, diagrams, etc.) as determined
by the City Engineer to prepare the engineer's report for the proposed open space district.
77. Developer shall include in the CC&Rs, if applicable, the obligation of the Homeowners' Association to
maintain all the facilities and improvements within private open space lots prior to the approval of the first [mal map
containing said lots.
78. Developer shall grade a level, clear area at least three feet wide (face of wall to top of slope), along the
length of any wall abutting an open space district lot, as measured from face-of-wall to beginning of slope, said area
as approved by the City Engineer and the Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation.
79. Developer sha1l ensure that all buyers of lots adjoining open space lots containing walls maintained by the
open space district sign a statement, when purchasing their homes, stipulating that they are aware that they shall not
modify or supplement the wallar encroach onto the open space lots. These restrictions shall also be incorporated in
the CC&Rs for each lot.
80. Developer sha1l agree to not protest formation or inclusion in a maintenance district or zone for the
maintenance of landscaped medians and scenic corridors along streets within and adjacent to the subject subdivision.
81. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, the Developer shall grant in-fee to the City on the
appropriate final map, all open space lots shown on the tentative map and execute and record a deed for each of the
lots to be maintained through the open space district.
82. Developer sha1l provide documentation, prior to the approval of the first finaJ "B" Map, to the Director of
Planning and the City Engineer that an annexable Mello-Roos District, or other financing mechanism approved by the
Sweetwater High School District and the Chula Vista Elementary School District has been established to provide for
construction of schools.
83. The update of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (currently being prepared) which incorporates
the public facilities proposed in the Otay Ranch SPA One shall be approved by City Council prior to the approval of
any final "B" Map.
84. Prior to issuance of any grading permit which includes Landscaping and Irrigation (L & I) improvements to
be installed in an open space lotto be maintained by the open space district, the developer shall place a cash deposit
with the City which will guarantee the maintenance of the L & I improvements, prior to City acceptance of said
improvements. in the event the improvements are not maintained to City standards as determined by the City
Engineer and the Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation. The amoWlt of the deposit sha1l be equivalent to
the estimated cost of maintaining the open space lots to City standards for a period of six months as determined by the
Resolution No. 19034 Page 15 of 22
City Engineer. Any unused ponion of said deposit may be incorporated into the open space district's reserve at such
time as the maintenance of the open space lot is assumed by the open space district.
85. Developer shall ensure that all buyers of lots fronting residential streets constructed in accordance with
Condition A sign a statemeIÌt, when purchasing their homes, stipulating that (1) they are aware that the individual
homeowner will be responsible for the maintenance of the landscaping improvements located between the curb and
the sidewalk (excluding City approved trees), and (2) they shall not replace or remove any trees planted between the
curb and the sidewalk without the approval of the City. These provisions shall be incorporated in the CC&Rs for
each lot.
WATER
86. Developer shall provide to the City a letter from Otay Municipal Water District indicating that the
assessments/ bonded indebtedness for all parcels dedicated or granted in fee to the City have been paid or that no
assessments exist on the parcel(s).
87. Developer shall present verification to the City Engineer in the form of a letter fiom Otay Water District
that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long term water storage facilities.
EASEMENTS
88. Developer shall grant to the City a 10' wide easement for general utility purposes along public street
fiomage of all open space lots offered for dedication to the City unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
89. Developer shall indicate on the appropriate "B" Map a reservation of easements to the future Homeowners'
Association for private storm drain and private sewer facilities within City open space lots as directed by the City
Engineer.
90. Developer shall obtain, prior to approval of any final "B" Map, all off-site right-of-way necessary for the
installation of the required improvements for that subdivision, including the installation of the required East Palomar
Street Improvements thereto. The developer shall also provide easements for all on-site and off-site public drainage
facilities, sewers, maintenance roads, and any other public facilities necessary to provide service to the subject
subdivision.
91. Notify the City at least 60 days prior to consideration of the final map by City if off-site right-of-way cannot
be obtained as required by the Conditions of approval. (Only off-site right-of-way or easements affected by Section
66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act are covered by this condition.) After said notification, the developer shall:
a. Pay the full cost of acquiring off-site right-of-way or easements required by the Conditions of
Approval of the tentative map.
b. Deposit with the City the estimated cost of acquiring said right-of-way or easements. Said estimate
to be approved by the City Engineer.
c. Have all easements and/or right-of-way documents and plats prepared and appraisals complete
which are necessary to commence condemnation proceedings as detennined by the City Attorney.
d. Request that the City use its powers of Eminent Domain to acquire right-of-way, easements or
licenses needed for off-site improvements or work related to the final map. The developers shall
pay all costs, both direct and indirect incurred in said acquisition.
The requirements of a, b and c above shall be accomplished prior to the approval of the appropriate Final
Map.
. Resolution No. 19034 Page 16 of 22
92. Developer shall grant easements to subsequent owners pursuant to Section 18.20.150 of the City Municipal
Code on any [mal map that proposes private utilities or drainage facilities crossing property lines as directed by the
City Engineer.
93. Developer shall grant to City on the appropriate final "B" Map two foot access easements along the rear and
side property line of lots adjoining walls to be maintained by the open space district. The locations of these
easements shall be as required by the Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation and the City Engineer to
provide adequate access for maintenance of said walls.
94. Developer shall grant on the appropriate final "B" Map the following: (1.) a minimum 15 foot wide
drainage and access easement for storm drains located between residential units, and (2.) a minimum 20 foot wide
sewer and access easement for sewer lines located between residential units. The City Engineer may approve that a
reduced (storm drain and/or sewer) easement width be granted at those locations where storm drains are proposed
adjacent to sewer lines. All other easements shall meet City Standards for required width.
AGREEMENTSIFINANCIAL
95. Developer shall enter into a supplemental agreement with the City, prior to approval of each final "B" Map,
where the developer agrees to the following:
a. That the City may withhold building permits for the subject subdivision if anyone of the following
occur:
1. Regional development threshold limits set by the adopted East ChuIa Vista Transportation
Phasing Plan have been reached.
2. Traffic volwnes, levels of service, public utilities and/or services exceed the threshold
standards in the then effective GroWth Management Ordinance.
3. The applicant does not comply with the terms of the Reserve Fund Program.
b. That the City may withhold building permits for any of the phases of development identified in the
Public Facilities Financing Plan (pFFP) for Otay Ranch SPA One if the required facilities, as
identified in the PFFP or as amended by the Annnal Monitoring Program, have not been
completed.
c. Defend, indemnify and hold hannless the City and its agents, officers and employees, from any
claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside,
void or annul any approval by the City, including approval by its Planning Commission. City
Council or any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to this subdivision
approval.
d. Hold the City hannless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage
resulting from this project.
e. Ensure that all franchised cable television companies ("Cable Company") are permitted eqnal
opponunity to place conduit and provide cable television service to each lot on public streets within
the subdivision. Restrict access to the conduit to ouly those franchised cable television companies
who are, and remain in compliance with, all of the terms and conditions of the franchise and which
are in further compliance with all other rules, regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating
and affecting the operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or may from
time to time be issued by the City of ChuIa Vista.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 1701'22
f. Include in the Articles of Incorporation or Chaner for the Homeowners' Association (HOA)
provisions prohibiting the HOA from dedicating or conveying for public streets, land used for
private streets (i.e., in multi-family areas) without approval of 100% of all the HOA members.
g. Ensure that all insurance companies are pennitted equal opportunity to go oUt to bid to provide a
Cooperative Homeowner's Insurance Program (CHIP).
96. Developer shall enter into a supplemental agreement with the City prior to approval of the fITst fmal "B"
Map, where the developer agrees to the following:
a. Panicipare, on a fair share basis, in any deficiency plan or financial program adopled by SANDAG
to comply with the Congestion Management Program (CMP).
b. To not protest the formation of any future regional impact fee program or facilities benefit district
to finance the construction of correctional facilities.
97. The applicant shall comply with the Affordable Housing Agreement approved by the City Council on
February 10, 1998 by Resolution 18885.
98. The Applicant shall pay, prior to approval of the first "B" Map, their proportional share, as determined by
the Director of Planning and/or Parks and Recreation, of a collaborative study analyzing local park needs for the area
east of the 1-805 Freeway.
99. Prior to the approval of the fITst final "B" Map, the Developer shall submit and obtain approval by the City
Engineer of an "Improvement Phasing Schedule" which will identify the timing of construction of all backbone
facilities and/or completion of the activity noled in the following table. The Improvement Phasing Schedule shall be
consistent with the PFFP as amended from time to time.
COST ITEM TO BE INCLUDED IN
IMPROVEMENT PHASING SCHEDULE FACILITY
.Payment of Telegraph Canyon Basin Drainage DIF For areas covered by backbone streets and all common
areas with include, but are not limiled to, parks, schools,
paseos and open space lots.
. Acquisition/dedication of off-site drainage easement. Poggi Canyon Channel (on-site and off-site) and
.Construction and maintenance (prior to City detention basin
acceDtance).
Security satisfactory to the City shall be provided for the above backbone facilities when their construction or
compliance is triggered as identified in the approved Improvement Phasing Schedule.
In addition to the foregoing, prior to approval of the first final "B" Map, the Developer shall provide security
satisfactory to the City Engineer to guarantee the construction of the following:
a. Full improvements of that portion of East Palomar Street contained within the tentative map
boundaries including full improvements of the transit stop proposed in East Palomar Street at the
Village Five core.
b. Fair share of the improvements for the pedestrian bridges connecting Village One to Village Five,
Village One to Village Two and Village Five to Village Six.
The amount of the security for the above noled improvements shall be 110% times a construction cost estimate
approved by the City Engineer if improvement plans have been approved by the City; 150% times the approved cost
...._... --...-.---.-.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 18 of22
estimate if improvement plans are being processed by the City or 200% times the construction cost estimate approved
by the City Engineer if improvement plans have not been submitted for City review. A lesser percentage may be
required if it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that sufficient data or other information is
available to warrant such reduction.
SCHOOLS
100. The Applicant shall deliver to the School DistriCt, a graded elementary school site including utilities
provided to the site and an all weather access road acceptable to the DistriCt, located within Village Five, prior to
issuance of the 500th residential building permit (150 students). The all weather access road shall also be acceptable
to the Fire Department. This schedule is subject to modification by the School district as based on District facility
needs.
MISCELLANEOUS
101. Developer shall include in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) provisions
assuring maintenance of all streets, driveways, drainage and sewage systems which are private. The CC&Rs shall
also include provisions requiring the HOA to obtain an encroachment permit from the City prior to perionning work
on any private easement which may disturb any existing landscaping or any other public improvements. The City of
Chula Vista shall be named as party to said Declaration authorizing the City to enforce the terms and conditions of
the Declaration in the same manner as any owner within the subdivision. The CC&R's shall also include language
which states that any proposal by the HOA for dedication or conveyance for public purposes of land used for private
streets (i.e., in multi-family areas) will require prior written approval of 100% of all the Homeowners' Association
members.
102. The Developer is required to submit copies of Final Maps in a digital format such as (DXF) graphic file
prior to approval of each Final Map. Provide Computer Aided Design (CAD) copy of the Final map based on
accurate coordinate geometry calculations and submit the information in accordance with the City Guidelines for
Digital Submittal in duplicate on 5-1/4" HD or 3-1/2" disks. Submit as-built improvement and grading plans in
digital format. Provide security to guarantee the ultimate submittal of improvements and grading digital files.
Update electronic files after any construction pen and ink changes to the grading or improvement plans and resubmit
to the City.
103. Developer shall tie the boundary of the subdivision to the California System -Zone VI (1983).
104. The developer may submit and obtain the approval of the City of a master final map ("A" Map) showing
"super block" lots corresponding to the units and phasing or combination of units and phasing thereof. Said" A" map
shall also show the backbone street dedications and utility easements required to serve the "super block" lots. All
"super block" lots created shall have access to a dedicated public street. Said" A" map shall not be considered the
first map as indicated in other conditions of approval unless said map contains single or multiple family lots or a
subdivision of the multiple family lots shown on the tentative map or unless otherwise indicated in said conditions of
approval. The City shall not require improvement plans in order to approve a final map for any "A" Map lots, but
the developer shall provide security to guarantee the construction of the backbone facilities, prior to approval of any
"A" Map in the following amounts:
The amount of the security for the above noted improvements shall be 110 % times a construction cost estimate
approved by the City Engineer if improvement plans have been approved by the City, 150% times the approved cost
estimate if improvement plans are being processed by the City or 200% times the construction cost estimate approved
by the City Engineer if improvement plans have not been submitted for City review. A lesser percentage may be
required if it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that sufficient data or other information is
available to warrant such reduction.
Prior to approval of the first "A" Map, the Developer shall enter into an agreement where the Developer agrees that
the subsequent development of a multiple family lot, which does not require the filing of a "B" Map, shall meet
Resolution No. 19034 Page 19 of 22
(prior to issuance of a builcting permit for that lot) all the applicable conditions of approval of the tentative map, as
determined by the City Engineer. Construction of non-backbone streets adjacent to multiple family lots will not need
boncting with the final "A" Map which created such lot. However, such improvements will be required to be
constructed ooder the Municipal Code provisions requiring construction of street improvements ooder the design
review and building permit issuance processes.
In the evem of a filing of a fina1 map which requires oversizing (in accordance with the restrictions of state law and
City ordinances) of the improvements necessary to serve other properties, said fmal map shall be required to install
all necessary improvements to serve the project plus the necessary oversizing of facilities required to serve such other
properties. The developer may seek repayment from other property owners through a reimbursement district.
105. Prior to approval of the first "A" Map, the Developer shall enter into an agreement to secure approval of a
Master Precise Plan for the Village Five Core Area prior to submitting any development proposals for commercial,
multi-family and Community Purpose Facility areas within the SPA Five Village Core.
106. Pursuant to the provisions of the Growth Management Orctinance (Section 19.09 of the CVMC) and the
Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP), the Applicant shall complete the following: (1.) Food the preparation
of an annual repon monitoring the development of the community of Otay Ranch. The annual monitoring repon will
analyze the supply of, and demand for, public facilities and services governed by the threshold standards. An annual
review shall commence following the first fiscal year in which residential occupancy occurs and is to be completed
during the second quaner of the following fiscal year. The annual repon shall adhere to those guidelines noted on
page 353, Section D of the GDP/SRP; and (2.) Prepare a five year development phasing forecast identifying targeted
submittal dates for future discretionary applications (SPAs and tentative maps), projected construction dates,
corresponcting public facility needs per the adopted threshold standards, and identifying financing options for
necessary facilities.
107. The applicant of each master tentative map shall be responsible for retaining a project manager to coorctinate
the processing of discretionary permit applications originating from the private sector and submitted to the City of
Chula Vista. The project manager shall establish a formal submittal package required of each developer to ensure a
high standard of design and to ensure consistency with standards and policies identified in the adopted SPA Plan. The
project manager shall have a well rounded educational background and experience, inducting but not limited to land
use p1anning and architecture.
108. The applicant shall submit copies of any proposed CC&Rs for review and approval by the Director of
P1anning and the City Engineer prior to approval of each fina1 "B" Map.
109. If developer desires to do certain work on the propeny after approval of the tentative map but prior to
recordation of the applicable final "B" Map, they may do so by obtaining the required approvals and permits from the
City. The permits can be approved or denied by the City in accordance with the City's Municipal Code, regulations
and policies. Said permits do not constitute a guarantee that subsequent submittals (i.e., fina1 "B" Map and
improvement plans) will be approved. All work performed by the developer prior to approval of the applicable "B"
Map shall be at developer's own risk. Prior to permit issuance, the developer shall acknowledge in writing that
subsequent submittals (i.e., fina1 "B" Map and improvement plans) may require extensive changes, at developers
cost, to work done ooder such early permit. The developer shall post a bond or other security acceptable to the City
in an amooot determined by the City to guarantee the rehabilitation of the land if the applicable final "B" Map does
not record.
PHASING
110. The applicant shall submit to the City a revised phasing plan for review and approval prior to approval of the
first fina1 "B" Map. The PFFP shall be revised where necessary to reflect the revised phasing plan.
111. If phasing is proposed within an individual map or through multiple final maps, the developer shall submit
and obtain approval for a development phasing plan by the City Engineer and Director of P1anning prior to approval
Resolution No. 19034 Page 20 of 22
of any final map. Improvements, facilities and dedications to be provided with each phase or unit of development
shall be as determined by the City Engineer and Director of Planning. The City reserves the right to require said
improvements, facilities and/or dedications as necessary to provide adequate circulation and to meet the requirements
of police and fire departments. The City Engineer and Planning Director may, at their discretion, modify the
sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision.
112. The Public Facilities Finance Plan or revisions hereto shall be adhered to for the SPA and tentative map with
improvements installed in accordance with said plan or as required to meet threshold standards adopted by the City of
Chula Vista. The PFFP identifies a facility phasing plan based upon a set of assumptions concerning the location and
rate of development within and outside of the project area. Throughout the build-out of SPA One, actual
development may differ from the assumptions contained in the PFFP. Neither the PFFP nor any other SPA One
document grant the Applicant an entitlement to develop as assumed in the PFFP, or limit the SPA One's facility
improvement requirements to those identified in the PFFP. Compliance with the City of Chula Vista threshold
standards, based on actual development patterns and updated forecasts in reliance on changing entitlements and
market conditions, shall govern SPA One development patterns and the facility improvement requirements to serve
such development. In addition, the sequence in which improvements are constructed shall correspond to any future
Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan or amendment to the Growth Management Program and Ordinance
adopted by the City. The City Engineer may modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions
change to warrant such a revision.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
113. Developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of the
Final Map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City of Chula
Vista Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual.
114. Developer shall underground all utilities within the subdivision in accordance with Municipal Code
requirements.
115. Developer shall pay the following fees in accordance with the City Code and Council Policy:
a. The Transportation and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees
b. Signal Participation Fees
c. All applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to sewer connection fees
d. Interim SR-125 impact fee
e. Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin DIP
f. Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin DIP
g. Telegraph Canyon Basin Drainage DIP
h. Otay Ranch Reserve Fund fee.
116. The applicant shall comply with all relevant Federal, State and Loca1 regulations, including the Clean Water
Act. The developer shall be responsible for providing all required testing and documentation to demonstrate said
compliance as required by the City Engineer.
117. The applicant shall ensure that prospective purchasers sign a "Notice of Special Taxes and Assessments"
pursuant to Municipal Code Section 5.46.020 regarding projected taxes and assessments. Submit disclosure form for
approval by the City Engineer prior to Final Map approval.
118. The applicant shall comply with Council Policy No. 570-03 if pump stations for sewer purposes are
proposed.
119. The applicant shall comply with Council Policy No. 522-02 regarding maintenance of natural channels
within open spaces.
120. The applicant shall comply with all aspects of the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 21 of 22
121. The Applicant shall comply with Chapter 19.09 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Growth Management)
as may be amended from time to time by the City. Said chapter includes but is not limited to: threshold standards
(19.09.04), public facilities finance plan implementation (19.09.090), and public facilities fmance plan amendment
procedures (19.09.100).
The applicant acknowledges that the City is presently in the process of amending its Growth Management Ordinance
to add a proposed Section 19.09.105, to establish provisions necessary to ensure compliance with adopted threshold
standards (particu1arly traffic) prior to construction of State Route 125. Said provisions will require the
demonsttation, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, of sufficient street system capacity to accommodate a
proposed development as a prerequisite to final map approval for that development, and the applicant hereby agrees
to comply with adopted amendments to the Growth Management Ordinance.
122. Upon submittal of building plans for small lot single family (5,000 square feet or less as deemed in the City
of Chula Vista Design Manual) residential development, plans shall clearly indicate that 750 square feet of private
open space will be provided.
123. All proposed development shall be consistent with the Otay Ranch SPA One Planned Community District
Regulations.
Resolution No. 19034 Page 22 of 22
COMPARISON OF OTA Y RANCH STREET CLASSIFICATIONS
TO CITY STREET CLASSIFICATIONS
FOR DETERMINATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS TO BE UTILIZED IN
TENTATNE MAP AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN PREPARATION
FOR OTAY RANCH USE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR
CLASSIFICATION OF... CITY STREET CLASSIFICATION OF...
Scenic Corridor Prime Arterial
Prime Arterial Prime Arterial
Primary Village Entry Class I Collector
Secondary Village Entry Class II Collector
Village Core Class I Collector
Residential Promenade Class III Collector
Core Promenade Residential
Village Main Residential
Village Plaza Residential
Residential A and B Residential
Alley Standards
\ \ CITYWID E ISYSIH 0 MEIPLANNING IMARTIN\RESOS\ 190 34 . cond.doc
"", ,," *"
..---- ,
.."
.."
.."
...."
..,o'
I .."
I .."
I .."
I .."
I .."
I -...."
to-------- -
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR ~~'i!ik. McMIllin D.A. America PROJECT OESCRIPTlON:
C) , OlaV Ranch AMENDMENTS
PROJECT No. 01 ~plC Pkwy., East 01 La Media
ADDRESS: & So. 01 st Palomar Dr.
SCALE: I FILE NUMBER: FV,U.A", I
NORTH No Scale
h:\home\planninglcarlos~ocators\pcm9816.cdr 3/10/98 11- If rlllC-f{. IÞ /
~
!:::
!!!
:r:
..J X
~ w
\!S
i
~
= dÞ¡f
~-
c~
l ~3 L Æ rrl1~)f,..r ttJ í
H .~~. ~~
~j *9-.-
5S
t;
-
~'H~(V~ N\1Pxlf P
(1?e~D IqD~
Otay Ranch General Development Plan
Proposed Text Amendments
1. PART II, Chapter I, Section E,lmplementation Mechanisms:
Paragraph 2a, page I 17: Additional Criterion to be added:
"The numherqfhome< idenqfìedJor the villQge core r<?pre<ent< an urhan plannir¡g
goal Reduction< in the numher qf multi-family unit< may he approved a< lor¡g a<
<ujJident den<itie< are provided to <zq¡port h,lS and light rail tramit
2. PART II, Chapter I, Section F, Village Descriptions and Policies:
Exhibit 46, Village Five Land Use Table, page 143:
Additional footnote in table: "Park and CPP acrp-4gß <hall he determined at the SfP A
Plan level to rpjlect approved Sf? A Den<itie<"
3. PART II, Chapter I, Section F, Village Descriptions and Policies:
Village Core Policies, page 144:
The Jmmber of hðfDes identified for the ,illag.: eore is a minimum and may not be
reduced-. "The numher qf home< identified fnr the villQge cnre røpre<ent< an urhan
plannir¡g goal Reduction< in the numher qf multi-family unit< mny he llJIproved a<
lor¡g a< <ujJident den<itie< are provided to <1<pport hu< and light rail tramit
#/1
I1-rrRfIl-N élJ r ~ocr g'Ò17
4/9/98 -IÞ-3
r\ \9.03 7-
e:X~b1+ ?J
MTDB .......
IIi.LH
Metropolitan Transit Development Board 'ItIoII"
1255ImO8',a: AvenuE. Suite 1O0C RECEIVED
San Dle~: ':;¡., 92101-749C
(619) 23-.--,45S
FAX (619. 234«407
DEe 2 4 1997
MEMORANDUM PLANNING
DATE: December 22, 1997 AG 270.1, SRTP 820.6 (PC 271)
TO: Beverly Blessent, City of Chula Vista
FROM: Nancy Bragad~
SUBJECT: OT A Y RANCH TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 98-04
Thank you for the opportunity to review the revised tentative map (TM) for Village 5. The
Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) has reviewed the map and found it to be
consistent with the transit-oriented development objectives expressed in the Otay Ranch Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) One plan. In addition, John Haggerty, MTDB Desfgn Engineer, has reviewed
the light rail transit alignment and found it to meet our design criteria (see attachment).
The overall densities in the village core are lower than was anticipated in the SPA plan, but we
believe that the mix of apartments, duplexes, triplexes, and small lot single-family homes in the
core area meet the intent of the plan. However, we continue to encourage you to approve a range
of densities that would permit the developer to build a greater number of units if warranted by
future market conditions.
If you have any Questions I can be reached at 557-4533.
PWalia
M-OT A YRANCH.NBRAGA
Attachment
cc: William Lieberman
John Haggerty
#1/
If Tj/f(! 11-)1 é,t) r
1Ft{
MembelAgen"e' . tXH I BI T 4
City of Chole VISta. Crty of Coco"oc. Crty of EI Caton. City of 'mpell" Beach. Crty 01 La Mesa Crty of Lemen GlOve. Crty of Natlo,,' Crty. City of Poway City of San D,ego.
City of SanleE Coo"'y of San D,ego. Slate of Caliíomla~1
Mellopoli"n T;ansrt Developmen: 80ald" Cooldinalm of the Melcopolitan T;ansrt System "d the I., T"'cab Admlmstla"on
Sob5<o",y coIPo;allon,,~san Diego T;an", coIPma"o".~s" Diego Tcolley. 100 and [jJsan Diego & Allzo"a EaSlelC Railway Company
Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area One EmIlI
LAND USE PLAN
II. LAND USE fr/J
The following provides a detailed description of Village One and
Village Five land uses, as depicted on the SPA One Land Use Plan ~A
(Exhibit 1-6). Table 1.2 provides a comparison betWeen the GDP
and SPA land use plans. Differences in acres (as described in more
detail below) are attributable to more precise road locations, open ~~ lQ¡O~3
space areas and development areas.
This portion of the document also analyzes the SPA land plan to ~~5~
evaluate consistency betWeen this SPA Plan and the atay Ranch ~ (ß1~\C¡ð'.-Jo
General Development Plan. The following table sumarizes the dif-
ferences betWeen the GDP defined Villages One and Five and the ~ r' /
scope of this SPA Plan. V
Table 1-2 Land Use Comparative Table - SPA One
ACRES DUs
GDP SPA GDP SPA
Village One 623.6 619.3 2,880 2880
Village Five 493.4 4ß6;e 2878 ~ \
49.L.6 un \
SPA One Total 1,117.0 -l-;+-H ;5 5,758 5;158
1.1l1U .Lill \
Area W. of Pas eo Ranchero 280.0 264.8 443 443 J\
"
Overall Total 1,397.0 -l-;3-tØo+ 6,201 6;Wt I.
U2U 5..Wí \ ,
~\
¡,
,
",
,.,. I"
~t -
., ; .
\ " DJ
\f
J
'\
. /
Otay
Ranch
S--j -
1-33
C! 0 qj-o q ;;t.. J'no 24, 1997
fZ 1<:(033 e)(~m+ 6
",....",-,,-..-'
~I! ::n
." it .
,g." .
~c
~,~~
I
.... ~
c
..
¡¡:
"
- :5
."
C
..
..J
t¡r:::..,i
~~U t
. .j
.. ~
~ ~
n
II)
oæs
~
en
w
CJ
<t
...J
...J
:> ~ 0 t~f
I II: ~.J
...... ~ o:¡: .i.
... ~ .c;
0 ~ /õ;- I~i
Z ~ L j . ~~~ ]H"
~ UI ]10. ~
...... 5> fill §~ .
a: s ~Z roi I~l!
~ -, b15§ g!ri
..... :r:: / ~~~-
~ ~ ¡~d
~ ~ :æl"
0 t: : - 2 ~~.r
u ~:;; - nii
----- ----.-
.
ï
~EJi
~I
p
0 ~
H
In
~
T-
en
W
CJ
«
...J '\!ì
~ ,-
- 'II
> . '"
. ~ II!
0 j~.
~. ~.
~i .
U ~ :I!!
Z ~ ;'..
«~ ~u~
a:::s
:> --
~~ ~-=.3
~~
05
~~-----~ -~
'H ~ ~
~~ 1
¿III
.¡j~
C
Ii
ii:
..
c:
0
~
III
.c:
i
,; rr:
€~ i 1i"
~~U§ t õ
j
0 B
~ =
n
..
c:
0
11) !
oð :;
,...
UJ
W
~
..J 0 N
..J -
-U)
>...
I o:!
- z
J: (,) g lis
0 CÞ ;;¡! h~
zUJ~ ~
c~~ ~
a: c::: :> Ê£,þ!
~~ ~
~ c::: 15 ~ - V ~~~{
~ as IS ~~n
00:5
------------------- ---------
Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area One EDI
LAND USE PLAN
GDP.
. The area west of Paseo Ranchero, including parcels not within
the Otay Ranch ownership (Ross, Dauz-Gorman and Gerhardt
parcels), must be comprehensively planned as a unit, except SPA,
GDP or General Plan Amendment application for one or more
of the non-Otay Ranch parcels will be considered without con-
current consideration of a SPA plan for the Otay Ranch parcels.
. The Comprehensive Plan for the area west of Paseo Ranchero
must include an evaluation of a general plan amendment for the
parcels not governed by the Otay Ranch GDP. The evaluation
should consider the factors discussed in this section.
. The Comprehensive Plan for the area west of Paseo Ranchero
should be prepared after the completion of the MSCp, or equiva-
lent regional habitat planning effort, but within 5 years of the
approval of SPA One,
. The combined total number of units authorized through the ap-
proval of Otay Ranch SPA One east of Pas eo Ranchero, and any
subsequent processing of the SPA for the area west of Pas eo Ran-
chero may not exceed the total number of units authorized by
the Otay Ranch GDP (6,201 units) for these areas.
B. VILLAGE FIVE
Village Five is comprised of approximately 491acres located in the
northern portion of the ütay Valley Parcel, southwest of the planned
interchange ofSR-125 and Dtay Lakes Road. The Otay Ranch General
Development Plan designates Village Five as an urban village to be
served by a light rail transit system. The Otay Ranch GDP and-1his
plan permit\: 2,878 units. As an urban village, the Otay Ranch GDP
provides for an approximately 115 acre village core including
commercial uses, an elementary school site, neighborhood park.!:, CPF
land uses, and medium-high density housing.
The following table summarizes the GDP defined Village Five and
the scope of this document.
~- S- Otay
Ranch
I-53
)"0024.1997
IImIII Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area One
LAND USE PLAN
Table 1-5 GDP Land Use Comparative - Village Five
ACRES DUs
Village Five GDP SPA GDP SPA
Single Family 280.6 i!3&&2il.I1 1,263 -l7ß LM2
Multi-Family 89.7 tt8 zrll. 1,615 t;6t5 L2ll
Parks 10.0 ~ 16.9.
School 10.0 10.0
CPF 11.3 tt:6 111..1
Commercial 6.0 ~2.Q
External Circulation 15.4 20.3
Internal Circulation *=4 2f1..i
Open Space 70.4 90.2
Village Five Total 493.4 49Mal./i 2,878 ~2,m
As depicted in Table 1-5 above, there are differences betWeen the
acreages depicted in the GDP and SPA for Village Five. These dif-
ferences are attributable to the more precise level of planning un-
dertaken to prepare the SPA One Land Use Plan. For example, the
GDP included acreage for internal circulation in the single family
residential acreage - the SPA identifies internal circulation acreage
separately. The GDP included 6.6 acres of neighborhood park land
within the Village Five residential acreage, but the SPA identifies
neighborhood park acreage separately. Village Five includes more
open space acreage because the GDP did not include the slope areas
adjacent to the Otay Water District Property in the open space to-
tals - the SPA Land Use Plan includes those open space areas.
I. Design Influences
The primary design influence for Village Five is the pedestrian
friendly village concept established in the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan. Other influences reflect on-site conditions and
characteristics such as, landforms, biological resources, drainage
patterns, aesthetics, land use relationships and circulation patterns.
Existing development patterns and Chula Vistàs General Plan poli-
cies for adjoining undeveloped land also influenced the design of
Village Five. The adjacent plans and USes include the regional open
Otay space system, off-site circulation consideration, public facility con-
Ranch ~-?
I-54
June 2~. 1997
-----------
Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area One IŒiII
LAND USE PLAN
area of the village located to the northeast. The secondary area
includes single-family residential neighborhoods, with a range of
lot sizes and product types and several pedestrian park sites.
3. land Use Plan
Village Five is an urban village, surrounded by major arterials and
buffered by open space. The land use plan incorporates the village
concept with higher densiries within the village core and decreasing
densities away from rhe village core area.
The land use pattern established by the Gtay Ranch GDP empha-
sizes balanced land uses, environmentally sensitive development,
transit/pedestrian orientation, a diverse economic base, diverse hous-
ing opportunities and land uses that offer a sense of place to Village
Five residents.
The Village Five Land Use Plan establishes single-family developments
from 4.1 to 5:9 6Jl dwelling units/acre, and multifamily developments
from &:'1 Zj to 33-;'t 31l!l dwelling units/acre. The densities planned for
this Village are consistent with the approved Otay Ranch General
Development Plan. The village core includes medium-high density
residential units, a 10.0 acre elementary school site, a town square, two
neighborhood park sites, a transit stop and shelter, future light rail
transit right-of way, 3:6 2.2 acres of commercial/retail with rp<idpntinl
ahmæ and -H-:61L11 acres for Community Purpose Facilities.
The Village Five Land Use Plan (Exhibit 1-10) depicts single-family
and multi-family neighborhoods and the Land Use Plan summary.
4. Road Connections
In some instances, SPA identified road alignments differ slightly
from the alignments depicted in the GDP. As a "general" develop-
menr plan, the GDP anticipated and permits such modest changes
between the GDP and the SPA. These differences are necessary as
the land plan becomes more precise due to physical requirements of
the road location, grading consideration, and traffic safety require-
ments (such as, sight-distances, "T" intersections requirements and
road crossing separations).
~-7 Otay
Ranch
1.57
1"",,24.1997
...--.
----------- -
!7 ¡ ¡¡Ii
~ ::õ: ~
:¡; " .
;'::5
.J5"
~
~
¡¡:
f
>
-U
¡¡,~
:;,; ..
0 ~
~
MN
:<i;¡
~ ...
CO
E
§ H~..... ... un
en 0 0 '"
CD
In
:::I
."
"
CO
...J
CD
> """
ü:
CD
C>
~
:>
i~ t
~I ¡
;
. ]
n
!z
~
z
12
~ ~
g ~
i ~ oil
a: t:: f!~
~ i ~iì
í: :: ~l ~
Ë... !.in
æ .... !S~
0: ~~.
;=I~
Ca:' ~~n
'" - c ~.
ß ~ - 6 d.n
"
~
- ----.,,_.,._,.
-~ -------~,------. --.-
¡¡¡-
~ ;ø~~~~~~~~~~~~ffi~~~~~~~o~~~~~~_M ~¡ m
~ ~§ - - - ~ -N NN-:: ~ ;¡¡: ~
e- I- Z CI)
~; ;~~~~oœm~~œ~V-N~~MN~~~"'~~~~~NN~ ~~
§~ ~3~~~~~ÐÐ~~~~~~~~ø~~~~~~~g~~ø~~ ~
0~ 1-0 C
lø MœN~~œO~-~OøMœ~VOVV~V~NøN~œ ~M-~œOOMøœøM ON~MØ j
~& ~ ~~~~~~~~ri~~~ri~~vdri~~~~~~~~ '~~~d ~d~~~cicigcici~
~e u -N---- -N- -- -~---- ~ N - -- NN~ ~
~a. c >
. -
> ~ ~
~ ]:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~a.~a. Õ~;; CI)
~ j~WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ UU ~~~~S =
S ;;: '" '=-""":= .!!!
~ ~œMV~~~øO_NM~~~~ø-~NœœONM~ø~~~~_N~ø-NO_~~~~N 66~ 5
.~e~~~~~~"I"I"I"I, ,'1'1'1~:è~~'1~~~"'f~~ """~~d.d.~~';"';".,.:t:t"'ch¡g .C>
zc~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~œ~~~~~~~~j'jja.a. a.a.a.a.~uu~ i~~
!.f 2 i,
'î! ~~
~ I ~ i:
jd Ii
H~ U
íP ¡~
~ ~¡~~ I~
..J .! ~J> l'
;; ~ ..-l.! ,~
.:J j <¡a I I t.o
} 2 ~ ,~
¡¡ ~ I' i." li
.~.ð h{
h'i~ !';
d. . 'h
ri.~ ~.~
¡
i
i
!
5
i
~
- ~
~ I
~
~ ~~
~ ! l.-~
~ .
-.. ø
.! ~ :;
I!' ~
g: ~ ~
~ ~.~. 2'
C./! E
~! 0
I- a. U I
0 ~III:
.:J
...-.-... -------- --
>-
a:
>- I-
a: a: Z
~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~
- Z a: ::¡ >- J:
0. :J W ::¡ a: "'"
0 ::¡ Z 0 I- Zw
t;; ~ g¡ ~ 15 i:!~
I- () () < W ¡¡'"
¡¡; on :I: ä: C) .->
~~§1~:5 0
~ 55 ~ ~ s! g
"'
<1110*-):( ~
>
>5
0
c
a:
"
Õ
~ ~ ~
a: j! ~ ~ :I
g t;; ~ ~ ~
ä:wl- a: "
g¡ ¡¡j Ë - ~ ~ t:f'
()¡::~ <~Wl- i5 I
g:I:~ j!~~15 ~:
Z()W <w"'::¡ "
wZa: wc>-z "
~~t;; g¡fij~Q
~~ j!I-~!¿~15;;!
ffiffi8tlJ j!~~~~ ~
1i:1i:",,~t;;a:I- j!:5Ô t~ aN
«>-"'~ I-=a: " Zw
wwa:z """>1- i\!!~ i:!'"
~ ~ ~;c ~ ~ ~ fiJ " ~ >~
a:a:w::¡o.«<a: '" >5>
~~~~~1515~ffi ~ 0
~~:5:5:5~~°1t .-
-i-i===a:a:¡¡Ja:
0"""»>0.0."'0.
ZICI":~I'
wig t.~ (i!
C)IC ¡¡¡:. I~
w.C !I'i.: ~ IE
...I
g<;j
,,¡.
;~ .
I ~llt
Ui
- ;¡¡U~
~ -I Õ !~n
~ ,:r~~
~ ibi
-...-----. --.------------------. -. --------------
~ Ii ~!
~~ ~
:2 0
~.~
3
~
iJ
>-
e:
>- l-
e: e: Z
~ffi~~
fa ~:¡ ~
~ z e: ::¡ :r
0. :0 W ::¡ iI: !II'"
~ ~ 1ê 8 ~ ~15
'" 0 0 -' W :5
I- U U < W ~='
¡¡; on J: ë: c¡ >-'>
~~~U::s 0
~g¡¡¡:~~ ¡¡ ~
ø ~
~~*.~ ~ !
> ..
¡3
0
0
"
<
0
tü " " ~
w'" ¡;: :5
e: e: z 2
~ ~ ~ ~ ð
~ ~ ¡!: ~....
8¡!:§: ~~*~
~J:tü e:~""W
ZUW <W"'::¡
WZe: wO>-Z
U<I- e:¡¡;e:c¡
~~~ 1-8~~~
~¡U¡tütlJ~¡:-~~
~~~~~~*Š~ 5,.
< < >- '" ~ tñ tñ =I e: ~w
W W e: Z > I- "OJ
~ ~ ~;;; ~ ~ iI: fa >j
g:g:~~::;::2::2ë§~ g>
wwc¡c¡c¡wwzw
zzSSS::¡::¡ou..
~~=!=I=l2i?2i?frl~
0<0<0»>0.0.(/)0.
Zlcl,,:ol"
wig iHg Ii
æ!g ills: lï
..I
Fi
ii~
š~ 11
, ¡;t~
h~~
Ž"~
."'~
6 - ! (,. . . i.~li
g .~~~
~ HH
~j 2 ê
:;;... ~,
,e t J.
z ~~
z - z >
~ ~ ~ z ;;: z
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2 2 ~ ~ 2 ~
¡:: ¡:: 2 2 ;¡; 2
c c :: - '" ;¡;
w w .... - c '"
(1) !;;: ø .... W ø
~ u ~ ~ ¡g ~
0 9 ~ ¡: is ~
Qg:~1;j::Jcrx
Z "- Il. W
w I ~ I I g ¡
C) I I I' g j
~ I g:
I
~~
; ~:I
..
Ii
., ~N
~ ~~
& 5>
if!
h~
jid
\ ~ ¡¡~~
- æ1!~¡
~-/~ ~m
~~g
i -- ¡m
- "'
:::.:¡ 2 ~
~~ ~ 1
~~
z ~ z
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
UJ ~ ::;; ~ UJ ::;;
is 2 ~ ! ! 2 ~
~ ::: 2 2 ~ 2
§ § ; ~ @ ~ t
gj ð ~ }¡! gj ~
~ 9 ~ ~ ~ ~
Ca:UJx:>a:x
0. a: UJ u. 0. UJ
ffi I Ë I I g :
c¡ ii, g , I ;¡¡
- I 0 -
~ - I I 0 : ~ ~:::
io ~ ~~
ri ~;;!
.., >">
¡¡ 0
I
de
~ ~:I
,.
,;
;¡:
~~
~~
>-'>
0
I
Uj
g¡¡l.
.~ ,I
~1IJ
ihj
~¡!!
:;!i'ö
~ .f.!,
6-/3 au
z z
<ë z <ë z
::¡¡ ;;: ;;:; ::¡¡ ;;:
ß ~ ~ ß ::¡¡
;;! ~ ß ;;! ß
d ~ ;;¡ d ~ g¡
~ &J d ~ &J ~z
L1J a: L1J L1J a: ::>;:
Z L1J a: z L1J ,"0
2 z ~ 2 Z ä!iJš
0 2 0 0 2 <¡j
R :5 ~ :£ g ~~
fiJ t- R fiJ '" ::;w
en CJ L1J en CJ ::! ¡!;
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o
O!Q~O!QI!!
C g:¡;s¡rg:¡;s~
Z
w I I I ;
CJ '.
~ I I ;
fJ
~:!
,I
Ii
....
~ )j~ ~"
.. ON
..:\ I ~~
I >,~
---_\ 5>
/
(,--_\~~~~>
L'O .u
I
~. "I
If
iilt
\ ~Ui
:¡¡~l!~
-----IlL ~~n
::> - T ...~æ
Un
--~----
z z
<z <z "'c.-
:; ;¡ ;!; :; ;¡ ~ ::1.!! ~ ~
0 :; < 0 :; ~ ~L -,
UJO:;UJO ~ _:ö~ 1
:; UJ 0 :; UJ NO~ :E :¡
3 :; UJ ;¡ :; ~.> ~>2 .Jj ~
u 3 ;;¡¡ d 3 :2 c"" ,,~c "~~ ~
~ hJ ~ ~ hJ ~z « Q-, ¡¡
UJ a: UJ UJ a: =>;: ~iìL-.J II!! E
Nð ~ ~ ð ~ ~~ ~ê ,!, ]
0 Z N " z~ ~ u
8 N 2 g 2 ~~ ~~ ~:-1 ~
~ R 8 ~ ~ ~~ $~L& /
~o ~ ~ ~ ~ :I¡:: " &'
- a: 0 - <0
~~~~~f'J
CI g:~~g:~~
Z
w I II I ;
ø '.
~ I I .
IE]
~:!
..
,i
"
UN
Zw
1 ;2'"
1 >~
¡!;;;
0
L'O '<:1
I '"
I ""
.,
iil
u~~,;
~i~~
~~W
hh
t:~l
r-- - ~;tn
::> - IS -:-t.fii
~- Un
w
z
::¡ ~
ffi ::¡
~ a:
~ ~ ~
ß ~ 10ft
(f) CJ w'"
0 Z a:W
C ~ ~ ~~
ffi a. ~ §'I!
C I' ::it;
w I:,g¡
....I ~~
, z::>
IE]
lj
~¡
~-/? \
- -
~ Ii ;:: ê
-' ii: ~.
:3 . 1
w ~~
z w w ~
::; Z III
a: ::;
W a:
;; W Z
w;; ;<
'" W 0
C '" ;,,¡¡¡
~ ~ i¡!¡jj
:r 1;; æ~
Q ~ x 15!¡!
z 0. W oJö
w I' <",
C:J w[ß
W I ö;¡
-I I z::>
IE]
0 ~:!
'" ,
\II "
"
:)
Z
0
~
<
u
¡;
co :r
~~ !fN
~fu ~~
~h5
if~ 0
--I
ij~
~h;
'i!'~
jli~
~sAI
!!l"
f'f.~
.¡h
In
I-
IE I- 0"
£; m ~ IE ~ ~.!! n
éi ~ g ~ ;ã .",'"
c « u z ~~ ~
::¡ t¡¡ 5 ~ CJ Q ,¡j.s
a: ...J Z 0 ~ I-
Q ¡? ~ ~ @¡ tñ ~ I!
z Q
w tï:~~:!;
C)
w
..J
J. OJ!'
IE]
~:!
,!
Ii
~-/f
~ --- ~~
-
-- - - -
- ------
-- -- - -
- -
0 C ::; ¡
M ~ """
~~ - i
-" ~
.¡j .5
~
ð
....
a: .... z
~ ffi ¡¡;
¡¡j :5 ~ ë!i
z z u " z
~ ~~~g
'" .... u 0 ;!!; z
~ ~ æ ê5 ~ ~
C ¡:? ~ ê5 æ !IS '"
z CJ) 0 -..
w 1 D '('
~ T I' ;~ '.)
:E:
"'"
~~
~='
- ...>
0
IE]
~:I
..
,i
---------
;;;¡ ,n
-'- ¡¡: ~,
:Ë J!! ~
:¡o';¡
.¡jF
... ~
-:.:. - :II
...
en
c
II
...
0
c
0
¡
~
..
II
II:
~
..
~
a.
:I:
Om
Zw
~~
~g
0
cj
a:
«
Õ
~
5
~ ~
!z w
w ~ ~ Iii t:
~ ~ S w ~ ~ ~
0 a: ¿ ~ ~ « ~ w ë
. . > 8 .. a: :1:" ~
~ ~ ~ :I: § ~ : ~ ~ w
ffi ffi ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
cg:g:~f,,:¡f>~a:;; ~
æ:18r........;'1.........Ë:i'I' 1:1:
~ . I : II I! ,I I !i:;;
UJ:181¡ Ë I I I~"
"'..8L.J æ I I>~
, gs:
og
r¡lf -- 7
~ ,- ~.!.
II: '~2
~,,~
hi'
~~, ,~
~p
~1i~i
W-!
z::- 2 7'.. ;;¡;'i'..
J - U ~l-r
,-,~'.
Uh
,----------- - -------------,
----
;:;:¡ i':.
~~ - i
;p
w¡!:
"0
C
~
~
~
Co.
III
C
~
Co.
0
C
0
'j¡
~
~
II:
]
:;
Co.
0;
a:
<
ë
~
:5
;d
¡:: z
z w
w ~ ~ t; t::
~ ~:5 ~ ~ ~ ~
~ : ~ g ~ g ~ ~ ~
ceo: X ~ ~ : ~ ~ w ,
:;! :;! <š ;,! :5 ~ w ~ :;! ~ ,:,
~~~~~I-ß¡¡;!gw ,,'" I
CCCJo:;¡ã"':i<ß~ :,-",
0 ~ ~ ~ : 2 ~ : > ~ 0: m
ffi:I"¡;i?I~¡ (II , X
C).I",;' -: , I ""-.' ~N
UJ:I:li11.I,:¡ I ( ~~
-' . I "O~ .:: 1 -"-.'- >~
, " ;5>
'_--:'~'L--S" 0
," .
Fi
niB
iii'
~~, ,;
"11 æ
:¡¡.1/
~i~-
j.~I
-- 2/ ~~f~
~ ':F!f
itn
--.------".--- --..--..--..
EmD Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area One
PUBLIC FACILITIES
The SPA One population generates a demand for 26.225 acres of
Community Purpose Facility, as follows.
Table 1-10 Community Purpose Facility Demand
CPF ACREAGE
POPULATION REQ UlRED PROVIDED
Village One 9,570 13.3 14.6*
Village Five 8789 1.l22 +t;t 'L2 H:6 1fl1
Te1e.Cyn. Estates" 1.4
Total if¡859 J.Mn ~~ ~2LZ
. Population for Village One includes the ares west of Pas eo Ranchero
The following criteria has been employed during the SPA land plan-
ning process to locate Community Purpose Facility uses within the
SPA One project area.
. Facilities shall be located within the village COte.
. Facilities shall be encouraged to shate parking with adjacent public
and private uses.
. Facilities and corresponding parking within village cores shall be
located and sized to avoid obstruction of pedestrian circulation.
. Facilities and other public structures may exceed height, bulk or
set back requirements generally applicable to private uses if such
deviations are necessary to enable the structUre to become the
focal point, "signatUre piece" or "point of ceremony" of a given
village.
. Facilities may locate in traditional commercial and retail facilities.
" The Otay Ranch GDP. and the PC Ordinance require that this SPA Plan comply with the PC
Ordinance provision of identifying 1.39 acres of CPF land per 1.000 residents. However. if the
CPF land is not utilized or the PC standard is modified. the amount of CPF land will be adjusted
accordingly.
Otay " Per the Otay Ranch GDP, provide within the first phase in the City of Chula Vista, Community
Ranch Purpose Facility land to satisfy the Telegraph Canyon Estates Specific Plan requirement (City of
Chula Vista Resolution No. 16960).
1-166 ~- '2-L
lune24,1997
--------
Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area One EmIl
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
. The Otay Ranch GDP also requires that the first phase of devel-
opment of Otay Ranch within the City of Chula Vista shall sat-
isIY the affordable housing obligation for the Telegraph Canyon3t
Estates GDP and SPA plan.
. Provide an affirmative fair marketing plan which describes vari-
ous efforts to attract perspective homebuyers regardless of gen-
der, age, race, religion, handicap or economic status.
Otay Ranch GDP permits a total of 6;M}" ~ homes within
Villages One and Five. Satisfaction of the affordable housing
requirement for SPA One requires the provision of æe 5.8f1 affordable
units. In addition, this phase of Otay Ranch development would have
to provide 34 affordable units in satisfaction of the Telegraph Canyon
Estates obligation.
The GDP requirement for the provision of affordable housing is
addressed in the Ranch-Wide Mfordable Housing Plan (Appendix
H) and the SPA One Affordable Housing Plan (Appendix I).
I. SPA One Affordable Housing Plan
The SPA One Affordable Housing Plan also identifies priority sites
within which affordable housing could be located in both Villages
One and Five, The alternative sites were selected based upon their
proximity to parks, schools, transit, retail and child care. Addition-
ally, the land plan was prepared with a range of multi-family densi-
ries sufficient to provide a wide range of opportunities for afford-
able housing within each village. The SPA One Affordable Hous-
ing Plan also identifies phasing criteria to ensure the provision of
affordable housing concurrent with the development of market rate
housing.
The Otay Ranch GDP supports "the use of accessoty dwelling units
as an additional source of affordable housing for lower-income house-
holds." The SPA One Land Use Plan does not provide for acces-
sory dwelling units because there are many opportunities to pro-
vide units affordable to low-income households within the multi-
family units included within SPA One. Further, accessory dwelling
" The Telegraph Canyon Estates obligation arises from a separate entitlement The precise require-
ment is the provision of a 3 acre site for affordable housing within SPA One. The SPA Affordable
Housing Plan proposes that the obligation be satisfied by providing actural units, 10% of the total Otay
number of dwelling units within Telegraph Canyon Estates. 10% of the Telegraph Canyon project
equals 34 affordable units, 17 low-income units and 17 moderate income units. Ranch
" Includes area west of Paseo Ranchero. S-- 2-3 1-189
June24,1997
~----------~---~-~--- ----------
Otay Ranch Sectional Planninl! Area One
Phasing Plan
provided consistent with the provisions of the PFFP. A 2.1 acre
neighborhood park (P-3) is also included in Phase lB.
E.h.ase..2A
Phase 2A is located in the northern portion of Village Five, south of
Otay Lakes Road. Phase 2A consists of 542 single family units and
a 90 unit multi-family site. Access to Phase 2A will be provided via
St. Clair Drive, from Telegraph Canyon Road. This phase is slated
for development early in the construction of SPA One because it is
anticipated that market conditions will be more favorable for single
family detached homes. Approximately one-half of the 2.0 acre
neighborhood park (P-9) is included within the single family
residential area northeast of the village core. H L1 acres of the W:6
6Aacre Village Five neighborhood park site (P-6) must be provided
consistent with the provisions of the PFFP.
Eh.ase.2B
Phase 2B is located in the northwest portion of Village One, east of
Paseo Ranchero and north of East Palomar Street. This phase consists
of 433 single family units and a 140 unit multi-family site. Access to
the Phase 2B area is provided from Telegraph Canyon Road. It is also
envisioned that a pedestrian oriented Paseo would be included as part
of the western edge of Phase 2B. An 11.1 acre neighborhood park
(P-l) is included within the Village One core area. Park
improvements will be phased to meet SPA One demand. A .8 acre
pedestrian park (p-4) is also included in this phase, in the residential
area north of the village core.
£hase.3
Phase 3 is located in the northwestern portion of Village Five and
includes 185 single family homes and a 129 unit multi-family site.
S-- 2-« Otay
RanJ:h
1-195
Olav Ranch Sectional Planninl! Area One
Phasing Plan
Phascl
Phase 4 is located in the southeastern portion of Village Five,
adjacent to the Otay Water District property. This phase contains
approximately 145 single family homes and 175 multifamily homes.
A .6 acre pedestrian park (P-ll) is included in the Phase 4 single
family area. Access to Phase 4 will be provided via the extension of
East Palomar Street through Village Five. The second SPA One
elementary school located in the Village Five core area will likely be
constructed during Phase 4, consistent with the provisions of the
PFFP.
Ph.a=.5
Phase 5 is the last SPA One phase and includes the western most
portion of Village One, including the village core and most of Village
One's multi-family units. This phase also includes site preparation for
all of the Village One CPF sites and the commercial sites. It is
anticipated that this phase will be developed last because the demand
for significant commercial activity will not occur until there is a
sufficient population base within Village One and the SUITOunding
community to support such uses. A similar rationale applies to the
larger CPF sites.
It is anticipated that the market acceptance for attached units will be
improved by the time Phase 5 is constructed. It is also anticipated that
development of higher density multi-family lots will significantly lag
development of the remainder of SPA One and may require that the
light rail transit is in operation to be feasible. The third SPA One
elementary school located west of Paseo Ranchero will be
constructed during Phase 5, depending upon the absorption and
student population associated with the build-out of SPA One homes.
Village One Raçt & Village Five Weçt
Both qf theçe development areaç are acceççed from Telegraph
Canyon Road via the conçln.iction qf La Media Road Theçe areaç
are Phaçed indqJendently n.f the areaç deçcrihed above and are
whject to a w'parate Chapter in the PFFP However aç with the
areaç deçcrihed above thiç prqject area will initially develop with
~-2~ a/cry
Ranch
1-196
Otav Ranch Sectional Planning Area One
Phasing Plan
~ingle fàmily hou~Ï1¡g product~ with multi-family home~ and
commercial U~e~ developir¡g later a~ the mnrlœt allows
fha&ù
This Phase includes all of Village One East and the portion of Village
Five located north of East Palomar Street. It includes approximately
125 single family units west of La Media and approximately 3f6 ill
SF and duplex units in Village Five West. It also includes ill
multi-family units in Parcel (R-46), a 4 li acre CPF parcel ~,
a 10 0 acre school site and Park Parcel /!:-6-;6 l!dL.l in Village Five
West and Pede~trian Park P-5 qf approrimately li acre~ .
Approrimnte~v fi ~ acre~ of the 74 acre Neighborhood Park mu~t be
provided C()nd~tent with the provi~ionç qf the PFFP m().~t lilœly
during the development of thi~ pha~e and Phme 2A Although these
public facility sites are within the Phase 1 boundary, the timing of
construction of these public facilities will be determined by PFFP
provisions.
fhase..2
This Phase includes all of Village Five West located south of East
Palomar Street, including the commercial, park, CPF and multifamily
sites which derIDe the village core for Village Five. This area
includes approximately -l-¡B5 Z41 multi-family units and 17fi ~ir¡gle
fami~v units. Development of this area will be partially dependent on
development progress in other areas which will provide the
population necessary to support commercial and CPF activities in the
core.
Development of the multi-family units will be determined by market
demand. Multi-family development may occur over an extended
period of time, even lagging single family development in other
village outside of SPA One. Some; densities may not be; marketable
tmti:llight rail smie;e; is operational.
ç- 2h Omy
!!!!!!El!
1-198
-- -------------------
~ ci
u: z
Q. .
Z ~ < .
W "- IE
c¡ I e
w I 1.0
...II
~EJi
~: .1
~ "
§ ~
.~ ~
U. if>
& CD ':!
¡go. :5
Co ;;: ,,>-
~ -j ! ~
~ 8 ~
~ ~
,90 ~
.r:.
en
~
I:
~
0
~ ~~ i un
.
'"
t ~ ~~~~
~ NO ~ *~Ur!
.2-~ i
~ ~ j
:! ~ 5'!~ i ..~N~!O!i!
~ ~~ ( ;~¡:!iJ!.dð
~,., :s"-I
., E~ ,., .
~ .., ..". JJ .
E OJ¡J¡! U::.i!!~~!t ¡s
E ~~~ .,J2:¡.0
.~ J11êñ::; :;~.~'5 51
.. 5 0;:(/)::;:;<
.. > 0'"
....:c
,
,
ç 2 7 ~ --
z
;;¡
--~----- '"
--- -~-
0.
::;
ffi -
d =!'!
. . -. ,
" . z I
<ww ~
H ~ ~~~
w <n <
::; z II:
::; w ::>
8 g; ~
~N
(.)¡j¡¡j¡
00
w 0 >
ð ~ ~
~ > 13
w :;; ~ 11:
~ !š ~ ~ ~~
~~~~&~
:! ~ ::; ::; ::> 3
:¡ :;; :g ;¡! ~ ¡¡
~æ!z¡¡¡~'õ~.g
c a-'~~§¡ ~
z ;;; ~ <n ¡¡; ::;
w<n¡¡;~wo
CI II: U
W ~i:t;¡NIL
.... U)U)a:~f¡
~-
~-2f
::;: g. ;n
0. :; ~ 1
I ~t
~ ~~
'" '" "
'" a: '"
a: '" C
'" Z .-
~ ~ ~ 5
- u 0 N
a! ä:-J
W '" « .
~ as ê ÎE)I
8 15 ~ ~§ .t.
¡;: ~ .1
uCñCñ o}
0 0 ~ ~
§ j
w 0 >-
is ~ j
~ ~ ~
:;:; u.
w « « wo
W a: u. u. "'et
~5~~~\\l
~~~~§3
=! '=! -J -J 0. ';¡
~~~~~'õ'i~
~~mmš ~
c 66~~~
z ;;:; ;;:; W W 0
W '" '" a: a: U
CI"""-Nu.
Wu.u.::;:::;:Q.
...J<I><I>a:a:u
&g
"",
ö:fi
~
~-21
Planned Community District Regulations ami
VILLAGE CORE
DISTRICTS
SECTION III VILLAGE CORE DISTRICTS
111.0. Purpose
The Village Core Districts are included in the Planned Community
District Regulations to achieve the following:
. To provide areas for office uses, retail stores, service establish-
ments and wholesale business offering commodities and services
required by residents of the village or adjacent villages.
. To provide an opportunity for commercial and quasi-public com-
munity support facilities.
. To encourage office and commercial uses concentrared for the
convenience of the public and for a more mutually beneficial
relationship to each other.
. To provide adequate space to meet the needs of modern com-
mercial activity, including off-street parking and loading areas.
. To protect commercial properties from noise, odor, smoke, un-
sightliness, and other objectionable influences incidental to in-
dustrial uses,
. To promote high srandards of site planning, architectural and
landscape design for office and commercial developments within
the City of Chula Vista.
IILI Permitted Uses
The following uses shall be permitted where the symbol "P" ap-
pears and shall be permitted subject to a Conditional Use Permit
where the symbol "C" appears. Uses where the symbol "A" appears
shall be permitted subject to an Administrative Review. Uses where
the symbol "N" appears shall not be permitted.
Th" mir"d "." d".igJ1atinn in th" Villqgp Fivp rnrp (r/RM?) nprmit.
".P. nn thl'! fir.t flnnr l"vl'!1 tn h" thM" 'pprifipd fnr "r rnmmprdal
Di.trirt" and nn f/nnr. ahnvp thl'! fir<t f/nnr ll'!vpl thMP 'nP!rifipd fnr
"RM2 m.frirt" .'<itl'! Dpvl'!lnpmpnt "'tandard. .hall hI'! dl'!tprminpd hy
"'it" Plan RI'!vil'!w
- Otay
~- ~ Ranch
111-29
l"e24.1997
~-~-----~
Planned Community District Regulations mm
VILLAGE CORE
DISTRICTS
. Building should be located on the site to ptovide adjacent build-
ings adequate sunlight for solar access when practical. Buildings
should be designed to minimize energy consumption, including
but not necessarily limited to the following conservation measures:
. Cogeneration
. South facing windows
. Eave coverage for windows
. Earth berming against exterior walls
. Deciduous shade trees on southerly or westerly orientations
Refer to the SPA One Village Design Plan for additional design
guidelines and criteria.
IliA. Community Purpose Facility (CPF)
The City ofChula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.04.055 requires
1.39 acres per 1,000 population for Community Purpose Facility (CPF)
Sites. A total offourteen and six tenths (14.6) acres ofland in Village
One and eleven and six tenths f!--l-:6} (11.1l) acres of land in Village
Five is designated for CPF use on six sites as indicated on both the
Land Use Map and on the Zoning District Map. The final CPF
requirement will be based on lot count at the Tentative Map stage.
Should additional acreage be required, the requirement will be met
through establishing a reciprocal parking agreement with public park,
commercial or other land uses for joint use of the parking area. Should
ajoint use agreement not be established, the additional acreage shall be
reserved in another CPF site, which may be chosen at the Final Map
stage. Construction shall be precluded on that alternative site until a
joint use agreement is negotiated. Similarly, a joint use agreement for
parking, in advance of construction, shall provide the basis for a
reduction in CPF acreage.
111.5 Precise Plan
A Precise Plan will be required to be prepared and submitted for
review and approval for all areas in the Village Core District. A Master
Precise Plan may be prepared for the entire village core area and
updated with each significant new project, This precise plan shall
establish specific areas within the village core and will limit the 10-
cation of certain uses (eg., fast food, auto repair, etc,). This plan shall
be prepared in accordance with City standards.
Otay
~- ~I Ranch
111-35
1"",,24.1997
Table 1-13.1 Phasing Summary (Village 1)
Neighborhood Area Phase I Total
I 1 2 I lA IB 2A I 2B I 3 I 4 I 5 I
Village One East
R-II 125
R-12E 86
Village One East Subtotal 125 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 211
Village One SF
R-I 103
R-2 74
R-3 81
R-4 96
R-5 79
R-6 S5
R-7 136
R-8 65
R-9 74
R-IO 125
R-12 109
R-13 76
Village One SF Subtotal 0 0 0 4S5 0 433 185 0 0 1103
R-14 129
R-15 215
R-16 280
R-l7 200
R-18 230
R-19 204
R-20 140
R-21 168
ViiI. One MF Subtotal 0 0 0 168 0 140 129 0 1129 1566
Village One Grand Totals I 125 86 0 653 0 573 314 0 1129 2880
Olay
S--32- Ranch
111-198
11/3/95~
Table 1-13.1 Phasing Summary (Village 5)
Neighborhood Area I Phase I Total
I 1 2 1A 1B I 2A I 2B 3 4 5 I
Village Five East
R-25 73
R-26 7S
R-27 58
R-28 82
R-30 145
R-31 83
R-32 113
R-33 55
R-34 40
R-35 40
R-36 69
R-37 66
R-38 45
Viii. Five East SF Subtotal 0 0 260 0 542 0 0 145 0 947
R-29 90
R-39 175
Viii. Five East MF Subtotal 0 0 0 0 90 0 0 175 0 265
ViU. Five East Subtotal 0 0 260 0 632 0 0 320 0 1212
Village Five West
R-23 SF 86ll
R-24 SF 138
R-41 Sf 127!lJl
Viii. Five West SF Subtotal ill !l!l
R-22 MF 92~
R-40 MF 2662Jli.
R-42MF t75li
R-43 Mf 24t lifl.
R-44 Mf 26t llJ1
R-45 MF 165111
R-46 Mf 115 ill
Viii, Five West MF Subtotal W m
Village Five Totals
SPA One Totals
Otay
Ranch
S--3~ 111-199
11/3/95~
- ~----------~~----
ç---:stf
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /.3
Meeting Date 6/9/98
ITEM TITLE: Report on the Application for the formation of Community Facilities
District No. 97-3 (Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One)
Resolution /,9?' ..:¿4\pproving the initiation of proceedings to consider
the formation of a Community Facilities District for Otay Ranch McMillin
SPA One
SUBMI1TED BY, Direaoc of Publk woc~
REVIEWED BY: City Managerl)rz~ -. (4/5ths Vote: Yes-XNo_)
Otay Ranch McMillin has formally petition e City to form a Community Facilities District
(CFD) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Act of 1982 for fmancing the construction and/or acquisition
of certain public improvements serving the Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One project. In keeping
with Council policy, the developer has submitted an Application containing information required
for reviewing the feasibility of the proposed CFD. Staff has reviewed the Application and
determined that the fmancial information provided is preliminary and general in nature and that
a complete analysis on the financial feasibility of the project can not be made at this time.
Compliance with Council policy can not be confmned until various documents such as appraisal,
market absorption study, disclosure form, Special Tax Report, Preliminary Official Statement, etc.
are complete. These documents will be prepared during the district proceedings and brought to
Council consideration prior to bond sale. Staff considers that this process will provide adequate
information ensuring that the developer has the financial ability to bring the project to completion
within City's criteria. Therefore, staff is recommending that Council accept the report and initiate
the formal proceedings for the proposed CFD.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council: 1) Accept the report on the Application
for the formation of Community Facilities District No. 97-3, and 2) Approve the resolution
initiating proceedings for the formation of a Community Facilities District for Otay Ranch
McMillin SPA One.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The "Mello-Roos Act" allows for the creation of Community Facilities Districts and the issuance
of bonds to provide for fmancing the construction and/or acquisition of public facilities needed for
the development. In addition, a CFD may also finance a broad range of services, including fire,
flood control maintenance, landscaping, library, open-space facilities, parks, parkways,
recreational services and school facilities maintenance. Any public facilities which the City may
/3-/
Page 2, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
own, operate or contribute money to, and which have a useful life of five or more years, are
eligible to be fmanced through a CFD. Debt services on the bonds are met through the imposition
of a Special Tax (explicitly not ad valorem) on properties solely within the CFD. The special tax
is collected with the property taxes. There is no direct cost to the City. All expenses related to
the district administration (including levying and collecting the special taxes) are funded by the
district. The ultimate security behind the bonds would be the properties located within the district,
not the City's General Fund or its ability to tax property within its jurisdiction.
On January 13, 1998, Council adopted the "City of Chula Vista statement of goals and policies
regarding the establishment of Community Facilities Districts". The purpose of this document is
to provide guidelines for the use of CFDs for financing the construction or acquisition of public
infrastructure or the provision of authorized public services to benefit and serve existing or new
development in the City.
Procedure for formation of Community Facilities District
Following are the key actions that Council would perform during the proceedings for CFD No.
97-3.
1. Retention of the consultant team (Special Tax Consultant, Financial Advisor, and Bond
Counsel). This item is before Council tonight.
2. Approval of the report on the Application and initiation of proceedings for formation of
the proposed CFD. These actions are the subject of this agenda item.
3. Approval of Resolution of Intention (ROI) to establish the CFD. The Mello-Roos Act
requires that the City Council shall adopt the ROI within 90 days of receiving a petition.
Staff anticipates bringing the ROI before Council by August 1998.
4. Public Hearing, voter's election, and levy of the special taxes by September 1998.
5. Bond Sale during the last quarter of 1998.
DescriDtion of the proDosed CFD No. 97-3
Exhibit 1 presents the boundaries of the proposed CFD which includes all parcels located within
the Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One (total acreage =290). At buildout, the district would contain
a total of 538 Single Family Residences, 160 Attached Residences, 776 Multifamily Residences,
3 Acres of commercial and 5 Acres for Community Purpose Facilities (churches, day care, etc.).
McMillin is proposing CFD financing of the following improvements:
. La Media Road, from Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway.
. East Palomar Street, within the subdivision boundaries
. Olympic Parkway, within the subdivision boundaries
)3- .:L
uvuv~~.v. "'~m...... no,""" .... n.. cn... ..........~...... ... ...- """'....m_m --- _n- ----.---- 00 ----
Page 3, Item -
Meeting Date 6/9/98
. Santa Cora Avenue in its entirety
. The pedestrian bridge over La Media Road
. All public parks associated with the project (p6, P7, P9)
The construction cost of these improvements is estimated at $12,775,244 of which only
$8,241,955 the developer is proposing for CFD financing. The location of these improvements
is presented in Exhibit 1.
Bonds are proposed to be issued pursuant to the Mello Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982.
A total of $10,432,855 is proposed to be taxed to the district. $8,241,955 will provide for the
construction of the proposed backbone facilities (grading, landscaping, street, utilities, drainage,
sewer, potable water, and reclaimed water). The remaining $2,190,900 will be used to fund a
reserve fund and pay district formation and bond issuance costs.
ReDort on the Application for CFD. No. 97-3
Council Policy requires that prior to Council initiating any fonnal proceedings for fonnation of
the CFD, developer shall submit an "Application", which would include all the necessary
information (business plan, percent of ownership requesting the CFD, etc.) demonstrating the
applicant's financial ability to carry the project. The policy also requires that the Application shall
be reviewed by a committee composed of the City Manager, City Attorney, Director of Public
Works, City Engineer, Planning Director, Finance Director and such additional persons as the
City Manager deems necessary.
N onnally, consultants would be hired fIrst and then participate in the review of the Application.
In this case, with the purpose of expediting the CFD proceedings to meet their development
schedule, McMillin asked for an early participation of the consultants for the review of the
Application. Staff approved the request with the condition that the developer submit a letter
assuming full responsibility for paying the consultants in the event Council does not approve the
corresponding agreements. Said letter was submitted on August 8, 1997. The consultants have
also submitted letters acknowledging that, in the event the agreements are not approved, they
would not pursue any monetary compensation from the City for reviewing the Application.
McMillin submitted a Finance Plan on March 13, 1998 (See Exhibit 2). The review committee
and consultants met with the developer on April 17, 1998 to discuss the Finance Plan and clarify
the intent of the Council policy, detennine the fonnat of the Application, and identify the required
financial information. McMillin submitted the Application on April 29, 1998 (See Exhibit 3).
The review committee met on May 5, 1998 to review the content of the Application as to
compliance with the policy and detennine the applicant's fmancial ability to successfully construct
the project and pay the special taxes during buildout. The report with findings and
recommendation on the Application is presented in Exhibit 4.
J3:J
Page 4, Item-
Meeting Date 6/9/98
In essence, the report recommends that Council approve proceeding with the formation of the
Community Facilities District. This recommendation is based on the preliminary information
submitted by the applicant. Extensive due diligence will be required as the district proceeds to
ensure compliance with the Council policy. All Council policy requirements must be met prior
to the issuance of bonds.
Discussion of Kev Policv Issues
The analysis of the Application is based on information provided by the developer. During the
proceedings, several analysis will be performed to ensure that the proposed CFD conforms to the
requirements of the Mello-Roos Act and Council Policy. Following is a brief discussion on how
some key policy issues will be addressed during the district proceedings:
1. Proposed Improvements: Improvements to be fInanced are primarily backbone streets and
associated improvements (i.e., sewer, potable water, reclaimed water, dry utilities)
providing local or regional benefit. The developer is also proposing the financing of a
pedestrian bridge, and backbone utilities. Staff considers that all these improvements meet
the requirement of the policy.
McMillin is also requesting that the construction of the public parks be included in the
CFD. Traditionally, the construction of public parks has been funded by fees that are
collected at fmal map approval. In many cases the developer would build a turnkey park
and turn it over to the City, receiving fee credits for the cost of the facility. A final
recommendation on the improvements to be financed by the proposed CFD will be taken
to Council as part of the Resolution of Intention to form the district (by August 1998).
2. Value to Lien Ratio: Council policy requires a minimum 4: 1 value-to-lien ratio. A ratio
of less than 4: 1, but equal to or greater than 3: 1, may be approved, in the sole discretion
of Council, when it is determined that a ratio of less than 4: 1 is financially prudent under
the circumstances of a particular CFD.
Based on the appraisal information submitted by the developer, the committee has
determined that the overall lien ratio for the project is less than 4: 1 at this time, however,
as part of the CFD proceedings, a new appraisal will be conducted on the property. A
preliminary appraisal and lien ratio analysis will be prepared for Council review at the
Public Hearing for the formation of the district (by September 1998). A final appraisal and
lien ratio analysis would be available for Council consideration prior to bond sale, which
is planned for last quarter of 1998. If the fmal analysis shows parcels which fail to meet
the 4:1 ratio, the developer would be required to either provide cash or letters of credit to
maintain the lien ratio within the City criteria, the principal amount of the bonds to be
issued for CFD 97-3 will be reduced to comply with City policy or provide sufficient
information to convince Council that a lesser lien ratio is prudent.
/.3-J-j
Page 5, Item-
Meeting Date 6/9/98
3. Maximum Tax: Council Policy establishes that the maximum annual CFD special taxes
applicable to any newly developed residential property shall be no more than 1 % of the
sale price of the house. In addition, the aggregate of all annual taxes and assessments is
limited to 2 % of the sale price of the house.
A preliminary calculation of the maximum tax, using estimated house urices, will be
available for Council consideration at the Public Hearing. A final test will be perfonned
at escrow closing using the actual sale price of the house. Council Policy requires that at
or prior to each closing of escrow, the escrow company shall apply a "calculation fonnula"
previously approved by the City Engineer to detennine the aggregate of regular County
taxes, Mello-Roos taxes, and assessment installments. If the 2% limit is exceeded, the
developer would be required to provide cash to buy down the lien to an amount sufficient
to meet the 2% tax ceiling. Compliance with this procedure would ensure that the
aggregate tax to be paid by the purchaser of the house meets the City's criteria.
FISCAL IMPACT: None, the developer will pay all costs and has deposited money to fund initial
consultant costs, City costs, and appraisal costs in accordance with the proposed Reimbursement
Agreement. The City will receive the benefit of the full cost recovery for City staff (estimated
at $45,000).
E,mil"" L -, Area ond Loca<ioo of fmpro,~ 'ì ,j1 J
2. Finance Plan '¡J .----
3. Application ~
4. Review Committee Report ~( ~
H:\HOME\ENGINEER\LANDDEV\OT A YRNCH\OR84R3.LDT ~G.~
June 4, 1998
/3~
RESOLUTION NO. 19026
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS TO CONSIDER THE
FORMATION OF A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
FOR OTAY RANCH MCMILLIN SPA ONE
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista, California, has been
presented with and has received an application from McMillin- D.A.
America Otay Ranch, LLC (the "Applicant"), requesting that this
City Council initiate proceedings pursuant to the Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (Government Code
Section 53311 and following) (the "Act") to form a community
facilities district preliminarily designated as Community
Facilities District No. 97-3 (Otay Ranch McMillin SPA One (the
"District") for the purpose of financing all or a portion of the
cost of the acquisition or construction of certain public
facilities; and
WHEREAS, such application was, as required by the City of
Chula Vista Statement of Goals and Policies Regrading the
Establishment of Community Facilities District (the "Goals and
Policies") previously adopted by this City Council, reviewed by the
community facilities district application review committee (the
"Review Committee") designated in such Goals and Policies; and
WHEREAS, based upon such review and pursuant to the Goals
and Policies, the City Manager has recommended that this City
Council accept the report of the Review Committee, and authorize
the initiation of proceedings to consider the formation of the
District subject to subsequent compliance of the proposed District
with the Goals and Policies, including without limitation, the
financial feasibility of the proposed District and the development
of the property within the District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows:
Section 1: The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2: This City Council hereby accepts the Review
Committee report.
Section 3: This City Council hereby authorizes the
initiation of proceedings to consider the formation of the District
as requested by the Applicant subject to all requirements of the
Act and the Goals and Policies. The decision of this City Council
to form the District is an exercise of the legislative authority of
this City Council, The adoption of this Resolution does not,
1
/3-~
therefore, obligate this City Council to exercise its legislative
discretion in a particular manner. This Resolution doe snot in any
way create a contractual, legal or equitable obligation of or
commitment by this City Council to approve the formation of the
District, This City Council expressly reserves the right to
abandon the proceedings to consider the formation of the District
for any reason at any time prior to the completion thereof.
Section 4: This Resolution shall become effective upon
its adoption.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista does hereby not allow the use of CFD financing for
Public Parks.
Presented by Approved as to form by
CL-~ t~
John P. Lippitt, Director of John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
Public Works
C,lrslinitiate.CFD
2
/3//
/(£-V/~&:b
RESOLUTION NO. 19035
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADDRESSING THE INFRASTRUCTURE
ACCESS CHARGE PROPOSED BY THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY
WATER AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the San Diego County Water Authority is
proposing to impose an Infrastructure Access Charge on all
customers of county water agencies, to be effective January 1,
1999; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the charge is to pay for a
portion of the Water Authority's Emergency Storage Project, and to
collect revenues for its Capital Improvement Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed charge will have the effect of
raising the customer's water bill by $1.00 initially, and by $2.00
by the year 2003; and
WHEREAS, the proposed charge is inequitable to
Sweetwater Authority customers in Chula Vista because they have
already paid for emergency storage at Sweetwater and Loveland
Reservoirs when the Sweetwater Authority acquired its water system
in 1977.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby support the establishment of an
infrastructure access charge for capital improvement projects and
emergency storage facilities and urges further dialog between the
water agencies and the County Water Authority to evaluate and
apply, as appropriate, a credit system for those agencies that
provide emergency storage, subject to a guarantee that such storage
will always be available,
Presented by Approved as to form by
Shirley Horton, Mayor
c, \r8 \Access. chg
)£1-/
Mayor's Comments - Air Commerce Center :;!J/Š
0 Late last year we had a presentation from the Air Commerce Center at
Brown Field and were given an update on their redevelopment plans.
As you recall, they're putting together a new master plan for the airport
that involves initially bringing in 3 to 5 cargo flights per day. By the
year 2014, this could be as high to 25 cargo flights per day, including
727s and some 747s.
D In all their community meetings, they've described the arrival and
departure of these aircraft as being to the west of Brown Field, over
South San Diego and Imperial Beach. However, pilots and other
people have expressed to me their concern that this plan is unrealistic,
and would never be approved by the FAA. I'm now concerned the FAA
could establish a different traffic pattern other than the one envisioned
by the Air Commerce Center: an approach that could bring large
aircraft, at very low altitudes, over Chula Vista.
D City staff has been attending the public meetings on the Air
Commerce Center and has been following this project closely. It's my
concern that city staff does not have the technical expertise or the time
to fully prepare the Council for the potential negative impacts that
could result from the FAA establishing a different approach pattern to
Brown Field.
D I support the redevelopment efforts going on at Brown Field, but also
recognize our duty to fully investigate this possibility. Since the Draft
EIR on the Air Commerce Center is scheduled to be completed by
July 1998, time is of the essence. For these reasons, it is my
recommendation that the Council consider retainina a consultant who
has knowledae of FAA rules and reaulations to advise us on how best
to deal with this possibility.
D The consultant could also advise us on low flying helicopters. We're
not sure if they're military, Border Patrol, or privately operated. But I do
feel they're flying too low and creating too much noise.
D It's my recommendation that staff come back to us, as soon as
possible, with a plan to retain a consultant who can advise us about
these issues, including an estimate on how much this will cost. And I'll
make that as a motion,..
/58-/
~~~.._- -- ~ ~-----~~--
RESOLUTION NO. 19¿?d.ð-B
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 19020 URGING INVESTIGATION
OF CALIFORNIA'S MILK PRICING STRUCTURE
WHEREAS, California consumers reportedly spent $632 million more for
milk in 1997 than consumers in neighboring states; and
WHEREAS, California milk prices have been stated as being among the
highest in the nation despite this state's dairy industry having produced 433%
more milk in 1997 than Californians consumed; and
WHEREAS, consumers in San Diego County pay the highest milk prices
in the state of California; and
WHEREAS, these high prices may be the cause for Californians having
consumed 25% less milk per capita in 1997 than consumers in neighboring states;
and
WHEREAS, California defines "milk" differently than the other 49
states and, as a result, bans the sale of "wholesome natural milk" which is
approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and which is available to
consumers in every other state; and
WHEREAS, California law discourages California milk processors from
buying milk from out-of-state dairy farmers and requires the processors to pay
fees to California dairy farmers when they buy milk from dairies outside the
state; and
WHEREAS, California law prohibits retail grocery stores from selling
milk at a discount, effectively preventing the sort of retail competition which
could lower milk prices for consumers; and
WHEREAS, these anti-consumer regulations protect the state's $3.7
billion dairy industry from competition within California and ensure the dairy
industry of a competitive advantage over dairies and processors from outside
California; and
WHEREAS, consumer-advocate groups, residents and other organizations
have raised concerns about the comparative disparities between California milk
prices and those throughout the nation;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby resolve that the City of Chula Vista requests the Governor,
State Legislature and appropriate state agencies examine these issues relating
to the marketing and sale of milk products in California and ensure that
California consumers are not being subjected to unfair or artificially inflated
pricing structures.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Mary Salas, Councilmember
c,I"lmilk
/~/l-' /
dA/3
:~
-
..
Li:!£r-ïJj
@ ?roject
Numbeí
:
"--
/
..-. ---
~ ~~'?"I<SIl';!~.-s
.o..:...<UllUu. ¿"
--- Finance Plan
McMILLIN / OTA Y R4..:."NCH
--- PROPOSED
CO M:MDl\ilTY FACILITY D ISTRI CT
FINANCE PLAN
-.
~
-
-
MARCH 13, 1998
-
-
-3
... ~~ McMillin Com~es
. Jj REsIDENTIAL & CoMMERCIAl. JGu. EsTAIT
March 13, 1998
Mr. John Lippitt
Director ofPnDlic Works
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
RE: McMillinlOtay Ranch SPA 1 CFD
Dear John:
P::r the City of Chula vma.'s recently adopted "Stat=ent of Goals and Policies
Regarding the Establishment of Co=uniTy Facilities Districts," we are pleased to
submit this Ïo=al request to the City to initiale the process to fo= a Co=UIriTy
Facilities Di:,ïrict The purpose of the clistrict is for construction of llrfrastructure which
is a requir=::nt of McMillin's SPA 1 ownership within the Otay Ranch. lncluded in this
transmittal is the Ïollowing:
Tab]
Tne boundary of the CFD is anticipated to include McMillin's ownership in SPA 1 of the
Dray Ranch. Tne anticipated land use witìún this ownership includes 1,468 residential
units, 2.9 =s of co=ercÎal uses, and 4.8 acres of co=UIrity purpose facility uses
(cased on approved tentative Map 97-02 and pending tentative Map /unendment 98-04).
Tab 2
- A general description and cost estimate for the public improv=ents which are eligible to
be funded ñ-om the CFD bonds are described in Tab 2. Each public improv=ent project
h2s been assigned a project number (and a McMillin int=al job number) for purposes of
àefuring "discrete components" ior acquisition by the CFD bond proceeds pUI5UaJlt to the
City CFD Policy. (A map oithe proposed public improv=ents in included in Tab 2.)
Tne estimated total amount of facility costs is larger than the anticipated bond proceeds
(see Tab 3.) Tills allows Ïor flexibility at this early stage in the process when costs are
still being reñned and the IOta! amount of otb::r proposed special taxes is still being
determined.
Tab 3
A description oftbe proposed CFD bond sizing is outlined in Tab 3- It is envisioned that
a single bond will be issued ÎI1 the approximate amount of $1 0,400,000 to acquire public
improvements completed in SPA L The bond sizing anaJysis is consistent with all the
2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, CA. 91950 ~9)477-4117 fax (619)336-3119 www.mcmillin.com
lY,",. JUWl J...IPP1U
City of ChuJa Vista
Page 2
provisions of the CFD Policy. The assumptions for the principal amount ofbonàs to be
issued is based on estimat::s for ñnancing costs, facility costs (s~ Tab 2), and
r' 2Ssumptions about other ~roposed special taxes. This amount is subject to change based
L': on more =mate cost est!Imltes, more lœowJedge about the other proposed 1and secured
L financing districts, and actu2J financing costs.
r~'
! Tab 4
¡ ,
~ A draft Rxt.e and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for the em is included in
, Tab 4 which is consistent with the City em Policy. This is based on current info=ation
' about the tow number of proposed dwelling units and estimated building square footage.
TabS
A proposed tÍmeJine for the CFD fo=atÎon and bond issuance is inc1uded in Tab 5.
Tab 6
The property to be included in the SPA 1 CFD is owned by a company named M cMžllžn-
D.A.. Ameriœ Otay Ranch Uc. (See title report cover sh...'"et.) The company consists of
two membC!5; McMillžn-Otay Ranch, Inc., a California Corporation, the manager, and
D.A.. AmeriCll CommunžrÏes, Inc., a California Corponnion. (S~ Certificate ofFo=ation
and Secretæy of State iiling.) The City CFD Policy Iequjres that the applicant own or
have the consent of not 1ess than 67% of the property by J!r'"...a. The ownership of the
property is inàicated by these doc:uments and can be more fully demonstrated as needed
as part of the district formation process. The CFD Policy also requires the submittal of
financial inÏormation to demonstrate the Jand owner's ability to construct the facilities
- and pay sp=::ial taJ¡:es. This info=ation will be submitted to the appropriate team
members on a confidential basis.
~ We Jook forward to meeting with you and the City's consuJtams to discuss the enclosed
items and to begin the fonnal process necessary to fo= the district and issue bonàs. If
" you bave any questions or comments, please do not hesitare to call me,
SincereJy,
tb ~'~7 ~
. ':.- "}
- /'-
IGmberJy Elliott
Vice Presid::m
- cc: CliñSwanson
Lombardo De:rrinicìad
;-
hiåmlsrvllåm:sp:aJ-Œ.ooc 5
.. ~\ McMillin Companies
~ REsIDENTIAL & CoMMEROAL REAL EsTATI
-:- McMillin I OIay Ranch
SPA I
Villages 1 & 5
- . CFD Boundary
-
-
-
"
'.
-' Legend
- - - CFD Boundary
-
~ BOO' 0' BOO' I.
- --- -_u_-- ------
McMILLIN OTAY RANCH
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES
McMillin
Project Job
Number Number Description of Improvement Project Cost Estimate
1 [781102) La Media (between Telegraph Canyon Road & Palomar Street)
- Staking $ 31,263
Water 322,835
Sewer 95,831
Surface Improvements 680,903
Landscaping 179,193
Contingency 98,233
Design 40,900
Total 1,449,158
2 [781107) La Media Crossing (Telegraph Canyon Channel Crossing)
Staking S 2,500
Storm Drain 286,933
Surface Improvements 15,646
Design 7,950
Total 313,029
3 [781202) La Media 1/ (Between Palomar and Olympic Parkway)
Staking S 26,580
Water 257,160
Sewer 384,259
Surface Improvements 1,115,905
rb Landscaping 207,881
Contingency 335,341
Design 50,000
Total 2.377,126
4 [781103) Palomar I (Westem Boundary to Santa Cora Drive)
Staking S 15,250
Water 127,260
Sewer 32,518
Surface Improvements 303,054
Landscaping 179,537
Contingency 41,298
Design 11,900
Total 710,817
5 [781203) Palomar II (Santa Cora Avenue to Easterly Boundary)
Staking $ 13,520
Waier 198,283
Surface Improvements 177,865
Landscaping 238,336
Contingency 94,201
Design 11,600
Total 733,805
~
h \data Isrv\kimIPUB I MPS.xLS Page 1 of 3
'1
- -_.._--
McMILLIN OTAY RANCH
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES
ô (781104) Santa Cora Avenue I (North of Palomar Stres!)
Staking $ 2ô,800
Water 137,88ô
&!wer 60,913
SLIIface Improvements 238,806
Lanèscapíng 128,912
Contingency 60,235
Design 19,200
Total 672,752
7 (781105) Master Utility Loop (Santa Cora I to La Media I)
Staking $ 2,842
Water 68,686
Sewer 47,142
ConDngency 6,028
Design 6,100
130,798
8 (781204) Santa Cora Avenue 1/ (South of Palomar Street)
Staking $ 22,820
Water 141,037
Sewer 107,472
SUIÍEc:e jmprovemenís 209,079
Lanèscaping 59,903
Contingency 95,058
Design 35,000
Total 670,369
9 (781208) Olympic: Parkway (Westerly boundary to Easterly Boundary)
Staking $ 27,970
Warer 287,715
Sewer 81,123
Surfa::e Improvemenís 55ô,295
Lanèscaping 112,700
ConDngency 211,587
Design 50,000
Total 1,327,390
10 (781209) Pedestrian Bñdge (over La Media II)
Staking 29,500
Bridge 590,000
ContirÏgency 59,000
Design 71,500
Total 750,000
11 (781188) Neighborhood Park (P-6, P-9 System)
Staking 100,000
Park ConstruCtion 2,000,000
Contingency 200,000
Design 200,000
Total 2,500,000
:nI?UBIMPS.xLS Page 2 of 3 g
BOND SIZING ANALYSIS
- McMILLIN I OT A Y RANCH CFD
-
.",
.',
Cost of
.'., Facility Tetal Bond Amount Issuance & Facility
Estimated CFD No. CFD No. - (7.00% In!. .Reserve CapitaJ~d CFD
'.'. Planning Tetal Product Home Tax Rate Tax 30YrTerm Fund ¡nteres! Construdie
Area Units Acres ~ ~ (50.3921So.FI.) Revenue 110% D.S.C.) 11.01.00% (12 Mes.) Proceeds
~al
hase 1
~: R-I-11 -120 28.3 SFD 2.800 51.098 5131.712 51,485,836 5208.017 5104.009 51.173.810
R-I-22 86 11.5 Duplex 1,800 706 60.682 ê84,S46 95.836 47,918 540.791
- R-I-23 87 15.4 SFD 1.800 706 61,387 692.506 96.951 48.475 547,080
:>.: R-I-24 138 28.7 SFD UDO 980 135.240 1,525,635 213.589 106.794 1.205.252
.: R-I-46 118 7.2 Conde 1.225 480 5B,664 639.219 89,491 44.745 504.983
CPF-I-1 2.1 CPF N/A 2.000 4.200 47.380 6.633 3.317 37,430
--
-
549 93.2 .449.884 5.075.122 710.517 355.2:;; 4.009.346
Phase 2
- R-I-12 8B 13.3 SFD 1.800 70B BO.682 BB4.546 95.836 47.918 540,791
. R-I-41 90 25.4 SFD 1.800 706 63.504 716.385 100.2.."4 50.147 565,944
- R-I-42 74 0.0 Duplex 1.800 706 52.214 589.028 82.464 41 .z::z 465.332
R-I-40 201 12.9 Conde 1.zz: 480 96.520 1.088,839 152.4.:>7 76.219 860.183
- 43 240 12.0 Apt 948 372 89.188 1.006,123 140.B5ï 70,429 794,837
, . ,-44/45 228 3.4 Apt 948 372 B4,728 9:5,817 133,814 BB.907 755.096
C-I-1 3.0 Comm. N/A 7,500 22.500 2.."3.821 35.535 17.767 200.519
CPF-I-2 2.8 CPF NJA 2.000 5.600 63.173 8.B.o14 4,422 49,907
~ --
919 72.B 474.936 5.35ï.733 750.083 375.~1 4.232.609
~tal SPA I 1.468 16ê.0 5924.821 510.432.855 51.460.BOO 5730.300 58.241.955
-.
1
~~ , ~ , ~
-- --.. - u- -----------
-
EXHm IT
-- -
'-,,-, RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
FOR COMMUNITY FA CILlTIES DISTRICT NO. -
(Otay Ranch)
OF THE CTIY OF CHULA VISTA
-
,- A Special Tax applicable ro each AssessDr's Pareel wÏIhin CDmmuniIy Facilities
- DÏS!ricr No, - Dfthe City Df Chula VISTa (herein "CFD -") shall be levied and
,- collected accDrding tD the Tax liability determined by the Ciry Council of the City of
Chu1a V lSta a...'1:Ïng in itS capaciry as the legis1ative body of CFD - (herein the
- "Council") through the application of the appropriate amDunt or rate for "Developed
Property" or "Undeveloped Properry", as desc:n"bed below- All of the property within
CFD -' unless exempted by law or by defuñtion of Exempt Property as defined
- below, shall be taxed for the pUIposes, tD the eXtent, and in the manner herein provided
("Taxable Properry").
-
A. DEFINITIONS
- The rerms:h::reinaf'a.er set forth have the following meanings:
- "Acre or A=age~ means the area of an Assessor's Parcel as shown Dn the latest
map of the Coumy Assessor of the CDumy of San Diego, or if the area of an
.~sessor's Parcel is nO! shown on such a map, the area shall be as shown on a
- current I"""::Drà.ed subåivisiDn map, parcel map, record of survey, or oth:r recorded
documenr c:reaIing or describing th: Assessor's Pare:L If the preϋing maps ar:
:" not availiû:J1:, the area shall be determin...'"C! by the City Engineer-
" ~ AdmÏnÎ5!IãIÎve Expenses" means ~y cost ÏncuIred by the City of Chu1a Vista on
behalf of CFD - relared to !he detemrinaIion of the amount of the amma1 levy of
- Special Tax, the cDlleCIÎDn of the Special Tax, the administration of the Bonds, and
other com ~ed in order ro carry out the authorized purposes of CFD -'
- ~.-\1mua1 Sp:cial Tax Rf:quiremenr~ means the amount I"'...quired to be l:vied in any
FIScal Y = 10 pay for. (i) the annual debt service on the Bonds, including the COst
~ ef the regisrrarion, transfer. and exchange of such Bonds, (ü) replenishing the
reserve fund to itS required level as desc:n"bed in the Bond Indenture, and (ill) the
Administnu:ive Expenses. Items (i) through (ill) shall be reduced by bond reserve
earnings in excess Df the reserve requirement, except those earnings that may be
required for rebate purpos:s, after completion of the public facilities which were
-
D=: 2/13/98 1;0
funded by Bonds.
"Annual lv'J.aXÍInum Special Tax" m= the maximum Special Tax that may be
levied in =h Fiscal Year pursuant to Se...'"tÎons C., D., and G. -on each Assessor's
Parcel classified as: (i) Developed Propeny for a period not to ex=d 30 years from
- the beginn:ing of the fim FISCal Year in which such Assessor's Pan:::l is classifiid
as Devcloped Property, or (ii) Undeveloped Property.
.. "Assessor's Parcel" m= a parcel of land as designared on a map of the San Diego
County Assessor and which has been assigned a discrete identifying parcel number.
- "Bonds" =ans the bonds or other indebreàness issued by CFD - to fund all or
- a portion of the authorized public faciliries designated in the ConmnmÏIy Facilities
District lL"'Port of CFD -
"Commercial Property" means the Acreage of an Assessor's Parcel of Developed
Property wÏthin the CFD -' the boundaries of which are cklineated on a
recorded map, which has be"-n zoned for commercial use.
"Conmnmiry Facilities Disrrict Report" =ans the repOrt approved by Council in
connection with forming CFD - designaring, among other things, the authorized
public fac:iliIies.
"Debt Seryic:e Requirem=" means an amount derermin...'"!i for each FIScal Year in
which the Bonds are ourstanding equal to 110% of the scheduled debt service on
such ourstanding Bonds.
-
"Developed Property" means all Assessor's Parcels wÏthÏn CFD - for which a
builcting p=it has be"-D issued as of June 30 of the preceding Fiscal Year.
"Exempt Property" means an Assessor's Parcel of property exisring at the rime of
the establishment of CFD - or which will be conveyed, deàicated, or
- irrevocably offered for dedication to a public agency pursuant to the Sectional Plan
Area which are exempt from the levy of special taxes, including propeny owned by
a public agency which is in public use; property which is utilized for pnblic utility
purposes and which is nor occupied on a regular basis of employees of the utility;
property ~ocably dedic:ared to a public agency for public use; propeny owned by
a church and utilized for church purposes; property owned by a homeowners'
association; property which is zoned for Dp"'..D space; property used as a golf course
other than clubhouse facilities; property which has no intrinsic value upon
foreclosure, such as sliver parcels at emries and perimeter landscape parcels;
provided such Ass.essor's Parcels shall not exceed - Acres.
"Extraordinary Special Tax" represems the difference, in any Fiscal Year, betWe"-n
the Total Projected Special Tax Deficiency and the revenues held by CFD - in
. Dar:: 2/13/98 2 II
~ lieu of the Extraordinary Special Tax as œscribed in the Bond Indenmre. If, in any
Fiscal Year, the Total Projected Special Tax Deficien..--y is less than or equal to the
revenu::s held by CFD - in lieu of IDe EX!raordinary Special Tax, then the
Extraordinary Special Tax shall not appiy.
-
- "Extraorãinary Special Tax Accoum" m::ans the amounts deposited, in any Fisca1
Year, from the EX!raorãinary Special Tax levy and amounts withdrawn, in any
Fiscal Year. pursuant IO the Bond IndentUre.
- .
- "Fiscal Year" means the period beginning on July 1 and ending on !be following
June 30.
-
- "Full Buildout" when there no longer remain Þ..ssessor's Parcels -classified as
Undeveloped Property-
"House Square Footage" means the livable area of improvement exclusive of garage
area or t:aIpon area of a ResidemiaI Propeny as shown on the most re:::em building
permit issu..'"!i for such Residential Prop~'1Y.
"IndentUre" means the Bond Indenrure åar::d as of __,19_, by and betWeen
the City of Chula Vista. on behalf of CFD -' and . as it may
be amended or supplemented from time to time.
"Land Us~ Category" means a classification of prop::ny specified in Section B
below.
- "Other Property" means the Acreage of an .A.ssessor's Parcel of Developed Property
within CFD -' the boundaries of which are delineated on a recorded map. and
IDe zoning and use of which is not Residential Propeny, Commercial Property or
Exempt Property.
"Projected Special Tax Deñci~ncy" means the amount derived by subtracting the
- Projected Special Taxes from the DebtServiœ Requin:ment in the F1SCal Years in
which the ProjeCted Special Taxes are less than the Debt Service Reqtñrement.
"Projected Special Taxes" means an amount for each FJSca1 Year in. which Bonds
are outstanding, equal IO rhe summation of Annual Maximum Special Taxes
anticipated to be collected from Developed Property and Undeveloped Property in
such Fiscal Years. As of July 1, 1999, and each July 1 thereafter. when Bonds are
outstanding, the DistriCt :shall cause the special tax consultant to determine the
Annual Maximum Special Tax revenues that are expected to arise from CFD -
over the Bond te~ from: [1) property classified as Developed Property, and en) rhe
estimated full buildout of residential and non-residential property that is classified as
Undeveloped Property. The special tax consultant's estimation of full buildout of
residemiaI and non-residential property that is classified as Undeveloped Property
Dæ: 2/13/98 3 /~
, shall b~ b2S~d upon =onable proje::rions of developm...'"IIt which are provided by
the pr~ owners of such prop:n:y; provid~d.. however, such åevelopmem
proje~uons shall nor exc::--..d the maximum developm= permitted by the applicabl~
[mal subåivision or parcel maps, tentative subdivision or parcel-maps, the Sectional
Plan AmI., ami the development agreement, if any.
"Residem1a1 Property" means an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property within
CFD -' the boundaries of which are åelineated on a recorded map, which has
b~n zoned for residemia1 use.
"Special Tax" means the amount acmally levied ami apporrioned by the Council in
any FIScal Year for each class of Developed Property and for Undeveloped Property
in accordam:e with Section D -
"SectioDal Plan Area" means
"Total Proje..'Led Special Tax Deficiency" means the presem value of the ProjeCted
Special Tax DeficienCy for each of the re:maining FIScal Years in which Bonds are
oursta.IlåÏDg. The discount rate used for purposes of this calculation shall be th~
weightÞd average coupon rate on the olIlStaDding Bonds determined at the rime of
ca1c:u1ation.
"Undeve1Õped Property" =ans all Assessor's Parcels within CFD - which are
not c12SsÏñed 2S Developed Property or Exempt Property.
B. LAND USE CATEGORlES A..1'IíD CLASSIF1CATION OF PROPERTY
On July 1 of each year, each Assessor's Parcel within CFD - ' shall be
categorized 2S either Developed Property, Undeveloped PropeItJ:. or Exempt
- Property, and 2Ssigned to one of the following Land Use Categories:
Land Use Category 1- Residem1a1 Property
Land Use Category 2.. Commercial Property
I....æu;l Use Category 3 .. Other Property
LarJd Use Category 4 .. Undeveloped Property
Land Use Category 5 - Exempt Property
C. ..\NNUALMAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES
The Annual Maximum Special Tax rates for Land Use Categories 1 through 3
applicable to Assessor Parcels classified 2S Developed Property, and for Land Use
0=: 2/13/98 4/3
.. Category 4 applicabl~ to Assessor Parcels c:lassi:fied as UndeveJop-...d Prop~rry, and
for Land Use Category 5 classified as Exempt Prop::rty, are sp~'ifi~d in Table 1,
- below:
r
[ Land use/
Cateo'-ory Desai on Annual Maximum Specia1 Tax
í', 1 I Residential Properry I $0.392 .mnJtiplied by House Square
t.c. FooIa2e
- I 2 Commercial Property I $7,500 er Acre I
' I 3 I Other PropertY I $2.000 er Acre I
~ 4 I Undeveloped Properry I $- per Acre and, IT applicable, the
ExtraordinaIy Special Tax levy per Acre
:' as dete~ in Sec:tÎon G
'0,' I 5 I ExeInDt Properry None I
D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECL4L TAXES
Commen..'ing at the beginning of Fisc:al Year 1998/99, and for eaci¡ Fiscal Year
thereafu:r, the Council shall levy the .tumlla1 Special Tax Requirement in the
followiDg orner of priority:
First: Tne.Amma1 Sp~ial Tax Requirem.."'Ilt shall be levied on Assessor's Parcels
,', of Develop-...d Property in equal perc:emage up to 100% of itS .~ Maximum
Special Tax as si:t forth in Table 1 for Land Use Categories 1 through 3; and
'-'- Second: If additional moneys are ne<'..ded aÏrer the first Step has been completed, the
Special Tax shall be levied proporrionately on each Assessor's Parcel of
,', Undevelop-...d Properry up to 100% of its Annual Maximmn Special Tax as set forth
- in Table 1 for Land Use Category 4.
- ,
Commencing at the beginnin~ of Fisc:al Year 1998/99, and for each Fisc:a1 Year
- thereafter. the Council shall additionally levy, IT applicable, the Extraordinary
Special Tax uniformly to Undeveloped Property pursuant to Section G.
- E. MANNER OF COLLECTION
:: .The Spe::ia1 Taxes which shall be levied in each Fisc:al Year in which Bonds are
outstanding and shall be collected in the same ~ as ordinary ad valorem
property taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same
. procedure, sale, and lien priority in case of delinquenc:y as is provided for ad
- valorem taxes. The Special Taxes when levied shall be secured by the li~n Unposed
- D=: 2/13/98 5 /1
pursuant to S~on 3115.5 of the SlTe"'-ts and Highways Code. This lien shall be a
continuing li.."'II and shall s::::ure each levy of Special TaJæS. The lien of the Special
Taxes shall cominue in force and effect umil the Spe=ial Tax obligarion is prepaid,
uermanently sarisfied, .and c.am:eJed in accordance with Section 53344 of.the
Governmem Code or umîl the Speci.a1 Taxes cease to be levied in the mànn...'"r
provided by Section 53330.5 of the GOVernment Code.
. PREPAYMENT OF SPECL-U- TAX OBLIGATION
.
1. AD.y 0WIJ..'"r of DevelDp"...d Property subject to the Speci.a1 Tax may discharge the
Special Tax obligarion in full, or in pan at any 1Ï=, by making payment as
follows:
a. Dettmñne the presem value of the rem.aññng payments of Sp-...cial Tax
applicable to such Assessor's Parcel using !he weigbted average coupon rate
of !he oUtStanding Bonds and the Annual Maximum Speci.a1 Tax rare
applicable to such -~sessor' s P.arc::J;
b. Multiply the .amoum in La. above by the owm:r's desir-...d prepaymem'
percenrage to determine the prepaymem amount.
c. Enter the applicabJe amount from Lb., .and add the following:
(1) call premium as required in the Bond instrum.."'II1., if any;
(2) interest on the amount in Lb. at the applicable Bond rare for each year,
if any, to the = availabJe Bond call date;
d. Enter the applicable amount from I.e., and subtn!ct the following:
(1) Tne Assessor's Parcel's prorata share of the bond reserve fund
determined by multiplying the Bond reserve fund requiremem by the
quotient obtained by diviàing the Assessor's Parce.l's applicable House
Square Footage by the total House Square FDOtJIge as ðe1=in...d in.
connecñon with the determination of Projected Special Taxes. For
pmposes of 1bis detennination., the Rouse Square Footage 1!pplicable to .
Commercial Property and Other Property shall be deemed to be 13,000
square feet per. Acre. In the event the Assessor's Parcel dœs not fully
prepay the Special Tax, the percentage de~-mined in Lb. shall be
multiplied by the amount determined in the preceding sentences 10
determine the -~sessor's Parcel's prorata share of the bond reserve -..
fund.
(2) the interest earnings' to be generated at the reinvest:rneIII rare as
determined by CFD - and from the discharge date 10 the next.
available bond call date.
e: 2/13/98 6 IS
pursuant to Sf:::tion 3115.5 of the Str~rs and Highways Code. This lif:D. shall be a
continuing li~ and shall s=e each levy of Special T~. The lien of the SpeciaJ
Taxes shall continue in forr.e and effe::r umil the Special Tax obligation is prepajd,
permanently satisfied, and canceled in accordance with Section 53344 of .the
Government Code or umil the Special Taxes cease to be levied in the mànn..."T
provided by Section 53330.5 of the Government Code.
. PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL TAX OBLIGATION
1. Any own.."T of Developed Property subject to the Sp"'...ciaJ Tax may åischarge the
SpeciaJ Tax obligation in full, or in pan at any 1Ïme, by ma1àng payment as
follows:
a. Determine the present vaJue of the remaining payments of Special Tax
applicable to such Assessor's Parcel using the weighted average coupon rare
of 1:hf: outstanding Bonds and 1:hf: Amma1 Ma:xmmm Spe..."ÏaJ Tax rare
applicable to such Assessor's Par....el;
b. MuJriply the amOUnt in 1.a. above by the owner's desired prepayment
perr.enrage to d..."'t..'"IIDÎne the prepayment amount.
c. Enter the applicable amount Ïrom 1.b., and aàd the folloWÏng:
(1) call premium as required in the Bond insrrum::n!, if any;
(2) inreresr on the amount in 1.b. at the applicable Bond rare for each year,
if any, to the neXt available Bond call dare;
d. Enter the applicable amount Ïrom 1.c., and subtract the following:
(1) Tlle Assessor's Parcel's prerara share of the bond reserve fund
derermined by multiplying the Bond reserve fund requir=m by the
quorient obtained by divicling the Assessor's Parcel's applicable House
Square Foorage by the toral House Square Footage as ð~;n~d in
conÌ1ecrion with the determination of Projected Special Taxes. For
ptlIposes of this derermination, the House Square Foorage applicable to
Commercial Property and Other Property shall be deemed to be 13, 000
square feet per.Acre. In the event the Assessor's Parcel does not fully
prepay the Special Tax, the p=entage determined in 1.b. shall be
mulriplied by the amount derermined in the preceding sentences to
derermine the Assessor's Parcel's prorara share of the bond reserve
fund.
(2) the interest earnings' to be generared at the reinvestment rare as
derermined by CFD - and Ïrom the åischarge dare to the next
available bond call dare.
~ 2/13/98 6 /6
- To Ib:: result of l.d. abov::, add Ibe following irems 10 det::nnin:: Ib::
~.
}.ss::ssor's Pare::J's total prepaym...'"Dl requir-...d:
(1) unpaid sp--cial tax::s, lln-'T"'..5I and p::na1ri::s, if any, which have b::"".-n
entered on the assessor's roIl;
..'
(2) a reasonabl:: aàminis1:ration Í::"".-.
- 2, Th:.~ Maximum Sp::cial Tax ntte for DevelDp"'..d Prop::ny applicable to an
Ass:ssor's Parcel urilizJng a pTepaym:m ~ less than'100% shall be
r-..dI=d În subs::qu...'"I11 Fiscal Y = by mu1riplying Ib:: .t~ss::ssor' sPare:: , s
- Ammal Maximum Sp::cial Tax Rat:: by !he pr::paym..'"Dlperc::mag:: acruaIIy us::d
in S::"'"!ÍODS F.1.b.
-, A norice of SpecÏa1 TID". cancella1ion sba11 1>:: recorœrl on any Assessor's Parcel iof
Develop::d Properry which prepays 100% of its Sp-..cial Tax as provid::d În:.1:h::¡
paym::m fDIInUla d::scrib::d above. ' : ;
~
G. EXTR..~ORDINARY SPECL-\L TAX
1. Þ.s of J= 1, 1999, and each J= 1 thereafu:r, umil such rim:: as !h:: Annual
y...aAÎmum Special Tax ra.res which may be levi::d on D::velDp"'..d Properry will
- equal. Dr ex=d the Deb! S::rvice Requirem::nt Dr mniI Full Buildout, whichev::r
0= earlier, CFD - shall cans:: the sp::c:iaI tax consultant 10 d::t::rmine iÏ a
Proj=d Sp::cial Tax D::fici=y exists, If a Proj::..-red Special Tax Defici=y
~ ::XÎS!5, then the Total Proj::C!ed Sp-..::ia1 Tax D::ficiem:y shall b:: calcu1at::d by
CFD - as sp-..ciñed in Secrion A.
2. Tn:: CFD - sha1ll::vy !h:: Extraordinary Sp-_'"Îal Tax, in any Fiscal Year,
unåer !h:: folloWing circumstanc::s:
a. Inirial Levy- 1k first tUne the ExtraordiDary Special Tax is applicable
.::j und::r Section A, the emirc amonnI determined und::r .such defuritionshall b-..
'-'" levied uniform1y on Bll Undeveloped Prop::rry and such amount shall b-..
'l d.."Posited in the ExtraordiDaIy Special Tax Accou:nt. Upon detemiiDation
:",1 !hat the Extraordinary Special Tax is applicable under S::crionA, the
property owner(s) bave !he Dppormnity to deposit moDies or security for the
", amount of !he Extraordinary Special Tax pumIaII1 to the Ind:nmre of Trust.
Tn:: d::terminarion of whet:h::r the properry ov,'I!::T(s) will us:: this alternative
must be made prior 10 the levy of the ExtraordiDary Special Tax.
"',
- b. Subsequent l-'"Vi::s. In each FIScal Year subs::quent to the iIñtia11evy of the
Extraordinary Sp::cial Tax as described În G.2.a, above, an additional
'" Extraordinary SJ=Îal Tax sba11 b:: levied lJIñfoIIDly on all Undeveloped"
:c; Prop::ny, to the eX!ent the Extraordinary Special Tax of such Flscal Year
==is the balance in !he Extraordinary, Special Tax Act:ount. To the
.~::
- - n
Dat::: 2/13/98 7 /'1
',',
"
e:œm the ba1am:e in the Extraorrlinary S~ia1 Tax Accoum, in any Fiscal
Year. exc~ the Extraordinary Special Tax, then no EnraorCÜnary Special
- Tax shall be levied in such FlSc:a1 Year. Upon deærmIDarion that an
aådÏ1:ional Extraorrlinary Spe=ia1 Tax is applicable under Sec:rion A, the
- prop~ oWD:r(s) have the oppommity to depOSÍt momes or security for the
3lI1OUDt of the ExtraorCÜnary Special Tax pnrsnam to the lnd..'"IJIUre of TruSt..
Tne detf:rmination of whether the prop~ ow=(s) will use this altf:rnative
-. IIIIISt be made prior to the levy of the Extraordinary SpecÏal Tax..
."
-
-
-
-
-
-
:
D~: 2/13/98 8 It
.. Application
-
LA.~OWNER INFORMATION FORM
THE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA IJ\¡'TENDS TO SELL TAX-EXEMPT BONDS (!HE
.,BONDS-) TO FINANCE TIΠPUBUC IMPROVEMENrS. UNDER. FEDERAL AND STATE
SECURITIES LAWS. THE CJTY IS REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE ALL MA~ FACTS TO
THE P~CHA5ERS OF THE BONDS. .FOR TH15 REASON, IT IS EXIREME.L Y
IMPORTANT JEAT YOU ANSWER EACH OF TIlE FOUDWlNG QUESTIONS
CQMPI-E.~Y ..._1IlD ACCURATELY. YOUR. PROMYr AND COMPLETE RESPONSE TO
THIS Qu::.STIONNAIRE IS CRITICAL TO THE CITY"S ABII...ITY TO SELL BONDS TO
FINANCE rrlE 1'l1BUC lMPRDVEMENTS.
OWNERSHIP
Na= of LaudDWn::I: M:M:i.l1~:n - D.A. Amerlca D~ay Ran::h, LLC
P'= d=lJe the CIWJIC!'Ship =-- oj the l.andowncr (i.I:.., iDdivÏduals, fmnly
trust. parmc:rsbip. CDIpDrdlÌOD.. ::t=..). 1'1= in::!uci= = of I::y individuals
x:spDnsibJe for maI:ing decisitlI1S far l.aDdawn:::r. P.!:zs= im:1ud: copies of
pan::c=bip agr==. anicl:s Dfimmparmian and bylaws. f3Ini}y trusts, e!C..
~ ~~"Í ~ed !.:iæ.bili.=y Corpor"~cn ccnsist:i:ng of '::We> membp.rs. Mc1'Iill:!.n
D::æy Ranch. Inc. and D.A. Amc:dca Commu..'lj:~ies. Inc. Mcl:!:i.llin Dt:ay
:&=h. Inc_. :!:s .1:hc ==ger. 5e.. an:acÌl",d ::crpcra~c l:i::era::Ure
fer resumes of ""y individuzJ.s.
Pl::ase: ariadl the: mostr=t copy Df your finam:iaJ Sl3tCIm:IJts.lncluding audit::d
=ts. ÎÍ availabl=. If you arr.a publicly hc:iri am1paJ1Y. pl= list the: dale: of
yD'.II" last I DQ or lOK filing and =1= a copy of your most r=t Anm1al Report.
In::iude at lc:ast DIIC rcf= from ;¡¡ bank Dr fimm::i3l instiUlIian. iDeJudÏDg IwIIc.
address Äl1Ii tc:Ic:phonc: number. Tcbi :Rank -
15~d tO~ S=:!.cr Vi::e ~res~~8::
:Nor!; en ~!enu! 5Y:lU
Dntuio. CA 917 909 7- 0
N= Fmancial staJ::m::m5 and infannaliDD abtainc:d from bank .œfe:r=s: are ncc::ssary
as part of the investigative: procc:ss pñor tD sclling the Bands. SudJ maIl:rial will
r=ain stricdy ccnfukntiaJ.. exc:pt to ~ =t tbaI sudl mat:rial is I~gally
rc:gair:d to be: dïst:lcs:d in CDIIIIecrÎan wilÌ! the: sal= of me: Bonàs.
PROPER1Y INFORMATION
For the Landowre:r"s prap=ny (th: "PropOly-) to b~ includc:d witlñn FJlI3Dcing
DÏSõrict list th= fDlIawing: .
5525'96.1=45.0000 -1-
/9
- -_.__....._.~-~_._-- .
Nwnb=r of gross acr=s cwœd: 288 Ac;;e$
Numbi::r of 3cri::S propos::d for di::vi::lop=t: 288 Acres
Number of at:ri::S di:Vclop~ to da~, if 3IIY= 0
List the Assessor's Parcel Numb::rs for thi:: Prop::r!y: 642-060-11
642-080-01
HI)1>I iong hay!: you own=d th: Propi::I'tJ? 7 months (9/12/97)
Wbar was th= purchas!: pria: you paid fer the Pfoperty? $13,800,000
Have you entcr::d intO any option er otha form of agr=!:nt to sell all Of a porrion
of the Property? :...1L YES - NO. If YES, p1casc describe arrangement and
aI:aCh copies of any agrc:::ments dc:scribi.!lg arrangarn:nr-
Se~~ Single Family Detached Lots to merchEntbuilder$.
Sell Single Family Artached Lors to merchant builders.
Sell Mu~ti-Fam1ly Sites to merchant builders. See attached table
for summary of sites under negotiation.
D-..scribi:: the exisIin¡¡: land us!: of th: Property:
Agriculture ~ Ranch Land
Is th= Property proposed for n:sidi::núal devdopm:m, commc:rcial developIDCnt. or
both? - RESIDENTIAL - COMMERCL/ù. -X- BOTH. Please sœ::
tb: total nurnb~ of any residential units propos=d and the total square footage of
comm...~iaI developm=nr propos=.ti
1474 Residential Units
2.9 Acres of Commercial Uses
4.8 Acres of Community Purpose Facility Uses
lhvc you prepared a busi.!Iess plan fer the development proposed on the Propc:ny?
--L YES - NO. If YES, please auach a copy. If not, please: prepare a
Developer Pro Forma in substantially the form anacl1ed hereto for inclusion i.!I th!:
Official Statement for th!: Bonds. See Attac"bed
Dc you intend to develop the Propi::I'tJ yourself>. -L- YES - NO. If YES,
d=ribe the =xpcct::d timing fOf deY!:lopmcnt ofthi:: Property. If available, please
list projected sales by ycar, listing commercial and residential devclopDæD[
s:parat:ly. See Attached Absorption Schedule
SSE996.J=4S.DODO -2-
20
What is the stanIS of land use apprcvaIs. maps and EIR's for the ProP="}' (i.:..
briefly dcscn~ th: cllITCnt zoning and th: SWIIS of any Developm:nt Agr=.
Spa:iflC Plans. u:ntañve maps or final maps for th: Propèn.y)?
SPA I, Pbas~ 1 TM C.V.T. 97-02 Approv~d.
SPA I, Pbas~ 2 TM Åmenàmen~ C.V.T. 98-04 ~~Proe~$s"
SPA I Approved w/E.I.R. (COP! on File as Public Record).
:Final 11aps £or SPA I, Ph""", in Proc:ess.
Have: any cnvironmentaJ studies or reportS been prepared for the Property?
...L YES - NO. If YES. pleas: provide a copy of the smdy or rep?n.
See Attacbed
Are any impact fees owing as a c:ondition ID develop the Property? ...!.. YES
- NO. If YES. please dcscn"be. C1~ of CImh V1s=: '1'el~graph Canyon
Drainage Fee / Transportation Developm~nt Impac:~ F~e / Traff;c:
Signal Fee / Int~rim Pre-SR125 Develo~ent Impact Fee / Tele~aph
Canl,?n Graviry Sewer D.I.F. / Telegraph Canyon Pumped Se..er .I.F.
Pub ~c: Fac:il1c:ies D.l.F. / Park ~ui5it:ion ~d Develo~ent Fee
Ot:ay Vat:er District:: Cap'8c:i~ Fee, Ami~at:icn Fe<:,~.C- .~ F1j-
Are th= any endangered species ha itats on the ropcn:y? - '..L O.
YES. please describe.
Arc th= any legal impcdimc:nts ID the p1anna:l development of th:
PropertY? If so. please desc:ribc.
No
Arc you aware of any proposed restrictions on the rate of future growrh in
the jurisdiction where th: Property is loc:¡m:d whic:h may impact the
development of th: Property (i. c.. proposed growth c:omrol ordinances or
initiatives)?
- YES -!...... NO
If YES. please explain:
Are thcI"l~ any geological impcdímcnts (earthquake faults. high ground water. soil
slippage, etc.) ID the planned development ofthc Property? If so. please dcsc:ribc,
No
55&996.1=45.DOQ() .3.
¿;;¿/
Is any d::vclopm:nt =cmly II%1IImwy OD me Propmy? ...2L YES - NO.
lfYES, please givc;a general desoiptian and pro~ infomwioD;as [0 r:srim;a~
=slI'UCtÍoD valu:. if available.
G~ading ~~ currently underway. Connt--uc~iOD Value = $5.8 Million-
What are your Jang u:nn plans for tb: Property; i.c-. sale of raw 1aIJd. sales of
improved p;arc:cls [0 merchant buiJdcn. sale of produCt [0 end u=. long tenD
hold.. =_?
S~e of Improved Parcels to Mer=han~ Bcilders.
What improvcmcms are =sary to devclop your Propaty and how do you
propos:: to finance th:m?
RoadwBy:;, Landsca~ing, Water ~es, seVer 1.ine!';, Reclaimed Warer
Lines and Dry Uti 1ty Facilities. Combination of Equity, Convenrional
Financing and Land Secured Debt Financing
Me there any existing IIUSt d=1s11oans an the Prcp::n:y? PJcas:: Stale tb: namc.
a::!àr:ss and telephone number of the I::nding instimtian aDd mc approximate loan
amOUDt. ~ IJ!Œ: Rob BDlva~. 4695 MacArthur Ct., Sul.~e {11550
Newport Beach, CA 2660 (714)224-4300 $15,000,000
1m'ERIAI. :BAn: Eril::b Gaadbady, 695 Town Center Dr., Suire {/ZOZ
Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (714)641-2281 $2,400,000
StJ!" I1iVES'I:HEJ!rrs LII!IT!J): Greg .Judkú1s. ~- 401 Wes~ A St:.
San Ditf,;';",,~~ 92101 ~19)23~6 4 $3,OOO,0~
Has t:DIlStrUeåon . g for any of . prop ~elopmf:llt br:::::n taiDr::cI?
-L YES - NO. If YES, pl= d:sc:ribc tb: source and amouut of sucl1loan.
Bank On~.Arizona R~volving Line of Cr~di~ - $15,000,000
What is the cum:nt S1ÄlUS of propcrt.y =- special ¡¡¡xes and asSCSS!Ilents nn the
.ProrJerty? ....-X...- PAID - DEUNQUENT. Have any propcrt.Y = Dr
asC"";<TTI""'ts on the Property been dr::Iinqw:nt at my tim= dwing tb: past 3 years? If
YES. please explain.
Yes. Prior =er Was delinquent. Back =:es and. penB.lt~es pB.~d vhen
prnperty closed escrow in September 1997.
Axe you delinquent in the payment of any property WtCS. spc:ciaI13Xr:s or
2SSCSSI11CDts on property that you own outside of the proposed boundaries of the
As=m::nt District? - YES -L NO. If YES. please explain.
Is the developer (or relaœd entity) now delinquent or in default an any laans. lines
of cr:åit or other obligatioo related to tb: Property or other projr::as? - YES
--L NO. lias the cl:vcloper (Dr related cnåty) b= in default on any loans. lines
SSÞMi.I=CS.OIIlIO -4-
c2c2
of c:m::Iit or other obligarion in the p2St tWo years n:1aœd to th: Property or oth:r
projects? - YES ....L NO. If YES, picas:: =xpla.in.
Has the devclop=r or any partner or related entity of the landowner ever fIled for
bankrupa:y or bc:::n declared bankrupt?
- YES ...L NO
If YES. specify dare and location of court wbc:re bankruplq' ac:tion wok place:
Has any claim been mad~ or suit been med. or is any claim or suit now threat::ned
against the 1..andowner with respect to the proposed dcvelop=t of the Property?
_YES lNO .
If YES. please attach a copy of the complaint. or jfunavaiIab1e, picas:: list the court
in which the a.:.'"tion is p::ncling and the case number, or if me claim or at:tion bas not
yet b--n filed please attach any d= summarizing me claim or ac:rion:
AIc th::n: any olbcr forcsa:able cirCUmstaDa:S not d:scribcd above that could
pr-..v::nr or significantly delay the proposed devcJcpm:nt oUbe Property? -
YES --X- NO. If YES. please: explain.
Piease aJIac:h a copy of your most = preliminary title repon: for me: Property.
Pkasc: atrac:h a copy of me most recent rax bill for the Property and evidena: that
=em installmc:nts due have been paid.
RELATED PROJECT INFORMA nON
Has an absorption stUdy been done for the proposed developm::nr of the Propc:n:y
within the last two years? If so, please provide a copy. Not Available
Has an appraisal b= done for the Propcn:y within the last two years? If so, please:
provide a copy. Yes. 5ee Anacbed
551991>.1=05.0000 -5-
;23
EXPERIENCE OF LAJIj'DOWNER GROUP
!>=scribe the development c:xperic= of the Landowner. Briefly dcsc:ribe any
c:um:nt or r=tIy comp1ct::d developmentS und..-r1aIœn by the Landownc:r.
Owner is ~he largest San Diego based lBnd developer wi~h 38 .'
vears ~er:i.ence'i,n ~h" =ea. Loc..:L nroject:" :i.nclu~e: :Boniu. -
long Canyon. Rancno Del Itey. Scripps :Ranch. and Scr:Lpps Ranch Nor~h.
PICISe provide corporate liltra= and sales broc:hurcs, if available.
PAYMENT OFTAXES/ASSESSMEJIoTS.
Desc:rihc the so= of funds thaI you will use to pay any ClXCS/asscssmc:nts to be
levied on your Property in connc:c:tíon with the Assc:ssmc:nt DistriCt (i.e., bank
savings. land sale proœcds. loan proceeds, =.)-
Ccmbi,na~1on of Equi~y. Loan ~roceeds 2Dà Land Sale Proceeds.
Do you foresee any difficulty in your ability to mak:: timely paytm:nt of your
'i2X:S/ assessmentS? YES ---L NO. If YES. please explain.
- NOTICE REGARDING DISCLOSURE.
The Securities and Exchange Commission r=ùy adopt::d amendmentS (the
.. AIœndments") to Rule lSa-12 under the Sccuriries Exchange Aa of 1934 relaring [0 certain
requir---d disclosure information that must be made available to prospective pun:hascrs of municipal
bonds. Under th: Am::ndInc:nts and other federal and StaIC sc:c:uritics law5, cc:nain material
information must be disdoscd (i) in connection with the iniriaI offering of bonds with rc:spect to
. maJ::ria.I persons'; and (ü) on an ongoing basis with rcsp= 10 "obligaœd persons. "
Whelhc:r a property owner/developc:l' might be a maICrial þ=OD or an obligated person will
dc:pc:nd on all of The facts and circumstances. If ÙIC information you provide in response 10 this
questionnaire indi= this might be the case. the financing tCaID will review with you the
information that may need [0 be disclosed to potl:ntial Bond ÌDVCStDrs in order to sarisfy the
Amendments and other fedcraJ and stale securities laws.
If informañon on the proposed development of your prop::rty is disc:Josed in connection
with the sale of tire Bonds. you will be rcquírccl [0 c:cn:ífy at tIw rime that the information is U'UC
and correct and docs not oIDit to state any material fact.
SSS!I96.1=4S.0DQI -<>- co2f
McMILLIN-D.A. AMERICA OTA Y RANCH
DEVELOPER PROFORMA
Property Acquisition .
MI:Millin-DA America Otay Ranch lLC purchased the property in September 1997. AJ.
purchase, the site consisted of raw land predicated over 1ÌIree sectional planning arëas
(SPA's) denoted as SPA's I, IT, and m Entitlements Ïncluded an approved General
Devclopmem Plan (GDP) for the entire site, an approv=i SPA Plan for SPA L and an
approved Te:mative Map (TM) for SPAL
Current and Pending Entitlements
A5 of April 199&, added SPA I entitlements consist of an approved grading and drainage
pJan, approved affordable housing agr=t, and executed state and feclc:nù
etMronme:ntBJ permits.
Additional pending cntit1ements for SPA I include the fo1low:iDg:
. GDP/SPAPJan amendment for SPAL Phase 2
. Revised TM for SPA I, Phase 2
. Precise Plan for SPA 1, Phase 2
. Improvem:nt Plans for La Media Road, Phase 1
. Improv::mcnt Plans for East Paloma¡- Street, Phase 1
. Improvement Plans for Santa Cora AVCIIlJe, Phase 1
. "An Map for SPA 1, Phase 1
. FmalMap and Improvement Plans for SPA!, Phase 1, Units 1, 2, 3, and 4
The entitlements are c:um:ntly :in proc:ess, and are anticipau:d to be approved within the
next ~IIlDlI1ÌIs.
Land. Development to Date
La Media Road crossing at Telegraph Canyon Channel is complete, providing acœss to
the site. Gnding began:in early April 1998 and is amcnt1y ongoing. As of April 1, 1998, a
total of$4,664,OOO has been spent entitling and developing the property.
Future Land Development
Land development of SPA L Phase 1 single family and muIti-fiunily residential
neighborhoods is anticipated to be complete:in the 1"' Quarter 1999- The single fåmiJy
sites will consist of finished lots with all ÍD-tnI!:t inftastruc:tu:re .in-place, The multi-family
site will consist of a sheet graded super-pad with all infrastructure to the perimeter of the
site. The SPA 1, Phase 1 school site, parJc. site, and community purpose facility site (CPF)
will be developed to a super-pad status, and be complete:in the 3'" Quarter 1999.
In SPA 1, Phase 2, the apartment site (phase 1 of a two-phase project) is anticipated to be
developed to a supc:r1ad status by the 1" Quarter 1999. Phase 2 of the apartment site will
be complete by the 3 Quarter 1999. SPA 1, Phase 2 singlc-iimilly residential sites will be
developed to fuJisbed lots by the 3'" Quarter 2000.
~:\áoIa\linanœ"""'-""l,",y\cii!~dac 04124/11R 9;07
c2~
McMiIlÏD-D-A.. America Otay Ranch
Developer Proforma
Page 2
.As the individual land use areas in SPA I arc: being developed, . public improvement
facilities mcluding backbODC: roadways, Jand5c:aping, water Jines, sewer Jines, rcclaim:=d
water lines, and d1y utilities will concum:mly be installed to coincide with dc:livery of the
various neighbothoods.
The total SPA I development period is estimated to range fttm¡ the 3'" Quarter 1997 to the
1" Quarter 2001, or a total of 17 quarters. The deve1opmmt period begins at property
acquisition and ends at the close of csc:row of the :final ncigñborhood.. .At completion, the
SPA I unit ::Dunt will include 698 single family lots, 776 multi-family units, 2.9 acres of
c:ommcrcia1 land., and 29 acres of public iBciJity land uses including a school, park and
c:ommunity purposesitc..
.All of the rcsido:nti.al neigbboIDoods ano scbcduled to be sold at completion of land
dc:ve1opmcnt to guest bui1ders for COnstIuctiOD of TCSide:ntDl improvc:mems. The school
site is designated as an elcm:ntary school and will cvcntuaIIy be sold to the Chu1a VlSta
Elementary School Dístñct. The park site will be CODStIUcted by the u.c and dedicated to
the City of Clw1a VlSta. The CPF site will be sold to a non-profit end user such as a
church, or day care ccn1er.
Uses and Sources of Cash
Total land development costs for SPAI, including all in-tract and pub]ic improvements, is
estimated to be $60,000,000 (includes pro-ra!a ponion of Olympic Parkway).
Sources of cash to finance SPA I land development consist of a combination of McMillin-
D.A. America Otay Ranch LLC equity, loan proceeds from convcntÏonal financing,
revenues from lot sales to merchant builders, and land secured debt :financing. McMiIlin-
D.A. America Otay Ranch LLC bas committed $18,000,000 in equity to the project. SPA
L Phas", 1 is encumbered with a $15,000,000 acquisition and development revolving line
of credit with Bank One Arizona.. SPA L Phase 2 is encumbered with a $2,400,000
acquisition loan with Imperial Bank.
A SPA 1, Phase 2 land development loan is not in-place. It is likely that after completion
of SPA 1, Ynase I, Bank One will continue the revolving line of credit facility for Phase 2.
Costs not covered by equity dollars or loan proceeds will be paid by revenues :from lots
sales and commwùty fac:tlities distIict (CFD) construction proceeds. RevellUes from lot
closings are anticipated by December 1998. Receipt of special district construction
proceeds is anticipated in the I" Quaner 1999, coinciding with complcrion of the first
public improvement facilities. The em w.i11 be structured as an acqui.sition district.
McMillin-DA America Otay 'Ranch ILC will rec:eive special distIict construction
procecd.s after completing each public irnprovc:mc:nt, and acceptance of the facility by th",
City of Cbula VlSta.
b:1dGa1fi_~ 0<CI24191 P:D7
:26 ",* TOTAL PAGE.09 **
Exhibit 4
Review Committee Report
- "-.~. ----
APPUCATION OF MCMn...LIN . D-A.. AMERICA OTAY RANCH, LLC
UNDERLYING PRINCIPALS OF POLICY
1. Prot::ctian af1h: public int=t.
2. fairness in app1icatian of specia] tax=¡ 11> cnncm and :6nuTc prop::ny owners.
3. fun discl= of specïa11aX li::Ds.
4. =dit wcrthin:ss af special tax bcmds,
5. prot::cting CDys =di! niiDg and financial posititm.
6. appli=ts pay all costs asso::ia1:d with C.F.D. :fomutticn.
FINDING OF 1'UBLIC INTEREST OR BENEEIT
PoD"" SUIIIID2U"V
Tœ City Coum:il may antharizc pm=dings if tœ Cozm::iJ detcrmin:s 1imt 1h= public improvcm::uts to be
:finan::z:d provide h=:!it 11> the community at large as wcIl as bcnciit within the C.F.D.
Alllllicrtion
1k application stab improv::m=rrts mquircd inclndc roadways, l"""""Ping. waì:r and =hUrned water
1in::s and dry IIIiJity" Specifu: improv::mc:uts luclud:: La M=iia :Rœrl, 1'aI.omar S1rcct. and Olympic
Parkway.
AUTHORIZED PUBLIC FACILITIES
PoIic:v S1IIDInar'V
hnprov:¡n:nts must be public improv::m:nts wfricl¡ will be CWDCd, op:raícd or maintained by the City or
other public agcn.."Y. -- ImpIDVClm:llts must serve a. D::ighbDIhood = or greater.
ADDIication
Imprøvements to be fiDanced an:: primarily roadways 1ÌI!It will be aaprired by the City. These roadways
1Iavc: 1oc:al and ~ona1 Þcncfit. 1k d..-vclcpcrs.financ:c plan also lists a pedestrian bridp. several
D::ig1iborl1ood pmb and baCk bone utilities as plt!Íccts to be acquirc:d using bond pnx=ds. The City's
adopœd policü:s do not provide: for the provision of n:ighbmhood pam as an authorized :fdciIity.
CU-....1&vst19753~ 1
R7
PRlOlUTIZA 'nON OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
Policv Summarv
Fi:rst priority of a C.F.D. cstab1isbr.d by the City ;s the pmvjsicn of public ùnprovcmcnts bcmmting the
Crty. Second prim:ity is the provision of public imprtlVClIlf:lltS owned, cpcra1:cd or managed by ether public
ageDCICS.
ÅDDlication
Improvements to be financed gcm:rally bencñt the Cjty. Same improvcmcnts will be acquired by OIay
Wm= Djstric['
AUTHORIZED PUBLIC SERVICES
Policv Summarv
..
Public scrviœs proposed to be financed may gcnc¡a]jy Ùlcludc 1) pazkways, medians and open space:; 2)
dramage and flood control and 3) other services authorized by the C.F.D. Act and adapœd by the City,
ADDlicatioD
Special taxes will be used to ac:q¡rire facilities. No services arc to be fimdcd by this proposed C.F.D.
INCIDENTAL COSTS
Polìcv Summary
Ccrtam eligible incidentaI- costs may be financed vm special tax bOllds. Those mcidcotal costs must be
dircctJy related to ÚDprovements financed by proceeds of such special tax bonds and arc subject to DOt to
cx=d percentage limitaIìons.
AÞtJliation
A breakdown of iDcidcnta1 costs is DOt incladed with the application. TIris infunnatian will not be available
until desigll and construction of:fucilitics to be acquired is completed. When available, the - breakdown will
be reviewed by Cjty s1afi; Ucm by ttcm.
Cü<l1l>ldwiavst\!l7 S3~ 2
~?
REQUIRED VALUE-TO-DEBT RATIO
The required valu: to lien ratio must be at least 4:1. A C.F 1). with a valoc-to-licn b=tWeen 3:1 and 4:1 is
alliJwcd based upon cÎrcumstaDces.
ADDlicaôon
The wlnc to lien ratio is not knCJWD and will Dot be known until amlpletion of the appraisal to be
undertaken fur the band issue and finallÙ:tcImÍDa.tian of facilities to be:6mmœcl The application states thc
Scpt=bcr 12, 1997 acquisition price as 513,800,000 fur the eøtírc 1,000 açrc project. A JIIIIC 1997
appraisal prepared fur GrossmDDt Bank lists thc iDlIowing "as is" JIIIIJkct YIÙUcs as of.ñme 23, 1997: SPA
I Phase I $4,600,000. SPA I Phase 2 513,900,000, SPA n $7,700,000, SPA ill $2,900,000. The
GrosSlDDlrt appraisal also lists an aggregate prospective maikc[ value on July 1, 1998 far SPA I Phase 1 Df
$41,466,000 (assuming completion of site ÍInprovcm:nts), It is now estimated those improvements will be
cœnplertd in.latc 1998. Cum:ntly, aD appraisal is being conducted by a bank involved in financing the
project, The developers have statai this will be made available to thc Ci!;y.
CRITERIA FOR APPRAISALS
Policy SIIIIIIIIarV
The City bas specific n:qnin:rnems fur appraisal conteøt and objectives
Aoolication
The appIiætion does Dot address criteria fur appraisals. The Ci!;y's finance team will direct the appmiscr
aDd provide guidance en scope of work and methodalcgy consistent with policy.
MAXIMUM AGGREGATE TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS
Policy Summary
The maximum annual special tax. installment applicable to any residmtial parcel shall not exceed one
perccut ofthc sales price. Total taxes sballnot exceed twDpcrc:cnt ofinitial sales price. The C.F.D. policy
provìdcs amecbæüsm to buy down to 2% at closing to meet the maximum tax policy.
ADDlication
The appli<=aticm docs not address this point. Limiting thc maximum aggregate tax is accœnplisbcd during
develt>pDJ<:lrt of tbc rate and =tbod of appol'lÎmlmœt and thc bond sizin¡Vdebt service phase of due
diligence.
CliOl1blcbuIalll\\!I7S3 2\pIis!.doc 3
:21
SPECIAL TAX REQUIREMENTS
Policv Summan'
The rate and method of appDrtiamne:nt shall adhere to specific requiIemcnts detailed wtthin the policies.
AouJication
The City has se\edcd and is hiring the Special Tax Consultant, who will be charged wÏth preparing a me
and method ccmsistcnt with City guidelines. The d=veloper provicled a suggc:st=:l rate and method that is
bciDg reviewed-
TERMS AND CONDffiONS OF SPECIAL TAX BONDS
Pnli"" SIllDDW'V
All tmns and condÍtioDS of ¡my tax bonds issued by the City shall be estahlishccl by tite City.
ApplicatiDn
Terms and conditions of a bond sale have ncrt yet been discussed and tIu:refure are not yet determined.
Tenns of a bond sa1c will be dcI:mùned during the bond phase by the City's fimwcc team that includes
SIa.1f. financia] advisor, bond couoseI and ether participants.
DISCHARGE OF SPECIAL TAX OBLIGATION
Policv Summarv
Special Tax obligaIions may be ¡=paid and discbargcd m. whc1c or in part at anytime.
Auplic:atiDn
The City's Special Tax Consultant will prepare a rate and method that conIaÎns prepayment provisions.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Policv Summary
Applicants are required to demonstrate 1hat there WIll be full discl.osure Df special tax obligations to
prospective purchasers Dfproperty.
AnnIic:ation
A fonn of disclosure was not provided with the applieæion. Typiczùly. disclosure fonns are prepared close
to time of sale to cod user. This developer bas a tnIcl: record Df adcqua1C disclosure with Dther projects.
Cli<z>blclw¡'"",197S32\sao!""-døc 4
30
!'REFORMATION COST DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENTS
Policv Summarv
All City and cœsuham costs incJmed in application process and pro=dings will be paid by applicant by
advimcc deposit
Application
The City has n:œivcd a dcposÍt fur City staff tUnc. The àew:lopcr has also ~ to provide ¡¡ deposit far
collSlÙtaDt costs. Deposited amcnmt:s are ~ec:t to reimbursement v.iJcnIjf a bond issue closes.
SELECTION OF CONSULTANTS
PolicvS~
Thc City sba1l select and main all cansultants.
AIJPliartion
Thc City has se1eaed all CCIIISIlltants via a proposal process. [Cansultam contracts were approved at the
May 26, 1998 City Ccnmcil meeting.]
LAND USE APPROVALS
Poli"" Summarv
The City may issue bands secured by special taxes when a) properties have received applicable
discretionary land use approvals consistent wi1h financing asswnpfums and b) applicable environmental
review is compJct::.
ApPIica1ioD
The application describes the status of land use approvals as follows:
SPA 1, Phase 1 1M C.Y.T. 97-02 Approved.
SPA 1, Phasc 2 TMAmcndmcnt C.V.T. 98-04 inProccss.
51' A 1 Approved wÆ.lR. (Copy on File as Public Rcccm.i).
Final Maps for SPA L Phase 1 in Process.
APPLICATION PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT RELATED CoF.D.s
Policy Summarv
Any application sha1l contain such infarmation and be submiaed in such funn n:quÏrcd by the Cit;y
MaDagcr. In addition cacb appJication must contain:
Cü-ldJUiavI:t\!l7 53 2\ooo1isL doc S
3/
J. ProofofæI1:ÌlcIi2:aria if the applicant is IJO[ the owner.
2. Evidence that the applicant n:prcs=ts the DWnCI5 of not less than 67'Y... by area. of property subject to
proposed levy.
3. A busÌDcss plan far the development of the propcny 1hat reviews the :Dnancial fi:asibility of the C.F.D.
and. dcmansuates the ability of the owner to pay special tax insta1Im=ts and. any Dtber taxes or
assessments until full build cmt
The application, provided on April 28, 1998, included the following ÌII:ms:
. Business and. Fmancial Nondisclosure Agr=:mcDt
. Landowner Infmmarion Form
. Dcvclope1" Pralimna
. Land Silks Absarpticn Schcduk
. Schedule of Siœs UndcrCoøtract
. Limited Liability Company .Agrcement W rth Amendments
. I..ûnit=l Liab~ Company Fœma:tion Docwncats
. Limited Liab~ Company FinaDcial Stmement
. Phase 1 Enviroamcrrtal Stndy
. Prc1imiDary Title Report!;
. Tax Bill and. Proof of Payment
. McMillin Companies CorpoI3i:c Litc:ra:tuTC Including Brochure and ~wnes ofKcy Individuals
. Appraisal
Pr~sly, a McMillinlOtay Ranch Finance Plan had been provided.
The infonna:tian provided is prc1iminaJy and gcncral in nature. Extcosivc due diligence will be required for
the prepaxatian of a disclcsure doanncot and. :final City decision to proceed.
The d=:lopcr bas provided proof of title to not less than 67% of the property.
The ability and. willingness of the property owner to pay special taxes can not be dctcmrincd at this time.
Poims to con.siàcI" include paymcm: history of develop=r with City and. other jurisdictions, value of the
property, and anticipated absorption.
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the City CoonciI approve proceeding with the formation of a Conununity Facilities District, subject to
the condition that bcfo:rc authorizing the jss= ofbonds and financing documenTS, that compliance with
the City goals and policies be documentable and camplctc.
Cli=b\clllllawt\97532\coa1îst.doc 6
3::¿ ** TOTRL P~GE.Ø7 **